5/22/19

BONUS EPISODE: How I was Equipped to Fight Social Justice and Francis Schaeffer on the Middle Class

Jon gets autobiographical about what prepared him to analyze the social justice movement and encourages laymen on how they can oppose it without a formal education.

Video:



Audio:



Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/worldviewconversation

Subscribe:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/conversations-that-matter/id1446645865?mt=2&ign-mpt=uo%3D4

Like Us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/worldviewconversation/

Follow Us on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/conversationsthatmatterpodcast

Follow Us on Gab:
https://gab.ai/worldiewconversation

Follow Jon on Twitter
https://twitter.com/worldviewconvos

Subscribe on Minds
https://www.minds.com/worldviewconversation

More Ways to Listen:
https://anchor.fm/worldviewconversation

Mentioned in this Episode:
https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/89631279-jon-harris

5/16/19

Arguing for Alabama's Pro Life Bill and Against SJWs in the Church

Jon discusses intersectional arguments against the Human Life Protection Act and how to turn them on their head. Also, the different ways Puritans and Separatists approach social justice warriors in evangelical organizations.

Video:



Audio:




Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/worldviewconv...

Subscribe:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/c...

Like Us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/worldviewcon...

Follow Us on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/conversations...

Follow Us on Gab:
https://gab.ai/worldiewconversation

Follow Jon on Twitter
https://twitter.com/worldviewconvos

Subscribe on Minds
https://www.minds.com/worldviewconver...

More Ways to Listen:
https://anchor.fm/worldviewconversation

Mentioned in this Episode:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4R6AeOF1OY&t=1s

5/8/19

Critical Theory, Liberation Theology, and SEBTS

Jon distills hundreds of pages of transcripts and articles from SEBTS to explain how Critical Theory and Liberation Theology are making their way into the institution. The questions on the Akin Ethnic Kingdom Diversity Scholarship application are also revealed.

Video:



Audio:



Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/worldviewconversation

Subscribe:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/conversations-that-matter/id1446645865?mt=2&ign-mpt=uo%3D4

Like Us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/worldviewconversation/

Follow Us on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/conversationsthatmatterpodcast

Follow Us on Gab:
https://gab.ai/worldiewconversation

Follow Jon on Twitter
https://twitter.com/worldviewconvos

Subscribe on Minds
https://www.minds.com/worldviewconversation

More Ways to Listen:
https://anchor.fm/worldviewconversation

Mentioned in this Episode:

SEBTS Quotes: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1m-2DQuN5bTDWwU3IeDGg-1l5gmW5yVnU/view

Akin Ethnic Kingdom Diversity Application Scholarship Questionnaire:



4/5/19

Tish Harrison Warren's "Liturgy of the Ordinary"

Tish Harrison Warren's book "Liturgy of the Ordinary," while accurately diagnosing some cultural problems with regard to identity and community, has dangerous advice within its proposed solutions. The kind of teaching this book represents is being mainstreamed in evangelicalism. Jon interacts with and critiques the book in this podcast.

Video:



Audio:



Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/worldviewconversation

Subscribe:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/conversations-that-matter/id1446645865?mt=2&ign-mpt=uo%3D4

Like Us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/worldviewconversation/

Follow Us on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/conversationsthatmatterpodcast

Follow Us on Gab:
https://gab.ai/worldiewconversation

Follow Jon on Twitter
https://twitter.com/worldviewconvos

Subscribe on Minds
https://www.minds.com/worldviewconversation

More Ways to Listen:
https://anchor.fm/worldviewconversation

4/1/19

Living Out, Lynching's Legacy at the Library, and Leaving Marx

Jon summarizes, explains, and critiques the Living Out controversy involving Sam Allberry and Tom Buck, SEBT's "Library Talk: The Lingering Effects of Lynching on Your Ministry," Danny Akin's concerning tweets on Kyle J. Howard and Biblical interpretation, as well as Bruce Ashford's critique of Marxism (but not social justice).

Video:



Audio:



www.worldviewconversation.com/

Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/worldviewconversation

Subscribe:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/conversations-that-matter/id1446645865?mt=2&ign-mpt=uo%3D4

Like Us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/worldviewconversation/

Follow Us on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/conversationsthatmatterpodcast

Follow Us on Gab:
https://gab.ai/worldiewconversation

Follow Jon on Twitter
https://twitter.com/worldviewconvos

Subscribe on Minds
https://www.minds.com/worldviewconversation

More Ways to Listen:
https://anchor.fm/worldviewconversation

Mentioned in this Video:
http://enemieswithinthechurch.com/2019/03/27/a-students-reflections-of-the-recent-lynching-seminar-at-sebts

3/25/19

The Social Justice Movement Has Taken Over My Church: Now What?

Cody, and Jon discuss what to do if your pastor or professor starts advocating Neo-Marxist ideas including when to leave a church or seminary and how to leave. Also discussed is a basic grassroots strategy to defend the truth while gaining support from like-minded believers.

Video:



Audio:




Concerned about social justice infiltrating the church? Join this Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/enemieswithin/

Cody Libolt https://www.patreon.com/ftnci

Jon Harris https://www.patreon.com/worldviewconversation

3/22/19

Slavery and Reparations

A historical look at slavery and a biblical/practical examination of reparations.

Video:



Audio:



Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/worldviewconversation

Subscribe:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/conversations-that-matter/id1446645865?mt=2&ign-mpt=uo%3D4

Like Us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/worldviewconversation/

Follow Us on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/conversationsthatmatterpodcast

Follow Us on Gab:
https://gab.ai/worldiewconversation

Follow Jon on Twitter
https://twitter.com/worldviewconvos

Subscribe on Minds
https://www.minds.com/worldviewconversation

More Ways to Listen:
https://anchor.fm/worldviewconversation

Mentioned in this video:

Just Thinking Podcast: http://thebarpodcast.com/JT/index.php/2019/03/20/jt-slavery-reparations/

3/12/19

The Downgrade Continues: SEBTS, JD Greear, and Young American's for Liberty

Southeastern now has a degree in "Justice and Social Ethics" meant to give ministers a "prophetic edge." Core classes include "Ethics of Wealth and Poverty" and "Social Justice and Race Relations." JD Greear's 03/10/19 sermon equivocates the judaizer heresy with racism and xenophobia, as well as being too proud of an American or Southern identity. Young American's for Liberty appears to have possibly supported the LGBT and MeToo protests at Liberty University on 03/06/19.

Video:


Audio: 



Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/worldviewconversation

Subscribe:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/conversations-that-matter/id1446645865?mt=2&ign-mpt=uo%3D4

Like Us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/worldviewconversation/

Follow Us on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/conversationsthatmatterpodcast

Follow Us on Gab:
https://gab.ai/worldiewconversation

Follow Jon on Twitter
https://twitter.com/worldviewconvos

Subscribe on Minds
https://www.minds.com/worldviewconversation

More Ways to Listen:
https://anchor.fm/worldviewconversation

Mentioned in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUv7ce8HeCM

http://enemieswithinthechurch.com/

3/7/19

LGBT and #MeToo Protest at Liberty University

By: Jon Harris

Last Wednesday I attended a protest sponsored by the LGBTQ+ and #MeToo movements on Liberty University's campus, at least that's what the flier said:


However, there are no official "MeToo" or "LGBTQ+" groups listed as student organizations at Liberty University, though there probably are unofficial groups. In reality, I believe this event was sponsored by Young American's for Liberty, a libertarian organization I suspect is straying from its "Ron Paul" roots.

The protest was against comments made at CPAC by Jerry Falwell Jr. and Donald Trump Jr. In the video below I engage a Christian advocating for gender dysphoria, as well as the senior class president, event organizer, and president of Young American's for Liberty at LU, Addyson Garner. At the 45:15 mark Garner says "My day job is helping push free speech on campus. For work, that's what I do." After our conversation on camera, I asked Addyson if she was fiscally conservative and socially liberal which she affirmed.

On the Young Americans for Liberty chapter website for Liberty University (https://yaliberty.org/chapters/liberty-university/) there is a "chapter plan" which says:
Liberty University claims to be a bastion of free speech in the midst of liberal colleges. This freedom of speech does not always translate on campus, and YAL at LU wants to challenge that. We strive to promote freedom of speech and freedom of assembly on Liberty's campus. YAL wants to educate and equip young adults to be activists for liberty by hosting events and educating students.
When I was on campus during an extremely cold day, there were two individuals, who did not look like students and were not LU staff, passing out cans of soft beverages with industrial style coolers right by the protest. They were going out of their way to offer it to every student passing by the most highly trafficked outside area on campus (in front of the Montview student union, where the protest was taking place). My hunch is that they probably worked, and were funded, by Young Americans for Liberty. I did not realize the potential connection until much later, so neglected to ask.

I did think it was significant though that this is the first time, as far as I know, that this has ever happened at Liberty University, but I'm sure it won't be the last. The lingering question in my mind is, why would a libertarian organization seemingly sponsor an event in which students holding rainbow flags are proclaiming, "Where does it say in the Bible you can't be gay and Christian?"

Video:




Audio:



Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/worldviewconversation

Subscribe:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/conversations-that-matter/id1446645865?mt=2&ign-mpt=uo%3D4

Like Us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/worldviewconversation/

Follow Us on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/conversationsthatmatterpodcast

Follow Us on Gab:
https://gab.ai/worldiewconversation

Follow Jon on Twitter
https://twitter.com/worldviewconvos

Subscribe on Minds
https://www.minds.com/worldviewconversation

More Ways to Listen:
https://anchor.fm/worldviewconversation

What Happened at Wednesday's Social Justice Q and A at the Shepherd's Conference?

Yesterday, 183 years ago, the first shots of what would come to be remembered as "The Alamo," rang out across the Texas brush country. Outnumbered by fifteen-to-one, a diverse group of men from six foreign countries and twenty-two states, fought to the last man in what is now hailed as the rallying cry in the war for Texas Independence. Davy Crockett, the famed trailblazer, "Indian-fighter," and congressman from Tennessee, led thirty men to fight in a battle that some may well have thought was not really his to fight.

In some ways, John MacArthur has become the Davy Crockett of the battle for the gospel (and against social justice) in the church. Even at his own conference he is effectively outnumbered, as yesterday's Lunch Session Q and A seemed to demonstrate. I'm old enough to remember, when I was a TMS student in 2011, Dr. MacArthur preaching against the religious right. Many of the professors and pastors at Grace Community Church took his ideas farther by discouraging Christian political involvement. In a strange way, the absence of MacArthur's "culture war" credibility, while making him an unlikely candidate for leading a political charge, has enabled him to keep a much clearer head in challenging social justice.

For MacArthur, this has always been a soteriological issue, which makes him a great communicator to particularly reformed Christians who care about that sort of thing. Since it is (right now) within the "young" reformed camp that the "woke" church movement seems to be making the greatest progress, MacArthur is a good champion to have. I write the following not only to defend MacArthur, but also to explain what happened yesterday with Al Mohler, Ligon Duncan, and Mark Dever, and why it is all significant.

First, there has been a lot of tip-toeing going on as of late. Phil Johnson put an end to that yesterday. This is perhaps the best result of Wednesday's Q and A. At the risk of giving MacArthur too much credit for what Phil Johnson actually accomplished---John MacArthur would not have been able to take the clear, measured, sage-like demeanor he had without Johnson cracking the eggs so-to-speak. In what social justice advocates are likely to label a "good-cop, bad-cop" routine, Johnson asked tough questions from the left, while MacArthur gave the answers the others should have given, from the right. The figurative fence sitters likely felt surrounded on both sides. The silence was broken. The issue was raised. The contrast was clear.

Al Mohler, who did most of the talking, in an uncharacteristic way, was clear as mud. Satirical clips started emerging within the few hour window the session was made available. (For some reason Wednesday's Q and A is the only session of the conference, which, as I write this, has been removed). There was one moment early on, in which Mohler deliberately avoided one of Johnson's questions  in which he was asked why he was not calling out social justice advocates in evangelical circles he was a part of. In general, Mohler spoke with vagueness, Dever spoke with confusion, and Duncan tried to be as agreeable as possible.

Dr. Mohler's offended posture does not seem congruent with a previous statement to desire "productive conversations" about social justice with men like John MacArthur. During the session, Mohler told Phil Johnson directly that he didn't "mind" being picked on, to which the audience let out a chuckle, perhaps at the confused reaction of Johnson, or perhaps at the mixed signals Mohler was giving. While Duncan and Dever were laughing at an attempt by MacArthur to lighten the mood, Mohler was not. Mohler also repeatedly hailed his conservative credentials in a very personal way, at one point even challenging Johnson to examine his record. If anything is to be remembered of Wednesday's Q and A, it will probably be Mohler's defensive tone.

One memorable quote that is starting to make the rounds was something John MacArthur said.

"I'll fight error but I won't fight my friends."

Some on the anti-social justice side have, perhaps rightly, confessed concern over this. I would like to clarify this statement in light of another one made by MacArthur later though. After Al Mohler figuratively rolled up his sleeves and, in almost a defiant way, told Phil Johnson that "If [signing the Dallas Statement] is going to be a test of fellowship among us, this will be a good time to find out," MacArthur stepped in. In what became the most clearly articulated and applause receiving statement of the session, John MacArthur gave everyone a window into how he views Mohler, Duncan, and Dever. I have divided his quote into five basic sections.

1. Builds Common Ground
"There's no question about our biblical commitment, no question about the fact that we're anchored deep in theology, no question about the fact that we want to care for the people who suffer right? That's part of being Christian."

2. Identifies Error
"The confusion comes when people keep identifying other groups of people as those who suffer. And we have all these new people to deal with who don't really suffer but there's a category created for them which makes them a suffering group and we're trying to figure out how do we deal with that."

3. Call to Action

"I don't have a problem with helping poor people or helping people who suffer. . . but if they keep creating new groups who are identified as those who are disenfranchised suffering people they put the evangelical church in a really odd place because now you got all the "me too" people and all the LGBTQ people. . . they keep identifying groups of suffering people and at some point we have to make a biblical stand. We have to say 'Wait a minute?'"

4. Identifies Enemy

"And you all know that. We all know that. but I think to the culture and some more liberal people they think we're stopping short of where our Christianity should take us right? We ought to embrace all these groups. I can hardly keep up with all the new ones that are appearing on the surface."

5. Summary Statement
"So I think for us to find our way to real suffering people dealing with real issues and love them in Christ and care for them and lift them up and maybe provide things for them that they haven't had in the past in the name of Jesus Christ is fine. But I can't become a victim of every new group that this culture invents for reasons that have very little to do with helping people and have to do with political power."

From the preceding statement is it clear that whether right or wrong, MacArthur does not view the three on the panel who have not signed the Dallas Statement as social justice advocates, heretics, or enemies. He does however hint at what he considers the danger to be: That they will fail to stand firm against enemies in the social justice camp. This is an assumption, but I believe MacArthur knows that on one end Mohler is being pressured by Russell Moore, Tim Keller, J.D. Greear, etc. and on the other end he's being chained to the scripture. This may or may not be correct, but the point is, John MacArthur seems to be connecting dots for Mohler, Duncan, and Dever, because on some level he believes they are not deliberate, but deceived. They are ignorant, not intentional. They are only fence-sitters because they have failed to understand how their fundamental beliefs are contradicted by the social justice advocates surrounding them. Disagreeing with John MacArthur's strategy, or thinking him to be naive is one thing. Saying he's buckling is another.

John MacArthur may go down like Davy Crockett did. Time will tell. But the gospel will always prevail. This Q and A went far in exposing how unprepared and calculating an otherwise clear thinker is in responding to the social justice movement. The contrast could not have been more stark. Perhaps in the eyes of broader evangelicalism, Dr. MacArthur will be thought of more negatively as a result of this. But then again, perhaps in the not too distant future people will be saying, "Remember the Shepherd's Conference of 2019!"

(Side note: This sticks in my craw, so I'll mention it: At one point Phil Johnson asked a question concerning how often the Southern Baptist Convention apologized for racism/slavery, to which Al Mohler and Mark Dever responded that Johnson was misinformed because it only happened one time in 1995. This is not exactly true. In 1989 there was a statement against racism and bigotry. In 1996 there was a statement on arson in African American churches which focused on racial reconciliation. In 2007 they denounced racism in a resolution on the Dred Scott Decision. In 2015 there was a statement on racial reconciliation. In 2016 there was the statement against the Confederate Battle Flag. In 2017 another statement against racism, including slavery, was adopted. There was a resolution sponsored by Danny Akin in last year's convention that was essentially another apology. It was not adopted. What was adopted was a statement against the "Curse of Ham," including using it as a justification for slavery, and yet another statement that condemned among other things, racism. Add to this the various statements written, sponsored, or supported by Southern Baptist entities and one begins to swim in a sea of anti-racist statements that just about all seem to carry a weight of guilt in some way. Don't believe me? Check out this, this, this, and this (all since President Trump's election). I'm probably only scratching the surface.)

3/1/19

Beware of Evangelical Inc.'s "Third Way"

Jon explains the "moderate" "third way" position advocated by Tim Keller, which discourages affiliation with Conservatives or Progressives, and why it's dangerous. J.D. Greear, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, and the Born Alive Protection Act are all part of the discussion.

Video:



Audio:



Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/worldviewconversation

Subscribe:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/conversations-that-matter/id1446645865?mt=2&ign-mpt=uo%3D4

Like Us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/worldviewconversation/

Follow Us on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/conversationsthatmatterpodcast

Follow Us on Gab:
https://gab.ai/worldiewconversation

Follow Jon on Twitter
https://twitter.com/worldviewconvos

Subscribe on Minds
https://www.minds.com/worldviewconversation

More Ways to Listen:
https://anchor.fm/worldviewconversation

Mentioned in this video:

https://www.facebook.com/ApologiaStudios/videos/399516737544428/ - Marcus Pittman at Batavia NYC Council
https://www.facebook.com/ApologiaStudios/videos/476046516266644/ - Trevor Batton at Austin City Council

2/26/19

The Political Objective of Enemies Within the Church

Jon Harris and filmmaker Judd Saul discuss "Enemies Within the Church." Judd explains the political objective of Leftist donors undermining Christian circles. He also gives advice to average Christians on how they can stand against social justice infiltrating the church.

Video:



Audio:



Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/worldviewconversation

Subscribe:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/conversations-that-matter/id1446645865?mt=2&ign-mpt=uo%3D4

Like Us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/worldviewconversation/

Follow Us on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/conversationsthatmatterpodcast

Follow Us on Gab:
https://gab.ai/worldiewconversation

Follow Jon on Twitter
https://twitter.com/worldviewconvos

Subscribe on Minds
https://www.minds.com/worldviewconversation

More Ways to Listen:
https://anchor.fm/worldviewconversation

2/22/19

Dr. Sam Smith on History, Social Justice, and Presentism

The chair of the history department at Liberty University shares his thoughts on Jemar Tisby, Social Justice infiltrating historiography, the dangers of presentism, and gives advice to both laymen interested in America's Christian heritage, and high schoolers desiring to become historians.

Video:



Audio:



Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/worldviewconversation

Subscribe:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/conversations-that-matter/id1446645865?mt=2&ign-mpt=uo%3D4

Like Us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/worldviewconversation/

Follow Us on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/conversationsthatmatterpodcast

Follow Us on Gab:
https://gab.ai/worldiewconversation

Follow Jon on Twitter
https://twitter.com/worldviewconvos

Subscribe on Minds
https://www.minds.com/worldviewconversation

More Ways to Listen:
https://anchor.fm/worldviewconversation

Mentioned in this Podcast:
https://cautiousenthusiasm.home.blog/

2/19/19

Al Mohler and Leftist Apologies

Jon Harris uses a recent story in the Houston Chronicle, about Al Mohler and Danny Akin's renunciation of C.J. Mahaney, to illustrate the difference between the Left's concept of repentance and biblical repentance. Topics discussed: Al Mohler's trajectory, participating in systems of oppression, and being a prophetic voice.

Video:




Audio:



Subscribe:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/conversations-that-matter/id1446645865?mt=2&ign-mpt=uo%3D4

Like Us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/worldviewconversation/

Follow Us on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/conversationsthatmatterpodcast

Follow Us on Gab:
https://gab.ai/worldiewconversation

Follow Jon on Twitter
https://twitter.com/worldviewconvos

Subscribe on Minds
https://www.minds.com/worldviewconversation

More Ways to Listen:
https://anchor.fm/worldviewconversation

2/14/19

Jonathan Edwards and George Whitefield on Slavery

Jon Harris explains how historiography factors into the social justice movement, exposes the dangers of presentism, and surveys the beliefs of Jonathan Edwards and George Whitefield on the subject of slavery.

Video:



Audio:



Subscribe:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/conversations-that-matter/id1446645865?mt=2&ign-mpt=uo%3D4

Like Us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/worldviewconversation/

Follow Us on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/conversationsthatmatterpodcast

Follow Us on Gab:
https://gab.ai/worldiewconversation

Follow Jon on Twitter
https://twitter.com/worldviewconvos

Subscribe on Minds
https://www.minds.com/worldviewconversation

More Ways to Listen:
https://anchor.fm/worldviewconversation

2/11/19

2/2/19

J.D. Greear's Mishandling of Romans 1:24-32

Jon Harris walks through some disturbing comments regarding homosexuality made by J.D. Greear, the president of the Southern Baptist Convention, in “How the Fall Affects Us All” Romans 1:24–32, delivered on Sunday the 27th of Jan. @ Summit Church in Durham, N.C.

Video:


Audio:



Subscribe:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/conversations-that-matter/id1446645865?mt=2&ign-mpt=uo%3D4

Like Us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/worldviewconversation/

Follow Us on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/conversationsthatmatterpodcast

Follow Us on Gab:
https://gab.ai/worldiewconversation

Follow Us on Twitter
https://twitter.com/worldviewconvos

Subscribe on Minds
https://www.minds.com/worldviewconversation

More Ways to Listen:
https://anchor.fm/worldviewconversation

Mentioned in this Podcast:

Sermon Transcript:
https://jdgreear.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Copy-of-4-Romans-1-24-32-Judgment.pdf

C.S. Lewis on National Repentance (Corporate Apologies): http://just84465.weebly.com/uploads/5/0/5/9/50596861/god_in_the_dock.pdf

Joseph's Spurgeon's related blog post:
http://www.sovereignkingchurch.com/blog/jd-greear-peace-peace-on-sodomy?fbclid=IwAR3c1fD2qjWHPG65ep-9VrwM2SxgSttj8-0-tYcFpiH0-Yf4J6il7gQyZvk

1/29/19

A Review of Jemar Tisby’s "The Color of Compromise"

By: David Scott

I moved the meter from 1.6x to 1.75 and only a few minutes later all the way to 2x. I just wanted the book to be over with after almost 5 hours of a continuous barrage of critical race theory barely masquerading as a “Christian history” of race relations in the United States. I might sound somewhat overly critical from the outset, but a few days on Jemar Tisby’s Color of Compromise has not aged well. That being said, I do want to give credit where credit is due, so I will begin with an overview that notes a few positives of the book before getting into the critique.
   
 Tisby’s book functions as a kind of historical manifesto for the “woke church” that is increasing in popularity and prominence among young, formerly conservative evangelicals – but that’s not all it is. It is primarily an indictment of the white, Protestant church throughout the history of the colonization and development of the land that is now the United States. Tisby deserves credit for acknowledging that history and historical individuals are complex and contradictory. He also deserves credit for (at least in theory) placing ultimate hope in Christianity for racial reconciliation and harmony in his introduction. Finally, he understands that his presuppositions will come through in his discussion, and doesn’t attempt to paint himself as “middle of the road” or “non-biased” as so many prominent historians do. This isn’t to say his narrative is true or helpful, but he does deserve credit for honesty. Unfortunately for Tisby, that’s about all the credit he’s entitled to, and it’s not enough to put down on a home loan.

Before launching into his historical narrative, Tisby anticipates objections to his thesis. Primarily, he thinks critics will object that:
  1. His ideas are too liberal and/or founded on Marxist ideals, and/or
  2. His historical facts are either wrong or misinterpreted.
To these potential objections he makes no significant defense except to say that the weight of the evidence he lays forth will prove his thesis. It’s highly ironic that he mentions Marxism, as his solutions at the end of the book seems as such, but more on that later. Tisby’s biggest issue when it comes to his historical narrative is gross generalization. His sequence of events is so polarized by a racialized lens that he sees essentially all “white” individuals and institutions as being either malicious or complicit in racism (seen as including “systematic” racism). Because of his radical lens, Tisby is very sloppy, sort of like a blindfolded man picking cherries. It’s not so much what he considers in his narrative, but what he leaves out. Here are several examples of what is very typical in the book:
  • When discussing the founding of the KKK, Tisby feels it utterly necessary to (very) briefly discuss General Nathanial Bedford Forest and his alleged war atrocities, racism and lack of education. He makes no mention of Forest’s rejection of the KKK, his opposition to lynching and his advocating for civil rights later in life.
  • When discussing racism in the early 20th century, Tisby makes broad extrapolations of several lynchings in the US for the purpose of indicting the whites that took part and the culture at large that supposedly supported them with silence. He also talks about the racism present at the Chicago World’s Fair in 1893 – but he makes no mention of the eugenics movement, Margaret Sanger or Planned Parenthood, arguably the most blatantly racist movement in American History. 
  • Despite the genocidal numbers of abortions in the black community, Tisby mentions abortion only as a point of supposed hypocrisy by whites that want to appear to care for the black community while simultaneously being engaged in “complicit racism.”
  • Tisby insinuates that Ronald Reagan essentially established his 1980 campaign from a starting point of implicit racism. His evidence: Reagan kicked off his 1980 presidential bid at the Neshoba County Fair in Mississippi – a county that several civil rights workers were murdered in 16 years earlier, and in his speech at that fair he advocated for state’s rights.
These are only a few examples, but they describe the basic tenor of the book, namely the overgeneralization and cherry picking.

In view of Tisby’s sloppy history his conclusions are not surprising. There are several notable suggestions he makes for “fighting” systematic racism, and this is the portion where he essentially goes completely Marxist (which, as you remember, he warned would be a critique in his introduction). He suggests, for example, that Christians get involved with local Black Lives Matter chapters despite the fact that the organization supports the LGBT agenda (which he admits) and rejects the very idea of the nuclear family (which you can find on their website).

While he makes a number of other personal and church orientated suggestions (for example, a call to vote, but with only “racial justice” as a criteria), it is fairly obvious that he’s leading up to his main remedy for racial injustice: reparations, which functions as shorthand for income redistribution that Tisby “Christianizes” by suggesting that the church could be the source of. Tisby also pleads for the taking down of Confederate monuments – a plea that is somewhat strange given his acknowledgement of the “complicity” of the entire history, country, and church in the United States. One wonders why every monument of a non-civil rights leader or hero shouldn’t be taken down. Finally, Tisby makes a whole-hearted endorsement for racial quotas and affirmative action as a form of reparation.

One of the great ironies of the book is that Tisby says in the introduction that his goal isn’t to single out any racial group, but then spends virtually his entire book indicting white Christians for their complicity in racism and white supremacy. Tisby paints a picture of two kinds of Christianity – one is cruel, oppressive and irredeemable; the other is hopeful and resilient. Really, one is Christian and one is not – and you can guess which one is which. It is a sad narrative as it presents a dismal and hopeless picture of the transforming power of the gospel – because it is not transforming. In fact, the entire premise of the book rests on a maxim resembling this: Racism never goes away, it merely adapts. One wonders if there is no killing racism why Tisby bothered to write the book in the first place.

At the end of the day, the sense this reviewer got from Color of Compromise was appropriately, in lieu of the material, implicit. Tisby very much wants reformed, evangelical Christians who hold to the Five Solas, sing “It is well with my Soul” on Sunday morning, and use a commentary when they study the Bible each morning, to feel comfortable stepping into the voting booth every November and confidently pulling the lever or filling in the bubble for each candidate with a “D” next to their name, all the while patting themselves on the back for “seeking justice, loving mercy and walking humbly with their God.”

1/27/19

From SJW Alt-Righter to Christian: A Conversion Story

Frank Russo sits down with Jon Harris to discuss his conversion to Christianity from the "Alt-Right." Frank defines the Alt Right, tells why many young people are attracted to it, and then finally why he rejected it to follow Christ. Frank concludes by giving advise to Christians on how they can help reach crusaders for social justice.

Video:



Audio:



Subscribe on Itunes:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/conversations-that-matter/id1446645865?mt=2&ign-mpt=uo%3D4

Like Us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/worldviewconversation/

Follow Us on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/conversationsthatmatterpodcast

Follow Us on Gab:
https://gab.ai/worldiewconversation

Follow Us on Twitter
https://twitter.com/worldviewconvos

Subscribe on Minds
https://www.minds.com/worldviewconversation

More Ways to Listen:
https://anchor.fm/worldviewconversation

1/22/19

What to Say About MLK (And The Seminaries That Love Him)

Martin Luther King Jr. has become almost universally respected as a symbol of freedom. Recently an article in Baptist Press entitled, "MLK taught as 'Christian hero' at SBC seminaries," reported on a truly startling trend within evangelical circles to grandstand him. How should orthodox and conservative Christians view MLK?






www.worldviewconversation.com/

Subscribe:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/conversations-that-matter/id1446645865?mt=2&ign-mpt=uo%3D4

Like Us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/worldviewconversation/

Follow Us on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/conversationsthatmatterpodcast

Follow Us on Gab:
https://gab.ai/worldiewconversation

Follow Us on Twitter
https://twitter.com/worldviewconvos

More Ways to Listen:
https://anchor.fm/worldviewconversation

Referenced in the video:

https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/humanity-and-divinity-jesus?fbclid=IwAR0CjqGas9YxMEaf-ci5p82xVzFRvJSoyhxEffoY5dXU6N4784ca1t16wks

http://bpnews.net/52270/mlk-taught-as-christian-hero-at-sbc-seminaries

1/20/19

A Compassionate Argument for a Strict Border Part 3

In the previous installment we looked at the idea of incentives, specifically trying to target the motivating factors for those who come to the US illegally. The thesis of that piece was this: it is not compassionate to incentivize those who are healthy and wealthy enough to make the move to US to abandon their nations – this is an especially gross injustice when it involves entitlements that destroy personal industry and integrity. We will now consider the most important part of this discussion: how can the poor, downtrodden and desperate of other lands actually be helped?

As a young man, I spent a sizable chunk of time in Southern Africa, specifically South Africa and Mozambique. I learned a lot about the world, other cultures and myself from the experience, but I also learned much about what true charity looks like. I saw a great deal of actual help for people who were in desperate need of assistance, but I also saw (to a much lesser extent) goods, service and time being given to people who probably could have done things themselves and were actually discouraged from being more productive because they knew that the help would come. The reason the second phenomenon was less common was primarily because the mission I was working for (which exists on a conglomerate of US and SA funds) was smart about how, why and when aid was given. The people running it understood what qualified as effective and compassionate, and what was faux compassion – charity given for the sole sake of making the one bringing it feel good about themselves without attention to how it would affect those receiving it. Sadly, much of the benevolence around the world is exactly that – faux compassion – redistributionism that hurts rather than helps those it is given to (see When Helping Hurts: Alleviating Poverty Without Hurting the Poor. . . and Yourself by Steve Corbett and Brian Fikkert). True compassion is not throwing money at a problem, nor is it giving away goods and services to those who haven’t earned it because of their perceived disadvantage – true charity is personal - it is life-to-life action based on kindness, sincerity and the identification of actual problems, lacks and needs. Sometimes it is rashly given, sometimes it is meticulously planned, but it is meant to be real.

What does this have to do with the border crisis? The overwhelming majority of rhetoric coming from many sides of the border debate but especially from the left falls into the category of faux compassion – perceived care and concern that isn’t based in anything tangible or substantial. A vote, Facebook repost or walk down to the Capital in D.C. may demonstrate the perception of caring for the oppressed of other nations, but it’s just perception because there’s no “skin in the game.” Outrage accomplishes nothing if there is no action to follow beyond voicing opinion, casting a vote, taking a walk or screaming at a politician. The point is this: advocating compassion is not the same as practicing compassion. As already has been established, throwing money at a problem (i.e., entitlements for immigrants/illegals) does them no great service, just as it doesn’t in the missional world – what makes the policies advocated by those in support of an open/soft border so much more confounding and immoral is that they so often advocate taking others’ money rather than their own.   

The inconvenient truth is that most organizations, groups and movements that actually have improved economic, social and cultural conditions for the poor/disenfranchised of the world are just who the progressive left loves to hate – Western empires (Britain, Holland, Germany, etc.), trade organizations/entrepreneurs (East India Company, Cecil Rhodes, Gilded Age philanthropists) and certainly most of all because of the their contributions to literacy worldwide, Christian missionaries – all of these the most prominent villains in Hollywood storytelling today. This is not to say that these entities and individuals were always driven by compassion, but even for those who haven’t, the effects have often remained because specific individuals wanting to show specific compassion saw opportunity and acted. Therefore what we think of as compassion is often not, and what we think of as not sometimes is.

We must then ask the question: what is true compassion? Here are a number of principles to help us navigate:

1) True compassion is specific. While one can bring awareness to a need for compassion, the outworking of that compassion has to fit specific needs. For example, one could bring the plight of the Christian minority in Kurdistan to a conversation, give money to a large organization that serves their cause, or retweet a news story that gives an overview of the situation, but none of these demonstrates “skin in the game” compassion, though they may all be proper and admirable. If giving money, true specific compassion would target specific individuals, churches or communities for specific needs. It could also mean traveling to the location and seeing firsthand what the needs actually are. It could even be personally welcoming in a family or individual in need to one’s home. In reference to the immigration question, these same standards should be applied.

2) True compassion expects nothing in return. An easy way to identify faux-compassion is by assessing whether an individual is trying to get something out of either their stance on an issue (like the border wall, for example) or even from getting involved in an organization through donation or volunteer. How do you tell? Those who are truly compassionate probably don’t talk about it.

3) True compassion is not hypocritical. This is fairly straightforward, and it’s the one out of these three principles that those in support of a stricter border usually remember to bring up, though it’s the least likely to change someone’s mind. If walls aren’t needed and the doors to the country should swing wide open to take any and all, then why not at your own house? Your own community? Your own city? The fact of the matter is that when problems become larger than us, we tend to see them less as our problems and more as someone or something (for instance, the government) else’s problem.

To get pragmatic, here are some ideas for actually showing compassion to those south of our border who want to come here (note: the first three are purposely sarcastic):
 
1) Research some of the countries that are sending us migrants. Study the political situations to identify what the problems are in those countries that are causing people to want to leave. Ask: what would actually solve this problem to the point that people could stay in their country? Then ask, is there anything you could do specifically to help the situation. If you want to be a vocal advocate, perhaps advocate for change in that country rather than just importing the people from that country here.

2) Talk to more recent immigrants (legal or illegal) and ask them why they left their country and if given the opportunity, if they would want to return.

3) Actually visit an aid worker or missionary living in one of the countries that are giving us an influx of migrants. Not an organized “voluntourism” trip, but contact someone specific and ask to stay with them. Learn about a country and meet people that live there. You’re far more likely to care about the people of that country if you know them where they live.

4) Donate your own money to causes, organizations and most importantly, individual people that do specific and personal work to improve the lives of the poor, oppressed and downtrodden

1/18/19

How Social Justice Parrots the Gospel

Jon Harris explains why Social Justice is a gospel competitor, not a gospel accessory. An orthodox Christian cannot accept both and be consistent, much less a Calvinist.

Video:



Audio:



Subscribe: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/conversations-that-matter/id1446645865?mt=2&ign-mpt=uo%3D4

Like Us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/worldviewconversation/ 

Follow Us on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/conversationsthatmatterpodcast 

Follow Us on Gab: https://gab.ai/worldiewconversation

Follow Us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/worldviewconvos 

More Ways to Listen: https://anchor.fm/worldviewconversation 

Referenced in the Video:

http://enemieswithinthechurch.com/ 

https://sovereignnations.com/

How Social Justice Parallels the Gospel
  • White/Male/Straight Privilege = Original Sin 
  • Political Correctness = The Law 
  • Woke = Born Again 
  • Liberal Politics = Sacraments 
  • Woke Leaders = Priests 
  • Sociology = Cannon 
  • Equality = Heaven  
 How Social Justice Contradicts the Gospel
  • Focus: External Behaviors instead of Heart Condition
  • Group: Oppressor Classes instead of Individuals
  • Order: Sanctification precedes Justification
  • Power: Perpetual Repentance instead of Justification

1/16/19

Immunizations and Hamster Wheels

A Follow Up on the “Downgrade of SEBTS”
By: Jon Harris

A few months ago many of us lined up somewhere to receive our annual dosage of sore arm and flu symptoms, er, I mean, our flu shot. But, not everyone gets the flu right? Only those exposed, without having a strong enough immunity, will catch the disease. So why not just get a flu shot when flu symptoms start becoming noticeable? Don’t be silly! By that time it’s too late! So what does this have to do with social justice infecting a Southern Baptist seminary (to pick from the countless examples one could draw from the hat)?

Only those who fear getting a disease will line up for the immunization, which is what the video was. A warning for those who see the threat social justice poses. It was not open heart surgery, nor antibiotics for someone already infected. To them it was only a concert for the deaf. 

Now, this gets down to the base assumption. Social justice is deadly, it kills, and a truly orthodox faith cannot ultimately survive being tossed about in its waves. The vast majority of responses to the video indicated A. This same belief, or B. A process of coming to this belief.  

I should probably say two things at this point. First, I have been greatly encouraged by the large and diverse group of people who have shown their support, including alumni, prospective students, current students, and even at least one person on staff. Second, because of the variety of platforms in which comments and personal messages have been sent, and because of my own tight schedule, I will not be able to get to all of them, but they are appreciated.

Now back to needles and scalpels. Social justice does need to be rooted out. And yes, I have endeavored to do my part not just in exposing it, but explaining it. The video was perhaps high on the exposing, and low on the explaining. This is not a defect anymore than an immunization is not heart surgery. This being said, I will now grab my scalpel for a few minor incisions.

There were a handful of negative remarks that I thought I would do well to address. One person accused me of saying that SEBTS had to dumb down their academic standards in order to receive minorities into their program. Of course, I said nothing of the kind. Changing the curriculum by making it less academic and more devotional (I.e. dropping hermeneutics as an M.Div. Requirement, and adding in courses on leadership and Christian disciplines, not to mention social justice courses sponsored by the Kern Family Foundation), is what is causing the lower standards. 

There is, however, a point to be made here. A personal friend of mine has been a member of the Southeastern society for years. At a donors meeting last year he told me about the pitch that was made to sponsors. Long story short, Southern Baptists are afraid their denomination is going the way of the woolly mammoth. One way to combat this, is to diversify the campus, at least according to them. Affirmative action and social justice are the chosen strategies for attracting this audience.

Here’s where the scalpel cuts. Minorities are capable. The immediate objection is usually that systematic racism determined that they would start a wrung down on the economic ladder. The giveaway here is that affirmative action sees ethnic and gender categories before it ever sees economic ones. It isn’t because of poverty that wealth is re-distributed, it’s because of something more fundamental. As a woman, or as a minority, you are not capable. You need our help. But that contradicts the second sentence of this paragraph? That’s because the second sentence is what I believe, and the fifth sentence is what proponents of affirmative-action believe when it gets down to it.

With “Kingdom Diversity” also comes social justice in advocacy and implementation. Though I tend to be more convinced that the advocacy of social justice has more to do with alleviating a white guilt that the cross of Jesus Christ must have overlooked, it is crystal clear that its implementation, in the minds of its creators, was for the purpose of attracting minorities.

Let’s think through this. Requiring knowledge of the Bible, including hermeneutics, is not enough to attract minorities? There needs to be something extra? What they really understand is social justice, so let’s focus on that. The problem with all this is, well, it’s, um, a bit racist. This is not being all things to all men, unless of course the apostle Paul thought it was unnecessarily offensive to share the gospel with some unless it was served with a little bit of left-wing politics on the side. No, the assumption here is that minorities will not come for just the Bible. I say this is a wrong assumption. All who are God’s sheep hear his voice, regardless of skin color.

If someone was willing to adopt the ideas contained in the previous three paragraphs, there would be no contradiction in also adopting the idea that academic standards need to be dumbed down for minority students. But, I'm the one rejecting all these ideas.

Another objection, which I saw more than once, was that I should name names. Now I do realize, there are those who may have received more of an inoculation than they really needed. I fear that for some, not only has this destroyed the social justice disease, but it has also destroyed kindness and graciousness with it. I’m not really in the business of sniffing out communists or racists simply to sniff them out. I find it interesting that the majority of times in the epistles when heretics are called out they are not named. Words like antichrists, false teachers, false prophets, and wolves seem to do. Because I’m warning about a disease at an institution, and not a particular person, I feel the same way.

There is also the other side. Those who think I should name names so that I cannot hide behind anonymity. I think what this crowd fails to recognize is that my warning is for those considering an institution. Some of the players involved are people, not organizations, events, or articles. But the same case can be built upon the latter three. They are the proof in the pudding. If there were a small number of people pursuing a hostile take over I would name them. This isn’t a take over though. This is a united front. Those to whom I made the video, who are already against social justice, are free to look at the front and see if what I say about individual players rings true. Otherwise, I don’t have personal problems with anyone, and as I stated in the video, I’m not looking to start any. My focus is broader than individuals.

A note on heretics- those pushing social justice occupy a broad range of dogmatism. Not all of them are heretics. In fact, the majority are probably not, at least yet. As I emphasize in the video, SEBTS is in a transitional phase. They only recently welcomed a female to their board (The board that oversees a seminary curriculum for men in the ministry), as far as I know the MLK 50 was the only sanctioned event given for class credit that outwardly pushed an identity politics message, and I did not hear about a professor warning students in his theology class concerning reading the Bible through the lens of “white privilege,” until last year (to name a few things I did not mention in the video). If left unchecked, all Christian organizations that have adopted oppressor/oppressed categories will eventually land themselves in heresy land whether they like it or not. A Gospel that places only certain “oppressor” groups upon the everlasting hamster wheel of penance is ripe for Tetzels, not Luthers. 

A final clarification. There are probably a few out there who, after reading this, are seething (a good indication that one has already caught the disease). How can he be so arrogant as to think he has the cure?! I will answer this- I don’t. Why Peter, an apostle was temporarily taken in by Judaizers I don’t know. Paul was not superior to him in spiritual discipline or love for the Lord. But Peter repented. This is the surest sign that someone is in fact a believer. Continuing in willful error is the sign of a false teacher. I’m certainly no Paul. I’ve sought to use some of his strategies (including his sarcasm at times), but like him, I am the chief of sinners. 

Let me tell you about Jesus. May I? I would have no light if it were not for Him. Without his Word I would be blind to the errors of social justice. It is the New Testament which tells slaves to serve even their unreasonable masters with the love of Christ, says it is the worker who is worthy of his wages, and endorses private property (Peter to Ananias) and even unequal wages (parable of the Vineyard) that I bend the knee. Men are the “heads” of women (complimentarianism), masters in charge of slaves, and parents in charge of children. Racial categories are not even consideration, at least not in the sense social justice advocates want them to be. 

Here’s where we are all equal- we are all equally sinful and responsible for breaking God’s law, a fact that does not distinguish between gender and ethnic groups. Here’s where Jesus comes in. You want to talk about giving up privilege? Jesus gave up everything to die for yes, even slave owners, and yes, even slaves. He took the wrath of almighty God for His own. It is at this point that two groups emerge within Christian churches. Sheep and goats. The sheep hear His voice, the goats reject it. The outward trappings of self righteousness are just too tempting a prospect to part with. I’d rather let Jesus deal with my sin, and the sins of my ancestors. Just because my eyes are open to social justice does not mean they are blind to other areas of works righteousness. May the Lord Jesus take away all our hamster wheels and immunize us against finding new ones. May He take off the heavy load and replace it with an easy yolk. He alone is wonderful and He alone is who we must preach.



Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...