If the anti-XNats were serious about opposing them on theological grounds, they’d be beating their chests to put forward a man for a no-holds barred 3 hour debate on the subject.

“Does the Scripture require Christians to commandeer government to establish a uniquely Christian magistrate authority, opposing pluralism and establishing a national religion?”

And if the XNats refused, of course, it would speak loudly enough (hint: they would not refuse). 

This is how Christians handle things; face to face, eye to eye, toe to toe. And this is how bad ideas die and how counterfeit movements are killed. 

It’s also how true movements test their mettle. So I ask you, “Where are the wise men? Where are the scribes? Where are the debaters of this age?” 

Back in the day, I appreciated a good fight in the high school parking lot, back when problems were settled in civilized ways. Fight! Fight! Fight! Fight!

It seems barbarous, but it is not barbarous to settle things. It’s barbarous to let feuds continue. 

Being only slightly more mature than then, I think @rightresponsem, @ADRoblesMedia, @jonharris1989 @Eric_Conn, and @William_E_Wolfe et al should present a man to accept all challengers. 

And the other side, Strachan, White, Wilson, Berry, O’Fallon, et al should pony-up a man to contest them. 

We break out the Octagon of debate and settle it like gentlemen. 

But one caution, just don’t beat someone so miserably hard they become an Antifa attorney feminist with a pony tail like McDurmon did. That was my bad. Let’s not give anybody a convictions concussion again.