The Social Justice Gospel

The Danger of Syncretism Between Christianity and Social Justice

Welcome once again to the conversations that matter podcast. My name is John Harris. This may very well be The most important podcast that I've ever recorded and I don't say that often I had the sense once earlier this year after the black lives matter inspired looting and burning of cities was underway and I assumed you were probably being blindsided by your pastors and your bosses with social justice language.

I did a podcast on social justice as a religion and I compared the core teachings of social justice to the core teachings of Christianity and I showed how they have their own salvation experience their own way of testing truth their own Saints holy books their own priests the sociologists and The list goes on and I know this helped a lot of you who are hearing social justice type language.

And I think this is going to have the same effect. Because what we are witnessing before our eyes is not simply secular social justice being imported into Christianity while Christianity is being cast aside we have actually a fusion so people who want to keep Christianity and import social justice and marry them and The theological word for this is syncretism.

This is what the children of Israel did Worshipping Yahweh and worshiping the gods of the nations around them and this has been a problem for as long as humans have been around and for 2 ,000 years of church history, we've seen false teachers and those misled by them and those are two different categories and They've come into the church and Oftentimes they add to the gospel and they don't tell you they're false teachers they don't even probably think of themselves as false teachers intentionally, but what they're promoting are lies and They destroy the core teachings of Christianity including the gospel.

And so What I've what is what has happened to me in the last I guess 48 hours is a lot of ideas have been Swirling in my head and I've had a moment almost a eureka moment where I realized that I've been talking.

I've been using jargon terms and words that I have not always defined. And I think the reason for that is whenever you get you start to get specialized in a field. You just assume that the people that you're talking with understand those those distinctions.

If you if you're talking to someone, let's say that likes baseball and you like baseball and you start using baseball terminology. It's fine. But if it's someone who just knows soccer then they're gonna be confused.

Especially if there are similar similar concepts with different terms or similar terms with different concepts and so what I what I've thought is that I Want to take the bird's-eye view with all of you and I want to help you understand how the fusion is going on the coming together of secular social justice and Christianity because we're in a situation now where We have people who have signed orthodox statements of faith and they say orthodox things.

And they we believe in justification by grace through faith. That's the gospel. That's part of but usually what will happen is they add to it somewhere and they have they say orthodox things over here but then over here they say things that contradict that orthodoxy or are not in keeping with that orthodoxy and This confuses a lot of people and and this is where I think many Christians who are trying to fight this in their churches are called slanderers or liars or something of that nature because Because people will run back to orthodox statements that are made and say well look they said the right things here well, that's not the point whenever you're dealing with something that's a syncretistic religion a fusion of two things then you're gonna have a mixture of truth and error and Isn't every heresy a mixture of truth and error every heretic and the word heretic just means schism by the way I know the Roman Catholic Church is.

You know, I think poison that word a little bit because they burn heretics, etc. Heretic just means schism. It's it's something different and Paul talks about a different gospel in Galatians chapter 1.

And so what I want to do is I want to do a Bible study. I want to bring scripture to bear on this topic scripture that I think I've assumed we all kind of know and we just get. But we don't always know and get it and there's a lot of things look I don't know and get there's a lot of fields that I have no clue about.

I have much to learn but but in this particular case we must understand what the New Testament teaching is on false Gospels and Then we must understand how liberation theology and the Marxist derivatives that we're seeing around us.

How those contradict that gospel? We're in a situation now. Let me give you an example where Christian categories are being used against us. So to give you a very common example someone who tells you You must listen to an oppressed perspective because it's Christian to listen.

That's loving your neighbor and you say well, yeah I want to be sympathetic. That's Christian. Okay. Well, that's a Christian ethical quality. But there's also a Christian metaphysic that says there's an objective reality that God has created and we can all approach the scripture and glean truth from it well, if we have an understanding that contradicts that meaning someone based on their level of power or oppression according to the Sociologist has greater access to truth and knows things.

We don't know then we're actually importing something that contradicts fundamental Christianity. Christian Metaphysics Christians Christian belief about reality while doing it in the name of Christian ethics.

That's what we're having and it's so confusing for so many of you and I get it. I understand it you're probably having conversations with people that are going in circles because The definitions haven't been brought out and and those things aren't being exposed.

So what I want to do is I want to take a very bird's-eye view of this whole thing as much as I can. And we're just gonna I'm gonna pack this episode full of information for you. And there are just so you know as we're going through the errors of social justice and and critical theory, etc.

There are more errors that I could talk about there. There are much there are many more errors, but I want you to get the basic ones the basic ones that contradict the gospel. I think we must we have to in our day and age understand these things.

It would be like living in a majority Muslim country. But you don't know much about Islam and you don't know how it contradicts the gospel and when they say God is you know. There's there's loving things God does and you say that it sounds the same.

Well, of course it does. But there's a whole lot of errors obviously in Islam. And so we're in the same place. We have a secular critical theory religion around us and we need to understand a few things about it and how it contradicts and corrupts so Here are the two things you're gonna need to encourage you if that seems overwhelming.

One a basic knowledge of the gospel. Do you want to fight this movement happening in your church? You need a basic knowledge of what the gospel is number two a basic knowledge of the errors of liberation theology and Marxist derivatives.

So that would be the post-colonial theory and you know, all the critical theories the list goes on. So you don't have to be an expert on all those things. You don't even have to know all those terms.

All you have to know is where does this social justice panoply this whole entire movement? How does it contradict the gospel so that you can catch it when someone tries to merge the two? We're gonna do a Bible study.

False Gospels in Galatians 1 and Galatians 2

Let's go to Galatians chapter 1. Let's read verses 6 through 9. It says I am amazed. This is the Apostle Paul speaking I'm amazed that you are so quickly deserting him who called you by the grace of Christ for a different gospel.

Which is really not another only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you he is to be accursed as We have said before so I say now again if any man is preaching to you a gospel Contrary to what you received he is to be accursed.

So here are some words that Paul uses that will really help us understand what he's saying because I think this is so important. He uses the word heteros think like heterosexuality, right? Different so there's another gospel a different gospel that is being promoted and that means Like the verses that I have here that show other places in the New Testament where it's used.

It's different in the sense of a Different kind so you have another of the disciples another king another slave a different one is what he's saying. He then says in some translations interpret this verse.

Translate this verse as another as well. He then says in Verse 7 which is really not another. Right that word another is the word a loss and it means actually similar. It means Of the same kind so I put some passages there the other Mary the other hand the other boats.

What he's saying is there aren't. You can have two Marys you can have two boats. You can have two hands, but you can't have two Gospels. That's why I think the ESV gets it right when it translates it not that there is another one.

There isn't another gospel. There's only one gospel. So the people who are promoting the false gospel are actually being disingenuous because what they're doing is they're saying we have the gospel and they're adding works to it as we'll see in a minute and.

And this is the gospel. But it's it's not even it doesn't even qualify for being a different way to God. It doesn't get you there at all. It's not the gospel. It's something completely different. Well, what is it then because they're part of the church.

He's writing to a church right there as far as they're they're they're attending and they're you know, they look like Christians. It could probably say some very orthodox things. So what what's going on?

Well, here's what's going on. Verse 7 the people who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ distort word is metastrophic and It means to change alter or distort and it's used in Acts 2 20.

I think it's the only other place in the New Testament to use the Sun will be turned into darkness and the moon into blood. So the moon's different. Not the Sun is different. It's turned. It's changed is the point.

Changing into something that it wasn't the Sun. It's ridiculous the Sun darkness. How could that be? Right? It's the Sun by definition. It's it's light. Well now it's darkness. So the gospel itself is actually being distorted.

This is subversive guys what Paul's talking about here is subversive and you didn't have I'm sure you did at the time but. But but you didn't have Paul at least saying that well. You know, we just got to give people the benefit of the doubt when they say these these heretical things.

Because over here they say true things. Well, no, it must be confronted. Paul in the very next chapter confronts Peter even and we're gonna look at that. So what's this false gospel? Galatians 2 3 through 5 but not even Titus who was with me though He was a Greek was compelled to be circumcised.

But it was because of the false brethren secretly brought in who had sneaked in to spy out our Liberty. Which we have in Christ Jesus in order to bring us into bondage. But we did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour so that the truth of the gospel would remain with you now.

What's going on here? Well Paul's saying we didn't bend to the requirement that false brethren. Were trying to put on us to bring us into bondage to have Titus circumcised. We didn't bend to it for even an hour.

Why. Because we wanted to make sure the truth of the gospel would remain with you. So this threatened the gospel. The false brethren are the pseudo Delphi. So they are according to dr. Bob Utley. Traitors the term was commonly used to designate traitors within a city who allowed the enemy to sneak into the city and survey its defenses.

So these are people that have snuck in to Christianity and they're helping the enemy. That's the sense of it and Paul saying there's false brethren that are doing this. Now in Acts 16 interestingly Paul had Timothy circumcised so as not to offend the Jews.

But in Galatians 2 he refuses to do it. Now, what's the difference? Why in Acts 16 is he saying yeah, I will circumcise Timothy and then in Galatians 2. Well, I'm not gonna have Titus circumcised. Because to put it in modern vernacular in Titus's case circumcision was compelled as a gospel issue.

That's why he wouldn't do it now interestingly next Paul talks about Peter an apostle someone who saved right and Peter got caught up in this. So you got the false brethren, right? But then you got Peter.

Now, what do you do with this when Cephas came to Antioch? I opposed him to his face because he stood condemned and You know, the word here is he stood guilty. Katagonosco he stood guilty. All right the word in chapter 1 verse 8 Said those who preaching a false gospel are to be anathema.

That is that's cursed right. Different words. So so Peter's in a different category here he's guilty he's not cursed he's not anathema. He's guilty though. What's he guilty of for prior to coming? Coming of certain men from James.

He used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they came he began to withdraw and hold himself aloof. Here's the key word fearing the party of the circumcision the rest of the Jews joined him in hypocrisy.

With the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel I said to Cephas in the presence of all if you being a Jew live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews.

How is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews? Why are you compelling things that are not? Commanded and and. The Gospels related to this. Why are you compelling things for the purpose of being right with God.

When Christ has already made us right with God. Do you hear that? Do you see that? Theological difference between someone who is temporarily inconsistent and someone whose life pattern affirms error related to the gospel.

Are two separate things. Peter was opposed and Peter repented. Philippians 3 18. For many walk of whom I often told you and now tell you even weeping that they are enemies of the cross of Christ. There are people who continue they would they're corrected.

It's not because of it's not just fear and hypocrisy. The corrections happen and they do not do what Peter did. They do not turn. They do not oppose the false teaching that they had presented. So what is the gospel?

This is the key question guys. We get this right we get a whole lot more, right? What is the gospel? Galatians 2 16 nevertheless. Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law. But through faith in Christ Jesus even we have believed in Christ Jesus so that we may be Justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law since by the works of the law.

No flesh will be justified. Romans 1 16. I am not ashamed of the gospel for it is the power of God to solve it. It's for salvation to everyone who believes to the Jews first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith as it is written, but the righteous man shall live by faith.

That's the power of the gospel. It's not in works. It's what God has done. He's the one working not us. It's through faith in the finished work of Christ. It's the power of God. First Corinthians 15 1 through 4.

Now I make known to you brethren the gospel which I preach to you which also you received in which you also stand by which you will also are Saved if you hold fast the word which I preached to you unless you believed in vain.

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received that Christ died for our sins According to the scriptures and that he was buried and that he was raised on the third day according to the scriptures.

It's the gospel. It's what Christ has done. And what's our part in this? Believe, have faith. That's it. So what does it look like then today to mix law and grace in the current situation the social justice battle because that was the problem that with the Galatian heresy adding circumcision to the gospel and Paul opposed Peter to his face just because he wasn't clear about it.

It was his lack of clarity sending mixed signals. And Paul would have been a bigot today, huh? They would have gotten rid of him mixing law and grace. Here's an example of someone who has done this and I'll tell you who it is in a minute.

You might figure it out. Here's some quotes. Be willing to die for racial reconciliation as you would for penal substitution. What's racial reconciliation? According to Paul racial reconciliation is not an implication of the gospel and certainly not a social issue instead of a gospel issue.

But it is a gospel issue. So apparently this racial reconciliation thing is fundamental to the gospel. Certain Southern Baptists view racial reconciliation as a social issue instead of a gospel issue because of an incomplete understanding of both the gospel and race.

So you're saying there's there's Southern Baptists who? Don't understand the gospel. Because they simply view racial reconciliation as a social issue. It's really fundamental to the gospel, isn't it? You're saying that they don't even understand the gospel.

I want to argue that the category of gospel should not be narrowly defined as entry language I .e. justification by faith, but should be broadly defined to include maintenance language. I .e. walking in the spirit maintenance language?

Well other than faith and belief. You could say soteriology has aspects of sanctification because God is doing a work in us. But the gospel the good news. Where is that in Scripture? The Gospels maintenance language tells us how to live in the power of the Spirit the reality of what God has done for him in Christ and There are some passages given Galatians 5 and Ephesians 2 through 6.

Here are the passages. The only three passages are from Ephesians in That section in those sections that reference gospel. Let me read them to you. Ephesians 3 6 to be specific that the Gentiles are Fellow heirs and fellow members of the body and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel.

That's what the gospel is accomplished. Ephesians 6 15 and having shod your feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace. Ephesians 6 19 and pray on my behalf that utterance may be given to me in the opening of my mouth to make known with the boldness the mystery of the gospel.

You don't find any maintenance language in any of that. It's not talking about any kind of works or things that we do. This unification of all things in Christ includes are receiving the blessings of all of the spiritual blessings in the heavenly places in Christ which at least includes election predestination adoption into God's family hearing and believing the gospel and Racial reconciliation.

You see how which does not belong in this? I offer a few biblical reasons. Southern Baptists from every racial stripe should continue to work towards removing the stain of racism from their churches. From their homes and from every aspect of SBC life.

Now let me ask you a question if the unification of all things in Christ includes racial reconciliation. Then why do Southern Baptists need to continue to work towards removing the stain of racism from their churches?

In a book in a Chapter about racial reconciliation if Christ accomplished it on the cross, then why are we working towards it? All sinners experience justification before God by faith in Jesus Christ apart from the works of the law, but without personal holiness.

We will not experience final justification. Because our works will prove whether we trust in Jesus and our works will either vindicate us or condemn us in the judgment. So there's justification and then there's final justification.

Do you remember how I just read for you how Paul? Confronted Peter simply because he was not clear about the gospel. He was not straightforward in the translation I read is this straightforward? Language, this is internally contradictory language we see here and It's scary language because what do you mean by racial reconciliation if that's works?

We have heresy and heresy in the sense that false teaching that subverts the gospel has entered very similar to what Paul talked about in Galatians. The man who said those things is named Jarvis Williams.

And he's currently teaching at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky the flagship Seminary for the Southern Baptist Convention and sure enough racial reconciliation includes works and let me share a few with of those with you.

There are do's and don'ts. Do get rid of certain art features. He says Southern Baptist churches need to erase take down or paint over all images of a white Jesus white Disciples and all white children learning at the feet of Jesus.

These images perpetuate white supremacy and suggests the kingdom of God revolves around whiteness. Now look I can think of some reasons to get rid of paintings but because they advocate white supremacy is an assumption and not a very good one and To make this part of the gospel because again penal substitution same level as racial reconciliation and to say well getting rid of these things.

That's part of racial reconciliation. You are adding works to the gospel now. Here's another one. Don't be colorblind. Southern Baptist should not claim they view all people in a colorblind fashion. Here's another one.

Do diversify your church. Southern Baptists need to enlarge their ethnic circles to include more black and brown believers. It's not a biblical command guys. Does it say that? If Southern Baptists live mono-ethnic lives, they will have a limited mono-ethnic perspective of the complexity of the Southern Baptist life.

So they will have incomplete information about their church. If they don't get an ethnic perspective of some kind from a black or a brown person. Is that biblical or does the Bible tell us how to view the church?

Do support other multi-ethnic churches. Southern Baptists must pray for and support multi-ethnic church plants says must in Their cities and communities if their churches are not going to pursue racial reconciliation.

Hmm. So this almost seems like the Catholic Church and they're say they say well you can do, you know Hail Mary's or you can do this. I don't you know, you have different options. Of what kinds of penance you want to do to alleviate the sin that you have or the duty you're supposed to fulfill.

Do listen to experiences. White Southern Baptist with privilege and without personal experience of the challenges associated with being black or brown person in the u .s. Should spend more time listening to their black and brown brothers and sisters instead of trying to speak to at about or for them.

Is this a biblical command guys and Even if it is what's it doing in the gospel? Do implement quotas if the stain of racism is going to become less apparent within the SBC white leaders. Responsible for organizing conferences must there's that word again.

Intentionally include black and brown people at the center of their conferences and the SBC needs to have conferences that are predominantly led by black and brown individuals. Question did Christ's death really accomplish racial reconciliation.

Mr. Williams. Because you said before that it did. That we should fight for it. Like we would fight for a penal substitution the unification of all things in Christ includes this but now we're in the maintenance language, aren't we and This maintenance language isn't even biblical ethics.

It's coming from critical race theory and I can show you all the quotes where Jarvis Williams talks about how much critical race theory Has influenced him and even influenced his reading of Scripture.

The Historical Roots of the Social Justice Movement in Evangelicalism

How did this happen? I want to give a little bit of a historical talk because I think people are wondering where did this come from and I'm gonna go back with you to 1972 and What I want to do is present a few things that I've included in my book social justice goes to church.

Which I will have a trailer for at the end of this podcast. So it's a little sneak peek, I guess but it's I think vital information if you really want to understand the origin of the movement and how syncretism has Formed in Christianity, it's been happening for a while.

It's just popular now 1972 David Moberg observed and he was a Social critic and had some well He was a sociologist who had some neo-marxist leanings towards the beginning of his life. He observed that evangelicals were awakening to their inconsistencies and returning to the totality of the Christian gospel.

So this is what he's saying, he's looking at evangelical Christianity saying hey, this is interesting that this is happening. Moberg expressed this total gospel is blending evangelism and social concern.

He states old dichotomies between salvation and service changing lives and changing society proclaiming and demonstrating man's vertical and horizontal relationships personal piety and social service faith and works and Believing and loving all of which can be summed up in relationship to the contrast between evangelism and social concern are breaking down.

David Moberg is Saying that there's a fusion going on and he's noticing it in the 70s. He's saying there's an awakening oh, it sounds like almost like getting woke doesn't it. And It's Rich a return to the totality of the Christian gospel.

So there was only part of the Christian gospel. Now we have the total Christian gospel. Well, who are some of these people he's talking about. Tom Skinner at Urbana. This is InterVarsity's 70 conference claimed that the gospel did not speak to the issue of enslavement and justice or inequality.

That a gospel that doesn't speak to those issues was not the gospel. Instead he fused the incomplete Gospels of both fundamentalists and liberals into a salvation which delivered from both personal and systemic evil.

Jesus had come to change the system and Christians were to preach liberation to oppressed people. This is a fusion of law and gospel and it's not even the biblical law. It's a law inspired by social justice.

Inequality injustice enslavement. Well, what would address these things it would be the ethics of the law of God. Would it not. Not the gospel not the good news. Gospel is good news a victory. What Christ has accomplished for us.

Here's another one John Perkins 1976 in the from the pages of sojourners. He said. Because evangelicals surrendered their leadership in the civil rights movement. He believed that they had not gone on to preach what the whole gospel.

So if you weren't leading the civil rights movement, you weren't taking part in. Was that a work or is that the gospel? Work or grace. Civil rights movement. In his book let justice roll down 1978. He says the purpose of the gospel was to burn through all racial cultural and economic barriers challenge all economic and social orders.

Call people to fellowship and make a new family. That's the purpose of the gospel really to to uh burn through economic barriers, hmm sounds like uh. Now if you mean in the sense that Christ brings all people to himself.

And they're all forgiven, but it doesn't sound like what he's saying there. Does it? Now I want you to know something john perkins has influenced russell moore quite a bit. Uh, and a number of evangelicals I go through it in the book.

Tom skinner who I just quoted you from uh influenced tim keller tremendously. Tim keller listened to the speech that I just quoted from from you over and over in 1970. Here's another person that influenced tim keller quite a bit and others um.

And and i'm going to read for some quotes for you and then i'm going to give you some categories. A full gospel concern with the whole man meant that christ atoning work offered liberation for people in their cultural endeavors.

Including political institutions and the making of public policy. His atonement Specifically offered liberation in cultural endeavors. In 1974 now that was from 2016 because he he's big in evangelicalism.

Just look up richard mao. I mean, he's influenced a lot of people. Sojourners 1974. He said this the payment that christ made through his shed blood was a larger payment than many fundamentalists have seemed to think.

Oh really for even when they have sung the words with their zeal. They have not seemed to acknowledge in their social political lives that jesus did indeed pay it all. He died to remove the stain of political corruption and of all forms of human manipulation and exploitation and he calls Us to witness to and to enjoy the first fruits of that full redemption a full redemption.

What is this. His shed blood was a payment for political Issues political to remove the stain listen to the language stain of political corruption. And now we're trying to get the stain of racism away.

This was in 1974. Here's the problem the atonement applies to non-cognitive entities. He's applying the atonement of christ. He shed blood to things that aren't human beings human souls that are sinful he's applying Qualities like sin to political institutions.

And saying there was christ's redemption. This is this is a neo-kaipurian now, it's very similar to liberation theology. There are some differences. They're not as for our conversation. It doesn't matter for me to bring up the differences because they're not significant enough.

But this is a neo-kaipurian way of approaching the gospel and richard mouse in his reading of kuiper. This is what he's coming up with. Now there's another way that the gospel gets subverted so we saw the neo-kaipurian way, right?

Here's an anabaptist way the progressive anabaptist and i'm using ron sider and john howard yoder as examples now. Ron sider has influenced russell moore. And david platt and the list just goes on and on.

I mean he's influenced a lot of people. Here's what he said in 1975 coming to jesus necessarily involved repentance of and conversion from the sin of involvement in structural evils. Such as economic injustice and institutional racism.

So if you're going to so coming to jesus, that's what it involves you got to repent of. And be converted from the sin of involvement in structural evils. Well, what's the structural evil? What does that mean?

And i'll show you what he means later. He means basically if you just benefit from a system of privilege you're in sin. John howard yoder 1972 justification by faith alone and through grace alone apart from any correlation with works of any kind.

Undercut any radical ethical and social concern. You need works now what they're doing is they're merging justification and sanctification. And they're calling it discipleship. They're saying well and john howard yoder there's another quote where he more blatantly says this but justification and sanctification now are merged sanctification meaning um.

Becoming more like christ. It's a work god does within you in which you follow his law more you look more like christ. He's he's changing you into being more into the image of jesus christ progressively right progressive sanctification.

It's called and this is um, this is. Justification, uh is the foundation for this it's the justification starts that process. But justification is a once for all you are saved. And these guys don't make that distinction and so they can easily import their neo-marxist ideas.

Their new left ideas and say that that's part of the law of god and because the law of god Must be followed in sanctification and it just becomes all one thing justification and sanctification. This is another way.

It's done. And there's a third way and this is the way we're going to talk about the most. Because this is actually also Has the same root a common ancestor with critical race theory and and the Similarities between them are are basically the same problems that christians should have a critical race theory.

They should have with liberation theology. Jim wallace, so someone kind of friendly to liberation theology. I'll show you his critique of it, but he defines liberation theology as a movement born out of the experience.

Experience is a key word of oppression, especially in latin america in which the marxist analysis and praxis is central. He believed liberation from all the spiritual structural and ideological shackles which bind and oppress was the promise of god's salvation in history.

So this is this is liberation theology. Jesus came to identify with the oppressed. And to rescue people from the the physical Structural problems. That are oppressing them. And he came to change the system.

That's what jesus did. And so we got to have a revolution right this fit this dovetails with marxism and. Here are the root problems, right and there's more problems, but here's the root the three that I want you to remember.

It's a different gospel. It's a gospel of social revolution. Okay, completely different when james cone talks about the gospel. He's not talking about the gospel that we just talked about. So there's a lot of equivocation that happens.

Um when you discuss this with people and they say well, what are you talking about? You know, he might be a heretic. But look he's talking about the gospel. Yeah, not the same gospel though. He has a different ethic.

It's marxism. Which has a reductionistic anthropology so everything boils down to these power relationships and an egalitarian objective. So the goal is to rip down all these hierarchies. Hierarchies are not sinful in and of themselves.

Some could be. Some uh, but there's a standard in scripture that we're given in fact scripture establishes some hierarchies and it regulates others. And the third element is subjective truth. There's a post-modern approach to truth in liberation theology.

It's a contextual approach to interpreting scripture sometimes called the horizons method sometimes called the hermeneutical spiral. But the basic idea is that you have your experience and your social location.

And then the bible has you know, there's the experience of the author and who the author was writing to and so. What what you're doing when you try to interpret this is like what gadamer said. Is you're going to go to the text and you're going to bring your experience and you're going to ask questions, right?

The thing about liberation theology generally is and this was what harvey kahn Believed this and this is what tim keller learned from harvey kahn and tim keller's contextual approach um. When you approach the text of scripture.

You're going to ask questions of scripture and the application and the interpretation are the same thing so Uh someone who follows a literal hermeneutic or a grammatical historical hermeneutic meaning they just want to know what what did the author mean?