Is this Jeremiah wRight? Print E-mail
Written by Eric Terfa Ula-Lisa   
Wednesday, 19 March 2008

 

'Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned."

                                                 Jesus Christ of Nazareth.

The Obama speech 'A More Perfect Union' is being debated. Some are of the opinion that his pastor's message from his pulpit in his almost all black church was wrong, full of hate, incendiary and anti-American. Not many people address themselves to the real message of the pastor. The issue as to what manner a pastor should make his delivery is almost assumed by all that the pastor's tone was wrong and full of hate. Most who say this, claim the higher moral ground over the pastor and without any knowledge of history, the church or even the basic rudiments of their faith or hermanuetics would claim the pastor's sermon was full of hate, unchristian and anti-american. Let us look at the Bible, the conduct of Jesus himself as he confronted hypocrisy, John the Baptist, Jonathan Edwards and the doyen of American preachers, Charles Finney, and we may pause before we throw Jeremiah under the bus. Jeremiah did not call the wrath of God, true biblical theology knows that the world already lies under the wrath of God. Liberation theology preaches to deliver the people from the wrath of God by preaching repentance and of Pharoah by commanding him to 'Let my people go'.

That Jeremiah

A certain Jeremiah of old prophesied the words of God to Zedekiah, King of Judah, to the effect that his city shall be destroyed and Zedekiah as king shall be captured. Interestingly, God was displeased because of a social issue: because the people of Judah defaulted in honoring the command to release the bondmen and women after seven years, the Jubilee. The issue of liberty and well-being of the people was central to the message. The people of Judah repented, let the bondmen free, then, changed their minds again and recaptured them. Then Jeremiah prophesied :"Therefore thus saith the LORD; Ye have not hearkened unto me, in proclaiming liberty, every one to his brother, and every man to his neighbour: behold, I proclaim a liberty for you, saith the LORD, to the sword, to the pestilence, and to the famine; and I will make you to be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth. ...

"The princes of Judah, and the princes of Jerusalem, the eunuchs, and the priests, and all the people of the land, which passed between the parts of the calf; I will even give them into the hand of their enemies, and into the hand of them that seek their life: and their dead bodies shall be for meat unto the fowls of the heaven, and to the beasts of the earth. And Zedekiah king of Judah and his princes will I give into the hand of their enemies, and into the hand of them that seek their life, and into the hand of the king of Babylon's army, which are gone up from you. Behold, I will command, saith the LORD, and cause them to return to this city; and they shall fight against it, and take it, and burn it with fire: and I will make the cities of Judah a desolation without an inhabitant."
                                                                                                                                                 Jeremiah 34:12-22

History and Religion

From history, there has been religion, autocratic rulers as well as Men of God; prophets, pastors or evangelists who spoke truth to power. Most times the rulers do not like what they hear, nor do they always heed the counsel of God as spoken by His servants. Most times, the servants were derided, persecuted or even killed to shut them up. John the baptist was beheaded by Herod because he yelled and would not stop that it was unlawful for Herod to take his brother's wife. Ahab would not listen to the mighty Elijah and said it was Elijah that 'troubelleth Israel' (1 Kings 18:17). There were times, however, that the kings paid heed to the prophets among them, repented and changed the circumstance of their nation. David repented and wrote Psalm 51. Abraham Lincoln did just that by calling for a fast and then issuing the Emancipation Proclamation that freed the slaves in the USA. America is by history, self-description, census or polling a majority-Christian dominated nation, so examples from the good book would help define the context in which the Reverend Jeremiah Wright ought to be seen speaking from since he was in his church's pulpit.

A Man of God, whether pastor, evangelist or prophet is taken from the people and ordained to speak the words of God, for God. He is supposed to see the plight of the people from the view-point of God or as it were, through the eye-lids of God. When a preacher mounts the pulpit, God enjoins him to speak as an oracle of God. Some examples may throw more light.

Oracles of God

Moses, who was raised in the king's palace, renounced his princely heritage to empathize with his people who were slaves in Egypt quartered in Goshen. Moses spoke truth to power when he obeyed God, for God had said unto him: "Go unto Pharoah and say unto him, Thus saith the LORD, let my people go that they may serve me" (Exodus 8:1). Moses may have had his failings, but when he spoke, he spoke as an oracle of God. Pharoah may have said that he was disrespectful or impudent or incendiary, but regarding the message, Moses was on point.

Samuel the Prophet, also had a little confrontation with his king.

"And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams. For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king. And Saul said unto Samuel, I have sinned: for I have transgressed the commandment of the LORD, and thy words: because I feared the people, and obeyed their voice. Now therefore, I pray thee, pardon my sin, and turn again with me, that I may worship the LORD. And Samuel said unto Saul, I will not return with thee: for thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, and the LORD hath rejected thee from being king  over Israel. And as Samuel turned about to go away, he laid hold upon the skirt of his mantle, and it rent. And Samuel said unto him, The LORD hath rent the kingdom of Israel from thee this day, and hath given it to a neighbour of thine, that is better than thou."

                                                                                                                                   1 Samuel 15:22-28

God again sent another prophet, this time Nathan, to King David who said to him, "Thou art the man" after narating a parabolic story that brought out the righteous indignation of David who had decreed that such a person who had so offended ought to be killed! David owned up to his sin, confessed before God's representative, the Prophet Nathan and was forgiven.

Jonah, after his initial costly disobedience to God, went to Nineveh to preach a very caustic and negative message - "Yet forty days and Nineveh shall be overthrown" (Jonah 3:4). He did not even ask the Ninevites to repent. His attitude was not loving, and it is clear that he thought they deserved the imminent destruction because of their wickedness. Those very negative words of prophesy propelled the King of Nineveh to action...

"So the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them. For word came unto the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, and he laid his robe from him, and covered him with sackcloth, and sat in ashes. And he caused it to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water: But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto God: yea, let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their hands. Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not? And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not."
                                                                                                                                     Jonah 3:5-10

Although the prophesy of Jonah was not polite or politically correct, he spoke the word of God, the people heard it, had a mind to repent, repented and were spared the wrath of God. the cynic may then ask if all pastors are modern prophets. The answer would be in the negative, but all pastors now have the spirit of prophesy. While being a Prophet of God is still a gift and a special calling as found in Ephesians 4:11, from the time of Pentecost Sunday, God has now poured out His Spirit of prophesy on all His children. So especially a pastor, under the anointing, in his pulpit, speaking as an oracle of God, is bound to prophesy.

Was Jesus Politically correct?

Jesus' central message of the gospel was love. He indeed reduced all the prophets and the law to two commandments - Love God with all and your neighbor as yourself. In context, it means do to the black man as you would your fellow white man. The main 'crime' that got Jesus the capital punishment was that he offended the powers that be by claiming to be "King of Israel" who had a kingdom apart from that of the Romans. The religious rulers of His day also hated Jesus because He publicly preached against their hypocrisy and often confronted them publicy. So the Rabbis together with the worldly leaders of Rome collaborated to accuse Jesus try Him in their courts and nail Him to the cross. Jesus had driven with a whip the merchants from the temple who no doubt were there on the authority of the 'rulers' of the Temple, thus upsetting their prosperity schemes. This same Jesus who preached love for all mankind had this exchange taken from Matthew 23:

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone...Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness...Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.... Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: Behold, your house is left unto you desolate." 

If Jesus' preachers have His Spirit indwelling them, is it any surprise that they are wont to be angry at hypocrisy or injustice to a section all while professing to be His followers? Some are quick to bring up the Scriptural injunction that all ought to be subject to governments, and that any criticism of the running of government affairs must amount to a rebellion. That too is shere manipulation of scripture. God never left any oppressive regimes alone. He often sent His messengers right from the time of the Judges to deliver them. Most who say we ought to sit without comment in servile docility after the coming of Jesus Christ forget of one of the prophecies of the Messiah:

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. (Is 9:6).

Even now, Jesus rules in the affairs of men, and He may speak to even the rulers through whatever vessel he chooses.

What was the message Again?

Most, if not all who appeared to censor the language of Pastor Jeremiah claim to be Christians. These 'Christians' did not dwell on the merits of the message of this pastor for his audience on a sunday morning whose doctored sound-bites was leaked to the media for political purposes to favor a particular candidate and do Obama political harm. Was this pastor saying anything new? Have Pastors Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, John Hagee, Rod Parsley and other pastors not said words to the same effect? Have these ever-loving Christians bothered to read the prophesies of Jesus Christ regarding the end-times? Have these persons read about the blessings and the curses in Deuteronomy 28? What triggers the curses as found in the bible? Does the neglect of the poor, the father-less, the widows and orphans come within these boundaries? Or is any person who preaches the word of the Lord contrary to what the authorities and the elite want to hear anti-American. If everyone who warns America of the impending wrath of God a false prophet or an enemy? What qualifies one to be a friend of the great USA? Those who seduce them with flatteries to a false hope, a false prosperity?

 Preachers from History

Jonathan Edwards, the legendary American Preacher, is known for one sermon: "Sinners in the hands of an Angry God". He wrote the sermon from the correct biblical worldview that we are fallen humans with a predilection to do wrong against a Holy God whose eyes cannot behold iniquity and so hanging by a thread unto the pit of destruction. He got his generation's attention, not because he said the right words the people wanted to hear; he gave them a picture of their impending plight based upon the word of God. He thundered that they faced the coming Wrath of God! Of course, he was not un-american. Contrary to the New-Age preaching that says everyone is good and bound to do good, preachers of old warned you from the bad in you and told you of the consequences of a death without repentance, that is; a complete turn-around. Charles Finney, my favorite, puts the responsibility of the national good squarely on the shoulders of the preachers. He writes:

"Preaching will bear its legitimate fruits. If immorality prevails in the land, it is the preachers' fault to a great degree. If there is a decay of conscience, the pulpit is responsible for it. If the public press lacks moral discrimination, the pulpit is responsible for it. If the world loses its interest in religion, the pulpit is responsible for it. If our politics become so corrupt that the very foundation of our government are ready to fall away, the pulpit is responsible for it. Preachers should not ignore this fact, but should lay it to heart, and be thoroughly awake to their responsibility concerning the moral of this nation". (Finney, Power From On High, 1995 Whitaker House p.131).

Disturbing Questions

I have little black children as US citizens. Working as a minister in the inner-cities, we have heard these rumors of the AIDS experiments among blacks amongst other sundry acts of wickedness purportedly perpetrated by the State. We had thought they were just rumors among sour losers in the game of life. To hear the same concerns validated by a succesful, educated minister who himself had served his country in war in the US Marines Corp is disturbing, to say the least. What about the deliberate denial of credit to Blacks; the lack of insurance for the poor? What about the lop-sided criminal justice system? Are these facts or just the rantings of a successful retired Minister? The disgrace of Katrina ressettlement a couple of years after the event! The disproportionate incidents of poverty, education and incarceration, are these things we can talk about or is it anti-american to even mention them. Would hounding the messengers make these issues go away? While Obama laid out the questions, he has not yet proposed answers. Hillary too needs not open the gender question to deflate this current one as hate speech; she needs to profer solutions. McCain who has as pastor Rod Parsley and was endorsed by no less a minister than John Hagee, also, ought to tell his plan for the poor. It will not hurt the compassionate Republican, President George W. Bush, to profer solutions too before he leaves the stage. 'By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, if ye have love one to another' (John 13:35). Love is proved by its work, especially among the poor and down-trodden. God Bless America.




RobotRobot is offline 
Villager

avatar
 # 1


'Go ye into all the world, and preach the gos...Read the full article.

Posted by Robot| 20.03.2008 12:17

Reply Quote



RoseRose is offline 
Villager

avatar
 # 2


What about the deliberate denial of credit to Blacks; the lack of insurance for the poor? What about the lop-sided criminal justice system? Are these facts or just the rantings of a successful retired Minister? The disgrace of Katrina ressettlement a couple of years after the event! The disproportionate incidents of poverty, education and incarceration, are these things we can talk about or is it anti-american to even mention them. Would hounding the messengers make these issues go away?


Also it's not unusual for whites with criminal backgrounds to gain employment over blacks with no such record.


Race Still Matters When You're Trying to Find Work
04-Sep-03
Racism

From TomPaine.com's blog: "Need proof that our society isn't color-blind? Recent studies show that putting a white-sounding name on an application is worth as much as an extra eight years of work experience to employers. White ex-cons get called back for job interviews nearly as much as black men without any criminal record. Today's Wall Street Journal reports on research that racial prejudice remains a huge barrier to employment. Despite the popular myth that affirmative action advances unqualified minority applicants, studies show that employers would rather hire whites than blacks, even if those whites have a criminal record. Think it's tough for a white guy to get ahead these days? Think again."


Posted by Rose| 20.03.2008 13:54

Reply Quote



AkinyiAkinyi is offline 
Villager

avatar
 # 3

Rose,


I personally know of a white who was hired in a corporate world even though he had convictions.

True talk my sis.

Posted by Akinyi| 20.03.2008 17:57

Reply Quote



ula-lisaula-lisa is offline 
Villager

avatar
 # 4

Here's more context...Is the ambassador anti-american for having a different view from the mainstream?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/20/224958/631/841/481227

What really surprises me is that I have not heard from my compassionate conservative faith-based brethren what their thoughts are...
could someone point me to a clip or link if you have seen any recently.



Here is the transcript of the Fox News interview with former U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, Edward Peck, that Rev. Wright referenced. The first interview occurred on October 10, 2001.
....

VESTER: Well, we couldn’t let that go, so Ambassador Ed Peck is here once again.

Welcome back, Mr. Ambassador.

PECK: Well, I hope it’s going to be pleasant.

VESTER: Well, it’ll at least be lively! You heard Dr. Kissinger say earlier that on the sanctions, the Iraqis want to keep them there. Saddam Hussein wants those sanctions there.

PECK: Well, the…

VESTER: He has a thriving black market…

PECK: Stand by! Stand by!

VESTER: … on oil, and he’s — and he makes at least — at least a billion dollars last year in black-market oil.

PECK: A billion dollars to feed 23 million people. Now, what does that work out to…

VESTER: The thing is…

PECK: … per person per year?

VESTER: … Mr. Ambassador, he didn’t use it to feed people.

PECK: Well, stand by. You see…

VESTER: Since the war, he has built…

PECK: Hey, hold it. Whoa! Whoa!

VESTER: … built 48 new palaces…

PECK: Wait a minute! Wait a minute!

VESTER: … and refurbished others to the tune of $1.5 billion!

PECK: Well, you don’t know that, either. But the thing…

VESTER: I do!

PECK: No, you…

VESTER: And you know who that comes from?

PECK: You’ve invited…

VESTER: Madeleine Albright.

PECK: Hey, look…

VESTER: It comes from the State Department!

PECK: Oh, my goodness gracious. You’ve invited me here to tell you what I think, so give me a chance now.

VESTER: OK.

PECK: OK. Dr. Kissinger sat there, with you in the room. I don’t have a chance to see you. You see me, but I’m in a dark room. He said that Saddam Hussein gets all this money from oil. Now, Henry Kissinger is smart enough to know, and so are you, that none of the money from the “oil for peace” goes to Iraq. They don’t get a dime from the sale of that “oil for food” money. It all goes to the United Nations, which doles it out, what’s left after reparations and so forth, under the aegis…

VESTER: I understand, but we’re talking about the black market. And I think that’s what the doctor’s talking about, as well.

PECK: Well, a lot of people…

VESTER: Richard Butler from the United Nations also confirmed this to me. And he actually said the number — the amount of money that Iraq is getting from its black market sales of oil is much higher. It’s several billion dollars.

PECK: OK, now…

VESTER: I have a — I have a chapter and verse from…

PECK: If we…

VESTER: … from the U.S. commander of the 5th fleet in Bahrain…

PECK: OK, he…

VESTER: … explaining his own patrolling of this. He sees the pattern…

PECK: He’s close by.

VESTER: Yes.

PECK: Now, if you’re going to take the U.N. figures that you just stated, why do you choose to ignore the ones about the deaths of children as a result of the embargo?

VESTER: Well, why do you choose to ignore the fact that Saddam Hussein gassed his own people!

PECK: Now, wait a minute! You have to understand — when did that happen? Do you remember?

VESTER: Yeah, during the Iran-Iraq war.

PECK: Well, what year was that?

VESTER: Many years ago.

PECK: Yeah, OK. What was the United States government’s position on that at the time?

VESTER: You know what? It doesn’t matter!

PECK: Well, see, it…

VESTER: He killed his own people!

PECK: It does matter. It does matter because…

VESTER: Why? I mean, murder is murder!

PECK: We didn’t think it was a problem at the time. It didn’t become a problem until after 1990. Saddam Hussein is not a nice guy. Don’t push me into defending him! My interest, my only interest — and it should be yours — is how do we advance America’s interests in that part of the world? And we do not do it after 11 years of a strangling embargo and bombing Iraq whenever we feel like it.

VESTER: They get plenty of money to feed their people! You know they do.

PECK: They do not, and I do not know it, and I don’t think that you do, either, as a matter of fact. Two United Nations humanitarian directors have resigned in protest, one after the other, one a Brit, one a German.

VESTER: All right…

PECK: They said, “Hey, I cannot be associated with this.” Now, my point…

VESTER: Ambassador…

PECK: I don’t think…

VESTER: Yes. Very quickly.

PECK: Yeah. You know, I don’t support Saddam Hussein. My job is to think about what’s good for the United States.

VESTER: All right, I’m sorry to cut you off…

PECK: And doing what we’re doing — yeah, you did it again.

VESTER: … but perhaps we’ll have another — no, we’ll have another night together. Maybe we’ll go to Baghdad.

PECK: I’ll look forward to it.

VESTER: Ambassador Ed Peck, thanks.

This entry was posted on March 20, 2008 at 7:40 pm and is filed under Barack Obama, Democrats, Election 2008, Politics, Youtube. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.



Posted by ula-lisa| 21.03.2008 11:12

Reply Quote



aiksmartaiksmart is offline 
Villager

avatar
 # 5

WASHINGTON—Let’s ask the hard question about the Rev. Jeremiah Wright: Is he as far outside the African-American mainstream as many of us would like to think?

Because Barack Obama’s speech on race in America was so candid about both the legitimacy of black and white grievances—and the flaws in those grievances—it carries the risk of offending almost everyone.

The man who, by parentage, is half black and half white took it upon himself to explain each side’s story to the other. Obama resembled no one so much as the conciliatory sibling in a large and boisterous family shouting: “Please, please, will you listen to each other for a sec?”

One of the least remarked upon passages in Obama’s speech is also one of the most important—and the part most relevant to the Wright controversy. There is, Obama said, a powerful anger in the black community rooted in “memories of humiliation and doubt” that “may not get expressed in public, in front of white co-workers or white friends” but “does find voice in the barbershop or the beauty shop or around the kitchen table. ... And occasionally it finds voice in the church on Sunday morning, in the pulpit and in the pews.”

Yes, black people say things about our country and its injustices to each other that they don’t say to those of us who are white. Whites also say things about blacks privately that they don’t say in front of their black friends or associates.

One black leader who was capable of getting very angry indeed is the one now being invoked against Wright. His name is Martin Luther King Jr.

An important book due out next month on King’s rhetoric by Barnard College professor Jonathan Rieder offers a more complex view of King than the sanitized version that is so popular, especially among conservative commentators. In “The Word of the Lord Is Upon Me,” Rieder—an admirer of King’s—notes that the civil rights icon was “not just a crossover artist but a code switcher who switched in and out of idioms as he moved between black and white audiences.”

Listen to what King said about the Vietnam War at his own Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta on Feb. 4, 1968: “God didn’t call America to engage in a senseless, unjust war. ... And we are criminals in that war. We’ve committed more war crimes almost than any nation in the world, and I’m going to continue to say it. And we won’t stop it because of our pride and our arrogance as a nation. But God has a way of even putting nations in their place.” King then predicted this response from the Almighty: “And if you don’t stop your reckless course, I’ll rise up and break the backbone of your power.”

If today’s technology had existed back then, I would imagine the media playing quotations of that sort over and over. Right-wing commentators would use the material to argue that King was anti-American and to discredit his call for racial and class justice. King certainly angered a lot of people at the time.

I cite King not to justify Wright’s damnation of America or his lunatic and pernicious theories, but to suggest that Obama’s pastor and his church are not so far outside the African-American mainstream as many would now suggest. I would also ask my conservative friends who praise King so lavishly to search their consciences and wonder if they would have stood up for him back in 1968.

These are realities that Obama has forced us to confront, and they are painful. Wright was operating within a long tradition of African-American outrage, which is one reason why Obama could not walk away from his old pastor in the name of political survival. Obama’s personal closeness to Wright would have made such a move craven in any event.

I’m a liberal and I loathe the anti-American things Wright said, precisely because I believe that the genius of our country is its capacity for self-correction. Progressivism and, yes, hope itself depend upon a belief that personal conversion and social change are possible, that flawed human beings are capable of transcending their pasts and their failings.

Obama understands the anger of whites as well as blacks, but he’s placed a bet on the other side of King’s legacy that converted rage into the search for a beloved community. This does not prove that Obama deserves to be president. It does mean that he deserves to be judged on his own terms and not by the ravings of an angry preacher.

E.J. Dionne’s e-mail address is postchat(at)aol.com.

Posted by aiksmart| 22.03.2008 10:23

Reply Quote



ula-lisaula-lisa is offline 
Villager

avatar
 # 6



I cite King not to justify Wright’s damnation of America or his lunatic and pernicious theories, but to suggest that Obama’s pastor and his church are not so far outside the African-American mainstream as many would now suggest.


@Aiksmart
I had kinda missed the above. Could you throw more light please...what is the 'lunatic and pernicious theories' you refer to above.

Here is another fallacy...or what might the following mean, somebody???



I’m a liberal and I loathe the anti-American things Wright said, precisely because I believe that the genius of our country is its capacity for self-correction. Progressivism and, yes, hope itself depend upon a belief that personal conversion and social change are possible, that flawed human beings are capable of transcending their pasts and their failings.




Can there be self correction???If so why has the self-correction ignored the poverty and race question???
Why was King killed before his poor peoples' march...has any one seen the inner-cities stats lately...
some self-correction...without an incendiary 'anti-american speech' eh?

Does the Civil Rights Dept of the Justice Dept work?

Da Bishop.

Posted by ula-lisa| 05.04.2008 09:48

Reply Quote


Last Updated ( Thursday, 24 April 2008 )
 
Next >

Services : E-mail news | RSS Feeds | Podcasts
Links:   About the NVS | Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy & Cookies | Advertise With Us
All Rights Reserved. NigeriaVillageSquare.com