Why Do Christians Resist the Idea of “Social Justice”? A Theological Question

joechristianwarrior said:

​

I’ve been reflecting a lot on the tension many Christians feel around the phrase “social justice.” It’s a topic that seems to trigger strong reactions from different sides of the church — both progressive and conservative — even though Scripture speaks frequently about justice, mercy, the poor, and the oppressed.


In studying this subject, I’ve noticed that there seems to be one main reason many believers push back against the idea of “social justice” today. What’s interesting is that I’ve heard this same objection from both sides of the political spectrum, even though they frame it differently.


Rather than turning this into a political debate, I’m curious from a theological standpoint:

What do you think is the primary reason Christians object to talk of “social justice”?​

Is it:

• a misunderstanding of the biblical meaning of justice?
• a reaction to how the term is used culturally or politically?
• fear of drifting into works-based righteousness?
• concerns about ideology?
• something else entirely?

I recently explored this topic in the final part of a video series I’ve been working on, and it led to some interesting insights. For anyone who wants to see how I approached the question, I've linked the video below. But the main purpose of this post is to hear your theological perspective and learn from the broader Christian community here.


Video link:

Looking forward to a respectful, Christ-centered discussion.


Grace and peace.

Click to expand...

Hey
I don't think we should separate sharing the gospel from doing acts of justice. Jesus preached the kingdom of God, and His message was accompanied by tangible acts of kindness, healing, and helping the poor.

Maybe we don't do more acts of justice because we've started to see them as separate from sharing the gospel. I see the good news as holistic.

So I would consider adding to your list (something else)
How have we compartmentalized or dichotomized the gospel?

Rose_bud said:

Maybe we don't do more acts of justice because we've started to see them as separate from sharing the gospel.

Click to expand...

Yet the Gospel of the Kingdom, Jesus' only gospel, was in following the Father's Kingdom/will was to act in servitude to both God and each other. It is the gospel.

joechristianwarrior said:

​

I’ve been reflecting a lot on the tension many Christians feel around the phrase “social justice.” It’s a topic that seems to trigger strong reactions from different sides of the church — both progressive and conservative — even though Scripture speaks frequently about justice, mercy, the poor, and the oppressed.


In studying this subject, I’ve noticed that there seems to be one main reason many believers push back against the idea of “social justice” today. What’s interesting is that I’ve heard this same objection from both sides of the political spectrum, even though they frame it differently.


Rather than turning this into a political debate, I’m curious from a theological standpoint:

What do you think is the primary reason Christians object to talk of “social justice”?​

Is it:

• a misunderstanding of the biblical meaning of justice?
• a reaction to how the term is used culturally or politically?
• fear of drifting into works-based righteousness?
• concerns about ideology?
• something else entirely?

I recently explored this topic in the final part of a video series I’ve been working on, and it led to some interesting insights. For anyone who wants to see how I approached the question, I've linked the video below. But the main purpose of this post is to hear your theological perspective and learn from the broader Christian community here.


Video link:

Looking forward to a respectful, Christ-centered discussion.


Grace and peace.

Click to expand...

"Social justice" has specific secular political science meaning that goes far afield of the given mission of the Body of Christ. There is some overlap, but there would also be considerable "mission creep" if the Body of Christ were to sign on to something devised and defined by secular political scientists rather than the Gospel of Christ.

Matt5 said:

We can see social justice at work in the Tower of Babel. Here, the leaders transformed stones (everybody unequal) into bricks (everybody equal.) Their path put civilization on a dangerous path where everyone could get wiped out in a war. Hence, God was forced to step in to save everyone. This is based on the oral Torah as told by Rabbi Daniel Lapin.

Bricks or Stones? - YouTube

Take a look at how God feels about brick or hewn stone (cut stone or brick):

Exodus 20:25 And if thou wilt make me an altar of stone, thou shalt not build it of hewn stone: for if thou lift up thy tool upon it, thou hast polluted it.

Isaiah 65:3 A people that provoketh me to anger continually to my face; that sacrificeth in gardens, and burneth incense upon altars of brick;

Altars of brick are a no-no because the brick has symbolic value. People are stones, not bricks.

Social justice seeks to transform people from stones into bricks.

Click to expand...

You heard it here first folks. If your neighbor is hungry, don't feed him, because it'll turn him into a brick.

So it boils down to who participate in hammering a culture. "Social Justice" as an afterfact action bears almost zero meaning. You personality is firmly formed starting from childhood till youth education in one form or another, in one way or another. Punishing an adult for that matter is completely meaningless.

Society runs like this. Through a mixture of cultural/social/parental education, if a society can achieve like 98% law-abiding citizens, the running of such a society is quite automatic. It can be run by itself through Rule Of Law. You set up laws for a society to run its own course. Both the western societies and the Japanese society were built this way. The devil can lay a hand on this society building process, the "education" actually starts when one is still in his/her mother's womb just as David put, but humans wrongly comprehend the situation as "original sin". Modern science however confirms that children education when in womb is possible.

The devil has track record in Canaan for building the Canaanites' cultures serving the purpose of stopping the Jews from settling down in Canaan. Since humans have no consent on this society building process, they don't have a measure to counter its effect. The Japanese won't fight their own culture, nor will the Chinese or Indians. They just choose to let it be it. Let it be so if you receive the Japanese childhood education to be the Japanese, Chinese childhood education to be the Chinese, Indian childhood education to be the Indians. We can't even consider that the fight is futile as such a fight never happened.

The West is rather blessed to have a Christian culture. In the process of society building two crucial factors are basically dealt with. 1) rebelliousness, and 2) greediness. Greediness is a more common phenomenon. You have both if you received the Chinese childhood education. The rule of philosophy of life is to maximize personal gain whenever possible, and to the extent that at all cost. That's the effect of greediness. As a result, this is a society repeatedly built by the Chinese (but strangely without their own awareness, the devil is doing a "superb" job);

"Behind the vermilion gates, wine and meat go stale and stink; On the roads lie the bones of people frozen to death." (society summarized by a famous poet 1500 years ago.

Did the Chinese seek "social justice"? They did. The death toll of Taiping Heaven Kingdom (around AD1950) is between 45 and 95 million. Did the death toll changed anything in terms of society building? The answer is No. That's why another 50 million human lives were added to the death toll in the next revolution. This period of history is called the Century of Humiliation. Within this 100 years, the price paid for "social justice" possibly exceeded a death toll of 100 million human lives. Does it change anything? It's absolutely NONE! Nothing would change unless the style of childhood education is changed. The Chinese culture promotes childhood competition through which everyone learns and pursuits maximizing personal gains whenever possible and even at all costs.

The possible way to change this is, 1) gain awareness by bursting the bubble formed by the devil, and 2) through Christians acting as the salt and light of this world by setting an example of countering the cultural greediness and rebelliousness. In the meantime, it loops through the process of building a society by greediness, and overthrowing it by rebelliousness with "social justice" in disguise.

In a nutshell, humans societies roughly fall into 2 categories, one where rule of law runs by itself (even the West is sloping) and other rule of law fails. Law-abiding citizens serving as the base of a society. Rule of Law will be a success if childhood education being a success. If childhood education is a success, it simply means over 98% citizens can achieve a state of law-abiding to allow rule of law to run its course. When that 98% number drops, it means your society is going crappier (that's the what it seems how the West now is going, along with the sloping of Christianity in the Western societies, that's by my speculation). The devil is doing his job. "Social Justice" has little to none effect on this process.

Build a greedy society and they, the greedy, will come. Build a compassionate society and the greedy will still come.

peaceful-forest said:

I watched the video you posted, and here were things I thought of in response to "what's stopping you from helping others?":

• Do we have the knowledge to help others? For example, homeless veterans that have mental health problems. I sure wouldn't know what to do.
• Do we have the resources to help others? We can help an individual when we see one on the street, for example, someone asking for money. Do many people now carry cash with them? Do people even have the money to help others?
• How is current help set up? They're usually organizations and programs. Not individuals we seek. For example, if we're in need of food and don't have any, we can go to a food pantry.
• Do we trust the person that needs help? I hear from others that there are scammers out there asking for money, pretending to be homeless and jobless people. I also question it when I see someone in the same situation.

Click to expand...

I watched also and agreed. It come down to personal sacrifice which we resist. And though we may wish to step out and make a commitment it is then that your questions come into play. If I am going to give I want it to be effective, not wasted. And I want it to go to the people who really need it. So that is where we hope that organizations and even the government can do a vetting and economy of scale efficiency that we as individuals cannot do on our own.

That is another aspect of social justice. It addresses structural injustice. Things beyond the influence or control of a single person. But then it gets political. How big does the social intervention need to be? What size of government intervention is best for the common good?

The purpose of government in any form has always been to control the many for the few. Any intervention will serve those who rule, at this time in history global Corporatism, whose goal is not to spread the wealth but to consume it all for the few. How does this fall in line with Jesus' commandments of serving God and each other?

timothyu said:

The purpose of government in any form has always been to control the many for the few. Any intervention will serve those who rule, at this time in history global Corporatism, whose goal is not to spread the wealth but to consume it all for the few. How does this fall in line with Jesus' commandments of serving God and each other?

Click to expand...

Government should also serve to protect the individual from larger predators. The Consumer Protection Agency was such an attempt, as were clean water and clean air legislation. Anyone remember the Cuyahoga River catching on fire?

Akita Suggagaki said:

The Consumer Protection Agency was such an attempt, as were clean water and clean air legislation. Anyone remember the Cuyahoga River catching on fire?

Click to expand...

A throw back to the 60's when even the roadsides were wall to wall garbage. Of course the pollution regulations drove industries to foreign countries, so I guess to make america great again it has to go back to de-regulation. Still only serves the few.

joechristianwarrior said:

​

I’ve been reflecting a lot on the tension many Christians feel around the phrase “social justice.” It’s a topic that seems to trigger strong reactions from different sides of the church — both progressive and conservative — even though Scripture speaks frequently about justice, mercy, the poor, and the oppressed.


In studying this subject, I’ve noticed that there seems to be one main reason many believers push back against the idea of “social justice” today. What’s interesting is that I’ve heard this same objection from both sides of the political spectrum, even though they frame it differently.


Rather than turning this into a political debate, I’m curious from a theological standpoint:

What do you think is the primary reason Christians object to talk of “social justice”?​

Is it:

• a misunderstanding of the biblical meaning of justice?
• a reaction to how the term is used culturally or politically?
• fear of drifting into works-based righteousness?
• concerns about ideology?
• something else entirely?

I recently explored this topic in the final part of a video series I’ve been working on, and it led to some interesting insights. For anyone who wants to see how I approached the question, I've linked the video below. But the main purpose of this post is to hear your theological perspective and learn from the broader Christian community here.


Video link:

Looking forward to a respectful, Christ-centered discussion.


Grace and peace.

Click to expand...

I can't say I have heard the arguments from others or seen any negative reaction to social justice itself, though I suppose it exists. In my case it is the social justice platform behind CRT (Critical Race Theory) invading the church and overtaking the gospel. The Bible teaches social justice and a respect for all persons since all are made in the image of God.

CRT is marxist at it's core, always seeking an oppressor. The oppressors at this point in time are white people and specifically white males, the patriarchy system, and the gender issues have been enveloped into it, and not least, Christianity. It is a road to persecution of the church, to silencing the gospel and biblical truths, and has nothing to do with actual social justice. It is itself an oppressor and silences voices through intimidation, and intimidation is just the first step.

Akita Suggagaki said:

Government should also serve to protect the individual from larger predators. The Consumer Protection Agency was such an attempt, as were clean water and clean air legislation. Anyone remember the Cuyahoga River catching on fire?

Click to expand...

I do remember the Cuyahoga River catching fire. Unless it happened more than once, I was living in Cleveland at the time.

Arial-by Grace said:

I can't say I have heard the arguments from others or seen any negative reaction to social justice itself, though I suppose it exists. In my case it is the social justice platform behind CRT (Critical Race Theory) invading the church and overtaking the gospel. The Bible teaches social justice and a respect for all persons since all are made in the image of God.

CRT is marxist at it's core, always seeking an oppressor. The oppressors at this point in time are white people and specifically white males, the patriarchy system, and the gender issues have been enveloped into it, and not least, Christianity. It is a road to persecution of the church, to silencing the gospel and biblical truths, and has nothing to do with actual social justice. It is itself an oppressor and silences voices through intimidation, and intimidation is just the first step.

Click to expand...

It's not simply CRT. CRT is based on Critical Theory, which is indeed Marx with the economics removed (and Critical Theorists are not shy of saying so). But Radical Feminism, a specific feminist ideology in itself, is also based on Critical Theory in which men are the Oppressors and women the Oppressed.

And, yes, the problem with Critical Theory for Christians is that Critical Theory requires permanent, eternal conflict between Oppressors and Oppressed in which there can be no repentance, reconciliation, compromise, or treaty.

Matt5 said:

We can see social justice at work in the Tower of Babel. Here, the leaders transformed stones (everybody unequal) into bricks (everybody equal.) Their path put civilization on a dangerous path where everyone could get wiped out in a war. Hence, God was forced to step in to save everyone. This is based on the oral Torah as told by Rabbi Daniel Lapin.

Click to expand...

A closer reading of the actual text reveals what the problem was. The motive for building the tower was to rebel against God's mandate to the post-Flood survivors to spread out into the earth. The Babel architects said, "Nope. We need a tower so that we can make a name for ourselves and avoid dispersion". (Genesis 11:4)
That allegory of transforming stones into bricks has nothing at all to do with equity or social justice; it was man's short-sightedness and hubris thinking if they got together and organized that they could prevail against God.

joechristianwarrior said:

​

I’ve been reflecting a lot on the tension many Christians feel around the phrase “social justice.” It’s a topic that seems to trigger strong reactions from different sides of the church — both progressive and conservative — even though Scripture speaks frequently about justice, mercy, the poor, and the oppressed.


In studying this subject, I’ve noticed that there seems to be one main reason many believers push back against the idea of “social justice” today. What’s interesting is that I’ve heard this same objection from both sides of the political spectrum, even though they frame it differently.


Rather than turning this into a political debate, I’m curious from a theological standpoint:

What do you think is the primary reason Christians object to talk of “social justice”?​

Is it:

• a misunderstanding of the biblical meaning of justice?
• a reaction to how the term is used culturally or politically?
• fear of drifting into works-based righteousness?
• concerns about ideology?
• something else entirely?

I recently explored this topic in the final part of a video series I’ve been working on, and it led to some interesting insights. For anyone who wants to see how I approached the question, I've linked the video below. But the main purpose of this post is to hear your theological perspective and learn from the broader Christian community here.


Video link:

Looking forward to a respectful, Christ-centered discussion.


Grace and peace.

Click to expand...

The Catholic Church does not ignore Social Justice teaching; there's a book of Church teaching on the matter.

It's not a subject that a Christian should avoid. It is important.

Xeno.of.athens said:

The Catholic Church does not ignore Social Justice teaching; there's a book of Church teaching on the matter.
View attachment 375405
It's not a subject that a Christian should avoid. It is important.

Click to expand...

The term "Social Justice" has specific secular political science meaning that goes far afield of the given mission of the Body of Christ. There is some overlap, but there would also be considerable "mission creep" if the Body of Christ were to sign on to something devised and defined by secular political scientists for their ends rather than the Gospel of Christ for the mission of Christ.

RDKirk said:

The term "Social Justice" has specific secular political science meaning that goes far afield of the given mission of the Body of Christ. There is some overlap, but there would also be considerable "mission creep" if the Body of Christ were to sign on to something devised and defined by secular political scientists for their ends rather than the Gospel of Christ for the mission of Christ.

Click to expand...

Have you read the book I cited?

online here Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church

Xeno.of.athens said:

Have you read the book I cited?

online here Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church

Click to expand...

Did you actually read what I said?

joechristianwarrior said:

​

I’ve been reflecting a lot on the tension many Christians feel around the phrase “social justice.” It’s a topic that seems to trigger strong reactions from different sides of the church — both progressive and conservative — even though Scripture speaks frequently about justice, mercy, the poor, and the oppressed.


In studying this subject, I’ve noticed that there seems to be one main reason many believers push back against the idea of “social justice” today. What’s interesting is that I’ve heard this same objection from both sides of the political spectrum, even though they frame it differently.


Rather than turning this into a political debate, I’m curious from a theological standpoint:

What do you think is the primary reason Christians object to talk of “social justice”?​

Is it:

• a misunderstanding of the biblical meaning of justice?
• a reaction to how the term is used culturally or politically?
• fear of drifting into works-based righteousness?
• concerns about ideology?
• something else entirely?

I recently explored this topic in the final part of a video series I’ve been working on, and it led to some interesting insights. For anyone who wants to see how I approached the question, I've linked the video below. But the main purpose of this post is to hear your theological perspective and learn from the broader Christian community here.


Video link:

Looking forward to a respectful, Christ-centered discussion.


Grace and peace.

Click to expand...

The Catholic church is for social justice.

Yarddog said:

The Catholic church is for social justice.

Click to expand...

The political science definition of social justice and the Roman Catholic Church’s social doctrine share some surface similarities but differ in scope, grounding, and emphasis.

Political science tends to define social justice primarily in terms of distribution of resources, rights, and opportunities—addressing inequality and systemic disadvantage. It often emphasizes outcome-oriented remedies, and those remedies can include violent government authoritarianism and war. The policies of the Soviet Union, Communist China, Communist Myanmar, North Korea all promoted secular "social justice."

Catholic social doctrine emphasizes the common good, human dignity, solidarity, and subsidiarity. It concerns not only material welfare but also moral, spiritual, and social flourishing. Redistribution is acceptable only as part of promoting the common good, not simply to equalize outcomes.

Political science approaches often focus on systemic structures and state interventions, prioritizing collective outcomes over individual moral liberty.

Catholic doctrine stresses both individual virtue and institutional responsibility. Social justice is a moral duty of all persons and communities, not just governments.

Secular social justice often treats inequality as inherently problematic when it correlates with unfairness or disadvantage.

Catholic social teaching recognizes that some inequalities are natural or necessary (e.g., differences in talent or effort) but condemns structures that unjustly oppress or exploit people.

Political science treats social justice as a secular tool to measure fairness in societal outcomes; Catholic social doctrine treats it as a moral imperative grounded in human dignity, aimed at the flourishing of individuals and communities within a divinely ordered moral framework.