Novemberesque Letters

Have you read Paul Bloom’s book “Against Empathy”? Amidst all the pushback to your conversation with Joe Rigney, Bloom wrote the book in 2016 and is an atheist professor of Psychology at Yale. He argues against empathy in favor of what he calls “rational compassion.” I’d be interested in hearing your thoughts on the book. Thanks!

Samuel

I agree with much of what you wrote here. I do have some things I want to address. The first is this “ This body of conservatism is what the parasite of progressivism feeds on. The immune system was supposed to consist of the leaders of the conservative movement, the people who read and write books for a living, and who were supposed to be fighting the progressive parasites instead of going to Georgetown cocktail parties with them”.

This is part of the foundation issue with many conservatives in our camp. They think that in the reading and writing of books they will gain knowledge in reading books which will help them in gaining influence in writing books. Meanwhile the enemy has formed a narrative, gained control of every lever of power and influence in society, and use them to control how the populace thinks. Conservatives love to say the facts don’t care about your feelings. The truth is the enemy’s narrative is more powerful in influencing how people think than your facts.

The other issue I have is this part, “ Unless we reject secularism as the idolatrous foundation of our liberal order, and turn back to Jesus Christ as the only possible foundation for a true liberal order, we are lost. There is such a thing as Christian secularism, and a Christian liberal order, and we must find our way back to that—because the alternative, as we are discovering to our horror, is a totalitarian secularism.”.

I agree the only answer is to turn to Christ. However the problem is your claim we must “find our way back.” Even if it were possible to find our way back to your so called Christian liberal order we would ultimately end up where we are now. The assumption seems to be that since the founding of our country was by Christians who were influenced by Scripture they created something we must recover and that it is the most biblical faithful system possible. The reality is our founders were in many ways influenced also by humanism. This can be seen by where they placed the foundation of government legitimacy. It was in the consent of the governed (humanism) and not on the lordship of Christ. The end of the Declaration invokes the name and authority of the People of these colonies. The founders wanted the protection of the Supreme Judge while invoking the authority of the People. We must not return to that. It will lead to where we are now every time.

John

As you are well aware conservatives just made huge progress in local elections around the country this past week. I am one of them. I pulled my kids out of the government schools and ran for school board. Despite the political liability of my situation I was elected to serve my community in this capacity.

My concern is this . . . A lot of this momentum is fueled by anger and that means unprincipled men can cause damage in these positions. How do you suggest that the newly elected Christian make the biggest possible impact on the government school system in his community? I understand I can’t reform the entire system from a minority position on one board in one city but there is a whole movement right now that just made a huge step in this direction.

I am meeting with my pastor soon to ask the same questions. The same pastor whom I absolutely love and respect through many years of leadership. The same pastor who required masks on the kids in the congregation until our tyrannical governor finally gave him permission to take them off.

I want to thank you for shaping my theology over the past two years in a way that I would never have been able to experience had I not stumbled upon your content. I have had the Canon App for quite some time and now proudly consider myself a post-millennialist with a brand new outlook on engaging the world around me.

Patrick

I am having trouble reconciling a theological view I heard recently from someone in my church, and it seems to be making headway with my men’s Bible study group.

When I first heard it, immediately rang the heresy bell and called my pastors, but I need to know if I jumped the gun and misunderstood, or if the gentleman is engaging in a tiresome semantic debate.

The view is that Christians no longer sin. Not sinless perfectionism, but that for Christians, who are dead to the law, there is no condemnation, and we are no longer under the law and thus unable to break God’s law. He based this idea in Galatians, and his understanding of Romans 7 being for the Jew, rather than the believer.

I asked him to clarify, “Did you say that Christians no longer sin?”.

“Yup.”

I shot back, “what about 1 John 1: 8-10?”

He came back with 1 John 3:6.

As he continued, I told him he was teaching antinomianism. Anticipating that objection, he shot back that he was an “a-nomian”, not an antinomian. There is no law.”

He bases his view in Eugene Peterson’s commentary on Galatians. I’m suspicious.

After hearing this develop, it sounds like he affirms that we trespass, we transgress, and we offend, but we don’t *sin*. Sounds to me like synonyms of that big bad word SIN. But who am I? I don’t have his theological studies under my belt, and he taught at Moody after all so I guess I don’t know.

My question, does Romans 7 describe the believer’s struggle with sin, or the unregenerate person under legalism failing to meet the mark? I don’t see how (or why) someone would go to such lengths to get to this weird area and make these odd assertions. Am I missing something? Am I straining gnats and swallowing a camel? How am I to continue to understand the believer’s struggle with indwelling sin?

Thanks for your help,

Gary

I love the NQN video! I am dying to know what song is playing during the outro. I searched in vain. Please end my suffering

Nathan

Re: Ah, Sorry. Almost Forgot. What is the song at the end of the video?

Chris

You maniacs! You regionally limited it all to heck! I can’t download Ride Sally Ride as a Dutchie in South Africa. I don’t know whether it is because of South Africa or the Netherlands that this is happening. Is there any mercy in this matter?

Sim

In ‘The Great Justice Juke’ you wrote the following sentence:

“Justice is precisely what we see manifested on the cross, where Christ died so that the sins of black race hustlers could be completely forgiven.”

The reason for my writing has to do with a couple thoughts regarding this sentence. You are older than I am and far more experienced. So, I want to entreat you as a father, as Paul commands younger men to do in 1 Timothy. I would ask that you hear what I have to say, and that you please write back, if you have the time to do so.

This sentence seemed to be in poor taste towards our Savior, for a few reasons. I am uncertain whether you meant this seriously or in jest.

If you meant it seriously, I don’t think it is good to attach a qualifier to our Savior’s work on the cross that might be interpreted as a joke by your friends or by your opponents. By your friends, that they don’t misinterpret what you say and think you are making light of Christ’s work on the cross. By your opponents, that you might remain above reproach.

If you meant it in jest, then I think you should consider removing it from your writing. I don’t think our God’s act of immeasurable love through the cross ought to be made light of in any way.

I write this to you out of love for Christ Jesus and out of love for you. My problem is not any distaste you have for ‘black race hustlers’. My problem is that it seems you are making light of God’s work on and through the cross.

If I am incorrect, please let me know that I am, and how I have misunderstood what you have written. If I am correct, then please let me know that as well, not that I can gloat, but so I know that my words have reached you.

I don’t think this letter will be published, but if it is, please remove my church home and under whom I am pastored.

Truthfully,

Wyatt

For next year’s No Quarter November video, could you please burn a real live heretic? That’s a whole scrubland to go after . . .

Ben

I have two questions regarding your position on Greek NT texts and biblical translation. 1. If I understand your position correctly, you favor the Majority Text over the more recently found older texts because those are the ones that God has preserved for throughout church history to today. Since you are postmillennial and believe that we are still in the early church, when looking at the whole of redemptive history, would not all of the texts be technically early? When we get to the year 10,000 there will be little time difference between texts found in 1500 vs 1900. Why would they still be rejected?

2. As I understand it, you also prefer the KJV because it is currently not copyrighted. Given how old the translation is, eventually a new translation would be desirable due to the language barrier. How would we go about creating a new one?

Sam

One of the questions I have about this whole affair (Sticker Gate) is whether or not the entirety of the employees of the City of Moscow are complicit. Are there no cops, city lawyers, city officials or staffers, who are publicly denouncing their colleagues? Is it all quiet on this Western front, but for the guns of Wilson and his team of lawyers? How deep does the divide go, and is there no hope of push back from within the corrupted institutions?

Joshua

Have you ever heard the saying many parents tell their kids “If your friends did something wrong does that give you the right to also do something wrong?” I heard that from my parents and I used it myself in speaking with other kids. However, your blog “On Aspen The Dog and Other Imponderables,” you actually have written that you think it IS okay to do something wrong, in this case break a town ordinance by putting up stickers, just because others have done so. The fact is it is unlawful to put up stickers or lost dog posters on posts in your town. Your clan put stickers on posts clearly against the rule. It makes no difference how many other stickers or lost dog posters are on those posts. The rules were clear and your clan broke those rules. Is this unfair and are they singling your clan out? Yes, of course. But, is that still good enough justification to break the rules? I think not. It is not like the mask mandates or jab mandates written by The Beast with no justification on their part. The rule is there for a reason. That the Beast turned away their eyes until the Wilsons did this “evil deed”, written with full sarcasm, makes no difference, my Dear Mr. Wilson. We as Christian cannot justify such actions no matter how the Beast tries to cover it up and lie. The Wilson clan did something wrong, against the town rules. You must own up to it. Sincerely,

Jim

I’m assuming a larger trend, but my sample size is only a handful of families I grew up with (including my own). I grew up Baptist, but my pastor was quietly Reformed, so I grew up in a Classically educated and homeschooled sphere, reading your books (which is probably why I turned out Presbyterian). In the last couple years you could almost draw a line through every family and divide it 50/50, child for child, one stays and one falls away. The rate at which old friends are falling away is dizzying.

I’m trying to get my head around this as an old member of a community, but more so as a parent.

There are a lot of people who have told me Proverbs aren’t promises, there is nothing a parent can really do, and it is all in the child individually and before God ultimately. But I’m wondering at that and it doesn’t line up with common grace and daily faithfulness. I also believe things about my children because I baptize them that my old Baptist church doesn’t.

What is going on here?

Thank you,

Kate

OK, gotta ask, why’d you pick on banjo players?

Steve

Sadly, this is my hometown.

Jill

In the “Letters” article of August 24, 2021, in response to a question for a recommended reading list for the men of the church, you mentioned “The God Who is There” by Francis Schaeffer . . . but that title is *not* included in your book “Reading Log” . . . Did you mean to say “He is There and He is Not Silent” instead? . . . and if not, please, why didn’t you include “The God Who is There” it in your reading log?

Thank you!

Robert

As an ardent follower of NQN, I’d like to know if you will be selling a NQN Flags in the store? I feel that to not sell them would be a very Marxist move of you. Extra large if you please.

Looking forward to hoisting the Gospel-Centered Jolly Rodgers.

Jesse

Greetings, Good Sir Editor:

A serious question: how about making those No Quarter November flags available in the store. I’d buy one (2×3, if you don’t mind; like the size of the one on the boat in Doug’s promo this year). It would be cool to fly it out in front of the house (my neighbours are used to odd flags in front of my house) and show some solidarity and perhaps stir up some conversation. Might get fire-bombed, but that’s sort of the idea in November, right?

Anyhow, had the idea—I’m a flag nut—thought I’d pass it on.

The Lord be with you!

David

Re. the burning boat You guys do a nice job of portraying cigar smoking in a positive light but you abuse the poor cigars. Lighting off piece of cloth, forsooth. The fire in the cigar looked like a special effect done in post. And then to supposedly jump in the water. Maybe no cigars were actually harmed but you glorified cigar abuse. Shame!

Rob

I wish to extend the full suite of empathy/sympathy as I too always find it difficult to light my cigar with my Malotov cocktail.

Jason

Can you comment on the recent viral podcast done by CT on Mark Driscoll and The Rise and Fall of Mars Hill? Thank you sir!

Callie

“I have the life experience equivalent of 5 or 6 PhDs in Scottish common sense realism.“ YUGE missed opportunity to used the phrase “lived experience.” Also, have you engaged with Scottish common sense realism in a book or blog? Would love to know your take on it.

Chase

My Dear Sir (if this word is still safe to use without committing a hate crime)—There are no factual statements incorrect in your essay as far as I can tell. The reasoning thereafter is sound. But we get to this part at the end where you say that there is a battle and it must be joined by everyone who sees it, and I think you want both too much and too little. Let me say it this way:

1. Every man who wears pants and not a dress is fighting the right battle every day. Every young fellow who accepts that he will finish 4th in the state finals and still runs in the men’s heat rather than adding ponytails and next year finishing first by 5 lengths is fighting this battle. Every Mom who has kids and raises them is fighting this battle. Every daughter who goes to a public university and realizes that her dad was not crazy but the actual sound patriarchy, but many people had crazy dads who were neither sound nor patriarchal, is fighting this fight. This is the real fight, not the pageantry of fighting. And this is not yet even the fight going on in each local church.

2. When you make the call to arms the way you have here, you set up many for pageantry, not fighting. You know: this is what Paul was actually on about in his letter to the Galatians. Circumcision is useless pageantry that actually rejects the Gospel; Love which is joyful, peaceful, patient, kind, and so forth was actually the outcome of the Gospel. You can say that you are fighting fire with fire (I think you are actually saying such a thing this year, but maybe you are just trying to outdo the “this is fine” meme), but the outcome of the Gospel is not actually fighting fire with fire, right? It’s fighting a spiritual war with love and truth as the weapons, and sacrifice and a broken heart as the nuclear weapons of the Cross. I am 100% sure you do not mean to set group 2 and group 3 to make performance art interpretive dances rather than storming the gates of hell, but it also seems clear to me you are doing just.

3. You are doing this by making outrage the tool of engagement. You have said plainly that the problem is the flammable age, not the inflaming words, but that’s how every pyromaniac reasons (and yes: that’s what I mean). Think of it this way: Jesus’ inflaming words were things like, “Your sin is forgiven,” and “This should be a house of prayer, not a cottage industry.” Your inflaming words are, “let’s start a fight” and “let’s get really ginned up about the outrage of others” and “let’s not trust institutions.” You can’t distinguish your inflaming words from those of the false brothers without the direct objects.

4. The remedy is not to make this a culture war. How many culture wars does Western Christianity have to lose before we realize that we cannot fight the good fight using the tools of the other side? The remedy is what it has always been, since Paul was dragged to Antioch where the people were first called Christians: contrition, reconciliation, fellowship, worship, again and again. This is in fact what happens when the Gospel is central. Coalitions are not formed: families are reconciled and generational sins are defeated. Seminaries are not founded: churches are grown, and love proliferates in a way that shocks and worries those who are actually selling fear, hate, and idols. This is where the war is fought and won, and this is how Hell’s gate is knocked over so those condemned to death and instead have new life.

So that said, let’s work on keeping our pants on, raising our kids well, and just saying no when a guy wants to use the ladies’ room. Otherwise, we are just Rush Limbaugh. We are just Ben Shapiro. We are clanging gongs making noise, not delivering a message of hope and reconciliation.

Frank

Having read your thoughts on fake vaccine cards, I looked through the comments, but did not find an answer to a question I have. If someone applies for a religious exemption and is denied, is getting a vaccine card, legitimate or otherwise, permissible for a Christian? If they claimed Christ to receive an exemption, would it be a denial of Christ to capitulate (or appear to capitulate) in order to keep their job? My thought would be, once they request the exemption, they must stay true to their stated convictions, regardless the cost. However, if you disagree, I would appreciate an explanation as to why it may be acceptable. You exhort pastors not to discipline someone who’s using a fake ID to feed his family, and I can wholeheartedly appreciate that. But does the extenuating circumstance of requesting a religious exemption change your counsel to such a brother? Especially in a state like NY, where the new governor has framed this whole thing religiously, where she wants her apostles to go out and spread the good news of the vaccine. And when questioned on it, suggested that there would be many converts among those who were holding out from getting the vaccine once the mandate took effect. In such a situation can any believer get a vaccine card to keep their job? Appreciate your thoughts. God bless.

Chris

So I have been perusing your book “Refuting the New Atheists”, and came across your claim that Shakespeare’s plays were actually written by Edward de Vere, seventeenth Earl of Oxford. (pg. 173) You linked to an old Credenda/Agenda article in the book, which I proceeded to track down on the Internet Archives, and am currently in the middle of reading. I am also currently taking a college class on Shakespeare, and was introduced to the de Vere theory earlier in the semester.

I am just wondering if you still hold this position, and if you still think de Vere also wrote the Martin Marprelate tracts? If so, what resources would you recommend?

Joshua

How did communion become what it is? Is a wafer of Styrofoam and some alleged juice (or in more conservative circles, a crumb of bread and a sip of wine) really enough to be a supper? When I read Paul, he admonishes those for getting drunk . . . that seems to indicate there was enough sustenance to get drunk on. Is our modern communion, even ones that include wine, a bastardization of what the Lord’s table ought to be? Or is it ok?

Thank you for your faithful teaching.

Thomas