![]() Evans has since made clear, in no uncertain terms, that he does not categorically dismiss CRT. ![]() ![]() The committee of presidents mentioned one of Tony Evans’ sermons in their statement, implying (at least in the mind of Evans) that he rejects CRT. The only evident difference between Resolution 9 and the latest from the seminary presidents might be the direction from which blowback came. Mark Devine, writing for the American Spectator, has some good thoughts in this regard. Greear continue to send mixed messages on the issue, to say the least. Southeastern Theological Seminary president, Danny Akin, and SBC president, J.D. If anything, the interim between Resolution 9 and the present has demonstrated cause for less confidence in the resolve of the presidents than held in 2019. But Jon Harris is right, the statement amounts to little more than a reaffirmation of Resolution 9. I, myself, expressed a measured hopefulness regarding the statement. Whilst rightfully admitting that “the problem of racism still exists,” the statement held that CRT was “not a biblical solution,” and that BFM and CRT were “incompatible.” The presidents, of course, denounced racism as well, but presumably according to the traditional definition (i.e., ethnic, or race-based animus) and not the modified, CRT definition (i.e., prejudice + systemic power).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |