The Southern Baptists (SBC) for the longest time were a known conservative bastion of the faith. Of course, any human institution can fail, and by the 1970's the SBC was collapsing into liberal Christianity. But some 30 years ago the organization got a second lease on life. They pushed back, reclaiming the Bible as their sole authority in matters of faith and practice. They grabbed onto the faith "once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 1:3). They climbed back to theological sanity.
That was 30 years ago. This is now. Over the past decade the SBC has rejected assaults from progressive Christianity in calls for female pastors (1 Tim 2:11-15), gay marriage (Gen 2:24), and the embracing of homosexual behavior as "Christian" (1 Cor 6:9-10). They held their ground. But for how much longer?
They just had their 2019 convention and approved insanity as a formal agreement. Last week they adopted Resolution 9. "What's that," you ask? While still hanging onto Scripture as "the first, last, and sufficient authority with regard to how the Church seeks to redress social ills," they embraced Critical Race Theory and Intersectionality. "These analytical tools can aid in evaluating a variety of human experiences." "Yeah, so?" I can hear you ask. First, Scripture (the one they said was the first, last, and sufficient authority) claims that it is "profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work" (2 Tim 3:16-17). If that covers "every good work," what are they doing?
It only gets worse from there. What is Critical Race Theory (CRT)? It argues that race is not biologically grounded and natural, but a social construct built "to maintain the interests of the white population that constructed it." That's right. Now, the truth is that "race" is defined as "a group of persons related by common descent or heredity." But that's not real. No one is in a group of persons related by common descent. Right? Of course they are. So we embrace this theory by disregarding reality and expect it to be a valuable analytical tool. CRT goes on to build on that concept by declaring all white people as racist based on this theory. On the other hand, since no black people are white, they cannot be racist even if they hate white people. In fact, the only ones that can be racist are white people. This is a valuable tool? According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, CRT is based on "nationalist thinkers such as Malcolm X, the Black Panthers, and Frantz Fanon."
What does the Bible say? The Bible draws no distinction between races. "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Gal 3:28). We have no grounds, as Christians, to discriminate on the basis of race, class, or gender. Which is precisely what CRT requires. Discriminate against all whites because they are all at fault.
And Intersectionality?? This is a currently-popular feminist view. It is a "non-empirical qualitative analytic framework that applies deconstructionist critical theory (a literary criticism method) to attempt to identify how interlocking systems of power impact those who are most marginalized in society." Everyone gets analyzed in terms of intersecting discrimination. For instance, women are discriminated against (1). Lesbians are women, and they are discriminated against (2). Black people are discriminated against (3), so a black lesbian would have three intersecting lines of discrimination. Herein is the problem, they say. This concept shapes everything from identity to politics, focusing primarily on 1) the oppressed and 2) the oppressor, which, surprise, surprise, is primarily white males.
What does the Bible say? Oh, we covered that. We have no grounds, as Christians, to discriminate on the basis of race, class, or gender. Which is precisely what Intersectionality requires. Discriminate against all white males because they are all at fault.
None of this excuses people who abuse privilege or abuse others. As it turns out, the Bible is opposed to that, too. But what is the biblical solution to these types of very real problems? Christ. Repentance. Death to self. Or ... we could go with "punish white males" and "make better laws." Which wouldn't exactly coincide with what Scripture says and what the SBC embraced in direct contradiction to what they embraced. You cannot accept as a valuable tool theories that oppose Scripture and say that you are taking Scripture as your basis. You can't take as useful worldviews that oppose a biblical worldview and then lay claim to a biblical worldview. This is not sane. And it is not a direction that will end well for the "woke" SBC.
9 comments:
I see you read the two articles I shared.
Actually, I read one and then did my own research. (I don't remember seeing two.)
I am amused by some Leftists I see on social media when they bring up race. On Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays, they say: race is an invalid construct; it cannot be defined in a way that applies to the real world. On Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays they say: there is indeed a hierarchy of races, with the white race being at the bottom of the totem pole in pretty much every regard.
Consistency is not the hallmark of much of today's "progressive thinking."
If you haven't read John Perkins latest, I highly recommend it. Essentially his argument is that there is only one race, the human race, and that any other distinctions are arbitrary. (That's very over simplified, but I'm not stupid enough to try to fit an entire book into a comment) Dr. Perkins is someone who should have a significant amount of credibility on issues of race and reconciliation, in addition to being an amazingly nice person.
So much of this is simply a way to divide and conquer in the political arena.
FYI, I got some rambling gibberish that appeared to be related to this post, but I deleted it because I didn't want to waste time on the rambling of an imbecile.
I haven't read Perkins (although I've eaten at his restaurants), but I agree that we're the human race and the rest of the distinctions are artificial. They can't even agree on what the distinctions are.
The problem is that these theories try to lay the blame on the whites when, as it turns out, the problem is with the humans. We are all xenophobic by nature, being more comfortable with the familiar and less comfortable with the unfamiliar. Coupled with our own predilection to excuse our own faults while pointing out others, these "tools" become weapons rather than helpful.
Isn't it wild that one can simply go about their day and be a racist without even trying?
Or that a church organization would think that was helpful.
Perkins is someone who's a little under the radar, but should have a fair amount of credibility on these topics. His most recent book "One Blood" takes the position that there is only one race (human) and that what we see as "racism" is a reflection of human sinfulness that crosses ethnic and "racial" boundaries. It's a radical idea, that the problem is that we're sinful, fallen, humans rather than because we're "white" or black. I'd definitely recommend checking John out. He's truly an amazing human and should be more well known than he is. His other radical idea is that inner city adolescent boys need men to walk alongside them and help them mature.
It's funny, DC Talk had the same idea back in '95.
Post a Comment