Category: News

Categories
News

Southern Baptist Theological Seminary Announces $5,000,000 in Reparations to Black Students, Promise to Show Partiality

The flagship seminary of the Southern Baptist Convention has announced millions of dollars in scholarships to be doled out exclusively to black students, in a move of “Al-firmative” action they hope will stave off further criticism that the seminary and yea, even the whole convention is racist.

SBTS announced in a press release:

Trustees of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary unanimously voted not to remove the names of the school’s founders from several campus buildings, but embraced steps to lament the institution’s racial history and provide up to $5 million in scholarships for African American students over the next few years.

The school’s founders, James P. Boyce, John Broadus, Basil Manly Jr. and William Williams, apart from being excellent exegetes of the word, also happened to be slave owners, resulting in a longstanding push by critics to have their names removed from positions of prominence.

The release also notes that the board approved four motions, with three of particular note:

1. SBTS will continue to express lament over the sinful dimensions of its legacy—including slavery and racism—and pledged to be an ever more faithful servant of the body of Christ in the education of faithful Christian ministers.

2. Beginning with the 2022-2023 academic year, SBTS will set aside $1 million of endowed and restricted funds as an endowment to assist qualified black students at SBTS through the Garland Offutt Scholars Program, honoring the legacy of the seminary’s first African-American full graduate. Additionally, the seminary will set aside $1 million for this fund every three years until a goal of $5 million is reached. “We hope to assist in the development of African American pastors and theologians and scholars and leaders by means of this historic new initiative,” Mohler said. These funds will be in addition to the current scholarship and student aid programs of the Seminary.

3. Leadership pledged to become more faithful in telling the seminary’s story, and the founders’ story with accuracy and biblical witness. The 2018 report on slavery and racism in Southern’s history is a starting point. “There is always more to learn about how to tell our story most faithfully,” Mohler said.

While we understand that Al Mohler and the board would bristle at this monetary offering being called “reparations,” it is hard to understand it as anything but. There are a lot of poor white students and other visible minorities out there who likewise were not slaves, whose parents were not slaves, or even whose grandparents who were not slaves who could really use these scholarships, but because of the color of their skin, SBTS has deemed them not black enough to apply.

Even open proponents of reparations like Ron Burns (aka Thabiti Anyabwile) see this for what it is.

If they don’t want them being called “reparations” the only other description we could think of would be “indulgences.” SBTS is spending $5,000,000 in indulgences to gain themselves entry into the good graces of the wokefolk and to alleviate their temporal suffering caused by the burning criticism of progressives and critical race theorists. They might even update the jingle, if they were so inclined: “As soon as a coin in the coffer rings, a black student from SBTS springs.” 

Of course, if the leadership at SBTS thinks that a measly $5,000,000 is enough to silence the critics or satiate their hunger, they have made a terminal miscalculation. Rather than allay and satisfy the beast, they used donations from churches to chum the waters for the next inevitable feeding frenzy.

This will never be enough, and the seminary will have to go back to this well over and over again. Rather than trying to placate the unplacatable, they have further alienated those they cannot afford to lose.

Categories
Critical Race Theory Evangelical Stuff Featured News

Christianity Today Bashes White Christians as Racists who Commit Violence Against Black People by Voting GOP

Christianity Today continues its theologically obstreperous ways, accusing white Christians of being inherent racists who commit acts of spiritual violence against black people by voting GOP and suggesting Democrat voters don’t have a biblical worldview.

The offending article is by Dr. Christiana Edmondson, an anti-racist advocate (the irony of such a title will become quickly apparent) who co-hosts the Truth Tables Podcast with two other allegedly Christian women. Incidentally, the other co-hosts, Michelle Higgins and Ekimini Uwan, are both pro-choice, with Higgins routinely posting support for Planned Parenthood.

So clearly, they take issues of systematic violence and racism seriously.

The thesis of her post is simple: “White Christians” have a faith that is corrupted by racism in a way that a “Black Christian’s” faith is not, to the point that inherent in a White Christian’s faith is the built-in justification to commit terrible acts of murder against black people.

Furthermore, White Christians express their racism by voting for the Republican Party, which happens to be an act of implicit racism and overt spiritual violence against black people. This violence is magnified when we say things like “The Republican platform is more in line with a biblical worldview” and “the Democrat platform promotes theft, pro-abortion-, pro-homosexuality, pro-transgenderism, inclusive sex-education for children which affirms sexual perversion, men in women’s washrooms, socialism, and a host of others unbiblical positions, and an as a result their platform is not compatible with biblical Christianity and Christians should not vote for it.”

Saying those two things might as well be the spiritual equivalent of a celestial curb stomp, crunching the teeth and sending bone splinters into the brains of woke Christians planning on voting for Biden.

Truthfully, the whole article is an excretable, gangrenous cauldron of the worst excesses of woke TGC, ERLC, and #BigEva put together, sprinkled with a little Black Lives Matter and Critical Race Theory Rhetoric for that extra bitter kick. She writes:

The so-called shared faith of white Christians and black Christians does not guard against violence toward the Emmett Tills, Tamir Rices, or George Floyds of society… [Editor’s Note. Emmet Till was a 14-year-old black kid who was falsely accused by a white woman of hitting on her in 1955. As a result, a group of white men kidnapped him from his home, tortured and killed him, and then were found not guilty in a sham trial. Till’s Mother, Mamie, chose to have an open casket at the funeral, showing off her son’s disfigurement, an act which helped to galvanize national attention against racism and acted as an impetus for many anti-racism organizations gaining power and prominence. ]

White Christianity’s very design exists to maintain false piety and sear the consciences of white people against the oppression and exploitation of blacks….

Spiritual violence abusively castes people within our systems but also in our imaginations and social media feeds with name-calling such as ‘heretic’ or ‘unbeliever.’

Edmondson takes particular exception with Mohler’s statement that voting for the Republican party is most in line with a “Christian worldview.” In this case, she takes him to task for the necessary implication that people (particularly black Christian women) who vote for the Democrats don’t have a biblical worldview when it comes to voting. She writes:

Spiritual violence against black Americans in the political sphere means disparaging and minimizing the faith of black Christians.

As president of the flagship seminary for the largest Christian denomination in the United States, [Mohler’s] religious endorsement of a highly controversial president known for racist and sexist rhetoric and actions mattered significantly…

My concern, while subtle, knocks at the door of spiritual violence. By saying one’s ‘Christian worldview’ leads to reelecting Donald Trump in 2020, Mohler asserts that faithful Christian theology applied to politics must draw the same political conclusions as most white conservative Christian men in this country. 

She continues with the disparagements:

Black women report some of the highest levels of Bible study, charitable giving, authoritative views on Scripture, amount of time praying, and church attendance. But because of their political and theological misalignment with Trump and Republican agendas, they are deemed by default biblically ignorant, and at worst, heretics, cultural Marxists, and whatever new term works to caricature and discredit those holding a differing view. Welcome to politically motivated spiritual violence.

Edmonson notes that “Despite claiming loyalty to the same Jesus, divergent “Christian worldviews” historically produce on one hand people like George Whitefield and Johnathan Edwards and people like Stacey Abrams on the other (or other Christians like Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, etc.).

The view that people like Stacey Abrams and Nancy Pelosi are Christians makes sense from her understanding, as Edmondson has already demonstrated that being actively pro-choice isn’t a deal breaker when it comes to someone’s “Christian” faith. Wannabe governors can be “Christians” and be pro-abortion and pro-LGBT at the same time, and there will be no discrepancy of conflict present.

Yet, from Edmonson’s perspective, the act of us saying that the mighty woman of God known as Democratic candidate Stacey Abrams is not a Christian is by necessity an act of spiritual violence against her, an act we commit because we have this White Christian Skin that is driving us to violence.

Most people, I imagine, watched in horror the recent footage of the unarmed black men killed in 2020…However, the horrors of 2020, coupled with the trauma-cementing psychological and spiritual violence of news networks popular to white “conservative Christians,” discredit each victim.

She finishes her article, however, with an appeal to White Christians to stop being so intrinsically violent, and to have a heart, and be more like black Christians who are dedicated to anti-racism, empathy, and repair.

The necessary violence of racism is combated by the nonviolent and steadfast resistance of black Christians, which reminds all of us who we are designed to be. White Christians, will your shared humanity and Christianity move you from violence and violence-denying to the nonviolence of empathy, solidarity, and repair?

Thank you, Christianity Today. You have really outdone yourself with this one.

Categories
News

I Was Called a Liar for Reporting on Mohler. Now We Know Who’s Lying.

More than two years ago, I had in my possession an email from Al Mohler to Southern Baptist Theological faculty warning them they had better not sign the Dallas Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel. I reported it here, but could not release it due to their fear and advice from legal counsel. Inexplicably, Mohler then alleged that he had made no such threat.

You can see the video from September of 2018 where Mohler explicitly denies having pressured faculty not to sign the statement after my initial claim was made (it’s in the first minute of the video).

As you can see (above), Mohler claimed on the next day that he had never discouraged SBTS employees from signing the document. In the days that followed, I was called a liar and accused of violating the 9th Commandment in regard to “bearing false witness against my neighbor.”

In reality, it was not the 9th Commandment that I violated, but the 11th…Thou Shalt Not Criticize Albert Mohler.

Mohler is indeed a hard figure to criticize. The man is a cold, calculating politician who on one hand criticizes concepts like Critical Theory on his Briefing podcast, but on the other hand, hires and promotes Critical Theorists to the highest levels of leadership at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (SBTS) and fires – exclusively – those who oppose it. Mohler knows very well how to speak with double-tongues out of both sides of his mouth, and ingratiates himself to conservatives and liberals alike.

But the reality is this; no amount of rhetoric from Mohler can change the fact that he has personally done more to promote and bolster Critical Theory amongst evangelicals than almost anyone. Institutionally, he has done more than Tim Keller. In terms of his gravitas and influence, he has done more than Russell Moore. He is the arch Critical Theorist if we are to believe a man’s actions rather than his words.

To quote Mohler at Shepherd’s Conference when he blew his stack at Phil Johnson for asking where he stood on wokeness (and otherwise refused to answer), “Who I platform speaks for where I stand.”

Indeed. And Albert Mohler is personally responsible for “platforming” the lieutenants of the Woke Militia in Southern Baptist life including Russell Moore, Matthew Hall, Curtis Woods, Jarvis Williams, et al. Find an insufferable woke snowflake in skinny pants and a bow-tie lecturing Southern Baptist on the principles of Intersectionality and you’ll trace them with zero degrees of separation to Albert Mohler.

As an aside, I’ll also remind you Mohler said in the ShepCon Q&A that he refused to sign the Dallas Statement because he does “not sign non-creedal statements,” assuring the more conservative audience that he didn’t disagree with its content per se. Considering that Mohler signed the Manhattan Declaration, it was an odd claim to make. But Mohler has since gone on to sign at least two non-creedal statements since the Q&A, apparently forgetting that he “does not sign non-creedal statements.”

Upon hearing me read his email on air, Mohler panicked and immediately threatened them again – this time with 5.0 of the employee handbook which promised retribution for those who “release any information learned while under the employment of SBTS.” Never mind that Mohler was violating 6.5.2 of employee handbook, which limits “retaliatory action taken against employees who publicly differ with the actions of the SBTS administration.”

That Mohler was lying should have already become evident.

Eventually, Russell Fuller announced his firing from SBTS for – according to him – opposing the wokeness at the seminary and (among other things) eventually signing the Dallas Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel. Fuller reported that eight professors opposed the teaching of Critical Theory at SBTS and, one by one, were fired if they did not relent. Mark Coppenger was fired within two months and as soon as COVID-19 hit, Mohler used the crisis to fire Fuller and Jim Orrick under the guise of a hurting budget.

Fuller said of his firing, “If I wanted to keep my job, I knew how to do that.” But he was unwilling to support Social Justice, Critical Theory, or other Marxist constructs being taught with the blessing of Albert Mohler.

Well, the Capstone Report ran an interesting article the other day that corroborates my account and the account of Dr. Fuller that Mohler did pressure SBTS faculty not to sign the statement. Entitled, Southern Baptist Elites attempted to stop Statement against Critical Race Theory, Alan Atchinson explains that new testimony reveals Mohler did precisely that.

To quote the article (which cites Founders Ministries director, Tom Ascol)…

“Faculty members at Southern Seminary have said they were strongly discouraged by the administration from signing that statement.”

Ascol, of course, is in possession of audio, video, and testimonials in regard to SBTS wokeness that he has chosen not to release because Albert Mohler pressured him not to.

While I find Ascol’s agreement not to air the footage with Mohler to be repugnant and cowardly, I can’t imagine that he would lie about what he knows regarding the pressure placed upon SBTS faculty not to sign the Dallas Statement. Ascol’s only discernment is on loan from Sovereign Nations CEO, Michael O’Fallon (which is fine discernment so far as I’m concerned), so I won’t beat him over the head for a bad decision here and there. And frankly, his admission regarding Mohler’s lie (above) is refreshing.

At the end of the day, you have a decision to make. JD Hall is a liar, Russell Fuller and other SBTS faculty members are liars, and Tom Ascol is a liar. Or, on the other hand, Albert Mohler is a liar.

PS…Albert Mohler is a liar.

What’s truly amazing to me is the persistant insistence among many that Albert Mohler is merely a rube who has no idea what’s happening at his own seminary and isn’t responsible for it serving as the hub of Critical Theory ideology being injected into evangelicalism’s bloodstream. At the same time they assume he is charitably naive or innocent in his ignorant bliss, these Mohler apologists are simultaneously convinced he is a genius.

You can’t have it both ways. Either Mohler is a bumbling idiot who has inadvertetly let his institution be overtaken by leftists or he is evil and orchestrating it intentionally.

Let me help you decide which one is accurate…Albert Mohler is not stupid.

Categories
Church Conspiracy Featured News

Leaked Audio Reveals Details about LifeWay & Thom Rainer’s Sweetheart Deal

(Capstone Report) The $1,000,000-plus severance package given to former LifeWay CEO Thom Rainer was kept secret from many trustees including the Compensation Committee and the board executive committee by former LifeWay trustee chairman Jimmy Scroggins. The stunning revelations came to light in audio provided to the Capstone Report of the new LifeWay CEO discussing the recent legal dispute with LifeWay’s former CEO Thom Rainer. The audio confirms the leaked letter to the LifeWay Trustees and LifeWay employees by the current three-member trustee executive committee. 

According to comments made by new LifeWay CEO Ben Mandrell, the current board officers were unaware of the severance package details. Mandrell noted the lack of transparency about Dr. Rainer’s package with trustees in recent comments on the future of LifeWay.

According to the new LifeWay CEO, in a phone conversation between Mandrell and Rainer, Mandrell told the former LifeWay president, “that such a generous transition agreement, in my opinion, should have been approved by a larger set of eyes.”

And, making it even clearer that the $1,000,000-plus severance package was kept secret from many trustees, the new board officers were unaware of it. Mandrell said he informed the board officers about the situation in an effort to get their advice about what to do.

“So, I brought in the board officers to give me some advice—in the company of advisors there is wisdom,” Mandrell said. “I laid out all the information on the table: the generous package that had been given to Dr. Rainer, which they did not know about, and the clear promise he had made that was in effect until October of 2021.”

Ultimately, LifeWay sought legal action against Rainer. You can read more about that below. However, the real story is the severance package, the apparent lack of transparency in it and appearance of a conflict of interest involving former trustee chairman Scroggins.

The lawsuit was attacked by some members of the LifeWay Board of Trustees. This included comments by Scroggins who told the Christian Post the lawsuit was “embarrassing” and “damaging to the kingdom.” Of specific interest for our purposes, Scroggins complained to the Christian Post that the lawsuit was filed without board approval.

That’s funny. Because Scroggins played a significant role in approving the sweetheart deal with Dr. Rainer and kept that information from the many LifeWay Trustees. Scroggins was president of the LifeWay trustees when Rainer announced his retirement and was specifically mentioned in the leaked LifeWay memo. According to the leaked document, (Editors’ note, published by Protestia here)  

“On Aug.13, 2018, in anticipation of his announced retirement, Dr. Rainer signed a lucrative transition agreement. The transition agreement was signed by then Board Chairman Jimmy Scroggins and former Senior Vice President of Organizational Development Selma Wilson on behalf of LifeWay. The document was signed without being reviewed by or with knowledge of the Compensation Committee or Executive Committee.”

Also, Scroggins published a book with Lifeway in 2016 and a student Bible study in 2020.

This type of intimate relationship between Scroggins, LifeWay and Rainer raises a host of ethical questions about non-profit governance; it even poses potential legal problems for the organization.

Also, why were so few people involved in the decision to grant Rainer the sweetheart severance package? Was Scroggins the only person to authorize the severance package? If so, did this comply with LifeWay policies?

Trust the trustees?

That seems like a bad idea when even the trustees are not consulted about seven-figure severance packages.

It is obvious the new LifeWay president is working hard to improve financial accountability at the SBC entity. He wants a culture of accountability at the organization.

Of course, the SBC Elites led by Scroggins dislike this level of accountability and publicly opposed the legal moves of the new administration.

Why is that?

See below the transcript of Mandrell’s extended comments. It is encouraging that the new LifeWay leadership wants transparency and accountability.

Transcript of Mandrell’s Comments on LifeWay & Lawsuit against Thom Rainer

In audio of new LifeWay President Ben Mandrell obtained by the Capstone Report, Mandrell explain why the new administration entered into a legal fight with former LifeWay President Thom Rainer. Mandrell spoke about the need to move forward and the need for a accountability and transparency at the organization.

“How is it that it honors the Lord to enter into a legal battle with the former leader of LifeWay?

“I get the question. It is fair. But, it is far more complicated than you might think. Back in March when COVID-19 began, our ELT (executive leadership team) went into an intense cost-cutting mode that was unavoidable. $25 million dollars had to be removed from the budget. Most of that would involve losing great teammates. It was gut-wrenching work.

“If you recall, I sent out a very emotional video apologizing to the number of people whose jobs were being deleted. Behind the scenes the ELT were having all these hard conversations. And I knew that I had to do something as a leader to do my part to search for every dollar that could be saved.

“So, I picked up the phone and called Dr. Rainer and I said, I had to have a hard conversation with him that my conscience would not let me rest and I asked him to give back a portion of the money he had been receiving from LifeWay so that we could save some jobs.

“I told him that such a generous transition agreement in my opinion should have been approved by a larger set of eyes.

“He was upset with me, but told me he would…

To continue reading, visit Capstone Report.

Editor’s Note. This article was written by the Capstone Report and published there. Title changed by Pulpit and Pen

Categories
News Op-Ed Politics

The Woke Religionists Are All Wrong on Individual Rights

You Cannot “Love Your Neighbor” by Using the Government to Do to Him the Things God Forbids.

(The Christian Intellectual) Leaders of the major world religions seem to agree that individual rights are not absolute.

For instance, consider Pope Francis: “The Christian tradition has never recognized the right to private property as absolute or inviolable and has stressed the social purpose of all forms of private property.”

Consider Timothy Keller: “Property rights are not absolute,” he says in a discussion of the Old Testament law. “The Bible’s vision for interdependent community, in which private property is important but not an absolute, does not give a full support to any conventional political-economic agenda. It sits in critical judgment on them all,” Keller says on Twitter.

Here is Russell Moore on video: Every right that we have in society is never absolute.” (See our earlier analysis here and here.)

Pope Francis, Keller, and Moore Are Badly Mistaken

What follows is an introduction to what the Bible says about individual property rights. Use these concepts in your Sunday school, your writing, or your interactions with Bible-abusers such as the three men above. First, I will overview the Bible’s concept of inviolate, individual rights. Then I will show some of the Scripture passages that demonstrate this concept.

Individually, the verses speak for themselves. But I will ask you to consider them in connection with one another in order to better understand the many ways in which the Bible both teaches and takes for granted the concept of inviolable individual rights.

As a guiding principle when looking at these verses, understand that you cannot “love your neighbor” by using the government to do to him the things God would forbid you from personally doing. This principle requires some explanation.

What God Forbids to the Individual, He Forbids to the Collective of Individuals

The actions that a government may justly take are a small subset of the actions that an individual may rightly take. No kinds of actions that are unjust when committed by an individual become just by virtue of being committed by a group.

God commands us not to steal; therefore, having a group do the stealing for us is out of the question. Or, to state the same idea in a more general and complete form: The Bible teaches that each person has an inviolable right to his own life and property (unless he forfeits that right by committing certain actions against others); therefore, it is out of the question to join with others and use the power of the group to deprive a person of his life or property. In fact, to join together with others to overwhelm and plunder the innocent is a great sin (Prov. 1:10–15).

Some may ask: “Isn’t there some special exception when talking about actions of groups — and especially governments? Couldn’t it be that it would be wrong for me as an individual to take away my neighbor’s property by threat of force, but it is perfectly justifiable in some situations for a government to do so?”

What is at stake when we ask this question? What we are really asking is: Are individual property rights absolute?

It is no surprise that leaders of world religions balk at the idea of individual property rights being absolute, because to do so would be to go against the prevailing assumptions about the nature and powers of government that extend back for millennia. “Surely, the governor has the right to collect tribute and dole it out in the form of bread, circuses, and state-managed healthcare,” such intellectuals comfort themselves — “that’s the way things have always been done.”

But have they really? Is that the system God created for his chosen people under Moses? Is that the system taught by the relevant passages throughout Scripture?

Limited Government

As you consider the selected passages below, notice that many refer not only to the relationship between a man and his neighbor, but also to the relationship between a man and his government. As history (especially the 20th Century) shows, there is great danger if a society is not careful to keep a government’s role limited.

The government does have a God-given role and power: punishing the evildoer. Even this single power is not one that somehow accrues only to the collective (and not to the individuals from which it is constituted).

A forceful response to evildoers is a right that all men naturally have. They merely delegate that right to a governing system in order to make it possible that people may live together in a society. The individuals never lay down even that one right that the state picks up. Even here, in the one area that all agree the government has a special prerogative, the government’s power comes from the consent of the governed, who are each themselves the parties that finally possess the rights.

Punishing the evildoer (specifically, the person who initiates action that harms others) is the Bible’s reason for the government’s existence — and it is the Bible’s limit on its power. The moral use of force is not unique to the government, but it is held by the government in a unique way, in situations in which civil society exists. So no, there is no special exception by which groups have the moral right to take actions that would, naturally, be morally forbidden to the individual. That includes the taking of property by threat of force.

Suppose all of the above is granted. It then becomes obvious what is wrong with the question: “How big should the government be?” or “How much power should the government have?” A government will have different sizes and different “amounts” of power, depending on the size of its population. But “how much” power is the wrong way to ask the question. Instead, ask “which” powers the government should have.

The Bible gives us the answer. It tells us exactly where the respective powers should lie. A man has the power over his own life unless he violates the rights of others. The government’s only role is to punish the evildoer and to praise the righteous man— that is, to judge between the man who has violated the right of another and the man who has not, and to use force to punish the rights-violator.

Thus, the government, the agent of force, should manage the legal system, the police, and the military. That is all it can do, according to the biblical principle of individual rights. And that is exactly what we see the government doing in the passages and principles we are about to explore.

Inviolable Individual Rights in the Bible

You find inviolable individual rights in Ex. 20:13 and Ex. 20:15: “You shall not murder” and “you shall not steal.”

You find inviolable individual rights in the principle of justice in Gen. 9:6: “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed.”

You find inviolable individual rights in the principle of selecting judges in Ex. 18:21: “Moreover, look for able men from all the people, men who fear God, who are trustworthy and hate a bribe, and place such men over the people as chiefs of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens.”

You find inviolable individual rights in the principle of just governance in 1 Peter 2:14, which says governors are sent by God “to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good.”

You find inviolable individual rights in Romans 13:3–4, which gives the governor the same role as 1 Peter: to punish those who do evil and praise those who do good: “For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.”

You find inviolable individual rights in the many passages describing the things that people have a right to.

Consider Acts 5:4a: “While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not at your disposal?” Ownership means the ability to dispose of a thing as you chose.

Likewise, the master in Matthew 20:15a says: “Don’t I have the right to do what I want with my own money?”

Many other passages likewise support the idea that individual people have an inviolable right to their possessions.

For instance, if there were no such right, and if “needs” constituted just claims on others, could Paul have said in 2 Thess. 3:10: “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat”?

If the state were designed as a tool to end poverty, could Jesus have said in Matt. 26:11: “The poor you will always have with you”?

If it were God’s will that the state redistribute personal property of individuals in this generation to make up for wrongs committed in prior generations, could God have said in Ez. 18:20: “The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child”?

If God were pleased by the state taxing the people and doing great projects to “help” the nation, could Samuel have had such a distain for what the future kings of Israel would do, saying they would take “the tenth of your grain and of your vineyards and give it to his officers and to his servants”?

Samuel goes on: “He will take your male servants and female servants and the best of your young men and your donkeys, and put them to his work. He will take the tenth of your flocks, and you shall be his slaves. And in that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves.”

Indeed, Solomon made use of forced labor, to the point that the people rebelled against his son in 1 Kings 12:4: “Your father made our yoke heavy. Now therefore lighten the hard service of your father and his heavy yoke on us, and we will serve you.”

If individual property rights were not inviolable, why would the Bible speak of the maintenance of such rights as the essence of justice? And why would it speak of the denial of such rights as the essence of oppression or injustice?

Psalm 82:3 cries to us that individual rights should remain inviolable and that governors should uphold them: “Give justice to the weak and the fatherless; maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute.”

Isaiah 10:1–2 likewise considers the violation of property rights to be a form of wicked plunder and spoil, often committed by the very governors who had been entrusted to protect against such injustice: “Woe to those who enact evil statutes and to those who constantly record unjust decisions, so as to deprive the needy of justice and rob the poor of My people of their rights, so that widows may be their spoil and that they may plunder the orphans.”

Are these passages telling us that God cares more about justice for the poor than for the rich? Not at all. Exodus 23:3 and 23:6 make it clear that God cares about justice in procedure: “… nor shall you be partial to a poor man in his lawsuit.” It continues: “… You shall not pervert the justice due to your poor in his lawsuit.” Partiality in either direction is thus prohibited.

Possessions matter. The government is in a position to be able to dispossess people, but it must not do so. Ez. 45:9 makes it clear: “Thus says the Lord God, ‘Enough, you princes of Israel; put away violence and destruction, and practice justice and righteousness. Stop your expropriations from My people,’ declares the Lord God.”

You cannot “love your neighbor” by using the state to do to him the things God forbids.

I will share a final passage. Lev. 19:13–15 makes God’s standards clear.

“Do not defraud or rob your neighbor.

“Do not hold back the wages of a hired worker overnight.

“Do not curse the deaf or put a stumbling block in front of the blind, but fear your God. I am the Lord.

“Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly.”

Why does anyone think he can do better than the standards God has set? Why does anyone think these commands apply to individuals but not to the collective? Why does anyone think these principles can be ignored by a government?

Today, the religious leaders want to ease your conscience as you vote to support policies that take us further and further from the idea of inviolable individual rights. Such men — from Pope Francis, to Timothy Keller, to Russell Moore — are leading people away from Scripture and toward hateful, envious doctrines of demons, suitable only for cowards and thieves.

Editor’s Note. The following article was written by Cody Libolt and published at the New Christian Intellectual

Categories
Church Featured News

Barna Poll: 40% of Christian Evangelicals are Pretty Much a Bunch of Socialist, Pro-Choice Pagans

Barna recently released another survey for self-described evangelicals and it has confirmed what all the other polls have said, just with rapidly heightening percentages. Results reveal that nearly half of evangelicals are pretty bunch a ragtag group of biblically illiterate, confused, socialist, sexually progressive weirdo pagans.

The survey released Tuesday, part of the Cultural Research Center (CRC) of Arizona Christian University’ American Worldview Inventory 2020 survey, shows an increasingly troubling trend. Famed Polster George Barna reveals:

The most startling realization regarding the theological reformation in progress is how many people from evangelical churches are adopting unbiblical beliefs. What makes that trend so significant is that evangelical churches, by definition, teach that the Bible is the authoritative word of God that teaches not only salvation by grace alone but also an array of life principles that are meant to drive one’s thoughts and actions.

Several polling results found that apply specifically to American evangelicals- a term that is not loosely defined but rather must meet 9 different criteria- reveal:

  • 48% believe a person who is good enough or does enough good works can earn eternal salvation
  • 44% do not believe that history is the unfolding narrative of God’s reality
  • 44% claim the Bible is ambiguous in its teaching about abortion
  • •43% maintain that when Jesus was on earth, He sinned
  • 42% seek moral guidance primarily from sources other than the Bible
  • 42% do not identify and confess their sins on a daily basis
  • 40% accept lying as morally acceptable if it advances personal interests or protect one’s reputation
  • 36% prefer socialism to capitalism
  • •34% reject the idea of legitimate marriage as one man and one woman
  • •34% argue that abortion is morally acceptable if it spares the mother from financial or emotional discomfort or hardship

The results certainly do not reflect favorably on the churches that these people attend. Barna says it nicely “If the views of the people attending our
Christian churches these days are any indication, we need to redirect our efforts for greater impact.”

We at Protestia are a little more direct.

Half the people in this poll are unregenerate pagans and have a false assurance of salvation. They’re part of seeker-sensitive churches that don’t teach the whole counsel of God, led by emasculated betrayers of Christ who’d just as soon preach on self-help and trivialities than a mercilessly tortured Christ who was murdered on a cross because of mercilessly foul sins- slitting the throats of their sheep with bad teaching and then juggling their heads to entertain the goats.

May God have mercy on us.

Categories
News

Jeff Durbin of Apologia Church Rails against ‘Woke Bulls***’ and ‘Slu**’ During Fiery Sermon

Pastor Jeff Durbin of Apologia Church raised some eyebrows during his message at the Fight Laugh Feast (FLF) Conference held over the weekend in Tennesse when he dropped some foul language in the process of calling out woke pastors who were whoring themselves out to pagan ideologies and practices, a move reminiscent of Mark Driscoll and edgy Youth Pastors everywhere.

The conference was the first conference ever to be hosted by the FLF Network, a like-minded group of ministries who seem to be centered around the gang at Doug Wilson’s Christ Church and have as their mantra and mission statement:

Together, we fight to expand the Kingdom of God in this world through powerful content. Together, we laugh while learning how to engage cultural topics with consistent Biblical responses. And we feast upon God’s word through biblical studies.

Durbin, as well as being a pastor in Mesa, Arizona, is known for the content produced by Apologia Studio, street preaching at abortion clinics through the ministry of End Abortion Now, and for being an outspoken theonomist.

He’s also known for recording a man confessing his sin and then anonymously releasing those recordings publicly when he deemed the supplicant not sufficiently repentant, judged that way because the confessing man years later gave a biblical critique of an aspect of Durbin’s ministry.

Near the end of the conference message, however, Durbin prepares the audience by contextualizing some choice words he’s about to say, explaining that “we need to say what the prophets said and do what the prophets did. I want to be very careful about what I’m about to do. Because I want you to understand why.”

He explains that the rules in his house dictate that cursing is not allowed and foul language is punished severely, but that desperate times call for desperate measures, explaining that “we have to understand that there are different speed limits at different locations for a reason.”

He points out that Jesus used strong language when dealing with spiritually dangerous things, telling hard truth in hard ways and using a serrated edge when it was called for, demonstrated by several occasions of calling people “sons of hell,” and “whitewashed tombs.”

Durbin quotes Ezekial 16:15-34, which outlines Israel’s harlotry and idolatry when she offered herself to the pagan nations without anything in return, painting Israel as a promiscuous nymphomaniac if the accumulation of other gods were an accumulation of lovers, and speaks of the deep displeasure and harsh words the Lord used when describing that whole mess. Then he goes off.

So in light of these issues, BLM, LBGT, and the abortion issue, evangellyfish woke pastors – you say ‘homolust is not a sin,’ even though Jesus said sin begins in the heart. You say ‘we aren’t under the law, we’re under grace. We don’t need God’s stipulated standards of justice.’ Yet you throw up your marxist communist fists shouting, ‘No justice, no peace!’

You swallowed the member of the Marxist denying what God says about our unity and identity in the Messiah, and you teach people that our identity is in our color. Shame on you. You deny God’s own word, accusing people of guilt for the sinful color of their ancestors.

Thus, you invalidate the word of God for the sake of your woke bulls***.

Durbin continues:

I could do this, by the way, more Pauline if you’d like. You invalidate it for the sake of your skubalon. Or I think if I want to be faithful and I want to say what the prophets say and do what they did, I need to be more like Ezekiel.

The woke evangelical whore is a sl** who lies down in the middle of a burning city, spreading her legs to the rioters and looters, spreading her legs to Marx, Engels, Alinksy, and Soros.

Only she knows the history. Marxism and Communism plunge nations into poverty. There’s’ no money in this for her, but she wasn’t looking for payment anyways.

The evangelical woke sl** is a sl** whose behavior makes Cardi B’s WAP ( A filthy song whose acronym is ‘Wet A** P****’) look like performance art for preschoolers.

Pray that God removes these pimps from the pulpit and fills it with prophets who will keep his bride pure and faithful.

Let’s pray.


The complete video can be seen here.


Categories
News

Thom Rainer Caves To LifeWay Legal Pressure, Will Honor Non-Compete Contract

The peddler of theological poison known as LifeWay Christian Resources, the publishing arm of the Southern Baptist Convention and publisher of all things Beth Moore, announced late Tuesday that they’ve reached an amicable agreement with former President Thom Rainer, one that was settled out of court and will end all legal proceedings.

You’ll recall that we leaked emails a few days ago from LifeWay’s board revealing these four salient points, in the process serving as a bit of a reputation wrecker in the eyes of the commonfolk SBC peasants, unaware that their favored son was acting quite poorly.

1. Dr. Rainer entered into a very lucrative transition agreement that was not disclosed to the board’s compensation and executive committees that would pay him in excess of $1 million.

2. Since his retirement on Feb. 28, 2019, Dr. Rainer has been paid in excess of $1 million plus benefits, not including royalty payments.

3. The transition agreement carried a non-compete clause.

4. Dr. Rainer has clearly violated the non-compete clause by entering into a partnership agreement with a competitor explicitly against his transition agreement.

Now that LifeWay has lifted up Rainer by the scruff of his neck, yelled at him for peeing the proverbial bed, and smacked him on the nose so that he won’t do it again, Rainer acquiesced to the organization’s demands and will honor the terms of his non-compete contract after all, meaning that he can’t move ahead with all those books planned for Tyndale until November 2021, 14 months away.

Rainer also must immediately discontinue any references to Tyndale and the promoting of certain company-owned products according to RNS who have seen a draft, writing:

Under the terms of the agreement, a draft of which was provided to Religion News Service, Rainer must also ‘cease using any and all tags such as @Tyndale, #Tyndale @NLT, #NLT or any other reference to any competitor of Plaintiff, Tyndale,’ on social media. (NLT is the New Living Translation, a Tyndale Bible.)

Rainer has also started returning a portion of the $1,000,000 severance packaged he received, though it’s not clear how much he will or has actually given back . In a statement, Todd Fanning, chairman of LifeWay’s board of trustees said:

Our prayer has always been that this could be resolved between LifeWay and Dr. Rainer amicably. We’re thankful Dr. Rainer agreed to honor his word and commitment to LifeWay, which has been our goal from the beginning. The trustees and Dr. Rainer are looking forward to putting this behind us.

Categories
News

Kyle J. Howard: White Evangelicals Have Devastated the Church by Being White

“Trauma Counsellor” Kyle J. Howard, who behaves as though he himself has never left the “bad place” in his mind and needs to seriously be reprogrammed, continues to lob racist sophistry bombs at “White Evangelicals,” accusing them of of “devasting the church” by having white privilege and simply existing.

Howard made the comments after a round of pushback from well-meaning folk, unaware of his crafty machinations and who took the bait in a previous thread where he made the claim that it’s “spiritually abusive” to ask someone to pray for their enemies, and there is no impetus or imperative to pray for someone who has caused you racial trauma.

Howard’s Twitter feed, which plays out like a showcase of some bizarre race-based trauma porn, states that asking someone who despises Trump to get along with someone who doesn’t is akin to asking a black person to kiss the whip they were abused with, as if by virtue of our skin we’re sitting there with our hands pressing on the back of their neck saying “that’s right. With the lips. Kiss that leather whip with bits of your own bone chips and blood embedded in it, you Trump-hating devil you!”

It’s intimated that even telling a black person that one is voting for Trump is akin to foisting spiritual abuse and racial trauma on that person, an act that will send them scurrying back into madness and the abyss of their own misery.

Though Howard’s devolution into unrelenting hysterics is nearly complete, Howard has likely not reached his final form yet.

We await the next salvo from the accuser of the brethren.

Categories
News

‘Evangelist’ Joshua Feuerstein Harrases Mask-wearing Man at Zoo and Tries to Feed Him Animal Pellets

Demonstrating behavior that wouldn’t be excusable or tolerable for even a 5-year-old, so-called “Christian evangelist” Joshua Feuerstein accosted a man holding a stroller at a petting zoo, mocked him for wearing a face mask, got up in his personal space, shoved his hand full of animal pellets in his face, and mockingly told him he’s just “feeding the sheep.”

Known for making national headlines a few years back when he accused Starbucks of canceling Christmas by introducing generic red coffee cups rather than more festive ones, Joshua Feuerstein is a run-amock Facebook savant. With no ecclesiastical credentials or authority, he makes a career out of spewing needlessly offensive nonsense. To make matters worse, he associates proudly with a cadre of nefarious spiritual knaves and uses his influence to both bolster and promote their careers of shameless self-indulgence.

This is no more true than in the featured video. Though Feuerstein deleted the video after uploading it, we have a copy of it here, courtesy of the pagans at The Friendly Atheist, who also get a hat tip for the story.

After pointing out to Feuerstein that a man walked by them wearing a face mask, despite being outside, the friend dares him to go up to the man and offer him animal pellets, goading him with “you won’t do it.”

Feuerstein, in an act of pure idiocy, is up for the challenge. He walks up to the man and sticks a handful of feed in his face, which the man swats away angry and surprised. When asked by the man what he’s doing, Feuerstein responds.

We’re at the petting zoo, it says, ‘Feed the sheep,’ dude…

In other wretched news, Feuerstein is planning on starting a new church with his wife down in Texas, called “America’s Church” where ostensibly he’ll be the pastor. The church is being billed as one that “Loves God, loves family, and loves their country.” That description, coupled with the prospect of being led by Feuerstein, all but guarantees it will be a hellhole of false doctrine, bad leadership, and Christ-shaming personified.