Paul's Passing Thoughts

The Hijacking of Charlie Kirk

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on September 22, 2025

The church is a hijacker. It began by hijacking the ekklesia, which was never an institution and never functioned as one, and it was never called, “church.”  In fact, “church” is not even a biblical word. People will protest this assertion by citing many versus from English translations where “church” appears. I kid you not.

Then, during the American Revolution, the church hijacked the Enlightenment movement, which was the driving force behind the American Revolution, and renamed it “The Great Awakening.” Today, we hear incessantly that America was “founded on Christian principles.” Hold on to that thought for a moment because I want to revisit it later; the idea that principles are either good or evil, and not common.

How did it happen? The hijacking of Charlie Kirk is almost a perfect prototype. Kirk’s movement, Turning Point USA, was primarily a commonsense conservatism movement, while Kirk was also a professing Christian. Actually, Kirk, an independent thinker, was more of a seeker who hadn’t landed totally on any particular orthodoxy, though his wife is Catholic.

However, the bulk of the movement was spawned by conservatism, not religion. In light of Kirk’s assassination, religion has seized the opportunity to hijack the movement. The full court press hijacking officially took place during the memorial service on Sunday complete with contemporary “praise and worship” music and several atonement-based gospels by pastors and political figures.

Church is by definition an institution, and is driven by an atonement gospel rather than a new birth gospel. EVERY sermon during the memorial was an atonement gospel. In other words, sins are only “covered,” and not ended. Churches need reoccurring monthly revenue, and obviously, an ending of sin doesn’t fit an RMR business model. Since Kirk’s death, thousands have been encouraged to “join a church.” I haven’t checked, but I am fairly confident that church attendance has skyrocketed in recent days.

So, be sure of this: instead of Turning Point USA being a conservative movement that includes Churchians, it is now a church movement that includes conservatives. And more and more, the Trump administration is appearing the same way. The danger here is this: people who have no need for church or religion, share common principles according to God-given conscience, and their exclusion is at least inferred if not clearly stated by in-your-face religion.  If you offend them enough by constantly calling them sinners, they invariably end up on the other side to make a statement, or just disengage from the arena of ideas all together since they are neither “good” or “evil.” Is the left totally whacko because you have to be one or the other?

By the way, Trump’s huge popularity is due to his focus on common, practical ideas. He is a man of the forgotten and left behind people, but now we have his cabinet members preaching the church gospel at Kirk’s memorial. Trust me on this: if church can also hijack the Trump administration, they will.

Let me be clear: Senator Tim Kaine is an insufferable dumbass, but yet, we should note something that he stated recently; “The notion that rights don’t come from laws and don’t come from the government but come from the Creator — that’s what the Iranian government believes. It’s a theocratic regime that bases its rule on Sharia law and targets Sunnis, Bahá’ís, Jews, Christians and other religious minorities, and they do it because they believe that they understand what natural rights are from their Creator. So, the statement that our rights do not come from our laws or our governments is extremely troubling. I think the motto over the Supreme Court is ‘equal justice under law,’ — the oath that you and I take pledged to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, not arbitrarily defined natural rights.”

If you want to know what Kaine is talking about, you need to look no further than America’s history when the Puritans ruled over the colonies. That would be the same Puritans lauded by the American church. In no church anywhere are they not lifted up as heroes of the faith. Yet, historically, they were superstitious tyrants that Britian wouldn’t even suffer.

Then, we have Ted Cruze’s response to Kaine: “I just walked into the hearing as he was saying that, and I almost fell out of my chair, because that ‘radical and dangerous notion’ — in his words — is literally the founding principle upon which the United States of America was created,” He then went on to quote the Declaration of Independence, citing, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, and that they are endowed by their Creator’ — not by government, not by the Democratic National Committee, but by God-‘with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.’”

Do you see the twist? Do you see the slight of hand? The source is not anyone’s interpretation of what God intended, which is inevitable whether a Puritan or an Ayatollah, the source, according to the Declaration of Independence, is what is “SELF-EVIDENT.” Get it? Common sense. What evidently works in real life, according to God-given conscience, and common knowledge hammered out in the arena of ideas. These are Enlightenment ideas, not religious ideas. And frankly, this was the hallmark of Kirk’s organization. Was.

With all this being said, what is going on is interesting. What is going is massive functional ecumenicalism. Oh yes, it will be denied intellectually, but functionally, it’s massive ecumenicalism. Was not the Arizona memorial an unprecedented massive lovefest? Yes it was, and everything but the kitchen sink was in there hugging and kissing. Do I think those of the New Calvinist movement will have to fall in line or lose cultural relevance? Yes, absolutely.

The church is a hijacker, and perhaps the result, particularly their latest conquest, is a  segue to the latter-day ecumenical movement we have been watching for.

paul

Tagged with: , , , ,

It’s About Trust, Not Free Speech

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on September 16, 2025

For the Xenia, Ohio School Board, It Should be a Matter of Trust, Not Free Speech

RE: Two educators placed on administrative leave pending investigation.

    Public servants like doctors, nurses, police officers, teachers, and judges, only qualify as such if they can be trusted. What does that mean? It means they can be trusted to apply their skills to the best of their abilities, and equally. For a judge, it’s equal application of the law. Obviously, anyone who cannot be trusted with evidence is not, and should not be, a policeman. When we go to see a healthcare professional for medical treatment, we certainly hope they don’t think we are suffering because of “karma.”  And lastly, teachers should respect the right of a child to have equal and quality education. Doctors, nurses, police officers, teachers, and judges, who cannot be trusted, are pseudo professionals.

    Hence, public statements by those who hold professional credentials are not merely a free speech issue; a public statement may self-expose someone as a pseudo professional. For example, if a doctor or a nurse thinks people of a certain political bent deserve to die, they can’t be trusted by everyone. That’s the definition of a public servant: they can be trusted by everyone. Legally, we say that “justice is blind,” because Lady Justice is blindfolded while holding a set of scales. This is also true for all public servants; they treat everyone the same because they can’t see anyone that would cause them to misapply their profession because of bias.

    But what about the ability to separate opinions from the execution of a profession? That depends on the statement. If the statement is a mere opinion, people are likely to believe the opinion can be separated from professionalism. However, if the statement includes malice, and even genocidal thoughts, that is a different matter and is contraindicated for public service. There is a difference between disagreeing with a dead person and celebrating their death because of the opinion.

    I will conclude by applying the nursing profession as an illustration. Aside from the fact that my wife was put in grave danger by two nurses at a hospital because they incorrectly assumed she is anti-vax, I will tell you as a practicing nurse that it is ill-advised to go anywhere for medical treatment while wearing political apparel. How did we get here? Why do so many nurses allow their opinions to distort nurse judgement based on what some people “deserve” or don’t deserve? The answer follows: to a significant degree, growing up, they were taught by so-called professionals that think their opinions should be the final word, even upon pain of death.  

    Nobody has ever lost their job for being anti-2nd Amendment. And no auto mechanic is going to lose their job because they stated publicly that Charlie Kirk deserved to die, because they work on cars, not people. Judges, policemen, medical professionals, and teachers work on people, and like all Americans, they are free to publicly expose the fact that they are unqualified to do so. Again, that is also free speech, but public servants must have everyone’s trust. That is the very definition of a public servant.

Paul M. Dohse,

ADN, LPN 

Luther’s View on Justice

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on September 6, 2025

Do Born Again Christians Still Need Salvation?

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on August 27, 2025

How Can Protestantism Be So Wrong?

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on August 12, 2025