THE MOST dangerous threat to Christianity in America today may be patriotism. Conservative Christians tend to be pretty patriotic, which makes us especially susceptible to the idea that we need to reclaim the country for Christ. At what point does being salt and light to the world morph into imposing a totalitarian government in Christ’s name?
C.J. Hampton, organizer of The Politics of Religion Conference April 1st and 2nd in Fort Wayne, talks about dominion theology, the gospel, and the need for Christian discernment.
Please note: due to our upcoming move to Illinois, we’ll be scaling back our podcast schedule to once a week for at least the next two months. We appreciate your understanding! For updates, visit the P.I.D. Radio Facebook page, and check out the great Christian podcasters at the Revelations Radio Network.
Click the arrow on the player below to listen now, or right-click (control-click if you have a Mac) the “download” link to save the mp3 file to your hard drive.
“THE MOST dangerous threat to Christianity in America today may be patriotism.”
Spoken like a true globalist.
This whole dominionist thing has become pathology for you.
When we wrote about dominionism, we actually read Rushdoony’s work. Have you even picked up a primary source on this issue? Or just what some excitable fundamentalist has written?
I don’t care what anybody thinks or how many “PID heads” want to string me up. You’ve officially fallen off the cliff and lost all sense of balance.
http://smashedmedia.us/bruce/?p=340
Since when did rudeness become a Christian attribute, Collins bros.? What ‘flew up’ your noses, anyway? And, talk about misunderstanding a subject–and, here I thought the Collins bros. were worth listening to–I listened to that talk you had with B. Collins, bros., and I don’t believe I’ve ever heard anything read as well as you must have read your speech concerning the founders, and the ‘notion’ of their ‘non-involvement’ in the ‘notion’ of a N.W.O. ‘involving’ this particular country–about how the illuminists could not have been behind a single thing, since they just hadn’t gotten their official ‘act’ together on the dates in question, concerning the American Revolution–well, well, well–so, I guess we throw that idea out the window, along with any other idea you’ve nixed in the past couple of years, now don’t we? Or–do we? Due to your rudeness twice now, I no longer consider you both a qualified source for anything having to do with what’s taking place in this world right now, or in the past–especially as it relates to anything Biblical.
Christie,
And, so it begins… As usual, PID fans uncritically descend upon us like a pack of wolves because we cannot give our assent to untenable theories. And, as usual, the counter arguments are ones largely premised upom emotivism, not objective research.
The scenario you are positing is a chronological impossibility. The Illuminati could not have even informed the American Revolutionaries of their existence or goals within the time-frame of the Declaration of Independence. That’s a historical fact, which is premised upon primary sources and not other conspiracy theorists.
And, of the estimated 2,000 Illuminists, 1,500 members have been identified. Not a single American, Washington or otherwise, appears on the organization’s lists. Again, that’s a fact.
The Illuminist conspiracy was a Utopian one premised, in part, upon the ideas of Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Ironically, the contention that all national governments are intrinsically evil was also espoused by Rousseau. Ironically, those who consistently malign all of the Founding Fathers espouse the very same view of government. Guess they have more in common with the Illuminati than the Founders did.
The Illuminist conspiracy was a Utopian one. Such Utopian elements are not present in the American Revolution. Anyone who has studied political philosophy and political science would know that. Take for instance the famous phrase presented in the Declaration, “Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Implicit in the last portion of that phrase is the contention that the ideal is perennially elusive and must be pursued on a personal basis. It cannot be engineered by the State. Soteriological social movements, which were spawned from the Illuminist conspiracy, are at odds with this contention.
Sounds like you just don’t like it because it doesn’t conform to your own private conspiratorial meta-narrative.
Whether or not we’ve been rude, manners has little to do with the facts. The facts don’t support the theories that are being propagated concerning the Founding Fathers.
And, since you have decided to call our Christianity into question, perhaps you should ask Derek why the title of the presentation he was about to deliver at this conference virtually mirrored the title of one of our articles. Aren’t there Biblical prohibitions against theft?
I guess the Apostle Paul was being rude when he opposed Peter to the face.
“The ‘notion’ of a N.W.O.”
The concept of a New World Order was conceived in its current form by Anglo-American globalist in the last 50-60 years. America is 200 years old.
We never argued against the existence of deviant elites entertaining several different models of world order (none of which are desirable). But we argued, and will continue to argue, against the idea that America was meant by the Founders to become a New World Order. The New World Order is a Utopian concept, America was not.
Keep drinking deep of the Jamestown Cool-Aid, Christie C. It has almost totally destroyed your grasp on reality. And Charlie Sheen would tell you that that’s a great place to be.
And, it is pretty cheap, if not downright fallacious, to premise the authenticity of others’ faith upon whether or not they give assent to untenable theories.
Let me ask you this… have you ever done research? Real research? Not reading exclusively conspiracy literature, but tracking down primary sources? As Michael Heiser has made clear, it isn’t for sissies. And, it is especially not for axe-grinding sissies.
Yet, the lion’s share of views that have come to dominate PID lately are those of axe-grinding sissies. A large amount of them are people simply seeking affirmation for questionable presuppositions, like resentment of all civic authorities or a derision of Catholics or eschatological assumptions.
Instead of objectively reviewing the facts, they intentionally go to sources that they know will affirm their presupposition.
And, that’s ultimately why you have taken issue with us… we refuse to tell you what you want to hear. I notice that you offered no rebuttal for the facts we cited in our interview. Instead, you complain because you don’t think we were polite enough.
Grow up. The research field is not courtesy class. It’s about responsibly examining the evidence.
By the way, have you asked Derek about the title of his presentation yet? Since you wanted to call our faith into question, perhaps you should be asking yourself why one self-professed Christian nearly used the title of other Christians’ work. Trust me, “Their Kingdom Come” was not a title Derek conceived. He should know… we only did a show over the article by the same name a year ago.
A good case for indifference to worldly politics, nations, etc. can be found in Vernard Eller’s “Christian Anarchy.”
A web copy is available on the House Church Central site: http://www.hccentral.com/eller12/
The enemy tries to fake the blessings of God through Christ. Dominionism is such a fake. The better concern is “What does in mean in our lives for the Kingdom of God and Heaven to be within us?” What type of seed does that plant? Why did Christ teach about His Kingdom as part of the gospel? Salvation stands alone, but the other side of the matter is the ability and authority of Christ to save us, from our sins via the cross, from the world, and from the demons and their “web” (the beastly kingdoms). He doesn’t save us to the utmost alone, but also through His agents and agencies.
There are various guesses about the meaning of “the manchild” and “woman laboring” in Revelation 12. I’m partial to the woman being the saints collectively through all ages. “Jerusalem above is free, who is the mother of us all.” (Gal. 4:26) Her virgin birth is likewise a collective; the manchild is the Kingdom of Heaven extended into the earth. Satan seeks to co-opt it through his kingdom, the dragon. Dominionism is part of that effort. The manchild is caught up to throne of God, and recognizes itself as an offspring or extension of the throne of Heaven. Plainly said, Jerusalem above (New Jerusalem) is both spiritually and naturally manifest. She bridges the dimensional separation. The manchild is only the openly apparent manifestation, as best I can tell, that will be most clearly seen during the millenial kingdom. But the millenial kingdom ends when this world ends — while New Jerusalem goes on into the new creation with her Husband and Savior (Jesus / Yahshua). The first fruit of New Jerusalem, (which includes of course Christ’s mother, Mary), was Jesus himself as a babe in the flesh.
Old Jerusalem, worldy Jerusalem, is exposed as Great Babylon, the open manifestation of the spiritual mystery babylon that extends throughout the world. “And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.” Rev. 11:8 The harlotry/idolatry of babylon was of course brought back there also along with that of Sodom and Egypt.
It was Christ’s own teachings about the Kingdom of Heaven in the parables that saved me from worldly politics back in the early 90’s. The USA is no better nor worse than any other nation of the world. (note my indifference) My allegiance is to Christ and His Kingdom, which is spread throughout the earth. And will in due time His kingdom will openly manifest as that stone that shatters the clay and iron feet of the worldly kingdoms / dominions, as per the interpretations of Daniel. Including no doubt the beastie princedoms of the fallen.
My allegiance is not divided. It helps to have a bit of Mennonite in my background. Worldly politics is at best an unequal yoke. If you wouldn’t compromise yourself with an unequal yoke in marriage or business, why do so in national loyalties? “The king’s heart is in the hand of the LORD, as the rivers of water: he turneth it whithersoever he will.” Proverbs 21:1 (cp. 2 Chronicles 7:14, “If my people who are called by my name….)
“This matter is by the decree of the watchers, and the demand by the word of the holy ones: to the intent that the living may know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men.” Daniel 4:17
The Almighty directs the nations as He sees fit.
I vote — not to endorse one faction or the other — but to counter their power base. Sometimes that means voting as independent, sometimes as a republican. But never as a democrat while the party plank includes abortion. When partisans don’t vote, it’s just as powerful. I voted against the democrats in the last presidential election, while the GOP by in large did NOT vote, which resulted in an all democrat congress and executive. I don’t see voting as a duty, but as a way of being wise about countering power bases. And I’d be the first to admit that it’s much more effective to write and speak to people (preach) than it is to vote in a representational republic where so many elections are rigged.
Our duty as Christians is to preach God’s way and obey it.
“… Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.” (Eccl. 12 esp. 13)
There is no defense of the USA. It was born in rebellion. Baptized in blood in civil war, which it propagates to other nations. Attempted genocide against the indians. Co-opted the Nazi occultists. Meddled in imperial tyranny around the world continuing today as mercenaries for Saudi Sunni Sheiks against the Shi’a muslims in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. And exterminated 10s of millions unborn in legalized murder, along with legalized tax theft in the trillions. And continues this day to enable underpaid nearly slave labor of illegals through lax enforcement of the law domestically, while promoting slavery in unregulated and unsafe corporate sweatshops abroad. You say look at the good America is doing. I ask can a tree bear both good and evil fruit?
America has no claim to the good fruit of the true Kingdom of Heaven.
“Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning. Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.” (James 1)
An important topic. Have been pondering this quite a bit lately, especially in light of Reconstructionism.
One point raised by Paul and Phllip deserves response. Yes, I did put forward “Their Kingdom Come” as the title of my presentation at the upcoming “Politics of Religion” conference. It was a bad decision. Ours is a small and somewhat insular community, and I should have considered that people might confuse their research with my conclusions.
That was not my intention. As Paul and Phillip have made clear, we do not see eye to eye on this issue. The title fit the ideas I want to present, that’s all.
I would do it differently if I had to do it again, but I simply didn’t consider “Their Kingdom Come” original enough to create a problem. For example, Their Kingdom Come is also the title of a 1997 book about the Roman Catholic society Opus Dei. A quick Google search suggests that it is far more widely known than PID Radio, Derek Gilbert, or Paul and Phillip Collins.
Paul and Phillip contacted me and expressed their objection to the use of the title. I apologized and immediately changed the title of the presentation. I thought that was the end of the matter.
Pingback: Major Causes of Infertility in Women: Uncovered » Just Cause 2