The Institute (協会)

"Wow" is right. Got a response for that Anthony? That is a really really good question...

"...stories like this are a major contributing factor..." to me seeing a desperate need for a mediator.

There is only one faith that addresses that.

I think it's worth noting a difference between rote racism, and blanket prejudicial statements because even Paul used those. I quote Paul in Titus 1:12-14:

12One of the Cretans, a prophet of their own, said, "Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons." 13This testimony is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, 14 not devoting themselves to Jewish myths and the commands of people who turn away from the truth.

Christianity won't eliminate racism or prejudicial thoughts anymore than it'll eliminate widows, orphans, or arguments at the family dinner table.

But if we, the people of God, could "take the Kingdom of Heaven by force," and truly live our lives "Coram Deo" racism within the Church wouldn't be as much of an issue.

a good friend of mine who directed me to this blog (hey Aaron!) once told me in a discussion that he had become convinced that the real great awakening in the US came when the slaves, in-spite of their oppression, believed the gospel.

Not only do I think this is true, but for a brother from across the race line to testify to this has been essential for my ability to retain my confidence in the gospel.

As a white guy (living in ministry in a black community) looking from the privileged-oppressor side of the fence and desiring to know true repentance. . . the skeptical comment really resonates. The question works in class terms just as well: How can the rich testify to the truth of God ("I have never seen the righteous go hungry") to the poor and hungry unless the poor speak the truth of God to us. . . with us.

Likewise how can white Christians testify to the truth of the reconciling-gospel in American context without being in relationship with African American brothers and sisters?

So, like it or not, our highly articulated doctrines are easily undone unless our lifestyles and relationships and practices reflect our love for God and our neighbor. I can give our brother skeptic a rational answer to his veracity questions, but if I do it alone I can't imagine it to be very persuasive.

I really don't think I have anything to contribute to this...

But weren't the cultures that the New Testament church lived in primarily cultures which were quite uninhibited and open when it came to homosexuality? Yet the early church had little question as to the morality of such things?

The fact that some Christians cheered when MLK was shot is supposed to be a pronouncement on the entire culture of Christianity at the time? What of the Christians that denounced slavery or racism in their days... what scripture were they quoting that conformed to that culture?
To make blanket statements about culture defining doctrine is not convincing, and seems to me to be an excuse for someone seeking to abandon their faith. It's like saying Christianity is wrong because all Christians want to kill doctors that perform abortions and bomb their clinics. It's obviously a false statement built on an insanely small violent faction of Christians and their actions.
You ask why the silence? I don't believe the truth and the pastors and churches that profess proper doctrine are silent... it is that they don't get attention. Are the news agencies going to cover the thousands of sermons preached each week that condemn racism, homophobia, etc... or are they going to cover the one that stirs up controversy with false teaching? If the commenter truly thinks silence on the part of truth prevails, perhaps he/she needs to stop watching the nightly news and get a broader sense of things first.

The main problem I see with this person's comments is a lack of understanding how hermeneutics works. While it is true that one can make the Bible say anything, this is only because one is not properly employing the principles of hermeneutics. When one gets "anything" from the Bible, he is has bad hermeneutics. The same can be done with logic. One can logically "prove" anything but to do so requires bad logic. When used correctly, logic does not "prove" everything nor does hermeneutics "give" everything. For example, the author of these comments states that hermeneutics is culturally relative. I doubt, however, that he really means this because if someone from another culture were to read his comments and come away with a different meaning than what was in the text, he was say that they misunderstood him. In short, the principles of hermeneutics are objective and should lead to objective understandings of Scripture (and of all written texts, for that matter). Dr. Thomas Howe at Southern Evangelical Seminary has written a marvelous tome on this subject that should be read by anyone seriously interested in the subject of hermeneutics.

"If Christianity is true why does there continue to be silence when known out-spoken racist Christians continue to pastor churches, write articles, lead denomination committees, serve as church officers, etc?"

It's true that racism still exists. But your wild eyed rantings of outrageous claims with absolutely no basis in fact only serve to cause resistance for those of us who are actually trying to do something about the problem.

Known outspoken racist Christians leading denominational committees?

Name two.

I dare you.

Okay, I'll make it easy on you.

Name a single denomination committee led by a known outspoken racist.

My take on the "couldn't God have made it abundantly clear to us?" question; darned good question, and Biblically speaking, God claims that it is clear--does not Romans say that we are without excuse?

In other words, what we have here is man's amazing ability to twist whatever words we hear into what we want to say, not any weakness on God's part. Even the failure of many to understand the clear implications of Scripture speaks not against, but rather for, the Gospel.

Bubba, can you name a single denomination committee led by a known outspoken racist? If Anthony can, then why doesn't he, in the very post where he condemns silence on the issue?

Mike, I can and have names but this is not the place to reveal those. There are systems and structures in place within the government of various denominations to deal with such issues and church courts should handle those exclusively. Posting names would serve no purpose here and the suggestion of such reveals an immature and naive doctrine of the church. Why would even think it would be appropriate to do so?

Then why in the world are you ranting and raving about "silence" on the issue?

And this is an appropriate place to denounce people for not exposing known outspoken racists in church leadership positions while at the same time it's an inappropriate place to denounce them yourself? That makes no sense at all.

Make up your mind.

Why ISN"T this "the place"? Christians should fight and expose racism at every opportunity, and in every venue.

Frankly, I'll believe that there are known outspoken racists leading denomination committees when I see it. And until I do, I won't believe it.

It's people like you claiming there's a racist under every bed who make those of us are actually working to educate people about real racism look like idiots.

Ever heard of the boy who cried wolf?

As Emerson and Smith make clear, the more isolated white Christians are from people of color the more unable they are to identify any racism. Mike, your comment only leads me to believe that you are out for mockery and self-congratulations rather than actually looking for wisdom. This type of self-righteous "we are the ones who are actually trying to do something about it" is exactly the spirit of so many that drive the wedge deeper.

It is on issues addressed in this manner that black and white Christians end up further apart.

Joel, brilliant observation! Thanks!

Im interested Mike Joyner how you are fighting racism? You are very passionate about your "authentic" role in fighting racism and also very passionate to note that there isn't any racism in this particular case to the point that you want believe unless you see it. Very interesting and almost (almost not entirely)contradictory.

Ant,
I told you man a few posts ago... Some folks dig their heels in.

Joel,
You already know your my guy! Call me!

Holla

So we can claim racism in white churches without providing any evidence?

Please. You want to talk about it, you better provide some evidence. My list: Fred Phelps, Louis Farrakhan, Jeremiah Wright, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and the nuts from Little Geneva or whatever they're calling themselves now. I don't know that this exactly demonstrates widespread bigotry in suburban, caucasian churches, though.

Certainly there is less racism now (proportionally)than from 40 years ago. Racism against African-Americans will decrease, not increase.

We are coming to a point where it isn't racism, it's economic class-ism. Poor hates rich, rich doesn't respect poor...

The African community's identity is too tied up to racism. What happens when racism is the same level as the Hispanics or Koreans ? It's not far off.

Family and education...

This guy's a joke.

"Why do Christians remain silent when known outspoken racists head up denomination committees?"

What racists head up these denomination committees?

"I can't say. I have to remain silent on the issue."

What a joke.