Paul's Passing Thoughts

There are many perplexing events taking place around us that really shouldn’t be that confusing at all: how in the world could Obama have won the election with this kind of economy (a first)? How could the Obama administration turn their backs on the Benghazi consulate and leave them for dead? Why would we not secure our border with Mexico immediately in the face of terrorist infiltration of our society on a large scale? How can the horrors of late term abortions be acceptable to any lawmaker? How can we take money from hard workers who are barely scrapping by and give it to those who won’t work?

“Because Obama is evil.” “Because Obama is a typical Democrat.” Because Obama isn’t a Christian.” “Obama is stupid.” Maybe, but even if those reasons are true; they are beside the main point. What Obama is standing for does not defy common sense at all if you understand his….philosophy.

Obama’s philosophy is one of two primary ancient philosophies that were among those living in the cradle of civilization. Those two primary philosophies are determined by how they answer one single question: who owns man? Now, if you hang around with my crowd, they are quick to respond by saying, “God owns man! Are you stupid?” Maybe, but this is also beside the main point.

The fact that God rightfully owns man is a given; how God has decided to execute His ownership is a much broader consideration. It begins with giving Him the glory that is due, which of course starts with the gospel. Once that is established, or nevertheless not established in the minds of many, is man created with a capability to be responsible for the sum and substance of his life before God? Stated another way: are men a herd of mindless animals created by God who need His specially anointed cowboys to manage the herd? Is mankind CAPABLE? This boils down to the philosophy of competence versus incompetence.

Sure, man depends on God for his needs—no doubt there, but past that, is there a capable colaboring involved that God expects on a Christian level, and on a non-Christian level as well? In other words, on the judgment day, will God only judge man for what he decided to do about His Son or will God judge man according to other things as well? The answer follows:

Matthew 12:36

I tell you, on the day of Judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak,

Man is both capable, and responsible. He is competent. And many concur—Christian and non-Christian. Does capability equal free will to choose God? I won’t go there, but it is clear that man is capable for something, and that he is free—born free if you will. It is interesting to note that procreation was going to happen with Adam and Eve regardless of the fall (Genesis 1:28), but they were only mandated to rule over creation; and not each other. This idea doesn’t exclude roles or leadership in some sort of project, but it does exclude God-appointed masters who have a special pipeline to His higher knowledge; eg, a spiritual caste system.

The latter is the other side of the argument, and qualifies the prism that I will use to clarify the rest of my thesis in this essay. Church historian John Immel organizes it this way: who owns man? Does government own man? Or does man own man? This is how I am going to frame my contention as well, but with a little twist: who owns man? Does government own man at the behest of God as a higher life form, or as a personification of an impersonal cosmic power? Or does man own man as a competent individual who will answer to nobody but God for the sum and substance of his/her life?

This is the battle of the ages. All mortal blood spilled on the earth finds its ancestor in this fundamental question. Man functions by His philosophy. The competence versus incompetence is the metaphysical argued with epistemology, determining ethics, and resulting in politics. And God is above all of it with His own metaphysical declaration—the Bible. Yet, in case no one has noticed, God Himself does not rule directly on earth—not yet anyway. Therefore, man is free, but what will one day be responsible before God at the judgment. Throughout Scripture, Christ describes Himself as a master who has gone on a long journey and assigned His servants to certain responsibilities while He is gone. When He returns, there will be an accounting.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch we call earth, the battle continues. It is a war, and has always been a war between those who demand to rule the incompetent masses by proxy, and the free, capable, and responsible. Hence, as a footnote, the latter often objects to the former demanding obedience to that which violates their consciences—stated another way by the apostle Peter: “We should obey God and not man.” Likewise, the apostle Paul: “Follow me as I follow Christ.”

For the most part throughout human history the philosophy of incompetence has reigned, and always clothed with virtue. Being guided by the enlightened who have been selected by God or the evolutionary survival of the fittest, life is for the sole purpose of serving what’s best for the whole of society, or the group. Self-identity as one who is utterly worthless unless defined by contribution to the whole is the epitome of good. Individualism is evil, and detrimental to the whole. Contribution to the whole in obedience to the government defines purpose. Carrots dangling on strings and motivations vary from hundreds of virgins, food, shelter, and clothing, to merely avoiding the boiling pot and starving beasts.

Cultural varieties are emperor worship, the government-approved god of your choice, and theocracies of all stripes. Historically, around the 6^th century, its lame doctrine of mythology was replaced with the more sophisticated social engineering of Plato. Western culture is heavily vested in Platonic thought which presented the ideal society as ruled by philosopher kings. The second category of citizen was the soldiers who enforce the will of the philosopher kings. The third and lowest strata in the Platonic caste system were the producers. Again, the life purpose of the producer or common citizen was his/her ability to contribute to the group. The anti-virtue was individualism. Plato also believed that the soul mirrored the metaphysical society. One was born with a soul that matched the need of his/her environment; ie, society. This is evolutionary-like thought. One is born a philosopher king, a soldier, or a producer. Rather than man being created by God separately to rule over creation and subdue it, he is rather a product of it. Creation is the creator of man to meet its own needs as opposed to God creating man. Thus, creation is the god, not the personal saving God. Plato probably received these ideas from ancient forms of Hinduism while in exile after the execution of Socrates.

From there, this construct was adopted by the Doctor of Grace in the Catholic Church: St. Augustine. The Catholic Church throughout history has been the epitome of Plato’s Republic. Augustine’s understudies, Martin Luther and John Calvin, though the most notable figures of the Reformation—never fell far from the Catholic tree. They were merely more principled philosopher kings than the Catholic Popes. Though they railed against the Catholic Church’s supposed inferior soteriology, they retained the exact same Platonic caste system and remained endeared to Augustine. Calvin quoted Augustine on every 2.5 pages of the Calvin Institutes (or over 400 times).

The combination of these two caste systems, though estranged, wreaked bloody havoc on Europe for 300 years. The tyranny of the Catholic Church was also the tyranny of the Reformers: same philosophy, same results. From this turmoil and darkness, arose a pushback from the Enlightenment era. The founding fathers of America were a product of that movement. Our Constitution was specifically drawn to prevent the horrors of the European Dark Age. Paramount was the goal to keep philosophers of any sort from having the soldier to enforce their dogma. America is predicated on the separation of the soldier and the philosopher king. It was founded on rugged individualism and the assumed competence of man.

America was initially blighted by the Reformation caste system via the Puritans who held to Calvinism. The Bible they brought to America (The Geneva Bible) on the Mayflower was a Reformed commentary and the product of Calvin’s bloody theocracy in Geneva. Both movements failed. Tyranny eventually dies a social death.

This trifold caste system rejected by America found life as Communism in Europe after the American Revolution. Secular detractors of the philosophy who fled to the US; eg, Ayn Rand, understandably saw selfism as the contra philosophy. Of course, the wise Christian seeks a balance between “think[ing] higher of ourselves than we ought” as opposed to selfishness as a cure for the eradication of necessary self-confidence and truthful assessment of the individual. However, it is interesting that many contemporary proponents of Reformed theology in this country still rail on Rand, and make her one of the primary foes of Calvinism. So, to be against Calvinism is akin to being a follower of Ayn Rand. This, of course, is ridiculous. But don’t miss the main point: Why do Calvinists see a non-religious individual like Rand as a threat? Because they know it really isn’t about theology—it’s about the fundamental philosophical presupposition about man, and they know her understanding of such is a threat to the real heart of their theology.

This philosophical war will rage in this country till the return of Christ. It interprets most of what is before us in the news on a daily basis. We are presently in a transition. The welfare state is not the communist state. The welfare state is the transition period that communists use to convert a society into Plato’s utopia. Right now, the welfare state in America is about 47%. But there are no welfare recipients in a Communist state, only kings, soldiers, and PRODUCERS. Hence, the welfare recipients are eventually informed that they are the producers—if they want to eat.

This thesis answers many perplexities in our day. The shared belief that mankind is incompetent makes for strange bedfellows and alliances. Open borders feed the temporary welfare state that leads to Plato’s Republic. The day when the welfare recipients are informed that they are the producers. If not deceived, they could have been free producers rather than slaves of the government. Benghazi and abortions are sacrifices for the betterment of the group, as are many other considerations.

Obama was elected by the temporary welfare state which is right now at 47%. The other 53% must hold their ground and educate the public. The welfare state must be educated in regard to the fact that they are being used and headed for slavery. And if not them—at least their children. The real debate must be continually put forth:

Who owns man?

paul