This issue is important to me because I believe it shapes the posture by which Christians live justice in the world. The first approach A.) can lead to a coercive posture in which Christians presume a superior position on justice in the world, while the second approach B.) asks us to live justice as a people working out what God has accomplished in Jesus Christ among us first. Living this justice as a people then makes it possible to share this justice with the world.

Well, we mentioned that what we’re looking at here is also a lot of the influences that you share with Tim Keller ones that I’ve covered in Timothy Keller, his spiritual intellectual formation. Chief among them appears to be Charles Taylor, a lot of what I just said in that last statement. Of course, as you know, Chris comes from Taylor. Let’s just talk about a basic issue there explained Charles Taylor’s notion of a social imaginary. And I want to know specifically though, how it differs from the concept of worldview. Very helpful. Let me ask you next next couple questions about Tim Keller. So again, we’re doing a special season on influences on on Tim Keller here. And my book is covering his spiritual intellectual formation. But he I know he’s influenced you. I’d love to know a little bit about that relationship and what you’ve learned from him. Yeah, and this is something that I think, you know, the Old Testament prophets, when they look out onto a world of sin, they’re not gleeful, either, they’re sorrowful, there’s a pathos to their reaction to sin and God’s judgment. And I think this is one of those moments in the modern world that really should evoke pathos and sadness and compassion from Christians when when we see you know, so Thomas Hobbes in the introduction to his book Leviathan, which is one of the founding texts of modernity and of modern political theory, it he just comes straight out with it says, basically, we cogs and wheels and springs, that’s all there is to human beings. And you know, so don’t fool yourself thinking there’s anything more. And then you’ve got other positions that try to elevate humans to the point where we’re doing things that traditionally God alone has done, you know, defining reality in our image defining good and evil, defining the meaning of our own existence. And to live on the horns of that dilemma, as the modern world is forcing many people to do is agonizingly heart rending, it messes with humanity to try and have to juggle with those two things. And and I think that as Christians, the the joy and the peace, and the wonder of being in the image of God is that you’re lifted off the horns of that dilemma. You’re neither a machine, nor are you. God Himself, thank goodness. And, and the word therefore, that the Christians can speak into these tensions in modern culture is is a really constructive, helpful piece bringing one I think. First, Watkin offers a sound exposition of crucial moments, movements, and structures from Genesis to Revelation in redemptive history. He is well-sourced theologically. His writing is devotional yet academic, sermonic yet technical at times, often witty, and always clear. Each chapter has study questions at the end. One can easily envision small groups working through this text together, with a Bible in hand for the relevant Scripture passages. The breadth and quality of the biblical survey would be worth the book’s price.

Is liberalism the answer?

Another little question, they’re all gonna be like, This is what happens when you write big books get big question. As an Anabaptist type, worldly power is defined by coercion or some form of violence. In other words, power is when person a. or system a. exercises power over (the key word here being “over”) person b. against the will of person b. or in a way that person b. has little/no say in the resulting consequences. This doesn’t have to be physically violent to be coercive. I see the whole Bible as revealing the negative effects, the sin involved, the often brutal consequences of such power. God himself may, in his sovereignty, indirectly use worldly power toward his purposes, but God ultimately wants to work in the world through the power of His presence to heal redeem and restore the world. This power, God’s power, is a completely different kind of power. As critical theorists endeavor to make “certain things visible and certain things valuable,” Watkin seeks to do the same through a fresh reading of redemptive history. He registers his particular critical interest in four ways. An important update of Augustine’s City of God, a proposal for making biblical sense of what is happening in contemporary culture.”

And it also just one word on that calling, because I can imagine some listeners thinking, so you’re saying that the things happening now don’t matter, that we should just, you know, sort of lose ourselves in some people who dream world of creation and fall and sort of lose our elephants. And I think someone like Bonhoeffer is really, really helpful on this because he would say, No, it actually makes the present count more, he dignifies the present, to put it in this broader context. And he talks about a better worldliness. Now. It’s by having your your your mind and your disposition full of these big overarching storylines, that you can actually become more use in the present. And you can see the importance of the present in a sharper way doesn’t dole you to understanding what’s going on. The church is thus a colony of heaven. 27 It is where the faithful are gathered from every nation, tribe, and tongue and the earthly things that divide (race, gender, and class) are set aside as our identity and unity are ultimately found in Christ (Col. 3:11). Though the secular ideologies of the past, including critical theory, have never been able to bring peace or usher in their this-worldly utopia, Jesus brought the kingdom of God that is already present among His people by His Spirit and will one day be consummate when all things become perfectly one—in Him. 28 The church embodies the kingdom of God on earth. It may not be all that the kingdom of God is, but it is certainly the way that God manifests the life and love of the kingdom on earth as it is in heaven. The keys of the kingdom are held by the church. The righteousness and justice of God should be faithfully, creatively, and actively displayed in the church. The church should be the safest place on earth for the oppressed and the victimized as the mercy and compassion of God are tangibly expressed. The church “is a form of a reconciliatory theater: a theater of faith, hope and love. It is precisely because the church performs the gospel rather than some other script that it is also a revolutionary theater.” 29 The church should be the most just institution under the sun, demonstrating the love, mercy, and kindness of God in ways that silence and captivate the watching world. Christopher Watkin, Thinking through Creation: Genesis 1 and 2 as Tools of Cultural Critique (Phillipsburg, New Jersey: P&R Publishing, 2017). This short book has an extended treatment on the need to study Scripture and culture with a posture of attentiveness. This stance is particularly dangerous because it undermines the function of Scripture as the final arbiter of truth, accessible to all people regardless of their demographics (Ps. 119:130, 160; 2 Tim. 3:16–17; 1 Cor. 2:12–14; Heb. 8:10–12). If a person from an oppressor group appeals to Scripture, his concerns can be dismissed as a veiled attempt to protect his privilege. Christopher Watkin, Michel Serres: Figures of Thought (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2020).

Neil Shenvi and Pat Sawyer, “The Incompatibility of Critical Theory and Christianity,” The Gospel Coalition, May 15, 2019, accessed August 10, 2021, https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/incompatibility-critical-theory-christianity/. ↩ It is not enough for Christians to explain the Bible to the culture or cultures in which we live. We must also explain the culture in which we live within the framework and categories of the Bible, revealing how the whole of the Bible sheds light on the whole of life. The bare fact that someone talks about ‘oppression’ or ‘social justice’ isn’t remotely sufficient to conclude that they’ve embraced critical theory. Each of these recent, formidable movements—and numerous others—draws from the older, more established philosophical well of critical theory in one fashion or another. Whether or not we are familiar with these concepts, they are very much becoming a part of the air we breathe. They are taught in college courses, and the morality and narratives that these theories promote are found even in children’s shows. 4 Workplace diversity training, whether military or civilian, now advocates many of these perspectives. 5 The narrative often portrayed is that white, Christian, heterosexual males are oppressors. Christianity is often viewed as the ideological root of many of society’s contemporary social ills. Defining and Describing Critical Theory The good/bad binary is a false dichotomy. All people hold prejudices, especially across racial lines in a society deeply divided by race. . . . The simplistic idea that racism is limited to individual intentional acts committed by unkind people is at the root of virtually all white defensiveness.” Robin DiAngelo, White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism (Boston: Beacon, 2018), 72–73. DiAngelo argues against the “good/bad” binary approach to racism in favor of a sociological one that leaves everyone (particularly white people) guilty of racism. Such a view runs counter to a biblical understanding of the personal nature of sin. ↩

In contrast, critical theory is associated with a metanarrative that runs from oppression to liberation: We are members either of a dominant group or of a marginalized group with respect to a given identity marker. As such, we either need to divest ourselves of power and seek to liberate others, or we need to acquire power and liberate ourselves by dismantling all structures and institutions that subjugate and oppress. In critical theory, the greatest sin is oppression, and the greatest virtue is the pursuit of liberation. A wonderful book bringing the Scriptures—every part of them—into a deep and illuminating conversation with the concerns of culture.” This may seem cynical? But again, I don’t see the work of critical theory as providing me a foundation for what justice is. Rather uncovering the power at work in the frame enables one to see the hierarchies, the abuse and the resulting antagonisms at work in a construct. When applied to race (critical race theory), gender (some queer theory), sexuality, politics and economics, it gives one the skill to unwind the antagonism, relieve the anger, and allow Jesus to reconcile, heal the division within gender constructs. It makes space for God in Christ to work and make things whole.

Augustine on Roman glory

In my (not so) humble opinion, evangelicals in general, conservative and progressive, have a habit of getting caught in the frame. We argue for or against an issue within the given frame never examining the frame itself. A good example is the way we argue for affirming/not affirming of LGBTQ sexuality and marriage, all the while never actually getting to examining the frame. Instead we assume the frame. For example, we never look at whether “attraction,” and its multitudinous formations in our culture, is something we should base anything on (never mind marriage). We just argue for or against whether those with a given attraction should be allowed to marry or not according to Christian tradition (or Scripture). When we delve deeper into the notion of “attraction” (via “the male gaze”– a third wave feminist discovery in the 90’s or other deconstructive work), we see layers at work we did not see before. We see perhaps that the very things we assume shape the culture responsible for the abuse the #MeToo movement has exposed. We never get to any of these questions unless we ask the question of “discourse” and how we are being shaped into these power structures. CRT: There’s an endless struggle between oppressor and oppressed. Justice for the latter can only come at the price of overthrowing the former: it’s a zero-sum game.

Liberalism: Identity markers like race are incidental to our shared, universal humanity. Society should be colorblind. The fundamental unit of social life is the individual.

Christopher Watkin, Biblical Critical Theory: How the Bible’s Unfolding Story Makes Sense of Modern Life and Culture (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2022). Fourth, Watkin is concerned with setting forth an all-encompassing theory that can explain everything on its own terms. In this way, a BCT aims to out-narrate contemporary theories just as Augustine’s City of God out-narrated the Roman world in his day. Watkin would likely say that Augustine was the first comprehensive critical theorist in the best sense of the term for Christians. In City of God, Augustine sought to make the right things visible and valuable under the light of the Holy Scripture. Watkin’s commitment to letting Scripture define terms and God’s revealed speech define reality will resonate with presuppositional apologists. only knew that the church had only known the Roman Empire in its hundreds of years of history. Yeah. If it does its job well, the present volume will provide a warm-up act before the main event, a pump-priming exercise making it just a little easier for others to come after me and do the real labor of deploying a range of biblical figures as they carefully and painstakingly work through complex social questions. Some of these interventions will deploy only a handful or even only one of the biblical figures I have identified; some will no doubt find others I have missed. [21]