Apologetics – Page 6

Continuing to Muse on “Neighbor”

“Michael Masters writes that Christianity ‘must now share the blame for the dissolution of the West,’ that it ‘has abandoned the defense of our people and has become an accomplice’ of those who would exterminate us. When we need the church the most, it not only abandoned us, but joined in the vanguard of dispossessory efforts against us. How did the faith that once served as an anchor, that so nobly prevented us from spinning away into the ether of oblivion, become our enemy? Masters summarizes the most common criticisms leveled at Christianity, that it ‘has subverted inbred traits of altruism that help family and tribe survive, and has transmuted those traits into agents of passivity and surrender,’ that it ‘has universalized altruism, thus stripping our defenses against multiculturalism,’ and that its ‘preoccupation with eternal reward in the world to come blinds some Christians to the consequences of their actions today.'”

Corey Giles

The Sword of Christ – p. 3

When I see clergy talk about how “everyone must be treated as a neighbor,” without any qualification that treating everyone as a neighbor doesn’t mean “treating everyone the same,” I hear echoes of this quote above in my head. When we make “neighbor” a universal principle, without the particularizing of definite degrees of “neighborliness” towards the particular people we encounter day by day and hour by hour, we have so broadened the meaning of “neighbor” that it means nothing. The word neighbor begins to slip into the ether realm of “if everyone is my neighbor than nobody is my neighbor.” If I owe everybody the same obligation of neighborly altruism, then what gets lost is the obligation to owe kith and kin and those who are of the household of faith, a greater warrant of neighborly obligation.

The chief opponent of Christianity today is cultural Marxism. Cultural Marxism is the theology that creates multi-culturalism. Multi-culturalism is built up and supported by the idea of that non nuanced statement of “everyone is my neighbor.” If it is not explained pointedly, in our current cultural moment, that “everyone being our neighbor,” does not mean that everyone is treated the same … everyone is to receive the same prioritization … everyone is to be hailed and well met … then the consequence is that the those who teach the unqualified statement, “everyone is my neighbor,” are doing the work of the devil (intentionally or not) by contributing to the health of the multiculturalism that is serving as the current coffin for all white people but especially for the White Christian people.

Lizard People … Then & Now

I have written here before about “Lizard People.” It is just my shorthand way of referencing people who are not like most humans. They are people who seemingly have no soul, experience no guilt, shame, or remorse, and who view other people the way they might view insects or slugs. Certainly, the Lizard People are driven by narcissism but there is more than just narcissism here. They are also psychopaths and the very worse of them are this way because of their religious beliefs.

In my reading I came across one of the Lizard People from the 18th century. Meet the Duc d’Or leans. Phillippe d’Or leans was one of the wealthiest men in France and was the cousin of King Louis XVI. d’Or leans was one of the guiding actors behind the dethronement and beheading of his cousin and his cousin’s wife, the Queen.

d’Or leans also had a sister-in-law whom he hated named the Princesse d’ Lambelle, who was one of Queen Marie Antoinette’s ladies. d’Or leans hated d’Lambelle because she had rebuked him for his role in the “March of Versailles” — an earlier attempt to murder the crown family. Rumors also swirled that d’Or leans would financially gain the d’Lambelle’s dowry if she would die.

d’Or leans thus paid assassins in the mob to murder d’Lambelle and then gave it the color of law by having her condemned to death for not taking an oath to hate the recently seized King and Queen.

However, we are still not in Lizard People territory yet. Where d’Or leans is seen as a Lizard came in an incident following the murder and decapitation of d’Lambelle. Upon the deed being done and after the mob had taken the decapitated and piked head of d’Lambelle to a salon to get her hair right again the mob marched the piked head before the veranda of the Duc d’Or leans.

Here we allow Nesta Webster to describe the Lizard Person quality of Phillippe d’Or leans.

“The Duc d’Or leans was just sitting down to dinner with his mistress, Madame Buffon, and several Englishmen, when the savage howls of triumph that heralded this arrival (of the piked head of d’Lambelle) attracted his attention. Walking to the window he looked out calmly on scene, contemplated with a perfectly unmoved countenance the dead, white face, the fair curls fluttering round the pike-head. The Duke of Orléans reportedly commented ‘Oh, it is Lamballe’s head: I know it by the long hair. Let us sit down to supper’,”

This is Lizard People status. No conscience. No remorse. No guilt. No shame.

It is just these same kind of elites that we are dealing with today. Like the Duc d’Or leans they have no souls. They perpetuate the basest of cruelties upon others and without blinking they sit down to enjoy their meals. You must realize that these are the kinds of people we are dealing with when we deal with the Corporatists, the Politicians at high levels, the Silicon Valley Billionaires, and the K-Street and Wall Street movers and shakers. You can not expect these people to be like you. They are not. They are Lizard People. They don’t have your manners, your morals, or your reservations. They are not like you. That is who we are dealing with as those behind the on the street Revolutionaries.

Do you really think people like Occasio-Cortez, Bill and Melinda Gates, Peter Thiel, Hillary Clinton, George Soros, Mark Zuckerberg, Ben Sasse, Larry Ellison, etc. are any different than the duc d’Or leans? These people have always existed, and our challenge is to realize that there exists a whole class of soul-less people at war with “legacy Americans,” and in realizing that give them no quarter when the time comes.

Daily Kinist Quotes (DKQ)

Given the continued lobotomized lunacy of the NAPARC/CREC/SBS churches on the subject of Kinism (i.e. – racial realism, familialism, ethno-nationalism, White Christian Nationalism, etc.) I thought I would begin posting daily Kinist quotes (DKQ) in order to demonstrate how utterly braindead these “churches” are that are excommunicating, and deposing ministers over the Kinist issue as well as passing sundry language that is born of egalitarian, neo-Marxist thinking. We have established already at Iron Ink that the Church is now advocating for the very same thing that Marxists have advocated for throughout history. I have posted the Marxist quotes more than a few times. Marxists “intellectuals” would be very comfortable with the course that these denominations are pursuing. In point of fact these denominations would have to say on this point, if they were honest and consistent, that the Marxist were right when it comes to affirming a policy that pursues the elimination of nations and races.

I’ve already posted myriads of these quotes in a post here;

So Say We All … A Protest To Dr. Sproul 2.0’s Comments

I posted all these before two Anthology volumes were published that contain myriads upon myriads more quotes saying much the same thing that you will find in the above link. The volumes, “Who Is My Neighbor” and “A Survey of Racialism in Christian Sacred Tradition,” reveals that the current denominations are violating the principle of Vincent of Lerins which taught, that true Christian faith must be what has been believed “everywhere, always, and by all.” The Anabaptists, who were renown levelers, would be exceptions but the Reformed don’t consider them Christian.

As I have said before, so I say again now, this issue is to our time what the issue of the eternality of Christ was in the contest between Arius and Athanasius in the 4th century, what the contest was between Augustine and Pelagius was in the 5th century, and what the contest was between Luther and Eck was in the 16th century. If we get this issue of egalitarianism wrong here the Church of Jesus Christ will not get back on track until we finally do go back and get it right. The Reformed throughout the centuries have always fought against levelling and the erasure of God ordained distinctions because they knew that such levelling was both born of and led to levelling the distinction between God and man. Levelling the creature-creature distinctions can’t happen without levelling the Creator-creature distinction.

With all that said, I will, day by day, bring you at least one, but often a few, quotes daily demonstrating where the Church Fathers have been on this subject over the centuries. By doing so, you will see how out of step the contemporary Church (we use the word “church” only by way of courtesy) is.

“Each town should support its own poor and should not allow strange beggars to come in, WHATEVER THEY MAY CALL THEMSELVES, pilgrims or mendicant monks, (or immigrants – BLMc). Every town could feed its own poor; and if it were too small, the people in the neighboring villages should be called upon to contribute. As it is, they have to support knaves and vagabonds under the name of beggars….”

Martin Luther

Address to the Nobility of the German People

Now ask yourself, if Luther argued that strangers (whatever they may call themselves) should not be allowed into towns how much more is it the case that strangers (whatever they call themselves) should not be allowed into family lines via marriage?

Also, this quote shoots holes into the idea that we have to treat illegal immigrants in the same way as neighbor as we do deal with fellow Americans. One can argue that Christians must treat all men as neighbors but if one argues that way they must introduce the idea of gradation of neighbors. After all, if everyone is your neighbor, no one is your neighbor.

“What, there is to be no serf because Christ has redeemed us all? What is this? This means that Christian liberty is turned into liberty of the flesh? Did not Abraham and other patriarchs and prophets own serfs? Read what St. Paul has to say about servants, who at that time were all in bondage. Therefore this article is directly opposed to the Gospel and it is rapacious, for everyone who is a bondman to remove himself from his master. A bondman can very well be a Christian and have Christian freedom, just as a prisoner or a sick person can be a Christian, and yet is not free. This article proposes to free all men, and turn the spiritual kingdom of Christ into a worldly one, which is impossible. For a worldly kingdom cannot exist where there is no class distinction, where some are free, some are prisoners, some are masters, and some are vassals, etc. As St. Paul says in Gal. 3:28, that in Christ both master and vassal are one.”

Martin Luther

Admonishment to Peace on the 12 Articles of the Swabian (Anabaptist) Farmers

Works Vol. 46 – p. 39

Pretty sure that this counts as a quote that supports Southern slavery.

The Well-Intentioned Offer vs. God Commands All Men Everywhere to Repent

Max writes,

The gospel offer is not grounded in Christ dying for each person individually. Scripture grounds the offer in God’s command and God’s promise.

God commands all people everywhere to repent (Acts 17:30). And He promises that whoever comes to Christ will be saved (John 6:37). That universal command and universal promise is the universal offer.

Bret responds,

Clearly Max you don’t understand the difference between a command and an offer. That God commands all men everywhere to repent is not the same as saying “God offers all men everywhere salvation.” The former is a true statement. The latter is not a true statement. God does NOT offer the reprobate salvation.

Max writes,

The offer is not: “Believe and then Christ will die for you.”
And it’s not: “Christ died for you in particular, therefore believe.”

Bret responds,

That’s correct, but only because the Gospel does not come with any offer at all.

Max writes,

The offer is: “Come to Christ, and you will find a real, finished, all‑sufficient atonement that actually saves everyone who comes.”

Bret responds,

That is not an offer. An offer says, “Christ offers to you salvation if you will have it.” What you have above Max is a tautology. Of course, people who come to Christ find a real, finished, all‑sufficient atonement that actually saves because the only people who come to Christ come because of a real, finished, all‑sufficient atonement actually saved.

Max writes,

Christ’s death is of infinite worth — fully sufficient to save every sinner on earth. The question of for whom He intended His death is a different category from the question of to whom God commands and promises salvation. Scripture keeps those categories distinct, and I’m trying to honor that distinction.

Bret

Logic also keeps the idea of “offer” distinct from the idea of “command.” You keep saying offer and then you explain “offer” as if it means “command.”

Christ commands all men everywhere to repent but He could not possibly give a well-intentioned offer to all men everywhere to repent since that would involve Him in the contradiction that He dies only for the elect, but He offers His salvation to those who were never elect and for whom He did not die for (i.e. – The reprobate).

Max writes

So the offer isn’t an empty box. The gift is Christ Himself — a real Savior with a real atonement that actually saves all who come to Him.

Bret responds

The offer is an empty box for the reprobate because there is no way it can be well-intentioned.

You don’t actually believe that man’s coming to Christ is the trigger event that effectuates Christ’s death for them do you Max?

Maybe instead it is the case that people come to Christ because they were saved at and in the Cross? Maybe that’s the reason why they hear the command (not offer) to repent and have faith?

Correcting Wesley Huff

Apparently, Wesley Huff is currently all the rage among apologists today. I first heard of him today. He was being interviewed by a chap named “Bartlett.” Below you will see an exchanged between Bartlett and Huff. It is my opinion that Huff’s answer was inadequate to the question.

Huff is reportedly Reformed Baptist. However, I am inclined to think he is some form of evidentialist in his apologetics.

HC91. What are good works?

Those only which proceed from true faith, and are done according to the law of God, unto His glory, and not such as rest on our own opinion or the commandments of men.

____

Bartlett to Huff: So if I don’t believe in Jesus, I don’t believe in the Bible, but I live a “good” life – I’m nice to people, I’m charitable, I’m trying to be kind wherever I can be – and I don’t believe in God am I going to hell or heaven as it relates to the scriptures?

Huff: Well, I don’t think if you’re living your life rejecting God, God is not going to force you into his presence.

—

Bret offers a better answer than Huff;

The problem here Mr. Bartlett is according to the Scripture “good” is defined as doing what we do for the glory of God. If you don’t believe in Jesus then while it may be the case that you do “comparative good,” you do not do “good” by God’s standard for “good.” The Bible teaches that “all our works are as filthy rags,” and this includes your being “nice,” “charitable,” and “kind.” God is not impressed with those behavioral traits because they fall short of the glory of God. To be honest, Mr. Bartlett, the behavior you describe as embraced by those who hate Christ are really just “splendid vices.”

Another problem here, Mr. Bartlett, is that you’re talking about being good, nice, charitable, and kind, but if you don’t believe in God how could you possibly be able to define what good, nice, charitable, and kind is? Without God, you’ve made yourself to be your own standard as to what constitutes virtuous behavior and that by itself will cast you into hell since making yourself your own standard is to make yourself out to be God. Now, why would God allow a false god into His heaven?

No, rebelling against God is rebelling against God and those who are comparatively virtuous as compared to others will be cast into hell along with those who were bad, mean, stingy, and hard-hearted.

The good news though Mr. Bartlett is that God will receive those who look to Jesus for forgiveness, repent of their attempt to be god and so their rebellion, and own God’s standard found in Scripture to be the norm that norms all norms.

Will you not trust Jesus Mr. Bartlett? That is His command to you.