Racial-ethnic groups within the Church

[temporal1]

Page 3

jbg:
Because I don't bother with the politics, I am unafraid to take the words at face value.

So making a community feel safe for people is an idea I have no issues with and I will refrain from reading in political "intentions." ..

Once words are appropriated for politics, which involves legal language, legal protections+requirements, and taxpayer dollars, it seems irresponsble for teachers and other leaders to ignore that reality and claim ignorance/innocence as reason.

In the very least, negligent use leads to (possibly unintended) promotion of divisive political ideology, which, i think, most agree, is not of Jesus Christ.

There is a tangled web when attempting to engage directly in stated/defined politicized language, while simultaneously attempting to deny the politicized purpose - for loftier goals. (i’m sorry to say.) i would love for “safe” to just mean “safe.”

i loathe today’s easy hijacking of everyday language for divisive political goals. but i recognize the plight. i try to be alert.
i appreciate teachers+leaders who are alert to distinctions while proceeding with caution. And those who are dependable about teaching students to be alert+discriminating about nuances in language.

i am personally very leery about any group that hints of being or becoming an organzed political bloc, with aims at garnering political clout, promotion, protection, access to the public treasury. none of these things are of Jesus Christ.

there are more+more blocs, all the time, esp as a result of gov schools churning out more SJWs than H.S. diplomas.

[GaryK]

Gary, does it seem right that I demand you to practice suffering love as a response to my rudeness.

What did Jesus say our response to such things should be?

Good question. What does Jesus say about me treating you that way.

Jesus does teach suffering love as a response to evil, but not an excuse for evil. I think he would say I should treat you better rather than demand your long suffering.

I'm trying to understand where you are picking up from what I'm saying that I'm advocating that those who say and do evil things against others should demand suffering love in return.

Back in our child-training years (our youngest is 27) I made it a point to teach my children that while the mean things others may do to you is wrong and needs to be corrected, your response should be to return good for evil, because that's what Jesus taught.

[joshuabgood]

I think it's entirely possible to empathize with people's pain and suffering and to let them know that we are on their side while at the same time encouraging them to take on the mind of Jesus in this very unfair, sin-filled, and indifferent world we live in.

So are you saying you don't think in the contexts I described that people like me should use our influence to make school a safe space for all children? Or use our influence to make sure the workplace is a safe place for employees? I guess I am confused and left scratching my head a bit regarding what you are disputing. Help me understand...

As I already noted I support being discipled into the spirit of Jesus. So that clearly isn't a disagreement.

No, I believe you should do what you can to have a good learning environment for your students. But I also think that it may not be in the best interest of anyone who is the target of evil things being said about them to hear that what they need is a "safe space". Life is not safe.

Also, joey_the_ox touched on the inconsistency I sense about your push to use "suffering love" to change society and earthly kingdoms into the Kingdom way but then using other means to change society when it comes to racial issues. It seems you are saying "safe spaces" are the answer for women and people of color, not "suffering love". It seems you are making exceptions for certain categories of people. I'm wondering why.

Safe work environments (for women and people of color) are indeed something to stiven for.

I don't see any contradiction. I teach our students suffering love. I never disciple them to respond with violence. Nor would I advocate for violence re the Nat Turner rebellion. The point is we confront evil/bullying, psychological abuse, in the name of Jesus. We do that because we love and value all people as image bearers of God. We should do that in all society. It is called being salt and light. We want people have safe spaces to grow and flourish. I would likewise advocate for you or for your children. We must confront evil. Nonviolence/nonresistance is not passive in the face of evil. This really gets to our other disagreement. I advocate for active suffering love and confrontation of evil anywhere it exists.

Further the only reason we are discussing women and people of color is because historically in this society both of those have been oppressed. Black folks are alive today who were cursed, threatened, and spit on, for the crime of being a 6 year old little girl wanting to go to school. In this society it wasn't until 1919 or so, the year my grandmother was born, that women were thought "capable" of discerning who to vote for. (If you review the newspaper cartoons against suffrage and their depictions of women it becomes obvious. It wasn't until 1948 that women were allowed to go to Yale. To this day, in some circles, quite close home, if girl is desirous of pursuing a liberal arts degree for the sake of learning, it is frowned on as "unnecessary" because her place is in the home.

Lastly, in fact, I do advocate for safe spaces for people who deal with gender identify questions or homosexual predispositions. And yes, they are in our midst but usually don't feel safe to express what they are dealing with. And yes, in a school of near 400 students, over the course of 7 years, we have had students that fit that description, as well as parents. They are real people with names. They matter. They are image bearers.

We should be able to acknowledge the above.

[Josh]

In this society it wasn't until 1919 or so, the year my grandmother was born, that women were thought "capable" of discerning who to vote for.

Hmm. As a plain Anabaptist, I don’t think Christians should vote. Worrying about women voting is analogous to if joshuabgood were gravely concerned that women aren’t subject to the military draft.

Josh, as a proponent of “suffering love”, do you think Christian woman should exercise their vote to right for and against candidates?

Lastly, in fact, I do advocate for safe spaces for people who deal with gender identify questions or homosexual predispositions. And yes, they are in our midst but usually don't feel safe to express what they are dealing with. And yes, in a school of near 400 students, over the course of 7 years, we have had students that fit that description, as well as parents. They are real people with names. They matter. They are image bearers.

… so you believe as a Christian you should create safe spaces where being openly homosexual or transsexual is tolerated, affirmed, and celebrated?

That’s what safe spaces are about and what they do. The reason I know is because I once too had a rainbow placquard pinned to my cubicle, advertising my domain as a “safe space”.

[joshuabgood]

As a plain Anabaptist, I don’t think Christians should vote.

I stop short of putting a "should" on it. I advocate against it. But it seems like you missed my larger point...which was, in this society women were thought incapable of having the discernment to make decision like voting. Like I said, review the literary opinions and cartoons of the era and you will see how many in society viewed women. Further, I also mentioned the example of women in education...it wasn't all the time in this society that women were thought worthy of education, and even more recently, higher education. In some circles, to this day, girls getting liberal arts degrees is frowned on as their place is in the home and college/learning is a waste for them.

Josh, as a proponent of “suffering love”, do you think Christian woman should exercise their vote to right for and against candidates?

As I noted you seem to have missed the point. See the text above.

so you believe as a Christian you should create safe spaces where being openly homosexual or transsexual is tolerated, affirmed, and celebrated?

I would suggest politely that you reread what I actually wrote, lay aside the political/polemical lens, and see if that is what I said I believed. And then try to fairly summarize what you heard me say.

[Josh]

As a plain Anabaptist, I don’t think Christians should vote.

I stop short of putting a "should" on it. I advocate against it. But it seems like you missed my larger point...which was, in this society women were thought incapable of having the discernment to make decision like voting. Like I said, review the literary opinions and cartoons of the era and you will see how many in society viewed women. Further, I also mentioned the example of women in education...it wasn't all the time in this society that women were thought worthy of education, and even more recently, higher education. In some circles, to this day, girls getting liberal arts degrees is frowned on as their place is in the home and college/learning is a waste for them.

As a plain Anabaptists, I believe along with most other Amish and conservative Mennonites and other plain folk that anyone getting higher education is to be frowned upon, whether male or female.

so you believe as a Christian you should create safe spaces where being openly homosexual or transsexual is tolerated, affirmed, and celebrated?

I would suggest politely that you reread what I actually wrote, lay aside the political/polemical lens, and see if that is what I said I believed. And then try to fairly summarize what you heard me say.

Homosexuality and trans sexuality are serious sins spoken against in the Bible. Why don’t you take a strong stance against them instead of providing “safe spaces” for them?

Would you provide safe spaces for someone to engage in racism at your school?

[joey_the_ox]

so you believe as a Christian you should create safe spaces where being openly homosexual or transsexual is tolerated, affirmed, and celebrated?

I would suggest politely that you reread what I actually wrote, lay aside the political/polemical lens, and see if that is what I said I believed. And then try to fairly summarize what you heard me say.

Homosexuality and trans sexuality are serious sins spoken against in the Bible. Why don’t you take a strong stance against them instead of providing “safe spaces” for them?

Would you provide safe spaces for someone to engage in racism at your school?

Josh you do seem to be missing what joshuabgood is saying here, or at least attributing to him positions he did not take.

[Josh]

Okay, here is what Josh said:

Lastly, in fact, I do advocate for safe spaces for people who deal with gender identify questions or homosexual predispositions. And yes, they are in our midst but usually don't feel safe to express what they are dealing with. And yes, in a school of near 400 students, over the course of 7 years, we have had students that fit that description, as well as parents. They are real people with names. They matter. They are image bearers.

I’m asking if he thinks this about other sins, particularly his vaunted racism (which he thinks the Bible describes as the most serious sin of all), or garden variety sins like adultery.

Would this statement be absurd?

Lastly, in fact, I do advocate for safe spaces for people who deal with adultery predispositions. And yes, they are in our midst but usually don't feel safe to express what they are dealing with. And yes, in a school of near 400 students, over the course of 7 years, we have had students that fit that description, as well as parents. They are real people with names. They matter. They are image bearers.

Should “safe spaces” be provided to people struggling with adultery? Why is homosexuality given special treatment here?

[joshuabgood]

I’m asking if he thinks this about other sins

Yes.

Should “safe spaces” be provided to people struggling with adultery?

Yes

Burying struggles is a recipe for continued defeat.

[Josh]

Nobody needs to feel “safe” to express they have adulterous desires. Instead, they need to ask Jesus to cleanse them from their sins and flee temptation.

Adultery should in fact feel very unsafe: adulterers should be of being outcast from their community, their family shunning them, their church condemning them, and ultimately eternal hellfire at the final judgment:

“ Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.”

There is no need for “safe space” for those who desire to do and talk about the above sins.