Alexander Solzhenitsyn & The Gospel Coalition

“But the world had never before known a godlessness as organized, militarized, and tenaciously malevolent as that practiced by Marxism. Within the philosophical system of Marx and Lenin, and at the heart of their psychology, hatred of God is the principal driving force, more fundamental than all their political and economic pretensions. Militant atheism is not merely incidental or marginal to Communist policy; it is not a side effect, but the central pivot. To achieve its diabolical ends. Communism needs to control a population devoid of religious and national feeling, and this entails the destruction of faith and nationhood. Communists proclaim both of these objectives openly, and just as openly go about carrying them out.”

Alexander Solzhenitsyn
Harvard Address

Note especially this clause in the quote above; “Communism needs to control a population devoid of religious and national feeling, and this entails the destruction of faith and nationhood.”

If Solzhenitsyn was correct here then how can those putatively Evangelical ministers who decry Nationalism and speak of the evils of Nationalism not be crypto-Marxists? If Solzhenitsyn is correct then the Gospel Coalition is doing the work of Marx. All these muttonhead ministers who are supporting the tenets that undergird CRT and Intersectionality are enemies of the Gospel. This includes but is not limited to Mike Horton, Tim Keller, J. Ligon Duncan, Sean Michael Lucas, Al Mohler, John Piper, Jarvis Williams, Ron Burns, Matt Chandler, J. D. Greear, David Platt, Joe Carter (Joke Harder), and on and on it goes.

Indeed, it might be easier to make a list of the glitterati ministers who aren’t doing the Devil’s work. These men are enemies of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I don’t care what else they have right. As long as they are pushing this Cultural Marxist narrative they are those who will hear; “Depart from me for I never knew you.”

These people need to be cast out of the Church and if they can’t be cast out then you need to be done giving them any credence.

Are All Arrests of Different Protesters All the Same?

“Joel McDurmon recently asked what conservatives would have done if Obama had ordered the deployment of federal agents to scoop protesting citizens into vans during the night. They would have gone nuts, that’s what.”

Doug Wilson Article

I continue to be mystified by this kind of reasoning on the part of McDurmon. I’ve seen it elsewhere from other people.

The idea seems to be that if conservatives would have been upset at the thought of Obama scooping up conservative protesters therefore it is perfectly legitimate for Marxists to be upset at the thought of Trump scooping up Marxists into vans during the night.

I don’t get it… really, I don’t.

The fact that genuinely conservative Christians (and one can’t be conservative without being a Biblical and dissident Christian) would get upset about their people being illegally arrested by Obama the Marxist doesn’t require them to join the Marxists about being upset when their people are being “illegally” arrested by a President who is legitimately seeking to uphold the law.

This kind of thinking is a “we need to be fair to everyone and treat them all the same,” reasoning. It is not unfair when Marxists, anarchists, and fascists are arrested for rioting, pillaging, and burning but conservatives are not arrested for not letting, by dint of force if necessary, the Marxists, anarchists, and fascists from burning American cities down. Similarly, it is not fairness when Black Lives Matter participants are arrested as long as those who are resisting BLM are arrested as well.

McDurmon is hinting at the idea that law, equally applied, means all protesters, regardless of political and military tactics, need to be arrested in order to be fair. But that is a non-sequitur. BLM is an admittedly Marxist organization. When their protesters begin to act like they’ve been consistently acting they need to be scooped up in Vans. When those protesters opposing BLM use force to stop BLM it is wicked to scoop them up in a van and arrest them.

The Deep State Virus, Masks, Vaccines & the Mark of the Beast

The relation of the “Mark of the Beast” to mask and vaccine mandates came up in Sunday School last week. Here are some reflections.

Ok … now I’m seeing the “Mark of the Beast” Dispies going nuts about masks. Chicken Littles running around like their heads are cut off screaming, “The End is Near, The End is Near.” And that because the mark of the Beast is the Mask or the vaccine and it all means we are entering the Great Tribulation.

A brief primer so as to dismiss those well-intentioned but misguided souls.

1.) The Mark of the Beast is not necessarily a literal mark, whether a mask, a chip, or a tattoo. If we read the Revelation passage in context (13:17) we find that there is also a mark of the Lamb in Rev. 14:1. That mark is the name of the Lamb and the Father on the foreheads of God’s people. Now the Dispies get hyped about the Mark of the beast on evil people but I’ve never heard anyone talk about having a literal mark of the Lamb on the good guy saints in this supposedly future contest between good and evil.

2.) So, the mark of the beast is likely a metaphor that was future to the readers of Revelation but is past to us. As to the symbolic nature of the mark, it merely symbolizes total dominion and control over a population, however, that may occur. The fact that John writes that the mark of the beast is on the right hand and the forehead is merely telling us that the thinking of those under the Beast’s sway will be controlled as well as all their doing. Throughout history, Tyrant states have sought this kind of control, whether one is talking about Stalin or King Cetshwayo’s of the 19th century Zulus or Lincoln or our government today which complains about false information but is itself the greatest purveyor of false information extant and all of that for the purpose of controlling our thinking and doing.

3.) The time references in Revelation force us to conclude that the threatened Mark of the Beast was future to John’s readers but is past to us today. We are not looking for a “Mark of the Beast” that has any connection to some “this has to happen before Jesus can come back” prophetic timeline. Nearly all of the time marker references in John’s Revelation as references that bespeak an imminent occurrence. (Note: the time is near, Rev 1:1, 3; 22:6, 10 references)

4.) Who the book is written to forces us to dismiss the idea that all that John writes of remains future to us. John was not writing to warn us about a “Mark of the Beast.” John was writing the seven persecuted Churches (Rev. 1:9) of the 1st century to warn them about the “Mark of the Beast.” It would have done precious little good to warn the seven Churches of Revelation about a Mark of the beast that wouldn’t take place for 2000 years.

5.) The purpose of the book of Revelation forces us to dismiss the idea that all John writes of in his Apocalypse remains future to us. John wrote Revelation with the purpose of speaking to the promised coming judgment upon Israel (Rev 1:7; 11:1–2) for her unfaithfulness which was fulfilled in AD 70.

Now, having said that, no one denies that Marks of dominion and control on the part of future tyrants may well be future to us but such future marks of future beasts having nothing to do with the prophetic “Jesus is coming back” clock. The mask is a sign of dominion and control and so will be any vaccines or chipping and Christians should be in the front rows of opposition due to the Kingship of Jesus Christ. However, none of that is relevant to the prophecies of Revelation. We may even see the day again where some lunatic, like Nero of old, has divine aspirations and desires worship. If we do though, we will oppose it as Christians but it will have nothing to do with the prophetic clock.

So, a Biblical hermeneutic insists that the “Mark of the Beast,” in Revelation likely refers to the attempt by Nero to have absolute dominion and control — even unto the point of being worshiped — as other populations were under the shadow of Rome’s hegemony.

Muggeridge Warned Us Over 50 Years Ago

“So the final conclusion would surely be that whereas other civilizations have been brought down by attacks of barbarians from without, ours had the unique distinction of training its own destroyers at its own educational institutions, and then providing them with facilities for propagating their destructive ideology far and wide, all at the public expense. Thus did Western Man decide to abolish himself, creating his own boredom out of his own affluence, his own vulnerability out of his own strength, his own impotence out of his own erotomania, himself blowing the trumpet that brought the walls of his own city tumbling down, and having convinced himself that he was too numerous, labored with pill and scalpel and syringe to make himself fewer. Until at last, having educated himself into imbecility, and polluted and drugged himself into stupefaction, he keeled over–a weary, battered old brontosaurus–and became extinct.”

― Malcolm Muggeridge

Requiescat en pace Margaret Donna Lombardi (1931-2018)

Today, three years ago today, Jane’s Mother joined the Church at Rest. This is something I wrote as a tribute.

________

It’s the things that we see but that we don’t see because we so readily take the things we see for granted that make all the difference. Jane’s Mom was a Pastor’s wife during a time when Pastor’ wives properly embraced the reality that their role was to be in the shadow of their husbands, working in the background so that the ministry of Christ could go forward. Jane’s Mom didn’t seek the limelight. She was too busy putting together the evening treats for the company who would be invited by her husband every Sunday after the evening service. Jane’s Mom didn’t seek the limelight. She was too busy practicing piano for Sunday Church service or too busy watching the littles in the nursery during Church. Jane’s Mom didn’t seek the limelight. She was too busy cooking meals or cleaning the scrapes and bruises of her littles. Modesty was a watchword and she was ever vigilant in practicing modesty so that her husband might be Christ’s voice to the congregation. But make no mistake about it… there would have been no Pastor Lombardi doing the work of the ministry of Christ if there had not been a Donna Lombardi doing the work of the ministry of Christ spending her time being modest. She was an example of the woman being made for the man (I Cor. 11:9). Were she alive today she would be embarrassed just by what I’ve said already.

She was from an era when women understood that they weren’t being abused because they served and prioritized their husbands. An era that found the woman’s zeal in being committed to her husband and children… and later grandchildren and great-grandchildren. And by being committed to them she was demonstrating her commitment to Christ.

In some places, they call this “Old-School.” I just call it Biblical feminity. There was nothing flashy or inspiring about it all, until you took the time to see what you thought you were seeing but had missed seeing. This is one vital and important part of what made the Christian West the Christian West. Our womenfolk weren’t uppity. They weren’t trying to be noticed.

“3Your beauty should not come from outward adornment such as braided hair or gold jewelry or fine clothes, 4but from the inner disposition of your heart, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in God’s sight.…”

She didn’t walk on water. Like us all, she had her moments when the silliness oftentimes seen in the ministry got the best of her. At times her tongue could sheer sheet metal. But could I pour a little Donna Lombardi in our wives in the West today I would pour liberally.

Requiescat en pace Margaret Donna Lombardi (1931-2018) and thank you for recreating so much of yourself in your daughter … my wife.