VFTB Live: Paul & Phillip Collins — The Politics of Dominion

dominionism

THE ELECTION of Barack Obama has prompted a visceral response from conservatives in America.  The tea-party movement has a strong appeal to conservative Christians, who respond to the movement’s call for smaller government that abides by the Constitution.

But within that movement are those who seek to remake the Earth for religious reasons.  Paul and Phillip Collins, co-authors of The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship, contend that the goal for Christians is staying on the narrow path between Dominionism and abdication theology — because both of those unbiblical options leads to tyranny.

For more background on the theo-philosophical roots of Dominionism, please read Paul and Phillip’s article “Their Kingdom Come: Dominionism’s Quest for Political Capital in the Emergent World Order”.  We recommend The Collins Brothers Unleashed podcast, which you’ll find online here.

Follow these links for more information about The Omega Hour Conference, August 27 & 28 in Las Vegas, the just-announced Supernatural Science and Prophecy Conference October 1 & 2 in Canton, Ohio, and the West Coast Conference on the Paranormal, October 9 in Irvine, California.

We’re proud to be a part of the Revelations Radio Network, a group of like-minded Christian podcasters.

Click the arrow on the player below to listen now, or right-click (control-click if you have a Mac) the “download” link to save the mp3 file to your hard drive.

12 Comments on VFTB Live: Paul & Phillip Collins — The Politics of Dominion

  1. Derek, you should have asked the Collins Bros to back up their comments about Dave Hunt and Chris Pinto. Perhaps they are correct, but they need to present more than their say so. Chris Pinto always presents his case with quotes and references, which is more than I can say for these “intellectuals”. I appreciate these guys, but am not impressed when a person needs to go “uhhhhh, uhhhhh, ummmmm… until they think of a word they can use that has more that twelve syllables. Get down on the level of the commoner. Most of the people who listen to these guys probably don’t even know what they’re talking about most of the time. There are alot of really smart guys out there who are wise enough to know that they should speak a language that people can understand.

    Proverbs 12:23 A prudent man concealeth knowledge…

  2. Ct,

    First of all, Paul and I always cite our sources. We cited them throughout the course of the entire interview. Evidently, you weren’t paying attention.

    Secondly, Pinto has presented Gnostic sects such as the Albigenses as genuine Christians. If Pinto had done his homework, he would know that this Gnostic sect mandated suicide, favoring starvation as the chief means of dispatching one’s self (World Book Encyclopedia. 1980 ed). Unbfortunately, Pinto is driven by the same Protestant impulse to assume that all sects that opposed the Catholic Church were Christian. This is a vintage non sequitur. Don’t know what that is? Look it up.

    Thirdly, Dave Hunt is guilty of the same logical violation and we cited a source to affirm this contention. In his book “A Woman Rides the Beast,” Hunt writes: “Pagan Rome made sport of throwing to the lions, burning, and otherwise killing Christians and not a few Jews. Yet, ‘Christian’ Rome slaughtered many times that number of both Christians and Jews. Beside those victims of the Inquisition, there were the Huguenots, Albigenses, Waldenses, and other Christians who were burned at the stakeby the hundreds of thousands simply because they refused to align themselves with the Roman Catholic Church and its corrupt and heretical dogmas and practices.”

    In this excerpt, Hunt conflates Gnostic sects with genuine Christians. Again, this conflation is based on the non sequitur that all sects that opposed the Catholic Church automatically qualified as Christians. This is fantastically bad logic.

    Fourthly, hurling insults concerning non-verbals in an extemporaneously delivered interview is just plain juvenile. Have you ever tried to explain complex topics on a live radio program? If you had, you’d know that speaking extemporaneously can leave one groping for words. Grow up.

    Fifthly, yes, we have college educations and we use them. It is just plain infantile, if not downright anti-intellectual, to excoriate someone for cracking a book. Our objective is to help believers think and thinkers believe. God did not give us our brains to forego their use. We can’t help it if you wish to forego the use of yours. And, we speak the english language. Ever heard of it? Use it or lose it.

    Lastly, I notice that you didn’t even quote the whole Scripture. It is easy to superimpose any number of interpretations upon a passage when you lift it from the matrix of a broader Biblical gestalt and read it in isolation. So, don’t think you can hide behind an incomplete reading of Scripture to justify your ignorance.

  3. Ct,
    First of all, Paul and I always cite our sources. We cited them throughout the course of the entire interview. Evidently, you weren’t paying attention.
    Secondly, Pinto has presented Gnostic sects such as the Albigenses as genuine Christians. If Pinto had done his homework, he would know that this Gnostic sect mandated suicide, favoring starvation as the chief means of dispatching one’s self (World Book Encyclopedia. 1980 ed). Unbfortunately, Pinto is driven by the same Protestant impulse to assume that all sects that opposed the Catholic Church were Christian. This is a vintage non sequitur. Don’t know what that is? Look it up.
    Thirdly, Dave Hunt is guilty of the same logical violation and we cited a source to affirm this contention. In his book “A Woman Rides the Beast,” Hunt writes: “Pagan Rome made sport of throwing to the lions, burning, and otherwise killing Christians and not a few Jews. Yet, ‘Christian’ Rome slaughtered many times that number of both Christians and Jews. Beside those victims of the Inquisition, there were the Huguenots, Albigenses, Waldenses, and other Christians who were burned at the stakeby the hundreds of thousands simply because they refused to align themselves with the Roman Catholic Church and its corrupt and heretical dogmas and practices.”
    In this excerpt, Hunt conflates Gnostic sects with genuine Christians. Again, this conflation is based on the non sequitur that all sects that opposed the Catholic Church automatically qualified as Christians. This is fantastically bad logic.
    Fourthly, hurling insults concerning non-verbals in an extemporaneously delivered interview is just plain juvenile. Have you ever tried to explain complex topics on a live radio program? If you had, you’d know that speaking extemporaneously can leave one groping for words. Grow up.
    Fifthly, yes, we have college educations and we use them. It is just plain infantile, if not downright anti-intellectual, to excoriate someone for cracking a book. Our objective is to help believers think and thinkers believe. God did not give us our brains to forego their use. We can’t help it if you wish to forego the use of yours. And, we speak the english language. Ever heard of it? Use it or lose it.
    Lastly, I notice that you didn’t even quote the whole Scripture. It is easy to superimpose any number of interpretations upon a passage when you lift it from the matrix of a broader Biblical gestalt and read it in isolation. So, don’t think you can hide behind an incomplete reading of Scripture to justify your ignorance.

  4. First off, I didn’t think you would read this, or I never would have posted. Secondly, you stated your response well enough the first time, there was no need to repost. Thirdly, Jesus quoted half verses as well, not sure what I’m talking about? Look it up.

    Listen, I admit that my attack on your immense brain power was immature and unqualified. However,I do not agree that you provided ample evidence in your attack against Pinto. You basically just broad brushed a sincere brother in-Christ as a “pseudo intellectual”, holding yourselves up as “true intellectuals” I assume. I was just having a little fun when I mentioned the fumbling for big words. I certainly could never measure up to you in an interview or in your capacity to retain knowledge. In fact, I was recently bragging you both up in a conversation with my wife, but I was sincerely turned off by the way you spoke so unkindly about Chris Pinto. Truth is truth, and I’ll take truth over favored personalities any day, but I stick as close as I can to the scriptural mandate to speak the truth in love. I obviously missed that mark in what I posted above, though much of it was spoken in jest. Please accept my humble apology, I hadn’t considered how you might feel if you read it or how I might sway others with reckless words. (This is where you think to yourself, “Sniff, sniff, I guess I did that too”.)

    May I suggest an exciting possibility? Perhaps A View From The Bunker could host a debate between you and Chris Pinto on the subject of early Christian history. I think that if it were conducted in the spirit of Christian love and humility, it could be an exciting and enlightening event.

    Sincerely,

    Your humbled friend.

  5. “Thirdly, Jesus quoted half verses as well, not sure what I’m talking about? Look it up.”

    Don’t get cute with me. You weren’t doing what Jesus did and you know it. In research and study, context is everything. By not quoting what came before or after your citation, you either change the meaning of the quoted verse to suit your position or you cause the verse to lose all meaning.

    Do you think it’s right for your “sincere brother-in-Christ” to slander Christians of the Catholic stripe?

    “May I suggest an exciting possibility? Perhaps A View From The Bunker could host a debate between you and Chris Pinto on the subject of early Christian history. I think that if it were conducted in the spirit of Christian love and humility, it could be an exciting and enlightening event.”

    May I suggest an exciting possibility to you, sir? Stop listening to religious bigots that distort the facts to satisfy their hatred of somebody (Catholics, Jews, Muslims, etc). These people are ruining the field for responsible researchers who have no axe to grind. Consider the following about your great scholar Chris Pinto:

    What about the fact that Pope Pius the 6th condemned the Illuminati 1785? Why is our dear Christian brother Pinto contending that the Catholic Church is in some unholy alliance with the Illuminati?

    What about the fact that there are well over 200 Catholic Church condemning freemasonry? When Alex Jones pointed this out to Chris Pinto on his show, all Pinto could do was make some bizarre comment about the whole thing being “complex” and somehow involving the idea of “order out of chaos.”

    The title Pontifex Maximus meant something totally different for the Popes of Christian Rome than it did Emperors and people of Pagan Rome. The Emperors began turning this title over to the Popes when the empire entered a transitional phase from paganism to Christianity. Why does Pinto rip the title out of its historical context?

    Why does Pinto give credence to the thoroughly debunked “secret Jesuit oath” that has never been shown anywhere to be authentic?

    I don’t care that Pinto cites his sources. So what? It’s the kind of sources he cites that are important. The man hardly ever turns to a primary source and it appears that he is guilty of circular citations (in other words, he’s just a conspiracist quoting other conspiracists).

    Again, in his documentaries, Pinto has presented the Gnostic Medieval heresies such as the Albigensians, the Cathari, and the Waldenses as genuine Christians. How do you justify that?

    Why do you care to defend your “brothers-in-Christ” who may happen to be Catholic. Instead, you recklessly and irresponsibly stand for a slanderer who I would bet green money you have never met.

  6. Don’t get cute with me. You weren’t doing what Jesus did and you know it. In research and study, context is everything.

    Your right, I should have quoted the entire verse and then it would have been obvious that I was a picture of the latter part;

    Pro. 12:23 A prudent man concealeth knowledge: but the heart of fools proclaimeth foolishness.

    This also would be appropriate…

    Pro. 12:18 There is that speaketh like the piercings of a sword: but the tongue of the wise is health.

    “Why do you care to defend your “brothers-in-Christ” who may happen to be Catholic”.

    ….I don’t care too. If they’re Catholic, they are deceived. If you don’t understand the contrast between Catholicism and true Biblical Christianity, then we ought to be having a different conversation. But I have no intention to continue with insults and unkind words. You obviously have a stronger intellect than I. And I certainly wouldn’t dare tread on your turf when it comes to misc. details of history, but when it comes to things which accompany salvation, let us be reminded, that God used the foolish things of this world to confound the wise.

    I must say, that your hot temper gives you away. Even after receiving a kind word you’ve chosen to remain high minded.

    Pro. 16:28 – A perverse man
    spreads strife, And a slanderer separates
    intimate friends.

    Pro. 28:25 -An arrogant man
    stirs up strife, But he who trusts in the Lord
    will prosper.

    Pro. 29:22 – An angry man stirs up
    strife, And a hot-tempered man abounds in
    transgression.

    Pro. 17:19 – He who loves
    transgression loves strife; He who raises his
    door seeks destruction.

    Once again, Please accept my apology.

    Pro. 17:28 – Even a fool, when he holdeth his peace, is counted wise: and he that shutteth his lips is esteemed a man of understanding.

    • For the record, I’m not interested in on-air debates. They don’t serve any real purpose except to entertain the listener, and not always in an edifying way. I’m happy to allow some diversity of opinion on the show, but not so diverse as to openly promote heresy. In other words, to paraphrase a pastor I once knew, I’m not so open-minded that my brain falls out.

      I have the utmost respect for Paul and Phil and the quality of their research. I also respect Chris insofar as he’s raised valid questions about how Christian this “Christian” nation really is. I’m not familiar with his claims regarding the Roman Catholic Church, so I can’t speak to them.

      We won’t all agree on everything, and if we put forward information that is incorrect, especially since we identify ourselves as followers of Jesus the Christ, we must be held accountable.

  7. While we’re running disclaimers, I just wanted to share the following correction.

    During the show, I referred to Joseph Farah as the writer of Merchant of Death, a book over arms dealer Victor Bout.

    That was incorrect. Joseph Farah was not the author of Merchant of Death. It was Douglas Farah.

    I got the two Farahs confused. Sorry for the mistake.

    Paul

    • That would be the first mistake of yours I’m aware of! Ct, I should have mentioned earlier that there were two reasons I didn’t stop Paul and Phil and challenge their criticism of Chris Pinto’s work. First, they do their homework, and I trusted that their assessment of the . If you’ve not read any of their work at the Conspiracy Archive, then please take a little time and do so, and see how well they research and cite their sources.

      Second, I will at some point have Chris Pinto as a guest. I’ve met him and I like him. In fact, I contributed a video segment to one of his forthcoming documentaries. That doesn’t mean he’s correct about everything, and he’ll have a chance to respond, if he chooses.

  8. Joseph Farah, I might add, is not totally lily white.

    The man has endorsed “birther” theories concerning Obama. While much has been made of this issue, I don’t find much substance to the claim that Obama is actually Kenyan. I could be wrong, but a refusal to share all the records does not instantly mean that the Administration is concealing the President’s place of birth.

    These kind of bizarre innuendo seem to only arise when someone on the political landscape is trying to destabilize someone else. Obama is no saint, but it’s important not to get involved what could be little more than dirty fighting between factions. In the end, all that accomplishes is the demoralizing of America (just look at the contest between Clinton and Starr. Perfect illustration.)

  9. You know, one of the risk you run with covering such a convoluted topic is confusing names that are similar.

    Even David Guyatt, who is a giant in the field, periodical has some mistakes, which he is quick to jump on and correct.

    In the newspaper business, we have a saying: “Everyone makes mistakes, we just print ours.”

    I guess the same principle applies here, except in an audio context.

    On the Pinto issue, I will give him this: his documentary over Kinsey was solid. I thought he did a good job pointing out the facts on that one. It’s a very important program to watch, especially when you consider the fact that Miley Cyrus (a girl barely out of her teens) is pole dancing on national television for all to see. Sexual sanity has flown out the window. And with morality jettisoned, a much more stringent and restrictive form of social control must take its place to prevent complete anarchy.

    Maybe that was the plan behind the introduction of radical libertarian ideas and moral anarchism all along: the transition from a free society to one form or another of totalitarianism.

    It’s when we move back in history (18th century going backwards) that Chris Pinto completely loses it and relies too heavily on sources that had an axe to grind with the religious authorities of the day.

  10. Ct,

    “I don’t care too. If they’re Catholic, they are deceived. If you don’t understand the contrast between Catholicism and true Biblical Christianity, then we ought to be having a different conversation.”

    I don’t know if Ct is even reading these post anymore, but I find this particularly disturbing. Catholics accepts the core beliefs of Christianity (the deity of Jesus Christ, the importance of sacraments such as baptism and communion, so on and so forth).

    For over 1700 years, the only Church was the Catholic Church. Those groups misidentified by many as the “underground church” following the “true Apostolic faith” were, as I pointed out, Gnostic heresies. So if Catholics are not Christians, Christ was not speaking the truth when he said that the gates of hell would not prevail against his church.

    Given the fact that Pinto informs Ct’s thinking on various issues, I scratch my head and wonder what exactly is constitutive of “true Biblical Christianity” to the man.

    As a non-Catholic, I saying this petty fighting between denominations, Catholic or Protestant, must stop.

    “Pro. 16:28 – A perverse man
    spreads strife, And a slanderer separates
    intimate friends.”

    Ct quotes this Bible verse, I assume, to rebuke me. But doesn’t this verse apply to Pinto, who is causing strife between Christians of both the Protestant and Catholic stripe?

    Just some food for thought and further research.

1 Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. Tweets that mention View From the Bunker | VFTB Live: Paul & Phillip Collins — The Politics of Dominion -- Topsy.com

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

UA-2941127-7