The Well-Intentioned Offer vs. God Commands All Men Everywhere to Repent

Max writes,

The gospel offer is not grounded in Christ dying for each person individually. Scripture grounds the offer in God’s command and God’s promise.

God commands all people everywhere to repent (Acts 17:30). And He promises that whoever comes to Christ will be saved (John 6:37). That universal command and universal promise is the universal offer.

Bret responds,

Clearly Max you don’t understand the difference between a command and an offer. That God commands all men everywhere to repent is not the same as saying “God offers all men everywhere salvation.” The former is a true statement. The latter is not a true statement. God does NOT offer the reprobate salvation.

Max writes,

The offer is not: “Believe and then Christ will die for you.”
And it’s not: “Christ died for you in particular, therefore believe.”

Bret responds,

That’s correct, but only because the Gospel does not come with any offer at all.

Max writes,

The offer is: “Come to Christ, and you will find a real, finished, all‑sufficient atonement that actually saves everyone who comes.”

Bret responds,

That is not an offer. An offer says, “Christ offers to you salvation if you will have it.” What you have above Max is a tautology. Of course, people who come to Christ find a real, finished, all‑sufficient atonement that actually saves because the only people who come to Christ come because of a real, finished, all‑sufficient atonement actually saved.

Max writes,

Christ’s death is of infinite worth — fully sufficient to save every sinner on earth. The question of for whom He intended His death is a different category from the question of to whom God commands and promises salvation. Scripture keeps those categories distinct, and I’m trying to honor that distinction.

Bret

Logic also keeps the idea of “offer” distinct from the idea of “command.” You keep saying offer and then you explain “offer” as if it means “command.”

Christ commands all men everywhere to repent but He could not possibly give a well-intentioned offer to all men everywhere to repent since that would involve Him in the contradiction that He dies only for the elect, but He offers His salvation to those who were never elect and for whom He did not die for (i.e. – The reprobate).

Max writes

So the offer isn’t an empty box. The gift is Christ Himself — a real Savior with a real atonement that actually saves all who come to Him.

Bret responds

The offer is an empty box for the reprobate because there is no way it can be well-intentioned.

You don’t actually believe that man’s coming to Christ is the trigger event that effectuates Christ’s death for them do you Max?

Maybe instead it is the case that people come to Christ because they were saved at and in the Cross? Maybe that’s the reason why they hear the command (not offer) to repent and have faith?

Scripture’s Stand Against Zionism/Dispensationalism

16 ‘After this I will return
And will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down;
I will rebuild its ruins,
And I will set it up;
17 So that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord,
Even all the Gentiles who are called by My name,
Says the Lord who does all these things.’

18 “Known to God from eternity are all His works.

Now lest we miss the point here what Scripture is teaching is that when the Gentiles came in the Church God fulfilled His promise to restore Israel. There is no future promise left that Israel is going to be restored. The Messiah has come. The nations are streaming in. God’s promise is fulfilled. God has no future promises left for Christless Israel.

The language concerning the “fallen tent of Israel” being rebuilt (Acts 15:16) communicates the restoration of the Davidic Kingdom that was at that time now becoming the Israel of God (the Church). With the ingathering of the Nations (Gentiles) David’s Kingdom has been re-established as promised in the book of Amos. The fulfillment then is anchored in Jesus Christ, the promised descendant of David who has ascended to sit on the celestial throne on the right hand of the Father.

The Christless Jews rejected their Messiah and in rejecting their Messiah they rejected any future claim to some kind of claim to a restored land, and to any future hope of being ruled by a Messiah that they still look for. They rejected all the promises of the Old Covenant because all those promises are anchored in Jesus the Christ. If the Jews will not have Christ, they cannot have any of God’s promises for all of God’s promises are only “yea, and Amen in Christ.” The Christ has come. Israel has been restored. The Davidic Kingdom is present in He who rules an eternal Kingdom.

But it is not only the Davidic Kingdom that is rebuilt from a state of despair so that now the Church is the Israel of God and the inheritor of all the promises of the OT, but it is also the case that because Jesus the Christ has provided the restoration of Israel in building up of the Church there is no longer any need for a rebuilt Temple in Jerusalem.

In John 2 Jesus refers to Himself as “The Temple,” that if destroyed will be raised again in three days. (An obvious reference to the resurrection.) Hebrews 8 reinforces the truth any anticipation of a future rebuilt Temple in the land of Christless Israel is utter nonsense.

“Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; a minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.” Hebrews 8:1–2

Jesus Christ is the rebuilt Temple and is the Great High Priest who alone can save from sin. As such any demand or requirement that a third temple has to be rebuilt on the site were the Dome of the Rock now sits is blasphemy and treason against Jesus the Christ. To look for and support the rebuilding of a Jewish Temple is a lifting of the middle finger to Christ and His work on the Cross.

Keep in mind that the whole purpose of the Temple was to provide a place for God’s presence and where sacrifice for sin could be made. Scripture makes it clear that Jesus the Christ tabernacled among us, communicating that the Lord Christ was and is the presence of God. Scripture makes it clear that with the sacrifice of Christ there is no necessity for the sacrifices that take place in a temple.

Hebrews 10:11 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But when Christ[b] had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, 13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. 14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.

What’s more, Scripture further teaches that the body of Christ — the Church — is the Temple with Christ as the cornerstone.

 

Eph. 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; 21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: 22In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

So, we see from this brief overview that God’s Word does not allow for the errant thinking and eisegesis that comes with Christian Zionism and Dispensationalism. Those movements, while perhaps well intended, are anti-Christ. They are in contradiction to the clear teaching of God’s Word. Scripture focuses us on the Lord Jesus Christ who is the fulfillment of all God’s promises. Scripture teaches us that to look for more fulfilled promises for Christless Israel or to look for a future Temple is to war against God.

In the end, Jews may gather back in Israel, and they may yet build a third temple but all that will be is more stink of blasphemy in the nostrils of God. It will not mean a damn thing in terms of fulfilled prophecy.

 

 

.

Modern Israel Is Not What the Christian Zionists Say It Is

To believe that the modern state of Israel is the fulfillment of prophecy, as the Dispensationalists and Christian Zionists do, is to sever the line of Scripture leading to Jesus. Jesus repeatedly speaks as such.

“Therefore, I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to [another] people who will produce the fruit of it.”   Mt. 21:43

Of course, Christ is referring to the Church here in Mt. 21. There are not promises left to chthonic Israel and as such the current modern state of Israel cannot be the fulfillment of prophecy because Christless Israel has been stripped by God.

Luke 13:7 Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground? 8 And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it: 9 And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down.

Israel did not bear fruit and so it was cut down. Chthonic Israel is deleted. There are no promises to a modern Christless Jewish people.

And when He saw a fig tree by the wayside, He came to it and found nothing thereon, but leaves only. And He said unto it, “Let no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever.” And immediately the fig tree withered away. (Mt. 21:19)

This is because all the promises were ever only for the Jew who was one inwardly, who knew the circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit. Never by the letter (Romans 2:29).

The New Testament crowns the Church as the new Israel of God and declares that it is the inheritor of all the OT promises, and the land the Church inherits is the whole world (Eph. 6:2-3, Mt. 5:5) and not some desert dirt in the Middle East. Dispensationalists and Christian Zionists who insist that chthonic Israel has some kind of divine claim to the land are in violation of the whole testimony of Scripture.

We owe those people, who Paul says are the children of the slave woman (Galatians 4) nothing but the command that they repent. It is idiotic to think that God will not bless us if we fail to bless the sons of Hagar.

These are not God’s chosen people. They are, as the Scripture teaches, the synagogue of Satan. They are those who say that they are Jews but are not, but are liars (Rev. 3:9). “Christian” support for Zionism based on Jews being owed the inheritance of Father Abraham because they are the sons of Hagar traced through Ishmael is crushed under the weight of a proper hermeneutic.

All this Dispensational and Christian Zionism has poisoned the minds of many in the Christian Church and has turned the Christian Church into an outpost for non-Christian blasphemous thinking.

Christ As the Suffering Servant

37. Q. What do you confess when you say that he suffered?

A. During all the time he lived on earth, but especially at the end, Christ bore in body and soul the wrath of God against the sin of the whole human race.1 Thus, by his suffering, as the only atoning sacrifice,2 he has redeemed our body and soul from everlasting damnation,3 and obtained for us the grace of God, righteousness, and eternal life.4

1 Is 53; 1 Tim 2:6; 1 Pet 2:24; 3:18. 2 Rom 3:25; 1 Cor 5:7; Eph 5:2; Heb 10:14; 1 Jn 2:2; 4:10. 3 Rom 8:1-4; Gal 3:13; Col 1:13; Heb 9:12; 1 Pet 1:18, 19. 4 Jn 3:16; Rom 3:24-26; 2 Cor 5:21; Heb 9:15.

It is during Lent that we find ourselves concentrating on those truths of Christianity that if they are brought up at all are brought up in a light and tertiary manner as if they are secondary issues. Huge Churches are built on the basis of not touching the issues that surround Lent. However, as we learn it is these subjects that often are at the heart of the Christian religion. We have taken up a couple of those truths the last two weeks. We looked at the subject of Repentance and the necessity, that because we are creatures, and because we are never completely free from the effects of Adam’s fall, our leaning into life should be characterized by repentance. We noted that because we always fall short of God’s perfect standard of righteousness in all that we think, do or say, our lives should be characterized as one of repentance.

Last week we considered the Lenten theme of humility. We said that if pride is the mother lode of all other sin then humility is the Round-up that kills pride. We spent some time considering the plethora of Scripture that reminds Christians over and over that God resists the proud by gives grace to the humble…. to the Scriptures that teach we are to clothe ourselves with humility. We insisted that it is only the Christian who ever pursues humility since the non-Christian, by definition, lives with self at the center of his whole existence. We insisted, that like repentance, the Christian life is one of constantly pulling the weed of self.

Most importantly, we noted that the Cross is at the center of repentance and humility. If we are to learn repentance and humility we must be students of the Cross. The Cross exposes our need for repentance reminding us of God’s righteous and holy standard by which sin is judged. If the price of sin was the Cross and if we grow in that understanding, then sorrow for our sin that issues in repentance is the hum of our lives.

Our repentance doesn’t improve our standing with God, but it reflects a growing gratitude for the Cross, and this gratitude demonstrates itself by a lifestyle of repentance and ever-growing obedience.

When we learn the Cross, we also learn humility. It is impossible to carry a proud and haughty mien when we consider the humility that Christ suffered. The Cross teaches that there Christ paid for all our pride, and the Spirit poured out because of the Cross works in God’s people to put to ever increasingly put to death pride, selfishness, and the desire to live with ourselves at the center.

This week we take up the subject of suffering. This is another motif of Lent along with Repentance and humility. This week we will take up the suffering of Christ and next week we will consider the call to our own suffering.

During all the time he lived on earth, but especially at the end, Christ suffered bearing the Wrath of God.

Here we find some surprised that it could be said that Christ suffered during all the time he lived on earth, thinking that the only suffering of Christ would have been restricted to when He entered into His passion … perhaps starting at Gethsemane and continuing on through the Cross. The Catechism teaches here that thinking is not accurate.

Here our Christian theologians introduce the distinction between Christ’s active and passive obedience. Here is a distinction that seeks to not isolate the whole of Christ’s obedience one aspect from another, but rather seeks to give us handles to better understand the suffering of Christ.

When we talk about the active obedience of Christ we mean the obedience Christ offered up during life with regard to His perfect obedience to the requirements of God’s Law. When we speak of the passive obedience of Christ we are referring to the fact that Christ, in spite of His perfect obedience to the Law during His life, Christ received the due penalty for God’s law having been violated.

Now, it is easier to think of Christ’s suffering under the distinction of His passive obedience whereby Christ suffers vicariously in our place for our sins. On the Cross Christ suffers the wrath of God as a sin offering, suffering as our substitute for the sin of the elect. The suffering in his passive obedience is not a suffering He deserves in Himself but a suffering He is required to meet as our representative – as in our place.

This passive substitutionary obedience and suffering is clearly taught in passages like,

For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. II Cor. 5:21

For Christ also suffered for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. I Pt. 3:18

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us. For it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree.” Gal. 3:13

So, it is easy enough, to trace the suffering of Christ in relation to His passive obedience … In and through His passive obedience Christ suffers the just penalty of the wrath of God against Sin. In His passive obedience Christ on the Cross is the representative sinner vicariously suffering for the sins of the elect.

But now we pause to ask if the Catechism is correct by teaching that Christ suffered during all the time on earth? Scripture here points us in a direction that confirms the Catechism’s teaching when Isaiah writes;

He is despised and rejected by men,
A Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief.
And we hid, as it were, our faces from Him;
He was despised, and we did not esteem Him. (Is. 53:3)


The Scripture teaches here that Christ suffered as despised and rejected. Christ is characterized as a man of sorrows acquainted with grief and for anybody who has knows even a wee bit of sorrows and grief, certainly we understand the suffering of that.

Jesus Himself speaks of His suffering when He teaches;

If the world hates you, understand that it hated Me first. / If you were of the world, it would love you as its own. Instead, the world hates you, because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. / Remember the word that I spoke to you: ‘No servant is greater than his master.’ If they persecuted Me, they will persecute you as well; if they kept My word, they will keep yours as well.

Here again is that idea of the suffering Messiah. Who would gainsay that universal hatred is indeed suffering – especially when that hatred is completely unjust? Yet, here is Christ testifying to His own suffering… His own persecution.

Now, the Catechism does teach that His suffering was especially at the end but the suffering at the end was of a piece with all the suffering the Lord Christ underwent during His whole life.

So, when we think of the active obedience of Christ wherein He fulfills all the demands of the law in our place we also think of the suffering of our Lord Christ. We are reminded that this suffering in His active obedience was a suffering that was redemptive – that is to say it is suffering in our place and for us. It remains a vicarious suffering.

We are reminded then of the suffering Messiah. We see His suffering as He lived His life in a world that was in unremitting rebellion against His Father. We see His suffering in His tears over the death of His friend Lazarus and in the lament we find Him anguishing over the refusal of Jerusalem to repent. These could not be isolated moments of suffering. Our Lord Christ healed the sick, delivered the possessed, raised the dead but in the doing of all that would He not have suffered seeing the weight of sin’s curse and its effect on creation?

In teasing this out … the suffering found in both the active and passive obedience of Christ we learn that the Catechism is Scripturally correct in putting in our mouths and in our memories the truth that;

“During all the time he lived on earth, but especially at the end, Christ bore in body and soul the wrath of God against sin”

The Hymn writers teach us the same;

Man of Sorrows
What a name
For the Son of God who came
Ruined sinners to reclaim
Hallelujah, what a Savior

There is something else going on here in the Catechism as it reflects Scripture that is going on here. In the Catechism’s question and answer with its emphasis on the suffering of the Lord Christ is pointing us towards the fact that the Christian faith is definitionally cruciform. By this I mean that the Catechism, when it teaches us about Christ’s suffering, in it’s relating that suffering to Christ and His being the sin-bearer.

There is a subtle point I want us to see here. It is subtle but vitally important all the same. By connecting Christ’s suffering as being related to bearing God’s wrath against sin the Catechizers, following Scripture, teaches us that the heart of the Christian faith is Christus pro me – Christ for me…. or in the corporate … “Christ for us.”

The Christian life though it is definitionally inclusive of “following Christ,” does not find its beating heart in a definition that Christianity means following Jesus.

I bring this out because I heard Tucker Carlson, say this week;

“A Christian is one who follows Jesus.”

Tucker Carlson

We give Carlson some latitude because he is young in the Christian faith. However, this is not the heart of what it means to be a Christian. No … this is the liberal definition of Christian. Liberals are forever asking “What would Jesus Do.” It is the Biblical Christian who promotes instead as the main question; “What did Jesus do.” And the answer to that question is the Gospel … is the primary definition of Christianity. What Jesus did is in the incarnation he added a Human nature, with the purpose of obeying all God’s law perfectly vicariously (in the place of) His people as conjoined with the purpose of suffering the just penalty of God’s wrath against both our sin nature and all our sinful acts that flow from that sin nature.

The proper definition of Christian is one who owns the sacrifice and suffering of Jesus Christ for their sins. That needs be the first thing that is said when someone asks “what is a Christian.” A Christian is someone who confesses;

A. During all the time he lived on earth, but especially at the end, Christ bore in body and soul the wrath of God against the sin of the whole human race.1

Now, let us begin our descent in landing this morning by noting the whole theme of Christ’s suffering being substitutionary. I haven’t used that word yet in this morning though I have frequently used the words “vicarious” and “vicariously.” This is a word, like propitiation, that we seldom use anymore in our communication. As Christians though it needs to be in our vocabulary because it is at the heart of our Christian faith.

Vicarious communicates the idea of substitution and so, vicarious suffering refers to the concept of enduring pain or hardship on behalf of others.

We have heard already the verses that teach that Christ suffered in our place, in our stead, on our behalf, in our place … or simply for us.

For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, I Peter 3:18

And again,

so also Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many; and He will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who eagerly await Him. Hebrew 9:28

Here we are required to bring out the truth that Christ suffers as our representative. He suffers the suffering and death that we deserved. The wrath of God against the Messiah is not a wrath against His person. Scripture gives us the voice of the Father saying twice; “This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased.”

So, the suffering of Christ explained as the wrath of God is not against The Lord Jesus Christ in and of Himself. The suffering of Christ is explained by the fact that Christ is in our place. He suffers the suffering that was ours to suffer. He suffers as our Federal Head. All the deserved suffering of the elect in His redeemed church Christ suffers in our stead. He suffers the wrath of God so that we have peace with God.

This explains why every Christian minister of every generation commands all men everywhere to repent. If they will not own this suffering of Christ in their place … if they will not see the love of the Father and Son in His suffering vicariously then the terrible eternal wrath of God remains upon them. Oh, why will you suffer God’s eternal judgment? Why will you continue stiff necked and unrepentant? Why will you curse humility and continue to walk in pride?

So vicarious is the idea of substitution … Christ vicariously suffered in our place, on our behalf, for us. This is the beating heart of our undoubted Christian faith and during a Biblical Lent it is the theme that we are drawn back to over and over again.

And it is this Reformed theme that makes Lent different from the Lent of Rome. By learning the Cross we understand that Christ’s suffering requires no improvement on our part. Our repenting during Lent, our clothing ourselves with humility during Lent, our suffering during Lent are done out of a pursuit for an unsure redemption … a wrestling with God to gain a still uncertain salvation. Our repenting, clothing ourselves with humility, our suffering during Lent is in gratitude for the certainty of the salvation that could not be improved upon because of Christ’s humility and suffering in our place.

Now, there is just one more loose strand to clarify before we close and that is the language used by the catechism can easily confuse some folks. It is this phrase I refer to;

“During all the time he lived on earth, but especially at the end, Christ bore in body and soul the wrath of God against the sin of the whole human race.”

Now, we have learned this morning about the vicarious nature of all this. We have labored to demonstrate the suffering that was found both in Christ’s active and passive obedience. Now we want to clean up that little phrase “the whole human race.”

People will and do easily walk away from this thinking that Christ suffered and died for each and every person who has ever lived. We want to draw out that is not the intent of the Catechizers.

First of all, we note that the Catechism has taught us that we are redeemed by this vicarious suffering of Christ. Now, if we take that idea and marry it to the idea of Christ bearing the wrath of God against the whole human race we would have to conclude that the writers of the Catechism were Universalist. If Christ suffered for the whole human race in the sense of every man who has ever lived than every man who has ever lived would be redeemed. This is Universalism.

The catechism nowhere else teaches this idea.

Now, some will insist that Christ suffered for the sin of every single man but every single man, they will say, has to have faith in Christ and if they don’t have faith in Christ then they will die in their sins. The problem here is found in the fact that a lack of faith is sin and if Christ suffered for the sins of every single person who has ever lived then His suffering paid for the sin that is found in a lack of faith.

So, unless we believe that the Catechism is teaching Universalism we cannot believe that it is teaching that Christ died either literally for each and every person who has ever lived or even hypothetically for each and every person who has ever lived. Saying Christ bore the wrath of God for the whole human race proves too much.

The resolution to this is to understand that the death of Christ is sufficient for the whole human race … that is, that the death of Christ is not lacking in any degree

The Canons of Dordt teach this;

The death of the Son of God is the only and most perfect sacrifice and satisfaction for sin, and is of infinite worth and value, abundantly sufficient to expiate the sins of the whole world.

The Canons of Dordt also teaches the particularity of Christ’s death;

For this was the sovereign counsel and most gracious will and purpose of God the Father that the quickening and saving efficacy of the most precious death of His Son should extend to all the elect, for bestowing upon them alone the gift of justifying faith, thereby to bring them infallibly to salvation; that is, it was the will of God that Christ by the blood of the cross, whereby He confirmed the new covenant, should effectually redeem out of every people, tribe, nation, and language, all those, and those only, who were from eternity chosen to salvation and given to Him by the Father; that He should confer upon them faith, which, together with all the other saving gifts of the Holy Spirit, He purchased for them by His death; should purge them from all sin, both original and actual, whether committed before or after believing; and having faithfully preserved them even to the end, should at last bring them, free from every spot and blemish, to the enjoyment of glory in His own presence forever.

Stating Reality Does Not Equal Black-Pilling … Maat & The PWC

Imagine you were among the Israelites living under the Egyptian Maat system. The Egyptian Maat system (there was a Goddess Maat) represented the divine force that governed Egypt’s cosmos, law, and daily life through principles of truth, justice, harmony, balance, order, reciprocity, and property. Further, the Egyptian Maat system was a social slavery system that provided order and was arranged in the shape of a pyramid. At the very apex of the pyramids was the Pharaohs. Everybody in Egypt was a slave of Pharaoh. Then there were those immediately beneath Pharaoh who were his slaves but had for slaves everyone socially inferior to them. Down and down it went until you found the Hebrews at the bottom of the pyramid social structure. They were slaves to all. This is part of what the Maat system provided for the Egyptians.

Now, the problem here was never any one Pharoah. The problem was Maat … the false goddess and the system that she inspired.

In this context, imagine any Egyptian saying … “If we just get a new Pharaoh, everything will change.” That would be an obvious falsehood since any new Pharaoh is still going to be working in the context of Egyptian Maat. Oh, he may tinker around the edges, but real change was never going to come until Maat was brought down.

This is illustrative of where we are at now in the post-war consensus (PWC). The PWC is our Maat. Voting is not going to bring down the PWC because the PWC is the system that we live under and voting is part of our Maat. Politicians, Clergy, Corporate Chieftains, etc. will come and go but Maat isn’t going to change without counter-revolution. The Maat system will not let you vote to replace Maat.

So, it is not black pilling to recognize Maat and the implications of living in the current Maat. Electing a new Pharaoh is not going to get us out of Maat.
Vote if you please … but don’t believe that it is going to fundamentally change anything.

Voting may get you a different form of Maat. Kamala Harris would have given you more faggotry, trannie-ism, and boys in girls locker rooms, but Trump has given us more foreign wars, more Israel bonding, and more lies about getting rid of immigrants, however, it all remains within the bounds of the PWC — within the bounds of our current Maat system.

Working within Maat will never cast Maat out. These things go out only by prayer and fasting …. and counter-revolution.

So, as your anger rises against Trump, just keep in mind, that they are all just like Trump. They all are spit up from the Maat system. From Woodrow Wilson forwards they have all been just playing a role dictated to them by the Maat. You will NOT elect someone better or worse than Trump. They are all part of the Uniparty and the Uniparty is run by the elite Maat.

Since that is true … it really doesn’t matter who sits in the oval office.