“We do not come to the Bible to discover whether it is true; we come to discover its meaning and its teaching, and therefore I say the only hope is that we preach its message to the people. We must preach it to them as the Word of God.”

How Can We See A Return To The Bible? by D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones. Kept Pure Press, 2024. Paperback, 40 pages, $9.99.
On October 24, 1961, the late D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones called his church and nation back to the Holy Bible. The call was issued publicly in the Royal Albert Hall in London at a National Bible Rally that had been organized by the Evangelical Alliance.
I personally heard this call over forty years later while reading a transcript of the address in the book “Knowing the Times” published by Banner of Truth Trust. The call truly is timeless and its continued influence upon my life and ministry compelled me to make it more readily accessible to a new generation of Christians.
Thanks to the kind permission of Banner of Truth, “How Can We See A Return To The Bible?” is now available in booklet format. Due to its convenient size, it is ideal for distribution on the literature table at church or for neighborhood outreach campaigns. Case discounts will be available through the publisher, Kept Pure Press.
Lloyd-Jones stated two distinct purposes at the outset: Commemorating the publication of the Authorized (King James) Version of the Bible and calling the people of his land back to scripture’s self-attesting and supreme authority.
Early in the address, Lloyd-Jones diagnosed the effects of a century’s worth of humanistic philosophy in the churches, colleges, seminaries, and in society as a whole; concluding that all of the dysfunction and even the wars of the twentieth century could be traced back to a spiritual downgrade in the previous century:
“We must not come to the Bible to find out whether it is true or not; we must come to find the meaning of the truth that is there. That has been the fatal error of this so-called Higher Criticism that has come to the Bible to find which part is true and which part is not. The moment you do that you are already wrong, irretrievably wrong!” 
“We do not come to the Bible to discover whether it is true; we come to discover its meaning and its teaching, and therefore I say the only hope is that we preach its message to the people. We must preach it to them as the Word of God.”
Having identified these root causes of the apostasy he was personally witnessing, Lloyd-Jones proceeds to address the futility of different attempts that were being made to “reach” modern man. Particular attention is given to the pseudo-solution of simply updating the language of the Bible:
“Men no longer read the Bible not because they cannot understand its language, but because they do not believe in it. They do not believe in its God; they do not want it.”
“Their problem is not that of language and of terminology; it is the state of the heart. Therefore, what do we do about it? It seems to me there is only one thing to do, the thing that has always been done in the past: We must preach it and our preaching must be wholly based upon its authority.”
This impassioned address concludes with an earnest appeal to take up scripture, to preach it in the power of the Spirit, and to trust God to make it effectual; not only for the gathering and perfecting of the saints, but also for the benefit of society.
Our nation also needs to be called back to the Holy Bible, and we pray that this timeless message from the late D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones will be heard and humbly received by a new generation of Christians.
Christian McShaffrey is a Minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and is Pastor of Five Solas Church (OPC) in Reedsburg, Wisconsin. He also serves as Stated Clerk of the Presbytery of Minnesota and Wisconsin.
Related Posts:

I have not yet developed a method for the quick and reliable identification of kooks, but I may begin working on it soon. Perhaps I will call it the Fawkes Protocol. The local church is a precious gift from God. It is place where Christ’s sheep should be able to rest each week in the green pastures of God’s truth and beside the still waters of his grace.

As I sipped my morning coffee on a brisk November morn, I reviewed the day’s schedule and noticed one appointment that iCalendar had scheduled without my consent: Election Day
Ignoring that intrusion for the moment, I proceeded to browse the latest headlines and, as usual, it was all bad news: War, terrorism, hate, bigotry, conspiracies, politics, scandals, indictments, etc.
After that, I visited a few Christian sites to see what was happening in the Kingdom of God and, sadly, I found much of the same (without the war and terrorism, of course). Everyone is on edge and that is a very dangerous place to be.
Two days prior was Guy Fawkes Day, so I made the mental connection: Our culture seems to be sitting on a proverbial stockpile of explosives. Whether that is due to some kind of plot or not, I will leave to the conspiracy theorists to debate. My only concern is not being around when it finally explodes.
I cannot, of course, leave the world; but I can take calculated measures to keep the world at a safe distance. You might want to do the same.
This begins in the heart as we set our minds on things above, remember that the Lord is at hand, and meditate upon worthy things.
The home must also be guarded. Turn off the news. Better yet, get rid of your television set all together. And as for that device in your pocket, try using it as an actual phone. Call someone and have a conversation.
Read More
Related Posts:

First of all, I am here raising a completely hypothetical question. In over two decades of ministry, I have never had a person ask me that exact question. If someone had, I suppose my initial inclination would be to say, “Probably not, but it depends.”
Sadly, it has been reported that some ministers are interpreting the appendix of “Why I Preach from the Received Text” in a way that undermines my initial inclination and, I believe, misinterprets the actual advice offered therein. The charge has even been voiced that the advice is dangerous and decidedly divisive.
Leaving a local church is a monumental decision and always involves many different considerations. I, in fact, once wrote a ten-step procedure for how saints should make and execute so weighty a decision in a manner that honors the Lord. Apparently, and as previously stated, the advice I offered in the anthology is being interpreted differently.
The purpose of this article is to clarify the advice that was offered that none might misunderstand the intent. Could I have possibly been more clear? Undoubtedly. At the same time, could my critics also be more charitable in their interpretation? Probably.
Let us proceed to review the advice [indented] as I offer some brief commentary on my intent. *
The Advice​

Fifty of the most conservative scholars in the world have come together to translate the Bible from its original Hebrew and Greek, employing the functional equivalence model, with a view to maintain a conservative standard of theology and practice in the churches and in our culture.

A special announcement from textandtranslation.org.
Sick and tired of wokeness? Most Christians are and we are therefore thrilled to announce a truly unprecedented project.
Fifty of the most conservative scholars in the world have come together to translate the Bible from its original Hebrew and Greek, employing the functional equivalence model, with a view to maintain a conservative standard of theology and practice in the churches and in our culture.
Being thoroughly impressed with the committee’s translation work, and believing that this new version will effectively stem the tide of liberalism, several Christian publishers have already agreed to make this translation available without copyright.
This new translation is titled the “Anti-woke Version” and the following sample verses prove its commitment to unapologetically conservative renderings:

If these samples warm your conservative heart, then we invite you to watch for the upcoming release of this new translation. It should be available on Amazon by December 25th. Simply search for “Anti-woke Version” or its very handy abbreviation: AV
Christian McShaffrey is a Minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and is Pastor of Five Solas Church (OPC) in Reedsburg, Wisconsin. He also serves as Stated Clerk of the Presbytery of Minnesota and Wisconsin.
Related Posts:

Both the Synod of Dort and the Westminster Assembly serve as noteworthy authoritative and confessional witnesses in church history to the inspiration of the Comma as the Trinity’s divinely self-attesting testimony. Our fathers in the faith were aware of the text-critical issues surrounding the Comma since the third century; they examined the extant evidence and found that “almost all Greek copies” available in their day contained it; they weighed other considerations inherent to their methodology; and they owned the reading as true and trustworthy. 

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. – 1 John 5:7
The above verse is found in nearly all Reformation-era Bibles, such as Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, Great Bible 1539, Matthew’s 1549, Geneva 1560, Bishops’ 1568, Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Biblia Reina Valera Antigua 1602, Giovanni Diodati 1607, and the Authorized (or King James) Version 1611. The verse is also cited as a proof text in many historic expressions of the Reformed faith: The Belgic Confession 1561 (Article 9), Heidelberg Catechism 1563 (Lord’s Day 8), Westminster Confession of Faith 1646 (Chapter 2), Westminster Larger Catechism 1648 (Q&A 9), and London Baptist Confession of Faith 1689 (Chapter 2).
Today, however, most Reformed scholars and pastors question or reject the verse as uninspired and unworthy of inclusion as a confessional or catechetical proof text for the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. This significant shift has led to confusion for contemporary Christians.
Debates over the inspiration of 1 John 5:7, otherwise known as the so-called Comma Johanneum, can be traced all the way back to the third century A.D.  Nevertheless, it is important to recognize that Reformation-era scholars included the Comma in their doctrinal statements intentionally and with sound and studied reasons. Let us consider two historical and confessional witnesses to its veracity.
Witness # 1 – The Synod of Dort was the international church council that published the aforementioned Belgic Confession and Heidelberg Catechism. It also commissioned a new translation of the Dutch Bible which came to be called the Statenvertaling (States Translation). This new Bible contained many marginal notes and some of them acknowledged known textual variants. The entry for 1 John 5:7 reads as follows:
This verse, seeing it contains a very clear testimony of the Holy Trinity, seems to have been left out of some copies by the Arians, but is found in almost all Greek copies, and even by many ancient and worthy teachers also, who lived before the times of the Arians, brought out of them for proof of the Holy Trinity; and the opposition of the witnesses upon earth.
Read More

Any who are concerned about the changes that may be coming to the Chicago Statement should also take some time to consider whether its statement on biblical authority was sufficient in the first place. We suggest that it was not and invite the reader to return to a more classic expression of Protestant bibliology.

The Gospel Coalition posted an article on March 15, 2022 titled “Updating the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy: A Proposal” and, as probably expected, some conservatives have already begun to voice concern.
Concern is certainly warranted due to the editors’ admission that the goal of the proposed update is to “clarify arguments in light of new hermeneutical and cultural arguments.” There is, as the Preacher said, “no new thing under the sun” (Ecclesiastes 1:9), so any attempt to contemporize classic confessions of faith should be held suspect.
That having been said, the Chicago Statement is technically not a classic doctrinal standard. It is a modern one (1978), and this proposed update provides an opportunity to ponder the question: What if the statement was, in fact, doomed from the start? We suggest that it was and offer the following proof:
WE AFFIRM that inspiration, strictly speaking, applies only to the autographic text of Scripture, which in the providence of God can be ascertained from available manuscripts with great accuracy. We further affirm that copies and translations of Scripture are the Word of God to the extent that they faithfully represent the original (Chicago Statement, Article X).
This particular article affirms a distinction that is actually easy to read past. When the statement speaks of the “autographic text” of Scripture, it is referring to those documents that were originally penned by the Prophets and Apostles. These documents obviously no longer exist, and all biblical scholars readily acknowledge that.
When the statement then speaks of what scriptures the church has access to today (i.e., “copies and translations”), it intentionally stops short of applying the term “inspiration” to them and explains that they can only be considered accurate “to the extent that they faithfully represent the original.” This is an alarming admission because it effectively leaves today’s church without an inspired Bible.
Pastors who subscribe to the Chicago Statement are technically not able to hold up any printed edition of the Hebrew Old Testament, or the Greek New Testament, or any vernacular translation, and declare to the congregation, “This is the inspired, infallible, and inerrant Word of God,” because they have no way to verify it by comparing it to the permanently lost originals.
True, they can speak of a general “providence of God” that has led to “great accuracy,” but that affirms far less than earlier statements of the Protestant faith.
For example, those who wrote the Westminster Confession of Faith also acknowledged that the inspired originals had been lost, but they allowed their faith in God’s promises (Psalm 119:89, Matthew 5:18, etc.) to lead them to a better conclusion concerning the copies they possessed: That God, by his singular care and providence, had kept his Word pure in all ages, so that the Bible they held in their hands could be regarded as inspired and authentical (WCF, I.8).
Any who are concerned about the changes that may be coming to the Chicago Statement should also take some time to consider whether its statement on biblical authority was sufficient in the first place. We suggest that it was not and invite the reader to return to a more classic expression of Protestant bibliology.
Christian McShaffrey is Pastor of Five Solas Church (OPC) in Reedsburg, WI and stated clerk of the Presbytery of Wisconsin and Minnesota. His church hosts the Kept Pure in All Ages conference on the text of Holy Scripture.

The reason for this is that man, of himself, cannot really come to the knowledge of the truth. The more man learns by his own effort (by the unaided power of his own mind), the more he faces the unknown. Just as a balloon, when it is blown up, expands in every direction, so does man’s learning bring him face to face with the endless mystery of the wonderful works of God.

Preface
The writings of G.I. Williamson were very influential in my life as a young Christian. His love for Scripture inspired me to receive the teachings of the Holy Bible with an implicit kind of faith.
I continue to recommend his study guide on the Westminster Shorter Catechism to catechumens and was recently reminded of his expert ability to communicate complex theological concepts to readers of all ages.
For example, the Barthian, or Neo-orthodox, view of Scripture is not the easiest thing to explain, but it is essential that Christians understand it. It is a very subtle heresy that starts with one small-but-sinister step: Separating the “text” of God’s Word from the “truth” of God’s Word.
People prove their willingness to do this in a variety of ways, but one of the most common seems to be the church’s increased tolerance for textual variants and contemporary translations.
Whenever someone (like me) complains about a word being deleted or changed, the concern is immediately rejected with the ready response, “It doesn’t ultimately matter because no doctrine is affected.”
Is this the way Reformed Christians now view Scripture? Is the “text” actually expendable so long as “truth” is preserved? If so, then how is this essentially different from Barthianism?
G.I. graciously granted me permission to repost the chapter from his study guide that exposes the error of Barthianism. As you read it, and especially as you come to the illustrations, try to put yourself in “Shorty’s” shoes for a minute or two. Which image best illustrates your view of Scripture? Could it be that we are all Barthians now? I certainly hope not, but sometimes I do wonder.
Christian McShaffreyPastor, Five Solas Church
Chapter TwoThe WSC Study GuideBy G.I. Williamson
Q. What rule hath God given to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him?
A. The Word of God, which is contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, is the only rule to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him.
“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16).
“If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life…” (Revelation 22:18-19).
Introduction
Strange as it may seem, Jesus once said that God has “hid . . . things from the wise and prudent, and . . . revealed them unto babes” (Luke 10:21). In other words, some of the most intelligent and best-educated people lack true wisdom. And some very simple people who are not well educated have true wisdom.
The reason for this is that man, of himself, cannot really come to the knowledge of the truth. The more man learns by his own effort (by the unaided power of his own mind), the more he faces the unknown. Just as a balloon, when it is blown up, expands in every direction, so does man’s learning bring him face to face with the endless mystery of the wonderful works of God.
For example, new and more powerful telescopes have been invented by men in order that they might study the secrets of the stars. But what has been the result? The result has been this: they now have many millions of new stars to study!
This is one reason why scientific theory is constantly changing. For the more men discover, the more they also discover how much more there is that they do not know. Thus, because men cannot know everything (there is just too much!), they finally get discouraged and realize that they cannot really know anything for sure.
Two Kinds of Revelation
Now the reason for this is that God did not make man to know everything (or, for that matter, anything) by his own power. Only God knows everything, and so, from the beginning, only God could give to man a sure knowledge of anything at all. From the beginning, this knowledge came to man in two ways:
(1) The first way in which God revealed himself is what we call natural revelation.
“The heavens declare the glory of God,” says the Psalmist; “and the firmament sheweth his handywork” (Ps. 19:1). “The invisible things of him [God] from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made” (Rom. 1:20).
(2) The second way in which God revealed himself is what we call special revelation.
For even in paradise God spoke to Adam. Adam had God’s word in addition to his works. Adam, by his study of nature, could know much. But he could not know all. He could not know, for example, what had not yet come to pass. In order to be sure of so “simple” a thing as eating fruit from a tree, it was necessary for him to interpret the “facts of nature” in the “light of God’s word.”
When Adam sinned against God, he rejected God’s word. He acted as if he did not need God to tell him what was right. Instead, he decided to try the so-called “scientific method” (that is, the “trial and error” method of discovering truth. And from that time to this, Adam and all his posterity (except for those who come to salvation through Jesus Christ) have walked in darkness.
This is not because of any “darkness” in God’s revelation. The “light” of God still shines brightly in everything that that God has made. But if man in the beginning (sinless Adam) could not understand the “light” of nature, without the “light” of God’s word, how much more is this true for us! For the only way in which man can be saved from sin is revealed in the Bible alone.
The revelation of God in nature is sufficient to leave men without excuse. It shows them the glory of the true God so that they ought to worship and serve him. But it is only in the Bible that men actually can learn what they must believe (in order to be saved from sin) and do (in order to serve God once more).
The Meaning of “Contained In”
But what does the Catechism mean when it says that “the word of God . . . is contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments?” By these words we are to understand that the very words which we find in the Bible are from God. However, in order to understand this clearly, we need to understand the wrong way in which these words (contained in) have been taken.
Since the time that this Catechism was written, clever men have tried to use the same words (“contained in”) with a meaning very different from what is intended by the Catechism.
Read More

This false gospel [Cultural Marxism], as we have seen, has a doctrine of sin, and that is the very existence of people like me. My only hope under this new religious regime is to become woke to my status as an oppressor and learn to hate my very existence. If I refuse, or at very least fail to begin signaling some woke virtue, I will face the scrutiny of its pseudo-ministers in the church and perhaps even the wrath of its inquisitors without.

Every false religion needs inquisitors because they are false religions. There is no light in them and lies do not draw people.
The original Marxists employed snitches to find and punish dissenters. During the Bolshevik revolution, dissenters were actually killed; but the Neo-Marxists rarely draw blood. They are just as content to drain the bank accounts of oppressors.
The previously mentioned, Social Justice Warriors are one kind of inquisitor, and they are always listening for infractions to Cultural Marxist orthodoxy. When they hear one, they scream (actually, they usually just send out a tweet with a sufficiently virtue-signaling hashtag attached). This how Cultural Marxism is being advanced and enforced inside the church: Social Justice Warriors in both pulpit and pew who snitch on the un-woke.
When it comes to enforcing Neo-Marxism outside the church, we have: ANTIFA. This “Anti-Fascist” movement is a nationwide network of Cultural Marxists who are mysteriously able to mobilize on a moment’s notice and who, upon arrival, begin to breaking things, burning things, throwing bricks and bodily fluids, etc.
One of their more subtle methods of punishing oppressors is a dirty little thing called “doxing.” This involves spying upon right-wing events, discovering the identity of those who attended, contacting their employer, and getting them fired for being “haters” of some kind. This tactic is actually very old, but it has become increasingly easy due to cell phones, facial recognition technology, and social media.
Such risks serve as a good reminder that persecution indeed comes in many forms, but it will always come to those who are faithful to the gospel: “Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution” (2 Timothy 3:12).
Are you ready to suffer persecution? You must be, because a false religion has been established in our land. It has a prophet and his name is Karl Marx. It has a god and it incarnates in revolution. It has apostles, like the violent Vladimir Lenin and the non-violent elites of the Frankfort School. It holds forth the empty promise of egalitarianism (i.e., absolute equality of opportunity and outcome).
This false gospel, as we have seen, has a doctrine of sin, and that is the very existence of people like me. My only hope under this new religious regime is to become woke to my status as an oppressor and learn to hate my very existence. If I refuse, or at very least fail to begin signaling some woke virtue, I will face the scrutiny of its pseudo-ministers in the church and perhaps even the wrath of its inquisitors without.
What, then shall we do? I am honestly not sure there is anything we can do, other than to affirm what Scripture says, “If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed” (Galatians 1:9). A more colloquial rendering of that final phrase would be: To hell with them.
Christian McShaffrey is a Minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and is Pastor of Five Solas Church (OPC) in Reedsburg, Wis.

These types of preachers were originally called “social justice warriors,” but it has come time to assign them a more honest label. They are, in all actuality, hate preachers. No, they do not call for acts of violence against anyone, but they are constantly calling people like me (i.e., straight, white, cis, male) to hate ourselves and to hate how our very existence oppresses others. This has caused psychological and spiritual trauma to millions of evangelical Christians, and you can hear it in the strange way they now talk: Virtue Signaling.

All the most popular preachers in America are now woke. They betray this sad fact in their frequent mention of the plight of the oppressed and also of our obligation as oppressors to make atonement for our historical sins. Remember, our “sin” in not something we actually did, but something we inherited from our fathers.
These types of preachers were originally called “social justice warriors,” but it has come time to assign them a more honest label. They are, in all actuality, hate preachers. No, they do not call for acts of violence against anyone, but they are constantly calling people like me (i.e., straight, white, cis, male) to hate ourselves and to hate how our very existence oppresses others. This has caused psychological and spiritual trauma to millions of evangelical Christians, and you can hear it in the strange way they now talk: Virtue Signaling.
Virtue signaling is when you modify your normal way of speaking in order to signal, or send a message, to others that you are sufficiently woke. For example, a normal person might say, “Hey, I was having dinner last night with a friend and he said the funniest thing…”
If you add a little wokeness to that conversation, you will end up with a virtue signal, “I was having dinner with a friend last night, who happens to be black, and he said the funniest thing…” The signaled virtue is obvious: I have dinner with black people, so I am obviously not a racist.
If you add even more wokeness to the conversation, you end up with even more signaling, “I was having dinner with a friend last night, who happens to black, and he said the funniest thing about his boyfriend…” Now the signaled virtue is twofold: I have dinner with gay black people, so I am obviously not a racist or a homophobe.
There is, actually, no end to the virtue that clever wokesters can manage to signal, “I was having dinner with a friend last night, who happens to be black, and he said the funniest thing about his boyfriend who’s running for a democrat seat in the Senate…” The signal is now threefold: I have dinner with gay black democrats. Notice that the joke has not even been told! What was the funny thing that he said? It doesn’t ultimately matter, because sufficient virtue has been signaled.
Listen for this kind of talk and you will be surprised by how prevalent it truly is. Virtue signaling is the Neo-Marxist’s twisted version of personal holiness or witnessing and if you do not learn to do it, you are doomed.
I am probably doomed, by the way, for writing these articles, but I do not care and cannot care because of a solemn vow I took on the day of my ordination, “Do you promise to be zealous and faithful in maintaining the truths of the gospel and the purity, the peace, and the unity of the church, whatever persecution or opposition may arise unto you on that account?”
I said, “Yes” to that vow. I plan on keeping it until the day I die and that makes me most willing to face the wrath of the Neo-Marxists. Yes, there is true wrath there, but this we will explore in the next article.
Christian McShaffrey is a Minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and is Pastor of Five Solas Church (OPC) in Reedsburg, Wis.

Listen closely to American preaching and you will hear it. The church no longer bears witness to the simple message of Christ and him crucified. Rather, churches have added other emphases to their message in an effort to appear as “allies” to the oppressed (e.g., injustice, inequity, abuse, etc.).

The good news of the Christian gospel is that a man can be born again or regenerated by the Spirit of God. When this happens, a man’s eyes are opened to see the love of God in Christ for the very first time.
The Neo-Marxists have a perverted version of this kind of experience. Eyes are indeed opened, but not to behold any good thing. To become “woke” means that your eyes have been opened to see all the privilege and injustice that exists in our world.
For a person like me (i.e., a wealthy cis gender male of European descent), becoming woke would require that I recognize myself as a natural born member of the oppressor class. After such a recognition, I would then have to bow before the god of revolution and, ultimately, die (because my very existence hurts others).
Short of voluntary death, is supposedly the option of becoming an “ally” to the oppressed classes, which is only a longer path toward death because it involves a conscious working against my own interests in society until I am eventually replaced.
A corollary doctrine to that of Wokeness is Intersectionality. Just as the oppressor can have different levels of evil attached to them, the oppressed have different levels of good attached to them.
For example, and returning to the previously explored areas of inequality in America, if women have historically been the largest oppressed group, then I should champion women’s rights. Yes, even to the detriment of my own.
Further, if a woman happens also to be black, we now have an “intersection” of two identities that have suffered oppression. Recognizing this, I should champion black women’s rights. Yes, and again, even to the detriment of my own.
We can take it yet another step forward in light of our current cultural revolution. The only thing more oppressive than being a black woman in American society is being a queer black woman, so again, having become woke, I should now champion queer black women’s rights. Yes, again and always, even to the detriment of my own.
Finally, do not forget about the Marxist’s historical obsession with economics. If you add poor to any of the oppressed classes previously mentioned, their experience of oppression only increases and, therefore, my woke duty to champion their cause only increases.
The summary of wokeness and intersectionality is that it can be acknowledged that most Christians might find this content of this article a little too blunt. The Neo-Marxists do not hesitate to use words like white, black, cis, queer, etc., so why is that today’s Christians experience such unease? The answer, it seems, is fear.
The fear of being called as a misogynist, or a racist, or a fascist causes most polite Christians simply to avoid the topics of wokeness and intersectionality. Many more (especially in mainline evangelicalism) actually over-correct in their speech patterns. This proves that the institutional church was not exempted from the long march of the Neo-Marxists.
Listen closely to American preaching and you will hear it. The church no longer bears witness to the simple message of Christ and him crucified. Rather, churches have added other emphases to their message in an effort to appear as “allies” to the oppressed (e.g., injustice, inequity, abuse, etc.). We shall consider this over-correction in the next article.
Christian McShaffrey is a Minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and is Pastor of Five Solas Church (OPC) in Reedsburg, Wis.