Therefore, just as I’m fearfully and wonderfully black, if you’re white—you’re fearfully and wonderfully white. Your identity is shaped by your creator, not critical race theorists. A positive white identity is only an impossible goal if you believe (white) people are not made in the image of God. But since white people—like all people—are made in the image of God, all white people should have a positive identity.

Just as white supremacy made some black people ashamed of their skin colour, critical race theory has made some white people ashamed of their skin colour.
In her best-selling book, White Fragility, Robin DiAngelo said “a positive white identity is an impossible goal. White identity is inherently racist; white people do not exist outside the system of white supremacy.”
The ramifications of that kind of racist rhetoric from authors, social media influencers, teachers, and imposter pastors cannot be understated. Critical race theory has altered many white people’s perceptions of themselves, especially young white people.
You’ve probably come across stories of children telling their parents they wish they weren’t white. You might not know, however, that critical race theory’s impact on young white people is significantly worse than that.
Young white people, especially young white women have been made to believe that though they can’t change their skin colour—they can change other parts of their body in order to achieve a positive identity.
White supremacy made some black people harm their bodies through skin bleaching. But worse, critical race theory is making some white people harm their bodies through transgenderism.
Many detransitioning white teenagers have admitted that one of the reasons why they once identified as transgender is because they didn’t think they could have a positive identity as white people.
For instance, a detransitioning woman named Helena Kerschner recently said, “I was just going through this period of like I don’t like how I’m treated as a cis person. I don’t want to be cis because cis means you’re uncool, and you’re privileged, and you’re an oppressor, and you’re bad. I don’t want to be bad. In that way I really incentivized to try to figure out a way to make my voice heard in these communities…Obviously I can’t change my race…so the only thing left was to start playing around with the gender stuff.”
Therefore, just as the civil rights movement used the phrase “black is beautiful” to affirm black beauty in the era of white supremacy, I’ll paraphrase the eternal words of our creator in this era of critical race theory and say: if you’re a white person, you’re fearfully and wonderfully white.
You’re wonderfully white because you’re wonderfully made by God. Your skin colour is just as beautifully painted by God as my black skin.
When King David said in Psalm 139 that he is fearfully and wonderfully made, he was speaking of every single part of his body, including his (probably) light brown skin—and he was also speaking of everyone with different shades of skin.
Read More
Related Posts:

Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan doesn’t forgive debt—it simply redistributes and transfers the debt to unwilling citizens. That makes it unjust. It’s unjust to force others to pay for a debt that isn’t their own. It’s therefore troubling that some Christians are comparing Biden’s student loan “forgiveness” plan with God’s forgiveness of sin.

Christians who don’t know what forgiveness is are like feminists who don’t know what a woman is.
But the ramifications are significantly worse.
Earlier this week I explained why Christians shouldn’t support Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan. But the most concerning thing about some Christians’ support for Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan isn’t their support for injustice, it’s their redefinition of forgiveness.
There are probably some Christians who support Biden’s plan who also acknowledge that it’s inaccurate to describe it as “forgiveness”. However social media is filled with people who claim that Biden’s plan is in accordance with the Bible’s teachings on forgiveness.
In fact, they claim since Christianity is based on forgiveness—it’s unChristian to oppose student loan forgiveness.
For instance, one ex-evangelical said: “Bold of Christians to be mad about student debt forgiveness while professing a faith that is literally based on forgiving debts.”
Another person said: “If you’re a Christian and you’re big mad about the possibility of student loan debt being canceled. Let me remind you that the entirety of your faith is built on a debt that you can’t pay that someone else stepped in and paid for you.”
Have you noticed that despite their opposition to Christian values, our culture consistently use Christian theology to deceive Christians into accepting ideas that are inconsistent with Christian ethics? Isn’t that from Satan’s playbook?
As the Bible says, “And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness.” (2 Corinthians 11:14-15)
Read More
Related Posts:

Biden’s student loan “forgiveness” isn’t real forgiveness. It doesn’t cancel an individual’s debt, it redistributes their debt and forces others to pay for it. Biden’s student loan “forgiveness” isn’t real forgiveness. It doesn’t cancel an individual’s debt, it redistributes their debt and forces others to pay for it. Student loan forgiveness is like a person who “forgives” an individual of their debt by harassing the debtor’s grandparents until they pay for it. Student loan forgiveness doesn’t forgive anyone, it penalizes everyone.

President Joe Biden will be announcing today that he will “cancel” up to $10,000 or $20,000 in student loan debt per debtor. This “forgiveness”, however, will only apply to individuals who earn less than $125,000 a year.
In a more just society, Biden’s plan would be widely unpopular. However in a recent NPR/Ipsos poll that oversampled people with student loan debt—55% of Americans support Biden’s student loan forgiveness.
Though some of these Americans are probably Christians, student loan forgiveness is antithetical to Christian ethics. Therefore Christians shouldn’t support it.
People who support student loan forgiveness frame it as a justice issue—and they’re right. Unlike many Christians, social justice activists understand that it’s impossible to separate ethics and justice from all aspects of life.
Social justice activists are not wrong about what they consider justice issues—They are wrong about what they consider evil or good, injustice or justice. As the Bible says, “Evil men do not understand justice.”(Proverbs 28:4)
We Christians, however, should understand justice. We should understand that debt is a matter of justice. We should know that like every justice issue, the Bible has addressed Christian ethics on (student) debt.
Therefore one of the reasons why we Christians shouldn’t support student loan forgiveness is because it promotes wickedness. The Bible says, “the wicked borrows but does not pay back.” (Psalm 37:21) 
Joe Biden’s plan will force many Americans into sin. This will force many Americans into disobeying God’s explicit commandments about debt. (Romans 13: 7-8)
Another reason why Christians shouldn’t support student loan forgiveness is because it’s partiality. Biden’s plan would only apply to individuals who earn less than $125,000 a year.
But what makes a person who earns $124,000 a year more deserving of “forgiveness”? In fact, what makes a person who earns $20,000 a year more deserving of “forgiveness” than a person who makes $125,000 a year?
Many of us have become so accustomed to partiality, we’re not only untroubled by it, we don’t even know what it looks like.
Read More
Related Posts:

Many of us love and fear our friends and family more than we love and fear God. We’re more afraid of becoming enemies with our loved ones than becoming enemies with God. 

Some of your supposedly Christian friends have recently said they are members of the LGBTQ community. That’s becoming increasingly common. However, an even bigger number of your supposedly Christian friends have become LGBTQ allies.
You already know that. But do you know why?
There are, of course, several reasons why many professing Christians are embracing LGBTQ ideology. Satan has devised many schemes to lead us into apostasy. With that in mind, although all people who support LGBTQ ideology do so for the same reason: sin—people can commit the same sin from different temptations.
As I’ve alluded to, one of the reasons why many professing Christians have become allies with LGBTQ people is because many of their friends and family have become members of the LGBTQ community.
Studies show that this is statistically the biggest reason why people become LGBTQ affirming. For instance, a 2013 study from Pew Research Center shows that 32% of Americans changed their minds on gay marriage because they “know someone who is homosexual.”
When a loved one says their sexual sins are an intrinsic part of who they are, they’re suggesting that if we do not love their homosexuality or transgenderism—then we do not love them. That is a powerful, manipulative argument that many parents, siblings, and friends do not have courage or integrity to resist.
Many of us love and fear our friends and family more than we love and fear God. We’re more afraid of becoming enemies with our loved ones than becoming enemies with God. Therefore for every person who becomes a member of the LGBTQ community, many more of their friends and family will become LGBTQ allies.
In a sense, familiarity breeds acceptance. Our culture knows that.
In a leaked video about Florida’s Parental Rights In Education bill, an executive producer at Disney said they had a “not-at-all-secret gay agenda.” Since people are more likely to become LGBTQ allies when they know and love others who are members of the LGBTQ community—influential institutions in our culture like Hollywood, mainstream media, social media, and academia have created an agenda to produce favourable LGBTQ representation to make us more accepting of LGBTQ ideology.
Therefore the most popular movies, TV shows, and books today feature characters and storylines designed to normalize LGBTQ sexuality. Knowing this, my wife—Annie Sey—has created a service called Library 4 Littles to help parents protect their children from deceptive books that indoctrinate them.
Read More
Related Posts:

Woke “Christians” who support abortion have become friends with the world and enemies with Christ. They’ve become enemies with vulnerable pre-born babies, enemies with the pro-life movement, enemies with real Christians—and especially, enemies with Christ. 

If you’re surprised that the most outspoken Christians on social media for “justice” are not rejoicing over the most important Supreme Court ruling in our lifetime—you shouldn’t be.
If you’re surprised that many woke “Christians” are angry that the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade—you shouldn’t be.
You shouldn’t be surprised many woke “Christians” support abortion.
As a pro-life advocate and a critic of woke ideology within the Church—I’ve been warning about Woke Christians’ implicit support for abortion for many years.
Three years ago, I said:
“One of the biggest indictments against the social justice movement within evangelicalism today is that it hasn’t produced a greater passion against the biggest human rights violation of our time—abortion. In fact, it’s producing more apathy and support for abortion.”
Woke “Christians” were implicitly supporting abortion years before they revealed their explicit support last week.
For years they claimed they were “holistically pro-life” to conceal their pro-abortion views. In fact, I know woke “Christians” who say they’re “holistically pro-life” on social media, but privately—they’ve told me they’re pro-abortion.
For that reason one of the best things about Roe v. Wade being overturned—other than hundreds of thousands of babies being rescued from murder—is that it’s exposing what many woke “Christians” really think about abortion and justice.
As the Bible says, “When justice is done, it is a joy to the righteous but terror to evildoers.” (Proverbs 21:15)
With that in mind, some of the woke “Christians” who’ve revealed some level of support for abortion are people like Dante Stewart (a regular writer at Christianity Today), The Truth’s Table podcast hosts ( Ekemini Uwan, Christina Edmondson, Michelle Higgins), and Mika Edmondson ( a pastor and a regular contributor at The Gospel Coalition).
In reaction to Roe v. Wade being overturned, Dante Stewart said:
“What makes me most sick is that Christians will celebrate and believe that God made it so. No, this is not God. It is years of Christians waging religious war. It is not about protection, love, or morality. All of this is about one thing only: power. White power.”
Ekemini Uwan said: “America is a failed state.”
Michelle Higgins said:
“Dear Black Christians who support reproductive justice and believe that abortion is healthcare, it is time to be more vocal in the places where we have been shamed, even if those places are the ones we call home.”
And Mika Edmondson said:

Related Posts:

So don’t be bitter. Especially since what you think about your parents reveals what you think about God. If you’re bitter about your parents, then you’re not being grateful to God. Still, forgiving your dishonourable father isn’t the only way to honour him. The Bible says, “The father of the righteous will greatly rejoice; he who fathers a wise son will be glad in him.” (Proverbs 23:24). Meaning, we should honour our dishonourable fathers by honouring the only perfectly honourable father: God. 

You should honour your dishonourable father—God commands that of you.
The fifth commandment says: “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land that the LORD your God is giving you.” Exodus 20:12
On Father’s Day this Sunday, many of you will probably honour your honourable fathers. But what about those of us with dishonourable fathers? What about those of us with bad fathers?
Or in my case, what about those of us with absentee fathers?
The fifth commandment doesn’t say, “honour your good father and good mother.” No, it says: “honour your father and your mother.” No matter who your parents are—no matter what they’ve done or haven’t done, God commands you to honour them.
God doesn’t say we should honour our parents because of their good character. He suggests we should honour them because of their position. In other words, we should honour our fathers not because they are good parents—but because they are our parents. Meaning, we shouldn’t honour our parents primarily because of what they’ve done for us; we should honour our parents because of what God has done for us through them.
This, of course, doesn’t mean adults need to obey their parents. Adults are no longer under their parent’s authority. This also doesn’t mean people who have abusive parents should place themselves in harmful positions. Suspending relationships with abusive, unrepentant parents is necessary. However, just as God commands us to honour bad emperors, he also commands us to honour bad parents. (1 Peter 2:17-18)
But what does that mean? What does it look like to honour a dishonourable father?
I think it’s simply to seek to do good to a bad father. I think it’s to do for your bad father what God does for his bad children.
If you have a dishonourable father, honour him by being willing to forgive him.
If you’re a Christian, though you’re a sinner—though you’re a bad child—doesn’t God forgive you? If your good father honours you with forgiveness, then return that honour to your bad father. Be willing to forgive them. Even if your father curses you, bless them. The Bible says, “bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you.” (Luke 6:28)
After all, whatever your parents have done or haven’t done to you—you’ve done much worse to God.
So don’t be bitter. Especially since what you think about your parents reveals what you think about God. If you’re bitter about your parents, then you’re not being grateful to God.
Still, forgiving your dishonourable father isn’t the only way to honour him. The Bible says, “The father of the righteous will greatly rejoice; he who fathers a wise son will be glad in him.” (Proverbs 23:24).
Read More
Related Posts:

Guns aren’t the problem. Stricter gun laws aren’t the solution. Absentee fathers are the problem. Good fathers are the solution. The vast majority of violent boys—including school shooters are fatherless. Until we start taking fatherlessness more seriously and restore the nuclear family as the standard for healthy families, we will continue to live in a more violent society.

The father of the teenager who murdered 19 children and 2 adults in Uvalde, Texas said:
He probably would have shot me too, because he would always say I didn’t love him.
The father is also a criminal. He has an apparently lengthy criminal record. His most deadly crime, however, isn’t on his record. His most deadly crime is that he is an absentee father.
A father who doesn’t value his child’s life is teaching his child a person’s life isn’t valuable.
63% of teenagers who commit suicide are fatherless. 72% of adolescent murderers are fatherless. 75% of adolescents in rehab centres for drug abuse are fatherless. 60% of rapists are fatherless. 85% of teenagers in prison are fatherless.
And especially, 75% of the most-cited school shooters in America are fatherless—just like the teenager who walked into Robb Elementary School to murder 21 people.
Of course, most fatherless people value life. Fatherlessness doesn’t make a person a mass murderer or a criminal. However, fatherless children are significantly more likely to commit crimes. For instance, a 2012 study on juvenile male inmates found that fatherless boys are 279% more likely to carry guns for criminal behaviour.
Absentee fathers discourage their children and they provoke them to anger (Colossians 3:21, Ephesians 6:4). I know that too well. 85% of children with behavioural problems are fatherless—that describes my childhood.
I was involved in over 20 fights before I was 18 years old. Most of these fights happened when I was between 4-10 years old, especially when other children made fun of me for being fatherless.
I didn’t know how to maintain my composure when other children blamed me for my father’s absence.
Read More
Related Posts:

To postmodernists, the question “what is a woman?” is just as unanswerable as the question, “what is truth?” Postmodernists, as relativists, do not believe facts matter—just as gender theorists believe biology doesn’t matter. Postmodernists believe anything can be the truth just as gender theorists believe anyone can be a woman.
The Daily Wire has been my favourite news outlet for several years. I’ve consumed thousands of hours of their podcasts. However their latest documentary, What is a Woman, is maybe the most important content they’ve produced so far.
The documentary features The Daily Wire’s author and podcast host Matt Walsh asking “experts” and average people a seemingly simple question: “what is a woman?”
Predictably, however, most of the so-called experts and average people in the documentary either dismiss the question or struggle to come up with an answer.
One of the “experts” in the documentary is a female therapist who identifies as “non-binary”; when Walsh asks her the titular question, she says: “I’m not a woman, so I can’t really answer that.” 
She also says, “some women have penises, some men have vaginas.” That immediately reminded me of the scene from Arnold Schwarzenegger’s 1990 movie Kindergarten Cop, when a toddler says: “boys have a penis, girls have a vagina”.
What is a Woman confirms gender theorists are not smarter than toddlers. Naturally, as we should expect from a Matt Walsh documentary, that produces a series of hilarious scenes. For instance, there’s a scene with a tell-it-like-it-is elderly shop owner who provides hilariously simple answers that emphasize the absurd “answers” from the group of “experts”.
However, the documentary is both hilarious and haunting. Matt Walsh’s infamous ability to maintain an impeccable level of satire and seriousness is what makes What is a Woman so compelling. The documentary seamlessly weaves through comedy and tragedy in a manner worthy of its subject matter.
What is a Woman is just as depressing as it is hilarious. Gender theory and transgender ideology deserve ridicule. However, these ideas also deserve our serious attention. As many of the scenes in the documentary reveal, transgender ideology harms people—especially little children.
The most poignant scene in the entire documentary is when Scott (Kellie) Newgent, the transgender founder of TReVoices raises her arm to reveal her severe scars and says:
“For the time in history, a marginalized group has a huge dollar sign on the top of their head. We have 5 children’s hospitals in the United States promoting that [her scars]…that’s a phalloplasty, that’s a bottom surgery [a surgical operation where part of a woman’s abdomen, leg, or arm is removed to create a ‘penis’]. We have 5 children’s hospitals in the United States telling girls that they can be boys at $70,000 a pop in a surgery that has a 67% complication rate that will kill me from infection…that I can’t sue on. We’re butchering a generation of children because no one is willing to talk about anything. I have three kids at the age they’re doing this to kids. I’m not transphobic. I love my kids. And I love other people’s kids, and you should too…This is wrong on so many levels…I get infections every 3 to 4 months…I’m probably not going to live very long.”
Read More
Related Posts:

The pro-abortion movement doesn’t ignore babies: they murder them. The pro-life movement, however, protects babies and their mothers. As for the ridiculous claim that the pro-life movement needs to embrace essentially leftist or socialist causes in order to prove we’re authentically pro-life: no. 

One of the biggest myths about abortion today is that the pro-life movement doesn’t help mothers. But I guess that shouldn’t be surprising.
Any culture that believes they’re helping mothers by encouraging them to kill their own children shouldn’t be expected to know what it really means to help mothers.
When people who kill children are considered heroes—of course, people who save children will be considered villains.
Therefore since the leak that America’s Supreme Court is set to revoke Roe v. Wade, critics of the pro-life movement have become even more devoted to that myth.
The critics say the pro-life movement isn’t “pro-life from womb to tomb” or “holistically pro-life”. They say we’re just “pro-birth and anti-abortion”. They say we don’t care about mothers, we only care about babies; otherwise, we would support socialist healthcare, paid parental leave, “free” child care, and more.
Essentially, they claim the pro-life movement doesn’t help mothers.
As you’ve probably noticed on social media—increasingly, some of these critics are professing pro-life Christians, including organizations like And Campaign and influential evangelicals like Russell Moore.
Earlier this week, Russell Moore said: “If in fact Roe is overturned, those of us who are pro-life must work to convince our neighbors that we can and will love and protect both mothers and children.”
And a few years ago, an ad from The And Campaign shamefully described the pro-life movement as “protecting the unborn baby (but) ignoring the mother”. And worse, they described the pro-abortion movement as “protecting the mother (but) ignoring the unborn baby.”
It’s depressing that many professing Christians are embracing talking points from abortion activists. Some professing Christians really believe the pro-life movement ignores mothers? And they really believe the pro-abortion movement protects mothers?
Read More
Related Posts:

The concept of intersectionality suggests a person with supposedly intersecting identities (such as being both black and a woman) is able to simultaneously experience discrimination as a result of being both a black person and a woman. Naturally, this creates a perception that black women, for instance, are categorically and uniquely different from both black men and white women. Essentially, intersectionality claims a person’s supposedly various “identities” makes them wholly different than other “kinds” of people. This is a worldly philosophy—but many evangelicals have fallen for it.

We’ve reached a point in evangelicalism when we’ve become so desensitized by abortion and so manipulated by critical race theorists that some of us would unashamedly celebrate the confirmation of an unjust Supreme Court Justice because she’s black.
Ketanji Brown Jackson was confirmed to America’s Supreme Court a couple of days ago—making her the first black woman to receive that honour.
However, she is the latest dishonourable character in the honourable role.
Just as she infamously claims she doesn’t know what a woman is—she also claims she doesn’t know when life begins.
In a better society, her claims would make her unfit for any consequential role. But in our depraved society, she’s a Supreme Court Justice.
Her history as a judicial activist for abortion is one of the reasons why Joe Biden nominated her (with strong support from Planned Parenthood and NARAL) in keeping with his promise to select a judge who would help strengthen and expand abortion laws in America.
And yet because she’s black, some evangelical leaders and organizations essentially joined abortion and LGBTQ activists to celebrate Judge ackson’s confirmation to the Supreme Court.
The president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission from the Southern Baptist Convention said:
“Despite the philosophical and legal differences individuals like me will have with her, Judge Jackson’s confirmation is a history-making moment. We should appreciate it as such. If we lose the ability to do that, we lose something that makes America an exceptional nation.”
Another influential evangelical said: “I disagree with her judicial philosophy but I celebrate the history of Judge Jackson’s appointment and am praying for wisdom and discernment as she serves on the highest court.”
Clearly, these evangelicals and others who shared similar reactions disagree with Judge Jackson’s judicial activism.
However, if Judge Jackson believed five year old children do not have a right to life, would they simply label that as “philosophical and legal differences”? Would they simply say they disagree with her “judicial philosophy“?
Would they celebrate her supposedly historic confirmation if she believed five year old children do not have a right to life?
Read More
Related Posts: