The Bible, Critical Theory, and Critical Race Theory, Part 2

Thomas W. Juodaitis

PDF   Download the PDF version of this review. If you do not have Adobe Acrobat installed on your system please click here on Adobe Acrobat Reader to download.

What Is Critical Race Theory (CRT)?

As we saw in Part 1, the roots and influences of CRT trace back through the Critical Theorists[1] of the Frankfurt School back to Marx and Engels back to the Jesuit communists, and ultimately back to the father of lies – Satan.[2] Now we must define what CRT is. In a nutshell, CRT is Marxism applied to Race instead of Class. Conservative activist Christopher Rufo defines CRT as

 

an academic discipline that claims that the United States was founded on racism, oppression, and white supremacy – and that these forces are still at the root of our society. That’s how it is defined in practice. But bureaucrats implementing critical race theory will say it is an academic concept arguing race is a social construct, and that racism is not only individual bias or prejudice but also something embedded in legal and political systems.

Critical race theory reformulates the old Marxist dialectic of oppressor and oppressed, replacing the class categories of bourgeoisie and proletariat with the identity categories of white and black.But the basic conclusion is the same: In order to liberate man, society must be fundamentally transformed through moral, economic, and political revolution.

In simple terms, critical race theory can be seen as a form of “race-based Marxism;”they share a common conceptual framework and critical race theory was explicitly derived from “critical theory,” a 20th-century ideology sometimes called “neo-Marxism.”[3]

 

Voddie Baucham, Jr. citing the UCLA School of Public Affairs defines CRT as “an outgrowth of Critical Legal Studies (CLS), which was a leftist movement that challenged legal scholarship.” Baucham again cites the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs:

 

CRT recognizes that racism is engrained in the fabric and system of the American society. The individual racist need not exist to note that institutional racism is pervasive in the dominant culture. This is the analytical lens that CRT uses in examining existing power structures. CRT identifies that these power structures are based on white privilege and white supremacy, which perpetuates the marginalization of people of color. CRT also rejects the traditions of liberalism and meritocracy. Legal discourse says that the law is neutral and colorblind, however, CRT challenges this legal “truth” by examining liberalism and meritocracy as a vehicle for self-interest, power, and privilege.[4]

 

Later, Baucham cites the Encyclopedia Brittanica on CRT:

 

Critical race theory (CRT), the view that the law and legal institutions are inherently racist and that race itself, instead of being biologically grounded and natural, is a socially constructed concept that is used by white people to further their economic and political interests at the expense of people of colour.[5]

 

Baucham calls CRT a new religion and includes that title as chapter 4 in his book. As a new religion, CRT has a new cosmology with its version of the six days of creation: “On the first day, white people created whiteness” (69); “On the second day, white people created white privilege” (72); “On the third day, white people created white supremacy” (74); “On the fourth day, white people created white complicity” (76); “On the fifth day, white people created white equilibrium” (77); and “On the sixth day, white people created white fragility” (78). Further, this new religion of CRT has “A New Original Sin: Racism” (80), and this original sin is “Systemic” (84). This new religion also has “A New Law (the ‘Work’ of Antiracism)” (87). Along with this new law, there is “A New Priesthood” with its new tribalism where “Narrative Trumps Truth” (91-111). Further, there is “A New Canon” based on works by “orthodox” CRT advocates (113-130).

Another conservative Evangelical, Owen Strachan has defined CRT as a form of “Wokeness,” which he defines as “a mindset, a mood, and a set of principles and beliefs” that he delineates as

 

1.      The world is fundamentally divided into oppressors and oppressed people

2.      A major form of oppression today comes from “whiteness”

3.      “Whiteness” is not a neutral system, but creates a culture of “white supremacy” that most benefits “white” people (and also others who fail to challenge it)

4.      The evils of this culture show up in disparities between groups, which reveal inequities, which reveal injustices (disparities lead to inequities, which lead to injustices)

5.      “White supremacy” must be vigorously opposed through “social justice,” “antiracism,” and the targeting of “white privilege”

6.      More broadly, any form of “privilege” and “oppression” stemming from heteronormative “white” capitalist patriarchalist structures must be opposed

7.      We can create a just, fair, diverse, and inclusive society grounded in equality of outcome by targeting inequities through political, legal, cultural, and fiscal means so that inequitable authority is deprivileged and minority groups are empowered.[6]

 

Later, Strachan also calls Wokeness a religion. He writes

 

Wokeness is akin to the Protestant liberalism of roughly one hundred years ago, but with a less supernatural frame. …

 

·         Wokeness has little grounding in a theistic system; it is this-worldly from the start.

·         Wokeness uses the categories of Marxism, with people being either oppressor or oppressed.

·         Wokeness champions the neo-pagan sexual ethic, one distinct from [B]iblical sexuality.

·         Wokeness is a utopian justice movement at its base; it syncs with both Enlightenment revolutionary movements and liberationist theological camps and connects in different ways to each.

 

Beyond these observations, it is appropriate to conclude that wokeness is a new religion. This is increasingly becoming clear. Ibram Kendi, for example, tweeted in 2019 that “Racism is death. Antiracism is life.” [Ibram Kendi (@DrIbram), “Racism is death. Antiracism is life,” Twitter, August 4, 2019, 9:45 a.m., https://twitter.com/DrIbram/status/1158011047451811842.] Whatever else Kendi may mean, his framing of “antiracism” as “life” signals that this concept has essentially salvific status for him. This is conversion for Kendi and others of his ilk (and increasingly, many thought leaders in American schools, corporations, HR departments, sports teams, and the list goes on). To be a “racist” (remember that he means this structurally) is to be dead. But to take up the cause of “antiracism” is life itself. This is religious and spiritual language.

A more technical description of this new religion, in my view, is “Utopian Judicial Paganism.”[7]

 

Dave Kubal, President of Intercessors for America agrees with Strachan in calling CRT a mindset, adding “It is a prevailing spirit resting upon our nation at this moment in time.”

 

CRT’s grandfather, Critical Theory (CT), dates to the 1930s. CT offered a false dichotomy as the lens through which to view life and economic status. Proponents of CT started a dispute between the working class—proletariat—and the capitalist leaders—bourgeoisie—that created a power vacuum resulting in Marxist revolutions. You were either rich or you were poor.

Similarly, CRT is attempting to force upon the American population a single false dichotomy to look at our world. But this time the division is primarily race, not socio-economic status. CRT divides on the basis of two negative outlooks: based on your race, you are oppressed or you are the oppressors.[8]

 

Australian scholar Christopher Watkin “draw[s] primarily on the work of…Derrick Bell, Harvard’s first black law professor.” Watkin considers

 

Bell’s work…to be on the hardline or pessimistic side of the CRT spectrum, [but] foregrounding Bell has three advantages: 1) he is widely considered the originator of critical race theory; 2) the sketch below offers an “ideal” or “pure” type of CRT that we may never encounter in its entirety in the wild, so to speak, but elements of which may well be present in our interactions and institutions; and 3) the way in which CRT is received, mediated and discussed in the church often privileges its more extreme forms, and in our current age of political polarisation and general drift away from the centre these more extreme ideas are the ones that currently exercise Christian commentators.[9]

 

Watkin states that “we can understand CRT in terms of eight principles” listed as follows: “1. Racism is structural and permanent; 2. There is no neutrality; 3. White people are incapable of helping black people; 4. Only black people have the right to speak about racism; 5. Only white people can be racist; 6. Change must be revolutionary not incremental; 7. Equality is measured by outcome, not by opportunity; and 8. Final victory is impossible.”[10]

 

Critical Race Theory’s Epistemology: Knowledge Is a Social Construct

Now while it is important both to trace CRT’s roots, which indeed are rotten, and to define CRT, it is even more important to look at its epistemology, for here we will see even more rotten roots that demonstrate that CRT has no basis to argue for its theory. It is no wonder, for if Satan and those who follow him attack God’s Word, they will certainly not follow the epistemology found in that Word. In a commentary titled “My Woke Employees Tried to Cancel Me. Here’s How I Fought Back and Saved My Nonporfit,” Grace Daniel writes,

 

First, critical social justice is an anti-objectivity ideology: One of its fundamental assertions is that there are no objective truths, only “positional” truths. As explained by Ozlem Sensoy and Robin DiAngelo in their 2017 book Is Everyone Really Equal?:

One of the key contributions of critical theorists concerns the production of knowledge…. These scholars argue that a key element of social injustice involves the claim that particular knowledge is objective, neutral, and universal.

An approach based on critical theory calls into question the idea that objectivity is desirable or even possible. The term used to describe this way of thinking about knowledge is that knowledge is socially constructed.[11]

 

This demonstrates that CRT is irrational. It denies that there is such a thing as knowledge, and worse yet, DiAngelo asserts that knowledge claims actually are a cause of injustice. But if all “knowledge” is merely a social construct, as DiAngelo and other critical theorists claim, then the highest level anyone’s ideas can rise to (and this includes the ideas of the critical theorists themselves) is opinion. John Robbins articulated a Biblical epistemology, wherein a coherent answer can be given to the question “How do you know?” Robbins stated, “Paul in the first four chapters of 1 Corinthians is intent on denying natural theology. In fact, he is intent on denying any source of knowledge except Scripture…. To claim knowledge apart from Christ is to express belief in a figment of one’s imagination.”[12] Robbins later added, “[T]here is no wisdom or knowledge outside of Christ. The traditions of men, the basic principles of the world do not give us knowledge.”[13] Further, contrasting the Bible’s epistemology with the world’s predominant views, Robbins stated

 

Rationalism teaches that we discover truth by means of logic alone. Empiricism teaches that we discover truth by means of sense experience alone. The Bible teaches that neither one of these provides us with knowledge. (153)

 

Christianity teaches an epistemology – a theory of knowl­edge – that goes along with its soteriology – the doctrine of salvation. Christian soteriology says you cannot do anything to save yourself. We have seen over and over again that sal­vation comes through knowledge. The Scriptures are able to make you wise for salvation (compare 2 Timothy 3:15). Christian epistemology also teaches that you cannot do any­thing on your own effort to come to knowledge. Knowledge is a gift of God as much as salvation itself. (159)

 

Robbins saw this writing on the wall back when he began The Trinity Foundation, for he wrote in “The Trinity Manifesto,” which is also in the back of every book The Trinity Foundation publishes as “The Crisis of Our Time”:

 

The attacks on truth, on knowledge, on propositional revelation, on the intellect, on words, and on logic are renewed daily. But note well: The misologists – the haters of logic – use logic to demonstrate the futility of using logic. The anti-intellectuals construct intricate intellectual arguments to prove the insufficiency of the intellect. The anti-theologians use the revealed Word of God to show that there can be no revealed Word of God—or that if there could, it would remain impenetrable darkness and mystery to our finite minds.[14]

 

Baucham also addresses the Critical Race Theorists’ (he calls them antiracists) rejection of objective “knowledge.” He writes, “Furthermore, as we will see, it also explains why the mere reliance on things like facts, statistics, or the scientific method are actually seen as racist.” Then in the footnote he writes

 

The idea that the scientific method is inherently racist is a hallmark of CRT. In one of the seminal academic papers on the topic, Tara Yosso, one of the most-cited CRT academics, lists five key elements of the ideology. Among them, she identifies “the challenge to dominant ideology. CRT challenges White privilege and refutes the claims that educational institutions make toward objectivity, meritocracy, colorblindness, race neutrality and equal opportunity. CRT challenges notions of ‘neutral’ research or ‘objective’ researchers and exposes deficit-informed research that silences, ignores and distorts epistemologies of People of Color. CRT argues that these traditional claims act as a camouflage for the self-interest, power, and privilege of dominant groups in US society.” See San Jose State University’s “Critical Race Theory in Chicana/o Education,” April 1, 2001, https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://duckduckgo.com/&/&httpsredir=1&article=1036&context=naccs. Also a flier at the Smithsonian’s Museum of African American History included the Scientific Method as “an element of whiteness.” The document specified that this includes objective, rational, linear thinking; cause-and-effect relationships; and quantitative emphasis.[15]

Strachan addresses what is called “standpoint epistemology” of wokeness advocates. He writes

 

Wokeness advocates typically embrace what is called “standpoint epistemology,” meaning that our social location and possession of privilege will shape our handling of truth. [Delgado and Stefancic, Critical Race Theory, 43-56.] Minority interpreters who have enjoyed less privilege (which per CRT blinds us from seeing truth) are able to “see” things in texts that others cannot. This hermeneutical commitment is based on the idea that “whiteness” as a privileged construct hinders interpreters from grasping dimensions of the text that underprivileged people can see. This commitment relativizes interpretation, whether of the Bible or of other books. It makes exegesis a culture-driven practice. Minority exegetes can see things that “white” exegetes cannot. [The work of Neil Shenvi and Pat Sawyer is insightful on this count. See Engaging Critical Theory and the Social Justice Movement, accessible online at https://ratio-christi.org/engaging-critical-theory-and-the-social-justice-movement.][16]

 

A little further on, Strachan writes, “Wokeness’s epistemology is deeply damaging to the pursuit of truth…. Yet wokeness pushes even harder on this point, and as presented by some advocates insists that reason itself is racist…. In wokeness, however, there is no deeper ontological grounding for truth; rather, wokeness simply asserts its commitments without foundation beyond our narratives. Human narratives are the grounding of truth in a woke system.” In a footnote in this section Strachan adds, “Delgado and Stefancic openly admit their epistemological stance, stating: ‘For the critical race theorist, objective truth, like merit, does not exist, at least in social science and politics. In these realms, truth is a social construct created to suit the purposes of the dominant group.’ [Critical Race Theory], 104.”[17]

One is here reminded of Kierkegaard (and the later Neo-orthodox who rediscovered him) who wrote, “Christianity protests every form of objectivity. It de­sires that the subject should be infinitely concerned about himself. It is subjectivity that Christianity is concerned with, and it is only in subjectivity that its truth exists. If it exists at all objectively, Christianity has absolutely no existence.”[18]

Thus, in their attack on knowledge, the misological Critical Race Theorists cannot give a coherent, let alone Biblical account of their opinion—not knowledge—for they deny objective truth, and there is no reason to listen to them.

 

Why Should the Church Worry About CRT?

The simple answer is because CRT is already in the church, especially its seminaries, colleges, boards, and churches. Here is where Baucham excels other writers on CRT/ Wokeness/ Antiracism (these terms are used interchangeably), for he names names even in his own ranks.[19] Under the subheading of The Nature of the Coming Catastrophe, Baucham writes

 

Why are people and groups like Thabiti Anyabwile, Tim Keller,[20] Russell Moore, the Southern Baptist Convention, the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, 9Marks, the Gospel Coalition, and Together for the Gospel (T4G) being identified with Critical Social Justice on one side of the fault, and people like John MacArthur, Tom Ascol, Owen Strachan, Douglas Wilson, and the late R. C. Sproul being identified on the other?[21]

 

Later, Baucham exposes Matt Chandler of the Village Church, writing

In one YouTude video, Matt Chandler, pastor of the Village Church in Flower Mound, Texas, former head of the Acts 29 network, and one of the leading representatives of the Young, Restless, and Reformed movement…echoes [Peggy] McIntosh almost verbatim. “I have grown up with this invisible…bag of privilege,” he says in a direct-to-camera presentation. Then, as if to press McIntosh’s analogy of  “an invisible package of unearned assets,” he describes “a kind of invisible toolkit that I can reach in there at any moment and have this kind  privilege that a lot of other brothers and sisters don’t have.” [The Village Church Resources, “How to Understand and Address White Privilege,” YouTube, June 28, 2017, https:// youtube.com/watch?v=pzUXZpMQ1TQ.] ...

These were not off-the-cuff remarks. The video, titled, “How to Understand White Privilege,” is very strategic. Chandler is clearly sympathetic to CRT’s version of white privilege.[22]

 

He also exposes David Platt and Jarvis Williams for their antiracist views:

 

David Platt, in a momentous sermon delivered at Together for the Gospel in 2018, defined racism as “a system…in which race, and specifically white and black skin colors, profoundly affects people’s economic, political, and social experiences.” This is unmistakably taken from the antiracist lexicon. But lest you think it lets individuals off the hook, Jarvis Williams claims that “race and racial reconciliation are soteriological issues.” Thus, not only are white Christians who fail to adopt antiracist theology and repent of racism in jeopardy of being alienated from God, but those who fail to elevate the preaching of the antiracist message to the same level as the preaching of the Gospel are apparently preaching another gospel—which, according to Williams, is no gospel at all.[23]

 

Baucham further shows how Evangelicalism is kowtowing to antiracism:

 

Ethnic Gnosticism argues that white people’s only access to the singular black perspective comes from elevating and listening to black voices. This is why I refer to it as “the new priesthood.” …

Evangelicalism is echoing the same sentiment [that white people cannot “see” without black voices]. Everywhere you turn, another prominent voice is calling for the recognition and elevation of black voices, sometimes even in ways that clearly advocate the principles of Ethnic Gnosticism. “Whiteness. Has. Caused. Blind. Ness. Of. Heart. Whiteness. Has. Caused. Blind. Ness. Of. HEART!” [Woke Preacher Clips, “Eric Mason: “Whiteness Has Caused Blindness of Heart!” YouTube, September 23, 2020, https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=OO6Ufo3GH8.] chanted Woke Church author Eric Mason (citing Ephesians 4:18). “The Bible can’t tell us what it is like to be black in America, or how to address systemic discrimination in housing or education,” tweeted Veggie Tales creator Phil Vischer. “We need to listen to voices who study the issues and have had the experience.” [Phil Vischer (@philvischer), Twitter, June 9, 2020, https://twitter.com/phil-vischer/status/12704680 29093216257?s=20.][24]

 

CRT’s Rotten Roots Produce Rotten Fruits

Now the rotten roots of CRT – Critical Theory back to Marxism, all the way back to Satan, with its irrational and un-Biblical epistemology produces some rotten fruit as well. It causes division, even stirring up more “racial” hostility. The Scripture warns against this:

 

These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren. Proverbs 6:16-19 (Emphasis added.)

 

According to CRT or Wokeness, “white people are oppressors. They foster ‘white supremacy’ at all times, and in fact cannot help but do so.”[25]As Baucham stated above, “Racism is the Original Sin to be repented of, but only white people can be racist.” Thus,

 

The CRT diagnosis is a radical reframing of man’s chief problem. It changes our funda-mental condition from one of individually willed sin to one of inherently racist “white-ness,” which makes horizontal transgression against men of greater import than vertical transgression against God.[26] ...

The normal “white” person is part of a structurally wicked order in which racism is “an integral, permanent, and indestructible component of this society.” [Delgado and Stefancic, Critical Race Theory, ix.][27]

Wokeness, and “social justice” like it, are tools of division.[28]

Wokeness is both authoritarian and libertine; both utopian and nihilistic; both state-worshipping and self-exalting. It is not internally consistent, like many worldviews, especially those developed in a post-truth age.[29]

 

And if Intersectionality[30]is taken into account, the greatest oppressors are straight, white, males.

A group that is “Woke” and follows CRT is Black Lives Matter (BLM). Some Christian thought leaders have advocated for BLM – “Southern Baptist Convention President J.D. Greear called for members of the nation’s largest Protestant denomination to declare that ‘black lives matter’.”[31] The BLM organization’s founders, Patrisse Cullors, Alicia Garza, and Opal Tometi openly identify as Marxist-Leninists, and their organization is openly pagan, “channeling spirits to accomplish their objectives.” It is also “openly feminist, pro-LGBTQIA+,” which is also “openly anti-male and anti-family.”[32]

Finally, I want to end with Voddie Baucham:

 

James Lindsay, one of the leading academic critics of the Critical Social Justice movement, offers a warning that the Church should heed:

 

For the foreseeable future, online outrage mobs are going to happen, and they will…eventually target your organization. Your only choice of resisting them is to maintain a positive, anti-fragile, team-oriented internal culture that acts as a counterbalance that gets you through the storm (think about it like boarding up your windows against a rhetorical hurricane). That requires making use of organizational leadership to cultivate the right internal values—broadly liberal and anti-victimhood —and to treat them like a condition of employment or participation in your organization. Then, you can stand against this obnoxious pressure and keep fulfilling your organization’s missions and purposes, as a team. [James Lindsay, “How Your Organization Can Resist Woke Social Pressure,” New Discourses, August 7, 2020, https://newdiscourses.com/2020/08/how-your-organization-can-resist-woke-social-pressure.]

 

It may surprise you to learn that Lindsay is an atheist. In fact, by his own admission, he used to be “an angry atheist.” He was no fan of the Church. In conversations with him, I have been struck not only by the depth and breadth of his knowledge of the origins, history, and key influences and influencers of Critical Social Justice, but his keen understanding of how dangerous it is to Christianity. He often says jokingly, “If I was still an angry atheist and wanted to destroy the church…I’d make ‘em woke!” It is both ironic and sad that CSJ’s attack on the Gospel is so clear that an atheist can see it, yet many churches, denominations, seminaries, leading ministries, and ministers have fallen prey to this movement.[33]

 

It is high time for those in the church to wake up and repent of being “Woke.” There certainly are problems in this world and in the church due to sin, but it must be solved with Biblical solutions, not solutions proffered by the enemy of humanity through his witting or unwitting followers. For those who follow Christ here in the West, and especially here in America, it may cost us again to name the name of Christ and follow his Word. But what is the alternative? Whether or not we turn the tide, we must remain faithful to our Lord who gave his life for us. I close with the words of Peter in 1 Peter 4:17: “For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?”

 

 

New Episode of Trinity Foundation Radio

 

Join host Steve Matthews for Trinity Foundation Radio, Episode 18, as he interviews Tom Juodaitis, President of The Trinity Foundation about the latest book, Thinking Biblically: A Challenge to Christians by the late John W. Robbins, which Tom edited. Visit the website and click on the link for TF Radio to listen to this latest episode.



[1]See especially “Resolution on Critical Theory,” American Council of Christian Churches, 78th Annual Convention, October 22-24, 2019, Faith Chapel, Carlisle, PA, April 25, 2022, https://accc4truth.org/2019/11/14/critical-theory/.

[2]See Marx and Satan (1986)by Richard Wurmbrand.

[3]Christopher F. Rufo, “What I Found About Critical Race Theory And Why It Shouldn’t Be Taught,” USA Today, Opinion Guest Contributor, July 5, 2021, accessed August 14, 2022, https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/voices/2021/ 07/06/critical-race-theory-schools-racism-origins-classroom/ 7635551002/?gnt-cfr=1. Emphasis original.

[4]Voddie T. Baucham, Jr., Fault Lines: The Social Justice Movement and Evangelicalism’s Looming Catastrophe, Salem Books, 2021, xiv-xv. He cites “What Is Critical Race Theory?” UCLA School of Public Affairs, Critical Race Studies, https://spacrs.wordpress.com/what-is-critical-race-theory.

[5]Bauham, Jr., 70. The citation is Tommy Curry, “Critical Race Theory,” Encyclopedia Britannica, May 28, 2020, https://www.britannica.com/topic/critical-race-theory.

[6]Owen Strachan, Christianity and Wokeness: How the Social Justice Movement Is Hijacking the Gospel—and the Way to Stop It, Salem Books, 2021, 24-25.

[7]Strachan, 125-126. Bracketed information originally in footnotes.

[8]Dave Kubal, “The Spirit Behind Critical Race Theory,” Intercessors for America, July 1, 2021, accessed July 20, 2022, https://ifapray.org/blog/the-spirit-behind-critical-race-theory/.

[9]Christopher Watkin, “Christianity and Critical Race Theory,” Cambridge Papers, Volume 31, Number 2, June 2022, 2, https://www.cambridgepapers.org/christianity-and-critical-race-theory/.

[10]Watkin, 2-3.

[11]Grace Daniel (Pseudonym), “My Woke Employees Tried to Cancel Me. Here’s How I Fought Back and Saved My Nonprofit,” June 2, 2021, access July 20, 2022, https://www.dailysignal.com/2021/06/07/my-woke-employees-tried-to-cancel-me-heres-how-i-fought-back-and-saved-my-nonprofit/.

[12]John W. Robbins, Thinking Biblically: A Challenge to Christians, The Trinity Foundation, 2022, 61, 62.

[13]Robbins, Thinking Biblically, 143.

[14]John W. Robbins, “The Trinity Manifesto,” The Trinity Review, October 1978, 2.

[15]Baucham, Jr., Fault Lines, 86 and footnote. This is not advocacy for the scientific method, which is a logical fallacy. See Gordon H. Clark, The Philosophy of Science and Belief in God, and Ronald L. Cooper, “The Bible and the Idolatry of Science,” The Trinity Review, September-December 2019.

[16]Strachan, Christianity and Wokeness, 105. Bracketed information originally in footnote, and emphasis in italics is added.

[17]Strachan, 106-107. Emphasis original.

[18]Concluding Unscientific Postscript to the Philosophical Fragments, as repro­duced in Bretall, A Kierkegaard Anthology, Princeton University Press, 1946, 207. See Robbins, Thinking Biblically, 43.

[19]Strachan is not so bold to name names. He also touts so-called “common grace” and Cornelius Van Til.

[20]For more on Tim Keller’s Marxism, see Timothy F. Kauffman, “Workers of the Church Unite!: The Radical Marxist Foundations of Tim Keller’s Social Gospel,” The Trinity Review, March-June 2014.

[21]Baucham, Fault Lines, 2. Douglas Wilson may be fighting CRT, but he does not have the Gospel correct and is a Federal Vision heretic.

[22]Baucham, 73-74. Bracketed information originally in footnote.

[23]Baucham, 87. Emphasis original.

[24]Baucham, 99. Bracketed information originally in footnotes.

[25]Strachan, 61.

[26]Strachan, 62.

[27]Strachan, 66. Bracketed information originally in footnote.

[28]Strachan, 99.

[29]Strachan, 128.

[30]Baucham explains: “Put simply, Intersectionality is about the multiple layers of oppression minorities suffer” (xvii). Strachan says, “The intersectional worldview denies that there is such a thing as a created order” (73).

[31]Baucham, 216. He cites Adelle M. Banks, “Southern Baptist President J.D. Greear Says, ‘Black Lives Matter’,” Religion News Service, June 9, 2020, https://religionnews.com/2020/ 06/09/southern-baptist-president-j-d-greear-says-black-lives-matter.

[32]Baucham, 217-221. Compare Strachan, 73-78.

[33]Baucham, 204-205. Bracketed information originally in footnote.