<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\07514792577\46blogName\75PLAIN+PATH+PURITAN\46publishMode\75PUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\46navbarType\75BLUE\46layoutType\75CLASSIC\46searchRoot\75//electofgod.blogspot.com/search\46blogLocale\75en\46v\0752\46homepageUrl\75http://electofgod.blogspot.com/\46vt\0757601018325433937574', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>


If I was a Bible teacher

[an email]

If I was a Bible teacher and a caller in to my show started accusing or complaining or going off on tangents...I'd say: "Hey, come back to reality."

"What is reality?" they would say.

"Evil, alienation, and death. This is reality here and now after the fall. All three are abnormal. We escape their grasp only one way..."

- C.

The walking of the soul

[an email]

I've sent this before, but it's so valuable to see the connection between the Work teaching [i.e. Fourth Way, Ouspensky] and the Calvinist, Puritan, Reformed school of doctrine. This is a passage from Thomas Boston's Human Nature In its Fourfold State. See, at the end, where he basically describes the state of identification, and ties it to being a feature of our fallen nature:

(6.) Is not everyone by nature discontented with his present lot in the world, or with some one thing or other in it? This also was Adam's case, Gen. 3:5, 6. Some one thing is always lacking; so that man is a creature given to changes. If any doubt this, let them look over all their enjoyment; and, after a review of them, listen to their own hearts, and they will hear a secret murmuring for lack of something—though perhaps, if they considered the matter aright, they would see that it is better for them to lack, than to have that something. Since the hearts of our first parents flew out at their eyes, on the forbidden fruit, and a night of darkness was thereby brought on the world, their posterity have a natural disease which Solomon calls, "The wandering of the desire," or, as the word is, "The walking of your soul," Eccl. 6:9. This is a sort of diabolical trance, wherein the soul traverses the world; feeds itself with a thousand airy nothings; snatches at this and the other created excellency, in imagination and desire; goes here, and there, and everywhere, except where it should go. And the soul is never cured of this disease, until conquering grace brings it back to take up its everlasting rest in God through Christ—but until this be, if man were set again in paradise, the garden of the Lord, all the pleasures there would not keep him from looking, yes, and leaping over the hedge a second time.
The entire book is Shakespearian due both to Boston's writing skill and the fact that his material is the most foundational truths. You see this in the first main section describing the fall of Adam. And you see echoes of Work teaching throughout. You also see how entire novels have been written on individual ideas presented in such biblical doctrine. I.e. that is the foundational power of what is presented. - C.


School vs. school

Listening to this Reformed Forum podcast (http://reformedforum.org/ctc422/), or as much of it as I did listen to before realizing how dead it is, I came to thinking about why Christians such as the ones on this podcast are so shallow and perhaps spiritually catatonic, if not dead.

The contrast that came to me was of school. Not school as most know of school but school as a higher reality. It's not a foreign notion to Christianity, even church level Christianity (the Reformation had the school of Geneva), but it's definitely a rare notion.

One element that separates school as a higher reality than anything church level Christians know of is the manner of teaching in the former. It's very different. There's no privileged position. You either have understanding or you don't, and you either are able to transfer it or you're not. Teachers rarely call themselves teachers. It's kind of a pure market environment. People just start talking, and someone gets singled out as just seeming to know more. But it's a testing both ways, with self-interest both ways, as-well-as mutual need. The teacher consolidates understanding in the act, or necessity of having to articulate it to others.

And people talk to whoever has interest. That's a very big difference I experienced when I crossed the threshold from occult realm school activity to the Christian realm. And I should say not just Christian realm but mainstream Christian realm, where you find the on-the-mark doctrine, i.e. five solas, doctrines of grace, covenant (federal) theology. In the occult realm people talked. In the mainstream Christian realm there don't seem to be individuals but establishment, guilds, groups, who when they see an outsider say, "Who are you? Go away!" (I remember the very first comment I wrote on a Christian blog. I was enthusiastic, and it was a longish comment. You know the response I got? "Why don't you get your own blog." And that was it. Interestingly - always I find it interesting - with nobody else there saying, "That's not a very nice greeting.")

In the dead-zone realm where seminaries and their products (pastors, scholars, whatever) exist there's no sense of mutual need or self-interest in the imparting of knowledge and understanding, nor is there a natural, pure market sifting of the wheat from the chaff. Guild mentalities develop, and there is no more ignorant ass than a person belonging to a privileged guild appropriating knowledge to themselves and making that knowledge what Latin phrases and contractese is to lawyers, something to be protected and used for worldly ends, with all the inane vanity attending such a use of what they never developed or discovered themselves.


Cucks in the Christian world just as cucks in the political world just want to suck jihadi ass

Ex-Jihadist Comes Forward With Stunning Statement About Donald Trump That America Needs to Hear

"They also know that Trump doesn’t care about political correctness and is unafraid to call them out for what they really are, savage and sadistic murderers stuck in the seventh century, bent on world domination and subverting the U.S. under Shariah law.

Hamid bluntly stated, “Trump gets it,” and went on to point out that Trump understands the mentality and motivations of the jihadists, as well as the most effective methods to confront and defeat them."

Sympathy for the Devil

All unregenerate human beings have sympathy for the Devil. All. Each just justifies it in different ways, mixed with more or less consciousness of their evil choices. This very much includes the unregenerate in the churches. I.e. the churchians. The first to give their dhimmi virginity to the Devil in whatever guise. This is why you don't find God's elect in the churches. We know the stench of Satan when we smell it.

"Speaking for myself, if Trump is the nominee, I won't vote for either one."

This dhimmi to the Devil churchian is looking for any reason to keep the Kingdom of Satan alive and well in the nation's capital. God, please, to hell with these churchians once and for all. Churchians are the Christian version of what cucks are in the media/political realm. When Jesus returns the Devil's religion will be hit (Marxism, Islamism), but there will be special attention paid to the cucks. The cucks in many ways are the worst of the worst.


The big brains at Triablogue turn out to be rather soft-brained in their political analysis

It's hard to describe how naive and off-the-mark this political analysis is:


It reads like somebody who is either very new to American politics or somebody who is a sort of extreme caricature of an establishment dhimmi.

Notice the denial in the post and comments of the very existence of an establishment (I'm not a fan of the French Revolution, but that's like Marie Antoinette denying there's a governing problem in 18th century France). There is also a similar establishment in Christian environments with all the similar traits as the political. Deep shallowness, comical incompetence, fear and reverence of the world, comical lack of self-awareness, condescending and smug attitudes backed up with nothing (if you are going to self-identfy as elite you should be, like, maybe elite at something, as Glenn Reynolds has said).

Donald Trump has called the establishment stupid, and establishment types and their dhimmis really don't like being called stupid. Especially in these times when their stupidity is on such wide display.


This is real, and it has nothing to do with Christianity

Want to know what 80 plus years of Marxist influence has done to establishment Christianity? Listen to these two dopes and the lunatic, narcissist, shallow bankruptcy of their discussion. One guy's an establishment historian, the other is a Protestant cleric who specializes in liberal Roman Catholic doctrine. They name-drop Ted Fickleburg who apparently was the associate professor of medieval Christian monastic use of different types of table settings and designated enforcer for Machen in his heroic push to expose his great enemy Pastor Wilbur Millburn as a liar and destroyer of the noble 14th General Assembly of greater west Pennsylvania evangelical society's reform measures regarding the placement of keyboard instruments with respect to pews in the commonly smaller church environments of the aforesaid western Pennsylvania region. Oh, my God. Don't hold a hammer while you're listening to this, it might end up in your cranium.


The devil's in the churches

Read this, establishment churchian dhimmis. May you rot in hell.



Experimental Christianity again

An example of the definition of experimental Christianity found at this link:


is reading a book like Boston's Human Nature In its Fourfold State and coming to actually see what the wrath of God is and means. Prior you knew of 'the wrath of God', but as a doctrine, a fact. Boston gets you to see it as direct and present reality, here and now where the life blood pulses. Not merely at an intellectual or philosophical level.

And seeing our own sin in the same way.

I've tried to bug the people at Reformed Forum to dedicate shows to books like Human Nature In its Fourfold State, but they seem to be more interested in being seminary philosophers.

Here's something interesting: when the seminary types look to 'go beyond' the basics they tend to merely veer left into pseudo original, liberal theology territory; when what they need to realize is to go beyond the basics is to become more experimental, or experiencial with the basics. Reduce to practice, and reduce to direct, present experiencial being of the basic doctrinal truths.


Why Mark Jones wants to stain Louis Berkhof

Mark Jones is a creepy sort. In the political realm he is the type to write for a pseudo conservative, very establishment magazine that lo and behold never saw a cultural Marxist move on the nation and culture that didn't make him get all tingly with approval. And just watch him go full Rex Reed on the untermensch when needed.

You can google it, but Jones has recently written a blog post at Reformation21 citing examples of Berkhof plagiarizing Geerhardus Vos in his Systematic Theology. The examples are of the nature of: Berkhof wrote, "Adoption and eternal life follow upon justification." Vos wrote, "With justification comes adoption and eternal life."

I kid you not.

Then Jones proceeds to give mitigation, several reasons, why Berkhof probably isn't guilty of plagiarizing Vos. Yet the headline stands that Berkhof was a plagiarist.

Why does Mark Jones want to put a stain on Louis Berkhof? Because Jones lately has come fully out of the closet as showing a nose-in-the-air dislike of Reformed Theology. It's too......common. Not enough separation, or hierarchy regarding the teaching church and the.......laaaay people. He's moved in a bit of a Romanist direction and adopted the old label last popular in the early 2000s of Reformed Catholic. He, for instance, wants sola ecclesia (church alone, whatever that can mean) to be made a sixth sola. He believes, with some of his friends at Ref21, that the word of God should only be heard, through the mediation of a properly ordained cleric, and not read by people who are biblical morons at best..you know, the untermensch. Reformed Catholics have similar Romanist leaning beliefs as Federal Visionists, who don't like Berkhof either.

So why does Berkhof come under their wrath? Isn't Berkhof's work just sort of an on-the-mark, well-organized, clear textbook variety of Reformed - i.e. biblical - systematic theology? Why pick on Berkhof? It's in the sentence above: on-the-mark. When Reformed Theology is presented on-the-mark its power becomes manifest. And Berkhof's work has another quality. He laces historical theology through his systematic theology in a way that inevitably convicts those not content with the basic truth and would twist doctrine and distort doctrine to suit their demands. I.e. Berkhof is an ever wakeful sentinel, and his presence annoys them. So now Jones has decided the tactic must be to separate Berkhof out from Vos and Bavinck (lesser read so less of a threat) by smearing the mud of a plagiarism accusation against him.

Wow. In a totally unrelated blog post by Mark Jones I found this: "...it is no coincidence that some of the best theologians over church history were men of the Scriptures first and foremost, otherwise they would have, like Berkhof, merely regurgitated Reformed theology!"


I wrote the above post without knowing about this:

Doug Wilson once disdainfully said, in a comments thread at greenbagins blog, that he didn't even own a copy of Berkhof's Systematic Theology. It was beneath him, it seems.


What 'experimental' means vis-a-vis Christianity

I came across this article in pdf.

In the first paragraph is a very good explanation of what 'experimental Christianity' means. I confess to having used the term while always being a bit hazy on the meaning.

Worth reading and remembering. - C.


On the presence of the cartoonishly evil Islam

I'm starting to understand more what is going on in the world today. 

All this Muslim crap and the lunacy of non-Muslims who enable it all a thousand ways...

It is helpful to read Rodney Stark's God's Battalions. This is a politically-incorrect, truthful account not only of the Crusades, but of European/Muslim warfare from the time the Arab Muslims ventured out of Arabia. I.e. from almost 400 years prior to the first crusade.

This early history is necessary and enlightening because it shows how much the Satanic movement of Islam has been intimately involved in the lives and history of Christians since God allowed them to manifest in the 7th century. 

I.e., what I'm getting at is we as Christians don't want anything to do with the retarded, goat-fucking sand monkeys and would rather they stay in their God-given hell holes...BUT.......that is not what God intended when He allowed them to arise. 

God intended Islam to be a thorn in the side of Christians, and a constant presence of evil for when Christian lands and peoples fall short of the faith or apostasize. The filthy, cartoonishly evil Muslims are also a test for each individual believing Christian. Do we hold to the faith or go dhimmi to the Satanic retards? Do we increase our understanding of the faith? Do we increase our level of being within the friction and heat of being in the faith by practicing the faith when it is most difficult?

Unfortunately we have no clerics who could write what I've just written. Why do I have to take a swipe at clerics at the end of this? To communicate that we as Christians are prophets, priests, and kings. Where do kings gather together? On battlefields. That would be the spiritual battlefield. Not a nursery being lectured to by a seminary graduate, full of cultural Marxist indoctrination up to his wet gills; and feckless in not having a clue about it. Bowing their knee, dhimmi style, to Islam (see James White, a vocal dhimmi, and the innumerable others who, for their own style, remain silent on the subject altogether.)

We'd like for the orcs to go back to their subterranean hells, but God has destined His children to be in a constant warfare in this pilgrimage. - C.


Note to James White

One thing you should never do is say somebody who identifies as Christian is not a Christian. That is denying the work of the Holy Spirit within a person. That is also placing yourself in a seat of judgment no human other than Jesus Christ can sit in.

You can confront somebody on their doctrine or behavior, but saying they are not a Christian when they claim to be is out-of-bounds.

This is a temptation for all Christians. Those who have been on the spiritual battlefield know the potential consequences of making this mistake.

In White's case he is stating that Donald Trump is not a Christian, presumably because he's been married three times and who knows what else. When you apply a strict legalist standard to fallen human beings you can decree anybody to the flames of hell.


Fear of death

I'm not referring here to a fear of death due to a lack of faith. Just the general thoughts of our impending death that can make us wonder about the unknown and perhaps be scared at times. For me, I've had that fear in the past, but right now, lately, I feel no fear or apprehension of death and what will happen. Here's one reason why.

The philosophical notions of a personal vs. an impersonal universe are very helpful in clearing the mind of infections of naturalism and atheism we pick up from the world in general.

This universe is not impersonal. God Himself is a personal God. Not, for instance, some impersonal force or energy, but a Person; with thoughts and emotion and will. We are created in His image which is why we are like that.

I think we tend to look up into the night sky and see no life and hence assume an impersonal universe. The light of the stars is not enough to evoke life; we want persons, the dearly departed, consciousness, angels, God Himself. As believing Christians we know we can't see into that invisible realm, but it's not even in our mind. We fall for the impression of the impersonal in what we're seeing and thinking.

We're definitely vulnerable when we die. Just as when we were born. Those are the two major thresholds we cross. But notice when we were born we weren't born into an impersonal realm? Our mother, a person, was there. A doctor. A nurse. Perhaps other family members. And even if we'd been thrown into a dumpster or aborted it would have been at the hands of persons.

So when we die we are told angels - persons - will be present. Perhaps dearly departed family. The presence of the Person of God, too, in some way? People. Not a realm of no conscious beings.


Is it obnoxious when an intellectual is a parasite on more foundational, and foundationally articulated, ideas?

Look at this. This is Tim Challies quoting a seminary professor, Carl Trueman, and doing it as if Trueman is articulating something only the unique and clever Trueman could articulate:
Here’s Carl Trueman doing what he does so well: “When you decide that categories of identity are merely psychological and that reality is constituted by language, you consequently have neither the right nor the ability to call a halt to the Promethean process which you have unleashed just because some of the results prove to be distasteful to you and unhelpful to your political cause.”
Why do I find this obnoxious? Because such observation can be had by the truckload in the writings of writers associated with worldview analysis. A subject that people like Trueman are likely to be ignorantly critical of. I say ignorantly because incorporated into worldview analysis, when done by Christians, is a self-critical element. Anyway...

I suppose it should be seen as positive that good, on-the-mark ideas and observations and analysis seep down into the general universe of discourse. But it might be good if we didn't present people as genius who are dependent on more foundational writers.


American exceptionalism

“Humanity has won its battle,” Lafayette wrote from the newly-liberated America, after the victory of the Revolution. “Liberty now has a country.”

Liberty now has a country.

That is what American exceptionalism is. It is why the Devil and his spiritual children have always burned with hatred for America; from outside, and from within.


Sometimes I come across a uniquely good comment on the internet

This was written under another tediously dumb column on Donald Trump by Jonah Goldberg at NRO:

"****4 hours ago

The Donald is in a long negotiation process with the plundering political classes to save the country. It is messy business when you have to negotiate with a cabal of totalitarian leftist statists but the Donald is up for it.

Already after less than a year of negotiations the parameters and assumptions about the value of the country have changed. The totalitarian leftist statists started negotiation from the assumption that the country doesn't even exist except to be taxed. The Donald is moving the discussion and more and more people are starting to believe that the country is worth saving. In a couple of months the leftists will acknowledge that we have borders and the establishment GOP will acknowledge that we have laws that govern them."


Seeing something in a different context can be powerful

Here is an exercise to find the most powerful sources and presentation of the Christian faith.

Imagine you are presenting the Christian faith to a semi-interested Muslim (and think Jihadist, though not a mentally disturbed one or a purely sadistic one, but a more thoughtful one who is just deceived in a big way...let's keep this within the realm of possibility, though the Holy Spirit can conquer any stony and rebellious heart).

The first part of the approach, it seems to me, would be to not necessarily steer the Muslim away from a human teacher. We might think, Muhammad, the human, has defiled enough minds, let's steer them towards the word of God and the Holy Spirit for their teacher.

Yet in Christianity there are schools. We tend to think in terms of branches and denominations, but really we should think in terms of schools. John Knox called Calvin's Geneva the best school of Christ. This is the sense I mean.

What teacher (prophet, small 'p') would be the highest school? Undoubtedly it is John Calvin. And the parallel is convenient. Muhammad, the prophet of the desert (false prophet of course), and Calvin, the prophet of the mountain. A Muslim could admire this prophet, Calvin, if he or she got to know him. (And we are doing this exercise for ourselves as well remember).

Who were the ultimate followers of the school of Calvin? The Puritans. Again, a Muslim could admire these Puritans, as he or she got to know them.

What is the most powerful book to learn of this school from? Undoubtedly the Bible itself. Yet a Muslim could see the power in adopting the Authorized, 1611 Version and being able to say, "This, this that I hold in my hands, is the pure and whole word of God, unchanging and inspired of the Holy Spirit Himself."

What books written by man would be a part of this powerful school? For systematic theology the mere books of knowledge would not make the cut. It would have to be the systematic theologies that had a historic character and uniqueness to them. a Brakel's Christian's Reasonable Service would be one. Calvin's own Institutes of the Christian Religion. Watson's Body of Practical Divinity. John Dagg's Manual of Theology, to cite a lesser known, unique one.

Also, very contained and ordered works such as Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress and Boston's Human Nature In its Fourfold State. These two are folk level works with power.

A work on spiritual warfare, a Puritan distinctive, foundational to the Puritan school, would be Gurnall's Christian in Complete Armour.

Spurgeon's Sermons would make the roster. Matthew Henry's Commentary would as well.

For history: Wylie's History of Protestantism and Schaff's History of the Christian Church. (The latter would be a slight refining influence to take too sharp an edge off the Christian, yet not to dull the edge.)

These are 12 works. The academic and reference material intentionally left out. We want literature of power rather than mere literature of knowledge (to use de Quincey's categories).

Now the Muslim convert has the history and example of the Puritans to drawn on and emulate; a strong tradition; a powerful and high school of the Christian faith; actually outside apostolic times the highest, most powerful school.


Obviously, and obviously not so obviously, we're currently witnessing the rolling out of a globalist plan

The plan ostensibly is to flood the first world with the third world so as to implement a real income redistribution. 'Cuz justice, and stuff. Yet in spiritual reality it is the Devil creating a one world unity of shit and tyranny and hell, for the purposes of killing God's children, killing more people as human sacrifice to the Kingdom of Satan, and to basically play for time until God kills all evil. Sin is irrational and the Devil and his followers act on the premise that they can defeat God, but they know better, deep down.

I say not so obviously because we're all a bit confused as to what has been going on regarding this globalist plan, so no need to pretend otherwise. An act this big can be easily overlooked.

We are also naive and ignorant regarding the Devil's plans, despite reading of them over and over in something called the Bible.

We also don't generally anticipate such massive, daring moves from people we generally don't have a very high estimate of. We forget that the spirit of the Devil makes even a village idiot a genius to do evil.

Is it inevitable? The entire planet reduced to a fake unified third world status? With people like Merkel and Obama holding the reins of tyranny over an easily controlled poor and chaotic landscape?

This is definitely a goal of the Devil. Is it a necessity in the plan of redemption? Is it required for the coming of the consummation?


Clerics and the discernment of evil

If you're a follower of James White currently wringing your hands over what's happened over the last few weeks you just need to understand that White's narcissism has finally forced him into a position of conflict with a regenerate discernment of good and evil. On the question of the Satanic death cult that is Islam White would rather position himself as bowing his knee to the Devil so that he can call everybody "stupid" on the issue, presenting himself as the only person with understanding.

And he's boxed himself in now pretty fully. Even talking about it now on his latest videos* you see that he's having to emote in the saucer-eyed, dramatically-bewildered-at-what-he's-witnessing way that he slips into when he's boxed in.

He's read books on Islam, learned some Arabic, shook hands with a Muslim debater or two or three, but typical of a shallow, specializing academic can't see the forest for the trees. In the military an officer like White is the worst possible nightmare scenario. As a cleric and Christian educator he's unfortunately more common.

* https://youtu.be/DWk737SEiaQ


Political comment of the year

This was written in the comments section of a Ben Shapiro article. Shapiro, in the article, is suggesting how the Republican establishment can end run voters and get rid of Donald Trump.

Ben, ya gotta abandon the anti-Trump attitude, it's clouding your judgment to the bigger picture. Yes, he's uncouth and runs his mouth, but he's the ONLY one talking to the base, saying the same things we've been saying in private for MANY MANY years. The others can't even be bothered to mouth the platitudes. "We can't build a wall! We can't deport millions! We can't separate families! We can't repeal Obamacare! We can't can't can't!" Then what the hell are you running for if you won't do the Peoples' bidding? We went to the moon and back in less than a decade, we can build a damn wall like the Chinese did millenia ago with manual labor or that Israel or Saudi Arabia are doing. All this ahistorical analysis of things that we can't do ignores the things that we WILL do, and far more violently, when the economic system tips over.

So - elect the uncouth guy who will build a wall and deport the hostile invaders to save our nation, our posterity, our culture, and our Constitution; or elect the "nice" polished politician that literally married an illegal alien and speaks Spanish at home. Or the bought and paid for hispanic from Miami who tells us dumb whites one thing in English and the same day tell his base the opposite in Spanish about amnesty. Or perhaps the neurosurgeon who seems pretty dim, utterly uneducated on politics, completely inexperienced in politics and executive responsibilities, and in horribly over his head. Or perhaps the slick genius Constitutional lawyer who oddly can't block any significant legislation, ever, in the Senate (why no holds, Ted?) who also has a seemingly big eligibility issue as he's not a "natural born citizen." Choices, choices. Since I'm not a limp wristed leftist and mere words don't hurt my feelings I'm going to go with the one who has a record of accomplishment and is actually a patriot.

First, head-to-head YouGov poll from Wednesday shows Trump destroys his opponents - Carson 60-40, Rubio 57-43, Cruz 57-43. That destroys the consolidation myth.

Second, this is static analysis - if so and so dropped an such and such became the front runner... - it wouldn't go 100% to the new frontrunner and Trump would start to attack them. Rubio is a seriously flawed and incredibly corrupt candidate - he's surged like the others have, and he's also flaming out like the others. Fewer of us realize how corrupt and what a liar Ted Cruz is (he voted for TPA then campaigns against bad trade deals. Uh huh.) I'll never vote for him - he's a proven weasel. Cruz has less downside but on the upside he's accomplished precisely zip as a Senator. All talk. And his superpac is run by David Barton of Glenn Beck fame. But I'm sure the establishment types would back him. Cason's book tour is finally winding down. That'll leave Jeb!

Third, most of the others won't drop out because they're part of the splitter strategy. The early primaries are not simple popularity contests and delegates are doled out proportionally and such. They'll drop out AFTER they get their delegates then push them at Jeb! at the convention. There's a reason these losers bouncing around under the MOE are still in it - the mega-donors are paying their way to win the rigged contest. The spending of trillions of dollars is on the line, a few million thrown at Christie or Kasich is peanuts to ensure a win. Until it becomes so painfully obvious that the candidate can't scrape above 1% or get any delegates, then they drop. (Graham, Pataki, Gilmore.)

Fourth, this is a bigger war. Trump has huge crossover appeal with the independents and blue dogs. He's not a GOP establishment insider and he's beating Hillary and Bernie head to head. He may actually get blue dog union support. Anyone notice the lack of "electability" stories lately? Why isn't the media pushing Jeb! to drop out? Has anyone actually identified a second Jeb! supporter besides his planted intern? Why not? I say his 8% poll number is complete BS.

Fifth. Trump is the choice of the base. We had wave elections in 2010 and 2014 to repeal Obamacare, but now it's fully funded. Hmm.. Then Cochran/McDaniels racist primary meddling by Mitch McConnell. And Cuccinelli. And Dave Brat. And the border. Etc. Many of us WILL NOT vote for any establishment guy foisted upon us. Period. That ship has sailed. Either we the people get to decide our nominee or the party elites do. If they win this battle then the party is done. The low turnout for McCain and Romney didn't just happen due to weather.

What is the purpose of the party - to profit the plutarchs or the people? Judging by their words and deeds the establishment the plutarchs are clearly only self-interested.

THAT is what this election is about. We finally have a legitimate outsider to rally around that can go toe to toe with the elites and beat them at their own game. This is bigger than Trump. We don't particularly trust him but he has our support 100%. The others are known quantities and they have, each and every one, stabbed us in the back while saying they're conservatives. If we had an honorable conservative in the race it might be different. And what happened to all the honest conservatives? IF they manage to get past the local and state politics and get to Congress they're co-opted and/or destroyed. We want a level playing field and someone who represents us and American values, not corporate K-street values. So what if he's wrong on a few issues or mean to some professional politicians - he's right on the bigger issues and he's fighting our biggest enemy - the GOP establishment.

So the elites can play fair and ride this wave to their diminishment or stand in front of it and get destroyed and most of their bought politicians replaced over the next few elections. We are furious and are NOT going away.



Sinless people

[An email.]

On sin I've been thinking lately that this is the problem with Muslims and the current crop of young college students making demands. Both groups consider themselves sinless. By default of not having a Christian worldview. 

The doctrine of sin has been lost. Biblical anthropology. 

People become moralizing monsters when they think they are sinless. The finger wagging Muslim lecturing everybody, justifying the worst horrors. Young university students screaming people should be silenced and fired for disagreeing with them, the holy, sinless young people.

I see a Black Lives Matter person ranting, and I think: another sinless black person. - C.


If you read the entire excerpt you'll see A. W. Pink's assessment of churches and a Christian's connection with them

6. Hatred of the World

We profit from the Word when we evoke the hatred of the world. What pains are taken in the world to save appearances and keep up a seemly and good state! Its conventionalities and civilities, its courtesies and charities, are so many contrivances to give an air of respectability to it. So too its churches and cathedrals, its priests and prelates are needed to gloss over the corruption which seethes beneath the surface. And to make good weight “Christianity” is added, and the holy name of Christ is taken upon the lips of thousands of those who have never taken His “yoke” upon them (Mat 11:29). Of them God says, “This people draweth nigh unto Me with their mouth and honoreth Me with their lips; but their heart is far from Me” (Mat 15:8). And what is to be the attitude of all real Christians toward such? The answer of Scripture is plain: “from such turn away” (2Ti 3:5). “Come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord” (2Co 6:17). And what will follow when this Divine command is obeyed? Why, then we shall prove the truth of those words of Christ’s: “If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you” (Joh 15:19). Which “world” is specifically in view here? Let the previous verse answer: “If the world hate you, ye know it hated Me before it hated you.” What “world” hated Christ and hounded Him to death? The religious world, those who pretended to be most zealous for God’s glory. So it is now. Let the Christian turn his back upon a Christ-dishonouring Christendom, and his fiercest foes and most relentless and unscrupulous enemies will be those who claim to be Christians themselves! But “Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you…for My sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad” (Mat 5:11,12). Ah, my brother, it is a healthy sign, a sure mark that you are profiting from the Word, when the religious world hates you. But if, on the other hand, you still have a “good standing” in the “churches” or “assemblies” [which are compromised with the world], there is grave reason to fear that you love the praise of men more than that of God! (The bracketed insertion did not appear in the original.)

(From Chp. 7 of Profiting from the Word, by A. W. Pink)


Which books of A. W. Pink were written when he was still a Dispensationalist?

That's the question I was searching for the answer of on the internet. The closest hit I came across was this:

"The late A.W. Pink, champion of Reformed Theology, was a Dispensationalist early in his writing career. Pink wrote four books on the subject of premillennialism from a Dispensational premillennial perspective: Redeemer’s Return, The Golden Age: A Treatise on the One Thousand Year Reign of Christ on Earth, The Antichrist, and The Prophetic Parables of Matthew 13."

That's from here: http://faithalone.org/magazine/y2011/11D2.html

So there is the answer. Fewer than I thought. The last two books mentioned were where I saw his dispensationalism, so that list rings true to me anecdotally.  

What separates real Christians

Real Christians read the Bible complete and are regenerated by the word and the Spirit. That goes without saying. What separates real Christians is the quality of their armor. Biblical doctrine is armor of God. What separates real Christians is their bookshelf and what they're able to see and accept and understand of on-the-mark biblical doctrine. The more they are active on the spiritual battlefield the more they will want real armor of God. Real, hard truth biblical doctrine assaults and insults our fallen nature. The soldier in battle doesn't care. He wants, he needs real armor. Note what your fallen nature doesn't want. Note your fallen nature's resentments, outrages, demands and desires. Go against them. Better yet be active on the spiritual battlefield unafraid to be conspicuous to the world and the Devil and hence be in the situation of a soldier who naturally wants real armor, telling all the demands and resentments of his outraged fallen nature to take a hike. At that point you will have five solas, five points of Calvinism, covenant, federal theology which is the real armor of God.


What to learn from news of a death

"Whatever it was [the cause of a person's death] it should, if anything, give people the realization that our days are numbered and only activities that truly develop us in an *essential* way are really worth giving the bulk of our time to; like, stop being shallow and desultory in your reading, Christians; get the word of God *engrafted* into your heart - fused into memory, will, and understanding - via a stated goal of complete readings, and get on-the-mark biblical doctrine into understanding to where it becomes the actual armor of God. Be systematic about it, and be complete about it as well. There is such a thing as terminal understanding of ultimate things."

The 5 principles of finding truth

This is an excerpt from Nancy Pearcey's book Finding Truth . It's from around page 255 or so (I have the ebook edition). It's an overview of the five principles of the book:

"A unique feature of a Romans 1 strategy is it can be applied universally to analyze and respond to any theory. Let’s remind ourselves of its key elements.

Principle #1 is to identify the idol. Every nonbiblical worldview starts with an idol, a God substitute. Romans 1 says that if humans do not worship the Creator, they will make a deity out of something in the created order. Like the blind men and the elephant, they fasten on some part of the created order and declare it to be the ultimate reality.

Principle #2 is to identify the reductionism. When one part of creation is deified, the other parts will be denigrated. Why? Because a part is always too small to explain the whole. Something will always stick out of the box. That “something”will be suppressed—devalued, dismissed, or denied. Otherwise it would count as evidence to falsify the worldview. Reductionism is always dehumanizing. It exchanges a high view of humanity made in the image of God for the image of something in the created order. And because the idol is something lower than the biblical God, its concept of humanity will also be lower. It will deny key attributes that make us distinctively human. And when reductionistic worldviews gain political power, the consequences are oppressive, coercive, and inhumane.

Principle #3 is to test the worldview against the facts of experience, the truths of general revelation. No matter how hard people try to suppress the evidence for God, the created order itself keeps challenging them. Both physical nature and human nature give evidence of the Creator. Therefore every idol-based worldview will fail to fit the evidence. It will contradict the knowable facts of general revelation. The more self-aware people are, the more clearly they will realize that they cannot live consistently on the basis of their own reductionistic worldviews. The truths of general revelation—the things they “can’t help believing”and living—create a gap between what they profess and what they practice. As a result, they live with a mental dualism, maintaining two sets of inconsistent beliefs.

Principle #4 is to show that every reductionistic worldview is self-defeating. It commits suicide. That’s because it reduces reason to something less than reason. Yet the only way a worldview can build its own case is by using reason. Thus it undercuts itself. It is self-refuting. Everyone who proposes a reductionist worldview must make a tacit exception for his own thinking—at least, at the moment he is stating his claims. But that, too, creates a logical inconsistency. It is an admission that there is one thing that the worldview does not cover—namely, the person who is proposing it. Either way, then, a reductionistic worldview fails.

Principle #5 is to make the case for a Christian worldview. By focusing on the points where competing worldviews fail, we can be assured that we are answering questions that are actually relevant. By identifying the points where non-Christians are free-loading, we can be confident that we are addressing areas where they sense a need for something more."


The death of the grown-up, pt. 6,783

[Skip to the bottom...]


Even in Genesis 1–3 we recognize the features of a covenant that we have delineated: a historical prologue setting the stage (Ge 1–2), stipulations (2:16–17) and the sanctions (2:17b) over which Eve and the serpent argue (3:1–5) and which are finally carried out in the form of judgment (3:8–19). It is only after this fateful decision that an entirely new and unexpected basis is set forth for human destiny (3:21–24). These elements are present, albeit implicitly, in the creation narrative, with the Tree of Life as the prize awaiting the successful outcome of a trial. Just as Yahweh the Great King endured the “trial” of creation and came out at the other end pronouncing victory and entering his Sabbath enthronement, his earthly ectype-vassal was to follow the same course. Genesis 1–3, and their canonical Christian interpretation, have an eschatological rather than simply existential orientation.
As further confirmation, the presence of the Sabbath at the end of the “six-day” work-week-trial holds out the promise of everlasting confirmation in blessedness. This pattern is not the imposition of an arbitrary law, but the image-bearer’s reflection of God’s own journey from creation to consummation. If Adam should default in this covenantal relationship, he would “surely die,” and we learn from the subsequent failure of Adam that this curse brought in its wake not only spiritual but physical, interrelational, and indeed environmental disaster.
Interpreted in the light of the rest of Scripture, Adam’s covenantal role entailed that he was the representative for his whole posterity. In fact, every person is judged guilty in Adam, and the effects of this curse extend even to the rest of creation (Ge 3:17–18; Ro 8:20). It is with this simultaneously legal and relational background in mind that Paul makes his well-known statements on the imputation of Adam’s guilt and corruption as the corollary of the imputation and impartation of the Second Adam’s righteousness (esp. Ro 5) in justification and sanctification.11
The theme of covenant solidarity, otherwise regarded as congenial to relational and communal views of the self, is nevertheless put to the test when it involves collective human guilt: the tragic aspect of human solidarity and relationality. “The intersubjective matrix which forms individual, related persons,” notes Francis Watson, “also simultaneously deforms them.”12 Together we stand or fall. The legal and relational basis for this solidarity is the covenant of creation. As John Zizioulas observes,

The drive of the human being towards otherness is rooted in the divine call to Adam. The call simultaneously implies three things: relationship, freedom, and otherness, all of them being interdependent.… Through the call, Adam is constituted, therefore, as being other than God and the rest of creation. This otherness is not the result of self-affirmation; it is an otherness granted and is not self-existent, but a particularity which is a gift of the Other.13

Human identity therefore originates in being addressed: “the human being is singled out, not merely as a species, but as a particular partner in a relationship, as a respondent to a call.”14 It is precisely this call that humanity, in Adam, refuses, because we wish to be the speaker, not the addressee, in the covenant.
Contrary to the assumptions of Rudolf Bultmann, Ernst Käsemann, and others, Paul’s polemic against the law and works of the law is not an abstract opposition. Humanity was created for love, which means for law, since law simply stipulates loving actions. Because of the fall, there is no longer any possibility of being justified by “works of the law.” All of humanity, including Israel, is now “in Adam,” condemned as a transgressor of the law. Thus, the covenant of creation (also called the covenant of works, law, or nature) is the legal context for God’s judgment. This original covenant of creation may be defended by appealing to non-Christian as well as Christian sources.

Michael Horton, (2011). The Christian Faith: A Systematic Theology for Pilgrims on the Way (pp. 415–416). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
Aside from what he's actually saying (decipher that at your leisure) the writing itself is pure academic, shallow, juvenile narcissistic garbage. It is writing that is worthy of the post-modern essay generator you can find on the internet. It very much is not worthy of a Reformed systematic theology.


Going on in the world

Psalms 59:1-17 (KJV)
1 Deliver me from mine enemies, O my God: defend me from them that rise up against me.
2 Deliver me from the workers of iniquity, and save me from bloody men.
3 For, lo, they lie in wait for my soul: the mighty are gathered against me; not for my transgression, nor for my sin, O LORD.
4 They run and prepare themselves without my fault: awake to help me, and behold.
5 Thou therefore, O LORD God of hosts, the God of Israel, awake to visit all the heathen: be not merciful to any wicked transgressors. Selah.
6 They return at evening: they make a noise like a dog, and go round about the city.
7 Behold, they belch out with their mouth: swords are in their lips: for who, say they, doth hear?
8 But thou, O LORD, shalt laugh at them; thou shalt have all the heathen in derision.
9 Because of his strength will I wait upon thee: for God is my defence.
10 The God of my mercy shall prevent me: God shall let me see my desire upon mine enemies.
11 Slay them not, lest my people forget: scatter them by thy power; and bring them down, O Lord our shield.
12 For the sin of their mouth and the words of their lips let them even be taken in their pride: and for cursing and lying which they speak.
13 Consume them in wrath, consume them, that they may not be: and let them know that God ruleth in Jacob unto the ends of the earth. Selah.
14 And at evening let them return; and let them make a noise like a dog, and go round about the city.
15 Let them wander up and down for meat, and grudge if they be not satisfied.
16 But I will sing of thy power; yea, I will sing aloud of thy mercy in the morning: for thou hast been my defence and refuge in the day of my trouble.
17 Unto thee, O my strength, will I sing: for God is my defence, and the God of my mercy.


An Address to Christian Warriors

Soldiers of Christ, be aware that you are highly advanced in God’s creation, that you occupy an important station, that you have an arduous work allotted to you, and that you have neither time nor talent to throw away. For you are enlisted under the banner of Christ: you have entered the armies of the Most High. You have taken the oath of allegiance to the King of Zion, and bound yourselves by an oath to fight the good fight of faith against sin, Satan, the world, and the flesh. What formidable enemies are these! You have to encounter all the powers of hell, and their name is Legion. Fight them you now must, for you have put on the armour, and taken the field to fight all the enemies of God and man.

When you survey the enemies’ camp, and see their strength, number, stratagems, and inveterate malice, and are then made to feel your own weakness and nothingness, you tremble and say, ‘How shall I go against these mighty hosts! Yet I must conquer them all, or die an eternal death.

’O soldiers of Christ, banish all your guilty fears! There is, after all, far more for you than against you. You are on the Lord’s side, and he fights for you. He is your refuge and strength, your sun and shield. He is with you in the field, to teach your hands to war, and to cover your head in the day of battle. He has promised you the victory. If God is for you, who is he that can overcome you and put you to death, when you are hidden in the Lord’s pavilion, and surrounded with the wall of salvation?

While in the heat of the battle, be filled with the hope of victory, and feel assured that you shall finally obtain a complete and glorious conquest over all that come against you; for has not the Captain of your salvation engaged to subdue Satan and all his armies under your feet? Trust him and take courage then. You cannot meet with disappointment, “for faithful is he that promised, who also will do it”(1 Thessalonians 5:24).

With a view to strengthen your hope of victory, keep in mind that you have not an enemy, difficulty, or danger to encounter but which has been already conquered and subdued for you by the great Captain of your salvation. And the countless millions of his soldiers who are now safely in glory, singing the song of Moses and the Lamb, were once here below, wrestling with all the enemies and difficulties which you now have to encounter.

Therefore fight valiantly, and rest assured that he who carried them safe through the war will also carry you to the triumphs of the world to come. Not one of all his true soldiers was ever left to perish on the field of battle. Put on courage, Christian warriors! Fight the good fight of faith, be faithful unto death, and then your Captain will release you from the war, and give you the crown of life, which you shall forever wear in honour of your gracious Lord and Saviour.

- The Reverend THOMAS JONES Northamptonshire, 1837.


This is something you have to see in vision

Today, for centuries, there's been the myth of the Noble Savage. This myth has covered up the demonic nature of human beings the world over.

When Europeans came to the New World they encountered what they termed savages. Demons they were called too. Not just a few Indian tribes. Most all.

Read this blog post for a litany of torture committed: http://www.reclinercommentaries.com/2011/04/fate-worse-than-death.html

My point in this is to see how evil and darkness were upon the land. Not noble savages, but evil.

From the Tower of Babel to now. Depravity of fallen nature.

But we think evil is making inroads when it was here to begin with. All lands. Mitigated only by very thin lines and layers of government based on natural law which is based on God's law. Never perfect, because itself administered by fallen human beings, but obviously not rank evil like things are without it.


No, America is not the center of evil on the planet

Any theologian or just Christian, obviously liberal but also putative conservative, who doesn't have the manifestation of evil on this planet forefront in his or her mind - and just the era they've lived through the last one hundred years alone - is living in delusion and shallowness. Nothing they say is of worth. They can't see anything. Supernatural evil manifesting (Marxist, Islam being the largest) is easier to see than the Kingdom of God manifesting, and anyone who can't see it has nothing of worth to say as a Christian.

And this is not even referencing the people who call evil good and good evil.


What modernists with seminary degrees mock

"Scriptures Induce Over Whole Bible History the Form of the Two Rival Kingdoms.

There is no subject on which we may more properly remember that "There are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamed of in our philosophy." It is evidently the design of the Scriptures to make much of Satan and his work. From first to last, the favorite representation of the world's history is, that it is the arena for a struggle between two kingdoms—Christ's and Satan's. Christ leads the kingdom of the good, Satan that of the evil; though with different authorities and powers. The headship of Satan over his demons is implied where they are called "his angels." He is also called Prince of Devils (Eph. 2:2; Matt. 25:41, 9:34). Prince of the powers of the air, and Prince of darkness (Eph. 6:12). This pre-eminence he doubtless acquired partly by seducing them at first, and probably confirmed by his superior powers. His dominion is compacted by fear and hatred of God, and common purposes of malice. It is by their concert of action that they seem to approach so near to ubiquity in their influences. That Satan is also the tyrant and head of sinful men is equally plain. This prevalent Bible picture of the two kingdoms may be seen carried out in these particulars. (a) Satan originated sin (Gen. 3:1; Rev. 12:9, to; 20:2, 10; 1 John 3:8; John 8:44; 2 Cor. 11:3). (b) Satan remains the leader of the human and angelic hosts which he seduced into hostility, and employs them in desperate resistance to Christ and His Father. He is the " God of this world" (2 Cor. 4:4). "The Spirit that worketh in the children of this world." Eph. 2:2. Wicked men are his captives. See above, and 2 Timothy 2:26. He is "the Adversary " (Satan,) "the Accuser," (Diabolo" ) "the Destroyer," (Apolluwn ) (c) The progress of Christ to the final overthrow of this kingdom is the one great business of all time; the history of the conflict is the history of man and redemption (Gen. 3:15; John 12:31; 1 John 3:8-10; 1 Pet. 5:8; Eph. 6:11; John 8:44; Mark. 3:23-27; Rom. 16:20; Acts 26:18; Luke 10:18). The single fact that ungodly men, until the end of the world, compose Satan's kingdom, proves that he has, and will have some power or influence over their souls." - Robert Dabney, Systematic Theology


Wisdom from the 1850s

"In religion, men appear naturally fond of the difficult and the obscure; perhaps, because they there find escape from the disquieting light of clearly revealed truth." - J. L. Dagg, A Manual of Theology


Best def. of gaslighting I've come across

[an email]

I've defined gaslighting before as when no matter what you do or say people act like you're being weird. 

Here's another way of defining it I just came across:

"Mickey Kaus characterizes the approach as “gaslighting” — giving your opponent a legitimate reason to get angry, then turning around and pointing to their anger as evidence they’re unhinged, obsessed, [etc.]..."

Disingenuous bewilderment is a cousin to this behavior. 

It's often, probably usually, done unconsciously. Most people aren't calculating enough to do it consciously. It's a devil spirit thing. Often done to individuals who are rogue from the devil's kingdom. Or in the first stages of becoming so. Or obviously a lost cause hence it's done to try to destroy them. People engaged in spiritual warfare experience this. - C.


What is the apex experience for humankind?

The world says: ejaculation is the apex experience.

The churchian says: raising a family is the apex experience.

The Christian says: salvation is the apex experience.


The Four Prime Things

Thomas Brooks (1608–1680) said,

1. “Christ,

2. the Scripture,

3. your own hearts, and

4. Satan’s devices,

are the four prime things that should be first and most studied and searched.”


Tremendous free book

[An email...]

You really can't go wrong with the trio of Bunyan, Spurgeon, and Pink. Of Calvinist theologians they offer the most on-the-mark school. No fear school. And with Pink of course he saw the full truth half way through his writing career, i.e. was Dispensationalist early then came to understand covenant theology [Edit. Actually see this, it was only four books he wrote from a Dispensationalist perspective].

The subject of Anti-Christ is confusing. Is it one person? Many? A spirit of iniquity? All the above? Bunyan in this book very clearly defines it all:


He also uncommonly expresses what I learned from Kline and have been writing recently on my Plain Path Puritan blog: that Anti-Christ seeks to take over the entire world. We're seeing it now, aren't we? Only a finite amount of real estate on the planet. Ronald Reagan once said, if we let evil capture America there will be no where left to go. Same idea. Same reality.

Once Anti-Christ asserts dominion over the entire planet, just like before the flood, then the end is triggered. I.e. the Devil doesn't get to experience victory. He is allowed to trigger his own demise but not to experience victory. - C.


Asserting dominion over the entire planet

There's a school of theology that says God made a deal with the Devil saying I will give you common grace. The sun will shine on you just as it shines on my people. The seasons will turn, food will grow for you. But...if you assert dominion over the entire planet that is when I'll bring my fist down upon you.

The Devil's religion today is cultural Marxism and Islam. Cultural Marxism softens up the target, and Islam is the active force. Today all Islam has to do is walk over a border and flip off cameras and take down stop signs, and...victory. That's how much cultural Marxism has softened up the target.

Prior, Islam and Marxism never had more than a third of the planet. Today it is in parts of the world it was never able to penetrate before.

To all you unbelievers: there is only a finite amount of real estate on this planet. Once you allow the Devil to have it all you will be living in a very different universe; and no longer will you be able to seek protection from Christians and Christian culture and civilization. You'll then be encased in the chains and darkness of the Devil's kingdom, the scenery of which only changes when it is tossed into the Lake of Fire.


How much worse?

The Devil's children are known by their ingratitude, arrogance, and treachery. They are currently flooding the world with their evil. Asserting dominion over the entire planet; lands God did not give them they are asserting ownership of. When Satan and his army and spiritual children assert dominion over the entire planet this is when God brings his fist down and the consummation of the plan of redemption commences. Just how worse it can get before triggering Divine action is the question. Probably best to assume a lot worse.

Right now Satan's religion is cultural Marxism and Islam. Cultural Marxism is providing the lunatic passivity in the face of the active force of Islam on the march. Any push back has been mostly an impotent chorus of words mixed with a "what the hell is going on here" resignation or dispiritedness. Not giving in, yet passive against a seeming omnipotent and omnipresent force of lunacy and evil.

Neh 10:28 And the rest of the people, the priests, the Levites, the porters, the singers, the Nethinims, and all they that had separated themselves from the people of the lands unto the law of God, their wives, their sons, and their daughters, every one having knowledge, and having understanding;

Everyone having knowledge, and having understanding; you know who you are. Remember who you are in all this dispiriting flood of evil. A pious approach is not called for at the end. One must be bold to separate oneself and claim the righteousness of Christ in the face of evil. At the end if you don't recognize and hate evil you are showing sympathy to God's enemies. This next point will be a hard thing to see, but here it is: Satan and his followers counterfeit aspects of the plan of God. When they preach absolute hatred of you and no mercy for you (as Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot taught their followers, and Islam's holy book teaches) they are counterfeiting how Christians are to view God's enemies at the consummation. Loving your enemy is a common grace era ethic. Figuratively dashing their very children against a wall is consummation ethics (God takes care of it, vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord). No sympathy for the Devil at the consummation.