Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 435 | Is Virtual Church 'Loving Your Neighbor'? | Q&A

Episode Date: June 9, 2021

Is it safe yet for Christians to attend church in person? What about the Christians who say it's irresponsible? We start off today's Q&A episode with this topic, then move on to answering questions about whether it's important we know what Jesus really looked like and the difference between "intersectionality" and "critical theory." --- Today's Sponsors: Good Ranchers delivers 100% American steak or chicken directly to your door! It's individually wrapped, vacuum sealed and ready to grill. Go to GoodRanchers.com/ALLIE & save $20 off, plus get free express shipping! ExpressVPN reroutes your connection through an encrypted server and your IP address is masked! Visit ExpressVPN.com/ALLIE & get 3 extra months free with the number-one-rated VPN! Kitty Poo Club is a convenient, all-in-one monthly litter box solution. Every month they deliver an affordable, high-quality, recyclable litter box that's pre-filled with the litter of your choice. Go to KittyPooClub.com/ALLIE & save 20% off your first order! --- Buy Allie's book, You're Not Enough (& That's Okay): Escaping the Toxic Culture of Self-Love: https://alliebethstuckey.com/book Relatable merchandise: https://shop.blazemedia.com/collections/allie-stuckey

Hey guys, welcome to Relatable. Hope everyone is having a wonderful day, a wonderful week. Today, we're doing another Q&A episode. And if you're new here, I am currently on maternity leave. And so we are doing these kind of evergreen episodes where we're not following the news cycle, but I'm doing lots of amazing interviews every week. And then I'm also doing these Q&A episodes. I'm also doing some topical episodes as well. And so in these Q&A episodes, I just take questions that you guys sent me from Instagram and I answer them. And so I usually only get through a few because they make me think about other things that I want to explain. But you guys sent me a lot of awesome questions. And so I'm going to answer as many as I can over the next few weeks. And if you didn't submit any questions,

that's okay. Every episode of these Q&As, I guarantee, has something. And so I'm going to answer. And that maybe you were curious about or wanted to ask me about, and so hopefully they will be productive and helpful to you as well. The first question I want to answer today is how you respond to someone to a Christian who says it's irresponsible to go to church during COVID. There's been a lot of dialogue, a lot of discussion and debate about that from the very beginning. Now, I would say most churches at the beginning of this whole thing about a year ago said, okay, we're going to just do remote services because we don't know how bad this is going to be. We didn't know.

Like, we were told that it could be a 20% fatality rate. And we just didn't know how terrible it was going to be. And of course, we thought it was going to be 15 days to slow the spread, LOL. And so we thought this whole thing was going to be very temporary. And so I think a lot of churches just said, you know, not meeting in person for a few weeks is not that big of a deal. People are going to be able to do this remotely. we'll come back together when it's safer. And then the longer this went on, the longer we realized that, oh, this is not going to just be 15 days to slow the spread. This is maybe even going to be more

than 15 months to allegedly slow the spread. There were churches that said, okay, well, at some point, we've got to meet together because, yes, as the saying goes, the church gathered is still the church scattered. No, God is not a building. No, You don't have to be sitting in a pew to experience God or to worship God. But those are not the only functions of the church. Someone who says that a church is just about experiencing God or learning about God or worshiping about God singing to God doesn't really understand what the church is. It's true that the church scattered or the church gathered and the church is also the church

scattered. So you can experience all of those things in your living room as well. But there is a command to corporate worship and to gathering in person in scripture. Hebrews 10 tells us this very quickly, or very clearly, rather, in verses 24 through 26. And let us consider how to stir up one another to love in good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another and all the more as you see the day drawing near. Sorry, that's 24 through 25. And so that's pretty clear. And Christians during this time certainly faced threats. They certainly faced danger that could possibly kill them, that could possibly take their lives. And God knew about coronavirus in 2020 when he gave this command. This was not something that was just exclusive to this time and space. I mean,

he was talking about the importance of meeting together. There are things that cannot be done individually when it comes to worship and when it comes to church that must be done corporately, like the edification of believers in person encouragement, having people bear your burdens. there is also something about singing together that is different than singing individually. And church isn't just about what you're getting. It's not just about these spiritual experiences. It's also about what you can give, like what kind of encouragement you can give. The gift that your presence brings, the comfort that your presence brings to someone else,

your ability to pray for someone in person. and all of these things are a part of church. Now, for those of you who are vulnerable and or you live maybe with an elderly person and you just haven't been able to safely go out in public, I do think that there's a lot of grace. It's amazing, actually, that we live in this time where we are able to attend church remotely, that we do have the technology, to access the ability to be able to hear the gospel from, you know, anywhere that has internet access on earth.

That's amazing. And God uses those tools to bring people to him. But at some point, we have to assess the risks versus the benefits. We have to look at the commands that the Bible gives us and says, okay, like what am I commanded to do? And I think also, as in all things, we have to look at our hearts and we have to look at our motivations. And we have to ask ourselves, why am I not going to church? Is it because of this overriding fear of a virus that, yes, of course, it has killed people that has an over 99% survival rate for most. people. For most people, for most groups of people, it is just as fatal as the flu. Now, for older populations, it is much more fatal than the flu. And of course, we care about those populations, absolutely. But if we're just looking at the numbers that the CDC gives us, it is just, it is comparably as deadly for most people under the age of 60 as other viruses are. And so we have to also be very honest with ourselves about why we're not going to church. Is it really because of this virus? Is it because you're trying to care for your neighbors? Or does it have to do more with the fact that you've just gotten used to sitting in your living room when it comes to church rather than gathering? And I don't

think that that's a good reason to look past Hebrews 10, 24 through 25. And by the way, it should also be stated that there are safe ways, like if you really are worried about the virus or if you're worried about the people around you, there are safe ways that you can gather in person. Like, you can wear a mask if you want to. You don't have to be within six feet of people. We've been going to church since April, last April. And honestly, we just don't get within six feet of people. And that's not necessarily purposely. That's just kind of how it is. A lot of people aren't hugging or shaking hands or things like that. And so we're still seeing our Sunday school class, we're still seated remotely close to people, but most people are just

kind of naturally spreading out. And we haven't had close interaction with people. And if the science is still the same, which I haven't gotten any message that it's not, that you are in risk of getting it. If you are in, if you are within six feet of someone, then being spread out and being six feet away from everyone except for your family is not a scenario from what we know from. from the data for spreading the virus. And so it is definitely possible. It is definitely, I think, edifying and important to meet in person and still try to protect yourself as much as you can and protect the people around you as much as you

can. There are so many different ways that you can do that. It's so important for the church to continue to be a refuge from what the world is doing. Like the world is promoting isolation. The world is promoting hyper-individualism. The world is promoting you carrying your refuge. burdens or paying hundreds of dollars an hour for someone to carry your burdens. And I'm not, by the way, speaking in general, against counseling and therapy, I think that those can be very good

tools. But the church can also, and should also be a place for people to be able to unload their burdens. It's not the same doing that over the internet. It's just not. And so there's going to be people who don't understand that. There's going to be people who say it's irresponsible. There's going to be people who had nothing to say about the BLM riots, who had nothing to say about people celebrating Joe Biden's win in the streets, but are very concerned about 50 people sitting six feet apart in a sanctuary. And for those people, like, you don't take your moral cues from them. You don't take your directions from them. If they're not worried about the spread of COVID, when it comes to hundreds of thousands of migrants untested, infiltrating the United States,

if they're not worried about the riots and the protests and the mass celebrations of people on the left side of the aisle when it comes to the spread of COVID, then you don't have any reason to take them seriously when it comes to their purported concern of believers gathering together in a safe way in church. So just want to say that. All right, the next question, what do I have to say about someone like Don Lemon saying that we need a real depiction of Jesus. So Don Lemon recently said, as I'm recording this, I'm recording this at the end of March. He recently said, you know, Jesus was black and like this is so important. And it always confuses me when people think that this is like a gotcha. Like people are shocked

by this. This has been a talking point for several years now that by the way, Jesus was black. Jesus wasn't white. Jesus didn't look like you. And I, it's almost like you're looking for some kind of reaction from white evangelicals and you're just not getting it. It's just just like a shrug of the shoulders. Like, okay, I understand, yes, there are depictions from Jesus of Jesus from the West that have depicted him as this blonde hair, blue-eyed guy. There's also depictions of Jesus in China of him as a Chinese person. Their depictions of Jesus is all different kinds of ethnicities, and it typically reflects the artist. And it is inaccurate to say that Jesus looked like a blonde-haired blue-eyed guy. It's an accurate.

to say that he was Chinese. We know that he was Middle Eastern. We know that he was Galilean. We know in general probably what he looked like. But the reason why it's just not a good point, like why I don't care when Don Lemon says something like this is a way to try to, I don't even know what he's trying to do, try to provoke some kind of shock and dismay from white evangelicals, from conservative people, is because I don't care. I don't care. If I am worshipping, if I am worshipping Jesus because of his skin and not because of who he is, not because he's God, then I'm an idolater. I don't have any business calling myself a Christian. If Jesus is, if Jesus's skin helps you worship him more or prevents you from worshiping him or inhibits your worship, then you don't know your Savior. You're worshiping some kind of cultural idol of melanin. rather than Jesus as God. So if you are someone who says, well, I can only worship a brown or black Jesus, okay, well, you don't

worship Christ. That's not what you're worshipping. We don't worship his skin color. We don't worship his melanin count. I mean, that's part of why we really don't hear a lot of physical descriptions about Jesus in the Bible. We've got Isaiah 53 too, who says, for he grew up before him like a young plant and like a root out of dry ground.

He had no form or majesty that we should look at him and no beauty that we should desire him. So it's almost like God is making the point. Like, look, his outward appearance is not what this is all about. It's about the redemption that he's going to offer you. It's about the reconciliation, about the propitiation, about the sacrifice, about him becoming Emmanuel, him becoming the covering and the forgiveness of your sins. also if you are someone on the other side of this who is like well I can't worship a brown or black Jesus I can only worship a white Jesus which by the way I've never met that person I've met a lot

more people who are much more empathic about Jesus's skin color being brown than people who are emphatic about Jesus's skin color being white but hey if you are that person that's also idolatry like that's also a sin that is also worshiping something that Jesus is not and that the Bible is very clear. It doesn't matter when it comes to our love of Jesus and our fidelity to Jesus. And again, I know that we use this term so much, but it has what has to do with liberation theology, which sees in the words of Ibrax-Kindy is not, is not something that views Jesus as the sacrificial land, something that saves our souls, but sees Christianity as a means to revolutionize society. and how it wants a revolutionized society is always through top-down government intervention.

It's always through Marxism, liberation theology, perpetuated primarily by James Conan the 20th century, has its root in the Frankfurt School, has its root in Marxism. Those aren't just boogeymans, that's just true. You can study liberation theology. That's what it is. Critical race theory and liberation theology for people who profess to be Christians like Ibermax Kendi are inextricably intertwined. You guys know, critical race theory views the world through the lens. of race through the lens primarily of black and white, categorizes white people as forms of oppressors,

categorizes black people, non-white people, usually just black people as on the side of the oppressed and views every American system, every institution, every even interpersonal interaction through that particular lens. And then liberation theology comes along and says that Christianity is supposed to, is meant to liberate the people who are on the side of the oppressed, in particular black and brown people from the oppression that has weighed them down. Not spiritual oppression, but physical economic oppression. That's what Christianity to the liberation theologian is to Christians who profess critical race theory. It's wrong. I mean, it's not based on the Bible. Jesus is not the social revolutionary.

you see a lot of these people also saying that Jesus was a Palestinian, that he was a Palestinian refugee, socialist, revolutionary. And he wasn't any of those things. Palestine didn't exist that he was Jewish. That's actually, by the way, people don't realize when people say that Jesus was a Palestinian, like that is a trope that's perpetuated by a lot of Muslims in that region to try to claim Jesus as their own, to try to claim Jesus. as their own prophet and try to strip Jesus of his Jewishness. It's an anti-Semitic trope, actually, and an anti-Christian trope. This idea that Jesus was a Palestinian when the region of Palestine was not established when Jesus was around. Jesus was Jewish.

He was a Galilean. He hailed originally from, he was born in Bethlehem. And so it's just inaccurate. It's all an effort to try to make Jesus into this Marxist political figure. he just wasn't that. And he also wasn't, you know, this American flag carrying a capitalist either. And I'm certainly not saying that. When we try to make God into our image, no matter what it is, whether it's a political image or a racial image, whether you're on the right or the left, the prosperity gospel is typically associated with the right sees Jesus as some sort of genie.

Then you've got this narcissistic gospel, which says Jesus is just a cheerleader who comes along for the right of my life and tells me how pretty I am. And then you've got the liberation theology, critical race theory, Jesus, that sees him as this black Palestinian freedom fighter, Marxist. All of it is wrong. Like, all of that is idolatry. Jesus is who he says that he is. Jesus is who he says that he is in John 1. Jesus is what scripture tells us that he is. He has God made flesh. He's Emmanuel, God with us. He is the word. That was with. God in the beginning, who is God himself, who laid down his life for his sheep so that we could be a sinful people reconciled to a holy God, be forgiven and spend forever with him. He is Lord,

he is king, he is coming back, and he is going to avenge all evil that has ever been done in the history of the world. He will establish a new heaven and a new earth, and he will rule in perfect peace and we won't be having these disagreements anymore and we certainly won't be quibbling over what Jesus looked like. Now, I want to read you this interesting passage from J.I. Packers' classic work, which is knowing God. Now, he has a very interesting perspective on this, on images of Jesus. This would include a crucifix, by the way. But he asserts that it's idolatry to have any depictions of Jesus at all. And I think he makes an interesting argument. In his book, he calls, Quotes Charles Hodge first, he says, idolatry consists not only in the worship of false gods,

but also in the worship of the true God by images. In its Christian application, this means that we are not to make use of visual or pictorial representations of the triune God or of any person of the Trinity for the purposes of Christian worship. The commandment thus deals not with the object of our worship, but with the manner of it. What it tells us is that statues and pictures of the one whom we worship are not to be as an aid to worshiping him. Images dishonor God, for they obscure his glory. The likeness of things in heaven, sun, moon, stars, and in earth, people, animals, birds, insects, and in the sea, fish mammals, crustaceans is precisely not a likeness of their creator. A true image of God,

wrote Calvin, is not to be found in all the world. And hence, his glory is defiled and his truth corrupted by the lie whenever he is set before our eyes in a visible form. Therefore, to devise any image of God is itself impious because by this corruption, his majesty is adulterated and he is figured to be other than he is. Of course, they are talking about violating the Second Commandment. We are not to make idols. We are not to image or we're not to fashion anything in the likeness of God for the purposes of worship. I think that part is important. And so this whole conversation about what Jesus looked like and how he must be brown or he must be white or he must be Palestinian or he must be whatever he is. Jesus is who he is and he is to be worshipped as he is.

And again, trying to say that he has to be one way for us to worship him or for him to solicit our adoration or our following, you're an idolater. You're an idolater if that is your mindset. You're not a believer. I'm just going to be harsh there. That's not me. That's not me saying that. That is scripture saying that you are an idolater. If that is your fixation on skin rather than your own sin and the salvation that Jesus gives

you by his death and resurrection. And so we have to worship him for who he is, not who we want him to be, not even an accurate depiction of what he might look like. That's not important to our. worship because again, Isaiah 53-2 tells us everything we need to know about Jesus' appearance. It's apparently not very important. Next question. Someone asked me what my favorite food is. A little change of tune here. You know, it's very difficult. It's very difficult to say, I would say, tax max.

I would say, like, give me some good queso chips. some tacos, fajitas. I really like fajitas, really like quixos, really like good guacamole. If I do say so myself, I make really good guacamole. It's very, it's not hard to do. So I don't feel bad about bragging about that. The key is I don't do, I don't do parsley. I think some people put parsley in there. I put garlic salts and lime and sometimes feta, sometimes peppers and onions, sometimes. and a lot of lime juice. The key is a lot of salt and a lot of lime juice. Not too much, but a lot. You got to get the ratio right. It's really not hard to make good guacamole, though. Get yourself some soft avocados, but, you know, right before they turn brown, which is very

difficult to do. That might be the hardest part about making guacamole. But that is, that's one of my, I would say, few winning recipes, good recipes, is my guacamole recipe. But yeah, I would say Tex-Mex is probably my favorite food. I love fried chicken, too. Love some biscuits. I just love bread. I love carbs. And I would say, though, I would say that Tex-Mex has all of those, has a lot of carbs. I like some good fajitas. So you need to think about this. You need to ask your spouse this. You need to ask your loved one. You need to think, like, if you could only have one kind of meal, like one kind of food for the rest of your life, what would it be? Like, would it be Italian food? Would it be American food? Like hamburgers and fries? I know that technically

both of those come from different countries, but they're very American. Would it be, like, and think about everything that comes with that. Like if you're, if you've got Italian food, you've got a wide range, you've got like capraise that you could eat. You've also got pizza. You've also got pasta. You've also got lots of different kinds of bread. So you really have a wide range. If Italian food is what you pick, same thing with Greek food. Like you could eat unhealthy. I love Greek food. You could eat super healthy with Greek food.

You could also have a lot of like pita and things like that, which is not necessarily that healthy. So would you choose that? Would you use Tex-Mex? You could also, you can make Tex-Mex healthy for sure if you cut out some of the bread that's used. Would you do some kind of Asian food in my pregnancy? I was really craving.

I was really craving Japanese food. We have a Japanese place close to us that we really like. I don't know why, but like miso soup just sounded really good. It just sounded really good in my pregnancy. And so we've had that probably like every other week, which is kind of a lot. But, you know, supporting small business. And so you need to think about this. It's a very important question.

What kind of food? Like what genre of food? if you could only eat that for the rest of your life, would you, would you pick? There's a lot to think about there. There's a lot of complexities. There's a lot of nuance. And so I would just encourage you to consider that. All right.

The next question is another big question. How is intersectionality different than critical theory? So intersectionality is a part of critical theory. And I kind of already explained critical race theory, but there are different forms of critical theories that are not just critical race theory. There's queer theory and there's like there's feminist theory, gender theory and things like that. And they all kind of fall under this umbrella of the oppressed versus the oppressor. It just depends on who you see as those playing those primary characters, whereas critical race theory sees it as black versus white. And it's

really actually not that easy because in critical race theory, they would say even someone who is black, but who says, for example, that they're not oppressed, that they're, you know, they haven't been oppressed by white supremacy or that if they don't believe in systemic racism, which is the central claim of critical race theory, then critical race theory would say that that person is not necessarily truly black. Like, they would say that that person has internalized whiteness and has internalized white supremacy. They don't, critical race theory doesn't necessarily put, for example, like Jewish people and Asian people on their side of non-white, sometimes those categories, according to CRT, are white adjacent, they would say. And so you can see the constant

contradictions and just the exhaustion that comes with critical theory, all forms of critical theory, queer theory is kind of the same way. You've got different forms of feminist theory. Part of that is standpoint epistemology, which is also used by all different forms of critical theory, including critical race theory. standpoint epistemology, you know, epistemology has to do with knowledge, knowing knowledge, the pursuit of knowledge, understanding, knowledge. And a standpoint epistemology says that you find knowledge, you can search for truth from your standpoint, not from objective reality, not from the scientific method.

It actually rejects those forms of objectivity as holding up hijackery. I know I'm using a lot of annoying terms right now, but holding up hegemony is like power structure. So holding up whiteness, standpoint epistemology in the world of critical theory, it gets rid of that idea of objectivity and says no true truth, real truth can only be known from someone's standpoint. Real truth is actually subjective. And that is how you get this idea of if you're white, you can't speak to this or if you're straight or if you're sister. gender, or if you're all of these terms, because of your privilege and because you're on the side of the oppressed, you can't speak to all of these issues. You have to have someone who, or because you're on the side of the oppressor, sorry, but you have to have someone explain this to you who is

black, who is gay, who is trans, or whatever, because your privilege, your skin color, your cisgenderedness, your heterosexuality actually blind you from real truth. So, standpoint epistemology would say from the standpoint of the so-called oppressed, that is how you get the truth about the world. And you see how problematic that is when we see all truth as subjective, when we see it all as arbitrary, then it just becomes a bludgeon with which to beat the masses into submission. I mean, that's what we see in every dystopian novel. That's what we see in something like 1884 where there exists no objective reality outside of what the party, outside of what Big Brother in 1984 tells you. And so if Big Brother, if the leading, if the ruling party in 1984

tells them, hey, 2 plus 2 equals 5, then you have no way to actually refute that because there doesn't exist a transcendent reality that is bigger than the people that are in charge. that's what standpoint epistemology does. That's why someone like Ibermex-Kindy will not debate someone like John McWhorter, won't have a conversation with someone like Coleman Hughes, won't talk to Glenn Lowry, won't actually have his ideas tested because he believes in this kind of subjective truth. Like he believes in the standpoint epistemology that actually can't be argued. And the whole thing is a Kafka trap.

And the whole thing is a way to make sure that it can't actually be argued against. It's non-falsifiable. That's where you get this kind of assertion that, well, you're either, you are either racist or anti-racist, according to Iber Mexican. You can't actually be not racist. And if you deny that you're racist, that's actually just proof that you're racist. So that's a Kafka trap. That's like, you know, Salem witch trials kind of thing.

If you deny the true or witch, that's actually evidence that you are a witch. And so, I mean, you're, for lack of a better word, screwed either way. And according to whom? according to the people whose standpoint has decided what is authoritative truth on this particular subject. And that's why it's better just to get rid of all of it. It's not possible to take parts of these critical theories and apply it to your own worldview. They are in themselves a worldview. They redefine what truth is. They redefine what oppression is. They redefine what right and wrong is. They have their own idea of a salvation, even they have their own idea of ascotology

in times, like what the world should look like. They have their own idea of what liberation looks like that is contrary to the Christian worldview. Ibrax Kendi actually said he was speaking at a, speaking at a church, and he actually said on video that he rejects the kind of Orthodox Christian belief that Jesus died for our sins. And he believes that Christianity is actually a form of a revolution, like we were talking about, to revolutionize society. And then he goes on to say that anti-racism is salvation, anti-racism, of course, his definition of anti-racism is a way to save humanity.

And so he doesn't deny that humanity needs a savior. He just denies that it's Jesus. And it's actually his own program. It's actually his form of anti-racism, which I'm sure. can sell a whole lot of books, which is very, which is very convenient. That was all a precursor. You asked about intersectionality. What is intersectionality?

Intersectionality like standpoint epistemology is part of critical theory. And it's just a way to try to describe the different identities and the cultural capital that is assigned to each identity. That is like a conservative way to explain it. Someone who is a progressive would not explain it that way. They would say it's a way to just understand people and, like, their different backgrounds and they're different, you know, the different things they identify as, like, you've probably seen people say, if your feminism is it intersectional, I don't want anything to do with it. And what they mean by that is that, you know, they would say that white feminism has been problematic. And so you need to make sure that you're including, like, black trans women in your, in your feminism.

So intersectionality, it takes stock of all of your different identities. identities and it assigns oppression points to those identities. And so I have like one oppression points because I'm a woman. But I don't, I'm, you know, I don't have anything else other than that according to this worldview of critical theory and intersectionality. I am, you know, of what they would say, a straight, cisgendered Christian, white, privileged female. And therefore, Again, according to a standpoint epistemology, I can't really know truth. I just need to, quote, listen and learn to other people tell me what truth is. And if I try to deny that or push back on it, it's just a sign of my white supremacy.

So you see how this is why I say that just like, you know, Rushland Ball used to say that politics is, politics is show business for ugly people. CRT is intellectualism for dumb people. Now, when I say that, I'm not saying that everyone who believes in CRT is dumb because I don't believe that. Just like, not everyone in politics is ugly. But it is a way for people who are not very intellectually savvy and who don't have a whole lot of ability to actually reason. It is a way for them to feel intellectual because the whole thing is non-falsifiable because it's all based on subjective interpretations of what reality is. and intersectionality is just a way to categorize people. Your intersectionality has to do with your sexual orientation, with your so-called gender identity,

with your religion in the world of leftism and intersectionality. It is the white, cisgendered, straight Christian male that has all of the privilege and therefore must kind of be taken down in some way. and, you know, the more transgender and queer and non-Christian and non-Western and non-white you are, the more intersectional you are. And they use these kinds of intersectional identities as the basis on which they decide, like, who to listen to on certain subjects. Again, if their politics and their ideology that they are purporting are correct. That's why they hate people who have intersectional, intersectional identities who don't agree with them on everything. So that's why, for example, they would say that someone who is black who doesn't hold to the idea that they're an oppressor.

They would call them an Uncle Tom. They would call them a sellout. They would say that you're not really black or whatever. Same thing with someone who is gay, who might be a conservative. They would say that that person is an embarrassment to LGBTQ people, how they're selling out, how they're self-hating. They would say the same thing about me as a woman who is pro-life. They would say that, oh, that's just internalized massage. And so they will dismiss anyone who has any sort of intersectional identity who doesn't agree with the politics of most people who have that intersectional identity or don't agree with the politics of leftism and try to justify their disagreement by invalidating them.

Again, that's the problem with the idea that it's that our study of knowledge and truth comes from a standpoint rather than objective reality. it's all a product of postmodernism, which questions absolute truth. And as you can see, that bucks up against Christianity. John 14.6, Jesus says, I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. We do believe in absolute truth, both revealed, or both general revelation that we see in science, that we see in nature, and special revelation that we see in scripture that believers have. access to and have been given the faith to understand and believe in. And so these two lines of thinking are totally, they're totally incongruent, not to mention that God doesn't see us by

those different identities. He doesn't categorize people as a press versus oppressor based on those identities. And he doesn't judge us based on those identities. We are going to be judged for what we say, for what we do here on earth. And if our name, by the by the blood of the land, lamb is not written in the book of life. If we are not in Christ, then we will suffer eternal wrath. But in Christ, we get forgiveness for all of those things as individuals. And we get to spend forever with him. And so no one's let off the hook because of their intersectional identity and eternity.

Just FYI. All right. That's all we have time for today. Thank you guys so much for listening. I will be back here soon.