Click here to go HOME
and click here to go back to the Tuesday Reports main listings, one of four main sections of uptospeedgoforit.com
Subject: The 3 major obstacles to the Logos Kingdom come on earth.
Part VI-B: The Final Victory in the realm of the spirit and the Kingdom come
(Tues, October 11, 2011)
(approx. 6495 words, 11 pp.)
"We are not ignorant of Satanís devices" Part VI-B
On "seeing" the Truth and thinking Rationally about it
On setting up the Kingdom, step-by-step: Only 3 major obstacles remain,
"legal positivism," closed-minded Epicureanism, and "higher criticism"
"Thy (Logos) Kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven."
Today I would like to consider the practical restoration of the nation out of "legal positivism" whether of a Liberal or atheist variety, and the practical restoration of the Church out of Liberalism and "higher criticism" generally as well as out of faulty traditions of men....
So, how do we restore the nation?
So, how do we restore the nation? As Alexis de Tocqueville said, the key to understanding America is the churches. This is indeed true, I think, and this means, for a variety of reasons, we must restore the churches in order to restore America. I would like to explore this point today at some length. We simply must get the mainline denominations out of the Great Apostasy, namely, "love is the only absolute," and back to a basic message of "sin and salvation" and "new spiritual life in Christ."
And all of the poorly trained pastors from mainline seminaries need to be taught in refresher courses, presumably, on how to preach such a message of belief (and repentance where needed) for a true salvation of souls in order to win souls by explaining the "I do" covenant theology of Marriage Feast of the Lamb Christianity by the so-called "sinnerís prayer," in order to enter into Christ and have Christ enter into us and in order to get reconciliation (that is, justification, salvation, etc.) and in order to get new heart regeneration (that is, rebirth) to go with the indwelling holy Spirit for the Abba Father relationship.
Massive Gospel Evangelical meetings or simply widespread personal witnessing may actually bring on a spiritual Great Awakening, restore all of the mainline denominations, and catapult us into a "higher moral law," Logos-based government because the people of America in overwhelming numbers will demand it and accept nothing else or less.
You see God is not simply "absolute love" as the Liberal apostate holds
You see God is not simply "absolute love" as the Liberal apostate holds but rather He is also absolute Righteousness, and we are not because "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God" and so we all need a Savior, etc.
I personally put it this way: 1.) Christ died on the cross for our sins in order to give us new spiritual life in Him. 2.) You must accept it for yourself personally. (Covenant "sinnerís prayer") and 3.) You are signing on to follow. And in truth many churches already preach this message and spiritual reality of course, but many moderate churches donít, out of ignorance, and many apostate churches donít specifically because they actively oppose this Bible-based Christianity as the very point of their Liberalism and "higher criticism."
But, regardless, in fact true salvation brings the Holy Spirit, Who acts as something of a sanctified conscience, and a clarified common sense, which we definitely need in our time since our best and brightest and at times our entire culture are steeped in the nonsense and ultimate depravity of Epicureanism, "legal positivism," and "higher criticism," and but out of a Great Awakening to the (intellectual) truth in our minds and to the (spiritual) reality in our hearts of the Gospel (and our need for it), presumably wise, rational Logos-based government will follow as day follows night, and the Kingdom is here in government as well as religion. "Thy (Logos) Kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven."
In truth un-regenerate man does not have a natural desire for good, wise, practical, moral government. Rather un-regenerate man tends to have a natural desire for selfish interest group government and a desire to implement an unworkable, impractical, and ultimately immoral social, political, legal, education, and economic agenda of one sort or another which he or she "sees" to be brilliant, wise, good etc. But in truth such faulty agendas of close-minded Epicureanism, "legal positivism," and "higher criticism" are not Rational, which should be clear by now.
Basic ancient Greek Philosophy 101... What is the purpose of a legislator?
Basic ancient Greek Philosophy 101... What is a good knife? It is sharp enough to cut things in order to fulfill its purpose. When something fulfills its purpose, that is its "end" or "good" in the nature of things. So, what is the purpose of a good legislator? The purpose of a good legislator is to make good laws! This is so simple and not complicated. Good laws are the good which the good and wise legislator does. He does not "do good" primarily if at all in terms of doing good in a charity, agape love sense of, say, Mother Teresa. She has a different ends or good she is fulfilling.
"The good" the legislator does is making good laws for the harmonious interaction of the parts of the body in their legitimate interests. This thus optimizes the well being of the whole and is both practical and moral. This is so simple and not complicated, but it is exactly what Epicureanism, "legal positivism," and Liberal "higher criticism" as well as the radical individualist Libertarian strongly oppose for good government, and as the very point of their positions!
This is in law, government and education a matter of Rational Moral Theism
If you hold the purpose of the legislator is to make good laws for the harmonious interaction of the parts of the body in their legitimate interests, then you are by definition a Rational Moral Theist of a Solomon, Socrates, and Cicero sort, and even Paul uses this same body model for the Church, where it has similar but somewhat different characteristics for the Church as opposed to the state. This should by common sense seem ridiculously self-evident, but that is the whole point of our current messes in education, law, government and the Church, where people "see" different things to be true, right, or good.
FDR thought foolishly the state can and should do everything for everyone with his "positive rights," as do most religious Liberals I would say. In fact, political utopian Liberalism is pretty much the result of a faulty religious Liberalism usually of a Christian or Jewish sort, which is the result of a theological Liberalism (mis-defining God), which is itself often the result of a faulty and ultimately irrational "higher criticism." So in a real sense "higher criticism" is the ultimate cause of almost all our problems in America today.
In any case political Liberalism, whatever its ultimate cause, is un-workable and utopian, and it tends by nature to create a massive, massive state to achieve its impossible ends, but to the political Liberal it was "self-evident" to him this is a good, and even the very purpose of a "good" legislator. And this is just as it is self-evident to the "legal positivist" that the state creates rights and is to play God. What could be more obvious! And it is self-evident to the (hedonist, atheist) Epicureans that the Rational Moral Theists are wrong, and hence hedonist humanism becomes the end or goal of a good education, etc. This is in law, government and education a matter of Rational Moral Theism not of salvation, but the fact is un-regenerate man or woman is not very naturally prone to a clear Rational Moral Theistic position outlined by Solomon, Socrates, and Cicero.
This gets very crazy at times. For example, I used to have a Congressman who would send back the customary reports to his district from Washington, and he would report that his voting record had been given an A or A+ by various radical Leftist social political organizations. This always struck me as sort of odd. Why? He was saying openly that he thought the purpose of a "good" legislator was to enact an unworkable, impractical and ultimately immoral Leftist agenda, and that he was doing an outstanding job at it, and he wanted everyone to know it!
It is all a matter of Rationality
It is all a matter of Rationality simply applied in different appropriate ways in law, government, education and even Christianity and Judaism. What is the Achilles heel of modern humanism, "legal positivism," Epicureanism, even Marxism and certainly "higher criticism" and Christian and Jewish Liberalism? The answer is they are not being Rational, which they are all often claiming to be, even as a central feature of their positions, but regardless none of these listed positions hold together Rationally in a Logos sense whether they are claiming it or not. (I did this endlessly in the Great Books video series some years ago now, and if you want extensive treatment of this subject you simply must get the videos.)
Hereís the deal in a brief formulation: It is not a matter of "faith" that Sinai happened or that Jesus walked out of the grave, anymore than it is a matter of faith that Caesar crossed the Rubicon or that Washington crossed the Delaware. Both Sinai and the bodily Resurrection of Christ are a matter of historical factual record as are Caesarís and Washingtonís actions, and they are both (that is, Sinai and the bodily Resurrection) as Scripture says a matter of "Who has believed our report and to whom has the (supernatural) arm of the Lord been revealed?" There is a "faith" element here in that one beliefs the reports are true, but that "faith" is not religious faith, as such, but simply the faith of believing any historical report including those on Caesarís and Washingtonís actions.
The bodily Resurrection of Christ is a virtual undeniable fact of history
The bodily Resurrection of Christ is such an undeniable fact of history that it caused the swoon theory to come about for the non-believer, namely, the swoon theory is Christ must not have died in the first place. Conspiracy and myth theories just do not work Rationally speaking, and indeed if one could make them work Rationally speaking, there would have been no need to come up with a Plan C of "swoon," as it were. It was the failure of myth and conspiracy theories which caused the non-believer to concede Christís clear walking out of the grave.
The situation here for the non-believer about the fact of Christís bodily Resurrection is so bad that two of historyís most famous atheists, David Hume and Bertrand Russell, tend to steer clear of the whole matter because the fact is so unassailable. Hume in my opinion is one of the most famous, greatest, and influential atheists who ever lived, but he is a terrible, terrible philosopher, and he constantly says idiotic things in all areas of philosophy, including the Resurrection, where he argues basically it could not have happened because it would have to be a supernatural event. No kidding? Thatís is the whole point! All the atheist Hume established once and for all is that if Christ walked out of the grave, God did it. Thank you, Mr. Hume for helping the Kingdom spread while trying to tear it down! God always has the last laugh with people like you.
Bertrand Russell, by contrast, is not a terrible philosopher
Bertrand Russell, by contrast, is also one of the most famous, greatest, and influential atheists who ever lived, and he is not a terrible philosopher, but a good one, though he is very wrong about many things, and he says many silly and even outrageous things regularly. However, to my knowledge Russell never even addresses the Resurrection, wisely I would say, rather he attempts, unsuccessfully to refute classical arguments for the existence of God in the Natural Revelation such as Aristotleís First Cause, Platoís Design, Socratesí Moral Law within, and even Platoís Good and others by saying they are not Reasonable but actually made-up by Christians to make themselves feel good about their supposedly essentially irrational Christian faith or superstition.
This is of course ridiculous and outrageous because the Christians get their arguments from the pagan Greeks (and do not make them up, as a fact of history), and, further, it is, of course, Russell himself who is being irrational to make himself feel better about his atheism, and he comes up with generally very weak, unsuccessful and irrational arguments in his attempt to refute the classical Rational arguments for God in the Natural Revelation with the endgame being for Russell that if it is not Reasonable to believe in God in the first place, we have no need to look and see about the Resurrection in the second place, as it were. However, in point of fact even if his arguments were somewhat successful about God in the Natural Revelation, which they are not, that would not be sufficient Reason not to investigate the claims of the historical fact of the Resurrection. This cannot be overemphasized. Why?
It is a common error to hold Sinai and the Resurrection are matters of "faith."
It is a common error in the Christian church and out of it to hold that both Sinai and the bodily Resurrection of Christ are matters of "faith." The is a huge error. They are primarily matters of historical occurrence, and are so claiming to be, and not myths or fables or, again, even matters of religious "faith." This can be demonstrated easily.
If you are Jewish and were in the Exodus and went through the Red Sea and were at Sinai, it has nothing to do with "faith." Right? You were there, and you saw it, as a basic historical event, albeit supernatural one, that you report to others, just like any other event you have been through that is not concerning the supernatural intervention of God in history.
And in my opinion as a practical matter this is why there is no strong faith component in Judaism as there is in Abraham specifically, which is picked up on by the Christians because one enters into the Christian Covenant by an "I do" (believe and receive) faith in Christís atoning work, but not really simply believing in the historical fact of Christís walking out of the grave, which is a supernatural historical occurrence that shows he is the Son of God and the atoning sacrifice was sufficient, and that the perfect Love and perfect Justice of God have met at Calvary (which the Liberal generally cannot "see" though 99% of other people not negatively influenced presumably can, both believers and atheists).
What in the world does this have to do with the Kingdom Era & "higher criticism"
What in the world does this have to do with the Kingdom Era, "higher criticism," and ultimately the Marriage Feast of the Lamb and defeating Satanís devices in the realm of the spirit? Everything of course. "Higher criticism" gets its impetus from assuming, not proving, that both Sinai and the Resurrection are matters of faith, not history, and are therefore not knowledge claims, Reasonable or otherwise, but simply matters of irrational faith. In fact if you believe in the clear historicity of Sinai and the Resurrection, there is not a whole lot to do "higher criticism" about! Why?
Because everything else will tend to fall in place fairly easily, you might say, especially when Sinai and the Resurrection are couple with the God of Genesis 1:1! These are the big 3 Biblical historical, defining realties, and Sinai and the Resurrection either happened or they are myth and conspiracy or a chocolate chip cookie recipe as the postmodernist holds, that is, they are about something altogether different, we know not what (getting in touch with "the flow," whatever). Why do the silly postmodernist chocolate chip cookie recipe or cheeseburger, cheeseburger (of the "love only" Liberal) theories come about in the late 20th century? Obviously because the supposedly brilliant Ďhigher critic" could not make his myth or conspiracy theories work in the 19th and early 20th centuries. (However massive conspiracy theories about the Sinai story, if not the Resurrection, are still somewhat common.)
If he could have made myth or conspiracy work, he would not have abandoned them for an overtly absurd (non-Rational) hidden-meaning postmodernism, and this is identical, you will note, to the situation with the swoon theory, that is, if one could show that myth or conspiracy could explain the Resurrection away, you donít to have to bother with the swoon theory. The swoon theory is a concession, in effect, by the non-believer that Christ did in fact walk out of the grave as a fact of history, every bit as much as Caesarís crossing the Rubicon or Washingtonís crossing the Delaware.
The "higher critic" usually does not even bother with historical analysis
In fact, the "higher critic" by and large does not even bother with historical analysis of Sinai or the Resurrection, rather he and increasingly she these days, almost always, just assumes that neither happened, and then he simply uses so-called "textual analysis" looking for apparent minor discrepancies in the text to supposedly justify throwing out both of the historical occurrences of Sinai and the Resurrection as well as most historical occurrences generally, when in fact even if minor discrepancies are there (which is not very clear) the overwhelming evidence is in fact Sinai and the Resurrection are historical as well as valid generally in the textual analysis.
In fact, the whole point of "higher criticism" is to assume that neither Sinai nor the Resurrection are historical occurrences and then to look for minor textual reasons to justify that position. And then "higher critics" argue among themselves about who has the best minor textual reasons for throwing out Sinai and the Resurrection, and it pays very good money, if you can get a job doing it. But to the point at hand: the Kingdom come on earth with Kingdom Christianity and the Marriage Feast of the Lamb, and this is where things get very interesting for the Christian, but not so much for the non-believer for whom this stuff has little or no relevance.
The best way to think about the Kingdom come and the Marriage Feast of the Lamb
The best way to think about the Kingdom come on earth and Kingdom Christianity and the Marriage Feast of the Lamb is the valid historical Christian faith and Evangelical Christian faith as it has played out and developed in history among correct or true believers in non-Apostate churches.
Take John Wesley and C. S. Lewis, two of the finest Christians who ever lived, and great Christian minds, at that, but neither develops a very strong concept of Evangelical salvation or Covenant, sinnerís prayer Christianity entered into by personal faith, specifically, in Christís atoning sacrifice. In fact, neither the Anglican nor Methodist traditions is very strong here, though when on track they shine like few others with a theology of the indwelling Spirit.
However, how often should a clear Gospel message be preached?
I, personally, for example have been in and out of conservative Methodist churches for 40 years now and have heard a clear Gospel message preached only about 4 times in those 40 years. One will hear many, many sermons on the Christian life and helping the poor but rarely if ever at all, any Gospel message whatsoever, and in truth one only gets "saved" (from the Final Judgment), that is, enters the "I do" Covenant once, and most of Christianity is living out the Christian life in the Spirit (just as with marriage one gets married once with "I do" and the rest is living it out), so there is perhaps some justification for this sad state of affairs on not preaching a clear Gospel message in the non-Apostate Methodist and Anglican churches, but be that as it may, a clear Evangelical believe-and-receive message is not so much not taught or preached but in truth more not understood, in the Anglican and Methodist traditions, even at their best.
By contrast the Calvinist and Baptist traditions have developed a very strong notion and theology of salvation and believe-and-receive, but are, or can be, somewhat weak on discipleship and the new Christian life in the Spirit , etc., and even actual evangelism. In any case, a clear Gospel message preached once every 10 years, in our best churches no less, is probably (in my humble opinion) not going to get the job done for a widespread Kingdom Christianity come on earth. (This is much as the average Christian is said to pray 1.25 seconds a week for the Kingdom to come on earth! Truly pathetic.) In my personal experience and from what I read in the literature, rare, rare indeed is the church that wins more than a person or two a year to the Lord, if that, outside of children, of course. The fact is the Church (the Body of all true believers, trusting in Christ, etc.) appears to be declining steadily every year for the past 100 years as a percentage of the overall population. Sad, but true, though easily reversible with a clear Gospel message introduced regularly into the mainline denominations? (But it probably needs to be done more than once every 10 years? Just a thought.)
On Kingdom Christianity...
The bottom-line here is the non-apostate Church has been moving by fits and starts two steps forward one step back at times toward a clear package deal of an Evangelical believe-and-receive, enter-the-Covenant by "I do" with a sinnerís-prayer faith in the last half of the 20th century and away from a simple intellectual assent to the doctrinal truths of the faith and then joining the church type faith.
That is Evangelical Christianity is you personally enter into covenant the New Covenant with Christ by believing-and-receiving and what do you receive? Reconciliation (or salvation), Regeneration (or re-birth, new heart) and Relationship (indwelling Spirit, Abba Father relationship, etc.) I use caps here for emphasis, and almost as names to the 3 Rís. And of course their is often a 4th R of Repentance, as well. Whatís the point?
This is Kingdom Christianity, and this is Marriage Feast of the Lamb Christianity, and it will pervade all the churches and all the denominations in the Kingdom Era, presumably. The specific believe-and- receive (enter-the-Covenant, sinnerís-prayer) 3 Rís formulation is original with me of course, (based on John 1:12 & John 3-4) but not the substance of the formulation, as such which has been evolving over the last 200 years culminating in Bill Brightís 4 Spiritual Laws and James Kennedyís Evangelism Explosion, and Billy Grahamís massive Evangelical Crusades, etc., etc
Kingdom Christianity of the Marriage Feast of the Lamb
In my view probably Watchman Nee puts together the whole package of Evangelical Christianity better than anyone else, (famously in The Normal Christian Life) but regardless my "believe-and receive 3 Rís" formulation is probably a little more complete and a little tighter message, than many, if not most, but, regardless, it is the same basic Evangelical message, as such. What is the point here?
This "believe-and receive 3 Rís" idea in whatever formulation is where the Church is going in history, and it is Kingdom Christianity of the Marriage Feast of the Lamb, and it is what the "higher critic," the Liberal, and often but not always the (pre-Vatican II) Roman Catholic tend to oppose outright as the very point of their positions, not good obviously and presumably why if there is a Great Tribulation the "higher critic," the Liberal, and Roman Catholicism will come under the Judgment of God with the lost hedonistic world, that is if they do not repent and get on track before then, which I think all three will in the next 50 to 100 years, if the Judgment does not fall first, and the Church Age end before they get their acts together by Rational argument.
But whatís new here? Rational Logos Christology to good government
Having said all of this on Evangelical Christianity, there is, as far as I know, something original or at least semi-original in my philosophy and theological writings, which is a bit of rarity, and I say this to keep you from trying to figure out where I got this. Kingdom Christianity is going to bring back Justinís Logos-Christology and apply it as the foundation of the state, law, and government, and Logos-Christology is about Justice, Righteousness and the Rational nature of the Laws of Nature and of Natureís God.
With this occurrence both the "kings" and "priests" aspects of Revelation are fulfilled where we as "married" believers and priests share the throne with Christ as kings to the extent we govern with Logos Wisdom Rationality and, hence, fulfill the promise made to Abraham to be justified or saved by faith and to be just and righteous rulers over the nations in Wisdom. (Actually much of this is in the Church historian Eusebius, but that is another story for another day.)
Basically what I am doing here is combining Justinís Logos Christology with the American concept of government (under the Laws of Nature and of Natureís God) to form a Kingdom Christianity concept of government, law, and ultimately the state, which may we hope and pray will not be a Leviathan anti-God beast which tries to control every aspect of your life in thought, word, deed and in the market place in a totalitarian fashion! In reality 1776 was a de facto Logos Christology without the theology of it developed as such, just as you could say Wesley and Lewis are de facto Evangelicals without developing the theology of "believing-and-receiving," as such, which they are obviously doing as great Christians.
Bottom line here? The Kingdom come on earth!
Bottom line here, the same as always: The Kingdom Era has a particular type of Christianity, namely, a Marriage Feast of the Lamb Christianity which is an Evangelical, enter-the-Covenant, sinnerís prayer Christianity which I put together in a "believe-and-receive 3 Rís" formulation and this is what is original here. And the Kingdom Era has a particular type of government, namely, Logos or Rationality based government based on the practical and the moral for real Justice, or that is desirable (or truly Good) harmonious interaction of the parts of the body in their legitimate interests, etc. And the "Kingdom come" is done, when these two things become our desired ends in religion and government!
And at that time "the knowledge of the Lord will cover the earth as waters cover the sea," that is, in our minds or knowledge claims and "each shall know the Lord from the least to the greatest," that is, in our heart experience acquaintance with God, as a spiritual reality. And, so, this will then, presumably, reflect the state of religion and government on earth as well as of education or human knowledge on earth as well as spiritual reality on earth. Why?
These things are all knowledge claims based on Reason, not mere "faith" claims. Again, the "faith" aspect to this is do you personally want to say "Yes, I do," to the Covenant offer of God in Christ and to new spiritual life in him. It is like a marriage, clearly, or even an oath in joining the military as the early Church was famous for understanding, and that is why Kingdom Christianity is specifically formulated to be a particular type of Christianity, namely, a Marriage Feast of the Lamb Christianity. Is this complicated? It does not seem very complicated to me. Actually, of course, none of this is original with me. I got it all out of Isaiah and Revelation. In any case, is this indeed the end of the Church Age?
Is this indeed the end of the Church Age?
Is this indeed the end of the Church Age? Is prophesy being fulfilled in our midst? So it would seem, and the signs are massive, and so, presumably, the reign of Christ in law, government and religion is at hand? The big signs? The Great Apostasy in the Church ("higher criticism"), the general society in massive moral decline and calling evil good, (basically a politically correct hedonism or Epicureanism and what do you "see" as good, and right and true here), and further we see totalitarian Leviathan atheist states of one form or another that want to control every aspect of your life and that have a great hostility toward Christians, and we also have a seemingly endless stream of false messianic political leaders, and of course there is the re-establishment of Israel as a nation.
How do we know that Liberalism is the great Apostasy? If it is not, the Church must completely return to the faith and then fall away again in future generations. I do not think that can or will happen, if the current sickly and dying Body of Christ, for the most part on life support systems, returns to the Bible faith in religion, it will proceed to set up the Kingdom in law and government, just as the Great Awakening led to 1776 based on "the Laws of Nature and of Natureís God." Piece of cake.
The moral decline of our time surpasses the decline and fall of the Roman Empire
Certainly, the moral decline of our time surpasses anything since the infamous decline and fall of the Roman Empire, a clear sign of the end of the age, and in our time we have atheist totalitarian states hostile to Christians, and this is true to a great extent even in America, and, interestingly, this hostility to all religion is not known before in history really but prophesied in Revelation. In history states usually have false gods, but they have gods, and further we have so many false messianic cult-like political leaders we cannot even keep up with them all, and now even in America, of all places, and clearly the return of Jews to the land Israel is of huge Biblical significance and in prophecy said to be greater than the Exodus!
Clearly this is the end of the age it certainly would seem, but how long we will take to transition into the Kingdom Era in Christianity and government, law and education is hard to say of course. And when and how a possible Great Tribulation will fall because of the great moral decline is also hard to say, but it could serve as a true catalyst for a new Great Awakening. That is, because many may not see the Light until they feel the heat as the expression goes.
However, the Bible is clear that the church of Philadelphia will be spared from the Great Tribulation which comes on the world and sickly unrepentant Church because of the preceding lack of faithfulness to God in that Church, no less, and because of the moral decline in the general society, and by type this is a parallel to ancient Israelís moral and religious state and ultimate fall prophesied by the prophet Isaiah and others of course. Still, we may say for our day, the darkest hour is just before the dawn.
In summation all 3 ("legal positivism" Epicureanism, and "higher criticism") started slowly and seemingly innocuously enough, but all three played out to what many Christians warned would be their logical conclusion. And all three hinged on throwing out altogether or radically re-defining the God of Genesis 1:1 as well as his perfect Righteousness and Holiness and obvious supernatural abilities, if He really exists.
The state can make a truly bad decision but not so for the "legal positivist" because there is no real "higher moral law" and, hence, the state or judge can do no real wrong. This is ultimately absurd and tyrannical and not a good situation for 99% of the people, but wonderful for the ruling elite and the statist, if you get to be state! With an enabling "legal positivist" 2008 Congress this can make Barack Obama (who cannot decide if the nationís founding and Constitution are "a pact with the Devil" p. 115 of Audacity) something of an un-Constitutional absolute monarch, albeit benevolent, likable absolute monarch but absolute monarch nonetheless, once we throw normal Constitutional rights and procedures and checks and balances to the wind. But for the traditionalist, it is not just the procedures of the Constitution which are at stake but the entire "higher moral law" worldview which went with the Constitution creating real rights and freedoms, from God, of course. I, for my part, take the Constitution to be just what the signers held it to be: a pact with their "Lord" Jesus. A perfect pact? No, but as perfect as they could make it, and certainly not a pact with the Adversary; such a view is ridiculous and outrageous, in my opinion, anyway.
We have evolved into something of an absolute monarchy, sad to say?
All the Democrat politicians (not Democrat voters) are seemingly Obamaís royal court along with "legal positivist" law professors and "higher critic" seminary professors and Epicurean college professors (not even 1% of the population I would guess), and the mainstream media is really usually, not always, just an arm of the Kingís court, being seemingly just an adjunct propaganda arm of the Democrat Party more generally, as many have pointed out. So, the corrupted media is not really a separate "problem," so to speak. However, all of these folks combined are numerically actually very few in number, for better or worse, and they all live like royalty with power and prestige and endless positive press coverage, etc., while 99% of the people, their subjects, work for them, and we get the leftovers after they have taken whatever they want from the fruits of our labors.
Being an America subject or so called "citizen" today is not really a "dogís life," of course, but we often only get the leftovers after the chosen 1% have taken what they want, by "legal positivist" King Obama and the irrational, unworkable and ultimately immoral Congressional and Supreme Court decrees of course. In reality the courts and the Congress and even the Injustice Department generally do whatever Obama tells them to do, and they had better do it dang fast of course, because all know it is not wise to stir the ire of an absolute monarch. Christ is of course said to rule with a "rod of iron," but the idea there is, I think, the rule of just and good law.
In truth, America's problems are not the President nor the Democrats nor the Republicans, we are all just actors on the stage of history. The real problem, if not evil, is faulty, unworkable, and undesirable political ideologies, and in our case mostly Liberalism and Radicalism, of one form or another, and once one buys into a faulty ideology it tends to have a corrupting and destructive effect on government and law and even society more generally, and here we are at the end of a sixty or more year cycle of history where Liberalism and Radicalism have played themselves out to their logical conclusions, and it is not pretty, but we must deal with reality whether economic, social, political, education, entertainment, even religious reality. Liberalism and Radicalism simply don't "work," because Liberalism tends to formulate its position in terms of faulty concepts of "compassion" and "positive rights," while Radicalism formulates its position in terms of faulty concepts of "social and economic justice." But what is the comeback to all of this analysis?
However, to be fair and to give both sides... What is the comeback to all of this?
What is the comeback to all of this? "Legal positivism" and "higher criticism" and "Epicureanism" are actually brilliant, and the ruling elite infected with these fatal diseases living the life of royalty is more than 1% of the population, it is more like 2 or 3% of the population, that is, if you throw in all their favored subjects such as Leftist political activists, and radical civil rights, homosexual, abortionist activists etc. or people totally given over to all of this nonsense profiting by the system, and if you add in their peripheral special favored subjects, from selfish special interest groups, you might even approach more like 20% or even 30% or more of the population, and in reality a fairly strong case can be made that Obama and all Democrats of today are not doing anything qualitatively different than FDR though certainly quantitatively so, but the demographics of people on board for the irrational, unworkable, and ultimately immoral (Liberal to Radical) Leftist agenda will change dramatically, for better or worse, with, say, 150 to 200 million salvations in a nationwide Great Awakening.
Still, at this point such a nationwide Great Awakening is a ways off presumably, and in the meantime as Dewey and Rorty and Fosdick and Carter and Danforth understood in the past and understand fully now, he or she who controls with an iron hand and with irrational if not absurd and depraved and tyrannical philosophies the universities, the law schools, the seminaries, the Democrat Party and some say half of the Republican Party as well as the mainstream media controls the country, and in point of fact this thoroughly corrupted ruling elite (for a generation or two now) is probably no more than 1% of the population, and need not be more than that, and in fact "Good" can be in the eye of the beholder, and maybe they have it, if you can only "see" it? Still, in the end, one can say tyranny is only good for the tyrant, and it is not really truly good for him, when you get right down to it in the bigger picture of things.
Bottom-line: The Solution to all our problems?
The Solution to all our problems? The solution is a new Kingdom Christianity (practiced even today by some groups) based on the overt "I do" Covenant offer of salvation in order to get a new heart for God and His indwelling Spirit for the Abba Father relationship. This will restore the Church in all denominations and with time usher in an historical era of Logos Rationality-based good government that is both moral and practical for the desirable interaction of all the parts of the body politic in a Kingdom Era of peace, justice and righteousness on earth for all the nations. However, specifically what legislation should be passed is another question for another day... And so concludes this our "Kingdom come" series of essays. Yours truly.