FBI Discovered Tyler Robinson Note – It All Makes Sense Now

My Dearest Trannie Paramour – Kitten,

After shooting a larger than life world known celebrity I wanted to sit down and write you a Shakespearean sonnet. All the things pressing on my mind right now evaporate when I think about you. It may be true that everybody’s looking for me but not to worry sweet-pea  … I can afford 15 minutes of time to sit here and write you this essay. I mean what is love if you can’t take a few minutes to sit down and write your love interest in the context of a massive manhunt?

I wanted to take the knowledge of my committing this crime to my grave but since it’s just you and I talking here with no threat of anyone ever being able to dredge up this communication I thought I would give you every bit of information that the FEDS might need, if they discovered this, to convict me. I know how understanding you can be, what with your silly sexy pronouns.

With all this manhunt surrounding me the one thing I’m worried about is how mad Dad’s going to be for my losing Grandpa’s rifle. Grandpa loved his Mauser and Dad’s really going to be mad at me about leaving this .30-06 Mauser of Grandpa’s behind. I suppose Dad could be mad at me about this assassination trouble but I know he’s really going to be steamed about losing Grandpa’s rifle. You think Grandpa will ever forgive me?

Oh… did I mention that I left a palm print on the stock. Silly me. You know how forgetful I can be.

But I did remember to bring a couple changes of attire.

Well, I hope I got all this punctuation correct. You know how I hate grammar errors.

Anyway …. I want you to know I did this all for you sweet-pea.

Hugs & Kisses
XXXOOXO

Tyler Robinson

P. S. – Wouldn’t it be crazy if they tried to pin all this on the Bagels?

P. P. S. – I’m super worried about getting caught but it’s OK cause I’m going to turn myself in.

And Then An R2K Fan-Boy Showed Up In The Comments

Some chap named “Jackson Stead” showed up in the comments section to dispute my take on R2K. I’m always in for a good polemical go.

Jackson Stead wrote,

This critique (against R2K) misrepresents both the metaphysical and theological framework of Reformed Two Kingdom (R2K) doctrine.

1. Christ’s Kingship is Not Denied

R2K affirms Christus Rex. Christ rules all things, including the civil and ecclesial spheres. The distinction is not between realms of truth but of office: church and state are both under His providential kingship, but exercise different delegated authorities. The state bears the sword for justice; the church administers Word and sacrament for salvation. These are real, divinely ordained institutions with distinct final causes.

Bret responds;

1.) R2K DOES deny Christ’s Kingship by muting it for the common realm and placing it under a different sceptre. Christ does not rule explicitly in the common realm per R2K but only implicitly via Natural Law. This whole R2K conception of Natural Law has been disputed not only by us Presuppositionalists/Theonomists but also by the non-R2K natural law guys like Stephen Wolfe. So, both you chaps and the Wolfe chaps appeal to this obvious Natural Law but you cannot agree on the reading of this putatively obvious “Natural Law.” It seems Natural Law is not as obvious on this matter as you would like it to be and Christ’s ruling “by His left hand” in the common realm by Natural Law is quite up for dispute.

Of course the preferred understanding is that there is one Kingdom with different jurisdictions wherein we find Christ’s appointment as stewards over those differing respective jurisdictions. In such a way these realms are both independent and yet interdependent. Independent because they each have been assigned different roles and responsibilities (Church = grace [Keys]/ Civil Social = justice [sword] / Family = discipline [Rod]).

You’re reading and all Natural Law readings creates a Gnostic dualism. It ends up giving us a Gnostic Jesus ruling over a Gnostic Kingdom.

Jackson Stead wrote,

2. Preaching and the Limits of Office

The pulpit is the instrument of the Church’s office. It declares the gospel and moral law as illuminated by Scripture and natural reason. That includes denouncing injustice—but within its mode and end. The Church does not legislate, prosecute, or campaign. It witnesses. Confusing the offices—making the pulpit a political stump—usurps the state’s vocation and undermines the Church’s own.

Bret responds,

2.) The Keys are the instrument of the Church’s office. Via the Keys the Kingdom of God is opened and closed. Via the Keys Word and Sacrament are given to the end of building up the body of Christ. The whole idea of natural reason is a piece with Natural law. Natural reason is fallen and so only redeemed reason as considering the Word and the good and necessary consequences from the Word instructs and guides God’s people. The Church clearly has a role in speaking to the State as seen throughout Scripture. (John the Baptist denounced Herod for His crimes, Jesus called Herod “that Fox,” The proclamation that “there is no other name under heaven by which you must be saved” was a challenge to the Worldly authorities as the usual proclamation of Caesar was “there is no other name under heaven by which you must be saved” referring to Caesar.) Then there was the accusation against Jason and the Christians,

Acts 17:6 But when they could not find them, they dragged Jason and some other brothers before the city officials, shouting, “These men who have turned the world upside down have now come here, 7and Jason has welcomed them into his home. They are all defying Caesar’s decrees, saying that there is another king, named Jesus!”

You may not think that the Church should speak to Caesar but these chaps in Ephesus sure thought that was what was happening.

The Church does indeed not prosecute, except on those rare occasions when it has to practice interposition, but it does campaign for righteousness. This is something we read about during the run up to the War of American Independence with all those Reformed Pastors prosecuting in the Pulpits the injustice of the Crown against God’s Word. Of course, part of the Reformed clergy’s complaint at the time was the intent of the Crown to place a Anglican Bishop over the Colonies.

Your understanding empties the office of the Minister of his needed prophetic voice under sovereign Christ. You accuse me of confusing the offices. I accuse you of neutering the office.

Jackson Stead wrote,

3. Historic Examples Misapplied

Ambrose confronted Theodosius as bishop on moral grounds, not as a rival magistrate. Likewise, the Black Robed Regiment often overstepped. Charles Hodge, cited, explicitly distinguished the Church’s spiritual voice from civil action. His warning was about silencing moral witness, not collapsing jurisdictions.

Bret Responds,

3.) Historical examples were properly applied. You just don’t like the implications. The idea that Ambrose didn’t confront Theodosius as a rival magistrate is just ludicrous. Do you think anyone would have listened to Ambrose if he had not been wearing that Bishop vestment? In terms of Hodge maybe we should go w/ A. A. Hodge since you have misinterpreted Charles;

“Christianity should be recognized publicly by this country. Christ should be recognized in the law of our land as the Supreme Ruler of our nation. I am a member of a society striving for this end; the principle is right, whatever our success may be. We should insist that if the State has a right to educate she must not educate in infidel history and philosophy, but, in assuming the educator’s function, must obey the Scripture injunction regarding that function — to train the young in the ‘nurture and admonition of the Lord.’”

A. A. Hodge (1823 – 1886)
19th Century American Reformed Theologian

Jackson Stead writes,

4. The Charge of Cowardice Is Baseless

The claim that R2K exists to “build large churches” is speculative and malicious. R2K theology arises from coherent metaphysics: natural ends, secondary causes, and the ordered distinction of powers. It is not pragmatism but principled realism grounded in classical Christian metaphysics and federal theology.

Bret responds,

4.) R2K is a completely novel way of reading Scripture not discovered and developed till Meredith Kline and his chief Romanist – Jesuit trained popularizer David Van Drunen. Van Drunen himself has admitted that it is a novel way of reading Scripture. Just go away. I’ve gone round and round with you poor souls so often that I can age myself in terms of the years I have been over this. If you guys aren’t cowards, you do a fine job of acting like cowards. R2K is coherent the way that Open Theism is coherent. R2K is coherent the way that men being born in women’s bodies is coherent. R2K is coherent the way that Vatican II Papists are coherent.

Finally, your metaphysics are not Christian in the least but are Gnostic and Dualistic. That explains why D. G. Hart (R2K aficionado par excellent) is always talking about living the “hyphenated-life.”

R2K is pure heresy.

Jackson Stead writes,

5. The Real Issue Is Providence and Ends

Civil authority is a temporal good, real and bounded. The Church’s end is eternal. R2K insists that while truth is one, offices are distinct. Denying this confuses grace with nature, eschatology with politics, and risks clerical overreach.

Bret Responds,

5.) No one denies offices are distinct. However, R2K does not make for distinctions but rather makes for divorce with it Gnostic Dualism. R2K is so worried about clerical over-reach that it touts clerical under-reach which is to say that R2K advocates for cowardice. It takes no courage at all to watch the broader culture burn all the while saying, “I am going to stay in my lane.”  It takes no courage at all to tell yourself that you won’t preach on the anti-Christ ideologies of the age because you want to remain holy and above it all. All the while those anti-Christ ideologies are swamping your people so that they reinterpret all of Scripture and all of life through those anti-Christ ideologies that you’re too pure to get involved with. You and your kind are destroying the Church in the West.

And don’t even get me started on your precious militant amillennial eschatology.

Jackson Stead writes,

Summary:

R2K is not cowardice, relativism, or heresy. It is a metaphysically coherent and confessionally grounded doctrine affirming that Christ rules all, but through distinct means. It guards the integrity of both church and state by preserving their God-ordained vocations.

Bret responds,

Dude … I wrote and had published a book on this subject. This is not my first rodeo. You guys are coherent the way that Open Theistis are coherent. You guys are coherent the way that II Vatican Papists are coherent. You guys are coherent the way that a guy who says he was born in a woman’s body are coherent. You are dualistic and Gnostic. Your dualism is seen in the R2K aficionado Dr. D. G. Hart’s love of the phrase, “living the hyphenated-life.” That just a pleasant way of saying that y’all are living the Dualist-life.

Confessionally grounded? LOL … you certainly can’t be serious. I suppose if you chaps are allowed to twist the confessions.

R2K is cowardice, relativism, and heresy. It is a dualistic gnostic soup that is metaphysically incoherent denying the explicit ruling of Jesus Christ over all as King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

You chaps are so cowardly the only time you demonstrate any courage is when you are fighting for the position that the Church should be irrelevant. Should your false system ever win out it will be the destruction of both church and state.

Aunt Boss-Girl & Her Nephew NutGrebe

My slimy Nutgrebe,

With Wormwood’s recent failures that has found both him and his idiot Uncle Screwtape serving as commodes for the eminent one we now turn to you to advance our cause in working with the cursed image bearers.

Be sure that the patients remain completely convinced that the enemy does not have a word for every area of life including politics. Keeping the patient’s thinking that the enemy does not have a specific will regarding their lives in the public square will keep them from thinking on the enemy except in the most shallow and pietistic of ways. Keep whispering in the wind that the foul faith we strike out against is a faith that is unconcerned about “worldly things” like politics or culture.

Make sure and keep the patients in a constant state of heedlessness regarding the despicable Crown Rights of our enemy in these different arenas of life. If you would do your work well, you will have your patient insisting that love requires them not to be judgmental on things like WOKE-ism or Cultural Marxism, or CRT in the public square. Feed them the line that those things are best left to the professional clergy and then convince the professional clergy that those things really are not what they’ve been tasked to think or speak about. In such a way these ideas of ours will gain traction without any opposition from any of those that we are assigned to contain. One more thing on this matter Nutgrebe, do your best to ensure your patient continues to believe that it is not possible to make any progress on these various cultural issues. Remind them that the world has always been troubled and that “this is world is not our home, we’re just a-passing through.” In such a way, your patient will continue to retreat because they will become convinced that our enemy delights in retreat. In such a way their culture will go from bad to worse and this with the benefit of them thinking that is the way our enemy above wants it.

Oh, and before I sign off Nutgrebe, allow me to insist that you not let up for an instant on how low we have managed to bring their clergy. Our attack on this front has been successful beyond our wildest dreams and it will be hell for you if you let your clergy assignments regain their footing. Continue to swell the ranks of Van Drunen, Hart, Chrissy Gordon, R. Scott Clark, and all our other clergy foot soldiers. Continue to make the clergy so insecure about their pocketbook that they continue to refuse to take strong stands on cultural issue. Keep reminding of the necessity to play it safe. Keep whispering about how they will lose members and financing if they apply the enemy’s word to the culture. We have made great gains by this method and it will be your doom to join Wormwood and Screwtape in serving as the eminent one’s commode if you fail here.

We have just begun to work as a team, you and I. Keep before you that I can make your task bearable if you follow my instructions and I can make your task so onerous you will find yourself wishing you were serving in the Soviet Gulag in Kolyma, if you refuse to follow my instructions. You have free will in the matter.

Your Affectionate Aunt

Boss-Girl

McAtee Defends Kirk Against An Angry Female Family Member

Like many Americans I have found myself shocked this past week by the murder of Iranyi Zarutska and the assassination of the Christian Charlie Kirk. The violence has been heart rending. Perhaps, however, what has been just as shocking to me is the glee that has been communicated by many unhinged Americans over the assassination of Charlie Kirk. I mean, I knew that these people hated Biblical Christians but I could not have guessed that the hatred was so wide and deep. It has been heart rending to read people exulting in Mr. Kirk’s death.

Even more heart rending was to read a closely related extended family member join in this ghoulish celebration.

Below, find interaction with this family member who thinks she is wise but really is wicked. She has me blocked on social media but another family member actually took the time to send it to me. I take the time to do this because I am concerned that I have other family members I love who are going to be dragged into the wickedness orbit we see this family member spouting.

____

MN writes,

I do think it is dangerous to rejoice in violence. I also think the argument of feeling sad for this because he had a wife and children isn’t good enough. Most evil men have. I have more grief for what this says about our society. About the distractions and divides people in power have put up that have gotten us to this place. People like Charlie Kirk.

So while I am pondering about what to think and how to feel about this. These are some quotes I will ponder:

Bret responds,

First you say that it is dangerous to rejoice in violence and then you turn around and try to justify the rejoicing in violence that is ubiquitous. You write that “feeling sad because he had a wife and children isn’t good enough.” In other words, one has to have more reasons than a widowed wife and orphaned children in order to be justified in being saddened concerning someone’s death.

Second, you make it clear that your sadness is not about Kirk’s death but rather your sadness is the fact that an evil man like Kirk, per your subjective standards, has placed distractions and divides in American society. So, if we are to take your words seriously what you have told us is that it is not the death of Kirk that makes you sad, but rather it was the life of Kirk that made you sad, because, in your subjective opinion, Kirk placed distractions and divides in American society.

Next, we have to ask, what evidence do you have that Kirk was a “evil man?” By what standard are you adjudicating in order to lower your gavel and say “Charlie Kirk was evil?” It certainly isn’t Scripture that is your standard because Kirk was careful to anchor all of his positions in Scripture. So, by your own subjective say so you’re trying to sell Kirk was an evil man? Who really is the evil person here?

MN writes,

Now you turn to quoting Kirk, thinking by doing so you are proving how evil he was. So… let us consider your quotes and your implicit reasoning behind the quotes that you provide proving he was a wicked man;

“It’s worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the 2nd amendment”

~Charlie Kirk

Bret responds,

So, let us join you in pondering this, understanding that you think this quote proves the Kirk is a wicked man;

1.) If you could bring Kirk back to life he would say this again. The man knew the evidence that existed that proclaimed that gun prohibition laws end up serving the purposes of the criminal class. Prohibiting gun only makes it so the law abiding class can’t get weapons. Criminals don’t care if they break the law in order to have weapons. Tell me that you don’t really think that the chap that shot Kirk would not have been able to shoot Kirk if only your precious dumbass anti-gun laws were passed?

Evidence 1 that this family member is just another non-thinking lib-tard.

2.) If we did not have the 2nd amendment no one would be able to possibly fire back when some idiot criminal on a roof is firing at them.

3.) This lib-tard family member HATES the current Trump government but if she can’t get access to weapons how is the left ever going to fight against Trump? Darling, if we take your access to weapons away your ability to defy Trump goes out the window.

MN disapprovingly quotes Kirk,

“I think empathy is a made up new age term that does a lot of damage” 

 Charlie Kirk

Bret responds,

1.) Fortunately for you, you will never have to deal with he burden of having empathy or even sympathy. You’ve made that clear with your hardness of heart against Kirk’s widow and orphans.

2.) Still, I agree with Kirk that empathy does do a lot of damage. What good does it do for someone to sit down and cry with someone crying? Does it fix their problem? Does it reverse their victim status, even if that is legitimate? Or instead does it empower people who only think they are victims to continue to be victims? Does it not only end up reinforcing bad and narcissistic behavior causing the one being empathized with to say … “yeah, I was right all along. People should feel pity for me.”

MN disapprovingly quotes Kirk

“The biggest thing is this: more younger women need to get married at a younger age and start having kids. The single woman issue is one of the biggest issues facing a civilization.”

Charlie Kirk

Bret responds,

Just because you’re single, angry, tatted up like a 18th century sailor on the Pequod, while being 25 going on 50 doesn’t mean Kirk is wrong here.

Keep in mind here that Kirk is addressing the issue of civilization. Western Civilization cannot continue unless our birth rate matches or exceeds our death rate. Currently in the West, our birth rate at 1.55 is way below the needed replacement rate of 2.1. In light of this Kirk is absolutely on point.

MN disapprovingly quotes Kirk

“Marital subversion” and “undermine their husbands”

Charlie Kirk on women voting differently than their husbands

Bret responds,

Again … how can this be denied? Women voting in contradiction to their husband is marital rebellion and should be treated as rebellion. Of course you find this hateful given your feminism. However, the Scripture is against you as it teaches repeatedly that wives must submit to their husbands.

MN disapprovingly quotes Kirk,

“When a man and woman are hooking up and the woman removes consent.
Yeah that’s a murky middle grey area”

Charlie Kirk on rape

Bret responds,

It is murky. A woman teases a man by her consent to foreplay giving all the signals that it is a go and then suddenly says… “I have a headache?” Yeah …. that’s murky.

MN disapprovingly quotes Kirk

“Women should try to find their husband before they’re 25”

Charlie Kirk

Bret responds,

Again … this is just common sense. The younger couples get married the more likely they will meld together quicker. The younger women get married the more time they have to have babies. The Christian faith teaches that the main purpose of marriage after bringing to glory to God is to have children. Marrying before 25, is pursuant to that end.

MN disapprovingly quotes Kirk

“You do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously. You had to go steal a white persons slot to be taken somewhat seriously”

~Charlie Kirk on black women in political roles

Bret responds,

Again … common sense. For example, the only reason Ketanji Brown Jackson was appointed to a Supreme court seat is because she was a black female (who during her testimony before the Senate could not even define herself as a female). Black people, exceptions notwithstanding, are merely affirmative action hires – hired in order to allow the company who hired them not to be hassled by the FEDS.

The only sin Kirk commits here is the sin of noticing.

MN disapprovingly quotes Kirk

“I’m sorry, but if I see a black pilot, I’m going to think; oh I hope he’s qualified”

~Charlie Kirk

Bret responds,

Pray you never find yourself crisscrossing the country on jets as flown by minority affirmative action hires. Pretty soon the odds are going to catch up with you.

MN disapprovingly quotes Kirk

“It creates very angry young ladies and bitter young women that then manifests those women into a political party”

~Charlie Kirk on birth control

Psst … get a mirror and look long and hard at it. You are the angry bitter young woman Kirk talked about.

McAtee Contra Rev. Chrissy Gordon & His R2K Non-Christian Christianity

This is how far the Christian Clergy has sunk;

From Rev. Chrissy Gordon, R2K and Escondido trained;

“Bringing the political war between the left and the right into the pulpit is unequivocally a compromise of Christian ministry and using the ministry for power and gain.”

One has to wonder if Rev. Gordon would retrospectively abominate the, by and large. Reformed Black Robed Regiment who were the ones who, from the pulpit, declared the whole counsel of God against the Trepidations of King George and the British parliament in the run up to the American War for Independence.

Or would Rev. Gordon abominate Ambrose, Bishop of Milan who used his power as Bishop to repreminad the Emperor Theodosius I for his unjust massacre of Thessalonica citizens in retribution. Ambrose, in his Ecclesiastical office wrote Emperor Theodosius the Great a letter stating the emperor needed to demonstrate repentance for the massacre, further adding that emperor Theodosius would be forbidden from receiving the Eucharist until he had done so.

Would Rev. Gordon abominate Reformed Theologian Charles Hodge who wrote on the same subject saying;

“To adopt any theory which would stop the mouth of the church, and prevent her bearing her testimony to the kings and rulers, magistrates and people, in behalf of the truth and law of God, is like one who administers chloroform to a man to prevent his doing mischief. We pray God that this poison may be dashed away, before it has reduced the church to a state of inanition, and delivered her bound hand and foot into the power of the world.”

Next we have to ask the question; “Why speaking God’s revelatory truth to every subject as in the pulpit is unequivocally a compromise of Christian ministry” and is a matter where one is ” using the ministry for power and gain?”

Is it a compromise of God’s Word to allow the mind of God to be known on every subject under the sun? Is it a compromise of the Lordship of Jesus Christ over every area of life to set forth the mind of God on whatever subject may be presenting itself before men?

According to Gordon’s precious R2K, God’s mind may not be made known from the pulpit on subjects like State sponsored terrorism, or transexualism, or no fault divorce, or abortion, because clergy are not able to decipher the mind of God from God’s revelation.

In my estimation the real reason that R2K advocates for this position is that it provides a compromise cover while at the same time allowing to build large churches. You see, if one speaks the mind of God from the pulpit on issues that are contentious in the culture one is going to alienate large segments of the population who will, in turn, not attend the church (and so give to the Church) where clergy are setting forth the mind of God from Scripture. This stance by Gordon and all his R2K toadies is not one of principle. It is one of financial gain. The R2K fanboys think that if they can make the church and pulpit apolitical they can curry the support and finances of both the right and the left.

Gordon’s position is the position of both the coward and the grifter and God will not forget the cowardice nor this grifting that is being done in His name.

Rev. Chrissy Gordon writes,

“They attack the entire purpose of Christian ministry. Do what the Spirit does in convicting the world of sin, righteousness and judgment. Don’t drag America’s political cesspool in Christ’s pulpit. This approach is earthly, sensual, and demonic.”

Bret responds,

This is pietistic bullspit. This is Jesus Juking taken to Ph.D level. This is ecclesiastical gaslighting.

The entire purpose of Christian Ministry, in relation to the pulpit, is to set forth the entire counsel of God. Further, the entire ministry of the Christian ministry is to set forth all of Christ for all of life.

How is there any convicting the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment apart from speaking on the subjects of sin in the culture, of what righteousness looks like in the public square, of what judgment to come looks like for those who will put their trust in wicked political solutions?
I quite agree that America’s politics is a cesspool (just like R2K churches) but one reason America’s politics is a cesspool is because the pulpit has been silent on the mind of God when it comes to political issues before the American public. The one way to guarantee the continuing cesspool of American politics is by Godly men remaining silent on the mind of God expressly set forth in Holy Writ.

Rev. Chrissy Gordon’s R2K approach is anti-Christ, smells of sulfur, and is a sure fire recipe for the church to continue to provide only escapism for answers to life’s hard question. If we lived in orthodox times Gordon would be brought up on charges for advancing the idea that the Kingship of Christ over every area of life should be banned from the pulpit.

Rev. Chrissy Gordon writes,

What’s truly cowardly is to not give people their true savior when that’s what they need most. Enough is enough with this.

Preach Christ and him crucified, not America and its politics improved.

Bret responds,

That savior that people desperately needs is also King of Kings and Lord of Lords. Gordon wants to give a “Savior,” who because He has been stripped of His title and position of King cannot truly be savior. For Gordon and his R2K effeminate pals Christ saves but He does not rule. Gordon has surrendered Christ in His threefold office (Munus Triplex) and instead given us a Christ who is no Christ since the R2K Christ only holds one office (Priest).

R2K is heresy and anyone who advocates for it is a heretic.