The 200 Year War ©2009 J.R.

Johnson

dawsonrebel@hotmail.com

Part 1: Whose Wineskin is

this, anyway?

THE GREAT FINAL BATTLE BETWEEN THE

NEW WORLD CIVILIZATION AND THE CHRISTIAN
CIVILIZATION

The Christian world is in direct opposition to the world that is

waiting to be born. Christianity has always been a faith that fights when
it finds itself backed into a corner. This age is the age, that Christianity
finds itself backed into the biggest corner of its life. In order for
Christianity to be defeated, its true, historic nature must be exposed and
defeated. Defeating a false view of Christianity will not provide a
permanent solution. The following section outlines the form of
Christianity that will be engaged in this final, historic battle of the ages.

1 THE BATTLE BETWEEN REVELATION AND REASON

In Freshman philosophy in college, the new tool of

philosophical reasoning in the hands of a young person, is like
giving a hammer to a five-year-old child: The youngster has no
understanding of a hammer’s proper function. Such is the state
of the young philosophy student. He will often use his new
knowledge to prove that the world does not exist. After all, he
will say, you cannot prove you are even awake. You cannot prove
that your senses are telling you the truth about a world that exists
outside of your body. You cannot prove that the mind, in fact, has
any connection of any reality at all. We may all be living in a
universe that is all in our mind. Having thus eliminated the entire
universe from existence, the student feels he has understood the
real message of philosophy.
One thing is certain, though, about the freshman in his
understanding of philosophy; the student is quick to grasp the
implications of his newfound wisdom. The implications of his
reasoning lead him to assume that the universe is of our own
making. This liberates the student from all connection to ethical
and social obligations. This is what the student wanted to find. It
is a truly liberating feeling. The individual has been set free to
create his own world to his own liking. After years of having to
conform to an adult world that has insisted on its own way, the
student is now intellectually armed to reject such a world. Of
course, the implications of such thinking are not even thought out
to their conclusion. Liberation from a world that a child does not
like, is the overwhelming purpose of his thinking.
There are two events that will bring our student back to
some sort of reality. One, he falls in love with another person
who in his new way of thinking only exists in his mind. This new
philosophy is not as acceptable under the new conditions. Who
wants to fall in love with merely a phantom of one’s own
imagination? That is not love, but merely intellectual
masturbation. While our mind may be satisfied with such a loved
one, our heart cries out for more than just a fantasy. The new
philosophy that sounded all so liberating, on second thought,
reduced the whole world to one giant masturbation fantasy. That
is not what our heart wants. What our mind may find
intellectually satisfying goes against something inside of us that
demands more of this worldly existence.
The second reality disturbing event, is to get into a
discussion with another young philosophy student. The other
student has also written off the world he was taught in school and
by his parents. He also has come to the conclusion that the world
he enjoys is of his own making. The discussion ends with both of
the students denying that the other student exists. That may
satisfy a young ego, but both go away from such a confrontation
with a feeling of emptiness. To create one’s own world is not
quite as satisfying as it sounds at first thought. After all, if I were
going to create an ideal world in my own imagination, I certainly
wouldn’t create it with such a jerk as the person that refused to
accept my egoistic interpretation.
In this early reality check, we are brought into the first
problem of all mankind, not just the freshman philosophy student.
What type of world do we live in? How do we get to know this
world? Is there any certainty in all of this? Does this world have
any laws that apply to human behavior? Is there a spiritual
world? Is matter all that there is? Is mankind free to build his
own world upon a world that contains only physical matter?
These questions have plagued mankind for its entire existence.
One of man’s great problems is that he wants to live like an
animal, but discovers such a world totally frustrating. Actually,
what he really wants, is to treat others like animals and yet have
the dignity of being himself something more than an animal.
This brings us to the basic battle which all men must tackle
first. How can mankind understand the world he lives in for
certainty? Can his mind approach the universe and understand it
with his own reasoning mind? Actually, it appears on the surface
that the mind is all that man has to understand this world. What
else is there? The problem for the adult in his philosophical
understanding is that he has trouble leaving behind his freshman
understanding of the physical world. He has matured beyond
such a solitary understanding. And yet, the solution that is
offered does not seem to offer much help. He can with his reason
create a world with his mind. The problem is, everyone else with
their reason can also create a world to their own liking.
We are left with almost as many world and life views as
there are people. If this world is to function at all, there must be
fewer than six billion world views. If reason is to be our guide,
there must be some method for narrowing down the number of
118
views to an acceptable level. Can we use reason to narrow them
down? But reason is the method used to create the six billion
differing systems. We are left with two choices. We can maintain
that some reasoning is better than other reasoning. We must find
a method for deciding which world view is better than other world
views. Failing to find such a method, then we must have some
other method of selecting one view over another. Do we put it to
a vote and declare the ultimate democratic choice? Can three-
billion-and-one voters decide what constitutes reality for the rest?
This sounds like a method to create a system which would
instigate numerous wars.
Another system is to create a world wide religion which
would constitute one world view. This religion would be
acceptable to all because it would be connected to the world view
that men had created for themselves. The religion would appear
to be real because all social and ethical functioning would be
based upon such a view. In other words, it would work. Such a
system would necessitate a world wide culture. If the new
religious interpretation of reality was to accepted by all, it must
work in all cultures. This means a way must be found to construct
a world-wide culture that would be accepted by almost everyone
in the world. Success for any person in such a culture would
require the alignment of one’s self to the reality described in such
a whole world religion.
A final method would be the simplest. One man could
impose his particular interpretation upon the rest of the world.
His view would be the winning view. All would be required to
accept this one interpretation or face physical or social
consequences. This is basically why a dictator is able to restore
peace to a nation: He is able to impose a uniform philosophy upon
his nation. While most societies do not want a dictator, many
have sought some form of pressure to assure the society is
unified around a common set of beliefs. Wars and disasters are
great unifiers. While we do not like to admit it, it is to the
advantage of most governments to have a crisis of some sort.
Just as doctors have a vested interest in curing disease, not
preventing it, so governments have a vested interest in trouble,
not the establishment of permanent peace.
 Back to our freshman philosopher for a bit. He still has his
problem. He doesn’t like believing in a real world that is outside
of his control. Yet, he finds it almost necessary for his own sanity
to assume that there are others out there who are not of his own
making. The student eventually decides some compromises are
in order. His pure reasoning did not get him anywhere except in a
very lonely universe. It is exciting to use reason to separate
oneself from all outside influence and control, but it is not a
permanent solution. Even if we are our own God, we are not a
Holy Trinity. We are alone. It sounds very reasonable, but in this
case, reason is not the solution, the young student is looking for,
in his quest for answers to life’s riddles.
Some assumptions are in order. There must be a real world
out there. This world should be pliable to our desires, but must
offer some resistence in the form of laws which cannot be
violated. Laws that can be violated are not laws, and a universe
without laws is not much different than each man living in his own
homemade universe. Mankind must be separate from the
physical world, yet able to communicate with it. The thing we call
persons must be of a separate substance than that of the world.
Matter does not think or feel or desire to be alive. Men who are
just pieces of matter with reflexes are not men. Even thought
must be something that goes beyond this material universe.
Thought, that is just the product of chemical reactions, is hardly
worthy of the name of ‘thinking.’
The thinking person must assume that others in his universe
are independent of his control and that they are thinking beings
also. And while the student is at it, it would be nice if the
electrical impulses of the brain can actually use its reasoning
powers to discover the laws of the universe. And, yes, of course,
that the electrical impulses in the brain can somehow find
satisfaction in the communion with other like minded brains. Our
young student has come along way, and there is a reason for this.
He finds that life is impossible without importing certain beliefs
into his philosophy. He has had to betray his philosophy that
requires that every belief be based upon reason. It was
liberating, but it would just not function. His mind requires beliefs
120
if it is to function as a mind.
What is our young student to do now? The freshman
solution is just say that he is not assuming anything, he is just
stating the obvious. The problem has been solved. A little
thought and honesty require the acceptance of these axioms as
an act of faith. The faith that the student saw in others that he so
despised, he has had to import into his own system. With the
new system in place, reason is now set free to explore the world
within the limitations set for it by our new philosophical system.
One of the first laws of this philosophy must be the statement: If
‘A’ is true, then ‘B’ is true. Every philosophy starts with an ‘if’
which it cannot prove. The most exalted reasoning starts with
that ‘if’ and then makes reasonable conclusions from there. This
backdoor solution to the creation of a reasonable universe is a
necessity.
The reasoner often starts out to deny the religious faiths that
seem to dwell in the land of uncertainty. Reason offers the
appearance of certainty that religious faiths do not offer. How
much certainty can an act of faith achieve? Not much. The
philosopher wants to live in a world that not only is he certain of,
but it is a world he can convince others is the only real and only
possible world. Through a slight of hand, he has achieved in
giving the appearance of having a solution to all of the world’s
uncertainties. Just accept this reasonable approach and everyone
will be able to unite in a common belief without the requisite faith
that religion requires. The philosopher is aided in his
proclamation in that there are many others who want to believe
that he is right. They have a vested interest in proving that
religion is not a requirement for life.
It must be obvious that the desire of our freshman
philosopher was at bottom, not reasoning, but to acquire a
system which would liberate him from the social, political, and
ethical control that others exert over him. The easiest solution
proved unworkable. The answer was actually the creation of a
new religion under the name of independent philosophy. The nice
thing about the new philosophy is that it has no ethics other than
the ones imported at the start. Man still wants to create his own
universe and be his own God, he just has to clothe his new
religion in the garments of independent reasoning. In fact, he not
only ends in getting others to believe in this new faith, through
much evangelism, but he even comes to believe that the faith he
created is the only true faith. There is only one faith and there is
only one reasonable philosophy, it is the one he proclaims.
The new religious faith is pitted against the revelation that
religious faiths are said to be based upon. Philosophies are based
upon reason we have found, but in order for the reason to
function, assumptions must be imported to ensure that the
conclusions reached through reason are able to function with the
human brain and human personality. Now, religious faiths are
also said to be reasonable. At least, the major ones all appear to
be reasonable to their own followers. It is very difficult for any
follower of any faith to believe in something he knows is false.
Now some cults are able to sustain a form of brainwashing that
can carry this off for one generation, but any faith that seeks to
live longer than one generation must be a reasonable faith.
Now every faith imports its own assumptions. There is no
escaping this necessity. The greatest religious leader is no better
off than our industrious freshman student. There is no way
around importing assumptions. The denying of this only leads to
problems. The arguments that one’s one system is exempt from
assuming thoughts, leads to false arguments. To reject the
honesty of this admission, results in the arrogance of claiming
that one’s own argument can be proved but that others cannot.
The fear of all thinkers is that if they make this admission, they
will reduce their system of thought down to the level of all other
systems. And they are right. There is no system that can be used
to prove that one system is more rational than another, assuming
that reason is used in both systems.
Does this not bring us full-circle back to the problem of our
freshman philosophy student? Are we left with cultural systems
that impose their values on everyone living under the government
that supports such a culture? The answer seems to be that power
is equal with truth.
Because no system of thought or culture can be proved, then the
only way to arrive at some system of truth is to impose some
122
cultural system upon the people. With no truth, the history is
merely the war of one system of truth against another system of
truth. Truth is the winning side. Of course, the subtle argument
used here is to imply that a reasonable system is synonymous
with truth. The philosopher can only arrive at coherence. He can
use his mind to ensure that the system does not include, internal
contradictions. That is all he can do.
If a philosopher were to evaluate one system against
another, he would have to have a standard which stands above
both systems. All systems are confined to this earth. To be a
standard, the super system would have to be from another realm.
Any system that is based on reason or is confined to this planet, is
going to be based upon some basic assumptions. There is no
escaping that. To have a system that is not based upon
assumptions, it would have to be from some system that is not
based upon reason and is not confined to this planet. When we
say the system is not based upon reason, we do not mean it is
unreasonable. It is merely to say that there are no reasonable
proofs that it is true.
How is it possible to have any truth at all? Obviously it will
not come from a man who thinks a system out using his mind.
That only gives us six billion systems. Are we left with the same
problem as the freshman in that every man is free to create his
own system? It would seem so. The Christian answer to this
problem is that the super system that we need to evaluate all
other systems must come by way of a revelation from God.
Suppose there is no God, you might wonder. Then we are back to
the six-billion-man solution. Every man being a God in his own
eyes. This would lead to a system, if no artificial system were
imposed, a life of constant warfare of one man’s ego against
everyone else’s ego. In fact, this seems to be the case. Without
having to develop any system of thought, it would appear that all
men are at war with every other man.
Okay, you say, we have only moved from having six billion
philosophical systems to having six billion revelations. There
does not seem to be any improvement in our situation. Mankind
appears at a dead end. There is no way to prove one
philosophical system or cultural system is better than another.
And there is no way to prove that any single revelation is any
better than any other revelation. There is an assumption in this
very argument. The assumption which is implied here is that
there is no God. When you start with that assumption, your
conclusions will betray you. Man in order to think like a man
cannot escape the faith that he is a created being. He was
created by a Creator.
The assumption of revelation is that man is a creature that
was created by God. It is further assumed that God who created
man was capable of communicating with him. To have a Creator
that could not communicate would be the same as having no God.
A further assumption is that the Creator made man in His image.
There can be no escaping this. Our reason, our personality, our
emotions, and our ethics must all reflect the way that we were
made. To assume that God would create beings only as a joke or
a toy would leave us no better off than the college freshman.
Now it is not flattering to mankind in being forced to assume his
very humanity is a gift and not of our own making. But there is
no way around it. Man must assume, if he is to be a man, that he
is more than a collection of atoms.
We are still left in a world that has multiple revelations, all
claiming to be divine truth. How does mankind go about choosing
which one is true? Did you notice it, but another assumption was
just imported? Can mankind choose? Is mankind in a position to
be able to weigh the differing revelations and decide with his
reason, which one is a true revelation? The answer is ‘no.’ You
see, it would take a system of thought in order to weigh and
evaluate which system was true. And we have already seen that
mankind cannot create his own system from the ground floor up.
This results in a real problem. We cannot create a system and we
cannot evaluate a system that is given to us. Are we still at a
dead end?
It would appear so. Mankind is locked inside a darkened
room with no way to communicate with the outside. The answer
that the Bible has to this problem is not one that mankind wants
to accept. Man does not choose God. God chooses man. And
even worse, he does not choose everyone. To every system that
124
men have invented, this is absurd. It takes control out of
mankind’s hands and places it in God’s hands. This strikes at the
ego of man and it does not flatter his great reasoning power. The
Biblical solution is not one that many are ready to accept, both on
philosophical grounds and egoistical grounds. Most choose to
resist any system that does not leave man in final control over his
own destiny. This is the basic warfare that exists in this world. All
other battles are a result of this primary battle.
We are now down to the understanding of what revelation is
and how it is understood. First of all, it is the invasion of this
world by God, and His desire to communicate with man. The
problem becomes more complicated in that the message of
revelation is, that not only must mankind learn his assumptions
from another, he learns that he is incapable of understanding
God’s message without God taking the blinders off of mankind’s
mind. Through an act of rebellion that mankind experienced
through a representative, man’s mind was broken. He was
incapable of receiving revelation without supernatural aid. At
first, this does not seem like a satisfactory answer to the question
posed by our college freshman.
Are there other revelations which offer a more acceptable
answer? In one word, the answer is ‘no.’ Men have recognized
that the Biblical idea was not acceptable to man’s self-confidence.
Realizing that a revelation is a necessity, many men have sought
to create their own version of a message from God. The corollary
of Biblical revelation is that there are counterfeits. A basic
principle of our earth is that interwoven with truth is deception.
There are actually two revelations according to the Bible. There is
God’s revelation and a revelation of an anti-god. Man is caught
between chaos on one hand by the rejection of all revelations,
and the conflict of two revelations fighting for the control of
mankind. This is not the kind of universe that any of us would
choose to live in, for it goes against the idea we have of ourselves
and the world we would like to live in.
Mankind is in a quandary. How to find his way out of the
locked room that he finds himself in, is the ultimate question. It is
an inescapable dilemma. There is no neutral ground that exists in
this universe. Mankind is in a war not of his own asking, but is a
participant. After his initial failure through Adam, his
representative, man is in every sense of the word, confined to the
locked room. There is nothing he can do to escape the
circumstances of his birth. This is not good. Revelation is the key
that unlocks the door. There is only one key that opens the door
to the communication with God. It is a key that is offered by God
to man. Mankind can respond to God’s offer, but he cannot
initiate anything. The basic story of the Bible is the history of
mankind’s response to the message of God.
Only after unlocking the door can mankind understand his
world. This creates still another problem. It puts man in another
quandary. Man can start with the revelation of God and use his
reasoning powers to create a world and a culture based upon that
revelation. There are others who use different revelations to build
a world and culture at war with the Biblical revelation. From this
quandary there is no escape. This is the world we have to live in
until we enter another world. There is a war of world views that
has lasted as long as man has lived on this earth. Any attempt to
escape this war only results in frustration. The world created by
escape can only be maintained through fantasy or drugs. Many
seek such solutions, but they are not workable. There is an
emptiness in it all, and the continual presence of cosmic
frustration as mankind tries to live in a world that does not exist.
What each system can promise is the conclusion of its
premises. As with all systems, in time they work out the
implications of their beliefs. Very few want to admit that ideas do
have consequences, but that is the nature of belief. What people
believe is of utmost importance and the ideas we adopt will lead
to other ideas and systems of behavior. Such is true for each of
the competing revelations. A particular culture will grow up
around each revelation. What is called ‘Western Civilization’ is
nothing but people living with the consequences of Biblical
assumptions. The great civilizations that we see on earth today
are a result of the differing religious belief systems that have
formed such cultures. Even the new culture on the scene, the
culture of Enlightenment has religious foundations.
Thus we have today, as the world becomes global, the final
126
conflict between the various revelational systems. In ancient
times, with the world populated by many tribes, each tribe could
have its own belief system. There was enough isolation that
conflicts could be solved by separating one tribe from another
tribe. As has been stated, each belief system gives birth to a
culture. Men cannot live in a society without a common culture.
As the world became more and more crowded, the cultures came
into conflict. The great mass movement of people to America in
the 16th and 17th centuries, was the last attempt at cultural
separation. The Calvinistic version of Western Civilization was
countered by the American Indian culture. The decadence of
most of the Indian Cultures offered little resistence.
Despite the appearance of cultures in the last stages of life,
the world today is really down to just two cultures: The Calvinistic
Western Civilization, and the system of Enlightenment Civilization
originated in France in the late 18th century. The Arab Culture
and the Chinese cultures are, despite temporary revivals, are on
their deathbed. The various minor cultures are trying to survive
through various forms of isolation, but the world civilization will
soon beat a path to their doors, and their days are numbered. If
the world continues on its path toward unity, only one civilization
will survive. Both Western and Enlightenment Civilizations are
based on revelations from a divine source. The Western derives
from Biblical Revelation, and the Enlightenment Civilization
derives from the revelation of the anti-god.
It is the conflict between these two revelations which is
driving the world toward either world war or world peace. Just as
conflict was impossible to avoid as the European settlers arrived
in America to come into contact with the Indians, so conflict is
inevitable today. A good example of the conflicts that must result
between cultures is seen in the difference between Indian and
Western ideas of land ownership. Land ownership for the Indian
is communal. Land ownership for the Western person is personal
and involves the fencing of the land. In the absence of
government enforcement of land titles, ownership of land is not
only the fencing of land, but the ability to fight off others who
want to expand their fence lines. These two differing conceptions
of ownership cannot live together. One will survive and one must
submit. The Indian wars were not based on hate, but the natural
clashing of two separate cultures and world views.
The various battles that will be described in the following
pages are all part of a great culture war that is going on. Most
are not even aware of the war because they have already
surrendered. The Indian who seeks a title deed for his land has
accepted the foundations of Western Civilization. The Indian who
claims that all land is communal will find himself at war with the
government and others who have a Western title deed to the
same land. There is no escaping a conflict. That is so obvious.
The same will be true of every other battle that is listed below.
There can be no compromise. One or the other will win, and that
cultural system based upon its revelation will survive. To those
who would like to hide from the coming conflict, the hiding will
only put off the inevitable. You can only hide in places that
neither side, for now, claims as its own.

2 THE BATTLE BETWEEN CREATION AND EVOLUTION

Both Calvinistic Western Civilization and the French

Enlightenment Civilization have differing ideas on the birth of men
on this planet. While Darwin came much later, there was a
connection between the Enlightenment and Charles Darwin. The
French Enlightenment eliminated God from the universe. When
something as big as God is removed, there is a giant vacuum
created. It is a vacuum that gives meaning to life. It is not just a
concept as the superficial might argue. It is a total view of the
universe. It includes not only the idea of a supreme being, but
the organizing principle of society. It determines the hierarchy of
persons and classes. It is what motivates people to either serve
their government or drift into some form of meditation. God not
only sanctions ethics, but it provides the built-in consequences for
those who fail to achieve proper behavior.
From the birth of the Enlightenment to the publishing of
Darwin’s Origin of the Species, there was a search for a
replacement to the God of Western Civilization. These were
128
transition years, and years of searching. This explains the almost
overnight acceptance of Darwin and his theories. The book sold
out on the first day. Darwin not only proposed a theory, he
provided an answer that people were looking for during an entire
generation. He was defended with the enthusiasm of a new
prophet, which is what he was. He was much more than a
scientist with a new theory about the origins. He was providing a
system that could replace the God who had entered into a
covenant relationship with Western Civilization.
Civilizations do not contain elements that can be
interchanged with other cultures. Those who cry out for some
form of multi-culturalism really a very naive. The parts of one
civilization cannot be plugged into another culture. Two cultures
cannot exist on the same territory. They can be combined only if
they give up their claims to being a civilization and agree to
submit themselves under a new civilization which integrates
elements from both. The unity must be based upon a new
unifying principle which is not contained within either culture.
That is what Charles Darwin did. He provided a new organizing
principle for the formation of a new world order civilization. A
new god had been born and with it a new civilization had been
born with it. The worldwide excitement was tremendous.
The defenders of Western Civilization were not always aware
of just what they were defending. Most seemed to think they
were just defending the Bible and its view of creation by God in
six days. They thought they were defending Christianity from just
another heresy. But this heresy was not just one of disbelief, it
was a heresy that offered a whole new way of believing. A new
Bible was introduced into society, the bible of nature. Man could
not go directly to the source of truth through nature. There was
no need for priests. Ecclesiastical teachings were no longer
needed to control people. The world was open to the new
seekers after truth. It was out there to for all who would merely
follow the appropriate techniques–the scientific method.
Western Civilization had been imposed upon man from a
source outside of his control. A new method had finally arrived to
support the new civilizing process of the Enlightenment. Man was
now free to form his own civilization free from any outside
interference. The goal of mankind had finally been achieved, man
had finally achieved the impossible: He had become his own god.
Because Christians and those who were part of Western
Civilization failed to realize the full extent of the attack, the
resources were not assembled to defend the old civilization from
attack. They failed to realize that no compromise was possible.
Every attempt to accommodate the new thinking into the old
system of thought, only allowed the burglar free entry into the
house he intended to rob.
Today this battle has been all but lost for those defending
Western Civilization. Any attempt to defend the creation acts of
God are seen as the last gasp of a dying fool. One of the reasons
for the foolish of the defense is that it has been confined to
specialized fields that few are able to understand. The scientific
specialists have argued that the evidence for evolution is beyond
the understanding of most Americans. They can understand the
thing about man being related to the monkey, but the actual
processes and the technical details are for the specialist. The
common man, who trusts the men in white coats, adopts the
accepted beliefs of the scientists as something to be trusted. But
evolution is much more than about primordial slime learning how
to walk. It is a whole philosophy of civilization.
There are three obvious explanations about the origin of life
on earth. One, God created the universe with certain built in
laws. Once creation was accomplished, there was no need for
God to do anything. In time, everything would work itself out to
the logical conclusions built into the universe from the start. Two,
God created the universe in accordance with the Biblical
explanation. He now only created the laws, but maintains a strict
oversight of every event in the ongoing history of the world.
Three, that by some explanation beyond our knowing, at the
moment of the Big Bang, laws were created when matter was
created. These laws in time resulted in the earth we have today.
There could have been any number of different results, but the
one we have today is the result of billions of years of accidents
working themselves into the structure we observe today.
There may be other explanations, but these are the three
130
that are vying for control of man and the ordering of a civilization.
When it comes down to it, there are really only two. Creation
versus evolution. The halfway answer of an absent God seems to
be a way to believe in God and not believe in God at the same
time. It is difficult to throw God away in one step, so the first step
is just to just lock Him in a closet. In time, the closet can be
eliminated. But, in terms of consequences, there is little
difference between and absentee God and no God at all. An
unknowable God falls into the same category as there being no
God. God and UFO’s fall into the same category–fun to speculate
about, but little more than a parlor game.
In the battle between evolution and creation, aside from the
molecular and technical arguments, what is the consequence of
believing in each system? What kind of civilization will result from
the philosophies of each? This is the area that evolutionists would
just as soon avoid. The common man is no ready to accept the
ideas of a worked out theory of evolution. What the evolutionists
are seeking to avoid at all costs is another Scopes Trial. The next
trial would not be over evidence in fossils, but over the vision of
future as seen in the minds of evolutionists. Until the new world
order is totally in place, the old civilization must be allowed to die
a slow death. By the time the new civilization is in place, no one
will care any longer about the old ways. No head on battle over
real issues, just a lot of confusing data to keep everyone from
getting too close to the actual battle.
One of the things, that evolutionists want to avoid at all
costs, are discussions of the implications of the evolution theory.
One of the issues is the idea of change. How is change produced?
What are the goals that will result from change? Who will control
the change? Can change be stopped? Is change always good?
How do you tell good change from bad change? Just this one
word carries a lot of implications and yet it is not on anyone’s
discussion list of priority issues. Why is that? What is there to
fear? These and many other questions must become part of the
defense of Western Civilization by Christians. One of the really
hot issues that evolutionists want to avoid is the question of
whether the principles of biological evolution apply to other areas
of life.
 Do individuals evolve? Do nations evolve? Do ethics
evolve? Do civilizations evolve? Do religions evolve? As we
progress through the wars between religion and the new world
civilization being born, the themes will build progressively. The
later wars will build on the results of the early battles. The first
battle was over the source of truth. The second battle concerns
the permanence of truth. As evolution evolves into other areas of
belief, the theme of an evolving truth and evolving civilization
become the new battlefields. The battle here over evolution is
laying the foundation for a whole new civilization. That is the
reason that only total victory is possible. The enemy of evolution
must not be allowed equal time or equal access to the purveyors
of information.
The philosophical arguments are phrased in terms of
whether we live in a universe of ‘being’ or ‘becoming.’ Medieval
culture was based on a universe of ‘being.’ Change was looked
upon as an enemy of society. Change was merely to help each
segment of civilization to improve, but no radical change or
revolution was foreseen or welcomed. With the Enlightenment,
revolution replaced change as the ideal of a society. Old forms
and customs were to be overthrown and new ones invented in
their place. Each generation had an obligation to challenge the
past as the world moved into new areas of understanding. The
rejection of everything that had gone before and the evolution of
something new was part of the political culture before it became
part of the scientific culture.
With the rapid change of technological invention occurring in
the world of the 18th century, the future was on everyone’s mind.
While one’s grandparents might have lived in a society their
whole lives without sensing any dramatic changes, the new
generation of the 1700's sensed that their world was on the verge
of something new and exciting. Those who planned the French
Revolution were seeking the violent overthrow of everything that
preceded them. While the words may have been different, their
intentions were the elimination of the past which they saw as
unfit for survival. The new social fit, who understood the
processes of history, were obligated to survive the destruction of
132
the past. When Darwin took this political theology and applied it
to biology, he was merely seeking to take the ideas of his age and
apply them to science.
With Darwinism, the Enlightenment became part of the true
natural order of things. It was no longer just one political ideology
among many, it represented the true order of the universe. It was
destined to succeed in the same manor that man had replaced
the ape. The new political ideology was more fit for survival than
the church related medieval civilization. Only a philosophy, that
understood the true nature of man, could make the new world
function as it should. Every aspect man’s existence must be
taken apart and analyzed. Only those parts that can be used
deserve to be preserved. The twin powers of Enlightenment
political philosophy and the Darwinian revolution in science
combined to launch the biggest rethinking of life on earth since
the time of Moses.
Up until the time of these two philosophies, man lived in
God’s universe. Some did not like it, but there were no other
choices. One could rebel against God’s world, but there was
really no other civilization one could embrace, barring the escape
into a pagan civilization. For most this was not an alternative, as
it represented the negation of everything they believed. Now it
was seen that man could invent his own new civilization. No
longer would one have the narrow choices of either living in God’s
universe or a pagan substitute. It would seem that the goal of
evolution all along had been to create an organism that would
take over the control of the evolutionary processes. There was a
time when primitive men replaced apes, now the time had arrived
for modern man to replace his primitive counterpart. He was to
build a culture not out of instincts and gradual accretions, but
through the intelligent planning of all of civilization.

3 ORIGINAL SIN BATTLE HUMAN POTENTIAL

One of the first things that man has to establish is that he is

capable of taking over from his primitive ancestors. Primitive
man had been held in bondage by a belief that he could not act
upon his own beliefs. The modern view is that man, being a
product of evolution, is in touch with the physical world from
which he ascended. There is no barrier to understanding. Man is
able both to communicate with the material world through his
senses, but his brain is capable of understanding the rules of
nature. When such men as Sir Isaac Newton discovered that
mathematics could explain the movements of the planets through
the sky, he gave man a new confidence that nature had supplied
mankind with the necessary language to speak to the universe.
The beauty of the mathematical laws is that it does not take
a priest to use the calculations. The church through its priesthood
has always held knowledge in secret. In fact, many of the
religions in history have secret doctrines which are preserved for
the very few who are chosen to understand such knowledge.
They are in turn to choose disciples to whom they can teach the
secret doctrines. The masses are never told what these doctrines
are, but are kept in bondage to the priests that use knowledge to
keep the masses enslaved. The whole idea is that knowledge is
something very mysterious and only the few and the chosen are
able to understand the universe.
The use of mathematics does not require a priest or
someone who is living a holy life. Anyone can learn mathematics.
Anyone can buy a book and study it on their own. There are no
hidden secrets for only the few. The new democratic faith that
was becoming the primary doctrine humanity seemed to align
itself with such discoveries as mathematics. One of the primary
purposes of democracy is to replace the church and its doctrines
with something that is open to all, not just those who play the
game that the church requires. Democracy and mathematics
present to mankind a universe that everyone can understand and
that the rules of the material universe are something that can be
discovered and proved. No faith in Newton is required to test his
theories. His ideas can be tested with scientific precision.
This liberation of man from his past is what the modern
world and its theories are all about. Often we lose sight of the
fact that there are wars of liberation going on all of the time. The
doctrine of original sin is one of the most heinous creations,
134
according to the new theories about man. Without a through
understanding of original sin, it is impossible to understand the
enthusiasm which many people joined in to welcome the modern
age. Sometimes it is difficult to fathom why mankind so readily
welcomed being related to a monkey. Man traded in being made
in the image of God for being made in the image of a monkey. It
hardly seems a fair trade off on the surface.
The first things to realize that in the process of ascending
from the monkey, man is superior to the monkey. The monkey
has no cosmic hold over man. Man owes the monkey nothing.
Man can make a pet or use the monkey for medical experiments.
In every way, man can look at the monkey and sense the distance
between them. Compared to a dumb animal, man is one
awesome machine. Even man in some of his basest behaviors
comes out looking pretty good compared from the slime pits to
which he is related. Also, as man can take pride in how far he has
come from the beginning, he can also look forward to the future
with a renewed hope of ever more powers.
Original sin offers none of the ‘slaps on the back’ that
evolution offers. It pictures man as being created in the image of
God, but left incomplete. He was given great powers over all of
God’s creation, but one very important power was withheld. He
was not allowed to decide for himself what was right or wrong.
That is something only God was allowed to do. If the created man
wanted to know the ethics of certain behaviors, he would have to
ask God concerning the rightness of the particular acts. No
matter how great man may be, having to ask permission before
doing anything is a bit humbling. A child does not mind asking his
parents for permission, but when the child grows up, he expects
the right to decide things for himself. Such is the case of man.
His coming of age, means man can decide for himself which acts
are right and wrong, and if it matters at all.
The Bible states that when mankind in his representative
figure, Adam, rebelled against this one directive, a certain disease
was placed upon man by his creator. This disease is called
‘original sin.’ Original sin is to be understood as different that the
acts which are called sinful. Sinful acts, according to the Bible,
are a result of doing things that are wrong as defined by the
Bible. Original sin is the disease that is born within every child
since the birth of Adam’s first son, Cain. Original sin is not an act.
The child or his parents did nothing to bring it about. It is an
inherited condition that permeates the entire human race. Every
person, born of a human father, inherits this disease.
If this disease is not the result of doing anything wrong, and
occurs in a baby before it has done anything wrong, then what is
it? Also, it seems downright unfair. Why would God punish the
whole human race to inherit a disease for which there seems to
be no cure? Even the Bible admits that no matter what a person
does, he will still experience the consequences of this disease.
The ultimate consequence is physical death. Ever since Adam as
man’s representative rebelled against God, man has this disease
which is only partly expressed through rebellion. While rebellion
is one of the most prominent results of original sin, it is still not
what is called original sin. Other such famous acts of rebellion,
such as pride and sexual deviations are also the result of this
original sin.
While the masses think of sexual acts as being the most
sinful and the most reasonable reason to avoid the Bible, the
disease that precedes the act is really what the Bible is all about.
When, the Bible teaches, man is born in sin, it is stating the
consequence for having sinned when Adam sinned. This disease
is a crippling disease. There are no areas of man and his total
personality that are free from the effects. If just one area of
man’s nature could escape from this disease, he would have one
area that could operate independently of God. When God created
man, he was complete except for the inability to examine any act
and decide its ethical impact. With the arrival of original sin,
every area now resembled his incapacity in his ethical decisions.
Man has a rational nature. It is quite obvious that all men to
some decree can reason–some better than others. But all have
this gift. They can look at facts and analyze them and arrive at
sound conclusions. Yet, the Bible states, that this marvelous
ability is no longer the gift of reason that God gave to man. It
lacks something. It has been tainted by original sin. And what
does original sin do to reason? Reason, instead of being part of
136
man’s total nature, now becomes only a mathematical type act.
Reason was meant to operate in conjunction with every other part
of our person and with a person who had the ability to
communicate with God. Reason now operates largely in a
vacuum of its own making. It makes decisions based on false
premises, or it makes decisions that conflict with other parts of
man’s nature.
We all have seen teenagers use their emotions to reach to
perfectly rational, according to them, decision. To everyone else,
it was a totally stupid decision. They should have known. How
could they have been so stupid, their parent might say? The
situation is a result of a different balance between the various
hormonal and psychological functions in a person. This simple
illustration is only compounded by all of the other factors that go
into making a decision. Because every area of human behavior
has been affected by the disease of original sin, there are no
infallible or perfect acts or decisions. And one of the most
devastating results of sin, is that a person is able to fool himself.
The desire to be seen in a good light will often influence all of our
decisions.
Is it any wonder that humans have trouble communicating?
And committing themselves to any kind of long term relationship
at times seems impossible. Both persons often arrive at the
relationship with different rational expectations and with different
degrees of sinful effects in their lives. If it were not for some
overwhelming personal needs and dependencies, it is a miracle
that so many do many to get along. Every social system must
take into account the effects of original sin or that system will
have a short life span. Social systems that require or expect men
to behave well on their own will fail: Witness the failure of so
many 19th century, utopian endeavors. Every society must learn
to deal with criminal and deviant behavior.
One of the least understood aspects of social behavior is that
every social system has certain standards which it upholds. If
these standards are not enforced, then that system is in a stage
of internal decay. Much is often made of the fact that today’s
deviant is tomorrow’s hero. That is true in the sense that deviant
behavior is an act of rebellion against a social system. When the
system can no longer control the deviants in its midst, then that
system is in its final stages of life. The 1950's in America
witnessed such a time. There was a massive effort to control
delinquent behavior and other acts of rebellion. The failure of the
1950's in winning a generation over to its beliefs resulted in the
cultural revolution of the 1960's.
The problem is that every society needs a social system of
beliefs to control the disease of original sin. Not all behaviors can
be allowed. There must be limits even in the most liberal of
societies. Without a total world view of what that society is trying
to achieve, there can be no really adequate control of deviant and
rebellious behavior. The chaos that our society is experiencing
today is the result of not having a philosophy that explains life to
all and is willing to separate those who are in rebellion against
such a system. While much is made of the church and its attacks
on heresy in the Middle Ages, every age must deal with its
heretics. To allow heretics to preach, through word or action, is
an act of war against that society. No society can endure that
allows such attacks to continue.
We in a stage in history when anything seems to be
acceptable. Our liberal beliefs have not developed a systematic
view of society or the direction in which it is going. The masses
are left to their own desires and the occupation of earning a living
and finding various means of escape. It is not satisfying. There is
that inner emptiness because the current glorification of
individual behavior results in the allowing the effects of original
sin to hold each individual in its grasp. Without a social
philosophy each person is allowed to do what he wants. The
problem, according to the Bible, is that without the proper
training, no one knows what they really want. There must be
some system that teaches the individual how to understand his
various desires and how to control them. Without such a system
of belief, the individual is left with a myriad of desires and beliefs
and no way to develop a priority among his competing beliefs and
desires.
Eventually, any government will step in to ensure that it
survives along with the ruling elite, who depend upon the
138
government for their support. When original sin is not kept in
check by a ruling philosophy and by individual self restraint, then
the government will have to become more and more control
oriented. There is a steady drift into a dictatorial form of
government. The priorities of the individual must now be set by
law or by decree. As our society slowly reaches this stage, there
is a growth in rules, regulations, licensing, and taxes–in one word,
more laws. Our current system of government could best be
called a ‘democratic dictatorship.’ The masses are allowed to
choose their form of dictatorship within a narrow band. They are
not allowed to choose another form of government or another
means of social control.

4 THE BATTLE BETWEEN SIN AND ITS CONTROL

THROUGH LAWS

Given the nature of original sin, every law is going to affect

the individual in some way. Every law is a restriction upon the
individual. Every society needs laws to preserve some order. The
battle ensues as there are different views of order and who is
actually benefitting from the social order. The cynic today
regards all laws as merely the will of some people imposed upon
the will of the masses. Unfortunately, this is becoming more and
more true. With no standard of right and wrong, there is no
standard to apply when passing laws. Laws are passed merely to
appease some pressure group, or to influence an upcoming
election. In close elections, any small group, that can control a
swing vote, finds itself in a position to impose its view of law.
It has become obvious through the many wars in the world,
that the side winning the war is able to declare its view of law as
correct. If it had lost the war, its view of law would have been
immoral. It is easy to make the connection, that law is merely the
will of the most powerful group or most powerful nation. And in
time, another war may occur, and a new view of law will be
declared right. Even in our nation, if two views of law are
disputed, the United States Supreme Court is called in to decide
which view of law is correct. By a five-to-four decision, a vote
often split on party lines, one view of law can be declared the real
law. Of course, that law will only be correct until a president with
a different view, can appoint a Supreme Court justice who will
help overturn a previous declaration of law.
Another great factor that leads to cynicism is that many are
allowed to become rich through the manipulation of laws. In the
Pacific Northwest, those timber companies that owned their own
trees managed to get logging restrictions imposed on federal
lands. Those companies that logged off of federal lands were left
without trees. The reason given was the concern of the large
companies for the environment. Often they would give financial
support to environmental groups who oppose logging on public
lands. The result is a shortage of trees and a decline in
competition. The price of the trees owned by the monopoly
companies increased several fold and the price of lumber went up
in a similar fashion. This type of situation has created an
impression that laws are only for those who have the money or
influence to get some bill passed. The common person has little
chance of getting his views made mandates through the use of
the legal system.
The church through the ages has also added its own laws to
the mix of laws. If the church was not able to get some law
passed through a government agency, they still enforced the law
through the power each local church had over its members. Many
churches have had laws against the use of alcoholic beverages.
They do not base these laws upon the Bible, but use these laws to
give the appearance of being for a righteous cause. For a time,
they even managed to get alcoholic beverages banned nationally
through a constitutional amendment. Even with the repeal of that
amendment, churches still persisted in their narrow view of
Biblical laws. Basically, the leaders in the church decided that
what they did not like to do should be immoral for all of their
people. The fact that the Bible teaches moderation in the use of
alcohol does not seem to influence their arguments or their
lawmaking.
Thus when it comes to the Bible and its teaching about the
140
ten commandments, many view such laws as just another
attempt by one group to impose its will upon another group. It is
easy to see how with so many religions and each having their own
law system, it is obvious that this is just another case of each
religion wanting to impose its view upon others. Until one religion
comes out as the new world religion, there is no alternative but to
allow each to keep their own views of law, as long as they keep
their laws in the private domain. To allow any on religion to give
public expression to it laws will only result in opposition from
another religion. This can only result in any age of religious wars.
Western Civilization having gone through one terrible time of
religious conflict, hardly wishes to encourage another time of
violence.
It would seem that the only rational solution would be to
have no laws at all. This would not work as there would be
anarchy. The religions of the world require law system to
maintain their differences. The nations of the world each have
their own laws to ensure that they remain in power. Each
business and organization also has a set of rules to ensure its
survival. The Social Security System is not going to get laws
passed which allow individuals to manage their own retirement
money. That would mean the end of its monopoly. Thus, there
are laws against the managing of one’s own funds that the
government removes from each individual’s paycheck.
Each church has rules to maintain the differences between it and
other religions. Baptists cannot allow their members to practice
polygamy. That would remove one of the differences between
the Baptist and the Mormon.
We have come to divide laws into several groups. A nation
will pass laws. A church will pass, so to speak, ‘sin.’ An
organization will pass codes. Laws will apply to all citizens of a
nation, the sins of the church will apply to its members, and the
codes will apply to those who work for an organization or do
business with it. Each would appear to be king within its own
realm of power. In theory, this is how it should work. But every
organization seeks to expand its rule. The nation wants to rule
the church, and the church wants to influence the government.
The organization wants to set its own code and standards, and
have those standards applied to other social organizations
through its use of government and church sanctions.
While every society needs laws to avoid anarchy, it appears
that a form of anarchy still exists. Every group striving to
maintain their own views, and striving to extend that influence
over as wide a territory as possible. Anarchy has been
transferred from individuals to groups, but anarchy still exists.
What are wars but the fighting over which law system should
prevail and who has the power to impose their law system over
another nation? Nations fighting nations, churches fighting
churches, and businesses fighting other businesses. There seems
to be no end to conflict. For example, what is capitalism but a
system of rules on how one business can declare war upon
another business? What are missionaries but the soldiers of one
religious order attacking another religious order?
It is becoming obvious that this battle is just as important as
all of the previous battles. This particular battle does not make
the headlines as a religious battle. The battle over abortion is
seen as a minor conflict over sexual rights. Rather, the abortion
battles are just a sign of a much bigger war over the
interpretation of laws and their application. This is one of the
most powerful goals of mankind, to define law and to impose it on
others. The ego of mankind being what it is, each individual
thinks that he would be a great king who could impose a beautiful
system upon the rest of mankind. If only people would all live by
the rational laws that I can see so clearly, then the whole world
would be at peace. While the God of the Bible has been
eliminated from our culture, there are many who would like to
take his place.
While battles have been fought over territory and many have
died to defend a land, what they are really fighting for is to decide
whose law will rule over a law. This may sound like a mute point,
but every government, once it gains power, seeks to extend its
influence over another land. The way it does this is through the
imposition of its law system. While the taxes paid are the more
obvious sign of a different law system, there is much more to
government than just the fact of taxes. If anyone wants to know
142
who actually rules over them, all they have to do is to determine
where all of their money is going. That will tell you the source of
your law system.
Each government also has a view on how its people should
be ruled. To live in China will be much different than living in
Austria. Each government has a different view on how people
should be ruled. They both collect taxes, and a person may
actually pay more of his income to the Austrian government than
the peasant in China. It is not only a question of how much a
person has to pay in taxes, but what those taxes being used to
support. Each government, whether it admits it or not, has a
philosophy of law. Laws are not for the thief and the murderer.
Most laws apply to the innocent person. Innocent in terms of
violating the major laws we think of when we think of what a
criminal is.
The modern government is involved in much today than just
the maintenance of domestic order and the preservation of its
borders from foreign aggression. Traditionally, this is what most
thought a central government should do. Any other needs could
be handled on a local level with the citizens of a city or county
taxing themselves for particular purposes. Because the nature of
what is thought of as law has changed, the nature of government
has changed. Law is not just to control deviant behavior, but is a
tool that can be used to change the very structures of society and
the way people interact. It can be used to create a paradise on
earth. Law has thus revealed itself to be, by the very nature, a
religious belief.
This is where modern society and government come into
conflict with Christianity. The Bible is based upon a view of law.
If there is one subject repeated over and over again throughout
the Bible it is this: Man must live by laws. The first thing that God
presented to Adam and Eve was a law system. The world was
destroyed by the flood because mankind had violated God’s law
system. The first thing God did when He brought Israel out of
Egypt was to give them a law system in the form of the Ten
Commandments. When the nation was formed in the land of
Israel, a whole system of laws was given to the people.
Throughout the rest of the Old Testament, prophet after prophet
called the nation of Israel back to the laws of its founders.
When Christianity moved out from the nation of Israel to
conquer the world, the thing it was required to do was to teach
the nations of the world the laws of God. Christianity is about the
keeping of the laws of God. When the New Testament talks about
the law being abolished, it is talking about the ceremonial laws
that were pictures of the sacrifice of Jesus to fulfill for all mankind
the requirements of the law. His death and resurrection did not
abolish the laws of God. In fact, mankind was now freed from the
effects of original sin by means of His atoning death. Man could
now live the life that God had originally planned for mankind. The
application of God’s laws through any nation’s law system, the
Bible promised, would result in God blessing that nation in many
ways, including the material, spiritual, and psychological. While
the term law has become a bad word, in the Bible, the idea of law
is that it comes as a gift from God.
The modern nation has actually come around to the Biblical
view of law: It regards law as a means to change people into a
better person. Laws are now not only designed to control the
obvious criminal, but are now designed to change the way people
behave. The nation seeks to save its people from their sins
through the application of laws of every area of life and every
type of behavior. While the Communists have long thought that
they could change a people through the systematic application of
reward and punishment, it now has become a democratic belief
also. Those who in times past may have become philosophers
and social reformers, are now becoming politicians. If the right
laws could be passed and enforced upon a nation’s people, the
world would become the utopia that men have dreamed about for
ages. That is the vision of today’s political leaders: Better living
through coercion.
One of the benefits of the current state of affairs is that
everyone has become aware of the importance of law. It is no
longer just the Christian and his Bible that proclaim the glories of
law. That is why when missionaries go into foreign lands, they no
longer gain the approval that they used to meet. They are seen,
and properly so, as part of an invading army. As Western
144
Civilization has accepted Biblical law in the past, the missionary
has been seen as an emissary of Western Civilization. The
indigenous population recognized something that some
missionaries were not even aware. Their teaching of the laws of
the Bible was not just an attack upon their native religion, it was
an attack upon their culture.
The trend in our age as is to lessen their attacks by the
preaching of multi-culturalism. This cannot be done. Two
cultures represent two separate law systems. Two law systems
cannot live side by side. The invasion of the North armies into the
South in 1861 was an admission of this fact. The Southern
Calvinistic law system could not exist in the same nation as the
humanistic law system of the North. A nation can have only one
foundation for its laws. To have two is just a temporary phase in
the transition from one system to another. The new law system
will always claim that it just wants a culture that tolerates
differences. This is the only way that a new system can gain a
foothold. Once it does, it attacks the old system.
There can be no separation of law and culture. You can
separate law from meaningless ceremonies. For example, the
church baptism of an infant is tolerated today because it is no
longer considered part of a law system. It is just a ceremony that
parents do in the privacy of some building, but it has no social
and public significance. Such was not always the case. The
baptism of an infant represented the belief by the parents, that
their child belonged part of the Biblical law system by its
relationship to the Biblical idea of the covenant family. When
others came along and were re-baptized as adults, it was an
attack of the view of the family as part of the Biblical world view.
Another example of a radical attack upon contemporary is
the rebirth of the Christian marriage. The traditional vows are
emphasized. There are no escape clauses to the covenant of
marriage except death, or espousal unfaithfulness. This act today
represents a totally different law system from that one imposed
by the American legal system. That two persons would commit
themselves to something beyond the law is an act of revolution.
Each event, such as this, that is repeated more and more often
can result in the transformation of a whole society. It would result
in the transformation of society. Of course the old order would
fight back. This is why we have cultural wars found in the courts
and in election. People become aware that more is on the line
than just a simple act of marriage. That is why the battle over
abortion is so intense. It is more than the life of a baby at stake,
it is the whole idea of the new world order that is at war with
traditional Western Civilization.
The battles have been basically over three views of law.
There are more, but in broad terms we will deal with three. There
is revealed law, which are the laws of the Bible. There is natural
law, which is basing laws that are revealed through the study of
nature. There is manmade law: Most typically, this is the law
imposed by kings and government agencies. In the current state
of affairs there is a battle over which type of law is going to
succeed. Right now we have a mixture of all three. This is the
reason our nation and its laws are in such dispute and seem so
corrupt. Three systems of law cannot exist side by side. Either
chaos will result or one form of law eventually wins in the end.
The current state of affairs is complicated by the fact that our
world is becoming the ‘global village.’
The twentieth century and its wars are more than battles
being fought over law or oil. As the world unites into one world
through the expansion of trade, travel, and communication,
different law systems are coming into contact. As one law system
resists, it meets pressure from another law system. One world
requires one law system. When people lived in tribes that had
only occasional contact it was possible to have different law
systems. As the populations grew and tribes expanded across the
globe, conflicts arose. These conflicts have often been pictured
as nothing more than one tribe trying to rob another tribe. In
some cases this is true, but more often we have the conflict of
one civilization with another.
The example most Americans are familiar with is the conflict
between Western Civilization and the Indians of North America.
Most tribes resisted the new civilization that invaded from Europe.
What happened is typical of so many events in history. As Europe
grew more crowded, it became impossible for those who had
146
different views of law to find a place to live where they could
practice their own type of law. Migrations have always resulted
where people would rather move on than fight a battle. If a group
is in a minority, it is pointless to try to fight unless they are
corned or very stubborn. Moving to an area where they can be a
majority is the easiest solution. This is the story of history. You
could write a whole history of just the migrations of peoples
across Europe.
It is important to remember that most people do not just
wake up one morning and decided they are going to leave
everything behind. Travel to a new land involves the loss of one’s
wealth, the loss of security, and the very possibly the loss of one’s
life. Migrations, for this reason, are not usually voluntary. They
are forced upon individuals and groups. The fight over a law
system is often voiced in the concerns over freedom. That is a
broad term which means different things to different people, but
the basis of most freedom comes from a particular law system.
One man’s freedom is another man’s tyranny. Abortion, again, is
a good example of this. In the man-made law system, abortion is
a freedom. In the Biblical law system the killing of a baby is a
form of tyranny of the mother over the child.
Returning to the conflict between the migration of people
from Europe to America, we can see this principle in operation.
Those who left everything in Europe to come to America often
came looking for freedom. The views of the Puritans in England
conflicted with the established church in their homeland. As the
conflict grew, many chose to find a place where they could raise
their children under a different law system. The migration to
American offered this opportunity. Unfortunately, some had
migrated to this land ahead of the European settlers. There were
approximately 250,000 Indians of various tribes scattered
throughout North America when the first colonists arrived. (The
author is aware that the numbers, in the battle of political
correctness, have been revised upwards of late.)
Most tribes lived a nomadic existence. The continent was
big enough that the tribes could travel about without too many
conflicts with other tribes. Once a particular land had been
hunted clean, the tribe would move to another area. This worked
to provide them a subsistence form of life until the invaders
arrived from Europe. The new arrivals had a different form of law
system. Their system involved, among other things, the belief
that individuals owned a particular peace of land. One did not
just move onto another, more fertile land, one cultivated a
particular plot of land and was a steward over that land. The
effort that one put into improving the land was passed on to one’s
children through a legal thing called an ‘inheritance.’ Obviously,
these two different views of land were bound to come into
conflict. The Indians could not sell the land to the English
because no one really owned it, and the English with their use of
fences, were not welcomed.
The two systems of law and two views of land ownership
could not exist upon the same parcel of land. The Indians were
not about to settle down and farm the land in the European
fashion. It would have meant the changing of their whole tribal
system. The Europeans were not about to give of their Bible and
its teachings on law. Just as the wars fought today over law,
these battles can never just be settled by adding another law.
This was the mistake of the treaties signed between the Indians
and the Whites. The treaties were nothing more than a
temporary truce until a new conflict over law arose. Eventually
the Indians became sub-culture in the North American landscape.
In a similar fashion the fashion, as the religious fundamentalists in
America lost control over the government, they retreated into
little church enclaves or religious reservations. The
fundamentalists are free to practice their religious beliefs as long
as they do not do so outside of their reservation.
In this age of political correctness, there are many who
would like to see the Indian reservation system end. While there
may be a delayed guilt over the past conflicts, there is also a lack
of understanding of why the conflict happened in the first place.
The same ones who want to free the Indians get very agitated
when the religious fundamentalists seek to escape from their
religious reservation. The modern phrase of the ‘separation of
church and state’ is a term used to confine the fundamentalist
law system confined inside the church building. What the term
148
really means is the separation of Biblical law from man-made law.
The two systems cannot coexist. What is termed tolerance today
is nothing more than a modern reservation system updated into a
more socially accepted form.
The new world order has conquered Biblical law inside the
United States. As it seeks to extend its rule of law to the entire
world, it is coming into conflict with other religious law systems.
The resistence of Muslim fundamentalists today is the nature of
the conflict we are experiencing in the Arab nations. They are
fully aware that a victory of the new world order will mean the
same fate for them, as the religious fundamentalists have
experienced in America. The
conflict between law systems is what the world is experiencing
right now. As the whole world decides whether to unite into one
belief, or whether the local tribes will be allowed to exist, we will
be living in an age of fear and uncertainty.
The world is headed for one system of law whether it likes it
or not. Basically the history of the world has been the story of the
Tower of Babel. This was the first attempt at a world civilization.
It failed. The people scattered throughout the earth. Each
successive attempt at a world civilization has resulted in its
eventual defeat. The usual cause has been the empire became
overextended. It moved beyond its ability to enforce its law
system upon the people. In the early stages of an empire, people
will scatter even further from its grasp. Just as many spread out
and away from the Tower of Babel, history is the record of one
people after another who have moved rather than come into
contact with a one world civilization.
As an empire became overextended, some tried resistence.
As they became successful, other imitated their example, and the
downfall was on its way. Just as history is the story of one
migration after another, it is also the story of one empire after
another that has tried to rule the world. The many attempts have
not been futile. There has been a learning process. Notes have
been kept. While the handbook for would-be world rulers will not
be found in your local bookstore, such a book, in fact many such
books, do exist in private hands. There has been progress in this
area of understanding what is necessary to rule the world. In the
meantime, many minor battles are being fought. Any group that
offers potential resistence to world rule is slowly being eliminated.
The final answer for now is that there is no place to migrate
to escape world rule. To hasten a one world law system, a
worldwide internal migration is being encouraged. The peoples of
the world are being mixed together. Any nation that has ties to
some local law system will find that there are so many
‘foreigners’ living within its borders that resistence to world law
will be impossible. The battle being waged today for world rule is
disguised as world trade, world communication, worldwide
immigration, a world entertainment structure, and a worldwide
press. This process is obvious to a world traveler who visits a
local mall. If he were to ignore any language indicators, he would
be hard pressed to determine where he was. What once was
called the ‘malling’ of America, has become part of the worldwide
scene. Each mall is like an embassy for the new world culture.
The uniting of the United States into a single nation serves
as a template that can be used to integrate the world into a one
world law system. With the nationalization of the press,
entertainment, and schooling, pockets of local resistence are
being defeated. Only one war was required to turn the many
states into one national market. The Civil War brought men
together into one national army and that army was used not only
to defeat local resistence to national policy, but was used to
destroy the local Southern culture. The South’s law system being
based on the Bible had to be defeated. It would always oppose
any national unity based on anything other than the Bible. That is
the reason Sherman had to march through the South. That is why
the South was subjugated to twelve years of military occupation.
The Old South and its culture had to be destroyed.
One world law system also means one world market.
Everyone will eat burgers at MacDonald’s, wear Levi’s, and drink
Coca Cola. Just as American companies flourished in the post
Civil War era with a national uniform market, the new
international conglomerates are lusting after a world without
borders or cultural differences. Just try to imagine how many
Levi’s are needed to cloth the nation of China. The transition to
150
this world law system is going on as you read. The battles you
are reading about are disguised as some form of rebellion or
terrorism, but the real reason is the same as the American Civil
War. Some culture in some small land is not changing with the
times. There is nothing like total destruction to destroy a culture.
The destruction of Japan brought us the Honda and the Toyota.
The destruction of each, little nation will result in a similar
process.
In closing, there is one nation today that is attempting to
become part of the worldwide commercial system, while
maintaining its own separate law system. That nation is China.
Right now it is trading with the world and attempting to keep the
world out. The Chinese Communist culture has let it be known
that it will not cave into foreign intervention within its borders.
They are the modern version of the Old South in the United
States. The current policy is to avoid a war similar to the one
required to break the resistence to national rule within the United
States. The goal is to so commercialize China that the
Communist philosophy will go the way of the Bible in the United
States. If China manages to somehow resist the pressure, war
will come over some contrived incident to force the new world
order and its law system upon that land.

5 THE BATTLE BETWEEN BIBLICAL FREEDOM AND

PLANNING

One of the best kept secrets in today’s wars is that the very
idea of freedom comes from those who have followed the Bible in
their lives. There are many different kinds of freedom. The one
we think of as freedom is based upon the Biblical idea. The word
‘freedom’ is almost like a condiment: It is just one of those things
that is added onto modern life to add a little more flavor. And like
most condiments, it is something that could be eliminated without
the destruction of the best elements of life. People would still
have jobs, own homes, have families, go to the mall, watch tv,
and carry on their lives without much difference. While the early
Americans were willing to die for their freedom, today just finding
a common definition that most could agree upon would be
difficult.
Each generation learns to define words according to their
experiences in life. Also, those events that mold one’s life and
character, are different for each generation. Those that grew up
during the Great Depression had a different outlook and set of
expectations than those that grew up during the fifties. One
generation was happy to find any kind of work, another
generation was looking for something called ‘job satisfaction.’
Those that went to war during the Second World War came home
with idea of putting ‘real life’ behind themselves. They were
looking for a home away from it all, a house in the newly formed
suburbs. Those who grew up during the wild sixties wanted to
experience earthly sensations as a means to enjoying the good
life. Each generation had a different idea of what it meant to be
free.
Add to this mixture, the various races and religions which all
have a different idea of what it means to be free. A Black
American will certainly have a different idea of what it means to
be free than a Unitarian living in Boston. A White Southern man
will have another view of what the good life is and the role
freedom contributes to the attaining of that life. He might see
freedom in a negative light as it has been used as weapon against
him and his heritage. It is as if freedom for him is a dirty word.
There is also a mixture of religious faiths in America, all with a
different idea of freedom. A Muslim Fundamentalist may regard
freedom as something the group experiences, but not an
individual thing. A Protestant Fundamentalist may regard
freedom as the psychological liberation experience during
worship. A person who is able to express himself emotionally in a
worship service is said to be free.
As all of these different ideas of freedom (and there are
many more) are united under one government, there is obviously
a conflict. Each group, in just this one area alone, looking for
something different in a free country. The Protestant
Fundamentalist wants the freedom to hand out tracts at a local
mall. The Muslim may want the freedom to built an ‘ugly’ mosque
152
in a residential neighborhood. The ex-sixties radical wants the
freedom to experiment with sex and drugs without legal
restrictions: What do you mean that she was only seventeen?
When the early settlers came to America they only had one idea
of freedom, and it was easy for them to gain a consensus. Today,
freedom had become the rallying cry of one special interest after
another.
Each year, new freedoms are added to our list of freedoms.
While in the past, President Roosevelt may have talked about the
four freedoms, the list has grown considerably since then. Each
American should now be free from not only fear, but free from
paying his medical expenses. The old freedom of religion has
been changed from the freedom to allow one’s religion to operate
in the public realm, to the new freedom of religion to put up a
building and practice religious rites within that physical structure.
The old freedom of being able to get a job has been changed to
the freedom to work in a physically safe, and psychologically
satisfying atmosphere. It is to be a totally non-threatening
atmosphere.
Obviously, the battles over freedom seem to imply that we
live in chaotic times. This is true, in part, because our society has
lost its cultural dictionary. While many of the founders of this
nation may not have been Christians, the King James Bible was
the dictionary of cultural life. One could agree with it or disagree
with it, but one’s opinion was either pro-Bible or anti-Bible, but
still one spoke in terms of what the Bible said. There is no
common ground any longer for a whole society to communicate
effectively. There are no longer any unifying concepts which can
bind a nation together. Of course, the reference is about normal
times. Anytime there is some disaster, there is some temporary
unification over something everyone is experiencing.
What can be done to bring some order to all of the chaos
that is experienced in society today. The answer is to change the
nature of society from being organized on the principle of
freedom to one organized on the principle of planning. The only
answer that seems possible in today’s world of chaos and anarchy
is to impose an order. An imposed order is another name for a
dictatorship. That word is avoided today. Every demand is made
out of the appearance of necessity. The leader appears to be a
victim of historical circumstance. He wishes he did not have to
take to actions he does, but the current situation demands he do
it. The new style of leadership apologizes for the power he must
use, but he feels he has no choice.
One of the forgotten facts in this all is that societies in the
past did achieve unity and a common purpose without a dictator
or benevolent autocrat. Societies were organized around a
common faith. A society will always have dissidents, but a
common purpose in the past has been a reality. We are, today,
so used to the conflicts and social battles, that the very idea of
social peace without a strong central government seems out of
the question. There again we have the idea of necessity. The
central government if it relaxed its hold upon the social world,
chaos would result. Immediately, it would say that new controls
were needed. And they would be, but the unspoken fact would be
that there is more than one source of controlling a society. This
fact has been totally forgotten.
There are many forms of governments beside the central
government we all know. There was a time in American history
when the local civil government in the town and county were able
and allowed to handle most of the governing functions. If people
disagreed with the local laws and customs, there were many
other towns and counties where one could freely take up
residence. In time there was a natural sorting. Similar to what
we have in the state of Utah today, although they have
surrendered much of their local freedom also. With the arrival of
the national uniform code for all laws and customs, people no
longer have to move to avoid conflicts. But there is also nowhere
to move to find some form of freedom. With the arrival of the
national chain of burgers, it is difficult to find good local foods.
What is true of food is even more true of local customs that made
each area like a different nation.
Most people only think of civil governments when they think
of governments. There are other forms of government. The
church often served a community to bring order out of chaos. So
did the labor union, and other social organizations. Private
154
schools also served as a form of government, not only through
education, but through the teaching of discipline and the
administering of justice. Each local form of government
administered control. People who misbehaved could be expelled.
That was a major event, not the minor thing it is today. To be left
outside one of these organizations was to be without a
community. It was to be alone. It was not good. People changed
their behavior to conform. Order was maintained not by some
dictator, but by the community maintaining control over those
who would disrupt the communities standards. Freedom was not
the right to misbehave, but freedom meant you had the freedom
to move to another community where your behavior might be
tolerated.
Another lost fact in today’s confusion is the importance of a
common faith for a nation. The idea that a nation can be
organized around several different world views all with equal
freedom is a very modern one. It is not an idea that has been
tried and found successful. In past times, the invasion of a
foreign nation has meant the obliteration of one or the other’s
world views. Often during the Roman period, the invading armies
would sometimes actually adopt the Roman customs. But no
where was it possible for pagan or barbarian to live side by side
with the Roman customs without one or the other becoming
dominant. A society based upon multiple customs and beliefs
may sound good, but it will not survive. There will be conflicts.
The conflicts will result in one or the other side winning, or a
dictator will arise to impose his order and world view upon
everyone. One way or another, peace would be restored.
Anarchy is not a permanent thing. Order will be restored. The
only question is, whose order?
Now we come down to the bottom line. Biblical freedom is
not compatible with a strong central government in a multi-
ethical social order. Either the Christians must be neutralized in
some way, or the new social order will never stabilize. There will
be constant warfare between the government a large segment of
its population. The constant fighting would be a check upon the
government’s plans for a new world civilization. There will never
be a world order of any significance as long as Christians maintain
their ideas about freedom. The exclusiveness of Christianity must
be eliminated. The idea that freedom means the freedom to carry
on public activities outside of government regulation and control
is contrary to a stable central government.
Through history Christians have seen it as part of their
church organization to also carry out charitable functions. Such
things as schools, adoption agencies, food banks, hospitals,
orphanages, and charities have been considered a religious
activity. As such, these activities have been carried on without
any regulations, and they operate as tax free agencies. The state
looks upon this as an intrusion into its domain. The church is to
perform the rituals of life, but they are not to interfere with
government operations or operate organizations that duplicate
government activities. The whole purpose of having a central
government is to have one inclusive operation that everyone can
use. The exclusiveness of the church operation is contrary to a
world wide system of government. No one must be excluded
from any important organization in any social order.
Freedom must be confined to the private behavior of
individuals without a church building who are performing a
religious ritual. When individuals leave the church building, they
now become members of a large and more inclusive order.
Exclusiveness must be confined to situations outside the public
realm. Freedom must be redefined to mean any behavior that is
legal one is free to do. In any social order, no one is free to do an
illegal act. No society could exist is individuals were free to do
what the society condemns. When Christians claim that their
religion allows behavior that is becoming increasingly seen as
illegal, then the Christian religion must change to meet the
circumstances of the time. To allow a medieval view of freedom
to survive into the modern age is not only stupid on the central
government’s part, it is disruptive of its attempts to rule the
entire society as one.
The new world civilization can exist only if freedom is
confined to the ruling agencies. They cannot plan if there are
restrictions upon their ability to implement their plans. The
Christian faith as it exists in the Bible cannot exist side by side
156
with any government that desires to plan an orderly society. To
have areas of society claiming that their behavior is outside the
control of a government agency is to invite anarchy. Every
religion must submit to the plans or anarchy will result. As the
modern society becomes increasingly interlocked by financial
transactions, the coming war will probably be fought in the area
of the economic. Currently, churches receive many subsidies, tax
benefits, and special allowances which can be used to control the
behavior of Christians. Most people will fight only until there are
economic consequences. The same will be for churches.
As the new world government and its counterpart in a new
world civilization becomes closer to reality, the war between the
Christian church and the state will escalate. The churches and
the individuals will face increasingly financial pressures to join
with others in creating peace throughout the earth. To allow any
church freedom would not only invite others to do the same, it
would mean the possibility of new religious wars. As long as
governments are allowed to plan the social order and to plan the
activities of churches, there will be a world of peace. To resist
this new freedom of government planning will result in one of the
final battles of Western Civilization. Either world government will
fail or the church will fail, but one of them must fail in their
mission to the world. The new world civilization cannot coexist
with the Christian version of the Kingdom of God.
The battle in the United States has been to use textual
criticism, Darwinism, Dispensationalism, revivalism, and public
schools to defeat Christianity. These are the main weapons
against the Christian Kingdom of God. With textual criticism the
Word of God was made equal with all other scriptures and, in fact,
all other books. The exclusiveness of Christianity was destroyed.
It was just one of many attempts to understand the mysteries of
this world and man’s place in it. With Darwinism, man became
just another animal seeking to live on this planet. His place as a
divine creature was lowered to one just above that of the ape.
With no divine image, there is no divine mission. Man is here by
himself to figure out how to survive like any other creature.
Dispensationalism removed the Kingdom of God to the
distant future after Christians had been removed from this planet.
There was no need to Christians to quibble over details on this
earth, as it was viewed as just ‘polishing brass on the Titanic.’
While the Christian may not agree with Darwinism totally,
Dispensationalism removed any responsibility on the Christian’s
part to institute the Kingdom on earth now. It was God’s
responsibility. With the mission of the Christian removed,
revivalism become ever more popular. Christianity became
associated with an intense and liberating emotional experience.
The false emotions generated created the impression that all was
right with the world. How could something wrong feel so good?
Christianity as expressed in revivalism was thus seen as the true
expression of the Kingdom of God. Emotion became the bedrock
of the Christian experience.
Finally, the public schools removed the children from their
parents and educated them according to the techniques of the
central government. Through the facade of local control parents
were conned into thinking that the public schools could do a
better job of teaching their kids. It was a slow process and
pockets of resistance were slowly defeated, but the public school
became the standard of what a good education should be. Even
when the churches eventually tried to rebel against the public
school movement, all they could do was give a poor imitation of
the public schools. They taught the same subjects with the same
books. A little school prayer was used to sanctify the secular
knowledge the children were receiving. The final result would be
not different than a child in public schools. The child would grow
up with a secular world view, because that is the view needed to
get into college and attain some material level of comfort.
Like the other battles fought between the central
government and the church, the church has come up short. It
teaches a false gospel in order to maintain its tax deduction. It
teaches secular knowledge and world views in its school so they
can receive proper accreditation. While it may protest the
teachings of Darwin, it incorporates the findings of Darwinism into
its basic theology. It applies the laws of evolutionary psychology
in with its teachings from the Bible. The Kingdom of God is
viewed, more as mankind’s struggle against the environment
158
than as a struggle against the rule of sin. Mankind is on a long
journey to learn how to achieve a oneness with nature, and when
this happens, men will be at peace with themselves and with the
planet. The leaders in the church are constantly updating their
message so that it will not be ridiculed by the ruling elites. The
end of the church age is upon us.

6 THE BATTLE OVER THE ROLE OF FORCE IN ANY

SOCIETY

When people talk about their fears of Christians and their

Biblical laws, their main objection, above all others, is the idea of
the Christian use of force. It is termed a theocracy. The objection
is that you cannot have any society where people are forced to
behave in a way that goes contrary to their conscience. The
history of the church and its rule in the medieval ages is repeated
over and over. The modern idea of freedom is seen as the
liberation of mankind from the rule of the church. The church is
pictured as forcing people to behave in ways that is contrary to
human nature. The Inquisition and the witch hunts became
symbols of an oppressive society which modern man does not
want to return. The dark ages are seen as one ruled by force
while the modern age is one ruled by choice.
The reason for this is the modern word game. In areas of
necessity, it is not regarded as something of force. Taxes are a
necessity. It is not seen as force. Environmental regulations and
the fines involved is born out of necessity. The laws based on
maintaining social order are vital as our society becomes
increasingly multi-ethnic and more interdependent. These laws
are becoming more and more intrusive as terrorism is becoming
more of a problem. The many health regulations are seen as
being in the interest of the general public. Housing codes, drug
regulations, product safety standards, etc. are seen as the
government’s role to regulate the entire economy for the general
will.
This can be contrasted with the church’s role in controlling
interest rates, in seeking regulations for warfare, in protecting
guilds, and using various church agencies to protect the poor
from exploitation. Looking back upon this age, the regulations
seem minor in compared to today’s computerized tracking of
every infraction. The costs of total regulation today are
enormous. Of course, regulations are not the real reason the
church is painted as authoritarian. The reason is its regulation of
morality. It sought in particular to enforce patriarchy and
monogamy. These are the two beliefs that moderns cannot
accept. They will accept wage slavery but they will not accept
monogamy and patriarchy.
Those that would profit from man’s penchant for freedom
from family responsibilities have catered to man’ weakness in this
area. The willingness of mankind to give up the freedom that
men experienced in earlier times for the freedom to be
irresponsible is man’s Achilles heel.
This is the only possible explanation for the submissiveness to the
new world civilization. What would have caused a rebellion in
previous ages is accepted today. Now some say that it is freedom
from religion that marks the modern age. It is not freedom from
religion however, it is freedom from the morality that religion
teaches. Moderns are quite willing to accept some pretty strange
religions, as long as intrusive moralities are not included.
There is more today than just the rule of the central
government. Through the use of laws and regulations, many
other agencies also rule over mankind with force. The modern
business corporation also rules over its employees with a force
that would have not been tolerated in previous times. Because
the retirement benefits package, employees are tied to
corporations for life. Most are afraid to leave for fear of losing
their chance of a good retirement. The longer an employee is
with a company the more he is tied into the various company
benefit’s packages. Also, the employee’s behavior is regulated
while he is working to promote efficiency and to provide a
harmonious workplace. The business also regulates the private
behavior of an employee if it might interfere with the company’s
business efficiency.
The various tax collecting agencies, also rule over people’s
160
lives intrusively, behavior that in the past would have been
regarded as a mark of a dictator. The amount information, an
individual must share with the various government agencies,
leaves little room for privacy. With the addition of computers and
their ability to share information about people means a person
has no privacy from anyone with computer-access codes. Also,
the various trade guilds such as the American Bar Association,
and the American Medical Association also rule over one’s
profession. The decisions made by the various guilds, affects an
individual’s life in more ways than people even know. Proper
medical treatment, and who can treat a person, are decided by a
guild that does not have the individual person’s real health in
mind.
The various trade treaties regulate what a person can buy
and sell, and what price will be paid for some product or service.
The individual has no choice but to buy the products offered by
the major distribution centers. The threat of terrorism has
resulted in new laws and regulations that all individuals must
submit to if they want to live in today’s world. The threat of
terrorism means that from this point on, all people will live under
the restrictions other generations only experienced briefly during
times of open conflict. The twenty-first century will be known as
the century of permanent war. The freedom people used to enjoy
during times of peace have disappeared forever.
One of the most important new areas of control is the
modern banking system. With paper money going away, no
person can live without a banking connection. With the numerous
monthly bills that must be paid to some distant provider of
services, a checking account and credit card have become
necessities. There is little room for freedom outside of the rules
and regulations of a bank. There is no freedom from banks. And
this is just on the local level. The international trade is done
through international banking concerns. Even the person who
wishes to travel cannot travel with just cash. A banking
connection is necessary for every part of life. The interest rates
charged by banks can make or break an economy. In some ways
the banks can bring governments to bow down to the
international system and controls.
 The new international treaties, regarding the behavior of
individuals is just starting to become apparent. The ability of an
international court to rule over individual behavior is now
recognized. Religions that discriminate will find themselves under
increasing pressure to conform to new more tolerant attitudes.
Individuals that harm the environment in some way could find
themselves in an international court and paying damages to a
foreign nation. The right to hunt and fish will also become
regulated by international treaties and agencies. It will not be
long before an international passport will be issued. Anyone not
complying with the new global regulations will find their travel
privileges revoked.
The list could be extended for pages. The bottom line is
that, despite the propaganda, we are living more and more in an
age of total control. Yet, this age describes itself as the freest in
the history of the world. While the Bible regulates moral
behavior, the new world civilization controls just about every
activity, except the sexual. In fact, with the spread of AIDS and
the fear of over-population, these areas could well come under
some new form of regulation. As time goes on, it is going to
become more difficult to accuse the medieval church of being
oppressive. The Bible will once again become the Book that
people look to for liberation from the modern iron cage of
freedom.
At times it has been difficult for moderns to understand why
the Bible depicts the execution of Jesus that way it does. People
declare, why did the Jews get so excited about what one person
was saying? There is a lack of awareness that in 27 A.D., there
was quite a religious bureaucracy. The various scribes, lawyers,
and religious leaders occupied a system that exploited the
masses and ensured themselves the riches of the land for
themselves. Jesus was not just a religious teacher, his teachings
reflected a whole philosophy of culture and government and
religion. His enemies knew that if the masses were to follow him,
the whole social bureaucracy would be in trouble. Jesus came to
declare war upon the privileged few who exploited the common
person. Jesus, in a sense, was declaring war upon the
162
establishment. He had to suffer the same fate as any other
traitor to the privileged elite.
The role of modern Biblical scholarship is to remove the
offense of the message of Jesus. If the actual implications of the
Bible were taught, the ruling elite would crack down upon the
church. Those who make their living off of the church need to
ensure that nothing happens to the flow of money into their
pockets. An activist Christianity would follow Jesus in His hatred
of the exploiting bureaucracy, and would call for a revolution.
This cannot be allowed to happen. In any war upon the church,
the leaders are the first one’s to suffer. The people may revolt,
but the leaders end up in prison or worse. The history of the
church is the history of its leaders seeking ways to avoid
confrontation with the ruling elite.
The first American revolution, with its Articles of
Confederation, was very close to a religious revolution to restore
power to the common people. Christianity favors the power of
the ordinary person and his ability to manage his own affairs. It is
not the freedom to do as he wishes, but it is the freedom to follow
God’s laws as he wishes. Such a government is never favored by
an elite or any self-appointed group that thinks it knows better
how people should be living their lives. When Christianity is
taught, there is always warfare. The war against an elite system
is the mark of Western Civilization at its best. The efforts of
people throughout history to limit elites and to restore power to
themselves is the forgotten aspect of the Christian influence upon
history. It is a history that is not taught today. It might give
people the wrong idea of what life is all about.
The religious system that Jesus encountered was very similar
to the administrative bureaucracy which has become part of
modern life. The scribes, and Pharisees are the people who set
up a religious system that could only be administered by the
proper experts. The common person could not approach God
without the hiring of a proper representative. The payment must
be made in the proper temple coin, which the temple bank would
be glad to exchange for you. Of course, the rates would not be
favorable. If the person wanted to sacrifice an animal, he would
pay to make sure his animal would qualify. If not, and it rarely
did, you could trade you animal for one that was acceptable. Of
course, a small fee was involved. The religion was a business to
fleece the common person.
When Jesus came to restore religion to its intended purpose,
he met resistence from those who had something to lose. The
power structure in the Jewish religious system is typical of any
system that seeks to perpetuate itself through the use of such
techniques of administrative roadblocks, accreditation,
certification, and licenses. Just as the Jewish priest had to certify
each animal for sacrifice, so the modern person must go to the
experts who have the proper status to perform the required
function. The priest would claim that his services were only to
protect the purity of religion, so the modern functionary claims
that everything is done to maintain quality of services. Whatever
the common man needs must be done through the proper person
or organization, which of course is not free, or even cheap.
One reason the elite opposes Christianity, is that it liberates
him from a religious system. Formal religion teaches a person to
be a pawn in the system. Such a religion requires experts and
hired representatives to perform the holy functions for the
common person. The person gives his money and the churches
and its bureaucracy does the rest. It is a good system for training
men to accept the type of society that the elites want to impose
on the common person. The common man is to work and to hire
experts to perform all of the other functions in his life. It has got
to the point where the common person even has to pay to be
entertained. Entertainment used to be something friends would
perform together or for each other. Now they sit and watch
others perform, for the usual fee.
Back of this whole system is the philosophy of force. While
animals have evolved and are subject to the forces of nature,
mankind has moved beyond the forces of the natural world. He
has done this by imposing his will upon the physical and social
worlds. The reason that men are greater than animals, is that
they have taken control of evolution. They have used force to
attain the world that they desire. No waiting for the long process
of evolution for man. He can use the force of his will to mold the
164
physical and social world to meet his needs. There are no rules
that man must follow. Evolution is not a moral force, but merely
the means to attain the desires of man’s desires. The means is
force. Man is free to use force to fulfill his needs. Today we live
in a world of men who have used force to create systems.
Christianity comes to the common person and offers grace,
which is free, and liberates him from the philosophy of force. This
liberation from the religious structure gives the person a sense of
confidence in himself. If he can approach God personally, maybe
he can do other things on his own also. Maybe he can create a
government that the people can understand and actually serves
to liberate the masses. Maybe he can operate medical and legal
systems without the fleecing that goes on to liberate him from his
money. Maybe he can run a business without the government’s
intervention. Maybe criminals can be dealt with, in a manner that
the local community desires. The list goes on and on. If
Christianity liberates man from force, it opens all kinds of
problems for the ruling elites.
Christianity offers a system of known laws that can be kept.
It operates a system that a common person can understand. The
laws of Christianity are not full of loopholes and exceptions.
When Jesus did good deeds on the Sabbath, he was in violation of
the technicalities which had been introduced into the system.
The laws of Christianity are to liberate, the laws of force are to
enslave. Once this principle is understood, the ruling elites are in
trouble. That is why there is a constant battle between the laws
of the Bible and the laws of society built upon force. At times in
history, the church has been captured by the elites and their
philosophy of force. Christianity seeks the liberation of the
common man from all force and it always at war with the ruling
elites. The two cannot exist at the same time.

7 THE BATTLE BETWEEN PROGRESS AND ZERO

GROWTH

Progress is a dangerous concept. It raises the expectations

of the common person. Those expectations lead to confrontations
with those who would impose the new world civilization. The
Bible is a book that progresses from the creation to the end of the
world. There is a constant progression of man’s understanding of
his place and purpose in this universe. Change is always the
enemy of the monopoly. Whether it is a government monopoly,
church monopoly, or business monopoly, change is a threat. Any
monopoly is very good at doing the same thing over and over. It
is bureaucratic and bureaucracies do not adjust to changed
circumstances. Of all of the processes on life, change is probably
the most difficult to predict.
The new world civilization seeks to somehow come to terms
with change and to channel it within some narrow confines. One
way to control change is to preach the doctrine of ‘zero growth.’
By seeking to confine change within narrow bounds, the
bureaucracy can then see nothing that cannot be predicted in
advance. The formal structure is not threatened. Each employee
can find security in knowing that his job will continue throughout
his lifetime. One of the main goals of humans is security. The
monopoly appeals to those who have the strongest need for
security and a life that can be predictable from day to day.
One of the doctrines used to teach the doctrine of zero
growth is the idea that the earth has reached it maximum
population. Any further population and the planet will start to
deteriorate. Ways must be sought to control growth and design a
civilization that is totally sustainable forever. Whatever resources
our earth has, there is a limited supply of all materials. The
people of this earth must learn to live off of those resources that
are renewable. Activities that consume resources, such as
burning oil and gasoline, must be replaced by those that use fuels
that can be renewed.
This whole process of creating a new civilization requires
that people be taught to lower their expectations of what life has
to offer. The Christian idea that man is to go out and conquer the
earth and seeking to expand his horizons continually is to be put
aside in favor of a static existence. Man is to seek his pleasures
in other areas than in trying to expand the horizons of life,
especially the material side of life. Instead of exploring new ways
166
to produce ever more products, man is to seek his spirit for
adventure in various sporting events. Whether as a participant or
a spectator, sporting events offer the maximum enjoyment with
the least expenditure of natural resources.
Western Civilization is based upon progress and change.
Life is seen as an adventure. Mankind is in war against nature
and seeks to unlock the secrets of blessing from the earth. The
earth does not reveal its secrets without much work, thought, and
chance taking. This process carried over into the spiritual realm.
Man sees the universe as having a beginning and an ending. In
between the two events, man is to make a city out of the
wilderness. With the Garden of Eden as an example, man is to
pursue a paradise on earth. From the chaos of the wilderness,
man is to build a kingdom reflecting God’s rule on earth as it is in
heaven. Man seeks not only material progress, but spiritual and
social progress. In every area man is to exercise his God-given
talents to change the earth.
Control and progress are always in conflict. Control requires
a reasonable expectation of what each person will do, and what
tomorrow holds. Control requires rules that apply to everyone
both today and tomorrow. Despite what is claimed about
Christianity being against change, it is only God’s commandments
which are unchangeable. Everything else is subject to progress
and change. It is the kingdom of man which sees the world from
just the opposite view. The commandments are to change, but
the life of man is to be controlled and subject to rules and
regulations. It is not that Christianity is conservative and
modernism is liberal, it is that they are conservative and liberal in
different areas.
The only change that is tolerated in the new world
civilization is the change designed by man and one that fits in
with the new world civilization. The change that occurs with
Christianity is more like a series of revolutions. The ideal of
Christianity constantly pushes man forward. He always sees the
world as being better than it actually is. The problem with change
is that it comes in bursts of growth. It is fairly smooth and
constant for about five hundred years. But then the old
structures can no longer contain the new elements of change.
This is when social and political revolutions occur. These
revolutions are not as the French Revolution whose goal is
destruction of everything, but more similar to the American
Revolution which involves a new way of organizing the world.
The civilization sought by the French Revolution is one of
total destruction of whatever is related to Western Civilization. It
is a war against the commandments of God. It is an attempt to
replace every law with laws that are man made and serve the
desires of each individual man. Even the calender is to be
remade to reflect a ‘rational’ order. The rational order would seek
to control every aspect of man’s existence and his relation to
every other man. The government would be empowered to rule
over all men for the good of every man. There would be rational
rules which would be enforced for the good of every man. It is
described as a new freedom, as man is set free from every
restriction which Western Civilizations and Christianity had
imposed upon man. The government would pass laws which
would force men to leave behind their past and to enter into the
new freedom of a manmade rational order.
This war is also fought through the use of words that has
added to confusion. To entice mankind into the new world
civilization it is important that all people buy into the new
program. In order not to alienate those who cling to Christianity
or other religions, the new order tries to find a place for religion
within the confines of a church, mosque, or synagogue. Religion
is redefined to mean the expression of intense feelings in a
worship service of some kind. The new religions would be subject
to the control and regulation similar to all other behavior. The
new faith must find expression in rituals and ceremonies and not
in trying to evangelize one’s neighbor. It would not be allowed to
seek to impose their views upon the new world order and its laws.
The laws of faith are to be separate from public expression and
are for one’s private devotion only. It is contrary to the new world
order to have any public faith that would make any other person
feel uncomfortable. The new world civilization will only have the
freedom of the individual in mind and will keep him from any
contact with any other religious faith.
168
 In order to unite the world under one civilization there must
be a giant leveling. Most will rise in the process. To them, the
new world order represents a temporary progress. Those who
have thrived under the former Western Civilization must be
persuaded that there are good reasons for their declining lifestyle
and lowered expectations. The reasons must be preached to the
youth starting in government elementary schools. The doctrines
of the earth’s over-population, and the belief that Western
Civilization destroyed the environment must be instilled.
Prosperity must be taught as a form of theft. Mankind in order to
make themselves feel good went out and robbed mother earth.
Those guilty of the crime of exploitation of foreigners and
the earth must now pay the price for their past sins. One of the
best ways to gain acceptance of the new doctrines is through the
use of guilt. Because all men are guilty before God and have a
natural feeling that something is wrong, this real guilt must be
redirected onto false forms of guilt. All guilt requires some form
of expatiation. The denying oneself of material pleasures and the
preaching to others of the new doctrines, give a person that he
has paid for his sins. The study of religious cults will reveal very
similar behavior to the new world evangelists of the new world
culture. As the children are taught the new doctrines, the age of
lowered expectations will have been accomplished.
This war is also focused against Christian doctrine.
Surprisingly, the Biblical view of sex is one of the hurdles the new
world civilization must overcome. With its belief in postponed
gratification, this doctrine creates a man of character. He is
willing to delay instant feelings for some future reward. This type
of person will do the same when it comes to material comforts for
himself and his family. When people come to use sex as a form of
instant gratification, they develop a whole different set of
character traits. Material pleasures are replaced by psychic
pleasures. Entertainment becomes more important than the
struggle to unlock the secrets of nature. The exploration of new
ways to feel good becomes the source of life’s quest.
In contrast to the world explorers such as Columbus who
risked their lives to find and explore new lands, the new explorers
are those who search for new ways to stimulate the brain to game
pleasure. The focus of research will change from the Biblical idea
of creating a garden to one of creating a vision. The new world
civilization must incorporate a new religion to help everyone gain
the mental and social pleasures that the new order will offer to all
of its citizens.
If Christianity is to survive, it must accept its place as one of
many faiths that allow men to enjoy the pleasures of this earth
without guilt. The proper faith provides rituals to guide its
members through the crises of life such as birth, marriage, and
death. It must also provide a means where those who have
feelings of guilt can have those feelings forgiven. And it must
teach it members to become part of the new world civilization.
Any faith that holds on to an outmoded sexual ethic will
come under more and more pressure from its faithful to relax
their standards. Any faith that sees the future in terms of
material and moral progress will also come under increased
pressure. The new faiths must function so as to held people
function in the new order. The old faith saw itself in opposition to
a constituted pagan order. Success in the new world is only
possible if one has a faith that supports the new world beliefs.
Those in opposition will end up in a fundamentalist ghetto. The
pleasures of life as offered to the people by the new world order
are essential. People cannot live life without some rewards. With
no future rewards such as a very real heaven, rewards must be in
this life. The only rewards available to the masses are the sexual
and mental rewards. If a religion denies these rewards to its
people, they will either force a change or they will give up such a
faith.

8 THE BATTLE BETWEEN BIBLICAL ELECTION AND

MODERN SELECTION

No society can exist without some method of selecting its

members for various functions and honors. Christianity has a
definite selection system. It is a selection by God and the
individual does not have a choice. His choices come only after his
170
selection. His being chosen is an aspect of grace. The new world
civilization must also have a system of grace and selection. No
society or social order can function without such a system. Not
everyone can be a king or not everyone can be popular. Not
everyone can be a judge or a stock broker. Every functioning
society must give its people reasons for their current status in life.
There is the Biblical doctrine of election. Individuals are
chosen through no part of their own. The promised line was
chosen to flow through Jacob and not Esau. God chose Jacob for
this purpose before he was born. He was chosen before he had
done anything to merit such a honor. At first glance this seems
unfair. Why should Esau be rejected through no fault of his own?
The answer is that history and life require some sort of choosing
or election. Would it be more acceptable to have a dictator
selected one over another? Would individuals then be angry
because they were not chosen? Of course, they would.
A society can also be based upon merit. Yet, even here,
someone must establish the criteria for selecting one over
another. Even if a test is given, someone has to design the test.
And every test can be slanted toward one type of person or
another. The very nature of a test is going to determine who is
going to do the best. Even the best of tests does not say who is
going to do a particular job the best. Tests decide who is going to
do best in tests, just in case more tests are given. Even verbal
interviews are very biased as better looking people achieve better
on verbal interviews. If you are ugly, you want a written test. If
you are good looking, you want a verbal test.
In life there are many selections. Many come before we are
actually conceived. The very genes of each child are determined
before his birth. The type of home determines much of ones
behavior and outlook. One reason our society has such a high
level of discontent is that everyone is a victim in some way. Life
is not fair. The numerous selective processes that start at
conception and continue throughout life makes us different from
others. Everyone feels that life could be better, ‘only if.’ The
focus in such a society is not on what a person has, but on what
he lacks. In comparison to others, we all fall short in many ways.
In comparison to others, we all can find things we can do better.
 The question that every functioning society must answer if
there is going to be social peace, is this one: Why am I doing this
in life and not something else? If a society cannot provide an
answer to this question, then resentment and envy will reign.
When that happens, there will always be social turmoil and
unrest. No system can be fair. Even allowing market forces to do
the selecting is a choice. Why allow the market to choose? Why
not allow a wise bureaucracy to choose? A society must have
some answer, and it must be accepted by the majority of its
members. One of the purposes of the government school is to
teach the children the legitimacy of the selective process.
In the twelve-year program of government schooling, a
constant process of selection goes on in the educational process.
Some students do better at sports and concentrate there. Some
do better in shop classes and achieve success in that pursuit.
Some do best in intellectual tests and decide to stay in that area
of their success. Some do well in none of the formal classes and
look to extra-curricular activities such as drama or scouting.
While the student is not aware of it, he is being encouraged to
accept his limitations and the processes that honor some over
others. The various failures, that he encounters, are designed to
be a message to him about his very nature. He is also being
taught that this process is honest and fair. He is supposed to
accept the decisions of this schooling process as reflecting reality.
The Christian idea of election has been criticized as being
totally unfair. The new world civilization is described as being the
best way to allow each member of society to find his place in the
order. The social order also has in place procedures for
eliminating possible handicaps. Some members because of their
race or physical condition are not able to compete in the selective
process. The system moves in with various programs designed to
help those individuals succeed beyond their failings in the school
and social system. These programs are designed to head off any
idea that life can be unfair. The government steps in and helps
those who have feelings that the selective process was slanted to
favor others.
Even with all of the procedures in place, there is still a high
172
level of dissatisfaction. Even if one has failed numerous life
experiences, no one wants to be at the bottom of the pyramid.
And yet, every society closely resembles a pyramid. There will
always be those on the bottom. A rolling ball might make a better
figure to pattern a society after in terms of curing resentment.
This is the Marxist idea. Everyone does every job throughout his
life. One day he is a farmer and the next day he is a banker. And
so it continues throughout life. And the rewards are based upon
need, not upon some selective process. This sounds nice on
paper, but every society needs specialists in some operations,
and those who are willing to work harder to get more. These
people must be rewarded in some way.
Election is being chosen by God. It is not just about
salvation, but about one’s role in life. God even controls are
genetic heritage and our social status to mold us into the persons
he has chosen us to be. Every obstacle in life is there because
God has put it there. Every difficult situation is a gift from God to
teach us something. Some are chosen by God to hold the more
exalted positions in life. Some are selected to be at the bottom of
the pyramid. The Bible does provide for principles that insure a
flat pyramid, but a pyramid does exist. Each individual is taught
that his place on the pyramid is designed so that he can serve
and be an example to others on that level. And with each reward
in life, there are responsibilities. Those who have more
responsibilities, more is expected of them.
In one sense, the Marxist idea of equal reward is an idea
borrowed from the Bible. Each person will be rewarded according
to how he handled the responsibilities that God gave him.
Rewards are according to faithfulness in each position of life that
we find ourselves. To be faithful steward for God at the bottom of
the pyramid entitles one to the highest of rewards. The Bible
does not look upon one’s place in the social pyramid as being the
main purpose in life. The truly great things that God gives to
people can be enjoyed at each level on the pyramid. Because the
new world civilization is based upon a material pyramid, with
physical and financial rewards based upon one’s place upon that
pyramid, most assume this is the only kind of pyramid.
The new world civilization is based upon a trading society
with material rewards for everyone. The goal is to make even the
bottom of the pyramid a financial success. In time, with world
peace through world order, the whole world will prosper. The
monies spent on warfare will be diverted to the financial reward of
everyone. From the richest to the poorest, all will exist in
financial prosperity. The world is on the brink of a new age.
Because of poor planning and constant waste of resources, the
planet has never been able to provide for its peoples. Now with
the computer and the ability men have to plan using its
information processes, the world is being transformed into a
financial paradise upon earth.
A final word in closing about the flat pyramid that the Bible
proposes. The Bible forbids such things as an income tax, a
property tax, and perpetual debt. These are designed to aid the
poorer members of society and to keep the rich from exploiting
the poor. The richer members of society are also help
accountable for their treatment of the poorer members. While
the rewards and blessings of God are not regarded as important
in our new world civilization, in a Biblical culture, such blessings
as mental health and a happy family are considered of great
importance.
Also, society is regarded as unit. It is not just the accumulation of
individuals. It is a giant family that grows out of the many small
families.
One fact often overlooked that people, because of man’s
sinful condition, always compare themselves to others. The fact
that the poorest person today lives like a kind in ages past means
nothing to the poor person. He compares himself to those further
up the pyramid. As long as society is organized around any
system that ignores the sinful side of man, it will have problems.
The new world civilization looks to training, education, prosperity,
and various free services to alleviate what the Bible regards as
man’s sinful nature. The new world civilization sees sins as a
lacking in some area. By supplying man’s every need, it is hoped
that the sinful tendencies can be extinguished. The new order is
based upon entirely different principles than the Bible. If the Bible
is correct, then the great new order will fail just as every other
174
civilization is history has failed.

9 THE BATTLE BETWEEN BIBLICAL HISTORY AND

EVOLUTIONARY EXISTENCE

Is there a goal for which mankind is striving beyond material

enjoyment? Is there some purpose for which mankind is called to
perform beyond just existence? The modern tendency is to see
life as something that is lived from day to day: A person enjoys
today and he will enjoy tomorrow when it becomes today. Each
day becomes a day to enjoy. Long term planning, if it exists in
people’s lives, consists in planning for future pleasures. You see
some remnant of the old Christian belief in the yard around many
homes. People have tried to turn their home environment into a
miniature Garden-of-Eden. There is more pleasure in the actual
work involved in building it than in some useful pleasure. In fact,
working on one’s miniature paradise is an end in itself.
The satisfaction gained from striving in one’s yard, is how
the Bible views all work. Man was placed into a garden by God,
and from that pattern, he was to go out into all the earth and
imitate that garden. The life of man was involved in more than
just raising a family and supplying for their needs. It was to use
those god-like qualities that he found within himself. One of
those qualities is the desire to transform the chaos of the earth.
He was to take a world that was ‘without form and void’ and fulfill
his task of doing what God had done in the beginning. Man’s life
was to imitate the God who created him. Man’s happiness is to
be sought in creating new life, providing for that life, and making
the world a place that can be called ‘good.’
As man has progressed through history, he has discovered
that the earth had many more treasures in it than just plants and
animals. The very materials of the earth were all put here by God
and each material had potentials within it. When God created
sand, he saw the potential of not only glass, but in a sense,
computers also. It was all there from the beginning. It was there
to use to create the earth into the place that any ‘god’ would
want it to be. This purpose of man is something that, even the
most evil of cultures, has had difficulty in erasing. When
Christians explored the earth and came upon pagan cultures, the
thing that impressed them most, was the attempt to destroy
God’s image in man.
The life of the savage was based upon a day to day
existence. Future planning was beyond them. Even long-term
construction projects were rare. The exceptions seem to be
monuments to the gods to placate them, and some form of
primitive housing. The more sophisticated the culture, the better
the housing. The American Indian often lived a nomadic
existence. There are not many sites to visit which display the
great monuments of the American Indian. While this is not the
place to go into detail, the great monuments of the South
American Indian and the early Egyptians reflect a culture that still
had large remnants of theistic belief. As the culture deteriorated,
so did the desire to construct great things. Civilization has always
been marked by the remains of great buildings.
The mark of a great man is to build for future generations.
The cathedrals that still mark the European landscape, often took
one hundred years or more to construct. The projects were for
one’s descendants. Men labored for a purpose that was greater
than just the pleasures of a day. The great buildings are not just
physical structures, but represent a faith in the future. For the
Christian and for Western Civilization, life has a purpose that is
greater than one lifetime.
The transformation of the earth is something that is the story of
history. Western Civilization is a history of mankind’s desire to
obey the command of God to transform the whole earth into
something that only a child of a creator God could do.
The proclamation of existence is seen in the new world
civilization. Life is to be lived in terms of daily pleasures: The ball
game, the movie, the good restaurant, and the liberty to enjoy
various ‘sinful’ pleasures are the goals of life. The great goals of
life are in terms of increasing the number of people that can enjoy
such pleasures, and the prolongation of life as long as possible.
Through increased planning in the economy and through
increased medical research, the goals of a long and pleasurable
176
life can be within the reach of all upon the earth. The new world
civilization can be seen in terms of achieving these goals. The
goals of Western Civilization placed other matters ahead of these.
The foundations of Western Civilization were based upon the
family, the community, the ownership of property, the local
church, the local school, and sound money. The assorted ethics
that so infuriate the modern man were in place to protect the
above institutions. The men of Western Civilization did not see
such things as sexual morality as an end in itself, but as part of
the sacredness of the family. In the new world order’s destruction
of the family, the sexual ethics associated with the family seem
very antique. Some of the changes have been very subtle. The
change from gold and silver backed money to something called
legal tender, no longer even seems important to modern man.
Money is no longer a receipt for wealth, but is a medium of
exchange that has been borrowed into existence. All money
today is based upon the credit card. The user, whether an
individual or government, creates money into existence with the
promise to repay the money at some future date. Money is not a
form of wealth, but a form of debt. (This will become important
later in the discussion of slavery.)
The goal of existence is to have each person leave the earth
when he dies to be as nearly to its original condition. The perfect
life is one whose ashes are scattered back to the earth upon
death. The ashes will give back to the earth everything the
person took from the earth. The result will be a stable world. A
world that can continue to sustain life into the eternal future, or at
least until the sun becomes dark. The goal of life is not the
construction of a great civilization to pass on to the future, but
the goal of maximizing life’s pleasures while minimizing life’s
pains. As history progresses, there should be ever more
pleasures, and fewer and fewer pains. And this is all to be done
without the disturbing the earth and its environment.
The earth in the Biblical narrative has both a beginning and
an end. The new world civilization sees both as irrelevant. The
universe is seen as eternal, a form of a god. It is to be worshiped,
and treated with the respect of a god. While the ancient
sacrificed his children to the god of the earth, the new sacrifice, is
an abortion. To keep the earth’s population stable, children must
be sacrificed. Too many children and the resources of the earth
will become depleted. The very depletion implies an end to the
earth. An end means the goddess earth is not a god, but part of
creation. The earth in the Bible has a very short life, at least by
eternal standards. It was created for man, and when the
purposes of God are complete, the earth will cease to exist. In the
interval, history is the story of man learning to create after the
image of God.
One of the important questions of this battle is the question:
To whom does the future belong? The Bible teaches that man is
eternal, whether he likes it or not. He must live his life in terms of
eternity. There is not escaping this. This belief has consequences
for any culture. Man is motivated to take care of himself. If life
ends with his own existence, then it does not really matter what
happens after one’s death. A nation may try to inspire respect for
future generations of earthlings, but it will be a losing effort. It
makes for good propaganda, but it does not motivate a large
number of people. The only way to care for the planet under such
conditions is at the point of a gun. People must be forced to care
beyond their own life spans. Unfortunately, this ultimately leads
to a government that must control its subjects from cradle to
grave.
In the new world order, the people must live as if there is no
tomorrow, and yet also live as if they are going to be around for
the life of the earth. This is the predicament the new world
civilization finds itself. It must indoctrinate people into both
beliefs. A hedonistic culture needs a government to rule over
them or they will end up in war with each other. Anyone who
frustrates their hedonism must be opposed. This leads to more
and more divisions within a society. One man’s pleasure is
another man’s restriction. While the government tries to limit
pleasures that divide a society, this becomes difficult as group’s
search for new ways to enjoy their short existence. One of the
flaws of a pleasurable existence is that pleasures require an
increasing intensity. There are limits to pleasure that no
government can provide.
178
 A culture based upon personal pleasure through its belief
that existence is all that each person possesses eventually breaks
down. Because there will always be disappointments in life, there
must be those who see personal service and charity as an
important part of life. A belief that this life is a preparation for
something bigger and better leads many to sacrifice today’s
pleasure for some greater good. A culture must be based upon
this type of behavior. Government provided services are always
limited, and they never provide the psychic and personal needs.
Governments can provide physical needs. That is what they are
good at doing. They cannot care. Only people can care and real
caring is part of a total world view.
Life and culture require that there be some greater good. A
goodness that is more important than immediate pleasure. Also,
a great culture requires that those who postpone pleasures will
not go unrewarded. The idea of not only judgment after this life,
but rewards are also part of the Bible and Western Civilization.
There is not only a heaven, but rewards for the good deeds done
in this life. Western Civilization is based upon the fact that not
even one glass of water given away to help another shall not go
unrewarded. This is quite a motivation. It is what entitles a
culture to be called great. Hedonism will ultimately destroy the
motivation to live for service and for another. That is why a
decaying culture exalts abortion. A child is no longer a gift from
God to be trained into his likeness, but a drain on one’s pleasure.
Beliefs always take time to bring about the consequences
that are latent in every belief. The belief in evolutionary
existence leads to the idea of hedonism. If one’s life ends with
one’s death, then there must be no planning which goes beyond
one’s death. If life has no great purpose, then today’s pleasure is
the only reality that can be proven to exist. A man knows what
feels good and what causes painful experiences. Life becomes
centered around the god of pleasure and the devil of pain. A
government may try to impose larger goals, but they will always
be just that, ‘imposed.’ The consequence of evolution will always
be a dictatorship. In the absence of a great ordering power, the
state must move in to supply that need.
One final item about the belief in evolutionary existence.
Man is definitely finite. He knows he is going to die. Corporations
and governments do not know this. Under the new world
civilization, these two entities seem to take on a life of their own.
While men will not be rewarded for serving each other, there are
rewards, and immediate rewards, for serving the giant powers
today. The striving to achieve these temporal rewards serves to
replace the need to serve the Kingdom of God and the culture of
Western Civilization. As this war between a great historical
purpose and mankind’s immediate needs, the consequences are
being worked out in history. The battles going on today are not
just a temporary disturbance, but are the consequence of two
great civilizations locked in battle.

10 THE BATTLE BETWEEN THE BIBLICAL UNITY AND

THE NEW SOCIAL UNITY

When civilizations decay, they often forget the foundations

upon which their greatness was built. One sign of such a time is
the temptation to pick the fruit off of a tree while at the same
time cutting down the tree. The connection between the tree and
its fruit are forgotten. The Biblical idea of the Trinity laid the
foundation for Western Civilization. It provided a tree that
provided many of the fruits of our existence that we enjoy today.
Because this is no longer understood, the Trinity is being
discarded, even by Bible-believing Christians. The fact that ideas
have consequences has been suppressed. The new world
civilization is based upon the fact that men can create a
civilization in the clouds, based upon the fruits of civilization men
desire, without a sound philosophical foundation.
Ideas are not relevant in the new world civilization. The
ability to create anything that man desires seems to be within our
reach. Our desires are based upon our material needs. Modern
technology appears to have opened the doors of heaven to our
every desire. Our every entertainment and diversionary desires
are available for everyone who has even modest means. With the
180
purpose of life having been changed, no one seems conscious,
that part of the human foundations have atrophied during this
period of technological marvels. For most of history, the goals of
mankind have been social. The relating of persons to persons, in
ever more fulfilling ways, has been the object of men’s desire.
One of the purposes of civilization has been to provide the means
so that social life can be maintained without too much effort.
The peace of mankind has been sought through some form
of unity. There has been unified states that have sought to bring
men into one nation, so that social life could prosper under such a
powerful umbrella of security. There have been attempts to
provide a unity through a common religion. The battles between
the Catholic Church and Mohammedan were for the control of the
world and to provide a unity for mankind. If all men could be
united into one religious faith, the social world could grow without
disruption. Because such a social unity is not as important today,
the religious wars are considered an act of primitive men.
Modern men want to achieve a unity based upon world trade and
material gain. The new unity will be based upon a common bond
of hedonism.
The early days of the Christian Church were marked by a
series of spirited councils. The Apostles’ Creed, the Councils of
Nicea, Ephesus, and Constantinople were all part of the growth of
early Christian thought. Christians were working out the
implications of their beliefs and setting up standards. The goal
was to achieve a unity through the definition of truth. Error was
thought to be the destruction of unity and civilization. If the
heretics could be eliminated, a social order could be achieved
which would bring peace and unity to mankind. Rather than using
the military or a bureaucracy to achieve unity, it was believed
that truth could conquer the world. If error was opposed and
exposed for what it was, man would choose the good against the
evil. It was thought that no one could consciously oppose truth
once it was firmly established.
The unity today is sought not in truth statements but in
democratic elections. Once the people have spoken, then the
truth has been established. The election results give society its
standard in which to seek a unity. If various groups feel that the
search for truth has not been completed, then they are free to
campaign for a change in the next election. The unity is a sacred
unity and a belief in the eternal process of election, truth, new
election, and new truth. As mankind progresses, he is refining his
beliefs through numerous campaigns and elections. There is
constant discovery of new truths as mankind progresses from
election to election. The combat of the elective process serves to
bring mankind ever closer to a cosmic truth. This truth is not
knowable, but the process is knowable. As men have faith in the
unification through the free election, men are able to achieve a
social peace on earth.
The goal of the new world order is to spread this faith in
democracy and the elective process to the entire globe. Even the
most primitive society can be on the road to progress if it can
learn to have free elections. This explains our evaluation of other
societies solely on the basis of what type of elective process is
used. In the communist world when it was at its prime, there
were elections, but only among the party members making
private choices in limited elections. Party and committee
meetings were often democratic in a sense but the electorate was
definitely limited. Many members of society were excluded from
the voting process. While in other nations, if free elections were
held, then those nations were regarded as being on ‘our’ side.
What a nation or people believed or did, was irrelevant, as long as
the elective process was in place.
The state is the voice of the democratic unity. The election
is the license for the state to act. The electorate may only vote
every four years. In between the state acts as the agent of the
people. While the figurative unity is in the people, the working
unity is in the state and its power to impose its will upon the
people. No society can have two sources of unity. The state,
because of this, must oppose every other system upon which
unity can be based. Just as a religion with two gods is a religion
on the decline, so a social order with two sources of unity is a
divided one. It is a period of disorder until a new unity can be
determined. The early church sought to base the unity on society
on the unity of the Godhead. This God created every fact in the
182
universe.
The war of the various unities is one of the stories of history.
You can trace history by studying the various unities used
throughout the ages. To the extent that the Christian God is
given content and definition by a creed or council, to that extent
any other source of unity will find offense in such an
understanding. When the state is supreme, it will try to either
eliminate God or other sources or unity. If God cannot be
eliminated, then the content of such a Biblical God must be
eliminated. A vague and sentimental God is no threat to the unity
of the state. Abstract statements or mystical beliefs are the allies
of any strong government. Such systems offer no counter system
of unification.
One of the more common ways to eliminate God from the
battle of various unities is to confine God to the mystical realm.
This God provides man with good feelings as he communes with
nature or finds some ecstasy in some experience. The one event
that must be subverted is the incarnation of God in Jesus. The
new world order must redefine this relationship if it is to have a
philosophical unity. If God can become a man then another unity
than the state has entered into the universe. If it can be proven
that Jesus was just another man, made divine, this can be
incorporated into the elective process. Every man or any man is
capable of becoming divine and a source of unity. Also, a state
may become divine.
In this universe, any unity will be considered divine.
Anything that claims to be the center of the universe and its
meaning will take on the form of a godhead. All social orders
must have some divine essence. If the Christian God is driven
out, if Jesus is no longer considered divine, then the vacuum must
be filled. In a materialistic age, this vacuum will be filled by some
entity such as a government or philosophical system. The
important point is that even if the idea of the divine is eliminated,
the characteristics of the Christian God cannot be eliminated. A
God by any other name is still a form of God. The divine requires
a unity. It requires omniscience, omnipotence, and
omnipresence.
As has become obvious throughout this discussion, there is
no avoiding the divine. It is impossible to live, think, govern, or
relate without some idea of the divine. The battle is never over
whether there is a god, but where should that god be located.
The Bible locates the divine in the Creator of the universe. To
deny the God of the Bible is always done in terms of another god
somewhere. The fact that deception is used during this argument
should be of no surprise. The Bible refers to the Devil as a great
deceiver and the father of lies. That those who oppose the
Christian God should lie then should be of no surprise. The
defense of the Christian God has always been based upon
arguments of truth. It is a description of reality. It is not an
attempt to create a world view but a description of the universe
as it was created.
The prime enemy of the Bible and the Christian God is the
modern centralized state. It offers a totally different description
of the ‘real’ world. In order for the state to accomplish its goals it
must have a nation who will not oppose its reign. Most individuals
who have been educated under government supervision have
been captured by the statist view of reality. They go along
because for them it is the only way they know. Also, the state
designs a total system of control that rewards those who are
compliant with the statist view of reality. Most citizens will see as
true something that works. ‘What works for me,’ becomes the
reality check for the average citizen living under the
government’s controlled social vision.
Every god must take care of his people. The Biblical
message, from cover to cover, is the story of God’s providential
care for those persons that He calls His own. The centrist state in
order to become divine, must imitate the Christian God. It must
take over every aspect of society and use every institution to
fulfill man’s every need. If man has a mental problem, if he is
poor, if he is socially deprived, if he needs education, if he needs
health care or if he needs a job, then the statist god is there to
help his people. A citizen no longer prays to God for a need, but
fills out the proper application form requesting some service.
There appears no need for the Biblical God when everything he
used to do can now be accomplished better and more efficiently
184
by the total-care government.
One of the purposes of this study is to show how this whole
process has come about in today’s world. One of the tools used is
the old ‘bait and switch’ technique used by con artists throughout
time. The state has fostered a religious faith thad offers its
people a plethora of blessings. The American Christian Church
has redefined the Biblical message into a series of material
blessings, and spiritual feel-good mental states. Because these
goals can actually be better attained through the centrist state
than the local church, the people switch their true allegiance from
the Christian God to the secular state. Without even realizing that
the Gospel message has been switched on them, they eagerly
give their first loyalty to the state.
One of the methods used to reduce the church’s message to
some vague heavenly reward has been the Americanization of
Dispensational Theology. The real world has been placed beyond
the reach of the Church and the Christian message. The Church
is, in fact, not the real purpose of God at all. The real purpose is
to be found in the nation of Israel. No Christian can ever be part
of this race of people. It is a separate plan of God. The Christian
is to celebrate the church and its evangelistic message of
salvation in heaven for the Gentile. The main goal of the local
church is to save souls through preaching and fellowship. The
rest of the world’ problems are not of their concern. In a short
time, all of the Christians will be transported to heaven, and then
the Jews will reform the world as the Messiah will establish the
nation Israel as the center of the earth both for government and
religion.
One of the problems with this method of eliminating the
Christian opposition is that it establishes a future conflict between
the various centrist states and the nation of Israel. The state is
merely using this doctrine for its own good. The Jews of Israel
regard this doctrine of their national and world supremacy as a
description of reality. They are the true people of God destined to
rule over the whole earth. There will eventually be a show down
between these two international orders. If the earth is eternal,
then there are those who see a long battle ahead for control of
the whole earth and everyone in it. The wealth and power of the
earth are such that organizations will fight and die for such
wealth.
Whichever side wins, the result will be a new unity. The new
world civilization is the first step in that unity. The Biblical unity
in the God of the Bible must be eliminated. In the history of
Western Civilization, the idea of personal freedom was born when
the power of ancient governments was denied. The government
of Rome and others were denied the power of the Godhead. Man
was to achieve his purpose outside of the confines of the state. In
fact, each individual person was freed from the state to serve
God. He was accountable to this God and not to the government.
This limitation of the unity of the ancient state marked the
beginning of the Christian West. As the old unity in the state is
being resurrected, the idea of freedom is also disappearing.
The freedom that the Bible talks about cannot be achieved
except under the protection of God who guarantees the nature of
man and his freedom from sin. The freedom of the modern state
is freedom to be an animal who is managed for his own good.
Freedom exists to do those things which promote the unity and
prosperity of the state. The Christian freedom is something
entirely different: It is the freedom of man to rule over himself, his
family, and the local community. There are areas of life which the
government has no power to control, even if it has the best
interests of mankind as its primary purpose. Man’s freedom is
guaranteed because of the many spheres of limited power which
have no authority over any other sphere. The Biblical unity is a
diversified unity. The rules of God guarantee the freedom of all
spheres of activity. The only restriction is that each sphere obeys
God’s revealed laws. With unity firmly established in God, His
laws, and His Word, diversity is free to prosper.

11 THE BATTLE BETWEEN BIBLICAL COMMUNITY

AND MODERN INDIVIDUALISM

In the Bible, the individual exists in his relationship with

others through various independent institutions. It is necessary to
186
keep repeating, but ideas do have consequences. While the
masses think that life is lived in terms of their everyday desires,
their lives reflect the beliefs of their culture. One of the least
understood facets of life is that the institutions of a society reflect
a religious view of man. Every person growing up in a society will
tend to view that world as the only possible world. It is accepted
as a given. The problem of living is to adjust one’s self to the
various obstacles that society presents. Social rebels are not
born from the failures of society, but from those that look upon
the world from a different perspective.
The modern idea of freedom is based upon a whole set of
beliefs that originally had foundations in a pre-capitalistic society
which lived in terms of a Biblical view of reality. It was based
upon various associations and these groups had power to
influence their members. A person achieved freedom through his
membership in these associations. The free individual apart from
any group membership was not the understanding of freedom. If
a person wanted to be totally free, it would have been necessary
to escape to some wilderness. Such an ideal of wilderness
freedom became the new ideal of the industrial society. The
liberation of the individual from every form of social obligation
became the goal of the new freedom.
The two views of freedom are at the basis of many of the
contemporary social conflicts. The Biblical idea of communal
freedom is at war with the capitalistic idea of the isolated
individual free of all associations. The modern world’s social
structures have grown up around the idea of the capitalistic view
of man and his human nature. Capitalism and the factory system
require individuals who are free to move from one factory to
another. The new corporation needs individuals who have no
obligations more important than his loyalty to his job. It needs
workers who will sacrifice their lives for the rewards that the
corporation can give. The new society of the factory system must
have individuals who are seeking monetary rewards, and the
status and power that giving onself to the factory offers.
As a society grows up around such a system, social
organizations develop to support it. As a person escapes from the
Biblical ideals, it becomes necessary to replace them with other
ideals. As a person escapes from Biblical associations, it becomes
necessary to replace them with other forms of relationships. One
of the secrets of the new society is that there are choices involved
in the structuring of a social order. Once those choices are made,
a reality is built up around them that makes those choices appear
as the only possible ones. This is confirmed by the fact that once
the support structures are in place, it looks like any other lifestyle
would be not only not work, but it would be impossible to live by.
It is true there is no retreat to some past, as to return to certain
aspects of the past would be admitting a social virus into the
environment.
A good example would be the introduction of the patriarchal
family into American society. Such a family is based on the power
of the father to make decisions for his family without outside
interference. It is based upon a system of one vote for each
family. The father as the representative of his family is entitled to
cast the vote. It would consider the family as the basic economic
unit and such laws as child labor laws would not apply. If the
family owned a business, the children would be expected to help
in that business. If someone in the family was in need, then the
father would talk to other families about possible solutions. It
would not be a government’s decision or responsibility. The
family would unite with other families to form other associations
such as a church, a school, a club or grange, or even various
welfare societies.
Such an institution as described above could not be allowed
to exist in a factory-based economy. It would eventually allow the
total destruction of such a system as more and more members of
society adopted the patriarchal family. The two systems of
organization cannot both survive in the same social system.
When it is suggested that a society can support both systems, the
reply is always that you cannot turn back the clock. That is true.
But you can make value choices and allow those choices to
gradually remake the total social order. Just the factory system
required a hundred years to destroy the traditional family-based
culture, so any changes will also require time. It is not a question
of being old fashioned or not, it is a question of which kind of
188
freedom will be allowed to exist. Is freedom communal or is it
something that an individual can enjoy all by himself? That is the
essence of the battle.
Our current society has lost entirely the concept of
communal freedom. This is why such remainders of the old
culture are having so many problems. It is difficult to keep alive,
a remnant of the communal culture in an individualistic age. This
is best seen in the present predicament of the institutional
church. The church is to be a gathering of families. It is to be a
powerful structure that meets not only for communal worship but
for communal action. The communal action part of the church is
basically over. It is no longer a gathering of families represented
by their fathers. It is a gathering of individuals who want to add
religion to their assortment of emotional experiences.
Thus the successful churches in today’s culture design
programs for the busy individual who wants a pre-packaged
experience or has some need connected with working and living
in a factory system. Religious ceremonies and day care services
are part of the foundation of a church that has survival as its main
goal. Other churches try to maintain a skeleton of a church left
over from the days of family worship and church social authority.
You see a handful of the old and the dying who remember church
experiences from their youth. It is a deadening experience
except in their minds and their attempts to keep something they
feel is important alive. They know it is a dead experience, but
there is no other choice for these faithful remnants.
The individual freedom culture is based upon competition,
contract, hedonism, and personal property. The factory system
was based upon these traits. A whole culture was based upon the
protection and expression of such a belief system. While the
battles have raged between the Biblical idea of freedom and the
new individual freedom, the new world civilization is progressing
to another type of freedom. As government tries to eliminate
personal contracts in favor of government supervision and as the
government tries to eliminate property as a left over from the age
of exploitation, there is a new freedom being formed. The new
freedom has been reduced to the freedom to feel good and to feel
good for as long as possible. It is strictly an individual thing and is
something an individual can experience without others, without
property, and without any real purpose in life.
If there is one hero to the modern mind, it might be
Robinson Crusoe. In being stranded on an island, he came
discover his true self and talents he never knew he had. He
became a great person by being separated from civilization. The
regimented lifestyle of England did not bring out the best in
Crusoe. In his isolation, he became the person he was meant to
be. Such is the myth that is held in many minds. The fact that
the real story differs from the myth does not matter. The
important thing is that men become their true selves only as they
learn to separate themselves from their parents, and from the
restrictions of civilization. The individual person is the true rock
of reality. A good society is one that encourages each person to
become a great individual. The social order exists to produce
great individuals. Individual happiness and pleasure are the
products of a great civilization.
Such organizations as the church, the family, and the school
exist only in order to support the individualistic system. At least
this is the non-Biblical view of reality. The Bible, without trying to
get too technical, talks about the reality of the Godhead as being
a Trinity. This Trinity is a reflection of the world that God created.
God is not a solitary individual. God is three persons in a
corporate unity. Individual expression is displayed only without
this corporate oneness. God is three and yet he is one. Both are
true and both facts represent a true description. In philosophy,
this arrangement is described as the truth of both ‘the one and
the many.’ Man lives in a universe where both the individual (the
one) and the many (the group) are real.
In non-Christian cultures there is a swing between the two
realities. At times, the individual is given total power. The
resulting society in time becomes anarchical. Social order breaks
down, crime runs rampant, and mental problems proliferate. In
reaction to such a breakdown, the resulting swing pushes society
into a centrist state or dictator. The one man and the corporate
world become the true reality. Individuals only find the purpose
in life by serving some corporate or national ideal. In time the
190
government becomes totally oppressive and rebellion sets about
destroying the iron cage in which everyone lives. The individual
is given free expression again, but only until anarchy results. And
the cycle continues.
In following the picture of the Biblical Godhead, the Christian
sees the social order made up of both communities and
individuals. An individual is real and he is a responsible being.
He has been given talents and responsibilities from God.
However, the corporate realities that God created are also real.
The individual is to find expression of his individuality within these
corporate structures. The individual is not best when he is
running wild seeking personal pleasures, and the corporate
community is not best when it tries to fit individuals in some
regulated mold that only serves the interests of the group. The
balance between these two expressions can only be found in the
Bible and the teachings it provides. The limits placed upon both
the communal and individual expressions are necessary to avoid
the extremes. If this is not done, society and civilization will
fluctuate between the extremes of individualism and the
extremes of dictatorship.
The primary group for learning this lesson is the family. A
Christian social order requires the training of each generation into
the reality of a world where both the ‘one’ and the ‘many’ exist.
Not every child is born a philosopher, but every child is to be born
into a family unit that is to teach the child this basic pattern of
reality. The child learns to be an individual, but he also learns to
be that individual within a family. He has individual gifts and
talents, but those are not just for his personal pleasure, but are to
help and serve the other members of his family. The child learns
both the importance of the individual, and also what the
individual has been created to do. He learns that the best
freedom is the freedom to be oneself within a social unit that both
loves and cares for him. The child can run away from home to be
himself, but in a good social order, he quickly learns that freedom
of expression in a vacuum is meaningless.
This is the reason that in unstable societies, both the dictator
and the anarchical individual attack the family. It is the enemy of
both. Sometimes the two extremes form a partnership to destroy
the family. After the family has been eliminated, then each side
is free to decide whether totalitarianism or anarchy should reign.
From the Biblical perspective the health of the basic patriarchal
family is the foundation of society. If that unit is healthy, then
other groupings such as the church and the school are healthy.
Also, if the church is healthy, then the centrist state is kept within
its Biblical boundaries. Without the Bible as a guide book, and
without the enforcing power of the church, the centrist
government always seeks out more power than it was designed
by God to possess. Just as the individual freed from morals
becomes anarchical, so the government freed from Biblical
restrictions becomes totalitarian.

12 THE BATTLE BETWEEN BIBLICAL SLAVERY AND

STATIST SLAVERY

One of the goals of the modern world is the total elimination

of slavery. The Bible states that slavery is part of the governing
world order created by God. There will always be slavery in this
world as long as sin exists. The question is never whether to
eliminate slavery or not, but which kind of slavery will a society
adopt. One of the easiest techniques in talking about an issue is
to present it as two sides to a question. Black versus white
makes discussion so much easier. This is done with the slavery
question. The modern world is pitted against the brutal stories of
slave ships and the atrocities of slave labor camps. Presented in
this way, the choice is easy. All would prefer to be a modern
slave to the state, than take the risks involved in the ancient
forms of slavery.
In the modern world of political rhetoric, every person who
feels confined or restricted in any way, claims they are being
treated like a slave. A slave has come to mean anything a person
does that he does not want to do. Women claim marriage is a
form of slavery. Entry-level jobs are described in terms of slavery
by the young. Clothing manufacturing in foreign lands is
192
described as slavery. Anytime a minority does not get their way
in politics, the cry of slavery is used to raise the level of political
rhetoric. Government schools are equated with slavery by
disgruntled students. It is obvious that any discussion of slavery
is closely tied up with a society’s view of freedom. Because
freedom has come to mean being released from any obligation to
another person, the concept of slavery has been enlarged beyond
past understandings.
The Bible has a totally different idea of freedom and it also
has a totally different idea of slavery. Both ideas go beyond the
narrow debates of freedom versus slavery that is found in today’s
political debate. The modern portrayal of slavery based upon the
American plantation is the Old South. The picture was glamorized
to an extent in the movie mini-series Roots. While the plantation
was the exception, with most slaves living with their masters in
the same homes or sharing a small farm, this image is what most
people think of when they picture slavery. This image is used to
prove to modern Americans are not slaves. No one is any longer
part of a plantation, and so we are told how we are now all free.
The poetic uses of this word are just that: Most realize that there
is a vast difference between the plantation and marriage.
This image has been converted in the political sleight of
hand that rules modern political debate. The people are told over
and over again that they are now free. While some minor
improvements still need to be made, the contrast between
contemporary life and a symbolic past allows the modern forms of
slavery to escape unnoticed. It also allows the history of the
United States to be used for political ends. Everything that the
Old South believed is discredited in the same breathe that slavery
is decried. The right to choose one’s associates is now considered
racism. Local communities are considered exclusive. Patriarchy
is anti-democratic. Private schools are elitist. In the name of
freedom from every belief associated with the Old South, a new
form of slavery is slowly being implemented.
In the Bible, short term slavery is allowed. This form of
slavery was used for the enforcement of debts, for the paying
back the victims of crime, and for the care of those who chose not
to experience the insecurity of freedom. The system was
basically designed to encourage the idea of individual
accountability and responsibility. The person who took on debt or
who committed a crime was treated like an adult. The system of
slavery was a safety net that did not treat individuals like
children. Adults were expected to act like adults and to be
responsible. To act otherwise involved consequences. A child
trained in such a system grew up realizing that his actions were
related to the community in which he lived. To live within a
community meant being responsible. There were charities and
various ways to obtain aid. But to enter into adult transaction
required adult responsibilities.
When government or some other agency steps in and
removes the consequences from actions, then a whole new
philosophy is introduced into society. The idea of a man being
held accountable to God is one of the first ideas to go in a society
that institutes adult day care techniques into the social order. A
nation’s social order will be patterned after their view of reality. If
they believe in the God of the Bible, then they will build social
structures that reflect the values of the Bible. The Bible teaches
that not only is each man responsible for his actions on earth,
there will be an ultimate accounting after death. The social order
will allow individuals to experience the penalties and
consequences of their decisions. This not only teaches each
person to live in a socially responsible manner, it prepares each
person for the life after death. The social order is designed to
reflect the reality that has been created into the universe.
One of the reasons for the strong reaction against Southern-
style slavery is to disguise the trend toward wage slavery in the
new world order. The masses are told over and over that they are
free because they can go home at night after work. The fact they
their lives are regulated and controlled to an extent that would
have caused rebellion in times past is a well-kept secret. The
income tax allows the government to keep close track of every
citizen. The various other taxes, which include the property and
inheritance tax, allow for further monitoring. The Social Security
system again acts as a monitor of individual behavior. With
increased government aid and services, the individual is
194
constantly filling out forms and relating personal details. There is
very little that has not escaped a tax, license, permit form, or
some form of monitoring.
With increased taxes, and the inflation of the money supply,
the individual has become more dependent upon a vast economic
system. The age of the independent entrepreneur is over. There
has been a steady attack on such trades as the farmer,
fisherman, and logger. These people all operated to some extent
as independent individuals outside of the normal social forms of
control. Each of the above jobs is more and more becoming part
of the new corporate world. The formerly free working man is
now just a part of a giant international corporation. His survival
depends upon his pleasing some bureaucratic standard
established by some foreign corporate office. With the number of
independent jobs decreasing, the chances of quitting a corporate
job and finding another job is often quite difficult.
The former free person finds his daily life controlled by the
various government agencies, and the corporate world. If he fails
to please any one of the various bureaucracies, his future as a
‘free’ person becomes in jeopardy. There are various safety nets
from which he can apply for aid, but these are designed to
demean his person and to keep him alive at the poverty level.
The attempt for any person to achieve any kind of decent living
outside of the normal channels is becoming almost impossible. If
a person could transport himself back in time, he would find very
little difference between himself and the slave in ancient times.
The appeal to his material wealth as a sign of freedom is not
really an issue.
The slave often lived at the standards of the typical small
farmer. The poor white farmer in the Old South often resented
the slaves who at times had a much better standard of living. The
manufacturers of the northern states thought it cheaper to
employee people rather than have slaves. An employee was on
his own away from the workplace. The employer did not have to
care for him or worry about his health. He had little investment in
the individual worker. If one worker died or became disabled,
there were others who could be hired and trained quickly. The
slave system, with the high investment in each worker, led the
slave owner to take care of his investment. The large
manufacturing factory had little investment to protect. Every
different economy has different economics, and it is important to
understand how each one operates.
With the current tax level at about 55 per cent, the worker is
paid a lot of money by the employer and then the government
takes it away to care for the worker when he is not at work. The
modern worker has little more freedom than the slave in the Old
South. In fact, the slave had some distinct advantages. Slavery
was usually limited to just his physical labor. Because the system
operated out in the open, there was no need to brainwash the
slave into the proper frame of mind. The worker today must
undergo years of training in government schools in order his mind
will accept the modern form of servitude. He must learn to live a
life that is totally regimented to the support the factory system
and the services it provides, and at the same time believe that he
is a free person. Learning to live under the two contradictory
states results in constant inner tension which results in social,
mental, and physical problems.
The Bible, instilled into Western Civilization, a different idea
of freedom. This idea of the free and responsible individual, who
was a king with his own domain, was part of Western culture.
This individual was always at war with any government that
sought to increase its wealth or power at the expense of the
individual free man. Many of the basic laws of Western
Civilization, such as the Magna Carta, were laws to restrict the
greed of the king and to protect the common working man. The
idea of man created by God to be a free person served as the
foundation for these revolts against the king’s power. The greedy
king was always referred to as one who was usurping powers that
did not belong to the king.
Without the Bible and its definition of man, and its limitations
on every area of power, the common man would have no
reference for his personal freedom. Even the American slaves
learned of political freedom from their reading of the Bible. Many
of the slaves educated themselves into the patterns of Western
Culture and were able to understand the difference between real
196
and false freedom. This is why most of the blacks supported the
South in their way against the North. They could understand the
difference between the wage slavery system offered by the North
and the possibilities of personal freedom within the Southern
system. Most wanted nothing to do with the type of impersonal
freedom offered by the North.
The empires of Greece and Rome were based upon a statist
freedom. It was the cruel form of slavery that comes to mind
when people think of slavery. Because it was subsidized by the
government, it was able to survive. The slaves that belonged to
individual owners in a free market system always found
themselves treated well. With no taxes to subsidize the farm or
plantation, the business must be operated in an efficient way. No
normal owner would destroy his investment. He wanted to pass
on his business to his kids. The result was a personal relationship
between the owner and his slaves. In the state system, each
slave was something that could be discarded by the state at its
pleasure. There were always more slaves available free to its
conquering army. With a zero cost of procurement, the state had
little interest in preserving individual lives.
The Bible gave significance to the life of each person. Those
who were one’s slaves or part of one’s household were also of
significance. Abuse was not only poor for business in a free
market system, it was a sin which the person would have to
answer to someday. Western Culture was based upon the value
of each person, the limitation of powers in each area of life, and
the idea of eternal judgment by God. Out of these beliefs
developed the limited monarchy, the common law, the free
market, private family, and the gold standard. A whole civilization
developed around the Bible and its associated beliefs. This old
culture is at war with the new world culture and the corporate
slavery planned for every individual.

13 THE BATTLE BETWEEN THE KINGDOM OF GOD

AND THE NEW WORLD GOVERNMENT

This historic battle starts with the Tower of Babel in the Old
Testament portion of the Bible. The desire of man apart from God
and His standard, was to create a new world standard, that would
have the same characteristics as God’s standard. There are some
truths that are apparent no matter which kingdom a man belongs
to on this earth: The future government will be worldwide, and
the government will be based upon a worldwide law. The conflict
between the two kingdoms is inevitable. There can only be one
world government. Two would be a contradiction. There can only
be one law system. No law can be a law if there exists other laws
which limit its effect. There is no escaping the conflict from the
two kingdoms.
In the current state of affairs, the church for the most part
has tried to live in peace with the kingdom of man. The church
has tried to stake out a territory which is free from the
government of man. This temporary truce allows the church to
exist as meeting place to perform rituals that enable people to
endure the struggles of life. The church is permitted to exist as
long as it recognizes that the final court of law resides within the
government and not in the church. For the sake of peace, the
church has surrendered its message and its law system. New
theologies have been taught to the people to explain why the
church no longer confronts the government and its evil law
system.
The reign of God has been placed in a future age when the
church has been removed from the earth. The church today is to
teach only the salvation of grace–that is the forgiveness of sins.
The Kingdom of God has been postponed to a future time when
the Gentiles have been removed to heaven and the earth will be
returned to the Jews who rejected the message of God through
Jesus the Messiah. While the church waits for their deliverance
from the Kingdom of Man, it is to proclaim a message of salvation
through the ‘born again’ experience. After the Christian accepts
this process, he is to live a moral life outside the worldly kingdom.
His life is to be a moral life in an evil age. The Christian is to
center his life around the church and its fellowship and meetings.
Each week the Christian goes out to be an example of a
moral person. He hopes that by his example and his telling
198
others about his church’s message, others will become born again
and join his church. The sign of a good church is that it is large
and growing ever larger. A good church will have multiple
programs to entertain the Christians and have expansion plans.
The individual Christian is encouraged each week that he is on
the right path and that he is doing God’s will. This assurance is
designed to help him live in peace and escape the warfare that is
going on in the world. By centering his life around the home, and
the church the Christian is able to form a small cocoon that serves
as his home in this world.
While the government and its worldwide kingdom expand, it
is content to allow the church to exist in isolation. Rather than
provoke the Christians into some form of resistence, they are
allowed to carry on their activities in isolation. Once the kingdom
of man has become a reality, then the church will be forced to
become part of it. To allow it to exist, apart from the
government’s kingdom, would be to allow the seeds of resistence
to germinate outside the government’s area of supervision. The
church and its theology must be integrated into the philosophy of
the new world civilization. At that time, the peace treaty that now
exists between the government and the church will come to an
end.
Eventually, the church will have to find another expression to
its beliefs than the Bible. Even new theologies will find it difficult
to explain why the Christians are still here on earth when the
kingdom of man has been inaugurated. Their peace plan will
have been shown to be a fraud. The churches will probably adopt
some type of improved Bible based upon universal psychological
principles. It will be a book of devotional and inspirational poems
and stories. It will focus around the performance of social rituals
to enable persons of all beliefs to feel the passage of time and the
sacredness of life. Currently the American Indian is being
groomed as an example of the type of faith each person will need
in the future.
The new world faith will teach a reverence for all of life and
all acceptable, government-approved behavior. The reverence
for life will include the limitation of technology and the
proliferation of government programs of help. The whole planet
will be looked upon as something alive and will be endowed with
the powers of life. It will include a modern version of nature
worship, and an appreciation of life which evolved out of the
chemicals of the earth. The earth will be the compared to an
enclosed chamber that creates, cares for, and recycles life over
and over. The role of man during his stay on earth will be to
leave the earth in the same shape as he found it, and to teach the
young to have the same reverence for the powers of the earth.
The new worldwide kingdom of man will be a culture of the
worship of life and the orderly behavior of all individuals. The
new religion will encourage behaviors that give man a sense of
well being in a world with no promises beyond this life. Science
will do its best to give every man a good eighty years of life and
the enjoyment thereof. As each man takes his place in the order,
peace will reign. He will be free to choose his forms of association
and pleasures. The kingdom of man will provide multiple choices
for the free individual. Life will be organized around
entertainment and the culture of enjoying the pleasures of life.
The movie, the ball game, the theater, the zoo, the amusement
park, and the good meal will form a web of pleasures and
diversions.
To satisfy man’s need for cosmic purposes, various hobbies
will become more and more important. Business will issue
various collectibles and many will form collections of such trinkets
of movie tie-ins and sports memorabilia. The collection of
antiques will provide a sense of continuity with the history of
one’s culture. It will also give the collector something to pass on
to his kids as a form of eternal life. The importance of family
traditions will be encouraged as the way to feel that life has a
meaning beyond this temporary life. The collection of family
keepsakes and photographs will be copied from the way the
Japanese keep family alters. Ancestor worship can provide a
suitable substitute for the rewards of heaven. By living a good life
on earth, a person will be remembered favorable by his
descendants.
The structure of this new earthly paradise will be shaped like
a pyramid. There will be one leader who controls a committee of
200
twelve who in turn controls a committee of three hundred. It will
continue like this all of the way down to the masses. This is the
nature of any man-made method of control. Government today is
seen as methods of control. In order to rule the earth every
method of control must be implemented. Any area outside of the
world government could lead to a taste for more freedom by the
people. Thus, every person must feel the control over every
aspect of his life. The very idea of any personal freedom outside
of government must be seen as insanity.
The paradox of all of this is that when world government
comes, it will be celebrated as the victory of freedom over the
forces of superstition. It will be proclaimed as the greatest era of
freedom in the history of the world. Freedom will be defined as
the freedom from all authorities other than the government. It
will mean freedom from all rules other than those enforced for the
good of the planet. It will mean the freedom from all
responsibilities other than those owed to the state. And finally, it
will be the freedom to be employed at all times at a job that best
suites the needs of the government and the individual person.
The only coercion in this society will be against those who fail to
seek the good of the planet and who still believe in religious
superstitions.
The Biblical kingdom that is at war with the new world
kingdom is almost the exact opposite of mankind’s new order.
Jesus warned of looking for some organization or some leader.
The Kingdom of God would not look like a normal kingdom, but
would be almost invisible to the naked eye. One of the signs of a
false kingdom would be the emphasis on the same things that
mark a secular organization. It would be based on rituals, power,
organization, and status. It would appear to be very similar to a
business corporation. It would have structure that would appeal
to those who desire the self esteem that comes with belonging to
an important business or government. The Kingdom of God would
have none of the rewards that is associated with most normal
kingdoms.
One of the problems when studying the history of the
Church, is that it is often written from the point of view of the
accepted idea of an influential kingdom. All of the things that the
Kingdom of God is not appear in the history books as the history
of the church. This leads to a very distorted view of history. The
history of the world is pictured as a war between the
organizational church in all of its glamour and the governments of
man. There has certainly been a war between the two
organizations. It is very difficult to write a history about the
Kingdom of God because most of its events are not recorded in
the typical historical annals. When a historian goes through
records to write his history, the true history has not been written
down for him to peruse. Thus, the historian writes about the only
struggles he can find.
This distorts not only history, but the Bible also. The records
that the historian uses are used as examples of God’s working in
history. The impression is given that God is trying to replace the
governmental structures with one of his own. The organization of
God’s kingdom would be identical to the government’s, but it
would have people in charge whose first allegiance is to the
Church and not the state. The Church may allow a parallel
governmental organization to maintain some power, but the
supreme court would be in the hands of the Church and its
officials. Everything the government did would need final
approval from the Church’s courts. Also, such services as welfare
and education would be in the hands of the Church. The
government’s role in men’s lives would be limited. The role of the
church in men’s lives would be totalitarian.
Such times of freedom in history have actually accrued
during times when the two organizations of the state and the
Church have been more or less equal in power. As the two
powers struggle for the allegiance of the people, promises are
made and freedoms granted. In America, the strong influence of
the colonial churches resulted in a constitution which left
immense power in the various churches. The fact that the United
States had no church similar to the Catholic Church structure in
Europe has been very deceptive. While the churches had
competing organizations, they did unite in their distrust of a
secular and governmental kingdom. The American churches were
powerful when it was necessary to oppose the Kingdom of Man.
202
 In fact, American history can be written as the struggle
between the Kingdom of Man as represented in the United States
government and the Kingdom of Man as represented in the
powerful churches on the American continent. The history books,
of course, picture this as the struggle between the church and the
state. The government’s kingdom wants a separation of church
and state. The church’s kingdom wants the government to rely
on the churches for its legitimacy. Many of the battles fought in
U.S. history have actually been battles between the church and
the state. The government has discovered that military battles
rally the people around the Stars and Stripes. The churches
always lose power during military campaigns. The church
leaders’ interest in peace is actually a result of their desire to
preserve their influence.
Aside from this more obvious battle is the secret battle
between both of the above kingdoms and the Kingdom of God.
Because this kingdom is not important historically or politically, it
has been ignored by just about everyone concerned. That even
the churches and their power structures have ignored the
Kingdom of God, is the most surprising. When histories are
written no one writes about the Church as if it belonged to the
same kingdom as the government’s power structure. One of the
main purposes of this book is to reveal the forces of history and
the battles that have destroyed so many from an entirely different
perspective. The Kingdom of God is part of history and there is a
great battle between this kingdom and the twin kingdom’s of
man.
Why is the Kingdom of God invisible? History records what a
culture deems important. The works of the Kingdom are not
considered worth mentioning or recording. The love in a family
according to Biblical standards, the education of one’s children,
the service to one’s neighbor, and the helping those in need in
one’s community all fall off the powerful’s mental radar screen.
They are not seen and therefore they do not exist. It is back to
the sound of a tree falling in a forest with no one there to hear it.
So much of the work of God’s kingdom is like that tree which no
one is there to record the sound from its falling. There is also a
totally different view of the role of government in God’s Kingdom.
 The worldly kingdoms are all in the shape of a pyramid with
the most powerful on the top and decisions moving from the top
to the bottom. Power, money, and status move from the bottom
to the top: Those at the bottom having none of the above. In
simple terms, the pyramid of God’s Kingdom is turned upside
down. Most of the money, power and decisions are kept at the
lowest level. The kingdom views reality as actually containing
many governments. The local school, the family, the church, the
club, and the county government are all supreme in their own
spheres of influence. In only the most extreme cases are
decisions appealed beyond the very bottom.
The church makes decisions over people’s lives and so does
the father in a family. Both are expected to make decisions along
Biblical guidelines. The members of the family are expected to
handle problems within the extended family network. If a father
is abusing his role as a Biblical father, the relatives might
intervene first. Then the local church might intervene. In the last
resort, the county government might intervene. In all of the
cases, the problem is handled by people who are one’s neighbors
and who care about everyone concerned. It is not a bureaucracy
seeking to perpetuate its rule and power. As communities and
families follow the Biblical guidelines for living, the Kingdom of
God is being extended. Such a proper functioning system never
makes for news headlines. It is just the people of God doing what
God wants His people to do.
One person helping another according to Biblical doctrines
and standards does not make for great empires. There would be
a world wide interaction, but no worldwide struggle for power.
One county may trade with other counties or one county may
trade with cities around the world. Such trade would be
transacted because it is in the interest of both to do so, but it
would not be a central government’s economic policy. It would
not require a vast army to enforce such a system. Violators of
trade would find themselves out in the cold with no trading
partners. There would be the trading of information, but no
attempt to coerce another community into some controlling
structure. God’s kingdom would spread throughout the world, but
204
not by the edge of a sword or the point of a gun. Man’s kingdoms
always require force.
Mass transportation and mass communication are molding
the world into a vast network. The current battles are over who
will control this worldwide trading system. There are several
different groups who desire the immense wealth and power that
would come from controlling the world’s trade and governments.
The United States, the Catholic Church, the international
financiers, Zionism, and several secret fraternal groups are all
implicated to some extent in this battle to create a kingdom of
man over the entire earth. All of the above, have been successful
to some extent at one time or another. They have even united at
times in their attempts to crush one of the others. In the end,
only one of them wants to reign over the earth.
The purpose of this book has not been to document which of
the above groups is responsible for any individual act of control
over historical events. The purpose is to declare the Kingdom of
God and the events in history which have been used to suppress
God’s power over the whole earth. The Bible declares that before
the end of history, the whole earth will acknowledge that God’s
laws and His rule are supreme. Not every person will become a
Christian, but the whole world will have to live by the rules of the
Kingdom because that will be the accepted way of living life. No
matter where a person will travel in the future, he will be able to
see the Kingdom of God in operation on the local level. There will
be no world leader or visible organization, but the kingdom will
rule, nevertheless.
We are back to the time-honored argument that ‘you can’t
turn back the clock.’ Every age thinks that its age is the final age
in history. Every even in the past has worked to produce the best
and final solution to the world’s problems. All that is needed is a
little tweaking of the system. Any change is seen as a threat.
Any proposed new system meets with total opposition from those
who have a stake in the current state of affairs. When the first
cars were produced, they were not very practical. No paved
roads, no gas stations, and infrastructure to support all of the
other automobile’s needs. The first cars were a threat to whole
industries, including the buggy whip makers. Yet change
occurred. In fact, the whole world changed around something
new.
The same process works with new ideas. New ideas about
banking, new ideas about something called a suburb, new ideas
about flying, new ideas of entertainment, and a host of ideas and
inventions, all started small and succeeded against all odds.
Those who sell coal do not like natural gas. Those who sold
toaster ovens do not like microwave ovens. The list is endless.
Every proposed change meets opposition from those who have an
investment in the current state of affairs. Criticism of new
products and services is to be expected. Criticism of new ideas is
the natural way new ideas are given life. Every threat requires
opposition and the loudest opposition will cry out against the best
products and the best new ideas. That is the free market system
of history. History does not stop. There are always conflicts
unless one side can stop change using the ‘point of a gun.’ And
that only works for one or two generations at the most.

14 THE BATTLE BETWEEN BIBLICAL EDUCATION AND

STATIST EDUCATION

The Kingdom of Man and the Kingdom of God have two

entirely different ways of teaching the young about life. In one
sense, the Biblical idea of teaching is one of education of the child
in the techniques of knowledge and the Biblical view of life. The
state looks upon its educational system as saving the child from
the environment in which the child is involved. The state view of
education is based upon the view that a child is an animal that
has developed to its current stage through evolution. In the past,
the forces of nature acted upon children to help them develop
into adults. The problem with nature is that it is random, and
success is accidental. The world has developed to such a stage
that only an education that understands mankind and has the
whole world in view is fit to educate the young.
For centuries, parents educated their own, but the children
became just carbon copies of what their parents knew. This
206
system works for a culture which is static. The long history of
such times as the Dark Ages testifies to the failure of parental
education. The world cannot afford to have another thousand
years of stagnation. With modern technology, change is
inevitable. Parents are only concerned with preserving the times
of their own childhood. Their memories of their youth are passed
onto their children. That will not work in a technological age.
Parents today cannot even show their children how to set the
clock on the VCR. A new age demands a new way of educating
the youth into the mysteries of technology and its use.
Parents often grew up with the memories of the Depression
and World War II drilled into them by their parents. They added
onto these memories the fear instilled during the cold war and the
chaos of the Vietnam War. These memories created a
conservative attitude toward life. The youth of today must be
educated with an attitude that trusts the future and those who
are in charge of controlling the forces that would destroy
civilization. While the past must be taught, it must not be used to
create distrust in the policies of government officials and the
various agencies charged with controlling the chaos in the natural
world. One of the number one goals of education must be to
eliminate such fears.
If governments allowed parents to educate their children or
to control the educative process, then each generation would
resist the future and its possibilities. Parents have a different
agenda than for their children than the state has. The state
thinks of the whole world and the integration of the children’s
minds into the minds of others around the world. Someone must
look at the bigger picture than just small town education. Only
the government that interacts with the whole earth is able to pass
on that vision to the children. Local education means just that.
Global education is the future. If the children are not introduced
to the future of mankind, they will become dependents upon
society as they will not fit into the culture that is growing into a
global community.
The new education is designed to prepare the children for
life in a corporate world. It is an entirely different world than the
one the Christian wants to prepare his children to participate.
The Christian with his belief in a personal God, attempts to
prepare students for a personal world. Children are to grow up
with a view to serving God and their community. They are to
develop personal skills and learn how to live in a world where
personal interaction is supreme. The church is also to based on
personal interaction and not a corporate structure. In this age
where the corporate form rules supreme, the church has now
imitated the corporate world. The corporate world and its rules
and regulations are the new reality.
The corporate view of reality is based upon a different view
of man, the universe, and human nature. If men did evolve, then
any talk of human nature is not possible. Men have been
conditioned by their environment to behave in certain ways. Men
have survived through the forces of evolution by looking out for
number one. The child is born with a giant ego and immense
needs that it wants the world to fulfill. One of the purposes of
the new education is to take this ego-centered, needy child, and
convert that monster into something that is useful to both the
nation and the corporation. This will involve further evolution
being performed upon the child. He must be trained to exhibit
certain behaviors and not just learn factual knowledge.
What type of child is society looking to produce? He must
still have needs, but needs that can be supplied by society. The
personal needs that a child brings into the world must be changed
into needs that the corporate world can supply answers. The
hedonism of the child is to be deflected into the cultural forms
that are designed to fulfill these appetites. The child is to be re-
manufactured into a machine that wants the products that society
is selling. The child is to learn to be a consumer. He is to look to
entertainment, consumer products, and consumer services as
being able to supply his every need. There appears to be a
tendency for children to be content with just a good family. This
tendency must be changed into something that society can use to
support the cultural norms.
Few people realize that education serves a purpose and that
the parents have little awareness of what actually is being done
to their children. Education is preached by everyone concerned
208
as one of the primary goals of society. The assumption is that if
education does not take place in a government school, then it is
not happening. The old idea that the parents were responsible
not only for the curriculum but for the actual education of their
children is a lost ideal. Education was done by the parents to
pass on their skills and a lifetime of learning to their children. It
was assumed that the parents would want what is best for their
children. After all, the retirement of the parents depended upon
how well they trained their children to earn a good living.
With the government taking over the retirement
responsibilities for everyone, it has been assumed that the
parents would no longer care for their own children. The self
interest that they had in a good education had been taken away.
The new view is that many children were the result of accidents
or the result of parents who were against abortion. The high cost
of raising children today and the low return on that investment
has created an image of parents who have children for some
primitive selfish purpose. One of the goals of education is to
liberate the children from their parental overlords. The new fad of
government-run day care facilities tries to lower the age at which
the government can take over the care of all children.
As we have been talking about all along, there is a growing
bond between governments and corporations in the goal of ruling
the world. In the evolution of the universe, there has been the
evolution of the processes in control of the evolution. The
survival of the fittest is too slow and too haphazard. The new
evolutionary process is a carefully constructed bureaucratic maze
designed to help those who play the maze game, and not to help
those who refuse or cannot jump through the official obstacle
hoops. There is a government-corporate world culture. Those
who submit to this culture are reward accordingly. There is no
longer a need for the type of individuals who conquered the
frontiers of the world’s wild lands.
The school system is designed to train the new child for the
new world culture. One-room schools did a great job of creating
educated individuals. Those schools, with the older students
helping to teach the young, created individuals who knew how to
serve, and the joy of helping another. The new school wants to
produce an individual who knows how to navigate the corporate
world. The small school must be destroyed and mammoth
corporate schools built in their place. The children must be
segregated by age: There will no older students instructing the
young. The school building will be built around the factory
architecture. One student will no longer bond with one teacher
but the student will move from specialist to specialist throughout
the day.
This process creates an impersonal order that is ruled by
specialists. The student moves around the building by following
the tyranny of bells, and time schedules. The student is
encouraged to major in some specialty. The student also learns
to escape the rigors of this maze through the use of pleasure and
entertainment. Just as Wal-Mart employees are encouraged to
bond with the company, so the student is supposed to develop a
‘school spirit.’ Most of this spirit is to find release through his
attendance at sporting events or school activities: These activities
are designed for students only–not for the parents or the
community. The student is being trained to enter the world of
corporate reality. He is being weaned away from his parents and
the community in which he lives.
The new world culture also demands a new curriculum. The
new person need not be especially proficient in “reading, ‘riting,
and ‘rithmatic.” Only the elite need such skills. The new
curriculum teaches a new ethic for a new culture. It teaches the
students to live in a multi-racial grouping. It exalts the various
ethnic private cultures and their role in the new world wide
culture. The schools might have an ‘ancestor dress up day.’ The
students show up wearing an outfit their ancestor might have
worn. The various cultures of the past are pictured in terms of
different foods, different customs, different clothing, and different
sexual ethics. The fact that these various cultures were based
upon very different religions and very different interpretations of
the world is down played. Religion was the foundation of most
cultures. This is no longer acknowledged.
The new child is just another part of the environment. The
work of parents is seen as a polluter of the child and his
210
environment. In the same way the government cleans up an oil
spill, the same techniques can be applied to the cleaning up of
the child’s polluted nature. The goal is to restore the
environment to an unspoiled condition. The child must be
returned to his perfect nature before being subjected to parental
pollution. Once this has been accomplished, the government’s
role is now to regulate the child’s new environment in the same
way it regulates the earth’s environment to prevent corruption.
The goal of the government’s schooling is to clean the child up
and then prepare him to live in the new, multi-racial, and multi-
ethic culture. The child must be so trained and selected that he
will not become a polluter as his parents were. The best students
are routed into leadership positions.
In the future, there will be a greater need for Wal-Mart
employees than for doctors. The school system must serve
society by training pupils for the needs of society and the needs
of the corporation. There is no need to train a nation of leaders
who are all capable of understanding how the culture works and
molds them. The student needs to be able to work at the many
entry level jobs and to enjoy spending what money they do earn.
They must want to raise only one or two children of their own.
They must be made to feel guilty for waste and to understand
that any prosperity comes only by destroying the planet. The
individual person must understand that the earth is very poor and
while it can be pleasant, the dream of riches for everyone is a
false dream. People become rich by discriminating against
minorities, and by exploiting the environment. The new world
culture cannot tolerate such opulence.
For the Christian education was also the introducing of the
child into the realm of the eternal. Life was not only love and
service, it was something that could last forever. An
understanding of this was part of all education. Education could
not save the child, but without an intellectual understanding of
the Bible and the ability to read it, there was no hope of entering
into heaven. Education not only was designed to help one pursue
a career, but it was designed to give one the tools of
understanding the eternal order. A person who understood
personal discipline through his schooling was more likely to
become a Christian than one who had no idea of the value of
personal self control.
The Christian school and the government school are
designed with a purpose in mind. Each has a different world and
culture in mind when it develops a curriculum. Each sees the
child much differently: One the product of love, and the other as
the product of natural forces. One sees a good child that needs to
be trained into a particular direction, while the other sees the
child as being born already corrupted, and the parents and school
are there to lessen the inherited corruption. One sees basic
reality as being a personality, and the other sees basic reality as
being purely material. The differences between the two
educations are immense. These differences are never discussed,
and the differences between the Christian and government school
are reduced to one of test scores. Which system can turn out the
most proficient test taker?

15 THE BATTLE BETWEEN GOD’S JUDGMENT AND

MAN’S JUDGMENT

Every culture has a way of enforcing it standards upon its

members. If any culture loses this ability to enforce its standards,
then it is no longer a viable culture. This is seen in the trademark
and licensing wars. When a manufacturer no longer enforces its
licenses or trademark, it is considered by law as having
abandoned its right to own that trademark. It can no longer take
anyone to court for violating its ownership of such rights. The
same thing applies to every culture. Jokes are made about
political correctness, but that is just one culture trying to enforce
what it believes are its rights.
Every culture through all time enforces its standards of
culture. No culture is accepted by everyone living under its
jurisdiction. Even the most popular culture will find some who
wish to rebel against the system. Usually rebels are in a minority
and can be dealt with through ordinary social ostracization. When
a culture is in its ascendency or in decline, it will find itself under
212
attack from organized opposition. Such organized attacks must
be judged and held up to punishment and ridicule. Looking back
upon other cultures in history, it is often amusing to the modern
man, to list the various behaviors and beliefs held up for
punishment.
Many suffered greatly during the Dark Ages as they refused
to assert their belief that the water and wine during communion
actually turned into the blood and body of Christ. Others suffered
over various beliefs about the proper method of baptism. While
seeming minor, these small disagreements were attacks on the
weakest links in a culture. Such attacks if not thwarted will result
in other attacks. That is why a culture, when viewed from the
outside, appears very narrow. It is not that cultures cannot
tolerate differences, it is that cultures cannot tolerate even small
differences over the core beliefs.
In the new world culture, the beliefs of ethical and racial
pluralism are core beliefs. Those who in even the most slight
manor joke or challenge such beliefs must be punished. The
media, in our culture, is full of examples of people being judged
and punished in the public eye for minor racial and ethical slurs.
To use a racial slur can end up costing a person his job. The
penalty for cultural crimes is often more severe than crimes which
are merely bad behavior. The same is true with those who
challenge the foundations of a government. It is one thing to rob
another person, but the attempt to protest the legality of the
current tax system, lands a person in more trouble and expense
than he can handle.
It is easy to see which cultures are most vulnerable and
where their weakest links are by the behaviors which held up for
public ridicule. The banning of Christmas carols in primary
schools looks very ridiculous on the surface. But it reveals a fear
on the part of the new world culture. If the culture is to succeed
in becoming worldwide, not even the smallest expression of
Christianity must be allowed to remain. Even the smallest
expression must become cultural incorrect and an offense to
other religious faiths. Christianity must be made to appear as
being rude, arrogant, and intolerant in the new world cultural
system. To allow minor expressions of this faith would open up
the possibility of a revival of Christianity.
Christianity also requires a discipline within its churches and
within its culture. It is no different than any other cultural system.
While the Bible is very strict in regard to the Ten Commandments,
it is quite tolerant of many behaviors not covered by such laws.
There is no vast regulation or control system. One reason that
the system is often pictured as oppressive is that most of the
Biblical regulations concern property, sex, and worship. These
three give offense to moderns more than anything else. The vast
freedom allowed outside of the few regulations is not appreciated
because of the restrictions in these three areas. The pictures of
religious intolerance are often in its enforcement of rules in these
three areas.
The oft-quoted statement, ‘judge not that you be not
judged,’ is used to condemn Christians who form or apply any
judgments. That other verses require Christian judgment is
overlooked. What critics of Christianity have in mind is not a
definitive understanding of the Bible, but they desire to keep
Christians out of the public forum. To not make any judgments
would mean a person would go through life without any defenses
against evil. To not make judgments would open a person to a
charge of fatalism, which is what it is: Whatever will be will be.
Life must be accepted as it comes and no discernment is
necessary. All that is required is to live life on a minute to minute
basis. Judgment is part of living and making daily decisions.
Any survey of secular governments must reveal that every
government that is not limited by the Bible, ends up making more
and more judgments about every little detail of life. As
governments gain power, that power must be justified and
maintained. Ever increasing judgment is applied to every area of
life. Even the taxes become ever more complex and require more
and application of power for their enforcement. When men seek
to free themselves from the judgments of God, they are replaced
with judgments that are far more severe and intimidating. The
bottom line is not freedom, but the desire to be free from God.
Most people will gladly replace obedience to God with slavery to
another man. It does not make sense, but it is in a backhand
214
way, the proof of what the Bible is saying about man’s rebellious
nature.

16 THE DEITY OF CHRIST VERSUS MAN’S DEITY

One of the myths of the twentieth century is the idea that a

secular government and culture are possible. We have dealt
previously with the impossibility of being totally neutral in the
face of the facts of the universe. Every fact requires a system of
interpretation. That are no facts that can be interpreted outside
of some system. Only something divine can create an
interpretive system. A mere mortal would never be able to gather
all of the facts and make some systematic analysis. Even if some
mere mortal mind were to gather ninety-nine per cent of the facts
into a coherent system, there is always the possibility that there
is some fact, as yet undiscovered, will yet bring about the
downfall of such a philosophical edifice.
Every culture must have a deity that provides a system of
interpretation. If the God of the Bible is thrown out, then He must
be replaced. Either a false church will arise, which claims to
speak for God, or a dictator will arise who claims to speak as the
final authority. When anyone wants to analyze a culture, the first
step is to locate the divine in that particular culture. If you can
identify the divine center of a nation or culture, then the rest of
that group’s behavior will make sense in terms of that particular
divine. In the United States, the divine is located in the
government in Washington, D.C. Every problem seeks out
Washington for some solution. Every need seeks satisfaction
through some government-imposed solution. Every political
difference seeks to find its view validated by the Washington
power structure. Just as the Catholic Church has the Vatican, the
United States has Capital Hill.
The battle between the early church and the Roman Empire
was a battle for the location of the divine in society. The Romans
realized quite early that neither Caesar nor Jesus could share their
divinity with another. One or the other would have to go. In that
particular battle, Jesus won out over Caesar. The next stage in
history was a battle between the new church structure and the
person of Jesus. The battle was fought over the nature of the
divine in the body of Jesus. Was Jesus a man who attained
godhead, or was He incarnated as God? And if God came down
and inhabited a man, did his human nature become God? The
solution arrived at by the early Christians was that Jesus was both
fully God and fully man, and his two natures did not intermingle.
He was God, but His humanity did not become God. It was a
temple of God.
This solution declared that the incarnation was a one-time
event. Human nature can never become divine and human
institutions can never become divine through some divine
occupation. There was a total separation between the divinity
and man. The only contact is through the mediation of Jesus the
Messiah. Nevertheless, the history of the world is the attempt of
various men and their creations to become divine and have the
authority of the godhead. There was no evolutionary process that
any man or system could grow into a form of the divine. Every
attempt of any man to attain divinity will only result in chaos. To
locate divinity and its attributes in some temporary man or
system will invite rebellion from their subjects. Every human god
is not satisfied with just ruling, but in time wants to be served and
worshiped by everyone. Every temporary god wants to take on
the character of the real God.
In the Bible, not only are earthly manifestations of God
forbidden, the powers that God delegates to man are to be
separated. The story of the Bible is the separation of the priest
from the king. The separation of the church and state is
important to the success of any culture. Unfortunately, this
separation in today’s form means the separation of the
government from God. This is not what the Bible has in mind.
The powers of the church and the state are separate powers, but
both hold their powers only under the authority given to it by God.
Neither the priest nor the king is to take on the character of God,
or to lust after the power and worship that belong only to God.
This separation of the church and state is not a separation of
the material from the spiritual. The current idea is that we live in
216
a physical realm and a material realm: The church rules over the
invisible spiritual kingdom, and the state rules over the material
world. This is not what the Bible is talking about. When Jesus
became man, he inhabited a material body. The body is part of
the spiritual. Jesus was not a ghost inside a body. His body while
not mingling with His divinity, was not alien to His person.
Christians today, not understanding this, attempt to escape from
the body and its rigors in an attempt to become more spiritual.
The church rules over the material world just as much as the state
rules over the world.
The separation is in terms of jurisdiction. The church is to be
involved in education and welfare. It is not the role of the church
to raise an army for a defense of the land. And it is not the role of
the state to try to feed every person in the land who is hungry.
Neither the church nor the state is to be spiritual in the modern
sense of the word. Both are to deal with the realities of this
world. Both are to rule under the authority given it by God. Both
are limited in their powers and neither is divine nor to be
worshiped. Also, neither is to attempt to supply the needs in
men’s lives which only God can give. This is not a perfect world,
and all men everywhere will go through life with some needs left
unmet. Any attempt to supply men with their every need is an
attempt to replace God with some human institution.
The history of the world has seen both the church and the
state attempt to become divine. The current stage of the divine
state in the twenty-first century will meet the same fate as the
attempt of the medieval church to become divine. The Bible
appears to teach that there will be a third stage in history. This
will be the final stage in man’s history. The state and the church
will unite to form a one world rule. Each will attempt to support
the divine powers that each covets so dearly. There will be one
great attempt to cure man from his sinful and fallen condition
through the power of the state bureaucracy and the rituals of the
church. The Bible predicts that the two powers will be defeated
and at the end of history only one power will be left standing that
can offer to men the cure that they have been seeking for six
thousand years.
One of the purposes of this study has been to take the
masks off the world in which we have to live. So much of our
daily struggles are disguised from our own mind. We seek cures
for things which have no cure and we try to heal problems which
all of the wrong solutions. The story of history is the chronicle of
man’s attempt to admit his real need and the fight over who is
allowed to heal that hurt. After all of the misdeeds of history,
there are very few who will not admit that mankind has a
problem. There are also very few who do not see a need for some
form of divine help. The battles have been over where the divine
is to be found and what part of man needs to be cured.
The Bible states that the final conclusion of history will read
thus: Man’s problem is sin caused by his rebellion from God, and
the cure is the Cross of Jesus, the Savior of Mankind. Children
used to be trained to think in these terms when they learned their
Mother Goose. The story of Humpty Dumpty is a picture of
reality:

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall,

Humpty Dumpty had a great fall,
All of the King’s horses,
And all of the King’s men,
Could not put Humpty together again.

No religion and no government can put Humpty together again.

History records the failures. More failures will ensue until all
mankind recognizes that only the Cross of Jesus can put man back
together again.
The story of history has been a constant conflict. There have
been repeated attempts to find the key to mankind and the
meaning of existence.

218
220