Published on February 8, 2024, 1:01 am

In a concerning turn of recent events, the former head of the ERLC, Russell Moore, along with liberal commentator David French, and Curtis Chang who is popularly known for his strong views on faith being applicable to pandemic resolution, have collaborated on crafting “The After Party”. This curriculum is purportedly designed to be a guide for churches and Christians through the treacherous waters of political ideologies without creating conflict. Ironically, these men symbolize some of the most problematic trends in modern Christianity, embracing practically every anti-Christian liberal ideology one can imagine.

A segment of their so-called ‘church’ curriculum created quite a stir when it praised Charlie Dates. This former Southern Baptist pastor has drawn heavy criticism from within the evangelical community due to his extreme political stance on social justice. Incredibly, these educators opted to laud Dates – despite his infamous decision to invite an actively gay past mayor of Chicago into his pulpit – as an ideal Christian leader espousing those principles they advocate for.

Their shenanigans border closely on parody as they turn profound religious dialogue into spectacle. Their promoted curriculum poses a serious threat to biblical truths; luring unsuspecting followers into embracing postmodernist views that are far removed from traditional teachings. Rather than guiding followers towards discerning God’s standpoint on political matters per Scriptural teachings, they veer away from scripture‘s clear guidance on such issues. By opting instead for a cocktail infusion of confusion and compromise that belittles the gospel which they profess allegiance too.

To add salt to injury, Curtis Chang openly confesses designing the curriculum in such a way that pastors can circumvent controversial issues in their pulpits completely. With what he refers to as “plausible deniability”, leaders now have room to brace their congregations without taking stances on any societal or political issue while sending members off as unwitting disciples enlisted by these wolves.

This alarming model is not representative of true leadership but rather promotes abdication of pastoral duties. The term “pastor” translates literally to “shepherd”, a title suggestive of leadership, guidance, teaching – exactly what those appointed with this duty are charged to exercise. Failure to offer these fundamental roles but rather substituting with politicians-turned-teachers such as Chang is a recipe for Christian followers being led astray. If your church is among those surrendering its political acumen by following the regime proposed in Chang’s clip, it would be far healthier for your Christian principles to abandon that ship in search of a safer spiritual haven.

In conclusion, our quest for real news and trusted news from a Christian worldview indicates a rise in politically-driven curriculum intended to direct modern church doctrines. These developments continue drumming up controversy within the Christian faith – calling us back into relentless commitment towards preserving Biblical truths against continuous erosion by liberal ideologies. As breaking news continues unfolding in this domain, we remain dedicated to providing exhaustive coverage on these matters that are pivotal towards safeguarding the sanctity and foundational beliefs of our Christian faith.