Vos & McAtee on National Election

“God’s decree is not exclusively concerned with individuals but also comprises nations and establishes the bond between generations. The destiny of a nation is weighed by Him, as is the destiny of a person. There is not the slightest interest, indeed is completely impossible on Reformed grounds, to deny national election or whatever it may be called.”

Geerhardus Vos
Dogmatic Theology Vol 1. — pg. 111

1.) If Vos is correct — and he is — then how could any Reformed Pastor, Luminary, or laymen deny the desirability, irreproachability and necessity of Christian Nationalism?

2.) The denial of the desirability, irreproachability and necessity of Christian Nationalism as coming from the Reformed community is proof positive that the Reformed community has become Baptistified inasmuch there is seemingly no longer an ability to embrace the corporate side of the covenant. For the Reformed, like the Baptists, the emphasis falls so much on the atomistic individual that the corporate side of covenantal categories is completely ruled out of bounds. Like the Baptists, salvation has become completely an individual, subjective reality. The Reformed have lost the corporate and objective side of the covenant.

3.) This statement more clearly than could be asked prohibits the New World Order agenda of erasing the Nations and turning the world into a vast melting pot. If God elects nations then nations are God’s is one means whereby He elects persons from those nations. To advocate positions that would destroy nations is to resist God.

Note also that this National Election, Vos offers, establishes the bond between generations. Clearly if National Election establishes the bond between generations it is a ethnic bond as well as a generational bond. Generations in a nation belong to the same ethnos. God works in ethnic lines. The bond God establishes is ethnic as well as Spiritual. Any attempt to destroy the ethno-generational bond that God establishes in and among nations is a denial of Biblical Christianity.

Alienist theology which teaches a postmillennialism where all peoples bleed into one is a anti-Christ theology. New World Order humanism is anti-covenant theology.

Rapid Fire Against Classical Liberalism … Four Musings Attacking Liberalism


Modern Liberalism, like Classical Liberalism by definition is religiously pluralistic. Modern Liberalism insists that all the gods be allowed into the public square. Given this definition no Biblical Christian can be a liberal or can support Liberalism as a social order motif. The Biblical Christian insists that only the God of the Bible be allowed to rule in the public square. This is why chaps like Jeffrey Ventrella, Doug Wilson, Toby J. Sumpter are being disloyal to Christ. Their advocacy for a “muted pluralism,” or a “principled pluralism,” remains pluralism and is a violation of the 1st commandment.

Now, the ironic thing about all this is that Liberalism really isn’t pluralistic, though it certainly sells itself as such. The hidden secret of Pluralism and so Liberalism is that while Liberalism does ostensibly allow all the gods into the public square it is only on the condition that each of them and all of them realize that their authority is always underneath the authority of the singular God of the the social order; to wit, the State. Pluralism (Liberalism) says all the gods are invited into the social order. Pluralism (Liberalism) gives that appearance to fools but at the end of the day Liberalism is just as monotheistic as any religious forming social order you would like to name.

And this is why, for the Biblical Christian, Liberalism as a worldview has to go. Biblical Christians resolve that Classical Liberalism has to go because Classical Liberalism provides a singular God as located in the State’s authority to dictate to the God of the Bible as to how influential He is allowed to be in the public square. For the Christian to support Classical Liberalism is for the Christian to support idolatry.



“For my part, I will start by repudiating all of these tired old forms of “post-liberalism.” Because it will not end any differently than it did the last time.”

Dr. Brian Mattson

Substack Article

One of the “tired old forms of ‘post-liberalism’ that Mattson is rejection is Nationalism. Indeed, the whole article is given over to why Nationalism is evil and how it alone is the reason for two world wars in the 20th century. Of course, in order to conclude that one has to ignore the Internationalism that was seeking to conquer the world. One has to ignore as well that a particular and unique kind of Nationalism arose in the 20th century precisely as a defensive mechanism against the Internationalism being floated by the Bolsheviks. Perhaps Mattson is right that Nationalism has killed its millions but he fails to remember that Internationalism killed its scores of millions.

Mattson sems also to forget in his article that in Genesis 11 the agenda wasn’t Nationalism but it was International Empire and that God’s solution to Babel was on one hand to scatter the effort at Internationalism while at the same time to raise up a confederation of Tribes to be a Nation that would be a light to the Gentiles. Mattson likewise seems to forget that Jesus himself sanctions nations — and by extension nationalism — when, in giving the Great Commission, He commands His Lieutenants to “Disciple the Nations.”

All this anti-Nationalism, issuing forth from Reformed-dom and Evangelicalism is a testimony to a profound misinterpretation of history as combined with a profound misinterpretation of the Scriptures. Sometimes it really seems to be the case that we are being led by the dumbest smart people the Church has ever produced.

It is interesting though, that when the topic turns to the sovereignty of Ukraine, all these post-nationalist pastors (paging Brian Mattson) suddenly become regular Garibaldis shouting “Long Live Ukraine.” Yet, according to them God hates Nationalism for White Christian descendants of Europe.

These WOKEsters laud the post-nationalism of atheists like Klaus Schwab and Pope Francis while at the same time consigning the Calvinist Viktor Orban to the Hate Bin. This is just the kind of thinking one might expect from Team Church. And herein we see the irony of it all. We may be living in a time that has never seen a bigger push towards one World Internationalism and clowns like Mattson are out there hanging on the cord of the tocsin shouting;   BEWARE NATIONALISM.

It’s hard to believe anybody is really that stupid and as such one has to
conclude that there is no reason to think that guys like Mattson aren’t ALL bought-and-paid-for WEF agents. Although since they’re Team Church, no doubt they sold their souls for a criminally meager price. On the other hand maybe they really are just that stupid after all?

Well, I hope that if they have sold their souls they at least received in the bargain a year’s supply of adrenochrome, or maybe they were just happy to know that they were practicing neighbor love. Sometimes getting people to do the right thing is satisfaction enough.



“For simplicity’s sake, I will explain it in this way: a radical is a complete liberal in the same way that a liberal is a half-radical. A liberal is a radical stopped in his tracks. A radical is a liberal who, by virtue of suitable circumstances, was able to grow to maturity. Or, to put it even more briefly: liberalism is the seed of which radicalism is the fruit.”

Groen Van Prinsterer
Liberty, Equality, Fraternity: A Refutation of Liberalism

Liberalism gives birth to Alienism inasmuch as Liberalism alienates the liberal from the idea of objective moral values as seen in the fact that consistent Liberalism allows all religions, with their varying moralities, into the public square.  If there are no objective moral values that eliminate the smorgasbord of other values then all that is left is an alienism from all else besides the sovereign autonomous self that is sovereignly determining which moral values will be embraced. As such the Liberal is alienated from any civilization/culture which does insist on objective moral values that must be bowed to by all peoples. The Liberal is alienated from any idea of transcendent truth. The Liberal is alienated from any notion of an extra-mundane God. The Liberal is alienated from reality. All that is left to the consistent Liberal is his own alienation born of the conviction of the sovereign autonomous self that there are no objective moral values. There is nowhere else to go except to an alienism that supports the Liberal’s instinct that there is no objective moral order to call home.

This leads me to conclude that the idea that Magistrates are not supposed to legislate/teach/require morals and instead just allow people to be free to pursue whatever morality they like (Classical Liberalism) has to be the greatest engine for Atheism ever developed.

As a Christian I am duty bound to oppose living in a pluralistic “free society” that allows for all faiths to ply their wares.

As a Christian, I am against Classical Liberalism.



Should Christians desire to win the culture wars against the WOKE cultural Marxists crowd they have to be done with classical liberalism as a worldview and embrace censorship once in power while suppressing ideologies, organizations, and persons who would subvert the Christian vision. In short Christians must practice cancel culture just as is prescribed in God’s Word. In God’s Word if someone, for example, committed a sexual crime their life was canceled. This kind of mindset must be take up again by Christians if they are to defeat those who would practice cancel culture by seeking to economically and personally destroy those who oppose sexual perversion.

The idea of absolute freedom of speech has never been practiced in American History. Early American communities has crimes against taking God’s name in vain. Woodrow Wilson’s Attorney General, A. Mitchel Palmer threw known communists out of America because of their radical speech and actions that were attempt to overthrow American interests. And today it is no different. Political Correctness does not champion an expansion of free speech. Political Correctness instead exchanges one contextual inhabitation wherein a certain kind of Christian speech dwells for a different contextual inhabitation wherein a certain kind of anti-Christian speech and behavior can dwell. Think of Political Correctness not as broadening the standard for free speech and liberty but rather as introducing a new anti-standard standard for free speech and licentiousness.

To paraphrase G. K. Chesterton we must seek to censor “the thought that stops thought.” We must give up classical liberalism (which was always a myth) and embrace once again God’s Law as the norm that norms all speech and behavior norms.

Now, some will think this sounds harsh and even, dare say it, Puritanical, but keep in mind that this is exactly what is being done to the Christian sense of proper speech, liberty, and decency by the anti-Christ left to the Christian. The anti-Chris left has succeeded in ushering in a liberty that finds kiddies being brought before perverts in order to hear the perverts read during Drag Queen Story Hour. The anti-Christ left has succeeded in brining an “expanded standard” that allows teenage boys to use the girls locker-rooms while the teenage girls are changing. The anti-Christ left has succeeded in shutting down speech that opposes these kinds of things from happening.

Is freedom of speech as wrongly absolutized really something that Christians want to support if it leads to where we are at? We must turn the censoring tables on the enemy. We must quit with the freedom of speech nonsense and begin to censor our enemies just as our Fathers did before us.

The culture war will not be won by aligning with Libertarian who, at least according to their principles have to allow every speech and behavior under the sun (as if that were possible).

If Christians who fancy themselves biblical and so conservative hope to recover anything akin to standards that they need not be embarrassed by then must not only articulate a moral and political vision that are wholesome by God’s standard but they also must suppress and censor and practice cancel culture on individuals, ideologies, organizations, and institutions that subvert our Christian vision.

CREC Libertarian Pastors Who Insist They Are Theonomists; Sumpter & Wilson

“Tucker Carlson says that there is no Nicene Creed of capitalism, and that’s true enough, but there is a Nicene Creed that says that God is the ‘Father Almighty, Maker of Heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible….’ Invisible things would include market forces, the creativity and ingenuity of men, as well as their created needs and desires. Until or unless God gives a government the authority to step in, it is a violation of the Nicene Creed to grasp power for yourself and violently and coercively prohibit the free actions and creativity of people made in the image of God.”

Rev. Toby Sumpter

1.) Has anybody in all of Church history since the Nicene Creed was developed ever used the Nicene Creed to prove that Capitalism (particularly the Corporatism Capitalism that we are currently living under) is God’s preferred economic order? Honestly, this is such a stretch I can’t believe that people don’t die of embarrassment just reading it. Let me guess… the Council of Chalcedon also proves that minimum wage laws are unbiblical.

Look, I’m a Biblical Capitalist (as opposed to the Crony Capitalism we now have) but I would never try to use the Nicene Creed to support my position.

2.) Technically market forces are not invisible. Market forces are very visible inasmuch as they are merely the decisions made by very visible people.

3.) “It is a violation of the Nicene Creed (by the Government) to grasp power for yourself and violently and coercively prohibit the free actions and creativity of people made in the image of God?” Really? If Sumpter is correct here (and he most certainly is not correct) then it would be a violation of the Nicene creed for the FEDS to craft laws prohibiting illegal immigration. After all laws protecting our country from illegal immigrants certainly prohibits the free actions and creativity of people made in the image of God. This is pure Libertarianism and not Theonomic in the least. Sumpter, like his mentor, Doug Wilson are Libertarians posing as Theonomists.

Clearly, Sumpter’s argument here is specious. A real theonomist like Rushdoony argued very differently about the Government making laws violently and coercively prohibiting the free actions and creativity of people made in the image of God. RJR offered,

“Well, first of all illegal aliens have broken the law. And justice to everyone requires that the law be upheld. So if they are illegal aliens they should be deported. Now that’s justice because it’s comparable to breaking and entering into a man’s house.”

Elsewhere the wise pastor Toby Sumpter writes,

“Others have suggested taking over the public schools and turning them into explicitly Christian schools funded by tax dollars and run by departments of education. All of which, I repeat, gives me the creeping fantods. ”

First, of all let it be noted that Biblical Christians would prefer for the public (government) schools to just be closed down with the responsibility of rearing children returned to the parents as opposed to being taken over by the Humanist state. However, failing that Sumpter should consider;

1.) Clearly  Sumpter doesn’t think neutrality is a myth. Sumpter seems to think that public schools can somehow be religious free and therefore they should not be Christian. Sumpter thinks, so it seems, that it is wrong for Christians to take Dominion over the public schools under the banner of Christ.

2.) Does Sumpter get the creeping fantods over the fact that the schools now are explicitly Humanists schools funded by tax dollars and run by departments of education?

You have a choice Dude. Either the Government schools are Christian or they are Pagan. Choose ye this day whom you will serve, either the gods of the pagans or the God of the Bible. This Libertarian smegma is not theonomy.

And here we find another example of creeping Libertarianism masquerading as theonomy coming from Rev. Doug Wilson.

“Christians must learn to distinguish sins from crimes. If God reveals His will on a matter, disobedience is sin. If God reveals the civil penalty which must be applied, then it is also a crime. But without wisdom from Him on the civil penalty to be applied, the civil order must leave enforcement of God’s law to the church, family, or the providence of God….when pornography is made and distributed, it should simply be used as evidence — of the adultery or of the sodomy, etc.”

Rev. Doug Wilson

Here Wilson is arguing that porn should not be criminalized by the State. It can be used as evidence in particular instances but it, itself should not be criminalized.

In his analogy between adultery/pornography and theft/movies which show theft, Wilson laments,

“Why do we resist punishing what God requires punishment for, and insist on punishments found nowhere in Scripture?”

“Cyberporn: A Case Study”
Credenda/Agenda_, vol. 7, no. 5, p. 11
It bears mentioning that not all modern Theonomists agree with Wilson that pornography is not a crime. For example, R. J. Rushdoony states;

“the link between pornography and revolutionary totalitarianism is a necessary one. The rise of totalitarianism has always been preceded by moral anarchism… the politics of pornography is a moral anarchism whose purpose is revolution, a revolution against Christian civilization. . . . Certainly new and clearer legislation [against porn — BLM] is necessary and urgently needed. . . we need and must have sound legislation”

Law and Liberty, pp. 18-20

In case you are not already aware there are serious problems today in what is left of Institutional Theonomy. Wilson and the CREC crowd might should just be called “the Cringe Crowd.” Gary DeMar over at American Vision has embraced full on Full Preterism. Sandlin is a ship that has no rutter. I seriously doubt the goofballs at Joel McDurmon’s “Baal’s Reign” even want to be known as theonomists.  Indeed, it would not be going to far to say Institutional Theonomy is dead were not for the work that Dr. Adi Schlebusch is doing at the Pactum Institute.

The Problem with our Cognoscenti

“He who is unaware of his ignorance, will only be misled by his knowledge.”

Richard Whately

I would have to say that herein we find the problem with to many in our clergy corps who are bright and educated but are still intellectual scofflaws. They have this vast pool of knowledge about any number of things from 16th century Elizabethan Puritanism, to Textual Criticism of the 18th Century Continentals, to the influence of Mercersburg theology on Philip Schaff as it influenced his Church history and yet the church languishes under their leadership. It is not that the subjects named above are bad. I want people around who know about those subjects. The problem is not with their areas of expertise. The problem is with their amazing ignorance, of which they are completely unfamiliar with, which puts all their grand learning in the service of the most idiotic and harmful of projects. For example how in the world could otherwise intelligent people come up with R2K, Federal Vision, or the New Perspective on Paul unless the quote by Whatley applies? We are a Church led by people who have not yet determined the difference between IQ and discernment, between the kind of mental acuity required for graduate and post-graduate work and the kind of mental acuity needed for the work of everyday living. We have a clergy corps who are long on theory but short on the ability to see the implications of where their theory is going to take us as a people.

And because of this, matters are going to get progressively worse in the Church.

Biden’s State of the Union Claims that Contradict Christianity

“We are a good people, the only nation in the world built on an idea.
That all of us, every one of us, is created equal in the image of God.”

Joe ‘Bite-Me’ Biden

2023 SOTU Address

1.) The Scripture teaches that there is none who are righteous. Christianity has always taught the idea of man’s sin nature and the truth of original sin. Biden’s speech stands in direct contradiction to Christianity 101. We are not a good people. We are a people who have a fallen sin nature who must be redeemed before we can even begin to pursue goodness.

2.) Note the pushing of the idea that the USA is a propositional nations. America, as founded, was never intended to be a nation built on an idea. That idea that we are a nation built on an idea came with the rule of the tyrant Abraham Lincoln who famously, but errantly said that this nation was “dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.” This idea of a propositional nation was when Lincoln seared it into America’s consciousness in 1863 with the Gettysburg address and it is still a lie when Joe Bite-Me repeats it in 2023. America, as the Constitution states formed a nation for white Europeans and their descendants. America was originally formed as a White Christian Nation.

3.) It is true that we are all created in the image of God. It is decidedly not true that we are all created equal in the image of God. It is clear and obvious that all men do not have the same abilities, capacities, giftedness, and talents. Men have never been created equal in the image of God. Men have been and continue to be created diverse in the image of God. So, from the Christian understanding all men are equal inasmuch as they are made of the same dirt, all men are equal inasmuch as they are all equally responsible before God’s law, all men are equal inasmuch as they are all equally dead in their sins and trespasses but all men are not equal inasmuch as they are all the same or will all realize the same potential if they are all given equal opportunity. This idea is nothing but long established and now accepted Liberal gobbledygook.