How Many Chicagos?

Introduction

Allow me to begin by giving you all a round-up of links that offer some very different perspectives on Debacle 2016. Wayne Grudem presents a case arguing that Christians can vote for Donald Trump. Thabiti Anyabwile presents his reasons for voting for Hillary here, which will be the inspiration for my comments today. And David Bahnsen outlines a case for an approach that I believe is as sound as it gets, given our lamentable circumstances.

Update: Another piece worth reading is by Alex Chediak here.

Thabiti
A need to differ . . .

Thabiti begins by saying that he is not looking for a wrangle. “I’m not looking for a debate with anyone.” But that is not how debate avoidance works. The way to avoid a debate is to refrain from saying something really controversial in the middle of a hot political season. While Thabiti has every right to nix the trolls at his blog, if he gets to write with passion on a subject like this, then a passionate but respectful answer should not be considered out of line. I do respect Thabiti’s judicious temperament a lot, but I believe that this is a bad mistake. I hope my reasons for saying this become increasingly evident as I proceed.

Setting the Stage

Thabiti presents an argument for voting for Hillary, but it would be a mistake to think that he is in any way endorsing her or her policies. He makes it most plain that he is simply preferring the devil he knows to the devil he doesn’t know.

“At this point, assuming Trump and Clinton are my only options, I’d vote for Clinton. Okay… take a deep breath. Count to ten. Pray. Here’s why: I prefer the predictable over the unpredictable.”

And . . .

“I regard a President Trump the worse of the two evils before us.”

And there it is. This is the necessary result once we are have allowed ourselves the right to choose between evils. Admit the principle, and you cannot object any more simply because of the acknowledged fact of the evil. Because we don’t have an evil-o-meter that we can hook up to the candidates to settle the matter objectively, we are all still having to estimate what we believe the consequences of each candidate’s election might be. But surely that is a matter of debate, right? The future is always more nebulous than mortal men want to believe. Someone could make a calculated bet that a Hillary administration would be much more resisted by Congress than a Trump administration would be, and that it would therefore result in fewer evil consequences. That is a judgment call that seems well within tolerances. He might be wrong on the facts (as I believe), but he could sincerely believe himself to be choosing the lesser of two evils. And we are good with people doing that, right?

This means that in principle Thabiti is doing the same thing that Wayne Grudem is doing—the difference between them being what they believe the practical consequences of the election might be. But no one actually knows that. We could wind up with a President Pence six weeks in—but it would still be irresponsible to vote Trump and then pray for heart attack. God expects us to make our choices on the basis of what we know, and not on the basis of what He alone knows.

God tells us what to do. The consequences are His.

“Moreover, look for able men from all the people, men who fear God, who are trustworthy and hate a bribe, and place such men over the people as chiefs of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens” (Ex. 18:21, ESV).

We are supposed to choose based on character, and not upon our supposed ability to trouble-shoot the future before any of it has happened yet.

Downward Spiral

There is a very real procedural tension in what Thabiti writes. He says that he did not vote for either the Republican or Democrat in the last several elections. He says (in effect) that he refrained from voting in the McCain/Obama race or in the Romney/Obama matchup “because I found their moral positions on vital issues unconscionable.”

But notice what this amounts to. Thabiti is saying that he felt comfortable sitting elections out because Romney—to take an example from the three—held to certain moral positions that were “unconscionable.” But this continues on for a few elections, and what finally motivates him to action? He is now voting because of the fact that both candidates are appallingly unconscionable. He refrained from voting when it was (comparatively) tacky to do so, but now is participating when it has become a matter of high wickedness. Something seems really backwards here.

I should not refrain from drinking three shots of whiskey because that would be “intemperate,” but then agree later in the evening to chug a bottle of Johnny Walker. I should either stick to my guns, or admit that I was being inconsistently fastidious earlier. Sticking to my guns is to be preferred for my money.

Abortion Silence

Thabiti says, rightly, “We must actually resist the evil as best we can.” I agree with this, but would suggest that we have more practical options than he suggests—because our options extend beyond voting.

According to Thabiti (in this election), the cost of voting against Trump (voting for Hillary) is not a cost that is too high. I would suggest that it is too high for a number of reasons—but here is my central one.

“But here’s what we know about both Stalin and Hitler. They both stampeded through their countries and neighboring countries destroying lives. If we’re not just being hyperbolic with the comparison . . .”

This is no hyperbole. We destroy lives as well as they did, and not just metaphorically.

It is astonishing to me that Thabiti was able to say that he was planning to vote for the (evil) Hillary without mentioning one of the principal evils we are dealing with. The current regime in the United States has killed about 50 million Americans thus far, all under the authority of penumbra-like rationalizations, and so we are a nation well steeped in our bloodguilt.

But this is not just simple murder on a gargantuan scale, it is also aimed in particular directions. An average day in these United States sees about 1,876 black children lose their lives in abortions. That’s one day, and nobody leaves teddy bears propped up against fences for them. Blacks represent about 13% of the U.S. population and about 36% of the abortions. The abortion rates in our country lean genocidal. And this is not just something that is done to the black population by white planners (although it is that)—it is also a pattern in which black fathers and black mothers are complicit. This is not something that is happening by some kind of unfortunate accident. It is a complicity that they need to be led out of, and it needs to be men like Thabiti who will do it.

In our elections, black Americans overwhelmingly support the party of death, the party that is killing them, and they desperately need leaders to get them out of that particular Egypt. I do not say they should go over to the Republicans, but they need to get somewhere else. Thabiti voting for Hillary is like Moses voting for Pharaoh (“the devil he knows”) because who knows what the Amalekites might be like?

At the current rates, this means that in a Hillary administration, in the course of one term only, another 2.7 million black children will lose their lives. That is the population of Chicago in one four year term. Many of their bodies will be sold for parts. In comparison to this butchery, the appalling slave market in Old Charleston pales in comparison. If Sodom will rise up in the last day and condemn Capernaum, Old Charleston will rise up in the last day and condemn us and all of our wicked ways. They will point to the blood running down the front steps of the U.S. Supreme Court, and they will have a point that leaves us standing in an ashamed silence.

2.7 million black children will die because of the policies of a woman that Thabiti says he is likely to vote for. I am referring to her full-throated support of abortion rights. The fate of these children (and many more) will also be sealed by her Supreme Court appointments, who will seal up that machinery of death for another generation. Exactly how many more “Chicagos” can the black citizens of this nation spare? And Thabiti says he is going to vote for her because it is an evil he can count on.

Battle Joined

Being salt and light in our nation is not something we do every election. We don’t just vote, and then see what happens before we vote again a few years later. Our presence in this nation is not simply periodic.

In this election, I am preparing myself for life in a beleaguered Christian opposition—regardless of who wins the election. And if I am going to be in that opposition (whether against Trump’s authoritarianism or Hillary’s despotism), I want to go into that opposition with my garments clean. I do not intend to have the yard signs of my coming adversary in my garage.

The state is going to continue to come after the church. In some way or another, the battle against the Church is really going to be joined regardless of who is elected. Things are so bad that the libertarian candidate is a statist. The libertarian candidate doesn’t have clue about religious liberty.

The issues will include what we can say from the pulpit, what can be taught in the classrooms of our schools and colleges, what kind of people must be hired by all Christian institutions, what professions conscientious Christians can go into (pharmacy, baking, etc.), and so on. The issues extend into many areas, but the battleground is going to be religious liberty.

Thabiti says that he is not constrained by the two-party system, but I am afraid that is exactly what he is constrained by. If we in the Church are on the verge of having to say “a plague on both your houses,” then it would be good if millions of us hadn’t just finished voting for one or the other of those houses.

Postscript

Scripture teaches us that we must have equal weights and measures. The judgment we apply to ourselves are the judgments we must apply to others. The excuses we permit for ourselves must be excuses we extend to others. If Thabiti is willing to cast a (reluctant) vote for the woman who approves the slaughter of 2.7 million more black children, and he will do so because he believes the alternative could well be worse, then he must be forever silent on the behavior of Christian anti-slavery advocates who genuinely feared the consequences of instantaneous manumission. His ability to criticize positions (like mine) on the slavery issue is just clean gone. If “the issues are complicated” applies to our current atrocities, then how much more do they apply to a subject that the New Testament directly teaches on?

Skip to 204 Comments
Letters
Submit A Letter to the Editor. Well-written, fair-minded letters may be interacted with in featured posts. Also, please mention the title of the post which you are addressing.

204
Leave a Reply

avatar
 
25 Comment threads
179 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
43 Comment authors
JLJonathanDebi SimonsjillybeanJim Recent comment authors

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Ben
Guest
Ben

If you were to debate Ron Burns aka Thabiti Anyabwile on this issue, you would find your abortion points to have little swaying effect. In discussing on social media his tentative support for Bernie Sanders (when Sanders was still in the race) someone confronted him on Sanders’ pro-choice position, and Burns responded by asking “What about the living?” That’s all the proof I need that he is a poor thinker and should not be a public intellectual representing reformed Christianity. To address your point about “not having the yards signs of my adversary in my garage:” I don’t think it’s… Read more »

Matt
Guest
Matt

Anyabwile’s position makes sense. As bad as Stalin was, he was no Hitler. Hillary is a low-risk choice in this regard. It’s OK now to vote for Hillary because Trump is so bad that he must be prevented from gaining power. Abortion is irrelevant to this choice because neither candidate plans to do anything about it, nor is there much of anything a president can do.

Fighting_Falcon
Guest
Fighting_Falcon

He can appoint supreme court justices.

ArwenB
Guest
ArwenB

The only reason no one cares about the millions Stalin killed is because he did it to his own people. If Hitler had stuck to killing Germans citizens, and left Poland alone, no one would have cared about what he did either.

JP Stewart
Member

Yeah, if there’s no Steve Spielberg movie, people act like it didn’t happen. Ask a person on the street about the murders of Mao, Stalin or Pol Pot, and you’ll most get blank stares (or “Did you just ask for my opinion of legalizing pot?”).

Alma
Guest
Alma

It’s amazing to me that we’re even talking about this. As much as I dislike Hillary, I think neither candidate plans to instill any kind of dictatorial regime in America. Whenever someone insinuates it, I can’t keep listening because it’s honestly a preposterous conclusion. If anyone would have, it might have been Bernie.

PerfectHold
Guest
PerfectHold

Help please with this idea that because the big two candidates find abortion irrelevant, so should you?

Alma
Guest
Alma

It has nothing to do with irrelevant. There’s no candidate that has ever wanted to make it illegal. That would not be democratic. The best way to keep abortion legal for the masses but make it rare is by defunding PP, which I think Trump is much more likely to do than Hillary.

PerfectHold
Guest
PerfectHold

Does your understanding of democratic allow for any of God’s laws (like Thou Shalt Not Kill) superceding popular vote?

Alma
Guest
Alma

If I could, I’d make it so that there would never be another abortion. However, this is impossible on the political scene, a fact which you can tell by the fact that no politician ever promises to reverse the Roe v. Wade decision. The best hope we have pragmatically is to defend Planned Parenthood so that taxpayer money is no longer funding abortions. This means they’ll be much rarer and then it’s a good chance to reverse it. Out of both candidates, Trump is by far the most likely to refund PP.

Katecho
Member

Matt wrote:

Abortion is irrelevant to this choice because neither candidate plans to do anything about it, nor is there much of anything a president can do.

Matt reminds us why he is so unreliable and untrustworthy. He seems to have forgotten that Hillary plans to end the Hyde Amendment (the rider that must be renewed annually in the federal appropriations process which prevents taxpayer funded abortion on demand). In other words, Hillary wants taxpayer funds to pay for abortions. That’s not an insignificant change.

Mark Griep
Guest
Mark Griep

“You get more of what you subsidize and less of what you penalize. It’s the LAW.”
Why do we keep subsidizing bad candidates with our votes based on the lesser of evils fallacy?

Christopher
Member

“I do not intend to have the yard signs of my coming adversary in my garage.”

You could burn the sign Guy Fox style.

“At the current rates, this means that in a Hillary administration, in the course of one term only, another 2.7 million black children will lose their lives.”

Is that number likely to be any different in a Trump administration?

John
Guest
John

There are a couple things I don’t understand about abstaining to vote:

1) Voting for the lesser of two evils is not the same thing as never being part of the opposition once they are elected. We are given two choices to be president, we choose the best of the two, and then we fight against the evils that come with it.

2) I wasn’t sure based on this post, but are you against the decision to work with Stalin against Hitler? Would it have been better to allow Hitler to hold Europe and assault Britain?

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

I agree with you on this one Doug. But given your logic, this is why you’re wrong in your perspective of the confederate south.

David
Guest
David

I’m not interested in defending Doug. But can you spell out what do you think Doug’s position on the confederate south is? And how the logic of this post contradicts Doug’s position on the south? Thanks!

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

He believes nuance is acceptable and says things about the virtue of the south and even the pleasantries about slavery (like slaves enjoyed wonderful relationships with slave owners)

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

But it is clear the system of slavery in our country had no ability to be defended given its roots in man stealing and practices of uprooting and ripping up families

adad0
Member

???
So in its’ first 60+ years, 1/2 the country gave up slavery, almost like a christian nation.
‘Wonder if the people who gave up slavery were influenced by the Gosple? ; – )

Christopher
Member

I don’t recall who gave up slavery in the first 60 years but it wasn’t 1/2 the country.

adad0
Member

??? Looks like in 1861 there were 19 free states and 15 slave states. Seems like gradualism was doin’ its’ thing.

Christopher
Member

I stand corrected.

adad0
Member

No sweat Casey, I did not really know myself until I looked it up.

“At the beginning of the war the Northern states had a combined population of 22 million people.
The Southern states had a combined population of about 9 million. This disparity was reflected in the size of the armies in the field.
The Union forces outnumbered the Confederates roughly two to one.”

To Wilson’s point about “gradualism”, 2/3 of the population had already outlawed slavery by 1861. By that standard, perhaps the USA at the time, was a bit less scummy than “lord” Ryan keeps insisting that it was.

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

I think you have defended some indefensible things. If you were willing to renounce your words in black and tan in regards to the harmonious relationship between the races as a result of slavery and your comments about it being the most Christian Nation that would be a good step forward to actually showing you haven’t defended indefensible items

Christopher
Member

If I recall correctly Doug said the harmonious relationship between the races in the slave owning south was the result of the gosple.

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

In other words doug has no problem recommending and extolling the virtues of a society that systematically targeted killed and tore apart African American families when it suits his political agenda. But when it doesn’t support his political agenda he loves to link the killing of African Americans and abortion with that political party. I would simply argue he should be consistent and recognize both as great evils the Confederate South and our current political parties who support the evil of abortion.

duellsquimby
Member

Ah Ryan…., you so wonderfully mischaracterize Doug’s position you should have a spot on Hillary’s team. I hear they’ve got a position right between Sandy Burgher and Wasserman-Schultz.

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

In other words you have no good argument so you decide to say something really stupid.

duellsquimby
Member

No Ryan, I’m laughing at you as you are just like Hillary. You’ll return to your same talking point. Over, and over. If you’ve read Black and Tan you should do so again. I read your posts and you go after Doug for what you think he said while not considering what he has said. You have done it with such vigor and vitriol I wonder what propels you. You seem singularly unencumbered by facts, nuance, or reality. You insist Doug must love the Confederacy and all that it is, despite much print and post to the contrary. From Doug… Read more »

Christopher
Member

Hey, you have an actual user name now. :)

David Trounce
Guest

Thabiti voting for Hillary is like Moses voting for Pharaoh (“the devil he knows”) because who knows what the Amalekites might be like?

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

Or maybe more like Jesus letting the Romans stay in power because revolution with unGodly means is even worse?

Alma
Guest
Alma

Jesus didn’t come to overthrow human power. Besides, Jesus clearly acted in such a way as to fulfill prophecy … Nero would destroy the temple. Yours is a false equivalency.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

I agree, Jesus came to overthrow Satan’s power, which was very much influencing certain humans.

I suggest you read “Jesus and the Victory of God”. The message that revolution against the Romans was an unGodly response is quite a clear message throughout the gospels.

FrJ+
Guest
FrJ+

All this discussion shows me once again that most conservatives are completely unshrewed in the political realm. I’ve bashed my head against the wall for nearly 30 years listening to doctrinally pure conservatives play the all or nothing game in politics. But politics is rarely an all or nothing game and it is never short term (i.e. only the next election matters). If you play the all or nothing game in politics you’ve just about guaranteed that you will receive nothing. How about this take: Trump is a tool, nothing else. I think I can get something of what I… Read more »

insanitybytes22
Member

Support for abortion, feminism, liberalism has fallen way off. I fear Trump could cause a backlash, remind people why they reject Republicans in the first place, and cause people to stop listening to conservatives on issues like abortion, small government, etc. For me, just listening to the hatred expressed by many Trump supporters, especially within the alt right, has caused me to pull way back from anything labeled (however falsely,) Republican, conservative, or even evangelical. There’s some real ugliness lurking there and it really ticks me off because those are my people, that is my tribe, but morally I just… Read more »

adad0
Member

Memi, our “every” tribe follows one Shepherd!

Ezekiel 34:22-24
22 Therefore will I save my flock, and they shall no more be a prey; and I will judge between cattle and cattle.
23 And I will set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, even my servant David; he shall feed them, and he shall be their shepherd.
24 And I the Lord will be their God, and my servant David a prince among them; I the Lord have spoken it.

insanitybytes22
Member

It doesn’t seem as if we are following our Shepherd at all, it seems as if we are following a couple of really lousy political candidates.

Ian Miller
Member

Yes. The impact of Trump as a successful leader of the party that supposedly represents conservatives is a huge reason, other than the massive character reasons, why I cannot vote for him. I’m almost tempted to vote for Hillary…but I can’t do it. I don’t see a real difference in their characters – but I also know that if Trump is the person I have to defend (even if I refuse to defend him), we’ve lost much more than we’ve won.

Alma
Guest
Alma

I really hope you reconsider your view. Like some supporters have said, Trump is not rude, he simply talks street. What can you expect? He comes from Queens and is one of the only candidates in recent memory apart from Reagan to not be a lawyer. For example, 99% of senators are lawyers. Do you really think only one profession, the riches one, represents the American people? For proper representation, there should be teachers, doctors, librarians, etc … in Congress. Now, that said, being an outsider is his appeal. He doesn’t mince words and has clear policy stances, unlike Hilary.… Read more »

Jane
Member

“He comes from Queens and is one of the only candidates in recent memory
apart from Reagan to not be a lawyer. For example, 99% of senators are
lawyers.”

False. Jeb Bush is not a lawyer. John McCain is not a lawyer. George W. Bush is not a lawyer. Mitt Romney is not a lawyer. Ben Carson is not a lawyer. George H.W. Bush is not a lawyer. Bernie Sanders is not a lawyer. Carly Fiorina is not a lawyer. Mike Huckabee is not a lawyer. Bobby Jindal is not a lawyer.

Currently, 55 Senators are lawyers, which is 55%, not 99%.

Alma
Guest
Alma

I apologize for the wrong stat. My point remains however in that that it’s a disproportionate number to other professions represented in Congress. It makes sense that Hillarys speech would sound more refined but it goes also goes to show that Trumps strength would be the economy.

Jane
Member

It is disproportionate and there is a point to be made, but asserting made up, significantly wrong stats with so much confidence doesn’t help your argument.

Alma
Guest
Alma

Right. That was my mistake.

jigawatt
Guest
jigawatt

But Hillary is indeed a lawyer. Just ask Thomas Alfred Taylor.

jigawatt
Guest
jigawatt

Thabiti said:

Let me say from the onset that I’m not looking for a debate with anyone. I’m not looking to sway anyone’s vote or to suggest that someone viewing things differently from me is in sin. I’m not wanting to pit my “moral outrage” against your “moral outrage” in a battle for “moral supremacy.” I’m certainly not interested in casting aspersions or receiving any. If you’re looking for that, then you’ve come to the wrong post. I’ll delete anything I think comes close to violating an Ephesians 4:29 approach to communication.

Is he attempting to claim a Safe Space?

Frank Turk
Guest
Frank Turk

Another view of the lesser of two evils.

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sop0o5

James Frazier
Guest
James Frazier

I’m having trouble reconciling Exodus 18 with David Bahnsen’s article. Do you agree with DB when he makes a lesser-of-two-evils excuse for Trump that he calls the 3b position?

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

This is probably where someone points out that in the not-so-distant past, we had an “anti-abortion-rights” administration, both houses of Congress controlled by the “anti-abortion-rights” party, and 7 of 9 Supreme Court Justices picked by “anti-abortion-rights” presidents….and the abortion rate didn’t go down one bit. The abortion rate grew tremendously in the 1970s, peaked in 1984 and 1985, dropped substantially from 1994-2000 before plateauing into a slower decline. Right now it is at the lowest rate in 45 years. Rather than supporting a party because they “claim” to be against abortion while doing almost nothing beyond symbolic gestures against it,… Read more »

adad0
Member

J’, your typical, church sponsored, pregnancy counseling ministry is doing just that! They know why abortions happen and offer alternative to that evil!
These ministries do justice and love mercy! Perhaps these ministries are why the abortion rate is dropping! ; – )

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

I agree that those are good things, the kinds of things we need more of. I feel that the national conversation and energy has focused FAR more on the blue/red wars than actually doing those things. For instance, how much energy on this blog has gone to the need for the church to devote more of its resources to such ministries, perhaps even relocating to those areas where they are most needed? And how much energy on this blog has been devoted to, “But don’t vote or anyone other than my chosen candidates because abortion!” The author of this blog… Read more »

Luke Pride
Guest

It almost seems like he believes the abortion issue is the only grossly immoral things leftists are imposing on us. Controlling spiritual formation, requiring people to pay for programs to line government pockets and dozens of other immoral things would make the immorality clear whether abortion was an issue or not.

JP Stewart
Member

Yep. And of course there’s the LGBQT agenda that Hillary will most likely push as hard as Obama did. Trump may not be a huge opponent, but at the very least he’s ambivalent towards those issues and not beholden to the Gaystopo.

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

This would be called, taken to the wood shed…and highlights the truth I’ve been contending for that Doug’s view on slavery is evil and is in need of repentance. I pray the Lord would grant you repentance brother.
https://blogs.thegospelcoalition.org/thabitianyabwile/2016/08/02/always-get-more-than-one-estimate/

fp
Guest
fp

Sather, you must have short-term memory loss. I specifically remember A-dad taking you to the woodshed over your lying about Doug’s views. Aren’t you progressives always screaming in people’s faces about how we must see the nuance, about how conservatives are such simpletons for not believing in nuance, how we must cut the Black Lives Matter crowd some slack for not speaking up about blacks killing blacks, because nuance? So Doug points out that not every single last interaction between blacks and whites in the Antebellum South was that of whitey whipping the field slaves to a bloody pulp every… Read more »

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

You are wrong…Doug is incorrect…and he’s silent…Remember that.

fp
Guest
fp

I remember you being done in by quotes from a link you posted in the other thread, after which you were very silent.

I may disagree with Thabiti about a lot of things, but it’s kinda hard to argue with him when even he acknowledges Doug’s non-racism.

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

I wasn’t silent. I responded to Doug, held his feet to the fire, and he turned tail and ran again. Bc he couldn’t handle the heat, he got out of the kitchen. Not surprising. But still weak to not be able to answer.

fp
Guest
fp

No, Sather. Now put on your thinking cap and follow along: I’m referring to the Rachel Held Evans thread where A-dad quoted from the rest of the debate between Doug and Thabiti — you know, the debate you claimed he never read. I’ve been referring to that thread the whole time. He showed you up, and you fell silent.

You can’t be that stupid.

Christopher
Member

Fight those windmills.

adad0
Member

Hmmm, not even the sound of crickets!…?????

How silent can a guy get? ????

jigawatt
Guest
jigawatt

I wasn’t silent. I responded to Doug, held his feet to the fire, and he turned tail and ran again. Bc he couldn’t handle the heat, he got out of the kitchen. Not surprising. But still weak to not be able to answer.

If I had to guess, I’d say that in the comments sections Doug has replied directly to you more than to any other person. Conversing via comments is not his thing.

It’s real easy to see someone’s biases and loyalties. Just look at who gets the benefit of the doubt and who doesn’t.

Christopher
Member

Dougs veiw on slavery might be inaccurate but it’s not evil.

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

It’s pure evil

Katecho
Member

Seeking to murder someone’s name and reputation through lies is also wicked. Something Ryan needs to consider.

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

If using someone’s own words to point and pray for repentance is evil in your mind I’d suggest reading your Bible.

fp
Guest
fp

Sather, do you read your Bible? If you did, you’d know that is says things like, “The one who conceals hatred has lying lips, and whoever utters slander is a fool.” (Proverbs 10:18).

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

Yes, I agree Doug does this with his views on the evil of slavery and the confederacy and he needs to repent

fp
Guest
fp

Nice try there, Sather, but no cigar. You seem to be comprehensionally challenged. Perhaps an ESL class could help you with your troubles?

Katecho
Member

Sather’s lies are in claiming that Wilson is defending Southern slavery when Wilson is on record, in multiple places, clearly repudiating race-based and kidnap-based slavery as well as all forms of racial malice and racial vainglory. Not even Anyabwile agrees with Sather. Sather simply ignores these facts and sifts through Wilson to try to twist his words. This attempt to murder is the very thing that James warns against. What is the source of quarrels and conflicts among you? Is not the source your pleasures that wage war in your members? You lust and do not have; so you commit… Read more »

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

THE ONLY SORT OF SLAVERY IN OUR COUNTRY WAS RACE BASED, VIA MAN STEALING…AND SOMEHOW DW THINKS THERE IS ROOM FOR NUANCE AND THAT IT WAS POSSIBLE TO OBEY SCRIPTURE AND PARTICIPATE IN THAT SYSTEM AS A FOLLOWER OF JESUS. THAT’S COMPLETE AND UTTER NONSENSE.

I DON’T ENVY DW, I PITY HIM. HIS VIEWS ARE AN OFFENSE TO THE GOSPEL AND WICKED. I PRAY HE REPENTS.

Katecho
Member

Rather than continue to lie about Wilson, perhaps Sather could quote Wilson saying that he thinks “THAT IT WAS POSSIBLE TO OBEY SCRIPTURE AND PARTICIPATE IN THAT SYSTEM AS A FOLLOWER OF JESUS”. Now clearly it is possible to participate in a system of biblical slavery and still be a follower of Jesus. This was the case with Philemon, for example, and there are references in Paul’s epistles to other such slave owners and masters within the Church who were members in good standing. As to whether one could “OBEY SCRIPTURE” in the act of participating in kidnap-based slavery is… Read more »

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

I’ve shown it plenty, go read the quotes. American slavery is biblically indefensible. But somehow, DW thinks in order to defend Scripture as infallible he must defend the evil American slavery as something that believers could participate in without sin. Whatever else he says, simply is for not, because he gives cover for Christians back then to own slaves. I’d stop on this issue if Wilson would simply say he is wrong, and take back his quotes that give cover to owning slaves in the wicked confederate system. So wicked a system (love of money at root no doubt) they… Read more »

Katecho
Member

Sather is, once again, unable to deliver on his accusations. He provides no quote showing what he accuses Wilson of. As such, Sather confirms himself to be just another internet liar. At least he can’t say that we didn’t give him a hearing.

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

I’ve quoted it many times, get a life

fp
Guest
fp

Then it shouldn’t be any trouble to quote it again. If you’re unfamiliar with the wonder of copy & paste, then I’m sure some technically inclined person in your life would be willing to help you out. Go ask your nine-year-old.

Katecho
Member

The irony of Sather telling us to get a life.

I’ll just point out that Sather has, again, failed to provide the quote that he needed to provide. Given the nature of his accusation, and his call for repentance from Wilson, I don’t accept Sather’s excuses.

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

You’re lazy, but that’s not surprising. Quote How could men have supported slavery? The question is especially difficult when we consider that these were men who lived in a pervasively Christian culture. We have all heard of the heartlessness — the brutalitites, immoralities, and cruelties — that were supposedly inherent in the system of slavery. We have heard how slave families were broken up, of the forcible rape of slave women, of the brutal beatings that were a commonplace, about the horrible living conditions, and of the unrelenting work schedule and back-breaking routine — all of which go together to… Read more »

Katecho
Member

One more time, Sather seems to have forgotten his own accusation and what he was asked to provide. Sather accused Wilson of saying that participation in Southern slavery was obedience to Scripture. Sather accused Wilson of “defend[ing] the evil American slavery as something that believers could participate in without sin.” This quote does nothing to support Sather’s accusations. It doesn’t say that participation in Southern slavery was obedience to Scripture, or that Southern believers participated in it without sin. It simply describes that the brutal oppressiveness of Southern slavery has been exaggerated and absolutized, ignoring instances of genuine loyalty and… Read more »

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

“On firm biblical ground” not sure what more you need

Katecho
Member

At a certain point, we may have to conclude that Sather just doesn’t have the intellectual capacity (or honesty) to see key distinctions. But I’ll make the attempt to spell it out for him. His quote from Wilson was this: The abolitionists maintained that slave-owning was inherently immoral under any circumstance. But in this matter, the Christians who owned slaves in the South were on firm scriptural ground. . . . Provided he owns them in conformity to Christ’s laws for such situations, the Bible is clear that Christians may own slaves. When Wilson says that Christians who owned slaves… Read more »

Katecho
Member

As another aid in spelling out important distinctions for Sather, what’s betters than to hear Wilson in his own words?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y0fTaMBESs

Notice how Wilson rejects any attempts to justify Southern slavery, while still condemning the approach of the abolitionist, and while still affirming the biblical position on Christians owning slaves for things like restitution of debts.

Sather needs to apologize to Wilson.

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

Another ridiculous idea: When we ask the question whether slavery in the South was a biblical slavery, the answer must consequently be yes and no. Was the South a nation in covenant with the Lord Jesus Christ? Had it undertaken formally to conform all its laws, including its laws on slavery, to the laws of Scripture? The answer is clearly no: the South was not a Christian utopia. If, however, we ask whether the South contained many conscientious Christians, both slave-owning and enslaved, who endeavored to follow the requirements of Scripture set down in the New Testament for believers in… Read more »

Katecho
Member

Sather blew a hole in his own accusation with this quote. Notice Wilson says: Had it undertaken formally to conform all its laws, including its laws on slavery, to the laws of Scripture? The answer is clearly no I think Sather owes Wilson an apology now. Wilson clearly said that the Southern institution of slavery was unbiblical. The sense in which Southern slavery could be said to be “Christianized” was in the attempt by some Christians (either masters or slaves) to apply a subset of Scriptural adherence over the top of the kidnap-based system. In that sense there were expressions… Read more »

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

Another sign of his “virtue he attempts to attach to his bs”…as he says Christians owning slaves based on the race based, man stealing evils of our slavery were on FIRM BIBLICAL GROUND TO OWN SLAVES…utter nonsense The abolitionists maintained that slave-owning was inherently immoral under any circumstance. But in this matter, the Christians who owned slaves in the South were on firm scriptural ground. . . . Provided he owns them in conformity to Christ’s laws for such situations, the Bible is clear that Christians may own slaves. . . . [T]he Bible prohibits us from saying that slave-owning… Read more »

Katecho
Member

Once again, Sather seems to have forgotten his own accusation and what he was asked to provide. Sather accused Wilson of saying that participation in Southern slavery was obedience to Scripture. Sather accused Wilson of “defend[ing] the evil American slavery as something that believers could participate in without sin.” This quote is clearly not a defense of Southern slavery at all, but a defense of the principle that Christians can own slaves, as defined by Scriptural laws for such situations. Southern slavery did not meet the Scriptural criteria, which is why Wilson condemns it as sinful. However, Christian slave owners… Read more »

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

Slavery and racial harmony..like Hitler and Jewish harmony…right… Quote: Slavery as it existed in the South was not an adversarial relationship with pervasive racial animosity. Because of its dominantly patriarchal character, it was a relationship based upon mutual affection and confidence. There has never been a multi-racial society which has existed with such mutual intimacy and harmony in the history of the world. The credit for this must go to the predominance of Christianity. The gospel enabled men who were distinct in nearly every way, to live and work together, to be friends and often intimates. This happened to such… Read more »

Katecho
Member

Sather seems to have forgotten his own accusation and what he was asked to provide. Sather accused Wilson of saying that participation in Southern slavery was obedience to Scripture. Sather accused Wilson of “defend[ing] the evil American slavery as something that believers could participate in without sin.” This quote does not say the Southern slave owners were without sin, or that they were obedient to Scripture. It simply describes how the close relationships could occur across the cultural and racial divide, in spite of the sinfulness of Southern slavery. Those close relationships could occur because of the influence of part… Read more »

Christopher
Member

What made the slavery in Pauls time defenceable?

Katecho
Member

Actual debt owed? Sather seems to admit room for nuance in order to avoid denouncing Scripture itself, but for some reason he won’t listen to Wilson. Sather simply ignores when Wilson condemns the racial- kidnap-based slavery of the South.

Wilson can condemn the slavery institution of the South while still pointing to some of its historical features that resemble biblical slavery, or resemble Christian influence over the master/slave relationship. Sather may come unglued, but that doesn’t make Wilson guilty of what Sather is accusing him of. It just makes Sather a liar.

Christopher
Member

Not all the slaves were debt slaves. If Sather wants to call participation in U.S. slavery unacceptable for christians he needs to explain why it was acceptable for christians to participate in greek/roman slavery. Or take Paul to task for defending the practice like Doug.

fp
Guest
fp

Tsk, tsk, Sather. Raising the decibel level isn’t the way to peg the truth-o-meter. In order to do that, you must TELL THE TRUTH.

Jill Smith
Member

I hope you don’t mind my saying, in my delicate Canadian way, that your self-righteousness is a little off-putting. I think the book in question is seriously mistaken in its use of sources and in its conclusions. But every time you start in on it, I find your piety much harder to swallow than Doug’s wrong-headedness. Could you possibly give it a rest? Just for a month or two?

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

Sure Jilly just for you…sorry to trouble you so

Christopher
Member

That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

Exactly why there’s never a reason to respond to you with evidence…no evidence is ever present in what you say…just minionship and you do that better than most Casey.

But theres a reason DW responds to me, he is trying to suppress the truth…and he has no ground to stand on.

Christopher
Member

Why do you think everyone who disagrees with you is Dougs minion?

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

I don’t, but you are

Christopher
Member

You conistantly lob the minion lable at people who disagree with you. Why do you feel that I am Dougs minion?

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

By the way, I’d encourage all of you to watch our live stream of #options2016 if you’re interested in some different voices on the biblical call to discipleship http://www.options2016.org

Tony
Guest

“Thabiti voting for Hillary is like Moses voting for Pharaoh (“the devil he knows”) because who knows what the Amalekites might be like?”

This quote sums it up. What he is saying is pure insanity. I am not saying he is insane but his thinking isn’t logical in this matter.

Alma
Guest
Alma

With all due respect, I cannot believe that you compare a freedom loving candidate like Trump with Stalin and Hitler, and expect to be taken seriously. There’s so much bias against Trump here that goes in complete contravention to the views of the vast majority of the evangelical community on Trump, who are voting for him in droves. It’s a very simple reason: religious liberty. Hillary will continue to sanction limitations on freedom while Trump wants to leave evangelicals alone to practice their faith in peace. There’s 0 proof that Trump would be anything other than staunchly democratic politically speaking,… Read more »

Reb4
Guest
Reb4

Interesting read… Just wanted to comment about this part said near the end:

“Egypt. I do not say they should go over to the Republicans, but they need to get somewhere else. Thabiti voting for Hillary is like Moses voting for Pharaoh (“the devil he knows”) because who knows what the Amalekites might be like?”

Problem with that was the choice was not between Pharaoh / Egyptians or the Amalekites, but Moses was following God.

Just passing through…

Though I will need to add one other post ..

Paul Lobo, Washington, D.C.
Guest
Paul Lobo, Washington, D.C.

Please feel free to delete I have posted this after reading part of your well written article. Now I have read it in its entirety Really, and they hate trump! At least one of Trump’s campaign promises was to defund planned parenthood! Let me assume, like the majority, that he is lying. I am not saying that. Now Hillary (God bless her heart) has no balls She has no balls, quite literally, like #alwaystrump Now she has not even said anything like that. In fact, if at all she gets elected for the highest office, not only Row vs Wade… Read more »

Paul Lobo, Washington, D.C.
Guest
Paul Lobo, Washington, D.C.

I meant I have posted it on my Facebook page. I have 100s of ‘friends’ ????
Majority are Christians? And many other religions and persuadion, many friends most definitely Christians from my church CHBC.. Thabiti was an elder there
As i said, please feel free to
Delete both of my posts on your website, if you so think it wise.

Brandon Bellinghausen
Guest
Brandon Bellinghausen

Disappointed at how Thabiti’s post began with the same kind of comment-deleting threats that Rachel H Evans begins most of her posts with.

Sadly, these sentiments grow out of the same ideology.

Jim
Guest
Jim

I find the issue of 2-4 Supreme Court appointments of anti life judges vs. 0-1 appointments of judges who might not legislate from the bench to be a very important point. Much in the rest of the blog post seems in need of reconsideration. 1) Citing God’s instructions to Moses in Exodus 18 on how to choose judges neglects the fact that in America one man one vote differs from Israel’s one man (Moses), one vote. If this instruction to Moses is to be taken directly by God’s people under the New Covenant, we’d better also start wearing tassels on… Read more »

Debi Simons
Guest

I’m afraid that I can’t read through all 250+ comments, so perhaps someone has already pointed this out: the May 10 article that Thabiti wrote was just the first one of three, and he is most emphatically not silent on the issue of abortion in the other two. It is not even correct for you to say that “Thabiti was able to say that he was planning to vote for the (evil) Hillary without mentioning one of the principal evils we are dealing with.” He does mention in the May 10 article that Trump equivocates on abortion. And then he… Read more »

Jennie
Member

Here is what I don’t understand at a very basic level about Pastor Thabiti’s decision to support Hillary Clinton. Over the last two years or so I have been slowly tip toeing into the Reformed world, and as I have done so one of the areas that I have found to be most challenging, but most necessary, is the the practice of complementarianism. I submit myself as best i can to this understanding, for it is pretty clear in Scripture. On a recent hunt for articles on the role of women and the Gospel, I ran into a beautiful article… Read more »