Apologetics – Page 6

The Arc Towards A New World Order

“Towards the end of the 1920s, Carnegie (Marburg) funded the American Historical Society to prepare a report detailing what the future of the US should be. The Seventh volume of this report specifies, ‘The future belongs to collectivism….’ Professor Harold J. Laski, philosopher of British socialism, made the following comment is his testimony about the commission’s report; ‘At bottom, and stripped of its carefully neutral phrases, the report is an educational program for a socialist America.”

Wm. Stuart

The Invisible College – p. 307

The aim of the elite, at least since the Congress of Vienna has been a New World Order where the globalist rule over a serf/slave hoi polloi. In order for this collectivist vision to become reality top down control is required. In order to gain top down control what is required is some kind of social credit system where a Oligarchy government has precise control over the flow of money. This will require some kind of digital money system that even now is talked about in every corner of the financial world.

Further, there will have to be control of movement. Control of money can do that somewhat but what is being aimed at, is the fifteen minute cities where movement will be unnecessary. The idea is that you will have everything at your fingertips as only fifteen minutes away, hence there is no need to travel. This was always the idea of the electric cars which could be shut off remotely if someone was traveling beyond permission.

If there is a contest right now as between nations the contest is not so much national as it is over who will have the right to sit on top of the NWO pile. In other words, I am not confident that any of the elite desire a return to Nations. I am confident that the desire of the different elite is a desire to be the ones who are the uber-elite in a New World Order they all desire to cobble together.

I highly recommend Wm. Stuart’s book as a encyclopedia that traces the theme of the attempt to build a New World Order. Stuart, starts way before the Congress of Vienna to build his case. Regardless of when in time you start it is pretty clear that the major point of contention for the Biblical Christian is as against those who would stitch together a global empire. The Biblical Christian understands that God deals with people groups as in their people groups and as such any attempt to build a New World Order is yet another attempt by fallen man to return to the Tower of Babel rebellion.

If one desires to understand the times, one must get their head around the fact that fallen man is doing all he can to return to Babel in order to “make a name for himself,” with the ultimate purpose and end of destroying the rule of the Lord Jesus Christ.

R2K Scott Clark On X … Continuing To Spread His Heresy

“Theocrats/CNs/Theonomists/etc fail to account for the progress of revelation and redemptive history. They all write as if the state of that people has not expired (WCF 19.4) but it has. This was true in the 16th century and in the 17th century.

We can see it in some of the most important Reformed writings of the period against tyranny. In his treatise On The Right of Magistrates Theodore Beza did this very thing. Our writers all recognized that national Israel was a temporary, typological institution but they all also assumed that there must be a state religion. That assumption, more or less demanded that they contradict their own reading of redemptive history. So, they talked about the king of France, as if he were king David and France, as if it were national Israel. It was incoherent and it remained so.”

Dr. R(2K) Scott Clark
X Post

1.) Theonomists agree that the state of the people hath expired but we also agree with the rest of WCF 19:4 which R2K Clark loves to disingenuously leave out when he quotes WCF 19. Here is the complete rendering of 19:4;

IV. To them also, as a body politic, He gave sundry judicial laws, which expired together with the State of that people; not obliging under any now, further than the general equity thereof may require.

As many times as R2K Clark has been reminded of the part above in the bold one has to conclude that Clark is consistently in violation of the 9th commandment bearing false witness against the WCF.

I will guarantee you that all those 16th and 17th century Reformed writers, who R2K Clark styles “Theocrats” were operating under the umbrella of WCF 19:4. If that is true that means that R2K Clark, were he an honest man, would tell the world that his position on WCF 19:4 is in contradiction to what WCF 19:4 teaches. I mean, either R2K Clark is in violation of WCF 19:4 or else the Reformed Fathers that Clark complains about were in violation of WCF 19:4. Y’all can take R2K Clark … I’ll stick with Rutherford, Gillespie, Calvin, and their tribe.

2.) R2K Scott Clark is a Theocrat. I’ll say it again in case you skimmed past that. For all the bitching that R2K Clark does about Theorcats, Theonomists, and CN’s he is himself a Theocrat.

This is due to the fact that theocracy is an inescapable category. As a Theonomist I desire our government to rule consistently with God’s Law. That makes me a theocrat. However, as a anti-theonomist R2K Clark desires our government to rule consistently with Natural Law. Natural Law is thus R2K Clark’s God and as a Natural Law Theocrat R2K Clark insists on the State ruling according to that law.

Now, keep in mind that even the Christian Natural Law fanboys can’t agree on what Natural Law does and does not teach. Natural Law fanboys such as Dr. Stephen Wolfe and Dr. R2K Clark get along with one another like homeless people get along with soap and bathing. As such, since there is no uniform voice on what Natural Law, R2K Clark is a Theocrat who takes the State as his God. The State will determining the meaning of Natural Law and all the little Natural Law Theocrats will have to bow to the State as their God. Indeed, this is R2K Clark did during the Covid ruse. He followed his state god and insisted that the Churches shut down. R2K Clark is a Theocrat. He merely has a different Theo in his cracy (Theocracy).

3.) Of course this means that R. Scott Clark owns and practices a State religion. The very thing he complains about Theonomists, Theocrats, and CN’s. The State religion that R2K Clark practices is humanism. R2K Clark is a humanist Theocrat. R2K Clark practices the State religion except for a few hours on Sunday when he tips his cap to a God who is only ruling in the church realm. Keep in mind, that it is that God (who is no God) in R2K Clark’s church realm that is teaching R2K Clark that the God of the Church realm is not the explicit God over the common realm (public square).

4.) By now we see a couple truths;

a.) R2K Clark is the incoherent one. There are so many contradictions in R2K that it is amazing that R2K Clark can spit without dribbling it all over himself.

b.) It is R2K Clark’s reading of redemptive history that sucks. He is basically a Marcionite. He finds so much discontinuity between the Old and New Testament that he basically owns a different God from the Old Testament saints as well as those Reformed Fathers he so bitterly rails against.

Like all R2K chaps, R2K Scott Clark is a deceiver of the body of Christ. Now, like all sinners they may have the best of intentions, but at the end of it all they are advocating a different religion, and a different Christ.

Tucker Carlson Says; “Satan Rules The World”

“The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers so they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.”

I Corinthians 4:4

I will no longer talk much with you, for the ruler of this world is coming, and he has nothing in Me.

John 14:30

“Satan rules the world.”

Tucker Carlson
Interview with Ambassador Mike Huckabee

This is my Father’s world:
Oh, let me ne’er forget
That though the wrong seems oft so strong,
God is the ruler yet.
This is my Father’s world,
The battle is not done:
Jesus who died shall be satisfied,
And earth and Heav’n be one.

Maltbie Davenport Babcock

I can’t count how many times I’ve heard the Carlson quote from well meaning but errant Christians who cite it in order to suggest that the bad things that happen in this world can be explained by a saying, “Well, Satan is, after all, the God of this world.”

This is a serious misunderstanding of what is being said in Scripture. When John records Jesus saying,”the ruler of this world is coming,” we must take into account a few matters. First, John, throughout is book uses the word “world” in at least ten different ways. Indeed, the word “world” in John, at times, becomes a bit of a frequently used word with a technical meaning.

In 12:40 when Jesus says, “for the ruler of this world is coming,” he does not mean that the triune God is not sovereign over all matters and all men. If Jesus did mean that He would be in contradiction with Himself as He says elsewhere when speaking of the Elect;

“I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand”

John 10:28-29

Clearly, if God is “greater than all” that means that God is the ruler over Satan and being the ruler over Satan, God is the ruler over the ruler of this world.

How do we resolve then, this apparent contradiction in John’s Gospel where on one hand Jesus speaks of “the ruler of this world is coming,” and on the other hand Jesus stating that “My Father … is greater than all?”

The answer is not complex. In John 14 where Jesus speaks of Satan as “the ruler of this world,” He is speaking of the world here, not in a physical sense as if Satan is in charge of planet earth. Instead, Jesus is speaking of Satan being the ruler of this fallen world system as it lies in Adam’s rebellion.

John uses the word “world”in the sense of “world system” other times in His Gospel;

John 12:31 Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out.

John 16:11 concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged.

So, we have to make distinctions then between the John’s usage of the word “world” being use to communicate a contemporary world system in its moral, ethical, and cultural dynamics, which because it is fallen, hates Jesus Christ and His Kingdom and the usage of the word “world” to mean planet earth and everything that happens upon it.

This reminds us that in this world (planet earth) there exists two world systems or Kingdoms. There is the world system (Kingdom) wherein Satan remains the ruler in the sense that it lies under the evil one. Paul mentions this world when he writes the Colossians (1:13) and says, “You’ve been delivered from the dominion of Darkness,” but then adds the phrase that teaches us that there exists also another world system (Kingdom) on planet earth; “to the Kingdom of God’s dear Son, whom He loves.”

So, Satan remains the “ruler of this world” but that does not mean that Satan has a domain that is outside of God’s sovereignty over Satan. Indeed, with the coming of Christ’s Kingdom we know that Satan’s world system is being increasingly driven back. Like a mustard seed the Kingdom that Jesus established is ever growing and with each expansion of growth this present evil age is being constricted. A day will one day come when the Kingdom of God shall cover the earth as the waters cover the sea.

In order to reinforce God’s exhaustive sovereignty in John’s Gospel we remember Jesus’ words to Pilate;

“You would have no authority over me at all unless it had been given you from above.”

Pilate had authority over Pilate the same way that Satan is the ruler of this world. In both cases the authority or rulership is derivative of God’s sovereignty. Yes, each had their authority or rulership but only as governed by the Sovereign God.

All this to say that Satan is not God over God in this world. Satan does not rule the world, though Satan does rule over those who are under His sway, but only so long as the sovereign God determines. Satan has had countless human minions that he once ruled under his world system, but God, who is great in mercy, plundered His elect from Satan’s rule and brought them into a different Kingdom, under a different ruler.

The passage in I Cor. 4 is much the same. Again, we have Satan, as the “god of this age.” But keep in mind that with the triumph of Christ the age to come (which is a different age than “this age”) has arrived and with that arrival of the age to come the strong man (Satan) has been bound (Luke 11:21) and Jesus who has bound the strong man is plundering his kingdom. There remain those (unbelievers) whom the god of this age (Satan) has blinded so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. However, the elect among these unbelievers will, in God’s time, come to see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ. Satan does not have totalistic control. He is only a god (of this age) in a very limited sense. That limited sense is limited because the Lord God Omnipotent Reigneth and of Him and through Him and to Him are all things, to whom be glory forever.

Amen.

NAPARC & CREC As Over The Falls

The phrase is “over the falls,” as in, “that person is beyond redemption – they are over the falls.” It communicates that someone is beyond hope. I use this phrase often. I think the Federal Government is over the falls. I think Government schools are over the falls. I think Seminaries in the US are over the falls. I think R2K is over the falls. I think that Evangelicalism and Reformedom is over the falls.

One example of the latter is the MAPARC (Marxist American and Reformed Churches) – formerly known as NAPARC (North American Presbyterian and Reformed churches). The MAPARC churches have repeatedly demonstrated that they are of their father the devil with their ongoing witch hunt to go after clergy (and soon to be Ruling Elders) who hold to the same convictions that their North American Presbyterian and Reformed Church fathers held.

We have to extend this jeremiad to the CREC as well. Just a couple days of go I was shown a clip of a CREC Church service and sermon in Hell, Michigan (apropos) wherein the Pastor said (paraphrasing here); “If you are in this congregation and you are hiding your Kinism, I invite you this morning to practice your athletic skills and sprint to the door and don’t come back.”

It has gotten to the point that folks, that if you’re financially supporting a NAPARC or CREC church that is financially supporting their denomination you are financially supporting the work of Hell. God’s people must come out of these Marxist egalitarian nests. These congregations and denominations are anti-Christ.

Find here the latest NAPARC abomination. The Allegheny Presbytery of the RPCNA threatens to sue Sam Ketcham. Do keep in mind that scripture forbids Christians taking one another to “secular” courts. Of course, the RPCNA’s response to that objection would be to say … “We excommunicated Ketcham. He’s not a Christian.”

So… my most recent evidence is Rev. Ketcham’s reporting that NAPARC has sent him a letter threatening to sue him;

“My former presbytery has threatened to sue me for $150,000 if I show you the recording of the trial at which they excommunicated me.

Why are they so afraid the public might see this trial recording? Because evil is done in darkness. Truth is done in the open—John 3:19-21. (It is a very good audio/video recording btw).”

This is just the most recent proof that NAPARC is over the falls. Folks, it is time to pull out of these denominations. It is time to start new works, mindful of how badly denominations have worked for the last 100 years or so. All of this will not change until the NAPARC and CREC denominations are hit in the pocketbook. They are not going change by reasoned argument. They are not going to change by producing 1000s of pages of church history. Most importantly, they are not going to change by Scriptural arguments. Why?

Because they are over the falls.

Look, I’ve said this before on Iron Ink, but I will say it again here. What the argument between Athanasius and Arius on the Deity of Christ was in the third century … what the argument was between Luther and Cajetan on the issue of Justification by faith alone in the 16th century is today what the current argument is between the Marxist egalitarian Reformed and the Biblical Reformed. It’s that important. If the church follows the Marxist voices the visible church will become an institutional and established anti-Christ church. NAPARC and the CREC will become in the US what the The Three-Self Patriotic Movement is currently in China – a mere organ of the State and/or a egalitarian cult that has more in common with Mephistopheles than it does with Jesus Christ.

Abandon ye all hope who enter into a NAPARC or CREC church.

The Protest Filed Against An OPC Overture by Ruling Elder Andrew Duggan

MAPARC (Marxist American Presbyterian and Reformed Churches) are at it again. Recently the OPC, feeling left out for not being as Marxist left as the RPCNA, ARP, and PCA, had a Presbytery file an overture that said; “Racists bad… We Marxist clergy good.”

There was one Ruling Elder named Andrew Duggan who was having none of the Marxism of his OPC Presbytery. Duggan filed this protest with the Presbytery. This will mean that the powers that be in the OPC will be going after RE Duggan.

“I the undersigned respectfully protest the action of the Philadelphia Presbytery of The Orthodox Presbyterian Church in approving the following overture:

‘condemn without distinction any theological or political teaching which posits a superiority of race or ethnic identity born of immutable human characteristics and…call to repentance any who would promote or associate themselves with such teaching, either by commission or omission.’

The Scriptures referenced in the grounds do not support or teach a doctrine of broad equality. Acts 17:26 can no more be teaching an equality of nations by virtue of being of one blood than the equality of men and women who are also of one blood, and in marriage are one flesh. Furthermore neither 1 Corinthians 12:13 or Galatians 3:28 by including “bond and free” a necessary unequal relation with other men and other Christians cannot support a universal relation of equals vis a vis the 5th Commandment. Furthermore Galatians 3:28’s inclusion of “male and female” cannot serve as the ground of equality, which are by creation not equal, as the Apostle Paul elsewhere uses the superiority of men based on the order of Creation, Adam being formed first to establish the reason why women are to remain silent in the church. The logic of these grounds are the same as the enemies of the Gospel use to ordain women in their “churches”. Furthermore this condemns our fathers in the Faith and of The Orthodox Presbyterian Church most notably J Gresham Machen who not only privately expressed his segregationist views in a letter to his mother, but expressed his view of White Supremacy in his article “Mountains and Why We Love Them” published on OPC dot org.

‘There, in that glorious round spread out before you, that land of Europe, humanity has put forth its best. There it has struggled; there it has fallen; there it has looked upward to God. The history of the race seems to pass before you in an instant of time, concentrated in that fairest of all the lands of the earth. You think of the great men whose memories you love, the men who have struggled there in those countries below you, who have struggled for light and freedom, struggled for beauty, struggled above all for God’s Word.’

The superlative of ‘humanity has put forth its best’ speaking of Europe can mean nothing other than White people. This overture goes beyond the teaching of the Scriptures and our secondary standards, and binds the consciences of our members officers and church courts contrary to the Liberty we confess in the 20th chapter of our Confession of Faith.”

Accordingly I respectfully but most forcefully protest the overture to our General Assembly.”

Andrew P. Duggan