Sunday Night, September 27, 2020, AM

All right, well, let's come back to your seats if you'll head towards 2

Timothy 3. We'll be reading from there in a moment. And then if you have more than one bookmark, you can go over to Isaiah 8, 19 -20, we'll be there in a moment.

So, 2 Timothy 3, verses 16 -17, coming back again to our study,

Sons of Issachar, second half of our study on critical theory. Let's go ahead and start a word, start with a word of prayer.

Father, I thank you for our time of fellowship, our time of singing and reading of the scripture. I pray that you would now help us as we consider what your word has to say.

Help us to trust you and trust in your sufficient word. Help us as children to follow you as our heavenly

Father, as sheep to follow our holy Savior. We thank you,

Father, for the gift of your Holy Spirit. Help us as saints to rejoice in your truth and pray these things for Christ's sake, amen.

So last week, as we were talking about critical theory and trying to give a definition to it and a history of it and so on, we defined critical theory as hostile interrogation of assumed social oppression.

In other words, there is the assumption in critical theory that societal oppression is occurring.

It is assumed capitalistic societies are guilty of oppression, period.

And so critical theory is the tool which begins to investigate in all the various ways that this oppression manifests.

And it's a hostile interrogation. It's a hostile witness on the stand. And so the attempt will be one of obscuring, but it's the job of the critical theorist to expose.

Critical theory was developed as a philosophical tool of cultural Marxists to destabilize structures in society perceived to generate capitalistic consciousness.

In other words, Marx wanted to see revolution where the workers rose up against the owners.

The proletariat rose up against the bourgeois. Why didn't this happen to the extent that it should in Marx's mind?

The cultural Marxists who came afterwards said, well, it wasn't just a matter of political realities or economic realities, it was a matter of cultural realities.

The way that the families are envisioned, the way that the church teaches, the way that the academy is handled, the way that art itself is handled.

All of these things keep in place these categories of oppressor and oppressed.

Therefore, in order for the revolution to succeed, it's not a matter of simply changing political realities or even aiming at economic realities.

You have to change the cultural realities. Therefore, the ideas of cultural

Marxism must march, must take a long march through the institutions. The family must be undone.

How are they doing? The academy must be undone.

Art must be undone. All these different cultural structures must be undone.

They are all full of oppression, full of systemic injustice, and so they must all be undone.

Okay, so that's cultural Marxism. And critical theory manifests as the tool of cultural

Marxists to destabilize all of these things. Critical theory is the philosophical equivalent of Black Lives Matter mob throwing

Molotov cocktails, burning, destroying, so on. This is the philosophical side of it.

Now, CT manifests through intersectionality. Intersectionality is a device which lets you know how many oppressed groups you belong to.

Remember, oppression is assumed. Critical theory is just trying to figure out in all the different ways. Intersectionality tells you how many oppressed groups you belong to.

If you do not belong to any oppressed group, guess what? You are the oppressor. If you don't belong to the really oppressed groups or to enough oppressive groups, then you, although you may have some oppression, you do have a lot of privilege that you are routinely required to check.

Critical theory is hate distilled into a philosophical acid, and I did that whole foil on 1

Corinthians 13 last week, just trying to show you the replacement of love as the Christian virtue, the prime

Christian virtue with critical theory and how opposite it is. I don't think that there's any resolution between critical theory and Christianity.

So, since we know that Christianity and critical theory are diametrically opposed, like Yahweh and Baal, that doesn't mean that there aren't several who would see some kind of synthesis formed between Yahweh and Baal.

Jezebel likes to mix the things up, doesn't she, to eliminate harsh categories and permanent boundaries.

Syncretism, bringing of these things together that shouldn't belong together, makes for a very profitable and supposedly peaceable approach.

Well, what gives cover for all this? We're going to talk about ecumenicalism, it's alive and well in the evangelical church.

But first of all, our conviction, our conviction, what is our conviction about this matter? We've talked about critical theory, what is our conviction?

Remember that critical theory is a philosophical tool, it assumes oppression, so we have to see everything through the lens of critical theory, see everything through the lens of intersectionality and so on.

However, in contradistinction to this, we believe in the sufficiency of scripture. So, 2

Timothy 3, 16 through 17, all scripture is inspired by God.

All scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

So, all scripture is breathed out by God and is profitable, it is excellent, it is good for teaching, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness, to know what's true, to know where we're wrong, to know how to get right, and how to live

God's way, the holy scriptures. So that the man of God may be adequate, not lacking anything, equipped for every good work, is there some good work that I need to do?

How in the world will I ever be equipped to do such a good work? Well, we have scripture.

Of pertinent interest is this, all scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.

The word in the Greek for righteousness is the same exact word in the

Greek translated for justice. Do we need training for justice? Do we need to be trained in justice?

Where do we find it? We find it in the scriptures, and it's adequate for everything that we need.

So, this of course,

I think, is verbally supported, verbally celebrated, assented to, promoted, included confessionally throughout evangelicalism.

Throughout Baptist churches and so on. I mean, this is just everybody, oh, absolutely.

Absolutely, amen and applause. Okay, so I don't think there's a lot of verbal disagreement on this, or ideological disagreement on this.

But we must continue about our conviction. Not only do we believe in the sufficiency of scripture, but we also believe in the folly of syncretism.

The folly of syncretism, and this must be added to our conviction to be clear about what we're saying about the sufficiency of scripture.

For example, in Isaiah 8, verses 19 and 20, when they say to you, consult the mediums and the spiritists who whisper and mutter.

Should not a people consult their God? Should they consult the dead on behalf of the living?

And this is a very important question to ask. Should we consult the dead on behalf of the living?

Verse 20, to the law and to the testimony, if they do not speak according to this word, it is because they have no dawn.

When did syncretism ever glorify God or work in the Bible? Garden, babble, did it work in the wilderness?

The golden calf, did it work in the land with Baal? When did it ever work?

Never worked. Did it work in the New Testament? Either on the side of the

Judaizers or on the side of the pagans and the Gnostics. When did it ever work?

When did it ever work? It never worked. It never, ever worked. And Paul himself was criticized for not mixing it up.

Wasn't he? First Corinthians one? Read what Paul has to say in First Corinthians one.

You can tell he's under attack because he's not mixing it up with some of the other sources of information.

So our conviction is the sufficiency of scripture and the folly of syncretism. With that in mind, we need to take our approach and clarify terms.

I said last week that as we talked about critical theory, it's obviously not in agreement with Christianity.

And it would be very hard to find a professing believer who is just all in love with critical theory and just, oh, that's the best.

That's not really there. The question comes down to how is it manifesting in some sort of blended version within the church?

That's the real concern. And this is where we need to clarify some terms.

So last summer, in 2019, Southern Baptist Convention had their meeting and there was something called

Resolution 9 that was passed. And it has a lot of whereases and resolves in it.

And it affirms the sufficiency of scripture, the authority of scripture, the inerrancy of scripture.

It affirms all sorts of wonderful and good things that everybody can applaud. And enjoy.

But it also says some other things about critical race theory and intersectionality. And so it's opting for some low level syncretism between the

Christian faith and critical theory or critical race theory and intersectionality.

So here's some of the things that they said. It was passed by the

Southern Baptists. Critical race theory, this is whereas, critical race theory. Here's how they define it.

Critical race theory is a set of analytical tools. Just in case you missed that, it was restated again like this.

Analytical tools, just in case you missed that. Cuz you know, Southern Baptists, they're just so slow.

They need to be, come on, sit down, it's easy. A set of analytical tools that explain how race has and continues to function in society.

Critical race theory they define as a set of analytical tools that explains how race has and continues to function in society.

And they define intersectionality as the study of how different personal characteristics overlap and inform one's experience.

So this is how they're defining critical race theory intersectionality. That sounds about as dull as dirt. But if you do your homework, you know that critical race theory is, calling critical race theory a set of analytical tools is misleading.

Because it's far more than that, as we've talked about.

It's not a matter of, it makes it sound like critical race theory is kinda sitting back in a chair and kinda thinking about things and analyzing post -game analysis after a football game or something.

That's not actually what it is. It's very active in its deconstruction and destroying of ideas.

And intersectionality is the study of how different personal characteristics overlap and inform one's experience.

Well, no, it's trying to understand how many levels of oppression you are under. In your capitalistic society.

So you have to understand what these things actually are. Now, it says, whereas, the next thing says, critical race theory and intersectionality have been appropriated by individuals with world views that are contrary to the

Christian faith, resulting in ideologies and methods that contradict scripture. They're saying, yeah, there are some problems with critical race theory intersectionality, but notice that they say the problems are not with critical race theory, the problem is not with intersectionality.

The problem is that these sticks on the ground that could be useful tools have been picked up by some bandits, and they're misusing them.

Is that how critical race theory came to be? Was it just simply a neutral, plain old analytical tool?

A shovel just laying there to be used for some intellectual spade work. And then along comes an evil villain who picks up the shovel and turns it into a weapon.

That's not the history of critical race theory or intersectionality. But that's what

Resolution 9 states, and it's a lie. It's out and out deception.

It is true that there are the people who use critical race theory and intersectionality abundantly.

Yes, of course, they are contrary to the Christian faith. Yes, they are doing things that contradict scripture.

And that part is true. But the truth is mixed in with the deception. And it says, whereas evangelical scholars who affirm the authority and sufficiency of scripture have employed selective insights from critical race theory and intersectionality to understand multifaceted social dynamics.

Isn't that great? Man, anybody dealing with multifaceted social dynamics is gonna need a little help.

The Bible is so backward, it can't even get close to talking about those things. You gotta use something to help you out with that very complicated mess.

So notice the point here. Notice evangelicals, they're safe, everybody, calm down, nothing to see here.

They affirm the authority and sufficiency of scripture, then they're good. And they have only employed selective insights.

Who selected them? Well, of course, they did. And because they trust the Bible totally, then you know that they only picked the good stuff out.

They must be the smartest people on the planet. They can reach into the gullet of critical race theory and pick out the little bit of flesh out of the innards.

Ah, perfect, this is helpful. Really, they can do that.

That's impressive. That's really impressive. Critical race theory, it says, resolve, they resolve, therefore, that critical race theory and intersectionality should only be employed as analytical tools subordinate to scripture.

Remember, these are just shovels and a shovel and a hammer. And you just use them correctly, subordinate to scripture, and you'll be good.

Not to be used as transcendent ideological frameworks. Okay, so you can't use critical race theory and intersectionality to be over the scripture and over our beliefs in God, but they must be submitted to the scripture.

Well, good luck with that. That Southern Baptists resolve also that Southern Baptists will carefully analyze how the information gleaned from these tools are employed to address social dynamics.

Really? I'm very encouraged that Southern Baptists are going to carefully analyze how this information, how the information gleaned from critical race theory is going to be used.

Southern Baptists can't keep track of half of their members, but they're going to carefully analyze the information gleaned from critical, how are you going to do that?

Now this is very, now they're saying the things that, please calm down, we have the best intentions at heart, okay?

And we realize that there's a thing in this world called critical race theory and intersectionality, and we know that it's being used all over the place.

And look, we understand there's systemic oppression out there, there's racism everywhere.

We don't want to be considered anti, to be against all the efforts there are out there to solve these issues.

And so we understand critical race theory and intersectionality have some problems. They've been used problematically, but we're only going to use them in very limited ways that are always in agreement with scripture, and don't worry.

That's Resolution 9. And it caused such a ruckus that later on they had to have a whole clarification session on what they meant by all this stuff.

So we're not left with just what they had in the resolution. The group came back to clarify.

They said, we use this phrase, analytical tools, to distinguish between the worldview of critical race theory and intersectionality's creators, and then the concepts that are used from these theories by some

Christians. Notice, they've just confessed the total lie. In the resolution, they said that critical race theory and intersectionality were appropriated by individuals with bad worldviews.

In their clarification, they said, these things came from people with bad worldviews.

Okay, and so they said analytical tools, we're just using some of the concepts, we're not using the worldview.

We share the concerns about the foundation worldview and various applications of critical race theory and intersectionality.

However, not every observation from these theories is wrong, sinful, or unhelpful. In limited ways, insights from these theories may show us what is, when it comes to the social dynamics people experience, and help us see more robustly the nature of, as one

SBC leader has described it, racial injustice and systemic wrongs throughout our cultural landscape.

Now, who came up with the idea that the cultural landscape is filled with oppression?

Who came up with that idea? Cultural Marxists came up with that idea. And that's why they came up with CT and intersectionality.

That's why they came up with that, because they wanted to help explain the oppression that we all know is there. And so the

Southern Baptists said, we're not using the worldview of critical race theory. We're just trying to explain how there's oppression in our culture.

They're using, they're borrowing from that worldview in their very statement. So that's why it's good to do your homework about, and some of this gets really ridiculous.

Okay, so there's an idea, the basic idea is what?

Is this, to clarify terms, conservative evangelicals reject critical race theory intersectionality as a worldview.

We understand they came from godless ideologies, godless worldviews. And so we are not in favor of these things at all, as far as a worldview goes.

However, there are some analytical tools. There are some concepts from critical race theory intersectionality, they're saying, that we can use that are helpful in understanding some of the wrongs that are going on around in our world.

And we wanna right the wrongs, and we wanna do good. We want, in the name of Christ, to do good to others.

And to right wrongs and roll back injustice wherever we can find it. So that's the claim, just to clarify.

So, remember, this is, we're just using it as an analytical tool, right?

Just an analytical tool, it's not a worldview, it's just an analytical tool.

So there's this hymn that was recently published, it's just an analytical tool. O Sacred Neck Now Wounded, you can see it on the back of your handout.

There's a hymn called O Sacred Head Now Wounded, new hymn published.

It was platformed by the Gospel Coalition. O Sacred Neck Now Wounded, pressed down by blows and knees, this son of God surrounded by silent enemies.

Will no one stop and listen, will no one rise and speak of violence and oppression which hangs you from that tree?

Man of sorrow is beaten down, our brother's blood cries from the ground. You bore our sin, we turned our eyes from you, the

Lamb of God. And you can read the rest of it, it's basically the same thing. So this was written after George Floyd was killed.

And so what are they doing? They're identifying the death of George Floyd with the suffering of Christ.

And why would they do that? Remember, it's just an analytical tool. They're doing that because of black liberation theology, father of which is

James Cone, who identifies the suffering of Christ with the suffering of all oppressed. You cannot understand the cross without seeing it through the lynching tree, and you can't understand the lynching tree without seeing it through the cross.

We'll talk more about James Cone in a moment. But again, the reason why James Cone writes what he writes is because of his commitment to critical race theory.

But remember, it's just an analytical tool. It's not like people will be writing hymns about it.

Recently, Jen Hatmaker, who used to be a very popular woman's Bible study material,

LifeWay, to their credit, stopped selling her stuff, tweeted, with a deep, deep bow,

I honor this absolute legend. She blazed the very trails that we walk on today.

I cannot say this with more sincerity. Well done, good and faithful servant. You fought the good fight, and you finished your race.

Enter into your rest, dear sister. She's writing about Ruth Bader Ginsburg. It's just an analytical tool.

It's not like people who are oppressed, like women who are oppressed, it's not like they get a free pass to heaven, no matter how many babies they've celebrated to death.

By the way, Ruth Bader Ginsburg actually said in one of her opinions that we've come to the point where we realize that abortion is not birth control delayed, it's more than that.

So she herself recognized that we weren't talking about something that was preventing life.

She knew what she was defending. Just an analytical tool, though, doesn't really make a huge impact.

A few quotes from Jarvis Williams, professor at the

Southern Baptist Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. Be willing to die for racial reconciliation as you would for penal substitution.

Southern Seminary. According to Paul, racial reconciliation is not an implication of the gospel, not something that happens because of the good news of Christ, but it is a gospel issue.

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

So what is he doing? He's saying that the good news of Jesus Christ, repentant of your sins and come to, and trust in Jesus Christ for salvation, that's too narrow.

That gospel is a term that needs to include the implications of the gospel as well. So we're backing the application of gospel reality, the fruit of salvation, backing that truck up into the very nature of what gospel means in and of itself.

Why is it important for Jarvis Williams to do? He says, well, it's important because the maintenance language of walking in the spirit includes anti -racism work, racial reconciliation.

All right, so that's why racial reconciliation for him is a gospel issue. If you're not doing racial reconciliation work based on however that's defined these days, then you're in trouble.

He says, all sinners experience justification before God by faith in Jesus Christ apart from works of the law.

But without personal holiness, we will not experience final justification. What did he just do?

He split original justification by faith alone, yes, at the beginning. But at the end, final justification is different.

Our works will either vindicate us or condemn us in the judgment. Southern Seminary, and this is not, and he is not alone, okay?

There are more than one professor at Southern who have been platformed and raised to the ranks and promoted who are teaching these things.

But remember, critical theory, critical race theory and intersectionality is just an analytical tool. It's not like it's gonna do, and besides,

Southern Baptists are gonna be real careful that they don't allow critical race theory to come up with any unbiblical conclusions.

Remember, they're gonna be real careful about that. I'm gonna read a little bit from James Cone, from The Cross and the

Lynching Tree, it's one of his monographs. He says, the gospel is found wherever poor people struggle for justice.

The gospel is found wherever poor people struggle for justice. The gospel of Jesus is not a rational concept to be explained in a theory of salvation, but a story about God's presence in Jesus' solidarity with the oppressed, which led to his death on the cross.

James Cone has an absolute different gospel, doesn't he? Okay, all right, and Denny Akin, who was president of Southeastern, was absolutely chastised for calling

James Cone a heretic, and was forced to come back on Twitter, and so that he hopes to find him in heaven. He says, salvation is broken spirits being healed, voiceless people speaking out, and black people empowered to love their own blackness.

That's what salvation is, according to James Cone. He says, the cross and lynching tree interpret each other.

The lynched black victim experienced the same fate as the crucified Christ, and thus became the most potent symbol for understanding the true meaning of the salvation achieved through God on the cross.

Remember, it's just an analytical tool. It's all the hotness these days to say that you've read

James Cone and are applying some of his insights in your ministry, in your teaching and preaching, and so on and so forth.

Walter Strickland, professor at Southeastern Seminary, says we fast and we pray, and that's fantastic, but that person needs to hear the voice of Dr.

Cone, beckoning us to the fact that that person is the one who is best suited to do the work of the social implications, the social outworkings of the gospel, and understands the brokenness of creation from scripture, and go about fixing it under the kingdom that's to come,

Walter Strickland. It's just an analytical tool, though. Eric Mason, who wrote the very popular book,

Woke Church, who blamed all white people for the death of Martin Luther King at the MLK 50 conference.

He has just delivered a big sermon about reparations. I think he called it

Dripology. I'm not making that up. Dripology. Drip is slang for money and cash, so he called it

Dripology. I'm not making it up. He said, if any so -called Christian, basically he said this in his sermon, if any so -called

Christian resists making reparations to black people, you just may want to check your justification.

And Eric Mason is highly platformed in big evangelicalism today. Remember, it's just an analytical tool.

I'm just trying to show you by just some examples. I'm just showing you, it took me about two hours to find this.

I know where to look, but it just took me about two hours to compile this list, okay? I'm just trying to show you that you can't add critical theory to Christianity and come out unscathed, no matter how careful you think you're being, okay?

Esau McCulley, PhD, teaches at Wheaton. So it's a question that I can't stop asking.

If all translation, translation of the Bible, if all translation is interpretation, and interpretation is influenced by social location, it's intersectionality, what does it mean that most of our

English Bibles were translated with very few black or other Christians of color or women involved?

Remember, it's just an analytical tool. And remember, critical theory will remain subordinated to the scriptures, until critical theory says, yeah, but the scriptures themselves are written by the oppressors, translated by the oppressors, so you can't trust it.

You can't keep critical theory subordinate to the scriptures. That's not the nature of it. It's like saying,

I'm gonna keep my acid in a napkin. Kyle J Howard wrote, when

I was in seminary, it was made abundantly clear by peers that the visual paradigm for godly masculinity was a man with a confederate style beard.

Didn't make me insecure, but the othering dynamic of the paradigm made it clear that I was a visitor in reforms of the

Baptist context. I think that was just funny, that it's just an analytical tool, but beards are racist.

Just an analytical tool, and it was just peaceful protesting. So that was just kind of running the reductio, so I don't think it's going to work.

I don't think it works, I don't think that adding some parts of critical theory and intersectionality, while writing articles against critical theory, writing articles against intersectionality, decrying it as bad, and then using selective insights from them in Christianity, I don't think you come out unscathed.

This is nothing more than snake handling. It's nothing more than snake handling.

Snake handling has its own little attractiveness when you go to a snake handling church, and snake handlers themselves in the pulpit kind of enjoy themselves because they're handling these creatures that are full of poison, full of danger.

You never know what's going to happen with it, but if you're really holy, and if you're really in the spirit, then they think, well, then nothing bad will ever happen to me, right?

Look, I can handle snakes, and I don't get hurt. I can add James Cone into my interpretations.

I can add selective insights from critical theory, intersectionality, and I'm not going to get scathed, but snake handlers don't realize how snake bit they are.

How can you properly understand and assess? We don't need critical theory or intersectionality or selective insights to understand where we are as the church, where we are as a society.

The scripture clearly assesses that for us.

Christ is very plain, and clear, and deep, and true, and challenging in his word, his teachings, in the good news of his salvation.

And he's on his throne even now, and he is ruling and he's reigning according to his word.

And we need to actually genuinely stick with the scriptures. Just because someone verbally assents to sufficiency of scripture, truth of scripture, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Okay, great, you're part of the club, but are you paying your dues? You're part of the club, but do you ever show up to the meetings?

You're part of the club, but do you ever show up? Right, okay, I know you said that, but where's the proof in the pudding?

Jesus didn't say by their words you will know them, he said by your fruits you will know them, okay?

So I think we can speak adequately to the sinful condition of man and our need for redemption and how to follow Christ with the scriptures alone.

And one last passage for our hope, and this is something that we always need to keep in mind. You know, the church is not perfect, yeah, far from it.

I'm not saying that we've got all of our ducks in a row, but we certainly don't need selective insights from Baal to improve the worship of Yahweh.

Okay, I don't think that's the way to go. Here's something for our hope. Ephesians chapter five, and I want to read beginning in verse 25.

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave himself up for her, so that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word.

Will he succeed? That he might present to himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she would be holy and blameless.

Oh, he will succeed, and he'll use his word to cleanse and purify the church.

May not happen at some people's desired rate or pace, but what do we know about God, what do we know about Christ?

That he's long -suffering and patient and has a long -term goal in mind, and we can just faithfully submit ourselves again and again to the word of God and know that he's washing us with the water of his word.

He's sanctifying us, he's beautifying the church, and we can rejoice in that, and I think that's where our hope is.

Well, let's go ahead and close by singing the doxology, and then truth group families will be heading to the fellowship hall and then to the teaching class.

Students, follow Josiah, because he'll be teaching tonight, okay? Let's sing doxology.