by Chris Stockman

I was sitting in church this past Sunday as we were saying the Lord’s Prayer, and began thinking about forgiveness and God’s relationship to time, as one does. Suddenly a thought popped into my head that I couldn’t shake. This article is the expansion of that thought. I propose the following for your consideration, as I believe that this is a question very much worth thinking about. This is intended to get the average person in the pew thinking. As a layperson myself, I want to see lay people putting some careful thought into what they are saying about God. The concepts talked about here have been at the forefront of theologians’ navel gazing for millennia, but I think I’ve done what I can to bring out the most significant aspects of them and avoid getting too far into the weeds.

I’ve heard someone say that God is timeless many, many times. From the pulpit, in casual conversation as an item that is taken for granted, etc. It’s one of those things that people think is the pious thing to say, and it’s a staple of what’s called classical theism. If you believe in classical theism, you are in good company, since nearly all of the most influential thinkers in the history of Christianity (Augustine, John of Damascus, Anselm, Aquinas, etc.) have been classical theists. But I would bet a lot that nearly all people today who share their beliefs about God and time (let’s call them atemporalists) have no idea what they actually entail. They certainly do not share some of the philosophical assumptions undergirding classical theism.

First let’s define timelessness. This is not as easy as one may think, since atemporalists are not always forthcoming with what they mean by their claims. Dr. R.T. Mullins (of The Reluctant Theologian Podcast fame) is a great one-stop shop for all things time. He defines timelessness as such:

Every theist believes God has no beginning or end. The point of being “without succession” is what I am most interested in at the moment. In order to get very far beyond this point, we need to know what time is, otherwise to say that God is timeless (or not) isn’t saying anything. This is also very difficult, as, while many philosophers are quick to define their view of the ontology of time (what times are real) and of the flow of time, they have an unfortunate aversion to telling anyone what time actually is. So you believe only the present moment is real; that’s nice, but what is that? St. Augustine famously wrote in Confessions that he knows what time is until someone asks him about it.^[2] Thanks for nothing, Augustine.

Few have a coherent notion of what time is. There are broadly two views: a relational theory in which time exists only if change exists, and an absolute theory in which time is a definite thing that has a particular nature; it exists with or without change. I favor the latter for reasons beyond the scope of this article. Time is, basically, something that makes change possible.^[3] (There is a more full definition, but this will suffice for present purposes.) The doctrine of timelessness then, regardless of absolutism or relationalism, has some rather disturbing implications.

Now, before you classical theists go running to Thomas Aquinas or John of Damascus to save you, hear me out. (Then you can go running to Thomas Aquinas or John of Damascus.) Think about it. What is forgiveness? Someone wrongs you, and then, assuming they feel remorse (or if they don’t, but for present purposes assume they do), they apologize and ask for your forgiveness. You are feeling indignation or at least have some negative evaluation of the other person. But in response to someone asking for your forgiveness, or due to some consideration of what the ethical thing to do is, you forgive them. Your forgiveness involves you changing your evaluation of the person, and you no longer hold their offensive action towards you against them. A relationship that was broken or nonexistent is now restored or being built. I do not mean to suggest that this is all forgiveness involves. But I think I am on safe ground in asserting that this is part of the picture.

Now consider what shakes out from rejecting that God is temporal. By the offered definition of time, God is then unable to change. This is the doctrine of immutability, the belief that God cannot undergo any changes. This is frequently misunderstood even by advocates of timelessness, so it is worth stating more emphatically: God is not able to change in any way, no matter what change is being talked about. William Lane Craig writes of immutability: “God cannot change in any respect. He never thinks successive thoughts, He never performs successive actions, He never undergoes even the most trivial alteration…He cannot even change extrinsically by being related to changing things.”^[4] This is a big one, since many classical theists (on the internet, not scholars as far as I am aware) think that their view of God is compatible with a particular type of change. (More on that later.) If one admits change into the life of God, that is introducing time into his life. Mullins again notes that “Any kind of change that a being undergoes will be sufficient for that being to be temporal as it will create a before and after in the life of that being.”^[5]

So can a timeless, changeless God forgive you? Well, forgiveness involves changing your evaluation of another person in response to their apology. Your disposition towards another person is different. There is a difference in the forgiver. There has been a change in their mental state and emotional life. Applied to God, there was a state of affairs in which God had a negative evaluation of you due to your sin against him, and upon forgiving you there is now a state of affairs in which he has a positive evaluation of you (due to being placed in Christ).^[6] If it is metaphysically impossible for God to change, then it is metaphysically impossible for him to change his evaluation of you. Thus, from the perspective of a timeless God, you are unforgivable.

But it gets worse. There is another core claim that classical theists hold dear: impassibility. As with time, saying God is impassible isn’t saying anything unless we know what a passion is. This one is more controversial to define (with some characterizing it as God not experiencing any emotions), but it is held by some to be the claim that God cannot be acted upon and that there cannot be a disturbance in the For-I mean God’s eternal bliss, and that God cannot be affected by any considerations outside of himself. St. John of Damascus (675-749) called a passion “…a sensible activity of the appetitive faculty, depending on the presentation to the mind of something good or bad…But passion considered as a class, that is, passion in general, is defined as a movement in one thing caused by another.”^[7] Elsewhere in his work, Damascene states over and over and over that God is impassible, that deity is passion-less, or some variation of that. Thus for Damascene, the impassible God cannot admit a passion (movement) in his emotional or mental life by something outside of himself. Now, I disagree with Damascene, but he is illustrative of The Tradition™️. So how does this make things worse?

Remember how I said forgiveness involves changing your evaluation of someone in response to their apology? That is impossible per the doctrine of impassibility, as that would mean God has been moved to do something in response to something outside of himself. Your confession and repentance to God quite literally can have no effect. (How prayer in general even works on classical theism is another issue as well.) The idea that God can be moved to do anything is utterly anathema to the classical theist. One of the underlying reasons why this is so is that classical theism fundamentally denies that God even stands in a real relation to the world at all. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) was not unclear: “But in God relation to the creature is not a real relation, but only a relation of reason; whereas the relation of the creature to God is a real relation, as was said above (I:13:7) in treating of the divine names.”^[8] This answer was given in response to the objection that if creation is applied to God in the active sense, then he would be temporal. There is much more that could be said on this point, but that is far beyond the present scope.

There is another way in which this somehow gets even worse^[9], but that should suffice for now: the classical God cannot forgive you since he cannot be moved to do so and is unable to change.

So, does the classical theist have a way forward? It turns out, yes, they do. They can keep their classical theism and their belief in God’s forgiveness, as I’m sure Barack Obama said in some possible world. Here are some options (I doubt this is exhaustive but it’s what I can think of):

1. They could deny that forgiveness involves a change in one’s evaluation of another person, or a change in one’s mental life.
2. They could deny that forgiveness needs to be given in response to something external to the agent.
3. They could deny that God’s forgiveness is anything like our forgiveness of each other.
4. They could deny that God had previously had a negative evaluation of us. 
5. They could deny that God currently has a positive evaluation of us.
6. They could affirm that God does forgive you and that any change this involves is a Cambridge change.

Option 1 is unsuccessful since I fail to see how one can be said to have forgiven someone when they have the same evaluation of someone as before the forgiveness. If I still think my brother is a pest that I want nothing to do with after I forgave him for being a pest, I have not really forgiven him.

Option 2 is perhaps more promising, but notice that it no longer would apply to our scenario with God. Scripture is clear that God forgives those who repent. God’s forgiveness is not unconditional. Taking this option would effectively deny salvation through faith.

Option 3 is directly contradicted by the Lord’s Prayer: “and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us”. Paul as well in Ephesians 4:32 writes “ Become kind toward one another, compassionate, forgiving one another, just as also God in Christ has forgiven you. (LEB)” If God’s forgiveness is utterly unlike ours, these statements from Jesus and Paul are unintelligible. I know this will be quite the hot take, but I do not believe Jesus and Paul were unintelligible.

Option 4 is a direct assault on any coherent understanding of sin. If God never assessed us negatively, then talk of salvation is meaningless; we aren’t being saved from anything, since we were never lost and were never at risk of God’s judgment. I don’t expect any classical theist to take this route.

If someone takes Option 5, I don’t know why they would want the Christian life.

Option 6 is interesting. A Cambridge change is one in which there is a change, but only on one end of the relationship. The example is given of being south of Cambridge. You then walk to the north of Cambridge. The change is that you were south of Cambridge and now you are north of it. Cambridge has not changed, you have. So, as defenders of classical theism are renowned for their charitable interactions with their opponents, they will kindly remind you that they are perfectly happy to accept Cambridge changes all day long with God. There is a change in God’s relationship to us, but it’s on our end, not God’s. We repented and asked for forgiveness. The change involved in God’s forgiveness is really a change in us. God is still (to use a temporal idea) in his perfect state of timeless and impassible bliss with his evaluations of all creatures great and small being known by him from eternity in his one, single instant.

While interesting, this is perhaps the most sinister option. We depend for our salvation upon God’s forgiveness. We would not be indwelled by the Holy Spirit without it. The idea that it is strictly a change in me that I am depending on for my salvation is truly terrifying. I still sin (change for the worse) and sometimes I may not look all that different from a nonbeliever; how then can I know that I really am forgiven? This idea would utterly destroy any assurance of salvation. Furthermore, it seems to fly in the face of the many passages that assert our utter dependence on God, even for our next breath (Job 12:10, Psalm 84, Psalm 104:29, Psalm 119:81-82).

Now, this by itself may not be a reason to reject that God’s forgiveness is a Cambridge change; maybe reality is just that dark. But there is another problem with the appeal to a Cambridge change: the relationship. The Cambridge change is only such if I really am in the relations “south of” and “north of” to Cambridge. But recall that a fundamental assumption to classical theism is that God is not really related to the world! The classical theist may try to wiggle out by saying that these Cambridge relations are not real relations. In that case, I don’t think I know what “real” means anymore. I give up. 

In the form of premises, the argument is:

1. If God is timeless, he is not capable of undergoing change in any form.
2. A necessary condition to being forgiven is that the subject initially have a negative evaluation of the object of forgiveness.
3. A necessary condition to being forgiven is that the subject no longer have a negative evaluation of the object of forgiveness.
4. Therefore, if God forgives someone, he goes from having a negative evaluation of them to no longer having a negative evaluation of them.
5. If God goes from having a negative evaluation of them to no longer having a negative evaluation of them, then there has been a change in his mental and emotional life.
6. God is timeless.
7. Therefore, God cannot have a change in his mental and emotional life.
8. Therefore, God cannot go from having a negative evaluation of someone to no longer having a negative evaluation of someone.
9. Therefore, God cannot forgive anyone.

As a bonus, here is the argument from impassibility against forgiveness being because of repentance:

1. If God is impassible, he is not capable of being moved to do an action by anything external to himself.
2. If God forgives someone because they have repented, then he has been moved to act by something outside of himself.
3. God is impassible.
4. Therefore, God cannot be moved to act because of something outside of himself.
5. Therefore, God cannot forgive someone because they have repented.
6. Therefore, repentance is not a condition for God’s forgiveness.

Conclusion

I want to be clear about what exactly I have and have not argued for here. I have not argued that classical theism is false. I believe it is false, but that is not my argument here. My argument is that the doctrines of classical theism logically entail that God cannot forgive you.

This is in contrast to teachings derived from a sound reading of Scripture. Scripture reveals God as being highly interactive. The doctrines of classical theism are directly contradicted on every page of Scripture and would render crucial claims of the Gospel itself literally false. I do not believe that classical theism should be on the table for a Christian to believe. Of course, classical theists can still be Christians, but that is in spite of their model of God, not because of it. Christian, take solace in that God really has forgiven you, that he really does no longer hold your sin against you, that he really has transferred us from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of his Son (Col. 1:13), that you are really no longer under condemnation (Rom. 8:1), and that he really does currently have a positive evaluation of you (Eph. 1:3-14).

I am sure that classical theists will have their rebuttals, and I look forward to seeing what they may be.

^[1] Mullins, The Divine Timemaker, in Philosophia Christi Vol. 22, No.2, (2020), 213.

^[2] Yes, I’m aware that he had a little more to say on the subject than this. But that’s not the point.

^[3] Mullins, The End of The Timeless God (2016), 18. See also Mullins’ chapter in Ontology of Divinity (forthcoming), edited by Miroslaw Szatkowski, 99-111.

^[4] Craig, Time and Eternity (2001), 30-31.

^[5] Mullins, The End of The Timeless God (2016), 157.

^[6] After I had written this bit, I came across an article by Mullins in which he actually says as much. “When God forgives a repentant sinner, God changes both intrinsically and extrinsically. God changes extrinsically in that God comes to stand in a new relation to a creature. Namely, being the one to whom a sinner is repenting of her sins. Yet, God also changes intrinsically in that God’s knowledge will perfectly track the changes in reality. God now knows that He is being prayed to, and God now knows that He is forgiving the sinner.” (Mullins, Ryan T. “Open Theism and Perfect Rationality: An Examination of Dean Zimmerman’s views on God, Time, and Creation.” TheoLogica: An International Journal for Philosophy of Religion and Philosophical Theology 8.2 (2024), pg. 2-3)

^[7] Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 2.22

^[8] Summa Theologica 1 q.45 a.3

^[9] I refer here to the doctrine of simplicity, rounding out the quartet of classical distinctives. This one is a bit more complicated to define clearly, and this post is already long enough, so I will save a consideration of it for a part 2.

By Will Hess

Recently, I spoke these words, and they rang out in an open dusty barn at a beautiful countryside wedding. I watched as two young people, whom I have grown to love and admire, walked down the aisle celebrating their marriage together with their entire lives ahead of them. It was a proper bookend to my ministry here in Michigan and one that filled my heart with joy, happiness, pride, and most of all…closure.

Why would I need closure? Let me explain…

In 2016 my wife and I moved here to minister at a small country church. We were young, excited, and ready to serve with all the excitement we had to muster. We quickly began discipling, serving, and creating plans for the future of the church. Things were going well…until they weren’t. Needless to say, ministry isn’t always easy. It took about a year for us to experience our first real trial as the church endured a split (not two years from a previous split they had suffered before our arrival). The reasons for the split were many, but most of all it was political and trivial – as most disunity tends to be. We felt betrayed as those who seemed to be our strongest supporters turned their backs on us over tertiary matters. During this split, my wife was gone in Washington nursing her dying mother in a hospice bed for four months. When my wife returned from her mother’s passing, the church had dramatically shifted. The people who once said, “we are praying for you and your family as your mom passes” were no longer to be found – leaving behind nothing but the bitter memories of hollow talk.

During this time though, we were able to rally some troops and begin to rebuild with a few key families. Things began to thrive again, and we began to heal. We saw the Youth Group alone go from four kids to sometimes over thirty! We had so much momentum and it felt that not even the gates of hell could withstand the force of this church. It was during this time that my other best friend Andrew and his wife Brittany decided to move up from Alabama to help build the church even further. Soon after that decision was made though, we received momentous news!

Cali was pregnant.

We were going to have a baby! Years of marriage thinking we couldn’t have a child and here we were – expecting our own little peanut. However, within just a few weeks, Cali miscarried. We were devastated. A month later, more turmoil began to grow with a few families in the church and not two weeks before Andrew and Brittany moved to Michigan – the church began to split…again…

I received a text and phone call at ten o’clock at night from the associate pastor. He was one of the key pillars to rebuilding the church after the recent split. He informed me they were leaving the church. They had shifted their beliefs regarding a matter we had once agreed upon and were unhappy. It seemed such a dramatic shift on an issue, so I attempted to reason with him and figure out if there were any other underlying issues. Finally, he exploded. He unloaded issues he had from the beginning, venting all his frustrations out – blaming me for all of it. Come to find out, nearly every decision we had made together, he secretly disagreed with. He spoke critically of that, my preaching style, our youth ministry etc. What began to take place was this individual calling around the church sowing more and more seeds of discord with a slant that would make Fox News or CNN envious. I remember people trying to reason with him, but to no avail. It seemed he didn’t just want to leave the church – he wanted everyone else to as well.

This cut deeply as this was a person who had once told me, “I’ve got your six” and would help me shape the church… This was a man I once viewed as a friend. A close friend actually. I’ll be honest…I was in legitimate shock. When my mother-in-law was dying this person would have me over, pray for my wife while she was away, break bread with me, laugh, and discuss our next steps for the church. Both of us were excited for the thriving church – just to see him bring a hammer to it and others. It was devastating as I saw a once thriving church heartbroken. Some people inclined their ears to him and left for their own various reasons. Others were disenchanted as they had helped rebuild the church three times now and chose to leave – exhausted (who could blame them?) Some used the disunity as an excuse to stop attending church altogether. It was agonizing.

We saw brother turn against brother during this time. One Sunday I was in Sunday School, listening to the teaching, and my wife came up to me and whispered, “people are causing issues in the lobby”. I got up from the sanctuary, walked through the double doors, and found a group of people fighting with each other in the middle of the main doorway. I quickly separated the groups and informed them that such behavior was not appropriate. Needless to say, a chunk of them also left after this. I was tired, I was sad, I was angry, and I didn’t know what more to do. It seemed unity was impossible…

There was an old man in the church, who has since passed away, who was close friends with people from the original split that occurred before my arrival and also close with people from the one following. I remember asking him at this point (during the third split), “why have you stayed? Through all of this?” His response has always stuck with me, “because after four years, and three different pastors? I think we can stop blaming the pastors.” Little did that elderly man know how much I needed to hear those words. During this time, I had begun to believe I was just an utter failure and perhaps ministry wasn’t the right place for me after all. Perhaps I was just young and dumb with delusions of grandeur.

However, fortune never favors those who wallow in self-pity, so we picked ourselves up and carried on one last time. After the church endured its third split in a few years, we strapped up and prepared to build once more. Although this time? I was much more tired. Spiritually I began to feel like I had poured and poured and didn’t have much more to give. The fire I once had was but a small ember. I was also paranoid of who I could trust as I had now experienced close friends in a church say one thing with their mouth, but another with their actions. However, I am a fighter by nature, so we carried on. Then we got the news…

Cali was pregnant again.

We were excited but also scared as last time we had a pregnancy. We lost it. During this time, I tried to keep Cali out of the spotlight entirely. I wanted her away from the stresses of ministry and the disgruntled church members. I wanted her to be as comfortable as possible so she could go through pregnancy in peace.

It didn’t work.

A new issue had risen in the church. These other people were determined to be heard and continued to demand meeting after meeting pointing their finger at minuscule things – primarily other church members. Finally, one day, my wife told me she was bleeding again. At this time, I was in bi-vocational ministry, so I rushed home from work. It appeared she was miscarrying again, but it was inconclusive. At the same time, we had a previously scheduled house showing. Cali told me to go to the showing, and she would monitor herself – perhaps it was nothing (although we both knew that was likely untrue). So, I went. After the showing I had to run to the store as Cali needed me to pick up some things. Then I got it, the dreadful phone call. Cali called me and informed me our precious baby had passed. In the middle of the supermarket, I broke down. Andrew and Brittany were with me at the time and quickly ushered me home to be with Cali.

As we sat there mourning, my phone went off. The family who was disgruntled wanted to meet with me in thirty minutes. I texted them that it was not a good time. They were insistent and my wife told me through her tears, “just go and put an end to all this”. So, I left my broken wife, walked over to the church and met them. I informed them I had limited time as things weren’t going well at home. This couple then said, “It’s okay, we figured Cali was pregnant again…sorry it sounds like it’s not going well”.

I couldn’t believe it. This couple knew what was going on in my home, put the pieces together, yet demanded for us to meet and address their complaint anyway. What was their complaint? That someone at church, their friend, cracked a harmless joke about them in good faith. It wasn’t a malicious joke nor cruel, but a simple folksy joke. Never have I ever felt like my family’s pain meant so little. Later that week, this couple and their extended family informed us they were leaving the church. This family whom we had personally invested in for years ended up discarding us like an afterthought. They even attempted to leave a letter with all their grievances before the entire church – for all to see.

This was my breaking point. I could barely take it anymore. My family was enduring tragedy after tragedy, and it seemed people in the church were more concerned about childish things than anything else. I began to speak to ministry friends, unfolding every event in detail. I was surprised how often I heard similar stories from other pastoral friends. What I thought was an exception to the rule began to sound more and more like the norm. During this time, quitting began to sound more and more favorable.

Then my wife got pregnant for the third time.

At this point I was exhausted. My wife and I were spiritually and emotionally drained. I also didn’t want my wife to have to deal with the pressures of ministry anymore as our little girl grew in her womb. Thus, after much prayerful consideration, we stepped down from the church and focused on our family. October 30, 2020, my beautiful daughter was prematurely born, but perfectly healthy. We named her Elyona – which means, “My God has answered”. Our hearts were full.

During this time, we got settled into our new house, the podcast began to grow, I began to teach at my friend’s church, I began a new career so my wife could stay home, and in every way possible things were going well. I even began to accept the fact that perhaps I wouldn’t be in vocational ministry and even reveled in being able to minister to others on my own terms – no strings attached. With how well things were going, why go back? I had about every excuse in the book to stay as far away from full-time ministry as possible. Yet, I could not get rid of the pull. I’ve known since I was seventeen that God wanted me to serve Him in ministry. No matter how much I worked, how much money I brought in, I could not get ministry off my heart and my mind. But why? With everything I’ve said up to this point, hasn’t ministry been horrible to me?

No. Not really.

The reality is ministry wasn’t all bad. Sure, we experienced many horrible things, but amongst all those terrible experiences we had many blessings. During our trials we made great friends with people in our church. Without that church I wouldn’t have hardly any of the people who are close to me now. If it wasn’t for that church, I’d never have built The Church Split. If it weren’t for that church, I wouldn’t have the love for apologetics and unity like I do now. I look around me and see all the things that are most precious to me and know that it is because of our ministry at that little country church that we have what we do. Every day I’m surrounded by people whom I love, have seen grow, and have a true friendship with. In addition, despite all these negative things, I have also seen many positive things…

About six months ago I received a call from a young man who attended that church’s youth group asking me to officiate his wedding. When he originally came to the church it was because a friend of his from work (Tabby, our former editor) kept inviting him to youth group. This young man wasn’t very close to the Lord yet and lived a lifestyle that was unbecoming of a Christian. We took a personal interest in his walk, hoping we’d see him grow in the Lord, and grow he did! He surrendered his life over to Jesus Christ, he gave up friendships that were harmful and became passionate about living a holy life. Eventually, we made him the leader of our praise and worship team.

Now, remember the man I mentioned earlier who spun things like Fox and CNN? This was one of those areas of contention for he did not believe this young man should be leading anything. He thought it was inappropriate of me to put him into leadership due to the young man’s recent background. He shamelessly held the young man’s background over his head. Yet, we continually saw fruit in this young man’s life. So, although he faced condemnation from this older gentleman, he remained faithful to church and continued to pursue his relationship with Jesus Christ. He eventually got engaged to his girlfriend, a wonderful and sweet Christian girl. Months later, as I stood there closing the wedding ceremony, I had peace. My time at the church wasn’t all for nought. Not everything there was bad. Our ministry was not in vain. God had been faithful to us all these years.

This young man is but one of a few positive stories I could tell regarding our time at the church.

You see…we have a tendency to focus on the negative while missing the forest for the trees. Because of this tendency we can miss the blessings. Each and every one of my closest friends (save for a few) are because of my ministry at that church. Also, the greatest impact for the gospel we’ve ever seen was at that church. Despite the splits, there was a faithful and steady bunch that kept pushing forward. This steady bunch would recruit others to the cause, and we’d see more people impacted by the gospel.

It wasn’t all bad. In fact, there were countless blessings along the way.

A while ago I wrote a piece, “Why Good Pastors Quit”. In that article I shared many of my own thoughts and experiences as to why so many people drop out of ministry. I stand by every word I said, but I wanted to add this to it: although many quit, many also cannot. Like myself, many pastors have a burning passion in their heart that won’t allow them to give up. Why is this?

Because the mission is more important than petty comforts.

We have a world that is lost and dying. There is conflict on every corner. There are people who are aimless, stumbling through life. There are people who are overwhelmed with depression feeling as if their life is without any and all purpose. There are others who are embittered by their past experiences. There are some who are filled with hatred due to an unjust world. These are all the works of the Enemy. If we want the world to turn around, then we have to be out there doing the work. We have to show people how they are made in the image of God, display to them the victory of the resurrection, project the love of Christ to them, and be prepared to give unto every man an answer for them hope that is in us. The reality is, as comfortable as life has been since leaving ministry – it’s not where I belong. I know that. Years ago I was given a mission to serve God and give the gospel to every creature. To serve the Lord with every fiber of my being. I can no longer stand on the sidelines – there’s too much at stake. This is why I’m not quitting ministry. People need the Lord, and the gospel still works (my own life is a testament to that). If the harvest is truly plenteous, but the laborers are few, then my place belongs in the field – doing the work.

Stay tuned for a big announcement…

^[1] Actual names have been redacted for privacy reasons.

Lately our current culture has been weighing deeply on my mind. I’ve thought on it, prayed about it, and tried to speak to it. However, the division that is occurring is mind numbing and I really haven’t seen anything like it. I am partially angry, partially sad, and even partially amused.

The writing was on the wall for decades that this was the direction we’ve been heading, as many people simply shouted at each other across party lines rather than taking sustainable action which would create viable results. Instead, we manufactured band-aids and pandering ideals.  We so desperately need to remember whom we are to serve: God and each other.  After all, we are created in the image of God and yet so many of us want to try to fix this world by attacking the symptoms rather than the cause: sin.

However, what I have found increasingly disturbing is how Christians have become conformed to this world.  They think, speak, and advocate just as the world does. I’ve seen Christians excusing miserable behavior in the name of faux justice by saying that rioting, vandalism of property, and silencing swaths of people because what they say makes us uncomfortable is justified due to (real or imagined) systemic racism. It’s so much easier to slap a label on them and walk away, but in reality, this only serves to bring further havoc to our social environment.  So, let’s talk about this.  Let’s talk about what’s happening.

Racism. The new unpardonable sin. Not only is it unpardonable, but it has also become the new Salem Witch Trials: Suspect someone of racism? They’re guilty and cannot be proven innocent.  We throw these “witches” into the metaphorical water and watch until they float and reveal their racism, or they drown under all the character attacks of accused racism. Either way, it’s a lose-lose. The angry mob says that certain behaviors or ideas are sure signs of the evil that is hidden deep down, so they set up a rigged trial and be sure that nothing is left in its wake.  It’s almost become a new cult or religion where a singular view is considered doctrine, and all opposers are damnable heretics.  Worse yet, Christians are being sucked into this worldly view alongside the world.  Instead of being resistant and “testing all things,” (1 Thess. 5:21) we buy whatever popular narrative is trending at the time.  We don’t just bite it- we swallow it- hook, line, and sinker.

I’m amazed at my own personal treatment, not including everyone else’s, during these times. In the last two weeks, I’ve been called a ‘supremacist’ and ‘racist’ by many.  Someone even said “Will has bought into white supremacist Christianity.”  So of course, I looked at my Korean wife and we both laughed. However, part of me was also angry and disturbed that this rhetoric has become the norm and is used so flippantly.  I can’t help but think, how have we gotten to the point where we can’t even speak to one another for a moment without such labels being so irresponsibly thrown around?

As I reflect, I can’t help but find irony in how history always repeats itself and responds in pendulum swings. Years ago, blacks were considered property, dogs, less than human who didn’t deserve any real opinion or view, and now the new race that’s popular to hate is white people. By telling whites to apologize for their privilege, or at least admit they have it is how we’re expected to help heal the world.  Should that fail to effect the desired change, the next best step is to beat your neighbor with a crowbar and burn down a local mom and pop shop.  How someone uttering such words or the ensuing actions helps the world, I’ll never understand, but nevertheless this is what is being demanded.

Even stranger is how white people are told, “You can’t understand your privilege because your privilege blinds you.” So, I can’t see or understand something that I can’t see or understand?  So, I’m just supposed to blindly accept that white privilege is a concept based upon some person, white or black, telling me it is one? In fact, many of those telling me such things are white college age adults, who are almost ashamed of their own pigmentation – which is equally puzzling. While many of my black friends are saying that they don’t see this either. Which begs the question: whose commands am I to blindly follow? What it really comes down to is whether someone feels you have committed such a crime, regardless whether or not you have, especially if they are a person of color.

Voddie Baucham calls this “ethnic gnosticism,” which is “the phenomenon of people believing that somehow because of one’s ethnicity that one is able to know when something or someone is racist.” This happens all the time.  It’s a form of identity politics.  “You can’t speak on ___ because you’re a _____”  Telling people that they have authority over a topic because they happen to fall under some sort of skin deep adjective is absurd.  It’s another form of racism/sexism: treating someone differently and silencing them based on their immutable characteristics. In fact, if you have to keep bringing up someone’s race to delegitimize their position – they’re not the racist. If you have to keep referencing someone’s immutable characteristics so that way you don’t have to listen to them? They are not the one committing the sin.

Furthermore, demanding that one people group repent of their ancestors’ sins, apologize, and bow down to a different group is equally immoral and condescending. Let me be clear: to apologize for something you never did is immoral; to blame people who have never committed such atrocities or crimes is evil. In addition, demanding such an apology doesn’t generate a sincere apology- it’s pandering, which is an insult to both parties.  This isn’t to downplay the sins of the past.  However, empty words and hollow talk fix nothing, and pandering sentiments merely fall upon on self-gratified ears.

On top of that we had people, not so long ago, advocate for a de-segregated society. We had heroes like Rosa Parks take a stand and say, “I’m human too, and my rights are the same as everyone else’s.”  She didn’t need the front of the bus.  She merely knew that it was her human right to be treated as an equal.  So many rightfully fought for a de-segregated society. Now, we have places like Williams College that are offering “affinity housing,” which is a nice way to say “segregated dorms.” We have now come almost full circle where those fighting for equality are advocating for segregation.  Instead of progress, we have discovered regression.  This is the natural consequence of intersectionality.  This is the natural outflow when all you see is someone’s skin color, gender, sexuality, etc.

If you buy into this philosophy of intersectionality, where different groups have different levels of oppression, then you have been deceived by an idolatry of ideology; one that promises equality but delivers inequality.  Let me explain: intersectionality says that at the top of the social ladder are straight white males and depending upon race, sex, gender, sexuality, etc., you are on different tiers.  In believing this, you are buying into a dangerous philosophy that in the end will not create equality, but rather segregation, because in an effort to make everyone equal, you’ve only succeeded in dividing people further.  Additionally, if you advocate for special treatment or recognition because of the color of your skin, your gender, or your sexuality, then you’re not advocating for equality.  Instead, you’re supporting superiority.  It becomes increasingly immoral when people want (and are given) constant special treatment for their immutable characteristics.

Don’t believe me?  Think of all the posts, shows, and blogs talking about white people.  There’s literally a show on Netflix called “Dear White People…”  Now, with all those things in mind, insert any other ethnicity in there and the world would’ve lost its mind.  Why?  Because according to intersectionality, we white people are free game since we at the ‘top’ of this invisible social ladder.  This is one of the many reasons I wholeheartedly reject this twenty-first century doctrine. It only serves to create further inequality.

This isn’t to say we should live in a “color blind” world either.  That world is extremely boring and un-colorful.  It’s great to recognize our God given differences.  It creates appreciation for different cultures and people groups.  My wife is beautifully Korean and I am pasty white.  To acknowledge this isn’t immoral.  We shouldn’t strive to silence black, Latino, island, Indian, Asian, white, etc.  Instead, appreciate them.  I don’t wish to be color blind, I strive to love the colorful.  To respect that with one another we create God’s world.  Instead of judging someone’s experience, understanding, or morals based on their skin color, I wish we could have a world that truly judged one another on our actions, our morals, and our values.  I often say that “the issue isn’t race, it’s culture and values.”  We need to return to where these values come from: God.

See, only with God can we truly claim racism is immoral.  Think about it, if we are just evolved monkeys, the result of a cosmic accident, useless accidental pieces of meat orbiting around a ball of gas, to live and die with no meaning – then what’s wrong with racism?  Wouldn’t this be our Darwinian instincts to be tribal and care for our “own kind?”  Who’s to tell the baboon that his prejudice against the chimpanzee is wrong?  This is just nature taking its course.  The fittest fighting for the top of their respective ladders.  Only if we accept that God created us in His own image, that God has a moral law, and to despise another person is to despise a fellow image of God can we find true unity, because only in Him is our true identity.

Furthermore, we have people defending and even advocating for the destruction of property which has resulted in dozens of innocent deaths.  Some killed in riots, another killed by being crushed under a statue, others losing their livelihoods – who committed no crimes.  This shows that when we handle issues wrongfully, it only causes more death and more pain.  If you advocate for such things – you too are part of the problem.  As a civilized society, we must remain civilized.  Let’s talk, have discussions, share ideas, and give solutions to these problems.  Violence, destruction, and death is an option that will not get us anywhere.  Destruction only begets destruction.

Then there are those who keep shouting bumper stickers, “BLACK LIVES MATTER!” or “ALL LIVES MATTER!”  Yes, yes, yes.  We know.  We agree.  Black lives are part of all and all are part of black lives.  They are part of each other so no reason to shout them.  Now you may ask, “Do you agree with the BLM movement?” My answer is simple: I disagree institutionally but agree morally.  The institution stands for things that I am directly opposed to (abortion, intersectionality, neo-marxist theory, etc.) but the moral that black lives matter?  Absolutely they do.

This isn’t to say racism doesn’t exist.  It most certainly does.  But when we start labeling everything we don’t like as “racist,” then we actually hurt the cause against real racism.  It merely becomes a buzzword that leads to The Boy Who Cried Wolf.  We are so quick to hand this out like candy on Halloween that its very impact has lost its savor.

On top of all this, we infer motive all the time.  For people who say “judge not,” we sure like to judge someone’s motive.  If someone advocates against violence in the black community they’re labeled as a “stupid SJW commie libtard” and if you speak on deeper issues like the fatherless rates in the black community, drug use, violent crime or any other thing you’re an “unforgivable KKK white supremacist racist hack.”  In reality, we’re all advocating and speaking to issues that exist and want to speak to these issues.  Instead of speaking, we label and attack, leaving the issues unaddressed and making the trench that divides even deeper.

So instead of dealing with the cultural issues that have a deep impact on minority groups, we spit in each other’s faces so we can feel a little bit more virtuous.  When we should be talking about how to keep drugs out of the inner cities, how to encourage two parent households, how to prevent the disproportionate black abortions, how to get men to step up as men, have properly trained people in the police force, and proper accountability measures set for such situations – instead we just scream insults at each other or vandalize a city square.  This not only leaves crucial issues unaddressed, but hurts the masses.

People speak of having compassion and empathy, yet don’t even have enough empathy to listen to differing perspectives.  What really happens is that we have empathy for that which we care about and hatred toward anyone else’s view that varies from our own.  In the end, we have selfish bias masquerading as compassion. People love their labels because it saves them from addressing complex topics and helps them feel self-righteous. Unfortunately, it actually does nothing for those in actual pain right now. Recently, I was even called a white supremacist racist for merely disagreeing with vandalism. Of course, I pointed out the obvious refutation to this: my wife is literally Korean.

Then the laughably pathetic thing happened.  I was told she was my token card to deny racism, and that secretly she was terrified to tell me that I was a miserable racist for fear of me domineering over her with my whiteness.  I was angry for a moment, because this was not just disrespectful to me, but to my loving wife.  So, I merely pointed out the obvious: “So because we disagree on this point, you accuse me of being a racist, I show you very obvious evidence that I’m not a racist, and now you twist even that to say I’m racist?  Yet, if I agreed with you on this issue, you’d say that my interracial marriage was brave and beautiful and against the social constructs.  So in the end, I am whatever you choose to perceive me to be no matter what the facts are to the matter.” This is the nature of the conversation nowadays.  We want to label and twist whatever people say to shut them down.  Intellectual honesty, decency, and respect be damned – we have a narrative we demand be followed.  It’s either you agree with the status quo of our perceived beliefs, or you’re a leftist shill or a racist (depending who you’re talking to.)  You’re either for us, or you’re against us.

People, ideas have consequences, and what you’re seeing happen right before your eyes is when bad ideas are allowed to blossom and set their roots.  Consequences happen.  The lack of morals on a number of various fronts has caused unspeakable pain and evils in this world.  It’s time we wake up and see things as they ought to be.  It’s time we recognize one another as humans.  Brothers and sisters.  Children of God.  Image bearers of the Creator.  It’s time we laid down pitchforks and torches.  It’s time to stop following mobs and the next big thing.  The world is manipulating us to keep us divided.  Black lives most certainly matter, powers need to be kept in check, but the answer isn’t attacking and hating one another.  This only creates more disdain in our world.

I greatly disagree with many people.  I’m a pastor after all – we don’t do what we do to win popularity contests.  However, I will always do my best to respect and love one another, because behind every sentence spoken is another person whom God shaped in the womb.  People whom He loved and put in the world.  In the end, if you want real change, you must see things through a framework that isn’t about race/gender/sexuality, but rather right versus wrong.  Moral vs immoral.  Righteousness vs. unrighteousness.  Godly vs. ungodly.  The only way you can find a clear picture of this is through surrendering to the creator of the universe: God.

Let me encourage you to stop insulting and attacking one another, and instead speak to one another.  Listen, love, and even correct one another if needed.  The philosophies today are washing away the masses and only leave destruction in their wake.  Choose a better way.  A higher way.  A transcendent way.  Put your faith in Jesus Christ, approach things as He did.  With grace and truth.

Galatians 3:28

“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.”