It is right and just to do so. BLM is rightly sceptical of a church that does not clearly see and say that black lives matter. And in this respect, BLM prophesies against the church, for the church, which is for the world.
The church must recover its revolutionary witness that God in Christ has come to overthrow every earthly kingdom. Christians should never be surprised to find that the world and church are in need of repentance and reform. God's restorative action is needed every day in every way. The church should accordingly welcome the witness of BLM and other social movements that put a spotlight on truths the church has forgotten, neglected and, in some cases, outright denied.
The Christian church should certainly stand for justice and in opposition to racism of all kinds. There are significant aspects of BLM's agenda which make it impossible for the Christian church to support that particular movement.
It is precisely your framing of the BLM issue that leads me to suspect that what is at work here is pure ideology. Throughout this thread, you have voiced a set of claims expressed not for reasons having to do with truth, but rather for pragmatic reasons, namely, to obscure what matters. Here's why I'm suspicious of your claims:
If you are concerned that BLM is not sufficiently concerned with justice, one might expect that Christians would be engaged in BLM-type efforts plus. In other words, one would expect that religious critics would put so-called "Social Justice Warriors" to shame by the intensity of their justice pursuit. I can only speak anecdotally, but nothing like this appears to be the case in the majority of churches I've observed and in the people who attend them. Second, and relatedly, if objectors such as yourself are concerned that BLM is not sufficiently concerned with justice, one might expect you to develop even more specific and thorough proposals from the more adequate perspective you purport to occupy. Instead, I find ready desperate and often shabby critiques with little effort to explain exactly the difference that the Gospel or Jesus or the church would make to the quest for social justice.
You don't seem to be following my argument. I am not saying BLM is not sufficiently concerned with justice (I state no position on that issue, as I suspect we define "justice" quite differently), I am saying it has objectives antithetical to Christianity and Christ's teaching in particular that make it impossible for the evangelical church (if we are to define it as some monolithic group, which it's not) to come out in support of it. We've discussed them on this thread, and you have already acknowledged them. What you have NOT done is gone a step further and make a logical argument for why the evangelical church should support such an organization with such antithetical views to Christianity.
Moreover, I think you misunderstand our calling as Christians. Christians are not to be Social Justice Warriors. To the contrary, we are called to be fully-devoted followers of Christ, and to tell others about him. Now, does that often times coincide with taking moral stances on issues of justice? Of course. But our objective is not heaven on earth. Our home is in a very different place.
Even large numbers of conservative Christians argue that "the ethical act" of pursuing justice flows naturally from Christ's substitutionary death on the Cross. For the record, I've never seen such a flow. When one reflects theologically, one can admit that BLM challenges us to open our eyes to the reality that it has "laid hold of certain truths that are essential parts of the Christian view of things" namely, that the Gospel announces God's eternal "no" to injustice and oppression. The Magnificat in Luke alerts us to God's kingdom-concern to cast down the mighty from their thrones and lift up the lowly, to fill the hungry with good things and send the rich away empty (Luke 1:46-55). Where BLM confronts "deadly oppression" and voices a rallying cry for ALL Black lives striving for liberation," Christians are invited by BLM to acknowledge and repent of the ways in which the church has failed to do the same.
It is right and just to do so. BLM is rightly sceptical of a church that does not clearly see and say that black lives matter. And in this respect, BLM prophesies against the church, for the church, which is for the world.
The church must recover its revolutionary witness that God in Christ has come to overthrow every earthly kingdom. Christians should never be surprised to find that the world and church are in need of repentance and reform. God's restorative action is needed every day in every way. The church should accordingly welcome the witness of BLM and other social movements that put a spotlight on truths the church has forgotten, neglected and, in some cases, outright denied.
The Christian church should certainly stand for justice and in opposition to racism of all kinds. There are significant aspects of BLM's agenda which make it impossible for the Christian church to support that particular movement.
The problem is you don't see that BLM is a much broader movement than the leaders identified with allegedly Marxist philosophy.
BLM as a concept, as a movement, is much broader than that group, just as the Civil Rights Movement was much broader than the Marxists who were involved in it.
Your criticism of BLM is PRECISELY the same criticism thrown at the Civil Rights Movement. You're adopting the arguments racists used against Dr. King and others.
As a broad movement, the idea of BLM is something Christ followers should definitely support.
It is right and just to do so. BLM is rightly sceptical of a church that does not clearly see and say that black lives matter. And in this respect, BLM prophesies against the church, for the church, which is for the world.
The church must recover its revolutionary witness that God in Christ has come to overthrow every earthly kingdom. Christians should never be surprised to find that the world and church are in need of repentance and reform. God's restorative action is needed every day in every way. The church should accordingly welcome the witness of BLM and other social movements that put a spotlight on truths the church has forgotten, neglected and, in some cases, outright denied.
The Christian church should certainly stand for justice and in opposition to racism of all kinds. There are significant aspects of BLM's agenda which make it impossible for the Christian church to support that particular movement.
The problem is you don't see that BLM is a much broader movement than the leaders identified with allegedly Marxist philosophy.
BLM as a concept, as a movement, is much broader than that group, just as the Civil Rights Movement was much broader than the Marxists who were involved in it.
Your criticism of BLM is PRECISELY the same criticism thrown at the Civil Rights Movement. You're adopting the arguments racists used against Dr. King and others.
As a broad movement, the idea of BLM is something Christ followers should definitely support.
BLM is a well funded domestic terrorist group.
ALL LIVES MATTER.
"Never underestimate Joe's ability to **** things up!"
Baylor desperately needs to offer a class in Marxism.
Even if the only reason is so all of you folks will understand that BLM--a protest movement born out of disproportionate police violence toward minorities in this country and inequities in the criminal justice system, is not marxism.
Which right-wing news site/source is promoting the idea that BLM protesters or the BLM movement = marxism?
You must have missed the interview with one of the founders, who described her and the other founders as "trained Marxists." Perhaps you can educate her on what that means.
Baylor desperately needs to offer a class in Marxism.
Even if the only reason is so all of you folks will understand that BLM--a protest movement born out of disproportionate police violence toward minorities in this country and inequities in the criminal justice system, is not marxism.
Which right-wing news site/source is promoting the idea that BLM protesters or the BLM movement = marxism?
You must have missed the interview with one of the founders, who described her and the other founders as "trained Marxists." Perhaps you can educate her on what that means.
It is right and just to do so. BLM is rightly sceptical of a church that does not clearly see and say that black lives matter. And in this respect, BLM prophesies against the church, for the church, which is for the world.
The church must recover its revolutionary witness that God in Christ has come to overthrow every earthly kingdom. Christians should never be surprised to find that the world and church are in need of repentance and reform. God's restorative action is needed every day in every way. The church should accordingly welcome the witness of BLM and other social movements that put a spotlight on truths the church has forgotten, neglected and, in some cases, outright denied.
The Christian church should certainly stand for justice and in opposition to racism of all kinds. There are significant aspects of BLM's agenda which make it impossible for the Christian church to support that particular movement.
The problem is you don't see that BLM is a much broader movement than the leaders identified with allegedly Marxist philosophy.
BLM as a concept, as a movement, is much broader than that group, just as the Civil Rights Movement was much broader than the Marxists who were involved in it.
Your criticism of BLM is PRECISELY the same criticism thrown at the Civil Rights Movement. You're adopting the arguments racists used against Dr. King and others.
As a broad movement, the idea of BLM is something Christ followers should definitely support.
You are missing a number of key distinctions that make this an apples to oranges comparison. The civil rights movement was not a political organization with written objectives. It had no name. It was no political party. It did not have a political system as a stated goal. Instead, it was a group of very different people, like-minded in their idea that Jim Crow was immoral, and using peaceful protest to achieve the destruction of Jim Crow. It had a very well-defined goal - end separate but equal.
In all of those aspects, it was very different from the political organization known as BLM, which does have stated written objectives, but really no discernable plan for achieving them. And it has been hijacked completely by a criminal element who doesn't value rights or democracy, but political violence. You do a huge disservice to the civil rights movement by making any comparison to the domestic terrorists currently participating in the BML movement.
Baylor desperately needs to offer a class in Marxism.
Even if the only reason is so all of you folks will understand that BLM--a protest movement born out of disproportionate police violence toward minorities in this country and inequities in the criminal justice system, is not marxism.
Which right-wing news site/source is promoting the idea that BLM protesters or the BLM movement = marxism?
You must have missed the interview with one of the founders, who described her and the other founders as "trained Marxists." Perhaps you can educate her on what that means.
It is precisely your framing of the BLM issue that leads me to suspect that what is at work here is pure ideology. Throughout this thread, you have voiced a set of claims expressed not for reasons having to do with truth, but rather for pragmatic reasons, namely, to obscure what matters. Here's why I'm suspicious of your claims:
If you are concerned that BLM is not sufficiently concerned with justice, one might expect that Christians would be engaged in BLM-type efforts plus. In other words, one would expect that religious critics would put so-called "Social Justice Warriors" to shame by the intensity of their justice pursuit. I can only speak anecdotally, but nothing like this appears to be the case in the majority of churches I've observed and in the people who attend them. Second, and relatedly, if objectors such as yourself are concerned that BLM is not sufficiently concerned with justice, one might expect you to develop even more specific and thorough proposals from the more adequate perspective you purport to occupy. Instead, I find ready desperate and often shabby critiques with little effort to explain exactly the difference that the Gospel or Jesus or the church would make to the quest for social justice.
You don't seem to be following my argument. I am not saying BLM is not sufficiently concerned with justice (I state no position on that issue, as I suspect we define "justice" quite differently), I am saying it has objectives antithetical to Christianity and Christ's teaching in particular that make it impossible for the evangelical church (if we are to define it as some monolithic group, which it's not) to come out in support of it. We've discussed them on this thread, and you have already acknowledged them. What you have NOT done is gone a step further and make a logical argument for why the evangelical church should support such an organization with such antithetical views to Christianity.
Moreover, I think you misunderstand our calling as Christians. Christians are not to be Social Justice Warriors. To the contrary, we are called to be fully-devoted followers of Christ, and to tell others about him. Now, does that often times coincide with taking moral stances on issues of justice? Of course. But our objective is not heaven on earth. Our home is in a very different place.
Martin Luther King, Jr., made a similar argument to yours in his sermon, "How Should a Christian View Communism?" While King states upfront that Christianity and communism are incompatible insofar as communism is based on a materialistic, humanistic, relativistic, nationalistic and atheistic view of life King's treatment of communism offers a fitting analogy for how the church today may be a faithful ally of a secular movement for social change. The example of communism serves to show that justice movements such as BLM present even fewer philosophical obstacles for the church's engagement.
While it may be true that I would not want to give sweeping, uncritical support to BLM, it is true in this moment that BLM offers a prophetic voice that calls the church to a renewed sense of vocation and mission. More important than the question of where, exactly, BLM goes wrong from the Christian perspective, is the need to uncover how BLM exposes the failure of the church to perform the Gospel, and what kind of allies should Christians be to BLM.
That is fine, and hopefully the church can make the changes it needs to make, if necessary. But that still does not support the line of reasoning that the Christian Church should support a man-made organization who holds ideas antithetical to Christianity.
It is right and just to do so. BLM is rightly sceptical of a church that does not clearly see and say that black lives matter. And in this respect, BLM prophesies against the church, for the church, which is for the world.
The church must recover its revolutionary witness that God in Christ has come to overthrow every earthly kingdom. Christians should never be surprised to find that the world and church are in need of repentance and reform. God's restorative action is needed every day in every way. The church should accordingly welcome the witness of BLM and other social movements that put a spotlight on truths the church has forgotten, neglected and, in some cases, outright denied.
The Christian church should certainly stand for justice and in opposition to racism of all kinds. There are significant aspects of BLM's agenda which make it impossible for the Christian church to support that particular movement.
As a broad movement, the idea of BLM is something Christ followers should definitely support.
......as they burn your Churches , vandalize icons, attack parishioners and demand Scripture be modified to condone abortion.
It is precisely your framing of the BLM issue that leads me to suspect that what is at work here is pure ideology. Throughout this thread, you have voiced a set of claims expressed not for reasons having to do with truth, but rather for pragmatic reasons, namely, to obscure what matters. Here's why I'm suspicious of your claims:
If you are concerned that BLM is not sufficiently concerned with justice, one might expect that Christians would be engaged in BLM-type efforts plus. In other words, one would expect that religious critics would put so-called "Social Justice Warriors" to shame by the intensity of their justice pursuit. I can only speak anecdotally, but nothing like this appears to be the case in the majority of churches I've observed and in the people who attend them. Second, and relatedly, if objectors such as yourself are concerned that BLM is not sufficiently concerned with justice, one might expect you to develop even more specific and thorough proposals from the more adequate perspective you purport to occupy. Instead, I find ready desperate and often shabby critiques with little effort to explain exactly the difference that the Gospel or Jesus or the church would make to the quest for social justice.
You don't seem to be following my argument. I am not saying BLM is not sufficiently concerned with justice (I state no position on that issue, as I suspect we define "justice" quite differently), I am saying it has objectives antithetical to Christianity and Christ's teaching in particular that make it impossible for the evangelical church (if we are to define it as some monolithic group, which it's not) to come out in support of it. We've discussed them on this thread, and you have already acknowledged them. What you have NOT done is gone a step further and make a logical argument for why the evangelical church should support such an organization with such antithetical views to Christianity.
Moreover, I think you misunderstand our calling as Christians. Christians are not to be Social Justice Warriors. To the contrary, we are called to be fully-devoted followers of Christ, and to tell others about him. Now, does that often times coincide with taking moral stances on issues of justice? Of course. But our objective is not heaven on earth. Our home is in a very different place.
Martin Luther King, Jr., made a similar argument to yours in his sermon, "How Should a Christian View Communism?" While King states upfront that Christianity and communism are incompatible insofar as communism is based on a materialistic, humanistic, relativistic, nationalistic and atheistic view of life King's treatment of communism offers a fitting analogy for how the church today may be a faithful ally of a secular movement for social change. The example of communism serves to show that justice movements such as BLM present even fewer philosophical obstacles for the church's engagement.
While it may be true that I would not want to give sweeping, uncritical support to BLM, it is true in this moment that BLM offers a prophetic voice that calls the church to a renewed sense of vocation and mission. More important than the question of where, exactly, BLM goes wrong from the Christian perspective, is the need to uncover how BLM exposes the failure of the church to perform the Gospel, and what kind of allies should Christians be to BLM.
That is fine, and hopefully the church can make the changes it needs to make, if necessary. But that still does not support the line of reasoning that the Christian Church should support a man-made organization who holds ideas antithetical to Christianity.
Political parties are man made organizations that PRACTICE ideas that are antithetical to Christianity.
It is precisely your framing of the BLM issue that leads me to suspect that what is at work here is pure ideology. Throughout this thread, you have voiced a set of claims expressed not for reasons having to do with truth, but rather for pragmatic reasons, namely, to obscure what matters. Here's why I'm suspicious of your claims:
If you are concerned that BLM is not sufficiently concerned with justice, one might expect that Christians would be engaged in BLM-type efforts plus. In other words, one would expect that religious critics would put so-called "Social Justice Warriors" to shame by the intensity of their justice pursuit. I can only speak anecdotally, but nothing like this appears to be the case in the majority of churches I've observed and in the people who attend them. Second, and relatedly, if objectors such as yourself are concerned that BLM is not sufficiently concerned with justice, one might expect you to develop even more specific and thorough proposals from the more adequate perspective you purport to occupy. Instead, I find ready desperate and often shabby critiques with little effort to explain exactly the difference that the Gospel or Jesus or the church would make to the quest for social justice.
You don't seem to be following my argument. I am not saying BLM is not sufficiently concerned with justice (I state no position on that issue, as I suspect we define "justice" quite differently), I am saying it has objectives antithetical to Christianity and Christ's teaching in particular that make it impossible for the evangelical church (if we are to define it as some monolithic group, which it's not) to come out in support of it. We've discussed them on this thread, and you have already acknowledged them. What you have NOT done is gone a step further and make a logical argument for why the evangelical church should support such an organization with such antithetical views to Christianity.
Moreover, I think you misunderstand our calling as Christians. Christians are not to be Social Justice Warriors. To the contrary, we are called to be fully-devoted followers of Christ, and to tell others about him. Now, does that often times coincide with taking moral stances on issues of justice? Of course. But our objective is not heaven on earth. Our home is in a very different place.
Martin Luther King, Jr., made a similar argument to yours in his sermon, "How Should a Christian View Communism?" While King states upfront that Christianity and communism are incompatible insofar as communism is based on a materialistic, humanistic, relativistic, nationalistic and atheistic view of life King's treatment of communism offers a fitting analogy for how the church today may be a faithful ally of a secular movement for social change. The example of communism serves to show that justice movements such as BLM present even fewer philosophical obstacles for the church's engagement.
While it may be true that I would not want to give sweeping, uncritical support to BLM, it is true in this moment that BLM offers a prophetic voice that calls the church to a renewed sense of vocation and mission. More important than the question of where, exactly, BLM goes wrong from the Christian perspective, is the need to uncover how BLM exposes the failure of the church to perform the Gospel, and what kind of allies should Christians be to BLM.
That is fine, and hopefully the church can make the changes it needs to make, if necessary. But that still does not support the line of reasoning that the Christian Church should support a man-made organization who holds ideas antithetical to Christianity.
Political parties are man made organizations that PRACTICE ideas which are antithetical to Christianity.
Baylor desperately needs to offer a class in Marxism.
Even if the only reason is so all of you folks will understand that BLM--a protest movement born out of disproportionate police violence toward minorities in this country and inequities in the criminal justice system, is not marxism.
Which right-wing news site/source is promoting the idea that BLM protesters or the BLM movement = marxism?
You must have missed the interview with one of the founders, who described her and the other founders as "trained Marxists." Perhaps you can educate her on what that means.
Disgusting comment. All you have to do, is agree that black people matter, and you won't. You want to pretend that all black people that value their lives are Marxists, and how could you support that????
Closet racism, made not so closet upon basic investigation.
It is right and just to do so. BLM is rightly sceptical of a church that does not clearly see and say that black lives matter. And in this respect, BLM prophesies against the church, for the church, which is for the world.
The church must recover its revolutionary witness that God in Christ has come to overthrow every earthly kingdom. Christians should never be surprised to find that the world and church are in need of repentance and reform. God's restorative action is needed every day in every way. The church should accordingly welcome the witness of BLM and other social movements that put a spotlight on truths the church has forgotten, neglected and, in some cases, outright denied.
The Christian church should certainly stand for justice and in opposition to racism of all kinds. There are significant aspects of BLM's agenda which make it impossible for the Christian church to support that particular movement.
The problem is you don't see that BLM is a much broader movement than the leaders identified with allegedly Marxist philosophy.
BLM as a concept, as a movement, is much broader than that group, just as the Civil Rights Movement was much broader than the Marxists who were involved in it.
Your criticism of BLM is PRECISELY the same criticism thrown at the Civil Rights Movement. You're adopting the arguments racists used against Dr. King and others.
As a broad movement, the idea of BLM is something Christ followers should definitely support.
I didn't refer to the *leaders,* I referred to the *agenda* - the group's states goals. See Forest's post above -
1) "We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement " 2) "We believe that prisons, police and all other institutions that inflict violence on Black people must be abolished..." 3)""We are anti-capitalist." 4)"We deserve and thus we demand reproductive justice [aka abortion] that gives us autonomy over our bodies" 5)"We foster a queer-affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking."
This is from their website. Why should Christian's support the disruption of nuclear families or the abolition of the police?
I'm in the All Lives Matter boat. Not discounting that black lives matter. I oppose the destruction of our country and disrespect shown to authority. The way that BLM goes about its business and wanting to defund Police is absurd. As Christians we should love everyone as ourself. I for one do not love what is going on in our country. I for one have trouble loving the hate.
If one finds oneself in a place where the phrase "All Lives Matter" is offensive to sensibilities, one is in a very bad place.
It is precisely your framing of the BLM issue that leads me to suspect that what is at work here is pure ideology. Throughout this thread, you have voiced a set of claims expressed not for reasons having to do with truth, but rather for pragmatic reasons, namely, to obscure what matters. Here's why I'm suspicious of your claims:
If you are concerned that BLM is not sufficiently concerned with justice, one might expect that Christians would be engaged in BLM-type efforts plus. In other words, one would expect that religious critics would put so-called "Social Justice Warriors" to shame by the intensity of their justice pursuit. I can only speak anecdotally, but nothing like this appears to be the case in the majority of churches I've observed and in the people who attend them. Second, and relatedly, if objectors such as yourself are concerned that BLM is not sufficiently concerned with justice, one might expect you to develop even more specific and thorough proposals from the more adequate perspective you purport to occupy. Instead, I find ready desperate and often shabby critiques with little effort to explain exactly the difference that the Gospel or Jesus or the church would make to the quest for social justice.
You don't seem to be following my argument. I am not saying BLM is not sufficiently concerned with justice (I state no position on that issue, as I suspect we define "justice" quite differently), I am saying it has objectives antithetical to Christianity and Christ's teaching in particular that make it impossible for the evangelical church (if we are to define it as some monolithic group, which it's not) to come out in support of it. We've discussed them on this thread, and you have already acknowledged them. What you have NOT done is gone a step further and make a logical argument for why the evangelical church should support such an organization with such antithetical views to Christianity.
Moreover, I think you misunderstand our calling as Christians. Christians are not to be Social Justice Warriors. To the contrary, we are called to be fully-devoted followers of Christ, and to tell others about him. Now, does that often times coincide with taking moral stances on issues of justice? Of course. But our objective is not heaven on earth. Our home is in a very different place.
Martin Luther King, Jr., made a similar argument to yours in his sermon, "How Should a Christian View Communism?" While King states upfront that Christianity and communism are incompatible insofar as communism is based on a materialistic, humanistic, relativistic, nationalistic and atheistic view of life King's treatment of communism offers a fitting analogy for how the church today may be a faithful ally of a secular movement for social change. The example of communism serves to show that justice movements such as BLM present even fewer philosophical obstacles for the church's engagement.
While it may be true that I would not want to give sweeping, uncritical support to BLM, it is true in this moment that BLM offers a prophetic voice that calls the church to a renewed sense of vocation and mission. More important than the question of where, exactly, BLM goes wrong from the Christian perspective, is the need to uncover how BLM exposes the failure of the church to perform the Gospel, and what kind of allies should Christians be to BLM.
That is fine, and hopefully the church can make the changes it needs to make, if necessary. But that still does not support the line of reasoning that the Christian Church should support a man-made organization who holds ideas antithetical to Christianity.
Political parties are man made organizations that PRACTICE ideas that are antithetical to Christianity.
I agree, which is why no church should ever endorse a political party.
Baylor desperately needs to offer a class in Marxism.
Even if the only reason is so all of you folks will understand that BLM--a protest movement born out of disproportionate police violence toward minorities in this country and inequities in the criminal justice system, is not marxism.
Which right-wing news site/source is promoting the idea that BLM protesters or the BLM movement = marxism?
You must have missed the interview with one of the founders, who described her and the other founders as "trained Marxists." Perhaps you can educate her on what that means.
And more..... BLM is espousing progressive ideas rooted in Critical Race Theory which is merely a transposition of marxist dialectics on class into dialectics on race.
Disgusting comment. All you have to do, is agree that black people matter, and you won't. You want to pretend that all black people that value their lives are Marxists, and how could you support that????
Closet racism, made not so closet upon basic investigation.
This thread was begun with the idea that the evangelical church should support BLM, the organization. That's a very different concept than your own, which I agree with.
Baylor desperately needs to offer a class in Marxism.
Even if the only reason is so all of you folks will understand that BLM--a protest movement born out of disproportionate police violence toward minorities in this country and inequities in the criminal justice system, is not marxism.
Which right-wing news site/source is promoting the idea that BLM protesters or the BLM movement = marxism?
You must have missed the interview with one of the founders, who described her and the other founders as "trained Marxists." Perhaps you can educate her on what that means.
Disgusting comment. All you have to do, is agree that black people matter, and you won't. You want to pretend that all black people that value their lives are Marxists, and how could you support that????
Closet racism, made not so closet upon basic investigation.
I agree you. Black people matter.
I also agree with others that BLM is an organization that doesn't give two s-h-i-t-s about black lives. It's an organization purposely named to invoke an idea/a feeling of one thing while they pursue the goal of another.
The everything is racist dog whistling is getting old and frankly, has lost much of it's value.
It is precisely your framing of the BLM issue that leads me to suspect that what is at work here is pure ideology. Throughout this thread, you have voiced a set of claims expressed not for reasons having to do with truth, but rather for pragmatic reasons, namely, to obscure what matters. Here's why I'm suspicious of your claims:
If you are concerned that BLM is not sufficiently concerned with justice, one might expect that Christians would be engaged in BLM-type efforts plus. In other words, one would expect that religious critics would put so-called "Social Justice Warriors" to shame by the intensity of their justice pursuit. I can only speak anecdotally, but nothing like this appears to be the case in the majority of churches I've observed and in the people who attend them. Second, and relatedly, if objectors such as yourself are concerned that BLM is not sufficiently concerned with justice, one might expect you to develop even more specific and thorough proposals from the more adequate perspective you purport to occupy. Instead, I find ready desperate and often shabby critiques with little effort to explain exactly the difference that the Gospel or Jesus or the church would make to the quest for social justice.
You don't seem to be following my argument. I am not saying BLM is not sufficiently concerned with justice (I state no position on that issue, as I suspect we define "justice" quite differently), I am saying it has objectives antithetical to Christianity and Christ's teaching in particular that make it impossible for the evangelical church (if we are to define it as some monolithic group, which it's not) to come out in support of it. We've discussed them on this thread, and you have already acknowledged them. What you have NOT done is gone a step further and make a logical argument for why the evangelical church should support such an organization with such antithetical views to Christianity.
Moreover, I think you misunderstand our calling as Christians. Christians are not to be Social Justice Warriors. To the contrary, we are called to be fully-devoted followers of Christ, and to tell others about him. Now, does that often times coincide with taking moral stances on issues of justice? Of course. But our objective is not heaven on earth. Our home is in a very different place.
Martin Luther King, Jr., made a similar argument to yours in his sermon, "How Should a Christian View Communism?" While King states upfront that Christianity and communism are incompatible insofar as communism is based on a materialistic, humanistic, relativistic, nationalistic and atheistic view of life King's treatment of communism offers a fitting analogy for how the church today may be a faithful ally of a secular movement for social change. The example of communism serves to show that justice movements such as BLM present even fewer philosophical obstacles for the church's engagement.
While it may be true that I would not want to give sweeping, uncritical support to BLM, it is true in this moment that BLM offers a prophetic voice that calls the church to a renewed sense of vocation and mission. More important than the question of where, exactly, BLM goes wrong from the Christian perspective, is the need to uncover how BLM exposes the failure of the church to perform the Gospel, and what kind of allies should Christians be to BLM.
My local church decided to attend a citywide prayer meeting in downtown San Antonio, along with thousands of other Christians from dozens of churchs, in response to the murder of George Floyd. It was an amazing time of worship & prayer, with different pastors speaking for 10-15 minutes at a time, before each would lead the group in a round of prayer. The total group was mostly Hispanic, but included thousands of white and black Christians too. A few people in the crowd were wearing BLM T-shirts, and maybe a 3 dozen were carrying home made signs. The BLM organization claimed it was one of their rallys, and the local and national media proclaimed it to be the largest BLM rally in San Antonio history. The meeting had NOTHING to do with BLM as an organization at all!
My point: Good Christian people choose to do the right thing and come together for prayer with their brothers & sisters of all ethnicities. It was an awesome time of fellowship, understanding, unity, and healing. BLM added the numbers to their total tally, and the media were happily complicit in it. They use these kinds of tactics to pressure large organizations & corporations for support, money & power; so BLM can push their Marxist agenda. This puts the book of Revelations into perspective. The good, solid Christians will do the right thing (as they should), but the enemy will still get to use it to build up his power through groups like BLM. It is a harsh time to be alive. We must continue to do the right things, but understand that thru evil groups like BLM and CNN, our good actions will be twisted to serve the enemies purposes. However, openly supporting the evil groups directly.... that's just abject foolishness. BLM is an anti-Christian/anti-Christ organization, and they should NOT be supported by any Christian of any color or denomination.
Baylor desperately needs to offer a class in Marxism.
Even if the only reason is so all of you folks will understand that BLM--a protest movement born out of disproportionate police violence toward minorities in this country and inequities in the criminal justice system, is not marxism.
Which right-wing news site/source is promoting the idea that BLM protesters or the BLM movement = marxism?
The co-founder of BLM described herself as a "trained Marxist."
Is she a right-wing source? Was she lying about her own beliefs?
If you don't believe she's right about anything else, why would you believe there was such a thing as a "trained Marxist"? That's actually funny, and not in a good way. "Trained marksman"? Yes. "Trained Marxist"? No such thing.
BLM is like any other group, including churches: Some members know what they're talking about and understand the mission. Many more really don't and are there for other reasons.
Finally, the woman who labeled BLM as a Marxist movement thinks everyone to the left of her--which is 99.9% of americans--is a Marxist.
So George Soros is behind BLM? He funds antifa and also finds the StLouis lady that confiscated the couple assault rifle ? Isn't he Jewish? But hates Jews? Sounds like a rich fun guy to be around. He hates America even though he makes a fortune here. His motto is disunity. And people hate this country so much that support his fundings?
So George Soros is behind BLM? He funds antifa and also finds the StLouis lady that confiscated the couple assault rifle ? Isn't he Jewish? But hates Jews? Sounds like a rich fun guy to be around. He hates America even though he makes a fortune here. His motto is disunity. And people hate this country so much that support his fundings?
Baylor desperately needs to offer a class in Marxism.
Even if the only reason is so all of you folks will understand that BLM--a protest movement born out of disproportionate police violence toward minorities in this country and inequities in the criminal justice system, is not marxism.
Which right-wing news site/source is promoting the idea that BLM protesters or the BLM movement = marxism?
The co-founder of BLM described herself as a "trained Marxist."
Is she a right-wing source? Was she lying about her own beliefs?
If you don't believe she's right about anything else, why would you believe there was such a thing as a "trained Marxist"? That's actually funny, and not in a good way. "Trained marksman"? Yes. "Trained Marxist"? No such thing.
BLM is like any other group, including churches: Some members know what they're talking about and understand the mission. Many more really don't and are there for other reasons.
Finally, the woman who labeled BLM as a Marxist movement thinks everyone to the left of her--which is 99.9% of americans--is a Marxist.
Did you actually read your link? If you had, you would have seen it doesn't "debunk" anything. In fact, it confirms what many have been saying - one of the co-founders who, according to politifact, is still prominently displayed on BLM's website, and claims that she and at least one other co-founder are "trained Marxist." That should be concerning for anyone with a hint of intellectual honesty.
So, far from debunking what others have said, this article confirms everything.
This is a perfect example of why you lack credibility and respect on this website.
Baylor desperately needs to offer a class in Marxism.
Even if the only reason is so all of you folks will understand that BLM--a protest movement born out of disproportionate police violence toward minorities in this country and inequities in the criminal justice system, is not marxism.
Which right-wing news site/source is promoting the idea that BLM protesters or the BLM movement = marxism?
The co-founder of BLM described herself as a "trained Marxist."
Is she a right-wing source? Was she lying about her own beliefs?
If you don't believe she's right about anything else, why would you believe there was such a thing as a "trained Marxist"? That's actually funny, and not in a good way. "Trained marksman"? Yes. "Trained Marxist"? No such thing.
BLM is like any other group, including churches: Some members know what they're talking about and understand the mission. Many more really don't and are there for other reasons.
Finally, the woman who labeled BLM as a Marxist movement thinks everyone to the left of her--which is 99.9% of americans--is a Marxist.
You are a huge fool if you think that the label "trained Marxist" was put on them by their enemies. It is how they described themselves. Here is the video evidence for you:
This is BLM leaders, in their own words, with no gotcha questions or manipulation. They are proud to be Marxists, and their list of demands lines up with Marxism nicely.
Baylor desperately needs to offer a class in Marxism.
Even if the only reason is so all of you folks will understand that BLM--a protest movement born out of disproportionate police violence toward minorities in this country and inequities in the criminal justice system, is not marxism.
Which right-wing news site/source is promoting the idea that BLM protesters or the BLM movement = marxism?
The co-founder of BLM described herself as a "trained Marxist."
Is she a right-wing source? Was she lying about her own beliefs?
If you don't believe she's right about anything else, why would you believe there was such a thing as a "trained Marxist"? That's actually funny, and not in a good way. "Trained marksman"? Yes. "Trained Marxist"? No such thing.
BLM is like any other group, including churches: Some members know what they're talking about and understand the mission. Many more really don't and are there for other reasons.
Finally, the woman who labeled BLM as a Marxist movement thinks everyone to the left of her--which is 99.9% of americans--is a Marxist.
Did you actually read your link? If you had, you would have seen it doesn't "debunk" anything. In fact, it confirms what many have been saying - one of the co-founders who, according to politifact, is still prominently displayed on BLM's website, and claims that she and at least one other co-founder are "trained Marxist." That should be concerning for anyone with a hint of intellectual honesty.
So, far from debunking what others have said, this article confirms everything.
This is a perfect example of why you lack credibility and respect on this website.
Baylor desperately needs to offer a class in Marxism.
Even if the only reason is so all of you folks will understand that BLM--a protest movement born out of disproportionate police violence toward minorities in this country and inequities in the criminal justice system, is not marxism.
Which right-wing news site/source is promoting the idea that BLM protesters or the BLM movement = marxism?
The co-founder of BLM described herself as a "trained Marxist."
Is she a right-wing source? Was she lying about her own beliefs?
If you don't believe she's right about anything else, why would you believe there was such a thing as a "trained Marxist"? That's actually funny, and not in a good way. "Trained marksman"? Yes. "Trained Marxist"? No such thing.
BLM is like any other group, including churches: Some members know what they're talking about and understand the mission. Many more really don't and are there for other reasons.
Finally, the woman who labeled BLM as a Marxist movement thinks everyone to the left of her--which is 99.9% of americans--is a Marxist.
Did you actually read your link? If you had, you would have seen it doesn't "debunk" anything. In fact, it confirms what many have been saying - one of the co-founders who, according to politifact, is still prominently displayed on BLM's website, and claims that she and at least one other co-founder are "trained Marxist." That should be concerning for anyone with a hint of intellectual honesty.
So, far from debunking what others have said, this article confirms everything.
This is a perfect example of why you lack credibility and respect on this website.
Actually, this is a perfect example of why you prove your extreme bias and failure to read except selectively with every post. Here's what the summary at the top of this post states:
IF YOUR TIME IS SHORT
Black Lives Matter was founded by community organizers. One of the three co-founders said in 2015 that she and another co-founder "are trained Marxists."
Black Lives Matters has grown into a national anti-racism movement broadly supported by Americans, few of whom would identify themselves as Marxist.
... So, one of the founders did state, 5 years ago, that she and another cofounder are "trained Marxists." That, IMO, was an ignorant statement on her part that doesn't reflect well on her. What the hell is a "trained Marxist"?
However, this is 5 years in the future, and BLM is not a "Marxist" movement. It's a protest movement.
Against an inequitable criminal justice system through which black people are arrested and incarcerated in higher numbers, and which has resulted in a disproportionate number of deaths of black people in police custody.
Lots of those deaths have involved shootings, too many of which were in the back or of children. George Floyd and Eric Garner were both asphyxiated. On video, It took 9 long minutes for Floyd to die, and he told the police what was happening. They didn't listen.,
What you and other conservatives want to do is distract attention from what happened to George Floyd and what happened to too many other people of color in police custody, and discredit a righteous protest as a marxist movement because one of the leaders once claimed to be a "trained Marxist."
BLM makes you uncomfortable just like the Civil Rights Movement made white people uncomfortable in the 1950s and 1960s.
But you can't find it in your squeezing, grasping, greedy, covetous, hard and downright mean heart or your biased brain to acknowledge people have a right to be angry about a man being asphyxiated by police--effectively publicly executed--for a crime that might have involved a few months in jail. Or a man being shot in the back for having a burned out taillight and not wanting to be stopped by police. Or a kid being shot by police in a park, in such a cold-blooded manner the cop appeared to be putting an injured animal out of its misery without checking to see if it might be helped first.
You are one of the most closed, partisan and meanest posters on this board. It's all about winning the argument, and you're always right, according to you. And always Rightytightwhitey.
I'm actually grateful for guys like you, because you will inevitably push moderates out of the Republican party because of your consistent defense of systemic racism and specious accusations of Marxism against anybody who thinks the government should play a role in anything---like protecting citizens from out-of-control police who think they can murder men and women on the job and get away with it because, since the victim was black and poor, his life didn't matter. THAT is the message of Black Lives Matter. It's totally justified, but you just don't want to hear it. So you've stopped up your ears and are blatting about Marxism.
Two excerpts showing Mothra's selective reading of my politifact posts:
Excerpt 1:
In July, the New York Times reported that Black Lives Matter may be the largest movement in U.S. history, as four polls suggest that about 15 million to 26 million people in the United States have participated in demonstrations over the death of Floyd and others in recent weeks. (That does not account for similar protests overseas.)
"I am fairly convinced these are mostly attempts to smear anti-racist activists. I think in some media, 'Marxist' is dog-whistle for something horrible, like 'Nazi', and thus enables to delegitimize/dehumanize them," Miriyam Aouragh, a lecturer at the London-based Westminster School of Media and Communication, told PolitiFact. Black Lives Matter "is not an organization, but a fluid movement; it doesn't actually matter if one of its founders was a liberal, Marxist, socialist or capitalist."
Excerpt 2:
Backlash against Black Lives Matter includes branding it as Marxist . The attack has been made in recent weeks by Rudy Giuliani, President Donald Trump's personal lawyer; Ben Carson, Trump's secretary of Housing and Urban Development; conservative talk show host Mark Levin; and PragerU, which has more than 4 million Facebook followers.
Aren't sure what Marxism is, actually? It was developed by 19th century German philosopher Karl Marx and is the basis for the theory of communism and socialism. "Marxism envisioned the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism by the proletariat (working class people) and eventually a classless communist society," Encyclopedia Britannica and Oxford Reference say.
These days, Marxism usually means analyzing social change through an economic lens, with the assumption that the rich and the poor should become more equal.
In a recently surfaced 2015 interview, one of the three Black Lives Matter co-founders declared that she and another co-founder "are trained Marxists."
But the movement has grown and broadened dramatically. Many Americans, few of whom would identify as Marxists, support Black Lives Matter, drawn to its message of anti-racism.
"Regardless of whatever the professed politics of people may be who are prominent in the movement, they don't represent its breadth," said Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, Princeton University African American Studies professor and author of "From #BlackLivesMatter to Black Liberation."
"There are definitely socialists within the movement, as there have been in every single social movement in 20th century American history and today. But that does not make those socialist movements, it makes them mass movements," she said.
It is right and just to do so. BLM is rightly sceptical of a church that does not clearly see and say that black lives matter. And in this respect, BLM prophesies against the church, for the church, which is for the world.
The church must recover its revolutionary witness that God in Christ has come to overthrow every earthly kingdom. Christians should never be surprised to find that the world and church are in need of repentance and reform. God's restorative action is needed every day in every way. The church should accordingly welcome the witness of BLM and other social movements that put a spotlight on truths the church has forgotten, neglected and, in some cases, outright denied.
The Christian church should certainly stand for justice and in opposition to racism of all kinds. There are significant aspects of BLM's agenda which make it impossible for the Christian church to support that particular movement.
The problem is you don't see that BLM is a much broader movement than the leaders identified with allegedly Marxist philosophy.
BLM as a concept, as a movement, is much broader than that group, just as the Civil Rights Movement was much broader than the Marxists who were involved in it.
Your criticism of BLM is PRECISELY the same criticism thrown at the Civil Rights Movement. You're adopting the arguments racists used against Dr. King and others.
As a broad movement, the idea of BLM is something Christ followers should definitely support.
I didn't refer to the *leaders,* I referred to the *agenda* - the group's states goals. See Forest's post above -
1) "We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement " 2) "We believe that prisons, police and all other institutions that inflict violence on Black people must be abolished..." 3)""We are anti-capitalist." 4)"We deserve and thus we demand reproductive justice [aka abortion] that gives us autonomy over our bodies" 5)"We foster a queer-affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking."
This is from their website. Why should Christian's support the disruption of nuclear families or the abolition of the police?
I addressed this in an earlier post. I believe that a Christianity which has no concern for the social conditions that constrain and cripple humanity is rightly called by Marxists "'an opiate of the people," a false Gospel. Both communism in King's day and BLM in our time sound a call for Christians to enact the Gospel that announces the arrival of God's kingdom where the poor are blessed.
Two excerpts showing Mothra's selective reading of my politifact posts:
Excerpt 1:
In July, the New York Times reported that Black Lives Matter may be the largest movement in U.S. history, as four polls suggest that about 15 million to 26 million people in the United States have participated in demonstrations over the death of Floyd and others in recent weeks. (That does not account for similar protests overseas.)
"I am fairly convinced these are mostly attempts to smear anti-racist activists. I think in some media, 'Marxist' is dog-whistle for something horrible, like 'Nazi', and thus enables to delegitimize/dehumanize them," Miriyam Aouragh, a lecturer at the London-based Westminster School of Media and Communication, told PolitiFact. Black Lives Matter "is not an organization, but a fluid movement; it doesn't actually matter if one of its founders was a liberal, Marxist, socialist or capitalist."
Excerpt 2:
Backlash against Black Lives Matter includes branding it as Marxist . The attack has been made in recent weeks by Rudy Giuliani, President Donald Trump's personal lawyer; Ben Carson, Trump's secretary of Housing and Urban Development; conservative talk show host Mark Levin; and PragerU, which has more than 4 million Facebook followers.
Aren't sure what Marxism is, actually? It was developed by 19th century German philosopher Karl Marx and is the basis for the theory of communism and socialism. "Marxism envisioned the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism by the proletariat (working class people) and eventually a classless communist society," Encyclopedia Britannica and Oxford Reference say.
These days, Marxism usually means analyzing social change through an economic lens, with the assumption that the rich and the poor should become more equal.
In a recently surfaced 2015 interview, one of the three Black Lives Matter co-founders declared that she and another co-founder "are trained Marxists."
But the movement has grown and broadened dramatically. Many Americans, few of whom would identify as Marxists, support Black Lives Matter, drawn to its message of anti-racism.
"Regardless of whatever the professed politics of people may be who are prominent in the movement, they don't represent its breadth," said Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, Princeton University African American Studies professor and author of "From #BlackLivesMatter to Black Liberation."
"There are definitely socialists within the movement, as there have been in every single social movement in 20th century American history and today. But that does not make those socialist movements, it makes them mass movements," she said.
try watching the video, and explain it away after that.
They openly claim to be Marxists, and their list of demands falls perfectly in line with modern Marxism.
BLM is an anti-Christian organization, that is claiming to be anti-racist. It is NOT about racism, but is totally about pushing a Marxist agenda.
The fact that you are supporting BLM so fervently, is just further evidence of their Marxism/Anti-Christianity.
Anti BLM people like you must cling to the notion that it is anti Christian in order to ignore the myriad of ways it exposes the facile arguments of people who claim to be Christian. If BLM is anti Christian, so is the Republican Party.
Two excerpts showing Mothra's selective reading of my politifact posts:
Excerpt 1:
In July, the New York Times reported that Black Lives Matter may be the largest movement in U.S. history, as four polls suggest that about 15 million to 26 million people in the United States have participated in demonstrations over the death of Floyd and others in recent weeks. (That does not account for similar protests overseas.)
"I am fairly convinced these are mostly attempts to smear anti-racist activists. I think in some media, 'Marxist' is dog-whistle for something horrible, like 'Nazi', and thus enables to delegitimize/dehumanize them," Miriyam Aouragh, a lecturer at the London-based Westminster School of Media and Communication, told PolitiFact. Black Lives Matter "is not an organization, but a fluid movement; it doesn't actually matter if one of its founders was a liberal, Marxist, socialist or capitalist."
Excerpt 2:
Backlash against Black Lives Matter includes branding it as Marxist . The attack has been made in recent weeks by Rudy Giuliani, President Donald Trump's personal lawyer; Ben Carson, Trump's secretary of Housing and Urban Development; conservative talk show host Mark Levin; and PragerU, which has more than 4 million Facebook followers.
Aren't sure what Marxism is, actually? It was developed by 19th century German philosopher Karl Marx and is the basis for the theory of communism and socialism. "Marxism envisioned the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism by the proletariat (working class people) and eventually a classless communist society," Encyclopedia Britannica and Oxford Reference say.
These days, Marxism usually means analyzing social change through an economic lens, with the assumption that the rich and the poor should become more equal.
In a recently surfaced 2015 interview, one of the three Black Lives Matter co-founders declared that she and another co-founder "are trained Marxists."
But the movement has grown and broadened dramatically. Many Americans, few of whom would identify as Marxists, support Black Lives Matter, drawn to its message of anti-racism.
"Regardless of whatever the professed politics of people may be who are prominent in the movement, they don't represent its breadth," said Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, Princeton University African American Studies professor and author of "From #BlackLivesMatter to Black Liberation."
"There are definitely socialists within the movement, as there have been in every single social movement in 20th century American history and today. But that does not make those socialist movements, it makes them mass movements," she said.
try watching the video, and explain it away after that.
They openly claim to be Marxists, and their list of demands falls perfectly in line with modern Marxism.
BLM is an anti-Christian organization, that is claiming to be anti-racist. It is NOT about racism, but is totally about pushing a Marxist agenda.
The fact that you are supporting BLM so fervently, is just further evidence of their Marxism/Anti-Christianity.
Don't try to tar BLM with me. I've attended one march with my daughter, because she asked me to go. I'm not giving them money. I do think their movement is justified. I don't think they are Marxists. I'm tired of seeing the blizzard of discrediting talking points that also discredit the reality that black people are disproportionately targeted by the criminal justice system and too many of them are killed or injured by police or end up in jail for minor crimes or crimes they didn't commit. I'm disgusted that any Christian, especially one who believes that Jesus was unjustly executed by a rigged criminal justice system, doesn't find the way police treat black people in this country unacceptable. Instead, you and your "Christian" buddies are denying and defending those practices or trying to diminish them or saying "if only they'd cooperated." Floyd ultimately cooperated and his fear of being killed by a mean cop was realized. On camera. How can you excuse that?
Even the language of what constitutes "justice" is controversial among evangelicals. In 2018, a group of pastors led by John MacArthur, an influential white megachurch pastor in California, signed a statement decrying "social justice" and arguing against "postmodern ideologies derived from intersectionality, radical feminism, and critical race theory." It condemned "political or social activism" as not being "integral components of the gospel or primary to the mission of the church." This kind of sentiment is common among white evangelical leaders, several Black leaders who work in these spaces told me: White pastors aggressively enforce the boundaries of acceptable conversations on racism, weaponizing any position that bears even a whiff of progressive politics and slapping labels such as "social justice" and "cultural Marxism" on arguments about systemic injustice. Black leaders at predominately white organizations are careful to emphasize that caring about racism is a gospel issue.
"If it's just a social-justice thing or a cultural thing, it's easy to dismiss, because that bases the conversation in ideology," Arthur Satterwhite III, the vice president of multiethnic ministries at Young Life, a prominent youth-ministry organization, told me. Some white pastors seek out Black voices who echo their own political beliefs, Mwuara told me. "I literally had to go on social media and just say, 'Please do not send me any more Candace Owens videos,'" he said, referring to the right-wing commentator and former communications director for Turning Point USA. When pastors do this, according to Mwuara, they see it as "teaching us something that we have missed. The problem with that is that you are really discounting 90 percent of Black Americans' viewpoints."
No matter how much goodwill they may have, white evangelical leaders repeatedly say and do things that are wildly hurtful to people of color in their communities. In June, at the peak of the protests against Floyd's death, Louie Giglio, the Atlanta megachurch pastor, said in an onstage conversation with the popular hip-hop artist Lecrae and Chick-fil-A CEO Dan Cathy that the term white privilege should be replaced with white blessing to "get over the phrase" that shuts down conversations on racism. Afterward,according to The Washington Post, Lecrae stepped into his unofficial racism-consultant role, telling Giglio how uncomfortable he was with the suggestion. (Giglio laterapologized.) Last month, Jerry Falwell Jr., the president of Liberty University,tweeted an image of a face mask decorated with one person in a Ku Klux Klan robe and another in blackface. Several dozen Black alumni of Liberty University, including pastors and other Christian leaders, sent a letter expressing their outrage at his "infantile behavior." (Falwell Jr. later apologized.) Jua Robinson, a pastor who founded a multiethnic church in Boston and was one of the Liberty letter's signatories, told me he has become accustomed to seeing white Christian leaders get flummoxed by issues of race:When Robinson was in his early 20s and working on the staff of Athletes in Action, a ministry of the organization formerly known as Campus Crusade for Christ, he asked a worship leader to try playing a gospel song. She got flustered, and "basically walked away from it," he told me. "The chords may be a little different, but if you know that I'm here, and others may appreciate it, why not at least give it a try?" Robinson is often the only Black person in the room at church-related events, he said, and he is regularly asked to speak to his colleagues about race. "Some of these people don't really have relationships with people of color," he told me. "I felt like God had given me a voice and a lane and a certain level of trust."
In recent weeks, as the country has confronted the deaths of George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and other victims of racist violence, white pastors have put out statements and hosted Sunday-morning conversations about the scourge of bigotry in our nation. Yet even these good-faith efforts often indulge "the empty sentimentality that people associate with racism," Pinckney said, and focus on individual relationships and behaviors: "We need to love each other, to treat each other well." This is no accident. "Evangelical theology tends to be very personal, highly relational, and therefore, engaging issues of systems and structures becomes incredibly difficult," says Greg Jao, the director of external relations at InterVarsity, an influential ministry organization that focuses on college campuses. Many white evangelicals may be on board with the idea of banishing racism from their heart, but may not be ready to confront the policy issues, such as racist policing, that enable the kind of violence that killed George Floyd. As of 2018, 71 percent of white evangelicals believed that incidents of police officers killing Black men are isolated and not part of a broader pattern,according to a survey from the Public Religion Research Institute. "A mainly intrapersonal, friendship-based reconciliation [is] virtually powerless to change the structural and systemic inequalities along racial lines in this country," Tisby told me.
For all the energy being devoted to addressing racism in the white evangelical world, the aftermath of George Floyd's death is not necessarily a turning point in how white evangelicals think about race, several Black leaders I spoke with argued. "About every four to five years, there's a larger national-level racial conversation, and many churches will make some gesture at that," Jao told me. "Then they don't speak on it again, don't notice the things that are happening locally or nationally, until the next major explosion." One test of the effects of this summer's protests is whether they will shift conversations about race and policing in conservative political circles. Nearly one-third of white people in the United States identify as evangelicals, and a strong majority of this group is Republican. White Christians are distinctively positioned to push politicians to take this issue seriously.
Ultimately, though, the Black leaders I spoke with do their work for the sake of the church, not for political gain. "It's not the responsibility of the ordinary Black person to educate white people. That, in itself, is oppressive," says Latasha Morrison, the founder and president of Be the Bridge, an organization that trains staff at predominantly conservative, white churches and organizations on how to have conversations about race.
In Charleston, Pinckney has spent the past month toggling between competing reactions to Floyd's death: the desire to shield his two young sons from violence, to lead his church with wisdom, to punch a wall. A few years ago, Pinckney and other local pastors formed a collective, 1Charleston, to encourage churches in the city to take on conversations about racism and the gospel. His city knowsall too well the devastating effects of racist violence on the church. "I long for the day that I don't get these messages, and I don't have to talk about these things," Pinckney told me. But "the same God who called me to disciple also called me to speak out against injustice."
