# The United States and Interracial Marriage



## JS116 (Feb 16, 2012)

This morning I found this interesting article on interracial marriage that povoked me to right this..

Here is is:

Interracial marriage in US hits new high: 1 in 12 - US news - Life - msnbc.com

I personally think this is a very good thing,but if not careful can lead to us into trouble and false assurance.Let me briefly explain, We all know(or should know) of the social injustices and strict laws on those who married,dated and even befriended those outside their races in the the early years.The thing is now while it is lawful to marry and be social with someone outside of your race,you still will have mixed opinions about it,from professing evangelicals and unbelievers.It used to be not that a big of an issue within the churches but now it is becoming more popular alot of people feel the need to speak out,unfortunately like the story that went viral on the media months ago about the pastor from Kentucky who forbid the black/white christian couple from his church not because of ANY legitimate biblical concerns that could've been addressed,but simply because they were not of the same "race" 1 week later he recanted of his position after it hit the media.

I don't know about you guys but it's things like this that makes me *VERY* upset,and that's an understatement.I have lots of reason why it makes me upset,but mainly because it's unbiblical and harmful.It makes me wonder what are _really_ the motives behind some people,I have seen "christians" fervently oppose things like abortion and homosexuality,but want to passively deal with the problem of racism.Whats wrong with that picture?Have we ourselves decided who and what matters deserve justice and concluded with who/what doesn't?Some people have even fooled themselves into thinking that since the laws that were supporting things like segregation and miscegenation are abolished,it no longer is helpful or beneficial to be addressed.I greatly would have to beg to differ.I'm not even going to address the unbelieving marriages I will save that for my blog.If you could hear some things I hear and see the things I see being done by people in the churches it truly breaks my heart and i'm sure it grieves God's too.I talk to a lot of reformed brothers and sisters who date and are married out of their race and cannot walk in their own churches without getting blank stares and screw faces.It's a shame because as a minority it's already hard enough to find true Christian who is of the same race,let alone a reformed christian is more harder to spot out,it just makes it harder on them to look for a potential spouse if skin color needs to contribute.

I just want to know are their ANY godly men and women who will be bold enough to speak out on these issues and their inconsistencies of the gospel?So far we have people like Tim Keller,John Piper,Ligon Duncan,Thabiti Anyabwile,Anthony Bradley and handful more who recently have seen the need to speak up on these issues,but we need alot more help than that.Does anyone care to seek justice for our brothers and sister in Christ?or are we content in our comfort zones?Will we continue to let our liberal christian counterparts deal publicly with these matters?Let me be clear,I'm not saying let's only focus our attention on this and disregard everything else,i'm saying see the level of importance these matters really are and fight these issues the same way you would fight abortion or gay marriage.Indeed the work at the cross was finished..for Christ but for us,we have a ways to go,and the only way we can do it is through him and by what he's done.Ask yourself,do you really,honestly and truthfully thirst for righteousness?if so what are you doing to see it be done?


----------



## A5pointer (Feb 16, 2012)

I am grateful for my perfect wife who is Filipino. Christians who are against it use prohibitions from Moses to inter marry. I do not know if there are other motives fueling the interpretation. I do though think we need not fear the Moabites bringing their gods to the land of Cannan.


----------



## JS116 (Feb 16, 2012)

A5pointer said:


> I am grateful for my perfect wife who is Filipino. Christians who are against it use prohibitions from Moses to inter marry. I do not know if there are other motives fueling the interpretation. I do though think we need not fear the Moabites bringing their gods to the land of Cannan.



Pastor Andrew Webb of Providence PCA did an excellent job when he spoke on this a while ago and even made a sermon on it with his encounters with those who oppose interracial marriage..you can view this thread for some of his points.It got kinda of off topic at the end but good discussion.

http://www.puritanboard.com/f15/mixed-race-marriage-resources-29733/


----------



## J. Dean (Feb 16, 2012)

Agree completely, Shawn. There is only one race: the human race.

Heck, I as a white kid had a crush on Whitney Houston in the 80s.

It didn't work out.


----------



## Rufus (Feb 16, 2012)

Based on what she told me a girl from my schools father basically was strong on the Bibles condemnation of interracial marriage (which, we know is distorted) but seemed to care little about the other things (from what I've heard, I don't know him well so I can't say for myself). 

I honestly believe that the church is the best solution to race problems. The Government can try all they want to try and solve such things through affirmative action, etc. but they, unlike God, can't get into the deepest corridors of our hearts. 

My only concern is that some people justify gay marriage by saying the people who oppose gay marriage would have been the same people who opposed interracial marriage fifty years ago (or rather as Sean Penn said that all of us who oppose gay marriage will have our grandchildren ashamed of us in the future). Personally I believe that using past racial tensions to justify gay marriage is a disgrace to all of those who fought for Civil Rights in the 1950's and 60's, seeing as it is 1) a totally different issue, 2) one can't necessarily tell if somebody is homosexual on the outside, one can obviously tell when somebody is of a certain ethnicity, 3) homosexuals aren't being forced to the back of the bus, forbidden from attending schools, made to use a different water fountain, etc.


----------



## Miss Marple (Feb 16, 2012)

Not to mention, homosexual behavior is a sin and being a given race is not.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Feb 16, 2012)

Joshua said:


> There are more foundational issues that need thoroughly to be dealt with. In doing so, it would make an emphasis on speaking out against anti-"interracial" marriage unnecessary. It's like trying to put a band-aid on a gaping wound. Wrong emPHAsis on the wrong syLLAble. Yes, commentary on the matter is important as opportunity arises, but to have such a subject hold primacy in a minister's preaching, teaching, etc. would be at the expense of the foundational issues that need preaching.



I agree. I think that comments and teaching on issues such as interracial marriage can easily be done as legitimate applications of certain texts, but to make it a central focus of one's ministry would be to put the proverbial cart before the horse.


----------



## JS116 (Feb 16, 2012)

Miss Marple said:


> homosexual behavior is a sin and being a given race is not.



Practicing racism is not?




Joshua said:


> Yes, commentary on the matter is important as opportunity arises, but to have such a subject hold primacy in a minister's preaching, teaching, etc. would be at the expense of the foundational issues that need preaching.



I agree a sermon dedicated on interracial marriage wouldnt be proper.I'm not looking for someone to make a sermon against it,but I am asking that those who preach linger over the text's that would apply to present day issues so the church knows what type of attitude it should have when confronted to make a proclamation where we stand on the issue.I would love to see more books,articles and discussions dealing with that in particular.I used anti-interracial marriage topic to show that, this is a type stereotypical attitude that stems from allowing racism.


----------



## Rufus (Feb 16, 2012)

JS116 said:


> Practicing racism is not?



I don't believe that Miss Marple intended it in any way like that, racism is a sin. She was addressing my mentioning that some justify homosexual behavior by saying it's the same thing as civil rights, etc.


----------



## JS116 (Feb 16, 2012)

JS116 said:


> o far we have people like Tim Keller,John Piper,Ligon Duncan,Thabiti Anyabwile,Anthony Bradley and handful more who recently have seen the need to speak up on these issues



These are some examples of pastoral guys who have spoken against these things without dedicating a whole sermon on it.


----------



## Tripel (Feb 16, 2012)

I have to admit ignorance on the extent of the interracial marriage controversy. I can imagine a handful of churches here and there that foolishly oppose it, but is the problem much larger?

There are always going to be some crazy people and churches out there. How much attention needs to be given to them? Again, perhaps the problem is larger than I know, and if that's the case can someone please point to some evidence?

As for racism in general, yes, that is everywhere, just as it has been since the time of Christ. What does the church need to do that it isn't already doing in this area? Every church I've been associated with as been against racism.


----------



## JS116 (Feb 16, 2012)

Rufus said:


> JS116 said:
> 
> 
> > Practicing racism is not?
> ...



Okay I do apologize if misinterpreted Miss Maple,forgive me I am just highly appalled by some of the things we allow to go on.


----------



## Tripel (Feb 16, 2012)

JS116 said:


> I am just highly appalled by some of the things we allow to go on.



What things? And who is "we"?


----------



## JS116 (Feb 16, 2012)

Tripel said:


> JS116 said:
> 
> 
> > I am just highly appalled by some of the things we allow to go on.
> ...



Haha im sorry Daniel I keep responding and missing your replies,my apologies. 

But I am referring to Christianity as a whole,I'm just shocked about what things we allow in our churches.This problem of interracial marriage has been brought to me by some friends and myself about being frowned upon by church members and family members for the idea.I dont want us to get too hung up on interracial marriage in this discussion,I just used interracial marriage to show one of the effects that happen when allowing racism to go on not dealt with.


----------



## RobertPGH1981 (Feb 16, 2012)

I think this depends on the region of the country you are in, and the age of the person you are talking about. I live within the city of Pittsburgh and do not hear people commenting on things like this, but it may be just the people I am around. I know forms of racism still exists but its typically with the older crowds and not the younger groups. 

People that live in the city tend to be more accepting/liberal because it tends to be a melting pot of ethnic groups and cultures. Because of this it is easy to get along with those who are different ethnically and culturally because you are around them all the time. (** I am not saying those who do not live in the city are all racist/prejudice, but I would say that its more common **)

I think over time some of this racism will subside but prejudices will exist in areas who are isolated from different races geographically. This is most likely because of negative publicity through the media (news papers, mtv, cnn, tmz ect).


----------



## jogri17 (Feb 16, 2012)

Racism exists in many sorts, just because someone approves in theory of interracial marriage, that doesn't mean if his/her daughter or son starts dating someone who is of a different skin tone, that person wouldn't start freaking out and becoming uncomfortable. I am much more of a cynic, I tend to believe we has humans always try to find something to hate and make boogeyman because as fallen creatures we love expressing our irrationality. After all, Archie Bunker didn't consider himself to be a racist.


----------



## JS116 (Feb 16, 2012)

RobertPGH1981 said:


> I live within the city of Pittsburgh and do not hear people commenting on things like this,



The Burgh! haha

But actually one of my friends who is a 27 year old white male is dating a black women who is I think a year or so younger and he said that he experiences it up there in Pittsburgh and I have another friend who is around 25 who is black and is engaged to a white female and says it's really a struggle,but it's worth it he lives also in Pennsylvania (yeah I have lot of older friends haha).Where I live in North Carolina it's not as bad as some places,outside the church it is more common and acceptable now,but you always have those who ride around with confederate flags who want a reason to oppose.The churches here have mixed feelings,thankfully to God the churches I attended havent done this to me,but I have friends here who have.Some of you guys probably cant relate because you havent been in a interracial relationship,but some of the things that are said behind closed doors and some actions you can tell their is some prejudices that people are harboring inside even in the churches.


----------



## RobertPGH1981 (Feb 16, 2012)

Just to add, there are prejudices within the white community dependent on your ancestors nationality. For example, my grandfather is from the Ukraine and my grandmother is from Germany. If I was dating a woman who's grandfather was 100% Italian, her father might not like me just because I am not Italian. So it exists in many different forms but you mention one that is more obvious.


----------



## Miss Marple (Feb 16, 2012)

JS166,

My comment was in regards to the popular effort to equate homosexuality with being a minority race.

As though they were somehow in the same "predicament." Neither are in fact a predicament.

Being a homosexual is a choice to sin, and furthering the evil by sanctioning it by some sort of 'marriage' ceremony is horrendous.

Being a race is no sin at all, and marriage between one unencumbered man and one unencumbered woman is good.

I find the current meme of opposition to homosexual "marriage" as somehow equivalent to opposition to mixed-race marriage to be appalling. They are in no way equivalent.

I accuse no on of this board of making that claim. I am commenting on the current popular argument in the secular word which says or implies that if we oppose homosexual 'marriage,' we are just like those who oppose interracial marriage.


----------



## JS116 (Feb 16, 2012)

Yeah I understand that,contrary to popular belief their is even black on black prejudices,in different ways.Some black parents I know here (particularly from Africa) wouldnt let their daughters marry a light-skinned african american male,for false reasons of course,but these dont compare to the type of treatment the color mixed relationships get.


----------



## JS116 (Feb 16, 2012)

Are you trying to find a way to bring me down? Second time! What is up with that?  

I will work on it, I must admit I try to respond quickly, but I guess accuracy is the key here.

btw..do my paragraph's look a little funny?I've never been good with constructing paragraph's, but I always try to express what i'm trying to say in the clearest way possible.


----------



## Kim G (Feb 16, 2012)

For those who think this is a small problem, you must not have grown up in Independent Fundamentalist Christianity. The Fundamentalist colleges (Bob Jones, Liberty, Pensacola, West Coast BC, etc.) consistently practiced and preached "separate but equal," or sometimes worse, "blacks are fit for serving tables" a la Bob Jones III. And these universities were churning out preachers who spread the hate.

I have recently become really convicted about this problem. I grew up in a home where interracial dating was forbidden under the idea of "separate but equal." I never understood it and didn't believe it but it was taught all around me. I thought I wasn't racist until I read "The Autobiography of Martin Luther King Jr." last month. I realized how many subconscious assumptions I had that were rooted in racist ideas. I repented of those. I don't know what I can do to change our culture's racial problems, but they DEFINITELY exist in ways I had never seen before.


----------



## Rufus (Feb 16, 2012)

RobertPGH1981 said:


> Just to add, there are prejudices within the white community dependent on your ancestors nationality. For example, my grandfather is from the Ukraine and my grandmother is from Germany. If I was dating a woman who's grandfather was 100% Italian, her father might not like me just because I am not Italian. So it exists in many different forms but you mention one that is more obvious.



 My grandmother was somewhat cautious of my father marrying my mother because she was worried my mother would give me too much of an Irish name and what-not.



> Yeah I understand that,contrary to popular belief their is even black on black prejudices,in different ways.Some black parents I know here (particularly from Africa) wouldn't let their daughters marry a light-skinned african american male,for false reasons of course,but these dont compare to the type of treatment the color mixed relationships get.


 Absolutely true. There is a lot of racism (including genocide) in Africa among Africans.

I will say I don't hate racism as much as I should (I did tell a girl not to use the word "chinks" the other day), I think its hard for many of us to hate racism as much as we should because honestly a lot of supposed racism isn't that racist. For instance if you disagree with the President your a racist, or if you don't like listening to Jimmy Cliff your a racist. Honestly some people are made to feel guilty for being white, and whites have been victims of racism too (i.e. being one of a few white kids in an all black school is far harder than being one of a few black kids in an all white school (at least at my school, we're 95% of everybody is white).


----------



## JS116 (Feb 16, 2012)

Kim G said:


> For those who think this is a small problem, you must not have grown up in Independent Fundamentalist Christianity. The Fundamentalist colleges (Bob Jones, Liberty, Pensacola, West Coast BC, etc.) consistently practiced and preached "separate but equal," or sometimes worse, "blacks are fit for serving tables" a la Bob Jones III. And these universities were churning out preachers who spread the hate.
> 
> I have recently become really convicted about this problem. I grew up in a home where interracial dating was forbidden under the idea of "separate but equal." I never understood it and didn't believe it but it was taught all around me. I thought I wasn't racist until I read "The Autobiography of Martin Luther King Jr." last month. I realized how many subconscious assumptions I had that were rooted in racist ideas. I repented of those. I don't know what I can do to change our culture's racial problems, but they DEFINITELY exist in ways I had never seen before.



You got it! I wasn't going to mention any names, but i'm glad you did.  these are a few instances of many.

I know for a fact i'm not just making this stuff up and trying to cause division, because I have numerous amount of friends in mixed relationships that go through persecution and their same raced couple friends can testify for it.


----------



## Somerset (Feb 16, 2012)

We have a lot of problems over here with inter-racial relationships. Many whites are not at all happy about them, but nor are many Asians. We have had several "honour" murders of Muslim girls for going out with black or white men. To show what a minefield it can be: the last time I heard someone calling someone else a "simian" (as near as I'm going) it was a third generation girl from Barbados referring to a Nigerian.

My church has a mix of people and I've never heard any off comments.


----------



## Andres (Feb 16, 2012)

JS116 said:


> If you could hear some things I hear and see the things I see being done by people in the churches it truly breaks my heart and i'm sure it grieves God's too.I talk to a lot of reformed brothers and sisters who date and are married out of their race and cannot walk in their own churches without getting blank stares and screw faces.



I think it's important to remember that this is not always the case. For some reason, and I will fully admit that it may just be how I am reading you, but you seem to be making the example above the norm for every case of interracial marriage. It's not at all. My gorgeous blue-eyed, blonde-haired wife and I have been attending our church together since we were engaged four years ago. Not once have I ever heard any kind of negative remark made towards us or felt anything but the utmost love from my predominantly white church. Unless I'm completely having the wool pulled over my eyes, my church loves me and my wife and our mixed-race son. And we love them in return. 

I think it's great you want to take a stand against racism and I agree with you that all Christians should, but just remember that a huge chunk of Christianity and the church is happy to welcome people of all backgrounds, including interracial couples.


----------



## Andres (Feb 16, 2012)

And besides, who could hate on these two? View attachment 2658


----------



## JML (Feb 16, 2012)

Andres said:


> JS116 said:
> 
> 
> > If you could hear some things I hear and see the things I see being done by people in the churches it truly breaks my heart and i'm sure it grieves God's too.I talk to a lot of reformed brothers and sisters who date and are married out of their race and cannot walk in their own churches without getting blank stares and screw faces.
> ...



I also agree that there is racism out there. But my wife and I are in the same situation as Andrew (except backwards as my wife is Hispanic) in that we have never been treated unusually by any churches that we have attended.


----------



## JS116 (Feb 16, 2012)

Andres said:


> I think it's important to remember that this is not always the case. For some reason, and I will fully admit that it may just be how I am reading you, but you seem to be making the example above the norm for every case of interracial marriage. It's not at all. My gorgeous blue-eyed, blonde-haired wife and I have been attending our church together since we were engaged four years ago. Not once have I ever heard any kind of negative remark made towards us or felt anything but the utmost love from my predominantly white church. Unless I'm completely having the wool pulled over my eyes, my church loves me and my wife and our mixed-race son. And we love them in return.
> 
> I think it's great you want to take a stand against racism and I agree with you that all Christians should, but just remember that a huge chunk of Christianity and the church is happy to welcome people of all backgrounds, including interracial couples.



This problem is certainly not the case in all churches, I'm not saying that.Like I said my church never held anything against it to my knowledge, but I do know churches and institutions that do.This thread is meant to initiate conversation among those who have experienced it in churches and to get their take on it.For clarification I use the word christians, to speak about the visible church.

---------- Post added at 07:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:00 PM ----------

It may be dependent the area,but I can assure the problem is alive in well in churches.


----------



## Edward (Feb 16, 2012)

JS116 said:


> you always have those who ride around with confederate flags



Instead of worrying about the stereotypes of others, you probably should start with an examination of your own.


----------



## GulfCoast Presbyterian (Feb 16, 2012)

From my perspective, I think it tends to be a subset of folks of a certain age that have a big hang up about interracial relationships. Those prejudices should be condemned. Thankfully, they appear to be shrinking with successive generations. When I was a child you would still see a few "Invisible Empire" bumper signs on trucks in rural Mississippi. Forty years later, those people would be considered misanthropes by the vast majority of people here.


----------



## JML (Feb 16, 2012)

Edward said:


> Instead of worrying about the stereotypes of others, you probably should start with an examination of your own.



Being from Alabama, I understand the whole Southern pride thing and I understand that the Civil War (or the War of Northern Agression if you so choose) wasn't fought about slavery alone. I get it. However, I never really understood the other view on the flag until hearing the perspective of someone that understood the other view. My best friend is African American. I don't think that Shawn is stereotyping anybody with what he said. I understand that the flag doesn't make one a racist. Truth is though that the confederate flag cannot ever be separated from the horrible acts of slavery. Whether anyone likes it or not, the flag is associated with racism. Therefore, people have a choice to make. 1) Keep the flag and try to explain all the time how you are not racist or 2) Remove what is a sign of the horrors and injustices of slavery and have nothing to do with it. I personally can be happy about being from the South without it.


----------



## RobertPGH1981 (Feb 16, 2012)

John Lanier said:


> Whether anyone likes it or not, the flag is associated with racism. Therefore, people have a choice to make. 1) Keep the flag and try to explain all the time how you are not racist or 2) Remove what is a sign of the horrors and injustices of slavery and have nothing to do with it. I personally can be happy about being from the South without it.



I have lived in Pittsburgh practically my whole life, so when I see a confederate flag that is the first thing that pops into my mind. Like John mentioned, the war was fought over much more than just slavery, but to fly a confederate flag in the air makes somebody not familiar with the history think exactly that. Even if I was familiar with all the reasons, and approved them outside of the immoral reasons, I would still not fly a confederate flag in Pittsburgh. The reason is simple, in the north flying a Confederate flag is considered taboo.


----------



## Andres (Feb 16, 2012)

John Lanier said:


> Whether anyone likes it or not, the flag is associated with racism.



Yup.


----------



## Edward (Feb 16, 2012)

RobertPGH1981 said:


> The reason is simple, in the north flying a Confederate flag is considered taboo.


Ah, but you miss the simple pleasures in life that come from sticking your thumb in the collective eye of the politically correct crowd. 

As for me, I'll take a General Jackson over a General Hooker any day of the week.


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Feb 17, 2012)

It is the case that American slavery was the catalyst for the U.S. Civil War. Slavery was the engine that drove states' rights, popular sovereignty, and so forth. And American slavery was inextricably tied up with racism in a way that slavery in antiquity was not. Many critics of slavery, like Clay and Lincoln, supported colonization because they did not think that the slaves could ever live as free on equal terms with whites. 

The Jim Crow laws that came in the wake of Reconstruction showed the prescience of Lincoln's apprehensions: slavery ended, but the racism that attended (and even engendered and fostered) slavery raged on. Racism has been ameliorated in remarkable ways in this country and great progress has been made. Few who have not delved into the literature can appreciate how racist the nineteenth century was, even in the best of men. We have come along more than many realize.

The Presbyterian Church had some of the most articulate criticisms of slavery and some of the most trenchant defenses of slavery. It is a legacy that we should not ignore, both so that we might be thankful for how far we've come and vigilant with respect to continuing progress. 

Peace,
Alan


----------



## JS116 (Feb 17, 2012)

Thank you so much Alan,that's all I was trying to say.I apologize in advance if I seemed to prove otherwise.I used the topic of interracial marriage as a catalyst to engage into the topic, but I guess some people are uncomfortable speaking on it, not sure if that's a good thing although. I believe we especially in the reformed churches can start the process of restoration by being gracious,loving and humble when speaking on it, some churches already have.

For those who wish to avoid the conversation,as a minority expect not a lot of growth of the gospel and church membership in urban areas,if we can't come together to speak and resolve the issues inside the church how can you expect those outside of the church to come in and embrace what we proclaim?This issue is much bigger than the "white church","black church" ,the north and south, united states and foreign countries etc. this is about Christ's church, the local and visible body, as well as the invisible spiritual body.


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Feb 17, 2012)

You have nothing for which to apologize from my perspective, Shawn. I simply, as a historian, wanted to give a bit of perspective and affirm how much of a role racism has played in our history, acknowledge how far we've come, and encourage continued vigilance against racism.

As a Presbyterian I am grieved at the support some of our forefathers gave to slavery and racism. I realize that it was pervasive in the nineteenth century but that still is grievous: it cost us then and still costs us today. As not a few have put it--slavery is America's orignal sin. It is not the only blot on us as a nation, but it is the chief one and it perplexes and further grieves me when I hear, of all people, Christians make light of this history or dismiss it with the wave of a hand. 

Peace,
Alan


----------



## mvdm (Feb 17, 2012)

JS116 said:


> Thank you so much Alan,that's all I was trying to say.I apologize in advance if I seemed to prove otherwise.I used the topic of interracial marriage as a catalyst to engage into the topic, but I guess some people are uncomfortable speaking on it, not sure if that's a good thing although. I believe we especially in the reformed churches can start the process of restoration by being gracious,loving and humble when speaking on it, some churches already have.
> 
> For those who wish to avoid the conversation,as a minority expect not a lot of growth of the gospel and church membership in urban areas,if we can't come together to speak and resolve the issues inside the church how can you expect those outside of the church to come in and embrace what we proclaim?This issue is much bigger than the "white church","black church" ,the north and south, united states and foreign countries etc. this is about Christ's church, the local and visible body, as well as the invisible spiritual body.



Voddie Baucham once related his conversation with a white pastor of a southern church who asked Voddie for advice on how his white church could become more integrated. Voddie then asked the pastor to drive him through the neighborhoods around the town and the church. They observed together that the town was nearly 100% white people. Voddie then turned to the pastor and asked him "now how do you think you are going to integrate your church when there are no black people here?--brother, your task is to minister to the sheep that God has placed under your care!" 

That story had me wondering whether sometimes in our rightful desire to combat the heart issue of hatred toward other races, that we strive for remedies that focus on outward and superficial matters, i.e., trying to artificially "create" integration . In my hometown made up of mostly Dutch ancestry, we have a number of migrant Hispanic workers. There were efforts to "integrate" them into the existing churches, but that bore little fruit. So a group of area churches called an Hispanic minister to plant an Hispanic, spanish speaking church in town. My question: should these area churches rather have continued efforts to "integrate" these workers into their existing "white" churches, or is it understandable/acceptable to have an Hispanic constituted church in town? . I have no definitive opinion on the matter, but am curious as to anyone's thoughts.


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Feb 17, 2012)

Mark:

You raise excellent questions. That they are now being raised and addressed by Reformed and Presbtyerian Churches is important. We've come a long way!

With respect to the last two questions--strive to integrate the Hispanic brethren or start a Reformed Hispanic congregation?--I think that the language issue settles it in favor of the latter. Different congregations need not mean spiritual disunity. The challenge is to recognize the historic racism as well as its present reality and to be thoughtful and intentional in seeking to address it. You all are addressing it and seeking to minister. The solutions will not look the same everywhere, but we must not stick our heads in the sand and deny it. We must minister, as VB rightly commented, where we are to whom God has given us. We must also look to break down barriers, since it is in Christ that walls of division come down, and we are one in Him.

Perhaps I should also say that our Covenanter brethren have a distinguished history in opposing slavery, one from which the broader-streamed Presbyterians would have done well to learn. 

Peace,
Alan


----------



## jwright82 (Feb 17, 2012)

JS116 said:


> Tripel said:
> 
> 
> > JS116 said:
> ...



I live in a southern town where Racism isn't as bad as it was but not dead either. My church would never allow racism in its members but what do we have to do with the hypothetical church down the street who preachs against inter-racial marriage? My point is that my church can only do what my church does, we have no say over other churchs. If we just preach the gospel than the rest will work itself out.


----------



## J. Dean (Feb 17, 2012)

jwright82 said:


> I live in a southern town where Racism isn't as bad as it was but not dead either. My church would never allow racism in its members but what do we have to do with the hypothetical church down the street who preachs against inter-racial marriage? My point is that my church can only do what my church does, we have no say over other churchs. If we just preach the gospel than the rest will work itself out.



Correct. Racism cannot be externally changed by man; it can only be internally rooted out by God. 

Not to stray from the intended topic, but sometimes we forget that we are called to be Christians, not activists. We are salt and light, but we work in the area God gives us, and God does the changing.


----------



## JS116 (Feb 17, 2012)

jwright82 said:


> JS116 said:
> 
> 
> > Tripel said:
> ...



I can see what your saying, but why does a church necessarily have to allow something in that particular church to speak against it?Is it not a christians duty to speak on social injustices that are going on in the culture that are inconsistent with the message of the gospel?Who said we have to be activist to do the work God has called us to do?The apostle Paul consistently instructs the the man of God to pursue righteousness and see to it that others get treated with equality and fairness.Jesus left us here for a reason, to preach and live out the gospel, reflecting the image of Christ.Jesus wasn't standing in the synagogue saying "I just came so you guys can get into heaven, I hope everything works out and eventually someday people will start getting treated fairly."Instead you saw him speaking against the foulness going on and proclaiming the message of mercy and redemption through him.Are we better than our savior?Arent we supposed to thirst for righteousness and mercy of others since Christ lived and died for ours?Yes without the spirit's working it is not possible,but let us remember the spirit works in us and through us.


----------



## Andres (Feb 17, 2012)

JS116 said:


> Is it not a christians duty to speak on social injustices that are going on in the culture that are inconsistent with the message of the gospel?



Yes, it is the Christian's duty, but not the Church's duty. I see a difference.

---------- Post added at 06:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:40 PM ----------




mvdm said:


> Voddie Baucham once related his conversation with a white pastor of a southern church who asked Voddie for advice on how his white church could become more integrated. Voddie then asked the pastor to drive him through the neighborhoods around the town and the church. They observed together that the town was nearly 100% white people. Voddie then turned to the pastor and asked him "now how do you think you are going to integrate your church when there are no black people here?--brother, your task is to minister to the sheep that God has placed under your care!"


----------



## Rufus (Feb 17, 2012)

jwright82 said:


> JS116 said:
> 
> 
> > Tripel said:
> ...



I would argue there may be more racism in areas outside of the south than in the south simply because the lack of ethnic minorities in places like were I live. Simply if you don't live with or know somebody outside of your ethnicity than your going to have an easier time starting to hate the collective group. 

I don't consider the Confederate flag as taboo, but I don't like it when people who have NO connection to the South use it because they call themselves "hicks" (as if the south was made up of "hicks"). If anybody has the right to use the Confederate flag here it is those who were raised in the south, or have some type of connection. I'm a direct descendant of a Confederate soldier, as well as a direct descendent of an American revolutionary war soldier.


----------



## chuckd (Feb 17, 2012)

Let me first say that I would never discourage a person from entering into a relationship with another race. There have been beautiful relationships and strong marriages and most of the posts on here are great to combat racism.

There are still legitimate arguments to warn a person from entering into a relationship with another race. Some races have vast cultural differences and to say "all humanity is the same, what's the difference" turns a blind eye to the huge potential problems that could occur. We need to be careful and not swing the pendulum too far to the other side and actively encourage interracial relationships just so we don't seem racist.

From a popular cultural book on Chinese:
_Some Americans fall in love with a Chinese man or woman, get married, and (sometimes) live happily ever after. Yet, cautionary words are in order. The reason is not that the process of establishing a romantic attachment with a Chinese is difficult. On the contrary, it is too easy.

Courtship practices among people in Western countries are based on the assumption that it is right and good for a young person to be involved in a series of romantic attachments over several years before finally settling into marriage. This assumption is the basis for dating, going steady, and even living together. The rationale for serial romances is that the young person will be far better able to make the choice of a long-term partner if he or she has had previous experiences with a range of temporary partners. Since the sexual revolution of the 1960s, Western romances have often included sexual relations.

This typically Western set of assumptions does not operate in the culture of the Chinese. Furthermore, these assumptions have a high potential for getting foreigners into great difficulty. The Chinese most emphatically do not share the idea that wide experience of any sort with members of the opposite sex is a desirable precursor to long-term commitment. Any young person who is seen as sharing his or her affections with a series of others is viewed thereafter as an undesirable romantic partner, someone that serious, responsible members of the opposite sex had better avoid. Although this attitude is beginning to change, it remains strongly ingrained in many Chinese.

Just as same-sex friendships are virtually always maintained for life among the Chinese, so are heterosexual attachments. Once a romantic relationship is acknowledged, it is expected by the partners (and their acquaintances) to be permanent. Romantic physical contact of any sort is an acknowledgment of strong attachment. This includes not only sexual intercourse, but also kissing, petting, and hugging. Even mere hand-holding conveys serious romantic intent among traditional-thinking Chinese.

The danger in Chinese-Western romances is that the person from the West, acting on typical Western assumptions, will demonstrate affection for his or her Chinese friend by a physical act of endearment. This may be one that, to the Westerner, seems quite innocent of deep meaning, such as kissing. It may be accompanied by a verbal expression of affection that also carries no deep meaning in the West. But acts such as these usually send a clear message to the Chinese, which may be paraphrased as “This is the love of my life!” Instant bonding may result.

Most foreigners are terrified when they discover that the person with whom they thought they were having a casual, if affectionate, date is now eager to discuss the course of their lives together. They are mortified when they find that their efforts to extricate themselves, albeit gently, result in major psychological trauma and perhaps even the involvement of Chinese relatives incensed at the idea that the respectability of a family member is about to be forever tarnished.

Of course, the foreigner may seriously intend a permanent attachment leading to marriage. If so, the Chinese partner’s family members may be pleased about this—but not necessarily. Traditionally, the Chinese have had a deep fear of miscegenation. And the distrust of foreigners engendered by historical episodes of foreign occupation as well as by indoctrination during the Cultural Revolution still lingers in the minds of some. So the prospect of marriage to a non-Chinese person may bring threats of disownment from parents. The Chinese partner in such a marriage may be stigmatized by friends. So the foreigner who contemplates marriage to a Chinese would be wise to determine the extent, if any, to which objections may arise before taking any unalterable steps.

Finally, we offer two other important notes of caution. Since China began opening to the outside world, prostitution has emerged in the coastal cities. Tourists and businessmen staying at hotels sometimes receive calls from young women offering sexual services. We strongly advise against using these services. Prostitution and the use of prostitutes are criminal offenses in the PRC. There are cases of foreign businessmen who, because they became involved with prostitutes, landed in jail, were victims of blackmail, or had confidential documents stolen from their hotel rooms.

Homosexuality is viewed by most Chinese as a low and contemptible practice. A charge of homosexuality can ruin the life of a Chinese, even to the point of his or her being banished forever from contact with family and friends. Do not expect any Chinese to accept this overwhelming risk._


----------



## Kim G (Feb 17, 2012)

chuckd said:


> Let me first say that I would never discourage a person from entering into a relationship with another race. There have been beautiful relationships and strong marriages and most of the posts on here are great to combat racism.
> 
> There are still legitimate arguments to warn a person from entering into a relationship with another race. Some races have vast cultural differences and to say "all humanity is the same, what's the difference" turns a blind eye to the huge potential problems that could occur. We need to be careful and not swing the pendulum too far to the other side and actively encourage interracial relationships just so we don't seem racist.



I get what you're saying, but it's not the same thing. You're talking about people with different worldviews based on their location and culture, not people in the same location and culture with the same worldview who happen to have a different color of skin. For example, a black American will have more "worldview" in common with a white American than with a black African. A woman may look Korean but may have been born and bred in America. She shouldn't be encouraged to marry a Korean from Korea just because they look similar. I've noticed, even in marriages between those who have the same skin color, there can be a lot of tension if one comes from a poor family and one from a wealthy family, or one from a religious family and one from an athiest family, or one from a happy family and one from a broken and abusive family. NONE of these things has anything to do with the racial conflict.


----------



## Andres (Feb 17, 2012)

Kim G said:


> chuckd said:
> 
> 
> > Let me first say that I would never discourage a person from entering into a relationship with another race. There have been beautiful relationships and strong marriages and most of the posts on here are great to combat racism.
> ...


----------



## Rich Koster (Feb 17, 2012)

I'm a German- Slovak American mut married to a English, Scottish & Cherokee mut...in Christ. If she should die before me, I have two races to chose from for a new wife. The living ( Christian) and the dead ( Non-Christian). Any cultural nuance would only determine what type of yummy foods may appear at the table, that we give thanks for. Likewise, If I should die first, she would be free to marry any man ......in Christ. It's a blemish we have to deal with, that some folks just don't understand proper racism. I also understand that neither of us should chose from option two ( the Un- Christian) when one of us goes into glory before the other  .


----------



## chuckd (Feb 17, 2012)

Kim G said:


> I get what you're saying, but it's not the same thing. You're talking about people with different worldviews based on their location and culture, not people in the same location and culture with the same worldview who happen to have a different color of skin. For example, a black American will have more "worldview" in common with a white American than with a black African. A woman may look Korean but may have been born and bred in America. She shouldn't be encouraged to marry a Korean from Korea just because they look similar. I've noticed, even in marriages between those who have the same skin color, there can be a lot of tension if one comes from a poor family and one from a wealthy family, or one from a religious family and one from an athiest family, or one from a happy family and one from a broken and abusive family. NONE of these things has anything to do with the racial conflict.



Well said. Would you council these people of the potential tensions that could arise between poor/wealthy, religious/atheist, happy/broken? If so, I think we must do the same between races, even if they are from the same country like the U.S. It's not like immigrants immediately adopt the host country's culture, even several generations down. My point was that vast differences in race (and wealth, family, culture, etc.) must be addressed and not swept under the rug as "you're the same, get over it."


----------



## Raine (Feb 17, 2012)

I think JS116 has raised some really good questions. I understand that the purpose of the church is not social activism, but it does seem like Christians as a group are often quick to jump into social activism on things like gay marriage or abortion, but have too often remained silent on racism. Even worse, many churches have taken the wrong side and supported racism in various forms. It's wrong to ignore ignore it and I do think that we should address it more openly, because there are still people who claim to be both racist and Christian and doing so brings reproach on the name of Christ and the church and goes against the teaching of the Bible that we are all of one blood through Christ.

I was raised racist, and my family tried to use religion as a justification for racism. I knew many people who even used a twisted form of Christianity to spread racism and to teach the falsehood that the Bible condoned racism, and my husband and I were members of a church that taught that interracial dating was a sin (this was less than 10 years ago). Almost every KKK member I've known (over 100, including several leaders) has claimed to be a Christian - a few were ordained ministers, and some would claim that they were doing God's work. To me, turning a blind eye to this and overlooking racism, especially from those who profess Christ, is far more serious than most of us take it.

Yes, it takes God to change hearts and this will come about through the gospel but that does not mean that we do not have a responsibility, as individuals, to speak out against racism and to counter the lie that it is somehow acceptable within the church or in society as a whole. I think some people are afraid to speak up because older people they respect may hold racist views, or because they think the problem will just go away, but it won't. There are still young people being raised to think that hatred is acceptable and that race is some sort of determinant of worth or character, and it is just as wrong to ignore those ideas and let them stand as it is to ignore any other false and destructive idea.

If people think that it is acceptable to protest or speak out against abortion and gay marriage, but is overly activist or going to far to speak out against racism, then they need to examine their reasoning. All of the above are sinful, but racism can be even more destructive and insidious because so many people have wrongly tried to justify it by hiding under a cloak of Christianity. If we have an obligation to oppose moral wrongs, then it seems like we should start with the one that has been given the most quarter among us.


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Feb 17, 2012)

Raine:

I thank God for your strong and clear witness to us. I am glad that you chose to speak up as you did and to share this with us. 

I believe that you are right and if the Lord, to whom we cry day and night for revival and renewal in His church, chooses to bless us with such, our confession of sin will include what you bring before us. The American church has much to confess in this regard. May the Lord be pleased to break us all so that we mourn for our sin and know the balm that comes to the broken-hearted.

We heard a marvelous sermon at our General Assembly about how we need to be the "Church of the Broken Hearted." What you spoke to, Raine, is no small part of that. May God truly have mercy upon us and grant us such broken hearts.

Peace,
Alan


----------



## Kim G (Feb 18, 2012)

chuckd said:


> Well said. Would you council these people of the potential tensions that could arise between poor/wealthy, religious/atheist, happy/broken?



Yes, I would council these people because their family differences could cause problems.



> If so, I think we must do the same between races, even if they are from the same country like the U.S. It's not like immigrants immediately adopt the host country's culture, even several generations down.



You're not getting it. Once again, you're mixing race with culture. If a third-generation American who looks Japanese marries a third-generation American who looks Russian, there is nothing to council just on the basis of their appearance. They are different "races" but from the same culture. However, if a third-generation American who looks Japanese wants to marry a first-generation American from Japan, then they need to be cautioned because their worldviews are so different by virtue of their different cultural upbringings.



> My point was that vast differences in race (and wealth, family, culture, etc.) must be addressed and not swept under the rug as "you're the same, get over it."



And my point is that you need to leave race out of it completely. RACE has nothing to do with it. CULTURE is the issue. Worldview is the issue. Not race. Not the color of someone's skin or their hair or where their ancestors came from many years ago.


----------



## J. Dean (Feb 18, 2012)

One other thing, just to set the record straight: the United States is not the only country in which racism was (or still can be) a problem.


----------



## JS116 (Feb 18, 2012)

I don't know what else to say...I simply cannot convince anyone that racism still exists and is alive and in the church. I think it's a real problem when the *world* can see that racism still exists and can address it faster then the church can. To be quite honest, I could careless if i'm liked because I choose to speak on the subject of race,the call of the gospel isn't a likeable message. I will not sit back and watch _anyone_ get treated unjustly in Christ's name and neither would the disciples. If you can, I would highly exhort you to examine your heart in the light of scripture. What i'm not looking for is a one size fits all fix, some churches have it more deeply rooted than others,while some would even see it to be non-existing or not even to be tolerated in their church and I commend them for their efforts to see unity and equality within the body. No matter what your standing is, I urge you and even myself to always be on guard against it as well as other sins, because it can easily creep in unnoticed and destroy.

Grace and Peace,

Shawn


----------



## Rufus (Feb 18, 2012)

Rich Koster said:


> If she should die before me, I have two races to chose from for a new wife. The living ( Christian) and the dead ( Non-Christian).



Marrying zombies is strictly forbidden.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Feb 18, 2012)

There are _multitude_ ways that people create "in-out" groups.

It so happens that in this country a super-strong divide was fostered from the very beginning. It began (I daresay) with the Euro-colonials vs. the established inhabitants. Both groups viewed the other as aliens. Conflicts ensued.

The importation of African-slaves (beginning with the Colonials, up and down the seaboard) was extremely damaging. People ripped from their home culture to live for and serve an alien population, that did not deign to assimilate them. Indentured servants could earn their way to freedom; slaves were chattel; but worse, there was an "infinite gulf fixed" between the African slave and his ancestral home and culture.

Today, most of us simply can't fathom what this was like. In that world, all that was left to such people was to bond with fellow slaves. We can thank God that many such people were brought to faith in Christ, but too often it was in spite of the indifference of their masters and caretakers. Perhaps it was the daunting size of the problem the Euros had created for themselves, but in any case their inertia in addressing it only makes the small inroads that were made stand out conspicuously for good. Which means that much evil was left.

When manumission was given (and there was a sizable population of African freedmen in Colonial America), still there was a cultural divide that continued unaddressed by the dominant group. Churches were begun _for or by_ blacks, e.g. the AME in the aftermath of the War of Independence. Meanwhile, the very obvious divide based largely on skin-color/appearance and undergird by institutional, intergenerational slavery continued.

The eventual Civil War did not erase the divide. Indeed, the white northerner-abolitionists who ostensibly fought against the white southern-slavers turned out to be (if possible!) even more committed to the group-divide than the defeated southerners.



Unfortunately, even this brief rehearsal can do nothing more than broad-brush the whole spectrum, and fails to do justice to either the highs or the lows of the reality. So here's the bottom lines, as I see them:

1) We must all acknowledge the group-divisions of the past (and present), recognizing that while some distinctions are fine and even inevitable, sin pushes us into evil exhibitions of the in-out model.

2) Sinful bigotry exists in every group.

3) Bigotry is only one of many sins that define humanity.

4) Spend most of your energy addressing your own sins as you become aware of them, and your next greatest efforts on the sins that are observable close-to-home, where you can make a personal impact. Elite-driven, mass "crusades" are inevitably the worst sort of flops. People resent being told (out of the blue, by a self- or elite-appointed prophet) what or how to think and backed up by punitive powers, especially on the basis of some alien source of authority.

5) If someone feels today like they are still "oppressed" or "victims," despite "progress" and "water-under-the-bridge," *you and I just need to back off*, and give them their space and the freedom to work through those issues. Who am I to tell that person how to feel about his personal background, or just his ancestry? Encourage that person, give him "data" if he will receive such from you; but don't assume that history is on your side, or that you have all the facts.

6) Start identifying MOST with the only "in-group" that matters: Christians. Be breaking or loosening your old, inviolable "ties that bind." Be thinking and feeling the pain of the persecuted, in those countries with odd-names, strange-languages, and a-typical colored/facial-featured people--people who would otherwise be "aliens" to you, but for the common grace-of-God-in-Christ you share. You have more in common with them than the fellow-American, unbelieving neighbor you've known since childhood.

Personally, I've found it very liberating to be divorced from my old nationalism, regionalism, elitism-of-all-kinds. When you start to feel "oppressed" by the world, or to feel "alienation" from the mass of people (society/culture) around you, you see and feel things you never saw before. I won't pretend to be able to feel what it is like to be "Black in the USA," I'm not entitled to join that group, given who I am and all my background. But I am able to experience what it is like to "feel oppressed" by the same or similar groups that many African-Americans (who choose to self-identify together) are alienated from. If I can't overcome individual or group rejection of me (based on _perceived_ group-affiliation), I can still sympathize with the underlying causes of that hostility.

It might be nice to come together with groups other than the ones I fit in, either to make a justifiable common cause; or just to be able to speak to each other to learn what unites us, even while accepting our differences. But it isn't always possible to overcome the barriers that exist--natural, or erected by men of either side--prison walls or defensive walls. The Christian route to penetration is weakness and perceived vulnerability. Once inside, then we can try to "be all things to all men," and make connections based on our shared humanity, our shared sinfulness and fallenness, and the shared Savior of a New Humanity.

When the people you are trying to reach can see that you knowingly share something with them at the deepest level, and you actually identify with them and love them, their hearts open to you. But the more indissolubly you are connected with your culturally "parent" associations--biases hidden even to yourself--your efforts will be necessarily (inadvertently?) tainted with those contaminating influences. How can the "target" culture fail to feel the mercenary-quality of your salesmanship? "What's in it for you, or your's, pal?"



May God aid us in overcoming both our "majority" and our "minority" cultural biases and elitism, subordinating all of those things (even the good in them) to our devotion to the One Mediator: Prophet, Priest, and King of an alternative people, of another world.

"Let goods and kindred go--
This mortal life also.
..........
His Kingdom is forever."


----------



## J. Dean (Feb 18, 2012)

JS116 said:


> I don't know what else to say...I simply cannot convince anyone that racism still exists and is alive and in the church. I think it's a real problem when the *world* can see that racism still exists and can address it faster then the church can. To be quite honest, I could careless if i'm liked because I choose to speak on the subject of race,the call of the gospel isn't a likeable message. I will not sit back and watch _anyone_ get treated unjustly in Christ's name and neither would the disciples. If you can, I would highly exhort you to examine your heart in the light of scripture. What i'm not looking for is a one size fits all fix, some churches have it more deeply rooted than others,while some would even see it to be non-existing or not even to be tolerated in their church and I commend them for their efforts to see unity and equality within the body. No matter what your standing is, I urge you and even myself to always be on guard against it as well as other sins, because it can easily creep in unnoticed and destroy.
> 
> Grace and Peace,
> 
> Shawn


+10


----------



## chuckd (Feb 18, 2012)

Kim G said:


> And my point is that you need to leave race out of it completely. RACE has nothing to do with it. CULTURE is the issue. Worldview is the issue. Not race. Not the color of someone's skin or their hair or where their ancestors came from many years ago.



Ah. We simply have different definitions of "race." I don't see race as simply the color of your skin, it also includes ancestry and ethnicity (which includes a common culture). And I think even a third generation immigrant will have their (all included) race, not just the color of their skin. If they don't, their parents will. We see that black, white, Chinese, Mexican, etc. ethnicities in America are unique even though many of these races immigrated several hundred years ago. I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing though. The world is full of "same, but different" dichotomies. I just think the "different" should be addressed when entering marriage.


----------



## Kim G (Feb 18, 2012)

chuckd said:


> Ah. We simply have different definitions of "race."



And this shows why it's beneficial for everyone in a discussion to make sure terms are being used the same way.  Thanks for the clarification!


----------



## thbslawson (Feb 19, 2012)

JS116 said:


> I don't know what else to say...I simply cannot convince anyone that racism still exists and is alive and in the church.



Shawn,

I'm convinced! I'm just joining the conversation today. Not only am I convinced, but I've seen it first-hand many many times in the church, even from some ordained PCA elders. I'm sickened by it, offended, and have even confronted people about it. I've been in churches where it's okay to criticize filling up your car with gas on the Lord's Day, but one dare not talk of the sin of racism. So I get it. I see it, and I'm on board with you.

But there is hope. We are part of a multi-racial congregation in Jackson, MS, about 30% Black, 68% White and 2% other. Our pastor, Mike Campbell (an African American) will be the first to tell you that the reconciliation that we see coming about at the church is because of the gospel. The church does explicitly mention "racial reconciliation" in it's purpose and vision, but this takes place through the preaching of the gospel.

I'm still learning and repenting of hatefulness in my past. I'm convinced that racism and prejudice are like any sins; if we're honest, we never conquer them perfectly, but we confess, repent and do fight. And it is my hope and prayer that my children will never grow up having to "overcome" and "undo" so much of sinful racist tendencies that I grew up with.

I definitely think this is an issue that needs to be addressed by the church and have the searing light of the gospel shined upon it. I'm thankful that some strides are being made, especially in the Deep South.


----------



## Pilgrim (Feb 19, 2012)

Sadly, there was a Justice of the Peace near where I live who refused to marry an interracial couple about a year or two ago. Regardless of the law, his practice was to refer them elsewhere due to the "challenges" that would ensue from such a liaison. Apparently this went on for a year or so until a couple decided to go to the news media and filed suit. He quickly resigned after the Governor and many others called for him to resignation. 

I'm surprised that the curse of Ham hasn't been brought up. That's been used to justify slavery and racism in general, often by those who have no use for the Bible otherwise. I don't remember where I saw it, but recently I saw a woman post that she had recently heard a sermon in which the preacher asserted that that interpretation was the correct one. If I'm not mistaken, some have traced this interpretation as having originated with Mslms in Medieval times. 

I'll also note that while some may have issues with Asians and Hispanics, for many whites the prospect of interracial marriage between blacks and whites is particularly frowned upon, with some professing Christians preferring their children to marry another white who gives no evidence of being a Christian as opposed to marrying a black Christian. But some of the same people could care less about their child marrying an Asian. 

As hinted at above, (although the question if interracial marriage would probably be looked at the same way by many) there are also clear differences between the perception of black African immigrants and African Americans that are the descendants of slaves. In many cases due to cultural, historical and other reasons, relations between whites and recent immigrants are often better than those between the descendants of slaves and recent immigrants as well as whites. There's less cultural and historical "baggage" there. 

With regard to churches, it sometimes cuts both ways, although obviously the dynamic is different with regard to privilege, etc. I've known of blacks who don't want to be in an integrated church or who at the least prefer to remain in the black church for various reasons. I saw one woman comment on Anthony Bradley's blog that she basically hated white people and hated having to deal with them during the week and considered church to be a refuge from having to deal with white people. (I have no idea whether the feeling was justified in any sense or what she may have had to put up with on a regular basis.) In my hometown, there is a black Baptist church that is pastored by a Nigerian immigrant. After he took over, it has grown rapidly into sort of a mini megachurch, at least for that area. He started inviting white preachers into the pulpit from time to time, most if not all being charismatic/pentecostal. This plus his messages on local TV led to whites attending and joining what had been a relatively small church just a few years prior. He said he knew this would probably cause a "Black Out" (i.e. some black members leaving the church) but that he thought it was the right thing to do regardless. 

While some of what he posts leaves me shaking my head, I think Anthony Bradley has some good thoughts on these issues. I saw him write once that in most cases having an integrated church is going to necessitate having minorities in leadership. That may account for the success at Redeemer PCA in Jackson, MS that Thomas noted. If it can be successful in Jackson then it would seem that it can be done anywhere.


----------



## JS116 (Feb 19, 2012)

Exactly Chris,I think you hit on some of the main points that I wanted addressed. I also think you hit a VERY good point when you said the "black" churches not wanting to be integrated into "white" churches either.I see a problem in the black community and churches, black liberation theology and the social gospel has had devastating a stronghold on the black community over the years. I agree with Dr. Anthony Bradley on some things and disagree with other things, we don't always have to end up with the same conclusion to realize there is a problem.

As a black male who grew up and lives in the suburbs,who loves studying theology,interested in academics and has had(and still does) many white friends and even dated white girls,I generally did not get accepted in a lot of black circles for it.I am considered an outcast by some of my own family members because I choose to fellowship at a predominantly white church, I chose to date girls outside of my race, I choose to hang out with some kids who aren't that culturally in-tune, I'm repeatedly told I am attributing to tearing down the black community because I have to conviction to not stick to race, but my faith.I am honestly fed up with being captive to the lies society feeds us. If being "black" means I cant befriend who I want ,marry who I want, go to church where I want , work at where I want, live where I want,preventing me from doing the will God has called me to do without having people trying to impose their unbiblical,eisegetic,prideful,man-centered,sinful opinions upon me, then by ALL means count me out. That is with any race, I have talked on various occasions to brothers and sisters from all different races who feel the same way, I _refuse_ and will not hold on to *ANY* form of tradition,practice or teaching that is inconsistent with the character of the triune God,his scripture and gospel message.You can see this in the new YRR movement and resurgence,while some may say their misguided, they are doing it with good intentions and seeking to please God and not man. 

But some will ignore us,some will ignore the problems, refuse to speak on it,tell us "settle down" it's not that big of a deal, but only if you knew.You may not see it because people can be real good with masking their heart and feelings,that doesn't mean it's not there alive and well waiting to devour, and it will continue to try to secretly ensnare Christians until we expose and stand together to fight it. God has and is doing great things, years ago it wouldn't have been possible for a black male like me to even talk to you guys,fellowship with you, build a real friendship, work with you and a lot of other things.Some people till this day still don't agree with the equality we have, but the thing is God's will is getting done not ours and I cant sit back and not give him praise and glory for what he has done not only in our hearts but outwardly in the world. Just as covenant Israel I will remember the Lord all of my days and give him praise for what he has done through out history, even if at times it seems a messy one he is still working things together for the good of his people.While I don't too much care for some of the overly black liberated dispensational teachings of Martin Luther King Jr,while he may have gotten his destination coordinates mixed up, he started from biblical starting point.


----------



## Tim (Feb 19, 2012)

Pilgrim said:


> it has grown rapidly into sort of a mini megachurch



A _mini mega_ church? Wouldn't the mini cancel out the mega?


----------



## py3ak (Feb 19, 2012)

Alan D. Strange said:


> Perhaps I should also say that our Covenanter brethren have a distinguished history in opposing slavery, one from which the broader-streamed Presbyterians would have done well to learn.



I came across a piece by Alexander M'Leod, who pastored the Reformed Presbyterian congregation in NYC at the beginning of the 19th century, which I thought I would share as a good illustration of this opposition to slavery:
Negro slavery unjustifiable: a discourse - Alexander M'Leod - Google Books


----------



## Pilgrim (Feb 20, 2012)

Tim said:


> Pilgrim said:
> 
> 
> > it has grown rapidly into sort of a mini megachurch
> ...



Well, the church growth gurus etc. have certain criteria for what qualifies as a megachurch. Wiki says it's 2000 or more in weekend attendance. I don't know if that particular congregation is or was consistently at that level or not. It might _only_ be 1000. Or maybe it's not even at that level. Regardless, for our purposes here as well as for that area (a small metropolitan area) it's mega.

---------- Post added at 01:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:04 PM ----------

Here are some links to articles that may be of some interest or of some help. They are by a Presbyterian pastor, Bob Vincent, who has been concerned with this issue for many years. 

Conservative Presbyterian Tensions

Studies on Various Topics (Scroll down to "Racism") 

Do note that Bob is one of the original "Reformed Charismatics" or "Charismatic Calvinists" and has been since the early 1980's, way before it became cool. Thus this linkage does not constitute an endorsement of everything on the site. That notwithstanding, I think there's a lot of good material there about the Reformed faith as well as other issues such as Oneness Pentecostalism. (Prior to that he was a Covenanter and RPCNA pastor! I think that may still influence his political thought to some degree.)



---------- Post added at 01:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:23 PM ----------

I think it would be an understatement to say that Dr. Malcolm Yarnell of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary wouldn't qualify for admission to the PB, (Nor would he wish to apply, I'm sure.) But this article he posted two years ago is very good with regard to pastoral challenges, etc. Malcolm Yarnell: A Southern Baptist's Pilgrimage From Racism


----------



## Tripel (Feb 20, 2012)

JS116 said:


> I will not sit back and watch anyone get treated unjustly in Christ's name and neither would the disciples.



And we all agree with you. 



> If you can, I would highly exhort you to examine your heart in the light of scripture.



You appear to be speaking as if there has been some sort of disagreement in this thread on racism. Hasn't everyone agreed with you that racism is an awful thing and should be firmly opposed by the church? 



JS116 said:


> I think it's a real problem when the world can see that racism still exists and can address it faster then the church can



Can you explain this? I see racism both in and outside of the church. In what way is the world addressing it in a "fast" manner, while the church is not?


----------



## JS116 (Feb 20, 2012)

Tripel said:


> You appear to be speaking as if there has been some sort of disagreement in this thread on racism. Hasn't everyone agreed with you that racism is an awful thing and should be firmly opposed by the church?



Hello Daniel,

I wasn't speaking to anyone on this board directly, nobody I am aware of has said anything in this discussion that has necessarily disagreed that it doesn't exist.I will say,some may disagree on how we are to handle it although,but I'm not tied up on that.The target group I was more specifically aiming for were those who would read this on the board and off,my apologies if I portrayed it that way.




> Can you explain this? I see racism both in and outside of the church. In what way is the world addressing it in a "fast" manner, while the church is not?



I said this statement because I see the media has always been all over the topic of racism,from the racist comments of Jeremiah Wright in the Obama campaign,all the way to the Kentucky pastor who refused to marry the interracial couple and more events that you can look up.These are all instances of churches that refuse to speak up on their racist positions *until* exposed and acknowledged by the media.What i'm trying to exhort is for christians to always be on guard for these attitudes and behaviors especially when it's been condemned by the text.We all can fall victim to it,so that's why we must constantly battle sin.I just wanted to share my pain and my heart over how much division it has called within the body, that is all.I commend the efforts I have seen and read about by the PCA,OPC and other reformed denominations who have said they repent as denomination for any injustices of their forefathers and also any individuals who did these shameful acts in Christ's name.My heart rejoices at the fact I have brothers and sisters in the Lord that are going to be fighting racism as well as other things unconditionally to make a stronger and unified church for the glory of God.


----------



## BJClark (Feb 21, 2012)

John Lanier;




> Being from Alabama, I understand the whole Southern pride thing and I understand that the Civil War (or the War of Northern Agression if you so choose) wasn't fought about slavery alone. I get it. However, I never really understood the other view on the flag until hearing the perspective of someone that understood the other view. My best friend is African American. I don't think that Shawn is stereotyping anybody with what he said. I understand that the flag doesn't make one a racist. Truth is though that the confederate flag cannot ever be separated from the horrible acts of slavery. Whether anyone likes it or not, the flag is associated with racism. Therefore, people have a choice to make. 1) Keep the flag and try to explain all the time how you are not racist or 2) Remove what is a sign of the horrors and injustices of slavery and have nothing to do with it. I personally can be happy about being from the South without it.



Interesting, I wonder why many don't see the American flag the same way, given it was the Flag that flew over the ships that brought the slaves to America on--but that is totally off topic.

as far as racism and inter-ethnic marriages..I have heard more blacks (in my area of the south) complain more about blacks dating outside their ethnicity than I have any other group. Even in California in the early 1970's I saw a black family shun their son and his family because he married someone not black and their children were mixed ethnicity.

I personally haven't witnessed it in churches here or other places I've lived...but is it at all possible that they aren't really being 'discriminated against' ? 
Have they considered it may not be about the color of their skin? Or the fact they are married to someone outside their ethnicity? 

Could it be a personal perception? Thinking other people are 'thinking' it??

I know people who 'think' that because they don't wear designer clothes to church or don't live in a particular neighborhood that those who do 'look down on them'
when in reality they don't..it's just their own internal thoughts they have based on how they were raised to think about themselves or others based on what they hear in the media--they haven't learned the value they have as people..not based on their money or supposed worldly financial status..it's like it's ingrained that they are some how not equals to them merely because of outward appearances--when in reality, it has more to do with their own perception not just of others, but of themselves that causes the issues they have inside or the perception they think others have of them.

One of my son's friends has a huge 'skin color' chip on his shoulder thinking anyone who wasn't black was out to get him (now how they played into he and my son who is white--being friends...never really made since--I mean, if all whites are out to get him and my son is white..then why didn't it translate over to that or any of his other white friends???) When I tried to point out that inconsistency...he didn't grasp he was being inconsistent in what he said he believed to be true and his actions.


----------



## thbslawson (Feb 22, 2012)

Bobbi Clark,

I'd refer you to this article.

http://www.aolnews.com/2011/04/08/46-percent-of-mississippi-republicans-want-interracial-marriage-banned/

The facts in the article have been verified. It's still very much a problem in some areas of the deep South.


----------



## BJClark (Feb 22, 2012)

thbslawson;



> The facts in the article have been verified. It's still very much a problem in some areas of the deep South.



Okay, that's in Mississippi, here is another poll that says the opposite based on a larger polling group across many states not just one. So do we go by the larger group of Americans polled, or by one small sector of one state to make such a general assumption, that there is an extremely large racism issue? While I agree some people are racist, that doesn't mean all of those in the Mississippi poll are racist..some may just disagree with inter-ethnic marriages because they want to preserve their skin color is that racist??

Record-High 86% Approve of Black-White Marriages
Ninety-six percent of blacks, 84% of whites approve

Record-High 86% Approve of Black-White Marriages

However, here is an article about black women who only desire to marry black men (they only want chocolate babies--does this make them racist??)

An Interracial Fix for Black Marriage - WSJ.com

Your views on interracial marriages - CNN

But lets look at the numbers within the Mississippi poll..

46% of those polled--well, that means that 54% of those polled felt differently..15% percent were unsure, so that leaves 40% who have no problem with it.



> The company asked 400 Republican primary voters about their preferences for candidates for state and national offices, as well as their views on interracial marriage.



So lets look at the numbers..they called about 400 people in Mississippi and asked their opinion on this topic...

15% or about 60 of those 400 are unsure what they think about inter-ethnic marriages
40% or about 160 of those 400 have no problem with it..
46% or about 180 people disagree with it..

So of the 400--more than half are either unsure or have no problem with it..so why focus on the 160 who have an issue with it? Why not be thankful that more than half of those polled are either unsure or have no problem with it?


----------



## Pergamum (Feb 22, 2012)

I don't really have much to contribute on this thread, but here is a personal anecdote that just happened to me:

My son came home two days ago from playing with his friends and asked, "Am I a whitey." This seems to be the first time he has outwardly noted the issue of color. 

When he plays with all of his lowland tribal friends, he seems impervious to race, and this race-consciousness only began to happen after a large influx of tribal children from the mountains occurred (resulting in the lowlanders and the highlanders largely segregating their own play, with Noah not sure what to do, seeing the play groups split sort of into two). An interesting dynamic.


----------



## JS116 (Feb 22, 2012)

BJClark said:


> hile I agree some people are racist, that doesn't mean all of those in the Mississippi poll are racist



You have to be real careful when using polls, percentages and statistics,especially ones presented by the media.Sometimes they don't clearly define what they mean, ex. which type of interracial marriage are that they speaking of? People of the same color but different heritage or nationality?People of same ethnicity but slightly different variation of color?Bottom line is I believe it's safe to say,we've finally come to an agreement that racism still exists inside and outside of the church no matter the "color"it's a problem we have to expect never to be fully tamed perfectly(at least on this earth),but is one to always to confront and fight against.




BJClark said:


> One of my son's friends has a huge 'skin color' chip on his shoulder thinking anyone who wasn't black was out to get him



You will have a couple of those who wish to take the "cry wolf" approach with racism.You see guys like Jesse Jackson,Al Sharpton etc. who feel their need to relate EVERY social issue to racism, this is surely not the case and _most _african americans I know of disagree with them and their approach to social issues.Even with those instances,we should never downplay or belittle a charge of racism,always keeping in mind that their has been and still is legitimate cases of injustice.


----------



## GulfCoast Presbyterian (Feb 22, 2012)

thbslawson said:


> Bobbi Clark,
> 
> I'd refer you to this article.
> 
> ...



I suspected, before I even looked, that the poll cited was done by the infamous "Pulblic Policiy Polling." I would trust the methodology of that group about as far as I can throw an anvil with no hands.


----------



## thbslawson (Feb 22, 2012)

Mark,

I would challenge you not to write it off though simply because of the source. From my experience I wouldn't doubt that statistic to be true or close to it.


----------



## athanatos (Feb 22, 2012)

BJClark said:


> So of the 400--more than half are either unsure or have no problem with it..*so why focus on the 160*[sic] who have an issue with it?


Because they didn't find everyone in Mississippi who felt that way. They found a small sample of a greater number. The poll's purpose is to be representative, a sample of the whole population. We're not focusing on 180, we'd be focusing on how prevalent it is -- almost HALF OF MISSISSIPPI is_ sure _they are against it!

And if Mississippi felt this way, how do Louisiana or Alabama residents feel on this issue?

I'm in an interracial relationship. My girlfriend was adopted from Bangladesh at the age of 1yr, so she speaks and acts just like a Grand Rapids, MI Christian. I hope some day to marry her. So some of this is a little relevant to me.


----------



## JS116 (Feb 22, 2012)

athanatos said:


> I'm in an interracial relationship. My girlfriend was adopted from Bangladesh at the age of 1yr, so she speaks and acts just like a Grand Rapids, MI Christian. I hope some day to marry her. So some of this is a little relevant to me.



I am happy to hear that Jonathan, this is another reason why I started this thread.I want to encourage those who are in interracial relationships/marriages from all backgrounds.Like I said before years ago, a lot of these things were prohibited lawfully and it's a great privilege for this upcoming generation to get to witness God breaking down these worldly barriers to bring in people from all races and nations into one family, under one savior.


----------



## GulfCoast Presbyterian (Feb 22, 2012)

thbslawson said:


> Mark,
> 
> I would challenge you not to write it off though simply because of the source. From my experience I wouldn't doubt that statistic to be true or close to it.



Thomas: From MY experience living in Mississippi for over 40 years, being involved in polling, and having been involved in Republican politics and lobbying, I would very seriously doubt that statistic to be true, even without the very dubious (In my humble opinion) polling organization.

---------- Post added at 12:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:59 AM ----------




athanatos said:


> They found a small sample of a greater number. The poll's purpose is to be representative, a sample of the whole population. We're not focusing on 180, we'd be focusing on how prevalent it is -- almost HALF OF MISSISSIPPI is_ sure _they are against it!



Actually, no. Step back and consider, if one believes the "poll" is valid, then about 50% of folks who actually showed up to vote in the Republican primary are "against it." Not 50% of "Mississippians." Mississippi is certainly not monolithic republican even in the caucasian population. Nor do most of the roughly 40% of Mississippi's population that are African Americans tend to vote in the republican primary. 

If you were to design a poll that gave a "wee" bit too much weight to much older caucasians in certain parts of the state, the numbers would skew even higher for opposition to IR marriage. If one designed a poll that gave a "wee" bit too much weight to folks in big college towns (big is relative here), you could make the numbers skew very low. Its not terribly hard to do. This is not to say there are not racists in Mississippi. It would be silly to think otherwise, and racism exists everywhere, unfortunately. However, it is my opinion that any poll that attempts to paint roughly 50% of Mississippi republican voters in that light is flawed, if not skewed. If you took that poll 30 years ago, with perfect methodology, it might not surprise me. 

Peace.


----------



## BJClark (Feb 22, 2012)

JS



> You have to be real careful when using polls, percentages and statistics,especially ones presented by the media.Sometimes they don't clearly define what they mean, ex. which type of interracial marriage are that they speaking of? People of the same color but different heritage or nationality?People of same ethnicity but slightly different variation of color?Bottom line is I believe it's safe to say,we've finally come to an agreement that racism still exists inside and outside of the church no matter the "color"it's a problem we have to expect never to be fully tamed perfectly(at least on this earth),but is one to always to confront and fight against.



Exactly, you have to be careful with polls, and the one I broke down was from the link you posted and referred to, yet it appears you want to discount the other poll--because it doesn't show the same result which is a greater sampling across the United States in General.

46 Percent of Mississippi Republicans Want Interracial Marriage Banned

And just so you know..I wasn't disagreeing with you that racism exists..just showing it's not only about 1 color of people being racist against another and that it ISN'T ONLY confined to the Southern United States. (please look at the other polls)




BJClark said:


> One of my son's friends has a huge 'skin color' chip on his shoulder thinking anyone who wasn't black was out to get him





> You will have a couple of those who wish to take the "cry wolf" approach with racism.You see guys like Jesse Jackson,Al Sharpton etc. who feel their need to relate EVERY social issue to racism, this is surely not the case and _most _african americans I know of disagree with them and their approach to social issues.Even with those instances,we should never downplay or belittle a charge of racism,always keeping in mind that their has been and still is legitimate cases of injustice.



Actually, there are more than a couple who 'cry wolf' the ones you mentioned scream the loudest because that is how they make their living.

IF MORE people of all colors of skin spoke out against them...they wouldn't make any money and thus they would probably go away..

but racism isn't just AGAINST blacks (which is what it appears your most concerned about)--its covers all skin tones...why not be concerned about ALL racism??
Against all shades of people?



Jonathan,

Like I said, that was one survey, so lets look that other one that I posted the link to, which represents the United States as a whole..which is why I'm asking why look only at the one from Mississippi??

Record-High 86% Approve of Black-White Marriages


1,319 adults were polled

Of those 86% of the population (as whole) have no qualms over mixed marriages.

so of the 1,319 people polled--1,134 of them have no qualms and 185 people don't agree with it or have no opinion on the issue..FOR whatever reason..it may have nothing at all to do with being racist..there are so many things involved that one would have to look at to determine whether every single one of them who disagree with it are truly racist or not..be they black or white and any and all shades of skin color in between--

So I ask again--do we focus on ONE state and claim that represents ALL of America??? or do we look at the population of the united states as a whole to get a TRUE representation of the United States? Maybe they should poll ONLY Democrats in Mississippi and get their opinion?? You can't say that particular poll represents the ENTIRE State (much less the entire United States or even a Political Party)--when they only polled one small sector of people...only those in ONE political party in only one of 50 states--to get an honest and more accurate poll they would have to poll MORE of the population not just one segment based on how they are registered to vote in elections. It's misleading..so again, yes, I say..We can not look at only those 180 people and say it is a TRUE representation of an entire state..

Why only mention southern States? Why not mention Washington State or New Hampshire? Illinois? Colorado? Alaska? Hawaii? Or even Massachusetts?

RACISM BLAMED FOR BRAWL AT U. OF MASSACHUSETTS - NYTimes.com

Millard - NOBLESSE OBLIGE RACISM AT WORK IN WASHINGTON STATE? by H. Millard (c) 2001

My daughter is married to Puerto Rican, thus my granddaughter is bi-racial, my niece is also bi-racial.--so please don't assume the issue doesn't effect my family, 

I get sick of people assuming Southern States are the ONLY place in America where this exists--And coming across that it's ONLY White people who are racists when in reality its every where and every color of people can be racist against a different color people..


----------



## thbslawson (Feb 22, 2012)

I suppose one thing that concerns me in all of this discussion is the amount of energy that is seemingly being exerted to defend against the charge of remaining racism in the church, rather than expose it and combat it. I wonder if it would be taken so lightly if it were any other sin. 

I'm by no means saying that every accusation or speculation of racism in the church is accurate, but I think we'd be fooling ourselves if we said it was minimal or didn't exist. Is the situation better than in the 1960's and 70's? Of course. But is it still alive and even well in some places? Most certainly. Hatred and prejudice against others, whether active or passive, is a blatant breaking of the second table of the law, to "love your neighbor as yourself". Dare we take that lightly?


----------



## GulfCoast Presbyterian (Feb 22, 2012)

thbslawson said:


> I suppose one thing that concerns me in all of this discussion is the amount of energy that is seemingly being exerted to defend against the charge of remaining racism in the church, rather than expose it and combat it. I wonder if it would be taken so lightly if it were any other sin.



Who, posting in this thread, has FAILED to condemn racism, in the Church or elsewhere?


----------



## thbslawson (Feb 22, 2012)

GulfCoast Presbyterian said:


> Who, posting in this thread, has FAILED to condemn racism, in the Church or elsewhere?



Where did I accuse anyone of failing to condemn racism? I stated...



thbslawson said:


> I suppose one thing that concerns me in all of this discussion is the amount of energy that is seemingly being exerted to defend against the charge of remaining racism in the church, rather than expose it and combat it. I wonder if it would be taken so lightly if it were any other sin.



I never said anyone "failed to condemn racism".


----------



## GulfCoast Presbyterian (Feb 22, 2012)

thbslawson said:


> GulfCoast Presbyterian said:
> 
> 
> > Who, posting in this thread, has FAILED to condemn racism, in the Church or elsewhere?
> ...



With utmost humilty, when in the context of this thread, which is where the conversation is taking place, you say racism in the church is "defended," "taken lightly," "not exposed," and folks do not "combat it" it is hard for me, at least, to read that as other than a failure to condemn and carry out that condmenation.


----------



## thbslawson (Feb 22, 2012)

GulfCoast Presbyterian said:


> With utmost humilty, when you say its "defended," "taken lightly," "not exposed," and folks do not "combat it" it is hard for me, at least, to read that as other than a failure to condemn and carry out that condmenation.



I apologize for not stating what I meant more clearly then. My concern is with the fact that when presented with the above statistic about registered Republicans in MS, many of the first reactions were to doubt the accuracy of the poll and question the source rather than consider if it's true or not. Other comments, some made here and some not, that frequently come up are "Well, black people are racists too" or "It's not race but culture" or "Other countries have race problems too." While all these statements are to some degree true, they tend to minimize or draw attention away from the main issue. One can for sure condemn racism, but that doesn't mean he or she is willing or prepared to do anything about it.

Now, I'll admit, I am basing a lot of what I'm saying upon personal experiences, experiences that others may not have had. As a white male I've been privy to back room conversations, mumbled comments and off-color jokes from others in Reformed circles that have utterly appalled me. I suppose in these situations they assume that because I'm white and southern that I'll either let it slide or get a kick out of it. I don't know. I know first-hand of brothers preaching on the circuit who were warned "Don't touch the racism issue." The point is, I still see it as a big problem, and one that is not so readily addressed as others.


----------



## GulfCoast Presbyterian (Feb 22, 2012)

I will point blank tell you I absolutely doubt the accuracy of that poll, or any poll by that group. It's not my first rodeo with pollsters in Mississippi. 

However, you are totally correct and to be commended for pointing out that simply because other races have "racism" issues, or that racism exists in other places in our world, or that folks have given "lip service" to the existence of the problem, this does not excuse any of us for condoning racism in any shape or form, active or passive.

Peace.


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Feb 22, 2012)

Thomas:

I've spoken all over this country (and in Canada). And I can tell you, when folk find out that I am from Mississippi (they can tell right away that I'm a white guy ), I've had a few racist remarks made with a wink and a nod, figuring that I'll be in agreement. 

Racism was far worse than most of us imagine and it used to be quite blatant. I could certainly tell stories from my youth, particularly in reponse to my having close black friends and what that cost me in earlier years. It's gotten much better, is not as blatant, but is still very much with us. Polling or not (I would not expect people to be truthful about racial matters with a pollster, as racism is socially unacceptable in public), it exists.

I think that the rising generations continue to improve with regards to this, although I have been more than a little dismayed by reports from my son of pervasive racist remarks in private at his college (a private, Reformed institution). 

I agree entirely that we need to continue to be vigilant in opposing such. 

Peace,
Alan


----------



## BJClark (Feb 22, 2012)

Thomas,



> Now, I'll admit, I am basing a lot of what I'm saying upon personal experiences, experiences that others may not have had. As a white male I've been privy to back room conversations, mumbled comments and off-color jokes from others in Reformed circles that have utterly appalled me. I suppose in these situations they assume that because I'm white and southern that I'll either let it slide or get a kick out of it. I don't know. I know first-hand of brothers preaching on the circuit who were warned "Don't touch the racism issue." The point is, I still see it as a big problem, and one that is not so readily addressed as others.



Did you call them out on it when you heard such things?? Or did you refrain from commenting at all?

Refraining from comments against it makes one just as guilty...


Shawn, 



> As a black male who grew up and lives in the suburbs,who loves studying theology, interested in academics and has had(and still does) many white friends and even dated white girls, I generally did not get accepted in a lot of black circles for it.I am considered an outcast by some of my own family members because I choose to fellowship at a predominantly white church, I chose to date girls outside of my race, I choose to hang out with some kids who aren't that culturally in-tune, I'm repeatedly told I am attributing to tearing down the black community because I have to conviction to not stick to race, but my faith.I am honestly fed up with being captive to the lies society feeds us. If being "black" means I cant befriend who I want ,marry who I want, go to church where I want , work at where I want, live where I want,preventing me from doing the will God has called me to do without having people trying to impose their unbiblical, eisegetic,prideful,man-centered,sinful opinions upon me, then by ALL means count me out. That is with any race, I have talked on various occasions to brothers and sisters from all different races who feel the same way, I refuse and will not hold on to ANY form of tradition,practice or teaching that is inconsistent with the character of the triune God,his scripture and gospel message.You can see this in the new YRR movement and resurgence,while some may say their misguided, they are doing it with good intentions and seeking to please God and not man.



Have you addressed the issue with your family members?

A question? have the people at your predominately white church you attend accepted and welcomed you? 

If so, then isn't it possible the underlying issue your facing is more about your 'family' and other 'blacks' in your community don't like the fact you see things 'differently' than they do, even theologically different? Are you challenging them in their beliefs? 

How do they react to people of other colors going to their church services? If you invited some of your white or Hispanic or Asian friends to their church how do you think they would react? given as you said


> I generally did not get accepted in a lot of black circles for it. I am considered an outcast by some of my own family members, because I choose to fellowship at a predominantly white church, I chose to date girls outside of my race, I choose to hang out with some kids who aren't that culturally in-tune, I'm repeatedly told I am attributing to tearing down the black community because I have to conviction to not stick to race, but my faith.


 I'm just curious, if they think you are contributing to the break down of the black community how would they view your inviting non-blacks into their church? Isn't it Ultimately God's church-- not a black/white/hispanic/asian/middle eastern peoples church?


----------



## JS116 (Feb 22, 2012)

BJClark said:


> yet it appears you want to discount the other poll--because it doesn't show the same result which is a greater sampling across the United States in General.



Wait..wait..wait a minute Bobbi I really do think you assuming some things that are not true, regarding the poll I didn't "discount" anything as you put it, I simply stated you have to be careful when using statistics I personally refer to them as little as possible, if you re-read what I put in the OP I clearly stated that the article I posted was what sparked me to bring up the conversation, not did I once use the results to prove anything, in this discussion I only used facts and personals experiences of myself and others.




BJClark said:


> but racism isn't just AGAINST blacks (which is what it appears your most concerned about)--its covers all skin tones...why not be concerned about ALL racism??



Again you assumed wrongly,I made it pretty clear that ALL racism was a sin and needed to get dealt with or not if it was done by blacks,whites or whoever



JS116 said:


> I will not sit back and watch _anyone_ get treated unjustly in Christ's name



Notice the italics on the word "anyone" so what makes you think I am being biased?What makes you think that you have the right to assume that i'm not concerned about all races? It may be the way you worded it or maybe I'm misunderstanding, but you have offended me by making that statement.



BJClark said:


> I get sick of people assuming Southern States are the ONLY place in America where this exists--And coming across that it's ONLY White people who are racists when in reality its every where and every color of people can be racist against a different color people..



I agree,also I never made the statement saying the south "the south is the ONLY place" where it exists..If you re-read what I put about my family you will see for yourself I am exposing them as well,that right there is showing you that I do not tolerate it no matter who it's from, my family, church, friends, myself or whoever.The church I was a member thankfully no I didn't experience racism, but the churches I have attended but not joined I have experienced it first hand.


----------



## Edward (Feb 22, 2012)

You all are missing the most important part of the poll. 4% of Mississippi republicans are 'very liberal'. 

After all, it's the poll result, so it has to be true. Right?


----------



## athanatos (Feb 23, 2012)

GulfCoast Presbyterian said:


> athanatos said:
> 
> 
> > They found a small sample of a greater number. The poll's purpose is to be representative, a sample of the whole population. We're not focusing on 180, we'd be focusing on how prevalent it is -- almost HALF OF MISSISSIPPI is_ sure _they are against it!
> ...


I admit, I misread it/did not understand that it was conducted at Republican primary. That's a huge failure on my part. Thank you for your correction.

Grace and peace


----------



## TexanRose (Feb 23, 2012)

I know that opposition to interracial marriage is alive and well within some Reformed circles, having seen it first hand in at least two churches (both in the north, incidentally). For instance I remember one young lady saying that as far as her dad was concerned, the worst marriage she could possibly make would be to a black Roman Catholic. Thankfully I haven't heard those views expressed in recent years, but perhaps that's only because I am the mother of two biracial children, so people think twice about discussing the subject in front of me?


----------

