The subject of true and false prophesying has been raised recently. See @derekradney especially. It’s important because as @PLeithart notes in his fine commentary on 1&2 Kings, Israel’s history is not so much political as it is prophetic.

One example - Ahab. Not only does he despise & reject the three prophets God mercifully sends him, but he embraces the hundreds who falsely prophesy in God’s name. That latter fact is the issue. It’s not that the false prophets are invoking Baal but YHWH.
Ahab’s prophets are false for numerous reasons but let me cite just one. They aimed to reinforce an unholy alliance between Judah’s future king and Ahab’s daughter Athaliah, a disaster that resulted in the attempted destruction of the Messianic hope.
Prophetically backing unholy alliances - defending the union of what God has separated - nearly led to the disastrous destruction of Judah. They are false not simply because of false predictions but because of errant theology.
I’m going to put this as plainly as I can. The Church today is disturbed, divided, and misled because of false prophets. They aren’t false in an obvious sense (or only in a narrow ‘charismatic’ sense) because they operate within otherwise orthodox settings & use orthodox terms.
These false prophets long for an unholy alliance. They support in the name of of the Lord a union of human government & church mission. Both church & state are gifts from God but they’re to be separated & distinguished. Improper alignments of these two entities...
... always leads to false prophets supporting that union (and I see it in Court Evangelicals), to the scattering of God’s flock on the hills, and the endangerment of the Gospel’s progress in the world. The false religious leaders who’ve pandered to power & propped up evil...
...bear responsibility for the deception of the flock, the supplanting of hope in Christ with hope in a political savior, and the confusion of Christ’s Kingdom with the government of the United States. There are far too many to name but you know who they are.
You love this country best not by trying to turn it into a conservative theocracy but by preserving intact the robust distinctions between church & state, by praying for those in authority, and always looking to share Christ with all. The USA is not Israel. The Church however...
...must learn by Israel’s example. The Church needs to get out of the politics business - though individual Christians should seek to serve across all party lines - and get back on mission of bringing good news to the world. That’s prophetic!
Finally, I’m not invoking @derekradney or @PLeithart here to suggest they’d agree with what I’ve written but rather to thank them for their excellent work. I am their debtor.

More from World

Good question: what proofs has BDA provided of his authenticity?

Let's go through some of them.


- BDA predicted the Saudis would assassinate Suleimani. They did.
- He said the dog that got Badghadi's arm deserved a Medal Of Honor. The next day the President posted a joke image showing him giving the dog a MoH.

- He said one of his ops in Syria would severely disrupt a CIA drug trafficking operation. This was proved true within a few days:
https://t.co/Hranupwcxj
- He sent gold to Brazil to help pay for an anti-trafficking operation there. That op became public soon afterwards.

- On May 31 this year, he predicted the President would be giving a speech the next day. June 1, the President gives a surprise address at the Rose Garden.
- He predicted the US would be making diplomatic moves on Greenland. True.

- He said the US would be pulling all troops out of Afghanistan. This was confirmed within the month.
- He claimed earthquakes would be hitting Iran's nuclear facilities in December. Yep.
- There were FOUR facilities hit, not the three made public. Also true.
"MLs" do support the proletariat of Xinjiang & have the whole time. People like @Tursunali_7 & @GulnarNorthwest (and many others) who show the world the real Xinjiang via their everyday videos.

Shopkeepers like in this video below say

"Pompeo, we Xinjiang people hate you."


Or everyday working people like Zaynura Namatqari, who speak out against vicious & disgusting US lies and accusations about


.@qiaocollective have a brilliant thread of everyday proletarian Uyghurs speaking out against the harassment they face from the US and their paid


'Uyghur proletariat' looks like this:


Not like this: (photo from a pro Islamist separatist protest in Turkey in 2017)
A few thoughts on this sad development 👇👇

20 academics criticizing an paper is fine; good science, really

10000+ hate mail for studying schools in Sweden is insane

Anonymous docs/ prof (hiding in faceless accts) on twitter smearing researchers is insane
[thread] https://t.co/QYldLD3WO0


In April 2020, @jflier and I saw this coming

We saw increasingly heated and personal attacks against scientists merely for having a range of views on COVID19 (PS there is no playbook/ right ans)

Tying science to naked politics was also bad idea, we

Yet, repeatedly that is what happened. Twitter 'experts' displayed an absolute intolerance to other views

Folks who disagreed weren't just wrong, they were malicious actors spreading "disinformation"

Really? Someone worked for 25 years as faculty to suddenly spread lies?

Disinformation has been so misused that it has lost meaning.

I recently saw an ID doc & lab researcher in the UK be accused of spreading "disinformation"

hahah, get outta here, you are trying to say "i disagree" but your keyboard is broken

Personal attacks have become so bad that I have seen a lab researcher accuse a doctor of wanting to engage in inappropriate relationships with patients due to diverging views on vaccine messaging

Seriously? It was a low point even for twitter

You May Also Like

I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x


The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x

Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x

The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x

It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x