I saw a well-known ostensibly conservative legal strategist dismissing the idea that Christianity Today's article casting doubt on the historicity of the Book of John is a big deal. Theologian Bill Roach here does an excellent job not only breaking down why CT was so wrong here, but why the nails matter.

Well worth a 26-minute listen.

You would expect the Christianity Today article denying the historicity of the the Gospel of John to be a hot topic of discussion for YouTube apologists. And many have weighed in! Like #MikeWingerii, #HonestYPTweets, #billroach_, #ostrachan, and #Pastor_Gabe. But one of the most prolific YouTube apologists has yet to say a word about this newsy and controversial article that Russell Moore chose to publish. And I suspect he never will. Wanna guess who that is?

Good article from Doug Wilson that digs down into the real conflict between the #JonahDispatch Right and the #realchrisrufo Right, which is--just how close are we to losing America as we know it.

I tend toward Rufo side that, as Doug puts it, feels that "the constitutional order of the Founders is a shell of its former self, and that we must fight like Picts painted blue to get any of it back."

But I also agree with #DavidBahnsen that of course this does not make any means permissible, but that doesn't mean I'm willing to take my cues from the Goldberg/French wing on what should be IMpermissible. Because these are the people who assured me religious liberty was doing just fine because the courts said so at the same time that the Biden DOJ was targeting conservative catholics as potential terrorists.

https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/books/some-really-basic-questions.html

Well I don't know when this happened #BoSnerdley but my 16-year-old self is freaking out right now....

(My not-so-16-year-old self freaking out a little too obvs 😂)

Wait but how is this satire #JoelWBerry? It's just what's happening!

I know I'm not Catholic so I don't get a say, but y'all should really pick this guy.

"Paul is speaking symbolically of the believer’s spiritual debt being 'nailed' to the cross, but the symbol’s power rests in the reality of Christ being physically nailed to the cross."

Credit where it's due, this is a really good article at TGC about why it matters that Christ was nailed to the cross.

thegospelcoalition.org/article/pierce…

I can’t see this article because it’s behind the paywall, but it appears to be a mea culpa, which is good. But I will say, I was told by multiple former ERLC staffers that when controversy swirled around the entity over Russell Moore’s leadership, he would disappear and leave staff to deal with it. He would not answer the tough questions himself..

He is the editor in chief of this magazine. What makes it to publication is ultimately his responsibility. For him to say nothing and send the writer out alone to speak is poor leadership and characteristic of Moore.

https://www.christianitytoday.com/2025/04/daniel-silliman-nails-apology/

Love seeing our own #MaryMargOlohan among the media disrupters!

One more point on CT staffer Daniel Silliman issuing a statement on the controversial “nails” article. Worth remembering that he was among the CT staffers who donated exclusively to Democrats, including Elizabeth Warren, until my Daily Wire report prompted CT to announce they would no longer allow staffers to make political donations.

dailywire.com/news/christian…

It’s out from behind the pay wall now. And the statement does not go to how the article made it to publication. The original article clearly suggested the Gospel of John might have been written at much later date to account for the “no nails” theory. So how could the author not have thought of it?

It also does not address the fact that the “scholar” who offered his expertise for this piece appears to be LGBTQ affirming. Does CT make it a practice to use the scholarship of rank theological liberals?

Elon, this is part of why abortion must be ended. New life is a blessing, and supporting a culture in which it is permissible to take those lives will inevitably collapse that culture.

Mike, respectfully, this doesn't go nearly far enough to address how this article made it through the editorial process. Especially given that the “new information” that led Silliman to reconsider was literally included in the original article.

I have never, ever seen a retraction like this. Where the author himself apologizes and the editors say nothing, as if they weren’t involved in the process at all.

https://www.christianitytoday.com/2025/04/daniel-silliman-nails-apology/

Last comment on the CT “maybe Jesus was tied to the cross and not nailed” controversy. #drmoore should absolutely be the one speaking to how and why this article got published. Any other editor-in-chief would address it himself. Whether it is cowardice or something else preventing Moore from doing so, it is deeply unethical of him to simply send the writer out to comment.

Not that I’m fishing for a free book, but what an important topic that rarely receives the consideration it should. Which is why we have Christians who think it’s no big deal to have 90-foot statues to pagan gods in the heartland.

"A growing number of those same leaders who once platformed Moore have begun privately voicing grave concerns about Moore’s trajectory. The dissonance between private criticism and public silence is untenable—and worse, it is harmful to the church."

This is the issue with those who surround Moore--they will tell you privately that they're concerned but they still work in ministries with him and will not address his trajectory publicly. Indeed, publicly, some still prop him up. So yes, it's very much worth asking those who continue to prop him up and/or stay publicly silent in the face of his trajectory why they are doing so.

Excellent article from #davemitz. Must read.

founders.org/articles/the-r…

"The crucifixion of Christ is not an obscure tertiary issue—it is at the heart of the gospel. To promote an unorthodox, subversive take on the cross and the reliability of Scripture, timed with Good Friday, suggests more than theological naiveeté. Russell Moore was, after all, the Dean of the School of Theology at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, so he can not plead ignorance. Rather, this is yet another example of his provocative agenda to attack conservative evangelicalism at any cost, even if it means undermining the trustworthiness of God’s Word.

"This episode shows Moore’s continued tendency to intentionally attack evangelical orthodoxy from a leftward position. It is not an isolated incident, but yet another example of an ongoing pattern of prioritizing political progressivism and theological liberalism over guarding the faith once delivered, just as long as Moore can stick it to those he views as his enemies."

Really, read every word.