Inclusive?

In the second chapter of the book of James, the writer cautions the church about pre-judging others and underscores the fact that Jesus died for all. The invitation has been extended equally, without pre-condition. We can read these words:
1 My brethren, do not hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with partiality.
2 For if there should come into your assembly a man with gold rings, in fine apparel, and there should also come in a poor man in filthy clothes,
3 and you pay attention to the one wearing the fine clothes and say to him, "You sit here in a good place," and say to the poor man, "You stand there," or, "Sit here at my footstool,"
4 have you not shown partiality among yourselves, and become judges with evil thoughts?

In this case, James is pointing out how some have excluded others based on their economic standing. In other parts of the Bible, we see that salvation is available to all, regardless of their social standing or ethnic background.  So, if God does not discriminate, why should we?  We are so prone to be partial, to show favoritism to those who look like us or live like us - He wants us to be inviting to all to experience the love of God and come to know Him. 

+++++

Peter learned a lesson about the inclusivity of the gospel, recognizing the availability of salvation to all. From a change of thinking, he spoke these words in Acts chapter 10:
34 Then Peter opened his mouth and said: "In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality.
35 But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him.
36 The word which God sent to the children of Israel, preaching peace through Jesus Christ--He is Lord of all--
37 that word you know, which was proclaimed throughout all Judea, and began from Galilee after the baptism which John preached:
38 how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power, who went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with Him.

It all sounds so noble and fair, but the warning signs are seemingly more common - organizations, which have been unduly influenced by a progressive agenda, have been hijacked by a philosophy that is summarized by three words: diversity, equity, and inclusion; DEI for short.  Fortunately, the National Religious Broadcasters convention this past year held a workshop addressing this issue, and I had several guests comment on this philosophy.

What happens is that in the name of "inclusion," is that some voices seem to be excluded.  Can you guess which ones?  Tyler O'Neil of The Daily Signal, who was one of my guests at NRB, covers the infiltration of these types of ideas in higher education in his home state of Virginia, writing in a piece that was also published at The Stream:

These DEI offices are the bureaucracy of the bureaucracy. They exist to push leftist ideology throughout the institution, hounding school administrators, staff, and professors to toe the line on “anti-racism” and gender ideology.

They represent a new priesthood pushing leftist dogma within noble institutions once dedicated to higher learning but increasingly acting as ideological factories that produce “woke” activists.

While corporate America has begun excising the DEI cancer, it has taken root and flourished in academia.

Case in point, as O'Neil relates:

Virginia Tech’s DEI director, Catherine Cotrupi, used her publicly funded email account to forward someone’s email pleading with readers to campaign against school board candidates the email branded as “hateful.”

Why did the candidates qualify as “hateful?” Because they support Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s commonsense policies on transgender issues.

O'Neil points out:

One of the targeted school board candidates said she was considering filing a lawsuit. The other candidate is a father who personally experienced the “transgender” nightmare of having a school tell him it knows better than him what is good for his daughter.

So, the philosophy that is present among Cotrupi's supporters: "...it is permissible for Cotrupi to use government funds to encourage people to campaign against these candidates— regardless of what the law or Virginia Tech’s official policy states."  O'Neil adds, "This defense reveals the underlying mentality of DEI and why these offices pose such a threat to open discourse in American universities."

He contends that the concepts represented by these three little words have been redefined, saying:

Americans support the concepts of diversity, equity, and inclusion, but the DEI movement defines these terms in divisive ways: Racial diversity counts, but ideological diversity does not. “Equity” translates to redistribution of wealth along racial lines rather than equal rules for everyone to succeed according to his or her effort and merit. “Inclusion” encompasses any sexual or gender “identity,” but rarely the Judeo-Christian principles that built the very universities these DEI offices subvert.

This type of twisted thinking has made it to a school district in the state of Virginia, in Albemarle County.  According to Alliance Defending Freedom's website, it represented a group of parents, described as a "religiously and ethnically diverse group of five families," that were on the wrong side of the issue, in the eyes of the school board. The case, unfortunately, was dismissed last year by a state court.

The website says, regarding the school district's policy that was challenged:

Everyone should stand against racism. It’s an unqualified evil.

But that’s not what the policy does in practice. Rather, the policy, which is rooted in critical race theory, instructs that students must be treated differently based on their race.

The website goes on to say:

To implement its new policy, the district turned to critical race theorists like Ibram X. Kendi and Glenn Singleton, who prescribe a regimen of disparate race-based treatment and racial stereotyping. In his book How to Be an Antiracist, Kendi argues for discrimination as the answer to past and present discrimination: “The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination. The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination.”

And, for what it's worth, Kendi is being investigated by Boston University, where his Antiracist Research Center is based.  The Washington Free Beacon states, in a September 21 article:

Kendi's center has raised tens of millions of dollars, including $10 million from Twitter founder Jack Dorsey and $140,000 from George Soros’s Open Society Foundation. But the Free Beacon reported on Wednesday that the think tank has hardly produced any research. A previous "antiracism" research center that Kendi ran at American University was similarly unproductive, the Free Beacon reported at the time.

This report was released just after Kendi "laid off much of the center's staff."

The Bible is clear that we are not to show partiality toward anyone.  That is a principle at the core of racism - showing preference or rejection toward a person based on his or her outward appearance. So-called "anti-racism" also treats people unequally based on immutable characteristics.  I cited some examples for you in higher education, as well as K through 12.  In essence, where there is racism, there is a commodification of people who are created in the image of God.

I think we could all stand to not reduce people to a product or a statistic.  We can appreciate the fact that God has created all of us and appreciate how we have been created.  Now, certainly, we are all sinners in need of a Savior, and we can see the people with whom we interact as brothers and sisters in Christ or others who don't know Him, but to whom we show love with the hope that one day they may accept Jesus as their Lord. Pre-judging people based on race is a harmful attitude and is inconsistent with the teachings of Scripture.