To Be a Christian

The world is wicked. Recent events have ripped away the veneer of decency from our rulers and our civilization, revealing a world of corruption.

In the Bible, God tells us that wickedness has always characterized the world, and it tells the individual what he must do in response: Believe in Jesus Christ, and be saved.

Christian salvation is independent of the conditions of society. Patriots may one day be able to restore social order, or society may continue to decay. Christians, if they have the skills and the opportunity, do not violate God’s laws if they work to improve their nation. Since a properly-ordered society is one of mankind’s greatest needs, God is pleased with genuine efforts to improve our country.

As men of the West, we note that Western Civilization achieved its greatest glory when it was Christian. This strongly implies that Christianity is necessary for the restoration of our European-based nations.

But we cannot know when, and if, order will be restored. We can know that God calls us to repent of our sins and believe in Jesus and his teachings. This will not directly heal our land, but it will lay the groundwork for national restoration and, most importantly, it will save our souls.

*

This work makes its case by quoting the Bible. Indented texts are Scripture, except for parenthetical text identifying chapter and verse, occasionally accompanied by short commentary.

This work does not attempt to describe Christianity completely, but only to introduce it. Its main goal is to show that Christian salvation has a specific nature and a specific content.

One Big Demonic Globalist Voice vs Many Small Truthful Voices

One of the most profound distinctions (so-called ‘polarities’) forced upon us by these times, is the stark choice between each person making his own inner-discernments about the truth of reality; or else a willing and willed embrace of what we know to be a world of lies and manipulations, emanating from the institutions of The Global Establishment.

Bruce Charlton, 3/8/2021.

I sometimes misunderstand Bruce, but he seems to be saying that we have two choices: submit to the big, ubiquitous, demonic voice of the corrupt world system, or discern truth inwardly. In my view, his words are correct but they miss the most important thing: Discovering the small truthful voices. We don’t have to discover truth all by ourselves. It’s not just me versus the world. It’s us versus the world.

Possibly Bruce regards it as an obvious given that we can encounter truth through the voices of others. Maybe the inner discernment he speaks of is nothing more than the act of choosing which voice to believe. (That is, after all, the key choice that any person makes.)  But in his current writings he emphasizes the untrustworthiness and wickedness of the current authorities and institutions, and the need for inner discernment. He doesn’t write much about the importance of the small truthful voices which can still be found in books and online.

Are Politics and Metapolitics No Longer Mainly About Conservatism Versus Liberalism?

Some thinkers say yes. I say, in one sense, yes. In another sense, no.

Starting around 1970, the New Left, having failed in their 1960’s attempt to seize open power through Revolution, shifted to the strategy of completing the takeover of institutions by leftist thinking through the use of legal and incremental means. This takeover had started in the Nineteenth Century, but it kicked into high gear when the Left began their modern campaign.

Like the proverb of the frog whose water temperature jumps suddenly, this move of the left inaugurated the era of open political battle between leftists seeking to conquer society by instituting leftist laws / rules and installing leftist officials, and conservatives seeking (often halfheartedly) to block leftism. The dominant paradigm of political warfare consisted of rival candidates seeking elected office, rival legislative factions seeking to pass or block laws, and citizens opposing or supporting laws (at the governmental level) or regulations (at the private sector level), all of which involved masses of voters or constituents exerting force by collective action.

Meme Magic: “OK, Big Brother”

When they say there is no evidence of v*ter fr**d:  “OK, Big Brother.”

When they say Global Warming is settled science: “OK, Big Brother.”

When they say Science proves we need Covid restrictions in order to be safe: “OK, Big Brother.”

When they say we need the Great Reset to save the human race: “OK, Big Brother.”

And so on.

Apply as needed. Your mileage may vary.

[In case it’s not obvious, the allusion is to Orwell.]

Lawrence Auster on the Root Cause of Why We Are Letting Our Culture be Destroyed

From the late, great traditionalist blogger Lawrence Auster comes this min-essay clarifying the meaning of transcendence. Auster points out that unless our activities, loyalties and institutions have meanings that transcend their merely physical elements, we cannot understand them, love them, or act to protect them.

In a postscript to the essay, Auster observes:

My main purpose in this discussion is to get at the root of why we our letting our culture be destroyed. I’m saying it’s because we have lost the experience of the transcendent as it is related to our specific culture, and therefore we don’t have the will to preserve or defend our culture. [Emphasis added] The transcendent needs to be understood not only in relation to the idea of God, but in relation to culture. If the transcendent is only experienced in relation to universal morality or God, then we end up with modern conservatism, which worships universal ideas of democracy and puts 99 percent of its moral energy into opposing abortion, but which fails to defend our culture as a culture from the innumerable ills that threaten it from without and within. It is no coincidence that both neoconservatives and evangelical Christians favor mass non-European immigration. It is because they lack a sense of the transcendent quality of our particular culture and nation.

Here is the essay:  (Source.)

An Aphorism

Right now, Derek Chauvin looks like he may become the Gavrilo Princip of our age. Let us pray that this time, history turns out differently.

(I make no reference to Chauvin’s intent, which is currently unknown. I refer to his impact.)

To the Alt Right (and Everyone Else): Jesus Christ is a Strong God, and You Need Him

As a rightist, you know we live in Clown World. In religious terms, a foretaste of Hell. But Hell is real and you’re in danger of going there permanently. The only escape is via Christianity. Read on:

Non- and anti-Christian rightists have, I think, two basic grudges against Christianity. One, the Christian institutions have mostly been converged, with a motley crew of liberal pseudo-Christians, “Christcucks,” “Gay Christians,” and so on turning most of Christendom into just another enabler of multiculturalism, LGBTQ, leftism, and on and on. If Christianity looks just like the rest of the nation, in thrall to the left, why respect Christianity?

But the more important objection is that real Christians appear weak and powerless. It makes their God look weak and powerless.

But according to the Bible (the real definer of Christianity), the real God is a mighty Being who in eternity past chose and predestined a group of people yet to be born to be saved and sanctified, and to live forever in resurrected bodies in paradise. And yet the mark of your being predestined is that you freely choose to repent and believe. God is powerful enough to predestinate and to give you free choice. God is not a weakling who sits around hoping that somebody would choose to join his team; according to Scripture God acts to save His people and to keep them saved. And if right now God’s people are having their behinds kicked big time, that’s because it’s part of his plan. God has good reasons for everything that happens; we just don’t know what they are. And at the end of the world, when God brings the current world order to an end and judges mankind, God’s team is the winning team.

Ontological Relativism: Our Civilization’s Latest Thing

Philosophy at its best is the study of basic reality. It helps people to think more accurately. At its worst, philosophy is irrelevant or malevolent. Let the buyer beware.

One way to divide philosophy is into ethics, epistemology and metaphysics.  Each can be ruined by being relativized.

The classic expression of ethical relativism is Pope Francis’s infamous “Who am I to judge?” In moral relativism there is no morality for all, just for individuals. Ethics is subjective (relative to the subject who is ethicizing), not objective (the same for everyone.)

Epistemological relativism says “Your truth is not my truth.” Everyone (or maybe every tribe) has his own truth. Alethic relativism (it sounds better in Greek) makes all truth relative to the subject, the individual.

These last two have been popular for decades, because relativism means you cannot be wrong.  But there’s a new kid on the relativistic block. When the postmodern dude or dudette says “I self-identify as a[n] insert descriptor here” he is spouting ontological relativism.

The Gillette Syndrome

Gillette Syndrome   When an individual or organization acts against its well-being, because of the requirements of its consciously-professed beliefs.

*

We see in the news that Gillette has taken a major hit, no doubt largely because of its infamous commercial accusing its natural customer base (people who shave) of being sinners against the new state religion of liberalism.

(ht Dalrock.)

Why would they knowingly offend customers actual and potential?  Because nowadays everyone is supposed to agree with feminism, which requires, inter alia, badmouthing men.

Belief in “Evolution” is not Necessary for the Dissident Right

Understand the terms used here. This is about evolution in the Darwinian sense: That purely material forces drive all biological change and therefore God is not the creator of the species and the human race. As a Christian I reject Darwinian evolution; the Bible says that God created the living beings, including mankind, and therefore Darwin contradicts Christianity. I do affirm evolution in the other senses, including microevolution, minor variation in already-existing forms caused either by natural selection or by deliberate human interference. I believe it because we see it happening now. But Darwinian evolution, which goes far beyond the observable evidence to postulate that all biological change was non-theistic, is doubtful and unnecessary.

And by “dissident right” I mean the non-mainstream yet non-insane right. Others may try to define the term more narrowly, but since the mainstream right is not helping to restoring a sane society, we need a term for rightists who are on the right path. At the moment, “dissident right” is the best candidate.