53R1A75

I’m going to subtitle this post: The most important question. But that probably is too artsy, light-hearted, vague and airy for what I’m about to talk about.

Its been in the news a lot. Obama & Wright. Dear me! How the media loves controversy because the culture supports it. And by “it” I mean, personal slanders and such trash that would only befit to amuse the mind of a good American. This line of conversation is such filth that several news sources have blatantly lied or misrepresented facts to try and pin Obama in the congregation at the time of the sermons. And don’t even get me started on the 5 or so (if even that many) 5 second sound clips. I want to have all these news reporters’ and politicians’ audio from all of their collective careers of everything they’ve ever said publicly crammed into just 25 seconds that will then judge the weight of their soul. Everyone, myself included, would fail and surely be damned to hell, not mention be declared anti-American, anti-semetic, rascist and bigoted. That’s the state of humanity, we’re imperfect.

But still there’s an argument that Rev. Wright is rascist and anti-american. Recently my brother sent my family a link for reading during an online conversation on the subject. I found a very revealing part at then end after the usual rebuttal/accusatory/observational think piece found en masse on the internet these days. While the bulk of the article went about (in general) comparing and contrasting white evangelical leaders and their political figureheads to the Rev. Wright and Obama, in the end there is a quote from Frank Schaeffer, son of Francis Schaeffer that caught my attention.

When Senator Obama’s preacher thundered about racism and injustice Obama suffered smear-by-association. But when my late father — Religious Right leader Francis Schaeffer — denounced America and even called for the violent overthrow of the US government, he was invited to lunch with presidents Ford, Reagan and Bush, Sr.

The writer goes on to follow through with this point. I cannot disagree with this seemingly blatant racism in politics. But what has been unsaid by any thinking voice on the topic (that I am aware of) is the distinct tone of what is being said.

This question must be asked, but cannot be asked by those in the media. The question is this:

When the punishment and destruction of the nation is called for by it’s religious leaders, and it’s rulers and principalities must face certain punishment and destruction for their sins, for the sins of the people, and the sins of a culture that has largely turned its back on a God they beg blessings from in word only, is the sin they are blaming this for the sin of a man sinning against his God, or the sin of a man sinning against another man?

Some may say this is the same thing, and in most cases I wouldn’t disagree. But in my opinion, most of what I’ve heard from Wright (in gross summary) is WHITE MAN HAS SINNED AGAINST BLACK MAN and BLACK MAN MUST/WILL BE AVENGED by God. Perhaps in God’s eyes this is true, but man is not God. Jesus’ gospel was colorblind. If I am truly to believe that then I must be very honest when I ask this question. Who is being sinned against that God would obliterate a nation? For a man, preacher or lay, to claim that the bearer of those sins is another man, it is simply wrong. On the other hand, claiming destruction upon, and damning America because we have given our love to another, forsaking our first love is totally true and accurate. We will reap what we sow, but we will reap whether we are white or black.