Apologetics – Page 21

From The Mailbag … How Has Jacobinism Infected The Reformed World?

Dear Pastor

What is Jacobin Reformed theology and what are Jacobin Reformed clergy?

Billy F

Hello Billy

Thanks for writing. First, we should note that most clergy today in the Reformed world are Jacobin. There are, of course, greater and lesser degrees of this Jacobinism to be found in our Reformed clergy but the tendency is ubiquitous. More about that after a definition;

A.) A Jacobin Reformed clergy embraces (often, quite w/o knowing it) the principles of Jacobinism. Jacobinism was a radical political group during the French Revolution known for advocating egalitarian democracy and engaging in extreme measures. During the French Revolution those extreme measures included the Reign of Terror, but in our context today extreme measures for Jacobin Reformed clergy means hunting down via inquisition type means men who do not agree with their Jacobin egalitarianism often with the purpose of defrocking and/or destroying by means of cancel culture clergy and/or members that are NOT Jacobin. Most frequently this happens by means of violation of the 9th commandment because very few men are guilty of what the 6th commandment violations they are being charged.

The term today has come to represent left-wing radicalism in the pulpit and ruling centers of what is unfortunately thought of as “Conservative” “Reformed” denomination. This kind of revolutionary politics is evidenced in the Church in its embrace of Alienism, egalitarianism, the Post-War (actually Enlightenment) consensus and the conviction that Democracy is God’s plan for social order arrangement.

We see it with the denial in denominations like the PCA, RPCNA, CRC, ARP, and CREC of the reality of race. More than a few clergy from these denominations have said things like, “there is no such thing as race,” or, “race is only about melanin levels,” or, “race is a social construct.” To hold to such views is a window into egalitarian convictions, and so represents Jacobin convictions. Another piece of evidence of how the majority expression of Reformed clergy are adopting Jacobin egalitarian convictions is the rise of female leadership in the Reformed Church. Michael Foster has recently exposed all the other Jacobin congregations in the PCA with his outing of congregations in the PCA that are operating with Defacto female elders. The irony is pretty thick here as Foster himself is likewise Jacobin given his expressed hatred of the anti-Jacobin belief system of Kinism. Foster’s exposure of Jacobin PCA congregations while being Jacobin himself demonstrates that there are different degrees of Jacobinism existing in the Reformed denominations.

Doug Wilson of the CREC is another high profile example of Jacobinism in denominations that are thought of as “Conservative,” and “Reformed.” Wilson has denied the reality of race while still embracing the reality of “ethnicity,” despite the fact that one can’t get to ethnicity without first traveling through race as ethnicity is a subset of race. Insisting that ethnicities exist but races don’t is like saying that Terriers and Retrievers exist but differing dog breeds don’t.

But Michael Foster and Doug Wilson should be understood to be the less excessive norms of today’s Jacobinism. There are many other clergy who are even more extreme in their Jacobinism today. Clergy like Ben Glaser, Rich Lusk, Andy Webb, Andrew Sandlin, Peter Leithart, Al Mohler, Uri Brito, Jeff Durbin, James White, etc. are all further examples of clergy who have been infected with one degree or another of Jacobinism.

The answer to this of course is a return to Biblical Christianity with all the implications of the doctrine of the Trinity (the One & the Many) for this discussion.

Please pray for the Reformed Church in America that God might either grant it reformation and renewal or failing that God might close its doors and raise up new ecclesiastical organizations which will not fall into the trap of Jacobinism.

An Apologetic Against Favoring Relics As Posited By A Roman Catholic

St. John Lateran is the Cathedral of the Popes. The “church” is a treasure house of relics where you will allegedly find;

1.) The heads of St. Peter and Paul

2.) The ark of the covenant

3.) The tablets of Moses

4.) The rod of Aaron

5.) An urn of Manna

6.) The Virgin’s tunic

7.) Five loaves and two fishes from the feeding of the 5K

8.) The dinner table from the Lord’s supper

And in the Pope’s chapel there resides;

1.) Foreskin and umbilical cord of Jesus.

Stephen O’Shea
The Perfect Heresy: The Revolutionary Life and Death of the Medieval Cathars

Bret observes,

Do you realize how credulous one has to be to be Roman Catholic?

It should be further observed that this idea of the necessity for relics as contributive to salvation in the Roman Catholic system continues today seeing , every Catholic church is required to have at least one relic, typically placed within the main altar.

Relics thus, are part and parcel of the Roman Catholic salvation system. To this day in the Roman Catholic process of salvation visiting a relic can grant a plenary indulgence, which may reduce or eliminate time spent in purgatory, thus hastening the Roman Catholic’s longed for salvation.

Jon Sheldon (Roman Catholic) defending relics replies,

“St John Lateran indeed has relics, as do churches all over the world. (Though I am not familiar with exactly which relics they have.) There is nothing unbelievable about relics unless you have an anti supernatural bias. This is exactly how I would argue against an atheist, by the way.

Relics are long attested to both scripturally and historically. The dead man who fell into Elisha’s tomb and was made alive and Paul’s handkerchief are two examples.

The early church kept and distributed relics.

If this makes us cringe today, or view these people as primitive, it is merely our post-enlightenment sensitivities.

It is also fundamentally gnostic. ‘Old bones and wood can’t possibly transmit power, that’s just superstition. God only transmits grace directly and invisibly.’”

Bret responds,

1.) Your examples from the Scripture on relics suffers from the fact that those examples are FROM SCRIPTURE. All the other relics scattered all over the world were not sanctioned by the testimony of Scripture. Further we are not told from Scripture that those articles mentioned in Scripture should continue to be seen as transmitting power. This is yet another example of Rome reading into Scripture.

2.) There are scads of problems with relics since the Scripture teaches us to place our trust in Christ alone and not power emanating relics. The Heidelberg Catechism, drawing from Scripture, teaches that

Q. Why is the Son of God called Jesus, that is, Saviour?

A. Because he saves us from all our sins,1 and because salvation is not to be sought or found in anyone else.2

1 Mt 1:21; Heb 7:25.
2 Is 43:11; Jn 15:4, 5; Acts 4:11, 12; 1 Tim 2:5.

30. Q. Do those who seek their salvation or well-being in saints, in themselves, or anywhere else (RELICS), also believe in the only Saviour Jesus?

A. No. Though they boast of him in words, they in fact deny the only Saviour Jesus.1 For one of two things must be true: either Jesus is not a complete Saviour, or those who by true faith accept this Saviour must find in him all that is necessary for their salvation.2

1 1 Cor 1:12, 13; Gal 5:4.
2 Col 1:19, 20; 2:10; 1 Jn 1:7.

3.) That the early church was in error is not a surprise to anyone given the problems the earliest churches had (Corinth, Galatia, Colossae, etc.). The early church does NOT get pride of place simply because it was the early church.

4.) A lack of belief on the part of Christians regarding the nonsense of relics does not mean a lack of belief in the supernatural. It merely means a lack of belief in the supernatural when it comes to the Roman Catholic church using this kind of manipulation to keep people in spiritual bondage and from trusting in Christ alone for salvation.

5.) I do not deny that the means of grace that God ordains for salvation are means of grace. In point of fact I insist that Rome cheapens the means of grace by introducing all these other means of grace that you are defending. If everything is a means of grace nothing is a means of grace. God explicitly gave us two means of grace and the foreskin of Jesus and the umbilical cord from Jesus are not among them.

Oh … and by the way … this is the way I argue against credulous Roman Catholics.

McAtee Continues To Pick Apart Tchividijan’s Nonsense

“So much of what passes for “Christian influence” today sounds more like Christian control. We hear calls to “take back the culture,” “reclaim America for Christ,” and “restore Christian values.” But the kingdom of God doesn’t come by seizing cultural control. It doesn’t advance by force or fear. It spreads through weakness, confession, forgiveness, and love. “Christian nationalism” turns the Christian’s calling to serve into a crusade to conquer. It assumes that the kingdom of God is something we build, when the gospel says it’s something we receive. Grace frees us from the burden of “taking back” anything. The world doesn’t need our dominance — it needs our service. The gospel doesn’t build empires — it resurrects sinners.”

📷Tullian Tchividjian
Previous advocate for Anti-nomianism
Now Advocate for Anabaptist theology

1.) There is no such thing as neutrality. Either the Christian faith is in control or a Christ hating faith is in control. Hence Christian control when it is indeed Christian is a reality to be pursued and delighted in.

2.) Tullian is advancing the idea that we seize cultural control by not seizing cultural control. Tullian argues that the Kingdom will indeed be received and so come but it is only to come and be received “through weakness, confession, forgiveness, and love.” Tullian doesn’t have a problem with the Kingdom of Christ coming. His only insistence is that the Kingdom of Christ come as Christians pursue cultural defeat and surrender. So, Tullian wants Christian dominance as much as the person he is complaining about but only in his way — the way of defeat and surrender.

3.) Tullian is seeking to advance his view of cultural control by seeking to shame Christians who disagree with him. That’s not very forgiving or loving or a matter of weakness on Tullian’s part. If Tullian really wanted to be weak he would just shut up on this matter and go into his prayer closet and just pray for his view of the Kingdom to come to pass and so quite lecturing other people because in his lecturing of other people there is a lack of weakness on his part.

4.) Notice that Tullian is seeking to advance his version of the Kingdom by means of fear. The fear that Tullian is trying to stoke is the fear of being displeasing to God if we advocate for the Lord Jesus Christ who is King be owned as King. Tullian would have it that Christ is only going to owned as King when His people do not insist that Christ be owned as King. Per Tullian, only by living as if Christ is not King can the Kingdom be received.

5.) Notice the glaring false dichotomy from Tullian here;

“‘Christian nationalism’ turns the Christian’s calling to serve into a crusade to conquer.”

Who says that a crusade to conquer can not be a matter of service? When cultures are conquered for Christ those who are in bondage to crimes such as sex trafficking, abortion, sodomy, etc. are no longer living in the context where such things are allowed. They may not yet be redeemed individually, but they are no longer living in a culture that is contrary to God’s expressed law-order. Is not the change that would come by Christians conquering be a service to those who would otherwise be plowed under and destroyed by such illegal legalities that exist in anti-Christ cultures?

In brief, there is nothing inherently sinful in conquering and conquering can be done as a means of service. Tullian is involved in a false dichotomy here. It would be a good thing for Talmudic or Mooselimb cultures to be conquered. It would be a matter of service to the people in those cultures if Christ who is King were to be owned as King.

6.) Tullian has another false dichotomy when he puts receiving the Kingdom in conflict with building the Kingdom. Because all is of Grace it is simply the case that when building the Kingdom we are also receiving the Kingdom. If I build a house as a Christian I understand that God is the one who has given me all the resources to that end and so it can be said at one and the same time that as I build my house I am receiving my house. Tullian’s reasoning here is of a nature that we should not plant a vegetable garden to get vegetables because God will provide vegetables, or similarly, we should not seek to build a family by the normal means of having children because God will provide children. In the same way Tullian is saying we should not seek to build God’s Kingdom because we are going to receive God’s Kingdom. Tullian is operating from a completely pietistic/retreatist worldview where man doesn’t work out what God works in.

7.) Tullian gives us another gem with;

“Grace frees us from the burden of “taking back” anything.

Really? Grace frees us from the burden of “taking back” family relationships that were destroyed because of a previous absence of grace? Grace frees us from “taking back” the harm that was inflicted in our business relationship with consumers because of a previous absence of grace? Grace frees us to be obedient and being obedient means that we take back those matters (for God’s glory) that were so injured by the absence of grace. That sentence from Tullian is just really pietistic bloviating. It sounds good but it really has little meaning.

8.) As mentioned earlier, Christian dominance when it is Christian is a service that the world desperately needs. What the world or the church doesn’t need is the kind of Christian dominance by surrender that Tullian is pushing.

9.) Tullian ends with another false dichotomy;

“The gospel doesn’t build empires — it resurrects sinners.”

These two realities are not mutually exclusive. In point of fact the Gospel as it resurrects sinners does build nations. The two go hand in glove. Where the Gospel resurrects sinners the effect is going to be that those resurrected sinners are going to in turn, in obedience to Christ desire to live in social orders that are pleasing to Christ and His authority.

So, while the Gospel may not build empires, it certainly does build nations and social orders where the Gospel and the whole of Christianity is honored.

10.) In the end this is a debate about two very different visions of Christianity. I would insist that Tullian is dishonoring Jesus by not taking Christ’s office of King seriously. Indeed, I would say Tullian completely dismisses the idea of Christ as “Lord.” For Tullian Christ’s Lordship is a Gnostic kind of reality. It is the same kind of Kingship that one finds in R2K thinking. It is the kind of Kingship that says “Jesus is King in a non Kingly way.”

McAtee Contra Tchividijan On The Evils Of Christian Nationalism

“When you start blending the gospel with nationalism, you don’t just confuse categories—you corrupt the message. The gospel isn’t about reclaiming a country; it’s about redeeming people.

This kind of distortion doesn’t stay contained. It ripples out—generation after generation—leaving behind a trail of disillusioned people who think Christianity is about moral superiority and cultural dominance instead of forgiveness and grace.

Lord have mercy.”

Tullian Tchividjian
Billy Graham Grandson
Former Presbyterian

1.) Blending the Gospel with Nationalism?

Yet isn’t this what Jesus did when He told his disciple to teach the nations to observe all things that Jesus had taught them?

These chaps keep using the word “Nationalism” like it is this poison rag that is inconsistent with the Gospel. Yet, the Gospel has every intent of having all nations owning Christ as Lord. After all, Christ must rule until all things are placed under His feet …. including nations.

This also demonstrates the age old Baptist type behavior of insisting that the Gospel is only an individualistic thing. The Gospel is to have no corporate or Institutional impact. Individuals can be saved, so the thinking goes, but not families, ethnicities, nations or cultures.

Indeed, I would go so far as to say that if the Gospel is not blended with a proper and biblical understanding of Nationalism, that it is NOT the Gospel.

2.) The Gospel is about redeeming individuals and reclaiming countries. Does Tullian really believe that the LORD Jesus Christ is not interested in reclaiming countries. What does Tullian do with the idea that the Gospel has the power to restore “wherever the curse is found?” I suspect that Tullian, and all people who talk like this own a pessimistic eschatology. If they are postmills (and Andrew Sandlin talks this way) then they have contradictions all over their eschatology.

3.) One wants to shake Tullian, and his ilk, and ask them why they are so opposed to Nations owning Christ and upon owning Christ weaving into their constitutions and law order the teaching and standards of Biblical Christianity. How could that possibly be a bad thing?

4.) Christianity can be both about forgiveness and grace as well as about moral superiority and cultural dominance. A Christian people who are part of a Christian nation should be morally superior to nations who are anti-Christ and should also have cultural dominance over them until such a time as they repent.

Now, if Tullian is talking about the self-righteousness that can come from those who do not understand themselves sinners saved by grace alone then of course that kind of moral superiority should be abominated and the culture that produces should NOT have dominance but a people believing that they are morally superior and so should have cultural dominance – only because of Christ’s favor – while they continue to embrace that they are simultaneously sinner and saint are to be celebrated. All Christians should strive for that type of moral superiority and cultural dominance. It is a righteous thing and not evil in God’s sight that the righteous should rule over the wicked Christ hater.

Bagel Inroads In America Continue In Our Culture & Our Churches

Recently, there has been a great deal of attention (even more than usual) to all things Bagel. The most glaring recent example is how the Bagels are gobbling up, in a more intense manner than previously, the media outlets in America.

We know that the last letter that Charlie Kirk wrote to Netanyahu (in May) was full of pleading that Netanyahu pay attention to the fact that Israel was losing the propaganda war. Since then Bagels have gobbled up the propaganda machine knowns as “Tik Tok” (Michael Bell, Rupert Murdoch, and Larry Ellison). This is in addition to all the other media giant conglomerations that the Bagels control.

This means that whether it is TikTok, MTV, Paramount, CBS, etc. what viewers will be getting is disinformation (propaganda) that is heavily weighted in favor of the Bagel interests. This comes at the same time that an organization related to Doug Wilson just offered 10million to purchase “Christianity Today.” Now, knowing Wilson’s predilection for all things Israel;

“My affection for Israel is personal, in addition to being theological and political. My wife’s great-great-grandfather was Rabbi Cohn, one of my co-grandfathers is a Christian Jew, my kids and grandkids have cousins who are Israeli, and according to AncestryDNA, I myself am 2% European Jewish. Nancy is 11% European Jew, her mother 26%. What all this amounts to is that our family would be much more involved on an active personal level if terrorists overran Israel than we would be if terrorists overran Vermont.”

Pope Doug Wilson

it is easy to understand why some wags have projected that if Wilson’s organization is able to secure “Christianity Today,” the name of the magazine will be changed to “Judeo-Christianity Today.” There’s even a funny meme going around with the latest proposed new Wilson owned cover for “Judeo-Christianity Today.”

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10236496790787244&set=a.1132919770643

Whether it is the Lamestream Lugenpresse or whether some future “Judeo-Christianity Today,” it seems that unless folks are willing to dig beneath the surface for the truth they are going to be just eating out of the troughs of Bagel propaganda.

The fact that the US is bedeviled by all things Bagel is seen in

a.) Israel’s role in JFK assassination
b.) Israel’s attempt to sink the US Liberty
c.) Jonathan Pollard spy case
d.) The Rise of Dispensationalism

Now add in the Dancing Israelis on 9-11 along with the rampant speculation that Israel was involved in the Charlie Kirk murder and it can be easily seen the need is for less Bagel influence in American affairs and not more such is going to be the case with the recent media purchases by Larry Ellison.

Still the drum of Bagel influence keeps beating. Recently, a couple chaps tightly tied to Doug Wilson and who run a podcast that is fairly popular among the CREC groupies were given an all expense paid 10 day trip to Israel by a Bagel organization. Toby and Gabe came back singing the praises of Israel. The same Israel that is the porn capital of the world. The same Israel where the pervert crowd goes to Tel Aviv to go on pervert holiday.

https://www.insidehook.com/travel/tel-aviv-queer-epicenter

Yet despite these objective facts old Toby, chief Lieutenant to Doug Wilson and full of great aspirations (along with Jared Longshore) to be the one who most perfectly apes Doug Wilson in speech, mannerism, and writing style, insists that Israel is on the cusp of in Old Toby’s word’s, “a conservative resurgence.”

In many ways modern Israel is the front line defense against anti-Christian & anti-Western barbarism.”

Rev. Toby Sumpter

CREC

Doug Wilson Lieutenant

Can you imagine anyone having their brains being so soft as to repeat this talking point once returning from all expense paid trip to Israel? Now, no one doubts that there are a small minority of Bagels in Israel that are seeking to be true to a immoral morality but the idea that Israel is serving as a front line defense against anti-Christian & anti-Western Barbarism is just lunacy. Did Old Toby visit the Brothels of Tel Aviv? Did he go witness the porn manufacturing? Did he partake of the LGBTQ night life? Was Old Toby spat upon, as commonly happens in Israel, for sharing his Christian faith?

That Old Toby is inside the Evangelical tent shilling for Israel is seen in this statement from Old Toby;

“If we are to take the virtue of natural affection’ seriously, it really must be part of our conversation surrounding our relationship to Israel and the Jews because the Bible teaches that the Jews are our apostate older brother.”

Rev. Toby Sumpter

Blogger @ “No Legs … Still Walking”

Never mind that “Natural Affection” means NATURAL and not Spiritual. Paul did not mean that Jews were, by blood, our older brother. As such … “Natural Affection” does not apply.

Never mind that even in the Ordo amoris if someone who is blood related and they apostatize you treat them as if they are infidel. You shun them until they repent.

Never mind that modern day Israel bears virtually ZERO relationship to the Jews of the OT but instead are Khazars and Edomites by blood. There is a reason why, Toby, that Israel imposes significant regulatory restrictions on DNA testing, particularly those related to familial ties.

This is ASSININE beyond words and is doing the work of subversion. This may be some of the best evidence yet that Moscow. like the broader Lugenpress in America, is bought and paid for by the Bagels.

Beware the CREC.

Beware the American Reformed clergy.