Truth About Our Sin
CT has done the white evangelical community a service by allowing us to hear from our black brothers and sisters the truth about our sin [“The Myth of Racial Progress,” Oct. 4]. As evangelicals, we know there is only one acceptable response to sin—repentance.
Thanks to the rich African-American community who one more time make themselves vulnerable by sharing themselves with us.
David J. Frenchak, President
SCUPE
Chicago, Ill.
The “Myth of Racial Progress” focused on a symptom of the church’s problem, racism, but missed the etiology. There is a whole plethora of social ills that are important diagnostic clues that the church is neither salt nor light in today’s American society.
The history of Israel demonstrates what happens when God’s people move from God and begin to worship Baal. As in ancient Israel, has this loss of commitment to God and biblical standards created a climate of darkness that allows social ills to flourish?
Hycel Taylor quoted Martin Luther King: “All you need for evil to triumph … is for good people to do nothing.” Jesus warned that “no man can serve two masters … you cannot serve God and mammon.” Could it be that evil is triumphing because good people are serving the wrong things and doing nothing to exercise spiritual muscles in active commitment to God and biblical principles? The expected race wars, economic collapse, AIDS devastation and other plagues will testify to our failure. Is there no prophet in the land to address the causes of the cancer in the necrotic organ known as the body of Christ?
Jack Given
Valparaiso, Ind.
Tony Evans and William Pannell said it in truth. The others, too.
Please continue stories that incarnate hope in accounts of congregations and teams of shared life in Christ and ministry.
H. Eugene Herr
Three Rivers, Mich.
The resentment expressed in your article toward white evangelicals was unchristian. You can justify it with modern sociology, but not biblical theology.
The electronic and elite voices of liberalism have long nurtured the lie that racism is closely related to conservatism or evangelicalism. Everyone from right to left and black to white has been guilty of segregation, voluntary or not. But it was fueled more by the “Social Darwinists” than any other force over the last two centuries. Christians erred in letting progressive and positivist values corrupt their minds into believing that groups, skin colors, and material factors are primary.
The church is not perfect, but the real enemy still stands outside of us pretending to be the savior of society and the black community, persuading them to resent “white evangelicals.” Meanwhile, they poison our family values (black and white) and the ethics of personal responsibility held so dear by evangelicals. They foster resentment with a focus on rights and entitlements. They teach us to keep score, and remember all the debts owed to us. Grace suffocates. Unity disintegrates.
Our racial divisions simply reveal our theological bankruptcy and our love affair with modern sociology and secular culture.
Joel Solliday
Moorpark, Calif.
Two additional forms of racism have affected the black community and church. One is the interventionist welfare state, which has destroyed families. The other is the failure of the church to train preachers and teachers adequately in the historic Christian faith. The neglect of biblical theology lies at the heart of the churches’ ineffectiveness—whether white or black.
Rev. Timothy R. Bennett
Binghamton, N.Y.
Revival At The Box Office
Christian values and themes are having a revival at the box office. One film that has theological appeal, of course, is Free Willy, though good reviews from Calvinists are hard to come by. Yet, the film with the greatest box-office draw for Christians is Homeward Bound. Not since Pilgrim’s Progress has the Christian life been so vividly portrayed.
Homeward Bound is an exciting and instructive allegory. Christians from three denominations are represented by three pets: a Siamese catechist and two dogmatists, separated from their parishes. They set off together to find their way home.
From the start, personality conflicts threaten their unity. Back-biting and scratching get out of hand with the spread of pride, envy, and a nasty case of fleas. Doctrinal questions also become div.isive. Veneration of the saints? Two votes for St. Bernard. Purrfectionism? One vote. Clergy vestments? Collars only. Speaking in tongues? Only if panting, cleaning, and licking are equally encouraged.
Yet, in the course of their perilous journey, an amazing transformation takes place. They face common enemies and discover they actually need each other. Like the church in Revelation doing battle with the great beast, these three Christians fight their own beasts: bears, porcupines, skunks, cougars, and crayfish.
Hats off to Hollywood! This is far superior to earlier films like 101 Denominations.
Regent makes Happy changes
On the concerns of Regent University’s law school, let me assure readers of CHRISTIANITY TODAY that Regent is aggressively pursuing full accreditation with the American Bar Association [News, Oct. 4]. Following their recommendations, we have constructed a $14 million law and government building, designated an additional $500,000 for law library enhancement, improved the faculty-to-student ratio, and are raising faculty salaries. Also, the law school is establishing a constructive association with the prominent American Center for Law and Justice. Since your article, we hired a dynamic and forward-looking new law dean, J. Nelson Happy, who will lead us from provisional to full ABA accreditation.
Regent University humbly walks in the splendid tradition of Christian institutions of higher learning that have remained faithful to their calling. As an original faculty member of Regent, I affirm that we have not strayed from our evangelical roots. As far as a philosophical shift, we have only turned from H. Richard Niebuhr’s posture of Christ against culture to Christ transforming culture. We continue to affirm our commitment to the Holy Scriptures, the Apostles’ and Nicene creeds, and the great evangelical tradition of our Lord’s church.
Terry Lindvall, President
Regent University
Virginia Beach, Va.
Chambers’s insights are timeless
Thank you for the article “My Search for Oswald Chambers” [Oct. 4], My mother gave me my first copy of My Utmost for His Highest sometime in my high-school years for my daily quiet time. I later wore out a second copy and continue, daily, with my wife, to read from a well-worn third copy.
Christians from the earliest days of the church have needed the insights stressed by Chambers—in particular, his reminder that we find Christ because he first seeks us, and, as Dr. Sam Shoemaker often repeated, “We cannot keep Christ until we give Him away.”
Griffin C. Callahan
Bluefield, W.Va.
No “social progress” advocate
I’m grateful to Robert Yarbrough for his gracious review of Paul, Women and Wives [Books, Oct. 4] and appreciate his evaluations of both its strengths and its shortcomings. I was, however, surprised to read of my acceptance of the myth of U.S. “social progress.” I actually believe U.S. trends like rampant promiscuity and abortion invite God’s judgment; I just do not associate them with biblical teaching on mutual submission, and I am trying to learn to write one book at a time. A reader of the review could also get the faulty impression that I limit Paul’s authority; to the contrary, I believe that though he often communicated in his audience’s language, he always did so under the Spirit’s inspiration.
Craig S. Keener
Salisbury, N.C.
“Perverse mythology” known before New Testament era
The review of our book [I Suffer Not a Woman, Oct. 4] created the impression that the distortion of the Adam and Eve story was not known until well after the New Testament era. Philo of Alexandria (died A.D. 45) allegorized the Adam and Eve story so that Eve was the bringer of the enlightenment and meaningful existence to Adam. In the ensuing centuries, the Gnostics would further embellish the theme; but the perverse mythology was already in place by the first half of the first century. Philo’s treatment is discussed on pages 65, 146–148, and 151 of our book, and a translation of the actual text is provided on pages 215–216. Josephus (born A.D. 37) was also aware of contemporary mishandling of the Adam and Eve story (pp. 149–150) and deplored it.
Catherine Kroeger
Brewster, Mass.
Robert Yarbrough’s dismissal of the Kroegers’ work is both unfair and unprofessional; your presenting it as a book review is irresponsible. If Yarbrough chooses to disagree with the Kroegers’ thesis, fine. But he refuses even to interact with it in a meaningful way. The Kroegers have presented a thoughtful, well-researched interpretation that deserves to be taken seriously.
Mark D. and Kari C. Ifland
DeRidder, La.
Searching for middle ground
Philip Yancey struck a chord noting the modern trend in church music [“Having a Bad Hymn Day,” Oct. 4], Musical expression presents a dilemma, especially for those of us over 40. To paraphrase the Bard, we are bombarded by cacophony sung by the inept, filled with noise and error, signifying confusion. “Can this be worship?” we ask.
Finding middle ground takes discernment, skill, and tact. We allow for sincere folks whose taste needs cultivation. Although much should be discarded, we do not arbitrarily refuse the new as if only the old songs are worthy vehicles of praise. Through the years, we also have sung poor theology to trite tunes and been blessed. Humility becomes us all.
Some words have changed their meaning. God is awesome in David’s sense: “Let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of Him.” But the Lord must not be equated to a rock star or a fast car.
Esther Siemens
Mesa, Ariz.
SBC’s relationship with Clinton
I was intrigued by your News article “Clinton Affirms Faith, Humility” [Oct. 4], and I’m puzzled by the statement, “Those invited were expected to be already sympathetic to the President’s concerns or at least open to civil dialogue on issues of mutual concern.” Is this CT’s characterization or that of the White House?
Since officials of the Southern Baptist Convention were not invited to the “interfaith” breakfast, I hope it is not the opinion of CT that the SBC is not open to “civil dialogue” with the White House. While we as Southern Baptists have clearly separated ourselves from Clinton’s policies on abortion and homosexual rights, we have made it clear that we are willing to work with the President on “issues of mutual concern.”
I would not want readers left with the impression that since representatives of the SBC were not invited to the breakfast, we are not being civil in our relationship with the President.
James A. Smith
Christian Life Commission of the SBC
Washington, D.C.
