Windows Into Worldviews

The Enemy Are The Luciferian Elites

Yesterday I received a phone call from a friend whose career takes him into high finance. My friend was dining with a colleague in a major capital not in North America working on a deal. This colleague is well connected in the world of the elites as you can imagine many people are who run in these kinds of circles. The colleague related to my friend how he had come up through the ranks and how he had been mentored by Nobel prize winner during his graduate years. The colleague noted that the Nobel prize winner who mentored him was a ruthless SOB and this mentor believed that that Lucifer had been wronged and that God should have shared His glory with Lucifer. Apparently this belief drove much of his mentor’s scientific research. The colleague communicated that many of the physicists working on particle physics at the CERN particle collider in Switzerland share the same belief and their work is an attempt to usurp God’s glory as Creator.

(If you’ve read anything about the CERN super particle collider you’ll now that the whole project is dripping with the occult including a huge statue of the Hindu god “Shiva — the god of destruction.”)

For opening ceremonies of CERN in 2017 laced with occult imagery see;

It seems the minds behind the CERN project want to bring demons into the world and harnessing their knowledge via quantum technology. Charlie Rose spoke about this explicitly, describing them as Lovecraftian beings or entities or something. Elon Musk has warned about “summoning the demon” via AI, and then the Large Hadron Collider seems to be more about ushering demons into the world than it is about dispassionate scientific discovery.

Those who start to understand the demonic component of the world they’re seeking to construct around us, have a useful tool of knowledge.

As the dinner conversation continued between my friend and his colleague, the colleague communicated, upon inquiry, that this belief of Lucifer being cheated out of the glory that was properly due him is shared by many of the global elites. He especially noted that the President of France (Macron) held this same belief as well as many highly placed people in the European Union.

My friend said he was shocked by this casual dinner conversation. I can imagine many of us would be.

All of this is consistent with what we already know about the character of our elites being Luciferian. From the Pizza-gate episode that was tied by coded language to Hillary Clinton and the Obamas to the tightly connected with the Clintons Anthony Wiener’s sexting with minors scandal to the spirit-cooking revelations to the Epstein Lolita express and trafficking children for sex servicing the highly placed elites to the growing testimony of the whole P. Diddy scandal it is now well past obvious that, generally speaking our elites are indeed Luciferians. This reality is underscored by anybody who has read at all on the occultic rituals the young elites go through at Yale’s famous “Skull & Bones” club. These young elites end up being Presidents (William Howard Taft and both Bush Presidents) Senators and leading elites in numerous fields. If you want to read on this I recommend Antony Sutton’s “America’s Secret Establishment; An Introduction to The Order of Skull and Bones.”

Remember this exchange from 2020? It is an example of “Me thinketh the lady doth protest too much. This was during a time when the elites were still trying to belittle and mock the idea that there was an intimate connection between the elites and Luciferian behavior;

None of this is new for those who have had eyes to see. Luciferian rituals were rife at Los Alamos (Trinity Site) during the Manhattan project as Michael Hoffman’s book, “Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare” chronicles.

This has even been in our literature as C. S. Lewis pointed towards this connection between the elites and the Luciferians in his theological science fiction Space Trilogy. Who can ever forget Lewis’ N.I.C.E — National Institute of Coordinated Experiments? This was Lewis’ “Scientific” organization — an organization that we later learn in the novel is manned by Luciferians. Clearly, Lewis was trying to warn us here.

It is my conviction that it is well past obvious that the global elite — the types who attend gala events like the World Economic Forum — are generally speaking, Luciferians. The battle we are fighting against the NWO is not merely one of ideas, though ideology is certainly a component. The battle we as Christians are fighting is against an ideology that is animated by principalities and powers and against people who are animated by Lucifer. Our fight is against very real organizations which are manned by people who are worshiping and serving Lucifer. These people hate the God of the Bible more than they love life, and they hate Christians with that same hatred.

Nobody who isn’t in Christ should get anywhere near this fight because if one is not clothed with Christ and indwelt by the Spirit of the living God they are going to get eaten alive.

Toby Sumpter On Superficial Divisions

“The multicultural globalist want to blend all culture into a bland humanism, but the blood-and-soil types end up insisting on superficial divisions. Covenant is the key to earthy and biblical unity and diversity, of what we might call a Protestant feudalism and Christendom.”

Toby “No Legs Yet Walking” Sumpter

I.) Nothing At All About Blood?

1.) “The Promise is to you and to your children….” Acts 2:39

2.) Gen. 12: 2 I will make you into a great nation, and I will bless you; I will make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. 3I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you; and all the families of the earth will be blessed through you.”

3.) God is known as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, (note the patrilineal descent) and not the God of Abraham, Hiram, and Malik.

4.) Gen. 24:²One day Abraham said to his oldest servant, the man in charge of his household, “Take an oath by putting your hand under my thigh. ³Swear by the Lord, the God of heaven and earth, that you will not allow my son to marry one of these local Canaanite women. ⁴Go instead to my homeland, to my relatives, and find a wife there for my son Isaac.”

Keep in mind that the wife that was later married by Jacob from these same relatives of Abraham was beset with the same pagan mindset as was true of the local Canaanite women as seen in her running off with Laban’s household gods. We note that so that we see that it wasn’t as if the people of Abraham were God-fearers unlike the local Canaanites and their women-folk.

5.) Do keep in mind also that there is a reason for all those genealogies in Scripture that demonstrate that Jesus the Christ was the son of David, the son of Abraham. (Matthew 1) In point of fact Jesus remains the Lion of the tribe of Judah at this very moment with DNA typable blood at the right hand of the Father.

6.) Ezra and Nehemiah and their decrying of mixed marriages and children anybody?

7.) “I was only sent to the lost sheep of Israel.” Jesus the Christ

Now before I am accused of suggesting that blood is the only consideration allow me to disavow that. I am only saying there that the covenant is not a Gnostic covenant. Grace, because of God’s ordination, typically runs in generational familial lines. Blood is not everything but neither is it nothing. Jesus enemies during his earthly ministry made descent an idol. Today the enemies of Biblical Christianity make descent to mean nothing as if grace does not, because of God’s free assignment, run in generational lines.

II.) Nothing At All About Soil?

So much for all those promises about “the promised land.” And what about our one day “inheriting the whole earth?”

So, it is not at all about blood and soil and yet Christ had to come from the tribe of Judah. It’s not at all about blood and soil yet Paul can say in Romans;

“the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile.”

And Jesus will say to the Samaritan woman in John 4;

22You worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews.

What is hilarious is that these same people like Old Toby will deny all categories of blood and soil while still insisting that those reputed to be blood Jews still have a glorious future ahead of them misinterpreting Romans 11. Still others want to say that the blood Jews are going to rebuild the temple on the glorious soil of Jerusalem.

Old Toby’s “thinking” (we’re feeling generous in calling it “thinking) gives us not only propositional nationhood but also propositional covenant theology. This is Gnostic covenantalism. The fact that it comes from putative Presbyterians demonstrates how far many of the Presbyterians have gone in grace destroying nature.

Again, my point in all this is to say “Old Toby is wrong.” Covenant has to do with blood and soil. My point is that while blood and soil are not everything neither are they nothing. For Pete’s sake that is proven by the 5th commandment. That is proven by the fact that the Holy Spirit can say;

“if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.”

I Timothy 5:8

Finally, note this clergy member said that family ties are nothing but superficial divisions. Good gravy, if that isn’t the theme song of the Globalists among us I don’t know what is. I find it shocking that a Presbyterian — the folks who historically believed that the best method of Church growth was by having large families — is telling me that family ties are superficial divisions. It is shocking as hearing P-Diddy saying “sex should be saved for marriage.”

Family is not everything. We must give up family if necessary to follow Christ but family is so important that God uses the idea of “family” to define how the church members should inter-relate.

And yet for Old Toby it is a “superficial division” — kind of like being a Michigan or Michigan State fan.

Redemption Aimed At In “The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance?”

An article by Marvin Olaskey got me thinking about this and pushed me to come up with my own slightly different take.

_________

In the film, “The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance” film-maker John Ford demonstrates in the villain’s name and character (played by Lee Marvin) that Liberty expressed as malevolence (Hence the name Valance?) is the worst kind of license.

The character played by Jimmy Stewart is named “Ransom Stoddard.” In the film Ransom is willing to surrender his life (as a ransom) in an attempt to rid the town of the malevolence of the license brought by “Liberty Valance.” And that is what everybody thinks happened as Ranse is universally thought of as “The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.”

The town Sheriff is aptly named “Sheriff Appleyard” (played by Andy Devine). Appleyard is a bumbling but lovable fool with no real authority in the town. Devine was Barney Fife before Barney Fife was Barney Fife. The Sheriff’s last name is interesting though if only because man showed himself a fallen fool as happening in a “Appleyard.” No real help against the license of Liberty Valance is going to come from the fallen Sheriff Appleyard.

In the climax of the film, everyone has abandoned Ranse as he faces down Liberty Valance in a gun fight wherein Ranse is clearly overmatched. It is dark out. Here we see themes of Jesus being abandoned by all while all is still dark. Ranse is rescued by Tom Doniphon’s (played by John Wayne) surreptitious gunslinging thus providing a ransom for Ransom.

Because of Doniphon’s heroics he loses the girl (played by Vera Miles) to Ranse Stoddard. Could it be that the name Hallie in the film is short for Hallelujah?

“The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance,” is indeed a tale about Liberty and how liberty can easily turn into license. It’s also a tale about how true liberty has to put down false liberty in order for all people to enjoy true liberty, but it’s also a tale about how a town is ransomed so that everyone can say “Hallelujah.” Finally, it might be taken as a tale that teaches that the true hero who provides the real ransom sometimes is not recognized by those whom he provided the ransom.

Helping Out Darryl Gnostic Hart

DGH wrote,

After a visit to my father at his local hospital, I had a worldview moment. What should have alerted me from the outset was the name of the place – St. Mary’s. But then I noticed that the spiritual services wing of the hospital had dropped off for him a brochure about their activities which was included with information about television channels and daily menus – talk about trivializing the eschaton. But the kicker was the crucifix in my dad’s ICU room. Shazzam!!! That’s a whole lot of idolatry for a man who is on a heart monitor.

Bret responds,

First we are sorry that Darryl’s Father is ill. It’s always difficult when our parents get to this age where we are watching them deteriorate in health. We trust Mr. Hart (Darryl’s Dad) will rally.

2.) It is true that the crucifix is idolatry and I’m fairly confident that the hospital staff wouldn’t object to your removing it in favor of a non-crucifix cross, or even a blank space on the wall.

Oh … and it would be a whole lot of idolatry even if Darryl’s Dad was not on a heart monitor.

DGH writes,

But is Roman Catholic medicine really any different from Reformed medicine or even – dare I say – secular medicine. If worldviews go all the way down to the very tips of our toes, and if we can’t escape the claims of Christ in any parts of our lives, can I really look the other way in good conscience when entering a hospital room that displays an image of Christ on a cross?

Bret responds,

1.) The old proverb that “even a blind old sow, finds and acorn once in-a-while” applies here. No Biblical Christian (worldview Christian) believes that false worldviews get it perfectly wrong always, all of the time. We merely believe that they have in their worldviews significant contradictions. As Bahnsen offered, “I don’t doubt that you can count. What I want to know is if you can account for your counting given your worldview.” So, Roman Catholics have medicines that work? No one ever doubted it. Even brothel workers can wear lovely evening gowns, but underneath it all they remain brothel workers.

2.) Worldview types often speak of the fact that the unbeliever is often involved in felicitous inconsistency. This accounts for Rome or other theological dispositions stumbling and getting some medicine matters correct. Medicinal Rome has snuck in some stolen capital from Biblical Christianity to get their Christ denying worldview off the ground. See Van Til’s, “Mr. Black, Mr. Gray, and Mr. White here.” So, Rome’s medicine works in spite of their world and life view and not because of it.

3.) Hart uses that word “secular” above, when he mentions “secular medicine.” If by secular he means a medicine birthed without theological a-prioris and faith commitments then of course his idea of “secular” is a myth. Does he doubt that? Perhaps, in the future, should he have heart problems like his father, Dr. Hart would consider consulting a animist Shaman, or a third world witch Doctor for all his medicine needs, or, he could consult a Western Medical doctor who also believes that boys can be born in women’s bodies. Worldview doesn’t affect how medicine operates? Methinks that the inability for many professionals in our health fields to authoritatively be able to answer “What is a woman,” kind of pulls the plug on Hart’s theory that “Worldviews don’t effect medicine.”

Maybe Hart, upon contracting a fever, would like to have a Doctor pull out leeches in order to bleed him so that he may be cured?

4.) Then there is the issue of Math. Math is, in and of itself, subjective right? If anything proves that worldviews don’t matter it is Mathematics right? Well, until you start attending Harvard and realize that there is a chap there who is teaching that 2+2 can sometimes = 5.

Kareem Carr Explains Why 2+2=5

Then of course there is Hinduism and math. If, as Hinduism states, all is one, then how does mathematics get off the ground? (And let’s not even talk about how believing “all is maya,” affects mathematics if Hindu math was consistent with their worldview affirmations.)

DGH writes,

And then there is the concern for quality of health care. If Abraham Kuyper was right that Roman Catholicism “represents an older and lower stage of development in the history of mankind” and if Protestantism occupies a “higher standpoint,” shouldn’t my dad try to find treatment at a Protestant hospital? Kuyper, by the way, wasn’t real complimentary of Roman Catholicism on science either.

Bret responds,

It certainly is the case that if presented with two hospitals having the same type of quality of care, I would definitely recommend Mr. Hart Sr. to go to the Protestant hospital.

I can speak to this point with some experience. This past year, as some of you know, I underwent open heart surgery for a valve replacement. The Doctor I was assigned was top shelf, in terms of reputation, but I knew little of his faith or theology. I had a whale of a time trusting myself to this process because of this. However, in God’s incredible providence a Christian cardiologist who has 20 plus years of experience contacted me. I took nearly everything Dr. A, who was doing my surgery, immediately to Dr. B (the Christian) to confirm every step of the way? Why? Because I trusted implicitly the knowledge of Dr. B, as existing in His Christian world and life view vis-a-vis not being sure of Dr. A’s world and life view. These things matter.

DGH writes,

It could be that I have once again misunderstood the claims of neo-Calvinism and that some algorithm exists for taking the gold of scientific advances from the dross of defective worldviews. But it could also be that the language of worldviews and the difference they make for every aspect of human existence is overdone, simply a rallying cry for inspiring the faithful, but not anything that would prevent my father from receiving treatment from unbelieving nurses employed by Roman Catholic administrators. Then again, the power of modernity is stunning, making all of those religious claims about connections between spiritual and physical reality look fairly foolish – as if a creed actually produces better medicine.

1.) I think it much more likely that Dr. Hart misconstrued as opposed to “misunderstood.” Because this is God’s world it is impossible for the Christ hater to get it perfectly wrong all the time, and so, as said above, they do import Christian worldview capital into their Christ-hating worldview in order to get their Christ hating world and life view off the ground. Some in Science do try to be consistent in their Christ hating worldview. Consider Lysenkoism for example. However, more often than not the Christ-haters are not as consistent as Lysenko was and they do import gold into their dross.

This isn’t that difficult for a Ph.D. like Hart.

DGH writes,

I mean no disrespect to the neo- Calvinists and their epistemological purity. But if they could help me out on this one, I’d be grateful. Does a Reformed worldview really make a difference for modern medicine and the ordinary decisions a sick believer must make in seeking a physician or hospital – under the oversight, of course, not of the elders but the insurance company?

Bret responds,

And as we have seen, the answer is resoundingly “yes, a Reformed worldview really does make a difference for modern, pre-modern, and post-modern medicine and the ordinary decisions a sick believer must make in seeking a physician or hospital.” For example, if Dr. Hart has any little ones in his life that he loves, I trust that if the little tyke complains of a belly ache they don’t take him to a modern Doctor who will tell him, “This clearly is a sign that the child is having unresolved gender issues.”

So here I finish, being happy to once again, to help Dr. Hart out on this one. I trust the good Dr. realizes that I also intend no disrespect to the neo-Gnostic Calvinists in our midst.

Bahnsen on Ethics Arrived At Apart from God

With painful irony we note the words of Dietrich Bonhoeffer: “Man has learned to cope with all questions of importance without recourse to God. . . . [God] is teaching us that we must live as men who can get along very well without him.” The pathos of these words is that they were penned in Bonhoeffer’s Letters and Papers from Prison, penned after Hitler’s Gestapo, learning to get along very well without God, had imprisoned Bonhoeffer, thereby preventing the completion of his book on Ethics and resulting in his hanging in 1945. When the questions of ethics are answered without recourse to God, the following views of the state become inevitable:

The State incarnates the Divine Idea upon earth (Hegel).

The State is the supreme power, ultimate and beyond repeal, absolutely independent (Fichte).

Everything for the State; nothing outside the State; nothing

against the State (Mussolini).

The State dominates the nation because it alone represents it (Hitler).

The State embraces everything, and nothing has value outside the State. The State creates right (Franklin Delano Roosevelt).

Thus Bonhoeffer’s assertion represented the very outlook which condoned his immoral execution. The source of moral authority and law within a society will either be theistic or political; when the former is repudiated, the latter allows of no logical barrier from tyranny.

Greg Bahnsen, Theonomy in Christian Ethics