Going Slow-Mo on James K. A. Smith’s Po-Mo

“Instead, because for the most part we are desiring, imaginative, non-cognitive animals, our desire for the Kingdom in inscribed in our dispositions and habits and functions quite apart from our conscious reflection.”

James K. A. Smith
Desiring the Kingdom — p. 56

1.) Did Smith write this as a non-cognitive animal quite apart from his conscious reflection?

2.) How does Smith know that our desires are inscribed in our disposition and habits unless he first self consciously reflected on that truth?

3.) If all this is happening quite apart from our conscious reflection then why is Smith bothering us with his conscious reflection on all this?

4.) Quick … without consciously reflecting, and only by means of your desire, tell me what a “disposition” is. Tell me what a “habit” is. Tell me what “conscious reflection” is. Tell me what a desire is.

One See’s the Strangest Things on the way to Vanity Fair

 So, we have Vanity Fair seeking to create the impression that Transgenderism (TranJennerism?) is normative. By putting “Brutlyn” Jenner on their cover they are, not so subtly, communicating that being Transgender is as normal as your average bombshell babe gracing the cover of your average run of the mill New York sleaze rag.
Of course the transmogrification of Jenner, former All American Stud and Athlete, into “Brutlyn,” the svelte and hubba hubba cover girl communicates that there is not that much distance between Bronco Nagurski and Marilyn Monroe. All of us, really are the same.And yet, in order to pull this off transmogrification off they have to wrap the 1976 Olympic Decathlon gold medal winner in Christian Euro-centric notions of beauty and femininity that have been with us for a very long time. So, they are desperately trying to change the social order but in order to pervert the social order they have to appeal to standards of the social order in order to pervert it. This is a classic example of Van Til’s “sitting on God’s lap in order to slap Him in the face.”One could easily make the case that the photo-shop, make-up, and lighting, creators of “Brutlyn Jenner” are practitioners of racism, trans-phobia and worst of all are guilty of Euro-centric biases. This is seen by their casting “Brutlyn” with a traditional white feminine mien along with the notion of European beauty. How dare they subtly suggest the WASP standard of beauty is the standard of beauty. 

What’s even worse, is the white that “she” is regaled in, on the cover of Vanity Fair.  This demonstrates “Vanity Fair’s” racism perhaps as well as any other component of the cover photo. In the European mind the color “white” is associated with purity and virtue and here is “Vanity Fair” having the cheek to reinforce that shibboleth by clothing “Brutlyn” all in white.

And what of the long hair of Brutlyn? This exudes patriarchy since women have, for centuries, been told by the misogynist Bible that “Long hair is a woman’s glory.” And “Vanity Fair” is supporting all this Christian Euro-centric hatred and misogyny that the West has been burdened with for centuries by placing that vile hateful picture of a shapely Euro-centric “Brutlyn” dressed in white on their cover complete with long flowing hair and feminine come hither smile.

What should we expect next from “Vanity Fair?”  A photo shoot with “Brutlyn” as a traditional stay at home wife and mother baking cookies for the neighborhood children?

Please do not mistake me here. There is no excuses for the perversion here. There is the point that even when the Cultural despisers go pervert they unconsciously still support Western notions of beauty and femininity. The irony is found in the fact that they cannot destroy Western culture without appealing to Western culture.

Some might insist that “Brutlyn” could have been black or mestizo. I don’t think so. Only in using a European is the first step arrived at in making debauchery palatable to the masses. If you can make Christian Europeans debase themselves, then everyone else will follow. That’s been the modus operandi of the 20th and 21st centuries. Doubtless on subsequent covers you will be sure to see an oriental.

The West is dead and continues to integrate downward into the void but the really funny thing is — the thing that should be screaming at all right thinking people — is that the Christian West, in order to destroy itself and strip itself of every smidgen of Christian residue, must appeal to residual Christian and Western standards in order to do so.



Morning Prayer

Benevolent Father who has revealed to each and all of your elect their brokenness, sin, and guilt and yet has clothed us in the Righteousness of Christ and as birthed us anew into your new creation, grant us grace to continue to reflect the beautiful reign of God in our lives, so that our ruin may be put off and your great Glory demonstrated in the renewing of a once broken people now healing in light of your tender care and mercy.

As citizens of your Kingdom grant us grace to be zealous for you, determined to defend your honor, and to be champions of your cause. Grant us the ability to rejoice knowing what we’ve been rescued from and delivered too. Give us love and tenderness for all the Saints and give us the capacity to make them know they are welcome in the Household of God.

Despite and through our weakness, Triune God, advertise and make known your fame.

The Fusion of Gnosticism and Cultural Marxism in Reformed Alienism

“Seriously though, this embrace of opposite ideologies is welding a religious Dualism among the Alienists. And that irreconcilable Dualism demands an immediate and absolute Irrationalism, the end of which is Solipsism. These folks are on the road to oblivion.”

Dan Brannan

The amazing things about these Reformed Alienist folks is that while they are Gnostic (all real reality is spiritual reality) in their appeal that spiritual truths negate corporeal truths they end up supporting cultural Marxist (all reality is material reality) positions in terms of their support of the idea that there is no such thing as races but only the human race. The Reformed Alienist position that racial or ethnic distinctions don’t exist or aren’t important once someone becomes a Christian puts them in the Gnostic place of insisting that spiritual reality is all reality and yet, as just noted, this leads them to the same place of the Cultural Marxists who are  forever championing the indiscriminate Brotherhood of all men.  Ironically the Reformed Alienists have joined in a choir with both the Gnostics, and Cultural Marxists and are singing together,

“I believe in the Kingdom Come
When all the colors will bleed into one
Bleed into one.
But yes, I’m still running…. 

But I still haven’t found
What I’m looking for.
But I still haven’t found
What I’m looking for.”

So with the Reformed Alienists you have the (hopefully) unintended collision and combination of Gnosticism and Cultural Marxism where in one movement you have existing two polar opposite worldviews.  Seriously, the only difference I find between the Reformed Alienist worldview and the worldview of the Gnostic or Cultural Marxist is that for the Reformed Alienist the “colors all bleeding into one” will be Christian Utopia  while for the Gnostics and Cultural Marxists the “colors bleeding into one” are humanist postmillennial colors. When trying to reason with these people one quickly senses that one is counseling someone who is bi-polar. When interacting with these Reformed Alienists one wonders wh0 will respond, Mr. Gnostic or Mr. Cultural Marxist or both at the same time?

What we need to understand, in order to attempt to comprehend this phenomena, is that the pure spirituality of Gnosticism and the pure ‘matter,’ of materialism, are correlatives of each other. If all is spirit then matter must be interpreted as spirit and if all is matter then even spirit must be interpreted as matter. Since both the spiritual and the material are necessary for proper distinguishing in God’s reality, the Gnostic and the materialist refute each other, yet they must steal from each other to get their faulty worldview off the ground.  They both can point out that the other needs what he has to make his opponent’s view reasonable; and they each must surreptitiously make use of the other one’s principle in some way in order to make each of their own views have some appearance of being reasonable.  As such even though materialism and Gnosticism are philosophically opposite it really is not surprising to find both of them end up being part of the Reformed Alienist worldview, as contradictory as that seems,  since both Gnosticism and materialism each end up advocating, intentionally or unintentionally, knowingly or unknowingly, that all reality is monist.

Since both unity and diversity are necessary for knowledge, the rationalist and the irrationalist refute each other, and they must steal from each other.  They both can point out that the other needs what he has to make his opponent’s view reasonable; and they each must surreptitiously make use of the other one’s principle in some way in order to make each of their own views have some appearance of being reasonable.

With the Reformed Alienist we are right back to Van Til’s rational and irrational wash-women who are forever taking in each other’s laundry, only in this case it is the Gnostic irrationalist and the Cultural Marxist irrationalist who are taking in each other’s laundry and they each have the name of “Reformed Alienist.”

Except From Herbert Hoover’s “Freedom Betrayed,” on Dropping the Atomic Bomb

Excerpt from Herbert Hoover’s “Freedom Betrayed.” This is from chapter 83 (Aftermath of Dropping the Atomic Bomb on Japan), 566-568.

“The use of the Atomic bomb on Japan has continued to stir the American conscience as well as the conscience of thinking people elsewhere in the world. Attempts have been made to justify the use of this terrible weapon. However, American military men and statesmen have repeatedly stated its use was not necessary to bring the war to an end. Quotes from some of these statements follow,

On August 29, 1945 the AP reported,

‘Secretary of State … Byrnes challenged today Japan’s argument that the atomic bomb had knocked her out of the war.

He cited what he called Russian proof that the Japanese knew that they were beaten before the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima. Foreign Commissar Vyacheslaff M. Molotov informed the American and British at the Postsdam conference, Mr. Byrnes said, that the Japanese had asked to send a delegation to Moscow to seek Russian mediation of the end of the war — an act that  Mr. Byrnes interpreted as proof of the enemies defeat.’

On September 20, 1945, Major General Curtis Lemay, who directed the air attack on Japan, stated to the AP,

‘The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war … The war would have been over in two weeks without the Russians coming in and without the atomic bomb.’

There was present at this interview two American Generals who were engaged in action against Japan — General Barney Giles, and Brigadier General Emmett O’Donnell — both of who agreed with Lemay.

In an AP interview in Washington on October 5, 1945, Admiral Chester Nimitz said he was convinced that the end of the war would have been the same without the atomic bomb or the entry of Russia into the war. He re-emphasized this in an address to Congress the same day saying:

‘The atomic bomb did not win the war against Japan. The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace before the atomic age was announced to the world with the destruction of Hiroshima and before the Russian entry into the war….’

In an interview with Newsweek, November 11, 1963, former President Eisenhower declared,

‘that he had opposed dropping the bomb for two reasons: First, the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing. Second, I hated to see our country to be the first to use such a weapon.’

Admiral William D. Leahy, in his book says,

‘…. It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagaski was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons.

It was my reaction that the scientists and others wanted to make this test because of the vast sums that had been spent on the project…’

It is desirable for the record also to call attention to the observations on the dropping of the bomb by other leaders at the time. Lord Hankey, a member of the British War Cabinet states:

‘… The leaders of the Western Allies decided at Potsdam in July, 1945, to resort to the ultimate expedient of the Atom bomb. It was a strange and risky decision. They knew that the bomb was the most cruel and deadly weapon that had ever been produced, and that it effects would fall indiscriminately on civilian and military targets. They knew that Japan had already approached Russia with a view to peace discussions. They knew that Russia was on the point of declaring war on Japan. Yet in this fatuous fight for a phrase, they would not pause to seek some more normal means of obtaining the terms they needed, nor would they wait to learn the effect of the Russian declaration of war.

   There is no published evidence to show that they even inquired  whether the use of the bomb was consistent with international law…. 

    … If the enemy had solved the atomic problem and used the bomb first, its employment would have been included in the allied list of war crimes, and those who took the decision or who prepared and used the bomb, would have been condemned and hanged.'”