Minister Paul Scott

Minister Paul Scott Refutation I mention and deal with his article here because things that he mentions are commonly heard and relate specifically to our mission here at B.A.M. Later, we hope to have a link dedicated to refuting commonly heard objections to being a black Christian. Until then, brief defenses will be offered to refute this kind of thinking that is unfortunately wide spread within the black community.

Surprisingly, this article hasn’t been posted at the Final Call’s website yet (I suspect that it will, given the number of linked articles already there by this author). This is disappointing, because I want to make sure that readers are able to observe that I am being even-handed on the issues this article raises. I will do the best that I can… I will summarize and quote as much of the article as I can, being mindful of online Fair Use Guidelines.

The recurring theme of the article is that the Black Church must be made relevant to black people… Minister Paul Scott advances that steps must be taken to ensure this happens:

Eurocentric images must be eradicated from our churches
The Messiah must be seen as a black revolutionary
The Bible must be studied from an Afrocentric point of view

There are disturbing quotes inside of each step mentioned above (as well as a large photo of a white jesus under the headline of the article), and I am going to refute some of these statements (in some cases, outright untruths). First, let’s look at some of the verbiage under step #1:

”While there has been a lot of discussion recently about the State of the Black Church and its relevancy, any conversation that does not begin with a call to eradicate false Eurocentric images and interpretations and to embrace an African Liberation Theology is like putting new wine into old bottles. In 2003, there must be a strong call for an African Reformation within the Black Church.”

My first reaction to this opinion is to ask, in 2003, how rampant are these Eurocentric images of Jesus anyhow? I will admit that you can find some images of a Eurocentric Jesus in some of the older churches, but again, what are the percentages? This article would have us believe that it is typical or a given. I have observed, personally, a hyper-afrocentric theme running through several churches in my own community. Black Jesus seems to be everywhere! I would ask what churches he is attending that boasts a preponderance of white or Eurocentric images of Jesus (not including Orthodox Catholic churches where Eurocentric scenes depicted on stain glass is the norm). However, for the sake of argument, lets say that there are several Eurocentric relics of "White Jesus" around? Black Christians need to be educated about the history of Christianity, period. Names, places and dates. If you are armed with/aware of the facts, then an image of "White Jesus" will find its proper context in your mind when confronted with it.

That proper context is as follows: Jesus' ministry occured not in Europe but in a Mediterranean land with a desert climate. This representation of Jesus (along with any representation of Jesus) is not accurate. It is not accurate because of the aforementioned settings and because there is not a physical description given of Jesus in scripture. If God's revealed word does not indicate a detailed physical description of Jesus, that tells me how important it is, and how I should regard it. What is emphasized in scripture however are the words and actions of Jesus, the revelation of Jesus as God in flesh, and His status as Savior of the world.

Secondly, the author states that Eurocentric interpretations be disposed of as well. I agree with this, and the truth is that Eurocentric - read:racist interpretations have been famously highlighted and exposed for what they are - lies and scripture twisting. Additionally, they have been successfully challenged and refuted by both black and white Christians… These interpretations include: "The Curse of Ham" and "Encouragement of Slavery".

Now if the author is referring to a literal interpretation of scripture (which I suspect is the case) then that cannot be and should not be ascribed to "white people". The Bible stands on its own merits and a traditional interpretation (one that has been practiced by Christians for over 2,000 years) of the holy scriptures, with careful attention paid to the historical and cultural contexts, will correspond with the biblical writer’s intended meaning. If the author does not believe in the authenticity and inerrancy of the Bible, that is fine, he has the right to reject it. However, it is intellectually dishonest to ascribe the portions that contradict a Liberationist model of Christianity as a "Eurocentric interpretation."

There is so much more to say based on the sheer length of the article and number of quotes... However I will try to keep this on track. The next statement is that the Black Church must see the Messiah as a Black Revolutionary.

There are so many disturbing quotes here that I am going to deal with them one at a time:

"The Black church must see the Messiah as a Black Revolutionary. No longer must pastors preach of a blue eyed, blond haired, white "Jesus Christ" whose only purpose is to give Afrikan people amnesia so that we will forget our 400 years of European oppression and accept our current condition.

First of all, this argument is a classic "Straw Man." This author is grossly misrepresenting what pastors typically preach, as well as what Christianity is all about. After stating these untruths (which every black person would find offensive and completely agree with by the way), the author proceeds to tear down what he himself has created.

To say that Jesus was a Black Revolutionary is to bring your own bias to the biblical texts. An unbiased, normal reading of the gospels would not lead you to this conclusion. This is so obvious it shouldn't even have to be explained. Again, what churches I wonder is the author frequenting that has a pastor preaching about a "blue eyed, blond haired, white Jesus Christ'?" I have never once heard a pastor tell a congregation to follow a "White Jesus". Anyway, according to the author, the preaching of "white Jesus" is done with the purpose of giving Afrikan people amnesia... Restated, the author is simply saying that Christianity (historical Christianity, which does not follow an Afrikan Liberation model) leads to passivity. This is simply untrue. Number one, scripture reveals what Jesus Christ's purpose was:

Matt. 1:21 - She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.”

Number two, an argument can be made that I personally was much more passive as an unsaved, aimless soul... Sadly, my only purpose was to gratify my selfish, fleshly desires. (Note: This is not to say that all who are unsaved are passive, however my own personal testimony is one of inactivity as an unsaved person to meaningful activity as a saved person) I want to quote Charles Gilmer from his online article called the The Truth About Jesus:

Those who suggest that Christianity has been a debilitating and pacifying force in the African-American community are ignoring the evidence. The God of the Bible has always been a source of comfort, strength and hope for our people. Faith in Jesus Christ has not created passivity but rather activism in thousands of African Americans.

In terms of accepting our current condition, amnesia, etc. There are countless activists who have a relationship with Jesus Christ (not one that has to follow an unbiblical African/Liberationist model to be effective) and it is because of His saving and liberating power, that those people have been able to pick themselves up and not only serve a living Savior, but also to contribute to our people's upliftment.

No longer must the pastor preach that the ultimate purpose of religion is to make Black folks love White folks while hating themselves and denying their history.

I wish that I had an image of a "Straw Man" to stick by this quote! This is one of the most blatant misrepresentations that I have read concerning Christianity. No wonder so many in the Nation of Islam stay enslaved to Fard's doctrines. If this is the only witness of Christianity they are exposed to, that is a shame. I would rather an unbeliever properly evaluate and reject Christianity on its own merits than to believe and reject lies and half-truths. I encourage everyone reading these words who desire to see Black Muslims and NOI members saved to drop seeds of truth about the Christian position at every opportunity you feel is ideal.

The ultimate purpose of Christianity is not to make Black people love White people (by the way, does this statement mean that all black people love all other blacks all of a sudden)? The purpose of Christianity is to bring the unsaved, the lost, the religious person, etc. into a saving relationship with Jesus Christ. It is because of that relationship that a Christian has the potential to love EVERYONE. It has nothing to do with denying our history. Again, see the article posted by Charles Gilmer. There is much activism within the Black church. This article gives the false impression that Black non-Christians have cornered the market on activism and the upliftment of the black community.

The TRUTH must be told that the peron who the European misnamed "Jesus Christ" was a Black Revolutionary named Yeshua, who fought against the religious leaders of the day and the (White) Roman Empire with the sword of TRUTH."

The author must be some kind of Hebrew Israelite with the Yeshua mention. For more about Black Hebrews visit this part of the site.

The last statement I will deal with is an admonishment to:

"...dilligently study the Bible from an Afrocentric point of view and apply those teachings to the LIBERATION of their people."

Again, I agree that we should study the history of blacks and their presence in the bible. There is a lot of history out there however and there are liberal authors who overstate the case a bit. Additionally, simply stated, everything that is black ain't Christian. I would encourage Christians to study the word of God FIRST (Christian doctrine section to be added to this site in a couple of weeks) before going outside of the word to discover any Afrocentric relationships/connections. This is important so that straw man arguments like the ones the author presented can be seen for what they are.

Moreover, much more can be said. I purposely want to keep these articles brief and reader-friendly. I will continue to check the final call's website to see if they post this article in its entirety... I want readers to be able to evaluate Minister Paul's Scott's words in context to be fair to him.

Found the article on 04/15/03!
Please click here to read the author's article in it's entirety...

Another article of interest: What Color is Jesus Christ?
article by Ron T. taken from deep link within StreetWizdom