What do you think?
Rate this book
Why Social Justice Is Not Biblical Justice: An Urgent Appeal to Fellow Christians in a Time of Social Crisis
“Highly recommended!” - Wayne Grudem, PhD, Distinguished Research Professor of Theology and Biblical Studies, Phoenix Seminary “I urge you to read and share this book immediately and widely!” - Kelly Monroe Kullberg, author of Finding God Beyond The Quest for Veritas “We have long needed a book like this. Every serious Christian—especially every pastor—should read and heed the wisdom it contains.” - Tom Ascol, Senior pastor of Grace Baptist Church (Cape Coral, Florida), President of Founders Ministries “We are a wounded nation now, and Christians need to bind up wounds and not make new ones. Instead of scorning those who push for social justice, we should recognize that leftist ideologues have twisted the concept of social justice, and some Christians have naively gone along with the distortion. Scott Allen offers an alternative that’s crucial to consider.” - Marvin Olasky, Editor in chief of WORLD magazine Prepare yourself to defend the truth against the greatest worldview threat of our generation. In recent years, a set of ideas rooted in postmodernism and neo-Marxist critical theory have merged into a comprehensive worldview. Labeled “social justice” by its advocates, it has radically redefined the popular understanding of justice. It purports to value equality and diversity and to champion the cause of the oppressed. Yet far too many Christians have little knowledge of this ideology, and consequently, don’t see the danger. Many evangelical leaders confuse ideological social justice with biblical justice. Of course, justice is a deeply biblical idea, but this new ideology is far from biblical. It is imperative that Christ-followers, tasked with blessing their nations, wake up to the danger, and carefully discern the difference between Biblical justice and its destructive counterfeit. This book aims to replace confusion with clarity by holding up the counterfeit worldview and the Biblical worldview side-by-side, showing how significantly they differ in their core presuppositions. It challenges Christians to not merely denounce the false worldview, but offer a better alternative—the incomparable Biblical worldview, which shapes cultures marked by genuine justice, mercy, forgiveness, social harmony, and human dignity.
264 pages, Paperback
First published September 10, 2020
723 people are currently reading
1169 people want to read
About the author
Scott David Allen
3 books6 followersSCOTT D. ALLEN is president of Disciple Nations Alliance, disciplenations.org
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 149 reviews
December 3, 2020
Revisionist History
Went in with an open mind. The explanation of the ideological social justice movement is adequate as well as the explanation of biblical justice, and that was actually very helpful. Beyond that, this book is full of half-truths and surface-level analysis. Of most significance is his explanation of the Preservation Narrative focusing on the evils of the Left. Absolutely zero historical understanding of these political parties and how they shifted over time in response to issues of civil rights and the role of government. I would recommend the first half of the book. I would not recommend the second half.
Went in with an open mind. The explanation of the ideological social justice movement is adequate as well as the explanation of biblical justice, and that was actually very helpful. Beyond that, this book is full of half-truths and surface-level analysis. Of most significance is his explanation of the Preservation Narrative focusing on the evils of the Left. Absolutely zero historical understanding of these political parties and how they shifted over time in response to issues of civil rights and the role of government. I would recommend the first half of the book. I would not recommend the second half.
July 2, 2021
In 1969, Francis Schaeffer warned, “There’s bound to be death in the city once people turn away from the base upon which our culture was built … Death in the city will be increasingly all-consuming unless there is true reformation in the church and culture upon the foundation of God and His revelation.”1 Fifty years later, Schaeffer’s words ring true as professing Christians succumb to the spirit of the age. One example of this is the introduction of social justice. Social justice has creeped into the church, parachurch, and the academy. The accommodation of this ideology has inflicted untold damage and is deceiving people and leading them astray.
Scott David Allen’s book, Why Social Justice is Not Biblical Justice sets the record straight. At the outset, the author contrasts biblical justice with social justice:
Biblical Justice: “Conformity to God’s moral standard as revealed in the Ten Commandments and the Royal Law: ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’”
Social Justice: “Deconstructing traditional systems and structures deemed to be oppressive, and redistributing power and resources from oppressors to their victims in the pursuit of equality of outcome.”
Careful readers will notice that the differences in these definitions are vast and wide. Biblical justice, which is an important aspect of God’s character is repeated throughout Scripture. Make no mistake: All Christians celebrate the reality of justice. The notion of social justice (what the author refers to as idealogical social justice) that many are embracing is not only unbiblical; it is anti-gospel. Scott David Allen skillfully shows why ideological social justice fails the biblical test and urges followers of Christ to steer clear from this worldly ideology.
There is much to commend in Allen’s book. The author shows the dangers of the “woke” movement, not to mention the ungodly ideology that drives critical race theory and intersectionality. These matters require a more comprehensive treatment, which are beyond the scope of this review. At the heart of the book, however, is a careful differentiation between the Revolutionary Narrative and the Preservation Narrative.
The Revolutionary Narrative
The Revolutionary Narrative flows directly from the polluted stream of ideological social justice. This view maintains that institutional racism and systemic injustice must be upheld and emphasized. People of color, according to the Revolutionary Narrative are constantly battling systemic white oppression.
The Revolutionary Narrative embraces the notion of “white fragility,” popularized by former University of Washington professor, Robin Diangelo. The notion of “white fragility” embraces the idea that white people need to “come to terms with their whiteness.” According to Diangelo, “whiteness has given them a big leg up in life while crushing others’ dreams, that their whiteness … has shielded them from growing up as quickly as they might have done had they not so heavily leaned on it to make it through life.”2 Thus, according to “white fragility,” all white people are racists, whether they realize it or not.
This narrative embraces the organization, Black Lives Matter, the neo-Marxist group that is growing exponentially in America. BLM is “queer affirming” and celebrates LBGTQ+ rights and seeks to abolish capitalism and replace it with a form of Marxist collectivism, not to mention the defunding of the police. The idea that America has driven by systemic racism is at the very heart of both BLM and the Revolutionary Narrative. America, in this scheme, about oppression, not freedom.
The Preservation Narrative
The Preservation Narrative “affirms the goodness of America’s founding principles and seeks to preserve them while desiring to continually improve our systems and institutions to more perfectly reflect these principles.” Such a view is deeply patriotic and cherished the work of the Founding Fathers, the United States Constitution, and the Bill of Rights.
In contrast to the Revolutionary Narrative, this narrative strongly emphasizes personal choice and responsibility. While racism exists and persists, it acknowledges that the ultimate evil lies in the human heart (Jer. 17:9). The author adds, “The challenges in the black community can be overcome in ways that are not dependent on the actions of white people, but the choices and actions of black people themselves.” Thus, individuals are accountable for their actions - both for good and evil.
The Preservation Narrative acknowledges America’s history of racism but also acknowledges the progress made, beginning with the abolition of slavery and racial equality. “Today,” writes Scott David Allen, “America is one of the least racist countries in the world and a land of opportunity for people of all ethnic backgrounds, which is why immigrants continue to flock here in huge numbers, including many with black and brown skin.” Racism, in this view, is condemned and justice is coveted for all peoples.
Non-Justice
The social justice movement has skillfully and tragically redefined justice as follows:
For Christians, it is critical that we understand the worldview shift taking place before our eyes. We have slowly moved from a Judeo-Christian worldview that provided a framework for justice and established worth among all people. “Today,” writes the author, “all this has been cast aside, as that which formerly brought order to society and meaning and purpose to the individual has been abandoned.” Ironically, then, ideological social justice does the opposite of what it sets out to do.
Ultimately, the social justice movement seeks to overthrow the Christian worldview. The author reflects on the consequences of ideological social justice: “In the zero-sum world of social justice power struggle, there is no ‘live and let live; tolerance. No win-win, or even compromise. No place for forgiveness, or grace. No ‘love your enemy.’ No ‘first get the log out of your own eye’ introspection. There is only grievance, condemnation, and retribution. Bigots, haters, and oppressors must be destroyed.” Thoughtful Christians, then, need to see through the veneer of this diabolical scheme to supplant a God-centered worldview that sees all people as image-bearers of God and bestowed with inherent worth from their Creator.
Conclusion
Francis Schaeffer’s admonition to aim for true reformation in the church by clinging to God’s revelation hearkens our attention back to Psalm 11:3, “If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do?” Day by day the foundations are eroding as ideological social justice eats away at the fabric of God’s propositional truth. The social justice movement strikes at the very core of the gospel - and is indeed, anti-gospel.
Rod Dreher warns us in his most recent book, Live Not By Lies that the “social justice” machine is one that must be opposed at every juncture: “Far from being confined to campuses and dry intellectual journals, social justice warrior ideals are transforming elite institutions and networks of power and influence.”3To be clear, this movement is worming its way into the church at an alarming rate. Therefore, we must resist it with all our might and focus our attention on loving God, loving people, and working to assure that people of every color and creed are accepted and loved as image-bearers of God. We must return to the cross of Jesus where justice and mercy meet and promises eternal life to each person who trusts in an all-sufficient Savior.
Why Social Justice is Not Biblical Justice is a landmark book. It should be devoured and discussed by Christians. The net gain will be a renewed interest in biblical justice and a reinvigorated passion to reach every person with the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Scott David Allen’s book, Why Social Justice is Not Biblical Justice sets the record straight. At the outset, the author contrasts biblical justice with social justice:
Biblical Justice: “Conformity to God’s moral standard as revealed in the Ten Commandments and the Royal Law: ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’”
Social Justice: “Deconstructing traditional systems and structures deemed to be oppressive, and redistributing power and resources from oppressors to their victims in the pursuit of equality of outcome.”
Careful readers will notice that the differences in these definitions are vast and wide. Biblical justice, which is an important aspect of God’s character is repeated throughout Scripture. Make no mistake: All Christians celebrate the reality of justice. The notion of social justice (what the author refers to as idealogical social justice) that many are embracing is not only unbiblical; it is anti-gospel. Scott David Allen skillfully shows why ideological social justice fails the biblical test and urges followers of Christ to steer clear from this worldly ideology.
There is much to commend in Allen’s book. The author shows the dangers of the “woke” movement, not to mention the ungodly ideology that drives critical race theory and intersectionality. These matters require a more comprehensive treatment, which are beyond the scope of this review. At the heart of the book, however, is a careful differentiation between the Revolutionary Narrative and the Preservation Narrative.
The Revolutionary Narrative
The Revolutionary Narrative flows directly from the polluted stream of ideological social justice. This view maintains that institutional racism and systemic injustice must be upheld and emphasized. People of color, according to the Revolutionary Narrative are constantly battling systemic white oppression.
The Revolutionary Narrative embraces the notion of “white fragility,” popularized by former University of Washington professor, Robin Diangelo. The notion of “white fragility” embraces the idea that white people need to “come to terms with their whiteness.” According to Diangelo, “whiteness has given them a big leg up in life while crushing others’ dreams, that their whiteness … has shielded them from growing up as quickly as they might have done had they not so heavily leaned on it to make it through life.”2 Thus, according to “white fragility,” all white people are racists, whether they realize it or not.
This narrative embraces the organization, Black Lives Matter, the neo-Marxist group that is growing exponentially in America. BLM is “queer affirming” and celebrates LBGTQ+ rights and seeks to abolish capitalism and replace it with a form of Marxist collectivism, not to mention the defunding of the police. The idea that America has driven by systemic racism is at the very heart of both BLM and the Revolutionary Narrative. America, in this scheme, about oppression, not freedom.
The Preservation Narrative
The Preservation Narrative “affirms the goodness of America’s founding principles and seeks to preserve them while desiring to continually improve our systems and institutions to more perfectly reflect these principles.” Such a view is deeply patriotic and cherished the work of the Founding Fathers, the United States Constitution, and the Bill of Rights.
In contrast to the Revolutionary Narrative, this narrative strongly emphasizes personal choice and responsibility. While racism exists and persists, it acknowledges that the ultimate evil lies in the human heart (Jer. 17:9). The author adds, “The challenges in the black community can be overcome in ways that are not dependent on the actions of white people, but the choices and actions of black people themselves.” Thus, individuals are accountable for their actions - both for good and evil.
The Preservation Narrative acknowledges America’s history of racism but also acknowledges the progress made, beginning with the abolition of slavery and racial equality. “Today,” writes Scott David Allen, “America is one of the least racist countries in the world and a land of opportunity for people of all ethnic backgrounds, which is why immigrants continue to flock here in huge numbers, including many with black and brown skin.” Racism, in this view, is condemned and justice is coveted for all peoples.
Non-Justice
The social justice movement has skillfully and tragically redefined justice as follows:
“The tearing down of traditional structures and systems deemed to be oppressive, and the redistribution of power and resources from oppressors to victims in pursuit of equality of outcome.”
For Christians, it is critical that we understand the worldview shift taking place before our eyes. We have slowly moved from a Judeo-Christian worldview that provided a framework for justice and established worth among all people. “Today,” writes the author, “all this has been cast aside, as that which formerly brought order to society and meaning and purpose to the individual has been abandoned.” Ironically, then, ideological social justice does the opposite of what it sets out to do.
Ultimately, the social justice movement seeks to overthrow the Christian worldview. The author reflects on the consequences of ideological social justice: “In the zero-sum world of social justice power struggle, there is no ‘live and let live; tolerance. No win-win, or even compromise. No place for forgiveness, or grace. No ‘love your enemy.’ No ‘first get the log out of your own eye’ introspection. There is only grievance, condemnation, and retribution. Bigots, haters, and oppressors must be destroyed.” Thoughtful Christians, then, need to see through the veneer of this diabolical scheme to supplant a God-centered worldview that sees all people as image-bearers of God and bestowed with inherent worth from their Creator.
Conclusion
Francis Schaeffer’s admonition to aim for true reformation in the church by clinging to God’s revelation hearkens our attention back to Psalm 11:3, “If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do?” Day by day the foundations are eroding as ideological social justice eats away at the fabric of God’s propositional truth. The social justice movement strikes at the very core of the gospel - and is indeed, anti-gospel.
Rod Dreher warns us in his most recent book, Live Not By Lies that the “social justice” machine is one that must be opposed at every juncture: “Far from being confined to campuses and dry intellectual journals, social justice warrior ideals are transforming elite institutions and networks of power and influence.”3To be clear, this movement is worming its way into the church at an alarming rate. Therefore, we must resist it with all our might and focus our attention on loving God, loving people, and working to assure that people of every color and creed are accepted and loved as image-bearers of God. We must return to the cross of Jesus where justice and mercy meet and promises eternal life to each person who trusts in an all-sufficient Savior.
Why Social Justice is Not Biblical Justice is a landmark book. It should be devoured and discussed by Christians. The net gain will be a renewed interest in biblical justice and a reinvigorated passion to reach every person with the gospel of Jesus Christ.
November 4, 2020
This is a book every Christian should read. Author Allen not only critiques "Social Justice" for what it is, an alternate religious worldview with no grace, forgiveness or redemption (or love) but only division, polarization and destruction, but establishes the Biblical Worldview of redemption in Christ and the church working in the world to fight for a biblically defined justice, common humanity and love for neighbor.
It is so sad to see many Christians absorb Critical Theory in its many manifestations. The reasons are legion but the fear of man surely is at the top. God forgive us.
This issue is ripping churches apart, tearing brother from brother, sister from sister where the saving gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ should unite us. But instead of grieving us, we thump our chests and say WE are the true body of Christ. So sad.
At a time when the church should be a beacon of light and hope in this fractured world, we have sold our prophetic voice for a bowl of red stew and have allowed the world to define terms, set the agenda and establish the means of engagement. This should not be. But we would rather have our personal peace and prosperity. Watch as the Lord takes this away!
It is so sad to see many Christians absorb Critical Theory in its many manifestations. The reasons are legion but the fear of man surely is at the top. God forgive us.
This issue is ripping churches apart, tearing brother from brother, sister from sister where the saving gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ should unite us. But instead of grieving us, we thump our chests and say WE are the true body of Christ. So sad.
At a time when the church should be a beacon of light and hope in this fractured world, we have sold our prophetic voice for a bowl of red stew and have allowed the world to define terms, set the agenda and establish the means of engagement. This should not be. But we would rather have our personal peace and prosperity. Watch as the Lord takes this away!
May 11, 2021
I came to this book open to the argument, but this is not it. The author fails to present a satisfactory picture of "biblical Justice" by using fragmented bible verses to support his own reasoning rather than exegeting the text. In the main chapter (ch 2) where he tries to accomplish this, he manages to quote people more than scripture itself and has a suspicious number of comments that don't seem necessary yet pander to a very Christian nationalistic perspective.
After establishing this flimsy foundation, he explains the definition of "social justice" with sweeping generalities of the most extreme version that most, if not all, people that I'm aware of that value social justice would not agree with.
He has good though not original things to say about worldview that become self condemning as he fails to exhibit any awareness of his own worldview (not realizing his very culturally biased version of "biblical"). He references the Declaration of Independence as an example of biblical Justice then later critiques modernist philosophers that ignore spirituality and uphold reason, ironically the same values of the Deist authors of the D.O.I. that he just praised.
When explaining Marxist theory, he leaves a huge hole by failing to acknowledge what makes it attractive and misses the whole heart of a movement. Why is this attractive? What could it implicate that the church is missing or failing at? Could we have blind spots, similar to when the church protected slavery for over 200 years? Is there any room for social justice to fall under the umbrella of biblical Justice? To what extent? Maybe his answer to all of these is "No," but his argument appears all the more insecure by not even considering them.
One last thought. It doesn't damage his argument necessarily, but it was incredibly difficult when he quoted Ravi Zacharias saying roughly "Truth is the handmaiden of justice. When truth dies, justice dies with it." This book was published 4 months after Zacharias' death and this quote itself is particularly difficult in light of his confirmed sexual abuse allegations and would be worth the publishers reconsidering.
After establishing this flimsy foundation, he explains the definition of "social justice" with sweeping generalities of the most extreme version that most, if not all, people that I'm aware of that value social justice would not agree with.
He has good though not original things to say about worldview that become self condemning as he fails to exhibit any awareness of his own worldview (not realizing his very culturally biased version of "biblical"). He references the Declaration of Independence as an example of biblical Justice then later critiques modernist philosophers that ignore spirituality and uphold reason, ironically the same values of the Deist authors of the D.O.I. that he just praised.
When explaining Marxist theory, he leaves a huge hole by failing to acknowledge what makes it attractive and misses the whole heart of a movement. Why is this attractive? What could it implicate that the church is missing or failing at? Could we have blind spots, similar to when the church protected slavery for over 200 years? Is there any room for social justice to fall under the umbrella of biblical Justice? To what extent? Maybe his answer to all of these is "No," but his argument appears all the more insecure by not even considering them.
One last thought. It doesn't damage his argument necessarily, but it was incredibly difficult when he quoted Ravi Zacharias saying roughly "Truth is the handmaiden of justice. When truth dies, justice dies with it." This book was published 4 months after Zacharias' death and this quote itself is particularly difficult in light of his confirmed sexual abuse allegations and would be worth the publishers reconsidering.
December 12, 2020
Read this book on the recommendation of a friend. I was severely underwhelmed.
Let me begin by saying that I have a lot of sympathy with his basic premise that social justice ideology as a totalizing worldview is incoherent, dangerous, and not what we want governing our society. As Christians we should want justice, and want it defined on God's terms, not the world's.
Having said that, this book doesn't have a lot to recommend it. The explanation of Biblical justice is very thin, and basically came to a classical liberal idea of negative rights without addressing the biblical concepts of corporate responsibility and the positive responsibility of the who have to those who don't. On the flip side, I don't think he did a great job of articulating the very Social Justice mindset he was seeking to critique. I wouldn't feel comfortable handing this book to someone and suggesting that they would understand this worldview-far better to just hand them to the link to vox.com and tell them to read a half dozen articles. They'll have a better grip on what's going on.
I also was frustrated by his distortion of historical events, for example, portraying the American and English revolutions as somehow unrelated to the French revolution. The tone through the middle/latter parts of the book was pop-level apology for America/the West rather than a Biblical interaction with the prevailing cultural ideology of our day.
In all, I just don't see enough substance here to warrant your time reading it.
Let me begin by saying that I have a lot of sympathy with his basic premise that social justice ideology as a totalizing worldview is incoherent, dangerous, and not what we want governing our society. As Christians we should want justice, and want it defined on God's terms, not the world's.
Having said that, this book doesn't have a lot to recommend it. The explanation of Biblical justice is very thin, and basically came to a classical liberal idea of negative rights without addressing the biblical concepts of corporate responsibility and the positive responsibility of the who have to those who don't. On the flip side, I don't think he did a great job of articulating the very Social Justice mindset he was seeking to critique. I wouldn't feel comfortable handing this book to someone and suggesting that they would understand this worldview-far better to just hand them to the link to vox.com and tell them to read a half dozen articles. They'll have a better grip on what's going on.
I also was frustrated by his distortion of historical events, for example, portraying the American and English revolutions as somehow unrelated to the French revolution. The tone through the middle/latter parts of the book was pop-level apology for America/the West rather than a Biblical interaction with the prevailing cultural ideology of our day.
In all, I just don't see enough substance here to warrant your time reading it.
June 8, 2021
The author gets the gospel right, lots of scripture references. So that was the good. I also don’t disagree with everything. I do see myself as conservative, but found his presentation and historical evaluations lacking.
However, This book presupposes that Christianity was what our country was founded on, and therefore to move away from it is wrong by virtue of rejecting the foundational beginnings of America. This was annoying. At multiple times the author references our Judeo Christian background, and like someone else mentioned ~ this is a revisionist history. No the founding fathers were not Christians. No, the civil laws and our system are not inherently Christian. It’s not sinful or bad, but it was not designed as a Christian theocratic institution. It’s like putting blinders on and acting as though Christianity ( as in truly saved people) has been dominant in our culture. Americas behavior is a stain in history we have truly wronged people. It simplifies so many of the true and objective issues that many have. SJW are not just concerned about issues revolving around sexuality, race, and economic status in just today’s context and I have met few people who are truly SJW based on the authors description. I know they exist, but I wouldn’t argue it’s the main argument in our culture.
I’m not naive to this topic and it’s many nuanced views. This book was an oversimplification and more of a personal complaint about political ideals not conforming to Christianity and lumping one idea with many.
Wouldn’t recommend as a whole, but found the second half vehemently opposed to reasonable and rationale objective historical fact... I’m shocked, honestly.
However, This book presupposes that Christianity was what our country was founded on, and therefore to move away from it is wrong by virtue of rejecting the foundational beginnings of America. This was annoying. At multiple times the author references our Judeo Christian background, and like someone else mentioned ~ this is a revisionist history. No the founding fathers were not Christians. No, the civil laws and our system are not inherently Christian. It’s not sinful or bad, but it was not designed as a Christian theocratic institution. It’s like putting blinders on and acting as though Christianity ( as in truly saved people) has been dominant in our culture. Americas behavior is a stain in history we have truly wronged people. It simplifies so many of the true and objective issues that many have. SJW are not just concerned about issues revolving around sexuality, race, and economic status in just today’s context and I have met few people who are truly SJW based on the authors description. I know they exist, but I wouldn’t argue it’s the main argument in our culture.
I’m not naive to this topic and it’s many nuanced views. This book was an oversimplification and more of a personal complaint about political ideals not conforming to Christianity and lumping one idea with many.
Wouldn’t recommend as a whole, but found the second half vehemently opposed to reasonable and rationale objective historical fact... I’m shocked, honestly.
October 4, 2020
Much needed rebuttal
Thank you, Scott Allen, for adding your voice to those pushing back against the hateful, graceless, evil social justice movement. May churches across America truly awaken to respect and love for the true gospel of Jesus Christ.
Thank you, Scott Allen, for adding your voice to those pushing back against the hateful, graceless, evil social justice movement. May churches across America truly awaken to respect and love for the true gospel of Jesus Christ.
January 9, 2021
Christians have always been concerned about justice. The Christian concept that we are all created in the image of God has led to the nearly universally accepted notion of human rights and the inherent dignity of all people. Throughout history, where these ideals have taken root, justice has increased – ending infanticide, abolishing slavery, promoting women’s rights, helping the poor. These ideas, and many others taken for granted today would have been considered nonsensical by the classical Greeks and Romans.
But here Allen argues that some of today’s concepts of Social Justice owe more to the influence of Marx and Critical Theory than to Biblical Christianity. And because of their proper concern for justice, some Christians are falling for what amounts to an entirely different worldview.
The author details the differences between the Biblical worldview and that of Ideological Social Justice. This is an abbreviated account of the core tenets of each worldview:
Who are we?
Ideological Social Justice: we are creatures whose identity is wholly socially determined.
Biblical Justice: We are created in the image of God, and have inherent dignity and immeasurable worth
What is our fundamental problem?
Ideological Social Justice: Oppression, from white male hegemonic power structures
Biblical Justice: Rebellion, against God, resulting in broken relationships with God and with fellow man
What is the solution to our problem?
Ideological Social Justice: Revolution, to overthrow these power structures
Biblical Justice: The Gospel. Christ opened the way for the reconciliation of our broken relationships
What is our primary moral duty?
Ideological Social Justice: To stand in solidarity with, protect and defend the oppressed
Biblical Justice: To love God with all our heart, mind, and strength, and love our neighbors as ourselves
How do we know what is true?
Ideological Social Justice: The notions of objective truth, reason, logic, evidence and argument are discredited tools used by oppressors to maintain their hegemony
Biblical Justice: Divine revelation, human conscience (the law written on our heart), God-given reason and logic
Who has ultimate authority?
Ideological Social Justice: Victims; their claims must be believed without question
Biblical Justice: God, and his revealed Word in scripture
I’ll just drop in a couple of quotes:
'If your story tells you that your primary identity is “victim,” your life will be marked by bitterness, resentment, grievance, and entitlement. If your story tells you your primary identity is privileged oppressor, your life will be marked by guilt and shame. However, if your story tells you that your identity is “sinner, yet loved by God and saved by grace,” your life will be marked by gratitude and humility.'
'The line between good and evil doesn’t run between racial groups, or males and females, or any other group, class, or party. It runs right through every human heart. We are all sinners. We, equally, are in need of grace and forgiveness. . . At the very heart of the biblical story is justice, but also mercy, grace, and forgiveness. Without these qualities woven into a culture, it will disintegrate.'
But here Allen argues that some of today’s concepts of Social Justice owe more to the influence of Marx and Critical Theory than to Biblical Christianity. And because of their proper concern for justice, some Christians are falling for what amounts to an entirely different worldview.
The author details the differences between the Biblical worldview and that of Ideological Social Justice. This is an abbreviated account of the core tenets of each worldview:
Who are we?
Ideological Social Justice: we are creatures whose identity is wholly socially determined.
Biblical Justice: We are created in the image of God, and have inherent dignity and immeasurable worth
What is our fundamental problem?
Ideological Social Justice: Oppression, from white male hegemonic power structures
Biblical Justice: Rebellion, against God, resulting in broken relationships with God and with fellow man
What is the solution to our problem?
Ideological Social Justice: Revolution, to overthrow these power structures
Biblical Justice: The Gospel. Christ opened the way for the reconciliation of our broken relationships
What is our primary moral duty?
Ideological Social Justice: To stand in solidarity with, protect and defend the oppressed
Biblical Justice: To love God with all our heart, mind, and strength, and love our neighbors as ourselves
How do we know what is true?
Ideological Social Justice: The notions of objective truth, reason, logic, evidence and argument are discredited tools used by oppressors to maintain their hegemony
Biblical Justice: Divine revelation, human conscience (the law written on our heart), God-given reason and logic
Who has ultimate authority?
Ideological Social Justice: Victims; their claims must be believed without question
Biblical Justice: God, and his revealed Word in scripture
I’ll just drop in a couple of quotes:
'If your story tells you that your primary identity is “victim,” your life will be marked by bitterness, resentment, grievance, and entitlement. If your story tells you your primary identity is privileged oppressor, your life will be marked by guilt and shame. However, if your story tells you that your identity is “sinner, yet loved by God and saved by grace,” your life will be marked by gratitude and humility.'
'The line between good and evil doesn’t run between racial groups, or males and females, or any other group, class, or party. It runs right through every human heart. We are all sinners. We, equally, are in need of grace and forgiveness. . . At the very heart of the biblical story is justice, but also mercy, grace, and forgiveness. Without these qualities woven into a culture, it will disintegrate.'
December 22, 2020
This book is a great - and dare I say important - read for Christians who are seeking ways to Biblically respond to the social justice moment in America. I wouldn't say that it's a perfect book or that I completely agree with all of his conclusions - for example while the author repeatedly alludes to the fact that there really are racist/oppressive/problematic social structures in Western society he doesn't really engage in unpacking their reality and how we can respond. When he does do so he also tends to be limited in scope. For example, he places a huge emphasis on the horrors of abortion but doesn't do much to acknowledge other very real issues that the church needs to engage with (i.e. rape culture, prison systems, etc.) and ways that we really may be in need of some education or awareness of issues we've missed out on because of our own limited perspectives. In general the first half of the book is excellent but the second half half sometimes draws conclusions that I find lacking or in need of further clarification/nuance/depth.
However his goal is more to question the foundations of the social justice movement as a whole, provide a rebuttal to critical theory, and to present alternative frameworks - and in this I really am thankful for the important points that he is raising and concerns that he addresses and I do feel like he raises many extremely valid and important points about the church's embrace of secular institutions, the failure of the church to engage culture, and the need to critically evaluate the foundations of the social justice ideology and critical theory's marxist origins.
Whether you end up agreeing, disagreeing, or partially agreeing with his conclusions, I'd encourage everyone to engage with his dialogue in order to critically examine you own biases, presuppositions, and conclusions in this very critical topic. I will absolutely be looking at some alternate takes from within the church, but this was a VERY eye opening read for me!
However his goal is more to question the foundations of the social justice movement as a whole, provide a rebuttal to critical theory, and to present alternative frameworks - and in this I really am thankful for the important points that he is raising and concerns that he addresses and I do feel like he raises many extremely valid and important points about the church's embrace of secular institutions, the failure of the church to engage culture, and the need to critically evaluate the foundations of the social justice ideology and critical theory's marxist origins.
Whether you end up agreeing, disagreeing, or partially agreeing with his conclusions, I'd encourage everyone to engage with his dialogue in order to critically examine you own biases, presuppositions, and conclusions in this very critical topic. I will absolutely be looking at some alternate takes from within the church, but this was a VERY eye opening read for me!
February 10, 2021
This could have been an excellent book. There is much I agreed with especially in the first couple of chapters. The overview of Biblical justice was good but could have done with being more positive - its not solely about stopping bad things like racism and abortion. The author helpfully laid out the basics of Critical Theory (as an aside - it would have been more helpful if this was clear throughout rather than calling it social justice). Both these sections really engaged my brain and helped me think through the issues.
I found the rest of the book less helpful. The author sections on the church and how Christians should respond were full of generalisations and often refused to acknowledge that some of the issues raised by proponents of CT are actually true even if their response is fundamentally flawed.
Whilst telling us to offer a better worldview, there’s nothing beyond that, no help in how to do that practically or even how to love those who disagree with you.
It could have been excellent. It’s a shame it isn’t.
I found the rest of the book less helpful. The author sections on the church and how Christians should respond were full of generalisations and often refused to acknowledge that some of the issues raised by proponents of CT are actually true even if their response is fundamentally flawed.
Whilst telling us to offer a better worldview, there’s nothing beyond that, no help in how to do that practically or even how to love those who disagree with you.
It could have been excellent. It’s a shame it isn’t.
November 7, 2020
Scott Allen has done us a service by writing a book-length comparison between what he calls ideological social justice and biblical justice. Well-grounded in scripture, it also references a good variety of sources. His passion will occasion some to write him off as an ideologue, but his arguments are not easily dismissed.
January 2, 2021
There are some books I just go crazy with highlights. This is one of those books. There is so much good information here!
July 5, 2021
You can feel it in the air and taste it in the water. Something is afoot, and it’s hard to put your finger on it. Like a virus spreading from community to community, it seems to be creeping along and then suddenly come the symptoms of infection, and one wonders where they picked it up from and how to shield their loved ones from it. Scott Allen, president of the Disciple Nations Alliance and author, has sought to diagnose the ailment and how it spreads in his 256-page paperback “Why Social Justice Is Not Biblical Justice: An Urgent Appeal to Fellow Christians in a Time of Social Crisis”. This very accessible work presents a map through the various ideas and types of justice without getting lost in juridic language.
Since “Why Social Justice Is Not Biblical Justice” is endorsed by Wayne Grudem and has received an abundance of reviews and analysis from others, including Tim Challies, I’ll leave the details to them. I found the book strong in definitions, distinguishing between various types of justice and views on justice. That was helpful in its own right since much of the obvious trouble comes from folks using the “justice” terms but meaning different things. The author also does a nice job in detailing important presuppositions and underlying assumptions that shape communities and countries. As he observes, “Societies are built in the image of the God or gods, that they collectively worship” (39). I also appreciated a sense of perspective and patience, such as when he is tackling the temptation many are faced with to bring the Day of Judgment into the here-and-now, “By not forcing this judgment into the present, Christians have the space to extend grace and mercy in the face of the world’s evil, even as they try to redress injustice when possible” (41). And finally, as Allen addresses “the right way to respond to ideological opponents” (191-202) he brings in a set of soberminded approaches that I wished more Christians engaged in cultural warfare would take to heart.
I have a few criticisms of the work, of which I’ll list two here. First, in chapter 7, while the author is taking on a plethora of damaging viewpoints, he sometimes quotes from original sources, which makes his case strong. But then at crucial moments he cites sources that are being quoted in other works. When that happened, it made me pause and wonder if his references were in context or out of context, were they being quoted fairly, and was he only echoing the printed perceptions or prejudices of other authors on the original source. This left me with uncertainty about his case at these points.
The other concern I had was how the author lumps together people – by name – almost in a “call-out” kind of way. For example, while criticizing Eric Mason’s book “Woke Church” he points out the endorsers (John Perkins, Ligon Duncan, and Tony Evans) and leaves the impression that these men are all on board with that specific work in all of its analysis and assertions. I’m not sure if this was intentional or not, but it left me with a bad taste in my mouth.
In the end, “Why Social Justice Is Not Biblical Justice” can be a useful resource, especially to help readers get oriented as to what is happening in American society, and inside the church. Readers will also find useful the author’s definitions of justice and how Biblical justice looks in contrast to other versions. And if one will take up Allen’s patience and perspective while pursuing gracious interactions with others, they will likely have more fruitful discussions and watch their interlocutors at least pause and reassess. With some reservations, I still recommend the book.
Since “Why Social Justice Is Not Biblical Justice” is endorsed by Wayne Grudem and has received an abundance of reviews and analysis from others, including Tim Challies, I’ll leave the details to them. I found the book strong in definitions, distinguishing between various types of justice and views on justice. That was helpful in its own right since much of the obvious trouble comes from folks using the “justice” terms but meaning different things. The author also does a nice job in detailing important presuppositions and underlying assumptions that shape communities and countries. As he observes, “Societies are built in the image of the God or gods, that they collectively worship” (39). I also appreciated a sense of perspective and patience, such as when he is tackling the temptation many are faced with to bring the Day of Judgment into the here-and-now, “By not forcing this judgment into the present, Christians have the space to extend grace and mercy in the face of the world’s evil, even as they try to redress injustice when possible” (41). And finally, as Allen addresses “the right way to respond to ideological opponents” (191-202) he brings in a set of soberminded approaches that I wished more Christians engaged in cultural warfare would take to heart.
I have a few criticisms of the work, of which I’ll list two here. First, in chapter 7, while the author is taking on a plethora of damaging viewpoints, he sometimes quotes from original sources, which makes his case strong. But then at crucial moments he cites sources that are being quoted in other works. When that happened, it made me pause and wonder if his references were in context or out of context, were they being quoted fairly, and was he only echoing the printed perceptions or prejudices of other authors on the original source. This left me with uncertainty about his case at these points.
The other concern I had was how the author lumps together people – by name – almost in a “call-out” kind of way. For example, while criticizing Eric Mason’s book “Woke Church” he points out the endorsers (John Perkins, Ligon Duncan, and Tony Evans) and leaves the impression that these men are all on board with that specific work in all of its analysis and assertions. I’m not sure if this was intentional or not, but it left me with a bad taste in my mouth.
In the end, “Why Social Justice Is Not Biblical Justice” can be a useful resource, especially to help readers get oriented as to what is happening in American society, and inside the church. Readers will also find useful the author’s definitions of justice and how Biblical justice looks in contrast to other versions. And if one will take up Allen’s patience and perspective while pursuing gracious interactions with others, they will likely have more fruitful discussions and watch their interlocutors at least pause and reassess. With some reservations, I still recommend the book.
February 28, 2022
Very well done book! I really like how he did not just say things about the social justice ideology but how he approached it through their own arguments, specifically through quotes. He was very gracious to the arguments of the side he clearly (see the title) disagrees with. I was really blessed by his approach when reacting to a fellow believer’s book on being woke. I also was even more convinced by this book of the nature of the social justice movement in America today, about how it has religious tendencies and how it is a hopeless religion. I pray this will help me communicate the gospel better and more clearly.
One complaint though: I don’t know if I just got a bad copy but my book kept having pages that were not bound to the book’s binding. Since I was reading on an elliptical it made it hard when pages kept falling out. But even with this, this book was stellar!
One complaint though: I don’t know if I just got a bad copy but my book kept having pages that were not bound to the book’s binding. Since I was reading on an elliptical it made it hard when pages kept falling out. But even with this, this book was stellar!
January 8, 2021
Wow, Scott presents good truth that’s needed in our day. My thoughts were challenged greatly as I read about what our society now calls “social justice” and what God calls justice. I have seen the importance of truth even more now.
“Christians should never allow anything other than God and the Bible to be our ultimate authority on what is true.”
“Christians should never allow anything other than God and the Bible to be our ultimate authority on what is true.”
April 7, 2021
My review of this very bad book:
https://godentranced.com/2021/04/07/b...
https://godentranced.com/2021/04/07/b...
June 30, 2021
A False War
This book constructs two monoliths: “ideological social justice” and “biblical justice”. Each is an interlocking system which can not be broken into parts. And they are at war. You are on the good side or the bad side. One must prevail. The other must lose. No learning can be shared between the monoliths. No learning can be shared because one monolith is wholly good and the other monolith is wholly bad. How can something that is wholly good have anything left to learn? How could something that is wholly bad have anything good to offer? One is a threat to society. The other brings health and life and goodness.
Does this sound extreme? Does this extremeness resonate with anything in your life? Ok, Marvel Comic Universe movies, yes. In those, there are clear bad guys and clear good guys. You can usually tell who’s who: the bad guys are ugly and the good guys are handsome, and sometimes green. Where else have I seen this extremeness? Oh, Star Wars! Darth Vader was obviously bad because he was dressed in black. And he had an ominous theme song. If fiction were true this book would be reliable. But I don’t have any soundtrack playing behind me as my life progresses. And, as Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn said: “The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either -- but right through every human heart -- and through all human hearts.” Or as C.S. Lewis said: “Of all bad men, religious bad men are the worst”. Secular humans and God-fearing humans equally have access to two opposite things: a sense of justice and an ability to utterly corrupt justice.
Almost nothing I've encountered in the whole of my life has been wholly bad or wholly good. So when I see a person present something as wholly bad or wholly good, I instantly know they are likely wrong. Mr. Allen presents social justice thinking as wholly wrong. And he presents Christian thinking as wholly right. Are not Christians fallible? Are not non-Christians made in the image of God? This fundamental error makes him lose credibility as he presents a painfully obvious one-sided picture.
The construction of these two monoliths pitted against each other in mortal combat results in several things: 1) We know we have to be very careful! You wouldn’t want to make friends with the enemy would you? You wouldn’t want to look or sound like them. 2) There’s obviously nothing to learn from them. This is war! And it is religious war. Mr. Allen uses many Bible verses, and says many true things, in support of a paradigm I understand to be false and damaging. What is that paradigm? Two groups are at war, one in service to God, the other bringing damage, and there can be no compromise. We must defend the truth! We must not give an inch! We must protect our society and our children’s future! Who could disagree with such self-evidently good and noble goals? This is surely what all battlelines throughout all of human history have looked like.
What if there were no war? What if the monoliths are creations of Mr. Allen’s mind? What if “us vs them” thinking is not what Jesus calls us to? Mr. Allen is right about hundreds of things. But it is possible to place many good things on a false foundation and result in damaging error. I believe this is exactly what Mr. Allen has done. Along the way, he has operated with such a low commitment to scholarly standards that this book reads like propaganda.
A Closer Look at The False War
Ironically, Mr. Allen does injustice to the ideas and history of both “social justice” and “biblical justice”. Neither are monoliths. Regarding social justice, I know this from Mr. Allen himself! On page 13 he quotes Ross Douthat: the social justice movement is “inchoate and half-formed and sometimes internally contradictory, defined more by its departures from older liberal ideas than by a unified worldview”. Not only is it not a monolith, but Mr. Allen presents the most extreme version of the movement as if it’s the average and barely allows social justice leaders to speak for themselves. I believe he quotes two of them.
The Christian movement is also not a monolith. “Biblical” means different things to different Christians. He conveniently skips over: 1) this plethora of interpretations and 2) the fact that the Bible is not a book dedicated solely to the question of justice. This last fact requires Christians to interpret, and, because interpreting is difficult, it doesn’t usually result in a single conclusion. An example of difference? The global church supports social justice! Take ten minutes and Google all major branches of Christianity (Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, mainline Protestant, smaller ones like Mennonite, etc) combined with the term “social justice”. Nearly all consider Jesus’ words and life a direct call to social justice. Mr. Allen and his movement are the exception. Thus “biblical justice” is not a monolith.
Mr. Allen not only creates a false war but guarantees we will never find the solution. He tells a story of vast interlocking systems (worldviews) which can not be disassembled. One system is wholly bad. The other system is wholly good. But if each interlocking system is actually a mixture of bad and good, and can actually be disassembled, then each movement actually has part of the answer. Unfortunately if you believe those different from you are wholly wrong, you will never receive the good they have to offer, and you will behave in a way that ensures they behave in exactly the same way to you, thus guaranteeing the problem continues.
This false war explains why Mr. Allen is so upset at his fellow Christians for accepting any thinking coming from the social justice movement. He is thinking in black and white terms! Black and white thinking is for children. Not adults.
Claims Made in Support of the False War
A large number of Mr. Allen’s claims are accurate. But the depth and frequency of Mr. Allen’s mistakes are so severe that I see only two options: either he has an extremely low commitment to scholarly standards or he has written propaganda.
Let me define terms.
Propaganda: “Information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view.” Source: lexico.com powered by Oxford.
Scholarly standards:
(I Googled this and didn’t find anything quickly. Following is from my own mind. Judge as you will.)
1. Define terms
2. Look at an idea from all major perspectives
3. Avoid inflammatory language or painting an inflammatory picture
4. Make statements as specific as possible
5. Provide evidence. (Extreme claims require extreme evidence.)
6. Prefer primary sources over secondary
7. Cite sources
Mr. Allen does number seven very well and honors the first half of number three. But the rest he thoroughly violates. If however his book is propaganda, he violates nothing. Propaganda does not try to adhere to scholarly standards; its only purpose is to convince readers of something, whether or not that something is true.
The Big Error
The mistake on page three is bigger than any he makes in his entire book. Mr. Allen states that social justice (ideology), critical theory, identity politics, intersectionality, and cultural marxism are the same thing. He does not explain why people have developed five different terms for the same thing. He does not say that while these ideas overlap they are different in some ways. He provides zero caveat and no release valve on a pressure cooker of his own making. A ten minute Google search tells you they are not the same thing. A thinker who makes an error this fundamental loses massive credibility. Or, is this intentional? Either he has a low commitment to scholarly standards or this is propaganda.
I was raised to believe in the free marketplace of ideas: the belief that when all the ideas and perspectives are placed on the table, the best idea will rise to the top. So I researched these terms from different perspectives. Not only are these five different things but, within those things, each term has slightly - or wildly! - different meanings, frequently depending on who is using them. “Critical theory” has a large number of definitions and multiple child theories (critical social theory, critical race theory, etc). “Intersectionality” has hugely different meanings. “Social justice” is something most of the global church believes Jesus commands us to do and integral to the faith, which clearly suggests that Mr. Allen and most of the church use this term differently. “Identity politics” can be understood as natural (and good) to politics or it can be viewed negatively (in other words, it has contradictory meanings). And “cultural marxism” is really a large bucket containing many ideas. Does Mr. Allen help his readers understand this? Does he even make the attempt? Does he at least notify readers that these things are more complex than what he intends to explore? Mr. Allen takes a deeply muddy situation and makes it worse.
The Golden Rule and Oversimplicity
Jesus calls us to treat others as we would want to be treated. This applies to the world of ideas no less than to any other world. When someone thinks differently than I my first response must be to seek to understand and assume the best. Why? Because that’s how I want to be treated. Jesus didn’t say “in the political world different rules apply”. Is it at all possible that the popularizer of “intersectionality” had good intent? Why, yes in fact! She was trying to right a wrong. Did Mr. Allen research this? Probably. He says he conducted significant research. Did he miss an opportunity to praise a fellow human being for good intent? Yes, he most certainly did. This book feels like an attack on everyone who is not a Christian. What an unChristian way to behave: not giving honor where honor is due. (I am not perfect in these things. I hope others kindly hold me to the same standards.)
My secular brothers and sisters are frequently right when my Chrisitan brothers and sisters are wrong. Two examples: when the U.S. government required desegregation but some Christians resisted and formed segregation academies, when the U.S. goverment fought to end slavery but some leading Christian theologians argued from the Bible for slavery. Does Mr. Allen take this complexity into account? Slightly, in the last chapter. The rest of the book makes it very clear that secular people do justice wrong and Christians do it right.
Primary Vs Secondary Sources
If Mr. Allen is going to talk about the social justice movement, he must quote its leaders. He quotes Ta-Nehisi Coates (page 65) and Stacey Abrams (I believe). But can you judge an entire movement based on a couple quotes from two leaders? Largely, Mr. Allen quotes journalists who (hopefully) have read the primary source material. But layers of interpretation between me and the source practically guarantee incorrect conclusions. Is this not the game of telephone we learn in third grade? (It’s also worth noting most of his sources are articles, not books.)
Evidence
On page 191 Mr. Allen makes a charge for which he provides no evidence and which my personal experience directly contradicts: “There is a mistaken idea that is now widespread in the evangelical community that ‘loving your neighbor’ means affirming what they sincerely believe, even it is false and unbiblical’. (The typo is in the book.) There is a basic principle which says: the more significant or weighty the claim, the more that evidence is needed. Yet he provides none! I live in a region surrounded by Christian publishing houses, think tanks, universities (one with national prominence), and possibly too many churches, and I know of no evangelical Christian who thinks this way. Mr. Allen appears not only comfortable condemning his fellow Christians but doing so with no evidence.
Page 148: “Historically, racism in America was perpetuated primarily by those on the political left. The Democratic Party defended slavery, started the Civil War, opposed Reconstruction, founded the Ku Klux Klan, imposed segregation, perpetrated lynching, and fought against the civil rights acts of the 1950 and ‘60s.” These are many claims and each is serious. Does Mr. Allen provide evidence? No. Had he attempted to provide evidence he would have found his last claim was false and would (I like to think) not have made that false claim.
Page 149: “#BlackLivesMatters… exists to exacerbate racial tensions…” This is a serious claim. Does Mr. Allen provide evidence? No.
Page 155-156: In Mr. Allen’s endeavor to contrast the Revolutionary Narrative with the Preservation Nattrative, he paints the Democratic Party as bad and racist and the Republican Party as good and not racist. “The only serious congressional opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 came from Democrats. Eighty percent of Republicans in Congress supported the bill.” The picture he paints is disturbing because it is false. He leaves out the Strom Thurmond story, what happened after that, and the two Presidents, both Democrats, who paved the way for the Civil Rights legislation to pass. I beg you, if you read Mr. Allen’s work, to educate yourself. He has presented multiple one-sided stories which result in error. Here’s a good start: https://youtu.be/W4eS2E-PoGo
Mr. Allen makes many other claims that merit evidence for which he provides none.
Painting a Nightmare
I work for a politically and socially liberal company which strongly advocates social justice, racial equality, diversity, and inclusion. On page 79 he describes social justice as believing “guilt belongs not to humankind as a whole, but to one group only: white, heteronormative males”. On page 119 he says “If you are part of the oppressor group, expect your transgressions to be highlighted. Even the slightest offset or ‘microaggression’ will be ‘called out’ and held against you.” I know this is false. I live it every day. I have for six years. Had Mr. Allen researched his questions from all major perspectives, rather than only one, and required himself to present evidence/examples, he wouldn’t have made this mistake. While some portions of the radical political left likely behave exactly as Mr. Allen describes, he presents the extreme as if it’s the average, thus misleading his readers. I work with mostly white males. While my company frequently offers (but does not require) classes in bias, diversity, and inclusion, not one of those white males has ever expressed guilt or shame. I haven’t heard of a single instance where a person voiced concern over being corrected for a microaggression. No one’s coming into the office sleepless because they’ve been so filled with shame about their whiteness or privilege. In fact many of these white males are proud of the effort towards kindness and compassion that they see in these endeavors. We are frequently educated on these things, but it’s not the nightmare that Mr. Allen paints.
Pluralism
Mr. Allen seems to have no awareness of the complexity that pluralism adds to this discussion. If he does, why does he never mention it? Consider the title of his book: “Why Social Justice is not Biblical Justice”. If you already think of social justice the way Mr. Allen does - as a wholly non-Christian thing - then social justice can not be biblical. Why write a book about that? This is like saying ostriches do not give birth to elephants. We already know that. Why should we expect non-Christian to behave like Christians? It is of no value to note that non-Christians behave like non-Christians and Christians behave like Christians. We already know this.
What is more interesting than whether “social justice” or “critical theory” are “biblical” (because of course they aren’t! According to Mr. Allen’s definitions) is instead 1) What can I learn from my secular brothers and sisters? 2) What can I help my secular brothers and sisters learn from me? and 3) How can we collaborate given some of our fundamental differences? Our differences are a chance for dialogue! Is this not why we are on earth? Do we believe the great commission and the sermon on the mount? Did not Paul say I have become all things to all men so that I might by all means save some? Would it not make more sense to honor all that is honorable and, when the opportunity arises, offer a different viewpoint, rather than setting up a war and demonizing “the other side”. How can I be upset at someone for being exactly who they are and who they are proud to be?
Pluralism is the recognition that people other than my group exist, those other groups deserve to exist and wrestle with the complexities of our reality, all groups get something right and get something wrong, and I must expect those who are different from me to be, uhm, different than me. (By “pluralism” I do not mean all ideas and values are equally good and valid; instead I mean all people are loved by God and I am in the wrong until I love them too, and part of love is laboring to understand another person and their viewpoint, honoring them and their intent, and not expecting someone who is different from me to be like me.)
Mr. Allen is concerned that the church is being shaped into the image of broader society. Had he not violated most scholarly standards, he could have shared ideas that would help us recognize and avoid poor thinking. Instead, he embodies poor thinking: conflating five fundamental terms, misrepresenting multiple ideas, and generating significant fear (read page 124 for “gulags and guillotines”). Why does Mr. Allen believe Christians need to be warned about “ideological social justice”? If these are two completely incompatible worldviews as he claims, it is not likely a Christian would be able to seriously consider the other worldview.
A Call… to what?
The last section of the book is almost helpful. It’s titled “Let’s move beyond criticizing culture to creating culture”. Mr. Allen’s instinct is correct, but he doesn’t explore what this looks like. The book ends, you feel the weight of an urgent crisis, and the answer is “create culture”. But what does that mean?! “We need to get back into the business of institutional formation and culture creation, particularly in the areas of education, the arts, media, law, and business” (page 195). If he would have written a book on creating culture - or one which respectfully and accurately helped us understand thought in the public square - that would have been a tremendous contribution. Instead this book reinforces combat mentality, made possible through a massive mishandling of ideas, and will surely result in hand-wringing without action thus deepening the problem.
This book constructs two monoliths: “ideological social justice” and “biblical justice”. Each is an interlocking system which can not be broken into parts. And they are at war. You are on the good side or the bad side. One must prevail. The other must lose. No learning can be shared between the monoliths. No learning can be shared because one monolith is wholly good and the other monolith is wholly bad. How can something that is wholly good have anything left to learn? How could something that is wholly bad have anything good to offer? One is a threat to society. The other brings health and life and goodness.
Does this sound extreme? Does this extremeness resonate with anything in your life? Ok, Marvel Comic Universe movies, yes. In those, there are clear bad guys and clear good guys. You can usually tell who’s who: the bad guys are ugly and the good guys are handsome, and sometimes green. Where else have I seen this extremeness? Oh, Star Wars! Darth Vader was obviously bad because he was dressed in black. And he had an ominous theme song. If fiction were true this book would be reliable. But I don’t have any soundtrack playing behind me as my life progresses. And, as Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn said: “The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either -- but right through every human heart -- and through all human hearts.” Or as C.S. Lewis said: “Of all bad men, religious bad men are the worst”. Secular humans and God-fearing humans equally have access to two opposite things: a sense of justice and an ability to utterly corrupt justice.
Almost nothing I've encountered in the whole of my life has been wholly bad or wholly good. So when I see a person present something as wholly bad or wholly good, I instantly know they are likely wrong. Mr. Allen presents social justice thinking as wholly wrong. And he presents Christian thinking as wholly right. Are not Christians fallible? Are not non-Christians made in the image of God? This fundamental error makes him lose credibility as he presents a painfully obvious one-sided picture.
The construction of these two monoliths pitted against each other in mortal combat results in several things: 1) We know we have to be very careful! You wouldn’t want to make friends with the enemy would you? You wouldn’t want to look or sound like them. 2) There’s obviously nothing to learn from them. This is war! And it is religious war. Mr. Allen uses many Bible verses, and says many true things, in support of a paradigm I understand to be false and damaging. What is that paradigm? Two groups are at war, one in service to God, the other bringing damage, and there can be no compromise. We must defend the truth! We must not give an inch! We must protect our society and our children’s future! Who could disagree with such self-evidently good and noble goals? This is surely what all battlelines throughout all of human history have looked like.
What if there were no war? What if the monoliths are creations of Mr. Allen’s mind? What if “us vs them” thinking is not what Jesus calls us to? Mr. Allen is right about hundreds of things. But it is possible to place many good things on a false foundation and result in damaging error. I believe this is exactly what Mr. Allen has done. Along the way, he has operated with such a low commitment to scholarly standards that this book reads like propaganda.
A Closer Look at The False War
Ironically, Mr. Allen does injustice to the ideas and history of both “social justice” and “biblical justice”. Neither are monoliths. Regarding social justice, I know this from Mr. Allen himself! On page 13 he quotes Ross Douthat: the social justice movement is “inchoate and half-formed and sometimes internally contradictory, defined more by its departures from older liberal ideas than by a unified worldview”. Not only is it not a monolith, but Mr. Allen presents the most extreme version of the movement as if it’s the average and barely allows social justice leaders to speak for themselves. I believe he quotes two of them.
The Christian movement is also not a monolith. “Biblical” means different things to different Christians. He conveniently skips over: 1) this plethora of interpretations and 2) the fact that the Bible is not a book dedicated solely to the question of justice. This last fact requires Christians to interpret, and, because interpreting is difficult, it doesn’t usually result in a single conclusion. An example of difference? The global church supports social justice! Take ten minutes and Google all major branches of Christianity (Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, mainline Protestant, smaller ones like Mennonite, etc) combined with the term “social justice”. Nearly all consider Jesus’ words and life a direct call to social justice. Mr. Allen and his movement are the exception. Thus “biblical justice” is not a monolith.
Mr. Allen not only creates a false war but guarantees we will never find the solution. He tells a story of vast interlocking systems (worldviews) which can not be disassembled. One system is wholly bad. The other system is wholly good. But if each interlocking system is actually a mixture of bad and good, and can actually be disassembled, then each movement actually has part of the answer. Unfortunately if you believe those different from you are wholly wrong, you will never receive the good they have to offer, and you will behave in a way that ensures they behave in exactly the same way to you, thus guaranteeing the problem continues.
This false war explains why Mr. Allen is so upset at his fellow Christians for accepting any thinking coming from the social justice movement. He is thinking in black and white terms! Black and white thinking is for children. Not adults.
Claims Made in Support of the False War
A large number of Mr. Allen’s claims are accurate. But the depth and frequency of Mr. Allen’s mistakes are so severe that I see only two options: either he has an extremely low commitment to scholarly standards or he has written propaganda.
Let me define terms.
Propaganda: “Information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view.” Source: lexico.com powered by Oxford.
Scholarly standards:
(I Googled this and didn’t find anything quickly. Following is from my own mind. Judge as you will.)
1. Define terms
2. Look at an idea from all major perspectives
3. Avoid inflammatory language or painting an inflammatory picture
4. Make statements as specific as possible
5. Provide evidence. (Extreme claims require extreme evidence.)
6. Prefer primary sources over secondary
7. Cite sources
Mr. Allen does number seven very well and honors the first half of number three. But the rest he thoroughly violates. If however his book is propaganda, he violates nothing. Propaganda does not try to adhere to scholarly standards; its only purpose is to convince readers of something, whether or not that something is true.
The Big Error
The mistake on page three is bigger than any he makes in his entire book. Mr. Allen states that social justice (ideology), critical theory, identity politics, intersectionality, and cultural marxism are the same thing. He does not explain why people have developed five different terms for the same thing. He does not say that while these ideas overlap they are different in some ways. He provides zero caveat and no release valve on a pressure cooker of his own making. A ten minute Google search tells you they are not the same thing. A thinker who makes an error this fundamental loses massive credibility. Or, is this intentional? Either he has a low commitment to scholarly standards or this is propaganda.
I was raised to believe in the free marketplace of ideas: the belief that when all the ideas and perspectives are placed on the table, the best idea will rise to the top. So I researched these terms from different perspectives. Not only are these five different things but, within those things, each term has slightly - or wildly! - different meanings, frequently depending on who is using them. “Critical theory” has a large number of definitions and multiple child theories (critical social theory, critical race theory, etc). “Intersectionality” has hugely different meanings. “Social justice” is something most of the global church believes Jesus commands us to do and integral to the faith, which clearly suggests that Mr. Allen and most of the church use this term differently. “Identity politics” can be understood as natural (and good) to politics or it can be viewed negatively (in other words, it has contradictory meanings). And “cultural marxism” is really a large bucket containing many ideas. Does Mr. Allen help his readers understand this? Does he even make the attempt? Does he at least notify readers that these things are more complex than what he intends to explore? Mr. Allen takes a deeply muddy situation and makes it worse.
The Golden Rule and Oversimplicity
Jesus calls us to treat others as we would want to be treated. This applies to the world of ideas no less than to any other world. When someone thinks differently than I my first response must be to seek to understand and assume the best. Why? Because that’s how I want to be treated. Jesus didn’t say “in the political world different rules apply”. Is it at all possible that the popularizer of “intersectionality” had good intent? Why, yes in fact! She was trying to right a wrong. Did Mr. Allen research this? Probably. He says he conducted significant research. Did he miss an opportunity to praise a fellow human being for good intent? Yes, he most certainly did. This book feels like an attack on everyone who is not a Christian. What an unChristian way to behave: not giving honor where honor is due. (I am not perfect in these things. I hope others kindly hold me to the same standards.)
My secular brothers and sisters are frequently right when my Chrisitan brothers and sisters are wrong. Two examples: when the U.S. government required desegregation but some Christians resisted and formed segregation academies, when the U.S. goverment fought to end slavery but some leading Christian theologians argued from the Bible for slavery. Does Mr. Allen take this complexity into account? Slightly, in the last chapter. The rest of the book makes it very clear that secular people do justice wrong and Christians do it right.
Primary Vs Secondary Sources
If Mr. Allen is going to talk about the social justice movement, he must quote its leaders. He quotes Ta-Nehisi Coates (page 65) and Stacey Abrams (I believe). But can you judge an entire movement based on a couple quotes from two leaders? Largely, Mr. Allen quotes journalists who (hopefully) have read the primary source material. But layers of interpretation between me and the source practically guarantee incorrect conclusions. Is this not the game of telephone we learn in third grade? (It’s also worth noting most of his sources are articles, not books.)
Evidence
On page 191 Mr. Allen makes a charge for which he provides no evidence and which my personal experience directly contradicts: “There is a mistaken idea that is now widespread in the evangelical community that ‘loving your neighbor’ means affirming what they sincerely believe, even it is false and unbiblical’. (The typo is in the book.) There is a basic principle which says: the more significant or weighty the claim, the more that evidence is needed. Yet he provides none! I live in a region surrounded by Christian publishing houses, think tanks, universities (one with national prominence), and possibly too many churches, and I know of no evangelical Christian who thinks this way. Mr. Allen appears not only comfortable condemning his fellow Christians but doing so with no evidence.
Page 148: “Historically, racism in America was perpetuated primarily by those on the political left. The Democratic Party defended slavery, started the Civil War, opposed Reconstruction, founded the Ku Klux Klan, imposed segregation, perpetrated lynching, and fought against the civil rights acts of the 1950 and ‘60s.” These are many claims and each is serious. Does Mr. Allen provide evidence? No. Had he attempted to provide evidence he would have found his last claim was false and would (I like to think) not have made that false claim.
Page 149: “#BlackLivesMatters… exists to exacerbate racial tensions…” This is a serious claim. Does Mr. Allen provide evidence? No.
Page 155-156: In Mr. Allen’s endeavor to contrast the Revolutionary Narrative with the Preservation Nattrative, he paints the Democratic Party as bad and racist and the Republican Party as good and not racist. “The only serious congressional opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 came from Democrats. Eighty percent of Republicans in Congress supported the bill.” The picture he paints is disturbing because it is false. He leaves out the Strom Thurmond story, what happened after that, and the two Presidents, both Democrats, who paved the way for the Civil Rights legislation to pass. I beg you, if you read Mr. Allen’s work, to educate yourself. He has presented multiple one-sided stories which result in error. Here’s a good start: https://youtu.be/W4eS2E-PoGo
Mr. Allen makes many other claims that merit evidence for which he provides none.
Painting a Nightmare
I work for a politically and socially liberal company which strongly advocates social justice, racial equality, diversity, and inclusion. On page 79 he describes social justice as believing “guilt belongs not to humankind as a whole, but to one group only: white, heteronormative males”. On page 119 he says “If you are part of the oppressor group, expect your transgressions to be highlighted. Even the slightest offset or ‘microaggression’ will be ‘called out’ and held against you.” I know this is false. I live it every day. I have for six years. Had Mr. Allen researched his questions from all major perspectives, rather than only one, and required himself to present evidence/examples, he wouldn’t have made this mistake. While some portions of the radical political left likely behave exactly as Mr. Allen describes, he presents the extreme as if it’s the average, thus misleading his readers. I work with mostly white males. While my company frequently offers (but does not require) classes in bias, diversity, and inclusion, not one of those white males has ever expressed guilt or shame. I haven’t heard of a single instance where a person voiced concern over being corrected for a microaggression. No one’s coming into the office sleepless because they’ve been so filled with shame about their whiteness or privilege. In fact many of these white males are proud of the effort towards kindness and compassion that they see in these endeavors. We are frequently educated on these things, but it’s not the nightmare that Mr. Allen paints.
Pluralism
Mr. Allen seems to have no awareness of the complexity that pluralism adds to this discussion. If he does, why does he never mention it? Consider the title of his book: “Why Social Justice is not Biblical Justice”. If you already think of social justice the way Mr. Allen does - as a wholly non-Christian thing - then social justice can not be biblical. Why write a book about that? This is like saying ostriches do not give birth to elephants. We already know that. Why should we expect non-Christian to behave like Christians? It is of no value to note that non-Christians behave like non-Christians and Christians behave like Christians. We already know this.
What is more interesting than whether “social justice” or “critical theory” are “biblical” (because of course they aren’t! According to Mr. Allen’s definitions) is instead 1) What can I learn from my secular brothers and sisters? 2) What can I help my secular brothers and sisters learn from me? and 3) How can we collaborate given some of our fundamental differences? Our differences are a chance for dialogue! Is this not why we are on earth? Do we believe the great commission and the sermon on the mount? Did not Paul say I have become all things to all men so that I might by all means save some? Would it not make more sense to honor all that is honorable and, when the opportunity arises, offer a different viewpoint, rather than setting up a war and demonizing “the other side”. How can I be upset at someone for being exactly who they are and who they are proud to be?
Pluralism is the recognition that people other than my group exist, those other groups deserve to exist and wrestle with the complexities of our reality, all groups get something right and get something wrong, and I must expect those who are different from me to be, uhm, different than me. (By “pluralism” I do not mean all ideas and values are equally good and valid; instead I mean all people are loved by God and I am in the wrong until I love them too, and part of love is laboring to understand another person and their viewpoint, honoring them and their intent, and not expecting someone who is different from me to be like me.)
Mr. Allen is concerned that the church is being shaped into the image of broader society. Had he not violated most scholarly standards, he could have shared ideas that would help us recognize and avoid poor thinking. Instead, he embodies poor thinking: conflating five fundamental terms, misrepresenting multiple ideas, and generating significant fear (read page 124 for “gulags and guillotines”). Why does Mr. Allen believe Christians need to be warned about “ideological social justice”? If these are two completely incompatible worldviews as he claims, it is not likely a Christian would be able to seriously consider the other worldview.
A Call… to what?
The last section of the book is almost helpful. It’s titled “Let’s move beyond criticizing culture to creating culture”. Mr. Allen’s instinct is correct, but he doesn’t explore what this looks like. The book ends, you feel the weight of an urgent crisis, and the answer is “create culture”. But what does that mean?! “We need to get back into the business of institutional formation and culture creation, particularly in the areas of education, the arts, media, law, and business” (page 195). If he would have written a book on creating culture - or one which respectfully and accurately helped us understand thought in the public square - that would have been a tremendous contribution. Instead this book reinforces combat mentality, made possible through a massive mishandling of ideas, and will surely result in hand-wringing without action thus deepening the problem.
September 27, 2022
Awesome. If you read this along side Truman‘s “Strange New World” and take notes on both, then you’ll have an in-depth and clear understanding of why the culture is as sideways as it is today
Everything, including justice, must be filtered through a biblical worldview. Anything less is unbelief being masked as empathy
Everything, including justice, must be filtered through a biblical worldview. Anything less is unbelief being masked as empathy
June 5, 2021
The book has absolutely nothing of value to offer if you don't already buy into the notion that Christianity is the truth. It certainly never attempts to offer any reason to justify why the Christian doctrine is true as opposed to just another story.
What the book and author does do is argue against an extremely distorted misrepresentation of social justice, particularly its goals, and its supporters beliefs and worldview. As as example, apparently the author thinks to support social justice one must completely do away with the concept of human individualism.
The author of course also calls on people of opposing viewpoints from him to be more open and accepting, while he denounces their lifestyles as sinful, and calls their worldview a "form of satanic deception."
What the book and author does do is argue against an extremely distorted misrepresentation of social justice, particularly its goals, and its supporters beliefs and worldview. As as example, apparently the author thinks to support social justice one must completely do away with the concept of human individualism.
The author of course also calls on people of opposing viewpoints from him to be more open and accepting, while he denounces their lifestyles as sinful, and calls their worldview a "form of satanic deception."
September 7, 2021
An excellent compare and contrast book between a biblical worldview and the modern "social justice" outlook. This book should be in the hands of every believer from the pews to the pulpits. As attractive as the term "social justice" sounds, the philosophy behind the term is unbiblical, contrary to the gospel and damaging to a free civilization.
Want to read
April 25, 2021I read several reviews that landed this title on my to-read list. The most helpful were from:
Barry
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
and Gareth Davies
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
November 23, 2021
A really good primer to what's going on in the debate between the critical theory/BLM crowd and those who want to maintain some sort of societal sanity. Ideas have consequences.
December 31, 2020
In the midst of our nation's ongoing debate on social justice, I have been looking for a biblical analysis of this growing contemporary movement and its beliefs and practices. Scott David Allen's book is one of the first book-length responses to appear. In it, he provides a strong defense of biblical justice against many popular claims that are made today. As a result, he has written a helpful resource for Christians to more carefully assess social justice in light of God's Word.
As the book begins, Allen summarizes what true justice is according to God's Word. He rightly recognizes God's authority and holds to the sufficiency of Scripture in building a biblical worldview. It is only after justice is properly understood that Allen shifts to looking at the ideology of social justice in order to evaluate its concepts. Then the author finishes by writing about how Christians should respond to this controversy.
I appreciate how Allen compares and contrasts biblical justice with ideological social justice (as he refers to these contradictory worldviews). In doing so, he demonstrates the problem of uncritically adopting the beliefs and practices of social justice, which will hinder the accomplishment of actual justice and ultimately undermine our gospel hope in Jesus Christ. All too often, I have heard Christians arguing for social justice positions which are inconsistent with a biblical worldview. They need to be confronted with the problems inherent in this new "religion" of social justice.
At the same time, I would have appreciated more interaction with arguments from ideological social justice advocates. Many of his quotes and references come from critics of today's social justice movement rather than directly from those whom he is arguing against. Additionally, almost all of his references and resources were online. His case would have been strengthened by responding to the best of those holding to social justice rather than regularly pulling together negative evaluations to make his argument.
With this in mind, it seems as if Allen paints with a rather broad brush in his criticism. Having spent much of the last year reading and listening to various views and perspectives, more nuance would have served Allen well. I could easily see those holding to social justice saying: "This doesn't accurately represent me!" And while a lot of his criticism and critique is valid, I think this book is more likely to further convince those who are already skeptical of social justice rather than leading those who have been influenced by ideological social justice away from its falsehoods and problems.
Furthermore, Allen is a strong proponent of transformationalism, dismissing those who prioritize the spiritual nature of Christ's kingdom as gnostic fundamentalists. As one who holds to two kingdoms theology, I found his sweeping condemnation unconvincing. I am also not sure that he has adequately taken into account the dangers of transformationalism. Still, I appreciate his overall desire to live with a biblical worldview and not simply be anti-ideological social justice.
But don't allow my criticisms keep you from reading Allen's important insights. He has provided us with a useful resource to better understand biblical justice and to recognize many of the dangers in the contemporary social justice movement.
As the book begins, Allen summarizes what true justice is according to God's Word. He rightly recognizes God's authority and holds to the sufficiency of Scripture in building a biblical worldview. It is only after justice is properly understood that Allen shifts to looking at the ideology of social justice in order to evaluate its concepts. Then the author finishes by writing about how Christians should respond to this controversy.
I appreciate how Allen compares and contrasts biblical justice with ideological social justice (as he refers to these contradictory worldviews). In doing so, he demonstrates the problem of uncritically adopting the beliefs and practices of social justice, which will hinder the accomplishment of actual justice and ultimately undermine our gospel hope in Jesus Christ. All too often, I have heard Christians arguing for social justice positions which are inconsistent with a biblical worldview. They need to be confronted with the problems inherent in this new "religion" of social justice.
At the same time, I would have appreciated more interaction with arguments from ideological social justice advocates. Many of his quotes and references come from critics of today's social justice movement rather than directly from those whom he is arguing against. Additionally, almost all of his references and resources were online. His case would have been strengthened by responding to the best of those holding to social justice rather than regularly pulling together negative evaluations to make his argument.
With this in mind, it seems as if Allen paints with a rather broad brush in his criticism. Having spent much of the last year reading and listening to various views and perspectives, more nuance would have served Allen well. I could easily see those holding to social justice saying: "This doesn't accurately represent me!" And while a lot of his criticism and critique is valid, I think this book is more likely to further convince those who are already skeptical of social justice rather than leading those who have been influenced by ideological social justice away from its falsehoods and problems.
Furthermore, Allen is a strong proponent of transformationalism, dismissing those who prioritize the spiritual nature of Christ's kingdom as gnostic fundamentalists. As one who holds to two kingdoms theology, I found his sweeping condemnation unconvincing. I am also not sure that he has adequately taken into account the dangers of transformationalism. Still, I appreciate his overall desire to live with a biblical worldview and not simply be anti-ideological social justice.
But don't allow my criticisms keep you from reading Allen's important insights. He has provided us with a useful resource to better understand biblical justice and to recognize many of the dangers in the contemporary social justice movement.
November 28, 2020
I recently read an essay by Tim Keller entitled "A Biblical Critique of Secular Justice and Critical Theory." Keller brilliantly explains different secular theories of justice and what is known as Critical Theory which has grown wildly popular in today's culture. Keller compares these theories to biblical justice. The problem? There are many, but of most importance is the fact that Critical Theory is not simply a theory, but a worldview. A worldview at odds with Christianity.
Scott David Allen picks up where Keller leaves off, explaining how Critical Theory has hijacked the definition of social justice with something other than what we think it means. Because of this, many Christians have jumped on the critical theory bandwagon unknowingly. Not realizing the dangers of this secular worldview. Critical Theory or social justice is NOT the same as the justice we read about in Scripture.
Biblical justice is first rooted in a transcendent moral law giver. It then means to live in right relationship with God and then others: giving people their due as image-bearers of God. Distributive justice is impartially rendering judgement, righting wrongs and meting out punishment for law breaking.
Critical Theory (sometimes called intersectionality or cultural Marxism) rather is a worldview which views the world as a struggle between oppressed groups and their oppressors. How do you move out from being oppressed? Overthrow the traditional structure and system by any means necessary, commonly violence. In fact, the aim is to free groups of oppression no matter the means and consequences. In Critical Theory, individual identity is overshadowed by corporate identity. Class, race, gender and sexual orientation are the defining characteristics of personal identity. There's also a focus on redistributing wealth and power to the victim (oppressed). The goal being equality of outcome for everyone.
Allen, not only explains Critical Theory in great depth, he also shows how this new justice movement has made significant inroads into mainstream evangelicalism, influencing many Christians today. We should understand that worldviews determine how we behave—how we function within our family, in our workplace, and in the broader community. Our worldview determines the type of society we create with others. Dallas Willard says our worldview determines the orientation of everything else we think and do!
Allen is concerned that if we try to hold on to both Christianity and Critical Theory, it will eventually erode core biblical truths. We will be forced to side with one or the other. Many are already unknowingly doing this. This is an important and relevant read for our cultural moment! I'm considering putting the rest of my thoughts/research into a paper for an eventual teaching.
Scott David Allen picks up where Keller leaves off, explaining how Critical Theory has hijacked the definition of social justice with something other than what we think it means. Because of this, many Christians have jumped on the critical theory bandwagon unknowingly. Not realizing the dangers of this secular worldview. Critical Theory or social justice is NOT the same as the justice we read about in Scripture.
Biblical justice is first rooted in a transcendent moral law giver. It then means to live in right relationship with God and then others: giving people their due as image-bearers of God. Distributive justice is impartially rendering judgement, righting wrongs and meting out punishment for law breaking.
Critical Theory (sometimes called intersectionality or cultural Marxism) rather is a worldview which views the world as a struggle between oppressed groups and their oppressors. How do you move out from being oppressed? Overthrow the traditional structure and system by any means necessary, commonly violence. In fact, the aim is to free groups of oppression no matter the means and consequences. In Critical Theory, individual identity is overshadowed by corporate identity. Class, race, gender and sexual orientation are the defining characteristics of personal identity. There's also a focus on redistributing wealth and power to the victim (oppressed). The goal being equality of outcome for everyone.
Allen, not only explains Critical Theory in great depth, he also shows how this new justice movement has made significant inroads into mainstream evangelicalism, influencing many Christians today. We should understand that worldviews determine how we behave—how we function within our family, in our workplace, and in the broader community. Our worldview determines the type of society we create with others. Dallas Willard says our worldview determines the orientation of everything else we think and do!
Allen is concerned that if we try to hold on to both Christianity and Critical Theory, it will eventually erode core biblical truths. We will be forced to side with one or the other. Many are already unknowingly doing this. This is an important and relevant read for our cultural moment! I'm considering putting the rest of my thoughts/research into a paper for an eventual teaching.
December 28, 2020
Anyone who has sat under my preaching for more than a year knows that racial justice is a deep burden in my heart. For nearly a decade I have preached a sermon against racism at least once a year in the churches I have pastored. That said, Allen’s book on social justice was perhaps one of the most insightful works I’ve read on the topic. Allen clearly and carefully demonstrates how much of what we call justice today is actually rooted in a comprehensive worldview that is antithetical to Christianity. Rather than thinking critically, many Christians (at times myself included) have bought this worldview hook, line, and sinker without carefully weighing its truth claims. This book is a much needed corrective if evangelical Christians are going to resist the dangerous and deceptive lies embedded in the cultural cries for social justice.
January 6, 2021
A storm has been gathering over the better part of the last decade, and is now bearing down on Christianity. That storm is the intrusion of social justice doctrines into the church and the uncritical acceptance of them by often well-meaning Christians. This is the problem Scott David Allen sets out to address in Why Social Justice is not Biblical Justice.
At the beginning, and throughout the book, Allen affirms his genuine concern for the oppressed, so this is no flippant disregard of injustices in society. Rather, Allen believes that the definition of justice now predominant in American society does not match the biblical definition of justice, and in fact reflects a worldview that is antithetical to basic biblical principles. Christians cannot, Allen thinks, embrace what he calls "ideological social justice" without ultimately compromising biblical orthodoxy.
Early in the book, Allen defines biblical justice, noting that at root it describes what is consistent with an objective standard of morality, God's moral law. In this way, justice is less about what human beings do to each other and more about the standard by which their actions are judged. Allen breaks down justice further into communitive justice (the command to live peacefully, harmoniously, and generously with each other, ensuring that all are given their due) and distributive justice (impartiality and equality by those in authority over others in homes, churches, and government, and their responsibility to correct and punish injustice). This two-fold definition of justice has a long pedigree, though Allen includes some of what other writers have called distributive justice in his category of communitive justice. Nevertheless, he notes that while God hates injustice, and will judge it perfectly, that perfect judgment will not come until the return of Christ, a return in which not only God's justice but also His grace and mercy will find their culmination.
Allen adds, contra F. A. Hayek, that there is a sense in which it is appropriate to talk about social justice, stating that some societies are marked by high, though still imperfect, degrees of earthly justice. He adds that such societies are almost universally those that have been influenced by a biblical view of justice, and on this point I am reminded of an early statement by the Catholic Church that social justice is defined as the ability of "associations or individuals to obtain what is their due, according to their nature and vocation," and is "linked to the common good and to the exercise of authority."
Allen also offers a brief overview of the development of ideological social justice ideology, placing the blame for its rise on the departure from a God-centered world of ideas before the Enlightenment, progressing through the secularizing effects of the Age of Reason (and science), and then to the postmodern world in which Marxism and similar ideas have provided a substitute for the Christian religion in a post-Christian age.
This leads to Allen contrasting the "core tenets" of ideological social justice with biblical Christianity, much of which is a fairly standard explanation and critique of social justice ideas. Allen does, however, hit on deeper points, including that social justice is incompatible with Christianity because it has no account of the equality of the sin nature of individuals (and thus the the groups they are a part of), and because social justice allows no room for forgiveness or grace in its scheme, leaving one group as a kind of perpetual debtor to another. Here, Allen reiterates the Christian's duty to fight injustice, but clarifies that we cannot adopt the world's definition of the term, particularly when its definition flies so flagrantly in the face of biblical truth and God's moral law.
In addition to refuting its definition of justice, Allen challenges the social justice interpretation of equality and diversity, noting that they also are inconsistent with the biblical definitions of those terms, in which equality means the equal dignity we all have as creations of God, and diversity means the diversity that He built into the world and us, His creations. Allen further notes that diversity and equality in the social justice regime eventually demand conformity to their definitions, or exclusion from society.
Allen adds an interesting treatment on how the biblical and social justice worldviews understand poverty, its causes, and the Christian's duty in response, writing that the Christian's duty is to aid the poor not by advocating leveling social and government programs, but rather by giving charitably, encouraging the right perspective on wealth and poverty, and inculcating the attitudes and conditions that lead to greater prosperity for peoples and societies. He also pushes back against the anti-American and anti-Western spirit of the social justice movement, accurately founding it in the leftist theory of history that focuses on vices and ignores virtues. He adds that conservatives are also beginning to criticize America, though his criticism of Patrick Deneen's thesis in Why Liberalism Failed seems to indicate that he might not fully understand the right's critique of American and Western history, which though by no means unassailable is considerably more nuanced than the left's.
On the topic of how Christians should understand our history in its combination of both good and evil, Allen supplies a more or less Burkean answer: we try to understand that historical figures, like us, are flawed and imperfect people who, like us, should be extended the grace that attends our realization that fallibility is the common lot of humanity. We accept the inheritance our ancestors have left us with appreciation for the good (and there is much good) and a commitment to preserving that good and improving where we can.
Allen adds that the social justice movement's "values and disvalues," what it reveres and what it reviles, leads to an inverted system of morality in which evil is recast as the sole domain of oppressor groups or the traditions they are said to uphold, while evil actions become neutral or downright virtuous when undertaken by the oppressed. Such thinking presents a challenge for Christians, many of whom are now tempted to revise the biblical system of morality to include social justice concepts (he cites Andy Stanley and the Episcopal Church as examples, but there are sadly many more).
Moving to how social justice has become mainstream, Allen observes that such cultural changes elicit one of three responses from the church: conformity to the prevailing doctrine with an attendant departure from biblical orthodoxy; accommodation of the new ideology, often unintentionally, such that biblical teaching changes subtly to reflect the culture; or it resists the ideology, which can take the form of engaging or disengaging from the culture, the former of which Allen believes is the biblically-correct method. He goes through some history of how the church has responded in each of these ways, noting most interestingly its response to and adoption of radical leftist and unbiblical views on feminism, LGBTQ issues, and race.
On the topic of race, Allen distinguishes two frameworks through which history, the present, and the future are understood. The "Revolution Narrative" views America as uniquely stained by racial sin, understands all current disparities as due to continued racism, denies that black Americans have any substantial degree of influence over their own outcomes, and views social revolution that overturns existing institutions as the remedy. The "Preservation Narrative" does not deny the troubled history of race in America, yet nevertheless understands that the basic principles of the Declaration of Independence were a key component in first ending slavery and then working towards the achievement of equal civil rights, proposes that the outcomes of black Americans are well within their ability to influence through their choices and actions, and sees the path forward not as tearing down institutions but continuing their improvement while preserving the good. Allen evaluates how both narratives treat several prominent issues, including police brutality and incarceration rates, and finds the Preservation Narrative not only closer to the truth, but more nuanced in how it approaches the problem - and such nuance, unsurprisingly, is often necessary in getting closer to truth.
Allen criticizes (and names) evangelical Christians who have either adopted social justice ideology and attempted to syncretize it with their Christianity, or who accurately discern the dangers of the social justice vision for Christianity and society, but who view engaging the culture on these issues and presenting a biblical worldview as "mission creep" and therefore not relevant to the Christian's task. He is correct to criticize both camps, though his latter point warrants emphasis: Christians' failure to understand cultural issues and work against those spinning falsehoods is a real and enduring problem.
Allen closes by calling Christians to clearly and boldly communicate the biblical alternative to ideological social justice, proclaiming the truth of God-endowed, true equality, true diversity, and true identity. These challenge the counterfeit equality, diversity, and identity of the world, revealing the beauty of God's created world over the stultifying ideologies of a godless philosophy. Allen further encourages Christians who oppose ideological social justice to avoid falling into a reactionary posture toward their task, advising them instead to: remember that, though identity politics is mistaken, men are not isolated individuals, but were made by God to live in communities; to realize that, though the social justice movement's conspiratorial views on racism are wrong, racism does exist and Christians need to remain committed to exposing and removing it, no matter who is practicing it; be ready to oppose actual instances of systemic injustices, provided injustices can be provably attributed to a system (he cites the pornography industry and government-approved abortion as examples) and not to other causes (as in the cases of mere statistical disparities); avoid responding to social justice advocates' uncritical anti-Americanism and anti-Westernism by adopting an uncritical pro-American and Pro-Western attitude; and, finally, to respond to the increasingly censorious political correctness of cancel culture neither by adopting the culture's combative rhetoric nor by being cowed into silence, but by proclaiming with boldness, humility, and graciousness the truth.
Allen calls Christians to move from criticizing culture to creating culture, realizing that culture is not something set apart from our duties as Christian witnesses, but the vehicle by which worldviews and philosophies get shaped. Retaining a biblical view of justice, defined by adherence to God's moral law and the impartial pursuit of truth, Allen believes that Christians should stand ready to influence the arts, business, government, and education - and to suffer the consequences of bucking the powerful in their pursuit of ideological hegemony.
Overall, Allen has contributed much to the ongoing discussion among Christians about the verities and falsehoods of the social justice movement. Some of Allen's arguments could have benefited from exposition and from the infusion of more sophisticated political and social theory (see American Awakening: Identity Politics and Other Afflictions of Our Time), but as an introduction to the topic that exposes error and encourages Christians to exercise discernment, Why Social Justice is not Biblical Justice succeeds at its goal.
At the beginning, and throughout the book, Allen affirms his genuine concern for the oppressed, so this is no flippant disregard of injustices in society. Rather, Allen believes that the definition of justice now predominant in American society does not match the biblical definition of justice, and in fact reflects a worldview that is antithetical to basic biblical principles. Christians cannot, Allen thinks, embrace what he calls "ideological social justice" without ultimately compromising biblical orthodoxy.
Early in the book, Allen defines biblical justice, noting that at root it describes what is consistent with an objective standard of morality, God's moral law. In this way, justice is less about what human beings do to each other and more about the standard by which their actions are judged. Allen breaks down justice further into communitive justice (the command to live peacefully, harmoniously, and generously with each other, ensuring that all are given their due) and distributive justice (impartiality and equality by those in authority over others in homes, churches, and government, and their responsibility to correct and punish injustice). This two-fold definition of justice has a long pedigree, though Allen includes some of what other writers have called distributive justice in his category of communitive justice. Nevertheless, he notes that while God hates injustice, and will judge it perfectly, that perfect judgment will not come until the return of Christ, a return in which not only God's justice but also His grace and mercy will find their culmination.
Allen adds, contra F. A. Hayek, that there is a sense in which it is appropriate to talk about social justice, stating that some societies are marked by high, though still imperfect, degrees of earthly justice. He adds that such societies are almost universally those that have been influenced by a biblical view of justice, and on this point I am reminded of an early statement by the Catholic Church that social justice is defined as the ability of "associations or individuals to obtain what is their due, according to their nature and vocation," and is "linked to the common good and to the exercise of authority."
Allen also offers a brief overview of the development of ideological social justice ideology, placing the blame for its rise on the departure from a God-centered world of ideas before the Enlightenment, progressing through the secularizing effects of the Age of Reason (and science), and then to the postmodern world in which Marxism and similar ideas have provided a substitute for the Christian religion in a post-Christian age.
This leads to Allen contrasting the "core tenets" of ideological social justice with biblical Christianity, much of which is a fairly standard explanation and critique of social justice ideas. Allen does, however, hit on deeper points, including that social justice is incompatible with Christianity because it has no account of the equality of the sin nature of individuals (and thus the the groups they are a part of), and because social justice allows no room for forgiveness or grace in its scheme, leaving one group as a kind of perpetual debtor to another. Here, Allen reiterates the Christian's duty to fight injustice, but clarifies that we cannot adopt the world's definition of the term, particularly when its definition flies so flagrantly in the face of biblical truth and God's moral law.
In addition to refuting its definition of justice, Allen challenges the social justice interpretation of equality and diversity, noting that they also are inconsistent with the biblical definitions of those terms, in which equality means the equal dignity we all have as creations of God, and diversity means the diversity that He built into the world and us, His creations. Allen further notes that diversity and equality in the social justice regime eventually demand conformity to their definitions, or exclusion from society.
Allen adds an interesting treatment on how the biblical and social justice worldviews understand poverty, its causes, and the Christian's duty in response, writing that the Christian's duty is to aid the poor not by advocating leveling social and government programs, but rather by giving charitably, encouraging the right perspective on wealth and poverty, and inculcating the attitudes and conditions that lead to greater prosperity for peoples and societies. He also pushes back against the anti-American and anti-Western spirit of the social justice movement, accurately founding it in the leftist theory of history that focuses on vices and ignores virtues. He adds that conservatives are also beginning to criticize America, though his criticism of Patrick Deneen's thesis in Why Liberalism Failed seems to indicate that he might not fully understand the right's critique of American and Western history, which though by no means unassailable is considerably more nuanced than the left's.
On the topic of how Christians should understand our history in its combination of both good and evil, Allen supplies a more or less Burkean answer: we try to understand that historical figures, like us, are flawed and imperfect people who, like us, should be extended the grace that attends our realization that fallibility is the common lot of humanity. We accept the inheritance our ancestors have left us with appreciation for the good (and there is much good) and a commitment to preserving that good and improving where we can.
Allen adds that the social justice movement's "values and disvalues," what it reveres and what it reviles, leads to an inverted system of morality in which evil is recast as the sole domain of oppressor groups or the traditions they are said to uphold, while evil actions become neutral or downright virtuous when undertaken by the oppressed. Such thinking presents a challenge for Christians, many of whom are now tempted to revise the biblical system of morality to include social justice concepts (he cites Andy Stanley and the Episcopal Church as examples, but there are sadly many more).
Moving to how social justice has become mainstream, Allen observes that such cultural changes elicit one of three responses from the church: conformity to the prevailing doctrine with an attendant departure from biblical orthodoxy; accommodation of the new ideology, often unintentionally, such that biblical teaching changes subtly to reflect the culture; or it resists the ideology, which can take the form of engaging or disengaging from the culture, the former of which Allen believes is the biblically-correct method. He goes through some history of how the church has responded in each of these ways, noting most interestingly its response to and adoption of radical leftist and unbiblical views on feminism, LGBTQ issues, and race.
On the topic of race, Allen distinguishes two frameworks through which history, the present, and the future are understood. The "Revolution Narrative" views America as uniquely stained by racial sin, understands all current disparities as due to continued racism, denies that black Americans have any substantial degree of influence over their own outcomes, and views social revolution that overturns existing institutions as the remedy. The "Preservation Narrative" does not deny the troubled history of race in America, yet nevertheless understands that the basic principles of the Declaration of Independence were a key component in first ending slavery and then working towards the achievement of equal civil rights, proposes that the outcomes of black Americans are well within their ability to influence through their choices and actions, and sees the path forward not as tearing down institutions but continuing their improvement while preserving the good. Allen evaluates how both narratives treat several prominent issues, including police brutality and incarceration rates, and finds the Preservation Narrative not only closer to the truth, but more nuanced in how it approaches the problem - and such nuance, unsurprisingly, is often necessary in getting closer to truth.
Allen criticizes (and names) evangelical Christians who have either adopted social justice ideology and attempted to syncretize it with their Christianity, or who accurately discern the dangers of the social justice vision for Christianity and society, but who view engaging the culture on these issues and presenting a biblical worldview as "mission creep" and therefore not relevant to the Christian's task. He is correct to criticize both camps, though his latter point warrants emphasis: Christians' failure to understand cultural issues and work against those spinning falsehoods is a real and enduring problem.
Allen closes by calling Christians to clearly and boldly communicate the biblical alternative to ideological social justice, proclaiming the truth of God-endowed, true equality, true diversity, and true identity. These challenge the counterfeit equality, diversity, and identity of the world, revealing the beauty of God's created world over the stultifying ideologies of a godless philosophy. Allen further encourages Christians who oppose ideological social justice to avoid falling into a reactionary posture toward their task, advising them instead to: remember that, though identity politics is mistaken, men are not isolated individuals, but were made by God to live in communities; to realize that, though the social justice movement's conspiratorial views on racism are wrong, racism does exist and Christians need to remain committed to exposing and removing it, no matter who is practicing it; be ready to oppose actual instances of systemic injustices, provided injustices can be provably attributed to a system (he cites the pornography industry and government-approved abortion as examples) and not to other causes (as in the cases of mere statistical disparities); avoid responding to social justice advocates' uncritical anti-Americanism and anti-Westernism by adopting an uncritical pro-American and Pro-Western attitude; and, finally, to respond to the increasingly censorious political correctness of cancel culture neither by adopting the culture's combative rhetoric nor by being cowed into silence, but by proclaiming with boldness, humility, and graciousness the truth.
Allen calls Christians to move from criticizing culture to creating culture, realizing that culture is not something set apart from our duties as Christian witnesses, but the vehicle by which worldviews and philosophies get shaped. Retaining a biblical view of justice, defined by adherence to God's moral law and the impartial pursuit of truth, Allen believes that Christians should stand ready to influence the arts, business, government, and education - and to suffer the consequences of bucking the powerful in their pursuit of ideological hegemony.
Overall, Allen has contributed much to the ongoing discussion among Christians about the verities and falsehoods of the social justice movement. Some of Allen's arguments could have benefited from exposition and from the infusion of more sophisticated political and social theory (see American Awakening: Identity Politics and Other Afflictions of Our Time), but as an introduction to the topic that exposes error and encourages Christians to exercise discernment, Why Social Justice is not Biblical Justice succeeds at its goal.
April 19, 2021
First sentence: In recent years, a powerful ideology has made deep inroads into the very heart of the evangelical church. To its mainstream advocates, it is called “social justice” and is nearly always coupled with a commitment to equality, diversity, and inclusion.
There are probably dozens--if not hundreds--of reviews that will do this book on justice actual justice. Reviews that may break down the book chapter by chapter and analyze its contents and provide readers with clues as to whether this is the book for them--or not.
The premise of this one is simple: justice has been coupled--for better or worse--with social justice. Coupled by people without the church (outside the church) certainly, but also coupled by people within the church. Social justice is eclipsing biblical justice. People looking for justice are turning not to God, not to the church, not to the powers that be, but to society, to specific sections of society.
The truth of the matter is that ANY definition of justice that discounts, discredits, ignores, belittles, twists, or distorts God's definition of justice is wrong. Plain and simple. God is Just. God is Righteous. God is Good. God is Wise. God is Omniscient, Omnipotent, Omnipresent. (In other words, all-seeing and all-knowing. He doesn't just know the outside actions--but the inward thoughts.) God is also the ULTIMATE (final) Judge.
For Christians--those who profess to be Christians--to give more authority or credit to outside theories or world views when it comes to justice--or when it comes to anything really--is just all kinds of wrong. For example, Critical Race Theory, or CRT. CRT should not be used as a tool to reinterpret or "interpret" Scripture. (Neither should feminism or intersectionality).
This book isn't written to persuade unbelievers--those outside the Christian faith--of the dangers of jumping on the social justice bandwagon. It is written primarily for those who profess to be Christ-followers (aka Christians, believers) to think biblically and with discernment about injustices in society. In other words, let the Word of God reign authoritatively in their lives--yes, even when it comes to living real life in a messy, messy super-fallen, soul-bruising world filled with tears, pain, and anguish.
The truth is the Bible has a lot to say both in the Old Testament and New Testament about injustice and justice, about sin and righteousness, about right and wrong, about good and evil. The Bible gives us guidelines and principles, certainly, but it also gives us promises upon which we can base our hope.
The book could have just focused on biblical justice--how the Bible treats the subject or doctrine of justice--but it also chooses to engage directly with the competition. It is all about comparing and contrasting the two: biblical justice AND social justice. It looks at them both from plenty of angles. It presents the flaws of social justice that Christians should be aware of before they open up their hearts and minds and embrace social justice.
I would say one of the most important things is to be aware that even though both groups use some of the same words, the two groups mean very different things by those words. So though on the surface the two groups may appear to have much in common--a common goal that is of utmost important--there are major differences in play. People can with completely good intentions fall for it. Especially if they are more tuned into the news--TV, internet, radio--than the Word of God.
The author does mention--and readers will already be aware--that both sides tend to resort (not even as a last resort) to name calling and label-throwing. This isn't a kind, friendly debate--an exchange of ideas--but all out war.
So the book is about dangers from the world, to a certain degree, but also about dangers within the church. It is the dangers within the church--coming from within--that prove costliest and feel like a betrayal. The Bible-believing Christian faces warfare from within and without--the church and the world.
There isn't a quick solution. It isn't as easy as saying, well, we'll just skip this hot topic altogether and focus on the essentials. No, the author urges justice--BIBLICAL JUSTICE, justice on God's terms--is essential to a right practice of the faith. What we need is preaching and teaching on biblical justice.
I definitely loved some of the chapters. I did. I found almost all of the chapters thought provoking.
If I could change one thing about the book, however, it would be his historical discussion of Republicans and Democrats. I think he has perhaps intentionally left this vague and confusing. Instead of pointing out the labels "Democrat" and "Republican" have changed, transformed, evolved through the past hundred plus years, he acts as if they are still the same. For example, he goes on about how it was Democrats that were racists, that were pro-slavery, that were pushing all these racists laws, that founded the KKK, and that it was always Republicans who were the good guys, who stood in opposition to the hateful, despicable Democrats. If you are at all familiar with history, you know that you can't do that. Or perhaps you shouldn't do that. If you were to go back in time, what passes today for "Republican" and "Democrat" today would be unrecognizable and completely foreign. Policies, ideologies, beliefs, practices morph and change. The issues we argue and debate today would be completely foreign if not horrendously shocking to the past. And that's not because we're "better" people. The truth is the past would shock us and our values just as much as our "values" would shock the past. It works both ways. Anyway, to sum it up, the paragraphs were the author explores this argument weaken his argument--in my opinion.
I did appreciate his argument not to conform to the world, not to accept the world's world views as your own, to cling to the Word of God, to fight the good fight, to live rightly by God's standards, to be the salt and light, the city on the hill.
I was torn between four and five stars. I wish they'd been more focus on what biblical justice is--what it looks like. I did like the engagement with the other side. But all his arguments weren't equally strong. Even if you don't agree 1000% with every paragraph, I think he gives plenty food for thought.
There are probably dozens--if not hundreds--of reviews that will do this book on justice actual justice. Reviews that may break down the book chapter by chapter and analyze its contents and provide readers with clues as to whether this is the book for them--or not.
The premise of this one is simple: justice has been coupled--for better or worse--with social justice. Coupled by people without the church (outside the church) certainly, but also coupled by people within the church. Social justice is eclipsing biblical justice. People looking for justice are turning not to God, not to the church, not to the powers that be, but to society, to specific sections of society.
The truth of the matter is that ANY definition of justice that discounts, discredits, ignores, belittles, twists, or distorts God's definition of justice is wrong. Plain and simple. God is Just. God is Righteous. God is Good. God is Wise. God is Omniscient, Omnipotent, Omnipresent. (In other words, all-seeing and all-knowing. He doesn't just know the outside actions--but the inward thoughts.) God is also the ULTIMATE (final) Judge.
For Christians--those who profess to be Christians--to give more authority or credit to outside theories or world views when it comes to justice--or when it comes to anything really--is just all kinds of wrong. For example, Critical Race Theory, or CRT. CRT should not be used as a tool to reinterpret or "interpret" Scripture. (Neither should feminism or intersectionality).
This book isn't written to persuade unbelievers--those outside the Christian faith--of the dangers of jumping on the social justice bandwagon. It is written primarily for those who profess to be Christ-followers (aka Christians, believers) to think biblically and with discernment about injustices in society. In other words, let the Word of God reign authoritatively in their lives--yes, even when it comes to living real life in a messy, messy super-fallen, soul-bruising world filled with tears, pain, and anguish.
The truth is the Bible has a lot to say both in the Old Testament and New Testament about injustice and justice, about sin and righteousness, about right and wrong, about good and evil. The Bible gives us guidelines and principles, certainly, but it also gives us promises upon which we can base our hope.
The book could have just focused on biblical justice--how the Bible treats the subject or doctrine of justice--but it also chooses to engage directly with the competition. It is all about comparing and contrasting the two: biblical justice AND social justice. It looks at them both from plenty of angles. It presents the flaws of social justice that Christians should be aware of before they open up their hearts and minds and embrace social justice.
I would say one of the most important things is to be aware that even though both groups use some of the same words, the two groups mean very different things by those words. So though on the surface the two groups may appear to have much in common--a common goal that is of utmost important--there are major differences in play. People can with completely good intentions fall for it. Especially if they are more tuned into the news--TV, internet, radio--than the Word of God.
The author does mention--and readers will already be aware--that both sides tend to resort (not even as a last resort) to name calling and label-throwing. This isn't a kind, friendly debate--an exchange of ideas--but all out war.
So the book is about dangers from the world, to a certain degree, but also about dangers within the church. It is the dangers within the church--coming from within--that prove costliest and feel like a betrayal. The Bible-believing Christian faces warfare from within and without--the church and the world.
There isn't a quick solution. It isn't as easy as saying, well, we'll just skip this hot topic altogether and focus on the essentials. No, the author urges justice--BIBLICAL JUSTICE, justice on God's terms--is essential to a right practice of the faith. What we need is preaching and teaching on biblical justice.
I definitely loved some of the chapters. I did. I found almost all of the chapters thought provoking.
If I could change one thing about the book, however, it would be his historical discussion of Republicans and Democrats. I think he has perhaps intentionally left this vague and confusing. Instead of pointing out the labels "Democrat" and "Republican" have changed, transformed, evolved through the past hundred plus years, he acts as if they are still the same. For example, he goes on about how it was Democrats that were racists, that were pro-slavery, that were pushing all these racists laws, that founded the KKK, and that it was always Republicans who were the good guys, who stood in opposition to the hateful, despicable Democrats. If you are at all familiar with history, you know that you can't do that. Or perhaps you shouldn't do that. If you were to go back in time, what passes today for "Republican" and "Democrat" today would be unrecognizable and completely foreign. Policies, ideologies, beliefs, practices morph and change. The issues we argue and debate today would be completely foreign if not horrendously shocking to the past. And that's not because we're "better" people. The truth is the past would shock us and our values just as much as our "values" would shock the past. It works both ways. Anyway, to sum it up, the paragraphs were the author explores this argument weaken his argument--in my opinion.
I did appreciate his argument not to conform to the world, not to accept the world's world views as your own, to cling to the Word of God, to fight the good fight, to live rightly by God's standards, to be the salt and light, the city on the hill.
I was torn between four and five stars. I wish they'd been more focus on what biblical justice is--what it looks like. I did like the engagement with the other side. But all his arguments weren't equally strong. Even if you don't agree 1000% with every paragraph, I think he gives plenty food for thought.
September 29, 2020
Very good book! This work puts its finger on much of the stuff that we see infiltrating the modern church. The author makes the case for why “ideological social justice” that is influenced by critical theory, specifically critical race theory, is not biblical justice. I remember first being exposed to critical theory in my early college years and remembering just how toxic it was. Highly recommended for anyone that is concerned about this trend.
August 4, 2021
“In the counterfeit story …, justice is the uprooting of traditional structures and systems, with the goal of redistributing power and money from so-called oppressor groups to victim groups in the pursuit of a utopian equality of outcome. This is a secular perversion of justice. In our story—the true story—justice is conformity to God’s perfect moral law as found in the Ten Commandments and the royal law: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself’.” This is Allen’s premise. It is, in my opinion, a false dichotomy. And beyond that, his redundant writing style and many grammatical errors made this a very frustrating read for me.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 149 reviews