Russ Douthat on Critical Race Theory

[nett]

The same people people have never argued what you're suggesting. I don't agree with biblical fundamentalism, but you're misrepresenting the position.

Falco Underhill is reading Exodus not as a historical document, but rather figuratively (his words) in terms of instructions for how we are to deal with present day conflicts with "unbelievers" and other cultures.

How is that different from someone who reads Genesis not as a historical or scientific document, but rather "figuratively" as a lesson on how God's hand is involved in creation through evolution, geological time, and other methods consistent with modern science?

Exodus is both historical and relevant. it's not purely figurative, or purely historical.

[Bootstrap]

Here's how I'm reading that through a New Testament lense: First of all, the context says God will do the driving out, not me. The Hittites, Canaanites, etc, can be understood figuratively as different sorts of unbelievers I may encounter in life, maybe some non-believing bullies I'm dealing with at work.

It says not to worship their gods nor make covenants with them, and neither of those things requires violence on my part, does it?

If you look at the OP, this thread is about how we understand American history. Are you claiming that God's plan was to give America to white Europeans, along the lines of Manifest Destiny? I assume you are not, but I cannot tell exactly what you are saying.

Do you mean to imply that the things whites did to black people and Indians are justified? Again, I assume you are not, but I cannot tell what you are saying.

I think American history includes all Americans, should be told from multiple points of view.

[Falco Underhill]

Falco Underhill is reading Exodus not as a historical document, but rather figuratively (his words) in terms of instructions for how we are to deal with present day conflicts with "unbelievers" and other cultures.

To be clear, I'm not denying those commands didn't apply to them literally (it obviously did) just that because we are under a New Covenant it wouldn't apply to us that way. In fact, the New Testament makes it clear that —

Ephesians 6:12

For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.

Some of their struggles were indeed against flesh and blood!

[Ken]

Falco Underhill is reading Exodus not as a historical document, but rather figuratively (his words) in terms of instructions for how we are to deal with present day conflicts with "unbelievers" and other cultures.

To be clear, I'm not denying those commands didn't apply to them literally (it obviously did) just that because we are under a New Covenant it wouldn't apply to us that way. ...

Or maybe they are simply part of Bronze Age history and don't apply to us at all except as part of the historical record. Which is how we read other inconvenient commands such as slavery or stoning for infidelity.

[Falco Underhill]

Falco Underhill is reading Exodus not as a historical document, but rather figuratively (his words) in terms of instructions for how we are to deal with present day conflicts with "unbelievers" and other cultures.

To be clear, I'm not denying those commands didn't apply to them literally (it obviously did) just that because we are under a New Covenant it wouldn't apply to us that way. ...

Or maybe they are simply part of Bronze Age history and don't apply to us at all except as part of the historical record. Which is how we read other inconvenient commands such as slavery or stoning for infidelity.

I think that's how an unbeliever would view it, but neither Jesus nor the apostles saw it that way.

[Falco Underhill]

If you look at the OP, this thread is about how we understand American history. Are you claiming that God's plan was to give America to white Europeans, along the lines of Manifest Destiny?

Where on earth did you get that assumption? Did CRT teach you that's what I believe because I'm white?

Do you mean to imply that the things whites did to black people and Indians are justified?

You mean because I'm white??

I think American history includes all Americans, should be told from multiple points of view.

Oh, and I must think otherwise because I'm white?

You see, your attitude is exactly why I don't trust CRT.

What do I think how history should be taught in public schools? I suppose I would need to see these assumptions mulled over and discussed by other scholars who don't share CRT assumptions, who are pro Western and Christian tradition, and see what they have to say about it. But they would probably be shouted down as horrible bigots and racists and so forth and nothing would come of it.

At any rate, you and I aren't going to solve that here.

[Bootstrap]

If you look at the OP, this thread is about how we understand American history. Are you claiming that God's plan was to give America to white Europeans, along the lines of Manifest Destiny?

Where on earth did you get that assumption? Did CRT teach you that's what I believe because I'm white?

Here's what you edited out: I clearly said I was assuming this was not what you believe:

I assume you are not, but I cannot tell exactly what you are saying.

And I invited you to tell us, clearly, what you are saying. Could you please do that? Simply answer the question, directly and plainly, please. Tell me what you actually believe, and why you quoted that particular verse.

Do you mean to imply that the things whites did to black people and Indians are justified?

You mean because I'm white??

I used the same sentence here, and again, you edited it out:

I assume you are not, but I cannot tell exactly what you are saying.

Again, I invited you to tell us, clearly, what you are saying. Could you please do that? Simply answer the question, directly and plainly, please. Tell me what you actually believe, and why you quoted that particular verse.

I think American history includes all Americans, should be told from multiple points of view.

Oh, and I must think otherwise because I'm white?

That's a statement about what I believe, not what you believe. So please take your own position, say what you believe, clearly. Don't edit what I said to distort it, don't use fake offense as a way to wiggle out of answering the questions. Just answer the questions, clearly, so I can know what you believe about these things.

I'm white too. I don't have a problem with people who are white.

[Falco Underhill]

That's a statement about what I believe, not what you believe. So please take your own position, say what you believe, clearly. Don't edit what I said to distort it, don't use fake offense as a way to wiggle out of answering the questions.

I'm white too. I don't have a problem with people who are white.

Your questions assumed I might think those things, and yes, you're white too, and clearly don't. But I can only assume from your questions the assumption that only those who are "woke" and have compliantly denied their own "whiteness" wouldn't assume those things.

Again, the attitude expressed there is exactly why I don't trust CRT.

And I already gave you my answer about what should be taught in history classes.

I would need first to hear all this crt gobbledygook mulled over by scholars whom I consider pro western Judeo-Christian civilization and see what they think can be safely salvaged of it, if anything.

It's just beyond my capacity to provide you with any short and sweet answers at the moment.

[Josh]

God’s commandments to the Israelites were entirely just and part of God’s perfect law. Anyone who wants to accept Jesus and the New Covenant must eventually accept the Bible too, and accept God’s instructions to his people in the Old Testament.

Sinful, wicked man will murder unborn babies by the millions today, yet criticise God himself when he ordered his people to annihilate the tribes mentioned in Exodus - who were idolaters, committed child and infant sacrifices, and other unspeakably wicked acts.

[Ken]

61 years ago today, four Federal marshals had to escort 6-year-old Ruby Bridges (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Bridges) to her first day of first grade at a previously all-white elementary school in New Orleans. This happened within the living memory of 50 million Americans. The reasons why white racists were so violently opposed to this child attending a previously all-white public school were exactly the same as all the reasons Josh listed above.

And today we have state legislatures and school districts seeking to ban the teaching of this very history because it is "divisive" or because they are labeling any race-related history as CRT. That is the actual reality of what is happening today. And it is shameful.