The Negative World might necessitate a change in one’s approach, but it ought not to change one’s conviction. In navigating the shifting tides of cultural dynamics, Deevers’s steadfast commitment to unwavering principles serves as a beacon of resilience.

You’re probably familiar with the controversial placement of a symbolic display by the Satanic Temple of Iowa in the Iowa State Capital in November 2023. The display showcases a mannequin resembling the pagan deity Baphomet, adorned with a ram’s head covered in reflective surfaces. Jon Harris recently wrote about the affair in these pages.
Apparently, Iowa allows any faith group to place images or icons in the state house for a term of two weeks. That said, the Satanist Temple self-professedly intended provocation with its statue. The move ignited widespread controversy culminating in the destruction of the display by one Michael Cassidy. What was noteworthy, and garnered much attention, about the chain of events was not the statue or its demise, but the response from pastor and Iowa Representative Jon Dunwell. His commentary was, in a sense, more controversial than the underlying facts.
Dunwell contended that if Satanists are prevented from installing statues of demons in the halls of Congress, then Christians will also have the same limitations in expressing their devotion to God in the public square. The distinctive aspect of Dunwell’s message lies in the overwhelmingly negative reaction it garnered from Conservative Christians. His critics contended that he had compromised the cherished values that many of his constituents hold dear and had betrayed the moral fabric of the community. Equally noteworthy was Dunwell’s apparently genuine surprise at the backlash he received from conservative Christians. To him, it seemed he was merely upholding the pluralistic status quo of “religious liberty.” As the old saying goes, “I may disagree with your Satanic displays, but I’ll fight for your right to display them.”
Perhaps unbeknownst to him, Dunwell’s surprise is rooted in what Aaron Renn terms the Negative World, a new realm we have all entered whether we like it or not.
Providentially, as the events with the Satanic display transpired, Dusty Deevers won a state senate election in Oklahoma, and by a significant margin. Much like Dunwell, now Senator Deevers wears multiple hats serving as both a pastor and a businessman, father and husband. It may not seem unusual or remarkable that a conservative like Deevers won an election in a red state, but, the odds were against him.
Deevers had no prior experience in politics unlike his main primary opponent, J.J. Francais. Francais is the mayor of Elgin, Deevers’s own town of residence. He also enjoyed financial backing and endorsements from the Governor of Oklahoma and the state superintendent. Despite this, Deevers beat Francais 2-to-1 in the very town Francais is the mayor. Jean Hausheer, Deevers’s other primary opponent, had strong financial backing and was even financially endorsed by Bart Barter, the President of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), Deevers’s own denomination in which he is ordained.
It would be quotes from Bart Barber that Deevers’s general election opponent, Larry Bush, would use against him in mailers across his district. To make things even harder for the Deevers campaign, two attack advertisements against him were played during the Texas vs Oklahoma college football game, as well as the Cowboys game the following day. Millions of people saw these ads. Your average politico would project a poor performance from Deevers.
Despite facing considerable challenges and opposition, Deevers emerged victorious, and Oklahomans emerged better for it. This success can be attributed not to mere popularity, winsomeness, or concessions, but rather to his unwavering commitment to his convictions, a genuine affection for his community, and a deliberate rejection of the “third-way” approach. Deevers’s campaign went beyond mere criticism of the abortion industry. He also scrutinized the Pro-Life sector, accusing it of compromising its principles. He was a vocal critic of the In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) industry and same-sex marriage. Deevers even advocated for the abolition of pornography.
One of his more controversial positions was his call to repeal no-fault divorce. He endorsed the idea of shaming those responsible for unjustified family breakdowns. In other words, Deevers ran a campaign that emphasized and prioritized the traditional family top to bottom. “Good families build good governments,” said Deevers. He emphasized the importance of protecting traditional family structures as the foundation for society’s well-being. “We must protect traditional marriage…I will fight to make sure Oklahoma laws never interfere with the spiritual and economic thriving of families.”
Deevers’s emphasis on uncompromising family values was just one facet of his campaign. He firmly supports the Second Amendment, advocates for lower taxes, and champions an overall business-friendly economy. However, above all, he made it unequivocally clear that his role as State Senator would be rooted in the acknowledgment that Christ is King. In Deevers’s words,
“I am a Christian first and foremost and a conservative through and through. Jesus is my King, and the Word of God is my guide. I make no bones about it. My faith in and love of Christ, which I preach every other Sunday at my church, animates my life and would be the foundation of everything I do as Oklahoma State Senator.” He then gets specific about what this means in practice: “It is an outrage that the government attempted to force closure of churches and businesses…that drag queens are permitted to dance for children at pride parades and story hours…that our public schools have exposed children to LGBTQ+ propaganda…that abortion pills still flow through legally in our state…that pornography and no-fault divorce are prevalent in our society…and that Critical Race Theory and Queer Theory dominate our public institutions. I promise to support legislation to put a stop to all of this.”
Deevers’s commitment to faith-based values and straightforward communication style struck a chord with conservative and Christian voters. Deevers’s opponents saw these policy issues as weaknesses, ones that they attempted to exploit by circulating thousands of flyers advertising his views, as if he was embarrassed by them and that they were per se ridiculous. But like Dunwell, Deevers’s opponents too have appeared to enter the Negative World without realizing it.
To reiterate the argument presented by Renn, the trajectory of secularization in the American narrative unfolds in three distinct stages: The Positive World (Pre-1994) characterized by a predominantly favorable societal view of Christianity; The Neutral World (1994-2014) where society adopts a neutral stance towards Christianity; and The Negative World (2014-present) where a pervasive negative perception of Christianity, particularly at the institutional level, has taken hold. The rejection of Christian morality is viewed as a potential hazard to both the public welfare and the emerging secular framework. As Renn points out, embracing Christian moral perspectives results in adverse repercussions. This transition is marked by a notable shift in public sentiment, with an increasing number of individuals and institutions expressing skepticism or disapproval of Christian moral values.  In light of this transformation, conventional methods of persuasion used by Conservative politicians and church leaders in the past are becoming obsolete in the Negative World, and this shift is evident in the changing political landscape.
Societal institutions are increasingly hostile to Christianity, that’s a given. But something more is going on. Conservative Christians are finding themselves less satisfied with the middle-of-the-road approach that prioritizes winsomeness and mainstream respectability in evangelical leaders and conservative politicians. A growing discontent is evident as individuals within these groups express frustration with compromises made in an attempt to appeal to a broad audience. This approach usually involves softening the Gospel’s exclusivity, and Biblical morality generally, through an emphasis on post-war, proceduralist dogma ostensibly designed for civility and stability. This Dunwell embodies.
Read More
Related Posts:

All of these things must, of course, be pursued in the context of our own relationship with Christ. It is only through union with Jesus—in his death and resurrection—that you will ever be able to begin to love and care for your wife in these ways. When we fail (and we will most certainly fail), we go back to the Lord in brokenness and contrition. We confess our sin to him and ask him for grace to grow in these areas.

In that extremely complex and, at times, hard to understand section of the apostle Paul’s letter to the Corinthians, we come across the comparison between the married and the unmarried (1 Cor. 7). In short, the apostle insists that marriage is good (and the norm), but that it brings with it a division of attention. Those who are married have a preoccupation with their spouse. Those who are unmarried are free to more fully “care about the things of the Lord” while “the married man cares about…how to please his wife” and “the married woman cares about…how to please her husband.”
This forces Christian husbands to ask the question, “What does it look like to biblically care about the needs of my wife?” This is a question that I feel as though I am just beginning to learn how to answer eleven years into marriage. While there is no silver bullet, there are many things that the Scriptures teach us in order to help guide the process of learning to love your spouse. Here are seven basic biblical ways that the married man can seek to please his wife:
1. Lead her in worship.
Whether this occurs one-on-one or in the context of family worship, a godly husband will seek to “wash his wife with the water of the word” and to lead her “to the throne of grace” that they might together receive grace and mercy to help in time of need. A man who truly loves his wife will want to sing God’s praises with his wife and to encourage her with God’s word.
This is the most foundational way that a godly husband can love and serve his wife. Everything else in the marriage is secondary to—and will necessary wax and wane commensurate with—this all-important calling. God has given a believing husband his wife so that he might shepherd her soul to glory.
2. Carry her burdens.
One of the apostolic words to husbands regarding the way in which they are to love their wives is that they are to “dwell with them with understanding” (1 Pet. 3:7). A loving husband will seek to be gentle toward his wife. A truly loving husband will seek to listen to his wife as she relays her burdens. He will be patient with her when she seems to be folding under the pressures of life. He will seek to understand why she is struggling even when he doesn’t have the same burdens.
3. Provide for her.
A man who truly loves his wife will be a man who labors diligently to provide for his wife. The loving husband will be a hard-working husband. This doesn’t mean that he will make lots of money; but it does mean that his priority is to “provide for his own” (1 Tim. 5:8). He will work as many jobs as might be necessary in order to provide for his wife. Being a provider is something to which a loving husband must be committed.
4. Serve her in the home.
I don’t know if it is possible for someone to hate folding laundry as much as I hate folding laundry.
Read More
Related Posts:

From the beginning Satan has come to God’s people suggesting that He cannot be trusted. He wants you to think that you need to take matters into your own hands if you’re going to get anything out of this life.  He wants you to believe the doctrine of God’s providence is a miserable thing instead of a blessing – that instead of casting yourself upon Him, relying upon Him and believing Him through trials that you would, instead, murmur and doubt and worry. How do we answer him?  We take up our shield of faith.

We are in a fight against principalities and powers who are bent on our spiritual ruin.  And much of the damage Satan does is by means of these darts that he hurls at the people of God.  He comes – as Joel Beeke put it – making suggestions, inserting evil thoughts in the the mind swaying the understanding with arguments and promises.
Our defense is the shield of faith.  We see that when Jesus was tempted He used the shield of faith. Satan came tempting Him, and Jesus responded with Scripture. In doing so He was using the shield of faith.  He had a choice as we do: believe Satan or believe the Bible.  Jesus believed the Bible and so he never succumbed to the temptation.
This will be our best defence.  God has given a complete set of armour, but above all else we need to take the shield of faith to quench these fiery darts.
In this series I would like to name 8 of the darts Satan uses and then comment briefly on how we can use the shield of faith to quench those darts.
First, Satan tries to get us to distrust God’s providence.   This was the first tactic he used with Jesus in the wilderness.  Jesus was hungry and Satan suggested that Jesus should take matters into His own hands and turn stones into bread.  Jesus had come to offer Himself as the bread of life, to show His people their need for spiritual food and to teach them to rely on their Heavenly Father. So Satan comes trying to cause Jesus to stumble on that very point.
Satan does the same with us.  Winslow asks, “Are we in affliction and sorrow?  He tempts us to question God’s goodness and love.  Are we prostrate on a sick and suffering couch?  He tempts us to doubt the wisdom and kindness of our Father…”
Read More
Related Posts: