E. Michael Jones posits that Denconstructionism in English Literature is merely Sola Scriptura as applied to other literary texts.
WHAT AN IDIOT
Dr. Jones, in his many books, is often brilliant in his cultural analysis but when it comes to his commentary on the Reformation and the Reformers he is every bit as atrocious on that subject as he is brilliant on cultural analysis. Below is another example. This is a quote from Jones’ Degenerate Moderns:
“Lutheran ideology unleashed libido to achieve its political and ecclesial ends, and Luther, like Hugh Hefner, discovered that the only way to make use of libido effectively was to create for his contemporaries an escape from the guilt that accompanied its satisfaction. The sixteenth-century equivalent of the Playboy Philosophy was justification by faith alone, culminating in the doctrine of the enslaved will. De Servo Arbitrio, it should be remembered, was published in the same year that Luther married. Luther, in creating his doctrine of the enslaved will, became the first modern man, and Lutheranism became the first modern ideology. Its primary attraction to the hordes of apostate priests and nuns who flocked to Wittenberg to follow him lay in its ability to rationalize sexual license and broken vows.”
So you see, Dr. Jones is an idiot when it comes to his comments on the Reformation. However, understandingly enough Dr. Jones took exception to my characterization and a conversation ensued
E Michael Jones Before you call someone an idiot, it’s always good to know what he actually said. I said that the New Criticism was a form of sola scrptura. Deconstructionism is Talmudic.
Now in order to understand this conversation let us define briefly “New Criticism” and “Deconstructionism”
New Criticism was a 20th century American invented methodology for reading literary texts. It stresses close attention to the internal characteristics of the text itself, and it discourages the use of external evidence to explain the work. As such, matters like authorial intent, usage of words in their original historical and cultural context, historical influences upon texts as well as historical circumstances out of which the text arises are all largely ignored. Some have characterized it as texts where the author has disappeared.
Deconstructionism, as a hermeneutical grid for reading texts takes the New Criticism one further step and eliminates the presence of the text. The text itself no longer has any objective intent or meaning, thus allowing the reader to engage the text to give it whatever meaning the reader can read into the text. The text is deconstructed in any original meaning and reconstructed in the image of the reader.
Now that we have that down we can observe the conversation between myself, Dr. Jones and a few other conversational partners.
Bret L. McAtee
The New Criticism is merely a 1/2 step away from Deconstructionism. It’s still an idiotic statement. You’re a person who has a mental or learning disability when it comes to all matters Protestant but yet someone who is extremely gifted in analysis on many other matters. You should just put your pen down when writing on Protestantism.
I’ve read tons of your stuff and will continue but you are of Rome and I am of Geneva and never the twain shall meet.
Now about your statement that Muslims and Christians serve the same God?
Note — Dr. Jones has publicly said that Christians and Muslims serve the same God. Since I had his attention I thought I might try to draw him out on that subject.
Bret L. McAtee I’ll take my chances Doc.
Now … what about your statement that Christians and Muslims serve the same God?
Dan Brannan Believe it or not, E Michael Jones, you are among Protestants who appreciate your work in many dimensions here. But on the subject of Rome v Geneva — and you’ll forgive my intemperance — you have lost the plot, entirely.
Bret L. McAtee
Just to confirm Dan’s statement that your work among the Protestants engaging you here is true here is a list of your books I have read.
1.) Libido Dominandi: Sexual Liberation & Political Control
2.) The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit: And Its Impact on World History
3.) The Jews and Moral Subversion
4.) Jewish Privilege
5.) Catholics and the Jew Taboo
6.) Dionysos Rising: The Birth of Cultural Revolution out of the Spirit of Music
7.) Degenerate Moderns: Modernity As Rationalized Sexual Misbehavior
8.) Monsters from the Id: The Rise of Horror in Fiction and Film
I think this makes me a fan. It certainly makes me someone who is lining your pocket. 😉 Thanks for your work Doc.
However when it comes to the Christian faith… well, my love for you requires I call for you to repent.
Dan Brannan I’ve probably read half that many of his books, but I long since lost count of the articles, podcasts, interviews and debates of his which I’ve imbibed.
Bret L. McAtee Oh … and so as to just keep on track Dr. Jones…
What about your statement that Muslims and Christians worship the same God?
Dan Brannan When Papists claim on one hand that Protestantism was actually an Islamic movement, or a Jewish movement, and on the other, that Islam and Christianity worship the same God all I can think is that they are speaking with a Talmudized tongue, themselves.
Bret L. McAtee So … Jews worship the same God also?
I must admit that I find this answer wildly unsatisfactory.
Let me get this straight. If Mohammed the Muslim insists that the God he worships is non-Trinitarian, (thus denying Logos) and requires the death of Jews and that the infidel when alive to pay the Jizya tax and that Allah requires Hjra in order to conquer Christians and that Allah takes pleasure in the honor killings of women for the slightest of infractions and that Allah will serve up 70 virgins to warriors who strap on a vest bomb to blow up children (shall I continue?) is the same God as the God of the Bible?
Let me get this straight. If Levi the Jew insists that the God he worships is non-Trinitarian, (thus denying Logos) and insists that Jesus is boiling in semen in hell, and insists that the Jews are their own Messiah, and commands the Gentiles must have fixed upon them the Noahide laws, and teaches that a woman’s unborn child is “rodef” and so can be killed, and teaches that Jews cannot be held responsible if they kill a gentile you believe this “ipso facto the same God” the Christians serve.
Dr. Jones … I can’t believe you really believe that
Rev. John Rutowicz writes,
Dr. Jones’ confession does not sound like the confession of a Christian but that of a monotheistic type of Perennialist. The Christian agrees with St. John “Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also.” 1 John 2:23
Bret L. McAtee Jesus speaking to the Monotheist woman in John 4
22 “You worship what you do not know; we know what we worship…”
Dan Brannan You cannot worship something which you do not know. That’s the point of the verse Rev. McAtee quotes.
Which is why Hebrews 11:6 says “And without faith it is impossible to please God.” Faith has doctrinal content.
Bret L. McAtee responds,
Pray tell, how is it that you know that Mohammed worships a God whom he does not understand? What text tells you this?
It seems by my observation that Mohammed understands perfectly the nature of Allah as seen by the fact that the character of the demon God Allah becomes incarnated in the sons of Allah, just as the character of the Jewish demon God is incarnated into the sons of the Jewish demon God.
It seems we ought to take seriously what the sons of Allah would say here. I’m confident that they would say that they do indeed understand whom they serve. They serve a Unitarian God which Scripture itself says is no God.
“Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also.” 1 John 2:23
But I understand here that you are making the same error that C. S. Lewis made in his novel, “The Last Battle.” In that novel Lewis has the servants of Tash being accepted by Aslan because those servants didn’t really know they were serving Aslan when they were serving Tash. This error seems to be the error that many Pelagians, semi-Pelagians, and Arminians make.
You are being inconsistent Dr. Jones. If the sons of Allah serve the same God as the Brothers of Christ serve then so do the monotheistic Jews.
Bret L. McAtee Says you Doc.
Anyway …. thanks for what you get right despite your denial of logos. I can see the hand of God’s common providence in your work. Your work has helped me immensely.
I do think you are not marketing yourself well in order to sell as many of your books as possible Dr. Jones. Your natural market is unto conservative Christians and when you start going all “Christians and Muslims worship the same God,” you are at that point alienating your natural constituency.
But … it’s your dime.
By the by … if Christians and Muslims worship the same God does that mean that moral Muslims are accepted by God?
Dan Brannan If Islam is not efficacious for salvation, they are not, in fact, worshiping the true God. Because worship of the true God is the prerogative of the Regenerate, not Heathen, nor Reprobates.
Bret L. McAtee
In point of fact it is not possible for Muslims to worship the same God as Christians since worship of the one true God can only occur as one is covered by the Son and united to the Son.
5 Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,
No faith in the covering of Christ … no peace with God … no worship of God.
As such (as Dan has implied) either Muslims in their worship are accepted by God OR Muslims and Christians don’t worship the same God.
Stuart DiNenno Christians are monotheistic and worship the true God. Muslims are also monotheistic, therefore Muslims must also worship the true God.
John drives a car which is a Mercedes. Harry also drives a car, therefore Harry must also drive a Mercedes.
Bret L. McAtee John drives only one car which is a Mercedes. Harry drives only one car which is a beat up Kia Forte.
John and Harry drive the same car.