Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Christian Sociology’ Category

Question 68 of the Westminster Shorter Catechism asks:

What is required in the sixth commandment?

Answer:

The sixth commandment requireth all lawful endeavors to preserve our own life, and the life of others.

And question 69 asks:

What is forbidden in the sixth commandment?

Answer:

The sixth commandment forbiddeth the taking away of our own life, or the life of our neighbor unjustly, or whatsoever tendeth thereunto.

Racial integration, Multiculturalism, Imperialism, and Propositional Nation Theory all clearly violate the Sixth Commandment.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Today’s reading is from Leviticus 19.

19 ‘You shall keep My statutes. You shall not let your livestock breed with another kind. You shall not sow your field with mixed seed. Nor shall a garment of mixed linen and wool come upon you.

Of this, Henry says:

“Here is, I. A law against mixtures, v. 19. God in the beginning made the cattle after their kind (Gen. i. 25), and we must acquiesce in the order of nature God hath established, believing that is best and sufficient, and not covet monsters. Add thou not unto his works, lest he reprove thee; for it is the excellency of the work of God that nothing can, without making it worse, be either put to it or taken from it, Eccl. iii. 14. As what God has joined we must not separate, so what he has separated we must not join.” [Deut.32:8] ~M. Henry’s Comm. On Lev.19

Notice that he quotes Jesus (Mark 10:9) on the topic of human marriage as the corollary passage. And recall that St. Paul tells us that the laws regarding cattle haven’t chiefly to do with cattle, but with human relations (1 Cor. 9:9-10).

Sir William Blackstone informs us of the definition of the word ‘Monster’ as it is employed by Henry to refer to the offspring of diversely gendered unions:

“A monster … hath no heritable blood, and cannot be heir to any land, albeit it be brought forth in marriage … But our law will not admit a birth of this kind to be such an issue as shall entitle the husband to be tenant by the courtesy; because it is not capable of inheriting. And therefore, if there appears no other heir than such a prodigious birth, the land shall escheat to the lord.” ~Sir William Blackstone’s Comm. on the Law, Vol.II, Chpt.XV

As with the category of a ‘Bastard’, Blackstone tells us that Monsters are, legally speaking, “nullius filius, kin to nobody”.

Read Full Post »

This goes out to the folks I know who continue to allege that criticism of the state of Israel and the Jewish Shoah are but a recent phenomenon devoid of pre-1980s precedent. Enjoy.

G.W. Armstrong writing on the subject of Zionism in 1950:

To the President and Congress of the United States
Gentlemen: I respectfully represent:

1. That the Zionists seek to destroy our republican form of
government and to establish a socialist government in place of it;

(2)that they have involved us in two world wars in pursuance of this
plan;

(3) that they seek to acquire the fabulous wealth of the Dead Sea estimated at five trillion dollars, and of the Arabian oil fields estimated at six hundred billion dollars;

(4) that this wealth belongs to us and the British Empire by right of conquest;

(5) that the Zionists are traitors and should be punished as such.

(a) I allege that a majority of the immigrants who have entered our country since the First World War are socialists and communists;

(b) I allege upon information and belief that Herbert H. Lehman, Felix Frankfurter and several Congressmen and other officials are Zionist communists and citizens of the State of Israeli.

Geo. W. Armstrong.
April 29, 1950.


Remember, this was written in 1950. 

Read Full Post »

This appears to be some serious Kinist entertainment.

Read Full Post »

Magnalia Dei

Again, a learned friend is doing the Lord’s work by translating the great doctors of the faith into the common tongue; many such works are suppressed today but so long as an authentic confessor of the antique faith draws breath there will yet be someone to preserve these treasures. 

What follows is  a wonderful piece– quite typical of the historical Church’s understanding of things. The author (and the church of his day) had no notion of the behaviorist theories of Freud and Young which have recently become so firmly entrenched; the Church of yesteryear believed in nurture but not to the exclusion of nature. In Fokelorist terms their cosmology was as anthropological as it was literary. For such views, unanimous though they once were, they would be harried from most modern congregations. But if we have little communion with those now living we will console ourselves with the communion of the venerable dead in Christ. 

“Through the flood, God had destroyed all men save eight persons; now the new world was to be reinhabited by Noah’s three sons. I will indicate just our own grandparents and those of our neighbors—other nations may take care of their own provenance. From Magog came the Turks and the Tatars. Magog means “a man who lives by plunder, not dwelling in cities or houses, but al-ways staying in the country”: those peoples have just such a nature. From Meshech came the Muscovites. Meshech means “a good shot”: Such are the terrifying warriors of that people. From Ashkenaz came the Germans. Ashkenaz means “a priest of the holy fire; a man who can call fire down from heaven.” From Elisha came the Silesians. Elisha means “God’s salvation; a man who knows and confesses the Savior of the world, Jesus Christ.” These two men learned about our Lord Jesus in the churches of Shem and testified of the heavenly truth to all the wolves. Here we see that God often finds pious hearts among the foe as well. From Riphath came our Poles. Riphath means “a great giant”: so are there still big, tall, strong folk among this nation. No other scribe in the world could have given us such an account. From this it is proven that Moses was the oldest, noblest, best, and most trustworthy writer of history. Hence it is now clear that Japheth was the grandfather of all of us who dwell in these countries. We are all Japheth’s children, and that which Noah foretold (Gen. 9:27), viz., that we children of Japheth would dwell in the tents of Shem, has come true: For through the gospel we have all been brought to the knowledge of Jesus Christ, who was revered in the churches of Shem. God be praised and thanked for this forever! From Ham, Noah’s youngest son, came but idle, wicked knaves and adversaries of God’s people: Babylonians, Philistines, etc. For as the raven, so the egg. The apple falls not gladly from the branch. What by elders was sung is the lore of the young. Bad hair and bad hide always make a bad pelt. Hawks don’t hatch eagles. Nimrod was a towering tyrant before the Lord; that is, by the tolerance and permission of God: For without God’s permission and will no tyrant could lift a foot, nor would Pilate have had any authority. Nimrod was the first king of Babel, a mighty warrior, feared by all men like a hunter by hares. He was, as his name implies, amarus dominator, “a bitter, severe ruler,” who forced his people to work in his court and wait on him as though they were peasants in bondage. He might as well have been called “Never-bread,” for he took the bread from the mouths of his poor subjects and left them with never a piece of bread, and he turned never red over the matter: He was not ashamed by any knavish trick; he had the ἀδιατρέψιαν of Caligula, who thought it was the most commendable part of his nature that he could say and do as he pleased and had no shame before anyone: but periit, cui pudor periit, “He is lost who is lost in shame” Dear [reader], behold, the worst knaves snatch for themselves the most power and glory in the world; the fattest pigs always snap up the biggest beets; the worst rogues always have the best luck; they live on the fat of the land while the devoutest people bear their cross and gnaw the table-cloth of hunger.
From Shem came the children of Eber, the Hebrews; in German this means “wayfarers, pilgrims, and strangers in the world.” Such is God’s peo-ple; and such must always continue to wander in the world and endure much affliction as dwellers in the same house. They know, too, that they have no enduring place here, and so they behave like strangers and folks on a pil-grimage, setting their hearts on the eternal fatherland where they shall stay forever: for our Lord Jesus thus studiously calls the heavenly dwellings man-siones (“places in which to stay”). Here again we find our Lord Jesus in a beautiful mystery. With respect to God, our Lord Jesus truly had the pri-macy and the greatest esteem from among His friends; but as far as the world was concerned, He always came last and brought up the rear. You can see this very beautifully in Genesis. When Moses lists Noah’s sons in the beginning of Genesis 10 (v. 1), he puts Shem at the top regardless of the fact that he is not the oldest but the middle [son]: Moses did this for the glory of the Lord Jesus Christ who was to be born from the bloodline of Shem. Thus Shem has the highest place for the sake of our Lord Jesus, as it has even been evinced above. He puts Japheth under him because that is where the circle is to be joined. In religion, Japheth’s children were to take after the children of Shem. In promotionibus Magistrorum (“when masters get their diploma”) the last locus is the locus gratiae, (“place of grace”). Thus Japheth is placed here in loco gratiae, for the children of Japheth “glorify God for His mercy,” as St. Paul says in Romans 15:9.
Ham, the wicked knave, is put in between them; for he, as the true tare among the wheat, was to plague and afflict the children of God just as has surely transpired. This is one thing. Shem has the highest place at the intro-duction of the chapter to the glory of our Lord Jesus; but when his children according to the flesh are counted, and Shem’s children are recorded in the manner in which they stood before the world, then Shem has to go to the bot-tom and come last: the precedence was given to Japheth with many wicked people, and to Ham with nothing but bad leaves. So it goes in the world: the worst knaves always get the greatest glory. It often cuts the pious to the lung and liver when they see it with their own eyes; for thus Psalms 37 and 73 are anguished, fretted and plagued with this grief. “Thus my heart was grieved, and I was pricked in my kidneys,” says Psalm 73:21. Cain, too, was the cock of the hoop; he built for himself the first city: Abel was a cinder-sweeper. The Herods with their wanton dancing maiden got the rosarium and malthouse: John got the kiln. That gallows-bird Barrabas came first in Pi-late’s speech and the hearts of the Jews: Christ was last and least. Like-wise in our text, Magog, Meshech, Nimrod, and the Philistines come first: Shem’s children are forced to gather their dust and breathe their stink. The former were a whole nation; the latter barely a handful. The former had great fortresses; the latter were poor pilgrims, etc. Therefore do not let it grieve you when the world sweeps you and your gospel behind the stove. “Fret not yourself because of evildoers; be not envious against the workers of iniquity. For like the grass they shall soon be cut down and as the green herb they shall wither… fret not yourself because of him who prospers in his way…For evildoers shall be cut off…For yet a little while, and the ungodly shall be no more: and when you seek for his place, it shall not be” (Ps. 37:[1-2, 7b, ]10). Where are the haughty nose-blowers of Ham’s bloodline today? There is nei-ther stick nor stocking of theirs to be found in the world. (Magnalia Dei, Part 2, Sermon XXIV, on Genesis 10, exerpt)

Valerius Herberger’s Magnalia Dei “The Mighty Acts of God” is subtitled: “Or, How Jesus Christ is the Core and Substance of Holy Scripture.” It is a 600 codex-page devotional commentary from Genesis to Ruth in which every chapter, or sermon, heading begins with “Jesus…”

Read Full Post »

The Prophet Jeremiah called the churchmen of his day “dumb dogs” because they refused to bark when danger was approaching. Nowadays bringing this issue up among elders in the church is liable to result in censure, excommunication or maybe even an IRS audit.

Notice what the puppet-pastor said in the interview? He claimed the whole “Romans 13 obliges us to do whatever Caesar commands” bit. This is an issue with which I’ve had a good deal of experience lately; it seems that even the once-conservative reformed churches have recently embraced the Hegelian idea that “government is god treading on the earth”. Of course, all of historic reformed thought rejects such notions but,  as with the issue of Kinism, the modern church has come about face to deny not only that these things (Kinism and the concepts of ‘consent of the governed’, and the ‘primary right of self-defense’) be biblical ideas but even to deny that anyone… ever believed such things. It boggles my imagination that a concept as historically non-controversial (in reformed thought atleast) as ‘consent of the governed’ is now completely alien to reformed churchmen. Not only is it alien to them, they are innately offended at the idea. Once Obama ascended these men were ‘activated’… like so many sleeper cells no doubt. 

This is an aspect of the subtle shifts going on christian thought; the church still invokes the same language but it is often completely denatured– completely redefined. The modern looks at Romans 13 recognizing only that the language therein is descriptive in nature, not prescriptive. That is their mandate. And due to that mandate they will subjugate all biblical ethics to the hermeneutical principle that description can never and in no wise be taken as prescriptive. But of course, to take it that way we immediately encounter the hypocrisy of such a hermeneutic: If Caesar commands that which is evil, it is declared righteous nonetheless… because it comes from the fount of modern judeo-ethics… Caesar. Because, they have ‘no king but Caesar’. (Of course the Jews are now sitting on Caesar’s throne but that’s another matter.) As such, they believe the decree of government actually sanctifies evil itself. But that’s just to say that they call evil, good and good, evil. ‘Dumb dogs’ indeed.

Read Full Post »


This Christmas I stumbled onto a certain conspiracy previously unknown to me; it was a small thing but insidious nonetheless. My daughter and her cousin both received new baby dolls as gifts. The dolls cooed and babbled in that baby sort of way but on the last of their audio sequences the voice suddenly changed and the words, “Islam is the Light” were annunciated distinctly. 

When I told everyone what I’d heard they were incredulous but after having heard it themselves they agreed– I had heard aright, these Fisher Price-produced dolls were promulgating Islam. Hear it for yourself

Now, I understand that random coos and garbled speech can ofttimes sound like a discernible word or patterned phrase but even if the phrase ‘Islam is the Light’ were accidentally created (unlikely as that eventuality might be) the recording still had to be subject to review by numerous people. Or are we to believe that Fisher Price has no quality control staff? Please.

Under such presumed circumstance one can only conclude that it has an element of intentionality in it; that is, It was purposeful. It would actually be much more far-fetched to believe the alternative so I count this as no conspiracy theory only but conspiracy fact

But this brings up a great question: Why, in modern America, is the postulation of a conspiracy theory as the remedy for any set of otherwise irreconcilable bits of data considered self-negating? If the ‘official story’ (i.e., government and media disseminated) cannot account for the facts of the matter, it naturally behooves any party interested in the truth of a thing to consider alternate explanations. And it isn’t as if the ‘official story’ isn’t in the same boat as that espoused by your average ‘well-manicured internet assassin’ (wink) either; for instance, both the government and the 911 Truthers posit certain theories of conspiracy to explain the ongoings of September eleventh. Both groups have imperfect data collection and personal biases subject to their own respective realms of cognitive dissonance. Therefore, the dismissal of one interpretation pejoratively as a ‘nothing but wild conspiracy theory’ is only to beg the question. That question is, which version better accounts for all the perceived data? But the hypocrisy of our anti-Christ foes necessitates their employ of such propaganda because bringing such matters to the light of day, for them, is ruin. 

As frustrating as such propaganda may be it is more disconcerting by far to witness ‘conservative Christians’ opting for the same interpretation of events and the same Critical Theory-inspired propaganda tactics. Insodoing our modern churches actually deny the entirety of the Christian religion because the Christian religion is inherently conspiratorial. Think of it: The scripture teaches that Satan and his angels conspired and still do conspire to thwart God’s plan for the cosmos. Likewise, it teaches that Mankind conspired and in large part, still does conspire against God. The Jews conspired against God’s Prophets, conspired to have Christ crucified and later still, engaged in a conspiracy to cover the fact of the resurrection, claiming, in their characteristically hypocritical fashion, that it was the Christians themselves who were acting as conspirators to trick the world into belief in the risen Christ! They, of course, would offer a whole different set of interpretations of these events but God has testified Himself, in His Word, as to whose ‘conspiracy theory’ is true. 

Yet the Jews persist in the same international conspiracy as they have from the first; they lie, bribe, and pervert in all venues inwhich they have access. And this, according to their own words, they consciously do in opposition to all Christian ethics. They proudly claim to oppose the ‘Edomite Goyim’ (as they call us) in all things. This, even the modern Church seems to wink at when they chide anyone with the gall to point such things out as anti-Semitic! Which, I might add, is now, as of very recent times, one of the worst things a fellow can be…or so I’m told.

But when we find, as in the case of Ben Stein’s movie Expelled, that even when on their most Nicodemian and philo-christian behavior, the underlying ethic is still with ultimate regard to the question of what is best for the Jews, we realize that they don’t even qualify as fair-weather friends to God’s people because that primary commitment on their part precludes the option of Christianity and Christendom with it. 

Just as they resolved two millennia ago, they consider that which serves their interests best is to conspire against God and execute His scapegoat, Jesus. This is because they regard themselves as God’s scapegoat. And this is why they have cast that which happened in WWII Germany as a ‘Holocaust’. A holocaust is, by definition, a spotless burnt offering to God for the propitiation of the nation. It is their Golgotha, Calvary– their lowest depth and their highest height. It is their self-atonement. 

No matter what a Christian resolves to believe transpired in those camps, he ought to denounce the Jewish interpretation in the strongest terms because it amounts to nothing less than Luciferianism. 

So too ought a Christian to denounce the farcical trial to which the German leaders were subjected at Nuremberg. Afterall, the method of those proceedings flew in the face of all biblical Law and Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence: The Judges, the Prosecution and the Defense all fell into a status of what the law calls ‘unclean hands’. They were all comprised of the Germans’ political and ideological enemies– the Soviets and their allies. And the Germans were actually prohibited from cross-examining the witnesses produced by the prosecution! Moreover, anyone showing up as witnesses for the Defense were arrested and tried as Nazi conspirators as well. These tactics effectively stripped the Germans of rights which all Western law had regarded as inviolable for a millennia or more. 

Oh yes, and let us not forget that the autopsies demonstrated that those lynched by the kangaroo court of Nuremberg had all been tortured terribly by their Allied captors. This would explain (and not to mention invalidate) their self-contradictory and generally incoherent confessions. But prior to the issue of the substance of such confessions is the fact that Cotton Mather drafted in the 1690’s what became the first canon of American law, prohibiting torture as a means of extracting information on the basis that it was unchristian to cause a man to incriminate himself under duress as such testimonies were inherently unreliable and it was unjust to punish a man for something which he had not yet been proven to have done. Western law had, since Mather’s time, taken these precepts for granted and yet the Germans were given no such quarter. 

No one is supposed to say that Nuremberg was a sham because no one is supposed to care whether those men were afforded a fair trial. That’s the conspiracy. The propaganda machine in place at the time was controlled by Bolshevik Jews in America, England and the Soviet Union. Public opinion was prepackaged by this media complex and the complete apathy for the question of justice in the Nuremberg trials was its result despite the fact that those proceedings represented the inverse of all Christian nomology.

Ultimately though, conspiracy theories follow a deductive line of reasoning, from top down, contextualizing particulars in light of a greater set of assumptions. Despite the fact that the modern mush-mind calls such an approach ‘nutty’, deductive reasoning is a logical process as much as is inductive reasoning. And mind you, its generally regarded by logicians to be the superior method of the two. 

So the next time some smug Evangelical scoffs at these things just remind him that everybody believes in conspiracy theories– its just a matter of which ones– especially for us Christians, ‘cause the bible is, as I’ve said, inherently conspiratorial in nature. 

And the answer to the question, ‘why is the postulation of a conspiracy theory self-negating in modern America (?)’, is that modern Americans, and supposed Christians foremost among them, consider the government-media complex as the absolute arbiters of truth. That is to say that they bow their intellect before an anti-Christ idol and that idol is the self-same one crafted in the shadow of Mt. Sinai and you can call me meshugga but I think it was crafted by the same hands. 

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »