Theologically Sound. Culturally Relevant.


I Was Wrong About James Lindsay

Very rarely would I say an article that I wrote ages poorly. And while I’ve admitted on numerous livestreams that I was wrong to be excited about Tom Ascol running for SBC President last year, an article that I wrote in September 2021, has a nagging presence that I need to own up to.

I am saddened by the division between Christian Nationalists and Mid Eva. However, much of this division would have been avoided if faithful brothers in Christ did not unequally yoke themselves to a God-hating atheist.

In September 13 2021, I wrote an article titled, Why James Lindsay is not influencing the church. In this article I argued that James Lindsay’s demonstrable frustration with pro-life Christians was evidence that Christians were not being influenced too much by him.

Those who were pro-lockdowns in 2020 should take a back seat in the cause of fighting tyranny. They’ve done enough damage. Leave it to those who had the courage to speak out when it was unpopular lead the charge against vaccine mandates.

But ultimately, this denotes, James Lindsay’s lack of influence in the church. The church can walk and chew gum at the same time. We can vote for Trump and not succumb to his moral failings. We can platform an atheist and drive him nuts with our steadfast insistence on abortion abolition policies. James Lindsay’s bandwagoning against tyranny now leaves one to wonder whether he also hopped on the bandwagon against wokeness or whether his worldview recognizes that a White male has no vested interest promoting an ideology that hates him.

In either case, the detractors of James Lindsay’s Christian audience are proven wrong.

This argument did not hold up over time. James Lindsay, to some degree, has been in the driver’s seat of Mid Eva, along with Michael O’Fallon. Both Josh Buice and to a lesser degree, Virgil Walker heavily rely on James Lindsay for their critique of Christian Natio0nalism. Josh Buice posits these questions:

As you can imagine, the subject is important and one that I believe merits time and a robust biblical examination. This conversation also opens up the door for additional questions to be addressed, which we intend to address at G3 Ministries over the coming weeks. Some of these important questions regarding Christian Nationalism would include:

  1. Is Christian Nationalism, as defined in this article, compatible within the framework of the 1689 London Baptist Confession? Can a person be a Baptist historically and embrace this view of church and state relationships?
  2. Will the empowerment of a “Christian Prince” and the punishment of sinners encroach upon Jesus’ blueprint of church discipline found in Matthew 18?
  3. If a “Christian Prince” is empowered, what happens to the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America? As a citizen of the United States and a Christian living in this nation, I believe that’s a valid question.
  4. Could there be concerted efforts within the shadows of the political sphere that are manipulating a reaction within the Christian community to the woke agenda in order to bring about specific change in the relationship between church and state that could actually be weaponized against the church?
  5. Are there parallels between the methodologies of Christian Nationalism and CRT/I that introduce ethnocentrism?
  6. Do the goals of Christian Nationalism fit within the pilgrim ethos of New Testament Christianity? In other words, if John Bunyan had been a Christian Nationalist, would we have The Pilgrim’s Progress?
  7. When it comes to ordering a Christian nation under the banner of Christian Nationalism, what version of Christianity will be enforced? In other words, will it be a minimalist approach to embracing the Apostles’ Creed or something more robust? Who makes this decision on what creed is the law of the land?

In an article that conflates Christian Nationalism with Papist integralism, questions four and five are straight from Lindsay.

This weekend a meme war erupted on Twitter, and Christian Nationalists ultimately let a foolish man speak and make known that he is a fool.

Is calling the Holy Spirit magic, blaspheming the Holy Spirit? Perhaps, though this is not what I had thought that it meant in the Bible. But this is a considerably bad look for the brothers at G3 Ministries who have propped up an obvious grifter who offers no solutions to the problems his worldview is insufficient to grasp.

I want to make peace between Christians, but I first need to admit that I was wrong and why I was proved wrong, in the hopes of learning from our bad judgements.

Powered by RedCircle

Support the Evangelical Dark Web

By becoming a member of Evangelical Dark Web, you get access to more content, help drive the direction of our research, and support the operations of the ministry.
Receive the Evangelical Dark Web Newsletter

Bypass Big Tech censorship, and get Christian news in your inbox directly.


5 Responses

  1. First I ever heard of him was watching a Q&A with Voddie, on the subject of critical theory. Someone asked if there were any good sources of information on the subject, and Voddie gave a few along with New Discourses, and specifically made it clear to the audience that Lindsey is an atheist, that he obviously doesn’t agree with Lindsey on everything, but that the site was a good source of information on the particular subject of critical theory. Lindsay’s published some good info on critical theory, but outside of and aside from that research, he should pretty much be ignored. And his research should itself be taken with a grain of salt and tested against scripture.

    Mr Pearson is 100% correct. Without the Holy Spirit, it is impossible to fully and clearly understand scripture. Atheists think they do, but they don’t come close.

    This is made clear in John 16:12-13, and other scriptures.

    1. The more time passes the more his expertise should be questioned. He’s out there arguing for equality over equity. Not even ten years ago, equality was the liberal talking point and they switched it.

      1. Yep, I agree. Goes back to what I posted yesterday. You have to about write a darned book to explain because words mean different things nowadays. Equality is a good example. We’re of equal significance under and to God, through Jesus. We all equally have a few certain rights, such as the right to life (but not the leftist contrived notion of so-called positive rights), and so on. Equal and fair opportunity but not equal outcomes, and so on.

        You about have to write a book just to use that one word. Who knows what he actually means. We have to be careful.

    2. As far as kicking “bums” out goes, it is imperative to honor scripture. Some things warrant it, such as sexual immorality (1 Cor 5), false teaching such as perverting the grace of God into a license to sin (Jude), and so on. Other things don’t, such as the sin of worrying too much.

      And the theology should obviously follow. What constitutes a false teacher should follow it. The Bible is not exactly wishy-washy on the subjects. It’s very clear. If there are any major disagreements on such matters, then somebody, somewhere is pretty much illiterate.

  2. Yeah he is good for explaining CRT and how it infiltrated the church because it infiltrate his organization. The new atheist movement I believe?? And destroyed it. Other than his expertise on that subject his beliefs should be ignored by Christian’s. It’s obvious he thinks your stupid and hates God. Which he would respond with I can’t hat something magical.

Leave a Reply

Get Evangelical Dark Web Newsletter

Bypass Big Tech censorship, and get Christian news in your inbox directly.

Join 5,117 other subscribers

Trending Posts