What's new
Christian Community Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate fully in the fellowship here, including adding your own topics and posts, as well as connecting with other members through your own private inbox!

Patel & Bongino Tease New 'Russiagate' Evidence In 'Wave Of Transparency' - Yet Insist Jeffrey Epstein Killed Himself

TCC

Well-known

FBI Director Kash Patel and Deputy Director Dan Bongino sat down for a wide-ranging interview with Fox News on Sunday, where the pair hinted at a "wave of transparency" on the horizon over weaponization of the DOJ by the Biden and Obama administrations.

"You asked in the beginning how the FBI was weaponized," Patel told host Maria Bartiromo. "Well, the FBI hijacked the constitutional responsibility of the Department of Justice and the Attorney General, and James Comey and others specifically decided what cases to prosecute and not prosecute. Don't believe me? Go to the videotape in the Hillary Clinton investigation."

"We don't decide prosecutions, and neither does any agent or intel analyst. We have great partners under Attorney General [Pam] Bondi. We work with them and discuss the matter with them, but the prosecutorial decision is with them," Patel continued.

No rush on those indictments and pre-dawn raids, guys.

. . . . .

Interesting article that likely has in it things many might be thinking about or asking questions about. What I find of particular interest in this situation is: Why is the emphasis (from two challenge the narrative power hitters) on insisting Epstein killed himself? Is not the greater story even if that is the case: "Hey, how is it with all the anomalies that Epstein was able to kill himself?" Who is behind that? Why did THAT happen. But instead, its just on sending people in any other direction but that one. Seeming to be upstanding "There is no there, there. I have seen the file." Instead of leveling with the people. Something that was the trade mark of what made Bongino a name. Without that he is just a wind bag. So where did Dan go? lol. Is the moral of the story: America has been reduced to an Instagram Account and Selfie Moment?

From two power house narrative challengers, big chese Kash and Bongino become affeminat morally? Is this a diabolical way to feminize tough guys? lol. ? Did the matrix transgender these two? Like, lol, what just happened?

The other possibility might be that there is something to this whole thing that Dan and Kasth are disguising. That is a possibility. Like maybe a stunt like this would make sense if Ebstein is actually not really dead. THAT would make sense. Or, they are hot on the trail of those who killed Epstein. And its an optic to distract. Either of those could be true. But from what we have seen, when in power, the testosterone levels seem to alter. We have seen that. And that is what this appears to be MORE than 2 other very remote possibilities.

If Dan and Kash were neutralized, then what does that mean? They are now globlaists selling out America? Hagelian Dialectic (HD) is all there is? As this forum knows, I'm not a great fan of that. But in this case, it does kind of beg that question...lol. Or at least provide some level of sensitivity toward the HD view. Blessings.
 

FBI Director Kash Patel and Deputy Director Dan Bongino sat down for a wide-ranging interview with Fox News on Sunday, where the pair hinted at a "wave of transparency" on the horizon over weaponization of the DOJ by the Biden and Obama administrations.

"You asked in the beginning how the FBI was weaponized," Patel told host Maria Bartiromo. "Well, the FBI hijacked the constitutional responsibility of the Department of Justice and the Attorney General, and James Comey and others specifically decided what cases to prosecute and not prosecute. Don't believe me? Go to the videotape in the Hillary Clinton investigation."

"We don't decide prosecutions, and neither does any agent or intel analyst. We have great partners under Attorney General [Pam] Bondi. We work with them and discuss the matter with them, but the prosecutorial decision is with them," Patel continued.

No rush on those indictments and pre-dawn raids, guys.

. . . . .

Interesting article that likely has in it things many might be thinking about or asking questions about. What I find of particular interest in this situation is: Why is the emphasis (from two challenge the narrative power hitters) on insisting Epstein killed himself? Is not the greater story even if that is the case: "Hey, how is it with all the anomalies that Epstein was able to kill himself?" Who is behind that? Why did THAT happen. But instead, its just on sending people in any other direction but that one. Seeming to be upstanding "There is no there, there. I have seen the file." Instead of leveling with the people. Something that was the trade mark of what made Bongino a name. Without that he is just a wind bag. So where did Dan go? lol. Is the moral of the story: America has been reduced to an Instagram Account and Selfie Moment?

From two power house narrative challengers, big chese Kash and Bongino become affeminat morally? Is this a diabolical way to feminize tough guys? lol. ? Did the matrix transgender these two? Like, lol, what just happened?

The other possibility might be that there is something to this whole thing that Dan and Kasth are disguising. That is a possibility. Like maybe a stunt like this would make sense if Ebstein is actually not really dead. THAT would make sense. Or, they are hot on the trail of those who killed Epstein. And its an optic to distract. Either of those could be true. But from what we have seen, when in power, the testosterone levels seem to alter. We have seen that. And that is what this appears to be MORE than 2 other very remote possibilities.

If Dan and Kash were neutralized, then what does that mean? They are now globlaists selling out America? Hagelian Dialectic (HD) is all there is? As this forum knows, I'm not a great fan of that. But in this case, it does kind of beg that question...lol. Or at least provide some level of sensitivity toward the HD view. Blessings.
Or Bongino is leveling with the people. And Epstein really did kill himself. Dan says he has seen the tape and it clearly shows no outside interference with this man and he says vwill release the tape shortly once they are 100% sure there is no more evidence to be lifted from it.

And, respectfully, what does the Hegelian dialectic have to do with anything to do with these two men? In other words, what is the thesis and what is the antithesis you see, brother? And then what is the synthesis you are suspecting?
 
Or Bongino is leveling with the people. And Epstein really did kill himself. Dan says he has seen the tape and it clearly shows no outside interference with this man and he says vwill release the tape shortly once they are 100% sure there is no more evidence to be lifted from it.

And, respectfully, what does the Hegelian dialectic have to do with anything to do with these two men? In other words, what is the thesis and what is the antithesis you see, brother? And then what is the synthesis you are suspecting?
Thanks for asking pastor. On its face, my concerns come from regognition of trends. This trend is two men, Dan and Kash, that have been extremely articulate and in the lime light doing so, of inproriates in government. Kash had first hand experience of having media contentions against him. I am encouraged to hear that @Batman trust their discernment (Dan and Kash). But because of my views on Trump, I do tend to be overly critical of his administration. As a means of not falling prey to my perhaps own grandiose views.

Since both Dan and Kash are very articulate and very aware of subtly (Kash was very active in countering Russia Gate for example), what concerns me is both Dan and Kash omitting circumstances known at the time of Epstien's murder. As a refresher from Wikipedia:

After initially expressing suspicion, Attorney General William Barr described Epstein's death as "a perfect storm of screw-ups". Both the FBI and the Department of Justice's Inspector General conducted investigations into the circumstances of his death. The guards on duty were later charged with multiple counts of record falsification.[1] Many public figures accused the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) of negligence; several lawmakers called for reforms to the federal prison system. In response, Barr removed the Bureau's director.

Due to violations of normal jail procedures on the night of Epstein's death,[note 1] the malfunction of two cameras in front of his cell, and his claims to have compromising information about powerful figures, his death generated speculation and conspiracy theories about the possibility that he was murdered.[4][5] Other theories claimed his death was feigned. In November 2019, the contested nature of his death spawned the "Epstein didn't kill himself" meme. Public opinion polls suggest that only a small percentage of Americans believe that Epstein died by suicide; one such poll saw 16% of respondents saying they believed Epstein died by suicide, 45% believing he was murdered, and 39% being unsure.[6]

Death
When Epstein was placed in the Security Housing Unit (SHU), the jail informed the Justice Department that he would have a cellmate and that a guard would look into the cell every 30 minutes. These procedures were not followed on the night he died.[28] On August 9, Epstein's cellmate was transferred, and no replacement was brought in. The evening of his death, Epstein met with his lawyers, who described him as "upbeat" before being escorted back to the SHU at 7:49 p.m. by guard Tova Noel.[25] CCTV footage shows that the two guards failed to perform the required institutional count at 10:00 p.m. and recorded Noel briefly walking by Epstein's cell at 10:30 p.m., the last time the guards entered the tier where his cell was located.[29] Through the night, in violation of the jail's normal procedure, Epstein was not checked every 30 minutes.[28] The two guards assigned to check his cell overnight, Noel and Michael Thomas, fell asleep at their desk[note 4] for about three hours and later falsified related records.[30][31] Two cameras in front of Epstein's cell also malfunctioned that night.[32] Another camera had footage that was "unusable".[32]

Controversy
Epstein's death was the first death ruled a suicide at the MCC in 14 years. Michael Baden and 60 Minutes questioned whether Epstein, who was almost 6 ft (1.8 m) tall and weighed 185 pounds (84 kg), could have been able to hang himself from the lower bunk. Photos taken after the death also show bottles and medicine standing upright on the top bunk.[25] Baden also questioned why Epstein did not use other materials available in his cell as a ligature, such as wires and tubing from a sleep apnea machine, which were stronger and longer.[25]

. . . . .

To me, in contrast to the above, to just say "There is no there there" in light of even attorney general suspicion initially just seems like somehow we are orchestrated in drumming down. Is it possible all those above mentioned things occured in the highest profile case and watch in the country? I suppose. Sure. But normally when that much drama surrounding events is present on such a high watch person, it reasonably opens up proportionate concerns. I think what might have been more helpful of Dan and Kash would be to address those known "incossitencies" which all occured together, and how they are explained away when looking at "the file." But that is not even mentioned. Its ignored.

So after a high profile case falls into a high profile storm of perfect errors meets, "there is no there there," that just has potential ingredients of addressing America from a "lets dumb them down" posture. At least it could be seen as such. Am I wrong? In this way it is kind of like being treated light idiots. In a similar way Trump wanted Calfiornia to fawn over him as a rescuer of flowing water from the North that never made it to the South nor to areas affected by California fires. Yet, from the posturing, we would never know that. We would have to go out of our way to even know there was no "there there" either. So pastor, I am just saying that these uses of media could qualify as suspected gaslighting...and not as much as "conspiracy theory."

Now there may be a perfectly good explanation of Trump and the Northern waters. But absolutely no one has that evaluation. To me, it would just be more respectful to the nation for Dan and Kash (in light of the great issues we have all been through together over the past decade) to speak to the anomalies (at least in part) rather than just say they know better and truth them. We have seen enough of that. So in and of itself it does not mean that Dan and Kash are compromised. But in a "compromise rich" political climate the nation is in, how does it escapse two very capable men from noticing their comments do not heal the ever expanding "compromise rich" environment we are all experiencing in the country together? And since they are wiser than the average Joe, and don't operate from what could have been reasonable wisdom to do so, it would just seem odd and somewhat compromising on its face.

Again, these are the places I force myself to hold my self views accountable since they are not the mainstream views of evangelical eschatology. Granted, an unnecessary psychosis could emerge in so doing all of that. And may all be for not. But where they might come in handy (even if subtle notice may have merit for other reasons that are valid to even the extent of reasonably dismissing my own eschatological views), is perhaps they could provide fodder to consider oddities in Trump Admin use of media. And highlight something of important but not necessarily related to anything I may be thinking entirely.

. . . . .

Sorry for the long post. But I am doing my best to show nuance here. The concern of those who hold Hagelian Dialectic (HD) views today are not my views. In fact, I believe I have been the most outspoken against HD on our forum. Because to me HD the way it is used in the watcher world is a stretch...and could suragate as an all seeing eye sense about itself too. For that reason, I reject standard HD views as they relate to escatology. But even so, as great an advisary to those views as I am, I do so with the most open consideration I would hope this too would be considered to come also from the HD side concerning views somewhat considerable in arenas of eschatology I might traffic in (the golden rule). In the standard HD view, they believe that all is theater. And its just globlalism or Luciferian Light that brings us to the tribuation. And there is no other path. Therefore all government is in cahoots with some grand wizard. So in that view, our worst case scenario of HD with Dan and Kash is that once they get into power, they fall under the spell of the grand wizard of HD that leads us to the tribulation. They no longer have their own views, but become puppets of theater that can only have one outcome according to the HD view. Global control that brings on the tribulation.

Again though, this is not my view. I believe there are factions. There are good faith players. Some of these won't even be believers. Maybe most wont. So my contrast to HD is massive. But when I see two capabable men bring ways of expressing America through media that seem very much like being under an HD spell to me, it does cause me concern to wonder. Now it could be just that Dan and Kash, in their mature insights, don't equally have ways to best discern how to inform the public. That is a given, amen. But the battle those two men have been fighting have exactly to do with how the optics in America have clearly all been a long the lines of America being gaslit all over the place. It would just seem reasonable that if Dan and Kash are that entrenched in that mode and species of warfare on behalf of America, they themselves would come across distinctly different from that which they profess to oppose. And maybe there is no "there there." But the level of concern some people have over the way this has been conveyed by Dan and Kash, to me, is not unreasonable to consider. Given the nature of the very warfare for our country these two men profess to be about.

. . . . .

At the end of the day, over time we will get a sense. In part I make a loud enough outcry here as a counter-intuitive literary device to hopefully turn out, by contrast, to be wrong. In that sense, here, in this thread, I would represent a good-faith concern on behalf of those who hold the HD tribulaiton view. And I myself partner to argue on their behalf even though overall I do not subscribe to their charactorization of eschatology. Given "them" the benefit of the doubt along the way. In honesty and sincere good faith. But also, as a literary device function, demonstrate more so my own eschatological views as having more weight. In part, because of the sheer honesty by which I pursue to challenge my own views and and willing to go into the deepest waters with the HD view aligned brethren. In this way, I employ to exhaust reasonable consideration from eschatological view perspectives I don't hold. As a good faith gesture for those who hold the HD view. Giving every consideration for their view to make its case. And doing that, as a means of investigating my own convictions. Even to the point of placing my own views to near death exposure if necessary to remain as honestly neutral as one might be. Which I would hope from the HD view side to do. So far, it does not seem the HD view perspective would do the same. Nor would they have to. But any sense in their hopefully doing so, would, in my estimation, be encouraged by, I would (stated like Yoda for fun). But I understand in doing that, wow, that is a ton of work to process like that. Perhaps not all members of the body need to travel those roads, amen. But I would just hope those on the forefront might. Not that I am holding my breath. lol. It probably will never happen. But that is not something I can control. But what I can do is get as honestly close to seeing how they see (in genuine practical ways) so as to be able to most genuinely consider what in their views might have merit.

We live in a day and age where kind of quite the opposite in communication style is more of the pop-culture trend type. To TRIPPLE down on our own convitions. Tripplying down on those convictions not ours might seem to be ridiculous. Admittedly. But it is "a" way to understand with them. Since my eschatology does differ significantly in places, as much as it might be on me, lets say, to have a burden of proof. It would equally be on me I believe as much to honestly seek out the budens of proof of others where in my own estimates might be lacking. Because for me its not the best proof that can likely provide the best end time hermeneutic. But rather the John 15:15 principle in operation that becomes that which would likely be providing the better part. And likely serve as some form of end time hermeneutic. A rather nuanced and complex one. But hopefully, that, in the sense of end resulting in deeper simplicity...I would hope. lol. That probably does not make a whole lot of sense. But just would seem to have to go with the territory if one, life myself, would on the regular see rather differently. Taking the mantle of proofing as more a John 15:15 genuine exercise than what proof a, b, or c, conviction might be discoverable. And in that practice, hopefully like in the first century, so in perhaps the last. To see more or less what the Father is doing. Blessings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hol
Thank you for your reply, Teren. But I don't understand the way the term Hegelian dialectic is being used. A dialectic is a method by which opposing points of view are discussed with a view to resolving them. Hegel (who incidentally rarely characterized his method as dialectical, rather referring to it as speculative philosophy) simply created a technique that has been somewhat incorrectly characterized as thesis, antithesis and synthesis. But basically Hegel suggested that any original idea (thesis) is speculative and contains internal inconsistencies and contradictions; thus it must be subjected to an examination to reveal those contradictions by the application of an opposing view (antithesis). Then the contradictions can be resolved, resulting in a comprehensive and complete philosophical concept being arrived at (synthesis). I apologize that I have put it so crudely, but it gives a rough overview of Hegel's dialectic method at work.

As a result of the above, it is clear that Hegel's method is neutral on any subject, merely describing a process through which a philosophical idea can be examined, corrected, refined and brought to a useful and comprehensive conclusion. It is a method, not a position or a concept or a point of view. So, I am still struggling to see how the Hegelian Dialectic is being viewed as a specific position or philosophical stance in the subject areas we have been discussing. :shrug:
 
I can see that their tone is condescending.

What I don’t understand is why not release the list of names in the Visitors Log?
Hi Holly. lol. Wow...as noted below I don't think I heard you at all. You meant the prison visitor log. I took that into the next county. However, It might be helpful in respect to another current issue on all of this--Why Kash has not released the Epstein black book names -- or that kind of Island visitor log. Wow...lol...I really got lost on that one dear sister. -- So a quick answer to you quote in "really hearing you," would be, instead other below...Amen!!!" And this is totally to the point I am making. So we don't even bring that stuff up? It may or may not be a factor. But it is totally a long the lines, amen, of what I am thinking about how Dan and Kash have chosen to address the people.. Bleessing...and now...my answer if I was hearing you wondering why the black book names have not been mentioned..." :)

I hear what you are saying Holly. It seems Joe Rogan has taken quite an issue with Dan and Kash for this too. This might sound a bit like I have a split personality lol. So I will try and provide some details with this. But withholding the names for right now I think is actually wise. Not because of 5-D chess or the sense that it could mean this or that.

Overall, what I believe to going on with us in the USA is a literal warfare between America and globlalism. And up to this point, globalism has been winning. Over decades they have creeped into every source of authority and influence in the country. To the extent it has led the country likely for several generations. What we think we are today, is largely, I believe, globalistic influence in us. Just look at TikTok as an example of where "woke" (as a mere part of what I percieve to be this agenda) has taken us internally.

Having said that, I understand why certain things can't or should not be done right now. There is so so much to do if America is to be in a safe enough zone away from current globalist influence as well as keeping it at bay from reentry decades into the future. So very much. I believe it is so entrenched in our culture, it is really not about who is president or even how the entire presidential admin term can fix things. I believe it is far beyond that.

The way I see it is to use an analogy of a small town (as a rep of America). If the small town police dept, fire dept, education dept, court system, libraries, military divisions, entertainment, media etc are all invaded by the Mafia and to some great exent owned and ran by the Mafia, what would happen in that town if a list of names was disclosed about bad players? That would get justice according to how the Mafia wants to public to swallow it. And nothing would change that because the entire system is broken. Not just a few departments or divisions.

So on that note, unless you replace or repopulate all those departments and economic sectors, what we do in a normal system can't really be done in the matrix. For that reason, the time to read the names is when you can actually do enough with that to matter. To read the names prior, to me, is to assign thousands of chaperone's to cake walk them to a wrist slap. And by so doing, instill in the culture deeper senses of nihilism, which works very well for a Mafia controlled reality.

. . . . .

So for Kash to say he will release the names on day one, I would see is a token vote of confidence for the people to consider him. I believe he ran on the notion to be about doing that sort of thing. For Kash to have this position is good. For him to say he will release it on day 1 is political speak for "It is very important." But it would not likely mean he would do it on day 1. But would have that kind priority concerning it. This could look like a cheesy bid for office. It's unfortunate we live in culture where it is easy to see things as meaningless because Kash did not do anything on day 1. Like he said.

I believe the political world is aware of this kind of condition existing. That they have to say stuff like that in order to affirm their level of position on a matter. Which is I believe a real position. What they can't say is: "But it will take longer than that because there is too much to fix first." Because to say that implies one might be weak, looking for excuses, and just saying things to get elected never really being about any of it. I believe that is a real and living unfortunate condition in our day.

I also believe that we will get the names. And a host of other things. In fact, my perspective is that we will be blown away how the direction of America goes. I truly believe that. I could be wrong or mistaken. But at the core of it, that is the trajectory I would understand to be the most relevant potential. How we get there though is another thing. It would seem if we get there we get there through a whole host of time, and quite an uphill slow motion battle. How slow? If America is to experience a genuine turnaround high points could be as soon as the midterms. Or it might even take into a presidency after 47's current admin run. In theory on that, to me, it could take as long as until 2028 to start seeing actual symptoms of genuine change. If America goes in that direction.

Having said that, I believe we can actually likely see some strong measure of a downpayment of that sort of thing around Summer/Fall 2026. Guessing dates is not overly helpful. I realize. However, what can be tentatively helping in estimates, is more or less to have clearity of where along the timeline of things we might actually be. I believe this sober approach offsets the day to day armchair quarterbacking of: "Nothing has changed. Its the same system, new faces." We don't want to live in a constant state of being "had." But I don't believe those approaches are actually valid in our current climate. I would even go as far as to say that "being had" to look more like thinking along the lines of same ol same ol. Now for my other personality...

. . . . .

So i have stated what my core deep conviction is. But the way I do conviction when it is obviously hook-line-and-sinker different than how the vast evangelical landscape would see eschatology go and the things to keep an eye on for that (those in evangelicalism that are open to end time considerations), is I have to hold myself accountable in that because there is no camp or group for that. The best way I would think to do that would be to give its greatest contrast full access and exposure to it with everything it has. Not for the sake to convince others. And not for the sake of using the sphere to sharpen my own arguments. That is not holding my view accountable at its most core need for that. Instead, I find best met need in honestly considering how dreadfully wrong I might be. And for that honest conversation to occur within my own heart (aside from whatever else others are thinking or perceiving), is to become as much a genuine thinker in line with those most contrary to my view as possible. Otherwise I won't seriously consider what a "steel man" argument in opposition to my perspective might actually look like.

Our tendencies as temporal creatures, especially in our modern climate, is to hold very secularly to our convictions less we weaken them. On the core tenants of the faith I believe that is necessary. But even there there comes a point where what our convictions are about Christ, and the Trinity, about the virgin birth and resurrection etc don't need to be protected as much within ourselves. Because our level of certainty transcends argument. Or at least I believe it could, or might, or should. Although that is not a perfect analogy because Christ and the gospel would never be undone in me, there by the grace of God go I. But being able to look deeply at how other brief systems see what they see is really not all that much of a threat in order to get to understand where others are coming from. And in most cases, might provide advantage. Not over others. But advantage for me to see clearly in being able to have more eye meets eye discourse with certain perspectives.

So all in all, I would say my convictions about eschatology are not as settled as the gospel, and since that is the case, in case the views of others are more accurate, I would want to not just see that but experience that genuinely with them. To see if it is more valid. But also along the way to understand how better to discuss those things. And since I don't know the end of it, that seems to be a reasonable and hopefully honorable approach. But I bring all this up to say that even though I believe America goes a certain way, I consider it good faith to have every doubt in the world Dan and Kash might be selling out on some level. Because that is how they themselves are coming across. To not be open to that possibility (in contrast to my eschatology), I believe would not be seriously holding my own views accountable.

What has occurred unfortunatley in the American Reformed world is "Orthodoxy as Performing art." And increasingly over time our culture is watching this unravel. Where being a poser = being gunuine. And they have gotten so stylized with their own belief system they seemingly have been trading reality for the image of reality along the way. Finding every means known to man to secure it. In contrast to coming out of that sinkhole, I believe a better way to affirm conviction is allowing it to be exposed to all the raw elements possible that could, if reasonable, erode it. And in fact, to be about that very thing even myself. Because what is true about something is true. It will stand the test.

I have no idea where Dan and Kash are going. I hope they learn from this and do a better job of how they understand public office communication works in our age. They may never get there though if their honeymoon phase is already questionable in society. The odds don't look good there...lol. But I think where the real arguments are in all of that is not whether the FBI and the DOJ can deliver. As much as it is keeping an eye on the ball of those things that could upstage that to eventually likely bring it to form. Blessings.
 
Thank you for your reply, Teren. But I don't understand the way the term Hegelian dialectic is being used. A dialectic is a method by which opposing points of view are discussed with a view to resolving them. Hegel (who incidentally rarely characterized his method as dialectical, rather referring to it as speculative philosophy) simply created a technique that has been somewhat incorrectly characterized as thesis, antithesis and synthesis. But basically Hegel suggested that any original idea (thesis) is speculative and contains internal inconsistencies and contradictions; thus it must be subjected to an examination to reveal those contradictions by the application of an opposing view (antithesis). Then the contradictions can be resolved, resulting in a comprehensive and complete philosophical concept being arrived at (synthesis). I apologize that I have put it so crudely, but it gives a rough overview of Hegel's dialectic method at work.

Asva result of the above, it is clear that Hegel's method is neutral on any subject, merely describing a process through which a philosophical idea can be examined, corrected, refined and brought to a useful and comprehensive conclusion. It is a method, not a position or a concept or a point of view. So, I am still struggling to see how the Hegelian Dialectic is being viewed as a specific position or philosophical stance in the subject areas we have been discussing. :shrug:
Amen pastor. And well you should. I want that T-shirt :) You bring up I believe the core issue. I don't see it crude at all. It is the actual position. Amen.

Hagelian Dialectic (HD) had become quite a ground swell discussion at JD Farags forum about 2 to 3 years ago or so. And the point of excellence you make here is something, in hearing all the tallk about HD, I came to realize too back then. I asked around a bit. Did some research, and asked this question at JDF: "Was not Hagel's understanding of HD his awareness of how things happen more than some way to re-engineer political science (or perhaps better said, add to its formation--I reckon many see Maichivelli as the political science godfather of sorts...though for me it would be more leaning toward Cyrus). Still I believe political science did not become a University major unti the 1800s.

But pastor your point is well taken. HD = observing how reality works. So that is the question I had a few years ago about all of that. Why are we using it in a way to expresses manipulative government when it is actually how government works? I can completely appreciate that seeing things this way would raise the question: "So who is using it in the astroturf or manipulative sense?" I would say Good Fight Ministries (which has a significant presence on YouTube). I have seen Tom Hughes (which I consider one of the more open minded pastors in the Calvery Chapel watcher deminotion), use it in the sense of it being manipulation of government. Even equating it to how it can be understood as a filter or end time hermeneutic. JD Farag is probably the most forward about using it in this way.

At the moment, it is not a super huge watcher perspective, to use HD as a way to explain end times. But to me, a belwhether indicator on some level is how Tom Hughes sees things. If Tom Hughes uses concepts it is because of what he sees as rising discussion points within the watcher world that he's found to be worthy of focus and consideration. Since Tom is for me the level headed edge of what could be end time mania, for me, Tom represents a random sample of what is percolating within the Calvery Chapel end time view perspectives. And Tom, seldomly, has used HD in this sense:

That government fabricate how the political process works in order to engineer a self fulfilling prophecy like. A move came out a while ago called "Wag the Dog." It was about how politics uses what appears to be grass roots ground swell political interests in order to drive an agenda prescribed in advance. For example, gun laws. For the sake of brevity, I'd ask permission to just go with this analogy for a moment. If you want stronger gun laws, it is beneficial to highlight how often gun violence occurs. If it is not occuring fast enough, cause them. Introduce mass shooting into society so we can have a bill ready in Congress to address it. Most would not believe society has gotten that bad. For the record I do believe there is a correlation to school shootings as a prefabricated enforced medium to give gravitas to bills against guns. I realize this is an obsurd position. But I use it for its abnoxious overture to help provide example.

Another one could be COVID. How do you make a culture more tame? Fake a pandemic. So like in that sense the:

Thesis: People are free to not take vaccines
Antithesis: Challenge that by mandating employedment requiring vaccines
Synthesis: A society that believes taking vaccines in order to stay employed is reasonable.

So that would be like a somewhat crude example of how HD today can be used as a political science tool to manipulate outcome.

. . . . .

HOW DO I MEAN IT

The premise of HD in eschatology has become to mean this: There is no left or right. We are a uniparty controlled by one overaching political entity that merely uses thesis and anti-thesis in the left/right paradigm to pretend there is an organic political process and resulting synthesis. At this point, another example of using HD to manipulate outcome would be to use electronic voting systems that can be hacked for outcome. If people don't know enough about the science, it would seem that electronic voting systems are capturing realtime votes. But it has been in the news for several years that voting systems (like countries that are Banana Republics) provide the veneer of voting but control it by producing the vote the government (not the people) want.

But back to HD as an end time hermeneutic. As far as I can tell, it looks something like this:

  • We know the world will go into a tribuation
  • We know that government during the tribulation will trend toward a one world government
  • Since the left and right are a uniparty, then this will lead to a one world government
  • Therefore there is only one outcome. Our government will lead us into a one world government
  • That being true, what we are witnessing today is merely theater that will inevitably end us up into a one world government

I believe that is the thinking. So how might HD look like that fits into Dan and Kash? Well, arguably from my standpoint it does not. But to me what it does display is kind of its niighbor: Influence to confirm. To me it just seems like Dan and Kash are conforming to some narrative they were so against. So in that sense, it would appear that Dan and Kash talk a good game, but at the end of the day they are owned by a uniparty that only pretends to have thesis and anthithesis.

IF THAT WERE TRUE
So if that were true, to answer your question, here is what the HD concern would suggest:

  • Dan and Kash talk about how they are for the people and justice
  • They get into office and adopt a narrative they seem to have challenged in the past
  • Therefore they become "controlled" oppostion
  • They can appear to be for the people while promising this or that but at the end of the day are there just to passify those who need a sense of justice
  • The idea behind that is that if the uniparty can pretend to provide anti-uniparty heroes like Dan and Kash, then the thinking goes: Through Dan and Kash we can capture the America liberty spirit, writte the story of how we (the uniparty) want people to think about something, and buy the Dan and Kash outcome.

So all in all, the idea of Dan and Kash in HD theory would be that they pretend to be for liberty but will only bring us to a way of thinking within the uniparty that aligns with feined liberty. Think about this in the Micky Mouse Club syndrome (you may see this differently, but is a rather loud theory):

  • Get innocent kids to present as the Mickey Mouse club
  • As they grow older have them experience more risque things but still keep them "acceptably moral"
  • As they becoming men and women, have them become the role models of sensual
  • As they progress in the sensual have them adopt wokeness and far left risque idealogy

So by cultivating people over time, by walking a culture through the evolution of those admired, Disney seemingly has presented an evolution arc serving as a role model. The entire arc becomes the traecotry of the role they model. Sure, start out innocent. Then get more risque. Then just a little more. Then become Katty Perry/Taylor Swift etc. The same role model arc can be seen as well in how Disney introduces the occult into the lives of children at an early age. Innocently enjoy Harry Potter. Later in life become a witch. So I am just trying to describe here the arc of role model in view is in a sense HD.

  • Thesis: Young and innocent
  • Atnithesis: You can become risque
  • Synthesis: That is a normal part of growth

And to some extent it is a normal part of growth in many parts of the world for teens to become rebellious etc. There is Truth behind certain levels of maturity and the experiences we have accordingly. But in this sense with Disney, is they have seemed to mirror that in order to fabricate what looks organic to be a pied Piper of sorts in how to think about evolving as a person. If that makes sense?

So that is not to say that Dan and Kash were in on it from the beginning. I used the Disney model to demonstrate using role models as an arc to tell a culture a story about themselves as a way to change thesis and bring antithesis. A society of Vegan, 15 minute city dwellers, who eat bugs, don't own anything, and believe it is in respect to honoring climate, and the forces of nature. Oh yeah, and to honor the forces of nature within us that determine what sex we should be. So all of that are story arcs that bring about an evolutionary result of how a uniparty wants to govern over a people. And how to help people think about themselves in that process.

In this sense, if Dan and Kash would be used by a form of story arc HD, they are two perfect guys to model how heroes grow. And what they grow into. So HD in the Dan and Kash world could be this: Let the uniparty dumb them down before the public, training the public to believe that good little heroes come to their uniparty senses. The fear in those who hold the HD as an eschatolgolical hermeneutic is how all roads lead to Rome. And how the right has been coopted by globalism or the unity party.

So pastor it is in that way I would try and empathisize with those who see that the only outcome for our world is a one world system. And that we are just witnessing how through mind control we are getting there. Do I believe that is the way eschatology goes? No. Instead I believe eschatology has nationalism overpower globalism organically. Not through controlled opposition. But to witness the testimony of God in the closing hours of the age of grace.

So, my eschatology suggests that we are not headed toward a one world government. This typically flies in the face of seeing we have to become a one world government because the Bible tells us that is what happens in the tribulation. The difference there for me is: I agree that occurs in the tribulation. But not in the age of grace. Most in evangelicalism would see that in order to be in a one world system we have to be brought into it in order for it to exist in the tribulation. I don't believe that is accurte.

. . . . .

I hope the above does answer your question. It's not ulitmatley one I subscribe to (that I believe Dan and Kash are part of or will ulitmately be affect by an end time HD occurance). But I do consider the potential. One of the reasons I ultimately would not is something along entirely different lines. An orientation of concern as to how gnosticism does seem to have its own storyline. And Hegel a place in all of that. One theme I typically counter HD as an end time filter is the notion of Hegel and his relation to gnosticism. So for those that hold to HD as an hermeneutic eschatolically, I believe is to permit gnostic thought into hermeneutics. This of course is a whole other range of issues...lol. But likely one I don't find myself in. Nor do I find myself in how even understanding Hegel as a gnostic helps break free outside other philosphical thought as to the direction of world nations today (in eschatology or other). The way in which the following channel thinks was largely how I was looking at things in 2017...although not nearly as informed. Had I not the eschatology view I do, I would likely be more in line with this channel. It does some fascinating deep dives. But ultimately it too is looking through an end time prism I don't ascribe to either. But if interested, these are really fascinating scholarly observations of where poliical science is headed today. Again, not my view. But that does not mean there is no helpful insights provided. That would be for sure. If this channel is outside the scope of this forum for its good, please remove the link. It is one particular approach of the overall HD eschatological view from a far more scholarly perspective than is typically entertained in eschatology (as far as I can tell). But in my estimation, a worthy table disusssion (one I really don't have time for...lol). But some really great observations. I have also included a link to their website for quick overview to detect if it is reasonable to leave up.

I hope this has been helpful in answering your question pastor. I'm trying. Again, at the end of the day I tend to agree with your position that our use today of HD is way over the top. But I give a nod to it because there are those associated to our forum that are influenced in the HD as a hermeneutic tradition. Perhaps my own version of role modeling our way out of that quagmire. Blessings.

YouTube channel and Hegel

Website

. . . . .

PS - Duh, note to self. Hegel is spelled with 0 "a's" Teren. :) Noted. I'll do better :p
 
So all in all, the idea of Dan and Kash in HD theory would be that they pretend to be for liberty but will only bring us to a way of thinking within the uniparty that aligns with feined liberty.
Interesting thoughts Teren. I appreciate how you remind us to not think dogmatically about our eschatological worldview.

I wonder if Dan and Kash are simply in over their heads and Dan is falling back on his previous strength in social media? They may have found that the FBI has deeply seated dark hidden agendas that they can’t crack, so they may have compromised. They sold themselves as smarter than anyone in the FBI, able to crack down on day 1, but may have found themselves in a dark maze several decades old. Either they would have needed fast & vast firings, or support the monster that the FBI has been for decades. If this is true, the lesson would point to at least two weaknesses that we tend to place confidence in: politicians who are ‘smart’ and that rhetorical claims of honesty & courage can be trusted.
 
😳

Well, I did ask for it! :lol:

But wading through it all, the Hegelian dialectic is still nothing more than a method or technique. You have merely demonstrated that some people are using an approximation of Hegel's method to supposedly determine what is going on eschatologically. But the dialectic itself is merely a method. It is not in any way a philosophical, theological, or eschatological viewpoint or position. So, my brother, can we make a deal never to use the term Hegelian dialectic again as a reference to some interpretation of what is happening in the world? Instead let's discuss the substance of an actual action or viewpoint itself. I think it would benefit our members far more and I would truly appreciate it.
 
😳

Well, I did ask for it! :lol:

But wading through it all, the Hegelian dialectic is still nothing more than a method or technique. You have merely demonstrated that some people are using an approximation of Hegel's method to supposedly determine what is going on eschatologically. But the dialectic itself is merely a method. It is not in any way a philosophical, theological, or eschatological viewpoint or position. So, my brother, can we make a deal never to use the term Hegelian dialectic again as a reference to some interpretation of what is happening in the world? Instead let's discuss the substance of an actual action or viewpoint itself. I think it would benefit our members far more and I would truly appreciate it.
With some schools of thought on this, it is far more than supposing. In that sense it has taken a prominent place blending eschatology hermeneutic with it. Those involved in that camp, from what I can tell, would see the rest of us not getting it. And venture into complete story boards of what things mean by it. Your observation gives me hope in it not getting very far. I hope this is the case because, to me, it would seem like as much of a concern as Christian Nationalism is for some.

In my own research, the links I would wonder about is through the likes of Anomaly on YouTube. It's a channel devoted to free range political commentary. He was a Trump supporter until COVID. And often brings some pretty good arguments that often legitimately challenge some thinking on the right. With those concerns of the right that make sense to have, it can look like often that politics in America is two wings of the same bird (thesis/anti-thesis) to bring about a desired prearranged synthetic outcome. Seeing this phenemon like that may not be exactly accurate. In fact, I would argue it is not. However, it has become on some levels a minor challenge for me, But in large part HD is not typically a theme in my own eschatology.

Anomaly is not interested in eschatology. But does demonstrate a reasonable concern as to why America in general might consider paradigms outside the left and right. For believers, this paradigm is the living Christ and the bible. Unfortunately to be able to see beyond the right/left paradigm today has given rise to, what appears to me, to be gnostic insight of being informed. And opens up a whole host of issues with it. In the American Reformed world and beyond, the following is a rather brief article from that website posted that details the tendency in the faith to merge and blend secular political ideologies with God, the bible, and our Christian experience.


With that level of the church falling pray to politcal ideology, even at some of our grass root spiritual levels, it would be likely only a matter of time where the church might pick up an HD mindset incorporating it into even eschatology proper. So in some ways, I guess I have honestly been working through that in some ways on behalf too even of some on the forum. But in general, I do see your point pastor. At the end of the day, how much attention are we giving something like? lol. And at what point does it itself become a distractions? For which I believe you make a very reasonable case for. I will honor that brother. Blessings. :)
 
Interesting thoughts Teren. I appreciate how you remind us to not think dogmatically about our eschatological worldview.

I wonder if Dan and Kash are simply in over their heads and Dan is falling back on his previous strength in social media? They may have found that the FBI has deeply seated dark hidden agendas that they can’t crack, so they may have compromised. They sold themselves as smarter than anyone in the FBI, able to crack down on day 1, but may have found themselves in a dark maze several decades old. Either they would have needed fast & vast firings, or support the monster that the FBI has been for decades. If this is true, the lesson would point to at least two weaknesses that we tend to place confidence in: politicians who are ‘smart’ and that rhetorical claims of honesty & courage can be trusted.
I like this Hol. I think this is a very valid point. It kinda hurts though to see those two punked if the case, lol. But this is something that makes a lot of sense on a number of fronts and for a lot of reasons. When looking at where things are going politically we can tend to want to line it up biblically or eschatologically. And some times when we do that, we can tend to lose the way things work in life outside of how our minds somewhat might tend to systematize things. Seeing perhaps theories more than real rubber meets the road reality. During my overall struggles in assessing what the heck is Trump doing in what seems to be at least marginally (if not more) end times. Like really, lol. Nobody would have thought that what he was known for to be such a power broker world leader just 10 or 15 years ago. And basically was literally laughed out of the room as a potential surviving candidate from the 45 primaries.

So what does seem to be on display, perhaps even more than we might be comfortable with, is the real world drama of our lives on display at the larger than life world stage level. So Hollie, this is kind of the first time I took similar thoughts to this level. So this thought I'll share is kind of the first time thinking it like this. But just as the internet and social media have become incredible avenues to inform the world and bring the level of the common man/woman to superpower potential from their sitting in their living room wearing a bathrobe, so to would it seems that the generic human frailty feature of our being be as much on display (plainly and embarrassingly so) at the G7 level.

Typically if things like that tend to air they tend to air dirty laundry. Like the whole Macron and his wife seeming scandal. Wow, what a soap opera...lol. But what is different in honoring your consideration at the high profile level, would be to have on display sincere, weak, faint, hopeful hearts paraded through a somewhat valley of death on the world stage. And how that looks is not like a heroic comic strip. But rather, it looks like us. The commons. In this way, it would in part attest to the level of the sincerely broken human condition being brought into the public sphere in light of what it genuinely looks like when real world meets the sythentically constructed architecture of evil rule in general over our world system.

Seeing it in that light is rather precious dear sister. At a time when things trend to fit theories. Our theories. Yet there are real world people experiencing what they are. Now something like that, it would seem, is the kind of thing God might exactly use. Even if not, it would be a candid camera moment for all the world to see in all its humble glory. And that, dear sister, is likely more valuable than a whole aircraft carrier full of theory. Amen. :love:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hol
Back
Top