One defining feature of many Christian men today is the effeminate practice of covert and evasive speech.

Even worse is the fact that this manner of speaking is widely seen as the moral, "charitable," and polite manner of speech, to be praised, encouraged, & emulated.
(Thread)

The essence of this effeminate style in the evangelical man is the strategic avoidance of taking personal responsibility for (or "owning") what he has to say.

This goal (the evasion of responsibility) is achieved through various tactics calculated against clarity & precision...
Rather than saying exactly what he means in a clear, and unequivocal, manner, the polite evangelical man will hint at his meaning through innuendo and implication––so as to alway maintain the plausible deniability that he didn't mean the controversial thing he meant...
Or, if he does speak clearly with unambiguous moral authority, he will be sure to leave the object of his criticism unclear. The object of his criticism––whether a person, or an idea––will always remain abstract, theoretical, and disconnected from any specifics or concretes...
By implementing the right degree of unclarity on either the nature of his criticism, or on the object of it, he ensures that the right people in his audience will be emboldened and endeared toward him, but that he will never have to defend or substantiate what he has said...
As noted above, this evasive manner of speech is not some guilty indulgence.

It is the widely accepted and prescribed method of communication for a "good Christian man."

Directness of speech, on the other hand, is considered a sign of bad manners, or even of sinfulness...
A man who says what he means, clearly and unambiguously, naming names where relevant, and welcoming open debate to those who disagree––

This man is seen as "arrogant," "divisive," "rude," "uncharitable," and unworthy of public engagement...
Our evangelical culture has adopted an ethic of communication which is perfectly designed to embolden error while neutering truth.

Only error can prosper in a climate of dogmatic ambiguity, and only truth can suffer as a result.
In this culture of dogmatic ambiguity of speech, honest men will necessarily be discouraged and punished for their honesty, while dishonest men are inevitably encouraged and praised for their dishonesty.

If we want true and lasting reform in the Church, this must change...
Many have become aware, and begun to battle against, some of the particular errors currently being pushed (e.g., wokeism, socialism, feminism, etc...), but such errors only became prominent to begin with as a result of this evangelical culture of ambiguity...
In addition to combatting the particular errors, we must also combat the effeminate culture of "polite" ambiguity which acts as the seedbed for all manner of error.

We must insist upon shining the sanitizing light of clear speech into every facet of evangelical culture...
We must make holy war against every false assumption about what is "polite," "charitable," and "respectable" in public discourse.

We must put the evasive, lying, cowards to shame for their refusal to take responsibility for their speech.
Imagine how healthy the Church could be if Her men spoke clearly and unequivocally, if they named names and listed specifics where relevant, if they stated their positions and declared openly their willingness to defend those positions in the light of public scrutiny.

#2021Goal

More from Religion

#Ramayana #LecturesOnTheRamayana

In the past, we had a glimpse of Lakshmana's devotion towards Sri Rama, his brother and father figure.

However, it is interesting to note his unique relationship with Sita, especially as seen by from her perspective.

Thread below

1/

We all know about the Golden Deer / Maricha incident and the way Sita influences Lakshmana to go in search of his brother.

Personally, I am unable to get 2 strong emotional points in one thread and hence, I will skip this incident for today.

2/

In Sundara Kanda, when Hanuman meets Sita, she says the following

सिंहस्कन्धो महाबाहुर्मनस्वी प्रियदर्शिनः।
पितृवद्वर्तते रामे मातृवन्मां समाचरन्।।

Lakshmana, who has lionshoulders and strong arms, who is handsome, who takes Rama as his father & treats me as his own mother

3/

ह्रियमाणां तदा वीरो न तु मां वेद लक्ष्मणः।
वृद्धोपसेवी लक्ष्मीवान् शक्तो न बहुभाषिता।।

Heroic Lakshmana, did not know while I was borne away. He is prosperous, foremost in serving elders. He is energetic and reserved in his speech like my father-in-law ..

4/

He is a prince dear (to his brother).

These are from Sarga-38, shlokas 60 and 61.

There are 3 distinct points which I want to draw the attention of the reader to.

1. She also compares Lakshmana to Dasaratha much like how Rama did when he constructed the hut in panchavati

5/

You May Also Like

Trump is gonna let the Mueller investigation end all on it's own. It's obvious. All the hysteria of the past 2 weeks about his supposed impending firing of Mueller was a distraction. He was never going to fire Mueller and he's not going to


Mueller's officially end his investigation all on his own and he's gonna say he found no evidence of Trump campaign/Russian collusion during the 2016 election.

Democrats & DNC Media are going to LITERALLY have nothing coherent to say in response to that.

Mueller's team was 100% partisan.

That's why it's brilliant. NOBODY will be able to claim this team of partisan Democrats didn't go the EXTRA 20 MILES looking for ANY evidence they could find of Trump campaign/Russian collusion during the 2016 election

They looked high.

They looked low.

They looked underneath every rock, behind every tree, into every bush.

And they found...NOTHING.

Those saying Mueller will file obstruction charges against Trump: laughable.

What documents did Trump tell the Mueller team it couldn't have? What witnesses were withheld and never interviewed?

THERE WEREN'T ANY.

Mueller got full 100% cooperation as the record will show.