Biden Administration Calls For Censorship

“This is not just about what the government can do, this is about companies and individuals recognizing that the only way we get past misinformation is if we are careful about what we say and use the power that we have to limit the spread of misinformation.”

Vivek Murthy
Biden Administration U.S. Surgeon General
Complaining about Joe Rogan’s podcast on Alternative Medicines

Everyone knows that Big Tech is carrying the censorship water for the repressive tolerance (Marcuse) of the left. This is a dog whistle by the Biden administration for Big Tech to slap down any media platform that dares disagree with Big Brother’s narrative. Can you say censorship?

Biden’s Surgeon General,  Vivek Murthy is a second-generation Indian whose parents hale originally from Karnataka, India. Murthy is now in the US screaming as Surgeon General for an end to America’s first amendment guarantee of Freedom of speech. Murthy however is clever enough to insist that the FEDS not get their hand’s dirty censoring instead passing it off to big Tech as the FEDS attack dog.

How long until we get to some kind of social credit program that finds us, like the Chinese, being gigged for speaking our minds in such a way as to violate government standards?

Luther on Imprecatory Praying

We should pray that our enemies be converted and become our friends and, if not, that their doing and designing be bound to fail and have no success and that their persons perish rather than the Gospel and the kingdom of Christ.”

Martin Luther
Luther’s Works, vol. 21: The Sermon on the Mount and the Magnificat, ed. J. Pelikan, A. T. W. Steinhaeuser (St. Louis: Concordia, 1956), p. 1100.

Those who refuse to pray imprecatory prayers are those who are an example of people who are seeking to be “nicer than God.”

The refusal to pray for the destruction of God’s enemies who refuse to turn and be converted is a demonstration of preferring a carnal sympathy for the wicked above making a stand for the Kingdom of God and His righteousness. Why should the wicked who refuse to bow the knee continue to be busy about their plans to tear down God’s Kingdom without knowing that the righteous are pleading for their plan to ruin God’s Kingdom advance be ruined?

There is no neutrality in our prayer life. If we are going to pray “thy Kingdom come thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven,” then we must pray God at the same time for the destruction of all those who would not labor with us to see God’s kingdom come.

Of course, we pray first for their conversion. They are miserable in their sins and it is a requisite and heartfelt kindness to them for us to pray for God to be kind to them by rescuing them from sin just as He was to us in rescuing us from sin. By the same reasoning, it is a requisite and heartfelt kindness to God to pray that the persons of His enemies perish rather than the Gospel and the kingdom if they kick against the goads of God’s command for all men everywhere to repent.

As Christians, we should have great pity for those outside of Christ. Greater still though should be our compassion for the triune God and His authority. Every tear dropped for the wicked and their conversion should be matched by two tears dropped for God and the advancement of His Kingdom and the making known of His glory.

Touching imprecatory prayer Martin Luther was right and Mike Horton and R2K is in error.

“The imprecatory prayers, invoking God’s judgment on the enemies, are appropriate on the lips of David and the martyrs in heaven. However, they are entirely out of place on the lips of Christians today, guided as we are not by the ethics of intrusion but by the ethics of common grace.” 

Dr. Michael Horton

Graduations; Making it by the Skin of my Teeth

It is April of 1977. Sturgis H.S. Graduation is in June. The foster family I am living with receives a letter from the School board telling them that “Bret may not be graduating in June as he is failing a class and will not have enough credits. We are also concerned that he may not meet the GPA allowed to walk.”

My foster parents were understandably freaking out. These incredibly kind people hadn’t bargained for a permanent resident and the plans were I would be on my way to college in August.

I told them … “No problem. I have it all under control.”

They were understandably not convinced.

A little background reveals that the reason I was so low on credits is that I had serious injuries in my Freshman and Junior years that found me unable to take courses like “typing” or “gym” or anything that required physical exertion. Consequently, for at least two years I was at school 6 hours a day but only taking 3 hours of coursework. Nobody ever checked up on that and all I thought was, “FREEDOM.” All that free time was spent playing euchre, paper football, and hob-knobbing with friends who only got 1 hour off every day.

The school board really had pulled the panic button and so scared my Foster family. Maybe they thought I was going to fail a couple of courses in that last semester? I ended up with 18 credits which was the exact number needed in order to graduate. My GPA? A stellar 1.82

All those gym courses from my Freshman and Senior years had saved me.

In June I graduated having passed one uncertain class and finishing a nose hair ahead of the required GPA.

College Graduation was a similar matter of just getting out by the skin of my teeth.

At the beginning of College, I was no better of a student than I was at the end of High School. In retrospect, I viewed Christian College as just a glorified summer church camp. That went on for the first couple of years wherein I failed more credits (classes) than I passed. I had taken it upon myself to major in the arduous degrees of Foosball, Donkey Kong, and assorted hijinks. Most of those classes were held in the student center where the radio blasted Rock -n- Roll whenever it was open. I did become quite accomplished in Foosball where in a mixed doubles campus tournament my partner and I finished second. (I had a wicked push shot from the front line.)  I mastered the Donkey Kong computer game routinely getting past the top level. AND nobody excelled me in hijinks. Indeed, it became a standing joke that if anything untoward happened on campus I was sure to be called into the Dean’s office to be grilled about what I knew. Along the way, I learned that at some point I had been put on a secret probation list. I kid you not.

It wasn’t until the end of my Jr. year it began to slowly dawn on me that I might not graduate if I didn’t kick things into high gear. I began to roll. I took a summer psychology course that would transfer that summer while working 7o hours a week and then in that last year I took 44 credits. There were several classes that were meeting at the same time that found me registered in both classes because I needed to expunge a former failing grade. Graduation required 124 credits to get out. It looked like I’d be graduating with exactly 124 credits. For years afterward I would have nightmares that I failed one of those courses that final year.

However, in March 1982 two months before college graduation in May, the Dean of Students (Rocky Kent) calls me in and tells me … “There is some doubt that we will allow you to graduate despite your big push this last year since you have not attended chapel in the years you have been here.”

Now, Rocky really was a good chap. A quite likable fellow even if he was the target of a good bit of ribald teasing. Being on friendly terms with “the Rock” the following conversation ensued;

Bret — “Chapel was required? Why didn’t anyone ever tell me? I mean I knew they wanted us to go but Rocky, do you realize how boring that Chapel routinely is?”

Observational aside — (Rocky was the College Basketball coach and was well known for working on drawing up his plays during chapel.)

Rocky — “That doesn’t matter. You were required.”

Bret — “So, after I’ve spent all this money and effort you’re suggesting you’re not going to let me graduate? I’m sure there are some lawyers who could make some money off of this scenario.”

Rocky — “Tell you what… if you promise to attend chapel the last two months before you graduate we will call it even and let you graduate.”

Bret — “That’s an awfully high price you are driving there but in order to show that I’m willing to go above and beyond … you’ve got a deal.” Those last two months of mandatory chapels were a raking of my soul. You have no idea how boring Wesleyans can be in their chapel services.

6 weeks later I walked earning my B.S. in History, Religion/Philosophy, and Political Science. However, even that was contested as the Registrar who had known me fairly well (and wasn’t really a fan) insisted up and down that there was no way I would be awarded three majors. She kept protesting and I just kept responding with … “Gee, Sue, you’ll have to take that up with my Academic Advisor as he’s the one who is guiding me in all this.”

Each time I responded with that phrase she became more and more adamant as seen in the increase of the volume and the pitch of her voice. One would have thought that we were negotiating over the possibility of her losing her virginity.

I finally received my three degrees with a B- average but she was so bitchy about it she had to scrawl the word “unique” on my record. I always laugh at that because I seriously doubt that anyone ever saw her scribble of “unique” on my records.

Finally, there was Seminary. This became another skin of the teeth moment in terms of Graduation. Grades or credits here were not the problems. I graduated with plenty of credits to spare and I had a solid 3.4 GPA. Because of taking on employment with United Airlines in Columbia, SC I added an extra semester to my three years taking two easy/cheesy courses that last semester. I filed all the requisite papers and I was all in the chute to graduate that following May.

However, I hit a snag. It wasn’t chapel this time. I had got a signed excuse from the Dean of Students because of my work schedule. (Chapel in Seminary wasn’t a lick better than Chapel in undergrad.) The snag I hit this time was named Dr. Jay Sensinig. Dr. Jay had shown up my final year to take over what is now called the practicum program of Seminary. When I was in seminary it was called “Field Education.” Here was a course that wasn’t a course. One did not pay for the credits of Field Ed. One did not have assigned classes for Field Education but I found out too late that, due to Dr. Jay’s improvement of the system when he took over one did have to turn in paperwork. Now, in my defense, I did not spend very much time on campus after the 1st year and as such, I wasn’t really tuned into new requirements. Therein lie the snag. I had turned in zero Field Education reports and without those Field Education reports, I was told, I could not graduate.

So, I did the natural thing. I went to see Dr. Jay. Dr. Jay was adamant that I turn in three years of Field Education reports. Now, you can ask my wife, but trust me when I tell you I just don’t have a memory for the kind of busywork that the Psychologist Dr. Jay was asking of me. I had been busy in the Church I had attended but in terms of providing the lesson plans for three years, and the detailed work explaining my going door to door evangelism, or teaching children’s Sunday School, or serving on the Church’s steering committee well that was completely gone.

So, I had to write a novel for Dr. Jay. You know, historical fiction? I made up lesson plans (who remembers what they taught in children’s Sunday School from three years ago? For that matter, who makes up a lesson plan when teaching 8-year-olds?), I gave the highlights I could remember from my door to door Evangelism Explosion work, I gave what info I could for other things but some of those things were still pretty sensitive as the Church I served went through some very hard times and I didn’t want to be spilling that stuff everywhere …. especially for the shrink Dr. Jay.

I finally put it all together and set up a time for a meeting up with him.  I sat it all on his desk and he let me know that it wasn’t satisfactory and that quite without looking at it. It seems he didn’t like my attitude. I know … hard to believe right?

And so there I was ready to walk in May of 88 but Dr. Jay would not approve and so I didn’t graduate in 1988. Nor in 1989 as he was still holding it and I was now 6 months into being called to Pastor a church. Finally, in 1990 he relented and gave his stamp of approval.

Later I found out that there had been a confab meeting about what to do about my status and my degree. I found out because the chap who had been the Dean of Students (Dr. Joe Parker — a great bloke) had taken the Southern Baptist pulpit 9 miles up the road from where I was serving in an Independent Presbyterian Church. Joe and I worked together on joint community projects and services along with a chap from the Episcopal Church and a fellow from the PCA work up the road. Joe was also still working as the Dean of Students when my case came up as to whether or not they were going to give me my sheepskin. There was a great deal of anguish coming from Dr. Jay (did I tell you he was a shrink by trade?) and from a chap named Lee Toomey who ran the work service program on campus. Lee complained that I was less than enthusiastic and cooperative when it came to my giving the school free labor that I was informed existed after I moved from Maine to South Carolina. Lee was also in charge of parking and I had a bad habit of parking in the wrong spots. Lee didn’t like that. Mea culpa, mea culpa, maxima mea culpa.

So, those were two strong voices speaking out against me being conferred. However, I had the office of the Dean of students speaking for me. Dr. Earl McQuay was the senior guy in the office and Dr. McQuay had been part of a student small group that I led for one year in Seminary. Dr. McQuay was a dear man who had suffered the loss of an adult son years prior. Some of that loss came out in our small study group and we wept with one another. Both Dr. Parker and Dr. McQuay were genuine friends though each was a generation older than me and they stuck with me though Joe Parker told me that “it was a close call. I didn’t know if you were going to make it.”

So, in 1990, 30 months after I completed my course work I was finally given my Seminary degree.


Breaking Down Bavinck

“In abandoning an absolute standard for judging good and evil, scholars attempt to utilize statistics and history to evaluate what would in the future be regarded as normative in terms of truth, law, and ethics. “The greatest happiness for the greatest number” becomes the sole norm in religion, morality, logic, and aesthetics. In itself, everything is a private matter—a matter of taste and passion or of character and education.

But because this would lead to licentious arbitrariness, individualism needs to be subdued by socialism. Science, represented by an Areopagus of scholars, must therefore prescribe to everyone, on the basis of their own analysis, what constitutes truth. They have the highest authority . . . They must now authoritatively proclaim the dogmas and norms which govern all of human life. On the basis of historical and statistical analysis, they must proclaim whether monotheism or polytheism, truth or lies, marriage or debauchery is to be preferred.

The only force, Clavel proclaims, which has the privilege of demanding faith and obedience, is science. It must prescribe, on the basis of facts, what is good for the family, the nation, and humanity as a whole. If society is benefitted more by lies than by truth, these two would have to swap places, because mankind does not exist for the sake of truth, but truth for the sake of mankind, from whom and through whom it exists. The timelessness of moral principles consists only in becoming timeless at the hand of man. And in order to ensure obedience to social dictates, the state has to enforce it by means of violence.”

Herman Bavinck

Philosophy of Science

Translator — Adi Schlebush

1.) When one rids the transcendent God who has come close to us in the eternal Word, the incarnate Word, and the inscripturated Word from one’s thinking then a new transcendent must be sought out in order to provide temporal unity to all the temporal particulars of life.

2.) Bavinck contends that the new transcendent God becomes statistics and history. The problem with these is obvious though. The problem is that in making statistics and history to be normative one has made man to be God since it is the mortal statistician who collects the “data” and it is a mortal historian who writes the history. In the former, we remember Twain (citing Disraeli) saying that there are  “There are three  kinds of lies: lies, damned  lies, and statistics.” In the latter, we divinize the historian and have embraced historicism. Consequently, in taking up statistics and history as our new norm that will norm all norms we have not rid ourselves of God. Instead, we have merely transposed the quality of godness to some man or men (statisticians and historians).

3.) The greatest good for the greatest number that Bavinck cites is the motto of pragmatism. Pragmatism is an illusion as there is no way that anybody could ever know what is the greatest good for the greatest number nor could any equation ever be established in order to determine all the variants that were possible in order to determine the greatest good for the greatest number.

4.) Apart from force, in the abandoning of God as a transcendent reality who gives objective meaning to everything what is left is pure subjectivism as those who are epistemologically self-conscious each do what is right in their own eyes. This is Bavinck’s point about everything becoming a private matter.

5.) When man becomes ultimate as the individual anarchy is the consequence. As such there must be created an equal humanist ultimate (one) for the equal humanist many. This is where socialism enters. Scientific Socialism (so-called) takes on the mantle of God walking on the earth in order that there might be a humanist order. This conflict between anarchistic humanism and humanistic Scientific socialism was the conflict that raged between Max Stirner and Marx.

6.) Pay attention here to the reality that what Bavinck wrote over 100 years ago is now what is rising in the West. Bavinck here was reading the stitches on the fastball coming. Clearly, we are living in a time where we have an Areopagus of scholars covering their authority with the fig leaf of science seeking to dictate to us as gods what mask, jab, and distancing by which we must abide. Such men have arisen and will continue to arise to do the same thing in the other areas that Bavinck mentions.  It’s all humanist bull-scat.

7.) In Bavinck’s last paragraph he predicts postmodernism in a subtle fashion. When Bavinck notes that when truth is not convenient it will be changed out for lies,  he is noting that truth will become completely arbitrary as it serves the interests of the elite in whatever way they desire. The idea of truth existing for the sake of mankind is just more humanism. Man will live by whatever truth he desires.

8.) In this scenario, we see in our situation that the FEDS have become the mercenary army (Bavincks requisite “violence”) for the Scientists with the consequence that they use their tyrannical power to ensure that everybody has absolute freedom (license-licentiousness) to pursue any deviant end while at the same time exercising that tyrannical power against anyone who insists that there is a standard about the Scientists and the FEDS by which all norms are normed — including the FEDS, their Scientists, and perverted and deviant rabble.

Bavinck was a genius. He is someone you should be familiar with along with Dabney, Rushdoony, Bahnsen, Gordon H. Clark, Christopher Dawson, Chesterton, to name only a few.

ATT Commercial

I couldn’t help but comment on this 39 seconds commercial.

1.) ATT brags that everyone gets the same great deals. However, if everyone gets the same great deals nobody is getting a great deal.

2.) Note the little girl complains “hey, that’s not fair,” after her brother receives a free larger lollipop than the free lollipop that she received.

How American.

In reality, as it is the giver of the lollipop’s prerogative to give freely whatever size lollipop they desire how can it be unfair if they, as the owner and distributor of the lollipops decide to give different size lollipops to different people? What would have been fair in the scenario was for neither of the children to receive a lollipop.

3.) ATT is selling envy with this commercial. The consumer is being taught to be envious of what someone else has that has been freely given to them as opposed to being content with a gift.