Legislating Morality, Culture & Politics Archives | CrossExamined.org

Nick Fuentes in His Own Words

Legislating Morality, Culture & Politics

With the interview on Tucker Carlson followed by Ben Shapiro’s scathing response, and the failed diplomatic intervention of Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts, Nick Fuentes ias no longer under the radar. I guess we have to talk about this guy. I should have some comments to share soon. But in the mean time, it will be good to hear Nick Fuentes in his own words.

As much as possible I linked to his own, original clips. In a few cases they’re paraphrases. The effort is to let him speak for himself. For people who aren’t familiar with his rhetoric, they are liable to think his critics are exaggerating or treating him unfairly. I get it. So, this is a chance to see him, for yourself without spin doctors in the way.

Not a Deep Dive, Just a Baggage Check

Now this is not a comprehensive survey or deep dive into Fuentes’s politics and practice. I’ll try to do that later. For now, it’s just an introduction to the kind of “baggage” he’s carrying. But, be warned. He has a knack for rage-baiting, aggravating, and triggering people. Remember to keep your testimony. Pray for him and even love him (Matthew 5:43-48). He needs to repent and get right with God. He may call himself a Christian, but he’s not exactly known by his love (John 13:35). So, I’m personally praying that he feels the tension between his claimed Christianity and the person he’s becoming, and turns to Jesus in confession and repentance.

In the meantime, take a look for yourself at what he has to say, in his own words. Each quote is linked so you can see where and how he says it, just in case you want to see if his words are getting twisted.

Nick Fuentes in his own Words Language Warning

Praise for Dictators/Dictatorships/Fascism

Holocaust Denial

Antisemitism and Anti-Jewish Conspiracism

Weirdly Violent and Cultish Statements

Racism and White Supremacism

White Nationalism

Sexism and Misogyny

Bashing Charlie Kirk

Recommended Resources:

Correct not Politically Correct: About Same-Sex Marriage and Transgenderism by Frank Turek (Book, MP4, )

If God, Why Evil? (DVD Set), (MP3 Set), and (mp4 Download Set) by Frank Turek

Legislating Morality: Is it Wise? Is it Legal? Is it Possible? by Frank Turek (Book, DVD, Mp3, Mp4, PowerPoint download, PowerPoint CD)

Jesus, You and the Essentials of Christianity by Frank Turek (INSTRUCTOR Study Guide), (STUDENT Study Guide), and (DVD)

Dr. John D. Ferrer is a speaker and content creator with Crossexamined. He’s also a graduate from the very first class of Crossexamined Instructors Academy. Having earned degrees from Southern Evangelical Seminary (MDiv) and Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (ThM, PhD), he’s now active in the pro-life community and in his home church in Pella Iowa. When he’s not helping his wife Hillary Ferrer with her ministry Mama Bear Apologetics, you can usually find John writing, researching, and teaching cultural apologetics.

November 26, 2025/by John Ferrer

The Persecution of Christians on Campus

Legislating Morality, Culture & Politics

[Editor’s Note: “The point of peak persecution on American soil is the University” – John Ferrer. This article from Christian Apologetics professor and high school Bible teacher, Steve Lee has been his passion project spanning most of his teaching career at the high school and college level. Over the past 14 years, this list of anti-Christian incidents has steadily grown with the most recent example being perhaps the most significant religious and political assassination in this generation: Charlie Kirk’s shooting at the Utah Valley University.

Readers should note that this list is not exhaustive. There are many more examples beyond this list. Also, these persecution events on U.S. college campuses is not intended for petty games of comparison, as if our persecution is more important than someone else’s. No, this is just an attempt to be honest about the kind of environment that young people are going into when they go to college. If the last 5 years have taught us anything about Campus life, it’s that college can be a slaughterhouse for immature, half-hearted, and shallow ‘Christians.’ And even for mature, and motivated young Christians, or even professors and administrators, sometimes administration and oppressive policies can still do a lot of spiritual damage. A major motivation for teaching apologetics is to prevent that from happened by raising up smart, savvy, committed Christians who can stand against oppressive speech policies, restrictive event policies, or even over anti-Christian behavior.

There are still tons of solid Christian clubs, local churches, and even some Christian professors who can help students make it through the gauntlet of university life. But, the point is that persecution is real, and Christian students have a better chance of standing up straight if they can brace for impact]

Being a professional student and spending over fourteen years in undergraduate and graduate education and another seven years as a professor at the collegiate level, it is disappointing to see the anti-Christian bias that is found on the college campus today. Instances have ranged from prohibiting Christian clubs from requiring their leaders (not members), their leaders to be Christian, to being shouted down in class for endorsing Christian views (and of late, being shot for discussing one’s Christian convictions). The rise of anti-Christian bias on campus is evident. Granted, many of the instances listed here are in no way comparable to what Christians are facing around the world, but an indicator of the rise of this attitude was found in a 2007 study by the Institute for Jewish and Community Research concerning anti-Semitism on-campus. Rather than finding anti-Semitism, the Institute discovered that 53% of college professors admitted to “unfavorable” feelings about evangelical Christians. No other religious group (including Muslims) was even close to this number.

Below are some instances of these “unfavorable” feelings about Christians on college and university campuses today:

See the 96 Examples of Christian Persecution
on US Colleges and University Campuses
Page 1 – #87-96
Page 2 – #1-85

Recommended Resources:

If God, Why Evil? (DVD Set), (MP3 Set), and (mp4 Download Set) by Frank Turek

Why Doesn’t God Intervene More? (DVD Set), (MP3 Set), and (mp4 Download Set) by Frank Turek

Why does God allow Bad Things to Happen to Good People? (DVD) and (mp4 Download) by Frank Turek

Relief From the Worst Pain You’ll Ever Experience (DVD) (MP3) (Mp4 Download) by Gary Habermas

J. Steve Lee has taught Apologetics for over two and a half decades at Prestonwood Christian Academy. He also has taught World Religions and Philosophy at Mountain View College in Dallas and Collin College in Plano. With a degree in history and education from the University of North Texas, Steve continued his formal studies at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary with a M.A. in philosophy of religion and has pursued doctoral studies at the University of Texas at Dallas and is finishing his dissertation at South African Theological Seminary. He has published several articles for the Apologetics Study Bible for Students as well as articles and book reviews in various periodicals including Philosophia Christi, Hope’s Reason: A Journal of Apologetics, and the Areopagus Journal. Having an abiding love for fantasy fiction, Steve has contributed chapters to two books on literary criticism of Harry Potter: Harry Potter for Nerds and Teaching with Harry Potter. He even appeared as a guest on the podcast MuggleNet Academia (“Lesson 23: There and Back Again-Chiasmus, Alchemy, and Ring Composition in Harry Potter”). He is married to his lovely wife, Angela, and has two grown boys, Ethan and Josh.

Originally Posted Here: https://bit.ly/49kuGG4

November 19, 2025/by Guest

Inside the Antifa Mind, Part 1: The Myth of Oppression

Legislating Morality, Culture & Politics

Welcome to my new series on the belief system known as Antifa.

If you’re a parent or student, you might be wondering: What do the Antifa professors on my campus actually believe? Why are they pushing communism?

My goal in this first installment is to explain their ideological foundation—how they think the world works—so that you can recognize their framework, understand their appeal, and ultimately see why it collapses under its own weight. This helps you see that such professors, for all of their study, have failed to become wise and cannot explain the basics of reality.

In the next part, we’ll expose the rational incoherence of that foundation. The public refutation of any movement takes away its influence over the minds of its adherents and potential converts once it is exposed as incoherent—when it’s shown to make no sense whatsoever. Its initial appeal, grounded in teenage angst and sin, dissipates went the adult wants wisdom instead of folly.

One of the best resources for understanding the Antifa movement from its own perspective is the 2017 book Antifa: The Antifascist Handbook written by Mark Bray.[1] In it, Bray says: “This book takes seriously the transhistorical terror of fascism and the power of conjuring the dead when fighting back. It is an unabashedly partisan call to arms that aims to equip a new generation of anti-fascists with the history and theory necessary to defeat the resurgent Far Right.”[2]

1. The Organizing Idea: “Oppression”

Every worldview has a core idea that organizes its moral and political vision. For Antifa, that concept is oppression.

To understand their appeal, you have to see that there’s always some admixture of truth—a kernel of reality—that draws people in. This one especially appeals to our sin and natural desire to cry, “life’s not fair.” Because we are made in the image of God we have a natural desire for justice. But our sin corrupts this into a merely materialistic justice.

Here’s what Antifa affirms, in their own way:

We are born into systems over which we have no control.
Those systems are mixed with moral evil.
In every system, there are groups who are “marginalized”—used by the system but denied its benefits.
In every system, others are born into privilege they didn’t earn and use it to preserve their power.

Even Jim Morrison captured the mood:

“Into this world we’re thrown, into this house we’re born.”

It does seem unfair that some benefit from the lottery of birth while others suffer. These aren’t new insights—they’re ancient philosophical questions about justice, responsibility, and fate. They press us to think, “Are the economic advantages of life really our highest good, or is there something even better than money and status?” The problem isn’t the questions Antifa raises. It’s their answers.

The problem isn’t the questions Antifa raises. It’s their answers.

2. The Marxist “Solution”

Antifa’s answers are, quite simply, catastrophically incoherent. Generally speaking, theirs are the answers of the French and Communist Revolutions. Rousseau, the French philosopher who laid the philosophical groundwork for the revolutionary spirit, taught that humans are born good and crime is an invention of society due to private property. “Man is born free and everywhere he is in chains.”

Similarly, Antifa believes that through violent revolution they can overthrow the oppressive system and rebuild a materialistic utopia of communal living. Bray tells us, “Despite the various shades of interpretation, antifa should not be understood as a single-issue movement. Instead, it is simply one of a number of manifestations of revolutionary socialist politics (broadly construed).”[3] Anything that gets in the way of the socialist revolution, even small government constitutionalism, is “fascist.”

According to Antifa, anything that gets in the way of the socialist revolution, even small government constitutionalism, is “fascist.”

From their initial complaint about inequality, they leap into revolutionary nihilism by implementing old-fashioned Marxist materialism dressed up in radical chic:

Burn down the existing system—it cannot be reformed, only destroyed.
Replace it with the standard communist formula: redistribution of wealth and state control of production.

The modern twist is that their Marxism has become decentered and nihilistic, following the ideas of Michel Foucault rather than Joseph Stalin. They still want to overthrow all order, but they prefer to use chaos, bureaucracy, and “cultural revolution” instead of centralized Soviet power.[4]

Bray links the “anti-racism” movement championed by figures like the disgraced Ibram X. Kendi with the LGBTQ+ and decolonizing movements, and all under the umbrella of anti-racism.[5] In other words, all of the causes the radical university professors advocate in university classes across the nation.

That said, they’re always willing to use a government—when it suits their purposes—to impose their ideology on everyone else. This is why they are so sensitive to the appearance that someone else might do it. “The lady doth protest too much, me thinks.” In their view, there are only two options, communists and fascists, or international socialists and national socialists—both are radical leftist ideologies.

3. The Religious Core of a “Materialist” Movement

Despite claiming to be materialists, Antifa offers its adherents an unmistakably religious outlook. This can be seen in the zeal with which they pursue their goals and the strength of fideism by which they believe themselves to be justified. They are anarchists and decentralized but we can still define those terms to see what holds the group together even if it is in a loose sense.

“Antifa should not be understood as a single-issue movement. Instead, it is simply one of a number of manifestations of revolutionary socialist politics (broadly construed). Most of the anti-fascists I interviewed also spend a great deal of their time on other forms of politics (e.g., labor organizing, squatting, environmental activism, antiwar mobilization, or migrant solidarity work).”[6]

Like all cults, they are organized around an “us vs. them” mentality where the “them” are outsiders, followers, sheep, who cannot understand. And because “they” cannot understand, the focus for Antifa is not rational persuasion but “community organizing” to “resist.”

Marx borrowed heavily from Christianity. He gave his own version of the fall and redemption. The fall occurred when private property was introduced, the fallen system is the capitalist exploitation of workers, and redemption occurs (and the millennium is introduced) when the workers of the world unite to overflow that system and replace it with their own.

The materialism of the movement can be found in its often overt anti-Christian, anti-God rhetoric. But it is also present in the absence of anything transcendent when the movement presents its utopian views. The human is a mere evolved animal that is to live in a materialist paradise where its material needs are met. The “revolution” is the only thing that gives the adherents of this religion any hope of a “cause” that transcends their lives and gives some appearance of meaning to their existence. This is why it has such a cult-like zealotry.

4. The “Authenticity” Creed

Their moral ideal is “authenticity.” They teach “existence precedes essence,” meaning you exist first and then define who you are. Echoing Sartre, Foucault said, “It’s my hypothesis that the individual is not a pre-given entity which is seized on by the exercise of power. The individual, with his identity and characteristics, is the product of a relation of power exercised over bodies, multiplicities, movements, desires, forces.”[7] That’s why they attach themselves to the LGBTQ+ movement—because both rest on the same principle: the will to power.

To be “authentic” means to exert your will, to define yourself, to reject all external authority. Again, Foucault said “The relationships we have to have with ourselves are not ones of identity, rather they must be relationships of differentiation, of creation, of innovation. To be the same is really boring.”[8]

This rejection of authority is also why the movement is anti-intellectual at its core. It abandons the authority of reason, dismisses logic as “oppressive” or “logocentric,” and replaces truth with the mantra: “Do what thou wilt.”

This is also applies to means/ends reasoning. All means are justifiable for the end sought by the radical. Saul Alinsky tells us, “If you actively opposed the Nazi occupation and joined the underground Resistance, then you adopted the means of assassination, terror, property destruction, the bombing of tunnels and trains, kidnapping, and the willingness to sacrifice innocent hostages to the end of defeating the Nazis.”[9] There are not “rules” for radicals; they are justified, in their own eyes, to do anything that achieves their goals. If they label their opponent a “Nazi,” as we hear the radical left doing with Charlie Kirk and other conservatives, then they are justified to stop him at all costs.

5. The Luciferian Inspiration

Their own mentors don’t hide their allegiance. For example, in Rules for Radicals, Saul Alinsky’s handbook for modern activism, dedicates itself to the first radical—Lucifer. There, he says, “Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins—or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom—Lucifer.”[10]

That’s no metaphor. They admire the arch-rebel. Whether or not they think there is a being named “Lucifer,” they worship him as their “light-bearer.” They would rather, as Milton’s Satan put it, “rule in hell than serve in heaven.”

Their concept of being “oppressed” even includes living under God’s law—because to them, God’s authority itself is oppression. Saul Alinsky says, “The Revolutionary Force today has two targets, moral as well as material. Its young protagonists are one moment reminiscent of the idealistic early Christians, yet they also urge violence and cry, ‘Burn the system down!’ They have no illusions about the system, but plenty of illusions about the way to change our world.”[11] They are idealists but without Christ and therefore without any restraint. They see the “system” as structurally racist and bigoted and not worth saving.

They would rather invent their own morality, even if it leads to ruin. The community organizer of Alinksy is to be a political relativist, and Machiavellian, who will use any means necessary to achieve his end. Nothing is off the table.[12]

The technical word for this is “heteronomy.” They opposed any law that originates outside of themselves. But their mistake is that God’s law is written on our hearts. It is a description of our being. God’s law describes the choices we must make to achieve what is best for us as humans. Seeing this, some are willing to take the step of denying their humanity and identifying as animals.

Alinksy goes on to teach about how to be a community organizer. Here he is very clear about the radical’s intentions: “The organizer is in a true sense reaching for the highest level for which man can reach—to create, to be a ‘great creator,’ to play God.”[13] l think of Lucifer as the Phoenix who is cast from heavens, only to rise again in the flames and create his own reality. These radicals are clear that this is their hero and their own aspiration.

6. Be Free in the U.S.A.

The sad irony is that those with communist leanings are nowhere more free to live that out than in the United States. Throughout our history, utopian groups have set up shop to show the rest of us how it is done.

In the United States, you’re free to voluntarily start a commune with others who are like-minded. Many have done this over the last few centuries. Such communes regularly fail disastrously, but you’ll still find groups that try again.

The keyword here is “voluntary.” In the United States, you can work together with others who voluntarily decide to do so. But the French and Marxist revolutionaries want to force everyone else to do it their way.

The United States is built on the idea of rational persuasion. That’s why we began our history with a Declaration of Independence where we presented an argument to the world. By comparison, the American revolution was far less bloody than any of the revolutions that followed. Our goal was not to destroy the British system, but to defend ourselves as having a right to our own system.

When a philosophy is essentially irrational, like that coming out of Marxism, it tends to hate the idea of rational arguments.[14] Instead, it seeks to force others to conform. That is why Antifa does not want to work within a system to change it, but wants to instead overthrow it.

7. What This Reveals

Once you understand these ideas, the Antifa professor’s worldview becomes predictable:

They see the world as an evil system that must be destroyed.
They justify rebellion as liberation.
And they redefine good and evil as power and weakness.

Their entire life’s work rests on shifting sand—a rebellion disguised as moral compassion. Their “system” is built on falsehoods and misunderstandings of reality.

It’s easy to convince people that they are oppressed and that life is unfair. That’s the seductive power of sin: the allure of rebellion.

What’s far more difficult—and far more valuable—is to pursue truth: to see the world as it really is, to understand our fallen condition, and to find redemption not in revolution, but in Christ.

Antifa has nothing lasting to offer its followers. It reduces human life to the material and promises a utopia it cannot deliver. To find meaning in life, we must come to know what is transcendent.

Next in the series:

In Part 2, we’ll examine the logical and moral contradictions in Antifa’s worldview—and show why their system not only fails philosophically but collapses under its own claim to justice.

Bibliography

Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals. New York: Vintage Books, 1971), at: https://ia801202.us.archive.org/28/items/RulesForRadicals/RulesForRadicals.pdf
Mark Bray, Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook (Brooklyn, NY: Melville House, 2017),

at: https://files.libcom.org/files/Antifa%2C%20The%20Anti-Fascist%20Handbook.pdf

Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), “Examining Extremism: Antifa,” (CSIS Briefs, 2021), at: Available at: https://www.csis.org/analysis/examining-extremism-antifa

George Washington University Program on Extremism, “Anarchist/Left-Wing Violent Extremism in America,” (Washington, D.C.: GWU, 2021), Available at: https://extremism.gwu.edu/

Ruth Kinna, “Heretical Constructions of Anarchist Utopianism,” Utopian Studies 15, no. 2 (2004), 97–121, at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/20718631

Sophie Scott-Brown, “Utopian Anti-Utopianism: Rethinking Cold War Liberalism through British Anarchism,” Intellectual History Review (2025), at: https://doi.org/10.1080/17496977.2025.xxxxxx

Murray Bookchin, “Anarchism: Past, Present, and Utopia,” in The Anarchist Papers, Dimitrios Roussopoulos, ed (Montréal: Black Rose Books, 1980), at: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/murray-bookchin-anarchism-past-present-and-utopia

Marty Tomszak, “Anti-Fascism as Constitutive of the Gospel Ethic,” Political Theology Symposium (Political Theology Network, 2024), at: https://politicaltheology.com/symposium/anti-fascism-as-constitutive-of-the-gospel-ethic

Acton Institute, “Five Facts about Antifa,” Acton Institute (Religion & Liberty Online, 2017), at: https://rlo.acton.org/archives/97805-5-facts-about-antifa.html

S. House of Representatives. “Hearing on Countering Domestic Terrorism: Examining Antifa and Other Left-Wing Extremist Movements,” (Washington DC, May 12, 2021) at https://docs.house.gov/meetings/GO/GO00/20210512/112524/HHRG-117-GO00-20210512-SD006.pdf

References:

[1] Mark Bray, Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook (Brooklyn, NY: Melville House, 2017), xii.

[2] Bray, xii

[3] Bray, xvi

[4] Editor’s Note: In this way, Antifa is a decentralized, organized around different hubs of anarchist and marxist radicals, rather than a strict centralized hierarchy of power. In recent weeks, some voices on the left have argued that Antifa isn’t an “organization” but a leaderless ideology. But it’s naïve to think that a terrorist group cannot also be an ideology or that it would need a centralized power structure to exist. For an argument against antifa’s “terrorist group status,” see, Luke Baumgartner [interview], “What is Antifa and why Trump calls it a Terrorist Group?” [Video] Public Broadcasting System (23 September 2025) at: https://www.pbs.org/video/targeting-antifa-1758662072/

[5] Bray, xvi, xxii, 46-7, 93, et al.

[6] Ibid, xvii.

[7] Michel Foucault, “The Subject and Power” (1982), The Foucault Reader, edited by Paul Rabinow (New York: Pantheon Books, 1984), pg. 214.
in Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics, edited by Hubert L. Dreyfus and Paul Rabinow, 2nd ed. (University of Chicago Press, 1983), pages 208–226.

[8] Michel Foucault “Sex, Power and the Politics of Identity” [interview] (1982), in The Essential Works of Michel Foucault, Volume 1: Ethics, Subjectivity, and Truth, edited by Paul Rabinow, ed., Robert Hurley, trans., (New York: The New Press, 1997), 162.

[9] Saul Alinski, Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals (New York: Vintage Books, 1971), 27.

[10] Alinski, ix.

[11]Ibid, xiv.

[12] Ibid, 79.

[13] Ibid, 61.

[14] Editor’s Note: Rather than treating reason as a principled methodology, with reality and truth being an objective judge between competing parties, Antifa – with it’s Marxist and Machiavellian roots – tends to treat truth as optional, and reason as disposable. Reason is, for them, a mere tool, to be used for pragmatic purposes when it suits one’s interests, but its readily discarded whenever it begins to work against antifascist aims. For antifa (and disciples of Alinski), power is the guiding principle, leaving reason/rationality is merely a pragmatic tool to be used, abused, and discarded, in service to the greater pursuit of power. Truth itself is seen as sophisticated tool of oppression under the current hegemony. This anti-realistic stance stems not from Antifa’s Marxist roots but rather from it’s postmodern influence, via critical theory, wherein reality itself is seen as a malleable social construct rather than an objective reference point for adjudicating between competing claims.

Recommended Resources:

Correct not Politically Correct: About Same-Sex Marriage and Transgenderism by Frank Turek (Book, MP4, )

You Can’t NOT Legislate Morality mp3 by Frank Turek

Legislating Morality: Is it Wise? Is it Legal? Is it Possible? by Frank Turek (Book, DVD, Mp3, Mp4, PowerPoint download, PowerPoint CD)

Does Jesus Trump Your Politics by Dr. Frank Turek (mp4 download and DVD)

Dr. Owen Anderson is a Professor of Philosophy and Religious Studies at Arizona State University, a pastor, and a certified jiu-jitsu instructor. He emphasizes the Christian belief in God, human sin, and redemption through Christ, and he explores these themes in his philosophical commentary on the Book of Job. His recent research addresses issues such as DEIB, antiracism, and academic freedom in secular universities, critiquing the influence of thinkers like Rousseau, Marx, and Freud. Dr. Anderson actively shares his insights through articles, books, online classes, and his Substack.

A version of this blog was originally posted at: https://bit.ly/4hGcv08

November 17, 2025/by Guest

Legislating Religion Or Morality?

Legislating Morality, Culture & Politics

It’s often said that “You shouldn’t legislate morality!” But, as Frank Turek argues ably, “all laws legislate morality.” He’s got a point. Legislating morality is inevitable. The question isn’t whether to legislate morality, but whose morality to legislate.[1] This predicament sets the stage for a genuine power struggle. Whose moral vision should win that tug-of-war? The outcome has yet to be determined on this side of eternity.

Legislating morality is unavoidable. Legislating religion, however, remains undecided.

Historically, the United States has been a majority Christian nation, informed by broadly Christian values, ethics, and worldview. The laws of this land, unsurprisingly, have often reflected a judicious and humanitarian outlook rooted in biblical Christianity. That means a growing recognition of sanctity of human life, the presumption of innocence, and freedom of religion.[2] The first amendment, for example, has firmly protected against forced religion, while fortifying freedom of religion and freedom of conscience, all while preventing any national religion.[3] America was founded, in part, because people rejected force-fed religion. With this in mind, we can readily admit that the United States has had a majority Christian worldview influencing its founding and maturation, without committing to a heavy-handed Church-state merger forcing Christianity on its citizens at the federal level, or confusing the two institutions for each other. Furthermore, that description seems to be the primary meaning of the phrase “Christian Nation.” At minimum, that’s what I’ve always meant by “America is a Christian Nation.” This country has a Christian heritage, lots of Christian citizens, and Christianity has been instrumental in the founding and fortification of this country.

What about Legislating Religion?

That concept of a “Christian nation,” however, has been variously understood and misunderstood over the years especially under the banner of “Christian Nationalism.” At this point another question arises, “What about legislating religion?”

The Majority Left

On the left side of the political spectrum it’s pretty common to hear fear-baiting rhetoric about a forceable Christian takeover. Christians, apparently, are trying to force their religion on people through religiously charged anti-abortion laws (“Keep your rosaries off my ovaries!”), converting public schools into Christian churches with school prayer, and imposing the Bible on courtrooms and congress (through congressional prayer and displaying the Ten Commandments). In this vein, the common phrase, “Christian nationalism”, is thrown around as a left-wing slur indistinguishable from “white nationalism,” “fascism,” or even “neo-nazism.”

For the majority left, especially in legacy media, “Christian Nationalism” isn’t a precise term. Nor was it meant to be. Mudslinging isn’t a precision sport. It’s just meant to smear, degrade, deride, and dismiss the victim. Aiming isn’t important when you’re making a mess. The force of this phrase, “Christian nationalism” is primarily emotive – it feels like theocracy, forced-religion, and heavy-handed Christians trying to “take back America” for rich white men, and their domestic slaves (jobless wives, dependent children, and employees). Of course, that’s a deeply uncharitable understanding of “Christian nationalism.” But, if the goal isn’t truth but power, and the aim isn’t precision but political posturing, then the label “Christian nationalist”, for the majority left, works well as a sweeping generalization lumping every conservative Christian patriot or politician under the same blanketing libel as the most hard-core theocrat, as if Christians generally want to replace the constitution with the Bible so we can start exiling non-believers, stoning gay people, and banning inter-cultural marriage.

It bears repeating that, coming from the majority left, the phrase “Christian Nationalism” is a libelous term meant to disqualify people. It sounds, to them (and to many moderates), like a substitute word for “white nationalism,” “white supremacism,” or even “neo-naziism.” So, anyone who embraces the phrase “Christian Nationalist” is liable to be dismissed and ignored before they have a chance to explain what they mean. The Christian Nationalist can try explain how they aren’t talking about forced religion like the Spanish Inquisition, apartheid-South Africa, or the Salem Witch Trials. But by the end of the explanation, there’s no one left in the lecture hall. The people dispersed as soon as he said he’s a “Christian Nationalist.” That’s the risk Christians run if they toy around with the phrase “Christian Nationalism” without realizing the enormous baggage it carries. Yes, we can encourage Christians to get more involved in politics and encourage politicians to bring Christian values and ethics with them to congress. But to call that “Christian nationalism” is about as naïve as calling people “gay” because they’re happy. People don’t hear that innocent intent when they hear such loaded words.[4]

The Radical Right

On the fringe right wing, however, the phrase “Christian Nationalism” is gaining fashion. Leaving the majority of Christian conservatives in the dust, there is a faction of people who openly promote Christian Nationalism in a more or less “theocratic” sense of the phrase.[5] Doug Wilson, for example, argues that Christianity should be the national religion, as well as the framing worldview and reference point for government.[6] For people to hold public office they would have to be Christian.[7] And certain Old Testament and 1^st Century cultural laws would be reinstituted such as repealing women’s right to vote, and reinstituting legal bans on homosexual practice.[8] Some Christian nationalists, in this vein, would go so far as to say that the Constitution should be replaced with the Bible.

From this fringe right wing perspective, one could argue that legislating religion is just as inevitable as legislating morality. In their view, religion is unavoidable and the only question is whole religion to legislate.

Three of the main contenders for that “inevitable religion” status are Christianity, Islam, and what some have called the “Woke Cult” or more charitably, “Progressivism.”[9] History has plenty of examples of Christian Theocracies and Islamic Theocracies, but the third category – Progressivism – might not seem as obvious.[10] Progressivism, might not seem like a “religion” at first. But the word “religion” does not simply refer to a formally established historically rooted belief-system with rituals, worship, theology, and so forth. Rather the first amendment sense of “freedom of religion” has always covered ideology, freedom of thought, and freedom of conscience. In this regard, progressive ideology certainly qualifies. Without parsing out “progressivism” too narrowly, it can include a range of left-wing ideologies including Critical Race Theory (CRT), Diversity Equity and Inclusion teachings (DEI), Anti-normativity and Queer theory, and more. Note, this is not just a question of ethics, but a wider ideology underneath those ethics. Progressivism is a religion in this broad, first amendment sense.

It is not clear, however, that the government will inevitably legislate religion. Ethically charged activity is unavoidable. Religiously charged policy, however, doesn’t have to happen. Sure, progressive ideology can sneak through sometimes, just as Christian, Jewish, libertarian, or conservative ideology, can sneak through too. But it’s still a stretch to call those religious and ideological influences “legislated religion.” The founding fathers never forbid such influence, but rather than giving special preference where one religion could be imposed on the general populace, they wisely installed a restrained sense of natural law. It has only a broad reference to “nature’s God,” and no particular religious trappings (prayer, worship, theology, rituals, etc.). Strictly speaking, a person could interpret “nature’s god” in terms of theism, polytheism, agnosticism, deism, pantheism, panentheism, or even atheism, where “nature’s god” is a personified reference to the mysterious machinations of primordial nature. We cannot safely assume that the Federal Government will necessarily impose a religion on the masses, nor can we use that fear to force Christianity on people under the banner of “Christian Nationalism.”

The Majority Right

The Majority of Christians on the political right-wing are somewhere in between those extremes. They don’t agree with Doug Wilson or any theocratic brands of Christian Nationalism. They might be open to some nuanced sense of “Christian nationalism” but, not if it means granting the libelous use of “Christian Nationalism,” on the left, where any given Christian patriot is labeled a hardline theocrat and lumped in with a motley crew of Conquistadors, Crusaders, and Witch Hunters. This group has the hard job of charting a path forward that avoids extremist errors on both ends. We probably shouldn’t replace the constitution with the Bible, or install a bunch of Old Testament laws in place of the bill of rights. But there is a lot of room to discuss repealing abortion-choice laws, reevaluating the Obergfell decision, and allowing prayer in schools. These ideas can be debated, case by case, without having to jump to any extremist conclusions. There is foolish excess on every side of the political spectrum. It is not enough to guard against “left-wing” errors with no concern for right-wing errors.

Charting a Way Forward

Surely there has to be another option. Right?

Vested parties probably need to have serious public discussion about the intricacies of “Christian Nationalism.” We can initiate this effort at the local level by simply asking, “What do you mean by ‘Christian nationalism’?” We cannot safely assume that everyone is using the phrase in more or less the same way. We need to identify looming errors, uses and misuses, and carefully carve out different senses of the phrase to avoid confusion, especially where people want to exploit that confusion for political purposes. People use smoke grenades only when they’re sneaking something past you. People use blurry confusing language for the same reason, to sneak something past you.

People use smoke grenades only when they’re sneaking something past you. People use blurry confusing language for the same reason, to sneak something past you.

That’s why we need to clarify terms. There might be a time, in the future, when the phrase is redeemed enough to where it’s more helpful than hurtful in public discourse. At present, however, the best way to maintain spiritual integrity and political sensibility, moving forward, is probably to avoid the phrase “Christian National/ism/ist.” Perhaps the phrase can one day be rescued from its baggage on the majority left and extreme right. Maybe one day it will no longer be a trap phrase that gets patriotic Christians to unwittingly imply they’re white supremacists. But as it stands now, the phrase is probably more trouble than it’s worth.

Patriotic Christians, of course, can still celebrate and be thankful for their country. They can assert American Exceptionalism. They can engage in politics, join political action committees, vote, petition, teach, speak, and run for office. They can even affirm Nationalism in the sense of an “America-first” agenda for the nation. In essence, Christians can affirm all sorts of political objectives without adopting the label of “Christian Nationalist.” For 95% of Christians, they lose nothing by shunning or shedding that label. Strategically, shedding the baggage of that phrase is all gain and no loss.

Meanwhile, the phrase “Christian Nationalism” already has a range of popular meanings that many people aren’t aware of, aren’t prepared for, nor are they ready to distinguish between them. “Christian Nationalism” can mean “patriotic Christian,” “a Christian who is a nationalist,” “Christian-influenced government,” “Church-State blurring,” “Church-State Fusion,” “Forced Religion,” “White-Nationalism,” “Anti-1^st Amendment,” “European Cultural Christian Theocracy,” “Old Testament Theocracy,” and of course, “Handmaid’s Tale Theocracy.”

Finally, Christian conservatives should be wary against big tent partnerships with self-identified Christian nationalists. I’m not saying it should never happen. But they should weigh the costs involved, recognizing that not everyone who identifies as a “Christian Conservative” is aiming at the same target. Whatever foolishness and evil we might be seeing on the political left, we should be humbly self-aware that human depravity isn’t partisan. There’s foolishness to be found on every political extreme, and even in the center. We need to be independently principled as Christians, not mindless partisans or reactionary populists.

“Do not be overrighteous,
neither be overwise—
why destroy yourself?
Do not be overwicked,
and do not be a fool—
why die before your time?
It is good to grasp the one
and not let go of the other.
Whoever fears God will avoid all extremes”
Ecclesiastes 7:16-18

References:

[1] This is the general thesis of Frank Turek’s Legislating Morality (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2003).

[2] Turek 2003, throughout.

[3] Before the first amendment, as many as 11 of the 13 colonies had a state religion even as they had different degrees of tolerance for other denominations and religions. Today, in light of the 1^st amendment (at the Federal Level) and the case history over “separation of church state,” no American states have a state religion anymore. See also, Turek 2003.

[4] It would also be like saying, “I’m not that kind of Nazi. I’m the good kind of Nazi.” Good luck with that one. You could be some other kind of Nationalist Socialist – and that’s the literal etymology of Na-Zi – and have nothing to do with the Third Reich, racial supremacism, antisemitism, eugenics, imperialism, or Germany. But as long as you adopt the same ruinous terminology, you’ll be considered discredited from the start. For the record, I think socialism is a bad idea too, whether nationalist or otherwise.

[5] There are several different ways to define “theocracy,” but the common theme between them seems to be “forced religion.” Weak forms of “forced religion,” would be disqualifying people from certain privileges and opportunities – like voting, citizenship, public schooling, public office, etc. – unless they convert to Christianity. Strong forms of “forced religion” would be explicitly punishing (prison, fines/taxes, exile, torture, killing) people unless they convert to Christianity. In the United States, where the first amendment prevents any strict identity between Church and State, it would be a theocratic, or at least potentially theocratic to eliminate the “separation of church and state.” When the institutions of “church” and “state” become so intertwined it’s difficult to tell where “church” ends and “state” begins, the state would be able to do, as Church’s do, and deny people different privileges and opportunities based on their religion. For churches, that would mean denying church leadership denying membership, or refusing to hire non-Christians. For the state, that would (or could) mean denying people voting rights, citizenship rights, or public office, based solely on their not being Christian.

[6] Doug Wilson, Frequently Shouted Questions About Christian Nationalism (Canon Press, 2025). See also, https://midamerica.edu/articles/41/doug-wilson-christian-nationalism-and-the-theonomic-debate, https://www.perplexity.ai/search/outline-douglas-wilson-s-chris-aL7PdXSBQe..ktOVtg5mjA

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Islam is a historically and traditionally theocratic religion. Christianity has some theocracy, on a case by case basis, but theocratic unions of Church-State have been less common since about 1500AD. The protestant reformation was a major turn away from heavy-handed Christian statism.

[10] Christianity and Islam are contenders as they are the two largest world religions, and both have a history of imposing religion through governmental means – even if Christian theocracy has been waning since at least around 1500AD, around the start of the Protestant Reformation.

Recommended Resources:

Correct not Politically Correct: About Same-Sex Marriage and Transgenderism by Frank Turek (Book, MP4, )

Legislating Morality: Is it Wise? Is it Legal? Is it Possible? by Frank Turek (Book, DVD, Mp3, Mp4, PowerPoint download, PowerPoint CD)

Is Morality Absolute or Relative? by Frank Turek (Mp3/ Mp4)

Legislating Morality (mp4 download), (DVD Set), (MP3 Set), (PowerPoint download), and (PowerPoint CD) by Frank Turek

Dr. John D. Ferrer is an educator, writer, and graduate of CrossExamined Instructors Academy. Having earned degrees from Southern Evangelical Seminary and Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, he’s now active in the pro-life community and in his home church in Pella Iowa. When he’s not helping his wife Hillary Ferrer with her ministry Mama Bear Apologetics, you can usually find John writing, researching, and teaching cultural apologetics.

November 5, 2025/by John Ferrer

Spiritual Foundation #4 Environmental Preparation

Legislating Morality, Culture & Politics

As we wrap up our blog series on foundational types of college preparation, let’s review what we’ve covered. We’ve surveyed laying a strong faith-based foundation with personal habits of Bible study and prayer. Then we built on the importance of intellectual preparation, largely using the study of apologetics and its related disciplines. Next, we discussed the need for relational preparation through campus ministry and local church involvement, as well as friendships and family support. In this final blog, we’ll explore how being prepared for the college environment can help your child be ready for a successful transition to college.

Knowing what you’re in for before you step on campus can help students acclimate more quickly and successfully to this new environment of strenuous academic expectations, new social networks and dynamics, and the responsibilities of adulting. That’s why the first two to six weeks can be so key to acclimation.

Philosophical Environment

Secular Colleges: Be prepared for the philosophical challenges Christian students encounter at secular campuses: We’ll refer you to an excellent article by Professor Owen Anderson that does a comprehensive job of explaining these challenges. Anderson provides a “be prepared” list of 10 items that parents and students would be wise to add to their apologetics training, Bible study, and critical thinking training. Overall, training your student about the philosophical ideologies they will face on campus will prevent major shock to their systems and can actually strengthen their resolve about their own beliefs. It comes down to a slew of “isms.”

I’ve defined an “ism” as the “ideologies of sinful man.” Owen Anderson names academic secularism, religious/worldview pluralism, scientism, pragmatism, higher criticism, existentialism, cultural relativism, Marxism, LGBTQ+, and activism as the main philosophical challenges. Perhaps even more helpful than identifying these issues is knowing how to refute these errors in thinking. The Mama Bear “Cultural Lies” book (the one with the green cover) discusses many of these, but you can also check out our Guide to Sexuality and Gender Identity book for LGBTQ+ issues.

Christian Colleges: Even Christian colleges need to be vetted. Do they actually teach from a biblical worldview or do they just post a few verses around campus? Rather than doing a deep dive here, let us point you to existing information on this topic from people we respect. Just beware. Some Christian colleges are Christian in name only.

Free Speech and Political Environments

Be apprised of the latest issues on campus. These issues may catch your student off guard if they’re not familiar and ready to respond. What is the spiritual, social, and political climate like on their campus? What major events should they look out for on the campus—do they have a Sex Week? (Yes, Mamas, it’s a real thing.) Look into the types of events and speakers their student government supports. Are they known for protests? What kinds? What kind of research is getting funded? Which books are available in their religion and sociology departments? What is their DEI policy (now known as “inclusion” or “belonging” policies, after the recent presidential mandate? Are campus ministries allowed to meet on campus? (You may be surprised at how many aren’t.) Does your student need to know how to navigate “safe speech” zones? Will they need to know what microaggressions are? Respect trigger warnings? Is there a mandatory “cultural sensitivity training” for incoming freshman?

Alliance Defending Freedom (adflegal.org) has incredible resources online regarding student rights, including a free speech conversation guide. They also provide free legal help to students and campus ministries whose religious freedom and free speech rights are violated.
The College Fix is an online news source covering breaking campus news. Seasoned journalists as well as student journalists contribute to the content. It’s a good pulse point for what’s happening on campuses in general.
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education maintains a database that catalogs speech codes of campuses. They publish an annual Spotlight on Speech Codes reviewing the state of free speech on campuses. Use it to see how your campus scores.
Campus Reform is a conservative watchdog in the nation’s higher education system. Campus Reform reports on the conduct and misconduct of campus administrators, faculty, and students. You can click on the “campuses” tab on their website to see if your university is in the news.

Physical Environment

Not only is your college student entering a new and different environment of ideas and policies, but they are quite literally moving into a new physical environment from their dorm room or apartment to their campus hub and the surrounding town. Preparing logistically for this new environment helps them adapt better and start out ahead. Have them get their room completely set up with all they need for a place to study, sleep, and take care of themselves. Setting an understanding with roommates about quiet hours at night and in the morning, as well as personal boundaries, can help set the tone for respecting each other while still enjoying one another’s company.

Have them visit where they will do laundry, pick up physical mail, and grocery shop. Map out the best routes to dining halls and campus classrooms to know the time it will take to walk to class, catch a bus, or ride a bike. Encourage them to introduce themselves to their academic advisor and professors (staking out their offices and office hours). Get to know where the infirmary is in case they get sick and where the student resource center is for times when extra help is needed. (Don’t forget to discuss whether you will have access to your child’s medical information and if you will be called if there is an emergency. Once they are over 18, your child will need to sign a HIPAA release form to grant consent. For more information on legal documents needed when a child turns 18 see this article.)

Conclusion

Mama, you are no longer their personal EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). It’s up to them now. They need to guard their faith, their intellect, their relationships, their personal space, values, routines, and philosophy. Prepare them the best you can and then release them – all the while praying for them and their campuses.

We hope that this college prep blog series was helpful for those about to start college, even though it may have been a bit of a crash course. But we highly encourage those moms of younger students to begin this work now so that you can send them to college on F.I.R.E. for their faith.

Faith. Intellect. Relationships. Environment. Preparing in these four areas will help your college kids build a college experience that is stable and unshifting with their faith still a cornerstone.

Before we conclude, though, we’d love to offer a prayer. This comes from Jeremy Story, who runs Every Student Sent (which we referenced earlier in this blog series). He gave us permission to share it with you.

A Guided Prayer for the Class of 2025:

Heavenly Father, We lift up this generation of college freshmen to You. As they walk into the lecture halls and residence halls, may they first walk with You.

Give them the boldness to stand firm in the faith and resist the pull of a culture that has forgotten You.

Lord, lead them to rich Christian community –

To friends who encourage their walk with Jesus. To campus ministries, churches, and mentors who will sharpen and send them.

Give them courage to share the Gospel –

To speak the name of Jesus with truth and love. To be a light in dark places. To love others radically and point them to the hope they’ve found in You.

May they not just survive their college years, but lead others into eternal life.

In Jesus’ Name, Amen.

If you want another prayer (or two), we recommend the prayers “Releasing My Almost-Adult Children” and “Adult Children to Walk Faithfully with God” from our book, Honest Prayers for Mama Bears.

Recommended Resources:

Jesus, You and the Essentials of Christianity by Frank Turek (INSTRUCTOR Study Guide), (STUDENT Study Guide), and (DVD)

How to Interpret Your Bible by Dr. Frank Turek DVD Complete Series, INSTRUCTOR Study Guide, and STUDENT Study Guide

Intellectual Predators: How Professors Prey on Christian Students (DVD) (mp3) (mp4 Download)

Can All Religions Be True? mp3 by Frank Turek

Julie Loos combined her passion for prayer and apologetics in her contributions to three Mama Bear Apologetics books. Her apologetics training came from campus ministry and certificates from Biola University and the Crossexamined Instructors Academy. Julie has been teaching, writing, and speaking on prayer for Moms in Prayer International for more than 23 years. She lives in Missouri with her husband, Todd, has two married sons, two grandchildren, and enjoys working out, Bible study, chocolate, coffee, and deep conversations.

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/4hytqBA

November 3, 2025/by Guest

Spiritual Foundation #3 Relational Preparation

Legislating Morality, Culture & Politics

As excited as I was to go to the university of my dreams, 40+ years later, I still remember the empty feeling of watching my parents and sister drive away. What would things be like at home without me? What would things be like at college without them? Will I make friends? Will I find my way?

One of the first ways to prepare your child relationally for college is to prepare you both for your relationship to change. Going off to college is an adjustment for the entire family. Your relationship with your child is going to naturally change as they move toward calling more of their own shots (and calling you less). So let me give you my $5 piece of advice: Mama, you need to let go. And your cub needs you to let go.

While they lived at home, you helped lay a strong foundation for them. And while it’s ultimately their choice whether or not to build on that foundation, let’s discuss how to keep your relationship strong while helping them navigate this new terrain. Let your child know these will be real choices and issues they will face and that you are confident they can handle them, but if things ever get a little heavy, you are just a phone call away.

Prepare for Vertical and Horizontal Relationships

As you and your college-bound child adjust to these changes, consider some structures to support their relationships. Just as there are vertical and horizontal aspects to a house via the foundation and the frame, so there are to your child’s relational structures. How can they pour into their vertical frame of faith with Jesus and His church while on campus? How can they support their horizontal foundation of relationships with fellow Christians, friends, and family?

Supporting the Vertical Structures (especially in the first two weeks)

I remember my first two weeks at college like they were yesterday. When I woke up that first Sunday in my college dorm room, I realized that – for the first time ever – I alone could decide whether I would go to church. Granted, it was over four decades ago, I lived in the Bible Belt, and going to church was still the “normal” thing to do. But go, I did. And I continued to go throughout my college years, but that’s likely because I made the decision early on.

Young people retrospectively report that the first two weeks of their college freshman year set the trajectory for their remaining years in school. According to the Fuller Youth Institute, we tend to overestimate how ready our youth group grads are for the faith struggles they will face in college. Parents and leaders should talk earlier and more frequently with their entering freshmen about developing a plan for the first two weeks, especially on how to investigate local churches and on-campus ministries.

Finding a church

One pervasive struggle for college students is finding a new church, as evidenced by the 40 percent of freshmen who report difficulty doing so. The group Every Student Sent helps incoming freshmen connect with ministries and churches on their campus, find community with other Christian students, and grow their faith through exclusive online courses. And a lot of this can be done before they ever set foot on campus. Plus, it’s free. There are portals for students, parents, school administrators, and youth pastors, so anyone can help get the student engaged and connected.

College Church Connection (CCC) is another great resource, providing a detailed report for your child based on a personal survey. CCC will recommend Christian contacts, college-town churches, and campus ministries based on the college he/she will be attending. Not only is this helpful, it’s successful. CCC reports that 80 to 90 percent of the students who receive a report find a church and a ministry they love during their first semester of college. The cost is minimal and a huge investment in your student’s spiritual health. This would make a great graduation gift for all church youth groups to give their seniors.

Finding a campus ministry

Keep in mind that your student may want a full-orbed type of ministry (worship, fellowship, Bible Study, prayer, recreation) as well as a more topic-specific ministry like Ratio Christi (RC). RC strategically trains students to participate in conversational evangelism by studying apologetics—the scientific, philosophical, and historical reasons for adhering to a Christian worldview (learn more about the intellectual foundation here). This can be a spiritual lifesaver when they are tossed into an environment where everything they thought they knew is being undermined by the secular humanism which pervades college campuses (even Christian ones!).

There are non-denominational and denominational campus ministries. If you have enough lead time during your child’s senior year of high school, subscribe to campus ministry newsletters, and “like” or “follow” the ministries’ social media pages to get a feel for their teaching and activities. Your student can get to know the DNA of each group through websites or by talking with upperclassmen from their church or campus about the ministries they are involved in.

On campus orientation days, look for representatives at tables for the campus ministries and churches. Check out campus ministry offices, the school’s religious life office, and nearby churches. Find out what night a campus ministry meeting is held and attend it. Some campuses even have student housing for Christians (for example, Christian Campus Fellowship).

Talk to a campus minister you might know. If your family, your church, or another family you know sponsors a campus minister somewhere, see if you could meet in person or virtually to discuss their insights into finding Christian community on campus.

Don’t confuse church and campus ministry!

Make sure your student knows that a campus ministry is not a substitute for a local church in their college town. Each institution plays a different relational role in your student’s life, and being involved in both is important for maintaining a well-rounded faith experience. Being part of a local church connects a student to the larger body of Christ and allows him/her to be accountable, to be spiritually fed, and to contribute. It also helps prepare for transition back into a local church, not only when home on break, but once they have graduated. There’s something to be said about the “muscle memory” of returning to church. Local church attendance during college also fosters intergenerational relationships, which have been shown to be important in retaining faith.[1]

The Horizontal Structures

Supporting your child’s horizontal structures means preparing them for what will happen with family, friends, and Christian fellowship.

Family check-ins. While we may be great at checking in with our students about classes, grades, social life, roommate issues, health, and when they’ll be home on break, we should also check in about their spiritual health as well. Whether by phone, text, video chat, or visits home, judge the best time and place. Pray for God’s leading on when and how to bring these things up. Longer breaks, like Christmas, might provide time for more in-depth discussions. But don’t go that many months without a check-in, or you may find your Christian student has already checked out. Here’s a link to a PDF with conversation starter questions you can use.
Navigating old friendships. Friendships also change in college. Your child may or may not remain close to their childhood friends. Help them navigate the loss of those friends and help them nurture them if they desire to keep them.
Navigating new friendships and forming their “inner circle.” College gives students an incredible opportunity to meet new friends from all over the world. While you want them to be discerning in the company they keep, you also want them to develop relationship and communication skills with a diverse set of people. Living in the world means learning how to interact with people from all walks of life. Remind them that though we are to be kind to all, we do not have to have equally deep relationships with all. Who they choose for their “inner circle” often dictates who they become. As your child gets involved in campus ministry and a local church, hopefully, they will find close Christian fellowship for counsel, accountability, and fun.
Navigating intergenerational friendships. While they may only think of friendships with their dormmates and classmates, their relationships will extend much further. They are also in relationships with their professors, ministry leaders, and pastors. They are in intergenerational relationships through choice – like their ministry leaders and pastors– and sometimes not of choice – like with their professors. Peers are important, but so are mentors. Your child should choose wisely, both spiritually and educationally. In Cultural Captives, Stephen Cable reports that college graduates with a biblical worldview are more likely to point to someone other than a family member as the most influential source in their faith. He thinks this is likely because when faith is challenged in college, those who don’t fall away can’t look to their fallen peers for guidance. They need an entire faith community at college, consisting of campus ministers and a college-town church.
Navigating relationships with their home church. If your home church has a current college small group, encourage your student to attend when home on breaks. If your church does not, how about starting one? It could fill a giant hole in a college student’s life. Facilitate a way for your home church to intentionally stay in touch with your college student—you are, in essence, sending them out as missionaries into hostile territory. The church has a vested interest in this while they are on campus and when they are home on “furlough.” Perhaps older adults in your church could adopt college students to stay in contact with while they are away. Our church sent an encouraging note and gift card for coffee right before exam time to all our college students as a way to let them know we cared.

Prepare for Future Success

Campus ministry, Bible study, and a weekly prayer partner were part of my spiritual syllabus. God used my college years to help me forge my faith. But if I were going to be a coed on campus this fall, in our current climate, I’m honestly not sure how well I would fare. Building a relational foundation vertically through connection with campus ministry and a local college church and horizontally through open communication with family and lasting friendships of all ages can make a concrete difference for yourself and your student in this journey.

References:

[1] For more about how a local church can help their collegians, visit https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/college-students-church-ready/.

Recommended Resources:

Jesus, You and the Essentials of Christianity by Frank Turek (INSTRUCTOR Study Guide), (STUDENT Study Guide), and (DVD)

How to Interpret Your Bible by Dr. Frank Turek DVD Complete Series, INSTRUCTOR Study Guide, and STUDENT Study Guide

Intellectual Predators: How Professors Prey on Christian Students (DVD) (mp3) (mp4 Download)

Can All Religions Be True? mp3 by Frank Turek

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/4oyK4n2

October 29, 2025/by Guest

Spiritual Foundation #2 Intellectual Preparation

Culture and Politics, Legislating Morality, Culture & Politics

In the previous blog in this series, we recommended starting spiritual college preparation with the faith-based foundation of Bible study and prayer. To that, we suggest adding several intellectual disciplines, which together help us love God with our heart, soul, mind, and strength. We start with the faith-building strength training of apologetics.

Intellectual Challenges Your Kid May Face

For a while now, the stats haven’t been good for Christian kids’ faith to come out intact after they hit the college campus or even after high school. (If you want the facts, just read a summary here.) In recent months there has been some better news about Gen Z: they are more open spiritually, and young men are attending church more. However, there are still questions about that “spirituality” leading to Christianity and whether the habit of church attendance sticks.

No doubt your child will need some intellectual muscles to stand strong against key challenges they will face in college. These include the gender/sexuality issue, competing worldviews (Marxism in particular), science, and how to integrate their faith into their chosen profession — just to name a few.

When it comes to the gender/sexuality issue, we recognize the difficulty in navigating it, much less understanding all its nuances. Critical thinking skills, conversational tactics, and a strong knowledge of the why behind God’s laws all come into play when dealing with this hot topic. We’ll give you general resources below to help with all of these intellectual challenges, but the greatest resource we can point you to about gender and sexuality is our book, Mama Bear Apologetics Guide to Sexuality and Gender Identity: Empower Your Kids to Understand and Live out God’s Design — especially the updated and expanded version that comes out in March 2026. We also recommend our various podcasts about these issues. We can’t refute what we don’t understand, so let’s start understanding!

How Apologetics Can Help

Anyone working out realizes that strength training can be uncomfortable in the moment (can you really do one more bicep curl?!). You push through a tough workout for the long-term results. Likewise with apologetics. If the thought of apologetics makes your heart rate increase, don’t sweat it. It will be worth it in the end for you and your child. This is partly because apologetics is more than just an intellectual exercise. It helps answer doubts, build confidence about Christianity, and protect your kids from the ideological mind viruses being spread on campus by any worldview which “sets itself up against the knowledge of God” (2 Corinthians 10:5). Apart from these obvious benefits, apologetics also:

Enhances worship. As students explore the reasons why Christianity is both true and good, they will learn much more about the character and nature of God. This increases their love for Him because they now love Him with their minds, not just their hearts. It also develops their trust at times when His involvement in their lives might not be as easily traced. By learning that He is immaterial, timeless, spaceless, powerful, intelligent, purposeful, morally perfect, and personal, they can’t help but worship Him.

Fosters discipleship. Digging into apologetics can develop relationships and therefore discipleship, both between the teacher and the student and between the student and the Word. That discipleship multiplies to others relationally as students share what they’ve learned. We are called to both be disciples and make disciples, so learning apologetics is a way of fulfilling God’s purpose for us.

Promotes evangelism. Let’s be honest. When it comes to sharing our faith, the church is more like a 90-pound weakling than a strong man. The statistics from Barna are downright embarrassing: evangelicals have among the highest rates of failure in follow-through from conviction to action when it comes to sharing their faith.[1] Many of us do not share because we have not developed our intellectual muscle for contending for the faith. Learning the reasons for our faith is like taking an evangelism energy drink.

Develops critical thinking. Studying apologetics is also a great exercise in critical thinking. Learning the reasons for and against Christianity (and how to refute the deficiencies of other worldviews) is a spiritual warm-up for the academic environment they are about to enter. It will help them listen more carefully, think more clearly, and speak more accurately.

That’s where instruction in critical thinking and tactical conversations is important. Greg Koukl’s book, Tactics, is the premiere resource here. In summary, Tactics puts you in the driver’s seat and diffuses defensiveness by learning to engage with three questions: 1) What do you mean by that? 2) How did you come to that conclusion? and 3) Have you ever considered….?”

Studying logical fallacies sharpens critical thinking—key not only for religious claims, but educational, political, and more. There are several books and/or online courses you will find helpful like the Filter It Through A Brain Cell and Fallacy Detective.

We’ve Got You Covered

When I started studying apologetics 20 years ago, the resources were few and far between. Not so today. And they no longer exist just in book form. Websites, apps, podcasts, and videos abound. We direct you to our Resources page, which includes a link to our Recommended Resource list and our Busy Mom’s Guide to Apologetics.

You might also show your kids how to use their phones as their intellectual strength training workout partner. For those who would like to get started with younger kids, there are what I call digital forms of “flashcards” available in the following apps:

CrossExamined — “Quick Answers” section. There’s even a “start here” section followed by four main content sections covering the basic questions Christians come up against: Truth, God, the Bible, and the 4 Es (Evolution/Evil/Ethics/Eternity).
Stand to Reason Quick Ref App — Includes several hot topics (morality, other religions, tolerance, same-sex marriage, and abortion) icons with a brief written overview of the topic and a link to a podcast for more depth.

In addition to using apps, encourage your kids to develop apologetics playlists of podcasts and YouTube videos that can exercise their minds.

Michael Sherrard, president of Apologetics, Inc., sums it up well: “… after an apologetics conference a young man told me that for the first time in his life, he saw that Christians weren’t dumb. It was encouraging for him to see that you can love God with your mind and that Christians have reasons for their belief.”

Conclusion

With discernment, consider sharing your own strengths and weaknesses, successes and failures, doubts and fears from your college years. Your vulnerability could go a long way to keeping the communication lines open. Parental influence is still key in the college years when it comes to faith, and as you engage in building the intellectual foundation of faith with your kids, you both will be loving the Lord with all your mind and strength.

References:

[1] See https://www.barna.com/research/sharing-faith-increasingly-optional-christians/ and https://www.barna.com/research/is-evangelism-going-out-of-style/

Recommended Resources:

Jesus, You and the Essentials of Christianity by Frank Turek (INSTRUCTOR Study Guide), (STUDENT Study Guide), and (DVD)

How to Interpret Your Bible by Dr. Frank Turek DVD Complete Series, INSTRUCTOR Study Guide, and STUDENT Study Guide

Intellectual Predators: How Professors Prey on Christian Students (DVD) (mp3) (mp4 Download)

Can All Religions Be True? mp3 by Frank Turek

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/3J49XMD

October 27, 2025/by Guest

A Twofold Calling: Why God Raised Up the Church for the Gospel and the Jewish People

Legislating Morality, Culture & Politics

Throughout the history of Christianity, God has raised up His people in specific places and times for unique purposes. The early church carried the gospel from Jerusalem across the Roman Empire. The Reformation revived biblical faith and reshaped the Western world. In our time, many Christian leaders believe that God has entrusted a distinctive mission to the American church — a mission with two inseparable parts: to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ to the nations and to stand with the Jewish people, including the modern State of Israel.

These two callings are not separate tracks. They emerge from the same biblical story, reflect the same divine purposes, and together represent one of the most important responsibilities of the church in our generation.

Preach the Gospel — and Fuel a Global Missions Movement

The first and most fundamental calling of the church is as old as Christianity itself: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations…” (Matthew 28:19). The Great Commission is not a suggestion for particularly zealous Christians — it is the church’s central identity and purpose. And for the past two centuries, the American church has played a uniquely significant role in carrying out that mission.

Beginning in the early 19th century, especially during the Second Great Awakening, revival movements in the United States helped spark a powerful missionary effort that would go on to shape global Christianity. Out of this wave of spiritual energy came the Student Volunteer Movement, founded in 1886, which mobilized more than 20,000 young Americans for overseas missions before World War I. In the years that followed, organizations such as the International Mission Board, Wycliffe Bible Translators, and Youth With A Mission (YWAM) played a key role in advancing the gospel by translating Scripture, planting churches, and training local leaders around the world. At the same time, American Christians poured significant resources into building seminaries, hospitals, schools, and humanitarian projects, all of which opened new doors for ministry and helped expand the global reach of the gospel (Noll, 2002)[1].

Of course, this work has never been exclusively American. British, German, Australian, Korean, Brazilian, and African churches have all been deeply involved in global missions. But the American church, uniquely resourced with wealth, freedom, technology, and global influence, has often functioned as a catalyst, multiplying the reach of others and pioneering new frontiers. The missiologist Christopher Wright notes that mission is not an activity the church does but the very identity of God’s people, participating in God’s mission to redeem all nations (Wright, 2006)[2]. This identity must remain central as the global landscape changes. Billions still live without access to the gospel, and God’s call to the American church remains: to send, support, and sustain a movement that reaches every tribe and tongue.

Stand with the Jewish People — Beyond Prophecy Charts

The second calling, standing with the Jewish people, is more controversial but no less biblical. It is not merely a matter of eschatology or politics. It flows from God’s covenant promises, from the church’s spiritual heritage, and from a moral responsibility rooted in history.

God’s relationship with Israel did not end with the coming of Christ. His promise to Abraham, “I will bless those who bless you…” (Genesis 12:3), was never revoked. Paul makes this point clearly in Romans 11, using the image of a cultivated olive tree to describe the relationship between Israel and the Church. Gentile believers are like wild branches grafted into Israel, drawing life from its covenant blessings (Romans 11:17–18). The root itself remains essential, and “the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable” (Romans 11:29). Moreover, Paul envisions a mysterious future in which the salvation of the Gentiles will provoke Israel to jealousy, ultimately leading to its redemption, and that redemption, he writes, will mean “life from the dead” for the world (Romans 11:15).

This vision offers a deeper reason to stand with the Jewish people than geopolitical alliances or prophetic speculation. At its heart, this is about covenant faithfulness and gratitude. From Israel came the Scriptures, the prophets, the covenants, and ultimately the Messiah Himself (Romans 9:4–5). Christianity isn’t a replacement for Israel — it’s the continuation and fulfillment of God’s promises through Israel. Supporting the Jewish people today, including affirming their right to security and self-determination in their ancestral homeland, is a way of honoring God’s faithfulness and participating in His unfolding plan (McDermott, 2017)[3].

The Moral Imperative: Confronting the Oldest Hatred

Even apart from theology, there is a profound historical and ethical reason for Christians to stand with the Jewish people: antisemitism. Often called “the world’s oldest hatred,” antisemitism has plagued humanity for millennia, from ancient slanders to medieval blood libels, from forced conversions to expulsions, and culminating in the Holocaust. Tragically, much of this hatred was fueled or tolerated by Christians, particularly in the Church in Europe and the Middle East. The Church fathers also wrote polemics against Jews, medieval councils imposed discriminatory laws, and even Martin Luther penned vitriolic works that were later exploited by the Nazis (Noll, 2002)[4].

Yet the story also includes courage and repentance. Believers such as Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Corrie ten Boom, and André Trocmé risked their lives to resist antisemitism and protect Jewish lives. Their example demonstrates what faithful Christian witness looks like amid hatred and violence. Today, antisemitism is resurging in new forms like conspiracy theories, Holocaust denial, and the delegitimization of Israel itself. The Church needs to, once again stand in the gap. Confronting antisemitism isn’t about politics — it’s about living out Christian love and obedience to Jesus’ command to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Mark 12:31).

Historical Responsibility and Theological Gratitude

Christianity is inseparable from its Jewish roots. Every page of Scripture, every covenant, and every prophecy is part of Israel’s story. Jesus Himself was a Jew who observed Jewish festivals and fulfilled Jewish prophecy. As N.T. Wright argues, the church does not replace Israel but participates in its vocation, to bear witness to God’s faithfulness and salvation before the nations (Wright, 2013)[5].

That shared story carries responsibility. After centuries of persecution, I believe Christians have a moral responsibility to stand up for the dignity and safety of the Jewish people. One important way we can live out that responsibility is by supporting their right to self-determination, including the existence and security of the State of Israel. Doing so doesn’t mean we have to agree with every policy or turn a blind eye to the suffering of Palestinians, but it does mean recognizing a deep obligation shaped by history and conscience. Justice, as the prophet Micah reminds us, requires that we “act justly, love mercy, and walk humbly” (Micah 6:8). Christians can oppose antisemitism and advocate for Palestinian dignity simultaneously. Compassion is not a zero-sum game.

“Compassion is not a zero-sum game.”

Engaging Objections: Supersessionism and Political Zionism

Some Christians reject this emphasis on Israel, arguing that the church has replaced Israel in God’s plan — a view known as supersessionism. But Paul directly refutes this in Romans 11:1 “Has God rejected his people? By no means!” The inclusion of the Gentiles does not mean the exclusion of Israel; God’s promises are enduring. Theologian Gerald McDermott argues that the church’s historic neglect of Israel stems from theological misunderstandings that flatten the biblical story and ignore its Jewish context (McDermott, 2017).

Others fear that Christian support for Israel leads to uncritical nationalism or partisan politics. This is a legitimate concern, and precisely why Christian support must be rooted in biblical theology and wisdom, not worldly ideologies. Supporting Israel does not mean endorsing every action of its government. It means affirming the Jewish people’s right to exist, opposing antisemitism, and advocating for policies that uphold human dignity on all sides.

Mission and Israel: Two Callings, One Story

It is important to see that these two callings, mission and solidarity with Israel, are not separate. They are deeply intertwined in God’s redemptive plan. Paul’s vision in Romans 11 suggests that Gentile evangelism will one day stir the Jewish people toward faith, and their redemption will bring even greater blessing to the world. In this way, mission and Israel’s restoration are part of the same divine trajectory, one that points to the final renewal of all creation.

Moreover, antisemitism itself is a barrier to the gospel. How can the church credibly proclaim the love of God if it remains indifferent to hatred against the people through whom God brought salvation into the world? Standing with the Jewish people is therefore not a distraction from the church’s mission but an essential part of it.

Strategic Pathways for the American Church

The American church has been uniquely positioned by God, with resources, freedoms, and global influence, to play a leading role in this twofold calling. But how can we move from ideas to action? Here are five strategic ways churches and believers can live out this mission:

Recommit to Global Mission. Renew investment in missionary sending, cross-cultural training, and gospel-centered partnerships. Support indigenous leaders and prioritize unreached peoples.
Confront Antisemitism Locally. Educate congregations about antisemitism’s history and current expressions. Partner with Jewish organizations to stand against hatred in your community.
Build Bridges with Jewish Communities. Foster relationships based on respect and trust. Participate in dialogues, attend cultural events, and demonstrate solidarity.
Advocate for Justice and Peace. Support Israel’s right to exist while calling for policies that promote peace, security, and dignity for both Jews and Palestinians.
Teach the Church’s Jewish Roots. Recover the Old Testament story, celebrate the Jewishness of Jesus, and help Christians understand how they are grafted into God’s covenant story.

Conclusion: A Church for This Moment

When we step back and see the bigger picture, the twofold calling of the church becomes clear. God has entrusted His people, and especially the American church, with immense opportunity and responsibility. We are called to proclaim the gospel with boldness and compassion, fueling a global missions movement that reaches every nation. And we are called to stand with the Jewish people, opposing antisemitism, honoring God’s covenant, and seeking justice and peace in the land where God’s promises began.

These are not two competing agendas; they are two sides of one mission — the mission of God to bless all nations through the family of Abraham and to reconcile the world through His Son, Jesus Christ. If the American church embraces this calling with faith, humility, and courage, it will not only shape the course of history but also bear powerful witness to the unchanging faithfulness of God.

References:

[1] Noll, M. (2002). A History of Christianity in the United States and Canada. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.

[2] Wright, C. J. H. (2006). The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible’s Grand Narrative. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic.

[3] McDermott, G. (2017). Israel Matters: Why Christians Must Think Differently About the People and the Land. Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press.

[4] Noll, M. (2002). A History of Christianity in the United States and Canada. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.

[5] Wright, N. T. (2013). Paul and the Faithfulness of God. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press.

Recommended Resources:

Correct not Politically Correct: About Same-Sex Marriage and Transgenderism by Frank Turek (Book, MP4, )

Was Jesus Intolerant? (DVD) and (Mp4 Download) by Dr. Frank Turek

Legislating Morality: Is it Wise? Is it Legal? Is it Possible? by Frank Turek (Book, DVD, Mp3, Mp4, PowerPoint download, PowerPoint CD)

Jesus, You and the Essentials of Christianity by Frank Turek (INSTRUCTOR Study Guide), (STUDENT Study Guide), and (DVD)

Tim Orr serves full-time with the Crescent Project as the Assistant Director of the Internship Program and Area Coordinator, where he is also deeply involved in outreach across the UK. A scholar of Islam, Evangelical minister, conference speaker, and interfaith consultant, Tim brings over 30 years of experience in cross-cultural ministry. He holds six academic degrees, including a Doctor of Ministry from Liberty University and a Master’s in Islamic Studies from the Islamic College in London. In September, he will begin a PhD in Religious Studies at Hartford International University.

Tim has served as a research associate with the Congregations and Polarization Project at the Center for the Study of Religion and American Culture at Indiana University Indianapolis, and for two years, he was also a research assistant on the COVID-19 study led by Hartford International University. His research interests include Islamic antisemitism, American Evangelicalism, Shia Islam, and gospel-centered ministry to Muslims.

He has spoken at leading universities and mosques throughout the UK, including Oxford University, Imperial College London, and the University of Tehran. His work has been published in peer-reviewed Islamic academic journals, and he is the author of four books. His fifth book, The Apostle Paul: A Model for Engaging Islam, is forthcoming.

October 22, 2025/by Guest

Why Culture Hates Charlie Kirk

Legislating Morality, Culture & Politics

When my book When Culture Hates You came out earlier this year, I got a lot of comments from both Christians and nonbelievers either laughing off the idea that the culture hates Christians or suggesting to me that writing a book of this nature was unnecessarily “divisive.” There are even some reviews from people who loved the book but still mention that you “just have to get past the title.”

Never mind the fact that Jesus Himself told his followers the world would hate them (John 15:18-19: “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you”).

Other Christians commented that because Trump had just been elected (the book came out in February), we were starting to see that the culture was turning around and we’re actually NOT so hated.

Again, never mind the fact that Jesus Himself told his followers the world would hate them…and that when you understand the nature of the hate He spoke of and WHY it would exist, you know it’s not a function of the specific political environment at any given point in history.

Friends, I’m going to be honest. When Culture Hates You explains so much of what we’ve seen play out this week (in both the tragedy and responses to it). It provides so many answers I think Christians need and are seeking right now, but I haven’t wanted to say that because I didn’t want people to think I was using a tragedy to self-centeredly promote a book. I decided yesterday, however, that to not point people to content that is, I believe, so uniquely timely for what’s happening out of fear of people’s mistaken perceptions regarding my motivation is ironically what IS self-centered.

So, at the risk of anyone thinking that, I reached out to my publisher and got permission to share chapter 1 here (I also shared the audiobook version on my podcast this morning if you’d rather listen). This chapter alone explains:

Why Christians like Charlie Kirk are hated by the culture (keep in mind the culture doesn’t hate ALL Christians)
Why Christians are hated for some beliefs and actions but not others (you won’t be hated for serving in a soup kitchen!)
What, exactly, Jesus said about the world hating his followers
Why Christianity is necessarily a public faith

As I said in my podcast episode, if you want to read/listen to the rest of the book at some point, great…but if you have $13 dollars to spend today, donate it to the Kirk family or TP USA rather than buy the book. I put all of their suggested donation links in the show notes here.

In the meantime, I hope the following chapter helps bring clarity to much of what we’ve seen play out in front of our eyes this week. If you’d like to read my social media comments on this horrific murder, I’ve been posting all week on Facebook and X. And finally, please take the time to watch my friend Frank Turek’s video in honor of Charlie. Frank was a close friend of Charlie’s and was standing next to him when Charlie was killed. He was one of five people in the car with Charlie on the way to the hospital. His video is a touching and beautiful tribute.

CHAPTER 1: JESUS SAID IT WOULD HAPPEN

On March 26, 1997, sheriff’s deputies received an anonymous call to conduct a welfare check at a mansion in Rancho Santa Fe, California. When they responded, they found a shocking scene: Thirty-nine people were dead in what turned out to be the largest mass suicide in United States history.

But it wasn’t just the scale of the event that made headlines. The deceased were also mysteriously dressed in identical black tracksuits and brand new Nike shoes. Each person had the same cropped haircut, and a large purple cloth covered each of the bodies.

News of the bizarre scene spread quickly, and the media flooded in. It was eventually discovered that the group had ingested a fatal mix of applesauce, sedatives, and vodka in order to facilitate a collective suicide. Why? They thought they needed to shed their earthly bodies in order to board an alien spacecraft hidden behind an approaching comet—a spacecraft that would pass them through “Heaven’s Gate” and into a higher existence.

People were enthralled with the Heaven’s Gate cult. Despite the morbid nature of what happened, the group became the subject of endless jokes. Even Saturday Night Live made a parody about them. Culture clearly thought the people in this cult were delusional and outlandishly wrong.

But culture didn’t hate them.

When your doorbell rings and you discover two well-dressed people from a local church standing on your doorstep, there’s a good possibility that they’re Jehovah’s Witnesses. Well known to the world for their door-to-door preaching, Jehovah’s Witnesses reportedly send more than 8.5 million people into neighborhoods each year.

The internet abounds with humorous memes of people desperately searching for a way to escape from these evangelists on their doorstep. Apparently, if you’ve ever looked through your peephole and quietly tiptoed back into your house hoping your unsolicited church visitors won’t ring again, you’re not alone. Culture widely considers Jehovah’s Witnesses to be annoyingly persistent in their door-to-door activities.

But culture doesn’t hate them.

If you drive through parts of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, you’ll probably have to slow down to accommodate horses and buggies driven by men dressed in black broad-brimmed or straw hats. As you pass through that rural countryside, it may look like a scene from another century. But it’s just everyday life for the local Amish community.

Lancaster County is home to the largest and most well-known settlement of Amish in America, though there are more than 350,000 Amish living in 32 states. Known for shunning modern conveniences like cars, the Amish form close-knit communities dedicated to simple living in pursuit of an undistracted devotion to God. Millions of people flock to Amish country each year to get a glimpse of their unique way of life. At the same time, the Amish are often criticized for being backward and isolated. Culture certainly thinks they’re a curiosity.

But culture doesn’t hate them.

There’s a reason culture doesn’t hate these three groups, even when it’s had an otherwise negative assessment of them: These groups haven’t attempted to influence the public square with their contrarian views.

The public square is anywhere views are shared for the purpose of shaping public opinion on how society should function. If contrarian groups keep to themselves such that culture can forge ahead in the absence of any perceived imposition of beliefs from those groups, they’re in the clear. Go ahead and don matching tracksuits with your friends in anticipation of an alien ship, spend your free time knocking on doors, or live like it’s 1750. Culture might think you’re pitiable, annoying, or weird, but it won’t hate you.

That level of bitter resentment is reserved for groups who believe they shouldn’t keep their contrarian views to themselves. Groups whose very purpose includes a charge to influence the culture around them based on beliefs starkly opposed to those cherished by that culture.

Groups…like Christians.

**Who Is Culture?**

When I say that culture does or does not hate certain groups, you probably have a general idea of what I mean by culture. But because that word can imply some very different things in different contexts, it’s important to clarify what I mean by it for the purposes of this book.

In the broadest sense, culture refers to the way of life for a society—the manners, dress, language, religion, arts, and customs generally shared by a group of people at a given time. That’s the kind of definition you’d find in a dictionary. But in everyday conversation, people typically use the word culture to mean something much more nuanced. Culture, in this colloquial sense, is personified. It refers to the people and institutions who hold the values considered to be in vogue for a given society.

For example, if someone says to you, “Today’s culture thinks that…,” you intuitively know how the sentence might end given what you observe around you. Any of the following statements would readily fit the presumed context: love means affirmation; it’s better to be spiritual than religious; happiness is the goal of life; you shouldn’t be judgmental; or any number of other prevalent ideas.

This zeitgeist, or “spirit of the times,” can be observed at both individual and institutional levels. Examples of key cultural institutions would include the media, entertainment, government, and academia. Individuals influence those institutions, and those institutions, in turn, influence more individuals. That cycle is ongoing and mutually reinforcing, leading over time to certain values becoming culturally acceptable or celebrated and others becoming anathema. Culture, then, is a snapshot of the current state of society’s values.

That said, it’s important to also emphasize some qualifications about what isn’t implied by my use of the term culture in this book.

First, saying culture thinks or does something is not making a statement about the thoughts or actions of all cultures at all times. For example, the Amish were persecuted by their culture in times past, but that cultural hatred no longer persists. The term culture necessarily implies a context of time and place.

Second, saying culture thinks or does something is not to suggest that every single person in a given society thinks or does the same. We can broadly say culture doesn’t hate the Amish, for example, while recognizing that there are surely some people who do (particularly if they’ve had a bad personal experience with the Amish community).

Third, saying culture thinks or does something is not making a claim about the percent of people in a given society who think or do the same; it’s impossible to broadly quantify the spirit of the times when that encompasses constantly shifting and diverse factors. But even if you could quantify it, sheer numbers wouldn’t necessarily tell the full story. When a statistical minority is more aggressive in influencing the public square with their values than a statistical majority that holds opposing views, it’s the minority’s values that will often come to define the culture.

In summary, for the purposes of this book, culture refers to the people and institutions who hold the values widely considered to be accepted and celebrated in the United States today.

Beyond the Soup Kitchen

The significance of culture to Christians cannot be overstated, because culture functions as a gatekeeper of the ideas that fashionable society deems admissible to the public square at any given time. And if you’re a group whose values have become anathema, the gatekeepers won’t merely roll a condescending eye at you and then let you in. They’ll funnel their hatred of your contrarian values into an active campaign to keep your influence out.

It’s probably not news to you that this is increasingly the relationship between culture and Christians today.

It’s worth noting, however, that culture doesn’t necessarily hate everything Christians might advocate for in the public square. For example, people with all kinds of different views about the world would agree that it’s a good thing to volunteer at or donate to local soup kitchens. If you’re part of a Christian group passionate about that form of service, you might decide to publicly advocate for the cause in some way. In doing so, it’s likely that no one will hate you, even if they disagree on the best way to approach the issue of food insecurity. Serving food to those in need is an action still widely considered to be a moral good.

But now let’s say you’re a group who believes humans in the womb have the same value and God-given right to life as humans who have already been born, and you decide to publicly advocate for a local pro-life pregnancy center.

I don’t have to tell you we’re out of soup kitchen territory now.

In today’s culture, the pro-life position is seen as a repulsive injustice to women. Consequently, culture doesn’t think that those who hold such a position are merely mistaken—a belief akin to thinking an alien ship is coming—it thinks they’re oppressors. If you speak or act publicly against abortion, you’ll be morally condemned and detested for being harmful, oppressive, cruel, toxic, violent, or misogynistic (more on that in chapter 8).

Loving your neighbor by publicly advocating for a soup kitchen and loving your neighbor by publicly advocating for the protection of life in the womb are both outworkings of a biblical worldview. But, as we just saw, there’s a major difference in how those two actions are perceived by culture. The former will likely draw ambivalence or approval, the latter serious condemnation. As Christians, therefore, we aren’t resented for everything we believe and do, but because we’re reviled for opposing some of the values most cherished by culture, we’re increasingly hated as a group.

The gatekeepers would love nothing more than for us to just keep serving soup while being silent about the issues on which we’re at odds with culture—and that’s a tempting proposition for many Christians. After all, if we did that, culture would like us (or at least like us more). Who wants to be hated?

But being hated is exactly what Jesus told us to expect if we’re going to follow His commands. Silence in exchange for cultural respect is a deal with the devil.

Jesus Said It Would Happen

Knowing what the Bible says about culture hating the followers of Jesus is the key to understanding the moment we’re in, so let’s go to Scripture.

Jesus called His 12 disciples together one day to prepare them to go out on a mission. He gave them the authority to cast out unclean spirits and to heal every disease and affliction (Matthew 10:1). He then instructed them at length on what to expect and do on their journey. It certainly wasn’t a talk designed to encourage the disciples with any idea that the mission field would warmly embrace them. Jesus warned that they’d be handed over to local councils and be flogged in the synagogues (Matthew 10:17), that family members would betray each other and have one another put to death (Matthew 10:21), and that He didn’t come to bring peace, but a sword (Matthew 10:34). It’s within that context that Jesus said the following: “You will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved” (Matthew 10:22). Later, in Matthew 24:9, Jesus repeated to His disciples, “You will be hated by all nations for my name’s sake.”

These verses should raise the question of why Jesus’s disciples would be hated. In the immediate context of these passages, Jesus doesn’t explicitly say why. But we get a more detailed picture of what He had in mind in His words from John 15:18-21:

If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you: “A servant is not greater than his master.” If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they will also keep yours. But all these things they will do to you on account of my name, because they do not know him who sent me.

Now we have the explanation: If the disciples were of the world, the world would have loved them as its own, but because they weren’t of the world, the world would hate them. Jesus similarly connected this explanation when He prayed, “I have given them your word, and the world has hated them because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world” (John 17:14).

So what does it mean to be of the world? The Greek word translated “world” here is kosmos. Kosmos in this context refers to unbelieving mankind, which is governed by evil. To say that unbelievers are governed by evil isn’t a hyperbolic theological claim. Jesus bluntly said on multiple occasions that Satan is the ruler of the kosmos (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11). In fact, He told a crowd of Jews who claimed to be children of God through their physical descent from Abraham that they were actually children of Satan (John 8:44)! Why? He said it was because their will was to do the devil’s desires.

That’s the pivotal distinction. People are either children of Satan or children of God. People who are “of the world” are children of Satan, and, under his influence, desire to go their own way rather than God’s way. In Ephesians 2:1-3, Paul says all of us have that desire for self-rule by nature:

You were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience—among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.

Those who remain of the world are slaves to sin because they remain in rebellion to their Creator; in following their own passions and desires, they do the will of Satan. Those who give their lives to Jesus, however, receive a new nature and are a new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17). They become children of God (John 1:12) and are now slaves to righteousness. Paul emphasizes this contrast in Romans 6:16-18:

Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness.

So let’s recap. Jesus said the world would hate His disciples because they were not of the world; if they were of the world, the world would love them as its own. To be of the world means to be under the governing influence of Satan, resulting in being a slave to sin. Conversely, to be a child of God is to be a slave to righteousness.

That leads to our final question: Why do the children of Satan necessarily hate the children of God? John addresses this question directly in 1 John 3:9-13:

No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God’s seed abides in him; and he cannot keep on sinning, because he has been born of God. By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother. For this is the message that you have heard from the beginning, that we should love one another. We should not be like Cain, who was of the evil one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his own deeds were evil and his brother’s righteous. Do not be surprised, brothers, that the world hates you.

In short, the children of God will be hated because they practice righteousness and the children of Satan practice evil.

Righteousness is despised by a fallen world.

When the children of God practice righteousness, they shine light on the works of the world, unveiling the truth of what they are: evil. Satan may masquerade as an angel of light (2 Corinthians 11:14), but that illusion is shattered by the true light that comes from the followers of Jesus. Of course those who are of the world will hate that. And they’ll hate you for making it happen.

Christianity Is a Public Faith

Given that this is why Jesus said the world would hate His disciples, it follows that He presumed they would be engaging with the world in some way; where evil continues in darkness, there’s no light to hate. Being a Christian, therefore, doesn’t end with a private profession of faith in Jesus as Lord and Savior. If we profess that Jesus is Lord over our lives, we’ll live in obedience to His commands (John 14:15)—commands that include the public engagement necessary to make disciples of all nations (Matthew 28:19-20) and to advocate for righteousness in our given cultures. Jesus spoke of this latter role in His famous Sermon on the Mount words about being salt and light (Matthew 5:13-16):

You are the salt of the earth, but if salt has lost its taste, how shall its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out and trampled under people’s feet.

You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden. Nor do people light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven.

As salt, we preserve a world that would otherwise be entirely under the destructive rule of Satan and enslaved to sin. We preserve the world for enough time that God’s purposes can be worked out. As light, we expose the darkness for what it is and bring glory to God in the process (see also John 3:19-21; 8:12; Ephesians 5:11). These roles of preserving and exposing are inherently of a public nature. They require Christians to advocate for righteousness in the public square. We aren’t preserving or exposing anything by sitting passively in our living rooms.

It’s at this point that some Christians get squeamish. They agree that we’re to be salt and light, but they believe that should only include sharing the gospel and doing good works in one’s private life—not advocating for righteousness in how society functions. In response, four points should be made.

First, acknowledging the need to advocate for righteousness in how society functions doesn’t imply there isn’t also a need for Christians to share the gospel and do good works in their private lives. We can share the gospel, do good works in our private lives, and advocate for righteousness in how society functions. This should be a rather obvious point, but it warrants an explicit remark because it’s a common reason Christians give for avoiding the public square. The underlying sentiment is that our primary mission is to share the gospel and do good works, so time spent on social issues is a distraction from what we should really be doing. While it’s a worthwhile warning to not turn our mission into a purely earthly one, the possibility of Christians erring in that direction is not an argument for not caring about the righteous functioning of society at all. The laws passed by our society affect our ability to even preach the gospel in the first place.

Second, the gospel itself implies the need to care about how society functions and act accordingly. When Christians say we should “just” preach the gospel, it’s worth asking what they believe the gospel is. The gospel is the good news that God loved the world so much, He gave His only son to die as payment for our sins so we could be reconciled to Him and have everlasting life. When we respond to this gracious offer of salvation, we submit to Jesus as Lord and follow His commands out of our love for Him. Caring about the way in which society functions is just one part of following Jesus’s second greatest commandment, to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 22:36-40). Part of loving your neighbor is caring about the quality of their lives in the context of the society in which they live. Put simply, we should want God’s best for them.

Third, when we care about the quality of people’s lives in the context of the society in which they live, we should want God’s best for them regardless of how many people are responsive to the gospel message at any given time. Christians sometimes believe that the extent of societal transformation for which we’re responsible is preaching the gospel so that individual consciences will be transformed and more individuals will then make righteous choices. But when you apply that logic to specific cases in history, few people would maintain the same position consistently. For example, imagine someone saying the following: “I think Christians in the nineteenth century really messed up by working to abolish slavery. They should have just preached the gospel so that individual lives would be transformed, and over time, that would have changed society to the point it would no longer find slavery morally acceptable.” I’m guessing nearly every reader would instinctively disagree with this imaginary person, but take a moment to consider why. Four million enslaved people were set free by the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863. How many more years would people have had to suffer in slavery if Christians had simply waited for a critical mass of Americans to have their moral sensibilities transformed through personal salvation? What if that critical mass was never reached? Should slavery have continued? Of course not. Fortunately, there were Christians at the time who recognized the need to shine light on the deeds of darkness and advocate for righteousness—the end to a wicked institution. They preached the gospel, but they didn’t wait to see how many conversions would happen before working to bring an end to societal evil.

Finally, God’s concern for how society functions runs throughout the Bible. It’s clear that God cares both about individual relationships with Him and the moral health of the societies in which individuals live. The following are just a few notable examples where biblical people were exhorted to proactively shape societies that function in a righteous way:

In Isaiah chapter 1, God expresses his wrath toward the people of Judah for their sins and empty religious ceremonies. He presses them to cease doing evil and instead “learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression; bring justice to the fatherless, plead the widow’s cause” (vv. 16-17; see also Zechariah 7:10). This, of course, would require public engagement and advocacy.
In the Jewish exile to pagan Babylon, the prophet Daniel was an official in King Nebuchadnezzar’s court. Daniel told the king, “Break off your sins by practicing righteousness, and your iniquities by showing mercy to the oppressed, that there may perhaps be a lengthening of your prosperity” (Daniel 4:27). Here we see that God expected even pagan societies to function in a righteous way (see also Amos 1–2 and Obadiah).
God told the Jewish exiles in Babylon, “Seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare” (Jeremiah 29:7). God didn’t want the exiles to thumb their noses at the pagan culture in which they were forced to live. They were to seek what was best for the culture—which would be to everyone’s benefit, including their own.
John the Baptist was thrown into prison because he had rebuked the civil leader Herod Antipas for marrying his brother’s wife and “for all the evil things that Herod had done” (Luke 3:19-20). Presumably, those evil actions included what Herod had done in his governing capacity.

Being salt and light isn’t only about having a godly influence on culture, but biblical examples demonstrate it certainly includes that.

When Culture Hates You

Something that’s easy to gloss over in Jesus’s words about being salt and light is how that passage ends: “Let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 5:16, emphasis added). This is a seemingly surprising conclusion given our earlier discussion about being hated for righteousness. In fact, it’s a jarring contrast even against Jesus’s immediately preceding words (Matthew 5:10-12):

Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

So which is it? Will the world hate us for shining light, or will it see our good works and glorify God?

The answer is both.

Sometimes when we as Christians testify to righteousness through our words and actions, people will have their eyes opened and glorify God as the source of all that is good and true. Praise the Lord for those times!

But in other circumstances, Christians will be reviled and even persecuted. Yes, Jesus said that we would be blessed when that happens, but that doesn’t mean it’s easy. The prophet Jeremiah spoke God’s truth to his culture, but he also lamented, “I have become a laughingstock all the day; everyone mocks me. For whenever I speak, I cry out, I shout, ‘Violence and destruction!’ For the word of the LORD has become for me a reproach and derision all day long” (Jeremiah 20:7-8). Jeremiah wasn’t an exception. The pattern of the Bible is that all the prophets suffered in some way (Acts 7:52). It’s never been popular to publicly advocate for righteousness in a fallen world.

No book is needed to equip and encourage Christians to persevere through cultural hatred when publicly advocating for something like a soup kitchen. As we discussed, no one will hate you for that.

But when culture hates you—when you’re reviled for promoting your views in the public square—it takes deep conviction and courage to nonetheless persevere for the common good. That requires biblical, cultural, and civic understanding that Christians don’t necessarily have by default. And therein lies the purpose of this book: to give Christ followers the crucial understanding required to confidently advocate for righteousness in today’s increasingly dark and hostile culture.

Part 1 will establish important foundational principles on the nature of Christian public influence. The purpose of this section is to provide readers with a framework for evaluating any common-good issue, whether it’s one we address specifically in part 2 or not. So don’t skip part 1! It functions as far more than a lead-in to part 2. It’s relevant to a plethora of issues Christians encounter beyond the specific ones we’ll consider in this book.

That said, in part 2, we’ll apply our understanding from part 1 to five issues that are of especially great significance for the common good today—issues on which Christians are also at great odds with culture and receive significant condemnation accordingly. These aren’t the only issues drawing resentment against Christians, but they represent a selection of those on which Christians most urgently need clarity.

I pray that When Culture Hates You will equip and encourage you to be the light God wants you to be in this world.

Recommended Resources:

If God, Why Evil? (DVD Set), (MP3 Set), and (mp4 Download Set) by Frank Turek

The Case for Christian Activism (MP3 Set), (DVD Set), and (mp4 Download Set) by Frank Turek

Why does God allow Bad Things to Happen to Good People? (DVD) and (mp4 Download) by Frank Turek

Legislating Morality (mp4 download), (DVD Set), (MP3 Set), (PowerPoint download), and (PowerPoint CD) by Frank Turek

Natasha Crain is a blogger, author, and national speaker who is passionate about equipping Christian parents to raise their kids with an understanding of how to make a case for and defend their faith in an increasingly secular world. She is the author of two apologetics books for parents: Talking with Your Kids about God (2017) and Keeping Your Kids on God’s Side (2016). Natasha has an MBA in marketing and statistics from UCLA and a certificate in Christian apologetics from Biola University. A former marketing executive and adjunct professor, she lives in Southern California with her husband and three children.

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/4gQL6bm

October 8, 2025/by Guest

The False Dilemma of Worldly Philosophies

Legislating Morality, Culture & Politics

“We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ.”
2 Corinthians 10:5

One of my goals as a Christian and as a tenured full professor of philosophy and religion at our nation’s largest research university (ASU) is to help Christian parents and students understand what to expect if they attend classes teaching radical ideologies—DEI, LGBTQ+, Antifa, decolonization, anti-settler, anti-white, and anti-heteronormativity theories. Christians know that such universities would never permit a Christian to use class time for evangelism. The radical Marxist professor seems to think that the First Amendment guarantees them a job as a professor, but it doesn’t guarantee them that anyone will attend their classes or programs.

So how did we get here, and what can parents and students do about it?

Three Steps that Led Us Here

1. The Myth of Neutrality – The first step is the myth of neutrality. Christians allowed public universities to be disconnected from Christian belief on the assumption that in a pluralistic society, public education cannot be shaped by one “perspective.” But this neutrality was a myth—and it was never practiced by the radical left.

Many on the left claim they are teaching “facts,” not religion, so they avoid the appearance of bias. Yet, for them, the Marxist dialectic is the fact of the matter. They look at who is in power and blame that power structure for realities like poverty and crime. In the modern era, white Christian males have been in power, so they become the objects of animosity.

This assessment has no nuance. These critics lump all Christians into the same narrative, ignoring that slavery, for example, was brought to an end largely by white Christian men, whereas it continues in other parts of the world today. But for the radicals, that too must somehow be blamed on colonization and, by extension, Christianity. All problems in any nation today are due, they tell us, to Christianity. Christian missionaries are the special subject of their animosity.

Twisting Christian Values –Second, they use Christian values to tie Christians up so they can’t engage in the intellectual battle. “Christians,” they say, “are supposed to be self-sacrificing and turn the other cheek. If you’re insulted, you shouldn’t reply. And don’t Christians care about the poor? Shouldn’t you help marginalized sexual groups?”

For many Christians, this strategy is powerful. They either bow out of the conflict with radicalism or even join it because they want to help those who suffer. Radicals will even quote the Bible to Christian students: “Didn’t Jesus say that when you help the least of these, you are helping Him?”

Students may be ready for a direct assault on the Bible, but they are often unprepared for scripture twisting. One radical I work with says she loves Jesus just not the other parts of the Bible made by men. Which parts of what Jesus says does she like and which parts are made by men? She likes the parts that accord with her own moral intuitions (two or three sayings about helping others) and all the rest, those that call for repentance for sin, those that tell the crowd to seek the bread of life, those that call us to love him by keeping his commandments, those she dismisses.

The False Dilemma – Third, we need to prepare for the false dilemma. A false dilemma gives only two options when more are available. It says, “either A or B,” when there is also C, D, E, and so on.

In a false dilemma, each side may contain some truth. Rarely does a belief system teach only falsehoods. The Marxist is right to care about the poor and to point out that greedy people misuse the capitalist system to exploit others. But the Marxist’s ability to identify real sins does not validate the rest of their worldview.

The Horizontal Solutions

Radical professors try to solve humanity’s problems on a merely human level—what I call the horizontal level. They believe crime and poverty result from private property. Eliminate private property, they argue, and we will create perfect humans.

But the other side of the false dilemma is no better. There we find godless capitalism, pushed by atheist technocrats who want to perfect humanity through technology and transhumanism built on capitalist innovation.

Both sides offer merely horizontal solutions.

The Need for a Vertical Perspective

The real solution begins with recognizing that there is more to existence than the merely human or merely material. We must begin with God, who has existed from eternity. We are His creatures, made by Him and given moral direction by Him. Our chief end is to glorify Him and enjoy Him forever.

Our human problem is first and foremost our sin by which we lost communion with God. Our sin destroys every aspect of our lives. It makes us hate ourselves and have body dysmorphia, it makes us hate our neighbor and develop grievances and envy, and it makes us hate God. Although God’s commands are good for us and are the path to life, in our sin we hate his law and find it a burden.

Jesus warned the crowds following Him that they sought only material bread when they should have been seeking the Bread of Life. Poverty is tragic, but there are far worse things—such as spiritual death. Jesus was clear that we should not be focused on “what shall I eat and what shall I wear” but on the kingdom of God (Matthew 6:24-26). He was clear that “Whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him” (John 3:36).

Why the Radical Turns to Marxism

The desire to help the downtrodden is why many godless academics are drawn to some variation of Marxism. Created in the image of God, they still long for justice and righteousness, even after abandoning God. They suffer under the weight of sin that crushes individuals and entire systems.

But rather than repent, many will just harden their hearts, double down on hating God, and propose their materialist dialectic. The “spiritually minded” simply add New Age platitudes about “the universe,” “my soul,” “reincarnation,” or “the One.”

The False Dilemma Exposed

The false dilemma appears because both perceived options—Marxism and materialistic capitalism—reject God.

Some forms of capitalism assert that the individual is the absolute owner.
Marxism asserts that the community is the absolute owner.

But the truth is that only God can absolutely own anything.

Capitalism has real virtues: personal responsibility, private property, fair wages, investment of capital, wise use of time. It has raised more people out of poverty and produced more innovation than any other system. But if it becomes mere human ownership for selfish indulgence, it is as ugly as Marxism.

We do not have to pick between two poisons. What happens in the university is that Marxists point out abuses in capitalism, and the unprepared Christian is caught and made captive to unbelief.

Preparing the Next Generation

We need to teach our children to see through these tactics. Help them anticipate the assaults of Marxist radicals so they are not caught off guard—and so they can raise questions exposing the folly of the materialist dialectic.

If they know the strategy in advance, they can counter it. Or better yet, they can choose alternative classes and professors. No one is required to take courses from Marxist radicals. Let them lecture to empty rooms.

Recommended Resources:

Was Jesus Intolerant? (DVD) and (Mp4 Download) by Dr. Frank Turek

Correct not Politically Correct: About Same-Sex Marriage and Transgenderism by Frank Turek (Book, MP4, )

How Philosophy Can Help Your Theology by Richard Howe (DVD Set, Mp3, and Mp4)

Legislating Morality: Is it Wise? Is it Legal? Is it Possible? by Frank Turek (Book, DVD, Mp3, Mp4, PowerPoint download, PowerPoint CD)

October 6, 2025/by Guest

Not a Deep Dive, Just a Baggage Check

Nick Fuentes in his own Words *Language Warning*

Praise for Dictators/Dictatorships/Fascism

Holocaust Denial

Antisemitism and Anti-Jewish Conspiracism

Weirdly Violent and Cultish Statements

Racism and White Supremacism

White Nationalism

Sexism and Misogyny

Bashing Charlie Kirk

Recommended Resources:

Recommended Resources:

1. The Organizing Idea: “Oppression”

2. The Marxist “Solution”

3. The Religious Core of a “Materialist” Movement

4. The “Authenticity” Creed

5. The Luciferian Inspiration

6. Be Free in the U.S.A.

7. What This Reveals

Next in the series:

Bibliography

References:

Recommended Resources:

What about Legislating Religion?

The Majority Left

The Radical Right

The Majority Right

Charting a Way Forward

References:

Recommended Resources:

Philosophical Environment

Free Speech and Political Environments

Physical Environment

Conclusion

A Guided Prayer for the Class of 2025:

Recommended Resources:

Prepare for Vertical and Horizontal Relationships

Supporting the Vertical Structures (especially in the first two weeks)

Finding a church

Finding a campus ministry

Don’t confuse church and campus ministry!

The Horizontal Structures

Prepare for Future Success

References:

Recommended Resources:

Intellectual Challenges Your Kid May Face

How Apologetics Can Help

We’ve Got You Covered

Conclusion

References:

Recommended Resources:

Preach the Gospel — and Fuel a Global Missions Movement

Stand with the Jewish People — Beyond Prophecy Charts

The Moral Imperative: Confronting the Oldest Hatred

Historical Responsibility and Theological Gratitude

Engaging Objections: Supersessionism and Political Zionism

Mission and Israel: Two Callings, One Story

Strategic Pathways for the American Church

Conclusion: A Church for This Moment

References:

Recommended Resources:

CHAPTER 1: JESUS SAID IT WOULD HAPPEN

Who Is Culture?

Beyond the Soup Kitchen

Jesus Said It Would Happen

Christianity Is a Public Faith

When Culture Hates You

Recommended Resources:

Three Steps that Led Us Here

The Horizontal Solutions

The Need for a Vertical Perspective

Why the Radical Turns to Marxism

The False Dilemma Exposed

Preparing the Next Generation

Recommended Resources:

Nick Fuentes in his own Words Language Warning

**Who Is Culture?**