In his sermon 'Social Justice and White Privilege,' Robert Bosley discusses systemic racism and white privilege through a biblical lens. He begins with a reading from Leviticus 19, emphasizing justice and impartiality in judgment. Bosley critiques critical race theory and intersectionality for fostering division and shame, arguing that they encourage a victim mentality and cause new social segregations. He defines systemic racism as an unfalsifiable concept that attributes disparities to racism without evidence of racist policies or individuals. Bosley promotes a biblical response that centers on treating everyone as image bearers of God and achieving unity through the gospel. He criticizes the concept of white privilege as creating racial stereotypes and argues that the church should reject these worldly ideologies. He calls on Christians to live by God's standards of justice and prepare to rebuild society according to biblical principles after these ideologies inevitably collapse.

So let's begin with reading Leviticus 19 starting in verse 11. Leviticus 19 starting in verse 11. You shall not steal, nor deal falsely, nor lie to one another. And you shall not swear by my name falsely, Nor shall you profane the name of your God. I am the Lord You shall not cheat your neighbor nor rob him the wages of him who is hired shall not remain with you all night until morning You shall not curse the deaf nor put a stumbling block before the blind, but shall fear your God.

I am the Lord. You shall do no injustice in judgment." And that idea of judgment is what we heard about today, the rendering of a verdict. You shall not do injustice in bringing a verdict. You shall not be partial to the poor nor honor the person of the mighty. In righteousness you shall judge your neighbor.

You shall not go about as a tale bearer among your people. Nor shall you take a stand against the life of your neighbor, I am the Lord. You shall not hate your brother in your heart. You shall surely rebuke your neighbor and not bear sin because of him you shall not take vengeance nor bear any grudge against the children of your people but you shall love your neighbor as yourself I am the Lord let's pray father we come before you and we ask the Lord for your help. I echo the prayers of my brother a moment ago.

Lord, give me clarity of speech, clarity of thought. Give each of us here the ability to hear these things and to understand and to examine what is laid before us. Help us Lord to be faithful to test all things by your Word. God give us help to see where the philosophies of this world are in contradiction to your word and your ways. Lord, give us the grace and the courage to reject the ideologies of this world and follow after you in Christ's name, amen.

So as I said, we're gonna be continuing looking at social justice and to review what we looked at the last couple sessions regarding critical race theory intersectionality. I wanna do a brief recap of the last session. Fundamentally, last time we discussed how critical race theory and intersectionality are a pair of destructive systems that ultimately encourage a victim mentality in those that the system labels the oppressed. And it causes the one labeled the oppressor to feel an unjust and unreasonable shame, usually for things out of his control, usually simply for the color of their skin. Because of this, it creates a new segregation in our society, a de facto segregation with social groups, racial groups sorting themselves and often avoiding one another out of fear or even hatred.

And sometimes this de facto segregation is made explicit and enforced by corporations or government entities. And in the church, these ideologies destroy the unity that should be ours through the blood of Christ. This causes Christians to look at one another and rather than coming to one another and seeing one another and interacting with one another on the basis of the fact that we are all image bearers made in the image of God and redeemed by the blood of Christ, this ideology teaches us to first consider what color skin your brother has. Is a divisive system that only causes problems. This is not a solution.

It does not fix what it claims to fix. It only further divides. And we saw that the proper response is to one call out the division that it creates And oppose it. And we oppose it firstly by elevating the impartial application of the law, primarily God's law, but also man's law as far as man's law reflects the justice of God's law. And secondly, we oppose it personally by treating everyone as an image bearer of God.

We treat one another impartially as God commands. And thirdly, we seek true relational unity through the gospel. We call all people everywhere to repent and put their faith in the Lord Jesus Christ because he has broken down all these barriers and made his people one. The goal is that Christ would be all and in all, as we saw last time. And so coming off of these topics of critical race theory and intersectionality, light, easy, no controversy there, we look at today the twin concepts of systemic racism and white privilege.

And as we go through this, much of what I say will be repetition because the ideas of systemic racism and white privilege are the application of critical race theory to the institutions and systems of society. So a lot of what you hear today will be very similar to what we've talked about before. But that is fundamentally because the answer for these people is always, it's racism. The problem is always racism. It doesn't matter what the question is or what solution they're trying to provide or what problem they're trying to answer, the answer they always give is, well, it's racism.

And so much of what I say today will be a repetition. But we will begin with the concept of systemic racism or sometimes what is called institutional or structural racism. And we'll begin by defining it. And after defining it, I want us to consider the two main problems with this concept of systemic racism. These two problems being, first, it's an unfalsifiable idea, and secondly, any argument against it is used to prove its existence.

Any argument against it is used to prove its existence. Any argument against it is used to prove its existence. Not the most pithy points, but hopefully you get my meaning. And these points largely I'm drawing from a very helpful article written by a man named Matthew Frank who I know almost nothing about, but he wrote an incredibly helpful article that appeared in Newsweek magazine for about two hours before the editors decided it was too controversial. But an article titled, Racism is Real but is Systemic Racism?

And note that we are talking about systemic racism, not systematic racism. These are different things. Systemic racism is the idea that racism is inherent in the system, regardless of what system we're talking about, whether it's a school, a corporation, or the country as a whole. It is something that is baked into the system. It is part of the system itself.

Something that is systematic is something that's being done in a step-by-step, thorough manner according to an overarching plan or a pattern. And so we can look back and rightly say that America's chattel slavery of 160 plus years ago was largely systematic racism, and in many instances systemic racism, as was the Jim Crow segregation in the South. But systemic racism, the claim that is being made today that we face systemic racism in our society is that the whole system, whatever the system is, has been so thoroughly corrupted by racist policies that no one escapes being tainted by racist ideas or the effects of racist ideas. You can make this analogous to our doctrine of total depravity. We confess, as the Bible teaches, that all men everywhere are fallen in Adam and thus our sinners by nature before they ever make a choice.

This fallenness is such that all of our humanity is affected, our will, our emotions, our intellect. Everything is marred by Adam's sin. And this is a way that systemic racism, this is a way to understand the effects of systemic racism that the critical race theorists want us to believe exists. They say that it is pervasive, it is all-encompassing, and it is inescapable, and every part of you is touched by it. You cannot escape it.

So in this way, systemic racism ultimately functions as the new total depravity in the modern religion of wokeness. One website defined systemic racism this way, quote, systemic racism consists of organizational culture, policies, directives, practices and procedures that exclude, displace or marginalized some racialized groups or create unfair barriers for them to access valuable benefits and opportunities. This is often the result of institutional biases in organizational culture, policies, directives, practices, and procedures that, and this is key, that may appear neutral but have the effect of privileging some groups and disadvantaging others. So I know that was a lot to take in. But did you note what was not contained anywhere in that statement?

There was nothing there about personal, intentional racial discrimination. There was nothing there about actual racial prejudice in the very definition of systemic racism. And this is key. The very definition of what racism is and how people have defined racism for literally centuries is completely missing from the definition of systemic racism or institutional racism. And this is not just a quirk of this one definition or an oversight by this company.

That is the point. And instead of carefully and clearly defining what racism is and how racial prejudice builds systemic racism. Instead of that, in its place, we have been given a vague definition with several very subjectively defined ideas. So that ultimately the basis for determining whether or not a system or its policies are racist is actually left up to the subjective opinion of those deemed the oppressed. And so the basis for determining whether or not the system is actually racist is not the presence of racist people or racist policies that can be named.

Instead, we are told we must look at the outcomes. Again, it said there at the end, it can have the effect of privileging some groups and disadvantaging others. And so we must, they say, we must look at the outcomes. The presence or absence of actual racist individuals or policies that overtly discriminate based on skin color or ethnicity, that is not how you determine whether or not a system is systemically racist. Rather, does it lead to disparities in outcome?

According to the social justice movement then, we can have a system of racism without racists. And this isn't just my personal assessment, this is the very assessment made by Vodi Bakum in his book Fault Lines, which you should all read, I would encourage you to do so. He makes the same point as does Owen Straughan in his book Christianity and Wokeness, that ultimately systemic racism is the claim that we have a system of racism without racists. And this is not even just the conclusion of opponents of critical race theory in the modern social justice movement. Robin DiAngelo, author of the book White Fragility, which is a book I do not recommend you read.

She is as pro-CRT as you can get. And in her book White Fragility, she says that racism is a far-reaching system that functions independently. Independently. So it's a system of racism that functions apart from this. Apart from what?

Apart from the intentions or self-image of individual actors. In other words, You have a system that is racist, regardless of what the people involved do, think, or believe. You have a system of racism without racists. And so if there are no racists in this system that we're being told about, or at least there aren't necessarily any racists in the institution, the institution is so corrupted by systemic racism, how can this system be discovered or proven? And as I said, we must look at the outcomes we are told.

Remember the distinction that the social justice movement makes between equity and equality. This is what divides this worldview from the Christian worldview and the Christian ethic on equality. The Bible defines justice as equality of opportunity and equal treatment under the law, impartiality. That is how the Bible defines just and righteous treatment. But the social justice movement says that, no, we must seek equality of outcome.

And if that means we must treat people differently to ensure everyone gets the same outcome, then so be it. It is completely flipped on its head. And so then, we are told that any disparity, or even the perception of a disparity, or perception of unequal treatment, is all the proof we need that the system is racist. If there is any difference in outcome, the system is racist. And this is why I've quoted this before, and here it is again, why Ibram Kendi in his book, How to Be an Anti-Racist, says racial discrimination is the sole cause of racial disparities in this country and the whole world at large.

That is the claim being made. And so critical race theory advocates and adherents will always point to the disparities between social groups and our society as proof of systemic racism, that the whole system, the whole society is racist to its foundations. And these disparities can be real or they can be completely imagined, as has happened in the past. Different levels of health, literacy, income, access to basic needs, services or even luxuries, access to public transportation, differences in how groups interact with police. All these things are identified as proof of systemic racism.

However, the work of connecting those disparities, because those disparities do exist. There are differences in social groups in all these categories. The work of connecting these disparities to actual racist policies or racist people in these systems is never made. That work is never done that connection is never actually laid forth. The next logical step of pointing to the actual source or policy or person that is causing this racial discrimination, that's never done.

You can ask these people till you're blue in the face, where is the actual racist policy? And They'll never come up with an answer. In fact, even you saying that there is a policy, a particular policy or a particular person to look for insinuates that you're just trying to defend the systemically racist system. Instead, the claim is made that the system is so corrupted that there is no single policy. There is no single collection of policies.

There is no individual or group of individuals at fault. The whole system is so corrupted, it's everyone's fault. The whole system must be torn down and something new built in its place. Something new that will reverse those disparities through granting special privileges to the oppressed. And my desire, when I hear these people talking about systemic racism and there are these disparities, which if we look at the bare numbers, we can say, yes, there are differences in outcome between different groups of people, whether you're black or white or Hispanic or whatever category you want to look in.

No two groups have the exact same outcome across our country. That's true. And so if you're telling me the system is racist, prove it to me. I want to know so that I can help you to get rid of that racist policy. That should be the desire of all our hearts to to get rid of these racist policies, these racist people who are causing pain and hardship for people.

I want them to prove their case. The problem is that work is never done. No point, no policy, no person is ever named, the conclusion is simply assumed. I say, show us the racist policy, show us the racist decision that is causing these disparities and instead I'm told that I'm racist even for asking. And so the ultimate conclusion of this is that these sections of society, whether it's blacks or Hispanics or whatever that are in these disadvantaged groups, the only hope for them is that they need help from white people to lift them up out of the system and to rescue them in a sense from the racist system, which to my mind that is kind of a racist claim that the white savior has to come in and rescue all these groups, that they are incapable of working above a supposedly racist system.

If any evidence is presented that counters the narrative of the critical social justice movement, then the argument is immediately dismissed as naive. If you say, well, no, that's not necessarily evidence of racism, there's X involved and Y and Z and all these factors contribute, The moment you make that argument, you are dismissed as being naive, or yourself trying to support and uphold a system of white supremacy. For instance, consider the issue of police killings. Statistically, there is a disparity by population between shootings and killings of white people and black people. By percentage of population, there does seem to be a disproportionate number of black individuals, overwhelmingly who are men, who are shot and killed by the police.

However, the moment you simply say, well, that doesn't necessarily prove racism in and of itself. We have to look at what are the causes in each of these events. The moment you turn to the individual cases and want to examine the evidence in each event to determine whether or not the shooting is justified or not, all that information is deemed irrelevant. The bare existence of that disparity is proof enough. The individual instances and the facts relating to each case is of no consequence.

The disparity itself is all the proof needed and all the proof given. And this is the first big problem with the idea of systemic racism. This is why I said it is unfalsifiable. Is an unfalsifiable system because any objection to it is immediately disregarded or considered irrelevant. Now, what is falsifiability?

That might not be something you're used to hearing. Falsifiability is the logical and philosophical understanding that an idea or theory needs to have some means of being disproven in order to be considered true or genuine. If something cannot be disproven, if there's no way that something can be disproven, then it has no connection with reality. You're just making something up. If there's no evidence for it and no evidence that could make you say, well, this isn't true.

You have to have a way of proving something false so that we can understand that it actually might be real. Consider it this way. Our faith, Christianity, is falsifiable. Christianity could be theoretically disproven. You want to disprove Christianity?

Show me the body of Jesus. That would instantly disprove everything I believe. Christianity is a falsifiable idea, a falsifiable religion. It could be disproven, theoretically. No one's going to find the body of Jesus, just so you know.

On the other hand though, systemic racism is an unfalsifiable assertion. No positive evidence is ever actually provided. They simply say, well, the disparity itself is proof, but then no individual person or policy is brought to light as the culprit and any evidence against the existence of systemic racism is automatically rejected out of hand. Any claim that would disprove The theory is utterly dismissed, not by logical argumentation, not by facts, but by barefaced claims and emotional appeals. Consider the fact that, yes, there are disparities between white and black people in the United States.

Well, what about other categories? That's part of the problem. As I'm saying, white and black, understand There are more than two colors, and white and black aren't even really good descriptors either. But that's the false binary that we're put into in many of these conversations, that you have simply just the white oppressor and the black oppressed, which subsumes all categories of Hispanics or non-white people. I refuse to use the politically correct term of person of color, or if I ever unironically use what did I say last time, BIPOC, black, indigenous people of color.

If I ever say that unironically, just shoot me and be done with it. So I'm not going to use those terms. When I'm saying white and black, I'm talking about all categories because that's how the language that these proponents themselves use this language. You've got the white oppressor and everyone else. But consider other groups that don't neatly fit into those categories.

For instance, what about Asians, Asian Americans? It's interesting. You look at the social justice adherents and they will contradict themselves often in the space of a single paragraph because statistically, Asians in America do better than whites in almost every category. They're less likely to live in poverty. They are less likely to do drugs.

They're less likely to kill themselves. They're more likely to have a healthier life. And so oftentimes they're folded into the white oppressor class because that would not be helpful for the narrative of social systemic racism. But then if Asians are the victims of hate crimes, then they are assigned the label of person of color, or they are part of the black oppressed category. Because this is an unfalsifiable system.

Every argument used to come against it, to try and disprove it, is ignored, rejected, or redefined. And that is what you will see consistently over and over again. So firstly, it's an unfalsifiable system. Not only is it unfalsifiable, but more often than not, bringing up the evidence against systemic racism, such as what I just did, is usually used as further evidence that the one bringing up those points is, you guessed it, himself racist and perpetuating the racist system. If you're white and you argue against systemic racism, well, that's to be expected.

You have to maintain the status quo of white supremacy. If you're black or another non-white category, then you have simply internalized racism, the racism of the system, and you're a traitor to your brothers and sisters of your social group. Or perhaps you're even trying to ingratiate and get favor for yourself from the white oppressor. And this phenomenon is interesting why you will often, especially if you're on social media, you will often see and hear black liberals and even often white liberals use racial slurs against black conservatives when they refuse to toe the line of social justice. For example, in April, Twitter allowed the modified racial slur, quote, Uncle Tim, end quote, to trend for 12 hours as Senator Tom Scott, a black Republican, was mercilessly attacked on social media because he dared to have the temerity to say, America is not a racist country in response to a speech by President Biden.

And so, not only is it an unfalsifiable system, but all the arguments used to try and disprove the theory are themselves turned around and used as evidence for the system itself. You cannot win. It is a circle that you cannot escape from. To argue against it is to prove it exists. And so What do we make of the conclusion that systemic racism is both unfalsifiable and any argument against it is taken as evidence of its existence?

Well, what do we call a belief or a claim with this kind of a foundation? Call it a conspiracy theory. We call it a conspiracy theory. In that article I mentioned earlier, Matthew Frank says, quote, judged by the presence of these two characteristics, for that its adherence, it is unfalsifiable, and that denial is taken as a guilty confirmation. The proposition that American society and institutions are affected by systemic racism has to be one of the greatest conspiracy theories of our time, so widely believed is it." Not only is it a conspiracy theory, but it is a remarkable one.

Because normally in a conspiracy theory, you need conspirators. There needs to be somebody hiding the truth and working behind the scenes for their nefarious ends. But in this conspiracy theory, there are no conspirators. And we're simultaneously all conspirators. Frank goes on to say, quote, the system, whether a college, profession, or the nation as a whole, is said to be suffused with racism, and asking for the identity of the culprits is supposed to be a sure sign of the inquirer's naivety.

The fault for systemic racism is no one's in particular, and everyone's in general, or at least everyone not belonging to the aggrieved class of its victims." And so it's a conspiracy theory with no conspirators, but we're also all conspirators. Now sometimes conspiracy theories end up being true, right? We've read about those and we've heard about those conspiracy theories that seemed outlandish at first and actually proved to be true in the end. Is that the case here? I don't believe so.

What is the dividing line between a conspiracy theory and a fact of history? Well, it's the fact part. I need proof. I need evidence. I need some shred of information that actually objectively reinforces what you're telling me is true.

And we don't see that with systemic racism. We see disparities, but can we really define and decide that all those disparities come from a general vague idea of racism built into the system? I don't think so. Is it possible that racism and racist policies are at fault for the disparities in our society? Absolutely.

That absolutely could be true. But the one making the claim must prove it. And they have yet to make their case. Further, what are we to make of the idea that something as complex as these disparities in all these different parts of society and among these different groups, what are we to make of the claim that what makes these disparities is a single factor? Racism.

Well, I think we should be wary of any type of single factor analysis like that. And in his book, Christianity and Wokeness, Owen Straughan makes that exact point. He says, quote, our culture and society are falling prey to what we call monocausality. This means that we trace very complex realities to just one simple factor. For example, income and employment disparities, infant rate mortalities, and overall health statistics are said today to reflect racism.

Quite a sorry, quote a percentage showing a difference between racism and you've sorry, between races and you've proven racism. Let me say that again since I stumbled over my words. He says, quote, a percentage showing a difference between races and you've proven racism. Such Data could reflect racism, sure, but we need to be wary of monocausality and recognize that in many instances there are numerous factors at work. There is no one cause for any of these issues, And that one cause is certainly not racism.

We need to be skeptical of any single factor analysis, but I wanted to ask us the question, is there a consistent theme that runs across these disparities among social groups? Is there a single factor that does come to bear on all these things? And I think there is. It's not the sole cause, but it's a big one. Fatherlessness.

The absence of fathers. Samuel Say, in his very helpful article, which you should just go and read Samuel's whole website, Samuel Say slow to write is his website. In his very helpful article, Our Fathers Are Failures, he writes, quote, When my father abandoned mom while she was pregnant with me, he set off a chain of events that are all too common with children raised without a father in the home. Children raised in single parent households are 20 times more likely to develop behavioral problems, nine times more likely to not graduate from high school, and two times more likely to engage in early sexual activity than children raised in two-parent households. Children raised in single mother households generally receive less attention and discipline than children raised in two parent households.

That inevitably creates behavioral, educational, and economic disparities between people raised in two parent households and the people raised in single parent households." He goes on a little bit later and says, in America, as we heard this morning, 73% of black children are born to unmarried black women compared to only 29% of white children born to white women. And as we heard this morning, that is flipped on its head from where it was just a generation or two generations ago. Are we really to believe that racism from the Civil War days is the cause of that when just two generations ago it wasn't like this? I don't think so. Samuel Segg goes on and says, Considering that children raised in single parent households are much more likely to develop behavioral, sexual, and educational challenges that harm their futures, it's unsurprising that given the 44% gap between the number of black children and white children born to unmarried women, there exists similar gaps between black Americans and white Americans economically and within the criminal justice system.

Despite all evidence and logic, social justice groups suggest otherwise. Instead they claim that all disparities, even the disparity between the number of black children raised by single parent households and the number of white children raised by single parent households, are the ramifications of past and present systemic racism in America today. So even the problem of fatherlessness is laid at the feet of systemic racism. But historically, I don't think you can make that case. Other writers agree with what he says, both Christians and non.

And while I do think we must avoid the knee-jerk reaction of flipping from one mono-causality to another, just as we can't say, well, it's all racism, we can't say it's all fatherlessness. We cannot avoid the conclusion that this is a massive contributor to the problem. And you have cultures and you have structures in families and extended families as well as actions taken by government, state and local and federal that have all contributed to this ongoing scourge of fatherlessness in our country. So you fathers, And I'm speaking to myself as well. Do not forget how powerful God has made you in the formation of your children.

God has given you tremendous power. Don't stand by, don't be passive, don't check out. You are incredibly influential in the lives of your children. And I have four kids, they're all young, and So I've barely begun to see it, but I know what scripture says. And that's what scripture says too.

And that's what the facts of our country and history show. Fathers, you are tremendously influential in the lives of your children. Don't forget that. So time is quickly slipping away. So that is the idea of systemic racism.

Now I want to look briefly at the coordinating idea of white privilege. And this will be very brief because time is running. This was a term popularized in 1989 by a woman named Peggy McIntosh who wrote an article titled White Privilege, Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack. Theoretically, this was an academic paper, though it contains no footnotes, is filled with no scientific analysis, and is filled with the language of perception and subjective experience. You can find it online.

It's about three pages. Read it. It's not difficult. In the article, she makes no scientific claims and makes no analysis of any facts. Merely what she does is she recounts the world as she perceives it as a white woman and uses that as the basis for developing what she calls white privilege.

As the title of her paper indicates, she perceives, or she understands and conceives of white privilege as this bag, or as she calls it a knapsack, of advantages conferred on her by virtue of her being white. And in her own words, she says, quote, I have come to see white privilege as an invisible package of unearned assets, which I can count on cashing in each day, but about which I was meant to remain oblivious. White privilege is like an invisible weightless knapsack of special provisions, maps, passports, code books, visas, clothes, tools, and blank checks. James Lindsay and Helm Pluckrose, in their book, Cynical Theories, points out that the idea of privilege, this idea of privilege, in which one can count on accessing this privilege in all situations, quote, flips the script by strategically redefining the absence of discrimination and disenfranchisement as unjust and problematic, end quote. In other words, the reason we are told that white privilege is a problem is not because people are discriminated against, but because the wrong people aren't discriminated against.

It's not that black people are discriminated against by white privilege. It's that white people are privileged It's that they are given a this cache of benefits so to speak that gives them a better life in place in society This theory then puts the burden of guilt not on the one making racial distinctions and discrimination, but it puts the burden of guilt on the recipient of so-called privileges. In other words, you do nothing to receive it, but you're still a racist because you receive these privileges in society. It puts the burden of guilt on the one receiving the privileges. This is a key component.

This applies to other aspects of privilege, which is throughout the social justice literature, not just white privilege, but male privilege, able-bodied privilege, etc. Etc. All of this puts the burden of guilt on the one being privileged. Now consider this illustration from the book Critical Race Theory and Introduction by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefanczak. This is the college level introductory textbook that is being used in our colleges and universities around this country to teach this to our children.

They say, quote, imagine a black man and a white man equally qualified interviewing for the same position in a business. The interviewer is white. The white candidate may feel more at ease with the interviewer because of the social connection he enjoys as a member of the same group. The interviewer may ask the white candidate to play golf later. Under the impression that few black people play golf and not wishing to offend, he may not invite the black candidate to play." And that is the illustration used to prove white privilege.

Because the white interviewer extends an extra level of comfort to the white candidate that is white privilege. And so their point is, it's not just the interviewer who is the one at fault. He's not merely the one, he's not the only one who is engaging in systemic racism in this instance. It's also the candidate, the interviewee, is equally involved in systemic racism even though he is doing nothing. He is passive, but he's still guilty.

So this concept lays the guilt of racism on the one who's passive in the event simply because of his white skin. This concept does the exact opposite of what it claims to do, just like many of these ideas. Rather than removing and exposing racism in the world, it creates racism. Because it forces those who buy into this system, it forces them to look at everyone and every event and every interaction through the lens of race and it stereotypes people into these large undivided categories all because of the color of their skin. It is while trying to and claiming to expose and eradicate racism it propagates it and further divides.

In conclusion what what do we do? Again I'm going to sound like a broken record because my conclusion is going to be the same as previous week's. Firstly, we reject. We reject it. The whole system, this whole theory, all of these ideologies, we reject it.

Because this is not the way forward for reconciliation and healing in our country. To make racism, sorry, to make race the center point of your interaction with everyone is not the way to get rid of racism. It is divisive, it is evil and we reject it and instead we affirm the goodness of God's law and we live in light of what of what God's Word says and how it says we should live in God's world. We reject this world's demands that we live in fear or shame over something as superficial and ridiculous as skin color. We reject the simplistic and dishonest claims of critical race theory and the social justice movement and all these worldly philosophies.

Instead, we do as we read here in Leviticus 19, we seek to live and create a just society where we do not deal falsely with one another, where we do not lie to one another, not because of skin color but because they're a human being made in the image of God. We do not cheat or rob our neighbor. We do not show partiality, either to the poor or to the mighty. We judge with justice. We make righteous judgments, both in our personal interactions as well as in the court of law.

In righteousness by God's standard we judge our neighbor. We do not hate our neighbor but we love him as we love ourselves. That is what we do. We show this world and these people who advocate this evil system that there is a better way to live. We show them a culture and a society of true equality and justice and love and peace.

We show them that real impartiality and fairness is not only possible but commanded by God and achievable through the cross because Christ has broken down those divisions Christ has broken down those barriers and he is making one new man one redeemed humanity across this whole world. Lastly, we must be ready to rebuild. And this is something I'm growing increasingly concerned about, as well as focused on in my own thinking, we must be ready to rebuild. What do I mean by that? No society can last with this ideology.

It's not possible. A society built on this kind of foundation will implode. It will not last. It will tear itself to pieces. And what will be left to pick up those pieces?

It's the church. Our society, our country itself may cease to exist, but the Church of Christ will endure. And the church will be there to pick up the pieces and to teach the nations what real justice looks like. And so we must pursue that even now. Even as we are marginalized and mocked by those around us for not buying into the social justice movement, we right now build a community and families founded on justice by God's standard.

Because in the end Christ's bride will endure and the harlot of Babylon will be destroyed. And when Babylon falls, the church must be ready to stand in the gap and begin the work of rebuilding and showing the world what a just and righteous society looks like. And so we must start now in our own homes, in our church, and as much as we can in our society around us. As we go and we live our lives and we make disciples, we build a better society among us so that when this ideology destroys itself we can be the instruments God uses to build again. That's what we do.

Let's pray. Father, we thank you for your kindness toward us. Thank you, Lord, that we have your word. God may you use it to instruct us and teach us. Help us, Lord, to not fall victim to these worldly ideologies, man's empty philosophy, but Lord help us to live in light of your commands.

Lord help us to live lives of justice and holiness. Help us Lord to be faithful to proclaim this message, the message of reconciliation in Christ. Help us Lord to be faithful to proclaim it as long as you give us the ability. Lord may you grant that your church would have the strength to endure and help us Lord to be there and ready to pick up the pieces. Help us Lord to be a light for healing to the nations in Christ's name amen