Title

Dark Freedom
The Rise of Western Lawlessness
by C.W. Steinle
Copyright 2015 by C.W. Steinle
All rights reversed

выберите язык

Follow on Facebook

Saturday, February 27, 2016

Dark Freedom: The Rise of Western Lawlessness - Chapter Nine

Dark Freedom: The Rise of Western Lawlessness - Chapter Nine

by C.W. Steinle
Copyright 2015 by C.W. Steinle

Copyrighted material.  All rights reserved.  No part of this book shall be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means - electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise - without written permission from the publisher.  This book may not be re-sold or given away to other people. If you would like to purchase this book or share with another person, please purchase a copy for each reader from any online bookseller.  Visit Dark-Freedom.com for purchase details or: http://darkfreedombook.com/

Part III - The Everlasting Kingdom
By My Name - "The Lord"

Lawlessness not only disregards the law, it also opposes the Lawgiver.  Christians confess that Jesus is Lord.  But the practice of lordship is far removed from the life-experience of most western believers.  One reason for the waywardness of the Western Church is this obscure understanding of the meaning of "Lord."  People can't be expected to obey the Lord's laws without the fear of the Lord.  They must understand whom they are fearing, or else they will meet the same failure as the Gnostics - who knew nothing but a theoretical god.  "And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard?" – Rom. 10:14
The God of the Bible is more than the Neo-Platonists' First Cause.  God not only created all things through His Son, He also controls all things through His Son.  The incarnation of God in Christ bore the image of the invisible God.  All authority in the heaven and on the earth has been given to the Son.  But sadly, we must even define what is meant by "authority," because authority brings to mind that politically incorrect word, "submission."  Therefore we must proceed with caution to consider that God is both; good, and Lord.
We are told in Genesis that once the fellowship between God and Adam was broken, several generations went by before men even began to call on the Lord.  Man's estrangement from his Maker made fellowship with Him impossible.  Were it not for the love of God which compelled Him to reach out to man, the relationship would be broken forever.  God revealed Himself to man only partially at first.  Hebrews One states that God, "at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets."  God revealed Himself in creation as "The Almighty."  In the flood God showed that He was the Judge of the earth; and also that He was the God who made a way of salvation for Noah.  God made Himself known to Abraham as the God of blessing, and as the God of the promised inheritance.  But God revealed Himself to Moses in a different way.
"And God spoke to Moses and said to him: ‘I am the Lord.  I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty, but by My name Lord I was not known to them.  I have also established My covenant with them, to give them the land of Canaan, the land of their pilgrimage, in which they were strangers.  And I have also heard the groaning of the children of Israel whom the Egyptians keep in bondage, and I have remembered My covenant.  Therefore say to the children of Israel: 'I am the Lord; I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, I will rescue you from their bondage, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great judgments.  I will take you as My people, and I will be your God.  Then you shall know that I am the Lord your God who brings you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians.  And I will bring you into the land which I swore to give to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; and I will give it to you as a heritage: I am the Lord.'" – Exodus 6:2-8
"I am the Lord."  Because Moses wrote the Pentateuch after the time of this revelation, he often referred to God as the "Lord God".  In His address to Moses above, God proclaimed that He was more than a Deliverer-God who was able to free His people from their bondage to Egypt.  God was also the Governor-God; the Lord God.  After God delivered the Israelites from bondage, Moses presented God's laws to the people and asked them to make a commitment to honor the Lord's terms of government.  Mt. Sinai was the place where God enrolled Moses in His campaign of deliverance, and Sinai was also the place where God unveiled His government to the Children of Israel.
"So Moses came and told the people all the words of the Lord and all the judgments. And all the people answered with one voice and said, ‘All the words which the Lord has said we will do.’  And Moses wrote all the words of the Lord. And he rose early in the morning, and built an altar at the foot of the mountain, and twelve pillars according to the twelve tribes of Israel.  Then he sent young men of the children of Israel, who offered burnt offerings and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen to the Lord.  And Moses took half the blood and put it in basins, and half the blood he sprinkled on the altar.  Then he took the Book of the Covenant and read in the hearing of the people. And they said, ‘All that the Lord has said we will do, and be obedient.’  And Moses took the blood, sprinkled it on the people, and said, ‘This is the blood of the covenant which the Lord has made with you according to all these words.’" - Exodus 24:3-8
Jesus is Lord.  The Christians in Jesus' day (especially the Hellenic Jews and the Gentiles) used the Greek Septuagint version of the Old Testament.  The Greek word for Lord, "Kurie", in the Old Testament is the same word used in the New Testament when stating that Jesus is "Lord", or in calling Him "Lord" Jesus.  When first century Christians made their confession that Jesus is Lord, they were acknowledging their confidence that Jesus was both; the Christ, and that same Lord (Kurie) of the Old Testament.  Thus Peter's words, "For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he says himself: 'The Lord said to my Lord, ‘Sit at My right hand, till I make Your enemies Your footstool.'  Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ." - Acts 2:34-36
Those heretics who believe that the God of the Old Testament is not the same as the God of the New Testament have not known God at all.  There is only one Lord.  "There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all." - Eph. 4:4-6 
David was a man after God's own heart.  David's psalms abound with praises for God's law.  The Psalms of David are also filled with prophecies about Christ.  David's God, and Christ's Father, are one and the same Deity.  It is an error to believe that Christians should have a different heart for the law than King David had.  The law was begotten of God, and should be cherished by His children.  "For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments.  And His commandments are not burdensome.  For whatever is born of God overcomes the world." -  I John 5:3-4 When David wrote in his First Psalm that a man would be blessed by meditating on the law, he didn't intend that only men of the Old Testament should be blessed.
"Blessed is the man
Who walks not in the counsel of the ungodly,
Nor stands in the path of sinners,
Nor sits in the seat of the scornful;
But his delight is in the law of the Lord,
And in His law he meditates day and night.
He shall be like a tree
Planted by the rivers of water,
That brings forth its fruit in its season,
Whose leaf also shall not wither;
And whatever he does shall prosper.
The ungodly are not so,
But are like the chaff which the wind drives away.
Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment,
Nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous.
For the Lord knows the way of the righteous,
But the way of the ungodly shall perish."
Jesus, the son of David, was also a man who loved the law.  Hebrews 1:8-9 reads, "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness . . ."
Jesus was not only a lover of the law, He was also the Lawgiver - the Governor God; the Lord.  The same prophetic verse which announced His incarnation also declared His endless government.
"For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called
Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Of the increase of His government and peace
There will be no end,
Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom,
To order it and establish it with judgment and justice
From that time forward, even forever.
The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this." - Isaiah 9:6-7
This brings us to our next observation about God's government - it is a kingdom.  A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.  Jesus is the Lord of a kingdom.  The kingdom form of government has been summarily rejected as inherently evil by today's westerners.  The behavior of the United Nations and the United States implies that all kingdoms need to be abolished, and all kings deposed.  Telling American Christians that Jesus is the king of a kingdom is like telling Luke Skywalker that Darth Vader is his father.  "That's Impossible!"  It just doesn't fit in with everything else they've been taught about the evils of monarchy.  The Church Deceived says, "Yes Lord, yes," to God's great salvation; but, "Surely not," and "May it never be," to "Thy kingdom come."
In fact, the western concept of heaven is an ethereal free-for-all where souls are set free to do whatever they want, whenever they want; very much like Plato's dreaded democracy.  Westerners imagine a "Have it your way" heaven.  They are prepared for the reign of the Burger King, but ill prepared for Christ the King.  Because of this perverted and egocentric impression of heaven, the pervasion of lawlessness might easily be seen as the fulfillment of the prayer, "Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven."  How can the new generation possibly embrace the vision of a model kingdom in heaven when the last thing they want is a kingdom on earth?
Faith in God's Lordship is also undermined in proportion to man's faith in the soundness of human reasoning.  The God of the Bible has been painted by western philosophy into a corner of the mind, where He is limited to the confines of predetermined parameters.  Who God is and what He can do is evermore distorted because of the incessant presence of Platonism and Gnosticism unwittingly absorbed by the Church.  The Lord God of the Bible is the Jehovah God; the God of love, grace, mercy, compassion - who cares, who heals, who rescues, who helps, who even understands our weaknesses - and yes, the God who also chastens and judges.  But the Platonic altruistic god of goodness is too good to judge and too idyllic to care; thus eliminating the need for redemption.  And the greater part of western culture has put their faith in this imaginary god.  The growing lawless majority assumes the living God is like their lifeless god.
Sufficient knowledge of man's philosophies concerning theology and politics has been introduced in previous chapters so that we may proceed to explore the heartthrob of lawlessness.  Immorality.  Immorality is the violation of God's moral code.  The basis of the American moral code shifted abruptly in the mid-twentieth century from the Bible to common law; which now has become little more than case law established by human tradition.  Most conservative Christians were not aware that the very foundation of Biblical morality had been removed from the courtroom long before the Ten Commandments were removed from the courthouse.  In 2010 the United States Department of Justice came out of the closet and shocked the Judeo-Christian community with the official banner below.  Almost as profound as the statement itself is the spiritual reverence assigned to the words Mankind, Life, and People; which were enlarged and ornamented to elevate these principalities of the earthly sphere to their presumed deific status.
Figure 10 - Dept. of Justice website banner from 2010 – 2014104
"The common law is the will of Mankind issuing from the Life of the People."  WND.com posted the following research regarding the source of this slogan.
According to U.S. House documentation, the quote is one of the multitude of statements engraved outside the Justice building in Washington. The full phrase is, "The common law is the will of mankind issuing from the life of the people, framed through mutual confidence, sanctioned by the light of reason."  According to The American Spectator, which has documented the controversy, some attorneys believed the quote was pulled or adapted from the writing of the 18th–century British jurist Sir William Blackstone, who "influenced not only British law, but also the American constitutional and legal system."
However, the report cites "other Department of Justice employees" who say the quote comes from British lawyer D. Wilfred Jenks, author of "The Common Law of Mankind" essays in the 1950s.105
These laws "sanctioned by the light of reason" have displaced the laws of God which were sanctified among men by the sprinkling of blood.  But replacing God's laws with the rules of men is not a recent problem.  And neither is man's inclination to raise up the god of human reason; and to set it up as an idol in the courts of the Lord.  It is time for us to look into the sanctuary and expose a sacred cow which was exalted by the Eastern and Western Churches.  Religious patriotism and individualism were the stepchildren of the Reformation.  But a far stranger fowl flew into the Church during her formative years.  It is a destructive principality; a shifty bird, which has been nesting in the tree of the Church since the second century.
The Reformers sought to expel it but were only partially successful.  It masqueraded as an angel of light resting innocently among the true teachings of Christ and His Apostles.  By God's grace, let the eyes of the reader be opened by Him to judge whether this bird is of God or of man.  And may those who have been injured by its talons find healing in Christ and His Word which is, "living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." -  Heb. 4:12
The seeming self-denial of the ascetic dualists appeared to Early Church Christians as a way to achieve the spiritual life they were striving for.  Rather than depending solely on prayer and the power of the Holy Spirit, they turned to the aid of Neo-Platonism.   But even though dualism attempts to overcome materialism, its assumptions oppose God's Word and twist the attitudes of the heart in destructive ways.  Our previous discussion of dualism pointed out that both the Platonic and Gnostic philosophies condemn matter.  They both condemn the Creator Himself, or else distance Him from creation by enough intermediaries to allow Him to retain His goodness.  The wickedness invoked by deeming matter to be evil has proven to be one of the foremost forces of wickedness.
Once man had transgressed his proper domain by forcing God to conform to human reasoning, the next step was to override God's directive of multiplying through sexual reproduction.  According to dualistic thinking, because matter is evil, man's strongest desire in the material realm must be the most despicable.  This demented reasoning makes the sexual urge the most wicked desire, and the sexual act the most heinous sin.  Not a few Church leaders spoke out-rightly (or strongly insinuated) that sexual intercourse between Adam and Eve was man's original sin.  So the Early Church fell to dualistic asceticism, teaching that righteousness could be attained by suppressing sexual desire and practicing celibacy.  This dualistic thinking segregated the supposedly righteous Christians from the moderate Christians on the basis of ascetic living.  The good Christians were celibate, and qualified for upper ministry.  But the inferior Christians, who were too materialistic, were expected to fulfill God's commission to be fruitful and multiply.  We have already alluded to the first tragedy of dualism - the fact that such vows of celibacy were seldom kept without some secret sexual outlet.
Many who have tried to live the ascetic life have ended up asking their Maker, "Why have you made me this way?" when, in fact, He didn't design man for abstinence.  Paul recommended celibacy to those who had been given this gift because of the turmoil faced by the first century Church.  But Christian dualism has kept countless men from the ministry over the last two thousand years; impeding the work of the kingdom, and putting the ministry into the hands of men who have actually unwittingly been compromised by worldly wisdom.  The secondary consequence of dualism which was demonstrated by the Libertarians of the previous chapter is one of the leading contributors to lawlessness today.
Dualistic logic which condemns matter and material pleasures cannot make a distinction between wedded and unwedded intercourse, since both acts involve the same flesh and the same desire.  This is why keeping the biblical laws against fornication and adultery has no philosophical benefit.  Only complete separation from the supposedly evil act of sexual intercourse can satisfy the technical requirements of "spirituality" according to the logic of the dualistic system.  Under this perverted doctrine of purity the very act of marriage becomes prima facie evidence that both partners have fallen short of the mark established by the sterile and heartless god of First Principles.  Therefore, even Church-ordained wedlock cannot remove the stigma that sexual intercourse has disqualified both husband and wife from meeting the dualistic standard of spiritual perfection.
The self-righteous and power hungry Roman church was happy to canonize the ascetic standard because it elevated the spirituality of the clergy and demoralized the laity.  Thus the common people, once reduced to this Nicolaitan status, could not help but see themselves as second class citizens of the kingdom of God.  Furthermore, both the drive and the act of intercourse carried the connotation of "dirtiness", in keeping with the Platonic notion that all material realities are flawed and only dim expressions of the perfect spiritual Forms.  As a result, even marriage could not alleviate a subconscious sense of guilt for not being able to overcome the sexual urge; even though it is perfectly natural and God ordained.  This twisted dualistic philosophy is retained even by many Protestant leaders.  Only by adhering steadfastly to God's government and rejecting the wisdom of man can the Church be delivered from this schizophrenic disorder. 
The heresy of the dualistic doctrine has struck to the heart of the Christian life and has never been banished.  Meanwhile, the Church has haggled over every other philosophical issue and never resolved what is surely one of the most significant doctrines in the everyday life of believers.  Disillusioned and demoralized, Christians inevitably come to question the abundance of life in this world promised by Christ.  But what does the Bible say?  "Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge." – Heb. 13:4 "Undefiled" means undefiled!  Marriage is in no wise dishonorable.  Few dualistic Christians other than Origen have actually comprehended what Jesus said in his response to the question of divorce.
"The Pharisees also came to Him, testing Him, and saying to Him, ‘Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for just any reason?’
And He answered and said to them, ‘Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?  So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.’
They said to Him, ‘Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?’
He said to them, ‘Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so.  And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.’
His disciples said to Him, ‘If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry.’
But He said to them, ‘All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given:  For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother’s womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it.’" – Matt. 19:3-12
Why did Jesus answer this question by offering the drastic alternative of castration?  Because man has been wired by his Creator for marriage.  Jesus was telling His disciples that if they wanted to live a life of celibacy they would need to disconnect the wiring in order to stop the sexual urges.  After all, to look at woman lustfully is a sin in itself.  Jesus was saying that if a man wanted to annul God's plan to be fruitful and multiply then that man would need to undo part of God's physical creation in order to live a life free from his God-given sexual instinct.  Granted, God is able to impart a special gift of celibacy to a few individuals – "All things shall be possible with God." – Mark 10:27 But celibacy without castration was not the practical alternative offered by Christ.  We need not go back to the behavior of the popes during the Middle Ages or the Libertines of the sixteenth century to understand why Jesus gave castration as the practical alternative to marriage.  The pedophilia of contemporary "celibate" clergymen speaks for itself. 
And still the bishops have been unwilling to relinquish their claims of super-spirituality and release the laity from marital condemnation; simply because it would dissolve their Pharisaical apartheid system.  When will the Church wake up and return to God's Word?  While the Church perpetuates this philosophical crime against humanity, the world has gained the upper hand by offering a lawless, but more rational, solution.  As the "light of reason" has been "sanctioned" over the last 60 years, and the laws of God have been abandoned, the Platonic thinking of the Church is being answered by its historical antithesis, Epicureanism.  "If it feels good, do it."  But we must make one more observation about the hidden dangers of Platonism.
When the dualistic system is carried one step further, the gates of Hell are opened.  If the natural and sanctified intercourse of Adam and Eve brought condemnation on all men for all ages, then all other sexual acts could not bear any greater condemnation.  If the desire for natural intercourse firmly grounds man to the material realm, why would any other sexual perversion lower him further?  In fact, perhaps all other perversions are actually more spiritual than intercourse; so that they might present more preferable alternatives then the natural intercourse which is expressly condemned by the dualistic Church.  Once again the deviant behavior of the so-called celibate Catholic priests attests to the wickedness unleashed by ascetic dualism.  The Catholic Church has done little to curtail its perversion because the priests have learned to prefer strange flesh over natural intercourse.
When marital intercourse is treated as a disqualifying weakness by the ascetic dualists, the command to be fruitful also becomes an enigma.  How could God's purposes be fulfilled through an act which is tainted by materiality?  This is the same predicament that the Docetists attempted to solve by their assertion that a spiritual Christ could not be incarnate in a material body.  By this same reasoning, God's command to be fruitful and multiply would seem to contradict His desire for man's spirituality.  Thus, in the mind of the dualist the fruit of the womb is spoiled before it is ever conceived.
The Bible says that man was conceived in sin because both parents are carriers of the disease of sin passed down from the time of Adam's fall.  It DOES NOT mean that the act which males and females were designed to do, and commissioned to perform, is an evil responsible for the generational dissemination of the fallen nature.  Dualism's tainting of the reproduction process also taints the unborn child who is the product of what is presumably a tainted act.  Even before Adam's commission to tend the garden, even before God began to fellowship with Adam in the cool of the day,  the very first word ever to spoken by God to the male and female of His creation was the command to, "Be fruitful and multiply."- Gen. 1:28
Christian youths should grow up looking forward to the day of their marriage when they can bless the heart of God through sexual reproduction and the fulfillment of God's plan for fruitfulness.  But because the Church Deceived has defiled the bed and made a disgrace of man's first commission, the youth are left to anticipate only the pleasure of the sexual act, and are for the most part oblivious to the sacred honor of bearing children unto their God.  Through this evil diversion, dualism's devaluation of what God hath joined together has also devalued the unborn child.  Sex has become the obsession; and the children are only an undesirable byproduct.  The abortion which the Roman Church officially opposes is actually further perpetuated by its stubborn refusal to recognize the heresy of dualistic asceticism.
A murderous spirit has already overtaken the United States, and much of the world.  As I present the proof for what I have just stated, please be assured that if you have sinned in this area and believed in the Lamb of God for forgiveness, you are indeed forgiven.  And if you have sinned in this area in ignorance, the Lord Jesus stands ready to forgive and to heal.  The sin that I am referring to is the abortion of the unborn.
A major contributing factor to the abortion rate has been the effect of humanism and Darwinism that is taught in the schools.  Students are not taught about the varying stages of a baby as it grows in the womb; when the color of the child’s eyes are determined, when the child’s nerves are developed enough to feel pain, etc.  Instead they are taught that a "developing embryo," not an "unborn baby," looks like a tadpole.  Teachers explain this is perfectly natural since we are all just complicated "accidents" from evolutionary processes.  So it's only expected that all life forms would look similar to tadpoles.  This line of reasoning leads a woman to believe that aborting a baby in the womb is essentially no different than destroying a laboratory experiment in a Petri dish.
The Humanists do not classify this choice as "the taking of a life."  In which case, please consider the maternal affection described by the ancient Hebrew word for compassion.  "Rachum" is the word commonly used in the Old Testament to mean compassion.  This word's origin stems from a similar Hebrew word - "Rechem", which means "womb."  During the siege of Jerusalem by the Babylonians, the people reached the point of starvation.  Jeremiah used this word for compassion to magnify the people’s desperation.  "The hands of the compassionate women have cooked their own children; They became food for them in the destruction of the daughter of my people." – Lamentations 4:10
This Hebrew word for compassion was based upon the natural affection that a mother would feel as she caressed her stomach during pregnancy.  The point that Jeremiah is making is that the very same women, who had once cherished the children within their wombs, were now forced by the madness of starvation to kill and eat them.  This example is given by Jeremiah as the most grievous violation of conscience conceivable in order to point out the severity of Jerusalem's punishment.  Where is this compassion in the twenty-first century?
America's conscience has been slowly seared to the point where many of her women have switched off this natural compassion.  Today, situations of desperation are seldom the reason for aborting one's baby.  Pregnancy is merely seen as untimely, unplanned, or inconvenient.  Why is there no love lost, no compassion, as babies are removed and discarded?  Can you imagine what Jeremiah's reaction would be today?  The biblical standards of family, sexual purity, and the worship of our Creator have all been rejected.  The fear of the Lord, which is the gatekeeper of the Christian conscience, has been trampled under the feet of today's heartless society.
The Christian Church now walks among a people who cannot distinguish good from evil.  There is nothing holding them back from expressing their hostility toward Christians.  Anger toward Christ's Church already fills their hearts, but the notion of tolerance has kept them at bay.  Until now.  Now their anger is beginning to spill through the cracks in the dike.  Their violence has overcome their own ability to resist it.  Once the persecution of Christians has been set in motion, there is nothing to stop it.  The same society who freely terminates the lives of their own children will have no qualms about exterminating the Church.106
The Bible clearly links the sins of Manasseh to the desolation of Judah"And the Lord sent against him raiding bands of Chaldeans, bands of Syrians, bands of Moabites, and bands of the people of Ammon; He sent them against Judah to destroy it, according to the word of the Lord which He had spoken by His servants the prophets. Surely at the commandment of the Lord this came upon Judah, to remove them from His sight because of the sins of Manasseh, according to all that he had done, and also because of the innocent blood that he had shed; for he had filled Jerusalem with innocent blood, which the Lord would not pardon."-2nd Kings 24:1-4 (emphasis added)
Not only did Manasseh kill his own newborn son, he also encouraged his countrymen to engage in this practice.  This was the "innocent blood" that brought desolation to Judah.  The Hinnom Valley, on the south side of Jerusalem, was the central location in Judah where parents would put their children to death.  The Hebrew words for "Valley of Hinnom" are "Ge Hinnom".  We are familiar with the Greek translation of this place as "Gehenna."  Gehenna was the city dump.  Because this place was so vile from the continuous burning of foul rubbish, and from the wickedness perpetrated there, Gehenna became synonymous with Hell itself.  And it was certainly Hell for the babies who were burned to death there in the arms of red-hot iron cradles.
The practice of infanticide was never approved by God.  Jeremiah 19 speaks of God’s distain for this sin: ". . . and have filled this place with the blood of the innocents they have also built the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings to Baal, which I did not command or speak, nor did it come into My mind." (emphasis added)   Infanticide was brought into Israel primarily by the worshipers of Baal and Molech.  It was the blood of innocent children which caused God to drive the Jews out from their land.  God Himself determined to make Judah desolate.107
The Church condemned that which God said was good, and it has led to the infanticide which never entered His mind.  The Church Fathers heeded the wisdom of men instead of obeying the Lord their God.  The dualistic god demands that men behave contrary to their God-created nature.  Here is the true perversion which has ultimately twisted the morality of western man.  The dualists have used the simplistic logic of a child to decide the will of God.  Just because God's Word gives guidelines for man's sexuality does not mean that God is against the sexuality of His own design.  For God to condemn that which He has sanctified would make Him either fickle or evil.  But God is good all the time.  He did not intend for people to spend their lives robbed of peace by a battle against that very thing which they were designed to do.
The Church has twisted the Scriptures to support asceticism; even creating fictions about Mary's eternal virginity so that she might stand as a superhuman cheerleader for the cause of celibacy.  God is a God of truth.  How tragic that the Church would fear God so little that it would add to the Scriptures in order to support this heinous dualistic position.  If the glorified Mary could look upon the earth from above, she would not want to be associated with the slaughter of millions of unborn babies which has resulted indirectly from these myths about the blessedness of celibacy.  But as long as the Church clings to its policies on asceticism, celibacy, and the exaltation of the Virgin Mary, all of the failures of dualism covered above will not be resolved.  Judgment must begin in the House of the Lord.
The dualistic system that was so hastily embraced by the Church Fathers, hermits, and monks has in all actuality become the Pied Piper which is leading the whole human race to edge of the lawless abyss.  And the progressive Church has made no improvement upon the traditional Church.  It has merely turned sliding down the slippery slope of human philosophy into an art form.  Isaiah pleaded with Israel to return to the Lord because that nation was no longer responsive to the Lord's chastening.
The Church sings of the Lord's return.  Let us pray she will learn to honor the sacred earthly union so that she might be dressed and ready to honor her union with her beloved Bridegroom.  Paul stated in Ephesians Five that the human union is a picture of the divine union.  "For we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones.  ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’  This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church." - Eph. 5:30-31 When dualism taints marriage on earth, it also tarnishes our anticipation of our union with Christ.  The Church must be purged of its adulterous worship of the spiritual idol of dualism so that she might obey her true Husband, Christ.  Likewise, let her consider God's dealings with Israel in the days of the judges when everyone did what was right in their own eyes.  Because of Israel's unfaithfulness God took away His hedge of protection and left Israel's borders open to enemy invasions.  By the time of Isaiah, Israel's unfaithfulness prompted God to the call for distant armies to remove her from the Land.
"Woe to those who draw iniquity with cords of vanity,
And sin as if with a cart rope;
That say, "Let Him make speed and hasten His work,
That we may see it;
And let the counsel of the Holy One of Israel draw near and come,
That we may know it."
Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil;
Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness;
Who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes,
And prudent in their own sight!
Woe to men mighty at drinking wine,
Woe to men valiant for mixing intoxicating drink,
Who justify the wicked for a bribe,
And take away justice from the righteous man!
Therefore, as the fire devours the stubble,
And the flame consumes the chaff,
So their root will be as rottenness,
And their blossom will ascend like dust;
Because they have rejected the law of the Lord of hosts,
And despised the word of the Holy One of Israel.
Therefore the anger of the Lord is aroused against His people;
He has stretched out His hand against them
And stricken them,
And the hills trembled.
Their carcasses were as refuse in the midst of the streets.
For all this His anger is not turned away,
But His hand is stretched out still.
He will lift up a banner to the nations from afar,
And will whistle to them from the end of the earth;
Surely they shall come with speed, swiftly.
No one will be weary or stumble among them,
No one will slumber or sleep;
Nor will the belt on their loins be loosed,
Nor the strap of their sandals be broken;
Whose arrows are sharp,
And all their bows bent;
Their horses' hooves will seem like flint,
And their wheels like a whirlwind.
Their roaring will be like a lion,
They will roar like young lions;
Yes, they will roar
And lay hold of the prey;
They will carry it away safely,
And no one will deliver.
In that day they will roar against them
Like the roaring of the sea.
And if one looks to the land,
Behold, darkness and sorrow;
And the light is darkened by the clouds." - Isaiah 5:18-30 (Emphasis added)

Purchase Dark Freedom in print or ebook at Amazon, B&N, and more.

Details at: http://www.darkfreedombook.com

Thursday, February 25, 2016

Dark Freedom: The Rise of Western Lawlessness - Chapter Eight

Dark Freedom: The Rise of Western Lawlessness - Chapter Eight

by C.W. Steinle
Copyright 2015 by C.W. Steinle

Copyrighted material.  All rights reserved.  No part of this book shall be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means - electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise - without written permission from the publisher.  This book may not be re-sold or given away to other people. If you would like to purchase this book or share with another person, please purchase a copy for each reader from any online bookseller.  Visit Dark-Freedom.com for purchase details or: http://darkfreedombook.com/

Part II - The Legacy of the Manmade Church
Protest, Reformation, and Peace

This is our last chapter on Christian History.  We simply cannot appreciate where we are in the journey of lawlessness unless we know from whence we have come.  Western Christianity, on the whole, is so far removed from the mindset of the Early Church that we must follow the breadcrumbs back through time in order to look beyond our contemporary attitudes.  As we follow the threads of religious and political philosophy over the course of history we will once again limit our observations to those excerpts which have had a direct bearing on the authority question.
Protestant Christians are generally aware of the theological arguments of the Reformation.  But the political positions of the Reformers are not so well known.  The attitudes toward civil and religious authority discussed in this chapter are drawn from Christian sources.  That is to say that the men making these proposals, and stating their opinions, were all Christians; and most of these men were clergymen.  These illustrations vary widely and are not meant to be cohesive.  Although independent, each development has had its own significance in shaping western thought.  In effect, we are merely turning these puzzle pieces right-side up so that a clear impression of the spiritual system of lawlessness might begin to form in mind's eye of the reader.
Thomas More is known primarily for his objection to the divorce and remarriage of King Henry VIII.  More had desired to enter the ministry but his father required him to pursue a career as a lawyer.  More eventually became Lord Chancellor of England.  He was sainted by the Catholic Church as a martyr of the Reformation because of his stand against the Protestant Movement.  More was imprisoned and then beheaded by Henry for his refusal to attend the king's wedding to Anne Boleyn.  Our chief interest with Thomas More is a fictional book, Utopia88, which he published in 1516 about a model commonwealth built on the imaginary Island of Utopia.
"Utopia" has become a common word for idealistic governments.  But this word coined by More carries a twofold meaning.  Phonetically, Utopia can mean either a "good land" or a "no-man's land."  The word was probably concocted as a whimsical reference to both as a type of pun, representing a good place - which in reality did not exist.
More placed his imaginary island somewhere in the New World; but for credibility he connected its discovery to one of the crew members of the actual explorer Amerigo Vespucci.  The Island of Utopia was supposedly created from a peninsula by drudging away the land connecting it to the mainland, in order to create a fifteen mile channel.  Access to and from the island was controlled by the island-state government.  Even travel between the island's 54 cities required an internal passport.  The people of Utopia were not allowed the freedom of privacy.  They were kept in open sight at all times so that they might be on their best behavior.  Utopians were required to eat in public halls and there were no taverns or other public gathering places.  Although several different religions were tolerated, Judeo-Christian morals were strictly enforced.  People who worshipped their ancestors, or the celestial bodies, were educated in the hopes that they might convert to Christianity.
Each city in Utopia had 6,000 household units.  The households were made up of 10 to 16 adults.  The adults were moved around the island from city to city and house to house when it was necessary to maintain the fixed population quotas.  But all adults were required to change houses every ten years.  In the event the island was overpopulated, people were relocated to the mainland, but could be recalled should the population fall below the ideal number.  Citizens who were in good standing could choose to leave the island.  Likewise, the mainlanders were welcome to move to the island within the specified limits of the island's population.
The administration of Utopia was managed by a prince, who was elected but then remained for life unless he was later deposed.  The prince could be removed from office if he behaved too much like a tyrant.  Every 30 households acted as a group to elect a representative, resulting in 200 of these representatives per city.  The prince was elected by these representatives in a secret ballot.
Figure 7 - Title woodcut for Utopia by Thomas More89
There were no locks on the doors because the people had no private property.  The wealth of the community was held in gold and jewels.  The gold was used for sewage pots and for the chains of the people who had become slaves due to misconduct.  Using the gold for such dishonorable utilities was intended to make gold an undesirable commodity.  The jewels were worn by children and were passed down as a sign of their maturity.  Goods were distributed to the people from public warehouses.  Everyone on the island was required to work for at least six hours each day.  All of the citizens were taught to farm, as well as learning a secondary trade such as weaving or metalworking.  The people were encouraged to educate themselves in their spare time.  Children who excelled in their studies were segregated for special education so that they might become qualified for administrative positions.
Immoral behavior was punishable by slavery.  People who were caught without their passports were warned once and became slaves upon a second offence.  Premarital sex was punished by lifelong celibacy and enforced by slavery if they failed to remain celibate.  Utopia also provided free medical care and other public welfare as needed.  The state also had the right to approve euthanasia.
It is curious that the Chancellor of English Finance would be so obsessed by the notion of communism.  Plato had proposed a Golden Age with communal property.  Although, Aristotle had argued that personal property enhanced virtue by necessitating responsibility.  More's contemplation of communal property could be attributed to two sources.  Sir Thomas was accepted by the monks of a nearby monastery and participated in their worship.  His observation of monastic life may have triggered his interest in communal living.  England was also in a transitional stage between allowing open range for common grazing and the restriction of these pastures by the landowners.  This privatization was not isolated to the British Isles, but was causing the same problems among the peasants on the Continent.  So now we will turn our attention back to the Reformation of Europe, where these social changes were in full swing.
The German peasants were the beasts of burden for society, and in no better condition than slaves.  Work, work, work, without reward, was their daily lot, even Sunday hardly excepted.  They were ground down by taxation, legal and illegal.  The rapid increase of wealth, luxury, and pleasure, after the discovery of America, made their condition only worse. . . The peasants formed, in self-protection, secret leagues among themselves: as the "Kasebroder" (Cheese-Brothers), in the Netherlands; and the "Bundschuh," in South Germany.  These leagues served the same purpose as the labor unions of mechanics in our days.  Long before the Reformation revolutionary outbreaks took place in various parts of Germany, - A.D. 1476, 1492, 1493, 1502, 1513, and especially 1514, against the lawless tyranny of Duke Ulrich of Wutemberg.  But these rebellions were put down by brute force, and ended in disastrous failure.90 
Thomas Muntzer was a German theologian who became an organizer in Germany's Peasant Wars.  He tried to come under the coattail of Martin Luther by adopting Luther's objection to papal authority.  But Muntzer rejected all authority except for his own.  Muntzer thought that the reformed churches should employ the same military might that the Roman Church had wielded.  He came up with his own plan for a utopian city which he envisioned to be the New Jerusalem of the Gentiles.  Supposedly motivated by a prophecy (of which he later recanted) Muntzer preached that the time had come for Christ's return, but that He would not come again until a New Zion had been prepared for His throne.
Muntzer chose the city of Muhlhausen to establish his kingdom.  The craftsmen in the city where attempting to establish a new city council.  Muntzer proposed the adoption of an "eternal council", based on what he considered to be divine justice.  In spite of a printed circular which was sent out to the nearby villages, Muntzer's plan was rejected; primarily because it did not address the rural peasants' grievances.  Subsequently he was thrown out of Muhlhausen by the existing councilmen.
The next year, in 1542, Muntzer returned to Muhlhausen with a modified plan which included some of the old council members.  This time he was successful and an "Eternal League of God" was established.  Muntzer then took over the council by violence and began to create his own communistic utopia.  But the nearby cities took up arms against Muhlhausen in order to topple Muntzer's new stronghold.  Even with the enlistment of 8,000 peasants, Muhlhausen was defeated by Frankenhausen.  Muntzer was tortured, executed, and then dismembered; his body parts were then displayed on the Muhlhausen city gate. (It is interesting to note that his banner was a rainbow flag.)  Friedrich Engels, co-author of the Communist Manifesto, wrote a book on the Peasant Wars in which he insinuated that Muntzer had used biblical language in his socialist experiment only because it was familiar to the German peasants.  Philip Schaff offers the following account of Muntzer's campaign.
Thomas Muntzer, one of the Zwickau Prophets, and an eloquent demagogue, was the apostle and travelling evangelist of the social revolution, and a forerunner of modern socialism, communism, and anarchism.  He presents a remarkable compound of the discordant elements of radicalism and mysticism.  He was born at Stolberg in the Harz Mountain (1590); studied theology at Leipzig; embraced some of the doctrines of the Reformation, and preached them in the chief church at Zwickau; but carried them to excess, and was deposed.
After the failure of the revolution in Wittenberg, in which he took part, he labored as pastor at Altstadt (1523), for the realization of his wild ideas, in direct opposition to Luther, whom he hated worse than the Pope.  Luther wrote against the "Satan of Altstadt."  Muntzer was removed, but continued his agitation in Muhlhausen, a free city in Thuringia, in Nurnberg, Basel, and again in Muhlhausen (1525). 
He was at enmity with the whole existing order of society, and imagined himself the divinely inspired prophet of a new dispensation, a sort of communistic millennium, in which there should be no priests, no princes, no nobles, and no private property, but complete democratic equality.  He inflamed the people in fiery harangues from the pulpit, and printed tracts to open rebellion against their spiritual and secular rulers.  He signed himself "Muntzer with the hammer," and "with the sword of Gideon."  He advised the killing of all the ungodly.  They had no right to live.  Christ brought the sword, not peace upon earth.  "Look not," he said, "on the sorrow of the ungodly; let not your sword grow cold from blood; strike hard upon the anvil of Nimrod [the princes]; cast his tower to the ground, because the day is yours."91 
The Swiss cantons had their own standing armies of trained militia.  These soldiers were hired, primarily by France, as mercenaries to help fight in the battles of the Holy Roman Empire.  Some of these mercenaries hired themselves out for service.  But the governments of the cantons also contracted to engage their own citizen armies in foreign conflicts.  Theologically, Zwingli is remembered for his unyielding opinion that the Eucharist elements embody only the spiritual presence of Christ.  But as a countryman, Zwingli was just as adamantly opposed to the Swiss being enlisted to the fight for France and the Empire.  He would rather that the Swiss cantons turn their military efforts to enforcing the freedom of Protestant preaching.  But Zwingli was unable to establish a consensus sufficient to override the Catholic resistance.  He was able, nevertheless, to secure Zurich as a Protestant stronghold.  He died as a patriot at the age of 47 as part of a small force which had rallied to defend Zurich against the armies of the Catholic Swiss cantons.
Figure 8 - The murder of Zwingli by Karl Jauslin92
Zwingli, provoked by the burning of Kaiser, and seeing the war clouds gathering all around, favored prompt action, which usually secures a great advantage in critical moments.  He believed in the necessity of war; while Luther put his sole trust in the Word of God, although he stirred up the passions of war by his writings, and had himself the martyr's courage to go to the stake.  Zwingli was a free republican; while Luther was a loyal monarchist.  He belonged to the Cromwellian type of men who "trust in God and keep their powder dry."  In him the reformer, the statesman, and the patriot were one.  He appealed to the examples of Joshua and Gideon, forgetting the difference between the Old and New dispensation.  "Let us be firm," he wrote to his peace-loving friends in Bern (May 30, 1529), "and fear not to take up arms.  This peace, which some desire so much, is not peace, but war; while the war that we call for, is not war, but peace.  We thirst for no man's blood, but we will cut the nerves of the oligarchy.  If we shun it, the truth of the gospel and the ministers' lives will never be secure among us."93
Martin Luther was keenly aware that all authority is established by God.  Luther was compelled to object to the will of the papacy where that will contradicted God's Word and God's ways; but he was not willing to discount the authority vested by God in the civil magistrate.  Luther distanced himself from the liberal Reformers.  He was more interested in correcting the errors of One Holy Catholic Church than in blazing a new trail of faith.  If John Hus and his Bohemian followers had not already influenced the princes of Northern Europe to show tolerance toward the Protestant Movement, Luther would surely have been handed over to suffer execution under the Papal Bull.  Had this been the case, Luther, like Socrates, would likely have accepted the sentence of the State without resistance.
Even so, Luther did recognize certain God-sanctioned limits on civil authority.  In his 1523 essay, Temporal Authority: To What Extent it Should Be Obeyed,94 he wrote; "God has ordained two governments among the children of Adam, - the reign of God under Christ, and the reign of the world under the civil magistrate, each with its own laws and rights.  The laws of the reign of the world extend no further than body and goods and the external affairs on earth.  But over the soul God can and will allow no one to rule but himself alone.  Therefore where the worldly government dares to give laws to the soul, it invades the reign of God, and only seduces and corrupts the soul."  Luther also rebuked King Henry for overreaching the limits of his earthly authority. 
He defends here the divine right and authority of the secular magistrate, and the duty of passive obedience, on the ground of Matt. 5:39 and Rom. 13:1, but only in temporal affairs.  While he forbade the use of carnal force, he never shrank from telling even his own prince the truth in the plainest manner.  He exercised the freedom of speech and of the press to the fullest extent, both in favor of the Reformation and against political revolution.  The Reformation elevated the state at the expense of the freedom of the church; while Romanism lowered the dignity of the state to the position of an obedient servant of the hierarchy.95
From the time of Wycliffe and throughout the Reformation, the pope or his papacy were accused of being the antichrist of John's Revelation.  Most Protestants retained this opinion well into the nineteenth century.  John Wesley's Commentary on Revelation Chapter Twelve reads: "Now, all the countries in which Christianity was settled between the beginning of the twelve hundred and sixty days, and the imprisonment of the dragon, may be understood by the wilderness, and by her place in particular.  This place contained many countries; so that Christianity now reached, in an uninterrupted tract, from the eastern to the western empire; and both the emperors now lent their wings to the woman, and provided a safe abode for her.  Where she is fed - By God rather than man; having little human help.  For a time, and times, and half a time - The length of the several periods here mentioned seems to be nearly this: The little time = 888 years, The time, times, and half a time = 777, The time of the beast = 666.  And comparing the prophecy and history together, they seem to begin and end nearly thus: The non - chronos extends from about 800[AD.] to 1836[AD.], The 1260 days of the woman from 847 - 1524, The little time 947 - 1836, The time, times, and half 1058[AD.] - 1836[AD.], The time of the beast between the beginning and the end of the three times and a half."96
The tradition that the Book of Revelation was an account of the history of the Christian Church continued through the lifetime of Charles Spurgeon, who wrote; "It is the bounden duty of every Christian to pray against Antichrist, and as to what Antichrist is, no sane man ought to raise a question.  If it be not the popery in the Church of Rome there is nothing in the world that can be called by that name.  If there were to be issued a hue and cry for Antichrist, we should certainly take up this church on suspicion, and it would certainly not be let loose again, for it so exactly answers the description."97
Martin Luther, Calvin, and the other Reformers also believed they were living during the time of the fulfillment of Revelation.  The pre-tribulation rapture theory was not considered by the Protestant Church to be a valid doctrine until the mid-nineteenth century; and it is still rejected by the Catholic and Orthodox churches.  Because Luther interpreted Revelation as a prophetic history of the Church, he struggled with the paradox of a legitimate Catholic Church headed by the antichrist.  Ultimately, he used his resolve that the pope was the antichrist to confirm the authenticity of the Roman Church.  He reasoned the Catholic Church had to be the true Church in order for the pope to sit in the temple of God declaring himself to be God.
At the same time, Luther continued the careful study of history, and could find no trace of popery and its extraordinary claims in the first centuries before the Council of Nicaea.  He discovered that the Papal Decretals, and the Donation of Constantine, were a forgery.  He wrote to Spalatin, March 13, 1519, "I know not whether the Pope is anti-christ himself, or his apostle; so wretchedly is Christ, that is the truth, corrupted and crucified by him in the Decretals."98
"I can hardly doubt," he [Martin Luther] wrote to Spalatin, Feb. 23, 1520, "that the Pope is the Antichrist."  In the same year, Oct. 11, he went so far as to write to Leo X. that the papal dignity was fit only for traitors like Judas Iscariot whom God had cast out.99
In his controversy with the Anabaptists (1528), Luther makes the striking admission:  "We confess that under the papacy there is much Christianity, yea, the whole Christianity, and has from thence come to us.  We confess that the papacy possesses the genuine Scripture, genuine baptism, the genuine sacrament of the altar, the genuine keys for the remission of sins, the true ministry, the true catechism, the Ten Commandments, the articles of the Creed, the Lord's Prayer. . . . I say that under the Pope is the true Christendom, yea, the very elite of Christendom, and many pious and great saints."
For proof he refers, strangely enough, to the very passage of Paul, 2 Thess. 2:3, 4, from which he and other Reformers derived their chief argument that the Pope of Rome is Antichrist, "the Man of Sin," "the Son of Perdition."  For Paul represents him as sitting "in the temple of God;" that is, in the true church, and not in the synagogue of Satan.  As the Pope is Antichrist, he must be among Christians, and rule and tyrannize over Christians. . . 100Luther was not pleased with this moderation, and added the margin:  "But they shall violently condemn popery with its devotees, since it is condemned by God; for popery is the reign of Antichrist, and, by instigation of the Devil, it terribly persecutes the Christian church and God's Word."101
Lastly in our investigation of the authority question during the Reformation we will review two groups of deviants.  These factions were the enemies of John Calvin in Geneva.  Calvin's political structure in Geneva is so widely known as a Protestant enclave that we need not cover Geneva as part of this study.  Suffice it to say that Calvin's Church ruled over the civil government to the extent allowed by the people.
Calvin's opponents draw our interest because they represent two reactions to Bible-based government.  The so-called Patriots were irreligious and the Libertines were the followers of a Gnostic cult.  The latter is a typical example of the fruit of the Gnostic religion, which always boasts of knowing God but is rarely accompanied by the fear of the Lord.  Because the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, the Libertines obviously had not known Him.  Whatever else they might have known, they did not know the God of the Bible.
We must distinguish two parties among Calvin's enemies - the Patriots, who opposed him on political grounds, and the Libertines, who hated his religion.  It would be unjust to charge all the Patriots with the irreligious sentiments of the Libertines.  But they made common cause for the overthrow of Calvin and his detested system of discipline.  They had many followers among the discontented and dissolute rabble which abounds in every large city, and is always ready for a revolution, having nothing to lose and everything to gain.
1. The Patriots or Children of Geneva (Enfants de Geneve), as they called themselves, belonged to some of the oldest and most influential families of Geneva, - Favre (or Fabri), Perrin, Vandel, Berthelier, Ameaux.  They or their fathers had taken an active part in the achievement of political independence, and even in the introduction of the Reformation, as a means of protecting that independence.  But they did not care for the positive doctrines of the Reformation.  They wanted liberty without law.  They resisted every encroachment on their personal freedom and love of amusements.  They hated the evangelical discipline more than the yoke of Savoy.
They also disliked Calvin as a foreigner, who was not even naturalized before 1559.  In the pride and prejudice of nativism, they denounced the refugees, who had sacrificed home and fortune to religion, as a set of adventurers, soldiers of fortune, bankrupts, and spies of the Reformer.  "These dogs of Frenchmen," they said, "are the cause that we are slaves, and must bow before Calvin and confess our sins.  Let the preachers and their gang go to the ----."  They deprived the refugees of the right to carry arms, and opposed their admission to the rights of citizenship, as there was danger that they might outnumber and outvote the native citizens.  Calvin secured, in 1559, through a majority vote of the Council, at one time, the admission of three hundred of these refugees, mostly Frenchmen.
The Patriots disliked also the protectorate of Bern, although Bern never favored the strict theology and discipline of Calvin.
2. The Libertines or Spirituels, as they called themselves, were far worse than the Patriots.  They formed the opposite extreme to the severe discipline of Calvin.  He declares that they were the most pernicious of all the sects that appeared since the time of the ancient Gnostics and Manichaeans, and that they answer the prophetic description in the Second Epistle of Peter and the Epistle of Jude.  He traces their immediate origin to Coppin of Ysel and Quintin of Hennegau, in the Netherlands, and to an ex-priest, Pocquet or Pocques, who spent some time in Geneva, and wanted to get a certificate from Calvin; but Calvin saw through the man and refused it.  They revived the antinomian doctrines of the mediaeval sect of the "Brethren and Sisters of the Free Spirit," a branch of the Beghards, who had their headquarters at Cologne and the Lower Rhine, and emancipated themselves not only from the Church, but also from the laws of morality.
The Libertines described by Calvin were antinomian pantheists.  They confounded the boundaries of truth and error, of right and wrong.  Under the pretext of the freedom of the spirit, they advocated the unbridled license of the flesh.  Their spiritualism ended in carnal materialism.  They taught that there is but one spirit, the Spirit of God, who lives in all creatures, which are nothing without him.  "What I or you do," said Quintin, "is done by God, and what God does, we do; for he is in us."  Sin is a mere negation or privation, yea, an idle illusion which disappears as soon as it is known and disregarded.  Salvation consists in the deliverance from the phantom of sin.  There is no Satan, and no angels, good or bad.  They denied the truth of the gospel history.  The crucifixion and resurrection of Christ have only a symbolical meaning to show us that sin does not exist for us.
The Libertines taught the community of goods and of women, and elevated spiritual marriage above legal marriage, which is merely carnal and not binding.102
The doctrines of the Libertines are strikingly similar to the teachings of a nineteenth century cult misnamed Christian Science.  This so-called science simplifies the spiritual realm to accommodate human reasoning.  Gnosticism denies the heaven and angels of God's creation and replaces them with a metaphysical abstraction which is nothing more than the opposite of matter.  This "scientific" reasoning cannot distinguish between the Holy Spirit and demonic spirits because the Gnostic "spirit" only exists as a logical place-holder representing everything outside the visible realm.  The lusts of the flesh can never be held in check by the fear of a theoretical god.
The Patriots represent a general type of the world's demography that is unbelieving and wants nothing to do with God and His laws.  The Protestant Movement was not isolated to the theology and authority of Church.  The Reformer's break from the Roman Church validated in the minds of non-Christians a sense that they should be extended the same freedom to break away from the Church and God's laws altogether.  Thus the hope of religious freedom by the God-fearers was countered by the hope among the ungodly that they might be free from the restrictions of Christian morality.  Though at the time of the Reformation, only a small minority would have been willing to confess they were Atheists.
The spread of Protestantism in various regions of Europe led to the question of how to determine a nation's religion.  Germany became the first test case by recognizing Protestant and Catholic zones.  Europe had a greater problem with establishing national and intra-national religions as a continent, due to the fragmented control of her multiple rulers.  Control of the Holy Roman Empire of Charlemagne had by 1438 been assumed by the Hapsburg Dynasty.  The Holy Hapsburg Empire was divided geographically by the independent nation of France.  It was also divided by the three mainline religions; Catholicism, Lutheranism, and Calvinism.  These divisive forces came to a head during the Thirty Years' War, from 1618 to 1648.  This war was complex in its origin, and in its many fronts.  These details would not shed light on our discussion of lawlessness.  But the underlying causes for war; dominion, religion, and climate, do all represent topics which continue to impact the future; and will be revisited near the end of this book.
Figure 9 - Thirty Years' War103
The Peace of Westphalia was a pact among the kings and princes agreeing that they would respect each nation's sovereignty.  Until this point in world history it was expected that successful rulers would expand their kingdoms.  The treaties resulting from Westphalia made some redistribution of territories, and formed alliances to balance the powers of Europe in order to inhibit acts of aggression.  The resulting Westphalian Sovereignty established a model for later international law.  It is worth noting that the House of Hapsburg continued (officially) into the eighteenth century.  And although some regions of the Holy Roman Empire gained sovereign status under the treaty, the Empire was not completely dissolved until the beginning of the nineteenth century.
The coexistence of multiple Christian faiths was accomplished by adopting Germany's treaty of Augsburg.  This method had succeeded in Germany by allowing the rulers of each sovereign state to choose which denomination would be supported under their administration.  Denominations other than the official state religion would be able to hold services at prescribed times, and to worship at all times in private.  By attaching religious affiliations to independent religions, a spirit of patriotism was woven into the fabric of Protestantism.  God and country were bound together in one allegiance - in one faith.
As for the climate, the seventeenth century marked the middle of the Little Ice Age.  The civil unrest during the time of the Thirty Years' War was exacerbated by the famine, pestilence, and extreme weather conditions caused by a two hundred year solar minimum cycle.  History shows that nearly the whole northern hemisphere was engaged in war during these centuries.  Some countries had three major national wars accompanied by internal civil wars all within a single century.  Two and three year consecutive crop failures caused mass migrations, invasions, and pillaging.  The countries of Europe were so expended of resources that soldiers were not paid, but were expected to survive on looting and extortion.  Farmers feared their own troops more than they dreaded their enemies.
Secular accusations that Christianity was responsible for these wars of Europe are simplistic at best.  But the Church did cause immeasurable bloodshed from the Middle Ages until modern times.  The problem caused by the unchristian doctrines and practices of the Roman Church called for protest and reform.  The Apostle Paul warned that it was possible to preach to others and afterwards to be personally disqualified.  The Roman Church disqualified itself from its God given ministry.  And Rome was never qualified by God to rule nations of the earth.  However, raising individual authority to an equal position with properly established authority became a faulty and unstable foundation for the Protestant faiths.
God bless those Reformers who made their good confession standing on God's Word alone.  Obeying God rather than man is always the right thing to do when God has given His direct revelation.  That revelation is most reliably discerned from the Bible, but is sometimes imparted in a personal way that is unmistakably clear.  The instruction of God, however imparted, is the only basis for standing in opposition to authority which God has ordained.
Meanwhile, the desperation of the Little Ice Age inflamed the spirit of individualism by turning daily life into a fight for survival.  Productive fields where parched, flooded, or frozen, sending their inhabitants to flight.  This age of "every man to himself" shattered the community paradigm, giving further appeal to the philosophical arguments for individualism promoted by Humanism.
Christians rejected the authenticity of the Roman Church and longed to return to the Early Church, but they ended up exalting individual conscience as the basis for spiritual judgment.  The spirit of individualism was unknown at the time of the Apostles.  It would have been better if these reformers had only used the pure milk of God's Word for their defense.  Today, in the twenty-first century, we are beginning to see the fruit of those tares which were sown among the roots of the Protestant faith.

Purchase Dark Freedom in print or ebook at Amazon, B&N, and more.Details at: http://www.darkfreedombook.com


Sunday, February 14, 2016

Dark Freedom: The Rise of Western Lawlessness - Chapter Seven

Dark Freedom: The Rise of Western Lawlessness - Chapter Seven

by C.W. Steinle
Copyright 2015 by C.W. Steinle


Copyrighted material.  All rights reserved.  No part of this book shall be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means - electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise - without written permission from the publisher.  This book may not be re-sold or given away to other people. If you would like to purchase this book or share with another person, please purchase a copy for each reader from any online bookseller.  Visit Dark-Freedom.com for purchase details or: http://darkfreedombook.com/

Part II - The Legacy of the Manmade Church
The Renaissance of Classical Philosophy

The two prior chapters recounted the oppression of Europe by Church leaders who were not honest or humble enough to admit that they had ceased from following Christ.  Taking advantage of that Name above all names, they wore it as cloak for vice.  The papacy profaned that precious Name in exchange for worldly pleasures.  The people were compelled to make sense of this spiritual tragedy by drawing three general conclusions; that God is not able, that the Church must be reformed, or that a false Church had arisen and needed to be replaced by a revived Early Church.  (This third reaction bears similarities to the attitude of today's Emergent Church.)
Christians were left with the quandary of what to make of a Church which had obviously and inexcusably fallen into sin.  They were forced to answer the sensitive question of; "What constitutes the true Church?"  Obviously God, His Christ, and His Spirit could not have failed.  Christ said the gates of Hell would not prevail against His Church.  Reformers, like Martin Luther, affirmed that the Roman Church was part of the Universal Church, but that its leadership and practices had missed the mark.  Other groups, such as the Anabaptists, rejected Rome as a false Church.  But all of the major Reformers made a distinction between the masses who attend church and those individuals who have genuinely surrendered to Christ.  This distinction was necessary in order to maintain that the Catholic Church was the continuing Church of Christ; and at the same time, to account for souls in that Church, including its leaders, who had lived like they were sons of the devil.
Because the unfolding of the mystery of lawlessness is our chief interest, this chapter will cover the social and political thought of the late Middle Ages through the Renaissance.  During this period most people were still grounded in the Christian faith, whereas during the Enlightenment many began to fall into Deism.  We will continue to draw on the research and commentary of Philip Schaff through this third chapter of Church History.
The turn of the first millennium without the return of the Lord, along with the unsettling corruption of the Church, gave rise to a movement called Scholasticism.  The schoolmen began to make an extensive study of the sea of writings by the Church Fathers in order to solidify the doctrines of the faith.  The Bible became one of many sources used in this search for truth; thus, the writings of the Fathers were canonized and set on a par with the Scriptures.  Writings from outside the church were also included in scholars' libraries. These included classical Latin and Greek texts.  During the first millennium these writings were mostly banned because they promoted worldly wisdom and pagan morality.
The ban, which had been placed by the Church upon the study of the classic authors of antiquity and ancient institutions, palsied polite research and reading for a thousand years.  Even before Jerome, whose mind had been disciplined in the study of the classics, at last pronounced them unfit for the eye of a Christian, Tertullian's attitude was not favorable.  Cassian followed Jerome; and Alcuin, the chief scholar of the 9th century, turned away from Virgil as a collection of lying fables.74

At first the schoolmen sided with the papal claims that the apostolic see held authority over the Church and the State.  But the northern nations of the Holy Roman Empire began to look to the classics of antiquity as reasonable alternatives to the violence and chaos caused by a Church which had been high-jacked by the selfish desires of fallen men.  The philosophies of men held the promise of a system that might better the human condition.  This study of the Humanities was even embraced by the churchmen.  People began to reason that God was in control of the spiritual realm, but man was the proprietor over the material realm, and should do whatever he could to make his world a better place.  Soon the Humanists began to estimate the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle to be equal, or even above, Christian ideology.  Thomas Aquinas studied Aristotle and incorporated some of Aristotle's philosophy into his theological catalog, the Summa Theologica.75
Figure 6 - Celestial Orbs in the Latin Middle Ages76
The scheme of the aforementioned division of spheres. · The empyrean (fiery) heaven, dwelling of God and of all the selected · 10 Tenth heaven, first cause · 9 Ninth heaven, crystalline · 8 Eighth heaven of the firmament · 7 Heaven of Saturn · 6 Jupiter · 5 Mars · 4 Sun · 3 Venus · 2 Mercury · 1 Moon
The image above depicts the medieval concept of the universe according to the scheme of Aristotle.  It was believed that the "Primu Mobile" (outer sphere) had its own consciousness, "nous", or Divine Mind; a concept tied to Plato's belief in the Demiurge and the World Soul.  The second book of Dante's Convivio describes the Ptolemaic universe.
"Outside all of these [orbs] the Catholics place the Empyrean heaven, which is to say, "the heaven of flame," or "luminous heaven"; and they hold it to be motionless because it has in itself, with respect to each of its parts, that which its matter desires.  This is why the Primum Mobile has the swiftest movement; for because of the most fervent desire that each part of the ninth heaven has to be conjoined with every part of that divinest, tranquil heaven, to which it is contiguous, it revolves beneath it with such desire that its velocity is almost incomprehensible.  Stillness and peace are the qualities of the place of that Supreme Deity which alone completely beholds itself.  This is the place of the blessed spirits, according to the will of the Holy Church, which cannot lie.  Aristotle, to anyone who rightly understands him, seems to hold the same opinion in the first book of Heaven and the World [i.e. De caelo].  This is the supreme edifice of the universe in which all the world is enclosed and beyond which there is nothing; it is not itself in space but was formed solely in the Primal Mind, which the Greeks call Protonoe.  This is that magnificence of which the Psalmist spoke when he says to God: "Your magnificence is exalted above the heavens."77
He begins by citing "the Catholics," or orthodox belief, as authority for his account of this "abode of the supreme deity," but then goes on to treat the Empyrean as a created thing, "formed in the Primal Mind," and as the motionless cause of motion in the physical universe. If God dwells in this place, the Empyrean resides equally in Him, and the universe at large is encompassed, causally and locally, by the Empyrean. Dante deploys the Aristotelian physics of desire to explain the relationship of the Empyrean to the lesser heavens, yet it is at the same time beyond space, a wholly spiritual realm where blessed spirits participate in the divine mind. Dante seems to emphasize this double status by mingling theological and philosophical language, and invoking Aristotle and the neo-Platonists side by side with the poet of the Psalms.78
The failure of religion's rule over the civil governments of Europe drove the people to contemplate other forms of government.  Through their rediscovery of Classical philosophy they were awakened to the thought that man could design his own ideal society.  Plato's The Republic provided a basic examination of various types of government.
During his life in Athens, Plato witnessed the fall of democracy and the installation of a tyrannical government.  In his Republic, Plato made a critique of various political structures.  Plato believed democracy to be the most unfavorable form of government.  He viewed democracy a great experiment that ended badly.  He concluded that it amounted to anarchy and resulted in slavery.  Athens was the first known attempt by a society to allow the crowd to rule themselves.
Just prior to 500 B.C. Athens became the first democracy in history.  The people had expelled a series of tyrants and established a popular assembly.  The other city-states mistrusted the Athenians and their aberrant form of government, and Athens gave the others additional cause for concern:  Following the expulsion of the Persians from Greece and, soon afterward, from some Greek cities of Asia Minor, Athens founded the Athenian League, a confederation of Greek cities around the Aegean Sea.79  
Recall from Chapter Four that Plato's idea of Justice was an equity or balance between competing elements.  Plato proposed an ideal society with three types of citizens: rulers, auxiliaries, and producers.  Plato's three parts of the human soul were coincidental to his three types of citizens.  The rulers are men whose rational part holds mastery over the other parts of their soul.  The auxiliaries are men driven by their spirit of honor.  And the producers are people who are slaves to their appetites.   Plato says that these characteristics should be recognized in children so that they might be trained in the area for which they are naturally qualified.  Plato's proposed perfect state is, of course, ruled by a philosopher-king.
Plato identified five types of government: tyranny, timocracy, aristocracy, oligarchy, and democracy.  Tyranny is imposed government, established by the tyrant or by an outside party.  A timocracy is a government in which the right to rule is based on the value of the individual in terms of their ability to produce revenue for the community.  An aristocracy is governed by the most qualified members of society - such as the philosophers.  Plato said that a democracy occurs when an oligarchy breaks down and the lowest class, which is driven by immediate gratification, takes control.  The democratic man is obsessed with unnecessary desires and is disorderly.  Because they lack the intellect of the Philosopher, and the Auxiliary's sense of honor, the public will desire to do whatever they want, whenever they please - leading the society to become the slaves to their appetites.
Plato was not eclectic in his disgust with the democratic man. (This explains why democracy was not perceived as a desirable form of government for two thousand years after the Athenian experiment.)  The reason for western civilization to have changed its view can be explained quite simply.  Throughout history, until the Renaissance, the community was perceived as meriting the greatest importance.  People were given recognition by their community based upon how well they could work within that community toward the survival and benefit of society as a whole.  Not until the latter years of the Renaissance did individualism emerge.  It is an interesting observation that this inward focus set the stage for the rise of Deism and Atheism.
The overbearing government by the Roman Catholic Church resulted in the same reaction that Israel had as they fled from the oppression of Rehoboam: "Each of you to your own tent, O Israel!"- II Chron. 10:16 Going to one’s own tent implied more than a redirection of allegiance to a different government.  It expressed a desire by Israel to return to the days before Saul; a regret that they had ever asked for a king.  Individualism was the natural reaction of the people to Rome's unreasonable micromanagement of the Empire.  But the Europeans were accustomed to kings, so their first response was to free their individual nations from the yoke of Rome.
We will now trace the history of reform over time and throughout Europe in order to follow the changes in prevailing attitudes concerning authority and the law.  Pay close attention to the struggle to resolve these two dichotomies: the authority of the Bible vs. the authority of the Church; and, human authority vs. the conviction of conscience.
Those who were closest to Rome were unable to ignore the problems caused by her meddling in worldly affairs.  Italy bore the greatest exposure in the fight between the popes and the kings for control over the Empire.  Consequently, Florence became the incubator of the Renaissance.  Dante Alighieri was born in the mid-thirteenth century and was caught in the midst of these controversies.   The Florentines became divided over the issue of dominance by the Holy Roman Empire, which at that time was controlled by Philip IV of France.  Dante sided with the party who wanted more independence from The Roman Empire, which eventually resulted in his banishment from Florence.  In his work, The Monarchia,80 Dante said that civil and religious authority should be separated.  He believed in the necessity of a potentate with enough authority to keep peace and maintain order.  This organization of society, Dante insisted, was necessary for civilization to thrive.  The happiness of individuals can only be achieved as the greater community is enriched.  The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy offers the following commentary.
The Monarchia is in its own way as idiosyncratic as the Convivio. Its purpose, foreshadowed in the discussion of empire in Convivio IV, is to demonstrate the necessity of a single ruling power, reverent toward but independent of the Church, capable of ordering the will of collective humanity in peace and concord. Under such a power the potential intellect of humanity can be fully actuated—the intellect, that is, of collective humanity, existent throughout the world, acting as one. For just as a multitude of species must continually be generated to actualize the full potentiality of prime matter, so the full intellectual capacity of humanity cannot be realized at one time nor in a single individual [Mon. 1.3.3–8]. Here Dante adds his own further particularization of this Aristotelian doctrine [De Anima 3.5, 430a10–15], asserting that no single household, community, or city can bring it to realization. The ordering of the collective human will to the goal of realizing its intellectual potential requires universal peace [1.4], and this in turn requires a single ordering power through whose authority humanity may achieve unity and so realize the intention and likeness of God [1.8].   The basis of this argument for empire is evidently the first sentence of the Prologue to Thomas' literal commentary on the Metaphysics, where he declares that when several things are ordered to a single end, one of them must govern, "as the Philosopher teaches in his Politics" [Thomas, Exp. Metaph., Proemium; Aristotle, Politics 1.5, 1254a-55a.]
The second of the Monarchia's three books deals with the great example of Rome, describing the city's providential role in world history, largely by way of citations from Roman literature aimed at demonstrating the consistent dedication of Roman power to the public good, and the conformity of Roman imperium with the order of nature and the will of God. The third book deals with the crucial issue of the relationship between political and ecclesiastical authority. Dante argues on various grounds that power in the temporal realm is neither derived from nor dependent on spiritual authority, though it benefits from the power of the Papacy to bless its activity. These arguments consist largely in refutations of traditional claims for the temporal authority of the Papacy, but the final chapter makes the argument on positive grounds. Since man consists of soul and body, his nature partakes of both the corruptible and the incorruptible. Uniting two natures, his existence must necessarily be ordered to the goals of both these natures [Mon. 3.16.7–9]:
Ineffable providence has thus set before us two goals to aim at: i.e. happiness in this life, which consists in the exercise of our own powers and is figured in the earthly paradise; and happiness in the eternal life, which consists in the enjoyment of the vision of God (to which our own powers cannot raise us except with the help of God's light) and which is signified by the heavenly paradise. Now these two kinds of happiness must be reached by different means, as representing different ends. For we attain the first through the teachings of philosophy, provided that we follow them putting into practice the moral and intellectual virtues; whereas we attain the second through spiritual teachings which transcend human reason, provided that we follow them putting into practice the theological virtues, i.e. faith, hope, and charity. These ends and the means to attain them have been shown to us on the one hand by human reason, which has been entirely revealed to us by the philosophers, and on the other by the Holy Spirit . . .
This is Dante's most explicit, uncompromising claim for the autonomy of reason, reinforced by the entire world-historical argument of the Monarchia and constituting its final justification for world empire. Dante here goes well beyond Augustine's sense of the stabilizing function of empire, and eliminates any hint of the anti-Roman emphasis in Augustine's separation of the earthly and heavenly cities. In the final sentences of the Monarchia the temporal monarch becomes, like the aspiring intellect of the Convivio, the uniquely privileged beneficiary of a divine bounty which, "without any intermediary, descends into him from the Fountainhead of universal authority" [Mon. 3.16.15]. Like the Averroistic reasoning of his earlier claim that only under a world empire can humanity realize its intellectual destiny, this crowning claim shows Dante appropriating Aristotle to the service of a unique and almost desperate vision of empire as a redemptive force. But whether we consider the world view of the Monarchia an aberration [D'Entreves, 51] or take it as Dante's straightforward exposition of his views on the relations of secular and religious authority, its categorical definition of the twofold purpose of human life is impossible to explain away. In the Paradiso [8.115–17] as in the Monarchia, to be a "citizen" is essential to human happiness, and the idea of an imperial authority independent of papal control remained fundamental to his political thought.81
Shortly after Dante, another advocate for civil independence arose from the western shores of the Empire.  Just as the remoteness of Rome from the center of Christianity had allowed her to rebel against Constantinople, so England's distance from Rome provided her with the leeway to be the last to submit, and among the first to be stirred by the spirit of freedom.  John Wycliffe has been called the Morningstar of the Reformation.  He is often remembered as a Bible translator, but his greatest impact on Europe during his lifetime was made by his political boldness in contesting against Rome's far reaching tentacles.  Wycliffe's opinion that authority must be questioned or rejected if it acts wickedly, was boldly declared by his words, "There is no moral obligation to pay tax or tithe to bad rulers either in Church or state.  It is permitted to punish or depose them and to reclaim the wealth which the clergy have diverted from the poor."82
In the summer of 1374, Wycliffe went to Bruges as a member of the commission appointed by the king to negotiate peace with France and to treat with the pope's agents on the filling of ecclesiastical appointments in England.  His name was second in the list of commissioners, following the name of the bishop of Bangor.  At Bruges we find him for the first time in close association with John of Gaunt, Edward's favorite son, an association which continued for several years, and for a time inured to his protection from ecclesiastical violence.
On his return to England, he began to speak as a religious reformer.  He preached in Oxford and London against the pope's secular sovereignty, running about, as the old chronicler has it, from place to place, and barking against the Church.  It was soon after this that, in one of his tracts, he styled the bishop of Rome "the anti-Christ, the proud, worldly priest of Rome, and the most cursed of clippers and cut-purses."  He maintained that he "has no more power in binding and loosing than any priest, and that the temporal lords may seize the possessions of the clergy if pressed by necessity."83
With the year 1378 Wycliffe's distinctive career as a doctrinal reformer opens.  He had defended English rights against foreign encroachment.  He now assailed, at a number of points, the theological structure the Schoolmen and mediaeval popes had laboriously reared, and the abuses that had crept into the Church.  The spectacle of Christendom divided by two papal courts, each fulminating anathema against the other, was enough to shake confidence in the divine origin of the papacy.  In sermons, tracts and larger writings, Wycliffe brought Scripture and common sense to bear. . . . As Luther is the most vigorous tract writer that Germany has produced, so Wycliffe is the foremost religious pamphleteer that has arisen in England; . . . .84 
It was in 1381, the year before Courtenay said his memorable words, that Walden reports that Wycliffe "began to determine matters upon the sacrament of the altar."  To attempt an innovation at this crucial point required courage of the highest order.  In 12 theses he declared the Church's doctrine unscriptural and misleading.  For the first time since the promulgation of the dogma of transubstantiation by the Fourth Lateran was it seriously called in question by a theological expert.85
Wycliffe also became aware of the importance of distinguishing between man's philosophy and the truth of God's Word.  According to Schaff, Wycliffe confessed that in his earlier years he had leaned on the classical systems instead of fully relying on the Bible.  John Wycliffe was one of the first politically active Christians to realize that the problem of government should not be solved through the application of pagan principles.
As for the philosophy of the pagan world, whatever it offers that is in accord with the Scriptures is true.  The religious philosophy which the Christian learns from Aristotle he learns because it was taught by the authors of Scripture.  The Greek thinker made mistakes, as when he asserted that creation is eternal.  In several places Wycliffe confesses that he himself had at one time been led astray by logic and the desire to win fame, but was thankful to God that he had been converted to the full acceptance of the Scriptures as they are and to find in them all logic.86
While it is not our intent to cover the history and theology of entire Protestant Movement, it is worth noting why Wycliffe has been called the Morningstar of the Reformation.  Although Wycliffe's writings were banned in England, they made their way into the hands of one of his European contemporaries, John Hus of Bohemia.  Hus translated Wycliffe's writings into Czech and read them from the pulpit.  The Czech nation was the first to reject the Christianity taught by Rome, and to form its own doctrines.  The Bohemian Movement was condemned by the papacy and Hus was burned at the stake.  But the Bohemian Kingdom withstood a series of papal crusades against it and was eventually left to practice its faith as Hussites.   Hus' primary grievances with Rome were over the sale of indulgences and the teaching of transubstantiation.  Thus, Wycliffe's teachings had gained acceptance in Northern Europe long before Luther.  And the Czechs' tenacity also set a precedent that would allow Martin Luther and his nation the ability to defy Rome.
Back in Florence the European Morningstar, Girolamo Savonarola, began around 1490 to condemn the immorality and greed of the province.  He became politically active when the ruling family of the Medici was expelled.  Savonarola spoke out publically against Pope Alexander VI until he was banned from speaking in public.  But he continued to speak out in spite of the ban.  After he was excommunicated he continued to call for reform until at last he was burned at the stake in 1498.  After the Medici family was restored to power, Niccolo Machiavelli wrote the political handbook, The Prince.87 Like his predecessor Dante, Machiavelli was convinced of the benefit of a local authoritative ruler who could defend the province from the dictates of the Empire.
These early responses to the Church's dominance were aimed at establishing even stronger local magistrates who could defend their own territories from the political struggle between the papacy and the kings of Europe.  Because of Europe's faith at this time, they still believed their civil authorities were under God's control.
Wycliffe's call for a national response to reject a corrupted clergy was eventually consummated in the Peace of Westphalia, which dissolved the Holy Roman Empire; thus allowing the sovereign nations of Europe to regain their autonomy.  But first the spiritual monopoly of the Roman Catholic Church had to be broken so that the nations might object to the papacy without the fear of eternal condemnation.  The authority question during the Protestant Reformation will be examined in the next chapter.
The Renaissance was merely the revival of the Humanities.  Not until the Enlightenment did Humanism emerge in its present form.  Platonism and Neo-Platonism were interwoven with Scholasticism during the Renaissance in the hopes that mankind might lay hold of the mysteries of God by using the tools of the Ancient Greeks.  The Church had opened itself up to the doctrines of men when it granted the weight of Scriptures to oral traditions and the writings of the Church Fathers.
The Greek and Latin philosophers, as Paul put it, were merely groping that they might find God.  Yet their murky visions were accepted by the Schoolmen as if they had already found Him.  In their foolishness these Christian theologians opened the door to the belief that all of the nations worship the same God.  The Church sought to gain a clearer understanding of God by merging the Gentiles' darkened image of God with the Bible's revelation of God.  Instead, they further contaminated and diluted the Church's knowledge of God.  Furthermore, the writings of the Fathers and scholars remain bound within the Latin concepts of God to this day.  The God of the Bible is the Creator of all men.  But He has chosen to reveal Himself through the Jews.  God is not the god that all nations worship.  This false doctrine of Universalism is a growing pestilence that is leading the unsaved down the road with those who are the enemies of the cross of Christ.
"Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ.  For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; and you are complete in Him, who is the head of all principality and power." – Col. 2:8-10

Purchase Dark Freedom in print or ebook at Amazon, B&N, and more.Details at: http://www.darkfreedombook.com