Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne, Yet that scaffold sways the future, and, behind the dim unknown, Standeth God within the shadow, keeping watch above his own.
The following is a comment left by one of the young ladies who attends the same Church I do. If I could I would stand and applause this response by Aimee because it reminds me that a little leaven can leaven the whole loaf.
Throughout (Piper’s) whole piece, John Piper establishes a false dichotomy between defending yourself with a gun and trusting Jesus. It’s not either/or. Especially in his 9th point, Piper allows that God does expect us to fend for ourselves in a way, (“Even though the Lord ordains for us to use ordinary means of providing for life [work to earn; plant and harvest; take food, drink, sleep, and medicine; save for future needs; provide governments with police and military forces for society”]) and yet Piper drastically draws a line at self defense (“nevertheless, the unique calling of the church is to live in such reliance on heavenly protection and heavenly reward that the world will ask about our hope [1 Peter 3:15], not about the ingenuity of our armed defenses.”) without much of an explanation as why the line should be drawn there. Why is working to provide money for food, clothes, and housing not considered a contradiction to the call to live in “reliance on heavenly protection?” ~ I think it’s much more trusting to stop working and depend on God for my meal. That way people will have no doubt as to where my hope is.~ In the Lord’s prayer we are instructed to ask God for our daily bread, but most of the time God provides that bread through providing a job that will pay for the bread. The job is the means to God’s provision that God established. Likewise, carrying a gun is also a means of God’s provision for my protection.
I’m also reminded of the false dichotomy between corporeal and spiritual. The verse itself in every version I’ve seen does not use the words “physical” or “material.” Instead it uses “carnal,” or “of this world.” It makes sense that the not “of this world” would be similar to the way Jesus used it in His response to Pilate in John 18:36 in that it does not receive its power from this world. Our weapons are spiritual in that they are helping to establish a spiritual battle. Any object in a Christian’s hand can be a spiritual weapon. The laptops that were used to type out Biblical responses to Piper’s heretical views are spiritual laptops. A gun used to protect God’s people and the judicially innocent are spiritual weapons.
The fact that we are no longer a “nation” can be accounted by the invasion, since 1965, of alien peoples from alien cultures. What Americans and the West can’t seem to understand is that this non-European immigration invasion, assured by the 1965 Immigration Act with its opening of the borders to the non-European world, is a colonization and a conquering of this territory once called “these united States.” It is the replacement of the previous people and culture in favor of a differing people and culture. The passage of said legislation was a masterful piece of lying from beginning to end. Sen. Teddy Kennedy, one of the chief sponsors of the Bill promised,
“First, our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same…
Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset… Contrary to the charges in some quarters, [the bill] will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area, or the most populated and deprived nations of Africa and Asia…
In the final analysis, the ethnic pattern of immigration under the proposed measure is not expected to change as sharply as the critics seem to think… The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs.”
Sen. Teddy Kennedy was a lot of things but stupid was not one of them. Kennedy, along with Sen. Philip Hart, Sen. Jacob Javits, Emanuel Cellar and others could not be so blind as to not know that the Hart-Cellar act would fundamentally transform America from a WASP nation to a Propositional Universal nation.
In this 1965 Act America was certain to cease being a nation, if only because the heart and soul of a nation is its people. The 1965 Immigration Act guaranteed the replacement of the nation’s people and so in principle, killed the American Nation that existed in 1965 in favor of a Universal Propositional Nation that exists now. In the words of Bertolt Brecht, what the Government did in 1965 was to dissolve the people and elect another.
That Universal Propositional Nation is a failure. The Liberal magic dirt theory that posited that non-Christian Europeans would instantly become Christian Americans simply by setting their foot on American soil has demonstrated instead that Somalian cliterectomies, and Arab “Allahu Akbahr barking,” and the third world sex trafficking doesn’t cease just because new arrivals from non Christian European countries have US soil under their feet.
‘Anyone who claims that open borders is a Marxist and Communist policy is an idiot who understand neither Marxism nor history.’
Bojidar Marinov
My only grievance with the former Communist and now Libertarian Bojidar Marinov is that he is so often wrong and yet still taken so seriously by formerly Theonomic organizations like American Vision and Chalcedon. In this quote we find yet another example of how egregious Mr. Marinov’s error usually is.
First, we should note that Karl Marx promoted a stateless border-less world. The abolition of the state was the central point of Marxism. This fact is echoed by Marx’s co-laborer Engels. When asked, “What will be the attitude of communism to existing nationalities, Engels responded by saying,
“The nationalities of the peoples associating themselves in accordance with the principle of community will be compelled to mingle with each other as a result of this association and thereby to dissolve themselves, just as the various estate and class distinctions must disappear through the abolition of their basis, private property.”
Secondly, we need to remember that the Communists promoted immigration. It was emigration that the Communists so strigently controlled. Americans were free to leave America and move to the Soviet Union or East Germany back in the 1950’s. So, they championed porous borders to enter but closed borders to leave. The Communists were vicious about closed borders but that was because they didn’t want anybody to get out of their Utopian paradise. The Marxist talk today about “open borders,” is the talk of “open borders” in a Communist New World Order where it would not be possible for anyone to escape. “You can go to any Communist Country you want to go to Comrade.”
Thirdly, Mr. Marinov’s call for “open borders” is misleading, and deliberately so. This nomenclature is intended to foster the illusion that one can be both open and closed. It is akin to advocating for pregnant virgins. Such language borders on lunacy. Retaining the word for “borders” in an “open borders” policy does not mean you have actually retained the borders. By opening them, you destroy them. If your policy is openness, openness is what you have. You are no longer closed off and so you no longer have borders. Pull the door off of your house and you soon cease to have a house. Why? Because one of the things making it a house was its door. The walls will soon follow as invaders tear them down using the hole that was formerly a door.
There is no way to have a national area that is both open and closed. It is difficult to imagine that Mr. Marinov does not understand this. You can have integrity in your borders, or you can have dissipation and lack of national definition. You cannot have both. What illness could possibly explain the fantasy of having both openness AND borders?
Thirdly, Mr. Marinov is just in error with his statement as this quote from Marxist theorist Karl Kautsky, demonstrates,
“Very differently from the apprentice or the merchant is the modern proletarian torn loose from the soil. He becomes a citizen of the world; the whole world is his home.
No doubt this world-citizenship is a great hardship for the workers in countries where the standard of living is high and the conditions of labor are comparatively good. In such countries, naturally, immigration will exceed emigration. As a result the laborers with the higher standard of living will be hindered in their class-struggle by the influx of those with a lower standard and less power of resistance.
Under certain circumstances this sort of competition, (that we Marxists are calling for) like that of the capitalists, may lead to a new emphasis on national lines, a new hatred of foreign workers on the part of the native born. But the conflict of nationalities, which is perpetual among the capitalists, can be only temporary among the proletarians. For sooner or later the workers will discover that the immigration of cheap labor-power from the more backward to the more advanced countries, is as inevitable a result of the capitalist system as the introduction of machinery or the forcing of women into industry.
In still another way does the labor movement of an advanced country suffer under the influence of the backward conditions of other lands. The high degree of exploitation endured by the proletariat of the economically undeveloped nations becomes an excuse for the capitalists of the more highly developed ones for opposing any movement in the direction of higher wages or better conditions.
In more than one way, then, it is borne in upon the workers of each nation that their success in the class-struggle is dependent on the progress of the working-class of other nations. For a time this may turn them against foreign workers, but finally they come to see that there is only one effective means of removing the hindering influence of backward nations: to do away with the backwardness itself. German workers have every reason to co-operate with the Slavs and Italians in order that these may secure higher wages and a shorter working-day; the English workers have the same interest in relation to the Germans, and the Americans in relation to Europeans in general.
The dependence of the proletariat of one land on that of another leads inevitably to a joining of forces by the militant proletarians of various lands.
The survivals of national seclusion and national hatred which the proletariat took over from the bourgeoisie, disappear steadily. The working-class is freeing itself from national prejudices. Working-men learn more and more to see in the foreign laborer a fellow-fighter, a comrade.
The strongest bonds of international solidarity, naturally, are those which bind groups of proletarians, which, though of different nationalities, have the same purposes and use the same methods to accomplish them.’
Here is an explicit statement by a known Marxist on the positive good that immigration and open borders are to Marxist.
Mr. Marinov, once again, despite his cocksure confidence, is in major error on this matter. Given all that has been adduced here we must ask Mr. Marinov, “Who is the idiot” and “Who is the one who does not understand either Marxism nor History.”
How many times does someone have to be wrong before American Vision and Chalcedon quit listening to him?
_______________
Assists for this post goes to Habakkuk Mucklewrath, Martin Svetislav, Colby Malsbury
Dr. Peter Jones has been a great benefactor to the Christian Church in the West with his work on Gnosticism, Egalitarian Pantheism, and Oneism. Via his various works his has been a prophetic voice warning the Church of a worldview switch that is already upon us. The greatest threat to the Church and the West is what he calls “Oneism,” but could just as easily be called “systematic Cultural Marxism.” He mentions Cultural Marxism but his focus is more on Karl Jung and Jung’s disciples. He locates animistic type religion in Jung’s psychoanalysis and insists that the goal of this religious Cultural Marxism is “thus all men Shamans.”
Dr. Peter Jones relates that the problem of the Jung(ians) is that they live in a Cosmos that is defined by Outsidelessness. This is another way of saying that there is no Transcendent Reference point by which meaning can be determined. Without a Transcendent outsidedness (that is also Trinitarian and so personal) what results is man sinking into himself to find meaning and to discover the divinity within.
This new Monistic Cultural Marxist religion is committed to the New Age goal of combining the opposites. This gives us a “beyond good and evil” morality where each man does what is right in his own eyes. Of course this is just another way of embracing the Hegelian dialectic of Marxism.
What has happened in our lifetimes is that we have moved from a Monistic Humanistic materialism where spiritual realities were folded into material reality to a Monistic Humanistic spiritualsim where material realities are now folded into spiritual reality. Both humanisms are Monistic with the only difference being that during the Enlightenment age that which was genuinely spiritual was reduced to the material whereas now that which is genuinely material is reduced to being categorized as spiritual. When one looks at the modern sciences of Quantum indeterminacy, quantum holism, and quantam non-locality (sub sets of Quantum physics) along with Quantum mechanics one begins to see a “science” that is more friendly to the New Ageist Spirituality of Eastern Mysticism and Western Romanticism.
In this new gnostic Monism the goal is the elimination of not only Modernity but also of Biblical Christianity. All of the distinctions that one finds in Biblical Christianity are eliminated in favor of the merging of the opposites. As a result we can speak of now of a Homocosmology, Homostoricism, Homorality, as well as Homosexuality. Indeed so great is the push for the elimination of distinctions that Jones’ opines that a day is coming when Biblical Christianity will be criminalized. The sodomites are NOT interested in equality folks. They are interested in turning normalcy into the aberrant.
Jones’ goes out of his way to agree with what I’ve been saying since I was 30 and that is psychiatry and psychology are the cutting edge expressions of this new religion that intends to crush Biblical Christianity. My angst at this confirmation is that much of the Church and Church Mission agencies have already redefined themselves in terms of the Monistic psychiatry and psychology that Jones’ warns against. It has been the case for years that in many denominations one cannot enter into the ministry or missionary field without first submitting to a battery of Monistic humanistic psychological exams, as well as- required time spent with the Denominational Shrink – Shaman. What has happened is that instead of these fields being reinterpreted through a biblical grid (if indeed that is even possible) the disciplines of humanistic shamanistic psychology have reinterpreted Christianity through their Monistic – gnostic grids. You can be sure that Christ’s Church has suffered as a result of this.
As a criticism of the book, I’m not convinced that Jones’ himself has extirpated all the Monism from himself that he so clearly sees elsewhere. In point of fact, given some of Jones’ complaint about “Institutional racism,” and “Institutional Sexism” one wonders if Jones’ despite his excellent work here hasn’t himself swallowed a poison pill of Monistic making.
I’ve read most of Jones’ published work now and viewed many many of his lectures. That should tell you that I value his work. In point of fact I think it is indispensable given our time and historical situation. When combined with more thorough works on Cultural Marxism and Postmodernism by other authors I think one has the opportunity to see Christianity’s greatest worldview opponent at this time.
In ending I think it should be said again that Radical Two Kingdom theology works perfectly in tandem with what Dr. Jones calls “Oneism.” R2K, in its most virulent and consistent forms, insists that the public square is, by definition, a-religious. As such Christians have no business in trying to appeal to Christianity in order to set aright the inroads of “Oneism.” R2K aids “Oneism” by not only not resisting to Oneism but by suggesting that it is sin to resist to “Oneism.”
“This Utopian vision (of a kind of egalitarian Pantheism) has a long spiritual history. The ideal of the alchemists of the Middle Ages involved ‘the uniting of the opposites …the fusion of male and female, .good and evil, life and death — whose union, they believed, eventually created the perfected and completed, ideal personality called Self. The Utopian cosmology in question understands how deeply the Christian faith has molded Western culture and intends to destroy the ‘bourgeois’ Judaeo-Christian culture as the first step toward a better world. To accomplish this, its advocates must weaken the culture systematically in its economy, its military, its psychology, and its morals.They also know what it will take to establish a revived pagan cosmology and will not tolerate half measures. They want all or nothing. The goal is the complete remaking of human identity.
We cannot see into the future to know if the agenda will succeed, but we need to face squarely the movement that is attempting to wrest our culture from its tenuous grip on Twoist (i.e. — God Transcendent) principles. At this point, such a powerful cosmology takes on an unmistakably religious character. One is reminded of the goal of the occult Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn…. “The Great Work, is, before all things, the creation of man by himself, that is to say, the full and entire conquest of his faculties, and his future; it is especially the prefect emancipation of his will.”
Sternberg’s analysis of “world purificationists” is right but does not go far enough… It fails to capture the true power of the movement: its possession of a new liberating cosmology, including not just politics and economics but sexuality and spirituality. The sociological analysis, joined to the ideology of revolutionary sexual and spiritual liberation, forms a powerfully influential movement, determined to reinvent the world. Indeed, as politics becomes more all-inclusive, it becomes more religious, claiming to answer all human aspirations, physical and spiritual, and to usher in a better world. ”
Dr. Peter Jones
The Other Worldview; Exposing Christianity’s Greatest Threat — pg. 98
1.) Jones’ conviction (easily sustained) is that the West is moving from its religious and historic foundation wherein a Transcendent God is presupposed to a religious foundation where a extramundane Transcendent personal God is scrubbed.
2.) This new worldview upon which, and by which, the West will operate is “Egalitarian Pantheism.” This is the idea that all is One (Monism) and that any distinction is Maya (illusion). This monist Egalitarian Pantheism posits an “Outsidelessness” to the Cosmos. It is an extension of the “God is Dead” movement started by Old Scratch in Eden, advocated for by Nietzsche in the 20th century, and proclaimed as arrived in the 60’s by process theologians.
This new worldview accounts for much of the degradation of the West since it provides the justification for the whole “social construct” theorizing that we are pummeled with today. Since there is no extramundane transcendent God by which to give meaning and definition to anything, therefore anything that previously had a stable meaning and definition is now open for change since without the Christian God all that is left is social construct. So, if man was really the one that constructed the idea of gender (as one example) then man can be the one who deconstructs gender. As such, since there is no “Outsidedness” to our Cosmos individual men can construct for themselves all and any meaning they might desire. So, men with penises can still be female in gender due to this Egalitarian Pantheism. In Canada a married man with 7 children decided that he was really a six year old little girl. In a Egalitarian Pantheistic worldview, where God is dead, who is to say that Stefonknee Wolschtt isn’t a six year old little girl?
3.) This is Existenialism come into its own. Given the philosophical arc that the West has been on for the last 200 years we have arrived at the point that was inevitable from the moment philosophy anchored itself in Descartes “Cogito ergo sum.”
4.) This Pantheistic Egalitarianism insists that it provides a moral construct that is “beyond good and evil.” As such any notion of moral policing is pass’e. However, we must keep in mind that this “beyond good and evil” is a contradiction since what is being advocated is that the morality that is “beyond good and evil” is good, while the morality that is not “beyond good and evil,” is evil.
“Do I contradict myself Very well, then I contradict myself, I am large I contain multitudes.”
Walt Whitman Song of Myself
5.) In this Pantheistic Egalitarianism, with its putative “beyond good and evil” morality there is the attempt to fuse the opposites. This is a new age version of the Hegelian dialectic wherein the thesis and antithesis are fused into a synthesis. Because of this attempt at fusion there is the conviction that in order for one to be “self-actualized” one must have within themselves both the virtues of a Chairman Mao and the virtues of a Mother Theresa at the same time.
This idea of “fusion of the opposites,” also underlies much of the perversity in our current sexuality. Homosexuality, Transgenderism, bisexuality, etc. are all, at some level, being driven by Egalitarian Pantheism and the desire to fuse the opposites. To fuse the opposites is the sacrament of Egalitarian Pantheism.
6.) Dr. Jones talks about the necessity to weaken the Christian worldview which supports the current culture that yet retains vestiges of Biblical Christianity. Militarily this was pursued, first, with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” and now with the full blown reception of the perverted into the ranks of the US Military. In the economy it has been pursued by the mega corporations marketing to the perverted clientele. In psychology it has been pursued by the mainstreaming of sodomy back in 1973 by the American Psychiatric Association’s removing “homosexuality” as a mental illness from its DSM. Of course the most recent weakening came in the Obergefell vs. Hodges decision in the Summer of 2015. Hollywood pursues this worldview relentlessly. Movies such as “The Matrix,” “Interstellar,” “Star Wars,” and “Noah,” all send out the message of Egalitarian Pantheism. The “anti-bullying” laws in Government schools is another means by which Egalitarian Pantheism is pursued. Anti-bullying laws are sold as egalitarian but their real purpose is to protect and mainstream sexual perversion in the schools belonging to the State.
7.) Note Jones’ comment about the desire of Pantheistic Egalitarianism to completely remake human identity. The champions of this new worldview will eventually push for the criminalizing of all those who retain a Transcendent God in their thinking and who insist that the reality of God impact the public square. All will be forced to support this Egalitarian Pantheism. Any churches that remain will be churches that have reinterpreted Biblical Christianity through a Egalitarian Pantheistic grid. It is already the case that the majority of churches in the West already do so, to one degree or another. Like the Hebrews in the Old Testament who dragged in their idols into God’s Temple to worship those idols so the Church in the West today has dragged in the idol of Egalitarian Pantheism into the sanctuary.
8.) Since there is no extramundane God in Egalitarian Pantheism the sovereign Self is absolutized and in essence becomes the god of the system. All is done for the glory of the sovereign self. Any whim is to be embraced, any idea of “self-control,” or any notion of boundaries or limitations is to be eschewed. All is the self and the self is all. This is the sodomite poet Walt Whitman redux,
I CELEBRATE myself, and sing myself, And what I assume you shall assume, For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you.
I loafe and invite my soul, I lean and loafe at my ease observing a spear of summer grass.
My tongue, every atom of my blood, form’d from this soil, this air,
Born here of parents born here from parents the same, and their parents the same,
I, now thirty-seven years old in perfect health begin, Hoping to cease not till death.
Creeds and schools in abeyance,
Retiring back a while sufficed at what they are, but never forgotten,
I harbor for good or bad, I permit to speak at every hazard, Nature without check with original energy.
“Song of Myself”
9.) Note the religious character of all this. As we have already noted the fusing of the opposites is the Egalitarian Pantheism’s sacrament. The Shaman-Priest is found in every man. All is god and god is all. The catechism of Egalitarian Pantheism is provided by Hollywood films. Worship occurs wherever and whenever orgasm takes place. There are Saints such as St. Alfred Kinsey, St. Hugh Hefner, St. Ron Jermy, St. Larry Flynt, St. Traci Lords, St. Janine Lindemulder, St. Jenna Haze and St. Tori Black. Egalitarian Pantheism could have a Saint for every day of the year. Of course, this proves again, that religion is an inescapable concept. Religion never goes away. The renown poet William Blake understood this well,
“Man must & will have Some Religion; if he has not the Religion of Jesus, he will have the Religion of Satan, & will erect the Synagogue of Satan, calling the Prince of this World, God; and destroying all who do not worship Satan under the Name of God.”
10.) Note the role of politics. Via Political diktat and legislative tyranny men and women will be forced into Egalitarian Pantheism. This was apparent in 2015 as seen in the attempt by the Lesbian Mayor of Houston, Anise Parker, to force public bathrooms to be co-ed. This is apparent in the Obergefell vs. Hodges decision. You will submit to Egalitarian Pantheism or you will be a non-person.