The following is an essay from 2001 by political scientist James Kurth on the “Protestant Deformation” or what could be described as the radical secularization of Protestantism. As he notes, we’re now entering the final stages of this deformation, a long and twisty road that has led us to a radical individualism that threatens a new form of totalitarianism upon the free world: the totalitarianism of the self. Enjoy.
Analysts of American foreign policy have debated for decades about the relative influence of different factors in the shaping of American foreign policy. National interests, domestic politics, economic interests, and liberal ideology have each been seen as the major explanation for the peculiarities of the American conduct of foreign affairs. But although numerous scholars have advocated the importance of realism, idealism, capitalism, or liberalism, almost no one has thought that Protestantism – the dominant religion in the United States – is worth consideration. Certainly for the twentieth century, it seemed abundantly clear that one could (and should) write the history of American foreign policy with no reference to Protestantism whatsoever.
What is so awful about Planned Parenthood? Well the fact that they kill children in the womb. “But it’s just 3%,” some say. Well, it’s 3% too many. But behind these necessary questions is the equally important question: why and how did Planned Parenthood come into existence? What is the history of the organization? Maafa 21 has the answer. It’s unbelievable. The reason it came into existence is just as abhorrent and saddening as the statistics of children murdered in the womb, merely by this organization. This should be watched by every person in America. (WARNING: there are some very tough things to hear, “mature” subject matter and offensive quotes in this documentary from founders and supporters of Planned Parenthood and others who supported the Eugenics movement.)
Matt Drudge makes great points on journalism in this speech he gave to the National Press Club in DC on June 2, 1998. Just think of what the main-stream media has become the 12 years that has passed since this was recorded: a pure marketing outlet for governments and corporations to spin things however which way they deem necessary to suit their agenda. And it’s no wonder the new media, the very thing he envisioned in this speech, is taking off. And it’s no wonder the Federal government (FTC/FCC) wants to squelch it. All his points still apply, and then some.
There is a strange idea abroad that in every subject the ancient books should be read only by the professionals, and that the amateur should content himself with the modern books. Thus I have found as a tutor in English Literature that if the average student wants to find out something about Platonism, the very last thing he thinks of doing is to take a translation of Plato off the library shelf and read the Symposium. He would rather read some dreary modern book ten times as long, all about “isms” and influences and only once in twelve pages telling him what Plato actually said. The error is rather an amiable one, for it springs from humility. The student is half afraid to meet one of the great philosophers face to face. He feels himself inadequate and thinks he will not understand him. But if he only knew, the great man, just because of his greatness, is much more intelligible than his modern commentator. The simplest student will be able to understand, if not all, yet a very great deal of what Plato said; but hardly anyone can understand some modern books on Platonism. It has always therefore been one of my main endeavours as a teacher to persuade the young that firsthand knowledge is not only more worth acquiring than secondhand knowledge, but is usually much easier and more delightful to acquire.
This mistaken preference for the modern books and this shyness of the old ones is nowhere more rampant than in theology. Wherever you find a little study circle of Christian laity you can be almost certain that they are studying not St. Luke or St. Paul or St. Augustine or Thomas Aquinas or Hooker or Butler, but M. Berdyaev or M. Maritain or M. Niebuhr or Miss Sayers or even myself.
Excerpt from Albert Mohler’s talk at T4G, entitled, How Does it Happen? Trajectories Toward an Adjusted Gospel (Audio) (Video)
“You might want to notice that in the most recent issue of Christianity Today, the April issue that arrived to me just days ago, in the cover story, Scot McKnight says, ‘I can count on one hand the number of historical Jesus scholars who hold orthodox beliefs.’ A fascinating statement. But the moment you begin to entertain the notion that there’s a distinction between the Jesus of history and the Christ of faith, you have already bankrupted the faith.
“Adolph von Harnack, another one of the most important figures in modern liberal theology, made an argument that I have actually heard some evangelicals paraphrase without understanding the toxic source and the disastrous meaning. Harnack said Christianity is like a seed or a kernel that is surrounded by a husk, kind of like a coconut. And he said that the kernel is authentic meaning, but the husk is this … he called it the acute Hellenization of doctrine, it’s this elaborated doctrine, it’s creeds and confessions and propositional statements and Scriptural claims concerning Jesus Christ, Gospel, salvation, fall, eschatology. Long before Bultmann, Harnack said what we must do to rescue Christianity is to pay attention to salvaging the seed and let the husk go. Do you buy into that? You’ve already given it all away.”
False flag attacks are not something that get discussed much when talking about the history of wars and conflicts. However, they have been used by governments for years to justify attacks on other countries, as well as create public support for whatever the authorities deem necessary to deal with the alleged/created threat.
Just what is a false flag attack? Here is an explanation on Wikipedia: “covert operations which are designed to deceive the public in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by other entities. The name is derived from the military concept of flying false colors; that is, flying the flag of a country other than one’s own.”
Here are just a few examples, including a couple involving the US. Many historians have even come to the conclusion that the Gulf of Tonkin Incident was a false flag attack orchestrated by the US, using old, empty destroyers as the targets, as a justification for the war in Vietnam. To my knowledge, this conclusion is unconfirmed, but being that the intelligence itself was skewed with documented proof of this fact, it seems at least possible these accusations could prove to be true.
Since the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin wall on November 9th, I’ve had a fascination in reading up on the history of the events and circumstances leading up to the Wall’s demise. In searching through some information, I came across this article in which a student doing his doctoral dissertation went over to East Germany to gather information. It proved to be a frightening experience as he recalls the story of being incarcerated multiple times, for hours at a time, for no apparent reason. Very interesting. Here’s an excerpt:
From my files it appears that the Stasi used three tactics with me. First, my interrogation officer repeatedly told me that I would remain in Investigation Prison until I confessed, and that I would be unable to contact the American Embassy, my lawyer, or my family. Such isolation, of course, was stressful. One reads that many made false confessions simply to come to trial and thence to a regular prison so that they could begin to have contact with their families again. Those who did not confess often stayed in Investigation Prison for periods longer than a year and, when they finally came to trial, were given extra long sentences because they showed “no regret for their crimes.” Naturally, those who did confess were convicted, even if they repudiated their confession during their trial.
This is an excerpt taken from the Canons of of the Synod of Dordt pertaining to the sure salvation Christ has purchased on behalf of His people. Far from being dry old dusty doctrines, these statements are full of life, hope and great to meditate over to give us a deeper sense of what has been accomplished by Christ in the work of Calvary. Whenever we sing the song When I Survey the Wondrous Cross by Isaac Watts at church, well, this is what it means to survey it. We consider and stand in awe at what Christ endured on our behalf and how great His love is to do such a thing for wretched sinners. If you have not taken the time to ever read through this excellent statement affirming the great wonders of God’s grace and denying those ideas that attempt to subvert the Gospel’s greatness, I would highly suggest this.
Article 1: The Punishment Which God’s Justice Requires
God is not only supremely merciful, but also supremely just. His justice requires (as he has revealed himself in the Word) that the sins we have committed against his infinite majesty be punished with both temporal and eternal punishments, of soul as well as body. We cannot escape these punishments unless satisfaction is given to God’s justice.
This day 20 years ago, November 9, 1989, was the day the Berlin Wall fell and Communist forces conceded their oppressive reign. I was ten years old and although I didn’t understand the full implications at the time, I can still remember watching the event unfold on the television and my parents being thrilled. My dad then explained to me the significance of that moment. And studying the history of how it got to that point later on, it became much clearer how truly significant that day was.
In order to commemorate 20 years of what represented the fall of a tyrannous, authoritarian, Communistic regime imposed upon a large portion of Europe and all of Russia, I wanted to post a few images and a musical work that captures the cultural deprivation and devastation resulting from so many years of oppression and repression.