I am a “Racist” and That’s Okay.

I was talking to person of color yesterday about the lack of a major church led peace rally in response to the Black Lives Matter riots, and the conversation ended with me essentially being called a racist.

How did we get there?

This person, a self-professed Christian who happens to be biracial, seemed like a person who might want to have one of those “difficult discussions” or race that supposedly never happen. I said I wanted to see church leaders hold an MLK style march on Washington where hundreds of thousands of Christians could unite with a message promoting peaceful protests.

I was then informed that there are apparently 1500 peaceful protests that I don’t hear about. I responded that I have no problem with those protests, or those who are just regular folk who believe that too many black people are being killed by police. My problem is with those at the top who pour millions of dollars into the “movement” and bus professional agitators to a location seeking to set the city on fire.

I was told that I was uninformed because I did not know about the 1500 protests. An interesting indictment, because this person 1) was unaware of the millions of dollars given to BLM by George Soros and other big money donors; 2) was unaware that unions are busing in paid agitators; 3) has watched none of the shooting videos; 4) knows very few of the names of the victims.

As I provided the statistics about how only 200-250 blacks are killed by police each year. How 70-80 of those cases are justified. Maybe 10-15% are questionable, and the remaining 10-15% are absolutely unjustified. These statistics are all available from government sites (FBI, CDC, etc.). This person actually told me that those statistics cannot be trusted.

I was even told that my opinions are based on videos, not what actually happened. Although they admitted to not watching any videos, this person believed that perhaps the evidence that I saw with my own eyes was possibly falsified. I suppose my eyes are deceiving me.

In arguing about justified shootings, I informed them that if one of my little ginger daughters pulled a gun on the police, I would expect her to be shot as well. It is NOT a racial issue.

“Have you ever lost someone close to you?” I was asked. Thankfully, I have not. However, according to this person, losing someone is extremely emotional and I cannot expect someone in pain like that to behave rationally.

I told them that if someone walked into my house and killed my family, I would more than likely be filled with rage, but I would not set fire to my innocent neighbor’s house. I understand the outrage. I get that the community may be hurting. I know that they seek justice. I do not believe that burning down a local CVS is proper exercise of the outrage and pain.

This person challenged my Christianity. They asked how a Christian could be okay with black people being killed. I told them that I am not okay with it, but there is no reasonable way to stop all of these shootings. No matter what training is implemented; no matter how many cameras are on the person and vehicles of police officers, perpetrators will still pull illegal firearms out and aim it at officers, thus, justifying shooting in self-defense.

This person told me that they have to be scared for their spouse and children because they are black, and might be shot during a routine traffic stop. I told them that out of a population of 350 million people, fewer than 100 are killed by police for “no reason.”

I also have to teach my daughters to not mouth off  and especially not pull out a weapon on a police officer. I told this person about being personally harassed by police several times in my life. I have been pulled over for no reason many times. I was sucker-punched by a black man during a basketball game and looked to the police for help as I was 17 at the time. The officer harassed me for 20 minutes, trying to get me to admit that I said the “n word,” which I did not. No witness said I did, but the officer could not believe that I was punched just for playing basketball despite a dozen or so eyewitnesses that backed up my story.

Having grown up as a pale, ginger boy in an all-black neighborhood, I got into fights. I was bullied and the victim of racism. I had to go to private school because it would have been worse for me had I gone to a public school.

This, apparently, is why I have “racism in my heart” now according to the person I was conversing with. I was a victim of racism, so now I must be racist. There is no evidence of this during my entire lifetime, yet I suppose I must be.

I mean, I also had some bad run-ins with white people. The only other white kids on my block broke into my house while we were at church and stole all of our video games and systems (and yes, there were many). In fact, I got into fistfights exclusively with white people in high school. Reflecting on this made me realize that I must also be racist toward white people. They were all men too, so I must now be a man-hating sexist. Makes sense, right?

No.

I was also told that my obvious outrage over being called a racist was more proof of my racism. The conversation ended when I asked if they had ever had a bad incident with a white person, and they simply said “not until now.”

“Wow.” I left the conversation with that one word response.

This is the never ending cycle of circular reasoning and straw man arguments that keeps people quiet about race in America today. Whenever the subject is broached, white people become racists. A conversation beginning with a call for unity and healing ended with charges of racism and personal attacks.

Unfortunately, I am too stubborn to run from the topic. I will still talk about race, and I will do so with some academic authority on the subject. I will do so with research, statistics, social theories, and actual data. I refuse to believe that one “must be black” to discuss black issues. With that logic, no blacks, Asians, Hispanics, Islanders, etc. should be able to discuss white issues, which, if you use the liberal academic talking points of the day, are all issues. The default of our society is white and male.

Women can talk about men. People of color can talk about whites. Yet the reverse is not allowed? Who is the racist? Who is ethnocentric now?

A “discussion” requires two people. If we are to solve any social problem, the “opposing” groups must engage in a dialogue. It is the basis for understanding one another. I look forward to being called “racist” more often, so long as I continue to press for conversations about tough issues. I can live with that, because I know that the Truth is on my side.

Karl Marx and the Forbidden Fruit

I am about to take a trip down a theoretical rabbit hole. Would you care to join me?

Karl Marx is one of the most quoted, inspiring, and powerful men that you probably know very little about. He is blamed for the current progressive movement, some very politically minded films, leftist politics, failed Communist empires, and dictators around the world. He is equally and unfairly given credit for his criticism of capitalism that has inspired filmmakers, radicals, revolutionaries, and politicians.

One cannot go to college in America or live in an anti-capitalist nation without having heard the man’s name. However, is he TRULY the one behind anti-Western, anti-capitalist, and anti-American revolutionary social movements?

Although the Communist Manifesto introduced the idea of religion being the “opiate of the people” — a drug that pacifies us so that we remain apathetic to the oppression and inequality forced on us by capitalism – Marx’s first written work was called The Union of the Faithful with Christ.

Have you ever heard about Karl Marx, the Christian? Here is an excerpt:

“Through love of Christ we turn our hearts at the same time toward our brethren who are inwardly bound to us and for whom He gave himself in sacrifice. . . Union with Christ could give an inner elevation, comfort in sorrow, calm trust, and a heart susceptible to human love, to everything noble and great, not for the sake of ambition and glory, but only for the sake of Christ.”

Or how about this when considering “the opiate of the people”:

“Religion itself teaches us that the Ideal toward which all strive sacrificed Himself for humanity, and who shall dare contradict such claims? If we have chosen the position in which we can accomplish the most for Him, then we can never be crushed by burdens, because they are only sacrifices made for the sake of all.”

However, shortly after receiving his high school certificate for “Religious Knowledge”, Marx made a complete reversal from the Christianity that he so eloquently wrote about. He began writing about avenging himself against God. This is not a form of atheism, because he clearly still believed in God. In other writings he dreamed of ruling the Earth on equal terms with the Almighty.

We know that evidence of Marx’s descent into darkness comes from a poem called “The Player” in which he claims to have sold his soul to Satan.

In a little know drama titled Oulanem, Marx wrote of a desire to destroy everything on Earth and drag humanity to the abyss where Satan will be chained.

There are several other little known writings and poems from Marx, as well as correspondences between he and his friends and family that highlight a direct turn from the man who wrote about the love of and union with Christ just a few years prior. [For more information on the subject, check out Marx & Satan by Richard Wurmbrand (1986)]

Karl Marx became a representative of Satan.

I want you to think of a story that we all know, regardless of our religious upbringing. The world began in a garden, a perfect place where man and woman believed that they were living a fulfilling life. Sure, God was there, and he is the one who set up all the rules for living in the garden, but it was a generally egalitarian existence. Yet when Eve ate the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, she became immediately aware of the inequality around her. Adam, too, ate and the veil of ignorance was lifted.

As Marx would put it, they achieved “class consciousness”—the sudden awareness of their situation as a lower class member of the proletariat; a “have not.”

God, on the other hand, is the ultimate “have.” After all, He literally has everything. God owns more forces of production than every factory owner who has ever lived combined.

The similarities between Marx’s ideas and “The Origin of Sin” are striking. Part of Adam’s curse is labor. Work is now difficult and unrewarding. Eve’s child delivery became painful. The rift between human beings widened throughout the generations. Familial relationships became strained. Even the labor of Cain and Able were alienating (another Marxist term).

Cain was alienated from his labor, as he did what he HAD to do rather than what he wanted to do. He was alienated from his peers, because Abel’s sacrifice was viewed as more worthy to God. He was alienated from nature in that he had to work in the field picking fruits and vegetables rather than tend to animals like his brother. Cain worked hard and toiled with sweat on his brow, not as a means to luxury, but for basic subsistence.

Marx, in his attacks on capitalism and religion, advocates that we abandon our relationships with God so that we can become “aware.” He is like Satan, offering us the “forbidden fruit” of knowledge.

Knowledge without wisdom, according to Solomon, is vanity. It is empty.

Furthermore, the book of Ecclesiastes provides an interesting commentary when you consider Marx’s ideals. “What profit hath a man of all his labour which he taketh under the sun?” Marx would say “none.” Solomon says “none.” The wisest man who ever lived went on to write about his fruitless pursuit of material goods. Solomon had more wine, property, women, and luxury than any hundred people could ever want. However, he was never satisfied.

Again, this is thousands of years before the existence of capitalism, which is the system that Marx exclusively blames for inequality and greed.

For Marx, the end game to this pursuit of materialism will inevitably lead to the fall of capitalism into a communist Utopia. Again, The Bible agrees that the entire worldly system will collapse into a New Heaven and New Earth which will solve the issue of inequality and forced, meaningless labor forever.

Satan is the opposite of God, yet people mistake the two. The anti-Christ is the opposite of Christ, yet people will believe that the former is the latter and worship him. Marx, as a representative tool of Lucifer has the opposite reasoning toward what The Almighty God has set out for us, yet bears striking similarities.

However, the ideas of Marx are not original. They are barely creative, and they are inspired by a being that is literally hell bent on dragging us down to the abyss for eternity.

So many humanists want to believe that Marx is somehow the champion of inequality. He is a mind born of The Enlightenment that uses science as a basis for understanding, rather that some outdated religious beliefs and appeal to God. Interesting, because none of his ideas are original. They can be found in and applied to the story of the first humans; a story largely passed over out of hatred or fear of Christianity. As a “Religious Knowledge” certificate earner, Marx would certainly have knowledge of Adam and Eve. Is it out of the realm of possibility that he, as a means to attack God, used the story of original sin as a catalyst for his revolutionary ideas?

So back to the question at hand: why Marx?

What if it was possible that Marx really did sell his soul to the Devil? Maybe Marx’s influence is actually Satanic; his words co-authored by a supernatural force that exceeds all reason. Perhaps the longevity of the doctrine of inequality written by an avowed God-hating Satanist cannot be explained by any rational thought.

As God breathed into The Bible and gave it life, perhaps Satan breathed into Marx’s writings and gave it death.