I appreciate Onwuchekwa and Charles' words in the Edwards topic. Very flavorful, vulnerable and loving. However, it would have been just as loving and brotherly for the other White brothers to share their thoughts on it as well. Even if they shared, "you know I've never thought about that as an issue but thank you for bringing that up for me to think about." As a believer it is just as important to hear White people's struggle or non-struggle with topics like Edwards because as a believer racism effects us all and applying theologians words to everyday life should be examined by all.
John Piper has talked about it on numerous occasions. All I hear is about how white people dont understand the issue and how they need to be quiet and “listen”. I find 99% of what people say in these kind of conversations useless. I mean, I quote David in the psalms when I speak and I don’t preface every quote with ‘you know we have to remember he was a murderer and an adulterer.’ Or I don’t avoid “attributing a quote to him” bc of these things. Should I? Seems a little childish to go through life with that mindset.
@@dylanwagoner9768 the difference is that we know that David was repentant of his sin, but we don't know that in regards to Edwards, do we? I think that could be the issue. Otherwise I understand your position :)
@@annacruz9163 1. I don’t think that would matter. Do we have record of Solomon repenting? We still quote him. 2. Here’s a question for you: could you be a slave-holding Christian during the time of the apostles and be in good standing with the church? The answer is absolutely you could. There is no way around it. All this reading back our moral standards on people of past is a bit much. I think in the Christians in the future will be looking back and cancelling us, wondering how on the one hand we were sleeping fine at night while babies were being murdered. On the other hand we’ll look back and ‘lament’ the peccadillo sins of our forefathers.
@@dylanwagoner9768 But do we celebrate Solomon as the greatest theologian of the Western World? It's one thing to quote someone and another to celebrate someone as a person the way we (in many ways rightfully) do/did with Jonathan Edwards. I would never tell anyone not to quote Edwards, but I do think this conversation is important, whereas you stated that in your opinion they were useless - that's the only reason I responded :). Of course you could be in right standing with the church being a slave-owner (speaks volumes about the church), but with the theological insight and deep love for God that Edwards had, I think it is hard to digest the fact he did not only condone slavery, but owned slaves. And I think it is important to acknowledge that. I think in hindsight we will have done many things wrong in our generation, no doubt. But I think the abortion argument is bad here, because again - there is a difference between not doing anything against an evil (which is really really wrong, yes) and committing it yourself. And I would say that most Christians nowadays wouldn't abort, but consider it a sin. Blessings!
@@annacruz9163 Its been a while since I watched this video so I can’t remember all that was said. Usually though, these slavery conversations don’t revolve around the Bible, but around assumptions. I hear what you’re saying. But the issue for Bible believing Christians is this: what would you have said to Edwards if you could’ve had that conversation. You can’t own slaves as a Christian? Surely he would take to to a number of passages in scripture that regulate the practice. Maybe he would tell you that he is seeking to treat them well and be the kind of master Paul tells him to be. What would be your biblical response? Honest question.
JOY for me Has been to Learn that I am Saved and Free from All the "commandments of Men" in the bible and out..And that I am Free to Enjoy and Walk with My Savior.. Alone.
Not to be negative or divisive, but regarding matters of race why didnt anyone else chime in or offer input on the questions at the beginning about Edwards? Though I appreciate the two brethren who spoke there were many things that could have been said but weren't. Its almost like nobody else wanted too touch the topic for fear of offending...I'm speculating but with all the recent social justice nonsense creeping into the church maybe Im catching red flags that arent there. Someone enlighten me...
Shaun Loomis you’re right. This is straight PC. There are correct forms of slavery/bondservants and incorrect. As for Edwards heart in the matter, only God knows. Unless his writings associate otherwise, who cares. Stay off the topic and in theology/the word. Go for broke on scripture and let that interpret the issue. I follow Paul, I follow Apollo’s, they follow John Edwards.....forsake all for Christ. Love and deny thyself, seek forgiveness, repent, repeat and strive unto death. Mans opinions are great for church dialogue but not when we aren’t comparing it to the word during the gathering.
In answer to your first question, they weren't invited to respond. Because they're white. Shame on DG for this kind of behavior. Jonathan Edwards is only the most influential theologian on the thinking and ministry of John Piper. You're right; it would have been nice to have heard what he has to say regarding a man he has studied all his life. Do not allow my sarcasm to undermine the seriousness of what we are seeing here; My heart is truly broken over the division and pandering attitude that was revealed here. You don't create unity by saying, "regarding Edward's owning slaves, let's hear from the black guys, but not the white guys". I pray that God would cause his name to be reverenced, and that for the sake of his name he would obliterate the divisive behavior that has infiltrated the church. Regarding the modern trend towards an imbalanced focus on racial issues and social justice: Jesus' blood purchased people from every tribe and tongue and nation. He brought down the barriers of race in his death. And we do him no honor when we fail to live in the light of what he accomplished. In the end we will see every injustice of history paid for either by the sinner in hell or by Christ on the cross. It is a poison of bitterness that demands more. God help us!
@@michaelhill3700 I agree with you. We must know man is not perfect not even the pastors. We must forgive and overcome our differences and bitterness. God is only perfect author we must look up to or others are being perfected.
@@michaelhill3700 to be fair, Piper has commented about this before. So you can find out what his perspective is. Nevertheless, you are ultimately correct in your assessment of the entire panel.
I am usually not the kind of person to "do" or "obey" God until I feel like it. If I don't want to obey God, I don't, because there is nothing I can do that will make me right before God by doing it if I don't already love God enough to WANT to do it. If I don't love God, no obedience of any other command such as tithing matters because the greatest command is to Love God. But when I actually love God, I naturally WANT to obey everything He says. In fact, I am EAGER to get more commands to obey from Him. So usually, if I don't want to obey God, I don't. In fact, if you don't want to obey God, you CAN'T because you aren't loving God which is God's primary command, and if you did love God in those movements, you would already WANT to obey Him. If you don't love God enough to WANT to obey Him, don't be a hypocrite and try to keep God's other laws. Instead repent to God that you don't love Him. At the least, be spiritually honest to God and yourself. Then pray that He gives you a genuine love for Him like you know you should have. Because of this real relationship with God, I was accused by a religious leader once who said "You do whatever you want". I replied, "but do you love what you do?" He later killed himself. He was doing all the right things... pastoring, teaching, traveling on missions... but none of it was because of his love for God. He was trying to keep all God's other commands but didn't have the love of God in himself motivating those deeds. Contrary to him, I do many wrong things. But God's spirit works in me to have repentence and genuine love and obedience towards God. So when I repent, God changes my heart to "both WANT and DO His good will".... Then when I finally do something for God, it's not I want to be good before Him. It's because I love Him for how Good He already is to me. Then I love God and want to be like Him, so I obey. I love Him and want to. It's the difference between a genuine relationship between a Holy Loving God and a sinner like me compared to a fake hypocrite religious person like that "pastor" who killed himself because He never actually had the love of God, only his self-righteousness which never satisfied his soul. I don't mean to be. If you are struggling with the question "Should I obey God when I don't want to?" you're already asking the wrong question....the question you should be asking is "God, will you forgive me for being so evil that I don't even want to obey you? Will you give me a love for you so that I will obey you?
Jon Mathews all people are not perfect! God knows this, He also knows what's in your heart before you speak! I feel that you love God and He knows you love Him, because you want to do what's right before God... May God bless you and I and and give us more understanding in what our Lord wants us to do here on earth, our time on earth is short. Lord Please help your Children make the best of our lives and spread your word to our Brothers and Sisters...AMEN
Please, I don't mean to sound rude or disrespectful. I'm from Brazil and I am watching the video. And I just have to say that the very notion that black people in the 21st century would stop going to a church because the southern baptists were ok with slavery in the 19th century is just absurd. In my view, anyone who has that thinking, is completely narcisistic and does not have a heart changed by the Gospel. And before anyone says anything, my father is black and he would surely find it unreasonable that this couple did that. It's just rooted in class thinking and race division. People shouldn't have that kind of thinking about anything. They are defining themselves by their skin color (which is exactly what racists do, they define people by their skin color). You are not your past. Paul used to kill Christians. So when you become a Christian, you stop associating with people who talk about Paul's theology? That's ridiculous and so is the couple's decision. I find it sad that this kind of thinking is encouraged in the sense that the pastor felt responsible somehow for their (to say the least) silly decision.
This is completely missing the historical legacies of the white and black church. With all grace and respect, this is a deep-rooted historical issue. Please read the works of great men of God like Francis Grimke to understand why some African-Americans still feel hurt by some of the acts of the white church. Importantly, though Grimke himself was Presbyterian (and in a multi-racial denomination), he lamented about the white church's silence on racial issues, and highlighted that this was deeply heart-breaking for many African-Americans. Please recognise that those African-Americans you deem as 'narcisistic' are your Christian brothers and sisters too, and maybe take time to listen to them, because some of their complaints are not just simplistic issues to dismiss, they are still prevalent in many churches in the South today. John Piper's own journey from his southern attitude towards racial issues to his more sympathetic position now was because he listened. Please, dear brother, maybe speak to some black folk first before dismissing them as unsaved. Also, might be worth researching why African-Americans also had to form 'the black church' around 1816 though they were firm believers for more insight into the issue. Certainly, this world is flawed. Praise God that it is passing away, and in the new creation, with Christ, race will no longer be an issue. On earth, as with many other sins, it is still a glaring issue that is deep-rooted in many societies.
@@koolchick592 I will try to explain why your arguments are wrong: It's not a matter of "listening to their cause" or "hearing what they have to say". Anything that can be said ON THE ISSUE THAT I BROUGHT UP, falls to the same essence (which is: looking at yourself as a part of a social/ethnical group and taking for yourself in the present the past sufferings of other people, for the sole reason they were in the same social/ethnical group you are). And that is a WRONG way to view the world, and it is not a Christian way to think and feel (not saying they aren't truly saved, but their worldview in this issue is not Christian, and so, we shouldn't make decisions - especially church decisions - to "apease" a wrong way to view the world. We should work to change the wrong world view they have. This whole thing is partially rooted in how some church leaders are cowarded in relation to the leftist agenda that is spreading to the West. Also, in how emotionally-driven we have become as a society, we have forgotten that facts don't care about our feelings. We should not be governed by how we feel, that is not how God made us to be. I don't need to "talk to some of them", as I said, my father (and his father was as well) is a black man. And slavery in Brazil was WAY worst than in America, and it lasted for a longer time as well. So, you're wrong. I'm not missing information. The subject in discussion is very clear. And there is no biblical basis for the couple's decision. And no biblical basis for the pastor's reaction to that in changing himself. He should've argued with them and explained to them why it is wrong to look at yourself as a "black person", a "black Christian", and to think in terms of "white church" and "black church". To do that, is to be a racist. You're a person, you're a Christian, you're part of THE Church. Period. No distinguishers are allowed.
@@LRibeiro97 We disagree on this issue. However, again with all grace, as a black Christian woman myself, yes, I definitely agree with you that my Christian identity is first and foremost. However, to dismiss all markers of identity that affect our lives and shape the way other people relate to us would be to be completely blind to it. They affect our lives and have a huge impact on our experiences. From reading the bible, especially the epistles, I don't see Paul completely ignoring diversity. In fact, the book of 1st Corinthians speaks to his recognition that diversity does exist. The Ethiopian Jew is explicitly referred to in the book of Acts too. And the book of Revelations speaks about how people from all nations will come to worship God. These don't ignore the other markers of identities that we have, they instead showcase understanding and an appreciation of that difference. If a group of your Christian brothers and sisters, who love Jesus, express hurt, the first reaction should not be to dismiss them, but to listen. These are real hurts and real issues that need addressing; yes, we are Christians, but we are also sinful and flawed, as a body of believers, if one part expresses hurt, 'toughen up' is certainly not the most gracious response. I'm going to end this conversation right now because we have different positions on this, but God bless you, and I pray God continues to build us up in our walk with him.
@@koolchick592 Well, I'm sorry that you insist on holding on to a world view that is backwards and just plain racist. Galatians 3:28 says: There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. We could, with no error, say "there is neither black or white" in the Kingdom of God. You're not a black a woman. You're a woman. A Christian woman. Period. Stop distinguishing yourself based on your skin color. To distinguish someone based on their skin color is to be racist. You have to not let it impact your life and impact your experiences. Saying that Paul doesn't ignore "diversity" and that he recognizes it exists doesn't add anything to the topic of discussion (that is: should people today carry the pain or the guilty of other people's past acts based on ethnic characteristics. And the biblical answer to that is no. In the same way a Christian Jew can be a member in a German Church with no hard feelings, the couple mentioned in the video (who are in need of a radical worldview change) should've simply ignored the fact that people from their church said they were "Southern Baptists". No one can be responsible for sins of the past, specially 200 year old past. "If a group of your Christian brothers and sisters, who love Jesus, express hurt, the first reaction should not be to dismiss them, but to listen." Arguing with someone (what I suggested) about their worldview is not dismissing them. To dismiss them is to just turn around and go away. To argue means to take into account what they said and give a proper response to it.
Oh how passionately I agree that God created us for His glory! Yes! Yes! God is the most God-centered person in the universe. This is the heartbeat of everything I preach and write. This is what Christian Joy is designed to preserve and pursue! God's chief end is to glorify God. This is written all over the Bible. It is the aim of all God does.  God's goal at every stage of creation and salvation is to magnify His glory. You can magnify with a microscope or with a telescope. A microscope magnifies by making tiny things look bigger than they are. A telescope magnifies by making gigantic things (like stars), which look tiny, appear more as they really are. God created the universe to magnify His glory the way a telescope magnifies stars. Everything He does in our salvation is designed to magnify the glory of His grace like this. God is glorified not only by His glory's being seen, but by its being rejoiced in. When those that see it delight in it, God is more glorified than if they only see it. His glory is then received by the whole soul, both by the understanding and by the heart. God made the world that He might communicate, and the creature receive, His glory; and that it might [be] received both by the mind and heart. He that testifies his idea of God's glory [doesn't] glorify God so much as he that testifies also his...delight in it. This is the solution. Did God create you for His glory or for your joy? Answer: He created you so that you might spend eternity glorifying Him by enjoying Him forever. In other words, you do not have to choose between glorifying God and enjoying God. Indeed you dare not choose. If you forsake one, you lose the other. God is glorified not only by His glory's being seen, but by its being rejoiced in. If we do not rejoice in God, we do not glorify God as we ought. If glorifying God is ultimately important, then pursuing the satisfaction that displays His glory is ultimately important. The radical implication is that pursuing pleasure in God is our highest calling. It is essential to all virtue and all reverence. Whether you think of your life vertically in relation to God or horizontally in relation to man, the pursuit of pleasure in God is crucial, not optional. Genuine love for people and genuine worship toward God hang on the pursuit of joy. If you want to glorify Christ in your dying, you must experience death as gain. Which means Christ must be your prize, your treasure, your joy. He must be a satisfaction so deep that when death takes away everything you love-but gives you more of Christ-you count it gain. When you are satisfied with Christ in dying, He is gloried in your dying. "O Lord, by these things men live, and in all these things is the life of my spirit: so wilt thou recover me, and make me to live. Behold, for peace I had great bitterness: but hou hast in love to my soul delivered it from the pit of corruption: for thou hast cast all my sins behind thy back" (Isaiah 38:16-17). facebook.com/profile.php?id=100024629838670
I think the attack on Edwards due to him being a slave owner wasn't being addressed Biblically. While I appreciated the candor and honesty, most of it seemed more opinion than scriptural. As I wrote earlier in another post: The Bible has guidelines for cultures under slavery; we can read it in Ephesians 6:5-9 and Colossians 3:22-4:1. We like to apply this mostly to boss-worker relationships today, but the context truly has to do with masters and slaves. Notice the scriptures never tell us to belittle the brother who is a master of a slave; in fact, it gives Biblical guidelines of how that master is to treat a slave. Why? Because there is a way that we can live the Christian life even in that culture. If Jonathan Edwards mistreated his slaves and didn't follow the scriptures, then that should be addressed, but if he didn't, then we can't treat him like a pagan because he owned slaves. That would completely wipe out Paul's description of Philemon in Philemon 4-7. Here was a slave owner who had a church in his house, and when his slave Onesimus ran off (taking things from his master based on Philemon 18) and was converted under Paul. Paul never told Onesimus that he was now free and didn't have to return; he told Onesimus to return and wrote the letter to Philemon to give him instructions on how to act and react. In addition, he never chastised Philemon for being a slave owner, telling him it was a grievous sin. I believe the recent rise of social justice thinking among prominent Christian leaders as made many men of God tongue-tied when it comes to this subject. It's as if they either have to "apologize" for quoting from Edwards based on theology or try to justify his Christian faith because he owned slaves. Edwards, Whitefield, or any other Christian that owned slaves did so in a culture just like Onesimus. And if the Spirit of God were truly in them, they would treat their slaves in accordance to the scriptures and perhaps even set them free. To insinuate that we need to be "ashamed" of these men of God because of slavery would be inconsistent to any sins we're frequently doing now that others could point to as well. Unless someone can show documented evidence that Edwards was a wicked slave owner that mistreated his slaves consistently, we should have no problems quoting their sermons or theology based on scripture. My goodness, King David had multiple wives and actually committed murder and adultery (2 Samuel 12). King Solomon, the wisest man on earth, committed idolatry multiple times, displeasing the Lord (1 Kings 11:4-13). Paul was so angry at Mark that he didn't even want to travel with him (Acts 15:37-40), yet was the same man that rebuked Peter publicly because Peter gave into the Jewish peer pressure (Galatians 2:11-14). The point is that godly men err always because we are but flesh; without submission to God's Spirit and Word, we will all commit errors in our lives. This doesn't dismiss those errors or even sins, but it is amazing that we want to treat them as unqualified as Christian leaders due to it. How sad that we can sit back in unbiblical judgment towards men dead and gone, but do we examine our own errors or thoughts? Do we disqualify ourselves from ministry based on some inconsistencies in our own walks? While it is fine to critique Edwards, we need to be careful that we critique it Biblically and without a hint of malice.
The non preachers of color should have spoken on the issue of slavery. Makes it look like a cop-out, in a time when POC are really feeling some type of way towards Christians, especially white Christians.
The questions were asked specifically to them, and they prob trying not to butt in and white-splain. Many of the white guys on the panel talk about it a lot. Especially John Piper! Look up some videos of John Piper on racial relations :)
In the interest of virtue in Truth which is of the Triad that Jesus referenced Himself to be (Way-Truth-Life), the ethos of this piece is tacitly skewed and therefore misleading. What is "reprehensible" is that there is not an ethnic heritage represented on this stage that is not a perpetrator of slavery. Indeed, those of African heritage have the largest share of the offense within its own history, so the undertone of the opening assertion is disingenuous, and if placed in analogous historical contexts, the men on this stage would be no different than all of Humanity in history. In the Name of Christ who is the Truth - among the Way and the Life, man enslaves man, and we all have a connection of this indictment in our heritage... not the least of which is the very heritage that is portrayed as the victim here. This is the very reason why all men should be in perpetuel incineration at birth by God Himself, which is the premise of Truth in Reformed Theology itself. Anyone that denies this - has not the Truth in them. As much as I love Desiring God (which is among the most vital means of Grace), it's disappointing... especially with the waves of controversy currently in Christianity, and this is a disservice to that very principle. Detractors and cynics of the social justice perspective are going to accuse the producers of this as putting out a token of sentiment that is only partially honest at best, and sadly, there could be no legitimate retort. DG.. I pray that you take under consideration the removal of this piece in the name of Truth Himself. This is the only neutral, anti-racism position to take because incomplete truth is misrepresentation and just as much racism as its counter (Mr. Onwuchekwa is perhaps oblivious to the nature that is within him, and if that's the case, then he doesn't fully understand the noetic effects of the Fall and the sin nature that is its derivative - and needs the grace and benefit of the doubt)... which is a demonstration of the sin that makes up both perspectives - it's called Total Depravity, and the primary illustration of Godliness in this piece is the very proof of that fact that counters the opening premise of this video. This again is a reiteration that the true Christ-like position is the anti-racism espoused in the Doctrines of Grace and the unspeakable Mercy of the Gospel. Soli Deo Gloria
Fun to see preachers talk like friends.... still sermons, i love it, and thank you
What a great panel of godly men
I appreciate Onwuchekwa and Charles' words in the Edwards topic. Very flavorful, vulnerable and loving. However, it would have been just as loving and brotherly for the other White brothers to share their thoughts on it as well. Even if they shared, "you know I've never thought about that as an issue but thank you for bringing that up for me to think about." As a believer it is just as important to hear White people's struggle or non-struggle with topics like Edwards because as a believer racism effects us all and applying theologians words to everyday life should be examined by all.
John Piper has talked about it on numerous occasions. All I hear is about how white people dont understand the issue and how they need to be quiet and “listen”.
I find 99% of what people say in these kind of conversations useless. I mean, I quote David in the psalms when I speak and I don’t preface every quote with ‘you know we have to remember he was a murderer and an adulterer.’ Or I don’t avoid “attributing a quote to him” bc of these things. Should I? Seems a little childish to go through life with that mindset.
@@dylanwagoner9768 the difference is that we know that David was repentant of his sin, but we don't know that in regards to Edwards, do we? I think that could be the issue. Otherwise I understand your position :)
@@annacruz9163 1. I don’t think that would matter. Do we have record of Solomon repenting? We still quote him.
2. Here’s a question for you: could you be a slave-holding Christian during the time of the apostles and be in good standing with the church? The answer is absolutely you could. There is no way around it.
All this reading back our moral standards on people of past is a bit much. I think in the Christians in the future will be looking back and cancelling us, wondering how on the one hand we were sleeping fine at night while babies were being murdered. On the other hand we’ll look back and ‘lament’ the peccadillo sins of our forefathers.
@@dylanwagoner9768 But do we celebrate Solomon as the greatest theologian of the Western World? It's one thing to quote someone and another to celebrate someone as a person the way we (in many ways rightfully) do/did with Jonathan Edwards. I would never tell anyone not to quote Edwards, but I do think this conversation is important, whereas you stated that in your opinion they were useless - that's the only reason I responded :).
Of course you could be in right standing with the church being a slave-owner (speaks volumes about the church), but with the theological insight and deep love for God that Edwards had, I think it is hard to digest the fact he did not only condone slavery, but owned slaves. And I think it is important to acknowledge that.
I think in hindsight we will have done many things wrong in our generation, no doubt. But I think the abortion argument is bad here, because again - there is a difference between not doing anything against an evil (which is really really wrong, yes) and committing it yourself. And I would say that most Christians nowadays wouldn't abort, but consider it a sin. Blessings!
@@annacruz9163 Its been a while since I watched this video so I can’t remember all that was said. Usually though, these slavery conversations don’t revolve around the Bible, but around assumptions.
I hear what you’re saying. But the issue for Bible believing Christians is this: what would you have said to Edwards if you could’ve had that conversation. You can’t own slaves as a Christian? Surely he would take to to a number of passages in scripture that regulate the practice. Maybe he would tell you that he is seeking to treat them well and be the kind of master Paul tells him to be. What would be your biblical response? Honest question.
JOY for me Has been to Learn that I am Saved and Free from All the "commandments of Men" in the bible and out..And that I am Free to Enjoy and Walk with My Savior.. Alone.
Not to be negative or divisive, but regarding matters of race why didnt anyone else chime in or offer input on the questions at the beginning about Edwards? Though I appreciate the two brethren who spoke there were many things that could have been said but weren't. Its almost like nobody else wanted too touch the topic for fear of offending...I'm speculating but with all the recent social justice nonsense creeping into the church maybe Im catching red flags that arent there. Someone enlighten me...
Shaun Loomis you’re right. This is straight PC. There are correct forms of slavery/bondservants and incorrect. As for Edwards heart in the matter, only God knows. Unless his writings associate otherwise, who cares. Stay off the topic and in theology/the word. Go for broke on scripture and let that interpret the issue. I follow Paul, I follow Apollo’s, they follow John Edwards.....forsake all for Christ. Love and deny thyself, seek forgiveness, repent, repeat and strive unto death. Mans opinions are great for church dialogue but not when we aren’t comparing it to the word during the gathering.
In answer to your first question, they weren't invited to respond. Because they're white. Shame on DG for this kind of behavior. Jonathan Edwards is only the most influential theologian on the thinking and ministry of John Piper. You're right; it would have been nice to have heard what he has to say regarding a man he has studied all his life. Do not allow my sarcasm to undermine the seriousness of what we are seeing here; My heart is truly broken over the division and pandering attitude that was revealed here.
You don't create unity by saying, "regarding Edward's owning slaves, let's hear from the black guys, but not the white guys". I pray that God would cause his name to be reverenced, and that for the sake of his name he would obliterate the divisive behavior that has infiltrated the church. Regarding the modern trend towards an imbalanced focus on racial issues and social justice: Jesus' blood purchased people from every tribe and tongue and nation. He brought down the barriers of race in his death. And we do him no honor when we fail to live in the light of what he accomplished. In the end we will see every injustice of history paid for either by the sinner in hell or by Christ on the cross. It is a poison of bitterness that demands more. God help us!
@@michaelhill3700 Well said, Brother. I agree entirley.
@@michaelhill3700 I agree with you. We must know man is not perfect not even the pastors. We must forgive and overcome our differences and bitterness. God is only perfect author we must look up to or others are being perfected.
@@michaelhill3700 to be fair, Piper has commented about this before. So you can find out what his perspective is. Nevertheless, you are ultimately correct in your assessment of the entire panel.
I am usually not the kind of person to "do" or "obey" God until I feel like it. If I don't want to obey God, I don't, because there is nothing I can do that will make me right before God by doing it if I don't already love God enough to WANT to do it. If I don't love God, no obedience of any other command such as tithing matters because the greatest command is to Love God. But when I actually love God, I naturally WANT to obey everything He says. In fact, I am EAGER to get more commands to obey from Him. So usually, if I don't want to obey God, I don't. In fact, if you don't want to obey God, you CAN'T because you aren't loving God which is God's primary command, and if you did love God in those movements, you would already WANT to obey Him. If you don't love God enough to WANT to obey Him, don't be a hypocrite and try to keep God's other laws. Instead repent to God that you don't love Him. At the least, be spiritually honest to God and yourself. Then pray that He gives you a genuine love for Him like you know you should have. Because of this real relationship with God, I was accused by a religious leader once who said "You do whatever you want". I replied, "but do you love what you do?" He later killed himself. He was doing all the right things... pastoring, teaching, traveling on missions... but none of it was because of his love for God. He was trying to keep all God's other commands but didn't have the love of God in himself motivating those deeds. Contrary to him, I do many wrong things. But God's spirit works in me to have repentence and genuine love and obedience towards God. So when I repent, God changes my heart to "both WANT and DO His good will".... Then when I finally do something for God, it's not I want to be good before Him. It's because I love Him for how Good He already is to me. Then I love God and want to be like Him, so I obey. I love Him and want to. It's the difference between a genuine relationship between a Holy Loving God and a sinner like me compared to a fake hypocrite religious person like that "pastor" who killed himself because He never actually had the love of God, only his self-righteousness which never satisfied his soul. I don't mean to be. If you are struggling with the question "Should I obey God when I don't want to?" you're already asking the wrong question....the question you should be asking is "God, will you forgive me for being so evil that I don't even want to obey you? Will you give me a love for you so that I will obey you?
Jon Mathews all people are not perfect! God knows this, He also knows what's in your heart before you speak! I feel that you love God and He knows you love Him, because you want to do what's right before God... May God bless you and I and and give us more understanding in what our Lord wants us to do here on earth, our time on earth is short. Lord Please help your Children make the best of our lives and spread your word to our Brothers and Sisters...AMEN
Please, I don't mean to sound rude or disrespectful. I'm from Brazil and I am watching the video.
And I just have to say that the very notion that black people in the 21st century would stop going to a church because the southern baptists were ok with slavery in the 19th century is just absurd. In my view, anyone who has that thinking, is completely narcisistic and does not have a heart changed by the Gospel.
And before anyone says anything, my father is black and he would surely find it unreasonable that this couple did that. It's just rooted in class thinking and race division. People shouldn't have that kind of thinking about anything. They are defining themselves by their skin color (which is exactly what racists do, they define people by their skin color).
You are not your past.
Paul used to kill Christians. So when you become a Christian, you stop associating with people who talk about Paul's theology? That's ridiculous and so is the couple's decision.
I find it sad that this kind of thinking is encouraged in the sense that the pastor felt responsible somehow for their (to say the least) silly decision.
They are making excuses and victimizing themselves. Its openly ridiculous
This is completely missing the historical legacies of the white and black church. With all grace and respect, this is a deep-rooted historical issue. Please read the works of great men of God like Francis Grimke to understand why some African-Americans still feel hurt by some of the acts of the white church. Importantly, though Grimke himself was Presbyterian (and in a multi-racial denomination), he lamented about the white church's silence on racial issues, and highlighted that this was deeply heart-breaking for many African-Americans.
Please recognise that those African-Americans you deem as 'narcisistic' are your Christian brothers and sisters too, and maybe take time to listen to them, because some of their complaints are not just simplistic issues to dismiss, they are still prevalent in many churches in the South today. John Piper's own journey from his southern attitude towards racial issues to his more sympathetic position now was because he listened. Please, dear brother, maybe speak to some black folk first before dismissing them as unsaved. Also, might be worth researching why African-Americans also had to form 'the black church' around 1816 though they were firm believers for more insight into the issue.
Certainly, this world is flawed. Praise God that it is passing away, and in the new creation, with Christ, race will no longer be an issue. On earth, as with many other sins, it is still a glaring issue that is deep-rooted in many societies.
@@koolchick592
I will try to explain why your arguments are wrong:
It's not a matter of "listening to their cause" or "hearing what they have to say". Anything that can be said ON THE ISSUE THAT I BROUGHT UP, falls to the same essence (which is: looking at yourself as a part of a social/ethnical group and taking for yourself in the present the past sufferings of other people, for the sole reason they were in the same social/ethnical group you are). And that is a WRONG way to view the world, and it is not a Christian way to think and feel (not saying they aren't truly saved, but their worldview in this issue is not Christian, and so, we shouldn't make decisions - especially church decisions - to "apease" a wrong way to view the world. We should work to change the wrong world view they have.
This whole thing is partially rooted in how some church leaders are cowarded in relation to the leftist agenda that is spreading to the West. Also, in how emotionally-driven we have become as a society, we have forgotten that facts don't care about our feelings. We should not be governed by how we feel, that is not how God made us to be.
I don't need to "talk to some of them", as I said, my father (and his father was as well) is a black man. And slavery in Brazil was WAY worst than in America, and it lasted for a longer time as well.
So, you're wrong. I'm not missing information. The subject in discussion is very clear. And there is no biblical basis for the couple's decision. And no biblical basis for the pastor's reaction to that in changing himself. He should've argued with them and explained to them why it is wrong to look at yourself as a "black person", a "black Christian", and to think in terms of "white church" and "black church". To do that, is to be a racist. You're a person, you're a Christian, you're part of THE Church. Period. No distinguishers are allowed.
@@LRibeiro97
We disagree on this issue. However, again with all grace, as a black Christian woman myself, yes, I definitely agree with you that my Christian identity is first and foremost. However, to dismiss all markers of identity that affect our lives and shape the way other people relate to us would be to be completely blind to it. They affect our lives and have a huge impact on our experiences.
From reading the bible, especially the epistles, I don't see Paul completely ignoring diversity. In fact, the book of 1st Corinthians speaks to his recognition that diversity does exist. The Ethiopian Jew is explicitly referred to in the book of Acts too. And the book of Revelations speaks about how people from all nations will come to worship God. These don't ignore the other markers of identities that we have, they instead showcase understanding and an appreciation of that difference. If a group of your Christian brothers and sisters, who love Jesus, express hurt, the first reaction should not be to dismiss them, but to listen. These are real hurts and real issues that need addressing; yes, we are Christians, but we are also sinful and flawed, as a body of believers, if one part expresses hurt, 'toughen up' is certainly not the most gracious response.
I'm going to end this conversation right now because we have different positions on this, but God bless you, and I pray God continues to build us up in our walk with him.
@@koolchick592
Well, I'm sorry that you insist on holding on to a world view that is backwards and just plain racist.
Galatians 3:28 says:
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
We could, with no error, say "there is neither black or white" in the Kingdom of God.
You're not a black a woman. You're a woman. A Christian woman. Period. Stop distinguishing yourself based on your skin color. To distinguish someone based on their skin color is to be racist.
You have to not let it impact your life and impact your experiences.
Saying that Paul doesn't ignore "diversity" and that he recognizes it exists doesn't add anything to the topic of discussion (that is: should people today carry the pain or the guilty of other people's past acts based on ethnic characteristics. And the biblical answer to that is no.
In the same way a Christian Jew can be a member in a German Church with no hard feelings, the couple mentioned in the video (who are in need of a radical worldview change) should've simply ignored the fact that people from their church said they were "Southern Baptists". No one can be responsible for sins of the past, specially 200 year old past.
"If a group of your Christian brothers and sisters, who love Jesus, express hurt, the first reaction should not be to dismiss them, but to listen."
Arguing with someone (what I suggested) about their worldview is not dismissing them. To dismiss them is to just turn around and go away. To argue means to take into account what they said and give a proper response to it.
Oh how passionately I agree that God created us for His glory! Yes! Yes! God is the most God-centered person in the universe. This is the heartbeat of everything I preach and write.
This is what Christian Joy is designed to preserve and pursue! God's chief end is to glorify God. This is written all over the Bible. It is the aim of all God does.

God's goal at every stage of creation and salvation is to magnify His glory. You can magnify with a microscope or with a telescope. A microscope magnifies by making tiny things look bigger than they are.
A telescope magnifies by making gigantic things (like stars), which look tiny, appear more as they really are. God created the universe to magnify His glory the way a telescope magnifies stars. Everything He does in our salvation is designed to magnify the glory of His grace like this.
God is glorified not only by His glory's being seen, but by its being rejoiced in. When those that see it delight in it, God is more glorified than if they only see it.
His glory is then received by the whole soul, both by the understanding and by the heart. God made the world that He might communicate, and the creature receive, His glory; and that it might [be] received both by the mind and heart.
He that testifies his idea of God's glory [doesn't] glorify God so much as he that testifies also his...delight in it. This is the solution. Did God create you for His glory or for your joy?
Answer: He created you so that you might spend eternity glorifying Him by enjoying Him forever. In other words, you do not have to choose between glorifying God and enjoying God. Indeed you dare not choose. If you forsake one, you lose the other.
God is glorified not only by His glory's being seen, but by its being rejoiced in. If we do not rejoice in God, we do not glorify God as we ought. If glorifying God is ultimately important, then pursuing the satisfaction that displays His glory is ultimately important.
The radical implication is that pursuing pleasure in God is our highest calling. It is essential to all virtue and all reverence. Whether you think of your life vertically in relation to God or horizontally in relation to man, the pursuit of pleasure in God is crucial, not optional. Genuine love for people and genuine worship toward God hang on the pursuit of joy.
If you want to glorify Christ in your dying, you must experience death as gain. Which means Christ must be your prize, your treasure, your joy. He must be a satisfaction so deep that when death takes away everything you love-but gives you more of Christ-you count it gain. When you are satisfied with Christ in dying, He is gloried in your dying.
"O Lord, by these things men live, and in all these things is the life of my spirit: so wilt thou recover me, and make me to live. Behold, for peace I had great bitterness: but hou hast in love to my soul delivered it from the pit of corruption: for thou hast cast all my sins behind thy back" (Isaiah 38:16-17).
facebook.com/profile.php?id=100024629838670
I think the attack on Edwards due to him being a slave owner wasn't being addressed Biblically. While I appreciated the candor and honesty, most of it seemed more opinion than scriptural. As I wrote earlier in another post:
The Bible has guidelines for cultures under slavery; we can read it in Ephesians 6:5-9 and Colossians 3:22-4:1. We like to apply this mostly to boss-worker relationships today, but the context truly has to do with masters and slaves. Notice the scriptures never tell us to belittle the brother who is a master of a slave; in fact, it gives Biblical guidelines of how that master is to treat a slave. Why? Because there is a way that we can live the Christian life even in that culture. If Jonathan Edwards mistreated his slaves and didn't follow the scriptures, then that should be addressed, but if he didn't, then we can't treat him like a pagan because he owned slaves. That would completely wipe out Paul's description of Philemon in Philemon 4-7. Here was a slave owner who had a church in his house, and when his slave Onesimus ran off (taking things from his master based on Philemon 18) and was converted under Paul. Paul never told Onesimus that he was now free and didn't have to return; he told Onesimus to return and wrote the letter to Philemon to give him instructions on how to act and react.
In addition, he never chastised Philemon for being a slave owner, telling him it was a grievous sin.
I believe the recent rise of social justice thinking among prominent Christian leaders as made many men of God tongue-tied when it comes to this subject. It's as if they either have to "apologize" for quoting from Edwards based on theology or try to justify his Christian faith because he owned slaves. Edwards, Whitefield, or any other Christian that owned slaves did so in a culture just like Onesimus. And if the Spirit of God were truly in them, they would treat their slaves in accordance to the scriptures and perhaps even set them free. To insinuate that we need to be "ashamed" of these men of God because of slavery would be inconsistent to any sins we're frequently doing now that others could point to as well. Unless someone can show documented evidence that Edwards was a wicked slave owner that mistreated his slaves consistently, we should have no problems quoting their sermons or theology based on scripture. My goodness, King David had multiple wives and actually committed murder and adultery (2 Samuel 12). King Solomon, the wisest man on earth, committed idolatry multiple times, displeasing the Lord (1 Kings 11:4-13). Paul was so angry at Mark that he didn't even want to travel with him (Acts 15:37-40), yet was the same man that rebuked Peter publicly because Peter gave into the Jewish peer pressure (Galatians 2:11-14). The point is that godly men err always because we are but flesh; without submission to God's Spirit and Word, we will all commit errors in our lives. This doesn't dismiss those errors or even sins, but it is amazing that we want to treat them as unqualified as Christian leaders due to it. How sad that we can sit back in unbiblical judgment towards men dead and gone, but do we examine our own errors or thoughts? Do we disqualify ourselves from ministry based on some inconsistencies in our own walks? While it is fine to critique Edwards, we need to be careful that we critique it Biblically and without a hint of malice.
Eric Smith really well said brother
The non preachers of color should have spoken on the issue of slavery. Makes it look like a cop-out, in a time when POC are really feeling some type of way towards Christians, especially white Christians.
The questions were asked specifically to them, and they prob trying not to butt in and white-splain. Many of the white guys on the panel talk about it a lot. Especially John Piper! Look up some videos of John Piper on racial relations :)
This is future reference for the mark of the devil. Once you accept it you are a slave to the system. Which is already forming
In the interest of virtue in Truth which is of the Triad that Jesus referenced Himself to be (Way-Truth-Life), the ethos of this piece is tacitly skewed and therefore misleading. What is "reprehensible" is that there is not an ethnic heritage represented on this stage that is not a perpetrator of slavery. Indeed, those of African heritage have the largest share of the offense within its own history, so the undertone of the opening assertion is disingenuous, and if placed in analogous historical contexts, the men on this stage would be no different than all of Humanity in history. In the Name of Christ who is the Truth - among the Way and the Life, man enslaves man, and we all have a connection of this indictment in our heritage... not the least of which is the very heritage that is portrayed as the victim here. This is the very reason why all men should be in perpetuel incineration at birth by God Himself, which is the premise of Truth in Reformed Theology itself. Anyone that denies this - has not the Truth in them. As much as I love Desiring God (which is among the most vital means of Grace), it's disappointing... especially with the waves of controversy currently in Christianity, and this is a disservice to that very principle. Detractors and cynics of the social justice perspective are going to accuse the producers of this as putting out a token of sentiment that is only partially honest at best, and sadly, there could be no legitimate retort.
DG.. I pray that you take under consideration the removal of this piece in the name of Truth Himself. This is the only neutral, anti-racism position to take because incomplete truth is misrepresentation and just as much racism as its counter (Mr. Onwuchekwa is perhaps oblivious to the nature that is within him, and if that's the case, then he doesn't fully understand the noetic effects of the Fall and the sin nature that is its derivative - and needs the grace and benefit of the doubt)... which is a demonstration of the sin that makes up both perspectives - it's called Total Depravity, and the primary illustration of Godliness in this piece is the very proof of that fact that counters the opening premise of this video. This again is a reiteration that the true Christ-like position is the anti-racism espoused in the Doctrines of Grace and the unspeakable Mercy of the Gospel.
Soli Deo Gloria
When did African American own slaves in America? What does slavery in Africa have to do with the legacy of slavery in the United States?
Stoo being afraid to tell the truth
The Christ rejecter is facing a dark,dark,eternity