1/ We’ve come back around to an era of like the early church, in which paganism requires a serious response.

The old guard is still in liberal secularism mode. By what standard? Sorry for the crusades! Er… they were justified! Either way, we’re moral and not backward! 2/ The new generation of those closest to the kingdom are not concerned about scientific progress or universal human rights. They grew up without roots, purpose, or meaning, and lament the loss of the societal conditions that made these things possible.

1/ This Redditor is saying explicitly what’s been preached subtly to evangelicals for years. Leftism = compassion; Defending your wife, children, neighbors, and possessions = idolatry.

https://twitter.com/_kruptos/status/1777674399333683433

2/ Past generations of Christians would have called a man effeminate, cowardly, treacherous, and worse than an unbeliever for sacrificing his family and country for foreigners.

1/ I don’t know how many people have paid attention to my Xweets long enough to notice, but my thoughts on Van Til & Christian Reconstructionist-adjacent ideas have changed over the past few years. So I was thinking it might be helpful to explain myself. 2/ Around 2016 or so, I became a presuppositionalist and soon after became all the other Christian Recon things (Theonomy, postmil). In 2018, I started reading Jordan and Leithart and became oatmeal stout FV.

1/ It’s true that virtue is a balance between two vices. In the case of masculinity, manliness exists between the extremes of effeminacy and cruelty. But what is very obviously needed a whole lot more in a time like this is a bold critique of effeminacy, not of Indian patriarchy.

https://twitter.com/gavinortlund/status/1769007830206492762

2/ Also, he paints with a broad brush about patriarchal cultures. In speaking of a high view of traditional patriarchy as “revisionist,” he either makes the same broad brush mistake he’s critiquing, or else actually thinks its proper expressions were not “progressive” enough.