In light of recent events that have led to racial unrest, protests (both peaceful and riotous), looting, and calls for sweeping societal changes, Dr. Voddie Baucham asks the question that every Christian today must consider and answer: “Is the Bible sufficient for racial reconciliation?”

In his 2019 address at the Southeast Founders regional conference, Dr. Baucham relates his own experience and approach to racial reconciliation and contrasts the “new hermeneutics” and “new canon” with the supremacy and sufficiency of the Bible for all matters of faith and practice. Drawing from Ephesians 2, he proclaims that God has already broken down all divisions, ethnicities, and classifications in reconciling us through the blood of Christ.

Dr. Baucham is Dean of Theological Education at African Christian University in Zambia, and is an author, conference speaker, and former pastor of Grace Family Baptist Church in Spring, Texas.

Please watch Dr. Baucham’s powerful presentation and make it a priority to share this timely video with friends and family.

We take very seriously the trust you place in Illinois Family Institute when you send a gift.
We understand that we are accountable before you and God to honor your trust. 

IFI is supported by voluntary donations from good people like you.

Written by Dr. Jerry Newcombe

Much of the mayhem we see today is linked to fatherlessness.

Around this time we celebrate Father’s Day. But fathers in our culture have not recently appeared very important—at least according to Hollywood and other culture-shapers.

We used to have programs like “Father Knows Best” or “Leave It to Beaver” with a respectable father figure. Then we devolved to Archie Bunker on “All in the Family.” He was the stereotypical bigoted, benighted patriarch who was not worthy of emulation.

Then we devolved to Homer Simpson, the buffoonish dad, who was anything but a role model.

Of course, in many households today, there is no dad. And that’s a serious problem. So many of the children in fatherless homes begin life at a serious disadvantage. The breakdown of the family at large has caused a huge crisis in our society. For instance, statistics show that the majority of prison inmates come from broken families.

Fatherlessness is a serious blight on American life. As the family goes, so goes society. And, contrary to what the left says (who spend much of their energy diminishing traditional gender roles and arguing that whatever “family you choose” is just as good as the real thing), fathers are integral to the life of a child.

Take an example. What is it that is devastating the black community today? Many in our current climate would say the main issue is racism. But sociologically, cultural pathologies are linked closely to poverty. And poverty is linked closely to the structure of the family. Government subsidies (by which the left buys votes) has created a permanent underclass of people by subsidizing fatherlessness and unemployment.

Prior to the Great Society, the rate of illegitimacy in the black community was relatively low and families were intact. And as economist Thomas Sowell points out, the poverty rate for African-Americans fell by 40 percent from 1940 to 1960—just before the “Great Society” welfare programs. Today, the illegitimacy rate is over 75 percent, which is devastating—by virtually all accounts.

I remember many years ago when I attended an “evangelical church” in Chicago that was a little on the liberal side. One of the lay leaders, a man, got up and prayed, and he said, “Our Father, Our Mother….”

I was thinking, “What?!?” So I asked him after the service about the unorthodox prayer.

His response was that that church was in the shadow of the most notorious housing project in the city, Cabrini-Green. Fatherlessness was a huge problem there. Most people growing up there had a negative feeling about their earthly father because he was absent or drunk or abusive. Cabrini-Green was such a disaster that it has since been torn down.

In his book, Hearts of the Fathers, Charles Crismier notes that many American children today lack the “God-ordered earthly anchor for soul security” because dad is not in the home. He notes,

“It is well known but seldom discussed, whether in the church house or the White House, that fatherlessness lies at the root of nearly all of the most glaring problems that plague our modern, now post-Christian life.”

For example, take the issue of poverty. Says Crismier, “Children living in female-headed homes have a poverty rate of 48 percent, more than four times the rate for children living in homes with their fathers and mothers.”

He points out that fathers are so important in the Bible, beginning with God the Father, that the words “father,” “fathers,” and “forefathers” appear 1,573 times.

Obviously, children in fatherless homes can survive and even thrive despite that handicap. But what a better thing it is to follow God’s design for the family.

There’s also a link between fatherlessness and unbelief. About 20 years ago, when he was a professor at New York University, Dr. Paul Vitz wrote a book, The Faith of the Fatherless. In that book he showed how famous atheists and skeptics in history had virtually no father figure in their life or a very negative father.

As examples, he cites Voltaire, Bertrand Russell, H. G. Wells, Friedrich Nietzsche, Jean Paul Sartre, Thomas Hobbs, and Sigmund Freud, among others.

Conversely, Vitz found that strong believers often had positive fathers or father figures. In an interview for Christian television, he told me, “I would say the biggest problem in the country is the breakdown of the family, and the biggest problem in the breakdown in the family is the absence of the father. Our answer is to recover the faith, particularly for men, and we’ll recover fatherhood. And if we recover fatherhood, we’ll recover the family. If we recover the family, we’ll recover our society.”

If you’re a father and you stay with your children and you love your wife, you’re a real hero and role model. Keep it up—our nation is counting on you.

This article was originally published at JerryNewcombe.com.

If you have logged on to Netflix, Amazon, and other places recently, you have probably seen some of corporate America’s virtue signaling via banners in support of Black Lives Matter. By itself, it is a powerful slogan which no one can disagree with, even if you’d prefer to say all lives matter. However, there’s more to this than just a slogan.

The organization Black Lives Matter has some very specific goals and views that many casual observers may not know: it was founded to dramatically change America, and its leaders have not been shy about where they stand. Here are just a few of their policy positions with a couple of my comments in parentheses.

• Black Lives Matter supports abortion. It states: “We deserve and thus we demand reproductive justice that gives us autonomy over our bodies and our identities while ensuring that our children and families are supported, safe, and able to thrive.” (Aborted babies don’t thrive nor are they safe. Black babies are disproportionately terminated by the abortion industry which has racist roots stemming from Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood.)

• Black Lives Matter supports the radical LGBT agenda. It states: “We foster a queer-affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking.” (Two of the three founders of BLM describe themselves as “queer,” a rather radical term for a homosexual activist.)

• Black Lives Matter opposes the traditional nuclear family which is a vital sociological part of overcoming crime and poverty. It states: “We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.” (Villages without fathers are poor [literally] substitutes for communities with intact families.)

• Black Lives Matter supports reparations. It states: “Reparations for full and free access for all Black people (including undocumented and currently and formerly incarcerated people) to lifetime education…retroactive forgiveness of student loans, and support for lifetime learning programs.”

• Black Lives Matter supports the abolishment of police. It states: “We believe that prisons, police and all other institutions that inflict violence on Black people must be abolished…”

• Black Lives Matter claims to oppose racism, but it is an organization with anti-Semitic leanings. In 2016 BLM adopted derogatory policy statements about Israel. It described the nation of Israel as an “apartheid state” committing “genocide” and supports the boycott, divest and sanction (BDS) movement against Israel. BLM opposes any support of Israel by the United States government.

• Black Lives Matter’s activism is helping the presidential campaign of Joe Biden. If one goes to the BLM website and chooses to donate, he is redirected to a site hosted by ActBlue and prompted with the message: “We appreciate your support of the movement and our ongoing fight to end state-sanctioned violence, liberate Black people, and end white supremacy forever.” Joe Biden is the top beneficiary of ActBlue’s fundraising efforts.

This article was originally published by AFA of Indiana.

On Tuesday, June 2, 2020 the trend of posting a black screen was seen across social media.

What is the Blackout screen?

According to Insider, Blackout Tuesday (with the use of the Blackout screen as a symbol) is “an initiative to go silent on social media, reflect on recent events, and stand in solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement.”

What is the Black Lives Matter movement?

According to blacklivesmatter.com, “Black Lives Matter began as a call to action in response to state-sanctioned violence and anti-Black racism. Our intention from the very beginning was to connect Black people from all over the world who have a shared desire for justice to act together in their communities. The impetus for that commitment was, and still is, the rampant and deliberate violence inflicted on us by the state.”

What is systematic racism?

According to Wikipedia,

“Institutional racism (systematic racism) is a form of racism expressed in the practice of social and political institutions. It is reflected in disparities regarding wealth, income, criminal justice, employment, housing, health care, political power, and education, among other factors.”

BLM pushes the narrative that police departments are inherently racist, but facts suggest otherwise.

What is the truth about police shootings?

According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), blacks are the victims of homicide 8x more than Hispanics and whites combined. These homicides, however, are not by police officers but by blacks.

According to census.gov, the black community makes up 13% of the population. Black men make up 6% of the population, are responsible for 42% of the crime, and account for 44% of all homicides in America according to 2018 statistics.

Michigan State University and University of Maryland College Park created a database of 917 officers involved in fatal shootings in 2015. The study found that in more than 650 police departments, 55% of the assailants who were killed were white, only 27% were black, and 19% were Hispanic.

According to statista.com, in 2017, 457 white people were killed by police and 223 blacks were killed. In 2018, 399 whites were killed, and 209 blacks were killed. In 2019, 370 whites were killed, and 235 blacks were killed.

These statistics and many others show that it is far more likely for a white person to be shot and killed by a police officer than for a black person to be shot and killed by a police officer.

The narrative pushing systemic racism in police departments is factually incorrect. The propagation of this lie by the leftwing media continues to erode race relations in this country.

What does BLM ignore?

If BLM really cared about black lives, they would promote personal responsibility in their own communities and teach their children respect for authority, self-discipline, and responsibility for their own actions.

If BLM really cared about black lives, they would talk about the 20 million black babies that have been murdered in abortion clinics since 1973. Every year 300,000 black babies are aborted. According to the Wall Street Journal,

Nationally, black women terminate pregnancies at far higher rates than other women. … Racism, poverty, and lack of access to health care are the typical explanations for these disparities. But black women have much higher abortion rates even after you control for income. … The more plausible explanation may have to do with marriage. Unmarried women are more likely to experience an unintended pregnancy, and black women are less likely… to marry.

BLM should be promoting traditional marriage with fathers for children. According to the National Center for Health Statistics, in 2015, 77.3% of all black births were illegitimate.

If BLM cared about their communities, they would not promote their destruction in riots.

BLM would also be talking about the black police officers that have been killed in the riots, like as David Dorn and Dave Patrick Underwood. BLM isn’t talking about these black lives because these lives don’t support the narrative they are pushing.

What BLM really cares about is dividing us. If we are divided, we are weak. If we are divided, we are easy to control, and the left wants complete control of our lives. The left along with BLM want God, law, and order out of America.

What does BLM demand?

BLM and other organizations participating in the riots are demanding that people bow down and ask for forgiveness for the racism they “inherently” have because they have a different skin color. But did not God make our skin color? Did God make a mistake when He made Caucasians, African Americans, Native Americans, Asians, and every other ethnic group? Aren’t all ethnic groups equal in God’s sight and therefore a good thing?

• Galatians 3:28 says, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus”.

• Romans 2:11 says, “For God shows no partiality…”

• Colossians 3:11 says, “Here there is not Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free; but Christ is all, and in all.”

If according to Scripture, no skin color is superior to another because God shows no partiality, why should we apologize for the way God created us? God makes no mistakes. God says in Psalm 139 that we are “fearfully and wonderfully made.”

Scripture teaches whom humans should bow down before:

• Psalm 95:6 says, “Oh come, let us worship and bow down; let us kneel before the Lord, our Maker!”

• Philippians 2:10-11 says, “So that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

So, what is the correct Christian response to the BLM movement?

As Christ followers, we kneel only before the throne of God. Before no one and no movement do we bow our knees in reverence and submission.

Believers, stop promoting the voices of those whose platform, ideals, and solutions are completely antithetical to God’s Word. Stop obsessing about how we look to the world. The world will hate us because they hate God (John 15:18). The world is diametrically opposed to God and His laws.

Why are we trying to make people accept us? Could it be that many Christians value the opinions of the world above God’s? (Prov 29:25)

What did your Blackout screen really say?

Your Blackout screen said that being white or something other than black—that this lack of melanin in your skin—is shameful and something to apologize for.

Your Blackout screen said that you are willing to bow before someone other than God.

Your Blackout screen said that America is racist, police are racist, and police are looking for opportunities to kill black people.

Your Blackout screen said that we are not equal. Our skin color separates us. Is this the message of the gospel? No, it is not. God calls for unity, not division. (Psalm 133:1)

The BLM movement is opposed to everything the message of the gospel of Jesus Christ stands for, and no believer should stand—or, rather, kneel—in support of this movement. “Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?” (2 Corinthians 6:14) 

Believers, stop embracing this movement. Reject the false narrative deceptively advanced in the name of compassion. Stop believing the lie.

The reason all forms of racism must be opposed is that God opposes racism. The same bigotry that has its roots in the BLM movement is the same bigotry that existed in Nazi Germany during the 1930’s and the American South in the 1800’s.

At the center of all racism is sin. Racism must be denounced as exactly what it is—a sin that falls short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23). For those of us in Christ, we can and must declare the gospel as the only means to heal our broken and divided land. We are all one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:28)

Alyssa Josephs is a 17 year-old conservative Christian who is passionate about following Christ and being a gospel witness to her peers. She lives with her family in Chicago.

We take very seriously the trust you place in Illinois Family Institute when you send a gift.
We understand that we are accountable before you and God to honor your trust. 

I had awarded Minneapolis mayor Jacob Frey the award for Most Cringeworthy Performative Act/photo op of 2020 for his fake body-wracking sobbing while kneeling at George Floyd’s casket. Frey’s performative act/photo op topped even that of the genuflecting congressional thespians adorned in culturally appropriated African kente-clothe scarves led by prayer warrior Nancy Pelosi.

You might want to take some Zofran 30 minutes before watching this:

But now I must rescind the award and give it to the dozen apparently racist celebrities publicly confessing and self-flagellating before the Black Lives Matter Crusaders for their collective, systemic white transgressions.

In melodramatically somber tones, lesbian Sarah Paulson, Aaron Paul, bisexual Kesha (formerly Ke$ha), Bethany Joy Lenz, Kristen Bell, Justin Theroux,  Debra Messing, Mark Duplass, Bryce Dallas Howard (Ron Howard’s daughter), Julianne Moore, Piper Perabo, Stanley Tucci, Ilana Glazer, and gymnast Aly Raisman are taking responsibility for “every unchecked moment, for every time it was easier to ignore than to call it out for what it was, for every not-so-funny joke, every unfair stereotype, every blatant injustice, no matter how big or small, every time” they “remained silent,” and “every time” they “explained away police brutality, or turned a blind eye.”

Eleven of the twelve sanctimonious celebrities work in an industry rife with sexism and exploitation of women and now we learn they are also, apparently, guilty of racism. While profiting from one of the most hypocritical and destructive industries in the country that creates and promotes soft-core porn and glorifies violence, all these self-indulgent, privileged celebrities are now confessing to being racists.

Are they really responsible for every not-so-funny joke, unfair stereotype, and blatant injustice in the world? Did all twelve of them really explain away police brutality? If that’s true, they have a lot to atone for.

The moralizers/offenders identify what they see from their snazzy digs:

Black people are being slaughtered in the streets, killed in their own homes. Going for a job should not be a death sentence. Sleeping in your own home should not be a death sentence. Playing video games with your nephew should not be a death sentence. Shopping in a store should not be a death sentence. Business as usual should not be life-threatening.

No disagreement. Is there anyone in America who believes black people should be slaughtered in the streets, killed in their own homes, killed while playing video games with their relatives, or killed while shopping?

But is there a pervasive problem with black people being slaughtered in the streets, killed in their own homes, or murdered while shopping? Well, yes, there is, but the slaughtering of blacks—including innocent children sitting on their porches, sleeping in their beds, and walking home from school—is being committed primarily by young black men raised without fathers.

Here are some data from scholar Heather MacDonald that the celebrity social justice warriors may want to consider:

However sickening the video of Floyd’s arrest, it isn’t representative of the 375 million annual contacts that police officers have with civilians. A solid body of evidence finds no structural bias in the criminal-justice system with regard to arrests, prosecution or sentencing. Crime and suspect behavior, not race, determine most police actions.

In 2019 police officers fatally shot 1,004 people, most of whom were armed or otherwise dangerous. African-Americans were about a quarter of those killed by cops last year (235), a ratio that has remained stable since 2015. That share of black victims is less than what the black crime rate would predict, since police shootings are a function of how often officers encounter armed and violent suspects. In 2018, the latest year for which such data have been published, African-Americans made up 53% of known homicide offenders in the U.S. and commit about 60% of robberies, though they are 13% of the population.

The police fatally shot nine unarmed blacks and 19 unarmed whites in 2019, according to a Washington Post database, down from 38 and 32, respectively, in 2015. The Post defines “unarmed” broadly to include such cases as a suspect in Newark, N.J., who had a loaded handgun in his car during a police chase. In 2018 there were 7,407 black homicide victims. Assuming a comparable number of victims last year, those nine unarmed black victims of police shootings represent 0.1% of all African-Americans killed in 2019. By contrast, a police officer is 18½ times more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male is to be killed by a police officer.

On Memorial Day weekend in Chicago alone, 10 African-Americans were killed in drive-by shootings. Such routine violence has continued—a 72-year-old Chicago man shot in the face on May 29 by a gunman who fired about a dozen shots into a residence; two 19-year-old women on the South Side shot to death as they sat in a parked car a few hours earlier; a 16-year-old boy fatally stabbed with his own knife that same day. This past weekend, 80 Chicagoans were shot in drive-by shootings, 21 fatally, the victims overwhelmingly black. Police shootings are not the reason that blacks die of homicide at eight times the rate of whites and Hispanics combined; criminal violence is. …

A 2015 Justice Department analysis of the Philadelphia Police Department found that white police officers were less likely than black or Hispanic officers to shoot unarmed black suspects. Research by Harvard economist Roland G. Fryer Jr. also found no evidence of racial discrimination in shootings. Any evidence to the contrary fails to take into account crime rates and civilian behavior before and during interactions with police.

Of course, everyone knows the celebrity pontificators aren’t really confessing and don’t really feel guilty. They’re doing what socially insular, intellectually myopic, presumptuous, and self-righteous celebrities do best: scold the deplorables—oh, and act.

What other icky cultural manifestations of kowtowing to the destructive Marxist ideologies of BLM and Antifa fascists are emerging? Here are a few:

• As of this writing, Seattle, a sanctuary city with a plague of homelessness, is now a lawless Antifa/BLM enclave, which has been named the “Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone” (CHAZ). At the command of political leaders, Seattle police surrendered the entire 6-block area to anarchists, including their own police precinct, which has been renamed “Seattle People’s Department East Precinct.” Leftists promptly erected borders around their zone and appointed a defacto armed police department. Lawlessness and chaos–which ultimately result in tyranny–are the logical ends of “progressivism.” Next up, the Purge. If current policemen all across this once-great nation walked off the job and BLM members took over “protecting” our rights and communities, would we have less racism, fewer bad “cops,” and communities better suited for human flourishing? I wonder if any businesses will open stores or corporate headquarters in Seattle? I wonder if any families will move there? Other than anarchists and zombies, who will want to move there?

• There are a number of candidates vying for the title of “Progressive” Hypocrite of the Pandemic Year. Top of the list is Michigan governor Christine Whitmer, or as Andrew Klavan calls her, “Obersturmfuhrer Whitmer, ” who prohibited Michiganders from buying seeds or paint when they were shopping at Home Depot, who told Michiganders not to travel north on Memorial Day weekend as her husband traveled north on Memorial Day weekend to get their essential boat on the water early, and who banned lawn care workers from mowing lawns—alone. Well, here she is marching shoulder-to-shoulder with BLM. Sheltering in place is good for thee but not for she when there’s a campaign for the vice presidency that needs a photo op. #PerformativeAct
  Does anyone think that if there had been hundreds of thousands of conservatives marching peacefully in streets for the past two weeks to protest the crushing quarantine—with zero rioting, arson, looting, and brick-throwing—that leftist quarantine zealots would have been silent? Or would there have been mass rage, rending of clothes, and sanctimonious scoldings over the iniquitous disregard for human life demonstrated by demonstrators?

• The mob is coming for your jobs. John Daniel Davidson writing for The Federalist warns that your position on BLM has consequences:

There will be no opting out of the Black Lives Matter movement. You’re either for BLM or against it—and if you’re against it, you’re a racist. You will either support BLM publicly and enthusiastically, or you will be harassed, shunned, and shamed out of mainstream America. If you dare to speak a word against BLM, you will be targeted, mobbed, and probably fired.

• Leftists now want to burn books (and movies and historical monuments), but since they can’t actually say that, they had to figure out a way to conceal that they want to burn books. What to do, what to do? 💡Brainstorm!Just rename book-burning. Call it “decolonizing your bookshelf.” Oh, and when you’re done with all that decolonizing, call the Firemen:

Coloured people don’t like Little Black Sambo. Burn it. White people don’t feel good about Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Burn it. Someone’s written a book on tobacco and cancer of the lungs? The cigarette people are weeping? Burn the book. (Captain Beatty, Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury).

We just put our American flag up at our house. I think it’s going to stay up for a while. I am deeply thankful to live in America where “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” and where our forefathers wrote, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

This is a remarkable country built on principles that enable it to become “a more perfect Union” as long as we remember the Creator who endowed us with Rights. Without a Creator, there exist no unalienable Rights. Without a Creator, there exist no transcendent truths, no moral absolutes. Un-created human lives don’t matter. Un-created humans create and inhabit a world of highly intelligent dogs eating dogs.

I hope Christians who, in the face of slander, hostility, and threats, offer feeble, vapid defenses of their silence on issues that both culture and Scripture address realize that 1. We the people are the government, 2. Children are watching as parents model cowardice and rationalization, and 3. Silent capitulators are feeding the behemoth that will devour their children’s and grandchildren’s hearts, minds, liberty, and maybe their bodies.

But by all means continue. Take up your crosses daily, and hide them in the basement.

Listen to this article read by Laurie: 

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/nauseating-performative-acts-by-celebrity-racists.mp3

We take very seriously the trust you place in Illinois Family Institute when you send a gift.
We understand that we are accountable before you and God to honor your trust. 

Written by Dr. Everett Piper

In April 1963, Martin Luther King Jr. wrote his letter from the Birmingham Jail. In it, he argued that “there are two types of laws: just and unjust,” King went on: “A just law is a … code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with that moral law.”

King then said, “Any law that uplifts [the human being] is just. Any law that degrades human [beings] is unjust. All segregation is unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damages the [human being].

“Segregation, to use the terminology of the Jewish philosopher Martin Buber,” contended King, “substitutes an ‘it’ for a ‘thou’ … and ends up relegating persons to the status of things [such as a color or a race].

“Segregation is morally wrong and sinful. Sin is separation … and segregation is an existential expression of man’s tragic separation, his awful estrangement, his terrible sinfulness.”

In other words, what King was clearly saying was this: When you divide what should be united, you are not an integrationist. You are a segregationist. And you are guilty of sin.

Voddie Baucham, dean of Theology at the African Christian University in Lusaka, Zambia, says it this way,

“The concept of race is not a biblical idea; it is a constructed idea. You won’t find the idea of races in the Bible. [In Scripture], we are all the race of Adam. One race, one blood … The separations we have created — the racial categories — are artificial … They are not real … Racial distinctions are things that we have made up to divide ourselves … But the all-sufficient Word of God says to us, ‘That’s a lie, stop believing it!’”

The take-home from both King and Mr. Baucham is this. We are made in the image of God. He designed us and defined us, and when we compromise His description of who we are — when we hyphenate our identity through our contrived definitions and divisions — we not only compromise the dignity of man but also denigrate the very definition of God.

St. Paul says,

“There is ONE body … and ONE God. For in Christ … there is neither Jew nor Greek … You are all ONE [emphasis mine] in Christ Jesus.”

In Genesis 1:27, we are told that “God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him …” Moses is very clear. God did not say he created humanity and then divided us by categories. All men and women are created as a singular race that is a direct reflection of the unity of triune God himself. There is absolutely nothing here that suggests otherwise.

In the “moral law of God,” there is no black and white. There is no such thing as a hyphenated human being. There is no such division. The only definition of man that we have in the Bible is that God created us as a unified “thou,” not a bunch of divided “its.”

Any segregation of this image — of the Imago Dei — into separate categories based on the “color of one’s skin rather than the content of one’s character” is “an existential expression of man’s tragic separation, his awful estrangement, his terrible sinfulness.”

The enemy of human dignity and human freedom knows this. He knows that all that’s necessary to conquer us is to divide us from each other and divide us from God.

Our nation’s seal says E Pluribus Unum and not E Unum Pluribus for a reason.

It is out of many, one! Not out of one, many!

United, we stand. Divided, we fall.

The consequence of abandoning this truth is always anarchy, not freedom. Lies always result in more and more bondage and less and less liberty.

Remember this in November.

Never vote for anyone shouting diversity rather than unity.

Never vote for anyone marching for “us” vs. “them.”

Never vote for anyone who focuses on black vs. white; the 99 percent vs. the one; the proletariat vs. the bourgeoisie.

Never vote for anyone who implies that some “lives matter” and others don’t.

Never vote for anyone who is “out of harmony with the moral law of God.”

Never vote for dividing and segregating the Imago Dei.

Never vote for anyone who waves the banner of the “it” vs. the “thou.”

Such people care little for those they claim to defend. They only care about power.

Such people know that if they can divide us, they can control us by manipulating our anger, resentment and our desire for revenge.

Martin Luther King Jr. knew this. He understood not only the lessons of Scripture but also those of history. He knew that a message of division and retaliation rather than one of unity and repentance always brings the “guillotine” and blood flowing in the streets.

Dr. Everett Piper, former president of Oklahoma Wesleyan University, is a columnist for The Washington Times and author of “Not A Day Care: The Devastating Consequences of Abandoning Truth” (Regnery 2017).

This article was originally published at The Washington Times.

New Orleans Saints quarterback Drew Brees, a committed Christian, and, before last week, deeply admired and liked by people of all colors and no color, committed an almost unforgivable sin. He said this in response to a specific question about athletes kneeling during the national anthem:

I will never agree with anybody disrespecting the flag of the United States of America or our country. Let me just tell you what I see or what I feel when the national anthem is played, and when I look at the flag of the United States. I envision my two grandfathers, who fought for this country during World War II, one in the Army and one in the Marine Corp, both risking their lives to protect our country and to try to make our country and this world a better place. Every time I stand with my hand over my heart, looking at that flag, and singing the national anthem, that’s what I think about, and in many cases, it brings me to tears thinking about all that has been sacrificed, not just [by] those in the military, but … those throughout the civil rights movements of the ’60s, and everyone, and all that has been endured by so many people up until this point. And is everything right with our country right now? No, it’s not. We still have a long way to go, but I think what you do by standing there and showing respect to the flag with your hand over your heart, is it shows unity. It shows that we are all in this together, we can all do better and that we are all part of the solution.” (emphasis added)

“Progressives” became apoplectic and splenetic. Judging from their attacks, one would think Brees had publicly celebrated Derek Chauvin.

Under withering attacks, Brees offered two apologies because the mob hated his first one. Then his wife, Brittany Brees, issued an apology in which she said,

Somehow we as white America … can feel good about not being racist, feel good about loving one another as God loves us. We can feel good about educating our children about the horrors of slavery and history. We can read books to our children about Martin Luther King, Malcolm X., Hank Aaron, Barack Obama, Rosa Parks, Harriet Tubman.. and feel like we are doing our part to raise our children to love, be unbiased and with no prejudice. To teach them about all of the African Americans that have fought for and risked their lives against racial injustice. Somehow as white Americans we feel like that checks the box of doing the right thing. Not until this week did Drew and I realize THAT THIS IS THE PROBLEM. To say “I don’t agree with disrespecting the flag” .. I now understand was also saying I don’t understand what the problem really is, I don’t understand what you’re fighting for, and I’m not willing to hear you because of our preconceived notions of what that flag means to us. That’s the problem we are not listening, white America is not hearing. We’re not actively LOOKING for racial prejudice.

If saying “I don’t agree with disrespecting the flag” also says “I don’t understand what the problem really is,” then does kneeling during the national anthem mean both “America is systemically racist” and “I don’t understand why you value the flag and national anthem. I don’t understand what you see that’s good in America. I’m not willing to hear you because of our view of America as pervasively evil and whites as oppressors”?

Unlike Brittany Brees, I can’t speak for all of white America. I don’t know what all of white America feels. But I do know that for a lot of white Americans, teaching our children about the horrors of slavery and lynchings, about Jim Crow laws, and about Harriet Tubman, Rosa Parks, Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., Hank Aaron, Jesse Owens, and the Tuskegee Airmen is not about “feeling good.” Raising our children to love others, to hate bigotry, and to stand up for mistreated friends is not about “feeling good” or “checking boxes.” It’s not about virtue-signaling or pride. It’s about serving Christ. It’s about loving our neighbors as ourselves. It’s about truth.

“Progressives” argue that people who explicitly condemn police brutality and all forms of bigotry and who have never said or done anything racist are the problem if they don’t endorse kneeling during the national anthem. Just curious, does that principle of collective guilt apply to all egregious sin? Are people who explicitly oppose the sexual exploitation of women and children in pornography, strip clubs, prostitution, and sex trafficking, and who have never viewed porn, visited a strip club, hired a prostitute, or trafficked women and children a problem? Should they kneel during the national anthem as a protest against the many Americans who watch porn, leer at women in strip clubs, hire prostitutes, and/or traffic in women and children? Are our flag and national anthem now symbols of the poisonous systemic abuse of women and children that colleges and universities promote through courses that celebrate porn? Are Americans who explicitly oppose the sexual exploitation of women and children, who are pro-actively teaching their children about its evil, and who have never been complicit in it via using porn, visiting strip clubs, hiring prostitutes, or sex-trafficking, the problem if they are not “actively” looking for the sexual exploitation of women and children?

Former NFL player Shannon Sharpe said this about Drew Brees’s response to an interviewer’s question about the knee-taking of athletes:

[Drew] issued an apology … but it’s meaningless because the guys know he spoke his heart the very first time around. I don’t know what Drew’s going to do, but he probably should just go ahead and retire now. He will never be the same. Take it from a guy that has been a leader in the locker room for a number of years. What he said, they will never look at him the same because he spoke his heart. It wasn’t what he said, it was how he said it. He was defiant. I will NEVER [yes, Sharpe shouted that defiantly] respect the man.

BTW, Brees did not speak defiantly as Sharpe falsely claimed—making Sharpe, therefore, a slanderer. Don’t believe me? Well, watch it yourself and see if you think Brees was “defiant”:

Sharpe expresses the “progressive” view of “tolerance,” and this is why “progressivism” will destroy both freedom and the country. Brees saying that he disagrees with knee-taking during the national anthem while at the same time saying the flag represents the sacrifices made during the Civil Rights era and acknowledging that right now we have a lot of work yet to do renders him—in Sharpe’s repugnant view—unsuitable for employment or respect.

Brees’s teammate Malcolm Jenkins castigated him too saying,

Drew Brees, if you don’t understand how hurtful, how insensitive your comments are, you are part of the problem. To think that because your grandfathers served in this country and you have a great respect for the flag that everybody else should have the same ideals and thoughts that you do is ridiculous. And it shows that you don’t know history. Because when our grandfathers fought for this country and served and they came back, they didn’t come back to a hero’s welcome. They came back and got attacked for wearing their uniforms. They came back to people, to racism, to complete violence.”

Brees never said anything like “everybody else should have the same ideals and thoughts” that he does. Moreover, Brees is justified in valuing the service of his grandfathers, and he is justified in his respect and love for America—the country to which emigrants the world over seek entry. He’s justified in loving America for her founding—though imperfectly realized—principles. He’s justified in celebrating the incredible integration of peoples of diverse races, ethnicities, and religions in America. He’s justified in appreciating how far we’ve come since slavery and Jim Crow laws.

It is possible for whites both to value the sacrifice and service of their fathers and grandfathers and to feel contempt for the injustice of black fathers and grandfathers being ill-treated following their service and sacrifice.

Vietnam war veterans—both black and white—were spit on by liberals when they returned home. Do we hold liberals who, not only didn’t engage in such behavior but also condemn it, accountable for that injustice? Do we blame such ugly behavior committed by some liberals fifty years ago on all of America? Does the American flag and national anthem symbolize their repugnant acts?

Jenkins continued,

And then here we are in 2020, with the whole country on fire, everybody witnessing a black man dying—being murdered—at the hands of the police, just in cold blood for everybody to see. The whole country’s on fire, and the first thing that you do is criticize one’s peaceful protest that was years ago when we were trying to signal a sign for help and signal for our allies and our white brothers and sisters, the people we consider to be friends, to get involved? It was ignored. And here we are now with the world on fire and you still continue to first criticize how we peacefully protest because it doesn’t fit in what you do and your beliefs without ever acknowledging that the fact that a man was murdered at the hands of police in front of us all and that it’s been continuing for centuries, that the same brothers that you break the huddle down with before every single game, the same guys that you bleed with and go into battle with every single day go home to communities that have been decimated.

Brees didn’t “continue to first criticize.” He has not been continually criticizing the kneeling protests. He didn’t initiate discussion of the topic. Brees was asked by an interviewer what he would do if teammates kneeled during the national anthem.

And while Brees didn’t mention George Floyd, he did acknowledge the suffering of the black community. To remind Jenkins, this is what Brees said:

[I]t brings me to tears, thinking about all that has been sacrificed, not just [by] those in the military, but … [by] those throughout the civil rights movements of the ’60s, and everyone, and all that has been endured by so many people up until this point. And is everything right with our country right now? No, it’s not. We still have a long way to go. … we can all do better and … we are all part of the solution.

What exactly did Jenkins mean when he said the kneeling protests were “ignored”? Likely he meant that there were many people who didn’t participate or support the protest. In other words, in Jenkins’ view, the only acceptable way to help decimated black communities is to protest the national anthem. But then isn’t Jenkins doing exactly what he accuses Brees of doing? Isn’t he demanding that everyone believe what he believes about the protests, the flag, and the national anthem?

Jenkins is ignoring that there are white people and black people trying to help decimated black communities. They’ve been trying for years, but they’re shouted down and called bigots for having different views than white and black liberals on how to solve the problems of racism and urban blight. Here are some of their ideas:

• How should we address actual racism committed by racist individuals in police departments—most of which are controlled by liberals? Punish them and/or get rid of them. How do we do that? Revisit/reform “qualified immunity” and policies that conceal police misconduct and protect brutal cops.

• How should we address crime in black communities? Work on transforming society by getting rid of no-fault divorce and using every resource available to promote true marriage and discourage out-of-wedlock pregnancies. Intact families with a mother and a father are the greatest protections against poverty and crime. And when crime is reduced in communities, businesses will move in.

• How do we improve education? Offer impoverished families school choice and end teachers’ unions that promote destructive policies and protect lousy teachers. And stop teaching divisive and false ideas from organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center’s education arm Teaching Tolerance, or Howard Zinn’s People’s History of the United States, or The 1619 Project that present imbalanced views of American history and teach children of color that because of white oppression, they have no hope of moving up in the world.

• How do we help blacks improve their financial position? Deregulate businesses and reduce taxes in order to grow the economy, thereby providing jobs.

• How do we help eradicate bigotry, bitterness, and hatred? We preach the gospel—the whole gospel.

If Jenkins is concerned about the decimation in his community, why attack Brees? Why not attack “progressives” who have run the cities in which those decimated communities subsist? Why not attack the racism profiteers like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson who make bank by fomenting racial division? Why not attack liberal leaders who deny school choice to poor black families? Why not attack teachers’ unions that protect lousy teachers in failing schools? Why not attack fatherlessness that results in criminality? Why not attack Black Lives Matter (BLM) that seeks to dismantle families, which are the single best hope for black children?

Here are just some of BLM’s principles and goals:

We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.

We foster a queer‐affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking.

Note that mothers and parents are mentioned but not fathers.

Are those principles and goals helpful to black children? Are they unifying? Are they good?

Jenkins was not done with his accusatory screed:

Drew, unfortunately, you’re somebody who doesn’t understand their privilege. You don’t understand the potential that you have to actually be an advocate for the people that you call brothers.

Will Jenkins stand behind whites who advocate for school choice, true marriage, and the end of teachers’ unions? Will Jenkins cheer whites who advocate against premarital sex and out-of-wedlock births? Will Jenkins cheer whites who advocate for the end of divisive, destructive diversity training and The 1619 Project that teach lies and foster division? Will Jenkins cheer for whites who advocate the ideas of Candace Owens, Thomas Sowell, Ben Carson, Bob Woodson and “1776 Unites” project? Or are whites expected to advocate for only ideas and policies that Jenkins, Ta-Nehisi Coates, Nikole Hannah-Jones and her 1619 Project scam promulgate?

Liberals have had fifty years to solve the problems endemic to urban communities of color—including eight years with a black president whose presidency saw black unemployment and racial division surge. Is Jenkins willing to listen to the ideas of others on how to help, how to advocate, how to get involved? Is he willing to listen to diverse ideas on how to rebuild suffering communities? Or will he say to black conservatives what he said to Brees: “you should shut the f–k up.”

It’s ironic that progressives have controlled most major cities for decades and have been forcing Americans in government schools and the corporate world to endure years of “diversity training,” “sensitivity” sessions, and “social justice” indoctrination, and yet we just suffered through the worst race riots since 1968 when Boomers and their rotten ideas began corrupting academia.

Their rotten ideas have—as expected and predicted—produced rotten fruit that is poisoning the hearts and minds of Americans. Race relations had been improving slowly but surely until the Boomers’ ideas seeped from sullied towers in bastions of idiocy like Berkeley to countless colleges and universities and then into high schools. Peggy McIntosh, White Privilege Conferences, and Howard Zinn’s revisionist history of the United States turned young teens’ minds into burbling cauldrons of contempt for America and its founding principles—those very principles that had brought us so far from the days of slavery, Jim Crow laws, and red-lining. With an erroneous understanding of American history, young Americans falsely believe that America was and remains a wholly evil country that must be destroyed and rebuilt in the recriminatory image of “progressives.”

Former NFL coach and Christian Tony Dungy, who likes and respects Drew Brees, expressed disappointment with his initial comments. Dungy said that “we need unifying voices, not divisive voices.” Dungy’s comments were disappointing in that he didn’t address the divisiveness of Black Lives Matter, Antifa, The 1619 Project, Critical Race Theory, or people like Al Sharpton. He didn’t address the divisiveness of the attacks on Drew Brees for saying—when asked—that he doesn’t agree with kneeling during the national anthem. But you see, Dungy wasn’t asked about any of that, just like Brees was not asked specifically about George Floyd.

Two apologies from Drew Brees and one long one from Mrs. Brees, all of which suggest they have joined BLM. These apologies bring to mind Winston Smith at the end of 1984. Sadly, it doesn’t take torture to get grown men (and women) to capitulate to a destructive ideology. All it takes today is a barrage of insults.

Every day, we see across America signs of hope and progress. We see interracial couples, multi-racial churches, multi-racial groups of friends, and upwardly mobile black families. Is America perfect? Of course not. No society can ever be perfect because humans are fallen creatures. Fallen creatures hate. People of all colors hate. But our founding principles are good, and they are guiding us toward better.

Over a dozen years ago, while working at Deerfield High School in Deerfield, Illinois, I was helping a high school junior on her paper for American Studies (still co-taught by the same two teachers today). She cheerily told me that by the end of first semester in American Studies, she hated America and hated being an American. “Social justice” mission accomplished.

Listen to this article read by Laurie: 

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Drew-Brees-the-Mob.mp3

We take very seriously the trust you place in Illinois Family Institute when you send a gift.
We understand that we are accountable before you and God to honor your trust. 

IFI is supported by voluntary donations from good people like you.

Nine years ago, my wife and I were married.

Nine years. It’s a long time. Except that it’s also not so very long.

Long or short, nine years is definitely enough time to experience some of life’s ups and downs together as a couple.

If you’ve ever seen the 1965 Disney move That Darn Cat (starring one of my all-time favorite actors, Dean Jones, as an FBI agent tasked with tailing a roguish cat in an attempt to locate the ruthless bank robbers and their hostage), you may remember the scene in which Patti Randall (Hayley Mills) is talking with her boyfriend, Canoe, after returning home from yet another date spent watching a surfing movie. “Couldn’t we just once,” she asks, “see a nice quiet movie where boy meets girl, they have problems which aren’t too weird, they fall in love and live happily ever after?”

Falling in love and having problems which aren’t too weird—and, of course, living happily ever after—is probably the ambition most of us have in our single days when we envision meeting “the one.”

Real life, of course, isn’t always so simple. We do have problems, and some of them end up falling outside that category of “not too weird” (or hard, or long-lasting, or whatever other adjective you choose to insert).

I’m not talking about marriage problems here. I’m talking about life problems.

Now, I don’t know what sort of challenges you’ve experienced during your married life. Maybe the life problems my wife and I have experienced aren’t as big, serious, or weird as yours. That’s entirely possible. Or maybe they’re more so. The point is, at one level or another, we all have struggles we weren’t thinking about on the happy day we said “I do.”

I didn’t expect the family business I’d built my career around to begin a long, painful decline just a short time after my wife and I tied the knot.

I didn’t expect to be forced into an unexpected and unwanted career change when said family business finally shut down.

I didn’t expect my new business to take so long to get off the ground.

I didn’t expect the mental health challenges that roiled our lives for so many months and which still flare up now and then in unwanted ways.

I didn’t expect parenting four little ones to be as hard as it is. (All you fellow parents can give a knowing chuckle here.)

In short, our lives together have had challenges we didn’t anticipate, problems we didn’t envision, and bumps in the road we didn’t want. From a financial standpoint, we’re certainly not where we expected to be nearly a decade after marriage. We’ve had to raid our meager retirement savings to cover living expenses. We’re still living in our “starter home” with the small yard rather than enjoying a larger house with more space for the kids outside—and what’s more, I have no idea when that will change.

All of those things (and more) are true. And it’s also true that some of those difficulties wouldn’t have been an issue (or at least not as serious) if I were a single man.

But you know what? Despite that, there’s no way I’d want to go back.

Because despite the problems that wouldn’t be problems if I were single, married life is good. God Himself said it’s not good for man to be alone, and I agree. We’re made for companionship. We’re made to share life with a partner who walks beside us through all the ups and downs, no matter what.

And that, by God’s grace (and the goodness and patience of my wife), is what I’ve enjoyed these last nine years.

I have no idea what the next nine years will hold. I could speculate, but I’m not sure my predictions would be any more accurate now than the ones my wife and I made before we were married.

But whatever happens (or doesn’t), here’s what I know I want: with God’s help, I want both of us to still be in love with each other. I want us to be closer to each other and to God than ever before. And I want to be walking beside each other through whatever God allows in our paths.

If you appreciate the work and ministry of IFI,
please consider a tax-deductible donation to sustain our endeavors.

It does make a difference.

Black lives do matter, but not because they’re black—which, as “progressives” continually tell us—is just a social construct. Black lives matter not because of the color of their skin but because they are human lives created in the image and likeness of God and endowed by God with unalienable, intrinsic rights.

Since society is composed of fallen humans with desperately wicked hearts, many forces conspire against blacks, including some toxic systemic forces that demand solutions. Few if any of these solutions are proposed by Black Lives Matter (BLM), Antifa, or the Democratic Party. In fact, in the grimy, grasping quest for power of BLM, Antifa, and “progressives,” they double-down on the policies and cancerous ideologies that undergird those policies, thereby increasing their own political power and the suffering of those whose votes they covet.

Because black lives matter, here are some ideas for uprooting or transforming malignant systemic dysfunction that harms black (and red, yellow, brown, and white) lives:

• Because black babies matter, we should end the barbaric practice of feticide that results in a disproportionate number of black babies being slaughtered every year.

• Because black women matter, we should create a public service campaign like no other—one that encourages men to marry women before having sex with them, or to marry women they impregnate.

• Because black children matter, this public service campaign should urge mothers and fathers to stay together. There is no greater protection against poverty and criminality than being raised by both a mother and father in an intact family. Fatherless homes reliably produce boys vulnerable to gangs who are tutored in the ways of criminality and then grow up to commit violent crimes against their own communities, thereby demonstrating that black lives don’t matter to them.

• Because black families matter, tax policy and public aid should incentivize marriage and employment.

• Because black families matter, they have a right to safe schools and to school choice. Black families living in deteriorating and dangerous urban communities (most of which have long been run by Democrats) should have choices regarding where their children are educated.

• Because black children matter, teachers’ unions must be eradicated. Teachers’ unions protect the jobs of terrible teachers, and through excessive pensions are impoverishing already cash-strapped states which then pass these costs on to taxpayers.

• Because black children matter, government schools should not propagate as truth ideologically biased ideas like those found in The 1619 Project or Howard Zinn’s People’s History of the United States. Teaching erroneous history and/or teaching that America is a country of unparalleled oppression and racial bigotry in which blacks cannot positively affect their own futures does a grave disservice to blacks and truth. Such inaccurate resources foster divisiveness rather than unity or love of the principles on which this country was founded. Untruthful depictions of America’s history in either direction—intensification or minimization of failures— are wrong. It is leftist ideas embedded in “teaching for social justice” that foster hatred of America and racial division. These ideas cultivate feelings of bitterness, resentment, and envy on the parts of “people of color” toward colorless people who have never harmed them. And these ideas cultivate the false belief in communities of color that improving their lots in life is impossible unless colorless people who have committed no sin of racial oppression take the knee.

• Because black lives matter, police unions that protect brutal police officers must be reformed. In a recent National Review article titled “It’s Past Time to Examine How Police Unions Protect Bad Cops,”  John Fund draws attention to an article in the Stanford Law Review in which Katherine Bies writes,

[D]uring the rise of police unions to political power in the 1970s, police unions lobbied for legislation that shrouded personnel files in secrecy and blocked public access to employee records of excessive force or other officer misconduct. Today, these officer misconduct confidentiality statutes continue to prohibit public disclosure of disciplinary records related to police shootings and other instances of excessive force. … [P]olice unions often strategically frame any opposition to their agenda of secrecy as endangering public safety and harming the public interest. However, police unions often conflate “the public interest” with the private interests of police officers. … Additionally, police unions have established highly developed political machinery that exerts significant political and financial pressure on all three branches of government.  

• Because black women, men, and children matter, we should address the existence and easy accessibility of pornography that is destroying families.

• Because black families matter, we should rethink legalized gambling and recreational marijuana that are hurting families economically and spiritually.

• Because black lives matter, celebrities should throw their hefty influence behind all these life-affirming proposals through their music, films, streaming programs, and tweets.

Because black lives matter, theologically orthodox Christians must better employ their creativity and tenacity in figuring out how to “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation.” Because black lives matter, they—like people of all colors and no color—must hear the good news that in Christ “there is not Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free; but Christ is all, and in all.”

Pastor Doug Wilson exposes the worldly “rival reconciliation project” that exacerbates  division and arouses hatred:

[B]ecause secular man has rejected the one in whom we all live and move and have our being, all his attempts are of necessity a downward integration into the void. Their proud project of universal toleration consistently spirals downward into the acids of hatred and violence.

In America, because of our Christian heritage, this project is an attempt to reconcile the trappings of traditional Christianity with the central dogmas of cultural Marxism, and it represents the high water mark of duncical folly. It is an attempt to reconcile squares and circles, good and evil, light and darkness, folly and wisdom, God and the devil. The cosmic reconciliation purchased by Christ has nothing whatever to do with this sort of monstrosity. …

The reason the streets of Minneapolis are on fire is because secular man in his pretended wisdom has been trying to reconcile two completely different methods of reconciliation — the way of atonement through the blood of Christ together with his way of accusation, recrimination, reparations, and retribution. …

But there can be no peace between the God of forgiveness and the god of recrimination, the God of no condemnation and the god of all condemnation.

Should we reconcile blacks and whites who were caught up in bitter enmity with each other? Of course. That is what the gospel does. Should we try to reconcile the world’s way of reconciling with God’s way of reconciling? Of course not. The world’s way only foments more and more bitterness, while God’s way breaks down the middle wall of partition. The world’s way is impotent, and God’s way saves to the uttermost.

There are many Christians who do not see what is happening, and who do not understand a blessed thing about it, but who are trying to help out with this monstrosity by decking out the secularist approach to reconciliation in the language of Christian reconciliation. They point out that ethnic reconciliation is a good thing in Scripture, which is true enough, but then they want to drape the Christian language of reconciliation over the secular way of doing it, which contains no authority, no sap, no salt, and no blood.

The short form of this atrocious compromise is this: Because the blood of Christ puts all ethnic enmities to death, we think we can just go straight to the group hug, declare all ethnic enmities a form of bigotry and a violation of America’s core values, and dispense with the blood of Christ. And then we wonder where all this hatred is coming from.

Listen to this article read by Laurie: 

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Because-Black-Lives-Matter_audio.mp3

We take very seriously the trust you place in Illinois Family Institute when you send a gift.
We understand that we are accountable before you and God to honor your trust. 

IFI is supported by voluntary donations from good people like you.

Overt, organized violent riots over the weekend escalated in such a way that the governors in twenty-three states thought it was necessary to activate the National Guard to augment local police efforts. In Illinois, these riots were not limited to downtown Chicago but spilled over into various city neighborhoods and suburbs like Arlington Heights, Richton Park, Calumet City, Tinley Park, Riverside, Orland Park, Blue Island, and Lansing. In Dolton, rioters thought it was a good idea to throw a brick through the window of Christ Oasis Church.

Other large municipalities also saw similar violence, including Aurora, Rockford, Waukegan, Champaign, Joliet, Springfield, and Peoria,

Reports of the peaceful protests, of which there were a few, were overshadowed by wall-to-wall news coverage of violence, vandalism, looting, and arson locally and in cities across the nation. In Washington D.C., “the church of the presidents” was set on fire by godless insurgents. The damage to St. John’s Church (est. 1816) symbolizes our culture’s rejection of God. Perhaps God has lifted His hand of protection in response to our rebellion and indifference to His precepts.

It was encouraging to hear Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot and Police Superintendent David Brown confirm the suspicions of many that the attacks were coordinated. Listen to their remarks:

Similarly, Minnesota’s attorney general and left-wing “progressive” Keith Ellison told Fox News Sunday that he has “evidence that outsiders have been present and, in some cases, have played a very negative role” in the riots.

There is little doubt who led these attacks. Antifa and Black Lives Matter, both left-wing groups that hate America, were front and center. It is likely that local street gangs composed of fatherless young men who despise law enforcement were also involved.

But questions abound. Were these organized efforts funded? If so, by whom? Were some of these violent agitators paid? Were they given a list of targets to burn, loot, and destroy? I wonder where all those criminals they let out of prison early are right now? If I were a betting man, I’d wager that some were looting, vandalizing, and setting fires.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to send a message to President Trump, Vice President Pence, and our federal lawmakers asking that the DOJ begin a criminal investigation to identify and prosecute the domestic enemies behind these organized efforts to destroy our cities. The FBI, the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives, and the U.S. Attorney’s office must use their resources to get to the bottom of this.

Condemning Injustice

Left-wing political operatives want to make the murder of George Floyd and victims like him solely about race. That is a superficial reading of the problem, as it goes much deeper than that. It is an issue of the human condition. 

Let me be unequivocal: Based on the horrific video clip and autopsy report, we condemn the lethal actions of Derek Chauvin and the inaction of the Minneapolis police officers. There is little doubt that their policing authority was abused and the civil rights of Mr. Floyd fatally quashed.

Additionally, we unambiguously support peaceful protests and political actions that demand justice in this case. Using the political tools we have been given to safeguard God’s gift of self-government is the way to address injustices and grievances. We do not and cannot support violence, vandalism, looting, and arson as it only spreads injustice and disunity. (1 Peter 3:8-14)

A Biblical Perspective

Jeremiah 17:9 teaches us that the “heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; Who can know it?” This is the human condition, we were born with a sinful nature (Psalm 51:5). 

In Mark 7:1-23, Jesus tells us that from our unregenerate heart

“proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lewdness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness.”

There isn’t one of us that is “good” in and of ourselves (Romans 3:10-12; Psalm 14:1-3; Psalm 53:1-3). Our sinful human nature has separated us from God and has us bound for hell — an eternal separation from God (Romans 6:23; Ezekiel 18:20; James 1:15).

Only through Jesus Christ can we find forgiveness (1 John 1:9), be reconciled to God (2 Corinthians 5:20), and be given a new nature (2 Corinthians 5:14-19; Ephesians 4:17-24; Galatians 6:12-16; Colossians 3:1-11).

As our culture drifts further and further away from God, we see an increase in the acceptance and practice of sin. Roman 1:28-32 tells us what to expect:

And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful.

Certain operatives want to use the Floyd tragedy for political purposes, to divide our country along racial and ethnic lines. Intersectionality is all the rage. Divide and conquer is not only a ploy of the “progressive” agenda, but a key tactic of the devil.

In Scripture, the Lord tells us repeatedly how important unity is (John 17:23; 1 Corinthians 1:10; Ephesians 4:11-13; Colossians 3:13-14; Psalm 133:1; Romans 12:16). It should not surprise us that there is unseen spiritual warfare that is manifesting in the physical realm, seeking to divide us.

In addition, in John 8:44 Jesus warns us that Satan is a murderer, a liar, and a deceiver:

He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it.

One of Satan’s goals is to divide us. (Matt. 12:25; Mark 3:25; Luke 11:17) Satan wants us to be bitter, ungrateful, angry, discontent, so he lies to us about our condition and God’s goodness. The New York Times‘ 1619 Project is a prime example of this effort to deceive Americans into a sinful attitude. Instead of being grateful to God for every challenge and circumstance (1 Thessalonians 5:18), resentment, bitterness, and suspicion are fostered. Every one of us should be thanking God for the privilege of living in this amazing country at this time in history, where the poorest among have a higher standard of living than royalty did throughout most of history.

Being the Remnant

We no longer live in a culture that has a Christian worldview. The residue of God’s blessings on this nation is wearing thin. We have been living off the cultural capital that came as a result of the faithfulness of previous generations. Nonetheless, we have been called at such a time as this to be ambassadors for His Kingdom (2 Corinthians 5:20).

Faithfulness, no matter the circumstance, is required of us (1 Corinthians 4:2), trusting that He will never leave us or forsake us, trusting that His plan is better than our plan, trusting that He is our strong tower and refuge. We dare not lean on our own understanding.

As this spiritual battle waxes and wanes, our fervent and resolute prayers must intensify. We should redouble our prayers for our family members, our church, our neighbors, our state, and our nation.

Likewise, we need to be wise about how we spend our time, talents, and treasures. Are we investing in temporal goods and goals, or are we working to advance the Kingdom of God, to see His will done on earth as it is in heaven? (Matthew 6:19-20-21)?

We take very seriously the trust you place in Illinois Family Institute when you send a gift.
We understand that we are accountable before you and God to honor your trust. 

IFI is supported by voluntary donations from good people like you.

As city after city in America is under assault, with buildings on fire and bloodied bodies laying in the streets, we need to unite in our condemnation of these violent riots.

There is nothing righteous about looting. Or bashing someone over the head with a skateboard and pelting him with stones. Or vandalizing the store of a black business owner.

This is chaos. This is anarchy. This is lawlessness. This is wrong.

We can be outraged over the killing of George Floyd and aggrieved over the sin of racism without resorting to this.

Here are four reasons why these race riots do far more harm than good.

First, they came at a time when more and more Americans were willing to talk about apparent racial injustice. As tweeted by the influential black rapper and podcaster, Zuby, “The USA temporarily had a moment where virtually ALL Americans were united in empathy and sympathy, over the pointless, awful killing of a fellow citizen.

“People of ALL colours and ALL political stripes, unanimous on an issue of clear injustice.”

“That’s extremely rare…”

He continued, “Now this unity and sympathy has been divided, diluted and misdirected as people fight on the streets, steal from their neighbours, and torch their own communities.”

“It’s fricking sad to see.”

“I’ll say it again. Some people thrive on division and anger. They don’t want solutions.” (A hat tip to my colleague John Zmirak for these references. He responded to Zuby’s tweets with his own: “The looters in Minneapolis no more represent black Americans than the neo-Nazi thugs in Charlottesville represented me.”)

As I emphasized in my latest article, “Hope for Black Americans,” this was a rare time when law and order conservatives like Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, and Dan Bongino united with Christian conservatives like Franklin Graham in condemning the killing of a black American by a police officer. Yet the focus has now shifted to the violence and lawlessness of the riots. How on earth is this positive or helpful?

Second, the riots paint a negative picture of black Americans, as if this is what “they” do. As expressed in a May 31 email, conservative Christian activist Scott Lively “contends that the purpose of Black Lives Matter rioting is to INCREASE Racism to justify the Marxist race-war narrative, and laments that too many conservatives and constitutionalists fall into the trap of lumping the innocent majority of Black Americans with the trained thugs of the BLM and the useful idiots who run with them.”

Obviously, Lively’s words are confrontational and even inflammatory, and one can debate his larger thesis. But his overall point is clear: the race riots, allegedly carried out in the memory of George Floyd, play into the worst racial stereotypes of black Americans. I ask again: how on earth is this helpful?

Third, these riots are destructive in their very nature, appealing to our worst instincts. As I tweeted on May 31,

“Peaceful protests can be righteous, godly, and powerful, even reflecting the Spirit of Christ. Rioting and looting are unrighteous, ungodly, and destructive, reflecting the spirit of lawlessness and chaos and murder. Which spirit is that?”

One of my black friends, a historian with a strong social conscience, said to me, “Anything that comes to kill steal and destroy is the enemy” (meaning, from Satan; see John 10:10). Precisely so.

In response to my tweet, someone challenged me, saying, “Forgive me if I’m wrong but didn’t Jesus clear out the temple with a whip?”

I replied,

“1) He acted in perfect harmony with the Lord. We often do not. 2) He did not kill anyone. He did not set the Temple on fire. He did not destroy the businesses of honest, hardworking people. I could go on and on. Surely you must know this.”

Enough said.

Fourth, there appears to be strong evidence that these riots are being aided and abetted by bad players.

Pastor Jim Garlow reported via email on May 31, “A couple of hours ago, some bussed-in protesters were attacking the La Mesa, CA police station only a few miles from where I live.

“A close friend of mine who is black has reported that the Minneapolis Airport was full of people today being flown in to create havoc. Many were being bussed in. And now we are hearing reports of pallets of bricks being dropped off at street corners in cities to give weapons to the anarchists. The George Soros types have found their moment. We pray for our President, governors and mayors.”

This was confirmed by Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, himself a liberal Democrat and an African American Muslim:

“We have evidence that outsiders have been present and, in some cases, have played a very negative role. But I’ve been talking with protesters and trying to get a sense of who some of these folks are and I’ve heard mixed things. Some of the negative stuff has come from people in Minnesota and some of it has come from people on the outside. What I’d say is we’ve got enough to handle on our own and that what we really need to do is refocus on justice for Mr. Floyd. And the negative behavior, looting, arson, does not help us achieve that goal.”

Conservative broadcaster (and former NYPD officer) Dan Bongino was even more blunt: “This isn’t a protest anymore, this is a coup,” he said.

He added, “This is an organized internal coup by a small group of agitators acting as a domestic terror group. That’s a fact.”

No wonder that President Trump has now declared Antifa a terrorist organization.

Groups like this rip at the very fabric of our nation, and their goals are vastly different than the goals of the vast majority of Americans.

Let us then work together for equality and justice. One way we can do that is by denouncing these violent riots. Then, we can refocus on the killing of George Floyd and the larger questions of equal treatment under the law.

This article was originally published at Townhall.com.

During the COVID shutdown, I would bet that a lot of families watched more movies or TV series than they might have without a national quarantine. While left on my own, I will invariably choose an old western, war movie, or police show from years ago. But if my wife and I are watching something, and sometimes even with the kids too, we are much more likely to see a romantic comedy than exploding tanks or screaming Indians.

You may have noticed in modern movies that there is an ideal of finding one’s soulmate in romantic movies. Modern progressive ideology of a marriage being about self-fulfillment, more than commitment, is clearly evident in our culture.

This is not to say one should marry someone whom they don’t enjoy simply because they are willing to marry. But if marriage is about self-fulfillment and the things that two people do together, what happens when times get tough or if one partner develops dementia or a disease? What if sailing, golf, or travel are no longer possible or no longer enjoyable together?

If marriage is about love and companionship between partners who can largely concentrate on doing fun things they like together, does this model have pitfalls, or does it make for more happier marriages as might often be seen on a sitcom or the Hallmark Channel?

The proponents of this more utilitarian approach to marriage do not deny that it will lead to more divorce as couples split when a marriage loses its usefulness for self-fulfillment, and a spouse simply moves on. However, they argue that their approach makes for more happier marriages, the cream of the crop theory so to speak, as those who are not fulfilled separate and those who remain are the happiest.

Divorce has climbed dramatically in the US and in societies where the belief that marriage should only last as long as matrimony brings self-fulfillment. Yet, has this truly brought happiness?

Bradford Wilcox of the Institute for Family Studies has a fascinating article about this in which he notes that while divorce has increased dramatically since the early 1970’s, marital happiness has not. About 67 percent of husbands and wives were “very happy” about their marriage in the early 1970s, but only about 62 percent of them were very happy by the late-1980s, according to the General Social Survey.

What is especially striking about this decline in marital quality is that, according to progressive logic, marital quality should have improved in the 1970s and 80’s as fewer and fewer Americans married and many supposedly second-rate marriages were dissolved.

Wilcox astutely notes,

What proponents of the progressive view did not really anticipate is this: if your parents, best friend, and sister all get divorced, your confidence in your own marriage is likely to take a hit. That’s because how we think about and approach our own union is deeply affected by what we see happening in the marriages of our friends and family members. Worries about the future of your own marriage, in turn, reduce your sense of emotional security, willingness to invest in your relationship, and happiness in your own marriage.

In his own recent study of California women, Wilcox concludes that how one views the permanency of marriage has a big impact upon marital happiness. He found, 82 percent of those who embrace an ethic of marital permanence report being satisfied in their marriages, compared to 77 percent of those who take the more conditional or functional view of marriage.

Why? Wilcox asks.

“In most marriages, knowing that you and your spouse are deeply committed to one another, come what may, fosters many other marital goods: more trust, more emotional security, more mutually beneficial investments in one another and the marriage—both financially and emotionally—more fidelity, and a clearer vision for a joint future.  All of which translate, for the average couple, into higher levels of marital quality, especially compared to couples who do not share a commitment to marriage ‘til death do us part.”

This article was originally published by our friends at AFA of Indiana.

Written by Peter Heck

In mid-March, Politico ran a series of short essays from “experts” on how coronavirus would change the world permanently. If you’re curious why I designate them as “experts” rather than experts, the authorities they assembled consisted of a cadre of college professors, including commentator Tom Nichols. Predictably, Nichols spent the majority of his time taking hyperbolic hate shots at the president, like this:

The colossal failure of the Trump administration both to keep Americans healthy and to slow the pandemic-driven implosion of the economy might shock the public enough back to insisting on something from government other than emotional satisfaction.

As tempting as it might be, I encourage you not to roll your eyes and ignore those words, because buried inside that little treasure chest of rage is a very revealing assumption. Specifically look how Nichols blames the president and his administration for failing “to keep Americans healthy.” Are we content with accepting that as a reasonable expectation to place on the federal executive branch?

Others in the Politico feature would seem to be. Margaret O’Mara, a professor of history at the University of Washington, predicted,

Not only will America need a massive dose of big government to get out of this crisis…but we will need big, and wise, government more than ever in its aftermath.

And University of Maryland’s associate professor of government and politics could barely contain her glee at the prospect:

The Reagan era is over. The widely accepted idea that government is inherently bad won’t persist after coronavirus … It is no longer “terrifying” to hear the words “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.” In fact, that is what most people are desperately hoping to hear right now.

Is it? I guess I’m skeptical. Though polls continue to show the majority of Americans are hesitant about lifting the lock-downs and returning to life as usual, the devil may be in the details. What does “as usual” mean, precisely?

Though hardly a representative sample, the majority of Americans I observe are content with accepting the advice and recommendations from government officials regarding hand-washing, face-touching, social distancing, and even face masks. But that contentment quickly runs out when advice and recommendations turn into lock-downs, stay-at-home orders, and forced business closures.

That’s why I think good sense would stop short of making hope-filled predictions like these left-leaning college professors are wont to do. What actually seems likely is that coronavirus is going to renew the civilization-old debate over the role that government should take in our lives.

Perhaps Americans will be enthralled with the sound wisdom of the CDC and their “don’t wear masks, wait, on second thought do wear masks, and actually, if you don’t wear a mask you’re a public enemy” advice. Maybe they’ll be convinced that our freedoms should be determined month-to-month by task-force-created predictive models. Possibly we will all go for a new cabinet-level executive department that will tell us where we can travel and when.

Or maybe all this big government in people’s faces will backfire on the left-wing planners. After all, it’s one thing to accept these kinds of intrusions and disruptions temporarily, when there’s an immediate, self-evident purpose. It’s quite another to adopt them as permanent changes to our way of life.

In the end, it’s possible that much to the chagrin of Politico’s panel, America will be drawn back to the wisdom of her founding, expressed articulately in a recent tweet from libertarian presidential hopeful, U.S. Congressman Justin Amash:

My wife and I have noticed something interesting recently, and it’s one of the more visible—and positive—side effects of the coronavirus lockdown we’ve observed.

There’s a nature park just outside our town that I’ve been visiting for virtually my entire life. It boasts nearly 700 acres of woods, meadows, creeks, ponds, and trails. I spent countless hours there as a child and teen hiking, biking, and enjoying cookouts with my family.

I introduced my wife to the park even before we were married (she was from out of town), and now that we’re parents, we’ve introduced our children to it as well. Hiking the trails and playing in the creek have become two of their favorite things to do.

I say all of that to say this: I’ve been going to this park long enough to have a pretty good idea of the types of folks that usually hang out there. Typically it’s groups of young men using the disc golf course that occupies a portion of the park, solitary hikers and dog walkers, and occasionally a group of horseback riders from the stables on the edge of the park. It’s rare to see a family together.

Until recently.

Since we’ve all been in the coronavirus lockdown, my wife and I have seen a marked increase in the number of families out together at this particular park. I recently took my three oldest kids on a hike along one of the trails and saw three or four other families along the way.

That never used to happen.

And the best part? They actually looked like they were enjoying themselves.

They weren’t grumbling, griping, and fussing. Parents and children were actually out together in the middle of a nature park on a beautiful Saturday afternoon and enjoying themselves.

That might seem like a small thing, but again, I’ve visited this park long enough and often enough to know that this isn’t normal. Maybe it should be, but it’s not.

But for now it is. And I’m glad to see it.

The coronavirus lockdown has been controversial. The longer it stretches on, I’m sure the more controversial it will become. And don’t get me wrong—there are some legitimate issues that need to be discussed and worked out. Whether right now is the proper time to open things up or not, one thing is certain: we can’t continue this way indefinitely.

But while it lasts, I’m glad to see that some families are making good use of the time. They’re together. They’re getting out of the house in healthy ways. They’re doing things they may have rarely done together in times past—if they’ve ever done them at all. They’re not just glued to their screens in separate rooms of their homes.

I’m looking forward to the end of this. I think we all are. But while it lasts, let me encourage you to use the opportunity to do positive things together. If you already have been, congratulations! If not, it’s not too late to start.

With the weather improving, it’s a perfect opportunity to enjoy nature together as a family. Take a hike and don’t worry if your kids get dirty. Let them play in a creek and get soaked if they want to. Throw rocks. Watch the current carry sticks downstream.

According to an article posted last year on the Psychology Today website, time spent in nature is linked to reduced heart rate, blood pressure, and stress cortisol, and “improves psychological well-being.”

Who among us wouldn’t benefit from reduced stress and improved well-being at a time like this? And if your kids or teens are feeling the stress of the moment, you’ll be doing them a favor as well to plan some family time out in nature. Two hours a week is great, but shorter amounts are still bound to do you good.

God gave us a beautiful world, and it’s an extra blessing that time spent in His creation can be therapeutic to our frayed nerves and stressed minds. Whether it’s something as simple as sitting on a park bench, or a more involved expedition to the woods, time spent in more natural environments can be a boon to your health, both physical and mental.

So grab your kids and head out. You’ll all feel better for it.

If you appreciate the work and ministry of IFI,
please consider a tax-deductible donation to sustain our endeavors.

It does make a difference.