Racism and the Christian Identity Movement

 

 

 

The Christian Identity Movement is closely intertwined with British-Israelism (Anglo-Israelism), Neo Nazism, and the Klu Klux Klan. They believe that the “’lost tribes of Israel’ are the Teutonic peoples that include white citizens of Germany, England, and Scandinavia…and that all nonwhite races are not only inferior but are inherently evil.” (H. Wayne House; “Charts of Cults, Sects, and Religious Movements,” 45)

 

Although they claim to believe in the Bible and many of its basic doctrines, the “race issue is truly the tie that binds.” “The races represent different and separate strains of evolutionary development.” (House)

 

For example, “Adam is the father of the white race only,” and that “the Jew is the adversary of our race and God,” (This is Aryan Nations). Well, from where did the Jews come? From Satan’s intercourse with Eve! Consequently:

 

·       We believe a racial nation has the right and the obligation to preserve itself and its members. (This is Aryan Nations)

 

Although they do not believe that all whites will be saved, they believe that only whites can be saved.

 

Can such racists be saved? God alone knows the heart. However, if such “Christians” were in my church, I would confront them for perverting the Scriptures as they do to derive their racist beliefs. Eventually, if they didn’t repent, they would be excommunicated.

You probably find little wrong with what I am saying. However, there is little difference between the Christian Identity Movement and the Critical Race Theorists (CRTs) who believe in the moral superiority of the “oppressed,” the blacks, and the inherent guilt of the white “oppressors.” Accordingly, the “oppressed” cannot be guilty of racism. Consequently, there are two different standards for the two groups:

 

·       If black people are equal in intelligence to other races yet physically superior it would stand to reason that we are superior overall. https://www.africanamerica.org/topic/black-people-are-superior

 

Wikipedia lists several groups dedicated to black supremacy:

 

• The Israelite Church of God in Jesus Christ (ICGJC), which is headquartered in New York City, was described in 2008 by the SPLC as an American "black supremacist sect" and part of the growing "black supremacist wing of the Hebrew Israelite movement".

• The Israelite School of Universal Practical Knowledge (ISUPK), based in the Upper Darby Township of Philadelphia.

• The Nation of Islam (NOI) is a religious organization founded by Wallace Fard Muhammad in the United States in 1930. They have been described by the SPLC as having "a theology of innate black superiority over whites".

• The Nation of Yahweh is a religious group based in the United States described as black supremacist by the SPLC. It is an offshoot of the Black Hebrew Israelite line of thought. It was founded by American Yahweh ben Yahweh (born Hulon Mitchell Jr.), whose name means "God the Son of God" in Hebrew. The Nation of Yahweh grew rapidly.

• The United Nuwaubian Nation of Moors was founded by the American Dwight York, who has been described by the SPLC as advocating the belief that black people are superior to white people. The SPLC reported that York's teachings included the belief that "whites are 'devils', devoid of both heart and soul, their color the result of leprosy and genetic inferiority". The SPLC described the Nuwaubianism belief system as "mix[ing] black supremacist ideas…

 

However, Wikipedia, as do many others, make excuses for such racist groups as mere reactions to white supremacy. Consequently, they are not really responsible for their racism, and it is to be tolerated.

 

Whatever their genealogy, racism shouldn’t be excused or condoned, especially not in the Church. Double standards create divisions, distrust, and disdain. Above all, it violates God’s Word.

 

According to their own motives, Critical Race Theorists do likewise. They divide to conquer by maintaining a sharp distinction between the “oppressed” (blacks) and the “oppressors” (whites). According to CRT, the blacks are woke (aware), while the “oppressors” are, at best, gladly blind to systemic racism.

 

Equality is therefore replaced by favoritism, and peace by conflict, the struggle for power, in opposition to Jesus’ prayer:

 

·       “that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me.” (John 17:21-23)

 

 

IT IS NOT RACIST TO WANT TO LIVE SAFELY IN PEACE

In a New York Times article, “‘I’ve Become a Racist’: Migrant Wave Unleashes Danish Tensions Over Identity: The thousands of Muslim asylum seekers pouring into Denmark have spawned a backlash, and questions over whether the country has a latent racial hostility at its core” (Sept. 5, 2016), there was no mention of Islamic violence. However, it is clear that Denmark is also being plagued by Islamic contempt and disdain for the Danish people as is occurring in other Western nations:

·       "Crime rates broken down by nationality in Denmark show that individuals from Muslim countries make up eight of the top nine places on the list. In addition, 2012 figures show that Somalis were sentenced for crimes, including innumerable sexual assaults, almost ten times more often than those with Danish citizenship. Indeed, more than half of all convicted rapists in Denmark have an immigrant background, according to official statistics, despite the fact that immigrants and their descendants account for less than 10 per cent of the population. “Iraqis, Iranians, Turks and Somalis are dramatically overrepresented among convicted rapists in Denmark,” reports BT.dk." (http://www.infowars.com/feminists-mute-on-muslim-rape-epidemic-sweeping-europe/)

Clearly, Islamic violence is not a national phenomenon. It is a religious phenomenon.

Is it so unusual and unacceptable that Danes do not want to be raped and beheaded and to be placed under shariah law? Is it racist to want to see peace and harmony prevail? However, The NYT and other mainline media outlets act as if it is.

THE CURE FOR RACISM

My wife and I attended a Jesus for Muslims meeting, where we saw a Jewish believer embrace a Muslim believer in Christ in love. However, there were no indications that they had attended Jewish-Muslim reconciliation conferences in order to first iron out their differences. Perhaps they understood that what they now shared in Christ took precedence over any ethic or historical differences.

We were thinking that if they had tried out the reconciliation venue that their different perspectives would have just exacerbated the raw feelings and divisions. Instead, it appears that their love and unity were a product of the overwhelming glory of Christ and the forgiveness that He had granted them. It was apparent that it was this forgiveness that had liberated them from both sin and their overriding sectarian identifications.

This made me think about other racial divisions – Black and White – we encounter, even in the Church. For the sake of Christ and the unity He had prayed for (John 17:20-23), I had wanted to thrash out these differences. However, I have been meditating on some verses that are leading me in another direction. Paul had counseled that our conversation should promote love rather than:

·       To devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the STEWARDSHIP FROM GOD THAT IS BY FAITH. The aim of our charge is LOVE that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. Certain persons, by swerving from these, have wandered away into VAIN DISCUSSION. (1 Timothy 1:4-6; ESV)

Will discussions about race promote unity or division? Do they fall under the category of “vain discussions?” Elsewhere, Paul warned against “unprofitable” “foolish controversies”:

·       But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him. (Titus 3:9-10)

Will the attempt to reconcile our differing opinions on race “stir up division?” I have seen and heard about too many failed attempts. They had resulted in the very thing that Paul had warned us about – division. This doesn’t mean that these issues aren’t very real and sincerely held. They are! However, it doesn’t seem that thrashing them out can lead to unity.

I had agreed to be a panelist for a discussion on “Racial Reconciliation in the Church.” However, I am rethinking this tentative commitment. If it creates quarrels, it violates the council of Scripture:

·       As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but NOT TO QUARREL OVER OPINIONS…Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand. (Romans 14:1-4)

I am convinced that God is able to make us stand together in unity even if we avoid certain contentious and divisive issues. It has become clear to me that as we move towards maturity in Christ, we also move towards unity with one another. How does this happen?

·       Rather, speaking the truth [of Christ] in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love. (Ephesians 4:15-16)

Perhaps growth and unity doesn’t depend on resolving all of our peripheral issues. Perhaps love and unity are better served by keeping our eyes and hopes on Christ alone. (Of course, present problems in the Church have to be addressed and resolved – Acts 6:1-6.) I don’t see how this strategy can fail us.

POLITICALLY CORRECT FASHIONABLE RACISM IS STILL RACISM

Recently, I attended an open-mic at the Urban Justice Center (UJC), NY, NY. It was a pleasant evening until one participant began raging against “white privilege” in her impassioned poem. She received hearty applause. I even applauded her poem until I began to think about it a bit and decided that this was racist.

The more I thought about it, the more troubled I became. I needed an outlet and found it on the UJC blog. I wrote:

·       I guess that at the UJC racism is fashionable as long as the racism is directed against “Whites.” Although I have heard a lot about “white privilege,” I haven’t seen any evidence of it. What I have seen is that racist statements are privileged and protected as long as they are directed against Whites. The UJC needs to publicly reject this double-standard.

·       If the UJC is serious about providing a “supportive environment,” as it claims, it must make its programs supportive of all peoples, regardless of their skin color.

·       Certainly, there is racism among all people groups. However, this must be dealt with through the courts, using evidence to prove that a law has been broken, on a case-by-case basis, and not by condemning an entire people, without any evidence of discrimination. When you indict an entire people, you have surrendered any claim to the name “justice” and have become the racist you have deplored, promoting your own form of hatred.

·       Urban Justice Center, I hope you will reconsider your stance that sees certain skin colors as profiting from the alleged "injustice of white privilege." Not only is this charge unfounded, such a charge encourages division and even violence against those who are allegedly profiting from such an injustice, bringing to mind the Hutus who had exterminated the Tutsis because of this very thing.

One UJC employee responded, and I tried to argue that indicting an entire group of people by virtue of their skin color makes little sense. I therefore posed these questions:

·       How white must the skin color be for someone to be considered “White?”

·       Do all Whites profit from having a certain skin color? What about those Whites who haven’t profited from their skin color? How about those who didn’t get a job or university acceptance because of Affirmative Action? Did they profit from “white privilege.”

·       What about a White who marries a Black. Have they too partaken in “white privilege?” And their children? How would you classify them? Are they only partially guilty of “white privilege?”

·       Do lighter people-of-color also partake of this injustice?

I was hoping that these questions would illuminate the injustice of charging someone with “white privilege” without any supporting evidence of wrongdoing, but it didn’t. I was also hoping that this employee would see the hypocrisy of calling the name “Urban Justice Center,” while it is clearly unjust to indict someone without any evidence. Even worse, to indict an entire group of people according to their pigment!

And what does this say about UJC’s written but hypocritical assurance that they are providing a "supportive environment?" I guess this only pertains for those of certain skin tones?

After accusing me of having “insecurities about this topic,” the UJC employee asked me to define “white privilege.” I answered:

·       Although "white privilege" had been institutionalized during slavery and "Jim Crow" days, it is no longer institutionalized. There are no laws that favor Whites. Yes, there are racist Whites but there are also racist Blacks. Racism must be challenged in both groups as it arises. It arose in the UJC. However, it is not challenged but defended.

·       The charge that Whites are favored by "white privilege" might serve as a charge against certain individuals. However, it is UNJUST to apply this indictment to an entire race or color!

The employee then charged that it is my statements that are promoting racism and that I have wrongly called the entire UJC “racist.” I responded:

·       I am not calling the entire UJC “racist.” However, I have seen that many progressive institutions not only tolerate reverse racism and provide an environment where reverse racism is encouraged –- with your degrading statements about me, you are even encouraging racism – but even promote it.

·       It is inevitable that such talk promotes crime against Whites. In fact, this seems to be happening. We find that a greatly disproportional amount of crime is committed by people-of-color against Whites, and this is not only in the area of property crime and assaults, but also rapes. White rapes of non-Whites are almost non-existent. We cannot say that at all about this reverse.

·       Even White political candidates are alleging widespread discriminatory practices against people-of-color without a shred of evidence. They allege that there is a systematic attempt to incarcerate people-of-color. These charges are unfounded, inflammatory, and manipulative.

Unless this racism is exposed for what it is and rejected, we will all suffer. I am not saying that discrimination against people-of-color should be overlooked. However, charges of discrimination and their evidences must be addressed by the justice system and not by the mob.