Brandon W. Hawk wrote a The Washington Post article against Alexander Dugin. The problem is, when the Left or those embracing Infidelity (Enlightenment viewpoint) write, they do so from such a false foundation that they are found to be attacking truth.
The article’s foundational premise is that “nationalist imperialism” is bad, which automatically must cast the Christian Roman Empire, or Protestant Britain as “bad”.
LET every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
It is pretty obvious why Left-wingers would hate Christian Empires. It is because they know they wouldn’t be free to just sin away, but would be under authority.
“His Eurasianist ideology is grounded in a fundamentalist religious nationalism that seeks to create a Christian empire that unites Europe and Asia in a quest to restore a ‘traditionalism’ rooted in conservative Orthodox Christian values and white supremacy.”(Hawk on Dugin.)
What would these Leftists say about Bible believers? “Their Oceanic ideology is grounded in a fundamentalist religious nationalism that seeks to create a Christian Empire that unites nations of the Pacific in a quest to restore a ‘traditionalism’ rooted in conservative Protestant Christian values and Anglo-Saxon cultural supremacy.”
Surely, Mr Hawk is actually attacking Christianity, and not touching on Dugin’s actual esoteric belief system.
Further, Mr Hawk accuses Dugin of using “medieval imagery”, and yet we reproduce pre-Enlightenment imagery because we are promoting a complete rejection of the Enlightenment ideals, while building on good ideas, like those promoted by George Abbott (pictured above) who helped make the King James Bible and believed in England’s gospel mission, that the English Church was the best, and knew of a great southern continent as yet unexplored.
14 They shall lift up their voice, they shall sing for the majesty of the LORD, they shall cry aloud from the sea.
15 Wherefore glorify ye the LORD in the fires, even the name of the LORD God of Israel in the isles of the sea.
16 From the uttermost part of the earth have we heard songs, even glory to the righteous. But I said, My leanness, my leanness, woe unto me! the treacherous dealers have dealt treacherously; yea, the treacherous dealers have dealt very treacherously.
The Left simply cannot be trusted, as their true enemy, the long term and eternal enemy of Infidelity is actually our religion. Thus, instead of attacking Dugin, they are attacking our views.
Lord Acton has famously stated, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men …”
People take this statement as the highest wisdom in politics, and various Christian writers and thinkers proclaim that this statement is an essential truth.
But is it? After all, Lord Acton was a Roman Catholic of the strongest variety.
Roman Catholicism and much of Protestantism erroneously teaches that the saintly Christian man is still substantially evil, flawed and under the yoke of sinfulness. Even if so to a lesser degree. But the Scripture shows:
“For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.” (James 2:10).
“Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.” (John 8:34).
What does that say of Lord Acton’s ultramontane views and his contemporary powerful popes? It is not the power that corrupts, but bad men, when they obtain power, do bad on a grander scale.
“When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn.” (Proverbs 29:2).
Therefore, it is not authority, not wielding power which corrupts. It is sin which corrupts. But if a person is righteous, then, as the Scripture in Proverbs 29:2 quoted above states, the people rejoice.
In other words, it is good for good people to have power, and maximum power must therefore lead to maximum good.
Constantine or Theodosius did much good, as did the Protestant monarchs. Nothing has changed in this principle, therefore it is highly desirable that good people be elevated to good positions.
“He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill, to set them among princes, and to make them inherit the throne of glory: for the pillars of the earth are the LORD’s, and he hath set the world upon them.” (1 Samuel 2:8).
So those supposed Christian political thinkers who raise up the human ideology over the Spirit-led Biblical view are either deceived or, worse, deceivers.
Here’s a quote showing the mistaken consequences of reasoning that power must be in some way corrupt:
“Since power corrupts and government power tends to naturally corrupt, if a society safeguards freedom of speech, its government becomes far more accountable to the people. Freedom of speech allows people to speak out and criticise the government when they think it is going awry. Consequently, freedom of speech ought to be viewed as a fundamental mechanism against the concentration of power.” (Augusto Zimmermann).
The flawed logic is that government power must be corrupt, and that the only way to deal with this is a form of libertarianism. In other words, allowing unBiblical and anarchic licence to say whatever is essentially a justification for anti-authoritarianism.
It is ridiculous to posit that the concentration of power is a bad thing, else one must reject the rule of Christ Jesus Himself! And if this is meant only for earthly government, then when shall Christian influence ever be allowed, for by such flawed reasoning, Christian government should be banned, which is the exact intention of Infidelity (consider, for example, its rigorous anti-Christian practises in the French Revolution, and to its consequences in the Social Revolution which permeated the English-speaking world from the late 1960s).
Mere socialist democracy, separation of powers by dilution, rejection of official religion and secularist removal of all religion in governance is, by its very nature, and in its origins and in its consequences, complete warfare against traditional Protestant Christianity.
The Gospel does not require some arbitrary grant of “freedom” of one sort or another to empower people to either speak out against “oppression” or else, to have the right to preach righteousness and “proselytise”.
Let us therefore turn to the higher and better way, that with the righteous, the truly ascending and attaining Christian, power is to be used well.
Christianity which is surrendered to at least the principles of Infidelity is already on its slow and tedious journey towards what is called the Left. The fact that almost all those on the so-called Christian Right have embraced the fundamental erroneous foundations of erroneous thought is deeply problematic, and requires empowered Christian action to bring Christian ideology to the sound foundation of Scripture and spiritual certainty.
Nothing is more wrong and unbiblical than to publicly berate various sinners, and then say that you are a sinner too.
That’s called hypocrisy.
“He also shall be my salvation: for an hypocrite shall not come before him.” (Job 13:16).
“Wherefore laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings,” (1 Peter 2:1).
Why is it unbiblical? Well, according to Scripture, Christians are not sinners.
“And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21).
“Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.” (Acts 3:26).
Either Jesus is the Saviour or not, because, “But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.” (Isaiah 59:2).
“Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.” (Romans 6:18).
“But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.” (Romans 6:22).
If a person accepts the righteousness of God, and then wisely, lovingly and properly explains about the existence of God, His law with its awful consequences, true repentance and what Jesus has ALREADY DONE for us, then they are going to be able to best help others come to realise, by the spiritual awaking of their conscience, that their state is precarious.
“And he shall redeem Israel from all his iniquities.” (Psalm 130:8).
A few months ago I commented on Bill Muehlenberg’s site:
It is easy to say that we want a shakeup of the Church, and it is easy to long for a revived Church. But the practical (spiritually attuned) aspects of this have been resisted by some of the best Christian voices, who either have capitulated in part to the program of the Left or have had weak theology which has not adequately primed them for a victory position.
The entire Ruddock Review is of no consequence for those whose authority is first in Scripture and in the Spirit of God. To advocate for “religious freedom” then is entirely misguided. Today’s ideological war against Christianity is not something that we could have done anything about, because it already began with the French Revolution, and Bible prophecy shows how today’s state of the Church was inevitable.
Revelation 3 as a prophecy about today’s churches shows how the call is for all Christians to repent and get right. You can develop out of weak theology and we are able to extricate ourselves from the influence of Enlightenment philosophy/Leftwing ideology within Christianity.
Here’s an example of how far towards left field veneer-style Christianity is sliding. A semi-political pamphlet was sent out requesting prayer for something called the “Human Rights Law Alliance”.
Isaiah 59:14, 15
14 And judgment is turned away backward, and justice standeth afar off: for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter.
15 Yea, truth faileth; and he that departeth from evil maketh himself a prey: and the LORD saw it, and it displeased him that there was no judgment.
If left-leaning propaganda about so-called “religious freedom” and human rights advocacy (the main philosophy of social justice warriors) is being called upon, then that’s very flimsy and does not deserve the title “Christian”, seeing the philosophy of the Enlightenment, the French Revolution and the entirety of modernist Infidelity is ANTI-Christian.
21 Now, behold, thou trustest upon the staff of this bruised reed, even upon Egypt, on which if a man lean, it will go into his hand, and pierce it: so is Pharaoh king of Egypt unto all that trust on him.
16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
The Protestant Reformation has been around for over 500 years. There’s definitely been evangelism into Eastern Orthodox areas.
Many Catholic areas in northern Europe converted from Catholicism to Protestantism, but the Eastern Orthodox in their national contexts, have been resistant to Protestantism.
Protestantism did everything to help Britain resist the underlying ideologies of the French Revolution. The Enlightenment and today’s Infidelity (e.g. Secular Humanism) have not been able to fully take over all the English speaking nations, though there has been very significant compromise within and weakening of Protestantism. One can certainly argue convincingly and profess that enclaves and individuals of the best sort of Christianity are to be found within the English-speaking Christian world and its global missionary radius.
Eastern Orthodoxy is essentially Constantine’s, Theodosius’ and Justinian’s Christianity as it had become in 1054. It has not changed much over the centuries. Eastern Orthodoxy is far less different to Roman Catholicism than Protestantism is. However, Eastern Orthodoxy and Protestants agree in rejecting the primacy of the Pope.
The Scripture teaches, “But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:” (John 15:26). The Holy Ghost would indeed be leading people to Protestantism, if any would heed Him.
Not only have the Eastern Orthodox resisted Protestant truth, but the long influence of Communism and the Infidelity which is spewing out of the West is having a disastrous effect on them. Today’s mere ceremonial tradition and symbolic buildings hold sway, rather than any life changing Gospel revival.
But this is what the prophecy of Zechariah states, “Then cried he upon me, and spake unto me, saying, Behold, these that go toward the north country have quieted my spirit in the north country.” (Zech. 6:8).
Propagandists say that there is a resurgence of Eastern Orthodoxy and a rising Christian civilisation in Eurasia. Sadly, it isn’t really true. Instead there’s continuing rejection of Protestantism.
There is a rising Christian civilisation in Australia and New Zealand, and that’s not because of golden domes being built, but because the Spirit of God is poured out. There are believers who are ministering the spirit (small “s”, see 2 Corinthians 3:6, cf Zech. 6:8).
Changes are happening behind the scenes because of the movement of times and seasons, and the prophetic angelic juncture in the spiritual realm.
The Bible is back, and there are believers who have their sickles out for harvest!
If any Eastern Orthodox believer will hear, let them convert to Word and Spirit Protestantism.
Every word of God is pure (see Proverbs 30:5) which means that every word is important. Every distinct word is important. Seeing that our King James Bible is aligned directly with this Scriptural principle, we find that we can rely upon every word, even to the jot and tittle (see Matthew 5:18).
In Song of Solomon 2:12, we read about the turtle, “The flowers appear on the earth; the time of the singing of birds is come, and the voice of the turtle is heard in our land”.
Some mockers have said that turtles, the reptiles, do not make sound. However, the reference is clearly to birds. This is clear from the reference given above, and also that the turtle is in the list of birds at Jeremiah 8:7 and more importantly in comparing Leviticus 12:6 with verse 8 of the same chapter:
6 And when the days of her purifying are fulfilled, for a son, or for a daughter, she shall bring a lamb of the first year for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon, or a turtledove, for a sin offering, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, unto the priest:
7 Who shall offer it before the Lord, and make an atonement for her; and she shall be cleansed from the issue of her blood. This is the law for her that hath born a male or a female.
8 And if she be not able to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtles, or two young pigeons; the one for the burnt offering, and the other for a sin offering: and the priest shall make an atonement for her, and she shall be clean.
From this, it could be concluded that the turtle and the turtledove are synonymous. But this is not the end of the matter, for we now come to the deep question, Why is it “turtle” in one place, and “turtledove” in another? What is the reason for the distinction?
This is where we can truly appreciate the accuracy of the King James Bible.
We know from science that there are different species of turtledoves. We know that in the land of Israel today that the Streptopelia turtur is present, the European common turtledove, and Streptopelia decaocto, the Eurasian collared dove. The common turtledove is migratory, thus being the “turtle” of the Bible, whereas the closely related species, also in the turtledove genus, the collared dove, is present in large numbers in Israel and is a resident species. Both DNA and the scientific classification place these species in the turtledove category, regardless of their current common names. These can be interbred and produce hybrids.
From this, we can conclude from Scripture that either the turtle (the common turtledove) or the turtledove (the collared dove) were used for offerings at the temple.
It is important to note that the “turtle”, when called by its Latin name is “Streptopelia turtur”, which translates to “turtledove turtle”, for its call, “tur-tle”. Following is a photo of the turtle:
Following is a photo of a turtledove: