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!

The Media Is FALSELY CLAIMING That Most Black Churches Support Jeremiah Wright And Black Liberation Theology!

Posted by Job on May 2, 2008

How many black followers of Martin Luther King, Jr. would have done so had they known that Martin Luther King rejected the deity of Jesus Christ? The media made sure that King’s black Christian followers did not know the fellow’s true theological – let alone political – beliefs, for they knew that had they done so, a huge percentage of King’s followers would have abandoned him and the civil rights movement in general. Please recall: despite the heavy attention given them by the media and the historical romanticism of them, Malcolm X’s Nation of Islam and the Black Panthers had a combined membership of less than a million. The reason is that even though the dire conditions in the black community made a large percentage of blacks receptive to political and economic radicalism, both the Nation of Islam and the Black Panthers suffered greatly in their efforts to recruit blacks because of their requirement that blacks overtly reject Jesus Christ. But these same blacks, however, were more than willing to follow a political movement disguised with the exterior trappings of orthodox Christianity, and the media was more than willing to keep the ruse going, just as they are more than willing to allow white evangelicals to be deceived by the religious right. How many white evangelicals know that George W. Bush lost a Texas Congressional race to a pro – life Democrat solely because of his stand on abortion? To the extent that the media even reported that race, they simply repeated the Bush line that he lost the race because he was branded as a Yankee carpetbagging interloper.

So now, the media is reporting that most black preachers either preach or support on some level Jeremiah Wright’s heretical abomination theology. Just as in the white community, you have black churches that are theologically conservative, theologically liberal, and theologically moderate. You also have churches that are not so much theological as they are traditional, and others that attempt to be modernistic. Now while there are few black churches that would legitimately qualify as fundamentalist, the percentage of liberal churches is far higher in the white community. As a matter of fact, were it not for denominations like the National Baptist Convention and the Progressive Baptist Convention getting involved with civil rights leaders and Democratic politics, and for some of the other black denominations hiring black preachers educated at the far more liberal white seminaries from similar denominations (i.e. African Methodist Episcopal churches hiring black graduates of very liberal United Methodist seminaries) there would be far fewer black liberal churches. Now I will grant you that in My Main Concern With Barack HUSSEIN Obama: His Victory Would Make Liberation Theology Seem Rick Warren Purpose Driven! I stated that a Barack Obama victory would result in wide acceptance of black liberation theology in the black community, meaning that other races would adopt some form of it as well, and how it would over time moderate and homogenize into a religio – political doctrine acceptable to the wide masses. Consider that Mormonism in its current form is very different – and hence much more acceptable to the mainstream – than what Joseph Smith founded. And while I am not making spiritual comparisons to charismatic Christianity – many of its adherents do actually believe in the Jesus Christ of the Bible and are born again – and either liberation theology and Mormonism, the fact remains that the modern dominant forms of it that you will see practiced in the Assemblies of God and Churches of God in Christ (the non televangelist charismatic Christianity) is far removed from the doctrines and practice of Charles Parham and Azusa Street, and for practical purposes are almost indistinguishable from many Baptist churches.

But the point is that the media is lying to make it appear as if there are this great number of blacks that preach black liberation theology NOW, sit in their churches and rant against white people, and espouse Marxism and Afrocentrism NOW, when no such thing is the case. The media is also contributing to this by not telling black people the full extent of the belief system of Afrocentrism and black liberation theology (just as they never told black people that Martin Luther King, Jr. did not believe in the deity, virgin birth, or resurrection of Jesus Christ, a fact that probably less than 1% of the black community knows). They just see a black preacher on TV attacking poverty, racism, George Bush, and the war. The blacks attacking the media for being hypocrites for focusing on Obama’s relationship with Wright while not attacking John McCain’s ties with John Hagee have no idea that THEY ARE FAR FAR CLOSER TO HAGEE THEOLOGICALLY THAN THEY ARE TO WRIGHT.

Wright himself contributes to this. When the National Press Club asked Wright if salvation was available only through Jesus Christ, Wright merely responded “did not Jesus Christ say that He had other sheep?” Now not only does the vast majority of black Baptists, Methodists, charismatics, etc. utterly reject pluralism and universalism – and most further have no idea of the question to or response concerning Wright since it was not widely reported – but Wright purposefully chose to omit the fact that liberation theology (and liberal theology in general) espouses a completely different notion of salvation and condemnation than is found in the Bible: liberal theologies DO NOT BELIEVE IN A LITERAL HEAVEN OR LAKE OF FIRE. Wright did not say that because he knew the headlines would have been “OBAMA PASTOR DOES NOT BELIEVE IN HEAVEN OR HELL!” and a good percentage of the Christian black support for Obama would evaporate. (Does Hillary Clinton’s liberal Methodism believe in heaven and hell? The media will never report that either!)

Link to New York Times Story

Link To MSNBC Story

Advertisements

6 Responses to “The Media Is FALSELY CLAIMING That Most Black Churches Support Jeremiah Wright And Black Liberation Theology!”

  1. WArren said

    While I agree with your premise, “The media is lying about most Black Churches Supporting Jerimah Wright and Black Liberation Theology”. I disagree with several of your other statements.

    As member and leader in the ‘Black’ Church for many years, I want to ask you to provide documentation for your claims that Dr. MLK Jr. denied the virgin, birth, and deity of Christ. From much of what I have heard, read and witnessed first hand, I have never seen Dr. King say or write anything that would lead someone to conclude that he denied these fundamental tenets of the Christian faith. You claim in your post that less than 1% of Black people know this. We know this to be untrue, that is not the same thing as ‘not knowing’.

    Based on my own experience, I find laughable your claim that most Blacks go to White churches? In what neighborhood is that? Certainly not in most inner city neighborhoods, and even in the suburbs, most Blacks go to predominately Black churches, even if they have to drive back to the inner city to attend. Can you cite more directly where you got this ‘information’ from?

    As for “Black Liberation Theology”, this is not a new theology and has been roundly rejected by most orthodox Christians (including Black Christians) for years. There is little danger that a Obama win will do much to cause Christian (black or otherwise) to embrace this heretical belief system. Jesus is our Saviour, not Obama. LOL

  2. Job said

    WArren:

    The link below contains other links that are the basis for my statement on Martin Luther King, Jr. It is extensive and well known within the academic and civil rights community I might add. It was also reported in the San Francisco Chronicle a few years ago. And as far as black liberation theology having been around for a long time and was rejected, James Cone developed black liberation theology at Northwestern and Union Theological Seminary in the late 1960s. That is actually rather new in terms of theologies. And by the way … there are not a few liberation theology preachers in the AME denomination, as they used to visit the AME church that I was a member of a few years ago as guest ministers.

    https://healtheland.wordpress.com/2007/08/15/proof-from-his-own-writings-that-martin-luther-king-jr-was-not-a-christian/

  3. Job said

    WArren:

    On the other two points of mine that you challenged, let us call it a 50/50 split. You were correct that few blacks attend white churches according to this article below. I honestly do remember the news reports in question, but could not find evidence to support it, so I will have to concede you as the winner and edit my post accordingly.

    But I am convinced that the more liberal and politically active black churches will adopt black liberation theology. Why? The civil rights era is dead, and everyone knows it. If Obama wins the election, black liberation theology, especially the “Afrocentric black nationalism” espoused by Wright, will become a lot more attractive to that crowd.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/05/examining_the_united_church_of.html

  4. There is no “Black” church, there is no “White” church and no saint of God should care what color skin the people are where they worship.

  5. Devon said

    Thank you IC…Thank you thank you….

  6. Warren said

    IC, yes I agree that there is no White or Black church as far as God is concerned. Unfortunately this is not the case where the world is concerned. To honestly acknowledge the racial makeup of a particular local church does not diminish how God see His Church. I did not mean to imply that either church is outside of being the ‘True Church’ by using the phrase white/black. I was responding to Job’s claim that the majority of blacks go to white churches.

    Job,

    I appreciate your response. If you want to call a almost 50 year theological idea ‘new’ I won’t argue that point though I would disagree with it.

    The links you provided as evidence that Dr. King was not a Christian are also not ‘new’ this ‘proof’ is so weak I hardly know where to begin. If you want to take the writings of 19 – 20 Seminary student trying to get a good grade use that as proof what what the man stood for, I can’t stop you from doing this. But to say that what he wrote on some term papers represents what he ultimately believed and taught is a bit of a stretch.

    It is clear from the papers that he was trying his best (as was expected) to argue from both sides of the case. Given the body of work and accomplishments of Dr. King to try and use this as evidence of a man’s entire life and work is flimsy at best.

    I hope that folks won’t hold me responsible for all of the things I wrote in Seminary while I was learning who I was, and what I really believed in. Using this as the criteria many folks would probably say that I am not a Christian either. Even though what I believed then is totally different than what I believe now!

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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: