Okay, fine, I might as well throw out one more thing RE Gavin Ortlund. A while ago he did a video on hard OT passages that frustrated me for a number of reasons. It involved sloppy/incomplete presentations even of his own favorite resources. /1

https://twitter.com/BMcGrewvy/status/1788390813791035868

Bracketing what everyone thinks about hard OT passages (this is not meant to launch that, done it before, not my purpose here) I just wanted Gavin to stop giving a comforting but misleading picture of the literature. I didn't think he did so intentionally, but that's how it shook out. /2

Earlier I posted some first impressions of Gavin Ortlund's new video discussing various "hard passages" in the Old Testament. I've since picked up some context and would like to make a new thread here adding it, while drilling down to some more specific thoughts. /1 First, I came at Gavin for what appeared to be a glaring omission of Paul Copan's assessment of Numbers 31 in Is God a Moral Monster?, where Copan appears to concede that God divinely commanded the killing of innocents, but the command was justified. Since Gavin mentioned Copan several times in making his arguments about ancient near Eastern hyperbole and whether the Israelites were attacking military fortresses or civilian residences, and since he ends up emphatically concluding that "We need not and should not envision Israelites killing infants, Israelites killing young children, etc.," this seemed relevant. /2

As promised, more footage from @detransaqua's PP protest last Thursday. In case you missed my last thread, Prisha did not initiate this confrontation. The counter-protesters approached her and proceeded to pepper her with questions for over 20 minutes. Let’s break this down.🧵/1 As I start rolling, they’re talking about the Twitter Space where Prisha was speaking with Michigan legislators about trans care. Prisha is saying anyone would have been welcome to join the Space and share opposing views, but nobody did. However, if the majority of people who show up are on one side, then yes, naturally the conversation will be one-sided, even though “that wasn’t the goal.”

Our interlocutor nods and smirks over this, then pivots to asking if she thinks adults should be allowed to access trans care. She carefully says she personally “can’t have a problem with that” if the adult “is fully mentally stable and fully understands what transition is,” but it’s important to emphasize that “you can’t consent to a lie” about what hormones will do for you. /2

Just to recap the timeline here:

*Begg gives terrible pastoral advice, clearly meant to at least help point the way for general guidance.
*It comes out a few months later, people are concerned but wait for an update.
*Begg doubles down in private, a ministry parts ways... /1

https://twitter.com/samueld_james/status/1753413961301528768

*Begg then comes out with an angry 45-minute sermon smearing his critics as Pharisees and fundies at best, closet cases at worst, in which he flagrantly mishandles Scripture and also retcons his original advice as not intending to be generalized. /2

My issue with this thread is that with all due respect to Prof. Leithart, I don't think he understands what "culture wars" actually look like, on the ground. /1

https://twitter.com/PLeithart/status/1681625074904727553

I've heard black inner-city pastors speak about having to sue for their right to run a school where kids could have a decent lunch, accepting government money for that purpose, and not rewrite their code of sexual morality and gender. /2

Currently reading Smoke On the Mountain by Joy Davidman (before she married C. S. Lewis), and uh, wow. Is timely. "And some of our preachers, with the best intentions, keep announcing plans for 'bringing Jesus up to date.'

Well, but mustn’t the churches adapt Christianity to suit the ideas of our time? No, they must not. Our ideas are killing us spiritually..."

An extremely generous review by Kevin DeYoung. One interesting bit of his compare/contrast framing of himself vs. Keller is that he partly puts down his more conservative instincts to being Reformed first, evangelical second. /1

firstthings.com/article/2023/0… I understand why he says this, sociologically. It doesn't necessarily have to shake out that way, though. I'm about as non-Reformed as it gets, and I have many serious problems with Keller's approach. /2

I see there's been some new twittering around the alt-right and weirdo Christian Twitter accounts RT'ing nationalist stuff. Anyone who knows me knows I have no love for the alt-right. But I guess I would just day "Now do this for everyone playing footsie w/queer theory." To put this starkly: Who's done/is doing more damage to the church? Some fringey edgelord weirdo with a YouTube channel, or, I don't know, Wesley Hill?

@JoelBrizzee I'm happy to get specific, but I have so much material it would kind of drag on Twitter. We can make a little list, though! Let's start with Rachel. /1 @JoelBrizzee Rachel has enabled the Revoice conference for years, utterly failing to perceive them as the serious threat they are, contributing her own profoundly shallow/unsound sessions, and at most politely "disagreeing" with speakers like Greg Coles. /2

I do think it's interesting that the new Keller Center seems to be treating "apologetics" as a chiefly cultural or perhaps theological project. Maybe I missed it but are they including people who could speak precisely to, say, the reliability of the New Testament? I like some of the names on the list. (Some better than others.) This is not so much a knock on them as it is a comment on the organizers' priorities/focus.

Okay, I watched That Episode of Last of Us. I will say, full credit for knowing exactly what it is, i.e., pure, uncut boomer gay wish-fulfillment. Bros flopped because it was trying to do five things. At least this is just doing one thing. It's a dumb thing! But credit for focus!