Note: Ryan Turnipseed is an undergraduate student at Oklahoma State University. He is an LCMS Lutheran, and can be found on Twitter, and Youtube. ~ Ed.

Recently I came across a Twitter thread made by one of my friends that has gained momentum. The content is simple. The gentleman has, without commentary, posted dozens of screenshots of mostly American Evangelicals lambasting seemingly everything as being idolatry. Allow me to clarify my intentions at the outset. Christians should rightly point out idolatry when idolatry exists, but that is not what these American Evangelicals are doing. In fact, I must admit that I am very skeptical as to the motivations of these authors. As of the time of writing this, according to the slew of authors in the thread, the following are the great idols of American Christendom: marriage and motherhood, family, patriotism, certainty, security, masculinity, biblical womanhood, guns, home, Christian Nationalism, “Christian Trumpism”, freedom, land, the Bible itself, homemaking, heterosexuality, church, sports, exercise, eating healthy, believing in the inerrancy of the Bible, Whiteness, law and order, automobiles, sleep in motherhood, religion itself, the Constitution, Star Wars, Duck Dynasty and the freedom articulated therein, the “Narrative of American Christianity”, and place or Nativism. 

Aside from the article on Star Wars, all of these were published in the last fifteen years with a pattern hopefully glaringly obvious for the reader. All of these recent “idols” are key aspects of what is commonly labeled as “the right” and Western Civilization. More importantly, though, the majority of these “idols” are core to Christianity and the life of a Christian. 

For anyone reading this, the theological aspects are probably easiest to counter. The battle for Biblical inneracy and the necessity of Scripture has been raging for centuries now. Much newer in popular disputes, but still easy for the Christian to argue for, is the Biblical role of women, the sinfulness of sodomy, the necessity of family and church, the sanctity of marriage, and the need for Christianity as a religion. The authors attacking these specific doctrines are very direct and open in their opposition to Christianity, which makes opposing these false teachings easier.

This is not all that is under attack, though, which brings us to a new group of authors much more difficult to oppose. Throughout all Christian history, we have seen many groups that claim to be orthodox Christians that teach nothing but the most pernicious doctrines. Early in Christian history, these false teachers came from within the church, disputing the Trinity and nature of Christ and who can administer the Sacraments. During the French Revolution, in Roman Catholic France, Christians faced a new dillema. The Civil Constitution passed by the National Assembly subordinated the Roman Catholic clergy to the revolutionary government. It is easy to look back and plainly call this a Roman problem, as they’re one of few churches that relies on an international hierarchy of clergy, but this is not the issue. The issue is a revolutionary, atheistic government subordinating the church, and more to the point, part of the clergy going along with it. These are just a few examples of many, as Christianity has a history of not just being attacked from very obvious external threats, but also from subversives who claim to be and look like they are from the inside. It should also be worth noting, as we look at modern Christian history, these subversives rarely start by attacking something obvious. Historical Criticism, for instance, didn’t start by advocating for transgender bishops and dressing in drag in front of children. Rather, it attacked something basic and vital, the inerrancy of scripture. It attacked inerrancy through subversive means as well, with its adherents claiming that the method was just supposed to help gain understanding of the Bible through its own context. What proceeded from there is now known as modern Liberal Christianity. 

Our contemporary adversaries have stronger strategies. One of the aforementioned “idols” was Whiteness. This does not just reference someone’s heritage and skincolor, a very insidious and vile attack on its own, but rather White culture and civilization as defined by the left. Attacking “Whiteness” is attacking everything from mathematics to traditional family structures to professionalism to non-modern Christianity. Instead of using the old strategy of attacking something in a discreet, “reasonable” manner, the modern adversaries of Christianity create their own lexicon of categories using words that everyone has been taught to dislike and attack everything that supposedly falls into those categories.

The same tactic is used with “Christian Nationalism,” the media’s favorite Christian boogeyman. For anyone that has studied history in the slightest, what is being touted as “Christian Nationalism” by the media would seem very commonplace in most Christian societies. “Theocratic” policies like prayer in schools, bans on sodomy, and bans on divorce were only repealed in the last sixty years, but that is not all that is under fire. “Christian Nationalists” are also abominable for having a fierce love for their localities and their people, breaking with modern political orthodoxy that seeks to destroy local identity. Whenever Christians are slandered for making an idol out of evil, scary “Christian Nationalism,” the only way to satiate the slanderer is to completely abandon all intention of ever having Christian laws and governance. Anything less is Christian Nationalism.

Placed alongside Whiteness and Christian Nationalism are the “idols” of masculinity, exercise, and healthy eating. At first, it might not be obvious why these are in the list. They become even more confounding if we are to assume only the best of intentions in the authors, but when we dispel such unreasonable assumptions and see the obvious attack on Western Society, these “idols” fit right in. This is a direct, worldly attack on the Biblical, traditional role of men in society and in the Church. Not only is it an attack on the role, but it is also attacking the potential of men to become the best they can. 

Remember, these are not external attacks on Christianity and Christendom, but the very fact that these are called “idols” means that the authors are attacking from the inside, masquerading as good Christians. They must be opposed if you care about your congregation not taking a dive into Liberal Evangelicalism. Opposing these attacks is not easy. The social power being exercised in accusing a modern Christian of idolatry on any of these grounds is the same social power that one can find being exercised in The Crucible, with accusations of witchcraft. The only difference is that in The Crucible, the characters accuse each other of witchcraft due to petty familial and property disputes. Those throwing around the accusations of idolatry in this context have no such motive; Their intention is to subvert Christianity out of a want to look socially acceptable or out of hate for Truth. 

The solution is not to bend to the whims of the accusers and dance around or entirely abandon family, locality, sound doctrine, Christian laws, and “Whiteness,” but rather to condemn those who, in framing Christianity as idolatry, have made an idol out of pointing out idolatry.