⭐ ⭐ 2 STARS: Toxic Empathy (Part 2)
A Flawed Polemic Masquerading as Theology (Part 2 of 2)
Theological and Rhetorical Failures + Conclusion
In Part 1, we examined Toxic Empathy's chapter-level critiques, showing how Stuckey misrepresents theological and social issues by relying on false dichotomies, proof-texting, and partisan rhetoric.
Now, in Part 2, we step back to analyze broader theological and rhetorical failures—where Stuckey's arguments collapse under deeper scrutiny. We'll also explore how Toxic Empathy reinforces a self-insulating worldview, making it difficult for readers to engage with complexity, nuance, or genuine theological diversity.
Finally, we'll close with better book recommendations—resources that balance conviction and compassion while avoiding the simplistic culture-war mindset Stuckey promotes.
1. Proof-Texting Over Contextual Theology
Stuckey wields Scripture as a weapon rather than a witness, using cherry-picked verses to "prove" her positions instead of engaging Scripture holistically.
For example:
She cites 1 Corinthians 13:6 ("Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth") to argue that affirming LGBTQ+ people or advocating for social justice is unbiblical.
Yet she ignores the broader biblical emphasis on justice (Micah 6:8), mercy (Matthew 23:23), and sacrificial love (John 15:13).
By using isolated proof-texts, she reinforces her pre-existing conclusions rather than allowing Scripture's full narrative—especially the life and teachings of Jesus—to shape her theology.
Missing Perspective:
Biblical exegesis requires historical and cultural context. Many of the verses Stuckey cites (Romans 1, Leviticus 19) have complex interpretive histories that theologians across traditions have debated for centuries.
The Wesleyan Quadrilateral (Scripture, tradition, reason, experience) reminds us that faithful interpretation requires more than just isolated verses—it calls for deep engagement with the whole witness of God's work throughout history.
2. Misunderstanding Empathy
Beyond its theological flaws, Toxic Empathy also fundamentally misunderstands what empathy actually is. Stuckey flattens empathy into emotional indulgence, failing to recognize that healthy empathy includes wisdom and discernment.
In psychology, empathy isn't just about "affirming everything" or being "led by feelings." Researchers identify three types of empathy:
Cognitive empathy – Understanding another person's perspective
Emotional empathy – Feeling what another person feels
Compassionate empathy – Balancing emotion with reason to offer help wisely
Nowhere in Toxic Empathy does Stuckey acknowledge this complexity. Instead, she frames empathy as a progressive trap, ignoring both psychological research and biblical examples of Jesus' empathy (John 11:35, Romans 12:15).
3. Ignoring Historical Christian Diversity
One of Toxic Empathy's greatest weaknesses is its assumption that Reformed Calvinism equals Biblical Christianity.
Stuckey completely erases entire Christian traditions that don't fit into her framework, such as:
Methodism (which emphasizes social holiness and grace)
Anabaptism (which prioritizes radical peacemaking and communal discipleship)
Catholic Social Teaching (which integrates justice with moral theology)
Black Liberation Theology (which engages faith through the lens of racial justice and systemic oppression)
Missing Perspective:
The early church was marked by diverse theological debates—Stuckey's rigid framework ignores this reality
Christianity has always had multiple streams of faithful interpretation—from St. Augustine to John Wesley to Dietrich Bonhoeffer—that don't fit her binary model
4. Political Ideology as Theology
Throughout Toxic Empathy, Stuckey equates conservative American politics with biblical faithfulness, framing positions like:
Opposing universal healthcare as "protecting biblical values"
Opposing LGBTQ+ rights as the only faithful Christian stance
Defending strict immigration policies as "upholding law and order" rather than recognizing their political nature
This is not theology—it's partisanship wrapped in Christian language.
Missing Perspective:
Majority-world Christians (from Africa, Latin America, and Asia) hold deeply biblical yet politically diverse views on these issues
The early church prioritized the poor, the foreigner, and the marginalized over empire loyalty (Acts 4:32-35, Matthew 25:31-46)
5. Dismissal of Trauma and Lived Experience
Stuckey's binary framing ("truth vs. toxic empathy") erases the role of trauma in shaping human decisions, reducing complex struggles to moral failings rather than wounds needing healing.
For example:
Abortion – She ignores systemic factors (poverty, lack of healthcare) that drive women toward abortion, framing it solely as a "sinful choice"
Gender Identity – She critiques detransition stories while ignoring deeper trauma (history of objectification, PCOS pain) that contributed to gender dysphoria
Missing Perspective:
Research (Bessel van der Kolk's The Body Keeps the Score) shows that trauma alters the brain, impacting trust, belief systems, and identity formation
Many deconstructing Christians aren't rejecting faith—they are trying to heal from religious harm (John 8:32, Matthew 11:28)
6. Fear-Based Discipleship Leads to Control, Not Transformation
At its core, Toxic Empathy isn’t just flawed in theology—it’s driven by fear. Stuckey’s entire argument hinges on worst-case scenarios, slippery slopes, and moral panic. But fear-based discipleship doesn’t lead to transformation—it leads to control.
Researcher Brené Brown (Dare to Lead) has shown that when people are driven by fear and shame, they become more defensive, more rigid, and less willing to engage complexity. That’s exactly what we see in Toxic Empathy. Instead of inviting believers to wrestle with faith, she demands certainty, loyalty, and absolute resistance to theological change.
But Jesus didn’t lead this way. He never used fear to manipulate people into submission. He invited them into a deeper, richer, more expansive vision of God’s love.
Final Thoughts: A Self-Reinforcing Framework
Toxic Empathy entrenches itself in a self-insulating logic:
Biblical Inerrancy – Stuckey's interpretation is framed as the only valid lens for Scripture, dismissing Wesleyan, Catholic, or global-majority traditions as deviations
Moral Absolutism – Nuance is equated with sin, reducing complex issues (e.g., abortion, immigration) to binaries of "biblical truth vs. woke ideology"
Persecution Narrative – Critics are dismissed as victims of "toxic empathy" or "cultural decay," insulating her arguments from substantive engagement
This framework mirrors the very "toxic empathy" Stuckey condemns: it weaponizes emotion (fear of heresy, distrust of dissent) while offering little room for dialogue.
This isn't just polemic—it's spiritual malpractice.
A Better Path Forward: Books That Engage Theology With Nuance
For readers seeking a faith that honors both truth and grace, Toxic Empathy offers little more than division. Instead, consider these books that thoughtfully engage theology, social issues, and human psychology with depth and nuance:
Esau McCaulley – Reading While Black (A biblical justice framework from an African American perspective)
N.T. Wright – Surprised by Hope (Exploring resurrection, justice, and the mission of the church)
Beth Allison Barr – The Making of Biblical Womanhood (A historical challenge to evangelical patriarchy)
Brian Zahnd – Sinners in the Hands of a Loving God (A Christ-centered response to fear-based theology)
Bessel van der Kolk – The Body Keeps the Score (How trauma impacts faith, trust, and identity)
Conclusion: The Cost of Certainty
When theology becomes a cudgel for cultural warfare, it abandons the very people Christ came to love.
Toxic Empathy exemplifies the very problem it claims to diagnose—weaponizing emotion to obscure truth, not reveal it.
There is a better way—one that follows Jesus in both conviction and compassion. Sadly, Stuckey's manifesto strays far from this path.
Would love to hear your thoughts—drop a comment below! 👇👇