On the Use, and Misuse, of Ugly Words

by

One does not enter pastoral ministry with the dream of one day writing treatises upon the polemical use of the word “faggot,” but here we are.

I have almost written this piece half a dozen times, most recently last month when Eric Conn, pastor of The Refuge Church in Ogden, Utah and co-host of the influential podcasts The King’s Hall and Hard Men Podcast, within a few hours called a fellow minister “a retarded snake” and posted the one-word retort “SlowToThink” to a Christian writer whose X handle is “SlowToWrite.” But the article hadn’t quite come together until I recently spent a couple days on X discussing whether “E-lie McFaggot” is fitting rhetoric for Christian disputation.

Eli McGowan is a Christian filmmaker whose X account is largely devoted to documenting and critiquing the alt-right, Christian Nationalist-adjacent movement to which Conn belongs, along with figures such as Joel Webbon, Dale Partridge, and Conn’s co-pastor Brian Sauvé. McGowan’s work at times carries the whiff of a tattletale, and he is widely despised by his opponents, from whom the nickname “E-lie McFaggot” is hardly the harshest response.

Of course, “Twitter is not real life,” as we used to say back when X had a real name. It is not news that largely anonymous figures say unpleasant things on the internet. But in point of fact, X is real life, and sins on X are nonetheless sins. Furthermore, sins on X have a way of eventually leaking into the lives and churches of those around us.

Keep reading…

Regarding the Neon Investigative Report

by

From April through October this year, I served on a temporary committee for the OPC Presbytery of the Southeast, investigating allegations by Stephanie Chernyavskiy against her adoptive parents, the elders of her former church, and a number of other individuals, with accusations spanning roughly two decades and at least three states.

After six months of investigation, at our October presbytery meeting our committee returned a 40-page report, with 49 additional pages of recommendations and appendices. Our conclusion: “the most serious allegations against the people and entities named in our mandate are either unfounded or impossible to prove” (NIC Report, page 3).

It is not my intention to relitigate the contents of the report, which I think stands well on its own. However, in the last few days Mrs. Chernyavskiy has publicly accused our committee of intentionally ignoring her witnesses and evidence as part of a cover-up, writing on Facebook, “Unfortunately the committee of five men declined to interview or speak to my wittnesses and did not include any of my evidence in their report.” This accusation has been amplified by herself and others across social media, and I believe some response is appropriate. (To be clear, the temporary committee was dissolved once our work was done, so I speak only for myself in what follows.)

The Timeline

Our committee was established in April of this year. Shortly afterward, Mrs. Chernyavskiy contacted our presbytery to say she was unwilling to speak with us or share any evidence until the conclusion of an ongoing criminal investigation in Kentucky sparked by her accusations. That investigation ended when a grand jury voted not to indict, and on June 13 Mrs. Chernyavskiy reached out to say she was ready “to share evidence, witness statements, and other forms of evidence such as photographs and emails, messages, etc.”

Keep reading…

Against Spangler’s “Race Realism”

by
Photo of Revelation 7:9

It’s been over three years since I last posted here—time enough to have a third child, graduate seminary, buy and renovate a home, and start a church plant. I have been too busy to write anything here, but I’ve been fighting the urge since July, when I first read Michael Spangler’s newly published “Race Realism” series. For several years, Michael was a minister in my denomination, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, until he was divested from office this April. Just a few days ago, at his request, our presbytery erased him from membership in the OPC.

By removing Michael from membership, we are no longer able to address his racial views through church discipline. I cannot speak for my fellow presbyters, but I personally voted for erasure because Michael has not attended an OPC congregation in years, and his continued membership in our denomination tied the hands of sister denominations where he began attending. Better to recognize that reality, erase him from membership, and address his views through other means.

To be clear, what follows is in no way an official answer to Michael from either my presbytery or the denomination. I have heard universal grief and opposition to his racial views from my fellow pastors, but in this response I speak only for myself. I am choosing to specifically respond to Michael’s “Race Realism” series because it is a good representation of a small but growing number of voices on the theological right, and because it originates from my own part of the church. I don’t want to elevate fringe voices by engaging with them, but I think we’ve reached a point where critical response is needed, even from such small platforms as mine.

“Race Realism” Summarized

Michael’s argument is laid out in a series of six lengthy articles. I do not intend to respond to every detail, and I will consciously ignore some bits which I find abhorrent in order to focus on the core of his argument, from which the rest grows.

The series’ basic argument can be outlined as follows:

  1. Race is real.
  2. Differences between races are real, and remain relatively constant over time.
  3. Because of these differences, some races are definitely and fixedly superior to others, with the white race preeminent.

From this third point, various applications are drawn, such as opposing interracial marriage, promoting segregation in society and church, opposing equal civil rights for non-whites, calling for the removal of non-white immigrants regardless of legal status, and suggesting foreign missions should be deemphasized to focus on revitalization of beleaguered white churches.

The main problem with Michael’s argument as an argument is simply that it is unsound, neglecting important facts and drawing unjustified inferences. The main problem with his argument in practice is that it undermines love between neighbors and brothers and promotes pride in those who hold to it.

Keep reading…

Getting to the Heart by Way of Obedience

by

As human beings, you and I were created with both a brain and a heart—with intellect and with emotion. True Christianity speaks to both these capacities, revealing truth about God while also teaching us to love both our God and our neighbor. Yet because Christians are still individual people, with our own characteristic strengths and weaknesses, for many of us either the intellectual or the emotional comes more naturally than the other.

In my own part of the church, as we rightly emphasize the importance of theological study, we are often in danger of sliding into a dry knowledge of abstract truths with little joy or love to go along with them. Yet, as James warns, “You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder” (2:19). Theological knowledge by itself just isn’t enough; it can neither satisfy our souls nor put us in right relation to our God.

When we recognize that our Christian life is out of balance—that we have a full head above a cold heart, or at least a tendency in that direction—it is natural to seek to rebalance ourselves by trying to stir up warmth in our own hearts. We buy devotional books which are long on feeling and short on theology, or we sit through worship desperately sifting the singing and preaching for little embers of emotion which may fire our own hearts. We try to will ourselves to feel by raw effort, and usually all we end up feeling is tired and discouraged.

Keep reading…

Covid Vaccines #5: Why It Matters

by

Over the last couple weeks, I’ve written about 12,000 words making a case for covid vaccination, arguing we can generally trust the official data, that covid vaccines are effective, and that we have good reason to believe they are generally safe. Perhaps it seems odd, then, for me to reiterate that my greatest hope for this short series truly isn’t to convince anyone to get vaccinated. I do think vaccination is wise, for the reasons I’ve laid out. But my greatest, overarching concern, the concern which has troubled me for months, is that a great number of evangelical Christians have been blatantly misled by people they trust.

I cannot tell you with 100% certainty that vaccination is the right choice. I think it is, but I may be wrong. I may be mistaken about some facts, or missing other facts, or simply coming to the wrong conclusion. So I am not certain I am right about all this. But I am absolutely certain that many widely held beliefs among American evangelicals are objectively wrong—not in the debatable sense of “I disagree with your conclusions,” but simply, factually, plainly false.

If people truly understand the available information about covid and vaccination—maybe even facts I’m unaware of, facts that demonstrate I’m wrong—and then make an informed decision not to be vaccinated, I’m not especially worried about that. I don’t think civilization is going to collapse if we can’t figure out how to jab every human being on the planet (though I do think an honest, informed look at the available facts would lead most people to get vaccinated, to everyone’s benefit).

Keep reading…

Covid Vaccines #4: Are They Safe?

by

In the previous post, I looked at the latest available data to see if the covid vaccines are effective. Despite challenges from the new delta variant, it is hard to dispute that the vaccines remain remarkably good at preventing infections, or, in the case of relatively rare breakthrough infections, preventing hospitalizations and deaths. If you want to protect yourself and those around you from covid, it makes sense to get vaccinated… unless the vaccine itself is a significant threat to your health.

I have waited until the end of this little series on covid vaccines to talk about safety issues for a couple reasons. First, I think this is one of the most difficult objections to engage, because it is an emotionally charged issue tied up with sad stories we’ve heard from friends or seen circulating on social media. One can’t—and shouldn’t!—simply dump a pile of safety studies on someone who believes that the vaccines injured or killed someone they love. However, our responsibility before God as stewards of our own health and of our neighbors’ wellbeing means we do have a responsibility to think carefully about even such difficult stories.

This brings me to the second reason I wanted to address safety issues last. As I have surveyed some of the main arguments against the vaccines in my earlier posts, I wanted you to see the way in which motivated reasoning and carelessness with the truth have so polluted this debate for more than a year. Many who should have known better have negligently passed along bad “facts” without much apparent effort at verification, simply because the claims fit a narrative they assumed to be true.

This blizzard of misinformation has, of course, been reinforced by Dr. Fauci’s self-confessed dishonesty, by the hypocrisy and abuse of authority by many in power, and by very reasonable skepticism about the trustworthiness of our government, the media, and Big Pharma. In a low-trust environment, we are mentally primed to believe the worst.

Keep reading…

Covid Vaccines #3: Do They Work?

by

In my previous article in this series, I looked at whether we can trust the data on covid and vaccination. That is a very important question, and if you aren’t sure about it, I would encourage you to go read that piece first. The short version: Challenges with testing and reporting mean case counts are more like estimates than exact tallies, but the more important figures for deaths and hospitalizations seem generally trustworthy. Also, the rumor that the CDC is counting vaccinated and unvaccinated cases differently is based on a misunderstanding of a completely different data collection program. Looking at the reporting systems in place, and cross-referencing the official picture with other real-world data, there doesn’t seem to be a good reason to doubt the basic picture of the pandemic which is presented by the official numbers.

In this post, I’ll look at what the numbers tell us about vaccine efficacy. I’ll look first at whether covid is still a threat, then at how protective the vaccines actually are, then at whether natural immunity is better, and finally at the problems of waning immunity and the delta variant.

Is covid even a threat anymore?

Just a few months ago, it seemed like covid was on its way out. Now, not so much. This survey from Jim Geraghty (a conservative writer who has been a good source of covid info throughout the pandemic) includes many links to local news stories in states across the country describing hospitals strained to capacity.

Keep reading…

Covid Vaccines #2: Can We Trust the Data?

by

In my first post on covid vaccines, I made a case for why vaccination is the best way to love our neighbors and be wise stewards of our own health. However, my argument had a major weakness. I think most skeptics would agree that vaccination is wise if everything I assumed was true was actually true. It’s that “if” which causes all the trouble. Most of us have heard any number of arguments that the data about covid and vaccines is unreliable, or that the vaccines don’t really work, or that they are dangerous. If those arguments are sound, then the case for vaccination collapses—and some of them seem quite compelling at first glance.

In this post, I will look at one major set of arguments against the vaccines: that, for one reason or another, we shouldn’t trust the numbers on covid and vaccination. This is an important question, because our picture of the pandemic and its possible solutions is necessarily built from statistics, percentages, and probabilities. Because covid is only moderately lethal compared to viruses like smallpox or the Spanish flu, we aren’t going to see bodies littering our neighborhoods. The official number of roughly 600,000 dead is “only” one in 500 Americans. Even though that’s twice as many Americans as died in World War II, it’s still few enough that most of us can’t get a good sense of the magnitude of the tragedy by personal experience unless we work in a hospital in a hard-hit region. For most of us, our picture of the pandemic has to come from numbers, and if we can’t trust the numbers, we can’t even begin to discuss anything else.

So let’s look at those numbers. I’ll first discuss the overall numbers which inform our understanding of the pandemic in the US, then more recent accusations that the CDC is intentionally fudging the numbers to blame most current cases on the unvaccinated. If you think I missed an important argument against the accuracy of covid numbers, please share a summary or link in the comments and I’ll update this post if needed.

Keep reading…

So, About Those Covid Vaccines

by

Also in this series:

To those of you who forgot I existed or subscribed because you thought I was a recipe blog, Hi! I still have a year left in seminary, but, for the first time since I started at GPTS, I hope I’ll have the time to start writing semi-regularly again.

As I’ve considered resuming writing, I spent the summer vainly trying to find my way around the elephant in the room: namely, the world’s ongoing thoughtful little chat about vaccination. I have repeatedly talked myself out of discussing it lest I do more harm than good, but after a lot of thought and prayer I have decided to start blogging again by embracing the covid elephant instead of dancing around it.

Let me start by saying that I am fully vaccinated against covid (thank you, Moderna) and I think you probably should be too. But my primary goal here isn’t to prove that vaccination is safe and effective, nor to convince you to get vaccinated. Instead, I have two main hopes.

First, I keep hearing from friends who are genuinely distressed and unsure who to believe about covid and vaccination. I cannot approach that question as a medical researcher or doctor, but then, you probably can’t either. We are both in the position of interested laymen, trying to find the truth in a haze of confusing data and conflicting narratives. And while I’m not a medical professional, I have spent the last 15 years teaching argumentation and research. That doesn’t make me infallible, but I hope it will make my perspective helpful.

Secondly, more than anything else about the past year, I have been heartbroken to see the anger and foolishness from all sides of our public discussions, including within the church. I am increasingly convinced that the controversies of the past year have been a divine test for the American church; a test we have largely failed as we have fallen into opposing camps, each defined by their loudest and least reasonable members while everyone else is afraid to start a potentially explosive conversation. Yet we are unlikely to find either peace or truth if we are scared to talk to each other! God’s tests are often preparatory, and I wonder how we will handle the next complex and divisive issue. Will we show the world what a difference it makes to be indwelt and sanctified by the Spirit of Christ, even in disagreement, or will we disdain those for whom Christ shed his blood? If I don’t change a single mind about vaccination but do help to bring some mutual understanding to a contentious debate, I will be happy and satisfied. (And on that note, please pray for my own wisdom and self-control as I write!)

Keep reading…

On Stewardship, Idolatry, and Dave Ramsey

by
Money

For many American Christians, if the Bible had an appendix, it would include a few books by Dave Ramsey. The personal-finance guru and creator of Financial Peace University is immensely popular, and rightly so. Ramsey’s practical advice has helped countless families get back on their feet after financial difficulties, or simply avoid financial difficulties in the first place. I have personally suggested Ramsey’s material to families and will do so again, but I always do so with an important caveat—because as helpful as Dave Ramsey’s advice is, any good financial self-help program carries with it very real dangers.

Ramsey’s 7 Baby Steps to Financial Freedom offer a good snapshot of the counsel he offers:

BABY STEP 1 – Save $1,000 to start an emergency fund
BABY STEP 2 – Pay off all debt using the debt snowball method
BABY STEP 3 – Save 3 to 6 months of expenses for emergencies
BABY STEP 4 – Invest 15% of your household income into Roth IRAs and pre-tax retirement funds
BABY STEP 5 – Save for your children’s college fund
BABY STEP 6 – Pay off your home early
BABY STEP 7 – Build wealth and give

Keep reading…

About

Contact

Twitter