A fault line emerges in the church. Critical Race Theory is a danger to the church and society. How should Christians speak on racial justice and reconciliation? All this and more in today’s review.

Hi, my name is Terence and I’m your host for Reading and Readers, a podcast where I review Christian books for you. Every month I review a book from Faithlife’s Free Book of the Month. And while waiting for the free book for the month of June, I review a book of my choice. For today, make that three books.

Listening to Three Reviews Side-by-side

Today’s review is inspired by my experience shopping for a microphone. The microphone reviewer would set up three mics side by side. Listening to them side by side gives us a perspective that a solo review would not.

So today, in the same way, I’m going to review three books side by side, so that you get a perspective that you would not get from a solo review.

I chose the first book after I saw a meme of Voddie Baucham walking away from an explosion labeled Critical Race Theory. What caused that explosion? His book Fault Lines: The Social Justice Movement and Evangelicalism’s Looming Catastrophe released in April this year at 270 pages. In his book, Baucham cites James Lindsay, an atheist. Curious, I looked him up and discovered that Lindsay is a co-author, together with Helen Pluckrose, of the book: Cynical Theories How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity―and Why This Harms Everybody.

Now I have two books to review. After reading them, I figured that I have a good grip on how Critical Race Theory harms the church and everybody else. And wouldn’t you know it, up comes a book on racial reconciliation, Ministers of Reconciliation: Preaching on Race and the Gospel. It is a collection of 13 essays, edited by Daniel Darling. It was just published this month. I couldn’t resist checking how pastors would speak on racial justice and reconciliation. So this would be my third book to review. Will they employ woke language? Keep listening to find out.

Fault Lines is Personal (in a good way)

Now to the first book review. Fault Lines is a personal book written by Voddie Baucham. Personal because he shares about himself and his dear friends.

The first two chapters is titled A Black Man and A Black Christian. His father left when he was young. He owes everything to his mother. She protected, sacrificed, advocated and disciplined him. Once, taking a shortcut home, a man shoved a gun in Baucham’s face. Soon after that, young Baucham and his mother moved away.

You can see from his life that Baucham personally experienced the need for a father, for a good education and to run away from crime. He came out relatively well and he has advocated the tried and tested ways of doing well, which is strong families and education saying no to crime and saying no to victimhood.

It’s a personal book because he speaks of his dear friends. He charges that some of his friends, highly influential Christian leaders, are turning to wokeism, to Critical Theory. He quotes them. And while those quotations do look bad in terms of this Critical Theory, I wouldn’t call them proof. There is a difference when John Piper says, “My God” and when Richard Dawkins says, “My God”. One is a believer, the other is speaking the language of a culture.

Why does he name names? I quote: “My goal is not to destroy, but to expose, warn, and correct in hopes that, “they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will”. And yes, I do mean to call these ideologies demonic.”

Critical Race Theory is a Religion

One of the most useful parts is chapters 4, 5 and 6, where he describes Critical Race Theory as a new religion.

This religion’s understanding of the universe is Critical Race Theory or Intersectionality. Original sin is racism. The law is antiracism. The Gospel is racial reconciliation. Instead of Levites as priests, it has oppressed minorities. The way to atone is through reparations. The way to be born again is to be woke.

He writes: ”In case you’re wondering about its soteriology, there isn’t one. Antiracism offers no salvation—only perpetual penance in an effort to battle an incurable disease.”

The Situation is Fluid

In the book Baucham brings up what happened with the “Dallas Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel” as well as the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC)’s Resolution 9 on Critical Race Theory. He cites these incidences as evidence of the fault line and the documents, the Dallas Statement and Resolution 9 are in the appendixes of this book.

There is an important footnote related to the SBC that you might miss, which is, I quote: “ As this book was on its way to press, the Council of Seminary Presidents of the Southern Baptist Convention released a statement on November 30, 2020, that is nothing short of a complete repudiation of CRT as well as Resolution 9. While the organization condemns “racism in any form,” the seminaries agree that “affirmation of Critical Race Theory, Intersectionality and any version of Critical Theory is incompatible with the Baptist Faith & Message.”

So he says here that this was this footnote was included in this book, “as this book was on its way to press” shows that this is an ongoing and developing issue in the SBC.

Threat to the Church and Everyone Else

If you are bewildered by how everyone has gone woke, this book helps to orientate the disoriented and assures you that you are of sound mind. Baucham clearly explains how and why Critical Theory is a threat to the church.

The next book I’m reviewing explains how and why Critical Theory is a threat to everybody else. It’s not just a church squabble, Critical Theory is an existential threat to all of society.

Speaking of threat. Sometimes I tell people that doctrine, some doctrine is a potential threat to the church and sometimes people would tell me that I’m over reacting. Debates on doctrines like the trinity or incarnation is limited to the academics. They stay in the seminaries and have no relevance or impact to evangelism, missions or the everyday Christian life.

Sadly, history and current events have shown that what happens in universities or seminaries do not always stay there.

Critical Theory is Cynical Theory

Cynical Theories How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity―and Why This Harms Everybody by Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay was published in August last year.

In chapter one of Cynical Theories, we read that postmodernism was limited to political theorists, philosophers and artists. They say that there is no objective truth. Everything is meaningless. It’s all doom and gloom. If postmodernism stayed limited to those few, all would be well. But it did not. It jumped out.

In chapter two, the authors write: “We therefore might think of postmodernism as a kind of fast-evolving virus. Its original and purest form was unsustainable: it tore its hosts apart and destroyed itself. It could not spread from the academy to the general population because it was so difficult to grasp and so seemingly removed from social realities. In its evolved form, it spread, leaping the “species” gap from academics to activists to everyday people, as it became increasingly graspable and actionable and therefore more contagious.”

Postmodern Principles

The most helpful part of the book is the two postmodern principles and to a lesser extent, the four key themes. They introduce the two postmodern principles in the first chapter, and in the second chapter show how postmodernism evolved and is now applied. In the next five chapters we read how it’s applied in postcolonial theory, queer theory, critical race theory and intersectionality, chapter six is feminisms and gender studies, and chapter seven is disability and fat studies.

So how can we understand this post modern principles? Let me explain the two postmodern principles using fat studies because I think this can still shock people. It’s scary how what used to be shocking is now normal: science is oppressive, gender is fluid, only whites can be racist. I think, or I hope, people can still be shocked by what Critical Theory says about obesity. But maybe what is shocking today will be normal tomorrow. That’s how fast the virus spreads.

The first principle is the postmodern knowledge principle. It is a: “Radical skepticism about whether objective knowledge or truth is obtainable and a commitment to cultural constructivism.”

Alright, What does this mean? You have heard it said that obesity is unhealthy according to science. According to postmodern knowledge principle, science is not value neutral and there is no objective truth that being fat is bad or obesity is unhealthy. It is just what science says. But there are other voices that are equally true that say obesity can be healthy.

The second principle is the postmodern political principle. It is: “A belief that society is formed of systems of power and hierarchies, which decide what can be known and how.”

You have heard it said that obesity is unhealthy. You heard it because that’s what the systems of powers and hierarchies want you to hear. They oppress fat people. They discriminate against fat people. Fat is bad, not because it’s unhealthy, but because thin people don’t like fat people.

The solution is not diet and exercise. The solution is to change society’s hatred for fat people.

Can you follow that? That is the postmodern political principle.

And so, in summary the two postmodern principles are:
1. There is no truth.
2. Truth is decided by the powers that be.

Isn’t this scary? It’s been said before and it’s worth saying again. We are living in George Orwell’s 1984. If you haven’t read that novel, you should go and grab it. You will see scary similarities between today and that book.

Theme of Losing My Individuality

Cynical Theories describes four major themes in postmodernism, namely:
1. The Blurring of Boundaries
2. The Power of Language
3. Cultural Relativism
4. The Loss of the Individual and the Universal

Just like the two principles, the themes help us detect the smell of Critical Theory in other fields.

Let me describe one of them, the loss of the individual. In chapter 5 on Critical Race Theory and Intersectionality, the authors write: “…, there is nothing complex about the overarching idea of intersectionality, or the Theories upon which it is built. Nothing could be simpler. It does the same thing over and over again: look for the power imbalances, bigotry, and biases that it assumes must be present and pick at them. It reduces everything to one single variable, one single topic of conversation, one single focus and interpretation: prejudice, as understood under the power dynamics asserted by Theory.”

What does Intersectionality look for? Prejudice. We don’t check whether it exists. We just need to find out where it exists. It’s kind of like you don’t check whether your husband or wife is having an affair. You assume it’s true. And you filter everything he or she does, no matter how innocent it may be, under the assumption of guilt. You are guilty! I just need to find out how you are guilty. And everybody is supposed to think that way.

This is the loss of the individual that Pluckrose and Lindsay writes: “Even if a person were a unique mix of marginalized identities, thus intersectionally a unique individual, she would be understood through each and all of those group identities, with the details to be filled in by Theory. She would not be understood as an individual.”

What it’s saying here is that if you are a black lesbian, you are supposed to think like a black person, like a woman person and like a homosexual person. Okay, so you’re thinking in three groups, these three identities intersect, but you’re supposed to think like everybody else in those three groups, you’re not supposed to think as an individual. Because if you say you’re black and you say that you don’t believe that whites are racist, then you are not following the group identity.

Voddie Baucham describes this thing as Ethnic Gnosticism. Ethnic Gnosticism is where all blacks think alike. If you don’t think alike, you are broken, you are not black or not black enough.

Comparing Fault Lines and Cynical Theories

So when we look at Fault Lines and the book Cynical Theories, both books are helpful in describing Critical Theory and its danger. Baucham to explain for the church. Pluckrose and Lindsay for society in general.

Both books rise the alarm by presenting case studies and evidences so that the reader goes “Ah hah! So that explains it. So this explain what I’m seeing in the newspaper – does anybody still read the newspaper? – reading the news and watching on Youtube and listening to all these politicians and professors. I finally understand what is going on in the world.” So that is useful.

However, there are crucial differences between the two books. Fault Lines is easier to read. Yes, it’s a shorter book, plenty of stories and relatable. Cynical Theories is harder to read. You can get lost in the technical names, history and connections. It’s written for a popular audience, it’s not scholarly, but because Critical Race Theory is so alien, it sometimes feels very surreal. You don’t really understand how did these people can come to think in that way.

More importantly, the most important difference is Fault Lines is written by a Christian arguing for the Gospel. Cynical Theories is written by atheists arguing for liberalism. Pluckrose and Linday’s saviour is liberalism. Baucham’s saviour is Jesus Christ. His solution to racism is the gospel, which leads us to our third book.

Ministers of Reconciliation

“Ministers of Reconciliation: Preaching on Race and the Gospel”, is a collection of 13 essays, edited by Daniel Darling.

Russell Moore, wrote the foreword: “This book includes reflections from many who have taught and preached on these matters, and these essays may well spark within you ideas for how to stand for Christ on these issues in your church or family or community.”

These matters, what he’s referring to, is racial justice and reconciliation.

Let me remind you of how I came to this book. After reading Fault Lines and Cynical Theories, the idea is to see whether do these 13 essays on racial justice and reconciliation, do they refer to Critical Theory?

Now, I want to strongly emphasize here. Whatever we read in the essay does not prove or disprove the author’s position on Critical Race Theory. They were not writing about that topic. And so, they may have a nuanced position which is not communicated in their essay. These are Christian pastors writing on racial justice and reconciliation for Christians in difficult times.

I think it’s important for me to emphasize this because I don’t want people to think that I encourage a woke hunt. You’re just looking for things that is woke.

I just want to demonstrate with this book how understanding critical race theory can be helpful in in reading and listening to what other people say around us.

The Bible on Racism in 60 seconds

To understand how this book, Ministers of Reconciliation is structured, try to imagine this:

You step into an elevator. The other guy in the elevator is a world famous professor on Christian ethics. You ask him about racial justice and reconciliation. He only has 60 seconds to answer you on such a complex and inflammatory topic. What can he say?

He could say: You should read Genesis 1:27 “created in the image of God”, Psalm 139 on the God who sees. Jeremiah 38,39 the African who rescued Jeremiah. Don’t forget the words “go and make disciples of every nation” in the Great Commission. Pick up on the racial themes between Jesus and the Samaritan Woman, between Peter and Cornelius, and between the Jews and Gentiles in Romans 15. Also study the Body of Christ in 1 Corinthians 12 and the Ministry of Reconciliation in 2 Corinthians 5:19. Paul speaking on Peter’s hypocrisy in Galatians, Jesus breaking the dividing wall in Ephesians 2:11-18, the chosen race, royal priesthood, holy nation and people of God’s possession in 1 Peter 2:9 and Revelation 5:9-10 which says, “By your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation.” Read all that and you will have a good idea of what the Bible says on racial justice and reconciliation.

Sixty seconds pass, the elevator door opens, he walks out and you are left with 13 rich and meaningful bible passages to read and savor.

And if you want to hear 13 different pastors expound on these 13 bible passages, you get this book: Ministers of Reconciliation.

Hinting towards Woke?

This is a side-by-side book review, so I pick up on two examples from this book. One example hints at woke language, the other decisively does not.

In the book’s first essay, Matthew D. Kim gives a definition of racism from Scott B. Rae and Jemar Tisby. As you read, as you listen, do you hear anything woke. He writes:

Racial prejudice has been defined by Scott B. Rae as “negative stereotyping on the basis of race and/or belief that particular races/ethnicities are inferior to others. Racism is the combination of racial prejudice and the institutions of power in any given culture that enable a group to perpetuate patterns of discrimination.… (pause. There are ellipses here which means he removed a sentence, I will pick up on this.) However, no one’s race exempts them from holding immoral racial prejudices.”

Similarly, in The Color of Compromise, Jemar Tisby writes, “Racism can operate through impersonal systems and not simply through the malicious words and actions of individuals. Another definition explains racism as prejudice plus power. It is not only personal bigotry toward someone of a different race that constitutes racism; rather, racism includes the imposition of bigoted ideas on groups of people.”

This is the outline of what I just read: Rae defines racism. Kim says similarly. Tisby defines racism. You have two definitions which Kim connects by the word similarly. After reading Fault Lines and Cynical Theories, I have become woke on woke.

First, there are two important sentences missing from Rae’s definition. His definition begins like this: “it is helpful to distinguish between racism and racial prejudice, since they are two somewhat different things.” Remember the ellipse? The sentence that was removed reads: “This distinction is part of the reason why some groups insist that minorities cannot be racist, since they don’t have the power necessary to enforce racial preferences.” and then Rae contrasts: “However, no one’s race exempts them from holding immoral racial prejudices.”

Did you miss it? Let me just repeat it. Rae’s definition: “Some groups insist that minorities cannot be racist… However (see where contrast kicks in?) However no one’s race exempts them from holding immoral racial prejudices. Rae is saying minorities can be racists or hold immoral racial prejudices.

Okay, so that is Rae’s definition of racism. Now we compare Rae’s definition with Tisby’s. Now, before I continue, Baucham is very critical of Tisby. So when Tisby’s name showed up in this essay, I read it again.
He mentions it quite a few times in his book.

Tisby says: “Another definition explains racism as prejudice plus power.” Prejudice plus power?

Hey, I read that in Cynical Theories. I checked and this is what Pluckrose and Lindsay writes, “ We are told that racism is prejudice plus power,’ therefore, only white people can be racist.” Because only white people, according to Critical Theory, have power, only white people can be racist. Blacks don’t have power, so they can’t be racist. And therefore you see that this definition is different.

The missing sentence from Scott B Rae is important for context. Rae says minorities can be racist or hold immoral racial prejudices. Jemar Tisby says minorities cannot because racism is prejudice plus power. No power, no racism.

Not here that the meaning of racism has changed. We all speak English, but some speak a different English. So when someone tells you, asks you the question, “Do you think racism is wrong? And you say, “Yes”. “Racism is wrong? Do you want to fix racism? If you see racism, you want to solve it?” And you say, “Yes, I would like to be a part of that. I don’t want racism to happen.” And then they said, “All right, so let’s support reparation. Let’s go and be an activist.” You say “No, I don’t want to be an activist. I don’t want to. I’m not supporting reparations.” And then they say you are a racist because you are complicit in the activities of the dominant culture, which you’re not willing to speak against. So, therefore you are a racist. And you’re like, what the heck just happened? The meaning of racism has changed. So when you agree to whatever Critical Theory says, you have to be very careful.

Similarly Or In Contrast?

I’m making much of this one paragraph in this one essay to reveal the bigger picture. Those who lean woke say “similarly” but those who are against woke say “in contrast”. The former want to highlight how Christianity can co-exist with Critical Race Theory methods. The latter say any similarity is superficial and is far outweighed by the vast differences in worldview.

Hear the argument. Baucham is not saying that Christian leaders have left the Christian faith to knowingly adopt the new religion of Critical Theory. They don’t say that. Baucham is not saying that. He is saying they don’t know that Critical Theory is a religion. They think it can be a useful tool.

One says similarly. The other says in contrast. Like night and day. Like light and darkness. Like God and another religion. You cannot worship both God and Critical Theory. People didn’t know. So with his book, Baucham is saying, “Now you know. You have no excuse.”

If you are following my arguments so far, then you will immediately grasp the significance of the next example.

This Is Not Woke

Another essay ,this one written by Bryan Loritts starts like this:

On the evening of March 13, 2006, a group of Duke University lacrosse students paid two African American women to strip for them at a party they were throwing. Five minutes into the festivities, one of the strippers abruptly quit and ultimately accused three of the men of rape.”

I skip to one paragraph later: “The DNA evidence didn’t match any of the lacrosse players, and the woman who cried “rape” was ultimately revealed to have fabricated the whole thing. We had all been had, hoodwinked, bamboozled. Race can be quite the con artist, aiding and abetting our deepest presuppositions, seducing us to add or subtract value simply by the color of a person’s skin. Try as we may, race has attached itself not only to our skin, but to our minds, casting an ever-present shadow and coloring our perceptions. We just cannot seem to get rid of this demonic system predicated on appearances…”

This is an attention grabbing introduction, he writes well. And parts of his experience cuts to the heart.

He writes: “On cool mornings, I will throw on my hoodie and venture outside. As I walk, it’s common to see people, who happen to be white, go to the other side of the street to avoid me. Right or wrong, my assumption is that this is because I am a large black man in a hoodie with his hands in his pockets and walking briskly. I find myself at times chuckling at the irony: while they are walking to the other side of the street, I’m reciting Scripture and praying for things like the multiethnic church to become the new normal in our world.”

So you see, even though in the beginning of the essay, he says that that the charge of racism against the African women was wrong, was found to be wrong. At the same time he shows us that racism is alive and kicking in his world. And not only that, after explaining further about how he experienced racism, Loritts confesses the sin of racism. I quote:

“A few years later, God called me to go to a predominantly white, wealthy church on the other side of town. I walked into that church like Jonah walked into Nineveh. People were helped by my preaching, and many came to Christ, but my heart was bitter.”

Then the chapter expounds on Acts 10. And you see how this man of God reflects on his sin of racism and thrusts himself upon the word of God. How does this sinner overcome his sin? Let me quote:

“As you know, our adversary has sought to make race a political or merely sociological issue. But when the preacher comes to texts such as ours and carefully excavates the ancient narrative in such a way as to show the congregation that the agenda is not being driven by CNN, Fox News, or MSNBC, but by the heart and mouth of a holy God, we now position them to deal with God. This truth should give us both courage and great sleep at night. Expository preaching—letting the text set the agenda for the message—is the preacher’s best friend, especially when dealing with inflammatory topics such as racism.”

Bravo! Bravo! I mean, even his essay is something that you can preach from. You see the conviction of the Gospel, of the power of the Gospel to cure and heal and restore the sinner’s heart, the racist heart. Oh this is just wonderful!

Who’s Woke? Who Knows?

In the final analysis, I don’t know where any of these writers stand on Critical Race Theory. This book was not designed to be read after Fault Lines and Cynical Theories. This book is not a sample given to students to sniff for woke teachings. I don’t want anyone to get that impression. This book stands by itself.

It is a book that aims to heal and recover a biblical vision of racial justice and reconciliation. Matthew D. Kim had far, far more to say on Genesis than citing Rae’s and Tisby’s definition of justice. Bryan Loritts had far, far more to say on Acts than his experience of racism. Every essay is an exposition of a bible passage but I couldn’t elaborate on them because I’m reviewing the book side by side with Fault Lines and Cynical Theories. You have 13 pastors writing from their heart on what breaks their heart namely racial injustice. And the only thing that can heal that heart is Jesus Christ.

Bible’s Power, not Woke’s Power

My biggest take away from this book is you can speak powerfully on racial justice and reconciliation without using woke language. If you say “power, privilege, white supremacy”, you have to define them because the meaning has been muddied by Critical Race Theory. People in the pews they don’t know what you’re talking about because they may agree, but don’t realize what they’re agreeing on.

So some try. I believe some try to use woke language as a bridge to Scripture. Thinking that, “If I speak your language, I am successfully contextualizing the message so that you can hear God speaking through His Word.” Okay, that’s the idea. And I don’t think it works.

I fear that eventually, if you go down this road, eventually Scripture will be used as a bridge to wokeness. Scripture will be used as a bridge to Critical Theory. Because in trying to package Scripture to appeal or appease the Woke crowd, you will sacrifice truth.

Now remember Critical Theory’s two principles: 1. There is no truth. 2. Truth is what the Powers that Be say it is. If pastors normalise woke language, the pew will eventually hear from outside the church, you speak woke, the outside world also speaks woke, but outside they will hear that there is no truth and they will eventually come to the conclusion that you are saying what you saying because you, as the Christian group, the dominant group in the culture, want power over me. They will interpret every interaction in terms of power and privilege. Because that is what you’ve been telling them from the pulpit. Power and privilege. So don’t do that. Don’t use work language.

Sin is Universal, Thank God so is the Solution

My final thought: Guys. Racism was around long before America was founded. Inter-generational racism is not unique to America. It’s everywhere. Name me a country with no racists? England? France? Turkey? Iran? China? Japan? Malaysia? Zambia? Nigeria? Cuba? Racism is everywhere. Sin is in every person’s heart. When you limit the racial conversation to whiteness, white supremacy, and white fragility, what you are doing is you take away the Gospel’s universal power to identify and kill the sin of racism.

What if an Israeli family and a Palestinian family wants to reconcile and they come to you Christian because they have heard of the Power of Jesus to reconcile Jews and Gentiles, to remove the dividing wall, to enable hate-filled people to forgive all sins. What will you say? Are you going to say dominant culture, systemic racism? Give me a list of people killed in the past? And the solution for proper reconciliation is reparations?

Haven’t you read the story of Corrie ten Boom and the Ravensbruck guard? She could not forgive him. Read the story. She obeyed God. She knew what Jesus said. And she chose to forgive and the Holy Spirit filled her. Holy Spirit work is what we want to see between Israel and Palestine, between blacks and whites, between husbands and wives, between brothers and sisters. That’s what we want to see. Not Critical Race Theory.

Comparing Fault Lines, Cynical Theories and Ministers of Reconciliation

And that’s what the best of Fault Lines and Ministers of Reconciliation has to offer: God. In contrast, Cynical Theories’ solution is: Liberalism. But Fault Lines and Ministers of Reconciliation, written by Christian authors, Christian pastors, they are offering God as a solution.

In this side-by-side review, we see that Fault Line and Cynical Theories describe the danger of Critical Theory to the church and to society. After reading these two books, we can detect wokeness in what we read and hear.

The best of Ministers of Reconciliation and Fault Lines shows that the way forward is to speak loudly and clearly that what the world needs is not a better philosophy or sociology or political activism, what the world needs is God the Father, Jesus and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Only through God, can we see an end to the sin of racism once and for all. The problem is man reject God’s solution. And reading all these three books just shows ever more clearly what is the right path ahead of us.

This is a Reading and Readers side-by-side review of Fault Lines by Voddie Baucham, Cynical Theories by Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay and Ministers of Reconciliation, a collection of 13 essays, edited by Daniel Darling.

Send Me a Review

How did you like the side-by-side review? Did you find it helpful or not? Let me know your thoughts. I would also like to request your write a review. This is the ninth episode. It’s early days and your reviews helps to keep the fire in me going. You don’t have to do it via a podcast player, you can just go to the website and submit the review in the contact form or email me direct. The website address is www.readingandreaders.com. That’s www.readingandreaders.com. Thank you for listening to Reading and Readers, a podcast where I review Christian books for you. God bless!

Book List

• Fault Lines: The Social Justice Movement and Evangelicalism’s Looming Catastrophe by Voddie Baucham. Amazon.
• Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity―and Why This Harms Everybody by Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay. Amazon.
• Ministers of Reconciliation: Preaching on Race and the Gospel, edited by Daniel Darling. Amazon. Logos.