There’s a term that keeps coming to the forefront of the various socio-politico culture wars with its most direct implication toward biblical Christianity. If you’ve not heard the term deconstruction or you are not sure what that means, I hope to set forth an understanding by which you can recognize it when you see it, and if your allegiance is to Jesus, to be aware of its one goal: the complete deconstruction and destruction of the Christian faith.
__________
I first heard the term about ten years ago when I regularly followed a former Christian Pastor and motivational speaker’s podcasts in a way that I do not and would not now (unless his leanings have changed trajectory) at this point in my faith journey. While I find this person to be sincere, thoughtful and caring about others and the world (to the degree that I can know/form observation), their increasing leanings toward various socio-political ideologies of deconstructionism and reconstructionism has become potentially too offbase for my comfort as a Christian. And yes, don’t be confused that the goal is simply to deconstruct into some type of equal, inclusive and good “space” (this term is being used ad nauseum these days…hold space, make space…create space and the very worst usage–“safe” space) where all is made right in the world. Rather, as with any totalitarian political movement, it is the reconstruction that is even more frightening. The initial deconstruction which radical and destructive agendas pursue only paves the way for the strengthening of political power and the reconstructive goals that accompany.
It has been quite awhile since I have taken time to tune in to this former Pastor’s recent podcasts, and that is not to say that I categorically find they have nothing worthy of consideration. In fact, the number of worthy podcast commentaries, challenges to the status quo and creative/engaging talks were in fact, significant.
People rarely make time to listen to someone that makes zero worthwhile and valid points. But herein lies the broader difficulties with the new ideas and challenges that inevitably rise and circulate in response to various pitfalls that traditions and conservatism sometimes generates: there is enough truth in what is said (or what superficially sounds logical and right) to draw us in to the murky places, and in every aspect of life we can be challenged with these types of things that require us to closely examine whatever the issue-at-hand might be.
While postmodern art, for example, has brought many interesting things to the table in terms of creativity, it also keeps raising the essentially existential question of “what is art?” While the idea and answer that “art is what artists make (or perhaps do)” is truly compelling, as in some sense all of life can be lived as a type of creative expression, eventually we must draw the line at whether a man who displays his own excrement in an art exhibit has done something of any worth or simply so deconstructed and desecrated the sacredness of art and creativity so as to render it a vulgar act, and meaningless.
Endless debates have gone on over such postmodern constructs–some seem somewhat worthy and others downright ridiculous. It is one thing to stretch the imagination and think outside the box (in fact, the speaker I once followed once said, “you mean…there’s a BOX?”) when it comes to the artistic splashes of Jackson Pollack, the discordant innovations of the composer Scriabin, or…one of my favorite accounts of performance art where two artists likely met over dinner, likely having a couple beers and likely musing over the “what if…what if…what if you did that and then I came along and did this?! How great would THAT be???!!!”
Thus was the case of the artist that duct taped a banana to a wall and named it art and while viewers were paying good money to film and video this bizarre still life, the other artist entered the room and literally ate the banana. One artist ate the concept of the other; and I actually found that quite clever and funny and it made an odd statement about what is the nature of art and creativity and how far can one push the boundaries and engage an audience. Yes, it was a sort of performance.
The thing about conceptual/performance art, however, (or any innovations in the art/music/creative world), is that the main value lies in the artist who first innovates. These seemingly easy art ideas/style changes may not even involve much if any real skill. The value is in being the first one to do it, and copycats have diminishing returns or even negative effects.
Not so, however, with the new deconstructionism that is slowly raising the question of what does it even mean to be male and female, and unlike the discouragement of copycats in the art and creative realm, the goal is in fact to promulgate and proselytize this new demonically-driven political-religious ideology. The goal is nothing short of brainwashing and compliance, confusing the average person who has a firm grip on reality, relationships, science, human nature, the One True God, and much else, and slowly pushing us all toward some genderless and fluid view of the most basic construct of what it means to be human: to be made in God’s image as biologically male or made in God’s image as biologically female.
Laying these artistic anecdotes/concepts aside here to engage in the more important conversation that, unlike whether people might want to spend lots of money viewing a banana duct-taped to a wall with another artist coming and eating the exhibit, are literally matters of life and death with far-reaching implications for society, families and the human race, and the spiritual health and well-being of those that above all else, seek to know and follow Jesus, and have His ways and truth permeate all else that we give ourselves to in this life.
It is not that there aren’t many things within modern Christianity and human history that need a bit (or a lot) of deconstruction. Take for example, the unholy marriage of Christianity to patriotism of any nation, political party or its flag, or the unquestioning acceptance of earthly, nationalistic military machines that are arms of enforcing political power and agenda. But rather, the type of advocating for the deconstruction we currently are witnessing in warp speed do not pertain to things that truly need that action (though they are presented in disguise) but are instead taking aim at that which is actually good, right and holy and that which humankind and decent people and civilizations have embraced since the dawn of time.
So what exactly is deconstructionism?
Well, it’s pretty much what it sounds like. In the most simple terms it would be to unbuild something–even down to the very ground or its non-existence.
To deconstruct the construct of deconstructionism (what a linguistical mouthful) and especially as it relates to the Christian faith I believe we simply need to remind ourselves of that which the faith has been constructed upon since the beginning of humankind.
- The One True God created our universe and our planet.
- The One True God created animals, biologically both male and female, with a view toward reproduction.
- The One True God created man (in His own image) and He created them biologically both male and female, since it was not good that the man be alone and with a command to be fruitful and to multiply.
- The One True God set forth the parameters to the first man (Adam) with a view toward shalom (all being right and good and holy in God’s good creation and full relational fellowship between the One True God and mankind).
- The One True God provided coverings for the biological man Adam and his biological wife Eve after they went against His command and the entire creation became subject to sin and death. In this covering made from a slain animal in the Garden of Eden, the one true God covered their shame and nakedness.
- The One True God pronounced both curse and future promise of blessing, hope and deliverance from all evil, death and destruction.
- The One True God made a covenant with Abraham, a descendent of the biological man and woman, promising him that in him all the families of the earth would be blessed and telling him to look up toward the heavens at the uncountable stars or to the shores of earth with the uncountable grains of sand, telling him that these would be the recipients through the covenant with Abraham of salvation, hope, deliverance and promise.
- The One True God went on to make various other covenants with those who sought Him in Spirit and in Truth–from Noah to Abraham to Moses to David–and at the appointed time He sent His own Son Jesus into our world once and for all humankind sealing a covenant of Hope and Salvation in His own blood.
- The One True God continued on, sending His Spirit at Pentecost and moving the gospel of Jesus Christ forward into all the earth.
- The One True God built His one true church upon the teachings given to the Judeo-Christian forefathers, the prophets and the apostles with a view that every knee bow to Jesus and every tongue confess allegiance to Him as King, Lord, Shepherd and all in all.
- The One True God has continued His workings through various humans in history in the writing of what Christians embrace as the New Testament collection of letters, accounts, prophetic messages, and teachings that encourage and move the followers of Jesus toward right relationship with God and others and permit for the greatest expression of love, beauty, joy, truth and flourishing available.
- The One True God has never waivered nor changed in His desire for love, health, wholeness and all other good gifts to continue and flow through the most basic biological building blocks of both male and female, with a view toward the blessings intended and embedded into all creation of holy union and covenant relationship between man and woman with fruitfulness of children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren and spiritual and material legacy extending and reaching forward into the legacy of generations of all that seek Him in Spirit and in Truth.
One might wonder why I keep using the term of the One True God. Simply put, it is a reference to language found in the account of Elijah’s confrontation of the prophets of Baal and stands in contrast to all false gods and demonic entities which seek only our death and destruction, in contrast to the fulness of life that is found in Christ Jesus.
(See 1 Kings 18:20-40)
Only when we can fully grasp, acknowledge and identify that which the One True God has constructed for our very life and has been constructing throughout human history can we see our way through the hazy, foggy, linguistical twistings and harmful machinations of the dark, demonic spiritual forces that are seeking to hold all humanity hostage into compliance with the spirits now at work.
I hope it goes without saying (but I should say it) that many sincerely caring people–even (and especially) those seeking to follow Jesus–can fall prey to things that sound right or seem right at first blush but are actually not that which we think they are. I succumbed to various ideologies that I’m now backpedaling from. When someone is persuaded for the first time to change viewpoint on a matter(s) it can be jarring. But what I believe we should really pay attention to is when those that can rightly say they’ve fully leaned on both sides of the metaphorical fence(s) and are now fast heading back to the first, previous view.
This would describe a good amount of my current political and spiritual backpedaling. Some things simply cannot be unseen.
Many who seek to persuade others in any matter make the assumption that if only the people could hear, see or truly understand their perspective they would see it as correct, legitimate, good, or needful.
What do we do then when one has truly been on both sides and begins to see through matters from the inside out? And then, retreats, retracts, reforms…and yes…even in some ways…repents. To repent of something means to do a one-hundred-eighty-degree turn, essentially.
One of the most powerful methods that demonic spirits (and sinful humans seeking the full dismantling/deconstruction of the beautiful words, acts and nature of the One True God) is through the distortion/weaponization of the word “hateful.”
No one wants to be called or considered hateful, and this accusation leveled toward those who seek to maintain the constructs (precepts) of the One True God is one of the most powerful and go-to of false accusations the enemies of Christ and the cross hurl at those who follow Him.
So before I continue on here, let me remind those reading of the most basic truth behind the entirety of the Judeo-Christian faith summed up in Christ as expressed in the constructs revealed through the foundation of the apostles and the prophets, and found in the short book of I John: God is love and we love because He first loved us.
1 John 4:7-21 English Standard Version
God Is Love
7 Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God. 8 Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love. 9 In this the love of God was made manifest among us, that God sent his only Son into the world, so that we might live through him. 10 In this is love, not that we have loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. 11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. 12 No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God abides in us and his love is perfected in us.
13 By this we know that we abide in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit. 14 And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world. 15 Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God. 16 So we have come to know and to believe the love that God has for us. God is love, and whoever abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him. 17 By this is love perfected with us, so that we may have confidence for the day of judgment, because as he is so also are we in this world. 18 There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love. 19 We love because he first loved us. 20 If anyone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot[a] love God whom he has not seen. 21 And this commandment we have from him: whoever loves God must also love his brother.
Since the most basic building block of the Christian faith and message is love, the most powerful weapon to deconstruct the love of God (as it is, not as we want to make it to be) is to accuse the true followers of the Jesus as being hateful. This false accusation seeks to shame and silence the followers of Christ, since it is the antithesis of what we who believe have come to deeply understand and experience when we enter into relationship with God through Christ and are sealed as belonging to Him, through our faith and baptism.
If one can twist and redefine what it means to be hateful and what it means to walk in truth–biological, spiritual and relational truth of all sorts–then one can successfully deconstruct the Christian faith and all that is good, right and holy in this world.
Why would anyone want to do this?
Well, that’s an excellent question.
__________
Recently I came across an article in my Google newsfeed about two student employees that were terminated by a Christian college in New York state, Houghton University. This college is associated with conservative biblical understandings and the Wesleyan church tradition. Since its formation in the late 1800’s, it has not strayed from its basic tenets and goals, which are based in historic understandings of the Christian faith (as I attempted to outline in my above introduction). Those who seek both to educate and to be educated at this Christian college have historically been those who practice the Christian faith and want to deepen that faith, as they also deepen their education and intellectual growth alongside that faith. This is so that they can better and more deeply offer themselves and Jesus Christ to the world, in whatever personal career paths they are training for.
I took note of this article and its account of the termination with interest, later finding myself in another conversation about diversity, equity and inclusion requirements that are being pushed into every sphere of society, the workplace and legislation/agendas. After mentioning the recent article, out of curiosity at some aspects of the situation, I looked up the names of the students on YouTube and was surprised to find far more behind-the-scenes information and spin by the talking heads of deconstructionism. I then realized what seems to be the deeper motives involved.
Generally there is always more to a story, and the potential for various people with strong agendas to intentionally (or unintentionally) set up various confrontations that might lead to further attention or even worse, litigation, is a matter worthy of keeping our eyes and ears open for. Many a person who believed their intentions good has pushed a number of destructive and death-giving policies into court cases that make their way up to the Supreme Court and then, into the laws and requirements of society.
__________
I’m a very visual person, and also take in more fully when I can see a person speak and listen to their vocal tones and other ways of expression. Mannerisms, linguistics, tone, eye contact and facial expressions of humility or pride, or indignation and smugness, generally stand out to me. The two students involved have made a fifty minute video with the goal of explaining their view of the situation and what their personal goals/values are and why they believe their actions should be justified and why they believe they were terminated and, by their own inferences alongside of other news commentators, consider themselves mistreated and the innocent subjects of Christian “hate” and “exclusivity.”
One of the first things I noticed in the video was a tattoo on the young man’s arm which is a triangle with a non-touching circle in its center. There are very specific reasons I have become interested in the various tattoos I am seeing on many young people as I have been learning that many of these images of geometric nature or other iconic symbols are actually connected to the occult and to various demonic gods and spirits going back into ancient times and cultures.
While the death-giving practices of paganism, the occult and various New Age wiccan-type religions and witchcraft have been advancing at warp speed during the past twenty or so years, we are seeing the simultaneous increased assault on historic, traditional, theologically and otherwise sound and life-giving Christianity.
When one researches occult tattoos online there are a plethora of images, information and various connections–many of which are not entirely clear. What is very clear to me is that a tattoo is a seal/symbol/sign of allegiance. And while there are a number of views by Christians and non-Christians concerning “to tattoo or not to tattoo” and many of these distill down to one’s personal aesthetics and revolve around allegiances to innocuous things such as beautiful flowers, plants or names and remembrances of significant people in one’s life, and sometimes images relating to genuine Christianity, nevertheless other symbols and images are clearly of a more dark nature and allegiance to unclean spirits and demonic principalities.
I am not saying that those who opt for such permanent images of spiritual allegiance are fully aware of the symbols and reasonings behind their choice/desire of such markings. I do believe various spins are put on certain images and who knows what prompts someone to make such a marking on their body.
Some have said that the act of tattooing itself is a sign of mental illness and self-mutilation. While this may be true in some cases, I’m not so sure I would categorize the pursuit of tattoos categorically as such. I do note, however, that many who become sucked into the transgender cult are brandishing images on their bodies that can rightfully be construed as occult/demonic symbols.
These symbols seem to involve images of mythological gods or goddesses; snakes and other animals/beasts generally associated with dark things in most cultures or biblically; geometric and heiroglyphic-like symbols/patterns that seem to represent secretive occult constructs; and symbols that are connected to forms of witchcraft, tarot card activity, astrology and secretive organizations/movements which are ambiguous or overtly dark, many of which require secret oaths and other biblically forbidden acts.
In my blog piece called CLOSER TO THE ‘FIRST DAYS’ OF HUMANKIND: COMMANDMENTS WITH PROMISES I included a sampling of internet images of young girls that have had their breasts voluntarily removed and their bodies mutilated with chemical hormones, and other surgeries leaving many in lifelong sterility, who are proudly showing their mutilated, God-created nurturing chest/breast. (Yes, many young women are even removing their reproductive organs that God so beautifully designed and are making horrifically demonic TikTok videos which celebrate this act of death and violence toward their own bodies and outright rebellion toward the One True God and His beautiful creation–our male and female God-created bodies, with their potential and ability to be the vessels that bring the beautiful and God-ordained joy of continued and new human life into the world.)
I am so revolted by the TikTok in the above paragraph that I truly cannot fathom any parent or grandparent or person that has experienced children and loves children to be “ok” and supportive of that. This is not a situation of the kind and loving thing, even the “Christian” thing, to be some version of acceptance, non-judgement–live-and-let-live beliefs. I actually believe far more people of rational mind and intellectual integrity (both Christian and non-religious) inwardly oppose this current social contagion but out of the increasing, coercive fear tactics that threaten both personal/family relationships and now, job security and success, they find it easier to comply, or worse…look away…
Here are some still/clipped images of the two students terminated by Houghton University in their responsive 50-minute video, that show the student’s tattoo. While I cannot find the exact tattoo online or any consensus on its possible meaning (by reading about the meaning of the separate elements of the triangle and the circle), the connection generally ranges to be anything from The Illuminati to potentially a symbol “used to bind demons during evocation” related to “Thelemic” magic to a potential plethora of other demonic allegiances (see search screenshots below at end of this piece). Wikipedia shows a List of occult symbols, for further reading and research.
And to be clear, I do not know what this student’s tattoo means and I am not saying it is demonic. I am simply pointing out that as I began to watch him speak and use his arm gestures/body language, it was the first thing that I personally took note of. Again, because I have made both broader and other specific observations of the usage of tattoos by those in various social justice movements and especially, those who are somehow touched/affected/advocates of gender ideology. I have just finished listening to a book by the Messianic Rabbi Jonathan Cahn that a friend recommended, and hope to soon do a blog review of “The Return of the Gods.” Quite interesting, and quite concerning for the Christian seeking deeper discernments about what demonic spirits are influencing those in society and/or personal realms.
This blog piece almost had the title Tattoos<Paganism<Wokesism<Transgenderism<Allegiances<JESUS, the One True God before I decided upon addressing the umbrella topic of Deconstruction. (I thought my usage of the “less than” sign with JESUS “greater than” all was a bit good/interesting title-wise…though long. Certainly the ultimate goal of specific identification of demonic spirits is for the purpose of prayer and casting them out through the Holy Spirit’s leadings, and away from our personal family and work and societal/national/world realms…)
I also take visual note that his tee shirt says Shameless and contains an image that appears to be of pyramids with city-like silhouettes/structures, but it is not clear. I did a quick search of terms “circles with pyramid city shameless” and the first link that came up was a Facebook Page called “Shameless Feminine Speaks” and interestingly is “(About) Join Rebecca Haywood, modern-day Shaman and sister to all, for “Shameless Feminine Speaks”— a podcast Lovestreamed here, every Tuesday 5:30pm Pacific. Shameless Feminine Speaks is for all the shamelessly shameless women, men, ladies and misfits who are ready for the feminine re-evolution!” (see page image at bottom of this piece)
While this does not represent any direct connection to Shua Wilmont’s selected tee shirt (I believe when people create videos such as this that most every element is intentional, for some visual and communicative reason. And though Google does create unique algorhythms for searches, it only strengthens my observations that transgender ideology can be directly and either knowingly/unknowingly tied to forms of witchcraft and demonic activity.
I also note that on the wall behind them is some type of painting/image which appears to show a contrast between Light and Dark (or possibly heaven/hell), with two different figures in the opposing scenes. Whether this was painted by one of them or was purchased from an artist/art source, I do not know. But these two selected the particular backdrop/location for their messaging.
Laying open beside the young woman is the Houghton College newspaper The STAR, and later in the video of which the students titled their communication “Stand by Your Values,” there is reference to this article in which Reagan Zelaya is quoted in regard to the school’s decision to close The Mosaic Center. And that seems to be the reason for the newspaper prop, which I wondered about from the beginning.
Raegan Zelaya’s comments in the article reveal the nature of her values/ideology which sits in opposition to that of the Christian college. The termination of these two students was not an attempt to silence their free speech, but a consequence of allowing such free speech. People mistake the difference between these two things on a regular basis. The removal of information by those on the left that goes against their agenda is actually censorship; and the various responses to the free speech of the left is the natural result of allowing people to speak things that others disagree with.
While that seems it should be obvious, I believe it is worth clarifying. There seems to be a linguistic push today to be “heard.“ Unfortunately, many who use this rhetoric don’t simply mean they want others to listen to and consider their opinions, but rather, to embrace, comply and to help promote/normalize. Disagreement with their views thus becomes renamed as being “unheard” and sadly, I know of numerous parents at the mercy and deep pain of such ideologic brainwashing and rhetoric that spills over into the family system and family matters, with a particular assault upon due respect of parents and their God-given authority/values and call to work for the good of their children and families.
In a generation and spiritual world system hell bent on deconstructionism, what better way to spurn relational chaos and destruction than to simultaneously deconstruct the rightful place of worthy parental elders in family and society–all the while virtue signaling that these young people are somehow wiser and worthy to instruct those in such places of godly authority and who are due reasonable respect. (the video the students made eventually reveals what the college perceived of as a tacit threat by Shua Wilmot in his seeking to re-educate the administration concerning gender ideology–my paraphrase). Again, to be heard is not to be listened to–these young people will never “feel heard” until they are agreed with and put into positions of authority and control, where such position is not only not right, but downright deconstructing and destructive.
Here is what Raegan Zelaya freely expressed in the campus’ journalistic publication:
https://www.houghtonstar.com/2023/04/14/mosaic-center-closing/
“Women’s Area Coordinator Raegan Zelaya remarks that while she understands the reasoning behind closing the Mosaic Center, Houghton–as an institution–can’t claim to value diversity if we aren’t doing everything we can to safeguard and develop it.
“If anything,” Zelaya writes, “it feels like it just further demonstrates that the university is only interested in the kinds of diversity that are convenient for marketing purposes. It is outrageous to have diversity as a pillar in our strategic plan when we are actively cutting the programs and spaces that help empower diverse students to succeed.”
While this blog piece could continue in length and time-consuming analysis, I wish to simply/give overview and invite those readers who are following these type of news events with interest and concern to listen to all or parts of the following videos, beginning with the one made by the two students involved. I believe as we listen to the rhetoric, we tune ourselves to hear/better recognize other similar rhetoric being put upon us from family members, society or in our work places.
First, the student’s tone and method of speaking is characterized by uptalk/upspeak and other linguistic mumbo jumbo that typifies the WOKE agenda and virtue signaling. At the start, the students put forth innocent sounding reasoning of why they have been “victimized” and how pure their motives were for including he/him and she/her pronouns on messaging that represents the college. They state that they are both “cis-gendered” and have often been “misgendered” for their ambiguous-sounding names.
One of the most important deconstructionist tactics to take note of is that it does not matter if these two are “cis-gendered” or not. Because, “cis-gendered” is not really a thing. Nor is non-binary. Nor is gender fluidity. Nor is there some reason to push everyone in the nation to clarify their gender or to focus on/state or otherwise clarify if they are male/female or what their preferred pronouns are.
If readers have one take-away from this piece, I hope that they will recognize the sleight of hand maneuvers pushing for the everyday citizen to comply with “clarifying their gender/pronouns.” It is like the old tale of the Emperor with no clothing. There is no need to clarify pronouns, nor are the endlessly growing list of pronouns and gender identities ANYTHING. They simply don’t exist. They are entirely a construct/social contagion with no real meaning in-and-of-themselves. But, if those pushing this dark agenda can force us to confess that something that does not exist actually exists…then, they have succeeded in helping creating/establishing a thing which is nothing…but…is a POWERFUL NOTHING.
A nothing so powerful that textbooks, laws and the very fabric and bodies of humanity will be dreadfully, permanently and darkly altered.
It puzzles me that more people do not recognize the dystopian/Orwellian nature of this.
And, I know my statement may shock some, or otherwise be construed as hateful, but it is not. It is the truth. (see introduction with basic outline of all that is right, true and holy in God’s good creation and in all historic teachings/understandings and science itself). “Gender” apart from biological sex, is not a thing. Biological sex is absolute. (This does not preclude conversations about same biological sex attraction; it simply states biological truth about sex and what it means to be male/female.)
I started this piece referencing postmodern art…and innovations leading to the question of “what is art?” Please follow my reasoning: we are now being led through various untruths/constructs to question, “what is the meaning of being male or being female?”
I really, really, really want readers to understand what these two students seem to be (through their own presentation/words) actually attempting, which was not simply to avoid being personally “misgendered.” Their goal and function appears to be, after my full listen to their narrative/explanation/”values” to be that of transgender activism/advocacy on a Christian college campus that clearly states its own goals/values.
To say that it is otherwise is untruthful, and if one goes on to listen to their entire video, it should speak for itself to those whose eyes and ears are becoming better attuned to deceptive guises of the mission to deconstruct. The initial statement of reason for their persistence in pronoun clarification slowly unfolds/falls apart as they go on to state they want to create a “safe space,” promote “inclusion,” educate (students, faculty and the institution itself) concerning gender, and help prepare Houghton students to embrace the gender ideology so that they can better spread it within their future professional roles. (my paraphrased summary)
These roles would include that of teachers of children, those in the fields of psychology, medicine and the arts, and every other realm including those who may head for forms of Christian missions, service, seminary and Pastoral pursuits. Simply put, these two students whether intentionally or not (I do not discount the depth of deception that is alluring young people into such darkness, that is masked as light) have in their own video expressed the clear intent to proselytize this false “gender and inclusivity gospel.”
And I find their seeming entitlement (to promote things that go against clear school policies) and lack of awareness of the Christian school’s rightful boundaries, noteworthy. Surely there are numerous Christian churches (or schools) that I might disagree with in beliefs and practices. If I encounter such a group, I recognize and respect that I can do any of three basic things: leave and go elsewhere; personally sort through what I accept/don’t accept with a respectful spirit, recognizing the authority of leadership; or respectfully communicate my grievances without any sense of being entitled to have my views accepted/complied with or things to change.
That this is not simply a small church group but a Christian college upgrades their infiltrative and attention-getting activities/potential influence to another level, in my mind. How long before this type of agenda infiltrate other Christian-based, lower level, private education and law-making?
And for this basic and understandable reason, Houghton University acted within their Christian purview to do as they did. Here, and below, the interview with the President of this university made clear, to the degree he can speak with circumspection, the basis of their actions. This interview sits in stark contrast to the anti-Christian twisting and assaultive reporting found in the link by The Young Turks where the situation was reframed as an “attack on inclusivity.” (both linked here, and below)
Simply put, if those following deconstructionist agenda can convince/establish that something which is not is actually a thing–and do this by forcing compliance of those are are not transgender (i.e. routine pronoun clarification)–then they have made a powerful first step to alteration of the most basic understanding of the world and society (and laws, politics, faith and more).
Make no mistake, the push for every citizen to mark/define themselves as something beyond the obvious of being biologically male/female is the most basic building block of a future world you will not want to inhabit, nor wish it upon future generations.
So, if your job could get terminated for someday not adding he/him or she/her to your emails, would you comply?
__________
Why paganism and witchcraft are making a comeback
Why Does the Bible Forbid Tattoos?
Thank You For Reading
Please Feel Free To Express Your Thoughts Below
