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.”

Introduction

            Last year I wrote an article about the “2020 Witch Trials” and the issues that came from it. Today I want to lean into that theme a little bit more and get to the spiritual and intellectual underpinnings of what allowed the 2020 dumpster fire to even take place. The same infection we saw rear its ugly head in 2020 has been festering for years and has even seeped into our churches. If anyone is familiar with our work at The Church Split, we seek to promote unity in diversity but still being unapologetically Christian and Biblical in all things – and this means we sometimes must challenge the status quo and sacrifice some sacred cows. This also means we risk offending an ever-polarizing culture, but this does not mean we ought to lose boldness in the biblical truths of the faith. So let’s talk about the cancer that is Victimhood Culture and how it is entirely antithetical to the gospel message.

            It is also important to note that my entire family has experienced trauma, abuse, and hurt. My brother tells his own story here, my sister discusses hers here, my father shares his here, and I share a little bit of it in a sermon of like-name here. Know that this is not coming from someone who has no idea what he is talking about – quite the opposite. I know all too well the dangers of Victim Culture and how it entices. In fact, during the most miserable years of my own life I bought into the narrative. I behaved however I wanted to and justified it with, “well they don’t know what I’ve been through.” It was not until later I realized that I was using my victimhood to justify not taking responsibility for my actions – which was ironic since most of the pain in my life was due to others not taking responsibility for their own actions.

            With that being said, I am also aware that we have all experienced different levels of pain and suffering. Some far worse than others. This article is not intended to minimize those experiences, but rather to maximize the saving power of God. To put our suffering within proper framing. Because to be honest, I grow tired of the Victimhood Culture. It has allowed for even more pain and hurt to take place and has split families, churches, and is currently tearing our own country in half. There is only one true response to it: The Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Let’s define our terms: What is Victim Culture?

            The concept can be allusive and difficult to define. I think Victim Culture is best exemplified by the “micro-aggression” and “safe space” subculture we see cropping up around America. Where people have to tread carefully or reap the consequences. This is not to say that victims and Victimhood Culture are one in the same. They most certainly are not. Victims and non-victims alike associate with Victim Culture and the same could be said about those who do not associate with such.

            Victimhood Culture tends to take victims, affirm their victimhood, and then continue to keep them as victims. Perpetuating an obsession with their trauma to the point where the victim is unable to move on. It does not allow victims to become victors, instead it keeps them down in an oppression only held back by the confines of their own minds. It makes people believe a lie that they have been destroyed by an unfair world, and now the world must either suffer for it, or that the world owes them for the evil suffered upon them.

            Which is interesting because it takes victimhood and gives it power. Those who are now victims can get away with not taking responsibility in their own life. They don’t have to apply themselves to work because “if only others understood what I’ve been through.” Or “I don’t treat my family perfectly but I’m not half as bad as my father was.” Or “I might lose it from time to time, but after everything I’ve experienced, what do people expect?” – and thus the seeds of Victimhood Culture are planted. It encourages people to not be emotionally, ethically, or morally accountable to others because of misdeeds experienced by others. Which is ironically its own form of abuse.

            It is this very Victimhood Culture that gives permission for riots, burnings, attacks, and hate crimes. Because why? Apparently one unjust or questionable action means the entire world must suffer for it. Therefore, we punish the masses for the actions of the individual. When confronted, naturally people deflect to the hurts and sufferings they have experienced and demand that others pay the price for their own misdeeds. If nothing else, they request not to be lectured or corrected in their behavior due to the immorality they have personally suffered.

This mentality is in complete juxtaposition to the gospel of Christ.

What is the Gospel?

Romans 10:8-13:

But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

            The gospel is for everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord. The Gospel is the promise of God unto salvation. It is the redemptive work of Christ. This gospel is for all people and without partiality.

            What the gospel does though is it gives us a hope and a morality. It tells us we are sinners and under condemnation, but God is good and paid a ransom for our sins (morality.) This shows that God prefers mercy over wrath. It reveals through God’s law that there is a right and a wrong, that there is a righteous judge, and also a merciful Father. The Gospel also tells us that we are valuable enough for Christ to die. It gives us a yearning of a Healer and someone who can make all things new (hope.) Therefore, the Gospel is able to show us what is right and what is wrong and gives us an eternal hope for something greater than ourselves.

            However, Victimhood Culture speaks directly against this. It preaches that the only person who deserves condemnation is the abuser. That their sin is far worse and unredeemable than your own (a skewed morality.) It also teaches that victims are damaged goods. Broken. Unable to pull yourself up from the ashes of brokenness (no hope, just self-pity.) Which begs the question: how is one to ever get past their PTSD, hurt, and suffering with such a message? In addition, it also teaches that the abuser is beyond salvation, redemption, or repentance. That they deserve to rot in hell, and they belong in prison for the rest of their life, and perhaps, even the death penalty (no hope, just condemnation) Which raises the next question: how is one to ever want to change the depravity of their behavior with such an awful message? The gospel speaks directly against this and gives hope to all parties. After all, what is the point of counseling if not for mending? What is the general point of prison and AA if not for reform? What is the point of the gospel if not for healing?

(Now, I am not excusing abusers, of course abuse is horrific and not to be excused. I am also not saying one should not pursue justice.)

In Scripture, it is clear that we ought not to blame others

Genesis 3:11-12:

He said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten of the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?” The man said, “The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruit of the tree, and I ate.”

            Everyone is familiar with this story. The moment Adam is confronted about their sin, he blames Eve and attempts to excuse himself from any and all responsibility. Was it true that Eve gave it to him? Yes. But could Adam had done otherwise? Yes. Let me encourage you not to fall into the tempting trap of blaming someone else for an action that was within your own control whether you were a victim or not. (Adam, certainly wasn’t a victim here, but I hope you get the analogy.)

            The Gospel is truly counter-intuitive because it goes against our nature to be vengeful and hateful to those who have hurt us. It’s easier to say, “I hate you and never want to see you again!” rather than “Father forgive them for they know not what they do.” It is much harder to look a repentant abuser in the eyes and say, “I forgive you and I love you as a creation of God” than it is to say, “I hate everything that you are.” In the end, it will always be easier to hate your enemies than to love them:

Matthew 5:43-48:

You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

            The Gospel teaches us that though the scars remain, we can move on. That God is big enough and that God’s grace is sufficient. I want to make note, “forgive and forget” is not in Scripture. To say such a mantra is to be both foolish and naïve. However, this does not mean you ought to be bitter either. Forgiveness takes place when we let go of the debt someone owes us, but reconciliation (to bring back together) is only made possible through the act of repentance. Thus, Christians should always forgive, but reconciliation might not ever take place because many times – people are not repentant. We tend to be stubborn, prideful, and arrogant. Especially when we buy into an entitled narrative that allows us to hurt others around us. Why is it you think that many abusers have been abused? They bought the same narrative and used the evil done to them to excuse doing evil to others.

 Dangers of Victim Culture

            Whether people want to admit it or not, there are real dangers to this phenomenon we see permeating in our culture which I suspect is a pendulum swing from people not taking victims seriously at all for many years. Regardless, extremes tend to land people in ditches on either side of the road. One of the many dangers it creates is the danger of never moving on. Having people relive and dwell on their trauma or oppression rather than looking ahead to hope. Moreover, it also gives people power over others. Recently someone said to me, “I’m at least glad that the power dynamics have flipped.” – but this should never be the goal. If you are seeking power in your victimhood, you are seeking the very thing the abusers were – power and unquestionable authority. The goal should never be power, but truth, righteousness, and goodness.

            Nowadays, we have made being a victim a status of which to achieve. This is what allows for false accusations and spoofs like what happened with Jussie Smollett which makes a mockery of true oppression. In fact, while working in youth groups, I continually hear about every single possible disorder the young person thinks they have. Why? Because we have made being a victim not just something to be proud of, but something to be desired. What we are allowing in our churches and our culture at large allows for people to continually make up new ways of which they are oppressed, which only adds to the intersectionality mess that we have today.

“When victimhood becomes currency, expect there to be counterfeits.”

Michael Knowles

2 Corinthians 6:11-13:

We put no obstacle in anyone’s way, so that no fault may be found with our ministry,but as servants of God we commend ourselves in every way: by great endurance, in afflictions, hardships, calamities, beatings, imprisonments, riots, labors, sleepless nights, hunger; by purity, knowledge, patience, kindness, the Holy Spirit, genuine love; by truthful speech, and the power of God; with the weapons of righteousness for the right hand and for the left; through honor and dishonor, through slander and praise. We are treated as impostors, and yet are true; as unknown, and yet well known; as dying, and behold, we live; as punished, and yet not killed; as sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, yet possessing everything.

We have spoken freely to you, Corinthians; our heart is wide open.You are not restricted by us, but you are restricted in your own affections.In return (I speak as to children) widen your hearts also.

            Notice how Paul expects there to be afflictions, suffering, and oppression. What’s funny is this passage seems to indicate that the Corinthians were playing the victim, and due to Paul’s rebuke, they seemed to believe he was restricting them. When in fact, Paul points out that it is their own affections that are restricting them, and make no mistake, pride can blind the abused as much as it can blind the abuser.

Bible vs. Victim Culture

            Make no mistake, we have created a new class of people in our culture: the unquestionable victims. As someone who has experienced abuse myself, I find this train of thought to be deeply troubling. Firstly, we Christians are not to show partiality (James 2:1-7) to any group of people. Secondly, it demands that people like me are treated differently. As though we are weak, feeble, and unable to carry on and rise above our experiences. It’s both unhealthy to victims, and extremely condescending.

            We also know that Jesus says, that if we do not forgive one another, He will not forgive us. We are also told that if someone is overtaken in a fault, we ought to seek to restore them, not instantly cast them out (Gal. 6:1-5) but notice that it is the spiritual. The elder. Those who are less likely to be pulled into temptation. But remember, if the person is repentant, we ought to forgive them. Again, this does not mean justice is never pursued – we also have a responsibility as good citizens in submission to the authorities of the land.

Luke 17:3-4

Pay attention to yourselves! If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him, and if he sins against you seven times in the day, and turns to you seven times, saying, ‘I repent,’ you must forgive him.”

            This is wildly unpopular today, and especially within the victim culture where we tell people they are entitled to their bitterness, but the Gospel promises that restoration is possible, and that people truly can change.

            It is also important that we recognize in life that suffering is to be expected. This doesn’t excuse needless suffering by the hands of others, but it is something to be expected. However, through the power of the Gospel and Jesus Christ, after all the suffering Paul endured – he said this:

2 Corinthians 4:7-10:

 But we have this treasure in jars of clay, to show that the surpassing power belongs to God and not to us. We are afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not driven to despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed; always carrying in the body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be manifested in our bodies.

This is an affirmation of the power of the Gospel.

Philippians 1:12-14:

I want you to know, brothers, that what has happened to me has really served to advance the gospel, so that it has become known throughout the whole imperial guard and to all the rest that my imprisonment is for Christ. And most of the brothers, having become confident in the Lord by my imprisonment, are much more bold to speak the word without fear.

This is an affirmation that our suffering can be used to display the Gospel.

Philippians 3:13-14:

Brothers, I do not consider that I have made it my own. But one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.

This is a reminder that we ought to put our past behind us and strain forward to what lies ahead. Paul is clearly indicating that this is not easy, but our goal must be Jesus Christ.

Romans 8:17:

and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him so that we may also be glorified with Him.

If we suffer in Christ, then we shall be glorified with Him. This is a reminder that our suffering is temporal, but the Gospel is eternal.

Romans 5:3-5:

Not only that, but we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.

            Many people have asked me in my life if I would change the suffering I have endured. I have given much thought about the various levels of trauma I’ve experienced and can say today, with utter confidence, that I would not change a thing. My life has often felt like a 30-year uphill fight with abuse, oppression, and trauma behind every turn. It is those very things that produced endurance in my spirit, character in my heart, and a hope in Christ Jesus.

1 Peter 5:10:

 And after you have suffered a little while, the God of all grace, who has called you to his eternal glory in Christ, will himself restore, confirm, strengthen, and establish you.

            Let me say with absolute surety that the only hope of truly overcoming one’s suffering is to look to the suffering of Christ. It is only through a relationship with God, having faith and trust in Him, will you see your heart mend. He is the true and loving Father, He is the one who created you, and He is the one who loved you enough to sacrifice His own Son to pay a ransom for you. In fact, it is by the scars of Christ that your scars are healed.

            Christians, I implore you to not fall prey to the enticing seduction of the victim culture today. No number of reparations, public apologies, medications, or affirmations will fully heal our broken souls – it is only through the gospel of Jesus Christ can one’s heart be truly whole.

How to Overcome Victimhood Mentality

            You must first recognize its benefits. Yes, I said benefits. Because in victimhood mentality you get to avoid responsibility by blaming your life’s position on someone else’s actions. Instead of saying “I have no control on how I got here, but I can control where I go from here.” Victimhood culture says, “you have no control on how you got here, and you have nowhere to go.” It also gives you attention and validation, rather than exhortation and rebuke that we so often need to build ourselves up. The other benefit it gives you is risk avoidance. You don’t have to worry about failure if you never try. Thus, you get to avoid the risk of failure and continue to blame it on your oppressor. Which sadly means we are allowing the abusers to defeat us. I cannot speak for you reader, but I prefer to be a victor, not a victim. I refuse to be defined by my pain, but rather to be defined by Jesus Christ – as an image bearer of God.

            This means you must be secure in your identity in Christ and be okay with not identifying yourself as a victim. The more you identify as a victim, the more you will remain one. However, the more you identify as a Child of God the more you will experience a spiritual resurrection, and as Christ forgave us, you will rise above and forgive others. Your hurt will finally meet the healer.

            So, take responsibility for what you can. You cannot control the evils that have happened to you, but you sure can control where you go from here. I encourage you to forgive and let go of your past hurts, agree with God with what sin is, seek to correct your own sin, and then choose to strain toward the mark of Christ.

“Pain is God’s megaphone to rouse a deaf world. You see, we are like blocks of stone out of which the Sculptor carves the forms of men. The blows of his chisel, which hurt us so much are what make us perfect.”

C.S. Lewis

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:

“God is timeless if and only if God necessarily exists without beginning, without end, without succession, without temporal location, and without temporal extension.”^[1]

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.

Here’s one: God cannot forgive you.

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.