27 March 2016

Beck and his Beast Worship


The linked video runs about 30mins and is painful to sit through but if you're not aware of the rhetoric, mindset and mood then it's a helpful summary. This is pretty much in keeping with the stuff I hear on the radio. I don't turn it on very often but when I turn on Beck it's pretty much the same material that he presents here.

Once again what profoundly disturbs me is not so much Beck himself. He's just a lost soul, caught up worldliness and a false gospel of power. But of the Big Three of Talk Radio (Limbaugh, Hannity and Beck) he's the one really pushing the 'religious' line. He's the one using Christian music, constantly peppering his speech with Biblical language. There's a lot of pronoun confusion... the Church, Mormons, Americans all often thrown together as 'we'. A 'peculiar people'? He doesn't mean what Paul meant. No, Beck is talking about Right-wing Quasi-Christian-ish America and even that is by his definition and use a somewhat nebulous construct.

Any Christian listening to him should immediately recognise that he's not one of us.

But in addition he's spouting a host of heresies related to Mormonism. Apparently many Evangelicals are confused on this point and I've heard not a few argue he's a Christian. Apparently they are unfamiliar with what Mormonism actually is. Seventh-Day Adventism and the Watchtower Society look pretty good when juxtaposed with Mormonism. Of all the popular cults, Mormonism is by far the most alien to Scripture. It's way outside the basic parameters of Biblical Christianity.

Good night I remember while growing up on the West Coast my dad didn't even want me hanging out with Mormon kids or going over to their houses. And there were certainly plenty of them but back then conservative Baptists didn't think Mormons were 'okay', they were viewed as freaks. I remember in High School one of the most attractive girls in school was a Mormon and after getting paired with her on a class project she was even starting to like me. Now I was just a very nominal (more than half-pagan at that point) Evangelical and yet even then I knew there was no way that I could ever get seriously involved with this girl. As gorgeous and pleasant as she was I 'knew' she was something 'other' and that her family (who were Temple Mormons) would basically be a bunch of loons with a basement full of food and wearing some strange underwear. I remember feeling kind of lame trying to convert her form Mormonism while wearing an Iron Maiden t-shirt.

But it's not just Mormonism. His narrative with regard to America is absolutely heretical and anyone Christian/Evangelical embracing Beck needs to be labeled and denounced as heretical.

If you're a professing Christian who likes Glenn Beck, you have embraced heresy. If you promote his teachings, you are a heretic.

Beck explicitly declares the founding documents of the United States to be divinely inspired and authoritative. No one claiming the Bible as their authority can embrace this. At that point they might as well embrace the Book of Mormon along with Beck. The Scriptures are no longer their sole authority but merely one authority among others.

Beck casts the American Revolution in terms of a Holy War, a covenant war blessed and sanctioned by God.

This is completely contrary to the New Testament. The American Revolution was unjustifiable in terms of Scripture and the very notion that God is covenanting with nations, while it does have historical precedent there's not one scrap of evidence in Scripture to support it. You cannot appeal to Old Testament Israel and come up with this idea. This is a woeful misreading and misunderstanding of what Old Covenant Israel was and it's also a repudiation of the teaching of the Apostles. The only Holy Nation in the New Testament is the Kingdom of God, Zion, the Church, the Body of Christ.

While Beck the Mormon and his apostate Evangelical allies may not have a problem with a bunch of Freemasons and Deists like Washington, Franklin, Jefferson and the rest, Biblical Christians do. While these men are certainly figures of historical interest they are not to be venerated. They were sinners and their deeds were not God-honouring or worthy of accolade. Had they lost, they would have gone down in history for what they really were, warmongers, butchers and traitors, white slave-holders who didn't want to pay their taxes. The American Revolution was pure butchery. In terms of percentages it was by some estimations America's deadliest war, dividing families and churches and contrary to the American narrative there were many Christians living in the colonies that utterly repudiated it and denounced it as godless Enlightenment abomination. I have ancestors on both sides of the debate, Carolina Swamp-fighters, United Empire Loyalists and not a few Germans that I think were just trying to stay out of it.

Beck is promoting a rash of historical lies and romantic interpretations of these events. History did not stop in 1789. Even a cursory reading of the events successive to the ratification of the Constitution and certainly the presidencies of Washington, Adams and Jefferson (all Founders) will demonstrate there was no consensus even then about what the Constitution meant or what direction the country was going. They quickly broke into factions and had vastly different visions for the fledgling nation. Beck's uniform narrative is a myth as is the Originalism he and candidates like Cruz promote.

Beck's hagiography of Washington doesn't stand either. He talks about Mt. Vernon. Maybe he should go there once more and perhaps this time he'll notice the key to the Bastille hanging on Washington's wall, a gift from Lafayette. Yes, I know the American and French Revolutions are supposed to be polar opposites.  

No, in fact they were closely related and the instigators of both understood this point all too well. The American Right has tried to muddy the waters by confusing the Reign of Terror with the original goals and inspiration of the French uprising in1789. In addition as I've pointed out repeatedly the Colonists didn't have to deal with the overthrow of the old order... it was across the ocean. In order to succeed the French people had to cast down the monarchy and with it the Roman Catholic entity that was also wedded to the feudal order... hence the later bitterness and retributive spirit.

Had the Revolution broken out in England, the Enlightenment warriors we call Founders would have had to deal with both the Hanoverian king and the Church of England, which itself was a different order than Catholicism in France. The Anglican Church had already been decimated by Henry VIII.

While Cromwell et al. were motivated by a different set of concerns (another point Christo-Americans are confused about) the end result would have probably been the same, a deposed king and a breaking of the ecclesiastical order.

Theologically Beck's American doctrine is both mythological and heretical.

I have to say the more I listen to Glenn Beck the more I am upset by his appropriation of Christian language. I am upset that many ostensibly Christian conservatives that I know are fans of his and that not a few leaders, even in Reformed circles have been happy to associate with him and appear on his programmes. They've shown themselves to be little more than mercenaries for hire and spiritual harlots.

I have to question their Christianity. The fact that they could listen to this day after day and apparently lack the discernment to mark it for what it is makes me question if they really understand the gospel.

Beck is preaching another gospel. He is a classic false teacher making merchandise of his audience and seeks to make a name for himself.

Thankfully his star is fading. For a long time I have believed that he's mentally unstable and apparently he's now got some kind of condition, whether real, psychosomatic or something else. I think he's being handed over to judgment but that's just my take on the matter.

Nevertheless, he preaches and promotes sin, lies and a false gospel of violence. Apparently many of his followers seem to miss the implications of his rhetoric. Those that embrace him seem to be handed over to a form of delusion, a type of judgment from God.

I cannot in good conscience worship with people who stand with this demon-inspired false prophet, for in the end that's what I believe he is.


  1. Something of note:

    A French Revolutionary Historian, David Andress, wrote a book on the Terror. His argument is that the Terror was not as bad as Schama et al. have made it into (namely, a blood orgy), and it was a logical, though horrible, calculation in the midst of paranoia and civil war. Now, the point to note is that he starts his book by comparing deaths between the American and French revolution.

    If his statistics are right, there were more deaths in the American Revolution, self-inflicted American-vs-American, by percentile, than among the French (pre-Vendee, I think, though not sure). What America lacked were intensely concentrated population centers and the systematic, programmatic nature of the Terror. So, according to Andress, the American Revolution was just as bloody (if not more so) than the French, it just doesn't receive the press.


    PS. What's wrong with Iron Maiden!? Their newer song "For the Greater Good of God" (which is more ballad than rough, garage metal) is a sarcastic repudiation of the Crusades and an affirmation(!) of Christ, who's mission is betrayed in such evil. Of course, Dickinson and the band aren't Christians (except for McBrain apparently), but they have solid messages. Who doesn't love Run to the Hills?!

  2. Hi John,

    My understanding is that conservatives are even reticent to refer to what happened in 1776 as a "revolution"; rather, it was a "War of Independence". Naturally, the reasons for this are obvious as stated in your post. They don't want the birth of their nation conflated with what happened in France in 1789 or, even worse, Russia in 1917.

    Furthermore, had the same conditions existed in the colonies as they did in France, the Revolution would have been just as, if not more, bloody and in the aftermath a leader like Robespierre would have emerged to consolidate power and do away with any remnants of the ancien regime that posed a threat to the new order.

    In fact, it could be argued that by not definitively addressing the issue of slavery in 1776, they laid the foundation for the conditions that would exist in 1861 at the outbreak of the Civil War - and, similarly, had Lincoln simply purged all traces of the Confederacy in 1865 (i.e. line up their leaders against the wall instead of granting them amnesty and even allowing them to run for political office), we would have never needed a Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s.

    But I suppose that's for another discussion.

    By the way, did you get my e-mail re: Reagan at Bitburg Cemetery?

  3. I prefer 1776 Rebellion.

    Yeah I got the email today. Feel free to post comments on that article. To answer the one question, no I didn't really see much in the way of Nazi stuff in the USAF. I can only think of maybe one or two guys who seemed to maybe be into it. The military is so diverse (I'm speaking 20 years ago). It's weird there's Black Panther types, Neo-Confederates, Goth/Punk types that take on a totally different persona after hours. It's really strange. I think the USAF is also different than what you'll encounter in the other branches, certainly the Navy and Marines. They live in different and much more compact worlds.

    I don't know how it is now but with all that diversity, it really wasn't very harmonious. There was a lot of racial tensions, cliques, the barracks were pretty tense at times. There would have been downright brawls except for the fact that no one wants to go to jail. In the military you are owned and if you mess up at home or with your bills or pretty much anything your work supervisors can take over and micromanage your life. You are literally a slave.

    The officer corps is of course a totally different world. Robert Kaplan has written about Neo- or Revived Confederate ideals in the military... honour, chivalry that sort of thing.

    I guess the thing is with the Third Reich and all that is... a lot of American Nationalists don't realise how close they are to it, how it would only take a little nudge and they could transition to that. It's not something people like to contemplate but I've become more convinced of it than ever.

    Could it ever happen here? People have been asking that since after the war. In school we had to watch 'The Eye of the Storm' the film about the teacher who conducted an experiment on her students and demonstrated how quickly people could be swayed into hate and violence.

    That film aside, I have no doubts at all that it could happen here, none whatsoever.