[Purple Haize]

Here’s an instructive write-up on the role of social justice in Christianity, as well as its history. A bit long, but worthwhile if you’re trying to look deeper than knee-jerk reactions to politicized terms.

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/arti ... l-justice/

Jeff Maples disagrees

https://reformationcharlotte.org/2019/0 ... ts-heresy/

And here’s a nice post about why a little bit of truth wrapped up in a lie makes the lie more powerful
https://www.gty.org/library/blog/B18090 ... al-justice

[Jonathan Carone]

I’m riding with Keller and Platt over Maples and MacArthur all day every day.

[Purple Haize]

I’m riding with Keller and Platt over Maples and MacArthur all day every day.

Of course you are.
I’m just going to ride with the Gospels.

[Just John]

I’m a fan of Franklin Graham. I would not mind him on the Board or involved in the Selection Process. I’m not sure he’s the guy to run a University

He already runs Samaritan's Purse and BGEA. Plus he likes his hunting and fishing time in Alaska and time to play politics. Can't imagine he would want it and LU shouldn't want him IMO. Like Jr, has a pretty acidic tone at times towards the political.

[Just John]

Social justice is absolutely a part of Biblical justice.

Caring for widows and orphans is social justice
Taking care of foreigners in your land is social justice
Feeding the hungry and giving to the poor is social justice

And no one does it worse than the government. Especially governments that try and steer all of those responsibilities away from churches.

Totally agree the government does a terrible job...yet the complaint from many here is that the church shouldn't get involved. I'm not sure how to square that.

[Just John]

With all due respect, why are you guys so thin-skinned about politics. Every University engages in questions related to this subject. It's unavoidable because it's reality. Nobody said that it was the only reality. But you do have to live in the world.

TDS is alive and well here. There is nothing more political in this country, than the public university and skool systems. The biggest problem with people here, isn't really that we are involved in the political system. They just don't like the side of the political system that Jr. was invested in. If we were equally invested in the social justice and liberal slant of things, they would be all in. Especially if the libs were to cancel their student loan obligations.

You probably know I'm not a liberal in anyway. I think LU should remain decidedly conservatively Christian, not a Baylor that many of us are concerned about. At the same time, I don't want LU to be known as strictly a political school of any stripe. We need to first be known for our Christian witness and good academics. If the academics are conservative and the spiritual emphasis is right, trust God with the rest.

[LUDad]

Social justice is absolutely a part of Biblical justice.

Caring for widows and orphans is social justice
Taking care of foreigners in your land is social justice
Feeding the hungry and giving to the poor is social justice

And no one does it worse than the government. Especially governments that try and steer all of those responsibilities away from churches.

Totally agree the government does a terrible job...yet the complaint from many here is that the church shouldn't get involved. I'm not sure how to square that.

At times the baby gets thrown out with the bath water. The theology taught by MacArthur and those within the The Gospel Collation is not as different as many believe. They also have respect for each other's theological views. That is why MacArthur invited The Gospel Collation to have one of their conferences at Grace Community Church and why he is invited to speak at their conferences. However, he gets grief from some Dispensationalists who take issue with his associations with the Reformed community. Many simply don't realize that MacArthurs' theology is now much more in-tune with Reformed theology than what he describes as his former "leaky" Dispensationalism.

Perhaps some day he even get from pre to post-tribulationaism (sorry, couldn't resist Spangler )

[paradox]

Confirmed sources from inside the administration are now reporting that Fielding Mellish has emerged as the leading candidate as next president/chancellor of LU

[thepostman]

That would be bananas

[Purple Haize]

That would be bananas

LU is supposedly opening a remote campus in San Marcos

[ballcoach15]

That would be bananas

LU is supposedly opening a remote campus in San Marcos

I got a good nomination for a president of this remote campus.

[stokesjokes]

Here’s an instructive write-up on the role of social justice in Christianity, as well as its history. A bit long, but worthwhile if you’re trying to look deeper than knee-jerk reactions to politicized terms.

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/arti ... l-justice/

Jeff Maples disagrees

https://reformationcharlotte.org/2019/0 ... ts-heresy/

And here’s a nice post about why a little bit of truth wrapped up in a lie makes the lie more powerful
https://www.gty.org/library/blog/B18090 ... al-justice

I don't know who Jeff Maples is, but that first link made me vomit in my mouth a little. Featuring such headlines as "Tim Keller Says Christians Have Freedom to Vote For Pro-Abortion, Pro-Sodomy Democrats" and "If You Have Trouble Figuring Out if You’re For Biden or Trump, You Ain’t Saved." Clearly a trustworthy source.

hard to take anything seriously after that point, but the article isn't very substantive anyway. It's mostly just "you know social justice is bad...MARXISM!"
He's also got an overly narrow definition of the gospel. Yes, the "good news" is that Christ died and was resurrected. A euangelion is also meant to be the introduction of a new ruler. So the "gospel" of Jesus Christ is the introduction of the Kingdom of God, including the radical social implications that Jeff Maples wants to separate out of the gospel.

And for John MacArthur, he has decided to ignore the Christian beginnings of social justice in favor of his own narrative that it's a secular construct. He says silly things like "there are no different flavors of justice" when scripture itself uses 3 different terms for justice, all with different meanings. And then he finishes with this weird projection of qualities I see in great amounts on the side of those who seek to deny social justice ("Hatred, envy, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, hostility, divisiveness, bitterness, pride, selfishness, hard feelings, vindictiveness—and all similar attitudes of resentment—are the self-destructive works of the flesh" i.e. everything present in the articles from that first source you link) onto those who are seeking social justice, which at its core, at least in a Christian context, is rooted out of Jesus' call to love our neighbors (take care of the least of these, care for widows, orphans, oppressed, yada yada yada).

[Purple Haize]

I don’t know who Jeff Maples is either other than the author of the article.
My point is that you can find articles on either side of the spectrum. Further it’s to show where the focus lies. With the Gospels or with Society. Social Justice certainly does incorporate facets of Gospel Justice. But they are most certainly not the same. I cannot embrace social justice as a movement because it’s means and it’s starting point are completely antithetical to the Gospel.

[Jonathan Carone]

I think where I disagree is I view social justice in the way The Gospel Coalition presented it. It is an outflow of the Gospel to me. Because of what Jesus has done for me, and based on the things I am commanded to do as a follower of him, I’m required to care about social justice issues. Our disagreements can be in how to apply our faith to our systems, but I’m of the belief these issues matter to God.

Edit to add: I want to make clear there's no judgment or anything in what I was saying right there. Well meaning Christians who read the Bible and follow Jesus can interpret it differently. I was laying out my view and what leads me to think social justice is important.

[Purple Haize]

What is it about the Justice of the Gospels that is lacking? I just don’t see a need to add anything to that.

[flameshaw]

I’m riding with Keller and Platt over Maples and MacArthur all day every day.

You are free to ride a broke-down nag over a thoroughbred, it really isn't going to bother anyone. Not surprised, especially for one that quotes Salon as a source of news. The National Enquirer is 1000% more reliable/truthful than Salon.

[flameshaw]

What is it about the Justice of the Gospels that is lacking? I just don’t see a need to add anything to that.

AMEN. The genesis of man-made rules and philosophies, more often than not, leads to legalism, which is always a negative result.

[Jonathan Carone]

What is it about the Justice of the Gospels that is lacking? I just don’t see a need to add anything to that.

I honestly think it's semantics. Much of social justice is biblical justice. It's just called by a different name in today's society. I think the two can be used hand in hand more often than not.

[cruzan_flame13]

What is it about the Justice of the Gospels that is lacking? I just don’t see a need to add anything to that.

I honestly think it's semantics. Much of social justice is biblical justice. It's just called by a different name in today's society. I think the two can be used hand in hand more often than not.

Not everything that was claimed justice in the Bible was a good thing. They were just examples of how sinful man is and how God used "useless" people for His will. So we might need to chevkwhat we mean by biblical justice especially if it seems beneficial for personal agendas or beliefs.

[Purple Haize]

What is it about the Justice of the Gospels that is lacking? I just don’t see a need to add anything to that.

I honestly think it's semantics. Much of social justice is biblical justice. It's just called by a different name in today's society. I think the two can be used hand in hand more often than not.

Your reply demonstrates the problem. “Much” “in today’s society”. “The 2 can be used together “
Why? You are saying the Justice of the Gospel is not enough. That in today’s society there needs to be more. I would say go down the tenets of what the Bible describes as Justice and stop there. There is no need to add or partner. It’s not semantics it’s core to how one defines Justice.
Just because “something” “sorta lines up” with the Gospels doesn’t make it a good thing

[Jonathan Carone]

Before we go any further in this, I want to get your definition of things and the names you use so that I can make sure we’re speaking the same language.

How do you classify issues like equality, taking care of the poor, caring for the widow/orphan, etc?

What is your definition of biblical justice?

What is your definition of social justice?

I really think we’re closer in opinion here than we realize.

[stokesjokes]

What is it about the Justice of the Gospels that is lacking? I just don’t see a need to add anything to that.

I honestly think it's semantics. Much of social justice is biblical justice. It's just called by a different name in today's society. I think the two can be used hand in hand more often than not.

Your reply demonstrates the problem. “Much” “in today’s society”. “The 2 can be used together “
Why? You are saying the Justice of the Gospel is not enough. That in today’s society there needs to be more. I would say go down the tenets of what the Bible describes as Justice and stop there. There is no need to add or partner. It’s not semantics it’s core to how one defines Justice.
Just because “something” “sorts lines up” with the Gospels doesn’t make it a good thing

No, that's not what he's saying and that's why it is semantics. When the Bible speaks of justice on social issues, that IS social justice. It's not partnering, it's not adding. The "justice of the Gospel," as you put it, includes social justice. In fact, as I've linked before, the term "social justice" was first used by a Jesuit priest based on the teachings of Thomas Aquinas. It's not a matter of something "sorta lining up," its based on ideas that can be clearly derived from scripture.

[ballcoach15]

Deuteronomy 4:2
Revelation 22:18-19

After this is read, "every head bowed and every eye closed".

[flameshaw]

I honestly think it's semantics. Much of social justice is biblical justice. It's just called by a different name in today's society. I think the two can be used hand in hand more often than not.

Your reply demonstrates the problem. “Much” “in today’s society”. “The 2 can be used together “
Why? You are saying the Justice of the Gospel is not enough. That in today’s society there needs to be more. I would say go down the tenets of what the Bible describes as Justice and stop there. There is no need to add or partner. It’s not semantics it’s core to how one defines Justice.
Just because “something” “sorts lines up” with the Gospels doesn’t make it a good thing

No, that's not what he's saying and that's why it is semantics. When the Bible speaks of justice on social issues, that IS social justice. It's not partnering, it's not adding. The "justice of the Gospel," as you put it, includes social justice. In fact, as I've linked before, the term "social justice" was first used by a Jesuit priest based on the teachings of Thomas Aquinas. It's not a matter of something "sorta lining up," its based on ideas that can be clearly derived from scripture.

The fact that the term "social justice" was first used by a man, not God, means that it is an opinion, not an absolute. We all have opinions. Mine is no better, or worse, than yours. It goes back to what PH said, it adds to the Bible, which is an absolute authority.
There are absolutes about how we should treat others. Unfortunately, most of the Bible is open to unconfirmed, opinion/man's interpretation. One must then, make a decision what to believe based on many factors, including personal experience and the consistency of other commentators.
The term "social justice"has been corrupted and hijacked further by modern society to refer to a mostly racial reference. I do not see that mentioned anywhere in the Bible, from that frame of reference. imho.

[paradox]

Who really cares what some theologian thinks about the two words social and justice and its appkication?

I'm sticking with the Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky collectivist definition of social justice theory. It is what it is.

Now if you're a Christian, you shouldn't need validation, especially from radicals. The only thing that should matter is how you deal with the people that God has placed in your path.


..