Geerhardus Vos Quotes on the Kingdom of God

“It may be said that the kingdom (of God) designates believers in their relation to God as ruler, the church believers in their separateness from the world and their organic union with one another. Or, that the church designates believers in their attitude of worship towards God, the kingdom, believers in their ethical activities towards one another. Or again, that the church designates the people of God from the point of view of their calling to be God’s instrument in preparing the way for and introducing the ideal order of things, the kingdom, the same people of God so far as they possess the ideal order in principle realized among themselves. These and similar distinctions have their doctrinal usefulness and are unobjectionable, so long as they do not obscure the fact that the kingdom, as well as the church, is circumscribed by the line of regeneration, and that the invisible church itself is that which determines its inner essence, its relation to God and Christ, a true kingdom since it consists of those over whom the Messiah rules as the representative of God.”
 
 
 
Geerhardus Vos
The Teaching Of Jesus Concerning the Kingdom & the Church — p.159 -160
 
 
From this, however, it does not necessarily follow, that the visible church is the only outward expression of the invisible kingdom. Undoubtedly the kingship of God, as his recognized and applied supremacy is intended to pervade and control the whole of human life in all its forms of existence. This the parable of the leaven plainly teaches. These various forms of human life have each their own sphere in which they work and embody themselves. There is a sphere of science, a sphere of art, a sphere of the family and of the state, a sphere of commerce and industry. Whenever one of these spheres comes under the controlling influence of the principle of the divine supremacy and glory, and this outwardly reveals itself, there we can truly say that the kingdom of God has become manifest.”
 
 
 
Geerhardus Vos
The Teaching Of Jesus Concerning the Kingdom & the Church — p.162 -163

Scary Kinism Defined & Examples Given Part III

IX.) That those who are not Christian in outlook reject the transcendent unity of creation in God our Creator, and in its place seek to substitute an immanent unity that ultimately destroys all distinctions.

Kinists believe that only God can provide both a transcendent unity and a transcendent diversity. This is because Kinists believe in the triune nature of the one Holy God. The abandonment of this eternal and transcendent one and many creates a vacuum that can only be filled by a creative immanent unity that becomes a monism that destroys all distinctions. This happens for a couple of reasons;

1.) Throwing out the God of the Bible is itself the destruction of the creator/creature distinction upon which all other distinctions are based. If there is no creator/creature distinction all other distinctions will eventually be lost.

2.) Throwing out the God of the Bible means that man must assume the role of God. As God is always defined by His unity this means that all mankind, now assuming the role of God walking on the earth requires a uniformity that reflects the oneness of God. This means the end of distinctions among men when this is consistently worked out to its inevitable consequence.

Only the God of the Bible with His creator Transcendence can provide the foundation for all creaturely distinctions.

The upshot for kinists in this regard is that we see multicultural social orders, polyglot marriages, and transracial adoptions as the consequence of abandoning the God of the Bible. We believe that the Babel push for oneness is idolatry that defames the God of the Bible. We believe that all of this polyglotism is an attack on God.

 

X.) That those seeking a New World Order find the boundless diversity in God’s creation an intolerable hindrance to earthly unity. That they seek a one-world government, a one-world religion, and a one-world man. That multiculturalism, miscegenation, and transracial adoption are all means to their ends.

With all the news of the pursuit of the Great Reset (see Klaus Schwab’s book Covid-19 The Great Reset) as well as the United Nation’s open and published Agenda 2030 as well as the omnipresent buzz on “The 4th Industrial Revolution” as well as all talk of the Metaverse and transhumanism it cannot be denied that there is a desire to homogenize every man, woman, and child into a New World Order where sameness (equality/equity) is the holy grail.

Because all of the above is true the kinist sees any attempt, including trans-racial adoption and polyglot marriages, to be a contribution towards the distinction-less oneness desired by those who are arcing mankind towards dystopia.

 

XI.) That Cultural Marxists seek a revolutionary regeneration of society by destroying all the institutions of Christendom. That multiculturalism and politically correct newspeak, as well as their control of the news media, entertainment, and education, are all a means to that end. That all of Christendom’s history is continually subjected to critical assessment designed to undermine it.

As has been said on Iron Ink repeatedly, the goal of the Cultural Marxists with their New World Order has only penultimately about homogenizing mankind by throwing mankind into a giant religion/cultural/racial blender. Ultimately the goal of the Cultural Marxists with their New World Order is about rolling the Lord Christ off His throne and locking Him out of His world. The ultimate goal of the New World Order, like Lucifer their Master is their resolve to

  Ascend above the heights of the clouds; and to be like the Most High. (Isaiah 14:4)

In order to accomplish that all that which was Christendom must be utterly and totally destroyed so that no remnant is left to remind the New World Order Man that there was a time prior to the New World Order Man’s time.

Examples of Newspeak are set forth by Vladimir Putin here in this 80 second video;

The whole recent Critical Race Theory debate in Government schools demonstrates the infiltration of New World Order in Government schools and as far as entertainment is concerned one can hardly view a Hollywood-produced movie that doesn’t find polyglot relationships all over the screen.

 

XII.) That under the Abrahamic Covenant, God’s covenant nation consisted principally of a subset of Abraham’s physical descendants. That in the New Covenant era, the elect come from all nations. That, nevertheless, God graciously made Europe the historic seat of Christendom. That because of this, the white Christian male is especially under attack by the forces of the New World Order

That Israel consisted principally of a subset of Abraham’s physical descendants is explicitly taught in Exodus 12:38

A mixed multitude also went up with them, and very much livestock, both flocks, and herds.

Israel was a distinct ethnic people as is seen by the additional comment that when Israel as a distinct ethnic people group left Egypt a multitude of people went with Israel who were not of Israel.

Nehemiah 13:3 chimes in here,

 Now it came to pass, when they had heard the law, that they separated from Israel all the mixed multitude.

In Nehemiah, Israel was in danger of going all New World Order Babel. Ezra and Nehemiah re-introduced the distinction between Israel and that not of Israel.

The Kinist agrees that elect come from every tribe tongue and nation but insists that they come as members of their tribes, tongues, and nations as we see in Revelation 21.

24 The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendor into it. 25 On no day will its gates ever be shut, for there will be no night there. 26 The glory and honor of the nations will be brought into it.

Notice the continued existence of nations and that the nations bring their glory and honor into the New Jerusalem nation by nation. There is no snuffing out of races and/or ethnicities.

Finally, for this entry, the whole weight of this New World Order which wishes to destroy Christianity and Christendom finds most of their energy committed to destroying the white man because in God’s inscrutable providence the white man has been historically and civilizationally perfumed with Christ. The Cultural Marxists of the New World Order believe that once they turn the Christian white man of the West into hewers of wood and drawers of water they will have successfully defeated the Lord Jesus Christ.

A Son’s Recollections of His Father — David Lee McAtee (Part I)

Like nearly all sons, I loved and still love my Father. However, it is complicated.

David Lee McAtee was born in May 1936 in Marshall, Michigan to Carl and Eva (Bower) McAtee. Carl’s first wife had died in childbirth not long previously and had left him with a large number of children. Eva (my Grandmother) had been left at home to care for her aging father (David Ezra Bower) who had passed in January 1936. When her father died Eva was already carrying my father — David McAtee — in her womb. So, one can see it was a bit of a shotgun wedding and my Grandmother was at the wrong end of the shotgun. She had gone from being a caretaker for her aging parents to being a chief cook and bottle washer to Carl’s small tribe of children, not to mention the recipient, along with Dad, of Carl’s drunken beatings. Years later, Dad speculated that perhaps Carl was not his biological father.

Because of the above, my Grandmother and father fell into a kind of co-dependent relationship. Grandma was always protecting Dad almost till the day she died and Dad was by all indications a Mama’s boy almost till the day his mother died. I don’t fault either one of them for this even though it was never healthy. In light of the terror that Carl was in the home, it makes perfect sense. I am merely highlighting the facts.

When Dad’s Dad (Carl) died in 1952 there was a huge stink about the inheritance. The children from the previous marriage basically desired to strip clean my father from any of the tiny inheritance that Carl was leaving behind. Eventually, some townspeople raised a ruckus, and Dad was left with much of Carl’s hunting gear. Carl’s mother (my Great-grandmother — Eva Reid McAtee   — (who I vaguely remember) set that perceived wrong right by completely cutting Dad out of her will. Eva Reid McAtee (1877-1963) left a portion of her estate to everyone of her grandchildren except Dad.

While this begins to explain how it was that Dad was a hard man, of course, it doesn’t excuse it. My Father and his Mother were treated poorly by the McAtee family. As such, Dad grew up angry and his anger never really subsided for the whole of his life. Unfortunately, he carried many of the faults of his own father into his relationship with his children, particularly his oldest son.

After, Dad graduated high school it looks like he spent some time in the US military but even that is questionable. There is a photo of him in an army hospital being greeted by some known personage. There is also the fact that at some point Dad got a monthly check from the Feds for being a disabled vet and at his retirement had a full disabled American vet pension check coming monthly. However, in the past decade or so, new evidence has come to light that Dad’s service in the service was perhaps irregular. No one will now know for sure. It may be the case that Dad was given a medical discharge from being hurt in a parachute training program. I say “parachute training program” because Dad had all the insignia from that outfit.

Eventually, my folks were married in what can only be described as a “non-traditional” wedding service. There is one photo of the bride and groom with the parent(s) of each but the lack of a wedding dress is glaring. I have no idea of the circumstances surrounding my folk’s wedding. I know my Mother’s father (Carl Edward Jacobs) never cared for Dad and Dad never cared much for Carl Jacobs. If I had been Carl Jacobs I probably would not have liked Dad either but with my Mom’s family inlaws always seemed to end up as outlaws and Carl himself was not exactly Mr. Personality.

The marriage, by all accounts, started out well. Dad was working steadily and Mom was having babies — one baby in 1959, 1960, and 1961. Money was a problem as money always burned a hole in Dad’s pocket.  Somewhere around the late 60s, the small automotive cottage industry shop (Universal Deisal) where Dad was the Union President shut down. For years after that Dad never held a job that could provide for a family.

Then unemployed and still having back issues from his time jumping parachute Dad got hooked on prescription drugs. He subsequently had to spend time in a hospital in Blufton, Indiana to get clean. I still remember taking trips to Blufton to see Dad in the Hospital. Of course, I was too young at the time to really understand what was happening.

At home, especially as I recall, after his job loss Dad was not easy to be around. He seemed to incarnate some of the habits of child-rearing he learned from his own father. I recall the terror of seeing Dad beat my mother more than once and I likewise was the recipient many times of those same beatings. Only in the year before his death did Dad try to apologize for all that. It was awkward for him to apologize to his oldest son as one can easily imagine. He mumbled something about his own father and said he now wished he could’ve avoided that. There wasn’t much I could say in response. Responding with… “It’s OK Dad,” didn’t seem appropriate and neither did making a big deal of it. The apology and conversation lasted all of 30 seconds.

Dad did like to hunt and fish and whatever pleasant memories I have of my father is in the context of hunting or fishing. He owned three hunting dogs at any one time (Beagle [Fred], Golden Retriever [Rusty], a German Short Hair [Prince], and a English Retriever [Max]). In retrospect, I now realize that we couldn’t afford those animals but I sure enjoyed them. The dogs were well trained and knew their business. I spent much time tromping through the woods with Dad and the neighbors. We brought home rabbit, squirrel, pheasant, and venison. I learned to clean it (though I’ve now forgotten) and I learned to cook it. I had no problem eating it. Squirrels were often turned into squirrel dumplings. Rabbit and pheasant went right into the frying pan.

It seemed that Dad’s rougher edges subsided in the woods and on the lake. Years later I found myself regretting that Dad could not have found some kind of employment that would have put him daily in those settings.

The hunting trips were wonderful. Listening to our low-pitched beagle and the neighbor’s high-pitched beagle tracking rabbits remains a fond memory. On one deer hunting outing, Dad and I were coming out of some really thick underbrush without having seen anything all morning. I pushed on ahead because I just wanted to get out of that mess as soon as possible. When I emerged from the unforgiving underbrush upon the old country road, there before me in the open sorghum field across the road stood a half-dozen deer with more than one buck present. Dad was still laboring to get out I turned by 12 gauge into a Tommy gun and proceeded to miss every one of the deer.

Then there was the fishing. We lived on a lakeshore growing up (Minnewauken lake). It wasn’t much of a lake in looking back but it was enough to keep us provided with all the fish we could ever hope to eat. I actually have more memories of fishing by myself but there were times when Dad and I would go together. I have no memories have Dad being angry or upset while we were hunting or fishing. Dad would often fish with two poles simultaneously. He would use a cane-pole and set it under one of his legs and then he would use a regular fishing rod and reel to cast in and out. The funnier moments came when he would get two hits simultaneously. It was funny watching him try to manage both poles with energetic fish on the line.

Those were the pleasant memories. I wish they had been more frequent. More were the times when I was warding off blows or being bellowed at or weeping for my mother’s injuries. One time I had misplaced the shoehorn from the nail it was supposed to be kept hanging on. It was a Sunday morning of all times and the rage and beating for that misplaced shoehorn will never be forgotten. Another time I forgot my ball glove at school. Rinse and repeat.  I wish I had a nickel for every time I heard him through the years bellow, “You’re no son of mine.”

Time was also spent with Dad for a few years delivering papers on a Sunday morning (Detroit Free Press). Every Sunday two out of three of us siblings had to go with Dad to deliver papers. The person sitting in the back had to stuff the papers putting the ads inside the paper. The person sitting in the front was the runner who had to deliver papers to the doorstep when it wasn’t put in the paper box. I hated this routine. First, Dad was always himself out of sorts even more than usual having to get up that early in the morning. Second, there was no pleasing the man whether one was in the front seat or the back seat. Third, who wants to get up at 2 am on a Sunday morning to deliver papers? However, this was Dad’s attempt to provide for the family. We would typically get home at about 7 am get some breakfast, fall asleep for an hour before heading to church where I consistently slept through the sermon.

At about the age of 11 or so, Mom had understandably had enough. Dad left the house for a spell. I don’t remember how long. Long enough that once he returned it was odd to see him around. His departure was a hard time for us children. Dad was unemployed, depressed, and now living with his mother and step-father. Upon his visitation rights, we would go to see Dad but his mood was so black that it was extraordinarily difficult to navigate. We were children and somehow we were seemingly being expected to pull Dad out of his depression and slough of despond. Even at that young age, I wanted to somehow help him but I didn’t know-how.

Finally, the folks got back together but it never was better. They decided that Dad would be the Mr. Mom while Mom would work to bring in the money from her factory job. Dad was a lot of things but Mr. Mom was never going to be one of them. One time one of my siblings complained about the meal that Dad had served and the next thing you know they were face-first in their plate. Nobody complained ever again about the meals Dad cooked.

Finally, Dad got work as a bookkeeper for a local nursing home but the damage had already been done to the marriage. The income as a bookkeeper was better but it still was inadequate and so the marriage because of all that has been said here as well as other significant reasons that will remain unmentioned went up in flames. I was a sophomore in High school.

What I am about to say next, I have seen as a minister over and over again in other families that have gone the route of divorce. For the women (wives) especially, things never get better even after the divorce. Divorce merely exchanges one set of problems that come from a failed marriage for another set of problems that are now present with the divorce.

The same is true for children of divorce. They go from navigating one set of problems to having to navigate a different set of problems. I went from the problem of the presence of a wildman of a father to the problem of being far more independent than I had any business being at that age. Then there were the whole custody fights, being told at 16 that you will have to choose which parent you will live with (what 16 year old wants to be put in the position of having to make that kind of decision?) the parents badmouthing each other seeking subtly and not so subtly to curry favor of the children by casting the other parent in a negative light, being placed in schools that your completely unfamiliar with, etc.

And Dad could’ve avoided all of that if he had just loved his wife as Christ loved the Church.

End Part I

Scary Kinism Defined & Examples Given — Part II

  • That culture is the external expression of religious belief in union with race and place.

    There are several ways to say the above.

    1.) Culture is the outward expression of a particular people’s inward belief.
    2.) Culture is a particular people’s religion externalized.
    3.) Culture is the result of pouring a particular theology over a particular people.

    The idea here is that while culture, faith, and race/ethnicity can be distinguished they can never be separated. This explanation also works to make us see that differences among peoples can not be attributed solely or even primarily to culture. Culture is the product of race/ethnicity combined with theology/religion and as the product can not be attributed as the primary distinguishing reality between different races/ethnicity so culture can not be said to be what makes peoples distinct. The primary distinguishing reality is race/ethnicity and belief.

    This is not to deny that individuals or small groups of individuals cannot be enculturated into a culture that is heterogenous of their own. There are many examples of children, for example, on the American frontier who were kidnapped by savage American Indians who were once finally rescued and who would never be able to mentally leave their forced enculturated experience.

  • That the ideal Christian social order is an extension of the family concept, considered at a larger scale. That Biblically, a nation is a large group of people of common patrilineal descent, living in a common geographical location, and having a shared religion, history, language, and civil government (a religio-ethnostate).What is given above is just the standard definition of nation as etymologically derived from the Latin word, “nation.”

    nation (n.)

    c. 1300, nacioun, “a race of people, large group of people with common ancestry and language,” from Old French nacion “birth, rank; descendants, relatives; country, homeland” (12c.) and directly from Latin nationem (nominative natio) “birth, origin; breed, stock, kind, species; race of people, tribe,” literally “that which has been born,” from natus, past participle of nasci “be born” (Old Latin gnasci), from PIE root *gene- “give birth, beget,” with derivatives referring to procreation and familial and tribal groups.

    The word is used in English in a broad sense, “a race of people an aggregation of persons of the same ethnic family and speaking the same language,” and also in the narrower sense, “a political society composed of a government and subjects or citizens and constituting a political unit; an organized community inhabiting a defined territory within which its sovereignty is exercised.”

    The reason that a nation is to be comprised of a particular race and ethnicity as the ideal social order is because such a social order has the most potential for a harmony of interests among the people occupying a social order. If a social order is polyglot and multicultural the potential for friction increases in relation to the percentages of the polyglot presence.

    Rudyard Kipling explains all this perfectly,

    The Stranger within my gate,
    He may be true or kind,
    But he does not talk my talk–
    I cannot feel his mind.
    I see the face and the eyes and the mouth,
    But not the soul behind.

    The men of my own stock,
    They may do ill or well,
    But they tell the lies I am wanted to,
    They are used to the lies I tell;
    And we do not need interpreters
    When we go to buy or sell.

    The Stranger within my gates,
    He may be evil or good,
    But I cannot tell what powers control–
    What reasons sway his mood;
    Nor when the Gods of his far-off land
    Shall repossess his blood.

    The men of my own stock,
    Bitter bad they may be,
    But, at least, they hear the things I hear,
    And see the things I see;
    And whatever I think of them and their likes
    They think of the likes of me.

    This was my father’s belief
    And this is also mine:
    Let the corn be all one sheaf–
    And the grapes be all one vine,
    Ere our children’s teeth are set on edge
    By bitter bread and wine.

    – Rudyard Kipling

  • That sin is a universal deformity in human nature, and that no perfect society is possible on this side of Heaven. That Christians should work to limit human error by seeking those conditions which are inherently productive of a harmony of interests, both in marriage and in society at large. That a harmony of interests naturally exists between people who are similar.

    Of course, this presupposes that peoples qua peoples are not the same. This is of course contested today but the father of Western civilization never believed in the blessings of a polyglot multicultural social order.The point about marriage above is the same as the point of social orders as a whole. Marriages are going to be successful in relation to the amount of common ground that the parties contracting marriage share. As such just as polyglot social orders are unwise so are polyglot marriages unwise.

  • That the God of the Old Testament, who forbade interracial, interreligious marriages to His covenant nation, is the same as the God of the New Testament. That marriage between parties who are not naturally congenial is unequal yoking. That unequal yoking in marriage or in society at large is destructive of Christian harmony, association, and growth.

    That God forbad interreligious marriages to His covenant nation is not controversial. That God forbad interracial marriages to His covenant nation is controversial but the weight of Scripture supports the contention. Following Calvin’s perspective on boundaries and distinctions, Rushdoony invokes the case laws forbidding mixing as support that God forbad interracial mixing:

    “These laws forbid the blurring of God-ordained distinctions. The nature and direction of sin is to blur and finally erase all the God-ordained boundaries … God’s laws are case laws. If vegetable seeds are not to be mingled, nor an ass and a horse crossbred, then in the human realm it follows that the confusion of God-ordained boundaries is even more serious.”

    (RJR, Commentary on Leviticus 19:19, p.230)

    This forbidding is seen most clearly in the book of Ezra where the women of non-Israeli origin and their children are commanded to be separated from Israel. If the problem in the book of Ezra was only religious then it is hard to see why the women or children would have been commanded to depart since doubtless many were not any more disobedient to God’s laws than their disobedient Israeli husbands.

    It can be conceded that as an exception a social order will be able to survive a polyglot marriage here or there but when polyglot marriages are pursued and pushed by the social order as equally normative, as we are seeing now in the West, it is a certainty that such a social order will eventually go into abeyance. It will also experience genocide as the original stock is eventually bred out of existence.

    Rushdoony understood this danger when he wrote,

    .‘Full equality’ means that no differences can be tolerated with respect to race, color, creed, economics, and all things else. THIS MEANS THE PLANNED DESTRUCTION OF THE VERY ELEMENTS OF SOCIETY WHO HAVE MADE OUR CIVILIZATION.”

    R. J. Rushdoony
    Roots of Reconstruction — pg. 581

    Of course, the enemies of the Christian white man understand this and are pursuing just this course in order to overthrow whatever residual influence of Biblical Christianity that remains in the West.

    As a final note, for the purposes of clarification, polyglot marriages wherein both partners are in submission to Christ and in support of Biblical Christianity should be supported as much as possible within the believing community with the hope that the children of such marriages will avoid the same polyglot marriages that their parents contracted.

Have You Been Smitten with “Mass Formation Psychosis?”

“If under… conditions a narrative is distributed through the mass media which indicates an object of anxiety and provides a strategy to deal with this object of anxiety, then all the free-floating anxiety might be associated to this object and a huge willingness might be observed to participate in the strategy to deal with the object of anxiety.”

Dr. Mattias Desmet
Professor of clinical psychology at Ghent University in Belgium

Elements of Mass Formation Psychosis;

1.) An event that creates anxiety and fear;

For example;

a.) Pearl Harbor

b.) JFK assassination
c.) 9-11
d.) Deep State Virus

2.) Isolation of individuals;

Until the Deep State Virus lockdown, I don’t know this has ever successfully been accomplished on such a wide scale. There was certainly isolation of individuals in London during the German bombing. I think one might argue that the Jap civilian prison camps were the isolation of individuals.

3.) Authority figure (leader or government) offers a solution;

Examples,

a.) FDR after Pearl Harbor

b.) Bush after 9-11
c.) Fauci/Collins w/ Deep State virus

4.) Repetition of a constant, controlled message of why people should be anxious, coupled with the specific, particular message of the group narrative.

The Media does this routinely with every outbreak of war more often than not conforming to the Government’s manipulation of the “news.”

a.) WW I — Remember Wilson’s Department of Information and the 4-minute men. See book, “Manipulating the Masses,” by John Maxwell Hamilton.

b.) WW II  — See Rolad Dahl’s role in manipulating US media in WW II run-up
c.) January 6th 2021
d.) Russia, Russia, Russia
e.) Deep State virus

5.) Censorship of any information or questioning of the “approved” message.

This is happening in spades with the Deep State virus and the quaxx narrative. Listened to parts of a 5 hour round-table with Jane today on the massive censorship of magnificently accredited Doctors who worked to counter to the official narrative.