I haven’t lied about anything, Jon.
I didn’t say Josh pays your salary, but does your connection qualify as one that shows financial ties and/or benefits?
Yes.
I will outline just a few of them in this thread ... 🧵

https://twitter.com/jonharris1989/status/1873798258838884584

Here, you openly host a Ridge Runner commercial for Josh. Ridge Runner is not a ministry. It is seeking *paying customers* to buy into the Highland Rim Project.
rumble.com/v2x2bky-ridge-…

I’ve been thinking a lot about 1 Cor. 3:4 and how it relates to the present moment in evangelicalism.
“For when one says, ‘I am of Paul,’ and another, ‘I am of Apollos,’ are you not carnal?” (See also 1 Cor. 1:11-13)
Paul was rebuking the believers for their party spirit. 🧵 From the Pulpit Commentary: “That party spirit ran so high that they were all listed on one side or another. None of them were wise enough and spiritual minded enough to hold aloof from parties altogether. They prided themselves on being ‘uncompromising’ and ‘party men.’ ..”

Some cardinal rules:
1. When a pastor is seen as a successful “brand,” the entire church will operate with a “protect the brand at all costs” strategy.
2. When a pastor is seen as a successful “brand,” the sheep won’t be allowed close enough to him to even know who he really is. 3. Even before he becomes “a brand,” the kind of man who really wants to be “a brand” is not the kind of man you want anywhere near a pulpit.
4. “Branding” is a business strategy that has nothing to do w/a biblical standard for ministry. A “brand” in a pulpit won’t tell you that.

This exchange below is significant.
Why draw hard lines between the radicalized, white-nationalist authoritarians who call themselves “Christian Nationalists” and normal, conservative Christians whom the Left call “Christian Nationalists?”
A: The Left WANTS US lumped together. 🧵





In the TPM story that @kkdumez referenced, the reporter uses conservative political points to describe SACR/CN. Yet reducing the description of literal, armed authoritarians to “anti-LGBTQ” also serves to deceive uninformed conservatives that SACR is merely “conservative.”

Thoughts on Alistair Begg’s sermon, in which he defends his LGBT “marriage” advice:
1. He never actually responds to any of his critics or refutes any arguments. He just likens critics to the Prodigal Son’s brother and Pharisees and gets in a dig at “American fundamentalism.”
🧵 2. He says: “All I was thinking about was, How can I help this grandmother not lose her granddaughter?” ALL? Shouldn’t a pastor also be thinking about what the Bible actually says on this subject? His overarching justification for his advice came down to “we need to have grace.”

In light of the Alistair Begg LGBT “marriage” controversy, I think a lot of people who make the “years of faithfulness” counter-argument need to understand some things about theological drift, Christian radio and biblical fidelity. 🧵 If any pastor you hear on Christian radio made any theological compromise/shift on a social issue, it’s possible you wouldn’t know about it for a long time. Why? Because radio ministries likely aren’t airing his sermon from last week. Often, you’re hearing sermons from years ago.

You publicly goaded me as I was minding my own business, remember?
First of all, your site is not a “news outlet” any more than you’re a “veteran investigative reporter.” You’re just a blogger who makes unforced errors.
Thread.

https://twitter.com/reachjulieroys/status/1678911941010501632

Example? John MacArthur’s “villa.” A villa is a large, luxurious residence. If you’d clicked on the document link that YOU put into your story, you’d have seen it says it’s a CONDO. And you posted the wrong house picture, too. I stopped reading your stories after that.

Why? A thread.
1. I can’t trust what you write. You grift off a lot of one-sided, error-laden hit pieces. And potential interview subjects who could correct your reporting inaccuracies won’t even talk to you. How, then, can you be trusted to “report the truth” about anyone?

https://twitter.com/reachjulieroys/status/1678808679221428224

2. Reputable print journalists don’t make easily avoided blunders, as I’ve seen in your writing about MacArthur. They don’t report only on some scandals, involving certain people, while ignoring others. But you do. Journalistic credibility matters. Truth matters.