A while back I was doing a series on the Total Depravity euphemistic phrase, “inclined towards sin”. Going through my notes, I realized that once again my attention deficit disorder got the better of me and I promptly turned my efforts towards other matters (and, as we are engaged in the heady task of dismantling some two thousand odd years of Greek paganism which has parasitically imbedded itself into the message of Christ–a decidedly JEWISH, not fucking Greek, message–there are always other matters). However, in the interest of consistency I would like to conclude my thoughts on the Reformed cognitive dissonance of “inclined towards sin”. I assure you, the entire idea is untenable; a purposeful distraction intended to subdue and fool otherwise critical minds.
That will no longer work on me. I’m hip to their Jedi mind tricks.
No…that won’t do. I shouldn’t insult the Jedi. There is nothing so poetic nor fantastic as Jedi mind trickery going on in the sermons of the neo-Puritans; those protestants who concede John Calvin as their Pope (which is basically ALL protestant denominations, whether they know it or not). No, the propaganda of the Reformed oligarchy is merely the art of the con.
So, without any more ado, here is the conclusion of this series…”Inclined Towards Sin?: Yet another nonsensical argument from the despots of Total Depravity”
“Inclined” presumes a tendency towards, as measured by a standard deviation, or deviations, from a median reference. But if everyone–that is, all of humanity–is equally inclined, then inclined becomes the median. Which of course contradicts the entire point and premise of “inclined towards sin”. Inclined means a tendency towards a particular behavior in service to a particular objective. But if the “tendency” itself is the nominal reference point for all of humanity, then how in the hell do you qualify or quantify it as a tendency? It is by definition no longer an inclination, it is merely the default state of being man. The singular IS of man’s nature is “inclined”.
That is utter nonsense. The very word then ceases to have any meaning whatsoever. Inclination cannot be the beginning point of man’s nature because one would lose any reference point from which to define inclination in the first place.
And so here we see, yet again, the attempt of the peddlers of a false and impossible gospel to infuse contradiction and double-speak into conventional terms…terms which are historically derived from man’s reason. So we are further treated, via a logical rape in the form of “inclined towards sin”, to yet more proof that Reformed ideas and rational consistency are utterly at odds with one another.
We can see then that “inclined towards sin” is merely another way to float the idea of Total Depravity towards the masses in a way that only masquerades as reason. And yet the fact remains that there is NO conciliatory premises at the root of Reformation theology. Contradiction is the father of the faith…there is nothing that is and yet is NOT at the same time. There is nothing which cannot be declared both true and false, and good and evil simultaneously according to the absolute “truth” of Protestant Reformation ideas. The entirety of the belief system is rooted in doctrinal farce, and a parsing of the English lexicon to the point were the blood of impossible reality runs from every page. There is no consistency of reason. All definitions are murdered in service to the oligarchy’s will to power; their slavish and salivating devotion to the sacrificing of humanity to ideas which ultimately do nothing except to feed the grotesque and gluttonous appetites of those who have decided that being God to everyone else is the best living to be made.
With “inclined towards sin” we are right back to the whole notion of Total Depravity, which declares that man is evil and inadequacy incarnate. Man is fundamentally unable to apprehend TRUTH; to make any rational or efficacious moral distinctions, and thus is incapable of learning. Man is nothing more than a beast, and cognitively deaf, dumb, and blind. He must be compelled by force to “obey the message”; to conform to the truth of “sound doctrine” which is always OUTSIDE of himself. And who is, somehow, able to convey “God’s will” to the masses? To perpetrated His disdain for their rank evil existence upon them, and to reap the rewards of such a cosmic calling? Why, it is those who have decided that they are somehow absolved of their metaphysical failures. And the great thing about this gig is that they are never on the hook for explaining their barbarity or their logical contradictions and doctrinal nonsense. YOU cannot possibly understand because you, by your very metaphysical nature, do not possess the ability to comprehend; they alone have been given the “grace to perceive” (thanks, C.J. Mahaney!).
They will argue that they have the divine right of kings over you. That they may own you and all that you possess; and your labor and its fruits are the offering reserved for them by God. It is a massive twisting of the Old Testament system of priests and temple keepers. They OWN you. YOU are their provision. Nothing more. And if you are lucky they will deign to count you worthy of salvation, but only if you maintain this salvation by the WORK of “faith” (and for all their talk of “grace”, their gospel is categorically works-based; there is nary a drop of grace to be found in the love-empty buck of Reformation theology). Which means, effectively, sit down, shut the fuck up, and give them their due, which is your very life and all the money in your bank account.
And this, my friends, is “faith” in the Reformed sense. The protestant sense. Oh, sure, the barbarity is not so readily apparent. After all, they shall not deny sustenance to the oxen–the laity–as it is treading out their grain. They are careful to make nods to your “own” possessions and time…but never in a sense that they concede that as you work abundantly to yourself you are entitled to the abundant profit of your work. Oh, no, no, NO. What you earn is merely “earning”, not deserving. That is, your hard work doesn’t pay off in dividends that you deserve. No, all your hard work doesn’t mean shit with respect to WHY you get what you get. All you have is by God’s grace, you see, not your work, and so they are entitled to it all, because they are God to you. But, again, they will make superficial nods to your right to own what you possess (most of them are Republicans, for some reason…weird, because they are massive collectivists and worship the idea of the State as the sole arbiter of all facets human life), and will applaud your hard work as they demand that you curtail your ambition, and remind you that the root of your “salvation” is the fact that you are anchored to the church collective. And so before you get ahead of yourself and get too prideful, you should give sacrificially. And thus, you are inexorably and perpetually tethered to your “place” in the “body”. Your desire to move on to bigger and better things–to live your life as if YOU own it according to the depth and breadth of your work–is considered damnable pride, and God will smite you for it.
They are careful to camouflage their true intentions, couching them in lofty and spiritual and hyper-sentimental tones. They will appeal to your natural tendency to derive your worth from the collective; a tendency spawned and nurtured by a Western civilization that has copulated incessantly with Greek gnosticism rooted in Platonist fallacy for thousands and thousands of years. They will tell you how important you are to the group; the church; the body; the faith; the family. They will appeal to your inherent sense of altruism by reminding you that you should “give to anyone who has need”; and yet they never mention that “anyone” NEVER includes you. Because what they really mean when they declare your priceless worth to their theo-marxist collective is that you are worthless beyond it. That you are nothing; pointless…an entity which God does not even consider. All you are must be sacrificed to the collective or you do not exist. Except, the great contradiction–contradiction defining all of Reformed thinking–is that whether you are part of the collective or not, there is no YOU anywhere in the equation. YOU is the very reason God hates you. The effective death of SELF replaced by the group is what is required for salvation.
Which begs the question, who exactly is getting saved?
Answer: no one.
Certainly not you. YOU is what God despises, and will for eternity. Since YOU are evil there can be no YOU, ever, which dwells in harmony with God in His heavenly kingdom. So again, I assure you that the “salvation” they preach has absolutely nothing to do with you. It is the collective salvation of the “body”. And who is the body? Who is the collective?
And so who is really saved?
For the rest of the “body” cannot be rewarded. Because the rest of the body is ultimately comprised of individual YOUs. Which cannot possibly be saved, because YOU are evil itself. So we all need to stop kidding ourselves. We need to stop listening to these witch doctors who are trying to convince us, in service to their own power and wealth, that man can be justly rewarded or justly condemned for what he is NOT, and what he cannot do, which is everything. Because man is utterly besides the point, because individual man is NOT. And there is no salvation for what is NOT, is my point.
And that is the dirty little secret. The secret of the collective NON-existence of individual human beings. Think about it. Have you ever stopped to wonder why the abuse and exploitation of individual human beings, even children, is not considered a deal-breaker when it comes to the doctrinal/theological/philosophical roots of collectivist ideologies like communism, Protestant Reformation theology, tribalism, national socialism, or monarchism, among others? Have you ever wondered why they don’t consider it an automatic disqualification of their ideas when they inevitably lead to the marginalization, exploitation, and even outright murder of human beings?
It is because they do not concede the existence of the individual, and all groups are inevitably made up of individuals. So they ALONE ARE the “group” in its practical form. That’s why. So if they can qualify any circumstance or action no matter how barbarous as centering upon YOU as an individual–and any circumstance can be qualified this way–then it automatically gets a doctrinal pass from the ruling ideologues.
Think about that the next time you tithe. Think about that they next time you enthusiastically put up your hand for the Urinal Cake Cleaning committee at church, fully convinced that your service to the “body” is a service to God. Think about what it really means. Think about the fact that YOU really don’t contribute anything in their eyes…that the very realization of your existence only comes in the form of “giving” and “serving” the collective…that there is no acknowledgement of YOU anywhere on the radar of that gnostic standing up in front of the plexiglass podium waxing eloquent, with great saccharine and soaring diatribes on God’s love and sovereign grace, with crocodile tears and a host of other manipulative histrionics all in service to a doctrine which despises YOU as YOU. A theology which only speaks of love as possible if it is in SPITE of you. That is, a love preached for the collective of God’s church and a love that prompts “sacrificial” (how many times have you heard THAT bullshit) giving and serving is merely a love directed at the self of the oligarch….the God proxy…the Pastor/Priest-in-God’s-Stead. Only HE matters. Because the church is him. Because God is him.
And you as YOU? Are a mask of the collective, or you can just fuck off to hell where you inherently belong.
And, incidentally, where you are going anyway. You think any individual gets saved in this paradigm? LOL! Find the roots of the doctrine and you will find the truth. And the truth? Is a silhouette of you, nothing more. A hole in the universe of reality.
1 thought on “(Conclusion) Man is “Inclined” Towards Sin?: Yet another nonsensical argument from the despots of “Total Depravity””
“Have you ever stopped to wonder why the abuse and exploitation of individual human beings, even children, is not considered a deal-breaker when it comes to the doctrinal/theological/philosophical roots of collectivist ideologies like communism, Protestant Reformation theology, tribalism, national socialism, or monarchism, among others? Have you ever wondered why they don’t consider it an automatic disqualification of their ideas when they inevitably lead to the marginalization, exploitation, and even outright murder of human beings?”
It is because they do not look at the root assumptions of what they believe. It is always a few bad individuals who simply did not do it right. Both the left and right are guilty of this. Both sides have their “experts” who know better for us than we do as thinking adults. The collective– whether it is socialistic government with it’s oligarchy of experts or hierarchical church.
I take it back to the aha moment I had while listening to one of John’s seminars at TANC. He talked about the fact we are “contractual” beings. And I think we need to go deeper with that. It is all about how we are to relate to one another.
When we redefine “love” to mean taking one for the team, we have lost all meaning of “love” and the contract John talks about fits right into that. We devalue not only others but ourselves.
One example of your paragraph above is that Wade tells us he agrees with Piper’s doctrine but then also tells us he disagrees with how that same doctrine plays out with Piper. He agrees with Piper’s doctrine but not how Piper tells us how that doctrine works. It is strange.
If we are contractual beings, that won’t work.