“Let love be genuine. Abhor what is evil; hold fast to what is good.” (Romans 12:9)
“The fear of the Lord is hatred of evil. Pride and arrogance and the way of evil and perverted speech I hate.” (Proverbs 8:13)
There are certain things that every Christian is required to hate; namely, that which is evil. Such holy hatred is not the absence of love but the practical demonstration of it. Scripture is clear that genuine love and the fear of the Lord, both fruit of authentic faith, are characterized by a hatred of evil.
One obvious implication of this Biblical principle is that where there is any toleration of evil, there is a deficiency in both genuine love and the fear of the Lord. Indeed, the sustained toleration of evil — without repentance — is a sure indication that one does not, in fact, know the Lord.
We need to keep this principle in mind as we consider recent events because one of the tactics used by those who tolerate evil is to try to minimize it through obscuring, whitewashing, blaming, and distracting. These aren’t simply clever and coordinated strategies. They are base impulses of the offspring of Adam used to cover their tracks.
The practical consequence of such impulses is that good and evil are made unclear. Anyone who challenges the toleration of evil is quickly bombarded by lies, accusations, non-sequiturs, tribal impulses, and various attempts to overwhelm them into silence. The actual issue (tolerating evil) quickly becomes obscured as more and more time is given to defending against an unending deluge of accusations.
The clearest example of this dynamic was manifest in the life and ministry of Jesus Christ. It is no small irony that those who are presently tolerating a resurgent antisemitism and ethnocentrism in their ranks are acting identically to a bunch of unbelieving Jews. If you held up the various gospel accounts of the tactics of Jesus’ opponents, they would map perfectly onto these men and their horde of anon fans.
Unfortunately, despite the clarity of Scripture, many (if not most) naïve and bewildered onlookers cannot see the play that is being run on them. In the case of the recent situation between Tobias and Joel, most caved at the initial threat (“He’s a liar! We have secret evidence! Delete your twitter account and REPENT!”), apparently having never faced the dynamics of a mob before. Whoever stuck around for the dumpster fire that followed, for the most part, gave into varying degrees of indifference and fatigue.
Both of these responses are exactly what a mob seeks to produce. They want you to doubt your eyes and ears and give way to sheer force. If they cannot make you completely forget why you showed up in the first place, they will make you think it’s just not worth the fight.
The simple fact is this: tolerating evil is an affront to God and a failure to exhibit the most basic fruit of faith, which is genuine love and the fear of the Lord.
If we have reached the place where we can’t even discern good from evil, or identify what genuine love and fear of the Lord looks like, we have wandered so far from our Lord that we’re in danger of forsaking Him entirely. This recent controversy is not, most fundamentally, a clash of personalities or a difference of perspectives regarding pastoral duties to former members.
To suggest so is itself a failure of discernment (in the least), and an attempt to whitewash evil (at worst).
The Context
There has been a shocking rise in the public endorsement of white-identitarianism in general, and antisemitic attitudes in particular, within the professing church. We should note that “antisemitism” here doesn’t refer to any and all criticism of the policies of the nation of Israel, individual Jews, or Judaism in general. What we have here is an ideology built on lies and malice which views an entire ethnic group as uniquely sinful and the functional scapegoats for all evil. This reaction is the fruit of a pathological avoidance of responsibility, comfort with blaming others, and accusations and lies — all wrapped up in a bitterness which defiles (Heb. 12:15).
We have seen barbaric and tribal impulses and attitudes rise in the public square. For example, a clear double standard has been applied to “pro-Palestine” radicals who are allowed to engage in rampant violence and vandalism while questioners of the narrative are arrested. Jews are denied entrance into their workplaces in a display of ethnic discrimination we haven’t seen since Germany in the 1930s.
We might expect such things from our progressive overlords and the various barbarians who have invaded our country. What is discouraging has been the toleration of such anti-Christian attitudes within the ranks of self-identifying “reformed” ministries.
The rise of ethnic nationalism is a predictable development. Historically, it has formed a kind of bulwark against communism, a system which sought to undo all creational norms, historical rooting, and traditional identity markers. Since we live in a culturally Marxist environment, it’s no wonder we see such reactions happening again.
Cultural norms such as family, ethnicity, culture, and nations will never simply cease to exist. However, we must make sure to define these realities according to Scripture rather than to base, unbelieving impulses. The temptation in fighting the left is to simply play the same game using different terms. Many young men, most under 30, have spent most of their lives being told that a number of the most central components of their identity (culture, cultural history, values, ethnic identity) are inherently evil. The left has made whiteness a shorthand term for all evil and many young men are sick of this malicious lie.
But instead of rejecting the terms of the conflict, some have chosen to fight the enemy on the battleground of their opponent’s choosing. This is a moral and strategic failure. They are embracing an identity that is defined by those who hate them and charging into online battles with it, essentially adopting a “If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em” strategy. This is as near-sighted as it is immoral. You don’t defeat evil by partnering with it.
And make no mistake, adopting woke, identitarian categories is evil.
Recently, several influential pastors endorsed a video featuring white-identitarian themes and explicit Nazi propaganda. When they did (eventually) back down from their public endorsement of the video, they made typically clever and evasive posts — functionally blaming any critics for being unfair, rather than humbly acknowledging their sin and error. It has since become a common tactic of these guys to accuse critics of forcing them into a “struggle session.” This play cleverly identified them as the poor, misunderstood victims who must now bravely oppose the pressures of the mob.
In short, they brushed over their endorsement of evil and labelled anyone suspecting them of wrongdoing as the ones doing evil. The whole play was reminiscent of what we saw from Public Health cat ladies during covid. There was something almost impressive about it in that the stamina required to vindicate oneself takes some degree of thought and intelligence. However, it is not a commendable skill. It may help make you an effective bureaucrat and feminine influencer but it will not make you a godly man, nor help you disciple godly men.
We need to stop at this point and be clear:
Anyone who watches a white-nationalist hype video featuring literal Nazis, which reached an emotional crescendo in the Nazi-filled Berlin stadium and celebrates it as good, has a severely broken moral conscience. There is no other conclusion. Any honest man would humbly admit such a corruption.
Any pastor who would promote such vile and anti-Christian sentiments is not qualified to lead anyone in pursuing good and abhorring evil. And this isn’t (as they will cry) because they said something “taboo.” It’s because they tolerate evil, which reflects an absence of both genuine love and the fear of the Lord.
It is that simple.
All the online rage and clever excuses doesn’t detract from this simple point. It was all an intentional and exhausting attempt to obscure this simple reality. It was done to cover their tracks, creating doubt and identifying their challengers as the ones who were evil.
We need to learn from this if we are to grow in love and the fear of the Lord. We need to hate evil. And right now, we’re doing a terrible job at it.
Lack of Ownership of Sin
Those at a distance from social media may be shocked to hear such evil is even being tolerated, which may lead to the question, “Where is all this coming from?!”
The answer, in a broad sense, is simple. It came from our first father, Adam. The toleration of evil is cultivated in an environment that avoids responsibility and cultivates a posture of blame.
The same people who have tolerated and even publicly promoted white identitarianism and Nazi sympathy have also adopted a policy right out of Adam’s playbook, called “No Enemies to the Right” (NETTR). The basic (pagan) idea behind this sentiment is that our greatest enemy will always be the left, so we will focus our criticism exclusively on them. We will NOT criticize the right. This policy is the breeding ground for hypocrisy, avoidance of repentance, and the cultivation of pagan, tribal impulses that are antithetical to the gospel.
As the covenantal head of our fallen race, Adam and his sinful behaviour serve as the pattern of our behaviour. The reality that Adam bore the primary responsibility for the sins of his household is evidenced by the fact that God addresses him in particular (Gen. 3:9) after the fall. Rather than take responsibility for his sins, however, Adam foolishly sought to hide and admitted later that this response was out of fear.
It is worth noting that fear of judgment characterizes unbelief and reflects a deficiency in love: “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.” (1 John 4:18). Adam’s response was not just from fear, but from a malicious desire to blame. Rather than own his failures, Adam blames both God (“the woman you gave me”) and his wife. In blaming God, he is adopting a victim identity. He is functionally saying, “This is your fault, and I am actually the victim here.”
The maliciousness of this blame cannot be overstated: Adam knew that the wages of sin was death (Gen. 2:17). In pointing the finger at his wife, he was willing to have her die before admitting fault. Such scapegoating is the antithesis to love, which is characterized by the sacrificial assumption of responsibility for the good of others.
The reactions of certain Reformed leaders in response to public correction reveals the extreme lengths to which guilty men will go in order to avoid taking responsibility for their sins and failures. The impulse to identify ourselves as victims when we are, in fact, the ones who have wronged others, is innate to all fallen men since. We will blame the innocent — even God himself — and be willing that others should die in our place.
If we fail to grasp man’s capacity for evil, particularly in their avoidance of responsibility, we will fail to grasp what is going on presently and be more likely to tolerate or even participate in evil.
The most serious failure here was that many well-meaning people who observed the aggressive blaming, accusing, hiding, covering, failed to discern what they were seeing. They automatically assumed there must be guilt on both sides. But it doesn’t always take two to fight, as my Dad taught me. Sometimes someone is just wrong. And sometimes the ones who are wrong are the ones most vehemently trying to deny it.
Tolerating evil rather than abhorring it
Evil rarely comes out and openly declares itself. Like the immoral woman from Proverbs, it flatters, whispers, and insinuates from the shadows. It disguises itself as a delicious morsel rather than the burning vial of poison it actually is.
For the individual, such moments serve as a moral crossroads. If evil is tolerated at this early stage, the conscience risks becoming seared (1 Tim. 4:2). A seared conscience, like a seared finger, has lost its sensitivity. It is unable to notice, and rightly respond, to the presence of evil. If the pattern of toleration continues, the distinction between good and evil becomes less and less obvious to the point where it becomes inverted (Is. 5:29). Evil is viewed as good and good is viewed as evil.
But the danger doesn’t just stop at the individual. The danger, as Jesus warned, is the leavening nature of tolerated evil. Whether it’s hypocrisy, resentment, or adultery, at some point the Overton window of any community expands to the point where no evil is too large to fit through. Suddenly, everything is on the table. Everything, of course, except the truth.
When a community is reduced to such a state, it is nearly impossible to change course apart from the grace of God. When the state of a collective conscience has become seared past sensitivity, even a clear appeal to Biblical warnings appears extreme. Consider the Pharisees who, after listening to Jesus, reminded him (you know, in case He didn’t really mean it) that “He had offended them also” (Luke 11:45.) But it turns out He had meant it. And He meant it because evil is extreme. To tolerate evil is to condemn your soul. Thus, evil can and must be responded to with a corresponding ferocity.
For those who think serious rebuke is the problem, here’s a thought experiment. Change the party in question from “Nazi Sympathizer” to “Child Predator.” Would you respond with careful nuance, qualifiers, and prancing little pony steps? Of course not. You would (hopefully!) respond with the hickory mallet of clear truth. And if people tried to get you to “do the reading” surrounding pedophilia, you’d tell them you’ve already done the reading, and the prescription was a millstone around the neck.
In such moments, the role of a pastor or brother is to attempt to awaken the dead conscience to the severity of evil and its consequences through the open administration of the Scriptures. In fact, the whole nature of a prophetic ministry is to awaken seared consciences, whether they’re to the left or to the right.
Certain influential leaders, however, seem to be increasingly comfortable with anti-Christian identitarian ideologies, to the extent that many Kinists, Nazi-sympathizers, and white identitarians consider them as co-belligerents.
Excusing evil in the name of precision
Those flirting with antisemitism will often respond with the defense that it’s all simply a matter of historical accuracy.
But the current revisionism surrounding events such as the Holocaust isn’t simply the adjustment of a particular historical record. It is an attempt to undo history. You see, when we say historical record, we mean something along the lines of “what actually happened.” And what actually happened in 1940’s Germany, according to the corroborated testimony of millions of people with vastly competing interests, was a genocide of inarguable proportions. If allegations you heard in a podcast, citing a newspaper headline, are more reliable to you than millions of eyewitness testimonies on every side, you are not actually interested in history or truth. You are a walking confirmation bias.
The fallout of this circus is that the gnats are strained while the camels are swallowed. The evil of Nazism is obscured while the “evil” of flawed metrics is prioritized (“It was only 5.1 million Jews killed, not 6 million!”). The fact that so much of the Reformed world is seemingly okay with swallowing camels is an indictment on us, and perhaps even the judgment of God on our arrogance. We who decorate the tombs of the prophets, we who make great boasts of our confessional lineage, we who take solace in the sheer historicity of our movement, WE are the ones to now inherit the rot of antisemitism.
The toleration of Nazi-promoting material is wicked and symptomatic of a corrupt conscience. The failure to demonstrate humility in acknowledging such content as evil, but rather endorsing it, is also evil.
Does any of this mean that malicious men can’t be saved? Of course not. Malicious men are the only kind there are. But their path to salvation is the same as everyone else’s: repent and believe Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And the first sins they will have to leave at the door are their malice and resentment. No one can serve two masters.
A round-up1
The sad thing is that the recent online tantrums weren't performed by actual children but by men acting like children — and herein lies the dangerous difference. The tantrums, in response to those calling out the Kinist and identitarian ideologues in the camp, were deceitful, intentional, and malicious. A tantrum is a way of bypassing truth, reason, and justice. It relies solely on manipulation and force. When children do it, they are seeking to control their reality by bending others to their unhinged will. When adults do it, they are doing the same thing.
We need to say, as brothers, pastors, fathers, and friends, that folly is still folly, no matter how many are following it. And we need to stop turning a blind eye to the fools in our midst. The rise and toleration of pagan ideologies is a serious issue and the lack of abhorrence towards it is evidence of both a failure to love and fear the Lord as we ought. One of the most obvious demonstrations of this failure is a dogged refusal to acknowledge it. The cost, in this instance, was Christian witness and principles. Lady wisdom was dragged onto the online altar and butchered, and no one blinked an eye.
Paul’s desire for the Romans was that they “would be wise about what is good, and innocent about what is evil.” What we have seen over the past few months is a warped attempt to reimagine objective evil as hopelessly complex. Such a posture should immediately set off warning bells for any discerning Christian.
Love, as evidenced in the hatred of evil, has always been the measure of true faith. Anything else is just a noisy gong or clanging cymbal.
It is telling that the response to Tobias’ thorough and measured description of events was met with a series of unhinged accusations.
For the first while, nobody could even identify what he was specifically lying about. It didn’t help that Eschatology Matters not only pulled the episode (as they are entitled to do), but then explicitly stated that Tobias’ video was full of lies and mischaracterizations, without naming them. They even went further to say that nothing in the podcast could be used to criticize Webbon, even though most of the podcast contained Webbon using his own words.
Such sweeping condemnations of Tobias, with no evidence, and the total vindication of Webbon was not an indication of justice. It was evidence of a coverup.
When I asked people in the “Tobias is a liar” camp what exactly he lied about, none of them seemed to know. One person simply screenshotted the statement from Eschatology Matters, and said “Seeeeeee?” But there’s a large difference between an allegation (“he lied”) and actual evidence. The eagerness to conflate those two things is the behaviour of a mob, not a genuinely Christian movement.
Next, we heard about a “secret recording” which was intentionally referred to by Webbon et al. as damning evidence of Tobias’ lies. But having listened to podcasts from both sides, it turns out the lies were all on Webbon’s side:
-He lied when he said Tobias wanted immediate excommunication of a member’s family on the sole basis of a meme that was shared. In truth, Tobias was calling for correction, exhortation, and rebuke, as any faithful pastor would.
-He lied when he insinuated that Tobias claimed to never want any kind of discipline done in any way. In truth, Tobias’ entire podcast was a record of his attempt to encourage Joel to exhort and rebuke (i.e. discipline) the member of his church for anti-Christian attitudes. Tobias’ claim, obviously, was that the sin of the former member was serious enough to warrant rebuke. And it follows that such sin could warrant escalated discipline (including excommunication) if not repented of. This isn’t complicated and reflects a very basic, orthodox view of pastoral ministry.
-He lied when he said the secret recording demonstrated Tobias contradicting his claim that he didn’t call for immediate excommunication. In truth, the zoom call confirmed that Tobias holds to a biblical view of discipline that encompasses exhortations and correction. Pointing out that he used the word “discipline” or “excommunication” is a malicious mischaracterization of both the Bible’s teaching and Tobias’ view.
Webbon then put these lies out in public in a malicious attempt to discredit the source.
Unfortunately, few people had the maturity to notice this play, which happened in broad daylight and was evident without needing to watch any secret tapes. It was all plain from simply listening to Joel and Tobias’ own words. There never was any controversy or complexity here. There was never a need for a secret recording, or any podcasts, or closed-doors conversations. The fact that everyone felt it was complicated was actually part of the play.
The embarrassment isn’t on the side of those who noticed what was going on. The embarrassment was all the people who perpetuated, through intentional ignorance, this juvenility.
For example, AD Robles admitting he didn’t even listen to Tobias' defence while feeling free to offer a judgement was the embodiment of folly and injustice. Any grown man who listens to Robles for more than eight seconds and doesn’t feel embarrassed for his lack of shame has a more severely damaged conscience than he is aware. The only explanation I have for Robles' apparent influence is that a lot of grown men have become conditioned to toxic, effeminate messaging. It is the air many folks breathe.
Thank you Alex for speaking clarity into this very troubling issue. There really are no gray areas here.
Thank-you helping clarify into writing what I was thinking.