First, a small apology for being absent so long. Jane and I were gifted with the Deep State Virus and though I think I’ve been sicker in the past I can say with certainty it has never taken me so long to fully recover from being ill.
Second, I’ve been reading while ill, Dr. Peter Breggin (MD) and Ginger Ross Breggin’s hot off the press book, “Covid-19 And The Global Predators; We Are The Prey.” If you want to know everything there is to know about the context and text of what we are living through I highly advise that you get a copy of this book. Breggin is readable and though it might drag at some point on the whole it does an excellent job of keeping the reader full of rage. For that reason, I can only read so many pages at any one sitting and as such I’m only 1/3 of the way through. What we are living through, as Breggin demonstrates is pure on euthanization. Breggin calls it premeditated mass murder on a global scale.
I will post more on Breggin later.
However, the thing that lit my fire to push me to return to Iron Ink was yet another gloriously stupid article by Rev. Kevin DeYoung. There are some chaps who write such drivel that they by themselves could have whole blogs dedicated to refuting them on a daily or semi-daily basis. DeYoung is one of those chaps. There are times I just have to turn away and put up with the fact that I can’t mop up an ocean of stupid from any one person. Readers of Iron Ink know that I have taken on DeYoung more than once here on Iron Ink. DeYoung’s latest article makes me rejoice that when he lived 30 minutes from me for years I had resolved to never meet the chap lest I go all assault and battery.
The latest dumbassery from DeYoung (hereinafter KD) can be found at this link for those who want to make sure that I have given KD and just thrashing.
First, let’s deal with the source of this bilge offered up by KD. It is none other than
Which sells itself as; “Sound journalism, grounded in facts and Biblical truth.”
For decades know the fish wrapping that is WORLD magazine has offered up itself as a Christian weekly publication. I wouldn’t let my worst enemies dog read World magazine. It has forever, at best, given people a Neo-Con spin on events. Joel Belz himself is no friend of Biblical Christianity as can be seen repeatedly by what has been printed in WORLD as well as what he has done personally in situations involving the Presbytery he is involved with. We did receive some good news this past week from WORLD at the red diaper baby Marvin Olasky toddled off the WORLD scene. The bad news is that he is going to be replaced by pink SBS President Albert Mohler.
I’d sooner read TIME or NEWSWEEK than WORLD magazine. At least with TIME and NEWSWEEK, I am not lured at all into thinking that somehow I am going to find Christian thinking between the covers. WORLD magazine is to the “news” world what Indiana Wesleyan University or Calvin University is to the Christian University world — A running joke.
Now we turn to KD’s piece.
KD writes of two problems with Christian Nationalism. The first problem KD offers is that there is not a set definition of what Christian Nationalism is and because there is not a set definition of what Christian Nationalism is we, therefore, can’t speak to the goodness of badness of Christian Nationalism since nobody knows for sure what it is. Therefore Christian Nationalism doesn’t really exist.
This is pure ignorance.
We could say the same thing about Christianity.
1.) The definition of Christianity is not agreed upon
2.) Therefore we cannot know that Christianity even exists since it’s definition is so disputed
3.) Therefore Christianity doesn’t exist
We could say the same thing about Marriage post-Obergefell vs. Hodges
1.) The definition of Marriage is not agreed upon
2.) Therefore we cannot know that Marriage even exists since its definition is so disputed
3.) Therefore Marriage doesn’t exist
I can just see some Atheists developing a Kevin DeYoung argument for the non-existence of God.
1.) The definition of God is not agreed upon
2.) Therefore we cannot know that God even exists since His definition is so disputed
3.) Therefore God doesn’t exist
You see what I mean by a full-on stupid argument by KD. It’s not even close to being rational.
Part of what it means to champion a position that people are arguing about is to offer your definition and then defend your definition as being the best reasonable offering of what that something is you are championing. The fact that there are different camps on what defines Christian Nationalism no more negates the reality of Christian national than the fact that there are different camps on what defines sex dismisses the reality that sex exists. (For example, I, for one, argue that it is not possible for two men to have sex.)
But we press on lest whimsy possesses us. Next, KD offers;
KD asks in relation to Christian Nationalism, “So what are we talking about?”
Before I answer that question I’d like to ask KD what he is talking about? I mean KD if we are not going to champion Christian Nationalism of some nature as the guiding light for our social order what will we champion. Please KD give us a name of what you’re advocating. You don’t want Christian Nationalism? Does this mean you want “Christian Internationalism” (an oxymoron if there ever was one). Perhaps you want to continue with this current joke that is Democracy that argues for a separation of Church and State that only separates Christianity from the public realm? Is that what you want Kevin? Do you even know what you want? What is your pedigree to be even discussing this subject? Are people supposed to listen to you because you’re a “Rev.” Perish the thought. They sure shouldn’t be expected to listen to you for the reason that you make a lick of sense.
But back to DeYoung’s question. “What are we talking about when it comes to this issue of Christian Nationalism?” Maybe Kevin should consult the Church fathers. God knows they sure understood what this DeYoung designated strange beast was. If Kev wants to be tutored before he writes his next boneheaded article on the subject maybe he should consult Achord and Dow’s Anthology titled, “Who is my Neighbor; An Anthology in Natural Relations.”
But just in case Rev. DeYoung can’t manage to read such a fat book allow me to give him a few quotes
“We cannot agree in that cosmopolitan view of Christianity which undermines the particularities of our National Establishment, any more than we could agree in such a cosmopolitan view of philanthropy as would extinguish domestic affections, in all their vivid and constraining peculiarity of influence.”
Rev. Hugh M’Neile, M.A.
Sermon — Nationalism in Religion
Delivered — 08 May, 1839
“Before the camps, I regarded the existence of nationality as something that shouldn’t be noticed—nationality did not really exist, only humanity. But in the camps, one learns: if you belong to a successful nation you are protected and you survive. If you are part of universal humanity—too bad for you.”
Cosmopolitanism gives us one country, and it is good; nationalism gives us a hundred countries, and every one of them is the best.
G. K. Chesterton
“Nationalism, within proper limits, has the divine sanction; an imperialism that would, in the interest of one people, obliterate all lines of distinction is everywhere condemned as contrary to the divine will. Later prophecy raises its voice against the attempt at world-power, and that not only, as is sometimes assumed, because it threatens Israel, but for the far more principal reason, that the whole idea is pagan and immoral.
Now it is through maintaining the national diversities, as these express themselves in the difference of language, and are in turn upheld by this difference, that God prevents realization of the attempted scheme… [In this] was a positive intent that concerned the natural life of humanity. Under the providence of God, each race or nation has a positive purpose to serve, fulfillment of which depends on relative seclusion from others.”
However, these quotes are irrelevant because these Church Fathers didn’t have the brilliant intellect of Kevin DeYoung to inform us that because people don’t agree exactly on what Christian Nationalism means, therefore, it doesn’t exist.
The next blindingly brilliant observation by DeYoung is
“Which leads to the second big problem: where are the people actually advocating for Christian nationalism?”
Well, Kevin can start with me. If he wants to push out beyond that boundary he might consider the consistent Postmillennialists that he knows (assuming he knows any). Indeed, only an Amillennialist or Premillennialist would claim that there is nobody advocating for Christian Nationalism. Maybe KD should ask himself why people are so absolutely mindlessly freaking out about the rise of Christian Nationalism? Could it be that Christian Nationalism is the one enemy that the enemies of Christ don’t want to see rising to threaten their anti-Christ nationalism?
And while we are on anti-Christ Nationalism let me just remind people that unless KD wants to join the Marxist Globalists and Internationalists, Nationalism is the only game in down. Secondly, let me ask DeYoung; “What is so ruddy wrong with Christian Nationalism?” Is Christ your King or not Rev. DeYoung and if He is your King what frightens you about Christ being recognized as King of every nation so that every nation practices Christian Nationalism? Admit KD… it is your putrid eschatology that causes you to have the heebie-jeebies when contemplating and writing about Christian Nationalism? I’ll tell you what scares me Kev. What scares me is clergy who don’t seem to understand that you cannot serve two masters. DeYoung, as the end of his article demonstrates, wants a social order that is kind of Christian and kind of not Christian. Has this clown ever heard of the Reformed anti-thesis? Sorry, Kevin but you’re not going to be able to fence straddle. You’re going to have to embrace that little phrase in the Lord’s Prayer that says “thy Kingdom come” while realizing with the coming of the Kingdom means at the same time the coming of Christian Nationalism. Yes, Yes, I know your lousy eschatology teaches you that you can have both the coming of the Kingdom and the Kingdom of Christ being defeated by National leaders who have no interest in seeing God’s Kingdom flower in the social-order realm. That is one reason I hate your defeatist eschatology.
The right Rev. DeYoung then writes,
There is no similar body of literature on the subject of Christian nationalism.
All, I can do is point DeYoung to guys like Rev. Dr. Francis Nigel Lee and even Dr. R. J. Rushdoony. If he would read the Achord & Dow Anthology I linked early it also might help the man.
Next, we find DeYoung writing;
Does this mean we are wrong to criticize Christian nationalism?
Keep in mind that KD suggested that Christian nationalism doesn’t really exist earlier in his piece so if Christian Nationalism doesn’t really exist how can anybody criticize what, per KD, doesn’t exist?
KD’s next whopper leaves me slackjawed,
“We ought to reject all manner of conspiracy theories, racial partiality, demagoguery, and the syncretistic blending of Christianity and Americana.”
Actually, what we need to reject are those who tell us that we ought to reject all manner of conspiracy theories, racial partiality, demagoguery, and the syncretistic blending of Christianity and Americana.”
So, per DeYoung, I should reject Scripture’s record that the Pharisees conspired to deny the resurrection of Christ. Per DeYoung, I should rip Psalm 2 out of the Bible. It is just a magnificently idiotic thing to say that “all manner of conspiracy theories ought to be rejected.” Certainly, some should be rejected but all manners? I will agree however that the demagoguery of Kevin DeYoung ought to be rejected immediately. I will also agree I have no interest in the syncretistic blending of Christianity and Americana. I loathe Murican Bears almost as much as I loathe Kevin DeYoung. However, I loathe all that because it is commonly a mixture of leftist tropes concerning America combined with Christianity.
Next, KD gives us this pearl;
Further, we must not give in to hating their side, deifying our side, and looking to politics to solve our deepest problems and give us meaning in life. If this is Christian Nationalism, the only Christian position is to be steadfastly against it.
I agree that we should not deify our side. I do not agree that we should not hate the enemies of Christ. Love for God and His Word moves us to hate the Cultural Marxists, Critical Race Theorists, and all those who would tear down the Kingdom of God. My love for these types demands my hatred of them in hopes that they will see God’s opposition and so flee to repent. So, Kevin, can one be a Christian Nationalist if they don’t deify their side but still hate that which is evil and cling to that which is good?
KD ends by demonstrating that he wants to ride two horses at the same time.
“Surely there must be some way to seek Christian influence in the political realm that falls short of heresy and idolatry. Surely it is not wrong to speak about the Christian underpinnings of our Founding and desire to see our country guided by Christian principles and undergirded by Christian truth. Surely we do not wish to denounce every Christian praying Proverbs 14:13 or 2 Chronicles 7:14 (even if the latter was a promise made to Israel). There must be some middle ground between a theocratic Christian nationalism and a culturally-acceptable Christian nothingism. I think most Christians are seeking to avoid both nationalism and national destruction.”
I would like to ask KD if it would be heresy or idolatry to have Biblical Christian magistrates up and down our political system who would seek to implement Biblical standards just as the humanists and Talmudists seek to implement humanism and Talmudism in our social order? Would it be wrong to have a Cromwell again Kevin? Would it be wrong to have a Calvin in Geneva again Kevin? What is wrong with a Christian Nationalism that honors Christ above all other competing gods?
In closing, I completely eschew your proposed middle ground. We are swirling the drain in the West and you’re asking for middle ground? Do you mean middle ground between Drag Queen Story Hour and Biblical Christianity? Do you mean middle ground between Marxists burning our cities down and a stable social order? Sorry Kev, Jesus said that “he who does not gather with me scatters.”
Clearly, my disappointment came through in this response. Understand though, that my disappointment is not only in Kevin DeYoung. With that man I just reckon it as “pigs and grunts.” However, my disappointment extends also to WORLD printing this simpleton bilge. But my biggest disappointment is that so many will read this DeYoung tripe and nod in ready agreement with every idiotic thing that man says.
It is that disappointment seen time after time in “Christian” publications that at times almost crushes me.