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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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