A page that calls itself For the New Christian Intellectual posted a question and then answered it. Q: How can you reason with someone who claims the following kind of nonsense? 1. “The God spoken of in Scripture cannot be proved to exist by any other method than the indirect
Hatred, a membership law, and noticing are not one object.
A nation is not a waiting room
The conjunction does not choose
Prudence is not baptism
They grant that a Christian people may care about law, family, and a magistrate. They keep calling the name something along the lines of a grievance ontology.
It names an office: public justice under the Lord, outward care of true religion, no claim to the keys.
Toby Sumpter and CrossPolitic grant that preferring married households with a parent at home, inside federal childcare money that will be spent anyway, is better than farming fraud or fatherless incentives. They keep calling that preference the same genus of ruin: socialism, welfare, the destruction of the family it pretends
What should the magistrate do with a spend he is already going to make?
The civil magistrate in late Protestant memory has become a thin office. A nursing father is not a night watchman.
Russell Moore's title proves too much Russell Moore says laughter at immigrant suffering is deforming our souls. Even those who want closed borders, he writes, should not find migrants’ pain entertaining. What we learn to laugh at disciples us.[1] Grant the last sentence. A conscience can be
Death is the mode the image requires. Part 2 of 2. Part 1 argued that S still requires P, and that T does not discharge the deed.[1] This part asks what P must be when S is the killing of three image-bearers by the hands that fed them.