No, we don’t throw out the good that J. G. Machen did, nor do we judge his soul. But we sure as heck need to acknowledge he had a thing for whitey, and the politics and Eurocentrism that go along with it. In addition to his letters, see the following:
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @AlsoACarpenter
Guess Brad never read anything from Machen AFTER the date of his personal letters which indicate he changed his views and beliefs on race. (See Christianity and Liberalism) But hey... who knew someone could change
#wokegonnawoke1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @DrewTilley
Brad has and Brad just quoted Machen from other sources. Brad also has yet to see anyone produce any evidence of changed views. In fact, biographer
@oldlife says he never repented of his racism.#FanBoysGonnaFanBoy2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
You slanderously interpreted the two quotes you posted today, proving nothing except that you read evil intent into Machen's words. And please with the fanboy charge, thou who tags half the woketelligentsia every time you think you've written something clever, begging for RTs.
2 replies 0 retweets 13 likes -
You don't have to like me, I don't care. But no slander here, sorry. Fanboyism is on display when you just can't admit what is obvious about your hero. I can read Christianity & Liberalism and enjoy it. I don't have to deny reality in order to exault the author to do so.
3 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Not sure it's a good look to keep calling a giant of the faith a white supremacist with no evidence or to say he "has a thing for whitey," turning innocuous statements about pre-war Europe into grievous sin.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
So we have the letters, we see him speaking of Europe and it's "race" as the finest in every way, and we read his own pro-Machen biographers writing that he was an unrepentant racist. I don't think it's a good look pretending otherwise. Take the reality and work with that.
4 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @AlsoACarpenter @ChortlesWeakly and
This right here. We cant flatten history by reading in our modern concepts and understandings and call it the same. To pretend otherwise is either disingenuous or evil.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @5PtsReformed @ChortlesWeakly and
Truth and righteousness are objective and not relative. All throughout the Scripture, prophets and apostles called out the sins of their fathers, even when they were "just men of their times." It is not a Biblical ethic to define sin by popular vote of the time period.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Circumcision was required. Then it wasn't. You're still not thinking historically or redemptive historically. But oh how self-righteous you are FOR ALL TIME!!!!
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.