Skip to main content

I’m Still An Evangelical

 Not in the sense of Protestant. In the sense that Jesus is my personal friend. Actually, friendship better captures what’s happening in the Scriptures than anything else.

A lot of people are giving up the label. Lots of reasons for this. Sex. People want to be liberal about sex. Maybe they are sinners themselves, and the guilt of believing something else while living differently is too much. Maybe they’re just sentimental and really liked “Will & Grace.” The reality of the lives depicted there is sadder than a sitcom.

The true nature of Sola Scriptura and Reformed claims about the Fall work together to make every argument an argument not about what the Bible says, but what it means. There remains a chasm between faith and reason, and under this regime, conscience and history and experience means nothing. We always thought “Where is that in the Bible?” would lead in one direction; it doesn’t. And it’s not really a question, it’s a direct challenge to any purported authority.

People think that if someone drinks coffee out of a tasteful mug and lives in a safe neighborhood, that person is trustworthy. It doesn’t work that way. Whether it’s racist men with podcasts, or today’s version of Rachel Held Evans, it’s “Did God really say…” all over again.

By the way, pay attention to the people who are “just asking questions.” Genuine questions deserve genuine answers. But some people assert things with questions, in the hope of avoiding the consequences of asserting things in the places where the truth still matters. It’s ignorance weaponized and monetized. For example, Candace Owens. Actually, it’s a good time to bring up Candace, because an authority doesn’t function if you ignore it. See also Matt Walsh.

Whether you know it or not, the Catholic Church is preserving what is good about “evangelical.” Take all the time you need. I didn’t bring the Spanish Inquisition this time.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...

What I Should Have Said

 I was functionally fired from my teaching job in November, 2024, after an unjust administrative "process" initiated by HR , and triggered by false accusations the content of which I was never told. My "defense" therefore could have no reasonable basis or direction. I won't say the name of the Local Education Agency, but the town where I lived and worked was Cheraw, South Carolina. I think that once I was on administrative leave, they could use nearly any indiscretion of mine as the final straw to remove me. I did connect with students on social media in protest, and I did express hope that I would quickly be returned to the classroom. The principal of the high school where I worked--a true lackey of the bureaucracy, and fully committed to educational ideas, methods, and solutions that don't work--also allowed his personal dislike of me to take the form of a belief that I was a substandard teacher. He gave me an unsatisfactory review on October 12, and we ha...

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...