On Pit-bulls and Love

Recently, I experienced all the joy of being attacked by a pit-bull and the subsequent delight of recovering from a significant dog bite. The whole experience got me thinking about the modern idea of “love” vis-a-vis an older idea of love. Allow me to explain.

A couple of days after the event I was contacted by the area Animal Control people who informed me that the dog would not be put down. Initially, I was good with that since I know the animal in question is a pet to some young children who doubtlessly love the animal. Having been a child once (it’s true… really) and having loved my own pets when a child I know that I would not have wanted my pet put down upon an incident that my parents told me was “not typical for the dog.” (Something I was told immediately after the incident by the owners while I sat dazed on the road.)

This is the love of seen consequences. I have compassion for the children (no, I don’t have any compassion for the criminal dog) and out of that compassion, I don’t want to see their feelings hurt.

However, this could also be called hatred in terms of unseen consequences of my agreeing to a lenient approach with the animal in question. The neighborhood that I live in, and where this happened is teeming with children. My agreement for lenient treatment for this animal, while putatively loving to its owners (the seen consequence) is potentially hateful to the next child or person who is attacked and bitten by the dog. My leniency has the consequence of endangering some unseen future person who could share my fate since I was so full of compassion for the children for whom the dog was a pet. I’ve had compassion for the children at the expense of showing a lack of compassion for some future child or person. If somebody else is bitten by this creature, you can be sure I am going to be kicking myself for being so “nice.” This thought has grown exponentially in my musings when I learned the data showing that nearly two-thirds of all dog-bite fatalities come from pit-bulls and this in spite of their only comprising six percent of America’s dog population.

Now, enlarge this idea on a grander scale and see the impact of this. For years we practiced a love wherein we thought about the unseen consequences. For example, in our social order and culture, for years if a young woman was pregnant out of wedlock, she would disappear from school and perhaps be sent to some relative who lived away from the community in question. Help could still be expected but it would help via the back door and not the front door. We look back on that now and think about how unloving that action was and we do so because we have forgotten the love that was being shown to other young ladies who were not pregnant and who may be less likely to engage in the behavior that resulted in the social ostracism of one of their friends. Like my action with the pit-bull which bit me, we are “loving” according to seen consequences and not loving according to unseen consequences.

Today, we don’t do anything to communicate such an action as a taboo because to do so would not be “loving,” just as my not wanting to put the dog that bit me down was loving to one party but unloving to some potential future person.

Love is seldom a zero-sum game. When we offer some version of love to one person we see we very often deprive love to some person who is unseen and not being taken into consideration. When we offer “love” by not visiting capital crimes with capital punishment we show “love” to the criminal but we withhold our love to God and the victim’s family. When we offer “love” to the illegal alien by the spending of our non-infinite nation’s resources we are with-holding our love to the citizen. And when I show love to the children of the pit-bull, I may well be showing a lack of love to the next person who may well be mauled more than I was.

 

Rev. Mika Edmondson On the Need For Nations and Ethnicities

Recently Rev. Mika Edmondson, a non-caucasian minister in Grand Rapids, Michigan tweeted out below on Twitter. He makes many of the same points that I was attempting to make in my post here,

http://ironink.org/?paged=2

I’m glad to see another minister making the same argument. I do hope he isn’t called a “white supremacist” for making these points as I was for making many of the same points.

Rev. Edmondson writes,

“Colorblind theology denies 

1. God’s promise to Abraham that “in you all the nations shall be blessed”(Gen18:18)

2. The Father’s promise to the Son that “I will make you a light to the nations”(Is.49:6)

3. The Spirits promise to us that “all the peoples will praise God” (Ps 67:5) 

4. Christ’s great commission to disciple the nations.

5.The Spirit’s work to prepare us for a multi-ethnic table. In Acts 10, the Lord prepares Peter with a vision, not only to preach to Gentiles but to accept them as clean/equals in Christ.

6. One of the main tenets of the historic Christian faith as outlined in the Apostles’ Creed. “I believe in the holy Catholic Church” Catholicity means precisely the opposite of colorblindness, celebrating the inclusion of all ethnicities in Christ.

7. Christ’s power to heal racial divisions, disparities, and injustices by ignoring their ongoing impact Colorblind theology undermine unity in the church by refusing to acknowledge significant ethnic differences or address significant problems.

8. Christ’s command to neighbor love by refusing to see or love others in their cultural particularity. It suggests there is nothing about the culture of its neighbor to really see or appreciate.”

Christ’s Ascension — 2018

 

Ephesians 1:17 I pray that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him, 18 the eyes of your understanding being enlightened, that ye may know what is the hope of His calling, and what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, 19 and what is the exceeding greatness of His power toward us who believe, according to the working of His mighty power, 20 which He wrought in Christ when He raised Him from the dead and set Him at His own right hand in the heavenly places,21 far above all principality and power and might and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come.22 And God hath put all things under His feet, and hath given Him to be the head over all things to the church,

This past Thursday was Ascension day.
 
Ascension Day is the 40th day after the celebration of Easter. Through History, the Church recalls the ascension of Christ into Heaven and celebrates His triumphant rule over all Creation as the Victorious Priest-King who has been invested with all authority on heaven and earth. Ascension day is another high celebratory day in the Church Calendar.
 
In the Ascension Christ’s Exaltation moves towards its apex which finds the Lord Christ sitting in Sessional rule with the Father. You remember in Christ’s Humiliation there was the incarnation, the crucifixion, and the burial so in His Exaltation there is the resurrection, ascension, and session.
 
We remember that the Ascension of the Lord Christ is a necessary aspect of the narrative of the Gospel. We confess the Ascension of the Lord Christ when we confess the Apostles Creed.
 
he ascended into heaven,
and is seated at the right hand of God the Father Almighty,


I.) Ascension and Christ as King

 

Here we see that the Ascension of Christ … The Father’s “setting Christ at His own Right hand,” is an act of enthronement and empowerment. In the Ascension, Christ is lifted  “far above all principality and power and might and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world but also in that which is to come. 22 And God hath put all things under His feet, and hath given Him to be the head over all things to the church.”
In the Ascension Christ then is seen as the Father’s assigned King to rule and have dominion. All things. This is why the great Dutch theologian and polymath could say,“There is not a square inch in the whole domain of our human existence over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all, does not cry, Mine!”
Dr. Joel Boot notes that this Ascension … this Enthronement of the Lord Christ has become an inconvenient truth in many quarters in the Church today.
“In (a prominent Reformed Theologians) culture of paradox, the Holy Spirit is practically invisible and thus the glorious ascension of our Lord is transformed from the regal setting of Christ at His Father’s right hand and the glorious procession of the Spirit upon the Church, into a tragic absence — and therefore a means of sanctifying inactivity and compromise by restricting the kingdom of God to saving souls from an alien world which God does not govern totally and consistently through His Christ. Instead, God has one rule for His church and another for the world of common grace, or natural law. What is that world? Do sinners share our moral framework? No, they suppress the truth in unrighteousness (Romans 1:18:32).Dr. Joe Boot 
The Mission of God — pg. 393Jesus Christ is the King over the whole cosmos. King over principalities and powers. Christ rules and so Christians are duty bound to walk in terms of God’s Law-Word as the King’s Law. King over all other powers that might contest and current dominions.

But the modern Church seeks to mute that truth or it seeks to claim the rule and dominion of Christ for their pet causes ignoring that with the King’s rule, comes already a pre-established law. Christ, in the total of Scripture, has already set forth what His cause is in terms of His rule.

That rule of the Ascended Christ is NOT merely a spiritual rule without also being a corporeal ruling. Many people hear “Spiritual” rule and they think “not real,” or “Gnostic.” Christ’s rule is absolute and while it begins as a Spiritual rule there is not spiritual ruling that does not have a corporeal correspondence.

Ascension Day should remind us of Christ’s Enthronement. The point of theAscension was to parallel the enthronement Psalms in the Old Testament. Those Psalms praised the King as he is ascending to take the Throne. In Christ’s Ascension Christ as gone up to take the Throne and He, right then and RIGHT NOW, rules over all.

God has gone up with a shout,
Yahweh with the sound of a trumpet.
Sing praise to God, sing praises.
Sing praises to our King, sing praises.
For God is the King of all the earth.
Sing praises with understanding.
God reigns over the nations.
God sits on his holy throne.
The princes of the peoples are gathered together,
the people of the God of Abraham.
For the shields of the earth belong to God.
He is greatly exalted!

Here in Psalm 47 we find what looks to be the description of a coronation, with shouts, trumpets and songs of praise.  God takes his place on the throne, not only as king of Israel but of all the earth and all the nations. Jesus is God’s final Davidic King and in and with the Ascension He has taken His place on the throne, as King of all the earth and of each and all of the nations.

The Ascension of Christ thus communicates that Christ has triumphed and that His Kingdom has arrived. Christ rules as the Father’s Mediatorial King and rules to such an end as to constantly advance His already present Kingdom. Because of the Ascension of Christ, the Lord Christ is at the Right hand of the Father presenting His credentials as surety for His people. Because of the Ascension, we have peace with God.

The Ascension reminds us that inasmuch as Christ reigns we reign with and in Him. The reality of the Ascension of Christ should forever deliver us from pessimistic eschatology that insists that the Church will end defeated in time and space History.

We are connecting Christ’s Kingship to His Ascension. Here we desire to attempt to frame a proper juxtaposition of truths.

There are those in the Church who want to talk about Christ’s Kingship as if the Kingdom of God is going to be reflected absent the proclamation of the Cross of Christ. It is as if they believe that the current Kingdom of God will be participated in by men who never understood God’s just wrath against sin yet were brought into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross. This will never do. The Cross is the center of our proclamation because it constantly reminds us of our only solution for sin and our only standing before God. We can not participate in God’s building up of His Kingdom apart from the Cross.

However, on the other hand, there are those who never want to move beyond the Cross to the resurrection and the ascension. Christ is King NOW and just as His humiliation was seen in space and time History, so His exaltation will be embodied in space and time History as He triumphs by His Gospel over the nations until His enemies are made His footstool. There are those who warn against the dangers of an over-realized eschatology (expecting too much dominion now in this life) and in doing so they are warning against a theology of glory where the humility of the Cross is ignored. This is a profitable warning.

But we might also warn against an eschatology that is under-realized and one that diminishes the Ascension of Christ. We might warn against a theology that requires defeat and insists that the victories gained by the ascended Christ are only “spiritual” in nature. We might warn against forgetting the enthronement and Ascension of our Lord Christ and His intent on making his very real enemies into very real footstools. We might warn against a theology that closes the door to God’s reign on earth being made manifest so that all the Nations flow into the Mountain of the Lord’s house (Isaiah 2).

So, Jesus is the Ascended one, who has been given a name above every other name (Phil. 2), now sits at the right Hand of the Father to the end of the fulfillment of all that the Gospel intended to accomplish which is the ongoing extension of His now established rule. In His, Ascension God has set His steward King as regent over the nations until His enemy nations are made His footstool.

Now, none of this truth denigrates the message of the Cross. In order to come underneath the rule of the King one must understand their rebellion against and alienation from the Ascended King. Only the atoning death of Christ can answer that rebellion and alienation. However, once that rebellion is forgiven because of the finished work of Christ and the alienation set aside so that we are now adopted as co-heirs with Christ we now are part of the Kingdom of God and walk in terms of His law Word — a law word that will hold sway over everything once His enemies are made His footstool.

III.)  Ascension as Christ as Priest

With His Ascension, Christ appears on our behalf. He is not only Ascended to the end that He was given to be the head over all things to the church. But Jesus has ascended also to the end of continuing His priestly work on our behalf at the right hand of the Father. If you will recall, the role of the Priest was not only to offer up sacrifices for the people, representing the People before God, but the Priest also was to pray and interceded for the people. Christ made His once for all Priestly sacrifice for His people but He continues His Priestly work in His Ascension by praying for us, His Church.

Hebrews 7:24 but because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. 25 Therefore he is able to save completely[c]those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.

Romans 8:34 Who then is the one who condemns?No one. Christ Jesus who died—more than that, who was raised to life—is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us.

Little flock, on this Ascension Sunday we can remember that the Lord Christ is Ascended to the end to continue His Priestly work for us. His presence before the Father pleads our cause. Are you hurt? Downcast? Tempted? Persecuted? Overwhelmed? The Ascended Christ intercedes for His people.

III.) Ascension as Typological fulfillment

Jesus at His transfiguration speaks of His coming Death, Ressurection, Ascension, as an “Exodus” in the Transfiguration accounts in Scripture.
31They appeared in glory and spoke about His departure, which He was about to accomplish at Jerusalem. That Transfiguration account revealed Christ’s glory prior to the crucifixion, and it anticipated his resurrection and ascension. The Ascension is where Christ complete His Exodus departure. In the OT the Exodus was God’s work to release His people from bondage to Pharaoh into a land flowing with milk and honey. in the death, resurrection and ascension of the Lord Christ what is being communicated in terms of typological insight from the OT and a reasonable reason why the word “Exodus” is used to speak of the redemptive events at the end of Christ’s life is that in the Lord Christ the Spiritual Exodus of mankind is completed. Man, because of sin, and the fact that sin had not yet been fully dealt with was in a kind of bondage. Christ being man’s representative shared in that bondage. But with and in Christ a New Exodus is thus now possible and is inaugurated, and in that New Exodus, we have been delivered from the Kingdom of darkness to the Kingdom of God’s dear Son, just as Israel was delivered from Pharaoh’s Dark Kingdom. Christ, in all His redemptive work, including His Ascension is the anti-type to the Exodus of the OT.

As true then Christ also answers Moses as a type to an anti-type. Christ has His Exodus but as He is our representative head we have our Exodus in Him and He leads us to out of bondage into God’s favor.

The Scripture gets at this when it teaches that because of the Ascension, we have the assurance that we ourselves are ascended with Christ and so are ruling with Him.
Ephesians 2:6 And hath raised us up [b]together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,
Consistent w/ Federal Theology what is predicated of the Covenant head is predicated of His people.
Christ has ascended and so Federally and Covenantally speaking we have as well.
Compare Ephesians 1:20 w/ 2:6
20 which the Father worked in Christ when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places,
2:6 — Speaking of believers

6 and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,

Conclusion

Re-cap

The Ascension of Christ communicates that Christ has triumphed and that His Kingdom has arrived. Christ rules as the Father’s Mediatorial King and rules to such an end as to constantly advance His already present Kingdom. Because of the Ascension of Christ, the Lord Christ is at the Right hand of the Father presenting His credentials as surety for His people. Because of the Ascension, we have peace with God.

Ascension day should be celebrated with the same verve as the day we celebrate Easter.

Ascension day gives us confidence that all false ideologies and religions  will be crushed underneath the reign of the Ascended Christ.

Kiss the Ascended Son folks, lest he be angry and you perish in the way.

Kiss the Ascended Son Muslims, lest he be angry and you perish in the way.

Kiss the Ascended Son Postmodernists, lest he be angry and you perish in the way.

Kiss the Ascended Son Jewish folk, lest he be angry and you perish in the way.

Kiss the Ascended Son Buddhists, lest he be angry and you perish in the way.

Kiss the Ascended Son Hindus, lest he be angry and you perish in the way.

Kiss the Ascended Son Atheist Humanist, lest he be angry and you perish in the way.

The Ascended Son isn’t playing around. Kiss the Ascended Son.

 

 

This Week’s Accusation Du Jour … “Pastor Bret uses ‘Racist’ Words”

Last week I was informed by Chloe that I was being accused in some quarters of being a “white Supremacist.” As such, I posted a response trying to point out how ridiculous such a charge is and how it can only be lodged by someone who has been influenced by Cultural Marxist categories and who could possibly themselves be an unconscious part of the new Cultural Marxist proletariat crafted to overthrow historic Christianity. I tried to use quotes from some of the Dutch Reformed Church fathers to demonstrate that you can not fit a slim dime between what I was trying to communicate and what several of the Dutch Reformed fathers wrote as they handled Scripture.

This week, a friend of mine (Michael Fort) has pointed me to a blog where the accusation was recently made by an eminent person who has repeatedly (three times at last count) made the accusation that my words are racist. Color me stupid, but even I can begin to see the beginnings of a bad Zombie apocalypse movie where I serve a bit role for being devoured by the ravenous hordes. You will forgive me, dear reader, if I am to be served up as the main course if my intent is to at the very least give the Cultural Marxist Zombies a bit of indigestion on the way down.

So, here I am in the situation where the Zombie Apocalypse hordes are gathering and they are giving off that high pitched signal that you hear in those kinds of films for other Zombies to come and also shriek and dine. In this case, if I am to survive the rest of the film I am thus put in the position of having to provide a defense for why I am not a “racist.” The way things are rolling I’m sure I’ll be back the next few weeks defending myself from being a misogynist, homophobe, and one who enjoys grilling babies over an open flame.

Let me say, at the outset, as I have noted before that I am working at somewhat of a disadvantage here since I have no earthly idea of what “racist” means.  The word has no objective meaning apart from its intended work as a polemical sobriquet. If no one embraces for himself the definition of “racism” or “racist” as given by the Cultural Marxists and if further the definition is only attached to something that is in and of itself inherently wicked per those who sling around the word who would ever admit that they are a racist per the definition of Cultural Marxists? I sure don’t. The word becomes kind of a verbal biological weapon that is intended to poison the well before the conversation can begin.

But for the sake of argument lets just say that “racist” means a person who hates non-Caucasians. (Warning here … in the not too distant past I was told by another eminent person that the term non-caucasian is “racist.” I was also told by someone else that using the phrase “person of color” is “racist.” What’s a guy to do?) If the accusation that I am a “racist” means that I hate non-Caucasians then the proof that I am not a “racist” is the job of producing evidence that I don’t uniformly hate non-Caucasians.

The problem here however, is now I am put in the position of the Apostle Paul who said he spoke “as a fool” and “as a madman” in having to march out his bonafides in order to sustain his ministry among God’s people as he was dealing with the False Apostles (II Corinthians 11).  I am not comfortable in doing what follows since Scripture mentions that our deeds of charity should be done secret. However, what else can I do if I am not to be eaten alive by the Cultural Marxists Zombie hordes?

I have been in the ministry 30 years this September. Along the way, I have been honored to try and help people from countless numbers of tribes, nations, and tongues. In my first ministry in South Carolina, where I spent 6 years, for two of those years I was instrumental in creating and putting together an old-fashioned tent revival for the tiny community that I served. We went out of our way to include and invite the black churches in the area. Many folks came from both the black and white churches. One of those two years we invited a friend of mine who I graduate Seminary with — a black pastor — who gave the message on each night of the “Revival meeting.” We put up a  huge banner over the town thoroughfare (imagine a tiny version of Mayberry RFD) and we rented and pitched a huge tent. We brought in a top-notch music guy who generously donated his talents. We put down sawdust. We had the black choirs from the black churches do some of the music. We had fellowship. The children played on the lawn as children do. Then we went back to worship in our respective churches week by week. I don’t know how much of an impact that had? One can never know or measure those kinds of things. No one asked me about this before deciding to launch the potential professionally career-ending charge of using words that are “racist.”

Then there was the work my friend Karl and I did. Karl was the Presbyterian minister in the city Church (population 500) and I was the Presbyterian minister in the little country rural Church. We had attended Seminary together. I came to love Karl like a brother. And like brothers, we were involved in each other’s life at the time. One of the things we did together at Christmas time was to have our congregations wrap up and donate gifts for children which he and I would then distribute to families in need. Karl and I went to white homes and we went to black homes trying to bring a wee bit of good will to impoverished people.

Then there was my friendship with Amos and Methrane Mateva. They belong to the Shona people and were from Zimbabwe. They lived in the trailer behind our trailer. We had classes together and had long conversations about what we were learning. My, at the time toddler-daughter Laura-Jane, and Amos’s toddler daughter Vimbai would often play together as we talked. When I took my first charge in South Carolina we continued to try and be of some service to the Matevas. We planted a huge garden together in the large plot of land that the new manse sat on. I remember Amos and I struggling together to pull up the Kudzu so as to clear the land and give our vegetable plants root room to grow. When harvest time came we shared the produce with the Matevas. I introduced the Matevas to the new congregation, Jane, I was serving. There were those in that Southern rural congregation who were at first, kind of uneasy with the idea but after Amos gave his presentation of life in Zimbabwe the congregation was largely won over.  That congregation was a wonderful place to start a career in the ministry and I praise God daily for them in my life.

Eventually, I would go on a 9-day fact-finding tour to Zimbabwe to investigate the possibility of my wife and I going there as Missionaries. While in Zimbabwe I stayed with a Shona family and ministered with a Shona pastor. I sat at their table and broke bread with them. I slept in their home. I visited the high-density suburbs of Zimbabwe and was stunned to see the conditions under which people lived. I went out into the rural areas of Zimbabwe with Rev. N. and was always graciously received by the rural people in their simple dwellings where we were uniformly offered Sadza, upon entry of each humble home. Sadza, for those accusing me of “racism” is a cooked maize staple in Zimbabwe. I often think how good it would be to have some Sadza again. On a Sunday I was in Zimbabwe I preached in the local church through a translator. I marveled not only at these people and how far they would walk to attend Church but also at the terrain they had to cover to get to Church. I also found it interesting that as they filed into Church the women sat on one side of the dirt aisle and the men sat on the other side of the aisle.

Obviously, the doors never opened to go to Zimbabwe to do Missionary work. Jane was especially disappointed as doing Missions had always been her dream growing up in a very missions-minded Pastor’s home and having spent 9 months in the Ivory Coast as a nurse just before we were married. Life has divinely ordained disappointments. You learn to trust God’s providence and move on.

We kept in touch with the Matevas as the years progressed, although we finally did lose touch with them a few years ago as communication with them became more and more difficult for several reasons. Before losing touch though, I introduced the Matevas to the congregation I was serving in Michigan and to a few folks who read this blog. Because of that, we were able to raise for the Mateva’s several thousand dollars to help them survive and do their Ministerial work in Zimbabwe among the Shona and Ndebele nations. If you type “Zimbabwe” into the Iron Ink search engine you can find fundraising appeals and correspondence from the Matevas. I’m sure this kind of action (fund-raising and friendship) is characteristic of all “racists.”

The world has become smaller and smaller because of the internet. Because of that, I have done my share of counseling and conversation over the phone with non-Caucasian friends. Several years ago, there was R from the Indian sub-continent who had married a white European woman and who called me a couple time to help with difficulties in the marriage. I tried to encourage him and counsel him the best I could in a difficult situation. Of course a “racist” would never have taken such a phone call but I gladly did and still count R as a friend. (R had been a personal friend with the Reformed Theological giant Dr. Francis Nigel Lee and we would spend considerable time online talking about that man’s abilities.)

More recently, “P” has come into my life by God’s ordination. “P” is a non-Caucasian who lives on the islands between the US Southern Coast and South America. “P” phones once or twice a month and we gladly chat for 60 to 90 minutes. I already consider him a friend. By his testimony, this twenty-something year old counts me as a mentor. I am embarrassed at how much he is impressed with me. I know I am not what he seems to think I am. “P” is starving for Biblical Christianity in a place where, by his testimony, zero Biblical Christianity exists. So he phones and we talk about God’s grace and God’s law. We talk about the challenges he faces. We talk about his relationship with his white European fiancee. To my recollection, I’ve never shrieked in racist horror. I count “P” a friend already. He and his fiancee, as well as his parents (who we have been honored to break bread with here in the States), have generously supported the ministry Jane and I are involved in here in Charlotte. I am overwhelmed with God’s goodness by putting these people in my life and by giving me the opportunity to help in whatever little “racist” way I can.

Allow me to speak a little of “G” who lives in one of the large metropolitan cities on the Eastern Seaboard. “G” is a black man who shares a common worldview and faith. Because of the wonders of the internet, we have chatted several times.  “G” tries to keep a comparatively low profile because he realizes it might well mean his job if he spoke out too boldly on the matters in which we agree. He is seeking to be as “wise as a Serpent and harmless as a dove.” I am more than confident from corresponding with “G” that he would agree with the words of Elizabeth Wright.

“White conservatives don’t want to take the lead in preserving what remains of this country’s now tenuous White, Anglo-Euro culture. To take on such a responsibility would make them even more vulnerable to the racial bullets and daggers they have been ducking for years.”

~ Elizabeth Wright, Black Conservative Author, and Social Critic

I highly recommend the writing of Elizabeth Wright. I have enjoyed reading her. I think you can still find them online.

“G” is a good man. His people and the Church needs many more like him.

Next we meet Dr. Jaime. I swear there are times when I think he is the humblest man who has ever lived. Actually, if it is possible to be too humble he certainly is too humble. Dr. Jaime is a Filipino professional living in the States. I will let Dr. Jaime testify in his own words to my “racist” disposition and teaching as he has recently on the blog where the eminent person is calling my words “racist.”

“I am one of the nonwhite Christian friends of Pastor Bret. We have known each other for 7 years or so. He has counseled me often, and I have financially contributed to his ministry.

I agree with the points he has made. I do not find them uncharitable. If whites can just closely observe how we are in the third world, they will realize that indeed we cause our problems that keep us stranded where we are. It is simple human depravity.

And we do critique each other in my nation, especially when we recognize how our Japanese neighbors are far more disciplined and advanced. I personally would not desire the collapse of Japan by inundating it with my own countrymen. I will not be upset if we are restrained by its citizens after they notice how we are in my nation.

For me, it is Christlike empathy, humility, and charity if we confess our own shortcomings, which we should work to repent of, and which we should not want to burden other groups with. That’s how I take Pastor Bret’s point that has been quoted about the third world here.

More importantly, I see it as a tribal issue. Even in ancient Israel, each tribe was responsible for its own members. It was so for other nations around Israel. We are to follow the same command of God.

There is nothing racist about how God has created specific tribes with their own historical evolution of unity by blood and faith. Scripture shows how Israel began as an abandoned and crying infant child ignored and rejected by greater nations around her. But then God Himself had much compassion to take her as His own offspring. Each tribe and nation can have such faith in His love, regardless of their state in history.

Here we also do see God eventually raise Israel as a mighty nation where noble kings, prophets, and warriors would arise. I find nothing wrong if anyone should note that Europeans, in particular, Anglo-Saxons, would have the most remnant raised by God to have special blessings similar to what ancient Israel and the kingdom of Judah once received from Him.

It does not offend me because it is the pleasure of God to do as He will with individuals and their tribes since the beginning of creation, all for the glory of His name. I am content and fully accepting of this truth as the sovereignty of God at work. I am neither European nor Anglo-Saxon. I am a Filipino, and yet my hope is that the remnant among my people does have its own gifts by the grace of Christ too. God has decreed in history that not everyone can be glorious Judah; others are nurtured by God to be repentant Naphtali and Zebulun.”

I would just note that Dr. Jaime is being humble when he notes simply that he has supported the ministry here in Charlotte.

Of course, I am no Albert Schweitzer, but it wouldn’t matter if I were because if the white South African missionary and Pastor, Dr. Peter Hammond can be accused of being a “racist,” as he recently has been by Dr. Joel McDurmon then any white person can be accused of being a racist simply because they will not hue the cultural Marxist line.

This is not all I could march out to provide an apologetic for why Pastor Bret is not “racist.” But I could drain every last episode and account in my life of cross-racial ministry and friendship but it wouldn’t matter to the Cultural Marxist influenced zombies who are seeking to destroy me both personally and professionally because, in the end, this isn’t about race, racism, or racists or white Supremacists. In the end, this is about theology, worldview, and ideology.  If non-Caucasians refuse to agree with the Cultural Marxist version of egalitarian reality then those non-Caucasians can just be dismissed as so many exotic “Uncle Toms,” by the Cultural Marxists. So, it doesn’t matter how many people, accounts, and friendships I march up to the microphone, I will still be condemned for being using “racist” words because I dare not fit into the zeitgeist. I challenge and so remain accused of using  racist words because I have deconstructed the Belhar Confession as proto-Marxist, and I will remain a misogynist no matter how many women would say to the contrary because I don’t believe women should be ordained as Pastors, and I will remain a homophobe no matter the friendships in my life that testify otherwise because I refuse to support sodomy as a lifestyle or an option for marriage, and I will remain being accused of using racist words because of my love for my people and my insistence that even their white lives matter. My opposition to these things is not going to change and I don’t care if I am frogged marched before courts, councils, and luminaries, I am not giving any quarter on these issues.

The reasons why I am giving no quarter on these issues have grown over the years. I now have 9 grandchildren and I know of a certainty that world that awaits them if this cultural Marxist one-worldism isn’t opposed and eventually stopped. I have sat by and wept at the accounts of the Soviet Gulags. I have been sleepless over what I have read at the French Revolution. I have cried out to God over the horrors of Mao’s “great leap forward,” as I have read the accounts there. Hitler’s concentration camps and the Turks treatment of the Armenians lingers in my memory. The Bolshevik slaughter of the Ukranian Christians, largely still unreported and unknown, taunts me in my sleep.  The future of my grandchildren is the present realities of the white Boers and Afrikaners in South Africa, where recently South Africa has just been upgraded to #6 on the genocide scale — the next to last step before the actual beginning of the slaughter. If I have to be personally and professionally destroyed in a fight for God’s glorious truth of the realities of nations and for the future of my offspring then let the destruction begin. I will wear that destruction as a badge of honor and will list it on my resume.

Maybe I am wrong here, however? Maybe the reason it has been said that I use “racist,” words is not because I hate non-Caucasian people. Maybe I have been said to have used “racist” words because of how many times I have written that white people have to be the stupidest people who have ever walked the planet. People, will come to me and talk about the controversial Charles Murray book, “The Bell Curve,” and my response generally is that my eyes tell me that white people should hardly be crowing about where they fall on the bell curve. Who else would give up their inheritance and patrimony in order to find satisfaction in the ability to virtue signal? Who else would embrace their own creeping destruction in order to have their enemies say nice things about them? Who else would gladly be led by women and children (Isaiah 3:12)? Countless are the times I have bemoaned that white people are the stupidest thing going because only stupidity combined with divinely imposed blindness can explain why a people would rebel against the God who has historically dealt so generously with them.  We, as white Christians, have sown the wind, and now for several generations, we have been justly reaping the whirlwind.  Part of that reaped whirlwind is the disease called Cultural Marxism.

Maybe this is why it is being said that I use “racist” words If my bemoaning of the utter stupidity of the white race as seen in what looks to be the majority attempt to live out the worse of dystopian realities is why it is being subtly suggested that I am “racist” then color me guilty.

Perhaps there is no defense against the label of “racist?” After all, if after being said to have used “racist,” words by a luminary, working for an organization committed to “racial reconciliation,” I am also told that “race is a biological myth,” what am I do to? One wonders how there can be any racial reconciliation between members of groups that do not exist? How can I defend myself against someone who at one and the same time says, “Race is a biological myth but then suggests to me that I am still a racist and  hater against something they don’t believe even exists?” It seems my real sin is believing that race is a real category and not a social construct. However, what I do to when we find studies like this being published?

https://www.forensicmag.com/article/2015/09/can-you-determine-race-fingerprint

Somebody better tell those fingerprints that they are being “racist.”

Like the Apostle Paul, I can at the same time, love both the whole family of God and my kinsmen after the flesh (Romans 9:3) and not feel an inch of shame for doing so.

For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race, the people of Israel.

Dr. Peter Jones… One or Two?

“One-ism, (all-is-one) is an esoteric read on reality. It maintains that everything can be explained by everything else. There are no qualitative distinctions to be found in the universe. The world creates itself and humans are ‘co-creators’ along with everything else. In this system reality is One. Think of one big circle. Everything is contained within it; rocks, trees, planets, human beings — even God, as a kind of energy. Everything is connected to everything else. There is nothing outside the circle.

Two-ism (all is two) is an exoteric read on reality. It maintains that the world is made by a Creator who is uncreated and radically different from His creatures. There are two forms of existence: the created and the one who created it. The two, while deeply related, are qualitatively distinct. Think of two circles, connected but distinct and essentially different.”

Dr. Peter Jones 
One or Two; Seeing a World of Difference — pg. 88

1.) What Dr. Jone’s labels as “One-ism,” is the idea where ontologically speaking, all reality participates in the same being. In most of these systems, one’s status in the social order is dependent on how much of that ultimate being they have unique to others who have less of this Oneist being.  The Mahat system of ancient Egypt was a Oneist system. The Pharoah was at the top of beingness and everyone descended from Pharoah had a lesser measure of being than Pharoah possessed. Animistic, Pantheistic, Hindu, are all Oneist systems.

The 1996 film “Phenomenon” is a classic expression of this One-ist Worldview as is the whole “Star Wars” series.

2.) Since everything is one and so all share the same being the ability to make qualitative distinct distinctions is impossible. For example, if a man and a woman share in the same universal being who is to say that there exists a qualitative distinction between what, in a non-Oneist worldview, has always been understood to be “male,” and “female?” Since the Oneist worldview finds an impossibility to make qualitative distinctions we get the idea of sexual fluidity and/or fluctuating gender. Indeed, in any consistent One-ist worldview any distinction has to be seen as temporary or arbitrary. Not only do we see the incapability of making hard gender and sexual qualitative distinctions we are increasingly seeing in some quarters of our culture the desire to erase the qualitative distinctions that once distinguished a child from the adult. There is a push in some quarters to sexualize the child arguing that the distinction between child and adult is unhelpful and arbitrary. On all these points we hear that heretofore universally accepted qualitative distinctions are merely “social constructs.” In Jones’ words above, humans are co-creators and as co-creator humans create these putative ‘social constructs’ that provide qualitative distinctions that we now, as a more enlightened One-ist people, understand are no distinctions at all. We hear this same kind of language about nations.  Distinct Nations, it is increasingly said, like gender, sexuality, and age are merely social constructs created by human co-creators who are free to uncreate what they had previously arbitrarily created.

Along this line, in One-ist worldview, religions likewise begin to break down and converge. Hard Ecumenicalism and a refusal to embrace the rough edges that segregate one religion from another becomes the watchword. Unity (really uniformity) becomes the be all end all passion. If all is one then uniformity is obviously the highest virtue and anyone who disturbs the pursuit of uniformity is a pebble in the shoe that must be eliminated. Of course, for the Christian unity is something that is never pursued. The Christian understands that unity is the residual byproduct of a common embrace of truth. The more people agree on truth, the more people will discover unity.

The demonstration of this mad pursuit for One-ist uniformity is commonly seen in the Revolutionary. Whether it was the One-ist leveling of the Bogomils, Cathar, Albigensians, and Ana-Baptists, whether it was the Phrygian cap in the French Revolution with the common leveling greeting to one and all, regardless of status or rank of “citoyenne,”  whether it is the universal leveling greeting of “comrade” during the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution, or whether it was the ubiquitous leveling Mao suit found in the post-Communist Chinese Revolution, the One-ist worldview passionately desires to press upon people uniformity. Uniformity in One-ist slovenly thought, uniformity in slovenly clothing, uniformity in One-ist speech pattern. If all is one then all are interchangeable uniform cogs in the One-ist world.

Actually, in a genuinely One-ist world, as consistently followed, language and communication would be utterly impossible since qualitatively distinct meaning is impossible in a consistently One-ist world. Perhaps this explains God’s confusing of the language at Babel. Babel was perhaps the greatest attempt to build a One-ist social order ever.

George Orwell’s novel, “1984” is a wonderful fiction that describes the pursuit of Revolutionary One-ism.

3.) The One-ist will, of course, appeal to “Science” as a support to their One-ist cause. However, what most people don’t realize is that convictions don’t change because of science but rather science changes because of our convictions. This is a huge subject and so I will merely recommend three books that explain what I am getting at here,

a.) The Structures of Scientific Revolutions — Thomas Kuhn
b.) The Philosophy of Science and Belief in God — Gordon H. Clark
c.) Hermeneutics and Science –Vern S. Poythress

An appeal to Science in order to prove One-ism will always be successful as coming from One-ist “Scientists.” Of course, if all is one, then anything and everything and nothing can be proven because no qualitative distinctions exist. One of the greatest failures of “Science” to give scientific heft to a distinctly non-scientific pursuit was the Soviet Union’s pursuit of Lysenkoism over Genetics. Lysenko insisted that he had overcome the qualitative distinction between Spring Wheat and Winter Wheat. He hadn’t and food shortages followed. “Science,” so-called, “proves” all kinds of things that just aren’t so. One-ism makes it easier for “Science” to do just that.

All of this to say that Science is only as good as the Theology that it is dependent upon and of which it is an expression.

4.) In Two-ism, because you have a distinct Creator and creature you also have other qualitative distinctions that are what they are because of how they have been named so by the Creator in His revealed Word. Genesis 1 is a long story of the Two-ist God making qualitative distinctions, and then God’s Law-Word goes on to make other qualitative distinctions which are definitely not social-constructs, though the One-ists will insist that God’s qualitative distinctions are instead really just so many social-constructs.

According to Bouwsma the idea of God’s creating qualitative distinctions was something well understood by John Calvin,

“The positive corollary of Calvin’s loathing of mixture was his approval of boundaries, which separate one thing from another. He attributed boundaries to God Himself: God had established the boundaries between peoples, which should, therefore, remain within the space assigned to them … ‘Just as there are in a military camp separate lines for each platoon and section,’ Calvin observed, ‘men are placed on the earth so that each nation may be content with its own boundaries.’”

W.J. Bouwsma
John Calvin: A Sixteenth Century Portrait — p.34-35

I highly recommend reading Dr. Peter Jones’ books. He provides scintillating analysis of how the culture and the Church are slipping faster and faster into One-ist presuppositions that are not Christian in their origin. Postmodernism, for example, is a child of One-ist ideology. Postmodernism teaches that no grand narratives exist and that all personal narratives are social constructs. Reality is malleable. Qualitative distinctions do not exist except as man subjectively creates them.

When One-ism slips into the Church the traditional language is retained but emptied of its original Two-ist meaning and is re-filled with One-ist pagan content. Dr. Jones’, in is “One or Two,” demonstrates how the Apostle Paul in Romans 1 deconstructs One-ism while making the case that our church and culture is increasingly falling into Oneism.