Book Sale

Thursday 13 June 2024

The Nation Is Sacred

 



"We see from history that the nation-state is the highest form of the idea of security. For Chinese people, the nation-state even equates to the great concept of all-under-heaven [tianxia, classical name for China].

Col. Liang and Col. Xiangsui, Unrestricted Warfare.

As I've argued for many years, nationalism is God's gift to humanity, to protect it from barbarism and imperialism. That is, to protect a people from falling back into warring and competing small tribes, or being subsumed by some version of Babylon; an empire that crushes all national identity.

Of course, the nation-state and the nation are not synonymous. The nation-state exists to serve the nation and can take various different forms over time, from monarchy, to oligarchy, to democracy. But the thrust of the statement above is pointing to that. The nation-state exists to keep the nation secure, to protect it from threats.  

Hence why the nation and nationalism are under such constant attack in our modern world. Our world is currently dominated by an ideology that wants to force all nations to be subsumed to a transnational authority; an empire on a global scale. This is essentially what globalism is and what it is seeking to work towards. A world where all nations have been overcome and all nation-states disbanded, so that a tiny, wicked elite can rule all.

Like all of God's gifts the nation is hated by the god of this age. Also, like all of God's gifts even many of his own people don't respect this gift for what it is: a means of limiting evil. Freedom and security flourish in godly boundaries. Everything God has created for man was designed to flourish in boundaries, whether money, sex, power, speech, nations or more. Without boundaries all of these things go haywire and pile harm on top of harm. The devil wants to break every possible boundary, he's transgressive in his being, and so are all his ideologies in this world. His deceptions even manage to persuade many amongst God's flock that to reject these good boundaries is a good thing to do. It is not.

 

Tuesday 11 June 2024

Boomers Could Do More…

 




So, they did this survey with boomers and this is what they found,

“Most boomers won’t give up retirement lifestyle to help children, Australian survey finds

Four in five think their kids have it harder than they did at same age, but seven in 10 unlikely to compromise retired life to help

Baby boomers can see younger Australians are struggling financially and want to help where they can, but they are not willing to do so at the expense of their retirement lifestyle, new research shows.

Four in five Australians over 65 think their children are facing harder times than they experienced at the same age and a corresponding three in four believe passing on their wealth is important, according to new research by the banking and superannuation company AMP.

But despite wanting to help, seven in 10 surveyed said they were unlikely to compromise their retirement lifestyle to do so.”[1]

I think the most significant thing this survey revealed is that most boomers are actually aware that their children are worse off than they were at the same age. The costs bearing down on a millennial family now in their 30’s to 40’s is far and above what it was for the same type of family at that age in the boomer generation.

Boomers had it so much better that there are countless older people out there who have gotten divorced, and both sides of the divorce are still doing well financially compared to many people in the younger generations who haven't. Mistakes like this just punish harder now, than they once did. You can look up these kinds of figures yourself. But this is revealing, not that they don’t want to give up their lifestyle, that we younger generations have always understood, but that they know how much better they have it and are not willing to cost themselves for the sake of their offspring. This is a bit more surprising. There are exceptions of course, there always will be. But these statistics show that the exceptions are the minority, as we also knew.

I don’t think we can change the older generations. I have actually counselled many people in my generation when asked about trying to do so, that this is a foolish, soul crushing, tiresome quest, that just ends in increased heartbreak. So what we should do is look forward. There is no doubt that in virtually ever important metric by the time the boomers have retired, they will have handed a nation to their offspring with a worse economy, a worse, culture, less wealth, less ability to rise through the class ranks of society, and a less cohesive society because of the large immigration that is being relied upon to pay for the welfare and medical debt that their generation benefits from the most. So, it is our responsibility to look forward to work hard to hand our children a better society.

Here are some principles:

1)     How can you use your wealth to benefit your children? Think not about your wealth as your means to enhance your lifestyle. Think of it as your tool to bless your children and their children. Plan accordingly.

2)     Homeschool, or if for some reason you are not able to homeschool, invest in your family relationships to the degree you wish your parents had done for you. I suggest homeschooling because this is a sure-fire way to create a deep bond in a family. I have observed this again and again. But it is not the only way to ensure this, I know families who have used conventional schooling and have still been able to do the same. The deeper principle is prioritize building bonds within your family above all else. This will create a culture in your home where you are all geared to looking after each other. Boomers were conditioned by the media of their generation to pursue self-fulfilment, some broke out of this, most, as seen by the figures, did not. A culture of family dependence will help shield you from the same mistakes.

3)     Don’t expend your energy trying to change your parents if they are always holidaying overseas, or in their caravans, or otherwise. Taking holidays is not wrong of course, but we all know there are those who go above and beyond on this. Don’t expend your energy on this, rather pray about it, give it to God, and then be fully prepared to have to start building again in your generation. A large percentage of the wealth of boomers will end up in the hands of caravan makers, luxury age care resort owners, and cruise ship companies. Consider investing in one of these or a similar industry and direct it towards building wealth for your kids and their kids. If you spend time trying to change your parents you will be disappointed. For Christians, God can do this, I have seen it, I really have. But outside of this use your energy to look forward, not feeling bitter about looking at what could have been.

4)     Be aware of the psyops. Boomers were taken for all they were by the biggest psychological operations in history. They all watched the same shows and listened to the same handful of radio channels. But they are still responsible for believing the lies they were told. We should learn from this and be aware of the lies the current media is telling and teach our children to see through them. If we do we will be preparing them in a way that we were never prepared. We won’t get it perfect either, but we can turn the tide a little from generation to generation.

More could be said, but we younger generations simply have to recognize that the older generations are what they are. The stats show that the experiences of many Gen-x and Millennials are felt society wide. Which should encourage us to recognize that there are many other younger families who will also want to seek to turn this tide. We can help each other in this. That's a bonus. 

List of References

Monday 10 June 2024

Why China and others are Winning

 


The West has been dominant in the world for so long that many westerners can’t really comprehend that the dominance of the West is coming to an end in our day. Another problem that stems from this is that many westerns can’t see that the way that the West thinks and acts is no longer the superior course of action in many arenas, our intellectual elites are behind the curve ball, you could say. The reason that China is overcoming the United States and its allies is not just because they make everything, well almost everything, but because they think about this world in far superior way, and this includes how they think about war.

Here is an example of why China, and its allies, are winning,

“The same factors are all affecting the use of the means of war. It is becoming obsolete to automatically consider military action the dominant means and the other means supporting means in war. Perhaps, in the not too distant future, the military means will be only one of all the available means in wars such as one of fighting terrorist organizations of the bin Laden category. A more effective means that can strike at bin Laden in a destructive way is perhaps not the cruise missile, but a financial suffocation war carried out on the Internet…

…As the arena of war has expanded, encompassing the political, economic, diplomatic, cultural, and psychological spheres, in addition to the land, sea, air, space, and electronic spheres, the interactions among all factors have made it difficult for the military sphere to serve as the automatic dominant sphere in every war. War will be conducted in nonwar spheres. This notion sounds strange and is difficult to accept, but more and more signs indicate that this is the trend.”[1]

This was written by two Chinese Liberation Army Colonels in 1999 and it is immediately clear from these two short paragraphs why China is beating the US and its allies. For one, consider how prescient this observation is. These two Colonels are reflecting on why America was so dominant in the first Gulf war in the early 1990’s, and why that form of warfare had reached a peak in their day. They were predicting that the complete dominance of the United States in the military sphere would lead to a situation where other countries would be forced to adapt and fight very differently, but also that many non-state actors like bin Laden would become a force to be reckoned with in the near future because these nonstate actors would be able to exploit weaknesses in the United States military doctrine and strategy. They were predicting war would evolve in a way the US was not equipped to deal with. Note, again, this was written in 1999, two years before the Trade Towers came down and bin Laden became a household name.

The argument of these two Colonels is that rather than thinking of war in terms of the best military equipment wins, nations should think in terms of anything at hand in our world, like culture, or economics, or computer technology, can be weapons that can be brought to bear and used to achieve the kinds of victories that were once attained with jets, missiles, tanks and warships. But more than that, they are predicting that any state which thinks first in terms of military force being the dominant means of achieving victory will be left behind. In other words, they had identified one of the key weaknesses of the United States, and to a lesser degree the allies of the US; their outdated understanding of war. 

When America was attacked in 2001 by non-state forces, what was their immediate response: Who can we go to war with? It does not matter who you think was ultimately behind or working with bin Laden, they understood the psychology of the Americans and how they can be provoked into war. The entire American society, culture, media and political establishment is geared towards treating combatting enemies as something which the military exists to do, and therefore when they are provoked in any way, they immediately look at how they can wield their armed forces to combat that enemy, or in the case of Iraq, they used it as an excuse to launch a war that they wanted anyway. As the authors note earlier in their book, the US is like a big giant, that is easy to provoke but clumsy in its response.

The same is true for Israel. We are seeing this with the current war in Gaza. After being provoked, again it does not matter what is behind this attack, how did Israel respond: Where can we drop the bombs? Where can we point the tanks? Where can we send the troops? They think again, like their twin society in the US, about how they can bring their military to bear against the enemy on the battlefield. In a lot of ways the US and Israel are like national versions of the Hulk, who think in terms of “smash, smash, smash” whenever they are attacked, or provoked. Both nations can perform reasonably well against inferior forces on the battlefield, but if they are attacked by non-state forces in a cunning way, they both act like giants seeking to swat at gnats clumsily.

China, on the other hand, shows here why it is gaining so quickly on the United States and taking the place of world leadership. They have brilliant minds at work in their society, who are obviously influential, that recognize that the means of achieving victories over other nations are many, and immediately defaulting to wars and bombs is dinosaur thinking. To some degree American leadership grasps this, because they have used things like sanctions and trade wars to cripple nations that opposed them, this has been true from Iraq, to Libya, to North Korea and others. But the military industrial complex is so strong and powerful in the United States congress that still the US thinks first and foremost about how they can solve their problems with the best technological weapons. They may use sanctions to begin with, but they bring in the military as soon as they can. It's their go to response. And much of their economy is geared towards paying overs for the newest fancy weapon to achieve that job. 

This has been seen in Ukraine where we have seen various reports about how a certain United States, or allied, weapon system, will turn the tide of the war, and also how on every occasion these weapons systems have failed to achieve this lofty goal. In some ways this is reminiscent of how Adolf Hitler kept putting his hopes in some new technology which would give him the advantage over the allies in World War 2, when really he was destined to lose because he could not outproduce the United States, or Russia in men and military equipment. China obviously recognized this, because look at how much emphasis they have placed on turning their country into the industrial powerhouse of the world. China has won many wars without firing a shot, simply by placing so much of an emphasis on production. Any nation that can outproduce its potential enemies has the advantage in any conventional war, and in many other ways as well.

In fact, since 2001 the United States has continually gotten itself bogged down into expensive wars, or proxy wars, across the world. At the same time China has focused on building its industrial and technological base, using its Belt and Road initiative to sure up its alliances and access to resources across the world, and also to build itself a positive image, while America’s image is increasingly tarnished because of its aggressive stance towards a growing list of nations. China has out thought the United States in every way. Without having to fight it is beating the US in many arenas. 

When you consider that China has such great thinkers recognizing that there are many others means of winning a war, other than military force, it really makes you wonder how long they have been going about this. China is winning because it has out thought the West, the West is losing because it has gotten itself stuck in a rut of using old strategies of conquest and dominance that no longer work in our modern world. That does not mean that conventional military wars are a thing of the past, they are not, look at how Russia is winning now against the western supplied and backed Ukraine in a conventional state to state war. But consider how Russia spent a couple of decades shoring up its industrial base, a localized economy, military capacity, alliances with local nations, and more before it responded with military force in Ukraine. Has America being doing this? No, it has been off-shoring its industry, alienating allies, becoming increasingly aggressive both militarily and economically, all while allowing their culture to degrade. This is why China and its allies are getting ahead.

Those of us in the West who are used to being the dominant powers in the world, have a rude shock coming. Those with eyes to see can already observe how behind the eight-ball the West now is. 

List of References


[1] Col. Qiao Liang and Col. Wang Xiansui. 1991, Unrestricted Warfare, Echo Point Books and Media, LLC, pp. 143-144.

Saturday 8 June 2024

The Offense of the Prosperity Gospel

 




The prosperity gospel is an offensive teaching. What is offensive about it is not that it is wrong to be rich. It is not, riches can come to someone through hard work, entrepreneurship, inheritance, and just plain luck, and none of this is wrong, inherently. What is offensive about it is not the idea that God can make someone rich, of course he can. We read in Genesis 26 how God blessed Isaac and made him wealthy,

“12 And Isaac sowed in that land and reaped in the same year a hundredfold. The Lord blessed him, 13 and the man became rich, and gained more and more until he became very wealthy. 14 He had possessions of flocks and herds and many servants, so that the Philistines envied him… 24 And the Lord appeared to him the same night and said, “I am the God of Abraham your father. Fear not, for I am with you and will bless you and multiply your offspring for my servant Abraham's sake” (Gen. 26:12-14, 24).

God can and has made his servants wealthy in this world for a variety of reasons. So it is not the idea that God can make people rich that is offensive. 

What is offensive about the prosperity gospel is that some turn the love of money into a righteous thing, and worse, they turn godliness into a means of gain, and get the gospel backwards as a result. The gospel is not about the material things that you get in this world, it is about the riches of God's saving mercy to us as sinners. Saying you will be blessed with wealth if you live righteously is just another way of saying godliness is a means of gain, and it misses the point of the gospel. Paul rebuked this severely. In 1 Timothy he says,

“9 But those who desire to be rich fall into temptation, into a snare, into many senseless and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. 10 For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs.”

I have personally observed this happen in so many different ways. We probably all have, to one degree or another. But again and again I find Christians who believe that they have unlocked the key to pursuing wealth, in a way that will not lead them into snares. They are almost certainly wrong. 

Godliness is not a way of getting rich. It is not a means of gain. You can live a righteous and godly life in this world and end up with nothing to your name, or not very much to your name. Do you remember what Paul had towards the end of his life? He tells us in 2 Timothy,

“9 Do your best to come to me soon. 10 For Demas, in love with this present world, has deserted me and gone to Thessalonica. Crescens has gone to Galatia, Titus to Dalmatia. 11 Luke alone is with me. Get Mark and bring him with you, for he is very useful to me for ministry. 12 Tychicus I have sent to Ephesus. 13 When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, also the books, and above all the parchments. 14 Alexander the coppersmith did me great harm; the Lord will repay him according to his deeds. 15 Beware of him yourself, for he strongly opposed our message” (2 Tim. 4:9-15).

A cloak, some books and paper for writing on. To be fair these were not as cheap in Paul’s day as they are in ours, but it is still a paltry collection.

Can you honestly say, or do you honestly believe that God has more reasons to bless you than Paul? Have you been more righteous in your life than one of the chief Apostles? Of course not.

If you are rich Paul says we should use this generously to bless others. But if you are one of the majority of Christians that are not wealthy, this does not mean God has not blessed you, it does not necessarily mean something is wrong. It places you alongside many great Christian names in history, who did not gain much materially from this world, because the gospel is not about that. But they didn't lose out, at all, they will be vindicated and so will all who have this hope in Jesus. 

 

Friday 7 June 2024

How to Bless Abraham, Biblically.

 



How to bless Abraham biblically is a strange question to be addressing in 2024, considering the man has been dead by for close to 4000 years. If you want to understand how we can live a life of blessing, that is blessing others and being blessed, there are many passages in the New Testament which teach us how to live such a life. A prominent example would be the Beatitudes by Jesus in the Sermon of the Mount. However, many Christians today are persuaded by a relatively historically novel interpretation of Genesis 12:1-3 that to bless Abraham, and guarantee blessing, we should bless the modern secular and godless state of Israel. This includes supporting them in their grossly disproportionate war of destruction against the Palestinian people.

Genesis 12:1-3 says,

“12 Now the Lord said to Abram, “Go from your country and your kindred and your father's house to the land that I will show you. 2 And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. 3 I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.”

It is clear that this is a promise for Abraham himself. I think it is severely debateable whether or not we should even apply the promises of being blessed to those who support Abraham’s descendants from this passage. But if you read further in Genesis you will see that God reiterates that promise to Abraham’s immediate descendants (cf. Gen. 26:15 for instance) and this promise to bless those who bless God's people is carried through scripture. So, we will leave that discussion aside for now.

What I want to discuss is whether or not we are required to “Stand with Israel” in their war efforts because of Genesis 12:1-3? There are two ways I could argue against this position: 1) I could show you conclusively that the promise of blessing is carried on to the descendants of promises of God, that is those who believe, not the descendants of the flesh. But this argument seems to go over the head of most people, and indeed has since Paul’s day. Paul spent most of his ministry combatting Judaizers who believed the blessings and favour of God came through their being the flesh and blood ancestors of Abraham, or 2) we can grant that this verse means you need to bless Abraham’s descendants to be blessed, and show that this does not mean fund their war efforts, and encourage them in their conquest of the land. We can show this by showing how foreigners were blessed by blessing Isaac, Abraham’s son. In other words we can see how the Bible itself understood this concept of blessing.

We read in Genesis 26 this,

6 So Isaac settled in Gerar. 7 When the men of the place asked him about his wife, he said, “She is my sister,” for he feared to say, “My wife,” thinking, “lest the men of the place should kill me because of Rebekah,” because she was attractive in appearance. 8 When he had been there a long time, Abimelech king of the Philistines looked out of a window and saw Isaac laughing with Rebekah his wife. 9 So Abimelech called Isaac and said, “Behold, she is your wife. How then could you say, ‘She is my sister’?” Isaac said to him, “Because I thought, ‘Lest I die because of her.’” 10 Abimelech said, “What is this you have done to us? One of the people might easily have lain with your wife, and you would have brought guilt upon us.” 11 So Abimelech warned all the people, saying, “Whoever touches this man or his wife shall surely be put to death.”

12 And Isaac sowed in that land and reaped in the same year a hundredfold. The Lord blessed him, 13 and the man became rich, and gained more and more until he became very wealthy. 14 He had possessions of flocks and herds and many servants, so that the Philistines envied him. 15 (Now the Philistines had stopped and filled with earth all the wells that his father’s servants had dug in the days of Abraham his father. (Gen. 26:6-15)

We should observe here that Abimelech blessed Isaac by doing something very simple: he left him and his wife alone. He chose not to steal this man’s beautiful wife. In fact, he seemed indignant at the suggestion that he would allow himself, or any of his men, to take Isaac’s wife. But he does something else, he also asks Isaac to leave him alone. We read from verse 16,

“16 And Abimelech said to Isaac, “Go away from us, for you are much mightier than we.” 17 So Isaac departed from there and encamped in the Valley of Gerar and settled there. 18 And Isaac dug again the wells of water that had been dug in the days of Abraham his father, which the Philistines had stopped after the death of Abraham. And he gave them the names that his father had given them. 19 But when Isaac’s servants dug in the valley and found there a well of spring water, 20 the herdsmen of Gerar quarreled with Isaac’s herdsmen, saying, “The water is ours.” So he called the name of the well Esek, because they contended with him. 21 Then they dug another well, and they quarreled over that also, so he called its name Sitnah. 22 And he moved from there and dug another well, and they did not quarrel over it. So he called its name Rehoboth, saying, “For now the Lord has made room for us, and we shall be fruitful in the land.”

23 From there he went up to Beersheba. 24 And the Lord appeared to him the same night and said, “I am the God of Abraham your father. Fear not, for I am with you and will bless you and multiply your offspring for my servant Abraham’s sake.” 25 So he built an altar there and called upon the name of the Lord and pitched his tent there. And there Isaac’s servants dug a well.

26 When Abimelech went to him from Gerar with Ahuzzath his adviser and Phicol the commander of his army, 27 Isaac said to them, “Why have you come to me, seeing that you hate me and have sent me away from you?” 28 They said, “We see plainly that the Lord has been with you. So we said, let there be a sworn pact between us, between you and us, and let us make a covenant with you, 29 that you will do us no harm, just as we have not touched you and have done to you nothing but good and have sent you away in peace. You are now the blessed of the Lord.” 30 So he made them a feast, and they ate and drank. 31 In the morning they rose early and exchanged oaths. And Isaac sent them on their way, and they departed from him in peace. 32 That same day Isaac’s servants came and told him about the well that they had dug and said to him, “We have found water.” 33 He called it Shibah; therefore the name of the city is Beersheba to this day” (Gen. 26:16-33).

Abimelech here has clearly observed that the hand of God is on Isaac to bless him and prosper him in all he does. So, does Abimelech conclude from this that he needs to make himself subservient to Isaac, place himself under Isaac, give large amounts of his tax money to Isaac, and use his armed forces to fight for Isaac? No, in fact he comes to a completely different solution he says, “16 And Abimelech said to Isaac, “Go away from us, for you are much mightier than we.” He decides to send off Isaac in peace so that they can live separately and not interfere with each other.

Abimelech even makes a covenant with Isaac and look what it says,

“28 They said, “We see plainly that the Lord has been with you. So we said, let there be a sworn pact between us, between you and us, and let us make a covenant with you, 29 that you will do us no harm, just as we have not touched you and have done to you nothing but good and have sent you away in peace. You are now the blessed of the Lord.” 30 So he made them a feast, and they ate and drank. 31 In the morning they rose early and exchanged oaths. And Isaac sent them on their way, and they departed from him in peace.”

“…We have not touched you and have done to you nothing but good and have sent you away in peace…” What is the nothing but good that they have done? They have not stolen their women, or their flocks, or sought to harm them, and they have left them in peace. This is blessing. You have no requirement to make your nation subservient to Abraham, Isaac or Jacob, to bless them, all you need to do is leave them alone, do nothing but good, and let them go in peace. 

The idea of how to bless the nation of Israel has become perverted and corrupted in today’s world. It has been used cynically by corrupt politicians and false teachers in the Church to teach Christians they have a responsibility to stand with Israel in their efforts to conquer the land. But Abimelech understood the blessing, and did not come close to anything like this conclusion. He simply wanted to leave Isaac along, and the passage clearly affirms this as a fulfilment of the blessing. 

You need to distinguish sharply between what the Bible says and then what people say that means. Genesis 12:1-3 is best seen fulfilled in Jesus, not a secular state in the land of Canaan. But even if you were to apply it to that land and state, there is still no moral requirement to support Israel in their wars. In fact, we would be required to do “nothing but good”, which would require us to not be involved in their wars, to speak honest about them, and hold them to honest account of how they are acting. As we would do with any other nation, or individual. 

Don’t let Christians push you around with a bad reading of Scripture to cajole you to support what you genuinely believe to be evil, because there are verses which seem to imply we should bless the descendants of Abraham. Even those who say they are just taking these verse literally, are not looking at how the Bible itself applies these verses in the very context in which they are given. Genesis 26:1-5 shows that God will bless those who bless Isaac, and the rest of the chapter shows how a king blessed Isaac by basically distancing himself from Isaac and his people, by leaving him alone. Nations are meant to be focused on their own affairs, not the affairs of other nations, and we see this theme being exemplified very early in the Scriptures.  

 

Thursday 6 June 2024

Anglophobia – Accusations of No culture.

 




Those who say we Anglos, that is descendants of the Anglo-Saxons, who make up the majority peoples of England, Canada, America, and NZ, have no culture are not just incorrect, but terribly so. The truth is that many of those who say that were just raised in a school system designed to help them forget who they are. I think this is quite deliberate, because our society has been pushed to self-hatred, or self-loathing, through excessive encouragement to guilt. But our culture has incredible significance for this world. A good example of this is the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. The Rev. James Ingram tells us,

“To the first question we answer, that the Saxon Chronicle contains the original and authentic testimony of contemporary writers to the most important transactions of our forefathers, both by sea and land, from their first arrival in this country to the year 1154…

…Philosophically considered, this ancient record is the second great phenomenon in the history of mankind. For, if we except the sacred annals of the Jews, contained in the several books of the Old Testament, there is no other work extant, ancient or modern, which exhibits at one view a regular and chronological panorama of a PEOPLE, described in rapid succession by different writers, through so many ages, in their own vernacular LANGUAGE.”[1]

This was written in the 19th Century. Note the historians point though; it is first the Bible, and second the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, that taught people the importance of documenting their history in their own language, and collectively fulfilling this work in multiple generations, from author to author, in a successive line. Not just at the hands of one writer, making notes of interest like Plutarch or Herodotus, but a generationally collective effort, which was in part designed to help establish a people's identity in real history and events.

The culture of England is so pervasive in our Western world, many of us have come to view it like the fish do the fish bowl, just something that's there. But it didn't get there by accident. The culture of the English was built over centuries, by dedicated Englishmen and women, who submitted unto the Lord Jesus Christ, and sought to make their nation a great people in this world. And you all have benefited from the generous spirit of the Anglos who share their cultural wealth. No one can claim that Anglo-Saxon culture is perfect, of course it is not. But not culture has advanced so much of the world in so many ways, in recent history, like the Anglo-Saxon culture.

I hope the Anglo-Saxons remember themselves before our civilisation is fully overcome by evil. Self-exalting pride is wrong, it is contemptible. Pride in your children and your forefathers, however, are both necessary requirements to create a surviving society. To lose one of these causes the loss of both, and no society can survive that loss for long. It will internally explode, or get overrun by a people who remember their past and who look towards how they'll continue their nations legacy into the future.

As one of the prophets said in the Scriptures, “5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and awesome day of the Lord comes. 6 And he will turn the hearts of fathers to their children and the hearts of children to their fathers, lest I come and strike the land with a decree of utter destruction" (Mal. 4:5-6).


If you would like to read about some of the ways that our Anglo-Saxon culture has come under attack, you can pick up a copy of the book: Anglophobia: The Unrecognized Hatred, from Lockepress. If you use the code REVMATT I will get a small percentage of the sale. Lockepress is run by a good friend of mine and I encourage you to check out some of the other books on the Lockpress page. We have to build our own platforms, and this is part of an effort to help with that. God bless.

List of References


[1] Rev. James Ingram, 1823, The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (p. 2). Neeland Media LLC. Kindle Edition.

Tuesday 4 June 2024

Foreign Legions

 


Australian Defence Force to recruit foreign nationals.[1]

The moment Rome started staffing its armies with German leaders and soldiers, it sealed its fate of one day being ruled by the Germans. When the Byzantine armies in eastern Rome started staffing their legions with the Isaurians and others, they guaranteed that they would be ruled by those Isaurians who wanted power, and other nations as well.

Australia acts like a mini-empire. An empire by definition is a state power that rules over many nations/nationalities. Every western nation has been increasingly doing this since World War 2. Every western leader has been seeking to build their own little empire, to rule like Nimrod over many peoples. 

The problem with multinational states is that it destroys the patriotism of the original nation that hosts that state, because they know that the government no longer cares as much about them, and it does the same to many of the other nations that come to be ruled by that state. This weakens the power of the state. But one way to perpetuate the dominance of the state is to use government power to sell citizenships for service, like this very policy proposed by the Australian government. This is dyscivilisational, there are no two ways about it. But destructive policies don't get the ire they once did, because for several decades our government has had a policy of just finding the people it needs to replace the citizens who won't do what the states wants or needs them to do. It just imports the supporters it needs or wants.

The army is an honourable profession ruled over by dishonourable politicians. Many Australians have seen the ways that our military have been used to attack countries that did not attack us, and therefore don't want to join. Many Australians do not support this, recruiting numbers prove that. Rather than working hard to build up nationalism and patriotism among the people by serving the needs of the people of this country, which will help to make the army more attractive, our government just wants to import what amounts to foreign mercenaries.

Historically armies staffed by foreigners, are far easier, and far more likely, to turn upon the citizens of a state. Because their loyalty is to the one who pays them, rather than the nation they are fighting for. This is a bad idea, and the exact sort of idea we should expect from our globalist minded leaders. They think like little Caesars, not like true lovers and servants of their nation.

Of course relying on foreign soldiers can also end up like this,

“While the fire was keeping the combatants apart, the Emperor tried to rally his troops and to prepare for a street-fight next day. But the army was cowed; many regiments melted away; and the Varangian Guard, the best corps in the garrison, chose this moment to demand that their arrears of pay should be liquidated; they would not return to the fight without their money! The twenty years of disorganization under the Angeli was now bearing its fruit, and deeply was the empire to rue the next day.

Alexius Ducas, in despair at being unable to make his men fight, left the city by night. He was soon followed by the last Greek officer who kept his head, the general Theodore Lascaris, who endeavoured to make one final attack on the Crusaders even after his master had departed. Next morning the Franks found themselves in full possession of the city, though they had been expecting to face a hard day of street-fighting before this end could be attained.”[2]

History shows this is a bad idea. Again our leaders think they are immune to the forces of history simply by their temporal place in the time line. Foolishness is reigning. 

List of References

Monday 3 June 2024

Pride is a Terrible Sin

 

Pride is a Terrible Sin


This might be a good time of year to remind people that pride is a terrible sin. A terrible, terrible sin, that God looks upon and seeks to humble or punish. 

Look at these passages:

Proverbs 8:13, “The fear of the Lord is hatred of evil. Pride and arrogance and the way of evil and perverted speech I hate.”

Proverbs 11:2, “When pride comes, then comes disgrace, but with the humble is wisdom.”

Proverbs 16:18, “Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.”

Proverbs 21:24, “Scoffer” is the name of the arrogant, haughty man who acts with arrogant pride.”

Proverbs 29:23, “One's pride will bring him low, but he who is lowly in spirit will obtain honor.”

This is just from one book of the Bible, there is much more in the scriptures about pride.

Wearing your pride or your sin like a badge is basically temping God to smite you. It is a terribly dangerous sin. Of course, God is patient, merciful and just, and he wants to give everyone as much time to repent as possible. The Apostle Peter tells us this,

“8 But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. 10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed” (2 Peter 3:8-10).

God is patient towards sinners, and praise God he is. But those who wear pride like a badge provoke the anger of our patient and merciful Lord. Turn from your sin and trust in Jesus. He is merciful and gracious to sinner, no matter the sin. But he will not forgive unrepentent pride.

 

Saturday 1 June 2024

Diversity, the Society Killer

 


Tawain produces over 60% of the worlds semiconductors, and over 90% of the world’s most advanced semiconductors.[1] Which means it is not exaggeration to say that the Western world would be crippled if it lost access to this vital source of technology. These are the chips that are in every computer device from laptops, to mobile phones, medical equipment, cars, and more. The chances are you are reading this on a device that was made with a computer chip that was developed in Taiwan.

This is a big part of the reason why the United States is seeking to retain dominance of the independent leaning island, and why it is willing to threaten China with a military response if China seeks to rush for full reunification of Taiwan with the mainland. China on the other hand, historically, has always considered disunity in its nation as the biggest threat to its peace and prosperity, which is the main motivation for it to want to reunify with the technologically advanced island. The Chinese people feel at threat when they are not united. Complete dominance over the world’s computer market would be a powerful side benefit of this reunification.

So, you might think, well there is a really simple solution to this, why doesn’t the United States just use its vast wealth, industrial capacity, technological know how and educated citizenship, to invest in making themselves a global leader in chip production again. Well, they are trying, but a pernicious force is undermining their efforts; diversity requirements.

We read in the Daily Mail, that these diversity requirements are so onerous that they are forcing companies which produce semiconductors to seek better conditions for their factories in other countries,

“Top microchip makers are postponing their expansion into the U.S. and setting up shop in Israel and Russia due to equity caveats that are required for them to receive grants from the U.S. government.

The Biden administration promised earlier this year that they would be handing out $39 billion in grants to encourage semiconductor manufacturing in the U.S.

Shortly after the announcement however, Intel announced they would be holding off on their Columbus factory, while Samsung also delayed their facility in Texas.

Despite the billions in subsidies, two experts believe the tech companies' decision to back out of building manufacturing facilities in the U.S. stems from the diversity, equity and inclusion policy.

In an opinion piece for The Hill, CEO of Strive Asset Management Matt Cole and head of research at the company, Chris Nicholson, say the subsidies are so 'loaded with DEI that it can't move.'

The pair say that Intel has now built manufacturing plants in Poland and Israel, meaning they would rather deal with threat of Hamas rockets and Russian aggression than the government's DEI regime…

…In their piece, Cole and Nicholson said that part of the CHIPS money calls for the creation of Chief Diversity Officers and helping minority groups.”[2]

The title of the article itself is pretty provocative, stating that Biden’s DEI requirements are worse than Hamas. Not in reality of course, but simply from the perspective that some of these companies would rather function in countries where incoming rocket fire is a real possibility, than wade through the diversity minefield that comes with the American government’s grants.

Just take a moment to consider how serious a problem this is. America cannot afford to lose access to Taiwan, without being fully chip independent itself. Therefore, if it wants to maintain its military dominance it has to become increasingly aggressive towards China in the South Pacific region, so it can maintain this access. This is why the United States has so militarized the region, it relies on this, and many other aspects of trade in Asia for its dominance in the world. But because of its own self-retarding diversity policies, it is not capable of creating its own re-energized semiconductor sector. So, what we are saying here is the diversity initiatives might be a major factor in a possible war with China. They at the very least make it more likely.

Another source explains why this is causing such an issue,

“The law contains 19 sections promoting DEI initiatives like prioritizing grants for “minority-serving institutions” and mandating plans to boost the participation of “underrepresented” groups in the semiconductor workforce.

Cole and Nicholson argue these DEI strings have significantly slowed the disbursement of CHIPS money as chipmakers must clear complicated bureaucratic hurdles. TSMC, for example, had to agree to rely more on local Arizona workers rather than skilled employees from Taiwan after backlash.

The authors contend national security is being endangered by subordinating semiconductor supremacy to DEI objectives. While the US pushes to diversify the chip workforce, strategic rivals like China are rapidly expanding military capabilities and advanced manufacturing.

Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo has defended prioritizing an inclusive semiconductor pipeline, recently launching training at historically Black colleges funded by CHIPS grants. However, critics insist DEI compromises are allowing America to fall behind adversaries laser-focused on chip dominance over ideological aims.”[3]

Rather than being able to just get on with the job of making these chips so that the US can be more independent in this field, companies are being forced to fill quotas, align with union demands for who can be employed and many other roadblocks to getting these factories running. Another expert noted that these companies would be built, but they would just be built slower, less efficient, and less capable of advanced chip production because of all of these diversity regulatory requirements.[4] It is incredible, isn’t it. Some of us have warned about the danger of this push for diversity for years, and now we are reaping the fruit of these terrible policies, including the possibility of war. 

It is not exaggeration that this could make war with China more possible. America is putting more and more pressure on Taiwan to sure up its independence from China, and China sees this as an act of aggression on their nation. While reunification for cultural reasons is China’s main motivation for incorporating Taiwan back into the fold, China also cannot afford to lose access to Taiwan’s technology base,

“China is, in fact, strategically preparing for this scenario more than people realize. First, a potential war scenario is a critical factor in the direction the country’s economy is taking. China is pursuing an increasingly massive indigenization drive for chips, technological supply chains and other critical goods, seeking to phase out the need for foreign imports. The US has long sought to use the semiconductor supply chain, and China’s dependence on Taiwan for a great deal of that chain, as a strategic chokepoint in order to cripple China’s economic and military development. Beijing has been investing aggressively to try and break out of this containment and wean itself off such dependency as fast as possible, all while simultaneously seeking to advance its own capabilities.

Secondly, China has long been preparing for the possibility that the US will try and impose a full-blown naval embargo on it, as unlikely as this may be. The Pentagon has been tasked with preparing a study on how such an embargo would be possible. The goal, of course, would be to cripple China militarily by depriving it of access to foreign fuel supplies, again attempting to use its lack of energy independence, owing to its population size as another chokepoint. Beijing’s biggest response to this has been to build the Belt and Road initiative, and use strategic partners such as Pakistan to create alternative maritime and commercial routes which effectively avoid its naval peripheral regions that have been increasingly militarized by the US. This also includes increasing strategic and energy integration with Russia.

When these things are viewed in context, China is certainly preparing for the contingency of a war, as well as laying down the economic adjustments that would be needed in such a scenario. However, it also remains true that at this point in time, Xi Jinping has not given up on diplomacy, and as much as he retains an incentive to economically develop the country through integration with Western markets, he is not likely to take such a massive decision. However, we must be honest that with the way the world is changing, this door is increasingly closing, and it is obvious to most people that on the current trajectory, Taiwan has absolutely no interest whatsoever in unification. So what options does China have left with Taipei? It may be damned if it does and damned if it doesn’t.”[5]

Is it not remarkable that this situation could have been completely avoided if America had not outsourced its chip building technology in the first place. The greed of western corporate capitalists to turn third world countries into cheap labour for their products has created a situation where now the most powerful nation in the world feels that it may need to go to war with a country that it helped develop this level of power and wealth and technology in the first place? At multiple levels the drive for globalization and diversity are responsible for pushing the world towards this new unnecessary war. Well, that and the old things like avarice and the quest for power and dominance as well of course.

Those who pushed for the offshoring of manufacturing have caused two major problems for the West; they have weakened our own manufacturing base, making us vulnerable to broken supply chains in the event of war, and they have made the countries which could go to war with us far, far more powerful than they once were. Diversity really is a society killer in more ways than one. It is shame that we had to learn this lesson again the hard way as a society.

List of References

Friday 31 May 2024

King As Evangelist

 


Imagine what a blessing it is to a nation, and its people, to have a king like this:

“It happened quite the contrary with one in the province of the Mercians, whose visions and words, and also his behavior, were neither advantageous to others nor to himself. In the reign of Coenred, who succeeded Ethelred, there was a layman in a military employment, no less acceptable to the king for his worldly industry, than displeasing to him for his private neglect of himself. The king often admonished him to confess and amend, and to forsake his wicked courses, before he should lose all time for repentance and amendment by a sudden death.[1]

People wonder why there is still so much trust among the population for the ruling classes, despite everything we have learned about how they are bought and paid for by various interests. Well the answer is simple. It is because we are descended from a long line of people who had good, not perfect, but good and decent rulers that actually took care for the things of God, and for their nations.

Here we have Bede writing this account of a king, Coenred, who was concerned for the soul of one of his military men. This man was highly regarded by the king because of his work ethic and abilities, but this king did not like how this soldier acted in his private time. So, he warned him and exhorted him continually to repent and turn to the Lord, before it was too late.

Imagine how different our nation would be, if our government leaders cared for the souls of their civil and military servicemen, more than they cared about their own advancement, wealth and privilege? Imagine the blessing this would bring on the nation. It was a culture like this that caused the western nations to advance beyond the rest of the world. China was more advanced militarily and in knowledge at this point in history. But it didn’t have godly kings like this, that were turning small backwater kingdoms at the edge of the civilized world, into the foundations for great societies.

You have to be a modern supremacist to think that we have advanced in every way, we truly have not.

List of References


[1] The Venerable Bede. The Ecclesiastical History of the English People (pp. 158-159). Neeland Media LLC. Kindle Edition.

Thursday 30 May 2024

Reading Comprehension, Indoctrination and Israel Part 2 - Replenishment Theology

 



Replenishment Theology

I had not intended this to be a multi-part series, however I was reflecting on a passage today which teaches that Israel and the Church are the same thing, and I thought I might as well turn this into another piece.

One of the mistakes the Judaizers, that is those who say you have to be circumcised and convert your ethnicity to join Israel, make is they deny one of the blessed promises of the gospel of Jesus Christ when they say that the Church is not Israel. Some make the mistake of thinking that we who identify the Church as Israel teach replacement theology or something like this. But nothing could be further from the truth. The message is not that the Gentiles replace Jews to become the people of God. The message is, and always has been all the way through the Bible, that unbelievers are replaced with believers, fruitless branches are replaced with fruit bearing branches, dead olive branches are replaced with new, living, olive branches.

This is why all of the generation that came out of Egypt was removed from Israel, by dying in the wilderness, but Rahab, Ruth, and Obed-Edom, all of whom were not Israelites by birth, can be accounted as part of Israel. In fact, not only as part of Israel, but Rahab the Canaanite and Ruth the Moabite, are accounted in the lineage of the Messiah himself (Matt. 1). Israel has always been a tree that replenishes itself, under the good stewardship of the gardener, or vine dresser (Isaiah 5:1-5, John 15:1-6). This is why there were only just over seven thousand true Israelites in Israel the days of Elijah, because not all Israel is Israel, only the branches which are connected to the trunk, the Lord, revealed as Jesus, the Son of God, in the New Testament (Rom. 11:1-5), are true Israel. Only true believers are true Israel, to put it more simply. This has always been the case with God's people. 

What the work of Jesus did was not create a new and second people of God, but simply made a new way for people to become part of Israel. No longer do you need to be circumcised and submit to the law, you simply need to trust in Christ. Paul outlines how one of the hopes and gifts of the gospel is full-fledged citizenship in the commonwealth of Israel,

“11 Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called “the uncircumcision” by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands— 12 remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility 15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, 16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. 17 And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near. 18 For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father. 19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, 21 in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. 22 In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit” (Eph. 2:11-22).

This passage is like a anvil and hammer which smashes any assertion that true Israel is a physical nation centred around a place in Canaan, rather than a spiritual entity based around the Lord Jesus Christ. What Paul says here is very simple: once you were not citizens of Israel, but now in Christ Jesus you are.

“11 Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called “the uncircumcision” by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands— 12 remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world” (vv.11-12).

Before our salvation, we Gentiles were:

1.     Separated from Christ,

2.     Alienated from Israel,

3.     Strangers to the covenants of promise,

4.     Having no hope and without God.

Now that we are saved we not separated from God and have full citizenship in his people.  

Salvation does not exist outside of Israel. Because Israel is the covenant people of God (remember Jesus is God), the believers in the covenants of promise, and those who have the hope of being saved by God. Before our salvation we Gentiles were excluded from Israel, and if you wanted to join you had to become Jewish first. 

But now we are “are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God…” Once we were not citizens of Israel, but now, through Christ, we have become full-fledged members of the household of God. The household of God is another name for the people of God. We were once not citizens of the people of God, now we are. We were alienated from Israel, but now we are full-fledged citizens with the saints. And this household is build, “…on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, 21 in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord” (vv. 20-21).

I find it hard to understand why someone could miss this. But it makes a lot of sense when you understand that 1) people have been indoctrinated, and 2) indoctrination can override basic comprehension. Paul switches from talking about citizens of Israel to citizens of the “household of God,” these are different words right, so they must be different things? Those who are taught that the Church and Israel are different things will latch onto this difference in the passage. But are they different things? No, they are different names for the same thing; the people of God. The word citizen is what connects the ideas. We once were not citizens of Israel, but now we are through Christ. We have not replaced Israel, we have been blessed with the gift of citizenship in the chosen people of God.

What Paul says in verses 11-18 shows how God achieves this for us,

“14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility 15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, 16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. 17 And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near. 18 For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father” (Eph. 2:14-18).

These verses show what it is that God has done with Israel and Gentiles. He has made a way in him for them to become one people in him by faith. Israel is now no longer a nation based on ethnic identity, it is a nation based on faith in Christ, a spiritual nation, with a spiritual citizenship, spiritual Israel. What Jesus has done has changed the nature of Israel, he hasn't replaced it. God has taken the two who were separated, Jew and Gentile, and made them one in him,

“14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility 15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, 16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.”

"One new man in the place of the two..."

What was two is now one. He does not say that Gentiles have now replaced Jews, he says that Gentiles and Jews have been brought together in one body. Call this people Israel, call it the church, call it the city of Jerusalem (Heb. 12:22-24, Rev. 21:9-14), call it the bride, call it the vine, call it the olive tree, call it the flock, call it the sheepfold, call it household of God, whatever you call it, it is one body in Christ.

Replacement theology is a slur. There are some people who assert it as a fact on the basis of some parables of Jesus that say God will replace the rebellious tenants of his vineyard with better tenants (cf. Matt. 21:33-46). But God is not replacing Jews with Gentiles here, he is replacing non-believers with believers, he is replenishing the tree because he only wants branches that bear fruit in keeping with repentance. Jesus tells us this, 

"43 Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits. 44 And the one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him.”45 When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he was speaking about them" (Matt. 21:43-45). 

It is clear Jesus is teaching here how the leadership of his people will be taken from the dead branches of the Pharisees and replaced with the fruitful branches of his disciples.  

Those who say the Church is not Israel are denying one of the great promises of God to all who believe in him: that they are granted full citizenship in the Israel of God, the people of God, God’s treasured possession. The tree is Israel, we have been grafted in, never let anyone deny you your re-birthright. It is yours in Christ Jesus, no matter your ethnicity.