Categories
News

TGC Finally Edits Article Describing Rittenhouse as ‘Mass Shooter’+ Still Compares him to Mass Murderer

Last year, The Gospel Coalition, seemingly on a suicide mission to shed whatever last vestiges it had as a credible gospel-centered organization, released an article by member Dr. K. Edward Copeland that compared the actions of 17-year Kyle Rittenhouse who shot three assailants in self-defense in Kenosha, to the Charleston Church shooter Dylan Roof.

The post began with the authors lamenting some bad memories from the month of August he has had in his past, then culminated into an ignorant, slanderous, objectively shocking article for a professing Christian organization where they compared a deranged and unabashed white supremacist who premeditatedly killed nine people in a church with the intent to start a race war, to the young man who came to help out and defend peoples’ lives and businesses, clean up graffiti along the way, give medical aid to protesters, who then shot and killed two people in self-defense who were seeking to do him gross bodily harm or worse.

Not only did Copeland compare the two shooters and lump them together as “armed mass shooters,” but he by necessity likened the victims at the church to the lawless looters and rioters and drew parallels between the three shot convicted criminals and the five congregants, three pastors, and one bivocational state senator killed in Emmanuel.

At the time we asked ourselves, “What sort of despicable comparison is this?” This divisive, dishonest, and needlessly provocative piece was ridiculed on arrival. This is unambiguous evidence that TGC has gone off the deep end, with this article being the proverbial rock tied around its ankles that sinks it to the bottom. Now all that is left to do is watch it eventually float to the surface and poke it with a stick.

Whenever someone asks us, “why are you always beating up on TGC?!?” We point them to this article as demonstrative of what the old Green Gang at the Coalition is putting out.

And yet now, after 15 months of sustained criticism over the content of this hideous creature, Collin Hansen, editor in chief of TGC has finally and made a few edits, writing:

Of course, this claim of it simply being an “editorial” oversight is laughable, given that TGC has been consistently criticized for this article and yet purposefully chose to do nothing about it, only changing it from “mass shooter” to “armed shooter” days after the trial ended.

Most important, however, is that even with the small alteration, it doesn’t change the fact that Kyle Rittenhouse is still being compared to Dylan Roof, with the removal of the word “mass” doing little to change that. It is a purposeful connection of the two. Hansen took some time to “oversee” the article and give it a second look, and yet did not feel it necessary to disturb that portion it it.

Lastly, a brief edit is not an apology. Comparing someone to a deranged mass murderer for nearly 400 days and then changing one word while the rest remains, is not an apology. Regretting an “oversight” isn’t an apology. Slandering Rittenhouse online and washing your hands of culpability is not an apology.

After a second, more careful examination of their “Why I hate August” article, TGC has seen it fit to leave it be as is, with no further changes forthcoming.

This is why we hate TGC.

Categories
bad theology Evangelical Stuff Featured Heresies News

Former Desiring God and TGC Author Paul Maxwell Describes in VIVID Detail how he Came to Lose his Faith

Several popular and prominent Christian figures have renounced their Christianity over the last couple of years including the former editor of Christianity Today, Mark Galli, popular Hillsong musician, Marty Sampson, purity culture pastor, Josh Harris, and recently Paul Maxwell.

Maxwell is a former Desiring God and TGC writer and the author of the book, The Trauma of Doctrine. He famously announced in April of 2021 that he had left the faith and deconverted, but left barely an explanation of what happened and what led him to repudiate his former beliefs.

In a new interview with famed apostate Josh Harris, Maxwell reveals what led him to this point, with an major focus on the need for self-esteem and the declaration that constant repentance was too draining on him, he swiftly demonstrated that truly he was never really of us. He shares:

I didn’t grow up or wasn’t raised a Christian, I became a Christian at a Youth for Christ conference when I was 16… I wanted to understand the Bible. So I went to Moody Bible College. And you know, it was at Moody that I read a book called Is There a Meaning in this Text by a guy named Kevin Vanhoozer, and that introduced me to some French post-modernists, the post-structuralist Jacques Derrida, in particular. And I had a real crisis of faith then at age 19.

You know, the idea that my whole life could be built on a text all of a sudden, didn’t make sense to me. And so Christianity wasn’t even so much the object of my doubt, as it was structuralism, which is a philosophical term for a way of approaching language that says, language, objectively means things. There’s a very strong connection between words and objects in the world. And I, I saw, I perceived a disillusion of that connection.

And the truth is, a lot of people at Moody and a lot of people in seminary go there because they sense a vocational calling on their lives- ‘I want to serve the church, I want to be a pastor’ – that was never me. I wanted to understand God, who is this God that I’ve devoted my life to? I want to know. And I want to know ‘why’ and I want to know ‘how’. And so for me, there were just unanswered questions that needed to get answered. And so I decided to stay a Christian.

And the truth is…when I announced that I wasn’t a Christian anymore, I think it was a combination of that seed that had been planted when I was 19, where I learned to kind of perforate my faith experience with genuine questioning, genuine questioning.

Because it’s one thing to say ‘doubts’, and then they say, ‘doubt your doubts’, and then ‘doubt the doubts of that’, you know, it’s an infinite feedback loop of doubt, but really saying ‘Wow, these things I believe, am I willing to genuinely entertain the notion that they’re not true?’ Or that truth doesn’t work the way it has to work for these claims to be what these people claim to be?

And so that manifested itself in a weird way for me, because initially, it was an intellectual question for me, obviously, these friends were like, Yeah, yada, yada, yada, all these intellectual questions. But ultimately, I realized I had an unworkable self-hatred that I had cultivated…and I did not have the tools to attain a level of what I felt was just a baseline normal, survivable mental wellness, and I didn’t know why.

He explains that after reading a book on self-esteem by Nathaniel Brandon, his whole mindset and worldview shifted:

And his claim in that book is essentially, in order to have the cognitive architecture of mental wellness, begins with esteeming the self, honoring the self, loving the self. And his definition of self-esteem, was what allowed me to let go of the version of Christianity I had held on to for so long, which is ‘self-esteem is the coordination of self-respect, and self-confidence, self-respect, being a conviction of one’s own worthiness and value, and self-confidence being a trust in one’s own mind and heart.’

And I thought ‘I don’t have either of those things’. And I realised if I have to choose between at least the way I’m manifesting and experiencing God through Christianity, and having self-esteem defined as ‘having the coordination of self-respect and self-confidence,’ I need self-esteem. I need this because it’s killing me not to happen.

It’s killing my relationships. It’s killing my perspective on the world. And I thought, ‘this is unworkable‘. So for me, you know, leaving Christianity in which for me, it was only letting go of the God concept as I had conceived it up to that time, was a matter of saying, ‘I am going to choose to love myself.

And there was a certain euphoria to that. There was a certain experience of that self-love that felt very much like what I felt when I originally converted to Christianity

And it was in that resonance that I realised what I did with God in terms of directing love towards the self dignifying the self, and then from there having a sense of mission. I can do without the God concepts. I don’t have to route self-love through a sense that I am undeserving of that love- that love is only ever a gift and a grace and undeserved. I thought wow, if I’m going to begin with self-respect, which is the conviction that I’m worth this love, then I have to insist on not routing that self love, through self hatred. And if I’m going to survive this life, and if I’m going to get pleasure and joy and bring pleasure and joy and purpose to other people, it’s going to be by beginning with the dignification of the self, and extending that to other people.

He concludes on why the concept of dying to self was so repulsive to him.

Christianity was the way I felt comfortable manifesting a lot of those unhealthy ways of thinking… but in Christianity, it was really- if I could really put my finger on…one reality, or one practice that I’m reified or ingrained, that sense of negativity that really detracted from that sense of the fullness of love that I felt when I when I converted to Christianity.

And this is maybe just one example of an infinite number of examples. But this idea of ‘the mortification of the flesh, repentance, daily repentance’ , it’s another way of always looking at the negative, or even if you’re not always looking at the negative, you’re at the very least always going back to the negative. You’re always going back to what’s wrong, what’s bad. And if you take the doctrinal, theological part out of it, and you just bring that to a mental health worker, that’s a neurotic way of thinking. And if you bring that to a positive psychologist, they’ll say, ‘Well, that’s going to be very detrimental to your self-esteem’

And I realised ‘I can’t do this. It’s too exhausting.’…Sure, I had my intellectual reasons for thinking that Christianity wasn’t true in that way, but I didn’t have the energy to be a Christian anymore. I didn’t have the psychological juice to keep that going, you know, my reservoir of love that I got in conversion. I think was sapped by those practices of repentance.

Categories
News

TGC Author: Straight Men Should Consider Singleness Out of Solidarity for Celibate Homosexuals

In an interview with Sam Wan featured on the Gospel Coalition, Simon Shead, a 24-year-old from New South Wales, spoke about his intention never to get married, serving as a microcosm for the problems with TGC as a whole.

He explains that the primary reason he is choosing lifelong celibacy and singleness is because “I believe that being single helps us to understand the sufficiency of Christ and to be undivided in our posture towards him.”

Shead offers that a secondary reasons for being single is counter-cultural, as “Non-Christians might wonder where my hope is placed if it is not in the deeply fulfilling sexual relationships we see on TV. This provides me with a great gospel opportunity.”

And the third? Out of solidarity with the gays.

Sam: You say singleness and celibacy is a godly and possible choice for straight Christians—and for the communities they are a part of. Why is that?

Simon: It is godly and possible because it is scriptural. Both marriage and singleness are great ways for a person to serve Christ!

But the cry I hear from celibate gay evangelical Christianis that straight Christians are not quite upholding the standard we apply to them. Sometimes the message from the evangelical church can feel like: “Marriage is great! Get married, everyone’s doing it. Oh, but if you’re gay, singleness is good too …”

I think a good way we can support our brothers and sisters in Christ in this area, is to stand in solidarity with them; to reclaim the gift of singleness for the church… it is worth gently pondering in the current cultural climate, is this a way we can further support our gay brothers and sisters in Christ?

Interviewer Wan affirms his decision, noting:

Standing in solidarity with your brothers and sisters who experience attraction to the same sex is such an important thing, and the choice you’re making is really putting your money where your mouth is.”

Talk about peak TGC right here.


Bonus: The message from the evangelical church should be that if you’re ‘gay and single,’ then you need to mortify that, as even the desire and inclination towards homosexuality are sinful. Thankfully, Christ died for those sins, and the scriptures clearly state that ‘such were some of you” is possible and in fact, is the natural progression in a life that has been submitted to Christ for sanctification. 

A heart given over to God becomes given over to heterosexuality, as there is not one realm of our life that the Holy Spirit does not conform.

There’s no need to stay single, as a “same-sex attracted Christian” who will only be so temporarily as he conforms himself to Christ, ought to find a spouse in a similar position as they are or different, and get married, make babies, and conquer the world.

This above reality is what makes the upcoming comments so disastrous, as it reinforces their status as someone whom Christ can’t change and is destined to singleness and celibacy forever, suggesting it as support when, in reality, it is spiritually severing.

Categories
Cursed Headlines Evangelical Stuff Featured

The Gospel Coalition Argues For Vaccine Passports To Attend Church

The Gospel Coalition (TGC) continues to stake out the worst possible position on the ongoing ecclesial drama surrounding the novel coronavirus, releasing an article advocating for churches to institute vaccine passports and relegating those ‘others’ who do not want to get vaccinated or who cannot get vaccinated for medical reasons to “online church” in the name of ‘loving one’s neighbor.’

This is hardly surprising, as TGC has been notoriously simpy when it comes to these matters, alternating between being completely silent about the infringement of religious liberty, and gaslighting their audience by claiming the government has not engaged in hostilities or persecution of the church during the last 18 months. Heck, if anything the state has been a perfect gentleman the entire time.

TGC Canada Again Argues that Their Churches Aren’t Being Persecuted,
TGC Author: Believing in ‘Big-Government Overreach’ Is a Denial of ‘Objective Reality’,
TGC Author: Christians Have Endured No ‘Hostility’ or ‘Ill-treatment’ From Govt During Pandemic

In a new post by Meagan Best, who is the Director of the Ethicentre Centre, she dedicates large portions of the article to advocating for the safety and efficacy of the Covid-19 vaccine before turning her attention to vaccine passports. Here, she holds two propositions to be true: 1) “restrictions imposed by the state on an individual’s liberty are justified only to prevent harm to others” and 2) “unvaccinated individuals present a risk to society.”

She ‘refutes’ the notion that Hebrews 10:24–25: “…not giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing… is applicable our current pandemic situation, arguing that it cannot be used as a prooftext for the insistence of gathering together:

The kind of “meeting together” that the verse encourages as a vehicle for mutual encouragement does not necessarily require large, weekly, extended, indoor gatherings. There are other ways in which we can fulfil the purpose of the exhortation in this verse.

She acknowledges that some people may not want to get the vaccine on account of a conscience issue, but that when it comes to church:

The conscience of those who remain unpersuaded by those arguments should be respected, but respecting a person’s conscience does not automatically confer on them a right to act in a way that endangers the health and safety of others.

Best concludes that because the unvaccinated don’t have a right to endanger other believers who have loved their neighbors by being double-dosed, they need to be prevented from gathering with their brothers in sisters in Christ, with these vaccine passports the way to go:

Given our responsibility to love our neighbors and prioritize the interests of the most vulnerable, there are good and persuasive reasons for us to support and implement a system in which proof of vaccination (or medical exemption) is a standard requirement for attendance at large indoor gatherings such as church services

…But this should not mean that we exclude those who have not been vaccinated from the fellowship of the church or from the circle of our ministry. If a regime of vaccine passports is to be with us for some time into the future, then our energy should be expended not on fighting against it but on finding safe, inclusive and responsible ways to gather and minister within such a context. One obvious option would be to advocate for a system that permitted those who remain unvaccinated or incompletely vaccinated to produce evidence of being COVID-negative as a condition for church attendance. Another would be to continue and expand the range of online opportunities for Christian fellowship and online communication….

…It should be entirely possible for us to practise both our call to minister the gospel to all people and our responsibility to love our neighbours and care for the vulnerable, without requiring one of these commitments to trump the other.

Categories
News

Oooooh…We see…TGC Says that Online Church is Not Real Church. Wow! Do They Really? How Interesting!

The Gospel Coalition (TGC) thinks you are stupid. No really, they think you are so slow, that they have done whatever the theological equivalent is of peeing on your head and telling you it is raining. What other explanation do we have for Jonathan Leeman’s recent article in that rag geared at effete men telling you that “There’s No Such Thing as Virtual Church” after these people have spent the last 18 months telling you that there is and that it’s awesome and it’s the best thing ever?

The overarching message from the coalition has been loud and clear: “You should obey the government if they say not to gather, or only gather in small batches, which is an act of sacrificial service, and an act of love, and a good witness to your neighbor.”

In doing so, the Gospel Coalition has essentially been functioning as the Ministry of Propaganda and Public Enlightenment for the government, giving writers the platform to explain how pastors being arrested for having church services isn’t persecution, how if you say the government has “overreached” in their actions towards refusing to allow people to have church services, that it Is a denial of “objective reality” and claiming that Christians have endured no “hostility” or “ill treatment” from the government during the pandemic.

TGC has taken all sides of the argument then tried to convince you it’s a circle. These cowards and frauds have been telling the world how being together in church isn’t safe right now, and maybe congregants should not sing in church, why we need to obey the government, why it is an act of love towards your neighbor to stay at home and not gather, why the virtual church is a good option and is the source of so many ministry opportunities, and how to boldly witness while streaming online, and etcetera ad nauseum.

Now in the new article, Leeman posits:

Once the pandemic began, many churches livestreamed their services, and many voices extolled the enduring value of “virtual church.” Pastors who had previously decried the idea now opened up “virtual campuses” and staffed them with full-time pastors, promising that the campuses would continue indefinitely. This was an exciting development in the history of fulfilling the Great Commission, some said.

He leaves the identity of “many” and “some” up to the imagination when he really could have been pointing to a contributor list to the website.

The push toward the virtual church, we fear, is a push to individual Christianity…to offer or encourage (even with good intentions) virtual church as a permanent option, hurts Christian discipleship. It trains Christians to think of their faith as autonomous. It teaches them they can follow Jesus as a member of the “family of God,” in some abstract sense, without teaching them what it means to be a part of a family and to make sacrifices for a family.

…Pastors should encourage people away from virtual “attendance” as much as they are able. We need to find a gentle way to remind our members that the livestream option is not good for them. It’s not good for their discipleship, and it’s not good for their faith. We want this to be clear to them, lest they become complacent and not work hard at gathering with us, if they can.

Yes. That is completely true. Stand up. Slow Clap. Yea and Amen.

The only thing is that it was said 18 months too late when no one cares and it costs nothing to say. While we were saying this back in March and April of 2020 and getting crucified for it, people like Leeman and organizations like TGC and the Southern Baptist’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) were arguing that the government has the God-given power and authority to shut down churches and that the church should submit, leaving either “no church” or “virtual church” as the only options – the latter of which he now says is not a real church.

Just stellar stuff.

You will recall it was Jonathan Leeman and Mark Dever who took a swing at John MacArthur last year for insisting on having whole-congregation in-person gathering while extolling the right of the state to restrict in-person gatherings so long as it was temporary. This might explain why Cheverly Baptist Church, where Leeman is an elder, along with basically all TGC churches “temporarily” shut down for such a long time, over 14 months with some of them. (And a side note, why is Leeman’s church insisting any children older than 5 are required to wear masks? Gross, dude.)

Now, we learn the whole thing was a mirage. You were doing something through the webcam and your digital communion, but it was certainly not church and it was certainly not good for your soul.

Good to know.


Categories
Critical Race Theory Evangelical Stuff Featured News Social Justice Wars

TGC Author Likens Bill To Remove CRT from Schools to ‘Jim Crow Attitudes and Laws’

The Gospel Coalition author and pastor Thabiti Anyabwile joined fellow race-baiter Dwight McKissic to condemn a recent Texas Senate Bill designed to remove Critical Race Theory (CRT) from the classroom as an “insane” and “gutwrenching” tip-toeing back to the racist “Jim Crow attitudes and laws” of the 1950’s and 1960’s.

Note. As a brief refresher to familiarize yourself with Anyabwile, the pastor has used his social media platforms to refer to his leftist positions as “pro-life” issues and yet endorses pro-choice candidates like Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden while claiming that all white evangelicals are guilty of racism. He has claimed that resisting reparations is ‘the echo of Cain’s voice’. and that white folk who reject systematic racism and reparations can’t read their bibles right.’ Anyabwile’s real name is “Ron Burns” but he chose the name “Thabiti Anyabwile” to identify with the “Black Nationalist Movement,” a move he made prior to converting from Christianity to Islam. Afterward, Anyabwile claimed to have been reconverted to Christianity but chose to keep his Black Nationalist name, which should tell everyone something about him.

Thabiti is referring to the terrible fact that several states in the mid-21st century enacted “separate but equal” laws designed to segregate races, with the idea that black folk would be given equal protection under the constitution and would be treated the same as white folk, but would have separate bathrooms, water fountains, busses, entrances, etc. These racist laws are evil in every way imaginable, and yet he’s saying that the same heart and motivation that came up with them, likewise is behind the banning of CRT from schools.

Of course, this is nothing but alarmist fodder and a dishonest reading. Texas SB3 does nothing of the sort and has absolutely nothing in common with Jim Crowisms. According to the article being quoted by Anyabwile, the bill would “remove more than two dozen teaching requirements from a new law that bars the teaching of critical race theory, an academic framework exploring racism’s shaping of the country”…and…”the measure also would bar the teaching of the 1619 Project— a New York Times initiative exploring U.S. history starting at the date enslaved people arrived in the English colonies.”

In a statement after the vote, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R), said that “Parents want their students to learn how to think critically, not be indoctrinated by the ridiculous leftist narrative that America and our Constitution are rooted in racism.”

Teacher and historian Brian Franklin explains more on Twitter:

“Many folks are claiming TX Republicans are “removing” teaching requirements about the civil rights movement & its leaders from TX curriculum standards w/ #SB3. This is not true. But it contains just enough truth to make for powerful political fodder.

True: the version of the #SB3 bill that the TX Senate just passed (w/o Democrat support) did in fact remove a *bunch* of specific people & events from the bill, including stuff on civil rights, women’s suffrage, slavery, labor, & more.

Also true: the current version of the bill also removed mentions of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abigail Adams, the American GI Forum, the 19th Amendment, and *much more.* Why remove all of this? Well, I find myself reluctantly agreeing with Sen. Hughes’ explanation.

B/c specific requirements aren’t typically dealt with by statute, but in the Texas Essential Knowledge & Skills standards (TEKS), developed by the State Board of Education.

And what civil rights history do we find in the TEKS? *A lot.* High school US history should teach a multiethnic array of civil rights organizations; King, Chavez, Parks, Garcia, Friedan; the Black Panthers; Letter from a Birmingham Jail; the VRA; more.

They’re not removing teaching about Martin Luther King Jr. or suffrage, but rather ensuring it only being taught in its rightful class, context, and without the specter of CRT wanting to strangle and hijack the narrative.

Apart from all that nonsense, these hysterics by Anyabwile and McKissic reveal a disturbing new tactic to deal with dissent. For certain professing Christians of a more progressive stature, apparently yelling “Jim Crow!” has become the new “RacistBigotHomophobe!” invective and accusation to paint the other side red with.

The Georgia voting bill that actually expands voting rights rather than constricts them, and has been lied about and trashed by dishonest democrats? Jim Crow! Refusing to go along with reparations as a means of social justice and reconciliation? Jim Crow! Resisting CRT being taught in our schools and churches? Jim Crow!

They may not always call you an outright racist, but seemingly they have a shiny new socially acceptable accusation to make the same connection.

Categories
Church Cursed Headlines Featured

The Gospel Coalition Promotes Book on The ‘Theology of Periods.’ Yes, Those Kinds of Periods

Gospel Coalition writer Emily Cobb has written a review of the book A Brief Theology of Periods (Yes, really): An Adventure for the Curious into Bodies, Womanhood, Time, Pain and Purpose—and How to Have a Better Time of the Month By Rachel Jones, recommending that Christians everywhere get this book in order to understand the theological implications of what it means to have Christian women undergoing a menstrual cycle, and how that affects their relationship to Christ.

Published by the Good Book Company, which is generally regarded as a conservative publisher who carries such authors as Tim Keller, Matt Chandler, John Piper, Alistair Begg and Sinclaire Ferguson, Cobb quotes Jones then explains:

…for roughly 50% of the population, for a large section of our lives, periods are a regular reality. 400-500 times in your lifetime—and for 60 days of the year—you’re on your period (p.10).

What a staggering statistic. A women’s period shapes her choices, her emotions, her energy-levels, and in our churches—generally filled with more women than men—it means that, on any given Sunday, many are experiencing their period, or the lead up or aftermath of it.

Cobb assures her readers that “God isn’t afraid to talk about blood,” and this book is so valuable because Jones “urges her female (and male!) readers to see a woman’s monthly period as a testament to the gospel. When we feel unclean, it isn’t really because we are having our period and shedding blood; it is because our spiritual condition in and of itself is unclean.”

I do need to remember it; because it’s only when we’ve appreciated the depth of the problem—when we’ve felt appropriate shame not at menstruation but at our unclean spiritual condition—that we’re ready to hear afresh the words of peace offered by our Saviour. (p.65-66)

Noting that a proper understanding of one’s period is a way to properly understand the gospel, Cobb concludes by saying this is a must-read for both men and women because:

…a woman’s period doesn’t just affect her. It affects men she comes in contact with too, and I believe a book like this can help men become educated on a Biblical view of this topic just as it is for women. May we start seeing wonderful resources like this as a way to equip us as saints in gospel-living. When we lift the veil on these topics, we allow God to shine his wisdom on parts of our lives we often keep hidden.

We await for her some young enterprising man to write the sequel, The Theology of Seminal Emissions: What the Shooting of Sperm has to Say About our Faith, Fears, and Being Fearfully and Wonderfully Made, which would use 90% of the same argumentation and bible verses to justify its existence, so that the church may be doubly and richly blessed by this exceptionally necessary works.

Just….whyyyyyyyyyy?

Categories
Evangelical Stuff Featured Heresies LGBTQQIP2SAA News

TGC Author Advocates for Using Trans Personal Pronouns, Suggests Not Using them Makes one a ‘Weaker Brother’

In a recent Gospel Coalition podcast, author and contributor Rachel Gilson answers the question of whether Christians should use people’s personal pronouns, noting that this issue “is probably one of the most difficult to answer well in a space like this, and I mean like in a digital question and answer type space.”

We do not know what is difficult about it: the answer is simple.

No. No, we should not use them.

This is true of the more benign ones like he/she/them/etc., but also the grotesque world of “nounself-pronouns” and “neo-pronouns” where people identify as “xe/xem/xyr, moon/moonself, star/starself, bee/beeself, bun/bunself, and anything else under the sun.

However, the question is a bit more complicated for Gilson, who has been smuggling unbiblical perspectives on biblical sexuality into the church for years. She previously advocated (or at the very least, gave a tacit approval) that if one partner in a “gay marriage” becomes saved, then they should not necessarily divorce their same-sex “spouse,” because “God hates divorce,” but rather continue in the marriage and remain celibate.

She’s also expressed her belief that becoming saved and having a new heart has essentially zero effect on one’s sexual orientation, and that for all intents and purposes, sexual orientation is not something that is touched by the sanctifying process of the Holy Spirit. She believes that the number of gay people who get their sexuality redeemed by Christ and oriented towards the opposite sex is a fraction of a fraction of a percent, but that this reality is “ok” because her homosexuality is a “gift” to the church.

In her podcast answer, Gilson goes straight to the scriptures which talks about the weaker versus stronger brother, and says that if people do not wish to use these [ridiculous and made up] pronouns, that is their choice, but that “you have to recognize that when you are interacting with a transgender person your inability to use their preferred name or pronoun could actually be received as very offensive by them or deeply hurtful by them.”

In contrast, she explains the “stronger brother” position, which according to her warped theology is that “others of us have no problem at all using preferred names and pronouns. We’re like, “Yes! This is a way of showing love. I’m ready to do this.” And in that case, your conversation partner is probably easily going to feel loved and accepted by you.”

Once this compromise is made, calling a boy a girl or a girl a boy, or a boy “bunself” or a girl “fairyself,” Gilson explains that this grants you “access to the heart of your friend,” which then in turn lets you talk about spiritual things with them by getting those pronouns and lies “in.”



Sadly, Gilson has it completely backwards. It is not the weaker brother who refuses to call people by their preferred pronouns, but rather the stronger one who is not willing to compromise the truth of God’s reality and break the 9th commandment despite enormous pressure from the world and once formerly reputable Christian organizations like the Gospel Coalition telling them to do so.

[Editor’s note: If you aren’t familiar with Paul’s thoughts on this, you can look the up in Romans 14. In context, weaker brothers are the ones that make up rules that they try to make “religious” and impose on everybody else. Kind of like Rachel Gilson is doing.]

Transcript below, provided by WPC

I think the question of preferred pronouns…really can come down to a question of conscience. So if you’ve done a quiet time recently in the weak brother/strong brother passages of scripture, Paul has a category for the reality that some Christians are going to come to issues and fall in different spots. And one of the most important questions there is how are we going to relate to each other when we fall in different spots? So, on the one hand, some of us would feel incredibly compromised using a transgender person’s preferred name or pronouns, because it feels like we’re complicit in a lie. It feels like we’re breaking the ninth commandment, right?

Like we’re bearing false witness about a neighbor, and we need to take that really, really seriously. It is never safe to go to a place that your faith doesn’t allow you to go against your conscience. And if that is your position, you have to recognize that when you are interacting with a transgender person, your inability to use their preferred name or pronoun could actually be received as very offensive by them or deeply hurtful by them.

And so I would encourage people in that category to think, “Okay, well, my truth is clear. How can I communicate clearly the grace of Christ here? How can I go above and beyond to show love, knowing that my posture on pronouns is going to be tricky for the person I’m talking with?” Others of us have no problem at all using preferred names and pronouns. We’re like, “Yes! This is a way of showing love! I’m ready to do this.” And in that case, your conversation partner is probably easily going to feel loved and accepted by you.

So then I would challenge you, since you have access to the heart of your friend, what would it mean for you to use that access to have truthful conversations either about who Christ is, maybe, if you feel competent about the nature of the body, even just beginning conversations of if your friend has thought about how God relates to these questions in their lives. But no matter where we come down, I want us to be able to relate to each other with honor and respect, because the church has not had to answer these questions before, and we we need to have grace with each other, right? We know that God loves desperately the transgender people in our lives, and so we need to be thinking as a community: how can we expose them to the love that we have received ourselves?

Categories
Church Evangelical Stuff Featured In-person Church Unrighteous Compliance

TGC Author: Believing in ‘Big-Government Overreach’ Is a Denial of ‘Objective Reality’

A Gospel Coalition is at it again. Mere months ago a Gospel Coalition writer condemned the consumption of all news that isn’t intensely local, suggesting that doing otherwise is Gnosticism, gives a God-complex, has no value, and makes one hate their neighbor. They said “anti-masking is not a “conscience issue,” but instead is sinful “civil disobedience” and suggested boomers are sinfully being “radicalized into conspiracies” by Ben Shapiro and Fox News.

This time, in an article by Brett McCracken, he posits that the “biggest emerging fissure in Western culture is not necessarily between political left and right” but rather between those who are “fiercely committed to reality” and those who “elevate the narrative above reality.”

He goes on to lists some examples of some beliefs that do not have a “good faith commitment to reality” but rather are committed to an untrue narrative, noting that “no level of scientific consensus or statistics will cause them to rethink or at least complicate their narrative.”

  1. “Nanny state” big-government overreach
  2. Corrupt Big Pharma
  3. Encroachments on personal liberty
  4. Vaccines as government control

None of these things are happening, he argues. None of those things occurred in the last 15 months.

That’s all just a narrative and conspiracy theories, and by believing they have happened or will happen, these men and women are not living in the real world, but rather are merely “allowing their entrenched narratives and biases” to “take precedence over objective reality.”

Where are the people who live in light of the facts about reality more than their feelings about it? Where are those whose understanding of the world is shaped more by evidence and logic than by narratives and anger? Where these people exist, they’re the true radicals…”

Categories
Coronavirus Featured In-person Church News Unrighteous Compliance

TGC Author: Christians Have Endured No ‘Hostility’ or ‘Ill-treatment’ From Govt During Pandemic

A writer for The Gospel Coalition has published an article making the case that Christians haven’t endured any hostility or ill-treatment from the government during the pandemic, but rather have only endured mild hardships since the whole thing began.

Pastor Paul Carter, writing for TGC Canada, explains that while many churches were forced to suspend their main large group gatherings and “normal Christian activities such as singing, taking communion and sharing a meal together was either strongly discouraged or forbidden outright,” he describes the 14 months as only as a “temporary suspension” imposed by the government and not something dastardly or more permanent that is worth getting worked up about.

He argues that the 14-month long tyrannical and ever-increasing virulent edicts against the church (our words) may be a “hardship” it is not persecution. He acknowledges there’s been a few missteps and “probably” some “overreach,” (Probably!?) but that there has been no “hostility and ill-treatment because of our religious beliefs.” He ponders: “I’m not sure how any reasonable person could argue that [there was].”

Carter makes these comments defending the government handling of the pandemic in his country while a church 120 miles south of him is facing 40 million dollars in fines for being open and whose doors were just recently barred by police. Another 25 miles further, Police arrived on the scene to give out fines because a church was having a drive-in service where they didn’t even leave their vehicles and were listening to the sermon through their small FM transmitter.

This drive-in service was declared non-essential, even as marijuana shops and liquor stores have been open as essential businesses the whole time. Across the country, one church congregation has gone underground after their pastor was jailed for a month and a fence was erected around their church while 60 armed police officers showed up with batons and riot gear to ensure there was no disruption. Further west, Black Lives Matter protesters have been allowed to march and hold rallies at will, congregating out in the public, but all indoor and outdoor church gatherings of any size have been suspended, even as restaurants, casinos, and bars remain open for business and socializing.

In fact, the new rules for outdoor services in Brtish Columbia cap the vehicles attending at 50, and anyone attending the drive-in service where they are not allowed to leave their vehicles must not only ensure their cars and trucks are 6 feet apart, but they must pre-register and their personal information captured, lest COVID-19 magically travel from vehicle to vehicle and infect the whole lot of them.

Finally, Carter declares that churches haven’t been unfairly discriminated against because “Churches, by and large, have enjoyed far greater freedoms than health clubs and workout facilities over the last 14 months” and concludes “so this has been hard, it has been crushing for many – but it does not appear to have been motivated by religious hostility or malice. Not everything that negatively affects the church can be categorized as persecution. Not everything difficult can be ascribed to evil motives.”