BIG EVA AND THE TRUNCATED GOSPEL COALITION OF PAUL TRIPP | EP 29

You mentioned a number of the people that Paul called out. He also called out Uriah and Syntyche in Philippians 4 for their divisiveness, and he named them by name. Jesus did name names. He named Herod that fox at one point.

And throughout the Old Testament, you see the same thing. Prophets do call out people. I don't consider myself a prophet, but we're supposed to follow the example of an Old Testament and rebuke those who are leading people astray because they become a danger.

It's dangerous to follow Paul Tripp's new theology. It absolutely is. It will destroy churches. And look at what has happened to the churches that have followed that train wreck, right?

What Big Eva Means and Where the Term Came From

And welcome to Tearing Down High Places. My name's Average Joe here with the pastors. We got three of them today to talk about Big Eva. What is Big Eva? What do we need to do about it? How do we recognize it?

Is it an issue at all? So welcome back, Seth Brickley. Great to be with you again. Yeah. From Wisconsin. Great to be with you. Nice to have you. And Pastor Jeff, how are you, sir?

Oh, I'm doing very, very well. We kicked off our study of Genesis again, going through on Wednesdays, noon.

So loved it. It's great to be back in the Word. Great. So we'll probably hear some Genesis today.

That usually happens. Whatever's been in my mind, what I've been studying is what comes out in TDHB. It always does. It's great that way. Pastor Tim, welcome, sir. Hey, Average Joe.

What's up, Seth? Jeff, how's everyone doing? Great. Good. Good. Okay. So the topic on the table, guys, is Big Eva. So let me be average and ask somebody, what the heck is Big Eva?

Well, Big Eva, the first time I ever heard this terminology was from the 2019 Spring Shepherds Conference. And this is the infamous Q &A that happened where John MacArthur, Phil Johnson, Lincoln Duncan, Al Mohler, and Mark Dever were all on the stage together.

And they were there to talk about the issue of social justice because, you know, in 2018, that's really when social justice really took off in American evangelicalism. And on the stage, Phil Johnson is kind of going through the history of these trends that have overtaken American evangelicalism.

And he talked about the emergent church. He talked about the seeker-sensitive movement, and he's saying, well, now we have social justice. And he called it Big Eva. And so that was the first time I heard the terminology.

So ever since I heard that, it's become clear to me that there is this big movement that is not faithful to biblical Christianity when it comes down to it. It doesn't mean everything they say is wrong, but it really is a mixed bag.

And Christians really need to be aware of this.

Emergent Church, Seeker-Sensitive Ministry, and Social Justice as Liberal Drift

Okay, we got to define some terms here because we're going to lose a few folks. First, I want to ask this. Is emergent church, seeker-sensitive, and social justice warriors, are they all basically the same group, just changing the names?

Is that what you're saying?

Yeah, go ahead, Jeff. Okay, I would say that all of them are a thinly veiled expression of liberalism. And that will just come in the iterations over the years. So the emerging church comes in the early 2000s, and it's this new liberal approach to scripture.

It's really postmodern and trying to do things in a way that not necessarily seeker-sensitive, but not faithful to the word of God, calling everything into question, taking a posture of uncertainty about even the things that are clearly explained in scripture.

That's emergent, emerging church.

Wait, say that again. How do you define emerging? Because I thought I heard you talking seeker-sensitive, and I know what that is.

It's quite different. I would say seeker-sensitive is even earlier. That's the 80s and 90s with Joe Hybels, and you've got Rick Warren, very seeker-sensitive, trying to make the church attractional, and therefore it waters down and loses the rough edge and the hard teachings of Christ.

Skipping some verses that people may not resonate with.

Right, unlikely to call people to repent, rather just try to make an easy-believism route to grow the church. So it's seeker-sensitive. It's sensitive to their feelings and emotions and not wanting to offend anyone so as to grow the church.

So it works well with the church growth movement.

It's almost gnostic, isn't it? Because it's like there's this hidden knowledge we'll let you know about down the road. Yeah, you could say that.

The Emergent Church comes in the early 2000s, late 90s, and it's people, who are some names.

From it? Rob Bell, Love Wins, Brian McLaren was the big name, McLaren, yep.

Blue Light Jazz, that book. Even Mark Driscoll early on was associated with them. Then he realized, kind of like lifted the liberal veil of it and made a break from Emergent. But what we're talking about here is something a little bit different.

It's more of a money kind of thing, an industrial complex, where leaders invite one another to their conferences and platform each other and are never willing to say anything negative, even when one of them strays.

For example, a big book came out in 2002-ish called Divided by Faith, and it really was a Marxist misunderstanding. It imported all kinds of ideas of accusing the church of racism just because of the color of people's skin.

It brought in those critical race theory ideas and brought it into the church. Well, when Big Eva, a couple of them jumped on board with that, Thabiti Anawible, David Platt in 2018 at Together for the Gospel, they began to peddle this stuff.

Big Eva circled the wagons, and they protected them, and they all echoed one another's teachings because they have so much wound up in one another's ministries. It's the board members of the gospel coalition.

It's the leaders of these institutions that are so networked and intertwined that, financially speaking, their empires depend on one another. That's what I take from Big Eva.

It's a powerful issue there. MIKE BOLOGNINO. Yeah, it's celebrity pastors. I have a list of names here, and some of these we would consider better than others based on what they've taught and what they've written.

But on one end, you have people like Andy Stanley and Rick Warren. On the other hand, you have people like Tim Keller, D .A. Carson, John Piper, Mark Dever, and then the younger crop that they raised up.

I really think that these people are actually chosen to be like the next kind of anointed one in this movement, Matt Chandler and David Platt, a couple of the rising stars. They platform these people, these big conferences.

They had T4G. Of course, the gospel coalition had some really big conferences. It's these organizations that are just huge, a lot of money, a lot of power, a lot of influence. And these celebrity pastors who have millions of followers.

MIKE GREEN. Wow. You mentioned Mark Driscoll and conferences in the same breath. I just saw him recently. He was at a conference where he was criticizing the people who set up the conference because they had some sort of pole dancer opening up a men's conference.

They called him to repent. It was ugly. Did you see that, Jeff?

It looks like you saw it. JEFF ZELENY. I did. It was a very interesting debacle. They had this guy. He was formerly a pole dancer, supposedly was saved. But as you listen to the interviews later, he never was.

He remained Eastern Orthodox, had a very poor understanding of salvation. In fact, he would climb a pole with a sword down his throat and then drop himself down the pole and catch himself right before being impaled by the ground through the sword and cutting himself to pieces.

He said salvation is every time he performs that stunt, the Lord saves him. That's how he thought he was saved. Anyway, Driscoll saw that he took his shirt off and moved around weird on the pole and everything.

So he was like, that's like a male pole dancer. What are you doing at a men's conference? He called it out rightly. And then he got pretty much run through the ringer for saying something. What's wrong with you people?

MIKE ZELENY. There we go.

But let me ask you this question. Who is more dangerous, you think? Is it the obvious Big Eva compromise like Jeff just mentioned, or maybe like a Rick Warren where there's obvious compromise, Andy Stanley, obvious compromise, or is the Gospel Coalition more dangerous because they have more credibility?

There's more truth. And yet packaged within that truth is something that's very bad.

Paul Tripp, the Truncated Gospel, and the Danger of Social Justice Theology

ANDY STOLER. One of the worst wolves that there is on the scene is Paul Tripp because he had 30 years of incredible gospel ministry. We had his brother come out the cornerstone, Ted Tripp, and do a family conference.

And as far as I know, Ted never went the way of Paul Tripp. But when Paul Tripp left 10th Presbyterian and moved to inner city Philadelphia and fell under the sway of Eric Mason, woke church, and that whole doctrine of social justice, he became the worst danger because he was so trustworthy.

Everybody loved Paul Tripp. He was a great counselor and somebody that we relied upon so well. Then he writes an article in 2018 called My Confession. And he says that for all of those years, he had been preaching a truncated gospel.

I wrote an open letter to him at that time and published it. It was carried on pulpit and pen, which is now bunked. And Bible thumping wingnut had it. But he never answered that. I sent it certified mail to his office and he never answered it.

But ultimately, My Confession, when he said he had been preaching a truncated gospel, he said essentially that 1 Corinthians 15, 1 to 4, the gospel. I want to remind you of the gospel. That is insufficient because it doesn't include this social justice aspect of the justice work that he says that is part of the gospel.

Yeah, one thing we've seen is how loosely the word gospel has been used, right? Like this is a gospel issue. I mean, how many times have we heard that? And like Jeff said, we have a very tight definition given in Scripture in 1 Corinthians 15, 1 through 4.

And it mirrors what happened 100 years ago with the social gospel, which is a works righteousness Christianity.

Seth, was it your question to Jeff when you said, so which is worse?

Yeah, I mean, to Tim too. I mean, any of you guys, what do you think, Tim? Which one's more dangerous?

I really, I think it depends on who the audience is. Because the one that's openly wrong, you probably have unbelievers following that anyway, that would probably continue to be unbelievers. The danger in someone who is preaching a true gospel for years and then switching to a false gospel, but saying it's actually better than the one that he was preaching and then leads a lot of big following that trust him.

I think that overall does more damage for the kingdom because people who are already saved and people who are already beginning to follow Christ are now turning away towards a path that they might not come back from.

So I think that's probably the difference.

I think that you've got to have a whole bunch of believers who are not well, well, discipled, who are going to say, oh, this is just the same old bad kind of church I left before. Or this is just like the Catholic church or just like the other heretical church I might have belonged to in the past.

And they're going to say, I don't want to deal with this when they, you know, when they see this kind of controversy within who they thought were faithful, faithful preachers. And we still have some, we still have old Paul Trip books that are probably still really good, but I don't want to support a ministry that's gone awry.

Yeah. And he wrote this book called Dangerous Calling that is all about persevering in ministry and being faithful to Christ till the end of your ministry. And yet he wrote this in 2012. And then only a handful of years later, he's pushing the social justice gospel.

And as I was sharing with you guys earlier, you know, the names on the back of this, it's really interesting how, I don't know if you can read the names through the screen here. We got Danny Akin, who's the president of Southeastern.

Put it up, put it up again. I zoomed in on you.

You got Danny Akin, who's the president of Southeastern Theological, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. And he is woke and he has led that seminary down a woke path. You have Tulian Chevijan, who was unfaithful to his wife.

You have Josh Harris, who came out affirming the LGBTQ agenda. And then lastly, you have James McDonald, who last I heard of him. And he flamed out of his ministry in Chicago because of gambling and other issues and domineering.

And then he was charged with, or he was accused of battery and was actually in court. So, I mean, it's just very interesting. It's almost like God is, even though like a lot of what's spoken in this book is true.

It's a huge alarm to say, guys, there's something seriously wrong. And many people are seeing this. More people need to see it about this machine. You can call it Big Eva. You can call it, I know John Harris calls it the Evangelical Industrial Complex.

Some have called it the deep state of Evangelicalism. I mean, if you want to get, you know, duh, duh, duh.

But I think there's a lot of similarities between the federal government bureaucracy and the Big Eva bureaucracy where they are, you know, like TGC sponsors a lot of new authors. And those new authors are sometimes attached to powerful people in the church or maybe not so powerful, but people that they want to be nice to.

So there's like this common grace going out. I don't know.

What makes you think, what was their original goal when they took the leadership position and what changed in their mind? Because it's so hard to even think that, you know, someone who's leading a congregation, like you look at people like who were so consistent in the Bible, like Paul, who was consistent all the way, you know, all the way to prison and then death.

And then, you know, someone like Jeff. Oh, I thought you meant Paul Tripp. You missed me. Paul in the Bible, Paul, the apostle. You see the apostles who were faithful all the way till the end. And then it's just, it's sad to see like people who are born again Christians, then they become leaders.

And then they, they just almost, I almost apostate, but not really. There's, I don't even know what to call that.

Yeah. And one of my big issues is some of these guys like a Joel Olsteen. I mean, he's just an obvious wolf, but Satan is better than that. As far as his craftiness, his deceit, he's going to put guys on these platforms who are going to write books, who are going to be credible.

They're even going to be associated with credible people. And yet through their ministries, Satan is actually going to use these men to actually lead people away from Christ. I mean, he is that good at deceiving people.

And I guess I'm alarmed as a pastor by how many pastors have fallen for this. Right. That's kind of what I'm saying. This is kind of alarming. Yeah. And not even, I don't even mean like the pastors who have actually gone down this path.

I mean, the Bible warns about those people. I'm talking about pastors who your job is to actually call these people out, to call a spade a spade. And what we've seen is they're defended. Oh, and then the people who call them out are crazy.

And that's what we've seen. And it's just disappointing to see that how many true shepherds are really out there.

Not many, because that that great church is massive. That is my overwhelming experiences. The majority of pastors are gray. They got both feet in red and blue trying to accommodate everyone. And they don't.

They're not faithful to scripture. They're just not. That's why we got to push Jeff's book, the Blood Red Church. I mean, that paradigm, that red, gray and blue description of what's going on out there is so helpful.

And I still see some of the big conservative pastors out there struggling on how to describe the great church, you know? Yeah.

Titus 1 .9 says he must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it. And that's really the dividing line, because this is a description of an elder.

An elder in a church, a pastor in a church has to be willing to do that last part. And that's the hard part. Telling the good and positive things. We do that all day long. You know, that's what we did less than an hour ago in the room next door.

We were talking about justification by faith. The difference between imputed righteousness and infused righteousness and all of those doctrines of the Reformation. That's the first part of Titus 1 .9.

But to rebuke those who contradict it means you have to have courage. If you're unwilling to rebuke Paul Tripp, you're basically saying that what he's teaching is OK. I'm OK if you go to Paul Tripp's church with Eric Mason.

That's what you're saying. Wow. The problem is you're allowing the sheep to go after the wolf. Joe, didn't you have a clip of some Eric Mason for us?

And Social Security was created for white people, but we're quote unquote benefiting off of it. But there's nothing that's been done in this country comprehensively as a system.

What the heck is he talking about? You can take your Social Security. That is not a benefit to me whatsoever. It's a weapon. And you know what? We for 100 years, the church has allowed that to steal money from its people just so that the government can go in and take over charity.

And charity was never, ever supposed to be the government. Right.

Yeah. Yeah. So Paul Tripp is going to this man's church. Think about that. And think of how many books he has written. And again, a lot of good things he has written. And yet if someone follows him down this path, it's not going to be good.

That video. That's all about him asking for reparations. There's another one.

It's really detailed. Go ask for silver and gold items and for clothing. Hallelujah. Hallelujah. And then and then here's some more. Hallelujah. Silver. Hallelujah.

Gold. Hallelujah. Good. Hallelujah. And livestock. I feel God right there. I don't know how stealing money is worshiping God. That is no hallelujah. That is not something God wants to be praised for. That is heresy.

Yeah. Because the Ten Commandments are not negotiable. When it says, thou shalt not steal. That doesn't mean that, well, government can come in by the edge of the sword, take money from people and redistribute that to others based on the color of their skin.

Right. And he's talking about, he's quoting Ezra in that part, but he's really talking about Moses. When they left Egypt, they were allowed to plunder the Egyptians. I mean, literally, they were allowed to plunder in a unique situation.

So they get the plunder. I mean, how does that, how do you, how do you get there with that?

Well, they must consider us to be Egyptians. Anybody that they want to take from any citizen that pays taxes is an Egyptian that needs to be plundered.

I mean, it's the worst exegesis ever. It is.

Social Justice, Reparations, and the Meaning of Division

Yeah. Now, some people might not be familiar with who Paul Tripp is. Can you introduce him?

You got any videos? Sure. Well, let me let him self-describe himself.

They call me a socialist or a Marxist. And I don't disagree.

He also, he hurts the conversation. There's another clip I noticed.

This is just the worst. I really want to address my white brothers and sisters.

Does God make divisions like that? Does God ever talk about making divisions? Is there something in the Bible? Oh yeah. Division. That's a sin. That's right. Yep. That's, he's making divisions. He's engaged in sinful behavior there.

But we have so, you know, the great church has so gotten rid of so many sins in their seeker sensitive movement. That's, that's not really, that's not sinful. Was that sinful? Anybody? You guys help me out.

I don't know. I'm just average Joe.

Hmm. Colossians 3 .11. There is no Jew or Gentile, slave or free, barbarian, Scythian, but Christ is in all. So the church, what Christ does is he tears down the dividing walls of hostility and makes in himself one new man who by faith are united to him.

And we consider ourselves brothers. We're not partial. We don't look down on each other or judge one another based on anything, let alone the color of skin. Hmm. He's anti gospel. They say, well, this is only an implication of the gospel.

Well, isn't an implication of the gospel in the other direction to bring unity into the body rather than to introduce Marxism. But the issue with, with trips article is actually deeper than an implication of the gospel.

Because when you read his article, my confession, he distinguishes between justification by faith, describing that as an incomplete gospel. And needed in this justice work, which he himself defines by going to Eric Mason's church.

Eric Mason is the author of woke church. So he's advocating for is social justice. It's wickedness.

It's, it's cultural Marxism. Do you think, do you think, Jeff, do you think that years and years of preaching in a secret, sensitive way, skipping over um, politics in general, and then not having a good understanding of actual political history?

Do you think that if I give Paul trip, the complete benefit of the doubt, do you think that's, that's the source of this confusion?

Yeah, because there was a misunderstanding when social justice came into the forefront. Those like Eric Mason, who were saying we need to explore the social implications of the gospel. And for Mason, it was also a heretical misunderstanding of justification by faith.

But what they were saying was there are implications of the gospel that apply to society. And that's true. And the pietistic reaction to that was to say, just preach the gospel. Yep. And even had a little bit of that from John MacArthur early on before he, he turned and made a correction that way.

Paul trip would have been part of that group that just preached the gospel. So when he wrote his confession, he was basically acknowledging that what the social justice warriors were saying about justice in the public square, the need for justice in the public square was actually right.

That's, that's the impetus for him to write my confession. The problem was he was so untrained in biblical categories of justice. He had spent so little time in the law of God and biblical jurisprudence, and all of what gave us the Western legal system itself.

We need more theonomy. Yeah, you need basically. And he wanted nothing. He had no grounding in that. He probably never read Bonson or just like rejected all of it outright. Didn't nuance it, but just rejected it.

And then when he came full into the conversation, he jumped in on the wrong side. He jumped in with the cultural Marxists and said, well, this is what we actually need to be doing. Because he was deceived by Michael Emerson and Christian Smith divided by faith.

And really what was nothing new about what those guys wrote. They were basically the old red letter Christians, like, you know, Shane Claiborne and Tony Campolo and what all the liberals had been saying.

John Harris's book outlines how this is what they had been saying for the late 1900s. Yeah, it's just the evangelicals weren't even listening to the conversation. And then when they jumped in, they jumped in on the wrong side.

Yeah, just preach the gospel, and they jumped in on the wrong side.

Unwritten Rules, Matthew 18, and the Duty to Rebuke False Teachers

So guys, my definition here of Big Eva, whatever we want to call it. You know, we'll call it Big Eva, though. It's the big industry of American evangelicalism full of worldly compromise. And here's my warning.

To blindly follow Big Eva may lead one away from Christ or limit one's faithfulness to Christ. That's why this is so important. And maybe if you guys are okay, can we talk about the unwritten rules of Big Eva?

Oh, what are they? Well, the unwritten rules, it's been called the 11th commandment. The 11th commandment is thou shall not say anything bad about another person in this club or an institution that they hold dear.

So that would be an unwritten rule. And if someone does speak out against a specific person or an institution, they'll say things like, you didn't follow Matthew 18. You know, where, you know, Matthew 18 is really what it's church discipline.

It's really a kind of a local church context. The Bible does in Galatians 2, verses 11 through 14, give an example of the Apostle Paul confronting the Apostle Peter publicly for his error. And you also see the Apostle Paul several times in his letters saying that these specific people have compromised the truth of the Word of God.

You know, Alexander the coppersmith, Philetus, he even calls out Demas. Jesus in his ministry in Matthew 23 calls out the Jewish leaders. Now he doesn't name them by name, but everybody knew exactly who he was talking about.

If you look at Matthew 23, and he uses very strong language to call these people out. And what's interesting is that within Big Eva, this is like, this is the greatest sin. The greatest sin is to call out these specific people, these specific institutions.

And the gentleman in the lower right screen here can attest to that. For those in the audience who don't know, I'll speak on behalf of Jeff here. Jeff wrote Woke Free Church and called out the leadership of the Free Church who were pushing this social justice gospel, platforming speakers, writing articles, recommending certain books.

And then Jeff lays out factually what they're doing. And instead of listening to Jeff and repenting, they view him as the problem. And not too long ago, in fact, gave him the highest possible discipline, right?

Permanent excommunication for just doing what he's supposed to do as a pastor, Titus 1 .9, to proclaim the truth of God's Word and to rebuke those who contradict sound doctrine.

Yeah, and they won't even talk at this point. Like I've written emails just saying, hey, why don't we just talk and see how we can seek reconciliation? They don't even answer emails any longer. So yeah, I don't know how reconciliation is possible without talking.

But you're right, it's the highest ban. It's shunning. I'm basically shunned at this point in the Free Church. You mentioned a number of the people that Paul called out. He also called out Uriah and Syntyche in Philippians 4 for their divisiveness.

And he named them by name. Jesus did name names. He named Herod that fox at one point. Yeah, and throughout the Old Testament, you see the same thing. Prophets do and call out people. I don't consider myself a prophet, but we're supposed to follow the example of an Old Testament prophet and rebuke those who are leading people astray because they become a danger.

It's dangerous to follow Paul Tripp's new theology. It absolutely is. It will destroy churches. And look at what has happened to the churches that have followed that train wreck, right? David Platt's church, John Piper handed off his church to some young, you know, social justice prodigy.

Jason Meyer. Yep, Jason Meyer.

Yeah, Jason. Yes, that's in Minneapolis. Jason Meyer, you know, he took it one step further than John Piper. John Piper talked about ethnic harmony during this ministry. And at the time, I don't think people knew what he was talking about until the last seven or eight years.

It was, you know, it was this kind of this diversity, equity, inclusion. And I don't even think he even knew kind of the political leftism that he was borrowing it from. But Jason Meyer takes it one step further.

And all this controversy, all this conflict happens in his church where things just blew up. And so now John Piper's church and all the campuses that he had, there was two campuses outside of the downtown campus.

They're all separate churches now. And I have a friend who actually goes to the North Campus. And he says, he actually told me this. He's like, he just started going there. He's been to that church over 20 times.

And he said he has not heard the name John Piper mentioned once. So I wonder if they're kind of distancing themselves. Because I know that the North Campus has taken a stand against social justice, which is good to hear.

Folk language has become very controversial.

Very controversial. So can you guys, can one of you guys give me a definition for the Synod division? Because sometimes it's not. I mean, we got to make arguments. And I think I'm hearing some folks say, well, you're divisive, but we're not.

It's being used in contexts where we're trying to pull people back to orthodoxy.

I would always say unity has to rally around something. And that something is truth. So unity rallies around truth. And division comes into play when someone compromises some point of the truth. Now you have parties, those who support this new false doctrine and those who support the true.

And that inevitably results in conflict. So truth really is the rallying point for unity.

Gotcha. So it's okay. It's not sinful to make a division amongst heretics. Correct.

Well, listen to this from Ephesians 4. Okay. So it's the responsibility of shepherds to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ until we all attain to the unity of the faith of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.

So that we may no longer be children tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness and deceitful schemes. Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into Him who is the head, into Christ.

From whom the whole body joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped. When each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love. That's what a church is supposed to do.

It's all built, as Jeff said, around the truth. And if there is division, sometimes it's necessary if people have compromised. Then we need to divide.

And so security was created for white people. Yeah.

Division. Over your right shoulder, there's a Grudem and an Erikson theology book. Yeah. If you read Erikson on the order of Seleutis, you have faith preceding regeneration. And if you look at Grudem, he has regeneration preceding faith in the order of Seleutis.

So how can you have those books side by side on your own bookshelf? No. How can you do that? I think it's because there are areas where we can differ and still retain unity in faith. Because by good biblical arguments, there's going to be differences among us.

So the real question that comes into play in this discussion, when Paul Tripp writes his confession and points the church towards social justice, is this allowable difference? Is this just a smaller kind of point of doctrine or praxis?

Praxis. Or is this something that's destructive of the faith? And it is the latter. Social justice is heretical. It leads, it destroys churches, first of all. It divides the body like a pizza and distributes it into different camps.

It wrecks churches. But even at the level of the gospel itself, Paul Tripp's article would be an example of where the gospel itself is compromised. My confession. It's not just a minor difference of theology.

The different positions of when the rapture is going to happen, pre-Tripp, post-Tripp, mid-Tripp. This is something that cuts to the gospel itself, especially because it deals with Christian ethics and even defining what's right and wrong.

Marxism will destroy an entire society. You can't just allow Marxism into your church and think that it's all just a minor difference of opinion. You vote Democrat, we vote Republican, whatever, no big deal.

These things destroy lives and destroy entire nations. And if you look in John 17, Jesus' high priestly prayer, where he intercedes for us and prays for us, two things that he prays for is unity, that we would be unified, and sanctification, that we would be sanctified, set apart.

And in sanctification, we grow closer and closer to Jesus. So if we're going to be sanctified, we can't willingly step back, backwards or step somewhere else apart from the gospel and think that that's being unified.

We don't want to compromise truth and sanctification just to be unified in something false.

N.T. Wright, the New Perspective on Paul, and Big Eva’s Double Standard

Amen, that's a false unity. Let me give you guys an example of someone and how Big Eva coddles this person and True Shepherds see this person as a serious problem and a wolf. And that person is N .T. Wright.

N .T. Wright has pushed a different understanding of justification, which is called the New Perspective on Paul. And he did not start the New Perspective on Paul. It was actually a liberal who started it, but he actually embraced it.