Why cant those left of center be honest on this one?

[Bob]

It is shocking to me that Dems make excuses for racism when one of their own has been exposed. Republicans do the same thing – when I guy like Larry Craig does something, they turn a blind eye, but get all freaked out over Governor Spitzer. You can still like a guy’s policies, but remain intellectually consistent. Below is an interesting article, that happens to have been written by an African American on the under-pinning’s of Obama’s church. Try to read with an open mind --

What is Black Liberation Theology?

Wright's Black Liberation Theology
By Anthony B. Bradley

What is Black liberation theology anyway? Barrack Obama's former pastor, Jeremiah Wright catapulted black liberation theology onto a national stage, when America discovered Trinity United Church of Christ. Understanding the background of the movement might give better clarity into Wright's recent vitriolic preaching. A clear definition of Black theology was first given formulation in 1969 by the National Committee of Black Church Men in the midst of the civil-rights movement:

"Black theology is a theology of black liberation. It seeks to plumb the black condition in the light of God's revelation in Jesus Christ, so that the black community can see that the gospel is commensurate with the achievements of black humanity. Black theology is a theology of 'blackness.' It is the affirmation of black humanity that emancipates black people from White racism, thus providing authentic freedom for both White and black people. It affirms the humanity of White people in that it says 'No' to the encroachment of White oppression."

In the 1960s, Black churches began to focus their attention beyond helping Blacks cope with national racial discrimination particularly in urban areas.

The notion of "Blackness" is not merely a reference to skin color, but rather is a symbol of oppression that can be applied to all persons of color who have a history of oppression (except Whites, of course). So in this sense, as Wright notes, "Jesus was a poor black man" because he lived in oppression at the hands of "rich White people." The overall emphasis of Black liberation theology is the Black struggle for liberation from various forms of "White racism" and oppression.

James Cone, the chief architect of black liberation theology in his book A Black Theology of Liberation (1970), develops Black theology as a system. In this new formulation, Christian theology is a theology of liberation--"a rational study of the being of God in the world in light of the existential situation of an oppressed community, relating the forces of liberation to the essence of the gospel, which is Jesus Christ," writes Cone. Black consciousness and the Black experience of oppression orient black liberation theology--i.e., one of victimization from White oppression.

One of the tasks of Black theology, says Cone, is to analyze the nature of the gospel of Jesus Christ in light of the experience of oppressed Blacks. For Cone, no theology is Christian theology unless it arises from oppressed communities and interprets Jesus' work as that of liberation. Christian theology is understood in terms of systemic and structural relationships between two main groups: victims (the oppressed) and victimizers (oppressors). In Cone's context, writing in the late 1960s and early 1970s, the great event of Christ's liberation was freeing African Americans from the centuries-old tyranny of White racism and White oppression.

American White theology, which Cone never clearly defines, is charged with having failed to help Blacks in the struggle for liberation. Black theology exists because "White religionists" failed to relate the gospel of Jesus to the pain of being Black in a White racist society.

For Black theologians White Americans do not have the ability to recognize the humanity in persons of color, Blacks need their own theology to affirm their identity in terms of a reality that is anti-Black--Blackness stands for all victims of White oppression. "White theology," when formed in isolation from the Black experience, becomes a theology of White oppressors, serving as divine sanction from criminal acts committed against Blacks. Cone argues that even those White theologians who try to connect theology to Black suffering rarely utter a word that is relevant to the Black experience in America. White theology is not Christian theology at all. There is but one guiding principle of Black theology: an unqualified commitment to the Black community as that community seeks to define its existence in the light of God's liberating work in the world.

As such, Black theology is a survival theology because it helps Blacks navigate White dominance in American culture. In Cone's view, Whites consider Blacks animals, outside of the realm of humanity, and attempted to destroy Black identity through racial assimilation and integration programs--as if Blacks have no legitimate existence apart from Whiteness. Black theology is the theological expression of a people deprived of social and political power. God is not the God of White religion but the God of Black existence. In Cone's understanding, truth is not objective but subjective--a personal experience of the Ultimate in the midst of degradation.

The echoes of Cone's theology bled through, the now infamous, anti-Hilary excerpt by Rev. Wright. Clinton is among the oppressing class ("rich White people") and is incapable of understanding oppression ("ain't never been called a n-gg-r") but Jesus knows what it was like because he was "a poor black man" oppressed by "rich White people." While black liberation theology is not main stream in most black churches, many pastors in Wright's generation are burdened by Cone's categories which laid the foundation for many to embrace Marxism and a distorted self-image of perpetual "victim" which we be explored in the next two columns.

Anthony B. Bradley is a research fellow at the Acton Institute, and assistant professor of theology at Covenant Theological Seminary in St. Louis. His PhD dissertation is titled, "Victimology in Black Liberation Theology."

[Rohirrim]

I find it hard to believe that an intelligent man like Barack Obama could sit still for that bs. That **** is right up their with L. Ron Hubbard.

[TexanBob]

I would disagree with your assertion that Republicans didn't care about the indescretions of Larry Craig. Many wanted him out and did their best to pressure him to leave but realized eventually he wasn't going to leave so they moved on. Besides, he is not running for reelection so he'll be gone as of January '09 anyway. Meanwhile, Mark Foley resigned immediately or there would have been major pressure from Republicans for him to resign.

Yes, you can probably cite Republicans who did not get pressure from the right to resign but, in general, they do a better job of policing their own than Democrats do.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by TexanBob

I would disagree with your assertion that Republicans didn't care about the indescretions of Larry Craig. Many wanted him out and did their best to pressure him to leave but realized eventually he wasn't going to leave so they moved on. Besides, he is not running for reelection so he'll be gone as of January '09 anyway. Meanwhile, Mark Foley resigned immediately or there would have been major pressure from Republicans for him to resign.

Yes, you can probably cite Republicans who did not get pressure from the right to resign but, in general, they do a better job of policing their own than Democrats do.

That's because those on the Left tend not to see sexual acts between consenting adults as a crime.

[Bladerunner]

I'm left of center and I'm honest about it...it sounds like victimization with a Christianity flavor applied. Even if the terms Black and White are to be taken as pure metaphores for oppressed and oppressor, Rev. White's interjection of this language into the Democratic debate certainly illuminates him as someone I am totally out of political alignment with. The question remains for me whether or not the same is true for Barack Obama.

[Bronco Jamus]

Anybody remember the party that tried to keep the black man from voting during and after radical reconstruction in the south?

Yep. Democrats.

[footstepsfrom#27]

As a white guy who is a member of a very well known and respected black church with a congregation of about 10,000 here in Dallas, I've been uniquely exposed to just about every conceivable theological viewpoint that resides in the black church overr the last 10 years.

Although my church is NOT a subscriber to black liberation theology (we hosted George Bush there twice)...ugh...I've encountered many people who do follow these ideas in my own congregation and because I've attended church elsewhere about two dozen times, often where these ideas are favored. I have NEVER failed to be welcomed with open arms EVERYWHERE I've visited. A few years ago when I was in some dire financial straights and unable to work, it was the churches...specifically the BLACK churches that helped me financially get back on my feet. Guess who would not help? Right...the wealthier WHITE churches in suburbia. Black churches often helped me even out of their own poverty.

The fact of the matter is, as a seminary trained Christian, though I disagree with the theological viewpoint that finds Israel's captivity in Egypt as representative of the plight of blacks in America today, or Jesus as a black man, I none the less completely agree that the white Christian church in America has turned a blind eye and a deaf ear to the plight of both the poor in general and blacks specifically. This is the reason that black liberation theology has found merit with so many poor African Americans in the first place. This ignornace and apathy of one of the great injustices in our society has long historical roots, and continues today, sometimes by design, but most often by simple ignorance. White evangelicals have done little or nothing to assist black congregations, form relationships with black Christians or interact with thier problems on any kind of scale that resembles more than the occassional exception...a fact that I consider amazing given the fact that the unity of the body of Christ is commanded by the Apostle Paul who specifically states that the old bariers of race and ethnicity are disolved in Christ, that these human barriers that once prevented unity are to be considered done away with.

The single greatest testimony to the love of God that white and black Christians profess to have in front of an unbelieving world is not going to be found in forcing your political views or your morality on the rest of society, or in how large your congregation is or how dynamic your arguments for Christianity are. Jesus said, "By THIS shall all men know you are my disciples, if you have love one for another". The single most powerful testimony to the world by the church would be found in it's deliberate willingness to come together across racial lines and do away with the racial, social and cultural barriers that seperate us in the face of societal pressure to do otherwise. But the church has not done that, and in fact has steadfastly refused to do this in this country.

Black liberation theology was born out of the refusal of the larger church...the WHITE church...in America to accept black members into their congregations or welcome them as equals. There are churches that do so, but historically these have remained few in number. The idea that the black church wil find acceptance amongst themselves, that they'll take responsibility for their own problems in their own communities...that part of black liberatin theology is no more racist than the reality of white churches in suburbia that focus their attention on the people who live arouond them...usually white, usually middle class, usually culturally consistent with the churches membership.

This is not racism. It's the response to racism, and if you don't understand that it's because you've never been inside a black church, never taken the time to find out how black people worship, how they feel about the larger world around them or their relationship to white Christianity. The views in this forum make that abundantly obvious.

[Arkie]

Obama could care less about Black Liberation Theology.

[Bladerunner]

Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27

As a white guy who is a member of a very well known and respected black church with a congregation of about 10,000 here in Dallas, I've been uniquely exposed to just about every conceivable theological viewpoint that resides in the black church overr the last 10 years.

Although my church is NOT a subscriber to black liberation theology (we hosted George Bush there twice)...ugh...I've encountered many people who do follow these ideas in my own congregation and because I've attended church elsewhere about two dozen times, often where these ideas are favored. I have NEVER failed to be welcomed with open arms EVERYWHERE I've visited. A few years ago when I was in some dire financial straights and unable to work, it was the churches...specifically the BLACK churches that helped me financially get back on my feet. Guess who would not help? Right...the wealthier WHITE churches in suburbia. Black churches often helped me even out of their own poverty.

The fact of the matter is, as a seminary trained Christian, though I disagree with the theological viewpoint that finds Israel's captivity in Egypt as representative of the plight of blacks in America today, or Jesus as a black man, I none the less completely agree that the white Christian church in America has turned a blind eye and a deaf ear to the plight of both the poor in general and blacks specifically. This is the reason that black liberation theology has found merit with so many poor African Americans in the first place. This ignornace and apathy of one of the great injustices in our society has long historical roots, and continues today, sometimes by design, but most often by simple ignorance. White evangelicals have done little or nothing to assist black congregations, form relationships with black Christians or interact with thier problems on any kind of scale that resembles more than the occassional exception...a fact that I consider amazing given the fact that the unity of the body of Christ is commanded by the Apostle Paul who specifically states that the old bariers of race and ethnicity are disolved in Christ, that these human barriers that once prevented unity are to be considered done away with.

The single greatest testimony to the love of God that white and black Christians profess to have in front of an unbelieving world is not going to be found in forcing your political views or your morality on the rest of society, or in how large your congregation is or how dynamic your arguments for Christianity are. Jesus said, "By THIS shall all men know you are my disciples, if you have love one for another". The single most powerful testimony to the world by the church would be found in it's deliberate willingness to come together across racial lines and do away with the racial, social and cultural barriers that seperate us in the face of societal pressure to do otherwise. But the church has not done that, and in fact has steadfastly refused to do this in this country.

Black liberation theology was born out of the refusal of the larger church...the WHITE church...in America to accept black members into their congregations or welcome them as equals. There are churches that do so, but historically these have remained few in number. The idea that the black church wil find acceptance amongst themselves, that they'll take responsibility for their own problems in their own communities...that part of black liberatin theology is no more racist than the reality of white churches in suburbia that focus their attention on the people who live arouond them...usually white, usually middle class, usually culturally consistent with the churches membership.

This is not racism. It's the response to racism, and if you don't understand that it's because you've never been inside a black church, never taken the time to find out how black people worship, how they feel about the larger world around them or their relationship to white Christianity. The views in this forum make that abundantly obvious.

I've little doubt that this is largely true, but I find the generalization of today's white society as oppressors to be alienating, and I have a far thicker skin for such ideas than most in my experience. This is why this is a political grenade for Obama...I'm sure he's hoping its a dud.

[Bob]

Originally Posted by TexanBob

I would disagree with your assertion that Republicans didn't care about the indescretions of Larry Craig. Many wanted him out and did their best to pressure him to leave but realized eventually he wasn't going to leave so they moved on. Besides, he is not running for reelection so he'll be gone as of January '09 anyway. Meanwhile, Mark Foley resigned immediately or there would have been major pressure from Republicans for him to resign.

Yes, you can probably cite Republicans who did not get pressure from the right to resign but, in general, they do a better job of policing their own than Democrats do.

I guess I am just damn tired when we give party members passes, and then jump all over someone when thier ideological framework doesnt matchup.

[Bob]

Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27

As a white guy who is a member of a very well known and respected black church with a congregation of about 10,000 here in Dallas, I've been uniquely exposed to just about every conceivable theological viewpoint that resides in the black church overr the last 10 years.

Although my church is NOT a subscriber to black liberation theology (we hosted George Bush there twice)...ugh...I've encountered many people who do follow these ideas in my own congregation and because I've attended church elsewhere about two dozen times, often where these ideas are favored. I have NEVER failed to be welcomed with open arms EVERYWHERE I've visited. A few years ago when I was in some dire financial straights and unable to work, it was the churches...specifically the BLACK churches that helped me financially get back on my feet. Guess who would not help? Right...the wealthier WHITE churches in suburbia. Black churches often helped me even out of their own poverty.

The fact of the matter is, as a seminary trained Christian, though I disagree with the theological viewpoint that finds Israel's captivity in Egypt as representative of the plight of blacks in America today, or Jesus as a black man, I none the less completely agree that the white Christian church in America has turned a blind eye and a deaf ear to the plight of both the poor in general and blacks specifically. This is the reason that black liberation theology has found merit with so many poor African Americans in the first place. This ignornace and apathy of one of the great injustices in our society has long historical roots, and continues today, sometimes by design, but most often by simple ignorance. White evangelicals have done little or nothing to assist black congregations, form relationships with black Christians or interact with thier problems on any kind of scale that resembles more than the occassional exception...a fact that I consider amazing given the fact that the unity of the body of Christ is commanded by the Apostle Paul who specifically states that the old bariers of race and ethnicity are disolved in Christ, that these human barriers that once prevented unity are to be considered done away with.

The single greatest testimony to the love of God that white and black Christians profess to have in front of an unbelieving world is not going to be found in forcing your political views or your morality on the rest of society, or in how large your congregation is or how dynamic your arguments for Christianity are. Jesus said, "By THIS shall all men know you are my disciples, if you have love one for another". The single most powerful testimony to the world by the church would be found in it's deliberate willingness to come together across racial lines and do away with the racial, social and cultural barriers that seperate us in the face of societal pressure to do otherwise. But the church has not done that, and in fact has steadfastly refused to do this in this country.

Black liberation theology was born out of the refusal of the larger church...the WHITE church...in America to accept black members into their congregations or welcome them as equals. There are churches that do so, but historically these have remained few in number. The idea that the black church wil find acceptance amongst themselves, that they'll take responsibility for their own problems in their own communities...that part of black liberatin theology is no more racist than the reality of white churches in suburbia that focus their attention on the people who live arouond them...usually white, usually middle class, usually culturally consistent with the churches membership.

This is not racism. It's the response to racism, and if you don't understand that it's because you've never been inside a black church, never taken the time to find out how black people worship, how they feel about the larger world around them or their relationship to white Christianity. The views in this forum make that abundantly obvious.

Very thoughtful response –

You are correct, that it may be (in part) a response to racism – but there comes a point when that response is at best a reflection of the bigotry that has existed in America for generations. In the case of the underpinnings of Black Liberation theology, and holding to bizarre, and I dare say paranoid concepts like the American government created Aids in a genocidal attempt to wipe out blacks – it crosses the line of reaction, to amplification of hate and bigotry.
Just because someone has wronged me, doesn’t mean, I become justified in responding in kind, or doing something worse – I think that might be something Jesus taught about at some point….hmmm.

[Bob]

Originally Posted by Arkie

Obama could care less about Black Liberation Theology.

But his pastor believes in it, and Obama allowed his family to be subjected to it for 20 years...

[Bob]

Originally Posted by Bladerunner

I've little doubt that this is largely true, but I find the generalization of today's white society as oppressors to be alienating, and I have a far thicker skin for such ideas than most in my experience. This is why this is a political grenade for Obama...I'm sure he's hoping its a dud.

I dont think so --- who else is going to get the nod -- Hilary cant win can she? If she gets the Superdeligates -- people will be pissed -- and I guess I would be pissed too.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Bob

Why cant those left of center be honest on this one?

I'm sorry, but a lecture on honesty or integrity from a republican and a Bush supporter is just too funny.

Even if all of your accusations about Obama are legit, you still come off like a guy who is "outraged" about a shoplifter stealing a pack of chewing gum while a bank robbery is going on right next door to your house.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Poll suggests Obama unscathed by pastor controversy

The poll was taken Monday and Tuesday, a week after Obama's landmark speech on race in America in which he criticized his former pastor Jeremiah Wright's comments on racism and US foreign policy, but declined to denounce him.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080327...e_080327095321

[W*GS]

LABF is turning into an Obamaniac.

[Bob]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

I'm sorry, but a lecture on honesty or integrity from a republican and a Bush supporter is just too funny.

Even if all of your accusations about Obama are legit, you still come off like a guy who is "outraged" about a shoplifter stealing a pack of chewing gum while a bank robbery is going on right next door to your house.

At least I can bash Bush, McCain, and Obama --

Your lame assumption is that to be against one idea -- one has to be for the other -- that may reflect your smallness -- not me, or most others.

[W*GS]

Originally Posted by Bob

Your lame assumption is that to be against one idea -- one has to be for the other -- that may reflect your smallness -- not me, or most others.

That's LABF in a nutshell. He cannot believe that to be against X, one must therefore be for Y. The possibility that one could be against both X and Y just cannot reside in his wee brain.

[Spider]

It isnt as easy as sex , I will tell you this Bob, when discussing race topics , it is so easy to get misunderstood , or taken out of context ....... The Black male sees the world with a different point of view , then you or me .... Racism is still alive and well , cant tell you how many times I have heard the word ****er used in Savannah GA , or in Canton N.C.......

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Bob

At least I can bash Bush, McCain, and Obama --

Your lame assumption is that to be against one idea -- one has to be for the other -- that may reflect your smallness -- not me, or most others.

If this is true, then why would I post an article like this one?

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpos...2&postcount=17

The lame assumption is yours.

[kappys]

Originally Posted by Bladerunner

I've little doubt that this is largely true, but I find the generalization of today's white society as oppressors to be alienating, and I have a far thicker skin for such ideas than most in my experience. This is why this is a political grenade for Obama...I'm sure he's hoping its a dud.

Racism is still a strong living memory for most minority peoples. Not just the racism of the 60's but even the casual racism of the 80's was there for younger folks. I think society as a whole has gotten much better about racism since the 90's, but that is a very short peiod of time and people do not forget their lives as children so quickly.

[Bob]

Originally Posted by Spider

It isnt as easy as sex , I will tell you this Bob, when discussing race topics , it is so easy to get misunderstood , or taken out of context ....... The Black male sees the world with a different point of view , then you or me .... Racism is still alive and well , cant tell you how many times I have heard the word ****er used in Savannah GA , or in Canton N.C.......

All true...

I grew-up in Chicago -- its seems like it may a different type of bigotry there. When one black family moved in (at least this was the case when I was a kid) there was something called "white flight," where folks would move away -- some moved because of the color of another's skin, but most others because of the color of money -- when the first few left others became concerned that it would deflate the value of their home, so folks jumped on the money train to leave first before they lost value ...-- kinda like a self-fulfilling prophecy.

[Arkie]

Originally Posted by Bob

But his pastor believes in it, and Obama allowed his family to be subjected to it for 20 years...

For political gains back then. Now the chickens coming home to roost...

[Bob]

Originally Posted by Arkie

For political gains back then. Now the chickens coming home to roost...

At best he did it for political gain, and turned a blind eye to some of the things said. It seems that Michell Obama has bought into more of it -- and the victim mentality.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Arkie

For political gains back then. Now the chickens coming home to roost...

I hadn't thought of that. Being a member of that church was probably a great boost for him when he was involved in local, ward politics in Chicago. Doesn't work so well on the national stage.