Sunday, June 21, 2020

A Proper Christian Response

How many Christian churches today are repeating the mainstream talking points: racism, racism, racism, whitey, whitey, whitey, privilege, privilege, privilege?  You wonder why we need a Christian church at all – don’t we get enough of this in our face every day?

From an earlier post, citing Paul VanderKlay:

Church leaders need to figure this out and create language rather than repeating worldly boilerplate in a sycophant’s quest for legitimacy from the zeitgeist.

So, let’s try this:

Genesis 1: 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Start here: we are all made in God’s image.  All of us, every single one.

Galatians 3: 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

If you want to understand both equality and diversity, perhaps this verse from Galatians can help.  You can only reconcile equality and diversity here.

Matthew 22: 36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?  37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.  38 This is the first and great commandment.  39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.  40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Of course, it is impossible to love our neighbor as our self.  Like many admonishments, this is aspirational.  We need a target to aim at, else we will never come close to the target.

Romans 3: 10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one

Not even the protestors; for sure, not the rioters.

Romans 3: 23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God


Ephesians 2: 8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

This can never be resolved by works.  No amount of kneeling, washing of feet, African clothing, or reparations will pay the price.


So, who or what will pay the price?  As I have written earlier regarding the demands of the day:

The problem is that there’s no atonement here.  No justice, no peace?  How about no atonement, no peace.  If the price to be paid is infinite, there is only one place where atonement will be found.  The church has this message; it should use it.  Instead of pandering with the same slogans that those who are out to destroy the church are using.

Where is that place?  I know of no sacrifice greater than a father sacrificing his son – unless it is the Father sacrificing Himself and His Son at the same time.  And that Father and Son were there from the beginning.

I do not look for forgiveness for the wrongs of my ancestors, let alone ancestors that were not even mine.  I have enough trouble with my own wrongs, and there are a few that I don’t think will ever be forgiven by those I have harmed on this earth.

But there is one place that these will be forgiven.  And if today’s Christian leaders want to deliver a message of hope and love – right now, today – in this time where all language of “atonement” is the language of despair and hate, they can deliver this message.


  1. In lighter news, I rode my bike into the heart of the protests of Indiananoplace (thank you Hillary's homebrew email server) yesterday and discovered that deaf people are part of the Revolution because there was a white lady sign languaging the rap of a black man beside her. So very thoughtful and inclusive.

  2. The second-to-last paragraph teetered on Patripassianism. My only objection to this otherwise solid piece.

    1. Thank you.

      I had to look it up. I think you are referring to the third-to-last paragraph.

      Way above my pay grade to split these hairs; plus I am not sure we have the language for it anyway.

  3. The gospel. All sin. All are forgiven through faith in Christ. All. All. All. That is the kind of equality that exists, impartiality.

    I thought my pastor got it right mainly today. Preaching on Exodus 3-4, he commented on past and present oppression, on God's call to Moses and then to each of us.

    He said several times that of course Christians are against oppression, police brutality, etc, but that isn't the central message. The central message is faith in Jesus for forgiveness of sins for All. Then we live out that salvation by calling out all sin to sinners so that they too will believe.

    I would put up the link to the video but it isn't up yet.

  4. Mr. M - I love your stuff, as you know. But if I may pick a nit, atonement is an Old Testament concept found nowhere in the New Testament. Atonement was a temporary covering of sins which was accomplished with the blood of bulls and goats.

    And if salvation is simply getting your sins forgiven (as it is often presented) through the 'atonement,' why did Jesus have to die on a cross? If there already was a system in place for forgiveness, why would Jesus humble Himself and become a man, and take the sins of mankind on Himself? He could have just stayed home.

    I'd love to see answers from you and/or your readers before I elaborate on this.

    1. Mr. Spock, I admittedly am out of my depth here. Even my father - who has spent a lifetime in the Scripture - has recently had conflict, both within himself and with others, on this point.

      So, I cannot comment either way. I put the following out just as a further conversation piece, not endorsing or denying, just to get the ball rolling:

      I will just suggest, for all who care to comment further, I think this issue remains less-than-clear after 2000 years of debate; Let's keep that in mind.

    2. Yeah, I consider atonement and redemption as synonyms. I think making a big distinction between the two is a mistake.

      Mister Spock defines atonement in a way that only applies to temple sacrifices, but it can also take on a broader idea. Redemption is the act of buying something out of slavery or previous ownership. Paul uses the word to describe our previous life as slavery to sin. The other word that is synonymous is reconciliation, which is the bringing of peace between 2 parties in conflict. That is essentially what atonement is. It involves the payment of the sacrifice and the bringing of peace.

    3. I'll wait a day or two to see if others reply, but in the meantime, can either of you find the word atonement in the NT? If not, what do you think the significance of that would be?

    4. I am not sure, Mr. Spock (I will take your word that it doesn't). I don't believe the word "trinity" appears either. Further, I am not comfortable completely divorcing the NT from the OT.

      I offer the following definitions, again without claiming any meaningful knowledge on the matter:

      The word “atonement” refers to a God-appointed sacrificial offering removing our guilt and the associated punishment we owe to God’s holiness and justice because of our sin. Atonement means to free us from the guilt and deserved penalty for our sin, to appease or remove God’s anger against us because of our sin and to reconcile us to Himself.

      Redemption refers to God purchasing us through Jesus’ death from the demands of His own perfect justice and holiness. This results in us being freed or liberated from our old masters – sin, Satan, eternal condemnation and eternal separation from Him – and in us becoming His slaves.

      "Atonement" certainly fits the intent in my post; how this relates to Jesus and the cross - again, I hold no meaningful opinion.

    5. Mr. M - as you can see, I couldn't get back to this subject. Sorry, I've been really busy. By now, it's kind of old, and I'm not sure anyone would even realize if I posted another reply. I'm sure the subject (which is atonement vs. propitiation) will come up again. I'll try to comment at that time. I hope you had a good Fourth of July.

    6. Mr Spock, yes, there will be another time. In the meantime, I take this response to a question from NT Wright as solace for someone like me:

  5. Found this in DaLimbraw Library -
    An excerpt from a post by Vox Day (2017):

    "Racism, as a concept, did not even exist until it was coined in 1902; the Oxford English Dictionary gives 1936 as the first recorded use. The idea that it could possibly be a sin, much less the very worst sin of all, defies not only the Bible and nearly two thousand years of theological literature, but reason and the calendar too.

    Remember, Christians are given a spirit of discernment and we are to judge things by their fruits. And the fruits of the false concept of racism as sin are deeply poisonous indeed. They have proven to be incredibly destructive of individuals, families, societies, and nations alike. When I was a child, I used to wonder how it could be that so many supposed Christians could ever be so deceived by the Antichrist as to literally worship evil.

    Now, as I see Christian ministers angrily denouncing racism and sexism from the pulpit even as they embrace Babelist globalism and sexual abomination, it all makes perfect sense. Aslan is not a tame lion, and God's definition of sin is not determined by temporal human sensitivities. Neither racism nor hurting someone's feelings by your beliefs are sins, and anyone who tells you they are is not merely lying, he is a servant of the spirit of Antichrist.

    This is really not that difficult for any educated believer. By EVERY single definition of racism utilized by the anti-racists, both Jesus Christ and God are revealed to be sinners by their overtly racist words and actions. Therefore, the perverted theology of anti-racism is obviously and necessarily false, and quite possibly blasphemous as well. And in that vein, notice how many female names are among the letter's signatories.

    Every so-called pastor who preaches against racism should be expelled from the pulpit. And if he refuses to repent, from the Church. They are among the wolves in sheep's clothing of whom we were warned."

    BTW - That was just the first item I found by word query - Racism