Paul's Passing Thoughts

Maybe more people would be saved if they had a clear picture of what salvation is. Protestantism greatly dampens the gospel by making God’s sovereignty the issue. If salvation is completely out of the hands of people, and people are the way they are because God made them such for His own glory (being glorified through the saved as well as the condemned), why worry about it? In many respects, this approach diminishes the gravity of the gospel.

On the one hand, you have a god who has chosen some for salvation and others for damnation, and this is determined by God making some vessels for glory and others fitted for eternal wrath. People will simply be aloof from the question of religion if God seems capricious because of His hatred of humanity. We hope we can find something else in the other hand.

All in all, though clothed in a scholarly motif, Protestantism is fundamentally mythological with two gods having separate agendas. God the father is a wrathful god who hates mankind, and Jesus is the loving savior god who saves us from being sent to hell by the demiurge god. Do you want to deny this? Rick Holland, former John MacArthur right-hand associate and heir apparent to the Grace to You empire wrote just that in his book, “Uneclipsing The Son” which was forwarded by the MacDaddy himself. If John MacArthur doesn’t represent mainline Protestantism, who does?

And in addition, the book propagates the Reformed tradition that decries the supposed problem of eclipsing Christ with the other two members of the Trinity. Shockingly, MacArthur himself alluded to this supposed problem in the book’s Forward. Instead of the Trinity fulfilling three different roles to attain one goal and a singular love for mankind, God the Father and the Spirit are presented as subordinates to Christ.

All of this nonsense actually decreases fear of God and makes salvation something God has done just for the hell of it or to sport with man. People not only reject the gospel as presented, they aren’t even sure they like God very much. At the very least, His message is unclear and confusing. But what if God loves mankind and gave His only Son to purchase all people for salvation? What if God is a loving God who is offering the gift of salvation to every person, and saying no is tantamount to rejecting the paramount gift from a God who defines all love? Everyone likes love. What if you offered a gift to your wife and she said, “I don’t want it”?

What if “We love Him because He first loved us” means that God loves all people and wants their love in return rather than, “The only reason we love God is because He preselected us.” According to this interpretation, unless God creates some to love Him, none would. Is that because if God created people with freewill His character wouldn’t invoke love? Or is God merely incapable of creating people with freewill? Or does He stop short of that because the results would be unpredictable?

Furthermore, I believe the verses that seem to indicate preselection (an ancient mythological concept to begin with) seem to do so because we have been brainwashed by the traditions of men. What is not within our control is to give birth to ourselves or to make the gift possible, but that doesn’t negate man’s ability to choose the gift. Protestantism makes the ability to choose, the issue, rather than man’s inability to make the gift possible. Salvation is not something man can purchase, it is a free gift.

Wouldn’t all of this Protestant nonsense sell better if inability only pertained to salvation which then resulted in ability to serve God along with OSAS (once saved always saved)? Remember, in Protestantism, inability extends to the “saved” as well because salvation is a “process.” Yes, it would probably sell better, but then what would we need the church for? While you might answer, “for edification and spiritual growth,” that incentive isn’t strong enough to support the monstrous infrastructure of the institutional church and the creature comforts of those who think the following: God is using them to save humanity from itself. No, no, a theology is needed that supports necessary RMR (reoccurring monthly revenue).

And by the way, most unbelievers suspect this is the case.

“how shall we escape if we ignore so great a salvation? This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him. God also testified to it by signs, wonders and various miracles, and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will” (Hebrews 2:3,4 NIV).

When God and His salvation is clearly seen in contrast to the traditions of men, the gospel is not only attractive, but compels people to fear if they neglect it because God paid an unimaginable price to secure a gift offered to all. If one is not sure the gift is even offered to them to begin with they will likely be uncompelled to address the issue.

And what is the issue? You supposedly commit your life to the church for a chance to obtain eternal life, or to decrease your time in purgatory.

When it’s all boiled down, it’s the gospel of, The only way to the Father is through the church where you have to come at least every Sunday and hear about what a sinner you are and give 10% of your income and hang-out with boring people who judge you.

That’s why people aren’t being born again and churches are chock-full of modern-day Pharisees who ridicule Pharisees.

paul

Bobby Aide was assigned to a different hall that morning and out of his element. But to his surprise as he passed a room, the name on the door was a resident he had served previously on his assigned hall. Bobby walked in the room and cheerfully greeted John Resident. “Hey! How are you doing sunshine?” Per the usual, John replied with those talking eyes that carry most of the water for his weak body of skin and bones. “No, I am not on this hall now,” Bobby replied, “just filling in.” Asking a resident how they are doing would ordinarily be a rude oxymoron, but aides can ask that because of what they observe though a mystery concerning heroism.

About then, a nurse walked in close to John’s side. John looked at her and whispered, “shower.” You see, the nurse is the aide’s superior officer, and John understands rank; he was a high-ranking officer in the Air Force piloting monster jets like the B-52. “I know, you are still trying to get that shower aren’t you?” replied the nurse with a compassionate grimace on her face. “Well, what do you say Bobby? Can you pull this off?”

Fact is, most aides in most facilities do not have the time to give a resident like John a real shower as opposed to a bed bath. But Bobby’s fear was heightened at the altar of petitions before God, and in accord with the guy to guy relationship they had on the other hall, Bobby answered, “Due to the way you smell, I better make time.” However, the politically incorrect jesting they mutually enjoy covered the truth.

During the shower Bobby, in his busyness, noticed that John was also in need of a shave. “Do you want a shave John?” ‘Do you have time?’ As Bobby picked up the razor and shaving cream and began to shave John he replied, “No.” John then replied with the second language of his eyes that reserves his voice for more important matters; tears…adding to the mystery of these heroes who are not only unsung heroes, but heroes who don’t even have a bad song.

Once-again on his normal hall the next day, Bobby heard back in regard to the shower incident: it’s all John talked about all day long.

More mystery.

How could a man with such a storied and accomplished life now stripped of all dignity put so much value on a shower? How does he find enjoyment in the minimal things of life that he inserts into his present existence? He once instructed Bobby; “Leave my door open I like to listen to all the commotion going on out there and the gossip.” Likewise, a resident once informed Bobby that he was being transferred to first shift before Bobby even knew. Bobby also knows what the aides on the other shifts say about him. The residents enjoy listening, and telling even more.

Any aide worth salt conversates fearfully with God about these mysteries. Aides don’t know if they could display such courage in the same circumstances. Perhaps at their altar, in fear, they cut deals with God: “Lord, you can’t let that happen to me because I’m an aide; after all, who would take care of these people?”

But all in all, these mysterious prophets proclaim truth that is little understood in Western culture dominated by Plato’s culture of death. Love of life is a mystery lamefully contended against by the dark gospel of “quality of life.” Indeed, this subjective so-called “quality of life” defines what we are talking about when we utter, “love of life.”

Therefore, the wise aide goes to work every day to assist these heroes in their stand for life undaunted by the labels and value placed on them by the so-called “experts.”

But more than anything, they go to learn from these mysterious prophets; for they experience something that we don’t understand about life, and understanding dissuades fear while the darkness of ignorance embraces it. Will we answer their call to understand life in this cultural Dark Age?

And in our attempt to cut deals with God at the altar in our temples of fear, will God answer…

“Who then would serve you?”

paul

I think it was Francis Schaeffer who said that artists are culture’s little prophets. I wouldn’t swear to my recollection of the source but the point is correct. Artists are both a reflector of cultural values and a compass of cultural direction. After a fashion; artists show us the future.

I can think of two examples.

Sharon Stone’s movie, Basic Instinct: In 1992 Sharon sat in a police interrogation room, turned toward the camera crossing and uncrossing her legs, flashing everyone on the big screen. It was maybe 15 seconds of titillating video but in 1992 that was as close as anyone got to frontal nudity so everyone flocked to the cinema to check out the original Brazilian. Of course, the religious right had a collectivist fit because people were doing bad things with body parts and every Christian who knows anything about sin knows that all sin is equal before God except sex sins. Sex sins are particularly sinful . . . uh . . . er . . . something like that. Anyway, the counter criticism was that the religious right was a bunch of prudes bla bla bla.

Fast forward to 2006: Because Hollywood has run out of ideas, Sharon Stone did Basic Instinct 2 with more nudity of the 50 year old actress. No one went to see it. I mean, Sharon is my idol. I hope I look that good at 50 . . . well, ok so I’m already there, but I’m just saying.

Of course, the director rehashed and redoubled his 1992 criticism—the reason his movie was a flop was the fault of all those religious nuts. And the director was profoundly wrong. The first movie is the reason the second movie flopped. In 1992 Basic Instinct was almost considered soft core porn. By contrast; in 2006, TNT, AMC, USA, HBO, Starz, and a boat load of other networks show more skin every hour than Basic Instinct 1 and 2 combined. In 2006 KIDS were getting more nudity in sex education class. And here is the truth: Basic Instinct 1 set the new standard on sexual “edginess” and so today, nudity on pretty much any media outlet is fair game. It wasn’t because America was too prudish that caused the 2006 failure. It was because America is unrestrained: a movie with a naked 50 year old woman? Yawn . . .

The second example is the Mapplethorpe “art” display from roughly 25 years ago. Beyond the correct outrage over taxpayer dollars being used to subsidize the “arts” more outrage boiled to the surface over the Mapplethorpe content: a bottle of urine filled with a crucifix, men with bullwhips sticking out of their back side, and other sundry vulgarities. Of course the New York liberal wine and cheese crowd lauded the display as visionary, and after a fashion they were paraphrasing the Francis Schaeffer quote: it was a vision . . . of what was to come.

Now, media, in almost all forms, is a cesspool of vulgarity. Not that my sensibilities are delicate. As I have admitted in other places, I can drop the F bomb with the best of them and am perfectly comfortable in company cracking very politically incorrect jokes. But I am also very aware that cultural America has trended to an endless embrace of the twisted, the warped, and the reprobate. Television and movies are little more than circus freak shows. American heroes are at best comic book characters, and at worst people offered up to us as heroes are heroic because they are twisted; e. g., Bruce Jenner.

And here is the point: In each example the artist tried to capture/reflect the “ideal” in cultural values thus setting the compass to cultural direction.

So now we get to Kathy Griffin and the Donald Trump severed head.

Comedians are a special kind of artist; they hold a unique place in culture because they talk about the things that everyone “knows” we are not supposed to talk about. Comedy is a cultural release valve which also implies it is an indicator of cultural pressure.

I won’t dig too deep into the psychology of comedians except to notice the following: when Ms. Griffin was doing her bit, it is very apparent she saw nothing abnormal, nothing strange, nothing repulsive in her comedy. She was performing for an audience that she absolutely assumed would see the “humor.” She fully believed she was capturing/reflecting a cultural ideal (you can’t crack a joke unless the audience has a reference to the punch line). Notice that when called to account her first reaction was to tweet defiance. And then she was obviously bewildered, unable to understand the fuss; it was just “edgy” comedy. 24 hours into the back lash, after sponsors stopped paying money and comedy gigs were canceled, America was treated to her tearful plea for forgiveness as if that was supposed to end the dealeo.

By the way, the Hollywood left’s sobbing beggary for forgiveness is yet one more cultural example of the rot created by historic Christian doctrine. Heinous people do evil things and everyone else has to write a moral blank check. Big fat crocodile tears obligate everyone to bequeath absolution. But for the “grace of God” we would all be holding up bloody presidential heads in the name of art, right?

Of course, Kathy played everyone for suckers because hours later she was in front of the mic alternately belligerent that it was her divine right to perform “edgy” comedy and weeping that Donald Trump “broke her”; she is nothing but a victim of a rich white man’s conspiracy to destroy her career.

My prediction: In three months Hollywood will create a severed head Oscar and turn Kathy Griffin into a hero. Michael Moore will make a movie about the Trump conspiracy to plant a bloody severed head in Kathy’s hand and Al Franken will demand a Senatorial investigation into Russian collusion—those damned Russians twisted the American public mind to be against yet one more innocent woman!

And you think I’m being absurd to make a point?
Snort!

So dear reader Pop Quiz:

Ready? This is a tough one.

Who else cuts off people’s heads?

Why does this group of people use this kind of atrocity?

Give up?

The answer: Islamic Jihadists cut off heads as a political statement of social dictatorial dominance.

Cutting off a head and holding them high for everyone to see, has always been, at the root, a political statement.

Dead is dead, right?

Shoot someone in the chest with a bullet, stab them with a spear, blow them apart with a bomb, and drown them in water. The end is the same: dead is dead. Maybe some methods are fast and maybe some are slow, but . . . dead is dead.

From John the Baptist, to Marie Antoinette, to Robespierre and the guillotine, to ISIS, to the Queen of Hearts, “Off with his head” has always meant social dictatorial dominance.

And this is exactly the point of Kathy Griffin’s “edgy” comedy.

Beheading the President of the United States is by proxy is an overt political statement of social dictatorial dominance. As an “artist” Kathy Griffin was happy to reflect the political left’s cultural values. Make no mistake: what Kathy Griffin did is a snapshot of the political leftist endgame. The beheading of Donald Trump is a metaphor for the rage the political left feels for the American electorate. The only reason the political left hasn’t built the French Revolution guillotine in Time Square, and frog marched POTUS and everyone who voted for him to the platform is because the political left knows we still have our guns.

Kathy Griffin fully believes she captured/reflected a cultural ideal.

Kathy Griffin’s “edgy comedy” is a compass pointing to the direction of American politics.

Kathy Griffin is a little prophet, because after a fashion, she is showing us the future.

John Immel