Third Reich or Westminster-Cal?

“And above all we have dragged priests out of the depths of the political party struggle and have brought them back again into the Church. It is our determination that they shall never return to a sphere which is not made for them, which dishonors them, and which of necessity brings them into opposition to millions of people who in their hearts wish to hold to the faith but who desire to see the priests serving God and not a political party.”

~ Adolf Hitler in a speech, October 24, 1933
R2K Enthusiast
Member — Christ Uniform Reformed Church

“[O]nce the church’s voice is stifled in the public square, the role of culture-makers shifts to the secular realm. The state will see this need and fill that need itself—in the name of national unity. In the case of Nazi Germany, it realized that it was now the state’s educational role to create a unifying worldview for the nation….”

“[T]he unity of the Germans must be secured through a new Weltanschauung [worldview], since Christianity in its present form was no longer equal to the demands which were to-day made on those who would sustain the unity of the people.”

Hitler told this to a group of Nazi leaders, August 27, 1933:

“The Church, as such, has nothing to do with political affairs. On the other hand, the State has nothing to do with the faith or inner organization of the Church.”

– Hitler again, in conversation with Nazi bishop Ludwig Muller

2:00 Of Dr. Greg Bahnsen Exposing The Cowardice Of WS-Cal

“If you sincerely try to stand against the slide into the cesspool of wickedness in our state, and in our culture by looking for a consistent biblical position by which you can witness against the disgrace all around us, (as many of us have found), you’ll lose your job within the Seminary community. You’ll lose your standing in the Church establishment. You’ll virtually become unemployable — even if your orthodox. You’ll become ostracized. You’ll be called ‘dangerous.’

What’s wrong with us that theonomists are dangerous when we have to lock our windows at night? It’s crazy isn’t it?

How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?

Of all the wicked heresies and threatening movements facing the Church in our day, when Westminster Seminary finally organized their faculty to write something in unison they gave their determined political efforts not to fight Socialism, not to fight homosexuality, not abortion, not crime and mayhem in our society, not subjectivism in theology, not Dispensationalism, not cultural relativism, not licentiousness, not defection from the New Testament, not defection from the Westminster Confession of Faith, — all of which are out there and they could give their legitimate efforts to. Boy the thing they had to write about was ‘Theonomy.’

How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he doesn’t see?

We are living in the cesspool of relativism and the Church doesn’t have an answer. Well, I praise God … that the truth that the early Church knew and is found in the Bible and is available to us and there are people like he who were willing to pay the price and say, ‘it’s worth it.'”

Why stand against the slide into the cesspool of wickedness when you can write articles suggesting that perhaps Christian could reach an entente with homosexuals on homosexual marriage? Why stand against Dispensationalism when your own theology is but a variant of Dispensationalism? (Some have even taken to calling R2K “Reformed Dispensationalism.”) Why stand against Socialism when your agenda is defined by Enlightenment and Liberal categories? Why stand against cultural relativism when your theology insists that your theology has nothing to say to the public square culture?

Look, long ago J. I. Packer noted that “bad theology hurts people.” R2K, doubtless is a theology that makes for nice sentimental people who get all teary eyed when they sing, “Trust & Obey,” but it is a theology that hurts people because it is escapist and retreatist when it comes to the public square. As an escape religion R2K is the perfect oppositional religion to the Cultural Marxists who practice power religion. It is the perfect oppositional religion for the cultural Marxists because it offers no opposition. If the cultural Marxist want to build an Idol out of the God State R2K says … “we’ll help you with those nasty reconstructionists by pointing them out to you and by making sure they are unemployable. We will blacken their names. We will misrepresent their positions. We’ll do all we can to cast them out of the Church. We will spit on the memories of Rushdoony (Why, we’ll even call him ‘Rushlooney’ in our private get togethers), and Bahnsen (Psst … We will call him ‘Rabbi Greg’ — ha ha ha).”

The White Hat Reformed Church is now riven by those who have two completely different worldviews and all the wishing and hoping in the world is not going to reconcile these antithetical worldviews.

You Are What You Love

Psalm 115:8 They that make them (Idols) shall be like unto them; Yea, every one that trusteth in them.

“God has made humans to reflect Him, but if they do not commit themselves to Him, they will not reflect Him but something else in creation. At the core of our beings we are imaging creatures. It is not possible to be neutral on this issue: We either reflect the Creator or something in creation…. All humans have been created to be reflecting beings, and they will reflect whatever they are ultimately committed to, whether the true God or some other object in the created order…. We resemble what we revere, either for ruin or restoration.”

G. K. Beale

We are imaging / reflecting creatures. This is why I say humans are chameleons, for they will reflect whatever culture that they are set against. When living in a pagan culture this explains why it is so important to not be conformed to the pagan culture but to be transformed by the renewing of our minds. The problem with the Church today is that it is reflecting and mirroring our pagan culture. This is why Churches that refuse to address the Public Square, because their theologies do not allow them to speak to the public square, will soon enough die out. Those churches will die out because their members will incrementally conform to the Spirit of the age since those Churches are ultimately committed to making sure that their members live in a zeitgeist that reflects one form of idolatry or another.

Public Opinion Polls, Historicism and Psychological Warriors

“Bernard Berelson was trained as a librarian but by the late 40’s was considered an expert in public relations and the manipulation of public opinion. One year after the publication of Blanshard’s book on Catholic power, Berelson co-edited ‘Public Opinion and Communication’ with Morris Jankowitz, one of the seminal works of communications theory, and a good indication of how the psychological warfare techniques refined during World War II were now going to be turned on the American public as a way of controlling them through the manipulation of the new media, i.e., radio and TV. Berelson establishes the book’s major premise in his introduction:

‘Growing secularization has meant that more and more areas of life are open to opinion rather than to divine law and to communication rather than to revelation. Growing industrialization has not only extended literacy; in addition, it has provided the technical facilities for mass communication.’

The goal of secularization was the reduction of all of life’s imperatives to ‘opinions,’ which is to say not the expression of moral absolutes or divine law. Once this ‘secularization’ occurred, the people who controlled ‘opinions’ controlled the country. Berelson is equally frank about where the new science of public opinion originated:

‘Research in the field was accelerated during WW II by demands for studies on the effect of communications upon military personnel, adjustment to army life and attitudes toward military leaders, enemy propaganda, and civilian morale. After the war this growing interest led to the establishment of additional university centers for the study of public opinion and communication by the methods of social science. Together with the continuing activities of industry and government, they now represent a large scale research enterprise.’

…. Berleson wrote also in 1950 that,

‘ there is a virtual pro-religious monopoly on communication available to large audiences in America today.”

Religious belief meant ipso facto the opposite of opinion, and therefore ideas not subject to the manipulation of the people who controlled the communications media. What needed to be done then was to move large areas of thought from the realm of religion to the realm of opinion if any significant breakthroughs in political control through manipulation of the media were to take place. Sexual morality was the most important area of religious thinking that needed to be moved into the realm of ‘opinion’ where it would be then under the control of psychological warriors like Berelson and those who paid his salary, namely, the Rockefellers.

And this is precisely what happened…

E. Michael Jones
Libido Dominadi

Notice that there was a designed and concerted effort, funded by the huge tax free Foundations (Ford, Rockefeller, Carnegie, etc.) to drag public thinking away from the residual remains of Christianity in the public square to a thinking that was called “secular.” The problem, of course, is that this was not a case where the public square was being unclothed of religious presuppositions, (secularization) but rather it was a case where the public square was being stripped of what remained of Christian presuppositions in favor of presuppositions consistent with Religious Leftist humanism.

This is seen in Berelson’s drive to get rid of religious absolutes in favor of “opinion.” However, clearly the problem here is that directed and manipulated opinion would now be the new absolute. The new absolute exchanged for the idea of Christian absolutes was the absolute of no absolutes. Any humanist absolute (masquerading as “opinion”) would be accepted in the secularized public square over and above a religious absolute.

Note also in the quote above the ascendancy of public opinion. Public opinion is to moral guidance what Historicism is to Historiography. In both cases, the absolute being evacuated, the only place a transcendent constant can be found is in the immanent subjective realm of space and time. If there is no transcendent constant then in order to shape public policy is to create public opinion through putative scientific public opinion polls and then to reify those subjective numbers into objective transcendent constants so that direction can be given to public policy. This is the same thing that happens in Historicism. As Historicism allows for no fixed transcendent constant by which history can be known and evaluated, therefore History itself must become its own fixed transcendent constant. Public opinion polls serve as absolutes for the immediate just as Historicism serves as absolute in interpreting the past as a guide for the future.

However, in both cases of Public Opinion polls and Historicism the results they yield are only as good as the manipulator the psychological warriors operating them.

Without the God of the Bible, who alone can give us a fixed transcendent constant as well as the certainty that the transcendent has become immanent, (thus assuring that the transcendent isn’t so transcendent that it loses touch with our sitz-im-leben), we only have a word and world of flux where man is a being manipulated and controlled by the Psychological warriors named Ford, Rockefeller, and Carnegie.

Addendum

R2K plays right into this agenda quoted from Jones. R2K allows the public square to be cleansed of what Berelson called religious belief in favor of the manipulations coming from the cultural elites.

Who said this version of Jesus + Nothing = Everything?

“Nothing is demanded of you — no idea of God and no goodness in yourselves, not your being religious, not your being Christian, not your being wise, and not your being moral. But what is demanded is only your being open and willing to accept what is given to you, the new Being, the Being of love and justice and truth, as it is manifest in Him whose yoke is easy and Whose burden is light.”

A.) Tullian Tchividjian — PCA Pastor
B.) Jack Miller — Sonship Guru
C.) Paul Tillich — Process Theologian
D.) David Van Drunen — R2K Theologian
E.) All of the Above