Uncategorized – Page 24

Darren Doane Caught Gaslighting

“I would argue to want you see yourself reproduced is incest.”

Darren Doane

Doane is the Director of “Collision”–the movie about Hitchens and Wilson

1.) Jesus Christ is said to be the express image of God (Hebrews 1:3). Is there something incestuous about the Trinity Darren?

2.) So, by that reasoning our being transformed into the image of Christ has the smell of incest about it?

But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord. II Corinthians 3:18

For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Romans 8:29-30

3.) God created man in His own Image and set man in the Garden. God therefore is an incest monger by Doane’s “reasoning.”

“We don’t wish to reproduce carbon copies. We wait in anticipation to see what the Creator has fashioned. Otherwise we are backwoods, as some seem to be, looking to produce pure breeds within their line and ending up with sickly incestuous dogs only good at sniffing for birds. We ought not to want to reproduce a skin color but a godly line.”

Darren Doane

Director of Documentary on Wilson & Hitchens

1.) Unless Doane thinks there are people out there who want to reproduce with their mother or sisters he is giving us a red-herring to talk about anybody desiring to reproduce carbon copies.

2.) We are backwoods for wanting to enter into marriage and so reproduce with people who share our race, ethnicity, faith, culture, as well as many commonalities as possible? It is wisdom to contract marriage with someone who has virtually nothing in common with you?

3.) Personally, I’ve never met any blue blood royalties or Appalachian “cousins” who alone could possibly be accused of inbred. Another Doane red-herring. Does Doane really believe that the counsel to “marry within your race” is a case of “inbred?” What a Maroon.

4.) False dichotomy as preferring Godly lines over skin color. One can do both at the same time. Where are all the Godly lines that are coffee latte (remember we are looking for generation upon generation here) Mr. Doane?

Can you imagine the level of absolute lunacy it takes to say something like Doane is saying.

I swear … the disintegration downward into the stupidity void is accelerating exponentially.

R2K Chronicles; Open Mouth … Insert Foot

When I was a boy my Father used to often tell me, “Better to stand there and look like a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.” The wonderful thing about the proponents of Radical Two Kingdom theology is that they have laid out for us, from their own mouths, declamations that the champions of Biblical thinking couldn’t make up if we were trying to twist their words and so misrepresent them. In this chapter we take a handful of those quotes and simply allow the reader the pleasure of the shock value of the quote. Following the shocking quotes we will spend a few sentences unwinding the torpidity of the quote cited. We will start with the more benign of the outrageous quotes and work our way toward the more “you’ve got to be kidding me” quotes.

The first quote comes from Dr. T. David Gordon who recently retired as a Professor at Grove City College.

“Theonomy, therefore, is not merely an error, though it has manifestly been regarded as erroneous by the Reformed tradition . It is the error du jour, the characteristic error of an unwise generation. It is the error of a generation that has abandoned the biblically-mandated quest for wisdom on the assumption that the Bible itself contains all that we need to know about life’s various enterprises. It is the proof-textual, Bible-thumping, literalist, error par excellence. It is not merely the view of the unwise, but the view of the never-to-be-wise, because it is the view of those who wrongly believe that scripture sufficiently governs this arena, and who, for this reason, will never discover in the natural constitution of the human nature or the particular circumstances of given peoples what must be discovered to govern well and wisely. “

Dr. T. David Gordon
R2K Aficionado
http://storage.cloversites.com/outpostreformedministries/documents/The%20Insufficiency%20of%20Scripture.pdfTheonomy is the “error” that R2K is seeking to slay. If it were not for theonomy, R2K would not have come into existence. Theonomy is R2K’s raison d’être. The attempt to demolish theonomy is the attempt to justify the existence of R2K.Gordon insists in the quote above that theonomy is the error that has been “manifestly regarded as erroneous by the Reformed tradition” and yet the original high profile malefactors against theonomy admitted that theonomy had long been an expression of the Reformed tradition. “The view (theonomy) is not really new; it is just new in our time. It was the usual view through the Middle Ages, was not thrown over by the Reformers, and was espoused by the Scottish Covenanters who asked the Long Parliament to make Presbyterianism the religion of the three realms—England, Scotland and Ireland.”Dr. R. Laird Harris
Presbyterian Church in America teaching elder
New Testament scholar
Presbyterian Covenant Seminary Review (Spring 1979), p. 1

Dr. Harris reinforces for us here that if it is anybody who is an erroneous “Johnny-come-lately” to the Reformed tradition it is Radical Two Kingdom theology.

Likewise the Grand-daddy of R2K — the man who laid the R2K groundwork for all his disciples to craft into the house of R2K, Dr. Meredith Kline once admitted that theonomy was the expression of the Westminster Confession of Faith and of the Reformers;

“If, providentially, anything good is to come of the Chalcedon disturbance, perhaps, paradoxically, it will come from the very embarrassment given to churches committed to the Westminster standards by the relationship that can be traced, as noted above, between the Chalcedon position and certain ideas expressed in the Westminster Confession. Perhaps the shock of seeing where those ideas lead in Chalcedon’s vigorous development of them may make the church face up to the problem posed by the relevant formulations and reconsider the Confessions position on these points. . . .”

Dr. Meredith Kline
Review of Theonomy in Christian Ethics — p. 173

Kline admits that theonomy is the theology expressed in the Westminster Confessions and he and his sui generis R2K theology is the reconsideration of the Westminster confession on the points in dispute between R2K and theonomy. In other words the R2K lover Dr. Gordon, per the original R2K lovers Dr. Harris and Dr. Kline couldn’t be more in error when he insists that theonomy has manifestly been regarded as erroneous by the Reformed tradition. Indeed, the heterodox R2K champion Dr. T. David Gordon is the one who is holding to a position (along with Harris and Kline) that has been manifestly regarded as erroneous by the original Reformers and their theological heirs.

Not only that but Gordon, breathing out his R2K presuppositions demonstrates certain consistencies in the weakness of R2K theology. In that Gordon quote we see that R2K doesn’t really take total depravity seriously. This is seen when Gordon insists that those who are not R2K have made the error of “abandoning the biblically-mandated quest for wisdom,” and notes that in suggesting what a fool’s errand it is to look to the “testimonies and the Scriptures,” to find God’s wisdom about “all of life’s various enterprises,” and this despite the testimony of God’s own word;

Psalm 19:7-8, “The law of the LORD is perfect, reviving the soul; the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple; the precepts of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes;” and “in Christ in whom are hidden all treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Colossians 2:3).”

Gordon, like most R2K mavens effectively denies total depravity when he suggests that apart from special revelation fallen man via natural revelation can “discover what it is to govern well and wisely.” Where now the Reformed and theonomic doctrine of man has fallen? Where now the Reformed and theonomic doctrine of total depravity? R2K fanboy Gordon would have fallen man discover on his own, quite apart from the wisdom of special Revelation, how to govern himself well and wisely.

Then to add insult to injury R2K Dr. T. David Gordon piles up the pejoratives in denigrating theonomists all the while being guilty himself of casting aside doctrines. Gordon accuses that the doctrine that theonomists hold insure that theonomist are unwise, and will never be wise when in point of fact it is just the opposite. It is Gordon’s R2K beliefs wherein Gordon and the R2K crowd become Natural Law thumping fundamentalists who are unwise and never to be wise if only because they surrender the ongoing validity of God’s special revelation law. If I have to fall on one side or the other of thumping the Bible or thumping Natural Law, I will fall on the side of the Bible thumping every time.

And as to the idea of R2K Gordon that theonomy represents the “Un-wise and never to be wise generation,” lets consider the rest of these R2K quotes.

II.) R2K Torpid Quote #2

“Not being a theonomist or a theocrat, I do not believe it is the state’s role to enforce religion or Christian morality…Another example—bestiality is a grotesque sin and obviously if a professing member engages in it he is subject to discipline. But as one who leans libertarian in my politics, I would see problems with the state trying to enforce it; not wanting the state involved at all in such personal practices…A fellow church member might advocate for bestiality laws. Neither would be in sin whatever side of the debate.”

Rev. Todd Bordow
Puritanboard, 2012.
Trained at WSC – California

1.) Per R2K Bordow it’s not the state’s role to enforce religion or Christian morality even to the point of lifting laws against sex with animals. This is R2K’s position on public governance and morality. We would remind R2K Bordow that if it is not the state’s role to enforce Christian morality then all that is left for the state is either the enforcing of non-Christian morality, non-Christian immorality, or Christian immorality. Clearly R2K Bordow’s desire that bestiality be de-criminalized means that Bordow desires that the state created a legal atmosphere where non-Christian immorality is the norm.

2.) We should note here that as neutrality is an impossibility it is therefore not possible for the state not to enforce a religion. Indeed, the American state does enforce a religion and that religion is the religion of humanism. Bordow’s advocacy of the State not enforcing a religion or a morality indicates a constant failure of R2K and that is the idea that there can be state neutrality in terms of religion and morality in the public square. As all law is an expression of religion all legislation is a codification of some religion or religious impulse. R2K Bordow’s insistence that the state should not enforce religion leaves only the religion of irreligion as the religion that is enforced by the state. In the OT that was characterized as “each man doing what is right in his own eyes.” When the OT writers penned that phrase it wasn’t seen as an optimal position.

3.) R2K Bordow hints here what we will be seeing more clearly as we move on and that is that R2K is in all actuality the theological foundation for Libertarian politics. It is my conviction that R2K embraces the politics of Libertarianism and then backfills their theology in order to fit their politics. More on that later.

III.) R2K Torpid Quote #3

This one never gets old;

“Nero did not violate God’s law if he executed Christians who obeyed God rather than man. If Paul continued to preach after the emperor said he may not, then Nero was doing what God ordained government to do. Christians don’t get a pass from civil law just because they follow a higher law.”

Dr. D. G. Hart
R2K — Hyphenated Life Creator
Old Life Blog, January 12, 2017

Hart may be one of the most extreme R2K-philes living in R2K la-la land. He could only be considered “smart” as making his way in an academic setting. If he worked anyplace else there would be signs outside his office warning; “Only fools go where angels fear to tread.”

1.) Tyrants who execute Christians who obey God rather than man are not violating God’s law. Tyrants who execute Christians who obey God rather than man are operating consistent with God’s law.

2.) Nero was a just man operating consistent with God’s law in executing the Apostle Paul.

3.) Civil law is a higher law than God’s law.

IV.) R2K Torpid Quote #4

“Question: ‘Suppose that it were legal in our country for a man marry his sister. If this were the case, and a man who attended your church wanted to marry his sister, would your church perform the wedding?’

Answer;

Is God’s law against marrying your sister in the Old Covenant one that was always in force and should always stand?….In the New Covenant Scriptures no mention is made of the impropriety of marrying one’s sister. Although the practice is illegal in many countries, which makes it sinful for Christians living in those countries to do (Romans 13:1), it seems that if you and your sister are both believers and you live in a country that deems marriage between siblings to be a lawful practice, then your marriage would be holy in God’s sight.”

Rev. Steve Lehrer,
“New Covenant Theology, Questions Answered”
Educated @ WSC — Escondido
Home of R2K

1.) God’s law pertaining consanguinity no longer apply in the New and better covenant because in the new and better covenant Jesus’ death, resurrection, and ascension works so that retards are not born of such sibling unions.

2.) Note the Libertarian impulse again. For Lehrer and Bordow and R2K in general the real law is the Libertarian faux non-aggression principle (NAP) law. For R2K, generally speaking, as long as one’s behavior doesn’t hurt someone (by a humanistic standard) then it is perfectly fine for that person to engage in that behavior. Incest and bestiality doesn’t hurt anyone therefore incest and bestiality are perfectly fine in R2K la-la land — God’s law-word be damned.

3.) Note also the misunderstanding of Romans 13. R2K consistently gets Romans 13 wrong insisting that the Magistrate is in reality God walking on the earth. Romans 13 does not teach such a thing. More on that in another chapter.

V.) R2K Torpid Quote #5

“Although a contractual relationship denies God’s will for human dignity, I could affirm domestic partnerships as a way of protecting people’s legal and economic security.”

Dr. Mike Horton
White Horse Inn
WSC Professor – Escondido, Ca.
R2K Training Center

1.) Allow us to practice the art of reductio-ad-absurdum here;

a.) Although a contractual relationship denies God’s will for human dignity, I could affirm sex-trafficking as a way of protecting people’s legal and economic security.

b.) Although a contractual relationship denies God’s will for human dignity, I could affirm pedophilia as a way of protecting people’s legal and economic security.

c.) Although a contractual relationship denies God’s will for human dignity, I could affirm menage-a-trois’ as a way of protecting people’s legal and economic security.

I mean where does this kind of “reasoning” stop? If it ever does stop, having given up God’s standard, by what standard does it stop?

VI.) R2K Torpid Quote #6

Twin spin from Mike Horton;

“Hearts have changed. Part of that is due to the fact that we all are friends with LBGT neighbors who are decent people.”

Dr. Mike Horton
White Horse Inn
WSC Professor – Escondido, Ca.
R2K Training Center

LBGT are decent people? Yes, and John Wayne Gacy made the kiddies laugh at the birthday parties when he entertained them dressed up as a clown.

They tell me that Stalin was a gracious host at his most lavish dinner parties.

VII.) R2K Torpid Quote #7

“Shall we enact laws against abortion? Christians may, in our wisdom, decide it is best to do so. But neither the Church nor her preachers can say unambiguously that such laws must be enacted. She lacks the authority, and the wisdom, to do so. Perhaps such a law will backfire; perhaps it will lead to more abortions, to more deadly abortions. Perhaps it is politically unwise, though being morally just. If she bases her actions on what God’s word teaches, the church must remain agnostic on such questions.”

Dr. Brian Lee,

WSC graduate and R2k disciple

https://www.patheos.com/topics/politics-in-the-pulpit/the-church-should-not-weigh-in-on-ballot-issues-brian-lee-110314?p=2

1.) Dr. Lee just threw any preaching on the 6th commandment out the window in terms of application. Lee would have us preach on murder being sin but God forbid that the clergy would say something like, “because murder is sin we should insist that the state pass laws forbidding murder as a crime.”

2.) Clergy cannot say unambiguously that laws against abortion should be enacted but apparently Brian Lee as a member of the clergy can unambiguously say that clergy cannot unambiguously say that laws against abortion should be enacted.

3.) What shall Dr. Rev. Brian Lee do with I Timothy 1:9?

“Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,”

4.) Once an abortion is deadly how can an abortion become “more deadly?”

5.) We now rank what might be politically wise above what is morally just? Can you say “political pragmatism over life?”

VIII.) R2K Torpid Quote #8

It is not the magistrate’s duty to police every sort of violation of natural law and sin. For example, no one but theocrats want the state enforcing obedience to the first table of the law. The magistrate’s natural sphere of concern and authority is in the second table. Civil authorities have a right and duty to arrange a calendar (e.g. public holidays) of working and resting according to the creational pattern, to prevent and punish theft, to prevent and punish murder, and to regulate public sexual morality. Marriage is a form of regulation of sexual morality.

Dr. R. Scott Clark, Natural Law
The Two Kingdoms, and Homosexual Marriage
The Heidelblog, October 27, 2008

Here Clark subtly casts aspersions when he says, “no one but theocrats want the state enforcing the first table of the law.” Clark seems to insinuate, with that remark, that theocrats are some kind of odd-ball minority but the fact is that throughout history Calvinist theocrats have been the norm for Calvinists. Once again, by insisting that Magistrates should not have responsibility to enforce the first table Clark reveals an implicit Libertarian political bias serving as a template to form his “theology.”

Just a few examples are to follow though these quotes could be piled one on top of another.

The French Confession is theocratic – (John Calvin — author)

XXXIX. We believe that God wishes to have the world governed by laws and magistrates,[1] so that some restraint may be put upon its disordered appetites. And as he has established kingdoms, republics, and all sorts of principalities, either hereditary or otherwise, and all that belongs to a just government, and wishes to be considered as their Author, so he has put the sword into the hands of magistrates to suppress crimes against the first as well as against the second table of the Commandments of God. We must therefore, on his account, not only submit to them as superiors,[2] but honor and hold them in all reverence as his lieutenants and officers, whom he has commissioned to exercise a legitimate and holy authority.

1. Exod. 18:20-21; Matt. 17:24-27; Rom. ch. 13
2. I Peter 2:13-14; I Tim. 2:2

[Second Helvetic Confession on magistrates is theocratic].

” In like manner, let him govern the people, committed to him of God, with good laws, made according to the word of God in his hands, and look that nothing be taught contrary thereto. … Therefore let him draw forth this sword of God against all malefactors, seditious persons, thieves, murderers, oppressors, blasphemers (1st commandment violators), perjured persons (3rd commandment violators), and all those whom God has commanded him to punish or even to execute. Let him suppress stubborn heretics (who are heretics indeed), who cease not to blaspheme the majesty of God, and to trouble the Church, yea, and finally to destroy it.”

Original 1647 Westminster Confession was theocratic;

The civil magistrate may not assume to himself the administration of the Word and sacraments, or the power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven: yet he hath authority, and it is his duty, to take order, that unity and peace be preserved in the Church, that the truth of God be kept pure and entire; that all blasphemies (first table) and heresies (first table) be suppressed; all corruptions and abuses in worship and discipline prevented or reformed; and all the ordinances of God duly settled, administered, and observed. For the better effecting whereof, he hath power to call synods, to be present at them, and to provide that whatsoever is transacted in them be according to the mind of God.

The original Belgic Confession of faith was theocratic;

“For this purpose He (God) hath invested the magistracy with the sword, for the punishment of evil doers, and for the praise of them that do well. And their office is, not only to have regard unto and watch for the welfare of the civil state, but also that they protect the sacred ministry, and thus may remove and prevent all idolatry and false worship; that the kingdom of antichrist may be thus destroyed, and the kingdom of Christ promoted.”

Should one have any doubts that Calvinism qua Calvinism has always been theocratic they only have to refer to Martin Foulner’s “Theonomy and the Westminster Confession.” Clark’s quote is torpid because it insinuates that somehow it is only odd-ball Calvinists who are theocrats when in point of fact it is only odd-ball R2K fanboys who still claim to be Calvinists and yet are not theocrats.

J have produced this chapter because I wanted folks to see where consistent R2K “theology” goes. With R2K one gets from the clergy and seminary Professors a refusal to advocate for anti-abortion laws, a stated desire to legalize domestic partnerships (just so long as we don’t use the word ‘marriage’), an affirmation that incestuous marriages could be considered holy in God’s sight, the refusal to criminalize bestiality, the insistence that LGBT people can be decent blokes, the accusation that all who dare disagree with R2K are unwise and never to be wise, and the insistence that Magistrates have no business enforcing the first table of God’s law.

How can anybody, with a straight face, call this “Calvinism” let alone “Christianity?”

McAtee Gets in the Middle of a Catfight Between Two Female Michigan State Senators

For the past couple of days the National press has been going all orgiastic on a short speech that a State Senator from Royal Oak Michigan gave in her attempted rebuke of another Michigan State Senator (Theis) for Theis’ daring to say that McMorrow was “outraged” that she can’t “groom and sexualize kindergarteners.”

I thought I would examine McMorrow — Dem (Royal Oak) response for which the National Press is fawning all over.

Begin McMorrow speech,

I didn’t expect to wake up yesterday to the news that Senator Lana Theis had, overnight, accused me BY NAME of grooming and sexualizing children – in an email fundraising for herself.

So I sat on it for a while wondering why me?

Then I realized.

I’m the biggest threat to your hollow, hateful scheme. Because you can’t claim that you’re targeting marginalized kids in the name of “parental rights” if another parent is standing up and saying no.

McAtee Responds,

1.) This is a classic example of “weak argument, pound pulpit.” It has not been established that Theis’ work was either hollow or hateful. McMorrow just denounces it as such with no proof. Neither does McMorrow prove that Theis is targeting marginalized kids in the name of “parental rights.” I’m sure that Theis would insist that she is defending straight children from becoming marginalized by those like McMorrow who have hollow and hateful schemes to target and attempt to marginalize straight children by her work to normalize perversity and deviancy.

2.) Next, the fact that some parent (McMorrow) disagrees with Theis and so stands up and says “no” to Theis doesn’t make McMorrow a threat. It just makes her one more person who is wrong who needs to be defeated in the public square.

3.) All politicians fund raise off of villains and bad guys. That is a time worn technique that is used by both sides. The idea that you’ve discovered some clandestine new fundraising technique is hilarious Sen. McMorrow. You are a villain and as such people are going to fund-raise off of you. It is the way the game is played and you know it.

Sen. McMorrow proceeds,

So then what? Then you dehumanize and marginalize ME. You say I’m one of THEM. You say she’s a groomer, she supports pedophilia, she wants children to believe they were responsible for slavery and to feel bad about themselves because they’re white.

Well here’s a little background on who I really am.

Bret responds,

Before we continue let’s keep in mind the McMorrow walked out of a prayer of Invocation that Theis gave. McMorrow was outraged over this segment of the prayer where she prayed,

“that children are “under attack” from “forces that desire things for them other than what their parents would have them see and hear and know.”

That this is true is why Sen. Theis has previously introduced anti-trans legislation that would require high schools to prohibit transgender boys from cisgender boys’ sports teams and transgender girls from cisgender girls’ teams. Does Sen. McMorrow support or oppose such legislation. I’m pushing my chips in on McMorrow opposing such legislation. As such she is a groomer. She is grooming children and adolescents to accept this type of perversity and deviance as being normal.

That’s it. That is what McMorrow was all outraged about when she walked out of Theis’ Invocation.

The fact of the matter is that children are under just such an attack. Now, allow me to insert here that if parents really were convinced of that the solution is as simple as taking their children out of government schools. Problem solved. Let McMorrow and the Democrats own the Government schools to do with what they please. The government schools have long ago been lost to both decency and learning and as such Theis should be calling for parents to just pull their children out of government schools.

McMorrow continues,

Growing up, my family was very active in our church. I sang in the choir. My mom taught CCD. One day, our priest called a meeting with my mom and told her that she was not living up to the church’s expectations, that she was disappointing. My mom asked why. Among other reasons, she was told it was because she was divorced, and because he didn’t see her with us at mass every Sunday.

Where was my mom on Sunday?

She was at a soup kitchen. With me.

McAtee responds,

All because I spend a lot of time at McDonalds that doesn’t make me a hamburger and all because McMorrow spend lots of time at Church with her Mommy that doesn’t make them Christian. Any woman who would be a Democrat is obviously no Christian.

And if the Priest saw you but not your Mom at Mass then obviously you weren’t with your Mom every Sunday at the soup kitchen. I suspect if the Priest was called forth as a witness on this matter his account would be considerably different than McMorrow’s account. Democrats have such an easy time with spinning the news.

McMorrow continues,

My mom taught me at a young age that Christianity and faith was about being a part of a community, about recognizing our privilege and blessings and doing what we could to be of service to others – especially people who were marginalized, targeted, who had less…often unfairly.

McAtee responds,

This only tells me that your Mom did you a disservice in explaining to you the meaning of Christianity. Christianity and faith is not primarily about being part of a community, etc. Christianity is about Jesus Christ atoning for your sins in a way that Mass only blasphemes.

Marxism also teaches about being a service to others (Just ask Orwell’s “Boxer”). Marxism especially emphasizes that those who are marginalized are so because it is all so “unfair.” However at the end of the day crypto-Marxism of the variety that McMorrow embraces is not Christianity no matter how much she wants to bleat about “the marginalized” the “targeted,” and the unfairness of life.

McMorrow continued,

I learned that SERVICE was far more important than performative nonsense like being seen in the same pew every Sunday or writing “Christian” in your Twitter bio and using it as a shield to target and marginalize already-marginalized people.

McAtee responds,

Well, it is quite true that attending Mass is performative nonsense though I’m sure your orthodox Roman Catholic Priest might think otherwise and so frown at Sen. McMorrow over that statement.

Second, I suspect that McMorrow’s bit about “writing ‘Christian’ in your Twitter bio and using it as a shield to target and marginalize already-marginalized people,” was a shot at Sen. Theis. Allow me to say that if McMorrow considers the perverse and the deviant as targeted and marginalized people as if that is a bad thing then Theis is right in her claim that McMorrow is a groomer.

The Christian faith teaches that people who are perverse and deviant as long as they insist in remaining perverse and deviant should be targeted and marginalized. There is no room among a people who are Christian to desire to mainstream deviancy or perverseness as normal. That is true even if the perverse and the deviant and their Senatorial supporters whine all day long about being targeted and marginalized. People who are resolved in staying in their perverseness and deviancy should be marginalized and targeted. They should be shoved back into the closet out of which they have slithered. Now, of course, should the perverse and the deviant desire to genuinely repent then no one should be allowed to marginalize or target them any longer.

But this is not what McMorrow wants. She wants to mainstream the targeted and marginalized. Her faith demands it. She wants to instead target and marginalized the Christian who opposes her support for mainstreaming deviancy. McMorrow is so full of hate she insists that we are the haters.

McMorrow spoke thus,

I also stand on the shoulders of people like Father Ted Hesburgh, the longtime president of the University of Notre Dame who was active in the civil rights movement, who recognized his power and privilege as a white man, a faith leader, and the head of an influential and well-respected institution – and who saw Black people in this country being targeted and discriminated against and beaten, and reached out and locked arms with Dr. Martin Luther King when he was alive, when it was unpopular and risky, and marching with them as a way to say, “We got you.” To offer protection and service and allyship, to try to right wrongs and fix the injustice in the world.

McAtee Responds,

Ted Hesburgh was to the Civil Rights era what Pope Francis is to the Great Reset Era — that is, just another soft Marxist. The Roman Catholic Church has been hard left since the 2nd Vatican council.

McMorrow blathers on,

So who am I? I am a straight, white, Christian, married, suburban mom who knows that the very notion that learning about slavery or redlining or systemic racism means that children are being taught to feel bad or hate themselves because they are white is absolute nonsense.

McAtee responds,

Systemic racism is a myth.

Redlining the way the libs tell the story is a myth.

And I would love it if the truth about slavery was taught to every child in America. We could start with these easy to remember quotes;

The Slave trade is the ruling principle of my people. It is the source and glory of all their wealth. The Mother lulls the child to sleep with notes of triumph of an enemy reduced to slavery.”

Black African King
King Gezo of Dahomey — 1840

Upon hearing of the United Kingdom’s ending of the Slave trade The King of Bonny (now in Nigeria) was horrified at the conclusion of the practice and said,

” We think this trade must go on. That is the verdict of our oracle and the priests. They say that your country, however great, can never stop a trade ordained by God himself.”

Even a six year old could get those quotes down.

And when white children are taught this fecal “education” they are being taught to hate themselves and McMorrow saying that such a notion is nonsense, is, well, nonsense.

She’s an leftist idiot who is just mouthing the tired old canards.

McMorrow chimes on,

No child alive today is responsible for slavery. No one is this room is responsible for slavery.

McAtee responds,

McMorrow only says such because she is a racist. She obviously didn’t get the memo that says only racist say such things.

McMorrow,

But each and every single one of us bears responsibility for writing the next chapter of history. Each and every single one of us decides what happens next, and how WE respond to history and the world around us.

We are not responsible for the past. We also cannot change the past. We can’t pretend that it didn’t happen, or deny people their very right to exist.

McAtee responds,

1.) The problem is that McMorrow is clueless about history and being clueless it is therefore not possible for her to respond properly to either history or the world around us.

2.) We can’t deny people the right to exist UNLESS they violate God’s law in which case they void their own right to exist if their violation is serious enough.

3.) White people are responsible for the pretend crimes of the past. McMorrow is off the systemic racism reservation with that observation.

McMorrow finally mercifully begins to finish,

I am a straight, white, Christian, married, suburban mom.

McAtee,

I seriously doubt that McMorrow is Christian according to any traditional understanding or standard of Christianity.

McMorrow,

I want my daughter to know that she is loved, supported, and seen for whoever she becomes. I want her to be curious, empathetic, and kind.

McAtee,

Blah, blah, blah. How high can she stack the sentimental platitudes?

McMorrow,

I want every child in this state to feel seen, heard, and supported, not marginalized and targeted if they are not straight, white, and Christian.

McAtee,

And here is the problem. McMorrow wants to normalize what every previous Christian generation prior saw and defined as perverse and deviant. No generation before the current one wanted to see straight, white and Christian children taught that perverseness and deviancy among their peers was to be normalized. McMorrow, by insisting that she doesn’t want to marginalize the deviant and perverse is proclaiming that she desires that the deviant and the perverse be taken as normative. It is most certainly not normative and so should be targeted and marginalized back into the closet.

McMorrow finishes with a sanctimonious flourish,

People who are different are not the reason our roads are in bad shape after decades of disinvestment, nor the reason healthcare costs are too high, or teachers are leaving the profession.

McAtee,

Completely irrelevant to the matter at hand. This is called the red herring fallacy.

McMorrow,

We cannot let hateful people tell you otherwise to scapegoat and deflect from the fact that they’re not doing anything to fix the real issues that impact peoples lives.

I know that hate will only win if people like me stand by and let it happen.

And I want to be very clear right now:

Call me whatever you want. I know who I am. I know what faith and service means, and what it calls for in this moment.

We will not let hate win.

McAtee,

McMorrow is the epitome of what it means to be a hater. However, she is clever enough to accuse her opponent of what she is guilty of. McMorrow hates straight white Christian children so much that she desires to get inside their heads to convince them that perverseness and deviancy are normative. She wants children to accept that boys can claim they are girls and that girls claim they are boys. In so doing McMorrow demonstrates that she is a deviant and perverse enabler and groomer and may thus be deviant and perverse herself. She is the hater. She is the hater of all that is decent, Christian, and normative. When she declares that she “will not hate win” it is hate that is fueling her determination that “hate” will not win.

McMorrow is correct… “we will not let hate win,” and in order to not let hate win we must stop people like Sen. McMorrow.

Cultural Marxism, Broken Families, and The Prophet’s Task

In terms of world and life views it is clear that the leading Weltanschauung voice in the West today is some form of Cultural Marxism. By way of definition Cultural Marxism is that belief system that sees all Truth as being “truth” and arrived at by the success of one identity group over another identity group in a power struggle wherein each group was involved. Cultural Marxism seeks to right all those previous wrongs by taking the victims (losers) of the previous power struggles and giving them their just due by taking the fruits of victory away from those who were the victimizers in those previous struggles.

Cultural Marxism, replaces the proletariat (worker class) of classical Marxism and replaces them with victim class. This victim class is comprised of the previous losers and victims in Western culture. As such where as classical Marxism called for “workers of the world to unite,” Cultural Marxism calls for the perverts and Christ haters of the world to unite to throw off the chain of Biblical Christianity. It is this new proletariat in Cultural Marxism which will accomplish the long march through the Institutions of the West.

So, Cultural Marxism in action is constantly on the search for perceived power imbalances (men vs. women, whites vs. minorities, sodomite vs. heterosexual, etc.) with the purpose of injecting agitprop in order to advance their agenda of a kind of equity that brings down the gifted and talented to the same level as those perceived to be victims.

Every elite institution in the country that has dominance over knowledge transmission, dominance over religious formation, dominance over culture production, and dominance over, even, in many cases, material production, has converged on a ideology upon which they all agree. That ideology is called, “Cultural Marxism.”

Of course that includes the Christian Church and that in turn includes the supposedly “Conservative” “Reformed” “Churches” in America. The Clergy is not inoculated against the zeitgeist simply because they are clergy. This accounts for how the current Reformed church in the West has been almost completely compromised by Cultural Marxism. Reformed Ministers spend at least seven years after High School in “Higher Education” and given the character and nature of that “Higher Education” it is almost impossible for them to not be oriented in Cultural Marxist thinking.

If your Minister can’t simply and succinctly tell you what Cultural Marxism is then it is very likely he is preaching it from the pulpit.

Now, we should not fool ourselves into thinking that this dominance of the Worldview of Cultural Marxism is just a passing fad. There have been more than a few people (public intellectuals) who have argued that it won’t be long until we are out of this Cultural Marxist phase.

I am not one one of those who agree with that analysis. It is my conviction that short of some kind of significant impacting disaster or a remarkable providence that brings unexpected Reformation that this worldview of Cultural Marxism is here to stay for the foreseeable future. I base that conviction upon the inherent instability that is present and growing in this country. In the thirteen years between 2009-2021 40.36% of the children born in this country were born to unmarried mothers. If we keep this trend up for just a few more years that will mean that we will have a generation, a large percentage of which, will have been raised without a stable family life. Instability in family life translates into instability in every area including the thought life of a people.

Cultural Marxism feeds on convincing people they are victims and people without stable family lives is a ready made audience for the Cultural Marxist message. Now combine the fact that Cultural Marxism goes forward by normalizing the abnormal with the fact that the abnormal becomes the normal for those from unstable family life and the facts are suggestive that Cultural Marxism or some variant of it is not going away any time soon.

Now, it is a given that Biblical Christians must do all they can to fight against this trend but at the same time Biblical Christians should be realists and realism demands the recognition that it would take a remarkable providence of the scale of the parting of the Red Sea to turn this degradation around. Biblical Christian should fight against this trend by having large healthy families that drop out of the trappings of the Culture all the while realizing that the broader culture is sailing on the good ship Titanic. Countries don’t come back from a long sustained 40% illegitimacy birth rate.

I don’t mean to sprinkle too much reality over one’s cornflakes but the above statistics are not alone in their foreboding. Because of those illegitimacy rates as combined with divorce we are now looking at somewhere in the vicinity of 70% of US children growing up without fathers. Now, to this number add the numbers who are born into a family with Dad and Mom together and whose fathers are not estranged but who spend their whole lives in Government schools and now the numbers are
probably 95%+ of the populace has been religiously, morally, mentally, and psychologically crippled.

It’s a fully marginalized society.

Now, to be sure God has, in times past, brought peoples back from the edge of destruction. It is often said that the Reformation led by George Whitfield in England as assisted by the Wesley Brothers in the 18th century brought England back from the French Revolution abyss but for every England that can be mentioned a hundred non-recoveries can be cited.

Some form of Cultural Marxism is the perfect ideology for a country so broken in their family structures. Cultural Marxism specializes in blaming someone else for the victim’s woes. There will be plenty of woe looking for someone to blame and plenty of aberrant behavior that Cultural Marxism will justify as being perfectly normal.

This is what the Prophets have faced over and over again. Jeremiah faced it. Amos faced it. This is the kind of thing Isaiah faced when God told him
⁸Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”

And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

⁹He said, “Go and tell this people:

“‘Be ever hearing, but never understanding;
    be ever seeing, but never perceiving.’
¹⁰Make the heart of this people calloused;
    make their ears dull
    and close their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
    hear with their ears,
    understand with their hearts,
and turn and be healed.”

Trying To Be As Pithy As Possible On The Contradictions Of The Credo-Baptists

It suddenly occurs to me that in the Baptist conception is inherently contradictory. For the Baptist, baptism is basically “deponent” ( that is to say that it is “passive in form, but active in meaning”). For the Baptist the person “is baptized” (passive). It is something that is done to them. However in nearly every other Baptist explanation of Baptism it has to do with how this Baptism is the declaration by the person of his or her decision to follow Jesus thus contradicting the whole passive idea with a definition that bespeaks activity. This is a contradiction and is in contrast to the Biblical meaning of baptism as a sign of Christ’s claim on the believer from the foundation of the world, a decision in which the believer is a totally passive recipient.

And it is the refusal of the Baptist to bring their children to the Baptismal font that unwinds the contradiction so as to reveal what the Baptist really believes. The Baptist might say that the recipient in Baptism is passive but inasmuch as they refuse to bring their children to be baptized they are screaming that the recipient of Baptism must be the active party. Baptism, thus for Baptists is not about God’s claim upon the believer but rather it is about the believers claim upon God.

This is actually put on display visibly as in Baptist Baptism the person being Baptized is not passive in the least but is clinging to the person who is baptizing them giving aid to both the person dunking them and their arising out of the water.

Baptist thinking, however well intended it might be, is thus a anthropocentric leaning into Christianity and thus can never be genuinely Reformed. It is the mix of synergism with the claim of monergism.

Hat Tip — Jonathan Lovelace