Letters Fully Junified

Could you please cash out what a general strike, as you suggested, would look like? What steps would need to be taken specifically? What is needed? How do you do it? When do you do it? Are there any times you would not recommend a general strike? What backlash do you need to anticipate? In short, how does one, as Jesus advised, consider the opposing force and know if you have the horsepower to take them on or to seek terms of peace?

Todd

Re “Belfast Blues:” 100% agree (!!), and would add the specific suggestion that the demand of a general strike be a general election within 30 days.

Andrew

Re; Henry and Eve.
I think it is safe to say that the first wedding was also an arranged marriage. Perhaps that should be the model for all marriages.
Enjoy your perspective on these issues.

Kevin

Do you have thoughts about the “Las Vegasification” of the U.S. under MAGA? The UCF fight on the White House lawn is the latest instance, but It all is so corny and tacky, and very little involves the transmission of custom (and therefore collective memory) from one generation to another. Their patriotism is mostly performative commitment that confirms the left’s silliest assumptions about the aesthetic taste of white Americans.
I regret the fall of an intelligent culture on the right. At the same time, it’s hard to ask for this without coming off as a scold.
How do we ask for a White House Lawn Psalm sing? Maybe that’s the solution.

No

I strongly urge my fellow skeptics to stop debating Christians. Here is why:
Sincerely,

Gary

Is there a way to be too fastidious with restitution/asking forgiveness, particularly when they are sins committed as a child/teenager?
An example would be if I were to have broke my classmate’s toy in elementary and not replace it, should I be replacing it now as an adult? Another example would be remembering something in high school I said to another classmate that I regret now. If I don’t currently have a way to contact them, should I be trying to find a way to contact them now?
I would say I have a sensitive conscience and “suffer” from morbid introspection when it comes to the Christian life. This bothers me because I remember sins from my youth, and then I think “I better ask for forgiveness from others for any and all sins I remember otherwise God won’t let me into Heaven if I die tonight.” Obviously that’s not correct, but to affirm the exact opposite isn’t right either. I could use some wisdom on this. Thank you.

Joshua

“Boomer Wars”
It doesn’t destroy the validity of your argument, but one can’t add the actual number of babies born to those criminally aborted and claim that would have been the actual number of babies born. Maybe, maybe not. Likely not, likely something in between.

Preston

When it comes to Boomers and all the economic stuff associated with them, one assumption I hear all the time is that all their wealth will eventually be passed down. But unfortunately that ain’t so. The vast majority of it will be swallowed up in end-of-life care because the Boomers want to live independently and the younger generations don’t want to take them in. Case in point, I know a family that pays $300,000 a year to care for the aging mother, but they justify it because “she has it saved up.” That will swallow up an inheritance mighty fast.

Andrew

A doctor of mine pointed out that the infant mortality rate made the early 19 century numbers look a lot worse than they were. Strange that we have improved infant mortality significantly but also choose to end so many pregnancies.
I enjoy your articles and podcasts.
Thanks

Paul

Greetings from the Texas Bible Belt,
I read your book, Standing on the Promises. While I found myself nodding along and empowered to regroup some parenting woes, I was also searching for more. As a mom of six, one of my children does not respond to discipline. By this, I mean he does not accept discipline. The rod is met with gritted teeth, no tears, no remorse, and right back to “the vomit.” Any removal of privileges results in stealing or conning to take the items back. Removing him from a situation results in him coming right back through breaking down doors, screaming, and violence. He does not accept responsibility and although we are not giving into a child led house, the constant attention needed for him to uphold basic rules in the home results in a ton of lost time and energy for the other five children, and frankly, is often dangerous. Really, the question is, how can we make a child care? We’re are desperately trying to “lead a horse to water” but feel stuck in the “can’t make him drink” part.

Randi

What’s the secret to not going in the wrong direction with the teaching on masculinity, race relations, etc? I find it very easy, at least for myself, to swerve into more sexist and racist tendencies—I define those two ‘ist’s by biblical standards, of course. It is all too easy to see that there is something wrong with the culture surrounding the womenfolk and the foreigners—but I don’t want to revert to the days where men could mistreat their wives, their very own bodies, or enslave fellow men, their brethren in Christ.
I think (if I may venture my own theory—I would still desire your answer to the question above) it is easy to swerve this way because we (white males) have forgotten what the Ivory Tower feels like to inhabit, and so we are all too easily tempted into ascending it again. The culture has been glorifying the opposite for a while; let us call it ‘the tar hut’, for simplicity; in the Ivory Tower, there are the sins of superiority—pride, disdain, castes, injustice, irresponsibility, and all such other sins—but in the tar hut, there are the sins of lowliness; envy, rebellion, and general scallywaggling. This is all of the ‘effin on the blim-blam,’ the culture that both glorifies violence, theft, and infidelity, and yet is horrified at violence, theft, and infidelity.
I do not of course think that we should stay in the tar hut either, residing with orcs (I refer here not to race but to the type of men and women so imbibed on the filth of the culture they cease to be rational—melanin has no bearing here, although culture and heritage do), but neither should we, as my own temptations bid, go to live with Saruman in Isengard. (You already know that the one directs the other- moving between the two is not a solution in the same way that switching from playing black to white on a chess board is not leaving the game—and was not Saruman barbaric, even primitive, himself?).
Still, I suppose you will have a better answer to my question than me—otherwise I would not still be asking it.

Aidan

Not addressing a specific blog of yours. Love your content.
Please address the split between brick-and-mortar preachers who have significant risk in addressing hard questions (scared people don’t come back = lost tithe) versus online preachers like yourself who seem to benefit from the opposite behavior (bored people don’t come back = lost clicks). There are obviously more angles than this, so pile ’em on.
I’m just looking for ways to help my preacher to use a better, biblical balance of risk-taking. Further, how can the average believer balance normalcy bias against standing on the joy of the Lord against nailing 95 paranoid memes against a cop’s armor plate? How do we live in these 2020 twilight times where nothing is right if you’re 20 and nothing is wrong if you’re 50, all at the same time? Reminds me of Jay Rosen’s “regression to a false mean.” Clowns to the Left of Me, Jokers to the Right: On the Actual Ideology of the American Press
Sorry for the rambling.

Anon

Wanted to ask, what are your thoughts on efficient learning techniques for teaching yourself something, especially from people like Cal Newport and Scott H. Young? I ask because I’ve found some of their methods work for me, but I don’t know how to think of them in light of a Christian Worldview, especially in regards to learning for a Classical Christian Education.

Kurosaki

I like how you interspersed your answers in Judah’s very long letter on June 9. Not always needed, but a good approach for the long ones.

Craig

“No longer a nursing father, he is now a nurse practitioner at the assisted suicide clinic.” Well that was a punchy ending! Well said!
As background, I come from the continental Reformed tradition (subscribing to the Belgic Confession, Heidelberg Catechism, and Canons of Dort). I appreciate what I’ve read of the Westminster, but don’t subscribe to it.
I’m wondering if you have any familiarity with Abraham Kuyper and his political views. Roughly while he was running for Prime Minister (and was elected) the General Synod 1905 of the Reformed churches he was a part of removed a section from the Belgic Confession article 36 (I will bracket off the removed section). It reads: The government’s “task of restraining and sustaining is not limited to the public order but includes the protection of the church and its ministry in order that [all idolatry and false worship may be removed and prevented, the kingdom of antichrist may be destroyed], the kingdom of Christ may come, the Word of the gospel may be preached everywhere, and God may be honoured and served by everyone, as he requires in his Word.” The Belgic Confession used in my church has those bracketed words in a footnote, stating when they were removed.
Do you have any thoughts on the removal of those words?
Ought these words to be affirmed?
Does the removal of these words actually change any content (since the coming of Christ’s kingdom corresponds to the destruction of the kingdom of antichrist)? Or was this change encouraged just as a political move by Kuyper?
Thanks for any thoughts you can share and God bless,

Caleb

I hope you’re doing well! I have a question regarding some back-and-forth that I have seen on the Internet regarding women and their roles in higher education. I apologize for the length; I have to give some context, since this is a growing issue in the great grand world of the internet.
I’m not interested in the whole “he said, she said”- type talk going on on the Internet; it feels a little too catty high school-girl-ish, and I should hope we are all far past that. However, please indulge me for a little bit. Recently, the Jolly Brawler mentioned something about a young lady at NSA commenting on higher education and women, located at this link:
I included the Eric Conn part of the conversation to show some are moving the conversation on the internet to say that both your son and NSA are encouraging feminist weeds to grow among the young ladies at NSA/in Moscow. I originally heard the quote that people are flinging about from “Stories are Soul Food,” and I completely understood what he meant in the original context.
The claim now is that fathers who do not wish their young ladies to become feminists ought to discourage them from attending universities. Those who agree with this also view women’s attendance at universities/in higher education as inherently feminist/Marxist in nature (see this link. Obviously, I am aware that his claim, “The argument that women need higher education so they can raise godly sons actually goes back to the French Revolution period . . .” is historically inaccurate, but that is not the crux of the issue.
The argument goes something like: “Because women must be under the authority of a man at all times, her leaving that authority under any circumstance is unlawful/unrighteous, and may encourage her toward either feminism or self-harm. Encouraging women to seek higher education cultivates a burgeoning rebel within her, and will ultimately lead her to, at least, risk becoming a boss-babe-wannabe. This makes her a less-desirable potential wife for a godly Christian man.”
Ever since, I have read similar discourses on Twitter/X that young ladies ought not to receive a really thorough education during high school, since their focus is to be at home; nothing in their upbringing or home education should encourage distraction from such things. Being outside of their father’s protection and headship would not only complicate things but would also entice them toward feminist tendencies.
I have lots of thoughts on this, tending toward the negative, but I wanted to know your specific thoughts on this. Again, I’m not trying to stir up unnecessary controversy or divide the Body; rather, I think this is a topic that deserves a good, thorough investigation. Friends of mine at church and I have already talked about this at length, so I know it’s been a hot topic.

ON

Having read both the PCA report and your response to it, I’m curious as to your thoughts concerning the section which condemns those who view ethnic homogeneity as a positive good. They cite Galatians 3:28 to support this claim. Without delving into the dank corners of “race realism,” which I believe can certainly go too far, it still seems that the PCA report is engaging in a category error in using this verse, which is referring to the unity of the Church in Christ as regards salvation by grace through faith, and applying it to the Civil realm. It appears self-evident that ethnic homogeneity within a society is indeed a positive good (I’m using Wolfe’s definition of ethnicity, which would see someone like Clarence Thomas as part of Anglo-Protestant culture, despite being a black Catholic) and promotes civil peace and order within a society. This obviously cannot justify mistreating anyone, but it does not appear to be out-of-bounds for civil rulers in Japan, for example, to have immigration policies that take into account the assimilatability of various countries in order to preserve the ethnic make-up of their own country. Additionally, it seems as if the PCA’s application of Galatians would also require the state to have no laws which recognize the differences between men and women, as they are both one in Christ. Am I missing something? What is your understanding of this part of their report, and would you agree with my analysis or disagree?
God bless,

JS