<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d14792577\x26blogName\x3dPLAIN+PATH+PURITAN\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLUE\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttp://electofgod.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://electofgod.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d3757314713231228019', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>


The election

[An email...]
Additions below...learn

If you're wondering what's going on with the election basically in this last quarter mile the media (mainstream media and cuck media) has thrown and smeared about 80 thousand tons of excrement on everything, daily, to dispirit everybody, taint everybody, provide cover for voter fraud, make people tired of the unending up is down falsehoods and lunacy (a Marxist tactic) to the point of giving up on attempting any meaningful action or change. And I forgot to mention the cosmic level gaslighting and ignoring of blatant evidence of massive treasonous corruption and other crimes.

The only solution is about a hundred thousand guillotines working overtime.

- C.


I have to add that alongside the exposing of the fake conservatives this political season has accomplished (the cucks, globalist parasites, pretending to be for liberty, except when it matters, like right now), there has also been an exposing of Christian clerics and theologians who have almost 100% thrown in with the demon globalists. Chalk that up to the common shallowness and fecklessness those types have always displayed in this era of cultural Marxism; but also chalk it up to the fact that 90% or more of clerics and theologians are pure and willing and active ministers of the devil. First to bow their knee to the devil, always willing to serve the devil.

Look at that demon mortician Russell Moore. Makes abortion his main issue, but fights to get Hillary elected...the most vicious child-sacrificing witch in political power today. Russell Moore is a Molech worshipping demon. May all the default pro-Hillary, pro-Satanic globalism ministers receive their just reward in time.


Simon of Australia writes:

Yeah we can see that here in Oz.... It's interesting actually, because I've been discussing it with people here, and everyone seems to fall into one of two camps. There's the people that clearly see what's going on, and then what we call "the Normies" who believe the main stream media and take it in as their only source of information, like "yeah but do you know about Trumps attitude to women?!"

The others clearly think Hilary is crooked and evil. I know a few people who have been converted by the likes of Infowars and Wikileaks so those guys are doing a job.

But over all, everybody agree's that this election is putrid, like a big stinking pile of warm steaming dogshit. Somebody said to me the other day that "America is broken", which was a good summation.

People here also seem to know that Trump is out day after day filling football stadiums with cheering crowds, while Hillary is at home sleeping, so if she some how slides into office with that big grin on her face everyone will know it was a setup.

I respond:

One theme to watch unfolding is the change from things being conservative vs. leftists to the battle lines being ruling class vs. everyone else. I wouldn't want to be in the ruling class when the dam finally breaks. (By the way, the dam is taking a long time to break because America had so much wealth post WW2. Wealthy people, even at just the happy suburban level, don't want to pick up pitchforks and fire. But the long attack on the country is now effecting people at levels that hit everyday survival reality. Healthcare, for instance. A million other things. The wealth is gone and no longer covers the effects of the long attack.) - C.

Simon of Australia responds:

I don't understand where the money has gone. How can America be 22 trillion in debt and not have the best roads, the best airports, the biggest army, then greatest hospitals, schools etc???

It's like all that money evaporated.

I respond:

What was called the Great Society in the '60s wasted trillions on programs that did nothing. The overwhelming of welfare type services starting in the '70s has never stopped. Once the WWII generation retired from public life baby boomers systematically looted federal and state treasuries to the tune of trillions for salary, benefits and pension increases. My oldest sister had a career as a high school teacher, basically. For decades she has lived and traveled like a Kardashian. She owns a multi-million dollar home on the Monterrey peninsula (she's never worked in Monterrey, always inland in poor areas), she travels to Hawaii every year and lives in a vacation home there, and she and her school teacher husband have basically spent their life traveling the world otherwise. Teacher's unions in California voted public money to themselves after the adults left the scene (the WWII adults) making each of them rich at the expense of future generations (all that debt). Now we have the theft that's occurred during the Obama years, which has been gargantuan. And along with all this the same people have strangled the wealth producers with taxes and regulations and trade deals designed to destroy the economy. We've been under extreme Satanic attack with no defenders at the top that didn't immediately get corrupted and drawn into the evil enterprise. - C.


As usual, the comments under Nevertrump articles are more honest and intelligent than the articles

Kent Lyon 

Ormond Beach, Florida

"What makes that crisis acute is the knowledge that he and his predecessors may have helped to bring it on themselves." Unfortunately, Mr. Continetti far over reaches. There is no evidence of any soul searching on the part of the conservative intellectual. He or she evinces no awareness of any role in bringing about the current crisis. The conservative intellectual is entirely myopic, appears to feel no responsibility at all for the current crisis, and is content to simply bash Trump supporters, viewing them exactly as does Hillary Clinton--as deplorables, despicable ignorant scum, against whom the conservative intellectual spouts vituperation reeking of disdain. The vile Charles Murray for example, evinces some sympathy for the denizens of Fishtown from a sterile statistical academic perspective, but the minute those denizens chose a flesh and blood candidate in Trump, he goes ballistic to the point of meltdown over the audacity of those denizens in challenging the order that they are suffering under. The conservative intellectual has lost all contact with the supposed beneficiaries of conservative ideas and policies. And the conservative intellectual views the hoi poloi with the same disdain as the Democratic Party elite, as voting fodder to be manipulated and bamboozled for the benefit of incumbency, nothing more, nothing less. Just as Buckley bragged to the end of jis life about helping Goldwater distance himself from thse deplorable Birchers (aka Goldwater's conservative populist base--evey businessman in Phoenix was a card carrying Birtcher in those days). so we have his successors bashing Trump, and by extension his supporters, in sotto voce and voz alta, helping to ensure that Trump loses in a lanslide like Goldwater did. Plus ca change...
The reason Reagan won where Goldwater did not, is that Reagan didn't alienate that deplorable base; he welcomed it. When pressed by the elites he simply replied: Just becuase they support me doesn't mean that I support them, and left it at that.
And by the way, Reagan didn't just espouse a nationalist/populaist position in the panama Canal debate--he singlehandedly handed Buckley and the pro intellectuals their heads on platters: He decimated them with vastly superior information and insight.'Reagan made Buckely look like an ignorant, effete fool.
NR's infatuation with Burke blinds it to about everything. Burke was a Royalist who opposed human freedom and the American Revolution. NR finds itself in the role of George III objecting to a declaration of independence by the hoi poloi, from the arrogant royalists that consider themselves conservative intellectuals and their duplicitous and disdainful political masters in the Republican establishment.


Ideas have consequences - do you buy that?

Ideas have consequences. I never use to buy that. I didn't put it into context using the phrase "ideas have consequences" in my earlier days, but similar thoughts about ideas.

I'd think: "So, I'm suppose to believe that some philosopher gets an idea, and somehow it then influences whole populations of people in an entire era of history? I don't buy that (I would say in my youth).

I just couldn't see that. It didn't seem practical to me.

Yet as I've learned more about ideas and worldviews I can very well see how that all did happen over and over in history. Probably to more of a strange degree than even some today who always bought the notion would even believe.

I think I have the answer as to why I didn't buy it, and why it is so.

Ideas - especially bad ideas - have tremendous influence on people because that is how the Devil operates in this realm (and before I was regenerated by the word and the Spirit I couldn't see that). Part of Satan being the 'power of the air' is ability to influence the ideas that float around and infect people. And it happens to such an easy and deep degree because it is *supernatural*, i.e. an act of Satan himself. It's a big part of how Satan controls his realm.

So as I marvel that young college students seem to have no defense against the lunacy of post-modernism in all its Hydra-headed manifestations I now see that part of that phenomenon is due to the fact that those young college students have no defense against the Devil and his stratagems to begin with. It's a supernatural hold the Devil has over the benighted young students (and still has over their parents, no doubt).

So when you see ideas as one of the weapons - a big one - Satan has to capture and hold people within the bonds of his Kingdom; and you see their supernatural quality; you don't marvel anymore at the effectiveness of bad ideas to control people.

The solution, the defense, is as always: complete reading - downloading into our soul - of the living, quickening word of God. It gives the material for a defense in ways we can't know when we are in the act of reading it, so we just must read it diligently and like a child, while making the continual effort to get parts-in-relation-to-the-whole understanding of it.


The awake vs. the walking dead (who are often leaders and educators in the Christian realm)

This video is revealing of how hallucinogenically shallow Christian educators and leaders are. James White ventures out of his specialty and shows his non-understanding of history (WWI sanctions on Germany are apparently directly analogous to the United States today, oh, no, he doesn't know anything about those sanctions...Russia is a major power on the rise...well, Russia doesn't even feed itself; it has oil, an arms industry, and that's about it, but when your image of Russia is THE SOVIET UNION, as White's obviously is, you will make a mistake like that).

White knows nothing about the liberty movement and Trump's involvement in it for decades, going back to Reagan.

White thinks Trump is a horrible speaker. White can't compute things like sound instinct, big picture, common-sense, and practical intelligence. Not to mention Trump's warfaring with ingrained political-correctness, something White can't recognize because political correctness is a medium for White which is like what water is to fish.

White also seems to have a deterministic view of decline. This is what socialists indoctrinate into people. What socialists do can never be undone. White is the usual feckless victim of cultural Marxism in the institutions of learning he graduated from.

White is almost criminally naive regarding the battle lines of this election. White considers *himself* an elite. He thinks that's a real thing to self-identify as. Thus the political establishment, according to White, is made up of adults (and stuff). People who "know how it is done." (And stuff.)

White like most all clerics today has no discernment for good and evil within him. He uses what he observes as genuinely bad to accuse fellow Americans, including Christians. He takes pleasure in accusing others. He can't see how the U.S. has been getting attacked relentlessly by evil from its inception; he sees it all as Americans and Christians indulging evil; and God's remnant are to blame...other than White, who sits back and gloats as he accuses and moralizes.

White is a minister of the devil by default of his stupidity and glass-eyed narcissistic indulgence in pretending to be "above it all", looking down on Americans, including Christians, lost in a maelstrom of evil that will never be interrupted or reversed or even confronted, and that is all "their" fault.

If you do just a cursory search on the 'net for the current political insights and opinions of similar internet celebrity pastors and theologians you will find they all are singing the same tune. Shallowness seems to be a requirement in today's church and seminary culture. And fecklessness in the face of cultural Marxist indoctrination.


An esoteric bullet point on Covenant Theology

Here I wrote a ten bullet point post on Covenant Theology.

In this post I'll write an esoteric point.

Jesus tells us how to be in covenant, in the Covenant of Grace. It relates to the so-called sacraments, but the sacraments are visual parable. There is a real, practical way to be in covenant. As real as physical circumcision.

It only happens on the foundation of regeneration by the word and the Spirit, it goes without saying.

Jesus tells us to be watchful, or awake. He also tells us to love our enemy. This correlates to love God and love your neighbor as yourself. The two great commandments of Jesus.

Isn't it interesting that watchfulness and loving one's enemy are not taught in churches and are not mentioned in systematic theologies? Yet they are teachings directly from the mouth of Jesus Christ Himself.

With watchfulness we are filled with the Spirit.

With loving our enemy we are communing with Jesus, our suffering Savior, in a real, practical way.

The two sentences above correlate to ritual water baptism and the Lord's Supper, though they are the practical doing of the sacraments.

A formula from another language: conscious labor, intentional suffering. The two conscious shocks. Conscious shocks to our system because they have to come from inside us, not as random shocks from the world outside us. Think of this last point this way: you are commanded to love your enemy. But in a real time event, in the traffic of your everyday life, you won't even remember that commandment. You'll be caught up in the event and in your resentment. The very act of remembering the commandment is a conscious act. This is partly what is meant by a conscious shock.

Intentional suffering is very different from what we know of as suffering. Most suffering is fake suffering. Various resentments and annoyances, etc. Intentional suffering is like when you *eat* your pride or your vanity in a real time event. It's not easy to do. You have to be separated internally from the 'you' that feels the resentment. But I'm writing this to give an idea that there is more to biblical teaching than is contained in even the best systematic theologies or devotional books.

These things aren't taught at the mainstream level because they provoke limits within a person, and when limits are provoked by definition one is at the end of one's rope, and craziness occurs by default. Yet you have to provoke your limits to be able to increase your limits. Especially to increase your limits to a next stage, where your average state will then be higher than before.

For instance truly practicing watchfulness will make one, eventually, like a crude engine someone has put very refined fuel into which causes the crude engine to explode. So these things can only be approached through stages of initiation, motivated from within.

But watchfulness (being awake in the moment, sometimes associated with the awareness of the presence of God, which ultimately is a necessary component, but at first it's difficult enough just to be awake - "I am here, walking down this street" - in the moment and to hold it) is difficult. Our natural state is waking sleep. Sleep walking through life. It takes effort to be awake in the moment. In fact you'll fall back into waking sleep quickly, and then if you wake up again later you'll then know what waking sleep is. It's where you were in all that in-between time. As I was saying, watchfulness and intentional suffering (loving our enemy) is truly how we can be in covenant. It raises our existence even in time. It makes us useful to God on the spiritual battlefield. It releases us from laws that effect and constrain sleeping people. You become like a knight (male or female) who has contact with Mt. Zion and is yet out in the world. You can effect the very fate of other human beings in ways God wants it effected. Do work for the Kingdom of God.

And in the process you build your being. It is blatant in the New Testament that there is a difference in level of being between God's elect. It angers many, but fear God alone. When you fear God alone you don't fear or worry about what 'angers' the world... Let the world be angry as hell all it wants. The anger of Cain... We are above that...

Fearing God alone also enables one to pursue Wisdom. You don't care what man or the world in general thinks of you. You don't allow the world to dissuade you from seeking wisdom. You fear God alone. A sophisticated language describing in practical language what this post is discussing can be found in a book titled Fourth Way by Ouspensky. It's not for everybody (especially shallow, mocking, scared people), especially not churchians (don't be a churchian), but also it's just truly not for everybody and that doesn't mean some people are lesser Christians than others. Some come, though, to a point where they want the practical level teaching. It needs regeneration. Then it needs a bit of a unique development in life regarding acquaintance with higher influences (imaginative literature, history, philosophy, art, music, science, religion) and a balanced development of each part of our being (intellect, emotion, physical). But Christianity has never been for dopes. It's only with the appearance of the culturally Marxist indoctrinated clerics and theologians that being a dope has been put forth as a virtue in a Christian. Stay away from synagogues of Satan, church or institutions of learning, and the people who teach or lead or come from them.

10 bullet points on Covenant Theology

1. Start with recognizing the three foundational covenants: the Covenant of Redemption, the Covenant of Works, and the Covenant of Grace. Some want to tuck the Covenant of Redemption into the Covenant of Grace and so only talk about the Covenant of Works and the Covenant of Grace, but the problem with that is the Covenant of Redemption is the foundation of both the Covenant of Works and the Covenant of Grace, not just the Covenant of Grace alone. The Covenant of Grace is the Covenant of Redemption as it is played out in historical time (the Covenant of Redemption is convened before creation in eternity); yet the Covenant of Redemption also underlies the Covenant of Works made in the Garden. The Covenant of Works is what Jesus comes to fulfill after the first Adam fails to fulfill it. This is part of the plan of redemption as laid out in the Covenant of Redemption. Some don't want to recognize the Covenant of Redemption because the Westminster Confession of Faith and the Three Forms of Unity don't mention it directly and they want their confessions to be perfect, but no document made by man will be perfect because it would rival the word of God itself.

2. It's important to realize there are three unique players in God's plan of redemption: pre-fall Adam, National Israel (as opposed to individual Israelites), and Jesus Himself. This is important to know so that you don't compare any of these three players with fallen man in general, pre or post-incarnation.

3. Jesus (the second Adam) came to fulfill what the first Adam failed to fulfill. So did this mean Jesus came to not eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? Well...yes, but obviously the garden is no more and the scene has changed post fall. So that Covenant of Works made in the Garden was republished on Sinai (the Mosaic Covenant) - in obviously elaborated form - so that Jesus could be "born under the law" and have that specific law to follow and fulfill to a 't.' Which Jesus did. Which only Jesus could do.

4. For some odd reason nobody in this discussion of Covenant Theology wants to talk about how National Israel is a prototype of the coming Messiah. It's curious because it is central to understanding Covenant Theology and to understanding God's plan of redemption overall. National Israel mirrored Jesus' life (for instance going down to Egypt). National Israel also came into existence to be the bloodline of the coming Messiah, from Adam through Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the Twelve Tribes. National Israel's history also was the actual substance of the engrafted word of God. You can see how close an identity as a type National Israel had with the coming Messiah. Blood, history, biography, etc. This typology is important to see why the Covenant on Sinai was made and how it relates to fallen man. National Israel was not fallen man, individual Israelites were fallen people, just like us, but as the entity National Israel they were a unique player in God's plan of redemption. There is NO similarity between National Israel and any people or nation that is not National Israel, pre or post-Incarnation. Individual Israelites were saved by faith in the coming Messiah just as we are saved by faith in the already come Messiah, but National Israel as an entity is unique as a type of the coming Messiah.

5. Saying the Mosaic Covenant is a republication of the Covenant of Works is not saying that anybody can be saved by their own works after the fall. This point is demagogued by many in the general discussions and arguments over Covenant Theology. The Mosaic Covenant was the republished Covenant of Works for National Israel as a prototype of Jesus, and for Jesus Himself to be born under and to fulfill.

6. Jesus' very fulfilling of the republished Covenant of Works on Sinai *is the Covenant of Grace for fallen man* once fallen man appropriates Jesus' accomplishment by faith. This is the only sense that the Mosaic Covenant is both a Covenant of Works and a Covenant of Grace at the same time. In other words: there is only one way to be saved........works. Either your own works (good luck with that, fallen man who has original sin and who has actively sinned from birth), or Jesus Christ's works, appropriated by faith. The latter route is the Covenant of Grace.

7. An aside: it helps to get an overall skeletal sense of the history of the plan of redemption by reading Thomas Boston's Human Nature in Its Fourfold State. Why? Because it will clearly show the differences between the pre-fall state of man in the Garden; the post-fall state of man in this fallen world; the new state that a human being enters when regenerated by the word and the Spirit; and finally the state of glorification beyond physical death. Knowing these four different states helps one in not making category mistakes. For instance, some very respected theologians treat Adam in the Garden the same as if he was a fallen man like us. No, Adam in the Garden was different from us. Adam had the ability to sin, and the ability to not sin. We as fallen people have the ability to sin, and the inability to not sin. Everything we do is sin. We are dead in sin. Adam in the Garden was not. He became like us after his fall, but prior he was different from us. Regarding sin and the four states it goes like this:

Man in innocence in the Garden: able to sin, able to not sin
Fallen man: able to sin, unable to not sin
Regenerated man: able to sin, able to not sin
Glorified man: unable to sin (which is a wholly new state that even pre-fall Adam did not possess)

8. The other covenants (other than the Noahic) had to do with setting up the Nation and Kingdom of Israel. The Abrahamic Covenant made Abraham's offspring, including the God-man Jesus Christ, God's unique people, with their own land, in time to set the stage for His overall plan of redemption. The Mosaic Covenant gave National Israel it's laws and ceremonies, again to enable them to bring the future Messiah into being undefiled by any of Satan's attempts to defile that royal bloodline. The harsh laws for adultery, for instance, had this for it's reason for existence. The Davidic Covenant set up the line of the Kingdom. The Noahic Covenant established the theatre of redemption, keeping it safe from future judgment like what happened with the flood, but obviously not keeping it safe from the final judgment. National Israel's history also played the role of showing the world that one can't earn one's salvation by one's own works.

9. In spiritual warfare the Covenant of Redemption is like the Christian's Magna Carta, or legal Constitution that he or she stands on when challenged by the Devil. There is also a small analogy regarding this with what being a citizen of Rome meant back in the apostle Paul's day. It granted rights and protections non-citizens didn't have.

10. It has to be stated that there is intentional deception by some when discussing Covenant Theology. Those who are mostly concerned with protecting infant baptism are the worst offenders (but Federal Vision types have their own motives for deception). Those concerned with protecting infant baptism distort Covenant Theology by first insisting that the Old Covenant mentioned by Paul is not Sinai but is the Abrahamic Covenant. They have to maintain the parallel, as they need it, between physical circumcision and ritual water baptism (when the bible makes circumcision of the heart - which is regeneration by the word and the Spirit - the parallel to physical circumcision). They also have to say one can be in the Covenant of Grace and not be in the Covenant of Grace *at the same time.* This is ad hoc garbage doctrine.

Which church?

Debater James White dropped the Romanist Hammer Verse® on his listeners yesterday, demanding that he be the ruler of "lay people" based on Hebrews 13:17 -

17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

White use to belong to a now defunct forum that had two levels. The lower level was for the "lay people", and the closed upper level was for the seminary graduates and other special people of God. Guess where all the upper level types spent the majority of their time? Yeah, in the closed upper level. Who wants to hang with unwashed nobody 'Christians' while taking the risk that one or more of them will show you up (which happened regularly, followed by the usual deletions and bannings).

Just as the 'elite' class that makes up the Washington establishment has no clue the level of contempt Americans hold them in, these clerics and seminary graduates equally have no clue the contempt God's lowly and plain people hold them in.

So what is James White missing in citing that verse? He's reading it in isolation. Prior to that verse is another verse. Hebrews 13:7 -

7 Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation.

Why is this verse relevant? Because it says *why* some person might have the 'rule' over another, and just what that rule consists of. Notice the phrase "the word of God" in that verse? That is the rule. If a person has the word of God they have the rule. God's word is the only rule for a Christian. Not a cleric or theologian or scholar. The word of God. Back then, when Paul was writing (assuming Paul to be the writer of Hebrews) the word of God was not as available as it is today, it goes without saying. We now have the complete word of God in convenient book form. If you lived in an era where you could only get at it from a person who has it then you definitely would be interested in sitting under that person.

Why did White miss that? Because White does not see the Bible as having the authority of the word of God. He sees bibles has having the authority of the word of scholars. He thus considers himself to be the rule spoken of in the verse.

There is another practical matter to be stated regarding this verse and how it is used by the Romanist types who use it as their hammer to get people to recognize them as a ruler.

When someone, anyone, says you must join a church, you say, "Which church?" They say inevitably, their church. Some will say any church. So, 99 out of a 100 churches are worthless regarding what they teach, so, I'm supposed to join a synagogue of Satan as a matter of course because clerics who think they are rulers say so? Well, they might then say, join a church that teaches the truth. I answer: if I'm able to discern the truth myself - which I am - why do I need any church at all? I'm in the Church of which Jesus Christ is King. The church you hate. The church which uses the pure and whole word of God which you hate. The church that is biblical. I say to James White and all other clerics who demand to rule over Christians: go to hell, devils.


Seeing God 2

Over a year ago I wrote a short post on the subject of seeing God. Here. Now here is another angle on this subject.

In the first post I mentioned how it can be an uncomfortable thing to think about seeing God in Heaven because that kind of feels like seeing a supreme authority figure, or being in the presence continually of an authority figure. It even feels a bit silly. Like a Muslim staring at their black rock after journeying a thousand miles to get there. I.e. what is the point of just merely looking at something? This is not mocking something like the beatific vision; this is practical thinking. Anyway, I answered that part of it in the first post linked above.

In this part two I want to mention another aspect of seeing God that doesn't get talked about. I believe it has to do with the subject of our level of being.

You have to have something in you before you can see it outside of you. Think of this in terms of language. You can't see why one musical composition is more interesting than another unless you have some of the language of music in you. If that involves just having heard different kinds and levels of music rather than having any musical theory in you it still applies because you heard that music which is audible language. I.e. you have *something* in you that gives you ability to discern the difference between the two musical works.

To see God you have to have something of God in you. Obviously the Holy Spirit applies here. At the level, though, of being in the Kingdom of God (seeing God - Jesus - directly) your level of being has to be higher than it is right now.

Forget the question of how your level of being gets to where it has to be to be in Heaven. Monergism, synergism regarding sanctification, etc. Let's just say you are *there* now. This means 'seeing God' is a measure of your new level of being. I.e. it is too simple to see it as you standing before Jesus gawking at Him and thinking that is the goal, to see Jesus. That's kind of silly.

When it's said the angels always face God that is talking about how they are arranged in their internal being. They are not always, literally - physically - facing God.

It's the same with glorified human beings in the presence of God which is to say in the Kingdom of God, the new heavens and earth.

The subject is level of being; not climbing up to the summit to view the old man in the cave.


Sacred truths, and oracles divine

Upon Truth's Victory Over Error

(This poem is at the front of David Dickson's commentary on the Westminster Confession of Faith)

Dost thou desire this Treasure to be thine
Of sacred Truths, and Oracles divine.
A fiery Pillar radiantly bright;
Come, it will guide thee in the darkest Night:
Thro' Seas, and Rocks, and Mountains on each Hand,
Through Wildernesses to Canaan's Land,
By Holy Writ the Truth it verifies,
By Holy Writ confutes all Heresies.
Tho' short, yet clear, for both do well agree
To make thy Path unerring unto thee.
As Ophir's Gold, which from Malacca came,
Made Solomon on earth the richest Man;
So will this Book make rich thy Heart and Mind,
With Divine Wisdom, Knowledge of all Kind:
Thee richer make, than Solon of great Fame.
Than all the seven wise Sages, Greece's Glory,
I do protest 'tis true, and is no story.


Worthless churchians

I just have to comment on visiting Reformed Forum again today. Usually they have a guy named Lane Tipton on, who seems to be afraid of his own shadow in terms of veering from the Westminster Standards, and who talks more idiocy per minute than the average sports commentator; but today they had a guy talking about what Calvin thought about the sabbath. This is like high energy for this forum. We live in a time when evil and Satanic lunacy is strangling the planet, and all these churchian clerics can think of doing is arrange yet another conference or talk about the Sabbath, or have a guy defend infant baptism while sounding like a Ludwig Wittgenstein scholar. These people are worthless in Christ's army. We're all mostly worthless in Christ's army, but it's not as obvious with most of us compared to these seminary vomited clerics and scholars.


God's standard

I hesitate to write this because James White reads this blog and this post will give him a new idea that he will immediately appropriate and then twist and distort which is why we're told not to speak out of school, but I'll use this preface to innoculate the post and forge ahead.

I recently watched the interview/discussion between White and Stephen Anderson:


It was actually a good, cordial discussion, until the end when White did the classic "I'm finished here" and pulled his mike off and walked off the makeshift set. Never has that move made for good optics. You would think Anderson had just produced photos of White in a bathhouse. They actually had just disagreed about the use of the word hell in the KJV.

My quick point. The unspoken theme in the entire discussion (which was about the King James Version vs. critical text bibles) was the fact that God always has His standard for His revealed word. Just as God always has a remnant of believers in every era of the history of redemption, He always has His standard for His revealed word.

Just as atheists are ironic, unself-aware identifiers of the true religion by what they passionately attack, and by what they lack enthusiasm to attack, critical text scholars are similar regarding God's standard for His word and the Authorized, King James, Version. They attack it, mock it, mock those who value it, and they call it dangerous, etc. While at the same time they appropriate its renderings shamelessly in their own translation activities, and identify it as the standard by the fact that it is their foil in everything they do and say.

In God's providence English has become the second language of the world. That His standard for His revealed word would be in English is not surprising.

Just as God always has a remnant who have faith, He always gives this fallen world the standard for His revealed word. That standard is not the ever-shifting critical text and its ever-changing versions. That standard is the Authorized, King James, Version and the manuscripts that underlie it.

Another way of saying this is: what is the true Bible? The one your fallen nature most doesn't want to be humbled to. Atheists and critical text scholars (often the two being the same thing) give up the truth despite themselves.


The Ring

If one were to look for a central ring symbol in the fantasy novel like world and journey of the Bible and God's plan of redemption it might be this:

30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Because God is acting from outside of time the first part of that ring - predestination - doesn't necessarily have to be seen in the context of our linear birth-to-death time line. It doesn't have to be constrained by that. It's God's sovereign choice still, but that choice, from our limited perception of time, can occur in higher aspects of time. A human being then can develop in a way to enter such other areas of time, making the fact and reality of predestination, monergistic though it still be, more interesting as a doctrine and reality for God's human creation.

The Bible doesn't blatantly go into higher aspects of time because it tends to explode the narrative. Also, such speculation gives room to the duller sorts (who are often professional theologians) to get everything hyper wrong, intentionally or otherwise. Usual caveat to the other types of simpletons: the foregoing has nothing to do with universalism.


Finally, on the republication of the Covenant of Works at Sinai; vindication in a published source

Over the years I've written several posts on the republication of the Covenant of Works at Sinai (i.e. what occurred on Sinai, the Mosaic Covenant) - here, and here, and here - and they have received hits because people are searching and are genuinely confused by this subject because theologians are very confusing in how they write about the subject; and because theologians that believe in infant baptism are very dishonest in how they write about the subject. They're dishonest because they never let on that their main concern in how they formulate Covenant Theology is to protect their doctrine infant baptism. Why are they so panicked to protect that doctrine to the point where they will distort doctrine? Because no matter how often and in how many ways they will deny it they see their salvation resting on the fact that they were ritually water baptized by a cleric. I.e. they believe in baptismal regeneration. We who have experienced regeneration by the word and the Spirit can understand their weakness, but not their refusal to go child-like to the word of God, and to God Himself in prayer (God says several times in his word, move towards Me, and I will move towards you, and this is done by reading his Old and New Testaments with the eyes of a child and by praying to God). They downgrade the fact and reality of supernatural, monergistic regeneration by the word and the Spirit as they downgrade the Bible itself by replacing it with constructed critical text monstrosities that replace the authority of the word of God with the authority of the word of man (scholars, academics, most of them self-identified atheists). Regarding the latter this causes them to look down upon the word of God as if it were merely one of a million text documents created by man and in effect having inherently the inner state of seeing the word of God as something that needs them more that they need it; which, needless to say, is an approach that will keep one in a state of spiritual death.

Having a clear understanding of Covenant Theology is powerful because it is the grand, overarching plan of God, or plan of redemption from one pole of eternity to the other. It presents all the parts of the Bible in a complete, unified whole and enables the believer to see their place within the great journey, or fantasy like novel, that is God's plan of redemption. It enables one to engage confidently in spiritual warfare as a pilgrim on the King's Highway making one's way to the Heavenly Jerusalem. To intentionally teach a version of this Covenant Theology that is distorted and ad hoc merely to protect a desired doctrine (infant baptism) that has no warrant in Scripture to begin with, let alone no warrant to be placed as the central concern in the plan of redemption is purely Satanic. That it's a holdover from Roman Catholicism should not surprise. Remember: the Devil knows what his great enemy is: it's the regeneration of God's elect by the word and the Spirit. Thus the Devil, in the dark days when the Roman Catholic Church had the power of the sword over Christians, called people to be baptized all day and all night, no problem; yet...he kept the word of God away from people upon penalty of torture and death. The Devil knows what regenerates, and it is not ritual water baptism.

It is under this law [the law given to Moses on Sinai] that Christ was born (Gal. 4: 4) and it is this same law (i.e. the covenant of works reaffirmed in the Old Covenant) that Christ fulfilled by his obedience (Rom. 5: 19-20) and it is the curse of this law which he endured by his death (Gal. 3: 13). Christ, therefore, accomplished the Old Covenant perfectly.

Barcellos, Richard. Recovering a Covenantal Heritage: Essays in Baptist Covenant Theology (p. 102). RBAP. Kindle Edition.

The Old Covenant, while being different from the covenant of works, reaffirmed it, not so that Israel would look for life by this means, but so that Christ would accomplish it. The Old Covenant was, therefore, not only necessary to lead to Christ but it was necessary so that he could accomplish salvation for God’s Israel.

Barcellos, Richard. Recovering a Covenantal Heritage: Essays in Baptist Covenant Theology (pp. 102-103). RBAP. Kindle Edition.

Samuel Petto explains this important point:

Indeed, I think, one great end of God in bringing Israel under this Sinai covenant, was to make way for Christ, his being born or made under the law, in order to the fulfilling of it for us. I do not see how (by any visible dispensation) Jesus Christ could have been born actually under the law, if this Sinai covenant had not been made; for the covenant of works with the first Adam being violated, it was at an end as to the promising part; it promised nothing; after once it was broken, it remained in force only as to its threatening part, it menaced death to all the sinful seed of Adam, but admitted no other into it who were without sin, either to perform the righteousness of it, or to answer the penalty; it had nothing to do with an innocent person, after broken, for it was never renewed with man again, as before: therefore, an admitting an innocent person (as Jesus Christ was) into it, must be by some kind of repetition or renewing of it, though with other intendments than at first, viz. that the guilty persons should not fulfil it for themselves, but that another, a surety, should fulfil it for them.[ 227]

Barcellos, Richard. Recovering a Covenantal Heritage: Essays in Baptist Covenant Theology (p. 103). RBAP. Kindle Edition.

This explanation from Petto demonstrates how he himself, and most of the Particular Baptists, considered that the covenant of works was reaffirmed with a different goal than at its first promulgation. The covenant of works did not provide a substitution to satisfy its righteousness; no one could obey in Adam’s place nor suffer his punishment. God, therefore, reaffirmed the covenant of works in another covenant that allowed for a righteous person to substitute himself for sinners. Not only was the Old Covenant not against the promises of God (Gal. 3: 21), but it was given specifically for the accomplishment of these promises (Gal. 3: 22-24). Without being itself a covenant of grace, the Old Covenant was given because of the covenant of grace and with a view to its accomplishment. Is this what the apostle John wanted to underline by declaring: “Out of his fullness we have all received grace in place of grace already given. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ” (John 1: 16-17)? The law given by Moses was a grace to lead to the grace accomplished by Jesus Christ.

Barcellos, Richard. Recovering a Covenantal Heritage: Essays in Baptist Covenant Theology (p. 103). RBAP. Kindle Edition.

If you read these quotes (which are from an essay in that book written by Pascal Denault) in the context of my three linked posts above you'll see what the republication (not reestablishment, but republication) of the Covenant of Works at Sinai is about.

The reason paedo-baptists (those who believe in and are panicked to protect the doctrine of infant baptism) refuse to see what is written above is because they MUST maintain a parallel between circumcision and ritual water baptism (when the real parallel there is circumcision of the flesh vs. circumcision of the heart, which is regeneration by the word and the Spirit), thus they actually say that the Old Covenant the apostle Paul mentions is the Abrahamic Covenant, AND that it is of the Covenant of Grace, making Paul in effect say the New Covenant does away with the New Covenant (which logically is on a par with their other necessary ad hoc violator of the law of non-contradiction doctrine that one can be in the Covenant of Grace and not in the Covenant of Grace at the same time).

Basically, in all this they downgrade the fact and reality of the doctrine of supernatural, monergistic regeneration by the word and the Spirit, and as a by product of that they have a man-centered view of the word of God itself (accepting atheistic, scholar-constructed versions over the pure and whole, inerrant, Holy Spirit preserved received Hebrew and Greek text in sound translation, which in English is the Authorized, King James, Version; the one they tacitly recognize as the Standard in all their translating activities despite themselves).

Anyway, this downgrading of regeneration (being born again) causes their churches to be dead zones, at best shallow, at worst Satanic. Spiritually dead either way. Their standard - and very on-the-mark, except on infant baptism - theologian, Louis Berkhof, wrote a surprising essay on this that they refuse to publish, yet lo and behold it is available to their dismay on the internet for anyone to read and be pleasantly - hopefully - surprised at.


Worldviews diagramed

Using Nancy Pearcey's 5 principles of finding truth (from her book Finding Truth) I thought I'd diagram major worldviews using that template, though in shorthand. [This post to be continually updated.]


The idol: relativism

The reductionism: reducing absolute truth to man's desires and demands

The external inconsistency: if truth doesn't exist then the words on the post-modernist's employment contract are meaningless hence he shouldn't get paid, but he still thinks he should get paid

The internal inconsistency: saying there is no truth is a performative contradiction; like saying everything I say is a lie

The case for Christianity: absolute truth exists because it is anchored in the being and self-revelation of God and matches what we human beings (who are created in the image of God) know to be true in our heart and conscience.


The idol: death

The reductionism: reducing God's creation and plan of redemption down to a counterfeit system designed to produce human death and suffering as sacrifice to Satan's Kingdom.

The external inconsistency: "Islam is a religion of peace" said while copious amounts of blood are dripping from the speaker's hands, if his hands have not been cut off already, the torturer becoming the tortured which is a common pattern in Islam's hell culture

The internal inconsistency: Allah hu ahkbar! means God is greater! but greater than who or what? Because Islam's god is Satan, and a counterfeit to the Holy Trinity of the Old and New Testaments, which is the Holy Scripture Islam uses to draw reflected authority for its own so-called holy book (like the moon - a symbol of Islam - reflecting the light of the Sun), while denying the core truth of the Old and New Testaments, thus God is greater translated is Satan is greater than the God of the Old and New Testaments, which is false because Satan is a created being, created by the God of the Old and New Testaments

The case for Christianity: For a counterfeit to exist the real thing has to exist


The idol: brain matter

The reductionism: reducing All and Everything to the grey matter that makes up the human brain

The external inconsistency: the image atheists see in mirrors; often dopey images that can't be reconciled as being solely the product of brain matter

The internal inconsistency: being the best identifiers of the true religion by what they attack and what they really have no enthusiasm for attacking

The case for Christianity: if the true God, sovereign in creation, providence, and grace didn't exist then atheists wouldn't exist, and atheists exist, so...


The idol: the Triune God self-revealed in the Old and New Testaments and in history

The reductionism: God is sovereign in creation, providence, and grace (I.e. there is no reductionism; the Creator/creation divide sets the table)

The external inconsistency: (not of Christianity, but of people) having life and consciousness by/in the logos by grace, yet being dead asleep in life indulging resentment

The internal inconsistency: (not of Christianity, but of people) having knowledge of God put in our hearts from birth and denying His existence

The case for Christianity: The Divine Origin of the Bible by B. B. Warfield; also the match between object and subject vis-a-vis the natural world and man, among other things...


9 Distinctives of the Puritans

There is some confusion among Reformed academics - theologians and church historians - as to how to define who was and who wasn't a Puritan; and whether there was any such thing as Puritans at all to begin with (some actually wonder this).

I see it this way: my observation that there is an academic approach to the faith and a spiritual warfare approach plays into this problem they have. The academic types can't see the spiritual warfare types or their approach.

The Puritans did indeed exist - in the past and today as well - and it should be added that Christians from the time of the Apostles who held these distinctives tended to be called names like 'puritan'; for instance, cathari is the Greek version of the puritan epithet, their history crazily rewritten by their murderers, like academics and popular culture today attempt to rewrite the history of the English, European, and American Puritans, if not, as mentioned, denying their existence altogether. (Look at this John Owen quote from the 1600s: “I will pass over other similar monstrous lies with the simple comment that they all pale into insignificance in comparison with the slanders that the Roman pontiffs have dreamed up against the Albigenses [Cathars], the Waldenses, and other faithful servants of Christ.” [pg. 147 of his Biblical Theology]) Here are the Puritan distinctives:

1. Bible oriented. Bible-believing, Bible-focused, Word of God valuing Christians.

2. They understood the fact and reality of supernatural regeneration by the Word and the Spirit (and overall recognized the work of the Holy Spirit Himself, especially in the foundational areas of regeneration and the preservation of the pure and whole word of God down through time, in a way that always seems to anger mainstream establishment Christianity).

3. They understood the difference between fearing the world and fearing God alone; and that when you fear God alone you don't then fear man or man's opinion of you which enables you to move in the direction of wisdom. They feared God alone.

4. They took a spiritual warfare approach to the faith. They understood and experienced the spiritual battlefield ('Faith hath a piercing eye, to see into the spiritual realm.'). For them this made biblical doctrine actual armor of God. They wanted real armor, hence they had no problem with 'hard truth' biblical doctrine (Calvinism), because it re-oriented them internally to being God-centered rather than man-centered or, in other words, being conformed to Christ.

5. They were practical with the faith (or "reduced to practice" the Christian faith). A soldier on a battlefield is a practical individual. Life and death is on the line constantly. For Puritans the Word of God and biblical doctrine is not merely philosophical or theoretical, but as practical as a spade, a weapon, a fox hole, or a good pair of boots. They also knew you have to practice the faith (summed up in the two great commandments of Jesus) in real time (i.e. be awake to the reality and presence of God always in real time; and love your enemy as yourself, because we always target our resentment at human beings one way or another, and it's resentment, rather than gratitude, that keeps us under the power of our fallen nature), in the traffic of one's average day, to increase understanding of the faith; i.e., to be truly conformed to the image of Christ.

6. Puritans were anti-establishment; or just by their nature outside any and all establishments. They were separated out from the world. They tended to be political targets of religious establishments and objects of mockery to the establishment.

7. Without being academic in the usual shallow ways (while still being willing to exploit any and all influences and sources of on-the-mark teaching, and being grateful for the effort to produce it, while producing it themselves as well) Puritans sought a complete understanding of the faith. They sought parts-in-relation-to-the-whole understanding of the Bible and its doctrine. They knew a Christian is to be a prophet, priest, and king (not an eternal infant in a nursery), and that the bar is raised high to be that, yet the Holy Spirit enables the Christian to meet and exceed that bar. For Puritans learning is active, and individual (we face death and our judgment, ultimately, standing solely on our own two feet).

8. They had a strong doctrine of sin and the very real wrath of God. They knew their own state. Tyndale's metaphor of the venomous snake described the Puritan understanding. We are snakes with poison in us, and we can't get the poison out of us. Only God can. And even if we don't strike with our fangs, it is nevertheless our nature to strike. So from birth, due to original and then active sin, we are by our very constitution unable to be in the Kingdom of God. It takes an act of God to change us, remove the venom from us (give us a new heart), and recognize the righteousness of Christ in us which we appropriate by faith in the life and death of Jesus Christ. In other words we can't improve ourselves enough to get into the Kingdom of God. The leopard can't change his spots. Only God can change us. And until He does, by an act of pure grace, we are children of wrath fit for the lake of fire. This stark realization Puritans came to know at an experiential level.

9. Which gets back starkly to the Bible. The word of God. Puritans knew regeneration was solely an act of God, we can't effect it. Yet the word of God, the living, quickening language of the Bible, is the wild card. God says in His Word, several times: move towards Me, and I'll move towards you. The Puritans knew we move towards God not by ritual or physical buildings, but by reading and getting understanding of the Word of God and by prayer.


I love some of the comments you see under articles

“Breitbart has no credibility outside of the most extreme conservative wing of our party."


Yeah, anyone outside of Washington D.C. globalist UniParty is "extreme" to these traitors.

In other words, Breitbart has no credibility with the D.C. political-class. And even that's a lie. They don't fear Breitbart for nothing, lol!

If Breitbart didn't have any credibility, these crap-weasel D.C. skunk-monkeys wouldn't be afraid of Breitbart.

- scott825

Martyn Lloyd-Jones

I've been reading up on Martyn Lloyd-Jones because I think he is very similar to me regarding many things of the faith. He is kind of an outcast among the mainstream too, for these reasons. So he's always been kind of off radar.

Here's one quote relevant to our times:

"A very good sign, therefore, that people are born again is that they become more acutely aware of the existence and the working of Satan than they have ever been hitherto. There is no need for Satan to busy himself very much with the unregenerate. They can be left, as it were; they are already bound; they are already in his kingdom and they cannot escape. But once people are transferred to the kingdom of God and the kingdom of light, the devil makes a new effort and in a spiritual way comes to them and attacks them. And they are aware of this other presence that is fighting for their life and for their very existence. Flesh and Spirit - the conflict is a proof of regeneration."

That's from Great Doctrines of the Bible. A sort of systematic theology.

Here is another telling quote:

"Nothing, it seems to me, is quite so strange as the way in which man by nature always objects to the doctrine of regeneration. There is nothing also, I sometimes think, that so demonstrates the depth of sin in the human heart as this objection to the doctrine of the rebirth or being born again. Read the New Testament Scriptures, and you will find that men objected to it in those days. When our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ spoke about it, He was always persecuted. People disliked Him for mentioning it. When He began to expose the depth of iniquity in the human heart and to talk about a rebirth, they invariably misunderstood Him. They disliked it then, and it has always been the same ever since. When John Wesley was truly converted, he went back to his university at Oxford and preached a sermon on this very subject; and he was hated for it. Those respectable religious people in Oxford disliked this doctrine, and they made it impossible for him to continue preaching there. The natural man, the unregenerate human heart, objected to this great and wondrous biblical doctrine of rebirth and regeneration. And it is equally true today. People sit and listen to an address or sermon on what is called the fatherhood of God or the brotherhood of man and they never object to it. When they are exhorted to live a better life, they never express any objection at all. They say that it is perfectly right, and even though they are reprimanded for not living better lives, they say that it is perfectly true and quite fair and that they could do better. But if a preacher stands before the natural man and says, “You must be born again—you must have a new life from God,”they ask, “What is this strange doctrine?” A THOUGHT TO PONDER There is nothing that so demonstrates the depth of sin in the human heart as objection to the doctrine of the rebirth." From Out of the Depths, pp. 71-72.

John Owen said something similar. The quote in the margin of my PPP blog.

I don't know everything about Jones, his eschatology, etc., so reserve the right to change my opinion...


Immortality - Boettner (rare book; at least I wasn't aware of it)

I didn't know Loraine Boettner wrote a book on death entitled Immortality. Just found that out. So I've been looking and looking for an electronic version, and it doesn't seem to exist. You can get a paperback version at Amazon, but I want the e-book version. Anyway, I did find a site or two that posted extensive sections from the book:




If you're ever contemplating death as we all do at times Boettner is his usual biblical self in bringing a lot of material together in a plain and clear style. - C.


Fox News Channel shows its new hand

For those of you who don't follow or discern such things here is the first bit of evidence the new management at Fox News Channel will take that network globally leftward.

The new management has given comic book philosopher (and Donald Trump hater) Jonah Goldberg permission (or an actual assignment) to attack Sean Hannity.

Remember, Trump and his voters (which includes myself, from the beginning) are fighting the Devil and his end time consummation movement to assert dominion over the entire planet. God is seeing who stands where. We are commanded to confront the Devil, always, everywhere. We know the end, we know the victories the Devil and his army of dhimmis will achieve; yet we also know God (and His people) have victory in the end. Personally it is not disappointing to see so many self-identified Christians taking the side of the Satanic globalist movement. That is expected and a refreshing validation of many years of attempting to show those very so-called Christians where they were falling short. I have no sympathy for the Devil or his followers. I actually have deep hatred for those who hate my God and Creator and Savior. May they reap what they deserve.

Churchianity is a false religion unto itself

A seminary professor writes this:

What moves pietism, what makes it what it is, is the quest to experience the risen Christ without the mediation of the preaching of the Word and Sacraments.

There are really three things that make churchianity dead. In this case Reformed churchianity.

1. Let's start with what is stated in the above quote. There is one mediator between God and man, and that is Jesus Christ. No priest/pastor/cleric is a mediator between God and man. Churchians always want to exalt cleric and ritual above the Word and the Spirit. It is such a Romanist tendency it is almost hallucinogenic to witness that a Protestant can't see that at this point. The further two points go a ways to explain it though.

2. The Romanist fetish doctrine of infant baptism is demanded by all churchians who actually hate the doctrine and reality of supernatural regeneration by the Word and the Spirit. The Romanist churchian, in this case, will say: "God, we grant you sovereignty in creation and providence; but we are going to have to draw the line at grace. Sorry, God, but we will take care of that." OK, little churchian, you go with that. And stay spiritually dead as a door nail.

3. Demanding bibles that have the authority of God taken out of them and the authority of man (scholars) put into them. Demanding bibles that need man more than man needs the Bible. Denying the work of the Holy Spirit in shepherding and preserving the pure and whole word of God down through history. (Churchians tend to deny the work of the Holy Spirit in pretty much everything.) As long as you demand a bible that needs you (for its very 'construction') more than you need it you will never be humbled to the word of God, and thus it will never be a quickening force within you.

The cure: recognize that Christians are prophets, priests, and kings. Not eternal infants in a nursery to be lectured to by seminary graduates nine out of ten of which don't even give evidence that their balls have dropped. (And any gathering of kings will be a gathering on a battlefield. The spiritual battlefield. It is generally conceded that the Devil occupies churches as a matter of course. This is because there are no warriors of Christ to run him off.)

The cure: Regeneration is the main thing. In the depths of the horror of the Romanist tyranny the Devil called people to be baptized and experience the sacraments all day and all night, but he kept the word of God away from people upon penalty of torture and death. The Devil knows what regenerates God's elect, and it is not clerics and ritual.

The cure: read the version of the Bible you most don't want to read. Be humbled to the version of the Bible you most don't want to be humbled to. Discern resentment and pride rising up in you when a certain version of the Bible is mentioned, and engage that Bible. You know what I'm talking about.


Good article on top ten pianists of the 20th century

Can't go wrong with this list. Surprised there were names I'd never heard of. They may not have recorded much into the more modern recording era...

This probably won't help, but I'll give it a shot anyway...

All you #nevertrumpers who so look up to your elite gods and goddesses and seemingly want to don dog collars post Georgetown dinner parties just like they do and talk about books they've never really actually read all the while sipping wine onto palettes destroyed by Diet Coke addictions as they thumb through their 83rd complete reading of Lord of the Rings... Here...please, try to read this piece from Spengler. Not Oswald, but the modern day guy who calls himself Spengler. He's really smart. You should be able to tell that. Should, I say. Though you all seem to be lacking the practical/common-sense intelligence component in modern day human models; or you are compromised by having to pay your rent by committing treason at the bidding of the globalist elite.


Standing Between Egypt and the Promised Land

Why does Christianity seem progressively dead?

By that I mean: you first encounter the Bible, the new genres, the doctrine, the new reality of it, the truth of it, you read it complete, several times, you get your arms around on-the-mark doctrine, then... Then what? Then you pick up the same Bible and it seems like old ground that has been covered, with nothing left to offer. Been there, done that.

At the same time whereas before your life seemed to be somewhat alive with a sense of higher meaning, higher contact, perhaps even some events suggesting contact with higher beings, angels, then... God seems to go silent. No guidance. No communication. You pray, you plead, when in dire straights, and...nothing. Hello?

This all occurs over a many year period, but it arrives. At least for me it arrived.

So, again, why does Christianity seem progressively dead? I.e. why over time does the entire process of coming into the faith seem to lose energy, or a sense of something active and higher world about it?

The common response from the more shallow corners of Christian environments would be something like: Stop looking for a burning bosom experience, you enthusiast! Eat your crackers, drink your grape juice, you are nothing and Christianity is supposed to be ordinary!

I'll answer my own question (then, in an additional note below, I'll give a higher level answer)...

Perhaps that very feeling of being cast onto a deserted landscape, surrounded by silence, seeming silence, is the very feeling of real development going on inside a follower of Christ.

Notice that feeling of abandonment and silence in a desolate landscape is very much not the feeling one had when dead asleep (prior to regeneration) in the world where everything is a light show of illusion and empty temptation and a mindless chasing after the worthless.

It would follow that when a person wakes up to their real situation that it will seem depressing in all the common ways we think of depression. We wake up to the fact that we are in kind of a bad situation. A fallen nature within, living in a fallen world. We are seeing good and evil (mostly evil) clearly now. It's like waking up to realize you're in a prison surrounded by violent lunatics. You're now on the spiritual battlefield. Who wants to be on a battlefield, of any nature?

But you can't go back to sleep.

You're standing between Egypt and the Promised Land.

You can only go forward.

Here is the higher level answer: You can't pour new wine into old bottles. The metaphor in the Gospels is about a leather 'bottle' that holds wine and so on. But see it this way: your being (i.e. your level of being) is like a glass. It is of a certain size. Because it is of a fixed size you can only pour so much wine (knowledge/understanding) into the glass. To increase your level of understanding you have to increase the size, or capacity, of the glass. You have to increase your level of being.

So if you are taking in the Bible and doctrine over and over, non-stop, and it is getting old and seemingly less and less profitable (diminishing returns) it's because you are trying to pour new wine (understanding) into an old glass that can't take anymore new liquid. It's capacity is full.

This is why an ancient formula states: Knowledge + Being = Understanding.

It's not just knowledge, but it is knowledge plus increasing level of being that is required to increase level of understanding.

The Bible has more to give. Yet you can only hold so much until you increase the size of the glass that represents the current level of your being.

(Now I hear the shallow voice: "Oh, so you're saying that if you somehow increase your level of being - whatever that means - then you'll start seeing new things in the Bible nobody else in history has been able to see? Do you become psychic too? Ha, ha. I'm hearing New Age gnosticism!!! There's nothing new under the sun! You can't know more than the very righteous and reverend Michael Horton knows! Why would you think you could? Do you have a seminary degree??? I'm finished here!!!")

OK, getting that guy out of the way...

I think regarding the Bible and doctrine "seeing more" means seeing and understanding the BASICS at the experiential level. Because a more secular version of that ancient formula could be put: Knowledge + Experience = Understanding. But that's actually a totally different thing because experience won't necessarily raise level of being. But it doesn't hurt. One thing experience gives is new language. Any experience, say a trade, commercial fishing, bricklaying, starting a small business, gives a person a new language to use in all other areas of life. For instance. But that is getting off topic. The question here is, going back to the ancient formula as first worded above, what actually is involved in increasing level of being?

It is simply practicing the knowledge you've acquired in real time, everyday life.

If the knowledge is love your enemy you first learn what that means (and doesn't mean) and then you actually practice it in real life situations and events. It's difficult to do in real time. (It's difficult to remember to do it to begin with!) We can be assured, though, if we do make the effort to practice that teaching from the Bible in real time situations and events then it will increase our level of being. And with that increase of level of being we can then go back to the Bible and perhaps see more of the teaching that we were perhaps missing before because we simply didn't have the capacity to see it and understand it.

Love your enemy is just one thing the Bible commands us to practice. Be awake is another. It arguably comes before love your enemy. The very fact that you are practicing the knowledge of the Bible is 'seeing more' in the statement about pouring new wine into old bottles. You don't pass over that, you see more in it. At a practical, experiential level.

Using more doctrinal type language we can see that resentment is something a Christian never has any reason to indulge in (even so-called righteous anger). For a Christian gratitude for everything all the time is the great royal attitude to be cultivated. Gratitude is the opposite of resentment. Practicing this in real time will increase your level of being.

I'll stop now.


Amazing so many people who self-identify as conservative can't see this

hokkoda A close election will produce a National Review endorsement of Hillary Clinton.

Stonewall_61 Even if true, it would have no effect, right? Trump says NR is irrelevant, and nobody pays attention to it. If anybody did, Trump would not have won the nomination.

hokkoda I'm not trying to tally up the votes this or that paid-political-campaign produces in November. The useful thing about Trump, to me, has always been that he has revealed what a complete scam that Conservative Inc. has become.

This is the election where I can't really lose because I believe it to be part of a bigger political realignment taking place in the country: The Official Party of Government vs. Everyone Else.

Trump, for all his faults, has pulled back the curtain on the fraud that is our one-party political system. Many of the things nevertrump criticizes Trump for the most are things that nevertrump excuses in the likes of John Boener, Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush, etc. What nevertrump has always failed to grasp is that they failed because they are not credible.

If 'nevertrump' actually advanced a candidate, they'd collapse. Which is why they didn't advance a candidate.


Devil-run hierarchies

Societies seem to naturally organize themselves into a hierarchy of Devil-run activity. It is the spirit in the air doing it. People are hollow. They channel the spirit with no resistance. This explains the organization and the hidden in plain sight aspect of it. The people making up the Devil-run hierarchy are dead asleep to most all of it. They may know they are getting power or money or what have you, but that probably is about all they know. They're puppets to the spirit of the Devil.

If Satan is the power of this world currently it follows that his spirit would be powerful to organize everything into structures to carry out evil.

So silly conspiracy theory can be laughed off legitimately by even the people most involved in the power structures that naturally get organized in all societies. They don't know what they are a part of. Again, they may be awake to a sense of having power, of being above the masses in some way or another, of having access to knowledge or money or what have you that others don't have access to. They may be aware of their status as wise men, etc.; but they will still be dead asleep to the spirit organizing them, and even probably to the organization itself.

We're getting closer

We're getting closer to seeing all that is going on in the world. Getting closer just usually means seeing the obvious in a clearer light.

A priest in France has now stated that Islam worships Moloch, and that their behavior is the behavior of a people that worships a god that demands human sacrifice.

In Western Europe and America and elsewhere the same god is being worshiped, though in the pure child sacrifice way. Abortion has been exposed lately as a crazily barbaric act. Videos have not only shown the viciousness of the abortionists, but the dead-soul mocking of it that comes out of them. They laugh even.

I am not holier-than-thou towards anybody who has had or been pro-abortion. What I am saying is the practice itself carried out by the people who are dedicated to doing it is evil practiced as worship to a god-front for Satan himself. The Kingdom of Satan is fed by human death.

I'm drawing the parallel between Islam and their supporters on the left in the West. The bizarre enabling of Islamic evil that is taking place in these leftist, socialist governments has to have a common motive. It is the worship of a god like Moloch (or Molech) who demands human sacrifice. This is why Muslims murder their own (their own children even) when they don't have other victims to kill. The leftist types have had abortion to fulfill their worship needs for going on many decades now. Prior there were massive wars (WWI, WWII) and actual genocide in recent history to satisfy the demand for human sacrifice to the Kingdom of Satan.

This is powerful to see. This is seeing lines. Battle lines. Instead of just shaking our heads in a kind of resigned, abstract bewilderment towards all this lunacy and evil, or just chalking it up abstractly to the fallen state of man and of evil on this planet, we see it in simple and real terms. Practical terms. False god being worshiped. Actual deeds being carried out in worship of this false God. All false gods are fronts for Satan, ultimately. Seeing all this simply but also in practical terms. It's powerful.

The motivation of Christians who pile on Trump

It's very easy for an evil government to control people via money and promises (though more accurate to say, evil establishment-in-power because the government system can be good though the people running it be thoroughly corrupt and evil).

When I read Christians sounding just like the globalist parasites (who have been calling themselves, dishonestly, conservatives) on the subject of Trump and this election I have to assume they are as bought off by establishment money as the latter group. Because their case against Trump is cartoonishly intellectually dishonest. Trump is not an unknown individual who has just appeared on the scene. He has a long history of being in the public limelight. He's given many interviews (and even political speeches) over the years. He's written books. It's fairly easy to see who he is and what drives him. His policies are common-sense and well-within the boundaries of what our system of government is all about. His history suggests he has nothing to do with racism, bigotry, fascism, etc., all the evil buzzwords the left (and now the establishment so-called 'conservatives') are using against him.

So when I read Christians - who are otherwise at least semi-intelligent - sounding like the freaked-out globalist establishment parasites I have to assume there is a similar money motive in their dishonest, disingenuous behavior.

We know the Washington establishment has involved churches in the human trafficking that is taking place in this country (United States) with federal money. The churches are being corrupted in this manner. This is how a tyrannous establishment operates. Could they also have corrupted other Christian institutions such as seminaries and colleges? It's very possible.

It all amounts to treason. What these people are involved with is Satanic to begin with. Globalism, it's goals, what drives it, is Satanic through and through. To take part in it by selling out your own country is treason. God knows what is in their hearts. Do you think God will allow somebody He can't trust into His Kingdom? If your fellow Americans can't trust you it's not a good sign.


Rare occurance

This is a rare case of a cleric calling a spade a spade. He'll probably back off of it later, nuance it to death, but just on the face of it now it is a rare event coming from establishment Christianity.

I also find it inspired to associate Islam with a god like Moloch. When we call them Satan worshipers (which they are) it actually flatters them and their evil persona. Moloch is an old front for Satan of course, but it's much better to associate Islam with such an old front, especially one connected with human sacrifice.

This is the end

When people assert their Satanic way of life on you they are making war upon you, and you then have to make war upon them.

Moving along... This article shows that seemingly only people in Poland can see what here seemingly only a street Calvinist like myself can see: that the Devil is asserting dominion over the entire planet, and doing it rather quickly and successfully. In a total way. I believe the Devil must always be confronted, but practically speaking what can an individual do? Anyway, there is only so much real estate on this planet, and when the Devil asserts dominion of it all he is cutting off the branch he is sitting on, and God then brings His fist down upon the entire play. It probably gets very bad for likely a long time (by our desires a long time) before that happens.

Get the real, pure and whole, word of God and its sound doctrine (the actual armor of God) fused into memory, will, and understanding; and go into survival mode preeminently, but also spiritual warfare mode which includes calling other elect to the faith and building up oneself and others in the faith. Then with power running the race to the finish, with discernment and inspiration of the Spirit, under the banner of Christ, conformed to His godliness, fearing God alone.


Two long-standing questions answered

[This was an email.]

1st Question: In biblical doctrine the Bible says we will rule with Christ over his creation. Yet, the question has always been, who is the ruled in this scenario? We seem to be rulers with no one to rule. I.e. everything, every creature that dies in rebellion to God is put away in hell, or the lake of fire. Everyone else is in a glorified body. I came close to an answer awhile back, but it didn't really satisfy. Something about ruling ourselves, etc.

So I came across this article, and it at least had something new in it.

Read the whole thing (it's short and really just a set of quotes), but here is a little: "The discovery of the immensity of the universe does not diminish but actually magnifies man's role in the cosmos. For if Christ is to rule over all things and we are to reign with Him, then we will be ruling over all the galaxies, affirming Christ's Lordship over the whole universe."

2nd Question: This might actually pertain a little to the above question as well, but it's the question of why are there different races of man? The standard answer from Christian theologians is horridly politically-correct. I myself wrote a post that is horridly politically-INcorrect that said some things I'd change now after what I've found, but here is that post.

So I decided to search for classic books on the subject that were very much not mainstream. Google was zero help. Google seems to censor search queries, by the way. I've seen this a few ways lately. But anyway, I finally had to go to the Stormfront website (Aryan, etc., site), and they came through. I found references to a couple of books. One didn't have much, but another turned out to be a goldmine.

The Origin of Race and Civilization by Charles A. Weisman

Out of print.

But lo and behold I found a very well formatted pdf (basically the pdf is the original pages of the book) here.

This book has a Chapter 3 titled Race and Scripture, which is exactly what I was looking for. A politically-incorrect book on the subject just to see what those types have said. This book kind of includes the best of similar books that came before (I get that sense). The guy seems to be a real Christian, but there is one thing missing: he doesn't mention the Gospel, and ends up giving the impression that only Adamic white individuals will be saved. I don't think he means to say that, but since he never mentions doctrinal things past the Old Testament it comes across like that, but this doesn't invalidate what the book is about.

Remember, the above book is severely politically-incorrect. It will make mainstream, establishment Christians very, very outraged. It will then inspire them to mock like the devil. Wacky, they will say. Nuts. But also, "RACIST!!!!!!!" will also come out of their world-fearing mouths. Fear God alone, it is the beginning of wisdom.

The author is very good at dismantling the ways mainstream, world-fearful Christianity tries to wave off these difficult questions of race.

I've been back and forth on the pre-Adamite question, for instance. It was debated by Calvinists early on, whether any humans existed before Adam. It's a difficult question to put forward because people will jump all over the notion accusing it of this and that and seemingly presenting biblical arguments against it, including soteriological arguments, which are serious. But if you read the chapter you will see the author is very impressive in calling out the shallowness and fear and lack of reason of the critics of the argument.

I've always said I'm Young Earth Creation, just to say it's all supernatural anyway, so... But maybe not so now. I do suspect Adam is around 6,000 years ago though.

By the way, the author is not an evolutionist either. You just have to read the chapter.

The quick answer to the question, though (why are there different races) is because there aren't different races but different species of one race. This is what I was always stuck on, the fact that Asians and Blacks are SO different from whites. Not just a little, or different by a little degree, as the mainstream tried to put forward. But REALLY different. (Remember Mouravieff on this subject? a different soul even). And each species was a different, unique creation. The creation of Adam was the creation of the white species. But you have to read it. The argument is forceful by illustrations from ancient Egypt and also bringing up much regarding ancient human types that we know exist and existed. He is also good at portraying the silliness of saying such differences can be accounted for by micro evolution in a short span. Etc.

One other point on this: this is a scary subject. God obviously controls these dark races from exterminating (or trying to exterminate) the white race. We know they want to. We know they have it in them to do it. We know they've attempted it, and are attempting it today. Kline's notion of 'Pilgrim Politics' also plays a role in all this. It means we are suppose to sort of pretend that the 'nations' that surround us are just like us, and we aren't to act as if they are different. Sort of, we're in their territory, currently. Don't congregate with them, but don't make war on them based on the racial (or species) difference. This approach obviously slips and slides into worldly fear and naivete considering the nature of the world we live in. Also it slips and slides into Satanic political-correctness.

So anyway, there are different races because there have been different creations of species of humans. Blacks and Asians didn't derive from Adam and Eve. How this effects soteriology is not a difficult matter regarding orthodox doctrine. And it's NOT about evolution, as the mainstreams world-fearers always accuse. Anyway, read the book and see for yourself. - C.

ps- And it goes without saying that anyone, any race or species, if you will, or nationality or whatever can be elect and regenerated by the word and the Spirit. After the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Also, a pure Adamic white person can be cast off, or cut off, and the lowliest (however defined) can be spliced in to the branch in their place.

Establishment Christianity in Hare Krishna robes, baking cookies

It's absolutely strange how clerics today say nothing about the evil that is currently rolling over every landscape on the planet. They seem to have a spirit of Hare Krishnaism. Mixed with an academic style separation from reality.

It may be due to the typical shallowness and fecklessness one sees in people who have gone through institutions of so-called higher learning that are thoroughly marinated in cultural Marxism.

It may be that they are just churchians more than anything else. Which implies shallowness.

They don't seem to be able to set realities of sin and spiritual warfare, anti-Christ and suffering, in anything close to a historical context let alone current events. They talk about baking cookies with their wife, how cute their babies are, what's the next great conference they're going to.

One would be tempted to suspect the Beast system has made it a part of their strategy to pay off the churches. With the goal to keep Christians subdued as they go about their evil.

I think the Marxists already accomplished that regarding the churches and church leaders during the 20th century when they set up the Marxist front groups intended to target Christian churches and neutralize them by making them liberal and shallow, culturally Marxist and dead asleep. If not dead.


Horrid, odious, blood-drenched atheists

Atheists cringe when it is pointed out that they murdered upwards of 100 million people in the last 100 years. Not to mention the mere suffering they caused in innumerable evil ways.

The one thing that united the disparate factions that came together as the horrid, odious, blood-drenched Bolshevik party was their shared militant and vicious atheism.

Here is something from an historian to give a sense of the vicious evil of these God-hating atheists:

Here is a quote from Stark in "Bearing False Witness," p. 201, though he himself is quoting Alexander Yakolov, the who chaired a Russian committee after the fall of the Soviet Union investigating such matters.

"Metropolitan Vladimir of Kiev was mutilated, castrated, and shot, and his corpse was left naked for the public to desecrate. Metropolitan Veniamin of St. Petersburg, in line to succeed the patriarch, was turned into a pillar of ice,; he was doused with cold water in the freezing cold. Bishop Germogen of Tobolsk...was strapped alive to the paddlewheel of a steamboat and mangled by the rotating blades. Archbishop Andronnnik of Perm...was buried alive. Archbishop Vasily was crucified and burned."

About 200,000 clergy were murdered, To quote again about what was done to priests, monks, and nuns, "[T]hey were crucified on the central doors of iconostases, thrown into cauldrons of boiling tar, scalped, strangled with priestly stoles, given Communion with melted lead, and drowned in holes in the ice." Over 20,000,000 Russians were murdered at least partly because of their religion.

A lot of atheists are really God haters, and express their hatred by torturing and killing religious people.


Ha, ha, the little angry cuck nevertrumpers are sad and confused

Here's the latest public pronouncement from confused cuck Jonah Goldberg. Don't bother reading it, he's basically announcing for the 87,000th time that he has successfully gone no. 2.

Now here is a pithy comment following the brilliant cuck column:

Veritas • 11 hours ago

This author has way too high of an opinion of him self. Even if I agreed with him, which I doubt, he comes across as a condescending, overwrought, self/absorbed loon.

Unfortunately, though, he doesn't come across as that in the super bubble he lives in. In that bubble he lacks self-awareness and anybody like Veritas who can talk straight to him.

In one part of the article, by the way, he breathlessly announces that he and his fellow defeated nevertrumpers are now "anti-establishment." Um, no. People don't automatically reverse roles when a war is won (and if Trump loses to Hillary there *will* be an insurrection, and you will pay a bigger price). You're still nazis/communists/globalists/feckless-dupes-of-evil.

Now be obedient, demon. Beg us not to send you to hell.


To hell with them all

Here is a good example of how feckless and ignorant Christian clerics are of politics and the realities of liberty vs. tyranny. The stupidity on display in this discussion is alarming. The fear of the world on display in this discussion is predictable, and no less alarming. These clerics all seem to have been neutered by culturally Marxist institutions of so-called higher education; and one has to always add they seem to have had no ability or curiosity to get an alternate take on things. Overall the shallowness of these individuals and their discussion reminds one of the hollow souls currently in western Europe. Also, I have to go back to their fear of the world...the actual fear you can hear in their voices in not wanting to say anything 'incorrect' is beyond obnoxious. It's obnoxious to hear people who put themselves forward as leaders or teachers of Christians to have this shallowness and fear of the world. These feckless souls have bowed their knee to the Devil. They are worthless in Christ's army. To hell with them.


The globalist parasites lost (somebody explain it to them)

Some comments under a David French (All Hail) article at National Review Online:

- Neoconservatives are a bitter, vengeful lot.

- As a liberal - I would say they're principled. Stubborn to a fault, intolerant, but def sticking to their principles on this one.

- It is really not so much an issue of principles but rather maintaining influence and control. If Trump wins, neoconservatism will suffer a major defeat in the Republican party. They could try to go to the Democrat party from whence they came but the Democrats are in a progressive cycle and would not be interested.

- Eh, not so much sticking to principles as what Dantes said - sulking. They did a full court press against Trump, backed a failed Jeb early on because of his open border immigration policy and then reluctantly endorsed Cruz at like 11:59 pm. They've been never trumping all along and I don't think they can get out of their rut even knowing what a Clinton restoration would be like. French and some of his cohorts even deludingly thought he might be the savior of the western world until they/he realized he had nothing to offer. And that was French's last rational epiphany. The rest is just more of the anti trump same.