Samuel Sey vs. Andrew Iskar: Alistair Begg and Decades of Faithful Ministry

Last week, Evangelical Dark Web broke the story highlighting the September 2023 comments by Alistair Begg advising that a grandmother should attend a gay wedding and give a gift. Within days, this became the prevailing discussion in the online evangelical world, as the comments received reactions from Steve Deace, Owen Strachan, and many allied discernment ministries. The comments have sent shockwaves, and for good reason, as Begg was a trusted voice for many faithful believers.

Yet there is a dichotomy within the reactions. Some have taken to appealing in favor of Begg’s decades of faithful ministry as a warning against discarding Begg while others see it as a critical compromise on a simple question. Best exemplifying this divide would be Samuel Sey, of Slow to Write, and Andrew Iskar, the firebrand author of The Boniface Option.

Andrew Iskar’s Tweet

Admittedly, Iskar came off the top rope with his recent tweet. Bolded sections were quoted in Samuel Sey’s response.

Compare Sean Strickland and Alistair Begg over the last 24 hours. People act like talk of testosterone and masculinity is just low-IQ machismo, but it actually really, really matters. Pulpits are filled with weak men like Begg who have all the outward trappings of “godliness” while a man like Strickland has none of that. He doesn’t claim to be a Christian or put forth any of the wholesome affections that are expected when you do. He is just a man who told the truth when the whole world demands that he lie. To do that requires the kind of intestinal fortitude that comes from the male hormone and the rare self-differentiation a man at the pinnacle of his craft has. The pulpits of American churches lack men such as these. We banish such men from ever hoping to pursue this calling. We put in place every possible incentive for men to be weak-willed, manpleasing hirelings. The best men will do anything else than suffer under the most intense, stultifying pressure. So instead, you have geldings like Begg, who can spend decades in quiet, nice, respectable ministry, but inwardly be total cowards worthy of nothing but disgust. There is a desperation for men who act like men to lead. You can see it when you see the reaction to Strickland. Conservative evangelicalism is desperate for men to lead, but the pathways for men-as-men to climb their way to leadership are completely cut off to them from the start. The only way forward will be to have churches which incentivize masculine leadership from the get-go and that attract and train young men who are really men and not conflict-avoidant nerds. And the second you do this, respectable men like Kevin DeYoung will attack you for your mood. You have to be willing to step over these people. You have to be willing to let the dead bury the dead. Respectable, winsome, Alistair Begg evangelicalism is dead and soon to be buried. It doesn’t matter how much money they have, what institutions they have, the publishers, the seminaries, the big churches and denominations. The PCUSA and ELCA had and still has all that, too. It has no future. It is trapped in the world before Negative World. The future belongs to those who are willing to fight for it. And in that number, there will be more than a few men with cauliflower ear.

Iskar’s response was indeed bombastic, much to his persona. The mention of Sean Strickland is meant to contrast secular masculinity with the effeminate church. Iskar contends that Begg’s type of evangelism is unequipped for “negative world,” highlighting that Begg began ministry in “positive world.” In the tweet, he alludes to the masculinity driven Moscow Mood wherein the men who want to boldly fight are attacked by the evangelical establishment, of which Begg is party to.

In his reaction video, Iskar contends that this was not a one-off moment, but the fruit of years of development. Iskar also attacked Begg for being a coward during Covid and failing to speak against the wicked Governor Mike DeWine. Essentially, Iskar’s reaction is a generational indictment that goes beyond Begg to the general cowardice of the American evangelical church.

Samuel Sey Reacts

Samuel Sey begins his reaction column with the aforementioned bolded quotes from Andrew Iskar, basically denouncing Iskar for his disrespect towards elders.

That person is around my age and Alistair Begg is twice our age at 71. I know that is increasingly irrelevant to many people today, but how we talk about people matters, especially when they’re significantly older than us. The Apostle Paul said to Timothy, “Do not rebuke an older man but encourage him as you would a father.” (1 Timothy 5:1)

Sey appeals to Begg’s age to contend that Iskar’s response was disrespectful. It is worth noting that 1 Timothy 5:1 is not as applicable when that elderly man is an elder in the church. Timothy was being given spiritual authority over his elders. Moreover, how men speak to other men is not the same as how men speak to women. A coach will verbally berate his athletes to challenge and encourage them. Tough words are encouragement. The soft preaching in the pulpit is a symptom of a church tailored to women. Begg’s generation has failed to reverse, and further facilitated, the cultural rot that has come from the deconstruction of Christianity in America.

Of course that doesn’t literally mean we should never rebuke older men. After all, the Apostle Paul encourages Timothy to rebuke all unrepentant church members in front of the entire church (1 Timothy 5:20). It means we should be especially careful in how we rebuke older saints. If we’re supposed to rebuke everyone with gentleness, we should be even more gentle in how we rebuke older saints. 

Especially since Alistair Begg has been a faithful pastor since well before I was born. Does almost 50 years of faithfulness mean nothing to us? If we’re ready to cancel him, then everyone should probably be canceled—except, apparently, zealous and inexperienced young men.

This is where Sey contends that Christians should not go hard on Begg, but rather be gentle. He further adds that this is not worthy of “cancellation.” This is not a mishap or gaffe, but a grave error on behalf of Begg and a capitulation to the world.

It is worth noting that David Morrill of Protestia argued that Christians should go hard on Begg because of his decades of faithful ministry. Others like Jon Harris implicated that it might be time for Begg to retire.

Alistair Begg should be corrected and rebuked for what he said. I’m grateful people like Owen Strachan have done so in a candid yet kind manner. I admire Alistair Begg and I’m looking forward to seeing him at this year’s Shepherds Conference. However, what he said is indefensible. 

Owen Strachan does nothing to diagnose why someone with decades of ministry would capitulate on this issue, so his response is rather impotent. This is not a “stumble” as Strachan writes but a seismic theological shift. And much of Samuel Sey’s reaction is treating Begg like many treated the other “stumbles” from teachers like Tim Keller, Russell Moore, Billy Graham, and countless other high-profile preachers who capitulated to the culture despite decades of experience.

After contending that Begg’s words were improper, which seems secondary to rebuking Andrew Iskar, Sey concludes with the following:

Some of Alistair Begg’s critics are seemingly only interested in [1 Corinthians 13:6], not the rest of that scripture. God commands us to love Alister Begg by being patient, kind, and hopeful with him. He doesn’t say we should be envious of his influence, boastful about our own supposed courage, arrogant about our so-called masculinity, rude by calling him a gelding (castrated), insist that we must step over men like him, or irritated and resentful towards men like him. 

Samuel Sey imputes envy to those who are calling out Alistair Begg, similar to the rhetoric of “platform builders” used against Joel Webbon. And while Iskar is the brunt of this column, Sey calls him envious, arrogant, and rude, prioritizing effeminate tone policing over the actual controversy. The fact that Sey cannot directly address Begg’s comments independently of another’s reaction is to his discredit. One might call it backhanded, or effeminate, thereby validating every concern addressed in Iskar’s tweet.

Conclusion

Samuel Sey is more interested in tone-policing than discernment. He is more condemnatory of Andrew Iskar than Alistair Begg. Others with bigger platforms have echoed similar concerns with Begg’s capability to be the man for the times in which we live, so why not engage them versus the fiery Iskar? In truth, the push for winsomeness is the reason Begg’s compromise occurred in the first place.

Believers should pray that the members and elders of Parkside Church confront Alistair Begg and lead him to repentance and long overdue public correction of this error. And if correction should fail, then it will be evidence that Alistair Begg is not the man for these times, and this compromise will be a mark on his decades of ministry.