Unleashed Cruelty
Martin Luther King passionately wrote out of a jail cell in Birmingham some 50+ years ago now… “There was a time when the church was powerful. It was during that period that the early Christians rejoiced when they were deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed.” A great statement, reaching for a clear answer. Where was the power of the early church centered and for what could each member rejoice? Was the joy that could be counted, as all, an ambiguous or political joy from God deemed worthy for suffering? King continues with his thought…“In those days the church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was the thermostat that transformed the mores of society.”
Yet over 2000 years removed from the context of the early church and the gatherers of which he alludes, King laments, “Things are different now. The contemporary church is so often a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound.” But, what is the certain sound? It could be argued that the thermostat has been replaced, and the numbers on the dial have been substituted for something much less desirable. In fact, some of the more popular manufacturers of the thermostat today are new and foreign. Foreign at least to the good news revealed to the early church. This new thermostat is persuaded to a wrong connection, and the warmth of its source is non-existent, as if different.
If there were a “short term” prophet for the cycle of depravity in government, could it be that we have heard it echoed from Alabama, and if not, King’s message would surely resonate in the culture of today, as it has in many governments formed along the road of history. The accusation for being an “ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound” rings loudly and distinctly in the realm of what is clearly “the gospel”, yet now it becomes muted in a unique fashion through “another manufactured gospel”. “Black and White” congregations alike are duped into considering a false dichotomy. As if the story is written in black and white ink alone. Yet inside the borders of these two colors are all the stories, all the nationalities and ethnicities that live and exist under governments. And these same governments are those that are judged by a higher gospel, different than the ones being manufactured today, in so many places. To craft “another gospel” in the midst of this humanity, is to unleash cruelty on all. Let me explain the cruel reality in several parts.
A New Gospel Under Development
We live in a world of takers. But God has always and uniquely changed that dynamic by demonstrating the obedience of giving. And has demonstrated that “unique action” in giving of Himself through the person of Jesus Christ (God), at the right time, and substantively given in a peculiar people throughout history and into eternity. This unique action “in giving” is intrinsically tied to the Kingdom of God. Not to be confused with any other Kingdom. So, “giving”, a known strength in the Kingdom of God, is but a fleeting foreign objective to the newly manufactured gospel; a shiny social objective, far short on any substance in the real Kingdom of God. Social constructs are easily manufactured to cast the original gospel into a different light. A more popular gospel is deemed worthy to replace the original in the tones of democracy, wherever in the world it may appear. Another gospel closely aligned to the original, yet abhorrently siding with the system of takers. How is the church to respond?
Feeding and caring for this new gospel is the aim of “waterless clouds”. And any church that will receive the message of this new gospel, receives the teaching at its own peril. An assumptive leader of the black community by his own admission, Barack Obama, while nearing his mid forties articulates his faith… “I’m a big believer in tolerance. I think that religion at it’s best comes with a big dose of doubt. I’m suspicious of too much certainly in the pursuit of understanding just because I think that people are limited in their understanding”. Yet the church knows something quite different. “Big doses of doubt” are not the elements of faith, even if people are limited in their understanding. Obama goes on to form his religious ethic, “I think that, particularly as somebody who’s now in the public realm and is a student of what brings people together and what drives them apart, there’s an enormous amount of damage done around the world in the name of religion and certainty.”
- Jesus Christ – (through Joel, Luke, and Paul) “WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED.”
- Barak Obama – “there’s an enormous amount of damage done around the world in the name of religion and certainty.”
Barak Obama further represents another gospel, in this way, and within the same breath…. “I find it hard to believe that my God would consign four-fifths of the world to hell. I can’t imagine that my God would allow some little Hindu kid in India who never interacts with the Christian faith to somehow burn for all eternity. That’s just not part of my religious makeup.” So, what is his religious makeup? He clearly is proclaiming some new gospel message, foreign to the gospel of the bible. It is most assuredly another gospel, not associated to the blood of Jesus Christ. Rest assured, the gospel of the Kingdom of God is rooted in the blood of Christ; a propitiation for sin. A sin that is worthy of Hell for any man or woman that is not covered by the blood. So is there another blood? The essence of the true gospel is a certainty that the blood of Jesus is not Hell bound. It is the power (dunamis) inherent in the gospel of the Kingdom and the blood that is effective and spills is from Jesus. It is in the true gospel construct where we find the essence of “giving”, not taking…a measurable difference.
- Jesus Christ – (through John) “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.”….”If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.”
- Barak Obama – “I can’t imagine that my God would allow some little Hindu kid in India who never interacts with the Christian faith to somehow burn for all eternity. That’s just not part of my religious makeup.”
Duped by Rhetoric and Metaphors
How has the church been duped by this rhetoric? Obama continues… “Obviously as an African American politician rooted in the African American community, I spend a lot of time in the black church. I have no qualms in those settings in participating fully in those services and celebrating my God in that wonderful community that is the black church.”
This is a poor commentary, and a broad brush, on any group whether white or black (or any other ethnicity)! So why would this man feel comfortable? That is easy to answer. When another gospel is accepted and has replaced the gospel of God,…. there is a place of comfort, a place of ease, a place of counterfeit, an easy target for “social”, and “political” platforms that mitigate against the true Gospel. Counterfeit power! Not the power of the gospel, mind you, but another power to persuade men and woman to a cause and effect. It is quite another gospel, with a more sinister and different result that is foreign to the fruit of the Spirit.
Is this the same message of the black church that preaches the gospel of the Kingdom of God? Not if the church you attend believes in the gospel of God, it isn’t. Here’s the antithesis of the true gospel… “But I also try to be (pauses Obama) . . . Rarely in those settings do people come up to me and say, what are your beliefs. They are going to presume, and rightly so. Although they may presume a set of doctrines that I subscribe to that I don’t necessarily subscribe to. But I don’t think that’s unique to me. I think that each of us when we walk into our church or mosque or synagogue are interpreting that experience in different ways, are reading scriptures in different ways and are arriving at our own understanding at different ways and in different phases. I don’t know a healthy congregation or an effective minister who doesn’t recognize that. If all it took was someone proclaiming I believe Jesus Christ and that he died for my sins, and that was all there was to it, people wouldn’t have to keep coming to church, would they.”
- Jesus Christ – (To those in the Corinthian church through Paul) “But I am afraid that, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ. For if one comes and preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted, you bear this”
- Barak Obama – “I think that each of us when we walk into our church or mosque or synagogue are interpreting that experience in different ways, are reading scriptures in different ways and are arriving at our own understanding at different ways and in different phases. I don’t know a healthy congregation or an effective minister who doesn’t recognize that. If all it took was someone proclaiming I believe Jesus Christ and that he died for my sins, and that was all there was to it, people wouldn’t have to keep coming to church, would they.”
Black and White Churches Beware
This “new gospel” might be appealing, empathetic, create action at the public square, and ascend as seemingly popular today; but it is amazingly foreign to the church that follows Jesus Christ. A nugget of this “new gospel” thinking is rooted in this belief….“arriving at our own understanding at different ways and in different phases”. This teacher is speaking for all religions mind you, not just the church of uncertainty that makes up his religious experience. There are black Pastors that know the gospel of the Kingdom of God, that stand along side preachers of the true gospel everyday, and cringe at this “new gospel” fallacious religious experience. And rightfully so, because they are found participating and preaching a gospel that is foreign to the precepts of another gospel…. while exposing, not coddling the waterless clouds. Oh for more cringing preachers; willing to lead the church that has been purchased by the blood of Jesus!
- Jesus Christ – (through Jude) “For certain persons have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ…..These are the men who are hidden reefs in your love feasts when they feast with you without fear, caring for themselves; clouds without water, carried along by winds; autumn trees without fruit, doubly dead, uprooted; wild waves of the sea, casting up their own shame like foam; wandering stars, for whom the black darkness has been reserved forever……These are the ones who cause divisions, worldly-minded, devoid of the Spirit. But you, beloved, building yourselves up on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting anxiously for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to eternal life. And have mercy on some, who are doubting; save others, snatching them out of the fire; and on some have mercy with fear, hating even the garment polluted by the flesh.”
Will You Heed the Warning?
- Is it important to our communities to articulate the gospel of God?
- Have citizens of the Kingdom of God in heaven and living in the earth exposed the “Waterless Clouds”?
- Is the Church important enough to follow the true Gospel?
- Who would you allow to speak and persuade in your Church as representing the Kingdom of God purchased by the blood of Jesus Christ?
Blessings,
Chris
……………………………………..
Next,
Black and White Congregations: Duped by Another Gospel: Part II
-More Waterless Clouds
-Social Justice, Government, and the Gospel of God
-How the Church Worldwide Shuns “Another Gospel”
-Solutions: The Excellent Power of the Gospel in Urban Communities
Bibliography:
- Martin Luther King Letter: Birmingham Jail 1963, University of Pennsylvania, http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html
- Obama Interview: transcript at, http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thedudeabides/obama-on-faith-the-exclusive-interview/#ixzz3LA93r7vx
- All Biblical Texts: NASB
Chris,
Just hurriedly read your article. Will give it a more critical reading later. Quick reaction: 1. President Obama is no more a spokesman for the Black Church as Jimmy Carter is for the White Church or Southern Baptists for that matter. As you know Bill Clinton and Al Gore held or may still hold membership in White SBC churches but they certainly don’t reflect the mainstream belief systems of Southern Baptist or evangelicals. Neither does President Obama reflect anything closely resembling the mainstream belief systems of the Black evangelical church community. Actually, it is grossly unfair to even postulate or represent him as reflecting, echoing, or in anywise representing the belief system of the Black Church. I could write a similar post substituting the names Clinton, Gore, or W. Bush who came out with beliefs reflecting universalism and a non-inerrant view of Scripture. So what? I thought that you were going to ask about the theology of James Cone or Jeremiah Wright. Those would be fair questions. But to even prop up President Obama as some kind of theological spokeperson for the Black Church is really beneath the pale. Tony Evans, Jerry Young(newly elected President of the NBC) T D Jakes, Fred Luter, or even a Thabiti Anywibwile(sp) reflects the beliefs system of the Black Church much more-so than President Obama. Please interact with the belief systems of the Black Church using someone who is highly vested there. Certainly, not, President Obama.
Dwight, thanks for the quick read and feedback. Obama does not represent the church at all, …and to your point many other politicians as well, whether black, white, or other…. that is the point of the article, and the same point was made by Jude. It is a good beginning point to begin to see how the church is easily duped. My prayer is that churches not be duped by rhetoric, and that form of another gospel.
To your point about other “waterless clouds”, I get to those in Part II.
” President Obama is no more a spokesman for the Black Church as Jimmy Carter is for the White Church or Southern Baptists for that matter. As you know Bill Clinton and Al Gore held or may still hold membership in White SBC churches but they certainly don’t reflect the mainstream belief systems of Southern Baptist or evangelicals.”
But Carter DID get elected on an “evangelical” vote. 1976 is the year that term was even introduced and it was in conjunction with Carter and his voting block. Newsweek called 1976 the “Year of the Evangelical”.
Of course, it all went South with Carter who was a micromanager and ineffective. But a big part of his voting block liked that he was an evangelical democrat Baptist SS teacher—in comparison to Nixon/Ford. It did not hurt that his competition was Ted Kennedy and then Ford.
But the evangelical voting block was born and identified with Carter, initially, and ironically seen as “mainstream” thinking at the time. His economic policies are what caused more evangelicals vote Republican the next time. But it was Carter who introduced us to the idea of an Evangelical President.
The landscape has changed since then but and has now changed even more. Party lines are becoming more and more blurred and no one knows what “evangelical” means anymore as it seems to mean anything.
And don’t scoff at Clinton not being somewhat “mainstream” in the evangelical community. In both elections (3-way!) he picked up about 1/3 of the evangelical voting block. A crucial difference for him.
Wow! When you announced in a comment stream that you were going to be writing a series I told you I was looking forward to it – to be honest I was getting a little impatient. 😉 – but boy was it worth the wait! Great article.
I write sloooowwllyyyy,… I can’t compete with Bart and Dave, those guys are amazing!
Two quick thoughts:
1. Tone down the bold!
2. It strikes me as a tad ironic that you open with a quote from Dr. King and use that as a prompt to decry liberal theology in the church.
Chris, you’re an apostate. You don’t care about theology at all, liberal or conservative. You commenting about theology is the definition of ironic.
I have no idea why Chris continues to comment here, Nate, but comments like that are really not helpful to anyone.
…Because the moderator allows him to?
The problems I have with this post are numerous. But in a nutshell it seems to be exactly what Bill Mac has said. I also see it as coming from a point of view that is in full denial of the obvious race problem we have in the SBC churches.
The facts from a Black Christian’s perspective are wrong. As if they were just made up off the top of the author’s head without actually fact checking. The last two posts have saddened me as it shows what I have thought all along. The race divide is deep in the SBC and it is being denied. I think some people need to get out in the social atmosphere a little more and quit hiding behind Christianity or in this case religion because I do not see this post as Christianity according to what I read in scripture. I would argue Christ would certainly not take this approach but would defend those of color who are being oppressed by churches.
“The facts from a Black Christian’s perspective are wrong.”
Which ones are you speaking to Debbie?
“The race divide is deep in the SBC and it is being denied.”
Fred Luter?
Yes that is a good point Lydia, Fred Luter was a good and historic move. I just hope we can continue considering how many positions there are in the SBC.
Consider it is almost 2015, and we just now elected a black President of the United States and a black President of the SBC, both historic. It is too slow. Way too slow.
“I would argue Christ would certainly not take this approach but would defend those of color who are being oppressed by churches.”
Yikes. This sounds eerily similar to what I heard from Jeremiah Wright.
Lydia: If it would be something Jeremiah Wright would say, then we would agree.
I point you to scripture itself. Jesus spoke, ate with, and taught those who were thought of as outcasts and not good enough to walk across the street for. The woman at the well, Mary Magdalene, Zacchaeus, even the thief on the cross who Christ told would see Him in paradise. That is just to name a few. Look at who Christ healed. Who he had as his disciples. The women Christ included in his ministry, the Ethiopian Prince. I could go on and on.
Debbie, I frankly don’t think you have any idea what is going on in the SBC. There are problems, yes, and they need to be addressed.
But when is the last time you attended an SBC annual meeting? A state convention? A national conference? When is the last time you did anything but sit at your computer and lodge charges against the SBC.
Dwight knows what he is talking about – he lives it.
But I think that if you want your accusations to have any validity and force, you need some level of involvement. You make wild charges as if you are in the know and I just don’t think you are.
Dave
In reading this I think you can disregard my P.S. 🙂
Dave: I would charge that I know that you want to give me credit for. I am involved. At one time I was deeply involved. I am actually angry that you would write such drivel in your comment.
I also read a lot, talk to people etc. I stand by every word I have written. I have also seen discrimination up close and personal. I could charge that you need to get out in the real world a little more. I think I have hinted at that, but have never come out and said it. I am angry and am voicing that anger, that is something I have not denied. We have more than a problem that needs to be addressed. I am Southern Baptist and do have a legitimate right to speak out. You may not agree or like what I have to say, but if I had the space and time could give proofs and examples of all I have said.
Frankly, I’m tired of the talk and would just like to see more diversity in the SBC. It is happening slowly, but too slow for my taste. Some of the comments that have been made on these discussions have me shaking my head and is a pretty good indicator of what is happening and has been happening for a long time.
I am a woman and white, it doesn’t mean I don’t know what’s going on. I have seen what Dr. McKissic has lived and it sickens me. It has not happened to me, and I won’t lie in that I am rather relieved that it hasn’t as I don’t think I could take it. I believe I would be as bitter and angry as those in Ferguson or other places where anger has occurred. Being mistreated is not something I do well and it is not something I can sit back and allow someone else to go through.
You do not have to tell me about Dr. McKissic. I have met with Dr. McKissic a few times, and love him, respect him more than any other human being I know, male or female.
“But in a nutshell it seems to be exactly what Bill Mac has said.”
I don’t recall accusing churches of oppressing black people. I think the SBC could benefit from greater diversity of race and experience, but that’s not the same thing. Chris (I think) did not say Obama spoke for black churches, he said he spoke for the black community. I think we also need to try to read things in the most charitable light. Chris J. is about the most thoughtful and even handed person who interacts on these blogs, so if you read something of his and think it is miles off base, you’re probably reading it wrong. Accusing someone of making up facts off the top of their head is a polite way of saying they are lying. That is not a charge that should be thrown around lightly.
You know this hammering is getting old. It’s abusive and it’s ridiculous. Bill I did not imply that. Do you all just make things up as you go along? How much abuse do you intend to pile on because that is what it is. You have no idea what you are talking about.
BTW: I stand by everything I have said. I am more in the know than you all want to know. Believe me. I don’t think you could handle it. Wait, you would just deny that too.
Bill, you are absolutely right… words do matter. Obama claims to have spoken, and is continuing to speak for the black community with his gospel. The question at the end of Part I, is …does that matter? I think it does, because it mitigates against what the real gospel achieves in the urban neighborhoods.
Debbie, it is you who have been most abusive of others in your comments. You can’t come on lobbing insults and accusations and expect no one to respond.
I have a question for you. When is the last time you attended an SBC event not at your own church?
Debbie, who is piling on what or who? Not quite following your logic here?
Debbie, I didn’t think you were calling me a liar…. so everything is fine. The bigger issue though,…what Gospel are we defending? and is it important to defend it? Chris R., for instance, could care less if we defend it (he likes our little in-house tiffs). He references guys like Thomas J, that have cut and pasted scripture to fit a political and personal whim…. that probably fit his eye better than the Gospel of God. TJ just couldn’t take a God that was miraculous, or had certain attributes… sound familiar to other politicians? No one is defending TJ or Chris R. (we should love and be kind to them though), but we better defend the Gospel. Many are listening!
Do you realize how often I hear “If you only knew what I know” or “if you’ve been where I’ve been” or “get a little older and you’ll see what I’m talking about”? Everyone has some kind of hidden or special experience that makes them more qualified than everyone else to speak on these things. When I want the low down on the black experience in the SBC, I’ll ask Dwight, or someone else who’s actually black. Then I’ll get the true perspective, even if I don’t end up agreeing with them. You can see from elsewhere on this thread that Dwight and Chris are working through the misunderstanding that came out of the post. Dwight didn’t just throw blanket accusations. That’s how it’s done.
Good catch Chris! There are curious distinctions about King’s efforts, and his peers view of those some 50 years ago… and what is seen in the news today. Those distinctions, although not perfect, run in two different directions relative to the gospel. Either those efforts run toward the true gospel (and in some cases King’s did), or they begin to form another gospel. That is the heart of the short series.
Chris
Extremely good, my brother. The greatest testimony to man’s sin nature is how easily he perverts the true clear Gospel. We are told that in the latter days…..well you get the idea. More and more I find myself praying “come quickly Lord Jesus”!
DL, a great testimony to man’s sin nature is to demonstrate the true Gospel. Many churches (whether the members or black or white) do this day in, and day out…. and that is what needs to be encouraged.
We have found the actions that are associated to the true Gospel are impactful, and do make a difference in the urban community. It is that power that should be reinforced and expanded in those communities that are at risk of being influenced by the “waterless cloud” theology. It is those theologies that need to be exposed…. A good roadmap for this is Ephesians 5.
May the Lord find us faithful as He does return!
Chris
Well said my brother. Paul’s words, the gospel “is the power of God unto salvation must be the battle cry of the day. If God be for us who can be against us. Greater is He that is in us than he that is in the world. The fields are truly white unto harvest. So many promises. You are correct, if we are faithful to do our part, God has already done His.
May God grant us wisdom to preach the word that can change the hearts of man as no other force can do.
Tomorrow give us an opportunity to be faithful as we stand in the pulpit. May it be a day that will magnify and glorify Him.
Amen!!
Escapism is not the answer DL. It never has been. There is a reason Christ has not come yet. The last of those who are to be saved are still to be, but we have a lot of work (racism in the church) to do yet. Society is far ahead of us in this area. We could learn something from that, but yet we do not.
Debbie, this is an interesting statement you have posited. So, just how is the “society” ahead of the “church” with respect to racism? Maybe you are referring to an opinion about general collective bodies like the NBC, SBC, AME, NAACP? But there is no doubt that many churches are lightyears ahead of the “society” with respect to racism, and for good reason according to Amos.
Yes Tarheel escapism. Something not taught in scripture.
Debbie
Escapism?? Waiting and anticipating the return of our Lord is hardly escapism. We are told to watch and pray. I,m glad you know the reason why His return has not yet become reality. Jesus didn’t seem to know. Maybe we best heed His words and let that lay (lie?) with the Father who alone knows the day and hour and the conditions.
Escapism?? Have you been in the streets in the 60’s in peaceful demonstration along side a Black brother, I have. Have you ridden school buses during the days of busing for the purpose of integration, I have. Have you led a white church in a racially mixed neighbor to totally saturate the Black community with aggressive outreach (not bus ministry), I have. No No Debbie, don’t accuse me of escapism
Escapism is sitting at a desk writing on a blog telling others what they need to be doing.
P.S. Dave, Debbie obviously hit a nerve. If my response is not proper feel free to delete it.
DL: I would think that we would want Christ to delay his return(which in His Sovereignty) is the case, until many more come to Christ. I don’t want him to return until some of the wrongs on this earth are right, and we Christians take the lead in righting them and not society. When one says “Come Lord Jesus”, it is usually for the purpose of escaping this life, which is what those who commit suicide also wrongly think.
This life is a gift to us from God. We are put on this earth as Christians to give people the message of Christ which I believe is also the message of treating all people, of every race, creed and gender. Adults and children. With kindness and justice and grace.
Paul never prayed “Lord Jesus Come”, his prayer was that he would trade lives with the Jews if it meant they came to Christ, went to heaven, and he took their place in hell, but he knew he could not. I would think that would be our model. Or the prayer that Jesus prayed. Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven etc.
Debbie, I suggest that you read 1 Corinthians 16:22.
Debbie,
The wrongs on the earth are not going to be right until Jesus comes. By the way, the apostle John prayed for Christ to return with the words, “Even so come Lord Jesus.” There is absolutely nothing wrong with desiring or even praying for Christ to return.
Wow Debbie, Did you really just say that you “don’t want Christ to return” until you’re satisfied with something here On earth??
Do you really think the return of Christ is dependent on anything other than the definite desire and plan of God?
That’s not true John. In fact many wrongs have been made right in this lifetime. Not all wrongs will be made right, but many will and many have been. The Holy Spirit is on this earth as long as we are here. We go and the Holy Spirit is removed also. I do not want that.
Tarheel: Yes, you heard me correctly.
Tarheel: I do not want people going to hell, I do want the very subject we are discussing to be made right, among those without Christ as well as those who have Christ. I do not want any to suffer, although admittedly the wicked I would like to see suffer, but I am not necessarily saying that is Biblical or correct, as God does not want any to perish according to scripture right?
Do you really think the return of Christ is dependent on anything other than the definite desire and plan of God?
Of course not and I trust the desire and plan of God. Our desires are from God as we have the Holy Spirit in us.
Christ will return in due time according to the will of the Father. Not a moment before – not a moment after – in the meantime – we are to be sober and watchful. We are to long for it – there’s coming a time when God will reconcile all things to himself.
I do understand that some people speak of the second coming as escapism – though I don’t think that’s what he meant – that tends to be true for many a pretrib rapturist like DL. ( 🙂 )
The fact remains that Paul and john both longed for Christ to return. I would rather king Jesus to come and fix everything rather than to wait around for lowly man to attempt to fix the ills of the world.
Debbie
I do not intend to disrespect you at all. I apologize if I ever have or if I ever do. That is not my heart. However, there are so many things wrong with your logic and theology I hardly know where to begin.
Am I understanding you to say that it is better to stay in this world just to correct the evils than to see the Lord return who will by his own actions correct all evils. Better here that in heaven? My mother died of Alzheimer’s. I rejoiced when God relieved her suffering and took her home. The coming of Christ is what scripture tells us to pray for and anticipate. It is the culmination of all that is and will be.
My My how loosely you use the word “usually”. How do you know what is “usual”. Where are your facts.
Praying for the return of our Lord is NOT escapism. You are completely wrong on both accounts.
I have learned that sometime’s it is best to say “opps I was wrong” than to keep digging the hole deeper. This is a good time for you to do that.
Debbie
Do the math. At the rte people are being saved as compared to the birthrate. Arithematic says that every day the Lord terries the more people that will spend eternity in hell.
Now, let’s both be honest. We are playing debate games with each other. Jesus will return when God’s perfect timing degrees it..end of discussion.
TARHEEL…I am not responsible for what the Bible teaches concerning the Rapture, I just interpret it………correctly. 🙂
We are to love Jesus and long for his appearing. The lack of a desire for glory and to see glory come to earth is likely an indication of a heart more focused on earthly things than heavenly.
The word says that we cannot both love God and the world. I spend too much time trying to prove him wrong.
DL: I have never felt disrespected by you but thank you for that comment.
However, there are so many things wrong with your logic and theology I hardly know where to begin.
I believe my theology is closer to what scripture actually says with scripture interpreting scripture or I wouldn’t so firmly not be moved, believe it. I know it’s probably something most have not heard in the Fundamentalist and Baptist teaching which is unfortunate as I see many myths developing from both ministries. I have studied scripture for many years and this is my theology and the scripture behind it.
I also feel the same way concerning your theology which does affect how we live, as you do mine. Maybe more so.
Bawahahahaha!
“TARHEEL…I am not responsible for what the Bible teaches concerning the Rapture, I just interpret it………correctly. 🙂 ”
I didn’t think that jovial jab would escape you – you see what I just did there – escape – har har har
Wow Dale. Talk about abuse of scripture and misinterpretation aka false threat to someone who disagrees with you. You win the abuse of scripture prize. It doesn’t matter as the threats are not harmful to me as I am fine with God, and pretty tough broad, but I think you should examine why you see the need to use scripture as a weapon Dale. One problem in our churches today is that you are not the only one. I believe it to be sin Dale.
Tarheel
Well done 🙂
Debbie
Well studied scripture resulting in strongly held beliefs yields denominations. I suppose that is the natural result of the mind seeking truth.
BTW much of my training/study is from a non SB tradition, tho I do hold to the fundamentals as delineated by the BFM.
Methinks the lady doth protest too much, but then I’m pretty sure that you calling me a sinner isn’t going to keep me awake tonight. I also don’t shy away from “tough broads.” I have plenty to whom I minister on a regular basis. It’s amazing to me how you can gather so much information about me from one simple sentence.
I was simply responding to your statement that Paul never prayed for the Lord to come back. He did, as did the apostle John. So do I, though I don’t put myself in the same category as the apostles (unlike Apostle Ed Stetzer).
Since you don’t know me, I dare say that you’re hardly qualified to pass judgment on me. But your own heart is pretty well laid bare for the public in what you’ve said here.
Dale: You did not misread me.
Debbie–“You did not misread me.” I really don’t have a clue what that means.
I’m not really sure why you try to go for the throat, but if it makes you feel better about yourself, go right ahead. My original statement was simply a reference to the word “maranatha”–“O Lord, come!” I don’t know what’s so abusive about that, but I’m willing to hear you out. Feel free to enlighten me.
The word says that we cannot both love God and the world.
Dave: Your interpretation of this passage would fly in the face of Christ’s prayer of letting the cup pass him, but not my will, but thine be done. That would be my prayer concerning Christ’s return. Which I do believe will happen just not in the same way you believe it.
Your interpretation would go against other scripture(love thy neighbor, do good, all good and perfect gifts come from above etc.)
We have the Holy Spirit in us as Christians, God himself is in us, the same God who loves the world and sent Christ to die for it, and who wishes none to perish. My view is in line with God and scripture.
One must read the whole passage in order to get a proper interpretation which is as follows:
15Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world.…
This world is our home. It is not our permanent home, but it is our home. It is a gift from God, not a prison sentence. Humanity and wanting others to come to Christ is who we are. It is not a sin, not going against scripture to want Christ to delay his return so that more will come to His kingdom and more to enjoy God’s blessings.
Debbie
Have you never heard:
This world is not my home, I’m just passing through
My treasures are laid up, somewhere beyond the blue.
The angels beckon me, from heaven’s open door
And I can’t feel at home in this world anymore.
Sorry Debbie, could not resist 🙂
Debbie
Seriously, how do you understand “we are in this world but not of this world”.
DL: It is a song using bad theology.
DL: To answer your second question, I understand it as we are in this world but we are not ruled by sin.
Debbie
What do you do with Revelation 2:20. Jesus says “I come quickly” John’s (i.e. the believer’s) response is “So be it do come quickly”
Chris Roberts seems to be kind of sneaky or is he around to mix it up with someone whose skepticism is incipient and weak but might be cultivated? In some ways he is kind of funny, hanging around a bunch of preachers, like a democrat at a Republican Fund Raiser or vice versa. Or could it be that he has an unstated suspicion that he might have been a bit hasty in his departure. After all, as a former Atheist, I find his skepticism wanting in many respects, but, then I have a few years on him.
Tell us again how you used to be an atheist!
Not too long ago, Chris was a frequent commenter on another blog outlining the doctrinal problems with the Trad statement.
I have learned from that. Doctrine over relationship is a problem.
False prophets have been known to argue from any and all streams of theological thought.
I’m sure you know that satan’s antichrist vessels of deception, trickery, and fraud come in various forms.
Please don’t connect Chris’ fraudulent antics with the theology he once feigned.
Lydia Chris only knew doctrine from a purlely intellectual standpoint. I’ve known other unbelievers who can cite and even argue facts of religion. But that was done apart from a relationship from God. So it surely was doctrine over relationship.
You guys forever speak of the Gospel, Jesus Christ, yet when someone like Chris Roberts comes along, You resort to this kind of behavior. There is a word for this but I’ll not use it.
Debbie: Chris seems to be playing a game with us. He knows this is a get together of Bible believing ministers trying to hash out an understanding of a Book inspired by Omniscience – no easy matter to say the least. And Chris I could probably recite the Christian atrocities better than you. After all, I spent six years doing research in Church History, beginning with the Inquisition’s attacks on the Waldensians and the Albigensians and expanding to cover the rest of church history, some 3000 5×8 notecards, not counting papers and notebooks, etc. Baptists are forever arguing about some issue. Back in the 1700s (and this is for both Debbie and Chris), they were having their usual wrangles about various matters, and some Episcopalian (though I think he was Anglican then) got very uptight about them quarreling all the time. A Baptist Historian in the past 10 ten years delivered a lecture at some get together about the matter. He bought the Episcopalian’s argument (I think after several years) hook, line, and sinker. I pointed out that at that time the Baptists were evangelizing in quantity and quality, persuading General Baptists to become Particular Baptists, uniting Separate and Regular Baptists, securing religious liberty (Hey, Chris, I am sure you heard about Jefferson’s securing the Religious Liberty Statute of Virginia, but did you hear that it was the result of the Baptists insisting on the matter, when they along with the Presbyterians were offered the opportunity along with all other Protestants to become the State Church. And the Baptists had the vote, so when the Presbyterians wanted to go with the offer from Washington and Patrick Henry, the Baptists said no and the result was the statute. While Jefferson gets the credit for writing it, the Baptists get the credit for causing it to be written). How about that Chris? A Bunch of Baptists are the folks who helped secure religious liberty for the state of Virginia and with Leland and Madison for the New Nation. They even set the example that everyone else wanted to imitate by putting religious liberty into precept and practice. Debbie, I ain’t mad at Chris, I just want him to really join the discussion and stop taking atheistic pot shots at us. And if you think I am being a little bit much, consider Paul and Barnabas over John Mark becoming enraged. The early believers were like us to day, just humans and sinners being saved by grace. That is why we had the awful mess of slavery, but even the Blacks played a part in the process, owning slaves to – here and in Africa. In fact, in the Sudan they still have slavery as you all ought to know.
There is a leaven of the Gospel at work ever since the time of our Lord, a leaven working to raise aspirations and ideals, producing moral transformations, sometimes on the individual level, sometimes on a national level.
O Chris, of course, I am familiar with Jefferson’s version of the Bible, one that stresses the moral and ethical practices of the Bible. And, by the way, I had one of his descendants from the Sally Hemmings family in one of my history classes at South Carolina State College. I also stayed in a hospital room a few years back with a White descendant from the Black side of the family.
My brother-in-law just revealed a fact about his past that I did not know, namely, his participation in the effort at integration and the end of racism. It is hard to keep up with everything a family member is doing. You all should know that every time you see the first wave going ashore at Omaha Beach, D.L.’s father is in that wave, and I am proud to have his name on my ordination papers as a member of the ordaining council.
I am happy to say also that my grandfather, great grandfather, and great great grandmother, were eligible for land in the Indian territory and that I worked in the cotton fields with some descendants of Sitting Bull. Life is really interesting or so it seems to me as a believer. In my Atheistic days, life seemed like it was gray and dull, with no future. Now, I think it is possible and likely that we shall go to the stars and settle quadrillions of planets out there in the next 900,000 years (in fact, the late head of the Skunk Works of Lockheed, developer of the Stealth Fighters, said that if E.T. needed a ride home, we could accommodate him). My feeling about the Second Coming issue is that what we neglect is the Present Coming assertions of our Lord in Jn.14:3,18,28, where the rendering, “I will come,” does not accurately reflect the tense of the verb erchomai, present indicative middle, “I am coming to you.” Just think of it. Our Lord has been coming to us for 2000 years, and He is right now in the process of coming to us. If we had more knowledge of Jonathan Edwards’ Humble Attempt as well as the First and Second Great Awakenings and the coming down of the Holy Spirit upon the people in convicting and converting power, we might well be praying differently than we do. It is the expectation of such help that leads me to think that God has Chris hanging around us, because He intends to save him. Smile Chris.
Chris R
I don’t think you want to get into a lobbing contest as it relates to history with DR. JW. He is a walking computer program of historical knowledge.
“Chris seems to be playing a game with us…”
Yes.
Why, Chris, the answer is simple, namely, being a skeptical fool only then I would not have added the last term. Now tell us just when you first begun to doubt and why? By the way, my computer repair man is a descendant of Tom Paine. Your remember him, and how Washington, Jefferson, and the others parted company with him over the issue of subjecting the Bible to an enervating skepticism. Have you read David Hume? And yes, I have read or listen to on tv, Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris, the fellow at Princeton whose name escapes me for the moment, plus a plethora of others. Ever doubt your doubts? Ever want to destroy everyone, while denying the same? Ever read Jean Paul Sartre? Ever seen what his students did in Cambodia or Marx’s followers did in Russia and Red China and elsewhere?
We could play “who’s done the greater atrocities” all day long and both sides would rack up a pretty high score while accomplishing nothing in determining which side actually holds to the truth.
As for who I’ve read, I’ve read none of those. My atheism is my own.
As for Jefferson parting company with someone due to skepticism, you are familiar with the Jefferson Bible, right?
Chris, I appreciate you commenting here and think you have some valid points.
This article is a bit of a mess, primarily by involving Obama and his statements. It’s difficult not to read it as a counterproductive rant against the president and by extension Black churches and ministers. It is not necessary to take this route.
A gracious reading of Chris’ article would be that he has no such intentions but rather lacks perspective.
William,
Thanks for putting into a few words what I’ve been trying to formulate every since I read this post. I totally agree with your assessment here. The only point that I get out of the post is to deliver a not so veiled assault on the Black Church. My regret is that he chose President Obama to be the representative/spoke person for the Black Church. I find this grossly unfair & so misleading ’till I have a very difficult time interacting with what’s said there. His premise is flawed and faulty from the floor. Maybe it will get better as he construct the walls. But if the foundation is flawed…..I don’t have much hope.
Initially Chris” question was as I recall was my use of the term that Jesus used “The gospel of the kingdom” in any way related to President Obama’s theology? I didn’t think so, but, not being familiar enough with Obama’s theology to comment….I said to Chris, if you are specific in telling me what Obama’s theology is I will be specific in telling you whether or not Jesus & my use of the term in any manner relate to Obama’s theology. Now that he has given the specifics of Obama’s theology, the answer is NO!!! In no wise, way, shape, form, or fashion does Obama’s theology as presented by Chris’ post related to Jesus’ or my use of the term “The gospel of the kingdom.”
Now we are getting somewhere Dwight…. “In no wise, way, shape, form, or fashion does Obama’s theology as presented by Chris’ post related to Jesus’ or my use of the term “The gospel of the kingdom.”
And that should be the answer for any preacher of the gospel. And to think that Obama’s form of “justice and righteousness” is what the church is formed from should be examined.
We, the church (black, white, brown, etc.) must expose and have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness; according to Christ. A leader of a nation that declares his allegiance to Christ and forms “another gospel” formed around 30 years of his religious makeup is not a trivial matter.
If we are in the process of defining the Gospel of the Kingdom, I am with you brother, I’m all in. Any church is naive to believe that “justice and righteousness” will come from “another gospel”.
The real question is why so many members of the church get upset when we begin to discuss the real gospel! The gospel is not on trial here, it has and is accomplishing the substance of the Kingdom of God. It is concise, clear, and powerful!
Chris,
I’m beginning to understand you better. I’m willing to lovingly and patiently walk with you through this to see where you are going with it. I assure you that not one of the nine major Black “evangelical” denominations would affirm Obama’s theology as it has been presented in your post. I can’t think of any Black preacher worth his salt who would sign off on Obama’s theology as presented here. William is right though…by extension you are draping Obama’s theology around the neck of the Black Church. There is simply no basis in fact whereby you should do that. As a matter of fact in your Obama quotes in your post he indicates that those with whom he worship assume a set of facts about his beliefs that he does not hold to. That is an admission by Obama that the Black Church does not share his belief system. I wish that you would make the distinction clear.
Dwight, agreed. And that distinction will be made, whether it is a “black”, or “white” church (I hate the color thing). Not sure why we have appended a new name on the church in the first place, as if God has forced segregation onto the Lambs book of Life.
Another gospel, that is delivered by Obama, is mitigating against the good work of those associations you mention, ..and that is not trivial my friend. His …is a powerful platform that mixes another righteousness and another justice.
I like the idea of exposing the enemy, not fighting with my friends about my Lord’s Gospel.
Dwight, you say “I find this grossly unfair & so misleading ’till I have a very difficult time interacting with what’s said there.”
What is grossly unfair and so misleading about pointing to a national leader, that has tremendous influence, and an inclining ear of over half the population of the United States (of all colors), and speaks frequently about Christ and the Kingdom of God, and yet holds to “another gospel”? We are told by our leader of the Kingdom to expose that type of rhetoric. I’ve heard you preach that from your pulpit,…. what is unfair now? Obama doesn’t represent your church or its portrayal of Gospel! I know that for a fact from listening to your sermons.
Its grossly unfair to the church (of all colors of skin) to not make that clear. In fact, it is cruel. Why is the gospel is veiled!
This article only used an easy and clear cut example of a person that espouses “another gospel”. I could not think of a more relevant or cogent person that effects a greater population. The post is not about Barak, it is about the Gospel. The post references his gospel message and testimony …since that message is actively attacking the Gospel of the Kingdom. That message and testimony is not owned exclusively by Barak, and it is alive and well in the United States.
Chris,
When it comes to theology,no one takes Obama seriously in the Black church. His theological views are not even discussed. I only hear White evangelicals discussing or even interested in Obama’s theology. Again, his theology generates zero or as close to zero as u can get to discussion in my circles. Just as I believe that Carter, Clinton. Bush & Gore have zero or near zero impact on influencing theology on the White Church, so it is with Obama on the Black Church. So, if your thought process is that his theology needs to be addressed or refuted because of it’s enormous influence, that simply is not the case. His health care plan(Obama Care) is extremely popular in the Black Church. Although he couched it in moral language, they like the program because of it’s availability. The Black Church strongly disagrees with his same-sex marriage views & his logic/theology behind it. They allow his views on other issues override his marriage views. Actually, they view him and most Democrats as “Pro-Life”….pro their lives. And they view Republicans as anti-their lives…rightly or wrongly. And that explains their vote. The mindset of J D Hall on the Ferguson issue, if he represents most Repulican viewpoints, that explain why they vote for Democrats.
Dwight, I don’t disagree with some of what you have stated,… yet I am vigilant,… because the urban communities we work in are very much influenced by what Obama’s mooring to “black theology” articulates. I’m not accusing you or your church, or the churches you mentioned earlier, of following “black theology”. Lord, I am thankful that any congregation would be sparred that horrific blight on the Gospel of God.
But, we don’t ignore the blight, we expose it as we are instructed to do. Some of the side effects of exposing that horrific philosophy is its effect on legislation.
The healthcare law, as an example, was the biggest increase in wealth for insurance companies in the history of the planet. This is simply a fact,…as you go and look at the lobbying 2 years previous to the writing of the bill,…Healthcare lobbying was at its highest peak in the history of this country. That is bad news for the black community because at the end of the day,..those communities will have less equity, and less control to have equity than ever before. Obama knows this, but demonstrates he cares little for the equity of the black families that need it most in order to contribute with dignity in the society.
The Gospel of God leads to better decisions. Giving, not taking. That will be expressed clearly in Part II.
My regret is that he chose President Obama to be the representative/spoke person for the Black Church. I find this grossly unfair & so misleading ’till I have a very difficult time interacting with what’s said there. His premise is flawed and faulty from the floor.”
Obama’s first campaign saw the biggest get out the vote endeavor through black churches. to ignore the political side of the typical black church in a black community in America is simply putting ones head in the sand. Obama was hailed as a sort of messiah figure in that world during the first campaign.
I would guess there are black churches that did not go this route. But most did.
Many of us grew up seeing black leaders like Jesse Jackson speak mainly in black churches on political issues.. black churches have been political players for many years.
But I do think it finally starting to change a bit.
Lydia,
You missed my point. Obama has not, is not, nor ever will be a representative or spokesperson from or to the Black Church on theological issues. Chris’ post addresses Obama’s theology primarily, not his politics. I maintain that by conflating Obama’s theology with the theology of the Black Church it is a false, unfair, and unfounded association, with absolutely no basis in fact(s).
Dwight,
This is a very uncomfortable
Conversation that could go pear shaped fast. So I will say this: like many evangelicals, black community churches do not necessarily separate theology and politics.
Actually William, it is not about any church color. The “perspective” will not seem so messy in Part II. This is a simple exercise of recognizing the Gospel of God, who is preaching it,…and who is not.
There are those of us that have been working for 20-30 years in “racial tense” areas, where children are at risk everyday, where economics do play a part, where families (black, brown, and white) need to see the real Gospel engaged. That is what we are doing….this remedy is not a theory for us. The other gospel mitigates against us daily in those neighborhoods. To remain vigilant to the true Gospel is critical. Without it, those neighborhoods return to the ways and means of “another gospel”.
“black community churches do not necessarily seperate theology & politics”
Lydia,
Where’d that come from? In some instances theology & politics intersect…like on abortion & gay marriage. In those instances you are correct. But as a general rule, what you said simply is not true. Black churches do seperate theology from politics. You are allowing a few noted exceptions like Jesse, Al, & Obama to be indicative of all, and they are not. They are the exceptions to the rule, not the rule. As a matter of fact when Jesse finished preaching a theo-political statement in the NBC late night service one year, the next preacher up was E V Hill. The presiding preacher in presenting Dr. Hill said after Jesse was finished….”And now for some real preaching….Dr.E V Hill”. Everybody laughed, including Jesse. He was making the point that Jesse was the exception to the rule, not the rule. Unless you frequent Black Churches and a variety of Black churches often, I’m curious as to know how did u form this false opinion?
Dwight, I agree that theology and politics intersect at some points but America has no state church.
“Unless you frequent Black Churches and a variety of Black churches often, I’m curious as to know how did u form this false opinion”
Quoting incidents from black “leaders” is not the place to “form opinions”. And many black leaders started as pastors so that is the norm. The fact that Obama built his career as a community organizer with the help of black churches helped inform this opinion. And the church was the place civil rights movement started and rightly so!
Get into the trenches. Try spending a lot of time in public schools (and yes, most black students identify with a church in their community whether they go or not), spend time on college campi with black students, etc. Do schools, colleges, government programs ever target your church for recruitment on their services? It happens here in a big way.
Is EV Hill’s church integrated? I know little of the man, so I have no idea.
Jackson, Sharpton, Obama are not “notable exceptions”. An entire group of people have allowed them to be their spokespeople. Obviously they have large support. Smaller voices have broken through, I grant you that. I hope more do.
Again, I repeat for the sake of clarity. I do not do “groups”. I do individuals because I can only have relationships with individuals. I believe groupthink has done a lot of harm in the long run.
Chris, I’m glad you’re tackling this important topic. Look forward to the series.
Chris,
Obama spent 20 years listening to Marxist Liberation Theology from Jeremiah Wright. But I think Obama is more pragmatic than that or at least his handlers were. Church was business for him as a “community organizer”. We noted that– as he finally started ignoring Wright during his first campaign. It became an embarrassment as some were listening to Wright’s sermons on the internet and were appalled.
The only thing he has in common with the problem we are discussing is the fact he made a career off of perpetuating “group think” and now he is president. And he quickly abandoned “his group” not long after– in their minds. He had bigger plans. He is still a Marxist, though. And his socialist policies are making collectivists of us all.
I have a ton of admiration for those who break from the “group think” and venture into the larger arena. I have great admiration for guys like Ben Carson who worked hard to escape the group think. What I do not understand is why so many leaders do not see that as what “individuals” are capable of doing.
The sad fact is that whites often use blacks to feel more pious. A soft discrimination that has become institutionalized. I wish they would think more highly of people as individuals.
A good dose of critical thinking skills along with higher expectations on both sides learned early on would do more for this black/white problem than anything else. The laws are in place. AA is in place (for a long time in government entities). We have elected a black president twice and so on. I suggest we stop looking down on an entire “group” of people and look at “individuals”.
Booker T Washington lamented in his book about what “black” pastors were teaching people and perpetuating poverty of thinking.
Years back, I was part of an effort to bring black and white churches together for worship in a very large venue. (Sadly it was nothing but a media event and I am now ashamed)
But one thing struck me as the “talks” went on with planning was that the black church leaders were constantly talking about jobs. That is about all they talked about as in “You white folks need to provide more jobs for the blacks”. These were sharp guys/ gals in nice clothes who were very educated. To me, it seemed that a form of slavery in thinking still existed.
One of the functions of the Body of Christ is love and help “individuals”. When we deal with groups, we have to deal with “leaders” of those groups who have agendas to maintain their leadership. It becomes a Diotrephes type problem. Individual relationships reflecting Christ is the answer.
Oh my…. There is a lot of priceless insight in there Lydia. I’ll be touching on a lot of those characteristics as we move along. One of the main questions is how does someone, as Jude would say, and I’ll paraphrase; “walk casually into our love feasts and mingle for 20 years without any fear”. Maybe its not so bad to expose those love feast impostors, and possibly even the love feast theology that provides their cover!
And this is sad, but true, and must be confronted head-on everyday… or it will fester “The sad fact is that whites often use blacks to feel more pious. A soft discrimination that has become institutionalized.”
Good stuff,…thx Lydia!
Chris,
What impact did Carter, Clinton, Gore, & W. Bush have on their theology? Little to none!!! Why hold Obama to a different standard? And please realize that the Black Church that Obama attended to for 20 yrs is considered by all mainline & evangelical Blacks as out of the mainstream of Black Churches. When I first learned of this church ’bout 25-28 yrs ago, it was because they held to a liberal view of homosexuality. Ironically though, a Moody professor told me that he’s visited their several times & they held to and preached a clear view of the gospel, but, erred greatly on homosexuality. Sort of like the SBC did on slavery. Obama’s Church is affiliated with UCC, a historic White liberal denomination. It would be more appropriate to identify his church theologically and affinity/affiliate wise with the White Church…not the Black Church. To that extent your premise is false.
Dwight,… just using Obama as a leader that claims things… believe me, there are others that are not as significant in influence, as you can imagine. Again, you keep alluding to the Black church exclusively,….my brush is not of color, my brush goes across the influence of his gospel across, white, black, latino, and other groups. The Black and White Churches being duped gathers in all the colors…. as I eluded to in the post.
I’m with you on Obama as not influencing certain churches that are on guard and preaching the Gospel,…Obama has only been appointed for this time to deceive some. If you think he has zero impact on the black community, then, well,….I think you are wrong. He has significant influence.
I said that his theological views have zero to near zero influence on the Black Church. As it relates to the “Black Community”…it’s difficult for me to ascertain how much influence he has there on their theology. It may be major, it may be minimal. But, I don’t believe that his theological influence on the Black non-church Community is strong enough to create a concern. If the local Bible believing Black a Churches do their jobs & do them well…then Obama’s theological influence is really moot.
Gotta run for a bit…teaching on Spiritual Gifts tonight. I hope to return later on.
The message/theology, known as “black theology”, is significant, because it lines up with the “social gospel, social justice themes” (maybe not in Texas, but all up and down the Northeast corridor), and those themes mitigate against all in the urban colors in the urban communities. We have real life impact and examples… I can share those as we move along.
Meant to say that Carter, Clinton, Gore, and W. Bush had/have no impact on the theology of evangelicals. I also meant to make clear that Obama reflects the theology of the predominately White UCC denomination. They would have no objection to anything that he’s stated. He reflects the White liberal theology of UCC, not the theology of the historic orthodox Black Church bodies.
yep, we’ll explore the concepts of the UCC a bit as well. Political religiosity makes for interesting partners!
I’ve long thought that liberal politicians use “civil rights” in the same way that conservative politicians use abortion. Important to talk about a lot, and important to never actually bring to a resolution, because once it is resolved, boom, there’s goes a major plank out of their platform, and now their power is in jeopardy.
Chris,
Are you suggesting that the concept of “social justice” is not a scriptural concept? Are u suggesting that social justice and the gospel are mutually exclusive? Do you see social justice as part and parcel of the gospel? I have no clue & really don’t care what Obama’s theology is but I believe that “the gospel of the kingdom” includes abundant and eternal life. I also believe that the gospel of the kingdom as taught and modeled by Jesus includes the gospel to the poor and the oppressed(Luke 4: 16-21), which is inclusive of social justice. In the gospel of the kingdom the God of justification is the same God of justice. Do you believe that? These concepts are really unrelated to “liberation theology’l the “social gospel” or any ethnic gospel of any kind….the “gospel of the kingdom”is only related to the gospel of Jesus as spelled out in the Bible.
Dwight,…those are wonderful questions, and I want to address those in a systematic fashion in Part II of these short posts, as this is where churches (maybe not yours, but many) get duped. Social justice, and the question that Les has offered, is extremely important in the light of biblical righteousness and justice and how it impacts society.
“In the gospel of the kingdom the God of justification is the same God of justice. Do you believe that?” I absolutely believe these realities are from the same God, and are distinctive. How these doctrines concerning justice and justification are related to the church, is how the church engages them into the world. The platforms for social justice is what is defined by liberation, social /or some now call “black theology” (unfortunate name) differently than by the Gospel of God. The difference is worth knowing and teaching. Suffice me to agree at this point, that justice is obviously a core component of the Gospel of God.
“Justice is a core component of the gospel of God”
Chris, Totally agree!!!!
Chris & Les,
I don’t have a textbook definition to give you for “social justice.” I actually prefer the term “Kingdom Justice”. Kingdom/social justice for me embraces the biblical concepts of righteousness, mercy, compassion, equality, fairness, mutual respect, recompense for wrong doing, being held accountable for wrongdoing, the diversity reflected in the leadership at the church at Antioch(Acts 13: 1-3), and the proper response to the complaints of the Greek widows(Acts 6). Ministry to the poor, needy, and oppressed. In summary whatever the Bible means when it uses the term, justice.
Dwight and all,
Aren’t the poor, the needy, and the oppressed, for most or many of them, an unjust people who will face the justice of God unless they repent?
Answering ‘yes’ to that leads me to understand that Gospel justice speaks to their need of a Savior so that they can escape the condemnation justice demands from them.
And not >necessarily< to the role of any congregation or group of congregations [like the SBC] to seek to relieve the oppressed or poor from their oppressors or their lack due to the travails of this world.
That does not mean we shouldn't help them at all, but that our role is limited by both the social/government order they are in, and by our primary duty to the Gospel and its proclamation. Part of the Gospel proclamation includes loving our family in Christ in demonstrable ways so that the world may see *FIRST* our love for each other BEFORE we love the others in the world.
But many times, from what I have read of the "social Gospel" is that churches and groups have worked so hard to provide physical needs to people that they ignored to provide actual Gospel based spiritual needs. And from what I have read, this focus on the physical as opposed to the spiritual was by design.
So when I hear the words "social justice" and see it as being described as the duty of the church to change society by political means [even if one isn't ignoring the Gospel], I think that is way off base.
So when our religious leaders involve themselves in worldly political endeavors, I see it as not biblical.
Where in the Bible do I find how Jesus protested the Romans treatment of the Jews?
No Where!
Where in the New Testament do I find the Apostles or Elders writing against governmental oppression?
No Where!
And certainly there were a great number of poor and/or oppressed peoples in Jerusalem, Israel, Turkey, and the surrounding areas.
And how then do we aid those oppressed but by pointing them to the Lord and to the life beyond this one. And by especially seeking out the poor and oppressed to bring them the blessed hope that the Gospel carries to all who submit to the Lord.
Our goal should not to be to change society politically but spiritually by freeing people from their slavery to sin and death and enslaving them to the everlasting Lord and King.
We all deserve Justice, for we have rebelled against the Ruler of All, and the suffering we suffer in this world can never come close to what we deserve to suffer.
Social justice is NOT the role of the church.
We read from Luke:
6 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up. And as was his custom, he went to the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and he stood up to read. 17 And the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written,
18 “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he has anointed me
to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives
and recovering of sight to the blind,
to set at liberty those who are oppressed,
19 to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor.”
This passage tells us that our role to the poor and the captive, and the blind, and the oppressed, is to proclaim to them that Jesus' death sets them free from the sufferings of this world, that in trusting Him, they have true riches, true freedom, true sight, and true liberty.
This passage does NOT tell us that our role is to seek to alleviate their sufferings in a worldly way or to make their worldly existence easier or more palatable.
Does that mean we shouldn't seek to feed the hungry or clothe the needy? Of course not, but the poor [and the oppressed] we will always have with us, and their greatest need is not freedom from their earthly troubles but the hope of eternal life.
-mike
Mike, I think I see what you are driving at… but your question may need to be framed a bit differently since all mankind faces justice.
“Aren’t the poor, the needy, and the oppressed, for most or many of them, an unjust people who will face the justice of God unless they repent?”
According to the scriptures that is everyone (everyone is me and them)
So when you say……
“That does not mean we shouldn’t help them at all, but that our role is limited by both the social/government order they are in, and by our primary duty to the Gospel and its proclamation.”
As a Kingdom citizen (not limited by time and space) my understanding of the purpose of government becomes a little different, ….and is the reason the conversation we are having can be dichotomized on several fronts. Because what you have put forward is one of those dichotomies, and yet it is really unnecessary. But as we begin to understand where “all” government has been assigned, the Kingdom of God and the government resting on the Son, it then becomes our understanding to those relationships wherein we move with the power of the gospel and our role in the earth.
What worldly government conforms to, and forms as social justice, is not the substance or demonstration of the justice of the Kingdom of God. Christ living in us and through us begins to demonstrate the justice of the Kingdom of God, as it does not conform to this world.
The justice of God in His Kingdom far exceeds the social justice of any world formed government. Understanding that difference and how to put action to it, exposes false gospels, and has no requirement for unnecessary dichotomy.
Dwight, I’m watching (reading) with interest where these posts go and your questions and Chris’ answers.
One question I would like to know: When you ask, “Do you see social justice as part and parcel of the gospel?”
How are you defining social justice?
Thanks brother.
Chris & Les,
Two things:
1. I insist on the terminology the gospel of the kingdom because a. Jesus used that terminology b. The term “gospel of the kingdom” implies social or kingdom justice. Every kingdom has a justice system of some type. So it as well in the kingdom of God, there is a justice component to it.
2. The gospel of the kingdom as it relates to justice is all over the NT. Primarily the words of Jesus…all the red letters of the Bible would spell out what I mean by “the gospel of the kingdom.” The parable of the Good Samaritan, Jesus’ treatment of the woman at the well, Jesus’ treatment of the woman caught in the very act of adultery would be an example of Kingdom justice.
Dwight, I insist as well. And how I attempted to answer Mike runs down that same road.
“What worldly government conforms to, and forms as social justice, is not the substance or demonstration of the justice of the Kingdom of God. Christ living in us and through us begins to demonstrate the justice of the Kingdom of God, as it does not conform to this world.
The justice of God in His Kingdom far exceeds the social justice of any world formed government. Understanding that difference and how to put action to it, exposes false gospels, and has no requirement for unnecessary dichotomy.”
This is where the false gospels, like those spoken of and lived out daily by Obama (and other political and religious figures), confuse the weak in the churches and create less equity, participation, and dignity for those at risk in our society . As I get to other “waterless clouds”, that straddle the fence, and become takers not givers….keeping their minds on a “social justice”, while ignoring the better way of “kingdom justice” found in the Gospel of God. Those waterless clouds are systematic to deny “kingdom justice”, since their actions and directives are to purvey another gospel that leads to the formation of “a” social justice of taking; without evidence of healing, and without peace. The substance of “kingdom justice” brings healing and peace,.. it is about giving, not taking. It is easily seen in the fruit of the Spirit. It is what Jesus demonstrated.
Something I would like to ask: What is the difference between social justice, and justice?
Excellent question …..
The difference is origin and action. Faith without works is a dead faith. An origin, other than the Gospel of God, creates “takers” and not “givers”. “Giving” is the action of true justice.
If the “social justice” is not rooted in the fruit of the Spirit, and accompanied by the Gifts of the Spirit, it is foreign to the Kingdom of God. “social” is a poor term for qualifying the definition.
Chris,
Thus far, the more that you and I clarify our thoughts, the more that I think that we are reaching a consensus or near agreement.
I have a BA degree in Bible from OBU, a small SBC affiliated college by virtue of their state convention relationship to Arkansas Baptist State Convention. I have 44 hrs toward an MDiv from SWBTS. I’m often called “Dr” but, I only have an honorary doctorate from a small Black Baptist College in Arkansas named Arkansas Baptist College. I have an insatiable appetite for reading. I said all of that to say, I find it amazing that a phrase used by Jesus at the outset the close and throughout His ministry…”the gospel of the kingdom.” & “the kingdom of God.” …gets only peripheral treatment in colleges, seminaries, and SBC literature. Here the two of us are trying to understand & define a term that should be a commonly used and understood term among evangelicals & SBC persons. Our lack of understanding, usage, and application of this term, I believe is at the core of the racial & civil unrest in our country. I appreciate your labor to define this term. Of the many wonderful & significant topics hosted at Voices, this one that you are now leading, would have to rank near the top, in my humble opinion, in terms of weightiness. Thanks Dave for your labor to provide this forum. Many if us(including me) would have no outlet to express ourselves in SBC life without the Voices platform. To that extent, Voices itself is a Kingdom Justice Ministry. They truly have provided an equal Voice to all viewpoints-within the boundaries of evangelicalism. This is generally not allowed on SBC official platforms.
Yes sir,… I had some confidence that we would reach this point, because we are experiencing the same Gospel of God. And you are right, Dave has put a platform in place where discussions can take place without the SBC political covers getting too wrinkled.
The “kingdom of God” and the “gospel of the Kingdom” are not that difficult to understand though,… that is why the parakletos is given to those that are family in the Kingdom. He gives us understanding. He gives gifts to men (man and woman) to bring Glory to His name.
One of the gifts, given by God for the church (to spill over into the world) that I taught on last night was “the gift of exhortation” Exhortation is a fantastic encouragement to the church because it is a perfect example of giving. The root of the translated term is parakaleo, to call… alongside. When the church begins to understand that the gift of putting our arms around each other (inside the church where gifts emanate), leading, and encouraging our family to bring Glory to God…that is a priceless thing. That is kingdom justice. That is what spills over into the community. An action of giving,… where putting your arms around a small child (or their mom, dad) at risk in an angry world, and focusing their attention on Christ in living, giving, and worship; oh what power we see exude from the Gospel of God! I think we begin to see how kingdom justice forms the substance for an effective change in social justice that is echoed in the Gospel of God.
But, there is another “social justice” that is promulgated by those fabricating another gospel. We, both you and I, must expose the players, and the schemes. The weak in all of our churches need shepherds exhorting toward the true Gospel, …since the arms of another gospel are at play in the community. Purveyors of another gospel rarely repent and play nicely, they continue to exist in and around the love feasts, politically savvy, ready to take and unleash cruelty upon those most at risk in our communities.
“Something I would like to ask: What is the difference between social justice, and justice?”
Bill Mac, Social justice seems to have evolved into equal “outcomes” ignoring individual effort.
Chris,
SBC Voices provide a voice for the voiceless. That’s a part of what Kingdom justice is all about. I appreciate Chris Roberts commenting here. I believe that Jesus would here Chris’ voice in this forum. Chris, I appreciate your response to parsonsmike upstream. The “dichotomy” that you mentioned that Mike was postulating is why I believe there is so much confusion or lack of consensus on the topic at hand. You answered parsonsmike very similarly to how I would have answered him.
Dwight… you are correct my friend,…..I love Chris Roberts. In fact, he is the self proclaimed “enemy” we are called to love. He makes no bones about his thinking. He no longer likes sneaking into love feasts of the church, even though he was mingling around the Kingdom of God at one point.
Chris Roberts is not the dangerous one. If I had to have someone in my corner in a battle, it would be Chris Roberts, and not Barak Obama, for instance. Not to pick on Obama,…but he is not as honest as Chris Roberts. Obama on the other hand is hanging around the love feasts, pretending to speak on behalf of family, yet in a cruel way.
I pray that the heavenly Father show mercy on Chris…. while I agree with Christ (through Jude) “Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints. For certain persons have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.” ….that is my response to the purveyors of another gospel, wielding cruelty on the family, and community.
Bill Mac,
Good question regarding the difference between social justice & justice. I’m sure Chris will weigh in on your question. But my thought is in the way I use both terms there is no difference. And that’s why I prefer the term “kingdom justice” rather than “social justice.” The justice I speak of is solely and exclusively rooted in the biblical concept of justice and the teachings of Jesus. “Social Justice”as defined & used by the world could include support for issues and ideas that the Bible would not back. Such as gay rights and gay marriage. I believe that we are better off dropping the word “social” before justice in evangelicalism, and simply saying justice, or I still like the qualifier “kingdom” justice.
🙂
I like the idea of kingdom justice because in a society where the law is fluid, then justice (in worldly terms) is also fluid. Still I would like to discuss examples of kingdom justice to see where we might agree or disagree.
Bill Mac,
The terms “social and economic justice” can be co-opted by Occupy Wall Street or The Tea Party. Even the porn industry was seeking government bailouts a few years ago when they were popular, in the name of equity and fairness with regard to bailouts. Kingdom justice encompasses “social and economic” justice but, within a biblio-centric frame of reference. There are many examples of kingdom justice that I could sight from Scripture & from history. I am time challenged at the moment. But, suffice it to say that how the disciples resolved the allegation that they were engaged in discrimination with regard to the distribution of food in the church at Jerusalem(Acts 6), that would be an example of kingdom justice. The one man-one vote system that was disallowed in South Africa during the apartheid years, but, it is now allowed, if memory serve me correctly, would be an example of kingdom justice. Having only one African American on the EC of the SBC, and no African Americans who serve as entity heads is an example of injustice, particularly, in light of the demographics of the SBC, and all of the public proclamations to be inclusive and fair.
When there was a theological disagreement over inerrancy, the SBC EC allowed a second state convention to form because of the theological disagreement. When there was a theological disagreement in Texas over spiritual gifts, the SBC would not allow a third state convention to form. That was injustice. It was at the meeting where I was told that they would not allow a third convention to form was when I discovered the highest ranking Black in the EC building at that time was the custodian. That’s an example of injustice. Finally, when Kevin Stilley criticized an SBC entity & entity head there was no public reprimand given toward him. When I publicly criticized an SBC entity, there was a public reprimand given. That would be an example of injustice. Oh, one more. The Arlington School District has allowed every President to broadcast his school year opening speech to all the students dating back to Reagan at least. When Obama was elected they would not allow the speech to be broadcast in the Arlington schools. Another example of injustice. During the same time frame they were planning to put the kids on a bus to go & hear W. Bush speak at the Cowboy stadium. You get the picture.
This will make for good distinction concerning justice. It is important to note, that injustices are numerous, subjective, messy, bad, etc.
Justice, as actionable, in the Gospel of God…. is clear, concise, and yet hard to execute. Identifying injustices is the easy part and must be adjudicated (actively judged) in the realm of the Gospel,… not in the realm of another gospel.
Bill Mac,
Forgot one. Sherri Klouda being hired by a conservative inerrantist trustee board as a woman to teach Hebrew. The same Sherri Klouda was fired by the same inerrantist conservative trustee board as a woman-and because she was a woman-for teaching Hebrew. That would be an example of an injustice. Dr. Karen Bullock fits the same scenario. I really believe that the SBC had to lay off 600 missionaries because of the unrepentant injustices that have taken place. To invade the private prayer lives of missionaries, but, refusing to take a position on the Masonic lodge membership, or even, to take a position on praying in tongues in private, yet, fire people as a result, is an example of injustice.
Wait!
Masonic lodge membership is forbidden by our missionaries isn’t it? Please tell me it is?!?!
I mean that surely our missionaries are NOT permitted to be Masons, right ?!?!?
Tarheel – While “freemasonry” is off topic, since you brought it up … many local churches won’t take a stand on this because their deacon bodies are infested with masons. The SBC passed a resolution in 1992 opposing membership and participation in organizations that contradict the Bible (including freemasonry), but these resolutions are not binding upon local churches. Good Lord, there are some things that local church autonomy should not protect! I know pastors who have lost their jobs by making a stand on freemasonry. As you, I hope masons are not serving as SBC missionaries … I wonder if there is a check-box for that on the application? God forgive us – there is such a mixture in the camp!
Dwight: The Klouda issue was a serious and shameful injustice. I’ll have to think about some of the others. As I have written, I’m for greater minority representation in our entities, and I think that will only occur with some deliberate action. But I’m not sure I see injustice per se unless we have people seeking something they deserve and being denied it. But it may be that I just don’t know what has gone on. The Klouda case was well publicized.
Dr. Dwight
I am not sure who refused to take a position on prayer language, but when I interviewed with HMB (now NAMB) the position was clear, it was a no no and was a deal breaker. Perhaps it was not a good position (tho personally I think it is),but there was no injustice.
I get to that discussion in Part II…. I have a few more thoughts to put into the post, so hopefully we have robust targets to explore. So, this is great feedback. And, I am a slow writer though…so, it will come a little past Christmas 🙂
Good article Chris.
I’m convinced that the 21st century church doesn’t have a clue about the Gospel of the Kingdom. Centuries of following the teachings and traditions of men have got us desperately off-track – we major on the minors. It would do us all well to read the red more closely, with particular emphasis on what Jesus had to say about the Kingdom of God. Today’s church is truly a non-prophet organization. We don’t have enough power to blow the dust off a peanut and the world doesn’t pay us much attention any more.
Thank you Max, we truly do “major on the minors”… and that is unfortunate within the family of God. I like to tell my folks that all the letters in the scripture are “red”…and lets live them out.
“I like to tell my folks that all the letters in the scripture are “red”…and lets live them out.”
Amen! I do, too!
“… all the letters in the scripture are “red”…”
Indeed! There is a scarlet thread woven throughout the whole of Scripture. And those stitched in red in the Gospels lay the finished cloth before us. Read the red and pray for power!
Max, nice little word play there… I like it!
D L,
Missionaries that were hired under the ’63 BFM statement, were fired because they would not sign the 2000 statement. Is that not an injustice?; changing the goal post in the middle of the game while a play is in progress?
To fire people because of their private prayer practices, although that was not an issue at the IMB when they were first hired….Is that not an injustice? For the SBC doctrinal statement to not address private prayer practices, but, for an SBC entity to enact a doctrinal position not affirmed by the SBC, and approved by 51 % of SBC according to a 2007 Lifeway Poll; is that not an injustice? To accept CP gifts from local churches & then disallow disqualify members of that church from serving as IMB missionaries because of their private prayer practices; is that not an injustice? Is that not taxation without representation? The EC will not take gifts from the CBF because of doctrinal differences. Should not that be their posture with pastors and churches who affirm praying in tongues in private? Why the inconsistency? Why the double standard?
Dwight, the BFM does not take a stand on alcohol – however all entities forbid even occasional use – is this an injustice too, in your thinking?
How about smoking?
Drug use?
We could go on and on about issues/stances that The entities take that are not directly spelled out in the BFM…are they all injustices?
Dr. Dwight
With HMB I was hired under the 1963 BFM. We were never asked to sign the 2000 although I do hold to it. I think you logic is flawed. The issue was, what was started in 1979, the CR. Prior to that the moderates/liberals or whatever you want to call them were in charge. Their theological moorings were not as tight. With the CR, the operative word here being “Conservative” those moorings were tightened. Those who led the CR theologically opposed tongues, prayer language and that was reflected in the dismissal of many SBC employees who were not inerrantist or other theological issues. Several people lost their jobs as a result of this. Wrong? Each has to decide. However the whole issue was to bring the convention back to a more conservative stance. Hence those who were of a different theological conviction were replaced. The LifeWay survey would have looked a lot different in 1993 than it did in 2007. Why? Because theology is shifting again. Those old line conservatives are no longer in charge of anything. They are retired, except for PP. That is the nature of the beast.
An injustice? Perhaps! I don’t really know. However what is the point of a CR if those holding what was considered bad theology were left in charge.
Dr. Dwight
With respect sir, you do not understand the purpose of the BFM. You must also recognize the difference between a confession of faith and a creed. The SBC entities can require their employees to sign the statement. However, the SBC cannot require a local church to sign the statement.
You ask on numerous occasion why we don’t make certain issues clear by voting on it. For one reason I don’t want to. Most SB don’t want to. We value the priesthood of the believer and autonomy. There are some basics upon which we must agree to be sure. But there are many issues that we allow each church to practice as God leads. This is precious to SB. It is what separates us from those who are creedal and controlled by a central hierarchy. I don’t want the convention to tell me what I must believe about a prayer language. I oppose that theology, but I want to fellowship with you and others who hold to it. I don’t want a convention to be the one who decides who is right, you or I. I want to believe on this issue what I want to believe and i want to let you believe on this issue what you want.
D L,
The difference is that you can get hired at the IMB with your beliefs and practice on this issue. I can’t get hired with my belief & practice. And therein lies a major difference. I am treated with discrimination within the SBC. You are not.
I cannot be employed by IMB because I am too old, is that discrimination?
Dr. Dwight
It is not discrimination, it is because you hold an incorrect theology.
Dr. Dwight
You ignored my argument and made a statement that was irrelevant to my comment.
Dwight,
“I am treated with discrimination within the SBC. You are not.”
Discrimination based on what?
Les,
Discrimination based on my belief & practice that 1 Corinthians 12-14 affirms praying in tongues in private as a gift that God gives certain believers to Edify the believer, to go forth & Edify His people. The SBC will take my CP gifts, but, will not allow me to serve as an IMB missionary. That’s discrimination.
But, I count it all joy, for the sake of God’s Kingdom.
Thanks brother. I’m not up on IMB requirements and/or restrictions.
Have a good evening.
Dr. Dwight
Please tell me you are not serious about that. The government takes my tax dollars, yet won’t let me serve in the army because I am too old. Is that discrimination? I have been a SB since I was a teenager. Every church I pastored gave generously to the CP (16-26%) yet they won’t let me be the CEO of the Exec. Committee. Is that discrimination?
Tarheel,
Please address the missionaries who were fired for not signing the 2000 statement?
Please address the 16 yr old in an Ohio WalMart holding a BB gun sold at the store in the BB gun section that was shot & killed. The policeman who shot him was totally exonerated. Was that not an injustice?
Please address the Anglo missionary couple who was denied a speaking engagement in Louisiana when it was discovered that they had adopted a Black child. Was that not an injustice?
Please address the missionaries who were fired after someone inquired about their private prayer lives. Was that not an injustice?
I’ve already said that I would preferred that question be taken off about the private language – and that the focus be shifted to the intent of the missionary/pastor/whatever that is partnering with the entity regarding ecstatic utterances in public. I’d Also be concerned with anyone who partners with and has no problem with such silliness as “Holy Spirit dust” and the like.
I know absolutely nothing about what you’re talking about regarding the adoption – so I’m not going to comment on that.
I’ve already spoken to the issue in Cleveland – it was not a BB gun it was a pellet gun – the gun looked real – the boy had been brandishing it in a violent like way – The boy had removed the orange indicators that we’re on the gun when it was bought – and the boy reach for the gun/pointed the gun at officers they had no choice but to shoot him – they did not know whether the gun was real or not – and I do not think a reasonable person should expect officers to wait until fired upon to “make sure the gun is real”.
I’m sorry as I can be that young man is dead – he’s not much older than my own son – but the choices/actions of that young man that day made his death not only likely – but reasonably unavoidable.
Dwight,
I had not heard about the BB gun incident. I watched the video and read accounts of it. First, from watching the entire video, who unfortunate, the officers seem to have reacted to the “active shooter” training they had just gone through when they encountered a 22 year old man (not 16) holding what appeared to be a rifle. Second, there’s no basis to believe it was racist. Third, It’s very sad the young man died.
Les,
Is this not an injustice? Similar incidents are happening eerily to often. If the church cannot call that in ident an injustice, we seriously have a problem.
Les, please investigate something for me. I got a call saying that the Flood Church in Ferguson was burned the initial night of the riot. Mike Brown’s dad is a member of that church. And because their insurance did not have a loss due to riots and civil unrest rider/clause, the insurance company is refusing to pay. I want to lift a special offering for that church. I wish Voices commenters would as well. Would you try & verify this for me since you live in that area? Thanks.
Dwight, I call it in my comments a few minutes ago a tragic mistake.
I don’t know about the church burning situation but I’ll try to find out. I studied and took the insurance licensing test a few years ago. It is almost universal that property damage coverage excludes riots and such. But I’ll see what I can find out.
Les
Les,
Yes. It was a tragic mistake. But should the officer be held legally accountable, as in a manslaughter charge? If he’s not, wouldn’t that be an injustice? You have not answered that question. Thanks for checking out the church matter for me.
Dwight, admittedly I don’t know all the facts. I did read accounts and watched the video that was admitted into evidence. It was a fairly long video.
So from what I know, no he should not have been charged. It appears he followed his training he had just completed 2 weeks prior.
Injustice is defined as :”unfair treatment : a situation in which the rights of a person or a group of people are ignored.”
So, no. I don’t see it as a case of injustice. But it was a tragic mistake. Unfortunately as the police have to deal with mass shooters from time to time in public places, there are bound to be tragic mistakes. But with mass lives on the line, the spilt seconds do matter.
Dwight
I am not Tarheel but I addressed that in this thread. To what I said I add, the SBC adopted a statement of faith. The bylaws require all employees to be in compliance. Those who would not sigh the 2000 BFM has an issue with something hence they were not in compliance. Unfortunate, yes but not an injustice. We cannot pay missionaries to teach something with which the SBC is not in agreement.
D L,
The fact that the 2000 statement was not a condition of their hiring, but rather, the ’63 was, does not suggest to you that they should have been grandfathered in? This was changing the goal post. We simply view these matters differently. Do you believe that the Klouda matter was an injustice?
Grandfathered? No. “We” wanted liberal missionaries gone – we wanted liberal professors gone – we wanted to clean house.
Tarheel & D L,
You sow the wind, and you reap a whirlwind.
I’m not sure what you mean by that.
Dr. Dwight
Neither am I. Please explain.
Dwight
Definitely not. This was what the CR was all about. Why go through 20-25 years of fighting and keep the same theology in place that we were trying to get rid of. That make absolutely no sense. The fact of the matter is quite simple. If one is in conflict with the 2000 BFM then they cannot teach according to SB doctrine as those paying their salaries expected.
I don’t have enough facts to common on the Klouda issue.
D L, Tarheel, Parsonsmike,
Wow!! Parsonsmike, thanks for the commentary on the wind & whirlwind. Very enlightening.
D L, I’ll state the obvious again. I am not Jesus. But, he didn’t choose to explain all of his words. Neither will I. But, parsonsmike commentary certainly gets to the heart of it. The meaning is in there. These conversations start to get circular at a certain point. This is Chris’ post. Therefore, I need to comment less. But, in the name if fairness, this is all the explaination I’ll give. There is a lit of wind being sown in our society from all sides, and all corners. It is inevitable then, that there will be a whirlwind to reap. We are now witnessing a lot of wind & whirlwind. It is high time that the church stands above the fray, and not sow the wind, and not reap the whirlwind, but rather, seek the Holy Spirit and let the wind of the Holy Spirit blow on our church and in this world once again. The wind & the whirlwind will not change society. The wind of the Holy Spirit will. It appears to me, there is to much wind & whirlwind being sown & reaped. I believe that our only answer to the issues we are discussing/debating is a move of the Holy Spirit. I honestly don’t believe the protestors(and most Blacks are grateful & surprised at the large numbers of White protestors) and most Blacks will ever see eye to eye on these issues. Therefore, all we are doing is a lot of wind sowing & reaping. I do have a ray of hope though that as Chris continues his writings, he may lead us to some kind of consensus or unity. If the church can’t reach unity on these issues, the world is doomed. I guess that’s why Floyd, Moore’s and Land’s commentary on these issues so blessed and encouraged me. I pray that the wind of the Holy Spirit blows on all of us and the church. That’s the only hope for solutions, healing, and unity. It is probably way pass the time for us to talk less & pray more. As Paige Patterson told Bart: Throwing words at the problem will not solve it. Throwing words around may just be sowing the wind & reaping the whirlwind. And when that happens in the secular society, it becomes dangerous. So, the wind of the Spirit is where my heart and passion are moving to to address these issues. Not sowing the wind, and seeing a whirlwind.
Need a new topic for an old subject. Both the Klouda decision and the IMB PPL requirement were trustee or administrative decisions not specifically covered under the BFM.
Tarheel,
I am not upset about it. But I fail to understand why Professor Stilley was not publicly reprimanded for criticizing an SBC entity an entity head, but, I was when I served as a trustee for the same thing. Is that not a double standard, thus, an injustice?
Tarheel,
There was another shooting in I believe Beaver Creek Ohio, near Dayton. It has no relation to the Cleveland shooting. This was a teen-age Black youth(16, I believe) in the local Walmart in the BB gun section, holding a BB gun, considering purchasing it. Someone called the police & said there was a Black Mam I the store with a gun. And the police came in the store & shot him. The police who did that was exonerated. Was that not am injustice? The people protesting think so. That’s why they are marching in the streets, and they should be.
Oh, I thought you were still talking about the Rice young man. I’ll look that one up.
Dwight, as I commented earlier, he was 22 years old FYI. Anyway, he was actually shot in the pet section of the store after picking up a BB gun that someone else had left lying on a shelf out of the box. Normally BB guns are kept in a box in wrapping.
He then walked around the store a long time variously holding the gun over his shoulder, swinging it by his side etc. The 911 caller said that he was pointing it at people, though the video does not show that. He then settled in the pet section and stood there for maybe 10 minutes doing who knows what. The caller told 911 it looked like he was loading the gun which was described as a rifle (the caller said). Appears to be a tragic mistake.
Les,
Do you believe that that shooting was justified? Yes or no, please?
Dwight, given what I read and saw on the raw video, I do not believe the officer should have been charged. So yes justified, though a tragic mistake.
We need to remember that officers are not perfect and have to make split second decisions. His recent training appears to have been followed.
Les
That is a good line of demarcation…tragic mistake, but not an injustice.
Wow!!! I am utterly amazed as to how many/most of you justify/excuse all of these shootings. That’s is your right. But, it inspires me to support the protestors even the more. We have fundamental differences in this country as to what is just and unjust. I am disappointed, but not surprised. This explains the impasse & unrest in our nation at this hour. Special prosecutors & more racially diverse jurors, are likely to view these matters differently.
Dwight
We have a legal process. It was followed. A decision was made based pn he facts at hand. A perfect system, no. But better than anything else I know. If we bypass our system anarchy is the result.
Dr. Dwight, I do know one thing. In this whole situation we must be careful to make a measured response and not assume that everything is racially motivated. This will only cause some people on both “sides” to dig their heels in a little deeper, and the divide will widen.
As an Ohioan, and whose wife works at a WalMart, I looked into the shooting at Beavercreek. From the video, it looked like the man was swinging the gun up and down, pointing it at no one, and talking on the phone [which he was]. It also looked like he never even knew he was going to be shot, so if the cops shouted a warning [the video was without sound], it wasn’t acknowledged, and my guesses that it wasn’t heard as something directed at him.
My opinion is that the police were at faulting numerous ways:
1] They could have evacuated the store in an orderly fashion since the suspect was in a corner of the store easily cut off from all other departments.
That would have saved another life since when the police started shooting, panic ensued and a ldy fire of a heart attack while running out of the store.
2] The police should have got his attention BEFORE shooting him. He was threatening NO ONE when he was shot. I saw no threat or danger to them or anyone else at the time of the shooting.
Now the guy was high at the time,and talking on the phone to the mother of his two boys, holding an unarmed weapon and threatening no one.
This shooting is more than a tragedy, it was a homicide. It should have been handled differently, and at the very least, the shooter, and/or the one who ordered him to shoot [if there was such a person] should have been tried for manslaughter and kicked off the force.
But like the Ferguson incident, the New York incident, the Cleveland tragedy, there is no indication that these were racist acts by the individual officers.
-mike
Dwight, I just watched the video of the Beavercreek Walmart shooting for the first time. I am amazed that some on this site are defending what happened there. While the man was not murdered in cold blood, the officers made a tragic mistake that was by definition an injustice. I am not familiar with the law in such a situation, but it seems that justice would demand a very stiff penalty for these officers.
I did not agree with what you have written regarding Ferguson. But I am amazed that some will defend the police no matter what the VIDEO evidence demonstrates.
I recognize the very difficult situation any officer is placed in when going into what he believes to be a dangerous situation based on the information given to him by someone else. However, it is part of the responsibility of a police officer to do everything he can to diffuse the situation in a non-lethal manner.
Since many are unwilling to say it, what happened in Florida and what happened in NY with Eric Garner were injustices.
Adam, I’m one of those you re referring to. Yes it was a tragic mistake. But as I wrote earlier, by definition it was not an injustice.
“Injustice is defined as :”unfair treatment : a situation in which the rights of a person or a group of people are ignored.””
I’m certainly no expert, but as I read definitions this is not an injustice in the legal sense. It was tragic for sure. Given what I read and saw about the case, one can understand why the officer reacted as he did based on the information he had been given. Could he have acted differently? Surely. But there appears to me to be no criminal action. Certainly no race based decisions.
But this case gets lumped in with the other high profile cases and all taken together paint police officers in the worst possible light, and that is very troubling too. Witness what we saw in NYC with the two officers gunned down by a black man. I’ve been looking for the marches about that case but can’t seem to find any.
Adam Blosser, I have not defended Nir derided The Beavercreek Walmart shooting. The fact is based on the video that I saw from the Washington Post I think – I just don’t have enough information either way – I did speak of the Cleveland area shooting of that young boy who was brandishing a firearm – because I thought that’s what Dwight was speaking of I did not even know about this until late late last night.
It’s amazing that you watch the video for the first time though – and immediately posted that the officer should be punished while at the same time accusing others for defending officers to easily – perhaps you have announced an injustice to easily? I don’t know – and I honestly – I don’t think you do either.
If we throw the “injustice word” around haphazardly in a similar fashion that the “R word” is thrown around – it too will lose its value.
Les, you are using the strictest possible understanding of the word “injustice” to say that this man’s rights were not violated. If you go back to Merriam-Webster and do a little reading, I think you should be able to see why what happened to that man in Walmart was an injustice.
You may be right that these officers acted within their training. If so, the training needs to be revised. That’s what was most troubling to me in the wake of the Ferguson situation: the militarization of the police. The idea should be to protect people, not kill the bad guys.
They turned the corner and shot a man based on what a 911 caller told them. The man was not pointing the gun at anyone. There was no time in the video for the officers to have said, “Put the gun down.” They turned the corner and shot. Now a man is dead. If that is not an injustice, I am not sure what is.
The shooting of the two police officers in NY was a very evil act by an evil man. He is now receiving greater justice than can be handed down by any man. What happened to those officers was wrong. It was an injustice. But of course their “rights” weren’t violated so maybe you are uncomfortable calling it an injustice. If you would like to organize a march in their honor, I am not sure who is stopping you.
If you haven’t defended or denied what happened, then I am not talking about you. The Tamir Rice video is very troubling as well. Another example of injustice. It does not rob “injustice” of its value to say that it is an injustice for a person to wrongly lose their life.
To so narrowly define injustice as to not include people wrongly losing their lives actually robs the word of its value.
Wow. All that certainty based on being introduced to the case – and watching a a short video with no audio – within the span of a few minutes. Interesting.
I say the same thing to my friend Les as well.
Based on what I know at this point – having just been introduced to the case – Watched a brief video – and read a couple of honestly biased articles – and not had time to have done any research – or even watch the 45 minute press conference from the prosecutor after the grand jury announcement – I found this on Google just before I went to bed last night – I am not ready to make any pronouncements.
One of the major problems here is there’s automatic assumptions – admittedly on both sides – that gets people entrenched and doesn’t lead to anything productive.
I argued for calm, and waiting for the evidence to come out in Ferguson – others declared Wilson precipitously and with great abandon declared Wilson unequivocally guilty – accepting stories based on false narratives that are still being perpetrated.
Adam
I just went with the first definition given. In these discussions over the latest high profile incidents, “violation of civil rights” has been invoked almost 100% of the time when there are calls for justice. That’s the context I was using to say there is not a strict injustice here.
“You may be right that these officers acted within their training.”
This link shows some of the slides from the two week prior training. It had to do with the threat of mass shootings such as Sandy Hook.
http://www.dailydot.com/politics/john-crawford-iii-ohio-police-shooting-video-walmart/
“But of course their “rights” weren’t violated so maybe you are uncomfortable calling it an injustice. If you would like to organize a march in their honor, I am not sure who is stopping you.”
Of course nothing is stopping me. It’s just a bit disingenuous that the protestors of these other high profile shootings are largely silent, and certainly not organizing protests, over officers being gunned down.
Tarheel,
As I said last night,
“Dwight, admittedly I don’t know all the facts. I did read accounts and watched the video that was admitted into evidence. It was a fairly long video.”
I’m not making 100% rock solid pronouncements. Just some “seems to me” observations.
There is one very important difference between the Ferguson situation and these other two cases: surveillance video. The videos don’t lie. Officers showed up on the respective scenes. Within seconds one of God’s image bearers was dead in each case. No one’s life was in immediate danger. The officers shot the bad guys. Perhaps based on their training? Maybe what the officers did was perfectly legal. I contend that it should not be legal. Officers bear an enormous when they wield the sword on behalf of the state. It has to be done with the utmost respect for human life. The goal should be to protect human life, not kill the “bad guys.”
*enormous responsibility
Adam,
“No one’s life was in immediate danger.”
We all know that now Adam. No one but the young man knew that at the time. The officer not anyone else knew what kind of gun he had.
“The officers shot the bad guys. Perhaps based on their training? Maybe what the officers did was perfectly legal. I contend that it should not be legal.”
And that’s your prerogative.
“Officers bear an enormous when they wield the sword on behalf of the state. It has to be done with the utmost respect for human life.”
Agree. The potential shooter and the officer’s life and the potential mass victims.
“The goal should be to protect human life, not kill the “bad guys.””
Agree. Officers have to weigh (often in split second time) how to maximize the protection of human lives.
Videos may “not lie” but the often lack full context and alone cannot always offer sufficent evidence for condemnation or exoneration. This is why grand juries/prosecutors gather all pertinent facts and assess them as a unit and not by individual parts – do you suggest that prosecutors a grand jury or criminal juries should just simply look at a two minute video or actually a few seconds video of the actual incident and just pronounce judgment based exclusively on that? That wouldn’t seem like justice to me.
“We all know that now Adam. No one but the young man knew that at the time. The officer not anyone else knew what kind of gun he had.”
Good point, Les. Just like the Tamir Rice incident.
20/20 hindsight and arm chair/computer screen quarterbacking in matters of life and death is ALWAYS clearer.
Tarheel,
Meanwhile, your idea of justice includes such things as letting a child be gunned down for waving around a toy in public.
False prophets always lie and distort.
I never said that. It it sad. Heartbreaking really – but in the Rice instance the “toy” did look real and at almost 13 he was old enough to know better than to wave around a real looking gun at strangers AND cops in public – not to mention he wanted people to think it was real because he took the orange coloring off of the gun so that he could deceive people into thinking it was real – bluntly he got what he wanted but no one wanted what he got.
Tarheel,
You think he wanted to get shot? And when, in the seconds it took for the police to pull up and shoot him dead, did he have time to react in a way you might consider appropriate?
again, I have no idea what you’re talking about with this double standard accusation.
Never mind. This thread is convincing me that life experiences simply cause us to look at the same set of facts, yet see & process them differently.
Question – I’m assuming from your comments that a white cop fired the shot – so if a black cop had done shooting – would you automatically view it the same?
It seems you automatically assume the worst based on skin tones.
Tarheel,
There is a reason why Black Cops are doing these shootings. I called for law enforcement officers to come forth for prayer this past Sunday, 15 or more came forth. They were all Black. They recognize two things: 1. If they shot White persons or kids under the exact same scenarios they would be treated differently. 2. They would handle these situations differently & often do. Therefore, they wouldn’t be having to face the scrutiny & create all of this civil unrest, over a lack of restraint, wisdom, and judgement. But, to answer your question, I would feel no different if the officer doing the shooting wee Black. As a matter of fact, I am not sure what color the officer was in the WalMart shooting. I know that a person should not be shot for holding a BB gun in a store a short distance from where the BB guns are sold.In Texas, people are allowed to legally carry a real loaded gun in stores. It happens here. Only White persons carry them openly. And there getting shot is out of the question.
“I called for law enforcement officers to come forth for prayer this past Sunday, 15 or more came forth. They were all Black. They recognize two things: 1. If they shot White persons or kids under the exact same scenarios they would be treated differently. 2. They would handle these situations differently & often do. Therefore, they wouldn’t be having to face the scrutiny & create all of this civil unrest, over a lack of restraint, wisdom, and judgement.”
They told you these things?
1. Not by me. Cops get wide deference from me. I’ve said that before, and I stand by it. I know they’re not perfect I know they can do well – and they can do wring – but “armchair policing” is easy and safe.
2. Handle differently? With wisdom, judgment, and restraint? You might want to reread your statement – it seems as if you’re implying that only black cops handle things in this way – therefore by implication it is the white cops that are act unwisely and without restraint and sound judgement?
Dwight makes a good point here. I think he’s wrong about the BB gun incident. Guns are sold in packaging. No one can take them out and simply walk around the store waving it around. Who does that?
But about the open carry thing, a while ago a bunch of yahoos tried to make a point by openly carrying assault rifles around in town (and inside businesses I believe). I guarantee if it had been a group of black people openly carrying assault rifles around, it would have gotten a very different response.
One last point, that I have tried to make before. BB/Pellet guns ARE NOT TOYS!!!! They fire a high velocity metal projectile. They are not as lethal as other firearms but they can seriously injure someone.
“One last point, that I have tried to make before. BB/Pellet guns ARE NOT TOYS!!!! They fire a high velocity metal projectile. They are not as lethal as other firearms but they can seriously injure someone.”
Thanks for that! That should be obvious to anyone two brain cells to rub together – but apparently it’s not.
Tarheel
You are right. It is totally beyond me why people do not realize that BB/Pellet guns are not toys. I have friends/acquaintances who hunt small game (squirrels etc.) with a pellet gun. In the right circumstance a pellet gun can actually kill a person.
This is why these discussions do not get very far. People simply ignore reality in their aguments.
Parsonsmike,
I appreciate your analysis & commentary on the Beaver Creek Wal Mart story. Looking at these matters objectively are important from all sides. I didn’t state that the Beaver Creek situation a racially motivated issue. It book us down to me that it is an unwarranted & unjustified police shooting. And that the police who did the shooting needs to be held accountable, regardless of the color of the police. or the customer.
Dear Dr. McKissic: The hope of citing facts is that the truth will prevail. Facts are the evidence which will help to keep the understanding from being warped or, if it is already warped, then contribute to correcting it. Our common regard for the facts is what works to help us overcome our differences. There are those who want to use the happenings for their own purposes, namely, the polarization of Whites and Blacks, to keep them apart, to promote unrest and more than civil disobedience. In other words, a Marxian dialectic at a sea change in our society.
This is not to say that some of the events are demonstrations of police malfeasance: Some of them definitely are, according to the evidence (videos, comments of observers, critical development of the factual material). However, who wants a change which might involve a political change which delivers us into the hands of a dictatorship? Marxism has come of age in America, so to speak, because there are certainly many on the faculties of higher learning in this nation. Like the bus driver from a church which I attended from 2004-2008 said, “If they want to start this communist thing all over, I know where they can get the people for it.” He was referring to a local state university, where he drove a bus, transporting students from dorms to a medical institution. These students were often from Communist China. Perhaps two to three years after that I was working in a place that grades papers, when I became engaged in a discussion with a lady from Rumania. When she found out that I had sat under one of the leading theoreticians of World Communism without changing, she began cussing me in English, then switched to Rumanian. Later, she came back and apologized. Or shall I tell you about a Chinese restaurant where I ate a few years ago. Our waiter was working on a degree at a local university, and he told us he was over here to get that degree. We also found out from him that he was an officer in the army of Communist China. Back in the 80s or 90s, a ship beached on one of our shores; it was full of people, many of them, if not all, were Chinese military people. And if you want more look for the material available on the internet and youtube about one of our leading capitalists whose aim is to have a one world government led by China. He even admits that he is a member of a cabal (his term) working to that end. While we work toward justice, integration, and the establishment of peace, it must be done with care, clarity, and compassion for all parties involved. Things seem terribly dark right now, but the darkest hour is before the dawn and the Third Great Awakening might be just around the corner. I have been praying for it to come for 41 years. God be praised for that which He has promised.
Tarheel,
What did I mean by, “you sow the wind, and you reap a whirlwind”?
Stating the obvious, I am not Jesus. But in following his method of teaching, he did not explain every parable. Some he left it up to the disciples to work it out. If you reflect long enough on the conversation you’ll get it. And if you don’t, maybe is what not meant for you to get it.
Dr. Dwight
Jesus parables made sense. Much of your logic escapes me, I am not sure there is anything to get. If you have something to say, say it! Jesus used parables to make profound concepts understandable, not to confuse his listeners.
Right now I am going to bed. I will look forward ot your response in the morning. Blessings my brother.
Question: “What does it mean to sow the wind and reap the whirlwind (Hosea 8:7)?”
Answer: Hosea 8:7 makes the enigmatic statement, “For they sow the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind.” This proverb is known in modern times for its use in military speeches and as a title for a science fiction novel. What did Hosea mean?
The proverb uses an illustration gleaned from the agricultural process of sowing and reaping. A farmer would sow seed. Of course, the type of seed he planted determined the type of plant that would grow and be harvested. This is the principle of duplication. In Hosea 8:7, God says that Israel had planted wind and would harvest a whirlwind. Taking the “wind” to mean something worthless and foolish (see Job 7:7; Proverbs 11:29; and Ecclesiastes 1:14, 17), we can surmise that Israel’s foolishness in the past would result in a veritable storm of consequence. Indeed, in the previous verses, Hosea decries Israel’s idolatry (verses 4-6). Their foolish pursuit of false gods would reap a severe judgment from the Lord.
Also at work in the proverb is the principle of multiplication: a farmer may plant one kernel of corn, but he will reap much more than that—a whole ear. In the same way, Israel’s sin of idolatry would bring forth an amplified consequence that would sweep them all away.
The rest of verse 7 notes the results of this “whirlwind” of judgment: “The standing grain has no heads; it shall yield no flour; if it were to yield, strangers would devour it.” So, the crop would yield nothing. Outsiders would steal anything that did happen to grow. Israel would have understood Hosea’s words well. A poor or stolen crop would be devastating. Here, God is warning His people that their idolatry would lead to ruin.
In addition to following idols, Israel was seeking help in other, equally sinful ways. “For they have gone up to Assyria, a wild donkey wandering alone; Ephraim has hired lovers” (Hosea 8:9). Israel had made ill-advised treaties with Assyria for protection from their enemies. Instead of trusting God, they relied on their wealth and the help of pagan nations.
The “whirlwind” came upon Israel in 722 B.C., when Assyria invaded Israel, destroyed the capital city of Samaria, and deported the Israelites. Yet Hosea 14:4 promised future grace: “I will heal their apostasy; I will love them freely, for my anger has turned from them.” A whirlwind does not last forever, and God’s judgment would not be unending. God would later renew the relationship between Him and His people.
Today, we can see the truth of Hosea’s proverb in many ways. Those who live in unrepentant sin can expect to suffer the consequences of their sin—consequences that both “fit the crime” and exhibit a stunning intensity. Also, this statement by Hosea is a clarion call to avoid idolatry. Anything that steals our trust in the Lord, lessens our devotion to Him, or controls us can be considered an idol and should be abolished from our lives.
Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/sow-wind-reap-whirlwind.html#ixzz3MiGJ9slg
I think I have been insulted and I am a little offended. But that has happened before.
Okay, The way you used it sounds like it could be a “code” threat of some kind. I hope that’s not what you mean by it?
Lease explain what meant. I don’t want to make assumptions.
Dwight, why is everyone stuck on injustices? Is it a surprise that injustices occur in life. I guess if we counted all the injustices in the world and had some sort of way to measure the impact of all those injustices,…someone might be happy. Maybe….but, probably not. To win at the game of injustices is to be duped and deceived to travel down the road as a “taker”, and not a “giver”.
How do we deal with injustices…. according to Christ’s instruction through James… “Consider it all joy, my brethren, when you encounter various trials, knowing that the testing of your faith produces endurance.” An amazing preamble to the next series of paragraphs from God, were we learn how to handle injustices. For the believer, injustices are simply springboards to endurance and realizing true justice in the Kingdom of God. James spends the entire introduction of the letter pointing to a Kingdom response.
If we go about measuring the weight of injustices in our earthly journey, we miss the intent of the justice provided in the Kingdom of God, and how we as Kingdom citizens conduct ourselves in the world. We miss the teaching of Christ given to us through James.
Tarheel,
That should have been, “There is a reason Black cops are not doing these shootings.”
Chris,
You are right. I repent. I was going fleshly rather spiritual. Thanks for bringing this back to the Kingdom. The need for healing & reconciliation is so great ’till all sides are going to have to extend grace & patience to the other side. Initially, I thought that you were going to be way off base. But, the more you unravel this, I am beginning to track with you. I responded to Bill Mac’s question ’bout examples of injustice. That’s what took us down this trail. I’m sorry for going to far in this direction. I await your follow up post. The James model that you allude to is appropriate to this conversation. And I need to apply the verses that you referenced to my current emotions. Thanks for bringing a Word & Kingdom focus back to this conversation.
Believe me…I need to repent and confess my sin daily to where I fall short in living out justice. Injustices seem to abound in life. The Word given to James is the balm we need, and leads us to the justice we seek.
Dr. Dwight
Good word and advice for all of brother.
Pryers and blessings