Darwin & Lincoln

In one of those strange Providences Abraham Lincoln and Charles Darwin were born on the same day in the same year. Perhaps it is fitting that they both celebrate their 200th birthday this year.

Darwin developed a system of thought that did away with God, while Lincoln developed the modern centralized state to fill the vacuum of the missing God. Darwin, having made God unnecessary, Lincoln took it upon himself to make the centralized state necessary. Perhaps, with a touch of celestial irony, Darwin claimed that man came from the ape and Lincoln was often referred to by his political enemies as “the great ape.”

Darwin, used science to deny God while Lincoln used politics to usurp God. Each, in their own way, and in their own fields, launched concentrated assaults on the foundations of the prevailing social order of Christendom. In the days since Lincoln and Darwin the state as God has supported the “scientific” worldview of Darwin, while the followers of Darwin have feverishly worked to support the putative notion of a non-religious state. The relationship between the intellectual descendants of Lincoln and Darwin have worked hand and glove to keep Christianity and Christians ghettoized.

If Reformation is to come again to the West both Lincoln’s centralized state and Darwin’s materialism will have to go. If that ever happens we can finally bury both of them.

Religion & Spheres

“Church leaders have been unable to confront the humanistic world order effectively. First, as we have seen, their concepts of sovereignty and law are defective. They concede these to the state and thereby cease to be Christian. Like the mystery religions of the Roman Empire, their role is limited to providing salvation in the form of inner peace and an abstraction from the world.

Second, churchmen see religion as one sphere among many, and they seek cooperation among the spheres, i.e., such as the harmony of religion and science. Their position involves a fundamental error. It is true that the church is one sphere among many, i.e., spheres such as the family, vocations, civil government, etc. To seek to make the church more than a particular sphere is imperialism, such as the state sphere now exercises. Religion, however, is more than church. It is the ground of all spheres. Church, state, family, the vocations, the arts and sciences, and all things else must be governed by religion, by Biblical faith, and every sphere has equally the duty of faithfulness to the triune God.

R. J. Rushdoony
Sovereignty — pp. 182

Paragraph #1

1.) Many, if not most contemporary expressions of Christianity, are, in the words of Dr. Gary North, nothing but escape religions. Christianity thus serves as a tame pet for the various statist power religions. There seems to be a unwritten truce between the state and much that passes for the Christian faith where the state continues to agree to give churches their tax exempt status in exchange for the church making sure that the natives don’t ever connect their faith to what happens in the public square where the state has its way. Christianity, as the ultimate escape religion, thus, holds hands with the humanism which is the ultimate power religion. It is a very commodious relationship.

Paragraph #2

1.) Churchmen continue to fail to accept that religion (theology / worldview) informs every area of life. Another way of saying this is that different spheres owe their definition and meaning to the religion (theology / worldview) that launches any particular sphere (or discipline) in question.

2.) This means the attempt to harmonize the Christian religion (as only one sphere) with another sphere is that there is no attempt to inquire what religion (besides the Christian religion) is the religion that is responsible for launching the sphere that the Christian religion is trying to harmonize with. Concretely speaking this means that it is grave error for the Christian religion to try and harmonize with a science (as one example) that has been launched by a competing religion. The Christian religion can only harmonize with a science that has been launched by the Christian religion.

3.) There is no common realm where epistemologically self conscious men with different religious commitments can meet and pursue what are thought to be various non-religious spheres or disciplines apart from the impact and consideration of their respective religious faiths. There is no cloak room in reality where our respective impacting religions can be hung up so that another room in reality may be entered where we may consider spheres or disciplines “un-religiously.” The fact that men with different religious commitments do meet and pursue what are thought to be various non religious spheres and disciplines is testimony that most men are not epistemologically self conscious.

Elections Have Consequences

1.) Goodbye 1st Amendment

http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0209/Sen_Stabenow_wants_hearings_on_radio_accountability_talks_fairness_doctrine.html?showall

BILL PRESS: Yeah, I mean look: They have a right to say that. They’ve got a right to express that. But, they should not be the only voices heard. So, is it time to bring back the Fairness Doctrine?

SENATOR DEBBIE STABENOW (D-MI): I think it’s absolutely time to pass a standard. Now, whether it’s called the Fairness Standard, whether it’s called something else – I absolutely think it’s time to be bringing accountability to the airwaves. I mean, our new president has talked rightly about accountability and transparency. You know, that we all have to step up and be responsible. And, I think in this case, there needs to be some accountability and standards put in place.

2.) Goodbye 2nd Amendment

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/read.aspx?id=4405

Here’s what Mr. Clinton had to say:

“[W]e will not go forward anymore, I don’t think, with the kind of politics of division and destruction that drug us down for too long. That’s essentially what is different, and what creates this great moment of opportunity . . . . to have conversations with people, instead of screaming matches, over things like what former Mayor [now Brady Campaign president Paul] Helmke works on so much—over what is the best way to keep the American people safe. Nobody wants to repeal the Second Amendment, and nobody wants to keep you out of the deer woods, but wouldn’t it be nice if your children didn’t have to worry about being mowed down by an assault weapon when they turn the corner?”

…Clinton continued, this time speaking more broadly than in reference to gun control alone. “[W]e’re now in a position to begin again,” he said. “It’s not a leftward movement. It’s a forward, communitarian movement.” Communitarianism is a movement that considers individualism an impediment to society uniformly adopting values the movement considers appropriate, including authoritarian gun control. For example, the Communitarian Network platform states “there is little sense in gun registration. What we need to significantly enhance public safety is domestic disarmament of the kind that exists in practically all democracies.”

3.) Goodbye Jurisdictional Sphere of the Family

http://www.redstate.com/warner_todd_huston/2009/02/07/boxer-urges-quick-handover-of-us-power-to-un/

The U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), which opponents say could destroy American sovereignty by imposing international rulings on American law, could reach the Senate within 60 days. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) says she wants a 60-day timeframe for the State Department to complete its review so the Senate can move toward ratification of the UNCRC. During the Senate Confirmation hearing between Boxer and UN Ambassador-designate Susan Rice held on January 15, 2009, Boxer told Rice the UNCRC would protect “the most vulnerable people of society.”

Opponents vehemently disagree. Under the Supremacy Clause (Article VI) of the U.S. Constitution, ratified treaties preempt state law. Since virtually all laws in the U.S. regarding children are state laws, this treaty would negate nearly 100% of existing American family law. Moreover, it would grant the government authority to override parental decisions by applying even to good parents a standard now only used against those convicted of abuse or neglect.

Breathless

“There is no God who condones taking the life of an innocent human being. This much we know.”

President B. Hussein Obama
National Prayer Breakfast

Given Obama’s record on abortion one doesn’t know whether or not one should laugh, cry, or cough up a primal scream. That a man with Obama’s voting record on abortion can stand before God and heaven and make this statement w/ a straight face is suggestive that there is no lie that Obama won’t be able to speak w/o being perfectly serious. That an audience of Christians can sit there and listen to such a lie w/o raising some kind of protest, catcall, or guffaw, is suggestive that when the word “Christian” is used in connection to Washington insiders that it means completely nothing.

Is Obama The Devil We Know?

“A lot of conservatives were really worried about Obama, even though they were not great fans of the Republicans, because they preferred the devil they knew to the devil they didn’t know. But it is time for them to relax. Turns out Obama is the devil we know.”

Doug Wilson
Blog Mablog

In a brief article at Doug Wilson’s site Doug tries to convince his readers that Obama is not really a drastic leftist but just another politician just like the other politicians that have held the office of President.

I have found Doug tends to get ahead of himself especially on the subject of National politics. This is no exception. First, some of the nominations of Obama (Solicitor General, Assistant Attorney General, Global Warming Czar) are clear indicators that Obama is not, in Doug’s words, “just the devil we know.” He is a Devil far worst than the Devil we have known. Second, Obama has been President for two weeks. It is waaaaaaaaay to earlier for Doug or any leader in the Church to be telling Christians that they don’t have to be concerned because Obama is just another garden variety wicked politician. I think we need to wait a solid year to see whether or not Obama turns out to be the devil we know.

Contrary to Doug Wilson, my advice is to keep your powder dry and to wait and continue to evaluate.