Machen the Kinist

“Human institutions are really to be molded, not by Christian principles accepted by the unsaved, but by Christian men; the true transformation of society will come by the influence of those who have themselves been redeemed … [I]t is not true that the Christian evangelist is interested in the salvation of individuals without being interested in the salvation of the race.”

J. Gresham Machen
Christianity & Liberalism — pg. 158-159

The Leviathan State’s Interest in Weakening the Family as Institution

A state with the kind of power that the current state has, has little motivation to encourage sexual fidelity and numerous incentives to promote unchastity. Far from being the friend of families and family values, the Liberal state represents the most insidious threat to human flourishing ever devised. The real goal of the amoral-inclusivist liberal order is a Leviathan of disordered sexual relationships constructed out of the dismembered parts of its victim: the human family. In this manner the Liberal Leviathan State removes the threat of the institution of the family to its absolute hegemony. By insuring the breakdown of the family unit via sexual perversity and unfaithfulness the consequence is that the State becomes stronger and stronger as the institution of the family becomes weaker and weaker.

Genesis 1 Contra Polytheism

What Genesis 1 is undertaking and accomplishing is a radical and sweeping affirmation of monotheism vis-a-vis polytheism, syncretism, and idolatry. Each day of creation … dismisses an additional cluster of deities… On the first day, the gods of light and darkness are dismissed. On the second day, the gods of sky and sea. On the third day, earth gods and gods of vegetation. On the fourth day, sun, moon and star gods. The fifth and sixth days take way any associations with divinity from the animal kingdom. And finally human existence, too, is emptied of any intrinsic divinity — while at the same time all human beings, from the greatest to the least, and not just pharaoh, kings, and heroes, are granted a divine likeness and mediation.

H. Conrad Hyer
Biblical Literalism: Constricting the Cosmic Dance — pg. 101

Does Total Depravity Look the Same in All Peoples?

When Calvinists speak of humans as “totally depraved,” they are making an extensive, rather than an intensive statement. The effect of the fall upon man is that sin has extended to every part of his personality — his thinking, his emotions, and his will. Not necessarily that he is intensely sinful, but that sin has extended to his entire being. So, total depravity is extensive, not intensive. Not all total depravity looks the same. People and / or Nations can remain totally depraved and still be morally superior to other people and / or Nations who are also totally depraved. Total depravity does not mean that everyone is equally depraved. Total depravity most certainly is not the moral leveler that Cassidy contends. People and / or Nations who are totally depraved can be morally superior though that moral superiority lends no salvific aid.

John Calvin on the Legitimacy of Slavery

“Here a question arises, Is perpetual servitude so displeasing to God, that it ought not to be deemed lawful? To this the answer is easy, — Abraham and other fathers had servants or slaves according to the common and prevailing custom, and it was not deemed wrong in them. Before the Law was given, there was nothing to forbid one who had servants or maids to exercise power over them through life; and then the Law, mentioned here, was not given indiscriminately and generally, but it was a peculiar privilege in favor of the chosen people. Hence it is without reason that any one infers that it is not lawful to exercise power over servants and maids; for, on the contrary, we may reason thus, That since God permitted the fathers to retain servants and maids, it is a thing lawful; and further, as God permitted the Jews also, under the Law, to bear rule over aliens, and to keep them perpetually as servants, it follows that this cannot be disapproved. And still a clearer evidence may be adduced; for since the Gentiles have been called to the hope of salvation, no change has in this respect been made. For the Apostles did not constrain masters to liberate their servants, but only exhorted them to use kindness towards them, and to treat them humanely as their fellow-servants. (Ephesians 6:9; Colossians 4:1) If, then, servitude were unlawful, the Apostles would have never tolerated it; but they would have boldly denounced such a profane practice had it been so. Now, as they commanded masters only to be humane towards their servants, and not to treat them violently and reproachfully, it follows that what was not denied was permitted, that is, to retain their own servants. We also see that Paul sent back Onesimus to Philemon. (Philemon 1:12) Philemon was not only one of the faithful, but a pastor of the Church. He ought, then, to have been an example to others. His servant had fled away from him; Paul sent him back, and commended him to his master, and besought his master to forgive his theft. We hence see that the thing in itself is not unlawful.”

John Calvin
Calvin’s Commentary on Jeremiah 34:8-17