The Bible Unifies and Social Justice Divides

As in Marxism, social justice (cultural Marxism) emphasizes group identity and responsibility rather than individual identity and responsibility. The groups may be composed of people who neither suffered nor inflicted wrong. Merit or guilt is based on such things as skin color, sex, and group size. Social justice determines what is right or wrong, and what the penalties or corrections should be; these may be antithetical to true biblical justice. What social justice calls justice is, at times, categorically condemned in Scripture as sin.

For example, the oppressed are minorities, which include homosexuals and transgenders. These groups are viewed as normal and oppressed while being white and heterosexual makes someone an oppressor—a sinner. And heterosexuality is not morally better than homosexuality or being transgender. This serves as a reminder that, according to social justice, biblical sin is sanitized by suffering the greater cultural Marxist evil of being oppressed by the evil majority group. Cultural Marxism divides people by basing merit on group identity rather than what the individual personally contributes—personal responsibility.

It also divides by making one group, the oppressed, able to know the truth, and determining that the oppressor group is incapable of knowing the truth. Resultantly, people cannot communicate between groups or unify because of the nature of each group identity; hence, we get identity politics, which by its very nature, divides rather than unites. If this unscalable wall of disunity and impenetrable communication barrier were not enough, we must add that today’s Marxism is of a postmodern variety.

As an American, people should be judged on such things as their character, their contribution to society or the company for which they work, or their academic achievement for acceptance into a school. These criteria reflect a meritocracy (capitalism, legal system of reward, and punishment), personal responsibility, and the Christian work ethic (2 Thess 3:10). Identity politics destroys this model. Identity politics focuses on group identity (race, sex, minority status) as sufficient to make a person rewardable even if he does not personally contribute to the task at hand or meet the qualifications that others have to meet to enjoy the same opportunity.

Accordingly, if a person belongs to an oppressed group (minority), he deserves preference for that fact alone, i.e., his identity. Consequently, the birth of plans such as affirmative action and diversity quotas that take us back to judging people based on the color of their skin rather than, as Martin Luther King said, “the content of their character.”[1] This criticism is not to disparage the intentions of those who promote such ideas, but rather to point out one serious problem with them. Several black scholars and intellectuals, such as Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, Jason Riley, Walter Williams, and Robert L. Wilson Sr., side with Martin Luther King and argue against such outcome-based solutions (like affirmative action and diversity quotas). Reading conservative black scholars like these will enrich your mind and life.

Not only is a person’s identity determined by what group he belongs to, but it is also deepened by how many intersecting layers of discrimination the person has experienced; thus, the term intersectionality. The person may identify as a black lesbian, as a transgender person, or any number of social identities that contribute to the type and level of systemic discrimination the individual believes she has experienced. Social justice, cultural Marxism, intersectionality, and identity politics divide people into postmodern Marxian groups based on our differences.

Since there is no unifying, absolute, standard set of values, acknowledgment of knowable truth, or even objective meaning of words in a postmodern Marxian paradigm, we cannot even identify what it means to be an American. If we proclaim specific standards, we are called oppressors and racists because there are no true or even superior norms according to postmodernism; there are just relative multicultural norms. Norms, morals, and influences from Christianity are seen to be particularly oppressive. Why? Because they claim to be true-truth (as Francis Shaeffer often said). The very claim to know truth from someone who is not in the oppressed group is oppressive.

We can see this postmodern Marxism in the destruction of every previous unifying and agreed-upon ideal (such as religion, history, personal responsibility, language, hard work, family, education, morality, structure, monuments, and our anthem) that we as Americans unified around; they served to depict what it meant to be an American.[2] Such destruction of all unifying qualities of America is nowhere more graphically displayed than in the unwillingness to stand at the national anthem or the pledge of allegiance and the willingness to burn the flag, which is the most significant symbol of these United States. All this leaves us with states in America, but little, if anything, to unify around.

Moreover, these intersectionally divided groups cannot even civilly and effectively communicate with each other. Because, based on intersectionality, only the minority or oppressed groups can even know the truth. And based on postmodernism, words have no objective meaning (we cannot know the authorial intent), only subjective meaning; that is, words may have a legitimately different meaning to the hearer than what the author meant, and that is the way it is. Therefore, whatever the hearer says the words of the speaker mean carries equal weight as what the speaker says they mean. Now multiply that by every hearer having the same authority to define the meaning of the spoken words; this is the end of meaningful communication—linguistical chaos.

In contrast, biblically, all people are created in the image of God, and, therefore, belong to the human race and are equal human beings. We, as humans, are all sinful by choice and deserve judgment. Our injustices are first and foremost against God’s holiness and his holy law, and then, and only then, against each other. Consequently, we are all equally in need of redemption.

Because God loves us, Christ paid for the sins of the world so that every person can be saved, which is God’s desire. Accordingly, our identity in creation is in that we are all a part of the human race, created in the image of God and sinful by nature and choice. Spiritually, those that accept God’s love and payment for their sins by faith in Christ and his sacrifice become Christians, which is our newly created identity (2 Cor 5:17). And all barriers are broken down (Eph 2:10–22). Accordingly, every human being can know the truth (John 17:17) and know the one who is The Truth (John 14:6; 20:30-31). When we are saved by faith in Christ, we should and can bring the knowledge of God’s truth, true justice, mercy, and grace to the world.

For now, we Christians are also Americans. Although tragic injustices have been inflicted on blacks by whites, and people on people, Christians must live out God’s righteousness, love, and forgiveness; none of which exists in critical race theory and cultural Marxism, but most especially is the glaring absence of forgiveness. Therefore, we must be clear that the social justice perspective with its identity politics divides, whereas the biblical perspective unifies. Social justice’s understanding of justice and injustice is corrupted, unequal, and partial, whereas God’s justice is equal and impartial. As Christians, we must resist the intimidation of those who seek to silence our voices and the truth of Scripture. We must also resist the temptation to join the trends of the hour or be silent for our own peace. We must, especially in this present hour, do all we can to live and communicate God’s truth about the gospel and the issues of our day.


[1] Martin Luther King, Jr. “I Have a Dream.” 8/28/63. American Rhetoric. https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm. Accessed 9/1/20.
[2] Postmodernism began as a literary and artistic movement that rejected the dogmas and principles of modernism or any other set of doctrines or absolutes. It now encompasses a full-life perspective of rejecting knowable, objective standards—including Christian absolutes.