How Should the Church Address Racial Injustice?

The following is an uncorrected transcript generated by a transcription service. Before quoting in print, please check the corresponding audio for accuracy. 

Justin Giboney
I stand before you today as the grandson of a civil rights era preacher, Bishop Thomas Lee Cooper was born into a country where an African American was hanged or burned alive. Every four days, he couldn’t set foot on the campus of most white conservative seminaries at least not as a student. Yet his high Christology and belief in the authority of Scripture helped him see the error in these realities and gave him a hopeful disposition. His gospel centered social action was proof of his resolve not to give up on America, or on majority Christians who saw God and nationalistic idols, but could not see the image of God and Him. In a society that devalued his life. He learned to find joy and gratitude and smart in the smallest things, because he knew that cynicism was a form of death in itself. He taught me that there was a solid and indivisible line between the gospel and the pursuit of justice and righteousness in society. He showed me that leadership was the privilege of self sacrifice, and that we all had to make that sacrifice and that Christians should choose to suffer themselves before adding to the suffering of others. This was the instruction of Old Testament prophets, the theology of abolitionist and murderers from sharecropping fields and urban ghettos standing on the promises of God without flinching. So imagine my astonishment to find out that it was often Christians, wielding the whip of injustice, Bible believers guarding the loot and plunder of white supremacy. Imagine my disbelief in hearing that when justice and the Moral Majority clashed, Freedom did not ring death bells told from Tulsa, Oklahoma to Los Angeles, California. And this wasn’t the isolated or momentary lapse in judgment of a few individuals. No, it was a long standing cultural mode of operation, a wicked institutional practice with its own apologetic, and theology of duplicity. This is how the American church found a way to disentangle justice from the message of Jesus Christ. Frederick Douglass once said that America that the American church is not only indifferent to the wrongs of slavery, it actually takes sides with the oppressor. It made itself a bulwark of American slavery. We could also say the American church was a bulwark of Jim Crow, of congregational segregation, and today, a bulwark of the big lie. The American church indeed has done some good works, and there are many who are doing good work today. But on the whole, it has been an abject failure on racial justice. It’s put forth a little effort to fully reckoned with that sin, let alone make amends. J. Gresham mentioned in his classic book Christianity and liberalism, called Christianity, the religion of the brokenhearted. He was saying this as a critique of liberal Christianity. He was saying that unlike liberals, Orthodox Christians, willingly went to the cross with a broken heart over sin. Theoretically, I guess he was correct. But the truth is a large part of the American church has never gone to the cross and brokenhearted humility over racial injustice. Many majority Christians have primarily responded with willful blindness, defiance, unrepentant, many refuse to show contrition because contrition would involve vulnerability, a lowering of oneself. You can’t be humble and maintain an air of superiority, and an all consuming culture war, public humility, apparently is too great a price to pay for justice. According to Barna Group, less than half of white Christians agree that historically the US has been oppressive to minorities. That’s objective historical fat, you had many bear false witness. Those numbers also show that white Christians are less likely less willing to address racial justice than white Americans generally. Such a dishonest and hostile public witnessed. Witness has robbed the church of moral credibility and it hurts our ability to evangelize the church must must approach racial justice with The Broken Heart, it must humbly acknowledge its failures and show reparative love through sacrifice, it can no longer seek to glorify itself to romanticizing American history. And all this starts with this change in spirit, a different attitude and mentality when it comes to race. But that’s only the beginning. In Jeremiah 22, the prophet delivers a message to the authorities of Judah on behalf of the Lord. He tells them to do what is just and right. The English Standard Version says do justice and righteousness. This the command isn’t cryptic. It’s not presented in riddle, nor is it quantum physics. It’s a it’s a playing command, followed by a credible threat from a God who hates injustice. God’s message is so clear that the heroes don’t even have to do the application themselves. Perhaps just in case they’re dim witted or on studious, God does the application for them, he tells them exactly what he means. Rescue from the hand of the oppressor, the one who has been robbed. That’s what we’re told to do. This is not a timid or conditional suggestion. It’s not it’s not a requirement that can be placed aside at times of inconvenience. It’s a command that reflects the will and the character of God and it speaks directly to the plight of black America. historian David Hollinger said that blacks are the only group to inherit a multi century legacy of groups specific slavery and institutionalized the basement. Under constitutional authority, black women are still three times more likely to die from a pregnancy related calls, not just on account of socio economic factors, but because of mirror of American narratives and biases in regard to the black body. Bryan Stevenson points out that black defendants are 11 times more likely than white defendants to receive the death penalty 20 times more likely if the victim was white. It takes some serious logical leaps in willful ignorance to separate those disparities from this country’s long history of racism, and from the American Church’s complicity. To do what is just and right today means no longer being the keepers of a disordered status quo. Racial Justice must become a priority. The great commandment tells us to love our neighbor as ourselves. First, John 316 gives love definition. It says this is how we know what love is, Jesus Christ laid down his life for us. Biblical love is not simply a sentimental disposition, or kind remarks. Love in this instance, is action, attending to the needs of others. And love is so sacrificial majority Christians cannot remain comfortable, they can’t continue to fear change, or to center their own agenda. And here’s a big one. Majority institutions also cannot allow a number of bigoted donors to prevent them from taking substantive action towards towards justice. Some of these relationships will have to die. Racism has never been painless, and there is no painless path towards racial justice. But allow me to provide a few very specific things that the church can do in regards to racial justice. And I would like you to note, this isn’t an exhaustive, exhaustive list. And none of these involve government mandate. This is what the church can do internally. And the other things may be a separate conversation. The first one is a race history curriculum. I’ve been blown away by how many Christians simply don’t know the truth about American history when it comes to race. And you can see that from the numbers I just gave. But we must reckon with the truth and with some of our failures. I was I was shown recently some excerpts from a history book that was used in a Christian school that said that the Civil War was primarily about states rights. And it went all through with these false equivalencies between the union and the Confederacy. As truth tellers as people who are committed to the truth, Christian denominations and institutions should come together and endorse a curriculum that accurately depicts American history, the good and the bad. For this next one, I would ask us to step out of our ideological boxes and consider it from a biblical standpoint. The other thing we can do deals with voters rights. By law, we know that black people have been disenfranchised in this country far longer than they’ve had franchise that’s indisputable. In support of equality and human agency, all Christians should come together and support voters rights, or at least support research to evaluate the fairness in our system. If some are right, and there’s nothing to be found, then we’ll know there’s nothing to be Now, but if your brothers and sisters feel there is an issue, given the history of this country, it’s worth looking into. Now this next one, I would ask everyone to step out of their ideological boxes for a second and think about this. From a biblical standpoint, we must pursue the principle of reparations. Some Christian institutions that are operating today benefited even from slavery. For example, we know that both a Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and Princeton acknowledged benefiting from revenue tied to slavery, for Princeton, for instance, and they said that 30 to 40% of their revenue during the pre Civil War period was tied to slavery. duquan and Gregory Thompson do an excellent job of talking about this and their book reparations. I propose that majority churches who are able should find black churches and brown churches in their area to support them financially with best practices, not culturally driven strings attached, we should create business opportunities and educational opportunities for black and brown communities. Listen, we serve a mighty God. Racism isn’t permanent, nor is it indestructible. But we must be willing to sacrifice and have the moral imagination to heal a polarized church. Everyone must sacrifice. No one of any race is off the hook. We must all be hopeful and charitable, we must have the moral imagination to reject cynicism, and unbiblical secular theory. But things will not change until we fear being unjust. More than we fear losing power, until we fear not doing enough, more than we fear taking too much of the blame. Things will change when we approach American racism, with obedience, and a broken heart. Thank you.

Brian Davis
What’s the best approach for the church to address racial injustice? Now, I am assuming this question is asking what is the best approach for the local church to address racial injustice in the world? The use of church just in the question itself is a little too ambiguous to meaningfully interact for me. So I’m gonna take it as what’s the best approach for the local church to address racial injustice in the world, and maybe touch on wider application, I think one of the first things we do want to do is separate the abilities of the institutional local church, and the universal church composed of every individual believer. There are ways local churches should not address racial injustice that individual believers should. And I think it’s important that we separate what the church is supposed to do, and what individual Christians are free to do. As an example, I think it’s fine for a believer to have their country’s flag waving in their own living room, or hanging from their own door posts. But I think it’s unfaithful for a local church to do the same.

Brian Davis
Similarly, I think it’s fine for an individual believer to be devoted to having a particular legal policy be changed. But I think it would be unwise for a congregation to adopt the same approach and the same focus. Now there’s exceptions to every rule, I think, a unique distresses there, be unique cause we’d be having a different conversation. Again, if we’re talking about our church could house runaway slaves, or if we were in Germany were somewhat we could house Jews who were being hunted. But all things being equal. This leads me to conclude that the primary way that local churches meaningfully address racial injustice in the world is in directly and indirectly here means that the connection is just not immediate. By that, I don’t mean that local churches should never mention racial injustice as a category, or that local churches should fail to expound on the presence of racial injustice in the Bible. There are many, many instances of racial injustice in the scriptures, or that we shouldn’t call for the same response that the word calls for, to such instances of racial sin. No local churches must do that they’re to faithfully preach the Word of God. If they are to declare the full council of God, then they’re going to talk about the sin of racial prejudice, racial injustice, and racial partiality, and it should be condemned as not being in step with the gospel. Now, it’s another thing entirely if that racial injustice is not out in the world, but it’s at home In the local church, in such a case, First Corinthians five tells us plainly, is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. In cases where the racial injustice is inside the church, then there are clear, commanded ways were to address it in God’s word. Just consider Peter and Paul and Galatians chapter two. What I mean by the primary way that local churches meaningfully address racial injustice in the world is indirectly is that to call the local church to specific social activities or to charge them to certain civic participations is beyond the bounds of the local Church’s authority. And I think in most situations, it could be pastoral malpractice. I think it’s the other side of the Christian nationalist coin that seeks to bind God’s kingdom to this world in a way that Jesus seemed eager to decouple them. Let us remember that in the moment of the greatest injustice in the history of mankind, namely, the crucifixion of our Lord. Jesus taught us something profoundly otherworldly about his way. He said, My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting. But my kingdom is not from the world, the churches work. By that I mean, the local churches work is not to transform the world, but to transform the saints. They are to be focused on making disciples who obey Jesus’s commands, who potently spread the aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved, and among those who are perishing. Our task is to build ourselves up in this most holy faith, to pray in the Holy Spirit, waiting for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ that leads to eternal life keeping ourselves in the love of God, while saving as many others as we can. In short, it’s to make the most biblical Christians that are ministries can produce.

Brian Davis
Believers that will shine the most brightly as lights in a perverse and crooked generation have the most potent flavoring of salt they can achieve among their neighbors, saints who are consumed with the glory of God, the gospel of Jesus Christ, the eternality of men, souls, and who are eager to love their neighbors. Well, this will only be accomplished by preaching the word of God Christ centered Lee, for we will only behave like Christ, when we behold Him in His Word. That is, how I would understand the local church best addresses racial injustice, by producing the most God glorifying Christ exalting gospel, sharing good words, doing compassionate and merciful believers that it can. Now that kind of philosophy addresses those kinds of issues, but I’m going to take some distance to see how they connect. So here are 10 brief aims at this kind of gospel ministry seeks to produce an every saint, this kind of ministry aims to form believers that pray first, to pray. Prayer is a means of addressing racial injustice, to pray for the governing officials, law enforcement officers, public servants, and everyone in high positions, to make laws and a society that are more just and more good, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life that is godly and dignified in every way, the Bible says is good. And it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth. The second thing this produces is it aims to form believers that feel that weep over wrongdoing, that lament over injustice whose I shed streams of tears when God’s law is not kept. Those who express their tears without weaponizing them, those who out of compassion, rejoice with those who rejoice, and weep with those who weep, that just like our Lord Jesus, who was lamenting three, it aims to form believers that expect evil. Scripture causes the present evil age, we are not going to make this age better. Therefore, we should expect a profound misunderstanding of justice and a profound amount of injustice in the world. And we certainly want to work to restrain as much evil as possible, but we need to appreciate we are in an evil age. We should know that injustice will abound wherever the gospel is not fully believed and adorned in faithfulness, and that doesn’t get fixed to glory. For I think this aims to form believers who expose and oppose evil, and that’s costly as we all know, it cost John the Baptist his hand But it’s part of being the light of the Lord should not partake in any unfruitful works of darkness. But since that exposed him. The fifth thing it does is it aims to form believers that are zealous for good works. And we might do those good works very differently. Some may protest, others may never participate in one, some may vote, others may not vote at all, so might become an activist who labored to be an agent of change in society. Others may focus their attention on their own affairs, and seek to honor Christ in the quiet confines of their day to day lives. We should all be eager to do good in order to love and to adorn the doctrine of God is scripture says, as we have opportunity, were to do good to all, especially to the household of faith. The sixth aim that this produces in believers is to make them full of charity, that there may be one particular area or avenue of seeking justice that one state is really excited about that another is just not as excited or compelled by it rather than buy in devour one another. Charity assumes that though we disagree on a possible course of action, you love Christ and others just as much as I do. That kind of charity is essential and reflects that we know a God who loves the seventh aim, I think this produces is believers that trust God, who trust God, despite circumstances. Saints ought to be rooted in God’s complete, powerful and wise sovereignty, even in suffering. To be able to passionately still praise Him is truly good, even in hardship, and to testify that his people are truly free even in injustice. Freedom for us, is not circumstantial, but being in Christ. So even in the deepest injustice, we know a peace that surpasses understanding that we rejoice in the Lord, always

Brian Davis
eight the eighth thing I think this forms in believers are believers who glory in their unity in Christ above their ethnic identities. This is perhaps one of the strongest apologetics to a watching, divided world that we have is to invite them out of that divided world into Christ United Church, where here, those ethnic distinctions are not made, but rather all are equally honored in Christ. Nine, the ninth payment forms in believers is those who rejoice in hope. Things are bad, and will get worse until Christ returns and we entrust ourselves to me judges justly. So while we are bothered by injustice, we need remember that waiting is a worship for way of engaging in racial injustice. Even in the deepest valleys of racial injustice, believers have a real hope. Heaven is coming. Though tribulation and injustice abounds. Now, his kingdom is forever, His heaven will be perfect. And that is the hope he calls us to look towards, in fact, to set our hope fully on, we do not live for this life only we live in view of the resurrection. Our citizenship is in heaven, and from it, we’re waiting for a king and a savior, we can endure all things now, knowing that one day soon, Christ, our Savior will make all things new, he’ll wipe away every tear we’ve ever cried, and he will repay himself, every evil against us in his vengeance. And lastly, the 10th Aim it produces in believers, at least that philosophy of ministry, and how it addresses those matters, is it aims to form believers who take the gospel of first importance. The most unique thing we can do on this planet in any country or city, is to tell men and women, how they might be reconciled to God, how they might partake of His divine nature, and how they might escape the corruption that is in the world because of sin. That is the chief ministry we have as Christians. The sharing of the gospel was God’s greatest act of love towards us, it will be our greatest act of love towards others as well. While some of us might become activists and we ought to support that, we must remember that all of us have been called to be ambassadors, God making his appeal through us imploring others on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God for our sake, He made Him who knew no sin, to be sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. The world has nothing to offer but injustice that God offers true righteousness in his son. So in summary, I do not think we can envision a Christianity where it is a flaw to conclude along with Paul, I decided to know nothing among you except for Jesus Christ and Him crucified for like in every age, that kind of Christianity will best address the needs of our day as well.

Jim Davis
Well, I don’t think that it’s a stretch to say of all the debates that we’re doing, this issue has caused more division, confusion, strife, and real hurt, at least in the American church in just in the past few years. Of course, there’s a long legacy of hurts on these lines. But it seems to be especially poignant over the past three years. So I want to start at a little bit higher level with you, Justin. And I’m going to drill down on some things that both of you said, Brian talked, and I think it was your sixth point in your way forward about charity among things in which we disagree. So my question is, how elastic should the church be on some of these issues of race and injustice? Another way to say it is, where do we distinguish in in the terms of Race and Justice between primary issues that we should as a church not give on and secondary issues where we should be able to disagree even seriously, disagree, but worship together and move forward in the same church?

Justin Giboney
That’s a good question. I would say, obviously, human dignity is a primary issue, and dealing with it is to be a primary issue and should be something that we really focus in on and make a priority. That’s the first thing I would say, obviously, I want to agree with you. Our first The first thing we should do is preach the gospel. I don’t disagree with that at all. I understand the difference between the church proper as an institution and the individuals, I’m talking more so about the individuals. But it’s very important for us not to create false dichotomies there either right, to make sure that we can’t just look at the world and say what they’re doing wrong. There’s stuff that we have to handle internally, that’s in the church, and that has come out of the church and that the world actually had to make corrections on parts of the church in that regard. So So of course, we have first we have first order issues, we all have to be charitable. I’ve mentioned charity, too. I think that’s a important part of what we do. We have to be peacemakers. But don’t Let’s not turn human dignity, which is tied to this racial conversation into a second order issue.

Jim Davis
That’s good. That’s helpful. Brian, you make the clear distinction. And when you’re talking between what the individual is called to versus the institution of the church, and you, you said, then I’m going to paraphrase you, I’m not going to quote you specifically. It would be different if we were in say, Nazi Germany or slavery. How is that different?

Brian Davis
I think you. So Galatians, six, as you have opportunity, I think, based on where we’re going to be situated, historically, we’re going to have unique opportunities to love our neighbors, right? I think it’s important to, in one sense, maybe de escalate some of the application just because it’s important, we appreciate that we are we are is not 18, you know, 55, you know, that doesn’t mean there’s not gonna be any parallels or no connections that we might be thinking through in terms of how do we honor human dignity. But the the opportunities that we have, or that we might encourage the church as a collective to respond to, I think you’re going to, I want to give churches maybe greater freedom to bind the consciences more, the more clear and vivid those opportunities are. So to the point, and I think it goes back to executives point of dignity. So if we’re at, let’s say, an all white church, and this is a 19, you know, 55, and we have somebody who’s Black, who wants to come join the church have zero problems burdening the church to say, we must bring them into membership, or we should excommunicate everybody else. It’s going to be a little bit different as we might talk about how we must process a particular shooting, or I think maybe even just particular calls of action. Even a brother was talking about how do we best equip people to your restoratively I think there’s gonna be a vast disagreement how that happens. And I’m going to not feel as free passed orally to bind people’s consciences to particular acts in that way. So I think the more vivid and the more clear the opportunity is, I think we we should feel like men are clear and vivid application of minding their consciences calls to action in that regard.

Jim Davis
So I’m gonna pull on that thread just a little bit. So let’s, you know, another debate that we had have had as abortion. We’ve talked about different aspects of abortion. So institutionally, you would agree that that is, that would be something that institutionally the church should rally around and behind? And if so, how is that different than something that would be a clear racial injustice, even if people in your church disagreed?

Brian Davis
Well? I mean, well, once it’s those are kind of two different questions to say that abortion is a sin. I think, again, you’re talking about Christians. Absolutely. That’s a First tear issue, right? You can’t murder people, right? And as a firm you as a believer, how do people best process that, particularly in this? They were, you know, some people say, Well, it’s a sin to be a Democrat, like point blank. And so when when it started getting to that kind of parsed application, right, or you must go to this particular one, if you’re going to love Jesus, as we’re like, well, there’s actually we all need to hold the principle. But there’s actually a lot more freedom in terms of how we hold that principle that we need to be really, really careful with. So that’s why I’m saying I think no, we all need to agree that personal human dignity, we all need to agree on that principle. A life is not less valuable based on what color skin it has, right now it’s made by whoever is made in the image of God is worth that dignity, period. Right? Abortion is, is is wrong, you can’t kill somebody. Right? We think that’s, that’s a that’s a basic application of loving life, how we go about working that out, as it relates to policy or organizing ourselves, or what people even do that whether it’s just a matter they pray about all the time, or what there’s there’s all different kinds of ways that saints can do good works, responding to that principle.

Jim Davis
So I’m hearing from from both of you really, that when we talk about primary and secondary issues, racism is a sin. That’s a primary issue. That’s a dignity issue. Sometimes how we go forward can be confusing, and there might be room to disagree on the way forward. I do it is that is that a fair statement?

Justin Giboney
Okay, it’s fair, I just, I think it hurts this conversation. And we don’t dig as deep as we could. When we keep it in the abstract. We talked about what could have happened, let’s talk about what the church has done and what the church hasn’t done. Historically, I think I laid out a pretty good case that the church has failed in this area, that the problem wasn’t just outside, the problem was inside. And I think one of the problems that we have, even the way that was presented today is you say, in the church, we’re doing good, we’re never going to change what’s outside. But I would remind, especially my ideological, ideologically, conservative brothers, brothers and sisters, that it was the world and the black church and the left that had to force the church to do anything on justice, when it comes to ideological conservatives have never given an inch on racial justice, unless being forced by the world’s laws to do so. That is shameful. We should feel some type of way about that. So I hope that slows us down a little bit. When we make the compare, of course, we know the world what the world isn’t all that. But why did it take the world to make that change internally, when we take when we start thinking about the history and take it out of the abstract, we see very, very clearly there’s a void there that the church needs a field, the church has actually perpetuated some things that it needs to correct. And we need to focus on making those corrections, take it out of the abstract and deal with what we could do better. So

Jim Davis
what what do you think about that? I mean, he’s made, he’s making the case that the church has delayed so that in some cases, well, either the African American church or even those outside of the church have had to step forward to correct some of these wrongs when the historically white Evangelical Church has not moved.

Brian Davis
Maybe in this Midwest start, I think we’re using the church pretty unhelpfully, you know, churches everywhere. I think a lot of times, you know, Americans, we feel we have the World Series, and it’s just us, you know, so when we’re talking about the church, I think it’s important, you know, so we’re talking about a strand of Christianity that is existed in this country, over the past couple of centuries, the church is much, much, much bigger than that. I think, to Justin’s point, I think he’s exactly right about is historically, I do think it needs to be reckoned with, particularly with the reformed tradition, there has been a gross abuse of theological exegesis, like so the the, there’s there’s no systematic books that have anthropology handled right, over the last couple of 100 years that deal with slavery, for instance, or what have you. So there, there has been a systematic approach to silence or to subdue, or to flatten what God has clearly said, as it relates to people, particularly in this country, particularly over the last couple 100 years. I wouldn’t say that it was only like that there was no conservative people who actually were advocating for particular change. But I’m also like, I’m thankful that the Lord did it by His power, regardless of the means. You know, it’s it’s the Deborah embarrass, you know, all the glory went to jail. So I’m just thankful that the battle was won in that regard. With the particular question, though, I’m just, I’m approaching it just in terms of what is my Bible say? And I’m trying to, I guess, limit courses of action, to not be my kind of read of the land. But God has spoken, I think sufficiently for His church everywhere. And that must mean it must apply here in America. And if we’re saying beyond what God says, we’re actually not representing just Christianity, we’re representing Christianity, plus an Americanism that’s kind of mixed in that actually doesn’t work other places either. And I think we should be really careful to do that. I actually don’t think that that helps the Churches witnessed here in America. I think it actually hinders, what is and I think we’ve experienced some of the bad fruit of that, even in the last, you know, four to five years, where just politically as a lot of Christians have bound themselves to public particular political candidates or positions. It has not helped our ability to speak clearly or to even share what we actually represent. And so I’m, yeah, I’m more so want to say, Hey, I totally agree historically, what has happened. But I think God has spoken sufficient about what we do going forward, I think we need to do a better job.

Jim Davis
How do you respond to that, Justin?

Justin Giboney
Yeah, I just think that, again, we can limit the definition. So we’re not just playing with definitions. We can talk about the American church we can talk about, I’ve talked specifically about the majority church. And so I think we should, you know, lean into that conversation. Because the truth of the matter is, we have to deal with specific issues in church. One of the things that I said earlier today was over 50% of white Christians don’t believe that the US has been oppressive to minorities. Again, that’s an objective historical fact that we don’t get, we have to deal we have to deal with that. Right? If that means our hearts aren’t aren’t right. So I don’t disagree with you when it comes to I don’t think I’ve said anything that the but I don’t think I’ve demanded that people do anything that the Bible didn’t say, if I look at even if we look at covenant lawsuits, they weren’t just about immorality, they were about injustice. They’re about how the poor were treated, they are about partiality in the courts. You look at Amos five, and we can go from we can go on and on about that, when even when we talk about the reparations conversation within the church. I mean, that’s, you know, you can see that in Exodus 2122, you can see that in Leviticus six, you can see it in numbers five, this is coming from the Bible. And this is what an ordered society is about. If we have a society where some somebody can take something from somebody, and isn’t expected to give anything back. That’s not an ordered society. So I don’t want to over spiritualize it, I want to make sure that we understand there are some specific mandates, or commands that are in the Bible that we need to do justice. And like I said, even with Jeremiah 22, is pretty clearly pretty clear. If you have or if you have people who have been oppressed, then you need to make the church needs to be active in doing that. And it’s more than just saying just be nice to people or do whatever, no one’s saying we’ve done something wrong, we need to take affirmative steps. Because what I worry about with the perspective that you’re coming from, is this the same philosophy that’s created the status quo. There’s more at this moment, just preach the gospel, when there’s clear issues that are there. And when we’re clearly missing opportunities to give, which we’re protecting power, instead of making sure that we’re being the people who are peacemakers creating wellbeing, creating a right relationship with God in society, there’s, I think that separation that you’ve made between what we do in the church and in society is a little too broad.

Brian Davis
I think I think this is actually good. I think it’s actually a good idea to drill down on this. So let’s say we have, and again, I don’t want to interact too much with statistics, but let’s just say there’s members of your church, that do not agree on the history of oppression in the country. Let’s say that it’s not that they disagree that for someone to be treated differently because of the color of their skin is wrong. Let’s have a affirm that, let’s say they’re just saying I just think, as I’ve looked into it, I just don’t agree that statistically, the the situation is as bad, let’s say now, as people are saying it is, let’s say and one of the things you recommends that we do a history curriculum, right that the church has to hear to listen, my says, I, I feel what you’re saying, I don’t really agree with that. I don’t think that’s a wise thing to do. The question is, does that affect our ability to take the Lord’s supper together? What I’m saying is, we’re not free to add, but say, you know, curriculums to what it means to be a member of Christ’s church, because he has spoken sufficiently about what it means to be a Christian bare minimum, I think it’s a lot of things we can all grow in. And there’s always going to be things we can all grow in. But just because somebody disagrees about something that’s, I think, pretty obvious and that they’re significantly wrong about does not mean it becomes a matter of disfellowship. Or I’m able to insist on your agreement with it, in order to be welcomed. And I think that’s maybe where the rubber hits the road a little bit. Because I don’t think they’re I don’t have a disagreement about people doing the best that they can do, trying to restrain evil to the best degree that they can, using whatever opportunities the Lord provides. I think that’s great to do. When we start saying the church must and we start saying things that’s not in the Bible. What we’re doing is we’re actually binding people’s ability to affirm what it means to be Christian, with additional actions that God has not actually commanded. I actually think that’s, I think that’s wrong. I think that adds to the gospel being the foundation of which we actually come to the table. We affirm each other and brothers sisters, and what that ends up creating is people go to this church, they go to that church, based on those other men Letters of agreement that can’t be in the same churches still disagree. So that’s I think that’s maybe what I’m leaning into in terms of important things I think that we want people to agree on. But let’s say we don’t agree on it. I don’t think we can then add additional acts that the church must do. Because the church is God’s domain in that sense that that’s the discomfort I have in them.

Justin Giboney
Yeah, but I don’t think I’ve done that. I think the command is do do what is just and do what is right do justice and righteousness. So we have to start there do justice and righteousness. If somebody in your church doesn’t agree with historical facts, that’s a process problematic. I’m not saying you kick them out of the church. But that’s not necessarily the question we’re addressing. How does the church move forward on racial justice, we don’t move forward on racial justice by just ignoring it. When I bring up the curriculum. I’m not saying you have to do the curriculum, or you’re not a Christian is a suggestion of how to do justice and righteousness through recognizing the truth. Because as you go out into different Christian spaces, people don’t know the truth about racial justice. We have books and Christian schools that don’t even recite the history of racial justice correctly. Those are things we can do, we should be doing something. So I think you can’t say we shouldn’t be doing something, you may not be interested in race for it. But for you to say, I don’t care and put your hands up, I think that is problematic. We should be doing something what we do, I can give you suggestions. But to sit and maintain the status quo and say, well, we can’t really force people to do this. That’s the same thing that would have maintained slavery, it would have maintained Jim Crow, it’ll maintain the same things that we’re going through today, because there is an imperative there to do justice and righteousness. I haven’t heard how that imperative. Actually,

Jim Davis
let me let me let me ask a question. And it’s on that note. So I’ve heard people say, any theology of justice that would not have ended slavery is not a theology of justice from the Bible. Sure. Do you agree or disagree with that?

Brian Davis
Okay, so I don’t hear anybody saying we don’t have to care about it. So I think that’s a mischaracterization of maybe what’s being communicated at that particular point, I think it’s a matter of not caring about it, it doesn’t matter. So when you say what justice is, and we keep attaching it to the specific thing that we’re passionate about, let’s back up and say, first of all, one of the most fundamental things we do as just believers with people who are different than us, is we actually welcome them in the Lord Jesus. So one reason people kind of keep jumping back into the Old Testament is because the New Testament carries for the idea very differently than the Old Testament. And there’s a lot of reasons for that. You’re talking about a national state, which is very, very different than the local church is. So when we’re using kind of Old Testament prophet calls for justice, and we’re not pushing it through the cross of Christ, we’re not showing how it’s actually realized in the people of God, where we actually don’t regard each other according to any ethnic distinctions or any worldly distinctions. But we regard each other entirely based on the merit of the finished work of Christ, what he’s purchased for us and where we’re seated. That is actually profoundly, I think, expressive of the righteousness and justice that God is actually calling for when we actually love each other according to that, and when we invite anybody else into that, regardless of who they are, regardless of what they’ve done. So the reason I am trying to maintain the difference between what’s happening in the world what’s happening the church, similar to First Corinthians five, I think Paul does, I think Jesus does, I think there’s a, the there’s a different there’s a different ethic ethic that his people are to have within themselves. And that doesn’t always translate, excuse me, that doesn’t always translate to what we’re able to even produce out in the world, we still labor for those things. But we’re, there’s a unique way we realize those realities within the life of the local church. So yeah, I don’t hear anybody saying that. That’s not important. Let’s not talk about it, ever ligaments in it. But what I am saying is like just passed orally, and you were probably approaching this conversation even very differently. I’m approaching it as a pastor. Well, I want people to think rightly, about everything, I’m going to be careful to what I use pastoral authority to with to make sure that is clearly connected in God’s word.

Justin Giboney
So that I just think eliminating that way kind of takes away from from this conversation. But But let me say this, um, you know, one of you so we can talk about the Old Testament, I don’t have to use the Old Testament, we can go to Luke 19. We can go to you know, Luke 418. There, there’s still there’s still demand, the command doesn’t change for us to do justice and righteousness. Right. It’s a we’re in a conversation as we are today about what does it mean to do justice to say, well, we’re in the church, you know, how it’s almost How can we avoid it?

Jim Davis
Right. I mean, let me drill down. You specifically talked about reparations. And you’re not even talking about, you know, Congress here. You’re talking about the church, you reference Princeton and the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. flush out a little bit more what you think reparations could and should look like, among Christians, and specifically the two ends intuitions you named.

Justin Giboney
Yeah, I mean, you know, I think obviously reparations has become an ideological buzzword. And so people here and they just jump back. I’m not I’m not I don’t even think we have to go there. We can go straight to the Bible and have some of those conversations about what that what that looks what that looks like. And I think it’s about repairing a community. It’s objective fact. And I don’t think people should be able to deny that things have been stolen from African Americans and other minorities. That’s an objective fact. I think we have to deal with it. I think we we run away from that that’s problematic. So how do you how do you restore that? This should never be for Christians. It should never be about being forced to do that. So I’m not saying we got to force every church to do this, this and that’s like, what are we can be compelled to do through the gospel? Now, the other thing that I will say is I’ve provided data, right, the data from Barna says, People are saying oppression isn’t a big thing, right? They’re saying more over 50% of white Christians are saying, actually, this never actually happened, which

Jim Davis
was shocking to me. I believe you i that that shocked me.

Justin Giboney
I mean, that’s where we’re at. So for those of us who are willing to reckon with that history, how do we restore it? How do we go about moving through through, you know, you have, you have Exodus 21 and 22, right, and you say, Okay, if something’s been taken to somebody, you restore that. Now, this is Old Testament, and the way it may be restored, may be a little bit different as maybe what you’re getting at. But the principle remains that if things have been taken as community, we have churches, denominations, other Christian institutions that have benefited from that, and people who have been in those institutions that have benefited from that there may be something they should get back, not because they’re forced to, but because they’re compelled through to through the gospel, because you can’t have an ordered society, if people have something taken from them. And then you don’t have to return it. And also, as a pastor, if you have institutions, you’re connected with institutions within the church, or your church has done some of those things and have some of those benefits, I do think that you have a real push to do something about that, and not just say, Hey, we’re just gonna pray about it. That’s that’s been the philosophy that the American church has had for too long. And it’s the same reason again, that the world, this terrible world had to force many in the church with its laws to treat their brothers and sisters with dignity. It’s that type of flow, I wouldn’t even call it the theology, I think it’s that type of philosophy that’s really hurt the church and kept us with the status quo that we had.

Brian Davis
I’m sorry, can I get the I just wanna say one thing about the SBC young cut this out, just because we put them under the bus. I just know, the SBC flaws, and all they have done tremendous things, so as to do a version of reparative justice, that I don’t want us to overlook. There’s many church plants that they have funded, that are minority led, they have many degrees, many scholarships, like they’ve, they’ve done a lot of work that I think he would be very encouraged by, at least to, you know, maybe in a in a lane, they may not be as much as could be done, but they’ve definitely taken some significant strides towards seeking to be more just with what they have. That I think is, you know, commendable. And I don’t I don’t want them to feel worthy here, this thing that was not known or seen or appreciated their labors in it.

Jim Davis
So the doctrine of reparative. Justice, how would you apply that today, again, not nationally, within the church and our institutions.

Brian Davis
What I appreciate about what our brothers saying is, there ought to be a longing if there’s someone we’ve wronged that we’re able to rectify the situation that it is, it is good, and it is godly to do that. So I agree with that. These are the the kind of doctoral category of reparations, not something I particularly adhere to. I think it has some pretty significant flaws for me. But I guess, maybe even coming down at a different level. I mean, part of me is just thankful to the Lord just as he’s describing, maybe some stuff he’s seen. I just have a completely different testimony as a Christian. I’ve been in wonderful churches. I’ve been a wonderful multi ethnic churches. I’ve been in predominantly white churches. I’ve been in predominately black churches, and I’ve seen all the saints care about justice. They haven’t always agreed on particular social actions or even particular social events. But the like, at least the what I’ve seen this theology lived out and it does not produce a slaveholders kind of theology like at all it’s, I’ve seen people provide for people schooling entirely. I’ve seen people send people to college that couldn’t afford it. I’ve seen people adopt children that were not their kids because they love them in the remover compassion. I’ve seen people get people out of situation they themselves got themselves in. I’ve seen people protest I’ve seen people who had a book so to me the I’ve actually seen it produce a very manifold rich display of good works, which is what I think the call for justice and righteousness blossoms out into in the in the New Testament. Church. And so I’ve never again, I just personally, I agree with him about the SBC. I think I don’t want to know about that there’s, I think there’s things I can do. But I just don’t know, I don’t know believers who have wronged people who have not been desirous to make it right. This has been my limited interaction with the churches I’ve been in. And so some of that feels a little foreign in that I just haven’t seen a Christian argue for that. I have been defended in the reparations category, because I think that’s different. There’s a different of distance, heritage, like, what makes somebody a people, you know, I’m mixed. So I’m like, which side is which side? You know, like there’s, there’s, there’s all these kind of things that go into it that I appreciate where Christians disagree on that. I don’t think that’s a one to one. It’s different. If I go by steal somebody’s car, then I get saved. And I’m like, I think I’ll give them the car back. So some of it feels an overly forceful application to something I think is there’s more space to disagree and, and Christians still love justice. But yeah, reparations is one of those words like I just have not been persuaded that it’s a there’s there’s situations and I think it’s a biblical application. But generally, in the way that I hear it regularly used. I’m not convinced.

Justin Giboney
Yeah, I will just say, I mean, it’s hard to have the debate with just anecdotes, right. Like we have to, we have to have some generalizations. So even in when I spoke, of course, the church is doing a lot of good things, this particular conversations about racial justice. And I think there has been a failure on a collective level and institutional level when it comes to racial justice. And that’s why I try to offer some of these, these numbers to say, people don’t even think it. After all this time, we’re talking about US history, majority of people don’t even a majority of white Christian don’t even think it was an issue we have to talk about, I mean, that that’s something that we don’t need anecdotes, even those don’t really refute that. And that doesn’t mean let me say this, that doesn’t mean that they’re terrible people and everything else. This I’m saying it this way, because this conversation about racial justice, and there’s been such a failure there, partially because we can’t even deal with the truth of what’s going on. Now, when you talk about So would you say that the principle of reparations is no longer. So if I steal your shirt, and I keep it and I give it to my son, is that his

Brian Davis
shirt? I would share with you my cloak also. Right? No,

Justin Giboney
no. My shirt belongs.

Brian Davis
Back? No. That’s something I think there’s instances where I agree with the principle, right? So again, you still a shirt, you can go get it, you steal a car, you can go give it back. We start talking about tracing the historical failure to love black people in our country, and then saying that the church are leading that charge of that, I think, I think so you talk about the doctrine of it. There’s there’s a wider application, I think you bring up a couple specific instance, you talk about the SPC, I think it’s a great conversation to have with the SBC. Like I I’ll go there with you.

Jim Davis
But that you can’t let the other denominations off. Right. It

Justin Giboney
wasn’t a theological seminary. But it wasn’t just them. I mean, that those are two examples that I gave. But we can give a lot of other examples of churches and other institutions that either because here’s reason that you give reparations, either you took something yourself, or you did not take a very distinct stance against what was going on with somebody what was close for you, or you benefited from it in some way. And so there’s a lot of different reasons that you might that you might be put in that position. And again, this isn’t a force you to do it. Are you compelled to say we’ve done something wrong how to our store, because we didn’t I mean, we can go back to the disparity conversation? Well, sure, right. I mean,

Jim Davis
well, let me let me let me do this. Because we any of these topics, are these these threads that we’re pulling on? Could be its own hour long conversation. I want to stay in the same vicinity. But one thing that that you hear people say is yes, it pertains to systemic racism. There used to be systemic racism, but there’s not any more. Can we move on? I’m curious how both of you would respond to that statement. And I’ll start

Brian Davis
with you. Sorry, I was you said, is there systemic racism

Jim Davis
that Yeah, thanks. So we move on. So there are people who say systemic racism used to exist, but no longer does. So can we move on from this conversation? How does that comment land? I’m gonna ask both of you, but I’ll start with you, Brian.

Brian Davis
I think it’s an unhelpful statement. Perhaps the positive side of it is they’re trying to acknowledge there’s been a change, which, you know, I think is important to acknowledge. Sometimes you get to conversation people, like it’s just the same as it’s been. It’s just like, Yeah, it’s so not that, you know. So I think maybe there’s a little bit of that. I think there’s also going to be a lack of agreement about what’s happened historically where things are, what statistics show or what have you. But yeah, so I wouldn’t think that to be a helpful statement or perspective.

Jim Davis
Yeah, do you would you say that systemic racism no longer exists in our country?

Brian Davis
I think as long as it’s gonna be p Bow canes have been killing Abel since the beginning. And that’s gonna keep happening. So people will continue to find sinful ways to diminish other people that will be and they will be creative and how they do that. It’s always going to be based on, you know, something. And so that’s going to happen until I think the Lord comes back and makes everything right now,

Justin Giboney
yeah, I would just say that we can’t watch it happen, nor can we participate in. And I think that’s one of the differences with me, I don’t think we can say it’s going to happen. And I think, you know, we have to be very serious and intend on doing something about as far as systemic racism, I think the examples that I spoke of really speak to that. So number one, you see black women, you know, dying from pregnancy related causes, three times more than white women do, based off how people see the black body, how people see, see black pain. And this isn’t just, it’s just not it’s really not on an economic level, I have a friend that was affluent, and that she went through the same thing that his wife passed because of that, you have the Bryan Stevenson quote that I gave were 20 times more likely to get the death penalty if the victim was was white. These are just two instances. But think about the implications of that mindset. If it happens in those two instances in the way that we see black people, then it probably happens in a lot of other situations to this doesn’t mean that everybody is poorly intended. But we have to agree on the facts. We have to agree on history. I think I disagree with you on if people don’t really want to take this statistics, and they see them differently, or they see the history differently. That’s not okay. Because there has to be truth. And truth has to matter. We’re all dealing with post modernism. And some of the things I go back and forth with some people on the left with is that post modernism and not winning recognize truth, Christians have to recognize truth and not only recognize it, to act on it to be just an unrighteous.

Jim Davis
So there is a political obviously, there are lots of political implications to what we’re talking about. One of the things that I hear often is that white evangelicals are captive to the Republican Party. How do you process that in light of the other side, people would say the African American, in our country are captive to the Democratic Party, because the percentage of voting is at least if not higher? How do you process the captivity to the different political institutions as it pertains to racial injustice?

Justin Giboney
I think those are facts. And I think when you look at the history of the parties, or how the ideologies connect with the parties, black people are in the Democratic Party because of how the Democratic Party reacted to civil rights. Or at least the people who became part of the Democratic Party react to civil rights. And that’s a whole different conversation. That’s who we connected to that’s who reached out a helping hand. And that’s why we’re in that party. Should we question that party, sometimes more than we do? Absolutely. And that’s what my organization talks about quite a bit. The other thing that you said there was the cap to the captivity of white evangelicals, to the Republican Party and to conservative ideology. And really to, you know, this speaks to the whole culture war conversation, because I think one of the things that we miss in this conversation is, especially when it comes to the white evangelical side, when you’re, when you’re so focused on the culture war, you’re going to be defensive, you’re gonna be opposition centered, you’ll be focused on winning more than doing what’s just gonna be focused on beating those liberals more than you are about about doing justice. So even when you issue an apology, usually it’s kind of tied to a ideological, apologetic, but you can’t be self sacrificial and be defensive. And I think that’s what stops conservatives a lot of times from doing racial justice, because there’s this even when you want to do it, well, I have to be on the defense, because I can’t give an inch to the other side. And so these ideologies and parties do stop us, I think on both sides from doing all the things we need to do we get say that we can have a conversation with Democrats when it comes to abortion, I do all the time. But we have to step out of that and be more biblical.

Jim Davis
All right, I’m gonna ask you a different question you were talking about, and I hope I quote you correctly. Identifying with Christ above our ethnicities was, is that an accurate statement? Well, yeah. And so obviously, our identification in Christ is our greatest identification, but might we be at risk of losing of flattening our racial and ethnic identities in doing that? Might we be at risk of seeing everybody in a colorblind way? Because when we look at Revelation, it seems like there is every tribe, tongue and nation, it seems like ethnicity and ethnicity is something that goes into the new heaven and new earth.

Brian Davis
Yeah, I’m Utah talking about a doctrine of ethnicity here, which I don’t think for most people they’ve kind of, you know, defined or filled out. I think it’s something that we all need to kind of think well about. The church when you say flattened the church is intended to be the showcase of a of a new ethnicity of people. He made a new man in place of the other ones, not just goes on top of The other ones, it’s in place of their, their to have a complete and exhaustive re identification. So much so that, you know, Paul would say here, there’s not that or this. So that there is a degree to which we we desperately, I think need to think well about what it means to live out the new ethnicity we have in the Lord Jesus. I think it’s a it’s an it’s part of, I think, a solution in terms of how we understand how to have certain conversations about racial matters, at least in the church today. So yeah, I, I don’t think we’re in danger of flattening our ethnicity right now, I think we’re in danger of over promoting it. You know, so there was a time where people used to even just like talking about racial reconciliation, and that’s I don’t even like talking that way anymore. Because they’re afraid they’re gonna lose part of them. And just the Bible does not talk that way about our in this city. We don’t like the who we are, is not bound up in our ethnicities in the flesh. God is so redefined us by hiding us in His Son. And so I definitely think that needs to be further developed. I don’t think it’s in danger of flattening, or I think I do think we’re in danger of actually promoting them too much.

Jim Davis
Justin, many people in you know, who have engaged in this conversation have become disenfranchised with the American church. What, and that could take many, many different forms, leaving the church altogether, leaving the faith, just not going to church anymore cell movements returning back to the historic African American church, whatever it is, but what do you say to them? What keeps you in this conversation in a room like this?

Justin Giboney
Because I don’t, I don’t want to be Jonah, I want to make sure that I’m reaching out to people and having these conversations, because I think the church is is one we do need to come together. And I will always be hopeful for that. I think we have to be hopeful for that. And then I would also say to them that when the church failed, it wasn’t because of the church was being too biblical or too orthodox. It’s because it wasn’t made biblical enough. And that if we’re really going to change something, you got to get in there and make sure that doesn’t mean people can never go to a different church or things like that. But we have to have hope. We don’t mourn like, you know, like people who don’t know Christ, we have to have hope. And we have to believe that things can change. That’s the story of the civil rights movement. That’s the story of many things. Some of these things are going to be around for a while, I still think we have to have a sense of urgency and a belief that things can change. If we believe our God is as strong as we say.

Jim Davis
We’ll run into that time. I want to finish with one question for both of you. What is the most compelling thing your opponent has said tonight to you? I’ll start with you. Okay.

Justin Giboney
No, I think he makes a very good point, just about I think what he’s getting that kind of that identity idolatry. We’re we’re too far into our ethnicity. I don’t think that we have to push away our ethnicity to be a part of the church or forget that to be one. But I do think identity idolatry has become an issue where we’re putting our identity of far higher than it should be, and making almost deifying it in ways that it can’t withstand and that eventually hurts us.

Brian Davis
That’s good. I think two things one, I was I was just struck and appreciative of just God’s grace and the strength to speak against what you think is unfaithful to God’s word, I think a call to be about doing that courageously and in as many instances as we can see it. I thought he modeled that well and desire to do that. Well, I also think just the you know, the the the lean into what’s possible in the Lord. It’s a wonderful thing to remember you know, that what’s impossible with man is possible with God.

Jim Davis
So I think it’s a great encouragement for brothers. I’m really thankful for the time that you have invested in this obviously, you’ve invested a lot outside of just preparing for this, which is why we asked you to be a part of this. Thank you for your heart for Jesus your heart for Jesus people in your heart to see things done the way they ought to be done in the kingdom. Thank you