The saints at the Gospel Coalition are at it again.
They are doing the Lord’s work, giving us flannel-shirt wearing LARPers the hottest takes on the extreme Gospel measures the niggers in South Africa are taking to rectify the extreme “injustice” of the totally evil apartheid imposed upon the passive, helpless, blacks by the aggressive, mean, white people.
For instance, Brett McCracken, a “senior editor at the Gospel Coalition” and resident of the zealously Christian multicultural state of California, has penned both a confused and obfuscating piece of travel literature that includes things about churches in it. Confused because he tries to reconcile his desire to insist upon racial egalitarianism being the bedrock of Christian ecclesiology, meaning white people must accept and deal with their institutional and demographic displacement because of Jesus or something. This belief is based upon the fallacious equivocation of soteriological egalitarianism with sociological egalitarianism.
McCracken attempts to reconcile the cliché meme of their being “no color line in heaven”, and therefore Christians being a fundamentally eschatological, brown and beautiful community, with his desire to see those filthy white people in South Africa get their land expropriated and systematically murdered, legally and informally, by a hostile black majority in control of the state. Or, as he puts it, the need for “social justice”.
McCracken (too many C’s), like his fellow white genocide advocates at the Gospel Coalition and the ERLC, must hold both of these “theological” principles to be true simultaneously. They must assert the lie that just because race is no longer a barrier to receiving salvation and that one must no longer be a Jew to be saved, white people must surrender their church spaces and countries to brown savages who not only worship differently and believe different things than they do, but will engage in systematic oppression and extermination of whites, both through the state or by incentivizing black-on-white crime with little to no state prosecution efforts. Because everyone can go to heaven, we must model our earthly home likewise.
But not so fast, racist. DYK that racial egalitarianism implies just type of social justice, known now by the gay euphemism of “racial reconciliation”, where faggots posing as institutional leaders use the Bible to guilt white people into giving brown people both more than they already have and deserve?
To these lunatics, their reconstructed Jesus means both living for a brown heaven and making sure white people are wiped out down here on earth. Or, making white churches brown and white countries brown through the shedding of white people’s blood.
This is a necessary sacrifice that these cloistered, globe-trotting prophets are willing to make. The “Gospel”, at the price of white people’s ecclesiological and political existence and self-determination.
Not a baaaaaad price if you ask Brett, since his travel literature doesn’t mention the brutal slaughter of white people once in its 2200 words.
There are few things I love more than visiting churches in other cultures and contexts and worshiping there with brothers and sisters in Christ, singing songs both familiar and foreign, often in languages I don’t understand. As far from home as I might physically be in those moments—whether across the country or across oceans—the corporate worship of God’s people grounds me in a deeper sense of “home.”
What the hell does this even mean? You feel at home singing songs with complete strangers in foreign places in a language you don’t even know’? Does this sentence even make sense? This is either some high-level virtue signaling about how much Brett loves brown people or, like a woman, his little emotions are just getting carried away with the sensation of novelty during this exotic experience, therefore confusing this relatively common phenomenon with something theologically true.
Singing this song with the saints of Common Ground Church, I felt that pang of joyful longing C. S. Lewis described as sehnsucht, knowing that one day this ephemeral glimpse of heaven will become an eternal reality. One day the diversity of God’s people, from every nation, tribe, and tongue, will be together for good, bowing before the Lamb.
But for now we are here, in earthly space and time, situated in a particularity that matters (even if it is not ultimate). Though I could sing the worship songs and feel united to my South African brethren on a profound level, our respective cultural quirks remained. They didn’t understand my apathy about cricket and biltong, and I didn’t understand their apathy about basketball and drip coffee. I tried to explain President Trump to them, and they tried to explain South African political parties to me, but both subjects were too complex to grasp in the hours we had together.
This is simple Brett, this doesn’t need a translator: white people have things, black people take them. The only debate concerns the means and the extent of the genocide that will result. Will the blacks simply allow other blacks to kill whites off in even increasing rates? Or will the black government officially legalize the confiscation of white property with a Parliamentary vote and a piece of paper to make it more respectable? Judging by the way things are going, it looks like their going to slide the knife in legally, thank God eh Brett? Social Justice at last!
You probably can’t “understand” it because there is no place in your cultural and ideological conditioning for white people to be in a structurally oppressed position. Not because its “too complex”.
Wherever I go in the world as a Christian, I am close to family.
It’s a strange thing, the body of Christ. We are shockingly global to the point that, wherever I go in the world as a Christian, I am close to family. Yet this family is full of members whose situations are incredibly diverse. We are a people whose homeland is ultimately elsewhere, but who are nevertheless placed in geography and culture now. We are a people whose destiny is ultimately eternal, but who are presently temporal, bound up in a history that involves us and relentlessly unfolds around us.
Translation: its a good thing that white people lost political power in SA because I believe Jesus wants multiculturalism. However, they haven’t done enough for these brown people. Lemme shill for the kikes a little more in this article.
This is South Africa. It’s a country where—not unlike in my own home state of California—the disparity between the “haves” and “have nots” is stark, bound up with generations of racial injustice and systemic oppression. Apartheid may have officially ended in the early 1990s, but its legacy is palpable everywhere you go in South Africa.
Apartheid may have officially ended in the early 1990s, but its legacy is palpable everywhere you go in South Africa.
Again, the tried and somehow still-not-boring institutional argument for racial sociological disparity. The only reasons blacks are poor and crime-prone is because white people swooped in and institutionally oppressed them. Besides for this fact, before white people appeared and in areas that are completely black, blacks manifest the same behavioral patterns and social structures as whites. Amirite guys? I mean, folks?
One of the country’s pressing political debates concerns land reform. Under the policies of state-sponsored segregation and apartheid (and before that, colonialism), much land was taken from non-white South Africans.
I mentioned the word “obfuscating” to describe this self-tryst because this is patently false. Most of the white owned land was originally settled by white Europeans several centuries ago. It was either cultivated virgin soil or it was purchased off of a different group of Africans that lived in certain parts of the land now known to South Africa. Brett appears to be under the delusion that SA was like America in the 18th and 19th centuries, with a continent full of Indians that white people systematically removed from their traditional hunting grounds.
Unfortunately for the Anti-White Coalition, this is not the case in SA. The Bantus, which compose a majority of black South Africans, were a northern racial group that invaded SA by slaughtering hundreds of thousands of blacks after much of the land was already settled by whites.
These are the obvious facts, yet this doesn’t matter to the senior editors at the GC. The means of lying or being willfully historically ignorant are justified for the Gospel end of white displacement and victimization.
And 24 years removed from apartheid, the majority of this land still belongs to white people. There is broad agreement in South Africa that some form of land redistribution is necessary, but the question is how? Should white-owned land be expropriated with or without compensation? What lessons can be learned from the experience of Zimbabwe, whose government seizure of white-owned land 18 years ago led to weaker agricultural sector and general economic decline? Would land redistribution in an already volatile economy send South Africa back into recession?
Broad agreement eh Brett? Who composes this broad agreement? Surely its not a monoethnic agreement of brown people against white political parties? That would seem to indicate some type of racial antagonism by these noble yet oppressed blacks towards those disgusting white people who need to hurry up and die already.
Also, the only reason Brett seems hesitant about “land redistribution” is because of the potential negative externalities it could have on black people. Let that sink in. In a country where being a white farmer is twice as dangerous than being a cop in a majority black country and four times more dangerous than being a citizen, and where white people are literally being tortured until they die, woman are raped for hours on end while their husbands are forced to watch, people’s heads are crushed and they are set alight, electrical drills are used to drill holes in their feet after they’ve already been tortured in other ways, the Gospel Coalition is worried that land confiscation is bad because it would result in hungry blacks, not dead whites.
Many black South Africans feel the pace of land reform has been too slow since 1994, when Nelson Mandela’s African National Congress (ANC) party set a goal of transferring 30 percent of white-owned land back to blacks by the year 2000. But in 2018, only about 10 percent of this land has been redistributed since apartheid’s end. Naturally, the issue feels urgent for black South Africans, who represent 80 percent of the nation’s population but own only 4 percent of the land, according to a recent government land audit. Meanwhile whites, who represent 10 percent of the population, own 72 percent of the land.
Again, a quick online check proves that this is a patent falsehood. Not only do black people own whatever urban slums they exist in, but they literally have segregated black ethnostates in SA assigned to them under white control where it is illegal for white people to settle in. These laws, unlike those favoring white land ownership, do not seem to be under threat of being confiscated from the blacks.
Are black ethnostates “Gospel”?
One last snippet of this will do for our purposes.
Like the land reform debates and “whose land?” question, “whose history?” questions are tense and complex in South Africa.
For Christians—people of the resurrection whose ultimate horizon is hope—it might be easy to focus on the promised future and downplay the painful past. But however right our eschatological orientation may be, as we look toward our eternal inheritance, it shouldn’t lead us to absolve ourselves of the difficulties raised by the past and encountered in the present. We shouldn’t say “can’t we just move on?” and expect the injustices of history to resolve themselves with the magic of time.
We’re embedded in time—as place—for a reason. It’s on us to embrace the specificity of where and what God has called us to, however challenging it is. I met one white pastor in Johannesburg who joked that he sometimes envies the non-Christians around him who just live their lives, enjoying watching rugby and drinking beer, unburdened by thorny questions of social justice and racial reconciliation.
This again illustrates the inherent logical contradictions in the Left’s ideology that was pointed out at the beginning of this article. They require a theological reconstruction that emphasizes eschatological multiculturalism for the purposes of denying white people any exclusively white church spaces because that’s a sin that started in the 1960’s. We are all “one” because heaven is one location, according to these people. However, we can’t wait just sit around and wait for heaven to happen; these people have also discovered at their university (not the Bible) that white people must also surrender political and existential sovereignty to racially antagonistic people, in SA and in the Western world.
The fact that this guy, and other GC propogandists, refuse to mention the white genocide that is happening and is about to intensify in SA with the expropriation of white farmlands shows that, fundamentally, self-conscious white people who do not relish an existence of inevitable brutal victimization that occurs at the hands of brown people are not included in their delusional, anti-Biblical eschaton.
Maybe there’s a reason God told humans to disperse, several times throughout the Bible. And maybe there’s a reason He took specific precautions in the past to thwart the multi-racial social structure these faggots are intent upon erecting.
However, this conclusion would require the moral fortitude to accept, actual theological study, and a deconstruction of the predictable anti-white hermeneutic these people take with them when they do get around to actually reading a Bible. Courage, honesty, and compassion. Virtues that know one in their right mind would ascribe to the white-hating fanatics at the GC and the ERLC.
I wait with baited breath for their article rationalizing the inevitable slaughter of whites as a self-inflicted event while they faithfully do their part for Globohomostinople to facilitate massacres by obfuscating to their faggy bourgeois, urban readers.