A reader emails to confirm that the Southern Baptists are not necessarily impressed by proposed SBC resolutions:
I am member of a Southern Baptist church in Arizona, a small church whose pastor delivers spiritually meaty sermons with isn’t afraid to tell people unpleasant truths. Your articles on the resolution directed against the Alt-Right and nationalism had me worried, as I have no desire to see my church or those like us converged. I went to church today praying for the right words to talk to my pastor about this issue.
After the sermon, my fears have been quelled, as shades of the Alt-Right were present throughout it. Our pastor talked about nations, not about some vague global community. He spoke in favor of using mockery against the enemies of God and the modern false prophets. He warned against letting political correctness stop us from defending the Gospel. He even used the words “I don’t care” in regards to those who disagree with him on national-spiritual matters, which brought a smile to my face.
I don’t know how this resolution will play out and what it means for Southern Baptists as a whole, but I do know now that we aren’t all lost. Thank you for the community you provide at your blog.
Remember, no matter how bad things get, the battle isn’t over and there is no reason to accept defeat. Only two numbers matter, 2 and 12. Because one plus one is three and all we need are twelve.
It is time to dissect this resolution and introduce some context.
The Southern Baptists have been in decline.
1. Their Birth rates are down. 2. Their Evangelism rates are down. 3. They don’t have an accurate grasp on the condition of their organization, statistically, as they are missing data from 1/4th of their congregations. 4. People are giving less to them 5. In contrast to their decline in population and wealth, they have been steadily growing the NUMBER of churches for the last 18 years, with another 479 (1%) net growth last year. This indicates a tendency to focus on Churchianism instead of being Followers of Christ. 6. More liberal churches within the convention contain the largest amount of baptisms.
I’ve only been a Christian for about 9 months. Within those months, I have hopped around Central Virginia trying to find a church which is not Social Justice Converged nor lacking in truthful scriptural backing. Initially, I felt a draw towards Baptist churches. Disturbingly, I also felt an intuition that there was a disharmonious spirit in the air within these churches. I concluded that I simply did not have a large enough sample size to formulate a coherent reason why I felt that. With this new resolution, I now have enough information. The corruption has spread to the top.
In their attempt to appeal to the masses, the same masses which would condemn Jesus Christ to Death, they have rejected Him and have become blind.
Now for the line-by-line analysis to back up my rhetoric.
Resolution on The Condemnation of the “Alt-Right” Movement and the Roots of White Supremacy Submitted to the Resolutions Committee for the SBC Annual Meeting, Phoenix, AZ, June 13-14, 2017 By William Dwight McKissic,Sr.
The use of air quotes indicates that the author does not understand what the Alt-Right even encompasses. Bait and Switch snake-tongue tactic used, swapping out White Nationalism with White Supremacy, even though they are different conceptual models. Note: I do not endorse White Nationalism because it is an incoherent model, seeing as there is no such thing as the “White Nation”. White Supremacy is also dumb, primarily because the differences between the white nations are too substantive and broad to categorize as a single entity of supremacy, although there are also ethical conclusions which are foolish in regards to the supremacy of any people over another. I am not up to date on church politics, but it appears that the Resolutions Committee has an opportunity to reject this resolution on June 13-14, 2017. I advise that they do so due to the lack of precision detailed within this document. The author, William Dwight McKissic, Sr. has not taken the time to understand exactly what the Alt-Right ideology is, and therefore is not making correct conclusions. Although he has already been caught in snake-tongue tactics and I haven’t even begun to look at the body of the resolution. A couple minutes of intensive research reveals that he has not been known to make wise decisions in his expression of his theology, and I would posit that this resolution is within that same category.
WHEREAS, Scripture teaches that from one man God made every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation (Acts 17:26); and
This piece of scripture is relevant only in pointing out that nations do, in fact, exist, and that they were made by God himself. It is important to note that directly following Genesis 10 to which Acts 17:26 is obviously referencing, The nations then unified in the story of the Tower of Babel in Genesis 11. One can properly infer that this has been the most diverse place in regards to nations, in the history of the biblical story. What did God do? He dispersed them and confused their language. It is God-willed that the nations exist separately from each other, and not mixed together in Unity and in the name of Diversity and speaking the same language. The natural objection would be Galatians 3:28 where Paul says that there is neither Jew nor Greek. If you stop the analysis there, then I would agree with the objection. But we do not stop the analysis there. In context, Paul is talking about how we are not held captive under the old law due to our justification through faith in the Lord Christ Jesus, and because of this, the faith is not limited to any singular nation, class, or sex. If we are to take Paul’s words as an indication that when one becomes a Christian, they immediately lost all nationality, then we must also conclude that the concept of slavery and freedom are no longer in existence when one becomes a Christian (thus rationalizing slavery) and that there neither female nor male Christians exist. Now, Acts 17:26 also gives a hint to how we should conceptually model the nations. This verse says that God determined the boundaries of their habitation, which would lead to the conclusion that the nation is not talking about the legal structure above a people, but instead about the people themselves.
WHEREAS, the prophet Isaiah foresaw the day when the Lord would judge between the nations and render decisions for many people (Isaiah 2:4); and
The only comment I have upon this reference to scripture is the fact that we are observably not in the day when nation shall not lift up sword against nation, and I also propose that, as the scripture says, be God who determines that day, not us.
Read the whole thing there. It’s both remarkable, and sad, that such a new Christian can produce a critical analysis that is observably more accurate and more relevant than what most lifelong Christians are capable of doing.
The Alt-Right represents the rainbow of nations created by God. Diversity represents the elimination and genocide of nations by men who believe they will make themselves gods. Choose carefully with whom you will side.
I was once a member of a Southern Baptist church. If this resolution passes, I will no longer consider myself a Southern Baptist, as the Southern Baptist Convention has been thoroughly cucked and is now officially an anti-nationalist and anti-American globalist institution.
Which “Christ” is that? Judeo-Christ or Anti-Christ? They’re cloaking it with the scare quotes and the modifier “that violates the biblical teachings with respect to race, justice, and ordered liberty”, but it is obvious that they are now globalists in service to the Prince of this world like so many of the other formerly Christian denominations.
The Alt-Right is not deceived. To the contrary, the Southern Baptists have embraced the wide and easy way in pursuit of the world’s approval. It won’t be long before they’ll be featuring female pastors performing same-sex marriages before empty pews. Convergence always ends the same way.
On tonight’s Darkstream, I explain why there is no contradiction between the famous injunction to love your enemies and the repeated commands to hate wickedness and evil. It’s more than a simple “hate the sin, love the sinner”, so do watch it before expressing an opinion.
I thought it was informative to see how this, more than any previous Darkstream, stirred up trolls and Churchians. It may serve you well to ask yourself this: why are they so opposed to hate? If they so readily accept so many other sins, why does hate so readily draw their angry attention?
“Do you have any suggestions for finding faith? I see the necessity of religion, and Christianity in particular, but aside from history and cultural affinity I don’t have actual belief.”
My suggestion: Pray.
Also, consider that the Christian worldview is more coherent, robust, and rational than any secular worldview.
Our model explains things such as why stars look fair and beautiful to our eyes when it serves no credible Darwinian purpose to do so.
Our model explains the naturalistic fallacy, that is, the gap between ‘is’ and ‘ought’ which secular philosophy cannot explain, and some cannot even address.
Our model explains how free will can exist inside a deterministic universe. A materialist cannot even formulate the question in a rational way.
Our model explains why humans seek beauty. Social-evolutionary explanations for this are less convincing than astrology.
Our model explains how creatures with free will capable of grasping intellectual abstractions can arise in a universe which contains no such thing as intellectual abstractions.
Our model allows investigation of final causes in nature, without which nature cannot properly be understood.
Our model explains the prevalence of so many theists throughout history. The theory that over nine tenths of mankind, including some of the most brilliant thinkers in their age, were raving lunatics who hallucinate about imaginary sky beings is not credible and not supported by evidence.
Our model explains the various miracles and supernatural wonders that are in the older history books, and which, for no scientific reason, were excised from being reported.
Our model explains both why there is a plurality of religions and why there are striking similarities between them.
Our model explains the origin of the universe. By definition, if the universe were all that existed, exists and ever will exist, than a material cause for it is impossible.
Our modern explains the current hegemony of the West and makes clear the meaning and purpose of what otherwise seems like insane and suicidal attempts by the apparently sober and sane men on Left to undermine and destroy it.
There is more there. It’s interesting to note that Tara McCarthy observed that for her, a non-believing nationalist, the most compelling evidence for Christianity is the globalists’ irrational hatred and fear of it. As I’ve recommended in the past, look hard at evil. Look as deeply and directly at it as you can bear.
And once you realize that it is real, material, self-aware, and intelligent, if that’s not enough to cause you to turn to Jesus Christ in humble repentance and gratitude, well, chances are that you’ll learn to fear God in a very different manner.
As we’re preparing for the release of The Collected Columns, Vol. 2, it’s interesting to see that an observer, who commented on the conceptual development of the Alt-Right, was correct to note that the ideas were often there prior to the label being applied. Consider this 2006 column, entitled The Vanishing Conservative, which, prior to both the coining of the term and the publication of Cuckservative 10 years later, anticipates the decline of the conservative movement.
I am not a conservative. While I respect genuine conservatives and appreciate the value of conserving cultural traditions, the Christian faith, and the foundations of Western civilization, conservatives have always struck me as the political equivalent of catenaccio.
Invented by the Austrian coach of the Swiss national team, the defense-oriented system was embraced by the Italians and used in Italy for over three decades, hence the name. But over time, attack-minded strategies were developed in response, most notably Holland’s famous Total Football System, which broke down the bolted door. No manager actually implements catenaccio today and references to it are mostly ironic and situational, made, for example, when a team is protecting a lead or is overmatched and playing for a tie.
The problem with both catenaccio and conservatism is that any positive movement is largely the result of luck, not purpose. They are defensive strategies, and as any military historian will tell you; defense never beats offense, it only staves off defeat for a time. In the end, even the most intrepid defenders will weary and the gates will finally fall to the barbarians.
Although it sounds ludicrous in a time when conservatives nominally rule the airwaves, the legislative, judicial and executive branches; 2006 may well be one day viewed as a low point for the American conservative. For politics is not mathematics and it knows no transitive law. It is true that many institutions and individuals are Republican, and certainly the Republican Party is supposed to be America’s conservative party, but this does not equal conservative dominance of the political scene.
For neither the institutions nor the individuals can be relied upon to work toward conservative goals. Most of the conservative actions taken in the last 20 years can be best described as holding actions, not actions intended to lower the rising tide of central government influence or combat societal devolution.
The malaise is movement-wide. Indeed, it is debatable as to which group is in worse shape, the “conservative” politicians or the “conservative” commentariat. While the leftward drift of the administration and the Congress have not escaped notice despite the best efforts of its cheerleaders to play it down; the abandonment of principle in favor of pragmatism has caused many in the so-called conservative media to do the likewise.
Just this week, one could listen to Michael Medved playing the left’s favorite game of denouncing another commentator—me, actually—as a Nazi while watching nominal conservatives falling all over each other in the competition to be the most outraged by Ann Coulter’s precision-guided comments about the ever-grieving “Witches of East Brunswick.”
(Given that there are thousands of people who lost loved ones in the September 11 attacks who Coulter did not criticize, it is more than a little disingenuous to pretend that her criticism is somehow inappropriate or misplaced. And just what is the statute of limitations on celebrity-victim status anyhow?)
Indeed, what with Michelle Malkin pushing FDR’s internment program, Ben Shapiro, Sean Hannity and numerous others pushing Woodrow Wilson’s foreign policy, Larry Kudlow pushing Richard Nixon’s monetary policies and the editors of National Review harboring a Harry Truman-style crush on the United Nations, one has to wonder if a liberal media is redundant these days.
The word “liberal” once meant something very different than it does today. It rather looks as if the concept of a “conservative” is in the process of undergoing similar etymological evolution. Regardless, it appears the bolted door has been unlocked and is hanging open on loose hinges.
Of course, my understanding then was not what it is now. In the original column, I referred to the nonexistent “Judeo-Christian ethic” rather than “Christian faith” and to “civilizations” rather than “Western civilization”.
Ironically, conservatives left behind by the Alt-Right now often defend Judeo-Christian churchianity in the place of genuine Christian values.
I don’t often direct your attention to the Darkstreams – I usually neglect to post them here at all – but I think this particular Darkstream is a particularly important one for anyone hoping to understand the relationship between Christianity and the Alt-Right, and why the eucivilizational atheists, agnostics, and pagans who support Western Civilization are ultimately going to need to embrace both cultural Christianity as well as support genuine Christian revival.
And let me say that I don’t blame any atheist, agnostic, or pagan who harbors deep contempt for the so-called modern Church. As I said, when I look at the churchian cucks who worship at the altar of Judeo-Christ the Good Samaritan when they aren’t busy welcoming refugees for pay, the first thing that springs to my mind is Jesus clearing the moneylenders out of the Temple.
The reason white working-class Americans no longer recognize their country is because it is no longer their country. This isn’t that hard. A society is made up of the people who inhabit it. It is not some sort of immutable structure that molds people into something else; the reason non-Romans in Rome behave like Romans is because they are heavily outnumbered and they don’t wish to draw Roman attention to themselves. Once they are numerous enough that they feel they can influence, or worse, “improve” the society they have invaded, they will change it from what it was before.
This is neither difficult nor debatable. Pour milk in your coffee and you can see the same process at work. Pour enough milk into it and it ceases to be coffee and starts to become milk.
Nearly two-thirds (65%) of white working-class Americans believe American culture and way of life has deteriorated since the 1950s.
Nearly half (48%) of white working-class Americans say, “things have changed so much that I often feel like a stranger in my own country.”
Nearly seven in ten (68%) white working-class Americans believe the American way of life needs to be protected from foreign influence. In contrast, fewer than half (44%) of white college-educated Americans express this view.
Nearly seven in ten (68%) white working-class Americans—along with a majority (55%) of the public overall—believe the U.S. is in danger of losing its culture and identity.
More than six in ten (62%) white working-class Americans believe the growing number of newcomers from other countries threatens American culture, while three in ten (30%) say these newcomers strengthen society.
That isn’t a graph of “the changing face of America”. That is a graph of America being transformed into Not-America, all thanks to one man, Emanuel Celler.
Celler made his first important speech on the House floor during consideration of the Johnson Immigration Act of 1924. Three years earlier, Congress had imposed a quota that limited immigration for persons of any nationality to 3 percent of that nationality present in the United States in 1910, with an annual admission limit of 356,000 immigrants. This national origin system was structured to preserve the ethnic and religious identity of the United States by reducing immigration from Eastern and Southern Europe, thereby excluding many Jews, Catholics, Italians, and others. Celler was vehemently opposed to the Johnson act, which passed the isolationist Congress and was signed into law. Celler had found his cause and for the next four decades he vigorously spoke out in favor of eliminating the national origin quotas as a basis for immigration restriction.
As Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee from 1949 to 1973 (except for a break from when the Republicans controlled the House), Celler was involved in drafting and passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Civil Rights Act of 1968 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. In January 1965, Celler proposed in the House of Representatives the Twenty-fifth Amendment, which clarifies an ambiguous provision of the Constitution regarding succession to the presidency. Also in 1965, he proposed and steered to passage the Hart-Celler Act, which eliminated national origins as a consideration for immigration. This was the culminating moment in Celler’s 41-year fight to overcome restriction on immigration to the United States based on national origin.
Note that he was a third-generation immigrant. Celler is an excellent demonstration of why God considers immigrants to be a curse upon the land, and why they and their descendants should never be permitted to participate in the political process in any society that wishes to maintain its national identity. Consider:
Know for certain that for four hundred years your descendants will be strangers in a country not their own and that they will be enslaved and mistreated there. – Genesis 15:13
After 400 years, the immigrants to Egypt were still not Egyptians.
The land must not be sold permanently, because the land is mine and you reside in my land as foreigners and strangers. – Leviticus 25:23
Immigrants reside in the land as foreigners and strangers. There is no Magic Dirt transforming them into natives.
May a creditor seize all he has; may strangers plunder the fruits of his labor. – Psalm 109:11
Debt and immigrant capitalists are literal curses.
Strangers will shepherd your flocks; foreigners will work your fields and vineyards. – Isaiah 61:5
No doubt doing the jobs that the natives won’t do. Isn’t it remarkable how what is happening today was described so accurately several thousand years ago, when scientists can’t manage to make a simple temperature prediction ten years in advance.
Our inheritance has been turned over to strangers, our homes to foreigners. – Lamentations 5:2
Immigration and the economic benefits they supposedly bring are a literal Biblical lamentation.
“It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.” – Matthew 15:26
A nation exists for the benefit of its children. Not for the benefit of strangers, foreigners, and immigrants. No wonder Europe’s childless leaders don’t give a damn about their nations. And if there is one core lesson of history, it is this: work your own damn fields.
This is what it looks like. Step by step, the world reels in one congregation after another, simply because the members would not abide by the Scripture.
The church that I grew up in was a place that I loved. My family spent a lot of time volunteering at various functions to help the place run right: setting up for lunch after the service, helping pass out food at funeral services, spending time getting it set up for vacation bible school, etc. A lot of good memories were made in that place that are still cherished to this day. Then came time to go away to college and I spent less time at that church, simply stopping in when I came home.
Looking back and thinking about the things that Vox has brought up, I realize all the signs of a growing convergence were there that we didn’t see. It started with the little things that we went along with because, how much could it hurt right? We no longer sang just the old hymns, and moved onto a mix of contemporary worship songs. Then there were no more hymns. Heaven forbid if the sound system crashed as the congregation would just have to stand there in shock and silence now. Then came the eradication of the clauses in the Bylaws about prohibiting members of the Masons to be elders, because that was simply “an old, archaic thing that didn’t matter anymore”. Then came the church vote on installing women deacons and elders, as both of them had “just done so much for the church”. Then came the hiring of a “new, dynamic pastor” who was certainly going to revitalize the numbers of people that were for some odd reason starting to drift to other churches. He certainly wasn’t Reformed, but that really didn’t matter did it? During the meeting with him before the vote, he was amazed that there was this document called the Heidelberg Catechism and had never heard of it, but promised to go read it when he was able. And finally there came the raiding of the saving account that the giving of the faithful had stored up over a hundred and twenty five years. Now it was all needed to build a “community outreach center” for the “vibrant growth of the unchurched” that would be our new church building and revitalize the area to new heights for God.
Now, I drive through the streets of my hometown out towards the crossroads of the highway to look at that God-forsaken temple to man’s arrogance. It is a grand, new building designed by some snooty architectural firm that is pretty much a mirror image of a movie theater the next town over. No real identifying marks on it, unless you drive around back and stumble upon where there is a cross. Or I guess if you can decode the “Faith Center” or whatever it is called now, and recognize it as a church. I have snuck in once or twice to see the new reality, just to sate my curiosity. After the light show and the semi-professional band is done playing, there is a fifteen minute self-help service that tells us how good we are and cherished we are. People are encouraged to bring their own Bibles, though I can’t see why, as there is no mention of God’s Holy Writ during the service. Must be for show. Or maybe something to rest your gourmet coffee on so as not to stain the new carpet.
Apparently we’ll soon discover how completely converged the Methodists are:
Karen Oliveto clutched a friend’s hand, closed her eyes and wept when she learned last year she had been elected a bishop of the United Methodist Church. Oliveto, who is married to another woman, had become the denomination’s first openly gay bishop.
Within minutes, a formal complaint was filed challenging her election as contrary to the church ban on clergy who are “self-avowed practicing homosexuals” – a petition that the highest Methodist judicial authorities agreed to consider. On Tuesday, the court will take up the closely watched case, the latest flashpoint over LGBT rights in a denomination splintering over the Bible and homosexuality.
“It highlights very greatly that we are two different churches and that the real difference is whether or not we’re going to live by the covenant that we each have agreed to,” said the Rev. Rob Renfroe, who leads Good News, a caucus of evangelical Methodists that has lobbied to uphold current teaching. Said Oliveto, “I’m in deep prayer, reminding myself of what God has called me to do.”
Oliveto, who is based in the Denver area, will attend the hearing in Newark, New Jersey, accompanied by fellow bishops from the church’s Western Jurisdiction, her wife, mother and childhood pastor. LGBT clergy and their supporters plan to pray outside and wear T-shirts listing the first names only of gay clergy who would risk losing their ministerial credentials by coming out.
The goal is to underscore the human cost of church policy, said the Rev. Lea Matthews of the LGBT advocacy group Methodists in New Directions. Prayer vigils are planned in the Methodist Mountain Sky Area region, which Oliveto leads, while others will join a prayer vigil online.
The court, or Judicial Council, is expected to issue a ruling a few days later.
The 12.8 million-member church, the third-largest in the U.S., was already in turmoil over same-sex relationships when Oliveto was elected. Methodists approved language in 1972 calling same-gender relationships “incompatible with Christian teaching.” The top church policy-making body, or General Conference, has upheld that policy ever since, even as LGBT rights gained acceptance and other mainline Protestants, including the Episcopal Church and the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), approved same-sex marriage. In recent years, the Methodists have seen their greatest growth overseas, especially in Africa, among more theologically conservative people, who have been standing with U.S. evangelical Methodists against recognizing same-gender relationships.
Deeply frustrated, Methodist LGBT advocates have stepped up pressure for new policies, holding same-sex weddings in defiance of church prohibitions and coming out as gay and lesbian from the pulpit. Conservatives responded by intensifying demands for church discipline over such actions. In one high-profile case, the Rev. Frank Schaefer was tried by a church court and defrocked for presiding at the wedding of his son to another man. Schaefer was later reinstated as a minister on an appeal of the ruling.
This really isn’t that hard. Any acceptance of same-sex relationships is sufficient to not only defrock a minister or a deacon, much less a bishop, but merits immediate expulsion from the church. Any so-called “Christian” church that embraces formalized sin, of any kind, is clearly nothing of the sort. This is not even remotely debatable.
Conservatives need to understand that the infiltrators are not seeking acceptance, and that they are not misguided, but they are there to destroy the organization from within. It’s not as if Christians weren’t warned of these “wolves in sheep’s clothing”, after all.
And furthermore, from a practical standpoint alone, it should be obvious that every single church that accepts female ministers, in direct contradiction to Scripture, has set itself on the wide and easy path that leads to worldly approval, declining attendance, societal irrelevance, and eventual destruction.
If those who wish to formally embrace everything from same-sex relationships to gluttony wish to set up their own organizations to pretend to worship the gods in whom they obviously don’t believe, there is nothing stopping them from doing so. So, ask yourself this: why is it so very important to them that they not only be permitted to join existing churches, but assume leadership of them and change their long-standing policies?
