The Ideology of Christian Nationalism vs. the Theology of the New Testament

My point, Larry, is that although my pov is more limited than Joel’s friends, I do have black friends from the inner city. And they have told me that it’s hell now compared to what it was when they were kids. So I already know what the typical answer would be.’

That would be my experience based on my previous ministry context as well. My main point was about moral judgment requiring a moral framework. As I pointed out above, the left would have a totally different judgment of the past but they would agree it was far different.

Larry,

Reread your own post. The only examples you provided to support your better moral compass theory of American history were related to sexual deviance.

My point was, and still is, your theory leaves out a lot of inconvenient history related to how African Americans were treated. I didn't say you agreed with how they were treated.

I will also add, I don't disagree that the black family structure has been decimated and is far worse now. But much of that can be placed at the feet of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society, Nixon's / Reagan's War on Drugs, over policing, and other government-sponsored niceties.

Comparing Jim Crow and today's world when it comes to society as a whole for black folks is like comparing apples to oranges. Its just different. They were/are both really bad in their own ways. Tom is right that we cannot minimize the evil of Jim Crow. 90 years of laws and the enforcement of those laws that made blacks 2nd class citizens and even at times subhuman should not be whitewashed. And Jim Crow laws weren't just in the South, they were alive and well in the north as well. Imminent domain laws in the name urban renewal, Redlining, refusal to grant black WW2 veterans the same FHA approved mortages, as their white counterparts, and etc...

If we're talking violent crime/murders/gangs, etc.. it was worse in the 1980s/1990s than today. Although the 1970's was notorious for murders/violent crime, especially in urban areas. But not as much gang related in the 1970's until turf wars over selling crack in the 1980s, which is one big reason was why gang violence became so prevalent. When crack cociane stopped being the drug of choice and switched to being weed in the late 1990s, crime also decreased. Crime stats over the past 60 years demonstrate all these trends I mentioned. . Also, in the 1970s, 80s, early 90s, there many more instances of slum lords, dilipating houses, government city corruption in urban communities, which contributes to crime. This coincied with many middle-class/upper-class African-Americans fled to the suburbs when civil rights laws were enacted, especially housing laws. But when they left for the suburbs, it left a huge leadership vaccum, except for the black church.

At the same time, things are bad now but in a different way. While the 1970s had their share looting (think of the 1977 NYC blackout), they didn't have "flash-mob" looting back then whereas flash mob looting has happened several times these past 3 years. As Larry mentions there was a different level of respect for those in authority back then that is not present now.

I am not necessarily disagreeing with Andrew either. The reason with some gangs why there is no code against killing kids is because you have teenagers (not adults) running those gangs because the older gang members have 20 years to life prison sentences. That is a valid reason why things may be worse now than before. Many blacks that I know do view the progressive sexual ethic or how new progressive elites are minimizing the role of the father as an example of how things are now worse.

Its apples and oranges.

The only examples you provided to support your better moral compass theory of American history were related to sexual deviance.

No, I mentioned families as well. But that was only a quick sample of a few issues, not a complete list. And then I mentioned more.

My point was, and still is, your theory leaves out a lot of inconvenient history related to how African Americans were treated. I didn’t say you agreed with how they were treated.

That history isn’t inconvenient. It’s evil but it doesn’t change the premise which is that even in times of great evil there were some things that were better than they are presently. Or to put it differently, we haven’t rid our society of evil. We have rather eliminated some of the good. And there are some Christians who think that is good because the past good was not based on gospel transformation and was therefore basically bad.

I think some (not you necessarily) have bought into some degree of the idea that anarchy or gospel transformation are really the only two options. If Christians advocate for “Christian” civil policies for all of us, including unbelievers, to live by in a civil society, we have compromised the gospel. I disagree. I am a dispensationalist so I am nowhere near a theonomist, a reconstructionist, even a Kuyperian, or one of the many iterations. But to point out the obvious, the Mosaic Law wasn’t only for the true believers in the covenant community. It was for the unbelievers as well.

Having laws about murder, rape, theft, sexuality, etc. are good even for unbelievers. But those laws cannot be justified apart from biblical theism and really biblical Christianity in this present age. So the minute anyone agrees with a law against theft, they have borrowed from a biblical worldview. That’s not a bad thing for society. The more people who reject theft, the better off we are, even if they are not believers.

But much of that can be placed at the feet of Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society, Nixon’s / Reagan’s War on Drugs, over policing, and other government-sponsored niceties.

Yes, it can also be blamed on underpolicing in some cases, on failed education systems (complex but due at least in part to family structures), on media (both traditional and social now). There are many complex and contributing factors.

In the end, I think it should be rather uncontroversial that our society has degenerated. That doesn’t mean everything in the past was rosy and great. It simply means that there were aspects that were better than they are now.

Larry wrote:

Having laws about murder, rape, theft, sexuality, etc. are good even for unbelievers. But those laws cannot be justified apart from biblical theism and really biblical Christianity in this present age. So the minute anyone agrees with a law against theft, they have borrowed from a biblical worldview. That’s not a bad thing for society. The more people who reject theft, the better off we are, even if they are not believers.

T Howard, do you believe we should give up on promoting the Biblical values listed above simply because our country failed so miserably in showing Christian love in the area of racial relations or do you believe we should continue to promote the values above while also promoting love toward our neighbor regardless of their race?

Full disclosure, I believe we should continue to promote the values above while also promoting love toward our neighbor regardless of their race.

We also must come to grips with the fact that both major parties have contributed to the racial tension in our country. It is not as simple as saying the solution to the racial inequity is to vote for one of those parties over the other. The solution is not to throw out Christian values. Promoting Christian values is not what caused the Jim Crow laws. Distorting or ignoring Christian values may have played too big of a role though. We need more Christian values, not less.

T Howard, do you believe we should give up on promoting the Biblical values listed above simply because our country failed so miserably in showing Christian love in the area of racial relations or do you believe we should continue to promote the values above while also promoting love toward our neighbor regardless of their race?

Not at all. My only point is that we are very quick to white-wash (I like Joel's term) our country's history. In so doing, we neglect the inconvenient truth that our country's history is inextricably linked to systemic racism and the dehumanization and oppression of minorities. And, the fact that professing Christians were involved in all of it makes it even worse. For example, have you not heard of accounts where black Christians weren't allowed to attend white churches?

Yet, we are led to believe that things were so much better back then, when everybody lived in Mayberry, families went to church, people were civil toward others, etc. Except for African Americans, because they weren't allowed to live in Mayberry due to redlining.

That said, yes, I believe Christians ought to promote biblical values. The best way to do that (but, not the only way) is to get serious about the great commission. Since the 80s, however, Christians have pretty much neglected that and turned to political power and coercion. And, what have we learned? Political power corrupts the gospel and deceives Christians. People's hearts remain desperately wicked despite the laws we pass and the politicians we elect. The good old days of cultural Christianity that people here are pining for was just a facade. We're now seeing that facade being demolished, and we're shocked, shocked to actually see the wickedness that's always been under the facade.

The solution to this wickedness I hear advocated here is, "rebuild the facade the way it was." (i.e., MAGA)

That's neither a realistic nor a biblical solution.

T Howard, I do not disagree with your last post. I just wish you had clarified that from the start.

Further clarification: anyone who thinks that Judeo/Christian values equates to white supremacy does not know their Bible nor the God of the Bible as well as they should. Any white supremacy teaching that tries to use the Bible to support it, is distorting the scripture. There are all kinds of false doctrines and sinful practices that try to use the Bible for their justification, but they are not using the Bible in an honest manner. The solution is not to reject Judeo/Christian values, but to teach Judeo/Christian values the way Christ would want us to teach them.