No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son . . . he hath declared him.
– John’s Gospel, 1:18 KJV
The Dialectic
It has been a thing always present in human consciousness: the existence of polarities. Even in his most primitive state, man has observed things like gravity in distinction from levitation, inhaling from exhaling, hot from cold – and so on.
In the moral realm, man has learned from experience the notions of “good” versus “bad,” “us” versus “them” and “love vs. hate.”
Zoroastrianism was a religion from the time of the ancient Persians which taught the cosmos is one of polarities: the god of light vs. the god of darkness. Zoroastrianism had a great impact on the world because of its philosophical sophistication. It dominated Rome through the Mithras cult and Christianity through Gnosticism (Origen), and various philosophies, such as Manichaeism (Augustine).
In the medieval world, these movements were sublimated in the Church which provided it with theological labels (such as “God” vs. “Satan,” “flesh vs. spirit,” and so on) to explain the universe.
In modern times, movements such as Freemasonry (Albert Pike), Communism (Karl Marx), and other expressions of the dialectic (Hegel) have emerged with many of the same teachings.
Christianity has suffered from its influence because of an unsettling distinction between a seemingly rash and harsh Creator God of the Old Testament (Jehovah) and the New Testament God of love and compassion (Jesus Christ). On the one hand, Christians are taught to embrace the Old Testament as Divine revelation because it was the same God who provided the New Testament; yet such a belief creates a schizophrenic approach to their religion: “How does one reconcile the slit throats of Canaanite babies with those of the Christmas story?” It seems that Herod and Joshua share the same moral status.
I say “it seems” so because Christian apologists have argued that Joshua would not have committed such a heinous act were he not expressly commanded to by God, while Herod did so out of his selfish nature. The genocidal act against the Canaanites was justified because of God’s sovereignty, while Herod’s was one which was at war against God’s sovereignty.
As the Prophet Isaiah (45) tells us, it is only God as our Creator who can undo what He has done. Only He can “kill and make alive” (1 Samuel 2:6). Because God has the power to make whole that which He has broken, only He has the right and the sovereignty to do so. Because He can create the “light,” He can conversely create the darkness (Isaiah 45:7). Man cannot.
A truly Christian theodicy (a defense of the moral character of God) will tell us that the dark times of the “Older” Testament period was a part of the process of bringing mankind into the “light” of the Christian age. This is the teleology of human history. Because of the promise of the Resurrection in Christ, “unfinished justice” will someday be resolved.
But does such a theodicy resolve anything? How did Joshua “know” it was God’s will to slaughter Canaanite babies? And conversely, how would we know today if such a Divine directive would be authentic?
Only if we can say that war has become obsolete in human experience could we escape the possibility of casualties among the innocent.
We are confronting that burning question right now because of the Israeli war in the Gaza against, ostensibly, a select terrorist group called “Hamas.” Because of their guerilla tactics of hiding among the civilian population, Israeli soldiers are indiscriminately killing them, as if they, too, were enemies combatant.
The world has been outraged. It has conveniently forgotten how much an existential threat Israel’s powerful neighbors have always been since the State of Israel was formed in 1948.
Ignorant of this basic historical context, outrage has been felt across American college campuses and has forced our modern Christian apologists who must encounter and respond to that outrage, to do so by concession. The recently assassinated, Charlie Kirk – who in the closing weeks of his life was disavowing his affiliation with “Christian Zionism” – appears to have been silenced because of that “betrayal.”
His long-time friend and colleague – Candace Owens – has taken up the avenging role of the “Kinsman-Redeemer” of Old Testament doctrine on his behalf. She has raised the “hue and cry” that it was the Mossad – the Israeli secret police – which contracted the assassination. We shall see.
The reader will recall that “Christian Zionism” – discussed elsewhere on this website – is fundamentally the belief that Christians must support Israel – right or wrong – because they are “God’s chosen people.”
Regardless, such a doctrine has provided a “blank check” to the Israelis to do as they please in dealing with the Palestinians and to many observers, the slaughter in the Gaza can only be described as a “genocide” by any standard required by international law.
The Frankfurt School
Names in the alt-right movement such as Candace Owens, Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly, Ben Shapiro, and Nick Fuentes are luminaries who will from time-to-time reference the Frankfurt School as the fountainhead of anti-Western subversion. For a more complete analysis of this movement, one could read the prolific works of Dr. Jerome Corsi.
A plethora of Wikipedia sources shows that the Frankfurt School was an early 20th Century Marxist-type “think tank” which recruited and trained an entire generation of future leaders in the Hegelian dialectic. Self-labeled “critical theory,” the dialectic process was employed by these “change agents” in all academic disciplines and social institutions in order to bring an end to the Christian religion, and hence, capitalism:
The Frankfurt School was a group of German-American thinkers associated with the Institute for Social Research that developed critical theory in the 20th century. It combined Marxist analysis with Freudian psychology, cultural critique, and other philosophies to understand and critique modern capitalist societies. Key members included Max Horkheimer, Theodor W. Adorno, and Herbert Marcuse, who fled Nazi Germany and continued their work in the United States at Columbia University.
Google AI Overview
It must be appreciated that these intellectuals – usually Jewish – could not understand why Marxism had failed to prevail in the Christian West, particularly among Anglo-American Protestants. They faulted their Leftist ideologies, such as Marxism, as being too “wooden” and not addressing the psychological underpinnings of the West’s religious and political institutions. Consequently, they felt a change in the religio-ethnic bias of that population was needed using educational and therapeutic methods. This was to be achieved through the use of “critical theory,” a process in play to this day.
“Critical theory” assumes that “oppression” is inherent to the possession of “power.” Weakness equals virtue:
Critical theory is a social and political perspective that challenges existing power structures by analyzing and critiquing society to promote social change. It argues that knowledge and truth are shaped by power dynamics between dominant and oppressed groups, and it seeks to unmask and dismantle ideologies that justify oppression. Key examples of critical theories include Marxism, feminism, and postmodernism, which expose how power operates in communication and other social systems.
- Core principles: Critical theory views society through the lens of power and inequality. It questions the idea of a single, objective truth, asserting that social structures and beliefs are often a product of dominant groups.
- Goal: The ultimate aim is to generate social transformation by identifying and challenging the roots of oppression, whether they are economic, political, or social.
- Historical origin: The term often refers specifically to the work of the Frankfurt School, a group of German-based Marxist social theorists.
- Examples of specific theories:
- Marxism: Focuses on class struggle and economic oppression.
- Feminism: Critiques gender inequality and patriarchal structures.
- Postmodernism: Questions grand narratives and universal truths.
- Application: Critical theory can be applied to various fields, such as education, communication, and the arts, to analyze and challenge existing power dynamics.
- Google AI Source
This view is a perversion of the Christian doctrine of dominion which, in contrast, teaches that personal sacrifice is the prerequisite to wealth and property. “Property” is the right or the power of “exclusion,” which is perversely viewed as “oppression” by these ideologues.
The Doctrine of the Trinity & the Third Principle
Like the ancient Druids, the Christian religion has come to believe and teach the doctrine of the Triad. In contrast to dualistic beliefs and the notion of the “dialectic” cited above, the universe requires three ultimate principles of being. Philosophically, this is necessary because two opposing principles in a dialectic will fling themselves apart unless a third force exists to pull them together.
In Hegel’s dialectic, the “synthesis” cannot constitute this ultimate third principle because the “synthesis” is a result of the interaction between the “thesis” and the “antithesis.” There still must be a third primeval force which draws the two opposing principles together.
It ought to be noted that Judaism in this sense is not biblical, but is rather, Zoroastrian. Kabbalah is Zoroastrianism. That is why Jewish intellectuals are often drawn to these modern dialectical movements.
They refuse to embrace the Trinitarian resolution which teaches the “father and the son” . . . and the Holy Spirit. The reason the Holy Spirit is the third principle (and is not called the “mother” in the Scriptures) is because “motherhood” is really the extension of fatherhood. Unlike the contrary imperative of pagan religion, which teaches the “mother and the son” – the son in this scheme becoming his own father in a continuous incestuous procession – the role of the woman is transformed into a co-equal pneumatic principle that draws all things together: “We are one in the spirit.”
However and unfortunately, “Classical” Christianity – Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, et al – has taken to a different heresy: sublimating the person of the Holy Spirit to an impersonal abstraction. Unwilling to elevate the feminine principle into the godhead, the Holy Spirit – instead of becoming a role model for the woman – becomes merely a supernatural “force” in the universe. In doing so – and this can only be introduced here, pending a future Pesher – the historic churches have posited the feminine role into a different kind of Triad: Christ, the Mother Mary, and the Church. You should see, here, a latent paganism.
As for the dialectic, the Establishment Church has practiced it from the beginning and an argument has been made by scholars of the Historicist School, that Zionism is merely a manipulated antithesis (see the last 30 minutes of this montage) to the Christian thesis in order to bring about a desired world change which returns mankind to “the Mother Church.”
We shall see.
JWS, 11/16/25
