ASKED AND ANSWERED

More and more of the seemingly mindless Post-Modern waffle emanating from the universities these days is being revealed as classic Marxism (although I am not sure that many of the unwitting idiots who nowadays proffer such 'wisdom' are actually aware of it). Take this post from a tenured twit as an example:

"A sociology professor at the City University of New York recently argued in an extensive series of tweets that “the white-nuclear family” perpetuates racism. Jessie Daniels, a self-described “expert on race,” began by declaring that, “What I’ve learned is that the white-nuclear family is one of the most powerful forces supporting white supremacy. I mean, if you’re a white person who says they’re engaged in dismantling white supremacy but… you’re forming a white family [and] reproducing white children that ‘you want the best for’ - how is that helping [and] not part of the problem?”
Apparently, the stable family structure is a “fact to be lamented,” and stable white families should be discouraged from existing. " [Toni Airraksinen]

Classic Marxism is antagonistic to what we term the 'nuclear family' for the following reasons:

Marxists argue that the nuclear family performs ideological functions for Capitalism – the family acts as a unit of consumption and teaches passive acceptance of hierarchy. It is also the institution through which the wealthy pass down their private property to their children, thus reproducing class inequality.

According to Engels, the monogamous nuclear family only emerged with Capitalism. Before Capitalism, traditional, tribal societies were classless and they practised a form of ‘primitive communism’ in which there was no private property. In such societies, property was collectively owned, and the family structure reflected this – there were no families as such, but tribal groups existed in a kind of ‘promiscuous horde’ in which there were no restrictions on sexual relationships. [ReviseSociology site]

I hear the unquestioning parroting of these theories all over the place these days and not least in some watered down form or another from within the very walls of the church, which is an indication of how much the world has influenced the church rather than the other way around.

In my humble opinion such transgressions are possible only because the Church has, by and large neglected the life of the mind in favour of the life of the spirit, not that the life of the Spirit is not important, it is essential, but here I speak of the emotionalism inherent in so much of the church today.

It is an age old dilemma, "what has Athens to do with Jerusalem" and whilst I understand the hesitation articulated at the time that this quote was uttered during the third Century AD it was intended as a refutation of the claims the rhetoricians, who set themselves up against the teachings of the church, were making. Interestingly the man who phrased the question was a man schooled in rhetoric and logic himself. He also said that it was the blood of the martyrs who seeded the church...a sobering thought given today's march of Marxism into our society.

We cannot arrive at KNOWING GOD through reason but once we know him reason is the tool we use to gain knowledge about Him and His ways.

Which is the more important wing of a bird....an absurd question...similarly which is more important Faith or Reason? A: neither, they both are.

Recent musings by B Muehlenberg to bolster my observations:

Oct 31, 2017
When I speak of Christians being illiterate, I have far more in mind than just the inability of some to properly read and write – in that they are simply the product of the modern Western education. But I am speaking here of a wider sort of illiteracy, one that is as regrettable as it is widespread.
I refer to historical illiteracy, theological illiteracy, biblical illiteracy, church history illiteracy, etc. Far too many Christians in the West today are woefully ignorant of that which they should not be ignorant. They know little about their own faith, their own Christian culture and history, their own doctrine, and their own Bible.
That is why the church keeps losing. A people divorced from their own heritage and their own belief system will not long stand. Indeed, they will be blown about by every wind of doctrine, by every cultural breeze, and by every latest trend, to paraphrase the Apostle Paul.