Marxism/Cultural Marxism – Page 5

Twin Spin #1 — McAtee Contra Wilson On The Nature & Character of America

Responding to Doug Wilson’s bloviating on the thread linked below;

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1857824129925476821.html?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR3a1SPDhUvNC-nX6pYuuYPYmtPBv9NRr-5MKRrxyw5Qa4EIIxZ5eAtg2zg_aem_RkYsp4e3U2k8YoFQYGPCJw

“The heaviest lift in our (America’s) process of assimilation was the descendants of the Africans who were brought here as slaves against their will. But it still was largely accomplished . . . until the advent of identity politics. Identity politics intends to melt the pot itself.”

Doug Wilson
Pope of Moscow

1.) Yes the descendants of Africa were brought here against their will as they were sold into bondage by their black African captors to, in many cases, Bagels who owned the shipping that was transporting these black Africans captured and sold as booty of war at at a great profit. It was a terrible thing for those people to endure but in the endurance of it the descendants of those black Africans have inherited a position and well being that could have never been theirs had their ancestors remained in Africa as war booty.

2.) Descendants of Africans were assimilated? They sure didn’t think so in the time of MLK. To listen to many today they don’t want to be assimilated instead preferring to be constantly playing the role of aggrieved victim. Those genuinely assimilated will have no foundation for pleading victimization.

3.) Identity politics came into being precisely because assimilation with its “America as melting pot” metaphor was NEVER true. It was only a matter of time once the project of white replacement got underway that identity politics was seen as the mask it was and is.

It is a mask, having been ripped off is now understood . If one looks at voting patterns, for example, going back decades and decades one can see the reality of identity politics in how minorities have voted over the decades. Identity politics merely became a problem, for people like Doug Wilson, once white people started voting in their interests. Identity politics was fine with the left up until the point when White folks began to realize that they had unique interests vis-a-vis other people groups.

“Until recently, America was a distinct ethnos that came into being as the result of many different ethnoi coming together at a pace that made assimilation possible—it was truly a melting pot.”

Doug Wilson
Pope of CREC

1.) What Doug doesn’t mention is that while it can be argued that America was indeed a distinct ethnoi, it was a distinct ethnoi as the European cousins inter-married. In other words, the US became a distinct ethnoi as comprised, in its majority expression, of White Europeans. That this is true is seen in census results from my own lifetime that registered America as being 88% white. This is a significant fact left off by “gate-keeper of Moscow.”

2.) Contra Wilson America was NEVER a melting pot. That was a myth sold to America in the early 19th century. I’m confident that current Reformed chaps seeking to be the Gatekeepers know that the more prevailing metaphor now is “America as salad bowl.” Interestingly enough the idea of America as melting pot was popularized by a early 20th century Russian Bagel immigrant, Israel Zwangli in a play he wrote. It has always been to the Bagel’s advantage to sell this dissimulation so that White Anglo Saxon Protestants don’t have a sense of ownership of their own nation. Those selling the whole “Melting Pot” myth have to know that America was, as recently as my birth, a nation that was 88% white and overwhelmingly Christian.

It is in the interest of Bagels to embrace and promulgate this false metaphor of “melting-pot” because by doing so no ethnic/racial majority is allowed to rise in order to “persecute” the Bagel population. A melting-pot metaphor keeps a people who are 2% of the population in an advantaged place as a “divide and conquer” technique. If there is no majority people group then it is easier for a group who has always refused to assimilate to control the whole nation.

“What these disparate groups were assimilated into was an Anglo Protestant culture that was superior to many other cultures. But any superiority that it had was because it was Christian, not because it was Anglo.”

Doug Wilson
Gate-keeper of Moscow

1.) If these disparate groups were assimilated into a Anglo-Protestant culture that was superior to many other cultures, then we might ask; “What the Hades has happened to that Anglo-Protestant culture these foreign elements were assimilated into?” I mean, if they were really ‘assimilated’ per the Gate-keeper of Moscow shouldn’t we still have that original Anglo-Protestant culture?

For the rest of the Wilson blathering immediately quoted above I quote the response of my friend DD;

2.) Wilson is arguing that America is not monoethnic but is a “melting pot” that at one point had an “Anglo-Protestant” culture. There are problems with this too numerous to deal with in a short post, but what I want you to see is the underlying egalitarianism.

If this is correct, there is no functional difference between ancient Greece, Japan, and the Aztecs because all were pagan.

At root, you see, there are no significant differences among the different peoples that cannot be primarily explained by the external factor of religion. There are men–not Dutchmen, Englishmen, Chinese, etc. and culture is reduced almost exclusively to one factor.

I once tried to explain to a pastor-friend, many years ago now, that the views he was articulating (similar to Wilson) were bound up in egalitarianism, which is a faith system that acts like leaven, poisoning the entire loaf. Once the camel’s nose is into the tent it is not long before you have women leading pastoral prayer or distributing the Eucharist. In time, they will be officers in the church, ruling and teaching. The knocking down of natural boundaries and categories does not stop, it is a ceaseless acid burning down the social order.

The Modernist of Moscow isn’t finished quite yet;

“The open borders policies of the last few years were not a continuation of our historic pattern of assimilation, but rather an ideological assault on the culture that was doing the assimilating.”

Doug Wilson
Embodiment of Modernity

1.) The last few years? Does the last few years begin for Dougie Doo Doo with the The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, also known as the Hart-Celler Act,? That was when this ideological assault began in principle. What has happened in “last few years,” is merely the logical consequence of that act that overturned a previous immigration policy that was decidedly pro Western and pro White.

2.) As this immigration is indeed a part of an ideological assault on our culture it is obvious in order to save what is left of this once “superior culture” we must close the borders and repatriate tens of millions of people. Is Doug down with that? I have my doubts.

3.) If you scratch the surface of the Hart-Celler Act Doug isn’t going to be too pleased with which unassimilated people group in America were the ones pushing for the end of the previous Hart-Cellar policy.

Dougie Poo continues with his genius IQ;

“In light of all the foregoing, Clarence Thomas is a far better representative of—and defender of— our Anglo Protestant cultural heritage than, say, a gross ton of anon crusader accounts with laser eyes.”

Doug Wilson
Egalitarian Maestro

If Japan found a Clarence Thomas defending their cultural heritage I imagine that they would be glad for that Clarence Thomas. However, that doesn’t make such a thing ideal or the expected norm.

So, inasmuch as Clarence Thomas does defend Anglo-Protestant culture then three cheers and more for Clarence Thomas. May he remain healthy for many more years. May he find himself continued to be hated by the overwhelming majority of his own people.

However, that an anomaly exists doesn’t mean that we should keep looking for anomalies as the norm.

Dougie Poo ends with a flourish;

“So those who want to defend America as a monoethnic state need to take care lest they wind up defending a morono-ethnic state instead.”

Doug Wilson
Moron in Chief

Look at how clever Doug is. Did you see what he did there? he changed out “mono” for “morono.” My that is clever. Head of the class type of stuff. Makes me wish I could be clever just like Dougie.

Hey …. I’m trying.

Doug Wilson, Side-B Nazism, The Green Witch & Awaking From The Silver Chair

In his latest brain fart the legendary gatekeeper Rev. Doug Wilson accuses those of us who agree with Augustine, Chrysostom, Luther, and Calvin on the issue of the Bagels as being a new version of “Revoice.”

Only the most high Rev. Wilson observes; whereas “Revoice” was about side-b sodomy, those of us who agree with our Fathers on the issue of the Bagels are side-b Nazis. According to Pope Doug we who agree with our Fathers on the Bagel issue are trying to be “sin-adjacent.” True, per Pope Doug, we don’t want to be out right Nazis but we do want to be kind of like that. Why some of us even have the temerity to agree with Dr. R. J. Rushdoony, David Irving, and many others that the genocide numbers may well have been inflated. Indeed, per Doug it seems that it may well be a sin to not only inquire too closely about the actual number total of deaths but it is even the case that it is beyond the pale to even contemplate the possibility that International Jewry had an agenda that was decidedly against the German people. One wonders if Doug has ever read about the boycott against German goods called for by International Jewry in March of 1933?

So, in Doug’s brain any honest attempt at historical revision automatically falls under the category of a Nazi version of revoice where Christians see how close they can get to Nazism without actually becoming Nazis. Of course, by this standard, Augustine, Chrysostom, Luther and Calvin and many Church councils were the original version of Revoice that folks like Sam Alberry, Nate Collins and Misty Irons copied in 2018.

Of course, Doug, as he typically does, leaves himself an out by saying, after he rips people who question the WW II narrative, that he has been questioning the WW II narrative for decades. Yeah, it sure shows Doug.

Doug wants to accuse these young chaps of being a Nazi version of “Side-B Sodomy.” Very well then, I accuse Doug of being the embodiment of C. S. Lewis’ “Green Witch” in the Narnia book “The Silver Chair.” If you will remember in that novel, Prince Rilian, has been seduced and enchanted to serve the ends of the Green Witch. However, the spell is never complete and daily the Prince is required to sit in the Silver Chair in order to get his daily fix of enchantment that will keep him beholden to the Green Witch. One day, in the presence of Jill, Eustace, and Puddleglum, Prince Rilian incrementally awakens from the spell and begins to rail and rage against The Green Witch and her spell upon him. At this point the Green Witch enters into the room they are all in and begins to sing again her spell of enchantment in order to put the Prince back to sleep and so under her spell.

Doug is playing the Green Witch. Young men are waking up to how much and how often they’ve been lied to by the Governmental-Corporate-Ecclesiastical-Media complex. In this awakening everything is being questioned from the post-Enlightenment/ WW II consensus forward. People are discovering that for centuries, if not millennium Jewish and Biblical Christian interests have been at severe cross purposes. Yet, in this awakening there we find guys like Doug Wilson seeking to reinvigorate the spell that has had us all sleeping for decades and has had us serving as lackeys for the purposes of an Institutional Green Witch that is contrary to our own Christian and National interests.

Now, to be sure, there are voices out there that are excessive on this subject. For example, some of the work, that the Lutherans, Mahler and Woe, are doing is positively unhinged. Keep in mind though that the swing back of this pendulum may be particularly vicious given the resentment and rage over being lied to for decades. If the snap back is extreme guys like Wilson (Andrew Sandlin, Karl Trueman to name a couple more) have to share the blame. Forcing the lid down on a boiling pot only guarantees that the whole pot is sure top explode.

Doug Wilson on this subject (and more than a few others) is the Green Witch seeking to put the young Princes of the realm back to sleep.

And myself?

I’m just trying to play the role of faithful Puddleglum by casting myself on the fire that is aiding in the Green Witch’s enchantment. I can only hope that burnt McAtee smells as head clearing as burnt Marshwiggle.

Addendum

I would strongly recommend that Doug read the following books. It is only a start.

E. Michael Jones — The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit
E. Michael Jones — The Holocaust Narrative
Maurice Pinay — The Plot Against The Church
Hillarie Belloc — The Jews
Martin Luther — The Jews and Their Lies
John Calvin — Response to Question and Objections of a Certain Jew
Against the Jews — Chrysostom

Contra Joe Boot

“Lies that sound true are always more dangerous. Jesus doesn’t call us to follow the Greek conception of the true, good, and beautiful — he requires obedience to the law of God which includes loving one’s enemies. My people are God’s covenant people from every tribe, tongue, and nation (Mt. 12:48-50). There is a difference between acknowledging the particular familial and civic responsibility I have toward my own immediate family and nation & ‘preferring’ some people over others. The overtones of this are obvious. And frankly it wasn’t Hispanics, who brought abortion to America or Blacks who brought Cultural Marxism, or Asians who brought LGBTQ ideology, or N. American Indians who brought euthanasia, or Arabs who brought the Climate Cult — I’m pretty sure it was ‘our people’ on all counts. Let’s put our house in order.”

Joe Boot

1.) Just for clarification’s sake, it should be understood that “the good, the true, and the beautiful,” are not independent categories that exist outside the reality of the God of the Bible being the precondition for being able to identify “the good, the true, and the beautiful.” In other words, apart from the God of the Bible the adjectives “good,” “true,” and “beautiful” could (and have) just as easily mean “bad,” “false,” and “ugly.” We know what the “good, the true, and the beautiful” are because of who God is. It is not the case that the “good, the true, and the beautiful” are descriptors of God apart from presupposing God.

2.) God’s law does require us to “Love our enemies,” but I would bet the farm that Boot doesn’t understand that one way to love our enemies is by resisting them with all our might. Scripture teaches that we are to “Let love be genuine. Hate what is evil; hold fast to what is good. (Rom. 12:9). We are indeed to love our enemies and sometimes the best way to do that is by giving them justice. The simplest example of this is spanking children. We spank our children because we love our children. Similarly, loving our enemies is sometimes not going to look like love as our enemies might want to define love.

Honestly, I can’t believe that Boot, of all people, is trotting the old “love our enemies” trope in order to prove that we should not have a greater love for our own people than for those who are the enemies of our people and who wish to destroy them.

2.) When Boot insists that his people are Christians from every tribe, tongue, and nation, as opposed to his kin, Boot has confused categories at best and at worst he is involved in a view where grace destroys nature. The fact that I have a very real spiritual attachment to all who rightly call on the name of Christ regardless of their race or nationality does not negate the fact that because of God’s work of creation wherein he has set people in clans, tribes, and nations so that those clans, tribes, and nations can properly be referred to as “my people.”

Why is it that this is so hard to understand? Normatively, I have a greater obligation to my own unbelieving parents than I do two Han Chinese Christians old enough to be my parents who live 1000 miles away. Is this not why we have the fifth commandment?

Look, it is not as if we Kinists do not understand that we have obligations to Christians who are not from our people group. When are the Alienists going to understand that it is fitting and proper to talk about a unique allegiance that we have to our kin?

3.) So, Boot, understands that we have a peculiar responsibility to our kith and kin and yet desires to insist that it would be improper for us to prefer our own kith and kin? This coming from the guy who named his organization “The Ezra Institute?” Man, the irony can’t get much thicker. Hey, Joe, you do realize don’t you that Ezra of all the OT Fathers perhaps more than anyone demanded, under penalty of law, for the Hebrews to put away wives and children who were not kith and kin to the Hebrew people. Joe… Booty man … it sure looks like Father Ezra understood it was proper to prefer one’s own people.

4.) Boot then cryptically drops .. “The overtones of this are obvious.” Now, I can be corrected here but methinks old Joe is dropping the Nazi card here. As if the fact that preferring one’s own people automatically makes one a Nazi. But you know what Joe? I don’t care anymore. You and your Boomer ilk can call me Nazi till the cows come home and I now longer give a tinker’s damn. Of course you won’t mind if I in turn, refer to you and your ilk as Cultural Marxists.

5.) Now this last bit is precious beyond speaking. We have the likes of Doug Wilson forever insisting how sinful it is to notice the sins of his Jewish ancestors because, well, because, they’ve done lots of good things to that balance the scales. Now, we find Boot putting white people in the dock quite without saying the scales are more then balanced. I’m sure Doug will soon be writing an article lecturing Boot on how inappropriate he was here.

6.) Next, on this same point can we notice that Maggie Sanger, who was the apostle for abortion was aided by Jewish immigrant named Fania Mindell in providing abortions to the public. On October 16, 1919, Mindell, Sanger and her Sister opened the country’s first birth control clinic, located in a tenement in Brownsville, New York. Jewish publications crow crow about this Jewish influence.

https://forward.com/culture/359288/meet-the-jewish-woman-who-helped-lay-the-groundwork-for-planned-parenthood/

Dr. Bernard Nathanson who preformed countless abortions before seeing the light was Jewish. Indeed, the Talmud teaches that abortion is perfectly acceptable since the fetus, in their twisted thinking, is a pursuer seeking to do harm. Now, I don’t deny that more than a few white people (Shabazz Goy) have been involved in the Abortion industry but the idea that somehow abortion arose and developed apart from Jewish influence is untrue.

Next we move to Boot’s bit on cultural Marxism … again, Cultural Marxism while having plenty of Shabazz Goy white disciples was a movement first originating with Jewish people. Jewish Names like Marcuse, Adorno, Horkheimer, György Lukács, and Wilhelm Reich litter the Cultural Marxist beginnings. Surely, Boot knows this, yet Boot decides to lay all this uniquely at the feet of white people.

Sure, white people, have sins plenty to repent of but the idea that Boot so quickly wants to prove that we are all equal because we are all sinners is just a sacrifice offered up to the God of egalitarianism.

“Mother Jones” “TheoBros,” & One Related Tangent

I spent two posts dismissing Rev. Chris Gordon’s dismissal of Christian Nationalism/Post-millennialism, only to read today a “Mother Jones” article that is seeking to warn everybody about the rise of what Gordon says is a dying movement. As odd as it may sound it seems both “Mother Jones” and I agree on something vis-a-vis Chris Gordon.

To Understand JD Vance, You Need to Meet the “TheoBros”

The “Mother Jones” article is worth a read in my opinion. What is most interesting about the “Mother Jones” piece is that this traditionally liberal rag gives the movement that Gordon so eschews a more objective take than most people like Gordon and the ilk from the Reformed-Evangelical world give the movement. Now, to be sure, “Mother Jones” is opposed to the movement and it’s article is seeking to “expose” the movement as something dangerous, but even despite that obvious slant there is in the piece a more even handed approach to what is being reported on then can be found from the likes of Chris Gordon and his R2K/Pietistic Baptist fellow travelers.

You can read the article for yourself if you please. However, there is one point I want to draw attention to and that is the label “Mother Jones” gives the movement. The label “Mother Jones” gives is “The Theobros.” Now, the problem I have with this handle is that it subtly implies that “The Theobros” are brothers who are uniquely operating according to a common theology. The beef here is, is that those who are opposed “The Theobros,” like “Mother Jones” are themselves also Theobros, in the sense that their militant opposition to “The Theobros” is based on a shared theology. It is not as if “The Theobros” are unique in being bonded together by their shared theology. When bond are bonded together a key factor in their being bonded together for a particular cause is a theology that makes them Theobros.

I point this out because I am convinced that underneath this labeling is the idea that people can be scared of “The Theobros” movement for the precise reason that they are caricatured as religious extremists, when in point of fact it is the Marxist Theobros opposing “The Theobros” who are the religious extremists.

If I may, I will only give one critique of “The Theobros.” This critique is not based on the article, though the article, if read closely, I think lends credence to this critique. My critique of “The Theobros” movement is that it is not self-referentially consistent. Now, some are clearly better than others among “The Theobros” but there are many in this movement who are only interested in taking half-measures, half-taken. The remedy that many in this movement are offering will not cure the disease. So, even if they are successful, I do not think that we, as a Christian nation, will be much better off. Oh, we may be better off for a season but the basic trajectory this nation is on will not be altered. The one way I could be wrong on this is if “The Theobros” movement is muting their voices because they know that, politically speaking, they can not say the quiet parts out loud. In brief, I do think that many of them are trying to move the Overton Window but they are not moving it yet past what is still considered acceptable by those on the right side of the left. As I noted, this may be merely a tactic rather than a conviction.

This brings me to a tangent that while unrelated to the “Mother Jones” article remains related to the subject as a whole.

Recently, I was talking to someone I am fairly confident would be considered a “Theobros.” During the conversation he said that he did not like the methodology of Kinism. As someone who knows a little bit about Kinism I asked him if he could be precise as to what this methodology of Kinism is to which he objects.

He replied by noting two things that I would like to spill a few sentence examining.

First he said, “That I don’t like how Kinists say that inter-racial marriage is sin.”

I must admit that I find this flummoxing. It is true that there are some few Kinists who say that all inter-racial marriage is sin. However, there are also even more Kinists who do not say that all inter-racial marriages are sin always all the time. There are more than a few Kinists, like myself, who merely say that while inter-racial marriages can be sin, they are not necessarily always sin but are normatively, as the higher statistical averages on the divorce rate for inter-racial couples bear out, not wise, and so these Kinists strongly counsel against such marriages, stopping short of labeling it as “always sin.”

https://www.thehivelaw.com/blog/interracial-divorce-rates-what-percentage-of-interracial-marriages-end-in-divorce/

My conversation partner’s protest then was not valid on this point.

His second reason for “not liking the methodology of Kinism,” was his being wedded to the theory of Natural Law. He doesn’t like the fact that Kinists, often (though not always) being theonomists, find Natural Law theory ridiculous. I sought to assure him that some Kinists might well embrace Natural Law while still being Kinists. This objection of his to “so called” Kinist methodology is even more non-weighty than his first objection. If one desires to embrace Natural Law while embracing Kinism nobody is going to tear up your Kinist membership card though you may be challenged on that particular point as a side-bar discussion.

What I see has happened is that the word “Kinism” has been turned into a “boogeyman.” Just as people are scared of being tagged with the word “racist,” or “anti-semite,” or “homophobic” so they have been convinced that being labeled with the opprobrium of “Kinist” is the worst thing in the world to happen. However, like the other words just mentioned, people do not realize that they are being manipulated to operate in the world view of those who are slinging the accusations. Since otherwise decent people are being stampeded into avoiding the left hurling these words at them, people begin to operate in such a way as to avoid these empty-minded pejoratives and in their mad rush to avoid these slurs these otherwise decent people operate in terms of their enemy’s world and life view.

Given the world and life view of God’s enemies and our enemies there is not necessarily or automatically any sin in being what they call “racist” or “anti-semite,” or “homophobe” or even “Kinist.” These are just words used to manipulate people into accepting their Cultural Marxist Weltanschauung (Worldview). If we are going to be successful in resisting the Cultural Marxists we need to get used to the way they hurl these words at us and reply with something like;

“Well, I’m sure to someone who is a Cultural Marxist like yourself your accusations make sense, and honestly, were I a Cultural Marxist like you I might say the same, but since I am not a Cultural Marxist, but instead am a Christian, I do not share the premise behind your accusations, and so find your accusations to be folly. I do not take your accusations seriously in the least.”

Twin Spin From Dr. P. Andrew Sandlin … More “Theology” With The Smell Of Sulfur

The young new church nazis find the Imago Dei troublesome because it reflects the unity of humanity in God’s created order: all humans are created in the image of God. That unity is a threat to white nationalism, just as white nationalism is a threat to the gospel of Jesus Christ (read Galatians). And it is more than marginally ironic that many of these same younglings that champion “nature” are at war with God’s created order.

P. Andrew “Andy” Sandlin
Theologian — A Really Bad One

1.) If the Imago Dei stamps out white nationalism suggesting that all men are the same then it stamps out differentiation between the sexes. Andy can’t have it both ways. Either the Imago Dei allows for distinctions among peoples to exist or it requires that we lose the distinctions between men and women.

In the end, Sandlin is not arguing for unity. The idiot is arguing for uniformity. He has lost the diversity in the idea of “The One and The Many.” Sandlin is advocating for social order monism. Sandlin might as well just find a good Unitarian church to place his membership.

2.) In the end here, Sandlin has baptized the doctrine of egalitarianism. The suggestion here is that because all men equally bear the Imago Dei therefore all men are equal in terms of abilities and predispositions. Further, Sandlin is suggesting that anyone who disagrees with his kindergarten theology is a “Nazi” (insert gasp).

Christianity has always taught that men are only equal inasmuch as they are all equally made of dirt and inasmuch as they all stand as responsible before and are obligated to God and His law and inasmuch as they all have a sin nature.

3.) Even the unity in the Christian faith that Sandlin might appeal to is squashed in terms of meaning all converted peoples are the same. Converted Urdu people will not be the same as converted Mongolian or Intuit peoples. Grace does not destroy nature but restores it. Sandlin’s appeal to “unity” because of the Imago Dei does not even work if cast in the context of converted people groups. Neither the common ground of the Imago Dei, nor the common ground of conversion drives the uniformity that Sandlin aims at. In terms of putting all this in the context of the Church even St. Paul notes that different people (and we would say peoples as well) have different gifts to bring to the body in order to help the body to excel.

4.) By denying these very real racial/ethnic distinctions Sandlin is a functional Gnostic. He does not believe in the material reality that God has created us with. He seems to think that the spiritual reality of being Imago Dei complete negates our creaturely humanness in all its variegated expressions. Have these people never read a weighty book on the Church’s first heresy called Gnosticism?

5.) Understand where all this is going for Sandlin. This appeal to the “unity” of the human race because of Imago Dei is greasing the rails for normativity of inter-racial marriages, cross-racial adoptions and multicultural “social order,” driven by saluting open borders. It is a theology hellbent on completing the destruction of a once Christian people.

Now, I’ll grant that Andy doesn’t realize the implications of his position but his inability to think consequentially does not mean what I’ve observed is any less true. At best Andy’s inability to connect dots means he’s merely stupid and not instead just plain wicked.

6.) Pray tell what is Andy going to do with me. I am no youngling and so he can’t cast that implied aspersion at me. Honestly, except for a few old timer chaps like Chambers, Mahan, and I, it is the younglings who are spot on in resisting this Nietzschean will to death that we find so prevalent among the Sandlins, Doug Wilsons, Al Mohlers, etc.

7.) Honestly, the sting of being called a “Nazi” has lost its bite. Like the accusation of “racist” it means very little to those who have eyes wide open to the Babel project. Call me a “Nazi?” Shrug … it’s like calling me a “edofix.” It means nothing to me. I know in your world Andy it is the greatest insult you can find but those who have gotten past the post-war liberal consensus just don’t give a rat’s arse about your slurs.

“It is just as erroneous — and pernicious — to equate culture with race as it is to equate intelligence with race. Culture’s characteristics are shaped by religion, not by race, easily proven by the fact that virtually all races have at different times and locations reflected godly religion and its wholesome characteristics, as well as ungodly religion and its unwholesome characteristics.

The issue is always religion, never race.”

P. Andrew “Andy” Sandlin
Theologian — A Really Bad One

1.) I don’t know of anybody within the Ogden Utah group, among the Kinists I hang with, among the Natural Law Nationalist who try to equate culture with race as if there is a one to one correspondence.

2.) However, there is an understanding among many that race is a contributory factor to culture along with race. Indeed, a good definition of culture is theology poured over ethnicity. To deny that genetics have anything to do with culture, and arguing instead that all culture is, is what goes on between someone’s ears is to, once again, profess allegiance to a Gnostic faith. Scripture teaches “as a man thinketh in his heart, so he is,” but notice that there is a man who is thinking here and that thinking man is the repository of generations of genetics. The material/corporeal is real people. God’s grace does not make who we are in our creaturely genetics disappear.

3.) To argue like Andy does here (and it’s not just Andy of the Boomer Evangelicals who are arguing in this fashion) leaves one arguing that nature means nothing in the nurture vs. nature debate. Sanlindism looks to mean that if men can just be programmed to believe the right things then nature means nothing. Again … Gnosticism.

4.) I think it is disputable that all ethnicities at one time or another have embraced Christianity to such a degree that whole civilizations were built. However, for the sake of argument let us grant Sandlin’s premise. Is he really trying to argue that a Pygmy Christian culture is going to look the same as a Japanese Christian culture or a Hottentot Christian culture? It is mind-boggling to think that the man might actually be arguing something like this.

5.) Of course race alone is not equated to culture… but neither can it be said that religion alone is equated to culture. Culture is the interplay between religion and genetics — between theology and who God created us to be in all of our corporeality. Culture is the outward manifestation of a peoples’ inward beliefs. However, as different peoples are, well, different, then even if different peoples’ embrace the same theology there cultures will not be or look the same. A Christian Peruvian people are never going to look the same as a Christian Ndebele people are never going to look the same as a Christian Cornish people. To think otherwise puts one on the wrong side of Babel.

6.) St. Paul destroys Sandlinism when he talks about the particular besetting of the Crete people. All peoples do not look the same in their rebellion against God and His Christ. Different peoples will express their fallenness each in their own unique way as peculiar to their own people group.

I am a postmillennialist and so I know that the ideas of these chaps will be put down. Still, I pray that God might be gracious to them before they die and grant them repentance. I have no doubt that they may well be Brothers but even as Paul had stern words at times for Brothers so stern words are required here.