Augusto-Letters, As It Were

If a sport dominated by lesbians is also dominated by doping, the question to ask is “were they lesbians even before they took the drugs?”

Kristina

Athletics and Christian Community #3
Re. modesty and swimsuits, ladies who want to swim for fun or exercise (rather than competitively) can find looser, less revealing swimwear, marketed primarily towards Muslim and Jewish women. The search term to use is ‘burkini.’

Lady Swimmer

What’s your view of Christians working for a company like Raytheon?
For readers who may not know, Raytheon manufactures some of the most advanced weapons systems used by the U.S. military, including missiles and precision-guided munitions.
On the surface, it seems entirely lawful for a Christian to make a living in that field. Scripture does not condemn military service, and most of us are grateful that our nation possesses strong defensive capabilities.
At the same time, things seem murkier when military force is employed in conflicts that may not clearly satisfy the criteria of a just war. To what extent, if any, does a Christian working on weapons systems share responsibility for how those weapons are ultimately used?
I’d be interested in your thoughts.

Michael

Good day Pastor Wilson. Jeff Fynn-Paul is an expert in urban studies from the Netherlands who is not considered a serious scholar of American history. This appears to be the first book he’s ever published on the subject—it seems I’ll-advised that one’s first foray into a subject be a sweeping declaration and judgement of 400 years of history. Perhaps he should have understood it better first?
For example, Benjamin Madley’s excellent “An American Genocide: The United States and the California Indian Catastrophe, 1846–1873” is written by an actual expert in early American history, and spends over 1000 pages carefully documenting on very narrow segment of it. He found that in JUST California in JUST 28 years (from 1846 to 1873), there over 370 known massacres of Native Americans that were documented at the time. When adding in individual documenting killings, he recorded 9,492-16,094 California Indians killed in that period. Of course, since the killing of Indiana often went unrecorded, the true numbers are likely greater. On the other hand, fewer than 1,500 Europeans and others were killed by Indians in that time.
If Madley alone has documented ~12k killings of Native Americans in California alone in 28 years, then how could Fynn-Paul claim there’s had only been 7k in all of America over nearly 400 years of history? Of course, most of the 1500s-1700s isn’t documented much at all, but lack of record-keeping shouldn’t be an excuse to claim it didn’t happen. Just from that small sample of California alone, it seems more likely that violent deaths works be 100k+, and related deaths from forced relocation, loss of land, starvation, disease, etc directly caused by that violence could be several times higher.

Koinonia Anon

Regarding girls in athletics, I’m reminded of the Calvin and Hobbes cartoon where Calvin is explaining to Susie why he is late for school.
Calvin: I tried to play hooky, but I got caught.
Susie: How?
Calvin: Mom had the wind for that final sprint.
Susie: Your mom had to CHASE you?
Calvin: I couldn’t believe it when she cleared the hedge.

Jennifer

I originally wrote this as a comment below “A Radical Proposal,” but after realizing just how long it had become, I decided to make some edits to it and write it as a letter as well in the hopes that you interacted with the arguments in more detail.
First, I want to clarify that I am not an absolute, hard-core abolitionist myself. I do genuinely think there is a moral difference between a bill that expands abortion access to 20 weeks when it had been 0, and one that restricts it to 20 weeks when it had been unlimited. In a vacuum, I do not think it would be a sin for a governor to sign such a law, or even for a congressman to introduce such a bill in the hopes to save as many babies as the Lord providentially allows them to save. I think abolitionists have over-extended themselves a bit when they argue that anyone who writes or signs such laws, at any time and in any circumstances, is just as guilty as murderers themselves.
All that being said, I am a strategic abolitionist, meaning I think the abolitionist strategy is the only one which is actually viable in these United States. First, the smash-mouth incrementalist ignores how legal battles in one state of our union impact those in another state. I said that in a vacuum I do not think such bills are necessarily sinful. However, we do not live in a vacuum. Passing incremental bills in a purple state gives Republicans in red states an out to avoid finally abolishing abortion outright, because when faced with 2 potential bills they will always pick the easier one. Smash-mouth incrementalists and abolitionists cannot work as co-belligerents because by merely proposing incremental bills you ensure the abolition bill’s demise.
Second, although you admitted the argument “appears to have some force,” I think you still downplayed the dampening effect of incremental bills on most people, allowing them to think the issue is solved when it clearly is not. Such bills make the final abolition of abortion take even longer, costing more lives in total than if we just pushed for an abolitionist bill until it passed. This is without taking into consideration the fact that the vast, vast majority of abortions occur before viability (about 99%) and most of those are self-administered (63%) and so your proposed amendment wouldn’t even save very many lives anyway.
Third, one of the biggest issues that I have with the proponents of “smash-mouth incrementalism” is that they severely downplay how much their strategy undermines their stated goal of total abolition. The analogy of a football field where incrementalists want to “run all the plays” while abolitionists only want Hail-Mary passes fails because it assumes that incremental bills still move the ball the right direction. There has not been a single incremental bill passed into law that only limits abortion, but does no other harm to the abolitionist cause. Every one has some sort of language which provides cut-outs for the mothers, and these cut-outs undermine any legal case for the Supreme Court to step in and ban all abortion on 14th amendment grounds.
Respectfully, I think you (unintentionally) mislead your readers when you describe incremental bills as merely bills that fail to save all babies instead of what they really are: bills that create murder cut-outs that were not there before. You may say “a truly smash-mouth incrementalist bill would have no such positive cut-outs,” but in that case the pro-life establishment would oppose those bills just as adamantly as they oppose abolition bills, thus removing the only real advantage of your strategy to begin with. At that point, you may as well support abolitionist bills, if only for the reason that they provide a consistent legal argument for future SCOTUS cases.
I hope you will consider the strategic argument for the abolitionist cause and join us in finally ending the abomination that is human child sacrifice.
God Bless,

Julien

I recently heard you describe how wealthy individuals really do enjoy giving to causes they value. And that how one asks for that help is a key feature.
As a church planter who is working to get a baby church financially stable enough to hire a staff pastor what advice would you give in this arena?
How to find these folks, and how to broach the topic?

Anon Pastor

I am writing because I wanted to share an old YouTube video with you. It’s a video where young men from the high school that I went to acquire around 70 signatures from young ladies in order to “end women’s suffrage.” It happens to be a high school located in Fairfax County, one of the wealthiest counties in the U.S.
Perhaps your bringing attention to it will finally provide the motivation needed for young ladies to learn what “suffrage” is.
Link
Thanks for all that you do,

J.O.

My question pertains to the counsel for a man who is 42, married, and has 4 children (12 and under). He has wanted to serve in the military since he was a young man and tried but the Lord closed the door in his younger years before marrying and having children. He is now at a point where he still has a short window of opportunity to serve in the military through the chaplain candidate program. This essentially is a pathway to be a seminary student and pursue a commission as a chaplain. Ideally he would serve in the Reserves as the National Guard currently is full of candidates and not able to accept any more. He has talked with a chaplain and the chaplain advised him of the opportunity to serve in the Reserves which has a similar mission. There’s high probability he would stay local to where he lives. This is important because he and his wife have significant roots and are highly involved in the community. He’s felt a call to ministry and his wife has acknowledged that and is on board with ministry but she is not on board with military chaplaincy even if it’s in the Reserves. How would you counsel him given the fact that he has a small window of opportunity because he could age out?

Jeremy

In response to “Yes, That is the Hinge”, I recommend Pascal Denault’s book “The Distinctiveness of Baptist Covenant Theology”, Revised edition. Written from a Reformed Baptist perspective (1689 Federalist subgroup). This is one of the best books I’ve read on the subject from a credo perspective.

Michael

I think all your points were spot on and clarifying. You and Ben just barely touched on the concept of having an “undercover” job. Clearly it’s one thing to be a drug dealer who lies all the time to evade the cops, and someone in this position might also find it easy to come home and lie to his wife about his line of work. The work is illegal and so the lying is unjustified and also sinful.
But . . . what about the narcotics officer or FBI agent who is busy infiltrating the drug ring and not only is lying to the cartel about who he is (for the purpose of busting them wide open), but he also must come home and lie to his wife about his line of work?
I believe, based on the conversation you did have, that the narc would be justified in his domestic deceptions for the sake of national security and the success of the sting operation, but I can see where many Christians might say, “Well . . . he shouldn’t be pretending to be a drug smuggler in the first place.”
Follow-up thoughts?

Andy

Let me quickly say how thankful I am to our Lord for your ministry. I have been greatly blessed by your efforts and continue to be so.
I pray the Lord will continue to use His servant.
I have a unique situation.
I am a dean at a small classical Christian school, and a teaching elder at the church where the school meets.
My wife and I have five kids, love our school and church, and are very thankful for our situation.
All five of our kids are at the school with me every day.
The issue is we are only able to do this because my wife works 50-60 hours a week.
She is an amazing wife and mother, and somehow manages to take care of the household, even while working.
However, while our situation is great, and I love what I do, I’m always plagued by the fact that my wife has to work so much.
I have an opportunity, job-wise, that would allow my wife to come home and be with the kids.
This job is in a previous career field, and is one I would enjoy. But more importantly, it would allow my wife to come and be with the kids.
My dilemma is that we would have to relocate to another state, and leave our church and school.
We would be moving back to where we are originally from, also allowing us to be with my ever-aging parents, and my wife’s family as well.
But I am struggling with whether I am being discontent with the situation and ministry God has given me currently.
Is it more important that my wife be at home with our kids than whatever school and church ministry I am able to serve in.
I realize that is not necessarily a black and white answer.
It is also complicated by the fact that my oldest two are 15 and 13, and love their school and friends.
I surrendered to ministry later in life (after being a military pilot), and have always felt the Lord leading me in this direction.
But I have this opportunity to bring my wife home with our kids, but at the risk of uprooting from our church and school.
Any sage advice and wisdom would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you again,

Mike

I recently came across this niche musical artist and was wondering what your thoughts are about him. Do you think he’ll go far?

Fanboy

So I went and read Hannah’s article—I had to search a bit to find it . . . It was shorter than I expected and she didn’t actually say much beyond the quotes you included. It almost seems like her article is an invitation to her readers to research you on their own to find out more. That’s a win for you in my book.

C&U

I have no proof of this, of course, but Hannah Anderson’s article at the Dispatch shows numerous common tells of being heavily AI generated. The inconsistencies/illogic, the heavy use of em-dashes (including places where semicolons would be more appropriate), and the way certain things are repeated with variances that don’t sound like the same writer.
This one caught my brain first: “But as the digital age came, and then snowballed, we were inundated with more information—more words—than we could process.” The whole paragraph it is in is a mix of redundancy (earlier discussion of her first acquaintance with you) and cheap philosophy, but that sentence particularly smells of bot.
Bot or not, I’m a little in awe of the incoherence of a section like, “Wilson’s paradigms offered an escape from reality and the need to deal with the truth of their actual lives. And like any other coping mechanism, it worked until it didn’t.” Somehow your content managed to be both just an escape/cope and yet also get smeared with responsibility for the actual at the same time.
People never cease to amaze me.

NB

How do we lovingly confront a “blackpilled” brother when the language of “concern,” “warning,” or “questioning someone’s trajectory” is dismissed as naivete or covert manipulation? How do we obey Jude 23 and “snatch them from the fire” when the blackpill mindset treats brotherly concern as evidence that you cannot be trusted?

Seth

I became aware of an interesting situation recently and would like your opinion.
A former military officer who was discharged honorably has been found out, after his military service has already been completed, to have committed adultery while on active duty with a female officer colleague. His service was otherwise exemplary. Even though it cost him his marriage, he has acknowledged and confessed his sin and as far as I know is repentant and following Christ and is active in a local church body for several years now.
a) Should that man be recalled to active duty and prosecuted under UCMJ laws prohibiting adultery?
b) Should that man have his honorable discharge downgraded to dishonorable and lose any VA or retirement benefits he might have incurred, and should he have to repay any VA or retirement benefits he has accrued since his last time in service?
I don’t know enough of the guy to know what his response would be to either of these, and I don’t know enough of the legalities as far as what is even possible/allowable for such things, but it raised some questions in my mind and was curious as to your take. Thanks.

JR

Did you know that the Christ Kirk sermon podcast (at least the one on iTunes) has not been updated since April?

Daniel

Recently, Joe Rogan has had both James Talarico and JD Vance on, and both interviews discuss Texas putting the 10 commandments back in the classroom. After listening to the poor understanding of education and it’s purpose on all sides, it got me wondering: is classical Christian education a national topic?
I’m beginning to wonder if the voices and minds of CCE need to really go on offense now. Parents are fleeing the public schools; they need to hear about the option of CCE! I’m young and thus don’t know if CCE has already been going on the offensive nationally, but it seems like there are some golden opportunities ahead if CCE’s best ambassadors enter the public forum and begin to inform the masses of this Christian counterinsurgency we are a part of.
Obviously you have been a prominent national voice, but it just feels like we need more. It’d be awesome to get someone on a podcast like Rogan. It also feels like we need to get young CCE people to step into the light and present it as an option to their peers (Gen Z) and their peers’ kids. I don’t know, maybe we are already on the offensive, but I am curious on what you think about CCE taking the national spotlight. Thoughts?
(for context, I am a teacher at a CCE school that is a part of the ACCS)

Justin

I am writing to ask for family advice. I have a father-in-law who is perfect in many ways. Generous, kind, thoughtful, loves the Lord. But he comes for frequent visits that are somewhat disruptive to family life and very stressful to me, because his personal habits shift the family power balance. I have thought about “manning up,” and trying to address some of my frustrations directly, but I’m pretty sure he would cheerfully agree with me and then not actually change. I don’t want to be rude and shorten or forbid his visits, so I have been seeing them as a chance to grow in patience. Am I on track? Do I need to just keep pushing through the stress? (My wife is not bothered by the same things.)

Stretched Thin

I published the music album I mentioned earlier this month. Your quote is in track 4.

Tim

This question occurred to me as my church is currently going through a sermon series on the book of Psalms.
I’ve heard you explain some of your positions on worship—looking for theologically deep worship music and avoiding the “Jesus is my girlfriend” stuff – which I pretty much agree with. And from what I’ve seen in videos, your churches generally seem to practice a very well-ordered worship that many charismatics often seem to lack.
I’m curious if/how you make room for the sort of rambunctious/raucous celebration that seems to be commanded occasionally by Psalm 150? Shouting, dancing, cheering, loud cymbals, and the like?

Ian

I am not responding to any particular post but rather have a question on Christian living. I have sought the counsel of my local elders on this issue but haven’t received any clear actionable advice at this time. I shall try to keep this as succinct as possible, so as not to try your patience.
I have a close Christian friend (we go to different churches) who a number of months ago, sat me down to bring me some “correction.” Except the correction was not about me, but rather about my wife. He said that my wife had a spirit of complaining and rebellion (unsubmissiveness?). My friend explained that he believes he should only bring correction to the head of a household, and that since husband and wife are one flesh, her sin is his sin and correcting the head is the way to go (to be clear, he thinks this means more than just a husband has a responsibility to deal with sin in his household, which is my position). I believe that correction should be brought directly to a person but allow that there are times when prudence demands that a husband be either talked to beforehand or in conjunction. Regardless, my wife was never spoken to directly in this matter with the result that she felt blindsided and like my friends were talking about her behind her back. To add insult to injury, neither of us feel like my friend knows my wife well enough to make this kind of judgement fairly. Nevertheless, we spent a considerable amount of time praying about it, checking our blind spots with close friends to see if this correction was valid (aka, are we sinning?), and really considering it. The resounding response from close friends was that this was not a valid correction and we were not sinning. I went to my friend, thanked him for caring about me, told him I didn’t think the method he used to bring correction was appropriate and to please not do it this way in the future, and, finally, that we had considered this matter and did not believe it was a valid correction (but we will be on guard against this in the future).
This has led to a near complete fracture of our friendship. My friend seems to believe that I and my wife are in unrepentant sin and has functionally cut off the friendship. I have gone to him twice to try to reconcile. He says that reconciliation can’t happen until “the truth” is determined. He believes that checking our blindspots with close friends is an invalid way of determining the truth because these friends only hear “our side.” He wants to involve two of our close mutual friends to determine “the truth” between us. He sees that as following Matthew 18. I’m at a loss of what to do. I believe involving our close friends as “judges” in a case between us would take an already tangled, messed-up situation and turn it into a full-scale imbroglio. However, I think I have exhausted the means available to me for reconciliation.
I would appreciate your advice on the following: a) How is correction supposed to work, especially in situations akin to mine? b) What should I do with my friend? Should I pursue reconciliation further? Or have I done all I can to live at peace with him?
Thanks,

H

This is not in relation to any of your posts, but having recently listened to several of your books on baptism and family/child rearing I had a few questions to see if I understand your position correctly.
Is the paedobaptist position that a child born to at least one Christian parent is a member of the covenant and that baptism is a sign/seal/recognition of that? So, even baptist kids are in the covenant. Or are they not born in the covenant and baptism is the means by which they are transferred into the covenant?
I think you’ve said somewhere something to the effect that if someone was baptized as an infant, wandered away from the faith and was an atheist (or whatever), and then was converted that they need not be baptized again. If this is your position is this because this person never left the covenant? That is, while they were an atheist they were under the in the covenant, but under its wrath and judgement, and now that they have converted they are still in the covenant, but under its blessing. Is this correct or am I getting this all wrong?
If it’s true that the person in the above example never left the covenant, is it possible to break the covenant in such a way as to be booted out? Or is it until death do we part? Or are there going to be people in hell who are still in the covenant, just under judgement?
Thank you for your ministry! I have been greatly blessed by it.

Alden

Re. Darryl Hart, the Wall Street Journal, and the First Person Singular Pronoun in the Objective Case:
Thanks for this clear-headed response. Brilliant.

John