From Gary North’s North – Millennialism and Social Theory.
Ask Christians if there has been progress in revising the creeds, and they will say yes, unless they are either Greek Orthodox, who deny the legitimacy of post-medieval creeds, or members of some Anabaptist sect that denies the legitimacy of creeds altogether. But most Christians assume that creedal improvement affects only the institutional Church, not society at large. Creedal progress is not seen even as an aspect of social progress, let alone a contributing cause. This presumes a fundamental relationship in history: the social irrelevance of the historic Christian creeds. It presumes that there is no continuity between the Church’s creeds and civilization. Yet it is this which must be proven first, not presumed. It is Christian Reconstruction’s contention that there can be no civilization without a creed. Creeds are therefore inescapable concepts. It is never a question of “creed vs. no creed.” It is always this question: “Which creed?”
Creeds have consequences. Christian creeds include certain presuppositions about law, judicial cause and effect, and time. These views may be more implicit than explicit, but they exist.
Jesus explicitly taught that we are the salt of the earth.
Jesus said that we, as the Body of Christ, hold the keys to heaven and hell.
The Apostle Paul insisted that it is the saints that judge the world.
So, why all this crawling and whimpering and bleating, about how powerless the Church is?
A pack of lies. Cowardly, insipid lies.
No, it isn’t the supposedly almighty, actually pathetic Establishment with the money and the guns and the universities and the media mouthpieces that has the power.
WE represent God. WE dictate what does, and does not, happen in this world.
The greatest favour Trump – and, in truth, the Brexit people – did for the world is demonstrate just how powerless the Media Blowhards and the Mouths of Expertise are… once you rightfully dismiss them as the bought-and-paid-for propaganda agents they always were.
…and since WE dictate what does and does not happen, it naturally follows that the revolting sea of filth and failure we are drowning in is a direct, linear result of OUR actions. (And, our lack of action.)
If you throw in the the licky-boot choices of our leadership for the last few hundred years or so…
- possibly since 1660, with the restoration of the monarchy – tied directly to the power-lusting, corrupt behaviour of the oh-so-pious Covenanters;
- or maybe 1783, with the secularist Constitution con-job being rubber-stamped by John Witherspoon;
- but my hands-down favourite (so far) remains the rise of Darwin in the 1850s: NOT because the scientific establishment backed him, but because the supposedly Christian clergy absolutely loved him.
…it’s obvious that we are being ground into the dirt because of our own failures in obedience and righteousness and faithlessness, coupled with the failures our so-eager-to-compromise Noble Ancestors.
Every time a secularist spits in your face – with your tax money, by the way – God clearly shows what the rightful wages of our insipid ancestors are.
If we want something different for ourselves and our children, we had better start repenting, and walking along a different path.
First, comes the Delegitimization of Our Masters. That’s going on quite nicely today, and will only accelerate. By 2025 or so, there won’t be a Mainstream anything: by 2035, the Great Default will have destroyed the welfare state, gutting the foundations of the power of the government today.
Second, comes the need to build a Freedom-based Alternative. This kind of thing comes only from sustained labour, year after year, decade after decade: there is no real short-cut possible. It took sustained effort to destroy Western Christendom and replace it with the Tolerance Committees: it will take the same effort to destroy the Committees, and Reconstruct Christendom in America and around the world.
(If I were a betting man, I’d say the last place for it to rise up will be Western Europe. Yes, I believe that Christendom will be a reality in Egypt and Arabia before any Frenchman or Englishman will tolerate it in his country.
Why? Because without the oil money (which will come to an end, sooner or later) Islam has nothing going for it. Except – and this is a big exception – they refuse point-blank to tear apart their children in the womb. This means that they will exist in the future (unlike Western Europeans), but it’s a miserable and ugly existence…
…until they know that there is an alternative that not only lets their children live, but live in peace and prosperity.
I personally don’t believe that Islam as a whole will repent, until the oil money prosperity is gone. But when it’s gone… and a good generation of bloody and money has been poured down the rat-hole of the Endless Jihad… then the door will be open)
For the details both glorious and gory regarding the Glorious Revolution, see Otto Scott’s The Great Christian Revolution: How Christianity Transformed the World and Geoffrey Robertson’s The Tyrannicide Brief: the Men who Sent Charles I to the Scaffold.
A quote from the latter:
By the terms of their  treaty [with Charles I], the Scots agreed ‘to hazard our lives and fortunes’ by invading England to restore Charles ‘to his government, to the just rights of the Crown and his full revenues’ in return for his undertaking to confirm the solemn League and Covenant (subject to an accommodation with the Church of England and its bishops) and to suppress ‘the opinions and practises of Anti-Trinitarians, Anabaptists, Antinomians, Arminians, Familists, Brownists, Separatists, Independents, Libertines and Seekers’ and, generally, ‘all blasphemies, heresy, schism and all such scandalous doctrines and practises as are contrary to the light of nature or to the known principles of Christianity.’ In other words, the Scots ‘engaged’ to fight for the King, to restore his prerogative rights to control the army, select ministers, appoint bishops, bestow honours and to maintain a ‘negative voice'(the royal veto over any parliamentary legislation), in return merely for Charles’s promise to advance the Covenant and to suppress some minor sects whose behaviour outraged their Calvinist sensibilities.
Right-wing Christians and their eagerness to grovel before wealthy and powerful men, all in return for trinkets and dog-biscuits.
Correction: “…for some promises of trinkets and dog-biscuits.”
It’s too late for the Covenanters, sadly: I have it on good authority that, 400 years later, they have forgotten nothing and learnt nothing.
Christians who intend to actually gain the victory over Satan had best learn from their Profile in Failure, as surely as we should learn from the Endless Jihad the flaws we should avoid as we build our own society on the busted ruins of this one.
It isn’t ‘Post-Christian America’.
It’s ‘Post-America Christianity’.
That needs to be our focus.