10 comments

1. Dr. Clark is right about anti-Semitism showing up in conservative Reformed circles. Fortunately, it’s a small problem, it’s almost entirely online rather than IRL (in real life), and in almost every case I’ve seen, when it shows up on legitimate and long-established Reformed discussion groups, it’s been stopped by administrators.

   Unfortunately, I have direct firsthand real-life experience with some of these people since their anti-Semitism has also made me a target due to my interracial marriage. Let’s just say I know more than a few things about Italian fascism and Mussolini and where that stuff goes. While I don’t think I’ve succeeded in getting any of these people to repent, I do think the fact that I know the actual history of real fascism, and how it worked out in Europe and how it “morphed and merged” into the “caudillo culture” of Francoist Spain and then Latin America, allowed me to get a hearing with people who would normally dismiss someone with my views as a “woke race mixer.” I do think I’ve created some “cognitive dissonance” and caused some of them to rethink whether the warnings of Psalm 1 apply to them, i.e., walking with fascism leads to standing and then sitting in some very bad places. This stuff has its own internal logic and will lead its advocates into places they do not want to do.

   The best I’ve been able to do is convince some of them that Franco is a better model for their concept of a Christian nation, which I suppose is an improvement over their previous views. However, Francoism is inherently contrary to Protestantism, and also to an Anglo-American view of capitalism and a “lex rex” view of justice. People who adopt Francoist Spain as their model are not going to remain Reformed and will be drawn toward traditionalist Catholicism.

   From what I’ve seen, most of the Reformed people who have anti-Semitic attitudes are young people who have become Reformed as part of a process of rejecting dispensationalism. The most common trajectory has been that someone was in IFB (Independent Fundamental Baptist) circles, became enamored of John MacArthur, turned against his modified form of dispensationalism, and then applied the same separatistic “me-against-the-world” mentality learned in IFB circles to their newfound covenantal view of the Reformed faith, becoming what I call “biblicistic Five-Pointers” rather than confessionally Reformed. Not surprisingly, they tend to have problems in confessionally Reformed churches.

   In other words, people who were once in churches that taught unbiblical things about Israel and the Jewish people have realized the problems of dispensationalism, but in rejecting one error, their pendulum swung into the opposite error.

   My usual approach is to remind such people that Puritans such as Oliver Cromwell and John Owen fought hard to legally allow Jewish people to openly live in England, that the Savoy Declaration is explicitly philo-Semitic, and that the Dutch Reformed have a centuries-long history of providing refuge for persecuted Jewish people. I’ve yet to find anyone who can come up with a response to my point that nobody in their right mind can think Oliver Cromwell is “woke” and “overly tolerant,” but if Cromwell of all people fought for the right of Jewish people to live openly in the Commonwealth, maybe we ought to listen to what he, and Owen, and the Savoy Declaration had to say about the Jewish people.

   People who care about confessions and Reformed history will listen. Those who don’t aren’t going to remain Reformed.

   Reply ↓

2. This is a massive problem for Reformed Christianity in America. There are NAPARC churches (plural) that have fallen to this ideology, and it’s spreading like wildfire with young men. I’d go as far as to say this is the greatest threat our conservative Reformed churches face today (which is not something I would’ve said in the recent past).

   Reply ↓

3. it’s pretty funny that the Trump administration goes after all of these elite universities under the guise of trying to take them to task for antisemitism while so much rank antisemitism hides in plain sight in so many corners of MAGA.

   Reply ↓

   • It’s far worse on the left. The left projects their violence upon the right as they launch vicious and violent attacks over and again, aka, Boulder.

     Reply ↓

     • Chris,

       The Anti-semitism of the left is a huge problem, which they seem unwilling to admit or face but those of us on the cultural/religious right also must face the reality of genuine Nazism.

       This X/Twitter thread blew my mind and still haunts me. Further, one leading advocate of Christian Nationalism uses, in his book, the very same language as the Nazis. Remarkably, few reviewers (if any) have noted this. My review is forthcoming. It’s an issue.

       Reply ↓

       • when I want a positively cartoonish caricature of the unholy union between MAGA and American Christianity (like, the professional wrestling version) I read American Reformer and see how long I can keep a straight face.

         Reply ↓

     • And yes the right launches vicious and violent attacks, such as KKK, Proud boys, etc… They all naturally flow from the right. (Satire)

       To say the boogeyman of “the left” commited the tragic attack by one illegal immigrant in Boulder is unfathomable to me. It shows once again how we cannot blame tragedies on a social movement or generalize these tragedies.

       Reply ↓

       • Ben,

         The American left needs to grapple with its violent underbelly.

         There has been a good deal of leftist political violence in my lifetime.

         Some of the most violent political actions in modern American history have been from the left.

         Reply ↓

         • I don’t disagree that the American left needs to grapple with that issue.

           I do however take issue with comments that seek to blame individual actions (such as the boulder terrible attack) on a whole social movement/group that has little to do with it. My reaction is coming I believe from my fatigue. I’m tired of (in my opinion) terrorist attacks, terrible events, or the exposure of horrific personal evil, being used to attack political groups, societal movements, or church/family connections. Sometimes connections can rightly be made, and there might be a causal force at play. But I personally believe we need to be more clear in holding the individual sinner liable for their own sin instead of overthinking “it must be from this movement” “they followed this person on twitter” “they went to this extremist church/group.” Blame games are awful things etc…

         • Agreed.

           I don’t see how leftism has anything to do with Boulder. That dude is an Islamist.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.