Tom Buck: Woke Hermeneutics

For some time, the godless ideologies of Critical Race Theory and Intersectionality are spreading like gangrene in our evangelical seminaries. Positionality, a fundamental tenet of intersectionality, is now being injected into the practice of biblical hermeneutics – the science of biblical interpretation. Dr. James Lindsay writes, “Positionality…one’s gender, race, class, and other aspects of identities act on the knowledge a person has about things.” When applying this ideology to biblical hermeneutics, some teach that we can best arrive at the meaning of biblical text by listening to the voices of people from different races and genders. Proper biblical hermeneutics involves understanding the original point of the author to the original audience. We cannot arrive at this knowledge by putting on the glasses of our own or anyone else’s ethnicity and gender. That would only serve to place an outside framework upon the text leading to the loss of the meaning of the text. In this lecture, Dr. Tom Buck reveals the dangers of woke hermeneutics, and exposes where it is gaining ground in evangelicalism today. The Great Awokening Conference, Session 8 Follow Tom Buck: Support Sovereign Nations: Follow Sovereign Nations: Podcast:

House Duo Target 3 Books of ‘Poison’ on Navy’s Reading List for Sailors


Tom Ascol: Critical Race Theory and Christianity 

Critical race theory and the accompanying concepts that are bundled within its pernicious conclusions are burning through our national institutions. Thankfully, President Trump has created a full-stop of the propagation of critical theory in federal agencies and institutions. What might seem odd is that in the halls of our churches and seminaries, critical race theory is not only being spread but also integrated into faith and practice. In this powerful presentation, Dr. Tom Ascol looks at the threat of critical race theory and how both the concept and its teachers must be rooted out of our denominations. The Great Awokening Conference, Session 3 Follow Tom Ascol:



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Two members of Congress are asking the Navy to pull three books promoting identity politics and wokeness from its official reading list. 

The books teach young sailors that they’re being asked to fight and possibly die for “a systemically racist country,” the lawmakers say.

The books—How to Be an Antiracist by Ibram X. Kendi; The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander; and Sexual Minorities and Politics by Jason Pierceson—are listed as part of the Chief of Naval Operations Professional Reading Program

All Navy personnel pledge to defend the Constitution, yet these books portray America as fundamentally bigoted, Reps. Doug Lamborn, R-Colo., and Vicky Hartzler, R-Mo., write to Adm. Michael M. Gilday, who is chief of naval operations.

Want to keep up with the 24/7 news cycle? Want to know the most important stories of the day for conservatives? Need news you can trust? Subscribe to The Daily Signal’s email newsletter. Learn more >>

In the letter, dated March 11, Lamborn and Hartzler, both members of the House Armed Services Committee, write:

We can seek to improve upon the promise of the Declaration of Independence without teaching our young men and women in uniform that the country they defend is fundamentally racist and bigoted and that the only cure to this corporate deficiency is modern day discrimination.

The letter says they object to the three books on the admiral’s reading list for sailors because they promote the view that the United States is a “confederation of identity categories … rather than a common homeland of individual citizens.”

“These works fall under the rubric of critical race theory, a racial form of Marxist philosophy which should not be allowed to poison our military,” the letter adds.    

Cmdr. Nate Christensen, spokesman for the chief of naval operations, told The Daily Signal in an email that the Navy appreciates the two lawmakers’ concerns.

“The Navy has received the letter from Reps. Lamborn and Hartzler, and the chief of naval operations, Adm. Mike Gilday, will respond directly to them,” Christensen wrote. “We appreciate the representatives’ concerns regarding this issue.”

Fox News reported Tuesday that Gilday did respond to an earlier letter from Rep. Jim Banks, R-Ind., that asked him to remove only the Kendi book, “How to Be an Antiracist,” from the reading list.

“While I do not endorse every viewpoint of the books on this reading list, I believe exposure to varied ideas improves the critical thinking skills of our sailors,” Gilday wrote to Banks in the letter, a copy of which was obtained by Fox News. “My commitment to them is to continue to listen, make sure their voice is heard, and make the Navy a shining example of an organization centered on respect, inclusive of all.”

Gilday, referring only to the Kendi book, said it “evokes the author’s own personal journey in understanding barriers to true inclusion, the deep nuances of racism and racial inequalities.”

The admiral also said that he wants the Navy’s sailors to achieve the same level of “self-reflection.”

In their letter, Hartzler and Lamborn ask Gilday to pull the three books from the reading list; verify the books aren’t being promoted to Navy personnel; “confirm that it is not the Navy’s official position that America is a systemically racist country”; and confirm the Navy’s opposition to race-based discrimination. 

“Why would we expect our nation’s young men and women to join the Navy to fight, and possibly die, on behalf of a systemically racist country?” Hartzler and Lamborn ask the admiral. “Why should they, if the books you have recommended are taken to heart?”

Not every viewpoint in the books on the reading list is endorsed by the chief of naval operation or the Navy, but exposure to varied viewpoints improves sailors’ critical thinking skills, according to one senior Navy official.

The two House members note in their letter to Gilday that Kendi’s book argues that “the entire American system is corrupted from top to bottom by racial prejudices which account for all the differences in outcomes in our society.”

Their letter includes this quote from Kendi’s “How to Be an Antiracist”: 

The defining question is whether the discrimination is creating equity or inequity. If discrimination is creating equity, then it is antiracist. If discrimination is creating inequity, then it is racist.

The letter also quotes Alexander’s “The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness” as saying that increased crime in the 1970s was “an opening to turn back the progress on racial progress in the United States.”

The two lawmakers assess Pierceson’s “Sexual Minorities and Politics: An Introduction” as taking a side in debates that are not scientifically settled. 

One example: “whether biological men should be able to use the same bathroom as women and girls, and whether they should be able to compete in women’s sports, shattering female records and receiving scholarships instead of women.”

Gilday, 58, a four-star admiral and chief of naval operations since August 2019, was nominated for the post by then-President Donald Trump. He is a 1985 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy.

Federal law requires the position to be held by an admiral who is a military adviser and deputy to the secretary of the Navy as well as a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email [email protected] and we will consider publishing your remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature.  

Fact-Checking DHS Chief’s Dishonest Statement on Border Crisis

Mayorkas Refuses to Call the Situation at the U.S.-Mexico Border a 'Crisis'

Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas told lawmakers Wednesday that the “unprecedented challenges” at the U.S.-Mexico border cannot be resolved overnight, “due in large part to the damage done over the last four years.” In testimony before the House Homeland Security Committee, Mayorkas said the Trump administration left behind an inhumane and inadequate system that his department is working swiftly to revamp. “President Biden has made one of his top priorities reversing the effects of the previous administration’s cruel immigration policies that separated parents from their children to deter others from seeking to enter this country,” Mayorkas said in his opening remarks. When pressed by Republicans, he refused to concede that the situation amounts to a crisis.

BY Chad Wolf Mark Morgan Lora Ries 


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas released a factually challenged and misleading statement Tuesday about the crisis on the border.

As specialists in immigration policy at The Heritage Foundation, we’re going to correct the record here on Mayorkas’ erroneous claims in a comprehensive response. (The last name after each section identifies which of us responded.)

Claim No. 1: “The expulsion of single adults does not pose an operational challenge for the Border Patrol … ”

Rating: False. One wonders whether Mayorkas ran this line by the men and women of the Border Patrol before saying it publicly because if he had, he would’ve been embarrassed to make such a claim. Our Border Patrol agents are apprehending 4,500 to 6,000 illegal aliens per day.

Want to keep up with the 24/7 news cycle? Want to know the most important stories of the day for conservatives? Need news you can trust? Subscribe to The Daily Signal’s email newsletter. Learn more >>

Former DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson said in 2019 that under the Obama administration, 1,000 apprehensions were a crisis. We are at six times this volume today, and to suggest that dealing with this massive increase is not an operational challenge for the Border Patrol is to deny not just reality, but basic math. (Morgan)

Claim No. 2: “We are expelling most … families.” 

Rating: False. The Biden administration is not utilizing all of its authorities with regard to the surge of family units. The facts tell us that the administration is not expelling “most” families under Title 42, as it claims. 

According to DHS data, the administration expelled only 41% of family units in February, down from 76% in December under the Trump administration. Washington Post reporter Nick Miroff pointed out this fact just this week. This is important, as the smugglers and cartels will capitalize on this fact and continue to push family units across the border, knowing that a majority will remain. (Wolf)

Claim No. 3a: “We are not expelling unaccompanied children.” 

Rating: False. The Biden administration is expelling unaccompanied children who are from Mexico every day. Administration officials have made a policy decision not to expel these children from the Northern Triangle countries, and the cartels and smugglers know this. The administration wants to have its cake and eat it, too, in desiring credit for supposedly treating unaccompanied minors more “humanely” without any criticism for the detention of increasing numbers of these minors. (Morgan)

Claim No. 3b: “We are encountering 6- and 7-year-old children, for example, arriving at our border without an adult.” 

Rating: Misleading. The Biden administration would have the American people believe most of the unaccompanied minors coming across the border are young children. This is false. The vast majority of unaccompanied children are between the ages of 15 and 17, with 75% over the age of 14. Many of these young people are coming to the border hoping to gain illegal entry into the U.S. for economic reasons.

Minors should be treated humanely regardless of their age, but the administration’s reliance on trying to pull the heartstrings of Americans is just more evidence it is interested in manipulation, not facts.

Mayorkas’ later accusation that the Trump administration put more children at risk for human trafficking is mind-blowing since the Biden administration’s undoing of Trump-era immigration policies has unleashed a historic flood of unaccompanied minors to the border, many of whom we know were trafficked or smuggled there. The Biden administration has empowered the cartels and human traffickers after President Donald Trump severely cut their profit margins. (Morgan)

Claim No. 4: “Mexico does not have the capacity to receive families.”

Rating: Misleading. There are numerous misleading components to this answer. First, the surge in family units is a direct result of the Biden administration’s push for amnesty and the undoing of effective Trump-era immigration policies. Mexico had been able to handle the return of family units under the Trump administration’s “Remain in Mexico” policy.

Second, Mexico is not the only country that can receive these illegal aliens, as they can be deported back to their country of origin. Third, the answer for Mexico is to help it build capacity—which both the State Department and other nongovernmental organizations can help enable. The answer is not to release illegal aliens and let them into the U.S., knowing that 90% will not qualify for asylum. (Wolf)

Claim No. 5: Reasons for the surge. 

Rating: Misleading. The Department of Homeland Security blames the Biden border crisis on violence in Northern Triangle countries, hurricanes, and the pandemic. To be clear, conditions are not so dramatically different in the Northern Triangle from years past to explain this historic surge.  

Not once does the administration take responsibility for disastrous messaging and the removal of effective immigration policies without a clear plan in place. This is absurd. Monthly apprehensions nearly doubled between summer 2020 and February 2021, because the Biden campaign and then the Biden administration was sending a clear signal to the world: If you arrive soon, you will receive amnesty. (Wolf)

Claim No. 6: “The prior administration completely dismantled the asylum system.”

Rating: False. Mayorkas’ claims are simply false. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services hired approximately 500 additional asylum officers to advance the Trump administration’s priority of reducing the asylum backlog. The Trump administration also shifted resources to prioritize the asylum backlog and those seeking protection at our own border.

The Trump administration inherited a backlogged asylum system and wisely chose to focus on reducing this backlog throughout Trump’s term. More individuals were granted asylum by DHS and the Justice Department during the four years of the Trump administration than under the final four years of the Obama administration. Total grants of asylum in 2019 alone—46,508—were the highest annual total since at least 1990. (Ries)

Claim No. 7: “The previous administration cut foreign aid funding to the Northern Triangle.” 

Rating: Misleading. Under the Trump administration, we demanded results before handing over millions of dollars in foreign assistance funding. As a result, we signed over a dozen border security agreements and saw unprecedented cooperation and results from the Northern Triangle countries.

These agreements helped slow the flow of illegal migrants through Central America, especially massive caravans, to our southern border. The Trump administration also made millions in funding available to these governments. (Wolf)

Claim No. 8: “There was no appropriate planning for the pandemic at all.” 

Rating: False. This statement is a slap in the face to the men and women at the Department of Homeland Security, who worked tirelessly to put plans in place to deal with the challenge of a pandemic on top of keeping our immigration system running. We implemented extensive plans—to include vaccine distribution to front-line officers when the vaccine would be made available—to ensure our front-line workers would be protected.

We worked with other federal agencies to ensure Title 42 would be available to our immigration enforcement officials. We knew that putting illegal aliens in crowded Border Patrol facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic was not the answer. Unfortunately, the Biden administration believes it is.  

We provided the Biden transition team with extensive briefings on the border and the tools we had in place to address illegal border crossings. We warned the transition team about the consequences of removing these policies.

They heard it directly from Customs and Border Patrol law enforcement officers. They heard that Border Patrol stations did not have capacity, and they heard that the Department of Health and Human Services did not have capacity. They knew it all and still rushed to dismantle the system for political reasons. (Wolf)

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email [email protected] and we will consider publishing your remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature.