State of the Black Church
 

Did anyone see thie Tavis Smiley forum On the state of the black church on C-Span on Saturday? I thought it was tremendous and we need more discussions like that on local levels. Dr. James Cone is the man, and his implore that we need not to denigrate the mind in order to experience God was a sorely needed message for us in the 21st century. What do you guys think!!!!!



Blackwatch!!!!!!
http://www.tavistalks.com/CONTENT/Ta...nts/index.html

My soror told me about it yesterday. She said that our local minister Bishop Paul Morten was on there. :rolleyes: She said he didn't have too much to say, probably because the panelists were "stepping on his toes." When he did have something to say, he didn't answer the question.

LMAO

From what she said, he should have been saying OUCH (Bentley comment, etc.) You should see the house he's building across the street from a soror. Whenever I have access to the neighborhood during the day, I'm going to take a picture of this Commericial Dwelling. This is the ONLY way you can describe it because it is HUUUUUUUUUUUUGGGGGGGGGGEEEEEEEEEE! :eek:

I saw it and it was great. Yes, Bishop Morten was on there and he said nothing. I don't get down with him or Darryl Brister. It's just one scandal after another.

2D, what neighborhood is it?

Have you heard the latest with DB? I was going to visit BL, but decided not to. Heck, DB came from BM. What would you expect?

Neighborhood: Eastover

Jeremiah Wright
 

One of the things that signaled to me that it was gonna be excellent was the commentary on educated pastors. Tavis Smiley asked how come Dr. King seemed to understand the connection between theology and politics and how important it was for the church to be the prophetic voice and "speak truth to power" against the powers that be-the government. Tavis then went on to note how many pastors today don't really become that politically active and he wanted to get some reasons as to why. Jeremiah Wright hit the nail on the head when he stated "90% of our black pastors today aren't seminary trained. Dr. King was seminary trained". This I think is fascinating to note because as we think about many of the issues that characterize our condition as black people here in America, many of the topics they were discussing, you could see that they were very complex issues that required some knowledge and grasp of politics, sociology, economics, psychology, etc. Many of our pastors are just not aware of these things and this greatly affects how they interpret the bible and what they teach. One word that they kept throwing out that I think the black church needs to examine more is hermeneutics- the science of biblical interpretation. This is where the black church renders itself irrelevant to many black people in the 21st century. You have to study hermeneutics in order to really understand the truth of the gospel. Dr. James Cone put it best when he talked about how we as a people would not let an untrained doctor perform surgery on us or let an untrained lawyer represent us in court, but we will, as Jeremiah Wright stated, let anyone who turns up their collar and says "thus saith the Lord" preach, teach , and lead us in our spiritual development. I think this is why Paul Morton was silent most of the day, because they set the foundation for discussion that was going to make him look foolish if he continued to open his mouth. And the few times he did say something, it just revealed his ignorance. What do you guys think?

Blackwatch!!!!!!

Re: Jeremiah Wright
 

I couldn't agree with you more. We have been hearing about Daniel in the lion's den for 30+yrs. There is so much more in the Bible. As cliché as this may sound, knowledge is key.

Black Watch you bring up excellent points. I truly enjoyed the forum. However, we talk about “our” problems all the day long, I would like to see a forum where our leaders, be it pastors, politicians, etc., join together to devise a strategic national plan to solve them?

I know it was a good program:
 

I'm waiting for the repeat. I can't believe I missed it. Actually, I can because I wasn't at home. I normally am able to catch Tavis and his shows that are on C-SPAN.

Aren't tapes available? My soror said she was going to purchase it so we could have a discussion.

Re: I know it was a good program:
 

Does anyone know when the repeat airs???

I would also like to see it.

Re: Jeremiah Wright
 

Amen!

In a college town, like Tallahassee, there are a lot of "upstart" churches that seek out college students. I have had the opportunity to attend one of the more popular ones and I can say that there was a lot of hooping, hollering, shouting, and singing, but not much else. All icing and no cake. I have always attended churches led by seminary-trained pastors. And, I am used to being "fed" by the word. This experience was a total shock for me. We spent three hours in this church and I didn't walk away with anything. I like to leave church feeling like I am a better person than when I walked in. I like to learn more about the Lord and feel that I am closer to him.

I managed to catch a piece of it, and it was great. I can't remember all the participants, but I certainly respect folks like Bishop Jones, Professor Grant and others who bring a level of critical thinking on subjects of politics, religion and social responsibility. I hope that parishioners are getting tired of being "preached" at and desire religious leaders who are educated on scripture and ensure that their church members are as well. One of the first things I looked for when I joined a church home was whether the Pastor was trained in seminary, whether he/she was passionate about social action and whether he/she employed a "teaching" model rather than a "preachin" model within the Church infrastructure. I was also looking for a Church that didn’t always “have” to follow the traditions of the black church, but was willing to think outside the box.

On www.cspan.org, you can watch the entire event (morning and afternoon session) via Real Video (best if you have broadband). It looks like Dr. West was a participant in the afternoon session (which I didn’t see at all).

You can buy both sessions via CSPAN, I think:
Forum
Role of the Church in Black America, Morning
Smiley Group
Detroit, Michigan (United States)
ID: 175009 - 02/08/2003 - 4:11 - $39.95

Forum
Role of the Church in Black America, Afternoon
Smiley Group
Detroit, Michigan (United States)
ID: 175009 - 2 - 02/08/2003 - 3:04 - $39.95

Unless you are ballin' like that to pay $39.95 EACH for a video (I know that I'm not), keep an eye out on Tavis' website. He said that he would be getting the re-air dates from C-SPAN soon. You can also check the C-SPAN website. I see that it re-aired Saturday night, but I forgot to set my VCR. If I get the dates before everyone, I'll post them.

Guuuuuurl, that is some MESS!! All that nonsense is a trip. DB also beats his wife. I got the inside scoop on that. BM is a trip also. I can't get with it. I have never set foot in BL or GSS. The Devil is working hard in there. :rolleyes:

Adam, Where are you?
 

One of the subjects that came up was the issue of gender justice in the black church. It was interesting to note how some estimates had 70% of black church goers being women, while over 95% of the pastors were men. A few years back , I read a book by Jawannza Kunjufu entitled Adam Where Are You? Why Black Men Don't Go to Church in it , Dr. Kunjufu discusses some reasons why black men do not go to church. It is even more fascinating to note that all of the responses to this topic have been from sisters, even though this is the Alpha Phi Alpha forum. So I'm gonna pose a question to the brothers as well as any men who may be reading this thread, Why do you think black men don't go to Church? Is it the preaching? Is it the relative lack of power we seem to percieve as compared to the pastor? Is the church itself not "powerful" enough in its action (or inaction) and message? Is the theology screwed up? Give some reasons.

To the ladies, why is the church so much more appealing to black women than to black men? What about the issue of women preaching and pastoring? Is the Bible written from a patriarchal context, as Dr. Michael Eric Dyson suggests? If so, then why aren't more men in church? Let's talk about these things:D

Blackwatch!!!!!!

Number one, unlike Islam, with the exception of the Preacher, the Black Church does not cater to the Black Male ego. As it is presently constituted, it fulfills what a woman is missing in a way that she can feel.

Alright...

As usual, I agree with Doggystyle on this one, and to take it a step further, the commercialization of the church is probably one of the main reasons men don't go.

I have noticed that in some Black churches in particular that there is a lot of pettiness, backbitting, and UNgodly things that go on in the church already and we SEE this on a regular. Like the episode on 'Soul Food' that came on Tuesday on BET (thats the only time I watch it now, but that is another thread) where the preacher was cussing and just bad mouthing folks IN THE CHURCH. Now why would I, or any other MAN want to attend a place of worship where I am not wanted. And how many times have we seen two or more WOMEN (supposedly they are women, I don't know) greet another sista or brotha only to talk about them when they think they are two steps out of earshot of them. Bullshit I tell you, bullshit.

Back to the commercialization of the church... okay, how come most of the young male gospel singers look like they retired from being centerfolds in a Playgirl magazine (see the PORN thread)? In order to sell gospel records these days, it doesn't take skill alone; you have to have the looks (remember I'm talking about GOSPEL) and the stage pressence of a circus act. Most of the people who you hear on the radio don't even look like people I go to church with (not hating on them), but if we were really going to have gospel singers who truly are doing the Lords work, then why can't they look like you and I?

And another thing, these plays... most of the subjects appeal to women. I can't even get a religous, faithful, 'every Sunday I'm going to Church' brotha to say that they have been to one or want to attend one. Again, the commericalization of the church. And who does the church reach out to... women. Most of the time, I have noticed that there are alot of topics and discussions that pertain to women. Alot of the social groups that pertain to women. It would be nice if I could get the pastor to watch a basketball game or shoot some hoops with me now and then. Or can we go to a REAL PRISON and do some work?

To sum it all up, the BEST reason men don't go to church is the crucifiction and witchhunts that come with going to church or not going to church. Most of the people who go would rather talk junk about the people who don't go than invite them to attend their meetings. And if a brotha don't or can't afford a good suit at the moment, folks act they don't want him to come with him anyway. WTF.

As far as me is concerned, I have found that I like to go to the REAL EARLY SERVICE... the one that begins at 7:30 am. And if I don't make it to that service, then I just don't go. And the best part of the 7:30 service is that everything is on time and you don't have too much of the bull...

I'm glad you mentioned being a member of a Non-denomination church.

I remember watching a program, it may have been Bobby Jones' talk show. Anyway, the panelist mentioned the various denominations and how there are those who have established the "Non-denomination" church. His question was "isn't that a denomination also?"

I thought it was a good question, because I never looked at it like that. I just thought that a group of people chose to worship other than the traditional or non-traditional ways. In a sense, it is a different group, choosing to worship with their own principles, doctrines, etc.

I know this really isn't the subject of the thread, but when I read your response, that question popped into my head.

Carry on...

I do agree with the Education part. Some of the ministers out there were hanging in front of the corner store on Monday, on Wednesday, they are in school, then Thursday, they are ordained and Sunday they open their church on Cook Street. I know, because one colleague did it basically like that and he couldn't preach to my pet ant (if I had one).

Re: Adam, Where are you? (long response)
 

Some of the biased (my bias) reasons I have heard that more men don't go to church:

1. Hypocritical: the usually "male" Pastor says one thing, but is doing quite another. Men generally see things more in "black and white" than women, and they're not very tolerante to see a guy teach "don't fornicate" "don't covet" and then see this is the main guy doing the coveting and fornicating! Other guys are not pleased by the "appearance" of petty backbiting from the men-hungry women that seem to populate some churches. These guys just want to worship and go home--they don’t want to try and “get at” some gal, they don’t want to see short skirts, back-less shirts and other club para some women like to wear to church (you know the gals who booty-hop on sat. and are wailing in the pews on sunday :eek:)

2. Over reliance on "preaching, " not teaching: Generally, men are more likely than women to want to know the "nuts and bolts" of a situation. When you have a minister that is not willing to be challenged, to touch seemingly contradictory statements in the Bible, to address misconceptions and empower the congregation, it is a turn-off for many men.

3. Intolerance: I notice this in relationships and other areas: women are generally less likely to carry past baggage with them. I run into men who've had bad experiences in their childhood church, and rather than find a church that fits their adult needs, they label all churches with the same broad stroke and vow to never enter the church's doors again. Women, I guess, we're used to being long-suffering, because we either stay with the church, warts and all, or we find something that's a better fit.

4. Church traditions and infrastructure do not cater to both genders equally: Men do not want to sit in a three-hour church service on a Sunday (for that matter, neither do I). For the black church, Sunday service was a social outlet traditionally--the only time we were able to get together and "TK." While it's still a large part of our lives, it doesn't not dominate our social infrastructure any longer. With both parents working, with our lives squeezed tighter and tighter into the weekends, it becomes difficult to devote in some churches an entire Sunday to the actual service. Men (and women) would rather spend the better part of Sunday doing a “fun” social activity.

5. Emotional context: For most people, their relationship with God is a very personal thing. Attending church requires that you trust your brothers and sisters in God, to sometimes wear your heart on your sleeve, to potentially show emotion and weakness. I think this is hard for men to do. I know men who believe and worship God, but prefer to do so in the privacy of their own homes/lives. They believe that some people in the church will hold their weakness “a’gin’ ‘em” at a later date.

5. Gender equality: When looking for a new church home, I only considered churches that encouraged "women in the pulpit." It is clear that the Bible is certainly written from a patriarchal context, but I don't think that's enough to encourage men to come to church (because many are not “taught” about the Bible in their church anyway). The men currently in the black church should be leading the charge to get "their brothers" to come to church, but often times these guys already in the church "appear" to be ego-maniacal, power-hungry, hypocritical, or hen-pecked (or a bit too much sugar in the tank) and none of these "appearances" are going to get guys distrustful of church for all the reasons (and more) above to start attending.

Standards
 

I have found that one reason that I keep going to church is that it is a spiritual release for me. I think Black men in general have a problem going to church because they are raised in that Black vs. White context. With men it is either yes or no. Right or wrong. So when we backslide(as all people do) men tend to think of it as part of life and do not like the feeling of being judged in church by a pastor that has done the same if not more wrong. Going to church must be ritutal for young black men at an early age. I also think it comes down to how your parents enforce values on you. And in this society boys and girls are taught 2 different set of values. The values that women are taught fall more in line with what the church teaches so logically they will feel more at home.

Sphinxpoet

If the majority of the members are women, it only makes sense to reach out to those members. It's hard to plan events and put together social groups in the hopes that it will attract others because in this process, you can lose the one that you already have.

And, a lot of the time, even if you do plan the events with men in mind, some of them still won't come because of all of the other reasons that you have listed.

I can see validity in some of the points made on this thread in regards to Black men and the Black Church. But, my question is, if you have all of these problems with the Black Church, why not just find another church, with members of any race, where these problems are not prevalent and where you feel comfortable? The problems with the Black Church should not keep away from all churches. This is not directed at anyone in particular.

Dr. Jeremiah Wright
 

Although I missed him on the program, it is wonderful to hear so many kind things about my pastor. He is a theological genius and very on point on issues concerning the African-American Church.

I always say, "If you don't want to hear the truth, then you don't want to hear Rev. Wright!"

I believe you can catch his sermons on the Trinity United Church of Christ broadcasts on the Hallmark Channel or local cable channels.

www.tucc.org.

You straight Classy Lady,

Thats a good point in considering a church... race. But then again, you have to comfortable with the overal atmospere of the church. And there are men who just aren't comfortable going to church period. The problem with finding a church where 'these problems are not prevalent' is that no such church exists on earth IMHO.

However, in order for change to come in the church MEN and WOMEN have to want to change the church. Not just talk about it, BUT ACTUALLY PARTICIPATING IN CHANGING IT. That means that MEN need to start going on a more regular basis (myself included). That's a big step, but once that is taken, I believe that eventually everything else will fall in line.

Unfortunately I missed the first forum, which seems to be drawing the most commentary, but caught most of the second one.

One of the more interesting exchanges was between Carlton Pearson and Jamal Harrison Bryant. The conversation was about Condaleza (sp?) Rice and Colin Powell and the impending War in Iraq. Pearson believes that we should embrace them and not speak negatively of the im public (i.e. "air our dirty laundry") because they have access that have never been given to AA before. He was also quite critical of most of the "established" black leader's reaction to Kirbyjon Caldwell and his relationship to Bush. By the time Bryant and Rev Al got through with him he was spitting nails. He even got into a tit for tat with the audience saying "Who's on this forum, me or you? Shut up!" While I did not agree with most of his comments, I would like to see more diversity in the comments that come from us. We sometimes treat "conservative like it is a 4 letter word.

The group spent a lot of time discussing politics/the war, etc., but disappointed me when they did not address what I felt was a serious theological issues. The Rev. Johnnie (sp?) Coleman, a female pastor from Chicago, gave this rambling monolouge about her "prosperity" ministry and how we did not have to be poor or sick and that if you "work the principles" in the Bible you could be prosperous too. No one ministry on the podium spoke up against this. I think this "name it and claim it", health and wealth theology is one of the most damaging today and could not believe no one said anything to her.

Like someone else said, I'm looking for solutions as well. IF we all agree on the problem, what are we going to do to solve it?

Great Responses
 

I must say that the responses have been most thought provoaking.

one one two- I applaud your willingness to admit that the only way the church can be more appealing to black men is if more black men went back to church. One thing that I think black men miss, especially those of us who are are truly sincere in our spiritual growth, is that the church is a social institution with a divine mandate. This means that we are the church!!! The church will only be a reflection of those who choose to be in the church. With all of the valid complaints against it, the church will only get better if those of us who are sincere are willing to put work in to ensure that church remain true to its devine mandate, to be the "salt of the earth" so to speak, forever representing the conscience of Christ to an unconscience world.

Eclipse- you are correct to note the problematic "name it claim it" theology being expoused by Rev. Colemon. I think the issue was addressed pretty well earlier in the first panel, when people like Bishop Noel Jones, Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright, and Dr. James Cone stressed the need for a thinking church to awaken in the 21st century. They stressed a need for the black church to adapt a more socially liberating hermeneutic in its theology. Also, Dr. Cone talked about the church needing to be more critical of what it called success, and to be more people centered and less self centered. Rev. Colemon's rant in the 2nd panel seemed almost assinine in light of the pleas in the first panel for people to demand more out of our pastors intellectually. I think she did more to discredit herself than anything with that rant about prosperity.

The exchange about Condi Rice and Colin Powell to me was the highlight of the 2nd panel. Especially when the pastor from Detroit stands up and says "What is wrong with you!!!!!" to Rev Pearson. I think he had a valid point, it is not enough to be numbered in the power structure when you are not representative of the best interests of our people. Cornel West notes in his book Prophesy Deliverance that we need to be weary of our "political mainstreamness", seeing as though the "stream" is owned by people who have as their normative value white supremacy. Condi Rice and Colin Powell are in good with Bush not because they are calling for an overhaul of the American political system, but because they are "acceptable" and proove that "acceptable" black folks can "make it" in this society (kinda what Rev. Pearson was saying). This is problematic because these "acceptable" folks don't seem to be responsive to the needs of the masses of "unacceptable" black folks. So what should the church be saying about this? I think the answer is in the statement "What is wrong with you???!!!!":D :D :D

Blackwatch!!!!!!

Good discussion

The Black Curch has issues, but there is nothing "wrong" per se with the Black Church (whatever that is).

Issues:

Role of the Pastor/Minister/Preacher
Too many preachers are uneducated and have a limited scope of knowledge and frame of reference. I an appalled by the nimber of followers many of these unlearned people have. Many preach an unsound doctrine and develop a huge following based on a cult of personality.

Too often a pimp and a preacher are indistinguisable. Thousand dollar suits, Bentleys, a cadre of women on call (ushers, choirmembers, pastor's aids), rings, jewelry. I'm sorry, the more material wealth you flaunt, the less I believe in your ministry

The "it'll be alright, wait on the Lord, suffer like a saint philosophy". Men don't particularly follow this style. Its not proactive, it doesn't take charge, no does it stimulate the intellect. Men like control or at least the appearance of control. Why serve a God that wants us to suffer? If I'm going to give up my will, should I not be rewarded with a lessening of my suffering? I can suffer without religion.

Men experience God differently. All the shouting, raising the Holy Ghost, speaking in tongues, foaming at the mouth, running the aisles etc will not be experience by men until their intellect is stimulated first. Men don't fear an eternity in Hell, at least, not without an intellectual understanding of how he relates in God's universe. Many preachers are just satisfied with getting shouts of "amen" and "hallelujah" from the synchophants around them to give the congregation meat for daily living rather than pablum for two hours.

Fortunately, there are many bible believing, bible teaching churches whose pastors minister a sound biblical doctrine, unswayed by liberal theology and driven by $$ signs and Holy Ghost Charlatans preaching a drive by, drive through false happiness.

BTW, in the first panel, the two biggest phonies up there were Bishop Paul Morton and Michael Dyson (a phony convicts himself with his own words). Ignore his flowery loquaciousness and his passionate speaking style and what he basically said was that the Bible was meaningless and his intellect supercedes the Word and therefore he could interpret God's word to fit his personal philosophy. How can you serve Jesus when you behave as a Pharisee. I would love to see him debate Cone or Jeremiah Wright.

Why didn't Sis. Vashti answer her question rather than telling us about sexual practices in S. Africa.?

For those that have four hours to spare, the program is available on the C-SPAN website to watch over your computer (if you have RealPlayer, which can be downloaded for free). I am not sure yet, but I think that you can download it to your computer and watch at your convenience.

Michael Eric Dyson
 

Interesting you call into question the notion of liberal theology and point to Dyson as an example of why not to study it. I first encountered the notion of liberal theology when I read some of Dr. King's papers from Crozier seminary. On the surface, liberal theology sounds almost blasphemous in some instances, but if you are truly serious about seeking Truth, then you have to at least consider some of its claims. Dyson is a feminist theologian, in other words, he's sees the Biblical text as a patriarchal document, as he states it is "male centered," and has a "male focused world view". What this means is that the Truth of God may not be represented in passages that seemingly demean the equality and humanity of women. This based on the premise that God is just, and that any unequal treatment of any human being by other human beings is not condoned in the logic of Godly justice. Question for you, Doggeystle 82, What do you propose as the alternative to liberal theology in seeking the truth about God and what the Bible teaches? A conservative reading of the scriptures, a "God said it, that settles it" mentality? Reading the Bible as if it were written in our time, our language, our culture, and our space? This is just not responsible reading of the text, because times have changed, though the Truth of God's love has not. So to truly seek this truth, we must seek to understand how the Truth of the Bible speaks to us today, and not rest in the patriarchal musings of ancient civilizations, which were not of God.

I am not saying explain away the Bible in a sea of post modern mumbo jumbo, but I am saying that truth does not have to come in the language of King James, but in the love of God and the sincere workings of those who do "diligently seek Him".

Blackwatch!!!!!!

Bro. Blackwatch

As for your statement of amending God's word to fit todays times and morals,

God says in Hebrews 13:8 " Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

I John 4:1 for people like Michael Dyson who wants to change the Word to fit his(carnal) philosophy, "Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, wheter they are of God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world".

Colossians 2:8 "beware lest anyone cheat you through Philosophy and empty DECEIT, according to the tradition of MAN, following the basic principles of the WORLD, and not according to CHRIST.

As for this so called patriarchy (a false buzzword used to stir up feminists and male apologists), thus saieth the Lord in Galatians 3:28..."There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free,, male or female, for we are all one in Christ Jesus"

For those who would corrupt the world of God , thinking that they know better than what God has written, to pursue political and socialist agendas rather than God's agenda, Romans 1:22-23 "Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man".

All of that is to say that any doctrine that is man first (prosperity, feminism, changing passages, wording, sex) or is set to please or appease man's carnal sensibilities, is false doctrine, and thosee that preach/teach those doctrines are charlatans and apostates. The silvery tongue is seductive and a deceiver and we are very susceptible(sp) to doctrines that either make us feel better or appeal to our personal life/political philosophy. But many of those doctrines are not sound Biblically. If your intellect or that of Michael Dyson's is greater that that of the Father the Son, and the Holy Ghost, the Apostles and saints, then more power to you.

There is an intellectual way to discern scripture, but it is heresy to supercede Scripture intellectually. That is the way of the Saduccees, Gnostics, and Epicureans (I believe)

Trouble
 

I know I probably will get screamed on but what is the deal with people speaking in tongues. It seems prevalent in our Black Churches but my point is this. It clearly states in the Bible that when the Disciples of Christ were touched by the Holy Spirit it descended upon them and he disciples were able to go out to the street and people from all countries heard them profess God in the TOUNGE of their native land. The true ability to speak in tongues is the ability to have everyone understand you. I am sorry but nowadays people speaking in tongues do not sound like anyone can understand them. Am I misinterpreting what tongues are supposed to be? Help a brother out!

Sphinxpoet

You are on point, especially with that last statement. Many of the doctrines used in "the church" is MAN'S interpretation/ opinion.

I remember a couple of years ago, there was a thread where you could interview someone no longer with us. My response was Jesus/God. I want to know DIRECTLY what was meant when XYZ was said.

the GC theologian-Reiki !!!!!!
 

I couldn't have said it better myself. God bless you!!!:D

Good point here also. Consider this, Is Truth relative, or our grasp or understanding of it? We are human, fallable, and subject to time, space, culture, history, environment, etc. that all characterize our understanding or interpretation of scripture. Our humaness also gives us "finiteness"-that means we cannot comprehend everything that God is -"infiniteness". So our grasp at Truth has to be checked, not by absoluteness, or the final word of objective truth, because we cannot achieve that, but in the way that our understandings of Truth help us in the ongoing process of human self definition and human self determination. Cornell West put it best in his book Prophesy Deliverance :
"Jesus Christ is literally the Truth, the Truth which cannot be intellectually reified but rather existentially appropriated by finite human beings with urgent needs and pressing problems"

In other words, we can only grasp at all the Truth Christ is, because of our falleness. Our gauge for the effectiveness of our "strivings" or "grasps" has to be if those things we read and interepret from scripture serve a positive purpose in making us better human beings, made "in the image of God"(cf. Genesis 1:24). In this sense, a critical understanding of not only scripture, but human nature, politics, history, and art and how they affect our interpretation of scripture are all important as to ordering our lives for Christ.


Blackwatch!!!!!!

REIKI

Thanks for your thoughts and I agree with you wholeheartedly. There are many passages, scriptures, and biblical doctrines that require serious intellectual debate and understanding. Too many unlearned preachers simply spout what they read without a deeper understanding.

I also agree with you Blackwatch in that we must understand time and place, who was speaking, what point were they trying to make, who was the audience, what were the socio-political, religious ethos of the time. The parables of Jesus summons the intellect and are open to interpretation that requires true discernment. The Book of Hebrews is a theological wonder that requires much knowledge and deep understanding. The Song of Solomon is an allegorical piece of literature. How is that to be interpreted?

I support the intellectual understanding of the Bible. What I vehemently disagree with is politicizing and socializing the Word to fit individual agendas, be they womanist, feminist, prosperity, Jehovah Witness, Catholic, and Mormon. They all have corrupted the word of God through false and flawed supposed "intellectual" interpretations. Just as Osama Bin Laden, the N.O.I, and 5 Percenters have corrupted Islam through false interpretation, my point is to be on guard when I hear people DELIBERATELY go against sound theology and undeniable scripture for their own personal aggrandizement. Anyone who will accept Tupacs and Biggie's lyrics as Gospel and then challenge the Word of God is a herectic and is playing an intellectual shell game.

Finally, many things in the Bible offer intellectual leeway, but other doctrines are crystal clear and concrete and only a political opportunist would challenge them, rewrite them, and dismiss them.

Re: Trouble
 

My understanding is that there are 2 types of "tongues" spoken of in the bible. One is "unknown" tongues, whick I understand to be a prayer language that is between you and God. If these languages are spoken in public Paul says we are to have interpretations so we don't bring confusion. Spiritual gifts are for the EDIFICATION of the body of Christ (the Church). If I don't understand what you are saying, how am I edified?

The other is "other tongues" which is what you spoke of. The Holy Spirit will give you the supernatural ability to speak another known language to witness to someone else.

Dyson and Tupac
 

I see where one can say that Academics and/or theologians can twist scriptures to fit a political agenda, I'm sure anyone could. I see blatant examples of this with the homosexuality debate. Peter Gomes, the Chaplain at Harvard, who is a self described "African American, Republican, Homosexual , Christian" has a book entitled The Good Book: Reading the Bible with Mind and Heart in which he pretty much explains away any sin that is consented upon by adults in the name of really seeking truth in God rather than falling into what he calls "bibolatry" or idolizing the Bible. I clearly see the homosexual bias in his reading of those passages such as Romans 1 and the Mosaic laws. But, in the case of gender justice in the Church and the notion of "patriarchy", to note that their is patriarchy in the church I don't think takes much twisting of scripture. The fact that things like the scarcity of women in pulpits, the notion that historically when girls got pregnant out of wedlock they (and only they) had to go in front of most congregations in our community and be subject to shame and scorn, that many of the pastors of our churches will tell a woman to remain in a physicaly, emotionally, and spiritually abusive marriage for the sake of making the institution of marriage look good, and etc. tells me that there is still a lot of patriarchy in our churches. I think the "liberal" interpretation or careful study of the Bible will reveal that God is not patriarchal, but that we live in a patriarchal society, which God calls us (both men and women) to challenge with God's "light".

I don't think Dyson accepts Tupac's words as Gospel. If you read Holla if You Hear Me Dyson goes to great lengths to talk about the mysogyny, self destructive hedonism and crass materialism in Tupac's music. I think Dyson's references to the work of Tupac is to note the creative genius that Tupac possessed and the biting social commentary that some of his music makes about growing up as a Black man in America. I think Dyson finds this an important insight to the human condition, especially the Black man 's possible collective psyche and that we should at least give ear to the cries of our "ghetto" (for lack of a better term) youth when we sit down and read scriptures for possible answers to our suffering. Besides, as an academic , Dyson has to question everything-Tupac, the Bible, his own mama. Don't get me wrong, most times I think Dyson praises Tupac too much and reads way more into Tupac's music than is actually there, but that is what makes him (Dyson) exciting and gives us an opportunity to love God with "all our heart, all our soul, and all our mind" by thinking about some of Dyson's ideas.
BlackWatch!!!!!!

To Doggystyle: Why do you consider prosperity a doctirne that is "man first...or set to please or appease man's carnal sensibilities"?

To Sphinxpoet: I have a different understanding of speaking in tongues. My understanding is that there is a difference between the gift of tongues and speaking in tongues. An interpretation is needed for the gift of tongues, not speaking in tongues. Paul, in 1 Corinthians, is talking about the gift of tongues and how the Corinthians were confused between the two. The gift of tongues is only directed by the Holy Spirit...he turns the gift on and off. The Holy Spirit will not provide the gift of tongues w/out an interpretation. A gift from God is not for you, it's for other people. That's why Paul said it is not edifying to the congregation unless there is an interpretation. One can be crooked, have extreme character issues, and still have a gift from God. God is the only one that gets the glory for the gift He gave you because He is the one that turns it on and off.

Speaking in tongues is a personal communication with God and is different from the gift of tongues. One can speak in tongues anytime he/she wants to. The important thing to remember is that it's something personal between you and God. Therefore, the volume of your voice and how much saliva you spit has very little to do with it....it's a heart issue. Think about it, when you share something personal with someone you don't scream it aloud for everyone to hear...it's personal. No one needs an interpretation but you. That's why Paul said that he would pray with the spirit and also with the understanding (asking God for the interpretation) as well as sing in the spirit and sing with understanding. He also mentions that he speaks in tongues; however, when he is in public teaching/instructing others he would rather not speak in tongues because that's his personal communication with God...it is not edifying to those who he is teaching. However, if God has a message for those he is teaching and equips Paul with the gift of tongues and an interpretation, then the congregation now has understanding.

When I speak in tongues at church it's between me and God...and the same goes for the person next to me and the person three seats down. Neither one of us is looking for an interpretation of the others prayers...it's personal.

When I look at the Black church today, I see a lot of members who do not study their bible thoroughly.

Many Black Christians don't even read it everyday. It just sits on a shelf and collects dust. "I ran out of time" comes out as a supposedly valid reason, but you cannot run out of time to get up and go to work to earn your income. The power behind our ability to do that rests in God. God rests in the Word. Running out of time to study God's Word prevents the Black church from increasing their understanding of what God wants them to do for Him.

If we do not learn the word and commit it to memory, then it will not stay with us in moments when we may need to apply them.

In Christ,
Reginald

Re: Dyson and Tupac
 

The classic trick of the devil. Out of the 90% evil, debaucherous, loathesome lyrics, lifestyle, and criminal activities of Tupac, find the 10% that offer some insight and conscience, and exalt that. NOT!!! A tree is known by its fruit. Yes, some wayward, leftist academicians find something redeeming about Tupac's Thug Life but that doesn't legitimize anything. Again, Dyson is a ish-starter who say alot of left-field things simply to draw attention to himself and he is in love with the sound of his own voice. How contrived is it for him to drop lyrics from the two most beloved and street-cred having rappers? He challenges strongholds just for the self-promotion. "Boy, did you hear what Dyson just said?" "Did you see where Dyson just ordained a woman and a homosexual over the protests of the church and the congregation?" Everywhere Dyson has gone, he starts ish and promptly leaves town. Every church and every university. He is a $5 con man in a $10 game and as soon as his bluff is called, he cashes in and rolls. Alot of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

REIKI::: just as you said, people have their own agenda and will falsely interpret the Bible to fit those biases, but when faced with such, read the directions. Most Biblical doctine is solid and incontrovertible. It says what it says. Man just wants to create leeway so that he can lie and cause confusion.

I think this "name it and claim it", health and wealth theology is one of the most damaging today and could not believe no one said anything to her.


This is by far, the best thread on GC right now! I watched this as well, and I have a lot of mixed opinions about everything. But to respond to what someone said, you can't NAME IT and CLAIM IT as it relates to health and wealth. I don't know why, but it seems like a lot of pastors have gotten off of speaking on sin and living as righteously and have moved to this living prosperously on earth. If we could name it and claim it, why would there be a need for a higher being? I don't understand it...

Re: Re: Re: Dyson and Tupac
 

Very clever argument REIKI!! Sounds nice and thought provoking. I'm glad that you, Tupac, and Michael Dyson are kindred spirits but I would presume that you are more sincere than either of those two. Just one thing. About finding the good in the 10% and dismissing the 90% of drivel. I guess that will suffice for those of like mind or the truly desperate. I guess whatever it takes to reach someone or find some inspiration all depends on the receptiveness of the listener. Oh.....I'll take my opinions on the life of Jesus from someone with a little bit more moral authority than Tupac. Its ok to be an ish-starter if you have validity, nothing wrong in that, righteouness is its own justification. Thats why Jesus didn't run from the cross.

Inquiring Minds want to know!!!
 

Our Men's fellowship will be discussing the issue of Gender Justice in the church and why many black men do not go to church with a fellowship this Saturday morning. To the ladies on this board, what are somethings you would like to ask some men, men like deacons and pastors, about how and why they think what they think about women pastors and teachers in the church? Also, men, what are some things you wanted to ask a pastor but yet were affraid to ask? I'll ask the questions this Saturday and post them here.

Blackwatch!!!!!!

State of the Black Family
 

Did anyone see Tavis Smiley forum on the black family on C-Span? Post your thoughts!