By John Immel (Click here for MP3 audio)
The original publication of Moral Seduction was my first effort to show how the seeds of tyranny are sown with precise ideas beyond the narrow confines of church and Christianity.
My first months of blogging stardom were spent highlighting tyranny’s philosophical elements as displayed in the Charismatic Reformed denomination called Sovereign Grace Ministries.My familiarity with their doctrine and practices made it an effective stepping off point.Plus, other voices needed to rise up to join the existing blog commentary concerning their blight on the vineyard.I was happy to take up in 2007 where I left off in 1998 before the blogging world took notice.
People tend to think that this blog revolves around the very narrow criticism of Sovereign Grace Ministries.This is understandable but not true.No matter how much I enjoy poking those specific intellectual and spiritual thugs in the eye, they are hardly the bulk of my concern.
In the ongoing effort to unearth the correlation between the foundational IDEAS, and the tyranny they breed, Spiritualtyranny.com has been branded into the minds of many as just another anti-SGM site.Well, it is, but only in as much as the “leadership” perpetrate spiritual thuggishness on individuals.But in the broader sense, they are but anecdote to the cause and effect of how historic ideas always progress to specific ends.
SGM is a very, very, small player in the trend towards indoctrinating American Piety into the European collectivist tyranny that dominated that continent for the better part of 1800 years.I know of other movements, with other acronyms in American Piety advocating many of the same concepts, perpetrating the same fundamental oppression of individuals in the name of God and the greater good. I just haven’t talked about them… yet. But whatever, tyranny is tyranny, no matter who advocates the governmental outcome.
My goal for the original Moral Seduction had mixed success. People sort of caught on to the “they who shall not be named,” riff understanding that I was deliberately NOT speaking the SGM name, but didn’t quite get why a speech at Notre Dame by the President of the United States had anything to do with a Reformed Charismatic bunch out of Gaithersburg Maryland specifically, or the Spiritual Tyranny theme in general.And most importantly, people really didn’t get the specific seduction I was trying to highlight.
This might be a shocker to some, but SGM leadership is in fact a victim of the very seduction this article discusses. Way back when, they were charmed down this path like so many well meaning semi-intellectuals looking for a cohesive “Biblical” world view.
8 comments
1 ping
Dan
November 9, 2009 at 11:18 am Dan(Quote) (Reply) (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Real Moral Seduction…
http://xkcd.com/660/
Jacob J
February 6, 2012 at 4:13 pm Jacob J(Quote) (Reply) (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Hey John, just read through some of this for the 2nd time. I didn’t read it all this time but used it as a way to refresh and collect some of my thoughts on this stuff. I’m surprised no one else has written any comments….
I’m reading ST every day and trying to glean as much information as possible. I have gotten a TON out of it so far though. I admit that Dear Christian Chicken Little hit home with me in some ways. I laughed at your image of God there, piteously drubbing man about the head with life’s circumstances…..But that is so true to how many people view what being a Christian is all about. I refuse to believe that after recieving the adoption as a Son, the healing and restoration of my brokenness, the New Birth and New Creation, I have to relate to God in this remote, cowering, half-sure way. I could throw more adjectives in there but you know what I mean…. Why do so many Christians live in Chicken Little Land?
I guess according to some of these ideas, we CHOOSE to live a life of intentionality or a life of pssivity…and when our moral purpose and direction are not being affirmed, we end up asking the Demagouges of Dictated Good for our spiritual answers, or something to that effect. I’m sick of an existence of anything less than total and radical freedom, purpose, and intentionality in the Annointed Jesus.
I am still feeling out these views and learning to wield them to an extent. I mean some of the stuff you cover I have a good understanding of, other stuff is pretty new to me.
I’m still confused somewhat on Altruism in the sense you are describing it here. I mean I think I am just having trouble understanding the practical implications of it. Is the main evil that it says that when you pursue your talents/drives/ and desires that God created you with, that it’s evil and selfish? I.e. if you aren’t sacrificing, it’s not moral? Or even just to live intentionally- Altrusim says that drive is not “Moral” or pleasing to God unless it is always self-sacrificing (which is of course defined by those in charge)?…. I see how that can be dangerous, because claiming a moral absolute of any sort is inherently ill-advised and dangerous. If then if my art and music isn’t self-sacrificing, it’s not moral?
So I’m not sure I fully understand it yet. I think with a couple weeks more research I’ll have a better handle on it… I DO completely see where Kantian metaphysics were a continuation of Platonic ideas.
I like how you used the speech from Obama to highlight our inherant fallacies and assumptions and presuppositions in American Moral Logic. I’m still working through that…
I COMPLETELY see how ”multi-culturalism” and “brotherhood and diversity and equality” have underlying metaphysical and philosophical foundations which perpatrate some VERY specific tyranny. The voice of Moral Authority creeps into our culture in a lot of ways through those supposed ideals. I will write a healthy response post about that ASAP… I definitely have some things to say on that subject. Calling a Spade a Spade is viewed as “old-fashioned”, culturally insensitive, and shallow minded. Along with a a whole host of other demonizing logic. Don’t speak harshly, it drives people away! We must have unity, unity, unity!”
Importantly, do you have any more to say about this bit?:
“Moral seducers are always redefining words because they want to control the ethical equation.”
and
“But this method is designed to chaperone our emotions and actions to prevent our dissent. They guilt us into accepting their definitions and manipulate our sense of justice.”
I’m really interested in that. Thank you!!!!
Jacob J
February 6, 2012 at 4:29 pm Jacob J(Quote) (Reply) (UTC -4) Link to this comment
One additional thought: Do you make a distinction between Ethical Altruism and normal Christian Charity? I don’t think about ethics when I donate food or money, I do it because I feel led and because it’s in giving that we truly recieve, (Kant would not like that haha)…. I think Christians do have a moral responsibility towards the less fortunate. I think that is misconstrued sometimes, but in a fundamental sense, Jesus does ask us to extend His love to others in a self-sacrificing way (i.e. it may cost us our money/ warmth/ shelter/ safety/ etc.).
John Immel
February 6, 2012 at 10:18 pm John Immel(Quote) (Reply) (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Hey Jacob…
I’ll tell you …. I remain impressed with how you are working through these ideas. You are patient and thoughtful, and working to integrate the ideas to make them their own. To my mind that is exactly how it should be done. That is what I did/do with thinkers that offered me truth.
Take your time. It took me years to develop the ideas that I am offering. Challenge what you read. And keep doing that until you are satisfied. There is no rush.
And from my side, I find your questions invaluable. It is for this reason that I started working on an article on Altruism. I realized after you started asking questions that I have assumed that people were familiar with what that meant but that was a faulty assumption. You have asked some essential questions that need answers.
The first step I think is figuring out how to explain the formal ethical statement such that people can grasp the central idea.
But the second step will require that I deconstruct the many ways Altruism has been introduced into Christianity. The challenge before me I think is that most Christians presume the moral ideal. And most every philosopher I’ve read that challenges Altruism condemns it as a part and parcel of Christianity. They reject morality by another worldly authority because they reject another worldly authority. However their criticisms of the ethical disaster of altruism are accurate.
I think what you are tripping (what most Christians trip over) is that they think they see Altruism reflected in cannon. More specifically they think they see the concept “sacrificial living” in bible verses, and have been told this type of living is the just remedy for Pervasively Depraved man. No one realizes that sacrificial living is an oxymoron, and very few people have the nerve to challenge the premise of depravity. So they read the themes of “sacrifice” and “giving” and “doing unto others” and assume that Christianity is basically altruism by another name.
I contended that Altruisms advocates have superimposed the moral standard over those themes.
Anyway… the article that is coming is my effort to take a whack at step one… with a brief glimpse into the real source of Altruisms destructive power. I doubt I will get to the second step of deconstructing the hijacking of Christianity by Altruistic advocates for a while.
In the mean time, I will offer this quote for you to consider. Maybe it will help you to get a peek at what Altruism really does, what it really demands of Man.
Ayn Rand, “Faith and Force: The Destroyers of the Modern World,” Philosophy: Who Needs It, pg 61
Jacob J
February 10, 2012 at 12:12 am Jacob J(Quote) (Reply) (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Thanks John, that is definitely some very thought provoking material. That helped clear some misconceptions up for me. We are called to serve others, but that does NOT mean letting them have the first mortgage on our life, buying our existence dime by dime…. and apparently Altruism in fact negates the higher virtues in a way. And thanks for the kind words. I am truly trying to make these ideas my own. I spent a long time parroting ideas or all forms, but I’m just trying to honestly examine and analyze ideas…listen without an agenda and see what sticks and makes sense. I’m curious how this relates to individual identity? Like what does a life lived fully altruistically look like? I’m going to chew over this comment and research on my own a bit…
A lot of my generation (the younger-ish one) does not critically examine anything handed down from on high. I’m trying to engage people more, and get them to challenge their own presuppositions, but it is indeed a choice. We always have a choice about how to respond to life. That sounds like a platitude but is a very challenging reality.
I saw something that either you or a commenter wrote which got me thinking- that the distinction between spirit/soul/mind/body is largely a Greek model in many ways. And that maybe we shouldn’t be viewing ourselves, after coming to the Anointed Jesus, as this creature terribly at odds with himself, with a battle raging constantly inside, not able to trust any part of his own being. I mean realize I did train my flesh to respond to a lot of deadly things before I became a Christian, but sometimes I do feel like we in Christianity are not focusing nearly enough on the amazing restorative and integrative power of Jesus.
I mean, I feel like a lot of people wither don’t know or don’t want to become a low swinging hombre of faith and intention. You were right- we tend to view Eden as this mystical dreamland where we lounge around. As if some sort of passive existence of being satiated is God’s highest calling… it sounds crazy in those terms but that’s I think what some Christians are aspiring to.
I know you said that you don’t like to do blog based Bible studies, and I don’t blame you haha. But I would love to hear any thoughts about Romans 7 at any point.
Well that’s just what’s on my mind today, I will ask any more formal questions as they present themselves. Thanks a lot for your comment I will focus on it’s implications this week. Shalom.
Ellie
February 10, 2012 at 7:28 pm Ellie(Quote) (Reply) (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Interesting Ayn Rand quote, John. Gives me something to think about.
Jacob J
February 14, 2012 at 1:35 am Jacob J(Quote) (Reply) (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@John-
I realize that a lot of that last comment was rehash of things you have previously posted, but typing it out helped me summarize for myself a little….Wow, I am really coming to a new perspective on things. And a lot of it comes down to teachings based on EMPOWERMENT versus teachings based on dis-empowerment/belittling/dishumanizing and disenfranchizing. When we base our identities on Empowerment in Christ, we find freedom and strength.
John Immel
February 14, 2012 at 11:47 am John Immel(Quote) (Reply) (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Jacob,
That is exactly what you should do… Work with the ideas to make them your own. That is the real goal of this whole exercise; men and women who have refined the tools of their own minds, fully capable, to stand in their own ideas, under their own rational power, and able to combat the philosophical disaster taking this world by storm.
Sense | spiritualtyranny.com
May 31, 2010 at (UTC -4) Link to this comment
[...] Moral Seduction [...]