Jesus Christ Is Lord

That every knee should bow and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father!

Jeremiah Wright’s $1.6 Million Dollar Home In The White Suburbs

Posted by Job on April 7, 2008

The fellow is just another false preacher fleecing the flock, no different from the TBN minstrels. See link below:

This is the home that Trinity built

Trinity United Church of Christ is building a million-dollar home along a Tinley Park golf course on land that was owned by its longtime pastor, Rev. A. Jeremiah Wright Jr., records show. The 10,340-square-foot home, apparently planned for Wright’s retirement, sits on land purchased by the pastor in 2004 for $345,000. In September 2006, the church applied for a building permit, and in December 2006 he sold the land to his church, which took out a $1.6 million mortgage on the property.

The church received a permit in April 2007 for the brick-and-stone structure, set on Odyssey Country Club.
Trinity officials declined to comment. The church’s national office said it is “customary and appropriate in many Christian denominations, including the United Church of Christ . . . to offer housing provisions for retiring clergy” after years of service.

Rev. J. Bennett Guess, a spokesman in Cleveland, said: “Each local UCC congregation is free to honor a retiring pastor in ways it feels most appropriate.” Rev. Dwight Hopkins, a professor at the University of Chicago Divinity School, said African-American congregations often purchase a parsonage for clergy. In some traditions, ministers own the home. In others, the church retains ownership.

In recent weeks, Wright has been a central figure in the Democratic presidential race as U.S. Sen. Barack Obama—who has described Wright as a spiritual mentor and confidant—has sought to distance himself from racial and political statements made by the pastor.

Tribune reporter Manya A. Brachear contributed to this report.

So … is this the “black value system” and “rejection of middle – classedness” that Jeremiah Wright espouses from the pulpit? Again, I don’t use the Melvin Jones terminology here, but if I did, Wright would get it. The Three Step Salvation Plan


53 Responses to “Jeremiah Wright’s $1.6 Million Dollar Home In The White Suburbs”

  1. Job, do you like how he purchased the land, sold it to TUCC at an apparent “loss”, but the land went into a trust for himself and his wife? So he basically got the money and kept the land too. Meaning he bilked TUCC for over $300K while being able to claim he “loss” money, when he actually gained over $300K and never lost his land. Then they build a mansion on it for him AND they took out a $10 million line of credit on it.

    Jeremiah Wrong (Wright), Retiring Like a Pulpit Pimp!

  2. Brad said

    That’s so weird.

    I could have sworn I read something about selling possessions and giving to the poor.

    Nope, must not have. I guess it’s the exact opposite.

    Now to get all of my stuff back…


  3. Job said

    Independent Conservative:

    Yep. These folks are just fine with hoarding wealth and gaming the system to cut moneymaking deals for themselves while they rail against it for others. And here comes “Reverend” Hopkins to let everyone know “this type of rank hypocrisy is OK, because you see this is what black churches do all the time …”

  4. When former US Senator Bill Frist was running suspect stock trades from a supposedly blind trust, people went ballistic. (And I think Frist’s hands are dirty on that deal despite none ever being found.)

    But Jeremiah Wrong runs a deal through AN OPEN TRUST that brings him over $300K in gains from church funds, then he gets a $1 million house on it and he’s applauded and defended BY THE SAME BUNCH THAT WOULD TAKE FRIST’S HEAD ON A PLATTER.

    With Frist, although I feel he did something dirty, it’s under the cover of a blind trust, so I don’t have enough evidence to speak about it much. I just usually keep my thoughts on it to myself given lack of solid evidence.

    Jeremiah Wrong has his deal in the open and surprisingly it’s not considered illegal at all how he pocketed over $300K for land he’ll live on. And we don’t know what’s up with the $10 Million line of credit. He could get some or all of that also and that’s under the covers, but a burden TUCC will have to carry.

    If Wright’s last name was Bush, then you’d see an appropriate response and TUCC members demanding answers.

  5. Charles said

    Okay, three things:

    1) First and foremost, this is not Barack so don’t even go there!

    2) Wright is not an elected official as Frist was.

    3) You can bet your bibby that because Wright’s former church was full of first-rate professionals, lawyers, accountants, etc… what was done with this house deal was done with the full knowledge of the trustees, the members, and anyone else that had an interest in the matter. Furthermore, I would bet you that it was one of them who brought the idea up to him in the first place.

    4) Were I a member of his church and certainly I am not; however, if someone came up with a similar plan for my current pastor, I would try to be the very first person voting in favor of such a proposal.


  6. Charles, in your zeal to protect your favored political candidate, you’ve jumped into a matter having nothing at all to do with him. Now you’ve created a discussion that otherwise would not come up.

    1) Nobody said a word about your guy who for all we wonder we can’t figure out why you support him.

    2) The point is not elected versus not elected, but rather the hypocrisy of selective outrage.

    3) How come nobody is saying what the $10 Million line of credit is for? The members are not saying, so I doubt they knew a thing about it at all. All who knew and OK’ed this only show themselves to be accomplices to a crime that God sees clearly.

    4) Now I’m starting to better see how you can support your favorite Presidential candidate.

    Charles, a shake move was performed for Wright to pocket over $300K, then a home way beyond anything reasonable was setup for that property, and a $10 Million line of mystery credit attached, all in a community that makes Wright a hypocrite to his own heresy of race based theology. Rather than something reasonable and more funds to help others, that assembly that is already under false doctrine now carries a larger burden to the tune of millions plus the over $300K. Brother Jesus spoke against this high rolling nonsense while placing burdens in Matthew 23.

  7. The last sentence should have been typed as:

    Brother, Jesus spoke against this high rolling nonsense while placing burdens on others in Matthew 23.

  8. Mike said

    I guess it makes no difference that this home is a parsonage and will be sold with the money returning to the church after Rev. Wright passes away. To me, that makes a huge difference.

  9. Coram Deo said

    Jeremiah Wright is just another run of the mill, in it for the money hack. In my mind there’s nothing new or shocking about him or his rantings whatsoever. He’s certainly not worth the press he’s being given, and if I’m surprised by anything whatsoever about this whole non-event it’s the fact that people are surprised by him – especially Christian evangelicals. This is why I’ve not wasted any time writing about him…until now.

    Truth be told Jeremiah Wright is simply an antitype of John Hagee and his ilk.

    Look at the parallels:

    Wright preaches a socio-communist “you’re being held back” black poverty gospel and Hagee preaches a “name it and claim it” WASP capitalist prosperity gospel.

    Both preach a government solution theology; the soteriology of Gnostic governance. Instead of Jesus Christ and His eternal gospel of grace, human government and/or politics is the solution to all their perceived woes and injustices – political action is the means to their ends.

    Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. (John 18:36)

    Both adhere to a corrupt “seeker sensitive” ecclesiology. Wright’s brand of error appeals to the downtrodden and disenfranchised and Hagee’s appeals to those who reap the benefits of the present system.

    Both Wright and Hagee are intensely focused on a message of instant gratification. They aim for results right here and right now in this life, and anything less is unacceptable; “the afterlife can wait, I want my heaven on earth NOW!

    But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: (Matthew 6:20)

    And let’s be honest here, it isn’t just Jeremiah Wright and John Hagee who are preaching this nonsense. Pulpits across the land are preaching the exact same (though opposite) messages week after week. The error is rampant, the deception is massive, and hell awaits all the blind adherents to these other gospels.

    I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. (Galatians 1:6-7)

    Do we love those people enough to tell them the truth? Are we bold enough to share the simple truth of Jesus Christ crucified, dead, buried and resurrected on the third day for remission of sins?

    I’d like to see the sincere, godly love of the TRUE body of Christ, the church invisible pour forth to our professing brothers and sisters who are immersed in these soul damning errors.

    Though there’s consumer Christianity on the right hand, and liberal Christianity on the left hand, yet there’s still hope.

    They’ve replaced the eternal Gospel with the vain imaginings of men, yet there’s still hope.

    They’ve replaced the cross of Christ with a plasticized, man-centered message to tickle the itching ears of their fickle adherents, hangers-on, yes men, and sycophants, yet there’s still hope.

    There’s hope – real hope – in the hands that were pierced for our transgressions.

    There’s hope – real hope – in the heart that poured forth blood and water for remission of sins.

    There’s hope – real hope – in the nail scarred feet that walked up Golgotha and carried the cross of sinful, fallen humanity upon His torn and bleeding back.

    Let us who are called by His Holy Name, the Name above all names, the name to which every knee in heaven, on earth, and beneath the earth will one day bow, the name of the The Lord Jesus Christ, the Risen Savior, the King of Kings and Lord of Lord, the Alpha and Omega, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the perfect and sinless Lamb of God, the Prince of Peace, Wonderful Counselor, the Ancient of Days, the Almighty God take up our crosses daily and follow after Him – after all, it’s a light burden to bear.

    He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me. (Luke 10:16)

    In Christ,

  10. Job said

    Charles D:

    My main thing with Jeremiah Wright IN THIS MATTER is his hypocrisy. His lifestyle is completely at odds with what he preaches. I was shocked to find out that Trinity United has 8,000 members. I mean, that is INCREDIBLE for that denomination, which has 2 million members and DECLINING.

  11. Hi Mike, you mentioned:

    I guess it makes no difference that this home is a parsonage and will be sold with the money returning to the church after Rev. Wright passes away. To me, that makes a huge difference.

    Mike, how can that money help poor saints now when it’s tied up in a home? Did the Apostles of the Lord Jesus ever buy into extravagance now and figure they’d sell it after they were DEAD? What you say is contrary to scripture. Matthew 25:31-46 does not tell us to live extravagantly now and give to the least of us after we die.

    What of the slave owner who frees their slaves upon their death? Is it OK for them to keep slaves while living? If no, than it’s wrong for a supposed “pastor” to hold up hoards of church money for his own extravagance.

    Also Mike, given how he preached about building up Black areas and against the trappings of “rich White people”, is he not a hypocrite? Given he’s got a $1 Million mansion in Tinley Park, IL which is 93.16% White. He’s the one who harped about doing for “Black”, but in his own life he’s provided an example of the very opposite, LEAVE. I would not hold this against him if it did not make him a hypocrite to his own statements and claimed positions, but it does.

    No Mike, it makes no difference that he’ll have this place till his death, then TUCC will consume the proceeds of the sale or use them possibly in another inappropriate manner. Once he’s dead, there is not even a promise to use the funds of the sale to house homeless saints. Basically this misappropriated money is in his lap till his death and then I guess on “trust” it should be assumed the money from a sale would be spent in a godly manner? Yea right, that’s like the politicians who abuse our money and say if we give them more they’ll use it well 🙄 .

    This is unjustifiable opulence, by the very people who are supposed to be examples of godly contentment.

  12. Also Mike, what about the move performed for him to have over $300K in his pocket? Selling TUCC land that he will live on anyway. He can’t take it with him after he’s dead. And what about the $10 Million line of credit that does not have to be reported to anyone? TUCC will NOT be getting back the $10 Million where ever it goes. If it goes into his pocket it’s gone and TUCC will have to repay that to the bank. If the TUCC leaders squander that $10 Million, who will know? They legally don’t have to report a dime of its use to anyone. Still if that $10 Million line of credit is drawn on it will be the TUCC members who will be paying that bill.

  13. Devon said

    Wow…shocking stuff to be sure!!

    One thing that seems odd to me is that Wright is a radical left wing Socialist/Marxist moron who I would think would be living among us mere plebians and not the rich folk that he rails against???

    I expect this kind of behavior from the name and claim it crowd ie Jakes, Dollar, Crouches, Meyer etc etc but not some lame socialist like Wright???? Though….one must remember that the top Politburo members in the late Soviet Union always had extra homes and dachas etc etc…..

    We know that people like Wright are not remotely Christian….this is only further evidence of him being a whited seplucher…..

    I’ll NEVER understand how any of these lame preachers can live in such opulence when many people in Churches around the world can barely afford to get to their Sunday morning service!! Disgusting!

  14. One thing that seems odd to me is that Wright is a radical left wing Socialist/Marxist moron who I would think would be living among us mere plebians and not the rich folk that he rails against???

    Just like Castro, he preaches one thing, but lives better than everyone else, (falsely) justified by the fact he’s the one who collected the money.

    Though….one must remember that the top Politburo members in the late Soviet Union always had extra homes and dachas etc etc…..

    Yea see, you get it!

  15. Job said


    “though….one must remember that the top Politburo members in the late Soviet Union always had extra homes and dachas etc etc…..”

    Yep. Also realize this: one of the justifications for black leaders supporting Marxism was to free blacks from capitalism, which was inherently racist because capitalism requires a large underclass, and it is convenient to put minorities at the bottom so that the people that the political system responded to – in America’s case whites – would believe in and maintain the system because they weren’t feeling the negative effects of the system. So, without a marginalized group that has to take the jobs that no one else wants, capitalism is supposed to be unworkable, especially since the people in the upper classes, even if they are not racist, will still do all they can to pass their class privilege from generation to generation. That was Black Panther ideology 101, and it was that very ideology that caused Jeremiah Wright (as well as a lot of other more “moderate respectable” black civil rights leaders, politicians, and intellectuals) to advocate the Soviet Union and Cuba.

    But what kept this going was the fact that VERY FEW BLACK PEOPLE ACTUALLY WENT TO THE SOVIET UNION AND CUBA! IF THEY DID, THEY WOULD HAVE FOUND THAT BOTH THOSE NATIONS HAD VERY LOW OPINIONS OF BLACK PEOPLE, AND CUBA IN PARTICULAR DEMONSTRATED THAT COMMUNISM MAKES RACISM HARDER TO OVERCOME! In Cuba, the fair skinned Cubans control who gets the elite jobs, and they only give those jobs to other fair skinned Cubans! Since there is no private enterprise in Cuba, the dark – skinned Cubans can’t even open up their own shops or their own Jet/Ebony magazines and such that American blacks were able to during segregation! No “Negro Leagues” in Cuba, it isn’t allowed!

    Ah! These people are not only hypocritical, but they withhold the truth from so many people. The media is in on it too … you’d never even know that there are so many dark – skinned Cubans from their reporting, because if they reported it the Marxists in the media would have to explain why all these black people are on the bottom of society in the very system that they claim is SUPPOSED to “liberate” and “bring equality to” blacks! Truthfully, it is not much better for blacks in the “social democracies” of Europe. The black people over there: they will give them free healthcare, free housing, free education, everything but a JOB that they can use to get off welfare and advance in that society. When the French prime minister Sarkozy tried to push through reforms that would have allowed blacks and Arabs to get more jobs over there, THE WHITE UNIVERSITY STUDENTS RIOTED AND SHUT DOWN THE COUNTRY! And to think that Obama, Clinton, and the rest of those people want to institute those same kind of “democratic socialist” government over here! If you think that it is hard to find a job or run a business in the inner city NOW, see what would happen after a good 10 years of democratic socialism.

    But the media never talks about the plight of blacks in Cuba or Europe. Why? Because if they did, they would be forced to admit that Jesus Christ offers a better deal to blacks than their false Karl Marx ever will. So out of their hatred of Jesus Christ, they keep the conspiracy of silence going on. That is why we have to continue speaking the truth.

  16. Charles D. said

    Come on Haters!

    This is the very first time that I have disagreed with the three Big Ones all in one fair swoop. Equally, this is the first time I’ve been able to see the fallacy in your premise and thesis. You’re all just plain wrong and I wish you would re-read your responses through more rightous eyes. After that, if you cannot see the errors in your statements, then, I’ll take you on, surely, during my noon break. You’ve written alot and I have to travel to work now.

    You surprise me CD, this is the first in my remembrance that you’ve built such a flimsy support for your statement of case; e.g., “it is no wonder that he has received so much press..” as if that’s a good thing, a thing that everyone desire. I haven’t seen ANY press that either he, barack, or myself would desire. Truth be told, you would want it either. The press you speak about has been no different than what you read here, nothing laudatory I assure you.

    IC For the live of me, I read Matthew many times and Jesus never spoke or otherwise intended: “Jesus spoke against this high rolling nonsense while “placing burdens on others” If the members facilitated the transaction exactly who is being burden?

    The commonality of all I read is that there is a defining unfamiliarity with high finance and the tax code. Come on – get a grip; stay on your strong suite. This matter clearly os not it.

    Finally, Devon I find an error in your treatise. First of all, you might want to drop out of this because you have neither a grasp for, or, understanding of the subject that’s going on all around you. Proof: instead of “plebians,” certainly you meant vipers.

    Oh, I will be back (as I said I would) to address what I find to be gross errors.


    Of course you know none of this is said in malice or with hard-feelings. Obama is my guy and as long as you leave him alone, then, all we are having is a spicy dialogue between brothers who support one and another, but, who are also strong in their convictions. Love, blessings and peace be with us all.

  17. Charles D. said

    And, when you get right down to it $1.6 is not a lot of money for a home or in the bank. Period!

    I’d like to see any of you armed with $1.6 in Juneau looking for a decent home. Don’t have to travel that far, just look in any named community in DC (unnamed communityare those where you simply cannot stop the druggies or pushers from acosting you, your family, or your property on a daily basis).

    I didn’t back into this dialogue about anything except principal and practices. Definitrly not the $$$ because that’s not enough to discuss. Million use to be a lot of money, the same as being crazy use to mean something.
    **WARNING** Stay away from the “softball” lest I knock it out of the park at your expense!

  18. nan said

    I guess it’s ok for george bush to be president and own all the possessions he has while saying he’s a christian too huh. he’s not selling anything and giving to the poor is he, so why are some of you trippin when a christian preacher really gets blessed by God. Sure there are some crooked preachers but if the queen of England can live in a palace and claim to be christian I guess that’s ok, but don’t let a christian have anything. By the way Jesus was not a poor man. I don’t know where you all get that from. When he was born he was given gifts as I recall. You don’t think Mary and Joseph had anthing huh. They wanted a room, so they had money to pay but the hotel was sold out. They were NOT poor and neither was Jesus, he had a treasurer didn’t he!!!!! You can’t help the poor much if you don’t have anything to give. You need money in order to help people when it some to food, clothes and shelter, and anybody who thinks that you don’t is living in a delusive state of mind.

  19. Job said


    “I guess it’s ok for george bush to be president and own all the possessions he has while saying he’s a christian too huh.”

    First of all, presidents are not pastors. Second of all, had you taken the approximately 180 seconds that it takes to become familiar with this website, you would know that I am a vehement opponent of George W. Bush, George H. W. Bush, John McCain, Ronald Reagan, Bill and Hillary Clinton, and everyone else who works for the anti – Christ’s globalist system. And yes, Barack Obama is counted among their number. Google “Barack Obama Council on Foreign Relations” and see what you will find.

    Second, Jeremiah Wright is not a Christian preacher. He preaches liberation theology, a theological system so heretical that even the Roman Catholic Church (which created it by the way) rejected it.

    Where we get that Jesus Christ was a poor man? The Bible says so. When Joseph and Mary gave the sacrifice required of a firstborn male child, it was doves, which poor people that could not afford an ox, cow, goat, or lamb was allowed to give. Jesus Christ was a manual laborer. Further, you do not know anything about Jewish life in the Roman Empire at that time. Unless you were a member of the religious elite (a Sadducee), tax collector, or a Roman citizen, YOU WERE POOR. Jesus Christ Himself stated “I have no where to lay my head.” When it was time to pay taxes, Jesus Christ worked a miracle to get a coin out of a fish’s mouth. The women who traveled with Jesus Christ had to go out and earn money to support His ministry, and they all had a common purse where Judas Iscariot was the treasurer.

    You are a TD Jakes follower, aren’t you? Because T. D. Jakes was the one who came up with this lie that Jesus Christ had to be rich to take care of His followers. Well, even if that was true, then these pastors are not following His example. Why? Because these pastors are not taking care of their followers! Their followers are taking care of THEM! So even according to your heretical false doctrine that plainly rejects everything not only the Bible but independent history, archaeology, etc. says about the class of Jesus Christ, these people are false.

    Let me tell you something else. The early Christians weren’t called Christians. They were called NAZARENES and EBIONITES. Do you know what EBIONITE means? POOR! And as for Nazarene, do you know who gave the Christians that name? The Pharisees and Sadducees. Why? BECAUSE NAZARETH WAS THE GHETTO! THE OTHER JEWS LOOKED DOWN ON THE GALILEANS BECAUSE THEY WERE POOR, AND EVEN THE OTHER GALILEANS LOOKED DOWN ON ON THE NAZARENES BECAUSE THEY WERE THE POOREST OF THE POOR! That was why your own Bible they kept saying “can anything good come from Nazareth?” and “no prophet has ever come from Nazareth” because it was considered a common, low class, ghetto poor area filled with uneducated ignorant people!

    Listen, one of the very reasons why the Jews rejected Jesus Christ was because of how He came. Had Jesus Christ come as a wealthy man with a huge mansion riding into Jerusalem on an expensive stallion wearing new shiny armor, they would have followed him, because they were expecting Him to be rich like David and Solomon. But because he rode into Jerusalem on a donkey wearing rags with fishermen and other laborers as His chief lieutenants and died the death of a criminal on the cross (incidentally, a punishment that it was ILLEGAL to give to a Roman citizen, which was why Paul was not crucified but rather BEHEADED), they rejected Him and looked for another. And guess what? The Jews are still looking for their rich Messiah. And you are doing the same thing. You are rejecting what the Bible AND history has said about Jesus Christ in order to follow the lies of these preachers.

    Listen, the Gospel of Luke plainly states explicitly as day that the women, Mary Magdalene and similar, supported Jesus Christ’s ministry with their labors. And if Jesus Christ was rich, why did Judas Iscariot care so much when the woman broke the expensive ointment over Him, claiming that it could have been sold and the money given to the poor, if Jesus Christ already had the money to A) replace the ointment and B) give to the poor Himself? AND IF JESUS CHRIST WAS RICH, WHY DID THEY LAY HIM IN ANOTHER MAN’S TOMB? RICH PEOPLE WERE LAID IN THEIR FAMILY TOMBS ACCORDING TO HEBREW CUSTOM THAT WENT BACK TO ABRAHAM!

    My goodness, nan, don’t you see how these people are using LIES to extort your money? Also, “that is where I get this from” … I get it from the Bible, from the epistles that say 1) that godliness is not for gain and 2) preachers should not be chasers of filthy lucre. The New Testament is filled with warnings against preachers getting rich off the gospel. Haven’t you heeded them? Or do you even read the New Testament at all?

    But this goes back to Jeremiah Wright … this is a fellow that preaches against wealth and white people while buying a mansion in a white neighborhood near a golf course. Show me in your Bible where it says that pastors do not have to practice what they preach.

    Look, if a pastor comes by wealth honestly, that is fine with me. My problem is the false doctrines that these fellows use to build their wealth.

  20. Charles, you’re still a bit deluded on this one brother.

    Nan, when George Bush pastors a church, lets talk about him and what he does with church funds. You speak of the Queen of England, well a pastor is not to play lord over anyone. Pastors are not supposed to be working for the pleasures of this life, if that’s the case, let them go get a job doing something else.

    Pastors are NOT supposed to be about the money, or have you not read 1 Timothy 3?

    Guess what, you’re not supposed to be acting like following Christ is about “total life prosperity”, or have you not read 1 Timothy 6?

    By the way Jesus was not a poor man. I don’t know where you all get that from. When he was born he was given gifts as I recall.

    Your words are an example of some of the worst of the prosperity heresy. You’ve turned Christ from one who came and lived in poverty, to someone who lived lavish to justify your GREED.

    Here is something for you to read: WAS JESUS RICH?

    Nan, you are not well studied at all, please read the referenced material.

  21. Charles said

    I’m afraid it is not I whose deluded on this one Brother; however, I have already surmised that we have differing views on the subject. And though there are some who agree with you (and, misguided though they be,) they are entitled to their opinion the same as you and I.

    It is truly unfortunately that some will use unsanctified views of pastors and presume to state what “they” think is enough or sufficient for the man of God. First, it is totally not any of our business and to create such statements as I have seen here is much more profane than the “wrong” being perpetrated against Rev. Wright. And if that wasn’t bad enough, one will take and wrongfully use scripture to support a position that is so skewed it borders on “knowing sin,” but unwittingly assumes the responsibility for those who read accept at face value what you know to be untrue in the first place.

    Lets be clear – the Bible does discuss pastor remunerations.
    The first passage is 1Timothy 5:17, 18: The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, “‘Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain,” and “The worker deserves his wages.”

    The connection of verses 17 and 18 shows us how highly Paul valued the ministry of the gospel. He says, in effect, So if even these deserve a fair wage, then how much is deserved by the one who works all the time in the highest and most important calling God gives? Certainly, his work is worth at least twice what other people get!
    Paul’s own practice is instructive here. Sometimes he took payment for his ministry, sometimes he did not. 1 Corinthians 9:1-18 and 2 Corinthians 11:7 show he found work instead of accepting money from the Corinthians, but 2 Corinthians 11 :8-9 and Philippians 4:15-18 make it clear he did accept support from other churches, and in 1 Corinthians 9:14 he stoutly defends that right. In fact, in 2 Corinthians 12:13 he tells the Corinthians they were less favored than the other churches, because they did not enjoy the privilege of giving to his needs!
    It is neither our place nor our responsibility say what is or what isn’t proper compensation for pastors; especially, pastor’s of churches where we are neither members of the congregation nor where we do not contribute a single thin dime. Then, our discourse becomes gossip and we all know what the Bible says about idle chatter.

    Was Jesus rich? The answer to that question is inconsequential, maybe immaterial. You don’t follow any of His other ways, so why the interest in His wealth. It is not unlike removing the beam paradox. Get even the basics of your life in order first, then, we can talk about and try to become Christ-like in other areas.

    Can I get a Whoop-Whoop? No?……..Hater!!!! Yes, you!

  22. Job said


    It appears that we think alike, for I myself used 1 Timothy 5:17-18 in a comment just yesterday on this very topic, as well as referencing Luke 10:7.

    Keep in mind: I did not take issue with Jeremiah Wright’s level of compensation in and of itself. I could have, but I chose not to. Instead, my issue from the very beginning was hypocrisy: an Afrocentric liberation theology Marxist buys a mansion in a white neighborhood near a golf course. Translation: another preacher deceiving the flock by not living what he preaches. He reminds me of another Afrocentric liberation theology Marxist … famed black studies scholar Cornel West, who frequently hops from one elite Ivy League university to another (instead of teaching at predominantly black colleges or at state universities) just to bump his pay (it was $300,000 a year at Harvard, and that was before he moved on to Princeton several years ago), and is never seen in public unless he is wearing his very expensive tailored suits. My goodness, why do these people even hold and promote views unless you are going to apply them to themselves? Why should I support Afrocentrism and Marxism if the people that preach it only want to live and work around whites, support white institutions (Jeremiah Wright’s denomination is one of the whitest in America according to a recent Pew Survey) and receive excellent compensation? It is almost as if white institutions – and the people that run them – are pulling these people’s puppet strings … advancing them along and giving them lots of money and exposure in order to influence the black community with their ideas.

    And this is the best part: the people that follow the likes of Jeremiah Wright and Cornel West because they like and support their views don’t even hold them accountable for their hypocrisy. They defend the right of black liberation theology Marxists to make millions working for rich white people. Why? Because they entertain these people. In that respect, you have to draw one of two conclusions. 1. They are no different from the false preachers and those that defend them. 2. The false preachers and their defenders are no different from THEM. Pick one of those two, and it really does not matter which. Either Wright and West and their fans are just like Benny Hinn and followers, or Benny Hinn and followers are just like Wright and West and their fans. Either way, it is all a racket that needs to be exposed. Even more than that, we need to take a look at the people who prop these guys up in the first place, who gives these people publicity and financial backing and shields them from real scrutiny.

  23. Charles D. said

    Agreed, and well stated.

    It always amazes me to see Mr. West in someone’s pulpit when his classroom antics are anything but pure or even wholesome for the in-take of young adult students. There’s a good reason behind him having to change Ivy-League institutions recently and the jealousy he displayed towards Henry Louis Gates is no surprise to me and is in conformance with what you have described above.

    Be Blessed.


  24. Charles (and Job), What Wright has been getting is NOT double honor by ANY measure. It’s INSANE OPULENCE.

    There are 2 means to view “double honor”.

    1) Honor in the form of respect + Honor in the form of a salary = Double Honor.

    2) Honor in the form of a salary double what is the norm for the church assembly’s level of income.

    Most go with item #1 above, but I’m not opposed to view #2.

    Regardless the measure, J. Wrong’s retirement package GROSSLY misappropriates funds that are supposed to be spent as the Lord commanded, to meet NEEDS and grant a satisfactory level of honor to GOOD elders, not insane abuse of funds and creation of lines of debt.

    The life of Jesus in ALL its details is NOT “inconsequential”, but the model for those who claim His name. As God had the Apostle Paul say.

    1 Corinthians 11 (King James Version)

    1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

    And in that he even included his avoidance of “bling”, see 1 Corinthians 4. Not that an elder has to avoid taking a salary, but should consider the examples laid down. Certainly there is NO SUPPORT for the grandiose misappropriation of supposed “church” funds we see in regards to J. Wrong.

    First he bilked $300K for the supposed sale of land he’ll still live on. It was only “sold” into his own trust for himself and his wife, so he’ll still have full use of it, plus keeps the over $300K. Then a mansion built that ranges far beyond “double” what much of his members know. They’ve got nothing near half of 10,000 square feet or $1 Million in their homes. Then there is this mystery $10 Million line of credit. Then top it off with the fact the whole thing takes place by building up in an area that J. Wrong used to claim holds Blacks back and is not the part of town he preached Blacks should be putting nicer buildings in.

  25. Wright and West have more in common now, if they did not already. Both talk “Black this” and “Black that”, while both living in rich White communities.

    As has been noted about West before.

    He is, however, not without detractors. Critics, most notably The New Republic literary editor Leon Wieseltier, have charged him with opportunism, crass showmanship and lack of scholarly seriousness. Hoover Institute research fellow Peter Schweizer wrote in his book Do as I Say (Not as I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy that West lives in a mostly white neighborhood and earns over $300,000 per year as a professor.

    Just replace the name “West” with “Wright” and all is about the same.

  26. Charles D. said

    “First he bilked $300K” Now I ask you; without first hand knowledge, meaning a view of the package in it’s entirety, is it fair or even reasonable to make such a charge?

    I don’t have to say {give the devil his due), because the devil will take his due; yours, mine, and anyone elses that have a time-space limitation. I (and I speak for myself only) am not comfortable accusing Wright of anything wrong or even inappropriate based on the evidence that I have, or , have read or seen. AND unless you are willing to crucify the man on the evidence you have presented so far, what instantly comes to my mind is: by the measure you measure, the same will be measured unto you.

    Some of us are willing to take chances, some of us even believe that what we say or believe is right and that we are safe in making certain assumptions. I don’t feel that way at all. Granted, on some days I feel different than on other days. I make mistakes, I even sin and would commit a greater sin to deny that fact. But when I use introspection, and in my heart of hearts: I find no guilt in the man and will therefore not condemn him.

    Truth be told, I cannot find fault with those responsible for giving him such a package. Even if some were not able to fully afford it. I view that as the depeth of their love for their pastor. Anyone can make a contribution, it takes a special person to make a sacrifice. I am sure you’ve heard the animal story where the hen volunteered to bring the egg to the animal breakfast, but, wanted the pig to bring the bacon and ham. Ones a contribution, the other is a sacrifice.

    AND! IC, I’m only gonna tell you one more time to lay off of Barack!!!!! Stop hating on the man. I knw where you live, I have your phone number too. 😉

    The Chazter

  27. Charles D. said

    Okay, Job and IC I am coming up on my 1 year anniversary posting here and it has been a pretty good ride. Met some really great Christian friends here; you guys, Fran, John, Ma Fruitcake, among others whom I care for spiritually (which include prayomg for on a regular basis).

    Hit some, have been hit by some and learned some things from all. Admittedly I have grown in some ways, and there are some denominations, sects, cults, that I had little or no knowledge of and would have gone on through life without knowing had I not been warned or alerted here. I’m gonna see where all of that lead me and plan on blaming you all if I come up short. Thanks.

    If any of you are considering giving me a gift or something, I’m registered at the registar in each of your communities, and a vote for Barack will do nicely. Gee thanks in advance for your support.


    Working tonight so gotta go.

  28. Devon said

    Job, that is very interesting about Black Liberation roots and such and where they picked up this socialist/marxist nonsense!

    Would it not be correct also that before LBJ,s ‘Great Society’ waste, that Black Americans by and large didn’t buy into this leftist lunacy?

    The only thing socialism/marxism does for a society is make everyone poorer…equal…but destitute….

  29. “First he bilked $300K” Now I ask you; without first hand knowledge, meaning a view of the package in it’s entirety, is it fair or even reasonable to make such a charge?

    Charles, do you even know what I’m talking about when I speak of $300K? It’s public record, but I can fill you in on the details if you need them.

    If the misappropriation is because of “love” for J. Wrong, it means they are putting him above what has been commanded in use of church funds. Where your treasure is… I didn’t say they didn’t have good intentions, but that does not mean it’s the right thing to do.

    If you have my phone number, please call, we need to have a long talk about your favorite US Presidential candidate. Or if you know where I live, please stop by and we can chat. I’ve got a stash of tasty snacks I’ll share with you 🙂 .

    Devon, one thing that is VERY MUCH part of the “Civil Rights” movement if you check the ideological view of many of it’s leaders, is that many were very much communists. Even before LBJ was sworn into office. You’d have an easier time making a case that they socialized LBJ rather than the other way around.

  30. Devon, keep this in mind, during the time of the “Civil Rights movement”, America’s capitalism did not appear to be working in the eyes of some Blacks. When you’re on the bottom and somebody tells you that over in Russia everybody lives equally and you don’t have any Black friends in Russia to speak with for the real scoop, you might be easily duped into becoming a pawn for Big Red.

  31. And Devon, I better add in all fairness, that although several of the “leaders” of the Civil Rights Movement were deep into communism, the average Black man on the street was not.

    And when programs like welfare started, there were Blacks who were in opposition to their family members accepting checks that required little in return. I can’t say I was living back then, but many older Blacks I speak with are not fans of welfare and those types of programs.

  32. Coram Deo said

    CD said: He’s certainly not worth the press he’s being given

    Charles said: You surprise me CD, this is the first in my remembrance that you’ve built such a flimsy support for your statement of case; e.g., “it is no wonder that he has received so much press..” as if that’s a good thing, a thing that everyone desire. I haven’t seen ANY press that either he, barack, or myself would desire. Truth be told, you would want it either. The press you speak about has been no different than what you read here, nothing laudatory I assure you.

    Charles – I don’t understand what you’re objecting to. Not that I mind a disagreement, but it seems that you’ve taken exception to something that I didn’t say.

    My point was that Jeremiah Wright is not worth the press coverage he’s received. Based on your reply it looks like you and I agree on this statement.

    In Christ,

  33. MR.LEE X SLAVE said


  34. Charles D. said

    Okay, what included with typical tasty snacks? Stash use to really mean something. Since you were also talking about the CR Movement, I gotta be knowing before I accept the invite. 😉
    Who knows? After dwindling your stash you might even suggest going to Rev Wright’s farewell revival. (”

    Also, let me know if’n you’re gonna vote for Bama so I can let him know. We’re counting on you.

  35. Devon said

    IC, this is all very interesting to me and new…Are you saying that some of the Black Leaders of the Civil rights era were Marxists?

    I have always admired MLK very much and though I knew he had some personal flaws (we all do to be sure) the courage he showed to stand up against real racism was and is wonderful…

    I know their were some white communists around MLK and all that but I hadn’t heard that any Black Americans were part of that movement????

    I usually dismissed some of this stuff on Hoover and his personal hatred of Martin….

    For the record, up here in Canada, we have a lotta prairie socialists….much to my own chagrin, my own least older since passed on family, helped get Socialized Medicine passed here and were big time supporters of the Socialist’s party…..and they were all Christians…Baptists…and I do think many of them were truly regenerate…but when it came to the political scene, they had good intentions but so very naive!!

    Take care

  36. Job said


    It is not that some of the black leaders of the civil rights era were Marxists. It is that the civil rights movement itself was started by the American Communist Party. Around the late 1800s and early 1900s, the American Communist Party was looking for support in the United States, but was finding little success. They decided that by taking up the plight of blacks, they could gain recruits among both blacks and sympathetic whites. One of the things that they did was create the NAACP, with W.E.B. Du Bois as their frontman. (Initially, the NAACP was virtually all white!) These folks were unable to sell the black masses on Marxism, because in those days, the model was Soviet and Chinese communism, which required an explicit rejection of Christianity. But in order to be accepted by the gatekeepers of the black leadership – which included Du Bois – you had to be Marxist or at least democratic socialist. The best example of this was the black arts (music, literature, etc.) movement called the Harlem Renaissance. Du Bois made it clear that nothing would see the light of day unless it could be used for Marxist propaganda. One person who refused, libertarian novelist Zora Neale Hurston, had her work so effectively blackballed by Du Bois and his group that she had to work as a maid to support herself.

    But the Harlem Renaissance folks were real slick. One of their tactics was to portray black American life as so bleak, dreary, hopeless, etc. that the reader would be open to the suggestion that communism was the black man’s only hope of salvation. Another neat trick of theirs was to produce work that SEEMED traditional or even Christian but was actually radical, subversive propaganda. One of the better fellows at this particular task was poet Langston Hughes, who wrote the poem “Goodbye Jesus Christ.” He wrote it on his way to visit one of Stalin’s Potemkin villages. Paul Robeson, the famous athlete and actor, wrote a poem to Stalin to commemorate his death, and claimed that the stories of genocide in Russia were lies, and that when he visited Russia he found it to be completely free of racism and offered the only opportunity for equality, dignity, and humanity for the black man. Robeson, the same one who was famous for singing Negro spirituals in leftist theater productions.

    As to the civil rights movement itself, it produced great benefits for black people, but make no mistake, it was a radical, leftist, subversive affair from the beginning. Even the very liberal Thurgood Marshall, criticized the street protests and said that it would do the nation and blacks more harm than good because the movement undermined the very systems and notions of respect for law, order, authority, etc. that were needed to secure black advancement in the first place. Marshall especially hated how King would recruit college kids and put them in marches, knowing full well that it would result in their being arrested, badly beaten, and possibly killed by police and angry whites. Thurgood Marshall’s criticisms of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X, the media and the history books have done a great job keeping those silent, but here is a link that contains those criticisms (and even here they appear only after a section that defends King from charges of communism):

    A lot of people bought into the notion that King’s tactics were Christian because they were nonviolent. But never forget: the inspiration for King’s tactics came not from the Bible or Christian tradition, but rather from the pagan Mohandas (Mahatma) Ghandi! While I have no issue with the strikes and boycotts that King organized early in his career (because those were LEGAL) the wide scale lawbreaking that he – or more accurately the hard core communists and atheists that were actually writing his speeches and doing his planning behind the scenes – cannot be justified anywhere in scripture, and as a matter of fact Romans 13 can easily be interpreted to specifically oppose it. Also, the nonviolence angle was actually sort of a ruse. These days, we are so used to seeing civil rights “marches” and “protests” on a routine basis on the drop of a hat, so they we think that they are no big deal. But back then, those marches and demonstrations were frightening affairs because they attracted large numbers of people that contained elements on both sides that were impossible to control, and inflamed passions on both sides as well. The truth is that anything from violent melees to full scale riots would break out shortly after those demonstrations. But when it did, the “leaders” would be off the scene and the media made sure to generally not to associate them with the violence.

    But living where I do, there are more than a few who used to participate in those marches, and they tell me that after the “leaders” stopped giving their speeches and were ushered off, they would have a full blown street fight on their hands, and their personal estimation of the civil rights organizers were the frauds (the ones who would run at the first sight of any confrontation but would claim otherwise afterwards) and the true (who would stay and fight with the police officers and angry whites riled up by the civil rights speeches).

    So, what was going on was street pressure tactics: a civil rights leader with a “nonviolent” reputation would threaten a city or workplace with a march unless they met their demands. Now these people did not fear, keep in mind, the bad publicity of people marching in front of their city or factory calling them racists, because back then society was segregated and being “accused” of refusing to hire blacks or sell or rent homes to blacks was fully accepted publicly. In many instances, a business would suffer more harm to its reputation and bottom line for being accused of treating blacks fairly than they would have for discriminating against them! No, the “threat” was the possibility of having a full scale riot on your hands, either during the march itself or soon after.

    However, there was one guy that Martin Luther King, Jr. dared not cross: Chicago mayor Bill Daley. He knew that his tactics stood no chance against Chicago’s huge, tough, and disciplined police force that quite frankly could have cared less about cracking more than a few skulls open with billy clubs. So he just made a show of demanding that Daley desegregate his city for the TV cameras, secured Daley’s promise that he would (knowing full well that Daley was lying and Daley knowing that King knew that he was lying) and then high – tailed it to Detroit as fast as he could!

    And even more so than the implied threat of the violence that would almost inevitably result from the marches and demonstrations was a bigger threat that Shelby Steele talked about in a limited fashion in his recent book on Barack HUSSEIN Obama where he called King a “bargainer.” Basically, King would use the threat of NONVIOLENT black leadership. He would stage rallies of tens of thousands of people, with the implication “see all these supporters I have? and I am ‘nonviolent.’ So you had better deal with me now, or else all these people and more will get frustrated with nonviolence and follow someone who is violent.” In other words, you will have to deal with me and my 15,000 unarmed Christians today or Huey Newton and 30,000 armed Black Panthers tomorrow! (In addition to being ‘nonviolent’, King’s bargaining position was that he was seen as being more politically moderate than the more radical leaders … King made a point of specifically distancing himself from Soviet communism, I guess it can be stated that King was more close to Leon Trotsky than to Stalin or Lenin.) And the King tactics were even more heavy – handed when you consider that right while this was going on in America, all over the world there were (often Soviet – inspired) demonstrations and movements, lots of them very bloody, and many of them ultimately leading to coups or at least coup attempts. Don’t think that this was an accident. The leftists wanted everyone to think that the whole world was being swept over by a tidal wave of communism or at least socialism, and that “change” was inevitable (“Change” and “Yes we can!” are not new slogans) and that the civil rights movement (and the other movements) in America were part of it. Yesterday Cuba, today Angola, tomorrow, America, the next day, the world!

    Now you had a lot of good honest, decent people who participated in and supported the civil rights movements that had absolutely no idea what was going on, because from the very beginnings of W.E.B. Du Bois’ Niagara Movement (precursor to the NAACP), they knew that they had to keep their Marxist goals secret from the patriotic Christian larger black population, or the movement would dissipate overnight. And, of course, no movie, news special, TV show, general classroom textbook, etc. talks about this stuff. Even the people who themselves are socialist, Marxist, communist, etc. do their level best to deny the extent to which communists were involved in (meaning started, financed, and meticulously strategically planned) the civil rights movement, and how subversive and radical their tactics were. I mean, there was a REASON why the FBI and the CIA was monitoring these people, and created counterintelligence programs against them. To this day, you can go on some of these folks’ websites, and they will complain how Hoover and COINTELPRO succeeded in stopping their grand movement to turn this nation into a Soviet vassal. My goodness, people like Congresswoman Barbara Lee and her predecessor Ron Dellums, both committed communists, still openly talk about it. I got a link that talks about Lee and Dellums below.

    I am hoping that one day an honest, balanced book about the real story of the civil rights movement will be written by someone who NEITHER has the agenda of trashing black people (as many conservatives still regrettably love to do) or hiding the really scary Marxist driving force behind it (which virtually all liberals always do).

  37. (I started typing this comment before Job’s comment went up. So I’m going to post it anyway, although Job has detailed much in his comment above. Just consider this a supplemental.)


    IC, this is all very interesting to me and new…Are you saying that some of the Black Leaders of the Civil rights era were Marxists?

    I usually dismissed some of this stuff on Hoover and his personal hatred of Martin….

    Some would like to act like it all was made up by “government”, but it was NOT ALL MADE UP. SOME OF IT WAS VERY TRUE.

    But before talking about the Communist stuff, I need to point out something I’ve pointed out before.

    Martin Luther King Junior was NOT a Christian, based on what we know of him. See:
    Proof From His Own Writings That Martin Luther King Jr. Was NOT A Christian


    Martin Luther King’s MORMON DOCTRINE!

    Go read King’s “Mountaintop” speech, the final one he gave in a Memphis, TN Masonic “Temple” just a day before being shot. King lauds philosophers of men and various other things. It’s not a speech that rest on the truth of the Lord Jesus Christ. It’s a secular humanistic speech, that implies people like Plato are saved by virtue of their philosophical notoriety. King also was a student of Hindu Gandhi.

    Now regarding the Communist aspects of the Civil Rights Movement. You should check this out:
    The Communist Party and African-Americans

    Let me list some names of of people held in high regard from the Civil Rights Movement who were Socialists. Any that were Communist are noted as such.

    A. Philip Randolph – Socialist Party leader – Planned and organized the “March on Washington”. That march was not something MLK Jr. thought up, but others had ideas of going to DC. What King carried out was inspired by Randolph and some more radical Black groups also were speaking of going to DC in a more radical manner, but it all ended up going as Randolph was seeking things to go. Randolph was a Socialist BEFORE AND DURING his time with people like MLK Junior. It was not a secret.

    W.E.B. DuBois – died a Communist Party USA (CPUSA) member – helped found the NAACP. DuBois did not actually join CPUSA till later in his life after his time with the NAACP, but it was always apparent he had such leanings. Of Stalin he said “Joseph Stalin was a great man; few other men of the 20th century approach his stature.”

    The whole original Black Panther Party – Communists – They were totally into the writings of Marx, Mao and Lenin, this is no secret. Their agenda fully incorporated Communist teachings. New members to their group had to attend “political training” classes, that were based on Mao’s Little Red Book.
    Angela Davis – Black Panther – Communist Party USA member and once Communist Party USA Vice Presidential candidate. Currently a professor at the University of California.

    Dick Gregory – Socialist – Ran for President in 1968 with the (Socialist) Freedom and Peace Party.

    Bayard Rustin – Communist who later turned Socialist – Major adviser to Martin Luther King Jr. and turned King on to Gandhi. Rustin studied under Gandhi. Rustin was also an open homosexual. King worked with Rustin, when many others would not touch Rustin with a 1-million-foot-pole.

    Martin Luther King Jr. – Socialist – I don’t think I need to explain. The real question with King is how strong were his ties to Communists? We know he worked close with Socialists and people with Communist Party ties.

    I could list more names, but I think you get the idea and you can EASILY find more.

    Basically the Communist and the “Civil Rights Movement” were good pals until the USA and Russia teamed up against Hitler, because then Russia toned down help for the Civil Rights Movement in favor of allowing America to avoid conflict in helping Russia win a fight. This is when some Black Communists felt betrayed and turned “Socialist”. Not that they supported Hitler, they were angry the Big Red Machine was turning away from focusing on working with them.

  38. Now Devon, if you get all of what has been said, it should be very easy for you to see how heresy like Black Liberation Theology could take root in the USA.

  39. Job said

    IC and Devon:

    I have to admit strong ambivalent feelings regarding the civil rights movement. I cannot deny that I personally benefited from it, as did a lot of other blacks. But I am fully aware of the arguments of people from the VERY LIBERAL Thurgood Marshall to the conservative (FREEMASON!) Booker T. Washington that the black community and the nation in general would have been better off in the long run had it not been for the political, legal, social, cultural, etc. TIDAL WAVE that the civil rights movement unleashed.

    I am not kidding. Take the current attitude that Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and similar have towards law enforcement. Its core is Black Panther Marxism. The Marxists held that THE TRUE ROLE of police officers weren’t REALLY going after criminals and providing for the public safety, but rather merely protecting the business interests of the rich (i.e. private property) and making the working class too fearful to rise up, take possession of (loot and steal) the fruits of the labor of workers that was rightfully theirs (other people’s things). In other words, it is based on the concept that private property does not exist, and those that have private property only do so because they stole it from the working class and underclass, and that the true purpose of the police is to keep the upperclass in power and allow them to keep stealing. That turned CRIMINALS into “political prisoners”, and even policemen into “enemy soldiers” for whom not only resisting but KILLING was justified!

    So because of this Black Pantheresque revolutionary ideology, they planted the idea in black communities that criminals were somehow these righteous sorts, and that the police were the enemy! Attitudes like “the police are an occupying invading military force” and “the police have no right and no business in the black community because we don’t want them here!”

    Of course, this only “works” in an actual subversive (or violent) attempt to overthrow the government. But Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton aren’t trying to overthrow the government or capitalism. Why? Because Sharpton and Jackson make a ton of money off capitalism and are very powerful thanks to the government! So, it is like they are straddling the fence, using rhetoric that they KNOW is impractical and irrelevant to the situation of their followers because they KNOW that their Marxist takeover will never be implemented. So, the result is that black people in these neighborhoods have to live with a polarized relationship with the police, and black people that so hate the police that they won’t even cooperate with them in the murder investigation of a family member!

    If you don’t believe me, go read or anything similar. These folks have actually convinced low income blacks to oppose and resist legitimate law enforcement efforts in their communities, claiming that putting blacks in jail is institutional racism because blacks commit crimes because of “the lack of economic opportunity” (meaning the lack of a Marxist political and economic system). But then again, the people who preach that mess tend to not live among the people that they preach it to! And that was the very point of this entire thread started about an Afrocentric pastor with his $1.6 million mansion in a white community near a golf course …

  40. djenk23 said

    i have a minor correction,IC….that wasnt a masonic temple that MLK spoke in…..That was Mason Temple, the central HQ for COGIC in Memphis, named after Bishop CH Mason…

  41. Djenk23, thank you MUCH for that correction brother.

    I just noticed when watching footage of the speech the other day, that they said it was the Mason temple and I obviously got a mistaken impression.

    Thank you for correcting me.

  42. Devon said

    Whoa…you guys are presenting some pretty heavy stuff here to say the least!

    I am aware about MLK and that he may not have been a Brother in Christ…and I had heard of some left wing leanings…but a lot of this stuff is fascinating to say the least…

    Regardless…the things that Martin did were great things….I would like to think he was motivated by Christ…I don’t know though…

    Job….that’s true about Ghandi being an influence on Martin but isn’t it true that Ghandi had said he picked up the non violence teachings from Christianity? Or at least his reading of it?

    I knew about Dubois and the Panthers…but the rest is news to me…..

    I’ll say one thing….I don’t know how old you guys are, but you sure know your history….this is not a topic much discussed up here in Canada…were to busy with the French English divide…ha ha ha …..

  43. Devon, I’m only 36 and I’m still learning. Some older Black folks that I know have filled me in on much, since “they were there”.

    It’s interesting to see someone like Harry Belafonte come on TV and hear an elder in the family yell out “that bastard ran and got into a car when the cops came and beat our heads in at that protest march with MLK Jr. in Alabama…” (They understand MLK Jr. being rushed away, but take offense to others who ran every time a cop showed up. And MLK Jr. was forced away by his friends when cops showed up, he was not really seeking to run himself.)

    I’ll say, I lived in the Atlanta area about 10 years and I left that area with a much different view of the whole of what is called “civil rights” than when I entered that area. Once I learned more, I could no longer view the past movement exactly as I once did and I really lost much respect for what is called the “civil rights movement” now. I say there used to be a “Civil Rights Movement”, but today there is a “Civil Rights Industry”.

    I remember visiting the King Center in Atlanta and saying “what’s all this Hindu junk doing in here…” And it just all went from there…

    Ghandi felt his non-violent view was of his religious view, but some accused him of being a Christian because of it.

    Ghandi said:

    My claim to Hinduism has been rejected by some, because I believe and advocate nonviolence in its extreme form. They say that I am a Christian in disguise. I have been even seriously told that I am distorting the meaning of the Gita, when I ascribe to that great poem the teaching of unadulterated nonviolence. Some of my Hindu friends tell me that killing is a duty enjoined by the Gita under certain circumstances. A very learned shastri only the other day scornfully rejected my interpretation of the Gita and said that there was no warrant for the opinion held by some commentators that the Gita represented the eternal duel between forces of evil and good, and inculcated the duty of eradicating evil within us without hesitation, without tenderness.

    I state these opinions against nonviolence in detail, because it is necessary to understand them, if we would understand the solution I have to offer….

    I must be dismissed out of considerations. My religion is a matter solely between my Maker and myself. If I am a Hindu, I cannot cease to be one even though I may be disowned by the whole of the Hindu population. I do however suggest that nonviolence is the end of all religions.

    The lesson of nonviolence is present in every religion, but I fondly believe that, perhaps, it is here in India that its practice has been reduced to a science. Innumerable saints have laid down their lives in tapashcharya until poets had felt that the Himalayas became purified in their snowy whiteness by means of their sacrifice. But all this practice of nonviolence is nearly dead today. It is necessary to revive the eternal law of answering anger by love and of violence by nonviolence; and where can this be more readily done than in this land of Kind Janaka and Ramachandra?

    He was a Hindu and influenced MLK Jr. more in Hindu ways than MLK Jr. influencing Ghandi to consider the Christian faith. And we know MLK Jr. was not really holding to the Christian faith in truth himself.

  44. Not sure what happened with that link above where I quoted Ghandi, but it should have been a link to this page

  45. Devon said

    This is really depressing…Hindu stuff at the King Center?? I wonder what Martin would think?

    Really though, I am a victim of a peecee liberal education to so I am learning things…

    Are yours and Job’s views held by man Black Americans or are you guys called sell outs and worse?

    Belefonte…now there is a name from the past..isn’t he cozy with Castro also?

    And your just a yung in…ha ha …I’m 43 but a lot of my study up here hasn’t had anything to do with American history per se…mostly Ancient and Biblical and European …..

    This is why I enjoy the internet so much…the kind of stuff I have found out about Islam or Church History or the Civil rights movement would NEVER be put on mainstream TV….

    Good stuff…

  46. Devon

    This is really depressing…Hindu stuff at the King Center?? I wonder what Martin would think?

    IT WAS HIS STUFF MAN!!! I’m sure they’ve still got it there anytime you want to visit Atlanta and see for yourself.

    My views are very much NOT the mainstream in what is called “Black America”. Job’s are not either, but in an election I suspect Job would get a few more “Black” votes than me, just a few 😆 . Job, you know my enjoyment of 10 happy years in Gwinnett County, GA would ensure I get less votes than you 😀 .

    Basically Devon, either you recite that garbage you see spouted on TV, or you’re an “Uncle Tom” and I personally enjoy being called one. They call me a “sellout” and I prefer being viewed as OUTSIDE of their views rather than INSIDE that lunacy. As I’ve mentioned before, I used to really be into it and Job was also, it really is a sort of alternate reality the way some see things. I’ve got my degree from a “Black” college (literally), seen Farra-the-Con speak in person more than once, have years logged of listening to Farra-the-Con speeches, Malcolm X speeches and MLK, Jr. speeches, I had a copy of Huey P. Newton’s “Revolutionary Suicide” back when few were willing to sell that book, when I used to mentor kids in PA I had the “father” of “Afrocentricity” Dr. Molefi Kete Asante speak to the group (something I totally arranged from start to end) and so on…

    I just thank the Lord he got me out of race cultism.

    Belefonte…now there is a name from the past..isn’t he cozy with Castro also?

    Castro, Chavez, I’ve done several posts about those things. You name a socialist or communist that is against America and folks like Harry Belafonte will call them great people.

  47. Charles D. said

    I have a day off, Uncle Tom, and it feel like getting out of the boobyhatch after a hard 20. Imma gonna rip and run and do all of the things that a freed man would do. NOT!

    By the time I catch up on my MBS work and maybe call a few shut-ins, the day will have long passed. Yep! Martin was an admirer of Ghandi and he never hide that fact. Many people do not believe that Ray killed Martin. The saddest commentary of the MLK saga is the way his children turned on each other and some of the individusl short-comings that made it to public view. Sad! You can tell that the older 2 haven’t missed too many meals (kidding).

    Anyway, I won’t be on here today, and I can already see the “backstabbing” wheels turning in your noodle already, but, DON’T!!! I WILL find out and I will pay you a visit!!!

    Chaz .)

  48. Thank you Charles.

    You know many use the term and don’t know who Uncle Tom really was.

    Ray killed Martin, but many would love to think that even Bush had a hand in it if they could write the story.

    Those kids are just a mess. We all could write for days about them, but we’ll leave that to Devon as a research project to look up himself 😆 . Do any of those kids have a REAL JOB? Of course those lazy kids had to claim copyright on everything but their daddy’s coughs for money! Otherwise they’d have to actually WORK AND BEAR THE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY OF CARING FOR THEIR (now dead) MOTHER LIKE REGULAR ADULTS!

    Have fun Charles, you’re not going to be around the rest of today huh?… Well is it true that Obama is one of the King kids or not Charles, come on and tell us (sarcasm) 😀 😆 . (Just knowing you won’t respond soon I could not resist a little jokey-joke!)

  49. Job said


    Actually, IC would get more votes than me because … oh never mind 🙂 !

    The notion that Ghandi got his nonviolence from Christianity is a lie. Ghandi already knew of noviolent thought from jainism, or jaim Buddhism. Truthfully, Ghandi was not a spiritual person at all, but a political radical first and an agnostic second. So Ghandi studied all of the world’s religions and major philosophies, and borrowed (or more like co – opted) things from them that fit and supported his revolutionary politics. He got two benefits from this.

    1. He was respected worldwide as this great open – minded thinker who was capable of appreciating the best of all philosophies rather than someone who adhered to a single worldview, the modern liberal ideal of “renaissance man.”

    2. He was able to make everyone think that he was on their side. So, to the Buddhists, he was a Buddhist. To the Hindus, he was a Hindu. To the Confucionists and Sikhs, he was Confucionist and Sikh. To the Muslims, he was Muslim. To the Christians, he was Christian. To the Jews, he was a Noachide (or Noahide) Gentile (long story, but please investigate, there is a real agenda going on there, the real goal of Jews in their “ecumenical dialogue” with Christians … it explains what is going on with not only the Christian left but also a lot of dispensational pre – tribulationist Christians like John Hagee). To the leftists/socialists/Marxists he was a fellow comrade. And to the atheists, he was atheist. Ghandi was all things to all people so that he might deceive enough of them to use in his quest to overthrow British rule of India.

    And that is the key in the comparison between Ghandi and King that everyone makes sure you miss. They focus only on King’s learning nonviolent political tactics from Ghandi, and claim that it was only “social change.” First of all, were King ACTUALLY interested in nonviolent social change, he didn’t need to go learning from Ghandi. King had everything he needed to turn the world upside down (remember the line about Paul and Barnabas from Acts, I think in Ephesus) in the Bible. He could have effected all the “change” that he wanted by preaching the gospel, running tent revivals and standing in public spaces and government buildings screaming Colossians 3:11 and Matthew 22:39 at the good Christian hypocrites letting them know that lynching, segregating themselves from, discriminating against, etc. black people was wrong, and rest assured he would have been thrown in jail for his trouble just the same, just as Paul, Silas, Barnabas, Peter, James, etc. were. Except that he would not have been the international media star that won a Nobel Prize and had a day named after him had he gone that route.


    I mean come on, people have to look at the facts and put them together.

    1. Of all the role models for King to choose for himself, he chose a guy that overthrew a white capitalist government. And King was very cagey in this regards. He did not pick Fidel Castro or Che Guevara, because that would have tipped everybody off. So, he picked someone that was not a socialist or communists, but had the same goals as the socialists and Marxists and used the same tactics as they to achieve them.

    2. Martin Luther King was recruited and trained by (somewhat at Morehouse but even more so at Boston University) people who were committed to the cause of Soviet communism. These folks knew what they had in King, so they ignored little stuff like plagiarism and gave the fellow his Ph.D., which he badly needed to be taken seriously by white America, anyway.

    3. King denounced the Viet Nam War. Good for him, I don’t blame him a bit. But why did King choose the war against the spread of communism (ostensibly?) to oppose? Why did not King criticize the wars that the communists were starting, and the coups they were funding and inciting? Why did King criticize America while supporting Castro’s brutal murderous corrupt regime? King did what he had to do in order to successfully deny that he was on the KGB payroll, BUT NO MORE. And let me say that KING DIDN’T HAVE TO BE ON THE KGB PAYROLL IN ORDER TO PERFORM THE SAME SERVICES FOR FREE SINCE HE LEGITIMATELY BELIEVED IN THE MARXIST CAUSE, AND WAS WILLING TO NOT ONLY DIE HIMSELF BUT RISK THE LIVES OF HIS OWN CHILDREN (yes, there were attempts to firebomb his home that had they been successful would have killed not just him but his wive and children) TO ADVANCE IT! And that explains why King NEVER AT ANY TIME held ANY communist, socialist, or leftist nation or movement to the same standards of peace, justice, or nonviolence that he was imposing on white capitalist America. That was the hallmark of the leftist movement then in denouncing America while ignoring, denying, or even DEFENDING the crimes of the Soviets, China, Cuba, and the bloody coups in Africa and Latin America, etc. or today in denouncing America while giving the violent oppressive Muslim regimes a pass.

    King accomplished some great things? Yes, but they came at a price. Start with the fact that virtually every liberal hate group that you can think of: homosexual rights, feminists, abortionists, environmentalists, etc. latched themselves onto the civil rights movement. Guess what? They have achieved most of their goals while the civil rights movement HASN’T. And I have already mentioned how the general attitude of lawlessness and disrespect for authority that the movement created has made law enforcement in black communities difficult … well go try to be a public school teacher in the areas where these anti – authoritarian attitudes are present! I still remember when a black Democrat in South Carolina successfully blocked a bill from becoming law that would have required children to address their teachers as “Sir” or “ma’am” as an effort to try to instill a culture of discipline in those schools. Her reasoning? Because the result would have been black children being forced to call their white teachers “Sir” and “ma’am” like we had to during slavery and segregation. She actually claimed that the measure was a plot to use public schools to indoctrinate white supremacy and black submissiveness into black kids. Never mind the fact that most kids in South Carolina public schools are white. Never mind that it would have required white South Carolina kids to refer to their black teachers as “sir” or “ma’am.” No, this woman wanted to preseve the notion that black kids need to be raised with the idea that they have to be constantly willing to defy and subvert authority at the drop of a hat to preserve and defend their rights.

    And that was exactly what Thurgood Marshall was warning against. Marshall won the court decision that desegregated public schools, but now black kids are failing, dropping out, and getting expelled in droves because they have the attitude ingrained in them that if they behave and do as they are told by their teachers and other authority figures, they are “selling out to the man” and “being submissive.” Even the ones that do academically succeed are conditioned to hate themselves for it, and to rebel and be subversive in other ways.

    Like I said, I benefitted from civil rights laws and affirmative action programs and am doing pretty good myself. But all I have to do is drive through the neighborhood where I live and maybe go to the grocery store or the local park and see the mentality and culture of the people to wonder if it was worth it. And do not get me wrong, I do not live in some inner city or low income area. Where I live is 90% black, but it is a suburban area that has a high concentration of college graduates and professionals. Yet they act – and allow their kids to behave – after the manner of the broadest crudest negative stereotypes that you see of black people in the media!

    I cannot help thinking that my own personal advancement and opportunity is not worth seeing all of these 12 and 13 year old black boys walking around with pants sagging down so far in the back that you can see their underwear. Why is that so bad? Well let me tell you: it comes from prison culture. In prison, walking around with your pants hanging like that identifies you as someone that is recruiting a partner for homosexual sex, and specifically advertising yourself as someone willing to be the one that is anally penetrated during the act in exchange for money/drugs, protection, or just because they want to. It is called “easy access”, and that is why the pants sag IN THE BACK. So when these HOMOSEXUALS get out of JAIL, they continue wearing their pants like that, and kids emulate them. And when some of these HOMOSEXUALS that were IN JAIL become rap and R&B “musicians”, they continue dressing like that on stage and in their videos, so more kids emulate them. And have you heard any rap and R&B songs lately? They are filled with that HOMOEROTIC PRISON TALK, BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE THE RAPPERS AND R&B MUSICIANS LEARNED IT! Everything from gay love and friendship slogans to violent homosexual rape and murder fantasies, it is all there. They do that mess to each other while they are in jail, and when they get out they write songs about it, and it is supposed to be “our little secret” among black folks that it is going on. So now you have little 9, 10, 11, 12, etc. year old boys (and younger!) learning that music and styles of dress and emulating it, and the girls learning that such behavior is what you should expect from “a real man.”

    Now, in certain cities, they actually tried to pass laws banning the “easy access” pants. They wouldn’t talk about the REAL REASON (because then you get accused of “discriminating against homosexuals”) but claimed that it was to help the kids learn how to dress for job interviews and other nonsense like that. Now as a person who is generally anti – state, I had no choice but to REGRETFULLY oppose the bill. But people who are NOT anti – state, the black activist civil rights Marxist types? THEIR RATIONALE for opposing the bills were “this will give the police another excuse to racially profile young black males, and it will result in even more of our young black male victims of institutional racism and a lack of economic opportunity” (again meaning the lack of a Soviet style economy that they know will never come into being)! In other words, these “black leaders” are specifically fighting for the right of blacks to be as subversive and create as much havoc and confusion as they choose to, because that was what their street politics of the 60s and 70s were all about. It is all they know, because it was all that the radicals that recruited and trained them taught them. They don’t know how to adapt their tactics or mindset to a different time with different challenges, and they certainly lack the subtlety to know in which contexts are the subversive behaviors help blacks and which ones hurt blacks … that subversive behavior designed to generate a movement to get a conservative politician out of office is good, but kids deciding that they are doing to defy their teachers and parents and go out and get pregnant, AIDS, hooked on drugs, and/or a felony conviction is bad.

    Now maybe Independent Conservative disagrees with me, and for that reason he might get more votes than me after all. But I am strongly leaning towards committing to the notion that it was not worth it. I mean, sure, blacks were persecuted, but so was the early church when the Bible was written, and so are Christians all over the world today. But I look at all of this chaos, confusion, and rebellion in American society today, where up is down and wrong is right and bad is good and virtue is considered bigoted and evil, and the main place where I see it reflected is the church. A lot of this revolting, disgusting behavior that we see with these false preachers is only possible because we have a rebellious culture, one where counterculture IS culture, that not only accepts it but glorifies it. I have to say that were a significant portion of the black American community today to encounter a true biblical church, one based on Godly models of authority and order, they would reject it, ESPECIALLY IF THE PASTOR AND THE DEACONS WERE WHITE OR EVEN MOSTLY WHITE. They would insist that it was a plot to suppress or inhibit black culture, the black spirit, etc., and to make us submissive and feel inferior through “false European religion.” They actually PREFER the churches that have removed 1 and 2 Corinthians from the Bible (not to mention 1 and 2 Timothy and 1, 2, and 3 John, and Galatians, and Romans, and James …) for ones where they get to do whatever they please and tear up the joints. Now they have “advanced” to the point where they feel comfortable under white pastors without selling out, but those are “pastors” like Paula White, Jentezen Franklin, Ron Carpenter, and others that patronize them and condescend to them by “talking black” to them from the pulpit, even to the point of incorporating lyrics from rap songs into their “sermons”, letting them go all “slain in the spirit” in the pews and the aisles, wear the same clothes to church that they would in nightclubs, bars, street corners (and prisons, yes, the “easy access” sagging pants are worn there too!), etc. They have found out that the secret is to just feed this culture, and SPIRIT, of rebellion and disorder, and they will have a huge INTENSELY LOYAL following of blacks that they will be able to just rob blind!

    Now I gotta tell you, this nonsense actually did originate in the Christian scene with Azusa Street, which Independent Conservative can tell you about. But I am convinced that the civil rights movement and things associated with it made it acceptable, mainstream, even compulsory. And when you consider that fact, it is no coincidence that it was a CHURCH OF GOD IN CHRIST that Martin Luther King, Jr. was doing his organizing in when he was murdered. Independent Conservative may have misspoke when he called it a freemason hall (lodge, temple, whatever they call those things!), but when you consider that the guy that started the charismatic movement that directly led to the Church of God In Christ, Charles Parham, was a freemason (as well as a Ku Klux Klansman and a closeted homosexual with a preference for underaged males) then IC’s error was not quite so far from the truth as one might believe.

  50. Charles D. said

    I was unable to post last night, so this is a test and can be removed. I got error Msgs that I was posting to fast.

  51. James said

    When should all agree now that Rev.Wright is a phoney. What he taught was phoney and the people around him are gullible even some running for president.

  52. I\’d get so much more work done if it wasnt for pbbgs 😉

  53. Lawrence said

    Incredible this is a important website.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: