Ethnic considerations – Page 15

AJ Drexson vs. McAtee on the Bible and Christian Nations / Nationalism

AJ Derxson writes;

Romans 11 has precisely /nothing/ to do with how believers should legislate and govern if they are in positions of power – which is the normal subject matter of “Christian nationalism.”

BLMc Responds,

Remember, AJ, in all that follows, you started this by calling me a “Cultist.”

I am now all confounded AJ because the great theologian Gerharrdus Vos said that Romans 11 was about Christian Nationalism. Now I have to decide if I am supposed to believe you or believe Vos. Here is what Vos had to say on the relation of Romans 11 to Christian Nationalism;

“Romans 11:17, 19, with its “branches broken off” metaphor has frequently been viewed as proof of the relativity and changeability of election, and it is pointed out that at the end of vs. 23, the Gentile Christians are threatened with being cut off in case they do not continue in the kindness of God. But wrongly. Already this image of engrafting should have restrained such an explanation. This image is nowhere and never used of the implanting of an individual Christian, into the mystical body of Christ by regeneration. Rather, it signifies the reception of a racial line or national line into the dispensation of the covenant or their exclusion from it. This reception, of course, occurs by faith in the preached word, and to that extent, with this engrafting of a race or a nation, there is also connected the implanting of individuals into the body of Christ. The cutting off, of course, occurs by unbelief; not, however, by the unbelief of person who first believed, but solely by the remaining in unbelief of those who, by virtue of their belonging to the racial line, should have believed and were reckoned as believers. So, a rejection ( = multiple rejections) of an elect race is possible, without it being connected to a reprobation of elect believers. Certainly, however, the rejection of a race or nation involves at the same time the personal reprobation of a sequence of people. Nearly all the Israelites who are born and die between the rejection of Israel as a nation and the reception of Israel at the end times appear to belong to those reprobated. And the thread of Romans 11:22 (of being broken off) is not directed to the Gentile Christians as individual believers but to them considered racially.”

Geerhardus Vos
Dogmatic Theology Vol. 1 — 118

Now, AJ, I know this might be difficult for you but let’s connect the dots here. If God is electing nations that means those nations are Christian and if those elect nations are Christian then it seems past obvious that those Christian nations are going to be ruled in a Christian manner and the only way to rule in a Christian manner is to have an eye on God’s gracious legislative Law-Word however that might express itself in those various and sundry elect Christian nations.

I do apologize though AJ. I just assumed that a normally rational person could connect those dots without me holding their hand and tracing out the connection. It was stupid of me to assume that.

AJ Drexson wrote

Secondly, separate nations (including Israel) exist because of what happened at the Tower of Babel. It doesn’t follow that the current arrangement is God’s ideal or is permanent. Indeed, God’s intent in the Babel separation “is that they should seek after God, and perhaps feel their way toward Him and find Him” (Acts 17:27).

BLMc responds,

It may be the case that the separate nations arose because of Babel but we see in Acts 2 that God sanctifies Babel on the day of Pentecost as each nation heard the Gospel in their own tongue.

Second, God’s mystery long hidden was that the nations in their nations would come into the Kingdom (Eph. 3:6).

Third, we see in Revelation 21-22 that the Nations as Nations come into the new Jerusalem thus teaching that Nations even exist in the new Heavens and Earth.

Fourth, we have the OT teaching (Isaiah 2 and Micah 4) that the nations in their nations will come unto the Mountain of the Lord to be taught God’s Law.

Fifth, we have not only Vos’s take on Christian Nationalism, but another Theologian, Martin Wyngaarden, taught that the Nations would never disappear, contrary to your dumbass assertion;

“More than a dozen excellent commentaries could be mentioned that all interpret Israel as thus inclusive of Jew and Gentile, in this verse, — the Gentile adherents thus being merged with the covenant people of Israel, though each nationality remains distinct.”

“For, though Israel is frequently called Jehovah’s People, the work of his hands, his inheritance, yet these three epithets severally are applied not only to Israel, but also to Assyria and to Egypt: “Blessed be Egypt, my people, and Assyria, the work of my hands, and Israel, mine inheritance.” 19:25.

Thus the highest description of Jehovah’s covenant people is applied to Egypt, — “my people,” — showing that the Gentiles will share the covenant blessings, not less than Israel. Yet the several nationalities are here kept distinct, even when Gentiles share, in the covenant blessing, on a level of equality with Israel. Egypt, Assyria, and Israel are not nationally merged. And the same principles, that nationalities are not obliterated, by membership in the covenant, applies, of course, also in the New Testament dispensation.”

Martin Wyngaarden
The Future of the Kingdom in Prophecy and Fulfillment: A Study of the Scope of “Spiritualization” in Scripture — pp. 101-102.

And when it comes to Acts 17, you might consider also reading vs. 26 AJ;

26 And He has made from one [j]blood EVERY NATION of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their pre-appointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings

Did you catch that AJ? God is the one who appointed the existence of Nations and NOTHING in Scripture suggests that they will eventually all bleed into one. In order for that idea to be accepted one has to go to U2’s Bono.

AJ Derxsen writes;

Which presupposes that ultimately, in a fully restored universe, there will no longer be nation-states. Because everyone in the New Cosmos will have “found” God – and thus the purpose of the Babel separation will have been fulfilled.

BLMc responds,

Do you read the Bible much AJ?

The Glory of the New Jerusalem

Revelation 21:22 But I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. 23 The city had no need of the sun or of the moon to shine [l]in it, for the [m]glory of God illuminated it. The Lamb is its light. 24 And the NATIONS of those who are saved shall walk in its light, and the KINGS of the earth bring their glory and honor [o]into it. 25 Its gates shall not be shut at all by day (there shall be no night there). 26 And they (the KINGS of the various NATIONS ) shall bring the glory and the honor of the NATIONS to it.

22 And he showed me a [r]pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding from the throne of God and of the Lamb. 2 In the middle of its street, and on either side of the river, was the tree of life, which bore twelve fruits, each tree yielding its fruit every month. The leaves of the tree were for the healing of the NATIONS.

AJ Derxson tells us that with the eschaton there will be no more nation-states. God’s Word tells us that there will be Nations-States and even Kings in the eschaton.

Now, who should we believe?

Scruton on the Relation Between the Living & the Dead; McAtee on Scruton

“The dead and the unborn are as much members of society as the living. To dishonor the dead is to reject the relation of obligation between generations.”

Roger Scruton

On Rousseau

Let us proceed to tease out some implications here;

1.) Of course this is nothing but the cream that rises to the surface from the doctrine called “Kinism,” which is itself merely Christianity as applied to social order functioning. There is not only a relation between kin who are living but also a relation between kin living, kin who have gone before and kin who are yet unborn. Without a honored continuity across the generations man becomes hyper-individualized with no sense of belonging to something greater than himself.

2.) Those who deny this truism are violators of the fifth commandment as Scruton’s second sentence clearly communicates. One simply can not deny Kinism and claim Christ.

3.) The only place left to go if one denies Scruton’s channeling of Edmund Burke is some form of cosmopolitanism. The eschew this wisdom is to embrace the life of the rootless nomad, and the wandering Jew.

4.) Without this principle what evolves is an ugly generational selfishness embraced by each succeeding generation. Without this principle living is only about me, myself, and I. Again, the sense of belonging is almost impossible to re-create.

5.) The only time we have authority to walk away from our forebears our walk away from our children is when our forebears were unfaithful to Christ in their traditions or when our children are unfaithful to Christ and His gracious Law-Word. To have to walk away from either of them for the sake of the King would be gladly done but done as with great tears and heaviness of heart. We would weep over their loss and our loss while rejoicing in gaining the Kingdom.

6.) In order to make this concrete keep in mind that all those “Christians” out there who are decrying Christian Nationalism, or Kinism, or even often-times “Racism” are in point of fact functionally denying the essence of this proverb. Those who deny this have to be considered at the very least “alienists” and at the worse, Enlightenment Liberals or Communists.

Ligonier, Indiana & America’s Diversity

“Well, I’m a standing on a corner in Winslow, Arizona And such a fine sight to see It’s a girl, my lord In a flatbed Ford Slowin’ down to take a look at me.”

Take It Easy
Eagles

Last week found me standing on a corner in Ligonier, Indiana while visiting kin.

Ligonier, you must understand is about as rural Indiana as one can get. It was, when I was growing up, the epitome of small town rural Indiana. At about 4000 residents Ligonier once upon a time claimed to be the Marshmallow capital of the world. That industry has long been absent from Ligonier, Indiana. When I was a boy, I would attend Ligonier’s West Noble High School basketball games against whom a uncle competed in Basketball games. I am here to testify that Uncle Kevin did not compete against any Hispanics in 1972 when he was competing against West Noble High School.

A funny thing has happened to Ligonier in the last 25 years or so. A funny thing connected to the surreal reality that upwards of 30 million illegal aliens now live in the USA. That number is so huge it is hard for one to really get their mind around it. However, visiting Ligonier, Indiana (or my hometown of Sturgis, Michigan) begins to make the number concrete.

When I was a boy, and even a young man Ligonier, Indiana and Sturgis, Michigan and many more small towns like them were as white bread as one can possibly imagine. However, with the US policy of porous borders small town America now looks increasingly like what small town Mexico must have looked like in 1975.

For example in Ligonier in the 2010 census Hispanic or Latino of any race were 51.5% of the population. That was an increase of almost 20% form the 2000 census. Further, as of 2020, 23.6% of Ligonier, IN residents were born outside of the country (1.06k people). Also of 2020, 81.2% of Ligonier, In residents were US citizens, which is lower than the national average of 93.4%. In 2019, the percentage of US citizens in Ligonier, IN was 82.6%, meaning that the rate of American citizenship has been decreasing.

Ligonier, I submit, provides a window into what is happening in small town America in these formerly united States. These two links sustain that observation;

The 10 Indiana Cities With The Largest Latino Population For 2023

The 10 Michigan Cities With The Largest Latino Population For 2023

While I stood on the corner of Ligonier, Indiana awaiting my Kin’s shopping I found myself observing the surrounding as it were from outside of myself. In the 20 minutes I waited for my Kin to finish her shopping I saw, as in a strange dream the following;

I saw sundry Hispanics walking up and down the sidewalk and it was obvious as to why. From where I stood I could see more than one Mexican Restaurant and several other Hispanic business devoted to bring in the Hispanic clientele. I saw a bakery, dedicated to Eastern European baked goods immediately next door to a bakery dedicated to Mexican baked goods. I saw three ample young ladies walking with a black young gentleman. I saw sundry white chaps passing by in their pick up trucks who had beards right out of Duck Dynasty or ZZ Top. I saw the average joe white person walking the sidewalks. And to add to the bizarre and surreal there I first heard the clopping of horse hooves and then saw sundry Amish buggies go traveling by me containing the Amish folk replete with the distinct attire that the Amish wear. Now toss in the requisite tatts and piercings that has become such a fixture in modern American culture and I found myself humming,

Picture yourself in a boat on a river
With tangerine trees and marmalade skies
Somebody calls you, you answer quite slowly
A girl with kaleidoscope eyes

Cellophane flowers of yellow and green
Towering over your head
Look for the girl with the sun in her eyes
And she’s gone

Lucy in the sky with diamonds
Lucy in the sky with diamonds
Lucy in the sky with diamonds, ahh

But for me it was;

Picture yourself on a street in a city
Where American towns are now bastardized
Somebody walks by, you’re staring quite boldly
A community now balkanized

Restaurants selling Mexican black beans
Amish coverings on heads
Look for the girl with white in her skin
And she’s gone

Diversity is our strength we’re now dyin’
Diversity is our strength we’re now dyin’
Diversity is our strength we’re now dyin’

Because of my visit to Ligonier, Indiana, as well as previous trips to my hometown of Sturgis, Michigan I can now more easily get my head around 30 million illegal aliens now living in these formerly united States. I can see the havoc that the Biden border policy is playing with the former homogeneity of America. I can visibly see that America is now being ruled by an occupying force that is resolved on destroying America.

And I can most clearly see that the only hope of historic Americans is the rise of peaceful secession movements so that this now balkanized country might become several nations.

Replacement Theory as Proxy War

Given that the attack on White people is a proxy war w/ the real intent of attacking the Lord Jesus Christ so as to roll him off His throne, any refusal to defend the attempt to replace and even extinguish White people when they are wrongly and summarily attacked is a refusal to defend the reign of the Lord Jesus Christ and thus demonstrates that such refuseniks are cowards and traitors to the Sovereign rule of Jesus Christ as well to their own people.

Yes … it is that serious.

If the Church can’t figure out that faggotry is sin, how do you expect it to figure out that Kinism is righteousness?

If running with the footmen makes the Church weary how shall it ever keep up with the chariots?

R. Scott Clark’s Opining on Christian Nationalism Rejected — Part I

Here I find myself just a tad bit over 3 weeks out from open heart surgery. On top of that I have managed to contract a very slight, but still discernable cold. I am, to say the least, feeling blah and quite lackluster. I have been kicking myself about not blogging more but I have just not had the oomph to do so.

Until now. Leave it to that grand idiot Dr. R. Scott Clark to write with such determined torpidity and stylistic buffoonery to cause me rise out of my languid pose of recovery so as to expose his shallow offerings and lampoon his “insightful reasoning.”

Recently, at his blog, “The Heidelfog” Clark had yet another go at the concept of “Christian Nationalism.” Naturally, as Clark is a stupid man he is opposed to this Biblical concept. It is ironic that a man who wrote a book on “Recovering the Reformed Confessions” would insists that those who wrote the “Solemn League and Covenant” (a steroidal advocacy of Christian Nationalism if there ever was one) and were largely responsible for penning the Westminster Confession of Faith were foursquare opposed to any idea of Christian Nationalism.

I mean R. Scott Clark is trying to tell us that the guys who penned the following were against Christian Nationalism;

LC#191 Q- What do we pray for in the “second petition” of the Lord’s prayer which is Thy Kingdom Come?

A – the Kingdom of God is to “be countenanced and maintained by the civil magistrate.”

Q-108 which asks what are the duties required in the second commandment.

A – “the disapproving , detesting, opposing all false worship; and, according to each one’s place and calling, removing it, and all monuments of idolatry.”

The magistrate’s place and calling requires him to remove all false worship and all monuments of idolatry.

Q-118 “What is the charge of keeping the sabbath more specially directed to governors of families, and other superiors?”

The answer says that it is directed to other superiors, because “they are bound not only to keep it themselves, but to see that it be observed by all those that are under their charge.”

Other superiors include the civil magistrate.

It looks to me like Dr. R. Scott Clark needs to recover the Reformed Confessions on the issue of Christian Nationalism because those documents clearly support Christian Nationalism.

But let us not deal merely in generalities. Let us dig into the subterranean chambers of Dr. R. Scott Clark’s and Dr. Kevin DeYoung’s idiocy. Let us take the time to pop their ponderous puss-filled pontifications on the position of Christian Nationalism. In order to do so we examine Clark’s 07 June offering on the same subject on his “The Heidelfog” wherein he quotes Dr. Kevin DeYoung to sustain his vile bile against Biblical Christianity.

First Clark argues that it was the end of sodomy laws combined with the rise of SCOTUS’s Obergefell vs. Hodges decision that made the way for the return of discussion supporting Christian Nationalism. Here Clark is only half right, which means he is completely wrong. Should we be surprised? It is true that pro-sodomy laws and pro-sodomite marriage may have lit the fuse to a return of conversation on Christian Nationalism but the larger issue was the realization of more and more Christians that their nation was embracing a Nationalism that was thoroughly pagan and anti-Christ. More and more Christians began to realize, because of the rise of sodomy and now Tranny-ism and child abuse sex change laws that their nation was indeed embracing a Nationalism but that that Nationalism was pinioned upon hatred of Christianity. So, instead of giving in to the rise of humanist Nationalism a chord was struck to once again begin thinking about Christian Nationalism. So, Clark is right about those issues driving conversation but he is wrong in not realizing that people began waking up to the fact that Nationalism is an inescapable category and that if we have to choose between a anti-Christ Nationalism where sodomy, Tranny-ism, pedophilia and sodomite marriage are expressions of the theology of the land and Christian Nationalism where Biblical morality is the law of the land they would rather rally around the flag of Christian Nationalism.

Clark then goes on to cite Paul Miller’s 2021 Christianity Astray article on Christian Nationalism as a beginning point of conversation on the subject. Clark ties together Miller’s work with Samuel Huntington’s writing on the same subject. Clark then goes out of his way to try and tie Dr. Stephen Wolfe’s “The Case for Christian Nationalism” in with Theonomy — which Clark hates with all the passion of Juliet’s love for Romeo. Clark fails to mention that Wolfe goes out of his way in his volume to communicate that he is no friend to theonomy. Indeed, it is my conviction, as a general equity theonomist that Wolfe’s book fails magnificently precisely because he pins his Christian Nationalism on Natural Law’s anti-theonomic thinking. However, the fact that Wolfe goes out of his way to distance himself from theonomy does not stop the libelous R. Scott Clark from disingenuously seeking to tie Clark to Theonomy. (Alas, if only it were really true.)

Clark next appeals to fellow well educated chucklehead Kevin DeYoung for support for Clarks own vitriol. DeYoung pleas for rejecting Wolfe inveighing;

“The message—that ethnicities shouldn’t mix, that heretics can be killed, that violent revolution is already justified, and that what our nation needs is a charismatic Caesar-like leader to raise our consciousness and galvanize the will of the people—may bear resemblance to certain blood-and-soil nationalisms of the 19th and 20th centuries, but it’s not a nationalism that honors and represents the name of Christ.”

Now, I am 75% finished with Wolfe’s book and I would dearly love to have the page number where Wolfe expressly said that “ethnicities shouldn’t mix.” I wish he had said it. I was disappointed he didn’t say it. As such I’d love the exact quote from DeYoung.

Second, how can DeYoung be a Christian minister living in a land where we still routinely kill the unborn and even the newly born and contend that violent revolution isn’t already justified. On this basis alone I think any pulpit worth its salt would be ashamed to be filled by DeYoung.

Third, while I think it is dang near impossible for a Christian prince to rise in Weimerca I certainly would not be opposed if one did arise to set matters straight. I would love for a Protestant Christian Franco, Pinochet, or Salazar to take the helm in this country. Would that God would raise up a Alfred the Great, a Charlemagne, or a Cromwell to lead this country. Can anyone tell me why DeYoung is opposed to a Christian Prince rising up to destroy all the high places in the nation?

Do not fail to notice how DeYoung subtly suggests, via his “blood and soil” descriptor that all who disagree with him on this are closet Nazis. Can DeYoung please tell me why Christian Nationalism that Wolfe puts forth (and frankly which I think is weak sauce) is not a Nationalism that honors and represents the name of Christ? Methinks when Kevin DeYoung talks like this Kevin DeYoung and Bret L. McAtee are serving different Christs because I think that Jesus Christ would be well pleased with that kind of Christian Nationalism.

At this point R. Scott Clark leaves off from quoting DeYoung and gives us more of his own blather. Red Clark, like any good Commie, directly ties Christian Nationalism to Nazism, making explicit what DeYoung offered implicitly;

“Segregationism (known among theonomists as “kinism“) and the lust for a “charismatic Caesar-like leader” should cause any decent American’s blood to run cold. These two features were also essential to the very “blood and soil” nationalism of the Nazis. We fought and won a war against these very things. The idea that religious heretics should be put to death is a repudiation of the first amendment of the Constitution and constitutes an anti-American revolution. Miller has seriously understated the nature and intent of the most popular form of Christian Nationalism.”

Here, I, in a decent and warm-bloodily manner, note;

1.) There have been many many Christian Kings throughout history and many many Christian Kings whom God’s people loved. To suggest that a rise of a good Christian King should make any Christian’s blood run cold reveals again that R. Scott Clark is historically ignorant.

2.) Is it R. Scott Clark’s position that any people who want to retain their heritage, traditions, and even their common bonds of blood are automatically wicked? Is the desire to belong to a set people in a known place really the kind of realities that should make the blood of Christians run cold? I mean, I know that thinking that way makes the blood of Cultural Marxists run cold but why should we think that thinking in such a manner as to love people and place to the point of wanting people and place to carry on into the future is something that makes all decent American’s blood run cold?

Honestly, R. Scott Clark saying that about Kinism makes my blood run cold.