Jeff

Jan 7

In recent years, a curious trend has emerged primarily among young men who say they are disillusioned with modern evangelicalism. Interestingly, it’s a mass exodus from evangelicalism toward Eastern Orthodoxy. Drawn by its ancient traditions, focus on liturgy, and the allure of order in an increasingly disorderly world, many see Orthodoxy as a refuge from the emotionalism and perceived shallowness of contemporary church culture.

For many, it’s a longing for something tangible, something rooted in history, something that feels sturdy in the face of relentless societal upheaval. But beneath the golden icons and incense-laden sanctuaries lies a troubling reality, a gospel obscured by works, rituals, and tradition. And while the appeal of Orthodoxy may seem compelling on the surface, it demands a critical examination—one that Trevin Wax’s Gospel Coalition article utterly fails to provide.

Trevin Wax’s recent article on The Gospel Coalition (TGC), “Is Eastern Orthodoxy the Next Big Thing for Young Men?” subtly endorses Eastern Orthodoxy as a valid expression of Christianity. As with most TGC articles, it reads like a carefully packaged mirage, polished on the outside, but utterly devoid of substance where it matters most.

The problem is not merely that Wax tiptoes around the theological deficiencies of Eastern Orthodoxy. It’s that he fails altogether to engage with the root of the matter, the gospel itself. And without the gospel, what are we even talking about? A version of “Christianity” that doesn’t proclaim the biblical gospel is not Christianity at all—it’s an empty husk counterfeiting the Church.

Eastern Orthodoxy, for all its aesthetic appeal—its golden icons, its incense-filled liturgies, its aura of mysticism—is fundamentally inadequate. It has traded the simplicity and sufficiency of Christ’s finished work on the cross for a labyrinth of works-based righteousness and sacramental superstition.

And yet, Wax seems content to present it as just another option for spiritually restless young men as though we can simply pick a religious expression like shopping for furniture.

Tired of modern trends? Despise the professional production of modern megachurches? Why not try Orthodoxy? Don’t get me wrong, I hate all that stuff too. But is the gospel even a factor in his analysis? Or has that become an afterthought in this postmodern buffet of Christian flavors?

I can understand the appeal of Eastern Orthodoxy for those desperately seeking an experience not rooted in the cultural zeitgeist. I’ve seen it firsthand. Several years ago, I visited the Greek Orthodox church where Hank Hanegraaf was chrismated. Walking into that building, I was struck by the artistry and solemnity of the surroundings—the rich iconography, the reverence for tradition, the ancient rituals that seem to transport you to another time. For those disillusioned with the shallow, emotionally driven practices of modern evangelicalism, it’s easy to see why such an environment would feel like a refuge.

But for those who are in Christ, He alone is enough.

The gospel is not found in the chanting of priests or the burning of incense any more than it’s found in the fog machines, concert lighting, and emotionalized lyrics of Bethel or Hillsong music.

Neither is it found in the veneration of icons or the endless repetition of “Lord, have mercy.”

The gospel is the good news of Jesus Christ—His life, death, and resurrection for the forgiveness of sins. It is the power of God unto salvation (Romans 1:16). And Eastern Orthodoxy, for all its pomp and tradition, obscures this truth behind a veil of sacramentalism and works-righteousness.

Orthodoxy’s convoluted theology, with its emphasis on synergy in salvation and its rejection of justification by faith alone, is not a harmless “third-tier” theological matter like eschatology. It’s a gospel problem. To suggest, as Wax does, that Eastern Orthodoxy is perfectly valid without acknowledging such is to sidestep this critical issue.

How can a system that denies the sufficiency of Christ’s atoning work and burdens its adherents with a yoke of works-based righteousness be considered reasonable?

The answer is simple: it can’t.

When I visited that Orthodox church, I could see why people might be drawn to it. The atmosphere is intoxicating. The rituals are hypnotic. If one is  to allow themselves, I could certainly see how it could feel like you’re stepping into a different reality altogether. But that feeling is deceptive. It’s a spiritual mirage—a deception that conceals the spiritual emptiness beneath. Orthodoxy offers an experience, yes. But experiences don’t save. Christ does.

The core problem with this movement is glaring. Eastern Orthodoxy does not proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ as revealed in Scripture. It denies justification by faith alone, a doctrine so central to biblical Christianity that without it, you no longer have Christianity. You have moralism. You have tradition. You have spiritual window dressing. But you do not have the gospel.

What does Wax think he is accomplishing by nodding approvingly at this theological trainwreck? Is this the kind of ecumenical “big tent” nonsense we’ve come to expect from TGC—where clarity is sacrificed on the altar of inclusion? That’s always been the game with them.

The Reformers spilled their blood over this issue. Paul anathematized anyone who dared to preach another gospel (Galatians 1:8-9). But apparently, in the Gospel Coalition’s modern parlance, it’s fine to sidestep such trivialities for the sake of some highbrow cultural analysis.

Orthodoxy’s preoccupation with tradition and mysticism may appeal to disillusioned young men seeking stability in an unruly world, but what does it offer their souls? A false hope wrapped in gold foil.

Sure, the chants and rituals might feel deep and profound. But is profundity a substitute for truth? Does emotional resonance save? If the answer is no—and it is—then Eastern Orthodoxy is a false religion. It’s a gilded cage, a counterfeit gospel that enslaves rather than frees.

Wax’s approach, on the other hand, panders to the surface-level appeal of Orthodoxy while ignoring its theological rot. He extols its “stability” and “masculinity” as though those qualities somehow redeem its outright rejection of sola fide. But stability without truth is just calcified error.

And what good is masculinity if it props up a system that leads men away from the very grace that can save them?

A gilded lie is still a lie.

The gospel is not a matter of taste. It is not a preference or a tradition or a lifestyle. It is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes (Romans 1:16). Wax may think he is offering a thoughtful analysis, but what he is really doing is leading people into confusion. And confusion about the gospel is deadly.

I get the appeal to stability, masculinity, and counterculturalism. I really do. But you don’t need incense. You don’t need icons. You don’t need rituals. You need Christ—and He is sufficient. The sufficiency of Christ is the lifeblood of the Christian faith. And any system, no matter how ancient it is or how rich it seems, that denies this sufficiency must be rejected outright.

Comment by Truth Uncensored Afrika: Could the rise in Orthodoxy be a result of evangelicals being pro Zionist. Go to Part Two.