Evangelicalism has failed to detect and reject the biblically inconsistent starting points of an unholy trinity of cultural ideologies: Marxism, multiculturalism, and genderism.[1] In this manner, the nature of evangelicalism has experienced a fundamental shift so that large parts of evangelicalism are no longer Christian. Each ideology is unholy because they promise good but deliver evil. They are a trinity because each successive ideology builds in some way on its predecessor, beginning with Marxism. Subsequent essays demonstrated that Marxism in its various contemporary forms and all of its current popular ideas—wealth inequality, income redistribution, social justice, etc.—are completely contradictory to and incompatible with the Bible and Christianity.[2] Later essays responded in detail to so-called Christian Marxists, who claim that Marxism is taught in Scripture.[3] Consequently, this essay and the next will briefly back up to look at the big picture. This essay demonstrates the practical connection between the unholy trinity’s undermining of evangelicalism and today’s major social issues.

The fundamental shift of evangelicalism to this unholy trinity of cultural ideologies is destroying the church, both theologically and practically. Marxism is destroying the church by reducing its evangelistic charity programs to mere wealth redistribution. (Marxism is an umbrella term for any political, historical, economic, or sociological ideology having its roots in Marx’s materialistic system and which seeks to transform capitalism into some form of socialism or communism.[4]) For example, back to school ministries have become popular across the country, in which churches distribute free backpacks containing school supplies to the poor.[5] While this is a good and noble endeavor in line with biblical principles of caring for the poor (Prov 28:27; Jas 1:27), both why and how one goes about it matters (Isa 61:1; 1 Cor 13:3). Some churches are using these back to school programs to preach the Gospel,[6] but others have explicitly interpreted the government’s role in Romans 13:4–5 as wealth redistribution rather than the enforcement of basic morality[7] to justify giving out free backpacks without any sharing of the faith. Not only does such Marxist theological motivation and practice run counter to the church’s biblical mandate in the Great Commission (Matt 28:18–20), but it also runs counter to historic church practice[8] and has resulted in church decline and closures.[9]

Multiculturalism is destroying the church’s soteriology (theology of salvation) and practice of evangelism. (Multiculturalism is a socio-political ideology, closely associated with “identity politics”[10] that has its roots in Marxism[11] and is concerned with: socio-political-economic recognition, respect, and equality of ethnic-religious minorities through anti-assimilationist tolerance[12] and wealth and power redistribution.[13]) Despite those who falsely believe that multiculturalism simply affirms diversity,[14] through its defining slogan, “all cultures are equal,”[15] this ideology entails the biblically inconsistent concepts of “cultural relativism” (every culture, including their religions, are equally true, valuable, and moral)[16] and “cultural imperialism” (“the imposition of one dominant culture on other cultures”).[17] Multiculturalism’s pressure to accept all cultures/religions as equal has resulted in many evangelicals defecting from the Bible’s explicit and plain claims to ultimate or exclusive truth (John 14:6; 17:17) and sole salvation in Christ (Acts 4:12; 1 Tim. 2:5). As a result, some evangelicals have moved toward pluralistic positions affirming salvation in all religions.[18] Similarly, multiculturalism’s notion of cultural imperialism has stifled many, especially younger believers, from practicing evangelism (Matt. 28:18-20) because they do not want to commit the social faux pas of intolerantly imposing their views on others.[19]

Genderism is destroying the church theologically by negating the doctrine of the creation order and practically by driving men out of both leadership in the church and the church itself. (Genderism is a term borrowed from contemporary secular gender studies which is redefined as referring to the false and anti-Christian family of ideologies consisting of feminism, homosexuality, transgenderism, transsexuality, and other gender related ideologies relating the LGBTQA++ positions that deny the creation order binary definition of male and female according to physical sex.)[20] There is a growing acceptance of genderism’s view that gender is a social construct (a product of the imagination),[21] and this in turn is erasing the biblical doctrine that through the act of creation, God ordered reality into certain spheres with distinct purposes such as the creation of people with two biological/physiological sexes, male and female (Gen 1:27), which have specific functions (Gen. 2:15, 18, 24–25; 1 Tim. 2:11–15).[22] Practically, and with regard to feminism, numerous and historic studies show that more women have attended church and have held more positions of lay leadership than men.[23] As genderism in the form of feminism increases the number of women in leadership and especially the clergy, several recent publications demonstrate that men have left or will not attend church as a result.[24]

The unholy trinity underlies nearly every major news story involving social issues currently being discussed. While many of these issues have important ethical implications involving explicit biblical principles, the unholy trinity is so pervasive and is having such a pernicious impact on the church that it overshadows other concerns in most cases. For example, while there may be self-defense (Exod 22:2-3) and public safety (Rom 13:4) concerns related to gun control, the recent example of a total weapons ban in Venezuela indicates that gun control is really an intentional Marxist ploy to advance a biblically inconsistent form of government.[25] Further, although there may be ethical issues of oppression (Psalm 10:17–18) and poverty (Mark 14:7), as well as obeying government’s laws (Rom 13:1–7) involved with illegal immigration, Marxists are intentionally using multiculturalism’s “celebration of diversity”[26] for several purposes: as an excuse to import people, to encourage immigrants’ desire not to assimilate in order to create a social crisis Marxists plan to solve with a totalitarian solution, and to garner votes to establish that collectivist result.[27] Finally, just as secular feminists are leveraging the #Metoo Movement[28] to advance their agenda, Christians for Biblical Equality (CBE) publicly announced in a series of emails to its constituents that CBE is opportunistically using both the #MeToo Movement[29] and the perhaps lesser-known #ChurchToo Movement[30] to intentionally advance their genderist takeover of the flagship academic evangelical organization, the Evangelical Theological Society, an influential scholarly group for the professors who train our pastors.[31]

Future essays will continue to explain the biblical inconsistency of the unholy trinity, but one should not lose sight of this ideology’s theological and practical destruction of both society and church as illustrated in this article.



[3]We began by responding to the most popular Marxist prooftexts, the constellation of passage in Acts (Acts 2:42–47; 4:32–37; 5:4; 6:1). Cf. https://epecarticles.com/2018/12/07/fundamental-shift-part-3-1-marxism-prooftexts-ron-m-rothenberg-ph-d/; https://epecarticles.com/2018/12/07/fundamental-shift-part-3-1-marxism-prooftexts-ron-m-rothenberg-ph-d/; https://epecarticles.com/2019/01/26/fundamental-shift-part-3-2-marxism-prooftexts-ron-m-rothenberg/; https://epecarticles.com/2019/03/27/fundamental-shift-part-3-3-the-question-of-marxist-prooftexts-ron-rothenberg-ph-d/; https://epecarticles.com/2019/04/30/fundamental-shift-part-3-4-debunking-marxist-prooftexts-ronald-rothenberg-ph-d/; https://epecarticles.com/2019/06/15/fundamental-shift-part-3-5-debunking-marxist-prooftexts-ron-rothenberg-ph-d/;https://epecarticles.com/2019/07/29/fundamental-shift-part-3-6-debunking-marxist-prooftexts-ron-rothenberg-ph-d/;https://epecarticles.com/2019/08/25/fundamental-shift-part-3-6-debunking-marxist-prooftexts-ronald-m-rothenberg-ph-d/In the Communist Manifesto, Marx claimed, “has not Christianity declaimed against private property” (CM2, s.v. “II Proletarians and Communists”); cp. John Frederick Denison Maurice, “Tracts on Christian Socialism,” The Eclectic Review1, no. 93 (1851): 73.

[4]Ofelia Schutte, “Marxist Thought in Latin America,” in Concise Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Edward Craig (New York: Routledge, 2000), 533–34; cp. Karl Marx, Zur Kritik Der Politischen Ökonomie, ed. Karl Kautsky, 2nd ed., Internationale Bibliothek, vol. 30 (Stuttgart: J. H. W. Dietz, 1903), xi; J. Wilczynski, An Encyclopedic Dictionary of Marxism, Socialism and Communism: Economic, Philosophical, Political and Sociological Theories, Concepts, Institutions and Practices—Classical and Modern, East-West Relations Included(London: De Gruyter, 1981), 343.


[6]For example, Director of Missions at Merritt/Summerhill Baptist Associations, Curt Hampton, claimed that there were “21 professions of faith that occurred at” their free backpack outreach. https://christianindex.org/back-school-means-back-backpacks-church-ministries/#.Xahz7uhKhhE

[7]For the traditional and correct interpretation of enforcement of basic morality see: Colin G. Kruse, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, PNTC (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 2012), 495–96; Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, NICNT (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1996), 800–01; Leon Morris, The Epistle to the Romans, PNTC (Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 1988), 463–64. For an interpretation consistent with Marxist wealth redistribution see: Redekop claims, “We desire to see good deeds carried out by governmental authorities, who gather and then redistribute, on our behalf, a substantial part of our income. According to Romans 13:4, that is precisely what God expects governments to do.”John H. Redekop, Politics under God(Harrisonburg, VA: Herald, 2007), 36. Cp. Robert Jewett, Romans: A Commentary, ed. Eldon Jay Epp, Hermeneia: A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible(Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 793; Bruce W. Winter, “The Public Honouring of Christian Benefactors: Romans 13.3–4 and 1 Peter 2.14–15,” JSNT34 (1988): 87.

[8]For example, McCarty’s 1977 study claimed, “The traditional mission program dictates that attendance at daily chapel services is a mandatory prerequisite beforethe transient can obtain food or lodgingfor a given day.” Emphasis added. Patrick F. McCarty, “The Transient Rescue Mission: A Study in Cultural Adaptation” (M.A. Thesis, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE, 1977), 8. Further, and as representative of other similar current ministries, the ministry policy of the Union Rescue Mission in Los Angeles, CA states on their website, “Our preaching is mandatory, but any response to that preaching is strictly voluntary. No one is treated or cared for any differently based on their response.” https://urm.org/about/faqs/being-a-guest/For similar practices in other comparable ministries see: http://www.ebrm.org/ministries#PreachingToTheLost;https://gospelrescuemissiongp.org/about/;https://www.anchoragerescue.org/;http://atlantarescuemission.org/our-programs-2/;http://www.graceevan.org/missions/ministry-initiative-teams/calvary-rescue-mit/;

[9]Sources demonstrating that historically Marxism has resulted in church decline:Russell Jeung, Faithful Generations: Race and New Asian American Churches(New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2005), Kindle ed., ch. 7: Conclusion; Harold E. Quinley, “The Dilemma of an Activist Church: Protestant Religion in the Sixties and Seventies,” JSSR13, no. 1 (March, 1974): 1, 13, 19–20; Mark Wild, Street Meeting: Multiethnic Neighborhoods in Early Twentieth-Century Los Angeles, Paperback ed. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008), 89. Sources denying Marxism results in church decline: Walter Rauschenbusch, Christianity and the Social Crisis(New York: Harper & Row, 1964), 330, 340–41; idem, Christianizing the Social Order(New York: Macmillan, 1913), 320; Reginald Smith, “Does Social Justice Contribute to Church Decline?,”  (2018. https://network.crcna.org/biblical-justice/does-social-justice-contribute-church-decline); C. Peter Wagner, Church Growth and the Whole Gospel: A Biblical Mandate(Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 1998), 195–97.

[10]George Ritzer, Introduction to Sociology, 2nd ed. (Los Angeles: SAGE, 2014), 124.Identity politics involves the use of collective political clout by groups based on gender, race, ethnicity, religious beliefs, or other shared traits or interests to advance the agenda and strengthen the social position of one particular group at the intentional expenseof others, such as Christians. Gabriele Griffin, A Dictionary of Gender Studies, Oxford Quick Reference Online (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017), s.v. “identity politics”; Ritzer, Introduction, 124. Identity politics is also closely associated with “politically correct language.”Calhoun, Dictionary of the Social Sciences, 323.Political correctness refers to “the avoidance of language and behaviors that discriminate against others by derogating them” and “is often used pejoratively to suggest that freedom of speech is censored by disallowing particular phrases, for example, that have prejudicial connotations.” Gabriele Griffin, A Dictionary of Gender Studies, s.v. “political correctness”.

[11]Massimo Borghesi, “Interculturality and Christian Mission in Today’s Society,” in Retrieving Origins and the Claim of Multiculturalism, ed. Antonio Lopez and Javier Prades (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2014), 138; Sarah Glynn, “Marxism and Multiculturalism,” Institute of Geography Online Paper Series: GEO-019  (2006. [on-line]. Accessed 30 Sept. 2015. Available from http://www.geos.ed.ac.uk/homes/sglynn/Multiculturalism.pdf/.): 1.

[12]Calhoun, Dictionary of the Social Sciences, 323; David Jary and Julia Jary, Harpercollins Dictionary of Sociology, ed. Eugene Ehrlich, Harpercollins Dictionary Series (New York: HarperPerennial, 1991), 319; Rattansi, Multiculturalism, 11.

[13]Guido Bolaffi and others, eds., Dictionary of Race, Ethnicity and Culture(Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2003), s.v. “Multiculturalism”; Allan G. Johnson, The Blackwell Dictionary of Sociology: A User’s Guide to Sociological Language, 2nd ed. (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2000), 202; Michael Vavrus, Diversity and Education: A Critical Multicultural Approach, ed. James A. Banks, Multicultural Education (New York: Teachers College Press, 2015), 2, 104.

[14]Many Christians falsely believe with D. A. Carson that there is a non-ideological definition of multiculturalism which simply affirms “cultural and perhaps ethnic pluralism,” but this simplistic idea has little if any support in the literature on the subject. Emphasis added. D. A. Carson, Christ and Culture Revisited(Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 2008), 76–77.

[15]Bolaffi and others, eds., Dictionary, s.v. “Multiculturalism”; Hirsch and others, The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know, 438; Vavrus, Diversity, 30.

[16]Anthony Giddens and others, Introduction to Sociology, Seagull 9th ed. (New York: W. W. Norton, 2013), 57–59; Louis Pojman, How Should We Live?: An Introduction to Ethics(Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 2004), 49, 54.

[17]Ritzer, Introduction, 128; Ritzer, Introduction, 125; Michael Vavrus, Diversity and Education: A Critical Multicultural Approach, ed. James A. Banks, Multicultural Education (New York: Teachers College Press, 2015), 30.

[18]Consequently, and as representative of the shift in evangelicalism, some well-known figures have defected from evangelism to embrace a full-blown pluralism—Langdon B. Gilkey, John Hick, Alan Race—while others have migrated to a mediating position (inclusivism) that is also not biblical: Clark H. Pinnock, Terrance L. Tiessen, S. Mark Heim, Roger Olson, John Sanders, John G. Stackhouse. D. A. Carson, The Gagging of God: Christianity Confronts Pluralism, 15th ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2011), 139–367;Langdon Gilkey, “Plurality and Its Theological Implications,” in The Myth of Christian Uniqueness: Toward a Pluralistic Theology of Religions, ed. John Hick and Paul F. Knitter (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2005), 37–50; John Hick, God and the Universe of Faiths: Essays in the Philosophy of Religion, Kindle ed., s.v. “Preface to the 1993 Reissue”; Alister E. McGrath, Historical Theology: An Introduction to the History of Christian Thought, 2nded. (Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013), 261–66; S. Mark Heim, Salvations: Truth and Difference in Religion, ed. Paul F. Knitter, Faith Meets Faith: Orbis Series in Interreligious Dialogue (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1995), 6, 10, 131; Roger E. Olson, Reformed and Always Reforming: The Postconservative Approach to Evangelical Theology, ed. Craig A. Evans and Lee Martin McDonald, Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), Kindle ed. ch. 3; Clark Pinnock, A Wideness in God’s Mercy: The Finality of Jesus Christ in a World of Religions, 15–16; Alan Race, Christians and Religious Pluralism: Patterns in the Christian Theology of Religions(London: SCM, 1983), 92; John Sanders, No Other Name: An Investigation into the Destiny of the Unevangelized, Reprint ed. (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1992), 2–4, 206, esp. 4; Terrance L. Tiessen, Who Can Be Saved?: Reassessing Salvation in Christ and World Religions(Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2004)., 31–35. As further evidence of this destructive shift to pluralism are Croatian-American and Yale theologian, Miroslav Volf, and the current and 62ndpresident of the Southern Baptist Convention, J. D. Greear, who have both affirmed,in complete contradiction of Scripture (2 Chr 15:3; Ps 96:4–5; Jer 10:8–10), the pluralistic claim that Muslims and Christians worship the same god. J. D. Greear, Breaking the Islam Code: Understanding the Soul Questions of Every Muslim(Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 2010), 58–59; Miroslav Volf, Allah: A Christian Response(New York: HarperCollins, 2011), 11. While various authors offer numerous reasons or motivations for this soteriological aspect of the shift in evangelicalism, there is some consensus that a major contemporary factor is that evangelicals have capitulated to the cultural concerns of multiculturalism. Langdon Gilkey, “Plurality and Its Theological Implications,” in The Myth of Christian Uniqueness: Toward a Pluralistic Theology of Religions, ed. John Hick and Paul F. Knitter (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2005), 37; Alister E. McGrath, Historical Theology: An Introduction to the History of Christian Thought, 2nd ed. (Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013), 268; Harold A. Netland and Keith E. Johnson, “Why Is Religious Pluralism Fun—and Dangerous?,” in Telling the Truth: Evangelizing Postmoderns, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000), Kindle ed., ch. 3.

[19]Borghesi, Interculturality, 138; Harold A. Netland and Keith E. Johnson, “Why Is Religious Pluralism Fun—and Dangerous?,” in Telling the Truth: Evangelizing Postmoderns, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000), Kindle ed., ch. 3.

[20]According to Airton and Thorne, “legendary sociologist” Erving Goffman(1922–1982) coined the term “genderism” in a 1977 study. Liz Airton, “Untangling ‘Gender Diversity’: Genderism and Its Discontents (I.E., Everyone),” in Diversity and Multiculturalism: A Reader, ed. Shirley R. Steinberg (New York: Peter Lang, 2009), 242, note #15; Barrie Thorne, Gender Play: Girls and Boys in School(New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1993), 85. In Goffman’s original use, the term simply referred to “a sex-class linked individual behavioral practice.” Erving Goffman, “The Arrangement between the Sexes,” Theory and Society4, no. 3 (Aut. 1977): 305.

Subsequent to Goffman’s minting of the word, Airton tracks its history through the educational and psychological fields and finally into gender studies where it has numerous definitions and even claimants for originating the term. Airton opts for using the definition from a 2005 study on “transphobia” by psychologists Hill and Willoughby. Airton, Untangling ‘Gender Diversity’: Genderism and Its Discontents (I.E., Everyone), 242, note #15. Airton’s decision appears wise as Hill and Willoughby’s definition is seemingly one of the most widely cited in the literature related to gender studies and also because it is very comprehensive. Darryl B. Hill and Brian L. B. Willoughby, “The Development and Validation of the Genderism and Transphobia Scale,” Sex Roles53, no. 7/8 (Oct. 2005): 534.

[21]Judith Butler, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, Reprint ed., Routledge Classics (New York: Routledge, 2007), 8–10; G. Griffin, A Dictionary of Gender Studies, Kindle ed., Oxford Quick Reference Online (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017), s.v. “Gender Studies”.

[22]C. Stephen Evans, Pocket Dictionary of Apologetics & Philosophy of Religion(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002), s.v. “creation order”; John D. Harvey, “Nature, Natural,” in Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology, ed. Walter A. Elwell of Baker Reference Library (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1996), 552–53; Anthony A. Hoekema, Created in God’s Image, Paperback ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), 21–31.

[23]Barna Research Group, “Five Factors Changing Women’s Relationship with Churches,”  (June, 2015. https://www.barna.com/research/five-factors-changing-womens-relationship-with-churches/); Ram Cnaan and others, The Invisible Caring Hand: American Congregations and the Provision of Welfare(New York: New York Univerity Press, 2002), 49; Pew Research Center, “The Gender Gap in Religion around the World: Women Are Generally More Religious Than Men, Particularly among Christians,”  (March, 2016. https://www.pewforum.org/2016/03/22/the-gender-gap-in-religion-around-the-world/), 5; Marta Trzebiatowska and Steve Bruce, Why Are Women More Religious Than Men?(Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2012), 5, 21.

[24]Thomas G. Bandy, 95 Questions to Shape the Future of Your Church: Tools to Fulfill the Cngregation’s Mission(Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 2009), 96; David Murrow, Why Men Hate Going to Church, Revised ed. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2011), 18; Leon J. Podles, The Church Impotent: The Feminization of Christianity(Dallas, TX: Spence, 1999), xv, 12; Larry A. Witham, Who Shall Lead Them?: The Future of Ministry in America(New York: Oxford University Press, 2005), 45.

[25]Hollie McKay, “Venezuelans Regret Gun Ban, ‘a Declaration of War against an Unarmed Population’,”  (Dec 14. https://www.foxnews.com/world/venezuelans-regret-gun-prohibition-we-could-have-defended-ourselves).

[26]Allan G. Johnson, The Blackwell Dictionary of Sociology: A User’s Guide to Sociological Language, 2nd ed. (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2000), 202; Michael Vavrus, Diversity and Education: A Critical Multicultural Approach, ed. James A. Banks, Multicultural Education (New York: Teachers College Press, 2015), 27, 82, 127.

[27]For a similar judgment see: Ann Coulter, Adios, America: The Left’s Plan to Turn Our Country into a Third World Hellhole(Washington, DC: Regnery, 2015), Kindle ed., ch. 5, 6, 17; Megan M. Ringel, Cristian G. Rodriguez, and Peter H. Ditto, “What Is Right Is Right: A Three-Part Account of How Ideology Shapes Factual Belief,” in Belief Systems and the Perception of Reality, ed. Bastiaan T. Rutjens and Mark J. Brandt, Current Issues in Social Psychology (New York: Routledge, 2018), Kindle ed., ch. 1; J. D. Hayworth and Joe Eule, Whatever It Takes: Illegal Immigration, Border Security, and the War on Terror, Ebook ed. (Washington, DC: Regnery, 2012), 51–52. For contradictory claims see: Aviva Chomsky, Undocumented: How Immigration Became Illegal(Boston, MA: Beacon, 2014), 50–51; Alejandro Portes and John Walton, Labor, Class, and the International System, Studies in Social Discontinuity (New York: Academic, 2013), 57; Mathias Sajovitz, The African Diaspora in the Austrian Political Economy: A Marxist Analysis(Raleigh, NC: Lulu, 2008), 19–20.

[28]Civil rights activist, Tarana Burke (1973–), is credited with founding the #MeToo Movement, as she coined the phrase “Me Too” in 2006 for her Just Be, Inc. organization which promotes “healing among women of colorwho had experienced sexual violence or exploitation” and “LGBTQindividuals.” “In 2017, when [sic.] a series of female celebrities came forward with allegations of sexual misconduct against Harvey Weinstein,” actress and activist Alyssa Milano (1972–) popularized the #MeToo hashtag on her Twitter account, broadening the movement into an international phenomenon. Emphasis added. Laurie Collier Hillstrom, The #Metoo Movement, 21st-Century Turning Points (Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2019), 104–05, 126–28. It should be noted from the italicized words, that the #MeToo Movement deals not just with genderism, but the entire unholy trinity, including also Marxism and multiculturalism.

[29]CBE president Mimi Haddad, asserted, “It’s time for a seismic shift in how the evangelical church, and especially the Evangelical Theological Society (ETS), engages women leaders. That’s because ETS influenceswhether women are accepted as pastorsand elders by denominations, seminaries, and even local churches. This year, key advocates will join ETS to assess the church’s complicity in #MeToo and #ChurchToo. This conversation is pivotal.

CBE will champion changeat this November’s ETS annual meeting with these strategies: The Evangelicals and Gender session, ‘Sexual Abuse, Gender, and Power: Developing a Theological Response for the Church and Academy.’” Emphasis added. Mimi Haddad, “#Metoo and ETS,” to CBE Constituency (2 October 2018). CBE’s October Newsletter stated, “It’s time for a seismic shift in how the evangelical church, and especially the Evangelical Theological Society (ETS), engages women leaders and interprets Scripture. The convergence of egalitarian momentum from previous ETS meetings with the #MeToo and #ChurchToo movements is pivotal. CBE will champion even more changeat this November’s ETS meeting.” Emphasis added. CBE International, “CBE Newsletter: October,” to CBE Constituency (6 October 2018). See also: CBE International, “What Does Our Theology Have to Do with #Metoo?,” to CBE Constituency (31 October 2018). CBE claims to spend “over $11,000” a year on its efforts to advance not only genderism, but the entire unholy trinity at ETS. Mimi Haddad, “Exploring Gender and Race at ETS,” to CBE Constituency (13 October 2019). cp. idem, “#Metoo and ETS,” to CBE Constituency (2 October 2018);

[30]Bloggers and true believers in the unholy trinity, Hannah Paasch and Emily Joy are credited with starting the #ChurchToo movement in 2017 on Twitter as a so-called “evangelical” action “dedicated to fighting the Christian power structures that enable abuse in the church.” Lyz Lenz, God Land: A Story of Faith, Loss, and Renewal in Middle America(Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2019), 119. In tweets in June 2018, Emily Joy stated her belief in the unholy trinity and the fact that #ChurchToo is about a Marxist overthrow of orthodoxy: “@hannahpaasch & myselfhave been very clearfrom the beginning that #ChurchToo isn’t just about women and/or sexism, and it isn’t just about giving a space for survivors to tell their stories, though it definitely is about both of those things” and “#Church Too is aboutdismantlingthe entire theological and political structures that allows these abuses to happen in the first place. #ChurchToo is feminist, sex-positive, pro-LGBTQ,anti-white supremacy, and committed to centering marginalizedvoices.” Emphasis added. https://twitter.com/emilyjoypoetry/status/1003677492912246784?lang=en. Similarly, Hannah Paasch stated in an article for the Huffington Post, “We are long overdue for a theological upheavalin the evangelical church, not just one in which women, non-binary and transgenderedpeople—particularly those of color—are thrown the occasional associate pastorate position, but one in which people of all genders are celebrated and protected.” Emphasis added. Hannah Paasch, Sexual Abuse Happens in #Churchtoo—We’re Living Proof: And Purity Culture Teaches Women That It’s All Their Fault(Dec, 2017.


[31]This comment should not be taken out of context nor construed as a denial that there is a real problem which both #MeToo and #ChurchToo are addressing. However, it is unfortunate that genderists are the ones addressing the real tragedy of abuse in Christians ministries and many complementarians have been dismissive of and/or resistant to acknolwege much less deal with this issue. The problem is not with complementarianism itself as CBE spins it, but rather the public scandals such as complementarians, Andy Savage and Chris Conlee of Highpoint Church in Memphis, TN and Paige Patterson of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, TX as well as liberals, president Bill Clinton and film producer Harvey Weinstein, and so-called Christian feminist, Bill Hybels, illustrate that abuseis an issue of sin which is perpretated by, impacts, and should be opposed by all people. Kevin Giles, “Complementarian Theology in Crisis,” in Eyes to See and Ears to Hear Women: Sexual Assault as a Crisis of Evangelical Theology(Minneapolis, MN: CBE International, 2018), 60, 76; Ruth Graham, “How the Evangelical Culture of Forgiveness Hurts Victims of Sexual Abuse,” (Jan 2018. https://slate.com/human-interest/2018/01/andy-savage-and-the-evangelical-culture-of-forgiveness.html); Samuel D. James, “Is #Metoo an Indictment of Complementarianism?,” (June 2018. https://letterandliturgy.com/2018/06/07/is-metoo-an-indictment-of-complementarianism/).