Is Segregation Scriptural? A Radio Address From Bob Jones On Easter Of 1960
- 207 views
Here is a link to a Twitter exchange I just had with Justin Taylor
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
This is a foolish piece. It’s entirely possible Taylor just doesn’t care, because he doesn’t have any roots or ties to fundamentalism. But, to those who do, this piece serves absolutely no purpose. He took a trip to the dump, waded through piles of refuse to dredge up this moldy garbage, and has laid it out upon the dining room table and invited the world to discuss it. Perhaps we should have just left this trash at the landfill where it came from?
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
From the article “Many thanks to historian John Matzko—a professor at Bob Jones University who is authoring the first scholarly biography of Bob Jones Sr.”
I wouldn’t want to be in Matzko’s shoes!
Church history - especially of the scholarly type! - should include warts and all so Christians know where we’ve been. Segregation is an ugly part of fundamentalism’s past.
[Jim]Church history - especially of the scholarly type! - should include warts and all so Christians know where we’ve been. Segregation is an ugly part of fundamentalism’s past.
Why limit it to fundamentalism? Yes, it was an ugly wart across the broad spectrum of Christianity in America for generations. To state it the way you do implies that it is only an fundamentalist problem.
It doesn’t help to smear one group when all Christians (I suppose especially in the South, but not just the South either) were guilty of the same thing.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
[Don Johnson] To state it the way you do implies that it is only an fundamentalist problem.
Process words more carefully! You know I did not “imply” that!
[Don Johnson] when all Christians (I suppose especially in the South, but not just the South either) were guilty of the same thing [the context is “segregation”].
Not really true: (from pp 41-42)
[a] Calvinist writer to tackle this issue is James Oliver Buswell in his book Slavery, Segregation and Scripture (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964). This book is divided into two sections. In Part One Buswell discusses the issue of slavery, and in Part Two he discusses segregation. Buswell gives a lucid and well documented account of pro-slavery arguments, considering in some detail the claim that Negroes are not fully human. He goes on to sympathetically treat the dilemma of Christian slave owners and the activities of Christian opponents of slavery. Against the background of these attitudes, Buswell goes on to discuss segregation, which he argues must be seen in the light of both slavery and the social disruption created by the slave system. Like Oliver he sees racial questions as not simply issues of color but as arguments about the right of one group of men to dominate and subdue another. He forcibly argues that such domination is totally opposed to the teachings of the Gospel and completely unscriptural.
On a personal note: I’ve never been a segregationalist (saved 1969 / and I was certainly aware of the issues then! I was 20 & lived in Cincinnati - a Southern “border state” that has a long racial history (not all good!)
To me, it is not an issue of whether other people were guilty too. My question is why BJU was a last holdout. Why were they so late to the party, one of the last schools in the south to enroll African Americans, long after it was mandated for public schools, and close to three decades after their archenemy Billy Graham was encouraging desegregation in his crusades? That does not seem like being the light of the world to me. BJU should have been the first to desegregate, not the last.
For me, I can (and do, really) concede that fundamentalists do take it on the chin for this and other issues, and a lot of it is unfair—as others note, north and south, the liberal churches and secularists were (and are) involved, too. But that said, we’ve got a trump card the liberal churches do not; we believe in sin, and we believe in repentance, and we believe we’ve got a Bible that will tell us, if only we will listen, what God’s real view is on the matter.
We can therefore smile and say “yes, we screwed up, and thank God, He brought us to repentance first with public pressure, and then more importantly through His Word. We looked at the stories of Rahab, Ruth, Moses’ wife, and a host of other things, and we came to the conclusion that the Scriptures are not compatible with any variety of ‘kinism’..”
And why did BJU stick to it so long? Complex story of the South plus fundamentalism—two cultures that are strongly rooted in a reaction against modernism. And even north of the Mason-Dixon, we’ve got some of the same reality—it’s a weakness we need to understand, no? We need to so emphasize sola scriptura that we’ll see clearly to correct our mistakes.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
[Jim]Don Johnson wrote:
To state it the way you do implies that it is only an fundamentalist problem.Process words more carefully! You know I did not “imply” that!
Well, I’d say write words more carefully. Your words can certainly be taken to imply just as I said.
Now, we can go back and forth saying “Did so, Did not” or we can move on. Your choice.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
as late as 1981, MBBC had the same rule. Though, it probably died when Dr. Cedarholm retired.
Hoping to shed more light than heat..
Aaron,
Judging by the bulk of the comments here, one might say you yourself were baiting when you posted it! Many of the comments are not on topic.
Justin Taylor’s article is practically anachronistic. If he had, instead, done a series titled only “IS SEGREGATION SCRIPTURAL?” and then explored the topic from a historic perspective, there would be little argument.
Ashamed of Jesus! of that Friend On whom for heaven my hopes depend! It must not be! be this my shame, That I no more revere His name. -Joseph Grigg (1720-1768)
Joeb,
I think you may miss my point. Aaron’s post questioned why a post was published specifically calling out Bob Jones on the issue of segregation, as if it is some new revelation. Any other conversation in the thread is off topic. It isn’t necessarily bad conversation, but it is off topic.
I’m interested in hearing more about why Justin Taylor / TGC posted it and what their motivations may have been.
Ashamed of Jesus! of that Friend On whom for heaven my hopes depend! It must not be! be this my shame, That I no more revere His name. -Joseph Grigg (1720-1768)
Who cares is a post is “off topic”? I certainly don’t.
Besides, Aaron’s post was a response to the original posting by Jim. Aaron’s comment does not restrict the content of this thread.
[Jim]From the article “Many thanks to historian John Matzko—a professor at Bob Jones University who is authoring the first scholarly biography of Bob Jones Sr.”
I wouldn’t want to be in Matzko’s shoes!
Church history - especially of the scholarly type! - should include warts and all so Christians know where we’ve been. Segregation is an ugly part of fundamentalism’s past.
A couple of points:
1. I’m happy to be in John Matzko’s shoes. I don’t intend my biography of Dr. Jones Sr. to be either hagiography or exposé. Bob Jones Sr. was a good man with human failings; affirming the former does not mean concealing the latter.
2. I never read Dr. Bob’s segregation sermon when I was a student. Maybe I just wasn’t paying attention, but I don’t think reading it was required in the mid-’60s—something I told Justin Taylor before he posted the blog article.
[JohnMatzko]2. I never read Dr. Bob’s segregation sermon when I was a student. Maybe I just wasn’t paying attention, but I don’t think reading it was required in the mid-’60s—something I told Justin Taylor before he posted the blog article.
Exactly. I’m not sure what motivated him, but he seems to have bought Camille’s line hook line and sinker. Which goes to my complaint about the alleged scholarship of his piece.
I’m looking forward to your book, John, I’ll be ordering it as soon as it comes out.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
Discussion