Reconciling the imposition of the "White Man's" religion

naughty

Sexy Member
Joined
May 21, 2004
Posts
11,232
Media
0
Likes
38
Points
258
Location
Workin' up a good pot of mad!
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Female
Good morning!

I saw the call for comments and I am here. Coming from a fundamentalist background, this is a definite issue. First, I must say that what I do and what I believe have a bit if disparity. First, why am I here? That alone would raise eyebrows if known within my church circle. I think Christianity has up until the last 35 years been strongly seen as one of the central focuses of the black community. Through out all of the long years of slavery and most of the 20th century's practices of segregation and discrimination, the church was seen as a safe harbor in which the seeds of the civil rights movement could be nurtured. Contrary to most stereotype ( some perpetuated by African Americans themselves) AA's tend to be rather conservative in their outlook. Facing the injustice of being denied basic civil rights, the subculture of homosexuality was for a large part seriously marginalized within a group who themselves had been marginalized. Parents feeling that the child already had enough strikes against him or her died a thousand deaths to find that their child was walking down that "firey path to hell". Like mental illness ( up until 1970 it was actually listed as one) the issue of homosexuality has long been a dirty little secret. With the exception of artists , writers actors and musicians whose gender bending joie de vivre could not be contained, it has been painfully suppressed . But where would we have been without Langston Hughes, Alain Locke, James Baldwin, Ma Rainey, Louise Beavers, Lil' Richard, etc. Their genius could not be denied, but their gender preferences were. Fear... plain and simple. In Romans I there is a whole list of sins which are decried .Yes, homosexuality is listed, but then so is fornication and adultery....
 

AlteredEgo

Mythical Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Posts
19,176
Media
37
Likes
26,249
Points
368
Location
Hello (Sud-Ouest, Burkina Faso)
Sexuality
No Response
I go to an Episcopal church. The current priest-in-charge will perform commitment ceremonies for gay and alternative couples. They must be Episcopalian, or membbers of our congregation. We have a group for Episcopalians "in the life", called Epiphany which holds regular meetings, and hosts events. The church was founded by slaves and free blacks who had white enough skin to fool the realtor into selling them the land. It was designed by the first licensed architecht who was an American of African descent. Early in its history, my church, the first black Episcopal church in New York (second in the country) had to struggle to become an official member of the diocese, even though it was one of the weathiest congregations to be found. Its first leader was the first black man to be an ordained Episcopal minister. It took him nearly twice as long to be recognized as an ordained priest as any white candidate at the time. Our congregation does not consider Christianity to have been foisted upon us by white people. We had to fight for the right to practice it. We earned it, right down to the very expensive painting of a white Jesus (it was a gift, what are you gonna do, right?) The white Episcopal establishment didn't want us. We scratched and clawed our way in.

Those in my family descended from slaves are Jews.
 

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
130
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Interesting Bronxy. I realize that most "latter-day" black Chritians do not think of Christianity as "foisted" on them. Nonetheless I assert it was.

I'm an Episcopalian too by birth and practice now as I've explained in other threads. That's a tolerance issue to me.

Has it been socially ingrained over many generations? Yes. Nonetheless it was the only thing available to the progenitors of black Americans once they hit these shores. It's to that early imposition I speak not the present state of affairs.

Re the "white Jesus" thing. I'm not convinced Jesus was black. The jury's still out on that one.
 

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
130
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Lex said:
It would be nice if other people of color who are reading this thread and are faithful (or not) would chime in with their opinions. I know I don't (and would never presume to) speak for everyone or anyone other than myself.

This thread is no intended to ask how Americans of African decent feel about practicing the "White Man's Religion." This thread is not intended to be our exposition of the History of religion.

What Stronzo is really after are the questions which baffle even me:
  • How do so many people following and practice something that has, on many occassions been shown to be the foundation of hate?
  • How does someone with faith reconcile their religious teachings about sexuality and homosexuality given that fact that they themselves might be gay, the probably have gay family members/friends, they certainly have gay co-workers and/or that they participate on this board (which is about a gay as it gets, really).
  • How do people of color in this country allow their faith to compell them to marginalize homosexuals and queer people when they themselves are STILL being marginalized?
  • How do those who so blatantly feel the sting of discrimination via racism and classism turn and shut the door on those behind them, instead of extending the olive branch?
  • Must the shit ALWAYS roll downhill? We did not compell the creation of the legistlation that protects us all by ourselves--we were helped my sympathetic White Americans and Jews (who also felt/feel the sting or discrimination).
  • Why aren't we using the numbers in our favor? It's totally illogical not to.

Fuck man! I just should have given the thread to you to compose Lex!!

That's dead-on and brilliantly what I was "after" when I authored this thread.

Well put, well said, and precisely what I'm getting at. Thanks.

People?? I have previously stated I understand the PRESENT DAY phenomenon of black involvement in Christianity per se. I get it already and any number or recounting of current involvement in Christianity is understandable to me on some level.

I'd ask that anyone responding ask the more cosmic question of "why is it that black people at some point in their upbringing and indoctrination into the culture imposed on them wouldn't say: Hey? I want to know the "faith of my fathers" and what happened prior to my generational arrival on this continent". There's a wonderful study being done which I saw, I think, on PBS which is able by DNA (?) to establish where many (Whoopi Goldberg was involved in this study) black Americans came from locale-wise in Africa. It's a huge boost to a sense of background which we all need, in my opinion, since knowing where we come from is pivotal to knowing where we're going.
 

Lex

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Posts
8,253
Media
0
Likes
118
Points
268
Location
In Your Darkest Thoughts and Dreams
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
@ Naughty--I am glad you responded and your voice here is critical. You are one of the more knowledgable and faithful elder AfAm on this board. Please do chime in more, Sis. Love you.

@ Bronxy--You are perhaps one of the more compelling members to post on these boards in quite some time. I learn more and more everyday. Thanks for sharing your church's history. Even in religious matters, it seems we AfAm have to work 10X as hard to be treated the same. Sigh.

Stronzo said:
Re the "white Jesus" thing. I'm not convinced Jesus was black. The jury's still out on that one.
Well, from what we know of sun exposure and cancer and fair skin--we should be able to agree that Jesus could not have been of northern European decent as he is so often depicted in pictures and movies (noen of which ever match the wooly-haired, bronze-skinned biblical decription). People with skin that fair simply could not have survived in that area without some of the modern protections that guard against sun-burn/cancer, etc. Indigenous people of that area do not have white skin.

Stronzo said:
Fuck man! I just should have given the thread to you to compose Lex!!

That's dead-on and brilliantly what I was "after" when I authored this thread.

Well put, well said, and precisely what I'm getting at. Thanks.
This was your thread, bro. It triggered some thoughts and feelings I have long carried and felt like sharing--nothing more. I am a beleiver in speaking up and sharing in the hopes that we all can learn from each other as long as we are willing to listen and try to step outside ourselves. Many here (myself included) once thought you incapable of that--and I am porud to see you doing it more and more as we commune here in these fora. It's tough to put yourself out there. Kudos to you for even having the moxy to bring this up.

Stronzo said:
I'd ask that anyone responding ask the more cosmic question of "why is it that black people at some point in their upbringing and indoctrination into the culture imposed on them wouldn't say: Hey? I want to know the "faith of my fathers" and what happened prior to my generational arrival on this continent". There's a wonderful study being done which I saw, I think, on PBS which is able by DNA (?) to establish where many (Whoopi Goldberg was involved in this study) black Americans came from locale-wise in Africa. It's a huge boost to a sense of background which we all need, in my opinion, since knowing where we come from is pivotal to knowing where we're going.

Dr. Henry Louis Gates, Jr. is one of the prominent people pushing this study. I saw pieces of it. Many African Americans can not fully trace their genetic/biological roots very well as our familes were, more often than not, purposely broken during slavery to make sure there were fewer common ties between and among us (It was used to keep the oppressed, well, oppressed).

That being said-the sad thing about the DNA study is that it tells what many in our community have always known on a lot of levels: The more "traditionally black" you look (think Whoopi or Oprah), they mosr definitively they can trace your roots back to African regions or a particular tribe. Fairer skinned AfAm have not been able to trace themselves back many generations at all. SIGH.
 

B_NineInchCock_160IQ

Sexy Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Posts
6,196
Media
0
Likes
40
Points
183
Location
where the sun never sets
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
If you're searching for a rational and logical basis for bigotry and intolerance, I don't think you'll find any. and just because an individual belongs to some category that has historically been (or continues to be) discriminated against doesn't mean that said individual is going to be more tolerant and open-minded because of this. This may not really apply but just for the sake of analogy look at the pattern of victims of child abuse in turn becoming abusers themselves. Bigotry is a learned behavior so why shouldn't blacks, homosexuals, and others who have suffered egregiously at the hands of it be able to embrace their own form of it at some point?
 

AlteredEgo

Mythical Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Posts
19,176
Media
37
Likes
26,249
Points
368
Location
Hello (Sud-Ouest, Burkina Faso)
Sexuality
No Response
Stronzo said:
Interesting Bronxy. I realize that most "latter-day" black Chritians do not think of Christianity as "foisted" on them. Nonetheless I assert it was.

I'm an Episcopalian too by birth and practice now as I've explained in other threads. That's a tolerance issue to me.

Has it been socially ingrained over many generations? Yes. Nonetheless it was the only thing available to the progenitors of black Americans once they hit these shores. It's to that early imposition I speak not the present state of affairs.

Re the "white Jesus" thing. I'm not convinced Jesus was black. The jury's still out on that one.

Your assertion would be seen as offensive by many in my congregation. It's presumptuous. This book details the first 44 years of my 197 year old congregation, and discusses the congregation from which they came. It does discuss their origins as part of the first Episcopal congregation in the US, and most of them were slaves, that's true. But let's not discount the fact that most of my congregation are educated professionals, worldly people who have plenty of opportunity to make their own decisions, draw their own conclusions, and who could leave at anny time. You think the Messianic Jews in my family were owned by Jews? No. Other Christians who practiced Judism as they do? No, not that either. My mother never went to church with us. She gave me a Koran, she gave me the Prophet, she gave me Jonathan Livingston Seagul, she brought me to my Jewish grandmother and had me study the bible with Jehova's Witnesses and join a bible club with Protestants. She showed me what my two sets of encyclopedias had to say about Hinduism, and even Buddhism, which isn't even a religion. No beliefs are foisted on anyone anymore. Not here anyway. We have choice.

I'm not saying Jesus was black, but I will say He was not white. Most of the folks living over there are not white.
 

Freddie53

Superior Member
Gold
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Posts
5,842
Media
0
Likes
2,609
Points
333
Location
Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
Gender
Male
Lots of talk about who Jesus was. Jesus was a Jew. This we know.
A lot of people confuse white and caucasian. Caucasin refers more to bone structure then skin color. More than likely Jesus looked like the Paslistineans who live in that region today. No African. Not European.

In my experience in playing for black churches, most blacks today are more devout Christians than people of European desent.

Most people are not that keen on history. They know the here and now. For a moment let's look at what I have heard black preachers preach:

1. They spend a lot of time on the Old Testament where the ancient Hebrews are conquored by invadors.

2. Blacks don't look at Jesus as a European. Neither do that look at any part of the New Testament.

3. And blacks don't think of Christianity as beiing a European religion. They look
what is in the Bible and the story takes place in whatis now the Holy Land, Iraq and Egypt.

While Christianity was the religion of the European settlers, it is not a North European religion. It was borrowed from the Jewish and non Jewish people whowrote the Bible who never set foot on European soil.




/
 

Matthew

Legendary Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Posts
7,291
Media
0
Likes
1,503
Points
583
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
This is a very complex topic. Let me just say that there are many functions of organized religion that run the gamut from very good to truly evil imo --from the preservation of community and a genuine effort to "repair the world" (tikkun ha olam) to outright domination and the evisceration of others. And many, many shades in between. So there are a wide variety reasons why various communities choose and participate in their faith organizations.

NineInchCock_160IQ said:
Bigotry is a learned behavior so why shouldn't blacks, homosexuals, and others who have suffered egregiously at the hands of it be able to embrace their own form of it at some point?

Yeah, and also we each have a race, a gender, a sexual orientation, etc. So it's possible to be at once a target of bigotry and also belong to a "privileged" group. Black heterosexuals can be as homophobic as white. White gays can be as racist as straights. In those cases, "at some point" is here already, ha ha.

@Lex: I got to study with Skip Gates when he was teaching in North Carolina. Tell ya more if you PM me.
 

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
93
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
NineInchCock_160IQ said:
If you're searching for a rational and logical basis for bigotry and intolerance, I don't think you'll find any. and just because an individual belongs to some category that has historically been (or continues to be) discriminated against doesn't mean that said individual is going to be more tolerant and open-minded because of this.
Two very excellent concepts, NIC. If "irrational" isn't part of the definitions of bigotry and intolerance (as phobia is defined as irrational fear) then it should be. And on the idea of discrimination targets being more tolerant and open-minded, my experience has been that the opposite is usually true... again, not logical, but there you have it.

I'm still not understanding why "I'll MMOB, and you MYOB" isn't a mantra taught, from birth, to every child in this country.
 

solong

Just Browsing
Joined
Feb 28, 2006
Posts
180
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
161
Gender
Male
Got a question:

What is "White Man's Religion?"

Are we saying here that God didn't create both white and black and yellow races?

If not, then what is "Black Man's Religion?"

And while we're at it,

What is "Yellow Man's Religion?"

I think we all ought to know that stronzo, being the intellectual that he is, has the answer, and I just love to learn all I can.
 

dong20

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Posts
6,058
Media
0
Likes
28
Points
183
Location
The grey country
Sexuality
No Response
solong said:
Got a question:

What is "White Man's Religion?"

Are we saying here that God didn't create both white and black and yellow races?

If not, then what is "Black Man's Religion?"

And while we're at it,

What is "Yellow Man's Religion?"

I think we all ought to know that stronzo, being the intellectual that he is, has the answer, and I just love to learn all I can.

Solong I wonder that you're missing the point a little, as I suggested and Lex clarified I think Stronzo (if I may speak to what I think he meant) asked why was it that those who have been marginalised and disenfranchised would seek perpetuate that behaviour on others? I don't think colour was the key underlying foundation of his question rather than a means of focussing on one common aspect of said behaviour as he had experienced it. It applies to many and not just in religious terms though in the context of this thread that was the question.

I think earlier poster suggested that it may been reactive so if I may paraphrase crudely in 'religious terminology'; it was not so much an example of "do unto others as you would have done unto you" as of "do unto others as has been done unto you"....or in laymens terms, get your revenge in first.

Whatever 'rationale' there may be behind such attitudes, they are, I suspect, as complex as they are subjective and perplexing.
 

B_NineInchCock_160IQ

Sexy Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Posts
6,196
Media
0
Likes
40
Points
183
Location
where the sun never sets
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
good point Solong. I've sometimes wondered myself what the implications are of identifying religion with your ethnic background. To me, this seems to completely remove faith from the equation. To follow the example of Muhammed Ali and Malcolm X and proclaim yourself to be Muslim simply because this is one of the predominant religions practiced in Africa right now (ignoring the fact that this faith was also imposed on Africans, by their Saudi neighbors) seems to me to be saying that you don't actually believe the core tenets of your faith, but are merely using it as adornment or decoration or as a means to make a political statement. At the point where your religion becomes so intermeshed with your identity as a people, as is the case with Jews today, I feel like asking what's the point of keeping your faith at all? If you recognize it as a social and cultural construct and therefore something culturally/racially relative and not really a question of right/wrong, moral/immoral, heaven/hell... then why bother? Just because of tradition?

I realize I'm probably oversimplifying Ali's and Malcom X's position here and I know there are plenty of Israelis who still believe strongly in their religion. I also think it's fine if you have independently discovered the Qua'ran or the teachings of Buddha and decide that these somehow apply more to your life or make more sense than whatever religion you may have been brought up to believe, be that Christianity or anything else. But converting or belonging to a faith simply because it makes a statement, looks good on paper, or is the same thing that other people with similar amounts of melanin in their skin happen to be doing doesn't make sense at all to me. Also, identifying any faith as belonging to a certain race or culture, even if it originated with that race or culture, also seems to not make sense. Both of these things diminish the religion in question in my opinion.
 

ChuckRich

Experimental Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2006
Posts
319
Media
0
Likes
15
Points
163
Location
SC, USA
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
I think the phenomenon of blacks and other minorities who suffered oppression putting that same bigotry towards gays is a lot like blacks who support racial profiling when it applies to middle easterners wrongly suspected of terrorist involvement while they fight against it being used against blacks for drug raids. When you ask people with these double standards for an explanation all they can really come up with is "Well, that's different." Though they can never seem to elaborate on what makes it different because at the core they don't have a reason.

I think a lot of it also has to do with the fact that black cultures is still overall more homophobic or at least intolerant of gays than America as a whole is becoming. I can't really begin to understand it. I think it's based on a deeper feeling of needing to focus on family and keeping the culture going. Which I think is also the reason why blacks are more likely to have a problem with interracial relationships and still not consider it to be in any way racism.

As far as reconciling religion and homosexuality I really don't know about that. I rejected Christianity during my adolescence. I think it was shortly after I came to terms with my sexuality but I don't think it was because of it. I would've rejected Christianity even if I was straight because it never really felt true to me. Now I consider myself an atheist but I don't think that accurately describes my beliefs. Most atheists don't believe in anything supernatural or metaphysical and place their faith in science but that's not how I am.
 

Lex

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Posts
8,253
Media
0
Likes
118
Points
268
Location
In Your Darkest Thoughts and Dreams
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
solong said:
Got a question:

What is "White Man's Religion?"

Are we saying here that God didn't create both white and black and yellow races?

If not, then what is "Black Man's Religion?"

And while we're at it,

What is "Yellow Man's Religion?"

I think we all ought to know that stronzo, being the intellectual that he is, has the answer, and I just love to learn all I can.

Stronzo clarifierd what he meant as did I and Chuck Rich.

If you could stop attacking him maybe you could read the entire thread and learn a little.
 

dreamer20

Worshipped Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Posts
7,963
Media
3
Likes
19,699
Points
643
Gender
Male
ChuckRich said:
I think the phenomenon of blacks and other minorities who suffered oppression putting that same bigotry towards gays is a lot like blacks who support racial profiling when it applies to middle easterners wrongly suspected of terrorist involvement while they fight against it being used against blacks for drug raids. When you ask people with these double standards for an explanation all they can really come up with is "Well, that's different."
The main problem that I have with the drug raids are the botched ones in which the wrong dwellings are raided and someone is killed in error.
Re: the terrorist suspects: people are being detained for having the same Muslim names as terrorists and those persons more often than not are persons of color too e.g. Muhammed Ali. The persons that favour this measure, of all races, feel another terrorist attack may be prevented by profiling. I do feel empathy for those travellers who are detained and searched, as I have been on occasion. But I know that this is done as a protective measure.


lol dreamer20
 

prepstudinsc

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
May 18, 2004
Posts
16,994
Media
431
Likes
21,502
Points
468
Location
Charlotte, NC, USA
Verification
View
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Re: the "white" Jesus thing. As a person of primarily Mediterranean decent, I'm offended by a blond, blue eyed Jesus, because he doesn't represent me. While there is a whole school of thought that one of the tribes of Israel settled in Britain, and that the people of the British Isles are all offspring of that, I say "hogwash!" Jesus was born in Bethlehem to Hebrew parents. He would have been dark complected and black haired. Lots of Biblical people had ties to Egypt and North Africa. The Queen of Sheba came up to the Holy Land. There is the story of the Ethopian eunuch being converted. I can go on and on.

Even if a person tried to assert that Rome spread the Christian faith around, let's not forget that Rome is in southern Europe--home to darker complected, dark haired people. Not the fair skinned, light headed people portrayed in pictures of Jesus through the ages. Many of the pictures we know were all painted by people of northern European heritage. This doesn't mean that they're bad, they just date from a time when they didn't know any better.

However, we know now and should be a more accurate in our representations.
 

dong20

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Posts
6,058
Media
0
Likes
28
Points
183
Location
The grey country
Sexuality
No Response
prepstudinsc said:
Re: the "white" Jesus thing. As a person of primarily Mediterranean decent, I'm offended by a blond, blue eyed Jesus, because he doesn't represent me. While there is a whole school of thought that one of the tribes of Israel settled in Britain, and that the people of the British Isles are all offspring of that, I say "hogwash!" Jesus was born in Bethlehem to Hebrew parents. He would have been dark complected and black haired. Lots of Biblical people had ties to Egypt and North Africa. The Queen of Sheba came up to the Holy Land. There is the story of the Ethopian eunuch being converted. I can go on and on.

Even if a person tried to assert that Rome spread the Christian faith around, let's not forget that Rome is in southern Europe--home to darker complected, dark haired people. Not the fair skinned, light headed people portrayed in pictures of Jesus through the ages. Many of the pictures we know were all painted by people of northern European heritage. This doesn't mean that they're bad, they just date from a time when they didn't know any better.

However, we know now and should be a more accurate in our representations.

Good points. I would agree that it would be logical to conclude that Jesus could be of 'Mediterranean' appearance, as a child I remember the discomfort in many when this idea was mooted, personally it seemed logical but not being a true 'believer' in that sense really I could care less. To many of course, logic denies faith so the idea fell on so many deaf ears.

It has been suggested that Jesus is more of a abstract construct on which to hang our faith rather than a single pyhsical being, again that idea has merit but does undermine traditional faith somewhat. That aside, taking a step further, if people were created in Gods image then each persons God (and thus by inference his 'son' Jesus) could be of similar appearence to them, be they Black, White, 'Yellow' or whatever and with equal validity.

I wonder that the very focus on the ethnical appearance of Jesus and thus the anger and division it can provoke is yet another excuse for us as people to divert our attention from what is important, in the context of this thread the basic Biblical ideals of decent behaviour toward each other, after all, if you turn us inside out and we are all the same.
 

solong

Just Browsing
Joined
Feb 28, 2006
Posts
180
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
161
Gender
Male
dong20 said:
Solong I wonder that you're missing the point a little, as I suggested and Lex clarified I think Stronzo (if I may speak to what I think he meant) asked why was it that those who have been marginalised and disenfranchised would seek perpetuate that behaviour on others? I don't think colour was the key underlying foundation of his question rather than a means of focussing on one common aspect of said behaviour as he had experienced it. It applies to many and not just in religious terms though in the context of this thread that was the question.

I think earlier poster suggested that it may been reactive so if I may paraphrase crudely in 'religious terminology'; it was not so much an example of "do unto others as you would have done unto you" as of "do unto others as has been done unto you"....or in laymens terms, get your revenge in first.

Whatever 'rationale' there may be behind such attitudes, they are, I suspect, as complex as they are subjective and perplexing.

What "revenge"? I've never felt I need revenge. I just don't think that way, but I also realize that some do, and those that think that way cannot be convinced that everybody else thinks that way, too.

The title of the thread calls it, "White Man's Religion," and so it is NOT ignorant to posit to the forum, "What do you mean, 'White Man's Religion?' "

By White Man's Religion, you purposely exclude, "Black Man's Religion." But now we discover that what is really meant by "White Man's Religion," is "A flaming bunch of hypocrites who can't stand anybody else that doesn't come up to their standards, in their group, and you all are responding to it.

So what's funny to me is, I am absolutely right and you presume to correct me, that I don't know what's going on. Believe me, I know a lot better what's going on that you think I do, and I'm just calling you on it by actually wanting to converse about "White Man's Religion." Stronzo is playing the race card, to generate catamites to his unbelievable hatred of Christianity, which he has exhibited in so many other threads.

And so, since any thorough discussion of a topic also must involve the reflection, or the contrary aspects of a claim, then I'll ask the group here a similar question.

How do you reconcile the imposition of 'Black Man's" religion? Talk about getting stares. Talk about feeling 2" tall. Talk about hatred that you could cut with a knife. Maybe none of you ever walked into a black church, before, and sat down. Let's just say the feeling is NOT that of "Welcome, Brother!"
 

prepstudinsc

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
May 18, 2004
Posts
16,994
Media
431
Likes
21,502
Points
468
Location
Charlotte, NC, USA
Verification
View
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
solong said:
What "revenge"? I've never felt I need revenge. I just don't think that way, but I also realize that some do, and those that think that way cannot be convinced that everybody else thinks that way, too.

The title of the thread calls it, "White Man's Religion," and so it is NOT ignorant to posit to the forum, "What do you mean, 'White Man's Religion?' "

By White Man's Religion, you purposely exclude, "Black Man's Religion." But now we discover that what is really meant by "White Man's Religion," is "A flaming bunch of hypocrites who can't stand anybody else that doesn't come up to their standards, in their group, and you all are responding to it.

So what's funny to me is, I am absolutely right and you presume to correct me, that I don't know what's going on. Believe me, I know a lot better what's going on that you think I do, and I'm just calling you on it by actually wanting to converse about "White Man's Religion." Stronzo is playing the race card, to generate catamites to his unbelievable hatred of Christianity, which he has exhibited in so many other threads.

And so, since any thorough discussion of a topic also must involve the reflection, or the contrary aspects of a claim, then I'll ask the group here a similar question.

How do you reconcile the imposition of 'Black Man's" religion? Talk about getting stares. Talk about feeling 2" tall. Talk about hatred that you could cut with a knife. Maybe none of you ever walked into a black church, before, and sat down. Let's just say the feeling is NOT that of "Welcome, Brother!"

I hate to disagree, but I have to here. I am on the staff of a historically and predominantly Black church. I have NEVER felt unwelcome or out of place. In fact, it is the most welcoming church I have ever been a part of. The first time that I ever went there, I knew I was "home." My friends and family come to visit and always remark on how the congregation makes them feel so comfortable. Even one of my college professors came to visit a few months ago. This is someone from a different religious tradition (Mormon) and who is very, very WASP-y White. LOL He said that he felt right at home. The focus should not be on the fellow worshippers, but on GOD. When that is the focus, the race or skin color becomes a moot point.

Another thing to think about is that there are historic churches dating from the time of the Apostles in other parts of the world. The gospel was spread to Africa early on. The Coptic church is strong in north Africa. In India, the church there traces its history to St. Thomas. The church has always been a worldwide organization, made up of many groups. The Western church IS NOT the only church. To think of it as the only church is wrong. White, Protestant churches are mere infants when compared to the Orthodox churches in other parts of the world that don't cater to "White" people.

Also, what about Korea, where the majority of people are Presbyterian? Asians are not white, but they certainly practice a historically "White" brand of Protestant Christianity.