| Tweet |
|
|
|
“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” – Galatians 3:28 (ESV), currently one of the most abused verses in the Bible
Unlike the revolutionary branch of Marxism, which believed that its dream of utopian equality should be pursued from the top down via the overthrow of the existing order and the creation of a new order, the cultural branch of Marxism held that utopian equality should be pursued from the bottom up through the gradual eroding of the prevailing culture and the co-opting of the existing order. The revolutionary method was tried and largely failed in the USSR and Communist Bloc, while the cultural method is currently ongoing in the USA, UK, and the rest of the West with great success. The cultural Marxists have managed to co-opt almost all of our institutions, including the government, the media, the education system, and even the church. Yes, even the church has bought into the cultural Marxist ideology, with its ungodly goal of complete earthly equality and its scorning of God’s sovereignty and particular gifts. Rejecting God, the Marxist seeks to create his own twisted version of heaven on earth. No barriers, no boundaries, no borders, no distinctions, no discrimination – we are all one and the same. No sin, no sinners, no judgments – well, except for those heretics who don’t embrace the true gospel of equality. Salvation can be obtained without God through devotion to the social gospel, equality, and tolerance.
The liberal wing of the church has embraced this ideology so thoroughly that they cannot even be termed “Christian” any more, while the more conservative (i.e. slightly less liberal) wing of the church thinks that it can embrace the older, more accepted parts of the Marxist ideology to ingratiate themselves with the pagan culture while not embracing other newer, less accepted parts. For example, the conservative church thinks that it can embrace miscegenation, but not homosexuality, “civil rights” for non-whites, but not feminism, and racial Marxism, but not gender Marxism. Thus, when a Kinist like myself starts talking about the reality and importance of race, they will throw out “there is neither Jew nor Greek” as proof that racial/ethnic differences are irrelevant and that discussing them is unchristian (unless it’s whites groveling before minorities). However, they hypocritically refuse to follow through and apply the rest of the verse in the same way. If this verse is saying that Christ erases all physical racial differences, then the verse must also mean that Christ erases all physical gender differences too. If “skin color” is accidental and meaningless, then why should “genitalia” be any different? There is no logically or morally consistent way to oppose homosexuality or feminism while supporting miscegenation or racial egalitarianism.
“If you really want to get to know someone, you don’t ask what’s between their legs,” says [the father].
When Storm was born, the couple sent an email to friends and family: “We’ve decided not to share Storm’s sex for now — a tribute to freedom and choice in place of limitation, a stand up to what the world could become in Storm’s lifetime (a more progressive place? …).” . . .
Witterick and Stocker believe they are giving their children the freedom to choose who they want to be, unconstrained by social norms about males and females. . . .
“What we noticed is that parents make so many choices for their children. It’s obnoxious,” says Stocker.
This is, of course, grossly unnatural and anti-Christian. God sovereignly grants us our gender as a blessing, with each having its own special roles. Far from being “obnoxious,” parents who raise their sons as boys and daughters as girls are doing their Christian duty to prepare their children for their unique roles. Witterick and Stocker are not only in open rebellion against God, but are seriously screwing up their children.
With all that being understood, the modern church, both liberal and conservative, due to their own Marxist interpretation of Galatians 3:28, cannot consistently condemn this couple. The church sees the verse as erasing physical distinctions, rather than interpreting it as a statement of spiritual unity among Christians, as it was intended. If it is sinfully “racist” and hateful to raise white children as whites, teaching them to be proud of being white and to fulfill their role as whites, as many Christians have told me that it is, then it is likewise sinfully “sexist” and hateful to raise children as boys or girls, teaching them to be proud of being boys or girls and to fulfill their respective gender roles. In fact, this twisted interpretation of Galatians 3:28 would make a genderless upbringing to be the truly Christian way to raise children. After all, there is no male and female – only Christians and non-Christians – so why would you want to set up artificial distinctions like “gender”? The church’s acceptance of Marxist presuppositions puts them in the position of having to call good evil and evil good to remain consistent (Isaiah 5:20). Of course, the conservative wing of the church will be hypocritical and condemn this couple anyway while still holding onto their racial egalitarianism, but that does not change the fact that they really don’t have a leg to stand on. You must fully reject Marxism and glory in the God-made distinctions of mankind, or you will be forced to incrementally embrace more and more of the Marxist positions as the pagan culture pressures you to be consistent with the presuppositions that you have already conceded.
To further prove my point that this couple holds the same Marxist presuppositions as the modern church, try reading the linked article again, but this time replace the word “gender” or “sex” with “race,” “boy/girl” or “male/female” with “European/African/Asian,” “genitalia” with “skin color,” etc. You’ll swear the article was written by your Sunday School teacher talking about racial equality.
