Please Help Us Keep These Thousands of Blog Posts Growing and Free for All
The above YouTube video by a Christian, Bill Dyer, of Southern Evangelical Seminary is truly misinforming and should be discussed. Below, I will interact with his video and share with you my insights. I highly suggest that you also watch his video. First, the latest argument from the Democratic left socialists is that “Critical Race Theory is not being taught in schools.” How can they make such an argument when it clearly is and clearly has been for years? They are saying without saying it, ‘there is no curriculum-specific being taught in the schools.’ Technically, in most cases, this is true. But the teachers are being taught the CRT ideology, mindset, worldview, and then dispensing that CRT ideology, mindset, worldview through their regular classes. Hence, it is not really down on paper as being taught. It is a part of the class discussions, slickly worded questions on the exams. So, yes, CRT is being taught in schools.
Second, let’s start by defining Critical Race Theory (CRT).
There is more than Critical Race Theory. You have Critical Queer Theory, Critical Feminist Theory, Critical Cultural Theory, and so on. So, what is Critical Theory? It is rooted in Marxism and is all about destroying traditional ways of life and replacing them with something else. It always creates conflict and it always destroys. There is another Critical Theory that has impacted the Bible for 200 years. You have Critical Literary Theory, the set of concepts and intellectual assumptions on which rests the work of explaining or interpreting literary texts. The Bible is a literary text. Early on it was known as Higher Criticism, then Literary Criticism, followed by Biblical Criticism. So, here we will coin a new theory, Critical Bible Theory. Remember, as you read the biblical excursion below, all Critical Theory always creates conflict, and it always destroys.
“AS THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARIES GO, SO GOES THE CHURCH”—J. Gresham Machen—The Christian Faith in the Modern World, p. 65
Let’s take a few paragraphs to offer the reader an overview of how dangerous Higher Criticism (Biblical Criticism) is.
Such Bible scholars as Robert L. Thomas, Norman L. Geisler, Gleason L. Archer, F. David Farnell, and the late Gleason L. Archer Jr., among many others, have fought for decades to educate readers about the dangers of higher criticism.
Tischendorf was a world-leading biblical scholar who rejected higher criticism, which led to his noteworthy success in defending the authenticity of the Bible text. Tischendorf was educated in Greek at the University of Leipzig. During his university studies, he was troubled by higher criticism of the Bible, taught by famous German theologians, who sought to prove that the Greek New Testament was not authentic.
NT Textual scholar Harold Greenlee writes, “This “higher criticism” has often been destructively applied to the Bible, and it has come to be looked down on by many evangelical Christians.” Greenlee, J. Harold. The Text of the New Testament: From Manuscript to Modern Edition (p. 2). Baker Publishing Group.
Higher critics have taught that much of the Bible was composed of legend and myth. They say that Moses did not write the first five books of the Bible, 8th century Isaiah did not write Isaiah, there were three authors of Isaiah, 6th century Daniel did not write Daniel, it was penned in the 2nd century BCE. Higher critics have taught that Jesus did not say all that he said in his Sermon on the Mount and that Jesus did not condemn the Pharisees in Matthew 23, as this was Matthew because he hated the Jews. These are just highlights, for there are thousands of tweaks that have undermined the word of God as being inspired and fully inerrant. Higher critics have dissected the Word of God until it has become the word of man and a very jumbled word at that. Higher criticism is still taught in almost all seminaries, and it is quite common to hear so-called Evangelical Bible scholars publicly deny that large sections of the Bible are fully inerrant, authentic, and true. Biblical higher criticism is speculative and tentative in the extreme. This fits with the textual scholar Daniel B. Wallace’s recent words in MYTHS AND MISTAKES In New Testament Textual Criticism, where he said: “The new generation of evangelical scholars is far more comfortable with ambiguity and uncertainty than previous generations.” (Page xii)
Craig Evans says Jesus did not say the I AM STATEMENTS IN JOHN’S GOSPEL:
(1) I am the Bread of Life (John 6:35, 41, 48, 51)
(2) I am the Light of the World (John 8:12)
(3) I am the Door of the Sheep (John 10:7, 9)
(4) I am the Good Shepherd (John 10:11, 14)
(5) I am the Resurrection and the Life (John 11:25)
(6) I am the Way, the Truth and the Life (John 14:6)
(7) I am the True Vine (John 15:1, 5)
After two centuries, higher critics with their higher criticism have ousted the Bible from its earlier status as the fully inerrant, inspired Word of God? Higher criticism has opened the flood gates to pseudo-scholarly works, which has resulted in undermining Christians’ confidence in the Bible. There is utterly no solid evidence for the claims made by higher critics. If any supporter of higher criticism says, “just because some have gone too far, or some have abused the method, this does not negate the benefits of using it,” listen to that foreboding feeling in the back of your mind. Or, the higher critic might argue, “you can take the good parts of higher criticism and leave the parts that undermine the Bible.” This is like saying, “you can remove the 75% poison from the water before drinking it, trust me.” There is a way to remove the bad parts for sure, fully abandon what is known as the subjective historical-critical method of interpretation and return to the old objective historical-grammatical method of interpretation.
THIS IS WHY CPH HAS CREATED A SECTION TO EDUCATE THE CHURCHGOER ON HIGHER CRITICISM – 20 articles at present, some over 100+ pages long.
End of Excursion
In CRT it is the whites who are the oppressors and the non-white are oppressed. In CQT it is the straight heterosexuals who are the oppressors and the homosexuals who are oppressed. With CFT all men are the oppressors and women are oppressed.
CRITICAL RACE THEORY: What is on the outside is what makes you who you are.
THE BIBLE: The inner person is what makes you who you are.
Critical Race Theory (CRT) is an academic movement made up of civil-rights scholars and activists in the United States who seek to critically examine the law as it intersects with issues of race and to challenge mainstream liberal approaches to racial justice. CRT examines social and cultural issues as they relate to race, law, and social and political power. This is the basic argument for CRT that is written so as to seem like it is reasonable and rational. ‘However, the truth of CRT is that it is an essential or basic element of a larger philosophical movement that sees American principles as a lie, covering for mere racist power dynamics. It’s destructive and directed at tearing down the country.’ (Ben Shapiro)
CHRISTIANS: ANTIRACISM IS THE NEW RACISM
- NEW: Proper English grammar is racist because black students are held back because they CANNOT write and speak correctly – Racist ideology
- NEW: Math is racists because black students struggle when “the focus is on getting the ‘right’ answer,” and when “students are required to ‘show their work.’”
- NEW: Voter ID is racist because black people are incapable of getting an ID.
- NEW: Black people are oppressed because they are black, and so they are incapable of having a successful life.
- NEW: White people are intrinsically racist because they are white and, by microaggression, they oppress black people.
- NEW: Many hundreds of things have become racism, and the liberal progressive social element of America is trying to take over the country by teaching Critical Race Theory in our schools.
In September 2020, President Donald Trump issued an executive order directing agencies of the United States Government to cancel funding for programs that mention “white privilege” or “critical race theory,” on the basis that it constituted “divisive, un-American propaganda.” He specifically called out the value of meritocracy. On January 20, 2021, President Joe Biden issued an executive order rescinding and canceling Trump’s previous executive order and once again permitted agencies to use such programs.
Interacting with the YouTube Video
When Bill Dyer says, “I totally reject CRT,” and then says, “but,” he just negated his statement. Also, social justice is just as damaging to humanity as CRT. No one that rejects CRT said that they did not want to hear from minorities as Dyer infers. This is a straw man argument* fallacy. Dyer is rationalizing. For example, BLM is a domestic terror group. So, it would be like you saying, “I don’t support BLM because it is a domestic terror group, but I do believe black lives matter.” Yes, that goes without saying. But singling out races is also to divide people among races, causing division, the very thing both philosophies (CRT & BLM) are supposed to be against. I think Dyer is failing to understand that these people are leftist Marxists who do not have the beliefs and values he thinks they do, and they will spin their message to get their desired outcome. Dyer is rationalizing and helping their cause, whether he realizes it or not. The very title of his YouTube post is misplaced. “Why Critical Race Theory is Important.” It is not important. In a nutshell, once more, CRT is an essential or basic element of a larger philosophical movement that sees American principles as a lie, covering for mere racist power dynamics. It’s destructive and directed at tearing down the country. Anything else is rationalizing, justifying, minimizing from people such as Dyer.
* STRAW MAN ARGUMENT: A straw man (sometimes written as straw man) is a form of argument and an informal fallacy of having the impression of refuting an argument, whereas the proper idea of the argument under discussion was not addressed or properly refuted. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be “attacking a straw man.”
When Dyer says you should not be scared, I ask who said they were sacred? This is another straw man fallacy. Who said they are not willing to listen to the struggles of minorities? No one, we do it all the time. But the struggles of minorities have nothing to do with the philosophies of or mindset of CRT and their end goal. Dyer offers his listeners one straw man fallacy after another. He says, ‘we can reject CRT and still say the American system is not perfect.’ Who said the American system was perfect? Dyer is setting up false arguments that no one made and then knocking them down, trying to appear like he is making rational points. No one said America was without flaws. I would be interested in knowing what liberal school Dyer went to because that is becoming self-evident. Who said we could not criticize the bad things that happened in America? Who has some idealized thinking about America that is unrealistic? Who said America does everything perfectly? Who said that the American system does not have room for improvement?
It is not as difficult as Dyer suggests these days for anyone in America to get out of any cycle. This is a myth. All one needs is determination and the desire to do so regardless of their circumstances. There are far more whites in cycles and dire straits than blacks, so this idea of white privilege is a farce. Even if a person was not given love and life skills from their parents, it is still very possible to get those on their own through themselves or other sources. For young persons you have (1) other relatives, (2) school counselors, (3) pastors, (4) government programs, (5) books, and (6) friends, to mentions just a few options.
When Dyer says the books he read have defined CRT and Dyer will give us those tenants, it is an illusion. The supports of CRT will give their readers and listeners winsome words, good-sounding talking points, and trivial or superficial arguments. It is what the CRT proponents say on social media and how they act that will dictate their actual beliefs and motives. I think Dyer is confusing philosophy with worldviews. But I will let that go. Yes, Dyer is correct; people are not calm about this. Dyer should extend his research to watching some videos where the leftist Marxists are talking about CRT in their volatile ways, and then watch the conservatives calmly discuss it. Also, look at the BLM and Antifa groups in the summer of 2020, where they destroyed America to the tune of billions, killing over 30 people. These are the most prominent advocates of CRT. So, Dyer is leaving out who are the ones who are not calm, and this is a bit disingenuous.
After having spoken with Bill Dyer on the phone, he explained again what he had said in the above video. More is coming on this subject matter where he intends to let the people know just how dangerous CRT is and the damage it will cause if it goes unchecked. He explained his process in this first video as trying to soften things, so as to get the left to the table to discuss matters. I explained that I knew that was what he was trying to do but that his video was still ambiguous, not that informative for an 18-minute video, and his failure to define who the people are when he says, “some people think this or some people think that.” In addition, the continual strawman arguments do not help if you do not know who the people are that are making these claims that Dyer speaks of. Lastly, what happens to those who do not come back for the following videos.
 Josh Dawsey; Jeff Stein, (5 September 2020). “White House directs federal agencies to cancel race-related training sessions it calls ‘un-American propaganda.’” The Washington Post. Retrieved Monday, March 15, 2021.
“Executive Order on Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping.” White House. 2020 September 22.
Cady Lang, (29 September 2020). “What Is Critical Race Theory?”. Time.
 President Joe Biden rescinds Donald Trump ban on diversity training about systemic racism