Truth in Love's Q&A PANEL II

This is truth and love. I'm thankful that you are joining us, watching the video. This is a second edition of our question and answer panel. I'm so thankful for these guys, their willingness to participate and join me as we talk about issues in our culture, in our society, and look at them from a biblical perspective.

I do apologize for the signal, the signal strength. If something happens, it should come right back. And that's for my guys participating, and that's for anybody that's watching. It says that it's having trouble streaming to Facebook, and that concerns me.

Let me see here. Anyway, I apologize for what's going on. Yeah, I'm having a bad signal. I'm going to try to get on YouTube and share it. Hey, I don't look like I'm not going to be able to do it. So it looks like it's going on YouTube, and if all goes well, we'll share it later on Facebook.

So that'll be cool. All right. So tonight, I apologize for that issue. We're going to be talking about a very hot topic in our society, in our culture right now, and it's influencing, arms are reaching many places.

And so we felt like it was an important topic for us to talk about, to inform our community about. And before we do that, just to remind everybody, this is Truth in Love, and we get that from Ephesians chapter four, verse 15, where Paul tells us, but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into him, who was the head, even Christ.

And that's been my goal, is to share truth and to do that in love. And I'm trusting that these guys will participate in that with me. We will share this truth in love and with the goal of growing up in Christ.

Let me share this paragraph with you that I wrote as kind of an introduction. It says, there's a never-ending bombardment from culture with ideologies, worldviews, and behaviors. These are attempts to influence society.

For Christians, specifically, it is an attempt to have us either denounce or compromise our biblical positions. Tonight, we're going to discuss some of those ideologies. We feel it is important to discuss these issues in news media and seen in our schools, colleges, and famous talking heads you'll see on tables in our community.

In our world, we desire people to come to know him as their savior, Lord, and king. These ideologies have a history and definition. Often, they are camouflaged to make persuasion easier. In a recent interview, I listened to a well-known and influential Christian leader, and that could also be reached and understand our culture.

I hope you will enjoy this panel and anticipate. We're going to start. Dan,.

You'll go ahead and introduce yourself. Oh, I heard that one. Hey, my name is Dan. I come from upstate New York. If you see me, I am battling seasonal allergies. They have just started. We just got the flowers blooming and the trees and the grass and everything's just going full steam right now.

But up here, working with the church, trying to share the gospel and see the glory of the Lord go out all over the place. I'm excited about tonight. I'm looking forward to.

Talking about this topic with these brothers of ours. Brian, top right. Yeah. Hey, I'm Brian.

I'm down on the south end of Atlanta. Vocationally, I'm a marketing director for a treasury consultancy, but I'm also a ruling elder at a PCA church. I'm very interested in the topic and the effect that it has obviously on the body of Christ and the way that it's infecting some of people's understanding of the gospel and of scripture and being bled in and then also the world.

I'm sure we'll get into it and I look forward to meeting and discussing with these.

Brothers from around the globe. We'll start bottom right, John. Yeah, my name is John. I'm.

A outreach pastor at Iron Station, North Carolina, and currently, I'm a licensed minister with the Church of God. And as everybody else has said, I want to see the gospel. I want to see the gospel proclaimed and the culture that we live in right now.

We need Jesus more than we ever have. I may be the only Church of God guy on here, I assume, but I'm humbled to be here and.

I hope I can help in any capacity. Absolutely. Alex? Hey, so I'm Alex. I am currently a student at Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, but I live in western North Carolina in Newland near Boone, Appalachian State University.

I'm an intern at my PCU, and I've had some preaching experience, but for the most part, I'm still learning. So bear with me as I struggle through.

Answering some of your questions. Jonathan? Hey, I'm Jonathan Foster. I'm the lead pastor.

At Vertical Life Church in Newton. And so we're baptized at Costell, just so everybody knows how we stand. We've got Church of God, Presbyterians, everything else. I guess we're in the middle. But, you know, excited about this conversation.

I appreciate the diversity and denominational culture. And so I think it's going to be a great discussion and just glad to be a.

Part of it. Thank you guys. So let's go ahead and start in on it. And don't hesitate. If you want to answer the question, just jump right in. We want to define what these terms are so that when I know that my wife and I, we were watching a television series the other night, and boy, it was hot and heavy pushing this stuff in that television program.

They weren't scared to even use this language, use the terminology, which surprised me. They weren't trying to hide it at all. And so we just wanted to find these terms first and foremost. I'm not sure where you're going, Robert.

You faded out. Close these screens. That might help a lot. There we go. All right. Hopefully you guys, there we go. All right. The first one is, I don't know what all was left out and what was put in there.

But the first question is, what is woke? And Brian, you were first on the list. So go ahead and start us off.

Defining Woke, Intersectionality, and Critical Theory

I'll give, yeah, maybe some contextual response. Woke is a term that's, it means something different, or it certainly has a different tone depending on who it's coming from. It was initially a champion term for those who were awakened to the realities of oppression and struggle from those who would see the world that way.

And so it was just a version of the notion to be awakened to what would be considered systemic or systematic issues. There's the Black Church in African-American experience by Mamia, I think is the name, is some referencing to some of the historical use of it, but it's been adopted by, maybe you could call it both sides of the perspective.

Those who see woke as a derogatory term and those who see woke as a rally cry. And so there's a book coming out later this year by Owen Strachan called, Trish Manatee and Wokeness. And he goes through and starts by defining what woke is not.

But then he kind of mentions a couple of things, says more succinctly than I probably could off the top. So I'll just read to you what he, he says what woke, wokeness is. It's first and foremost, a mindset and a posture.

The term itself means that one is awake to the true nature of the world when so many are asleep. In the most specific terms, this means one sees the comprehensive inequity of our social order and strives to highlight power structures in society that stem from racial privilege.

In intellectual terms, wokeness occurs when one embraces the system of thought mentioned above in the writing, critical race theory. And that teaches that all of societal life is structured along racial power dynamics.

I think in common parlance, it would just be, you know, those who see the world through this critical perspective. And there's, I know we're going to get into some of the, some of the other definitions and terms.

And so maybe that'll help to flush it out over time. But there is a, there's a good book. I know you guys had mentioned it early on, Fault Lines. It was recently, you know, published and released, written by Vody Boncombe.

And he does a great job in, in outlining some of the history in, in terms that are easy to read without having to dive through a lot of historical academic text. But short run, if I'm not going too long on this contribution here is many people are familiar with the notion of, or the person of Karl Marx and some of his, his writings and thinkings about how there was inequity in the haves and the have nots of society long ago.

And he talked about the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, and looked at them through the notion of oppressor and oppressed, the haves and the have nots. It was purely an economic perspective. And he prophesied, more or less, or predicted that there would be a great fallout because of that, that those who didn't have would rise up and, and crush their oppressors.

That did not happen. And so his followers had to come up with a reason why that didn't happen. And so one of his students, Antonio Gramsci, was the guy who first came up with the concept of cultural hegemony.

The, the, the idea that those, those oppressors, those people who have everything, have power in the, in the culture, set the tone. And, and there's really no way of coming around that. Following on from that was this notion of Adorno and Marcuse and others, that came to be known as the Frankfurt School, a hundred years or so ago, the 1920s in Germany, actually came over to the States later with some of this ideology.

But they, they, they came up with what would be critical theory, which was just seeing everything, not in terms of individual interaction or responsibility, but rather structural inequity. So sin, if you were to think of it in that term, which they don't, but, but flaws or problems in society exist in structures of society rather than in the hearts of men.

And so when that was trying to be adopted in the States, it's such an entrepreneurial, you know, environment, puritan work ethic, people were, you could, someone could, could, could jump social or economic strata in a generation if they worked hard.

And so that notion of let's tear everyone apart from the haves and the have-nots didn't take. And so a new lens was developed rather than looking at things from rich and poor or those who had wealth and controlled wealth and those who were working for them.

They started to look at other lines and that's where we'll talk about next, I guess, Kimberly Crenshaw's intersectionality, those concepts, even before she turned it later on in the century. How can we, how can we look at oppressed versus oppressor across lenses beyond economics, race, gender, any type of victimhood concept.

Liberation theology played into this, even in the church. But so a long form, long form overview of the.

Intersectionality, Victimhood, and the Christian Worldview

Kickoff. Can somebody give us a definition of intersectionality? Brian just hinted at it.

I pulled up the Google definition from the Oxford languages. This is a source. As a noun, it is the interconnected nature of social categories, such as race, class, gender, as they apply to a given individual or group, regarded as creating overlapping or interdependent systems of discrimination or disadvantage.

To use in a sentence is through an awareness of intersectionality, we can better acknowledge and ground the differences among us. One of the things I thought about when I saw that was undoubtedly, it seems to be man's desire and a desire to separate out different classes of people to different looks of people.

Every time I think about that, I think about where as Christians, we're all in Christ, right? There's neither Jew nor Greek. There's neither slave nor free man. There's neither male nor female for you're all one in Christ.

And I think about how the world so longs to divide between different skin tones, between different genders. And the world's even confused right now as to there's only two, you know, two genders. They've got, they're so confused in that they can't figure that much out.

They've grown into a place where everything's got to be separated. You can't, you can't know anything because I can't know anything about a woman at all because I'm a man. I can't know anything at all about a black man because I'm a white man.

I have no reason to even speak to any of his problems. I can't know anything about. Does that make sense? Yeah. It's almost as if though you can't speak to anybody about anything unless you have intimate knowledge of his or her plight.

It can't be an innate truth. It can't be an absolute truth. It has to be a relative, relative to that situation. At least that's the way I understand it. Am I speaking out of course here, fellas? Is that what the intersectionality.

Means as far as the nuts and bolts of it? Yeah, I think you're on the right track. And you made me think about there's a free episode, if anybody has seen it, heard of it, or want to go check it out. Douglas Wilson and his Man Rampage series.

He has one free series. It's episode one of the first season, and it's called The Sin of Empathy. And that's similar to what you were talking about there. You have to step into their shoes to be able to help in any way.

And so that's not necessarily... We have scripture. We have Christ. We have the Holy Spirit. We can use those things. And I guess just a layman's understanding of intersectionality from what I've understood in the past is you can have different...

Well, I can't even think...

Layers of victimhood, right? What's that? It's sort of like layers of victimhood. So if you're rich and I'm poor, I'm a victim level one. If you're white and I'm black, and I am poor, victim level two.

If you're a man and I'm a woman, that's victim level three. In terms of the more you have trans versus cisgender, able-bodied versus disabled. So this plays into that critical theory as well. Is that what you're talking about?

Yeah. So literally the term is, where are those... Where are those... Intersecting lines? Yep. That's intersectionality. So across the spectrum, oppressor versus oppressed on what lens? That's layer one.

The next one, it intersects. And so if you are a white, heterosexual, male, cisgendered Christian, you are the worst of the worst. And pick whatever camp is in opposite that. And they would have what is the most social cred victim status.

And in this world, they actually get... In this ideological world, they actually have... It's a way of turning power on its head, because what you just said a second ago was spot on. Truth is a relative concept here.

They don't even think about it in those terms, but it's all about the lived experience of a victim. And everyone has a different level of intersectional victimhood. And so you, white man, could never know a black woman, or you, heterosexual, can never know a transgendered experience.

Bodie Bauckham talks about that in the term... I think he coined the term cultural Gnostic. It's like a new Gnosticism, right? It's that secret knowledge from the Gnostic era of old. Truth comes from their secret perspective that you can only get if you live.

In that class of people. Okay, I see. So it's got to really go down, guys, real quick,.

Just to simplify it. All these things do layer upon layer. Each one is not independent of each other. So a woke person is supposedly aware of the social injustices, and they're operating through a thought process of critical race theory and intersectionality.

And so the real issue that comes with this, as we define it, is it's defining an oppressor, and it's defining a victim. And so that's the real issue. And then it unjustly points fingers at people just because of your skin color and your economic status and your work.

So we may be the most loving, non-racial, compassionate towards sexuality. We can have the most compassion of all those things, but because I am a conservative, white, middle-class pastor, now I'm the oppressor, no matter what my actions is.

I carry that label immediately. And so that's the issue of this, is it makes a blanket statement. And so it doesn't really solve racism. It actually creates a racism.

I was sitting here thinking, so it sounds to me like since there isn't racism, we have to manufacture it to create a problem that we can therefore protest. Does that sound fair?

Did that come across at all? Yeah. I mean, it is fair to a degree. I don't want to say that racism.

Doesn't exist. It does. And that's what I wanted to, too, just to not... I don't like the term devil's advocate because I'm not an advocate for the devil. Okay. But on the flip side of the word woke, it's not necessarily always a negative term because we should be aware that there are still racisms that exist.

I live in the South in North Carolina and Iron Station is just across the hill from it. So we can't say there's not racism in my city. There is one side of town versus another.

Side of the town. Sure. But the statement that you were making just now sounds to me like that sounds like the definition of racism to me. No, no, no. What I'm saying is just on the terminology.

Of woke. But the problem is with the word woke, it carries a liberal agenda with it. If it was just an independent definition that, hey, we're aware of some things that are socially unjust, like, for example, I work with a lot of Hispanic people.

We plant Spanish churches. I speak Spanish. I love Spanish people. Our government will collect taxes from them, thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars, but they won't give them a visa. So that to me is an injustice.

If you're not going to give them a visa, then don't take their money and go ahead and move them back to where they came from. You know, it should be like real clear or like taxes. But that's what we had an American Revolution over was taxation without representation.

And so it's like a hypocrisy. So all I'm saying is we should be aware. And sometimes people would call that, well, I'm woke because I'm aware of things that may seem counter American even, you know. But that's not what we're talking about tonight, just being aware.

The word woke and all this kind of stuff carries this liberal agenda. And that's why this is a topic that is so highly debated. So there can be like a neutral ground that just the definition of itself is not necessarily bad because it's just like, I'm aware that there's social injustices.

Is there? Yeah, we could go to social services or anywhere and find injustices with kids or injustices with all kinds of stuff, you know, where the system has mishandled things. But that's not what we're talking about.

The issue with all this tonight is the liberal agenda that is permeating through our culture. And that's why we're meeting tonight is because that's we've got to figure out as brothers in Christ and pastors and church leaders how to be able to disciple our congregations through these systems, because they most of our congregations probably are very much unaware of this as well.

You know, I mean, even though they've heard it, they have no idea what it means.

And so when I'll say to you on that, no, no, that's great. There's, you know, things happen on a spectrum. So we can talk about trying to understand things from let's maybe the ideal or a caricature. But the people that you're going to experience day to day in the church who've been infected by the propagandized everything that you see on the TV and, you know, schools and whatever, there are a few people who are whole hawk, you know, adherents who are, you know, priests in this new religion.

Most folks, it's been caught and they just don't have a filter or a framework. So like on an ideological basis and there's a book. Let me see. I give it proper credit. We're mentioning it before we started here.

Scott David Allen wrote a book called Why Social Justice Is Not Biblical Justice. And in it, he does a really good job of breaking around the ideology's core tenets and comparing those to what would be a biblical framework.

So just a starting point on that that helps in kind of seeing this is I'll read the first couple of them here. You know, what is ultimately real for ideological social justice or the woke movement that sees the world through an intersectional lens, you know, along the critical race theory paradigm?

Ultimate reality is the human mind defines what's ultimately real. It's humanism. Biblical worldview says that the God of Jesus is the ultimate reality. In the beginning, he created the heavens and the earth, right?

Who are we? Well, from an ideological social justice perspective, creatures whose identity is wholly, like W-H-O-L-L-Y, socially predetermined. We're products of our race, sex, and gender identities.

But the biblical worldview would say we're creations and image bearers of a good, holy, and loving God with inherent dignity and immeasurable worth. What's our fundamental problem? I'll stop on this one.

As a human being, from our perspective, I'll start there, it's rebellion. All have sinned, fall short of the glory of God, right? Our rebellion against God has resulted in broken relationships between God and man, between man and his fellow man, and between man and creation.

And the onus of that sin is in your heart and mine as individuals. The fundamental problem of ideological social justice is oppression. White, heteronormative males have established and maintained hegemonic power structures to oppress and subjugate women, people of color, and sexual minorities, LGBTQ community, and others.

And sin exists. You may perpetuate that as an individual, but it exists corporately in your group and structurally in society. And so ultimately, the goal then is to blow up society and those structures and rebuild, build back better.

Like it's the notion that we have to tear down what's wrong and broken and put something else in its place so that we'll turn the oppressors into the oppressed and the oppressed into the oppressors. It's an ideology of revolution with no real absolute truth and no individual responsibility, but cumulative culpability.

Eric, I do want to apologize.

The thing is, it's a worldview. This is a new worldview. A couple of you guys have glasses on. I'm not making fun of you, but it's the lens that people see the world through. And I think that's important to quantify woke intersectionality, critical race theory.

So it's not something that people have, it is something that some people have just conjured up, but it's been around for a long time. But it's become an agenda and it's become a worldview and it's become something that is being forced in our culture.

It's not something as if it's some kind of mutual platform that people are making decisions, hey, let me investigate this and decide for myself what I think. It's like, if you don't believe this, then you're a heretic, you're an outcast.

And so I think there's a lot to go with that, but it is a worldview and I think we need to be aware of that. Go ahead, Rebel, sorry.

That's okay. I wanted to apologize again. For some reason, I'm having a horrible time with my signal strength and I'm going in and out and I think that's messing with probably with the video quality as well.

So thank you guys for your patience and anybody who's watching, thank you for your patience in that. Yeah, I think you guys are right on because I was thinking about how Christianity, Jesus followers used to be known at one point as the way.

And of course, Jesus is the way to the father. He is the way to life, but he's also the way to living. And we get our understanding, we get our command, we get how we are to live from scripture. And so Christianity, it speaks to our way of life and our way of living.

And so we're wanting to look at this woke movement, intersectionality, these ideologies, the Christian way of life, because the Christianity already has answered or tear down Jesus has answers for these.

Similar, and so I think people get and systematic, different ones have different meanings. Can somebody tell us what the difference is between systemic and systematic? And where you mostly hear systemic right now is with systemic racism and it doesn't mean systematic.

One of you guys that hadn't talked yet, jump in. Can you repeat the question? Yeah, the difference between systemic and systematic. Could you hear me? Yeah, I heard you.

One of my questions that I was supposed to answer in the original thing before we did assignment. So I'll give you just a quick definition of what I had. You guys chime in, please. Basically systemic is system wide.

So in other words, there's a system wide problem that is creating racism or habits or processes. And the systemic would infer that it's difficult to reverse because it is supposedly system wide. So in other words, our system was created by what we already talked about.

The oppressor is our system creators. So the white male heterosexual, he's the one that created the system. So now there's automatically systemic problems with everything else versus systematic is would be very intentional, even on an individual basis, racism.

And so that's where I'm more or less reject systemic. But I understand there are people that are still very capable of systematic. And so systematic would be like if I have a personal bias toward race or any other culture without sharing the gospel with them, that I'm refusing to do that or love them or that that would be systematic.

And if I intentionally create plans to hurt them, to create divisions against them or those kind of stuff. So systematic is more of a nuclear issue with an individual. Systemic is culture or systems throughout the whole.

Nation. I agree. I think systematic, you could be a systematic racist, like you use the system that's in place to cause racism or in order to put your racism to work. But a systemic systemic racism would imply that the system itself is inherently racist.

That's right. And that's one of the big claims of the woke movement is that our institutions from their very foundations are built upon this racism that exalt one group of people and oppress another. That's right.

In the same light, going to the next question, there's two words again that sound similar, and we get them and they're used in this on both sides and that quality equity.

Way I understand equality versus equity is really in the same light as this notion of systemic racism, just with time added into it. Does that sound right? Whereas somebody somebody has to be better off, whether it be financially or physically or whatever, based purely on the people that's come before them.

And some people have, because of that, one group has looked as having a leg up on somebody else. So equality means each individual or group of people is given the same resources or opportunities where equity recognizes that the person has a different circumstance and allocates the exact same resources and opportunities needed to reach an equal outcome.

To me, my Gaston County way of thinking is that's where you see, there used to be a show called Pinks where they drag race, where one person had a slower car so they let him start closer to the finish line than his faster opponent.

And, you know, to me, it's absolutely ridiculous. Having been raised in a Western society that has taught me that if you do your best and you work hard, you can be anything you want to be. And for the vast majority of my life, I've seen that to be true.

I don't fully understand where this worldview, I heard what you said, where it comes from, Marxism, the history behind it, I understand what you said perfectly. I just don't see where it has ever really been a problem in America.

I didn't know that about the immigrants who work and have to pay taxes and don't get their visa. I did not know that. And I don't claim to know everything about anything. But I do know this, my whole life, I've worked, I was raised and born into a, we'll say a modest family.

We had a lot more wants than we had things. And one might say it was on the wrong side of town. But on the other hand, as long as I've been alive and had an opportunity to get a job, and if I've worked hard, somebody has always helped me out.

I've never seen anybody on the job, regardless of whether they were a man or a woman or whether they were black or white or Hispanic, ever be looked over if they were working hard. Somebody always helped them out.

That's been my experience in a way. I can say that from firsthand experience, working in factories, working on job sites, you put in the effort, people recognize it. And whenever you need a hand carrying a ladder, moving a bucket, whatever, somebody will help you out.

Somebody will open the door for you when you're walking through it. And they don't care who you are, where you come from. And that's what I've seen. Now, I understand that in other countries, you can't climb social chains or break through those barriers.

Those are there, those are set up. I just don't see where that exists in America. Not to the degree that we ought to burn down CVSs over it.

Yeah, I do think an important part of biblical justice would be to ensure that everyone has equal opportunities to achieve their goals. I think one of the problems with woke ideology is that instead of looking to make sure that everyone has equal opportunities, it looks to make sure that everyone has an equal outcome.

And that's not a part of biblical justice. We ought to ensure that everyone has equal opportunity, not necessarily equal outcome. And I think that's where the difference between inequity and inequality comes in.

Inequality would be, we don't have equal opportunities. Inequity means we have different outcomes. And one of the things that you have to watch with the language that's used is, I've actually been reading through some articles that come from this woke ideology.

And they'll say that inequity is evidence of racism. If we see unequal outcomes among races, that is in and of itself a evidence of racism in our system, systemic racism. But that's not the case. If there is equal opportunity among the races, then racism doesn't exist within our systems.

There could be other factors involved that cause disparities among the races, but that's not necessarily a racism within our systems themselves. It's a story people are trying to tell. And there's a book that came out years ago by Saul Alinsky called Rules for Radicals, a pragmatic primer on realistic radicals.

Hillary Clinton did her dissertation on it. But the notion of community organizers fall under the vein of, essentially, how do you infect change? And if your goal, if you're a secular humanist who doesn't believe in God and does all that you can to suppress the truth and unrighteousness, because the Bible says that all men are without excuse, that he's made himself claims, so that all mankind are without excuse.

And so anyone who claims that God doesn't exist or that they can't know doesn't exist from the Bible, if we trust it, we have to believe that they're lying, both to themselves and to us. And so even in the notion of equity and inequity and inequality, outcome versus rights or opportunities, equal opportunities, yeah, equal outcomes, equitable outcomes, like the poor will always be with us.

It's different bodies or the body has different parts. God blesses in different ways. But we're coming at it from totally two different things. Proponents of this know they're lying. They're not trying to find truth.

In fact, one of the ways you can tell that is that they shut down the conversation. Anyone who disagrees, they have categories to say why, even if they don't realize it, it's impossible for you to know.

Even the notion of reason and logic is claimed to be racist. So when you're putting that syllogism together of if this, then that, can't do that because that is systemically racist. That's a structural oppressive tool from the cultural hegemony, those who are in power and are trying to oppress anyone from ever revealing the truth and becoming woke that all these old white guys are just out there to push everybody down.

Or all these old Christians are down there just to push everybody down or anybody with money or power or whatever vein happens to suit the fancy. The goal is not to seek nor find nor proclaim truth. They ignore the fact that truth even exists.

Truth is power. That's in this ideology. The ultimate goal is to obtain it, more and more of it, and hold onto it for as long as you can. Blatantly lying to someone is a tactic. That's what's being done.

That's one of the tactics here in the playbook of, if you want to call it, the woke movement. It's difficult to even have a conversation. It's like trying to reason with a relativist. They don't think you can or don't care to try.

We're all here because we're trying to serve the way we think that we understand to do best. Hopefully, he's loved us and we have a desire to see the world bettered. Even those people who hate us and who think that this is a little collective of the white supremacist patriarchy here, they were made in the image of God by God.

But for the grace of God, we'd be in that same spot trying to deny him and lying to ourselves and others. But praise God, he's given us his Holy Spirit to open up our eyes and to awaken us in a biblical sense so that we can see the truth and know that God is real because he's revealed himself as such.

The Bible is true. It's the only authoritative source of truth in this world. By that standard, that normative measure, we can say, all this stuff is falsehood. You're chasing after the wind. You can feel sorry for them rather than hate.

How do you change things? For those on the edges, who they're trying to impact and in effect, for the church itself, believers who are becoming corrupted by this ideology, becoming soft to their understanding of the word.

They're standing on sand and not on the rock. It's easy to get blown by every wind of doctrine or whatever's popular or whatever's the fad. There's this notion back in 1967, I think it was, I can't think of the guy's name, Dunsky or something like that, who said, hey, you talked about systemic versus systematic and the notion of intentionality.

There are some people from the Frankfurt School and beyond who are saying, let's tear down the system. How do we do that? Well, Dunsky, I think is his name, 1967, a long march through the institutions.

How can we do that? Let's infect academia. Let's infect Hollywood and entertainment. Let's infect news and media, journalism, the law schools, so that we can start to impact justice, always under the guise of trying to do a good thing, but really trying to tear down Western culture because they want to build it up in a new, different way.

If revolution is ultimately the goal, I mean, in wartime, what do people do? Especially people that don't have, God is someone they feel like they're being accountable to and the Bible is a standard moral rule.

Lie, cheat, steal, scratch, do whatever you can to accomplish your end. I guess I'm rambling or whatever, but we're not dealing with someone across the table who wants to have an honest, rational discussion.