Their Kingdom Come: Dominionism’s Quest for Political Capital in the Emergent World Order

You may also like...

4 Responses

  1. You might find this post of mine useful

    But I want to say, my personal study of the Ancient Gnositics tells me they were more like the Abdicationists then the Dominionists.

  2. William King says:

    Dominionism is a clear and present danger that needs a more proper response: Confrontation. What is needed to confront Dominionism head on and defeat it is a body, an organization of like-minded people who understand this danger and is willing to come together to stop it. It needs to be a movement against Dominionism, with teeth, willing to scrap with Dominionists head on, eye-ball to eye-ball and feet to feet, uncompromising, unmerciful, and with the gumption and will to do what is necessary to stop them. The Dominionists are at war with Secular America. It is time that people clearly understand that and act accordingly.

  3. Kuudere-Kun says:

    I don’t like Dominionism or Gnosticism but this desire some have to twist Gnosticism, but this desire some have to twist Gnosticism to the point where the exact opposite so they apply the term to everything they don’t like annoys me.

    To me believing there even is a “transcendent realm” is pure Platonism and this a gateway drug to Gnosticism. I believe New Testament Metaphysics are much closer to Stoicism, God is Immanent within the Universe not Transcendent.

    • Phillip Collins says:

      On the Orthodox Christian view, the Biblical God is both transcendent and immanent. Neither quality holds primacy over the other. He is in the universe as much as He is outside of it. Elevating one quality to the detriment of another always results in some forms of Gnosticism. Ancient Gnosticism tended to elevate the transcendent to the detriment of the immanent. Neo-Gnosticism or, as Voegelin would have characterized it, immanentizing Gnosticism elevates the immanent to the detriment of the transcendent. These categories can be found in the work of by Hans Jonas and Eric Voegelin, who offering differing valuations of Gnosticism while maintaining the same categories. So, there was no terminological elasticity in our invocation of the term. We deferred to scholarly sources.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *