Monday, November 10, 2008
"O Come Let Us Adore Him?": Plans Made For Obama Holiday
The fantacism spreads. Guess not long until we must be stamped on the right hand or forehead as well.
Thursday, November 06, 2008
Kaine Surrenders Virgina To Obama As A "Handout" State
If Ralph Nader can't use the term "Uncle Tom", why isn't the governor of Virginia saying "Old Virginny is dead" also being condemned for propogating racial stereotypes.
What The Obama Media Takeover Will Look Like
When the word Clark is mentioned, replace it with Obama.
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
So Do They Deserve Only 3 Or 4 More Now?
If it really is true that COLOR is more important than CHARACTER as we can deduce from the numerous talking heads in the media (who by the way I wonder as White people would step aside to give their own positions to "people of color" or that is only an obligation of those of us below their lofty status on the socioeconomic ladder), since Black people make up about 10% of the population, does that mean they are only entitled to 3 or 4 more of this segment of the population to hold this office?
Don't get ticked at me for pointing out the obvious as I am not the one that advocates Affirmative Action and quotas.
Fanatic Crowds Take To The Streets
One must temper this jubulation by asking had the New Messiah gone down in defeat if these zealots would have ripped to shreds the first White person they came across.
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
Deadbeats Expect Handouts From Obama
And will Welfare Peggy be badmouthed, trashed, and investigated like Joe The Plumber?
Monday, November 03, 2008
Friday, October 31, 2008
Character, Knowledge & Independent Thought Denounced As Bourgeoisie
Abraham Lincoln is credited with saying that the philosophy of the classroom in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next. If the proposals of one pedagogical theorist are implemented, students will in all likelihood never know anything about the figure believed to have uttered such an astute observation.
According to a Daily Mail story titled “Drop middle class subjects says school adviser”, in the United Kingdom, education officials are considering a proposal that would eliminate traditional academic subjects such as English, History, Science, and Geography because these disciplines are “middle class”. In the place of the old curriculum, schools will emphasize a series of “personal aims” such as energy conservation, sustainable development, and personal relationships.
Such change must be made because these “middle class values” are a holdover from the 19th century as “mere stepping stones to wealth” and “alienated many youngsters...from disadvantaged backgrounds.” These comments exhibit a desire to tear down and reconstitute more than the public education system but rather the entire society.
For example, first and foremost the remarks are a rallying cry against Western civilization’s Judeo-Christian foundations. Across Europe, the spineless and effeminate are afraid to raise their voices against Islamic encroachment for fear of radicalized adherents of this particular faith flying into homicidal hissy fits. By undermining the legitimacy of the values upon which society (and thus the educational system as part of society) rests, revolutionists hope to rebuild what they tear down in their own image.
In the Judeo-Christian worldview, the individual is imbued with considerable moral value for having been made in the image of God. However, in secular theory of education, since God is taken out of the picture, the individual loses much of his distinctive worth and becomes little more than an extension or cog of the group from which values and worth are alternatively derived.
The ultimate threat to such intentional collectivism is the ability to think and provide for oneself. In fact, part of the criticism of the traditional academic subjects is that they are "mere stepping stones to wealth."
State forbid (can't say heaven anymore since that is likely to offend some philosophical deviant), the individual (yet another ontological concept out of fashion in the New Order) that the individual should provide for himself. Rather one is to be taught reliance and dependence on the group and to aspire no higher than the station predetermined for them by committee.
In pursuit of this goal, students are instead to be taught a series of themes and personal aims such as civic responsibility, commitment to sustainable development and valuing personal relationships. Thus, students are not to be instructed in how to evaluate claims and policies made in regards to these matters but rather what to think about them.
Under the old regimen of traditional subjects, students assimilated and synthesized facts which they then utilized to weigh the different sides of an argument and then adopted the position they felt was closest to the truth. Under the new way of doing things, students are being told ahead of time what (to use a word popularized in the 1990's when this kind of nonsense percolate to the surface of mainstream pedagogical theory) "outcomes" they are to embrace.
For example, students not taught geography or science don't really know if they are being told the true state of the environment or being sold a total crock about sustainable development. Likewise, if students are not being taught the lessons of history and literature, how are they to know whether or not what they are being told presents a balanced perspective, what constitutes good citizenship, or that they are merely being brainwashed into sacrificing everything they have on the altar of the Fatherland (or rather the "Homeland" as it is becoming known as today).
Relatedly and more importantly, what if by some slim chance a student managed to transcend the intellectual shackles placed around their mind and did not embrace the presented outcomes? Will it be annotated in the student's file as has been suggested by the proponents of Outcome Based Education in this country with one's station in life no longer determined by one's talents but rather if one has embraced the values and outlooks one has been told to by elites.
Furthermore, while the educational system ought to teach students basic values such as treating others with a basic level of respect regarding person and property (what use to be called the Golden Rule and the Ten Commandments before we were told to be all jittery about mentioning God and the Bible), do we really want bureaucrats assessing whether or not our children "value personal relationships"? These days this is probably psychobabble for applauding homosexuality, shacking up outside of marriage without guilt, and additional welfare handouts for each additional mouth brought into the world as the result of such unions, thus making what usually gets tossed into the face of the disapproving as a private matter into a very public one.
Though improvement could be made in informing students as to how these subjects are applied to life beyond the classroom, the liberal arts have earned their name as those bodies of knowledge worthy of a free man. Any reform that does more than tinker around with the edges of the system that has for the most part proven itself for centuries is not about improving the life of the individual but rather about devising more efficient ways to enslave it.
by Frederick Meekins
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Monday, October 27, 2008
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Obama Exploits Dieing Grandmother As Campaign Prop
If his grandmother, who he one time referred to as a "typical White woman" (just ask Ross Perot what happens to candidates who refer to Black folks in less than fawning terms), means so much to Obama, why did he wait so many days to see her?
Makes you wonder what she was slipped or pushed down to so he could take advantage of this ready-made story.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Skinheads Adopt More Mainstream Appearance & Message
The best thing to do in these unsettled economic and social times is to basically not send money to anyone and if their is a cause you care for is to blog about it yourself. That way, you retain control over the message and ensure that your hard-earned money does not end up in the hands of snakeoil salesmen from other extremes of the spectrum of belief.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Southern Baptist Seminary Advocates The Abolition Of Freedom
From this sermon, one gets the impression the Christian is suppose to let identity thieves and aspiring tyrants to walk all over them.
Government Dishes Out More Welfare Handouts Under New Orwellian Name
Food Stamps have been renamed "Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program" in order to downplay stigma.
Maybe what is needed is a little shame to get many of these people with the gold-plated teeth and Cadillacs off the government take.
Many of these poor are not as poor as they make themselves out to be but instead spend their incomes on non-essentials or on food items higher up the food chain than where they have earned the right to eat.
Aren't The Preachers Just As Bad?
In this episode of the Albert Mohler program, guest host Russell Moore of Southern Baptist Seminary laments how American Christians are spoiled.
If so aren't the pastors just as bad or even twice as worse?
For example, you'll have preachers now whose congregations live amidst swathes of unconverted foreigners still lecturing parishoners how wretched we are for not sponsoring overseas ecclesiastical junkets.
Let offerings slack off awhile and you'll see just how unmaterialistic the clergy can be. Will there be as big of smiles plastered across their faces when it's their salaries that are cut and just not of those sitting in the pews?
And speaking of foreigners, according to Moore, those living in poverty stricken areas are somehow more inherently spiritual because the squalor in which these people live are closer to those experienced during Biblical times.
Yet if God wanted a society to remain at such subsistence levels, would He have included in His Word many of the principles (though by no means a blueprint for the "name-it-claim-it" prosperity gosepl) that do lead to increased standards of living on average?
Besides some of the foreingers I know seem to have this ability to talk spirituality one minute and then cut loose with a string of profanity and lewdness the next that would make Hugh Heffner blush.
Often among conservative Evangelicals, Brian McLaren is regarded as a dangerous subversive. However, though more orthodox than the guru of the Emerging Church movement, Russell Moore may present almost as much of a threat as he has been taken into our own midst.
by Frederick Meekins
Monday, October 20, 2008
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Price Of Olympic Gold Growing Too High
With the breakup of the Soviet Union and the alleged demise of Communism, it was assumed that the Olympic games would no longer be as much of an arena for showcasing the competing ideologies of individual liberty and nearly total social control. And even though East German woman with mustaches no longer quite raise eyebrows and hushed chuckles the way they once did, the Olympics are as much a battle for the minds of men as they have always been.
On the surface, it would be easy to conclude that the success of a country's Olympic efforts would be determined by its medal count, particularly gold. If that is the case, the world is once again presented with contrasting examples provided by the United States and Red China.
On the one hand, China won the most gold but the United States won the most medals overall if silver and bronze are also factored into the tabulation. To some athletic diehards, though, it is only the gold that counts.
A story titled "U.S. Will Be Rocked By China's Heavy Medals" by Yahoo Sports posted 8/22/08 analyzes the situation as follows: "The difficult thing for the Americans to stomach is this is unlikely to change in future games. This isn't a one-time surge by a host nation...Whether the U.S. holds on this time or not, eventually China's system, coupled with it 1.3 billion people, should be unstoppable."
Of this development, Peter Uberroth of the United States Olympic Committee said in the story, "It's going to be difficult (to dislodge China). The resources that they put toward their Olympic team and the population base and the dedication is fantastic."
Even though it is inspirational when Americans take the gold in these events and our flag and national anthem are lifted above all others for the world to see and hear, this country needs to stop and think for a moment if emulating the Chinese approach to obtain gold is really worth it. For if we do, we will have turned our backs on the values that made America --- not China --- the beacon of hope to the world.
In the United States, individuals pursue athletic glory because that is that they want to do with their lives free of state coercion. In China, there is no such choice.
In “U.S. will be rocked by China’s heavy medals”, Dan Wetzel writes, “In China, they wouldn’t have had a choice. A sports star, like the property a house is built on, is owned by the government...China selects athletes at young ages and pushed them into sports in which their expected body types might thrive. In the U.S., an athlete is allowed to follow his own path to success and failure.”
Those having embraced the communitarian outlook growing in popularity in this country that conditions us more and more into accepting the arbitrary whims of the group as superior to the prerogatives of the individual might not be able to fully grasp what this means really without explanation.
Though even in America those aspiring to athletic greatness must dedicate a seemingly inordinate amount of time to perfect their skills, often family especially in the form of parents are there in the background providing the kind of emotional and logistical support necessary to obtain this goal. However, things are quite different in China.
One report that aired on the NBC Nightly News during the course of the Olympic games showed a training facility where children no more than six or seven years old were warehoused around the clock like livestock as they were drilled in gymnastics by their Communist taskmasters. These children detained at the training camp were permitted to see their families only a couple of times per year.
Some made uncomfortable by such living arrangements that defy God’s intentions for the family of parents being the primary caretakers and source of guidance in a child’s life will try to console their consciences by positing that, even if we don’t like it, it might be the only path to a better life for these children. Even through this grueling toil, there is little chance of that.
In the United States, since the interests of the individual also carry weight and just not those of the larger group, there is emphasis (even if there are instances where the results have fallen short of this goal) of cultivating athletes capable of providing for and looking after themselves once their time in the limelight has transpired even if the life the athlete ends up with is less than the one dreamed of. However, in China where the individual is viewed primarily as a cell within the broader social organism, this aptitude is honed at the expense of other skills since under Communism the person's worth is derived from what they can contribute to the overall group or nation.
Some will argue that this is all merely the rantings of an individualistic borderline-libertarian conservative who doesn't like Communism very much reading back into all of this. However, a quote from a 5/6/07 Los Angeles Times store titled "Athletes Are Run Into The Ground In China" proves that my assessment is not all that far off the mark: "The athlete's entire training is financed by the state, and successful athletes...are considered government properties who must do as their leaders say. Their job is about gaining glory for the country, not pursuing personal interests."
Some today who have an admittedly milder and diluted philosophy similar this pounded into their heads by government, academia, and increasingly even by the nation's churches might initially respond, "What's so wrong with that" as they proceed to spout rhetoric about the wonders of community and the evils of self interest. However, in a land of over one billion people where the government owns you, once you break or are outdated by the newer model rolling off the assembly line, there is nothing to protect you from being tossed aside like yesterday's garbage.
For example, marathon runner Guo Ping thought that, once her days as an athlete were over, the government would reward her with a position as a police officer as her coach (who also beat those training under him with a whip or knocked them to the ground with the bumper of his car) promised. The coach's defense in court was that the beatings "weren't severe".
Unfortunately, such a case is not so much a rarity as it is the norm. According to a similar article titled "China's Disposable Athletes" published in the 7/17/07 issue of Time Magazine, nearly 3000 athletes retiring each year in China end up unemployed with educations barely beyond the primary level. One distraught female Chinese athlete lamented, "I gave my youth to sport, but in return, I was thrown out like garbage with no knowledge, no skill, and a barren womb."
However, the liberal media is only willing to take its critique of world socialism so far. It has been jokingly said that the few remaining Communists in the world can be found on American college campuses; however these subversives and their fellow travelers can still be found in many more places, especially among the ranks of prestigious journalists
For instead of blaming these outrages on the systematic dehumanization inherent to all forms of collectivism, the Times article says, "The root of Zou's troubles, like so many things in China today, can be traced back to the country's wholesale adoption of capitalism."
Are you going to tell me things were hunky-doory under Communism when millions were starving to death and the hungry resorted to cannibalism? Are you going to tell me it's Capitalism's fault today that house church pastors rot in prison?
What links each and everyone of these is a fundamental devaluation of the individual.
Frankly, if that is what it takes to excel in the Olympic games of the 21st century, perhaps the United States should be proud of its diminished Olympic prospects.
Dan Wetzel writes, "In the U.S., the athlete's goal is most often himself," and in appraising the decision of an athlete that pursues opportunities other than the Olympics, "No one in their right mind in the States would expect him to do anything else." Who needs a gold-plated trinket when you can buy the real thing?
by Frederick Meekins
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Baseball Player Denounced For Enjoying Spam
Food police step up their patrols to control our dietary lives.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Monday, October 13, 2008
Wednesday, October 08, 2008
Ministry Shames Women Into Selling Their Wedding Rings
If someone wants to sell their wedding ring for charity, that is their business. However, I don't think this should be institutionalized to the point where there will eventually develop an attitude where woman that do not part with this cherished keepsake of their nuptuals will be seen as less spiritual than those who do in a manner similar nowadays in Christian schools where there is almost two tiers of students with those considering careers in missions and such as somehow beeing seen as more holy than those contemplating more "secular" occupations.
Hypertolerant Africans Deport Corsi At Gunpoint & Tell Him "See You In Hell"
From missionary propaganda the average Christian is often told how morally superior and kinder those hailing from the Dark Continent are than the average westerner. So when are we start going to kick out unwelcome foreigners?
Monday, October 06, 2008
What Part Of "Shall Not Be Infringed" Don't You Understand, Senator?
In her brief time in the national spotlight, Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin, if nothing else, has rejuvenated the debate in this country regarding certain fundamental values. Interestingly, not all of this stems directly from the candidate's spoken statements but rather from a number of comments made about her by her Democratic counterpart Senator Joseph Biden.
From comments made on Fox and Friends mentioned in an Associated Press article titled “Biden says Palin family is off limits to critics”, voters learn that, to the Delaware Senator, government and politics are the ultimate and perhaps only source of values, truth, and hope.
In analyzing Palin’s acceptance speech, Biden remarked, “I didn’t hear the phrase ‘middle class’ mentioned. I didn’t hear a word about healthcare. I didn’t hear a word about what we’re going to do about the housing crisis, college education, and all the things that the middle class is being burdened by now.”
Maybe these things were not mentioned because for the most part they are not much of the government’s business. If anything, government involvement for the most part tends to exacerbate the problems in these perplexing areas.
For example, why is it the government’s responsibility (and thus ultimately the taxpayer’s) to bail you out of bad real estate investments? By subsidizing education to such an extent where it is available to just about everyone whether they really want it or not, its value has been undermined to the point where a bachelor’s degree may actually signify less actual learning than a high school diploma from previous generations.
Traditionally each social sphere oversaw the affairs in its own domain and exercised caution when venturing into the waters overseen by the neighboring spheres (especially if the one doing the intruding was the government). However, to liberals such as Biden, now as the government reaches into additional corners of our lives in the name of supposedly making our lives better, ultimately government and politics will be the only sphere that remains or be the sphere that ends up controlling all the others even it terms of the attitudes that these institutions will be permitted to express.
If the Obama campaign wants to refrain from commenting on the propriety of the daughter of a Vice Presidential candidate being expectant with child outside the bounds of marriage, that is the prerogative of the Obama campaign. After all, there are platoons of the far more deviant in the Democratic Party such as Chelsea Clinton who has been shacked up for years living in what used to be called “sin”.
However, though Obama might think he hands down stone tablets from on high with Biden taking them to the people as some kind of 21st century Moses, to say what the press and the people can and cannot discuss hints at a theoretical usurpation of the First Amendment even more offensive than an out of wedlock pregnancy or a recalcitrant segment of the public that does not sweep under the rug the moral values they have been taught simply because they have become an inconvenience to the elites that have set themselves up on a level above the rest of us.
The American people, through opinion-forming institutions such as the media, churches and now the blogosphere, must be the ones to decide for themselves this weighty ethical concern. For while the only right decision is to keep the baby, there are some so progressive in their outlook that they would ship to a Khmer Rouge-style reeducation camp anyone that does not reflexively embrace these new reproductive fads where the baby shower. To some of us, to takes a while to debate the consequences for any potential parental shortcomings when minors become parents before they properly ought.
There is indeed forgiveness and restoration in Christ. However, most of the time those stepping into these challenges are not up for consideration for one of the nation’s most solemn offices.
by Frederick Meekins
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Monday, September 29, 2008
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Women A Bad Christian If They Don't View Themselves As Baby Machines
More of the same from the Swansonite sect.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Is Albert Mohler Losing His Spine
While Dr. Mohler is to be commended for tackling the new spate of cussing clergy, in other respects it seems at times he may be losing his spine.
Earlier this year, he condemned Ann Coulter for her remarks about John Edwards (laregley in part because Edwards is married and Coulter, insinuating that somehow this makes Edwards a better Christian despite not honoring marriage vows). And now, Mohler has repented around the 28 minuted mark of the above broadcast for calling the British royal family "spectacularly maladjusted".
If we are to go into apoplexy over something that trivial, the culture war is already lost.
Much of Mohler's ministry centers around the need to return to sterotypical gender roles. If that is the case, Mohler should talk like a man and not like a pious but overly fastidious grandmother.
by Frederick Meekins
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
European Parliament Seeks To Scrub Out Mr. Clean
The old biddy making the fuss over this is named "Honeyball". One couldn't come up with a better named for a new James Bond sourpuss.
Ray Boltz Claims God Made Him Gay
Can the polygamous invoke the same excuse?
Found it interesting how Al Mohler blamed the Evangelical community for the singer keeping this a secret for so long.
Rather, could it have been that Boltz did so because his own conscience knew what he wanted was wrong?
Monday, September 22, 2008
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Into The Heart Of Darkness, Part 1
Senator Barack Obama has captured the world's attention unlike almost any other political figure of the era in which we live. However, despite all the theatrics surrounding the candidate and the almost messianic adoration displayed on the part of his followers, very few can possible tell you what he actually believes other than in "change", which, though sounding like everything you ever dreamed of, can actually consist of the stuff of nightmares.
Discerning Americans caught an early glimpse of what was beneath the facade of intoxicating rhetoric when it became more widely disseminated what Obama's spiritual mentor Jeremiah Wright actually believed and what Obama had to have soaked up philosophically during the formative years of his early adulthood. Devoted acolytes will respond that his holiness has distanced himself from such racialism.
David Duke made similar claims during the early to mid 90's until falling back into similar patterns of extremist thought. So if few believed Duke back then, why should we extend the benefit of the doubt to Obama now since a leopard seldom changes its spots?
Before the Jeremiah Wright incident, many White Christians felt considerable guilt over the constant harangue invoked by the more liberal among the clergy about 11 o'clock Sunday morning being the most segregated hour of the week. However, with the exposure of the disease of Black liberation theology eating away at the heart of many Black churches, it has turned out that any sincere Christian irrespective of their ethnic background ought to be cautious about entering these "synagogues of Satan" as Scripture itself calls such hovels of doctrinal compromise.
By more closely examining what liberation theologians actually expound and what is mediated to the broader public by politicians such as Barack Obama, one realizes that the threat posed by this pseudo-messiah and false prophet goes much deeper than the lamentable historical animosities between the races. And even though this animosity against what this great country was built upon goes much deeper than race and ethnicity, it is the jumping off point into the radical circles in which Obama is being heralded as an almost messianic figure.
Many Americans of goodwill no doubt think Jeremiah Wright and his warped theology are a rare aberration on the American religious radar screen. His kind of outlook is actually more widespread than one might actually think.
To many of the influential in Black ecclesiastical circles, the problem was not so much with what Jeremiah Wright said but rather that Whitey found out a bit about what was being planned for him among those whose ultimate loyalty is not to the God of the universe and His revealed word but instead to race as a manifestation of the COMMUNITY. Most American Christians steeped in commonsense and the truths of the Bible would consider the things espoused by Jeremiah Wright beyond the bounds of propriety; however, the assessment of liberals is considerably different.
According to an article in the 5/5/08 edition of The Nation titled "The Liberation Of Reverend Wright" by Eudora Smith, Wright's elocutionary peeks such as "God damn America" represent the "rhetorical traditions [that] meld biblical allegory with contemporary political concerns and whose sanctuaries provide a rare space where a collective black racial consciousness can be expressed uncensored by others." I don't remember Italians being referred to as long-nosed garlic eaters as part of the Biblical literary heritage. Eudora Smith continues, "It may surprise many in white America...that there are a lot of Jeremiah Wrights out there..."
Perhaps even more frightening than that there is a kook like Jeremiah Wright espousing the kinds of things that he does is that there are so many that believe as he does or look to him as an honorable man of God. Many simply excuse Wrights preaching, according to an MSNBC.com article titled "NYT: Black Churches In NC Torn Over Wright" as "a prophetic style that combines spiritual guidance with often harsh social criticism that has its roots in Old Testament prophets."
The reflections of a number of Wright's supporters are documented in a 5/11/08 Baltimore Sun article titled "Black Preachers Agree To Disagree." However, from the article, the disagreement is not so much with Wright's message but that the world found out about it before their pony Obama won the horse race and it would have been to late for America to do anything about it until the next election.
Rev. Johnny Golden of New Unity Ministries told the Baltimore Sun, "We see a lot of what he is saying and we understand it, but his comments have wounded the opportunity of Mr. Obama to make gains and opportunity for America to embrace his ideals."
Rev. Marshall Prentice of Zion Baptist Church went even further in his support for Wright when he told the Baltimore Sun, "To attack any pastor for what he says from the pulpit is an attack on all pastors. Whatever we say on a given Sunday, we truly believe is given to us by inspiration of God."
Oh really? There is a cultic movement known as Christian Identity that is essentially a religious form of Nazism; if someone claims to be a pastor within that pernicious sect and disseminates their poison from behind a pulpit, by the standard advocated in the previous quote, are we as mere laymen permitted to speak out against such error?
Protestantism broke with Roman Catholicism largely in part over the realization that clergy are not infallible and that there must be an objective standard that exists above the mere opinions of man even if we as finite individuals do not yet understand the entirety of the divine plumline. However, leftist denominations such as the United Church of Christ of which Wright is a part hold that Scripture is no more a definitive rule of faith and practice than any other piece of religious literature. So when clergy speak to matters beyond and that even blatantly contradict revelation’s scope, why should the Christian in the pew have to defer to someone just because they wear a clerical collar?
Such nonsense may be rife within denominations dominated by African American religionists. Yet as a group largely Protestant in orientation, one ought to expect rigorous pastors and theologians to protect Evangelicalism against such doctrinal toxins as expounded by the likes of Jeremiah Wright. However, the same spirit of relativism and timidity infecting the rest of our culture now paralyzes some of Evangelicalism’s foremost institutions simply because the heretic making the claims happens to be an ethnic minority.
Christianity Today was initially founded as a conservative alternative to more liberal religious periodicals such as Christian Century and Sojourners. If that is the case, its founder Carl Henry must be rolling over in his grave.
Eager to achieve the appellation of “relevant” as did the Social Gospel and Death of God movements from previous generations, insecure Evangelicals are quick to latch onto any intellectual fad that comes along (especially if it happens to be anti-American as of late). And since all things Obama are all the rage, the editors of Christianity Today can’t help but get on the bandwagon by posting sympathetic viewpoints.
According to the article titled “Jeremiah Wright, Evangelicals’ Brother In Christ”, the disputed pastor is no worse than John Hagee and ought to be accepted as one of our own. But what exactly does Jeremiah Wright believe? Shouldn’t we examine this before we extend him unreservedly the hand of fellowship?
The theology espoused by Jeremiah Wright is known as “Black liberation theology”. However, there is more to this than Black people wanting to go to church predominately with other Black people. Even those who painstakingly go out of their way to avoid making distinctions between right and wrong are forced to admit there was something profoundly incorrect going on at Wright’s church.
According to the 5/12/08 edition of Newsweek, Oprah Winfrey use to be a member of Wright’s church not so much out of theological conviction but rather because she simply wanted to go to a Black church. Before we return to the primary thrust of this analysis, that admission is of such significance that it needs to be examined a bit further as it expresses a mindset relevant to this essay.
If a Black person wants to make being around other Black people their highest priority even above fidelity to God Himself, liberals and multiculturalists don’t have a problem with it. However, if White folks are reluctant to go back to Black churches not so much because of anything against Black people per say but because what rational White person is going to want to sit week after week hearing sermons that do not exposit the Word of God for our daily lives but rather how wretched White people. And furthermore quite frankly, in many Black churches, the congregation can’t simply sing in the pews but must also jump over them and roll around in the aisles.
For refusing to patronize such ecclesiastical confusion, we get lengthy lectures how we are all one big human family. But even in families, don’t siblings enjoy different ways of relating to their father? One might enjoy going with him to the duck pond while the other prefers taking him to car shows; does there really need to be all that much hand-ringing about these things being enjoyed separately?
Since Oprah Winfrey ultimately worships Oprah Winfrey (a claim backed by her embrace of Eckart Tolle), Oprah realized her own deification among the masses of ignorant feminists with too much money would be at stake if she bent her knee to a false god other than herself. So she parted.
There is more to Black liberation theology than looking to Christ to free individuals from their sins. In fact, a traditional Jesus plays a very small role in this worldview and the individual is valued even less as one is only important as part of the larger group or COMMUNITY.
John 3:16 tells us, “For God so loved the world, that He gave us His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” However, to Black liberationists, this most fundamental of Gospel Scriptures contains nothing but error.
According to a WorldNetDaily.com story titled "Christians Copy Christ Killers Says Obama's Pastor's Magazine", Jesus doesn't really love the little children, not the Red, nor the Yellow, and the White ones especially aren't really so precious in His site after all. According to theologians subscribing to this school of thought such as Jeremiah Wright and James Cone, Jesus came only for Black people.
Cone is quoted as saying in the WorldNetDaily article, "The black theologian must reject any conception of God which stifles black self determination by picturing God as the God of all peoples. Either God is identified with the oppressed to the point that their experience becomes God's experience, or God is a God of racism."
Thus, one is a racist if one DOES NOT show preferential treatment towards Black people. It must be noted that this is not the only kind of double standard advocated by those in Jeremiah Wright's circles.
In orthodox Christian theology, since all races and ethnic groups are equal ontologically or biologically even if the ways certain cultures manifest themselves are better than others, particular standards and expectations can be applied to individuals irrespective of their background. However, if one follows the thought of Jeremiah Wright to its logical conclusion, then Black folks should not have to adhere to so-called "White man's law".
In his remarks before a 2008 NAACP anniversary dinner, Jeremiah Wright contended that European-American children are "left-brained" in that they are logical and analytical whereas African-American children are "right-brained" making them creative and intuitive. On the surface, such theorizing does not really sound like all that big of a deal as often different ethnic groups tend to excel at specific things. But one must ask the question what will this alleged bit of scholarship be invoked to justify in terms of public policy.
Wright quips in his NAACP remarks, "When they [public schools] were desegregated in Philadelphia, several of the white teachers in my school freaked out. Why? Because black kids wouldn't stay in their place. Over there behind the desk, black kids climbed up all on them."
In other words, since their brains process information differently, it is unacceptable to expect Black people to abide by the same set of expectations White folks are expected to adhere to. Why, how dare you expect order in the hallways of America's inner city public schools!!! You're a racist if you expect Black children to sit there and conduct themselves in a disciplined and studious manner.
Think I am exaggerating? Both the American Enterprise and Washington Post Magazines have run stories in the past where White teachers were categorized as racist for not having a big smile plastered across their faces about minority children labeled as learning disabled rampaging as they wished in the classrooms of these respective teachers.
Where does this line of reasoning end? If it is discovered that Blacks have a more difficult time curtailing the compulsions driving one towards reproduction, does that mean we are just suppose to keep handing out the welfare checks and Food Stamps without nary a word of rebuke about the moral decay gripping our nation where the unmarried don’t simply have one child outside of marriage and learn from their mistake but irresponsibly continue having one child after the other without a trip to the altar?
If it is proved that the “Black brain” has a greater propensity towards violence, does that mean we may not condemn the warlike conditions plaguing our city streets? If one takes Black liberation theology to its logical conclusion, even if Jeremiah Wright won’t admit to it publicly, according to this warped worldview it might not even be wrong to put a bullet in Whitey’s head and take his property; some might even call it an act of love or (as Jeremiah Wright said in his NAACP remarks) “just different”.
In the history of Communism, Marx is remembered as the thinker providing much of that philosophy’s theoretical basis whereas Lenin was the politician who implemented these doctrines into an actual political situation with slight adaptations. Likewise, Jeremiah Wright contributes significantly to the ideological foundation that Barack Obama would build upon whether the candidate is willing to admit to it or not.
by Frederick Meekins
Thursday, September 18, 2008
PCA Minister Won't Make Definitive Defense Of 24 Hour Creation Days
At this presbyterian church I use to attend, they wouldn't take much of a stand against boozing either but certainly got hissy and dogmatic about membership.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Swansonites Contend Women Should Be Second Class Politically
According to this Generations Radio broadcast, women should not be involved politically but should instead cook dinner and have kids.
By criticizing Palin's baracuda nickname, Swanson insinuates women should be walked all over politically rather than speak out from a conservative perspective.
This society has been so screwed up by reprobate men AND women don't we need every voice of reason to take a stand against the threats both from within and without that treaten this great nation?
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Salman Rushdie Categorizes 9/11 Attacks As Brilliant
This is the literary pottymouth we were all suppose to feel sorry for because the Ayatollah Khomeni had issed a fatwa calling for the death of for publishing a novel parodying Muhammad.
Frankly, if he is applauding the death of innocent people, why should we get all weepy should Islamist violence befall him now?
Monday, September 15, 2008
Will Haydron Collider Open A Gateway Into Hell?
Tom Horn and Steve Quayle examine the occultic symbology of the CERN organization such as its Hindu mascot and the resemblance of its insignia of three sixes.