Whiteness at the Intersection
Interesting thoughts on the whiteness of intersectionality. I have felt this sentiment in my gut for some time, but here it is all laid out in words. More concerning than this, however, is that the evangelical church seems to be falling for it hook, line, and sinker.
Kyle
Kyle, yes. There is a great deal of gullibility going around.
This is regarding your recent article, “The Unbearable Whiteness of Intersectionality.” Some of the criticism to the concept of institutional racism has been that such a concept does not point to any particular individual to blame for racism, and thus it creates a racist boogeyman in culture at large that no one is able to point to, but is certainly responsible for systemic oppression. Likewise, when you speak of white progressives, “the pasty white guy,” as you described, setting the bar for progressivism, are there particular notorious individuals we can point to today responsible for the problem of whiteness? If there is no one person (persons) for our fingers to point to, does that present a similar problem that is seen in the boogeyman of institutional racism? I also understand it is entirely possible that I failed to understand your argument and have thus wasted your time with this letter. I sincerely hope the latter is not the case. I would appreciate your thoughts. Blessings in Christ,
Justin
Justin, if I understand your question and possible objection, it would go like this. Isn’t it inconsistent to object to the liberal generalizations about whiteness, and then to frame a few conservative generalizations about liberal whiteness myself? And my reply to this is that I don’t object to generalizations or caricature as such. Jesus painted the Pharisaical party in cartoonish colors, and He did so righteously. He gets to call them whited sepulchers, and they don’t get to call Him a drunkard and a glutton. And the reason has to do with the accuracy of the caricature (can you recognize the target through it?) and whether or not the thing caricatured is a problem. The officiousness of the pasty white guy is a thing, and as a thing, it is a problem. The white privilege that sets people off is also a thing, but in a biblical worldview there is nothing wrong with something like “privilege.” That is only a sin in the egalitarian dictionary.
I agree with you on several points in this article, such as your observation that Clarence Thomas (and Thomas Sowell for that matter) are not treated as blacks by radical liberals, but I question the idea that the intersectionality business is white-run. The very term was invented by a black lady professor named Kimberle Crenshaw. It is true that most liberal professors and newsmen are still white, and that whites have played a major role in the wave of radicalism, but in recent years that seems to have been changing, as the University of Missouri succumbed to student protesters. Obama, the most socially liberal president the U.S.A. ever had, is black, and old white liberals such as Barbara Boxer and Frank Lautenberg are being replaced by still-more-liberals of color such as Kamala Harris and Cory Booker. The Black Lives Matter movement in Seattle attacked Bernie Sanders—I don’t know why. Perhaps I am missing something in this article, but I do not believe that intersectionality is an elite white conspiracy, and if it is, it is likely to be taken over by a diverse band of liberals, as Shift and Ginger fell to Tash when the Calormenes came.
James
James, yes. This has to do with the point I was making about proxy wars. When the group that the progressive whites raise up start thinking a little bit too independently, and start to believe the propaganda that is being circulated concerning them, they can start to challenge those who initially sponsored them. And that is why the white progs then raise up another group that trumps the earlier ones. Why is the hot item right now the tranny thing? Because white liberals can flood into it. Heterosexual black men are now participating in the sin of white privilege.
The Prayer for Andrew Cuomo
If the murderers can be saved oh GOD, I pray for their salvation with repentance/removal from their filthy sick crimes. Oh, carry my grief, carry our grief for the innocent victims. Lead us in our forgiving thoughts on what to think righteously, and what to speak righteously, and what to do righteously oh precious HOLY SPIRIT. In JESUS name. Amen Amen Amen Amen
Marguerite
Marguerite, and amen.
Powerful, excellent. Moving!
Andrew
Andrew, thank the Lord.
AMEN and AMEN! And may You, LORD, give us a peg in Your holy place, that You may enlighten our eyes and give us a measure of revival in our bondage.
Thomas
Thomas, yes. May the Lord lift us up out of the slippery place where we currently are.
Thank you! I serve at our local pregnancy resource centers and can sometimes be discouraged by the apathy I see in pastors and churches. It is such an encouragement to have a pastor speak on behalf of the pre-born. So many have (wrongly) asserted that this is either a “political issue” or a “women’s issue” and their faulty reasoning gives them a “get out of jail free” card. I shared with our board that we need more volunteers/client advocates and they asked why folks are not serving. I said, “Prayerlessness.” Thank you for praying, preaching, writing, teaching and loving. You help to strengthen my heart for the work.
Kat
Kat, keep up the good work.
Canon Audible
So excited about Canon releasing more audiobooks! I have been so blessed by their books, but given my life right now, I probably get through 5 or 6 audiobooks to every hard copy book I read, since I can “read” audiobooks while I cook, wash dishes, clean, supervise the kids from the porch, drive around, etc. I am stockpiling my Audible credit in anticipation.
Lori
Lori, that’s the spirit . . .
So y’all are making a concerted push to transfer canon books to audio. That’s great! If y’all are interested, I would love to be a part of it. Long time reader, jail chaplain, member of Trinity Presbyterian CREC in Valparaiso FL. Inspired by CR Wiley’s encouragement to antifragility and household economy, I have recently purchased a fairly quality mic and am interested in getting into audio book recording, particularly recording of solid Christian audio, and y’all definitely fit that bill. If y’all could use some cheap help, I would definitely be interested.
B
B, I passed your contact info on. Perhaps you will hear from them. But just by the way of a preliminary question, do you say y’all that much when you read?
Find Your Calling
I am a big fan all the way in Missouri and I am extremely grateful for all of your video and written content. I am currently reading Father Hunger and so far it has been a joy to read. I’m 23 with a Bachelor’s degree in Business Administration but I haven’t really determined what I am supposed to be doing with my life in terms of vocation and I don’t know how to begin tangibly discovering my calling. I have prayed for provision and clarity and I will continue to wait for the answer to those things. But, since I have read this, I want to ask: how should I go about discovering my calling? What aspects of my life should I be taking a hard look at and how should I aid myself in the determination of my talents and abilities and the gifts God has given me to build a suitable life for a wife, children, and bring glory to Jesus? Thank you for all that you do. Blessings,
Christian
Christian, this is a huge subject, but I would start here. After that, I would get the book God at Work by Gene Veith.
Christ Hidden in Your Calling: God has granted you so much wisdom and I sincerely want to thank you for consistently applying the balm of the gospel and the Word of God to life—all of Christ for all of life. I hope you continue to write and engage the culture as long as you can; otherwise, who will I go to read as a modern day Chesterton. God bless you and your work!
Seth
Seth, thanks for the very kind words.
Any suggestions for good commentaries on Hebrews? Also, what happened to CanonWired? I haven’t been able to access it for some time. It just times out when I try. Bill
Bill, I can heartily recommend Christ and His Rivals. The only down side is that the guy who wrote it thinks he is funny. And CanonWired is right here.
Mandatory Divorce?
Can you direct me to an online teaching that Doug has written which answers this question: “Must a man divorce his wife if there has been adultery on her part but she was demonstrably repentant?”
Chris
Chris, that sounds familiar, and I am guessing it was an Ask Doug question. I am not sure how to go about finding it. But my answer would be no, divorce is not mandatory when the guilty spouse is repentant. Even so, even with repentance, the wronged spouse has the option of divorce. For my part, as a counselor, when a marriage can be put back together in a biblical way, that is what I work for.
A Reasonable Gripe
I’m a long time reader of yours. This is not a response to any given post. But rather a gripe/request about how you creatively title your posts. I have often had the following experience: 1) I read an awesome article of yours 2) years pass 3) I think to myself, “I’d like to re-read that Wilson post where he deals with the question ‘Why do we need to ask forgiveness if God has already forgiven all our sins?’” 4) I look for it and can’t find it, because for all I know it may be titled “A Polecat in a Hollow Tree,” or something like that. :-) Maybe your search engine is better than I realize. But I wish the titles were more descriptive and less funny.
Justin
Justin, I take your point, and I feel the pain. But if the titles were duddy and descriptive, who would want to read them the first time?
You define masculinity as the glad-hearted acceptance of sacrificial responsibility. What do you think are the chief rewards for taking responsibility?
Wil
Wil, the rest of that formula, as I teach it this. Authority flows to those who take responsibility. Authority flees those who seek to evade it. So I believe that sacrificial responsibility, true masculinity, is the foundation of biblical authority.
Righteous Lot
I enjoyed your post “A Few Words On Behalf of Karen Pence,” as I do most of your spade-calling. So this is perhaps off point, but here goes: Why did you choose the Lot in Sodom episode as a counterpoint to the sex scandal nonsense? Lot didn’t send out his guests to be raped, but he did offer his (presumably teenage) virgin daughters to be raped, and nothing in the text suggests that he wouldn’t have done it had the angels not taken over. I’m aware of commentaries that say that this story was as much or more about the sin against hospitality as it was about the sexual sins of homosexuality or rape. So I get it that there are lessons in the story, e.g., that not everything the Bible recounts, it necessarily approves. So I shouldn’t read your reference to “righteous Lot” as meaning that offering his daughters was righteous… right? (Especially as you aimed the piece at progressives, who will immediately lose all ability for rational thought once they see the calculus of “Obama/Roe/Obergefell = bad, Lot-who-was-OK-with-his-daughters-being-raped = good.”)
Marie
Marie, thanks. And you are right to point out that I would condemn Lot’s treatment of his daughters. But the apostle Peter calls Lot righteous, and so I thought I should too. My point was simply that to the mob outside, it was a scandal to them that Lot was not being fully cooperative with their sexual agenda.
In “The 9 Pitfalls of Homeschooling” you had said: “And I would also ask everyone to hold their fire until I can assemble the comparable list for traditional classroom instruction.” I was wondering if there are other blog posts in the works to address the comparable list.
Whitney
Whitney, thanks for the nudge. And I believe that somebody else nudged me on this earlier, and I was equally apologetic, and equally unproductive. I will try to get to it.
Mormon Music
To Amy, who pointed out that The Lower Lights were Mormon—that’s unfortunate (I’m the guy who recommended them). I researched them a bit when I first found them because they were from Salt Lake, but didn’t find enough evidence either way. For what it’s worth, I over-analyze lyrics to Christian music, and I didn’t catch any twisting of words on the songs they covered (I think I would have). Whatever category that leaves them in . . .
Joseph
Joseph, thank you for following up on that.
The Trump Conundrum
PDW writes: “Now as I have written here before, I did not vote for Trump, in part, because character really matters. If Trump broke his word on so many occasions in the past, which he had, I had no reason to believe that he wouldn’t break his word to us if elected president. So I simply didn’t believe him, and I didn’t think the evangelicals who supported him should have believed him either. I thought they were going to be abandoned (yet again), but thus far I have been shown to have been wrong.” I write to confirm that you were correct in thinking that Trump would break his word. Indeed he has. He promised to eliminate “Gun Free Zones” on “Day ONE” (https://tinyurl.com/yaut2uyr) Still not even close to that goal. He has declared himself a champion of the 2nd Amendment/RKBA—Right to Keep and Bear Arms. (https://tinyurl.com/yd7swdo2) Yet he has repeatedly added to the penalties and regulatory paradigm that God-fearing 2nd Amendment advocates despise. (https://tinyurl.com/yatcvxd2) Currently the clock is ticking on a bump stock ban that may transmogrify to include all semi-automatic firearms in the future. (https://tinyurl.com/y8mvhwor) In many ways, on RKBA issues, Trump has done more damage to RKBA in 2 years than Obama did in 8. Gun owners, who admittedly voted against HRC as much they voted for Trump, have had their trust betrayed in the same way minority groups have had their lives/rights degraded voting for democrats over the generations. On the larger point of Pence accepting a VP nomination from a man devoid of moral character, how can anyone judge that decision? The hypocrisy of attempting moral judgement in this instance is laughable. A reasonable case can be made for the sincere conscience either way: A) Yes, provided Pence is not expected to defend a Lewinsky-type scenario, past present or future, who would anyone rather have as VP? A cross-dresser? Perhaps a Biden type who can’t keep his hands off any female (https://tinyurl.com/y93sxpwx)? B) Yeah, I won’t tacitly approve of this dude, he’s going to betray the People—based on his track record.
Ron
(and, it should be noted, a different Ron than the signatory on the next
letter)
Ron, I agree with you that he is the same man. And I also agree that the instances you cite are examples of him not keeping his word. But—for whatever inscrutable reason—he has been consistently good on judges, who will be a very practical bulwark for us when he is gone. And secondly, in the space where I live (education and higher education), I can tell you that if Hillary had won, it would largely be game over for us. As it is, Trump has given us incalculable gifts.
For some evangelicals (including moi), a vote for Trump was very specifically a vote to prevent what I consider occupation of the White House by two incredibly scandalous and corrupt people. I had no grand illusions of Trump, and could only pray that as distasteful as he is, he would limit a further lurch of our nation to the left. Had I another viable option I would have taken it in a second. As it stands today, he’s performed better than I expected. Have I compromised my Christian beliefs? You tell me.
Ron
Ron, you have a point. And the upcoming debate among evangelicals about the next presidential campaign is going to be a hullabaloo.
More on Psalms
Could you revive this link? I remember hearing this song when you posted it a few years back and it’s been in my head recently. Would really like to hear it again and play it for my kids. God Bless,
Aaron
Aaron, you should be able to locate it here.
“Even so, even with repentance, the wronged spouse has the option of divorce.” Totally disagree. We are obligated to forgive our brothers or sisters who are repentant. How can a minister of the gospel justly grant the dissolution of a lifelong covenant, “til death do us part” between two communing members of the faith? If the perpetrator is honestly repentant, and working to right the wrong and living consistently with that public repentance, then I don’t think we can lawfully permit a divorce. The only possible exceptions I could conceive would be if a child is present or there are… Read more »
-BJ- said: “Totally disagree. We are obligated to forgive our brothers or sisters who are repentant.” The argument that true repentance requires forgiveness and thus trumps the “exception clause” is interesting, one which I’m not certain I have heard before. However, forgiveness is not reconciliation, so it raises the question “Does God require reconciliation when forgiveness occurs?”. I think God desires all relationships to be godly and healthy, and so I believe He desires all marriages to continue. But, practically speaking, how does one know that their adulterous spouse is truly repentant? I think divorce for adultery (or other porneia)… Read more »
“how does one know that their adulterous spouse is truly repentant?”
It is admittedly always a judgment call on the part of the minister. If they honestly (and totally) confess, stop the behavior, and do whatever wisdom requires to pursue reconciliation, we have fairly good evidence to assume the repentance is genuine.
The short answer would be if they are repentant enough to partake of the Lord’s Supper and not be under church discipline. These things obviously take wisdom and patience, but to give a pass to divorce with a repentant spouse is not good.
BJ, I struggle with this from my own experience. Would you draw any distinction between a one time affair and serial adultery over a period of years of which the innocent spouse was previously unaware? My own church always favors reconciliation and would not recognize a civil divorce, but would allow the innocent spouse to live apart when a pattern of chronic deception and infidelity makes a sudden profession of contrition a bit hard to swallow. I don’t think this is a particularly good solution in human terms. It does give the innocent spouse time to evaluate the sincerity and… Read more »
Indeed. Forgiveness can, and ideally will, lead to reconciliation, but forgiveness is not reconciliation.
Adultery brings the very real risk of AIDS and other incurable diseases. I have wondered if such were to happen in an adulterous situation, would the “put the disease from the camp” verses be an extra motivation for divorce. thoughts?
That is a complicated case, to be sure, and not to be taken as normative, but here is my take at it. The one-flesh union is a leg of the three-legged stool called marriage. If a deadly disease is acquired in the course of sinful infidelity, and the normal sexual relationship within the marriage is permanently damaged, then lawful divorce is not out of the question. I would always seek to preserve marriage, no matter how bad things get. I have seen some of the most terrible situations overcome by God’s grace. But, in that case, I would argue there… Read more »
Part of determining true repentance, a tough job indeed, is the nature of the sin and the nature of the repentance. If a someone has a year long affair and gets caught, their claims of repentance will be looked at much more skeptically. The bearing of “fruit in keeping with repentance” will have to be objectively and publicly undeniable. So, let’s say a wife has a one night stand with another man, she is overcome with grief and sorrow, and she confesses. She confesses to her husband. She confesses to the elders. She is sorrowful. She is willing to give… Read more »
I think Doug phrased things the way he did because of the question he was answering. The wronged spouse is allowed to offer restoration of the marriage covenant; for which forgiveness is a necessary but not a sufficient condition. The unfaithful spouse is the covenant-breaker, and so I think we ought not to place the whole burden of divorce on the faithful spouse who could not countenance restoring the cheater. Suppose a godly woman discovered that her apparently godly husband of 12 years had been carrying on a four-year affair with the wife of another member of their church. The… Read more »
lndighost, I think Doug “phrased things” clearly enough to show his position, and BJ clearly disagrees. In your example, the husband clearly did not repent initially. However, he may have eventually reached the point of true repentance. I would contend that repentance may be a process, not always an instantaneous event. If the process is slow, then trust is further diminished and the path back is longer. When it is unclear if he has truly repented (in your example I think it is remorse, not repentance), then I think separation is appropriate. There needs to be time to redevelop adequate… Read more »
OKR , I agree with you, and I think that the innocent spouse must try very hard not to interfere with the child’s relationship with the other parent. When the spouse is unrepentant and indifferent to anything the church might do, the situation is complicated by the courts. You can’t, in my state, demand that children not have sleepovers in the other parent’s home on the grounds that a new girlfriend (or boyfriend) is resident there. This means that you can’t prevent your child from fully understanding why the parent left the home, and the burden of dealing with the… Read more »
I think we should be very cautious about young girls cohabitating with any unrelated men. We should at least give it weight as a consideration. Controllong for other variables girls spending considerable time cohabitating with fertile unrelated men (mom’s boyfriend, step-father, step-brothers, and adopted brothers, and even half brothers) have earlier menarch and are more promiscuous (and at an earlier age) that girls living with their father (best) and full brothers, or with only women. It seems to be biological or epigenetic and not due to abuse (obviously a big concern as well- quite rare with fathers, not at all… Read more »
demo,
I agree that there are many potential problems with young girls residing with men, but, as would be expected, the state sees it differently.
Note: While the usage of cohabitation is correct, I was puzzled as your usage does not have the typical connotation of a romantic relationship.
The statistics about girls being victimized by mom’s boyfriend are frightening. When my ex left, our daughter was fifteen. Her pediatrician warned me that, for a predator, a teenage girl is the prize and because mom is so desperate for romantic attention, she either is oblivious or she turns a blind eye. I was advised never to let a “boyfriend” spend the night or be alone with my daughter. I didn’t need to be warned, but I thought it encouraging that doctors are aware of the risks to children and are counseling parents to be careful.
Jilly (and OKR),
The possibility of abuse is clearly a big issue and one that we should be very careful about and cognizant of, but i was trying to point out that, even in the absence if any sort of abuse or sexual interest, the evidence shows that the presence of an unrelated man in the home changes girls’ biology.
Of course a 15 year-old is probably old enough that the early maturing effects wouldn’t be relevant.
Probably not. The biology is interesting; I hadn’t known any of that. Research does indicate that, especially with girls in their mid-teens, there is a much greater risk of sexual promiscuity and of vulnerability to older men. But I think this is across the board and doesn’t depend on whether there is a live-in partner. This is probably due to the girl’s own attempt to ease her emotional pain, in conjunction with the loss of the parent who is better at risk assessment and boundary enforcement!
Jill, Not sure what my state would say about such sleepovers, but I believe I was allowed to have a clause in my divorce agreement that alimony would cease if there was a live-in boyfriend. I’m perplexed as to why you seem to imply that you would want a child to be ignorant about why the other parent is no longer in the home. I certainly would expect the children to feel hurt and anger, but I don’t think ignorance is bliss. The fact that the innocent spouse would have to deal with this is unfortunate, but I think I… Read more »
I don’t think ignorance is bliss, but timing is important. If there is a chance the parent might repent and come back home, I wouldn’t want to undermine the child’s respect and affection by disclosing information that might never need to be known. And, if the parent doesn’t return, I think it would be easier for a child to accept “Dad moved out and now he has met a new girlfriend” than “Dad left me because he would rather live with Cindy.”
In that case, I would question the husband’s repentance. How one repents is very indicative of the true heart. Given that the husband’s repentance is in question, the lawfulness of divorce is still open. My opposition would be if a husband has an affair and his repentance is true, genuine, public, and undeniable, but the wife refuses to pursue reconciliation. The process of healing would be long and slow and filled with proper accountability. But a spouses refusal to pursue reconciliation is indicative of a lack of forgiveness. The two are not the same thing, but one flows out of… Read more »
BJ, thanks. I’d be interested to know whether you counsel any differently when it’s the wife at fault. I think we can sometimes be too egalitarian in these cases. Of course, we are all to be forgiving, merciful and Christlike, but it is the husband who represents Christ in the marriage. It was Hosea, the husband, who had to keep taking back his unfaithful wife, and it’s the husband who is told he may not divorce his wife except for marital unfaithfulness. None of this is to say that wives should be able to get away with infidelity or that… Read more »
Matthew 19:9
And Luke 17:3-4 needs to be considered as well.
BJ,
Do you think a minister (yourself) grants, or allows, a divorce; or do you counsel to pursue or not persue a divorce?
If a woman finds out her husband has been whoring around and she immediately files for divorce would you disciple her?
Demo, Great question. As a WCF Presbyterian, I do not grant divorces in the sense that I have the authority to enact them or undo them. I oppose the Catholic teaching in that realm. But I do have the authority to do more than merely counsel. I usually describe what pastors do in the marriage and divorce realm as public declarations regarding how the church will treat such relationships. So, the marriage is not joined or dissolved by my decree, as if it carried any authority to effect marriage or divorce. But, my decree is meant to authoritatively decide what… Read more »
Thanks for the answer, BJ.
I definitely meant discipline… but phone typing is my bane. I certainly hope you would disciple her if possible!
Your last paragraph helps me understand your position, but I’m still not completely clear. Is her divorcing her husband (lets assume there are no additional sins) after his unfaithfulness in itself a disciplinary issue.
Demo, Potentially, but like the initial unfaithfulness, it is all in the response. I find it hard to imagine a wife divorcing her truly repentant husband, while she acts totally above reproach in the process of divorce. But, to your question… I would see civic divorce without ever considering reconciliation to be very problematic. If the husband is acting like a schmuck and she is seeking counseling and being patient, the discipline is on the husband. If the husband is truly repentant, and the wife refuses to entertain reconciliation, refuses to work on their marriage, and refuses to find a… Read more »
BJ,
I don’t. As easy as many Christian women today seem to find it to divorce for far lesser reasons than adultery/porneia, I can easily imagine that scenario.
OKR, By “acts totally above reproach” he means commits no sins. This seems to beg the question that proceeding with a divorce on the grounds of porneia/not desiring to have a reconciled marriage is in itself sinful. He made this clear(er) here “If the husband is truly repentant, and the wife refuses to entertain reconciliation, refuses to work on their marriage, and refuses to find a path back to a normal marriage, then I would see that as evidence of unforgiveness.” I’m not sure that pursuing divorce in this case constitutes refusal to offer forgiveness. Seems like category confusion. I… Read more »
demo, I presumed that “acts totally above reproach” is an accusation that she is pretending to be without fault regarding the divorce. That is, behaving much like the Pharisees Jesus reproached as being like whitewashed sepulchers. I am not certain but I think we are basically in agreement here, and we both disagree with BJ’s presumption of lack of forgiveness when there is unwillingness to reconcile. I will restate that I do not think it is clearly sinful to get a divorce when the spouse has committed adultery/porneia even when the spouse has truly repented. In that case, the repentant… Read more »
OKR, Demo, I understand that forgiveness and reconciliation are different things, but my argument is simply that one necessarily leads to the other. Reconciliation is the fruit of forgiveness. To divorce (pun intended) these two is to create an additional category I don’t see in Scripture, forgiven but unredeemed. Three other thoughts about this: (1) Marriage is an explicit reflection of the gospel, and there is not one hint anywhere in Scripture that the gospel ever gives us forgiveness without reconciliation. No true believer would ever try to twist a reflection of the gospel by insinuating otherwise. (2) Jesus’ exception… Read more »
BJ, I’m not convinced that reconcilliation always follows forgiveness. At least not in the way you are presenting it. It i have a business partnership with a man and he defrauds me massively I will forgive him, I will consider him brother, an i will harbor no ill will but i am not required to reconcile by continueing the business. If I am friends with someone, and we are playing poker and he pulls a gun on me, when he is repentant I will forgive him etc. But I won’t necessarily play poker with him any longer. If my wife… Read more »
Demo,
Two quick responses:
(1) The relationships you describe are not based on a vow to God for lifelong fidelity, and also are not creation ordinances designed by God to reflect the gospel.
(2) The discipline would not be for the divorce, proper, but for a lack of forgiveness to a repentant brother or sister. The unwillingness to pursue reconciliation, and instead seek divorce would be evidence of a lack of forgiveness.
I am short on time, so I will take up the exception clause in a later comment.
And thanks for the great debate, I love this.
BJ, 1) obviously I agree that the character of the relationship is unique. Your argument that marriage is uniquely mirroring, or dramatizing the gospel – the relationship of Yaweh and Israel, Christ and the Church, is well taken. But it is still a natural (and biblical) institution for mortals and the type falls short of the anti-type in a number of ways. Marriages are not eternal, but by design they are finite. Spouses die, and marriage isn’t an eternal institution. Remarriage is permitted and desireable in some situations. I don’t think the fact that marriage is an image of the… Read more »
BJ, “The relationships you describe are not based on a vow to God for lifelong fidelity, ….” Well, actually one was. Specifically, “If my wife brings other men into my bed ….”. “I understand that forgiveness and reconciliation are different things, but my argument is simply that one necessarily leads to the other. Reconciliation is the fruit of forgiveness.” Do you contend this is true in all relationships, or only specific ones such as marriage? While I think your argument that reconciliation of a marriage following adultery/porneia is good, I still consider the exception clause valid, with forgiveness necessary but… Read more »
Lori another good source of audiobooks is Librivox. The books there are classics that the copyright has expired. They are all free, produced by volunteers.
Doug, I’m disappointed but not particularly surprised that you did not respond to me letter regarding “The Unbearable Whiteness of Intersectionality.” In my letter I challenged your premise that the current sexual ethic is overwhelmingly the work of white liberals. For your readers and commenters I’ll present the data below. The New York Times Editorial Board has 13 members, consisting of six whites, three Jews, and four POC, making whites 46% of the board, a representation gap of 15% (whites comprise 61% of the general U.S. population). Hardly what we would call a group of “white overlords.” I also examined… Read more »
Armin, I agree that Doug’s take on this topic is wanting. However, most Americans see Jewish people (Ashkenazi) as white and 94% of Jews call themselves white on surveys. From the first legislation in the US that discussed race and naturalization, in 1790, Jews were counted among “free white persons” who were eligible for citizenship. Jews are white, its that simple, and with rampant intermarriage there is less and less of a distinctive Jewish ethnicity with each passing year. Jewish people are way over represented in every elite body and profession in America because they are enormously talented people. It… Read more »
Well said. What I find truly inexplicable is that the tiny minority of Americans who see Jews as ethnically driven to exert a hegemonic and evil influence over gentile society also vehemently oppose intermarriage with Jews. If they believe what they say, surely any attempt to dilute the Ashzenazi gene pool must be a good thing.
Demo, The fact that they call themselves white isn’t particularly relevant. What matters is how strong their Jewish identity is relative to their whiteness, as well as their perception of how their Jewish identity and values fit into the Western milieu. If they see themselves as a distinct group with a distinct set of interests, with those interests often coming into conflict with the majority population, and if they have historically demonstrated a willingness to violate universalistic Western values to further such interests, then that matters more than how they identify themselves on a survey. I don’t know where you… Read more »
Armin, I think we have to get a definition of “white” or race out of the way in order to speak intelligently about these things. I have read you to take a biological HBDesque approach to race as a primarily biological construct centered on the heritability of traits. However, in your response above you give an almost entirely social concensus mediated view of “white.” Both are useful paradigms, but mixing and matching will just cause confusion. When I say Jews are white, simple as that – I am referring to a biological and historical reality. Obviously when you add in… Read more »
Demo, I just read an interesting article about a recent discrimination case in which a judge ruled that Jewish “heritage,” as he called it, entitles someone to protection under civil rights legislation. A young man, born to a Jewish mother and Catholic father, attended a Baptist college in Louisiana where he became Christian. After approving him for a coaching job, the coach came back and said the young man had been rejected by the college president because he was racially Jewish. The college argued in its defense that Bonadora was not entitled to protection under the religion clause of the… Read more »
Jilly, what an odd case… what college was it? Most christians (evangelicals at least) in America revere jews as God’s chosen, gifted with magic powers.
Demo, it was Louisiana College in Pineville, LA. It’s a very small Baptist private college with 1300 students. Here’a a pretty good wrap-up: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=7b14a9e9-0236-48a2-a711-749bfa28aaf5
Jilly,
What a bizarre case. Title VII is already used for things like hispanics which aren’t (despite what our friend Armin might think) really a race. A discriminated against heritage would seem to fit…
They must mitigate the damage by marrying clever gentile girls who will appreciate their verbal skills and laugh at all their jokes.
Demo, I didn’t deny that the Jews were a biologically distinct ethnic group. The question of how semitic the Ashkenazi Jews are is far from settled. According to the article below, European Jews have a 30-60% non-Jewish admixture, making them, as MacDonald puts it, an “intermediate group.” I understand that the high level of high intermarriage muddles the issue, but those considered 100% “Ashkenazi” are usually easy to physically identify. Furthermore, Ashkenazi Jews are well-known to be at a significantly higher risk of certain genetic diseases than other people with European ancestry. To acknowledge this is to deny that being… Read more »
MacDonald’s three-volume work has come under serious criticism, even by non-(((Jews))), for cherry-picking data, misrepresenting evolutionary psychology theory, distorting genetic research, and presenting unfalsifiable hypotheses. When challenged, he simply moves the goalposts or changes his definitions. For example, he claims that every significant radical movement or ideology is the birthchild of the Jews seeking to destabilize Western society for their own nefarious benefit. When confronted with radical movements dominated by gentiles, he simply claims they were insignificant. When confronted with Jews of impeccable conservative ideology, MacDonald says they are not the kind of Jews he means (or, alternatively, they are… Read more »
Armin,
One more question that may help me understand your use of “white.” Are Amish people white?
Demo,
Amish are of Swiss-German ancestry, which I consider to be white.
Armin, I asked about Amish because, in the case of Jews, you seem to take a social construct view related to their solidarity with the majority population: “What matters is how strong their Jewish identity is relative to their whiteness, as well as their perception of how their Jewish identity and values fit into the Western milieu. If they see themselves as a distinct group with a distinct set of interests, with those interests often coming into conflict with the majority population, and if they have historically demonstrated a willingness to violate universalistic Western values to further such interests, then… Read more »
Armin, WRT the Amish, i just want to let you know Ben Franklin disagrees with you, not sure how popular his view was in 18th century America: “Which leads me to add one Remark: That the Number of purely white People in the World is proportionably very small. All Africa is black or tawny. Asia chiefly tawny. America (exclusive of the new Comers) wholly so. And in Europe, the Spaniards, Italians, French, Russians and Swedes, are generally of what we call a swarthy Complexion; as are the Germans also, the Saxons only excepted, who with the English, make the principal… Read more »
Demo, Perhaps I’ve made defining “whiteness” too complicated. Let’s think about how we define, say, “blackness.” Whatever criteria can be reasonably used to answer the question “What is black?” can be applied to whites. Everyone knows what a black person is. A black person is a distinct, readily observable phenotype. You mention skin color, which is typically the most obvious trait, but skin color is only a small part of the genetic differences between blacks and whites. There are also differences in bone density, facial structure, musculature, testosterone levels, brain size, and limb length, just to name a few, as… Read more »
Armin, You are making defining “whiteness” way too difficult because you are using motivated reasoning to try to exclude a group of people with very light skin from your definition of “white.” The only reason to do this is because you freight “whiteness” with a moral dimension. Your information on genetics is pathetically incorrect. There is more genetic diversity in Africa than in the rest of the world combined. You are likely more closely genetically related to a bantu than he is to a !Kung. You are definitely more closely related to an average American black (with an average of… Read more »
Demo, You state, “There is more genetic diversity in Africa than in the rest of the world combined. You are likely more closely genetically related to a bantu than he is to a !Kung. You are definitely more closely related to an average American black (with an average of 24% white ancestry) than he is to an mbuti, and probably more closely repated to him than he is to a Nihlotic like a Masai.” This attempt to refute the idea of clear, genetically distinct racial categories is absurd on the face of it. The idea that I would have more… Read more »
Armin, I don’t see a citation for the illustration on your article (hint – when readinf this sort of information if they don’t clearly cite their sources it is probably crap), but it is obviously either far outdated or just shoddy. For instance it shows very little genetic distance between the different groups in Africa and huge genetic distance between groups outside africa. It is well know that there is more distance between say the Hadza and the Masai than between any out of Africa groups. They also show a tidy common ancestor model for each group, which is wrong.… Read more »
Hi Demo, I tried to find out more about the Masai and the Hadza, and while I couldn’t find what I was looking for, I did see similar statements. That a Sudanese and a Tanzanian have greater genetic distance than either has with one of us. That two African villages in the same area can have greater genetic distance between them than Ronald Reagan had with Mao Tse Tung. So I continued to read. I understand that all genetic diversity is contained in 0.1% of the genome, and that over 90% of all alleles are found in two or more… Read more »
Jilly, The prevailing out of Africa theory holds that there was a severe genetic bottleneck when people left africa leaving all of the people in eurasia, oceania, and the americas with far fewer unique alleles. There was some admixture from neanderthals and denisovans and there may have been multiple migrations (negritos may come from an earlier movement) but that is the basic theory. The Hazda, and maybe the San, mbuti and others, were already genetically isolated prior to the out of Africa movement, so they form a distinct lineage. There is also an enormous amount of genetic material in Africa.… Read more »
Also, Jilly. There has been some gene flow back into Europe to east Africans including Ethiopians and the Maasai. Ethiopians are apparently closely relates to Yemenis and Armenians. I wonder if Armin thinks the Kardashians are white? Or RJ Rushdooney?
Armin, As to your oak tree example it is again quite poor and shows a failure to understand basic biology. It is very easy to define an oak tree over against other types of trees. The genus quercus is well differentiated generically and morphologically from other angiosperm trees. It is, however, very difficult to tell the difference between some oak that are very closely related like northern red oaks, shumard oaks, black oaks, scarlet oaks, and southern red oaks. They are very similar morphologically (though there are differences, and where they share territory they hybridize freely and form intermediate types.… Read more »
Armin, Last thing – if semitics aren’t white, what are they? Negroid? Mongoloid? How many groups do you want to have? If you are splitting off middle easterners why stop there? Why not separate categories for northern and southern europeans? Why not split germanics from gaelics? It is all so arbitrary. Look at the case law in American history – semitics have been considered white a little over half of the time, dependent on the zeitgeist. With regards to your point about Jewish psychology and self-perception over half of jews (who marry) are marrying outgroup members. Looks like whatever we… Read more »
Jill, You state: “When confronted with radical movements dominated by gentiles, he simply claims they were insignificant.” “[T]hey (‘Jews of impeccable conservative ideology’) are engaging in a charade to lull the suspicions of the poor schmuckered gentiles who are fooled by their claims of being decent white Americans.” Can you please give specific examples of when MacDonald has made these claims? You state: “In the third volume of the series, he recommends systematic discrimination against Jews in college admission and employment. He also calls for heavy taxation of Jews to prevent their having too much money.” Can you please quote… Read more »
I don’t keep the books in my house, so check back in a couple of days.
Well then I suppose you have a better memory than I do, because I don’t remember him saying these things. However, I did find this slate.com article. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2000/01/evolutionary-psychology-s-anti-semite.html In the seventh paragraph, the author makes the following claim: “Toward the end of the third book, MacDonald lays out his solution for restoring what he calls ‘parity’ between the Jews and other ethnic groups: systematic discrimination against Jews in college admission and employment and heavy taxation of Jews ‘to counter the Jewish advantage in the possession of wealth.'” Jill, have you actually read The Culture of Critique, or did you just… Read more »
Morning Armin, I don’t pretend to be an expert on MacDonald. I haven’t read the books, though I am familiar with the topic. I just skimmed chapter 8 of the 3rd book (Unz helpfully has the whole series html). I don’t see where he gives policy perscriptions, but i see how his readers (and critics) could get that impression: “Moreover, achieving parity between Jews and other ethnic groups would entail a high level of discrimination against individual Jews for admission to universities or access to employment opportunities and even entail a large taxation on Jews to counter the Jewish advantage… Read more »
Armin, I have read most of it. And you will find the quote at the foot of page 308 in this pdf. Page 384 if you’re going by the pdf pagination.
http://www.angelfire.com/rebellion2/goyim/je1.pdf
Have you read this criticism: https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/04/16/analyzing-kevin-macdonalds-culture-of-critique-and-the-alt-rights-embrace-of-anti-jewish-ideology/
Jill,
I’m having a hard time believing you didn’t just cop that statement from the Slate article. If you had actually read the book, or even just that entire passage, you would know that MacDonald was not at all calling for taking those steps, but was actually pointing out the absurdity of trying to systematically redistribute wealth along racial lines to achieve complete equality.
Yes, Armin, I have read the entire passage, and yes, I have read most of the book. Which is why I was able to locate, very quickly, a page number for a passage you said wasn’t in there. If you would like to give me a pop quiz on it, please be my guest. I have been reading about MacDonald for years. Knowing people who teach at CSULB, I took a keen interest in his “academic” career and the intense media scrutiny it provoked. I followed his testimony in the Irving trial and was quite amused by his admission that,… Read more »
Armin, I may just be misreading you, but I’m no closer to understanding what you mean by white and what sort of definition you have that could exclude Jews but not, say, Faroese. Is white a biological construct representing some level of shared genetic inheritence, or is it a social construct, an ingroup, a tribal marker, that has some superfluous overlap with physical characteristics (lightish skin) but is primarily a category of standing, status, and solidarity. Until you get a definition nailed down your thinking is going to be confused. The idea that Italians are white, Icelanders are white, Poles… Read more »
Demo, In my previous comment I linked to an article which states that the Ashkenazi Jews have a 30-60% European admixture. Below I will post a link to a study done around the same time that shows the European admixture of Ashkenazi Jews to be 35-55%. Not to oversimplify things, but if you split the difference on both figures, the Ashkenazi Jews would be on average 45% European and 55% Middle Eastern/semitic. This is why MacDonald in the article I previously posted referred to them as an “intermediate group.” Regarding your question about how to identify whites, I would say… Read more »
Armin, I will likely write more tomorrow but: “Have you ever felt the need to ask someone to define “black?” I don’t think so, because we all know what that is.” No, I haven’t because black is about skin color (not continental heritage, most N. Africans aren’t black). White is also a skin color and Ashkenazi jews are white. Look at king boogeyman jew Soros, he is white. You are introducing an esoteric argument to try to disqualify jews from special whiteness… why, are us white folk magic? Also, Semitic is usually classed as caucasian. It is certainly not mongoloid… Read more »
What are those of European and African descent?
But why are italians white and libyans not (to me they look the same). If you are going by looks, the people from all sides of the Mediterranean are more the same than people from Northern Europe. But still some of them counts as whites, and some of them counts as middle easterners.
Armin,
I find the relationship of Jews to the wider Western culture interesting. In reality, the Hebrew influence paved the way and influenced so much of Western culture, it is hard to imagine Western culture without the Hebrew Scriptures. The reason for the identity divide is complicated, but it is primarily due to religious differences and not racial ones. To be Jewish, means primary, at least in the West, not being Christian. That is just as true in White Europe and the US as it is in the Brown South and Black Africa.
BJ, The fraught history of Jewry within Christendom (and within political Islam, for a different can of worms) has a lot of interesting features. a few brief things that are worth considering: *persecution appeared to really pick up during the rennaissance, alongside a more developed sense of the state. Much of the folk tradition around early- and mid-medieval persection of Jews appears to be black legend. * the churches practices around money lending increased tension, once state taxation power became more formalized (14-15th centuries) the burghers often taxed the jews very heavily and had then produce mire revenue by raising… Read more »
The perception of a transcendent loyalty accounted for the deep dislike and suspicion of immigrant Catholics in the late 1800’s. When you read the writings of nativist groups, you’re struck by the similarity of the rhetoric. Catholics were considered to give their first allegiance to the pope; they were hordes of illiterate and superstitious people being used to destroy freedom of religion, put the government in charge of all churches, and undermine traditional Protestant American values. Even JFK had to reassure Protestants that he would not be taking orders from the pope. Every now and then I still see this… Read more »
Jilly,
Quite so, in non-Catholic countries Catholics were seen as undermining the solidarity of communities and sometimes as enemy agents. This is really evident in the activities and rhetoric of the second Klan which in many geographic areas was more anti-jew and -catholic than anti-black. Some of the strongest Klan areas weren’t even in old Dixie (contrast Edward Jackson – gov. Indiana with Ma and Pa Ferguson in Texas).
Yes and the suspicion had centuries of precedent (popes claiming authority over the civil rulers) to give it warrant. The fact that Catholics largely Americanized in the event (and thus went against centuries of papal precedent) should not be read into the quite understandable suspicions at the time. But even today, Scott Hahn reads Marsilius of Padua as a proto-Protestant (read: bad guy) and his argument is not unrelated to Marsilius’ taking the emperors’ side contra the popes.
Armin, the 94% came from the article to which you linked and is in keeping with other surveys. I doubt that Demo’s statement “Jews are white, simple as that” would be disputed by many of them; I believe it would be more typical to say “US (as opposed to Ethiopian or Asian) Jews are white, but in addition we are members of an extended family rooted in a common faith and/or culture.” The original ethnic group has been changed through conversions in and out, and by the diaspora. Recent DNA testing of thousands of Latin Americans has shown genetic Sephardic… Read more »
Mike Bull has pointed to an interesting take on Lot that might let us see him in a more favorable light: http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2017/01/25/crafty-lot/. My hesitancy is that there seem to have been some in the mob who knew Lot and would have seen through the hypothesized deception.
The article by Athas is very readable, and quite short. I would recommend it to anyone interested om the topic.
Athas makes some good points about the way the daughters are referred to in the story. At the very least it seems hard to maintain that the daughters were actually at home when offered.
http://www.academia.edu/28365744/Has_Lot_Lost_the_Plot_Detail_Omission_and_a_Reconsideration_of_Genesis_19
However, we must also contend with the fact that the morals of the primeval saints don’t always map onto ours and we are likely to try to harmonize the stories of Lot, Jacob, Jephthah, etc. with our own sensibilities.
It’s a big claim to say whole church, including translators, has misunderstood the text for 2000 years and he, almost he alone, has come to the proper understanding. I’m not 100% sold but certainly it’s food for thought.
Whether Athas is correct or not, there is enough unambiguous unrighteousness in Lot’s life to make the reader question the Holy Spirit’s describing him as righteous. But ultimately, his righteousness is precisely the same as ours; the imputed righteousness of Christ.
What translation problems are you pointing to? Passages are reevaluated all of the time, but it rarely turns (primarily) on translator error. I think Peter is clear that it was Lots righteous actions, his personal righteousness that is at issue, in the context: “If he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; 7 and if he rescued Lot, a righteous man, who was distressed by the depraved conduct of the lawless 8 (for that righteous man, living among them day after… Read more »
Yes, I guess I was preaching to myself. I have to be continually reminded that God does not hold (e.g.) David’s sins against him, and therefore neither should I.
In that bullartistry article:
That’s a new one to me. One that I’m hesitant to believe.
Whatever the case, I still don’t see Lot as an especially righteous man.
OKR ,
I don’t think you should be too skeptical, though obviously feet aren’t always sexual. One classic reference is 2 Sam 11:8, when David tells Uriah to go home and “wash his feet,” he apparently understood as he later told David that he couldn’t go lay with his wife while others were camped in tge open. In 2 King 18 the phrase translated “piss” in the KJ means something like water of the feet.
If Lot is not righteous, what do you think of Peter calling him righteous?
demo,
Since I don’t think I’ve ever heard that was a euphemism in the last fifty years of my life, I will remain skeptical. I also found no reference to that concept on any Jewish websites. There is an interesting article on the subject at Feet and erotica in the Bible.
Thinking about it, I wonder if righteous in the New Testament has a rather different meaning than I give it. Specifically, I think I consider righteous to be equivalent to holy. I’ll have to read and think about it further.
As I understand it, righteous and justified are the same word in the New Testament, and holy is a different one. But don’t try to take that to the bank unless you hear it from someone else.
I dug around in some rabbinical commentaries and learned that you were not supposed to eat a meal or go to bed without washing your feet. For married men, this duty devolved on their wives and could not be assigned to the household slaves. Uriah coming home from battle would have had his face, hands, and feet ritually washed by his wife. So while it is clear what David intended Uriah to do, I don’t think we can think of foot washing as a euphemism in other contexts. I think it is more like “Go home and let Bathsheba take… Read more »
Jilly, I don’t put too much weight on it in any particular context, but I think foot CAN mean male genitals. It also appears that foot and shoe were a common ANE metaphor for sexual congress, which may make some sense of the (somewhat bizarre) Halitzah ritual. Here is a Jewish source, with some footnotes promoting the foot/genitals connection: https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/what-did-ruth-and-boaz-do-on-the-threshing-floor/ And here is an apparently Messianic Jewish source discussing feet in the ruth context: https://www.torahclass.com/old-testament-studies-tc/51-old-testament-studies-ruth/707-lesson6-ruth-3 “The usual Hebrew word for foot or feet throughout the Old Testament is regel. And indeed we DO find the word regel used in the… Read more »
Thanks, Demo. Now if I could only figure out how anything as unsexy as feet acquired that connotation.
Beauty in the eye of the beholder?
Lots of metaphors are weird, or a little disturbing, if thought about too much.
Jill,
While you (and I) do not consider feet to be sexy, I understand there is a significant number of men who do. I cannot think of any reason to explain this.
I usually only read ya’ll when I am reading the plural you in Scripture. Thanks for passing my offer on!
Since we threw ye overboard, we need something to fill that space, right?
And ‘y’all’ is better than the kiwi ‘yous’!
“Yous” also occurs where I grew up, north of Philadelphia. A bit farther east toward New York, it’s “youse” (soft s) and in Pittsburgh and environs it’s “yinz” (a corruption of you’uns.) Most of the rest of the country is divided between “you guys” and “y’all.”
I have always hated “yous” with every fiber of my being. Y’all is just fine. The British “you lot” has its charm but is a bit informal for some applications.
Growing up in southern Ohio and northern Kentucky, I was inundated with you’uns. I never thought twice about it until I got a job teaching English in urban Virginia and those kiddos had themselves some fun at my expense.
Kentucky also gave me a heavy dose of ya’ll at times, but everyone in my family and community wanted when “you’uns” were coming over.
Indighost, how do you Kiwis use yous?
Mainly in jest! It tends to be used more by our island populations, sometimes as “yous fellas” but also on its own (“Hey, yous!”).
DW reviewed Aimee Byrd’s book recently. She’s doubled down on her views of gender roles and masculinity, going a little bat guano crazy:
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/troublerofisrael/2019/01/god-calls-masculinity-very-good-lets-stop-caricaturing-it/
I have little sympathy for those such as Aimee who are triggered by reading truth. I see that Aimee considers Sam Powell to be of high repute. Having experienced his deplorable behavior and thinking, I am hardly surprised. The man epitomizes churchian male(?) thinking.
You define masculinity as the glad-hearted acceptance of sacrificial responsibility. What do you think are the chief rewards for taking responsibility?
Wil
Wil, the rest of that formula, as I teach it this. Authority flows to those who take responsibility. Authority flees those who seek to evade it. So I believe that sacrificial responsibility, true masculinity, is the foundation of biblical authority.
Ok. What are the chief rewards then?
It sounds like the chief reward is a better ability to exercise biblical authority. But I, too, wondered if there was a clearer answer.