Category: Quotes & Commentary

Diversity’s Dirty Little Secret Exposed

“When considering the broad theme of Oneness, it is important to note that this is not about imposed cultural sameness for the crushing of expression or creativity. Tolerance and openness exist for cultural, ethnic, social, personal, sexual, and religious identities. Diversity is encouraged, so long as divisive exclusivity — ‘separateness’ or ‘two-ness’ — does not threaten the fabric of anticipated harmony. In fact, distinctive cultural sensitivities and personal tastes are respected so long as they remain within the mosaic.”

Carl Teichrib
Game of Gods; The Temple of Man in the Age of Re-Enchantment – p. 13

Understand what is being said here. The Monistic Uniformity that we are headed for will allow the appearance of diversity but only if that diversity contributes to the major theme of Monism. You can be sexually perverted in any direction you like (hence Diversity) but you will not be allowed to say anything that insists that such a thing as sexual perversion exists because that would be to interject a Separateness or Two-ness of right and wrong into the Monism that can not be questioned. So, people will be allowed diversity in perversion and abnormality but they will not be allowed any diversity that suggests that there is a standard by which all diversity must comply. In such a way the opponents of Two-ism can claim diversity while all the while pursuing Monism (Oneism).

Marriage as Mirroring Partners

Dr. Anthony Flood explains in a very simple fashion why marriage across religions, race, culture, or even class is not a good idea;

“Aquinas’s principle states that the greater the similitude, the greater the stability and permanency of the love. The greater the permanency of the love, the greater the real union the lovers seek and likely obtain. Thus, a greater similitude prima facie affects a greater real union between friends. The ultimate rationale for this principle draws from the relation between unity and union. As unity is the principle of union, the closer two things are naturally, the closer they can be through love. At the level of persons, the closer a relationship with another person comes to unity the stronger it will be. Since self-love arises immediately from substantial union, we can say that the more of a lover’s love for the beloved approaches one’s own self-love (and vice versa), the greater the loving union between them will be. In other words, the most stable and permanent love relationship will be the one that approximates most each person’s love of self. “

Anthony Flood
The Metaphysical Foundations of Love — p. 35

Kinists do not discourage marriages across racial lines because they hate people. They discourage marriages across racial lines because they love people. They know the lack of racial similitude between bride and groom will likely be a future friction point and so fracturing point of the marriage. The goal of entering into marriage is for each partner to have a partner who is in a multitude of respects a reflection of themselves. The more harmony of interests between the one male and one female marriage candidates the more likely that the marriage will be a success. Introducing vast differences in race, or class, or religion, or culture, or values as in each party coming to the marriage altar is a sure-fire means to guaranteeing that the marriage will fail or at the very least not be as happy as it otherwise would have been if those differences had been taken into account before the marriage was entered via covenant.

Now let me anticipate an objection to the quote as coming from earnest Christians. I can hear many protesting at Dr. Flood’s recommendation of the necessity of self-love. I will only say here that if you want a guarantee that a marriage will fail marry somebody who doesn’t have a healthy and Christian love of themselves. When Dr. Flood talks about “self-love” he is not talking about narcissism. He is merely saying by way of metaphor that people who are comfortable in their own skin should marry people who would likewise be comfortable in their skin if they had to be.

Doubtless, there are inter-racial marriages that work, as well as marriages across class lines and culture lines and religious lines that work. Praise be to God for those marriages. However, I’ve also seen healthy three-legged dogs who run well, but that doesn’t mean that we should promote either inter-racial, inter-religious, or inter-class marriages or the cutting off of the legs of dogs. The fact that something odd or unusual works isn’t a recommendation for continuing to pursue the odd and unusual.

God Owns The Land

“God is cast in the roles of Creator and ‘supreme landlord’ in the Pentateuch. The land owes its existence to Him, and he creates its inhabitants, continually monitoring and supervising their behavior. He allocates land to people: *Adam is placed in *Eden (Gen. 2:8), Canaan is promised to the *Israelites (Gen. 15:16-21) and there are references to the allocation of land to the Edomites (Dt. 2:5), Moabites (Dt. 2:9), and Ammonites (Dt. 2:19). Conversely, He removes people from land when they do not behave in a worthy manner: he expels Adam and *Eve from Eden (Gn. 3:23-24), scatters the tower builders over all the earth (Gn. 11:8), and earmarks the Canaanites for expulsion from their land when the level of sinfulness warrants it (Gn. 15:16).”
 
Dictionary of the OT Pentateuch
Entry under “Land”
From “Who is My Neighbor”

As God does not change this has prompted me to consider;

1.) The fact that each of us lives where we live is not by chance or happenstance. We are where we are physically located by God’s ordained decree. We can find comfort in this truth when we end up in zip codes that we loathe. I remember when we first moved to Charlotte I kept waiting for God to send us an unexpected check in the mail so we could move from what I thought then was a God-forsaken location. I should’ve taken more comfort that God wanted me in Charlotte for reasons that were His own even if inscrutable to me. Saint, you are where you are because God has placed you there.

2.) Of course, there is a macro application here as well. People groups inhabit where they inhabit because of God’s ordination. Further, people groups are removed from their homelands and places often (not always) due to disobedience. Traditional WASP Christians are being removed from their homelands and who could argue that it is not because they have rebelled against God’s Law-Word and sown the wind with their gross covenant violating immorality.

Our removal is internal. By that, I mean God is removing us though we remain in our homeland. God is removing us via the recruit and dilute methodology combined with sub-replacement birth rates.  Western man has sown the wind and now is reaping the whirlwind. We are being slowly genocided and genociding ourselves and so are being removed from the land.  Scripture underscores this phenomenon when God warned Israel that the results of disobedience would be,

43 “The alien who is among you shall rise higher and higher above you, and you shall come down lower and lower. 44 He shall lend to you, but you shall not lend to him; he shall be the head, and you shall be the tail.

3.) Overall this reminds us again of that stout Reformed doctrine of God’s exhaustive sovereignty. Our whole lives are structured and ordained by the Omnipotent God. Every breath we take, the very ground we inhabit, the tightness of our family units, the careers and jobs we have; all this is from the hand of a sovereign God. To God’s people, all of it is to our good. To those people who oppose God all of it is for their judgment.

In conclusion, the only way that Western man finds an end to God’s judgment of removal from our lands is to repent of our sin of rebelling against God and His Christ. We have need to repent of rebelling against God’s clear Law-Word. Only National repentance as led by repentance among God’s people will end the sure genocide and so replacement of Western man.

In Praise of Hatred

“Hate that which is evil. Cling to that which is good.” Romans 12:9

“A kind Providence has placed in our breasts a hatred of the unjust and cruel, in order that we may preserve ourselves from cruelty and injustice. They who bear cruelty, are accomplices in it. The pretended gentleness which excludes that charitable rancor, produces an indifference which is half an approbation. They never will love where they ought to love, who do not hate where they ought to hate.”

Edmund Burke


Hate gets a bum rap. Here all hate is doing is being the visceral counter-reaction to all that is loved and hate gets hated on. Hate gets maligned with ideas of “hate-crimes,” and “hate-speech,” and “hate-facts.” No one ever faults love when it is invoked for lust and yet hate takes it on the chin by receiving all the bad press and that even when employed properly.

You literature fans… where would you be without hate? How could you have a five star novel without the nobility of hatred in the building conflict? Could Dicken’s, “A Tale of Two Cities” ever have gotten off the ground without building our hatred for Madame De Farge? Would you have ever read Tolkien without Gollum? What would be Beowulf without hatred for Grendel? Even in the Scriptures we keep turning the pages to finally see the Serpent’s head fully crushed.

And what of history? History would be boring if there weren’t people to justly hate. Whether it is Vikud Quisling or Benedict Arnold. Whether it is Judas or Julian the Apostate. Whether it is Pope Francis or Bloody Mary, history wouldn’t be history without a proper hatred for the proper people.

For these reasons alone I think hatred should be toasted. Love gets all the credit but without hated hatred love would just be another ho hum passion losing the ability to be repulsed by what contradicts it.

Consider, for a second, the consequences to our culture because so many have decided that hate is bad. Because we are seeking to ban hate that which fills the vacuum of its absence is tolerance. The consequence of embracing tolerance in place of a full on loving of hate is not that hate disappears but rather is subtly re-directed. We are taught hate is bad and tolerance is good with the result that we now hate ourselves all the while telling ourselves how loving we are being. We used to properly hate those who were seeking to overthrow our the values of a culture that was, at least in part, Christian. Now, we are convinced that it is horrid to hate the opposite what we used to love. It used to be noble to hate sodomy, hate abortion, hate LGBTQ’ism, hate the stranger and alien whose cultural baggage promised the overthrow of our own beloved cultural values. So, hate hasn’t gone away. It has merely changed zip codes. We used to hate the opposite of that which we loved. Now we merely hate ourselves as we tolerate that which is destroying us. We once hated sodomy but we were taught that particular hate was bad and so we replaced our hate with tolerance with the result that we ended up hating our sons as we created a culture wherein they could more easily embrace sodomy. But… hey, it’s all good because we now have the ability to tolerate our sodomite sons. We once hated abortion but we were taught that particular hate was bad and so we replaced our hate with tolerance with the result that we ended up hating our daughters as we created a culture wherein they could more easily secure that needed abortion. We once hated tattoos but we were taught that particular hate was bad and so we replaced our hate with tolerance with the result that we ended up hating our sons and daughters as we created a culture wherein they could more easily ink themselves up. Again… hatred, being an inescapable concept, hasn’t really gone away, it’s merely relocated itself so that we hate ourselves and our kin.

If the God of the Bible hates (Ps.139:22; 119:63; Prov. 6:16-19) , and if we are supposed to aspire to character of God as seen in Christ then hate should be lauded. We see the hate of our Lord Christ in the way He spoke to His enemies and in His expertise in driving out the Bankers out of the Temple. Hate, glorious hate.

Indeed Scripture presses upon God’s people to properly hate.

Ecclesiastes 3

There is a time for everything,
and a season for every activity under the heavens:

8 a time to love and a time to hate,
a time for war and a time for peace.

Psalm 139

Do I not hate those who hate you, Lord,
and abhor those who are in rebellion against you?
22 I have nothing but hatred for them;
I count them my enemies.

Proverbs 8:13

The fear of the Lord is hatred of evil. Pride and arrogance and the way of evil and perverted speech I hate.

And yet we are still told my our clergy corps that Christians ought not to hate instead of being taught that Christians ought not to hate unrighteously and so improperly. In being taught not to hate by our Clergy what we are being taught, by force of inevitability, is the virtue of tolerance, which, as we enumerated above, merely re-locates the address of the inescapable hate so that we become self-haters.

Ironically, in the Church’s “war on hate,” as led by our emasculated clergy, what ends up happening is that Western Christians are having their auto-immune system shutdown so that everything that would have been rejected by the glorious work of auto-immune hate is now slipping through and sickening the Christian faith unto death. Instead of our hate energized auto-immune system spitting out the Aimee Byrds, Greg Johnsons, and Sean Michael Lewis instead without Biblical hate we are infected by their viruses.

No other faith system is doing this to itself. It seems that Western Christians alone have decided that Christians need to love everybody in a multicultural orgy which is promissory of the death of Western Christianity since it can no longer resist the death viruses of a border-less world, New World Order globalism, and the diminution, disappearance or enslavement of the Occidental Christian race which Christ has been pleased, as seen in history, to retain as the carriers of His faith across the world.

Another way this demented war on haters is seen is in the rabid opposition against opposition. The only thing that can be strongly opposed is strong opposition. To strongly oppose is to be “too intense,” or “not morally sensitive,” or even “Fascist.” It is just not good form or socially acceptable to bare one’s teeth at anybody or anything. It is possibly acceptable to be pro-life, pro-borders, pro-marriage, pro-truth in media, pro-just hiring practices but just try being anti-baby killers, anti-immigration, anti-sodomites, anti-lugenpresse, and anti-race quotas. Just see how the invitations to the societal soirees begin to decline. We are so afraid of rabid and reasonable opposition that we will not tolerate plain speaking and insist on circumlocutions in order to avoid being labeled (gasp) “haters.” Of course being “anti-racist,” and anti, “anti-Semite” still is considered acceptable hate and will get you a pass into all just the right parties.

Whence comes this war on hate? Let me offer a few guesses,

1.) A few days ago a friend of mine who is one of the sharpest laymen I know wrote me and reported,

“Yesterday morning we tuned into the church webcast to learn that it doesn’t really matter what you know (those were his words) because all you need is LUV. He then spent 20 minutes expounding on that theme.”

I have no empirical data but I suspect that this kind of preaching is not that uncommon in Churches (conservative and liberal) across the nation. If all you need is LUV then hating hate is the preeminent virtue for any Christian.

2.) The ubiquitous conviction by dumbed down Americans that “all is well.” Despite the fact that we are living in an epoch that never called more for hatred of the best vintage we remain convinced that “all is well,” and anybody who says to the contrary is to be shunned. Dr. Andrew Joyce says it well,

“Merely sharing your feelings of intense dislike, now termed “inciting hatred,” has been deemed criminal conduct in scores of Western countries. Criminal conduct! This despite the fact there has never been a point in our history more deserving of the deepest loathing, the most scathing contempt, and the most vicious hatred.”

Here we are living with effeminate Churches, chaste queer clergy in skinny jeans and sleeve tattoos, mass immigration of strangers and aliens for whom toilets are a novelty, public library Tranny reading hour, the enstupidification of America’s students, and we are being told that it is just so gauche to express the finest hatred, loathing, barbs of detest, rancor, enmity, and bitterness, that one can find within them. If there was a time for Menckenian opprobrium this is it. If ever we should marshal the sarcasm of Ambrose Bierce, this is it. Let us call down the giftedness of skewering as found in Nock, Johnson, and Chesterton. Our great love for the pure makes this properly a “time for hatred.”

3.) Post-modernism disallows us to characterizes anything as objectively bad. Nothing is intrinsically virtuous and so to be loved and nothing is intrinsically vile and so to be hated. We can handle hearing people say, “I love this or that,” because post-mondernism and deconstructionism teaches us that these kinds of value statements are person variable. However to say, “I hate this or I hate that,” we immediately recoil since that has the ring of a universal statement. How care anybody hate anything since nothing is intrinsically hateful.

4.) We hate Christ. Christ had no problem hating that which was hateful but since we hate Christ we refuse to hate what His Word identifies as hateful.

Conclusion

We have need to understand that there is an effect to this cause. When we choke off our ability to hate we, by necessity diminish our ability to love since love and hate are but the same emotion as pointed in opposite directions. We hate that which contradicts what we love and we love that which reverses or suffocates what we hate. If we cannot hate our capacity to love will be stunted and deformed. Indeed so related are love and hate that should you ever meet someone who tells you they don’t have a bone of hatred in their body, you can be sure you are talking too either a sociopath or a psychopath. Run for your life.

Fighting in the Shadow of Short Term Loss

“The ceaseless body blows delivered with increasing power by the allied forces left the German Army breathless and helpless but it is fair to acknowledge that they retreated fighting for every kilometer that they ultimately had to concede. It was not a chase and hardly a pursuit. Chased, decimated, despairing, the German soldiers fought on making us pay a heavy price for every mile we wrestled from them. Throughout the whole war, the Germans had shown themselves doughty fighters but there was nothing finer in their record than the pluck with which they continued to withstand us in the hour of their defeat. They could not but know that they were beaten. At home, their families were starving. Yet in the month of October — the last whole month of the war — The British forces in France suffered 120,000 battle casualties as evidence of the resistance they encountered. Between July 1 and the cessation of hostilities (11-11-18) the British battle casualties from fighting a beaten foe, and a foe who knew he was beaten was on every front totaled 430,000 in killed, wounded, prisoners, and missing. During practically the same period the French lost 531,000 men and the Americans over 200,000. Let us give due honor to a brave people with whom we have had but one deadly quarrel. They fought to the end with desperate valor.”

Llyod George 
Memoirs

The reason I post this here is that, by way of metaphor, the Church known by Christ is now in the same place as the German Army was in July of 1918. Short term we are a beaten foe and we would wage war better if we just came to terms as being, in the short term, a beaten foe. Acknowledging such would go a long way towards eliminating disappointment and give us reasonable expectations. Acknowledging such would deliver us from such a thirst for visible victory that we inch towards calling defeat “victory” because we are so desperate for a visible victory. Acknowledging such would cause us to place our hope in God as opposed to voting patterns, political promises, or social activism.

This is not a call for pessimism, though doubtless, that is what it will be cast as by those who have no ability to fight on when short-term victory is not on the horizon. Instead, this is a call for optimistic post-millennial realism. We work towards the future regardless of what God’s good providence has given us in the present. We work with the expectation that our current labors will, while not bringing instant victory, put us and our seed on a trajectory of future victory.

We still soldier on and fight back and resist with all our might for our great Liege-Lord Jesus Christ. We can still, sticking with the metaphor, inflict casualties and we should pray we are given opportunities to do so. If the Germans of WW I could be brave and fight on in the knowledge of a certain defeat we few — we happy few — can continue to be brave and fight on in the knowledge that we are preparing the ground for future victory. That is victory enough.

Always faithful.