Yesterday, Timothy Isaiah Cho, a professed Christian and associate editor at Faithfully Magazine, who is known on Twitter for progressivist, social justice laden Tweets, posted the following thread:

As I saw this post making the rounds this morning, a couple of thoughts came to mind that I feel need sharing. Mr. Cho appears to want to address Christians he thinks are more concerned with refuting heretical beliefs than helping those in need. Yet, his own post is laden with faulty presuppositions. I think it is helpful to note a couple of them here.

To take Mr. Cho’s view on this, one has to assume a couple of things: first, that errant and heretical beliefs must be given an ear because they are cries for help due to one’s victim status, real or perceived. That being a victim, culturally, means one has the right, or even duty, to come up with their own views of Scripture to right real or perceived wrongs. Whether or not these views are orthodox or heretical is besides the point. The issue is that there are cultural wrongs to be corrected. If a victim class fails to rightly handle Scripture, the Christian must still be more concerned with the victim’s needs than their handling of the Word. This implies that one cannot dismiss the heresy without giving into the idea that claimed victim status is real and the heresy cannot be refuted without coming up with something else to replace it.

And, second, that Scripture itself is insufficient to respond to the heresy and refute it. One must be forced to accept errant humanist views on victimhood and “reconciliation” before one can address the heresy. In other words, Scripture must sit at the foot of Intersectionality – admitting and confirming victim status, conceding that such status needs to be addressed through humanistic means – before one can appeal to Scripture to address the errant doctrinal beliefs. Of course, this is the very thing that leads to the heretical doctrines to begin with. It’s an endless loop that allows Mr. Cho and others to keep Christians from going straight to the Word and addressing a heretical teaching. Remember, the issue is not the doctrine but the victim status that is all-important. It is not the Word’s correct interpretation and application that is of highest importance but meeting the felt needs of the victim class before we are ever concerned about how they view Scripture. Mr. Cho is looking to paint Christians into a corner. He wants to say “OK, even if what they teach is heresy, you must address their status and must work to right their perceived wrongs! Stop telling them they’re wrong and fix their perceived problems!”

Ultimately, this is what social justice ideologues are concerned with. It is seeking to create a cultural utopia in the here and now, where everyone’s grievances are assuaged and equality for all is the motto. But when we appeal to a person’s perceptions of what is equality before we seek to understand the concept from God’s Word, we import sinful and faulty man-made ideas upon the Text. To have orthopraxy, right conduct and practice, we must have orthodoxy, right understanding of God’s Word. Our most pressing concern ought not be the perceived victim status, but what God says about man, sin, salvation, and reconciliation. Are we to be more concerned with how comfortable man is now in this life? Or is it of higher importance that we address the spiritual needs before we get to the physical? A thorough understanding of Scripture reveals the latter is more important than the former.

And let us be clear, Scripture does in fact address issues of oppression, though perhaps not in the way that Mr. Cho and others would prefer. Scripture identifies that the ultimate source of all evil is the sinful heart of man. The world hurts, oppresses, steals from, hates, and even murders people because of sin. “What causes quarrels and what causes fights among you? Is it not this, that your passions are at war within you? You desire and do not have, so you murder. You covet and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel. You do not have, because you do not ask. You ask and do not receive, because you ask wrongly, to spend it on your passions.” (James 4:1-3) While laws and policies can limit the actions of sinful man, to an extent, they cannot change the wicked heart of man. That is why Christians must first and foremost seek to preach the gospel, that sin hardened hearts might be changed, redeemed, and made right through Jesus Christ. Yes, those that hurt and oppress are called out by God in His Word, told they will be held accountable for the sins they themselves have committed (not the generalized corporate guilt preached by social justicians). Yet, it is not the law of God and its inevitable consequences that changes the oppressor into a helper of the oppressed. It is the gospel and the miraculous work of regeneration through the Holy Spirit that makes this happen. Then, as Christ instructed us (Matthew 28:19-20), we teach the brethren to know and practice all that His Word commands. Hearts changed and conformed to Christ willingly, even if sometimes warring against the flesh, seek to love and care for those around them. They seek to repent of their sins and make restitution to those they have hurt. And they seek to honor God by teaching others to do likewise. So, we see that the Word indeed does address these issues, but not in the corrupted, humanistic way that progressivists would prefer.

Thus, we must see Mr. Cho’s Twitter thread for what it is, an attempt to undermine the sufficiency of Scripture and an appeal to unbiblical ideologies meant to trap Christians into progressivist mantras and practice. Let us seek first the kingdom of God, rightly understanding and practicing His teachings, correcting those in error, leading them from the paths of sin, and then addressing what issues in this life that may actually be needed.