I recently posted about the leaders of the CN movement being wolves and how they should be treated as such (not simply wayward brothers). This Samuel Sey situation though has been the final nail in the coffin. I (naively) believed there were many genuine Christians caught up in it. I now believe there are likely very few genuine Christians in the movement at all. It has all the hallmarks of an actual cult. It has morphed from a movement into it's own type of religion, and should be viewed as such. It is truly evil and filled with the most vile and wicked men. Men who exalt themselves, and revel in their pride and self-righteousness. Men who hate others, who debase fellow Image bearers. These men blaspheme the name of Christ by all the evil filth that pours from their hearts and is spoken or written by those claiming His name. If there ever was anything "Christian" about christian nationalism, is is now completely gone. If you are in this movement, flee to Christ before it's too late.

Eric, I have never a single time promoted James Lindsey. To my knowledge, I've never listened to a single lecture or even interview he has ever done. To this very moment I know nothing of any mistress, Nazi or otherwise. I've never met him, had any communication with him, and in all honesty, am not even sure I would even recognize him if I saw his picture. You, on the other hand, are about to share the platform with men who currently utter some of the most vile and disgusting things I have ever heard in all my born days. They are sexual perverts and have blasphemed Christ and you know this. But you are going to share this platform with them knowingly, deliberately, with full knowledge and do it under the banner of "Christ is King." You may sit down now.

"God, I thank You that I am not like other men—liars, lawbreakers, deceivers, or even this publisher who raised money for that sinner's family." The discussion surrounding Samuel Sey's detention and impending deportation has been some of the most disgusting I have ever seen around here, and that's saying something. Protestia initially reported what sources told us (and, obviously, what we hoped was true): that Sey's detention stemmed from an immigration paperwork problem rather than his error. When DHS contradicted that account, we updated our reporting. Ordinarily, no big deal. Outlets update info all the time. And whether or not Sey was at fault, and no matter his legal status, his family is clearly in serious financial need. Yet what do we see? Supposed Christians demanding apologies/retractions for our directing potential donations to Sey's family because the claim that he was here legally is being contradicted. Some people are suggesting that his family is profiting from this somehow, or that Protestia was "fundraising for a lawbreaker." Since when did Christian charity become conditional upon innocence, ideological agreement, or personal approval? What Bible are you reading? Christ commands us to love our enemies (Luke 6:27–36). Paul commands us to feed them when they're hungry (Romans 12:20). James condemns those who withhold material assistance from needy brothers (James 2:15–17). Proverbs 24:17 forbids rejoicing when an enemy falls. Yet we seem to have no end of online professing Christians (including pastors!) seemingly delighted by Sey's predicament and demanding financial assistance for his family be shut off. And here's the particularly grotesque irony: Many of these men acknowledge that their black, Ghanaian-born theological opponent is their brother in Christ, while carrying on as if Scripture has nothing to say about this. But the household of God isn't segregated by ancestry, no matter how much some seem to want it to be. And Galatians 6:10 commands us to do good to all, especially those of the household of faith. Sey's wife and children didn't violate immigration law. And even if Sey knowingly broke the law, that doesn't disqualify him from Christian charity. If the fundraiser contains inaccurate information, correct it. Donors deserve the truth. But don't pretend that wrongdoing (even deliberate, which has not yet been demonstrated) eliminates a family's needs. Jesus condemned the Pharisees for neglecting the weightier matters of the law: justice, mercy, and faithfulness (Matthew 23:23). Yet some of you are so eager to "gotcha" Sey for apparently breaking the law that you've forgotten the law of Christ, or that you can uphold immigration law without abandoning Christian charity. Protestia will always err on the side of Christian charity. We have a history of financially supporting people who don't like us (and have openly lied about us) when they truly need it. In this case, I'd argue that if your support for the Sey family's obvious financial need turns on whether the immigration problems were his fault, you should probably keep your money. God doesn't want it.

Did people not really know how vile "Christian Nationalists" are up until now? They are the type of people that should be marked and avoided. Pray for them, but don't associate with them. Lovingly point them to Christ, but don't let them think what they're doing is fine and dandy

I have received a statement from DHS regarding Sam Sey: “On October 21, ICE arrested Samuel Sey, an illegal alien from Ghana, at the Columbus International Airport. Sey entered the United States legally in 2022 but overstayed his length of admission by over four years, in violation of our nation’s laws. Sey has no pending applications and accepted voluntary departure. He will remain in ICE custody until removed from the United States.   “We do not pick and choose which laws to enforce or where to enforce them.   “We encourage all illegal aliens to take control of their departure with the CBP Home App. The United States is offering illegal aliens $3,000 and a free flight to self-deport now. We encourage every person here illegally to take advantage of this offer and reserve the chance to come back to the U.S. the right legal way to live the American dream. If not, you will be arrested and deported without a chance to return.” - DHS SPOX As I get more information, I will update.

It looks like @SlowToWrite overstayed his legal residence in the US by years. And apparently, he may not be legal in Canada either, as DHS has described him as "from Ghana." He is now voluntarily deporting. Does he deserve this? Yes. The difficulty for his family is on him - not our immigration laws, nor on his theological or political views. The GiveSendGo fundraiser's claim that he is a legal resident is false. Yet, he only "got what he deserved" in terms of his facing the legal consequences for his failure to follow immigration laws, not because his views or his color warrant removal.

Social media back-and-forths on Christian Nationalism-related matters suffer from a seemingly insurmountable problem: participants routinely conflate words and opinions with actions and violence. But instead of issuing trigger warnings and demanding safe spaces, we cry "slander!", issue a Ninth Commandment proclamation against our foes, and self-righteously demand that the rest of the Internet enforce our verdict. It's a peculiar form of Christianized speech policing, where criticism, disagreement, rebuke, or even an uncharitable interpretation is elevated from something we dislike into a moral offense against God Himself. And once we've declared ourselves the victims of such an offense, we assume the authority to adjudicate the matter, pronounce judgment, and demand that everyone else recognize the guilt of the accused. Of course, genuine slander exists. Bearing false witness is sinful, and Christians are obligated to speak truthfully about their neighbors (Exodus 20:16; Ephesians 4:25). But criticism is not inherently slander, disagreement is not violence, and even poorly formed, unfair, or materially false speech is not automatically evidence of malicious intent. The moral evaluation of someone's words requires considerably more care than simply announcing that we have been wronged. The tell is when public Christian figures begin treating criticism of themselves as actual material harm—a kind of violence or violation of their rights—rather than speech to be answered, corrected, or, when appropriate, rebuked. This pious pre-adjudication does something rather convenient: it rhetorically transforms an opponent from someone who might be mistaken, unfair, or even genuinely sinful into a morally disqualified enemy. And once someone has been placed into that category, apparently all bets are off. The critic is no longer simply wrong. He's a liar, a slanderer, a wicked man, an enemy of righteousness. His arguments need not be represented accurately, his motives may be freely presumed, and his character can be reduced to whatever contemptuous category best serves the occasion. Caricature, ridicule, insinuation, and crass generalizations become permissible because, after all, look what kind of person we're dealing with! The initial accusation of slander thus becomes the mechanism by which we grant ourselves permission to slander. The designation of an enemy becomes the mechanism by which we excuse treating him in ways Christ expressly forbids. And this is where the whole exercise becomes especially absurd. The Ninth Commandment does not cease to apply to us because we believe someone else has violated it. Scripture condemns not merely lying, but malicious speech, false accusations, and the misuse of the tongue (James 3:5–10; Colossians 3:8–9). We are forbidden to repay evil for evil (Romans 12:17), commanded to avoid reviling in return when reviled (1 Peter 3:9), and explicitly instructed by Christ to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us (Matthew 5:44). Notice that none of these commands contains an exception for opponents who have actually wronged us. Indeed, loving one's enemies would be a rather meaningless command if it applied only to people who had never treated us unjustly. Even a genuinely slanderous opponent is not thereby rendered "fair game" for our own sinful behavior. We may correct him, rebuke him, expose his falsehoods, and demand accountability where appropriate. But we may not abandon truthfulness, fairness, or Christian charity in doing so. The fact that someone has sinned against us does not confer upon us the right to sin against him. Ironically, the very people demanding painstakingly charitable interpretations of their own words will sometimes offer their opponents nothing of the sort. They insist upon precision when describing their own positions while indulging sweeping, dehumanizing categories when describing everyone else's. They demand that their motives be judged favorably while confidently assigning the worst possible motives to their critics. It's a remarkable asymmetry, particularly among Christians who profess to believe that God's moral law is universal, objective, and binding upon everyone. Somehow, we've convinced ourselves that thin skin is actually toughness, that indignation is discernment, and that responding to every criticism with the imprecatory finality of God Himself demonstrates spiritual courage. We condemn the therapeutic culture's obsession with emotional injury while adopting its central conceit: that being offended or wronged grants us special moral privileges in how we treat others. But it doesn't. The Christian response to injustice is not to manufacture a class of people toward whom justice is no longer required. Nor does Scripture permit us to replace Christ's command to love our neighbors with a friend/enemy distinction in which our friends receive every benefit of the doubt and our enemies receive none. "Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good" (Romans 12:21). That command is not suspended when the evil is directed at us. Words are not violence simply because we'd like the emotional and rhetorical advantage of calling them that. Criticism is not slander merely because it stings. And even when genuine slander occurs, the person committing it does not forfeit his claim to truthful, just, and Christian treatment. If our defense of the Ninth Commandment requires us to violate it, perhaps we weren't defending the commandment in the first place.

Jesus says to love your enemies, so I really try to do that. But the hardest of those enemies to love are the ones who say the most vile things in Christ’s name.

Weak men cosplaying as strong men create hard times. Growing a beard and being "based" doesn't make you strong.

Yes, I’ve been thinking about this, it’s pretty amazing how @SlowToWrite’s arrest has exposed a lot of true colors. Might do more to expose the rot growing in the shadows of the NXR than any of Sam’s debates ever did. I hope he can see how God is using it and count it as a win!