Further. Every. Day.

Argument 1#

“Pro-Lifers want to control Women” (Not really an argument, but let us deal with it.

In a story from the guardian, (Slide 1#) a new poll says that Pro-Lifers simply want to control women's bodies due to misogyny. They base this purely on slanted questions that are clearly aimed at political issues, and not in a way that would divine between egalitarian and misogynistic traits.

Article here:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/22/a-new-poll-shows-what-really-interests-pro-lifers-controlling-women

This is simply not the case. Just because Pro-Lifers do not want to see a government mandate on companies to enforce diversity hiring does not mean that we hate women. It just means that we have an intellectual standard. Likewise, Pro-Lifers are no more advocating against a woman's autonomy in the prohibition of infanticide as we are in the prohibition of homicide. This is an intellectually consistent view.

Argument 2#

Some will simply say that the infant in the womb is a clump of cells. Or even then, they may be a human clump of cells, but not a person. As is done here by Clair White over at Medium.com:

https://medium.com/@ClaireJWhite/a-clump-of-cells-71071af908d9

To the first argument, genetically, this is undeniably a natural human with his or her own DNA and is in the most vulnerable stage of life. Cancer may have its own DNA as some will point out, but that is a silly comparison at best because Cancer is an unnatural thing that is from YOUR DNA that you received at conception in your mother's womb.

Argument 3#

The next issue raised by people like Clair White, is the issue of personhood. When does someone become a person? At consciousness? How about unconscious patients on life support? Did these lose part of their humanity? How about those who are mentally deficient? Is this consciousness and value of human life on a sliding scale? How about babies with deformities? Should we remove them from the gene pool? The Secular Humanists in Germany toyed with these ideas in the early parts of the last century and Europe is headed back in that direction now. This is not a slippery slope, this is a proven and repeated trajectory. Playing with the idea of personhood allows for great injustices in the name of so called science and progress. We saw it in Nazi Germany, Communist Russian, we see it today in China, and here in the west with the blackmarket for embryonic tissue for stemcell research.

Even if the infant is not a full fledged person, the argument falls apart. What do we do to those who poach or kill dolphins? Eagles? Even the destruction of some bugs and turtles land the perpetrator in the slammer. Is not the human embryo even more valuble than the embryo of a dumb animal? (Yes people have been jailed for damaging eggs of birds, turtles, etc)

Argument 4#

Another common claim that is made is that Pro-Life means Pro-Birth and nothing more, as articulated by prochoiceamerica.org in this article.

(Slide 3#)

https://www.prochoiceamerica.org/campaign/the-hypocrisy-of-the-pro-life-movement/

Again, they are conflating disagreement in how to fix these other problems with intellectual inconsistency. This is not the issue at hand.

The Violinist Argument will provide us with some good context for several claims and arguments. Pulled from(https://prolife.stanford.edu/qanda/q2-2.html)

“Educated pro-choicers who claim that the question of fetal personhood is irrelevant because the mother's right to an abortion would trump the fetus' right to life even if he is a person may bring up Judith Jarvis Thompson's famous “Violinist Analogy” or some variation of it.

In this somewhat contrived story, a man (a violinist, in the original formulation of the analogy) is dying, and the only way to prolong his life is to hook him up to another human and siphon off some of that person's blood or kidney function (or something) as a form of life-support. He must remain in this state for the several months necessary for medical technology to reach the point that it can intervene and completely resuscitate him. So the music lovers, in their zeal to save the violinist, find some random woman who happens to be the only person in the world with the right blood type. As she sleeps in bed, they hook her up to the violinist. The woman wakes up to find herself strapped down to the bed and attached as a form of life support to a complete stranger, essentially a human parasite, lying next to her. Unless she severs the tubes, she can't move or go anywhere indefinitely, forced to have her energy siphoned off by the parasite. Most people's (correct) reaction is that the woman has the right to free herself of the violinist, even though she knows that this will result in his death.

The idea is that this situation is analogous to an unplanned pregnancy: against her plans, the woman finds herself supporting the life of an unwanted person and has the right to deprive that person of her bodily support, regardless of what the result is for the parasite.”

Argument 5#: I have the right to abortion because the baby is a stranger and a leach that has appeared unplanned, unannounced, and unwanted.

Unplugging a stranger form life support is not an active act of murder, but rather a passive act of retracting care. No one believes that retracting life support from a terminally ill patient is necesarrily murder. The imposition on the one giving life support is not a morally necessary one, so one person's need for life support does not mandate another's autonomy. So this is a false equivalence. The proper analogy would involve dismembering the stranger, not unplugging them. One is an passive act that frees you of the responsibility (like adoption), and the other is an active act of murder.

Argument 6#: I did not consent to the pregnancy, just the sex.

The lack of consent argument holds little water. Consider this analogy: Someone playing baseball in the street may not have consented to the property damage caused by an accidental window break, but they WILL have to face the repercussions. If your child was conceived by a consensual act of procreation, then this is no different. You may attempt to argue that you have no responsibility for your actions and that you do not want a child. If so, adoption is an option for you. However, what is not an option, is jamming a pair of forceps into your baby's head or the head of your irate neighbor (How do you get to kill a 3rd party for your convenience when your actions caused the situation?).There are repercussions for actions. This also holds for rape and incest, 1% of cases. The principle is the same, but the blame is not on the woman, but the man. How does an evil act, committed by a more powerful person onto a vulnerable person, validate another evil act perpetrated by the original victim, onto an even more vulnerable person? If the baby in the womb is a person, then they have as much right to not be physically violated and ripped to shreds while alive as the woman had to not be raped.

Argument 7#: I have autonomy over my own body.

Correct! So does the infant. Imagine this, if turbulence on a commercial flight causes a stranger to stumble onto your lap, you do not have the autonomy to stab this person in the head and suck their brains out. In the poor analogy above, this unnatural position is temporary like pregnancy. Pregnancy, however, is the natural outcome and end to sex. Your autonomy extends to contraceptives, abstinence, adoption, or surgery to prevent you from being able to conceive. When did murder enter into the equation of personal autonomy?

Argumen 8#: If I cannot be compelled to give an organ to a stranger, or even my own child, how can I be expected to give my uterus?

Three points here:

1. A kidney transplant is permanent, pregnancy is 9 months. While a pregnancy does affect some bodily changes, these are incomparably benign to a lifetime of dialysis if kidney 2# stops working.

2. The issue of ontology is worth thinking about here as well. What is the purpose of the kidney? It works within the original owner's body to perform a critical function. You are partially impaired without both kidneys. Transplanting a kidney is an extraordinary and extra-natural act. The uterus, however, has a different purpose. It was made to hold the human life that dwells within for the duration of 9 months. The natural purpose of the uterus is to shelter that life. This is perhaps a weak argument, but one formed in response to a weak attack on the Pro-Life stance.

3. None of the above arguments deal with the issue of the infant's vs the organ recipient's state of health. The person in need of a kidney requires someone else to give up part of a healthy donor body to provide two people with compromised physical capacity. Without the donation, there would simply be one live non-donor, and one dead person who was in need of a kidney. The act of actively destroying the baby in the womb leaves one mother with a statistically higher chance of suicidal ideation (outside of 5~10 years), and a dead baby in the vacuum cleaner. Carrying to term allows for both individuals to live physically whole lives.

Argument 9#: I have reproductive rights.

That is true! But pregnancy is not reproduction, conception is. Even if someone took your agency in the case of rape or incest, the issue is not made better by infanticide.

First question of the day is, what is Climate Change? Because it was Global Warming, until the recent cooling cycle (closely related to the Sun getting cooler, as it does in cycles). Now it's Climate Change.

From Wikipedia:

“Climate change threatens people with food and water scarcity, increased flooding, extreme heat, more disease, and economic loss. Human migration and conflict can be a result. The World Health Organization (WHO) calls climate change the greatest threat to global health in the 21st century.”

So, let's look at the claims that have been made concerning this impending disaster and what has actually happened.

Claims like Greta Thunberg's: “Around 2030 we will be in a position to set off an irreversible chain reaction beyond human control that will lead to the end of our civilization as we know it.” or AOC's: “The world is going to end in 12 years if we don't address climate change.” are not new. We have been facing these for the last several decades of climate alarmism. However, do not let the facts get in the way of the agenda. It's not like climate change is 13,260% less responsible for Human death since 1920. That's right, Climate related deaths have only DECREASED with the technological trappings of modernity, like electricity, central heating and cooling, and transportation for critical supplies.

However, not everyone is so fortunate. According to the WHO, roughly 2.6 billion people are still forced to cook with solid fuels (biomass, dung, and other wastes.) This results in an estimated 3.8 million deaths per year, about the same as what the WHO attributes to “outdoor air pollution”.

These are the same people who can barely get enough food to eat, food that we often use for “Biofuel” projects. Dr. Indur M. Goklany in his 2010 paper on the subject linked 192,000 excess deaths to the growth of “Biofuel”. He compared the deaths to the 141,000 estimated excess deaths that year attributed to Global Warming by the WHO. These people need energy, food, and working logistics more than they need virtue signals.

While trillions are being poured into solar and wind to make them cheaper (and they are becoming cheaper), these sources are not reliable nor usable in all environments. In the Texas freeze of 2021, there were many factors in play. One of which was a lack of proper grid management, noted, but at least the non-winterized natural gas and coal produced some energy, while the frozen windmills were still.

I have no qualms with clean energy. I've worked in this sector and have patents in solar. I want clean energy as much as the next person. However, the Paris Climate Accords and Kyoto Protocol will only stifle development if enforced by organizations like the UN. The Kyoto Protocol was certainly not enforced upon nations like China or India, even though they are grossly more to blame for pollutants than the United States of America. The US of A actually decreased emissions while deregulating under Trump's Era.

The other issue is that we have seen these same claims made over and over again with conflicting claims of warming vs cooling depending upon what decade we are speaking of. Let's go back, shall we, to the claims that have been made over the last few decades:

1. 1967 Dire Famine Forecast By 1975

2. 1969: Everyone Will Disappear In a Cloud Of Blue Steam By 1989 (1969)

3. 1970: Ice Age By 2000

4. 1970: America Subject to Water Rationing By 1974 and Food Rationing By 1980

5. 1971: New Ice Age Coming By 2020 or 2030

6. 1972: New Ice Age By 2070

7. 1974: Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast

8. 1974: Another Ice Age?

9. 1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life (data and graph)

10. 1976: Scientific Consensus Planet Cooling, Famines imminent

11. 1980: Acid Rain Kills Life In Lakes (additional link)

12. 1978: No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend (additional link)

13. 1988: Regional Droughts (that never happened) in 1990s

14. 1988: Temperatures in DC Will Hit Record Highs

15. 1988: Maldive Islands will Be Underwater by 2018 (they're not)

16. 1989: Rising Sea Levels will Obliterate Nations if Nothing Done by 2000

17. 1989: New York City's West Side Highway Underwater by 2019 (it's not)

18. 2000: Children Won't Know what Snow Is

19. 2002: Famine In 10 Years If We Don't Give Up Eating Fish, Meat, and Dairy

20. 2004: Britain will Be Siberia by 2024

21. 2008: Arctic will Be Ice Free by 2018

22. 2008: Climate Genius Al Gore Predicts Ice-Free Arctic by 2013

23. 2009: Climate Genius Prince Charles Says we Have 96 Months to Save World

24. 2009: UK Prime Minister Says 50 Days to ‘Save The Planet From Catastrophe'

25. 2009: Climate Genius Al Gore Moves 2013 Prediction of Ice-Free Arctic to 2014

26. 2013: Arctic Ice-Free by 2015 (additional link)

27. 2014: Only 500 Days Before ‘Climate Chaos'

28. 1968: Overpopulation Will Spread Worldwide

29. 1970: World Will Use Up All its Natural Resources

30. 1966: Oil Gone in Ten Years

31. 1972: Oil Depleted in 20 Years

32. 1977: Department of Energy Says Oil will Peak in 1990s

33. 1980: Peak Oil In 2000

34. 1996: Peak Oil in 2020

35. 2002: Peak Oil in 2010

36. 2006: Super Hurricanes!

37. 2005 : Manhattan Underwater by 2015

38. 1970: Urban Citizens Will Require Gas Masks by 1985

39. 1970: Nitrogen buildup Will Make All Land Unusable

40. 1970: Decaying Pollution Will Kill all the Fish

41. 1970s: Killer Bees!

From: https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/50-years-of-failed-doomsday-eco-pocalyptic-predictions-the-so-called-experts-are-0-50/

And there are more at the link attached!

Also, the “97% of climate scientists concede that man-made climate change is real and will kill us all” is not only misleading, it is flatly false. Many of those scientists protest Climate Alarmism. Forbes did a debunk piece on this here: https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstein/2015/01/06/97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-100-wrong/?sh=611fb1f13f9f 97% of climate scientists agree that man made pollution, presence, and other factors have an influence on the climate. This does not mean that they believe that we should leave those who cannot afford solar and wind infrastructure behind by demanding that they do not use fossil fuels. All of us want human flourishing. If you look at the evidence that they present in the article above, you will see that man made emissions directly coincide with increased lifespan and longevity.

On a more Biblical note, the World will not end in anything other than the events of Revelation. Is Climate Change a part of that? Maybe, but maybe in a more insidious way than some would imagine. With all of the shifting goal posts we have seen to this point, we must realize that there is an ulterior motive at play here. There obviously is and we know that those lawmakers who push the climate agenda want a one world system. This is the system that the Beast will use to persecute the Church and attempt an unsuccessful coup against God Himself.

With the facts in mind and at hand, let us move forward with knowledge and in the Spirit to relieve those who are in fear on this topic. We should be able to do this in love and in a manner that is winsome so that others may come to know the Truth.

War Is Peace
Freedom Is Slavery
Ignorance Is Strength
Truth Is Disinformation

Elon Musk buys Twitter, two weeks later, the Biden Administration forms a DHS “Disinformation Governance Board”. The name itself reminds us of the Orwellian novel 1984, but I think it is important to remember how Orwell came to his worldview when he wrote 1984. George Orwell was a Marxist who saw what his worldview produced in Spain before he became a Libertarian. In 1984, language was loaded with opposing ideas to confuse and subjugate the populace. The Ministry of Peace waged War, The Ministry of Truth ran propaganda, The Ministry of Love was the Gestapo-like entity in charge of torturing disidents. In one minute, angry protesters could shift targets of protest by a simple PSA from the Ministry of Truth. It may sound far fetched, but we are watching it happen before our eyes in the USofA today.

Elon Musk, a prominent businessman, heralded as the techno-messiah of the EV World has brought us affordable Electric Vehicles (Actually, you did through taxpayer dollars, but that is another topic for another day.) Now the Tesla Billionaire is Public Enemy 1# for buying Twitter with the only intent to restore it to a neutral platform. Make no mistake, Musk has much to gain by this. Conservatives are seeing incredible spikes in traction on Twitter and thousands upon thousands of what appear to be bot accounts are being deleted, deflating Democrat Accounts’ Followers. Twitter may well soar to new heights with a more universal appeal if Musk can succeed in his attempts to restore Twitter to its original purpose. That is, if Twitter survives the turmoil we see brewing from an Administration positioning themselves.

Now that we have set some of the table, let’s go back to Scripture. Of all of the liberties and virtues that the Lord seems to value, which did He exhibit or place first? Love may be the first answer that comes to mind and that is true, but what kind of Love? The kind that allows people to have freewill. What was the Lord doing in Genesis 2 when He forbade Adam and Eve from eating of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil? He could have removed that tree. Why did he allow it to exist? Because Love can only exist in the presence of freewill and the opportunity to exercise that freewill.

When a government begins to assert what is true and what is not. Where has that Government placed itself? Who’s authority has the Government usurped? Truth is best described as reality. God defines reality. When you attempt to write your own reality, by definition that is sin and also is extremely dangerous.

The DHS which has been aggressively dismantling Border Security is now focusing in on our own citizens in the United States. They have claimed that they will only be using our tax dollars against what they consider to be disinformation. However the young lady who has been installed as the head of this enterprise has a terrible track record. She buried the Hunter Laptop story (proven true on all accounts) and trumpeted the Russia Collusion Story (proven false on all accounts). Ad Hominem aside with her vitriolic TikTok account aside, these people are not equipped or qualified to make decisions about what is true and not online. No one is. To make things more Orwellian, remember that this is the same DHS that has billions, literally, of rounds of ammo stockpiles with no justification as to why a law enforcement agency would stockpile so much ammunition (not shoot or add to training regimens).

Remember that Christ was called disinformation that could destroy the Jewish Nation. His disciples were put to death for such disinformation. Steal your hearts, pray, and let’s fight this corruption by telling others the Truth. Not just about what is happening and why these draconian measures are wrong, but let us be about the Gospel, more than ever!

What is Easter? Did Jesus celebrate Easter or Passover? Are Christians celebrating a pagan holiday? Are we missing out on a blessing in not celebrating Passover? No, Passover, Maybe?, and Absolutely in that order. Join us as we explore the difference between Easter and Passover in the hope that we may get a better understanding of Christ. -Further. Every. Day.

#047 Critical Gender Theory

Before we dive into the rabbit hole, let's define some terms:

Gender from Webster's 1828 Dictionary:

1. Properly, kind; sort.

2. A sex, male or female. Hence,

Gender from Merriam Webster 2022:

: sex sense 1a the feminine gender

b : the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex

With those two definitions stated and the shift in definition noted, let's look at 2 the tenets of Critical Gender Theory

Gender Is A Social Construct

Gender Is Performed

1. Gender is a Social Construct:

Biology screams against this in many ways. As a general rule, your biology dictates which sex you identify with and has always done so. ~98% of people globally identify with their born God-given gender as statistics show. (https://www.statista.com/statistics/1269778/gender-identity-worldwide-country/)

So, let's not deal with the sociology just yet but those outliers who actually have genetic abnormalities. Many conservatives will say: “Biology states that if you have an Y Chromosome, you will develop into a male.” This is normally the case, although a bit reductive. But let's look at the exception. About 15,000 people in the United States have some mixture of XXY, XYY, and other conditions that create an androgenous response or infertility from the person's DNA. Some of these have counter-normative or intuitive formation of primary and secondary sex characteristics. However, this accounts for less than 1% of 1% of the population and most if not all of these folks present relatively clearly as male or female. (https://isna.org/faq/y_chromosome/)

Now, aside from genetic abnormality, which still presents as one sex or the other, X and Y Chromosomes are pretty good indicators of what and who this person will be. The mainline argument is not that there are anomalies, but that biological differences are things that can be tweaked to suit our own whims and fantasies. This is simply not true and destructive. Let's look at the ultimate experiment that proves that Gender is not only a biological fact, but pretending otherwise is dangerous at best.

2. Gender is performed

The story of David Reimer should provide some insight into the veracity of this idea. But before we get to David's story, we should deal with the man behind David Reimer's suffering and Modern Gender Theory: John Money. You can find his praise filled bio at the Kinsey Institute's Website: (https://kinseyinstitute.org/about/profiles/john-money.php). Those who know that name know that Aflfred Kinsey was a sex “researcher” who collablorated with the ilk of Nazi officer Dr. Fritz von Balluseck who would rape his victims and record data. Fritz and other pedophiles and rapists were not only documented by Kinsey, but encouraged to continue their research. With this information Kinsey published ghoulish charts that documented the “Speed of Pre-Adolecent Orgasm” with numerous data points down to 5 month olds in Kinsey's book Sexual Behaviour and the Human Male. John Money was not only a colleague of Kinsey, but also a defender of pedophilia as seen in his work. “If I were to see the case of a boy aged ten or eleven who's intensely erotically attracted toward a man in his twenties or thirties, if the relationship is totally mutual, and the bonding is genuinely totally mutual [...] then I would not call it pathological in any way.” Said John Money in a 1991 interview with the Journal of Paedophilia.

Reimer was one of the many victims of John Money and his idea that Gender was performative and constructed by societal expectations. David was one of two twins, born Bruce. Bruce as an infant was castrated by an experimental circumcision. His brother Brian remained whole. Mr. and Mrs. Reimer were directed to John Money for their injured son's treatment, unaware of Money's character or exploitative nature. Money recommended that Bruce be completely sex reassigned to female and treated as such. By two years old, the deed had been done and Bruce was renamed Brenda. Brenda loathed his life and all of the toys and affects of girlhood, longing to act as a boy. Also, John Money had recurring sessions with Brenda and Brian where Money forced the children to commit sex acts upon eachother, for Money's and his Colleage's benefit. In Brenda's teen years, he was on the verge of suicide when his parents finally broke down and told Brenda the truth of his biology. Brenda immediately opted to transition and become known as David. He went through reconstructive surgery, undergoing mastectomies and surgery to simulate what had been surgically removed as a child. Alas, all of the damage done to both Brian and David/Bruce was too much for them to handle and they both committed suicide within two years of each other. John Money's experiment, however, has had its impact as his theories had already become mainstream before they were proven so very wrong by the lives of these two innocent boys that he had destroyed.

https://slate.com/technology/2004/06/why-did-david-reimer-commit-suicide.html

So, why are Christianity and Critical Gender Theory incompatible? Well, the Biblical view of Complementarianism states that there is a binary for gender. We see that in Genesis.

Critical Gender Theory relies on the Marxist system of oppressors and oppressed with differing standards for morality within each group. This flies in the face of God's Justice. One more thing, if Critical Theory views the powerful as oppressors, where does this put God?

Malachi 2:15

And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth.

What was marriage for? Reproduction. Sure there are those who cannot have children and their marriage is still of inestimable value. We live in a fallen world, and God is wonderful at making lemonade out of lemons. However, reproduction is the primary purpose of marriage.

Genesis 1:27

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

So here we have the creation of a binary.

Genesis 19:4-5

“But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.”

This is the first reference of homosexual behavior. It doesn't end well for those practicing it.

Leviticus 18:22

“Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.”

Deviation from God's picture of Christ and the Church is an abomination. It is dysfunction that eats away at the very basic fabric of who we are as Image Bearers of God.

Deuteronomy 23:17-18

“There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel. Thou shalt not bring the hire of a whore, or the price of a dog, into the house of the LORD thy God for any vow: for even both these are abomination unto the LORD thy God.” (Dog referring to the word Kadesh or one who acts in a dog like manner.)

There has always been a spiritual aspect to sexuality. Research is now showing that there are chemical interactions in the brain that permanently bond you to each sexual partner with which you interact.https://www.sagu.edu/thoughthub/the-physiological-bonds-that-happen-during-sex/

Judges 19:22

“Now as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial, beset the house round about, and beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know him.”

Just in case the first account doesn't convince you, the second should make you take note. Sodom and Gammorah were wiped off the map for this. In Judges 19, we see men of the tribe of Benjamin commit the same sin. Benjamin as a tribe was nearly wiped out of Israel.

Romans 1:26-28

“For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;”

This should send shutters through the soul of the Christian. We should also have an intense empathy for those traveling this road of destruction. We should be reaching out to those in sin, just as our Father reached out to us when we were in such straits.

1 Corinthians 6:9

“Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,”

The Greek word for effeminate means those of an uncertain affinity. This does not mean androgenous people, but those who chose to live in a way outside of the way that God created them, specifically men choosing to be effeminate.

1 Timothy 1:10

“For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;”

Again, primarily focused on men with men, Romans 1 deals with women too, but the idea is that there is a binary order and falling outside of that order is in rebellion to our Heavenly Father.

All of this to say that the Critical Theory of Gender has been roundly proven destructive by stories like David Reimer's. Its affects are incredibly destructive, and those who suffer from dysmorphia concerning their body or dysphoria concerning God's order don't need this toxic ideology that was cooked in the same incubator as John Money, Nazi Doctors, and the Marxist Frankfurt School. They need Christ. Let us arm ourselves with Truth to free those who would be freed in a loving, but non-compromising way.

So, let's start out with the elephant in the room, no matter how we look at the plight of the African Americans in our society, there IS a problem. There may be more to it, however than simply discrimination, although that DOES happen, albeit not as it did in Jim Crow and Slavery days.

Statistically there is an issue with wealth distribution between Whites, Hispanics, Blacks, and Asian, but is this really an issue of systemic racism? How can the Naturalized Nigerian-American make more than 10% the average American, as seen in the below Yahoo Finance data? Is this a sign of discriminatory practices in a country that an immigrant can make more than the average income of its natural born citizens?

Before you read this next paragraph, I need you to consider that these are the statistics and data. They have little to do with race, as we will attempt to show in a moment, but the truth is what will help us aid those communities who have remained wounded and poor for centuries. When discussing police policy, many will point to the disproportionate incarceration of the African American, this is a reality. However, according to the below study on homicides and crime in 2019 America, over 50% of the homicides in this nation are committed by those of African descent. It is important to note that in 2019 America, 14% of the population fit this description. One critical piece to this puzzle lies in the next bit of information from the FBI Stats from 2019: 48.7% of the homicides in the United States occurred in the South.

As Christians, we are supposed to look to our Master and King for His solutions to oppression as well as matters of society. However, the Enemy of Our Souls, is in the business of offering counter solutions, like Legal or Critical Theory. The idea that the only dynamics in life are that of oppressors and oppressed is at the root of this theory and Critical Race Theory strives to critique the Western Culture (built on Judeo-Christian Principles) as a power structure of oppressors and oppressed that must be reorganized. (As we have discussed before, this is all derivative of failed Marxist Theory. It has simply been repackaged as a different set of oppressors and oppressed.)

So, what would the tenets of CRT be? Well, here are the 5 tenets of Critical Race Theory from Nicholas Daniel Harlep of University of Wisconsin Milwaukee in 2009:

“There are five major components or tenets of CRT:

(1) the notion that racism is ordinary and not aberrational;

“Firstly, racism is ordinary : the overall ethos of majority culture promotes and promulgates a notion of “color-blindness” and “meritocracy.” These two notions are mutually intertwined and serve to marginalize certain enclaves of people—predominantly people of color. Color-blindness and meritocratic rhetoric serve two primary functions: Critical Race Theory first, they allow whites to feel consciously irresponsible for the hardships people of color face and encounter daily and, secondly, they also maintain whites' power and strongholds within society.First, color-blindness legitimizes racism's need for an “other” in order to flourish and maintain its influence within the fabric of society. Racism and white supremacy are not aberrant, insofar as the oppressors—the status quo—exploit the “others” (the oppressed) in order to maintain their elitist control, as well as to claim that they are neutral. Close examination repudiates this false sense of neutrality. Second, meritocracy allows the empowered—the status quo—to feel “good” and have a clear conscience: many would ask why the powerful would not have a clear conscience since they maintain a majority of the wealth and power in society. The powerful maintain power and only relinquish portions of it when they have nothing to lose; furthermore, they receive platitudes and compliments when they do choose to dole out portions of their power”

(2) the idea of an interest convergence;

“Secondly, Bell's (1980) theory of interest convergence is a critical component within the cogs of CRT. Common sense belief s are formulated by the majority “status quo.” The beliefs created by the majority—the haves—oppress minority groups—the have-nots and have-too-littles. Stated more precisely, interest convergence is the notion that whites will allow and support racial justice/progress to the extent that there is something positive in it for them, or a “convergence” between the interests of whites and non-whites. CRT focuses on informing the public how certain stories act and serve to silence and distort certain enclaves of people and cultures (typically people of color), while simultaneously building-up and legitimizing others', typically the majority—status quo (which retains or gains even more power through these transactions).”

This author then continues with a parable about aliens and white people making a deal where white people get a perfect world after sacrificing the blacks to the aliens. This is to prove the point that whites only reverse racist behavior if it benefits whites. (Charming, right?)

(3) the social construction of race;

I totally agree with this one….

(4) the idea of storytelling and counter-storytelling;

“Fourthly, the idea of storytelling comes from its powerful, persuasive, and explanatory ability to unlearn beliefs that are commonly believed to be true. CRT calls this concept “storytelling” and “counter-storytelling.” This dichotomy—storytelling and counter-storytelling—is predicated upon the belief that schools are neutral spaces that treat everyone justly; however, close examination refutes this: simply evaluating graduation rates accomplishes this. School curricula continue to be structured around mainstream white, middle-class values. There continues to be a widening of the racial achievement gap (the separation of students of color's achievement and the achievement of Anglo-Americans). Whose needs do these values and curricula serve? It is not students of color?

Hackman and Rauscher (2004) draw attention to the fact that under the guise of mainstream curriculum certain enclaves of students become marginalized through curriculum and praxis that are insensitive and inequitable. Hackman and Rauscher (2004) state the following:[...] often under-funded [...] mandates across the nation leave many educators wondering how best to serve their students, particularly those students who do not fit into the mainstream [author's emphasis] profile or curriculum. In today's schools, the needs of students with disabilities and members of other marginalized groups often go unmet, and as such, more inclusive educational approaches need to be adopted to ensure that all students have access to a solid education. (p. 114) CRT's counter-storytelling is a necessary tool given the curricula in equity in the U.S. educational system. Without CRT's counter-sto rytelling, the true stories would never be publicly proclaimed, and perhaps the world would come to believe and perceive that all was fine.”

This translates to a disdain of the Scientific Method, Mathematics, Logic and Rhetoric, for less logical and more empathetic “story based learning”. (Because melanin, prevents people from thinking logically… oh yes, this ultimately came out of 1930s Germany. This makes more sense now.)

(5) the notion that whites have actually been recipients of civil rights legislation.

Fifthly, whites have actually been recipients of civil rights legislation. It is worth

citing Taylor (2009) at length:

Fifty years post Brown, de jure separation has been replaced by de facto segregation, as White flight from public schools has created a two-tiered system in many cities and student assignments have shifted from mandatory busing to neighborhood preferences. Most children of color currently attend schools with relatively few Whites; very few White children attend schools where they are the minority. Clarenton, South Carolina, one of the case schools used by civil rights lawyers Thurgood Marshall and Charles H ouston, remains as segregated as it was before 1954. The educational progress of African Americans that has occurred has thus been allowed only if it is perceived by the majority as cost-free, or nearly so. Preferably, these changes have come incrementally, and without social disruptions such as marches, boycotts, and riots. Importantly, for most Whites, advances must come without affirmative action. (p. 6-7)

The irony is that, although whites have undeniably been the recipients of civil rights legislation, it has also been verified that affirmative action, too, best serves whites (e.g., Delgado & Stefancic, 2001; Delgado, 2009). Delgado (2009) exhorts and explicitly requests that “[...] we should demystify, interrogate, and destabilize affirmative action.

The program was designed by others to promote their purposes, not ours” (p. 111). Lawrence (2002) states this similarly: “The dismantling of affirmative action is segregation. Its purpose and meaning are the same as the Jim Crow laws'' (p. xv).”

I actually agree here to the point that the majority of well intentioned laws, and some of them ill-intentioned, leveled at fixing racism do not fix the problem. These laws only create more problems more egregious than the original issue.

So, instead of simply smelling a rotten egg, let's attempt to figure out how we are to fix the issue. But before we do, it is important to note how we got to where we are. Let's look to Thomas Sowell for some history. In a great commentary on the issue “The Origin of Black American Culture and Ebonics, Sowell deconstructs the origins of certain behaviors and characteristics of different cultures. He starts out reading a historical excerpt describing a terror of a people decending on 1950s Indianapolis, people who did not regard work, the law, their children, and who's moral standards were so low that they would shame an alley cat. The folks of Indianapolis were not making a racist cry for relief from African-Americans settling in their towns, but white rednecks. These Celtic rough and rowdy characters would sooner kill their brother or best friend than take an insult. This subculture is one that Sowell, and other historians, trace to modern day hood culture. With a link below, it is an interesting listen, but Sowell makes several very good points. The most salient, I think, is the fact that these white southerners were in a cycle of intergenerational poverty that even freshly arrived Germans, Danes, and even freed African slaves would out perform in every way from education to commercial success. This intergenerational poverty had been present in these families before they even came to the New World from the British Isles. Not only did these lack the Protestant Work Ethic, but promiscuity was rampant. One clergy member noted that 9/10 of those brides he officiated for were pregnant at the ceremony. This was in stark contrast to those in the North where such things were far from normal. Rape was also often punished less severely than petty theft, whereas in the North, rape was a hanging offense. This culture of Godlessness was the culture that many poor and enslaved African Americans lived within, even after emancipation. They had picked up the most destructive tendencies of Anglo Culture.

After gaining their freedom, Sowell notes, those who escaped the RedNeck Culture often ultimately made it to the middle class, some even before the 1960s. Now, this does not mean that things were at all easy, but this is not simply an issue of oppressed and oppressors. The presence of successful members of society with high melanin content in their skin suggests cultural issues. This is where the Church needs to step in.

What does our Father in Heaven say about the philosophies of this World?

Colossians 2:8 “See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.”

If it does not comport with scripture, it should be out. This counter reality narrative is vain, deceitful, and destructive.

Ibram Kendi once wrote in regards to antiracism, a component of CRT: “The only remedy to racist discrimination is anti-racist discrimination. The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination.”

In A Rhythm of Prayer: A Collection of Meditations for Renewal Chanequa Walker-Barnes, a self-proclaimed theologian prayed: “Dear God, Please help me to hate White people. Or at least want to hate them. At least, I want to stop caring about them, individually and collectively. I want to stop caring about their misguided, racist souls, to stop believing that they can better, that they can stop being racist.”

Galatians 3:28 “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”

James 2:9 “But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.”

CRT is toxic and antithetical to the Biblical Worldview. It may sound nice, like every other trap the Enemy of Our Souls lays before us, but in the end, bitter sadness awaits.

We as a Church need to not only be informed about what CRT is, and we also need to be a Holy people. We need to address racism in every form, whether it is racism or the new ant-racism of CRT, we need to unify as one diverse body under and in Christ. If the World sees that, perhaps some will realize how wrong this belief truly is.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/u-could-actually-more-nigerian-133011858.html

https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/crime/ucr.asp?table_in=2

https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/fact-sheet/facts-about-the-us-black-population/

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED506735.pdf

Before we get to Social Justice, however, we need to go to the place from where Social Justice, a blanket term to cover a variety of Critical Theory Tenets, hails. The Frankfurt School or the Institute for Social Research was founded shortly after WWI in 1923 and was largely influenced by the works of Sigmund Freud, Karl Marx, George Hegel and other Atheistic Philosophers of the 19th Century. Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, and Herbert Marcuse were three of the leading minds, among others in the Frankfurt School. They believed that: “Mass Culture (and subsequently, what we know today as Popular Culture) should, according to them, be rescued from the stigma of crude banality into a valuable and worthy expression of real world experience.” They set about the task of reevaluating Marx's theory that Capitalist Society would collapse and a Communistic Revolution would take its place in a new utopia. Upon the failure of Marx's prediction, the Frankfurt School folks, started to rebrand the movement with Legal Theory, Critical Race Theory, Gender Theory, and Post-Colonialism.

But before we get to them, let's remind ourselves who these Frankfurt School folks idolized and what they're teachers thought. Freud was of the opinion that God's Plan for sexuality was restrictive in his book “Civilization and It's Discontents”. Karl Marx hypothesized that Work was inherently exploitative of the workers, and those who had money to hire people were inherently evil, or at least at odds with those who had to work. (Now, Marx's mother has been quoted saying: “If only Karl had made capital instead of writing about it!") It's difficult to not succumb to ad hominem here, but Marx was also a racist with the Hispanic, Jew, and African below his nose.

In a quote from a Panama City News Herald article compiling Marx's unsavory remarks he is quotes as such:

“When the U.S. annexed California after the Mexican-American War, Marx wrote: "Without violence nothing is ever accomplished in history." Then he asked, "Is it a misfortune that magnificent California was seized from the lazy Mexicans who did not know what to do with it?" Friedrich Engels added: "In America we have witnessed the conquest of Mexico and have rejoiced at it. It is to the interest of its own development that Mexico will be placed under the tutelage of the United States." Many of Marx's racist ideas were reported in "Karl Marx, Racist" a book written by Nathaniel Weyl, a former member of the U.S. Communist Party.

In 1887, Paul Lafargue, who was Marx's son-in-law, was a candidate for a council seat in a Paris district that contained a zoo. Engels claimed that Paul had "one eighth or one twelfth nigger blood." In an April 1887 letter to Paul's wife, Engels wrote, "Being in his quality as a nigger, a degree nearer to the rest of the animal kingdom than the rest of us, he is undoubtedly the most appropriate representative of that district." Marx's anti-Semitic views were no secret. In 1844, he published an essay titled "On the Jewish Question." He wrote that the worldly religion of Jews was "huckstering" and that the Jew's god was "money." Marx's view of Jews was that they could only become an emancipated ethnicity or culture when they no longer exist. Just one step short of calling for genocide, Marx said, "The classes and the races, too weak to master the new conditions of life, must give way."

Marx's philosophical successors shared ugly thoughts on blacks and other minorities. Che Guevara, a hero of the left, was a horrific racist. He wrote in his 1952 memoir, "The Motorcycle Diaries": "The Negro is indolent and lazy and spends his money on frivolities, whereas the European is forward-looking, organized and intelligent."”

So, ad hominem is not inherently off the table when the fruit of the tree continues to remain poisonous. From the Black Book of Communism, we read that 94 million Communist Citizens were killed in the 20th century by Communistic Governance.

65 million in the People's Republic of China

20 million in the Soviet Union

2 million in Cambodia

2 million in North Korea

1.7 million in Africa

1.5 million in Afghanistan

1 million in the Communist states of Eastern Europe

1 million in Vietnam

150,000 in Latin America

10,000 deaths “resulting from actions of the international Communist movement and Communist parties not in power.”

And the other 19th century thinkers that the Frankfurt School drew from were similarly flawed men without the guiding light of scripture to reprove and correct the fallacies erected within their own rationale.

But this is not an essay on Marxism or Freudism, but a critique on Critical Theory. However, recurring themes will be playing out among those who subscribe to the Cultural, Philosophical, and Theological premises that we have already discussed. Critical Theory, much like Freudian Sociology and Marxist Political and Economic Theory, does exactly what its name suggests that it does, it critiques. Critiques what, you may ask: Western Culture and we will see Judeo-Christianity.

What really ground the gears of these Frankfurt School Philosophers was that the media and prosperity had supposedly hypnotized the masses into not realizing that they were actually oppressed. “The Consumers are the workers and the employees, the farmers and lower middle class. Capitalist production so confines them, body and soul, that they fall helpless victims to what is offered them. As naturally as the ruled always took the morality imposed upon them more seriously than did the rulers themselves, the deceived masses are today captivated by the myth of success even more than the successful are. Immovably they insist on the very ideology which enslaves them. The misplaced love of the common people for the wrong which is done them, is a greater force than the cunning of the authorities. (Adorno and Horheimer 1973, Pg. 133/144)

“Our Humanist ideas will only work if they will just let us try to enslave them again.” These are the Germans, need I remind you. Now, many of the Frankfurt School fled Germany because of their Jewish heritage, but their Atheistic ideology was ultimately incubated in the same stew that Marx, as we've established as a rabid anti-semite, Freud, and the eugenics movement that sought to sterilize the Jews from the face of the Earth. These are the people who we allowed into the universities in the 1960s and 1970s. These socialists and communists simply redesigned their ideology as they saw the colossal failures of Germany, Italy, Russia, China, and everywhere else their Humanist agenda was attempted.

This ultimately comes from a rejection of God's standards in substitution for Human reason alone. Reason is a critical part of the Christian Faith, but without the temperance of God's Justice and Moral Law, Human Reason always ends in injustice.

https://m.theepochtimes.com/c-how-the-specter-of-communism-is-ruling-our-world

https://www.newsherald.com/story/opinion/2020/08/16/many-marxists-dont-realize-their-hero-racist-and-anti-semite/3369024001/

https://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/movingwords/quotefeature/marx.shtml

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_School

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigmund_Freud

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Sigmund-Freud/Sexuality-and-development

https://asavalas.medium.com/freud-and-the-injustices-of-societal-sexual-repression-398c76303e99

What is Biblical Justice? Well, first, what is Justice?

Webster's 1828:

1. Justice; right. In practice, equity is the impartial distribution of justice, or the doing that to another which the laws of God and man, and of reason, give him a right to claim. It is the treating of a person according to justice and reason.

The Lord shall judge the people with equity Psalms 98:9.

With righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity Isaiah 11:4.

2. Justice; impartiality; a just regard to right or claim; as, we must, in equity allow this claim.

Wikipedia 2022:

Justice, in its broadest sense, is the principle that people receive that which they deserve, with the interpretation of what then constitutes "deserving" being impacted upon by numerous fields, with many differing viewpoints and perspectives, including the concepts of moral correctness based on ethics, rationality, law, religion, equity and fairness. The state will sometimes endeavour to increase justice by operating courts and enforcing their rulings.

So now that we have a framework of what Justice is, where do we get the values of right and wrong? Is it game theory based social contracts? Or is there an over-arching standard to which we all appeal when we say something like “napalming babies for fun is wrong”? How about killing off minorities for the promise of a healthier future? How about preventing those with particular beliefs from receiving medical care? From where do we get our standard? Well, obviously you can tell from our conversation so far that the Bible is the standard we call upon. So let's look at what God calls Just and how He conferred the duty of carrying out Justice to Man, historically. We also will see where Justice and Law became perverted.

Genesis 2:16-17 “And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.”

Genesis 3:8-24 hold the first trial in all of history. We see the examination of the defendants and witnesses by Judge, Jury, and Executioner.

In Genesis 9:5-6 we see the Lord handing over the Judicial, Legislative, and Executive branches to man.” nd surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man. Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.”

In Exodus 18:19-22 we see what would later model for the American Judicial System: ”Hearken now unto my voice, I will give thee counsel, and God shall be with thee: Be thou for the people to God-ward, that thou mayest bring the causes unto God: And thou shalt teach them ordinances and laws, and shalt shew them the way wherein they must walk, and the work that they must do. Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens: And let them judge the people at all seasons: and it shall be, that every great matter they shall bring unto thee, but every small matter they shall judge: so shall it be easier for thyself, and they shall bear the burden with thee.”

In Exodus 20-23 we see the Lord lay out part of what would become the Mosaic Law. This is what was used by Moses, Joshua, and the Judges all the way up to Samuel. Samuel's sons were wicked men. They perverted the Lord's system and ultimately died for it. However, before these sons of Samuel died, the Children of Israel cried out for a King. This led to the rule by a man, and not directly by God. Now, with man in between God and the people, tyranny ensued. We see Saul, David, Solomon, Rehoboam, and the rest suffer from their humanity. And the people suffered as well.

The United States of America is a unique system, in that our Founding Fathers attempted to revert, as much as was possible, to a somewhat Exodus-like form of Government. This government, they warned, would only work with citizens who held the Judeo-Christian Ethic. John Adams stated in a 1798 letter to the Massachusetts Militia: “Avarice, Ambition, Revenge, or Galantry, would break the strongest Cords of our Constitution as a Whale goes through a Net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” The return to a Godly society with the freedoms and liberties of Christ were at the core of our system.

Today, we see an enormous amount of crime and our measures of prison time have failed to produce the clean streets we would like. Sure, the streets are safer when one bad guy is taken off of them. However, how did God choose to deal with crimes? Capital Punishment, Restitution, Corporal Punishment.

Capital Punishment: Deuteronomy 22:25 m“But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die:”

Restitution: Exodus 22:7 “If a man gives his neighbor money or goods to keep for him and it is stolen from the man's house, if the thief is caught, he shall pay double.

Corporal Punishment: Deuteronomy 25:2-3 “And it shall be, if the wicked man be worthy to be beaten, that the judge shall cause him to lie down, and to be beaten before his face, according to his fault, by a certain number. Forty stripes he may give him, and not exceed: lest, if he should exceed, and beat him above these with many stripes, then thy brother should seem vile unto thee.”

Now, many have said that they believe that we should abolish prisons. Where are prisons found in the Bible? They are not, unless we are talking about the prisons of the Gentiles who oppress the Israelites. Prisons are a man-made concept. It is thought that the first prisons were constructed in Egypt or by some of the Mesopotamian nations surrounding Israel. http://www.prisonhistory.net/prison-history/history-of-prisons/

So here is the question: Why do we not follow God's plan for law and order? Sure, some things are different than the Levitical Law days, but the principles are similar. And before you go on to site Christ and His forgiveness of sins of various people, Christ is God. He is the ONE person who had the authority to do that (also the only one who would know if this person had actually repented). So why have we changed the way we meet out Justice?

Jeremy Bentham was the philosopher responsible for the modern incarnation of British and American prisons. His primary motivation was that he was against the Death Penalty. https://www.crimemuseum.org/crime-library/famous-prisons-incarceration/history-of-imprisonment/

Bentham was the Father of the Utilitarianism Movement as we know it today. He believed that: “actions are morally right if they tend to promote happiness or pleasure (and morally wrong if they tend to promote unhappiness or pain) among all those affected by them” https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjwq4SgpuX2AhU8j2oFHRJ6DesQFnoECAIQAw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.britannica.com%2Fbiography%2FJeremy-Bentham&usg=AOvVaw0-6DiUdiSNK_byPWSbvG9q

So here we have an example of man going his own way. Now that we have seen that this system does not work as well as we would have liked it to, some are suggesting that we reduce prison sentences as articles like this one do: https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2020/oct/1/new-study-shows-tough-crime-generation-spent-more-time-prison-despite-falling-crime-rate/

However, there is no indication that the lawlessness would go away and as we see in places like Southern California, reduction in consequences only increases crime. https://www.poynter.org/reporting-editing/2022/why-has-shoplifting-been-out-of-control-since-the-pandemic-began/

The issue is not a change in man made policies, but a return to God's policies. One will be less likely to steal if one has to pay restitution. One is much less likely to murder if death is the result, and certainly they will not be able to murder a second if death is the consequence. Now, some will immediately recoil at the mention of the death penalty, that is okay. The death penalty has also suffered at the hands of “man's wisdom”. Deuteronomy 17:6 should have been applied on all of those cases where faulty forensics or other circumstantial evidence put innocents to death: “On the evidence of two witnesses or three witnesses, he who is to die shall be put to death; he shall not be put to death on the evidence of one witness.” Follow God's standard and things will work as well as possible.

More Bible verses dealing with Justice:

Who is ultimately sovereign over Justice?

Ecclesiastes 3:17 “I said in mine heart, God shall judge the righteous and the wicked: for there is a time there for every purpose and for every work.”

Hebrews 10:30 “For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.”

What does God say a society should do concerning Justice?

Hosea 12:6

“Therefore turn thou to thy God: keep mercy and judgment, and wait on thy God continually.”

What affect should Justice have on the righteous, what about the wicked?

Proverbs 21:15

“It is joy to the just to do judgment: but destruction shall be to the workers of iniquity.”

Proverbs 24:24-25 “He that saith unto the wicked, Thou art righteous; him shall the people curse, nations shall abhor him: But to them that rebuke him shall be delight, and a good blessing shall come upon them.”

Whose job is it to maintain this order?

Romans 12:9 “Let love be without dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good.”

Romans 13:1-7 “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.”

What does the Bible say about partiality?

Leviticus 19:15 “You shall do no injustice in judgment; you shall not be partial to the poor nor defer to the great, but you are to judge your neighbor fairly”

1 Timothy 5:21 “I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of His chosen angels, to maintain these principles without bias, doing nothing in a spirit of partiality.”

Deuteronomy 1:17 “You shall not show partiality in judgment; you shall hear the small and the great alike. You shall not fear man, for the judgment is God's. The case that is too hard for you, you shall bring to me, and I will hear it.”

First off, what is an “Otherkin”? From Oxford: “a person who identifies as nonhuman, typically as being wholly or partially an animal or mythical being.”

Or from Wikipedia: “Otherkin are a subculture of people who identify as not entirely human. Some otherkin believe their identity derives from reincarnation, trans-species dysphoria of the soul, ancestry, or metaphor. Others attribute it to unusual psychology and do not hold spiritual beliefs on the subject.”

Furry from Oxford: “an enthusiast for animal characters with human characteristics, in particular a person who dresses up in costume as such a character or uses one as an avatar online.”

Furry from Wikipedia: “The furry fandom is a subculture interested in anthropomorphic animal characters with human personalities and characteristics. Examples of anthropomorphic attributes include exhibiting human intelligence and facial expressions, speaking, walking on two legs, and wearing clothes.”

You may have heard of Dragon Lady or some of these others who identify as cats or other critters. This has become more popular in recent years and we are now seeing the rise of the subculture. Now, it is easy to laugh at fur-suits and mock these people as yet another sexual deviant, but this IS part of the mission field in America. We should be looking at what ideologies and pathologies have befallen these people and attempt to see what can be done for their spiritual malaise. There is a very real consequence, not for being an otherkin, but for the spiritual issues that lie underneath this dysmorphia.

According to this paper from semanticscholar.org, there is a ~40% suicidality in the group with a roughly 80% apparent overlap with the LGBT Community.

https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Risk-and-protective-factors-for-SADness-in-the-An-Simpson/eed2f99e9868c993d78c2d3d55880bef354c18ef/figure/3

Once again, these numbers suggest some participate for the sense of community, while others have suffered from trauma that is statistically present in the LGBT community. It was hard to track down stats on the history of abuse in the furry and otherkin communities. However, the we can also look at the consistent complaints of dysmorphia with their physical human condition as a sign that they are not happy with themselves as is. They will go to extraordinary lengths to relieve themselves of their human condition, even turning to antisocial a-human behaviors or surgery as you can see in this one interview with Anthony Padilla. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrgN2Y4Towo&ab_channel=AnthonyPadilla

This is not just a physical thing. To call it such would be dismissive of the true problem. The issue ultimately boils down to a severe dislike of oneself and the order that God created, or at least the fallen state in which we all live.

Now, the truth is, these otherkin and furry folks are on to something: they are souls living in fallen bodies and the yearning for something more and better is a natural one. We will someday have a glorified body, as image bearers of God! However, the Enemy of Our Souls has led these poor people to believe that trading down to animals or mythical creatures is somehow better than what God has promised. We have the answer these people desperately need.

What does the Bible say about the form for which we are destined?

1 Corinthians 15:42-53

This is much better than some animal or fantasy creature.

1 Corinthians 15:57

This new body and hope comes through this victory.

Genesis 3:6-7

This shows us that our bodies are in need of something. We are lacking without that which the Lord has planned for us.

Revelations 3:18

We will no longer be naked, or without that which we need to be complete. We will be clothed in His Righteousness. THIS is the ONLY solution for the very real lack that our frail unregenerate bodies hold.

We have the answer for these people as well as the mandate and commission to reach them for the Gospel's sake Mathew 28:19-20. We are not to make fun of them, but to seek to make them disciples of Christ. If you have someone like this in your life or the Lord brings someone like this into your life, remember to what you are called and meet them where they are at, just as Christ did. Lead them to the knowledge of the One who can solve their dysmorphia.

Now, there may be someone coming forward to say that “reassignment” surgery or a same sex relationship helped them with their depression. This may hold anecdotal value, but even in the case of someone who has decided to alter their body and undergone the knife, for example, they are still not the opposite gender. Their DNA and body composition shouts against the lie that is being told when we designate new “pronouns”. And in truth, underneath the facade, there is still a biological gender hardwired into this individual's heart and mind and all of the emotions that go with it, suppressed underneath an unnatural identity.

But let's not deal with anecdotes just yet. What are the statistics and facts surrounding dysmorphia and reassignment surgery? Well, according to a rather thorough study in Sweden (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885 ) 10-15 after operation, morbidity (after having adjusting for comorbidities) is nearly 20 times in comparison to those with a heterosexual lifestyle. This does not mean that the surgery killed the person, as how some on the Left would like to twist the argument. That is a strawman if ever there was one. The issue is of the heart. What does the Bible say about marriage?

Genesis 2:24 Defines Marriage

Mark 7:21 Christ speaks about Sexual Immorality

Romans 1:24-32 really speaks to the issue specifically

1 Corinthians 6:9

1 Timothy 1:10

Now, there are those who would say that the Bible never condemns homosexuality, but beastialty and pedophilia, as they do in this article:

https://www.americanprogress.org/article/four-things-you-didnt-know-about-god-and-same-sex-marriage/

However, this is not the plan of the Lord. What does Marriage represent?

Ephesians 5:21-32

So what has the Enemy of Our Souls done? He has perverted our view of this image of God's relationship to us through dysphoria and jealousy of roles, and to our demise, we have fallen for it as a culture.

Your value is not in your sexuality, it is in the fact that God above LOVES you. He wants to spend an eternal marriage supper with you in a place we know as Heaven. If you are suffering from a lack of ability to identify with the concept of marriage, may I suggest to you that the things in your life that have led you to this dysphoric view of Godly Marriage are just the Enemy's attempt to steal your true joy? No partner, lifestyle, or surgery can fill the void in your soul that God is meant to fill. We long for a relationship with the divine, and though many things and ideas may vie for that spot, only He can successfully fill it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDIrnp2iNJU&ab_channel=BlaireWhite