PCA Wokeness and SBC Brokeness

Travel schedule. I can't really say where I was two weekends ago, but I was, uh, involved in a project that you will know about later on this year that I think, uh, is of a high level of importance for what we do.

Uh, but last weekend I was in Washington state at a Christian political conference and it went really well. And, uh, first time I've been there and got to meet some great some of you, uh, who were able to come out.

So I really appreciate those who did come out and did stop by and say hi and looking forward to seeing what the Lord does in that region. Next weekend, I will be in Shelbyville, Kentucky for the reformation war room.

And if you want to check out where to register, you can go to my website, johnharrispodcast .com. And if you go to speaking, go down to reformation war room. If you click on that, it'll take you to the reformation war room.

There it is. So, uh, 80 Robles is going to be there with me and we're going to have a great time. I just want to let people know too, I haven't pushed this hard yet, but my book against the waves Christian order in a liberal age is out now surprised.

Uh, I was surprised to see it out because I was, uh, traveling and this is the first time I've really done publishing the way that I'm doing it. Uh, this is the first endeavor of truth script pressed, which at this point, I guess I'm overseeing.

And, uh, so I uploaded it to Amazon and within about, I don't know, 48 hours, it was there. Boom. There it is. You can order it. So, um, I actually don't even have my author copies yet. I should get them this weekend.

So if you go to johnharrispodcast .com and you want to get a, uh, an autographed copy of the book, you can do that, but you are going to probably wait a little bit more because I'm going to have to get back from my trip next and it'll probably be shipped next Tuesday, most likely Tuesday or Wednesday.

Uh, but I can give you an autograph copy. That's probably the best deal for me. But, uh, if you want it sooner than that, you can go to Amazon and get it there as well. Uh, there's what it looks like it's on Kindle.

Uh, and it's also on a paperback in those two formats. And hopefully by the end of the week, if not the end of next week, it will be on audible. So you can listen to it as an audio book. Uh, if you're patron, you've been able to listen to it as an audio book for the last two weeks, but, um, it'll be widely available very soon.

So, uh, there you go against the waves, Christian order in a liberal age. Let me know what you think. I hope you enjoy it. I think this is an important book for the times in which we live. Obviously I wouldn't have written it if I didn't think that it's a little longer than the other two books I did on social justice, but for good reason, there's a lot of open questions right now as people reexamine their assumptions and a lot of their assumptions come back to the liberal order in which we live.

So, uh, this is actually what I presented on in Washington last weekend was social and political liberalism. And, uh, hopefully it was, it was a good helpful talk. I know those will be available too, by the way.

I don't know if they are yet. I think hopefully in the next few weeks, I'll try to post links on my social media as those talks become available. But, uh, we actually recorded a number of podcasts, uh, myself and the pastors that I was with, um, and, uh, at a master's Bible church there in Vancouver, Washington.

And, uh, you know, it was, it was really encouraging, good time. And so I'll share some of those with you as well. Uh, anyway, today we have a number of things to talk about and I want to start with the PCA, the Presbyterian church in America.

They are kind of like in my mind, similar to the SBC in some ways. There's obviously differences, uh, not just with theology, but with the challenges that sweep over the denomination at various times.

But I think both of them have similar reactions, instincts, and problems afflicting them. They're both conservative denominations, at least with their doctrinal statements, and they've been inhabited by conservatives for the most part, but there, there are cracks in the foundation.

And, uh, this is something that a lot of the PCA pastors want to deny. Uh, just like in the SBC, you see the same thing. We have no liberals in the SBC. Look, everyone signed the statement as if that means something, uh, means something, but it doesn't mean everything.

And it's, uh, it's just, in my mind, it's historically illiterate, uh, to think that the, the mainline denominations also had these great statements of faith. And of course, uh, in a, in a modern setting, you know, there's more, I would say there's, there's more of an effort to change doctrinal statements, amend them, take out language.

Uh, whereas in post-modernism, you can kind of like, it's like jello. It just kind of wraps around and, uh, you don't have to change the doctrinal statement. You just reinterpret it. But, but certainly, uh, at the beginning of the modernist controversy, there were denominations with very solid doctrinal statements with people in the seminaries who were teaching against those doctrinal statements while claiming to be in, uh, in agreement with them.

So this is part of the problem, but what I want to do is I want to go through some of the recent controversies that have been in the PCA. Some of these, one of these, at least you have heard me talk about, and, uh, then we're going to discuss a little bit what this means.

And so the first thing I want to bring up is this statement from mission to North America. Now, I mentioned this in a podcast and I mentioned that, uh, someone from the PCA contacted me. He was a conservative and said, you know what, John, make sure you don't go out there and praise this statement.

And I didn't, uh, but many did. And the statement is from, uh, Erwin Ince, who is the head of the mission to North America. If you're a Southern Baptist, this is kind of like the North American mission board.

It's like their missions arm, but it's for the United States and the mission to North America. Uh, statement says that they, uh, essentially apologize for erroneously allowing the posting of content that advised undocumented persons on ways to avoid being detained by authorities.

Now you even look at the language there. It's not illegal, right? It's undocumented. It picks the term that's more suitable for a leftist framing, but it says, we affirm that it is our Christian duty to obey the lawful commands of the civil magistrate and be subject to their authority to counsel otherwise as sin.

And so, uh, there's this, um, trying to backtrack and trying to clean up a mess where they were literally the Presbyterian church in America was literally, uh, putting out information, advising on how to, uh, avoid and evade ice for illegal migrants in this country.

And so that's pretty egregious, right? For a conservative denomination to be doing this. And this is part of, uh, what they had to do to, um, who knows what happened behind the scenes, but they had to do this to save face, to maybe, uh, keep positions.

I don't really know what the effects would have been or the consequences if they had not done this, but, uh, there, there certainly would have been consequences if this was uncovered, it is much better for them to come forward with this and say they were wrong than for someone to discover that they did this.

Right. So this was put out there by Erwin Ince and the advice that I received to not go out there and trot this out as some kind of a great statement that, you know, PCAs in good hands was, uh, was good advice.

And I take it well because, uh, it was not long afterward, the Christian post, um, put this out and, and actually I think the daily wire, uh, was maybe the one who broke the story. I'm not sure, but the, the issue is the PCA church in California stirs debate for racially segregated dinner, a dividing wall.

Now this dinner happened at resurrects in Oakland church, a church in Oakland, California that is part of the PCA. And guess who the speaker was? That's right. Reverend Erwin Ince, the same person who crafted the statement I just read to you.

So Erwin Ince, uh, within a week of making the statement that he was being praised for by conservatives, uh, is now at this dinner speaking in a segregated, uh, and we'll get into whether or not this was segregated in a moment, but that's the way it was framed as a segregated dinner for blacks only.

And, uh, it says into as the coordinator of the PCAs mission in North America made headlines earlier this month by pending the extensive statement representing the MNAs guidance, advising legal immigrants to, uh, of how to avoid detainment by immigration and customs enforcement.

Re uh, Rez Oak, which I guess is the shortened name for the church, held another black history month event Saturday that was open to all races during which in celebrity lecture on race, justice, and theology.

But before they did that, they had an exclusive dinner. And of course, Megan Basham got in on this, uh, pretty early on and said a PCA source notes that the 2000, well, actually, you know what, I'm going to skip over this because I don't, I don't know if this is the most relevant thing, but she, she was, she, she made a number of statements about this, this particular one here that I was about to read is just about how this, uh, it goes against the, uh, previous statement made by the mission to North America, where it's not, it's a non-binding thing, but, uh, they essentially identify segregation as a sin and holding segregated events that some Christians can't go to, you know, as sinful.

Now I'm sure the thing is, this is a little muddy because this I'm sure does not apply to Chinese churches or, uh, women's Bible studies and things like that. But, um, but, but there was a statement made that you could certainly look at and say, you know what, I don't think this really is in keeping with what they did in California recently.

Um, but it's important for me to note that Megan Basham got involved in this and was opposing this dinner because this comes up later in a separate controversy that spun off of this. But, uh, part of the pushback was that this wasn't really a segregated event.

And I think Anthony Bradley got in on that, uh, who is prominent in the PCA and, but here, here's the truth of the matter. It really was. And this is a video that protests you put out there. This is from the church.

And I want you to listen to what this.

Particular video says about it. Then on Friday, the 21st from six 30 to eight 30, we're going to have a black fellowship dinner. And let me just say something about what, what this is and why we're doing it.

Uh, this is a special opportunity for black brothers and sisters in our congregation to connect with one another. We have a growing community of black worshipers and congregants, which is really exciting.

And it may be jarring for some of you to hear that we're creating an event, uh, for black Christians. Uh, when you come to church and you've been coming to ResOak, you know how much we love and prize diversity.

We believe that the kingdom of God, that heaven is diverse. And that's something that we celebrate, but we also love helping people connect with one another. And so in the same way that we might have a men's breakfast or a woman's brunch, we want to help our black brothers and sisters come and connect.

This is going to be an informal event. Uh, pastor is going to be there to join us for that. Meet somebody who comes to the 9am service, bring a friend. This is another amazing event to invite a friend to.

And we are.

Really excited to be able to do this. So you can see from that announcement that this was not something that was specific to one group while others were invited to participate like a celebration, uh, that, you know, like you think of St. Patrick's day, for example, the celebration that is unique for the Irish people, but everyone's allowed to participate, right?

It wasn't that, which is how some people were trying to frame this. This really was an event that was unique to a specific class of people to the exclusion of others. And we can, uh, and we will get into a broader discussion of what that means because there are women's Bible studies and men's Bible studies.

There are things like churches that cater to groups who speak a certain language. So others who don't understand that language would not know what they're doing. And so they don't come. And is that the same thing?

And that's going to come up as an objection and a defense here that, uh, people are misreading this, that this is something that, uh, is just like what I, the events I just described. So, uh, I think we need to just establish that this was an event that was specific to a unique class of people and to the exclusion of others.

And if we don't understand that from the beginning, then the rest of this won't make as much sense. So this spun off into another controversy related to this evangelical dark web, put this out, Anthony Bradley Stokes race war against Megan Basham.

That was obviously a little bit of a, uh, vivid headline there. I don't know that you want to call this a race war necessarily, but he was rude. I'll put it that way. He was definitely rude. Here's what he says after Megan Basham highlighted this event, this fellowship dinner for black history month.

Uh, he said, Megan Basham is the personification of low IQ. This is so dumb. This is the same ignorance that asks, why is there a black church? Research shows that content like hers is a sure sign of significant father issues.

So Megan Basham now has daddy issues. And if you know anything about Anthony Bradley, this is one of the things he talks about is what it's like to grow up without a father and the effect that has, especially on young, uh, black men and women.

And to accuse Megan Basham of this is actually a pretty serious charge coming from him, because he knows what that means. And, uh, Megan Basham, all she said was that this, uh, dinner that Erwin Ince, the rector of Presbyterian Church in America's missions program, was speaking at, uh, is, represents how, um, Christ's kingdom is supposedly divided by skin color.

That they're, she's accusing them of essentially trying to divide Christ's kingdom by skin color, which is the same kind of things that Anthony Bradley, if you, I did this, um, and I don't want to, uh, bore you with all the different statements by Anthony Bradley on segregation, but I did do this just briefly just to see.

If you go, look up the term segregation under Anthony Bradley's, uh, X profile, and you will see example after example where segregation is painted as a very negative thing, and, uh, that this is a theological thing that is against the body of Christ.

And Megan's trying to, I think, be consistent here and say, well, if that's what you believe, if that's what the, these people have been saying this for a long time, and now you're going to have a segregated event, then, you know, I'm just going to apply your logic to you, essentially.

Now the difference, and this is where the woke thinking comes into it, the difference here is that if you're in a minority position in their minds, then, and minority is more than just the numbers that you possess.

It is the social strata, the power relationship that you have towards those who are the default, who control things, essentially. So if you are not in control, if you are in a alleged subordinate position, then this kind of thing becomes okay.

If you are in a position of control and authority, then this kind of thing is not okay. And that's why even in South Africa, where white people, the descendants of the Dutch, the descendants of the English, the Boers, these people are not afforded the kind of privileges in the minds of the woke crowd that those in the United States who are in a minority position are afforded, because historically, well, the white people have controlled things, right?

So that's really the root of this is that you can have a strong in-group preference if you are in a minority, which really means an oppressed position in their minds, and if you are an oppressor, then you are not allowed to have an in-group preference.

You need to be inclusive and have diversity and bring everyone on in. So we've been living under this, obviously, for quite some time, and it's really, I'm not even shy about calling it the civil rights regime at this point.

It's not just the affirmative action regime. This is the entire civil rights project, is to try to create some kind of a platform for minorities who have a disparity between themselves, whether that's economic or influence, with those in the majority positions or authoritative positions.

And through the mixing of people together, through the artificially tipping the scales to favor people who suffer from this disparity, these kinds of things, we have adjusted our entire society, including churches, in many cases, to try to accommodate and erase this disparity that exists.

And I quoted this in my speech on Saturday, but there's a 2018 study that shows that after 60 years of the civil rights regime in America attempting to destroy these disparities, they have not made a dent.

There's really no significant progress. The disparity still exists. So anyway, this is one of the ways, this is one of the tools used to try to overcome that disparity sometimes, is to have exclusively Black spaces or minority spaces of various kinds, so that an in-group preference can be cultivated and to prevent white people from coming into this kind of an event or space.

They like to use the word space rather than place, but white people coming into these places would ensure that they become the authoritative ones, and they reap the benefits from whatever plans are going to be discussed and so forth.

So that's a little bit of the thinking behind this, and you're going to see this play out, much of this, as I show you various reactions. But the accuser of father issues, I mean, it's a slam that honestly he should apologize for.

It's a slander is what it is. It is a low blow. It is a disgusting thing, and if she were to say that to him or to accuse Anthony Bradley of having issues because he's not married and doesn't have children, for example, then she would be obviously accused of racism.

She would be run out of town on a rail because she is this white woman who is trying to speak down to someone in a minority position, but he gets away with this kind of thing, not with conservative thinkers more so like myself, but with those who are, let's say, on the woke side of things.

He totally gets away with this kind of thing, and that's not the only thing he said. He said a couple, in my opinion, nasty remarks, but the first thing you often see in these situations where someone is out on a ledge and they have gone too far, they have offended the conservative base of their organization or denomination is people will give their personal endorsements.

They'll post pictures with that particular person, and while avoiding the issue why those people are on the stand and being cross-examined, they'll just give a blanket endorsement, and so you have Rebecca McLaughlin here saying, good morning to everyone, and especially to my brother Erwin, Erwin Ince, she's talking about.

For those who don't know Erwin, here's a podcast episode he did with me last year on how he came to be a Christian and why Christianity is better than CrossFit, and of course, who could argue with that subject matter about personal testimony of becoming a Christian?

I remember when Dr. Russell Fuller exposed the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and what Al Mohler was doing and what some of the people under him were doing there in regards to critical race theory, and not just that.

He also talked about postmodernism. He talked about higher criticism, and the first thing you saw was the professors that he named, Dominique Hernandez, Matt Hall, et cetera, they come out with these videos, and the first question in those videos, if you remember, is now how did you become a Christian?

Tell me about your personal testimony, and this is something that Christians in both the PCA and the SBC and conservative circles think absolves them of the infractions that they have committed. They can just trot out their personal testimony and the minds go off, because you think that this is the core of the Christian message, it's why we're gathered into places like seminaries and churches and other endeavors to get the gospel out there, and whatever accusation is flying around out there, it must not be important, or perhaps it does not have merit, because this person's a Christian because they have a story.

And this is, I'm so used to it, that this is just how things operate in the SBC and the PCA. Either that or they'll show a picture of, here's my friend signing the abstract and principles, or here's my friend agreeing to the doctrine that we all believe.

That's the attempt in both of these situations, whether it's the personal testimony story or whether it is, look, this person's orthodox because they believe the piece of paper that we all agreed to, or at least they say they do.

So I don't think it's much of an actual defense here. It doesn't actually get into the weeds, it doesn't address the issue, but it is something that people like Rebecca McLaughlin in this case, and other people like Jim Pachta, who is a counselor, and he is in the PCA as well, elder at New St. Peter's Presbyterian Church, a therapist I guess is the word.

These are the kinds of things that they'll say. He says, my love for Erwin is greater than my desire to react to the vomiting of Megan Basham. So he actually does get into the issue a little bit here.

You have Lamont English. Now, Lamont English, if you remember, I've done extensive talks twice I think now. I've gone into more extensively what his role in the PCA has been, but his name will come up at the center of the whole Zach Garris debacle and the people that are trying to get Zach Garris defrocked from his presbytery, the Rio Grande Presbytery, out in New Mexico.

Lamont English, who, you know, very woke guy, he has this to say, I am thankful for the good Dr. Anthony Bradley. One of the highlights of last year was getting to meet and learn from him at HBCU. We sat next to each other on the plane ride back, and this brother encouraged my soul with his honesty and wisdom.

The PCA is blessed by his presence. So he's defending Anthony Bradley because Anthony Bradley decided he would go down with the ship that Erwin Entz is on. Love the good bishop and thankful for his continued encouragement, ministry, and witness in the PCA.

The denomination is better with Reverend Erwin Entz in it. So it's just...and then you bring up something superficial. The same thing happened with Remecca McLaughlin, right? She brings up something superficial like the gospel or whatever she said is better than CrossFit.

Here he is saying, I love he enjoys Superman Returns because that's definitely an underrated Supes film. So the strategy is to affirm this person's orthodox, they're a Christian, and then to downplay whatever concerns there are because it's in the same category as Superman Returns, apparently, or CrossFit.

So these people who want to make a big deal, they're just overblowing things. Lamont English also defended Anthony Bradley here when Anthony Bradley said, to be black in the PCA means spending your ministry being attacked if you do anything that shows love instead of contempt for the black community.

So now people who complain about this segregated event are attacking the black community. I've been called liberal, woke, the PCA's illiterate n-word, a supporter of liberation theology and CRT, etc.

It needs to stop. Well, are you those things, right? That's the question. Here's Lamont English saying a bunch of woke things with the, you know, the fist raised on his t-shirt. Here's...and then here's the segregated event, and Dr. Erwin Entz and Anthony Bradley's using these as these are attacks on the black community.

That's what these are. If you object to wokeness, BLM narrative, you are attacking the black community. And Lamont English is here for it. It could be exhausting, he says, being black in this space. So I hear that word.

That is one of the big words I hear constantly is exhausting. It's just so exhausting to be a woman. It's so exhausting to be black around white people. They just drain you of all your energy because really the assumption here is they're dumb.

They say stupid things. They make ignorant comments, and you just have to keep explaining to them their position and how you're subordinate and they're being insensitive to you. That's the context this generally comes up in.

That's why people are exhausted. They claim to be exhausted. My reaction is, if you're so exhausted, why are you in the PCA? If you want to rejuvenate yourself, if you need to get some rest, then go somewhere else if that's how you feel about it.

But it is a way to diminish the thinking and opinions of those who are not black in this case. They're not exhausted. If you don't feel exhausted, then you probably don't understand what's going on. You don't have access to the same truth.

You are blinded. You don't see what's clearly in front of you. Because if you did, you would also be exhausted. You would be upset about the insensitive things and the horrible disparities that exist and the way that white people bandy about their privilege and their leadership and think that it's owed to them essentially that they should just be in these roles of importance.

So it just becomes exhausting because you're constantly stigmatized and marginalized and pushed down even by well-meaning people who don't realize that's what they're doing. So that's what's going on here.

Notice none of these really address the issue. All of this is smoke and mirrors. You have then the wagon circling Brad Edwards. You and Dr. B are deeply appreciated and respected by many. Daniel F. Wells, Lamont, I am grateful that you have persevered and remained in our denomination.

You are an encouragement to many, including me. Jason Cornwell, I'm sorry you have to put up with this nonsense. Jason Cornwell actually was the one that made the statement of there are no liberals in the PCA, none.

And we have a confession, so we can't. It doesn't work, I guess, if you have a confession to have liberals. As if liberals can't infiltrate, lie, subvert in other ways that the confession doesn't even perhaps address.

And I've noticed that lately. It's like creation ordinance stuff that gets subverted and the confessions all just assume those things, right? So you're kind of like, you could say the confession addresses it, but it's two or three steps in and you have to make some assumptions.

Like for example, things like God made the male and female homosexuality is sinful. Usually historic confessions didn't have to spell out homosexuality being sinful. This was just assumed. And of course that's part of creation, but I digress.

These folks that you see here, the reason I include this is these are the same people who have signed the complaint against Zachary Garris in the PCA. These are the people that want to get rid of, cancel conservatives in their denomination.

And they think they're doing the good work of the Lord by getting rid of vile racists and evil bigots in their denomination. But they don't have any problem driving people out, is my point. They don't have any problem trying to get rid of the people on the other side of the aisle from them in the denomination.

But as soon as one of their guys is attacked, even for something as egregious as saying Megan Basham has daddy issues or speaking at this segregated event, they will immediately circle the wagons and say, how dare you?

How dare you? Which is what's going on. Now here's someone who actually did try to, from the PCA, who did try to get, who addressed the issue. And this is from Micah Edmondson. Micah Edmondson responds to Megan here and says, segregation refers to legalized separation and disparities to promote the lie of racial supremacy.

It was a tool to enforce the racial caste system in America. Blacks were not just put in separate spaces, but inferior spaces relegated not to other seats on the bus, but the back. So there's two elements to this, right?

For it to be segregation, it must be legal. It must have the weight of the government and coercion behind it. And it also needs to be an inferior position that it puts black people in, a subordinate position.

So in this particular case, this can't be segregation, this dinner that Erwin and spoke at, because the assumption is, it's separate but equal. I don't know, you can't make this up, right? I mean, the facilities are equal, so it can't be segregation.

And the government's obviously not behind it. So the government's not policing the event. But you just heard the announcement, who's going to be watching over the event? Who's deciding who gets to go and who gets to stay home?

Well, it's the church. So because the church is behind it, this is bonkers to me, because Micah Edmondson is the same guy, many of the guys I just showed you are the same people who promoted divided by faith.

And this whole narrative that separate but equal is wrong, it's sinful, and that for it to happen in the church is especially egregious. It's worse than having it even in the government. I mean, because you're dividing the body of Christ.

So now he's giving the logic that segregationists from years ago, at least, would have found some agreement in that, well, these spaces aren't unequal. And there's segregation du jour, and then there's segregation that's legal, right?

And people will vote with their feet and go places in a natural, organic way, birds of a feather flock together. But he's saying that legalized segregation is the only kind of segregation that qualifies, I guess, as segregation.

So I guess the suburbs are fine, right? I guess gentrification is fine under this. All the things they complain about are fine. Even redlining, to an extent, right? Wouldn't that have been fine as long as the government's not involved, as long as it's banks and private organizations?

That should be fine. It's not really segregation then. I don't think he's thinking through this too deeply. He says, women's ministry isn't segregation. Men's ministry isn't segregation. Youth ministry isn't segregation.

Latino ministries aren't practicing segregation. Korean churches aren't practicing segregation. These affinity spaces strengthen believers for fellowship in the broader church. So if I added to that, a specific white ministry is not segregation either by that logic, right?

Or is it because white people are in the dominant position in his mind? And there you get the woke logic, right? It's the power disparity. So I have not done this, actually, but I'm just curious. What if you just clicked on—I'm doing this in real time here—but Micah Edmondson, and you just type in segregation.

I mean, you could do this with—I didn't spell segregation right—segregation. You could do this with any of these guys and just look at what they've said about it. Let's get past before this latest controversy.

Okay. 2021, Micah Edmondson. Segregation. We're keeping the peace and preserving our way of life. So he's comparing it to Jim Crow slavery. It's injustice. It doesn't go elaborate on it, but it's just a blank statement of segregation in the negative.

The term segregation describes not only racial separation itself, but also the long legacy of systemic oppression that has led to the current separation. Okay, so now we're broadening the definition to include the people he doesn't like.

So it's not even just racial separation. It's this— again, we're in power dynamics. It's the subordinate position thing that he doesn't like. It's the disparity, right? We could probably go on and on here.

He talks about it quite a bit. For 350 years, segregation was the law in American churches. Really, American—now we're talking about the church, right? We're not talking about this—for 350 years, was it really the government that was enforcing for 350 years that churches must be black or white?

No, it wasn't. Of course not. In all times and places in the United States, definitely not. Blacks were relegated to the back of worship spaces, barred from communion table in places, and shackles which were affixed to the pews.

Imagine the blasphemy of having shackles built into church pews. So this goes on and on and on. He obviously is not consistent with his own understanding that he's bringing now of what segregation is.

He broadened it, and again, the core thing is the power dynamics. It's the disparity there. So if you can segregate, really, to use the actual etymology of the word, you can separate and have an in-group preference for your own people, your own, in this case, black folks, and you do unique and gated events for them, as long as you're in that subordinate oppressed position by their standards.

Brian Fickert, Brothers and Sisters in Christ, the vitriol being unleashed on Dr. Bradley and Irwin is simply evil. It's evil, to point out their hypocrisy. We need to stand with these brothers in the face of wolves in sheep's clothing.

Doing so exposes us to the wolves' attack, but the Great Shepherd is with us. I mean, there's such a moral power play. Jesus is on our side. These are the wolves. These are heretics, essentially, right?

These are awful people. And Nate Fisher responded, said, posted a link that shows that Dr. Fickert here has been a consultant to the World Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank, and the United States Agency for International Development.

So for those of you who are very curious about our denominations, what about government ties? Is there government ties? Well, it doesn't explain everything, but in certain circumstances, you can certainly see, okay, yeah, here he is.

I mean, look, he works for the United States Agency of International Development. That kind of, that figures according to Nate Fisher, and I think that's probably right. Yeah, okay, you're enforcing the rule of worldview, if you want to call it that, the thinking of the elites in society who have pretty much run everything up until Donald Trump got back in, and still run most of the influential sectors of society.

Howard Davis, the biggest dangers in the PCA and for the PCA, not a leftward slippery slope, but a racist, baptized Christian nationalism, there it is, which abounds on X, and which many theologically sound leaders seem to be okay with.

In the PCA, I really wish that Gospel Refinet would make this a priority to address, and Gospel Refinet is the Gospel Reformation Network. So these guys are, I think, supposed to be more conservative group in the PCA.

Whether they are or not, I don't, you know, that's debatable. I think Lincoln Duncan is like one of their board members or something, but, and I actually talk about some of the members to that organization in my book, Against the Waves, and show that I don't think these guys necessarily, some of the guys at the top necessarily even have, you know, like John Payne, have the ability to take the hard stands that need to be taken.

They're busy, you know, saying, like, I want to have unity with my brothers whom I disagree with, and it's kind of like the John McCain approach, right? And there, meanwhile, insinuating you're a wolf.

But there you have Howard Davis, right? We need to, that's the real problem. So it's deflection at this point. Let's not focus on the issue. Let's deflect to the real problem here, and the real problem is not that.

And I want to point out, this isn't the only thing happening. I just, this might be a smaller deal with the PCA, but Chuck Ezell, a ruling elder in the PCA, became the director of the Office of Personal Management.