Still, Carlson and Sanders are right to suggest that Du MezвЂ™s critics should focus on evidence-based arguments. In a thoughtful Twitter response to Carlson, Du Mez persuasively argues that her citation practices are the norm for crossover academic books. But Jesus and John Wayne is not a comprehensive history of a movement or all of its key figures-it is a story about important dimensions of evangelical culture related to gender and patriotism.Д¬arlson suggests that Du Mez makes unsubstantiated claims and fails to cite вЂњtrustworthy sources.вЂќ This critique goes to the core of the academic craft, and Du Mez takes it seriously. I had similar impressions reading the book.

Sanders notes, for instance, that Du Mez omits large swaths of white evangelicalism and suggests that Du MezвЂ™s narrative assumes a great deal of causation. Lucas believes that Du Mez persuasively вЂњconnects the dots.вЂќ Carlson and Sanders both find Du MezвЂ™s account less compelling. Jesus and John WayneвЂ™s subtitle makes clear that Du Mez takes us into contentious territory: вЂњHow White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Fractured a Nation.вЂќ She makes a strong argument about the influences of toxic masculinity and unchecked patriotism on white evangelicalism. The symposium included a laudatory review by Sean Michael Lucas and critical ones by Kirsten Sanders and Jamie Carlson.

So I was pleasantly surprised by a recent Mere Orthodoxy symposium on Calvin UniversityвЂ™s Kristin Kobes Du MezвЂ™s new book, Jesus and John Wayne. I like less the reviews and tweets about those books, which too often feel like fans cheering on opposing sides of a high-stakes sporting event, one rooting effusively and the other critiquing relentlessly. I like well-written and well-argued controversial books.

Jesus and john wayne responses