An Anti-Christian Agenda Believers Must Reject
I have a choice between prison guard A who cuts up babies and beats my family daily, but has been faithful to his spouse and is a middling liar; and prison guard B who has a track record of keeping his promise to prevent these horrible policies, but has a sordid sexual past 12+ years ago and a lying potty mouth. I go with prison guard B every time.
—Robert A. J. Gagnon, Professor of Theology at Houston Baptist University—
We are exploring reasons why social justice and biblical Christianity are incompatible. We can summarize part 1 and part 2 this way:
Those who have been forgiven are compelled to forgive, but those who demand “social justice equality” are unforgiving.
If this seems implausible to you, then respectfully, you don’t yet understand that advocating for social justice means demanding government redistribution of wealth—taking resources from groups that have been deemed “oppressors” and giving them to other groups that have been deemed “victims,” in order to achieve some semblance of equality.
One of the best examples of this is the call for reparations for American slavery, an institution that hasn’t existed in America for 154 years. Any fair-minded person knows that since all American slaveowners and slaves are dead, any arrangement to rectify past wrongs committed by slaveowners against their slaves cannot truly be just. Social justice warriors, including certain leaders in American evangelical churches, however, are undeterred and are pushing for reparations anyway. Here is the point that Christians need to remember: Social justice warriors in the church are demanding retribution, despite biblical teachings commanding believers to forgive.
As bad as this is, the goals of the social justice movement go far beyond a demand for reparations. It is glaringly apparent that a leftist political agenda is involved. Here is our theme for part 3.
The agenda of the Democrat Party is racist. Further, it is anti-God, anti-biblical, and anti-Christian.
We’ll make this case in a moment, but we also will issue an important warning against the backdrop of the evil the Democrat Party is promoting.
Sadly, the radical agenda of the Democrat Party isn’t stopping social justice warriors in the church from trying to convince conservative Christians to support Democrats and vote for them.
I realize these are controversial ideas, but they are accurate. These are truths I am compelled to point out.
How do we know that social justice (SJ) and biblical Christianity are incompatible? we look at the evidence. In addition to three pieces of evidence we examined last time, we now add a fourth.
Exhibit 4: It Isn’t Just About Reparations, but About a Great Deal More
Samuel Sey is a Christian blogger, a resident of Toronto, and an observer of the culture and the church’s role in it. Recently he posted an article on his website titled “Whiteness, Blackness, Christless.” He begins by noting that the movement for racial reconciliation, you would think, ought to be eschewing racism and uniting white and black believers. But it isn’t. He pointedly asks, “If the racial reconciliation movement is designed to produce unity, why are so many of its leaders divisive?”
The Sparrow Conference, a Christian women’s event, was supposed to be about racial reconciliation. One of the speakers was Ekemini Uwan. Uwan is a co-host on the Truth’s Table Podcast and a writer whose articles have appeared in Christianity Today, the Huffington Post Black Voices, and The Witness: A Black Christian Collective. According to the her bio on her website,
Ekemini…is passionate about sound theology, … [and] has a fierce commitment to biblical orthodoxy and its implications for issues pertaining to racial injustice, anti-black racism, and white supremacy.
In an interview held onstage at the Sparrow Conference, Uwan said this. Please don’t just read her words—read them as you listen to her speak.
So then when we talk about white identity, then we have to talk about what whiteness is. Well, the reality is that whiteness is rooted in plunder, in theft, in slavery, in enslavement of Africans, genocide of Native Americans…It’s a power structure, that is what whiteness is, and so that the thing for white women to do is you have to divest from whiteness because what happened was that your ancestors actually made a deliberate choice to rid themselves of their ethnic identity and by doing so they actually stripped Africans in America of their ethnic identity…Because we have to understand something – whiteness is wicked. It is wicked. It’s rooted in violence, it’s rooted in theft, it’s rooted in plunder, it’s rooted in power, in privilege.
People chose whiteness – they chose a man to be elected in office who is all about whiteness…So there’s real political consequences in here, so you have to divest from whiteness, you have to divest from patriarchy, white women specifically – because over 50% of you all voted for Trump and you got to ask yourself why.”
Uwan’s statements about whiteness prompted “several” of the attendees to walk out. After quoting Uwan, Sey noted that she claimed her statements were not meant to attack whites. Yet he challenged this assertion, noting also that
her reasoning and rhetoric in that interview suggest otherwise. Whiteness is a racist concept [invented] by critical race theorists. Whiteness ties White identity with White supremacy. It suggests that White people have unconscious, implicit biases against non-White people, especially Black people. According to Whiteness studies, it’s natural for White people to be White supremacists. And that is why people like Ekemini suggest that White people need to divest from Whiteness so they can become “allies” to Blackness—allies to oppressed Black people.
The critical theory and Marxism have become a driving force within the racial reconciliation movement. Despite all evidence, many refuse to accept this fact. But at the end of her onstage interview, Ekemini recommended books by two self-proclaimed Marxist authors, David R. Roediger and Noel Ignatiev. And her colleague, Jemar Tisby has openly embraced James Cone’s heretical, Marxist Black liberation theology.
Although radical, these ideas have spread far and wide in the evangelical world. Among numerous evangelical leaders, Critical Race Theory and Marxist teachings are being upheld. We see Marxist elements, for example, the social justice movement and in the push for reparations for slavery.
We also see efforts to soften what has been, in the past, the church’s strong stance against homosexuality. The Revoice conference is part of a movement to normalize homosexuality in the church, although up to this point, those in this movement still say homosexual sex is a sin and that according to the Bible, marriage is limited to one man and one woman for life. What, then, is the problem? There are several, including the teaching that a gay identity and a Christian identity can coexist.
Racist Underpinnings
Let’s return to the issue of race and the problems Samuel Sey cites in his article with what is ironically being called a racial reconciliation movement. It’s important to say that Sey doesn’t just condemn racism against whites, but racism and racial slurs against blacks as well. And so he should. He laments that the church in America is more divided over race and racial issues than it was a mere five years ago—yet ironically, in Christ, people of all races and ethnicities can become one. There is room for neither oppressors nor victims in Christ’s body! Sey rightly charges that “we’re abandoning biblical theology for worldly philosophies and political agenda that cannot unify God’s people the way the gospel does.” Samuel Sey is right!
In the environment that prevails, it isn’t surprising that racial reconciliation isn’t occurring. Note again these statements from Sey. Ekemini Uwan “recommended books by two self-proclaimed Marxist authors, David R. Roediger and Noel Ignatiev. And her colleague, Jemar Tisby has openly embraced James Cone’s heretical, Marxist Black liberation theology [BLT].” This doesn’t mean that everyone in the social justice movement espouses BLT. Nevertheless, it has gained increasing acceptance in recent years.
While Uwan, as a social justice warrior, accused President Trump (and by implication, conservatism) of racism, President Trump actually has been praised by a black pastor from Ohio as being “pro-black.” Moreover, Christian leader Dr. Michael L. Brown has stated, “Although there were certainly divisive aspects to Trump’s campaign there’s little hard evidence that he is a racist. And from the reports I hear from people close to him, he has a genuine burden to help the inner-cities, which are largely minority.”
Numerous social justice warriors within evangelical circles are using the issue of racism to push conservative evangelical leaders toward the Democrat Party. Yet apparently, some don’t just recoil at what they believe to be racism; they also seem to be irresistibly drawn to the liberal, and even leftist, ideology the Democrats relentlessly promote. Whether they cite the issue of racism or not, a significant number of church leaders are indicating they believe Christians can have clear consciences and support Democrats. Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) President Russell Moore and Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) President J. D. Greear are just two examples.
Dr. Russell Moore
Dr. Russell Moore, who was a staff member for Mississippi Democrat Representative Gene Taylor and who reportedly became a Republican, does not appear to have abandoned his allegiance to the Democrat Party, despite various statements he has made disagreeing with Democrats on certain policies. Video blogger A. D. Robles keeps a discerning eye on what’s happening in the SBC. He made the following observation regarding a statement in a speech Moore gave at the MLK 50 conference held April 3-4, 2018 in Memphis, Tennessee. You’ll first hear a clip from Moore’s speech, then Robles’s comment.
You can watch A. D.’s video in its entirety here. A. D. is spot on in his assessment regarding Russell Moore and the message he is sending, not only through this speech, but broadly through his work at the ERLC as well.
J. D. Greear
On June 12, 2018, J. D. Greear, pastor of the multi-campus Summit Church in greater Durham, North Carolina, was elected president of the Southern Baptist Convention. In an interview held a short time later on NPR’s Morning Edition, Greear stated that the Convention ought to “decouple the identity of the church from particular political platforms over which there can be disagreement.” He did not, however, elaborate on any particulars he may have had in mind.
Even so, the main message was abundantly clear. The title of an article quoting Greear (cited above) decodes the “hidden” message: “Greear Calls for SBC to ‘Decouple’ From the Republican Party.”
This really was no surprise. Months earlier, in a blogpost explaining why he was allowing his name to be placed in nomination for SBC presidency, Greear wrote,
The basis of our unity in the SBC is the gospel. As a Convention, we should be neither defined nor characterized by a certain church style, method of ministry, political affiliation, or cultural and racial distinctive. We are a gospel people; the gospel is, as Paul said, “of first importance” (1 Corinthians 15:3). We must avoid the temptation to let smaller doctrinal issues or any personal preferences replace the centrality of the gospel as our unifying standard.
Nevertheless, before the 2016 presidential election, Greear
laid out paths for how Christians could vote for either party or not at all in 2016. (Who did he vote for? The pastor joked during the election “I have publicly called for both of them to step down. That is about all I will tell you, OK? I’m wondering if we can just go with nobody in November. Stay single for the next four years. You know, find ourselves.”)
Recall as well that several months ago, the United States Senate couldn’t muster the votes even to consider the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act because not enough Democrats were willing to vote to end debate and consider the measure itself. This bill would have mandated that care be given for children who were born alive in situations where abortions had been attempted. J. D. Greear tweeted these statements.
So, Greear couldn’t even bring himself to state directly which party was responsible for defeating the measure, a provision that, if it had become law, would have made infanticide—the killing of infants outside the womb—illegal. This sent A. D. Robles on a righteous tirade. A. D. is not, by the way, a Republican, so he has no partisan axe to grind. He roundly condemned Greear’s lack of clarity— “Get some spine, J. D. Greear!…You’re over here [essentially telling us,] ‘Well, it’s still OK to vote for them because I like their economic policy. They care more for the sojourner.” He then asked rhetorically, “What are the chances that a party of people who get the easiest moral question anyone’s ever been asked—Hey, should it be OK for you to kill an infant?—that’s the easiest moral question anybody’s ever been asked in the history of humanity—they get that wrong—what are the chances that they are getting right some of these more complex questions about what to do with refugees? The chances are about zero—about zero percent!” Thank God for Robles! We need more men like him!
What are the chances that people who get the easiest moral question anyone’s ever been asked in the history of humanity—Hey, should it be OK for you to kill an infant?—they get that wrong—what are the chances that they are getting right some of these more complex questions about what to do with refugees? The chances are about zero—about zero percent!
—A. D. Robles—
The Democrats’ War on God and on All Things Decent
The Republicans, I believe, have been frustratingly inept at promoting true conservatism, including policies that I believe promote freedom, uphold human dignity, and affirm numerous other biblical principles. I don’t believe by a long shot that the Republicans have a corner on biblical truth—but please wake up! Thankfully, the Republicans aren’t voting to prevent passage of a bill that would outlaw infanticide! The truth is that the two major political parties in America are not morally equal! The 2016 Democrat Party platform reveals an anti-God, anti-biblical, and anti-Christian agenda—an agenda that I believe no Christian can or should support.
The two major political parties in America are not morally equal!
Party Platforms Tell Us a Great Deal
We’re going to look briefly at several items in the Democrat Party platform. Some social justice warriors, such as Dr. Walter Strickland, have disparaged looking at party platforms for information to help one decide how to vote. In this Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary Kingdom Diversity podcast, he says,
What happens is that we begin to default to these party platforms, either Republican or Democrat, and what we have to understand is that those party platforms aren’t “thus saith the Lord.” Only Scripture is, and the fact of the matter is this, that Scripture will cut against things that the Democratic and Republican parties have to say, and we have to be able to tow that line and say, “Granted, yes, we do have to cast a vote,” if you choose to vote, but Christians have to know that there’s not any party that’s the party of Christ.
Respectfully, I would love to tell Dr. Strickland that I’ve never heard any believer claim that anything in the party platforms represent a word from God. Rather, believers look to the party platforms to learn the stated intentions of the two parties and their respective candidates, then they evaluate those intentions against the truth of Scripture. This is both legitimate and wise. Furthermore, while it is true that “there’s not any party that’s the party of Christ,” and while it also is true that “Scripture will cut against things that [both] the Democratic and Republican parties have to say,” believers who can’t see that the Democrats are promoting an anti-God agenda are blind in the worst sort of way.
Mark it down! A. D. Robles gets it right: “What are the chances that people who get easiest moral question anyone’s ever been asked in the history of humanity—Hey, should it be OK for you to kill an infant?—they get that wrong—what are the chances that they are getting right some of these more complex questions about what to do with refugees? The chances are about zero—about zero percent!”
Consider these items from the 2016 Democrat Party platform. At this link (PDF here — the source from which I retrieved the information below), you also can compare and contrast each item to the corresponding statement from the Republican platform.
- The Democrats favor abortion-on-demand and oppose “Republican efforts to defund Planned Parenthood.” Now, a little less than three years later, they’ve taken what they call “reproductive rights” a step further. They won’t even support a proposal that would require doctors to give life-sustaining care to babies who emerge from the womb alive.
- They favor the redefinition of marriage to include same-sex couples.
- They “support a progressive vision of religious freedom that respects pluralism and rejects the misuse of religion to discriminate.” This means, among other things, that while Democrats think Christians have a right to believe whatever they want to believe in private, they don’t believe they necessarily have the right to live according to their deepest held convictions on a daily basis. This is contrary to the principle of freedom of conscience, a bedrock principle on which our nation was founded. Recall the risks and sacrifices that have been made, not only by Jack Phillips, but also by Barronelle Stutzman, Blaine Adamson, and others.
- Democrats want federal judges “who [will] defend the constitutional principles of liberty and equality for all, and will protect a woman’s right to safe and legal abortion.” To learn what is meant here by equality, we need only look at the proposed so-called “Equality Act.” Various Christian organizations and leaders, including the Family Research Council, the American Family Association, National Religious Broadcasters, Alliance Defending Freedom, Dr. Michael Brown, and Dr. James Dobson, have issued dire warnings against it. They “warn of its chilling effect on religious liberty, describe it as a ‘coercive sexual orientation and gender identity law,’ and say it would force public schools to conform to the LGBTQ agenda.”
- The Democrat platform calls for a reduction in military spending. Also, it celebrates “the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and the opening of combat positions to women.”
- Democrats believe human rights include gay rights. The platform states, “We will continue to stand with LGBT people around the world, including fighting efforts by any nation to infringe on LGBT rights or ignore abuse.”
- Democrats oppose (then candidate) Donald Trump’s recommendation to ban immigrants from countries that provide training and supplies for terrorists. Most of these countries are heavily populated by Muslims.
- The Democrat platform calls for more government intervention in addressing poverty. It indicates party members wish to channel “more federal resources to lifting up communities that have been left out and left behind.”
- Democrats want to abolish capital punishment.
Hopefully most readers see most of the items cited above as clearly immoral and wrong, especially in light of biblical teachings! Recommendations to provide government assistance to those in need, however, may sound reasonable and even compassionate. Even so, these kinds of spending bills—and there have been countless such bills in the history of our country—have not been effective in eliminating or even reducing poverty (also go here). Actually, they appear to have increased it, and then held it steady. How compassionate is that?
The problems in the black community run deeper than social justice warriors understand. Candace Owens recently tweeted,
Poverty rate among blacks: 22% Poverty rate among whites: 11% Poverty rate among MARRIED blacks: 7% Do not let liberal supremacists convince you that white people are the problem at the same time that their policies encourage the 77% father absence rate in black households.
The Effort to Kick God Out
Democrats are engaged in another effort as well. They are working to kick God out of public life.
Making the Leftist Agenda More Palatable
The Democrats and their social justice allies are quite cleaver. They know that a great many people can’t stomach their agenda; so, to make it more palatable, they manipulate words and terms. While part of what they say is true, there are enough falsehoods in their appeals to make them worthy of being soundly rejected.
Next week, we’ll continue our discussion, and we’ll expose the high-sounding emotional appeals as propaganda.
Be sure to return.
Part 4 is available here.
To access additional Word Foundations articles on social justice, go here.
Copyright © 2019 by B. Nathaniel Sullivan. All rights reserved.
top photo credit: Photo by Melany Rochester on Unsplash
Be First to Comment