The Injustice of Social Justice

The Injustice of Social Justice.  Pastor MacArthur's biblical commentary needs to be given careful attention.  John writes, "The besetting sin of pragmatic, style-conscious evangelicals has always been that they shamelessly borrow fads and talking points from the unbelieving world. Today’s evangelicals evidently don’t believe the wisdom of this world is foolishness before God (1 Corinthians 3:19). Virtually any theory, ideology, or amusement that captures the fancy of secular pop culture will be adopted, slightly adapted, perhaps cloaked in spiritual-sounding language, propped up with specious proof texts, and peddled as an issue that is vital for evangelicals to embrace if we don’t want to become totally irrelevant.

That’s precisely how evangelicals in the mid-twentieth century became obsessed for several decades with positive thinking, self-esteem, and “Christian psychology.” After that, it was marketing savvy and promotional strategies. By the beginning of the twenty-first century it was postmodernism, repackaged and aggressively promoting itself as the Emerging Church movement.

Today, critical race theory, feminism, intersectional theory, LGBT advocacy, progressive immigration policies, animal rights, and other left-wing political causes are all actively vying for evangelical acceptance under the rubric of “social justice.”

Not every evangelical leader currently talking about social justice supports the full spectrum of radical causes, of course. Most (for the moment, at least) do not. But they are using the same rhetoric and rationale of victimhood and oppression that is relentlessly employed by secularists who are aggressively advocating for all kinds of deviant lifestyles and ideologies. Anyone who claims victim status can easily and effectually harness the emotional appeal of a plea for “social justice” both to gain support and to silence opposition.

Is the Controversy over "Social Justice" Really Necessary?

Is the Controversy over "Social Justice" Really Necessary?  Pastor John MacArthur writes, "I do not relish controversy, and I particularly dislike engaging in polemical battles with other evangelical Christians. But as my previous posts in this series demonstrate, when the gospel is under attack from within the visible church, such controversy is necessary. And if it seems fierce disagreements within the church have been the rule rather than the exception, that’s because relentless attacks on the gospel from people professing fidelity to Christ have come in an unending parade since the very beginning of the church age. There has never been an extended period in church history when it has not been necessary for faithful voices to mount a vigorous defense of one or more cardinal biblical principles.

None of the controversies I’ve described in my previous posts sprang up suddenly. The lordship controversy, for example, was a conflict many of us saw coming more than a decade before I wrote The Gospel According to Jesus. The twisted gospel of the prosperity preachers has its roots in the Pentecostal movement going back to the early twentieth century. Normally we can see storm clouds brewing and anticipate where the next major assault is coming from.

But occasionally a new threat to the simplicity or clarity of the gospel seems to erupt with stunning force and suddenness. The current controversy over “social justice” and racism is an example of that. Four years ago, I would not have thought it possible for Bible-believing evangelicals to be divided over the issue of racism. As Christians we stand together in our affirmation of the second great commandment (“You shall love your neighbor as yourself”—Leviticus 19:18). We therefore stand together against every hint of racial animus.

The Long Struggle to Preserve the Gospel (pt. 2)

"A previous blog post by Dr. MacArthur focused on some of the past few decades of conflicts within the evangelical movement that have provoked me to preach and write in defense of the gospel. It wasn’t an exhaustive list—that would be tedious, I suspect. Evangelicals as a group have shown an unsettling willingness to compromise or unnecessarily obfuscate all kinds of issues where Scripture has spoken plainly and without ambiguity.

For example, despite the clarity of 1 Timothy 2:12 (“I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man”), leading evangelicals have been debating for several years whether women qualify to be elders or pastors in the church. Many capitulate to cultural preference rather than submitting to biblical authority on this and other similar issues. Some have tried to redefine the role and proper functioning of the family. Others seem to want to deconstruct—or simply ignore—what the Bible says about divorce and remarriage.

More disturbing yet, over the past few years some evangelicals have begun to borrow moral rationalizations from secular culture in the wake of America’s sexual revolution. For years there has been a slow but steady softening of evangelicals’ stance against sex outside of marriage. More recently, and more ominously, several vocal evangelicals (including some in positions of leadership or influence) have been tinkering with novel ideas regarding gender fluidity, sexual orientation, transgenderism, and homosexual marriage. Those are issues that generations of believers would never have dreamed of putting on the table for debate or redefinition in the church. But at this very moment there is a burgeoning campaign to reconsider and abandon the church’s historic stance on LGBT issues under the banner of “social justice.”

Why have so many evangelicals openly embraced such compromises? The answer is very simple. It’s the next logical step for a church that is completely ensnared in efforts to please the culture. For decades the popular notion has been that if the church was going to reach the culture it first needed to connect with the style and methods of secular pop culture or academic fads. To that end, the church surrendered its historic forms of worship. In many cases, everything that once constituted a traditional worship service disappeared altogether, giving way to rock-concert formats and everything else the church could borrow from the entertainment industry. Craving acceptance in the broader culture, the church carelessly copied the world’s style preferences and fleeting fads.

It's Not About Kaepernick

"To mark the 30th anniversary of its groundbreaking 'Just Do It' ad campaign, the Nike corporation recently announced a new campaign featuring former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick, unarguably one of the most polarizing figures in America today, with the slogan: "Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything."

At first glance, the exhortation by the Oregon-based corporate behemoth seems rather harmless and innocuous. In fact, give it a quick perusal while you're busy making dinner, paying bills online, or toying around with your favorite smartphone app and the entreaty comes across as downright positive, affirming, and motivating. After all, we all believe in something, don't we? Who of us wants to be viewed as merely coasting through life with no sense of conviction or creed to help us navigate a world that all too often proves itself to be morally and ethically rudderless?

Notwithstanding the aesthetic significance of this advertising shibboleth as a successful marketing ploy or motivational axiom, what I find most concerning is the fundamental question the statement inherently begets. That is, should believing in "something," regardless of its veracity or legitimacy, be considered a virtue in and of itself (as Nike® seems to think)?

In Scripture, the word 'believe' first appears in Gen. 45:26. It is the Hebrew verb 'aman and denotes having a firm and settled assurance in that which has been established as objectively true. During His first trial before Pontius Pilate, Jesus declared, "I have come into the world to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice (Jn. 18:37)", to which Pilate retorted, "What is truth (Jn. 18:38)?"

Social Justice Causes and Gospel-Centered Ministry

Photo Credit: Right Now Media

This week I have been posting some of the most helpful articles that I have come across related to the recent craze within the evangelical church that is all things SOCIAL JUSTICE.  Pastor Phil Johnson's post is well worth our prayerful consideration.  "When the morning worship service ended last Sunday, a woman whom I had never met before made a beeline for me and stood between me and the aisle. I was trapped in a row of seats. She said she was a guest from out of town, but she seemed to recognize me, and she said she wanted to help me understand the “social justice” issue.

“Despite what you think,” she said, “it is a gospel issue.” “Injustice is everywhere in the world. I am fighting it full time. Right now I have several lawsuits pending against injustice in the health-care industry. Don’t tell me that’s not gospel work. You’re not being a faithful witness unless you’re fighting for social justice. It’s built right into the gospel message: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’”

I tried to sound as agreeable as possible under the circumstances: “That’s surely one of the most important tenets of God’s moral law, and it does distill the idea of human justice into a single commandment,” I said. “But be careful how you state it. That’s not the gospel. That’s the Second Great Commandment.”

“Oh, right,” she said. “I meant to say the gospel is ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind.’”

“Well, that’s the First Great Commandment,” I said. “That’s still law, not gospel.”

“What do you mean?” she said. “I can show you those verses in the Bible.”

“Yes, ma’am, I know,” I said. “It’s Matthew 22:37-40. But that’s a summary of the law. It’s not the gospel.”

The Long Struggle to Preserve the Gospel (Part 1)

"From the earliest days of the apostolic era, faithful Christians have been called upon to contend earnestly for the truth of the gospel. The hardest battles have taken place within the visible church, among those who claim fidelity to Christ. That’s because the greatest threats to gospel truth have not come from atheists and other overt adversaries, but always from influential voices that arise within the church who speak twisted things (Acts 20:30). The evidence that this was happening in the very earliest era of the New Testament church is seen not only in Paul’s parting words to the Ephesian elders, but also in his admonitions to Timothy and Titus, and in Christ’s letters to the churches in Revelation 2-3.

When I was studying doctrine and apologetics in seminary, I thought I was equipping myself to defend biblical truth against an onslaught of attacks from the world. I envisioned answering atheism and confronting threats to the gospel that would arise out of secular culture, the entertainment industry, the academic world, and other places outside the church.

Sometime after I entered full-time ministry, it dawned on me (to my profound shock) that the greatest threats to biblical truth typically arise from within the fellowship of professing believers—and it is a relentless parade of attacks. Looking back through church history, I realized that’s how it has always been. There has never been a time when false doctrines, harmful methodologies, unwholesome practices, bizarre beliefs, poisonous ideologies, and false teachers weren’t troubling the church of God—often with seriously divisive and otherwise spiritually destructive results.

In retrospect, it should not have been a surprise to me that the worst troubles come from within. I was born into a pastor’s home. My father was the son of a pastor. Both were part of the historic denominational landscape of planet church. They were in the American Baptist Church (ABC) denomination.

By the time I was a teenager, my grandfather was in heaven, having served as a pastor until the day he saw the face of Christ. My dad left the faltering, compromising ABC to plant an independent church in a building sold by a failing Lutheran congregation.

My father took his stand in the liberal-fundamentalist conflict. The issue then was the inspiration and authority of Scripture. My dad was bold and relentless, always with grace, to defend the Bible as inspired by God in total. He was cut off from lifelong friends who stayed in the ABC, but he was never divided in his loyalty to the true doctrine of Scripture. He encouraged me as a teenager, as a college student, and as a seminary student to learn and acquire all the doctrinal and evidentiary proofs necessary to defend the Word of God against the modernist and liberal attacks.

Social (In)justice and the Gospel

John MacArthur has heard enough.  The Gospel Coalition's regular promotion of social justice and various expressions of critical race theory under the banner of Gospel-centered church ministry demanded a thoughtful response.  Over the past many Sundays at Grace Community Church and via the Grace to You blog Pastor John highlights what many lesser known pastors and bloggers have been saying for years. "Scripture says earthly governments are ordained by God to administer justice, and believers are to be subject to their authority. The civil magistrate is “a minister of God to you for good . . . an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil” (Romans 13:1–4). But it is also true that no government in the history of the world has managed to be consistently just. In fact, when Paul wrote that command, the Roman Emperor was Nero, one of the most grossly unjust, unprincipled, cruel-hearted men ever to wield power on the world stage.

As believers, “we know . . . that the whole world lies in the power of the evil one” (1 John 5:19), so worldly power structures are—and always have been—systemically unjust to one degree or another.

Even the United States, though founded on the precept that all members of the human race “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,” incongruously maintained a system of forced slavery that withheld the full benefits of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness from multitudes. Many generations of people from African ethnicities were thus legally (but immorally) relegated to subhuman status. According to the 1860 census, there were about four million in the generation of slaves who were being held in servitude when Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation.

The Civil War and the abolishment of slavery did not automatically end the injustice. A hundred years passed before the federal government banned segregation in public places and began in earnest to pass legislation safeguarding the civil rights of all people equally. Until then, freed slaves and their descendants in Southern states were literally relegated by law to the back of the bus and frequently treated with scorn or incivility because of the color of their skin.

I got a small taste of what it felt like to be bullied and discriminated against in the American South in the 1960s. I spent a lot of time traveling through rural Mississippi with my good friend John Perkins, a well-known black evangelical leader, preaching the gospel in segregated black high schools. During one of those trips, as we drove down a dirt road, a local sheriff—an openly bigoted character straight out of In the Heat of the Night—took me into custody, held me in his jail, and accused me of disturbing the peace. He also confiscated (and kept) all my money. He ultimately released me without filing charges. I suppose he considered the money he took from me an adequate fine for doing something he disapproved of.

Must Everything Be Racialized? Reflections on a Recent Article by John C. Richards

Yesterday on his blog, The Exchange, hosted by Christianity Today online, Ed Stetzer gave space to his colleague, John C. Richards, to write about the recent SCOTUS nominee. Richards, a “Christian person of color,” serves as the Managing Director of the Billy Graham Center at Wheaton College. His article is entitled, “Brett Kavanaugh is a Troubling Supreme Court Pick for Black Christians.”

Richards’ article strikes me as an example of much that is wrong in American evangelicalism today. It reflects a conviction-shaping-narrative that cannot be sustained by historical facts (and, as we all know, you can have your own opinions, but you cannot have your own facts) as well as the kind of racialized thinking that clouds judgment.

He writes, “I long for the days when Supreme Court judges weren’t viewed as representing a particular ideology.” I assume he means “any” particular ideology rather than only one particular ideology. If that is correct, I wonder when those days existed? Both strict constructionism and loose constructionism are ideological approaches to interpreting the constitution of the United States (as is regarding it as a living document). The former fulfills the 9th Commandment while the latter is the spirit that permeated the days of the judges in Israel’s history (Judges 17:6). Every Supreme Court judge has an ideology. Granted, there may have been times when that was not as readily recognized as it is today. If so, it is a good thing that such naiveté no longer exists.

Richards also opines,  Never before in history has our country been so divided politically. In the past, Senate confirmation hearings for Supreme Court justices were informative and valuable in determining a judge’s fitness to serve in this critical office. Today, confirmation hearings are nothing less than a political slugfest that often values partisanship over a jurist’s ability to fill a seat on the highest court in the land.

There is no doubt that we are living in an era of deep political division but, thus far, we have not paid the price of 600,000 deaths, as we once did, for our divisions. Further, I am not sure how far into the past Richards is looking to contrast to today’s “political slugfest[s]” that are confirmation hearings (which have only been going on since 1916). It must surely be more than three decades since during that time such hearings have given us a “high tech lynching” and coined “bork” as a new verb.

My greater concern stems from the way that Richards racializes the nomination of Kavanaugh.

The Rise of Woker-Than-Thou Evangelicalism

"Unless you have been living in seclusion somewhere, you will have noticed that a radical putsch is currently underway to get evangelicals on board with doctrines borrowed from Black Liberation Theology, Critical Race Theory, Intersectional Feminism, and other ideologies that are currently stylish in the left-leaning secular academy. All of these things are being aggressively promoted in the name of "racial reconciliation." This has suddenly given rise to a popular movement that looks to be far more influential—and a more ominous threat to evangelical unity and gospel clarity—than the Emergent campaign was 15 years ago. The movement doesn't have an official name yet, but the zealots therein like to refer to themselves as "woke." Evangelical thought leaders boast of their wokeness and vie with one another to be woker-than-thou.

In many ways, today's Woke Evangelicals are merely an echo of their Emergent forebears. The central threads of their rhetoric are identical, and many of their goals are similar—starting with their campaign to convince other evangelicals that gospel clarity alone will never reach a hostile culture. To do that, they say, we must strive for postmodern political correctness. We need to try to "make Christianity cool." Nowadays, that means race must be an issue in practically every subject we deal with. Meanwhile, diversity, tolerance, inclusivity, and a host of other postmodern "virtues" have begun to edge out the actual fruit of the Spirit in the language and conversation of some of our wokest brethren.

Troubling Trends Coming to an American Church Near You

Photo Credit: www.noidentitytheft.com

"There has been much to talk about in recent weeks in the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC). The problem is, we need to talk more. I (Pastor Josh Buice) write this article as a lifelong SBC member and pastor. I’m a graduate of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. I have no agenda to stir-up trouble in the SBC. However, there is trouble, and that’s why I write as a concerned pastor.

As the annual meeting in June approaches, the pace of the political structure intensifies as usual, but this year, with a new president to be elected and other factors at hand (such as moral failures of leading professors)—the pace has drastically increased to say the least. Albert Mohler has written a piece suggesting that the wrath of God has been poured out on the SBC. Sam Rainer has used the language of a “dumpster fire” in an article he published about the recent problems within the Convention.

Make no mistake about it, there are major fires in the SBC that need immediate attention. A great deal of attention is centered on the issues of immorality (SBC version of #MeToo) among leaders in the SBC and SBC entities. Certainly the SBC could benefit from a greater humility, so perhaps God is using such situations to bring Southern Baptists to a point of repentance. A few years ago the talk of the SBC was about church planting, but today the talk is centered on social justice, racial inequality, and the empowerment of women. One issue that must be addressed in the SBC today is the issue of political intersectionality. Make no mistake about it—if left unchallenged the SBC will see massive decline and a complete capitulation on matters of complementarianism.

What is Intersectionality?

Intersectionality was originally coined in 1989 by Kimberlé Crenshaw, a political activist and radical feminist, in order to describe oppression against women on specific different points of intersection. Today, it’s used in a more broad sense. In short, intersectionality as it has been defined, is discrimination based on overlapping layers of individual classes of discrimination. It’s when a person is subjected to discrimination for more than one classification such as a woman who is black and lesbian. She would classify, under this line of reasoning for three basic discriminatory marks—being a woman, who is black, and is also a lesbian. According to the definition of intersectionality, where these three marks “intersect” is the focus of her greatest and most severe discrimination which places her at the greatest risk of oppression in our culture.

Although this term was birthed out of a radical feminist political culture, it’s now being used within evangelical circles to describe people who are oppressed and “held back” from certain advancement within evangelicalism. Today, conferences are being held, articles are being written, and people are talking  quite frequently about social justice and intersectionality as it pertains to ethnic diversity and women empowerment.

How Will Intersectionality Politics Change the SBC?

As this agenda continues to play itself out, the outcome has yet to be determined. Will the SBC split during this new era? Many people are predicting a split and splintering of the current denominational structures across evangelicalism. Some are suggesting that as this agenda continues to work its way through the SBC and other groups like the PCA, that we will see a fracture happen at some point in the near future.

While we must pray that it doesn’t happen, we must speak up and point out the dangers of ideologies such as intersectionality. God has created both male and female in his image and we as image-bearers of God have a specific purpose in God’s redemptive plan. This goes not only for men and women, but for all ethnicities. However, the ideologies of intersectionality do not run down the tracks of the gospel of Jesus Christ and they certainly don’t lead to the same end goal. How will intersectionality change evangelicalism?

Deconstructionism

Intersectionality, like many ideas, was not created in a vacuum. They are birthed from parent ideologies that create spin-off ideas and movements. Intersectionality was birthed from a Neo-Marxist view that seeks to tear down hierarchies and create new power structures that help the minorities achieve equality. This approach seeks to divide everyone in a specific population into race, class, and gender segments and place a great spotlight on the minority groups among that population. Then, by organizing an effort to “help” the minorities achieve equality, this movement works to create a great deal of sympathy, money, and support for those oppressed individuals.

The result of such a politically charged and emotionally driven movement is power and influence. In essence, it places the leaders of the pack in the captain’s chair. However, we must be clear, the ethnic division is never solved. This is an age-old model that does not work. It continues to keep the ethnicities divided while empowering people to solve the problems. In short, American politics pumped billions of dollars into the civil rights movement era up to our present day in attempt to solve such problems. While it created many jobs, gave people positions and titles, it never really solved the division between ethnic groups. Why did it fail? It failed because you can’t solve human depravity outside of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Today, the same ideas are being used to address the need to empower women and provide them with equality within evangelical circles such as the SBC. This same language was directed at racial inequality and injustice at the recent MLK50 conference as well resulting in a call for repentance for the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., as Thabiti Anyabwile articulated in his article:

My white neighbors and Christian brethren can start by at least saying their parents and grandparents and this country are complicit in murdering a man who only preached love and justice.

One must ask an honest question about this social justice war—is this movement the right way forward or will it lead to greater division? Will this movement deconstruct the SBC and other hierarchies in evangelicalism without harming local churches in the process? Does this whole social justice war empower women and minority ethnicities in our culture or does it patronize them?

Complementarianism

When we think of how women are used in the household of faith—we certainly see the value of faithful discipleship among the women who train the younger women and children (Titus 2:1-10). For nearly two millennia the Church understood their roles and responsibilities in regard to women teaching and exercising authority over men, and it wasn’t until the militant feminist movement of the 1960s that caused people to seriously question the boundaries of God—even among conservative evangelical circles.

Paul never held women back in his day, instead, he was helping them forward by pointing out their intended roles in God’s creation as he wrote about such roles to Timothy in his first letter to his son in the faith. As I’ve stated in a previous article on this subject, the word teach, “διδάσκω,” according to Thomas Schreiner, has in mind the public teaching and involves authoritative transmission of tradition about Christ and the Scriptures (1 Cor. 12:28-29; Eph. 4:11; 1 Tim. 2:7; 2 Tim. 3:16; James 3:1).[1] While women are permitted to discuss biblical theology in a mixed group setting such as a Sunday school class, women teaching children or other women (Titus 2), or in a private setting such as with Apollos’ instruction that was gleaned from meeting with Priscilla and Aquila—biblical teaching, when among the church as a whole or a mixed audience should be led by men. It seems clear that Paul was addressing an issue that was taking place in the life of the church and needed to be corrected.

The role distinction of women and men has been made clear from the beginning. God has one role for men and another for women—that goes for life in general and for leadership structure within the church. To rearrange God’s plan is dangerous, as we’ve seen in our American political debate surrounding the redefining of marriage. If the SBC should decide to redefine complementarianism—we can expect a massive landslide as the foundation crumbles on this issue.

Dawn M. Owens, an author, speaker, and radio show host said the following in a recent tweet:

If we are going to apply 1 Timothy 2:11-14 as our end all be all in this argument first we need to acknowledge is says “a woman” not all women. But since you are stuck in applying it that way, then you must apply it to ALL women whether in or out of church.

In the same conversation, Dwight McKissic, pastor of Cornerstone Baptist Church in Arlington, Texas responded by quoting Dawn and then stating the following:

Interesting insights&commentary on that passage,that I’d never heard,read,or considered. Grateful that women aren’t forbidden to tweet, scripturally [emoji not included here in the quote]. Women often bring out fresh perspectives interpretively, that are exegetically accurate&profound.I regret many refuse2hear wmn.

Is this how we’ve been trained to interpret the Bible? Is this rightly handling the Word of God or is this a method of eisegesis rather than exegesis? Certainly this can’t be the fruit of the Conservative Resurgence in the SBC. One must not mishandle God’s Word in order to uphold the dignity and value of women.

Jen Wilkin, popular author and speaker also weighed in on the issues in a recent tweet as she said:

As go our seminaries, so go our churches. It’s past time for a full re-evaluation of existing power structures, and for the strategic implementation of formal channels of influence/input/leadership for women in the SBC.

In a recent Tweet, Russell Moore (the president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the SBC) stated the following:

There would be no Southern Baptist Convention without Lottie Moon and Annie Armstrong. We desperately need a resurgence of women’s voices and women’s leadership and women’s empowerment, again. It is way past time.

In that same line of thinking, J.D. Greear Tweeted out to Beth Moore regarding her article written to chart her own personal road of oppression, by stating the following:

Thank you, Beth! Hoping that we are entering a new era where we in the complementarian world take all the Word of God seriously–not just the parts about distinction of roles but also re: the tearing down of all hierarchy & his gracious distribution of gifts to all his children!

With two of the largest voices within the SBC today championing women’s empowerment and encouraging a tearing down of all hierarchy as we enter a new era, the question remains — what is this new era and what what will the result be for the SBC as we move forward as a collective group of partnering churches? Will women be invited to preach to the Convention in the days to come? Will once conservative evangelical circles redefine complementarianism and rearrange roles and boundaries for women in leadership? How will this change the SBC and perhaps other denominational structures in the broader evangelical world?

Only God knows the answer in full. While I’m not a prophet or the son of a prophet, my prediction is that the social justice agenda will keep the ethnicities divided and smash the foundation of a robust view of complementarianism. We should all work to root out racism and uphold the proper use of women’s gifts inside and outside the local church—but the social justice warrior movement is not the best way forward. A firm commitment to the gospel of Jesus Christ is the only way forward.

I’m reminded of that truth every time I read the story of the demon possessed man who was living in the tombs and rejected by society. When Jesus changed his life—he was suddenly pictured as a man in his right mind and clothed (Luke 8:35). It’s the gospel—not intersectionality or any other ideology that will bring about peace, unity, and respect for the image-bearing dignity deserved by all of God’s people. The longer we continue to import language of sociology on biblical texts and employ tactics from the political sphere—we will continue to see a divided SBC and one that may never fully recover. May the Lord spare the SBC from such a disaster."

Article by Dr. Buice first posted at sovereignnations.  Dr. Josh Buice serves as the pastor of Pray's Mill Baptist Church in Douglasville, Georgia He is the founding director of the G3 Conference. Pastor Buice studied at SBTS where he earned his M.Div. and D.Min. in expository preaching.

"The Social Justice Movement is Dangerous and Detrimental to the Church (For These Reasons)!"

"What I think about when I can't sleep at 3 am- Pastor Don Green writes,

...The preoccupation with so-called social justice in some professing Christian circles is profoundly dangerous and detrimental to the souls of unsaved and saved alike.

Its effect is to teach men to nurse their grievances and perceived injustices on a horizontal level, rather than to fear God for their own sins against Him on a vertical level. It thus preoccupies the thinking of men with passing earthly matters rather than pointing them to the eternal consequences of sin and God’s coming judgment. We badly need a corrective from the perspective of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31).

Furthermore, in the name of the gospel these so-called Christian social justice warriors testify to the world that the biblical message is really not that different that socialistic concerns after all. Rather than “declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent, because [God] has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead” (Acts 17:30-31), the SJWs drag our dialogue into the muck of current political discourse that will only be swallowed up by the next social cause in a matter of days, weeks, or months.

The pressing matters of personal sin, righteousness, and judgment (cf. John 16:8) are marginalized as men—in the name of Christ, no less—set our minds on earthly things, the end of which is only destruction (Philippians 3:18-19).

Not only that, the spirit of their complaints do something equally insidious to the minds of those who do indeed suffer in this life. Our hope is not—not, I say!!—to batter the perceived elite into submission and extract forced confessions and ultimately financial reparations from them for past wrongs in which they may or may not have personally participated.

The Social Gospel Trend Within Evangelicalism: a Biblical Rebuttal

TGC's Social Justice Prophet

My favorite Christian blogger, Pastor Phil Johnson of Grace To You, has made his return to the blogosphere.  His latest article is well worth your time.  The Social Gospel Trend Within Evangelicalism: a Biblical Rebuttal

"The issue underlying practically every popular evangelical trend we have ever decried here on PyroManiacs is the same moral defect that was the besetting sin of the Pharisees—namely, a craving for human applause. The current ranks of evangelical leadership are filled with men who care far too much about what the world thinks of them. The intellectually sophisticated among our Top Men tend to covet academic esteem, especially from unbelieving scholars. Those who are less—um, cerebrally endowed—just yearn to be admired for being über-cool. Between those two extremes are a legion of evangelical movers and shakers who think they can achieve both goals. Lately, they have sought to do this by cultivating a noisome air of political correctness.

Scripture could not be more clear about the value of this world's approval. Jesus said, "Woe to you, when all people speak well of you, for so their fathers did to the false prophets" (Luke 6:26). And, "If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you" (John 15:18-19). And, "you will be hated by all for my name's sake" (Matthew 10:22). And, "Blessed are you when people hate you and when they exclude you and revile you and spurn your name as evil, on account of the Son of Man! Rejoice in that day, and leap for joy, for behold, your reward is great in heaven; for so their fathers did to the prophets" (Luke 6:22-23).

It's a theme that runs throughout Scripture, starting with Cain's murderous contempt for his own brother's righteous offering, and finally summed up in 1John 3:13 with this admonition from the Apostle of Love: "Do not be surprised, brothers, that the world hates you."

Christians are expressly forbidden to embrace the world's values or seek its approval: "Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world--the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride in possessions--is not from the Father but is from the world. And the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever" (1 John 2:15-17).

Russell Moore's Social Justice Crusade is Flawed

Pastor Thabiti Anyabwile's infamous "pro Bernie Sanders" Tweet

With far too many white (American) believers, "normal Christianity is white..." so says TGC's beloved Russell Moore. 

Friends, don't buy into everything that Dr. Moore and friends are actively promoting under the banner of so called "Gospel-Centered" ministry.  Let's use our minds to think critically and biblically about this multi-layered issue.  Let's first understand what critical race theory is before we begin to call it a Gospel-centered mandate of the Church.  

One can love and show grace to ethnic minorities without embracing the social justice gospel.  For example, Grace Community Church in Southern California (and many other churches) that DO NOT EMBRACE Critical Race Theory or TGC's progressive understanding of "social justice" are ethnically and economically diverse.  If that fact shocks you, you are likely spending too much time watching MSNBC and perusing the Huffington Post's website.  Here's another real life example.  My former congregation (which did not embrace TGC's version of social justice) overwhelmingly affirmed an Indian Christian to serve over them as a key lay-leader (which is what Moore advocates for in this video); We rolled out a red-carpet when a precious Mexican family visited and later joined our Christian fellowship.  In our midweek youth and Awana ministries, and during our Sunday School hour, we regularly demonstrated the love of Christ to countless children and families (the vast majority of whom were not white skinned).  For some church leaders, to be "color blind" is itself a racist form of white privilege.  On a personal level, my wife and I regularly had low income, single-parent family children over for meals (even on holidays like Father's Day or Easter).  We took ethnic minorities with our own children to the local ice cream shop, or to the movies with us, I plowed snow for our African American neighbor, and the list goes on and on.  Here's another example that confirms my central point.  A predominately white evangelical congregation in Pennsylvania is currently taking care of six children who have been removed from the care of their African-American mother; (this single mom is trying hard to improve her particular life situation).  Many of my "conservative white friends" have adopted children from Asia, Africa, and from the struggling neighbor across the street.  What's my point?  One doesn't have to imbibe "critical race theory" in order to love one's neighbor.  Gasp! I know.  It was MLK himself who famously said,  “Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.”

And STILL those who don't buy into TGC's interpretation of biblical justice (i.e. critical race theory) are called "ignorant fools" or worse.  Tim Keller recently said that white evangelicals aren't jumping on the MLK50 bandwagon because of the "stubbornness of the sinful heart."  Many who agree with Voddie Baucham, James White, John MacArthur, Robert Gagnon, Ardel Caneday and yours truly are afraid to speak out and push back against this TGC trend because they don't want to be marginalized (or to be unfairly labeled a "racist.")  Trust me, I get it. My experience is not unique.  However, we pastors must fear God more than man and should speak out if/when the church is drifting from the true mission of the Church (Col. 1:28-29; Eph. 4:11-16; Matt. 28:18-20).  For starters read this helpful series and this helpful article.  This "movement" is a big deal within the larger, Bible-believing, Christian church right now.  It's the primary reason I have invested so much time researching and writing about it.

The Social Justice and Critical Race Theory Bandwagon: Should You Hop On it?

If you have not been hanging out on a remote island you have no doubt heard and read over and over again about the so called "gospel mandate" to fight the systematic oppression against African-Americans that is still rampant in our  nation and to expose "white privilege" and other forms of racism that are (allegedly) alive and well in the "conservative white evangelical" church today.

As you try and sort out what this all means, what the root problems are, and what the biblical way forward looks like for a "Gospel-centered" congregation I would encourage you to listen to Pastor Charlie Dates sermon from the MLK50 conference.  I do not agree with much of what Mr. Dates communicates in this passionate message but it's important that we understand where the "other side" is actually coming from; lest we construct "straw men arguments."  As if an entire conference on this subject wasn't enough.  This same issue was promoted again at another mega-conference the very next week.  People with power and influence are pressuring pastors and congregants alike to jump on the social justice bandwagon...Should you hop on it?

As you likely know, many evangelical leaders (John MacArthur, Tom Ascol, James White, Voddie Baucham, Robert Gagnon, yours truly, etc) have warned the evangelical church that "critical race theory" is grounded more in progressive ideology and in worldly thinking then in actual biblical proof texts.  This same camp has also warned the masses that the unintended consequence of all this will be to unnecessarily divide the Body of Christ.  This is not just speculation.  One Pastor admitted at the same MLK50 conference that 300 members left his church when he started emphasizing social justice theology.  This celebrity pastor quickly noted that it was necessary subtraction however because "ignorant fools" will never accept this teaching.  For men like Charlie Dates, Russell Moore, and Matt Chandler these are Gospel-centered matters (not political disagreements).  The recent MLK50 conference made this point loud and clear.

Though all sides in this debate agree that true racism is wicked and sinful (and thus has NO place in the Church-Galatians 3:28) there is a huge chasm when it comes to whether or not "racial justice, white guilt, white supremacy, systematic oppression, racialization, illegitimate hierarchies of segregation that continue to hold down people of color?

The Racialist Lens Distorts True Christian Unity (by Dr. James White)

Photo Credit: TGC ERCL MLK50

Irrespective of "the content of your character" if you question the biblical legitimacy of critical race theory as advocated by the Gospel Coalition you will likely be branded a racist.  As Dr. James White pointed out today, Ironically, the Racialist Lens Distorts True Christian Unity. 

Case and Point:  A black pastor in Illinois (who filled my pulpit on two occasions) publicly labeled me a "racist" when I dared to disagree with him over the BLM narrative- Ferguson race riots (post Michael Brown).  Now evangelical Pastor Thabiti Anyabwile (who once suggested that Bernie Sanders was the best candidate for African American voters), has called out John MacArthur's Assistant Pastor (Phil Johnson); while renown Christian evangelist/apologist James White is under fire from MLK50 speaker Kyle J. Howard on similar charges.  United Christian congregations will increasingly become divided if this social justice gospel trend continues.  Faithful churchmen need to stand up and warn the flock of Christ (even if means enduring slanderous charges).  The world already believes the Holy Bible is homophobic and sexist so what's one more unfair pejorative?

When evangelicals today talk about "racial reconciliation" (from a progressive point of view) and "social justice" causes you need to understand exactly what it is they are calling for and where this ideology/terminology comes from.  Sadly, many church leaders are jumping on this bandwagon having done very little research.  More importantly God's Word is often set aside and/or is routinely misapplied in effort to promote what are now en vogue political/social science theories.

20 Reasons I Don’t Take Potshots at Fundamentalists: by John Piper

This is Dr. John Piper at his best.  20 Reasons I Don’t Take Potshots at Fundamentalists.  In view of recent conflicts over social justice issues it's a timely post to be reminded of.

As context allows: "1) They are humble and respectful and courteous, and even funny (at least the ones I’ve met).

2)They believe in truth.

3) They believe that truth really matters.

4) They believe that the Bible is true — all of it.

5) They know that the Bible calls for some kind of separation from the world.

6) They have backbone and are not prone to compromise principle.

7)They put obedience to Jesus above the approval of man (even though they fall short, like others).

8) They believe in hell and are loving enough to warn people about it.

9) They believe in heaven and sing about how good it will be to go there.

10) Their “social action” is often helping the person next door (like Jesus), which doesn’t usually get written up in the newspaper.

Matt Chandler Calls Social Justice Dissenters "Ignorant Fools." A Pastoral Evaluation of Chandler's MLK50 Sermon

Photo Credit: Christian News- Matt Chandler at MLK50

Just yesterday the Gospel Coalition asked Pastor Matt Chandler of Acts 29 ministries to preach a confrontational sermon specifically aimed at white pastors and white Christians.  The sermon was titled, A House Divided Cannot Stand: Understanding and Overcoming the Inconsistencies in White Evangelicals on Racial Issues. Matt Chandler has been a leading voice within "conservative evangelicalism" with regards to subjects like white privilege, the majority culture, racial reconciliation,  systemic racialization/oppression, institutional racism, and housing, police, and legal discrimination against people of color, etc.  Now if you went to public university, read the Huffington Post, and/or watch CNN or MSNBC, you are already very familiar with critical race theory. The Gospel Coalition has presented countless numbers of articles on this subject. But for those who are not familiar with this ideology, what is critical race theory anyways? 

Harvard University summarizes it as follows: Critical race theories combine progressive political struggles for racial justice with critiques of the conventional legal and scholarly norms which are themselves viewed as part of the illegitimate hierarchies that need to be changed. Scholars, most of whom are themselves persons of color, challenge the ways that race and racial power are constructed by law and culture. One key focus of critical race theorists is a regime of white supremacy and privilege maintained despite the rule of law and the constitutional guarantee of equal protection of the laws. Agreeing with critical theorists and many feminists that law itself is not a neutral tool but instead part of the problem, critical race scholars identify inadequacies of conventional civil rights litigation. Critical race theorists nonetheless fault critical legal scholars as failing to develop much to attract people of color and for neglecting the transformative potential of rights discourse in social movements, regardless of the internal incoherence or indeterminacy of rights themselves.

Let me say from the get go that in my wide circle of pastor-friends from around the country none of these ministers (to my knowledge) are "uncomfortable confronting real racism" nor do any them oppose genuine Gospel-centered "racial unity" in the Christian church.  We all glory in the heavenly scene of worship in Revelation; as believers from around the globe worship the Lamb who was slain for our salvation (see Revelation 5:9-14).   My pastoral network all support local and global missions because we serve a Global-minded God.  Most of our churches have sent out many missionaries and our short-term missions teams; etc.

Matt Chandler however says this is not so!  By Chandler and TGC's definitions, white Christians are largely "ignorant" and/or are "just plain fools" (i.e. racist).  Chandler said "I don't hate my people" (referring to whites) "I just hate fools!" (i.e. those who don't view this issue the way that I now do).  I realize that some readers will accuse me of putting words in brother Chandler's mouth.  Brother-pastors if you have not listened to Chandler's sermon at MLK50 and read TGC's many articles on this subject please reserve judgment until you have done so.  My aim in this final blog is to evaluate Pastor Chandler's TGC message against the back drop of the Word of God and to share my pastoral perspective along the way.  

Before his MLK50 message Chandler's Village church praise team presented a social justice praise song titled "Walk With You."  This worship song begins with a quote from Dr. King.  You can listen for yourself by clicking here.  The lyrics of this song set the stage for what Matt was about to share in his talk.

In yesterday's MLK50 sermon that was broadcast around the country, Chandler said that Christians who are uncomfortable confronting racism are part of a “cascading effect, and it starts with ignorance. … They don’t know what they don’t know and they are part of a system that encourages their not knowing.”  Chandler then talked about how much of this stems from what is not being taught in the public schools.  He suggested that private schools are worse (as the audience chuckled).  Chandler believes Church leaders need to fill in these gaps with regards to black history and with regards to present day systemic racism.

Here Pastor Matt swears in public and expresses his perspective

Let's think through this loaded accusation.  If you are familiar with two of the leading churchmen of our era you know that Pastors John MacArthur and R.C. Sproul do not share TGC's perspective concerning various  aspects of critical race theory/the social gospel.  This partially explains why faithful white pastors like this, as well as courageous black pastors like Voddie Baucham, did not respond to the Ferguson riots the way many Gospel Coalition leaders like Thabiti Anyabwile, Tim Keller, and Matt Chandler did.  From that whole ordeal it was obvious that the conservative Evangelical church is divided over this subject.  But ask yourself this, "Does Chandler really believe these giants of the faith are ignorant (by experience and learning)?"  Or is it possible that certain Christians simply view this multi-layered issue differently than TGC does?  Calling fellow (in many cases, like-minded) Christians "ignorant" is a bold charge.  Labeling people who don't agree with you as "fools" is strong language.  You readers will need to examine the evidence Chandler provides to see if these things be so (be sure to read the Christian perspective from the other side too).

In his message Chandler went on to say, “If I preach the sermon out of the book of Isaiah on justice, my inbox would fill with their glee that I would broach the subject. But if I applied it to the subject of race, then all of a sudden I was a Marxist or I’ve been watching too much of the liberal media. If I spoke on abortion, I was applauded as courageous, as a ferocious man of God, and yet when I would tackle race I was being too political … If I quoted the great reformer Martin Luther … never did I get an email about his blatant anti-Semitism. But let me quote the great reformer Martin Luther King Jr., and watch my inbox fill with people asking me if I’m aware of his moral brokenness.”  

Let's consider this lengthy quote for a moment.  It is important to point out that the common "buzz words" that many Gospel Coalition authors/speakers use today are not original to them.  One of the things thinking Christians need to do is to study where do these critical race theories originate from?  I am talking about controversial concepts such as "white privilege."  The same principle is necessary when a believer studies "psychology."  It is vitally important that one understands Freudian thought before one determines whether or not you should integrate biblical principles with secular psychology.  More on that another time.   

Regarding Chandler's comparison between quoting Martin Luther and citing Martin Luther King Jr. in sermons and getting much different responses from his mostly white congregation.  I have heard plenty of Christians from various denominations express their appreciation for Luther's heroic boldness in defending the gospel doctrine of "Sola Fide" (justification by faith alone) against the Roman Catholic Church.  But I have also listened to plenty of believers and pastors point out the tragic anti-Semitic thought in Luther's later writings.  Luther, like so many of us, sometimes struggled to control his tongue.  Those who embrace Premillenialism eschatology tend to be be especially grieved over the sinful rhetoric in Luther (not to mention his actions against Anabaptists).  For more on the great Protestant Reformer's warts read Future Israel: Why Christian Anti-Judaism Must Be Challenged. To get a balanced portrait of this Christian theologians strengths and weaknesses watch this new Luther documentary.  Suffice it to say, when Matt Chandler claims that no one in his church mentioned Martin Luther's warts but many white people were quick to point out Dr. King's unorthodox theology and his sexual  immorality it's really not that compelling of an argument.  Chandler's experience at the Village Church is not universal and the theological and moral differences between the two men are not comparable.

Chandler quickly noted that his address is not aimed at "FOOLS."  He has no time for them.  He went on explain who the fools are and then differentiated between white Christians who are IGNORANT versus those who are just ignorant FOOLS.  This very popular conference preacher went on to say that his local church lost about 300 members when he started focusing many of his sermons on social justice, racial reconciliation, white privilege, systemic oppression, etc.  What shocked me was when Chandler referred to these 300 Christians as being FOOLS.  Chandler said his elder board did not shed a tear when these ignorant people left Village Church.  If you want a first hand account of what type of FOOLISH believer Chandler attacked in this address you can peruse this Christian police officers firsthand account.  In it you will read many of Pastor Chandler's public Tweets that certain church members took issue with. Some of these public statements have been included in this article.

Matt Chandler- Posted by a former Village Church member

Quoting Chandler again from MLK50, “There is nothing about how the majority of white men and women are educated that would lead us to believe that Africans and African-Americans are intellectual, innovative or creative except a couple a y’all in sports or entertainment.”  Say what?  Many of my white friends and family members believe Condoleezza Rice is one of the smartest geo-political minds in the world today.  We would only wish that our nation's Supreme Court would be chaired by nine Clarence Thomas'!  Faithful black preachers like Voddie Baucham and Conrad Mbewe can fill my expository pulpit anytime they desire. Our nation overwhelmingly elected an African-American President (twice over).

Ultimately, Chandler said that the solution moving forward is for churches to talk about race and racism—despite potential blow-back: “There is no way forward if white pulpits won’t talk.”   By "talk" Chandler means you need to help your congregations see that how our "coalition" views social justice issues is in fact the gospel truth. Follow my example brother-pastors.  Do what I have successfully done at Village Church (listen to the sermon friends).  White Pastors need to go into their mostly "white churches" and drive out foolishness while informing the ignorant.  Quoting Dr. Martin Luther King, the pastor of The Village Church said, "In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies but the silence of our friends."

Chandler added that he had a difficult time sleeping the night before because he knew what he was asking of some of them.  If you apply what you heard in this conference you might be criticized, bullied and fired pastors.  Implied in this rhetoric is that some of you will be persecuted for righteousness sake as you champion these social justice convictions.  TGC obviously believes it is the truth about racial justice that is diving certain white evangelical churches (not error).  Stop and think through these implications and exhortations friends.

Chandler encouraged white pastors to begin by preaching on the Bible's view of ethnicity and unity. "Ethnic harmony is one of the great themes of the Bible. This is the refrain of the Bible over and over and over again," he said, adding, "Jesus consistently confronted broken thinking about ethnicity."  The underline theme of this message is that white churches are ignorant of their white privilege and are often unaware of their racism.  Chandler encouraged white evangelicals to find black evangelicals who think differently then you do about these issues and to listen to them (minute 20) that you might "champion their position."  Chandler did not encourage his audience to apply this same principle.  He then took, what appeared to me to be a veiled shot at faithful black leaders like Voddie Baucham, when he said blacks that think like white evangelicals do on this subject "are probably trying to win your approval or a position."  Chandler's said if we're to move forward public school "textbooks must be revised.  Structures must change."  Black leaders must be given legitimate places of authority and board positions in our Christian schools, seminaries, churches, and para-church ministries.  "We do not want to put on ministry events where anglo-communicators outweigh people of color."  Chandler noted that white evangelicals are often guilty of "tokenism."  "What I share today does not flow out of "white guilt" or out of "political convictions."  "This is about the gospel!"  Many evangelicals conduct is not in step with the truth of the gospel!  This is sin and you (white evangelicals) need to repent.  Chandler closed by saying you can't rescue a fool but many whites are just plain ignorant.  And ignorance leads to immaturity which sometimes leads to hostility or withdrawal.  I am not giving white people a pass I am just trying to help my African-American understand.  Some of you pastors are going to get fired as you bring this message into your white churches.  Such biblical fidelity, Chandler added, will put in the Hebrews 11 hall of faith chapter."

Personal Perspective and Recent History-  In my last ministry our 173 year old Baptist Church was located near the lower income part of town (in an economically depressed city).  Over nine years my family and I reached out to many low income children and families.  My wife and I took many precious black children with us to get ice cream at Union Dairy, we had needy children over to our home on holidays like Father's Day, we paid for low income black children to go to the movies with our own four children, handed out morning and afternoon snacks to the kids when we lived next to Blackhawk school.  Our daughter's closest friends were black, white, and brown and they were also precious children.

Our local church, though small, had a vibrant outreach ministry via Awana and Youth Group.  In fact, before I transitioned to a new ministry, of our 50-60 children and teens that joined us on Wednesday night, 85% of them were from the community and the vast majority of them were not white.  Whoever came we tried to reach for Christ.  I saw our congregation provide scholarships, meals, and do genuine gospel-centered evangelism.  I also watched my flock lovingly welcome a Mexican family into our church family; (in fact the husband/father became my closest friend).  I proudly witnessed our congregation overwhelmingly affirm an Indian believer as one of the main lay leaders in our local church.   Despite the content of my character I have been publicly called a RACIST by fellow TGC-minded believers- simply because I do not agree with all the conclusions and solutions of either critical race theory or the Gospel Coalition's vision of social justice.  What's happened to me has happened to many others.  Where does this type of thinking stem from?  In my humble opinion, I believe TGC has unintentionally brought unnecessary division within the American Church.  If true, this would be the ultimate (tragic) irony. 

Friends, we saw first hand how broken the family unit is in our city.  Many of the great challenges public school teachers and bus drivers had in Freeport often came back to serious behavior issues.  I felt the pain associated with drug and alcohol addictions (and saw how it impacted children).  I witnessed the epidemic of promiscuous sexual behavior among kids and adults and watched how children followed in the footsteps of their parents and grandparents.  I heard first hand accounts of what nurses saw in the hospitals.  I observed how so many men from 18-55 walked the streets or hung out at the local library day after day.  This is a multi-layered issue with many different root problems/challenges.  

Ironically and sadly, the evangelical Church seems to be dividing more as a result of this "social justice" emphasis that has become so en vogue these day.  Once united churches and Christian friends (Gal. 3:28) are beginning to distance themselves from one another.  I grieve over this (per John 17).

Why do I write these articles?  I do so because many of us are concerned that the church is (unknowingly) drifting from her central mission and chief message (Col. 1:28-29; 1 Cor. 1-2).  Before jumping headfirst on this social activist bandwagon please consider the perspective of two veteran missionaries to Africa (read article here).  Listen to what wiser shepherds like John MacArthur have to say concerning this often explosive subject.  Read about MacArthur's own gospel ministry during the height of segregation in the Deep South wherein he was arrested in Iain Murray's biography (note John MacArthur: Servant of the Word and Flock, chapter ).

I've written this series because I have witnessed a double standard and selective demonizing at TGC that seems to be more political in nature (than theological).  (see this post)

FINAL PLEA- Before calling white Christians who view this multi-layered issue ignorant fools, or closet racists please consider their lives and the content of their character.  Let us write clearly, listen humbly, and speak and act in Christ-like ways.

The entire Scripture is summarized in two commands.  Jesus said, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength" and strive to "love your neighbor(s) as you love yourself."  Christian love believes the best and rejoices in the truth.

The best quote that summarizes my overarching perspective on MLK50 and TGC's longstanding position on social justice was said by another godly Pastor (Tom Ascol).  His quote is to the point and is great counsel for all of us to try and live by.  May God grant His Church wisdom, courage, humility, and grace as we discuss these issues before a lost world.

"I regularly remind myself and people I love that we have enough trouble dealing with real sins, we do not need to try to manufacture more according to our own proclivities."  Pastor Tom Ascol