nikolai_42
Well-known member
There are 3 main problems with today's Woke/CRT "theology" (some may not call it a theology, but it necessarily has one and it can even be seen by the fact that it has an impact in the Christian Church):
1. Definition of sin
2. The primary injured party in "sin"
3. The remedy for sin.
1. Definition of sin - to cut to the chase, sin is about one's own definition of wrong. It is the post-modern mindset cohered into an absolute (if that's possible) devotion to one's own sense of self and the preservation of that sense of self. Anything that flies in the face of my needs and wants is offensive - and that's where it becomes sin. Of course, this Jello-like definition of right and wrong takes its cues from Critical Race Theory and those who are most likely to offend are those who have the most privilege. They, of course, are not able to be sinned against because their privilege is an eternal offense to those who don't like it. So, really, there is a double standard at work - one set of rules for the privileged and one set for those defined as oppressed. And within the category of "oppressed" there are so many different ideas about what is really sinful (since it's driven by those most sensitive to having themselves offended and so caters to faddish political correctness), that the standard there is not even definable. It is an infinitely variable standard.
2. Primary injured party in "sin" - there is only one focus of sin in this theology : Me. Once again, the only reason this mindset even has a chance at survival in the Christian Church is that God has been redefined in man's image and a growing number of denominations have abandoned the idea (to a greater or lesser degree) that all sin is primarily against God. Somehow, sin has morphed from what scripture says about it (that it separates us from God) to something that is egregious because it separates us from man. Even conceding the point that sin affects others (which it does) and so we need to live in peace with others (as far as is possible with us) at the heart of the definition of sin is not God, but man. This is not just the unbelieving world upset at the church because the church hasn't treated them well, this is the unbelieving world looking for a reason to enact its bitterness against God and replace Him with "me" - complete with revised commandments and theology. And again, even if we were to concede the thought that all so-called "privileged" individuals need to grovel at the feet of those who are defined as "victims" as a form of repentance, there is no reconciliation in woke theology. Only "Justice". Which leads to the final point....
3. The remedy for sin. In scripture, the offended party (God) did something to deal with the problem of sin. In love, He condescended to bring it in by Himself - by coming to earth in the form of a servant and suffering the death of a criminal (an innocent victim) and overcoming sin and death. He bore justice that we might not have to. Woke theology demands individual justice for sins because that's all it can offer. And where it gets the idea of justice is anyone's guess because, again, it is all "me" at the center. Justice is appeasing the offended one on their terms. And if God were deemed the offended one, even those who are "victims" would recognize the privilege they have as living, breathing people. They would not demand justice, but recognize THEIR sinfulness as well. And the result of that? It should be mercy - otherwise they are in the same situation as that which they perceive the privileged to be in. Woke theology can't coexist with Matthew 18:21-35. But since Woke theology is from the heart of unbelief, there is no forgiveness and there is no need for the victim to concede anything to their supposed oppressor.
Woke Theology has NO place in the Church which Jesus Christ bought with His own blood.
1. Definition of sin
2. The primary injured party in "sin"
3. The remedy for sin.
1. Definition of sin - to cut to the chase, sin is about one's own definition of wrong. It is the post-modern mindset cohered into an absolute (if that's possible) devotion to one's own sense of self and the preservation of that sense of self. Anything that flies in the face of my needs and wants is offensive - and that's where it becomes sin. Of course, this Jello-like definition of right and wrong takes its cues from Critical Race Theory and those who are most likely to offend are those who have the most privilege. They, of course, are not able to be sinned against because their privilege is an eternal offense to those who don't like it. So, really, there is a double standard at work - one set of rules for the privileged and one set for those defined as oppressed. And within the category of "oppressed" there are so many different ideas about what is really sinful (since it's driven by those most sensitive to having themselves offended and so caters to faddish political correctness), that the standard there is not even definable. It is an infinitely variable standard.
2. Primary injured party in "sin" - there is only one focus of sin in this theology : Me. Once again, the only reason this mindset even has a chance at survival in the Christian Church is that God has been redefined in man's image and a growing number of denominations have abandoned the idea (to a greater or lesser degree) that all sin is primarily against God. Somehow, sin has morphed from what scripture says about it (that it separates us from God) to something that is egregious because it separates us from man. Even conceding the point that sin affects others (which it does) and so we need to live in peace with others (as far as is possible with us) at the heart of the definition of sin is not God, but man. This is not just the unbelieving world upset at the church because the church hasn't treated them well, this is the unbelieving world looking for a reason to enact its bitterness against God and replace Him with "me" - complete with revised commandments and theology. And again, even if we were to concede the thought that all so-called "privileged" individuals need to grovel at the feet of those who are defined as "victims" as a form of repentance, there is no reconciliation in woke theology. Only "Justice". Which leads to the final point....
3. The remedy for sin. In scripture, the offended party (God) did something to deal with the problem of sin. In love, He condescended to bring it in by Himself - by coming to earth in the form of a servant and suffering the death of a criminal (an innocent victim) and overcoming sin and death. He bore justice that we might not have to. Woke theology demands individual justice for sins because that's all it can offer. And where it gets the idea of justice is anyone's guess because, again, it is all "me" at the center. Justice is appeasing the offended one on their terms. And if God were deemed the offended one, even those who are "victims" would recognize the privilege they have as living, breathing people. They would not demand justice, but recognize THEIR sinfulness as well. And the result of that? It should be mercy - otherwise they are in the same situation as that which they perceive the privileged to be in. Woke theology can't coexist with Matthew 18:21-35. But since Woke theology is from the heart of unbelief, there is no forgiveness and there is no need for the victim to concede anything to their supposed oppressor.
Woke Theology has NO place in the Church which Jesus Christ bought with His own blood.