PDA

View Full Version : Southern Baptists Capitulate on Race



Veršandi
Monday, January 4th, 2021, 03:40 PM
Robert Hampton, American Renaissance, January 4, 2021

Race haunts the Southern Baptist Convention. The SBC has regularly appeased blacks, but some Baptist seminary presidents think Critical Race Theory (CRT) goes too far. As they said in a recent joint statement, “We stand together on historic Southern Baptist condemnations of racism in any form and we also declare that affirmation of Critical Race Theory, Intersectionality, and any version of Critical Theory is incompatible with the Baptist Faith & Message.” The presidents did not fail to emphasize that they “oppose all forms of racism, personal and systemic.” Southern Baptist president J.D. Greear called the statement “gracious and important” and urged members to read it.

The message was designed to give as little offense as possible, but it gravely offended many black Baptists. At least four high-profile black pastors cut ties with the SBC. “I can’t sit by and continue to support or even loosely affiliate with an entity that is pitching its tent with white supremacy,” Louisville minister Joel Bowman told the Washington Post.

To borrow a Biblical metaphor, the SBC sounds an uncertain trumpet on CRT. The SBC doesn’t endorse CRT but promotes “anti-racism.” As Mr. Greear tweeted in early December:

Some in our ranks inappropriately use the label of “CRT!” to avoid legitimate questions or as a cudgel to dismiss any discussion of discrimination. Many cannot even define what CRT is. . . If we in the SBC had shown as much sorrow for the painful legacy that sin has left as we show passion to decry CRT, we probably wouldn’t be in this mess.

Last summer, the SBC president backed Black Lives Matter.

The seminary leaders are now wavering. They expressed “regret that our statement inadvertently caused significant hurt among some black brothers and sisters.” They will meet with Black SBC leaders in January, presumably to grovel.

The SBC is 85 percent white and six percent black. It opposes abortion and insists on biblical inerrancy. However, the SBC also backs mass amnesty for illegals and denounces white identity politics.

The Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC), the SBC’s influential policy arm, announced on Christmas that:

[Jesus Christ] was born a mixed-race Savior. In his flesh, Christ embodied the racial diversity that would mark his kingdom. His kaleidoscopic heritage pointed to the day when every knee in heaven and earth would bow at his name.

Far from being “mixed race,” the gospels of Matthew and Luke say Jesus was a direct descendant of King David and thus of Israel’s royal line. What happened to biblical inerrancy?

In 2016, the “Southern” Baptist Convention called for an end to flying the Confederate flag. It’s no surprise J.D. Greear wants to change the denomination’s name to “Great Commission Baptists.” “Our Lord Jesus was not a white Southerner but a brown-skinned Middle Eastern refugee,” he said last October.

In 2017, the SBC formally censured the alt-right and “white supremacy.” “Southern Baptists were right to speak clearly and definitely that ‘alt-right’ white nationalism is not just a sociological movement but a work of the devil,” ERLC President Russell Moore said at the time. “Racism and white supremacy are not merely social issues. Racism and white supremacy attack the Gospel itself and the person of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

https://www.amren.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Russell-D.-Moore.jpg

The ERLC’s Dr. Moore is a prominent Never Trumper who cheers mass immigration. He works with the George Soros-funded National Immigration Forum. The SBC itself endorsed amnesty in 2006 and 2011. The church passed a pro-immigrant resolution in 2018 that reaffirmed its support for amnesty and denounced “nativism.”

Dr. Moore also insists that evangelicals are “not a white church” and their future lies “among African Anglicans and Asian Calvinists and Latin American Pentecostals.” He claims Trump-supporting white evangelicals are “in for a shock” when they reach heaven: “The man on the throne in heaven is a dark-skinned, Aramaic-speaking ‘foreigner’ who is probably not all that impressed by chants of ‘Make America great again.’”

This is a far cry from the SBC’s antebellum origins. The church broke away from the national denomination in response to abolitionist tirades from northern Baptists. The SBC apologized for its support of slavery in the 1990s. Sam Francis, then a Washington Times columnist, noted that there is no condemnation of slavery anywhere in the Bible, and that the Baptist leaders seemed motivated by “a desire to accommodate themselves to modern political sensibilities rather than by serious religious or ethical precepts.” Francis was demoted for that column, but his words ring even truer today.

In 2018, the SBC expelled an entire congregation. James Edwards, host of the dissident radio program The Political Cesspool, is a life-long member of Lighthouse Baptist Church of Bartlett, Tennessee. At the prompting of a black preacher named Dwight McKissic, the SBC ordered Mr. Edwards’ pastor David Rogers to expel the “racist”. When Pastor Rogers refused, the SBC dropped the entire church from the rolls — without a hearing or any of the procedures that would ordinarily apply.

https://www.amren.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Edwards.jpg

Fortunately, the SBC’s rank-and-file do not share their leadership’s obsession with diversity, Black Lives Matter, and mass immigration. Seventy-two percent of white evangelicals say police shootings are not a sign of systemic racism; 56 percent say anti-white racism is just as bad as discrimination against blacks; 76 percent say the Confederate flag is a symbol of Southern pride, not racism; and 86 percent say the same of Confederate monuments. These are the highest percentages of any religious group.

The majority of white evangelicals want less immigration. Sixty-eight percent say America is not obligated to accept refugees, 75 percent backed President Donald Trump’s hardline immigration policies, and white evangelicals are 75 percent more likely than all Republicans to believe “immigrants are invading American society.” Fifty-two percent of white evangelicals oppose the decline of America’s white majority.

The SBC, much like America’s political class, doesn’t represent white interests. It would rather bend the knee to a few black pastors than stand up for what their congregants believe. One wonders whether their real faith is Christianity or BLM.

Amren (https://www.amren.com/commentary/2021/01/southern-baptists-critical-race-theory/)

Emma of Normandy
Tuesday, January 5th, 2021, 04:05 AM
Evangelicals are already about worshipping Israel. Might as well cuck to Negroes too.

KYAnglo
Tuesday, January 5th, 2021, 03:56 PM
I was raised in the Southern Baptist sect and I never saw this pandering garbage at the local church level as a kid. The county I live in has the most SBC churches per capita, in the country, according to what I've been told.
That said, I left that church and Christianity generally a long time ago. These idiot negroes (and whites too) claiming to be preachers, etc need to decide which they're going to follow: their god, or Marxist-derived extremist ideologies like "critical race theory". One can't attempt to espouse both and still claim to be pretty much any sort of real Christian as far as I can tell.
Still, it's a bad sign that what was one of the most conservative Christian denominations in the country are now selling out to negro racism and leftist extremism.

Rodskarl Dubhgall
Tuesday, January 5th, 2021, 09:12 PM
Faith & Heritage kinist blog spoke out against SJW Moore some time ago and I pretty much quit going with my in-laws to their congregation once I heard about the SBC caving on the fag issue. Even though the pastor swore up and down that he wouldn't preach anything but the Gospel, he subsequently was moved from this place to become an itinerant preacher without a home.

Growing up, I was steeped in American Baptist tradition going back to my ancestors who were the first Baptists in America. There was never any real uniformity of ideology or peer pressure between sects, as each pretty much did their own thing. Freedom of conviction is largely due to my ancestors, who fought for independent thought. None of this stipulation nonsense was ever tolerable.

Rodulf
Tuesday, January 5th, 2021, 10:17 PM
There are sooooooo many reasons I threw out the jew god so hard he bounced twice down the alley. The Southern Baptist church destroyed my parents, making them into White eunuchs. Totally robbed them of their sexuality and enjoyment of life. Christinsanity is a curse on the Aryan folk.

Elizabeth
Tuesday, January 5th, 2021, 10:55 PM
I never understood the claim that Jesus is a direct descendant of King David because it was his adopted stepfather, Joseph, who was the descendant of King David. Jesus is supposedly the Son of God, not Joseph.

Chlodovech
Tuesday, January 5th, 2021, 11:34 PM
I never understood the claim that Jesus is a direct descendant of King David because it was his adopted stepfather, Joseph, who was the descendant of King David. Jesus is supposedly the Son of God, not Joseph.

Adopted Jewish children inherited the legacy of their adoptive father; according to Jewish law Jesus Christ is a descendant of David. And although this is intensely disputed between Jews and Christians, Christians claim St. Mary had some royal, Davidian blood, despite belonging to the priestly class. The Jews don't rule out this realistic possibility, but say it's irrelevant. They say the messiah prophecies require the messiah to possess a paternal blood link with king David. As a Christian I hold it that a maternal blood link is good enough - for one, it doesn't really matter where the Davidian blood comes from - and the Jews themselves have prioritized the maternal blood link over the paternal link at a later stage in the history of their religion. The requirement wasn't part of the very first prophecy either, it's the product of latter prophecies which latched themselves on to the main, original one.

Astragoth
Wednesday, January 6th, 2021, 12:15 AM
"Ye are of YOUR Father the devil" Not OUR father. Two separate bloodlines. Jews are imposters and the children of the devil. It's not hard.

Theunissen
Thursday, January 7th, 2021, 09:25 PM
Evangelicals are already about worshipping Israel. Might as well cuck to Negroes too.

I understood that to be the case for decades already.
Seems they have replaced the Holy Ghost with the Zeitgeist.

It used to be somewhat different:
https://archive.org/details/ChristianDoctrineOfNationsScottTrask
But well, the general attitudes were as well.

KYAnglo
Friday, January 8th, 2021, 04:15 PM
I understood that to be the case for decades already.
Seems they have replaced the Holy Ghost with the Zeitgeist.

It used to be somewhat different:
https://archive.org/details/ChristianDoctrineOfNationsScottTrask
But well, the general attitudes were as well.

As I've already posted elsewhere and know from experience growing up, far too many of the Southern Baptists and evangelicals generally do seem to worship or fetishize jews and Israel and have for a good while. Nowadays they plaster the "judeo" in front of "Christian" often. All of it completely at odds with actual Christian belief of whatever sect or denomination.

Theunissen
Friday, January 8th, 2021, 11:50 PM
As I've already posted elsewhere and know from experience growing up, far too many of the Southern Baptists and evangelicals generally do seem to worship or fetishize jews and Israel and have for a good while. Nowadays they plaster the "judeo" in front of "Christian" often. All of it completely at odds with actual Christian belief of whatever sect or denomination.

Christian Zionism has been around for a while. I'd trace this back to the 1960s with some of course already earlier engaging in prototypes thereof. I think that relates to the popularity of the Scofield Bible Commentary. It's essentially also an equivocation fallacy. Since the bible talks about Israel and Jews, those that are assigned presently with those names must be the same thing, not. And well, Judaism as we know it is kind of the opposite of Christianity, despite pretences to the different. It's a lot double talking on the part of Jews and gullible Christian folks are too foolish to notice that.
They got no idea of Amalek, Talmud and a number of other things. "But they believe in the old Testament" - No, they don't. Otherwise they'd be Christians ;)

https://archive.org/details/amalek-the-eternal-enemy-of-the-jews

Rodskarl Dubhgall
Sunday, January 10th, 2021, 06:33 PM
Christian Zionism has been around for a while. I'd trace this back to the 1960s with some of course already earlier engaging in prototypes thereof. I think that relates to the popularity of the Scofield Bible Commentary. It's essentially also an equivocation fallacy. Since the bible talks about Israel and Jews, those that are assigned presently with those names must be the same thing, not. And well, Judaism as we know it is kind of the opposite of Christianity, despite pretences to the different. It's a lot double talking on the part of Jews and gullible Christian folks are too foolish to notice that.
They got no idea of Amalek, Talmud and a number of other things. "But they believe in the old Testament" - No, they don't. Otherwise they'd be Christians ;)

https://archive.org/details/amalek-the-eternal-enemy-of-the-jewsThere was actually more double talking by Saul, in rebuking Simon at the Council of Jerusalem and going to the Areopagus in Athens to confute Nazarene Judaism with the Unknown God of the Stoics and Epicureans. Pharisee Saul persecuted Stephen and had the nerve to co-opt his synagogue when the Jewish-Roman Wars were scattering the Jews across the Empire, then going from city to city and binding them together, like an Abolitionist conductor on the Underground Railroad amidst real Romans. The Nazarenes weren't Pharisees, Sadducees or Essenes, but they weren't Greeks any more than Saul was a Roman. This race-bending enthusiasm in our own time was prefaced by Saul's own innovations to blur those lines from the post-Joshua life of the "Apostles" and universalise that which was peculiar to their shepherd's Judean flock, admonished from the start to bypass Goy and Samaritans.

The agency and prerogative to steer from this course came after their leader's execution at the hands of those to whom their new pioneer belonged. So, if Saul wanted Greeks to cohabit with Jews in the Temple, how is that so different than Pilate and Herod getting on? Jews didn't want to be swallowed up by Goyim and Aryans wouldn't want to absorb Jewry as a corruption in either instance--both are completely understandable reservations. To insist on overlapping Indo-European and Semite strangers to abolish differences and achieve more globalistic cultural hegemony began with Persians taking over Babylon, then Greeks in Egypt, then Romans in Carthage, etc. With the pre-Galilean Atenist worship of Adonai or Adonis, there was already some Semitic bastardisation under the skin of Hellenism, so it's no wonder other derivative ideologies like Manichaeism flourished. If we wouldn't now worship Ishtar or Isis, why Joshua or Jesus, just another Messiah or Moses? These are Semitic tropes, through and through.

Truth is, Christianity is just another manifestation of Semitophilia when practised by Indogermanics, but otherwise self-affirmation when done by Aramaic Syrians and Copts. We cannot honour our fathers and mothers by putting the Biblical Patriarchs and Matriarchs on pedestals over and above them in importance. Filtering history from the Jew POV in the Tanakh is the only means to New Testament supersessionism, for the Books of Esther and Maccabees show this course to mingling with us on their part. If the Jews want to purify themselves of our heritage by discarding Ashkenazi Yiddish and Sephardi Ladin remnants, beyond disavowing the Greek Septuagint and Aramaic texts to rehabilitate their Hebraicentric worldview, then why do we bend over backwards to accommodate them by tabula rasa memory-holing our pre-conversion Gentile/Pagan/Heathen roots and instead using their Bible as template for all our own self-loathing bias?

Why should Jewry be coddled to stand apart from us and we stand apart from ourselves, in complete subjection to their preferences? Goy Christianity is slavery to Jew supremacy on the Cross. The Six Million had to pay for our sins and we obtain Shabbas Goy salvation from their direction. Christians absolutely refuse to draw the line in the sand from observing obsequiousness to any and all Jewry, whether their selective preference is Pharisee, Sadducee, Essene and/or Nazarene fortune-teller dictating the nature of morality and comity. After all, Gentiles wouldn't even be playing second fiddle Jewry if not for Saul, who argued this very thing about adopted Israelites. Saul admonished his fellow Jewry to welcome us into their society, as he himself was a Jew welcomed in Roman society no different than Herod himself. Do we need to hold up Hannibal bin Hamilcar as an honourary Roman by assimilation? Do we really need to go inside the Temple beyond the outer court reserved for outsiders such as we? WHY?!

I don't feel any pain of rejection or exclusion from Judęo-Masonic occultism, nor do I feel obliged to prove my universalist appreciation for it to be incorporated into my life indifferent or preferable to Aryan philosophy. That was the ultimate mistake by Cyrus in playing the part of Messiah to the Jews and by Ptolemy in assuming role of Pharaoh, followed by the Constantinian Shift in assuming that Rome's only way forward was in putting Levantinism above the Eternal City itself. As the Greeks became Honourary Israelites, so too did Romans follow, hence Constantinople. "Ex oriente lux" should have its limits at Semitisms, but when the first Aryan empire became a model for all that followed, this was wholesale mimicry in infamy, to the erroneous heresy that extant Zoroastrianism, Hinduism and Buddhism are dirty, foreign things just like our own lost faith, vanquished by Christian Zionist Crusades and Jihads. We are systemically impoverished of innate spirituality and culture, simply because of apologists for Semites due to expansionism and fear of losing them unless adequate consolidation was done, even at our fundamental expense in the end. Is it all worth it? REALLY?!