Letters in the Asylum

Go home 2020, you’re drunk!

Jordan

I’m sure you’ve covered this somewhere already, but can you help me distinguish where the line is between acknowledging and repenting of our national sins, without buying into sjw class-shaming? For example, I would reject the statement, “You’re a white-supremacist, because you belong to a white-supremacist America.” I would reject that for two reasons, both because I do not think America is a “white-supremacist” nation, and because I do not accept that being born a white American means you can assign the sin of white-supremacy to me. That seems nonsensical at face value. But on the other hand, I do think there’s a sense in which the sin of, for example, abortion, is a “national sin” for which I should in some way mourn and repent. But part of my personal repentance for that example includes the fact that by being a man who in times past used porn regularly, I think I participated in a trade that is tied up with and leads to the sin of abortion. So there’s multiple layers to that, but I think even apart from direct, personal sin, I would lean towards accepting the idea of abortion being a “national” sin, while I would not lean that way with white-supremacy, and I can’t quite fully flesh out how that is logically consistent.

Hopefully those examples make sense – and I appreciate any thoughts trying to sort out the distinction.

Thanks!

KR

Candace Owens, Brandon Tatum, Larry Elder… Their presence is mostly in the popular world of podcasts, instagram, and Youtube, seeking to share their influence that way. But following their tracks, they’ve led me to what I was most concerned to find, that is, where are both seasoned and younger black scholars who are saying these things, people who are building on the legacy of Booker T. Washington, Frederick Douglass, Martin Luther King Jr…and more recently Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, and Shelby Steele? The tracks led me to this event at the Manhattan Institute, which is led by Jason Riley. The event took place more than a year ago.

The video is long. It starts with a conversation between Jason Riley and Glenn Loury, an older economist at Brown University who I did not know; then comes a panel discussion of several young black scholars and educators: Ian Rowe, Coleman Hughes, and Michael Fortner. You would be particularly interested with the educational vision and endeavors spoken of by Ian Rowe. It is concluded with about ten minutes of closing comments by Glenn Loury, where he passionately exhorts the audience to wake up, lest black America be doomed forever to “the soft bigotry of low expectations” and “patronization,” warning that it will only get worse if we do not wake up. Urgency, agency, and honesty were his watchwords. He is both deeply concerned and pissed off. He knows the hour is very late. The lecture Dr. Loury gave, which was the centerpiece of the event but is not included in the video, is in the link here and is worth reading. He is wisely trying to negotiate a third path, between the careless right and the insane left.

More than one of them observes in the course of the conversations that these same statistics and the same solutions they are proposing which are right now most acutely applicable to black America are increasingly applicable to other dysfunctional communities, as the disease is clearly spreading. They urged us to think of this as an American problem, not a racist one, a problem of false narratives that is making all of America sick.

Your example, Pastor Wilson, has always been strongest to me because of your courage to speak the truth and for your robust and joyful confidence in the gospel. I thank God for you and I pray for you. Pasty white folks from northern lands like me are tempted to think “Only black Americans can say these things” but that is an excuse I realize will not hold up before the Judge of all the earth. All the same, what strikes me from listening to this event is how much these scholars desire discussion, and how frustrated they are by the lack of discussion. Their courage and loneliness in this endeavor is painful to see. I ask, what kind of hospitality in Christ’s name can we engender between us and them? These men feel for me more like co-belligerents than any I have encountered. But it seems that there is a fraught space around racism that requires the deep wisdom of God. Anyway, I commend it to you, as it would be a sign of God’s merciful winds of renewal were you to be found in their camp and they in yours. His kingdom come.

Michelle

“The Nature of Reasonable Doubt” “And let us suppose that the defense laid before you a number of facts that had somehow never made it into the news reports. These facts were a complete novelty to you, and they proved to you, incontrovertibly, that George Floyd did not die because of Chauvin’s knee on his neck.”

As a surgeon well-acquainted with treating patients with traumatic injuries particularly to the head and neck, on watching the video of George Floyd’s arrest and death, I concluded that he definitely did not die of being choked or strangled (the general public’s conclusion was that he was obviously strangled to death—put in a “choke hold” which is why such holds have been banned in Minneapolis as of last week). The airway to the lungs and the main blood vessels to the brain are located in the front and middle of the neck. They are essentially fixed in their positions–head rotation does not move the vessels or airway to the sides. Since Floyd was in the prone position, Chauvin’s knee was on the back of his neck–on his neck bones (vertebrae) and on the para-spinal muscles of the neck (those big muscles on the back of the neck on either side of the vertebrae). So, the back of his neck was protecting his airway and blood vessels from compression and his jaw/head along with his collar bones was keeping his airway and blood vessels from being compressed by the pavement (try compressing the front of your neck on the floor–it’s not do-able). This is the anatomic reality that was confirmed by both autopsies–no evidence of traumatic strangulation. Death by strangulation has obvious anatomic findings on autopsy (crushed or bruised airway structures, other ruptured blood vessels). “Asphyxia” as the cause of death in the second autopsy might just be a clever maneuver by the family-retained (and thus, non-independent) examiners (the county coroner is the truly independent examiner–he is not on the police department’s payroll, and he must report all findings including the non-traumatic findings of the airway and neck regions; the second examiners has no such requirements and is motivated to only report what might be helpful to the client paying them). To the general public, asphyxia is synonymous to strangulation (especially with the knee on neck video). However, here’s the “New Oxford American Dictionary” definition: a condition arising when the body is deprived of oxygen, causing unconsciousness or death and the origin of the word: early 18th century (in the sense ‘stopping of the pulse’): modern Latin, from Greek asphuxia, from a- ‘without’ + sphuxis ‘pulse’. So, if those second examiners are called to testify as expert witnesses, they can say that he died of asphyxia even if they found the cause of death to be a heart attack. Their ace in the hole to protect them from perjury charges is this non-colloquial, technical definition (no oxygen to brain because heart stopped).

Given Floyd’s serious medical conditions (the coroner, again, was required to note those findings) of severe coronary artery disease and cardiomegaly (would be consistent with a clinical condition called congestive heart failure) as well as methamphetamine on board (a stimulant which would stress his fragile heart even more) and COVID-19 (which has been shown to cause an inflammatory condition of the heart–again, not good for an already fragile heart), it wouldn’t be surprising that the added stress of the arrest (and the hold, etc.) would result in him having a heart attack then dying.

So, he definitely didn’t die of strangulation.

As far as the charge of murder? The officers would have had to have known about all his medical conditions and would also have had to of had the medical knowledge that putting him in that prone position hold along with those medical conditions would lead to a heart attack and death. Pretty far-fetched. To put another point on this: such a hold on a person without those medical conditions would not at all be lethal.

I’m not sure what to make of the MN attorney general going for 2nd degree murder–that seems pretty easy to disprove. Is he just getting bad medical expert advice? I would think any decent defense attorney would be able to get a physician expert somewhere to point out what I just explained. So, it would be legal malpractice for the defense to go for a plea bargain–if taken to trial, the defense would win, easily. Or, maybe the AG is just giving what the mob wants now knowing that this won’t go to trial for years (and, by then, he’s on to some other elected position)? Or, maybe, like you said, if Chauvin is cleared of all charges then the AG can appeal to the mob that the courts are all rigged and then riot and light up the cities with fire again (with the AG being seen as a hero)?

DP

Saw you were recently called out by Eric Mason (by description and writings, not by name) in a recent panel discussion at an Acts 29 retreat hosted by Matt Chandler.

Link here (at 59 min mark)

It was suggested by Mr. Mason that your writings on race, slavery, and the civil war make you justly deserving of a “bum rush.”

Has the call been answered, and if so, how are you faring? Well, I hope.

Blessings,

Louis

I have a question for you; knowing how busy you keep yourself it does not require an instant response. With that in mind, I would hope for a blog post based upon cogent and rational actions if faced with a situation as is unfolding in Minneapolis whereby the lesser magistrates (city council) are embracing and enacting official anarchy by doing away with law enforcement.

Gray

In light of the controversies of the day, what books would you recommend Christians read on racial issues in America?

Sam

We attend a church that jumped onto the social justice bandwagon some time ago. It started with some initial breakout sessions, and has moved into the full facet of church ministry including regular communications and training as well as the attempt to shoehorn the idea that “social justice is a gospel issue” into as many sermons as possible. While I disagree with much of this approach, my main critique is that this is a selective and political application of the gospel. The same application is not made to politically sensitive issues such as abortion. Church leaders would not want to be seen at the Pro-life march or even publicly support church involvement. At what point should the above issues cause one to inspect church membership re: the application of the gospel and how should one think through these matters.

Jeremy

Thanks for “Minneapolis Burning and Black Privilege.” Your short blog post probably contained more Scripture than my weekend’s social media news feed with twenty five years worth worth of Christian acquaintances.

Could you expand a bit more on your statement on white pastors: “This is because they do not love black men and women, but rather themselves. Because they love themselves, they want to be seen as being all about racial reconciliation. But seeming and being are two different things.” I’m halfway there with you. Wanting to be liked and compromising on truth to do so is textbook self-love. I’m with you so far. But the friends, and pastors, that I know who have bought into this are still genuinely kind and loving people, who cry real tears over the injustice for genuine victims like George Floyd and Brenna Taylor. How do I reconcile their genuinely caring efforts for change, somewhat like the Savior who cried for Lazarus and flipped tables over exploitation and discrimination with the decidedly not Christ-like, Marxist-leaning narrative of “ending privilege” and “black lives matter?” Thanks and keep up the good work.

Wesley

Thanks to a friend, I recently discovered your blog. I read it carefully following the example of the Bereans. Your recent blog “Minneapolis Burning and Black Privilege” hit me between the eyes. My hope and prayer, yes prayer is that this message will somehow be spread and read by a vast number of the elect in Christ. We are the ones who truly need to embrace the truth in your observations. The elect yet to be gathered need to read it also and let it open their eyes and lead to repentance.

Paul

Your desire to remain as impartial as possible, such that you could be a legitimate juror in Chauvin’s murder trial is admirable. Such desire for impartiality is morally right and also a bedrock of our judicial system.

However, it seems to me that the case against Chauvin is at least as clear as the case against Planned Parenthood that should have been brought to trial after the Daleiden videos. Looking back on your comments on those videos, though, it seems that you could not have been an impartial juror at such a trial. You wrote that what Planned Parenthood was doing was illegal, specifically.

This seems to me an example of inconsistency within conservative Christians, a tribe I consider to be my own. We are quick to condemn and judge when it comes to evidence against enemies in our favored causes, but in causes that are perceived to be favored by liberals, we qualify and reflect and ask people to slow down, and then we write about how the gospel is the answer.

Which it is.

Justin

What are your thoughts on the argument that a church should wear masks and follow CDC guidelines out of obedience to Romans 12:18? Thank you in advance. I appreciate your ministry immensely.

Amy

A long while back you posted a video summarizing A Failure of Nerve by Edwin Friedman. I read it soon after, and it was a revelation. I now regard it as a top-five leadership book.

My question is how Friedman’s concept of self-differentiated leadership in the face of others’ anxiety applies to Romans 14 or 1 Corinthians 8, and considering the weaker brother. In my church, many are fearful, and desire that masks be worn during our church services. So our leaders are entertaining the possibility of recommending (though not requiring) masks as a way of preferring the weaker brother.

Is that an appropriate application of the principle of considering the weaker brother? Or is the question of masks a different principle than what Paul wrote about? Are there times to show preference to the weaker brother, but then other times, Friedman-style, not to?

Blessings,

Eric

I have followed your blog for a few years now. I am a Bible teacher at a private Presbyterian school in New Zealand. This week a post I made on Facebook went viral and now the cancel culture is striving to ruin my life. Your posts and biblical approach to justice give me strength to stand strong and weather the storm. Thank you for your work and ministry! I will be praying for you

Ethan

I finished reading Man in the Dark three days ago and have been savoring the experience. I had planned on writing to express my gratitude to you for authoring it. However, the letter “Another Country Heard From” spurred me to do it now. I am hoping that the writer of that aforementioned letter was using sarcasm or something that was too far above my head BUT in case he wasn’t, here goes. I have been enthralled with Man in the Dark since dubiously starting the first chapter. Most modern fiction leaves me cold. Romances are an altogether unsatisfying category. I am no longer titillated by the pagan bodice rippers and am left flat or melancholy by the Christian attempts that I have had the misfortune to have read prior to your book.

The Man in the Dark is wholesome without being sappy, formulaic, or maddening because of those contrived obstacles set between the two would-be lovers in so many romance “novels”. The story engaged my intellect and emotions in a very satisfying way. I feel richer for having read this novel and hopeful to find other fiction titles authored by you. I normally avoid the romance genre other than the classics because modern authors tend to be tawdry or sappy, thank you for being neither!

Since I’m already here, I must also thank you for Blog & Mablog in general, “Minneapolis Burning and Black Privilege” specifically because it helped keep me from losing all hope in my fellow Americans and generally keep my sanity in this dystopian panic and chaos, the Plodcast for being a voice of reason in a chattering age, No Quarter November because I appreciate not being handled with kid gloves while still being treated with civility and respect, it was my first and it was most magnificent and refreshing. Thank you for the free books during No Quarter November, I am still savoring them as a reward for reading more tedious and mundane fare, and a HUGE thank you for Man Rampant, I watched it with my adult and teen daughters, and then we encouraged my husband, teen and adult sons viewership, when the other kids are old enough, I hope to re-watch it with them. Keep fighting the good fight!

Please sign me:

A baptistic mother of many on the West Coast.

You were recently praising Sweden’s more laid-back approach to the Co-Vid crisis.

What are you feelings now given that it has the world’s highest death rate from the virus?

The new confirmed deaths per million in Sweden is almost twice that of the US, and five times greater than France.

Experts in Sweden have said the lock-down strategy was costly a failure.

Brendan