thestream--2020-06-14--Oahu’s Energy: Irony, Hypocrisy … or Both?

On Oahu ’ s west side , a Hawaiian green sea turtle snuggles up to a reef for an afternoon nap .
But this is no ordinary reef .
It ’ s the warm water outflow structure for Oahu ’ s biggest electric power producer , the Kahe Power Plant .
Built in the early 1960 ’ s , the 651 megawatt ( MW ) workhorse often provides over 40 % of Oahu ’ s power .
Hawaii being what it is , you are probably imagining Kahe runs on clean , renewable energy .
Guess again .
Kahe runs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the power plant that draws crystal clear Pacific waters close to shore , while providing a massive artificial reef , runs on 100 % oil .
Residual fuel oil to be exact .
And Kahe is not Oahu ’ s only power plant running on petroleum liquids .
In fact , using data gathered from the U.S. Energy Information Administration ( EIA ) , I estimated that in January 2020 , a whopping 72.6 % of Oahu ’ s power generation was from petroleum liquids .
One of the most expensive forms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in place to scrap Oahu ’ s aging oil-fired plants and replace them with cheaper , cleaner-burning natural gas plants .
However , that plan was rejected in 2016 .
With a goal of 100 % renewable energy by 2045 , Hawaiian Electric claims that as of 2018 , 22 % of Oahu ’ s power is generated from renewable forms .
However , my estimates using EIA ’ s data put that number closer to 13.8 % .
Where am I going with all this ?
Well , after reading this article @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Humans ( before YouTube censored it ) .
While the film was a little too “ doomsday scenario ” for me , it was an eye-opener regarding how backwards the green energy movement can be .
Especially the anti-fossil fuel mentality and where that is leading us .
Take solar panels for example .
To acquire the silicon used in the panel , quartz must first be blasted out of a mountainside , then smelted using coal .
For every ton of metallurgical-grade silicon produced , 5-6 tons of CO are produced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ step in becoming a silicon wafer for a solar panel .
Everything , including transporting the panels to their final destination , uses fossil fuels .
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political , Economic and Moral Issues of Our Day .
Wind turbines and solar panels don ’ t last forever , either .
In fact , those currently operating in Hawaii will have to be replaced , at least once , before reaching Hawaii ’ s 2045 deadline for 100 % renewables .
And , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fiberglass wind turbine blade ?
At the moment , you don ’ t .
Perhaps the most surprising part of Planet of the Humans was the Green movement ’ s adoration of biomass for fuel .
The word “ biomass ” is a general term for a surprising array of “ renewable ” products .
Wood chips are a main source of biomass , but woodchips are made of carbon , right ?
So burning them produces carbon dioxide , right ?
But isn ’ t carbon dioxide the same global-warming-crisis-gas produced by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Me too .
Turns out biofuels , which Oahu ’ s new Schofield Generating Station is “ capable ” of using , are produced using fossil fuels .
Back to biomass , those woodchips have to come from somewhere , which means trees , and there are places on the planet where major deforestation is occurring to satisfy the demand .
Did you know “ biomass ” also means household trash and sewage sludge ?
Ewwww .
Oahu ’ s H-POWER facility runs off these two products .
Plus some fossil fuels @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( meaning taxpapers pay ) if they do not provide enough trash to satisfy a predetermined quota .
In other words , the system encourages increasing trash amounts .
Also , consider the fact that a lot of this trash includes plastic wastes , which are of course produced from fossil fuels .
Looking back at the chart , biomass plus coal plus fossil fuel liquids account for 92.3 % of Oahu ’ s power generation , all of which give off greenhouse gases .
Should We Cover One-Third of Oahu with Wind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ m not completely against trash-burning facilities like H-Power .
Run well , they can reduce the size of landfills , which one would think is important on a small island in the middle of the Pacific Ocean .
Hence the irony of massive solar and wind projects on Oahu .
For example , a quick look on Google Earth revealed the recently-completed Kawailoa wind and solar project sprawls across a whopping 2,900 acres .
My estimates also show that , on Oahu , generating 1 MW of power using wind and solar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s more than 800 times as much land as the Kahe petroleum-fired power plant requires to generate the same amount of power .
Using wind/solar projects to produce the same amount of electricity Oahu utilities produced in January 2020 would require a staggering 119,735 acres .
Almost one-third of Oahu would need to be covered with solar panels , wind turbines , and battery storage systems .
The Kawailoa project has already been fined at least once for excessive stormwater discharges .
On an island where clean and clear ocean water is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to look again at energy sources that take up less space .
Instead of being hypocritical and bashing fossil fuels while using them to meet a politically correct agenda , maybe we humans should focus on being more efficient and creative , developing products that require less energy and materials to manufacture and use .
David E. Shormann , Ph.D. , a Marine Chemist and Limnologist , is President of DIVE ( Digital Interactive Video Education ) , Magnolia , TX , and lives in Hawaii .

On Oahu’s west side, a Hawaiian green sea turtle snuggles up to a reef for an afternoon nap. But this is no ordinary reef. It’s the warm water outflow structure for Oahu’s biggest electric power producer, the Kahe Power Plant.
Built in the early 1960’s, the 651 megawatt (MW) workhorse often provides over 40% of Oahu’s power. Hawaii being what it is, you are probably imagining Kahe runs on clean, renewable energy. Guess again. Kahe runs on oil.
You read that right, the power plant that draws crystal clear Pacific waters close to shore, while providing a massive artificial reef, runs on 100% oil. Residual fuel oil to be exact. And Kahe is not Oahu’s only power plant running on petroleum liquids. In fact, using data gathered from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), I estimated that in January 2020, a whopping 72.6% of Oahu’s power generation was from petroleum liquids.
Take solar panels for example. To acquire the silicon used in the panel, quartz must first be blasted out of a mountainside, then smelted using coal. For every ton of metallurgical-grade silicon produced, 5-6 tons of CO2 are produced.
One of the most expensive forms of power generation, a plan was in place to scrap Oahu’s aging oil-fired plants and replace them with cheaper, cleaner-burning natural gas plants. However, that plan was rejected in 2016.
With a goal of 100% renewable energy by 2045, Hawaiian Electric claims that as of 2018, 22% of Oahu’s power is generated from renewable forms. However, my estimates using EIA’s data put that number closer to 13.8%.
Green Energy Runs on Fossil Fuels
Where am I going with all this? Well, after reading this article, I watched the film Planet of the Humans (before YouTube censored it). While the film was a little too “doomsday scenario” for me, it was an eye-opener regarding how backwards the green energy movement can be. Especially the anti-fossil fuel mentality and where that is leading us.
Take solar panels for example. To acquire the silicon used in the panel, quartz must first be blasted out of a mountainside, then smelted using coal. For every ton of metallurgical-grade silicon produced, 5-6 tons of CO 2 are produced. And this is just the first step in becoming a silicon wafer for a solar panel. Everything, including transporting the panels to their final destination, uses fossil fuels.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
Wind turbines and solar panels don’t last forever, either. In fact, those currently operating in Hawaii will have to be replaced, at least once, before reaching Hawaii’s 2045 deadline for 100% renewables. And, how do you recycle a massive, fiberglass wind turbine blade? At the moment, you don’t.
Perhaps the most surprising part of Planet of the Humans was the Green movement’s adoration of biomass for fuel. The word “biomass” is a general term for a surprising array of “renewable” products. Wood chips are a main source of biomass, but woodchips are made of carbon, right? So burning them produces carbon dioxide, right? But isn’t carbon dioxide the same global-warming-crisis-gas produced by burning fossil fuels? Yes.
Confused? Me too. Turns out biofuels, which Oahu’s new Schofield Generating Station is “capable” of using, are produced using fossil fuels.
Back to biomass, those woodchips have to come from somewhere, which means trees, and there are places on the planet where major deforestation is occurring to satisfy the demand.
Did you know “biomass” also means household trash and sewage sludge? Ewwww. Oahu’s H-POWER facility runs off these two products. Plus some fossil fuels. Supposedly, the city gets penalized (meaning taxpapers pay) if they do not provide enough trash to satisfy a predetermined quota. In other words, the system encourages increasing trash amounts. Also, consider the fact that a lot of this trash includes plastic wastes, which are of course produced from fossil fuels. Looking back at the chart, biomass plus coal plus fossil fuel liquids account for 92.3% of Oahu’s power generation, all of which give off greenhouse gases.
Should We Cover One-Third of Oahu with Wind and Solar Projects?
Personally, I’m not completely against trash-burning facilities like H-Power. Run well, they can reduce the size of landfills, which one would think is important on a small island in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Hence the irony of massive solar and wind projects on Oahu. For example, a quick look on Google Earth revealed the recently-completed Kawailoa wind and solar project sprawls across a whopping 2,900 acres.
My estimates also show that, on Oahu, generating 1 MW of power using wind and solar requires 154 acres of land. That’s more than 800 times as much land as the Kahe petroleum-fired power plant requires to generate the same amount of power. Using wind/solar projects to produce the same amount of electricity Oahu utilities produced in January 2020 would require a staggering 119,735 acres. Almost one-third of Oahu would need to be covered with solar panels, wind turbines, and battery storage systems.
The Kawailoa project has already been fined at least once for excessive stormwater discharges. On an island where clean and clear ocean water is so valued, perhaps it is time to look again at energy sources that take up less space. Instead of being hypocritical and bashing fossil fuels while using them to meet a politically correct agenda, maybe we humans should focus on being more efficient and creative, developing products that require less energy and materials to manufacture and use.
David E. Shormann, Ph.D., a Marine Chemist and Limnologist, is President of DIVE (Digital Interactive Video Education), Magnolia, TX, and lives in Hawaii.


thestream--2020-06-14--The Spirit of Anarchy is Not from Above But From Below

The Greek word anomia occurs 13 times in the New Testament and it literally means “ lawlessness.
” As defined in one major Greek dictionary , anomia means “ to behave with complete disregard for the laws or regulations of a society — ‘ to live lawlessly , lawlessness , lawless living ” ( Louw-Nida Lexicon ) .
The spirit behind anomia is not from above , but from below .
There is nothing wholesome about anomia , nothing good , nothing positive .
Rather , it is evil and destructive , producing chaos , not order , and resulting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ antichrist , who is virtually the living embodiment of the devil , as “ the man of lawlessness ” ( see 2 Thessalonians 2:3 ) .
When we see anomia , lawlessness , we know who is behind it .
The spirit of anomia is not the spirit that emboldens someone to do what is right , even when that means going against the grain of society .
That is a spirit of courage , a spirit of submission .
And rather than emphasizing rebellion , that spirit emphasizes obedience .
As Peter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day , “ We must obey God rather than man ” ( Acts 5:29 ) .
Peter did not spit in the face of the religious authorities who wanted him to stop preaching in Jesus ’ name .
He did not leave their presence and incite a riot .
He did not set buildings on fire .
Instead , he and the other apostles said , “ With all respect to your authority , when you command us to disobey God , we must disobey you instead .
We will always obey our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the spirit of lawlessness , a spirit that despises authority and that cultivates chaos .
And it is a spirit that is at work throughout America today , leaving a train of destruction in its path .
We must firmly resist the spirit of anomia .
Paul wrote these important words in Romans 13 , words that we need to put front and center during these times of cultural upheaval .
Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities , for there is no authority except that which God has established .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ by God .
Consequently , whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted , and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves .
For rulers hold no terror for those who do right , but for those who do wrong .
Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority ?
Then do what is right and you will be commended .
For the one in authority is God ’ s servant for your good .
But if you do wrong , be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the sword for no reason .
They are God ’ s servants , agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer .
Therefore , it is necessary to submit to the authorities , not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience .
( Romans 13:1–5 ) We all agree that when a government is set on doing evil , as in Nazi Germany , for example , we resist their evil .
But that godly resistance to evil is a far cry from the spirit of lawlessness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and cultivates a spirit of disobedience .
A society without proper authority will quickly disintegrate , leading to violence , war and collapse .
Even a family can not operate without proper authority , and children who are not taught to obey their parents end up suffering for it later in life .
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political , Economic and Moral Issues of Our Day .
God-established parameters are healthy and good .
And when the people in authority abuse their privileges , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ respond with principled obedience to a higher authority .
Peter described false teachers as “ those who indulge in the lust of defiling passion and despise authority ” ( 2 Peter 2:10 ) .
This is a sign of the depth of their corruption .
To say it once more : the spirit that despises authority is from below , not from above .
On Thursday , June 11 , I tweeted a link to an article explaining why true Christians could not be Marxists .
One of my friends emailed me this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by believers accommodating movements that are based in anti-biblical world views .
It is as if they do not do world view thinking at all .
I can underhand why a Christian would or would not support Trump .
.
.
.
It is how you evaluate his bad behavior vs. polices etc .
But when it comes to the Black Lives Matter movement and Marxist revolutionary movements , it is so , so off .
My reading of history is that every mass movement for change not influenced by the biblical world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the anti-police movement , defund the police movement , does not lead to no police but to a police state tyranny .
Think of the difference between the French revolution and its anti-God ideas vs. the American one , or the anti-slavery movement led by Christian revivalists and even MLK ’ s civil rights movement .
All were biblical worldview influenced .
Then think of the slavery that followed the communist revolutions .
The death and destruction .
How can Christians be so blind ?
We are now reaping the whirlwind of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the last 60 years .
From the universities to media .
Only a mass revival beyond what we have ever seen can reverse it.
” Yes , only a great outpouring of the Spirit from above , through the Church , can reverse the growing spirit of anomia from below .
Which S/spirit will prevail ?
Dr. Michael Brown ( www.askdrbrown.org ) is the host of the nationally syndicated Line of Fire radio program .
His latest book is When the World Stops : Words of Faith , Hope , and Wisdom in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him on Facebook , Twitter or YouTube .

The Greek word anomia occurs 13 times in the New Testament and it literally means “lawlessness.” As defined in one major Greek dictionary, anomia means “to behave with complete disregard for the laws or regulations of a society — ‘to live lawlessly, lawlessness, lawless living” (Louw-Nida Lexicon). The spirit behind anomia is not from above, but from below.
There is nothing wholesome about anomia, nothing good, nothing positive. Rather, it is evil and destructive, producing chaos, not order, and resulting in destruction. Paul actually describes the antichrist, who is virtually the living embodiment of the devil, as “the man of lawlessness” (see 2 Thessalonians 2:3). When we see anomia, lawlessness, we know who is behind it.
The Spirit of Anomia
The spirit of anomia is not the spirit that emboldens someone to do what is right, even when that means going against the grain of society. That is a spirit of courage, a spirit of submission. And rather than emphasizing rebellion, that spirit emphasizes obedience. As Peter said to the religious leaders of his day, “We must obey God rather than man” (Acts 5:29).
Peter did not spit in the face of the religious authorities who wanted him to stop preaching in Jesus’ name. He did not leave their presence and incite a riot. He did not set buildings on fire.
Instead, he and the other apostles said, “With all respect to your authority, when you command us to disobey God, we must disobey you instead. We will always obey our Lord.”
That is the polar opposite of the spirit of lawlessness, a spirit that despises authority and that cultivates chaos. And it is a spirit that is at work throughout America today, leaving a train of destruction in its path. We must firmly resist the spirit of anomia.
Paul wrote these important words in Romans 13, words that we need to put front and center during these times of cultural upheaval.
Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience. (Romans 13:1–5)
The Higher Authority
We all agree that when a government is set on doing evil, as in Nazi Germany, for example, we resist their evil. But that godly resistance to evil is a far cry from the spirit of lawlessness, a spirit that scorns righteous authority and cultivates a spirit of disobedience.
A society without proper authority will quickly disintegrate, leading to violence, war and collapse.
Even a family cannot operate without proper authority, and children who are not taught to obey their parents end up suffering for it later in life.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
God-established parameters are healthy and good. And when the people in authority abuse their privileges, we do not respond with lawlessness. We respond with principled obedience to a higher authority.
Peter described false teachers as “those who indulge in the lust of defiling passion and despise authority” (2 Peter 2:10). This is a sign of the depth of their corruption.
To say it once more: the spirit that despises authority is from below, not from above.
A Path to Tyranny
On Thursday, June 11, I tweeted a link to an article explaining why true Christians could not be Marxists. One of my friends emailed me this in response:
I am very disturbed by believers accommodating movements that are based in anti-biblical world views. It is as if they do not do world view thinking at all. I can underhand why a Christian would or would not support Trump. . . . It is how you evaluate his bad behavior vs. polices etc. But when it comes to the Black Lives Matter movement and Marxist revolutionary movements, it is so, so off. My reading of history is that every mass movement for change not influenced by the biblical world view leads to greater tyranny. So, the anti-police movement, defund the police movement, does not lead to no police but to a police state tyranny. Think of the difference between the French revolution and its anti-God ideas vs. the American one, or the anti-slavery movement led by Christian revivalists and even MLK’s civil rights movement. All were biblical worldview influenced. Then think of the slavery that followed the communist revolutions. The death and destruction. How can Christians be so blind? We are now reaping the whirlwind of what was sown in our universities for the last 60 years. From the universities to media. Only a mass revival beyond what we have ever seen can reverse it.”
Yes, only a great outpouring of the Spirit from above, through the Church, can reverse the growing spirit of anomia from below. Which S/spirit will prevail?
(For a graphic video illustrating which spirit is behind the rioting and looting, see here.)
Dr. Michael Brown (www.askdrbrown.org) is the host of the nationally syndicated Line of Fire radio program. His latest book is When the World Stops: Words of Faith, Hope, and Wisdom in the Midst of Crisis. Connect with him on Facebook, Twitter or YouTube.


thestream--2020-06-14--Judge Not! It’s Not About the Rules

Judge Not! It’s Not About the Rules

Although I ’ m not a betting man , I bet that if you went into our local high school and polled the students ( thinking back to the good old days a few months ago when students could be found in schools ) , and asked “ Who are the most judgmental people you know ?
” they would say “ Christians.
” How can that be ?
Jesus very clearly said : “ Do not judge , so that you may not be judged ” ( Matthew 7:1 ) .
Perhaps we Christians don ’ t need to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ instead we just need to listen to Jesus !
If we are being honest , most of us struggle with judgmental attitudes .
Not me , of course .
I ’ m not judgmental , I just have superior discernment about how other people should live !
I hope you realize I am joking , this being an area I can struggle in also .
Jesus tells us to not judge , but does he give us any help in learning how to live without judging others ?
Let us look at Jesus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ judge , so that you may not be judged .
For with the judgment you make you will be judged , and the measure you give will be the measure you get ” ( Matthew 7:1-2 ) .
Very often we read this to mean that if we judge someone , God will judge us in the same way .
However , through Jesus we learn about the grace of God , and how God does not treat us as our sins deserve .
Being judgmental is not an unforgivable sin .
Also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at all .
Here is another way to think of it .
Suppose I come at you with judgment , something like “ You are stupid because you did this.
” Will you respond with “ O , good thought Clarke , thank you for that ” ?
Will you not more likely respond with “ Who does Clarke think he is ?
” See what happened there ?
I judged you , which led you to judge me .
If I come at you with a lot of judgment in a really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with a lot more judgment .
“ Clarke said this , that and the other thing to me — well , let me tell you this , that and the other thing about Clarke !
” The measure we give will be the measure we get .
The words of Jesus here are neither a promise , nor a theological premise , but rather a proverb .
This is how judgment and judgmentalism usually go .
Judgment is usually a two-way street .
The path of judgement is not a path you want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lead to a good place .
There is a better way of handling our relationships .
What is that better way ?
Tidy Up My Own House The better way is to focus on tidying up our own house .
We now have a vegetable garden in our yard , or at least space allocated for one .
We could look over the fence and judge the neighbors ’ vegetable gardens , except we don ’ t know what we are doing and have much to learn .
Likewise , we can ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lack of spiritual growth and life skills if we lack spiritual growth and life skills ourselves .
However , do we have the right , perhaps even the obligation to judge others once we have achieved spiritual maturity ?
Perhaps we feel justified in saying “ I am not judgmental , I just have great discernment about how other people should live.
” Let us turn again to the words of Jesus : Two men went up to the temple to pray , one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ was praying thus , “ God , I thank you that I am not like other people : thieves , rogues , adulterers or even like this tax collector .
I fast twice a week ; I give a tenth of all my income.
” But the tax collector , standing far off , would not even look up to heaven , but was beating his breast and saying , “ God , be merciful to me , a sinner !
” I tell you , this man went down to his home @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all who exalt themselves will be humbled , but all who humble themselves will be exalted .
( Luke 18:10-14 , NRSV ) Our garden is never that great .
Just when we think we are doing well in spiritual maturity , pride kicks in .
After all , we are not just doing well in our spiritual maturity , we are doing better than others .
In fact , thank the Lord we are not like others !
How quickly we become the Pharisee .
Walking with Jesus on a Journey of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do have discernment about other people ’ s situations ?
I know how that feels .
We have three teenage boys , so my discernment is through the roof as to how they should live !
Surely we have an obligation to help people steer a good course if they are headed for rocks and we know where those rocks are ?
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political , Economic and Moral Issues of Our Day .
We go back to what Jesus has already taught @ @ @ @ @ @ @ namely , that it is not about rules , but about character .
If we have a rules-based way of looking at life and spirituality , we may jump all over people for breaking the rules .
Especially the rules we keep well , or more likely , only the rules we keep well .
However , if we focus on walking with Jesus on a journey of character formation , then we will offer to walk with others on their journey of character formation .
We are aware that we ourselves still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who seem to have farther to travel along that path may actually be further along than we are .
Walking together along a path of mutual growth is far better than running down the two-way street of judgmentalism .
The Best Way Not to Judge

Although I’m not a betting man, I bet that if you went into our local high school and polled the students (thinking back to the good old days a few months ago when students could be found in schools), and asked “Who are the most judgmental people you know?” they would say “Christians.” How can that be? Jesus very clearly said: “Do not judge, so that you may not be judged” (Matthew 7:1).
Listen to Jesus
Perhaps we Christians don’t need to hear a sermon on judgment, but instead we just need to listen to Jesus!
If we are being honest, most of us struggle with judgmental attitudes. Not me, of course. I’m not judgmental, I just have superior discernment about how other people should live! I hope you realize I am joking, this being an area I can struggle in also.
Jesus tells us to not judge, but does he give us any help in learning how to live without judging others? Let us look at Jesus’ words again: “Do not judge, so that you may not be judged. For with the judgment you make you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get” (Matthew 7:1-2).
Very often we read this to mean that if we judge someone, God will judge us in the same way. However, through Jesus we learn about the grace of God, and how God does not treat us as our sins deserve. Being judgmental is not an unforgivable sin. Also, Jesus does not mention God here at all.
Judgment is a Two-Way Street
Here is another way to think of it. Suppose I come at you with judgment, something like “You are stupid because you did this.” Will you respond with “O, good thought Clarke, thank you for that”? Will you not more likely respond with “Who does Clarke think he is?” See what happened there? I judged you, which led you to judge me.
If I come at you with a lot of judgment in a really harsh tone, you will likely respond with a lot more judgment. “Clarke said this, that and the other thing to me — well, let me tell you this, that and the other thing about Clarke!” The measure we give will be the measure we get.
The words of Jesus here are neither a promise, nor a theological premise, but rather a proverb. This is how judgment and judgmentalism usually go. Judgment is usually a two-way street. The path of judgement is not a path you want to go down. It does not lead to a good place. There is a better way of handling our relationships. What is that better way?
Why do you see the speck in your neighbor’s eye, but do not notice the log in your own eye? Or how can you say to your neighbor, “Let me take the speck out of your eye,” while the log is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbor’s eye. (Matthew 7:3-5, NRSV)
Tidy Up My Own House
The better way is to focus on tidying up our own house.
We now have a vegetable garden in our yard, or at least space allocated for one. We could look over the fence and judge the neighbors’ vegetable gardens, except we don’t know what we are doing and have much to learn. Likewise, we can’t go picking on people for their lack of spiritual growth and life skills if we lack spiritual growth and life skills ourselves.
However, do we have the right, perhaps even the obligation to judge others once we have achieved spiritual maturity? Perhaps we feel justified in saying “I am not judgmental, I just have great discernment about how other people should live.” Let us turn again to the words of Jesus:
Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee, standing by himself, was praying thus, “God, I thank you that I am not like other people: thieves, rogues, adulterers or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give a tenth of all my income.” But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even look up to heaven, but was beating his breast and saying, “God, be merciful to me, a sinner!” I tell you, this man went down to his home justified rather than the other; for all who exalt themselves will be humbled, but all who humble themselves will be exalted. (Luke 18:10-14, NRSV)
Our garden is never that great. Just when we think we are doing well in spiritual maturity, pride kicks in. After all, we are not just doing well in our spiritual maturity, we are doing better than others. In fact, thank the Lord we are not like others! How quickly we become the Pharisee.
Walking with Jesus on a Journey of Character Formation
But what if we actually do have discernment about other people’s situations? I know how that feels. We have three teenage boys, so my discernment is through the roof as to how they should live! Surely we have an obligation to help people steer a good course if they are headed for rocks and we know where those rocks are?
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
We go back to what Jesus has already taught in the Sermon on the Mount, namely, that it is not about rules, but about character. If we have a rules-based way of looking at life and spirituality, we may jump all over people for breaking the rules. Especially the rules we keep well, or more likely, only the rules we keep well. However, if we focus on walking with Jesus on a journey of character formation, then we will offer to walk with others on their journey of character formation. We are aware that we ourselves still have some distance to go.
Those who seem to have farther to travel along that path may actually be further along than we are. Walking together along a path of mutual growth is far better than running down the two-way street of judgmentalism.
The Best Way Not to Judge
We want to minimize the roadblocks on the journey toward maturity. One’s sinful nature is a speed bump which becomes a roadblock through judgment. It does not matter how amazing my neighbor’s garden might be, if he pops his head over the fence and starts coming at me in a judgmental way for my gardening, I am probably not going to listen. He does know better, but the judgmental way he expresses it leaves the gate wide open for me in my pride to reject his discernment. But if he is simply a friendly and helpful neighbor who has a great garden, I might go to him and ask “How’d you do that?”
Very few people get judged into life change. Far more get loved into it.
Are we good neighbors? Are we progressing down that path of character formation? What fruit is growing in our lives? Have we been nurturing judgmental attitudes which can grow like weeds, or “love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control” (Galatians 5:22,23). Developing such fruit of the Spirit is done by walking with Jesus. That is how we tidy our gardens. That is what will enable us to help others with theirs. We want to be helpful, not hurtful. To quote Carey Nieuwhof: “Very few people get judged into life change. Far more get loved into it.”
Are you judgmental? Or just highly discerning like me? Ahem. The best way to get a handle on our judgmental attitudes is not by fixing everyone around us so there is no one left to judge. It’s by sticking close to Jesus on a journey of growth. We have a long way to go, but we have a lot of help along the way, from God through the Holy Spirit. And even from those we might want to judge.
Clarke is the pastor of Calvary Baptist in Cobourg, Ontario. He blogs at clarkedixon.wordpress.com.
Originally published on Clarke’s blog Sunday’s Shrunk Sermon. Reprinted with permission.


thestream--2020-06-15--Remembering My Friend, Peter Moore

Remembering My Friend, Peter Moore

During my college years on the weekend after Thanksgiving break , despite term papers and looming finals , I had to ski Sugarloaf Mountain .
Fanatical ?
You bet and I became an excellent skier .
That ’ s why it struck me on a 2009 trip to Vail that I couldn ’ t keep up with my 71-year-old friend .
Oh , I could out-ski him in the bumps , but for speed and daring The Very Rev .
Dr. Peter C. Moore skied way out of my comfort zone .
I ’ ve thought quite a bit about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ May 30 at age 83 .
He was the sort of person who never seemed to slowed down .
But I ’ m getting ahead of myself .
That ’ s number four on the list of things I learned from him .
Better to begin at the beginning .
The chaplain at my boarding school held a weekly Bible study at his home and already owning a Bible , I decided to attend .
There in January 1971 I first met Peter .
He was just moving from New York City to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ school students : Fellowship of Christians in Universities and Schools ( FOCUS ) .
That evening Peter mentioned the importance of reading Scripture daily .
He so successfully recommended Scripture Union ’ s Encounter with God that I subscribed the next day and used it for years .
At every FOCUS program I attended and in conversations with Peter , I saw someone who not only believed and loved the Scriptures , but did all he could to obey .
His tireless efforts over the years to renew the Episcopal Church always centered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As one reflection on his life put it , “ He was a man who served under the Bible and not above it , fighting to keep the church he knew and loved in a place of obedience to Scripture.
” 2 ) Peter Loved God With All His Mind While FOCUS programs included a good deal of Bible study , they never ended there .
Now that you ’ re a Christian , I was told , you ’ ll want to read these books .
The books included works by Francis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at L ’ Abri in Switzerland ) , C. S. Lewis , Os Guinness , J. I. Packer , and John Stott .
Peter and others led discussions about existentialism , utilitarianism , the sexual revolution , media , modern art , and contemporary literature .
“ Is this what Christians do ?
” I asked .
Someone assured me that it was — a pious act of wishful thinking .
Nonetheless , it ’ s what I learned to do .
Peter taught me that “ take every thought captive to obey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all my schoolwork , everything I read , the news , music , movies , science , poetry , philosophy , humor , dating , marriage , family .
… “ Every thought ” meant every thought .
Christianity , he insisted , was an all-encompassing worldview .
And in my writing , speaking , and teaching , in work I did with Chuck Colson and in the distance learning program I direct at Wyoming Catholic College , “ every thought captive ” remains central .
During the summer between graduating from boarding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Peter and I went for a long walk .
I don ’ t know what exactly was said , but I do know that when we returned , I was what the late Fr .
Richard John Neuhaus called “ an ecclesial Christian.
” Neuhaus wrote , “ An ecclesial Christian is one who understands with mind and heart , and even feels with his fingertips , that Christ and his Church , head and body , are inseparable .
For the ecclesial Christian , the act of faith in Christ and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not two acts of faith but one.
” Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political , Economic and Moral Issues of Our Day .
Peter ’ s whole career reflected his ecclesial Christianity .
Founding FOCUS was about evangelizing youth in order to renew the Church to then renew the culture .
Founding and serving as president of Trinity School for Ministry ( originally Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry ) was about renewing the Church to renew the nation .
Later in life , directing The Anglican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Church to renew the whole world .
Love for Christ means love for the Body of Christ , the Church .
Six years ago when Peter was 77 , he heeded Anglican Bishop Mark Lawrence who “ called for the creation of a leadership training initiative that would bring future leaders in the Anglican Communion to America … for periods of study , teaching , reflection and nurture.
” Peter , on staff at St. Michael ’ s Church in Charleston , became director of The Anglican Leadership Institute .
There , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ age , ” he had had an outsized influence on Christianity across the globe .
This February , already quite ill , Peter mentioned in an email his recent “ 30 podcasts on famous church leaders through the centuries from Irenaeus to John Stott.
” Why would he let age or even illness stop him ?
Which brings me back to skiing .
Peter had his share of difficulties , suffering , and sorrows .
But he never lost his love for the Scriptures , his love for the Church , his love @ @ @ @ @ @ @ love for going full speed ahead in God ’ s service .
May he rest in peace and may his tribe increase .
Dr. James Tonkowich , a senior contributor to The Stream , is a freelance writer , speaker and commentator on spirituality , religion and public life .
He is the author of The Liberty Threat : The Attack on Religious Freedom in America Today and Pears , Grapes , and Dates : A Good Life After Mid-Life .
Jim serves as Director of Distance Learning at Wyoming Catholic College and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weekly podcast , “ The After Dinner Scholar .
”

During my college years on the weekend after Thanksgiving break, despite term papers and looming finals, I had to ski Sugarloaf Mountain. Fanatical? You bet and I became an excellent skier.
That’s why it struck me on a 2009 trip to Vail that I couldn’t keep up with my 71-year-old friend. Oh, I could out-ski him in the bumps, but for speed and daring The Very Rev. Dr. Peter C. Moore skied way out of my comfort zone.
I’ve thought quite a bit about skiing with Peter since his death on May 30 at age 83. He was the sort of person who never seemed to slowed down.
But I’m getting ahead of myself. That’s number four on the list of things I learned from him. Better to begin at the beginning.
1) Peter Loved The Scriptures
The chaplain at my boarding school held a weekly Bible study at his home and already owning a Bible, I decided to attend. There in January 1971 I first met Peter. He was just moving from New York City to Connecticut to create an outreach to private school students: Fellowship of Christians in Universities and Schools (FOCUS).
That evening Peter mentioned the importance of reading Scripture daily. He so successfully recommended Scripture Union’s Encounter with God that I subscribed the next day and used it for years.
At every FOCUS program I attended and in conversations with Peter, I saw someone who not only believed and loved the Scriptures, but did all he could to obey. His tireless efforts over the years to renew the Episcopal Church always centered on believing and obeying the Bible. As one reflection on his life put it, “He was a man who served under the Bible and not above it, fighting to keep the church he knew and loved in a place of obedience to Scripture.”
2) Peter Loved God With All His Mind
While FOCUS programs included a good deal of Bible study, they never ended there. Now that you’re a Christian, I was told, you’ll want to read these books. The books included works by Francis Schaeffer (Peter had studied with Schaeffer at L’Abri in Switzerland), C.S. Lewis, Os Guinness, J.I. Packer, and John Stott. Peter and others led discussions about existentialism, utilitarianism, the sexual revolution, media, modern art, and contemporary literature.
“Is this what Christians do?” I asked. Someone assured me that it was — a pious act of wishful thinking. Nonetheless, it’s what I learned to do.
Peter taught me that “take every thought captive to obey Christ” (2Corinthians 10:5) included all my schoolwork, everything I read, the news, music, movies, science, poetry, philosophy, humor, dating, marriage, family. … “Every thought” meant every thought. Christianity, he insisted, was an all-encompassing worldview. And in my writing, speaking, and teaching, in work I did with Chuck Colson and in the distance learning program I direct at Wyoming Catholic College, “every thought captive” remains central.
3) Peter Loved the Church
During the summer between graduating from boarding school and heading off to college, Peter and I went for a long walk. I don’t know what exactly was said, but I do know that when we returned, I was what the late Fr. Richard John Neuhaus called “an ecclesial Christian.” Neuhaus wrote, “An ecclesial Christian is one who understands with mind and heart, and even feels with his fingertips, that Christ and his Church, head and body, are inseparable. For the ecclesial Christian, the act of faith in Christ and the act of faith in the Church are not two acts of faith but one.”
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
Peter’s whole career reflected his ecclesial Christianity. Founding FOCUS was about evangelizing youth in order to renew the Church to then renew the culture. Founding and serving as president of Trinity School for Ministry (originally Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry) was about renewing the Church to renew the nation. Later in life, directing The Anglican Leadership Institute was about renewing the global Church to renew the whole world. Love for Christ means love for the Body of Christ, the Church.
4) Peter Ended Well.
Six years ago when Peter was 77, he heeded Anglican Bishop Mark Lawrence who “called for the creation of a leadership training initiative that would bring future leaders in the Anglican Communion to America … for periods of study, teaching, reflection and nurture.”
Peter, on staff at St. Michael’s Church in Charleston, became director of The Anglican Leadership Institute. There, in what some might call his “old age,” he had had an outsized influence on Christianity across the globe.
This February, already quite ill, Peter mentioned in an email his recent “30 podcasts on famous church leaders through the centuries from Irenaeus to John Stott.” Why would he let age or even illness stop him?
Which brings me back to skiing. Peter had his share of difficulties, suffering, and sorrows. But he never lost his love for the Scriptures, his love for the Church, his love for sharing the Gospel, and his love for going full speed ahead in God’s service.
May he rest in peace and may his tribe increase.
Dr. James Tonkowich, a senior contributor to The Stream, is a freelance writer, speaker and commentator on spirituality, religion and public life. He is the author of The Liberty Threat: The Attack on Religious Freedom in America Today and Pears, Grapes, and Dates: A Good Life After Mid-Life. Jim serves as Director of Distance Learning at Wyoming Catholic College and is host of the college’s weekly podcast, “The After Dinner Scholar.”


thestream--2020-06-15--Neil Gorsuch Helps Transform the Supreme Court Into the Supreme Legislature on LGBT Rights

In what dissenting Justice Samuel Alito called one of the most “ brazen abuse [ s ] ” of the Supreme Court ’ s authority , a six-member majority of the court led by Justice Neil Gorsuch has rewritten Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to include sexual orientation and gender identity in the definition of “ sex.
” Why bother trying to pass the proposed Equality Act when you can get the justices to make law for you ?
Title VII prohibits an employer from failing or refusing “ to hire or to discharge any individual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ individual … because of such individual ’ s race , color , religion , sex , or national origin.
” Gorsuch — joined by the four liberal justices , along with Chief Justice John Roberts — decided that employment decisions that take any account of an employee ’ s sexual orientation or gender identity necessarily entail discrimination based on sex in violation of Title VII .
In Bostock v. Clayton County , Georgia , which was combined with two other cases , Gorsuch wrote that the straightforward application of the terms in Title @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meaning at the time of its enactment , means that an employer violates the law when it intentionally fires an individual based in part on sex .
In a logical and legal leap , Gorsuch then argued that includes sexual orientation and gender identity , since those concepts are related to sex .
Thus , Gorsuch reasoned , it means the employer is treating individuals differently because of their sex .
An employer can not escape liability by showing that it treats men and women comparably as groups .
The employer has violated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ male and female homosexual and transgender employees to the same treatment .
Gorsuch dismissed as irrelevant the historical fact that none of the legislators who passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964 would have ever expected or contemplated that Title VII ’ s ban on employment discrimination on the basis of sex would apply to a man hired by a funeral home who then told his new employer , the R.G .
& G.R .
Harris Funeral Home , that he planned to “ live and work full-time as a woman.
” That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the court .
That provision of the 1964 law was intended to stop the blatant employment discrimination rampant against women at that time .
The majority opinion by Gorsuch upending more than five decades of prior precedents was only 33 pages long .
Alito , joined by Justice Clarence Thomas , filed a blistering dissent in which he said that “ there is only one word for what the Court has done today : legislation.
” He pointed out that the majority ’ s claim that it is “ merely enforcing the terms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” As Alito undisputedly says , “ if every single American had been surveyed in 1964 , it would have been hard to find any who thought that discrimination because of sex meant discrimination because of sexual orientation—not to mention gender identity , a concept that was essentially unknown at the time.
” The majority tries to “ pass off its decision ” as just an application of the term “ sex ” in Title VII , claiming it is applying the textualism championed by the late Justice Antonin Scalia .
But according @ @ @ @ @ @ @ majority ’ s opinion “ is like a pirate ship.
” He added : It sails under a textualist flag , but what it actually represents is a theory of statutory interpretation that Justice Scalia excoriated — the theory that courts should ‘ update ’ old statutes so that they better reflect the current values of society .
Alito said that the majority ’ s “ arrogance ” is “ breathtaking , ” since “ there is not a shred of evidence that any Member of Congress interpreted the statutory text that way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ sexual orientation , ” nor “ gender identity ” appear on the list of five specified grounds for discrimination in Title VII , and the majority ’ s “ argument is not only arrogant , it is wrong , ” he wrote .
The terms “ sex , ” “ sexual orientation , ” and “ gender identity ” are “ different concepts , ” and neither of the two latter terms are “ tied to either of the biological sexes.
” Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Issues of Our Day .
Alito is , of course , entirely correct , as one of us pointed out in a recent article in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy .
And , of course , Congress knew that “ sex ” didn ’ t include “ sexual orientation ” and “ gender identity.
” Alito recalled that there have been numerous bills introduced in Congress over the past 45 years to amend the law and add those terms , but they all failed .
The majority is “ usurping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” of government and has taken the latest congressional bill on this topic and “ issued it under the guise of statutory interpretation.
” Justice Brett Kavanaugh also filed a dissenting opinion , in which he wrote that “ this case boils down to one fundamental question : Who decides ?
” The issue is whether Title VII “ should be expanded to prohibit discrimination because of sexual orientation , ” he wrote , adding that responsibility “ belongs to Congress and the President in the legislative process , not to this Court.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , tenacity , and grit ” of the gay and lesbian community for working “ hard for many decades to achieve equal treatment in fact and in law.
” But , he added , under separation of powers , “ it was Congress ’ s role , not this Court ’ s , to amend Title VII.
” Alito made it clear that the “ updating desire to which the Court succumbs no doubt rises from humane and generous impulses.
” But the “ authority of this Court is limited to saying what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Alito , Thomas , and Kavanaugh got it right , and the majority got it wrong .
The word “ sex ” ’ — still today as when Congress passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964 — refers to our biological reality as male or female .
It doesn ’ t refer to our sexual orientations or malleable gender identities as some see it .
If those terms were contained within Title VII , there would have been no need for Congress to repeatedly try to amend the law to add sexual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In an act of judicial activism , a majority of the Supreme Court has simply legislated from the bench and amended the statute itself .
Congress has not legislated such an outcome , and it was wrong for the court to usurp lawmakers ’ authority by imposing such an extreme policy on our nation without the consent of the governed .
Hans von Spakovsky is an authority on a wide range of issues—including civil rights , civil justice , the First Amendment , immigration , the rule of law and government reform—as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Foundation ’ s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and manager of the think tank ’ s Election Law Reform Initiative .
Ryan T. Anderson , Ph.D. , is the William E. Simon Senior Research Fellow in American Principles and Public Policy at The Heritage Foundation , where he researches and writes about marriage , bioethics , religious liberty and political philosophy .
Anderson is the author of several books and his research has been cited by two U.S. Supreme Court justices in two separate cases .

In what dissenting Justice Samuel Alito called one of the most “brazen abuse[s]” of the Supreme Court’s authority, a six-member majority of the court led by Justice Neil Gorsuch has rewritten Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to include sexual orientation and gender identity in the definition of “sex.”
Why bother trying to pass the proposed Equality Act when you can get the justices to make law for you?
Title VII prohibits an employer from failing or refusing “to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual … because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.”
Gorsuch — joined by the four liberal justices, along with Chief Justice John Roberts — decided that employment decisions that take any account of an employee’s sexual orientation or gender identity necessarily entail discrimination based on sex in violation of Title VII.
A Giant Leap
In Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, which was combined with two other cases, Gorsuch wrote that the straightforward application of the terms in Title VII, according to their ordinary public meaning at the time of its enactment, means that an employer violates the law when it intentionally fires an individual based in part on sex.
In a logical and legal leap, Gorsuch then argued that includes sexual orientation and gender identity, since those concepts are related to sex.
Thus, Gorsuch reasoned, it means the employer is treating individuals differently because of their sex. An employer cannot escape liability by showing that it treats men and women comparably as groups. The employer has violated the law even if it subjects all male and female homosexual and transgender employees to the same treatment.
Gorsuch dismissed as irrelevant the historical fact that none of the legislators who passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964 would have ever expected or contemplated that Title VII’s ban on employment discrimination on the basis of sex would apply to a man hired by a funeral home who then told his new employer, the R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Home, that he planned to “live and work full-time as a woman.”
That was one of the three cases before the court. That provision of the 1964 law was intended to stop the blatant employment discrimination rampant against women at that time.
That’s the Job of Congress
The majority opinion by Gorsuch upending more than five decades of prior precedents was only 33 pages long. Alito, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, filed a blistering dissent in which he said that “there is only one word for what the Court has done today: legislation.” He pointed out that the majority’s claim that it is “merely enforcing the terms of the statute” is “preposterous.”
As Alito undisputedly says, “if every single American had been surveyed in 1964, it would have been hard to find any who thought that discrimination because of sex meant discrimination because of sexual orientation—not to mention gender identity, a concept that was essentially unknown at the time.”
The majority tries to “pass off its decision” as just an application of the term “sex” in Title VII, claiming it is applying the textualism championed by the late Justice Antonin Scalia. But according to Alito, that claim and the majority’s opinion “is like a pirate ship.” He added:
It sails under a textualist flag, but what it actually represents is a theory of statutory interpretation that Justice Scalia excoriated — the theory that courts should ‘update’ old statutes so that they better reflect the current values of society.
Alito said that the majority’s “arrogance” is “breathtaking,” since “there is not a shred of evidence that any Member of Congress interpreted the statutory text that way when Title VII was enacted.”
Neither “sexual orientation,” nor “gender identity” appear on the list of five specified grounds for discrimination in Title VII, and the majority’s “argument is not only arrogant, it is wrong,” he wrote. The terms “sex,” “sexual orientation,” and “gender identity” are “different concepts,” and neither of the two latter terms are “tied to either of the biological sexes.”
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
Alito is, of course, entirely correct, as one of us pointed out in a recent article in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy.
And, of course, Congress knew that “sex” didn’t include “sexual orientation” and “gender identity.” Alito recalled that there have been numerous bills introduced in Congress over the past 45 years to amend the law and add those terms, but they all failed.
The majority is “usurping the constitutional authority of the other branches” of government and has taken the latest congressional bill on this topic and “issued it under the guise of statutory interpretation.”
Justice Brett Kavanaugh also filed a dissenting opinion, in which he wrote that “this case boils down to one fundamental question: Who decides?”
The issue is whether Title VII “should be expanded to prohibit discrimination because of sexual orientation,” he wrote, adding that responsibility “belongs to Congress and the President in the legislative process, not to this Court.”
Judicial Activism in Extreme
Kavanaugh lauded the “extraordinary vision, tenacity, and grit” of the gay and lesbian community for working “hard for many decades to achieve equal treatment in fact and in law.” But, he added, under separation of powers, “it was Congress’s role, not this Court’s, to amend Title VII.”
Alito made it clear that the “updating desire to which the Court succumbs no doubt rises from humane and generous impulses.” But the “authority of this Court is limited to saying what the law is.”
In their dissents, Alito, Thomas, and Kavanaugh got it right, and the majority got it wrong. The word “sex”’ — still today as when Congress passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964 — refers to our biological reality as male or female. It doesn’t refer to our sexual orientations or malleable gender identities as some see it.
If those terms were contained within Title VII, there would have been no need for Congress to repeatedly try to amend the law to add sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classes.
In an act of judicial activism, a majority of the Supreme Court has simply legislated from the bench and amended the statute itself.
Congress has not legislated such an outcome, and it was wrong for the court to usurp lawmakers’ authority by imposing such an extreme policy on our nation without the consent of the governed.
Hans von Spakovsky is an authority on a wide range of issues — including civil rights, civil justice, the First Amendment, immigration, the rule of law and government reform — as a senior legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and manager of the think tank’s Election Law Reform Initiative.
Ryan T. Anderson, Ph.D., is the William E. Simon Senior Research Fellow in American Principles and Public Policy at The Heritage Foundation, where he researches and writes about marriage, bioethics, religious liberty and political philosophy. Anderson is the author of several books and his research has been cited by two U.S. Supreme Court justices in two separate cases.


thestream--2020-06-15--‘The Diversity We Have is Our Strength,’ Says Pastor Miles McPherson

America needs a way forward after the unjust killing of George Floyd .
Miles McPherson , pastor and author of The Third Option : Hope for a Racially Divided Nation , joins the podcast to share his personal story of experiencing racism and how we all can move past an “ us versus them ” mentality to build relationships with those who look different from ourselves .
Also on today ’ s show , we read your letters to the editor and share a good news story about daily prayer and worship gatherings that are taking place at the site @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the podcast below or read the lightly edited transcript .
The Daily Signal Podcast is available on Ricochet , Apple Podcasts , Pippa , Google Play or Stitcher .
All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts .
If you like what you hear , please leave a review .
You can also leave us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at letters @ dailysignal.com .
Enjoy the show !
Virginia Allen : I am joined by Miles McPherson , pastor of the Rock Church in San Diego , California @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hope for a Racially Divided Nation , and a former NFL football player .
Pastor Miles , thanks for being here .
McPherson : It is my pleasure .
How y ’ all doing today ?
Allen : We are doing well , really excited to chat with you .
You joined The Daily Signal Podcast about a year ago , and you talked about your book “ The Third Option : Hope for a Racially Divided Nation , ” and it ’ s really a joy having you back on today because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that hope right now .
Allen : We sure are .
… For those who might not be familiar with your book , just give me a little bit of a summary .
The Third Option , you said that you wrote it because we grow up and we ’ re trained to think in this “ us versus them ” mentality , but you say , “ No , there ’ s actually another way to think.
” What is that third option ?
McPherson : Correct .
You know , if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can just feel it , you have to , it ’ s us versus them .
You have to pick one side against another .
You ’ re either for or against black lives , you ’ re either for or against the police or for or against defunding the police .
And there ’ s so much division in the world .
The third option is that we honor what we have in common .
So instead of being me against you , if we can join together and focus , acknowledge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ common , we have more similarities than differences .
All of us bleed red , all of us love family , food , fun , sleep , and we ’ re all made in the image of God .
And so the number of things that we share in common far outweigh our differences .
Even when George Floyd was killed , the reason we ’ re seeing protest is because all of us—black , white , Hispanic , Asian—have pain in our heart .
We share that in common , and we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to him was wrong .
And so if we can join forces and focus on those things , then we can walk in hope and actually experience some healing .
Allen : You do such a good job in your book of explaining some of your own experiences as a kid facing racism from both the black and white community .
Could you take a minute and just share a little bit of your own story ?
McPherson : All my grandparents are from Jamaica , two black grandfathers , one white grandmother @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So I have light brown skin .
I went to school in my white neighborhood , in the white neighborhood near me , and when I grew up , it was segregated .
So I went to school in a neighborhood that was 100 % white .
And so I got harassed there because I wasn ’ t white , and then I got harassed because I wasn ’ t black enough .
And that ’ s where I lived .
So I always felt a little bit like an outsider , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had the United Nations in my house .
And then when we played football , black and white came together and we also had unity on the football field .
So that ’ s kind of where I got to meet and get to see unity and actually participate in unity , was on the football field , in addition to my house .
Listen , racism is sin , and we all have some kind of bias toward people and that applies to everybody on the planet .
And so every country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now experiencing one expression of it here in the United States .
Allen : I think sometimes when we hear stories like yours , there ’ s this temptation , specifically in the white community of which I ’ m a part of , to say , “ OK , I ’ m not going to see color.
” But you point out that it ’ s really not helpful .
And it ’ s actually dishonoring a huge part of who a person is .
So how can we actually see color @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an individual who looks different from us ?
McPherson : It ’ s a good question .
You know , one of the ways to honor the similarities that we have is to acknowledge that we have blind spots and a blind spot is being blind to what you are blind to .
You don ’ t even know , you don ’ t know .
It ’ s the gap between your intent , of what you say or do , and the impact of what you say or do .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t see color , ” their intent is to build a bridge or to say , “ Listen , I ’ m not going to judge you , ” but the impact can be to the person of color is negative because you just told that person you don ’ t see them and you don ’ t see them for what they are .
I remember the first time someone told me they didn ’ t see color , my color .
I thought they had an eye astigmatism .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no , no .
We just don ’ t see your color.
” And I was like , “ So you see red , blue , and green , but you don ’ t see my color .
So , how do you know I have a color you don ’ t see if you don ’ t see it ?
” … I even asked them , I said , “ Do you see me as white ?
” And they didn ’ t know what to say .
And so it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ white and my experience is not white .
So when you say you don ’ t see what I am , you are also ignoring the burden that comes with my color , which means you don ’ t want to deal and address or acknowledge my burden .
Which means how can you love me then ?
How can you really care for me if you ’ re willing to ignore and deliberately ignore any pain that I have ?
So saying you don ’ t see color , I get the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ negative .
So it ’ s better to say , “ No , I see what you are because God made you that way and you ’ re beautiful.
” There ’ s nothing wrong with that .
It ’ s like when someone gets a tan in Hawaii , they want to show it off .
So when you get a tan in Hawaii , you want to celebrate .
But when you get a tan in the womb , you want to invalidate .
And so it ’ s kind of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ m going to go to Hawaii and get a tan so everybody can see my brown , ” but when someone ’ s born brown , we say we don ’ t see it .
And so it ’ s a blind spot .
I think people should say , “ I see what you are , I respect what you are , I want to learn about who you are.
” And that ’ s how we grow and honor and respect .
Allen : In that same vein of learning about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , you talk about having race consultations instead of just conversations .
What do you mean by that ?
McPherson : Well , because you see color , every person you talk to you , you ’ re having a race conversation .
Even when you look in the mirror , if you ’ re white , you know you ’ re talking to a white person .
If you ’ re black , you know you ’ re talking to a black person .
So whoever you have a conversation with , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re talking to .
Therefore , every time you see someone , even before you say anything to them , in your mind you ’ re saying , “ That ’ s an Asian person , ” “ That ’ s a what , ” and you may be wrong , but you ’ re guessing .
… Also , because of your background and your social narrative , which we all have , which is the story that shapes how we see the world based on all the information we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up , we have opinions and those opinions speak to us when we see someone .
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political , Economic and Moral Issues of Our Day .
What we need to do is take those opinions , which are the race conversation , and suspend them until we get to know the person and let the person self-disclose to us who they are .
That ’ s called a race consultation .
I am letting you show me who you are and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ challenge my preconceived ideas about who you are .
So if I see someone that ’ s like the lady in New York City who had the dog off the leash and the black man came and said , “ Can you put the dog on the leash ?
” And she freaked out and called the police and said , “ An African American man is threatening my life.
” And all he was doing was asking her to put her dog on the leash .
And he was videotaping this .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ black man and she got scared because what was in her head .
But if she would [ have ] just asked him or if she would just obey the rules to put a dog on a leash , it wouldn ’ t have been a problem .
But if she would ’ ve said , “ Tell me about yourself.
” He would have said , “ Well , I ’ m a Harvard grad , ” which is what he was .
But she didn ’ t have that consultation .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ chance to reveal to her who he was .
She just judged him because of what was in her head .
So instead of us doing that with people , we need to give people opportunities to reveal who they are .
Allen : How do we keep that going ?
Because I think in moments like these , there ’ s so much energy and there ’ s passion and we want to build those bridges , but several months from now , a year from now , we need to keep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do that ?
McPherson : I think we have to walk .
You know , one of the things that we all have in common is that we ’ re all on a journey and we ’ re all learning and we will learn till the day we die .
If we ’ re faithful to being human , we will learn about ourself , we will learn about other people .
And if we choose to give people the respect that they are learning too , [ then ] we walk together @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not like people who don ’ t want to deal with it and just want a quick fix— ” I did my thing , I said , ‘ Hi.
’ I said , ‘ I don ’ t see color.
’ So now I can go about my business.
” Well , it ’ s not that simple .
It ’ s more about building relationships , loving , honest relationships with people who don ’ t look like you and getting to know each other and giving each other [ the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and say dumb things .
Because I have a bunch of friends of all nationalities and we say all kinds of dumb things to each other and we learn and we grow and we forgive but it ’ s all based on love .
So it ’ s a whole lot of room for mistakes and questions .
And we have to have a culture where we can do that .
But I would say to people , listen , develop relationships with people and then develop relationships with their friends and their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t ever assume you have arrived , just be a learner and be humble about it .
Allen : And that ’ s something that your church is very , very passionate about and focused on .
How have you all cultivated that in an ongoing way of bringing people together from different backgrounds ?
McPherson : Yeah .
Our churches , we have tens of thousands of people in our church from more nationalities than I know .
San Diego is very diverse .
Sdrock.com , You can watch our services @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we have been diverse for 20 years ever since Day One .
And we worship together , we serve the city together , we pray together , we counsel and cry together .
So , we do life together .
And because we do life together , you get to know people and then you get to realize , “ Wait a minute , the diversity we have is our strength.
” I did a sermon in Spanish a couple of years ago and in preparation I got a bunch of Spanish speakers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have 15 Spanish-speaking nations represented .
That ’ s just Spanish .
And so , because we do life together , we get to know each other and learn from each other .
As you do that , you realize , “ Wow , people are amazing.
” So it ’ s not like I have to feel like I ’ m better than you , or you ’ re not as good as me .
I have something to learn from you .
… When you have the experience of learning from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which is what happens when you come to our church , you ’ re always around different people .
And so when that becomes your norm , you get more comfortable with that .
And you get more comfortable with the fact that you don ’ t have to know everything .
That you don ’ t have to be the superior one or the inferior one .
You get to be one of the people .
So we just do life together and that ’ s how I go back to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with people .
On my social media , I ’ m always talking about these kinds of things .
And if someone wants to follow me , @ milesmcpherson on Instagram and all the things , @ milesmcpherson .
I ’ m always posting stuff .
So I ’ m always talking about color , and race , and educating people .
And also showing that you can do that and be comfortable .
It doesn ’ t have to be a stressful , fearful thing … I ’ m comfortable in my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comfortable in their ethnicity .
It ’ s not like if you say , “ That person ’ s white , ” or , “ That person ’ s black , ” that that ’ s a racist thing .
It ’ s just a fact , if you say it respectfully and honorably .
Allen : … You mentioned social media , the media does play a big role , I think , in how we often see race — whether that ’ s social media or movies or TV .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when we kind of see those portrayals , recognize when maybe it is racist and choose to not agree with inaccurate portrayals that we ’ re seeing ?
McPherson : It ’ s all about numbers .
I ’ m a numbers guy .
No .
1 is the number of unity .
No .
2 is the number of division .
And when you hear stuff , if it ’ s causing a No .
2 , in other words , me against you , or if it ’ s creating distance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If it ’ s creating unity , it ’ s love .
So how you say things , what you say , how other people say things , if it is uplifting and life-giving and unifying , it ’ s not racism .
If it ’ s degrading and demeaning and causing division , well , then that ’ s the negative .
What we always want to do is think , “ OK , how do I turn that comment into a positive ?
How do I turn that experience into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the positive in that person ?
” That ’ s why my book The Third Option helps people see God in people .
So I would encourage people to go to Amazon , go to milesmcpherson.com , and get the book The Third Option .
Every chapter has three questions at the end .
So you can actually go through a discussion guide and go through discussions and talk with people .
It has things you can do in the community .
And to practice , I have a chapter where I challenged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to go to a neighborhood where they ’ re the only white person .
Because black people [ are ] always around , they ’ re always a minority , but white people are rarely the minority .
So you have to go to a place where you ’ re the only white person , and then you can feel like , “ Oh , this is what it feels like to be the other.
” I did it with a guy and even in my book , he wrote his testimony about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ telling us what people were thinking in their heads .
And I was wondering , “ How do you know what people are thinking in your head ?
” That ’ s what he was feeling , but it ’ s not necessarily fact .
Now he had a taste of what it means to be a minority .
So I just want to encourage people to get the book , get The Third Option , read it , do it , live it , and go through it with somebody who is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And we ’ ll be sure to put the link for the book in today ’ s show notes because … it ’ s so relevant .
And , Pastor Miles , your story is so inspirational .
Everything from your time in the NFL and growing up to becoming a pastor and leading such a diverse congregation , it ’ s so relevant .
Before I let you go , I just want to ask you , what is the prayer that you ’ re praying over our country right now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to pray ?
McPherson : John said , “ I must decrease and Jesus must increase.
” If all of us would just say , “ God , I need to decrease .
This can ’ t be about me .
It ’ s got to be about you.
” And everybody wants to be defensive and be right over somebody else .
That ’ s us first then .
But if we all humbled our knee before God and say , “ Lord , I just want to decrease .
And I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ life , ” John 3:30 , that ’ s what I would encourage people to do .
Just to humble themselves before God because none of us are right , you know ?
Yes , there should be justice .
That ’ s correct .
George Floyd should not have been killed .
That ’ s correct .
But justice is a God thing .
And the justice that God is going to render is way better than the justice of man .
Those cops , they can go to jail for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a better justice than that .
He wants to change all of our hearts so it doesn ’ t happen again .
And so I would encourage people just to bow before God and surrender their life to him .
Allen : Pastor Miles , thank you so much .
Really appreciate your time today .

America needs a way forward after the unjust killing of George Floyd. Miles McPherson, pastor and author of The Third Option: Hope for a Racially Divided Nation, joins the podcast to share his personal story of experiencing racism and how we all can move past an “us versus them” mentality to build relationships with those who look different from ourselves.
Also on today’s show, we read your letters to the editor and share a good news story about daily prayer and worship gatherings that are taking place at the site of Floyd’s death. Listen to the podcast below or read the lightly edited transcript.
The Daily Signal Podcast is available on Ricochet, Apple Podcasts, Pippa, Google Play or Stitcher. All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts. If you like what you hear, please leave a review. You can also leave us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at [email protected]. Enjoy the show!
Virginia Allen: I am joined by Miles McPherson, pastor of the Rock Church in San Diego, California, author of The Third Option: Hope for a Racially Divided Nation, and a former NFL football player. Pastor Miles, thanks for being here.
McPherson: It is my pleasure. How y’all doing today?
Allen: We are doing well, really excited to chat with you. You joined The Daily Signal Podcast about a year ago, and you talked about your book “The Third Option: Hope for a Racially Divided Nation,” and it’s really a joy having you back on today because we are in need of some of that hope right now.
McPherson: Yes.
Allen: We sure are. … For those who might not be familiar with your book, just give me a little bit of a summary. The Third Option, you said that you wrote it because we grow up and we’re trained to think in this “us versus them” mentality, but you say, “No, there’s actually another way to think.” What is that third option?
McPherson: Correct. You know, if you look on the news and you can just feel it, you have to, it’s us versus them. You have to pick one side against another. You’re either for or against black lives, you’re either for or against the police or for or against defunding the police. And there’s so much division in the world.
The third option is that we honor what we have in common. So instead of being me against you, if we can join together and focus, acknowledge and focus on what we have in common, we have more similarities than differences.
All of us bleed red, all of us love family, food, fun, sleep, and we’re all made in the image of God. And so the number of things that we share in common far outweigh our differences.
Even when George Floyd was killed, the reason we’re seeing protest is because all of us—black, white, Hispanic, Asian—have pain in our heart. We share that in common, and we share in common that what was done to him was wrong. And so if we can join forces and focus on those things, then we can walk in hope and actually experience some healing.
Allen: You do such a good job in your book of explaining some of your own experiences as a kid facing racism from both the black and white community. Could you take a minute and just share a little bit of your own story?
McPherson: All my grandparents are from Jamaica, two black grandfathers, one white grandmother, and one half Chinese black grandmother. So I have light brown skin.
I went to school in my white neighborhood, in the white neighborhood near me, and when I grew up, it was segregated. So I went to school in a neighborhood that was 100% white. And so I got harassed there because I wasn’t white, and then I got harassed because I wasn’t black enough. And that’s where I lived.
So I always felt a little bit like an outsider, but when I went home, I had the United Nations in my house. And then when we played football, black and white came together and we also had unity on the football field. So that’s kind of where I got to meet and get to see unity and actually participate in unity, was on the football field, in addition to my house.
Listen, racism is sin, and we all have some kind of bias toward people and that applies to everybody on the planet. And so every country is different and we’re just now experiencing one expression of it here in the United States.
Allen: I think sometimes when we hear stories like yours, there’s this temptation, specifically in the white community of which I’m a part of, to say, “OK, I’m not going to see color.” But you point out that it’s really not helpful. And it’s actually dishonoring a huge part of who a person is. So how can we actually see color in a way that adds honor to an individual who looks different from us?
McPherson: It’s a good question. You know, one of the ways to honor the similarities that we have is to acknowledge that we have blind spots and a blind spot is being blind to what you are blind to. You don’t even know, you don’t know. It’s the gap between your intent, of what you say or do, and the impact of what you say or do.
So if someone says, “I don’t see color,” their intent is to build a bridge or to say, “Listen, I’m not going to judge you,” but the impact can be to the person of color is negative because you just told that person you don’t see them and you don’t see them for what they are.
I remember the first time someone told me they didn’t see color, my color. I thought they had an eye astigmatism. And so they said, “No, no, no. We just don’t see your color.” And I was like, “So you see red, blue, and green, but you don’t see my color. So, how do you know I have a color you don’t see if you don’t see it?”
… I even asked them, I said, “Do you see me as white?” And they didn’t know what to say. And so it’s because I’m not white and my experience is not white.
So when you say you don’t see what I am, you are also ignoring the burden that comes with my color, which means you don’t want to deal and address or acknowledge my burden. Which means how can you love me then? How can you really care for me if you’re willing to ignore and deliberately ignore any pain that I have?
So saying you don’t see color, I get the intent, but the impact can be negative. So it’s better to say, “No, I see what you are because God made you that way and you’re beautiful.” There’s nothing wrong with that.
We worship together, we serve the city together, we pray together, we counsel and cry together. So, we do life together. And because we do life together, you get to know people and then you get to realize, “Wait a minute, the diversity we have is our strength.”
It’s like when someone gets a tan in Hawaii, they want to show it off. So when you get a tan in Hawaii, you want to celebrate. But when you get a tan in the womb, you want to invalidate. And so it’s kind of hypocritical to say, “I’m going to go to Hawaii and get a tan so everybody can see my brown,” but when someone’s born brown, we say we don’t see it. And so it’s a blind spot.
I think people should say, “I see what you are, I respect what you are, I want to learn about who you are.” And that’s how we grow and honor and respect.
Allen: In that same vein of learning about others and other people’s experiences, you talk about having race consultations instead of just conversations. What do you mean by that?
McPherson: Well, because you see color, every person you talk to you, you’re having a race conversation. Even when you look in the mirror, if you’re white, you know you’re talking to a white person. If you’re black, you know you’re talking to a black person. So whoever you have a conversation with, you’re aware of who you’re talking to.
Therefore, every time you see someone, even before you say anything to them, in your mind you’re saying, “That’s an Asian person,” “That’s a what,” and you may be wrong, but you’re guessing.
… Also, because of your background and your social narrative, which we all have, which is the story that shapes how we see the world based on all the information we’ve received as a kid, growing up, we have opinions and those opinions speak to us when we see someone.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
What we need to do is take those opinions, which are the race conversation, and suspend them until we get to know the person and let the person self-disclose to us who they are. That’s called a race consultation. I am letting you show me who you are and I’m letting you expand and challenge my preconceived ideas about who you are.
So if I see someone that’s like the lady in New York City who had the dog off the leash and the black man came and said, “Can you put the dog on the leash?” And she freaked out and called the police and said, “An African American man is threatening my life.” And all he was doing was asking her to put her dog on the leash. And he was videotaping this. Well, what she saw was a black man and she got scared because what was in her head.
But if she would [have] just asked him or if she would just obey the rules to put a dog on a leash, it wouldn’t have been a problem. But if she would’ve said, “Tell me about yourself.” He would have said, “Well, I’m a Harvard grad,” which is what he was. But she didn’t have that consultation.
She didn’t give him the chance to reveal to her who he was. She just judged him because of what was in her head. So instead of us doing that with people, we need to give people opportunities to reveal who they are.
Allen: How do we keep that going? Because I think in moments like these, there’s so much energy and there’s passion and we want to build those bridges, but several months from now, a year from now, we need to keep these consultations going. How do we do that?
McPherson: I think we have to walk. You know, one of the things that we all have in common is that we’re all on a journey and we’re all learning and we will learn till the day we die. If we’re faithful to being human, we will learn about ourself, we will learn about other people. And if we choose to give people the respect that they are learning too, [then] we walk together and learn together in relationship.
This is not like people who don’t want to deal with it and just want a quick fix—”I did my thing, I said, ‘Hi.’ I said, ‘I don’t see color.’ So now I can go about my business.” Well, it’s not that simple.
It’s more about building relationships, loving, honest relationships with people who don’t look like you and getting to know each other and giving each other [the] opportunity to be wrong and learn and say dumb things.
Because I have a bunch of friends of all nationalities and we say all kinds of dumb things to each other and we learn and we grow and we forgive but it’s all based on love. So it’s a whole lot of room for mistakes and questions. And we have to have a culture where we can do that.
But I would say to people, listen, develop relationships with people and then develop relationships with their friends and their friends and their friends. And don’t ever assume you have arrived, just be a learner and be humble about it.
Allen: And that’s something that your church is very, very passionate about and focused on. How have you all cultivated that in an ongoing way of bringing people together from different backgrounds?
McPherson: Yeah. Our churches, we have tens of thousands of people in our church from more nationalities than I know. San Diego is very diverse. Sdrock.com, You can watch our services at sdrock.com.
But you know, we have been diverse for 20 years ever since Day One. And we worship together, we serve the city together, we pray together, we counsel and cry together. So, we do life together.
And because we do life together, you get to know people and then you get to realize, “Wait a minute, the diversity we have is our strength.”
I did a sermon in Spanish a couple of years ago and in preparation I got a bunch of Spanish speakers together so I could practice and we have 15 Spanish-speaking nations represented. That’s just Spanish. And so, because we do life together, we get to know each other and learn from each other.
As you do that, you realize, “Wow, people are amazing.” So it’s not like I have to feel like I’m better than you, or you’re not as good as me. I have something to learn from you. …
When you have the experience of learning from different kinds of people all the time, which is what happens when you come to our church, you’re always around different people. And so when that becomes your norm, you get more comfortable with that. And you get more comfortable with the fact that you don’t have to know everything. That you don’t have to be the superior one or the inferior one. You get to be one of the people.
So we just do life together and that’s how I go back to my relationship, if you build relationships with people.
On my social media, I’m always talking about these kinds of things. And if someone wants to follow me, @milesmcpherson on Instagram and all the things, @milesmcpherson. I’m always posting stuff.
So I’m always talking about color, and race, and educating people. And also showing that you can do that and be comfortable. It doesn’t have to be a stressful, fearful thing … I’m comfortable in my ethnicity and people in our church are comfortable in their ethnicity. It’s not like if you say, “That person’s white,” or, “That person’s black,” that that’s a racist thing. It’s just a fact, if you say it respectfully and honorably.
Allen: … You mentioned social media, the media does play a big role, I think, in how we often see race — whether that’s social media or movies or TV. But how can we train ourselves to, when we kind of see those portrayals, recognize when maybe it is racist and choose to not agree with inaccurate portrayals that we’re seeing?
McPherson: It’s all about numbers. I’m a numbers guy. No. 1 is the number of unity. No. 2 is the number of division. And when you hear stuff, if it’s causing a No. 2, in other words, me against you, or if it’s creating distance or dissension, that’s division. If it’s creating unity, it’s love.
So how you say things, what you say, how other people say things, if it is uplifting and life-giving and unifying, it’s not racism. If it’s degrading and demeaning and causing division, well, then that’s the negative.
What we always want to do is think, “OK, how do I turn that comment into a positive? How do I turn that experience into a positive? How do I see the positive in that person?” That’s why my book The Third Option helps people see God in people.
So I would encourage people to go to Amazon, go to milesmcpherson.com, and get the book The Third Option. Every chapter has three questions at the end. So you can actually go through a discussion guide and go through discussions and talk with people.
It has things you can do in the community. And to practice, I have a chapter where I challenged people, a few white people, to go to a neighborhood where they’re the only white person. Because black people [are] always around, they’re always a minority, but white people are rarely the minority.
So you have to go to a place where you’re the only white person, and then you can feel like, “Oh, this is what it feels like to be the other.”
I did it with a guy and even in my book, he wrote his testimony about what he felt. And he was telling us what people were thinking in their heads. And I was wondering, “How do you know what people are thinking in your head?” That’s what he was feeling, but it’s not necessarily fact. Now he had a taste of what it means to be a minority.
So I just want to encourage people to get the book, get The Third Option, read it, do it, live it, and go through it with somebody who is different than you.
Allen: Yeah. And we’ll be sure to put the link for the book in today’s show notes because … it’s so relevant.
And, Pastor Miles, your story is so inspirational. Everything from your time in the NFL and growing up to becoming a pastor and leading such a diverse congregation, it’s so relevant.
Before I let you go, I just want to ask you, what is the prayer that you’re praying over our country right now and how are you encouraging your congregation to pray?
McPherson: John said, “I must decrease and Jesus must increase.” If all of us would just say, “God, I need to decrease. This can’t be about me. It’s got to be about you.”
And everybody wants to be defensive and be right over somebody else. That’s us first then. But if we all humbled our knee before God and say, “Lord, I just want to decrease. And I want you to be elevated in my life,” John 3:30, that’s what I would encourage people to do.
Just to humble themselves before God because none of us are right, you know? Yes, there should be justice. That’s correct. George Floyd should not have been killed. That’s correct. But justice is a God thing. And the justice that God is going to render is way better than the justice of man.
Those cops, they can go to jail for the rest of their life. God has a better justice than that. He wants to change all of our hearts so it doesn’t happen again. And so I would encourage people just to bow before God and surrender their life to him.
Allen: Pastor Miles, thank you so much. Really appreciate your time today.
McPherson: Thank you.
Copyright 2020 The Daily Signal