Voddie Bauchum speaks some wisdom on these matters, from the black community, although his analysis is thoroughly Christian, biblical, and strengthened via the school of (South Central L.A.) hard knocks.

Expand full comment

There seem to be a good many people who will try to turn the inattentive church members into supporters of that which is heretical, and whilst it is right to be aware of trends, it is wrong to follow them. I am fairly sure that the good people of my local Methodist Chapel were being inveigled by the 2019 Methodist Conference into accepting a very bad report which would have sent the church into bland acceptance of same sex marriage, had it not been that it had to be ratified in 2020, but was not presented at that time. And certainly, if they ever do have an event of this kind at the Chapel, I shall be exiting their denomination the same day.

Expand full comment

Erick, I don't know if you've had a chance to pick up Carl Trueman's latest book ("The Rise and Fall of the Modern Self" (Cultural Amnesia, Expressive Individualism and the Road to Sexual Revolution"). It's all about the deconstruction of western civilization and where we stand today in the wake of Woke. But if you haven't, read it yet, I recommend it.

In light of that scenario/agenda, a couple of days ago Mitch McConnel and Nancy Pelosi both experienced the tip of the anarchist's sword. It was a warning, I think, about the nature of the beast that seems to be stirring in our today in our midst. (I'm sure you must have read about the vandalism.) I would imagine that McConnel may have been more mentally prepared for this type of evil reaction than Speaker Pelosi was.

After all, she IS the "progressive". I suspect that she wasn't expecting "progressive" Vandal-ism at her front door.

Just for 'fun'... a poem:

Yes, the Visigoths are roaming

Through the high end neighborhoods.

Nancy, look, we tried to warn you,

But it didn’t do much good.

Yes, the Cancel Culture henchmen

Have their eyes, girl, set on you.

Some, I think, could see it coming.

Others didn’t have a clue.

Well, so much for just ”progressive”.

Nancy, that’s just not the aim.

No, the beast that you’ve been riding

Isn’t playing “liberal” games.

I don’t think your fancy ice cream

Helped your case on live TV.

That was classic “hard to swallow”…

(As is rank hypocrisy.)

But Ouroboros was watching,

Can you hear his liberal hiss.

He’s approaching right on schedule

From his “Safe Place”…(The Abyss).

No, the serpent takes no prisoners.

Better lock down all your doors.

Might be time to grab your gun, girl.

This ain’t Kansas anymore .

Expand full comment

I am presently reading Rod Dreyer’s latest book “Live Not By Lies”. In it, Mr. Dreyer illustrates his warnings about what he calls “soft totalitarianism” with the experiences of people who have lived under Marxist dictatorship. The people who he cites in the book unanimously decry what is happening in America today; one amazed person told Dreyer, “Don’t they know what they are doing?” I suspect that the answer to that question is “No”, probably because history, even quite recent history, may as well be the Middle Ages to those seduced by the allure of all that “free” stuff, forgetting that the cheese in the mousetrap, to the mouse, was also “free”. Why is this so? Dreyer credits it to the fact that in the West, we have separated civic virtue from the underlying moral principles on which it was based. History teaches us that the first thing any totalitarian seeks to do is separate the people from the moral principles on which their nation was based in order to impose the principles he must have underlie the state he would impose on them. Marxism in any form is utterly incompatible with Judeo-Christian values; that the Greg Thompsons of this world would have us believe otherwise is a condemnation of both him and us.

Expand full comment

Well, I read Thompson's post. I don't agree with it entirely, but I think it has more in the way of solid points than gobbledygook word salad. I like to read from people I disagree with too; maybe I've read too many leftists, and internalized their jargon! Personally, I tire of counterargument by reducing the opponent to "Marxist / Leninist / Socialist / Communist." It's a bogeyman. Intellectual tribalism. Label something as a thought-crime, and you get to skip the details. Isn't that what we're accusing the left of?

I certainly understand the hesitation for this particular -ism; there's a lot historical correlation between communism and totalitarianism. But I'm not convinced that any single policy change dooms us to become Venezuela. Other Western countries are far more socialistic than we are, without having fallen off the ledge.

"Thompson puts the Christians on the bad side"; have Christians never been on the bad side? I'm not a theologian, but I grew up in a Lutheran church, and seem to recall the Reformation being a movement against the excesses of the Catholic Church. Doesn't "Protestantism" imply that there was some amount of protest against the orthodoxy?

I prefer not to dismiss an idea out of hand, solely because we associate the idea with our historical geopolitical enemies. Isn't that worldly too, to choose our policy on the basis of what's unlike countries we oppose? Are capitalism, and America itself, not also worldly? I happen to like capitalism, and America, but we're sinners too. Sometimes our navel-gazing borders on idolatry.

Expand full comment

My philosophy professor at Boston College was part of the “Institute of Marxist Thought ” in the philosophy dept at BC. He was in is 70’s and he was also a Jesuit priest. Once over a beer (this is a Catholic school after all) he told me that he had spent his career trying to resolve Marxism with Christianity and had finally come to the conclusion that it was not possible. He said that atheism was just too great a part of Marx.

Expand full comment

Here are a few Scriptures pertaining to these issues:

". . . and out of His mouth came a sharp two-edged sword. . ." (Rev 1:16)

" And all those who had believed were together and had all things in common." (Acts 2:44)

Implications in the church's present challenges:

~~Christ is presented in Scripture as a divider. His word is separated from the dictates of men. Believers who stand with Him will stand upon his Word, and consider all other human doctrines and theories as secondary. Christians need not be bound by human expectations of correct behavior when the Lord himself has set the standards, in His Word, for his people's behavior.

~~As for the postmodernist iteration of Marxist socialist doctrine, Christians are not bound by any worldly prescriptions for equality and community. We have our own standards, which the Lord has established in His Word. In Acts 2:44 we find there is biblical precedent for communitarian sharing, to be administered, judged and shared by Christian churches; this early example does not, however, require the benevolent practice of Christians in their communities to be subject to the fickle currents of worldly doctrines--be they Marxist, Socialist or Capitalist or any othe -"ist", except Christ.

Expand full comment

Jesus warned about these false preachers. As Erick pointed out, the world hated Jesus and still does. I pray for the young who are being indoctrinated in this as these heresies permeate society from all sides. I am an Eastern Orthodox Christian and my church preaches Christ as the Gospels reveal him. My priest doesn't preach politics but did tell the church that marriage is a sacrament and only between man and woman! There are Christian churches that aren't buying this marxist crap! Pray they stay that way.

Expand full comment

Erick, I compared your post from today with your post from yesterday. In yesterday’s post, you argued for a similar unity that occurred after the 9/11 attack. In contrast, in today’s post your argument was about the danger of being united with those who are on a path opposed to clear teaching about God given us in the Bible.

After 9/11, Americans of all political persuasions were unified against a violent attack on the physical territory of our country by a foreign enemy, in a similar way that an earlier generation was united by the Pearl Harbor attack. But this was never a political or religious unity, as a vicious divide over the morality of abortion and LGBT behavior never went away. Any deceptive unity from 9/11 had virtually disappeared by the time the media was trumpeting “Bush lied, people died” in regard to the Iraq war.

I also believe in grace and Biblical morality and I do not support cancelling people with different political or religious views than mine. But your argument that our country can have a unity between political parties with polar opposite positions on issues like abortion, the morality of LBBT behavior and violent riots/looting is simply not correct. Light cannot unify with darkness (2 Corinthians 6:14) and truth can never unify with falsehood.

A Politico article about the 2020 Democratic Convention starts with this headline: “'I will be an ally of the light, not the darkness': Biden frames election choice as light versus dark.” You may dispute the concept of a Flight 93 election, but both political parties see the 2020 election and the elections that follow it as a vote on what constitutes light/darkness in a political world that in various ways overlaps with a moral world.

Moral integrity never sacrifices truth for the sake of unity with darkness. Rather, it always seeks to drive out darkness by shining light upon it. Your post from today regarding “gay Christians,” “BLM/Marxism” and “Critical Race Theory” attempts to do exactly that. Whether you believe it or not, that is a similar goal to the 90% of the Republican party that supports Trump, who seek to drive out what you know in your heart are bat-c**p crazy political policies.

Confronting darkness is divisive because many “people love darkness instead of light because their deeds [are] evil. – John 3:19.” The moral question is how to deal with people who refuse to come into the light of truth. The Bible teaches that God lets the wheat grow with the weeds until the time of the harvest when they are separated (Matthew 13:30). Until then, God lets his rain fall on both the righteous and the unrighteous (Matthew 5:45). Jesus was indeed a friend of sinners (Matthew 16:19), but he never once was supportive of sin. We should do the same.

Expand full comment
Sep 12, 2020Liked by Erick-Woods Erickson

Extremely insightful Erick while the SBC, in which my church belongs, doesn’t have any voices as extreme as Revoice, there are trends which are very concerning.

More believers and pastors should read this. While many in the SBC may have a tendency to have a “not us!” mentality, there are events within our Convention which if not identified and corrected, will lead parts of the SBC towards the same destination.

Accurate and well enunciated. Again, your writing and opinions regularly challenge my thinking and motivate me to be ever more diligent and discerning.

Expand full comment
Sep 12, 2020Liked by Erick-Woods Erickson

I believe the timing of this article, in my life, is by the Lord’s hand. An adult family member attends a PCA church and I see these inappropriate teachings taking root. My EPC church in

St. Louis (Home of Covenant Seminary) has a number of members and even staff that quietly ascribe to these idea’s. I covet your prayers for wisdom an direction on how to respond with truth in grace. Thanks Erick

Expand full comment

May I should be glad that I am almost 70. I don't want to be around when true Christianity, this country and the world falls. I pray every day that it doesn't, but...............

Expand full comment