Jews 12:07 pm
Jesuit Coadjutor “Brother Nathanael” has made another video, fingering the Jews as the supreme influence behind Zionism in America.
If that is the case I have a question: If indeed the Jews are behind Zionism and the present war-push toward Syria, why did Israel’s President Shimon Peres agree to hand over to the Vatican the sovereignty of the holy sites of Jerusalem?
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/150757#.UcBKYPm1F2M
Why?
Sabbath 6:32 am
Civil Disobedience and Gun Rights 10:26 pm
Jesuits 4:10 pm
WW3 8:44 am
Economics 7:48 am
I commented tonight at Traditionalist Youth Network
http://www.tradyouth.org/2013/06/economic-suicide/
The South can by law, never benefit from Capitalism and the Industrial Revolution because of the creation of the legal corporate person by Roscoe Conkling and the immunities that derived from that legislation pursuant to
Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Clara_County_v._Southern_Pacific_Railroad
and
Pembina Consolidated Silver Mining Co. v. Pennsylvania – 125 U.S. 181
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/125/181/case.html
See also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood
The issue is the Yankees have patents on all the major machinery of the Industrial Revolution and are also protected under the law as a person in their life, liberty, property, as well as the Privileges and Immunities under the U.S. Constitution. The South continues to get poorer because she is paying tribute to the Northern Corporations. We must go back to neither Capitalism nor to Communism nor to the Roman Feudalism for that is what we are under now. We must go back to Agrarianism, plowing our fields and providing for ourselves with God’s means of production: Horse, OX, Goat, Cow, Chicken, etc. Yankees have no patents on those machines. They need no Yankee Corporate oil, gas, or spark plugs but are fed from products we grow on our own lands. That is the only way we get free. We must also boycott all Northern Corporations and chains in our states and get their grid out asap. We do not need bloodshed to get this done. We just need to change our thinking and stop giving our money to the Yankees. Get a wood stove for the house, and get solar panels for electricity. Let’s bankrupt these sob’s.
Theology Proper and Triadology 12:15 pm
Triunists often point to 1 Tim 3:16 as the clincher in a Theology Proper debate. Their argument is founded on a weak foundation.
First, the θεός reading is unique content from deprecated manuscripts in the Majority text family.
Even the Romanist version does not contain this reading:
http://www.newadvent.org/bible/1ti003.htm
Erasmus even rejected it as spurious:
Erasmus, the Growth of a Mind by James D. Tracy Page 161.
Daniel B. Wallace on the θεός reading in 1 Tim 3:16:
“The textual variant θεός in the place of ὅς has been adamantly defended by some scholars, particularly those of the ‘majority text’ school. Not only is such a reading poorly attested [Footnote: …Not one firsthand of any Greek witnesses prior to the th century read θεός…-DS] but the syntactical argument that ‘mystery’ being a neuter noun, cannot be followed by the masculine pronoun (ὅς) is entirely without weight. As attractive theologically as the reading θεός may be, it is spurious. To reject it is not to deny the deity of Christ, of course; it is just to deny any explicit reference in this text.”
Page 341-342
Vincent’s Word Studies
“God ( Θεος )
But the correct reading is ος who. The antecedent of this relative is not mystery, as if Christ were styled “the mystery,” but the relative refers to Christ as an antecedent; and the abruptness of its introduction may be explained by the fact that it and the words which follow were probably taken from an ancient credal hymn. In the earlier Christian ages it was not unusual to employ verse or rhythm for theological teaching or statement. The heretics propounded their peculiar doctrines in psalms. Clement of Alexandria wrote a hymn in honor of Christ for the use of catechumens, and Arius embodied his heresy in his Thalia which was sung in the streets and taverns of Alexandria. The Muratorian Canon was probably composed in verse. In the last quarter of the fourth century, there are two metrical lists of Scripture by Amphilochius and Gregory Nazianzen.”
Racialism and Theology Proper and Triadology 5:48 am
I figured from my last reply that we were not going to be allowed to have this conversation. I tell you, from my debates on the Trinity, I am fully assured that Calvinism’s doctrine of Total Depravity is very true. Human nature hates the truth.
Anti-White Racism and Racialism and Theology Proper and Triadology 4:57 am
Shotgun,
“1. You’re doing Reformed systematics a major disservice by such a vulgar generalization of our understanding of trinitarianism.”
>>>I need more than your opinion to be convinced that I have made a misrepresentation. I have spent many years making sure I don’t do that.
http://drakeshelton.com/2012/12/20/the-reformed-apostasy-from-the-nicene-creed-in-john-murray/
“There are many positions in Reformed theology on these doctrines; many subtle shades of nuance (for us Presuppositionalists, we immediately think of Gordon Clark’s hell-raising over Van Til’s trinitarianism – and that’s only a small example in a sea of squabbling).”
>>>I followed that Clark-Van Til debate closely and Clark’s complaints led me to a position that rejects both Van Til’s errors and Clark’s failure to escape those same errors.
“So, when you use language like *the* “doctrine of the Trinity”, it comes across as naive (at best). At worst, you’re critiquing a vile caricature.”
>>>I thought I made very clear just in the above comment:
“One of the points of my post was to show that there is no monolithic definition of “The Trinity”. There are different understandings of it of which the Triune version is the worst, being a cover job for Sabellianism.”
You are not even reading what is before you.
“2. Since a Reformed doctrine of the Trinity is fairly complex, how might a Reformed fella respond to your
accusations? Well, traditionally, Reformed dogmaticians draw a distinction between the “ontological” Trinity (God’s actual nature) and the “economic” trinity.”>>>Oh if you only knew what a mistake that just was. I believe that distinction which is why, if we are allowed to continue this conversation at any length you will quickly abandon it. Filioque theology is at the heart of your position and it fundamentally denies that distinction. The whole basis of Filioque is that the sending of the Spirit from the Son in the economia is ontologically on the same level as the procession of the Spirit from the Father eternally. You run into the same problem with eternal generation that the Reformed Churches have been denying for a while now.
“And given a Reformed view of the “economic” trinity (where the Son is subservient to the Father, and the Spirit proceeded from both … wink, wink, nod, nod), I don’t see how this doctrine fundamentally supports egalitarianism at all.”
>>>Is the subordination of role something necessary or arbitrary? Is it ontologically grounded or is it a mere convention?
“3. I once attended a very small Scottish Covenanting Presbyterian church near D.C. They had a missionary over. This man had traveled the Bulgarian wilds for years and had many stories to tell. But, he highlighted the failure of the Eastern rite catholic churches to fend off the ideals of Marxism. An interesting observation given your brief statement of the trinity here.”
>>>Are you suggesting that my criticism may be correct?
“You’re worried about egalitarianism; you might better be worried about tyranny.”
>>> Doesn’t one flow out of the other? Isa 3:12.
“4. I’m no egalitarian, but I don’t see how we can fiddle with the doctrine of the Trinity and maintain a rationally coherent metaphysical scheme.”
>>>I am not suggesting that we deny that there are three divine persons, homoousios. I am suggesting that homoousios is not a numeric qualification
http://drakeshelton.com/2012/08/29/homoouiosgeneric-or-numeric/
http://drakeshelton.com/2012/09/06/jnd-kelly-on-homoouios-generic-or-numeric/
http://drakeshelton.com/2013/01/29/documentation-for-the-assertion-that-the-meaning-of-the-term-homoousios-was-misunderstood-and-changed-in-the-west/
http://drakeshelton.com/2013/01/30/the-meaning-of-homoousios-in-basil-the-great-monoousios-rejected/
and that the phrase, “the one God” does not refer to divine nature but to the personal property of the Father that he is auto-theos. The only time the NT uses the word “Theos” and attaches a numeric value to it, it is referring to the Father; never to the son or spirit. And the fact remains, the One God is never said to be a divine nature. The Scripture does describe ******the Father****** as the one person who is, “tou monou Theos” (John 5:44 “How can you believe, when you receive [fn]glory from one another and you do not seek the [fn]glory that is from the one and only God?), “ton monon alethinon theon” (John 17:3 “This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.) and “eis theos” (1Cor 8:6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him; Eph 4:6 one God and Father of all ).
“If you disagree, as a good Van Tillian I would have to deconstruct your view via transcendental argumentation – the view of the Trinity you presented would lead to logical difficulties and perhaps, if true, would render this conversation impossible (as you’d be stuck in the ego-centric predicament).”>>>You may bite off more than you could chew. Van Til gloried in the logical paradoxes of the Trinity.
“5. The Reformed doctrine of the Trinity (to speak generally) may be right or wrong, quite a part from Drake’s feelings towards egalitarianism. In other words: if it turns out that Scripture teaches an egalitarian God head, then we, as Christians, are obligated to accept, submit, and obey.”
>>>Then what you would be admitting to is nothing short of Communism because what you also get in an egalitarian Godhead is a communion of property.
“So, Drake, the case you’ve offered here is irrelevant.”
>>>Being an anti-egalitarian website, I can find no arguments with more relevance.
“Due to the authoritative nature of Scripture, your attempted “reductio” only works if you prove that what’s being taught is wrong.”
>>>
http://drakeshelton.com/drakes-triadology-stuff/
Bon Appetit
“And finally, 6 – do we really have to use such a sad occasion (the closing of S/W/B) to have a slug fest?”
>>>Might as well go out with a bang!
Uncategorized Libertarianism, Libertarianism Exposed 7:02 am
Sources:
That Thiel funded Paul:
Peter Thiel’s official membership in Bilderberg:
-1-.jpg)
