The Fatal Flaw Of Secular Democracy

Christ's ThroneThe great experiments in Democracy, liberty for people, has been a success by most accounts. Authority from monarchs has been neutralized and the will of the people has become the deciding factor in the direction Western nations take. However, the secularization of Western democracies has a fatal flaw that will ultimately spell its doom.

Human civilizations have lived under some state of monarchy for much of history. Be it kings of the primordial world, the kings of Israel, the king of Babylon, Grecian thrones, the Caesars of Rome, and the kings and queens of England, monarchy has been a long established pattern of human government. Democracy is the attempt to eliminate that pattern for a new pattern, one where the many rule themselves instead of the many ruled by one. The secularization of democracy solidifies this into a movement of complete human autonomy.

A secular arrangement requires a worldview that is either deist or atheist in its concept. The existence of a transcendent God presents a problem if that God is moral and carries out judgment on humans who violate that His morality. Mankind’s independence requires that God not exist or that God not be involved in man’s affairs.

A third concept holds that God does exist and God is involved in the affairs of man, but He is permanently and perpetually benevolent, never negative in his morality (prohibition through law) and never passing judgment (punishment). It is man who then becomes moral in the negative and judgmental and being so makes him inferior to God, who is not. In such a state, God is ultimately nothing more than high idealism or emotional comfort since it is man who must do the dirty work of tackling his own problems. Given that God is either unwilling or incapable, God becomes irrelevant and man is left to himself to rule himself in autonomy.

The one problem man is then left to do without God is face the problem of evil. He must not only decide for himself what is good and what is evil, but must decide what to do about evil. God remains a high idea and a great comfort in man’s efforts to be like God, to be perpetually good and never evil, but it is the hands of man and not God that get dirty. The fundamental pride in humanist autonomy is that man is both capable of identifying evil and dealing with it, without need for God.

Declaring that man and God are partners working together in relationship for the same goal, the promotion of good, solves nothing. If God will not prohibit behavior (law) and judge violators (punishment), then it falls on man to do so. The presence of God is irrelevant based simply on the fact that He is impotent.

Given that man did not create himself, his existence is entirely because of the will of his creator, God. Thus, man is both dependent on and answerable to the One who created him. This removes any possibility of man ruling himself.

Modern democratic movements operate on the concept of man living without any ruling authority, either in this universe or outside this universe. The masses of people are heralded as heroes whenever they rebel against any authority that might affect their lives. For the past one hundred years, the secular democratic movement has allowed citizens to defy their families, churches, and governments, any symbol of authority, for the sake of individual liberty.

Christianity holds there is one God, manifested in the man Jesus Christ, who is now sitting in a position of monarchical authority over the material universe. The affairs of man are under the whim and will of His throne. Christ is not the babe swaddled in a manager, but a man sitting on a throne given to him by God, the only monarch by divine right to have ever existed.

Under this absolute rule, men build democracies, seeking to grant liberty and justice for all. There is no shame in such efforts and it could easily be argued that God promotes such efforts today as He did in the past. Yet, as they grow confident in the works of their hands, they are forgetting the God who made man’s minds, hearts, and hands. They are forgetting that they are clay in the hands of the Grand Potter. It would do political leaders well to visit tombs and graves and see the final end of all men, small and great.

Western democracy has been a great comfort and achievement for fallen man, but if he should forget to fear the wrath of God and fear the judgment of His Christ, then he all that he has built will be taken from him.

The only rational way to have a successful democracy is to have it dominated by Christianity, a moral religion that points toward a divine monarch, whose authority makes null and void any and all other claims of greatness. Secularization and the cultural neutralizing of Christianity by other religions reflects the great temptation of Eden. Man seeks to be like God, knowing good and evil for himself, autonomous and justified in his own magnificence.

This may lead to the final end of the democratic effort and its ultimate downfall. Man simply was not made to rule himself. Instead of fighting wars to spread secular democracy around the world, perhaps the goals of “Christian” nations should be to promote acknowledgement of the throne of Christ.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Why Creationism Remains a Superior Answer

Evolution has become the dominant answer for the question of man’s origins, at least among the more intellectual and educated. The wealth of data supporting it as well as its sheer popularity has proven a compelling force for many.

Yet, the creationist movement remains strong and vibrant. Supporters begin with the belief that the Protestant cannon, the 66 books that make up the Holy Bible, come from God and that the history presented in the first couple chapters of Genesis, the opening books of the Bible, is historically accurate, being divinely originated. If it says that God created the world in six literal days, then the world was created in six literal days.

Now, those who challenge a literal six-day creation for an evolutionary history will bring up the idea that the Genesis account does not propose a scientific answer to the origins of man. The intent of Genesis, it is said, is to provide a history for Israel. Or for some other intent. This argument of intent is right. Genesis is not a scientific book and does not provide a purely scientific answer to the beginnings of man and his purpose on earth and it is not meant to.

The question then is whether or not man should live by purely scientific means. The great weakness of science is that it is incapable of providing morality for man, the guidelines that determine what actions a man should and should not take.

Take rape for instance. Science can provide incredible amounts of information about what happened, and it can even offer a psychological motivation, but it cannot answer the most important question. Is rape morally wrong?

This is the great advantage that the biblical account of creation has over the scientific answer of evolution. It provides a moral answer where evolution offers only scientific information. Science can only say that man evolved from previous stages of life and that at one point there were males and females who mated and produced offspring. What it cannot give is a moral basis for determining whether or not man should or should not kill his fellow-man or whether or not a male should force himself sexually on a female. Stating that God made man in His image and then gave him woman and marriage, as the Bible does, provides a clear basis for moral answers to such questions.

Science is a great gift to man, but it cannot be the basis for his existence. A creation account does not have to be scientifically accurate to be right because it is more interested in a moral answer. Man needs a moral foundation to life, not a scientific foundation. Creationism, having life founded on the biblical account of a six-day creation, even if it is mythical, provides the moral foundation man needs to live. Because of that, evolution will remain an untenable answer for man’s existence here on earth.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

What A Matriarchy Looks Like

Who is the head of the family?

Who is the head of the family?

Feminism is about female superiority over men and women are even heralded as saviors of mankind. Despite its claims to humble equality, the natural result of its ideology is matriarchy, a society governed by feminine sensibilities. The evangelical church does not see the demeaning of masculinity and the deliberate promotion of female authority. In order to maintain some semblance of integrity with “biblical” ideas, it has accepted equality without calling it equality, what is called complimentarian; men and women are equal but have different roles.

Now I imagine that a distilled version of patriarchy would look like a military unit. It is obvious that some men are superior to others the superior men are given rank and responsibility above others. In family and church it not so clear or obvious because of the presence of women. While the feminine presence is the completion of man’s creation, in his current fallen state, something from God is gained and something from the devil smuggled in. A man must not only deal with his own fallen nature and the fallen nature in other men, but also the fallen nature in women. As Don Corleone said in The Godfather, “I spent my whole life trying not to be careless. Women and children can afford to be careless, but not men.”

Since women are not men and function along feminine lines, when they are in charge, things should not be expected to look the same as if men were in charge. Just what a matriarchy might look like is ambiguous and difficult to imagine and that is from the natural way that the emotional storms that women are capable of cloud and confuse a man’s ability to develop order.

However, there is an idea that I think would be a perfect place to start. In fact, once this paradigm is in place, a matriarchy becomes easy to imagine and see.

Sunshine Mary posted an article about a concept called “backleading.” She writes,

… Badger explains is a ballroom dancing term referring to a woman who is “resisting the lead’s kinesthetic instructions that are part and parcel of partner dancing.”

She then goes on to explain how this analogy applies to marriage:

A wife in this situation wants it to seem like she is submitting to her husband’s leadership but really she is trying to backlead him into making decisions that she feels like submitting to and not making decisions that she doesn’t feel like submitting to. [Emphasis mine]

This is how I imagine a complimentarian marriage actually functions in reality despite what leaders claim it is supposed to be. On the outside, men attend leadership meetings, pastors preach on male headship from the pulpit, and books are written about men finding their way back to masculinity.

But it is behind the scenes where the matriarchy is most likely to grow and thrive. It is in the home, especially the bedroom, that matriarchy finds it fertile ground. Christian men leave their meetings and their church services and go home to their wives. Since they are bound by God, church, and vow to never leave their wives even in the worst situations, they must bear burden of whatever their wives throw their way (called “fitness testing” by some).

What happens behind closed doors is usually kept private, but their is some truth that Christian men deal with varying degrees of this:

In this clip from Steel Magnolias, at 2:00, Drum declares what his true motivation is:

If I don’t I’ll have to deal with my wife and I make it a point to never deal with my wife.

Before a Christian man makes a decision, he must first consider his wife’s feelings on the matter. Those feelings can easily become the decided factor. To the outside world, he is a strong leader, working to provide for his family in service to Christ, when in reality he is merely working to satisfy his wife’s endless emotional needs. In public, it appears to be biblical male-authority headship, but in private is female-feeling headship.

Consider statements like the following:

  • “If mama ain’t happy, ain’t nobody happy.”
  • “We all know who wears the pants in the family.”
  • “Behind every good man is a good woman.”

What these statements say is that even though a man may publicly carry himself with the respect due a man who carries the burdens of responsibility, it is his wife that bears the final authority in their home. And that authority carries into public.

For those American churches that still promote male authority in the home and the pulpit, if they are going to quote things like,

 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God (1 Corinthians 11:3 KJV),

then they need to recognize that what it preaches and what its congregation practices may not be the same. It needs to recognize the problem is systemic. From old mainline denominations to small fundamentalist churches, where there is women, there is the reality of matriarchy.

It is little wonder that the men in the apostle Paul’s day declared, “It is good for a man not to touch a woman.”

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

There Is No Matriarchy

Ladies, we are in charge!

Ladies, we are in charge!

I have been pondering why American Evangelical Christianity cannot recognize the matriarchy that is emerging all around them. Secular sources not only recognize it, but celebrate it. The idea of a society run and governed by feminine sensibilities is becoming quite popular.

The Evangelical Church holds to a complimentarian relationship between men and women, but that is merely accepting feminist equality while never using the terms “feminist” and “equality.” While claiming their doctrines are derived from scripture, they often overlook the obvious presence of male dominance their own religion is founded on.

Christianity is a historic religion and both its holy text and the God it declares are masculine. The Bible is a male-oriented text, written by men to men, guided by a divine Father through the authority granted to a divine Son. There is no way to soften this or smooth it over without ignoring the majority of what is presented.

The only reason I can conjure as to why the church refuses to see the matriarchy in its own pews and pulpits is that it expects a matriarchy to look and function like a patriarchy. They look for women in positions of power and authority to act like men in positions of power and authority, which feminism claims is bad.

If matriarchy is like what patriarchy is said to be, women would be expected to act violently against their husbands and rape their husbands when they wanted sex. That is supposedly what equality freed women from. Yet, because women are not violently beating their husbands or raping them in the bed (as patriarchal men were said to have beat and raped their wives), then it must be equality and not matriarchy.

An egalitarian mindset would explain this in secular and liberal circles, as men and women are both equal and essentially the same. But on the side of the aisle that claims that men and women are fundamentally different, it should be obvious that a matriarchy would not look like a patriarchy.

However, this issue will be out and in the open should America elect its first female president. While it may be a few elections away, the desire for such a feminist achievement is always there. With a female president, will her husband be equal to her or subservient to her authority, especially since other men in her cabinet will definitely be subordinate?

But what of women across the country? Will they view a female president’s authority over men as a sign of the new order of things? At such a point, it will be obvious to the evangelical church that women are running home, church, and country, but will church leaders be bold enough to actually say “Hey! Women are running home, church, and country!”

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Ceasar Will Not Save America


The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar. – John 19:15

When I was an undergrad, I remember when former President Bill Clinton visited my college to campaign for his wife, Hillary, in 2007. What struck me was the intense fervor that the audience had. Nothing Mr. Clinton could say would have been wrong. I also noticed a ripple of fear when it came to the opposite party. It was simply a given that if a Republican won the office, the country would be doomed. The Democrat Party was considered pure and the Republicans corrupt and the empowerment of the Right would bring in a world of darkness. There would be weeping and gnashing of teeth by minorities, women, and gays.

Fast forward to 2012. Barack Obama is running for the Democratic Party. Conservatives everywhere are full of fervor for the Republican Party because it is the pure and noble opposition to the corrupt and evil Democrat Party. A small portion of Christians warn that Obama may be the infamous antichrist set to rule the world at the end of the age. And there is fear, fear that the progressive vision held by the Democrats will usher in a world of darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth by whites, Christians, the small business owner, and the wealthy.

All of it is political sound and fury and nothing is truly signified. The population is fighting culturally over having its own Caesar in power. For the right, it is the Caesar of Ronald Reagan and economic prosperity. For the left, it is the Caesar of Barack Obama and economic equality.

Hear the Christian say he has no king but Caesar.

Hear the pagan say he has no king but Caesar.

Now hear the words of the One who is and will always be the only king over planet earth.

No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. – Matthew 6:24

The church in America has lost sight of its true king and has sided with the Caesars of the political world. Television and radio herald the greatness of these Caesars while pulpits with lights, cameras, and production become places where modern Pharisees and false prophets convolute the wisdom put forth by Christ and His kingdom.

If a Christian is to stop cheering for Caesar and return to the throne of Christ, he must first recognize that America has deeper problems than whether or not the economy is capitalist or socialist. He must face feminism. The notion of equality is the trunk of the tree of evil and money is the root.

From feminism comes divorce called independence, giving women the freedom to earn their own money.

From feminism comes adultery called sex-positive equality, giving women the freedom to sleep with men that will be generous with their money. This includes being paid as a porn star.

From feminism comes abortion called choice, giving women the freedom to not spend their money on children.

For the church, divorce, adultery, and abortion should be unacceptable, but as a long as it accepts equality between men and women, female sympathies will be the deciding factor instead of what Christ has decreed. Conservative churches criticize these things, but do they out of obedience to the enthroned Jesus or because the women of the church have decreed these things to be hurtful to their feelings and happiness while being quietly reserved as a necessary evil because men are evil? Right now, the answer is not all that clear.

America may soon elect its first female president. At that point, open calls for a matriarchal (female-oriented / female-dominated) society will begin, with equality becoming a political white wash to cover the desired inequality. The church will have to make a choice to either continue to seek a solution in Madam Caesar in Washington or return to a biblically modeled standard of Father and Sons, which runs completely counter to the emerging political and social culture that is rising to dominate America.

Posted in Uncategorized | 8 Comments

So Now Jesus Hates Haters

While perusing Facebook to get news on friends, one has to wade through an endless ocean of memes filled with quick philosophy, cuteness, anger, humor, and meaningless complaining. There are also political and religious memes and sometimes they reveal much about the thinking of people.

Jesus hates

This particular meme reveals the view of Christ now held by liberal Christians as they continue to hold up homosexuality as the crown jewel of their modern, enlightened faith.

Most Christians take the writers of scripture as authorities on the things of God and believe that these authorities are so because of divine appointment. So when they read scripture, they take what is written seriously and struggle to understand and apply it to life. When the writers of scripture level criticism against homosexuality, readers take it seriously.

For example:

For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. – Romans 1:26-27 AKJV


Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. – 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 AKJV

If the Elizabethan English is too archaic, then a modern liberal translation might help:

Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God. – 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 NRSV

This writer of scripture thinks that homosexuality is not necessarily a good thing. Yet, liberals deliberately ignore what scripture says and attempt to conjure up highly intellectual justifications for why homosexuality is in fact fully acceptable in the eyes of God. And this despite the fiery example of the destruction of the city of Sodom and the fact that God also rejects divorce and adultery.

To protect the jewel of their equality crown, liberals will have to move from a neutral position of having Jesus being inclusive to having Jesus being a judge for their cause. Instead of Jesus being the judge of what his Father holds is wrong, such as homosexuality, He is now the judge of haters, those who will not accept homosexuality.

Of course, this is not surprising, given that for liberals, authority is found in feelings, science, and the visionaries of human utopia.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Update on Western Woes

About three weeks ago, I was discharged from my local hospital after spending eleven days fighting influenza and double pneumonia. As a man with a muscular disability, akin to Muscular Dystrophy, I was blessed to have survived. Pneumonia can kill the elderly and disabled and does, plain and simple. Seven of those days in the hospital were spent unable to eat solid food and drink only minimal liquids, such as water and ginger ale. It was rough.

I am still in a phase of recovery and writing regularly is proving nigh impossible. Western Woes is still open for business, but the posts will be slow in coming.

Miserman is alive and, though not quite well, still pondering the mess that is becoming Western Civilization.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments