Thomas Cross’s recent article on The Gospel Coalition is a good intro to what took place on April 3 in Memphis, where TGC and ERLC hosted the MLK50 conference, honoring a perverted Communist as a moral exemplar for his work in extending indefinitely the theft of “Reconstruction” and, most importantly for “civil rights” leaders, providing a nooseless solution for bedding white women.
All the cucking and howls of gibsmedat at the conference whipped perpetually-needy Africans and various Soros employees into a self-righteous froth, and in the days following it was proclaimed throughout the land that white people must repent of their corporate guilt for failing to give their lives to a man who only wanted to love you, and love you REAL good.
Ron Burns, who took for himself the name Thabiti Anyabwile, or if you prefer, Swahili Joe, hopped aboard the grievance train, bound for the Big Rock Candy Mountaintop. I mean, of course, that he took to the Internet and pounded out a screed which accuses all dem honkies of pulling the trigger for James Earl Ray. But I wouldn’t want you to think of this as a hate crime (does he look like a hate criminal?) or think that this will adversely affect his employment in any way. He’ll still be a coveted token on Reformed parachurch ministry conference panels. Good tokens are hard to find.
Mustafa Dave writes that “the entire society killed Dr. King.” But of course, he doesn’t include blacks in the “entire society.” He clarifies, “My white neighbors and Christian brethren can start by at least saying their parents and grandparents and this country are complicit in murdering a man who only preached love and justice.” The article is so thoroughly Marxist that it essentially substitutes blacks for the proletariat and whites for the bourgeoisie.
In another article, he actually makes agreeable points on how the Bible deals with blood relations, but this is only in service of his claim that all whites bear guilt for the murder of MLK, infinitely through their generations, except for those who denounce “racism,” which means in this context the desire of white people to freely associate and keep their own institutions, as inherited from their own ancestors, and not to harm or deprive blacks in any way because of it. He writes, “The biggest wrong is minimizing or denying that racism exists. . . . When it comes to racism . . . white America is Cretan in its understanding and actions.”
In other words, white people are “evil beasts” if they disagree that the Bible condemns slavery, that our Constitution and laws were sinful for supporting it, that miscegenation should have been legalized, that black children in their own schools, and their families in their own neighborhoods, were ipso facto mistreated or deprived of justice, and that we have a never-ending racial obligation to repent of what were never sins or crimes in the first place, while keeping quiet about the racially-lopsided nature of crimes committed against us, year after year.
Then Dishonest Doug Wilson comes along, playing one of his typically devious tricks. It all sounds well and good to rebuke a reputed minister of the gospel for burdening Christians for generations with the ongoing guilt of “sin” allegedly committed by those who are no longer alive, and long since reimbursed. What Doug actually does here is far worse: he shows his conservatard stripes by acquiescing to the substance of the charge; he agrees that our grandparents were in sin for opposing heretical MLK’s rabble and the reversal of the separate-but-equal legal structure that Plessy v. Ferguson put in place. He bows in reverence to the politically-correct gospel, which is that we too are in sin if we agree with our grandparents.
As flowery as Doug’s words can be – and he makes some good points, in spite of himself – he implicitly concedes defeat by refusing to strike the root, which is the charge that “racism” (i.e., wanting our grandchildren to look like our grandparents, and rejecting the foolish wishes of our children to marry anything with a pulse and different chromosomes, even if it calls itself Christian) is sin!
Notice how Doug calls Soul Glo Tom a cultural Marxist, not for elevating the Communist agitprop of “racism” to the level of sin, but for joining with those who monetize guilt. He then puffs out his chest and shows that he’s above the nastiness of racial loyalty by calling white people “officious busybodies, wanting to run everything,” who like to “accuse their ancestors of appalling crimes while feeling superior in the accusation. Self-loathing and pride, rolled all into one.” This is true, and it’s exemplified by Doug himself. But then he refuses to characterize blacks in a similar way; he simply tells His Ebony Highness, the Marquis de Willy, that “your people can be free of their besetting sins today.”
White pastors, who place the word race in quotations every time they write it, because they believe that it’s Darwinian or a figment of the imagination, are ill-equipped to deal with the Marxist strategy being utilized so effectively against them. They are shepherds who can’t identify the sheep. Despite all their pretensions about “fencing the table,” they’ve allowed predators into the sheepfold, and their only solution to the predation is to tear down the walls to speed the conversion to sheephood.
Burns/Anyabwile may be on the fast track back to Nation of Islam radicalism. In his book, Reviving the Black Church, he writes that he left Islam because he came to view it as “a real enemy to the progress of African Americans, an opiate and tool of white supremacy.” This is where the hypocrisy of white pastors is glaring. They fawn all over Mobutu Lou, in the hope that he’ll anoint their foreheads with diversity oil, and they love it that he advocates “the progress of African Americans.” They love it that he opposes “white supremacy,” however that might be defined from week to week. But they cannot tolerate the idea of white men promoting the advancement and security of their own people. That would be – you guessed it – racist!
If only Jaffar Jimmy could behave himself at the country club, brunch would be serene. But no, last year our boy had to endear himself to his Washington, DC congregation by treating cops as enemies of the peace and endorsing a socialist Jew in a party of baby-killers to be the ideal representative of black interests.
This is why Doug Wilson never fails to raise the subject of abortion in his tender reproofs against Baghdad Boo, but not because of the stark incongruity of black Christians who want to blot from the Lamb’s Book of Life all white Americans who lived prior to 1950, and any of their offspring who agree with them, while granting more than 95% of their electoral support to a party whose stated purpose is to allow mothers to murder their own children. No, Doug’s point is that Margaret Sanger was a “racist” who founded Planned Parenthood to exterminate the black race, so the incongruity is that those who appropriately (in Doug’s view) honor MLK for destroying “white privilege” – meaning white existence – should vote to enable those who use our tax dollars to guarantee that there will be fewer black people in the world. Of course, there’s scarcely a difference in the Republican leadership, at least, on either point. But as you can see, Dishonest Doug is truly what R.L. Dabney called a northern conservative, the shadow that follows radicalism to perdition.
Wilson’s hilarious groveling to Burns apparently couldn’t deter the latter from casting a vote for Hillary. How many Chicagos will it take? Doug asked Ron, referring to the number of deaths by abortion to be expected from one term of Hillary’s presidency. Ron replied that Doug had no right to comment on the carnage and suffering in Chicago until he demonstrates “compassion and investment” by leaving the state of Whiteaho to mingle with blacks in deep-blue, inner-city districts. Until then, said Ron, Doug is only playing “the shame game” by politicizing Chicago as “the poster community for Black dysfunction.”
While it can admittedly be fun to watch these men punch the tar baby, the body of Christ needs to come to terms with a couple of things that are only going to get worse, the more they’re ignored.
- Spiritual unity does not necessitate physical amalgamation. In fact, blending disparate peoples together only makes things worse by diminishing familiarity, which diminishes trust, which diminishes common cause and pits every man in competition with his neighbor. (The competitive exclusion principle can be seen even at the cellular level.) In our personal lives, there will be no charity. In public life, there will be no consensus. This is especially dangerous for whites, because we share an innate sense of cooperation, and we expect the same from everyone around us. When it doesn’t exist, stress is too high for family formation.
- As a logical consequence, it’s better for races to separate and thrive. As Christians, why would we want to endure mutual recriminations? Why should we subject ourselves to the toxic cocktail of black aggression, white grandstanding on virtue, and Jewish meddling? Why not help each other as we’re able, which is done for every other group of Christians overseas, while protecting our own interests and restoring a culture that uniquely reflects us as a people?
Pastors today refuse to admit obvious truths because they want to view everything through the lens of soteriology. All men are fallen, and “there is neither Jew nor Greek” in the grace bestowed by Christ in salvation; yet from this they conclude that all nations, kingdoms, races, and ethnicities are withering on the vine, and good riddance when they’re gone. They don’t care that our Christian ancestors disagreed with them; they don’t care that all of history rejects their ideology as genocidal madness. They crave the respectability of their peers, and there will be many hard lessons for them to learn in the years ahead.
Dr. James White’s response to the Wilson/Anyabwile dispute is a case in point. White acknowledges that the apostles recognized “ethnicity” and “skin color,” but not “race” since “there is, in their minds, one race, the human race, and the modern perversion of that concept into racialism is not consonant with their worldview.” He argues, “The basis of Christian unity is found in the eclipsing of these things by the over-riding unity that the renewal of the Spirit brings about in our lives, a renewal in which there are no distinctions.” Therefore, our relationships with each other must “transcend and eclipse any other human relationship . . . so everything that has come before must be buried at the foot of the cross. . . . The reason the church can exist amongst all tribes, tongues, peoples and nations is that the gospel puts us all in the SAME bucket: the redeemed.”
You can see how categories are mixed to the point that differences between people groups that are thousands of years old and are literally hardwired into our genes are assumed to magically no longer have any effect in our lives. Against all experience, conversion to Christ is alleged to sweep these differences away, and all territorial borders, barriers, and boundaries with them. Such pastors have chosen to break with orthodoxy, which teaches that we are all equally deserving of condemnation, and in Christ we are all equally redeemed, but this doesn’t change the fact that we are all different in many ways, and the differences are ordained by God himself for our own good. We are not to “bury” these distinctives! What father would treat his own children as equal to all other Christian children? What nation has treated its people as interchangeable with any other and managed to survive?
James White doesn’t believe that the blessings and curses of Deuteronomy 28 apply to the church today, even though following the first part of the chapter self-evidently leads to blessings, while ignoring the commands self-evidently leads to the curses found in the second part of the chapter.
And now, quite predictably, White is “stunned” by the consequences of his colorblindness. A black man, Kyle Howard, has stated publicly that he would not feel safe while meeting with White alone. White responds to Howard here. “What evil could White have committed to provoke such a response?” you ask. No one really knows, but the point, according to Howard, is that when a black man urges repentance from uppity white folk for racial insensitivity, asking for reasons is probably evidence of your guilt. Far better to use the occasion to lie prostrate and reflect on your offensive whiteness.
And sing a song while you’re down there, like this song (lyrics) that was performed prior to Matt Chandler speaking at MLK50. It states that MLK’s “dream” came from God, and the dream was to dismantle “hierarchy.” It refers to hierarchy of races, specifically, but since caste has been outlawed for centuries, this always refers to economic or class differences, in practice, and how to level them using words like “justice, unity, equality,” which in legislative form means taxes, quotas, and reparations. Standard Marxist fare. The song claims that “the evil one” opposes MLK’s dream and seeks “to keep us divided” by seeing to it that whites are “treated as superior” and to keep blacks in the “daily fight to remind myself that I am worthy.” I’m not sure how this sentiment fits with the lyric that we are created “distinctly different on purpose,” but hey, it’s “art.”
The old Christian songs that were based on the unwoke Bible referred to our worthiness as well – our worthiness of judgment and God’s worthiness of our praise. But now “microaggressions lie behind every other corner lurking,” and white people are as blind as James White in understanding the offenses they’ve caused by breathing air.
I wonder if Isaac Watts ever considered using the word “microaggressions” in his hymn lyrics.
| Tweet |
|
|
|
