Thursday, August 31, 2017

The Nashville Statement - A Coalition for Biblical Sexuality

Albert Mohler devoted an entire episode of his “Briefing” podcast to discussing The Nashville Statement.  Mohler writes why The Nashville Statement is so important:
What makes this document on the one hand so timely is the fact that it speaks with genuine gospel commitment and genuine Christian compassion to the entire church, including persons who are struggling with same-sex desires or with gender confusion. At the same time, out of that same love and gospel conviction, it speaks with clarity to what God has very clearly revealed in his Word concerning not only his original design for human beings made in his image male and female, but for the exercise of the sexual gift entirely, as Scripture says, within the context of marriage defined, as the statement says, as a covenantal sexual procreative lifelong union of a man and a woman.
The entire statement can be found at NashvilleStatement.com, and there you will also see a list of the original signatories. It’s a range of evangelical leaders; what binds those evangelical leaders together is a concern for the burden of speaking clarity during this time the confusion. And that clarity, not coming from ourselves, but rather, we believe, from the authority of God’s unchanging Word.

Critical Theory and the Unity of the Church

Fellow ARP Minister and Erskine College professor, Dr. William Evans (with others) has written about the notions of "white guilt, white privilege, critical theory and intersectionality" found in secular academia.  This article, Critical Theory and the Unity of the Church, shows us that we must return to Scripture and not rely on the bankrupt secular and Marxist categories that ultimately divide humanity.
Excerpt:
Some in the conservative Reformed community evince a laudable desire to overcome racial injustice, but they often seek to understand racial divisions by relying on categories drawn from the “critical theory” of secular academia (e.g., notions of “white privilege,” “white guilt,” “intersectionality,” and more broadly the power-analysis tradition that stems from Marx, Foucault, and others) rather than from Scripture and the Christian tradition.  As a result of this uncritical borrowing, some in the church are falling headlong into the divisive identity politics that now plague the broader culture and particularly higher education.
Continue reading

Wednesday, August 30, 2017

Confederate Heritage, History and Statues

This is a fine explanation of why we ought to value our Confederate heritage written by Raquelle Sheen, who has a masters degree in Civil War history.
======================================
Raquelle Sheen
A friend of mine from Massachusetts recently asked on Facebook why so many conservatives are so supportive of the Confederate flag and monuments and why the South in general is still so attached to their Confederate heritage, even though they lost. My friend wasn't trying to be combative, but genuinely wanted to know. So here's my response as to why many Southerners still feel as they do. Discussion welcome. Feel free to share.
*********
First, the fact that the Confederacy lost is irrelevant to the people who honor their Confederate heritage. And that's as it should be--one should honor causes because of what they stand for, not whether or not they triumphed. If the Allies had lost in WWII, I'd still honor my WWII Allied heritage. So hopefully that addresses your confusion about why people care even though they lost. 
Second, many Confederate History Lovers (for purposes of convenience, CHLs henceforth in this post) have spent far more time researching the Civil War and reading about the Southern people than most folks up North have. Most folks up North aren't terribly interested in the war. I know, I lived there for 10+ years and I didn't care much either when I lived there. But when you start researching and reading the "other side" and start reading original diary after original diary, including the post-war narratives, you gain an entirely different perspective.
Third, the reason the North isn't as interested in the war is that the war didn't happen on their land, there are few historical sites to bring it to their remembrance, and it didn't affect them historically the way it affected the South. When the war was over, Northern homes and crops were still standing, their economy recovered, and they did not face 12 years of occupation by vicious politicians and a military force. I don't think most Northerners fully understand the impact of the war down here. In some areas of the South it has taken literally 100 years for the economy to recover to its pre-Civil War levels.
Fourth, many CHLs are old enough to remember their grandparents talking about the war. They are old enough to remember the stories of destruction, looting, burning, and even raping. I know people today like this. They know exactly what happened to the family property, they know exactly how poor their grandparents were even several generations after the war because of the destruction, and they know the unspeakable things that happened in their own family at the hands of Northern soldiers. 150 years really isn't a very long time. I have personally met an elderly woman whose father was a Confederate soldier. Time shrinks when you look at it that way. To a Northern millennial, the Civil War was a big fight 150 years ago about slavery. To a 70-year-old Southerner, the Civil War was when Grandma's house was burned down, she lost everything, her father and brothers were killed, and (in some cases) she was raped by a Northern soldier. That's not an exaggeration for many families here.
Fifth, along those lines, many Southern families have lived in the same area for generations. The rural South isn't as nomadic as many of the transient Northern cities. So they know exactly where their Civil War ancestor lived, died, and is buried. Many times his grave is in their own town or close by. So again, they still have personal connections to the war.
Sixth, many CHLs know that roughly 65%-70% of the South did not own slaves. If you read the original writings, the average soldier was not fighting to preserve slavery. The politicians might have been, but the rank and file soldier was fighting to protect his homeland from an often merciless enemy. While there were many good men in the Union army, some Northern soldiers could be extremely brutal, ruthless, and cruel to civilians. Not all of them were, but many of them were. Southerners appreciate the Confederate soldier because he was fighting to drive out an invading force.
Seventh, many Southerners are steeped in the traditions and beliefs of the founders and do not (and did not) believe that secession was treason. If secession was treason, then so was the colonial secession of 1776. It grieves me that many Southern states seceded over slavery, but I absolutely believe they had the right to do so. The very Declaration of Independence spells out that when a people decide the government is no longer meeting their needs, they have the right to dissolve it and create a new one. We can disagree over the reasons and rationale for Southern secession (although a look at the various state ordinances of secession is enlightening--there are many other reasons listed for their secessions beside slavery) but that doesn't mean that they were irrevocably bound by natural law to remain in the Union forever.
Eighth, Southerners love an underdog and always have. 
Ninth, CHLs are becoming more and more attached to their heritage and the symbols of it because the extremists on the left are working harder and harder to take it away. If the extreme left had more savvy, they'd shut up and let it all fade from people's memory and eventually there might rise up a Southern generation who doesn't care about the monuments and flag anymore. Instead, they have a systematic fight going to erase history and sanitize it and reinterpret it. My master's degree is in Civil War history and I got so SICK of so many pompous Civil War historians prattling about "lost cause mythology" without ever once giving the Southern voice an objective ear.
Tenth, you gotta hand it to the South that Lee and Jackson were incredible, principled, God-fearing men. You get a few guys like that in the history of your cause and they quickly become larger than life heroes who live on well past a war.
Eleventh, Reconstruction bred more bitterness in the South than the war. You oughtta read up on it sometime from a Southern perspective. For twelve years, Northern politicians enjoyed grinding an already broken and impoverished people into fine dust. Southerners have long memories.
Twelfth, a lot of Southerners have Scottish or Irish roots. The Scots-Irish culture is very big into memorializing the past, reverencing heroes, and being attuned to its heritage.
There, that's a quick overview.
I love the monuments and respect the Confederate flag because I respect the Southern soldier for fighting in defense of his native land. I know the names of my Confederate ancestors and have photographs of some of them. To my knowledge, none of them owned slaves. I have records of their military service. I've walked onto battlefields and thought, "My own great-great-great uncle died here." I understand the complicated factors surrounding the war and realize that saying "it was just about slavery" is factually wrong and grossly oversimplified. I oppose attempts to rewrite history and therefore support the monuments and flag, because it tells a side of the story that the Northern victors began suppressing in the 1860s and that many liberals are continuing to suppress today.

https://www.facebook.com/raquelle.sheen/posts/10213589355559084

Tuesday, August 29, 2017

Charlottesville Donnybrook - a column by Walter Williams

Charlottesville Donnybrook
"Few Americans recognize and respect the fact that multiracial societies are inherently unstable. What we’ve been doing for decades, through various government policies, is stacking up combustible racial kindling awaiting a racial arsonist to set it ablaze."