Charlesj68

Authored by Charles Kennedy via OilPrice,com,

Russian oil company Bashneft, part of state-controlled giant Rosneft, has installed metal mesh at its refineries to protect them from drone attacks from Ukraine, Russian media reported on Friday, quoting Radiy Khabirov, the head of the Bashkortostan region where Bashneft is based.

“We don't stop there. There are a number of solutions there, which I won't talk about yet. They are classified. But believe me, we worry about this very much,” the Bashinform agency quoted Khabirov as saying.  

This year, Ukraine has intensified attacks on oil refineries in Russia, which have reduced Russian refining capacity, and which, reportedly, have the White House concerned about rising international prices.

The United States has repeatedly urged Ukraine to halt its drone attacks on Russian oil refineries due to Washington’s assessment that the strikes could lead to Russian retaliation and push up global oil prices, the Financial Times reported last month, citing sources familiar with the exchange.

The drone attacks from Ukraine on Russian refineries could disrupt fuel markets globally, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said last week, estimating that up to 600,000 barrels per day (bpd) of Russia’s refinery capacity could be offline in the second quarter.

Russia has brought back online some oil refining units in recent weeks, reducing the capacity taken offline by Ukrainian drone hits to around 10%, from 14% at the end of March, calculations by Reuters showed earlier this week.

The refining capacity in Russia that is currently offline due to drone attacks is now estimated by Reuters at around 660,000 barrels per day (bpd), compared to 907,000 bpd offline at the end of March.

Still, maintenance and other outages at Russia’s refineries will actually raise the refining capacity that will be offline this month compared to March, according to Reuters’s data and calculations.

Russia said in early April it could repair all damaged units within two months. Russia’s Energy Minister Nikolai Shulginov has said that all damaged refineries in the country would be restarted by the beginning of June.

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

The U.S. Defense Department said Thursday that it will extend the deployment of up to 400 active-duty American troops at the U.S. southern border with Mexico until at least the end of September.

The Pentagon had pulled 1,100 troops from the border last month but extended the deployment of the remaining 400 soldiers.

"On Aug. 24, 2023, the secretary of defense approved an extension of up to 400 personnel providing support to Customs and Border Protection on the southwest border through Sept. 30, 2023," Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Devin Robinson told NBC News on Sept. 1.

Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin approved in May the deployment of 1,500 active-duty troops to the southern border for 90 days to assist border officials with a possible influx of illegal immigration at the border.

The Pentagon said the troops will "fill critical capability gaps, such as ground-based detection and monitoring, data entry, and warehouse support" but will not directly participate in law enforcement activities.

The troops were intended to help back up border officials dealing with the end of Title 42, which allowed U.S. authorities to quickly expel tens of thousands of migrants from the country in the name of protecting Americans from COVID-19.

Spike in Illegal Border Crossings

Data released by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) on Aug. 18 showed that the U.S. Border Patrol recorded 132,652 encounters between ports of entry along the southwest border in July, up from 99,545 in June.

Migrants seeking asylum wait for U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents to allow them enter the United States at the San Ysidro crossing port on the US-Mexico border, as seen from Tijuana, Baja California state, Mexico on May 31, 2023. (Guillermo Arias/AFP via Getty Images)

According to CBP data, the U.S. Border Patrol encountered an average of 2,016 single adults per day in July alone, marking a 66 percent decrease from the 6,164 they encountered per day in the first 11 days of May.

"CBP's message for anyone who is thinking of entering the United States without authorization or illegally along the southwest border is simple: don't do it. When noncitizens cross the border unlawfully, they put their lives in peril," it stated.

CBP One App

The latest numbers also reflect a sharp increase in use of the CBP One mobile app through which up to 1,450 migrants can get appointments at land crossings with Mexico to seek asylum. CBP processed more than 44,700 individuals with CBP One appointments at ports of entry in July.

CBP One is for people of any nationality in central and northern Mexico entering the United States by land and seeking asylum or humanitarian parole.

Migrants must book an appointment through the app and show up to the appointment at U.S. ports of entry. If they don't have an appointment, they would be turned away.

Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) said on July 26 at the House Judiciary Committee hearing that the influx of people at the border has not decreased, noting that the CBP One app "allows migrants to bypass the southern border and enter directly in the United States’ ports of entry."

"Instead of bringing them to the southern border, you’re bringing them directly to ports of entry,” Mr. McClintock said.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton makes a statement at his office in Austin, Texas, on May 26, 2023. (Eric Gay/AP Photo)

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a lawsuit against the Biden Administration on May 23 to challenge a rule that encourages illegal immigrants to use CBP One app to seek entry into the United States.

Mr. Paxton said the app encourages illegal immigration to the United States because it "cannot verify that an illegal immigrant would qualify for an exception, which would prevent them from being deported."

"The Biden Administration deliberately conceived of this phone app with the goal of illegally pre-approving more foreign aliens to enter the country and go where they please once they arrive," he said in a press release.

Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

Let's discuss leverage and where we are in the investment cycle.

Despite huge stock market gains over the last decade, U.S. pensions are hundreds of billions of dollars short of what they expect to need to pay public worker retirement benefits.

As a result of underperformance Retirement Fund Giant Calpers Votes to Use Leverage, More Alternative Assets.

The board of the nation’s largest pension fund voted Monday to use borrowed money and alternative assets to meet its investment-return target, even after lowering that target just a few months ago.

The move by the $495 billion California Public Employees’ Retirement System reflects the dimming prospects for safe publicly traded investments by households and institutions alike and sets a tone for increased risk-taking by pension funds around the country.

Without changes, Calpers said its current asset mix would produce 20-year returns of 6.2%, short of both the 7% target the fund started 2021 with and the 6.8% target implemented over the summer.

Board members voted 7 to 4 in favor of borrowing and investing an amount equivalent to 5% of the fund’s value, or about $25 billion, as part of an effort to hit the 6.8% target, which they voted not to change. The trustees also voted to increase riskier alternative investments, raising private-equity holdings to 13% from 8% and adding a 5% allocation to private debt.

Borrowing money to increase returns allowed Calpers to justify the 6.8% target while maintaining a more-balanced asset mix, concentrating less money in public equity and putting more in certain fixed-income investments, fund staff and consultants said.

When Bubble Meets Trouble

John Hussman's latest missive is When Bubble Meets Trouble

I expect that the coming decade – and possibly even the next 12 months – will be a disaster for the U.S. stock market. Emphatically, our own investment discipline doesn’t require forecasts or rely on projections. Rather, our investment stance will change as valuations, market internals, and other observable factors change. My real concern is for passive investors – particularly charitable organizations whose missions would be compromised by a loss of over 50% in their equity investments (and whose missions might be enhanced by avoiding even part of that), and retirees who have barely enough to enjoy their future, but with most of it dependent on the temporarily bloated prices they see printed on a page or flashing on a screen.

Measured from current extremes, I expect that the unwinding of this bubble will drag S&P 500 total returns below Treasury bill returns for least a decade, and possibly two. Yet like other bubbles, I expect that most of the damage will come off the top, resulting in market conditions that are reasonably investable within a year or two. Presently, the valuation measures we find best correlated with actual subsequent market returns are at the most extreme levels in U.S. history. Moreover, as I’ve detailed before, the low level of interest rates does nothing to improve those prospective returns. For a review, see the section titled “The mapping between observable valuations and expected returns is independent of the level of interest rates” in Alice’s Adventures in Equilibrium.

Repeat Message

The thing is John has been saying these things for years. So have I but he has gotten more grief for it. 

A few of Jeremy Grantham’s observations about speculative bubbles should not be missed. Not just because they agree with our own thinking, but because hearing the same concepts in different words, from a different speaker, can often deepen one's understanding.

“How high the peak is has no bearing at all on what the fair value is. What it does change is the amount of pain that you get to go back to fair value and below. I’ve been very clear about what I consider a definition of success – and that is only that, sooner or later, you will have made money to have sidestepped the bubble phase.”

This is a point I’ve emphasized often, but it can’t be repeated enough: amplifying a bubble doesn’t somehow avoid its consequences – it makes those consequences worse. Amplifying a bubble doesn’t even create “wealth” for the economy as a whole, only temporary opportunities for wealth transfer between individuals. That’s because the wealth isn’t in the price – it’s in the future stream of cash flows. If one holder sells, the next buyer has to hold the bag, and ultimately it’s the cash flows that matter. The only thing progressively higher valuations do is to progressively lower the long-term returns that investors will subsequently enjoy if they buy (or hold) at those valuations.

One of the things that you may have noticed is that our downside targets for the markets don’t simply slide up in parallel with the market. Most analysts have an ingrained ‘15% correction’ mentality, such that no matter how high prices advance, the probable maximum downside risk is just 15% or so (and that would be considered bad). Factually speaking, however, that’s not the way it works. The inconvenient fact is that valuation ultimately matters. That has led to the rather peculiar risk projections that have appeared in this letter in recent months. Trend uniformity helps to postpone that reality, but in the end, there it is. Given current conditions, it is increasingly likely that valuations will begin to matter with a vengeance. – John P. Hussman, Ph.D., March 7, 2000

I know that many of you believe that the current episode of speculative enthusiasm will persist forever –that the Fed will make it persist. We’ve already established that market returns are likely to be flat or poor even if the market achieves what Irving Fisher disastrously projected as a “permanently high plateau” in 1929, and valuations remain forever above extremes never seen before last year. Investors should also consider what might happen if valuations merely touch their historical norms – even 20 years from today – and growth in fundamentals matches that of the past 20 years. The simple arithmetic implies that the S&P 500 would actually lose value on a total return basis.

Will Hussman's Message Be Heard or Acted On?

The one word answer is "no". 

The two word answer is that "It, can't" which many will miss. 

Here's a longer more complete assessment that will have some puzzled: "It is mathematically impossible for Hussman's message to be heard and acted upon, in aggregate."

At an individual level, investors do have a choice. You or I or even a fund like Hussman's can indeed take action. 

But given for every buyer there is a seller, someone must hold every stock, every bond, every dollar, every ounce of gold, and every Bitcoin, 100% of the time. 

No Escape

In aggregate, there is no escape. 

The bigger the pension plan, the harder it is to escape. 

Rather than heed Hussman's warning, Calpers opted to double down with leverage. How long the strategy works is a mystery. 

When the crash comes (and it will) it will be interesting to see how Congress acts.

*  *  *

Like these reports? If so, please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Authored by Bill Blain via MorningPorridge.com,

“Everything transitory is but an image…”

The biggest risk to markets have always been policy mistakes by central banks and/or governments. The risks are rising as confusions about inflation abound. The reality is Central banks have tripped themselves – by assuring us inflation was transitory, they’ve pretty much nailed on its permanence!

Policy Mistake Risk and Inflation

Early doors y’day I was listening to Professor David “Danny” Blanchflower on the radio – ex Bank of England economist and Monetary Policy Committee member. He made a telling comment about the news BoE Governor Andrew Bailey is pushing for a rate hike at the November 4th MPC rate-setting meeting – dismissing every single rate hike since 2007 as a “policy mistake”. He’s spot on. He also reckons a deep recession is about to hit the US – based on his analysis of consumer anxiety and fears – and if the US catches a cold, then the UK will be thumped!

“Is the BoE about to make a policy mistake? Markets sure seem to think so”, says a senior portfolio manager at Allianz this morning in the FT: “Investors worry over potential BoE rates ‘mistake’. Hmm…. Imagine that.. and investor who has figured out rising rates aren’t necessarily good for his book? Who would have guessed.. ?

Policy mistakes are a massive market risk. Don’t believe Central Banks and Politicians are omnipotent. The issue is defining what would be a policy mistake and what is a POLICY MISTAKE.

For instance; Financial Assets remain seriously distorted by the consequences of the last 10 years of QE and ultra-low interest rates. It would be a policy mistake not to unravel the multiple negative market consequences of bad policy. However, to do so – by tapering QE purchases, raising interest rates, and causing investors to question the implicit put they think Central Banks have given markets – will likely trigger a market tumble, and thus be a policy mistake.

It becomes a Policy Mistake when Central Banks give up trying to pull the wool over our eyes about “transitory inflation” (the market equivalent of being a little bit pregnant), yet hike rates into the face of a supply chain recession, spurred on by Governments wanting to rein back debt by introducing austerity programmes and tax hikes. That’s a combined central bank policy mistake and a political Policy Mistake = triggering a run on the currency caused by rising competency fears about the debt they are trying to cut which will herald and imported inflation spike.. Etc, etc…

On the other hand, the most recent US retail sales data was exceptionally strong – was it a real spending splurge by consumers following the pandemic, or was it retail stocking up in the expectation of shortages to come?

Blanchflower and many other economists are still in the transitory inflation cap, citing US Lumber prices earlier this year – which spiked higher as builders hoarded timber on anticipated shortages, but quickly fell as the demand spike proved unsustainable.

Which leads to the question when does a price spike lead to transitory or long-term inflation? Retail Prices tend to demonstrate fluidity on the way up, but are notoriously sticky once they peak. Central banks might think the prices retail consumers encounter in the shops respond to stimulus like bond prices – they don’t.

Rising prices clearly colour expectations and purchase decisions. If folk accept inflation is transitory they will just keep buying – which means prices remain high.

Doh! – you see the problem…?

Belief in something being transitory is likely to make it permanent. If prices remain high that triggers wage inflation. Etc, Etc. Jay Powells comments on “Transitory Inflation” might just go down alongside Alan Greenspans “If you understood me, I misspoke” comments in the Big Book of Central Bank Moments.

I guess the coming holiday spending season will be .. interesting… Container ports around the globe remain clogged up, lorry drivers are scarcer than hen’s teeth, labour costs are under pressure (I’ll be intrigued to see what Amazon et al pay their Christmas hires this year..), and supply chain glitches put manufacturing under pressure… just how transitory do you expect it all to be?

Meanwhile, big trouble in big China

The market flow yesterday confirmed we are certainly living in interesting times…. China’s sub 5% growth raised recessionary fears around the globe… 4.9% growth would be considered stellar in most developed economies, but the fact China is struggling with supply chains, soaring energy costs, and the unfolding Evergrande debacle and potential contagion is illustrative.

I suspect our view of the implosion of the Chinese property sector is a bit like watching ducks on a windy day – serenely floating on the surface looking unperturbed, but furiously paddling below the waterline. It’s worse than it looks. The realisation of just how heavily dependent the economy is on property sales – looks unsustainable.

The consensus is $50 bln held by Evergrande bond holders will suffer most. Domestically, it’s a different tale; even as more property firms default the CCP will try to ensure the real estate sector is “stable and orderly”. Evergrande’s domestic liabilities of some $148 bln plus will no doubt be dealt with in order not to unleash a tide of domestic business defaults and retail pain – but it will have to be done in a manner that doesn’t look like a bailout.

It’s likely to get messy. The Chinese will find trying to micromanage the property sector by simultaneously disciplining banks on property company lending, while encouraging mortgage lending to mop up surplus supply creates all kinds of opportunities for speculators. Keep an eye on that space.. I suspect China will continue to contract. When China catches a cold, the rest of us will probably break out in pustules…

Authored by Vanessa Serna via The Epoch Times,

California restaurants are preparing for potential bacon shortages beginning January 2022, when a new law to improve farm animal conditions that could cause a decline in pork supply goes into effect.

Prime Meat Market, a butcher shop in Irvine, Calif., on Aug. 2, 2021. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

One of the first international pancake houses in Orange County, Pancakes R Us, foresees a costly impact on its menu prices.

Abdullah Akbar, who runs the Costa Mesa restaurant, told The Epoch Times the eatery uses around 600 pounds of bacon per month. The restaurant is known for classic breakfast combos offering diners a few strips of bacon for nearly every meal.

“The prices will have [an] effect on us, and we have no choice but to increase our prices,” Akbar said.

In 2018, state residents voted to change farm animal confinement laws by passing Proposition 12. More than half of state voters ruled in favor of prohibiting the retainment of calves, pigs, veal, and hens in small areas, along with the sale of veal, uncooked pork, and shelled and liquid hen eggs.

“Prop 12 addresses some of the cruelest abuses ever inflicted on farm animals,” Josh Balk, vice president of Farm Animal Protection at the Humane Society of the United States, told The Epoch Times.

“The pork industry confines mother pigs in tiny cages so small they can never turn around. Shifting to more humane and cage-free conditions vastly improves the lives of these animals for egg-laying hens.”

As of now, the hens stand wing-to-wing with other birds in cages the size of microwaves, where they’re forced to sleep, eat, and lay eggs in the same spot, Balk said.

“In the pork industry, allowing these pigs to at least turn around is a big step, and that goes to show how poor these animals are treated,” he said.

“Mother pigs in a cage where they can’t turn around; they’re forced to live in what is their own coffin for their whole life. They’re forced to look straight ahead, and that’s it, and they go psychologically insane.”

With nearly 63 percent of Californians voting in favor of Prop. 12, the initiative received a lawsuit from the North American Meat Institute to halt the motion. In June 2021, the Supreme Court rejected the legal challenge.

“The Supreme Court’s outright rejection of the meat industry’s challenge to Proposition 12 is significant, and consistent with prior court rulings affirming that states have the right to pass laws protecting animals, public health and safety,” the Humane Society of the United States’ senior staff attorney, Rebecca Cary said in a June 28 statement.

“The meat industry should have focused on eliminating its cruel caging of animals rather than filing hopeless lawsuits trying to overturn extraordinarily popular, voter-passed animal cruelty laws.”

According to a study conducted by the Hatamiya Group, a decline in pork supply in the state by 50 percent would increase bacon prices by 60 percent in the Los Angeles market. Additionally, the report found that an increase in pork prices will decrease the overall demand if prices were to spike.

While animal cruelty organizations call for an end to the mistreatment of farm animals, restaurant associations statewide fear that potential price increases will hinder the industry amid the devastating economic impacts of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus pandemic.

The Food Equity Alliance, a statewide coalition of state grocery stores, restaurants, businesses, and pork producers, wrote a letter to Gov. Gavin Newsom in May 2021, urging him to delay the effects of Prop. 12 by using his executive powers.

“Californians have been hit hard by the economic impacts of COVID-19 with consequences serious and far-reaching on restaurants, grocers, businesses, and hard-working families,” the letter reads.

“Another threat on the horizon is the implementation of Proposition 12.

“The Food Equity Alliance … is asking that you exercise your executive authority to delay the implementation of Proposition 12. It’s the only solution to protect the most vulnerable Californians, grocery markets, and restaurants from facing a pork shortage and skyrocketing price increases at a time when they are already struggling with the devastating impacts of COVID-19.”

As the implementation date of Prop. 12 is nearly half a year away, a Rabobank report estimates that California will fall 50 percent short of its pork needs.

Two dear friends introduced me to Douglas Wilson and Moscow, Idaho. Praise be to the Lord for my friends and the ministry of Doug. Since that introduction, I have viewed a handful of his sermons, lectures, and other discussion videos. I have a question I would like to ask Doug or another delegated leader regarding romantic relationships and pornography. Having heard Doug speak on this a number of times, I have yet to hear much concerning one certain aspect to this issue, which is what brings me here. Perhaps I am in the wrong place to ask such a question, and if so, may I be pointed in the proper direction? Otherwise, I would be quite grateful for wise council on the question, which is:

Need a man completely and utterly defeat this sin and affliction (porn) before entering into a relationship aimed at marriage with a woman? Furthermore—if that *ought* to be the case, how long and far removed must that man be before he (or both parties) can justify a relationship to commence?

I understand this question might not be answered soon or even at all. I suspect this question/topic is rather common, and thus a suitable answer might already exist.

Thank you for anything you can provide.

P

When Bacteria Bleat—I just wanted to tell you I thought this article was some of your best work to date! I really enjoyed how clear you made the applying of Van Til’s apologetic without even batting an eye. This was great applied apologetics. I would love to see you write a whole book like this.

Very well done, thank you!

Jon

Could you address this [see below]in a future blog post? It seems to me lots and lots of pastors are either using sermon “services” or straight up plagiarizing other pastor’s work.

This is awful. I’m a Southern Baptist, and this is our leadership. What does this say about evangelicalism that we are okay with this?

Chris

On the ultra-cosmic level, the universe is an absolute monarchy, with God ruling directly and inscrutably. On the microcosmic level, the Christian nuclear family is an authoritarian monarchy, with the husband-father bearing the responsibility of leadership according to sound authoritative doctrine. Would it not follow that on the meso-cosmic level, the Christian nation state would aspire to be at least a constitutional monarchy; and that on the macro-cosmic level of international Christian civilization, an elected monarchy.

The same line of reasoning would follow for priesthood also. Christ is High Priest; and a father is priestly toward his children. Why not affirm priests on the meso-cosmic level of Christian communities; or on the macro-cosmic level of relations with the non-Christian world?

Do not republicanism and lay presidency at the altar suppose a disruption in the levels/spheres of moral order? That is, kings and priests are only acceptable in the most remote and immediate spheres, but not in between. How justifiably so?

Andrew

I recently listened to Plodcast podcast mentioning a book called the Fourth Turning.

This brought to mind a short paper called the Fate of Empires written by Sir John Glubb.

Here is the link, or you can do a search for a site you are comfortable with for a download.

John

I agree with everything in this article, but what do you think should be the approach for the fool who believes all the same things as the atheist in your article and yet at the same time claims to subscribe fully to, say, the Baptist Faith & Message 2000?

Seth

I very recently discovered you and your work as a whole, but instantly recognized your distinctive voice from years ago, listening to your address at Piper’s C.S. Lewis conference on the 50th anniversary of Lewis’ death. Your joke about buying Calvinism in 50-gallon drums stuck with me, and when I stumbled upon one of your Youtube videos a few weeks ago I immediately thought “Oh hey, it’s the weapons-grade Calvinist!”

Sir, thank you for your work on our Lord’s behalf, and your witness in His name.

I have a theological question for you, and apologize in advance if this was not the correct avenue to ask it.

My question assumes three premises.

– God’s divine nature is immutable

– Christ is fully God and fully human

– Human nature is more than our physical bodies

Assuming I have these three correct, does it not follow that the Second person of the Trinity was *always* human? As opposed to *becoming* a man during His physical incarnation?

Unless immutability is only a characteristic of the Father and the Son changed His nature at a specific point in time about 2000 years ago, this seems to be the logical conclusion.

If so, and the Word in the beginning was already man, and His humanity preceded the creation of the universe, then would making creatures “in our image” (Gen. 1:26) be referring to our race adopting the Son’s pre-existing humanity, rather than a more abstract interpretation (imposition of spirit on flesh)?

Does this also suggest that the Son, being our true progenitor, would have incarnated as our Lord regardless of the Fall, perhaps in happier circumstances? Had Adam and Eve not disobeyed, might the second Person of the Trinity have joined them and their descendants in the garden?

In Gratitude,

Nathan

I have two reoccurring issues within my conversations regarding the partial preterist postmil position.

1) My pastor, friends, and family have all been influenced on their eschatology through John MacArthur and Master’s Seminary. That being said they have roughly no idea what the postmil postion entails. They have done very little research on the topic themselves. Commonly in my interactions with them regarding postmill, they quickly dismiss it and state that “Revelation was written post A.D 70.” This answer seems to be the get out of jail free card for them. How would you respond and do you have recommended literature on this topic?

2) My second question regards the level of importance that our eschatological view should hold. In a recent conversation with the pastor of my brother’s church, we went back and forth for a brief time comparing the millennial positions. As I began showing the difference between natural interpretation and wooden, the conversation was dismissed with the reply, “In the end we are all Christians. These things have been debated forever.” This response was a way out of the conversation, but it left me with an unsettled feeling. Am I wrong to think that the position we hold has a huge impact on our life and hermeneutic? The postmill position has been extremely eye opening and a huge blessing for my wife and me. Our life has been changed through thinking generationally and seeing Christ as a victor over this world. Is it wrong for me to feel that this is a major topic that should have more weight and importance? Not something easily dismissed as “non-essential”?

Godspeed,

Denver

I just listened to your podcast on Tim Keller’s hands on the scales. I would like to know what you think of his New City Catechism? It seems to me like every time I am exposed to it I am confronted with some old subtle heresy now being masqueraded as doctrine.

Thanks for your hard work.

Tyrone

Kindly comment on the moral necessity and/or utility of a referendum on prolonged lockdowns, and what threshold of acceptance or rejection would establish a mandate. Such a tool is strikingly absent.

I am keenly aware that in every debate, one side—at least invisibly—holds the guns, often receiving disagreement as from one who speaks “opinion to authority”.

Writing from Canada, I am stunned at the zeal of law enforcement in establishing international-level security measures between provinces (especially Manitoba-Ontario) as though traveling between Israel and Lebanon; and this without a peep from their conservative leaders about the need for regional referenda to establish legitimacy for the use of force imposing non-conservative policies on their very electors.

Thank you for speaking as a voice of sanity amidst the chaos.

Andrew

I am curious what you think is an appropriate timeline for a pastor to return to ministry after being caught in sexual sin. Let’s assume the sexual sin is adultery for example. I’ve heard some say as soon as the pastor is repentant, he is again qualified to return as a pastor. What about sexual abuse?

Josephine

The Christian Sabbath | Another answer for Jonathan would be the book “The Christian Sabbath” by Dr. Robert Paul Martin”:

Trey

I wanted to ask a question about the recent articles you have been writing on the biblical necessity of free speech. I am in broad agreement with your position and I think theonomy is indeed biblical. One objection I anticipate goes like this;

Can’t the argument surrounding blasphemy also be applied to the right of the state to execute? The danger of letting the state punish blasphemy is that the state can abuse this and become the ultimate blasphemer. Can’t the state also abuse the right to execute criminals and become the ultimate murderer? If we don’t want the state to punish blasphemy then we should also want to prevent the state from having the power to kill. Or to state the objection more directly, just because the state can abuse its powers to punish blasphemy, it doesn’t mean that the state shouldn’t punish blasphemy when appropriate by biblical standards.

I am not sure how I would respond to this objection. I suspect that the person making this objection would be someone who is a more radical theonomist than yourself, and I don’t expect to meet any of them here in New Zealand, but, should I become a more radical theonomist than you?

Thank you for all your work, and I lack the ability to express how helpful your writing has been for me and everyone who has to put up with me.

Ethan

RE: Kevin DeYoung and the Taxonomy of Conflict

This post really deserves to be a book, a kind of present-day Rushdoonian spiritual successor with handsome helpings of the Peterson-esque (or is J.P. Wilson-eqsue? huh) “Ha! Gotcha” humor from which you cannot seem to help yourself going there.

Speaking for my family, we were closet 4s. Every 4-ish murmur escaping from hearts to lips have been silenced and shamed and explained away by the numerous and more prestigious 3s we are presently surrounded by. Now we are on our way out of our current non-denominational, premillennial, dispensational circles that we got saved in and learned everything we know about the faith from – until we discovered the ministries and publishings of Christ Church. Not that we haven’t extensively surveyed the milieu of Evangelicalism and its thinking apart from you, but your reasoning – for all the reasons your article points out—stands apart, and so many times we have heard what you’ve had to say and thought, “That is exactly how we felt all along”—and were frustrated that we hadn’t been able to articulate it.

So to our surprise, we are now moving our family from Austin to Moscow, and we still don’t know whether we will wind up believing in postmillennialism, infant baptism, theonomy, sacramentalism, cold weather, and a whole host of issues we grew up believing were dividing lines. Yet in terms of pleasing God, we have vastly more in common with you in thinking and approach to obedience than our own theological camp, and the divide between us and our fellow 3s is beginning to feel like a chasm, fixed, with a metal curtain in the middle—and the Rich Brothers told Abraham his ideas aren’t welcome on their side because he quoted Lazarus. So when you say “4s are more ecumenical”—we present to you the tablets of our hearts as living proof, that in spite of the appearance of vastidious interwebital shunning you receive on a daily basis—the silent 4s, who may lack either the training chops or the pluck or a bit of both, God appears to be drawing together to take our stand.

Our personal calculus has come to reject “oh no, what will 1-3 think.” We want to avoid the opposite problem: even trying to resist the spirit of the age, we sense we have been so catechized by the deafening laugh track that we fear what David called our hidden sin most of all. We feel grave danger of losing all our rewards and watching our entire lives burned up like straw in the end for disobedience we learned to be bullied into, not even questioning. We know the Hebrews Cloud exists and urges us on, but at this point in time we feel we need to kind of surround ourselves in a Cloud of 4s to search our own lives and re-pattern our family after the Original and Most Hated 4 (He is actually a 7, as opposed to Bolz-Weber’s -2), our Lord Jesus Christ. Right now, Christ Church, her members and ministries are one of the only clear and unmistakable voices that shares our heart and thirst for unapologetic obedience, especially the kind of obedience that exposes manipulators. Praise God for that; on the other side of the online four-stompers are a whole lot of sheep like us who battle with great despair for our children, and God has set you all up as one city on a hill for many of us to gain clarity and be set free from the catechism of this nuclear waste site dumpster of a culture.

One bone to pick with your article—”I also hasten to add that you might [a 4] and still be a jerk.” I wholeheartedly agree there objectively exists a true moral concept, backed by the gold standard of the agreement of God the Father, of “jerk.” But the leftian boo track has the super-majority of airtime about what the word jerk means. In my pitch for turning this article into a book, what I’d like to read from you is a thorough gutting and filleting of all the twisted laugh track dictionary entries, followed by a sane, ackshually moral (as in holy (as in mimicking God)) definitions of the i-am-undone-for-the-3s-think-me-a-meanie words we are routinely handed to wear as Convention name badges.

And if you permit me one final request in this overlong blog post-sized letter, I urge you to make your first attempt of sane redefinitions where it concerns your use of the word “sketchy.” I thought the Rich Man told Abraham his experiences were pretty distinct, no lack of definition and clarity in that particular Conference.

Patrick

“Paleo-Woke” In my last latter to you, I mentioned how I consider myself “paleo-woke”, but maybe a better term would be “theonomically woke.” Anyways, I mentioned that you should speak more sensible to the “woke” person and don’t treat us all the same. You mentioned that you believed the category I mentioned does exist but that you haven’t found calibrations on your part do much. I would like to say that THEY DO! I’m living proof! As someone who loves Eric Mason and the gospel work he’s doing in Philly, who loves his book Woke Church, (though I wouldn’t agree with everything or put it exactly the way he does.) I see how you’ve tried to reach out. I see how you’ve gone above and beyond in many ways. That spoke to me. When people, willfully or ignorantly misunderstand you I see that. Listen, the hood needs Doug Wilson. Ok, we don’t really, we need Jesus. But I’m still bringing you to the hood even if I don’t use your name. And just know that there is (based on De Young’s chart) someone who is a 1 or a 2, that loves Doug Wilson and even defends you to others. I love that you cut both ways and aren’t afraid of offending “both sides.” But in 800 years when you are long gone I believe your influence in the inner city will have blossomed. And I don’t want you to get tangled up in the petty squabbles with well known leaders to stop you from speaking to those of us that find ourselves in an entirely different context than Idaho and those of us who love Eric Mason but also who by a strange providence have found ourselves influenced and loving some random “lumberjack” guy in Moscow, Idaho. I see how you’ve been misunderstood and I still appreciate your gentle and irenic nature even though you aren’t afraid to get the sword out and start slayin dudes either. I’ve seen it through your online interactions and know that you won me over.

Keep doing what you’re doing. But know we are out there, and some of us are even putting our neck on the line in places you couldn’t imagine.

May God continue to bless your work and and may the fruit of your work, by God’s grace, multiply into an incalculable impact through the Gospel for the good of this world and for the glory of God, that in all things He might receive the honor and praise.

Ace Hartwick

Thank you for the edification and guidance you provide through the podcast. It has been a blessing to listen to!

I had a quick question for you. A while back you mentioned that many people spread false accusations about you online. I find you to be correct on this, as I see a plethora of people saying outlandish things that are easily proven wrong.

One accusation I see floating around is that you’re self-ordained and have taken the role of pastor without being examined. However, I researched your denomination’s (CREC) bylaws and it is very clear that examination is required to be a part of this group of churches.

So, my question is, is this claim that you’re self-ordained just another one of the silly myths that people try to spread about you? It seems like people will do anything to spread bad information, but I wasn’t sure if there was a reason that there’s controversy around your ordination.

Once again, thank you for all you do to spread the cause of the Gospel!

In Christ,

Jeremiah

Since I saw “On Earth as it is in Heaven” on YouTube I was intrigued by your message and have since watched many of your lectures and debates (as well as from Voddie Baucham, Bruce Gore, Jeff Durbin, Steve Gregg and others) and I feel blessed by God with the renewed and better understanding of his Word.

Especially the topic about LGBT+ interested me because in the past ten years I feel public opinion changed dramatically on this even though I think the Bible is clear on this topic.

However I came up with a theory (based on the Bible) which is maybe interesting to you as well.

I was thinking about Sodom and how it is mentioned that all the men (all ages) wanted to participate in these sodomic actions.

This triggered me to think that all men (and women) in Sodom were either born this way or it was their choice to participate.

Maybe the ‘born this way’ argument applies to all of us.

Maybe we were all born gay, lesbian, heterosexual and so on?

If not, then how could it be that all men in Sodom wanted to participate?

Looking at Wikipedia, so far no gay gene has been found and it points out that its a combination of factors and that social environment plays a role too.

Looking at the demographics of sexual orientation (also Wikipedia) it shows that over the years the LGBT+ population share is growing steadily.

Quoting from this website:

“Notably, the generational group that has the highest percentage of people who identify as LGBT is the youngest — Generation Z (born 1997 to 2002) — with 15.9%. That compares to 9.1% of millennials (born 1981 to 1996), 3.8% of Generation X (born 1965 to 1980), 2% of baby boomers (born 1946 to 1964) and 1.3% of traditionalists (born before 1946).”

The question arises how is it possible that there’s a difference of 14,60% between Generation Z and the traditionalists generation?

How can this be if people are born this way?

If people are born this way the number would remain static and not increase.

So my theory is (based on the biblical story about Sodom) that if this continues, the population share of LGBT+ will continue to grow, 20%, 30%, 50%, who knows?

Especially since it’s being promoted at schools, work places, everywhere (even churches?).

This would answer the question why we care (besides that it conflicts with what God teaches us).

If the LGBT+ population share rises and it is proven so hard to change this sexual orientation, this will be destructive to the fertility of the US and many other western nations.

In that sense, this theory will be proven false or true in the coming decade.

Since the ‘born this way’ argument is such an important argument for many Christians to believe that its God’s will for them to behave this way, to have same-sex mirages and so on, I think it will be important to keep an eye on this population share statistic.

Soon our nations will turn (population wise) literally into Sodom?

I’m a Christian from the Netherlands, 31 year old father of three kids, married to a beautiful woman.

Forced by corona I’m working from my attic with a view at the high school where I always thought I’d send my kids to, until this week when I saw from my attic window the rainbow flag on top of the roof of this school.

It’s (in name) a Christian school—however they purposely avoid any reference to Christianity on their website and also at school itself (with Christmas no cross but only a tree).

I’m interested to hear what you think of my theory explained above?

I call it the “We are all born gay” theory since I think it emphasizes this point that, if we resist God’s will, we will all follow the way of Sodom and it makes it clear that it still, in essence, is a choice we make.

God bless you and your family.

Yours Faithfully,

Jelte

I am reading Dabney’s Defense of Virginia and the South on your recommendation. In chapter 1, among some really good insights, he says,

“…for the African race, such as Providence has made it, and where He has placed it in America, slavery was the righteous, the best, yea, the only tolerable relation.”

I’m not so sure. It’s obvious that any slave needs a liberal education to prepare him for freedom, and the descendants of slaves still suffer today for the lack of such an education. It seems to me that a better long-term Christian approach to the problem of millions of slaves imported into the colonies by the British would have focused on education and evangelism. I hope that’s classical education, not modern democratic bias talking. I will read the rest of the book with interest, but I would love to know what Christian writers pick up the conversation from Dabney, accepting his insights but taking a less enthusiastic view of the righteousness of American slavery.

Thanks.

MB

Your thoughts?

Todd

Just watched your video on Masculine Responsibility and the Covenant. I heartily agree with everything said there. I find the train of thought you laid out there very convicting whenever Satan attacks with the line of, “it’s ok to sin in (insert sin here) way because your wife / kids will never know.” But I want God to bless my wife / kids, so I will do my best to remain faithful in all aspects of life, whether they be public or private.

However, can we take this train of thought too far? If there is a family that seems like the father and mother are faithful in their parenting, but their kids turn out rebellious, does that mean that there was hidden sin in the life of the father? It pains me to think of someone like John Piper, a man whose ministry I’ve appreciated, has a wayward son out there. Does that mean that JP has some dark side we just don’t know about? Should I get rid of his books. I very much want to hold to the truth of I Tim 3:4-5. But I’m unsure of where the lines are at.

Roger

Recently watched your Dry Twig interaction with Gary DeMar, for which I am thankful.

I grew up with the same osmosis and somewhat conviction and only have recently researched my own eschatological viewpoint. I am incredibly thankful it was last year where I started to dive in the deep end and the infamous algorithm of our Internet Media overlords plunged me to your channel (an act of Providence, no doubt). I kept hearing of this intriguing Postmillennial position from this doughty pastor in Idaho and godly raucous pastor in Arizona, [a position] I was always told was “just for the liberals.”

While I will admit I am not entirely convinced of the postmillennial school (I would consider myself an optimistic amillennial), I am not opposed to the posty’s. I quite enjoy them. Needless to say, I have seen your arguments come to life in my own readings of Scripture. Particularly it is Christ’s Discourse to His Disciples in John 14-17. In seeing the incredible power of Christ’s ascension and giving of the Spirit by the will of the Father, I see the postmillennial position a bit more clearly, and I am thankful for that.

Keep pressing on, brother. Thankful for you and your ministry.

X