Once again, I understand where you guys are coming from, but based on those standards it is hard to think that anyone , let alone Dabney, is regenerate. That is, if we take Matthew 5 seriously, we are all murderers, adulterers, etc.

Ben,
I understand what you are trying to say here, and I agree with your posture against covering up horrible sins of some of our fathers of the faith. But you seem to be over reacting in your comment. “Dabney is NOT in heaven if …” This statement flies in the face of an elementary doctrine of grace. There are plenty of sins we do not repent of: sins of ignorance, or even constant stubbornness and pride. Nobody reaches a state of perfection before they die, but thank goodness Dabney put his whole trust in someone who truly was perfect in spite of every temptation. Racism, Intolerance, or even murder isn’t the standard of “who gets in and who doesn’t”, perfection is the standard. I find your comment to be the equivalent of “Repent of all your sins equals accurately naming every single sin you have ever committed, or else you aren’t going to heaven.” That is mechanistic and Catholic, which is ironically also sinful. It is repentance and faith IN Christ who is our mediator which is the onyl way of salvation. Lastly, someone with a TRULY solid Theology, WILL go to heaven. True theology comes from only one source, the wisdom of Christ to those who are united to him by faith (2 Cor). Driving a wedge between theology and “repentance” is a false dichotomy.

Carl. I appreciate what you wrote. To call Dabney’s racism as a “blind spot” seems to give him a pass. I hear such a description as, “we can’t possibly blame Dabney for being a racist because he was unaware that black people are really human beings like the rest of us”. Give me a break! This attitude that bigotry and racism is the result of some external influences denies the doctrine of man as a fallen creature who sins because that is his nature. The truth of the matter is Dabney was a bigoted racist who looked upon some of his fellow image bearers as inferior to himself simply because they did not have the same skin color that he did. He carried this bigotry throughout his life with full awareness of how repugnant it is in the eyes of God. Regardless of his contribution to Theology, Dabney is NOT in heaven if he died holding onto this gross sin. We ought to be afraid because even those with a solid Theology don’t get into the kingdom. Repentance and faith in Jesus Christ is the only way into God’s kingdom.

We ought to be sensitive to all our weaknesses, yes. But the subject here, indeed, is a theologian. And not just any. Dabney’s impure views on race not only colored his doctrine of man and evangelism (dayenu!), but as a trusted and towering figure, speaking to and from a deeply religious South, his teachings were bound to have a profound effect on the sad train of human affairs and the legacy of hate for generations.

So I tend to agree that our first and proper response to Dabney and his legacy should probably not be some softy along the lines “we all have our warts and all”… Or even a desire to seek “a more complex view”…

Rather, I think it best to respond with: Fear. We ought to be very afraid! Grievous sin lies at the door of the best of us.

Though I am not sure this is what it amounts to in this particular case, Banner of Truth tend to abridge and edit out bits of books that don’t fit in with their own beliefs – look for the ellipses.

I also felt this program was a bit of a whitewash; yes, racism is not an unforgivable sin, and none of us are free from sin. However, there is a difference between being racist once, making a systematic practice of being racist and defending your racism theologically – if you don’t believe me replace ‘racism’ with ‘adultery’ in that last sentence. By not exploring how this might have distorted his doctrine of man, and evangelism (among other things), this program remained incomplete.