A lot of pop culture is just a psy-op designed to turn kids into perverts. It’s been working pretty well for a few generations now.
—
Calvin on apostasy (ICR 3.24.8):
“This expression of our Savior [in Matthew 22:14] is also very improperly interpreted. But there will be no ambiguity if we attend to what our former remarks ought to have made clear, viz., that there are two species of calling: for there is a universal call, by which God, through the external preaching of the word, invites all men alike, even those for whom He designs it to be a savor of death and the ground of a severer condemnation. In addition to this, there is a special call, which for the most part God bestows on believers only, when by the internal illumination of the Spirit He causes the word preached to take deep root in their hearts. Sometimes, however, He communicates it also to those whom He enlightens only for a time, and whom afterwards, in just punishment for their ingratitude, He abandons and smites with greater blindness.”
The whole section is worth reading to see how Calvin’s treatment of apostasy is much more nuanced and complex than modern popularizations of Calvinism. See also 3.2.11-13.
—
In this effeminate age, SEC football has become a soap opera for Southern men.
—
It’s striking to consider how many countries (and states) use Christian symbolism or mottos on their national (or state) flags:
My own state of Alabama flies the St. Andrew’s cross, a sign that at one time at least, the people of this state knew that we existed under the reign of King Jesus. It’s also a reminder of our state’s Celtic roots.
One historian describes the origins of St. Andrew’s cross this way: “According to legend, the first century Christian martyr St. Andrew considered himself unworthy to be executed in the same manner as Jesus and convinced his Roman executioners to use a different cross for his crucifixion.”
St. Andrew is the patron saint of Scotland, and the use of St. Andrew’s cross is a link to our state’s early Scottish and Scotch-Irish settlers, most of whom had a Calvinistic bent.
—
In many churches, the elders’ wives are a shadow government who actually run the church. It’s the ecclesiastical equivalent of the deep state. And it’s the gateway to toxic empathy and wokness in the church.
—
For kids, having mom at home is a necessary component of mental health.
—
Nightly family dinner is social and cultural glue.
It is not a coincidence that when Solomon describes the ideal family in Psalm 128, he envisions them gathered around the family table.
—
I heard about a church that uses this question to weed out elder candidates: “Can you sit across the table from a crying woman and tell her, ‘No’?”
—
The charge of anti-Semitism has become the new charge of racism
The difference is that today, no one 30, maybe under 40, cares
The era of bullying others through name calling is over
I think social media has given a lot of people thicker skin
You just get immune to it
But, also, no one really listens to what anyone else is saying
This certainly seems to be true of most of Tucker Carlson’s critics
Tucker completely rejects identity politics
By definition, that makes it impossible to be an anti-Semite
He does question our foreign policy towards Israel and it’s rationale
I’m in the same camp
I am very open to pragmatic and prudential reasons to support Israel – but not dispensational, theological ones
And I do think anti-Semitism is a real problem (on the left and right) – its a real sin – and one Paul warned us about in Romans 11
When it comes to our foreign policy towards Israel, “Does it serve American interests?” is the key question
On one of Tucker’s monologues recently, he talked about the dangers of the US not supporting Israel – so he’s thinking it through
But no one in power is making that case that I know of
Perhaps we should aid Israel because they are our lone ally in a chaotic region; perhaps we should do so because they are the last bastion of Westernism (albeit in secularized form) in that part of the world; perhaps we should do so because an Israel without America’s support would be much more aggressive – maybe their dependence on our aid also keeps them on a leash
The most rabid pro-Israel people like Cruz and Graham just make misguided theological appeals to justify their support – the younger generation isn’t buying that
Tucker is almost too sincere – and too naive in his interviews
He could ask guys like Fuentes hard questions and even play devils advocate – steel man the opposing point of view to stress test a position
Instead he does a softball interview
I think that was the problem
But doing an interview with Fuentes to see why millions listen to him is certainly worthwhile, and in that sense Tucker was fully justified to do what he did
—
I agree with Tucker Carlson – we should completely reject identity politics. It’s inherently Marxist and openly divisive. It also doesn’t work because identity groups end up cutting themselves off from the common good. In other words, when as identity group forms to seek power on its own behalf, it almost never actually improves the condition of that group.
The original form of identity politics in American history was feminism. Has it worked well for women? No, absolutely not. It has undermined marriage and family. It has led to great misery among American women. Do we think sex-based identity politics will work any better for men? It will just drive the wedge between the sexes even deeper.
Blacks embraced racial identity with the rise of MLK and the civil rights movement. Has identity politics helped blacks? Obviously not. Blacks are worse off now in many ways than before – and that, despite the fact that blacks were suffering real injustices prior to the civil rights movement. Black entrepreneurship, home ownership, and marriage rates have all declined with the rise of black identity politics. Black illegitimacy has skyrocketed. Why do we think racial identity politics will work any better for whites? Identity politics feeds entitlement and the victim mentality. It’s the politics of losers.
Obviously in a democratic system like we have in America today, gaining political power requires some kind of coalition building. But the coalition needs to be much thicker than what identity politics allows for.
—
I don’t want to live in a multicultural nation. I want to live in a Christian culture, specifically, a Christian America. I want to live in a Christian nation, and I want my kids and grandkids to live in a Christian nation as well.
—
Psalm 11:1-3 is an important text for the culture war:
[1] In the LORD I take refuge;
how can you say to my soul,
Flee like a bird to your mountain,
[2] for behold, the wicked bend the bow;
they have fitted their arrow to the string
to shoot in the dark at the upright in heart;
[3] if the foundations are destroyed,
what can the righteous do?
David is tempted to flee the battlefield and head for the hills. Like a bird, he wants to fly off to the mountains. But he talks himself out of it because of what’s at stake. If he does not defend his nation and his people against the wicked, the foundations of his culture will be destroyed. This is exactly what’s happening in our so-called culture war: Marxists and progressives are attacking the very foundations of our civilization and some Christian pastors have decided to become culture war pacifists. They have to decided to opt out of the war and head for the mountains rather than defend all that our Christian ancestors built. They are willing to allow society to crumble into moral filth and rot rather than fight for what is true, good, and beautiful.
—
An old post from 11/19/24:
A comment on FV and assurance–
Assurance is not found through a process of introspection, making sure I have a really regenerated heart (the human heart is too much of a labyrinth for that, and we are all too easily prone to self-serving forms of self-deception).
Rather, assurance is found by looking away from ourselves, and looking outside of ourselves, keeping our eyes fixed on Jesus as the author and finisher of our faith.
Assurance is primarily extraspective, not introspective.
One of the ways I “look” to Jesus is by resting in the promises he makes to me in his Word, personalized at the baptismal font.
Recovering Calvin’s pastoral use of baptism was a major plank in the FV project.
The Christians I’ve seen struggle with assurance the most either have a highly introspective piety, constantly examining their inward desires and experiences to make sure they “really meant it” when they had a conversion experience, OR they are hyper-Calvinists, constantly turning inward to assess whether or not God *really* regenerated them at some point in the past.
Both of these ways of seeking assurance turn the Christian in on himself.
FV is a very simple, straightforward antidote to both.
True, I can derive assurance from the reality of my obedience (eg, 1 John), but that obedience is outward/external fruit that can be publicly/ecclesially assessed so it’s not just a matter of examining myself in isolation but in community.
It’s also an obedience that grows out of faith in Christ, so the obedience test is inseparable from the doctrinal tests in 1 John, and the whole point of doctrine John has in view is to point me away from myself to Christ.
—
Herman Bavinck recognizing the inescapability of the culture war in 1904:
“If we understand Christianity’s warrant and maintain a desire to preserve her essence, then we can do nothing else but take a resolute position against the systems of the day and the worldviews of its own invention and fashioning. There can be no question of
‘mediation.’ There can be no thought of reconciliation. The times are too grave to flirt with the spirit of the age….However lovely peace would be, the conflict is upon us.”
—
Herman Bavinck on theology and practice:
“In dogmatics we are concerned with what God does for us and in us. In dogmatics God is everything. Dogmatics is a word from God to us, coming from outside us and above us; we are passive, listening, and opening ourselves to being directed by God. In ethics, we are interested in the question of what it is that God now expects of us when he does his work in us. What do we do for him? Here we are active, precisely because of and on the grounds of God’s deeds in us; we sing psalms in thanks and praise to God. In dogmatics, God descends to us; in ethics, we ascend to God. In dogmatics, he is ours; in ethics, we are his. In dogmatics, we know we shall see his face; in ethics, his name will be written on our foreheads (Rev. 22:4). Dogmatics proceeds from God; ethics returns to God. In dogmatics, God loves us; in ethics, therefore, we love him.”
—
Some Christians think we should avoid the culture war. But the alternative to the culture war is obviously not cultural peace. It’s a flesh-and-blood war. We fight the culture war precisely so we can avoid having to fight a flesh-and-blood war.
We should be grateful our founding fathers set up a system where we could work to resolved “culture war” issues peaceably. It has not always worked, obviously, but as long as the potential remains, we should continue trying to actualize it.
—
The point of Romans 1:18-32 is to demonstrate that any culture that rejects the worship of the true and living God will go insane. To reject God is to reject reality. To reject God is to reject all truth, goodness, and beauty. To hate God is to love death. Idolatry leads to immorality which leads to cultural disintegration. The only choices are Christ or chaos. Those who will not have Christ as lord will reap the whirlwind.
—
Modern feminist women are uninterested in marriage and children. They are dedicated to every progressive cause and protect liberal ideology with a mama bear instinct. We are getting a good idea of why Paul said in 1 Timothy 2, women will be “saved through childbearing.” Women who are not anchored to homes and family life generally go crazy. They maternal instinct does not go away but it gets relocated and perverted. Women need accountability. They need families to care for. They need competent male headship.
—
People who think if we had female rulers there’d be fewer wars are totally ignorant of female nature.
—
There’s an old saying, “If you’re the smartest person in the room, you’re in the wrong room.” That’s true. But the goal shouldn’t be to be the smartest person in the room anyway. Your goal should be to be the wisest person in the room.
—
Miles Smith has a couple recent tweets on religious freedom:
I’m not exactly sure what Miles is getting at but since I’ve written on this topic before, I’ll say a few things in response.
First, religious freedom requires in a nation/culture some measure of religious homogeneity. Pluralism (ironically) will always end up curtaining someone’s freedom because
(1) religions contradict one another
(2) at least some religions make all-encompassing claims that bear upon the public square.
Some of America’s founding fathers thought religious pluralism could quell conflict of the sort that convulsed Europe after the Reformation (see my ‘Compact Road map of American History”). But this betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of religion. And it obviously hasn’t worked.
A religion that is just a matter of private spirituality can exist in a pluralistic nation without much problem. But religions (like the Christian faith and Islam) that make public claims, that have a vision for public justice and social life, will never be content with pluralism. The totalizing nature of their claims means they will seek to shape and transform the life of a people. These are not merely private, they are civilizational. This is why, historically, Muslims were not welcome in the West. It was understood that Islam and Christian faith had radically different visions for culture, politics, family, etc. It’s why Christian in Muslim lands live under dhimmitude as second class citizens. Of course, while both Islam and Christian faith are civilizational religions, they have very, very different ways of attaining their goals. The early Christians eventually conquered the Roman Empire through through preaching and service. Muslims resort to the sword of iron.
All the usual questions about religious freedom show there can ultimately be no truly pluralistic society. How will this pluralistic society be designed? What law system transcends all religions in such a way that it can embrace and govern them all? For example: Will Mormons be free to practice polygamy? Will Amerindians be free to use peyote? Will Molech worshippers be free to murder their own children? Will Satanists be free to sacrifice cats? Will Muslims be free to wage jihad and kill infidels? Will the city allow the muezzin or church bells? There is simply no workable solution to the problems raised by unrestrained or absolute religious liberty. Religious liberty, like all civil liberties, must be rooted in some kind of framework that will ultimately deny some religions the full exercise of their beliefs.
Besides, where does this view of religious liberty come from? What religion teaches a doctrine of religious liberty? What is it grounded in? Does God tell us to create a society of absolute religious liberty, and if so where? I can’t find it in the Bible, explicitly or implicitly. Christians certainly believe religious belief cannot be coerced; in that sense, in a Christian society, people are free to believe what they want. But they would not be free to translate any and every religious belief into practice. And practice is the point of many religions. Practice is certainly the flashpoint of conflict. Think of Constantine who outlawed the practice of pagan sacrifice but did not try to coerce Christian belief. That’s the model the West ended up following during the era of Christendom.
The historic Reformed position is that the Christian civil magistrate should enforce both tables in his sphere, in a way appropriate with his role as a civil ruler. He would promote the true faith, but not punish unbelief as such, nor those who believe in other faiths simply for holding to those faiths. He would not require people to worship the Triune God, but he would not allow public shrines to other gods. He would not require citizens to confess Christ, but he would punish certain extreme forms of public blasphemy. He would not require church attendance on Sundays, but he promote laws that encouraged it. He would seek to make marriage and family policy reflect the basic biblical and creational design. He would outlaw murder, eg, abortion, and promote responsible self-defense. He would punish certain sexual offenses (adultery, sodomy, porn, prostitution, etc.), but without setting up an invasive sexual gestapo. He would promote prosperity and forbid theft, even by the state. He would promote civil justice as defined by Scripture; law and order would be the hallmark of his rule. And so on. He would distinguish sins from crimes, and only punish the latter. he would include promoting Christian faith within the common good.
It’s fashionable today to accuse “Christian nationalists” of fascism. The opposite is closer to the the truth – those who want to impose secularism and progressivism on us are the real fascists. But any social order someone disagrees with is going to “feel” fascist or authoritarian. For many people, fascist = anything government does that I don’t like. Or, fascism = anyone I didn’t vote for winning the election. The issue is not the exercise of authority as such. Authority is inescapable. The question for the Christian is whether or not civil authority is used in a properly defined, circumscribed biblical way. Christians want a tightly limited government. Christians do not view the state as savior but as servant. Christian nationalism is actually a much better safeguard against fascism than what we have right now.
In our current situation, religious pluralism is an obvious and inescapable fact. We have to navigate that as best we can. But it is both an historical anomaly and not sustainable or stable in the long run.
—
John Adams suggested the proper symbol of America is the arrow since it combines the imagery of a sword and a pen:
“The proper emblem of Our Government is not an Eagle, but an Arrow, which is a potent weapon, compounded of the sword & the pen. The sword–part is useless without the feather. If the sword has done much, the pen has done more. When the first is rewarded, the last should not be forgotten.”
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/99-02-02-7505
—
Our economic system today is really screwed up. We have socialism for the poor (welfare, subsidies) and the rich (bailouts, money printing), and we have capitalism for middle class (ruthless competition). But the middle class is getting squeezed out – they make too much money to receive welfare benefits but they are too weak to get the protections the rich garner for themselves.
—
The younger generation has found the current system doesn’t work for them. They are saddled with too much debt and too few opportunities. As a result, many blame capitalism and opt for socialism. Unfortunately, they’re going to find out that doesn’t for them either.
__
I am totally against US invovlement in Venezuelan regime change. Venezuelans are getting what they voted for. let them live with it. If Maduro is so bad, they can do to him what Americans did to King George – overthrow him themselves. But there’s no reason for America to be invovled.
—
Yenor provides a helpful way forward in the public, legal, political battle vs. pornography:
https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-problem-of-online-porn-its-already-illegal-
—
Motherhood is a full time job in the home (Titus 2:3).
Fatherhood is a full time job, too, but in a very different way since fatherhood includes the burden of provision, which often takes a man out of the home.
—
Men will always be interested in sports for the same reasons they are always interested in war, economics/free markets, the history of exploration and invention, and politics – these fields reward things men value, like courage, competence, and risk-taking.
—
This is a good article but I always try to compare the numbers in articles like this to things I know in real life
I realize comparing my own situation to his numbers doesn’t matter since most of my adult life was lived before runaway inflation
My biggest advantage was starting out married/post-college life with no debt, having a dad who taught me a lot about money, and a wife who knew how to live frugally – my wife and I raised our kids on a lot less income than he says it would take in the linked article
I know a lot of young families who make it work with a stay at home mom and the husband makes under 140k – often way under 140k
The reality of the market is that if things are not actually affordable, the price drops, of necessity
Houses remain expensive because people are willing to pay – when assets get overpriced, they crash – which could very well happen at some point
But whatever our economic problems, we don’t have people starving to death in the streets, at least not yet
That being said, we do have deep systemic economic problems and no one is doing anything to fix them (and most suggestions, like 50 yr mortgages, would make them worse)
Looking at “cost of entry” is a good way to assess the situation – the 1950s way of calculating the poverty line is no longer relevant
Many of the problems we face could easily be fixed if we had the political will to do so
We do not have enough housing being built, largely because of regulations that make it artificially difficult (I would say deportations would also help housing costs but I don’t think we will ever see enough deportations for it to make much difference)
Getting women out of the workforce and back home eliminates child care costs, should lower taxes, and would increase wages and opportunities for men – it’s also much better for children
The goal needs to be an economic system where a family can have several children and live comfortably on one income
Regulation also kills the health care/insurance industry – it’s crazy that a “conservative” state like Alabama has absolutely no health care free market
Government money makes college way way too expensive – but it’s an easy fix – just allowing college debt to be rolled into bankruptcy alone would radically change the system, though many other things could be done
And so on
The article is definitely right about how screwed up our subsidy/welfare system is, from both an economic and a moral perspective
The middle class is definitely under the most strain and is getting screwed right now
If it keeps up, more people will simply quit trying – and that’s when an economy enters a death spiral
The only way to really get ahead and build wealth today is to get vested in the stock market or real estate or some other asset that can outpace inflation
That is getting much harder to do
Young people are economically illiterate and are rapidly becoming economic nihilists
Tucker’s interview with Charlie Kirk was really good on this – it really captured the way young people think
Hope is a big factor in people’s outlook and life choices
When people lack hope, they get crazy
—
On FV and justification:
—
The current conservative “civil war” over Israel is not good. The reality is that for movements to be successful, everyone has to give a bit. I have definite views on what our relationship with Israel should look like. But I would not split the conservative movement over it. It would have been much better to split over a hardline stance on abortion or same-sex “marriage.”
—
It’s not wrong to strongly desire what God designed you to have – it’s certainly not idolatry – even if his providence frustrates the fulfillment of that desire.
—
There’s a line in a Led Zeppelin song from the late ‘60s, “When your conscience hits, you knock it back with pills.” I have often wondered how much of our culture’s addiction to “mental health” medications, like SSRIs and other anti-depressants, are used for exactly this reason – they are ways of knocking back a guilty conscience. While unresolved guilt, and its attendant pangs of conscience, is not the only cause of depression, it is certainly a major one, as Scripture testifies. And guilty people who refuse to turn to the blood of Christ will look almost anywhere else to get relief.
—
“Citizens are not governed for their good and for the true glory of the supreme King when the secular authorities do not rule according to the divine Law and are not set to observe it themselves. For where God is not recognized and obedience to Him is not required before all things, there peace is not peace, justice is not justice, and that which should be profitable brings injury instead.”
― Martin Bucer, Instruction in Christian Love [1523]
—
“Reformation, then, was not merely a matter of getting doctrine right. It was a comprehensive call for the church to conform her entire life—beliefs, liturgies, structures, and ethics—to the pattern set forth in Holy Scripture.”
— Daniel Nealon
—
The godly man does not have children in order to fill Satan’s forces or populate hell, but in order to reclaim the earth for the kingdom of God as warriors in the great cosmic battle of history.
—
Many people, especially young people, who critique capitalism have no idea what capitalism is. Capitalism is just freedom in the economic sphere. It’s just freely buying and selling. The only way to set a just price is to find one the buyer and seller agree upon. If someone with power – the state – tells the seller how he must price his goods, economic freedom is destroyed. Prices should be set by supply and demand, not government fiat.
Of course, for the Christian, freedom is always regulated freedom. It’s ordered freedom. So even free markets are regulated. While the 8th commandment basically establishes the free market, along with the fact that the Bible no where authorizes the state to plan or control the economy, this does not mean people should be free to buy and sell anything they want. Parents should not be allowed to sell children. Women should not be allowed to sell their bodies as prostitutes. Pornography should be outlawed under obscenity and decency laws. Certain types of drugs (a form of witchcraft) should not be available on the market. And so on. While God’s law establishes a free market, the actual formation of a market is a human construct. People have to create products. They have to have a way to make those products known and offer them for sale. An agreed upon currency has to be used. And the state has a role in enforcing just weights and measures. A proper free market is a moral market, a market regulated by ethical standards. A biblical free market means buyers and sellers exchanging lawful goods and services according to their own interests. The genius of the market is that every economic exchange should be a win-win transaction, in that both parties get what they want. Capitalism has created more wealth for more people than any other system. Whereas socialist and communist systems drag everyone down to poverty, the free market gives a way of creating jobs and generating wealth. It encourages entrepreneurship, efficiency, and innovation.
When most people today rail against capitalism, what they are actually railing against is globalism. “It’s capitalism that offshored our jobs. It’s capitalism that hollowed out the Rust Belt.” And so on. But free markets do not require globalism. In fact, capitalism can be fully consistent with at least some forms of economic nationalism. Within a nation, a free market can and should exist – there should be minimal state regulation. The state should not pick winners and losers. But when it comes to trading between nations, a global “supply chain,” and so forth, there are other considerations. Adam Smith believed individuals within nations should be free to import and export goods. In principle, that’s true. If one nation cannot produce what another nation can, and vice versa, it makes sense that they would engage in trade with one another, and both could benefit. But the actual situation is more complex. What if nation A subsidizes its workers in industry X, giving its own workers a great advantage over workers in industry X in nation B? Workers in industry X In nation B will eventually find themselves out of work – and not because they aren’t good workers but because they are competing against subsidized workers. The market is not free in that there really isn’t a level playing field. There is no biblical requirement for a nation to open its market up to other nations carte blanche. Israel was actually warned about entering into various kinds of alliances with nations that served other gods. Does anyone think the Israelites were supposed to enter into free trade with the Amalekites? Or the Canaanites? Obviously not – and to do so would have been considered traitorous. But in David’s and Solomon’s day, Israel did engage with trade with Tyre because they were sufficiently like-minded (cf. 2 Samuel 5:11, 1 Kings 9:13; see also Amos 1:9 which later accuses Tyre of breaking its “covenant of brotherhood” with Israel). David bought cedar from Lebanon. Solomon imported skilled workers from Tyre to assist in building the temple because those workers had skills Israelites did not. But in these cases, again, there are reasons to think Hiram and his people were either Gentile God-fearers, or at least culturally similar enough to Israel to engage in trade. There were other nations Israel refused to do to business with, economically and politically, because they were considered enemies.
So to apply this to our contemporary situation, a nation can be fully committed to free markets, and still resist globalism. A nation should be wary of engaging in trade with other nations that cannot be trusted to play fair. It should not enrich its enemies. It should not engage in alliances with nations that have antithetical worldviews. Those who critique the kind of free market globalism that went into high gear in the 1990s have a point. To get more specific, why does America engage in trade with Islamic nations in the Middle East by buying their oil? Why do we engage in trade with Marxist China? Sure, we get cheap goods, but at what cost to our own society’s well-being? Why have we allowed massive immigration of workers to do jobs our own people could do? The free market – capitalism – does not require any of this. And it’s time to rethink it. Yes, that means we may need to break up global supply chains. It may mean some goods will cost us more. It may mean less cheap junk for sale. But American workers, especially American men, have suffered greatly, and not because of the free market or capitalism, but because we decided engage in trade partnerships with modern day Amalekites. America needs a free market that serves the American people, not one that disproportionately serves the interests of other nations.
—
Women far typically more vicious than men.
Think of the classic line: “hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.”
In Mere Christianity, Lewis asks, “If your dog has bitten the child next door … which would you sooner have to deal with, the master of that house or the mistress?” He then proceeds to make the point that, “The relations of the family to the outer world – what might be called its foreign policy – must depend, in the last resort, upon the man, because he always ought to be, and usually is, much more just to the outsiders. A woman is primarily fighting for her own children and husband against the rest of the world. Naturally, almost, in a sense, rightly, their claims override, for her, all other claims. She is the special trustee of their interests. The function of the husband is to see that this natural preference of hers is not given its head. He has the last word in order to protect other people from the intense family patriotism of the wife…. If you are a married woman, let me ask you this question. Much as you admire your husband, would you not say that his chief failing is his tendency not to stick up for his rights and yours against the neighbours as vigorously as you would like? A bit of an Appeaser?”
Or think of Kipling on the “mama bear” nature of females: “But the she-bear … rends the peasant tooth and nail; For the female of the species is more deadly than the male.”
—
There’s an old saying, “If you’re the smartest person in the room, you’re in the wrong room.” That’s true. But the goal shouldn’t be to be the smartest person in the room anyway. Your goal should be to be the wisest person in the room.
—
Cultural Marxism’s goal has been to make “a long march through the institutions.” It’s a kind of reverse exorcism – the cultural Marxists drive out God to make room for the demons. Progressives have gone through culture commanding God and the godly, “In the name of Karl Marx, I command you to come out.”
The Great Commission requires the confession “Jesus is Lord” to make a long march through the institutions.
—
Women who make a habit of telling men what to do are feminists, no matter what they claim to be. The essence of feminism is challenging men’s authority – in church, home, and society.
—
“Moreover, to Kings, Princes, Rulers, and Magistrates, we affirm that chiefly and most principally the conservation and purgation of the Religion appertains; so that not only they are appointed for civil policy, but also for maintenance of the true Religion, and for suppressing of idolatry and superstition whatsoever, as in David, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah, and others, highly commended for their zeal in that case, may be espied.”
— John Knox
—
“I think far, far too many Americans lack piety towards Europe — piety in the old Roman sense of giving honor to ancestors. Yes, contemporary Europe can be absurd and woke, but an American who hates Europe, or is indifferent to Europe’s fate, is a fool. Europe is where we come from. Even if you are black or Asian, if you are a Westerner, then you too, in some sense, came from Europe. Would you really be proud of watching your mother and father fall apart, and not caring? It’s like that.
But it’s more important than that. I’m so grateful that my children received a classical Christian education, which entailed them reading the ancient Greeks and Romans too. Every kid who graduated from that school has been told the Story, and how the story of our civilization entwines with the Story of the Gospel. They learned that whoever they are, it has to do with events and people who lived and worshiped, made love and made war, in Europe. To hate Europe, or to be indifferent to it, is to hate yourself, ultimately. And it’s to undermine the foundations of American civilization too (and Canadian, and Latin American, and Australian…).”
—Rod Dreher
—
About this time of year, many progressive and left-leaning Christians will talk about how the holy family was a refugee family and therefore….we should have open borders, never deport an illegal immigrant, etc. This is a total misunderstanding of the story. First, Jesus was born in Bethlehem because Mary and Joseph complied with the government’s censor decree. They were rendering unto Caesar what Caesar asked of them. Second, when they fled to Egypt, they did nothing illegal. They were only there very briefly; they did nothing illegal and they did not try to live on country that wasn’t theirs. They did nothing illegal – they certainly did not cross any borders illegally. There is no analogy between the gospel accounts and our current immigration crisis.
—
The most destructive division in our country is not race or class but sex/gender. The union of the sexes is uniquely fruitful, so the division of the sexes is uniquely destructive.
—
If you follow the Kathy Keller motto, “a woman can do anything an unordained man can do,” your two genders are not male and female but the clergy and everyone else – and that “everyone else” category is androgynous. This is a rejection of God’s creation order. It is a flawed attempt to accommodate the church to an egalitarian culture.
—
“The fact that so many successful politicians are such shameless liars is not only a reflection on them, it is also a reflection on us. When the people want the impossible, only liars can satisfy.”
— Thomas Sowell
—
“True leaders must be willing to stake out territory and identify and declare enemies.”
– James Stockdale
—
The lesson of Proverbs 7:
You can’t turn harlot folly into a housewife.
—
You can avoid reality but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.
— Ayn Rand (paraphrased)
—
“Christianity is not just involved with “salvation”, but with the total man in the total world. The Christian message begins with the existence of God forever, and then with creation. It does not begin with salvation. We must be thankful for salvation, but the Christian message is more than that. Man has a value because he is made in the image of God.”
— Francis Schaeffer
—
“Christian society is not going to arrive until most of us really want it: and we are not going to want it until we become fully Christian. I may repeat “Do as you would be done by” till I am black in the face, but I cannot really carry it out till I love my neighbour as myself: and I cannot learn to love my neighbour as myself till I learn to love God: and I cannot learn to love God except by learning to obey Him. And so, as I warned you, we are driven on to something more inward – driven on from social matters to religious matters.”
— C. S. Lewis
—
Are you a culture warrior or a culture coward? Those are really your only options.
—
Classical Reformed “two kingdoms” theology was largely crafted in order to keep the state out of the church’s business. Modern (or
“radical”) “two kingdoms” theology seems designed to keep the church from speaking the Word of God to the state.
—
“The fundamentalists often defend ideas that I deplore, but a remnant of spiritual health makes them foresee the horror of the warm and fuzzy concentration camp that our benevolent bureaucracies are preparing for us, and their revolt looks more respectable to me than our somnolence. In an era where everyone boasts of being a marginal dissident even as they display a stupefying mimetic docility, the fundamentalists are authentic dissidents.”
— Rene Girard
—
“All leadership is based on the patriarchal model. The father is a good father because he loves his children. That’s the model for all leadership.”
— Tucker Carlson
—
God doesn’t need America, but America needs God.
—
Pastors who whisper about sexual sin are false teachers.
—
In Scripture holy kings are especially praised for restoring the worship of God when corrupted or overthrown, or for taking care that religion flourished under them in purity and safety. On the other hand, the sacred history sets down anarchy among the vices, when it states that there was no king in Israel, and, therefore, every one did as he pleased (Judges 21:25). This rebukes the folly of those who would neglect the care of divine things, and devote themselves merely to the administration of justice among men; as if God had appointed rulers in His own name to decide earthly controversies, and omitted what was of far greater moment, His own pure worship as prescribed by His law.
— John Calvin
—
It’s been said that Christian nationalism is a response to the failure of secularism. That’s true. But it is also a response to the failure of conservatism, a conservatism that has not conserved anything of value.
—
Reality is not optional.
—
The most destructive division in our country is not between races or classes but between the sexes. The union of the sexes is uniquely fruitful, so the division of the sexes against each other is uniquely destructive.
—
Here’s my pushback on the truck driver thing with Carlson and Shapiro referenced at the beginning of this podcast:
Yes, robo-trucks would hurt truck drivers and their families.
But outlawing them would hurt the engineers who developed the technology.
Engineers have to eat too.
Engineers have families too.
Their good is part of the common good too.
Why should the government use the force of the sword to tell engineers who developed a technology with the expectation they could sell it to provide for their families, “Your product is outlawed”?
And where do we draw the line? Should podcasting be outlawed because it put journalists and newscasters out of work?
This is where I think Sowell has a point.
Everything government does has unintended consequences.
Right wing central planners are no more omniscient then left wing central planners.
I think free speech requires a free market.
Without a free market, Musk can’t buy Twitter.
And after he bought Twitter, he fired a bunch of people.
Is that legit under Carlson’s system?
I just think it’s a case of tunnel vision on Carlson’s part.
Maybe it feels better to protect truck drivers than engineers and podcasters than engineers and journalists because it favors “the little guy.”
But I still question it.
Bottom line: the free market is more of a principle than a pragmatic thing.
—
If you want your dreams to come true, don’t oversleep.
—
One of the most rational things you can do is recognize that rationality has limits.
—
The most important question in life is, “What are you willing to die for?”
—
“A madman is not someone who has lost his reason but someone who has lost everything but his reason.”
— G. K. Chesterton
—
The Christian faith can survive without America, but America cannot survive without Christian faith.
—
“America first” can only be true for Christians in a limited, qualified sense sense. It always has to be “Christ and his kingdom first.” “America first” can fit inside that framework as a political program, provided we understand that the best thing for America is to seek first the kingdom of God. Magistrates seek the kingdom of God by applying his civil law to their nation, serving as a terror to evildoers.
—
Why MAGA?
I would say MAGA is more friendly to a Christian social vision, includes more faithful Christians in its administration, and is a whole lot better than the only realistic alternative at this time. Christians can make use of MAGA, though it’s obviously flawed and sub-Christian in all kinds of ways. The only way to make America great is to make the church in America great. America cannot rise above the level of its church – or its families, for that matter. To make America great again, we have to make the church and family great again.
MAGA is a more secular version of what Pat Buchanan offered us in the 1990s.
—
The most important question you can ask is, “What are you willing to die for?” Your answer to that question will define your life.
—
“If the imagination were obedient, the appetites would give us very little trouble.”
— C. S. Lewis
—
Motherhood IS a career – and for women, it’s the most noble career there is.
—
We hear a lot about the problem of housing affordability. We don’t hear enough about the affordability of cars. The average new car price is now over $50k. How is that sustainable? It only works because so many people are willing to borrow money to buy what is surely going to be a depreciating asset.
It’s hard for me to believe there is not a market for stripped down vehicles but few are on the market. The cheapest pickup for sale today starts at $30k. Most are way over that mark. Some of this is due to government regulations – safety and fuel economy regulations add complexity, which adds to cost. Safety regulations increase the weight of a vehicle, which makes it harder for manufactures to meet economy regulations. So manufacturers have to overcomplicate drivetrains to squeeze out 1 or 2 more mpg. This hurts reliability and adds to repair costs when something breaks. The shade tree mechanic can’t do much on a new car because many repairs require propriety, specialized tools and so much is computerized/electronic.
Insurance costs are also way up.
We are becoming a “car poor” society, even as we are a “house poor” society.
Of course, much of this by design. The poorer people are, the easier it is for politicians to manipulate and control them. They more desperate people, they more likely they are to look to the state for salvation, which just increases the power of our political overlords.
—
“Sin consists concretely in placing a substitute on the throne. That substitute is not another creature in general, not even the neighbor, but the human self, the “ego” or “I.” The organizing principle of sin is self-glorification, self-divination; stated more broadly: self-love or egocentricity. A person wants to be an “I,” either without, next to, or in the place of God. Turning away from God is simultaneously a turning to self. Prior to this, God was the center of all human thought and action; now it is the person’s “I.” Humanity not only surrendered its true center but also replaced it with a false center.”
— Herman Bavinck on sin
—
A note on liturgical order:
Leviticus 9 gives the basic outline of the service. But there is still question about where certain set pieces of the service belong.
In many traditional liturgies, the sursum corda and Sanctus come right before the Eucharist. Jordan has argued convincingly that the sursum corda obviously belongs right after the absolution (sin offering) as part of the ascension offering, marking our ascent into the heavenly sanctuary. I don’t think there is one “right” place for the Sanctus. It’s being sung continually in heaven so we can join in at any point. I like Jordan’s order with the Sanctus as part of the ascension (the Sanctus is early in the liturgy in Revelation and follows Isaiah’s cleansing in Isaiah 6), but in a nod to tradition, at TPC we have kept it just before the Eucharist.
—
“Education is not a subject and does not deal in subjects. It is instead a transfer of a way of life.”
— G. K. Chesterton
—
Reformed theology stressed that it was the person of the Son who became flesh—not the substance [the underlying reality] but the subsistence [the particular being] of the Son assumed our nature. The unity of the two natures, despite the sharp distinction between them, is unalterably anchored in the person. As it does in the doctrine of the Trinity, of humanity in the image of God, and of the covenants, so here in the doctrine of Christ as well, the Reformed idea of conscious personal life as the fullest and highest life comes dramatically to the fore. . . All these developments in the doctrine of Christ are based on and occur within the boundaries of the Chalcedon symbol.
— Herman Bavinck
—
You know America is in crisis when there’s only one manual transmission, rear wheel drive, V8 sedan left on the market….and it happens to be a Cadillac. The feminization of American society is almost complete.
There are only about 20 models on the American market that still offer a manual transmission. Very sad.
https://carbuzz.com/cadillac-ct5-v-blackwing-only-manual-v8-rear-wheel-drive-sedan-left-usa/
—
“There are two types of education…One should teach us how to make a living, and the other how to live.”
— John Adams
—
“In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government ought to be instructed…. No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people.”
– Noah Webster, preface to An American Dictionary of the English Language, 1828
—
Wilson makes many good points in this post on slavery and the book of Philemon. A few supplemental thoughts: anyone who objects to the way the the Bible in both the OT and NT tolerates and regulates slavery simply doesn’t understand ancient history, whether in the Hebrew world or the Roman world. The Bible certainly acknowledges that slavery is suboptimal – the most famous redemption story in the OT, the exodus, is the story of slaves being freed; Exodus required fellow Hebrew slavers to be set free in the seventh year; Deuteronomy 23 did not require runaway slaves to be returned to their masters, the opposite of America’s Antebellum Fugitive Slave Law; Paul tells slaves in 1 Corinthians 7 if they have the opportunity to gain their freedom and thus improve their station in life, they should do so, indicating freedom is preferable to slavery, all things being equal; both OT and NT teaching required slaves to be treated humanely; etc. But it’s important to understand that in the pre-industrial, pre-modern world, slavery, rather than freedom, was man’s natural condition. Slavery was preferable to many alternatives, such as starving to death. Life was incredibly difficult for the vast majority of people. In many cases, slavery was necessary to survival. This is why some slaves chose to stay with their masters even when they could have gone free (eg, Exodus 21). Those who look at the slavery of the ancient world in horror simply reveal their ignorance of history and historical conditions. This is not at all a defense of slavery as institution; just a realistic appraisal of how the pre-modern world and pre-modern economies worked. A slave in the ancient world who was freed did not necessarily enter into an easier or more prosperous life. He might even find life harder as a freedman. Hobbes’ description of the state of nature was apt description of life for most pre-modern people: nasty, brutish, and short.
The truth is that the only places in the world that successfully eradicated slavery were cultures influenced by the Bible. The West was the first to outlaw slavery in the medieval period, and then did it again in early modern period. Islam and paganism have no impulse to eradicate slavery. The Christian faith arose in a world dominated by slavery, and did not call for a violent (and destructive) revolution that would have ended slavery. Such a revolution would have done more harm than good. Rather, the Christian gospel set a ticking time bomb next to the institution of slavery. When the leaven of the gospel sufficiently leavened society, slavery ended. The gospel, and the gospel alone, creates free men – men who are freed from slavery to sin and who can therefore eventually work to gain freedom from other forms of slavery. Spiritual freedom eventually brings economic and political freedom as well, as the implications of the gospel get worked out.
The modern world shows us that many people simply cannot handle freedom. They need someone to tell them what to do. They cannot take responsibility for themselves. In the modern world, many are debt slaves (in many cases this is inevitable). Think about how many Americans live in dependence on the government’s welfare programs to provide for them – this too is a form of slavery, though disguised. Freedom brings with it responsibility, and many people do not want that responsibility.
Wilson’s post: https://youtu.be/0U9hFlcr9CM?si=kfqp2tKBG8_cjfEt
—
The Christian faith inescapably theonomic. I was listening to a short overview of George Wallace’s 1968 presidential candidacy and they did some “man on the street” type interviews of his supporters. Here is a quote from an Auburn student in 1967:
“Well, this is our world. We’re the ones to inherit this world and George Wallace, Lyndon Johnson, Ronald Reagan, Romney, the rest of them will pass on. They’ll leave it to us. And so what they make will be what they leave to us. And what kind of world they leave to us? I believe George Wallace is a type of man that will leave to this country. A world we can be proud of. Not a world that they’d like for you to believe where there’s prejudice and bias against a man. I’ve never hated another man in my whole life. I’ve always tried to my folks brought me up to try to be a Christian and I believe that way. Another thing I believe is that there has been a breakdown in this country is of young people — they’ve lost Christianity in their life. They have lost a meaning for God. And I believe God has a very definite place in everybody’s life, in political life. This country was founded by Christians. Well, Governor Wallace is a very religious man and he holds that uh some of his highest principles are governed by the law of God and I think all men are governed by the law of God. That law comes first before any law.”
I’m not saying Wallace really applied the law of God in his politics – I’m not an expert on Wallace and obviously he had racist views that he eventually repented of. His views on segregation were deeply problematic. He was a Democrat. But it’s very interesting that this young American college student in 1967 is saying that America is a Christian country that should be governed, even in its politics, by the law of God. Most likely, he had not been reading Rushdoony.
But he knew the Bible was authoritative over all of life, including politics. All Christians know this unless bad teachers and pastors beat it out of them.
See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4YwSfMZS8U
—
Protestant and heavily Protestantized Roman Catholic nations are First World nations, Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox nations Second World nations, Islamic and pagan nations are Third World nations. Religion creates culture. Protestants have created the best, wealthiest, and most moral nations. If religious trees are known by the fruits they produce, Protestants are on top.
—
Conventional wisdom says the “3 M’s” made people lean more and more conservative as they got older, namely, marriage, multiplication, and a mortgage. It’s no surprise today young people lean socialist – they are not getting married, not having children, and they don’t own anything except debt. They have no skin in the game and no future orientation or hope. It’s no surprise they want to burn the system down.
—
IMMIGRATION + WELFARE STATE = TOTAL DISASTER
—
Before you worry too much about Christianizing your nation, focus on Christianizing yourself and your family. We can’t speak prophetically to our non-Christian civil realm until our own house is in order. We can’t give what we don’t have.
—
A reminder to parents:
A smartphone doesn’t just give your child access to the internet, it gives the internet access to your kid.
—
[T]he object of the Magistrate’s power as a Magistrate is the external man, and earthly things, because he doth not in such a spiritual way of working, take care of the two Tables of the Law, as the Pastor doth; and yet the spiritual good and edification of the Church in the right preaching of the Word, the Sacraments, and pure discipline is his end. It is true, whether the blasphemer profess repentance, or not, the Magistrate is to punish, yea and to take his life, if he in seducing of many, have prevailed, but yet his end is edification, even in taking away the life; for he is to put away evil, ‘that all Israel may fear, and do so no more.’
— Samuel Rutherford
—
Wives need to be reminded of their biblical duties just as often as husbands. They need to have their characteristic sins pointed out just as often as men.
—
Progressivism is based on the idea that there are no fixed truths and society is continually evolving.
Progressivism is a form of humanism, which makes man the measure of all things.
—
The left is hellbent on destroying children. Child sacrifice is at their heart of their demented, deranged religion. Sometimes they murder children in the womb. Sometimes they cut off their genitals and pump them full of cross-sex hormones when they are older. They indoctrinate children into soul-destroying, civilization-crushing thought patterns in public schools. In all kinds of ways, the left wages a war on children.
—
Stedman makes a good point here. We want marriage rates to go up and this kind of branding won’t do that. We need to give young men more reasons to get married, not fewer. A mark of feminism is pathologizing/demonizing the male sex drive. We have to respect the way God made men. The “normal” male sex drive is the strongest drive in his life – by design. Men who properly order and discipline their sex drive are the builders of civilization. I’m very sympathetic to arguments against hormonal birth control, but the framing made in this video is rooted in a flawed understanding of sex (which is, unfortunately, a feature of Roman Catholicism).
The reality is that, while sex is not a need for survival the way food and water are needed for survival, it is most certainly a need within marriage. Sex may not be necessary to survival as such, but it is certainly necessary to a marriage’s survival – and civilization’s survival. Sex within marriage is a very legitimate need. It’s not just that the man “needs” sex. The wife needs sex as well. Their marriage needs sex to be what God designed it to be. God did not give us powerful sexual desires just to frustrate us. He gave those drives to us because they are integral to our purpose in life. Sex is good; sexual desire is good; sex within marriage is the fulfillment of God’s design, as it creates a joyful bond within the marriage and creates new life.
An example: Proverbs 5 commands a man to “rejoice in the wife of his youth” and “be satisfied with her breasts at all times.” To be blunt, a wife should not interfere with her husband’s obedience to these commands. Another example: 1 Corinthians 7:5 teaches the husband and wife to not deprive one another sexually; they should only refrain from sex when they mutually consent to do so, which means that spouses should be sexually available to one another at all times, in principle, unless both agree to abstain. All of these teachings can be qualified and nuanced in various ways. But Scripture most certainly teaches sex within marriage is a great blessing – not only because it gives life to new image bearers, but because sexual union is the heart and glory of the marriage covenant.
—
Yes, thanks. I have made similar arguments. Stedman makes some great points. Women cannot nag men into leading (or doing anything else, for that matter). If a woman leads a man into his leadership position/role, he’s still not really leading, and they both know it. To the degree he does lead in such a case, it will only be in the ways she permits, which still isn’t leadership. It’s responsibility without authority. This is something a lot of conservative women who might otherwise have helpful things to say do not understand about men and the male/female dynamic. In general, each sex has to police their own. Again, lots of great wisdom from Stedman here.
—
Truth, goodness, and beauty don’t come cheap. You can’t get them on the discount rack. Building the next Christendom will require sacrifice on the part of God’s people. There is no way to build a God-glorifying culture without funding it. The kinds of projects we need to undertake are expensive. If we aren’t willing to make the necessary sacrifices, we can’t really complain about the state of the world. Progressives fund their causes; will Christians fund theirs in greater measure?
In the NIL era of college sports, the program whose fans spend the most are likely to win championships, assuming the money is well invested. The culture war works the same way. Obviously it takes more than spending money to win. But you won’t win without it. Find worthwhile places to put your money, then do it. Invest in the Christian future. Invest in the next Christendom. Such investments will pay historical/temporal and eternal dividends.
—
Tucker Carlson has made a good point about how journalism has been corrupted over the last few generations. The role of mainstream media has been completely inverted, especially since 2020, but the problem goes back much further.
Journalists used to hold people with power accountable on behalf of people without power. Today, they squash people without power on behalf of those who do have power. Journalists are more concerned with reinforcing the narrative of Leftwing elites than telling the truth, come what may. Journalists used to punch up; now they punch down.
—
Free enterprise/markets + Christian virtue = wealth creation
—
Marxism just assumes capital is already there and economics becomes a contest over who owns it. But where does capital come from the first place? This is part of Marxism’s incoherency.
—
Free speech requires free markets and free enterprise. If the state controls the media, or will not allow you to start your own media company or buy an existing one, practically speaking, there is no free speech. Take Elon Musk @elonmusk buying Twitter – Musk saved free speech because companies like Twitter had become accomplices to the government in censoring politically incorrect speech. Musk was able to buy Twitter on the free market and save freedom of speech in our modern day “public square.” In a fully socialist regime, there would have been no way to buy Twitter. Central planners never would have allowed it (and Democrats did all they could to stop it). Again, for free speech to have meaning, there must be free enterprise and a free market. Otherwise you won’t be able to fund free speech platforms and your free speech won’t have a place to be spoken. Just a reminder: historic Christian conservatism is a package deal. One freedom (in this case, free speech) requires a host of other freedoms to get traction.
—
Conservative Christians envision a free society, but it must be an ordered freedom grounded in virtue. Liberty and virtue always go together; there can truly be one without the other.
—
All modern liberation movement have resulted in slavery rather than liberation. Feminism was supposed to result in liberation for women but has made them miserable. The Civil Rights Movement was supposed to liberate blacks, but in many ways blacks are worse off now than before. The sexual revolution liberated sex from marriage but in doing so has brought heartache, cratering marriage rates, and the endless bloodshed of abortion.
The point is not that there were no injustices or problems to correct. Revolutions sometimes identify a real problem. But modern liberation movements have not provided a true liberation or correction.
—
“We have lost our national instinct because we have lost the idea of Christendom from which nations come. In freeing ourselves from Christianity, we freed ourselves from freedom.”
— G.K. Chesterton
—
2 + 2 = 4 is only true because the Triune God exists.
—
Without the Triune God, nothing has meaning. Reality is just atoms banging around. And, by the way, where did the atoms come from?
—
“One canon reduced to writing by God himself, two testaments, three creeds, four general councils, five centuries, and the series of Fathers in that period—the centuries, that is, before Constantine, and two after, determine the boundary of our faith.”
—Lancelot Andrewes
—
Men are the problem solvers of the human race.
—
“When God will punish, he will first take away the understanding.”
–George Herbert
—
“So the maples formed a union
And demanded equal rights
“The oaks are just too greedy
We will make them give us light”
Now there’s no more oak oppression
For they passed a noble law
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe, and saw”
—
Lyrics from “The Trees” by Rush
Rush warned Gen X about the dangers of socialism and egalitarianism. Who’s doing the same for Gen Z? 84% of young females and 64% of young men voted for Mamdani. Crazy.
I suppose the closest the younger generation has is the original Incredibles movie, which openly attacked the mediocrity of egalitarian societies. But the message apparently didn’t really stick.
—
Socialists say there shouldn’t be any billionaires. It’s a political philosophy built on envy and economic illiteracy.
Socialists frequently attack @elonmusk, so take him as an example. How much of Musk’s assets are other people owed? What share do you think you deserve? Most of his wealth is not in cash, it’s tied up in his businesses, so if the state is going to stop Musk from being billionaire, it’s going to have to steal businesses he built and give them to others. In that kind of system, why would anyone try to build a large, successful business – a business that is successful precisely because it provides what people want at prices they are willing to pay? Why build a business if the government is going to plunder it and confiscate it?
There’s no way socialists will be satisfied with taking down billionaires, because there still won’t be enough money to do everything socialists want the state to do. So millionaires will have to be next. And so on, until all wealth creators and job creators have been destroyed. This is why socialism drags everyone down to poverty. Even if the government took all of Musk’s assets and used them to feed the poor, there will still be poor people. So then what? Who gets plundered next? A socialist state will devour wealth until there is no wealth left to plunder. That’s the logic of socialism. Socialism creates a rolling revolution that never ends because human needs and wants are never fully met in a world of scarcity. If government takes on the job of keeping everyone happy, of being the provider for everyone, then the state’s desire to take will be insatiable. As Margaret Thatcher said, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money” – including billionaires’ money. This is why socialism is the politics of envy. It must demonize the successful in order to have appeal. It’s the politics of lazy losers.
Besides, why assume the government can do more good with Musk’s money than Musk himself? The government cannot create wealth. It can print money, but that’s not the same as creating wealth; in fact, it dilutes wealth by causing inflation. The government cannot really create jobs, unless they are government jobs (bureaucracy), and it does so by draining resources from productive people to give them to unproductive people. Musk has not only created wealth for himself, he has created incredible wealth and opportunity for others, through stock ownership, new jobs that pay well, etc. If you really want a stake in Musk’s businesses, if you really want to take ownership of the “means of production,” buy shares in one of his companies. If the state demonizes wealth creation by taking from men like Musk, where will new jobs, innovation, and investment opportunities come from? This is why socialism is predicated upon the economic illiteracy of the populace. People who favor socialism have no idea where wealth comes from, where jobs come from, where innovation comes from. It’s an economic dead end.
This is why socialism can never work in the long run. What lower income people need more than anything is not the redistribution of wealth but a healthy, competitive economy with opportunity. We don’t need fewer billionaires, we need many more. A rising tide lifts all boats. Economic freedom and competition are crucial to nation’s well-being. If we want a free and flourishing nation, we must encourage and reward those who generate wealth and create new jobs. It takes skill to create wealth and jobs. It requires risk. Who is going to develop those skills and take those risks if there is no reward in it? Socialism and Marxism contradict human nature. The entrepreneur does far more for the common good than the government bureaucrat. “The poor you will always have with you,” as Jesus said. But socialism will make everyone poor. Free enterprise and entrepreneurship always reduce poverty and make life better for most everyone. Of course, as I’ve said before, there is no economic system that can create wealth for those who refuse to put in the work – nor should there be.
An assessment:
—
The second commandment is still in force. Those who kiss idols bring a curse on their children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren.
Besides that, a degree of faggotry is involved in kissing icons. Kissing icons is gay.
—
If you have to make excuses for a man, he wasn’t the man you thought he was.
—
If you have to make excuses for a man, he’s not really a man
And a man who makes excuses for himself is definitely not a man.
—
Some people don’t want you know this, but you can simply trust in Jesus and have all your sins forgiven.
—
“Socialism is a first cousin to communism….Socialists don’t like people to do things for themselves. Socialists like to get people dependent on the state. You will never build a great society that way.”
— Margaret Thatcher
—
An old thread on creation:
God made the world in 6 days about 6000 years ago
1/4
Genesis 1 is clear about the days of creation – but if there is any doubt, the wording of the 4th commandment in Exodus 20 should settle it
2/4
Genesis 5 and 11 give us chronologies for the express purpose of providing a timeline going back to Adam Biblical religion is historical religion and chronology is the backbone of history
3/4
The NT draws doctrinal and ethical implications out of the historicity of the creation account
See Mark 10:6-9, 1 Timothy 2:9-15, 1 Cor 11:1-16
If the creation account is not taken as history, many other things taught by Scripture (especially sexual ethics) collapse
4/4
—
From Tucker Carlson’s interview with Chris Williamson, on birth rates:
“In South Korea, for every hundred South Koreans, there are four great grandchildren. A 96% decrease.”
“You want to get really redpilled [probably should be “blackpilled” – RL]? In 100 years there will be only North Koreans at current rates of fertility. So that means the last Stalinist system in the world works better on a fundamental level, which is to say it reproduces itself more effectively than the most precise copy of American society ever created, which is South Korea, occupied by American troops for 75 years. It’s it’s an American clone. I don’t know if you’ve been there. Great people. Awesome people. I love the South Koreans, but they’re committing mass suicide. Meanwhile, their Stalinist sibling, which like the most repressive society ever, is reproducing. What is that? I’m against North Korea. I love South Korea. I’m just being clear about my preferences. But is there a better measure of success than a birth rate? I don’t really know that there is another measure of success other than a birth rate. What would it be? GDP?”
“Well, if you can increase GDP, which we have, but decrease the birth rate, you have perhaps traded the thing that you want for the thing that’s supposed to get it.”
Full interview: https://youtu.be/DWybONUddV4 The best part of this interview was probably Williamson’s insight into why AI sexbots will never replace real women.
—
Secular progressives are generous with other people’s money. Evangelical are generous with their own money.
The problem with socialism/the welfare state is that you run out of money before you meet all human needs. Socialism can never solve the problem it aims to solve, so it has to continually drain wealth from productive people and give it to unproductive people.
—
“To love at all is to be vulnerable. Love anything and your heart will be wrung and possibly broken. If you want to make sure of keeping it intact you must give it to no one, not even an animal. Wrap it carefully round with hobbies and little luxuries; avoid all entanglements. Lock it up safe in the casket or coffin of your selfishness. But in that casket, safe, dark, motionless, airless, it will change. It will not be broken; it will become unbreakable, impenetrable, irredeemable. To love is to be vulnerable.”
― C.S. Lewis, The Four Loves
—
“For whatever reason God chose to make man as he is— limited and suffering and subject to sorrows and death—He had the honesty and the courage to take His own medicine. Whatever game He is playing with His creation, He has kept His own rules and played fair. He can exact nothing from man that He has not exacted from Himself. He has Himself gone through the whole of human experience, from the trivial irritations of family life and the cramping restrictions of hard work and lack of money to the worst horrors of pain and humiliation, defeat, despair and death. When He was a man, He played the man. He was born in poverty and died in disgrace and thought it well worthwhile.”
― Dorothy L. Sayers, Creed or Chaos?
—
“Conflict between Christ and Caesar is not inevitable: in fact, Jesus specifically commanded His disciples to ‘render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s’ (Matt. 22:21). Conflict becomes inevitable when the secular authority – Caesar – demands for himself honors that belong only to God….In modern America, the state does not openly claim divine worship; but in effect it is seeking to make itself the center of all human loyalties, the goal of all human aspirations, the source of all human values, and the final arbiter of all human destiny. In so doing, without using the language of revelation, it is claiming to be divine…..”
— John W. Whitehead,
—
It wasn’t Charlie Kirk they hated. It was the truth they hated. Or to be more precise it The Truth – The Way, The Truth, and The Life.
—
One way men exert leadership is by singing their bass or tenor part loudly and joyfully in congregational singing.
—
Are women more easily deceived? George Orwell thought so, based on what he wrote in 1984:
“It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers−out of unorthodoxy.”
—
Proof women are more easily deceived:
Bikinis
Horoscopes
Voting patterns
Feminism
—
What the state did to the black family beginning in the 1960s, it is now seeking to do to all families. Marxism and socialism require the detection of marriage and family. But note that raw individualism leads to the same statist, socialist end. We must respect the governments God has ordained in church, family, and state.
—
George Washington’s Thanksgiving Proclamation of 1789:
“Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor– and whereas both Houses of Congress have by their joint Committee requested me to recommend to the People of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness.
Now therefore I do recommend and assign Thursday the 26th day of November next to be devoted by the People of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being, who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be– That we may then all unite in rendering unto him our sincere and humble thanks–for his kind care and protection of the People of this Country previous to their becoming a Nation–for the signal and manifold mercies, and the favorable interpositions of his Providence which we experienced in the course and conclusion of the late war–for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty, which we have since enjoyed–for the peaceable and rational manner, in which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national One now lately instituted–for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed; and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and in general for all the great and various favors which he hath been pleased to confer upon us.
And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech him to pardon our national and other transgressions– to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually–to render our national government a blessing to all the people, by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed–to protect and guide all Sovereigns and Nations (especially such as have shewn kindness unto us) and to bless them with good government, peace, and concord–To promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us–and generally to grant unto all Mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as he alone knows to be best.
Given under my hand at the City of New York the third day of October in the year of our Lord 1789.”
This is an obvious manifestation of historic American Christian nationalism.
—
Reality remains undefeated.
—
Why are the sexes at odds today? Men and women are no longer getting what they were designed to get from one another, so they seek it elsewhere.
God designed women to rely on men for provision and protection, but now they look for the state to give those things. We see it in the way women vote, especially single women. They are looking to the state to be a surrogate husband and father. They vote for socialism, and socialism in turn aims to make masculinity expendable. Of course, the state cannot really fill the void for women that a husband would fill, so women still feel alone and miserable even though they have everything that feminism told them they need to be happy. Many women find out too late that feminism is one big lie. They still seek male validation, mainly through getting male attention on social media, but it doesn’t replace the role a good husband would play in her life any more than the state’s social programs.
Meanwhile, the strongest drive in a man’s life is his sex drive. Finding entitled, feminist women either unattractive or unattainable, he turns to pron to get his needs met. Like women, he settles for a counterfeit of what God designed him to have and it just makes him miserable, shamed, and emasculated. Men still need respect, but since they cannot get it from a woman, they seek it elsewhere, in athletic or career achievement, in video games, or in becoming a social media edge lord. But nothing replaces the respect a man was designed to receive from a woman. Without that respect, he feels alone and adrift. Lacking a wife and children, he lacks purpose. Feeling like society does not need or want what masculinity offers, many men take the blackpill and drop out. Many men get tired of being accused of having “male privilege” even though they have not enjoyed any such privileges; indeed, being male has only brought them scorn and scapegoating. It’s no surprise, then, that many young men embrace a victim mindset and turn to radicalized online voices.
The only way out of this mess we have created is repentance. We have to unwind the whole sexual revolution. We have to return to our creational design and to God’s law. There is simply no other way out of this maze. Not only does our spiritual well-being depend upon it; the future of civilization depends upon it. Women have to repent of their particular sins; men do as well. We must reject the whole paradigm of the sexual revolution, which made premarital fornication the norm, wrecked marriage by giving us no fault divorce and Obergefell, denied obvious sexual differences between men and women, and promoted the travesty of the LGBTQ movement. The sexes are not interchangeable. We are designed for specific roles and responsibilities. Sex is designed for the covenant of marriage. Period. Can we embrace the world as God made it? Or will we keep doubling down on rebellion?
Women must understand that God has called them to be submissive wives and nurturing mothers. They must prioritize husband above boss and motherhood above career. There will be no solution to what ails our culture unless women can recognize and embrace what God made them to do. This will require humility on the part of many modern women. Many modern women are complete fools when it comes to understanding men, attraction, marriage roles, and what will bring fulfillment. Meanwhile, men have their own problems. Many young men are figuring out what they need to do, and are preparing themselves for the kind of leadership roles God calls them to fill. But we still have far too many men who lack ambition, drive, and courage. We have too many soft, effeminate men who simply cannot rise to meet the challenges of the moment.
Something as unnatural as the alienation of the sexes from one another is a clear sign of judgment. In Romans 1:18-32, Paul describes the burning out of a civilization that has gone after idols and immortality. The end result of rejecting the Creator is alienation from creation itself — seen most clearly in sexual confusion. The prominence of LGBTQ today is a sign that our culture is given over to its rebellion — but collapsing dating rates, marriage rates, and birth rates are too. Our culture has embraced an unnatural way of life for men and women in virtually every way — we are running our hands against the grain of God’s creation design, and so it’s no surprise we are getting splinters. Again, I say it: The only way out of the mess is repentance. We must turn from our sin back to the God who made us. The Bible must replace Instagram, Hollywood and Taylor Swift as our source of guidance. We must turn away from the folly of thinking we know better than God. We must reject the lie of autonomy that tells us we can create our own sexual standards – or have no standards at all. We must reject the foolishness of thinking that sex and gender are fluid, and so we can define ourselves however we want. We will keep banging our heads against the wall of reality until we bow before the living God, and lay everything before him – including our sexuality.
—
Contrary to Ken Burns, America’s founding fathers did not get their ideas for representative government from the Iroquois Indians, but from Presbyterians.
—
The best thing a mom and dad can do for their kids (other than passing along Christian faith) is give them the gift of happily married parents.
A happy and stable marriage is the best foundation for a happy and stable family life once kids come along. A home life full of strife, arguing, disagreement, cynicism, grumbling, disrespect, eye rolling, and other forms of “drama” between mom and dad will inevitably impact children, even at a very early age. This isn’t just something we can derive from Scripture; there are plenty of studies of various sorts that suggest a link between emotional/relational problems later in life and childhood stress, often due to parental conflict. Any stress or conflict between mom and dad will ripple out and reverberate through the rest of the family — and will do so even if mom and dad are trying to keep their conflicts private and out of the sight of children, it can still create an atmosphere of anxiety. Children can just sense when mom and dad aren’t right. Parents, do all you can to make sure the home you bring your children into is a home already filled with joy and peace. Nothing will give your children more confidence than knowing that mom and dad are overflowing in their love for one another.
Having a happy home is what makes discipline effective. If the home is characterized by constant division, then discipline for a child is a moment of acute pain in a life of chronic pain. If the home is characterized by peace and fellowship, then the discipline makes the child feel excluded from something joyous and glorious — and he wants back into that joy and glory as soon as possible and so he is incentivized to repent and restore fellowship.
—
One thing women often do not understand is just how much men value peace in the home. Men want to fight their battles outside the home, not inside the home; men want to fight for their wives (and children), not with their wives (and children). Women will sometimes stir the pot with their husbands….it’s just the way the fall has impacted them, going back to Genesis 3:16. This is where the lessons from Friedman’s Failure of Nerve book can really come in handy. Husbands, you can learn to stay relationally connected to your wife without getting caught up in any unnecessary strife or drama (Friedman calls this “differentiated leadership”). Good husbands are not intimidated or controlled by their wives’ strong emotional reactions, but help to shape and rein in her emotional reactions. Another related point: Men are often oblivious to the most common sins of women and so we do not correct them when we should — sins like pettiness, gossip, manipulativeness, disrespect, nagging, etc. But every husband needs to develop the ability and gravitas to correct his wife — and the conscientiousness and social awareness to know when she needs it.
—
Adults should make sacrifices for the good of children rather than sacrificing children so they can fulfill their desires as adults.
—
Whether or not a man insists on taking his family to church while on vacation is a good test of his faithfulness, maturity, and leadership. It’s a good test of his churchmanship.
—
Jesus is the true Israel. All those in union with him by faith are true Israelites.
Many fleshly descendants of Abraham have been broken out of the tree because of their refusal to trust in Abraham’s true Seed, Jesus. And many Gentile branches have been grafted into the family tree of Abraham by trusting in Jesus.
The church has not replaced old covenant Israel; the church continues Israel in new covenant form. The new covenant church is the Israel of God, even as old covenant Israel was the church of God under the old covenant. God’s plan, revealed in Genesis 12, was always to bring Gentile families and nations into the Abrahamic covenant.
—
This is the gospel: At the cross, God did to Jesus what he should have done to me because of what my sin did to him.
—
On Nick Fuentes:
I haven’t followed Nick too closely, but I’m sure he gets many things right. He also pretty vile – he’s not another Charlie Kirk, obviously.
From what I can gather, his appeal to young men is largely based being transgressive/edgy. He appeals to those who want to burn the system down rather than reform it. This is totally understandable, though problematic.
For young men growing up in public schools, constantly shamed and scapegoated simply for being male, the attraction of his message is no surprise.
Young men are accused of having “male privilege” but have never experienced any of those privileges – just the opposite, in fact, as their masculinity has been pathologized.
Guys like Fuentes will continue to grow in popularity until the great feminization is reversed.
The fruit growing on the Fuentes tree is telling. He does not make young men better men. He does not give them hope (the way Kirk did). He does make them angrier. He black pills them instead of making them more resilient and prudent.
—
A tree is know by its fruits. It seems to me that disciples of Fuentes are getting black pilled. He doesn’t give young men hope, a mission, or a plan, like Kirk did.
He does make young men angrier.
I do not think anyone who is single and childless can be trusted to really care about the future in the way those with families do.
He has diagnosed many of our society’s problems, but he’s not going to give real solutions. He encourages more of a victim mindset, when what’s needed is grit and resilience.
He’s more of a spectator and critic than someone who is actually in the game.
That’s why I was a bit surprised Tucker had him on, unless Tucker just wanted access to his followers. Tucker strikes me as closer to Kirk than Fuentes – seeing the problems but also actively working to solve them, but just point them out.
—
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”
—Voltaire
—
I’m not a big Dreher fan, but his summary of the right’s groyper/anti-Semitism problem has some insights. I don’t agree with all of this, but a good bit overlaps with what I have written elsewhere, especially concerns about the “burn it all down” crowd:
- The Groyper thing is real. It is not a fringe movement, in that it really has infiltrated young conservative Washington networks to a significant degree.
- Irrational hatred of Jews (and other races, but especially Jews) is a central core of it. This is evil. If postliberal conservatism requires making peace with antisemitism and race hatred, count me out.
- It cannot be negotiated with, because it doesn’t have traditional demands. It wants to burn the whole system down. It really does.
- At the same time, the gatekeepers of the Right aren’t going to be able to make it go away, because they have less power than ever. Dealing with this is going to require great skill and subtlety, and courage.
- This malign movement didn’t just appear from nowhere. There are within it legitimate grievances. And, as I keep saying, it emerged in a culture that, per Hannah Arendt’s diagnosis, is primed to believe totalitarian things.
- The Left got there first. This is not a case of “whatabout”; for almost two decades, left-wing radicals have marched through institutions and imposed illiberal, race-based leftist policies that openly intended to discriminate against whites, males, and anybody who dissented. You cannot understand the rise of the Groypers without understanding this first.
- Conservatives like me had hoped that Trump’s anti-woke pushback would simply restore the meritocratic status quo. It turns out that the Zoomercons don’t want that. They want revenge.
- This has the potential to destroy conservatism politically. In actual existing America, a white nationalist party that demonizes non-whites who would otherwise be drawn to a conservative message will alienate those voters. Even if all whites voted for the white nationalist party, it still wouldn’t win. But very many whites, including white Christians, will want nothing to do with it.
- It also poses the risk of wrecking the new, post-MAGA conservatism, whose natural heir is JD Vance. There will be old-school normie conservatives like Sen. Ted Cruz who will do their best to hang Fuentes and Jew-hatred around JD Vance’s neck. There are enough living Boomers and normie Republicans who would rather vote for a suboptimal candidate like Cruz than take their chances with a candidate who, fair or not, has been tarred with the evil of anti-Semitism and race hatred via Fuentes and Carlson.
- Anti-Semitism is spreading like a virus among religious conservatives of the Zoomer generation. They’re getting it through online influencers, but apparently their pastors and parents are either not fighting back, or have lost authority in the minds of these young people. This is irrational. For example, I heard from a number of Zoomercon Christians that Zoomer trad Catholics are making antisemitism part of their spirituality — this, despite the fact that the Catholic Church explicitly condemns it. The same phenomenon, I am hearing, exists among Zoomercon Orthodox and Protestants. Putting aside politics, this is total spiritual poison.
- I anticipate that the liberal media is going to have a field day with this, in part to distract from the ugly fact that antisemitism is triumphant among Zoomer progressives, and that the new face of the Democratic Party is Zohran Mamdani, a woke young Millennial who has made a career of intense hostility to Israel, bordering on anti-Semitism, if not actual anti-Semitism (I believe he is anti-Semitic, but it’s arguable.)
- Conservatives — Jewish, Christian, and agnostic — who support Israel are going to have to think very hard about how to proceed. Support for Israel has collapsed among the young, and it’s not coming back anytime soon. This is the political reality we have to deal with. We can’t wish it away, or cancel it away.
- The intra-conservative fight is here, and we can’t avoid it. Nor should we, for the sake of party unity. In The House Of Government, Yuri Slezkine said that the willingness of parents to indulge their radical children played a significant role in the eventual triumph of Bolshevism. Some of these parents comforted themselves with the thought that their adult kids would grow out of their revolutionary fervor. Others may have hated what their kids believed, but didn’t want to risk alienating them, so they stayed quiet, and passively supported them, hoping for the best. VP Vance said publicly last week that this conservative “infighting” is a pointless distraction. I told him personally, and respectfully, in a meeting last Friday that I disagree, and why. And I told him why I think all this is a direct threat to his political future. I stand with Gerard Baker of the WSJ:This is why Mr. Vance’s breezy dismissal of the struggle to extirpate extremists from the right-wing coalition as “infighting” is a mistake. What he belittles as intramural squabbling is the difficult and necessary work of moral and political hygiene for the conservative movement—and the country. What we saw at Heritage last week wasn’t some distraction from more important work. It was the latest episode in the struggle of good against evil.
Dreher also gives a fair assessment of Buchanan and Israel’s response to Hamas:
“Anyway, you can extrapolate from Jewish enthusiasm for communism in Eastern Europe and Russia to their tendency to be enthusiasts for liberalism in America. Remember, it wasn’t until the 1960s or thereabouts that universities and other WASP-dominated institutions began dropping quotas designed to limit or keep out Jews. Why wouldn’t they want to advocate for a more liberal social order, one that didn’t oppress them?
On the Right, many of us gripe about the neoconservatives, the leading intellectuals of whom were Jewish. But we forget that neoconservatism simply was conservatism in the Reagan era. Pat Buchanan was famously not a neocon, but his protest wasn’t so much against right-wing Jews as it was the right-wing mainstream, which was a conservatism that had made peace with post-WW2 modernity.
About Israel, as you know I support Israel, but I also agree that criticism of the Israeli government does not logically imply anti-Semitism. Still, it’s rare, in my experience, to talk at length with people of the Left or the Right who have strong criticism of the Israeli government, who don’t elide it pretty easily into noxious views of Jews as Jews. That has been my experience, anyway. One thing that chaps my backside is the double standard lots of Israel critics have for the Jewish state, versus other countries. Any reasonable country in the world who had suffered what Israel did on 10/7, and who faced a religiously fanatical enemy next door whose founding document (the Hamas Charter) explicitly sacralizes the elimination of the Jewish state, would have done what the Israelis did. For us, it’s theoretical; for them, it’s existential.”
—
Feminists tell their daughters, “Make sure you are never financially dependent on your husband. Prioritize your career because he might not provide for you financially.” But imagine if fathers told their sons, “Make sure you are never dependent on your wife for sexual fulfillment. Your wife might not satisfy you, so keep a side chick.” This kind of counsel destroys marriages before they start. Marriage is a relationship of mutual dependence. A man should bear the brunt of provisioning for the household. A wife should be sexually available for her husband. In marriage, each spouse serves and blesses the others.
—
Are you thinking that you will mind these things tomorrow? Remember the words of Solomon: “Boast not yourself of tomorrow; for you know not what a day may bring forth.” (Proverbs 27:1.) “Serious things tomorrow,” said a heathen to one who warned him of coming danger; but his tomorrow never came. Tomorrow is the devil’s day — but today is God’s day. Satan cares not how spiritual your intentions may be, and how holy your resolutions — if only they are fixed for tomorrow. Oh! give not place to the devil in this matter. Answer him, “No! Satan, it shall be today — today!”
— J C Ryle
—
In your youth, Satan will tell you you are too young to serve God. In your elderly years, Satan will tell you you are too old to do anything for God. The truth is that in both youth and old age, God calls us to serve him. Today is the day and now is the time. Serve God with everything you have, where you are, as much as you are able. In Scripture, we find God using the very young, the very old, and every age in between, to serve his purposes.
—
“The path of the worldly man grows darker and darker every year that he lives; the path of the Christian is as a shining light, brighter and brighter to the very end.”
— J C Ryle
—
If we’re all the same as egalitarianism says, then why do we need diversity?
—
The 30 year mortgage was a bad idea; 50 year mortgages are even worse. Americans are already drowning in college loans and credit card debt. The last thing we need is another way to permanently enslave Americans to the bankers.
We do have a housing crisis in America. There are many reasons for that crisis, including millions of illegal immigrants competing with Americans for housing, often with government subsidies; investment firms buying up residential properties; too many regulations that choke out the supply of new housing; and a host of other factors. But 50 year mortgages do not solve the problem, and might make it worse by driving prices even higher.
Debt as a way of life is crushing. A BNPL mindset is destructive. It’s enslavement. If anything we should be going back to 7 year mortgages. The 50 year mortgage plan seems like a desperate move to fix the housing crisis without dealing with its deep structural problems. It also sounds a lot like the “you’ll own nothing and like it” mantra that comes from the hard left.
—
“The Marxian message of ‘exploitation’ helped sweep communists into power in countries around the world in the twentieth century, at a pace and on a scale seldom seen in history. There is clearly a political market for that message, and communists are just one of the ideological groups to use it successfully for their own purposes, despite how disastrously that turned out to be for millions of other human beings living under communist dictatorships.”
—Thomas Sowell
—
“The only foundation for a useful education in a republic is to be laid in Religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments.
Such is my veneration for every religion that reveals the attributes of the Deity, or a future state of rewards and punishments, that I had rather see the opinions of Confucius or Mahomed inculcated upon our youth, than see them grow up wholly devoid of a system of religious principles. But the religion I mean to recommend in this place, is that of the New Testament.
It is foreign to my purpose to hint at the arguments which establish the truth of the Christian revelation. My only business is to declare, that all its doctrines and precepts are calculated to promote the happiness of society, and the safety and well being of civil government. A Christian cannot fail of being a republican. The history of the creation of man, and of the relation of our species to each other by birth, which is recorded in the Old Testament, is the best refutation that can be given to the divine right of kings, and the strongest argument that can be used in favor of the original and natural equality of all mankind. A Christian, I say again, cannot fail of being a republican, for every precept of the Gospel inculcates those degrees of humility, self-denial, and brotherly kindness, which are directly opposed to the pride of monarchy and the pageantry of a court. A Christian cannot fail of being useful to the republic, for his religion teacheth him, that no man “liveth to himself.” And lastly, a Christian cannot fail of being wholly inoffensive, for his religion teacheth him, in all things to do to others what he would wish, in like circumstances, they should do to him.“
— Benjamin Rush
—
Soren Kierkegaard: “The tyrant dies and his rule is over, the martyr dies and his rule begins.”
—
“The highest, the transcendent glory of the American Revolution was this–it connected, in one indissoluble bond, the principles of civil government with the precepts of Christianity.”
– John Quincy Adams, Letter To An Autograph Collector, April 27, 1837
—
“The only way to drive away the Devil is through faith in Christ, by saying: ‘I have been baptized, I am a Christian.’”
–Martin Luther
—
Ben Franklin understood the problems with socialism and the welfare state:
“I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading them out of it. I observed that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer.”
—
The welfare state has a corrosive effect on society. It subsidizes immorality and penalizes virtue. And, as the saying goes, you get more of what you subsidize and less of what you penalize.
—
I can virtually guarantee you your great great great grandfather/mother had a harder life than you have today.
—
The main center section of Proverbs seems to be a random collection of aphorisms with no discernible structure or logic. This is odd because every other book of the Bible has a recognizable structure (often chiastic). But perhaps the apparent disorder of the proverbs is by design: just as life seems to come at us with an apparently random set of experiences and situations, so it is with Proverbs. Proverbs mirrors reality. It mirrors our experience. And yet it would not surprise me if someday, someone in the church discerns some kind of deep, hard-to-discover structure that explains the order and placement of the book’s aphorisms in the central section. This too would mirror reality. Events and experiences that seem random to us are really part of God’s grand and beautiful design, as he weaves all events together in light of his sovereign will.
—
How many of the “no kings” Trump protesters voted for a man who just said, “there is no problem is too big for government to solve”? Talk about delusional….
—
Found online – a great warning about socialism:
“This woman says the quiet part out loud and speaks an uncomfortable truth. Say it louder for the people in the back!
“If the Government feeds you, it can starve you. If the Government houses you, it can evict you. If the Government pays your utilities, it can turn them off. If the Government pays your cell phone, it can disconnect it. If the Government provides your transportation, it can decide when you go and where you can travel. If the Government takes care of your health, it can decide when it has spent enough money on you. If the Government educates your children, it can choose what they learn. If the Government raises your children, it can shape what they believe. If the Government controls your information, it can control your truth.
And when a Government controls all of those things, it doesn’t have to take your freedom, you will hand it over piece by piece in exchange for comfort. You’ll think you’re being cared for, when in reality is, you’re being kept.”
—
Every abortion represents an orgasm that should not have happened. Abortion sacrifices innocent children on the altar of sexual autonomy.
—
The parable of the leaven in Matthew 13 teaches the gospel will make its long slow march through institutions and nations.
—
Feminism and socialism in America are luxury beliefs. They depend upon comforts and prosperity they didn’t create, and will destroy if allowed to run their course.
—
A 2001 article from Joseph Sobran, pointing to the insights of Hillaire Belloc’s book “The Great Heresies,” written in the 1930s:
Back in the 1930s, when white men were preparing for another round of mutual slaughter, few of them paid any attention to the Muslim world. They assumed it to be a backward region that history had long since passed by.
One man saw it differently. The great Catholic polemicist Hilaire Belloc, an Englishman of French ancestry, remembered Islam’s past and predicted, in his book The Great Heresies, that it would one day challenge the West again. As late as 1683 its armies had threatened to conquer Europe, penetrating all the way to Vienna; Belloc believed that a great Islamic revival, even in the twentieth century, was altogether possible.
Belloc saw Islam not as an alien religion, but in its origins as a Christian heresy, adopting and adapting certain Christian doctrines (monotheism, the immortality of the soul, final judgment) and rejecting others (original sin, the Incarnation and divinity of Christ, the sacraments). Its simple, rational creed had a powerful appeal to Arabs who had known only the arbitrary gods of grim pagan religions. It swept the Arab world, then made converts — and conquests — far beyond Arabia.
Islam was a militant religion from the start. Mohammed himself conquered the entire Arabian Peninsula in just a few years. The new faith was torn by violent internal divisions even as it continued to spread. But spread it did, with incredible rapidity.
Christians had good reason to fear Islam, which soon conquered Spain and held it for centuries. But because Islam has little attraction for Christians, the West has generally failed to grasp its appeal for others, its profound and permanent hold on the minds of believers. Unlike the Christian West, the Muslim world has never had crises of faith like the Reformation and the Enlightenment. Islam is a simple religion, easily understood by ordinary people. Its commandments are rigorous but few…
Belloc admitted that the idea of a new Muslim challenge to the West seemed “fantastic,” but only because the West was “blinded” by “the immediate past.”
Taking a longer view, he saw Islam, though inferior in material power, as having a great advantage: its religious faith was still strong, while the West was losing its religion and consequently its morale. He thought it entirely possible that Islam would catch up technologically, while he doubted that the West would undergo a spiritual revival.
Are we seeing the beginning of the fulfillment of Belloc’s prophecy? If so, the current uproar over Islamic terrorism may turn out to be a mere superficial symptom of a much larger historical drama. The West is still strong, but it is dying. Islam is still weak, but it is growing. Never mind the terrorists; check the birthrate.
—
The looming showdown in the West is not between woke progressives and Christians. It will be between Islam (enabled, of course, by those woke progressives) and Christian faith.
Islam has been a scourge to Christendom from the start. God raised up Islam against the church in the same way he raised up Canaanites against old covenant Israel in the land of promise – as a test and judgment.
Islam is essentially a Christian heresy. In its beginnings, God used iconoclastic Islam to judge an icon-worshipping church. In our day, he is using the hardness of Islam to judge and expose the softness and effeminacy of the contemporary Western church.
Islam’s goal has always been to conquer Christendom. Today, not much of Christendom is left. It has largely fallen from within, by its own apostasy. But if Christendom is going to stand tall against the current Islamic invasion, as it has at times in the past (eg, the Battle of Tours), Christians are going to have to rediscover the strength of a fully biblical faith and culture. Islam has a comprehensive law. Islam expects victory. Islam keeps its children. Can Christians do the same, with the tools God has given us?
Of course, biblical faith is antithetical to Islam in most every way. The Christian way of salvation is entirely different. Sharia law and biblical law are very different. Christian patriarchy is very different from Islamic patriarchy. The Christian view of women, children, and sex is very different from the views of Islam. Islam has a very different way of doing evangelism (if you can call it that) than Christian faith. And so on. But many Christians today are half-hearted about their faith. Many Christians have diluted their faith. Meanwhile, Muslims are deadly serious about the mission they believe Allah has given them.
What will it be, Western man? Church bells or the adhan?
—
There are many reasons why civil magistrates should ordinarily be men, but here’s one that gets overlooked: The magistrate bears the sword (Romans 13). Civil rule is inherently masculine because it is inherently martial. Perhaps this easy to forget today because our magistrates do not fight our wars like the kings and judges of old. They are usually safely ensconced in government buildings while they send out professional soldiers to the battlefield. We never see a magistrate carry an actual sword (or any other weapon), even though all of them bear the power of the sword in some sense. Perhaps if our magistrates did carry weapons at all times – and especially if we expected them to be on the battlefield in times of war – we would better see why magistrates must ordinarily be men. We would also get a constant reminder of how civil power works: everything the state does, from taxation, to punishing criminals, to defending the nation, it does with the power of the sword. Or to modernize it, as it has been put, political power comes out of the barrel of a gun.
If we keep in mind everything the state does, it does with the sword, we’d also be quicker to see through the lies of socialism and Marxism. Socialism is appealing, in part, because it sounds so kind. It sounds so generous. It appeals to the entitled, to those with a victim mindset, to those who envy anyone with more. The promise of “free” stuff from a politician is hard to resist. Who doesn’t want free healthcare, transportation, childcare, etc.? But if the person promising all that “free” stuff had a sword in his hand as he did so, it would be a poignant reminder that anything the government “freely” gives to you, it coercively took from someone else. For all its promises of a kinder, gentler government that cares about your problems, government is still about coercive force. If someone puts a sword to your neck and says, “Give me your wallet,” that’s not kind or generous, even if he’s going to give the contents of your wallet to someone else (keeping a healthy cut for himself, of course). All civil power is rooted in the threat of violence. All civil power is the power of the sword. All civil power is inherently coercive.
Bottom line: Magistrates bear the sword, and everything they are obligated to do and everything they promise to do, requires the force of the sword to accomplish. The sword is how the state does whatever it does.
—
Stossel’s video gives a good, quick overview of what socialism does to cities: https://x.com/johnstossel/status/1986033253384630387?s=46&t=au-C34qTtl4rGPFr5igkAw
—
Young men, every woman in your life is testing you. Every woman in your life is trying to emasculate you – not necessarily intentionally, but it still happens. Your wife, your mom, your daughters are all in on it. They don’t necessarily mean to, but they will castrate you if you let them, if you don’t learn to stand up to them. They want to emasculate you, even if they don’t know it, and it’s your job to make sure it doesn’t happen. If you do let it happen, your wife will resent you.
—
When my girls were little, I used an illustration with them to help them understand the importance of emotional self-discipline. I told them that their emotions are like a wild horse, and they have to be the rider of that horse. They cannot just let the horse run around wherever it wants to. They have to steer the horse where it should go. They have to tame the horse. The point is not to destroy the horse (as if emotions needed to be eradicated) but to discipline the horse (so emotions are obedient to Christ).
—
Men, remember, it is not wrong for you to want what God has designed for you to have.
—
Feminism has taught women their biggest problem is lack of self-esteem. If only they got more compliments, more encouragement, more “you go girl” messaging, they’d be happier. Much of the church is complicit in promoting this lie.
—
Wives need to understand that being protected by their husbands and being submissive to their husbands go together. Wives also need to remember submitting to their husbands is a way of submitting to God and living under his blessing.
An unsubmissive wife cannot be protected. To illustrate this, sometimes I will draw a circle. The inside of the circle is where the husband wants his wife to be — that’s where she is obeying him, carrying out his vision for their household, submitting to his authority, etc. But inside that circle is also where she finds God’s blessing (because in obeying her husband she obeys God’s Word) and where she finds her husband’s protection. All too often wives live outside that circle, and then wonder why there is so much conflict in their marriages, why the marriage seems like one long unending argument day after day, why they feel unprotected and lack peace, etc. The counsel they need to hear is “Get back in the circle!”
—
Husbands, you are the head of your wife. It is not wrong to stand up to her. It is not wrong to stand up for yourself and the position God has given you to her as her head. In fact, many times righteousness requires you to stand up for yourself and your office in the face of her rebellion against her leadership.
—
One thing many men have a hard time doing is handling a woman’s negative emotions. Many men lose frame when their fiancée/wife express negative emotions — they do anything they can to try to make her happy, and they allow themselves to be manipulated by her negative emotions. Certainly, you want to do what you can to make her happy, but it’s important to not let a woman’s negative emotions daunt you. It is important to not let them cause you any stress or anxiety. Women process *everything* emotionally. Their emotions are constantly fluctuating. Women will *always* be feeling something, usually in a strong way. Often times, the best thing to do is to not try to solve the problem, but simply hear her out, console her, and move on (remember the youtube video, “It’s not about the nail”). Even if she is mad at you, unless you have really screwed up badly, it’s not going to last. By being strong, instead of getting sucked into any emotional negativity, you can lead her to a more joyous place. Be the rock when she is a hurricane. But the lighthouse when she is a storm. Be the banks when she is a raging river. Whatever you do, don’t lose frame. Edwin Friedman is helpful here. He says that to lead you have to always be the calmest person in the room (or in the relationship). You have to be self-differentiated from her so you do not get sucked into the swirl of emotion, but also connected to her so she knows you love and care.
—
Ladies, if you feel like your husband doesn’t listen to you as much as he should, maybe it’s because you don’t say very much worth listening to. Are you forming yourself into Lady Wisdom, a woman who can give her husband sound counsel? Women have to work at growing in wisdom just like men. Women sometimes way overrate their own intuitions and instincts. But women, like men, are fallen and must work at pursuing wisdom. Wisdom is not natural for any one. It is gained by careful obedience over the long haul.
—
Men are called to live with their wives in an understanding way. This means he has to know her, he has to listen to her discerningly, he has to watch how she reacts in different situations. He has to understand who she is as an image bearer and a co-heir of salvation. Understanding her does not always mean giving her her way. It does not mean always giving her what she wants. Sometimes a man has to tell his wife “no.” But he should understand why she wants what she wants and why she thinks the way she does.
—
Wives often do not understand what it means to respect a man. They usually need their husbands to give them at least some teaching in this area.
Yes, husbands, you have to learn from her how to treat her and meet her needs. It goes both ways. Living with her in an understanding way means (at least in part) recognizing what makes her feel loved, secure, protected, provided for, etc. But it is also important for a man to take responsibility to teach his woman how she is to treat him, eg., what he will allow or not allow, what she can say to him or must not say, how she speaks to him and about him in front of others, etc. The reality is that women do not naturally understand respect the way men do, and thus they do not naturally respect their husbands in the way men understand respect. A woman might do something disrespectful without even realizing she has been disrespectful, eg, something she might say to him in front of others or about him to others that seems like a non-issue to her. Women do not have the built-in honor code that men have. An example: Any man who got on a lifeboat as the Titanic was sinking recognized that he could be branded a coward for taking a seat on the lifeboat; he might be accused of failing to be true man. No woman had to worry about being accused of failing to be a true woman, or of being a coward, when she got on the lifeboat. Her calculus is simply different. So I really do believe most husbands have to train their wives in what respect looks like in the marriage. he will need to explain honor to her. A godly man will sometimes have to tell his wife, “You cannot speak to me that way. You can express disagreement, but it has to be respectful,” or, “You did not need to tell me what to do in that situation.” Your goal is to develop her into your biggest ally and cheerleader. Your goal is to wash in the Woes which includes teaching her how to practice respect within the marriage. Help her see what it means for husband and wife to be complements rather than competitors. Help her understand what it means to honor her husband.
—
One key to having a good marriage is expectation management. Men especially need to manage the expectations of their wives. Think of the Warren Buffet joke: “What’s the key to a happy marriage?” “Low expectations.” Obviously, that’s an exaggeration. But some women develop expectations for a marriage that can never be met. (Men can too, of course.) Wives can be quite discontent (think of Eve who had everything in the Garden of Eden and still wanted more). The reality is that while much about marriage should come naturally, it still requires a lot of work to cultivate a happy married life. Expectations should be tempered by reality. Men can often help out their future selves by reining in any unrealistic expectations she might have.
—
Counsel for young men on vetting a potential wife:
1. Christian faith/character — Dig deep into any theological and ecclesiastical differences. Take the lead in thesse conversations. Is she submissive to God’s Word and servant-oriented? Can you teach her and lead her effectively? Does she respond well to your leadership? Is she humble? Does she embrace the calling of wife? Does she want to embrace motherhood? How career oriented is she? Does she think of women as “always the victim”? What are her politics? If she votes for socialist or progressive candidates, run away. Be ready for her to test you in these discussions, so maintain frame. In terms of character, the main issue is can you trust her. Would you trust her with your children? Your money? Your future? Your life? Bottom line: Is she a godly, high character woman, or is she more influenced by feminism, social media, etc.?
2. Physical attraction — Are you attracted to her? This is obviously essential. Is she self-disciplined and committed to good health (diet, exercise, etc.)? Is she the type that would “let herself go” in the years come? Of course, desire needs to be mutual. Is it clear that she desires you? Are there any indications that she feels like she is settling? More than anything, it is the polarity of the masculine and the feminine that drives attraction, and your masculinity can bring out her feminine beauty. Does she have feminine grace and charm? Does she understand the differences between men and women and their roles in marriage?
3. Femininity — Does she seem willing to submit to a man or does she want to compete with men? Does she have a good relationship with her father? Does she have a decent understanding of men and how men think? Does she resent men? Understanding men is something most women have to grow into, but where is she starting from? Is she domestic in the ways she will need to be? Is she willing to learn? Does she seem to have a start on the skills needed to manage a household? Is she nurturing, while not falling into the trap of “toxic empathy”?
4. Personality — Do you like being with her? Do you like her style? Do you connect? Can you have fun together and be serious together? Is there chemistry between the two of you?
—
Men, remember, to be a husband is to be a Christ figure. This will mean serving and sacrificing for your wife (and eventually your family). But do not fall into the “servant leadership” trap or the “happy wife, happy life” lie. There is a sin identified in the Bible as “listening to the voice of your wife” (Gen. 3:17, 16:2). Some men inadvertently put pleasing their wives above pleasing the Lord. Spouses should want to please other, to be sure (1 Cor. 7:33-34). But this is not the ultimate goal. Ephesians 5:25-27 indicate the purpose of a man sacrificing for his wife like Christ did for the church is to sanctify her. The purpose of his sacrifice is to make her holy, not happy (though ultimately holiness and happiness will coincide). This means she may not always like the way he sacrifices for her, just like the sanctification process Christ puts his church through is not always pleasant or easy. To take this one step further: When there is a disagreement, make sure you do not give up on what you believe in or what you think is best too easily. A lot of men will put up a fight for what they think is best for a while, but eventually cave in to their wives because it is simply easier. It really takes a strong spine to lead well in a marriage. It is hard to disagree with someone you also want to sleep with. But you have to stand your ground when the situation requires it. This is not to say you never defer to her — sometimes it really does not matter, or sometimes you find she has an insight you didn’t have. But a lot of men want peace at any price. The result is that their wives get their way but lose respect for their husbands. You have to know when to stand firm and not budge. You have to develop firm opinions and views on various issues. You have to have a vision for your life and your family. You have to know what you want, what you think is best for your marriage and your family. Again, too many marriages devolve into a matriarchy (even though both spouses would say they affirm Ephesians 5) because he simply does not have the strength of will that she has.
—
Men need to recognize there are a lot of paradoxes that come with being a husband. Women are a mystery and yet we are commanded to live with our wives in understanding (1 Peter 3). We want to please our wives and yet sometimes giving her what she says she wants will make her unhappy. Wives are supposed to respect their husbands, and yet they are programmed to test their husbands’ mettle as well, since they are the weaker vessel and need to make sure their man is strong enough to lead, protect, and provide. When she tests you, the fallen part of her will want to win so she can have her way, but the created/redeemed part of her will want you to win so she will know she is married to a strong man.
—
Counsel for husbands:
For almost all modern Christian men, so-called beta qualities come much easier than alpha qualities. The best men combine both, but most of us are lacking more on one side than the other. For most of us, we need to kill the “inner beta” that rears up at the wrong times, when we should be acting as alphas. Never stop developing yourself as a man, a leader, a ruler, and a head. Take full responsibility for yourself and your family. Developing a wide range skills. Work on being decisive. Work on dealing with anxieties, remembering that almost all of our unmasculine behaviors are the result of anxiety we have not mastered. Share yourself with her, but don’t be afraid to hold something back; vulnerability (depending on the context) can make you appear weak. You do not need to put all your burdens on her; in fact, you should protect her from carrying burdens she does not need to carry. That’s part of protecting her and caring for her as the weaker vessel. A sense of humor is a great help to a husband; use it your advantage in the relationship. Humor can bring light into otherwise dark places, it can diffuse difficult or dicey situations, it can create a bond as laughter is shared. Tease your wife and flirt with her constantly. Remember that what makes marriage so enjoyable is polarity — and your masculinity energy is what will draw out her femininity more and more. Energy matches energy. She wants you to “just get it,” so show her that you do. Be confident and poised even when you are feeling a lot of pressure. Avoid needless arguments and quarrels with her. When you see a weakness in yourself, attack it relentlessly to become a better a man. Family leadership requires competence, so keep growing and maturing as a man.
—
Good insight and counsel from the Manhattan Institute:
“Mamdani’s rise tells us something profound about the moment we’re in: a generation of disaffected young people is channeling its frustrations into resentment rather than the ambition, hustle, and drive that have long made this city a beacon of opportunity. This disaffection comes in many forms: the rage of downwardly mobile professionals who’ve lost faith in capitalism, and the vitriol of isolated young men who’ve lost faith in themselves. Different expressions of the same condition-disillusionment disguised as politics.
To those young Americans, right or left, we offer a different vision. A reminder of what truly fulfills us, and of what holds a nation together. Politics cannot replace faith, family, and community. Prosperity cannot simply be granted by government—it must be earned through enterprise and responsibility. And America is not broken beyond repair. We remain capable of renewal and greatness.
At the Manhattan Institute, we believe that merit, order, and personal responsibility are the antidotes to despair. We believe that America remains a place where effort and achievement matter, and that cities like New York can once again be engines of progress.
New York’s story isn’t over. Cities that have begun to wander back from the brink of catastrophe by embracing competence over radical ideology—like San Francisco—are beginning to recover. The same can happen here.”
Peter Thiel also offers important insights into this moment, especially for young adults:
“I certainly would not suggest that our policy should be to embrace Millennial attitudes unreflectively. I would be the last person to advocate for socialism. But when 70% of Millennials say they are pro-socialist, we need to do better than simply dismiss them by saying that they are stupid or entitled or brainwashed; we should try and understand why. And, from the perspective of a broken generational compact, there seems to be a pretty straightforward answer to me, namely, that when one has too much student debt or if housing is too unaffordable, then one will have negative capital for a long time and/or find it very hard to start accumulating capital in the form of real estate; and if one has no stake in the capitalist system, then one may well turn against it.”
—
When I do pre-marital counseling, I try to spend some time during the last session talking about the wedding, the wedding night, the honeymoon, and the general topic of getting adjusted sexually to married life. Most of the couples I marry are virgins. I’ll summarize here a few of the things I tell couples about the wedding night:
1. Remember, your wedding night is the first night of the rest of your life. Be patient.
2. Practice makes perfect. Sex on your wedding night is wonderful and exciting, but it is not the best sex you will ever have. Learning how to please and enjoy each other to the fullest will take time.
3. Enjoy. This is God’s gift. Receive it with thanksgiving.
—
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
— C.S. Lewis
—
“If all cultures are equal, then cannibalism is just a matter of culinary taste.”
— Léo Strauss
—
“I was guilty of judging capitalism by its operations and socialism by its hopes and aspirations; capitalism by its works and socialism by its literature. To this day, this error and its disastrous consequences are observable in the judgment and behavior of some impassioned individuals, mostly young.”
— Sidney Hook (1902-1989)
—
In his speech tonight, Zohran Mamdani said, “We will prove that there is no problem too large for government to solve and no problem too small for government to care about.” This is a good working definition of statism – the idolatry of the state. No problem is too big or too small for the state to solve. Government can fix all your problems. Government is god.
It should be obvious this is unAmerican. America’s system of government was not designed to be a statist system, which is a major reason why America has been so successful historically. The US Constitution was designed to leave a great deal of freedom and responsibility to individuals and families. It left room for other institutions, like the church, to play a role in solving problems. “That government is best which governs the least,” was the spirit of America’s founders. But Mamdani wants the total state. In Mamdani’s NYC, government will provide total solutions. But how can the state solve all problems without having all power? And all wisdom? How can the state be the solution when so many of the problems that need solving were created by the state? How can the state attempt to solve everyone’s problems without creating a host of new ones? Will any of these proposed solutions have trade-offs? If the state is the solution to people’s problems, does that mean people don’t have any responsibility for their problems themselves? As usual, socialism gets judged by its intentions rather than its results. How many immigrants have fled to America from nations where the government promised something similar to Mamdani? It hasn’t worked elsewhere and (to the extent Mamdani can actually implement his agenda) it won’t work here either. Reagan’s quip still holds true: the scariest words in the English language are, “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”
More importantly, Mamdani’s philosophy of politics is unbiblical. The state, according to Romans 13 and elsewhere, does not exist to solve all our big problems and care about all our small ones. The civil magistrate is given the sword to be God’s deacon (servant) and the avenger of his wrath in the civil realm, promoting the good and terrorizing evil. The purpose of the state is not to provide “free” healthcare, transportation, education, or even cellphones. Everything the state does, it does with the power of the sword. But the sword is only wielded righteously when wielded in accord with God’s law. A biblically ordered state doesn’t care about your problems; it cares about God’s justice.
—
“Our political and social quarrels now partake of the savagery of religious wars because, at bottom, they are religious wars. The most divisive issues in American politics are now about our warring concepts of right and wrong, or good and evil. In a way the Kerner Commission never predicted, we have indeed become “two nations.””
— Pat Buchanan
I came across this Buchanan quote in an old article by Rushdoony. Rushdoony goes on to explain:
“This conflict is basic to the crises in American life since 1950. In United States v. Macintosh, Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes recognized, in his dissent, that “the essence of religion is belief in a relation to God involving duties superior to those arising from any human relation.” The Court, however, was increasingly governed by the cynical legal positivism of Oliver Wendell Homes, Jr. who denied God and all legal, philosophical, and moral absolutes. He denied or questioned “if cosmically any idea is any more important than the bowels,” or if man is more significant than a baboon or a grain of sand. He observed, in a letter to Harold Laski, “What damned fools people are who believe things.” In a case involving pacifism, he wrote (1929), “All ’isms seem to me silly – but this hyperethereal respect for human life seems perhaps the silliest of all.”
The locale of justice was being relocated, from God, to man, and then to the state….
The modern state has seen itself as the messianic savior of man, as the great culminating hope of the ages. The state, republican or democratic, Marxist or fascist, is the supposed solution to human ills and problems….
The two warring concepts of right and wrong, of good and evil, referred to by Buchanan are humanistic statism and Christianity. Modern statism is a religion, a humanistic one. It believes that the state is man’s natural and true order, and that the democratic (or fascist, or Marxist, or any other state form) is the just order. Justice is what the state does, because the state is the final or ultimate order….
More than a few sociologists no longer see law as the necessary arm of the state; it is being replaced by psychotherapy, and the therapeutic state. In such thinking, health (or justice) means conformity to the social norms dictated by the state, and any social deviance requires coercive rehabilitation. The psychiatric hospitals for dissidents in the Soviet Union are a logical outgrowth of this faith.
Statist law, however, lacking moral force, leads to the rapid deterioration of social order. The demoralization of society, the rise of delinquency, promiscuity, drug use, alcoholism, violence, perversions, and more, give evidence of the fact that the substitution of state coercion for the Biblical doctrines of authority and law leads to the shift from moral force to brutalized force, and to the decline and disappearance of justice.”
—
Why are progressives fine with murdering innocent babies in the womb but object to the state executing those who are guilty of murder? Oh wait, never mind.
If progressives accepted the death penalty for murder it would mean admitting that those who perform and procure abortions should be executed.
Progressives often say Christians are insinsistent in defending life in the womb while supporting for the death penalty for certain crimes. But this is backwards. The inconsistency is on the progressive side: they justify killing the innocent while defending criminals from punishment.
—
Israel is considered a high income nation. Obviously, the US considers Israel an ally against Islamic terrorism in the region, but why do we give Israel billions of dollars in foreign aid every year? Israel is largely a socialist, progressive nation, with free health care, free abortion on demand, etc. our foreign aid subsidizes this; without that aid, Israel would likely need to spend more on its own defense. Instead, we make socialism possible by paying for a chunk of their defense. At least, that’s how it looks.
I have no problem with Israel defending itself. They got attacked and struck back against Hamas. That’s their right. What I wonder is about is why we fund a high income, largely socialized nation with American tax payer dollars. What’s the prudential argument for this? It’s really the same situation Trump pointed out with NATO nations in Europe – our subsidies allow them to afford socialism. How is this in America’s best interests?
—
“We have staked the whole future of our new nation, not upon the power of government; far from it. We have staked the future of all our political constitutions upon the capacity of each of ourselves to govern ourselves according to the moral principles of the Ten Commandments.”
—Attributed to James Madison
—
Statism = when the state gets out of its lane, when we expect things from the state it wasn’t designed to give us
Statism = expecting the state to do things God has not ordained for it do
Sphere sovereignty is one way of keeping a leash on the state. The state should not interfere with the provence of the other spheres of church and family.
—
Reformed Protestants are sometimes jealous of Roman Catholics because they have a body of church sanctioned social teachings. But we actually do have a body of social teachings as Reformed Protestants, we just neglect it. The Westminster Larger Catechism, particularly in its exposition of the Ten Commandments, gives our churches a broad and deep social vision. We also have a doctrine of the state, marriage, and other aspects of social ethics in the Westminster Confession of Faith. Yes, some aspects of this teaching need to be updated to deal with contemporary issues, but the basic biblical principles are there.
—
Obviously there’s no way she could have seen this coming.
—
Is the Roman Catholic Church part of the visible church? Charles Hodge answers:
“That Romanists as a society profess the true religion, meaning thereby the essential doctrines of the gospel, those doctrines which if truly believed will save the soul, is, as we think, plain.
1. Because they believe the Scriptures to be the word of God.
2. They direct that the Scriptures should be understood and received as they were understood by the Christian Fathers.
3. They receive the three general creeds of the church, the Apostle’s, the Nicene, and the Athanasian, or as these are summed up in the creed of Pius V.
4. They believe in “one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. In one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of his Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made. Who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man. And was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, suffered and was buried. And the third day rose again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead, whose kingdom shall have no end. And they believe in one catholic apostolic church. They acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins, and look for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come.”
If this creed were submitted to any intelligent Christian without his knowing whence it came, could he hesitate to say that it was the creed of a Christian church? Could he deny that these are the very terms in which for ages the general faith of Christendom has been expressed? Could he, without renouncing the Bible, say that the sincere belief of these doctrines would not secure eternal life? Can any man take it upon himself in the sight of God, to assert there is not truth enough in the above summary to save the soul? If not, then a society professing that creed professes the true religion in the sense stated above.
5. We argue from the acknowledged fact that God has always had, still has, and is to have a people in that church until its final destruction; just as he had in the midst of corrupt and apostate Israel. We admit that Rome has grievously apostatized from the faith, the order and the worship of the church; that she has introduced a multitude of false doctrines, a corrupt and superstitious and even idolatrous worship, and a most oppressive and cruel government; but since as a society she still retains the profession of saving doctrines, and as in point of fact, by those doctrines men are born unto God and nurtured for heaven, we dare not deny that she is still a part of the visible church. We consider such a denial a direct contradiction of the Bible, and of the facts of God’s providence.”
Full article: http://hornes.org/theologia/charles-hodge/is-the-church-of-rome-a-part-of-the-visible-church
—
Holiness is formed by habits.
—
“I think I warned you before that if your patient can’t be kept out of the Church, he ought at least to be violently attached to some party within it. I don’t mean on really doctrinal issues; about those, the more lukewarm he is, the better. And it isn’t the doctrines on which we chiefly depend for producing malice. The real fun is working up hatred between those who say “mass” and those who say “holy communion” when neither party could possibly state the difference between, say, Hooker’s doctrine and Thomas Aquinas’, in any form which would hold water for five minutes. And all the purely indifferent things–candles and clothes and what not–are an admirable ground for our activities. We have quite removed from men’s minds what that pestilent fellow Paul used to teach about food and other unessentials–namely, that the human without scruples should always give way to the human with scruples. You would think they could not fail to see the application. You would expect to find the “low” churchman genuflecting and crossing himself lest the weak conscience of his “high” brother should be moved to irreverence, and the “high” one refraining from these exercises lest he should betray his “low” brother into idolatry.”
–C. S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
—
James 5:16 says, “The prayer of a righteous man has great power as it is working.”
Your righteousness – your obedience – is connected the effectiveness of your prayers. If you don’t listen to God law, why should he listen to your prayers?
—
“No one in America should go hungry.” – Modern advocates of the welfare state
“If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.” – The Apostle Paul
—
“The Bible says if a man doesn’t work, he shouldn’t eat.”
“But what about children and the disabled?”
“Obviously, they are not able to work, so they should still be cared for apart from the expectation that they work. The Bible distinguishes different types of poor people, including the deserving and underserving. The Bible recognizes different causes of poverty, some of which are a person’s own fault (read about the sluggard in Proverbs) and some of which are not his fault (natural calamity, disability, political oppression, etc.). The Bible gives us a more finely tuned way of looking at these problems than the welfare state can, and it also gives more finely grained, personalized solutions.”
“But 70% of people on SNAP work.”
“Then what Paul says about not eating does not apply to them. The Bible gives us principles that guide charity. For example, the gleaning laws in the Torah were a way of giving the poor the opportunity to work and provide for themselves. Wealthier land owners left parts of their fields unharvested. The poor could come in and harvest those parts of the fields. The wisdom of this is clear: the wealthier in society were required to be generous, while the able-bodied poor were given economic opportunities. The rich have an obligation to the poor, but irresponsibility was not subsidized in any way.”
“So why did you quote that verse about he who doesn’t work shouldn’t eat?”
“Because 30% of the people who are on SNAP don’t work, and many of them could. And further, many people abuse the system, only working enough hours to retain their benefits, instead of being more diligent, developing more valuable skills, and aiming to get off government (really, tax payer) dependency. And besides, biblically, the state wields the sword; it is not the ministry of welfare or wealth redistribution. Care for the poor primarily belongs to families and churches. Some forms of helping the poor actually hurt them, by robbing them of dignity and agency. Our current welfare system all too often subsidizes immorality, irresponsibility, laziness.”
“But how are people supposed to live off of minimum wage jobs?”
“They’re not. Minimum wage jobs are for young and low skilled workers, not household breadwinners. Minimum wage laws are not helpful because they price those lower skilled, younger (usually teenage) workers out of the market place and limit their opportunities. A household breadwinner should work at developing skills that will be worth more in the market place – and if he doesn’t have those skills, he’s not yet ready for a household. We have all kinds of systemic problems in our economy that make it harder than it should be to make a decent middle class living. Those problems should be fixed. In most cases, this is the state trying to fix what the state broke. But they should be fixed in a way that honors personal diligence and responsibility. They should not be fixed with more handouts and distribution from those who work hard to those who just want to slide by without improving themselves or working hard. There is no economic system that can bring prosperity to people who are immoral, irresponsible, and lacking in diligence – nor should there be.”
“That makes sense. Why don’t more people see it this way?”
“Three reasons. First, biblical illiteracy. God’s Word provides wisdom about social issues as well as personal issues. The Bible lays out the basic principles, which can then be applied to various situations, and filled out with prudence. Second, we live in a culture with widespread economic illiteracy. People do not understand how economies work. They do not understand markets. They do not understand stewardship, how to handle money, how to build wealth, and where wealth, jobs, etc. come from. We need to start assigning Sowell books to high schoolers so they can enter world with some understanding of economic realities. Third, we live in a culture that has fostered entitlement and victimhood. That needs to end.”
ADDENDUM: The Bible generally situates care for the poor in the context of a relationship, not in the context of statist bureaucracy. Initial aid for an impoverished person can be relatively unconditional, but conditions can be added over time – and whether or not those conditions are met will help determine if the person is a worthy impoverished person or not. Tim Keller’s book The Call of the Jericho Road actually has some sound wisdom here, as does the book When Helping Hurts.
—
“In a society in which idolatry runs rampant, a church that is not iconoclastic is a travesty. If it is not against the idols it is with them.”
— Herbert Schlossberg
—
“All true needs—such as food, drink, and companionship—are satiable. Illegitimate wants—pride, envy, greed—are insatiable.” — Herbert Schlossberg
—
“Big business often is said to be the enemy of government, but that is highly misleading. The robber barons were robbers because they bought off legislatures in order to further their economic interests at the expense of competitors and customers.”
— Herbert Schlossberg
—
“Organized envy usually crystallizes into egalitarian norms whose origin is found not in custom but in government. This is a kind of uniformity from above: egalitarianism through coercion, either ideological, economic or social. These three facets are complimentary and Marxist-Leninist doctrine proclaims a utopia based on this triple equalization: that all think alike (ideological), that all belong to this one class only (economic), and that all share a similar patrimony (ethnic). Ideological egalitarianism requires a supreme definitory urging, an education, the means of communication to the masses that are centralized and directed, and an implacable censure for whatever is not the official ideology. This in short is cultural dictatorship, the ultimate weapon of egalitarianism. The envious find within this system a firm protection against originality, against free intellectual exchange, and against noetic superiority. Power alone is allowed to think; the rest can only be simple reformulators or applicators shaped by the same mold. To distinguish oneself is to fall into heterodoxy. For this reason, any thinker worthy of the name has been labeled within Marxism as “deviationist.” Even within democracies there are certain dogmas that allow the labeling of those who disagree as “maladjusted.” The envy of the intellectually mediocre establishes a canon so that it may denounce and condemn the independent thinker. The unity of the envious imposes an “orthodoxy” that not only frees them from the effort to create and makes it easy to overlook the absence of creativity, but forces those who were formerly privileged and envied to an agreement, so that they may come to come pronouncement like the following; “Do not envy me; I am not different. I am equal to you, I believe your catechism to be true, and I condemn to moral exile all those that are not members of this club.” In this manner, “the privileged” have apologized for being outstanding and have promised to change their ways. This ruse neutralizes the envy of the establishment and allows free access to the communication media and to the budgets. “Either the syndicate of orthodoxy or the ghetto” constitutes the dilemma that summarizes the tactic of the most refined manifestation of collective envy.”
— Gonzalo Fernandez de la Mora, from Egalitarian Envy
—
“Curiously, among philosophers, those who wrote most penetratingly about envy were all bachelors.”
— Joseph Epstein
—
“Envy is concealed admiration.”
— Kierkegaard
—
Egalitarianism is just a way of attempting to recast envy as a virtue. It’s central command is, “Thou shalt covet.”
—
Socialism is the politics of envy.
—
“Marxism was never a science; it was a religion of revolution, a creed of destruction masquerading as economics.”
— Gary North
—
“Marxism is a destructive ideology; it is not a science but a doctrine of destruction.”
— Ludwig Von Mises
—
“The whole gospel of Karl Marx can be summed up in a single sentence: Hate the man who is better off than you are. Never under any circumstances admit that his success may be due to his own efforts, to the productive contribution he has made to the whole community. Always attribute his success to the exploitation, the cheating, the more or less open robbery of others. Never under any circumstances admit that your own failure may be owing to your own weakness, or that the failure of anyone else may be due to his own defects – his laziness, incompetence, improvidence, or stupidity.”
~ Henry Hazlitt
—
Taylor Swift is far more dangerous to young Christian women than Nick Fuentes is to young Christian men. Intersstingly, men get lots of warnings about Fuentes but women get very few about Swift.
—
Some follow up from a sermon I once preached on Mark 2:
It is very interesting that Jesus forgives the paralytic “when he saw THEIR [the paralytic’s friends’] faith” (2:5). It’s as though the man’s friends trust Jesus on his behalf — and that is what impels them to bring their friend to Jesus for healing. What are we to make of this? It seems that that there is such a thing as “corporate faith” in the Scriptures. The evangelical church today rightly emphasizes our need to make a personal response to Jesus. Each person must trust Christ for himself. But faith also has a communal aspect, and you see this come out frequently in the gospels, where one person’s faith procures blessings for another person. For example, we find parent figures (e.g., the centurion in Mt. 8 and the Syro-Phoenecian woman in Mt. 15) who believe the gospel on behalf of dead or demon-possessed children — and the children are rescued on account of the parents’ faith. The same thing happens in baptism — parents believe the gospel on behalf of their children, and thus bring their children to Jesus (who has promised to offer himself and his benefits in the sacrament) for blessing. This does not negate the necessity and possibility of the children’s faith but the faith of the parents acts on behalf of the children and obtains something for them.
Again, none of this suggests that the paralytic did not have to trust Jesus on his own, as an individual. He did — and I think we can assume that in this very story, he puts his faith in Jesus. But we should not let an emphasis on individual faith keep us from seeing faith’s broader, wider dimensions. We are not isolated atoms, floating in space. Rather, we are molecules — we are all attached to other people. The paralytic’s friends form a faith-community, in which the paralytic himself can be brought to faith. Faith is always begotten and nurtured in the context of relationships with other believers. Yes, we have to believe the gospel for ourselves, as individuals. But faith ordinarily comes to fruition as we get immersed into a community of faith, as was the case with the paralytic in Mk. 2.
Applied to families, this is why the whole notion of “growing up Christian” makes so much sense. Of course Christian children share their parents’ faith. They might shipwreck that faith later on in life, especially if they get tangled up in a different community that rejects and mocks the gospel. But children who are born into a believing household start off as believers themselves. They share in the corporate faith of the family. As parents “believe the gospel for their children,” their children receive benefits from Christ, and the parents seek to nuture the faith of their children unto maturity. By faith and in faith, parents continually bring their children to Jesus for forgiveness and renewal, just as the paralytic’s friends brought him. Yes, the child must also learn to own the gospel for himself, to personalize the covenantal relationship. But even that individualizing of the gospel promises happens against the backdrop of the wider communities of family and church — not by escaping them.
Similarly, those who come to Christ as adult almost always do so in the context of relationships — an “alternative family,” if you will. They convert, not merely because they hear an amazing sermon or read a book (though those things may be useful and necessary means), but because Christians reach out to them, befreind them, and (over time) enfold them into the community of the gospel. For adult converts, becoming a Christian is never a matter of simply changing ideologies or worldviews; it means changing whole social networks and communities as well. Becoming a Christian is not just embracing Christ, but embracing (and being embraced by) a whole new set of friends. Coming to faith is inevitably deeply relational. This is why one of the best evangelistic strategies you can use is to invite a non-Christian friend to Christian events (including worship). Your non-Christian friend may feel a bit uncomfortable or disoriented (especially in worship), but the personal contact that takes place provides an opportunity for understanding to grow. The relationships allow truth to get a foothold, and over time, lead the person to consider making the faith his own. Non-Christians need to experience the Christian commmunity in action as much as they need to hear the gospel proclaimed. As they see how Christians live and interact, they can begin to imagine themselves as Christians too, and the possibility of faith opens up for them.
—
Secular therapy is “another gospel” that has infected much of the church. Some thoughts:
Secular therapy replaces the language and concepts of “sin” and “repentance” with those of “trauma” and “safety.”
Many churches and Christians now process life events through therapeutic concepts like “trauma” but this is actually an alternative and rival to the gospel and the Christian faith. Trauma is real, obviously, and we should speak to it and seek to heal it with the tools God has given us.
But the use of trauma has been so inflated, it’s become almost useless and trivializes REAL trauma.
Preaching of God’s law can be traumatic – but in a good and necessary way. Only when the law wounds can the gospel do its healing work.
We cannot attain maturity without learning to take responsibility for ourselves, including our emotions/emotional responses. For example, avoiding a catastrophizing mentality is a well-documented key to happiness – but this requires mental and emotional discipline and (in many cases) differentiation so you can keep your head while all those around you are losing theirs.
Further, we must beware of safetyism. Making people objectively physically safer does not always result in better mental health, especially for boys and men – for masculinity to develop and thrive, men need some level of risk/adventure; the lack of it deadens our souls.
Overall, therapy culture has infantilized America. It has produced a culture of immaturity and irresponsibility. If has sucked the soul out of us. It has produced soft, effeminate men. It has produced women who are slaves to their feelings, who get bored with the ordinary duties of life and require ever increasing levels of drama and excitement. It has produced emotionalism in our churches, replacing liturgy with “worship experiences” and preaching with Ted Talk-style self-help messages.
—
Confusing – or really conflating – the brain and the mind is a huge problem in current counseling models. Brain illnesses should be distinguished from mental (spiritual) illnesses. They often interrelate, but they are distinct categories.
—
“When in 1 Corinthians (11:28) Paul said that a man should examine himself, he spoke only of adults because he was speaking about those who were quarreling among themselves. However, he doesn’t here forbid that the sacrament of the altar should be given even to children.”
— Martin Luther (from Luther’s Works, vol. 54, p. 58)
—
C. S. Lewis on vocation:
Don’t be too easily convinced that God really wants you to do all sorts of work you needn’t do. Each must do his duty ‘in that state of life to which God has called him.’ Remember that a belief in the virtues of doing for doing’s sake is characteristically feminine, characteristically American, and characteristically modern: so that three veils may divide you from the correct view! There can be intemperance in work just as in drink. What feels like zeal may be only fidgets or even the flattering of one’s self-importance. As MacDonald says, ‘In holy things may be unholy greed!’ And by doing what ‘one’s station and its duties’ does not demand, one can make oneself less fit for the duties it does demand and so commit some injustice. Just you give Mary a chance as well as Martha!
—
Lewis, on recognizing skill and mastery in vocation:
Nearly everything that is very well done looks easy to do, especially if you have never tried it yourself.
—
C. S. Lewis, on “ordinary people:”
Meanwhile the cross comes before the crown and tomorrow is a Monday morning. A cleft has opened in the pitiless walls of the world…It may be possible for each to think too much of his own potential glory hereafter; it is hardly possible for him to think too often or too deeply about that of his neighbour. The load, or weight, or burden of my neighbour’s glory should be laid daily on my back, a load so heavy that only humility can carry it, and the backs of the proud will be broken. It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest and most uninteresting person you talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship, or else a horror and a corruption such as you now meet, if at all, only in a nightmare. All day long we are, in some degree, helping each other to one or other of these destinations. It is in the light of these overwhelming possibilities, it is with the awe and the circumspection proper to them, that we should conduct all our dealings with one another, all friendships, all loves, all play, all politics. There are no ordinary people. You have never talked to a mere mortal. Nations, cultures, arts, civilization—these are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat. But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit—immortal horrors or everlasting splendours.
—
Sex before marriage creates a fake bond. Refusing sex within marriage weakens a real bond.
—
“A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.” No. A woman needs a man just as much as a man needs a woman. God created the sexes to be interdependent.
—
“Wanting more information is often just a form of procrastination.”
— Russ Roberts
TPC Pastor's Page 