Elitism often goes hand in hand with equalitarianism, as seen in Marxism and in Plato’s Republic, both of which deny the biblical view of man. Plato’s model called for rule by philosopher-kings, the abolition of property and family autonomy, and total control of education and culture, all to suppress individualism and enforce obedience.

Modern elitism continues this pattern through state control, claiming that man is infinitely malleable, denying original sin, and redefining happiness as service to social goals. The elite present themselves as reason incarnate: agreement is labeled rational, while dissent is treated as deviance. Though they profess love for the masses, elitists privately despise them and resent the independence created by free markets and social mobility.

This mindset dominates politics, academia, and even the church, where abstract “principles” and esoteric interpretations replace obedience to God’s concrete commands. Elitism is ultimately a religious system rooted in Greek abstraction rather than the authority of the triune God. Scripture calls not for submission to elites but for faithfulness to God’s law, reminding us that true wisdom begins with “the fear of the Lord.”

Aristocracy means “rule by the best,” but history shows that societies have defined “the best” in very different ways. From philosopher-kings and feudal nobles to country gentlemen, saints, and intellectual elites, true aristocracy has rarely rested on power alone. At its strongest, it ruled by moral authority, honor, service, and example rather than force.

When aristocracies abandoned responsibility or developed contempt for the people whether among feudal nobles, Marxist rulers, or modern cultural elites they ceased to be “the best” and became destructive. Jefferson’s hope for a “natural aristocracy” based on talent and service in America eventually degenerated into an isolated and arrogant clerisy, illustrating how pride marks the decline of leadership.

In the modern world, celebrities and political strongmen function as a hollow aristocracy, while respect for authority has largely vanished. The paper concludes that societies receive the rulers they deserve: when people reject moral responsibility, rule by the worst follows. True “rule by the best” can only exist where men and women submit themselves to God’s authority and govern their lives accordingly.

Rushdoony argues that memory personal and cultural is essential to being fully human: when memory collapses (as in senility), a person can remain socially polished yet be stripped of identity, continuity, and direction. He extends that to cultures: history is “social memory,” and when a society becomes present-obsessed and contemptuous of the past, it heads toward cultural senility barbarism because “people who have no past have no future.”

He warns that modern humanistic education and media intentionally warp or replace historical memory. Marxists (and “neo-Marxists”) understood that to create a “new man,” you must rewrite the past; and he claims the broader humanistic project does something similar by swapping history for “social science” a naturalistic, God-purged framework that treats society as an experiment shaped by experts. The result isn’t a higher civilization but a population of “barbarians” people detached from inheritance, meaning, and responsibility made easier to mold into whatever elite rulers want (echoing Orwell’s themes).

His proposed recovery is explicitly theological: history must be approached as a theological science because God not man is Creator and Determiner; therefore genuine cultural memory begins with conversion, Scripture, and seeing man’s story (creation, fall, redemption) rightly. Only Christ restores true freedom and human wholeness (“If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed,” John 8:36), whereas amnesia leaves societies vulnerable to manipulation, “newspeak,” and decline.

This position paper argues that the Enlightenment’s exaltation of human reason has produced a recurring and destructive dream: the creation of a perfectly rational, planned society ruled by philosopher-kings, with the Turkish Empire presented as an early and revealing model of this ideal. Admired by Western romantics and humanists for its supposed order and rationality, the Ottoman system subordinated all people rulers and subjects alike to the state, treating human life as expendable in service to an abstract ideal of reason. This same vision reappeared in the French and Russian Revolutions and persists today in modern welfare-technocratic states, where terror is replaced by bureaucratic control through education, law, economics, and technology. In such systems, law ceases to be a transcendent standard of justice and becomes merely an instrument of state policy, while freedom is redefined as cheerful submission to managed servitude. The paper concludes that whenever God’s law and sovereignty are rejected, men inevitably substitute their own rational plans, producing not liberation but tyranny, and calls readers back to the biblical choice between serving the Lord or submitting to the nightmare of man’s “reason.”

#Enlightenment #Statism #PhilosopherKings #Humanism #BiblicalLaw #ChristianWorldview #ReasonAndRevelation #ChristOrState

A common error in the church is assuming unbelievers share Christian moral standards and simply need Christ “added” to their lives. Scripture teaches the opposite: fallen man is at enmity with God and requires regeneration, not supplementation. Modern culture compounds this error by denying morality altogether, redefining human problems as technological, environmental, or educational rather than moral and spiritual.

\Because we live in a moral universe, growth is unavoidable either toward maturity or decay. In Christ, salvation begins a lifelong process of sanctification and growth, not instant perfection. Societies and churches that reject moral categories or deny the need for growth produce hypocrisy, stagnation, and tyranny. True life, freedom, and progress come only through regeneration in Christ and obedience to God’s moral order.

This position paper argues that taxation is fundamentally a religious issue because it rests on the question of sovereignty who is lord, God or the state. It rejects the common claim that churches are wealthy tax dodgers, showing instead that church-owned property historically provided extensive social services, while modern states hold vast tax-exempt lands yet increasingly burden the people through expropriative taxation. Scripture teaches that only God, as Creator and Lord, has ultimate authority to govern, legislate, and tax, with the tithe serving as a confession of Christ’s sovereignty, while the state is limited to a narrow ministry of justice. When the state claims sovereignty, defines religion, and treats tax exemption as a “subsidy,” it effectively declares itself god, a modern Baal, and undermines true freedom. The paper concludes that statism replaces theology with political doctrine, erodes liberty, and enslaves society, whereas genuine freedom and restoration come only through Christian self-government under God’s law, faithful tithing, and obedience that demonstrates living faith in action rather than words alone.

#Taxation #Sovereignty #ChristOrCaesar #BiblicalLaw #Statism #Theonomy #ChurchAndState #FaithAndWorks

Modern governments increasingly equate state interest with public interest, using the claim of a “compelling state interest” to justify control over education, religion, and society. Historically, this language has masked the expansion of centralized power, not the protection of liberty and justice. When the state defines morality and justice for itself, freedom erodes and dissent is treated as a threat.

Biblically, sovereignty belongs to God alone. When the state claims ultimate authority, it becomes hostile to both God and man. True public interest is found not in expanding state power, but in freedom under God’s law where church, family, and society operate within their God-given spheres, and liberty with justice is preserved.

Adiaphorism, the idea that some areas of life are morally “indifferent,” is not Biblical but a pagan import from Stoic and Cynic philosophy. Scripture teaches that all of creation is under God’s law and sovereignty; there is no morally neutral realm. By treating parts of life as outside God’s jurisdiction, adiaphorism limits God’s authority and transfers lawmaking power to man.

This shift has grave consequences. When morality is detached from God’s law, both church and state claim authority to legislate according to human will. The result is antinomianism in the church and totalitarianism in the state. Modern “public policy” functions as a humanistic doctrine of infallibility, suppressing Biblical morality while enforcing statist ethics. Adiaphorism thus undermines Christian faith and opens the door to expanding tyranny by denying God’s comprehensive rule over all of life.