We need better champions against Wokeism (the Founders Trailer disaster)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pergamum

Ordinary Guy (TM)
Well, the Founders Ministries (Calvinistic Southern Baptists) has put out a short trailer for their upcoming film "By What Standard?" against the Woke Church that probably did more damage to their cause than their enemies ever could have. Now that I've seen the trailer, I sure won't see the finished film.


First, several pastors came out with statements that they were blindsided by the interviews. They thought they were talking about one thing, and then snippets were cut out about another subject. Basically, people were recorded for purposes for which they did not give consent to. If you want to talk about "justice" - you've got to at least act justly while filming about it. "Danny Akin, Jason Keith Allen, Albert Mohler and Adam Greenway featured in a video published by Founders Ministries, have expressed concerns that the edited footage does not accurately portray their views or the views of other Southern Baptists" says the Biblical Recorder.

Second, Founders and ARBCA have had a close relationship.

Third, they posted images of Rachel Denhollander as if she is part of liberal women preachers or were sent by the devil attacking the Church. Lots of people recognized her immediately from the blurred image.

ReligionNews covers this here: https://religionnews.com/2019/07/23...es-merritt-to-trojan-horse-of-social-justice/

"Owen Strachan, associate professor of theology at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary and former president of The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, also appears in the video, arguing that “liberal Christianity” is invading the evangelical church and a spiritual battle is underway.

“We are always having the principalities and powers exert pressure on us,” said Strachan.

An image that appears to be of Rachael Denhollander, an abuse activist who spoke at the SBC’s annual meeting, is intercut with Longshore’s comments.

That angered Jacob Denhollander, Rachael’s husband.

He told Ascol and Founders Ministries on Twitter that their use of “my wife’s image in your video and the insinuation that she is part of the principalities and powers attacking the church is cowardly, grossly dishonest, and bearing false witness.”

“Please apologize and stop,” he said."



Then, fourth, when people began to object, numerous folks such as Doug Wilson the heretic and Marcus Pittman (who may have helped film and so has a dog in the fight) responded that not liking the trailer was evidence you were an egalitarian or that you sided with Woke Christianity. Not liking the trailer = you are an SJW. I.e. they were digging in their heels to cover for their shoddy work.

Then, fifth, they finally took out the images of Rachel Denhollander and said it was just an innocent mistake. As if it just fell into that spot in the trailer. Now, most film editors take HOURS to edit even 10 minutes of film. Their excuses just cause me to have more distrust of them.

People often apologize because they are caught; not because they think they are wrong.



Pastor Tom Ascol also recently wrote an article entitled, Southern Baptists, Sexual Abuse, and a far more Serious Problem." In this article, Ascol shifts the argument from the problem of sexual abuse to the problem of unregenerate church membership. This article rubbed me the wrong way.

In the midst of a sexual abuse scandal, the writer changes the topic.

He says, sexual abuse is bad, but even worse is unregenerate church membership and lack of church discipline. We need to discipline more church members.

And then many Reformed Baptists then reshare this blog and say amen. Several folks have reposted this article and then a discussion ensued about how bad the doctrine of most Baptists are.

But, I'd like to point out - in many cases it was perfectly orthodox ministers who were abusing children or tolerating abuse in their churches. And then other pastors covering for him, THAT is, indeed, a doctrinal problem.

What is more, Ascol pushes for more church discipline, but it is not just the members of these churches so much that need to receive more church discipline, as the blog states…it is the leaders! These are largely pastors and youth pastors committing these sexual abuse crimes and covering them up. I am sure all of these abusers can voice very orthodox beliefs and defend their doctrine from the bible. They probably attend church regularly. But they are still abusers.

It is not that the members need to receive harsher discipline, it is that the pastors are often an untouchable elite that do not have to answer for their crimes. They merely hide it and cover for one another as the abusive pastor takes a new church.

The article is a change of subject that diminishes the heinousness of the sexual abuses that have been uncovered in many baptist churches. It's a tone-deaf "whataboutism" at its worst.




CONCLUSION:

The video is bad (at least the trailer).....it is like they are TRYING to make enemies.

I despise the “Wokeism” of the church and affirm that Critical Race Theory is fundamentally Marxist at its core and needs to be fought. As Voddie Baucham said, It is "Ethnic Gnosticism."

BUT,

(1) We need better champions to fight this battle. These guys are flubbing it.

We need men who are not tone-deaf and who have not aligned themselves with dubious pastors who have forsaken justice.

I just don't think the Founders and Tom Ascol are the people to successfully champion this fight.

(2) We need to make sure that addressing sexual abuse in the churches is not lumped into this same “Woke Christianity” that they are fighting against. We must fight for true biblical justice, which means that we address these #churchtoo cases of abuse in churches. Fighting against abuse in churches should NOT be included as part of "Woke Christianity" or women preachers.

This is NOT how to win a war. We need better champions.
 
Last edited:
Another point:

In the short clip, it begins with Pastor Tom Ascol stating, “This is God’s world, and he gets to set the rules.” “I’ve seen godless ideologies that have spread throughout western civilization over the last several decades, with a vengence….”

That is all well and good. But then just a minute later, a video clip of Pastor Matt Chandler from the Village Church is shown. The clip seems to be his apology or a discussion about how better to handle cases of sexual abuse in the church. In recent years it seems that the Village Church has mishandled 2 cases of sexual abuse in their church. Google the Karen Hinckley case where the wife left the husband because he was a pedophile and the Village Church then disciplined HER! (I kid you not). Of course, why Chandler was ever invited to speak as an expert on handling sexual abuse cases, I am not sure why, since he's failed twice now.

But anyway.... in the clip, Chandler says, “Seek outside counsel. We’re just not experts in this.”

This leads the viewer to contrast Ascol's words, "God's Word (presumably as interpreted by pastors) sets the rules, versus Chandler's wise (for once) counsel on dealing with sexual abuses cases, to "Seek outside help."

I believe the way the film is edited might lead some to believe, therefore, that churches ought not to report or seek outside help when they encounter abuse. God's Word...God's rules, after all. We have seen what a disaster it has been when largely Calvinistic and Baptist churches have tried to handle abuse cases internally. Not in a single one of these cases has justice been served when the church handled it. It wasn't until outside counsel and authorities were alerted that the cases were handled properly.

The trailer is really just bad editing. I agree that Wokeism needs to be fought. But give the fight over to somebody more competent, please!
 
Just a couple of thoughts.

First of all, of course the clips were edited, it was a three minute trailer.

Secondly, if the SBC leaders denounced things like egalitarianism, the adulteration of the gospel, and the rising acceptance of homosexuality with anything close to the zeal with which they have denounced this trailer, I might take them seriously.

Lastly, I don’t know the motives of the people who put together this film, or the trailer, but it is entirely possible that they may have edited the footage to communicate an uncharitable message, and if so, they should be rebuked. Regardless, there is no question that the SBC is heading in the wrong direction, and that the current leadership has allowed it to happen, and so they too need to be rebuked.
 
If they added an image of Rachel Denhollander in the trailer that was clearly wrong and I'm glad it's been edited out. The clip of Matt Chandler I took to being utilised as illustrative of a belief amongst evangelicalism that Scripture does not give us all the teaching we need for the church to operate. That we need "expert" opinion from the world. That is clearly wrong. Chandler said pastors are not equipped to deal with sexual abuse. Well it depends what he means. If he means as criminal investigators, then he's correct and Scripture nowhere gives that responsibility to pastors. If he means that pastors and sessions have no oversight role then he is wrong: a member of a church who committed such a crime shoud be tried and punished by the state and by his session as he has violated the laws of two separate (though connected) spheres. Civil and ecclesiastical law are distinct. But none of that means we should be going to the world for guidance or teaching. The idea that offences committed by members of the church which also violate the civil law should be only dealt with "in-house" is not Scriptural in the slightest. That erroneous view is corrected by being more Scriptural and not by turning to the world as if we are lacking something which only the world can provide. (As discussed in a previous thread there are mechanisms which are developed by the civil magistrate to help prevent such crimes which can legitimately be adopted by the church but that is quite different from going to world for advice or teaching.)

All that said the clip of Chandler maybe wasn't the best to use to make that point- if that's the point they intended- considering there has been a rash of sexual abuse cover ups and in that clip he was specifically addressing that.

The film itself looks interesting though.
 
If they added an image of Rachel Denhollander in the trailer that was clearly wrong and I'm glad it's been edited out. The clip of Matt Chandler I took to being utilised as illustrative of a belief amongst evangelicalism that Scripture does not give us all the teaching we need for the church to operate. That we need "expert" opinion from the world. That is clearly wrong. Chandler said pastors are not equipped to deal with sexual abuse. Well it depends what he means. If he means as criminal investigators, then he's correct and Scripture nowhere gives that responsibility to pastors. If he means that pastors and sessions have no oversight role then he is wrong: a member of a church who committed such a crime shoud be tried and punished by the state and by his session as he has violated the laws of two separate (though connected) spheres. Civil and ecclesiastical law are distinct. But none of that means we should be going to the world for guidance or teaching. The idea that offences committed by members of the church which also violate the civil law should be only dealt with "in-house" is not Scriptural in the slightest. That erroneous view is corrected by being more Scriptural and not by turning to the world as if we are lacking something which only the world can provide. (As discussed in a previous thread there are mechanisms which are developed by the civil magistrate to help prevent such crimes which can legitimately be adopted by the church but that is quite different from going to world for advice or teaching.)

All that said the clip of Chandler maybe wasn't the best to use to make that point- if that's the point they intended- considering there has been a rash of sexual abuse cover ups and in that clip he was specifically addressing that.

The film itself looks interesting though.

The trailer begins with Pastor Tom Ascol stating, “This is God’s world, and he gets to set the rules.” “I’ve seen godless ideologies that have spread throughout western civilization over the last several decades, with a vengeance….”

That is all well and good. But then just a minute later, a video clip of Pastor Matt Chandler from the Village Church is shown. The clip seems to be his apology or a discussion about how better to handle cases of sexual abuse in the church. In recent years it seems that the Village Church has mishandled 2 cases of sexual abuse in their church. Google the Karen Hinckley case where the wife left the husband because he was a pedophile and the Village Church then disciplined HER! (I kid you not). Of course, why Chandler was ever invited to speak as an expert on handling sexual abuse cases, I am not sure why, since he's failed twice now.

But anyway.... in the clip, Chandler says, “Seek outside counsel. We’re just not experts in this.”

This leads the viewer to contrast Ascol's words, "God's Word (presumably as interpreted by pastors) sets the rules, versus Chandler's wise (for once) advice on dealing with sexual abuses cases, to "Seek outside help."

I believe the way the film is edited might lead some to believe, therefore, that churches ought not to report or seek outside help when they encounter abuse. God's Word...God's rules, after all. That is certainly what several ARBCA/Founders pastors did in the case of Thomas Chantry; they knew about abuse cases and discussed this abuse for 2 decades but nobody EVER reported it to the police. We have seen what a disaster it has been when largely Calvinistic and Baptist churches have tried to handle abuse cases themselves internally without the help of law enforcement. Not in a single one of these cases has justice been served when the church handled it themselves. It wasn't until outside counsel and authorities were alerted that the cases were finally handled properly.

By the contrast in the Founder's trailer between Ascol's admonition, "God's Words, Gods rules..." and Chandler's apologetic counsel to "seek outside help" I believe some might lump advocacy to fight against abuse in churches with being "woke." But even "Un-Woke" people need to "wake up" to the abuse epidemic in our churches!


Protecting our children from abuse in churches is not part of the "Trojan Horse of Social Justice" invading our churches.
 
P.s. I think SOMEBODY needs to make a film or documentary against the Woke Church. I just don't think it should be these guys after viewing their initial work. Get Voddie Baucham in there, maybe.
 
The trailer begins with Pastor Tom Ascol stating, “This is God’s world, and he gets to set the rules.” “I’ve seen godless ideologies that have spread throughout western civilization over the last several decades, with a vengeance….”

That is all well and good. But then just a minute later, a video clip of Pastor Matt Chandler from the Village Church is shown. The clip seems to be his apology or a discussion about how better to handle cases of sexual abuse in the church. In recent years it seems that the Village Church has mishandled 2 cases of sexual abuse in their church. Google the Karen Hinckley case where the wife left the husband because he was a pedophile and the Village Church then disciplined HER! (I kid you not). Of course, why Chandler was ever invited to speak as an expert on handling sexual abuse cases, I am not sure why, since he's failed twice now.

But anyway.... in the clip, Chandler says, “Seek outside counsel. We’re just not experts in this.”

This leads the viewer to contrast Ascol's words, "God's Word (presumably as interpreted by pastors) sets the rules, versus Chandler's wise (for once) advice on dealing with sexual abuses cases, to "Seek outside help."

I believe the way the film is edited might lead some to believe, therefore, that churches ought not to report or seek outside help when they encounter abuse. God's Word...God's rules, after all. That is certainly what several ARBCA/Founders pastors did in the case of Thomas Chantry; they knew about abuse cases and discussed this abuse for 2 decades but nobody EVER reported it to the police. We have seen what a disaster it has been when largely Calvinistic and Baptist churches have tried to handle abuse cases themselves internally without the help of law enforcement. Not in a single one of these cases has justice been served when the church handled it themselves. It wasn't until outside counsel and authorities were alerted that the cases were finally handled properly.

By the contrast in the Founder's trailer between Ascol's admonition, "God's Words, Gods rules..." and Chandler's apologetic counsel to "seek outside help" I believe some might lump advocacy to fight against abuse in churches with being "woke." But even "Un-Woke" people need to "wake up" to the abuse epidemic in our churches!


Protecting our children from abuse in churches is not part of the "Trojan Horse of Social Justice" invading our churches.

I already read this when you posted it earlier. As you'll see in my comment I in no way disagree with you. And as you'll also see in my comment I was suggesting why they might have been using that clip of Chandler and as you'll also see in my comment I thought, if they were using it for the reason why I thought they were, it probably wasn't the best clip to use to make their point.
 
I already read this when you posted it earlier. As you'll see in my comment I in no way disagree with you. And as you'll also see in my comment I was suggesting why they might have been using that clip of Chandler and as you'll also see in my comment I thought, if they were using it for the reason why I thought they were, it probably wasn't the best clip to use to make their point.

Ok. Sorry/

I hope maybe Founders will take heed of the criticism and check themselves and start anew with something better. The battle needs to be fought. And in the past Founders has put out some good stuff. But this is not good stuff. They need to improve and clarify their position and be better at how they argue lest they turn potential allies against them.

But of course, MAYBE they are playing to their most loyal base. I see comments online saying, "shots fired" and claiming that anyone who doesn't like the trailer is just a triggered SJW. That might pump up the home team, but it does not mobilize new fans.
 
P.s. I think SOMEBODY needs to make a film or documentary against the Woke Church. I just don't think it should be these guys after viewing their initial work. Get Voddie Baucham in there, maybe.
Voddie Baucham will be featured in the film.
 
I don't know much at all about this stuff. But watching the trailer, it sets up Tom Ascol as the hero. The one man standing up. The man who has the answers; the man doing it right. Seems very dangerous to me. Seems to me from the trailer to be way too much about making much of Tom Aschol.
 
Voddie Baucham is the best guy to speak to these issues:
1. He understands the issues clearly.
2. He's black.
3. He moved to Zambia.

The cultural Marxists have no defense against Baucham.

If you haven't watched this lecture, you should:
 
I don't know much at all about this stuff. But watching the trailer, it sets up Tom Ascol as the hero. The one man standing up. The man who has the answers; the man doing it right. Seems very dangerous to me. Seems to me from the trailer to be way too much about making much of Tom Aschol.
I noticed that as well. But of course, that is a hidden motive that I cannot prove.
 
Voddie Baucham is the best guy to speak to these issues:
1. He understands the issues clearly.
2. He's black.
3. He moved to Zambia.

The cultural Marxists have no defense against Baucham.

If you haven't watched this lecture, you should:

I agree. He's their Kryptonite. His sermon on "Ethnic Gnosticism" was great.
 
Basic Problem: all the people trying to do Jesus' job.
Layered Problem: all the people chasing celebrity.
Additional problem: dependency on visual media.

Most "warriors"--of the SJW type, or of their counterparts, so... both/all sides--are focused on engaging combat with some symptom of a monster. It's so big, that when some of us glimpse the true outlines of something heaving into view, it takes our breath away. If it doesn't or hasn't, then you are fighting as a man beating the air.

We've got all these Rambos; and for each guy who breaks ranks or leaves his post (with or without his fire team) the job that he/they was supposed to be doing is neglected, the overall work is weakened.

Give some guys a little more responsibility or (supposedly) more gifts than the average pew sitter, and they can't stay down. These kind want to be heroes in the movie that's playing in their mind. "Greatness" is not something they want thrust on them; no, they are going to "dare" to win.

Jesus is the King, the General. His marching orders are not too complicated for the men he has called to understand and implement. His battlefield doctrine is fully spelled out in the Manual. And if it's not in the Manual, it's not necessary, and it may be a Bad Idea.

Who are these people issuing various "rallying cries" from here and there? Who appointed them? Supposing one has a commission; how did that rank give him the authority to survey the whole front and determine a point of attack, or the tactic to be employed? To the law and the testimony; if they speak not according to this word, there is no light in them.

Today's church is swamped with hubris and a profound lack of discipline. The SJW set has come out of ranks, with claims to know where the church should be by now (or at least be heading!), and are clamoring for a following. And to challenge their noise and to redirect the grunts leaping out of their foxholes to answer them, others have taken up a similar hue and cry. Don't join that cause, join ours; but yea, you can't stay where you are.

Well, what if Jesus wants them to stay right there? These alternate voices (to the local pastor and elders) claim to be speaking for Jesus. You aren't doing enough for Jesus (do you feel bad about that?) so here's what you can do for the good that I feel strongly about. How horrendous when the pastor is either deaf to or confused by the siren-song, or taken by it!

Before the SJWs, there was DW and him raising his profile and seeking the limelight, putting out a magazine to go nationwide--not for the sake of a country-sized denomination (even a small one); but in order to create a "movement" (or more) with a certain party at the head of it. So, him chiming in with criticism in the latest brouhaha is really just more of the same from him.

People are not content to be told that most problems exceed their span of control. They also exceed the span of control of a church and most groups of people. Groups of people are either organized or unorganized, and organized groups are managed by leaders. These are people (sometimes down to one person) who want to leverage the power of many people to achieve some goal. They have to persuade people--usually by appeals to emotion, especially fear; helpfully with some hopeful goal, a vision of the good.

Whence this vision? Is it Jesus'? How do we know? Why has this vision been obscured through time until now? Did Jesus need the internet? Did he need the findings of the science (art) of persuasion/manipulation honed in the 20thC, coupled with the power of supercomputers?

Or maybe these are all sophisticated smoke-and-mirrors (like the old smoke and mirrors) to move the church and individual Christians off their mission, and out of their defenses.

The "vision" is aided (like it ever was) by visual media. There are good uses, even teaching uses for visual media. History (story in general), or perhaps more accurately a slant on history is tailor made for it, because it imposes a first-person perspective on the viewer. You see what the camera eye (as it were) saw for you; you pay attention to what the director wanted you to see.

This present movie under discussion (OK, the trailer) is a part of a self-conscious effort by a group to gain--even if in a genuine sense it wants to gain back--control of the direction of an even larger group, the SBC. Using the visual medium of a movie to influence, to teach not timeless doctrine but specific action in the present, is a page out of a particular kind of playbook.

Our religion primarily utilizes the verbal medium. We preach the truth, verbally proclaiming it, because (mainly) it has the promise of good effect, and I believe a greater effect in the long run. Visual media have a powerful immediate effect, which quickly tapers off. It leaves impressions, rather more than the remains which are the imparted content of the words that held/hold thoughts.

Trying to beat the opposition at their own game is folly. Just because someone is gaining a following by standing down front waving a banner or yelling in a microphone is no reason to aim at winning back those jumping up by doing the same. Formation of the MoralMajority was folly. Entertainment as worship was folly. Creating a "movement" in order to ride its wave to victory is folly.

Is the movie "folly"? I don't know, but the trailer sure appears to be.

The old paths, those are the ways, walk in them.
 
I noticed that as well. But of course, that is a hidden motive that I cannot prove.
Here are some additional thoughts and questions as I reflect:

1) Has he personally gone to the people in his video to express his concerns about things they've said? Isn't that what we're told to do? So for instance he had Matt Chandler in his trailer, and put him forth as a "bad" guy. Has he talked with him in person? Has he gone to him as a brother, if he has concerns about things that he said, to express those concerns? Because if he hasn't, then the whole thing he's doing here is actually unbiblical; which is ironic, because the whole tenant of the video is: WE are the ones being biblical.

2) The whole thing has a spirit of pride and haughtiness. They bash others for I guess "false humility"? But actually when Scripture says to confront others with sin (real or perceived), to admonish others, it commands us to do it with a spirit of humility and gentleness. Sorry, I saw ZERO spirit of humility or gentleness in the trailer. And don't say: But we're standing for the truth so it doesn't matter. Humility vs. truth is a false dichotomy. Scripture says do both. So again, to correct someone with truth but not do it in a spirit of humility, love, charity, and gentleness is actually, once again, unbiblical. In the clips, he's laughing when he's interviewing others about the people that are teaching/doing the wrong things. Should he be laughing? What kind of spirit does that convey? Seems to me if anything he should be weeping.
 
As for an alternative movie, draft Les Lanphere who did Calvinist and should be done in a few months with Spirit & Truth, aimed at the YY&R crowd which maybe should be YYR&Woke?
 
Voddie Baucham is the best guy to speak to these issues:
1. He understands the issues clearly.
2. He's black.
3. He moved to Zambia.

The cultural Marxists have no defense against Baucham.

If you haven't watched this lecture, you should:

I haven't seen anything with Baucham but I understand he's pretty good on this area. However frankly his being black and living in Zambia is kinda irrelevant. White men are allowed to talk about this stuff too and they're allowed to call out whites and blacks who are bringing heresy into the church.

I didn't see hubris in this trailer. I saw men who are very worried about what's happening speaking out. That has always happened in the church: God raising up men to sound the alarm about whatever particular heresy is infecting the church at a particular time. As men used the printing press and tracts in the past they use the Internet and social media today. I say good on them. The trailer itself may have been badly edited but let us wait for the actual film.

The gates of Hell will not prevail against the church but once godly denominations can be pulled down and congregations in which the Gospel was once preached can become synagogues of satan and the undiscerning can be ensnared by the wolves in sheep's clothing. God has promised that there will always be a remnant but He hasn't promised it will necessarily be in America or Britain. We are called upon to fight the good fight and to stand up against the enemies without and within the church.

As to the refrain of "have they gone to Matt Chandler privately": these wolves are speaking publicly, leading many astray. They must be repudiated.
 
However frankly his being black and living in Zambia is kinda irrelevant. White men are allowed to talk about this stuff too and they're allowed to call out whites and blacks who are bringing heresy into the church.
No doubt--his skin color and the fact that he moved to a third world country don't make his arguments any more or less true, and anyone can make arguments just as cogent as his.

However, the whole point of the SJW/cultural Marxist/Wokist movement is that there is a power play between majority groups and minority groups. When a white man argues against it, his arguments are dismissed as mere excuses for the oppressive majority group. They can't say that about Baucham. From a tactical perspective, there's no one better. No one can accuse him of being the enemy of minorities or the underprivileged.
 
Last edited:
From a tactical perspective, there's no one better. No one can accuse him of being the enemy of minorities or the underprivileged.

Actually, to the contrary. The Woke® crowd accuses him of being co-opted by the "white man" to be an enabler of system of white privilege.
 
Actually, to the contrary. The Woke® crowd accuses him of being co-opted by the "white man" to be an enabler of system of white privilege.
How does one become an enabler of white privilege in Zambia?

That level of irrationalism is hard to debate. The only solution to the entire race issue is the Gospel and understanding that we are now one in Christ and that is our new identity.

No need to get fancy with documentaries and brand names. Preach the Word, preach it well, and serve the Supper.
 
Might be wise to withhold judgment on the work of these men until after the movie comes out.

Absolutely. The faux outrage being poured out by the evangelical intelligencia over this is ridiculous. The fact that so many are buying into it demonstrates why so few are willing to speak out on this issue. Is the trailer perhaps misleadingly edited? Of course. When was the last time anyone saw a trailer for any movie that wasn’t? That’s just the nature of a trailer, and for the record, most trailers aren’t even put together by the same people who made the movie. At any rate, these men should be commended for having the courage the speak out. Once the movie actually comes out, then we can all watch it and decide if it is fair.
 
No need to get fancy with documentaries and brand names. Preach the Word, preach it well, and serve the Supper.[/QUOTE]

And guard the sheep, hold fast to the doctrine, and oppose them at every turn as Paul did. Both are necessary in every generation.
 
And to be clear: I agree with @Pergamum that some of the editing of the trailer was counter productive. Some pieces of evidence work against you more than for you. But that shouldn't mean we discard the whole work. Also from the trailer I think it looks like a promising film and look forward to it.
 
People on Twitter seemed to be losing their minds over this. People on both sides. Twitter is not helpful for lowering the heat (though presbycast's trolling of this is humorous In my humble opinion).

I think it will be telling how Tom Ascol and Jared Longshore acknowledge this. Do they double down? Do they ignore it? Do they acknowledge, apologize, and move on? Are they working behind the scenes to touch base with the principal people impacted (it seemed like Tom was trying to get a hold of the Denhollander's https://twitter.com/JJ_Denhollander/status/1154062129189797888?s=20 )? I am withholding any sweeping judgment until I hear (or not hear) from them.

[Edit] And I am mostly interested to hear about Denhollander being included and the potential miscommunication between some of the people who seemed to be surprised by the direction of it. Hopefully they can acknowledge the mistakes that may have been made.
 
Last edited:
There will a couple of missteps with the trailer but the hysteria over it is designed to distract us from the substance of what the film is about. It's also telling that certain people are more animated over this than they are over the heresy which is being addressed in the film and which is causing serious harm to the church.
 
Reportedly someone associated with Doug Wilson’s ministry edited the video.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
presbycast's trolling of this is humorous In my humble opinion
I just dropped in there to take a peek--I'm being absolutely truthful here--I had no idea that there was commentary there criticizing the visual turn in evangelicalism (in light of this visual media dustup) that was posted not long before my comments here. Those comments and mine, being somewhat complementary, were not interdependent.
 
UPDATE:

A pastor in the US has informed me that he has called Tom Ascol and that Pastor Ascol was very humble and apologetic.

Ascol has called the Denhollender's and their pastor and apologized to them.

The video was sent out to as many as 100 persons to get their input before being put forward and everyone approved it. So I was told that Ascol was taken by surprise at many who have backtracked since the tweets started, though he acknowledges mistakes were made that have contributed to causing this.

Of course the pastor then urged me to talk to the person before posting things publicly, which seems to be a very common but strange thing that Christians urge, but the trailer being made public, and people being encouraged to watch it, doesn't really fit the context of going privately to a brother. It was a public fiasco and so deserves public discussion and commentary. It was not a private matter or marriage or family issue; no, they were spreading the video out publicly to be watched. Without a push-back, I don't think any remorse would have been shone. He must have surrounded himself only with people who affirmed the film and did not give him wise feedback.

And also, this is a reminder that the folks on the "Social Justice" side have done some pretty dense things as well (calling Trump supporters Rednecks, pushing for reparations for slavery, etc), I would never in a million years listen to the sermons of many pushing for Social Justice, but Pastor Ascol has ably preached the gospel for many years.

My hope is that a lesson is learned so that future efforts are more successfully and that the true issues are not clouded.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top