Christians and Racial Justice: A Critical Debate (ft. Neil Shenvi & Ed Uszynski) 

37:45 White people have not thought about race? They fought to end slavery, they helped fight the civil rights movement. And we are taught to think about it all the time. Non-stop. We can't look at a black person without thinking about their race and overthinking microaggressions. This is not a Christian way of looking at the issue. It seems obvious to me that Ed actually buys into the narrative and doesn't agree that it's a bad thing. It's hard to listen to this without wanting to make constant comments. I am trying to listen, I am trying to understand, but I don't think when people say things that are bad and unbiblical we need to try to understand where they are coming from all the time. We should be able to say this is wrong. The same is with queer theory in the same as with racism. Imagine this. A group of white evangelicals suddenly stand up and say blackness is a problem, and black people need to be less black. Are we not okay condemning that, or do we need to have a conversation? Or can we do both?

I'm a black woman and I disagree with Ed. I'm not sure if maybe I'm just not smart enough for this conversation, but I find myself disagreeing with Ed for one very obvious reason, I don't need to consider CRT, because the Biblical idea of racial justice is sufficient. Why mess around with the very flawed counterfeit when I already have the original.

While I feel Ed's heart at least in part, as a believer, I don't think I need CT as a lens as to how to view or treat anthropological/social issues. Scripture, I think, clearly delineates as to how we should respond to society's sufferings and pain past or present and it begins with going back to the fundamental command to love our neighbors of all colors, socio or economic levels, lgbtq, etc; who are all image bearers of God. The Biblical view in my opinion should be the fundamental theoritical and applicative lens with which to be informed and address the human plight.

Why does Ed get to explain away and excuse what all the authors have written?

Thanks for hosting this debate, Sean! This was really insightful and beneficial for me.

Thank you for this Sean for this discussion. It was so helpful to me as I have conversations with others.

I think the question should be phrased differently.... Is Christianity a threat to CRT? Answer is , yes, when a person is genuinely converted, Christ will be everything.

Ed, feelings are fickle. Feelings don't think. Feelings don't process facts and reality reliably.

Ed's position becomes clearer and clearer as he speaks. He lives within anecdotal space, which is terribly antithetical to logical thinking. We are overrun with objective vs subjective thinking.

I see Ed’s heart to not create hard lines that cut out conversation, but the issue is the heart of CRT that may have started with pure intentions has evolved into something ugly and divisive. And the thing is, the mindset that white people are encouraged to have is one that also cuts off conversation. I don’t know how many good talks I’ve had when I’ve just “shut my mouth.”

Sean, I would LOVE it if you interviewed Steve Gregg from the Narrow Path! He is brilliant and is a walking Bible.

Neil's analysis in his book has provided the STARTING POINT to understanding Critical Contemporary Theory... education/knowledge is critical first among Christians. I prefer this before forming any opinions on this topic.

I loved watching these two with their different roads to the topic locate each other throughout the conversation and illuminate their similarities and differences, with such a spirit of charity and love. Great examples. Thank you to both!

A very enjoyable debate with good points made on both sides, but I think Ed Uszynski has lost sight of the idea that ideas themselves can contain enticement (see also: Genesis 3) and thus can be dangerous. Both men seem to actually agree on how to apply the concepts but Neil Shenvi wants to walk the track and count ties carefully until he's ready to stop, while Ed kept referring to "riding the train." What if the train moves fast and has no stations before end-of-line?

My Hosts Ed, Sean, and Neil thank you for thy visitations and attending unto our OWN! Remember WHO said "If ye LOVE me"! Love you too! Gratitude and Honor

Great thought provoking conversation that brought some clarity from both sides, even though Ed as far as I understand does not represent or endorse the present CT we are experiencing secularly and that I think more specifically Neil is warning of.

I've never once in my 58 years seen a gay person down trodden and oppressed. Not once

1:37 - As followers of Jesus, why do we need this “great lens” of intersectionality to look through? Does Gods word not provide us with the best lens with which to think rightly about these issues?

22:40 Bogus movements don't give just words to a person. They put ideas in people's heads. In this case including but not limited to victim mentality and actual racism.

Well done Sean! Thank you for this.

This is a fascinating discussion and I'm only ankle deep into it, listening wise, but as a medium toned person (neither dark nor light), I have experienced racial prejudice, and I do think that getting the narratives of lived experience of not-White people IS valuable to examine.

Good on Neil. Ed is definitely trying to conduct a struggle session against him.

Dear Ed: the extreme result is the inevitable result.

Neil, I agree completely and I think you’re handling your side well. It’s not about NOT hearing the “why” in a personal conversation… it’s about not entertaining dangerous and destructive ideology in order to look open minded. You can speak in grace AND truth. I can’t believe Ed can hear a quote that is so abusive (white people don’t get to speak and need to allow others to yell and cuss them out) and still only think, yeah but what is behind that. If you had a husband abusing a wife, sure you can find out why, but you don’t entertain the idea of the behavior and think it’s fine for someone to recommend that behavior to others because of the trauma the husband maybe originally experienced. Abuse does not justify more abuse. Neil’s perspective seems like the good middle ground to me.

Very helpful conversation. Thanks for hosting this content.

At one point near the end of this amazing exchange of ideas, Dr. Shenvi is making a point about the way intersectionality is at the core of CRT. He says something like, “If you go to a Critical Race Theorist and say, 'I am open about being introspective about the ways in which I've been cruel and insensitive regarding race, class, gender, sexuality and other marginalized people . . . '” BUT THAT'S JUST IT: I don't think Evangelicals want to be introspective about the ways in which their thinking and behavior may hurt marginalized people. They are happy to have a first-rate scholar like Dr. Shenvi delegitimize CRT and its adherents. They are glad to have that homosexuality component to CRT because, in their minds, it invalidates the whole deal. Rant aside, thanks to both Dr. Shenvi and Dr. Uszynski for modeling a passionate but respectful dialogue, and to Dr. McDowell for fairly and adeptly moderating. Dr. Uszynski, you're my new hero.

The statements are so vague about people saying that they felt left out of a conversation. I'd really like to know exactly why and how they felt left out not a bunch of assumptions about the white man in the meeting. As a teenager I grew up in the Inner City from middle school to high school and was a minority as a white . Most of the students in my school were immigrants or indigenous Canadians. I suffered bullying from indigenous people. Our family was not affluent including being on welfare for a Time. For the last 30 years I have lived on isolated indigenous reserves in Canada where I as a white person, a distinct minority. In today's Dei ideology I represent the racist oppressor in this community even though the indigenous people here are my employers and I am subservient to them because I am an employee. I am here on their good graces. I essentially have non-person status because I am not a band member and I am not allowed to vote in band elections nor voice my opinions. I recieve no special perks band members receive, as I am not indigenous nor a band member.yet I am beholden to all their laws and authorities. The church that I attend here is a nice mixture of cultures including treaty status band members, non-status indigenous, people white people, Americans and Philipinos . We don't seem to have any cultural issues. And often it seems It's the indigenous people are on their own volition apologizing to the non-status residences for the racial biases or racist actions of the local band members which is extremely minimal nor dangerous on the whole. And we the minority non-status groups do not complain about any racist attitudes towards them, again of which I say is very minimal. I still can't help but think and observe that d e i ideologies turn to disrupt the peace and cause divisions where there was no divisions before. Of course I as a white person my 30 years plus experience and observations are meaningless because of the color of my skin according to Dei. I have had many opportunities to hear individual indigenous peoples neigbhours ahare their life experiences. I have heard the full range from the best to the worst. It can't be generalized. It can be apologized for but can not be erased through reparations. There is so much more to say but who knows it it would help!

Great conversation. . .

Currently reading critical dilemma. I would say ed misrepresents Neil’s book and its purpose. Neil at some points is very charitable to points in CRT, he does not throw the baby out with the bathwater at all in my opinion. Ed surprised me in this conversation, a lot of the points he brought up as “not addressed” in the book actually were addressed just not to the depth he seemed to have desired. Obviously it’s not possible to remember everything you read but I there were a handful of things ed said about Neil and his book that were just untrue whether he knew that or not. Another point I don’t think most people will read critical dilemma and come away thinking they need to avoid CRT like the plague. Ed is reading his own bias into the book when he says it will make people avoid CRT as an evil thing.

This interview was a blessing! Taylor's testimony really touched my heart! I want to order his book. God bless,! ❤

One complete extrovert, one more quiet introvert. Makes for a very unbalanced conversation in terms of “two sided discussion” (the idea differences notwithstanding) unless the moderator controls it a bit better. Ed tended to “drone on” over the same points, and anecdotal experience (valuable thought it may be). Lopsided. Ed’s criticism of Neil’s perspective felt condescending to me.

21:52 "And I find myself saying that Neil is pointing out why a statement is wrong. And I find myself asking why was the statement made in the first place?" I think that's the money question and money observation, on Ed's part. I think Neil's approach of general condemnation is the easier route and also why many will take it. I say that distinguishing critical race theory or thinking about race critically, from much of the heretical views its morphed into and been hijacked by. Thinking about race critically in a nation with our history and present, helps us address the inherent dignity of black and brown image bearers systematically stolen and suppressed over centuries. With gospel lenses we can see a similarity between CRT and the fig leaves Adam and Eve grabbed for themselves to cover their nakedness in the Garden. The serpent disrobed them of their righteousness as image bearers. And America has a history of this sane dis-robement continuing in its churches (slavery, segregation, Jim Crow, red-lining). The solution is not pretending there's no question. It letting the gospel restore the glory of the dignity that has been lost, stolen and even sometimes forfeited.

I heard . A Pastor say recently, that Where People leave Churches. In many cases, these are OVER dramatised..with minor issues.. Then Blame the Church. Where they were Not Blameless .. just Saying!

Hey guys great talk. I love debates/discussions between knowledgeable people because it gives the rest of us a chance to think critically and reflectively, so thankyou both for your respect towards each other and for Shaun putting this together and letting you speak. If you would permit me to use some analogies from some of my favourite movies, my takeaway from listening from both of you regarding CRT seems to be Neil sees it as "the One ring" from LOTR, it cannot be controlled, it only corrupts and it needs to be destroyed, whereas Ed seems to see it as the infinity gauntlet from the Avengers, yes it is powerful and dangerous, but let's use it for our good. While those are both valid perspectives , the fact that you both agree this theory CAN cause harm, with reports of suicides from it, lends tension to view it as the " One ring" rather than the infinity gauntlet. I know Ed will push back on this, so let me gently suggest a litmus test, replace the words black with white and white with black in the language espoused by the theory and see if that causes you some discomfort. I think when you do this you will realise the same mentality that created the Jim crow laws in America created this theory also. As Paul says, there is neither jew nor Greek, slave nor free, (no black or white- 😉) for we are all one in Jesus. God bless brothers.

Our faith in the Lord Jesus can not be separated from any other discussions. If we are not talking in thw context ouf our faith our words, thoughts & results about any other subject are in vain

40:00 this is the thing Neil does so frequently that causes frustration for me... somebody quotes someone's book that isn't a problematic quote, then Neil goes and finds a quote in the same book that he disagrees with, and uses that to undermine the entire book and author as if we should toss everything about that author into the junk drawer. Critically minded people don't operate that way. That isn't good faith engagement. In fact, if Ed quoted David Swanson, it wasn't to endorse everything David Swanson ever wrote, but it was to attribute an idea to the proper person, because it wasn't Ed's original idea.

Can someone tell me what's wrong with meritocracy?

This conversation is very difficult to listen to. Because it is completely and utterly unhelpful! I hear a lot about “lived experience” and all the differences between Black people and white people and their experiences, etc. etc. etc.… Let us who love Jesus look at the scriptures when it says we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against spiritual principalities and powers of wickedness in high places… white black brown etc. it doesn’t matter… These people aren’t our enemies these people aren’t our problems. These people aren’t our oppressors… The enemy of our very souls is who comes to kill steel and destroy! and people are our neighbors, and we are called to love them. The more we talk about our differences and our personal traumatic lived experiences with other races, the deeper the division goes. A house divided cannot stand! People aren’t the enemy! The enemy of our souls is the enemy! The greatest commandment is to love, God and love your neighbor! You can’t have one without the other! For how can you love God if you don’t love your neighbor who you can see? The Bible says then you’re a liar and the truth is not in you. This conversation is unhelpful! Love God, love people! Wrestle against the enemy using the armor provided you through the Holy Spirit! That’s it! There’s no other argument! nothing else needs to be said! Apply the Word of God to your life and that’s all you need to do.

I am listening to this over time so I am adding comments as I go. Toward the end when Sean summarizes Ed's position, that he doesn't support critical race theory but basically likes elements of it, I have heard no evidence that there is anything he doesn't support. What tenet of critical race theory does he reject? He accepts interest convergence, racism is normal and ordinary, intersectionality minus homosexual marriage, it seems like he buys into pretty much all of it. I do wish that this conversation could have focused on examples of how racism is ordinary and embedded today, because I would dispute that, at least to any real measurable degree. I find that these people usually cite disparities, which are not evidence of discrimination. Changing culture would have far more impact than eliminating racism. I'll throw one final comment in here. The racist impact on black communities is from policies on the left. I highly doubt Ed would agree with that, but Thomas Sowell documents it very well. Even during Jim Crow, blacks in the south were buying houses, building families, and starting to build wealth. LBJ's welfare state policies destroyed the black family and began the cycle of government dependence that still haunts them today. Want to solve the problem of a Christian school in a black community not offering opportunities for those poor, black students to attend? Support vouchers and school choice! Private Christian schools cannot afford to have students go for free, at least the ones I am familiar with, and I was the principal of one. The left oppose all ideas that would allow black communities to get ahead and instead support all the ideas that hold them back.

Really great respectful discussion. Looking through a broader societal political lens CRT is a potential gateway to progressivism and ultimately the deconstruction of orthodox biblical beliefs. I wouldn’t give my kiddo a Ouija Board to play with just for fun either. At the individual level one can’t do any better than loving their neighbor and demonstrating some curiosity about others. CRT offers all risk and nothing more positive than what scripture plainly prescribes. Everybody has struggles to overcome and challenges to face. A small fraction of those may be race related. Churches centering on race plays into the hands secular progressives.

Does Ed know who who LBJ was?

This Ed guy is so condescending. He’s determined to make Neil agree or else categorize Neil as a racist. Ed shouldn’t even be platformed here.

But they’re NOT individual theories. It’s all one world view and it’s not Christian.

Listening to Ed is difficult.

I have tried to facilitate conflict between and among Christian individuals and groups for over 50 years and never reach harmony by starting with theoretical points of view. There are far too many personal issues and pain points. Harmony is always between humans that must agree on an issue. Peter was unable to have table fellowship. This discussion is an example of three theoretical men trying to harmonize different theories.

CRT is another gospel and what does a Bible say about another gospel? There are things that are unredeemable such as porn, abortion, and Karl Marx. What fellowship does light have with darkness?

It seems to me that Ed is all four and speaking from standpoint epistemology so it seems to me that his discourse is colored by the tenants of CRT so he's speaking through those lens not about them

1:32:22 Neil forgets that anti-sodomy laws were on the books in the USA until 2003. Like it or not, that's absolutely governmental oppression.

agree with Neil - my church doesn't understand CRT and cannot explain why its ideological tenets are bad biblically

CRT, much like progressive Christianity correctly identifies issues and problems. But where they go from there is antithetical to the Gospel. Ed is correct in following to where CRT points and wants to have conversations, but then he seems to stop there. CRT goes further, much further. And it’s a path towards disunity not unity. Ed seems to want to have hard conversations about race, sex, etc. but critical theory doesn’t allow for that.

Christians are finding CRT in the same way that non-Christian are discovering Jordan Peterson

I'm only about a third of the way through so far, and I think I agree more with Neil. But I don't necessarily disagree with Ed. What I've noticed is that they are both attacking the systematic first, but they're coming at it from opposite systematics. For example it is attacking systemic racism paradoxically or ironically or poetically by approaching the individual relationally first. Ed is attacking the systemic monolith or ideal of CRT because the system itself is anti-biblical and bad. Both of them are right, but they're starting point is different. Neil is saying debunk and agree that the whole system is bad and then we can relate to the person, it is saying we need to relate to the person first and then show them how the gospel is a better way and also CRT is wrong, but dealing with your concerns As an individual is not wrong.

There are texts. Read Joni Schwartz-Chaney's Critical Faith: What is it, What it isn't, and Why it matters

I completely disagree with Ed. I’m kinda of certain I’m not going to keep my mouth shut.. I’m around a lot of great people, white and black.. and Hispanic.

For a wonderful defense of colorblindness, read Coleman Hughes new book The End of Race Politics: Arguments for a Colorblind America.

Seemed like Ed sees CRT as a vibe rather than an ideology with propositions and real content. Also, ANY idea whatsoever can spur meaningful conversation. That doesn’t mean an idea is fit for use in the church. For example, “Pol Pot’s goals and ideas were misunderstood and actually admirable.” That horrendous sentence could generate some great conversations. But it’s an immoral statement. Content matters.

I am still not getting at all why we should talk about CT in a church. Bible gives us basic principles that solve this all. If we don't have enough love and forgiveness it IMO makes no sense to talk about CT. Because love and forgiveness is way more important. And IMO effectively removes the need of CT topic from the life of a church. Bringing the CT topic to church just for the purpose of bringing it there seems only poisoning to me. We should learn to live as Christ wants as simple as the topic is. Not to add complex philosophical ideas that blur, disrupt and replace the simple truths.

I think u need to talk to Jeremy Lin about race in the NBA...its deffinately there according to his experience.

Oppression come here in front! Remind! LORD many have exalted themselves above! Where ye belongs? Under Thy Feet LORD! Oppression will say, remember the little Child born "i" AM! Will visit! The salvation and the Redeemer. Forgiveness knows commanded to keep? Drawn near! The SON of MAN will keep!

Ed should go to the church that i just left, they got into CRT big time. He'll need to go fast, because it's about to close down due to all the offended white people leaving.

Every individual has a unique experience and everyone has a right to be heard, loved and understood. But no one's experience warrants special considerations/ privledges/powers/ over another's experience. Galatians 3:26-28 for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Both guys have valid points, but they’re based on experiential SUBJECTIVE experiences. When we over focus on the problem of sin’s fallout we will have different responses! As believers we are charged to study the truth of the WORD and know what it says about everything. There is nothing new under the sun. The Israelites were having the same conversations while being chased across the desert by the Egyptians, and they also would have been charged to obey their masters when enslaved (according to scripture). We are to study the truth and then respond, not study the counterfeit and expect to glean truth from its ever changing environment.

Ed acts as if Kendi is the "Fringe" of CRT and unfortunately he is wrong! I work for a public agency of over 10k employees. In 2015 it was Kendi's and D'Angelos version of CRT training that we were required to attend. It may also be helpful to mention that there is more disunity and suspicion between co-workers now than prior to 2015. I feel he is trying to teach a real "fringe" version himself. Also, and I hate that I have to apply this to Neil, also, but I never heard any scripture or examples of Biblical views in this entire discussion. Rather than the urgency to "find usefullness" in CRT concepts (as Ed suggest), I would ask "Is the Bible sufficient or does it lack on these issues?" Do we really need another idelogy to understand how God feels about racism and oppression?

To me, Ed comes off as arrogant & argumentative. I just can't imagine hanging out with him would be pleasant.

Uszynski - hope you get your pot of gold. Keep encouraging the persons of qualifying groups to only think inward, and feel oppressed. Shenvi - Keep on keeping the faith. If they want truth and they want Christ, they will step rightly.

Beloved DECIEVERS will say are ye good? Keep watch! For this is the great Awakening! Upon all dry grounds nor the world.

Great discussion. Appreciated their geniality even in their dissension. Perhaps, all of us just want to be viewed as more than just the color of our skin? God made me white, and this ideology would say that makes me inherently evil. I feel totally defeated by this conversation sometimes because I cannot change the color of my skin. Interestingly, as Christians, we say we are born with a fallen nature, inherently in need of a savior, which is why condensing the fundamental problem to sin makes sense. I think we need to stop using all these words too that spark instantly a hard heart. Perhaps the main point is that All of the ideas discussed stem from a Marxist atheistic worldview, which should be the warning sign to Christians that it is incorrect but is man’s attempt to correct errors within society. Christians ought then to go to Gods Word to determine the correct response. Perhaps we ought to remember that people of every color have done evil things. I read something where an person with more pigment complained about friends not being willing to go into her world. Then you have individuals within that shade of pigment like Candace O who do not want to be associated with “bl..k” culture. It is complicated on all shades of the discussion, but It does require discussion to bring clarity and unity to the body of Christ. I don’t think we should listen to secular ideology unguardedly ever or put on their lenses to view the world or ride a secular train at all. If people are suffering as a result of their sin, should we alleviate that suffering before they have had sufficient time to turn to God? I believe there is space to be that hand of grace, but God uses suffering sometimes to turn people’s hearts to Him. Are we stepping in too soon or too little to late? Important conversations for the church to have. Thanks again, Sean!

Remember my Hosts thy shared "i" AM. None can separate! Came with sincere conversations given just for thee! Cherish. Yes, walking with thee! If it takes to carry thee! 1 footprint

Ed Stetson? Are you going to say anything?

Since Ed is more concerned with feeling than knowledge, let me explain my feelings for Ed. I feel like Ed is calling me and all white people racist. That makes me feel bad. I don't think he cares about my feelings because I'm white. I thought all races were one through Jesus. That is not the message I hear from Ed.

Beloved remember God of life of the Living! Here ye ALL ARE in FRONT! From the I AM. OLIVER JAMITO BORN DECEMBER 29 1976 SIGNITURE! The NEW Day come forth! Here "i" AM!

Yes. Politics is always a threat to religion. CRT is political.

Sinful people suffer. Calling it injustice is against God.

If anyone thinks something is a threat to Christianity, they should, perhaps, re-evaluate what they believe about God.

I’m a black woman and I agree with everything that Ed said!!

The comment section crowd, that thinks Trump has not been treated justly, seems to be mad at critical Christian dialogue thought.

I May Consider Purchasing Ed's Book, But Only After I Run Out Of TP.

You basically gave the entire floor to the critical race apologist. Neil was on the defensive the whole time. Thinking about whether i need to unsubscribe from this podcast.

Of course injustice of all sorts, but listen Ed, your are not thinking as a real Christian would! We care for anybody, our Neighbour! A fake Christian would be unjust..! Things will Not be like you want it to be until JESUS gets back here! That’s your problem!

If whiteness is not an ideology… then explain the love of Trump by white evangelicals???

الحمد لله على نعمة الإسلام اللهم لك الحمد والشكر على كل نعمة أنعمت بها علينا Jesus not God Trinity not exist

The difference between Neil and Ed is that Neil is rejecting CRT due to its anti Christian mandates. While Ed seems to defend it because there are some ideas involved that may have merit. CRT needs to be dismissed. If we find issues then we do not need to adopt a bad theory to work on those issues. Any issues that are with us today should be addressed.

White guy: White people should let POC lead conversation on race. Also white guy: Proceeds to tell the Indian guy how he should talk about race.

I really appreciate Ed in this discussion. His approach resonates with me and my experience. I look forward to reading his book.

It's interesting because I work in an agency that has a huge focus on DEI and CRT issues. When I hear the same messaging coming out of my church, I had to question if my agency was having a revival (obviously not) or if the church was living downstream from modern culture. I am so glad I found ministries such as the Center for Biblical Unity which helps expose what is really happening in churches today and encourages us to look to the Bible for principles around Unity as this is not some "new issue". In fact this led me to a personal revival where I learned to appreciate vs by vs, chapter by chapter Bible teaching, that helps reduce the likelihood of secular ideology and influence from coming into the teaching.

The problem with looking at the world through the lens of CRT is that it is a broken and distorted lens based on unbiblical, Marxist assumptions about human nature and how the world works. We absolutely need to listen to people with different perspectives and try to understand them, but at the end of the day we have to apply a Biblical lens to understand the world around us. It was a great conversation.

Much of this interesting dialogue centered around 1) whether or not CRT authors are viable, and 2) the damage white people may or may not do to society. Absent in this entire conversation is the damage black people (and Hispanics, and Asians, etc, etc, etc) may or may not do to society. On that point alone, this is an unbalanced conversation, and has limited use in any real racial reconciliation. Maybe that 1/2 of the conversation will come later (I'm not holding my breath. Christians in the West are remarkably averse to talking about that, and would much rather talk about white pathologies. They are unbalanced on that point). I raise that point in order to demonstrate that Ed consistently wants his cake and eat it too. Here's a prime example: At the 1:26:00 mark, Ed talks about human rights for gays (and other oppressed minority groups), while at the same time maintaining his Christian view that homosexuality is immoral. As Christians, we have no problem acknowledging both facts. However, he skimps on the fact that CRT advocates repeatedly insist that his Christian opinion on homosexuality **IS** oppression, whether or not he physically/socially abuses gay people. Ed pretty much turned a deaf ear to Neil's insistence that CRT advocates repeatedly write that there is no bifurcation on exactly this issue. Sorry, but if CRT advocates are selling their worldview as an 'all or nothing', then the right Christian response is "Nothing for me, please! Thank you, and have a nice day" The Biblical response to this fundamental CRT mindset has already been made clear in the pages of Scripture: "Come out of her, My people, so that you will not share in her sins or receive any of her plagues." (Rev 18:4). Ed needs to wholeheartedly condemn CRT the way its advocates sell it. And he seems averse to doing so. ..just like most Christians won't talk about black (and Hispanic, and Asian) pathologies in society. - - Personally, I'm not much in favor of Neil's stance on SBC Prop 9. I get what he's saying, but I was one of the voices giving him grief about it when he ran his FB forum on it some years ago. I'm of the opinion that all truth is God's truth, and whatever scraps of meat CRT has to offer comes with too much bone to bother with. Scripture is sufficient, and doesn't need a CRT crutch. And if it matters, I'm not white, and I was born in a 3rd world country. Today I live in a small US town that is overwhelmingly white, with a 0.97% black population (you read that right). I stand out like a sore thumb. And yet, I can probably count on 3 fingers the number of times I've been treated with racial animus over the past ~30 years. (Maybe the problem is different in big cities. It's been a long time since I've lived in a big city.)

Totally agree with Neil - we need to understand first the IMPACT of CRT, then through discussions the details behind the higher level issues and facts can be gotten at through both experiences and facts.

36:00 Neil talks about writing a book that says certain bad doctrines are bad. And then separately somehow there is a different way to talk to your LGBTQ friends or coworkers or whatever. OK, but I think the problem is that when you write books that just say this is bad, you can do it in a way that is not offensive, and let the truth be the offense if need be. Today it is becoming very lucrative and popular to be as deliberately offensive as possible toward those we see caught in sin or with whom we disagree. This does nothing except create more division and doesn’t even give people a clear picture of the truth to reject or accept. We as Christians need to understand that we are being heard against this backdrop of toxic Christianity or toxic conservatism. And I used to listen to Rush Limbaugh religiously for about 13 years straight. 56:10 just up to this point Neil is talking about his experience with white people being very loving and caring. Yes, I have experienced the same thing growing up white in a white community. Up until you question their perception of a particular person that they idolize (political figure, spiritual teacher, or whatever). Also a note pay attention to what too often happens when somebody doesn’t experience that love and connection and they look around at everybody being happy and loving, and they are not experiencing that, such as in a covert abuse situation? Or just plain old being overlooked and ignored. It’s very easy to miss if you aren’t the one experiencing it. And when they turn around and accuse the favored elder or pastor of abuse, and everybody just says well that can’t be happening because we aren’t experiencing it, it’s doubly traumatizing to that person. How many Christians are we hearing about today? That had no idea of the abuse that was happening right under their nose because they couldn’t believe that such and such Pastor would do such a thing? I know that we have to treat people the way they present themselves to us, if they aren’t spouting racist things then we can’t assume that they’re racist. I get that. But that doesn’t mean it’s not making inroads. And the last people who are going to see it are those who are not the targets. 56:14 he gives what seems like lip service to discussing the idea that 20% of evangelicals do not agree with inter racial marriage. That is a pretty **huge** problem to be just dismissing it out of hand as if it doesn’t apply to this situation. You can’t dismiss the dangers of a lit match just because the flame is small . And 20% is not small.

Ed seems like a nice guy, but my problem with his position is that he seems to want to excuse the writers of CRT because of the history of slavery and because all the problems hadn't been dealt with yet. He doesn't seem to realize that CRT ultimately is racist and leads to an even more racial way of thinking about everything since everything is defined by race in it. He should realize the problem if he took all the statements made about "whiteness" and put in the word "blackness" instead. It would immideately show what it really is. Correcting a wrong with another wrong is never the solution. I've been instructed by Christ to look at the fruit of a tree and thereby judge it. The fruit I see from CRT isn't pretty, it reeks of hate and just about every negative emotion you can think of. It does not promote or foster any of the fruits of the spirit, on the contrary, it makes you go the other direction. That tells me everything I need to know about who the ultimate source of it is. There's also a foul smell of emotional blackmail and manipulation of empathy within it that I almost fell for, but that highly enranged me once I saw through it. The one point I'll give Ed is that I do believe in dialouge.

How exactly does one "pay attention to the Bible from the lenses of the black community"? What does that even mean? Does this change how we interpret the Bible? Why would anyone need this lens?

The over arching conflict seems to come down to CRT & CGT both revolve around group -think and group righteousness, whereas, Christianity, by God's Word, is about the individual ultimately, each soul created uniquely, each on a journey, of course to bring every other soul they can to the Lord Jesus Christ, but ultimately, to reach the eternal reward. CRT & CGT are all about coercing everyone else to believe and conform to them, Christianity is about conforming to Christ. One is a narrow worldly view, the other is expansively looking out and far to eternity. Without basic truth, which Christians can only promote, hopefully with love, there is little hope for those individuals who've determined their entire life focus will be about 'color', 'fairness', 'equity'. Amazing accolades and job security for the lead promoters, but likely a failed eternity will be their reward.

l just learned that Voddie Bauchum has written a new book. l like Voddie!

What do these worldly ideas have to do with the church? I'm not going to drop to my knees, when I don't know why people even listen to this.

Anyone who is pro-CRT only needs to read Brian Godawa’s “Cruel Logic”.

Christianity is the worst enemy of the body of Christ. Truth is not relative, truth is not dogma. Truth simply is! It is independent of interpretation, but not simple logic.

It seems that U2 are talking in vague generalities and a lot of the discussion. Why can’t you mention very specific things and hash it out from there. It seems that one of you is more logical and the other more emotional and in that case you’re just going to talk past each other. You’ve got a tackle specific things. Specific circumstances. Specific tenants One at a time without talking about sweeping generalities.

Ed, I sense you're more interested in lots of conversations about feelings but i don't hear much about what God thinks and wants from us.

Feelings and lenses, feelings and lenses... Read the book. Follow the book. Follow Jesus.

Beloved bring all my shared "i" AM Judges and Prosecutors in front if will say differ? I'll wait right Here