Civil War Statues

[Jerry Shugart]

What should the Christian perspective be toward the removal of Civil War Statues and the re-naming of politically incorrect names like the Washington "Redskins"? Or even changing the names of towns and cities named after Andrew Jackson--Jackson and Jacksonville? Or Maybe the state of Washington or Washington D.C. since George Washington was a slave owner?

I believe that the final decision on such matters should rest with the city or state where the statues reside. And the city or state should decide if a name change is in order.

This is an issue which is very attractive to the political party which practices identity politics so anything which anyone might add to the discussion only adds fuel to their fire. So I think that it is best ignored.

Thoughts?

 

[Ktoyou]

Some of the Confederate statues were put up in the 1950s; those may be under a different standard than the stature=s erected during and after the war, They would have to rightly judge between those repenting the 'cause' from those which were meant to nullify civil rights in the South.

Surly, no president name should be changed; however, names like Calhoun may be seen as repressive.

 

[SStyles]

What should the Christian perspective be toward the removal of Civil War Statues and the re-naming of politically incorrect names like the Washington "Redskins"? Or even changing the names of towns and cities named after Andrew Jackson--Jackson and Jacksonville? Or Maybe the state of Washington or Washington D.C. since George Washington was a slave owner?

I believe that the final decision on such matters should rest with the city or state where the statues reside. And the city or state should decide if a name change is in order.

This is an issue which is very attractive to the political party which practices identity politics so anything which anyone might add to the discussion only adds fuel to their fire. So I think that it is best ignored.

Thoughts?

Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Some of the Confederate statues were put up in the 1950s; those may be under a different standard than the stature=s erected during and after the war, They would have to rightly judge between those repenting the 'cause' from those which were meant to nullify civil rights in the South.

Surly, no president name should be changed; however, names like Calhoun may be seen as repressive.

I found the following article which speaks of the Christian's responsibility in regard to social justice and it provides food for thought:

"Perhaps the best way to understand our responsibilities in the social/cultural arena is to look to Jesus for our example. Jesus lived in one of history’s most corrupt societies. But He perfectly maintained His Father’s perspective on social and political matters, even though He lived in a society that was every bit as pagan and corrupt as today’s culture. Cruel tyrants and dictators ruled throughout the region, and the institution of slavery was firmly entrenched. Legal and economic oppression of the Jews by Rome was rampant, dwarfing anything we experience today. But even in the face of such tyranny, Jesus never issued a call for political changes, even by peaceful means. He never attempted to “capture the culture” for biblical morality. He did not come to earth to be a political or social reformer. Rather, He came to establish a new spiritual order. He came not to make the old order moral through social and governmental reform, but to make new creatures (His people) holy through the saving power of the gospel and the transforming work of the Holy Spirit. He knew what many today fail to grasp: governments and institutions are made up of people. When people’s hearts are changed by Christ, godly governments and institutions will follow. If the hearts of the people are corrupt, getting them together in groups only multiplies the corruption. What we need is not better government, but better men and women in government."​

https://www.gotquestions.org/church-social.html​

 

[Ktoyou]

Seems like good thought. Power makes one less able to distance themselves from their power. Much of this is about power.

People today, desire to take their power to change the power in the past, which once had power over them. This is where it can be no more than a power claim; I am afraid this is how people force thought change.

Sometimes it is good to be old

 

[SStyles]

I don't really get involved in politics. I know I should but I just can't stand any of it.

When it's just me, God and the scripture my conviction is that I'm in favor of anything coming down that is requested by people of color pertaining to slavery and the civil war. Remove it and put it in a museum. Understanding the history of slavery, the civil war and the actual monuments (erected much much later). As a law abiding citizen, I respect the process and would not interfere with those.

I'll include some of the scriptures that have convicted me in that area. I'd love to know if someone has been impressed by God and scripture (forget politics) to keep the monuments. I heard an interesting argument earlier that I'm still reading and processing. It included Romans 11:36

These are a few That have convicted me to remove them:

Acts 6
Rev 7:9 Matt 6:9-13
Psalm 139
Ezekial 14
1 Corinthians 8
Matt 18:6-9

I know a lot of Christians who seem upset by the removing of the monuments and changing of names so I'd love to hear more to gain understanding on how they arrived at that conclusion based on their knowledge of the scripture and personal convictions, recognizing that my very strong conviction could be discernment of how to handle the entire situation (meaning God has shown us in scripture how to handle these things) or God has convicted me personally of how I should handle it in my personal sphere of influence (James 4:17).

 

[SStyles]

Seems like good thought. Power makes one less able to distance themselves from their power. Much of this is about power.

People today, desire to take their power to change the power in the past, which once had power over them. This is where it can be no more than a power claim; I am afraid this is how people force thought change.

Sometimes it is good to be old

Ok so this is very interesting. We are headed in a completely opposite direction-purposefully submitting power and seeking justice through church, not politics.

My husband and I have submitted to the leadership of POC pastors and leaders in the Christian community (not political) supporting their efforts in the spreading of the gospel and bringing about unity through submission. Sacrifice of power reconciles. The word of God spread in Acts 6 when the powerful gave up their positions. The disciples increased rapidly.

While monuments play a symbolic part in the big picture, we are hoping true church unity and the gospel message will bring about social justice and equality much more effectively than trying to regulate it. Meaning, as believers we should be speaking out and voting, showing love and care for issues that affect church unity, but not necessarily marching/pursuing power/etc unless personally convicted (Annointed if you want to stay within the theme)

Right now, I can't expect people of color to come to my all white space if I haven't proven that I love them and see them as created in God's image and I'm willing to acknowledge and to an extent set aside my privilege or leverage it for their equality. Listening to diverse leaders, reading their books, going to their church and when they say-hey this hurts or hey this keeps me from believing you want me here, I support them. It's a no brainer the closer we get in relationship. It seems backwards when I write it down like this. It's a gamble but it's also a conviction. Good thing I don't have the power to change that much so the risk is pretty minimal!



Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Deja Vu All Over Again?:

https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/...=50c030a1d6116668c62f36ecee37f5b6&action=view