Could Matthew Vines Make a Case for Christian Idolatry?

That’s the question that Andrew Wilson implicitly asks in his brilliant parody entitled “The Case for Idolatry.” Though Wilson never mentions Vines or any other “LGBT-affirming” evangelical by name, his satire is clearly aimed at arguments in favor of abandoning traditional Christian doctrine on sexuality and marriage.

Read Andrew’s terrific piece.

Then, read my contribution at Mere Orthodoxy, in which I compare passages between Wilson and God and the Gay Christian author Matthew Vines to discuss whether Wilson’s parody was a fair one.

Excerpt:

The point of parody is not to produce a point-by-point rebuttal of someone’s claims. Instead of explicitly refuting the arguments of LGBT-affirming evangelicals, Wilson’s parody intends to expose the fragile underlying logical framework of LGBT-affirming rhetoric. If an absurd claim (in this case, that open idolatry is consistent with Christian belief and practice) can be supported using the same logical progression used by LGBT-affirming evangelicals like Vines, it is fair to question whether that logical progression is valid.