Still not getting this. You said, "Christians founded the US colonies and states. The romanists have always been pro immigration whether Irish or German Catholics or other Latins from south of the border. It is about RELIGION not race.
The Mexicans were not allowed to immigrate north before the 1965 Immigration Act. Most of the Africans have been here before the Europeans arrived so they all have a place (unless they are Caribbean Latins)."
So, when you referred to "here" above you were not referring to the USA? You were referring to "the Americas"?
How do you define an island as being Catholic/Latin - I have no idea what that term means. So, for example, how would that relate to Jamaica and Barbados? How are they "Catholic/Latin"?
In regards to racism, any opinion that promotes superiority (or inferiority) of one race based solely on the race of the person(s) under scrutiny is racism - it doesn't have to have anything to do with culture.
You also stated that "All is not rosey with an interracial family". Are you trying to infer that all is "rosey" with non-interracial families? I beg to differ. Is that opinion based on any facts?
You mention that no country wants immigration or interracial marriage. Where's the evidence for that? Some countries have specific immigration programmes, deliberately setting out to attract immigrants: Australia and the UK being two prominent examples. In particular, the UK has benefited immensely from immigration.
You then say, "Supporting immigration will help maybe 1 in 10 come to the true Jesus. That means 9 / 10 do not, showing the suicidal ends of such a plan."
Come on, james2, you cannot just invent a statistic and then attempt to use that to prove your point. Even if we assume for the purpose of the argument that you are right that "supporting immigration will help... 1 in 10 come to the true Jesus"
It certainly does not mean that 9/10 do not come to Jesus at all. There is no logic behind such a statement unless you are contending that supporting immigration is the only form of evangelism that any immigrant will ever encounter.
The last point I want to comment on is perhaps the most hypocritical statement I have seen for a long time:
"We can love and support the people in their own lands, they do not all have to come to the USA."
It seems that you are speaking in opposition to what is written on the Statue of Liberty's plaque:
"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
The nation invites them and you turn them away on the basis that they are foreigners. Where did your foreparents come from, james2, were they native Americans or were they foreign immigrants?
Well thanks to James2's post we now have a definite answer as to whether racism exists in the SDA church. It does and we need to aggressively address it.
Right. First we need to disband the black conference. A conference based solely on race is obviously racist.
I think the conferences should merge rather than having one of them be disbanded. The white conference should not just impose conditions on the black one, any differences should be negotiated between equals. The result will still be one conference, but everyone will have had a say in the process.
The devil is a liar! No sir, not now or ever!
I happily attend a multi-cultural (including Caucasian) SDA Church, that is in a HBC and has an African-American Senior Pastor. It is Afro-centric in Worship and culture. We need to see that kind leadership especially in evangelism, but also for our children.
We also have a SDA church with an Assistant Pastor that is Caucasian and that congregation is also mixed.
I have said it before: When people start talking about "getting rid of conferences", WHY is ALWAYS the HBC (Historically Black Conferences) that are "supposedly" supposed to be done away with? Not to mention they are thriving and and retaining our youth. They are also thriving financially.
Disband the "Historically Segregated Conferences" that did not allow Blacks in the first place, then call me.
I think they should be merged into one conference. I don't care if they have redundant leaders for awhile until by attrition through retirement that unity is achieved. God doesn't favor us based on our skin color. There are no separation of housing in heaven. There is One God, One Jesus, and One Holy Spirit for the salvation of all of humanity. There isn't a different God for every race. Therefore, there should never be a racial divide in our churches.
Those who want to remain in separated conferences based on race and think that is appropriate have obvious issues with bigotry.
As to your question Sarah, can you name any other conference that has separated itself solely on race? I can't.
So, I regard a bulwark of racism in the church is the one conference that demands to be separated based on race.
My solution is simple. Redundancy, until unity through integration is achieved.
We should not be proud of racial separation in our church, it should be a source of shame.
You tell Kentucky-Tennessee to disband and merge with South Central Conference, leaving the officers at SCC as they are. They are NOT going to. While you are at it, let me see how you will handle one our pastors being female and expressive worship.
It's separated by culture and conviction....not race. Like I said, you are welcome to join the multi-cultural congregation.
Are you saying you want a conference dedicated to only one race then? I have absolutely no issue with expressive worship. You are barking up the wrong tree with me on that.
When you have an entire conference with a color in front of it as a descriptor, no matter what that color might be, it is by nature divisive and racist. It is nothing but segregation.
No matter the conference, the ordination of women pastors has no basis in scripture.
In God, regarding salvation we are all one male and female. However, God has distinct roles for us to play based on gender. Once this sinful world is put aright, the oneness of male and female will become apparent again, as the curse God put on Adam and Eve, and by extension all of us, will be lifted. However, there will no longer be pastors, elders, and deacons either. There will not be a need for any of those roles.
God, however, has never made a distinction based on skin color. That is a distinctly human evil.
So, Daryl, are you saying that we should have conferences based solely on racial divide? Why stop with the Black Conference then? How about the Native American conference, the Hispanic conference, the White conference, the Asian Conference, and so on. Either we need to break down the wall of separation, or we refuse, you may as well build it higher.
If we are going to sin, we may as well be all in, right?
I have found that the Black regional conferences have the least multi-cultural congregations of all. If you want a multi-cultural congregation come to the so-called White conference churches.