The Marx of a Wolf | Toby Sumpter

this talk is titled the marks of a wolf how intersectionality is invading the church so this means we have to talk about karl marx because marx is spelled with an x the other word we need to talk about is intersectionality but before we get to either of those terms we need to begin by talking about a real gem of a man georg hegel georg hegel marx and his sidekick engels taught something called dialectical materialism which was a modified version of hegel's dialectical idealism and here's the key point you need to know dialectic is philosophical speak for happy mystical violence so when you hear the word dialectic think happy mystical violence here's how it works hegel a christian for as far as we know nevertheless accepted the idea increasingly common at the time that it was the job of deep thinkers to bridge the great chasm between god and man between our human understanding and knowledge of the truth and ultimate absolute truth in god and the transcendent this was the job of deep thinkers for some reason thinkers of such deep thoughts although many of them professed to be christians were unsatisfied with the old orthodox answer to the problem of the great chasm between god and man the old orthodox answer was god has revealed himself god has spoken to us in creation in scripture and in the incarnation of his son jesus christ and this really is the key to our entire predicament that we're going to come back to several times throughout this talk the dead the devil came in the beginning and asked has god said and ever since this has been the central question really in the history of the world has god said has god spoken are you sure is his word clear is it intelligible is it sufficient it's as though god built this great golden gate bridge across the infinite chasm from the creator to his creation he built this great golden gate bridge across that infinite chasm to us but piles of our deep thinkers said it was not good enough it's it's too old-fashioned it can't answer our modern questions it's too rickety that may have worked for ancient people but it will not do in the modern age of science and enlightenment and so our thinkers of deep thoughts swung their intellectual grappling hooks out into that great chasm an infinite chasm mind you and they wrote fat books about how you might swing across the infinite chasm on their convoluted sentences now if you're already lost this is a good sign that you have not yet been corrupted by modern philosophy but if you're sitting there getting kind of excited thinking this will be just the sort of philosophical twister game you were hoping for i'm afraid i must ask you to leave now so hegel was one of those deep thinkers who threw his grappling hook out into the infinite and he claimed that the clanking clatter he heard several minutes later was a sure sign he had arrived at the truth apparently nobody thought ask why his rope was pointed straight down but the rope attached to his grappling hook was made up of a three-strand cord he affectionately named dialectic a three-headed little monster he called thesis antithesis and synthesis thesis antithesis and synthesis hegel posited that everything in this world was on a magical collision course with perfection but throughout time and space this perfection was slowly being worked out through opposites and contradictions now if this seems stupid to you you're probably a pretty smart person so the key term is synthesis which is what i'm calling happy mystical violence hegel's basically the philosophical father of relativism but here's the deal hegel said that our understanding of the world truth science and history was constantly evolving but it evolves he said by our current understanding of the truth thesis colliding with opposites and contradictions antithesis and then magically a synthesis appears hence happy mystical violence but the key thing here is the rejection of the finality of antithesis that is the concrete bedrock reality that if one thing is true it's opposite follow me closely is false are you awake it's the simple things in life that go wrong if one thing is true its opposite will always be false it will always be false if if one thing exists it cannot also not exist at the same time instead of the finality of antithesis hegel postulated that the collision of thesis and antithesis truth and its opposites would result in a synthesis a new thesis supposedly a deeper understanding of reality and truth notice that despite the many brain cells at work this doesn't make any sense it's not rational now hegel no doubt would have said that someday it will be some kind of rational hegel himself likely meant for god to be the the breaks on this car intending for god to somehow superintend this process but he effectively through god into the trunk of his car without breaks and many of his followers and disciples have turned this dialectic process into full blown relativism truth is in process what is true for you is not true for me we all have our own truth now there's a very childish sense in which hegel could have been describing something that sometimes appears to happen in the real world think about the way this works in science sometimes one scientist posits the earth at the center of the solar system the next guy comes along and points out the math doesn't work so then another guy comes along and posits the sun at the center of the solar system each generation posits truth as far as they understand it but other certain facts create challenges tensions contradictions and then a new understanding emerges that synthesizes earlier contradiction but here's the thing what is actually happening is that some theses are being proven false and some antithesis are being found to be true truth does not actually change only our understanding of it is improving truth and contradiction are not actually colliding and creating some new truth a and not a do not hook up and have a baby named b that's basically what hagel said now the thing to really underline here is that's crazy that's insane how do opposites and contradictions create some new truth or higher reality they don't but hegel said they do how we don't know it's magic but that's not reasonable it doesn't make any sense enter karl marx that's the ugly guy up there this is the basic model that marx adopted only karl marx was a thoroughgoing materialist he didn't care about god or transcendent truth but marx embraced this basic worldview the idea that history evolves through constant collisions between truth and its contradictions thesis and antithesis and magically produces synthesis new and better realities now marx was a liar and a plagiarist but the one thing that he was right about was the fact that people do tend to oppress abuse and exploit other people given the opportunity sinful people tend to harm one another that's just that's true as far as it goes but it's the sort of observation that most parents of young children could also make marx was also obsessed with money as he was frequently in debt and behind on his own bills and therefore he saw people as primarily defined by their economic class particularly what he considered the two great classes the bourgeoisie and the proletariat berswazee and the proletariat the bourgeois class was the business class the landed the owners of the factories and companies the ruling class the proletariat was the working class wage earners renters and he saw the center of all human conflict here this he said was the great and central contradiction in all human experience the oppression and exploitation of the proletariat working class by the bourgeois ruling class now stop for a second if marx is hegelian why didn't he just sigh in relief and say a great contradiction a great collision let violence do its happy mystical thing and make some synthesis we don't know marx didn't say for some reason he resented this particular collision and he was in favor of another one so marx argued that the bourgeoisie with all its money and power inevitably destroys human life families individuality it has drowned the most heavenly ecstasies of religious fervor of chivalrous enthusiasm of philistine sentimentalism in the icy water of egotistical calculation from his communist manifesto it has resolved personal worth and to exchange value and in place of the numberless indefeasible chartered freedoms has set up that single unconscionable freedom free trade in one word for exploitation marx also recognized that family and morality and property and freedom are all connected he said this also in the communist manifesto don't wrangle with us so long as you apply to our intended abolition of bourgeois property the standard of your bourgeois notions of freedom culture and law marx argued that all those notions of private property and freedom and culture and law were all connected and in his view all arise from their fundamental exploiting character so it all had to go marx argued not only for the abolition of property then but also for the abolition of the family why on what foundation is the present family the bourgeois family based he asked on capital on private gain he saw the institution of the family is inherently exploitive and again we might ask but mr marks why not let this little collision course this little contradiction do its magical little synthesis and he does not say but we begin to suspect that the answer is envy all of this is also why he urges replacing home education with public education again from the communist manifesto do you charge us with wanting to stop the exploitation of children by their parents to this crime we plead guilty we aim to rescue education from the influence of the ruling class since their children are transformed into simple articles of commerce and instruments of labor marx argued the same thing for marriage claiming that it is a wicked monopoly meant to co-opt women as quote mere instruments of production so marx despised the ruling class and what he saw as its exploitation of the working classes but on the other hand he envisioned revolutions from the working class he said this the communists disdain to conceal their views and aims they openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions let the ruling classes tremble at a communist revolution the proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains they have a world to win working men of all countries unite and that's how the communist manifesto famously ends it's a little dramatic but again the oddity the inconsistency is that he approves of this exploitation he approves of stealing bourgeois private property he approves of destroying the traditional family and marriage and the education of children by their parents but doesn't approve of the others now if you're following all this you may wonder to yourself what happens after the revolution after the workers unite and lose their chains and fight off their bourgeois overlords wouldn't that make the proletariat the new ruling class wouldn't they be the new bourgeoisie this is what mark says in answer to that the proletariat executes the sentence that private property pronounced on itself by begetting the proletariat just as it carries out the sentence which wage labor pronounced on itself by bringing forth wealth for others and misery for itself i have no idea what that sentence means but there's the next sentence if the proletariat is victorious it does not at all mean that it becomes the absolute side of society for it is victorious only by abolishing itself and its opposite then the proletariat and its determining opposite private property disappear that may be one of the dumbest paragraphs ever written also it's hilarious but but notice what he says notice the hegelian language it abolishes itself and its opposite and disappears how magic thesis antithesis synthesis okay now we need to get to intersectionality enter kimberly crenshaw it's rather striking that as the berlin wall was coming down in 1989 another communist wall was going up in the writings of academics like kimberly crenshaw known as intersectionality she's a graduate of cornell harvard and the university of wisconsin we should tell you all you need to know she was focused just focused most of most of her career on a subject known as critical race theory crenshaw wrote this in 2017 the prevailing understanding of racial justice that had come to a head in the early 1980s premised racial discrimination on the enlightened terms of rationality enlightened terms of rationality accordingly she writes racial power was seen as discrimination a deviation from reason that was remediable through the operation of legal principles civil rights lawyers and liberal allies may have differed on the need for targeted interventions to help along this universalist repudiation of racial distinction but they shared a baseline confidence that once the irrational distortions of bias were removed the underlying legal and socioeconomic order would revert to a neutral benign state of impersonally apportioned justice here's what she's saying the prevailing understanding of racial justice according to her in the early 1980s was premised on rationality that the world has a basic logic to it there's a basic order to the world therefore discrimination was understood as a deviation from reason it was irrational that could be solved through the operation of rational legal principles if the irrational could be removed the underlying legal and socioeconomic order of the west could revert to a legal and socioeconomic order of justice now what crenshaw argues in the course of this article is that when obama was elected president in 2008 many saw this symbolically as this great turning point in our country the clear indication that america had abandoned the irrationality of racism and white supremacy and america had embraced rationality and can now sort out all the old animosities through an unbiased application of neutral legal principles what crenshaw's article goes on to report is that this post-racial celebration came too soon what many hailed as the great symbolic victory of racial rationality in the election of obama came crashing down in what many considered a great defeat in the election of donald j trump i wasn't expecting that now quite apart from whether crenshaw's narrative is accurate crenshaw asks this question why how could an america elect obama in a seeming act of rationality and then turn around and elect trump crenshawn company answer this way they say the problem of discrimination and oppression and exploitation is not merely a momentary act of irrationality a momentary lapse of reason what she and others argue in critical race theory is that the whole american western system is rotten there's no underlying order now do you start to hear the echoes of marx just as marx saw that property and family and education and freedom and morality and law are all bound together in a complex system of bourgeois exploitation of the working-class proletariat critical race theorists posit that white supremacy is not a random aberration it infects the whole system and many of the same elements are involved they say private property the traditional family structure marriage private schooling homeschooling concepts of freedom and law are all bound together in a complex system of white exploitation of other races all you have to do is substitute white for bourgeoisie and people of color for the proletariat and we're looking at the same basic picture of human society we need to think about this carefully as christians we believe that there is an underlying order to the cosmos that is good god made the world it is held together by his word we also believe that sin is a form of irrationality sin is rebellion against god's good order so when it comes to racism for example we do agree that it is a deviation from god's good rational order hatred of someone for where they came from or what they look like and so on is hatred of the image of god and it's a form of murder in the heart where we need to be careful is that the removal of irrational distortions of bias is not as easy as humanists think if there were a bunch of humanists in 1980 saying all we need to do is restore people's rationality and then racism will disappear that would be wrong it's not merely a matter of restoring someone's rationality sin goes deeper than that you can't solve racial prejudice by merely being more enlightened but where christians must not be duped is into trying to burn down god's order does sin infect the order yes but the order is good christians are authorized to tear down every idol we are authorized to tear down every institution every thought that sets itself up against the knowledge of jesus but we do so in order that god's good order of reality may remain fixed in its place and god's good order includes things like private property free trade the goodness of marriage parents having the responsibility to raise their children in the fear of the lord god's biblical morality and law and so on now the other thing to note is that if you assume the macro vision of this marxist hegelian world view of history that every historical moment is the result of a previous irrational collision of previous truths and contradictions then every historical moment is actually already irrational every historical moment is the synthesis of previous contradictions that means that every historical moment doesn't really actually make sense you can't i'm just going to go over this one more time you can't add thesis and antithesis together and read and deduce anything rational from it thesis and antithesis truth and its opposite being false just stay there in god's world you don't get anything from them and if you do claim to be getting something from their adding together truth and its opposite truth and its contradiction if you claim to get anything from that you know what always loses truth you can't add truth and contradiction together and get more truth you get less truth truth always loses and this why this is why synthesis is always inherently violent it's always distorting truth and so this is the world that crenshaw assumes and the other critical race theorists assume so for crenshaw and many of her intersectional friends every historical structure is the result of a previous collision of truths and contradictions creating some new magical irrational synthesis they do not believe that there is bedrock goodness and truth and order established by a good creator god they believe there is nothing special about our moment in history and progress merely means bringing up the next collision the next contradiction to move history forward towards some so-called perfection now we need to add one last spice to this funky concoction intersectionality crenshaw's first major paper on this topic was published in the university of chicago legal forum in 1989 entitled demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex crenshaw's quoted in a vox article vox is where i go to find out what leftists think it writes this is vox quoting crenshaw intersectionality was a prism to bring to light dynamics within discrimination law that weren't being appreciated by the courts in particular courts seem to think that race discrimination was what happened to all black people across gender and sex discrimination was what happened to all women and if that is your framework of course what happens to black women and other women of color is going to be difficult to see what crenshaw posited is that these different kinds of discrimination tend to overlap it's not merely discrimination against black people she said it's not merely discrimination against women but you actually have to combine these overlapping discriminations to really understand what's going on again the vox article summarizes the paper centers on three legal cases that dealt with the issues of both racial discrimination and sex discrimination in each case crenshaw argued that the court's narrow view of discrimination was a prime example of the conceptual limitations of single issue analysis in other words the law seemed to forget that black women are both black and female and thus subject to discrimination on the basis of both race and gender often a combination of the two so intersectionality teaches that beginning with race and gender there are often multiple layers of discrimination that have occurred on the one hand and then depending on who you are you may have multiple layers of privilege and power on the other intersectionality defines justice as empowering those who have lost power giving voices to those who have been silenced in an effort to level the playing field intersectionality teaches that oppression and exploitation are the most fundamental realities in the world and therefore you cannot really understand a person or her situation if you have not carefully sifted through all the layers of exploitation and depression this is what defines human beings in the view of intersectionality it is the sum total of all your scars a human being is the sum total of all their oppressions all their abuses all their exploitations and so you do not understand them it is too complicated too complex you must be quiet you must listen they must speak and so fundamentally pain trauma and hurt feelings become the standard for all things now where crenshaw and critical race theorists go all koi is but they are rarely as frank as marks about what to do and what comes next marx openly called for violent revolution overturning the old systems of property family morality law and justice and he said that when done properly it would cause the violent revolters not to become the new dominant class but rather they would magically settle into a classless society why will this happen we still don't know also we don't believe it and crenshaw basically tries the same rhetorical play without explicitly calling for violent revolution from the same vox article it says crenshaw said that contrary to her critics objections intersectionality isn't an effort to create the world in an inverted image of what it is now rather she said the point of intersectionality is to make room for more advocacy and remedial practices to create a more egalitarian system in short crenshaw doesn't want to replicate existing power dynamics and cultural structures just to give people of color power over white people for example she wants to get rid of those existing power dynamics altogether changing the very structures that undergird our politics law and culture in order to level the playing field to that last line again she wants to fundamentally change the very structures that undergird our politics law and culture in order to level the playing field the problem with this is that god has created a world full of hierarchy god has created a world in which he distributes power and authority and privilege and wisdom and blessing as he sees fit and this is how we know that the marxist intersectional utopia in which power supposedly disappears is a complete sham power will not disappear because god will always be on his throne we can agree that people often misuse their power people often exploit others but what marx and crenshaw and all their envious friends are trying to do is get rid of the only thing that will actually hold abusers and tyrants and exploiters accountable god's law god's order god's morality which condemns all true exploitation so what was abusive economic classes in marx's communist manifesto has been transferred to intersectional identities race gender sexual orientation etc and the goal is the same a complete destruction of the structures that undergird our politics law and culture in order to level the playing field this is hegel's synthesis happy mystical violence so how is this invading the church i have three things because i'm a preacher first of all none of this is a helpful analytical tool from ben shapiro to the southern baptist convention far too many conservatives shoot themselves in the foot right out the gate by granting this framework any legitimacy at all christians and all people committed to basic tenets of truth and rationality should stop saying that these are helpful analytical tools for example in the same vox article i only read one the author writes i asked ben shapiro this question directly and he said the original articulation of the idea that is intersectionality by crenshaw is accurate and not a problem unquote as ben shapiro now shapiro to his credit is one of the most prolific critics of intersectionality and critical race theory but that's a really bad place to start he has missed how deep the rot goes i would urge all christians and people who believe in truth to begin any conversation about these things by asking these questions why is oppression bad is exploitation wrong why is racism wrong why is white dominance not good and furthermore even if these things are bad what kind of bad should all bad things be crimes and if there has been a crime what is the appropriate consequence by what standard you say you want to rid our world of the legal and moral order of western civilization so why is rape wrong if darwin is right why doesn't might make right here's the thing from marx all the way down to the present really from the devil in the garden down to the end of the world evil is always parasitic evil always wants to assume certain fixed realities about god's world without acknowledging god and then they they want to assume those fixed realities about god while stabbing him in the back while giving him the finger everywhere else this is fundamentally inconsistent irrational but it's immoral you cannot assume biblical morality for oppression an exploitation and racism and then turn around and reject biblical morality for truth and justice which one do you want you can't have both how do you know what is wrong the christian answer is we have a word from god we have the bible we have revelation what these people are doing is effectively they're they're running across god's bridge to secure your pity about exploitation and racism bad things are happening how do they know that they ran across god's bridge they assumed god's standard to grab your pity and then they come back over to our side and demand that you swing across the infinite chasm on their stupid grappling hook quick quick this is the only way and we need to stop listening the hegelian marxist worldview says that conflict and revolution create perfection why we still don't know it's mystical it's magical but by that logic by that logic ruling class oppression could just as easily create utopian societies as working class revolt by that same logic white dominance could just as easily create racial harmony as intersectionality if there's no reason why it must be this way then there's no reason why it couldn't also be the other way do you see how do how if you if you can't explain why will this work we don't know magic then anything else is good enough anything else is sufficient i'm gonna go with white dominance why not by your standard it's fine the fact of the matter despite marx and crenshaw's protests to the contrary the claim all we want is equality is a complete sham how do we know because they're lying how do we know they're lying because they already told us they want to destroy the structures that undergird our politics law and culture if somebody says they want to destroy the foundation of your house but don't worry they're not going to destroy your house you're not being an extremist to ask how do you plan to keep my house from being destroyed while you destroy its foundation marx was an angry abusive man paul johnson in his book intellectuals says that when marx addressed the prussian government in 1849 he openly promised violence we are ruthless and ask no quarter from you he said when our turn comes we shall not disguise our terrorism in 1850 he distributed a plan of action in germany in which he wrote far from opposing the so-called excesses those examples of popular vengeance against hated individuals or public buildings which have acquired hateful memories we must not only condone these examples but lend them a helping hand but enough about black lives matter johnson again the mark that marx once established in power would have been capable of great violence and cruelty seemed certain but of course he was never in a position to carry out large-scale revolution violent or otherwise and his pent-up rage therefore passed into his books which always have a tone of intransigence and extremism many passages give the impression that they have actually been written in a state of fury but in due course lenin stalin and mao zedong practiced on enormous scale the violence that marx felt in his heart and which his works exude when an ideological mass murderer or his devotees that have actually carried it out want you to accept that his weapon of choice is really a good weapon you should not agree no it's not a nice weapon at all it's not a helpful analytical tool at all just because a pile of lies always steals a few of god's truths to prop them up so they don't look quite so satanic does not mean that we should congratulate them on a helpful analytical tool it's not helpful if the entire point is to distort reality the standard is not your hurt feelings the standard is not even the occurrence of real exploitation or oppression or abuse the standard is god's word secondly this is invading the church and how is distorting our understanding of christian identity intersectionality is invading the church everywhere the authority of god's word is denied doubted downplayed or forgotten one of the most insidious ways this is happening is through what i call christian mysticism christian mysticism is basically a baptized hegelianism instead of receiving god's word as truth reading it interpreting it believing it and obeying it and expecting to see ordinary blessing in progress as we put sin to death and put on christ we have often accepted satanic lies that god's word is not clear is not helpful does not address our particular modern problems and so we have sought security and our own forms of intersectionality instead how does this work well what makes your christian faith real authentic true how do you know that you have come to know the living god for many christians it is their crisis conversion or various spiritual or physical crises throughout their lives they look back on their personal tragedies collisions crises and traumas looking for some kind of emotional experiential synthesis that makes them utterly unique giving them particular emotional or experiential scars but that is not the basis of christian identity security or peace christian identity is not found in your traumatic past your christian identity is not found in your emotional or physical abuse your failures your collisions your contradictions there's no inherent value or power in any of it often this is rooted in a confusion over the gospel itself we are not saved by some kind of emotional or intellectual experience but a church that teaches or implies that real authentic christians are ones who have experienced a crisis an emotional jesus an emotional song during an emotional message these people are begging to be taken advantage of what is the basis for your salvation what's the basis of your forgiveness your justification your confidence your peace did you cry enough did you feel it deeply enough how much dopamine coursed through your veins and here's the point it's a mystical it's a false mystical gospel because it's an offer of some form of synthesis it's an irrational leap of faith but that is not the gospel our security our authenticity our peace our anchor is jesus and this anchor holds within the veil it goes all the way across the chasm it goes all the way into heaven itself our assurance of forgiveness and righteousness and truth is not fundamentally an experience inside of us it is fundamentally a reality that happened outside of us it is a historical fact that happened two thousand years ago that cannot be changed that is true forever facts don't care about your feelings and the death and resurrection of jesus doesn't care about your feelings either this is the fundamental antithesis it is the fundamental contradiction of all our sins and lies and i want to jump up and down on this salvation is not a synthesis synthesis is an irrational blending of contradictions and opposites god is not blending together our sins and failures with his righteousness and creating some kind of new concoction that he calls new creation that doesn't make any sense no the cross is the great and final antithesis of all our sin our security our hope our joy our peace our truth and authority do not rest on our feelings they rest on historical fact that when jesus died you died in him your sins were laid on him when christ was crucified you and your sins were nailed to that roman cross and buried in that palestinian tomb and when jesus rose from the dead you were raised in him and none of your sin came with you why because justice was completely fulfilled what your sins deserved has been accomplished it's finished there's no synthesis it's all wonderful glorious antithesis your sins are gone this is the fact of the gospel the truth of the gospel this is not synthesis god did not synthesize sin and righteousness to save you he destroyed your sin your death and jesus carried you out of a grave clothed in his righteousness and if that were not enough he gave you baptism and the lord's supper as his authoritative signs outside of you outside of your feelings that you belong to him these are facts this is truth this is who you are believe him follow him finally intersectionality is invading the church in its distortion of true christian authority the righteousness of jesus is the only basis for all christian authority christ was the only true and perfect victim and therefore god has highly exalted him philippians 2 christ did not suffer for his sins the suffering of christ was pure and completely innocent he was the only true and perfect victim therefore god has highly exalted him how did jesus get the name above every name by being the innocent victim for the sins of the world the spotless lamb of god christian mysticism trying to somehow experience the sufferings of jesus is really just a heretical intersectionality of its own it's an attempt to make your imperfect suffering authoritative bizarre examples of this happen when you see an advertisement for a christian marriage seminar with some dude on his fourth wife he understands your pain no he doesn't your imperfect suffering is not authoritative whatever your experience including real and horrific suffering it is tainted by your sin if you try to die on that cross you will not come back from the dead you cannot squeeze any moral authority out of your tainted experience except for the acknowledgement that it is worthless you can only do it paul did with all of his credentials and say they are done why because they're covered in pride bitterness wrath lust guilt and shame how could your suffering save you much less anyone else scars are not the credentials of christians they may be trophies to god's power and grace but they are not your credentials they are not our basis for security or truth or authority we do not place our trust in happy mystical violence christ did not come back from the dead for some irrational magical reason no he came back from the dead because he could not stay dead he only died in the first place because god the father laid our sin on him but once the sin was completely paid for he could not stay dead jesus rose for the same reason the sun rises every morning he rose for the same reason the rain falls down and therefore the righteousness of jesus is the only basis for christian power and authority what do i mean i mean what is the basis for addressing the sins of white people what is our ground our foundation our authority for addressing the sins of black people hispanics asians men women abuse victims abusers old young disabled childless single it is nothing but the death burial and resurrection of jesus christ period full stop he died for every kind of sin and we proclaim forgiveness in this blood this blood that doesn't discriminate it washes the foulest clean it cleanses all so can a pastor wisely counsel an abused woman can a white pastor wisely counsel a black woman you can see the creeping tentacles of marxism and intersectionality in churches where there must be race and gender quotas do we have a woman on that committee do we have a person of color on that committee we're doing a conference on racism do you think we can find some conservative black man to talk to us about racism you don't need a black man to explain racism all you need is jesus and his word and as soon as the reply comes back but it's just more complicated than that that's just what a white preacher would say then you need to know that's the devil god said so will it be what will it be the antithesis of god the antithesis of the cross of christ and his eternal word or will it be the eternal confusion and irrationality of synthesis and intersectionality will it be the fixed standard of god and his truth and our salvation or will be the freefall of hurt feelings exploitation envy mysticism church leaders that are bowing to these ideal ideologies are basically cowing to the claims of alien authority and they need to be confronted and disciplined or else the faithful need to leave their churches they are not entering by the door of the sheepfold because the door of the sheepfold is christ they're climbing in some other way they're thieves and robbers no matter where they went to seminary so ask them what gives you the authority to teach and preach and counsel to the abused to race prejudice victims if they say it's christ and his word then you have reason to stay but if the answer is that they were abused that they are survivors themselves that they've been discriminated against that that they can have empathy for the marginalized or they got special training from abuseawareness.com then i'm here to tell you run those are not the qualifications for a pastor or teacher or counselor does god teach us wisdom through the body of christ yes of course does god teach us truth through our experiences yes but fundamentally any truth that comes from other people and various experiences if it is actually truth is merely pointing us to jesus and his word there's no other truth there's no other foundation there's no other bridge there is only christ father thank you very much for sending your son thank you that he is your complete and sufficient word and it is all that we need for this life and so father pour out his spirit on us so that we might know your word and know your truth and walk faithfully in it in jesus name amen [Applause] you

Channel: Canon Press

Views: 10,084

Keywords: canon press, canon press interview, bible, theology, moscow idaho, christian, pastor, christ church, religion, apologetics, marx, karl marx, atheism, marxist, cultural marxism, communism, moscow, canon, press, toby sumpter, toby, sumpter

Id: xfaHnh-1UD4

Length: 54min 18sec (3258 seconds)

Published: Sat Oct 30 2021