Keep sharing good news without ads.
#NoDespair2020
Hi. This is D .A. Horton. D .A. Horton is a carnale out of California. He is a professing Christian and a rising star in Big Eva. I would say probably a B-lister at this point, but definitely his star is rising.
He should be an A-lister very soon. I first heard about him from a video he did on The Urban Perspective, which is actually the very first response video I ever did on YouTube. You should check it out.
And he was, it was an episode called What About Brown? And he was very upset that blacks get all the attention and Latinos don't get any attention. So what about brown people? That was the whole point of the video.
As you can see, he is whiter than I am. Can't even say that stuff with a straight face. But anyway, so yeah, he's, I think he's a professing critical race theorist as well. I could be wrong about that, but he's definitely very influenced by critical theory.
I'm pretty sure he's open about this. I'm not sure. I don't have enough time to research his whole catalog of materials. But what I wanted to do was I wanted to watch this video and we'll watch it in its entirety.
It's only two minutes long. And then we'll watch it again and start and stop because this is a very big problem for me. Because what happens here is this is like a very sophisticated way. And we're going to look at a very unsophisticated way, but he's a very sophisticated Jedi mind trick.
He's trying to trick you with a bunch of words and we're going to pick them apart because I think it's very important. You're, you're, you're probably hearing a lot of language, just like the language he's about to use and a lot of challenges, just like the challenge he's about to use.
And I want you to be prepared for it so that you can handle it in a biblically appropriate way. Again, this is a carnality talking to you.
About racism inside of all of our conversations in the body of Christ that are tackling the issue of racism or anti-racism or the sin of partiality as it relates to various different ethnicities. It seems that most believers are in agreement that racism or the sin of partiality is just that a legitimate sin.
I'm not seeing a lot of Christians or followers of Christ oppose that. I'm also seeing people acknowledging how history shows that in America, churches were segregated both socially as well as legally in mass.
So during chattel slavery, Jim Crow, et cetera, I really don't see Christians kind of, you know, falling back to deny this historic fact. It's very obvious. I'm also seeing polarized views among professing believers that say racism is either systemic or it is an issue of one's self.
It's either institutional or it's individual. This is where many Christians are not seeing eye to eye. It seems that the post, so many buzzwords we live in when integration has been a reality for decades, that some people say that systemic sin is a thing of yesteryear.
It can no longer be around because laws have changed. Others disagree with this point. Yet my question is not about American society at large, but specifically churches in America. The theologian Henry Ironside said this, and I want to read his quotes so I don't mess it up.
Sin never dies a natural death. It must be thoroughly judged. Like leaven, it is stopped by fire, by judgment, self judgment, or God's judgment, for sin ever works on until it is judged. When indulged in by an individual or permitted in a company, it continues working, though often imperceptibly, until it is judged, either in oneself or by God's people or God himself.
So my question that I'm looking for feedback, not a fight on, is this. When did the sin of racism or partiality, specifically as it relates to ethnicity, get thoroughly judged in America en masse? Or has it ever?
So I'm looking for historic receipts. I'm looking for documents from denominations, perhaps something to show that this sin.
All right, so that's the video. And as you might imagine, I do have a response for him. But I want you to that's really not what this video is about. I will respond to him. But he says this is a sincere question.
This is not a sincere question. There is no given given the definitions of the words that he's been using here. There is no response that you can give to this that he'll be satisfied with. It doesn't matter how obvious it is.
It doesn't matter how over the top your response is. It doesn't matter how correct it is. There is no real response here that he would he would expect so that he would accept. So you know, when you're talking to your friends and they start throwing buzzwords like anti-racism and, you know, systemic institutional, all this stuff, you need to be under you need to be aware that you're dealing with someone that has a different worldview than you.
It's just no question about it. So when he uses words like anti-racism and things like that, he's meaning something very different. But I'm getting ahead.
Of myself. Let's watch this guy again. All right. Inside of all of our conversations in the body of Christ that are tackling the issue of racism or anti-racism or the sin of partiality as it relates to various different ethnicities, it seems that most believers are in agreement that racism or the sin of partiality is just that, a legitimate sin.
Okay, stop right there. And so this is.
Something that needs to be addressed at the outset. Did you notice how he very quickly, and we can't fault him for being quick or talking fast. I talk fast, and you might not know this, but on Twitter you often only have two minutes, 20 seconds to put a video out on Twitter.
So you have to talk fast, but he just quickly kind of scattergun racism, anti-racism, the sin of partiality. We all agree that that's a sin, a legitimate sin. And the fact is that we don't. This is a trick, guys.
This is a Jedi mind trick. And you need to hear me out here because that's going to sound crazy because on the one hand, AD, you've come out and you say you're against racism. You've experienced racism.
You don't like racism. Yeah, that's right. I am against racism. I've experienced racism. I don't like racism. And I believe that partiality, the sin of partiality is the actual problem with racism. But the problem here is that DA Horton is a critical race theorist.
And when he uses the term anti-racist, you might be tempted to think, oh, well, anti-racism, that just means you're against racism. No, it doesn't. No, it doesn't. Anti-racism is a technical term for these people.
And so when you hear anti-racism, you just hear, oh, I'm against racism too. When they say anti-racism, what they mean is you need to be against all of these statistical disparities and these institutional things where whites make more on average than Latinos.
Latinos make more on average than blacks, the wealth of the families. We need to everything to be even Stevens. And if you're not for everything being even Stevens, then you are a racist. Actually, even if you are for that, you are a racist.
You just need to figure out how you're a racist. And that is very different than the sin of partiality. That is very different than the sin of partiality. So we can't just accept all of those together.
You see the reality is that when he says anti-racism, racism, this is just the sin of partiality. That's false. That's he's, he's, he's tricking you. The Bible has nothing to do with these ideas that statistical disparities in wealth or whatever it is are automatically a form of oppression or automatically the sin of partiality.
The Bible doesn't know anything about that. In fact, that idea, that anti-racism idea is itself a partial thing. That's a part that's that, that commits the sin of partiality. And we can talk about that in a later video, but you see what he's trying to do here.
He's trying to get us on the same page and he's doing it in order to take you a place where you probably don't want to go. But you know, if you accept his premises that he thinks you have to accept his, his, his, his, his conclusion.
But just be careful of that. When you hear people using words like anti-racism and stuff like that, you need to understand these are technical terms. And this is a very good chance that are using these words in a way that is foreign to the.
Scripture. I'm not seeing a lot of Christians or followers of Christ oppose that. I am though.
I am. I've seen, I'm seeing tons of Christians oppose that. And it's not because they're racist and it's not because they don't like black people. And they, it's not even because they don't like Brown people.
I guess he's Brown. Um, it's not that at all. It's that they're insisting that we define these words, partiality and stuff like that completely biblically. And the Bible is very, very clear about how to define these things.
And it's very against the kind of definition that you would find in a critical theory textbook. Um, because the Bible says that you can't be partial to the rich or the poor. You can't be partial. You can't hate your oppressor.
You can't, you can't be partial to, to anybody. That's, that's the whole point of the scripture and, and, and, and, and justice according to God's law. And so anti-racism, when it says things like, unless you oppose, um, statistical disparities in wealth or income or things like that, unless you want essentially a socialist paradise where everyone has the same, um, then you're a racist.
Well, that's, it has nothing to do with the scripture. You know what I mean? Nothing at all. Let's continue. Also seeing people acknowledging.
How history shows that in America, churches were segregated both socially as well as legally in mass. So during chattel slavery, Jim Crow, et cetera, I really don't see Christians kind of, you know, falling back to deny this historic fact.
It's very obvious.
It is very obvious. There's no question about it. What's not obvious though, D .A. Horton, and this is what all social justice warriors do is what they want to do is they say, okay, you agree with the history we use to segregate.
Um, and you know, the thing is, and this is part of the critical theory, sort of racism definition that racism never goes away. It just changes form. And so what you want, what you're doing here, D .A. Horton is saying, okay, if we used to be racist, then that's tantamount to admitting that we are racist right now.
And that's not the case at all. We have to demonstrate that. So, uh, yes, that is very true.
Um, but let's see where he goes with this. I'm also seeing polarized views among professing believers that say racism is either systemic or it is an issue of oneself.
Stop right there. That is a straw man because the reality is, um, everyone that I know that opposes this, this, this, uh, critical theory type stuff and this oppression narrative and the idea of systemic racism, every single person that I know in myself included, of course, um, says that it possibly racism could actually be institutional and systemic.
In fact, it has been in the past. That's a very distinct possibility. Racism itself. And the sin of partiality is committed by individuals, but those individuals can set up systems that perpetuate impartiality.
That's definitely possible. Um, you know, uh, a system can't sin. Only people can sin, but people can set up sinful systems. That's definitely a possibility. So it's not an either or thing for us, but what we, but the big problem that we have is that you have to prove it either way.
So whether or not it's an individual that you're claiming is racist, you actually do have to demonstrate that you can't just say it, which I know that's against critical theory, but you know, whatever.
Um, and it's the same with institutions. You can't just say an institution is systemically racist. You have to actually demonstrate how it is. And this is how critical theorists tend to do that. They say, well, if it wasn't racist, then everyone would have the same wealth.
But as it stands now, not everyone has the same wealth. And so therefore it's like, no, that doesn't actually prove it. You know what I mean? That doesn't prove it at all. That's just a statement of, of what is now we got to figure out why that is.
There could be lots of reasons why that is. Here's an example that I use. I say, okay, let's say you did some research and, um, that, that younger people were, were disproportionately pulled over by the cops, right?
You know, they were pulled over for speeding and it disproportionately high rates people under, I don't know, let's call it 25. Um, so, and then I said to you, so that demonstrates that police officers are ages.
They hate people under the age of 25. Would that demonstrate that? No, it would not. It could mean it could mean that maybe police officers have it out for, for young people, but it could just as easily be that there are more young speeders out there.
People just have a disregard for life or they're not as responsible when they're younger or something like that. I'm not saying that's the case. I'm just saying there's other alternative explanations.
And so you actually do need to demonstrate it. And so this idea that people are running around saying it's either personal or institutional. No, it's not that. I mean, sins can only be committed by people.
We, I think we would both agree with that, but those people, it is possible for them to sit up, set up sinful systems. In fact, chattel slavery, you just mentioned it. That was a sinful system because according to God's standards, you cannot man steal the, you know, if you, if you kidnap people, the penalty, when you're caught with a kidnapped person is the death penalty.
So it's an unjust thing to do. So people within that system were committing the actual sins, the actual crimes, but they set up a whole economy based on man stealing in some instances. And so the, the system they set up was a, was sinful, but the sins were committed by people.
It's not either or, but DA Horton, just because I am admitting that it's not either, or doesn't mean that you don't have the burden of proof to demonstrate that to us. It's just that simple. We can't, we have to see what is so that's a biblical standard of justice.
We can't just say things we can't just assume things we have to actually demonstrate. That's the whole idea of having two or more witnesses because I, I listen, I want to give you the benefit of the doubt DA Horton.
I mean, look, you know, we're, we're both Cardinalis members of La Raza, you know what I mean? So, so I want to trust you, but the thing is you have to give me more than just assertions. That's, that's just how it works.
I mean, that's a biblical standard. It's either institutional or it's individual.
This is where many Christians are not seeing. We're definitely not seeing eye to eye. And the reality is that only one set of us is actually using biblical standards for this because what we're saying is the institution can be set up in a sinful way, but only the people are actually, that are actually committing the sin are the ones guilty for the sin, participating in the sin.
Those are the ones that are guilty. So I'm not guilty and neither are you DA Horton, because you have a certain shade of skin of sins of people who had that shade of skin as well. Even if they set up a system that was sinful, if you didn't participate in it, you're not guilty.
You've got nothing to worry about when it comes to that particular sin. But you know, that's not what we're getting from the social justice advocates in the Christian church. We're getting some other standard that doesn't come from the Bible.
We're getting other definitions that doesn't come from the Bible.
And that's a big problem for me. It seems that the post civil rights era that we live in when integration has been a reality for decades, that some people say that systemic sin is a thing of yesteryear.
It can no longer be around because laws have changed. And that's another straw man.
It's not that it can no longer be around. The question is, is it around? That's the question. So it's not that we're saying it's impossible for this to be the case, but what we're asking is you're saying this is the case.
Please demonstrate it to me. Please show me how this is. Where in the system that we've set up, is it unjust? Where in the system that we've set up, is this a situation where we actually have to change the system and not just change the people?
Because here's the reality. Sinful people can operate in a just system in a sinful way. This is important. Let me break this down for you here. So we have sinful people and we have righteous people, right?
And sinful people set up sinful systems. That's right. And it is possible to be a righteous person in a sinful system and not participate in a sin. That is possible. That is possible. I think that there are tons of people in the prison system, for example, Christians that work as officers in prisons.
I don't think prisons are biblical. I think it's an unjust system. And yet, I think that it's possible for a righteous person to work within an unjust system in a righteous way. And likewise, it is possible for sinners to work in a just system that doesn't need to be changed.
It's not institutionally racist and commit evil, sinful acts within that just system. Let me give you a perfect example. Right now, hate crimes are illegal. You can't murder someone for being black. You also can't murder someone because you don't like their face, but that's a side issue.
So that's our system. That's our institution. It is illegal and frowned upon and shunned to murder someone because they are black or Latino or whatever it is. And yet, sinners can still operate in that system and say, you know what?
I'm still going to do it. And what we should do is bring the full weight of the law on it. Is it perfect justice every time? No, it's not perfect justice every time. But God knew that sinful people would be only able to implement his perfectly just law in an imperfect way.
God knew that, and yet he still gave us the standards for justice, the standards for eyewitnesses, the standards for penology, and all of this kind of stuff. God knew we were only able to implement it imperfectly, yet he still told us to implement it.
And so this is the problem we have with you guys, DA Horton. This is the problem that you kind of make it seem like as long as there's even one racist, then this whole system has to come down. It's like, that's really stupid and childish, and it's not biblical in any way.
That's not how God saw it. That's not how God saw it at all.
Let's get to the rest of your video. Others disagree with this point, yet my question is not about American society at large, but specifically churches in America. The theologian Henry Ironside said this, and I want to read his quotes so I don't mess it up.
Sin never dies a natural death. It must be thoroughly judged. Like leaven, it is stopped by fire, by judgment, self-judgment, or God's judgment, for sin ever works on until it is judged. When indulged in by an individual or permitted in a company, it continues working, though often imperceptibly, until it is judged, either in oneself or by God's people or God.
Himself. So my question—. I completely agree with this idea because every sin will find you out. You will be found out, and you might never be found out in the here and now, but nobody gets away with what they do.
Nobody gets away with what they do. Either they reveal it themselves and they judge themselves and they, you know, they repent and all that kind of stuff, or somebody else brings it up, or the civil government finds out and brings it up, or God himself judges you on the last day and that kind of thing.
And all of those are completely legitimate ways, if you're a Christian, to have your sins and your crimes judged, and all of those happen. You know what I mean? Every single day, all of those happen. Let's hear out his question, and then we're going to talk about why that matters in just a minute, because you see, he just told you what he's talking about.
He's either talking about self-judgment, church judgment, civil judgment, or spiritual judgment according to God's standard at the last day. God.
Himself judges. That I'm looking for feedback, not a fight on, is this. When did the sin of racism or partiality, specifically as it relates to ethnicity, get thoroughly judged in America in mass, or has it ever?
So I'm looking for historic receipts. I'm looking for documents from denominations, perhaps something to show that this sin. So here's the receipts. You know,.
If you look at how God judges sin and judges nations, it's a very consistent pattern. There's war, there's death, there's pestilence, there's rampant paganism, there's sexuality being turned on its head, there's killing of children, all kinds of horrors like that.
I mean, you want to look at the blessings and curses that God outlines in the book of Deuteronomy. That gives you a window into what it is, economic calamity, stuff like that. And this guy's acting as if, well, I mean, what could possibly be the judgment of God on slavery or ethnic discrimination?
It's like, honestly, DA, like what planet do you live on? Seriously, like, I don't know, maybe three quarters of a million dead in the civil war, three quarters of a million Americans, just lives snuffed out in the civil war.
I don't know. I mean, since civil rights and stuff like that, I mean, how many babies are murdered in the womb every year? Almost a million a year, something like that. I mean, what else do you need to see?
I mean, economic calamity, do you mean, do you understand what happened in the South after it was completely destroyed and all of that kind of stuff? I mean, these things were judged by God. These things were judged by God.
And the reality is that if you look at the weakened state, and I mean this in a serious way, I'm not the kind of guy to disparage the church. And I'm not, I don't think I'm disparaging the church here.
I think I'm just stating a reality here. The church in the United States has weakened. I mean, we've got judges that don't even know the difference between a boy and a girl. We've got judges that don't know how to read, even at such a basic level to understand that you can't restrict the freedom of assembly, especially in a religious context.
And yet you're claiming like, somehow we're just, nothing's happened to us, nothing. It's like, dude, no. Do you realize that we're under judgment now? I mean, how else can you describe this? I mean, God says that unjust judges and rulers are a curse on a nation.
We are currently being cursed right now. We are currently being cursed right now. And I think that it has a lot to do with ethnic strife that the church itself is participating in. And DA, frankly, you are as well.
Like we need to figure this stuff out. This stuff isn't really that complicated. When God says don't show partiality, he means it. He means don't show partiality. It doesn't matter if you're oppressed or oppressor.
You see, this is the reality. This is the big problem with this whole perspective is that that answer, of course, will not be accepted. What he's looking for is essentially what you see in NASCAR and what you see at like Starbucks and stuff like that.
Essentially what he wants you to do is just to self-flagellate and apologize for sins that you didn't do and maybe write a hundred word essay about how racism is bad and how you promise to do better and how you're going to be an anti-racist.
And basically what he wants is for you to accept the entire narrative as part of your repentance for the collective guilt that you have because, you know, your ancestors may or may not have participated in this system and stuff like that.
And the reality is there's nothing biblical about that at all. That's not how we do this. That's not something a Christian ought to do. If you're a Christian, you apologize for sins you didn't do. That's actually a sin itself.
That's a lie. That's breaking a commandment of God. And actually, it doesn't do Horton any favors either for you to perpetuate this myth that he wants to put forward and stuff like that. And so you shouldn't do that.
That's not what the Bible says you should do. That's not a receipt that's appropriate. This is just all kind of a scam to get you to go with him where he's going that he doesn't really have any good warrant to be going.
It's all a big scam. One of the big themes of the woke church cult in the social justice movement in Christianity is, oh, the church has so much to learn from these other sources. Like we have so much to learn from NASCAR.
We have so much to learn from, I don't know, Starbucks or whatever it is. Like there's just, you've heard that so many times. I even read an Eric Mason book where he says, we have so much to learn from hip hop culture, you know, like money cash hoes, like that kind of thing.
The church has so much to learn about racial unity from all of these other sources, except for the Bible, of course. And it's really just, it's a scam. So anyway, this is a big problem for me because DA, you know, you have to understand.
And I think you do. You seem like an intelligent person that the words that you're using here, racist, anti-racism, you know, you don't mean what most people mean when they use that word. And you especially know that it's not just straight out of the Bible.
It's the same thing as partiality. It's just not. It's just not. And so when you start off that way and then you take us to this weird place, it's extremely dishonest. It's really disrespectful as well.
It's a Jedi mind trick. Let me show you a much less sophisticated example of this Jedi mind trick. This is a tweet from Philip M. Holmes, another blue check mark, but it's actually a quotation from Ligon Duncan, another blue check mark.
This is Big Eva, all stars here, all stars. I'm going to have to do more content on Ligon Duncan because I know some things. Here's what Ligon Duncan said. He said, anti-racism is not the gospel, but the gospel is anti-racism and racism is anti-gospel.
Hence heresy of the deepest die. First of all, let me read that again. This is a very stupid level Jedi mind trick. Anti-racism is not the gospel, but the gospel is anti-racism and racism is anti-gospel.
Hence heresy of the deepest die. This is word salad mixed with very, very evil upheaval, evil upheaval of biblical standards and biblical fidelity. Anti-racism is a technical term. It's a technical term that does not mean you're against racism.
What it means is a very distinct thing coming straight out of critical race theory, and it overturned the definition of partiality in the Bible. Anti-racism itself is a partial ideology. Anti-racism is a sin.
And so here, Ligon Duncan is using the words and the phrases and the definitions of the enemy and putting it in gospel language and saying that the gospel is anti-racism. The gospel, I mean, if you understand what anti-racism is, I'll include a link to a kind of a basic definition of anti-racism.
Anti-racism is work. Anti-racism requires, if you're going to be anti-racist, then you have to put in work, essentially. You have to do the work of anti-racism. So what he is saying here, Ligon Duncan is saying here, in an attempt to sound woke, in an attempt to appeal to the masses, in an attempt to go along with the zeitgeist and make friends with the world, putting in work of anti-racism is not the gospel, but the gospel is put it in work for anti-racism.
And racism is anti-gospel, hence the heresy of the deepest desire. And so I have to only assume, since he's using the fake definition of anti-racism, I'm only assuming that he's using the fake definition of racism either.
Therefore, he's saying that if you do not believe that it is part of your job to eliminate statistical disparities between wealth and income and all of that kind of stuff between the races, then that is heresy.
That is not heresy. Ligon Duncan is exchanging his phony baloney law intended to appeal to pagans for the law of God. You will not find anything in the law of God like this. You will not find anything in the law of God like this.
You will not find anything in the gospels like this. This is garbage. This is garbage. And you know why he does this? He explains why he does this. He does this because he thinks, pragmatically, this is the way forward for the church.
Pragmatically, he doesn't want his grandchildren to be influenced by the LGBT lobby, and so he's going to say this kind of stuff so that maybe they won't go to the LGBT lobby and become gay or something like that.
That's pretty much what he says. We'll talk more about this guy because Ligon Duncan is a force for, how should I put this? He's a force for the woke church cult in the church in America. Anyway, I hope you found this video helpful.
God bless.
