Voddie Baucham

[joshuabgood]

Can you tell us what Robin DiAngelo's overarching theology has in common with historic Anabaptism?

I don't know much about her, but I don-t think she makes any Christian claims so I don't think she has a theology or theism period.

With all due respect though, how is that relevant on a thread about Voddie Baucham?

It's quite interesting to me that you don't seem very interested in the theological worldviews of people who are in line with your views on racial issues. If it's of such importance to focus on the theological worldview Voddie holds to and use that to discredit him on his views on racial issues, why not do the same with everyone?

One of the strong points of historical Anabaptism was to test ideas and doctrines against the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles and to reject what doesn't align with those teachings. As a professing Anabaptist, it seems strange to me that you would promote the worldviews of authors and speakers who make no Christian claims and possibly even deny theism altogether. IMO, that seems pretty anti-Anabaptist.

In my view, Voddies perspective on salvation undergirds his position on racial reconciliation. He says it himself. He also is very clear that his view of salvation is a reformed perspective. There is nothing tricky going on here.

As for folks like Diangelo, I don't promote her as a Chrisitan teacher. Real simply, because of gifts God gave people, on occasion nonChristians bring legitimate ideas to be considered. There are grains of truth for instance in the Hindu idea of Karma. Or Buddhisms rejection of accumulation of goods. Neither of those ideas originated from direct knowledge or following of Jesus.

That said, all this on this page is a distraction. This thread is about recognizing V Baucham as an on point theological Christian teacher. Why the distraction?? Is there something you object to in my analysis of VB?

[GaryK]

I don't know much about her, but I don-t think she makes any Christian claims so I don't think she has a theology or theism period.

With all due respect though, how is that relevant on a thread about Voddie Baucham?

It's quite interesting to me that you don't seem very interested in the theological worldviews of people who are in line with your views on racial issues. If it's of such importance to focus on the theological worldview Voddie holds to and use that to discredit him on his views on racial issues, why not do the same with everyone?

One of the strong points of historical Anabaptism was to test ideas and doctrines against the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles and to reject what doesn't align with those teachings. As a professing Anabaptist, it seems strange to me that you would promote the worldviews of authors and speakers who make no Christian claims and possibly even deny theism altogether. IMO, that seems pretty anti-Anabaptist.

In my view, Voddies perspective on salvation undergirds his position on racial reconciliation. He says it himself. He also is very clear that his view of salvation is a reformed perspective. There is nothing tricky going on here.

As for folks like Diangelo, I don't promote her as a Chrisitan teacher. Real simply, because of gifts God gave people, on occasion nonChristians bring legitimate ideas to be considered. There are grains of truth for instance in the Hindu idea of Karma. Or Buddhisms rejection of accumulation of goods. Neither of those ideas originated from direct knowledge or following of Jesus.

That said, all this on this page is a distraction. This thread is about recognizing V Baucham as an on point theological Christian teacher. Why the distraction?? Is there something you object to in my analysis of VB?

You brought up historical Anabaptism as a way of discrediting Voddie's views of racial issues. I'm simply trying to understand why you don't apply this Anabaptism test to all people on racial issues. It simply is not consistent, IMO, and raises a lot of questions in my mind about how your professed views on Anabaptism and Kingdom values hold up under scrutiny. If you are going to apply these types of tests to only one side and not the other, I think that is a problem.

Can you point me to where Voddie says his reformed views undergird his position on racial reconciliation? If you are going to point to where he said racial reconciliation is already accomplished in Christ, I've already said that I think you are mistaken to attribute that quote to reformed theology, because I reject reformed theology and believe the same thing. Tell me why I'm mistaken in my view that racial reconciliation is already accomplished in Christ's atoning work. In the type of Kingdom you describe in the other thread about what the gospel is, do you see racial animosity in that description? I don't.

[joshuabgood]

You brought up historical Anabaptism as a way of discrediting Voddie's views of racial issues. I'm simply trying to understand why you don't apply this Anabaptism test to all people on racial issues. It simply is not consistent, IMO, and raises a lot of questions in my mind about how your professed views on Anabaptism and Kingdom values hold up under scrutiny. If you are going to apply these types of tests to only one side and not the other, I think that is a problem.

Can you point me to where Voddie says his reformed views undergird his position on racial reconciliation? If you are going to point to where he said racial reconciliation is already accomplished in Christ, I've already said that I think you are mistaken to attribute that quote to reformed theology, because I reject reformed theology and believe the same thing. Tell me why I'm mistaken in my view that racial reconciliation is already accomplished in Christ's atoning work. In the type of Kingdom you describe in the other thread about what the gospel is, do you see racial animosity in that description? I don't.

Gary, I have tried (evidently unsuccessfully heretofore) to draw the connection for you. But I'll try again =). If one views salvation as primarily involving personal absolution and the "finished work" (which by the way is not a biblical term) of Jesus by grace alone through faith...through the lever of penal substitutionary atonement, for an ultimate futuristic, eschatalogical salvation, then the views of Voddie logically follow. Racial reconciliation already happens by itself when people accept this salvation and personal absolution. There are no societal/cultural or moral next steps/obligations. It is a "free gift" that entails "no works" lest anyone should boast. James is a book of straw. The teachings, life and witness of Jesus are marginalized and literally ignored for the most part. The gospel becomes an ethicless judical deal that doesn't involve real, literal salvation on earth as also in heaven. This theology permits slavery, permits burning witches, permits warring against American Indians, etc etc . I don't find this view of salvation compelling as it doesn't fit with the message and person of Jesus Christ. (Since you have already stated your issue with Calvinism we can leave that for another thread.

I have already outlined in the other thread what I think is a more Christocentric (and in harmony with Jesus teachings) view of salvation and the good news. The real ethics and outworking of that perspective leads to entirely different outcome on race relations, church reconciliation, practical living like Jesus, etc. (Yes I know Anabaptists are repeatedly accused of being a works religion as a result - but that charge I don't think is defensible - but I won't take time to take that down here aside from mentioning the life boat analogy).

However, a simple thought experiment I think shows that in fact the real work of restitution and reconciliation is needed even for those "in Christ." For instance in our Anabaptist tradition, as you and I know, there have been many acrimonious splits between Christians. The work of Christ followers, in this instance, isn't to mystically claim that we are already reconciled "in Christ" and so no work needs to be done to reconcile painful church splits (or any other business or missions split or in marraiges). No...the real work of Kingdom building exists in bringing these parties back together, engaging in the real work of restitution and reconciliation. In our culture and society there is work that needs to be done to bring about racial reconciliation. And that work is part of building the Kingdom of God on earth as in heaven.

It isn't about willy nilly discrediting Voddie because of some unrelated theology. But I have explained that before I think. But even that aside, I am happy to affirm Voddie on the points of his teachings that seem to me to be aligned to the good news of Jesus Christ (his life and witness). For instance, his advocacy for man/woman marriage for life. There is no "gotcha" here, Gary. I don't mind affirming people who espouse things that to me feel like truthful points worth considering. It doesn't matter if it is Voddie or anybody else.

[Josh]

The most ardent promoters of progressive views on racial reconciliation are groups like PC(USA) and United Church of Christ, which are Reformed denominations.

I would say that being Reformed or not makes virtually no difference at all as to whether or not someone chooses progressive views or not.

The PCA is moving rapidly in the same direction as your own personal views, despite being extremely Reformed.

Meanwhile,

The real ethics and outworking of that perspective leads to entirely different outcome on race relations, church reconciliation, practical living like Jesus, etc. (Yes I know Anabaptists are repeatedly accused of being a works religion as a result - but that charge I don't think is defensible - but I won't take time to take that down here aside from mentioning the life boat analogy).

If so, wouldn’t Anabaptists already hold the same views you do? Especially the most Old Order Anabaptists, who don’t hold to things like PSA at all?

[PetrChelcicky]

joshuabgood,
I have promoted the idea that Christianity has developed out of Reform Judaism in stages and our differences mostly mean that we cling to different stages.
In your case I see three important stages:
1. The Sermon on the Mount emphasized that all men are sinners and guilty, not only certain outsiders,
2. The "Our father" emphasized that forgiving of our sins or guilt is one of our great hopes in life and connects this with our ability to forgive other people's sins.
3. The theology after the crucification promoted that Jesus died for our sins, i.e. that the forgiving of our sins is now not only a hope, but a definite promise - so if we are true believers it ought to be easy to forgive each other. Reconciliation with the nonbelievers remains as difficult as always, but reconciliation within the Christian camp is easy.
I'd say that this is post-Paulinian theology, not only Reformed theology.
Now there are two parties. One party sees the danger that post-Paulinianism makes life too easy (and indeed there were "anomists" who proclaimed that after Jesus' death anything is allowed). And the other party - to which I belong - sees rather the danger that a return to the starting point (Reform Judaism) makes life too difficult: Either it leads back to the idea that we not all are sinners, but sinners are only outsiders (so forgiving is not needed), or it leads to the idea that anybody can be expected to forgive sins done to him simply by his own force of will (without the impulse given by the knowledge that his own sins are forgiven, too).
As all questions of faith this is a question of hopes and expectations, not so much of true and false. The two parties or factions will co-exist for a long time. Here I only try to explain why the second party (my party) exists.

[GaryK]

You brought up historical Anabaptism as a way of discrediting Voddie's views of racial issues. I'm simply trying to understand why you don't apply this Anabaptism test to all people on racial issues. It simply is not consistent, IMO, and raises a lot of questions in my mind about how your professed views on Anabaptism and Kingdom values hold up under scrutiny. If you are going to apply these types of tests to only one side and not the other, I think that is a problem.

Can you point me to where Voddie says his reformed views undergird his position on racial reconciliation? If you are going to point to where he said racial reconciliation is already accomplished in Christ, I've already said that I think you are mistaken to attribute that quote to reformed theology, because I reject reformed theology and believe the same thing. Tell me why I'm mistaken in my view that racial reconciliation is already accomplished in Christ's atoning work. In the type of Kingdom you describe in the other thread about what the gospel is, do you see racial animosity in that description? I don't.

Gary, I have tried (evidently unsuccessfully heretofore) to draw the connection for you. But I'll try again =). If one views salvation as primarily involving personal absolution and the "finished work" (which by the way is not a biblical term) of Jesus by grace alone through faith...through the lever of penal substitutionary atonement, for an ultimate futuristic, eschatalogical salvation, then the views of Voddie logically follow. Racial reconciliation already happens by itself when people accept this salvation and personal absolution. There are no societal/cultural or moral next steps/obligations. It is a "free gift" that entails "no works" lest anyone should boast. James is a book of straw. The teachings, life and witness of Jesus are marginalized and literally ignored for the most part. The gospel becomes an ethicless judical deal that doesn't involve real, literal salvation on earth as also in heaven. This theology permits slavery, permits burning witches, permits warring against American Indians, etc etc . I don't find this view of salvation compelling as it doesn't fit with the message and person of Jesus Christ. (Since you have already stated your issue with Calvinism we can leave that for another thread.

I have already outlined in the other thread what I think is a more Christocentric (and in harmony with Jesus teachings) view of salvation and the good news. The real ethics and outworking of that perspective leads to entirely different outcome on race relations, church reconciliation, practical living like Jesus, etc. (Yes I know Anabaptists are repeatedly accused of being a works religion as a result - but that charge I don't think is defensible - but I won't take time to take that down here aside from mentioning the life boat analogy).

However, a simple thought experiment I think shows that in fact the real work of restitution and reconciliation is needed even for those "in Christ." For instance in our Anabaptist tradition, as you and I know, there have been many acrimonious splits between Christians. The work of Christ followers, in this instance, isn't to mystically claim that we are already reconciled "in Christ" and so no work needs to be done to reconcile painful church splits (or any other business or missions split or in marraiges). No...the real work of Kingdom building exists in bringing these parties back together, engaging in the real work of restitution and reconciliation. In our culture and society there is work that needs to be done to bring about racial reconciliation. And that work is part of building the Kingdom of God on earth as in heaven.

It isn't about willy nilly discrediting Voddie because of some unrelated theology. But I have explained that before I think. But even that aside, I am happy to affirm Voddie on the points of his teachings that seem to me to be aligned to the good news of Jesus Christ (his life and witness). For instance, his advocacy for man/woman marriage for life. There is no "gotcha" here, Gary. I don't mind affirming people who espouse things that to me feel like truthful points worth considering. It doesn't matter if it is Voddie or anybody else.

Josh, I just finished watching Voddie's sermon on racial reconciliation and the picture you paint above about Voddie, I simply do not see. I hope you watch this video and point out for me where you see reformed theology coming through, where individualistic salvation is present as opposed to the body being reconciled through Christ and where what he says is in conflict with historical Anabaptism. Also, can you point out from a scriptural basis where what he teaches is in conflict with what Jesus and the Apostles taught? Here is the video.

[Humble Disciple]

Dr. Baucham has some relevant things to say, but I disagree with his Calvinism and his opposition to Black Lives Matter as somehow being inherently Marxist. Calvinists persecuted Anabaptists.

[temporal1]

Another video:
This one is a lot about the plight of black conservatives; i empathize, i appreciate different ones i see in leadership, like Dr Alveda King, Candace Owens, Larry Elder, the late Herman Cain, Voddie B., Dr Thomas Sowell, and others. It makes me sad to imagine what they must endure for their beliefs, including ugly insults+accusations. It seems so senseless.

He speaks of his own experience.

Why Voddie Baucham is Canceled / 15min.

[Ken]

How ridiculous.

No one has "canceled' Voddie Baucham.

He has a public ministry with a web site
He has a newsletter with thousands of subscribers
He has books available on Amazon and every other major online bookseller
He has bazillions of YouTube videos that get heavy play
He is all over Twitter and other social media sites
He has a full schedule of paid speaking engagements
He is frequently on national TV

He is about the least "canceled" person that one could possibly imagine.

[temporal1]

i was happy to listen and conclude this was another example of the subject line not exactly matching the topic.
it’s so common, i rarely notice anymore. listen/read for content. there’s often more than headlines.

if you hated that one, i’m thinking of adding another tomorrow that may make your blood boil.