Sunday, October 09, 2011

What a crock!

According to the aptly named CADRE blogger Metacrock:

I'm really torn between quitting the apologetic thing and devoting all my time to politics to battle the tea party and Rick Perry.
The atheists are the lesser danger because they have less power.
Tea Party guys are more likely to admit they are stupid and no one expects them to be great thinkers.

i) I’m not a fan of Perry. I simply follow Buckley’s adage: Support the most electable conservative in the race. It’s too early to say who that will be.

ii) So Metacrock thinks the Tea Party is “dangerous.” Even more dangerous than atheists. According to their website, the Tea Party stands for such “dangerous” notions as:

Limited federal government
Individual freedoms
Personal responsibility
Free markets
Returning political power to the states and the people

Does Metacrock consider that “dangerous”? Or does he think that's code language for something more sinister?

iii) He also thinks Tea Partiers are “stupid.” Is Eric Cantor “stupid”? Is Dick Armey “stupid”?  


  1. That's simply a regurgitation of left-wing agit-prop. It speaks volumes of Metacrock's discernment and ability to think critically.

    In Christ,

  2. Sounds like a leftist. Probably thinks the march-on-WallSt derps have a good agenda.

    p.s., pretty sure Dick's last name is spelled "Armey". =)

  3. I know that he denies inerrancy, so I wouldn't be surprised if he leans left in other ways as well.

    I'm wondering though, other than "he who does not toil, shall not eat" (thus - presumably - denying welfare) is there much we can draw from the Bible on how big or small a government should be.

    Ayn Rand (for what it's worth) thought that government should consist of no more than a court, a police force, and an army, since that's the only thing that applies to protecting rights. Is that a biblical ideal in any way?

  4. The Biblical ideal is Christ as despotes, essentially supreme ruler. And one day He will reign in that manner.

    In the meantime, generally the more individual freedom allowed (in particular regarding economic and privacy matters), the better off the people are in both standard of living and freedom from persecution.

    The increasing global rule is a very dangerous trend when it comes to personal freedoms and rights, but it is unstoppable.

    The sea change in government to an increasingly global rule is being allowed as time gets later and later on the eschatological clock, but at the same time as a result of this, persecution will increase, as will the destruction of free enterprise and wealth (among all but the elites).

    The more restrictions placed on people, the less free they are, and in turn the more likely they are to be abused and persecuted.

  5. At the recent "Values" summit, a popular pastor noted that Mormons are not real Christians. Implied is that Romney is not fit to hold the office of President. Given Article VI, paragraph 3 of the Constitution (no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States), don't you feel it violates the spirit of the Constitution to insist that his beliefs preclude him from office?

    Which document must be the forefront of any voting Christian: the Constitution or the Bible?

    While many non-Mormon conservatives would probably vote for Mitt, do you not see a growing trend towards the desire to ignore the Constitution in favor of some religious considerations?

  6. The Constitutional clause about religious oaths has no bearing on voter intent.

    Rather, if a candidate is duly elected, he can't be disqualified on religious grounds. But religious considerations can certain figure in whether or not he's elected.

  7. I've read Meta's stuff -- he's thoroughly orthodox on most issues, but he's a far left ideologue, and he doesn't mask it either!

  8. @James: "Implied is that Romney is not fit to hold the office of President."

    Really? The most straightforward implication of that statement is that said pastor is trying to convince his audience that Romney's not a Christian, and thus doesn't hold the same beliefs as they do, not anything to do with fitment for the office.

  9. I would point to a couple of things.

    One, of course is the fact established by Steve, above.

    Here's the verse that seems to me governs that sort of reasoning:

    Luk 16:8 The master commended the dishonest manager for his shrewdness. For the sons of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than the sons of light.

    Now a days, if the media hounds find anything in your closet it is because you were not so shrewd!

    As for Mormons, I ask, were there any great influences by any Mormon scholars or theologians applied to the process that framed the original documents when founding and establishing the government "We the people..." of the United States? We run the risk of not being able to do if the foundation of this nation, those documents, is destroyed.

    At the end of the day, whether so or not so, also, this is it, only, that will win the day:

    Psa 9:5 You have rebuked the nations; you have made the wicked perish; you have blotted out their name forever and ever.
    Psa 9:6 The enemy came to an end in everlasting ruins; their cities you rooted out; the very memory of them has perished.
    Psa 9:7 But the LORD sits enthroned forever; he has established his throne for justice,
    Psa 9:8 and he judges the world with righteousness; he judges the peoples with uprightness.
    Psa 9:9 The LORD is a stronghold for the oppressed, a stronghold in times of trouble.
    Psa 9:10 And those who know your name put their trust in you, for you, O LORD, have not forsaken those who seek you.

    Being reformed, one need not wonder why anyone would "seek" the Lord before, at the time of or after an election that places one duly elected into the office of the Presidency of the United States, as is so brilliantly captured by these words:

    " Rather, if a candidate is duly elected, he can't be disqualified on religious grounds. But religious considerations can certain figure in whether or not he's elected."

    To the victor goes the spoils, then! :)

    Until then, let us keep on praying for President Obama, his administration; the Speaker of the House and the members of both Houses; the Judiciary; and, all in places of duly processed authority!