Center for Agrarian Homesteading Education

Palm Pre Battery Review For You Off-Grid Folks

2009-07-09T11:32:00.004-05:00

Howdy y'all from my Off-Grid utopia in the very center of Texas. I am typing this on my laptop powered totally (right now) by solar power which is stored in batteries which happen to be the topic of this new review.

Ok, if you haven't yet read my Off-Grid Pre Review, please do so here:

Off-Grid Living with the Palm Pre

As background for my current review, you should read the review of the latest Palm Pre commercial by some nitwit at PCWorld:

Assigning Blame for That Weird Palm Pre Commercial - PC World

So here is the way this deal works... Some IPhone autobot gets the memo from Apple headquarters:

TALKING POINTS!

1. The Pre doesn't have very many apps! That sucks! IPhone has millions of apps no one will ever know about or use, and you probably only will ever regularly use a couple of dozen, but STAY ON MESSAGE! Millions of useless apps is better than less than that!

2. Bad build quality! If you torque your Pre from side to side like some ham-fisted butcher trying to twist off a shank bone, it begins to feel loose and "oreo-y". Also, it has sharp corners that can be used by careless drunks to shave or give Columbian neckties! Bad. Bad. Bad. build (Note, do not mention that Pre has a removable battery, or that it doesn't melt and/or turn pink if you accidentally becomes SUMMER, or that Pre owners get a whole month to return and exchange phones with legitimate problems)

3. Battery life sucks! Stick to this one even if it is no longer true and if it hasn't been true since 1.0.2. Just keep repeating it. And whatever you do, do not point Pre owners to any readily available advice about extending battery life. Also, don't let them know that you can buy a replacement battery with extended life (Replace a battery? Who would want to be able to do that? What a silly idea).

So next, said autobot writes a review of a commercial that basically goes like this:

1. I didn't like the commercial.
2. Did I mention the talking points?

Ok, so here is my review of the Palm Pre battery life as I have experienced it in my Off-Grid life here in hot Central Texas...

On the morning of the day I read the stupid PCWorld Palm Pre commercial review, I woke up at around 7 a.m. in West Texas at my parents house. A neighbor who had just moved here from Canada and I drove the four hours in order that he could get his mini-van through customs. Don't ask me. I just went to help. Anyway, it turns out that Customs was closed on Friday, so we ended up staying and not leaving until Tuesday. I left the Pre on the touchstone overnight on Monday night so when I got up at 7 a.m. the phone was 100% charged.

I utilize all of the battery saving tips that are ubiquitous on the Internet and on sites like PreCentral (which is why I scoff and laugh at people still claiming to get 4 or 5 hours of battery life on their phone). I turn on the Wi-Fi if there is a strong Wi-Fi signal (like in my cabin), and I turn it off when there is not (like usually when I am driving around). I keep the GPS turned off unless I am using it. I multi-task a lot, but I close unused or unnecessary cards when I am not planning on using them any time soon. I keep my "cards" open down to about 3 or 4. I adjusted my phone settings so the email is checked only every 30 minutes and I have the screen go off fairly quickly. In addition to that. Immediately upon finishing a task, if I am not going to be using the phone, I hit "off" with my thumb to make sure the screen goes off.

I used the phone quite a bit in the morning because my wife, children, and a few of the folks in our community were texting me. I was also using the Pre to check weather for the drive home, and reading the news. Every so often I would check email. Texts were coming in almost constantly. We hit the road heading home at about 9 a.m., and we stopped in Slaton 45 minutes later for a coffee, where I checked email, texts, weather, etc. on the Pre while my buddy got the coffee. I used the GPS location two or three times in the next two hours, along with checking mail and sending/receiving texts. We stopped in Abilene to go to Sam's Club and to eat lunch. My wife and children were texting me grocery lists, etc. and I used the Pre to read the news, check email, etc. while we were at the restaurant. There was standard usage until we got near home, then I was texting quite a bit to see if there was anything else anyone needed at the store before we made it home. When I got home I had a lot of work to do, so the Pre stayed in my pocket (a few texts here and there) until around 7 p.m. At this point I had about 34% battery life left after 12 hours. I got online with the Pre and was reading Tweets on Twitter when I came across a Tweet about the stupid commercial review from PCWorld.

So get this, 12 hours after I took the Pre off of the Touchstone, I was surfing Twitter, I minimized and multi-tasked by opening up a web page to read the nitwit's commercial review. The commercial review had a link to the video of the commercial, so I minimized that web card and opened up the video link and watched the commercial. All this time I am getting texts from neighbors who are going to come over to say hi and sit on the porch later in the evening. With those four cards open, I switch over and tell the Pre to check my email.

Now... with all that actual multi-tasking going on (real multi-tasking, not fake multi-tasking) 12 hours after I charged the phone and after a full day of heavy usage, what do you think crossed my mind when Mr. Nitwit Apple Hack Spokesman says "The commercial doesn't stop half-way through, for example, which would symbolically illustrated another life, the Palm Pre's battery life, which Wired.com described as 'puny'". TALKING POINTS!!!

I don't have the new extended life battery, and frankly I don't need one. I really don't know what these people are talking about, but I can tell you this... Apple is pushing a lot of people very, very hard to keep spewing the Talking Points memo verbatim. You know, after my very honest and unsolicited review of the Pre as an Off-Grid tool, I was accused of everything from Hypocrisy to being a paid shill for Palm. Still, to this day I haven't even received a T-Shirt for all my hard work. I wonder what Apple is paying these clowns who are writing these stupid reviews for PCWorld and other periodicals, because I think I am getting the short end of the stick here. I did get a bunch of people following me on Twitter (mbunker) but I would rather they send me a new Palm Pre for my wife, since she just smashed her Samsung Highnote in the back door of our van. (***UPDATE... Palm is sending us a Palm Treo Pro. THANKS PALM for saving the day!!!***) Get that Palm? Somebody Tweet them, and also tell them this...

MORE APPS NOW so the APP fiends can go nuts and shut up the IPhone nitwits.

Thank you for your time,

Michael Bunker

P.S. Right now it is 1:15 on Wednesday. Had a fully charged Pre at 8 a.m., heavy usage, and I'm sitting at 84% after over 6 hours. What are these people talking about?

Off-Grid Living with the Palm Pre

2009-06-22T15:13:00.006-05:00

*Palm Pre Review submitted to EverythingPre.com and PreCentral.net. Feel free to re-post or use this article with proper attribution and a link... thanks*

This is my second review on off-grid living with the Palm Pre. My first review was written 3 days after I received the Pre on rollout day June 6th. As of Saturday the 20th I have now had the Palm Pre for 2 weeks. As I said in my first review, I am nowhere near the typical Pre user. My needs are unique and therefore my smartphone has to be unique as well. I live on a completely off-grid 40 acre ranch in Central Texas. We raise Pure Longhorn cattle, a milking Holstein, sheep, rabbits, chickens, and yellow blackmouth curr dogs. We are not anti-technology, but we examine every technology very closely to see if it will actually benefit our simple lifestyle. We live our lives very deliberately, and we know that most supposed "time-saving" technologies have actually created a society of slaves to the machines, and we seriously examine whether a device or technology is actually offering us any benefits or if it just becomes another toy to be serviced by its human slaves.

I did a lot of study and comparison shopping before I decided on the Pre. Again, my family lives completely off-grid. What power we do use comes from our small solar array, and we do occasionally run a generator. I am writing this on a small Acer laptop using wireless radio internet from the nearest small town. I am a writer, I edit a few fairly large websites, and I am an Agrarian blogger. I receive a lot of communications and correspondence from people all over the world, and I need to be able to constantly stay on top of my correspondence while still remaining free to work on my ranch and live the life I preach about and love. It had gotten to the point that I generally spent at least 5 and sometimes up to 8 hours a day in our small cabin on the internet. I needed a smartphone tool and not a toy. When you live on a ranch, you appreciate tools and you know tools have a purpose. I wasn't just out for the newest gadget, I have been looking for a way to accomplish very specific tasks in very specific ways. I needed a tool that would hold up to the rigors of what I do, and that would allow me to do things while I work on the ranch. I know that there are fanboys and tech geeks out there who couldn't wait to break down the Pre and analyze every line of code, etc. I know that there are folks who just want a great platform on which to run multiple apps and games. I basically needed a mobile internet, email, and texting tool that would also provide mountains of information at my fingertips - instantly. I'm not disparaging other phones or other people, but I needed a tool that would be able to respond to my very unique needs.

The Pre has been all that I could have asked for, and more. Here are some snippets of what I do with my phone...

*I am able to snap pictures as I work and immediately text or email them to interested parties.

*A couple of days ago I sold a heifer (a young cow that has not yet dropped a calf) to a friend halfway across the country, then he paid me via Paypal and I received payment and notification on my phone - all within a half an hour, and I never had to get on the laptop.

*I purchase goods and supplies, on online stores and on ebay, directly from my phone. And I can do this purchasing on regular websites, not just on special "mobile phone enabled" websites. None of this costs me any more money with the Sprint Everything Data program.

*I keep in constant contact with my family, the members of our agrarian community here, and many other people via text messaging and email.

*We live in tornado alley, and Central Texas is well known for severe weather, tornadoes, and flash floods. I am able to constantly monitor the weather, and even watch up to the minute detailed radar, wherever I am.

*Just the other day, a lady from our community was traveling three hours to Austin to go pick her son up at the airport. I was able to track his flight on my pre and provide her up to the minute updates as to his progress and his arrival time.

*We don't have a television, and we rarely watch it, but I am able to sit on my front porch in the summer evening breeze and watch The History Channel, Discovery Channel, Animal Planet and dozens of other stations - all via my Wi-Fi or the Sprint Network on Sprint Premier TV - right on my Palm Pre. I know my father's Iphone won't do that!

*I am able to keep up to date on news that affects my family, and that I need to feature or discuss on my websites and blogs. The Palm Pre also multitasks, so often I am doing all or many of the things I am mentioning here AT THE SAME TIME!

*I have often used the Sprint GPS and Locator features for finding the nearest gas (and lowest prices) in our area - since we have four towns near us, all in different directions. My wife has used the GPS services for finding flea markets and yard sales, and we have used it to find other addresses when we have to go to town. My wife and I also both have roadside assistance via the phone, which is great to know.

*I use the alarm to remind me of things I need to do, and I use the memos to write down sku numbers of fencing so I won't forget it before I get up to the register at Tractor Supply.

*I have been able to seamlessly sync with Itunes and pull down my music into the phone.

*I love the pull out keyboard, and I have to say that this is one of the great selling points to me with the phone. I am 6'3" and 235 lbs and I find the keyboard easy to use and I can type quite quickly on it.

*Oh!, and I use Pandora... almost every day. After a hard, hot day of work, I like to put on some Original Jazz Band, Jim Cullum Jazz Band radio, or Baroque music, or Jerry Jeff Walker, or even Fiddler on the Roof as I relax on the porch.

And here's another point... I live in Central Texas where it very well might be 104 degrees and high humidity. I might be soaked through to the bone with sweat, and I have yet to have had a single glitch or problem with the Pre. I did purchase the inexpensive replacement insurance in case I drop the Pre in a cattle tank, but I don't think I will need it. This is one tough phone. After I read all the complainers whining about the flip-open power door, I was worried. But seriously, that was just ridiculous. My main concern is that the dog will chew it up. I think only someone with serious ham hands would break this phone "accidentally".

Now, I probably don't use half of the utility of this phone. I don't know all the secret hacks and I have yet to play any real games on it. I am satisfied with the apps that are available, even if I am looking forward to what new stuff will be coming out in the future. I don't know how to jailbreak, nor do I know what a "clean ESN" is. I don't use the calendar, and I don't use all the fancy syncing features with Google or Facebook. I do Twitter (so check me out on Twitter: mbunker), but I am pretty knew at that.

Ok, so that is my review of the phone. Not much I would change about it. I hope to see some more Apps and some of the fixes that have been proposed/promised in upcoming updates, but I am completely pleased and happy with the phone. You Iphone fanboys, wipe the lotion off your hands and come on out here and work with me for a week and see how your phone holds up. You'll have to read a book while I'm watching cable TV on the Pre, but after the week we'll see which phone you would choose!

Michael Bunker

Check out:

MichaelBunker.com
BiblicalAgrarianism.com
Lazarusunbound.com

The December Project

2008-11-24T12:26:00.000-06:00

11/24/08 - 2nd Day - After Breakfast. As some of you know, in my household, our December Project begins in just a week. As a part of our continuing effort to separate, and to train ourselves and our minds, and to wean ourselves from the world - we will be staying home for the whole month of December. No going to the stores. No running to town. Period.

This type of project has been pretty common for the members of my family. This is how we trained ourselves and weaned ourselves from grid electricity. It's a great experiment, and it will teach you quite a bit about yourself and your condition. Now, December is the perfect month for this project for us. We don't celebrate the christ-Mass, obviously. So we really dislike the whole commercial hubbub during the so-called "holidays". We also don't like the heathen, apostates, homosexuals, and other assorted worldlings telling us to have a "merry christ-mass" every 5 seconds. Although our flesh does like some of the sales (and we might miss out on turkeys at .39 a pound) we aren't in dire need of any of that stuff.

Also, December traditionally is a month that would be used for meat processing and preservation, and for the chopping and stacking of firewood. For a traditional Agrarian family in December, these would have been the main tasks for the month. Here in Texas, when we have many nice days in the 50's, 60's and 70's in December, the month would also be used for building or construction projects. Our december is going to be taken up mainly in butchering, processing and storing meat. Our goal is, if the Lord wills, by the end of January to have put up enough meat for a whole year. That would be a goal we have never yet accomplished in the 10 years we have been on our agrarian-separatist journey. We also hope to begin the construction of a community cold smokehouse. Brother Larry and I have been planning on starting the smokehouse for awhile, and we hope to get started on it in the next few weeks. It is our intention, subject to the approval and will of God, that we have the cold smokehouse built and operational by the middle to end of January. I will be giving more details on the plans, materials, etc. on the cold smokehouse as things move on.

Ok, back to the December Project. I want to suggest that you and your family participate at some level. Sure, I don't expect any of you who are not yet living off-grid, etc. to be able to just take the month of December off with no notice. But there are other projects you can do:

Make a list and write down all of your town/store trips. If you run to 7-11 for a slurpee, write it down (added bonus: write down the mileage for each trip). If you go to the grocery, write it down. If you go to the pharmacy, write it down. Anyway, keep copious notes on each entry. Then, go down and comment on whether this item or trip was needed. Maybe come up with a code (1-10 or something) that tells you how critical the item or trip was.

Do a "needs/wants" test. Get a journal, a notepad, or some type of record-keeping device, and every time you use ANYTHING during the month. Write it down. If you use a stick of butter, write it down. If you use a box of tin-foil, write it down. Anything you consume, write it down. This will provide you with a grocery list of things you normally use. Then go down each item with your family, and discuss what you would do if the economy/system collapsed and you could no longer procure this item. What would you do? This is one of the most critical exercises in which you will ever participate. WHAT WILL YOU DO IF THESE THINGS ARE NOT AVAILABLE for an extended amount of time? What things can you begin to provide for yourself? What projects (like keeping chickens or building a greenhouse, etc.) can you engage in that will help you produce some of these things for yourself? What things can you eliminate now, in order to avoid the pain of having to do without it during a period of stress or danger?

On your trips list, discuss with your family how many of your trips were necessary. How many could have been avoided or combined? How many could have been eliminated with proper planning and foresight? How much gas did you use on unimportant trips? How much did you spend on "wants" that are not "needs"? How many times did you eat out when you didn't need to? Then discuss how to cut out the fat. Pray about it alot, and see what you can do to eliminate unnecessary trips to town or to the store. Plan ahead, and see if you can make a huge dent in your costs.

Anyway, these are December Projects that you can do this year. I know it is short notice, but if a disaster or collapse comes, it will likely be with short notice as well.

We ask for your prayers and support during our December Project. We hope to learn more about ourselves and our situation throughout this project. I should not be off-line, so you may still contact me or send me your Q&A questions during the month. I hope to keep posting to keep you all filled-in on how things are going and what we are learning. If you have any questions about the December Project, feel free to comment here.

Hope all is well with y'all out there.

Your servant in Christ Jesus,

Michael Bunker

Separatism as a Fundamental Principle, 3

2008-11-06T11:24:00.002-06:00

Separatism as a Fundamental Principle of Christian Agrarianism, Part 3
Posted by Michael Bunker
editor@biblicalagrarianism.com

The Kingdom of God

In the last part, we cursorily examined the history of the world's system of mammon, and of the beast system which would arise that would cause all manner of men to become slaves to their own primitive and carnal lusts. As prophesied in the Holy Bible, a system arose from among the people that allowed them to join together in order to fulfill the desires of the flesh. This system, despite and contrary to the commandments of God, allowed man to come together and develop a system of specialization which severed man from his connection to the creation and gave him duties and employments that were unproductive or counter-productive to his spiritual well-being, causing him to rely inordinately on man and governments rather than on the providence and sovereignty of God, and it eventually stripped man of his position of authority in the lives of his people, his family, and his children. Through time mammon became the operative principle of life, and, as the scripture promised, even very religious men and women were deceived by it, taken captive by it, and would become slaves to it - even to the point that the religious authorities in the time of Christ were willing to purchase, betray, and extinguish His mortal life for money. From these truths we come to understand that arguments for syncretism and against separatism are really arguments for the maintenance of (and service to) the system of mammon that feeds and coddles the flesh as opposed to God's ordained system which nurtures and grows the spirit. Jesus said that every man would serve either Him or Mammon (Matt. 6:24), and His Word teaches us that in the last epochs of this period of world history the system of Mammon would grow to be such a powerful entity that men would not be able to separate from it without great personal cost – in persecution, pain, and suffering - and that those who are enslaved to it would only be able to continue in it by agreeing to willfully choose and serve (worship) it, as opposed to serving God in the Kingdom of God.

In the first part, we discussed the Kingdom of God (or Heaven) as it is taught to us in the parables of Christ. We should take another look at these parables here. I will relate to you two of the parables from Matthew the thirteenth chapter that the Lord uses to explain and display the Kingdom of God:

“And he spake many things unto them in parables, saying, Behold, a sower went forth to sow; And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up: Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth: And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away. And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprung up, and choked them: But other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear” (Matt. 13:3-9).

And again:

“Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn” (Matt. 13:24-30).

We should note that Jesus chose not to explain the parable to the masses:

“All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world. Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field” (Matt. 13:34-36).

Jesus did not intend for the religious pharisees or the carnal man to understand the parable. We should also note that he sent the multitude away so that he could explain the parable to his elect disciples alone:

“He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear” (Matt. 13:37-43).

In explaining the parable to his disciples, He chose to use agrarian terms - terms only those who understood a farming based life could understand - so even among the disciples (and those that would come after them) His words were intended to be clear and understood chiefly among the people who understand, live in, and work, the soil. His words would have meaning to those who understand the soil, and whose society is built and designed around the proper management and dominion of the land. Think about that for awhile. We have to confess upon reading the Word of God, that God had no intention of showing truth and mysteries to those who have no love for Him or His ways. He intended this truth for a separatist - agrarian people.

So let us look at the parable:

Jesus Christ is the one that soweth the good seed – and we know that the good seed is the Gospel of God and His Kingdom.

The field is the world (not the “church” as is claimed by some), and we know from the parables in this very chapter that we studied earlier, that the world has wayside areas where the hearts of men receive the Word of the Gospel, but understand it not, and it is said that the seed which spills there is snatched up by the Devil (Matt. 13:19). Remember, these people were not intended to hear or understand the Gospel:

“And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them” (Matt. 13:14-15).

Some people receive the Gospel in stony places, which means that they are unregenerate religious people who claim to understand and believe the Gospel, because the Word says that they receive the Gospel with “joy” (Matt. 13:20). These people have stony unconverted hearts (Eze. 36:26) that are blind, deaf, and dumb to the Kingdom of God. These religious professors have no good soil (meaning they do not have regenerate hearts) and therefore the Word cannot root in them. These make a good profession for awhile, but at last, when things get too hard, or when persecution and suffering arises, they fall away.

Some people receive the Gospel among thorns. The thorny ground is that unfruitful ground which is encumbered by the cares and deceptions of the world. There is much activity (like in Vanity Fair) and much commerce, and much activity, but no separation or true righteousness. When these people receive the Word of the Gospel, they try to combine it with the ways of the world. These folks say they love Christ and are Christians, but they truly love mammon and the ways of the world. The ways of the world, and the deceitfulness of riches then choke out the Word. Sadly, the Word of God says that this false believer may look and act like he thinks a Christian should look and act, but alas, in the end, he is unfruitful (Matt. 13:22).

So these are the explanations that Christ gave of the way the Word of God is spread and received, and how the Kingdom of God is grown in the world. Now, within the world, in the best soil, Christ has sowed His seed. Not long after this sowing, though, the enemy (Satan) sows tares (or false wheat) which grow up in the world in the same places where the Gospel was preached.

Jesus Christ says that the good seed are the Children of the Kingdom, and the tare seeds are the Children of the Wicked One.

When the time comes that the Word begins to bear fruit (the Gospel leads to conversion in the hearts of God's elect), angels come and separate the wheat and the tares. The tares are gathered together (not out of the “church”, but out of the whole world, including the professing “church”). What is this gathering together if it is not the gathering of worldlings to the centers of mammon and worldliness? The people gather together, just as they did in the days of Babel, in the days of Nimrod, and in the days of Nebuchadnezzar. These are gathered together to be burned, as the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were burned.

This gathering together of the wicked, from my understanding, happens twice – once because the wicked tend to gather together in this world – and again when they are gathered together at the great judgment to be thrown into a furnace of fire:

“As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world” (Matt. 13:40).

God will also gather together His own:

“Our God shall come, and shall not keep silence: a fire shall devour before him, and it shall be very tempestuous round about him. He shall call to the heavens from above, and to the earth, that he may judge his people. Gather my saints together unto me; those that have made a covenant with me by sacrifice. And the heavens shall declare his righteousness: for God is judge himself. Selah” (Psalm 50:3-6).

The wheat is gathered into the barn (Matt. 13:30) and onto the threshing floor which is the place of purgation or purging (Matt. 3:12). This is not some spiritual “purgatory” like that which has been made up by the Papists, but is the Church of God and our life of obedience in Christ while still here in this world:

“Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire” (Matt. 3:12).

Our verses here and our knowledge of the agrarian art of threshing teach us some valuable lessons. First we should note that tares are never brought to the threshing floor. They are already gathered to be burned. Only wheat is gathered to the threshing floor. On the threshing floor the wheat is spread and it is thoroughly beaten with sticks. This purging does not separate the wheat from the tares (who have already been separated and gathered together) but it separates the wheat from the chaff. Chaff is the part of the wheat which not desirable to the farmer. He desires to purge the chaff away from the wheat, so he beats the wheat - “As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten” (Rev. 3:19a). The Holy Spirit – the fan of the Lord – thoroughly purges the floor, blowing away all that which is displeasing to the Lord. The wheat is then gathered into the garner, which is the Lord's Kingdom. When the Lord desires to use the wheat, it is ground into flour and used to make good bread.

This is a story of separation through and through.

Now let us take a look at how horribly these beautiful parables have been mangled, distorted, and mis-taught by the prophets of syncretism.

They teach that the wheat and tares are supposed to stay together, and that they are indiscernible, and that they are never separated, and that these verses teach that there is no telling where a Christian may be found, and that a Christian may grow just as safely and healthily in an urban city among the wicked and surrounded by unbelievers as he will when separated into a true Christian agrarian society.

They teach that the field is “the church” (although Christ says it is the world), and therefore it is no wonder that there are unbelievers and believers in the church. While it is true that there will almost always be deceived unbelievers in any “church”, the Bible teaches that they are the Children of the Wicked One and that they should be rooted out. The prophets of syncretism teach that it is natural for a “church” to be filled with unbelievers (after all, it is evangelism), and that tares and other weeds are to be encouraged, and that the “church” ought to be filled with them. In fact, the entire modern “church growth” movement is based on the premise that tares need to be brought into “church” so that they can be changed into wheat! The modern dominionist movement doesn't believe in filling the “church” with tares, instead, they believe that the wheat ought to be about the business of expanding the fields and taking over neighboring farms, so that more tares will be converted to wheat.

Contrary to the teaching of the Bible, the prophets of syncretism teach that tares become wheat when they “get saved”, and that all men were once tares but that the saved tares become wheat. The Bible, however, teaches that wheat comes from wheat seed, and that tares come from tare seeds.

The Bible teaches that the Lord Jesus Christ alone is the sower, who plants only good seed. The prophets of syncretism teach that evangelists and all believers are sowers, and that they plant indeterminate seeds, some of which grow into tares, and some that grow into wheat.

The prophets of syncretism teach that the wayside is to be purposely sowed, as is the stony ground and the thorny ground. While the Bible teaches that sometimes good seed happens to fall in these places, the syncretists manipulate others into giving money, and gather together huge amounts of it, to hire professional “sowers” who are then purposely sent out to sow seed among the rocks and thorns.

While the prophets of syncretism teach that any man can and should be a sower (despite the fact that Jesus calls Himself the sower), they also teach that only spiritual angels – actual created angels from heaven - can be reapers or harvesters. Syncretists teach this error despite the fact that Christ asked the disciples to pray for the Lord of the Harvest to send laborers to the harvest: “Then saith he unto his disciples, The harvest truly is plenteous, but the labourers are few; Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he will send forth labourers into his harvest” (Matt. 9:37-38). The Bible teaches that the word “angels” means “messengers”, and that sometimes ministers of the Gospel are called “angels” (Rev. 1:20). Now, if we look at the Bible and we see that these harvest labourers are supposed to separate wheat from tares in this world, and then gather the wheat to the threshing floor, does the false gospel of syncretism still stand up to scrutiny?

Since the parable of the sower says that these harvest events are to happen “at the end of the world”, the prophets of syncretism teach that physical separation will only happen “at the end of the world”, and by this they mean, after we are all dead. The Bible, however, teaches that the phrase “at the end of the world” often means “during the time of the Gospel”, after Christ has suffered and died on the behalf of His elect, and has put away their sin in order to separate and purify them unto Himself: “For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself”.

The Lord Jesus Christ used these parables to accomplish two things:

To give enlightenment, truth, direction, and encouragement to the elect of God – those who have been given by Divine Grace the ability to hear and see the Kingdom.
To hide these sublime truths from world lovers and mammon lovers – the Children of the Wicked One – who naturally and angrily reject the truth of God.

“And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand” (Matt. 13:10-13).

To those whom it is given to know the mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven, more shall be given to them, and they shall have more abundance. The phrase “he shall have more abundance” is one word in the Greek which means “to superabound” or “to have in excess”. Since the child of the Kingdom has a heart towards spiritual things, and towards eternity, he will superabound in spiritual gifts when he is separated by God into the Kingdom. Those who believe themselves to be in the Kingdom of God, but who are actually the “children of the wicked one”, will have even those gifts that they think are theirs taken away from them. This is why it is constantly reaffirmed in the scripture that the professing believer is to examine himself that he be in the faith. There are those who love the world, who serve mammon, who separate only invisibly and never actually, who think that they are in a good condition, and that they are bound for heaven after they die. They have been blinded to the truth of God found in His parables. The kingdom of this world has a religion called Christianity, and the prince of this world has a people who call themselves “christians”. This truth is plainly evident in the prophetic scriptures, yet it doesn't often cause mainstream “christians” to question their affiliation, their lives, or their understanding of God's Word.

In the next part we will examine God's plan in using separatism to teach and train His children for the Kingdom that is to come.

I am your servant in Christ Jesus,

Michael Bunker

Separatism as a Fundamental Principle, 2B

2008-09-16T07:57:00.001-05:00

Separatism as a Fundamental Principle of Christian Agrarianism, Part 2-B
Posted by Michael Bunker editor@biblicalagrarianism.com

Before you read this part, go read Part 1-A

Read Part 1-B

Read Part 2-A

Mammon

“Worldly-mindedness is as common and as fatal a symptom of hypocrisy as any other, for by no sin can Satan have a surer and faster hold of the soul, under the cloak of a visible and passable profession of religion, than by this; and therefore Christ, having warned us against coveting the praise of men, proceeds next to warn us against coveting the wealth of the world; in this also we must take heed, lest we be as the hypocrites are, and do as they do: the fundamental error that they are guilty of is, that they choose the world for their reward; we must therefore take heed of hypocrisy and worldly-mindedness, in the choice we make of our treasure, our end, and our masters.” (Matthew Henry)

In the next several parts we will be discussing separation and its importance as it relates to the Kingdom of God. In this part we will specifically be discussing the Kingdom of This World and the system of Mammon which gives it power. Throughout all of human history, and throughout the entire Bible, there are two opposing kingdoms in view. We will be discussing these contrasting kingdoms in depth, but it is necessary here that I discuss some very important principles concerning these kingdoms; principles that are often forgotten or confused by students of the Word.

The Kingdom of This World

There is a kingdom, which is actually made up of all the worldly kingdoms (Matt. 4:8), which is referred to by Jesus repeatedly as “this world”. This kingdom has a ruler or spiritual prince (the word “prince” means “ruler”) also called “the god of this world”, has other spiritual principalities and powers, has earthly princes or kings, has its own wisdom, and has a fashion (an external condition, a culture, style, or system) also known as a “course”. It is important to note that Satan, the prince of this world (John 12:31, 14:30, 16:11, Eph. 2:2), is not the rightful King or Prince of the earth. That position was originally given to Adam as man. Satan, therefore is a usurper prince, who has gained his authority by deceit and by the willful consent of the governed, and not by rightful inheritance.

This kingdom of this world is referred to throughout the Bible and in many of Jesus Christ's discussions, sermons, and teachings. It is important that we point this out, because the modern mantra of “in the world, but not of it” - taken to mean “just like the world in the flesh, but spiritually separate” - teaches that there is no discernible difference between the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of This World. There are two prominent errors, mentioned before in this series, that lead to a dangerous and erroneous view of the Kingdoms:

The futurist and dispensationalist view that the Kingdom of God is still future, and that no one enters the Kingdom until they die. In this view, the Kingdom of God is heaven and the spiritual realm, and Christ was bringing and instituting no real Kingdom during His earthly ministry. This view invalidates separatism because in it there is nothing to separate from and nothing to separate to; and it promotes worldliness and denies all that Christ had to say about the Kingdom of God.

The Kingdom Now, Theocratic, or Reconstructionist view that the Kingdom of God came fully and completely during the time of Christ or shortly after that, meaning that Christ has already come and instituted His Kingdom, which is of this world, and things will get better and better as Christians “christianize” wordly institutions and bring all things under the rule of Christ. In this view, as we have mentioned before, the Kingdom's of this world have already become the Kingdom of God, and God has no intention of returning to destroy the wicked and to bring a new heaven and a new earth. Christ has already returned (at some point invisibly) to rule, the seventh trumpet has sounded, and there is no difference between “this world” and Christ's kingdom, therefore there is no need for separation. This is the worldview and system that the Papists have tried to push for over 1400 years, and the Church of England and other national “churches” have tried to institute for several hundred years.

We will discuss the two separate and distinct kingdoms more in the next part, but for now it is important for us to examine what Jesus Christ and His Word has said about the difference between “this world”, and the Kingdom of God.

First, we should note that the Kingdom of this World is not vanquished and overthrown until the last trumpet:

“And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever” (Rev 11:15).

Paul confirms that this last trumpet will not be “invisible” or some confusing and indiscernible moment in history (like the destruction of Jerusalem), but will be the moment when all Christians of all time are “changed” and are given incorruptible bodies. The earthly bodies of corruption will NOT inherit the Kingdom of God, but those who are Christ's will be changed and given incorruptible bodies. This is true of the righteous dead, who at this time will rise from the dead, and of the living:

“Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?” (1Co 15:50-55).

It is naturally in the Devil's interest to confuse the kingdoms and to cause professing Christians to err by convincing them that they have nothing to fear in worldliness. Both the futurist and the preterist, both the dispensationalist and the reconstructionist, are able to deceive people by convincing them that they can stay in the world without fear or danger. But the Bible says that the two kingdoms, The Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of This World, will remain distinct and separate until the last trump, when God's children will be changed and receive incorruptible bodies. If you have not received your incorruptible body yet, then the last trumpet has not sounded, and you are accounted with either the Kingdom of God, or the Kingdom of This World. You live according to the fashion (or “course”) of one or the other (1 Cor. 7:31). The Bible says that if you live according to the fashion or course of this world, then you are still deceived and in the power of the Prince of This World:

“Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience” (Eph 2:2).

John Gill says this of the “course of this world”: “the course of it is their custom, manner, and way of life; to which God's elect, during their state of unregeneracy, conform, both with respect to conversation and religious worship: great is the force that prevailing customs have over men; it is one branch of redemption by Christ, to deliver men from this present evil world, and to free them from a vain conversation in it”. Because of the prevalent errors in discerning between the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of This World, most professing Christians have been convinced that there is no difference, and that there is no “course” or “fashion” of this world that identifies men according to which Kingdom and Prince they serve.

Like I said earlier, we will get into some depth on the subject of the Kingdoms in the next parts, but for now it was necessary that I identify and prove that the Kingdom of God is separate and distinct from this world, and that it has separate and distinct characteristics, and operates according to different principles. The Kingdom of God came with Christ, because Christ IS fundamentally the Kingdom of God, and as in any other Kingdom, Christ's Kingdom has its own society and culture, its own economy, its own fashion and course. It came with Christ, but will be fulfilled and perfected at Christ's return at the last trump.

Knowing that there are two separate kingdoms with two separate masters, let us hear what Christ says about one of the fundamental differences that exist between the two kingdoms:

“No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him” (Luk 16:13-14).

Now, let me tell you that there are some of you reading and hearing this right now who believe yourself to be in the Kingdom of God, and to be under the Headship and Kingship of Jesus Christ, but who serve mammon and mammon alone. Now it is time that we study what this means, so we can identify error. Separatism naturally involves a sword: “For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart” (Heb 4:12). Note that the Bible says that covetousness and the service of mammon identify those who are still servants of the Prince of This World. The “passport”, mark, or citizenship papers of the children of this world lies in covetousness and the service of mammon. I want to note again that this is why Satan and his prophets push the prevailing errors concerning the two Kingdoms. Deception requires that men not be able to see God's intention and purpose in separation. People remain in the Kingdom of This World, and subject to the Prince of This World, because they cannot see the Kingdom of God - “Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John 3:3). In order to be able to separate from the Kingdom of This World, you need to be able to see it, and in order to see it, you must be born again.

Ok, all of this has been preface to our latest history lesson. Today we are going to track some of the history of the Kingdom of This World, and its system of mammon, so you can see what it looks like today.

Mammon is defined several different ways, and we can get a more full understanding of the essence of it by studying these definitions:

Riches, wealth; or the god of riches.
The false god of riches and avarice.
Wealth, wordly gain.

Mammon is the personification of the earthly and worldly desire for more wealth or money than is necessary. The Bible teaches, “And having food and raiment let us be therewith content” (1 Tim. 6:8). The service of mammon is the sign or mark of those whose hearts are on this world, and not on the world to come. It is critical that we understand these things, and that we know history, because an understanding of money (and mammon) is necessary in order for us to know God's mind when it comes to separatism and agrarianism. It is the love of money and the service of mammon that keeps men in bondage to the world.

The History of Money

In studying the history of money, it is important that we first get rid of the colonized deceptions that pervade our thinking. Money as we know it (coins and paper) are a relatively recent invention. When the word “money” is used in the Old Testament, it is not speaking of coins and paper used as currency. First let me say that the word “money” is actually from the Latin moneta, which means "mint, coinage," and is derived from Moneta, a title of the Roman goddess Juno. Coins were minted outside of the temple of Moneta, and it is from this practice that man has derived the name of money. Please also remember that, from this time, money became an inexorable part of human worship in the Kingdom of This World, and became a central pillar of most worldly religions. It is not unimportant that our Lord, the rightful King of Creation, was betrayed for money.

Some will insist that money has been around forever, and that it has always been a central reality in the history of God's people, but when you read the term “money” in the Old Testament, for example when Abraham bought the cave and field of Machpelah for money, it is not at all speaking of coinage and paper that we call “money” today. Let us read the account:

“And Abraham stood up, and bowed himself to the people of the land, even to the children of Heth. And he communed with them, saying, If it be your mind that I should bury my dead out of my sight; hear me, and intreat for me to Ephron the son of Zohar, That he may give me the cave of Machpelah, which he hath, which is in the end of his field; for as much money as it is worth he shall give it me for a possession of a buryingplace amongst you. And Ephron dwelt among the children of Heth: and Ephron the Hittite answered Abraham in the audience of the children of Heth, even of all that went in at the gate of his city, saying, Nay, my lord, hear me: the field give I thee, and the cave that is therein, I give it thee; in the presence of the sons of my people give I it thee: bury thy dead. And Abraham bowed down himself before the people of the land. And he spake unto Ephron in the audience of the people of the land, saying, But if thou wilt give it, I pray thee, hear me: I will give thee money for the field; take it of me, and I will bury my dead there. And Ephron answered Abraham, saying unto him, My lord, hearken unto me: the land is worth four hundred shekels of silver; what is that betwixt me and thee? bury therefore thy dead. And Abraham hearkened unto Ephron; and Abraham weighed to Ephron the silver, which he had named in the audience of the sons of Heth, four hundred shekels of silver, current money with the merchant” (Gen 23:7-16).

This event happened sometime around 1859 BC, but the use of silver as money had been around for some time before that. We read here that the “money” used by Abraham was actually silver. It was not paid in coins, but had to be weighed out in “shekels”. The shekel weight had been established by the Babylonians as part of the Babylonian system we are studying here from around 3000 BC and it was related to an established weight of barley. The word shekel did not refer to a coin, but to an established weight (such as a “gram” or an “ounce” is an established weight). The word “money” in our English Bible is translated from the word kehsef which means “silver”.

Back Even Further

For the first 1600 years of the world, exchange, and commerce were accomplished through trade and barter. In some cases and places, due to an intrinsic problem with barter (called “the coincidence of wants”) a system of credit was created, where a basic standard was set, and an intermediate nonperishable item was used to eliminate the coincidence of wants. For example, if you raised dates or figs, which are perishable, and you desired to trade for wheat or goats – it would be necessary (in order for there to be a straight trade) that someone “coincidentally” was wanting to trade goats or wheat for figs or dates at precisely the time when your crop was harvested and ready for trade. This problem is called “the coincidence of wants”. In order to mitigate against this problem, a third crop or item may be utilized to bridge the distance. You might go ahead and trade the figs and dates for a future crop of wheat or for some future number of goats. In the interim, the owner of the wheat or goats might give you some valuable item that is valuable but nonperishable (like wine, salt, or silver, etc.) to hold until which time he is ready to redeem them with the wheat or goats that you need. But the point is that for 1600 years mankind had no real need for what we call money. Until the wicked descendants of Cain began to build cities (which necessitate money, debt, and specialization) every man lived an agrarian existence, and he produced from the ground most, if not all, of what he needed to survive. Trade and Barter existed, but they were actually quite rare. Most men survived by God's providence from the land, and did not have any need for more than they could eat, drink, wear, or live on for their survival. It is so common for man to look at history through glasses tinted by his own experience, that it is very difficult for modern man to even conceive of a world without money.

Abraham was considered a very wealthy man, and it is said he had gold and silver, so people automatically assume that he was one of the idle rich like we have around today. But wealth in that time was measured in a wholly different way. You see, there was no need – in fact it would have been wasteful and ridiculous – to have more than you need. It is said that Abraham was “very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold” (Gen. 13:2). Note that cattle is mentioned first, because it was the primary measure of wealth and store of value. The term “cattle” meant cows, oxen, sheep, asses, and camels. So it is true that Abraham was wealthy, but we must also remember that Abraham was the patriarch of a very large clan. His family and servants numbered in the many hundreds, if not thousands. Abraham had a lot of mouths to feed, and he properly managed his large herds and flocks for the maintenance of himself, his family, and all those for whom he was responsible. Abraham was considered wealthy, as we have seen, but an examination of the time and culture will cause us to reject that Abraham's wealth was anything like what we call “wealth” today where men gather to themselves mountains of irrelevant and unimportant items, and invest large amounts of money in decorations, entertainment, and so called “stores of value” (like stocks and bonds). There would have been no need for more animals than could be managed for the production of food, clothing, and supplies for the amount of people for whom Abraham was responsible.

I pause here to note that we read in Genesis the 13^th Chapter that Abraham was wealthy and had many cattle and herds, and so was his nephew Lot. They were both so wealthy that they could not dwell together in the same land anymore, so Abraham desired to separate from Lot (who evidently operated on different principles) and so he gave Lot the choice of what direction he will go. Lot chose the plain of Jordan near the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. Abraham chose to dwell in the land of Canaan, which was without cities, and was more conducive to agrarian success. Ok, I will return to the discussion of the wealth of Abraham, but we have to take a side road here to discuss Lot – since, although Lot ought to be the poster-boy of separatism and God's preference of agrarianism over urbanism, Lot seems to have become the hero and spokesmen for worldlings everywhere who all fancy themselves to be Lot. So let us look at this for a moment...

It is said by worldlings and syncretists that Lot was saved for his own righteousness, but the Bible says he was saved by the intervention of Abraham (an agrarian separatist) (Gen. 18) and because “God remembered Abraham” (Gen. 19:29).

It is said that Lot is not an example of separatism, though God clearly took vengeance on the wickedness and urbanism of Sodom and Gomorrah, and separated Lot out from it before it was destroyed.

Let's review the story...

Lot, due to his choice of living near the cites of Sodom and Gomorrah, lost his wealth and was rescued by God's grace alone from the destruction of those cities. God determines to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, even with Lot and his family in it, but Abraham intercedes with God to spare Lot (Gen. 18), who is his kinsman. Lot and his family (his wife and two daughters) are physically removed from Sodom in order to save their lives. Lot is ordered by God in a Christophony not to stay or stop in the plain, but to flee all the way to “the mountain”. The mountain is a type of Mount Zion and of Christ's Kingdom. Lot is too afraid to flee to the mountain, even though his eventual destruction in the plain of Jordan is evident, so he begs God to allow him to stay in a small city (Lot even mentions twice that it is just “a little one” ), and God agrees for Abraham's sake not to destroy that one small city (Gen. 19:17-21). Lot and his daughters are scarcely saved and his wife perishes even as Sodom and Gomorrah are destroyed. It is said that Lot is spared for Abraham's sake, not his own (Gen. 19:29). Later Lot repents of staying in the small city, and flees to the mountain, only to there become (by God's providence) the father of the wicked Ammonites and the Moabites.

So just maybe worldly syncretists do not want to claim Lot as their spiritual father.

Back to our discussion of wealth. The system of barter and trade changed slowly. First, as we have seen, men began to look for an intermediate commodity, such as salt, wine, or silver, that could be used as a store of value to help with barter and trade. So long as men lived rural and agrarian lives, there was little need for much silver or gold, and very small amounts of these metals were held as a store of value – and then only to offer relief from the “coincidence of wants”. With urbanization and specialization, came the need for money and for the ability to acquire, hold, and expand it. The Babylonians first systematized the exchange and use of money, as it became fundamental to the new Babylonian urban culture. Hammurabi, the first king of the Babylonian Empire, in his famous code, created extensive rules and laws governing the creation, use, and exchange of money. This is the beginning of the world's system of mammon.

For another 1000 years, the Code of Hammurabi and the first Babylonian system of commerce was used throughout the known world. But then, even as this first Babylonian system of money and exchanged reigned in the world, Nebuchadnezzar came to power in Babylon.

There are two main events in the life of this Nebuchadnezzar that we need to study. The first is the dream he had in Daniel the 2^nd Chapter.

In the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, the king awakens from a dream that he cannot remember. The dream troubles him, so he calls forth all of the Chaldean mystics and Magicians, and all the astrologers and sorcerers, but they are unable to tell him either the substance or the meaning of the dream. Because of this, Nebuchadnezzar grows very angry and orders the death of all the wise men and advisors in Babylon. Arioch, the king's captain reminds the king of Daniel, the wise man of of the captives of Judah. Daniel tells the king he will give him the interpretation after prayer, and retreats to be with his friends and pray for the interpretation. The interpretation is given to Daniel, who then gives it to the king:

“Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the form thereof was terrible. This image's head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass, His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay. Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces. Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth. This is the dream; and we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king. Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory. And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold. And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth. And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise. And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters' clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay. And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken. And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay. And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever. Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure” (Dan 2:31-45).

Here Daniel gives the king of Babylon both the dream he had dreamed, and the interpretation thereof. The king had dreamed of this great image (an idol or statue) made of various metals and materials, and he had watched as a large stone, cut out without hands, crushed the statue, which crumbled into dust or chaff and was blown away of the winds. The stone that smote the feet of the statue then grew into a great mountain and filled the whole earth. Now, Daniel also gives Nebuchadnezzar the interpretation of the dream. Nebuchadnezzar would be the first of four great kingdoms which would ruler over the people of the earth. The Babylonian empire, of which Nebuchadnezzar was the king, would be the gold kingdom. The kingdom would eventually fall and be replaced in order and time by three subsequent empires. The second kingdom, the silver kingdom, is given for us in the Bible as the Kingdom of the Medes and the Persions (or the Kingdom of Medo-Persia). The third kingdom, the kingdom of brass is the Empire of the Greeks. After the fall of the Greek Empire, the Roman Empire (the fourth kingdom) will arise. The fourth kingdom is very interesting and deserves our attention. The fourth kingdom will be the kingdom that remains in power until the end of the age. The fourth empire begins as iron, then as it travels down the legs and into the toes of the statue (through time) it becomes a conglomeration of iron and miry clay. From history we see this fourth kingdom develop first as the Roman Empire, which after it's fall becomes the empire of the Roman Papacy, which reigns through its conglomeration of secular and religious power, in an ever weakening way, until the Lord comes to destroy it.

Now, we need to note that this whole system is one statue. It is one system, even if it is ruled and shaped at different times by different world powers. Each system flows into the next, and the single beast portrayed by the statue still exists as one beast when it is destroyed by the stone, which is Christ.

Daniel tells the King that a very great and awful beast system will be developed, and that he, Nebuchadnezzar is the head and originator of that system. This system will be a culture, a dynasty, a financial and an economic system, and a single kingdom (called the Kingdom of This World) that will dominate history until it is destroyed by Jesus Christ. The final incarnation of this beast will have attributes of all the previous kingdoms, and will add the attributes of each successive system as they are amalgamated into one beast.

Let's move on to the second important event of Nebuchadnezzar's life.

In Daniel Chapter 3 we read that Nebuchadnezzar, apparently smitten with the fact that he was the head of gold, or having become obsessed with gold, and possibly in an attempt to forget or eradicate the idea that his golden kingdom would be replaced by lesser kingdoms in succession, built an image much like the one in his dream, only he had it built (or gilded) completely in gold. Let's read about it:

“Nebuchadnezzar the king made an image of gold, whose height was threescore cubits, and the breadth thereof six cubits: he set it up in the plain of Dura, in the province of Babylon” (Dan 3:1).

So we note that Nebuchadnezzar made the image 60 cubits high, and 6 cubits wide, which number, 66, is the precursor of the mark of the eventual beast it prefigured, 666, which ought to help direct us in the right direction concerning the spiritual root and direction of image and its purpose. The number 6 is the number of man, and the eventual beast (the system begun here at Babylon but completed in the end of time during the fourth (or Roman) period, would be a system of worship that is man-centered, so the final six would not be evident in this typological image of gold. The image of gold was built for worship, and as a religious idol, it was forced upon the people of Babylon as a god. It prefigures a man-centered system of economics, and society that will have all the attributes of the four kingdoms built into culture and lives of the people. The event was being held, it was said, during an economic convention in Babylon where all of the great men and authorities in the kingdom were coming together to unite under this kingdom of gold. Howard B. Rand in his Study in Revelation says this:

“Here we have an account of the birth of the gold standard, when by solemn decree it was made a controlled medium of exchange, the possession of which became essential to those who would buy and sell in the world markets”

From this point onward, the world had created a system for itself where wealth was no longer defined as the ability to abundantly feed, clothe, and care for your family and servants from the land. From this point on, wealth required the acquisition and holding of the means of exchange, instead of actual property, land, cattle, etc. The intermediate means had become the idol, and metals – which you cannot eat, which will not provide you shelter, and with which you cannot use to clothe yourselves – had become the primary form of “currency” and measure of wealth. As is natural among wicked men, the rationalization was eventually made that carrying and holding gold and silver was no longer practical. Soon coins of inferior materials were substituted for those of gold and silver. Silver, the original form of money, was soon phased out in favor of gold backing alone. It was not long before paper money came into existence, originally backed by gold held in storage at “banks”, but eventually it was backed by nothing but the word of lying governments. Paper and coin would be phased out in favor of digital money, wealth would be measured by blips on computers, and by the amount of debt one can handle while still appearing wealthy. All of this was designed in order to allow wicked men to fall farther and farther away from the garden from which they originated. Without this system of money and without this Babylonian economic system, cities would collapse, and men would be forced to return to the land and produce from it – or perish.

God, in the brilliance of the creation, had abundantly provided for Adam and all of his progeny. So long as God's children remained separate from the system of “the world”, and so long as they were solidly based in an agrarian system according to God's command, they flourished and produced untold wealth. But man, through covetousness and greed, created an economic system that enslaved him; that would not allow him to buy or sell (trade within the urban economic system) unless he was willing to become fully invested in the system; unless the system was worshiped and enthroned in his life. This system, the Babylonian beast, is the system we call “The Kingdom of This World”.

Since the blood of the Babylonian system is money, the love of money (greed and covetousness) became necessary for success and survival in that system. This system and love is what is called Mammon in the Bible. Mammon is not just a corrupt money system, but it is worldly-mindedness and the culture and society that is created, through the generations, by Mammon worshipers.

Contrasted here are the two systems:

The Kingdom of God, where God's sanctified people rely on Him solely for their food, shelter, clothing, etc. and for the means of life.

The Kingdom of This World, where worldlings rely on themselves, mammon, and their corrupt economic and social system for the means of life.

“Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light. But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness! No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment?” (Mat 6:19-25).

This is to say that today, as you read this, you serve either God or mammon. One or the other. And this is not a mystic declaration. It is real and practical and has real evidences. If you life in the world, according to the rudiments, course, and fashion of the world, then you are serving mammon – regardless of where you say your heart is. You cannot say that you live in and according to the world culture, but you are separate from it in your heart, because that would be to say that you are successfully serving two masters, which Jesus says is impossible.

This is not to say that in no way should you concern yourself at all with eating, drinking, or for raiment for your body. This is saying that the use of unauthorized means in order to obtain these things is forbidden. To rely on the world is idolatry. Reliance on the world, and its Babylonian system, is the serving of mammon. God is not changing his mind here and telling us that utilizing proper means (agrarianism, farming, gardening, etc. whereby God provides for us) is wordliness. In the proper Agrarian/Separatist system, it is God that provides for us, and according to His own principles, not according to the rudiments of the world.

Separatism is a fundamental principle of Agrarianism because both are pillars of God's Kingdom, and both are necessary for a right view and a right mind towards God's Kingdom.

In the next part, if the Lord wills, we will discuss the two kingdoms, and we will go into greater depth on how the great deception concerning them has progressed.

I am your servant in Christ Jesus,

Michael Bunker

Separatism as a Fundamental Principle, 2A

2008-09-09T17:07:00.002-05:00

Separatism as a Fundamental Principle of Christian Agrarianism, Part 2-A
Posted by Michael Bunker
editor@biblicalagrarianism.com

Before you read this part, go read Part 1-A Read part 1-B

Becoming Babylon

We have established in the first two parts that Separatism is:

a) Reflected in the entire teaching of the whole Bible.
b) Not contrary to, or in contest with, evangelism or missionary work.
c) Commanded by God

Now it is important that we view Separatism in its relationship with Christian Agrarianism, and we will begin to do so in this part. When examining an issue like this, it is beneficial to have a vision (Prov. 29:18) of what God's intent was for the happiness and perpetuation of His people, and it is also valuable to be able to see the panorama of human existence and activity as man has fallen further and further from God's original intent. History, it is said, is a light by which we may guide our feet, and it is surely for this reason that God saw fit to give us the history of mankind, and of Israel, in written form.

God first placed man in a garden (not a city, or a disordered wasteland, or a jungle or thicket, but a well-ordered and planted garden), and commanded that man till and tend the garden for his provision and for the health, happiness, and perpetuation of his life. God put man in the garden with the command that he dress it and keep it, and immediately, before ever there was a fall or sin or death, He gave a command for man to be separate from sin. God commanded man to stay separate from a particular tree, a tree which provided access to that unauthorized knowledge which would not tend towards his happiness and obedience:

"And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it. And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die" (Gen. 2:15-17).

Here again we see the pattern of separation. Now look at the entire pattern as it played out:

God created the light, and separated the light from the darkness (Gen. 1:3-4

God created the firmament, and separated the waters from the waters (Gen. 1:6-7

God separated the dry land from the waters (Gen. 1:10)

God caused the green grass and the herbs and trees to come forth out of the ground (Gen. 11-12)

God created the lights in the firmament, the stars, moon, and sun, to separate the night from the day and to divide light from darkness (Gen. 1:14-18).

God caused the fish and the birds to come forth abundantly (Gen. 1:20-22).

God caused the animals and creeping thing to come forth by separating them from the earth (creating them from dirt) (Gen. 1:24-25).

God created man by separating him from the earth and giving him dominion over it. He put a separation between man and the animal kingdom by making man King over it. God commanded man to have dominion and to manage the earth and subdue it, and to bring it under authority for God's glory (Gen. 1:26-28).

God separated the Seventh Day unto Himself as a perpetual sabbath day of rest, and rested from His own labors on that day (Gen. 2:1-4).

God separated man by command and law from all that which, however enticing and beneficial it might seem, would not be conducive to his life and happiness (Gen. 2:15-17).

As we have mentioned, God planted man in the Garden of Eden, and allowed him access to all of the trees of the Garden except for that tree of the knowledge of good and evil. God separated man from that tree by way of command, that he touch it not, neither eat from it, lest he die.

Let's take a moment and review some of our principle terms, because I am going to make an illustration and it is critical that you understand what I am saying. There are two opposing positions in view here:

1. Separatism - an advocate of separation from something established - ecclesiastical, political, cultural, or social. From the term separate, which means "to divide, sever, or set apart", or "to set apart from a number for a particular service".

2. Syncretism - the attempted reconciliation or union of different or opposing principles, practices, or parties, as in philosophy or religion.

Now, as an ironic aside - worldling Christian professors and theologians believe that there is a "syncretism" or compromise that can be had between even these opposite two worldviews. Since everything they are and everything they believe is based on syncretism, they must conclude that there is even a compromise between syncretism and separation. This compromise creates nothing but a monster, since it is really just syncretism repackaged in order to salve and silence the conscience of man, who knows instinctively that God commands separatism from the kingdom of this world.

Back to the garden. So the separatist would see God's commands in the Garden of Eden as absolute. Do not have anything whatsoever to do with the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. God was unequivocal - Do not eat from it, lest ye die. The syncretist would say, "Yea, hath God said, ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? Surely you may eat of it and not die. You see, God is interested in your heart! If your heart is right, it doesn't matter what your body is doing. God wants you to be clean and separate in your heart, so as long as you feel clean and separate in your heart, then go ahead and eat of any tree you like, even the forbidden tree, because God knows your heart". This is what they are saying when they say, "Go ahead and live however you like, God doesn't care. Every legal occupation, every worldview, every way of life is equal, so long as you feel good about it and accept it in your heart". This is also what the dominionist or reconstructionist is saying when he says, "Yes, we confess that the world is evil, and that the prince and ruler of it is God's enemy, and that its foundation and principles are fundamentally contrary to God's way and order, but... God is using us to reclaim the world and to bring it under the dominion of Christ. So... in order to convert the world, we must live like the world. Live however you like so long as you put Christ's name on everything you do, and so long as you try to convert the world around you to this same type of syncretistic "christianity""

That is the fundamental difference between Separatism and Syncretism. Syncretism always says, "Yea, hath God said?" and tries to find a way to continue in disobedience by salving and anesthetizing the conscience.

It is not unimportant that we mention here that there was another tree in the garden – a tree from which our first parents might have freely eaten. That tree is the Tree of Life (Gen. 2:9). We know that this Tree of Life is representative of Christ, of whom it is said He was “separate from sinners” (Heb. 7:26). Christ, who called men out to be and live separate from the world, and who was Himself crucified “without the gate” (Heb. 13:12), and calls His own beloved to come to Him “without the camp”, is that Tree of Life that the sons and daughters of men are always rejecting in favor of the tree of knowledge (wordliness).

We have established that before the fall, God's command was very plain and unequivocal. God put man in the Garden and commanded him to keep it and till it (Gen. 3:15) - so man was created as an morally neutral but upright, holy, and innocent creature, capable of serving and glorifying him, but also capable of disobeying him. Man's vocation was to be an agrarian one, and he was designed and intended for the working and ordering of God's creation for God's glory. This command of God has never been rescinded, nor has His intention for man changed in the intervening millennia. After the fall we find the command re-established:

"Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken" (Gen 3:23).

I hope you understand that from this point, it is necessary that I give a sweeping panorama of man's folly on this planet, and I am going to do so in less detail than I would like – but, like Stephen who prophesied using history to those who would stone him, it is necessary that we cover the intervening thousands of years in a few short breaths.

Man was sent forth to till the ground, to take dominion over it, and to manage it for God's glory. Immediately we see man's intention to do otherwise, and to build cities, and to conglomerate and unify in order to bypass God's intentions. We also see God's opinion and hostility towards the building of cities, and to the attempts of men to come together and pull together for their own perceived worldly benefits.

Adam and Eve, following their rebellion and after they were barred from the garden from whence they came, conceived a son named Cain who, though he was originally a tiller of the ground, was a covetous rebel, and became the first murderer. And what is his curse? God says he will no longer will be a successful farmer: “When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength” (Gen. 4:12); and he shall be a wanderer on the earth, subject to the whims of the earth and the people thereon. He will be subject to the worlds culture, and a slave to the prince of the earth (Satan). Upon hearing that he has been removed and terminated from his divinely given vocation as a farmer, what does Cain say?

“And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment is greater than I can bear” (Gen. 4:13).

Going out from the presence of the Lord, and continuing in his rebellion, Cain determines to build a great city, the shining monument to his sin. This city he names after his son Enoch (now, this is a different Enoch than that righteous son of Jared who “walked with God” (Gen. 5:21)). Many who have studied this subject in much depth have concluded that this city, built by Cain, was the city archaeologists and historians know as Tenochtitlan, which is modern day Mexico City, the largest city on the earth today. Remember that the earth was not divided at this time, meaning that the continents as we know them, divided by the seas, did not exist. The earth was divided at the time of Peleg (Gen. 10:25). We can't know this for a fact, but it is interesting that it is very likely that the city that Cain built might still be with us, and that it might be the largest city in the world today. That city is the archetype of every city in the world today.

Now, the earth became corrupt and filled with violence, because mankind had corrupted his way upon the earth (Gen. 6:12), and had refused the commands of separation and agrarianism given by God. Many writers and commentators have written about this time of corruption and violence, but we know that as man moved away from his true vocation, as he built cities and engaged in idolatry, he moved further away from God. His way was corrupted because man always believes he has a better plan, and that his way will bring him to glory without what he considers the stifling rules and commands of a just God. There are several different theories as to what type of corruption prompted God to destroy the whole earth. One theory says that the sons of Seth, sons of the righteous bloodline, took to themselves wives of the daughters of Cain (Gen. 6:2). John Gill, who holds to this theory, has this to say:

“According to the Arabic writers, immediately after the death of Adam the family of Seth was separated from the family of Cain; Seth took his sons and their wives to a high mountain (Hermon), on the top of which Adam was buried, and Cain and all his sons lived in the valley beneath, where Abel was slain; and they on the mountain obtained a name for holiness and purity, and were so near the angels that they could hear their voices and join their hymns with them; and they, their wives and their children, went by the common name of the sons of God: and now these were adjured, by Seth and by succeeding patriarchs, by no means to go down from the mountain and join the Cainites; but notwithstanding in the times of Jared some did go down, it seems; and after that others, and at this time it became general; and being taken with the beauty of the daughters of Cain and his posterity, they did as follows: and they took them wives of all that they chose”

In this theory, which seems to be the most widely held, the Sethite line violated the command of separation and purity, corrupted themselves by their syncretistic and miscegenetic marriages with the worldly Cainites, and brought destruction upon the whole world.

A second popular theory claims that angels, falling and leaving their first estate (Jude 1:6), began to lust after the daughters of men (mortal human women) and took them as wives, creating a race of giants (Gen. 6:4) who were not fully human, and therefore not subject to redemption. It is interesting to note that the Jude 1:6 verse, which tells us that the angels left their first estate, is followed by this:

“Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire” (Jud 1:7).

Supporters of this theory take from this that the sin of the fallen angels (leaving their first estate) was sexual in nature, and involved “going after strange flesh”, which means going after different flesh, or, that which is of a different kind, race, or species – in this case, leaving heaven permanently to cohabit with human women, and, in doing so, producing mongrel offspring. This too violates the principles and commands of separatism.

Ok, so in either theory we can conclusively determine that the singular sin which brought forth God's most destructive and damning judgment – in all of the history of the world – was a sin against God's command of separation. Herein we see God's mind on the subject, and we come to know God's intention in that judgment he will bring in the future.

God saves Noah and his progeny through the means of separation – he causes them to go into the ark, and he shuts the door, and rains down vengeance on those who are now His enemies – those who refused the preaching of Noah, and who would not separate from the corruption of the world.

After the world and every living thing in it is destroyed, God commands Noah and his family to go out from the ark, and to take the animals forth that they may breed and replenish the earth, and in Genesis 8:20 through 8:22 God institutes the type of sacrificial worship, and again, using agrarian terminology, commands man to live separate agrarian lives, holy unto him:

“While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease” (Gen 8:22).

God gives forth threatenings and promises to Noah and his family, who are to go forth and be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth (Gen. 9:7); and Noah understood this to be a command to him to be engaged in agrarian work, as it is said, “And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard” (Gen 9:20). Note that Noah did not decide to build a city.

Noah's son Ham, like Cain a rebellious and wicked son, uncovered his father's nakedness and sinned against Noah and against God, and for this he and his line were marked and cursed to be servants to the lines of Shem and Japheth. Ham's son Cush begat Nimrod “who began to be a mighty one in the earth”. John Gill says, “that is, he was the first that formed a plan of government, and brought men into subjection to it”. The Jews say that Nimrod was the first king after God. Nimrod fundamentally re-ordered life throughout his dominions so that man was no longer free under the authority of God and His righteous commandments alone, but now suffered to be put under the dominion of a human king who ordered things after the commands of Satan, the Prince of this World. Nimrod patterned or copied his kingdom after a corrupt version of the kingdom of God, even forming a golden crown for himself after “seeing the figure of a golden crown in heaven” (John Gill Commentary).

“And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. Out of that land went forth Asshur, and builded Nineveh, and the city Rehoboth, and Calah, And Resen between Nineveh and Calah: the same is a great city (Gen 10:10-12)”

So here again we see how the wicked, who despise God's authority and who desire to usurp Him and to replace Him, immediately begin to build cities and gather men to themselves under their own pretended authority.

It is in this Babel, built and founded by Nimrod, that a tower begins to be built:

“And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech. And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there. And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them throughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for morter. And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded. And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech. So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth” (Gen 11:1-9).

Here we have the model of what has become modern urbanism and syncretism. All of the agents of syncretism, no matter how religious and spiritual they sound, have as an unstated mission statement “let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth”. Please note that the enemies of God are saying that, if man does not join together in urban and worldly fellowship, he will be scattered upon the face of the whole earth – which was God's command concerning man. Man scattered over the earth, tilling it and managing it for God's glory, will be free and unencumbered by the capricious tyrannies of wicked men. Man will be free to produce and harvest food from the ground (God's increase), and to worship God according to his conscience, and will not be enslaved to human economies, false currencies, debt and credit schemes, etc. This is what Satan did not want, so he puts it in men to come together and to live urban lives in close fellowship with their fallen brethren.

Whether they are using the argument of missionary evangelism, or Christ's eating and drinking with publicans, all syncretists – like Nimrod, Ham, and Cain – desire that man will not separate from worldliness and from the “kingdom of this world” as God has commanded. No matter how they howl and moan at the inference, they are agents of Babel, and God is found in His own Word to be steadfast against them.

From Babel (which became Babylon) we have the foundation of two antichristian systems:

Our current political, economic and social model – the urban nation state or kingdom being dominant over God's heritage and the freedom of the individual - including a monetary system which is designed to enslave men to an urban system of currency, debt, and credit.

The Babylonian religious system, which evolved into Talmudic Judaism and modern apostate Christianity, which is codified and represented by Papal Catholicism (the birth mother of the Charismatic/Pentacostal movement, and almost all modern nominal "Protestant" sects).

We will look at these two systems in more depth in a future part. It is important now to review, before we go on to the next part.

Review

A close study of Biblical history shows that our modern Babylonian system is a result of 6000 years of rebellion against God's commands concerning those who would worship Him in truth. Babylonianism, pushed by the prophets of worldliness and syncretism, is that same beast and sin which brought about God's judgment at the great flood, and the confounding of the languages on the plains of Shinar. This Babylonian sea-beast, depicted for us in the 13^th Chapter of the Revelation of Jesus Christ, is at perennial war with the true Saints of God (Rev. 13:7). God's opinion of syncretism and worldliness is well known, and we can be certain that His judgment will fall against this world, and all the proponents and false prophets of it.

In the next part we will examine how the modern Babylonian system of politics, economics, industry, and culture, captures, enslaves, and trades in the souls of men. We will study the root of the love of the world, which is mammon, and we will study the love of mammon, which is that love – antithetical to the love of God – which is called root and basis of all evil.

I am your servant in Christ Jesus,

Michael Bunker

Separatism as a Fundamental Principle, 1B

2008-08-19T10:08:00.002-05:00

Separatism as a Fundamental Principle of Christian Agrarianism, Part 1 - B
Posted by Michael Bunker
editor@biblicalagrarianism.com

(This first article is long and will be divided into several "parts" for this blog)

Before you read this part, go read Part 1-A

The “Great Commission”?

Let me start this section by making a few points. I include this discussion within the larger discussion of Separatism, because "missionary evangelism" is a topic used as the primary argument against the right doctrine of Separatism (as if the two are contradictory or exclusive, which they are not). I find the argument to be tiresome for a couple reasons:

1. Generally (or most often, in my experience) the person who uses the “missionary evangelism” argument against the doctrine of Separatism does no evangelism himself. For example, I have traveled somewhere around 3 million miles, and preached to literally hundreds of thousands of people on 3 continents (as a Predestinationist Separatist!) in the last 7 years. These numbers do not include the millions who have heard the gospel on our websites, or the thousands of people a day who either read or listen to my audio sermons. I do not say this to pump up myself or the ministry - or to take credit for anything that God alone has done. I only mention it to illustrate a point... I am the product of what I believe to be true. But most of those who I have engaged
in debate on Separatism, and who have used the “Great Commission” as an argument for Syncretism – have not gone on missions on any real scope, preached or evangelized at all! A few may have, but most have not. So the point is that there is a very high probability that the person who is using missionary evangelism as a "trump card" against separatism, is neither a missionary, nor an evangelist.

2. In the same way, the advocates of modern missionary evangelism (and Syncretism) rarely consider the product of their worldview, nor do they themselves examine which Gospel is being preached.

In a recent letter challenging my teaching on Separatism, a writer alternately charged us with worldliness (for going to stores, for having an internet site and for evangelizing) and at the same time he accused us of some wicked, cultic form of separatism which denies Christians the opportunity to evangelize the world. It seems that any stick is good enough to beat true Christians! Even when those sticks are contradictory. It is usually a good sign (as Christians)
when you are being crucified between two thieves. This is an important issue, and it is one that needs to be handled very precisely. One of the great mantras within professing Christianity is called "The Great Commission". The commission is indeed great, but if it is handled improperly, it is a great commission of evil and source of befuddlement for God's true church. Just look how this blunt instrument is now being used against the doctrine we have just illustrated (Separatism), a great commandment of God.

We want to start out by saying that we DO believe that God raises up some (but few) individuals; and we believe He can and does send these individuals “out” with the Gospel of peace. We would never deny the great works done through people like George Whitefield, Adoniram Judson and Hudson Taylor. What we intend to examine here is the modern idea of “The Great Commission” and how Missionary Evangelism has corrupted the true gospel.

"And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature." (Mark 16:15)

Applying this verse recklessly to the whole Body of Christ has been one of the great victories of the modern apostate religious system. Please note before we start that I AM NOT SAYING that the gospel should not be preached to every creature. Nor am I claiming that any particular Christian does not have the obligation to preach the gospel, or that we ourselves are not obligated to hear the Gospel and obey it. What I am trying to do, is properly understand this verse in light of what God would have us look like and how He would have us act today. In short, What is our duty?

Let's take a look at the preceding verse:

"Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen" (Mark 16:14).

Note that this great commission is given specifically to the "eleven", and it is specifically given because of their unbelief. The resurrected Jesus Christ appears to his eleven remaining disciples and the primary purpose for his appearance before them is to “upbraid” (or strongly rebuke or scold) them for their unbelief! Read verses 9-11. Mary Magdalene goes and tells the eleven disciples that Jesus lives, but they refuse to believe her. Then, in verse 12 he appears personally to two of the "eleven" and these two go (in verse 13) to tell the other nine (the residue) and these nine also refuse to believe.

Remember that Jesus Christ had told these eleven men personally that he would be resurrected, and every one of these eleven men had claimed to believe Him. So Jesus was dealing in this section of scripture with a rampant issue of unbelief among those who He had personally picked... those who had been "with Him" (verse 10). But why, we must ask, did they not believe? Had they not walked with Christ? Had they not talked with Him? Had they not witnessed his many and manifold miracles? Why would they refuse to believe? Well, as we well should well know, belief is not within the power of man. Belief is a gift of God (Phil. 1:29, John 6:29). It was not yet given unto these disciples to believe, and it is evident that the gift of belief had been
temporarily withheld from them for God's own glory. No one can believe in God (and all that He says about Himself) without belief being given from God. The Holy Spirit needs to reside with us, helping us to believe. So Jesus sends out these particular eleven hard-hearted disciples, with the specific injunction that they are to go to the entire known world at that time and preach the "good news". Then, because of their unbelief, and knowing that no one would naturally believe them, He gives these "eleven" signposts so they can know when someone has truly believed:

1) They that are spiritually regenerated (born-again) by the baptism of the Holy Spirit will be the saved.

2) And those that are not given the gift of belief shall be the damned. Now we know that the following verses, apply to the eleven only – because in verse 20 it says "and they went forth". Who are "they" who went forth? It must be the specific "eleven" to whom He is speaking. And it is confirmed to us plainly that they (the eleven) fulfilled this scripture by "preaching every where". And it is confirmed that verses 18 and 19 refer to the "eleven", because here in verse 20 it says that God "was working with them" to confirm the signs of their apostleship with the signs and miracles that He had promised. So this section of scripture is a treatise on UNBELIEF and not on evangelism. God sent broken and unbelieving vessels out to preach His gospel, so that when the gospel was spread about, HE would get all the glory. He confirmed His message in them particularly and fulfilled this scripture before the eyes of the world. It was necessary that Christianity was to spread far and wide quickly so that it could not be stamped out by persecution; and it was also necessary that it grow organically and not organizationally, so that it could not be wiped out by the Romans or corrupted by the Jews.

So we have proved our point "positively", in that we have shown in context that it was written specifically to the "eleven". Next, I will prove our point "negatively", in that I will show that it could not have been written to the whole church.

So now let us look at this section of verses "negatively". Can it be that this verse is supposed to apply to the "whole church", as in every Christian that ever lived? I believe that it cannot, because the context does not allow that meaning, and because that interpretation would contradict the plain teaching of scriptures elsewhere. If I (according to the opinion of modern “christianity”) am to apply this scripture to my life, then I must ask myself why I am currently
sitting at my home? (and why are you?) I still live and breathe, and I have not been martyred or taken home to heaven, so why am I not physically going forth to every country preaching the gospel to every creature? The acts of “preaching” and “teaching” are used synonymously in most of the Bible. Our primary verse in this study is Mark 16:15 which commands the eleven to “preach the gospel”. The exact parallel verse in Matthew 28:19 commands the eleven to “teach all nations”. So in our context here, preaching and teaching are synonymous. So why would James say, “My brethren, be not many masters (teachers or preachers), knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation” (James 3:1)? It doesn’t make much sense to tell people not to be teachers, if Jesus is contradicting this exhortation by commanding EVERY CHRISTIAN to
“teach all nations”. And, of course, Paul asks in 1 Corinthians the 12th Chapter “Are all… teachers?” The answer is… OF COURSE NOT. We are all (all believers) placed in the body with different and important gifts, to be employed on God's behalf for the edification and the growing of the body. So we must ask. If the Bible commands us in Mark chapter 16 to personally travel and evangelize, then why does the Bible openly encourage some people to stay home and live peaceably and to do good? If this scripture is meant to apply to every Christian, then almost every Christian that has ever lived has failed miserably in fulfilling it. And despite what the charismatics say, I can personally tell you that every “so-called” manifestation of miracles that I have seen from those who claim to be Christians has come from practical religious athiests who have convinced themselves that emotion and manipulation is the fountainhead of the miraculous. And, after all, if this is a universal verse, then all who believe are also to take up serpents and to drink poison (Mark 16:18).

Why, I ask, when the apostles themselves gathered together in Acts the 15th chapter to consider everything that is commanded of those who believe in Christ, do they command this: "That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well."

Why did the Jerusalem council not reaffirm the Great Commission, having specifically considered all that was to be required of Christians? Why are we commanded by Paul and all the other apostles to keep God's commandments, the moral commandments and particularly his Royal commandments (to love God and to love our neighbor) as the fulfillment of our total duty to God? Why is "missionary" evangelism absent from the Decalogue? And why is it not shadowed forth in the Old Testament? In the Old Testament, we do not see God sending Israelites out to evangelize and convert the surrounding heathen, in fact, in most places in the Bible they are encouraged to stay as separate as possible from them. However, we do see in the Old Testament where God sent specific, chosen vessels (whether they be angels or men) to gather His elect together out of the heathenish peoples. God scatters and re-gathers His elect according to His own glorious and supernatural power. He utilizes a very few, very select, very chosen vessels in which to accomplish His tasks.

Modern corporate “Christianity” (whether purposely or not, we shall eventually see) has totally missed what true Christian evangelism is. We are commanded by God to be Christians (to live our lives as Christ commanded). That one act is our fundamental duty. We are commanded to live Christian lives by grace and to work Christian works by faith. This, alone, is our duty to God and to man. Modernist evangelistic “christianity” has become so wrapped up in “preaching
the gospel”, while simultaneously rejecting the pure and true Gospel of Sovereign Grace completely. It is as if they were to say, “We care not what food we feed to the poor and the downtrodden. If it is a poisonous and deadly meal, we care not. But we must give them more of it, or they will never have their hunger satiated”.

So here is the main point:

THE GOSPEL IS NOT FOR UNREGENERATE UNBELIEVERS! IT IS FOR THE CHURCH!

The Gospel exists for this reason: "That ye might walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing, being fruitful in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God; Strengthened with all might, according to his glorious power, unto all patience and longsuffering with joyfulness; Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son" (Colossians 1:10-13).

The Gospel is for the CONVERSION of the elect, not for the REGENERATION of sinners. Only the power of God through the quickening of the Holy Spirit can regenerate a lost sinner. The Gospel is to convert to Christianity and to right-mindedness those whom the Spirit has already regenerated.

Note that Paul says this in Romans: “So, as much as in me is, I am ready to preach the gospel to you that are at Rome also” (Romans 1:15).

So Paul says he is ready to preach the Gospel in Rome to "you" that are there. Who is the "you" he is talking to? Let's look: "To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ." (Romans 1:7).

Interesting don’t you think?

But, some might argue, just look at verse 16 of that chapter. It says that the Gospel is "it is the power of God unto salvation". This is the principle memory verse of many Gospel salvationists. But read the next half of the verse, where it says "to every one that believeth".

The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believes! It does not say that they are saved by the Gospel; it says that the inward work of regeneration is shown forth as salvation through their belief. They were given belief first!

Here is an even greater proof:

"For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect." (1 Corinthians 1:17).

Paul specifically states here that gospel does not save (as in eternal salvation/regeneration). The applying by the Holy Spirit of the benefits of the Cross to the elect of God is what saves eternally. Paul does not "baptize" or "quicken" eternally. He preaches the Gospel. Let's look at the next verse: "For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God." (1 Corinthians 1:18). To those who ARE SAVED, the Gospel is the power of God. It brings about conversion of the mind. Now when we preach, we do not know who is regenerated, and who remains in an unregenerate state. So if we are called to preach, we preach the fullness of the true Gospel to all creatures. But to those who are perishing without grace, the preaching will be foolishness. It will have no eternal effect. But to those which are the elect of God, this same preaching will bring forth out from them the internal work of salvation, which must have previously been wrought by the Holy Spirit in them. The next objection will usually come out of the book of Romans: "How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." (Romans 10:14-17)

Because of the sometimes confusing structure of this section of scripture, it is often used to preach "gospel salvation". Let's take it really slowly and examine those parts of the verses that can be easily confused. First, the average reader will be unaware of what is referred to when it says "Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?" Let's look: Isaiah 53:1 says: "Who has believed our report? And to whom is the arm of Jehovah revealed?" And of course this is a good encapsulation of our question. We know that the "arm of Jehovah" is Jesus Christ. So to whom
has Jesus Christ been REVEALED? John speaks of this same section of Isaiah when he says: "so that the saying of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spoke, 'Lord, who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?' Therefore they could not believe, because Isaiah said again, 'He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, so that they should not see with their eyes nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them'” (John 12:38-40). John here tells us that ISAIAH is saying that only those to whom the Lord is revealed, can BELIEVE on Him. So, knowing that scripture does not disagree with scripture - let's look at Romans again. Romans chapter 10 says that hearing is a necessary prerequisite for believing, and we wholeheartedly agree. But how can they hear, so that they can believe? This is the question that this section Romans addresses. So our scriptures say, "How can they hear without a preacher". Which is to say, How can they hear on their own? Don't they need a messenger? The word "preacher" here, means "herald" or "messenger". Every "herald" or "messenger" must be sent. The preacher issue will end up pretty moot, because Paul will tell us in verse 15 that many who have had the Gospel preached unto them do not believe it. This, at last, is the whole point of these scriptures! Paul is saying, how do people hear the gospel? The tension builds… HOW DOES THIS ALL TAKE PLACE?

It is at this point that Paul brings in the story of Isaiah, who proves that God must reveal His Son to those who He has not personally hardened and blinded. He must cause those to see who previously could not see, and He must cause those to hear who could not hear. How does He do that? Well, (Paul says) “faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the WORD of God”. We must keep this in mind, because here is where much of the confusion comes in. In verse 15, Paul admits openly that many preachers are sent to preach the Gospel. But there is a problem. In verse 16 he admits that many who hear the Gospel do not believe it. They do not obey what they
hear. So regular "hearing" (through the ears) is not the cause of faith, and it is not what brings about salvation. So Paul asks the question that Isaiah asked... "Who shall believe our report?" Well, I will tell you who will believe it. All those to whom the Arm of the Lord is revealed will certainly hear it and believe it. So, knowing this, we can know that faith comes by hearing. Not the hearing that is mere "listening" through the ear canals. But faith comes by spiritually being allowed to hear the Gospel. How does this happen? It can only happen by the Word of God! But this word "Word" is not speaking of the written word (The Bible) at all. This word "Word" is the Greek word “rhema”, which means - the spoken word, or a direct command So now it all clicks. It all starts to come together. Faith comes by hearing, but we can only hear by the direct command from God. God says to me particularly, "you will hear" and then I hear. When Jesus Christ is revealed to me I will hear Him and believe Him. Now first I must be enabled to hear, so later when a preacher or teacher declares Christ to me, I can hear him preach the Gospel and say, "WOW, I BELIEVE THAT!" Now I can believe in Christ. Now I can receive the gift of faith so that my belief in Christ will not be merely a superficial form of mental ascension, but it will be a saving faith in Christ.

So Paul says:

1) Not everyone can hear.
2) The Lord must be revealed FIRST, before He can be believed upon.
3) Hearing comes from the direct command of God, and that command is not universal, but is particular to whom God will reveal His Son.
4) The Gospel can only be "heard" if God, through His spoken command concerning us particularly, allows us to Hear it.

This is what we have always said. And this is what we teach.

So we do not believe in "Gospel Salvation" or "Gospel Regeneration". We do believe in Holy Spirit Regeneration, and Gospel Conversion. Let us look at another objection. To the Corinthians, Paul says this: "Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain." (1 Corinthians 15:1-2).

Some will say that these verses teach that we are saved by the Gospel. But that is not what these verses say at all. We must remember that our Bible has been translated into the English tongue from another language which has differing speech patterns. Paul is dealing in this chapter with those who deny the resurrection of Christ (verse 12). He specifically mentions that those who are saved are those who have believed the gospel "which I preached unto you". There is now another gospel which is being preached, and that gospel denies the resurrection of Christ. Paul says that if we stand fast and firm in HIS Gospel (that of the truth of the resurrection) we are saved. So if we stand in this truth, then we are saved and we have not believed in vain. So this is another verse that cannot be used to prove Gospel salvation. These verses give us a deeper understanding of what the Gospel is for: "But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake. For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ." (2 Corinthians 4:3-6).

As the Doctrines of Grace openly proclaim, the unregenerate cannot receive the Gospel, nor can they hear it. Only the regenerate mind/heart can hear the Gospel and believe it. We know that the Gospel has been truly, spiritually heard when it is obeyed. The Gospel is a means of CONVERSION, and it was designed to make lost sheep into found sheep. It was never designed to turn goats into sheep, which is impossible. Paul calls the Gospel a "mystery" (Ephesians 6:19), and it accepted by all those who believe in the power and glory of God that "mysteries" must be unveiled to the spirit by the Holy Spirit of God. It is evident that the Gospel has been hard locked away from billions of people who have lived and died on this planet, having never had the Gospel preached unto them. Arminians believe that the Gospel must be preached to "every creature" so that they can stand or fall in judgment based on whether or not they "believed
the gospel". But the Arminian has no explanation as to why God would keep the Gospel from millions and millions of humans, who perished without ever hearing the good news of Christ at all. The Arminian must, then, believe that there are billions in hell who are there because mankind failed to preach the gospel to them. The Arminian is therefore logically to deduce that (since he always assumes he is saved) he personally will be in heaven because of LUCK or CHANCE. He just happened to be born in a time and place where the gospel (or, shall we say, "a" gospel) is preached everywhere all the time. So it is CHANCE + GOSPEL + WORKS + The Work of Christ = SALVATION for the Arminian.

They may deny it, but it is the logical conclusion that can be drawn from what they believe. Now, sadly, many who believe in the Doctrines of Sovereign Grace also have fallen for this same error.
So let me say regarding evangelism that we DO preach the Gospel. But the true Gospel is not what most modernist “christians” think it is. The true Gospel is the Gospel of God’s Sovereignty and His Grace and Mercy towards His sheep. We preach the Gospel, not by pushing a decisionist gospel on the whole world without any consideration of the truth. We preach the Gospel by living live that are set apart and holy unto God. We preach the Gospel by having a right worldview and by rejecting false gospels and false worldly ways. We preach the Gospel by being Christians, and by declaring the truth to those who ask us about the hope that is in us.

Does God have evangelists today? Of course He does.

Is everyone an evangelist? Of course not.

I absolutely believe that the true Gospel should be preached. God knows that there are elect of God out there who have never heard it, and it is the power and means of their conversion and it shows forth their salvation, if indeed they are the saved. Many millions have been converted by the preaching of the Gospel. Many lost sheep are brought back into the fold by means of the Gospel, so preach it we must. But let us examine two very different ways in which evangelism can be viewed:

1) The Sovereign Grace method - which was utilized by the Reformers, the Puritans and the early church in America. This was the evangelism which made parts of the American continent a paradise on earth. Evangelize your family, and submit your own ways unto God. Keep His commandments; be a peculiar people. Separate from the world and all worldliness, and be Holy unto God. Invite ALL to come unto Christ, but make sure the Christ that is lifted up is the real Jesus Christ of the Bible, for He says "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all
men unto me." (John 12:32) Christ draws men unto Himself. Christ saves men, and he saves them before they ever hear the Gospel - as Paul himself can attest from personal experience.

2) The Pharisaical method, which is nowadays called "missionary evangelism". This form is based on the false idea that if WE do not evangelize, men will not be saved. This method denies that God has manifold and wonderful ways to save souls, and does not need men in order to do it. Jesus said this: "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than
yourselves." (Matthew 23:15).

God does raise up evangelists and missionaries. There is no doubt that He does. But the true ones (like George Whitefield) will be known by the Gospel that they preach. I challenge you to find more than a handful of missionaries or evangelists who preach the true Gospel in the world today. Instead, hordes of Americanized missionaries preach the devilish gospel of Arminianism,
swarming foreign shores - consuming the people and leading them into error. These lands are not benefited by Christianity, but the churches and ministry boards are benefited greatly by the huge sums of money they can raise by emotionally manipulating fat, dumb American "christians" to fulfill the "great commission" by paying large sums of money (with only a small portion) to be
used to send someone else bastardize the gospel. I say we evangelize best by being Christians, and by learning the true Gospel and by living it every day. We will see what true evangelism is when we live what we say we believe. We will see it in a most powerful way. Then we will see the power of true evangelism. Agrarian friend Franklin Sanders pointed out the great conversion story of Lieutenant-General Ewell during the war for Southern Independence. I include the story here, most ably presented by the Reverend William Jones, a Southern Chaplain from Northern Virginia:

“At a council of war, one night, Jackson had listened very attentively to the views of his subordinates, and asked until the next morning to present his own. As they came away, A. P. Hill laughingly said to Ewell, "Well! I suppose Jackson wants time to pray over it." Having occasion to return to his quarters again a short time after, Ewell found Jackson on his knees and heard his ejaculatory prayers for God's guidance in the perplexing movements then before him. The sturdy veteran Ewell was so deeply impressed by this incident and by Jackson's general religious character, that he said: "If that is religion, I must have it;" and in making a profession of faith not long afterwards he attributed his conviction to the influence of Jackson's piety.”

While this story is often used to illustrate powerful prayer, piety and character – I would like to point out the most obvious (but obviously overlooked) element of the story. Stonewall Jackson was in his tent... by himself! God used this time of supplication and prayer to call one of His children to Himself, and He didn't need a missionary board to do it. Nor was Stonewall found proselytizing on a street-corner or in a feed store. Separatism works, and evangelism is most properly a Christian life lived.

So let us address the real question, and focus on the real answer.

Preaching missionary evangelism is really a dodge for the incorporated church system. When someone throws up missionary evangelism as a challenge to Separatism, it is not usually because they themselves evangelize; nor is it because they desire that 99 percent of Christians (or even 5 or 10 percent) engage in evangelism. The last thing most churches and pastors want is everyone in their church heading out to the mission field. What they want is for 99% of the people to pay for corporate or denominational evangelistic efforts – no matter how eternally successful they really are. Missionary evangelism is a cash cow, and it successfully takes the focus away from the real issue. Before we send our “christianity” abroad, we should first examine our Christianity. Most people do not want to examine their own lives to see if there is real fruit borne of their professed faith. When I say that evangelism is primarily “being Christians” I mean that our time and efforts should first be spent in assuring that we are in the faith. Christian, evangelize thyself!
While most Christians refuse to heed the scriptures concerning separation and personal holiness, they concern themselves with obligations that they do not even understand, and seek to obey commands that were not even given to them. It is not that they cannot practice Biblical Christianity, it is that they will not. It is not that most Christians are overwhelmed with a conscience that demands that they evangelize; it is that they are pressed hard and weighed down by a conscience that demands that they be Christians. In order to avoid the latter, they must focus on the former; and since they usually will not “go” themselves, they feel better when they give money to missions, and thus the seared conscience is salved.

Evangelism starts at home. When you are satisfied that you are in full obedience to what is required of you by the Gospel; when you are separated from religious whores and all papists mythologies; when you are certain that your family is evangelized and your house is properly ordered; when your worship aligns with the Word of God; and when your worldview is consistently Biblical throughout; THEN should you concern yourself with missionary evangelism. But you will find that, for the most part, if you have done all these things well, you will have little need to evangelize… because your Christian walk will have alienated and scattered all the goats and wolves, while the sheep (both lost and found) will have been powerfully evangelized by your life and behavior.

I cannot emphasize enough that our earthly success as missionaries and as ambassadors depends upon a right view of both the Sovereignty of God, and the obedience that is required of us in the scriptures. As a last point I want to examine the idea that Christians are supposed to
“leaven” the rest of the world. This is where some true Christians can find areas of conflict, and I pray that all sides of the issue are considered calmly and objectively. I agree with this quote from our friend Franklin Sanders concerning some errors in modern Christian behavior:

“...feckless Evangelicalism... withdraws from confronting the world because underneath it fears that Christianity has no answer. This is what John Milton sneered at as a "fugitive & cloistered virtue" in "Areopagiticus." Therefore we have Chreestyun bookstores, and Chreestyun music and Chreestyun theme parks and Chreestyun radio and I don't know what all else, most of it functioning at the lowest possible aesthetic and intellectual level, utterly indistinguishable from
the world -- oh, the Chreestyun rockstars grab their thigh rather than their crotch, but differ in little else. Whatever happened to Rembrandt? The Christian university? Bach? Shakespeare? Christianity GAVE the world art, music, literature. It all belongs to God, and is impossible without him. The would-be artist that blasphemes God can only do it because he created light and colour. So what is Evangelicalism afraid of today? Can the gates of Hell hold out against Christ's saints and his Church?”

I agree completely and wholeheartedly with these sentiments. No true Christian, living the life of the Christian, believing the Gospel of Christ, obeying His commandments, should shrink from the marketplace of ideas or from the arena of battle with the enemies of Christ. But I question some
apparent presuppositions behind other sentiments voiced in conjunction with this passionate belief. I guess I have to wonder at the different view of the world I must have. I do not see professing “christianity” shrinking into ghettos or hiding in “christian only” forums. I see modern apostate “christianity” shoving their false art, music, literature, politics and worldview down the throat of the world. I see a “christian” king and his party of neo-con fascists parading their hologram of “christianity” before the whole world. With all due respect, I don't see professing “christians” hiding in cellars or slinking down alleys, I see them jamming fish symbols and yellow ribbons on anything that moves. It seems that anything and everything is “christian” today... which may have been part of Franklin's point. Maybe it is true Christianity that he fears is shrinking from the fight. But I cannot agree that true Christian separatism, holiness, sanctity is a huge problem today. I see terms like “hyper-separatism” being bandied about and wielded as a weapon, but against what? It seems that separatism is only good today if it can be used as an argument for worldliness and syncretism. Bad ideas succeed when a false dialectic can be offered to really lazy people. The fascist says, “anyone who is not with us is with the terrorists!” The communist says, “anyone who is not a communist is a fascist!” The statist says, “anyone who rejects us is unpatriotic!” Now, the syncretist can say, “anyone more separated from the world than me, is a hyper-separatist!” This is a dangerous and slipperly slope. Other more reasonable and rational (but I think un-biblical) arguments have been made for syncretism. So let us look at what the Bible has to say about contact between the holy and the unholy:

“Thus saith the LORD of hosts; Ask now the priests concerning the law, saying, If one bear holy flesh in the skirt of his garment, and with his skirt do touch bread, or pottage, or wine, or oil, or any meat, shall it be holy? And the priests answered and said, No. Then said Haggai, If one that is unclean by a dead body touch any of these, shall it be unclean? And the priests answered and said, It shall be unclean. Then answered Haggai, and said, So is this people, and so is this nation before me, saith the LORD; and so is every work of their hands; and that which they offer there is unclean.” (Hag 2:11- 14)

A clean thing can not make the unclean clean. Your presence in Sodom, does not sanctify Sodom (God pulls the clean thing out before destroying Sodom). But the unclean thing CAN make everything that touches it unclean. The Pharisees were seen as avoiding every sinner, tax-collector, Samaritan and leper – so their actions are used as an argument against Separatism. But the Pharisees were not separatists, they were hypocrites. The Pharisees
desired to Lord it over the Lord's people. The Pharisees violated the law at their own whim, they rejected the commandments of God for themselves while they imposed them on everyone else. The Pharisees were NOT separatists, they were hypocritical theocrats. The argument is then made that by proper and diligent engagement, Christians can “leaven” their surroundings and wicked institutions (such as Mother Earth News). I have to strenuously object to this idea. Leaven is rarely used as a positive thing in scripture. Only in one place is leaven used (in parable) to represent the gospel of the Kingdom. This parable can be found in Luke 13 and in Matthew 13: “Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened”.

Now, Kingdom Now Presbyterians and other Dominionists (like Pat Robertson) have used this verse to say that the whole world is going to be leavened by the Gospel. But I think that these folks are missing the message here (along with the whole theme of Prophecy). Let's examine some facts:

1. The leaven is the Kingdom of Heaven (Jesus said, "My Kingdom is not of this world")
2. The whole loaf is leavened by it.
3. The leaven is “hid”.

Examining Christ's other parables and the context of this very chapter, we know that these loaves are wheat loaves. It is wheat that is harvested by the angels in order to be the Kingdom (Matt. 3:12, 13:29-30). This very chapter explains to us that the tares are to be snatched up from the Lord's field and burned, the wheat is to be taken to the purging floor where every bit of chaff is removed and destroyed by fire, THEN is the wheat to be taken to the garner and used to make loaves. So the loaves here are wheat loaves. The wheat is Christians and only Christians. The Gospel of the Kingdom (as we have explained) leavens the elect and converts them to the Kingdom. The whole loaf (of wheat) is then leavened! We should be careful in using the Lord's parables in ways other than the way in which He used them. We Christians are not to pluck up the tares, and neither are we to go with them to the fire. We are to be gathered to the purging floor, and eventually to the Lord's garner to be made into His loaves.

Now let us look at the direct commandment of Separatism:

“Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in [them]; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean [thing]; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty” (2 Corinthians 6:14-18)

It is not Mother Earth News that is going to be leavened by proper Biblical action, it is the elect of God who are evangelized when we are truly Christians. We are to represent our Lord, “For such an high priest became us, [who is] holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens” (Hebrews 7:26). I am not saying that we do not engage the world, or that we do not represent Christ or battle for the supremacy of Christian ideas – far from it. I am saying that we don't live among them, we don't slave in their factories or feed their machines. We should work towards total dependence on God, and stop depending on His enemies. We should stop trying to train goats to act like sheep, and start feeding the sheep – or better yet, stay in the sheepfold, look to the Good Shepherd and eat good grass. The last objection against Separatism generally comes from Jude, verse 19: “These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit”. Of course this weapon is generally used by those who do not know how to rightly handle God's Word:

Matthew Henry rightly identifies these ignorant men as sensualists: “He guards them against seducers by a further description of their odious character: These are those who separate, etc., Jud_1:19. Observe, (1.) Sensualists are the worst separatists. They separate themselves from God, and Christ, and his church, to the devil, the world, and the flesh, by their ungodly courses and vicious practices; and this is a great deal worse than separation from any particular branch of the visible church on account of opinions or modes and circumstances of external government or worship, though many can patiently bear with the former, while they are plentifully and almost perpetually railing at the latter, as if no sin were damnable but what they are pleased to call schism.”

The great commentator John Gill also rightly identifies this false separatism:

“ Jud 1:19 - These be they who separate themselves,.... Not from sinners openly profane; such a separation is commendable, being according to the will and word of God, to the mind and practice of Christ, and which tends to the good of men, and to the glory of God; but from the saints and people of God; it is possible that a child of God may for a time leave the fellowship of the saints, but an entire and total forsaking of them, and of assembling with them, looks with an ill aspect; nor did they separate themselves from superstition and will worship, and every false way of worship, which would have been right, but from the pure worship, ordinances, and discipline of God's house, by a perversion of them, and as being above them, or unwilling to be under any notice and government; not from errors and heresies, and persons that held them, with these they herded; but from the pure doctrines of the Gospel, and ministers of the word”.

Most specifically we should note that these separatists are those who are “mockers... who should walk after their own ungodly lusts”, which can hardly be said of true Biblical separatists. So, my purpose in this letter is to identify proper Separatism, defend it Biblically, and to make sure that good men don't ignorantly slander a commandment of God while earnestly trying to do good towards God's children and His Kingdom. I have not yet tied Biblical Separatism to Biblical Agrarianism, but I will soon if the Lord allows.

I remain your servant in Christ Jesus,

Michael Bunker

Separatism as a Fundamental Principle, 1A

2008-08-19T09:23:00.002-05:00

Separatism as a Fundamental Principle of Christian Agrarianism, Part 1 - A
Posted by Michael Bunker
editor@biblicalagrarianism.com

(This first article is long and will be divided into several "parts" for this blog)

In this first article I hope to explain some specifics of Christian Separatism, and to clarify some errors in thinking made by many good men and women who struggle with the concept of Separatism. First let's begin with a Biblical defense of the concept of separatism as it is opposed to the worldly view of syncretism or conformity.

At the outset we should state that the word “separate” is one with the word “holy”. Holiness is separate-ness. “Holy” means “special, set aside for a specific purpose”. In the Old Testament, the English word “separate” is used 24 times, almost unanimously with this connotation of a person, place, or thing being separated unto God for His own divine purposes. The word is used 8 times in the New Testament (and we will examine these) including the command of Separatism found in 2 Corinthians 6:14-18. Only one time in the NT is “separate” used as a negative chastisement (Jude 19), and the context of that verse clearly explains just who these people were, what they separated from, and exactly what was their specific error. Christian authors
and commentators within God's true Church have always gone to great pains not to slander true Christian separatism by wrongly applying Jude 19. We will examine that verse later.

Separatism for God's people is a principle element and underlying truth found throughout all of Scripture and all of Prophecy. It exists in virtually every spiritual type and shadow given to us in the Bible.

God’s people shall dwell ALONE:

“The eternal God [is thy] refuge, and underneath [are] the everlasting arms: and he shall thrust out the enemy from before thee; and shall say, Destroy [them]. Israel then shall dwell in safety alone: the fountain of Jacob [shall be] upon a land of corn and wine; also his heavens shall drop down dew. Happy [art] thou, O Israel: who [is] like unto thee, O people saved by the LORD, the shield of thy help, and who [is] the sword of thy excellency! and thine enemies shall be found liars unto thee; and thou shalt tread upon their high places” (Deuteronomy 33:27-29)

Most people remember that the curse of Balaam against God’s people was turned into a blessing by God, but most people do not know - exactly what was the blessing that God conferred to Israel via Balaam? What was that blessing anyway?

“How shall I curse, whom God hath not cursed? or how shall I defy, [whom] the LORD hath not defied? For from the top of the rocks I see him, and from the hills I behold him: lo, the people shall dwell alone, and shall not be reckoned among the nations” (Numbers 23:8-9)

Please take some time and study and pray over this fact. While it was the purpose of Balak to curse God's people, the very specific blessing conferred upon Israel was that they should dwell alone and not be reckoned among the nations. The word “reckoned” is the Hebrew word chashab which literally means to “plait”, “braid” or “interpenetrate”. God blessed Israel through Balaam by promising them that they would dwell separately, and would not be intermixed with the world around them. We can determine, then, that the curse sought by Balak is that Israel would be “braided” into the surrounding culture.

The Divine purpose of Separation was unveiled beginning with Noah and Abraham. Also notice that separatism is always a corollary (or maybe a result) of finding grace with God. Noah was set apart when he found grace in the sight of God: “But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD” (Genesis 6:8).

Subsequent to receiving grace, Noah was ordered to be separate: “And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth” (Genesis 6:13). “But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee” (Genesis 6:18).

Abraham found grace with God. He dwelt alone and was separate:

1. Get thee out of thy country, etc.
2. I will MAKE OF THEE a great nation
3. “So Abraham departed, as the Lord had spoken unto him”

Isaac and Jacob dwelt alone… they were separate.

Joseph was separated for the fulfilling of God’s purpose, he was the progenitor of those who were forced into Egypt: “The blessings of thy father have prevailed above the blessings of my
progenitors unto the utmost bound of the everlasting hills: they shall be on the head of Joseph, and on the crown of the head of him that was separate from his brethren” (Gen. 49:26).

The repeated cycle of Israel being separated unto God (and being blessed thereby) is inevitably followed by their apostasy as they slowly return to their old ways of conformity and syncretism with the world. Throughout this series of cycles, we are introduced to different forces, spirits or personalities – some who encourage Israel to greater separatism and holiness (God's true
prophets), and others who encourage Israel to greater conformity with the world around them (the world's prophets).

So just where do the prophets of conformity get their doctrines?

There are several different individuals or groups who (either purposefully or ignorantly) defend the concept of Christians remaining intermixed with the world. Some of these people are honestly deceived; some are generally right thinking but erroneously use the lexicon and illustrations from others who are deceived; and still others are prophets sent from the enemy (though they are allowed and given space for a time by God for His purposes) to deceive those who God would not have hear, and thus obey, the truth. I will not judge the motives of any particular person or group, I will only examine their arguments to see if any of them stand up to scrutiny.

Jesus Christ's High Priestly prayer, and “in the world, but not of it”

I should say here that much of what follows has been edited, rewritten or adapted from other articles I have written previously on the subject. All of this is from my unpublished book “The Process Driven Life”...

Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty

God’s commanded will is that His people come out from among THEM and be separate. Specifically we will be known (outwardly to the rest of the world) as His sons and daughters if the Holy Spirit brings us out from among the wicked.

Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven

Confusion is caused in many discussions like these because assumptions are made that should not be made. When people use the word “Christian” they often mean radically different things. There are only two ways given in scripture to know who is a Christian:

1. Their Doctrine (John 7:17, Acts 2:42, Rom. 6:17, 16:17)
2. Their Fruit (Matthew 7:16, 20, 13:23, and many other parallel verses)

It should be assumed that not everyone who claims to be a Christian is a Christian. We will know the true Christians because they will be caused by the Spirit of God to be obedient to His declared will. Those that do the declared will of the Father in heaven are the ones who enter into the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt. 7:21). Jesus said in the fifth chapter of John’s gospel that he never said or did anything unless the Father in heaven said it or did it. When Jesus commanded His children to come out from among them, then, it was because it is the declared will of the Father that all of His children will come out and be separate. This fact is also declared throughout the types and shadows in the Old Testament – which were given for our edification and for our instruction. Some of these points we have mentioned earlier, but let us review:

God’s Church (in Abraham) was commanded to get out of the former country and to go unto a land that God would show unto him… to live separate from his old kindred.

God’s Church was caused to come out from among the Egyptians and from their bondage.

God’s Church was commanded to dwell alone in the land and to not go to the world for assistance or protection.

God’s Church was commanded to go out from the wicked, and unto Christ without the camp, bearing His reproach.

God’s Church was commanded and caused to go out from Canaan before Jerusalem was destroyed.

God’s Church was caused to go out from Rome so that Rome could be judged.

God's Church was caused to flee from and separate from the established but apostate state churches of Rome and then of England.

God’s Church was caused to flee persecution in Europe and to flee to the desert where she was to dwell alone.

It is sad that the modernist “christian” system has succumbed to a religion of catchphrases and mantras, rather than a belief system based solely on the revealed and commanded Word of God. What follows is a conversation between myself (the Editor) and a man we will call Religious Worldling. The actual conversation is not fictional at all but is the conglomeration of many
conversations I have had with pastors and preachers around the world who reject the Bible’s teaching on Separatism:

Mr. RW: I have read some of your writings on Christian Separatism, and I fear you are doing your readers a great disservice and are leading them into error on this point.

Editor: Well, I certainly would not want to lead anyone into error. Maybe you can help me then? I am always willing to be corrected by the contextual teaching of scripture. Where have you found me to be in error?

Mr. RW: Christian Separatism is not Biblical. The Bible teaches that Christians are to be “in the world, but not of it”. Teaching Christians to not be in the world is teaching them to violate the scripture. Extremism is the fountain of all error. There are two great errors that Christians have to avoid: Separatism on the one hand, and Syncretism on the other. Christians are not to be separate, but neither are we to be worldly. The truth lies somewhere in between.

Editor: I think I understand what you are saying. Could you show me where in the scripture you have found these exact words… to “be in the world, but not of it”? I would appreciate it if you would assist my feeble memory, but I have in front of me the King James Bible and would like to be able to read the context of that verse.

Mr. RW: Sure. I just taught a series on this at our Church. You can find those words in John the 17th Chapter, verses 14-16.

Editor: Actually, I cannot find those words in the Gospel of John, or in any other book of the Bible. The exact phrase “in the world, but not of it” is not in the Bible at all. That exact phrase is actually a Sufi Muslim saying that was picked up by the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages. Anyone who is interested can do an internet search on the exact phrase and you will find that what I am saying is true. The one place you will not find that exact phrase, is in the Holy Bible.

Mr. RW: Ok, I understand what you are doing. Sure, the exact phrase is not in the Bible, but the teaching is right there in the 17th Chapter of John.

Editor: I will agree that the twisted version of worldliness being taught today has been violently wrenched out of the High Priestly prayer of Jesus in the 17th Chapter of John; but I will not agree for a second that Jesus is teaching (contrary to the teaching of the whole Bible) that Christians are to compromise between Separatism and Syncretism by rejecting Separatism and only partly embracing Syncretism. These words are mutually exclusive. The Bible teaches Separatism for God’s true Church from beginning to end, and only by rejecting thousands of
other scriptures, both literally and in type, can one come to the conclusions that you have come to. Let us look at the context and teaching of the prayer of Jesus in the 17th Chapter of John and see if your Sufi saying holds water:

“I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth” (John 17:14-17).

First we must understand the word “world” in each context that it is used. The word “world” is translated from the Greek word “Kosmos”, and can have several different meanings, depending on the context in which it is used. I will quote here from the teaching of the great writer and teacher A.W. Pink on the different meanings of the word “world” in the scripture, and I ask you to investigate each meaning in context. You will find Mr. Pink is correct in each case:

"Kosmos" is used of the Universe as a whole: Acts 17: 24 - "God that made the world and all things therein seeing that He is Lord of heaven and earth."

"Kosmos" is used of the earth: John 13:1; Eph. 1:4, etc., etc.- "When Jesus knew that his hour was come that He should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved His own which were in the world He loved them unto the end." "Depart out of this world" signifies, leave
this earth. "According as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world." This expression signifies, before the earth was founded—compare Job 38:4 etc.

"Kosmos" is used of the world-system: John 12:31 etc. - "Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the Prince of this world be cast out"— compare Matt. 4:8 and I John 5:19, R. V.

"Kosmos" is used of the whole human race: Rom. 3: 19, etc.—"Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God."

"Kosmos" is used of humanity minus believers: John 15:18; Rom. 3:6 "If the world hate you, ye know that it hated Me before it hated you." Believers do not "hate" Christ, so that "the world" here must signify the world of unbelievers in contrast from believers who love Christ. "God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world." Here is another passage where "the world" cannot mean "you, me, and everybody," for believers will not be "judged" by God, see John 5:24. So that here, too, it must be the world of unbelievers which is in view.

"Kosmos" is used of Gentiles in contrast from Jews: Rom. 11:12 etc. "Now if the fall of them (Israel) be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them (Israel) the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their (Israel’s) fulness." Note how the first clause in italics is defined by the latter clause placed in italics. Here, again, "the world" cannot signify all humanity for it excludes Israel!

"Kosmos" is used of believers only: John 1:29; 3:16, 17; 6:33; 12;47; I Cor. 4:9; 2 Cor. 5:19. We leave our readers to turn to these passages, asking them to note, carefully, exactly what is said and predicated of "the world" in each place. (A.W. Pink – The Meaning of Kosmos in John
3:16).

The term “kosmos” or “world” as it is used in the verses you have quoted from the 17th Chapter of John, ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT mean “the world culture” (which in every other place we are commanded to leave and flee), but it means “the universe as a whole”, or “the earth”. You will find this to be true because it is used that way in this very chapter, before and after the verses you have quoted. In verse 11, we find Jesus praying to the Father and instructing the disciples that He is going to leave the EARTH (17:4) and go to HEAVEN:

“And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are” (John 17:11).

Jesus specifically states that He is going to leave the world (the earth), but that His disciples will be left behind on the earth, as He is going to the Holy Father.

In verse 24, we find Jesus praying to the Father that the ones given to Jesus by the Father will one day be with Him where He is going (so we see that this word 'world' is about location and not culture or society):

“Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world” (John 17:24).

So we see that the word “world” in this chapter can absolutely NOT mean “the world culture” or “the unsaved world”, but it means “the created universe”, or, “the earth”. God has not chosen to take us off the planet and to Heaven while we are alive, but has chosen to leave us in His created universe for His glory; both for evangelism purposes (examined later), and so that we will stand as a divine rebuke to the world. The very same chapter teaches that:

1.) Jesus does not pray for the unsaved and wicked world (John 17:9).

2.) Jesus only prays for and loves the ones who either believe on Him now, or who will be caused to believe on Him through the teaching of the disciples, which is inclusive of the total sum of
those who are given to Christ by the Father (John 17:20, 17:6).

Jesus not only does not specifically teach us to be “in the world” as in the culture of the world; but He specifically teaches us the exact opposite:

1.) He teaches that we are not of the world (the world culture), just as He was not of the world culture, but lived separately from the world culture (John 17:14).

2.) He prays that the Father will sanctify (separate and purify) us from the world system (17:16-17)

3.) He prays that since He is leaving the created world, that the Father will protect and keep unified and separated from the world those whom the Father has given Him.

4.) He claims that while He was with His disciples in the created world, He protected them and separated them from the world systems (John 17:12).

5.) He promises that the world HATES His children, because they are not a part of the world culture (John 17:14).

Now you, and preachers like you, are teaching a compromise between Separatism (coming out and being separate from the world) and Syncretism (fully embracing the world system), but there can be no compromise between these two systems. The Bible teaches Separatism throughout, and ANY step at all in the direction of embracing the world culture is Syncretism and is an error. You cannot be halfway between these two teachings, by their very definitions.

Mr. RW: I can see why people are convinced by you, but our own experience and understanding of how the world works requires that Christians, in order to evangelize the world, be in the world.

Editor: I am not here to convince anyone. Declaring the truth will convince those who God chooses to know the truth; while it will cause the world to hate us, even as Christ has said. Now once again you confuse terms, while the very conversation we are having refutes your argument. Here I sit before you as a Separatist (which you yourself claim that I am). I am in the created universe, existing on this planet (which is what John 17 claims), yet I desire more than anything to be, and am continuously being, separated from the world culture into Christian Community. You admit this is true of me by calling me a Separatist. Yet, here I am before you evangelizing you. I am declaring the truth of the Bible to you; and this is the very heart of evangelism. I
do not have to embrace and live in the world’s culture, the world’s cities, nor do I need to partake of the world’s dainties in order to evangelize. My LIFE is evangelism, and yet I am a Separatist. Merely separating from the worldly religious ilk is evangelism because the truth is manifest by Christians walking in the LIGHT of scripture. The LIGHT is the light of men. LIGHT is contrasted with darkness. Light which is mixed up with darkness loses it’s attribute of light-ness. Light is the most effective when it is gathered together in strength, where it stands as a rebuke to darkness. What you have taught is NOT what the Bible teaches, and pithy catchphrases cannot refute the entire teaching of God’s Word on the subject. You can rest assured that the Bible is a Separatist book. The very word “Holy” means SEPARATE, so the very front cover of my Bible declares "SEPARATE BIBLE" on it. There can be no holiness without separatism. There is only Separatism or Syncretism. One is true and one is false.

RW: I cannot agree with you. Experience denies it. The whole history of the Church is one of growing outward into the world evangelistically.

Editor: Respectfully, there you are wrong once again, and it seems you have now coupled ignorance of scripture with a profound ignorance of history. The History of the true Church is a history of Separatism.

Christ separated out His apostles from among men. They were to leave their jobs and lives and be dedicated to Him alone. Those who Christ evangelized were of two sorts… Christ saw a great multitude following Him and separated them by giving commandment that they should “depart to the other side” (Matthew 8:18). Some refused to follow and made excuses because they had pressing business in the world (even after claiming that they would follow Him “withersoever”
He went!) Only His chosen disciples followed Him. This is separation. Out of the “great multitude” only His disciples followed Him.

God calls His true Church to separate and to live in community. It is their own fear and slavish wickedness that calls them back into the world before long. Remember that the same separated disciples (who Christ pulled out of the world) chose to return to their employments after the
death of Christ (John 21:3). Christ went and retrieved them to His work. We see in history the pattern of God separating the Church, followed by a time of apostasy creeping in that causes them to join once again to the world.

When 3,000 believed during the day of Pentecost, they immediately separated from their old lives, sold their properties and began to live in community with the Christians in Jerusalem. When persecution began after the stoning of Stephen, the Christians separated from Jerusalem
into Christian communities abroad. Christians eventually drifted back into Jerusalem and back into a life of Syncretism, but when the Romans began to surround Jerusalem, the Christians separated completely into a Christian community in Pella and the Decapolis. Once again Syncretism set in, and once again God brought persecution and death to the Church through the hand of the Caesars to separate out the real Christians from the mere professors. Christians again separated into Christian communities in the countryside and in the caves and catacombs. Those who were never a part of the Roman system (the Waldenses and others) lived separately in the Alps of Switzerland, France, and Italy and kept the apostolic belief system pure and untainted by the errors of Rome. Later, true Christians who had been enslaved by Rome were caused to flee syncretism with her and to separate from the Apostate Church during the Reformation. After the decrees of Conformity, Christians once again fled syncretism and separated into Puritan Christian communities. So, history teaches that Separatism is the work of God, and that Syncretism is the work of the devil. There IS NO MIDDLE GROUND.

RW: I see that there is no reasoning with you, so I will leave you alone in your error.

Editor: I will be taught from the Bible, but if it is your reasoning alone that you require that I worship, I will of course refuse.

Obedience requires that we heed the commandments of God. Separation is not an option for God’s elect… it is a commandment. As the scriptures say, “come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord”. Fear of freedom prevents most who believe that they are the called of God from ever separating from the world. Modernist lies and mantras, some based on Sufi sayings and catchphrases and not on the plain and contextual teaching of Scripture, have overwhelmed the professing “church”. Remember, it is the secular world that has made Separatism into a foul word, and they have done it for the same reason that Jesus said that they cannot love Him or His children. They hate separatism because they love death (Prov. 8:36) and they despise wisdom (Prov. 1:7). The world needs Christians to bow to it, but Christians definitely do not need the world. If we do not follow Christ in His commandment that we separate ourselves and live in loving Christian community, it is because we still love the world and because we are afraid of freedom. Repentance begins with the gift of believing the truth about ourselves; however, people do not obey because they lack faith. But Christ is the fountainhead of faith. All who truly desire to grow into maturity and perfection in Christ should pray as the disciples did, “Lord, increase our faith” (Luke 17:5). All others are mere professors, and they are known NOT by their words, but by their deeds.

Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

(continued in Part 1-B)

Off-Grid Living for Agrarians, Part 13: Local Culture

2008-03-26T15:34:00.006-05:00

In abandoning his Agrarian roots, man has abandoned his connection to the land, and with it has cast out his peculiar local heritage and culture. In it's place he has adopted a rootless, amorphous, and temporary international culture - defined alone by man's insatiable and fruitless hunger for more - more personal peace, more affluence, and more comfort. Biblical cultures were defined by those peculiar practices endemic to a particular people, and those practices were derived by their necessity due to the close and personal interaction between the people and the land. Relationships, celebrations, and even diet were defined and restricted by land and growing practices, and all of life was governed by what (and when) the land would produce. By definition, then, the culture was a representation brought forth from the divine gardener of a piece of land, the good ground, from which the progenitor of all men had been derived. Each culture was the product of not just the morality and laws the people had accepted for themselves, but of the types and quantities of crops that would grow readily in the local soil, and the animals indigenous to the place which could be used for food, or which could be sustained easily by what could be grown.

I have mentioned quite a few times in this series that our ideas of what the ideal life will be should change with our knowledge of what a perfect God wills for His people, and what He has originally declared is good for us; and our expectations should reflect our experience in what will work well where we are. As you will already know from reading this series, I put a high value on a good philosophy and right thinking in engaging in an off-grid Agrarianism plan. As we grow and learn, some practices, means, and methods will develop (or re-develop) which are highly successful, and others will be abandoned as failures. What will develop, then, if the Lord wills and tarries, will be the development of a particular Christian Agrarian culture where we are. Traditions, practices, feasts, etc. will become more local (because hopefully we will have already cast off the international pagan/apostate ones), and we will once again begin to be defined by our peculiar Christian culture. The Christian man and the Christian family will once again be connected to the land. He will have legends and the stories of building and working the land, and He will have a sense of history that is more in line with reality and less the result of socialist, industrialist, and secular propaganda.

Once upon a time, when the South was still Agrarian and predominantly Christian, even within the south there were many, many, diverse and discernible cultures. While the South was generally one in their values, morals, and overall respect for the land and the family - within the south, in fact even from town to town, you would have found a grand diversity in how these values were practiced. Every small town had different festivals and celebrations. One town might have "The Watermelon Festival", while another town celebrated "Okra Days". Around here, the two big days for us right now are The Fiesta De La Paloma (the Feast of the Doves) in Coleman, Texas, and Santa Anna Funtier Days in Santa Anna. As our Christian community here (if the Lord wills it) grows and expands, we will develop our own special days and festivals, and these ought to develop organically, and they should reflect God's love for His people, and His overall plan for man. We already look forward to "First Wednesday" which is our monthly community work day, and we all look forward to the two Ranchfests we have every year. But the point is that our desire in our Off-Grid Agrarian lives is to live our lives more locally, and to do so it all has to start with us.

I mentioned in the 11th part that we ought to start looking to focus on growing more perennial fruits, nuts, and crops. The harvest of these crops will likely be a regular yearly event, and can be a time of great fun and fellowship. We ought to also be looking into what types of food and crops are indigenous to our area. Those that have developed here and succeed here are great, and if they can fit our criteria, then we ought to pursue them; but if we can reclaim those foods and crops that really thrive in our soil, then we would be foolish not to focus on them. It has been a shocking (perhaps it should not have been) thing for me to realize that the crops that I have grown over the past 8 years that have done the absolute best, are these:

Okra
Black-eyed Peas
Green Beans
Squash

...and now I have learned that Sweet Potatoes and Greens (Mustard, Collard, Spinach, etc.) grow great here.

Now let me see... that looks like a Southern Menu if I ever saw one! Why should I be shocked that these foods grow well here in the South? There is a reason that these foods are identified with the South - and sometimes we are too slow to figure these simple things out - I know that I am.

I intend to really focus on these locally successful crops, and our diets will change to represent what grows well here.

Our minds and hearts need to be more local. Live wherever you want to live, but if you plan on being a Christian Agrarian - then really LIVE there. Make it your home, and you and your Christian fellows will see a Christian culture thrive there. Rather than spend your time in the world, partaking in the world's culture and society, put those things behind you and live your life as a Christian among Christian friends and family. This series is about Off-Grid Living, but more specifically it is about successful Off-Grid Living. Our mindset is critical in our success, and a right philosophy of life and living will immeasurably assist in that success. The Apostate "christian" world has adopted the mantra "Grow where you are planted" as a rational for professing "christians" living worldly lives among other worldlings. I would add the following asterisk:

* IF you are planted in good ground, and IF you are sure you are not a tare, and IF you are willing to work and grow in the soil, and IF you are intent on being obedient towards the production of good fruit, THEN you should 'grow where you are planted'.

Your servant in Christ Jesus,

Michael Bunker

Off-Grid Living for Agrarians, Part 12: Building

2008-03-17T15:05:00.001-05:00

Worldliness is the constant, daily, selling of one's soul in exchange for carnal comfort. Godliness is a constant selling of one's carnal comfort in exchange for the good of one's soul. The grand plans of many aspiring Agrarian homesteaders crash and burn because of some mental threshold of minimal comfort that the mind both expects and demands. I would say that almost 100% of the objections raised against Agrarian Separatism and Off-Grid Homesteading have to do with COMFORT, no matter how the questions are disguised or how the objection is framed. Even when the protester denies that comfort is behind his or her objection, it is always there - lingering as the final and unmistakable truth behind why people won't leave the world behind. When someone protests that they are staying in the world for the sake of their children or grandchildren, or because they believe their "sacrifice" will allow future generations to live like God has commanded - if you just replace their entire protest with CARNAL COMFORT and you will be a whole lot closer to the truth.

Now, I have no problem with being comfortable, I like a nice bed and a good meal as much as anyone. That kind of comfort is not what we're talking about here, and the point I am making is that if we make carnal comfort the rule and we never look at what we should be doing and how we should be living - merely because the right thing seems uncomfortable - then we will never be obedient in those things we ought to do.

I have mentioned this verse before:

Prepare thy work without, and make it fit for thyself in the field; and afterwards build thine house. (Pro 24:27)

God's wisdom declares that we ought to live uncomfortably for awhile while we are preparing our life and living for the future. We ought to make our lands, fields, gardens, and animal facilities workable, managing all of it for our future good and for the sustenance of our families - and we ought to do these things first. THEN, when God has blessed our endeavors and our obedience to His Word, we should build our house. John Gill said this:

"and afterwards build thine house; when, though the blessing of God upon thy diligence and industry, thou art become rich, or however hast such a competent substance as to be able to build a good house, and furnish it in a handsome manner, then do it; but first take care of the main point, that you have a sufficiency to finish it; see the advice of Christ, Luk_14:28"

Now, of course, many people are going to say that there is no Biblical command for people to live Agrarian lives, despite what these verses (and many others say). They will say that these verses only applied to some other culture, long ago, that would have to prepare their fields because they didn't have a Wal-Mart. Some people really believe that modern urban industrialism is just as good and pleasing to God as Agrarianism... and I suppose if they are willing to discount or disbelieve about half of the Bible, they might have a point. So God says that we ought to live in such a way that we produce food from our own fields, and my point is that we ought to expect and even foster some discomfort at the beginning of our journey. If our countrymen had followed this advice, we would not have a mortgage crisis today. The average worldling today is unable to feed themselves or provide for themselves. They do not grow food or husband animals for their food and care. Yet they live deliciously in mortgaged castles, eating dainties that have been poisonously grown and marketed, cared for by a paternalistic beast that juggles the means of survival just well enough to make all seem right for a time.

But what should YOU do?

When choosing to move off-grid, you should remember the rules:

Separation
Simplicity
Sustainability

Start separately and simply, even if it means you might be uncomfortable for awhile. Mine is a family of 6 living in a cabin of less than 500 square feet, with a small 1976 camper as an addition. My bedroom is the size of many people's walk-in-closet. I am typing this manifesto while sitting on a bed because I do not have a desk on which to work. If you will make sure your initial setup fits these three critical rules, you should do well.

Gill points out that we ought to expect God to reward our diligence in doing our duty. I am convinced that if the Lord wills that we prosper here, I will be able to build a house some day when my fields and animals are made to bring forth abundantly; and I believe that the house I will build (if the Lord wills it) will be much nicer, more sustainable, much more permanent, much more well built and solid, and even much more comfortable, than any I might have built in haste, with little money, before it was in God's timing. So my advice to you is to engage and embrace discomfort in the beginning - even invite it. Make yourself live with less, and prove what is good and right. By that I mean, try to live without all the stuff, and when you realize that you can do so, then you have proved that you don't need it. More than 75% of the stuff we did not sell before we came here, but put in storage, we found out we didn't need. My advice for many folks today is to sell everything except the few items you are absolutely sure, without a doubt, that you will need. Sell it all and then buy what you KNOW you need. I am convinced that most people already have the resources to begin their off-grid journey, but the money is locked up in junk they don't need and shouldn't own.

Building an off-grid life will most likely start with the soil and not much else. I have made many mistakes in my off-grid adventure, and I am willing to admit those mistakes and pass the wisdom on to you all. If I had it all to do over again, I would start with the dirt and a shovel. I would dig a hole for my root cellar as my first building project. Whatever your first project is, remember the three rules and keep it simple. Always remember that food and water are primary, and ought to occupy your time and mind for a long while before you ever begin to think about long-term comfort. So long as our mind considers the world to be a safety-net and a crutch, we will not have a right view or mindset. We ought to think that food and water production and storage are critical to our survival, because they are. If you were cast onto your land with nothing but some basic tools, how would you prioritize things? Would you spend your time on temporary comforts? or would you spend it tilling and planting?

Now, this part of the series is about building, and I suppose I ought to get to that, but I wanted to make sure our minds were right about the subject first.

So... what to build?

Remember that this is the part of the process that will take the most time, will require the most of us, and will last the longest with us. Where and how you choose to build - these are going to be decisions that stay with you for a very long time. If you choose to build in a modern style, and then a few years later you think you might want to use your farm for agro or eco-tourism, then you are going to regret your modern new buildings. If you choose to build in a place or direction that isn't well thought out, and then you learn later that you didn't have all the information, you are going to regret many of your decisions. This is why I believe that God would have us live on our land for some time, working the soil and producing food, etc., before we build our permanent home. That way we can see the way the wind blows, how the water pools and drains, and myriad of other important realities that will one day effect how we live our daily lives. In these parts, back in the old days, the folks would dig a root cellar as their temporary living quarters while they prepared their fields, pens, sheds, and barns. The house would come to be much later. That idea, as we have shown, is a very good one. If you live in a land where heat isn't as much of a problem, then you might want to build a small temporary cabin, or you could purchase a small camper or tent to live in while you prepare your fields and out-buildings. In any case, get to know your land for a few a year or two before you build permanently. You will make better decisions in the long run.

Our first "structure" was a chicken coop built from a castaway deer blind we found on the back of the property. I put a new floor in it, built it up on "stilts" and used some old fencing to fence in the coop. Next I built a second coop that would also serve as a grain and feed storage. We put in our garden and a corral as we were building our small cabin. Our cabin was designed as a temporary dwelling (5-7 years) and has grown a bit to help us do the things we need to do. We started our root cellar in the first full summer after we arrived here and we had it ready to use at the beginning of last spring. Today we literally have thousands of pounds of storage and preserved foods stored in our root cellar.

I have received dozens of questions about the building of a remote/off-grid cabin. While I do have many ideas about the subject, and I have learned a lot about what to do and what not to do, you need to remember that this series is not about "how to do" stuff. It is about maintaining a sane and intelligent philosophy and process in doing it. My advice in building a cabin? Small is fine, especially if it is temporary. You really want to go for cheap, but not dangerously cheap. Try to use resources that are free or very inexpensive. We have found folks willing to let us tear down houses and other buildings if we will just remove the materials. From these materials we have built all sorts of things, including a farrowing shed for pigs that I built completely from these re-used materials. The basic philosophy, though, is to spend some time anticipating your needs. You should always plan for thing like catchwater, storage, etc. Think about where you are going to put the stuff you need, and how to get rid of the stuff you do not need. Think about the weather, seasonal changes, sun track, where you want to sit when it is hot in the morning, and where you will sit when it is hot in the evening. How do you want to direct the breeze through your building? How much light will you need? I am convinced that I can build a good sized (but maybe partially unfinished) cabin, with a sizeable catchwater and rainwater storage, for less than $10,000, and that is using mainly new materials. If one were able to procure a large amount of free, cheap, or salvaged materials, the cost would be significantly less. I am fairly positive that we don't have anywhere near 10 grand in this cabin, and we built it in increments, as money, supplies, and labor were available.

What if I had to do it all over again (as it relates to housing). Once again, I would build below ground first. My first structure would be a root cellar, and I would live in it while I build a second, larger root cellar (larger than this current cabin). Then, if I need to put a small one-room shack over my large underground cabin, I would do so. This plan would do the following for me:

1. It would be much easier to manage the temperature swings, and to stay cool in the summers. Our expense for cooling "stuff" for the first two years probably added up to well over $200 a month for most of the year (I would estimate close to $2000 per year). This cost would be almost eliminated if we had built underground, and that money could have gone to building cost instead of waste. Even now, on this 17th day of March, it is 83 degrees and I have two ceiling fans going at full blast to cool the cabin. No such need in a root cellar or basement cabin.

2. The root cellars would be handy and easy to use from a permanent house I plan on building in the future. As it is now, this cabin will either become a guest house, or a dry storage, or a combination of both, but it will not be as easily usable once I build a house. The house I build, if the Lord wills, will incorporate a large underground or partially underground living area for the coolness factor.

3. There would be no need for us to leave the cabin and slog through the mud to the root cellar when severe weather threatens. We could put the children to bed and not worry about having to get up and traverse the hazards to get into the root cellar if a tornado is coming.

When I do build a house, if the Lord wills, I will incorporate all the things I have learned through practical experience, and I will know tons more about my land and about how to do things correctly. I will know more about wind currents, temperature changes, sunrise and sunset at different times of year, rain runoff, etc., and I pray the Lord will continue to give me wisdom and ideas up to and including when I do finally start to build my house.

Returning to our point, if we do not look at off-grid living as a complete system, with a philosophy that guides our decision making, then we will fly to and fro without any real purpose, and quite often we will be working at cross-purposes with ourselves and with our future plans. Take the time and use your mind and your creativity to envision how you want to live, and how to go about it. All the rest of your building plans, then, will fall into place, and will only require the materials, the know-how, and the motivation to get them done. Now, don't you feel better?

Your servant in Christ Jesus,

Michael Bunker

Off-Grid Living for Agrarians, Part 11: Permaculture

2008-03-11T09:26:00.002-05:00

Although there are mentions of rotational kind of "seasonal" or annual crop farming in the scriptures (crops such as wheat, corn, and barley - used to make bread and other staples), by far, when speaking of food products, or God's providence, or blessed wealth, the Bible talks about perennial crops or perennial food items. A blessed land is said to run with "milk and honey". We read about olive trees, almond trees, pistachio trees, milk, honey, dates, sycamore figs, apples, grapes, and pomegranates, as well as many root crops including garlic, onion, and leeks which in many cases could be left or stored in the ground for a good part of the year. I think we can all agree that the original garden planted by God for man was made up of fruit and nut orchards and perennial crops. I don't think that annual crops were instituted until after the fall, but of course that is mainly speculation. But I do believe that many crops which are considered annual seed crops now were actually perennial plants in the original garden. For example, Tomatoes which are an annual plant in most of the world, are actually perennials in the Tropics and all the modern species of tomato are derived from perennial fruit.

As we mentioned in some previous parts to this series, quite a bit of food was stored "on the hoof", which is actually one of the Biblical means of storing wealth and being prepared for hard times. Biblical herdsman concentrated their efforts on animals that were fairly easy to keep, reproduced well or copiously, could be pastured on free or relatively free lands, and that did not require expensive care or feeds. In short, it seems that a man's wealth was determined by that which was renewable, sustainable, and somewhat perennial. A wealthy man would have had a land running with milk and honey; he would have had orchards, and vineyards, and cattle, and root crops that come up and produce all year or every year. Those who depended inordinately on annual crops were subject to drought, disease, and famine. We ought to think about that when we get started in our own homesteads. Our family has made a practice of planting trees every year, and the majority of those trees are chosen for some type of food production. I think setting a goal to plant 5-15 fruit or nut producing trees a year... EVERY YEAR... ought to be in every homesteading plan, no matter how much land is available. If a small acreage gets too crowded with trees (is that even possible?), then the oldest trees can be harvested for the wood. Pecan, Cherry, Walnut, and Apple wood is great wood for woodworking, building, and for firewood. We also plan on planting fruiting bushes and vines every year as well. You also ought not worry about producing too much fruit or nuts. Remember that you will always be buying food for your animals until you can produce enough on your own to stop buying feed. Feed a portion of your crop to your animals, because fruits and nuts are a great addition to a balanced animal diet, and rotted fruit is great for a compost pile. Fruit and nuts can be dried, powdered, canned, etc. pretty easily. It is a truism that in this current environment our diets are greatly lacking in fruit and nuts, so changing our diet to represent those items which are more permanent and perennial is just a good idea.

Permaculture

One of the topics I talk a lot about around here, and one that you will hear me speak quite a bit about in the future, is permaculture. The word "Permaculture" is a combination of the terms Permanent and Agriculture. Permaculture is a philosophy and design theory that revolves around the idea of inter-dependent planting and design. The overall idea is one of sustainability, but it goes beyond that. A permaculture plan is one that incorporates all the sustainable ideas in a way where each area benefits and serves another area - in a type of symbiosis that is hard to explain, but easy to understand once it is grasped. For example, a permaculture idea of raising chickens might be a chicken coop and pen system where fruit and nut trees and bushes are planted so that they drop their fruit or nuts into the chicken pens. The coop might be designed so that the chickens (which produce heat, fertilizer, and carbon dioxide - all of which is necessary for plants) have a portion of their "run" in a greenhouse. By going about their normal duties, they produce a large portion of the heat and CO2 that is necessary for the plants to survive. The plants produce oxygen and food for the animals, and the fertilizer can be used to boost the productivity of the plants. This is mainly just an idea to get you started on the overall philosophy, but modern pastured poultry and pasture rotation/animal rotation schemes are all based on some permaculture philosophies.

Proper, sustainable, permaculture design of the homestead can greatly reduce the overall workload, and can reduce or eliminate many of the costs related to running the homestead. A few hours of planning and design can eliminate untold amounts of cost, work on the homestead. Some permaculture ideas, though they will not eliminate labor completely, will certainly eliminate costs. Using chickens in insect and pest control; using properly planned and designed orchards to produce food for our animals, and using animals to work and improve the fields and gardens, are all a part of permaculture design.

In coming to a right mindset on these issues, it is necessary that everything we think be put on the table and debated. Our diets ought to change to better represent our location and our geographical reality. We ought to eat those things that grow well locally, and as much as possible it should reflect those things that can be grown perennially or that increases the sustainability of our homestead. From the species of trees we plant, to the types of crops we grow, we need to keep in mind how that choice is going to effect us and continue to effect us in the long run. If we get into the mindset that we are always going to be able to put in a nice annual garden, or some annual seed crops, and that somehow that that idea is sustainable, then we are likely to fail if things do not forever continue as they are now. From the day we start our homestead we ought to be thinking of some type of perennial or continuous food production. It is hard in this world of immediate gratification and a "get it now" mentality, to plan for a crop that will not mature for many years, but we ought to always remember that this is exactly the way that God works, and our patience will be rewarded in due time. One of my greatest anticipations is to see the trees we planted in our first year here on the ranch, produce fruit. Not only is this a great example of God's mighty works in and through us, but it is a profound picture of His providence and grace towards us, that He provides sweet and free fruit from the ground abundantly to all of His children who will reach out and take it.

Your servant in Christ Jesus,

Michael Bunker

Welcome to the Center for Agrarian Homesteading Education

2008-03-04T08:58:00.000-06:00

Howdy! We needed to build a repository for all the articles on Agrarianism, Homesteading, and Off-Grid Living - so we have decided to put them on this blog so that they can be easily referenced. We hope they are a blessing to you.

Michael Bunker

Off-Grid Living for Agrarians, Part 10: Preserving the Crop 2

2008-03-04T08:46:00.000-06:00

This part is going to eventually be a continuation of the discussion on food and crop preservation, etc., but I have some things to say first (are you surprised?). I have appreciated all the great comments and emails about this series. I think one of the most interesting things to me has been so many people who have identified that the philosophy of "off-grid" living we talk about in this series is so radically different than that which is portrayed in the off-grid magazines and books. As I've said, so many people think of "off-grid" living as merely a way to avoid paying utility bills, or as a way to insulate oneself against disasters or emergencies, or as an eco-friendly lifestyle choice. The philosophy we are espousing is so fundamentally different than most people expect, it makes it necessary that I constantly (and in each part) remind everyone of the differences. First, we believe that this life (particularly of Agrarian Separatism) is one that God commands; and second, we believe that this way of living is the only way to preserve and maintain our family and our Christianity in the face of a world bent on destroying it and us. Our focus on separation, simplicity, and sustainability - means that many of the biggest features of what the world considers "off-grid living" are not going to be part of our long-term plans. Every single thing has to be questioned to see if it actually fits into our model. Every single process needs to be measured against these measuring sticks (and note that they are all interwoven/interdependent):

1. Does it increase or maintain our separation? Does it require more and more syncretism with the world, or less and less? If it requires constant maintenance and expense, is that requirement going to increase my dependence on the world and the world's systems? Does any item, product, worldview, or practice require continued worldly input? Do I have to work away from my land in order to support it?

2. Is it simple? Is it less complicated and involved, less likely to break or break down and need worldly attention, less gaudy, ostentatious, prideful, showy?

3. Is it sustainable? How much continued cost, expense, outside material, money, etc. will it take to maintain or continue? Can I produce it here, or can I produce what it takes to produce it here? Can I continue to use it/do it/practice it if the world system around us collapses? And how dependent am I on the world for it?

Of course all three of these measuring sticks are founded on the over-riding principle "Is it moral and Biblical?", but we will expect that you already have accepted that one premise. Now, here I need to stop and deal with some objections.

(Note, I'm not going to even begin to deal with the "be in the world, but not of it" myth perpetuated by false "christianity" today. I've handled that objection handily in my 'separation' articles.)

If there is anything I am an expert on it is not so much off-grid agrarianism as it is rationalizations, excuses, and false arguments. I'm an expert because I've used them all, and I've examined them all very, very closely. Right now, some of you folks reading this are saying "Hey, we're always going to need to have some contact with the world! You yourself have said, Bunker, that you cannot make sponges, salt, or aluminum foil, so you are going to have to buy some things!". Alright, granted. But the point can be taken in two directions, one which is illegitimate and one which is legitimate. If the reader says, "We must always have contact with the world, so we might as well have more contact than less", or, "since we must always buy some things, why not buy as much as possible?", then he has become illogical and he might as well go back to the world and maintain his life as a cog in a machine. This type of argument is made all of the time. People read what I write and they'll say, "Well, if YOU aren't living this completely separated hermit life with absolutely no contact with the outside world, making all your own equipment, growing 100% of your own food - then who are YOU to preach to me? We're all dependent on the world.... etc., etc., etc." Let's look at all the folly that can be derived from this type of argument. I'll give some examples:

"Almost every toothbrush has some small, microscopic amount of fecal coliform bacteria on it - so.... we might as well eat feces".

"Since many things we eat have ingredients which would be poisonous in large amounts or if delivered in certain ways, and we eat them anyway, then eating and drinking poison is perfectly fine in any amount" (for example, many of the fruit and nuts we eat have small and healthy amounts of cyanide in them, therefore drinking a glass of cyanide would be perfectly fine).

"Since we must all have contact/business/discourse with the world, then any contact/business/discourse with the world is authorized and acceptable to God".

These fallacies generally collide in the person making rationalizations with another great error - that of making oneself the standard. This fallacy basically works out like this:

"Everyone to the right of me is too far to the right, and everyone to the left of me is too far to the left, therefore I am the standard", or in politics, "Everyone to the right of me is a fascist, and everyone to the left of me is a communist".

This fallacy works out in Separatism and Agrarianism like this, "I am the standard, therefore anyone more separated than me is anywhere from 'a bit extreme', to 'violating God's commandment to go out into the world and evangelize, create disciples, etc.'"

Most dangerously, these illogical fallacies can collide in the adherent to right Biblical doctrines like Predestination, etc. and can be twisted into un-Biblical errors like Fatalistic Determinism, which would say something like "Well, this is where God has us now, therefore this is where God wants us".

I plan on adding an "answering objections and logical fallacies" section towards the end of this series which will go over all of this again, but I need to point out this here because I know the way the mind works, and I know the rationalizations the mind makes against the loss of comfort, status, etc. Especially in women (sorry ladies) but in all people, there lies a vast army of self-defense and rationalization that constantly wars against the truth and in defense of the status quo. Women are by nature created to be security and safety driven. The God-given nurturing and protection devices built into a woman are used by the enemy to rationalize sin and disobedience, just as the God-given desire in men for control and dominion can be used to rationalize immobility, laziness, and the status quo. Now, some few of you may be saying "but I agree with what you have said and the need for agrarianism, separation, simplicity, and God-honoring sustainability". For those who are not actively arguing against the need for separation, simplicity, and sustainability, there can be a more subtle foe at work. A very distinct truth can be taken to a false conclusion. Arguments like "I'm alright for right now", "look how far we've come", "this is going to take generations", "It's a process, so my speed is as good as any" can just as easily be used to rationalize disobedience. I don't mean to pick on any particular group of people, but those who still have one foot in the world and one foot in this life are the most susceptible to the disease of sinful rationalization and immobility. We all have to be on our guard against the enemy who, I can assure you, does NOT want you to go down this path.

Now, the reason I went off on that little rant is to emphasize that our philosophy is fundamentally different than that of those who produce most of the materials for off-grid living. I read many homesteading, agrarian, back woods, country style magazines, periodicals, and blogs, and there is much value in them. Any number of abilities, skills, and secrets can be learned by perusing their pages. However, there is always the danger that we will forget our fundamental philosophy and that we will get off track if we are not constantly watching and on guard. Most of the magazines push "off-grid" sustainable living as just a very great alternative, and as a way to accomplish self-sufficiency or ecological protection - but they never explain just HOW they are accomplishing these things, and they rarely explain how you are going to get certain necessary items if the whole system that supports your system crashes. For example, if you put in a very humble, inexpensive, and easily maintained solar power system just for some lights, fans, etc., and that system utilizes batteries - then the question is self-evident... "What happens to my system if I cannot get batteries?". This leads to the question, "What happens to me and my family if I am dependent on this system?". Nothing is inherently wrong (at all) with a solar power system (I have one), unless we are at all dependent on it and if the loss of it will destroy our ability to continue in our work and lives. So simplicity and separation are equally balanced with sustainability, and vice versa. Refer back to the earlier argument on intermediate means for more detail.

Ok, so see how nice this is for me? I have a trapped audience. By now everyone is screaming - "enough of the philosophy, talk about canning!".

Canning

Canning gets its own subtitle, but don't think there won't be any agrarian separatist philosophy in it, because there will be. Because, as you know, this is not a series about HOW TO DO things. It is a series about HOW TO THINK. If we think correctly, we will usually do correctly. So here goes... Some people, when I have written about canning in the past, are a bit confused by what we mean by that. By canning we should say "jarring", since the term "can" has changed and now makes people think about tin or metal cans - when for most people who store food, "canning" means "to preserve food for long term storage by preparing it in cans or jars and utilizing heat and/or pressure"; and for most of us, "canning" means JARS and not actual metal cans. That is an interesting commentary on how language has changed. Because "jarring" came first. Storing in metal cans happened much later, and still is mainly done by industrial means and in corporate food preservation, not too much by individuals due to its prohibitive cost. Canning is a relatively new food preservation phenomenon which was basically unheard of until the French Revolution, so, as far as Agrarian skills go, canning is not an automatic default option. It is a relative new thing. Long-term storage of fresh food in jars, cans, pouches, or containers, came about because of military necessity, not because European agrarians needed or developed it. Large bodies of armies, moving across lands that had already been stripped for dozens of years by preceding armies and endless wars, needed food supplies that could be carted along with the army. In the dark and middle ages, an army provided for itself and foraged (or stole) what it needed along the way. By the 1700's, there wasn't a whole lot left to steal, and many rural, town, and village people had become experts in keeping their "stuff" from marauding armies. A large French newspaper, motivated by the French government, offered a huge monetary reward to anyone who could invent a way to store large quantities of food cheaply. In 1809 a French scientist noted that food stored in jars and kept airtight stored a lot longer than those that were not. No one knew why for another 50 years when Pasteur proved that microbes were what was causing spoilage. Soon it was learned that killing the microbes would make the food stay good for a very long time, and the process of "canning" was born. All of this is to say that a lot of times we off-gridders default to something thinking it is the only way to do it, since our grandparents and their parents did it. Hey, I'm all for canning - my family cans all the time, and we will continue to do so, but canning, if looked at logically and unemotionally, does not completely fit all of the criteria we talked about above. There is always a continuous need for canning jars, lids, and bands - and pressure canning, particularly, is subject to disruption if we are unable to replace the pressure canner or its parts. Canning, then, falls into the category of "intermediate means". We will continue to can foods, and to use that resource as long as we can, but if we are inordinately dependent on canning for our continued survival, then we put ourselves at risk. You may put up quite a few spare bands and lids (like we do), and even store a spare canner, but in reality if any disruption goes on long enough, you will have to abandon canning as a means of food preservation. Ok, so along with our canning functions, we need to learn some of the more primitive methods of food preservation, like using salt, oils, sugar, honey, lard, etc., along with root cellaring, smoking, curing, drying, and other means of keeping our food for long periods of time. We also ought to consider some of the other ideas in this series, like relying on foods that don't require as much preparation or storage. Root crops can often be kept in the ground through the winter, and with the addition of root cellars, many food staples can be kept without expensive and time-consuming preservation techniques. We need to consider how Agrarians in past centuries (before the advent of modern techniques) were able to survive and thrive without these newer means. There is nothing inherently wrong with technology or progress. Nothing is bad just because it is new (except doctrine). But if we constantly weigh every process or product against our scale of separation, simplification, and sustainability, we will learn to go past the easy and immediate answers and look for longer term answers. If you are able to can and store a year or two supply of food, great! Use that year or two to learn the older, more permanent storage techniques, and acquire the skill to use them. Then you can feel free to can all you like, since you will be able to NOT can if you need to.

I've already mentioned it but I've been surprised at how many people really had no idea you could can meat. Freezers have been a default option for so many for so long, that not using them seems strange and bizarre - even to some very separated agrarians. In our walk, we hope to be learning and perfecting the arts of smoking, curing, potting, etc. very soon, and to teach it diligently to our children.

See you in the next part!

Michael Bunker

Off-Grid Living for Agrarians, Part 9: Preserving the Crop 1

2008-03-04T08:45:00.001-06:00

This section, which is still a part of the discussion on homestead food, will be about preserving and keeping the harvest or crop. It will likely take several parts to discuss this topic fully. This series is really not very cleverly organized or laid out - but it has been a bit difficult to maintain the balance that is necessary for folks who are really new to this concept. As I've said several times, the concept of moving from a colonized urban or suburban worldly life to an off-grid agrarian life can be very overwhelming - even debilitating. I can tell you that there always seems to be more to do and more to know, and sometimes (certainly when you first start) it can seem like too much. So in writing this series, I am trying to balance some good philosophy in order to help people start out and avoid some really bad ideas out there, and I am also trying to be an encouragement that this is really something that you can and ought to do. Basically this series is about a right and good philosophy, though it is sprinkled with some very general ideas and suggestions.

I am going to review a little here. Remember that there are several different (and many very wrong) ideas about how to move into a life of off-grid agrarian living. Usually the first concept that is visualized when someone hears "off-grid" is that of alternative energy. In other words the idea here is to live basically in the same manner (with some lifestyle changes) and with the same "conveniences", but without being connected to the grid. So in this view, you would move into some alternative energy like solar, wind, or a combination of the two - and with that you would provide electricity for lights, freezers, refrigerators, and maybe even TV's and game consoles. Ok, so this is NOT what I am talking about in this series. It is so difficult for the average person to conceive of a life without these things, that this type of thinking is usually prominent at the beginning. Add the overwhelming cost of doing this type of thing to the idea of buying land, building a house, gardens, fields, tractors, etc. and you can see why most people convince themselves that this is either not doable, or at the least it will take several generations to get it done. Basically, without trying to offend anyone, this philosophy is the idea of moving to the Promised Land while taking Egypt with me. The first questions we normally get from folks run along these lines:

How will I power my power tools?
How do you keep food frozen?
How do you run lights and fans?
What about air-conditioning?
What about keeping milk, eggs, and drinks cold?

If you will remember back to the first part of this series, I mentioned that not one of these things would have even been a question in the minds of our great-grandparents. Prior to the ready availability of cheap and easy grid power, none of these things were a problem or a concern. People lived generation after generation without even considering that it might be a good idea to freeze meat for years on end, or that you might want to drop the temperature 30 degrees during the day, or that somehow ketchup and mustard need to be kept a degree or two above freezing. Add this to the fact that the average modernized suburbanite is weighted down with hundreds upon hundreds of modern time and space saving devices, each neatly fitted with a cord that plugs into a tiny receptacle in the wall - which connects all such labor and time saving devices into an enormous world-wide electrical beast - which soothes and eases each man and woman throughout their day so that they are never disquieted, unnerved, or uncomfortable, and so that they slide peacefully, easily and nonchalantly into the pit.

That is all to say that our philosophy ought always to be to simplify, downsize, and eliminate. We want to learn the old ways, not just because they are old, or because they are historical, but because they work and because they are sustainable. I do not mean "sustainable" in quite the way the modern eco-friendly folks do, though there is something to that as well; I mean "sustainable" in its literal meaning - we learn these ways because we will be able to continue in them even if the grid beast collapses and dies. We can continue in these ways without undue intercourse with a corrupt and dying world, and without being stained or harmed by too much dependence on worldly necessities. There really is no reason that you cannot grind your own coffee and wheat. There really is no reason why you need your pickle relish to be maintained at 35 degrees. There really is no valid reason to keep food frozen to 0 degrees for long periods of time. Your great-grandma didn't need a 48 inch fan or TV screen, and neither do you. Your great-granddaddy didn't need a perpetual 72 degrees in every room he entered and every minute of his life, and neither do you. The point is that we ought to get past that thinking, and when you do so, you will find that MOST of the costs and energy of moving off-grid is eliminated along with the myths and bulwarks in the mind of the colonized. If you realize that you can do the things you want to do with hard work and your own labor without paying $24,000 for an off-grid solar power system, then you just saved $24,000 and all you have to do now is learn to replace STUFF with SKILL and KNOW-HOW.

Ok, when it comes to the biggest bulwarks in the mind - I would say that freezers and refrigerators are way up there, and since we have been talking here in the last few parts about food production, the question arises - how do you store the food you produce? Well first, I'll tell you how the old-timers did it - the folks who first settled this land...

Root crops (some of the first planted and harvested) were kept in a root cellar. The root cellar was usually the first project started and completed on the land, and for good reason. When folks first came into this area of Texas they were facing a sometimes harsh climate (during the heat of summer), and though there were oaks and other trees for building, the days could get downright HOT during the 104 degree sweltering summer days while the house was being built. So the first construction was a hand-dug root cellar. There is one, probably originally built in the 30's or 40's, still existent up at the front of our property. The first excavations were basically trenches, and the width depended on how it was to be used. If a young couple or young family planned on living in it while they were building a house, the trench may be as big as 4-5 feet wide. Sometimes the original hole was dug only 5 or 6 feet deep. So you can see it didn't take long to build. The earliest "dug-outs" were really just rock-lined trenches that were covered with heavy branches and beams, then some of them would have been covered with 6-12 inches of dirt or sod. That was it. The family would live in there for awhile while the homestead was being started. Usually the next thing to go in would be the gardens and animal pens, then, when food production was up and running, the barn would be built, and finally, after that, the house building would begin. The "dug-out" would get a door and would become the first cool storage or root cellar. When the barns and the house were built, sometimes they would have a small root cellar dug up underneath them, and here is where your quick foods and condiments would be stored. Remember, ketchup and things like that were not foods that were originally designed to make french fries taste better. Ketchup (or really Catsup) was a way of storing tomatoes from the harvest. It is already designed to maintain food quality at moderate temperatures, so the idea that you need to store condiments in a refrigerator is really a very new myth. While it is true that you don't want to let Mayonnaise get really hot, it is a myth that it must stay refrigerated at 35 degrees in order to stay good. Mayonnaise was a product made from eggs and oil in order to store the egg crop. Mayonnaise is perfectly fine at root cellar temperatures. If you took everything out of the average refrigerator that doesn't need to be kept in there, you would be left with this strange and bizarre ephiphany... most Amerikans keep and feed a money sucking refrigerator for a single primary purpose - in order to have cold drinks and in order not to have to walk a few feet (or lift up a hatch door) to a root cellar to get condiments. I saw a $2100 refrigerator the other day in a store, and I bet it costs every bit of $300 a year to power that monster. Which means that in its lifetime, if interest (nobody has $2100 cash to plop down on a refrigerator, these things are usually built into a house or bought on credit) is included and all other things are taken into the equation, the owner of that refrigerator will likely pay close to $10,000 for cold drinks and cool mayonnaise. And they might even write me and tell me that separation and moving off-grid "takes time and money", etc., and "maybe we'll do it next year". My whole cabin AND root cellar cost less than $10,000. The point is that the cost of doing things the way you are already doing them is WAY more than you can afford, and it is all because of some mythology in thinking and because of colonization in the mind. So a root cellar, even a very simple one, is a much better idea. Some of the folks here in our community started with a small hole in the ground, maybe 3' x 2'; condiments and things would be put into coolers and dropped into the hole in the ground then covered with a board and some hay bales, etc. If ice is bought in bags from town, these coolers would keep milk cold for a week or more. One young couple here on the land used this method to keep milk cold for a baby and a toddler, and as far as I know they are still doing it. It works great. I read a story about a family that dug a small root cellar (maybe 5' x 5') right under their kitchen. They put a trap door on it and they put some thin shelves on the wall and a ladder down into it. They were able to keep all their condiments and almost everything else they used to keep in their refrigerator in there and it worked fine. So, in short, you do not need a refrigerator. Now, there is no problem with having one as an intermediate step, or so long as you know that when you move off-grid you will have to power it somehow; and so long as you know that if the world "system" is interrupted, your refrigerator will likely be one of the first casualties. If you are not dependent on it, and it doesn't stop you or slow you down, then there is no problem with having one. But you do not need it.

What about freezers?

This is a question I got when I was at Homestead Heritage. Agrarians like to store and preserve food, and freezing food is an easy way to preserve it, so how do you run or replace a freezer as an off-grid agrarian? Well, I confess, freezers are nice. If you read the top agrarian or homesteading writers in the magazines, you would think that freezers were actually absolutely necessary and a fact of life. I like to use the freezers mainly for meat storage, since I do not yet have a cold-smoker or an ice-house. But a freezer is really just an intermediate step, and ought not to be relied upon for anything long-term. Really, when you talk about bulwarks or road-blocks in the mind, here is where I have to face facts just like everyone else. I LIKE STEAK... and PORK CHOPS... I don't eat them very often, but I really, really like them. I really can't imagine giving up medium-rare steaks every once in awhile, especially when I have a bunch of cattle on the hoof, and a nice ribeye only costs me less than $2.00 a lb. Ok, back to work here, my mouth was starting to water. So what about freezers? Are they necessary? Well... no, they are not. Like I said, as an intermediate step, they are nice. We have three freezers of different sizes, and right now two of them are not plugged in at all. One is basically a dry storage and we use it to store gallon jugs of purified water. The other is only used when we butcher an animal or when we buy a boatload of some type of meat on sale at the store. We stick stuff in the freezer while we are processing it and canning it. Now, in the old days butchering was done in the winter for this very reason, so planning our butchering can eliminate our need for a freezer. Most butchering ought to be done between November and February (probably December and January here in Central Texas).

Canned meat can be stored in the root cellar, and when a cold-smokehouse is built, meat can be smoked and cured for long-term storage. Meat can also be "potted" - where it is cooked and stacked in a large crock. Each layer is then covered with its own grease or lard until the whole crock is full. Meat preserved this way, and kept fairly cool, could last for months and months. Meat can also be dried and then re-hydrated. Some of the old folks would cut beef or venison into strips and dry-smoke it, then hang it until it was bone dry. It could then be dry stored until it was needed. The night before it was to be used, it would be soaked in water until it had totally re-hydrated, then it could be cooked and used like normal fresh meat.

I want to stop here and make a comment about canned meat. I will engage in a longer conversation about the sustainability of canning in the next part, but for right now I want to deal with the issue of canned meat. I have heard many ignorant persons (people who have never tried it) make sarcastic and negative comments about canned meat. I can tell you from my own experience (and as a meat lover) as someone who eats canned meat several times a weak, that canned meat is very, very good. If you like beef stews with big huge chunks of steak in it, then canned meat is for you. If you like beef stroganof, or pork and rice, etc., then you will really like canned meat. The first canned meat I ever had that didn't come from a store was when I stayed with some friends and they made some venison stew. It tasted EXACTLY like beef stew. It was tender and delicious. Last night for supper Danielle made beef stew from beef we canned a year ago when we bought some roasts on sale. The meat was cubed in about 1 1/2 inch squares and canned. Danielle made stew from our homegrown canned green beans, some veggies left over from earlier in the week, some rice, canned tomatoes, etc. It was really very good. My favorite regular meal right now is pork and rice from our canned pork, and it is a good thing because if there are two things we have a lot of, it is pork and rice. So there is no problem at all with canning meat. It is easy and it preserves very well. As time goes by, more and more of the bulk of our butchered animal is being canned - even hamburger and ground sausage, sausage patties, and bacon. Most mornings we have fried bacon from bacon that we canned, with fresh eggs, fried potatoes, and tortillas or biscuits.

We intend to move towards more curing, cold-smoking, drying, and potting - but for now we are canning most of our meat.

Another long-term solution will be for us to build a springhouse and an icehouse. An icehouse is a very well insulated building, built either below ground, above ground, or in some combination of the two, and designed to store ice for long periods of time. A springhouse is, ideally, a rock or concrete building where cold water from a natural spring or creek is diverted for the purpose of keeping food cold. In the average springhouse, a trough of stone or wood was built into the sides of the walls and the cold moving water would fill the trough. The jars of food, milk, butter, etc. could be placed in the water to stay cold. In our area, a springhouse could be built in conjunction with an icehouse so that the melt runoff from the icehouse could be diverted into the springhouse troughs to keep food and beverages cold.

So, for your notes - smokehouse, springhouse, icehouse. All these were very widely included in many homesteads only a century ago.

Ok, more on food preservation in the next part.

God Bless,

Michael Bunker

Off Grid Living for Agrarians, Part 8: Food Production 2

2008-03-04T08:44:00.001-06:00

Continuing in our discussion on food production in Off-Grid Agrarianism. We have previously discussed meat production for the off-grid homestead. Today we will discuss other non-meat food production. Currently (or I guess in the past year we are raising or producing about 20% or less of our yearly non-meat needs. We have not yet raised any grain or dried bean supplies at all. We put up a year supply of green beans last year, and have only consumed about 10% of that because we have a pretty extensive food storage program and we have been rotating out our stored store-bought veggies first. We put up quite a few tomatoes for soups, stews, etc. We have not yet ever produced a potato or root crop, though we intend to do root crops this year. We have produced quite a bit of our herbs in the past, though we will hope to do much better on that this year and in the years to come. Vegetable, Herb/Spice, and grain/bean production ought to be combined with a very intensive home preparedness/food storage program. As you can see, my family has a need to increase our production of these staples.

One of the solutions to our situation is to really work on and emphasize a year-round growing program. In addition to our plans to add a greenhouse and cold-frames, we intend to do some other year-round growing of plants and vegetables that can be grown in our area throughout the fall and winter. We are currently installing double-dug garden beds and raised beds, and we also will be (if the Lord wills) building some 1 acre pens for free-range animal and crop rotation. So you can get a picture of the entire program, we intend (if the Lord allows) to produce some large scale dry bean and seed (oats/wheat/etc.) crops in rotating fields, as well as to move into intensive gardening of vegetables and other staples in order to move towards 100% production of our own supplies. This includes growing enough hay or other crops to feed our animals (those who are not actively participating in free-range or rotation schemes.

One of the first things the potential off-grid family can do is to get an idea of what you use, and how much of it. Sometimes for the gardener, it develops that you just kind of grow what you feel like growing and in an amount that seems right in order to just "have a garden". This is not a good idea. A garden and all growing programs, even for your small homestead, should be planned. Some old favorites or things you just like to have around may have to be sacrificed if they are not solid additions to an overall food supply plan. Vegetable or crops that take up a lot of space, but only produce a small amount of food and only for a short time are usually the first to go. In addition, some other crops that you may never have tried, or that may not currently be a part of your diet, may need to be adopted by you and your family. At present, all of the families here in the communities are getting into the idea of growing large amounts of sweet potatoes. The sweet potato is a great and healthy food source, it can be stored for quite a long time (through the winter), it is a combination of excellent people food, and excellent animal feed. Even though I am a southerner and I have eaten sweet potatoes most of my life, it has never been a "regular" food for me and my family, and we have never grown it. But we are convinced it will provide a basic staple for the family that grows very well in our climate.

My philosophy has always been to pick out 1 (or 2 or 3) major product per year and heavily focus on growing a bunch of that one thing. That product ought to be a) a major food source for your family - something you will eat a lot, b) something that stores or preserves well, and c) something that you can produce WAY more of than you can consume in one year. Last year that product for us was green beans. This year it will be something else, probably onions and 1 or 2 other things I haven't determined yet. Several years ago my big thing was dried beans. We grew several great crops of black and white beans and were able to store a good supply, much of which we subsequently used for seed in the years that followed. Dried beans are a great source of nutrition, and they store exceptionally well. I know that it is cheap and easy to buy and store commercially grown Pinto Beans and other dried beans. I myself have literally tons of them stored, and we eat them for several meals every week. Our main Sabbath meal every week is Pinto Beans. But you really ought to grow most of your beans yourself, because we really have no idea what kind of planting quality the beans we have in storage are. We have planted store bought pinto beans and gotten a crop before, but I certainly would not count on it, and I wouldn't be comfortable relying on being able to continue such a thing using (most likely) hybrid beans. The real answer in our area is going to be black beans and white beans, which grow well, are harvested easily, store easily, and taste great too. We regularly mix up our bean usage between stored Pintos and white beans. I want to emphasize too that if you get a good heritage seed or a good traditional non-hybrid seed for these beans, you can be pretty assured of being able to use all of your storage beans for seed if the need arrives. Your crop can also be nicely stored in 5 gallon buckets in a root cellar or other cool area. A 5 gallon bucket of beans will last a normal sized family for a good while.

As far as garden growing, there are as many opinions as there are growers, and I am still in the learning phase. The main point I want to make though is that I know some excellent gardeners who would make poor subsistence farmers. It is one thing to grow some great veggies or awesome marigolds. It is quite another to purposely work to provide a majority of the food for your family so that you do not have to buy food at stores - which is the goal and ideal of Off-Grid Agrarianism.

Much less space is necessary for a small subsistence farm than most people think. I am convinced that a pretty large family can live and survive, providing near 100% of their own foodstuffs, on only a few acres OR LESS. While I own over 37 acres, my garden is less than 1/8th of an acre. I plan on making more and more land available for tillage every year, but I believe I can provide more than enough food for my family just from this one small garden, using intensive gardening techniques. Eventually, my plan (if the Lord wills it) is to build a garden that is nearly 1/4 acre, keep my current garden as an herb and tomato garden, and utilize the 1 acre rotation fields for growing some larger crops each year. So one year I might grow an acre of wheat, an acre of dry beans, and an acre of some feed crop; and the next I might grow an acre of oats, an acre of snap beans, etc. Any excess that cannot be eaten, stored, used for animal feed, or bartered - will be sold at the farmers market, or to some local stores who buy these things for resale. My gardens will consist mainly of double-dug beds used in rotation, and used year-round.

As I mentioned before, any good subsistence farming/gardening plan needs to be combined with ample food storage. Root cellars are a necessity, especially here in the hot south. We will also be needing dry storage, some barns and outbuildings for drying and curing foods, a smokehouse, a springhouse, and an icehouse - each which will be needed for different and necessary purposes. I will discuss those things in a later part to this series. Anyway, if you cannot store it, preserve it, etc., you probably should not produce it. Very few things, with the exception of Lettuces and other garden and salad greens and veggies, are going to be grown for immediate consumption - until we get a good sized greenhouse. It is an great thing to be able to go directly to the garden for a meal, and I relish such times, but I have to keep in mind that food production is for the whole year, and for our survival and for our safety and security. God provides these things for us because He cares about us and loves us, and our labor is bestowed for His glory alone, and we must always keep that in mind. God's provision in allowing us to work for Him in providing nearly 100% of our necessities constantly puts us in remembrance of Him and His goodness and kindness towards us. We pray to Him to wean us from the "store", and to provide for us completely and sovereignly RIGHT HERE where He has planted us. We, like plants, need our rain and food in due season, and we rely on Him for it. A good food subsistence program coupled with a sound storage and preservation plan is our way of being dutiful and diligent in God's commandments. It is HE that has commanded us to till the soil, and to work the land (Gen. 2:15, 3:23), and we all ought to do that diligently as unto a glorious and loving master.

Now, many people get into animal husbandry and they make some really big mistakes. Some go out and buy 100% of the most expensive feed you can buy, and they keep feeding those animals from the feed store, and they never can figure out that they are losing money and time on the deal. Not that we are in this for the money, but if I have to keep working a day job in order to feed my animals, then I have fallen from suburbanism (where I work all day to buy stuff from other people to feed myself), to sub-suburbanism (where I work all day to buy stuff from other people to feed animals). Not a good trade-off. Our plan must include a program to provide much of the food and supplies for our animals from our own labor and from the ground. Back in the old south, where sweet potatoes, turnips and turnip greens, carrots, etc. were major staple crops, MOST of the crop went to feed the animals! When you read some of the old farmer's almanacs you will find that most small farms in the south fed their animals sweet potatoes, rutabagas, turnips and turnip greens, and other root crops. Corn was a yankee animal crop. So many people automatically run to corn as a staple crop for feed animals, but historically, at least in this area, corn was not used for that purpose. In fact, in England potatoes (regular potatoes) were considered animal food and not people food. The English (perennially derisive of the Irish) considered it quite hilarious that Irishmen ate potatoes. There was an old English joke that potatoes were food only for horses and Irishmen. The Irish responded that that is why the Irish man is as strong as a horse. Anyway, I love potatoes and all these other root crops, but consider using the bulk of any crop for animal feed. They grow better with less problems and risk of a total crop failure than corn and above ground seed crops do. The point is we have to grow or gather what we feed our animals.

Here in Central Texas, we harvested acorns from the hundreds of oak trees on our land to feed to our pigs. We were able to feed them and fatten them for several months off of acorns from the land. If we were more diligent at it, or if we had already put in a good free-range program (we did free-range them for several months) we would have had to buy less and less feed for them. This year we will try to put a better effort into it. We still buy hay for our cattle, but we have a plan to free-range them on our land later this year. I intend to grow some root crops this year to feed our milk cow and any other cattle that won't be running with the herd.

There will always be some products we will likely not be able to produce. We cannot produce salt, though we do get salt from a lot of the foods we produce. We do not have a salt mine, so we buy and store large amounts of salt. We will never be able to produce quite a few other necessities, but that number is far smaller than I first thought. We ought to be able to produce honey, soaps, pepper, candles, even rope, string, furniture, tools, etc. God created us with the ability to solve many problems, and we have to divorce ourselves from the corporate mentality and industrial mindset that has crippled our individual creativity. Most people are like people deprived for their whole lives of the use of their eyes, ears, other senses, and their legs, arms and hands. These things atrophy from lack of use, as does all of our other creative senses and abilities. The industrial system paralyzes us and makes us completely dependent on the system, while simultaneously convincing men that they are better off than their forefathers, and "more advanced". Hardly.

Ok, that's it for this part. More coming up, if the Lord wills it.

Your servant in Christ Jesus,

Michael Bunker

Off-Grid Living for Agrarians, Part 7: Food Production 1

2008-03-04T08:43:00.001-06:00

This topic (food production) will take two parts, so make sure to read both of them.

When I was in the woodworking class at Homestead Heritage, I had some discussions with the folks that live there and there were some interesting differences (other than doctrinal issues) in our concept of Agrarianism, homestead living, etc. In their 14 minute video presentation the announcer says that the people there don't want to live in a "museum" or to live in the past. They want to embrace and encourage those skills and doings of the past that enhance family and communal living, while embracing those modern things where they also assist in the overall goal of peaceful, simple living and brotherhood. Well, these things are admirable, but an outsiders view might be valuable here. Most of the folks who visit Homestead Heritage are basically what we here call "worldlings". They live in the city or the suburbs and they actually do visit Homestead Heritage because it is like a museum. They see it as a Living History Farm and they want to see horses pull hay trailers and they want to see crafts made by hand the "old fashioned way". Once again, this is all admirable, but we here in our community didn't visit in order to see a museum. We want to learn what we can in order to inculcate the things we learn into our lives. I visited Homestead Heritage while I am already living an off-grid Agrarian life. So I was a bit of a curiosity to them. They are used to worldlings asking them how they make molasses or how they build barns, but while I was there they were asking me how I live without grid electricity and how I store food without a freezer. You see, they have embraced enough of the world's system that they live much like the world does. Sure they farm the communal pastures with horses, and they grow (corporately) a lot of their own food, and they have maintained (again corporately) many of the skills of yesteryear, but the average family living there lives on less than an acre and has grid power and grid water. They live in the suburbs of a pretty large city. They live 2-3 miles from the city of Waco, Texas. They basically are suburban folks who have pitched in together to work some communal fields and raise communal crops. This is way better than the average suburbanite, but I think it still falls short of the Agrarianism that we are talking about in this series. All of this is to say that we desire to separate ourselves even further from the "grid" system, not because to do so will be to live in the past or to "live in some museum", but because we think the grid system is:

1. Unreliable, and requires Christians to, very dangerously, rely on some pretty corrupt and evil systems in order to maintain survivability. Naturally the world system is in constant danger of disruption, and so, by default, anyone hooked to it or who relies on it is in a perilous state of reliance on that which is unreliable. It is one thing to say "oh, we rely on God", when in fact you are relying on a system which is completely contrary and antithetical to God and His ways.

Which brings us to the second point...

2. The system is evil. It naturally deprives man of the ability to survive and thrive outside of it. It is so overwhelming in its tendencies to corrupt men and cause them to become helpless dependents, that most people do not realize how really helpless and dependent they have become.

I explained this to the folks at Homestead Heritage and it seemed as if they agreed. I think they might have some long-term plans to lessen their dependence on grid power and water, but I don't know what they are.

Secondly, and this is the main point of this part, their system of food production, while interesting and admirable, does not seem to emphasize the necessity for each individual family to raise and grow most (if not all) of the food consumed by the family. Each family lives on a small tract, and may have a garden and some chickens, etc., but most of the bulk of the food production is communal or corporate and therefore must be purchased by the individual families from the company store. This requires most of the men (at least) to work off of their own property in order to make enough money to supply the family. This, to me, is the opposite of the concept towards which we ought to work.

Food Production

Our process ought to be working us towards self-sufficiency in our food supplies. This means that each family ought to focus on producing as much of their food as possible, and in increasing it each year by learning better techniques, by learning new skills, by working harder, and by diversifying. Start by trying to figure out how much of your food you produce. Maybe if you are new it is 0%, which means that you are currently dependent on the world system for 100% of your food supplies. These worldly food supplies grow worse and worse each year. Worse in total nutrition, worse in toxins and poisons in the food, worse in every possible way OTHER THAN in the way they look. Modern commercial farmers will tell you that they have learned to make food LOOK better, by making it worse for you and by reducing its overall actual quality. I was reading the Growing Great Garlic book by Ron Engeland, and in it he admits that smaller garlic that is a little less appetizing to look upon is actually more flavorful and probably better for you - but the commercial buyers and restaurants want the bigger and more robust looking garlics. This means that their overall ACTUAL quality is diminished in order to make them more salable. And this is an organic gourmet garlic grower telling it like it is. If organic gourmet growers are telling you this, what do you think is happening to the non-organic corporate grown industrial crops? The point is that you should be lowering this percentage of dependency immediately, and increasingly working to drop that percentage each year.

Ok, so I am going to go through the major food areas and discuss them individually:

Meat. Currently (as of late winter 2008) my family is producing about 80% of our own meat. Eggs are considered meat in our economy, so I will discuss them first. The first structure we built (actually acquired) here on the ranch was a chicken coop. I built the first coop out of a dilapidated hunting blind we found on the back of the property. I put a new floor in it and built it into a small coop and moved our 50 or so chickens into it. We quickly built a fenced pen around the coop with some old hurricane fencing that had been donated years earlier. We are still using this coop as our main coop today. We had egg production immediately (since our chickens were already producing), which means that we had protein growing from the land from day one. You may have to start your chickens from chicks, but you still should be producing eggs usually within 5-6 months of getting started. I would put in a chicken coop and get chickens before even beginning to think about where you are going to sleep and what you are going to live in. How many chickens to get is really based on the size of your family and how many eggs you eat. By the way... EAT MORE EGGS! My family will eat up to a dozen eggs on the days we eat eggs. So we usually keep between 30 and 60 hens. This winter, when the hens are usually not producing as well as normal, we were still getting 6 eggs a day, which allows us to have eggs at least every other day. As of yesterday our production was going up (due to the warmer weather) and we received a dozen eggs yesterday. Eggs are good and wholesome and provide a boatload of necessary nutrition. They can also be stored. They can be dried and powdered, stored in waterglass, larded, etc.

The great thing about homestead meat production is that the safest and best way to store meat is on the hoof. So begin by thinking of what type of land/pasture, etc. you have available and begin to determine how you will provide protein for yourself. If you are on a small homestead (less than 5 acres), you will want to focus on small, fast reproducing animals. Consider pigs, rabbits, pygmy goats, chickens, turkeys, quail, etc. You may want to have a milk cow or some midget cows, but it would probably be better to milk a goat and use goats or sheep for meat as well. If you did have the pasture and feed production enough to keep a small milk cow, you would get a calf every year that you could grow and butcher for meat. If you keep goats for milk, then you will want to maintain a small herd so you can always butcher some goats for meat. If your homestead is larger, you definitely want to consider having a few cows - for milk and for meat. I recommend the pure Texas Longhorn for many reasons, click on the article and read all about it. As I said, for the smaller homestead, you should definitely consider rabbits and fowl. At our old homestead we produced quite a bit of our meat from turkeys, geese, and chickens. Make a decision on your meat production based on the availability of space and feed. If you will pen your animals then you need to allot enough farm space to produce most of their feed. If you will free-range your animals (which I recommend), then you need to study on pasture management and rotation so you can do this without constantly having to buy feed and supplements.

Some folks have problems with eating pigs, and if you do, then just skip this paragraph - but for the rest of us the pig is the answer to a whole lot of problems. Pigs are easy to keep, they reproduce fast, they are cheap and clean if they are allowed to range and fend for themselves, and they produce an enormous amount of meat in a very short time. I currently have 6 pigs that were born here on the land - and three of them will be butchered in the next two months. Our problem is not "how will we have enough meat?", but "where do we put it all?". Pigs are also good in an animal/pasture rotation system. They plow up the ground, deposit very rich manure, and do great benefit to the soil.

We also keep Longhorn cattle, and thus far we have butchered one small bull. If the Lord wills I will butcher one steer this fall, and another one the next fall. After that, if the Lord allows, our cattle production will be up enough for us to butcher two cattle a year, which will be more than enough meat for our family, with enough left over to barter, trade, sell, etc.

We raise meat rabbits, and will be butchering our own product starting in the next 20 days. My oldest daughter Tracy is in charge of rabbit production, and she is doing well. She will still have to learn to butcher, but she has butchered chickens and other animals and does pretty well with it. We also will be increasing our chicken meat production, and we hope to add Turkeys this year sometime.

So you can see that meat production is critical, but it is entirely doable - and at a remarkably low cost. I will discuss food preservation at the end of the second part of this "food production" section, so in that section we will discuss what to do with all that meat we are producing.

Ok, that is it for meat. I'll move on to vegetables and other foodstuffs in the next part...

Michael

Off-Grid Living for Agrarians, Part 6: Philosophy 2

2008-03-04T08:40:00.000-06:00

Looking into Agrarianism and Off-Grid living can be very, very overwhelming at first. There are a million things to learn, and a million choices to make, and it seems as if any bad decision or wrong move will leave us penniless and homeless, foraging roots on a stark landscape of despair. Well, it can seem that way. Too many people, as I have mentioned in previous parts, think that they are going to, someday, just leap into this idyllic "Little House on the Prairie" life, and if it can't be like that - then they aren't yet ready. So rather than make progress every day (It is a Process Driven Life, you know) - they make no progress at all. Always planning, they never act. Always intending, they never do. Sometimes the problem is not in the reality of "can we do this?", but it is an error in the mental view of what it is to live as an Off-Grid Agrarian. As I have mentioned, if you have a picture postcard idea of what this life will be like, then you will always fall short, and the mountain will always be too steep to climb.

Reading some Agrarian blogs, you will find people who seem to do it all (and it can seem overwhelming) - canning, butchering, growing, husbanding, cattle, rabbits, goats, pigs, sheep, geese, chickens, turkeys, quail, drying herbs, smoking meat, root-cellaring, making candles, making lard, building outbuildings, etc., etc., etc. I mean, who can learn all of that and do all of that? Well, eventually you can, but if you think that you will be required to step out of a suburban apartment or cracker-box house and be able to do all of these from the get-go... well, I can see why your current life might seem safer and easier, and why most people do not ever pull the trigger. I can't think of any Agrarians, off-grid or otherwise, who stepped into this life doing (or knowing how to do) all of that stuff. I know I didn't. I was working a corporate sales job when my father offered to sell us our first five acres in 1997, and to put a single-wide mobile home on it for us. It was many months after that when we got our first animal besides a dog. Some friends came out when I was at work and put up a small square goat pen and put a Billy-goat in it. I came home to find my wife staring at a Billy-goat in a bare pen with no housing and no food other than the grass in the pen. We had no idea what to do. Then the goat started breaking out of the pen... several times a day... every day. So, slowly, I learned fencing. I had never built a pen in my life, but once I had to fix a fence three times a day - chase a goat, and drag it back into the pen - I felt sure I could throw up a workable fence. Taking my newfound skill, I built a pen around what would be a large garden. Then I built a larger pen for a goat yard, and we got more goats. Then I built chicken pen, because the same friend who gave us the goat pen gave us 14 chickens and a set of chicken nests. Well, that's how we learned about chickens and goats. In May of 1998 my wife quit her job to homeschool and tend the homestead, and 5 months later I quit my job to preach and teach full-time. We didn't know how we were going to make it, or how we would live. Within a year or two we had a couple-hundred chickens, a dozen goats, geese, and turkeys, and a cow. We didn't know anything about any of it when we started, and there weren't a million Agrarian sites and blogs out there either. We had Carla Emery's Encyclopedia of Country Living, and we used it every day for every thing we could think of. I learned homestead carpentry the same way I learned homestead fencing... by making mistakes, and by necessity. I tell people - "if you want to be a successful off-grid agrarian homesteader, then make a mistake a day for 11 years and you'll be right where I am". The point is that you don't learn all of this stuff and become proficient at it while you are still living in the city. Sure you can practice a few things in your back yard, but you will not really know what you are doing until you JUST DO IT. And you will not just do it all at once. You add skills a few at a time, as God makes them necessary, or as He puts it on your heart to learn them. I see folks who are new at this, and they are usually in a couple of different categories. Some want to do it all, and they want to do it right NOW. They are akin to the guys I meet who want to learn survival techniques, and for their first survival trek they want to go into the wildest, coldest, most unforgiving situation imaginable, and they want to do it with only a pocket-knife and a stick of Big Red gum. Others are on the other extreme. They think that by raising some herbs in a pot on their patio, they are learning the skills they will need to survive as an off-grid Agrarian. Ten years later they will have an herb garden and a chihuahua and they will still be telling themselves that some day they will take the leap! The realistic situation is one that is somewhere in-between the two extremes. You do have to pull the trigger and choose when and how to get out and onto the farm. You have to do that regardless of all the consequences and all the "giants in the land" that conspire to keep you immobile and dependent on the world. But once you get out, and get your land, you have to move intelligently and you have to learn your skills as they are necessary. You cannot expect to do it all at once. This is why COMMUNITY is really so important to a proper Christian Agrarian existence. If we live in Community with like-minded believers, then we all don't have to be experts in everything. If you work together, you can all learn different skills, and teach and help one another.

It sounds hard to believe, but most of the Agrarian skills are really easy and intuitive. It is only because we have been so colonized into the world's way of doing things, using machines, etc. that we don't know how to do some really simple things. I mean, getting and raising chickens was one of the "giants" in my thinking. It seemed so complicated - and what if kill them all, or they all fly away? Well, in my experience keeping chickens is one of the easiest and most rewarding things you can do as an Agrarian. It really is a no-brainer. Sure you can make mistakes, and sometimes you might kill all your chickens (I did it once) on accident, but you know, I got more chickens and learned from my mistakes. It's not like they are children (they put you in jail for accidentally killing all your children!). Now, I can tell you that maintaining chicken and egg production is one of the easiest things we do around here. I think most of the people in our community will tell you that the hardest thing they have had to do is to pull the trigger on actually making a firm decision to move and live off-grid. Once the ball got rolling, and they were actually on the land, the rest has been pretty easy.

Now that we are all living an off-grid life, the trick is to not get into too many things at once, or into the wrong things. When we recently went to visit Homestead Heritage my girls talked about wanting to learn Pottery, and some of the guys mentioned wanting to learn Blacksmithing. Well, these are great skills, and it is good to want to learn them. But how practical is it? I told Tracy (my oldest daughter), "The problem is that knowing how to make pots would be great. But it takes a huge investment in time, money, and equipment, and how many pots can you use? Are you going to just keep making pots after you have all you need, or are you going to sell them? Do you have a market for pots?" I mean, maybe there is a market for them, but how many do you have to sell to pay back the thousands of dollars it would take to set up a kiln, etc. and all the other equipment it would take? I would love to be able to make pots and plates, etc. if we need them (and I think I know enough to do that in an emergency), but I don't think that we are going to be going into the pottery business. Blacksmithing is a similar thing. If one person really wanted to make the investment to get all the equipment, and a forge, and a supply of steel, and all the other stuff you need, then I can see where having a blacksmith in the community would be a great benefit. But is everyone going to do this? It wouldn't make sense for everyone to do it. I think Blacksmithing will be a specialty skill that maybe one or two people might want to get into. It will be very expensive to get into it, and the only way it will ever pay off is if the person doing it wants to market products and services to outsiders for profit. I'm all for learning these skills, but I don't think the average homesteader ought to make them a priority. My point is that it is good to want to learn something and to want to acquire a skill, but every thing we learn and do ought to have a payoff towards our success, survival, satisfaction, peace, etc. We ought to have a plan for everything we do.

My personal experience after several years of helping and watching many people (singles, couples, and families) get into this lifestyle is this... those who have the least to start with pull the trigger the fastest, and end up learning the necessary skills the fastest. They may have less land, and less of everything else, but they learn the things they need to learn the fastest. The slowest off-grid Agrarians are those who have money and means when they start out. They cling to the old ways the longest, they do things on a bigger scale, and they move a lot slower. The young couples who have had to do this with virtually no money and almost no income have been the quickest to learn the necessary Agrarian skills, quickest to get gardens and animals started and producing, and they have been more successful much earlier. This contradicts the idea that you aren't ready to pull the trigger and move into an off-grid life yet, because this counter-intuitive truth shows me that the longer you take to prepare and save up for your Off-Grid Agrarian adventure, the slower you will move into it, and the slower you will learn what you need to learn to succeed at it. Those who are probably the most able to move into this life (because of their current situation) are the ones who will most likely never, ever do it. Think about it, who has the most to "lose"? People who now own their home in a comfortable suburb, or who have equity in property, and who have "stuff" - these are the people who will most likely never do it, because they have the most to lose, and because they fear losing the comforts of their current life. They dream too grandly, and when they cannot see how to purchase the dream right off (instead of working to build it) they never do it at all. If I am corresponding with a homeless guy and a suburban accountant, I would put my money on the homeless guy being more successful in moving off-grid and in creating and living a successful off-grid Agrarian life.

Now you know why I don't listen to excuses when it comes to people saying they want to live this life.

So, the point of part 6? Don't let the giants in the land... or anything else, stop you from pulling the trigger on the life you know you should lead. Don't get yourself overwhelmed by thoughts of what you don't know, or in worrying about what you don't have. All that stuff will come in time, and you will do just fine IF you will just do it. You don't have to be Martha Stewart or Carla Emery or Davy Crockett to survive and thrive as an off-grid Agrarian. If you will just do it, and then, if you will keep doing it long enough - you and your family will probably far surpass those folks in just a single generation. And that is my encouraging thought for the day.

I am your servant in Christ Jesus,

Michael Bunker

Off-Grid Living for Agrarians, Part 5: Water

2008-03-04T08:38:00.002-06:00

Every movement is diverse and can consist of widely different philosophies. Some philosophies of Agrarianism are really good, and some are really horrible. It is not politically correct today to call someone else's ideas "horrible", but I am far from politically correct. Agrarian movements in the past have been founded on a vast array of philosophies, some which are completely antithetical - much like our concept of Biblical Agrarianism is antithetical to the Communist and Marxist "agrarian" reform ideas of Pol Pot and other dictators. Pol Pot's communist and collectivist agrarian reforms in Cambodia left about 1 million dead. Even among those who call themselves "Biblical" or "Christian" agrarians, there are a plethora of philosophies and ideas - some which, frankly, aren't truly agrarian at all. It is a mistake to say that you cannot define terms, even if the proper definition of terms excludes some folks who want to identify themselves as Biblical agrarians. I will talk more about this topic in a future chapter in this series, but for now I just want to point out that just because someone lives on a farm, engages in some gardening or agrarian activities, and declares himself a "Christian" does not mean that the philosophy that he lives by is Christian or Biblical Agrarianism. There are some really good materials and blogs out there by Christian agrarians, and I have often plugged them:

The Deliberate Agrarian
Tabletop Homestead

...and many others - these are just a few I try to check out regularly. But there are some really, really bad ones out there too. I read one the other day that literally defined EVERYONE as an Agrarian. Basically the thesis was that if you eat food, then you are an agrarian. Well, frankly that is just ridiculous. Eating food doesn't make you an agrarian any more than drinking water makes you a fish. I suppose the fact that there are electrical synapses that fire in my brain makes me a power plant or a junction box. If, as the Bible says, everyone who claims to be a Christian is not one (Mat 12:50 - For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother), then it should be evident that everyone who claims to be an agrarian is not one. Always remember that there are tares in every field of wheat, and it takes wisdom and understanding to discern them.

Ok, in the next couple of parts we will be talking about water and food. Water is more important than food, so we will talk about water first. The other day we met a man who was very serious about the dangers out in the world today. He had imbibed some of the myths and lies of the government (about boogeymen and terrorists), but he had determined that the world is not as safe and dependable as it pretends to be, and he spoke as if he had realized that the "grid" system of life was in a tenuous condition and that it is destined to collapse. One of the things he told us was that "the terrorists" (Fasist-speak for "anyone who rightfully distrusts and dislikes Amerikan imperialism) are going to attack our systems of electricity and water. Ok. So we looked around and saw that he was on city power and water. He might have a generator or two socked away, but, like I mentioned in part 2, generators are just an intermediate step and not a permanent solution - not to mention that, according to his philosophy, "the terrorists" control the worlds oil supply; and with all the roof lines this man had on his property, not one had a gutter or any semblance of a catchwater system. Do you see the disconnect between what people say they believe, and what they show that they believe by their actions? I never believe what a man says to me... not ever. I believe what he shows me by his actions.

There is no doubt that there very likely will be an attack on our already dwindling fresh water supplies in Amerika. Where that attack comes from and who is ultimately responsible for it, I cannot tell you - but there are two things you ought to know about the current water supply:

1. It is already poisoned. If you are living on unfiltered and un-purified city water, then you are already being poisoned. If you didn't already know that, then you need to do some research, because this work on Off-Grid living is not going to be big or long enough for me to catch you up on the dangers of city water supplies. Here is a hint: Heavy metals, dangerous and caustic chemicals, toxic build-up in pipes, fecal matter, etc. Think about it.

2. It is highly susceptible to attack, and it is tenuous at best even if there is no attack.

One of the most glaring realities that urbanites and suburbanites face every day is that they may wake up in the morning with insufficient water, undrinkable water, or no access to water at all. Just this past year, Coleman, Texas, which is only 12 miles from here, had a serious water situation. During a "random" test, a water test expert detected dangerous levels of toxins in the water supply. The word went out for everyone to boil their water. Stores and restaurants were informed that they could not provide water or ice for drinks. The problem is that if you do not listen to the radio, then you would never have known there was a problem. This happens in cities around the country every day. Not to mention the state of the power supply system that is required to pump water to city dwellers. I could go on and on, but the point is that you cannot trust water that is provided by government. Ever.

Now, I am speaking to people who are already rural, or who will be rural very soon (we hope), so - how do we separate Agrarians think and plan for our water needs?

There are several ways to procure water for an off-grid life, and I will discuss each method and then give you some positives and negatives about which you ought to think:

1. A water well (either deep or shallow)
2. Surface water (lakes, streams, ponds, tanks, etc.)
3. Catchwater
4. Water from the air (Air-wells, dehumidifying systems, etc.)

You should note that you will need water for your own family use, for drinking and every other use of water; and you will need water (huge amounts) for keeping animals, watering gardens and trees, etc. Your long-term water plan needs to provide for sufficient water for every conceivable need. Modern urbanites use about 100 gallons on average per person per day! Smart, efficient, off-grid agrarians may use anywhere from 5-15 gallons per day - usually closer to 5. I figure our absolute minimal needs for personal use (not including gardens or animals) at 6 gallons per day per person, which for my family of 6 adds up to almost 14,000 gallons per year.

Our first thought is always to have a water well. I would say that 95% of the people who ask me about our off-grid life here ask me if I have a water well. I do not. A water well is a great thing, if it works, and if the land you buy has a working water well - then great. I would warn you that a deep water well isn't always as dependable as people think. Wells often have problems. They can cave in; the water can dry up or go bad; the pumping system or mechanism can break or stop operating, etc. Having a well is great, but always be careful not to depend too much on it. Most of the people who homesteaded out in the Great Plains a century ago failed because of the failure of water wells. A good water well in an area that has a pretty dependable aquifer at a reasonable depth can cost you between $3500 and $5,000 - and that is before you ever pump a drop. That does not include pumps and pump supplies, pipe, power, etc. If you plan on using a deep well hand pump you will still probably spend over $1000 for the pump and all the pipe and other supplies you will need. A hand pump is more dependable than an electric pump though. Some people choose to use both, and it is possible to have both an electric (12V or AC) pump and a hand pump in the same well hole. Again, the well is susceptible to cave-in if it is not properly and carefully cased, and there is always the probability that the well can run dry during a period of extended drought. Here in Central Texas, the digging of water wells is really iffy. There have been two wells dug in our community: One was successful, though it is a low-output well. The other was a dry well... a failure. The failure cost $2500 even though it was a dry well. A water well could be a great solution if used in conjunction with other water solutions.

Surface water. If you happen to procure a property with a very large lake that has good, clean, water - then you are way ahead of the game. One of our neighbors has a 4 acre pond with a pump that serves his house. The pond always, even in the drought, holds enough water to provide for his needs. In this case you would only need to work out a pumping and purifying system (pumping for the whole system and purifying for any personal use and drinking water) and you should be alright. You could also make a large tank, pond, or lake on your property if there is enough water running through the property when it rains. This can be an expensive process if you have to do it all from scratch. Here in Central Texas it can cost upwards of $15,000 to hire a crew to come in and build a cattle tank (Here in Texas the word "tank" on a ranch usually means a small pond) that may be less than 1/4 acre in size. Here on our ranch, Elder David has been working to build a tank on his own by renting a backhoe and doing all the work himself. It still will likely cost several thousand dollars in backhoe rental costs before it is all done. Always remember, though, that these costs are generally one-time costs, and if your water plan can provide you with dependable water year-round, then it may be worth it to you to spend the money (if you have it). One of our two tanks here on my property went totally dry during the drought we had in 2006, so always remember that surface water can also be tenuous during drought conditions.

Catchwater. This, to me, is the ideal solution for most situations. When we were in Western Australia we noticed that virtually every roof line, no matter how small, fed water into gutters that ran into a personal cistern - even in the cities. Every drop of water that fell from the sky was caught and stored. This is the way we ought to live. It is a great philosophy for several reasons:

1. Rainwater in most rural areas is pure and clean. It only must be filtered because of the material that gets in the water from the catchwater surface (such as roofs and gutters), but as it falls it is pure and perfect.

2. Catching rainwater shows and displays our complete reliance and dependence on God, and not on the systems of men. We rely on our Father God to provide us with the rain necessary to maintain us. When we rely on rainwater, we show this dependence, and we are more likely to remember to pray and give thanks to God for His provision. City people do not think of God when it comes to turning on or off a faucet. People who rely on rain directly for daily use water are more likely to pray for it, and to thank God for it.

Although we live in Central Texas, there is plenty of water (many, many, many times more than all of the families here in the community could ever use) that passes through our property. The concept of Catchwater is to utilize as much of this water as possible, not only by catching it from roofs into cisterns and tanks, but by catching runoff water in tanks or ponds. For the same amount of money that you would spend on digging a water well and procuring pumps, etc., a structure can be built and a tank bought that will supply you with a good percentage of your water needs. I have less than $1500 in my catchwater system on my cabin, since it catches water from the roof lines on the cabin and is not a structure built specifically to catch water. My cabin is 610 square feet, but it has 710 square feet of roof line. This means I catch somewhere near 350 gallons for every 1 inch of rainfall. That is not a lot, but it adds up to close to 10,000 gallons of water a year. Not enough for a family of my size, but it is a lot of good water, and it helps. Two of the families here on the land have roof lines that are capable of catching between 1200 and 1800 gallons per inch of rain fall. This capacity would provide an average of 31,000 to 46,000 gallons of water a year in an average rainfall year. For a small agrarian family, this ought to provide most of the necessary daily use water. This would have to be augmented for watering large gardens or for watering animals, but if used in combination with other surface or subsurface water projects, this method is very successful. I plan (if the Lord blesses and wills) to catch the water off of every roof line we build. If the Lord wills for my office to be completed this coming year, that will add an additional 350 gallons of water per inch of rain, or another 9100 gallons of water per year on average. Some of our younger families are subsisting on the water caught from the roofs of goat sheds, farrowing sheds, outhouses, campers, etc. It is doable. But catching water ought to be on our mind as we engage in any building project. We also will be (if the Lord wills) expanding our surface water projects, including expanding our ponds and tanks, and building new ones when we are able. In my opinion, the new agrarian homesteader ought to focus his/her resources and time on catchwater resources FIRST.

Water from the air. It is possible, and in some cases doable, to produce water from the air. This would fall under the category of "intermediate" or "ancillary" steps in providing water. Let me give a few examples. Many of you know that air-conditioners, freezers, refrigerators, etc. will produce water from the air in high humidity situations. This is why you will see water dripping from your A/C unit in the summer when the humidity is high. This is called "condensing" and the water is "condensation" which builds up because of the drastic temperature transfer and differential between the freezing cold in the tubing and the warm, wet, air surrounding it. Using this theory, some companies have developed low energy "air wells", which are units with condensers that condense water from the air and then catch it and purify it for consumption. This is something to look into for anyone who lives in a high humidity environment, and who produces their own electricity via solar power. Several of these units could be powered by solar power to provide water - although it would be very expensive and it would still be subject to failures and problems. I have considered purchasing one or more of these units (or manufacturing one ourselves) and putting it in a special root cellar or "dry room" where we want it to stay less humid than in a regular root cellar, which might have humidity levels of 70-95%. For example, a couple of automobile compressors could be powered by solar power in an underground room with high natural humidity. The water running off of the compressors could be caught. I reckon that up to 10 gallons a day could be caught in this manner. Water can also be gathered, in small amounts, from anywhere (either natural or man-made) were condensation appears regularly.

Water storage is more important to your survival and success than food storage. Storing water in ponds, tanks, lakes, etc. is ideal; water can also be stored in man built tanks and cisterns. We have a 1500 gallon above ground storage tank for our cabin catchwater that cost us somewhere around $800. A good and talented construction guy could build one with much more capacity out of wood and/or concrete. We are also considering a 20,000 gallon above ground pool for water storage. The homesteads in this area 100 years ago used below ground rock-lined cisterns for water storage. The old home that used to be on our neighbors property had water provided from a small pond which was pumped up to the house where it was stored in a rock-lined cistern.

I am still studying ways to further enhance our catchwater system here on the ranch. Off-grid water is an important issue, and I imagine we will be studying and adapting our system as long as the Lord tarries and he continues to bless us with peace and quiet here on our off-grid ranch.

Your servant in Christ Jesus,

Michael Bunker

Off-Grid Living for Agrarians, Part 4: Land

2008-03-02T17:18:00.000-06:00

Land. Like Mark Twain said, buy it because they aren't making any more of it. Wars are fought over it. Land is power - always has been. There are as many philosophies about land as there are philosophies, and the problem with philosophies is that they often get codified into law without any reason behind them, and as such they become unreasonable maxims. Unreasonable maxims become walls in our thinking, guiding us to conclusions that may be just as unreasonable as the philosophy that brought us there. This is why we say that the mind of modern man is "colonized", which means he has accepted things as truths that are not truths at all, but are just learned behaviors - patterns and trails of thinking that have become ruts out of which we cannot free ourselves. Most people believe certain things merely because their whole lives everyone around them has believed those things. People accept things "the way they are" mainly because they have never experienced any other way. Unhappily, when I speak to people about land it is difficult to get them to think clearly on the subject, because their thinking is based on a lifetime of accepting as truth what was once just a philosophy or idea pushed by an eager zealot. The modern industrialized mind cannot even begin to consider that, for literally thousands of years, the idea of being caged into a poorly built crackerbox house on a 1/4 acre lot would have been laughable as a workable land philosophy. Most "amerikans" don't know of any other way of living, and even those who might have a bit more land are flummoxed when they learn that, only 150 years ago, owning outright "forty acres and a mule" was considered a bare step above poverty. The Homestead Act of 1862 gave 160 acres of land to each person or family, provided they stayed and worked the land for at least five years. Today, television commercials show gleaming and smiling couples, hugging one another in joyful bliss, ecstatic because they have entered into a mortgage contract to purchase a shoddily built but gilded and trimmed crackerbox on 1/4 acre of land. The voice over says, "You always dreamed of owning your own home...".

In order to properly think about land in our Agrarian journey to an off-grid life, we have to be willing to consider things we have never before considered. Land has to be central to our thinking and our philosophy, but land cannot become an idol, or we will surely fail in our Agrarian pursuit. Here are some things about which you should think:

1. Not every person in an Agrarian society will be a landowner and farmer. Although it is a high ideal, it is impossible and has never been a workable solution - in all of history - for every man to own and farm land. Even in the most successful eras of Agrarian bliss, there have been landed folk and unlanded folk. There will always be employers and the employed. Even in the Bible the shepherds were shepherds, meaning that they tended the sheep of others. In an Agrarian village in Europe 200 years ago, the average farm would have employed dozens and dozens of workers - shepherds, swineherds, thatchers, millers, coopers, smithies, brewers, etc. How do you think most people came upon their last names? Now, in many cases, these workers worked on the main farm, but also had a small spread for themselves and their family which they worked on the side to provide more for themselves and their loved ones. Others started up their trade in small villages, working for themselves and helping the Agrarian society by working in a specific area that is needed by the society. But there will always be those who acquire and hold more land than others, and who are willing to employ others. The farmer back then, was a wealthy man, held in high esteem by the society and by other men. Some, due to certain situations, circumstances, etc. who will have to work for others. There is no scandal or anything ignoble in working for another man in a healthy and proper pursuit.

2. Land should never be an idol, but is a means through which we can obey God, provide for our own, evangelize our families (first, and then others), obey the commandments of God, and glorify Him in the work He has given us to do. Land, like any other means, needs to be put in its proper place in our thinking. We cannot take it with us, and it would be a pitiable thing to gain the world and lose your soul. Too many people contact me and tell me of their Agrarian dream to buy them a plot of land in the boondocks and start farming, etc. I will ask them about fellowship and service and brethren and doctrine and these important things, and it turns out they have no plans to have any of those things. Or worse, they will plan on finding some local "bible believing" church to go to... which means that they will sell out doctrine and true Christianity for a proxy "church" filled with industrialized and anesthetized minds. It is just as dangerous to disobey God and stay in the city of destruction in order to maintain fellowship with family and worldlings as it is to flee the city of destruction with no intention of living in some type of communion and fellowship with God's elect children.

3. Land is highly valued by Christian and Secularist alike, and will be tough to acquire in quantities enough to serve us as homesteads. If it were not tough, it would not be valued highly enough by us. Acquiring land, if that is your goal, will take some creative thinking - unless you are just rich enough to plunk down a sizable wad of cash on the perfect homestead.

4. "The perfect homestead". Too often we idealize the Agrarian life until it becomes a wall we cannot scale or a picture postcard we will never realize. I have heard people wistfully describing the land they are looking for with dreamy eyes cast back into their empty heads. After their breathless description of rural bliss, I will say, "I have seen just the land you are describing... it is in a picture hanging on the wall in a restaurant in town". Life is not a picture. If you are expecting to find the perfect little homestead with a year-round brook flowing through it and a pond with geese and a perfectly green pasture with the perfect red barn... etc.... etc... then you will inevitably fail, because the homestead you look for will either a) cost you a million bucks, or b) never live up to the dream you have concocted in your mind. You will most likely start with empty or overgrown land and you will most likely have to build your utopia there. Agrarianism is coming to love the land God gives us, and to till it and work it according to our needs and the directions given by God. We build homesteads, we cannot afford to buy them.

5. Last point before I move on, and it will be the jumping off point for our discussion today. In order to procure land in the world today, we must be willing to pray hard, work hard, and think hard. If the solution is just "plunk down the money and buy the land", you may never have money enough to pull the trigger. You need to be creative, and to think in ways you are not accustomed to thinking. There was a reason that millions of men and women became indentured servants only a few short centuries ago. They were willing to work as near slaves for 5-10 years in order to become landholders someday, if the Lord did will it. Today, few people are even willing to consider such a thing, and so they stay slaves to a debilitating commercialized system, having their souls sucked out at work each day, just because they cannot think outside of what they already know.

Ok, so, like I said, that is the jumping off point for our discussion on land. We have to be willing to try new things, and to think extraordinary thoughts. Our ticket to land ownership may be out there right now - we just haven't thought of it yet. My father bought some land in the mountains of New Mexico. Next to his land was a small, empty parcel that no one ever worked or built upon. He asked around, did some research, and found out that the adjacent land was owned by a huge world "church" (I will not mention which Antichrist it was) who didn't even know that they owned the land. Someone likely had died and "donated" the land in order to get to heaven. The local diocese didn't even know they owned the land. Dad made a ridiculously small offer (probably 1/5 of what the land was worth) and the cash whores sold it gladly and immediately. In a like (but opposite) scenario, when I lived in West Texas, some of our friends had their eyes on a parcel of land near ours. They did the research and found out who owned it. It too was owned by a religious cult who did not know that they owned it. This cult, however, was unwilling to sell the land at any price. You just never know. I have heard more stories than you can imagine, but the stories have convinced me that there are thousands of acres of land out there that can be bought for a reasonable price, where the current land owner is willing to work with a buyer to make a good and doable deal. I know that this next story is about a worldling in a city, but the story still has a good principle. An old friend and business partner of mine bought a house in a rundown part of town by merely knocking on doors until he found out who owned an old (but well built) house that was soon to be nothing but a crack house. He found the owner, made an offer to buy the house with monthly payments (but with no interest!) and said he would keep the riff-raff out of the area and keep the owner out of court. He made up a contract where he would own the house outright in about 5 years. He then spent a couple of thousand fixing up the house, brought in 5 individual college students as renters, and paid the house off in a year or so. In just a few years he owned almost all the houses on the block, and several others in the area. I have seen this same principle work in rural land deals, but it takes work. We have been shocked to find how willing most of the rural folks are to work with us on any number of projects and plans that we have. We are getting things offered to us for free almost every week by people who know who we are and what we are doing. This goes to the next principle... work hard and talk to people who might be able to help you.

It will be impossible for me to set up a hypothetical for every possible scenario, but I'll throw up a hypothetical that fits the situations I hear about the most often. Ok, so here is a scenario I receive in email questions all the time...

"Michael, I am single and unattached. I want to live the Agrarian life, but I have no money to speak of, some debt, and very few skills."

Here is what I would do. I would sell virtually everything I own (except a working vehicle) and try to scrounge up some cash. Even a thousand dollars would be a good start. Next comes the homework. I would identify where I want to live. This part applies to everyone. Write down everything that is important to you, and important in a living location, and start to prioritize your thinking. Here is my list:

a.) I want to live near like-minded brethren, in Christian community with those who understand these philosophies and who are seeking obedience to God every day.

b.) I want to live as freely as possible, with as little government restriction of my rights as possible. I want to be able to own guns, defend myself, hunt, fish, drive, travel, build, farm, etc. with as few governmental restrictions as possible.

c.) I will need a land that is farmable, with enough annual rainfall to be caught and stored, or enough readily available water to work a farm.

d.) I want a climate that is good for farming as many months out of a year as possible.

You may want to add more things, all the way up to Z if necessary. These first 4 were critical in my thinking, and I prioritized them in a way that I believe put first things first.

Next you need to consider how many acres you will need, and how much is a reasonable price per acre. Now, most people do not need near as much land as they think. With some of the advances in intensive and "square foot" farming, a very small homestead can produce more food, if worked properly, than a good sized family can eat. I have no doubt that a 4-5 acre homestead is sufficient for most people. Some will want more, some might even be able to do with less. I know of people farming 2 acres in a way that is very, very successful. Next you have to start pinpointing an area where all of your priorities overlap. Is there a place near true Christian brethren (and I mean like-minded brethren with good doctrine) where the other priorities are all met and land is fairly affordable per acre? Put a pin mark in the map. That is what I did. Next, in this scenario, I would travel to that area and start nosing about. Seek out the small towns, far from the big cities and go into the diners and cafes and have coffee. Talk to people. Once I have found the area where I want to live, if I must and I have no other options (such as to work for these Christian brethren and live on their land while I make the money to buy my own land) I would rent the cheapest room available in the smallest town nearby. Then I would talk to EVERYONE I could talk to. I would start in the cafes and diners and talk to everyone, letting them know that I am willing to work day-labor for cash. You would be shocked at how fast folks in this area were willing to put us to work. There are always farmers and ranchers who are looking for day workers, or ranch hands. Price your labor fairly, taking into account that you no longer live in a big city with big city needs and expenses. Work hard, and continue to let others know you are willing to work. Take the jobs that pay good, and work hard at them, treating your employer as the Bible commands us to treat masters. Put away money. In your off-time, begin to search for land. You will not generally find cheap and affordable land in the real estate papers, though it is not impossible that you might. You might see a few real estate agents and tell them exactly what you are looking for. They might not be able to help you, but then again - they might. Don't get forced into a real estate buying pattern. Be willing to make outlandish offers, but not insulting ones. Talk to land owners and tell them what you are trying to do. You might be pleasantly surprised and find a good deal where an owner is willing to work with you on purchasing the land. Much of the land today is owned by absentee land owners, who lease the land for cattle, or hold on to it for tax reasons. You never know when one of these folks might be willing to part with 5 acres if you are willing to watch their land for them, or do some fence work, etc. Try anything.

Work hard, and be willing to take work that will teach you skills you will need to know to work the land. We here in our community are learning new things every day about building and construction by working for others when the need arises. This way you get paid twice... in cash, and in skills. By the way, this is also a valuable thought when it comes to learning things you may need to know. Do you want to learn construction, welding, farm techniques, etc.? Why not find someone who does those thing and offer to help them for a modest wage? If they cannot afford you, it may be worth your time to work with them for awhile for free if you must - because the skills may be very valuable someday.

I certainly do not have all the answers in procuring land, but I have learned enough to know that almost nobody can afford land the old-fashioned way. Going off-grid in our Agrarian pursuit is a joy, but it is also a challenge. It is necessary that we learn to think in new and creative ways. I have found that if I keep first things first (my duty to God and His commandments), that ways seem to be opened to me to do those things I need to do. Too many people are satisfied with disobedience and with worldliness, while they convince themselves that their circumstances bar them from doing what they know in their conscience they should do. Too many people, like Henry in Henry and the Great Society, promise themselves that they will do the right thing someday. Of course they never do, and they increasingly refuse to condemn themselves as their conscience once did - as they are hardened against the need to obey at all. And they will convince themselves that they are alright, and that obedience is really just in the heart anyway. Ever heard that before? I have. Hundreds of times, and, as an excuse, it transfers from obedience to God's commandments and ordinances, to any other obedience required of us.

When we preached separatism, which the Bible preaches from cover to cover, some folks told us "We merely need to be separate in the heart", as if the heart can separate from what it loves. If you love the world, you will not separate from it; you will make excuses for it, and for your marriage to it. Separatism is a fundamental principle of Christian Agrarianism. Obedience is a fundamental principle of Christianity. Neither is taught or required today, which is a shame. Christian Agrarianism is not a garden in the heart, nor is it growing wheat in an suburban backyard (though it could start with those things). Christian Agrarianism is principally the obedient movement of God's children out of the City of Destruction, and out of the maw of the beast on consuming them. The command of Christ to flee the earthly city when we see it encompassed with enemies, is no less vital today than it was 2000 years ago. It is ever the wilderness where God hath prepared a place for His true Church (Rev. 12:6, 12:14-17).

That's all for this rant... more next time... if the Lord wills it.

Your servant in Christ Jesus,

Michael Bunker

Off-Grid Living for Agrarians, Part 3: Philosophy

2008-03-02T17:17:00.000-06:00

It is time to discuss a very important point. In the previous part, I mentioned (and approved of) using "intermediate steps" in our process of going off-grid or separating from the wicked world system. An intermediate step could be anything from, say, selling your house and furniture and moving into an inexpensive apartment or camper, to getting a part time job that allows you more time to work on developing your homestead. Intermediate steps can be a propane freezer on your way to an icehouse, a refrigerator on your way to a root cellar, or a propane heater on your way to a woodburner. It is often both inevitable and necessary that we make use of intermediate means towards our ultimate goal. This is why this blog is entitled The PROCESS Driven Life, since we confess that obedience to God and our work here on earth is a process. We, as Christians, are to be PROCESS driven and not PURPOSE driven. Ultimate purposes and results belong to God, but obedience is ours. In our move of obedience, often we will make use of intermediate means - which I described in the previous part. Ok, so for example, I mentioned that moving from grid electricity to intermediate means (like propane, kerosene lamps, generators, solar power, etc.) is not only acceptable, but pretty necessary. So long as we recognize the inherent weaknesses in dependence on these things, and so long as we take steps to mitigate the dependence and the ultimate damage when (and if) our ability to use these things is lost, then we may use them to help us separate from the world system. Another example... there is nothing inherently wrong with my using a battery operated drill - so long as I recognize the inherent weaknesses in the dependence on battery power; so long as I recognize that this battery powered drill may not always be available to me; so long as I make plans for being able to continue my work if battery powered drills become useless to me, etc., then I am in a good position. Then I am not operating from a position of weakness. This same philosophy, then, should be applied to everything we do.

So now to the "very important point" I mentioned. Pay close attention. There is no greater danger to our well-being and our eventual freedom from the grid system than to rely inordinately on, or to trust in, intermediate means. Let me explain...

A truism you must face - PEOPLE ARE LIARS. Even you. And if you do not recognize that, then you are lying to yourself and doing terrible damage to yourself. Most of the dead bodies on the wayside of the pilgrimage out of the world grid system were killed by a lie they told themselves, and the cause of death was "reliance on intermediate means". Does this mean you are going to fail because you rely on battery powered drills? NO. Probably not, anyway; but, like I said, the philosophy applies to every area of your life. Remember that you are a liar, and most of the things you tell yourself about yourself are not true. As a professing Christian you have enemies (The World, The Flesh, and The Devil), and those enemies never cease to make war against you - and their most valuable weapon is YOU. Here is how this thing works. Many people deify the devil and blame him for everything bad that happens to them. Well, I can assure you that the devil need not have anything to do with most professing Christians... they are doing fine damaging or even damning themselves. The World (over which the devil reigns as the Prince of this World) and its deceptions, dainties, comforts, business, concerns, etc., is plenty enough to damn the souls of almost every man who will ever live. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. The carnal man automatically loves the world, and defends it, and will not let go of it - and almost no one sees it for what it is. So the love of this world is the reason that most people who tell themselves they want to separate from the world will not succeed. They cannot leave what they say they hate, because they really love what they say they hate. They will merely redefine what they mean when they say "world". The modern religousite has redefined the word "world" to mean - anything that has a sticker on it with a satanic symbol, or that blatantly is involved in the worship of Satan. But to them, the world economic system, the world political system, the world social system, the world education system, the world religious system - none of these things are part of the "world". Why? Because they love those things... or at least enough of those things that their use of them makes them inseparable or indiscernible from the world. This is not a rant, this is a fact. I am trying to tell you what the Bible means when it says "the world, the flesh, and the devil". The devil uses the world to appeal to your flesh. You, then, as fallen man, do what is natural to you - which is to love yourself and satiate your flesh. This does not mean that you have binges and orgies. This means that you always seek the comfortable and easy way, the way that is more pampering to your flesh. Since you are in love with the world, when you do become convinced in your mind that something is evil, if you are deceived by the devil, you will find some middle-ground that allows you to stay in the world but still say you are not "of it". You will find a way to take a half-step away from the world, but still stay in it as a part of it. This, then, is the danger of intermediate means. If you are not careful, you will park out (or camp) in "intermediate means" and you will make them your home and you will never separate from the world. You will convince yourself that since you are more separated then just about anyone else, that you are alright or acceptable - even if you are not. I've seen this more times than I can relate, and it is very, very dangerous.

It may be hard to get your mind around what I am saying, because I am NOT condemning intermediate means. I am not even saying that you MUST move past them to some perfect, idyllic, pre-industrial/agrarian life, and that the use of any of them after that is heresy. Some of us will likely always be using some intermediate means. I am saying that you must be able to see things rightly, and to recognize your natural proclivity to not do things all the way, and to rely inordinately on intermediate means. If you do this, then you are in just the same precarious position as the world, you are just one step removed from it. So, say you procure yourself 5 acres of land, build a cabin that is powered on solar power or generators, put up a store of food and batteries, and then rest as if you have it made. If a collapse happens, you are just one step away from being in the same situation as the world. Your lights won't go out as fast, but they will go out eventually, and if you have not made plans to operate without the assistance of the industrial world, then you will go down with it.

REASON

The basic point is that we must employ our REASON during the process of going off-grid. Let's don't get too focused on not paying an electric bill, then forget the real reasons we want to be independent from the system.

Time for some examples. All of these are real world examples of folks who suffer from the lies they tell themselves...

The man that I mentioned before goes out and gets him some land out in the country. He builds himself a cabin (or moves in a camper) and begins to sock away food and supplies. He may even get himself a few animals. He never gets around to planting a garden (or even planning to plant one) and he soon finds out that living off-grid, if it is not done properly, is just as expensive as living on the grid. He doesn't have an electric bill to be paid to the electric company - he pays it to the gas station instead in the form of gas for his generator. He still has a food bill, still has a phone bill, still has a clothing bill because he still does all of his shopping in town. What has changed? Well, he has to drive farther to get to all the stuff he still loves.

Another man decides to move off grid and does many of the same things. He decides, though, that rather than move to his off-grid life before he is ready, he will work his way out of the system. He minimizes his life and moves into a camper or a small rent room. He spends all of his money on getting prepared to go off-grid... The problem? He never does. He never pulls the trigger. His incremental nature causes him to slide unknowingly right back into everything he was doing before. He slowly begins to reacquire all of his "stuff" and the expenses related to that stuff. Pretty soon he is just as far away from going off-grid as he ever was, only now he doesn't have a nice house to do it all in, because he got rid of that.

There will always be a reason to NOT do what you know you should do. There will never be enough money, no matter how much you save, to go off-grid if your heart is still on-grid. However much you con yourself into thinking that you will one day miraculously have enough money to splash it all down on a pre-fab farm with everything off-grid and ready to go, that will never happen.

Prepare thy work without, and make it fit for thyself in the field; and afterwards build thine house. (Proverbs 24:27)

The problem is that people have things out of order. They want to build their house first (and by this I mean that they want to keep the fleshly man comfortable and protected above all things). They want all the comforts of the old worldly/industrial life before they are willing to pull the trigger on separating from that old industrial world. They want to bring Egypt with them. The Bible says that we should prepare for our future provision (food and water) BEFORE we worry about the comfort of our flesh (shelter). Don't go taking this too literally. I am not condemning anyone who throws up a quick shelter, so long as they are preparing for their future provisions too. I am pushing the more spiritual aspect of the verse - that we should think about what it will take to not be reliant on the world for our food and raiment, and then we should be concerned with creature comforts. For those just now planning to go off-grid, this means that if you sit there and plan out all of the alternative ways to keep your current standard of living (but do it off-grid) the sheer cost of that plan will keep you from ever implementing it. It will be overwhelming, and you never will have separated from the world, which was the whole point in the first place.

Going off-grid is often a slow and arduous project, and often it is incremental, and often the process relies completely on intermediate means. Those are facts. The problem is that, if we are truly serious about going off-grid, there must be progress. We must be constantly moving, and we will need to be constantly checking ourselves and our heart to make sure we aren't just whistling in the dark. We need to be on the pilgrim's path and not hanging around in Vanity Fair.

Are you moving out?

Your servant in Christ Jesus,

Michael Bunker

Off-Grid Living for Agrarians, part 2: Lighting

2008-03-02T16:46:00.000-06:00

I apologize that this series is not better organized. It is more "train of thought" since I am typing stuff as it comes to me. Maybe it will work out anyway.

Many people truly believe (either consciously or subconsciously) that it is enough to know the truth, even if you never act on it or obey it. The Bible teaches that to know the truth and not to act on it and obey it is a curse and is the sign of the damned. In every movement of God where he brings His people into greater holiness and separation, there will always be those who try to ride the fence or tread the middle ground. Jesus rebuked this notion that you could follow Him out of the camp while still remaining in it.

Ok, in our first part we discussed the grid system, its purpose (both spiritual and physical) and the results of being enslaved to the world system. We recognized the need to get out of it, and discussed some ways to begin training ourselves to leave that system for good. It is necessary that we know that not only CAN we make it off the grid, but that most of humanity for 6000 year has lived without any electric grid at all. My grandparents lived a good portion of their lives with no electrical power. Electrical dependency is a new phenomena and it is only the historical ignorance, covetousness, and slavish colonized mind of the worldling that convinces him that it will be difficult or impossible to leave the system.

George Clooney's character in the movie Oh, Brother Where art Thou? said this about the soon to come electrical grid:
"Everything's gonna be put on electricity and run on a paying basis. Out with the old spiritual mumbo jumbo, the superstitions, and the backward ways (editors note: this means Christianity and Agrarianism). We're gonna see a brave new world where they run everybody a wire and hook us all up to a grid. Yes, sir, a veritable age of reason. Like the one they had in France. Not a moment too soon."
Of course we know what the age of reason in France eventually produced... a little thing called The Reign of Terror, which claimed 40,000 victims (almost half by guillotine) in about a year. You see, it was a slippery slide... Prior to the Age of Reason, it was believed that all knowledge could only be gained via the Pope and the "church" alone. Next came the Age of Reason which held that all knowledge could be gained via reason alone. Next came the Age of Enlightenment, which held that all knowledge could be gained by the use of reason AND the five senses. Next came the Age of Revolution, that held that reason and the senses were useless unless they existed at the right end of a gun. Next came the Age of Industry, which said that reason and knowledge were only useful in the pursuit of gain... the gain of money, property, riches, "leisure time", etc. Next came the Age of Information, which holds that all of the benefits of all the brilliant and successful previous ages can be had at 1/2 price if everyone will just log on, sign in, and submit; shop at the same stores, wear the same clothers, watch the same shows, bow to the same false "gods". Coming next, of course, is the Age of Judgment, where all of these ideas and all those who succumbed to them will stand before a righteous God.

I digress again...

Ok, so we want to get off-grid, but how? We have to know what we do want, how we want to live, and that it is certainly possible for us to live that way. We have to look past the giants in the land and trust in God and His promises. Sell everything, eradicate debt, try to use every dollar eliminating the future need of more dollars. Study alternate methods of doing everyday tasks. Realize that you are on a journey, and that "off-grid" is not a destination, but a continuous battle. Your battle can start like ours did. We decided to turn off the lights and use them as little as possible. We bought oil lanterns and began to use them when the sun goes down. Since I am recommending oil lamps, there is a point I need to make here... and it will be helpful to consider in your progress and plans. Hopefully this is a helpful digression:

Any solution that requires that you continue indefinitely to buy something that you cannot make or produce on your own, is only a temporary or stop-gap solution. Ask yourself what would happen if some type of "eschaton" or world changing event happened. How long would you be able to keep doing something you are now doing if the world was never again going to revert back to normal? I was talking about lighting, so let me illustrate...

It is not a permanent or final solution to replace grid electricity with kerosene lanterns - unless you can make, or have an endless supply of, kerosene. Unless you can produce kerosene or some other type of burnable, safe, oil... like Olive Oil maybe, then lanterns may not be your solution. Sure you can store kerosene, but you can't store enough and eventually you will run out. This is doubly important to realize when you know what is going on with our petroleum supplies in this world. You cannot count on having ANY petroleum product in the future. Period. So kerosene lanterns are not a permanent solution. Next, ask yourself what your forefathers did.

First, we should point out how our ancestors handled the lighting issue. When it got dark, most of our forefathers went to bed. Although there were folks in previous generations who wrote, sung, laughed, loved, and lived by candlelight - most folks just went to bed. Candles are an option, if you can make them and you can continue to produce the "stuff" from which they are made. We raise pigs, so we can make tallow and fat candles, but they will be precious and we will not want to burn them all up every night. When it is dark, go to bed.

Second, like I said, candles will work, and are a good permanent solution if you can make them. Solar is a good solution, but not a permanent one. In order for solar power to be good for powering lights at night you must have battery storage, and batteries will not last forever. They will have to be replaced. If you have solar power, think of it as a 1-5 year headstart on making yourself candle rich.

Every aspect of your life has to be looked at from this point of view. It is good to be off-grid and able to live separate from the system - with, say, propane, diesel, kerosene, solar power, etc. That is good and it is miles and miles better than being tied to the world system. But it is the difference between "tied" and "loosely tied". In the long run we can become enslaved to those things just as easily, and if our lifestyle doesn't change, if we don't become more obedient and different from the world, then we will have merely delayed the inevitable. Start thinking about water, food, heat, light, cooling, food production, preservation, and storage. Think of all of these things and come up with a system (a road map) that will get you there. Ask for help. Ask questions. Listen. Learn. Realize that most of the questions we ask ourselves are based and informed by false presuppositions. I had a lady once who asked me how she would curl her hair if she didn't have grid power or if the power ever went out for good. I couldn't even begin to address all of the false presuppositions behind the question. So I didn't answer it. We have to realize that it is not some of the things that we think that are wrong. Virtually everything that we think is wrong.

Ok, back to power and lighting. I use a lot of rechargeable batteries, and I use a lot of solar products to recharge the batteries. This allows me to do most of my work without having to go back and forth to town. In a crisis, most of the things I use batteries for are NOT critical, so I will not be at a loss to live without them. So batteries are a good intermediate solution, and they help us do a lot of things we need to do right now as we move out of the system. I have several very low power LED lamps, reading lights, and flashlights. I try to buy everything to take AA batteries, but some of them take AAA. I buy NiMH (Nickel Metal-Hydride) rechargeable batteries in bulk, and I recharge them several ways. I have several solar rechargers that recharge the batteries directly from the sun. I also have some regular AC plug in rechargers that I can plug into my power system that is run and maintained by solar power. This way I always have batteries that are ready to go. We use AA batteries to power our radios and communication devices too. There are literally dozens of new lighting ideas and sources out there that use low wattage to power them. Check things out and begin to store up and use these things. Remember, especially in the fall, winter, and spring - kerosene lighting is a good intermediate solution as well. As long as this type of energy source is available and affordable we can use them as we come out of the industrial system.

Many years ago we bought some battery-powered 18V power tools when we were building our barn back in Smyer. I had a choice between buying some really nice and expensive ones, or some really cheap ones. I decided to buy the cheap ones (Ryobi) and figured if they got me through that one project, they would have been worth the price. 4 years later we are still using them. The original set came with a drill, flashlight, a hand vacuum, and a circular saw. We bought a second set of batteries a year and a half ago. A year ago while doing the root cellar project I was irritated that the batteries weren't lasting very well and we had so many things going on that I needed to have a set on hand charging so I went to town to buy another set of batteries and a second charger. It was going to cost $59.99 for the batteries and charger, or I could get a whole second set of tools with batteries and charger for $99.00. So I bought the second set. This allowed us to have a second set of tools so we could have more people working at once. This gave us a second flashlight too. I tell you all of this to say that the flashlights in these sets are awesome and work very well. Later I bought a car charger so I can charge the batteries in my truck whenever I go to town. Now they have created dozens of other tools and accessories that will run off of these 18V batteries. We use our Ryobi flashlights every night and every morning since we are up before the sun. We milk the cow by these lights as well.

You also want to buy several (many) of these flashlights they have which don't take batteries. We call them "shake lights" since you have to shake them to charge them up. They are an irritant if you need immediate (and/or silent) light, but they work great after about 30-60 seconds of shaking them. We had some of these for the children, but they inevitably lose them or break them so they end up borrowing the Ryobi lights and I just as inevitably end up using a shake light to go to the outhouse. You can also buy wind up flashlights which are good to keep in store. By the way, in the outhouse we have a light that is powered by rechargeable AA batteries. Harbor Freight and Home Depot sell solar powered night lights that charge during the day and stay on all night. We use these in the root cellar, you could use these just about anywhere you need some light at night.

Lehman's sells parts for olive oil lamps. These are "do it yourself" lamps and candles you can make that run off of olive oil. Basically they are pieces of twisted wire and wicks that you can drop down into any jar or large mouth bottle. We use canning jars and some other glass jars we buy for real cheap at garage sales. Anyway, they burn olive oil or any other type of bulk cooking oil. Olive oil works great, but you may not have an endless supply of it. You can also use these for making fat lamps and using cooking grease or other type of oil. Be careful and don't start a fire. Olive oil will not start a fire and usually other oils and greases will not because the temperature does not get hot enough. It would be good to have a very large supply of these inexpensive parts (wicks and wick holders) for emergencies. Check out Lehman's for a bunch of other lighting ideas from yesteryear.

Also, look into "fat lamps". Fat lamps were what was used before coal oil and other fuel lamps. The old "genie" lamps that people rubbed to get a genie to come out were fat lamps. They run off of rendered tallow from pigs. Perfect for us pig raisers.

I may have mentioned it, but I have a couple of reading lights I bought at a Harbor Freight store in Abilene. I have one mounted over my bed for night reading and one mounted on the front porch over a chair so I can read at night and early in the mornings after milking. Harbor Freight sells dozens of different low/no power lighting items including handcrank spotlights, solar powered lights, floodlights, flashlights, lanterns, etc., LED lights, etc.

We try not to use kerosene lanterns too much except when it is cold outside because they provide a lot of heat, which is great when it is cold, but not so great when it is not. 1 or 2 kerosene lanterns burning all night will keep the edge off in a small cabin or camper. Always, always, always make sure your sleeping quarters are vented if you have any type of flame burning overnight. You will die if you do not.

Well, that is it for lighting. I probably forgot something, so feel free to ask questions on this post if you have any.

Your servant in Christ Jesus,

Michael Bunker

Off-Grid Living for Agrarians, Part 1: The Grid

2008-03-02T16:40:00.000-06:00

I've had some questions about Agrarianism and off-grid power, so I thought I'd address them in a special edition of the blog. Basically this will just be a discussion of the whole concept of alternative power, and how it fits into the Agrarian "off-grid" ideal. It will likely be a many part series, and we will conglomerate all the parts into a single tract sometime later. So consider this OFF-GRID LIVING, PART 1.

First, the concept. Why is living "off-grid" so central to the idea of Biblical Agrarianism?

It is our opinion that industrialism and the inter-connected/inter-dependent world it requires to support it, is responsible for most of what is wrong with the world. Ok, sin is what is wrong with the world, but industrialism is the coalescence of all that sin does and can do in the world. It is distilled sin, in that it perpetuates and allows all that man imagines, and therefore, in industrialism nothing is restrained from man that he might imagine to do:

And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. (Gen 11:6)

Now this, then, makes industrialism the modern tower of Babel. It is the one language of the world, and it is the result of the carnal man saying "Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven". Of course the city is urbanism and the tower is industrialism.

Ok, so if you disagree with that, then you have no reason to read further or to investigate Agrarianism. Your system (urban industrialism) is already here and is already out there on the plain of Shinar and you may go get your fill of it. If, however, you agree with what I have said, then Agrarianism is God's alternative. And, we should note, disconnecting from the current system is necessary for our spiritual safety, our physical well-being, and for our good. The "connection" that ties people into this system is the system we call "the grid". That grid consists of physical and spiritual connections and services that intertwine us with the world, and cause us to rely on the world system instead of on God. There is a huge difference between utilizing some aspect of the world system, as necessary, for the purpose of further separating from it (much as you would, if you were in a small boat, push off from a dock in order to gain speed to separate from it), and loving the world by being tied to it - so do not let naysayers and illogical barkers convince you that if you believe in separation, that this separation must be complete, total, and immediate - or else you are a hypocrite. Let dogs bark. You just go on about the business of being obedient. Dogs defend what they love - never forget that. A barking dog is just defending its first love.

Ok, so this world "grid" system is most perfectly represented by the electrical grid. In the electrical grid, everyone is tied together and reliant on some mega-corporate (or fascist state/corporate conglomerate) system to provide them with power. Now, the trick is to provide sooooo much power, and at such a seemingly low cost, that people will go out into the corporate industrial stores and buy tons of "stuff" that can be plugged eternally into wall sockets. Each one of these things in and of itself uses only a nominal amount of power, but each is designed to accomplish several things:

1. To cumulatively provide huge amounts of money to the power company.
2. To make us daily MORE dependent on the power company for the maintenance of a certain "standard of living".
3. To make us daily LESS viable as creatures dependent on God alone for our provision, safety, happiness, and well-being. In other words, each generation is less and less able to survive without the comforts and conveniences provided by grid power.
4. To enslave us to our baser lusts. The system itself is designed to provide proxies for all that God would have for His children. The grid-system provides a perpetual 72 degree womb where every carnal need is met instantly by the world system.

So, after fallen man discovered the ability to create electrical power and to channel it down long power lines to each individual dwelling, the marketing arm of Satan clicked into business. Daily, more and more power gulping systems and gadgets are provided which take mankind farther and farther away from the way that God has ordained that His people live. The Bible says this was the job of man before the fall:

And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it. (Gen 2:15)

And this was the job of man after the fall:

Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. (Gen 3:23)

We are to work with our hands (1 Thess. 4:11), in the ground/soil (Gen. 3:23), and to be content with food and raiment (1 Tim. 6:8). The lie of the industrial grid system is that if you will enslave yourself to your baser lusts (for comfort, leisure, entertainment, sin) then you will not have to labor in the soil. That is basically the gist of it. That is why your parents always told you to go to a worldly college to get a degree... so you won't have to dig ditches. The world hates the idea of working in the soil, because that is what God has decreed for man. Anyway, I digress...

So this grid system is a tool of the world for the enslavement of the minds and hearts of the people. Once again, if you do not agree, you may go your way... your system is out there and you may go have your fill of it. If, however, you still agree - we can move on to the next step.

GETTING OUT

Getting "off-grid" looks like a monstrous and overwhelming task. It is the giant in the land that keeps us from going in and taking the good land that God has promised us. The grid system is easy and relatively cheap (when you consider that you are already in it, and enslaved to it) in that it will cost you more to get out than to stay in. To be honest, our flesh LOVES air conditioning and microwaves and hair dryers and such things. All the junk we plug in to outlets is designed to please our flesh. That is why they are so hard to get rid of. The first task in getting off-grid is to fall out of love with these things. To realize that they enslave us and they are poisonous to our souls and to our hope of eternal life. Not that going off-grid will save us - but be assured of this one thing, living for our flesh will certainly damn us. Think of going off-grid as going into a lifeboat from a sinking ship. You may not be saved if you go off the ship, but you will surely die if you stay on it. Anyway, we have to fall out of love with these things that pamper and cater to the flesh. We have to look at them with a true and pure eye and convince ourselves that these things are poisonous to our well-being. Then we can more easily toss them. Those things that are conducive to off-grid living, or that can be used to our benefit, or that can be used to help us on our pilgrimage OUT of the system - we can retain. The next step is to train ourselves to go without these things, and train ourselves on older and better ways of doing things:

Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein (Jer. 6:16).

Don't be one of those people who says "we will not walk therein. God has said that the old paths are better than the new ones. That is a fact declared from heaven. Learn it and love it.

The next step is to practice and begin to live the things we say we believe. This is the first real step on the pilgrim's progress. Step out and start to practice and live it. I mentioned in the last email that you can start by cutting your power off at the box. First for a few hours maybe. Then for a day. Then for a couple of days. Then for a week. Then for a month. Do this and learn how to get along fine without it. It doesn't count if you do it while you are on vacation, or when the weather is 72 degrees outside for a week. Do it and practice living off-grid. Encourage yourself to keep pushing it farther until you learn the skills you need to have to get along without grid power. Sell all of the junk you don't need and begin to procure those things that will help you to live off-grid... which means you need to sell almost everything you own. Best get used to it, since you won't take any of that stuff to wherever you go after you die. Get rid of it and start to make it without it.

That's all for today. More in the next episode.

Michael Bunker