The Adults Have Left the Room (and why postmodernism ruins everything it touches).

Yesterday there was a video making its way around the internet of Vice President Kamala Harris introducing herself at a meeting by saying, “I am Kamala Harris, my pronouns are she and her.” This was followed by a series of other women at the roundtable discussion introducing themselves by stating their name and preferred pronouns. You can watch these introductions here. If you watch them, you probably find it odd that they are also describing their clothing and hair. To be fair on that point, this is a meeting with disabled people, many of whom were apparently blind. The descriptions helped in that regard, but I’m pretty sure blind people can tell a woman’s voice from a man’s. Regardless, when people introduce themselves and state their preferred pronouns, I no longer take them seriously and neither should you. When it comes from the Vice President of the United States of America using her preferred pronouns, you should no longer take our leadership seriously either. The adults are no longer in the room, and the entire operation of this administration has turned into a clown show. Unfortunately, the clown show also permeates our cultural institutions and needs to be totally rejected.

But, how did we get here? The answer is postmodernism. This morning I came across a Tweet by Wokal Distance that I found to be one of the more important things to read if you want to understand how postmodernism has ruined our society and our ability to think clearly about matters of ultimate importance. My entire education and adult life has revolved around theology and philosophy, so I can’t help but to see the importance of this tweet thread from Wokal. Below is his tweet, and anything in bold is just me adding notes of clarification or adding context that may be helpful.

“Deconstruction (and the postmodernism which spawned it) ultimately leads to two existentially unlivable consequences:

1. The death of the logos (rational principle that gives order and meaning to reality), and consequently

2. The erasure of the Summum Bonum (highest good)

Because postmodernism says all conceptions of rationality, reason, and truth are constructed by people who were biased and self-interested, it denies there actually is any such thing as a logos. Thus, there is no transcendent principle that gives order and meaning to reality. This point cannot be understated and is the foundation of the rest of his argument. When Wokal says that postmodernism sees all conceptions of rationality, reason, and truth as constructed by biased people, he is pointing out that very reason why so many people see something like white supremacy in everything. In many circles today, particularly in higher education, if you are white, then you’re opinion doesn’t count as much because you come from a place of bias and colonialism without even knowing it. Therefore, your bias means your opinion doesn’t matter. Postmodernism continually pulls at these threads until it all comes apart and all sense of reason and truth are destabilized. Once you deconstruct rationalism and reason, then you end up with the Vice President having to state her pronouns, as if they could actually be something other than what she is biologically. The fact that people can now have “preferred pronouns” is evidence that reason and truth have been undermined by postmodernism. Furthermore, the fact that the leadership of this country is buying into this absurdity is all the more troubling.

Because there is no logos and no transcendent principle that orders reality and provides its meaning, then there is no logos and no transcendent principle we can use to order our lives and society, and there is nothing which provides our lives and our society with objective meaning. In other words, once you remove a rational principle for ordering a society as well as what gives meaning to life, then you have to find it in something. In our society right now, that seems to be the radical ideology of wokeness.

In a world where there is no transcendent principle to order reality or provide meaning, then there is no way to decide which things are objectively *GOOD.* That is, there is no way to decide which “goods” have primacy and are most valuable, excellent, worthwhile, and so on.

This means there is no *highest good* (Sumum Bonum is Latin for “highest good) to go at the top of our hierarchy of values for us to aim at. According to postmodernism, there is only competing ideas of what is good, and none have any claim to being the absolute highest good.

Once you accept the deconstructive philosophy of postmodernism you are left with no trascendent principles by which reality is ordered, and thus no highest good that you can establish for your society to aim at. All you have is competing visions and none get to have primacy.

With nothing to order reality, and nothing objective to aim at, the result is a complete loss of objective meaning and a society of absurd nihilism. In other words…you end up with clown world. Go back and read the first paragraph if you must. This is the entire point of his Tweet thread. Once you destabilize truth and objective reality, you end up with people believing they can change their gender or feeling the need to state what pronouns they want you to use (by the way, you should never use someone’s preferred pronouns. Don’t give in to the absurdity). Here’s another example – this is a UC Berkeley law professor: arguing with a Senator about how men can become pregnant.

Clown world is a meme level description of the absurdist nihilism, the nonsense and meaninglessness at the heart of the postmodern world. And the only thing strong enough to pull the sword of objective meaning from the stone of a nihilistic postmodern world is the LOGOS. As Christians, we understand the “logos” to be God as providing ultimate meaning. Wokal is a Christian as well, but he is writing in philosophical terms. I don’t believe non-Christians can arrive at the same understanding of the logos as Christians, but most of America has had a God-centric worldview since our founding. That is why for most of our history our culture has had a solid understanding of truth and reason.

Without a transcendent principle (Logos) to point our way to the Highest Good (Summum Bonum) we will lose ourselves in the absurd nihilistic world we have created. And the result will be a combination of despair, aimlessness, depression, selfishness, and self-absorption. Have you checked mental health trends? Suicide rates and attempts are sky high, especially among teenagers who have bought into this nonsense.

People swing back and fourth between despair (because nothing really matters) and selfishness (as they try to create their own meaning for themselves by fulfilling whatever desire they happen to have at whatever cost they can pay) So, when you look out and see people use their “freedom” to chase the fulfillment of selfish desires….The cries of despair, tears of desperation, whimpers of lostness, and sobs of depression are nothing but the sound of man worshipping the one who created the postmodern world he inhabits: himself.

_________

That’s it. Go back and read that last paragraph again. It might be one of the most important things to understand about how “clown world” leads to destruction.

Theological Patriotism

Over the last few years I have become increasingly patriotic, but I have struggled with how Christians should publicly display their patriotism given the divisive nature of our culture. For many years I wanted to separate my patriotism from my Christian faith as if they were two completely different belief systems. In one sense that is obviously true, but I will argue here that American patriotism is tied to Christian theology. American Christians simply cannot completely separate their faith in God from their love of America. Why? This cannot be done because the founding of this great country has theological foundations. As hard as one might like to try these days, you simply cannot fully separate patriotism and theology. The existence of America depends on its theological foundation, and if you cut America free from its theology then you lose the country. The two go hand in hand, and your understanding of theology should lead you to become a proud American patriot, for without Christian theology America would not exist. To be very clear: Christian theology does not depend upon America. Christianity always has and always will stand on its own. God does not need America, but America does depend on Christian theology. As I said, the theological roots of America should lead you to become a proud American.

This creates a problem though for many Christians because if you love God and country you will often get labeled as a “Christian Nationalist” by woke progressives who are more inclined to see America as Babylon instead of a bastion of freedom. That kind of comparison is nonsense, but if the woke can apply the “Christian Nationalist” label and associate it with something akin to a theocratic racist dictator, then they win the language game, and you become scared to publicly pronounce your love for God and America. Woke progressives shame people into silence so they can divide the country and remove its theological framework. You have probably seen this word game play out in the media and possibly in your own life as well.

So, how is a Christian supposed to have a robust theology of patriotism for which they are unashamed and unapologetic?

A strong sense of patriotism begins with the Christian doctrine of the imago Dei. The imago Dei simply means “image of God.” In the book of Genesis in the Bible, you will find that God created all living things “according to their kind.” He created the fish in the sea “according to their kind.” God made the birds of the air “according to their kind.” He did the same with the living creatures on the earth and all other animals. They were all created “according to their kind,” meaning there are obvious variations of animals within their own kind.

By Genesis 1:26, there is a clear distinction between the animal world and the first man God created, Adam. Genesis 1:26-27 says, “Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.’ ²⁷ So God created man in his own image, in the image of God (imago Dei) he created him; male and female he created them.” Do you see how man is made different than everything else? Human beings are created in the image of God. Entire books have been written on the meaning of the imago Dei, but let’s suffice it to say that to be created in the image of God sets you apart from the rest of creation. Further, it means that every single human being has dignity, worth, and value because humans are made in the likeness of God. As one theology textbook puts it, “The image of God is the special status that all human beings have as those made to reflect our Creator’s character and commissioned to carry out his purposes in the world.”

A Christian understanding of the imago Dei leads to at least two different conclusions. First, it leads us to understand that human beings have a particular freedom in this world, and that freedom should reflect the goodness of God in all areas of life. Yet, at the same time, we understand that Adam and Eve sinned, and that sin had disastrous consequences here in this life and on the image of God that we carry as people. The founders of America knew these two things well, and it would help form the basis upon which America could become a properly ordered society.

I would contend that the doctrine of the imago Dei is at least one pillar in the founding of America. It is no secret that most of the Founding Fathers of America were Christians (or at least deists who held a Christian worldview). John Hancock, the first signer of the Declaration of Independence, said, “Resistance to tyranny becomes the Christian and social duty of each individual. Continue steadfast and, with a proper sense of your dependence on God, nobly defend those rights which heaven gave, and no man ought to take from us.” What are “those rights which heaven gave?” They are at least no less than the rights inherent in the doctrine of the imago Dei in which God commanded Adam and Eve to be fruitful and multiply, to subdue the earth, and to have dominion over creation. Those “rights which heaven gave” derive themselves from the fact that we are all created in the image of God. The founders of America understood this, and so they determined they would form a system of government that would encourage human flourishing and account for human sinfulness. As John Adams said, “If Men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and the next place, oblige it to control itself.” John Hancock, John Adams, and all the other Founding Fathers knew they had to form a government that properly understood the imago Dei, and this is undeniably clear in the Declaration of Independence.

On July 4th, 1776 the following words were penned in the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

The founders were not seeking to initiate a theocracy, but it is abundantly clear that their goal was to create a nation based upon a Christian understanding of the imago Dei that would lead to human flourishing, freedom, and justice. This understanding of freedom is why the founders believed in rational self-government, separation of powers, checks and balances, and limited government. America is based on these principles because these unalienable rights are given to us by God and not by the government. This is where so many in our culture have gone wrong. The woke progressives and the political left appear to believe that rights are created by the government. Nothing could be further from the truth. The government does not give you your human rights. The government of America is designed to protect the rights given to you by God as someone created in His image. Rights precede government. This is why I said earlier that if you cut America free from its theology, then you lose what makes America special. America is inextricably tied to Christian theology. You may not like this truth, but that does not change the truth of our founding. In fact, because you live in America, you are free to believe whatever you would like to believe, live where you want to live, and basically do whatever you want to do so long as you don’t harm someone else in the process. You can thank God for that freedom, for you will find it nowhere else in the world like you will find it here.

You might be wondering, “How then could America have Christian theology as its foundation and still have participated in chattel slavery?” This is a great and complex question because chattel slavery is clearly sinful and a dark stain upon American history. Without overcomplicating the matter or making this longer than is necessary, I believe it is important to understand that men are flawed to the point that they were somehow able to justify in their own minds something as heinous and sinful as slavery. Ironically though, it was also their understanding of the imago Dei that allowed them to overcome slavery and fight a war to end its practice. Even Frederick Douglas called the Constitution a “glorious liberty document.” Dr. Tony Evans, one of the greatest African American preachers of our day, has said that understanding the imago Dei is the key to overcoming racism and oppression. Slavery existed all over the world, but it was specifically the Christian worldview that brought it to an end as we know it. There’s a reason why slavery isn’t mentioned in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution. It’s because the founders knew it was wrong, and they did not want our founding documents to provide any safe haven for the existence of slavery to continue.

Christians have always been in the trenches fighting for human rights because the Christian understanding of the imago Dei is that which leads to freedom and flourishing for all people. Like it was with slavery, it is also the Christian worldview that led to the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Abortion was never a right guaranteed by the Constitution, and the slightest bit of intellectual honesty should be able to admit as much. Abortion was a made-up right that led to 50 years of aborting 60+ million babies in the womb. Each one of those tiny human beings bears the imago Dei, and to destroy that life is an assault on the goodness of God and an affront to his creation.

As I mentioned at the beginning of this, Christian theology must lead to a healthy patriotism that is grateful for a nation that has time and time again done the right thing because it has the right foundation based on the imago Dei.

How are Christians to faithfully live out their patriotism? They should do it without apology, without shame, and without ever backing down from defending the greatest country that has ever existed.

My oldest son is now 15 years old, and he pays attention to much of what is going on in our country. I am fortunate enough to have many conversations with him about this very subject, and he is growing to love America as well. I tell him time and again, “Don’t ever let anyone tell you America is the awful nation they think it is. They are fools and blinded by their disdain of Christian virtue.”

I understand the complexities and nuances of arguing that your theology should lead you to love America. I am well aware that we may disagree on the politics of our day, but I am also quite aware that this country is in dire need of Christian virtue, morality, and an understanding that a society cannot flourish when it turns its back on what made it great at its founding. You may not be a Christian (and that’s your right), but you cannot deny that a Christian worldview based on the doctrine of the imago Dei is that which holds America up as bastion of freedom and a bright light in a very dark and grim world.

I’ll end this by quoting Lee Greenwood and simply say:

That I’m proud to be an American where at least I know I’m free,
And I won’t forget the men who died, who gave that right to me,
And I’d gladly stand up next to you and defend her still today,
‘Cause there ain’t no doubt I love this land,
God bless the USA!

GuidePost Solutions and the SBC

Last night as I was getting ready to go to bed I checked Twitter and came across a Tweet by GuidePost Solutions. GuidePost is the investigative firm hired by the SBC Executive Committee to investigate itself. This has already created a firestorm for the SBC. Here’s the Tweet:

First of all, I realize that Twitter is a gigantic waste of time, but it is where many ideas are hashed out. In that regard, Twitter is an important part of what shapes our culture. This post by the firm that investigated the SBC EC is troublesome on many levels.

First, I was wrongly under the assumption that the SBC would have hired a Christian organization committed to biblical principles of justice and due process (yes, due process is a philosophy that arises out of a biblical worldview). If GuidePost is committed to what they tweeted, can they be equally committed to a Judeo-Christian understanding of humanity and justice? I don’t think so. Did they operate based on the principle of Proverbs 18:17? That verse states, “The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.” What about 1 Thessalonians 5:21, which says, “test all things, hold fast to what is good.” Did GuidePost test their own conclusions, or did they get the narrative they wanted? Perhaps GuidePost can set aside the worldview they put out in that Tweet, but I am suspicious of their ability to conduct a thorough investigation that operates out of the worldview on display above. However, this is not the only problem.

Secondly, GuidePost says they are committed to “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” which is a specific philosophy often termed as DEI. DEI is a framework that arises out of both critical race theory and critical social justice. DEI is often the operating standpoint of many universities and secular organizations. Let’s break it down. When you and I hear the word “diversity” we likely think about diversity of thought or tolerance of other viewpoints. That’s not how diversity is used within a DEI framework. Diversity here refers to the idea that society should privilege the marginalized and marginalize the privileged in order to redress the imbalances in society. Equity is also problematic. People frequently confuse equity for equality, but in reality, they are worlds apart. Equity has nothing to do with being fair and impartial. Instead, equity is more closely associated to the idea of social communism in which equal outcome is the goal. Therefore, those who hold to the idea of equity would rather level society to produce an equal outcome. Inclusion is the third leg of DEI. Inclusion should mean creating a welcoming atmosphere, but within the DEI framework, inclusion has more to do with the exclusion of any ideas that might make someone feel unsafe in a particular identity group. Inclusion from within a DEI framework is how you end up with “safe spaces.” Again, should the SBC hire a firm “committed to strengthening diversity, equity, and inclusion?” Never. The SBC shot themselves in the foot by hiring GuidePost. Unfortunately, we aren’t done with this Tweet yet.

The third problem with this tweet is the idea that they “strive to be an organization where our team can bring their authentic selves to work.” This is again operating out of a critical social justice framework. The idea of “authenticity” is often spoken of as if it is a virtue in itself. Christians should remember that authenticity is simply a description of someone that may or may not be virtuous. As it relates to the world of social justice, authenticity is wrongly applied to the idea that to question one’s authenticity makes you the bad one. For instance, what if a transgender person enters the workplace and wants me to acknowledge their chosen pronouns that do not align with their biological gender? Would GuidePost force me to acknowledge their “authentic” pronouns? If they are committed to being an organization where people can be their “authentic selves,” will they compel speech from those who who refuse to acknowledge that someone can change their gender? There are two more problems with this tweet.

The fourth problem is using the phrase “collective progress.” What does “collective progress” mean? To be honest, I’m not sure how they are using it, but given everything else, I am inclined to believe it means that they will use the power of everyone else in the organization to force their will on those who disagree with the above mentioned problems. This hints at a Marxist worldview of revolution.

The final problem has to do with them being a “proud ally to our LGBTQ+ community.” If they are allied to the LGBTQ+ community, then we have a real problem with them being the firm investigating the SBC. I assume this means they believe in the “T” part of this and that gender is fluid. What about the + symbol? Have you ever given any thought as to why the “+” sign is always added at the end of LGBTQ? The + symbol is a stand-in for whatever other letters might come next. It’s basically a way of saying, “We support lesbians, gays, bi-sexuals, transgenders, queers, PLUS whatever else you want to add to these identity groups.” Furthermore, if they are allied to this, then are they allied to #MeToo also? Those things frequently come as a package deal. Do they “believe all women?” If they subscribe to the idea that you must “believe all women” then that also means they might “disbelieve all men.” Is it possible that they approached this report with a worldview that could have impacted the outcome?

Again, this is the firm hired by the SBC Executive Committee to investigate itself. I am appalled that this was the best we could find. There are other Christian organizations who do similar work, and the SBC hired GuidePost. For what it’s worth, Ed Litton, the President of the SBC, is who hired this company. As I mentioned in my previous post, Ed Litton came with his own set of problems in regards to widespread plagiarism. He was also celebrated by the “woke” within the convention. I sure do hope I am wrong, but I simply cannot believe that GuidePost Solutions was a reliable firm with the right commitments to investigate the Southern Baptist Convention.

I love the SBC. I have 3 degrees from SBC schools. I have been in an SBC church since I became a Christian 25 years ago. I believe the SBC is worth saving, but this choice to hire GuidePost was a mistake of epic proportions and will likely cause irreparable harm and distrust within the convention. I pray for better days ahead.

What Just Happened in the Southern Baptist Convention?

If you have paid any attention to the news recently, then you are aware that a bombshell report dropped about sexual abuse within the Southern Baptist Convention. For some, this report spells the end of the SBC, while for others, it is a hopeful call to repentance and renewal. Many, particularly in the media, seem more delighted to have one more stone to throw at Christianity.

There is much to say about this report, and this is my humble attempt at helping you understand the Southern Baptist Convention as well as the context from which the report has arisen. Let me be clear at the outset: one single case of abuse is one too many. One cover-up of abuse is one too many. I grieve with every single person who has been abused, and I pray for justice to reign down on every single abuser.

First, it is important to understand the SBC.

WHAT IS THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION?

There are hundreds of books written about the SBC and its history, but I frequently find that most people have no idea how the SBC functions. In reality, the SBC is not a denomination. What that means is that there is no hierarchy of leaders or churches who have authority over any single church. Again, there is no single leader within the SBC that has authority over even one church. I am a pastor at my SBC church, and the only group that has authority over me is the Personnel Committee of my church and the congregation itself. In actuality, the SBC only exists for the few days each year it is “in session” at its annual meeting (that’s why it is called the Southern Baptist CONVENTION). The “Convention” exists only when it’s in session.

What then is the Southern Baptist Convention? The SBC is a network of like-minded and autonomous churches who voluntarily cooperate together by financially contributing to what is called the Cooperative Program (CP) of the SBC. The CP is how SBC churches partner together to fund missionary efforts, seminary education, etc. The funds collected by the SBC are managed by the Executive Committee (EC), which is made up of 80+ members. This point cannot be missed because it is going to become central to the issues of abuse. The responsibility of the EC is a legal and fiduciary responsibility to carry out the will of the churches that have voluntarily partnered together. In other words, when church members tithe to the church, part of those funds stay within the church for its own ministries while a portion is also sent to the CP of the SBC for distribution of funds in the manner called for by its members. Those members are called “Messengers” who attend the annual meeting and vote on various issues (this is essentially a church business meeting made up of all the churches who voluntarily cooperate with one another). In all honesty, this way of churches partnering together is genius, and it has fueled the greatest missionary force to have ever existed. It is incredible and truly a wonderful work of God in this world.

Again, what this means is that the SBC is not actually a denomination. It is a stewardship operation that exists to steward the financial resources of the SBC. These funds given by churches are managed by the Executive Committee (EC). It is also worth noting again that the EC has no power to do anything other than steward the money collected by all SBC churches, as well as a few other minor things. That’s really it. They have no power over any of the 47,000+ SBC churches. This same kind of structure also applies to various state conventions and associations. In addition, it’s important to also understand that every entity within the SBC, such as a seminary, is autonomous and accountable to its own Board of Trustees (remember, there’s no hierarchy of power to tell an individual church or seminary what to do).

If you are wondering how each entity within the SBC gets its own set of Trustees, it’s actually quite simple. The President of the SBC gets sole power to appoint a group called the Committee on Committees. That committee then appoints another committee called the Committee on Nominations. Then, the Committee on Nominations will nominate the board of trustees for every SBC institution (seminaries, ERLC, IMB, NAMB, etc). The Board of Trustees is then voted on by the Messengers at the annual SBC meeting. I know, it’s sounds horribly boring and like a headache of a business meeting, but it’s actually quite appropriate and an orderly way of organizing 47,000+ autonomous churches and 12 SBC institutions. This is all probably more information than you need, but you cannot understand what just happened if you don’t really understand how the SBC functions.

ALLEGATIONS OF ABUSE IN THE SBC

One of my goals in writing this is to help you understand the context of this report. For at least a decade, there have been multiple accusations of sexual abuse, rape, and other inappropriate gestures made against various leaders and/or pastors within the SBC. In large part, many of the complaints revolve around the inability of the SBC to censure, fire, revoke ordination, and/or otherwise end the ministry of someone who has been accused of misconduct with or without due process of law. Specifically, many have felt that the Executive Committee knew of many of these allegations but failed to do anything about it. There are many people who have requested that the Executive Committee provide a database of known abusers so churches could check it before hiring someone in their church. This is why understanding the SBC is important. There is simply no mechanism in the SBC by which a local church pastor can be censured or fired by someone outside of his local congregation because each local congregation is autonomous. Every church in the SBC is autonomous. Again, the SBC is not a denomination whereby someone outside of the local church or seminary has authority over anything.

That being said, individual EC members can use the power of their own voice to express concern and opinions, and many of them have done so for years. There were mistakes that were made (as you will soon see), but you must keep in mind that a local church matter of abuse in the SBC is an issue for local law enforcement to deal with according to the law while the same church has a responsibility to remove any staff member or volunteer credibly accused and convicted of any misconduct. In addition, any church involved in covering up a crime to protect the reputation of the church deserves every bit of scorn they rightfully receive. Covering up a crime to protect the reputation of the church is shameful and despicable.

This is the context leading up to 2016 and beyond.

DONALD TRUMP, RUSSELL MOORE, AND THE #METOO MOVEMENT

Do we really have to talk about Donald Trump? Yes. Donald Trump rose to political prominence in 2015 for announcing that he would run for President. His rise to prominence created a fault line that divided the SBC. There were many in the SBC who supported his run for the presidency while others lamented over those who would support Trump. Enter, Russell Moore. Moore was the president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC). The ERLC is one of the ministries of the SBC that advocates for various government policies that advance the cause of Christian ethics and religious liberty throughout American life.

Russell Moore was and still is very popular among younger evangelicals and SBC pastors. He’s also highly respected among those who are more progressive, or “woke,” in their theology. He was an outspoken critic of Trump and argued that Christians should never vote for Trump specifically because of sexual allegations against Trump. In many ways, Moore shamed Christians who chose to support or vote for Trump. This led to a further fracturing of the SBC. Those who opposed Trump frequently coalesced around certain ideas and ideologies that were becoming prominent within a younger generation of people within the SBC. Specifically, there were elements of critical race theory and liberal theological drift common among Moore and those who followed him closely. This following also drew the attention of Beth Moore and Kyle James Howard, both of whom have since left the SBC and are now outspoken critics of it. Further, they have each embraced the view that the SBC is categorically racist and abusive. Beth Moore is a loud critic of the SBC who frequently tweets her opinions and frustrations to her one million followers. Russell Moore, Beth Moore and Howard further helped fracture the SBC.

Back to Russell Moore. Moore drew the ire of many within the convention for the way he attacked Trump voters and seemed to be leading a liberal theological drift within the convention, specifically as it relates to racial matters. Eventually, there was an investigation by the ERLC Trustees into the nature and leadership of the ERLC. This action angered those who followed Moore, and the Twitter mob quickly came out to defend Moore with claims of a mass exodus from the SBC if Moore was fired from his position.

Meanwhile, Moore wrote a letter that was “leaked” to the press just weeks ahead of the 2021 annual meeting of the SBC. The letter was actually written 18 months prior to the leak (written in January 2020), and Moore claimed that he was aware of sexual abuse committed and/or covered up by members of the Executive Committee and from within many of the SBC churches. Please note that Moore was directly implicating members of the EC for committing and/or covering up abuse. His leaked letter went so far as to say, the SBC has a “culture where countless children have been torn to shreds, where women have been raped and then ‘broken down.'” All of this is suspicious. Leaked letters have now become part and parcel of American life and seem to be a way to throw around allegations without having to credibly identify anything or anyone. This “leaked” letter is also quite suspicious because it means that Russell Moore apparently knew of credible accusations and sat on it for well over one year (which by the way would have made him complicit in any cover-up). In addition, Moore was a resident of TN, which is a mandatory reporting state. This means Moore had a legal responsibility to report the accusations he made. Finally, Moore never specifically mentioned anyone, but instead he leveled accusations at the Executive Committee. One of two things must be true: Moore was right but a coward for not reporting, or he figured a leaked letter with suspicious accusations might blow up the “system” he is unhappy about. Spoiler alert: Moore’s letter is what sparked the investigation that has now been released and every one of Moore’s accusations turned out to be false (even though the investigation found other things).

All of this is happening during the rise of the #MeToo movement, which also cannot be ignored. For whatever good that may have come from the #MeToo movement, there is an equal amount of problems with it. For one, the #MeToo movement has ruined our understanding of due process. All it takes is one accusation of wrongdoing and someone’s life can be ruined. The philosophy of “innocent until proven guilty” has turned into “guilty until proven innocent.” This change in the way people think about these matters has ruined our understanding of how the law works and why it works the way it does. Furthermore, one of the mantras of the #MeToo movement was “believe all women.” That has also proved to be a terrible mistake. Unfortunately, there have been many instances in which women have lied as a way to ruin the reputation of someone they did not like, be it politically motivated or not.

Finally, Moore’s leaked letter and the rise of the #MeToo movement had enough people concerned that at the 2021 annual meeting of the SBC, its messengers voted to investigate the Executive Committee to find out if any wrongdoing actually occurred. Messengers to the annual SBC meeting are just individuals from local churches who go to the annual meeting to vote on various matters within SBC life. At that meeting, Ed Litton was voted as the next SBC President (who, by the way, came with his own scandal of plagiarizing J.D. Greear’s sermons). Litton hired GuidePost Solutions to investigate the Executive Committee. GuidePost is an independent organization. Over the next year GuidePost conducted its study of the EC and released its report.

For many, the “leaked” letter by Moore is seen as a retaliatory way to have the EC investigated and to take down the SBC in general. This would become especially prominent as attorney client privilege became part of the central debate within this entire drama.

Next, I will summarize a variety of issues that surround this report.

THE ” SECRET DATABASE“

The media continues to talk about a “secret database” held by the Executive Committee in which they had an ongoing list of several hundred potential abusers in various churches. Not all of these were SBC churches. The so-called database was setup by a member of the EC who setup a Google Alert to send a news report that contained the words “abuse” and “Baptist” in it. Google would then automatically send a news article to one of the EC members so they could read the article and be aware of potential abuse cases in the SBC. Those news articles were used to form a spreadsheet that contained the name of the person, the state, a summary of the news article, and what denomination they were from. You can view the full list here: SBC List. The problem with this list is that it basically contains news sourced from automated Google Alerts and provides a list of people who may or may not have been convicted or even credibly accused.

Did the EC have a running list of potential abusers? Yes. Was it a “secret database” kept by the EC to cover up abuse and protect the reputation of the SBC while doing nothing to help churches or those abused? No.

As a matter of fact, this list contains around 400+ names over a period of 24 years and in almost every single case of abuse, the minister or volunteer was fired, jailed, or otherwise removed from ministry by that local church. It is standard practice in every SBC church to background check every volunteer that works with minors as well as anyone paid by the church in any position at all. In addition, the EC always provided on the SBC website a link for churches to check the sex offender registry. It’s worth realizing that the EC is not setup to be able to litigate every accusation of abuse in 47,000+ churches. That’s the deal with the “list.”

WAIVER OF ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE

Another hot topic that has been widely misunderstood is the issue of “attorney-client privilege” in the EC. You have to understand that the EC has its own set of lawyers and accountants who advise them because they are managing hundreds of millions of dollars. Those who wanted the EC investigated drummed up enough support to convince the EC to narrowly vote to waive their attorney-client privilege. Against the advice of every single lawyer they consulted, the EC voted to waive this privilege, which gave GuidePost deeper access into things that would have been otherwise off-limits to the investigation. Several lawyers provided an option to allow GuidePost access without waiving privilege, but the demands of those on social media pushed enough EC members to waive their privilege. The reason this is such a hotly debated matter is because waiving privilege also came with the insurance coverage of the SBC being dropped. This is the exact reason many voted against waiving privilege. They knew that waiving attorney-client privilege would potentially lead to endless lawsuits that could bankrupt the SBC. Nobody voted against waiving it to hide anything. They simply wanted to protect the SBC’s insurance coverage. That insurance coverage is what legally protects the SBC against lawsuits and protects all of our assets. That insurance is now gone and the funds and assets of the SBC are now up for grabs as lawsuits are being filed. Just last night I saw an ad on Facebook that said, “SBC knowingly covers up sexual abuses. If you were abused by a member of the SBC, you may seek justice and compensation.”

Once attorney-client privilege was waived, every single lawyer and accountant that helped the Executive Committee resigned. Waiving this privilege could become the downfall of the SBC.

This is problematic for obvious reasons. For what it’s worth, it is my understanding that the EC was able to maintain some level of insurance but not what it had previously. It is also my understanding that the EC cannot be sued because it has no authority over churches. We will see how this plays out. However, it is also very problematic because the EC manages funds that come directly from people who give money in the pews of local churches to be managed by the EC. I am convinced that the overwhelming majority of churches properly handle cases of abuse, and the funds given by the people in the pews should not be open season for lawsuits that should be a matter of local law enforcement.

Let me reiterate something: local churches that knowingly cover-up abuse or secretly harbor abusers should be sued for every last penny the law allows for. Pastors or volunteers who commit abuse should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

The main problem is that the EC is being attacked rather than allowing local law enforcement to deal with an instance of abuse in a local congregation where the abuse took place. The EC simply has no power or ability to handle cases of abuse in a local church or seminary. It makes me wonder if there are more people aiming to take down the SBC than there are people who want to uphold the law, due process, and deal with things within the jurisdiction in which a crime took place. If you follow any SBC matters on social media, you will quickly find out that there is a very large number of people who believe the SBC is rotten to the core, racist, and abusive. They want to take down the SBC and everything with it. Unfortunately, we have moved into an era in which social media is often able to accomplish such things.

The waiving of attorney-client privilege has opened the door for potential lawsuits that could bankrupt the SBC. This could have been avoided while also allowing GuidePost to conduct a thorough investigation.

THE REPORT AND A FEW QUESTIONS THAT DON’T ADD UP

To be clear, the report was not pretty, and it certainly contained evidence that many mistakes were made. I acknowledge that, and I hope those who had anything to do with any mistakes repent and pursue better practices. I’ve read the full 200+ page report, and it’s not easy to read. I am also well familiar with many of the cases it mentions because all of this has been out in the open for many years on social media. Some of the cases it discusses have some legitimacy. Some of them are questionable at best. For example, many of you are probably familiar with Johnny Hunt. He’s the longtime pastor at FBC in Woodstock, GA. He was named as an abuser in the report who pursued and abused another pastor’s wife at a condo. The details given are written in such a way to make you believe a certain narrative around what took place. Johnny Hunt denies that it was abuse, but he does admit that a brief moment of indecency happened between him and another woman (she also admits that it was brief, but she called it abuse). Who was right? I simply don’t know. What I do know is that there’s a significant difference between an abuser and someone who commits adultery. One is a horrendous crime that should be punished by law and the other is an immoral act against God, his spouse, and those who trusted him. Johnny Hunt will have no due process and will now likely forever be seen as a sex offender because a report found him “guilty until proven innocent.” GuidePost did not seek Johnny Hunt’s side of the story. It ran with one side. Perhaps the report had an agenda of its own?

Furthermore, the “secret list” has been drummed up by the report farther than it should have been, and GuidePost failed to reach out to the person who setup the Google Alert system in the first place. His opinion matters, and it was excluded. Call me old-fashioned, but I am a little skeptical of reports that lead to a conclusion without providing context or opinions from all sides. There’s a reason a lawyer can object during an examination for “leading the witness.” A report can do the same thing, and this report certainly seems to lead to a particular conclusion it wants you to have. That conclusion is that the SBC harbors abusers and covers up sexual misconduct. I don’t believe that is the case.

Let’s be clear: once an allegation of abuse has been made, there is ALWAYS a victim. That victim is either the person abused or the person wrongfully accused whose life is ruined as a result. We must be very careful when we make judgments on any one person or any institution when due process is denied and convictions in a court of law have not been made. I am well aware of the challenges of getting a conviction in a case of abuse or rape, but I am simply unwilling to give up due process because of the challenges faced by these types of lawsuits and accusations.

WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?

To be honest, I’m not really sure. Time will tell what will happen in the SBC. I waited to finish writing this article because I wanted to wait and see the various reports that would come out after the report was published. I’m glad I did because much has come to light since the report was released. I’d like to address a few things:

IS THE SBC A SAFE PLACE FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN?

Absolutely, yes! Let’s be clear about something: the “list” uncovered about 400 potential abuse cases in over 47,000+ churches over a span of 24 years. By contrast, there are about 15,000 cases of sexual abuse and sexual violence in 97,000 public schools in one single year. I am sure there are may more cases in churches and in schools, but do the math and you’ll find that a child is 40 times more likely to be abused in a public school than a church. Why isn’t the real story about abuse in public schools? I’m not engaging in whataboutism. I am simply making the point that by all comparable metrics, the SBC is incredibly safe.

Again, one case in a church is one too many. It’s one too many anywhere. But, wherever sin exists, we should expect to find instances of the physical manifestation of sin, such as abuse. I also want to add that evil people will often use religion as a way to gain access to women and children. People who commit such horrendous and evil crimes do not bear the name of Jesus Christ. They are wolves in sheep’s clothing.

WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE SBC?

I don’t know the answer to this either. I do know the EC has now setup a hotline where someone can find help for abuse. I am thankful for that. I think it’s a step in the right direction. The SBC has also agreed to maintain a public database of “credibly accused” or convicted abusers so SBC churches can check it against any potential hires or volunteers. I am skeptical that this is a good idea. For example, a local news agency reported on a pastor in Alabama who had the same name as someone else in the state who was on the list. That was a mistake of the news agency, but that pastor has said it has ruined his ministry in the community. This is why keeping a list was a bad idea to begin with, and it will be a terrible idea going forward.

Any convicted abuser can be found by a background check, and churches should do their due diligence when screening ministers and volunteers. Providing a public list of those “credibly accused” is unwise because it denies due process and “credibly accused” can be difficult to establish and could contain a spectrum of credibility used to put someone on a list that very well could be innocent.

My other concern is that the EC has re-allocated millions of dollars from the budget without the consent of the Messengers from SBC churches. This includes 9 million dollars taken to fund some of the initiatives suggested by GuidePost Solutions. Of that 9 million dollars, 4.5 million of it is being taken away from the International Mission Board over the next 15 months. Paul Chitwood, the IMB President, said this will essentially defund the IMB’s ability to send 72 more missionaries into the world. My problem here is the EC redirecting millions of dollars without the consent of the churches who gave that money to be used for missions.

WHAT ABOUT JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITY?

As I see it, the EC should do a better job at providing resources and training to local churches to properly deal with these matters based on jurisdictional authority. What I mean by this is simple: when a church becomes aware of a crime of abuse or sexual misconduct (or any crime for that matter), there are two spheres of jurisdiction: the church and local law enforcement. The job of the church is to IMMEDIATELY REPORT ANY AND EVERY CRIME committed to local law enforcement. The church cannot attempt to litigate these matters “in house.” Too many churches try to do that, and it is ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS a grave mistake. This is one thing the GuidePost report did bring to light. Too many churches have failed at reporting crimes and trying to deal with things within the church. The only jurisdictional authority the church has is church discipline, which means the church must rebuke and remove any member from church membership AND support the victim. Anything else must be left to local law enforcement with full cooperation from the church.

Pastor Voddie Bauchum’s church in Texas provides a great example of this. They had a church elder who was discovered to be abusing his wife and kids in his home. The church immediately reported the crime, helped physically provide a safe location for the wife and kids, and held the local District Attorney accountable to pursuing justice on account of the abused. My understanding is the D.A. did not want to pursue the case, but the church continued to push the D.A. to pursue it and the church was successful. Unfortunately, the wife lost the “breadwinner” in the family and could no longer support herself and her kids. The church financially supported this family until the woman was able to secure employment and the ability to provide for herself and her kids. This is a wonderful example of a church properly handling a crime while at the same time fulfilling its obligation to care for the abused. If more churches followed this model and were trained to properly do so, then the church would have a far better reputation of pursuing justice while also caring well for those who are abused.

CONCLUSION

At the end of the day, this is a long and complex story. It is one with many sides, and I am well aware that you may not agree with my particular take on it. We are living in the bad fruit of postmodernism where truth is difficult to discover and where social media mobs often control what people believe. As Christians, we must always pursue what is true, even if that truth uncovers horrible sins. For it is only in the light of truth that the gospel shines forth to save sinners and help heal those who bear the weight of abuse. I long for the day when Jesus will return and never again will any man, woman, or child experience any sort of abuse. I long for the day when evil is eradicated from this world, and for the day when every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord.

If nothing else, I hope this helps you gain an understanding of what has happened, and I further hope that you will pray for anyone who has experienced abuse and that justice will be served to anyone who abused another person made in the image of God.

Reflections on America from an Older Millennial

As for millennials I’m right up there with the oldest of them. I was born in 1981 and will be turning 40 in just a few months. At the other end of the millennial age spectrum are those in their early to mid-20s. That’s quite the age difference, especially given that younger millennials aren’t old enough to remember 9/11 and how the world changed following that event. Less than a year after 9/11, I was in an airplane over the Atlantic Ocean when one of the air conditioning motors caught on fire, and we had to return to land and make an emergency landing in Gander, Newfoundland. The sheer panic that overcame the people on the plane was intense. Everyone assumed we were part of another terrorist attack (obviously, I lived to tell the tale). This is part of my generation’s history that younger generations will not understand.

The interesting part of being the oldest of the millennials is that I’m old enough to identify with generations older than me, and yet I believe I am young enough to understand those below me as well. I wasn’t born with an iPhone in my hand. I’m old enough to remember playing old school Donkey Kong on Atari and getting our first Nintendo (not Super Nintendo or Nintendo 64, just plain old, Nintendo). I grew up shooting BB guns in the woods and drinking out of a hose (gasp!). Our trampolines didn’t have safety nets either, nor did we wear bike helmets. How on earth did we ever survive? The fact is that there’s a significant difference between older millennials and younger millennials.

Regardless, for those around my age but especially those younger than me, there seems to be a common thread: many of us have gone through a period of time in which we began to believe that America is an evil country whose only purpose was to pillage and plunder our way into prosperity. Many of us bought into the lie that America is responsible for all that is wrong in the world. We accepted the notion that America is systemically racist and full of greedy capitalists. I realize this feeling has always been present in American history, but it is undeniably more present among younger generations now, especially with the dawn of social media.

Those thoughts about the evils of America began for me around 2015 when Donald Trump entered the Presidential race and became a frontrunner for the 2016 election. I quickly joined the #nevertrump team, and I simply could not understand why scores of Christians would support a man like him. Christian support of Trump was the final straw for me that nearly set me down a path to team woke. I began to see America like Israel would have seen Babylon – as an evil empire oppressing the masses through the delusion of freedom. I began down the road of becoming a “progressive,” fully believing that America needed a revolution.

Two things prevented me from going full on progressive in my politics: theology and history. There was always a tension between what I believed theologically and what I believed politically. My theology would only let me go so far politically. What I began to see is that theology and politics are intertwined in a way that cannot be fully separated. For instance, my Christian beliefs about an unborn life inform my political views about abortion. How could I embrace a progressive view of politics while holding to a Christian ethic of life? The same is true for homosexual marriage. I could not embrace a progressive view that essentially erases marriage while also believing that God ordained marriage to be a union between one man and one woman. Those are just two examples, but the list could certainly be much longer. As my theology prevented me from embracing a progressive view of politics, history was the second step that pulled me back from the brink of progressivism.

My brother and I would often exchange heated text messages about politics, Trump, racism, etc. He was staunchly opposed to my views, and it was evident that he loved America much more than I did at the time. It took some convincing, but he finally got me to listen to a few podcasts about current affairs. In addition, he told me about a line of thinking within the African American community that rejected the current narrative of racism and oppression in America. That included people like Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, Shelby Steele, and many, many more. As my understanding of America expanded outside my Twitter feed, I began to see the shining light of American greatness.

Then I enrolled in an American History class through Hillsdale College. I fully admit that my understanding of American history was sorely lacking. In middle school and high school I was much more interested in girls and P.E. class than I was about learning history. However, this class through Hillsdale began to shape my understanding of America into what it should be, which is the greatest place that has ever existed in the history of the world. That doesn’t mean America is perfect, but it does mean that through all her faults and failures, this country is exceptional. Currently I am taking another course with Hillsdale titled: “Constitution 101: The Meaning and History of the Constitution.” This class is just as good as the first one, and it has given me further evidence that America is not the awful, racist, and evil place many would like you to believe.

I found in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution that our country is exceptional and that no other document exists under which human freedom has flourished so wonderfully. Yes, it took time, a Civil War, and the Civil Rights Movement for that to be extended to everyone, but those two documents stand as a promissory note of the eventual freedom of all people. Do I wish it would have been true from the date of signing? Of course I do, but I can’t change history.

Theology and history have a way of forcing you to deal with both the past and the future. My theology would not allow me to move forward with progressivism, while history forced me to deal with the past in such a way that helped me see the cliff progressivism is headed toward.

What is it I’d like younger millennials to know?

• Theology matters

As much as I wish theology and politics were not intertwined, they are very closely linked together. Here is what you must know though: what you believe about theology and the Bible will inform your politics. You cannot avoid that reality. The problem for most younger millennials is that the process of understanding theology and history is often played in reverse. Too many younger Christians decide what they believe about politics and history before they decide what they believe about theology and the Bible.

If you buy into the current secular worldview, then your theology will eventually follow closely behind. You will eventually buy into the idea that America is Babylon. This is a dangerous road that will wreck your theology and destroy what you believe about everything. This is why we have seen many Christian artists beginning to deconstruct their faith and walk away from orthodox Christianity.

The same history many younger Americans have bought into about our own history is also true for what is often believed about the church. Many younger Christians see the church as equally oppressive. This is also a false understanding of church history and evangelicalism in general. The truth is that if your theology and your church reflects the values of the current secular world, then it’s time to pause and evaluate your theology.

Here’s a good diagnostic question: does what you believe about the Bible reflect worldly values more than it does what your parents or grandparents probably believe? If you can answer that in the affirmative, then it’s likely that you’ve already embraced a secular worldview and have begun to filter your theology through the world rather than the world through your theology. All I’m asking of my younger millennial and Generation Z friends is that you consider your theological beliefs before you jump ship and embrace worldly values.

I’d also ask of my younger friends that you consider American history.

• History matters

I recently watched the documentary on the life of Clarence Thomas. It’s an exceptional documentary, and I highly recommend it. It opened my eyes to a much bigger understanding of America. I’m also disturbed that Amazon removed it from its streaming service during Black History Month (perhaps because it doesn’t fit the woke narrative?). Clarence Thomas grew up in the south under very difficult circumstances where racism was the norm and dire poverty was surely his future. Thomas beat the odds and became the second African American to sit on the Supreme Court.

Thomas went down that path of thinking America was an awful, evil empire. As his views began to change and as he understood more about America’s founding documents, he said, “The principles of this country are worth dying for.” Further, he said, “I was looking for a way of thinking, a set of ideals that fundamentally at its core said slavery is wrong…which natural law, of course, does.” Thomas found what he was looking for, and he didn’t find it in revolutionary ideas. He found it in the Declaration of Independence which boldly states, “All men are created equal…they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights.” This is natural law in its most basic form, and it forms the foundation for why America had to end slavery and extend these rights to every single person on American soil.

These are complicated issues that need a great deal of understanding, but it must be understood that the foundational documents of American history are what paved the way toward freedom and equality for all people. Was that path easy and filled with warm fuzzy feelings of freedom? Of course not. Nobody is denying that. However, anyone can look back into history and realize that the freedom every single American enjoys today is rooted in our past, no matter how difficult that past may be. America was the revolution the world needed.

The reality is that there are no perfect countries. World history is unfortunately a history of conquest. There is not a country on earth that did everything right, but there is only one country on earth that is founded upon the right ideals that have led to the greatest amount of prosperity and freedom in the world for all people. That country is America, and I am proud of this exceptionally great country.

It is because of my understanding of our history that I refuse to accept the idea that America is an awful and racist country.

Again, I would ask of my younger friends, if you buy the idea that America is awful, then at the very least do what I did. Take an American history class with Hillsdale College. These are free classes that you can take on your own time. If you are going to charge forward with the woke view of America, at least take a pause and reconsider before moving another inch forward.

This does not mean that every Christian will agree on every matter of politics, history, and policy. There is a wide range of disagreements Christians can have about all of these matters. However, there is a limit to everything, and my theology was the blockade that prevented me from going any further down this road of progressive/woke ideas.

It’s taken me the better chunk of the last two years studying history to come to a place where I see that America is the greatest place on earth, and as Clarence Thomas said, “The principles of this country are worth dying for.” I believe that, too. If you’re headed down a different path, then I encourage you to pause and reconsider. It may just be that the freedom you think exists out there somewhere in a utopian vision of the world already exists right in front of you. It’s called America.

God bless America!

Defining Critical Race Theory

Hold on tight. Read this a few times. It’ll help you understand what’s going on in society.

Almost one year ago I wrote about critical race theory and intersectionality (CRT/I). Since then I have spent a great deal of time studying CRT/I and its many offshoots, particularly its Marxist roots. Critical race theory is frequently in the news now, especially as you see various governors banning it from public schools.

However, there is one problem that persists: nobody seems to be able to accurately define critical race theory. In my sermon on Sunday, I mentioned the idea that CRT is essentially Marxism. I’ve had a few questions about this subject since then, so I would like to define CRT for you.

In the most brief way possible, Christopher Rufo defines critical race theory as racialized Marxism. Rufo is no stranger to this subject matter. He is the senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. He is a graduate of Georgetown University, and has spent time working on domestic policy matters with the Heritage Foundation as well as at the Claremont Institute.

Critical Race Theory = Racialized Marxism.

But, what does racialized Marxism mean?

First, let’s define Marxism. Marxism is a political and economic theory that divides people into two groups: oppressors and the oppressed. Within Marxism, the main idea is that those in the oppressed class would realize their oppression, rise up against their oppressors, and initiate a revolution that would usher in the utopia of a classless society. Marxism seeks equity throughout society. Interestingly enough, equity is a term we hear frequently now. It’s important to note that equity does not mean equality. In America, we believe in equality of opportunity; whereas, in Marxist thinking, equity means equality of OUTCOME. When you hear the word “equity” today, you should know that equity does not mean equality.

Marxism is about ushering in the utopian vision of a classless society by way of revolution. That revolution happens when the oppressed recognize their oppression through a critical consciousness (that’s where we get the word “woke” from). Marxism is about class struggle.

Remove the term “class” from Marxism and insert “race.” This is how you get to Critical Race Theory. CRT is racialized Marxism. Critical race theorists believe America is racist to its core, and that America can also be divided into two groups by race: the oppressors and the oppressed. The goal of CRT in America is not to work toward greater racial unity. The goal of CRT in America is revolution.

This is exactly racialized Marxism. Nobody is hiding this. Black Lives Matter has openly declared it. Hundreds and hundreds of universities teach it. Anyone who wants to argue with this definition has the burden of proof on them to change my mind.

With that in mind, critical race theory has many different strains of thought, but there are three unifying principles that define CRT. These three principles are a combination of ideas coming directly from Derek Bell and Stokely Carmichael (often cited as the founders of CRT), Richard Delgado (University of Alabama Law Professor who wrote the standard textbook on CRT), Robin DeAngelo (author of White Fragility), Ibram X. Kendi, and Nikole Hannah-Jones (author of the 1619 Project).

1. Racism is the ordinary state of being for white people.
2. You are invested in racism even if you claim not to be racist.
3. It is impossible to not be racist, so you must become “anti-racist.”

Let’s unpack each of these.

First, CRT teaches that racism is the ordinary state of being for white people. In other words, CRT teaches that racism is present in every action or interaction a white person has with any person of color. The question is never, “was this action racist?” The question is always, “how did racism manifest itself in every action or interaction.” For example, let’s say you own a store and two customers walk in at the same time. One is white, and one is black. Who do you serve first? Normal people don’t bring race into this situation. If you’re a business owner, you likely just let the two customers know you are there to help when they need it. However, CRT teaches that if you help the white man first, then you are obviously racist because you put a white person before a black person. But, if you help the black person first, then you are still obviously a racist because you must have helped the black man first because you don’t trust black people to walk around your store unattended if you were to help the white man first. CRT always brings race into every situation. This is why we continue to hear absurd stories about how everything from mathematics to test scores are racist tools of oppression.

Secondly, CRT teaches that you are invested in racism even when you claim not to be a racist. The reason critical race theorists say this is because white people benefit from “the system” that was established to oppress black people. In other words, all white people are guilty by association because white people benefit from the system designed to oppress people of color. This would extend even to things like property rights and individual liberty because even those things are viewed as part of the system that was setup to maintain power and oppression over other people. 

Do you see how troubling this is?

Third, CRT teaches that you must become anti-racist. Like the term “equity,” anti-racism is not being used in the way you might think. Anti-racism sounds like you should acknowledge that racism is bad. However, anti-racism is far more than that. Remember my first point above: according to CRT, it’s impossible to not be a racist. Well, if that’s true (which it’s not), what are you supposed to do? You are to embrace the teachings of anti-racism. Anti-racism is a form of training often used in corporate settings, diversity programs, and schools/universities to help white people dig deep within themselves to identify their complicity in racism. In other words, it’s practically a form of counseling and therapy to help you uncover your own racism. These types of programs are becoming commonplace from kindergartens to large corporations. Anti-racism is in fact racism by another name and in a different direction.

The objective of these 3 principles is to usher in a revolution that sets America free from its oppressors within a capitalist, free-market system because it is “the system” that oppresses people. CRT is not interested in reform. Reform is not sufficient within CRT because the entire “system” is the problem and must be destroyed and rebuilt. This is what racialized Marxism looks like. You must understand that CRT is not some random worldview that’s out there on the fringes of society. CRT is a well-established legal theory with its roots in Marxism. Any argument to the contrary will require a significant amount of evidence to change my mind.

Now that you can define CRT, is it really a problem to worry about? YES. Here’s why:

Are you a doctor or do you have plans to go into the medical field? CRT will be forced on you there. The American Medical Association has already outlined a 5 year plan to implement CRT in medical programs. You can read all about it here: AMA: Organizational Strategic Plan to Embed Racial Justice and Advance Health Equity.

Are you a realtor? Then watch what you say. The National Association of Realtors changed their code of ethics last year to implement various aspects of CRT. As of right now, the NAR can censure you or revoke your license if you speak against certain things as a private individual. You can read about it in their newly adopted code of ethics. Matt Moore has written about this here: An Open Letter to the National Association of REALTORS.

Do you have kids? Then CRT is coming for them too! Let’s not leave out the kids. Nickelodeon’s efforts at ending climate injustice and climate racism are just as absurd as anything else.

Going to Seminary? CRT is there, too. Dr. Mestizo is a well known professor of CRT at Wheaton College, which has typically been a bastion of Christian Orthodoxy.

Do you shop at Target? Target is essentially living out the Marxist CRT agenda with the partnership with GLSEN, as well as up and down their corporate structure.

Here’s the deal – CRT and all of its many offshoots are not compatible with biblical Christianity, but CRT has become such a powerful force that it has made inroads well within evangelicalism and even inside the Southern Baptist Convention. CRT is not going anywhere. You might as well get comfortable understanding what it is so that you won’t fall into its trap.

I hope this helps you understand what it is and how to spot it because it’s everywhere.

Should Christians be Concerned about Critical Race Theory?

I’m not often inclined to write about every cultural or social issue that pops up. However, there are several movements afoot that are different than other movements, and I think Christians need to pay attention to how some of these movements will impact religious liberty and Christianity in general. 

Over the weekend you probably heard the news that President Trump wants to end funding to any federal programs teaching Critical Race Theory. He labeled these programs as “divisive, anti-American propaganda,” and he was right for doing so. Of course, this sparked a lot of controversy on both sides of the aisle, but it also confused a lot of Christians because Critical Race Theory is usually confined to the halls of academia. However, many Christians are beginning to hear this term, along with others keywords like: “woke,” and “social justice warrior (SJW).” These are terms that often go hand in hand with Critical Race Theory.

So, what is Critical Race Theory, and why does it matter?

Critical Race Theory is often combined with the philosophy of Intersectionality and abbreviated as CRT/I. CRT/I is a dangerous philosophy and worldview rooted in Marxism that undermines the foundations of our own society. While it has often been confined to the halls of academia, it is now a rapidly growing movement within our own country, and believe it or not, it is growing quite rapidly within certain branches of evangelicalism as well. 

In its most basic form, CRT/I is a method of confronting power structures in society by dividing people into groups based on the amount of power within that group. It goes one step further by stating that those who hold power always oppress people who do not have power, even if they are not actively doing something oppressive. The entire basis of this worldview is that America is systemically racist, which means racism and injustice run throughout all of the “systems” of our country. Therefore, anyone who is part of the “system” is ultimately a gatekeeper of the racist institutions America was founded upon. CRT/I attempts to confront the oppression inherent to the system by dividing people into two groups: oppressors and the oppressed.

For instance, a white male would be considered as one having more power than a black male because white people have historically held more power than black people. Based on CRT/I, the white person would be the oppressor and the black male would be the oppressed. This concept holds true for those in CRT/I even if the white person is doing nothing to actively oppress the black person. According to CRT/I, it is true simply because white people are part of a “system” of whiteness. If you layer the concept of Intersectionality on top of CRT, then you create more groups and more layers of oppression. For instance, a white heterosexual male with advanced education would be considered as having far more power than a black homosexual female with no education. You can see how the layers work. The more “intersections” you can create, then the more power one group has over another, and, therefore, the more oppressive the power group becomes. 

Now, as a hint of how this intersects with religious liberty, just imagine how the oppressed groups view the church. Within the CRT/I worldview, the church becomes one of the most oppressive groups in the country because it is frequently filled with white heterosexual people who have advanced the cause of racism and are still doing so today.

Within the CRT/I framework, moral authority belongs to the oppressed groups because the oppressed groups are the ones with the authority to describe what’s actually happening in the world. In other words, they are the ones who experience oppression and therefore have the authority to speak of it. Furthermore, the oppressed groups do not believe that oppressors should have a claim to any moral authority because they oppress people. 

How does someone gain moral authority within CRT/I? Moral authority is gained by surrendering to those who do have moral authority within the oppressed groups. In other words, that would mean someone like a white male could only gain moral authority by surrendering his worldview to the worldview of someone within an oppressed group (such as the black homosexual female in the example above). This is exactly what just happened at Northwestern University Law School. In today’s episode of The Briefing from Al Mohlder, the Washington Free Beacon has reported a very specific instance of this. The school recently held a training event to help school administrators understand how to be an ally for people of color on campus. Following the training, the interim dean of the law school proclaimed, “I’m Jim Spata. And I am a racist.” One of the other administrators confessed to being a “gatekeeper of white supremacy,” not because she had actually done something oppressive but because she is part of the “system.” Again, according to CRT/I, someone does not have to actually do something racist or oppressive to be labeled a racist. Simply being a part of the “system” of injustice established in America is enough to be labeled a racist and an oppressor. These school administrators are not racist themselves, but they have now surrendered to a different type of system that will demand their allegiance to the very ideas tearing apart America.

The end result of this worldview, known as CRT/I, is what we are watching play out on national news with all of these continued riots and looting. But, there’s one more step you must understand that helps undergird and support these movements: The 1619 Project. 

If you aren’t familiar with the 1619 Project, it is a project from the New York Times headed by Nikole-Hannah Jones. The 1619 Project is aimed at reframing American history as one founded for the sole purpose of extending the reach of slavery into the Americas and to establish white supremacy. Slavery is, of course, a terrible part of our history, but it is simply untrue that America was founded for the singular purpose of slavery and the establishment of white supremacy. The Declaration of Independence makes it clear that our country was founded on the ideals that all men are created equal and that everyone is endowed by their creator with very specific unalienable rights that precede government. Our founders had it right, and the 1619 Project is a complete and utter falsehood that should be rejected. Is America perfect? No. Did our founding ideals apply to everyone equally at our founding? No, but thank God that the founders set our country on a path where that would eventually be true for everyone as it is now today. 

The 1619 Project may be new to you, but it is not new with the cultural elites and those who are beginning to implement it into the public education system. Within many school districts, it is now being used as an alternative way of telling American history to our children (and probably your grandchildren). Education Next has even reported on the use of the 1619 Project in children’s curriculum through Random House Children’s Books.

When you combine the philosophies of CRT/I with the 1619 Project, you create an explosive situation, which is exactly what we are all witnessing on the news every single day lately. These philosophies undergird organizations like Black Lives Matter and antifa groups. “Black lives matter,” as a statement, is true because all lives matter. But, Black Lives Matter, as an organization, must be rejected because of its Marxist underpinnings and embrace of CRT/I and the 1619 Project (and for many other reasons as well, such as its organizational aim to “disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family.”).

Now, you may be asking yourself, “Is this really such a big deal that a pastor should be spending his time writing about it? Surely this isn’t a mainstream idea that we should be worried about.”

I disagree. Over the last week, NPR featured and promoted a book called, “In Defense of Looting,” in which the author seeks to justify the looting and rioting because those types of actions are the only way to tear down the “system” of capitalism and white supremacy that was used to build this country. Those who loot and riot, according to the author, are only taking what is rightfully theirs anyway. Looting and rioting are a means to new birth that can only be realized once the system is completely torn apart. Once again, this is cultural Marxism being played out through the philosophies of CRT/I and undergirded by a false view of American history. 

In addition to NPR’s feature, Kay Warren, wife of famed pastor Rick Warren (author of The Purpose-Driven Church), tweeted out that white supremacy and injustice are “built into the walls of our country.” She used imagery from Jeremiah 22:16 to claim that America is built on these very concepts I have discussed above. Kay Warren is no obscure figure on the horizon of evangelicalism. She has a following of over 50,000 people on Twitter and her husband is the pastor of one of the largest churches in America, which also happens to be affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention. 

As a side note, the Southern Baptist Convention has passed resolutions condemning CRT/I and elevating the authority of Scripture. The language in those resolutions will likely be strengthened in the coming years.

The conversation about CRT/I and the 1619 Project has been bubbling in theological circles for a few years now (and in academia for decades), but it is now reaching a fever pitch that is flowing over into the mainstream. 

Should Christians be concerned about these philosophies? Absolutely.

But, why? 

Christians should be concerned because these dangerous philosophies (along with many others that we don’t have time to discuss) will present major challenges to religious liberty as well as how you may be viewed in an encounter in a restaurant or grocery store, or even while walking down the street or enjoying time at a local park.

I had a conversation with a friend of mine a few months ago about religious liberty. He told me that he views the church as the primary oppressor in our society. This is exactly how people are beginning to view you. More and more, as a Christian, you will be viewed as an oppressor rather than someone who wants people to be set free from true spiritual oppression (to use the same language). Furthermore, for the millions of college students who have been indoctrinated with these philosophies, the only answer and resolution will come in the form of tearing down the foundations of our society in order to build a new one free of capitalism, free of white supremacy, and free of religion in general, but free of Christianity more specifically. You simply cannot buy into CRT/I and the 1619 Project without concluding that what currently exists must be torn asunder – both this country and the church. 

CRT/I and the 1619 Project lead to revolution. The only option within this framework is to tear down that which exists in hopes of building a utopia free of oppression. Unfortunately, and quite ironically, the revolution will not be peaceful or free of oppression. It will use force and oppression to silence any and all who refuse to shout its mantras.

A few final thoughts:

Am I overreacting? No. These are really dangerous philosophies that are rapidly moving into the mainstream, and there are many Christians and seminaries embracing these ideas. Trust me, these very same ideas will be taught to your children and grandchildren. They are not American ideals, and they certainly are not Christian either. It’s important that you understand these philosophies, where they come from, and how they will play out in society.

Yet, at the same time, I don’t want you to react in fear or to lose hope in the church or in our country. One of my favorite verses comes from Psalm 2. There we read:

1 “Why do the nations rage

and the peoples plot in vain?

2 The kings of the earth set themselves,

and the rulers take counsel together,

against the Lord and against his

Anointed saying, 

3 ‘Let us burst their bonds apart

and cast away their cords from us.”

How does God respond?

4 “He who sits in the heavens laughs;

The Lord holds them in derision.”

In other words, no matter how much people plot to do evil and to rip apart that which is good, God is not surprised, he will not be mocked, and God is still sovereign and in control of all things! As a matter of fact, the Psalm says that God sits in heaven and laughs at their feeble attempts to plot against the Lord (let that calm your soul to know that God laughs). 

I realize that not everyone will agree with my assessment or possibly even my view that American history is good and founded upon the right ideas. If this is all new to you, then I suggest taking the time to ask me questions or to seek out people who are knowledgeable about these matters. A lot of people are interacting with these ideas and are being influenced by those who promote them rather than influenced by those sounding the alarm. These are issues that I have followed for years and have studied throughout my education. They are not small issues to be disregarded as ideas on the fringe of society. They are issues that will negatively impact religious liberty and the foundations of America. They are here to stay, and Christians need to understand what’s at stake. 

Finally, let me be clear that I am not dismissing the idea that racism still exists today. However, I do not subscribe to the idea that America is “systemically” racist, meaning that racism and injustice are still intentionally built into the systems and institutions of our country. Do we have racist people in America? Absolutely. Is America systemically racist right now? Absolutely not. Will racism somehow disappear if we tear it down and start all over? No. Racism is a grievous sin of the heart, and I am incredibly thankful that the gospel of Jesus Christ provides a better answer to the problems we see in the world today.

Morning Roundup – Monday 11/5

Godspeed by Britt Merrick on Kindle today for FREE. I can’t vouch for this book because I haven’t read it, but it certainly captures my attention. Merrick declares, “You were made for this.” In Godspeed, Britt Merrick challenges us to step out of our little, self-centered lives and step into God’s grand mission—His plan to restore, redeem, and renew the world.

A Prayer for America on Election Day – Al Mohler states, “May God grant us mercy and grace as we seek to fulfill our responsibilities as citizens — and our responsibilities as Christians.  This world is not our home, but we do bear responsibilities as followers of Christ as we are living here.” This is a great article that will help you think about how to pray for our nation.

Four Ways a Woman’s Words Can Give Life – Amanda Edmondson, writing for The Resurgence, “As women, we can live out the call to be life givers at any point in our life regardless of our marital status, number of children, or grandchildren. Be a woman who gives life to those around you in your homes, work places, and churches.”

The Polls Tell us Less Than We Think – Kevin DeYoung writes a helpful article about what the polls tell us. If you haven’t figured it out already, the polls are just too close to call.

Missing the Facts on Obama and Faith – Interesting article here on Obama, faith, and liberal Protestantism.

The Gospel Project – The Stolen Blessing

The Stolen Blessing

Dear Parents and Guardians,

The Gospel Project for Kids continued its journey through God’s story by learning about a little sibling rivalry. Any child with a sibling can attest to the struggles that sometimes plague this special relationship. Jacob and Esau were no different. Jacob’s name means “heel grabber,” an apt description of who and what he was.

Esau despised his birthright in favor of some tasty stew that Jacob was making. The birthright was an important right in Hebrew culture, and for Esau to look on it with disdain was contrary to all that it was designed to do. Jacob took advantage of his brother and secured for himself a better familial position.

Jacob is a perfect example of why people need a Savior. He tricked his father into blessing him instead of his brother. Jacob lied and was a devious manipulator to gain something that wasn’t rightfully his. Like Jacob, we seek a birthright and a blessing that don’t belong to us, but we can’t lie, cheat, or deceive in order to gain it. Instead, Jesus shared His birthright and blessing with us when He paid for our sins on the cross and gave us His righteousness.

_________________

I’d like to take a moment to encourage everyone to be intentional about the Gospel Project and discipleship. I have come to the realization that discipleship has to be intentional. If it’s just something you try to do every now and then, it won’t work. Discipleship takes time and commitment. One of the reasons I love the Gospel Project is because it makes that process easy to do. If take the time to do the family journal exercise each week, review the cards, and work on the scripture memory with your kids then you are doing a FANTASTIC job. If you want to take it a step further, and you have an iPad, I would highly encourage you to get the Gospel Project Family App. It is a tremendous blessing, full of activities, videos, and games to help your kids solidify what they are learning.

Keep pressing on, parents and grandparents! The kids NEED you to teach them the Bible!

Blessings,

Jon

The Gospel Project – Week 4 – The Tower of Babel

Dear Parents,

The story of the Tower of Babel helps us understand the devastating effects of sin. Even after God had destroyed all life on earth through the flood and graciously saved Noah’s family and the animals, it wasn’t long before people disobeyed God again.

God instructed Noah to spread out and fill the earth. Instead, people decided it best to settle. Rather than bringing glory to God by following God’s plan, people decided to glorify themselves. They built a tower to make a name for themselves.

God’s plan to populate the earth following the flood could not be sidetracked. When God confused the languages of the people, they were forced to move away from one another and into people groups and nations bound by single languages. Eventually one of these nations would become God’s chosen people. Through the nation of Israel, Christ would come to save the world.

Remember to review those Gospel Project cards, and don’t feel the need to make it something “stiff.” Have fun with the cards. Ask your children questions about them. They soak in a lot more than you might think. I am always amazed at how much my kids are learning and how much they remember.

Also don’t forget that the kids will be singing their songs in the morning church service on Sunday, October 7th. They will review the songs on Wednesday nights at 6:30 at the beginning of RAs and GAs. I hope you all have a great week. I’m praying for you!

Blessings,

Jon