Since Jonathan emailed me directly demanding that I respond to the questions he posted, I thought I'd interrupt my vacation in the "barbecue capitol of the world" (Lexington, NC--which, by the way Greg, is where you vacation when you live on a tropical island) and chime in.

First off, thanks brothers for engaging these ideas.  For me, there's something about "iron sharpening iron" in the comments and questions.  I appreciate all of you for the thoughtful encouragements and questions and suggestions.

Second, the questions....  Jonathan first, since his were so important to interrupt my time with my lovely wife and adorable children... who are with their husband and daddy on their first vacation since entering the pastorate full time. :-)

1.  The differences in skin color are biological or genetic.  But "race" is a much bigger idea/social theory than skin color.  When most people see a person of a differing skin color, they think "race" not just skin color.  By thinking "race," they are calling on a whole bunch of assumptions and ideas that make up the notion "race."  That is not biological but social and cultural.  It's linked to skin color in most people's thinking, but it's not caused by biology in any way.   We need to break apart "race as biology" from cultural and social assumptions/ideas in order to be free from the imprisonment that "race" is.  Here's how I tried to put it in the talk:

The emphasis in the OT and NT wherever the Bible speaks of creation of humankind is mankind’s common biological descent from Adam.  Our common ancestry is underscored.  The most fundamental recognition is not our difference labeled as “race” but our oneness, not our discontinuity but continuity.

To put it another way—This obvious truth that all men are descended from Adam and Eve through the line of Noah… demands complete abandonment of “race as biological distinctiveness.”  “Race” in the way we commonly use the term, as a proxy for explaining phenotypical differences—differences in appearances, does not exist in truth.

I want to be clear.  I am not saying the differences in skin color, hair texture, etc. does not exist.  I am saying that the theory we use to explain those differences is completely false, non-existent.

2.  I'd ditto Greg's comments re: the necessity to think about, evaluate, appreciate, and use the best (that is, most godly) aspects of ethnicity.  If we're to recognize or appreciate skin color, then it should be done in the way we recognize and appreciate the diversity of cloud configurations, differing colors and smells of roses, the brilliant array of colors in a stunning sunset or sunrise.  In other words, God purposes to be glorified in the fact that He has made all men in His own image from one parentage and yet made them incredibly diverse. We need to stand in awe of that... not try to look into the secret things of God that belong to Him alone. 

Greg, by God's grace,it's not a hopeless dream to see people from varying ethnicities worshipping joyfully together in the same local church.  By God's grace, I think there are an increasing number of such churches.  We should pray and work for more.  To do otherwise would be to settle for dividing Christ's body in a way that He never does.

One final and very important question that needs to be answered:

WHEREAS he has compelling knowledge of Public Enemy and hip hop,

WHEREAS he demonstrates a remarkable ability to roll with da bruthas,

WHEREAS he is no less cool than C.J. Mahaney,

WHEREAS grace and empathy fill his heart, showing itself in mercy and love for all,

WHEREAS God has granted him the privilege of serving a multi-ethnic church, which he does with joy,

Be it henceforth and forever RESOLVED, that Mike McKinley is a true brutha, down with the cause, and granted a lifetime, irrevocable ghetto card.  He can roll with me anywhere, any time.