Brother, thank you for the breath of fresh air. It’s been something that my pastors and I have been talking about a lot lately. There seems to be so much tribalism in the church following certain leaders in all things and rejecting anyone who disagrees with you. Rather, we can benefit from many leaders while also have healthy disagreements. I appreciate the tone and spirit of this video. Thank you!
Yes. It’s a lot like Paul’s discourse to the Corinthians about some being of Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas. And he says, “whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future-all are yours..” (1 Co 3:22). I think, though, If someone is in fact a heretic or at least progressively heading towards heresy, they obviously would not be included in that verse. But should be marked and avoided. Ya know, the good kind of division.
Totally agree. I'm a baptist, pre-millennial Master's Seminary guy, but my family has been greatly blessed by Wilson and the rest of the Moscow/Canon crew despite having profound theological differences with them. I believe being able to learn from those with whom you disagree with is a mark of maturity.
I guess I'm with Wilson because, as a man, It's been a long slog trying to figure out even the simplest aspects of what it actually means to be a biblical man in practical, daily life (roles, duties, how to grow as a man and a husband). I may not always agree with Doug Wilson, but he actually gives some guidance in a thoughtful, biblical, even fatherly way. I'm sick to death of the "nuanced" stuff, because to me it comes across as intentionally vague to the point of being unhelpful, ivory-towerish instead of practical, and often needlessly complicated for the sake of seeming intellectual. It comes across as the kind of thing grad students study to keep them out of the real world a few years longer. (No offense to grad students, not saying all of y'all are like that!) Maybe I'm being unfair, but that's my take.
I like and appreciate them both, but yeah, some times Tom comes off as a little Faustian while Doug is consistently driving home the truth, loudly, and clarifies what we are to do with said truth.
I work for a recovery ministry in a small town. After a person graduates the 1 year program, we offer supportive housing. If they do well, we offer the opportunity to buy a home in the community. That's how we are building the church in this town. 🙏
I think for myself the NT Write/Keller nuanced approach was very helpful going through University in a very agnostic country (and left leaning region of said country). It helped me respond to challenges in a thoughtful and effective way and that really boosted my confidence. The stuff those guys went through allowed you to say "hey there is a Christian solution to that problem, let me tell you more". But I am aware that this was a very intellectual environment in which engaging in ideas was the thing we all loved and when I was not talking to academy-bros I noticed that I found myself flat footed in conversations, a bit of Doug and Co combative training would have helped. Both are helpful, but both need to some how unite. and THAT is the hard bit and we will need the Lord for it.
As an older woman I love masculinity & a good old-fashioned protector/provider type of man. Someone who can take care of me under even the worst of circumstances. But I also want him to be a strong man of God who has wisdom & grace. Don't get me wrong, these men can be hard to find these days, but I do believe they are still out there. Fortunately, I married just such a man & I've never regretted my decision.
I like the taking action and the "get to building" mentality that I've seen from Wilson and others, it gives me a lot of encouragement to keep working on my art to the glory of God!
Keith, I think you are being reasonable. The RC vs. Keller question is a good one. My experience in the PCA is as long as I am speaking about or teaching academic theology (I have a degree in theology) and I stay in the conceptual realm, no one has an issue with core historic Reformed doctrine, Westminster theology, historical Puritianism or Presbyterian theology. As soon as I apply the theology to contemporary issues, the skubala hits the oscillator.
That quote about Sproul and Keller is so true. The PCA church near me who is big into Keller recently hired a new pastor who basically affirms "gay Christianity." They've become even worse on certain issues than the PCUSA church in my area (they're more "conservative" for the denomination). The polarization is also very real among zoomers, most the people you meet are either very left-wing or very right-wing. I definitely encourage people to move more to the right though, towards conservative Christianity.
@@stefanwalicord2512 ah. That's too bad that this is seen as a huge division. As long as we see it as sin, our exact approach for helping those in need will sometimes differ
You have definitely touched on something here. One thought that comes to mind was something I learned during my days in Big Eva youth ministry- “your students will act like an unedited version of yourself.” It’s interesting because I often think I could have a productive discussion with Doug Wilson on some areas of “nuance”, but I don’t feel the same way about many of his devotees. Likewise for many practical ministry scenarios with NT Wright and his fans.
Thanks for reminding me that there are good Christians on the “other side”. I lean more towards Wilson, but I am glad to hear you see faithful guys in the other direction too. Very easy for me to forget!
One thing I've been noticing about both sides of the divide is a commitment to too much intellectualism in the faith. The scholarly side definitely makes mountains out of molehills and quibbles on words. Whereas there is an emphasis on practical living on the Doug Wilson side, there is a lack in those circles to personal piety and communion with God. Where the intellectualism comes in is here is the postmillenialism and a romanticize view of church history. It can be less of a commitment to how they interpret Scripture and more of a picture in the mind to muse about "if I was in office I'd do this" or "what do you think about this issue in the past?" I think this is mostly because on the Internet we have access to so much information we can get too intellectual and even argue with one another over issues that have no bearing on our lives.
Wilson represents confidence. Wright represents humility. Confidence in Christ empowers you to do the unpopular thing, to follow the Lord when culture is arrayed against you. When that confidence slips away from being founded on the rock, it turns into pride. Humility rooted in an understanding of Christ gives you the ability to open your mind and step past your selfishness to love God and love others more completely. Humility unmoored from Christ becomes a particularly fetid combination of cowardice and your mind being so open your brain falls out. We need both, but we need them to be tied to Christ. Wright is "good Kirk" and Wilson is "bad Kirk" from that classic Star Trek episode.
This has always been an issue in the church, people wanting to follow after the popular teacher(s). It must be guarded against, but at the same time Paul also tells the church in Corith to "follow me as I follow Christ." I think the lesson here is to follow Godly men, but constantly check what they teach against the authority of scripture, and to be willing to turn left when scripture says turn left, even if the Godly man says turn right.
I think it’s clear that both sides are necessary, as they are not opposed to each other. I’m a member in the CREC who appreciates a lot of what Wilson does, but also appreciates Wright and the scholarly side of things. Good take here Keith.
NT Is RC . Why would you not see that fact as enough to stay away from his teachings? The devil knows the Bible better than any of us. Would I want to do a Bible study with him???
@@mariosangermano You can disagree with someone and still appreciate them or think their approach is better. Catholics are Christians, they hold to the fundamentals of the faith, I just have a lot of issues with them theologically. I also am a provisionist, not a Calvinist, does this mean I should avoid @ConversationswithaCalvinist because we disagree on things that aren't fundamental?
@HistoryNerd808 I know NT isn't roman catholic but I had to question your comment saying they hold to the fundamentals of the faith. Have you ever read the council of Trent where they pronounce anathema to those who hold to justification by faith alone? That is not a slight disagreement. They teach a different gospel..
A fair amount of both these brothers ministries resonate with me, I believe we are blessed to have such men in the body of Christ…I am draw to Wilson as I want the world to be more black and white and I think this is the attractiveness for younger men, we need strong leadership and much of what Wilson represents depicts this. However NT Wright I become more drawn to when I need a pastoral heart…when life isn’t black or white and we fail, we need that redemptive love. For the broken in our church’s who hear the Shepard’s voice I think they resonate more with Wright, the divorced, the widows, the weak men, the recovering alcoholic, broken lives need sometimes need the “man up” message alongside a compassionate patient kind congregational love which reflects Gods nature. Personally I think its win win if we can incorporate more of both mens theology into our Church’s and not exclude those of remain firmly in only one camp. As long as its is a non salvational issue we should work towards keeping unity within the Church…even though it does my head in and raises my blood pressure…
Yes, I think your comparison is valid. However, I don’t know if I really see it trending one way or the other. Christianity is very diverse and we tend to express our faith through a variety of specific styles which reflects the wide spectrum of our differences. I will say that there can be a natural pendulum effect. As one side becomes more dominant, it agitates those who are inclined to the other side to rise up in their own convictions. Oh snap! I think I’m probably sounding more like an N.T. Wright guy at this point… 😅
Thank you for this video! The “two ditches” analogy is so true…and applies to every area of the Christian life…and we all need to understand that the extremes are both wrong.
Both men have good ideas. Where we run into trouble is when we get into "camps"; following a man instead of Christ. "I am of Paul, I am of Apollos"....it's not a new problem. Let us provoke one another to love and good works. Thanks for this reasoned essay.
Honestly been a Christian most my life and just learned of these men recently. I am come from a different breed of Christianity (if you will) . The punk rockers , metal heads for Christ sorta background. The shaking my head at doctrinal divisions and denominational bickering on secondary issues while missing Christ altogether. The tribalism in Christianity is something Paul said we shouldn't have. The modern day version of " I follow Apollos or I follow Peter or Paul" schisms. I personally dont care who you follow as long as you follow The Creed of Trinity , Divinity in Christ, Christ physical death and Resurrection , and Biblical theology that is closest to the Apostles. Look at different teachers , from Early Church Fathers like Ignatius and Polycarp to Luther and Calvin. Take what they say and back them against Scripture. Everything is nuanced yet Everything has a landing platform to which we stand on stance. Christianity has lines. Those lines are Scripture. We abandon Scripture we abadon God. So in a nutshell to sum up my ramble. Christianity isn't about anything but Christ at the end of the day. I listen to a preacher but never think they are the end all to those who came before. Unity in essentials. Liberty in secondary and Charity in all. Rambling over. 😂
I think your analysis is spot on! Not to mention it was a good reminder that we are all brothers, no matter which theological camp we find ourselves in.
Very well said. Especially how you explained that these men are not the ditches, but that there are ditches if you travel too far past them. I definitely lean towards Douglas Wilson personally. Even as a Baptist myself.
In Aaron Renn's model, being a more nuanced Christian in a positive or neutral world is a viable strategy. However, what happens when you live in a negative world hostile to the gospel? Being more nuanced in the world we live in now is often counterproductive. In a negative world, one needs to speak the truth with clarity, often direct, poignant, and with boldness. This frequently comes off as offensive to the modern culture and is something that the nuanced Christian is very uncomfortable with.
The Covenant renewal worship that you will find more likely in the Wilson camp is glorious! Even my little ones know and follow along in our worship service. It's simple and extremely powerful at the same time. Our family is blessed by the Lord's day worship every Sunday!
I appreciate this perspective. I find Wright to be very helpful on a lot of things, although he does tend to over-qualifiy things in my view. I don't know much about Wilson, not being a calvinist myself. But the people i know well who do like Wilson tend to be the kind of extreme people you talked about. My experience with Wilson fans can be summed up by a direct quote from one regarding his neighbor who is an unbeliever and raising her children by herself: "I don't go out of my way to be mean to her." Why on earth would a follower of Christ even consider being rude to someone in desperate need of Christ? My experience has been that the Wilson culture promotes this kind of smug self-righteousness and superiority complex. Thats not to say Wilson himself promotes it. I don't follow his work at all. This is just my experience, so I've always associated him with that sense.
In my opinion, this analysis is spot on. I believe social media encourages much of the tribalism or "ditches" in Christianity today, and we've been conditioned to think we can draw meaningful conclusions about other perspectives by just consuming sound bites.
I don’t think this is a modern trend; I think it’s a problem that has plagued the church from the beginning. The Bible is clear and understandable….our privilege and responsibility is to teach and proclaim its truths. You’re right when you say it’s easy to fall into a ditch, and be harsh in that proclamation. But I don’t think this is our main problem. The other side, the other ditch is the problem…the mushy, virtue signaling, worldly side. This is the easy place to go. This side gets you likes and interviews. This tendency towards being “agreeable” has always been around, and many are drawn to it. It’s a side more suited to the broad road than the narrow one, as another has said here.
I come from the cerebral side, but when I look for a church in my local area, I want to know what they are doing that I can help with to feed and clothe the local poor, especially the widows and orphans. If they are not doing that I'm not sure their heart is in the right place. Foreign missions are fine if you've already taken care of the needs in your local area and still have a surplus to share, and it's not just a summer camp for bougie teens.
Setting stuff on fire, physically or metaphorically has its appeal, but remember Wright and Keller did what evangelicals (in general) said could not be done, or were afraid to do. While mainstream Evangelicalism was building mega churches in middle class suburbs, they built theologically conservative churches in secular, liberal, pluralistic environments. That should cause some reflection on what it means to be effective in a fallen world.
Funny, where I live 0.1% of people are church goers, and very few Christians. Now THAT'S a problem !! These small theological issues can only become important in places where there is a Christian culture. We need to spread the gospel.
Tribalism has almost completely taken over in American politics. My observations of American evangelicals make me very uneasy that the pursuit of political power is replacing the worship of God. If that's the case, then the divisions you see in church thought are simply the result of people following the teaching of their god.
When Machiavelli wrote “The Prince,” he said it is best to be loved and feared. God is the only being able to do this perfectly, but why do we have to choose? The US Army had both Eisenhower and Patton. The US Navy had both Spruance and Halsey. We need both.
As an Anglican who was influenced in part by NT Wright’s writings in my journey towards Anglicanism I would nowadays lean more towards Doug Wilson in many respects (but not all)
You are spot on that Wilson emphasizes what we should be doing as Christians. Unfortunately, it's very unhealthy for the church. I've been to CREC churches on opposite ends of the country and seen a pattern. Jesus says the entire old testament is about him, but that denomination tells Jesus to take a backseat so we can use the old testament for moralism. One pastor straight up said in Sunday school class that the denominational view is the Bible is about us. He said we want to avoid focusing too much on Jesus because that can be a "distraction." No joke. His words. But dude, Wright is a straight up heretic. New Perspectives is saying you have to work for your salvation. He might have helpful insights into other books of the Bible like the gospels, but he gets a very basic and key part wrong of what the gospel message actually is. So I would go neither of these ways.
Love the new studio look! Also, thanks for bringing a realistic look at how to see our fellow christians. We tend to forget that God is the final judge and not us.
Funny enough, I am closer to the NT Wright than Wilson. However, almost all the people I choose to associate with are more in the Wilson camp. My church is more conservative than me and this was no accident. Its super helpful to be consistently challenged by those kind of men while also having great influence in my personal life from the often more intellectually rigorous and winsome side of the likes of Gavin Ortlund, Keller, etc.
My view, using your analogy, is that both sides are still on the road, some of their number teetering on the edge of the ditches you described, but rather than pulling their members back from the edge of the ditch they are both busy digging a new ditch down the middle of the road. This won't end well if we can't refocus on where the danger lies.
I think it is always good to question and look at where the church is in culture. It makes us examine ourselves and our beliefs. If course we need to do this through scripture.
Both Wilson and Wright are shaky on one or more of the reformation solas. Both also lean hard into culture-making and have a maximal view of the church's mission. So putting them on a spectrum makes sense, I think. But then for all of us who hold tight to the solas and have a narrow view of the church's mission, we might need a couple of different folks to give us our spectrum. But who would they be? Anyway, I appreciate your nuanced and manly analysis!
I think this is a good analysis and I think there is great value to both. We need the scholarly chops of Wright and the fighting spirit of Wilson to have a healthy church. I pray these two wings will be driven together work together in the face of our enemies, but I worry that will not be the case.
As a PCA member, I can see how the Sproul/Keller question can give some insight. My answer is Sproul and while I can’t speak for my pastor, I confidently believe he would say Sproul as well.
I don’t know where I would fall as a Lutheran. However, there is a line between the Missouri Synod and ELCA. ELCA is on the left side of that line. The Missouri Synod is center right of the line.
From a practical perspective, NOT theological, the churches I see as having longevity are Catholic and Mormon; they are male friendly, focus on building families, have church governance and authority, and have strong organization and infrastructure. The Moscow church gets these right, but also has Protestant theology.
I'll be honest, I'm not super familiar with either but, despire me being a young man(28, with a beard lol), I think I prefer Wright based on your summary. I think a big problem today is that the Church has become political. Not saying Wilson is(again, not super familiar with him) but it feels like a lot of people want to twist scripture to fit their preconceived political opinions on both sides of the issue, and try to say that scripture says things it doesn't(example for me is people trying to use Luke 22:36 or Isaiah 2:4 to support their particular view on gun control.) I'm also admittedly much more cerebral and less of a culture warrior. I still believe a lot of those things but I think the "burn it all down" approach is unhelpful and just pushes winnable people away.
Wright, to my understanding (second hand), went heretical- the same direction, oddly enough, as many FV people did. Wilson seems to have stayed away from heresy, even if he has some problems. The CREC... has got some real issues inside it (the one I attended for a while turned out to hold to baptismal regeneration of a sort). Generally, though, I find Wilson a much better direction than Wright. Much less compromise with secularism. The danger of Tate-style issues is nevertheless real.
Mentioning two big names and a little bit of controversy will surely get you a lot more views. Instead of pleasing the god algorithm, how about you stick to teaching amillennialism and good reformed doctrine on which you are one of the best at. Let the channel grow by it self organically while you concentrate on the things that really matter. Be blessed my brother!
I am LCMS, and I would go to Doug Wilson's church if I lived within 30 minutes of it. I agree with most of the LCMS teaching (Baptismal Regeneration, Liturgical Practices, True Body and Blood of Christ, etc), but I am increasingly more and more turned off by the growing Quietism. I see it as a surrender, and the Pastors pushing as being tone deaf in the face of very real evil in society. I see it as an abandonment of the flock to those who would persecute us. I am also disturbed by the fact that in document on racism I read on the official website, it seems to imply what Voddie Baucham called "Ethnic Gnosticism". It also implies culture is somehow a racial trait. They want to excommunicate people for racism, but how can you be racist if there is only one race, and our denomination acknowledges that? There is just so much confusion in the people publishing stuff in the LCMS and in our leadership. The direction genuinely makes me nervous.
Be a community of light in all the local areas through love and good works, giving glory to God. Then things will change without a single act of law, because people will be drawn to the gospel and will themselves change. But give in to the temptation for power in this age, attempting to restrict others through the levers of law, and people will resist vehemently. They will resist the specific as well as the gospel. First things first. Be the gospel. Save lives. Do not become a stumbling block.
i like your video. I,m older than you and have been through a lot of "christianity" good and not so good. Keller and Sproul not too sure about either one as far as accuracy but then again neither am I always, if the truth be told, and it should. as to the first two guys I can,t speak to but agree with the analysis of them as far as content. I see a disparaging there. I think you are on to something. Thx
Fair assessment. Although, I think the ditch on the Wright side is a bit bigger and it’s a more slippery slope. God calls us to be men and act like men, and seems to be more black and white than nuanced (i.e. 1 John). Not to mention being doers of the word and not hearers only.
Both Wilson and Wright have influenced a lot of Christians. What may be even more revealing would be knowing what writers/preachers have significantly influenced Wilson and Wright.
I wonder if the pattern you are describing is the pattern I see. Too many people love God with only their whole heart or only their whole mind. Thankfully God is working to bring us to fuller maturity to love Him with our whole heart, soul, and mind (deut 30).
I like your content. Keep it up. I think you're right. It's often said these days that we've transitioned from a neutral culture in it's posture toward Christianity to a hostile culture. It's usually made by folks in the "Doug Wilson" camp. It's strange to me that those most likely to see themselves in the midst of a brutal culture war are also those most likely to shoot their fellow evangelicals. Usually friendly fire is a problem on a battlefield. Could evangelicals please have conversation and debate about difficult topics without using words like wolf and hireling? It's getting frustrating.
Funny when you gave the Sproul Keller analogy my mind went right into one direction and I knew exactly what you meant. Btw, Sproul didn’t go wokish and team up with the left on a way forward for the church. Just sayin
(Oops…I commented before I heard you talk about the ditches, but I still place these men in them) If there is any comfort I take in my life besides by salvation, it is that I place Doug Wilson and NT Wright squarely in the ditches to the right and left of my Christian walk. I have no time for men who’ve attracted cult following with their “new thing” (federal vision/new perspective on Paul). If I want a new thing, I’ll listen to Enuf Z’nuf
I think you forgot two other streams and thus two other dudes: 1. Billy Graham. 2. John Hagee. Both seriously influenced christianity. Especially John Hagee. His antics led to the modern charismatication of the church.
I look at it this way Pastor. One side seems to be using “nuance” to find acceptance with our current cultural system. Whether it’s an academic pedigree as long as a line at a In-N-Out grand opening, having a Semper Blandus (Always Winsome) attitude, using vague language that can appease both sides as needed, or by prodding slowly towards leftist cultural norms, their seems to be a consistent trend. A trend the church has seen before, and not a long time ago. J Gresham Machen fought a very similar battle only a century earlier. Remember, he was not well liked by his contemporaries much in the same way DW is. Meanwhile the Moscow mood seems to be the counter cultural move of Christian men who have seen what this modern world is and reject it out right. Considering the extreme nonsense our current pop culture is providing, I earnestly would have a hard time understanding why the Doug Wilson’s and Jeff Durbins of the world are so hated by the church, but then remember that was Athanasius. Nothing new. On a personal note, the reason I will personally never adhere to the Semper Blandus crowd (as I have started calling them) is, as a professional soldier with multiple tours of combat, there is nothing winsome about taking another man’s life. Yet, time and time again in Holy Scripture we see godly men do exactly that. I cannot buy into the false notion that Jesus is always nice, and expects his believers to always be nice. After all, “Jesus was a JTAC.” (Genesis 19:24) On a separate note, I’m still waiting to see a Denominations go to the Gym episode. lol SDG
You have your thumb on something real here, but I think what you are seeing is a broader trend in American culture and this divide you noticed is how this trend expresses itself if n evangelicalism. America is obsessed with the culture war. Everyone one knows which side they’re on even if they don’t like participating. The problem with the culture war is it takes serious issues and reduces them to their usefulness in the Twitter spats. People don’t take serious long looks at issues or consult with wiser more experienced brothers. They pick up the nearest weapon to hand just long enough to hit the other guy over the head. No room for deep study, or admitting the other side might have a point here or there. Same thing is happening here. The Wright group see a complementarian pastor fall and they jump to Twitter with glee to act like they won some argument. The Wilson crowd find some video of some freaky drag show liturgy and do the same thing. My advice: delete social media, stop watching cable news and get plugged in somewhere you can be useful. Don’t shy away from your convictions. Just share them with some brothers over a table. Suddenly Wilson and wright will seem much less important than the people around you.
I'm not familiar with these men though perhaps I have seen their fruits. From your description, I'm not sure which camp I'm in. I may have pitched my tent in the middle. Not the worst place to be I guess.
Usually the nuanced crowd sees 3 categories, while the bible teaches theres only 2. You or either for or against Christ. The neutral middle category like the nuanced think exists is against. As a result of this the nuanced sees no harm in accepting wisdom from the neutral side, forfeiting alot of scriptural wisdom.
I'm sorry, but I don't see where all the confusion over where men's roles are. As a Christian, my behavior as a man is simple - as a husband, I am to love my wife as Christ loved the church. I don't have to act like a chest-thumbing silverback gorilla to be a man, I look towards Christ's behavior as the model for how we, as Christians, should behave. I think we, as Christians, have over analysed what it means to be a Christian, and we end up (falsely) using a misread of the gospels to justify our preferred political position. In Christ, there is no 'left' or 'right', no progressive or conservative - Jesus gave us pretty clear instructions on how we are meant to live our lives.
Good way to make people think. I couldn’t follow either of these men due to errors they hid, to and teach, but I recognize the attraction to both on the Christian community. Now pushing 70 I have lived long enough for to recognize that tribalism is dangerous and invariably gets drawn towards this world and trying to bring heaven to earth. Instead, I want to seek that city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God. This world is passing away. Yes, o care about thee culture but I know that the onky hope is the gospel. I’m more concerned about the danger that both these men represent to the gospel.
There is nothing beneficial about Wright. He believes penal substitionary atonement is pagan theology, theistic evolution, and the gospel that Paul preached is not the same as in the four gospels.
Not sure that it is a pertinent comparaison.... Wilson/Keller would be a better one because they ask the same sorts of questions. Also the problem is that you compare an American.... Presbyterian? With an English Anglican. Don't confuse American Christianity with European Christianity. For example, as a French Christian, Doug Wilson just appears to me as a parody of what happen when you confuse christianism and "the American way of life".
In some ways I think we are to hot and cold at the same time, to be that refreshmrnt that is Christ to all we come accross. Beyond the ditches there is also the refusal to press forward, to be tipid or lukewarm as it were in our faith. There likely is also a bad to desire to plow forward to fast, ala trying to predict the last day accurately. We must be lead on all sides by the scriptures through the Spirit.
The OPC in its report on justification, some years back, condemned both NT Wright (New perspective on Paul) and D Wilson (FV) as heterodox particularly on the subject of justification. I’m no longer attending an OPC, but even back then Kellor made us uneasy and that was before he came out of the woke closet.
Doug Wilson for the win! For me it boils down to building strong families with faithful children, strong, vibrant, churches, rejecting clown,-world culture, homeschooling, and taking a stand against the culture of death. Also not bowing to government tyranny.
Brother, thank you for the breath of fresh air. It’s been something that my pastors and I have been talking about a lot lately. There seems to be so much tribalism in the church following certain leaders in all things and rejecting anyone who disagrees with you. Rather, we can benefit from many leaders while also have healthy disagreements. I appreciate the tone and spirit of this video. Thank you!
Yes. It’s a lot like Paul’s discourse to the Corinthians about some being of Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas. And he says, “whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future-all are yours..” (1 Co 3:22).
I think, though, If someone is in fact a heretic or at least progressively heading towards heresy, they obviously would not be included in that verse. But should be marked and avoided. Ya know, the good kind of division.
Totally agree. I'm a baptist, pre-millennial Master's Seminary guy, but my family has been greatly blessed by Wilson and the rest of the Moscow/Canon crew despite having profound theological differences with them. I believe being able to learn from those with whom you disagree with is a mark of maturity.
I guess I'm with Wilson because, as a man, It's been a long slog trying to figure out even the simplest aspects of what it actually means to be a biblical man in practical, daily life (roles, duties, how to grow as a man and a husband).
I may not always agree with Doug Wilson, but he actually gives some guidance in a thoughtful, biblical, even fatherly way. I'm sick to death of the "nuanced" stuff, because to me it comes across as intentionally vague to the point of being unhelpful, ivory-towerish instead of practical, and often needlessly complicated for the sake of seeming intellectual. It comes across as the kind of thing grad students study to keep them out of the real world a few years longer. (No offense to grad students, not saying all of y'all are like that!)
Maybe I'm being unfair, but that's my take.
I agree with you. There's a lot to learn from him.
I have several friends in seminary where they have to read NT Wright, and your descriptions of his work is exactly how they describe it.
I like and appreciate them both, but yeah, some times Tom comes off as a little Faustian while Doug is consistently driving home the truth, loudly, and clarifies what we are to do with said truth.
I work for a recovery ministry in a small town. After a person graduates the 1 year program, we offer supportive housing. If they do well, we offer the opportunity to buy a home in the community. That's how we are building the church in this town. 🙏
Theres only one correct path, and it is straight and narrow!
Soli Deo Gloria!
Indeed, no question there bro!
@@ConversationswithaCalvinist 👍
I think for myself the NT Write/Keller nuanced approach was very helpful going through University in a very agnostic country (and left leaning region of said country). It helped me respond to challenges in a thoughtful and effective way and that really boosted my confidence. The stuff those guys went through allowed you to say "hey there is a Christian solution to that problem, let me tell you more". But I am aware that this was a very intellectual environment in which engaging in ideas was the thing we all loved and when I was not talking to academy-bros I noticed that I found myself flat footed in conversations, a bit of Doug and Co combative training would have helped. Both are helpful, but both need to some how unite. and THAT is the hard bit and we will need the Lord for it.
As an older woman I love masculinity & a good old-fashioned protector/provider type of man. Someone who can take care of me under even the worst of circumstances. But I also want him to be a strong man of God who has wisdom & grace. Don't get me wrong, these men can be hard to find these days, but I do believe they are still out there. Fortunately, I married just such a man & I've never regretted my decision.
I like the taking action and the "get to building" mentality that I've seen from Wilson and others, it gives me a lot of encouragement to keep working on my art to the glory of God!
Keith, I think you are being reasonable. The RC vs. Keller question is a good one. My experience in the PCA is as long as I am speaking about or teaching academic theology (I have a degree in theology) and I stay in the conceptual realm, no one has an issue with core historic Reformed doctrine, Westminster theology, historical Puritianism or Presbyterian theology. As soon as I apply the theology to contemporary issues, the skubala hits the oscillator.
For the algorithm!
You are a hero without a cape, my man!
That quote about Sproul and Keller is so true. The PCA church near me who is big into Keller recently hired a new pastor who basically affirms "gay Christianity." They've become even worse on certain issues than the PCUSA church in my area (they're more "conservative" for the denomination). The polarization is also very real among zoomers, most the people you meet are either very left-wing or very right-wing. I definitely encourage people to move more to the right though, towards conservative Christianity.
How does he affirm "gay Christianity?" If he did he would be kicked out of the PCA
I suspect he means a "Side B" celibate gay Christian kind of idea (Revoice style)
@@stefanwalicord2512 ah. That's too bad that this is seen as a huge division. As long as we see it as sin, our exact approach for helping those in need will sometimes differ
You have definitely touched on something here. One thought that comes to mind was something I learned during my days in Big Eva youth ministry- “your students will act like an unedited version of yourself.” It’s interesting because I often think I could have a productive discussion with Doug Wilson on some areas of “nuance”, but I don’t feel the same way about many of his devotees. Likewise for many practical ministry scenarios with NT Wright and his fans.
Thanks for reminding me that there are good Christians on the “other side”. I lean more towards Wilson, but I am glad to hear you see faithful guys in the other direction too. Very easy for me to forget!
One thing I've been noticing about both sides of the divide is a commitment to too much intellectualism in the faith. The scholarly side definitely makes mountains out of molehills and quibbles on words. Whereas there is an emphasis on practical living on the Doug Wilson side, there is a lack in those circles to personal piety and communion with God. Where the intellectualism comes in is here is the postmillenialism and a romanticize view of church history. It can be less of a commitment to how they interpret Scripture and more of a picture in the mind to muse about "if I was in office I'd do this" or "what do you think about this issue in the past?" I think this is mostly because on the Internet we have access to so much information we can get too intellectual and even argue with one another over issues that have no bearing on our lives.
Wilson represents confidence. Wright represents humility.
Confidence in Christ empowers you to do the unpopular thing, to follow the Lord when culture is arrayed against you. When that confidence slips away from being founded on the rock, it turns into pride.
Humility rooted in an understanding of Christ gives you the ability to open your mind and step past your selfishness to love God and love others more completely. Humility unmoored from Christ becomes a particularly fetid combination of cowardice and your mind being so open your brain falls out.
We need both, but we need them to be tied to Christ. Wright is "good Kirk" and Wilson is "bad Kirk" from that classic Star Trek episode.
Or, Wilson is Kirk’s management style and Wright is Picard’s management style 😂
Thumbs up for the Star Trek reference
"One of you says 'I am with Paul' another 'I with Apollos,' 'I with Cephas,' another, 'I with Christ.' Is Christ divided?"
This has always been an issue in the church, people wanting to follow after the popular teacher(s). It must be guarded against, but at the same time Paul also tells the church in Corith to "follow me as I follow Christ." I think the lesson here is to follow Godly men, but constantly check what they teach against the authority of scripture, and to be willing to turn left when scripture says turn left, even if the Godly man says turn right.
@@clausewitz41_plus_1 spot on
I think it’s clear that both sides are necessary, as they are not opposed to each other. I’m a member in the CREC who appreciates a lot of what Wilson does, but also appreciates Wright and the scholarly side of things. Good take here Keith.
Good thoughts, thanks for watching!
NT Is RC . Why would you not see that fact as enough to stay away from his teachings? The devil knows the Bible better than any of us. Would I want to do a Bible study with him???
@@mariosangermano You can disagree with someone and still appreciate them or think their approach is better. Catholics are Christians, they hold to the fundamentals of the faith, I just have a lot of issues with them theologically. I also am a provisionist, not a Calvinist, does this mean I should avoid @ConversationswithaCalvinist because we disagree on things that aren't fundamental?
@@mariosangermano Wright isn't Romam Catholic. He is Anglican.
@HistoryNerd808 I know NT isn't roman catholic but I had to question your comment saying they hold to the fundamentals of the faith. Have you ever read the council of Trent where they pronounce anathema to those who hold to justification by faith alone? That is not a slight disagreement. They teach a different gospel..
A fair amount of both these brothers ministries resonate with me, I believe we are blessed to have such men in the body of Christ…I am draw to Wilson as I want the world to be more black and white and I think this is the attractiveness for younger men, we need strong leadership and much of what Wilson represents depicts this. However NT Wright I become more drawn to when I need a pastoral heart…when life isn’t black or white and we fail, we need that redemptive love. For the broken in our church’s who hear the Shepard’s voice I think they resonate more with Wright, the divorced, the widows, the weak men, the recovering alcoholic, broken lives need sometimes need the “man up” message alongside a compassionate patient kind congregational love which reflects Gods nature. Personally I think its win win if we can incorporate more of both mens theology into our Church’s and not exclude those of remain firmly in only one camp. As long as its is a non salvational issue we should work towards keeping unity within the Church…even though it does my head in and raises my blood pressure…
Yes, I think your comparison is valid. However, I don’t know if I really see it trending one way or the other. Christianity is very diverse and we tend to express our faith through a variety of specific styles which reflects the wide spectrum of our differences. I will say that there can be a natural pendulum effect. As one side becomes more dominant, it agitates those who are inclined to the other side to rise up in their own convictions. Oh snap! I think I’m probably sounding more like an N.T. Wright guy at this point… 😅
Thank you for this video! The “two ditches” analogy is so true…and applies to every area of the Christian life…and we all need to understand that the extremes are both wrong.
New channel follower here and loving your content sir!
Not familiar with Wright, but a phrase like, "new thoughts on Paul," makes me think, "Probably not..." for what it's worth.
Ps. I do think if more men listened to Wilson we'd have fewer 'Andrew Tates' in this world.
I’d check out what Wright believes on evolution and the new perspective on Paul. I don’t think he matches up to what the Bible teaches
@@danielwarton5343 ...then my "probably" would become a "definitely not." :)
Both men have good ideas. Where we run into trouble is when we get into "camps"; following a man instead of Christ. "I am of Paul, I am of Apollos"....it's not a new problem. Let us provoke one another to love and good works. Thanks for this reasoned essay.
Honestly been a Christian most my life and just learned of these men recently. I am come from a different breed of Christianity (if you will) . The punk rockers , metal heads for Christ sorta background. The shaking my head at doctrinal divisions and denominational bickering on secondary issues while missing Christ altogether. The tribalism in Christianity is something Paul said we shouldn't have. The modern day version of " I follow Apollos or I follow Peter or Paul" schisms. I personally dont care who you follow as long as you follow The Creed of Trinity , Divinity in Christ, Christ physical death and Resurrection , and Biblical theology that is closest to the Apostles. Look at different teachers , from Early Church Fathers like Ignatius and Polycarp to Luther and Calvin. Take what they say and back them against Scripture. Everything is nuanced yet Everything has a landing platform to which we stand on stance. Christianity has lines. Those lines are Scripture. We abandon Scripture we abadon God. So in a nutshell to sum up my ramble. Christianity isn't about anything but Christ at the end of the day. I listen to a preacher but never think they are the end all to those who came before. Unity in essentials. Liberty in secondary and Charity in all. Rambling over. 😂
I think your analysis is spot on! Not to mention it was a good reminder that we are all brothers, no matter which theological camp we find ourselves in.
Very well said. Especially how you explained that these men are not the ditches, but that there are ditches if you travel too far past them. I definitely lean towards Douglas Wilson personally. Even as a Baptist myself.
100% agree…
Couldn’t agree more on two ditches, but culture/gubment keeps filling the ditch with pea gravel, paving over it and calling it road…
In Aaron Renn's model, being a more nuanced Christian in a positive or neutral world is a viable strategy. However, what happens when you live in a negative world hostile to the gospel? Being more nuanced in the world we live in now is often counterproductive. In a negative world, one needs to speak the truth with clarity, often direct, poignant, and with boldness. This frequently comes off as offensive to the modern culture and is something that the nuanced Christian is very uncomfortable with.
The Covenant renewal worship that you will find more likely in the Wilson camp is glorious! Even my little ones know and follow along in our worship service. It's simple and extremely powerful at the same time. Our family is blessed by the Lord's day worship every Sunday!
I appreciate this perspective. I find Wright to be very helpful on a lot of things, although he does tend to over-qualifiy things in my view. I don't know much about Wilson, not being a calvinist myself. But the people i know well who do like Wilson tend to be the kind of extreme people you talked about. My experience with Wilson fans can be summed up by a direct quote from one regarding his neighbor who is an unbeliever and raising her children by herself: "I don't go out of my way to be mean to her." Why on earth would a follower of Christ even consider being rude to someone in desperate need of Christ? My experience has been that the Wilson culture promotes this kind of smug self-righteousness and superiority complex.
Thats not to say Wilson himself promotes it. I don't follow his work at all. This is just my experience, so I've always associated him with that sense.
Wow, you articulated what I have been thinking for a while. Nice to see. I am not the only one who has noticed.
In my opinion, this analysis is spot on. I believe social media encourages much of the tribalism or "ditches" in Christianity today, and we've been conditioned to think we can draw meaningful conclusions about other perspectives by just consuming sound bites.
I don’t think this is a modern trend; I think it’s a problem that has plagued the church from the beginning. The Bible is clear and understandable….our privilege and responsibility is to teach and proclaim its truths. You’re right when you say it’s easy to fall into a ditch, and be harsh in that proclamation. But I don’t think this is our main problem. The other side, the other ditch is the problem…the mushy, virtue signaling, worldly side. This is the easy place to go. This side gets you likes and interviews. This tendency towards being “agreeable” has always been around, and many are drawn to it. It’s a side more suited to the broad road than the narrow one, as another has said here.
Thank you Keith. You have a calming affect on the rhetoric out there.
I come from the cerebral side, but when I look for a church in my local area, I want to know what they are doing that I can help with to feed and clothe the local poor, especially the widows and orphans. If they are not doing that I'm not sure their heart is in the right place.
Foreign missions are fine if you've already taken care of the needs in your local area and still have a surplus to share, and it's not just a summer camp for bougie teens.
My Church isn't a Presbyterian Church, but my Pastor most certainly prefers Keller to Sproul. I wish there was a more solid Church in my area.
Funny enough Sproul and Keller were great friends! Sproul even did Keller's wedding and taught him at Ligonier in PA!
One of our pastors cried on stage when Keller died. We don't go there anymore.
Setting stuff on fire, physically or metaphorically has its appeal, but remember Wright and Keller did what evangelicals (in general) said could not be done, or were afraid to do. While mainstream Evangelicalism was building mega churches in middle class suburbs, they built theologically conservative churches in secular, liberal, pluralistic environments. That should cause some reflection on what it means to be effective in a fallen world.
Funny, where I live 0.1% of people are church goers, and very few Christians. Now THAT'S a problem !!
These small theological issues can only become important in places where there is a Christian culture.
We need to spread the gospel.
Tribalism has almost completely taken over in American politics. My observations of American evangelicals make me very uneasy that the pursuit of political power is replacing the worship of God. If that's the case, then the divisions you see in church thought are simply the result of people following the teaching of their god.
When Machiavelli wrote “The Prince,” he said it is best to be loved and feared. God is the only being able to do this perfectly, but why do we have to choose? The US Army had both Eisenhower and Patton. The US Navy had both Spruance and Halsey. We need both.
As an Anglican who was influenced in part by NT Wright’s writings in my journey towards Anglicanism I would nowadays lean more towards Doug Wilson in many respects (but not all)
You’re on to something pastor Kieth
This was an excellent fly over of masculinity in Christianity today! Well done Brother!
You are spot on that Wilson emphasizes what we should be doing as Christians. Unfortunately, it's very unhealthy for the church. I've been to CREC churches on opposite ends of the country and seen a pattern. Jesus says the entire old testament is about him, but that denomination tells Jesus to take a backseat so we can use the old testament for moralism. One pastor straight up said in Sunday school class that the denominational view is the Bible is about us. He said we want to avoid focusing too much on Jesus because that can be a "distraction." No joke. His words.
But dude, Wright is a straight up heretic. New Perspectives is saying you have to work for your salvation. He might have helpful insights into other books of the Bible like the gospels, but he gets a very basic and key part wrong of what the gospel message actually is.
So I would go neither of these ways.
I appreciate what each man teaches. I find it hard to determine where I land. I do like Bishop Wright's thoughtful views on the Bible.
Love the new studio look! Also, thanks for bringing a realistic look at how to see our fellow christians. We tend to forget that God is the final judge and not us.
Funny enough, I am closer to the NT Wright than Wilson. However, almost all the people I choose to associate with are more in the Wilson camp. My church is more conservative than me and this was no accident. Its super helpful to be consistently challenged by those kind of men while also having great influence in my personal life from the often more intellectually rigorous and winsome side of the likes of Gavin Ortlund, Keller, etc.
My view, using your analogy, is that both sides are still on the road, some of their number teetering on the edge of the ditches you described, but rather than pulling their members back from the edge of the ditch they are both busy digging a new ditch down the middle of the road.
This won't end well if we can't refocus on where the danger lies.
I think you’re spot on.
I think it is always good to question and look at where the church is in culture. It makes us examine ourselves and our beliefs. If course we need to do this through scripture.
NT Wright professing to be wise has become a fool and led many off the egalitarian cliff.
He's also a RC !! That alone is enough to avoid him.
@@mariosangermanoWright is Anglican.
@@mariosangermano He's not Roman Catholic? What?
Both Wilson and Wright are shaky on one or more of the reformation solas. Both also lean hard into culture-making and have a maximal view of the church's mission. So putting them on a spectrum makes sense, I think. But then for all of us who hold tight to the solas and have a narrow view of the church's mission, we might need a couple of different folks to give us our spectrum. But who would they be? Anyway, I appreciate your nuanced and manly analysis!
I think this is a good analysis and I think there is great value to both. We need the scholarly chops of Wright and the fighting spirit of Wilson to have a healthy church. I pray these two wings will be driven together work together in the face of our enemies, but I worry that will not be the case.
As a PCA member, I can see how the Sproul/Keller question can give some insight. My answer is Sproul and while I can’t speak for my pastor, I confidently believe he would say Sproul as well.
I don’t know where I would fall as a Lutheran. However, there is a line between the Missouri Synod and ELCA. ELCA is on the left side of that line. The Missouri Synod is center right of the line.
From a practical perspective, NOT theological, the churches I see as having longevity are Catholic and Mormon; they are male friendly, focus on building families, have church governance and authority, and have strong organization and infrastructure. The Moscow church gets these right, but also has Protestant theology.
I'll be honest, I'm not super familiar with either but, despire me being a young man(28, with a beard lol), I think I prefer Wright based on your summary. I think a big problem today is that the Church has become political. Not saying Wilson is(again, not super familiar with him) but it feels like a lot of people want to twist scripture to fit their preconceived political opinions on both sides of the issue, and try to say that scripture says things it doesn't(example for me is people trying to use Luke 22:36 or Isaiah 2:4 to support their particular view on gun control.) I'm also admittedly much more cerebral and less of a culture warrior. I still believe a lot of those things but I think the "burn it all down" approach is unhelpful and just pushes winnable people away.
My musical preference is Shane and Shane and shanties, I guess I'm healthy!
Huh???????????????????????????? Now we have two more paths? I thought there always was only one path, Go RC!!!
Wright, to my understanding (second hand), went heretical- the same direction, oddly enough, as many FV people did.
Wilson seems to have stayed away from heresy, even if he has some problems. The CREC... has got some real issues inside it (the one I attended for a while turned out to hold to baptismal regeneration of a sort).
Generally, though, I find Wilson a much better direction than Wright. Much less compromise with secularism. The danger of Tate-style issues is nevertheless real.
Pastor Doug Wilson is the man
Which one sells the most flamethrowers? That's the real question.
Mentioning two big names and a little bit of controversy will surely get you a lot more views. Instead of pleasing the god algorithm, how about you stick to teaching amillennialism and good reformed doctrine on which you are one of the best at. Let the channel grow by it self organically while you concentrate on the things that really matter. Be blessed my brother!
I am LCMS, and I would go to Doug Wilson's church if I lived within 30 minutes of it. I agree with most of the LCMS teaching (Baptismal Regeneration, Liturgical Practices, True Body and Blood of Christ, etc), but I am increasingly more and more turned off by the growing Quietism. I see it as a surrender, and the Pastors pushing as being tone deaf in the face of very real evil in society. I see it as an abandonment of the flock to those who would persecute us.
I am also disturbed by the fact that in document on racism I read on the official website, it seems to imply what Voddie Baucham called "Ethnic Gnosticism". It also implies culture is somehow a racial trait. They want to excommunicate people for racism, but how can you be racist if there is only one race, and our denomination acknowledges that? There is just so much confusion in the people publishing stuff in the LCMS and in our leadership. The direction genuinely makes me nervous.
Be a community of light in all the local areas through love and good works, giving glory to God.
Then things will change without a single act of law, because people will be drawn to the gospel and will themselves change.
But give in to the temptation for power in this age, attempting to restrict others through the levers of law, and people will resist vehemently. They will resist the specific as well as the gospel.
First things first. Be the gospel. Save lives. Do not become a stumbling block.
i like your video. I,m older than you and have been through a lot of "christianity" good and not so good. Keller and Sproul not too sure about either one as far as accuracy but then again neither am I always, if the truth be told, and it should. as to the first two guys I can,t speak to but agree with the analysis of them as far as content. I see a disparaging there. I think you are on to something. Thx
I am very concerned about Douglas Wilson on Federal Vision, both men seem to be iffy of justification by faith alone
Fair assessment. Although, I think the ditch on the Wright side is a bit bigger and it’s a more slippery slope. God calls us to be men and act like men, and seems to be more black and white than nuanced (i.e. 1 John). Not to mention being doers of the word and not hearers only.
Both Wilson and Wright have influenced a lot of Christians. What may be even more revealing would be knowing what writers/preachers have significantly influenced Wilson and Wright.
I wonder if the pattern you are describing is the pattern I see. Too many people love God with only their whole heart or only their whole mind. Thankfully God is working to bring us to fuller maturity to love Him with our whole heart, soul, and mind (deut 30).
Spot on analysis!
I like your content. Keep it up. I think you're right. It's often said these days that we've transitioned from a neutral culture in it's posture toward Christianity to a hostile culture. It's usually made by folks in the "Doug Wilson" camp. It's strange to me that those most likely to see themselves in the midst of a brutal culture war are also those most likely to shoot their fellow evangelicals. Usually friendly fire is a problem on a battlefield. Could evangelicals please have conversation and debate about difficult topics without using words like wolf and hireling? It's getting frustrating.
Both serve well forcing us to think about our assumptions. Kind of like this video
Funny when you gave the Sproul Keller analogy my mind went right into one direction and I knew exactly what you meant. Btw, Sproul didn’t go wokish and team up with the left on a way forward for the church. Just sayin
(Oops…I commented before I heard you talk about the ditches, but I still place these men in them)
If there is any comfort I take in my life besides by salvation, it is that I place Doug Wilson and NT Wright squarely in the ditches to the right and left of my Christian walk. I have no time for men who’ve attracted cult following with their “new thing” (federal vision/new perspective on Paul).
If I want a new thing, I’ll listen to Enuf Z’nuf
I think you forgot two other streams and thus two other dudes:
1. Billy Graham.
2. John Hagee.
Both seriously influenced christianity. Especially John Hagee. His antics led to the modern charismatication of the church.
Keller or Sproul? Yes.
I am not familiar with Wilson or Wright
I look at it this way Pastor. One side seems to be using “nuance” to find acceptance with our current cultural system. Whether it’s an academic pedigree as long as a line at a In-N-Out grand opening, having a Semper Blandus (Always Winsome) attitude, using vague language that can appease both sides as needed, or by prodding slowly towards leftist cultural norms, their seems to be a consistent trend. A trend the church has seen before, and not a long time ago. J Gresham Machen fought a very similar battle only a century earlier. Remember, he was not well liked by his contemporaries much in the same way DW is.
Meanwhile the Moscow mood seems to be the counter cultural move of Christian men who have seen what this modern world is and reject it out right. Considering the extreme nonsense our current pop culture is providing, I earnestly would have a hard time understanding why the Doug Wilson’s and Jeff Durbins of the world are so hated by the church, but then remember that was Athanasius. Nothing new.
On a personal note, the reason I will personally never adhere to the Semper Blandus crowd (as I have started calling them) is, as a professional soldier with multiple tours of combat, there is nothing winsome about taking another man’s life.
Yet, time and time again in Holy Scripture we see godly men do exactly that. I cannot buy into the false notion that Jesus is always nice, and expects his believers to always be nice. After all, “Jesus was a JTAC.” (Genesis 19:24)
On a separate note, I’m still waiting to see a Denominations go to the Gym episode. lol
SDG
Thank you
I think I'm more 3rd way: John McCarthur. :)
Amen!
He’s the right guy to listen to. NT Wrong isn’t a good chap to follow
Keith, have you read many books by NT Wright?
You have your thumb on something real here, but I think what you are seeing is a broader trend in American culture and this divide you noticed is how this trend expresses itself if n evangelicalism. America is obsessed with the culture war. Everyone one knows which side they’re on even if they don’t like participating. The problem with the culture war is it takes serious issues and reduces them to their usefulness in the Twitter spats. People don’t take serious long looks at issues or consult with wiser more experienced brothers. They pick up the nearest weapon to hand just long enough to hit the other guy over the head. No room for deep study, or admitting the other side might have a point here or there. Same thing is happening here. The Wright group see a complementarian pastor fall and they jump to Twitter with glee to act like they won some argument. The Wilson crowd find some video of some freaky drag show liturgy and do the same thing. My advice: delete social media, stop watching cable news and get plugged in somewhere you can be useful. Don’t shy away from your convictions. Just share them with some brothers over a table. Suddenly Wilson and wright will seem much less important than the people around you.
I'm not familiar with these men though perhaps I have seen their fruits. From your description, I'm not sure which camp I'm in. I may have pitched my tent in the middle. Not the worst place to be I guess.
❤
Instructions unclear. I hit the subsribe button twice. But I was subscribed before I did it.
Usually the nuanced crowd sees 3 categories, while the bible teaches theres only 2. You or either for or against Christ. The neutral middle category like the nuanced think exists is against. As a result of this the nuanced sees no harm in accepting wisdom from the neutral side, forfeiting alot of scriptural wisdom.
I'm sorry, but I don't see where all the confusion over where men's roles are. As a Christian, my behavior as a man is simple - as a husband, I am to love my wife as Christ loved the church. I don't have to act like a chest-thumbing silverback gorilla to be a man, I look towards Christ's behavior as the model for how we, as Christians, should behave. I think we, as Christians, have over analysed what it means to be a Christian, and we end up (falsely) using a misread of the gospels to justify our preferred political position. In Christ, there is no 'left' or 'right', no progressive or conservative - Jesus gave us pretty clear instructions on how we are meant to live our lives.
Maybe a balanced mixture of both. I will throw a wrench in now, they keep the 7 Day Sabbath as did Christ.
Good way to make people think. I couldn’t follow either of these men due to errors they hid, to and teach, but I recognize the attraction to both on the Christian community. Now pushing 70 I have lived long enough for to recognize that tribalism is dangerous and invariably gets drawn towards this world and trying to bring heaven to earth. Instead, I want to seek that city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God. This world is passing away. Yes, o care about thee culture but I know that the onky hope is the gospel. I’m more concerned about the danger that both these men represent to the gospel.
Living out your faith is a testimony to your belief.
Talking about it is an embarrassment. You should be able to tell the difference 😐
There is nothing beneficial about Wright. He believes penal substitionary atonement is pagan theology, theistic evolution, and the gospel that Paul preached is not the same as in the four gospels.
One of the most offensive things in this video is the use of Papyrus in the Shechem logo.
Moscow Mood has been encouraging and a missing aspect of what is lacking in winsome, limp wristed, Jesus is my boyfriend type Christianity.
@@philipmurray9796 If only he didn’t teach heresy …
@@toddstevens9667 yawn 🥱
Team Wilson
Not sure that it is a pertinent comparaison.... Wilson/Keller would be a better one because they ask the same sorts of questions.
Also the problem is that you compare an American.... Presbyterian?
With an English Anglican.
Don't confuse American Christianity with European Christianity.
For example, as a French Christian, Doug Wilson just appears to me as a parody of what happen when you confuse christianism and "the American way of life".
Bro the music sounds like your about to recommend calvinol.
In some ways I think we are to hot and cold at the same time, to be that refreshmrnt that is Christ to all we come accross. Beyond the ditches there is also the refusal to press forward, to be tipid or lukewarm as it were in our faith. There likely is also a bad to desire to plow forward to fast, ala trying to predict the last day accurately. We must be lead on all sides by the scriptures through the Spirit.
Clarify "We are to BE hot and cold at the same time"
The OPC in its report on justification, some years back, condemned both NT Wright (New perspective on Paul) and D Wilson (FV) as heterodox particularly on the subject of justification. I’m no longer attending an OPC, but even back then Kellor made us uneasy and that was before he came out of the woke closet.
It seems that your Wright analysis is missing something. I wouldn't say he's esoteric or impractical. And, you don't understand the NPP?
I prefer Wright but my beard-game is on point 🧔♂️
NT Wrong 🤨
MacArthur quote... hehe...
Doug Wilson for the win! For me it boils down to building strong families with faithful children, strong, vibrant, churches, rejecting clown,-world culture, homeschooling, and taking a stand against the culture of death. Also not bowing to government tyranny.