Obama’s Throne of Satan (Pergamon Altar)

Obama’s stage at the 2008 Democratic convention was designed in the style of the Pergamon Altar, a Greek Temple, which is mentioned in the book of Revelation as the “Seat of Satan” or the “Throne of Satan,” depending on the translation. The biblical reference is not just to the altar, but to Pergamos as a regional center of the Roman state and a center of occult/pagan worship and persecution of the early Christians.

The Roman state “Imperial Cult” was a religion, in which the roman emperor was worshiped at Pergamos as a god. The black nationalist doctrine of Obama’s Trinity church in Chicago also teaches that the black man is the manifestation of God on earth and one can self-exalt himself to god status. That man can become a higher being or God and the self-worship of man is a tenet of satanism/Luciferianism. Click the images below for more info.

A temple is a place of worship. So, it seems that this bizarre stage design is alluding to the worship of Obama and the dedication of his campaign to Luciferian principles, much like Saul Alinsky dedicated his book, “Rules for Radicals” to Lucifer. Rules for Radicals is said to be the Bible of community organizers like Obama. Alinsky was deceased by the time Obama moved to Chicago, but he was trained as a community organizer by Alinsky’s top students.

Many have speculated that Obama is a pathological Narcissist, also popularly called an “egomaniac” or “megalomaniac.” Extreme Narcissists, often believe they are a divine being, a prophet, mouthpiece of God or actually God, himself. Extreme Narcissists are drawn to cult leadership, because it validates the mentality of their psychological disorder. See this clip for more info about Narcissism.

Documentary on Narcissism (Video)

Obama may do these things in part as a form of provocation. In this case, though, it also provides an indication of his occult religious belief. It should not be necessary to point out that it is very dangerous to have a president, who is unprincipled enough to use such tactics and unstable enough to exhibit obvious signs of a bizarre religious belief.

Obama appears to consider such national and international events, in general, as an opportunity for provocation and ritual. There have been several other such unusual occurrences, such as his saying once that he is God during a creepy episode at the 2011 9/11 memorial, the photo of the Soviet warships during the 2012 DNC event honoring US veterans, his first foreign speech in Cairo, which is of special significance to Black Nationalists, etc.

Occultists and agitators often try to provoke the opposition into a hysteria. Obama hopes we will overreact and can be marginalized and made an object of ridicule. In that way he can animate his cult-like following.

Pergamon Alter - Satan's Seat of the Book of Revelation
Pergamon Altar – Satan’s Seat of the Book of Revelation

Below is the quotation from the Bible.

Revelation 2:12 And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write; These things saith he which hath the sharp sword with two edges;
Revelation 2:13 I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, even where Satan’s seat is: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth.

The significance of this temple for a presidential candidate is quite disturbing. Antipas, an early Christian martyr, was roasted alive inside a hollow bronze bull on the altar, because he refused to renounce his Christian faith and worship Augustus Caesar, the Roman dictator, and the other idols. The bull was designed so that the screams of the victim as he was burned to death would make the bull appear to come to life during the sacrifice.

The Black Liberation Theology of Wright’s pseudo-Christian sect in Chicago is also a would-be state religion, holding that the black race is divine and that the black messiah will arise from the black race with a divine mission to destroy America, as we know it, and create a black-ruled utopia, a millennial kingdom, which, in concept is similar to the 1000-year Reich. Reich means “kingdom” in German and millennial, of course, means “1000-year”.

Hitler’s architect, Albert Speer, also modeled the Tribune at the Zeppelin field in Nuremberg, Germany after the Pergamon Altar. The Zeppelin field was the site of the Nazi Party’s annual national rally (Reichstag) and where Hitler was worshiped by the faithful like a god. (See the documentary film “The Architecture of Doom” by Peter Cohen, in which is it mentioned that Hitler’s Tribune design is based on that of the Pergamon Altar.)

Pagan religion is generally about self-worship of man and tribal leaders. The Gnostic occult is a combination of paganism, Neo-Platonic Greek philosophy and the apocalyptic end times theology of the Zoroastrians. Worship of man and his works (the state) is also a central concept of the occult and Satanism/Luciferianism. Satanists frequently admire Hitler for his spiritual power and satanic will, whether they agree with his racism and methods, or not.

Tribune at the Zeppelin Field in Nuremberg (Click for more info)
Tribune at the Zeppelin Field in Nuremberg (Click for more info)

Below is an image of one of the rallies in Nuremberg at the Zeppelin field in front of the tribune modeled after Satan’s Altar of Pergamos. Most Germans probably did not realize that they were heiling Hitler, while he addressed them from a perverse replica of Satan’s Throne of Revelation, or maybe they just did not care. It was an omen of the apocalypse to come. An early Christian martyr was burned at Pergomos as a sacrifice. Hitler used the altar as his tribune and slaughtered 10 million Christians and Jews as his “sacrifice.” Now, Obama has used a similarly designed temple as his own tribune in his nomination convention.

Reichsparteitag - Hitler speaks from the Throne of Satan
Reichsparteitag – Hitler speaks from his Throne of Satan

Next is Obama’s stage as the democratic convention in 2008 in Denver. The resemblance to a smaller version of Hitler’s Tribune in Nuremberg is obvious and the design is even more like that of the Pergamon altar than is Hitler’s Tribune in Nuremberg. There have been many references to Obama being a messiah or god by Obama’s supporters and in the media. The Founder (~1920) of the black nationalist mass movement, Marcus Garvey, recommended that black groups emulate white supremacist groups, because he thought supremacist ideology and religion was the secret of the success of the white race. Garvey, known as the prophet of black nationalism, stated that some day the black race would produce their own Hitler.

The faithful Worshipping at Obama's Altar
The faithful Worship at Obama’s own throne

These Americans also do not realize that they are hailing Obama in this sick spectacle, while he is perched upon a stage modeled after the biblical Satan’s Throne and Hitler’s Tribune. Black Liberation Theology holds that the black race is divine and will produce a messiah, or messiahs (plural) who will lead the destruction of America and white society. The racial concept is similar (in reverse) to the racial concepts of Nazism and also to the racist, apocalyptic identity version of Christianity that the Nazis forced on the German churches. History repeats itself, the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce, at least we must hope that it is only a farce. The Nazi movement was an exception among occult messianic movements in the impact that it had.

Obama speaks at the Nazi-revered Victory Column in Berlin
Obama speaks at the Nazi-revered
Victory Column in Berlin
Black Liberation Theology can be considered therefore a form of Luciferianism, in so far as it teaches the exaltation and worship of the (black) man, while the white race is scapegoated and demonized. This is the mirror opposite of Nazism, which exalts the white race and demonized Jews and people of color. Self-worship is a form of Luciferianism, whether one worships the red demon as a being or not.

So, the nomination stage can be considered to be an altar to Satan, not just because it is designed to look like the Pergamon Altar, but because Obama’s religion under Jeremiah Wright, Jr. is a form of satanism, and there have been many references to him being a god/messiah.

This design is of a very famous temple, but it is not the common design of a Greek temple. It is difficult to imagine that this design just happens to be coincidental and such bizarre occurrences happen too often to always be chance. It is more likely an intentional provocation and a symbol of Obama’s subversive inverted values relative to the rest of society.

About one month earlier, Obama gave a speech in Berlin, at the Siegessäule or “Victory Column”, just a short walk away from both the Pergamon Museum, where ‘Satan’s Altar’ is on display and also next to the bunker where Hitler committed suicide in April 30, 1945, Walpurgis night. The Victory Column is itself still seen by some Berliners as a Nazi symbol. It was a very fitting homage. The speech was given before a wildly-cheering, mesmerized crowd, the size and enthusiasm of which had not been seen in Berlin probably since the 1930’s and 40’s for such a political speech.

Obama is a disciple of Saul Alinsky, who dedicated his famous book on political organizing to Lucifer. Alinsky’s techniques of organizing were based on the techniques of Al Capone’s mob. Alinksy said that the purpose of his method was foremost to “gain power,” which reflects the Luciferian ethic. Click here to see a review of other Luciferian influences on Obama and historical comparisons to other messianic movements.

Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins — or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom — Lucifer. Quoted from Saul Alinsky’s book “Rules for Radicals.”

If Alinsky dedicated his book to Lucifer, why should we be surprised, if Obama, a disciple of Alinsky, and also a member of a sect with a doctrine based on the principles of satanism, has dedicated his presidency to Lucifer?

ROBESPIERRE AND THE CULT OF THE SUPREME BEING

Another example of worship of leaders comes from the French Revolution. Like Obama and Adolf Hitler, the leader of the Jacobins and dictator of France, Robespierre, constructed a throne, so that he could be worshiped like a god at the fests of the Cult of Reason, also called the Cult of the Supreme Being. This was a Luciferian religion, which was made the state religion of revolutionary France. This painting depicts Robespierre seated on his throne. A small artificial mountain was built for the throne and he would mount the throne wearing a toga during the festivities of the cult.

The Throne of Robespierre, Dictator of France

Robespierre led the effort to de-Christianize France and the slaughter of several hundred thousand people. Cathedrals were were turned into stables for horses or were demolished. In the rebellious province of Vendée, Christians were exterminated by the hundred thousands, including men, women and children.

There are many examples from history of would be “great leaders” who wanted to be worshiped as a god. Adolf Hitler and Robespierre are just two examples from recent history. From a historical perspective, it is not unusual to see this type of behavior among megalomaniacs and psychopaths.

Shocking Quotes From Black Liberation Theology

This post provides some shocking quotes from foundation books of Black Liberation Theology. The goals of Black Liberation Theology are to destroy white society, America and what they call the white church (traditional Christianity). Black Liberation Theology is, of course, the doctrine of Obama’s “church” in Chicago. Jeremiah Wright declared that as there doctrine. This is his professed (political) religion.

Black Liberation doctrine holds that any and all actions are justified in destroying the white enemy and America. This page contains several dozen excepts from the first two books by James H. Cone, who first canonized Black Liberation Theology.

Black Liberation Theology is a branch of black nationalism, which is a 100-year-old mass movement of several different religious sects, based on black identity, that variously present themselves as Jewish, Christian and Muslim, though they are not orthodox in any of these religions. Black Liberation Theology was derived in large part from the theology of the Nation of Islam in the 1960’s, now headed by Louis Farrakhan. The Nation of Islam is not orthodox Islam, but a cult-like, black sect.

Black Liberation Theology is designed to be more sophisticated than the doctrine of the Nation of Islam, in order to better appeal to black urban professionals, and to infiltrate the hateful concepts of black nationalism more readily into the black churches and black community.

The racial basis of the beliefs of the Black Nationalist movement are the mirror image of racist white identity movements, such as the Nazi Christian Identity movement and the Ku Klux Klan. The founder of the Black Nationalist mass movement, Marcus Garvey, mandated as far back as the 1920’s that that blacks should form groups that emulate white supremacy groups, such as the Ku Klux Klan. This is the origin of the Nazi-like racial concepts of Black Liberation Theology and other black sects that are the heirs of the Garvey movement. Garvey prophesied that one day the black race would produce their own “Hitler.”

<

div class=”WordSection1″>

From “A Black Theology of Liberation” by James H. Cone (1970)

Orbis Books, Maryknoll, NY, Printed June 2008

Page

 

xii

Oppressors never like to hear the truth in a socio-political context defined by their lies. That was why a Black Theology of Liberation was often rejected as racism in reverse by many whites, particularly theologians. For example, Father Andrew M. Greeley referred to my perspective on black theology as a "Nazi mentality," "a theology filled with hatred for white people and the assumption of a moral superiority of black over white."’ White reactions to black theology never disturbed me too much, because Malcolm X had prepared me for them. "With skillful manipulating of the press," said Malcolm, "they’re able to make the victim look like the criminal and the criminal look like the victim."’

9

Because white theology has consistently preserved the integrity of the community of oppressors, I conclude that it is not Christian theology at all.’ When we speak about God as related to human­kind in the black-white struggle, Christian theology can only mean black theology, a theology that speaks of God as related to black liberation. If we agree that the gospel is the proclamation of God’s liberating activity, that the Christian community is an oppressed community that participates in that activity and that theology is the discipline arising from within the Christian community as it seeks to develop adequate language for its relationship to God’s liberation, then black theology is Christian theology.

It is unthinkable that oppressors could identify with oppressed existence and thus say something relevant about God’s liberation of the oppressed. In order to be Christian theology, white theology must cease being white theology and become black theology by denying whiteness as an acceptable form of human existence and affirming blackness as God’s intention for humanity.

10

Black theology will not spend too much time trying to answer its critics, because it is accountable only to the black community. Refusing to be separated from that community, black theology seeks to articulate the theological self-determination of blacks, providing some ethical and religious categories for the black revo­lution in America. It maintains that all acts which participate in the destruction of white racism are Christian, the liberating deeds of God. All acts which impede the struggle of black self­ determination-black power-are anti-Christian, the work of Satan.

11

That white America has issued a death warrant for being black is evident in the white brutality inflicted on black persons. Though whites may deny it, the ghettos of this country say otherwise. Masters always pre­tend that they are not masters, insisting that they are only doing what is best for society as a whole, including the slaves. This is, of course, the standard rhetoric of an oppressive society. Blacks know better. They know that whites have only one purpose: the destruc­tion of everything which is not white.

   In this situation, blacks are continually asking, often uncon­sciously, "When will the white overlord decide that blackness in any form must be exterminated?" The genocide of Amerindians is a reminder to the black community that white oppressors are capable of pursuing a course of complete annihilation of everything black. And the killing and the caging of black leaders make us think that black genocide has already begun.

12

It is in this situation that black theology seeks to speak the word of God. It says that the God who was revealed in the life of oppressed Israel and who came to us in the incarnate Christ and is present today as the Holy Spirit has made a decision about the black condition. God has chosen to make the black condition God’s condition! It is a continuation of the incarnation in twentieth-century America. God’s righteousness will liberate the oppressed of this nation and "all flesh shall see it together." It is this certainty that makes physical life less than ultimate and thus en­ables blacks courageously to affirm blackness and its liberating power as ultimate. When persons feel this way, a revolution is in the making.

With the assurance that God is on our side, we can begin to make ready for the inevitable-the decisive encounter between black and white existence.
White appeals to "wait and talk it over" are irrelevant when children are dying and men and women are being tortured. We will not let whitey cool this one with his pious love ethic but will seek to enhance our hostility, bringing it to its full manifestation. Black survival is at stake here, and we blacks must define and assert the conditions necessary for our being-in-the­-world. Only we can decide how much we can endure from white racists. And as we make our decision in the midst of life and death, being and nonbeing, the role of black theology is to articulate this decision by pointing to the revelation of God in the black liberation struggle.

20

The mind must be freed from the values of an oppressive society. It involves prophetic condemnation of society so that God’s word can be clearly distinguished from the words of human beings. Such a task is especially difficult in America, a nation demonically deceived about what is good, true, and beautiful. The oppression in this country is sufficiently camouflaged to allow many Americans to believe that things are not really too bad. White theologians, not having felt the sting of oppression, will find it most difficult to criticize this nation, for the condemnation of America entails their own condemnation.

Black thinkers are in a different position. They cannot be black and identified with the powers that be. To be black is to be commit­ted to destroying everything this country loves and adores. Creativ­ity and passion are possible when one stands where the black person stands, the one who has visions of the future because the present is unbearable. And the black person will cling to that future as a means of passionately rejecting the present.

25

   The black experience is the feeling one has when attacking the enemy of black humanity by throwing a Molotov cocktail into a white-owned building and watching it go up in flames. We know, of course, that getting rid of evil takes something more than burning down buildings, but one must start somewhere.

   Being black is a beautiful experience. It is the sane way of living in an insane environment. Whites do not understand it; they can only catch glimpses of it in sociological reports and historical studies. The black experience is possible only for black persons.

28

Blacks need to see some correlations between divine salvation and black culture. For too long Christ has been pictured as a blue-eyed honky. Black theologians are right: we need to dehonkify him and thus make him relevant to the black condition.

30

For black theology, revelation is not just a past event or a contemporary event in which it is difficult to recognize the activity of God. Revelation is a black event — it is what blacks are doing about their liberation. I have spoken of the black experience, black history, and black culture as theological sources because they are God at work liberating the oppressed.

31

It is indeed the biblical witness that says that God is a God of liberation, who speaks to the oppressed and abused, and assures them that divine righteousness will indicate their suffering. It is the Bible that tells us that God became human in Jesus Christ so that the kingdom of God would make freedom a reality for all human beings.This is the meaning of the resurrection of Jesus. The human being no longer has to be a slave to anybody, but must rebel against all the principalities and powers which make human exist­ence subhuman. It is in this light that black theology is affirmed as a twentieth-century analysis of God’s work in the world.

37

This is an awesome task for black theology. It is so easy to sacrifice one for the other. There is a tendency, on the one hand, to deny the relevance of Jesus Christ for black liberation, especially in view of white prostitution of the gospel in the interests of slavery and white supremacy. One can be convinced that Jesus Christ is the savior and God of whites and thus can have nothing to do with black self-determination. And yet, what other name is there? The name of Jesus has a long history in the black community. Blacks know the source from which the name comes, but they also know the reality to which that name refers. Despite its misuse in the white community (even the devil is not prohibited from adopting God’s name), the black community is convinced of the reality of Jesus Christ’s presence and his total identification with their suffering. They never believed that slavery was his will. Every time a white master came to his death, blacks believed that it was the work of God inflicting just judgment in recompense for the suffering of God’s people. Black theology cannot ignore this spirit in the black community if it is going to win the enthusiasm of the community it serves.

38

Black theology must realize that the white Jesus has no place in the black community, and it is our task to destroy him. We must replace him with the black messiah, as Albert Cleage would say, a messiah who sees his existence as inseparable from black liberation und the destruction of white racism.

38

What does the name (Christ) mean when black people are burning buildings and white people are responding with riot-police control? Whose side is Jesus on? The norm of black theology, which identifies revelation as a manifesta­tion of the black Christ, says that he (Christ) is those very blacks whom white society shoots and kills. The contemporary Christ is in the black ghetto, making decisions about white existence and black liberation.

 Of course, this interpretation of theology will seem strange to most whites, and even some blacks will wonder whether it is really true that Christ is black. But the truth of the statement is not dependent on white or black affirmation, but on the reality of Christ himself who is presently breaking the power of white racism. This and this alone is the norm for black-talk about God.

46

  When we apply this view of God’s revelation to the existing situation of blacks in America, we immediately realize that the black revolution in America is the revelation of God. Revelation means black power-that is, the "complete emancipation of black people from white oppression by whatever means black people deem necessary."’It is blacks telling whites where to get off, and a willingness to accept the consequences.

  God’s revelation has nothing to do with white suburban minis­ters admonishing their congregation to be nice to black persons. It has nothing to do with voting for open occupancy or holding a memorial service for Martin Luther King, Jr. God’s revelation means a radical encounter with the structures of power which King fought against to his death. It is what happens in a black ghetto when the ghettoized decide to strike against their enemies. In a word, God’s revelation means liberation-nothing more, nothing less.

51

Black theology does not deny that all persons are sinners. What it denies is white reflections on the sin of blacks. Only blacks can speak about sin in a black perspective and apply it to black and white persons. The white vision of reality is too distorted and renders whites incapable of talking to the oppressed about their shortcomings.

  According to black theology, the sin of the oppressed is not that they are responsible for their own enslavement-far from it. Their sin is that of trying to "understand" enslavers, to "love" them on their own terms. As the oppressed now recognize their situation in the light of God’s revelation, they know that they should have killed their oppressors instead of trying to "love" them.

55

The reality of God is presupposed in black theology. Black theology is an attempt to analyze the nature of that reality, asking what we can say about the nature of God in view of God’s self­disclosure in biblical history and the oppressed condition of black Americans.

If we take the question seriously, it becomes evident that there is no simple answer to it. To speak of God and God’s participation in the liberation of the oppressed of the land is a risky venture in any society. But if the society is racist and also uses God-language as an instrument to further the cause of human humiliation, then the task of authentic theological speech is even more dangerous and difficult.

It is dangerous because the true prophet of the gospel of God must become both "anti-Christian" and "unpatriotic." It is impos­sible to confront a racist society, with the meaning of human existence grounded in commitment to the divine, without at the same time challenging the very existence of the national structure and all its institutions, especially the established churches. All national institutions represent the interests of society as a whole. We live in a nation which is committed to the perpetuation of white supremacy, and it will try to exterminate all who fail to support this ideal. The genocide of the Amerindian is evidence of that fact. Black theology represents that community of blacks who refuse to cooperate in the exaltation of whiteness and the degradation of blackness. It proclaims the reality of the biblical God who is actively destroying everything that is against the manifestation of black human dignity.

  
Because whiteness by its very nature is against blackness, the black prophet is a prophet of national doom. He proclaims the end of the "American Way," for God has stirred the soul of the black community, and now that community will stop at nothing to claim the freedom that is three hundred and fifty years overdue. The black prophet is a rebel with a cause, the cause of over twenty-five million American blacks and all oppressed persons everywhere. It is God’s cause because God has chosen the blacks as God’s own people. And God has chosen them not for redemptive suffering but for freedom.

59

  
It is not the task of black theology to remove the influence of the divine in the black community. Its task is to interpret the divine element in the forces and achievements of black liberation. Black theology must retain God-language despite its perils, because the black community perceives its identity in terms of divine presence. Black theology cannot create new symbols independent of the black community and expect blacks to respond. It must stay in the black community and get down to the real issues at hand ("cutting throats" to use LeRoi Jones’s phrase) and not waste too much time discussing the legitimacy of religious language.

  The legitimacy of any language, religious or otherwise, is deter­mined by its usefulness in the struggle for liberation. That the God­ language of white religion has been used to create a docile spirit among blacks so that whites could aggressively attack them is beyond question. But that does not mean that we cannot kill the white God, so that the presence of the black God can become known in the black-white encounter. The white God is an idol created by racists, and we blacks must perform the iconoclastic task of smashing false images.

61

When black theologians analyze the doctrine of God, seeking to relate it to the emerging black revolution in America, they must be especially careful not to put this new wine (the revelation of God as expressed in black power) into old wineskins (white folk-religion). The black theology view of God must be sharply distinguished from white distortions of God.

62

   The goal of black theology is the destruction of everything white, so that blacks can be liberated from alien gods.

   The God of black liberation will not be confused with a blood­thirsty white idol. Black theology must show that the black God has nothing to do with the God worshiped in white churches whose primary purpose is to sanctify the racism of whites and to daub the wounds of blacks.

63

Because blacks have come to know themselves as black, and because that blackness is the cause of their own love of themselves and hatred of whiteness, the blackness of God is the key to our knowledge of God. The blackness of God, and everything implied by it in a racist society, is the heart of the black theology doctrine of God. There is no place in black theology for a colorless God in a society where human beings suffer precisely because of their color. The black theologian must reject any conception of God which stifles black self-determination by picturing God as a God of all peoples. Either God is identified with the oppressed to the point that their experience becomes God’s experience, or God is a God of racism.

65

In contrast to this racist view of God, black theology proclaims God’s blackness. Those who want to know who God is and what God is doing must know who black persons are and what they are doing. This does not mean lending a helping hand to the poor and unfortunate blacks of society. It does not mean joining the war on poverty! Such acts are sin offerings that represent a white way of assuring themselves that they are basically "good" persons. Knowing God means being on the side of the oppressed, becoming one with them, and participating in the goal of liberation. We must become black with God!

66

…everyone in this country knows, blacks are those who say they are black, regardless of skin color. In the literal sense a black person is anyone who has "even one drop of black blood in his or her veins:"

  But "becoming black with God" means more than just saying "I am black," if it involves that at all. The question "How can white persons become black?" is analogous to the Philippian jailer’s question to Paul and Silas, "What must I do to be saved?" The implication is that if we work hard enough at it, we can reach the goal. But the misunderstanding here is the failure to see that blackness or salvation (the two are synonymous) is the work of God, not a human work. It is not something we accomplish; it is a gift. That is why Paul and Silas said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved."

   To believe is to receive the gift and utterly to reorient one’s existence on the basis of, the gift. The gift is so unlike what humans expect that when it is offered and accepted, we become completely new creatures. This is what the Wholly Otherness of God means. God comes to us in God’s blackness, which is wholly unlike white­ness. To receive God’s revelation is to become black with God by joining God in the work of liberation.

  Even some blacks will find this view of God hard to handle. Having been enslaved by the God of white racism so long, they will have difficulty believing that God is identified with their struggle for freedom. Becoming one of God’s disciples means rejecting whiteness and accepting themselves as they are in all their physical blackness. This is what the Christian view of God means for blacks.

70

Black theology cannot accept a view of God which does not represent God as being for oppressed blacks and thus against white oppressors. Living in a world of white oppressors, blacks have no time for a neutral God. The brutalities are too great and the pain too severe, and this means we must know where God is and what God is doing in the revolution. There is no use for a God who loves white oppressors the same as oppressed blacks. We have had too much of white love, the love that tells blacks to turn the other cheek and go the second mile. What we need is the divine love; as ex­pressed in black power, which is the power of blacks to destroy their oppressors, here and now, by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject God’s love.

72

Black theology will accept only a love of God which participates in the destruction of the white oppressor. With Fanon black theol­ogy takes literally Jesus’ statement, "the last will be first, and the first last:" Black power "is the putting into practice of this sen­tence.""

73

Righteousness is that side of God’s love which expresses itself through black liberation. God makes black what humans have made white. Righteousness is that aspect of God’s love which prevents it from being equated with sentimentality. Love is a refusal to accept whiteness. To love is to make a decision against white racism. Because love means that God meets our needs, God’s love for white oppressors could only mean wrath-that is, a destruction of their whiteness and a creation of blackness.

74

   If God, not whiteness, is the ground of my being, then God is the only source for reference regarding how I should behave in the world. Complete obedience is owed only to God, and every alien loyalty must be rejected. Therefore, as a black person living in a white world that defines human existence according to white inhumanity, I cannot relax and pretend that all is well with black humanity. Rather it is incumbent upon me by the freedom granted by the creator to deny whiteness and affirm blackness as the essence of God.

  That is why it is necessary to speak of the black revolution rather than reformation. The idea of reformation suggests that there is still something "good" in the system itself, which needs only to be cleaned up a bit. This is a false perception of reality. The system is based on whiteness, and what is necessary is a replacement of whiteness with blackness. God as creator means that oppressed humanity is free to revolutionize society, assured that acts of libera­tion are the work of God.

82

We know who God is, not because we can move beyond our finiteness but because the transcendent God has become immanent in our history, transforming human events into divine events of liberation. It is the divine involvement in historical events of liberation that makes theology God-centered; but because God participates in the historical liberation of humanity, we can speak of God only in relationship to human history. In this sense, theology is anthropology.

94

This is not intended as a put-down of white young persons who are moving against their elders for one of the first times in Ameri­can history; and I must say that they do appear to be quite human at times. The positive value of these "unusual" manifestations is their seeming recognition that there is something wrong with carry­ing on a war in Vietnam and with oppression generally-contrary to the long-standing assumptions of this
society. The beginning of freedom is the perception that oppressors are the evil ones, and that we must do something about it.

97

Is it possible to
change communities? To change communities involves a change of
being. It is a radical movement, a radical reorientation of one’s existence in the world. Christianity calls this experience conversion.

   Certainly if whites expect to be able to say anything relevant to the self-determination of the black community, it will be necessary for them to destroy their whiteness by becoming members of an oppressed community. Whites will be free only when they become new persons-when their white being has passed away and they are created anew in black being. When this happens, they are no longer white but free, and thus capable of making decisions about the destiny of the black community.

101

5 Freedom and Blackness. What does freedom mean when we relate it to contemporary America? Because blackness is at once the symbol of oppression and of the certainty of liberation, freedom means an affirmation of blackness. To be free is to be black-that is, identified with the victims of humiliation in human society and a participant in the liberation of oppressed humanity. The free per­son in America is the one who does not tolerate whiteness but fights against it, knowing that it is the source of human misery. The free person is the black person living in an alien world but refusing to behave according to its expectations.

  
Being free in America means accepting blackness as the only possible way of existing in the world. It means defining one’s identity by the marks of oppression. It means rejecting white proposals for peace and reconciliation, saying, "All we know is, we must have justice, not next week but this minute"

  Nat Turner, Gabriel Prosser, and Denmark Vesey are examples of free persons. They realized that freedom and death were insepara­ble. The mythic value of their existence for the black community is incalculable, because they represent the personification of the pos­sibility of being in the midst of nonbeing-the ability to be black in the presence of whiteness. Through them we know that freedom is what happens to blacks when they decide that whitey has gone too far and that it is incumbent upon them as the victims of humiliation to do something about the encroachment of whiteness. Freedom is the black movement of a people getting ready to liberate itself, knowing that it cannot be unless its oppressors cease to be.

107

Most whites, some despite involvement in protests, do believe in "freedom in democracy," and they fight to make the ideals of the Constitution an empirical reality for all. It seems that they believe that, if we just work hard enough at it, this country can be what it ought to be. But it never dawns on these do-gooders that what is wrong with America is not its failure to make the Constitution a reality for all, but rather its belief that persons can affirm whiteness and humanity at the same time. This country was founded for whites and everything that has happened in it has emerged from the white perspective. The Constitution is white, the Emancipation Proclamation is white, the government is white, business is white, the unions are white. What we need is the destruction of whiteness, which is the source of human misery in the world.

121

The blackness of Christ clarifies the definition of him as the Incarnate One. In him God becomes oppressed humanity and thus reveals that the achievement of full humanity is consistent with divine being. The human being was not created to be a slave, and the appearance of God in Christ gives us the possibility of freedom. By becoming a black person, God discloses that blackness is not what the world says it is. Blackness is a manifestation of the being of God in that it reveals that neither divinity nor humanity reside in white definitions but in liberation from captivity.

The black Christ is he who threatens the structure of evil as seen in white society, rebelling against it, thereby becoming the embodi­ment of what the black community knows that it must become. Because he has become black as we are, we now know what black empowerment is. It is blacks determining the way they are going to behave in the world. It is refusing to allow white society to place strictures on black existence as if their having guns mean that blacks are supposed to cool it.

  
Black empowerment is the black community in defiance, know­ing that he who has become one of them is far more important than threats from white officials. The black Christ is he who nourishes the rebellious impulse in blacks so that at the appointed time the black community can respond collectively to the white community as a corporate "bad nigger," lashing out at the enemy of human­kind.

123

The importance of the concept of the black Christ is that it expresses the concreteness of Jesus’ continued presence today. If we do not translate the first-century titles into symbols that are rele­vant today, then we run the danger that Bultmann is so concerned about: Jesus becomes merely a figure of past history. To make Jesus just a figure of yesterday is to deny the real importance of the preaching of the early church. He is not dead but resurrected and is alive in the world today. Like yesterday, he has taken upon himself the misery of his people, becoming for them what is needed for their liberation.

To be a disciple of the black Christ is to become black with him. Looting, burning, or the destruction of white property are not primary concerns. Such matters can only be decided by the op­pressed themselves who are seeking to develop their images of the black Christ. What is primary is that blacks must refuse to let whites define what is appropriate for the black community. Just as white slaveholders in the nineteenth century said that questioning slavery was an invasion of their property rights, so today they use the same line of reasoning in reference to black self-determination. But Nat Turner had no scruples on this issue; and blacks today are beginning to see themselves in a new image. We believe in the manifestation of the black Christ, and our encounter with him defines our values. This means that blacks are free to do what they have to in order to affirm their humanity.

124

The Kingdom of God and the Black ChristThe appearance of Jesus as the black Christ also means that the black revolution is God’s kingdom becoming a reality in America. According to the New Testament, the kingdom is a historical event. It is what happens to persons when their being is confronted with the reality of God’s historical liberation of the oppressed. To see the kingdom is to see a happening, and we are thus placed in a situation of decision-we say either yes or no to the liberation struggle.

  
The kingdom is not an attainment of material security, nor is it mystical communion with the divine. It has to do with the quality of ones, existence in which a person realizes that persons are more important than property. When blacks behave as if the values of this world have no significance, it means that they perceive the irruption of God’s kingdom. The kingdom of God is a black happening. It is black persons saying no to whitey, forming cau­cuses and advancing into white confrontation. It is a beautiful thing to see blacks shaking loose the chains of white approval, and it can only mean that they know that there is a way of living that does not involve the destruction of their personhood. This is the kingdom of God.

125

  
The kingdom is what God does and repentance arises solely as a response to God’s liberation.

  
The event of the kingdom today is the liberation struggle in the black community. It is where persons are suffering and dying for want of human dignity. It is thus incumbent upon all to see the event for what it is-God’s kingdom. This is what conversion means. Blacks are being converted because they see in the events around them the coming of the Lord, and will not be scared into closing their eyes to it. Black identity is too important; it is like the pearl of great value, which a person buys only by selling all that he or she has (Matthew 13:44-46).

  
Of course, whites can say that they fail to see the significance of this black phenomenon. But loss of sight is characteristic of the appearance of the kingdom. Not everyone recognizes the person from Nazareth as the incarnate One who came to liberate the human race. Who could possibly imagine that the Holy One of Israel would condescend to the level of a carpenter? Only those with eyes of faith could see that in that person God was confronting the reality of the human condition. There is no other sign save the words and deeds of Jesus himself. If an encounter with him does not convince persons that God is present, then they will never know, except in that awful moment when perfect awareness is fatally bound up with irreversible judgment.

126

That is why Jesus compared the kingdom with a mustard seed and with yeast in dough. Both show a small, apparently insignifi­cant beginning but a radical, revolutionary ending. The seed grows to a large tree, and the bread can feed many hungry persons. So it is with the kingdom; because of its small beginning, some viewers do not readily perceive what is actually happening.

    The black revolution is a continuation of that small kingdom. Whites do not recognize what is happening, and they are thus unable to deal with it.
For most whites in power, the black commu­nity is a nuisance-something to be considered only when the natives get restless. But what white America fails to realize is the explosive nature of the kingdom. Although its beginning is small, it will have far-reaching effects not only on the black community but on the white community as well. Now is the time to make decisions about loyalties, because soon it will be too late. Shall we or shall we not join the black revolutionary kingdom?

127

Unfortunately, the post-Civil War black church fell into the white trick of interpreting salvation in terms similar to those of white oppressors. Salvation became white: an objective act of Christ in which God "washes" away our sins in order to prepare us for a new life in heaven. The resurgence of the black church in civil rights and the creation of a black theology represent an attempt of the black community to see salvation in the light of its own earthly liberation.

  
The interpretation of salvation as liberation from bondage is certainly consistent with the biblical view:

128

Today the oppressed are the inhabitants of black ghettos, Amer­indian reservations, Hispanic barrios, and other places where whiteness has created misery. To participate in God’s salvation is to cooperate with the black Christ as he liberates his people from bondage. Salvation, then, primarily has to do with earthly reality and the injustice inflicted on those who are helpless and poor. To see the salvation of God is to see this people rise up against its oppressors, demanding that justice become a reality now, not tomorrow. It is the oppressed serving warning that they "ain’t gonna take no more of this bullshit, but a new day is coming and it ain’t going to be like today." The new day is the presence of the black Christ as expressed in the liberation of the black community.

130

Because the church is the community that participates in Jesus Christ’s liberating work in history, it can never endorse "law and order" that causes suffering. To do so is to say yes to structures of oppression. Because the church has received the gospel-hint and has accepted what that means for human existence, the church must be a revolutionary community, breaking laws that destroy persons. It believes (with Reinhold Niebuhr) that "comfortable classes may continue to dream of an automatic progress in society. They do not suffer enough from social injustice to recognize its peril in the life of society."’

135

Because the work of God is not a superimposed activity but a part of one’s existence as a person, pious frauds are caught in a trap. They are rejected because they failed to see that being good is not a societal trait or an extra activity, but a human activity. They are excluded because they used their neighbor as an enhancement of their own religious piety. Had they known that blacks were Jesus, they would have been prepared to relieve their suffering. But that is just the point: there is no way to know in the abstract who is Jesus and who is not. It is not an intellectual question at all. Knowledge of Jesus Christ comes as one participates in human liberation.

 



 

From “Black Theology and Black Power” by James H. Cone (1969)

Orbis Books, Maryknoll, NY (printed 2008)

Page

 

xii

God’s reality is not bound by one manifestation of the divine in Jesus but can be found wherever people are being empowered to fight for freedom. Life-giving power for the poor and the oppressed is the primary criterion that we must use to judge the adequacy of our theology, not abstract concepts. As Malcolm X put it: "I believe in a religion that believes in freedom. Any time I have to accept a religion that won’t let me fight a battle for my people, I say to hell with that relig­ion."

Another weakness of Black Theology and Black Power was my failure to link the African-American struggle for liberation in the United States with similar struggles in the Third World. If I had listened more carefully to Malcolm X and Martin King, I might have avoided that error. Both made it unquestionably clear, especially in their speeches against the U.S. government’s involve­ment in the Congo and Vietnam, that there can be no freedom for African-Americans from racism in this country unless it is tied to the liberation of Third World nations from U.S. impe­rialism.

xiv

Martin and Malcolm began to search for the human, democratic side of socialism. What was clear to both of them, and clear to me now, is that we need to develop a struggle for freedom that moves beyond race to include all oppressed peoples of the world. As Malcolm X told a Columbia University audience a few days before his assassination; "It is incorrect to classify the revolt of the Negro as simply a racial conflict of black against white or as a purely American problem. Rather, we are today seeing a global rebellion of the oppressed against the oppressor, the exploited against the exploiter."

3

If in this process of speaking for myself, I should happen to touch the souls of black brothers (including black men in white skins), so much the better. I believe that all aspiring black intellectuals share the task that LeRoi Jones has described for the black artist in America: "To aid in the destruction of America as he knows it:"

6

The same is true of the words "Black Power:" To what "ob­ject" does it point? What does it mean when used by its ad­vocates? It means complete emancipation of black people from white oppression by whatever means black people deem nec­essary. The methods may include selective buying, boycotting, marching, or even rebellion.

12

One of the most serious charges leveled against the advocates of Black Power is that they are black racists. Many well-inten­tioned persons have insisted that there must be another approach, one which will not cause so much hostility, not to mention rebellion. Therefore appeal is made to the patience of black people to keep their "cool" and not get too carried away by their feelings. These men argue that if any progress is to be made, it will be through a careful, rational approach to the subject. These people are deeply offended when black people refuse to listen and place such white liberals in the same category as the most adamant segregationists.

13

It is interesting that most people do understand why Jews can hate Germans. Why can they not understand why black people, who have been deliberately and systematically dehumanized or murdered by the structure of this society, hate white people? The general failure of Americans to make this connection suggests that the primary difficulty is their inability to see black men as men.

When Black Power advocates refuse to listen to their would-be liberators, they are charged with creating hatred among black people, thus making significant personal relationship between blacks and whites impossible. It should be obvious that the hate which black people feel toward whites is not due to the creation of the term "Black Power." Rather, it is a result of the deliberate and systematic ordering of society on the basis of racism, making black alienation not only possible but inevitable. For over three hundred years black people have been enslaved by the tentacles of American white power, tentacles that worm their way into the guts of their being and "invade the gray cells of their cortex." For three hundred years they have cried, waited, voted, marched, picketed, and boycotted, but whites still refuse to recognize their humanity. In light of this, attributing black anger to the call for Black Power is ridiculous, if not obscene. "To be a Negro in this country," says James Baldwin, "and to be relatively conscious is to be in rage almost all the time."

15

And James Baldwin was certainly expressing the spirit of black hatred when he said:

The brutality with which Negroes are treated in this country simply cannot be overstated; however unwilling white men may be to hear it. In the beginning-and neither can this be overstated-a Negro just cannot believe that white people are treating him as they do; he does not know what he has done to merit it. And when he real­izes that the treatment accorded him has nothing to do with anything he has done, that the attempt of white people to destroy him-for that is what it is-is utterly gratuitous, it is not hard for him to think of white people as devils.

15

But the charge of black racism cannot be reconciled with the facts. While it is true that blacks do hate whites, black
hatred is not racism.

17

  The white man, in the very asking of the question, assumes that he has something which blacks want or should want, as if being close to white people enhances the humanity of blacks. This question — What about integration? — completely ignores the beastly behavior of the "devil white man" (Malcolm X’s designation). Black people cannot accept relationship on this basis.

21

The real menace in white intellectual arrogance is the dangerous assumption that the structure that enslaves is the structure that will also decide when and how this slavery is to be abolished. The sociological and psychological reports, made by most white scholars, assume that they know more about my frustration, my despair, my hatred for white society than I do. They want to supply the prescriptions to my problems, refusing to recognize that for over three hundred years blacks have listened to them and their reports and we are still degraded. The time has come for white Americans to be silent and listen to black people. Why must the white man assume that he has the intellectual ability or the moral sensitivity to know what blacks feel or to ease the pain, to smooth the hurt, to eradicate the resentment? Since he knows that he raped our women, dehumanized our men, and made it inevitable that black children should hate their blackness, he ought to understand why blacks must cease listening to him in order to be free.

21

White people should not even ex­pect blacks to love them, and to ask for it merely adds insult to injury. "For the white man," writes Malcolm X, "to ask the black man if he hates him is just like the rapist asking the raped … `Do you hate me?’ The white man is in no moral position to accuse anyone else of hate." Whatever blacks feel toward whites or whatever their response to white racism, it cannot be sub­mitted to the judgments of white society.

23

How Does Black Power Relate to White Guilt?

When white do-gooders are confronted with the style of Black Power, realizing that black people really place them in the same category with the George Wallaces, they react defensively, saying, "It’s not my fault" or "I am not responsible." Sometimes they continue by suggesting that their town (because of their unselfish involvement in civil rights) is better or less racist than others.

…

There are no meaningful "in betweens" relevant to the fact itself. And it should be said that racism is so embedded in the heart of American society that few, if any, whites can free themselves from it.

24

Second, all white men are responsible for white oppression. It is much too easy to say, "Racism is not my fault," or "I am not responsible for the country’s inhumanity to the black man." The American white man has always had an easy conscience. But insofar as white do-gooders tolerate and sponsor racism in their educational institutions, their political, economic, and social structures, their churches, and in every other aspect of Ameri­can life, they are directly responsible for racism. "It is a cold, hard fact that the many flagrant forms of racial injustice North and South could not exist without their [whites’] acquiescence," 47 and for that, they are responsible. If whites are honest in their analysis of the moral state of this society, they know that all are responsible. Racism is possible because whites are indifferent to suffering and patient with cruelty.

25

White America’s attempt to free itself of responsibility for the black man’s inhuman condition is nothing but a protective de­vice to ease her guilt. Whites have to convince themselves that they are not responsible. That is why social scientists prefer to remain detached in their investigations of racial injustice. It is less painful to be uninvolved. White Americans do not dare to know that blacks are beaten at will by policemen as a means of protecting the latter’s ego superiority as well as that of the larger white middle class. For to know is to be responsible. To know is to understand why blacks loot and riot at what seems slight provocation. Therefore, they must have reports to explain the disenchantment of blacks with white democracy, so they can be surprised. They must believe that blacks are in poverty because they are lazy or because they are inferior. Yes, they must believe that everything is basically all right. Black Power punctures those fragile lies, declaring to white America the pitiless indictment of Francis Jeanson: "If you succeed in keeping yourself unsullied, it is because others dirty themselves in your place. You hire thugs, and, balancing the accounts, it is you who are the real criminals: for without you, without your blind indifference, such men could never carry out deeds that damn you as much as they shame those men."

26

Black Power and the White Liberal

In time of war, men want to know who the enemy is. Who is for me and who is against me? That is the question. The as­serting of black freedom in America has always meant war. When blacks retreat and accept their dehumanized place in white society, the conflict ceases. But when blacks rise up in freedom, whites show their racism.

27

The liberal, then, is one who sees "both sides" of the issue and shies away from "extremism" in any form. He wants to change the heart of the racist without ceasing to be his friend; he wants progress without conflict. Therefore, when he sees blacks engag­ing in civil disobedience and demanding "Freedom Now," he is disturbed. Black people know who the enemy is, and they are forcing the liberal to take sides. But the liberal wants to be a friend, that is, enjoy the rights and privileges pertaining to white­ness and also work for the "Negro." He wants change without risk, victory without blood.

The liberal white man is a strange creature; he verbalizes the right things. He intellectualizes on the racial problem beautifully. He roundly denounces racists, conservatives, and the moderately liberal. Sometimes, in rare moments and behind closed doors, he will even defend Rap Brown or Stokely Carmichael. Or he may go so far as to make the statement: "I will let my daughter marry one," and this is supposed to be the absolute evidence that he is raceless.

   
But he is still white to the very core of his being. What he fails to realize is that there is no place for him in this war of survival. Blacks do not want his patronizing, condescending words of sym­pathy. They do not need his concern, his "love;" his money.

40

If we make this message contemporaneous with our own life situation, what does Christ’s defeat of Satan mean for us? There is no need here to get bogged down with quaint personifications of Satan. Men are controlled by evil powers that would make them slaves. The demonic forces of racism are real for the black man. Theologically, Malcolm X was not far wrong when he called the white man "the devil:" The white structure of this American society, personified in every racist, must be at least part of what the New Testament meant by the demonic forces. According to the New Testament, these powers can get hold of a man’s total being and can control his life to such a degree that he is incapable of distinguishing himself from the alien power. This seems to be what has happened to white racism in Amer­ica. It is a part of the spirit of the age, the ethos of the culture, so embedded in the social, economic, and political structure that white society is incapable of knowing its destructive nature. There is only one response: Fight it.

Moreover, it seems to me that it is quite obvious who is actually engaged in the task of liberating black people from the power of white racism, even at the expense of their lives. They are men who stand unafraid of the structures of white racism. They are men who risk their lives for the inner freedom of others. They are men who embody the spirit of Black Power. And if Christ is present today actively risking all for the freedom of man, he must be acting through the most radical elements of Black Power.

 

55

If the riots are the black man’s courage to say yes to himself as a creature of God, and if in affirming self he affirms Yes to the neighbor, then violence may be the black man’s expression, sometimes the only possible expression, of Christian love to the white oppressor.

61

   
Black Power, then, is God’s new way of acting in America. It is his way of saying to blacks that they are human beings; he is saying to whites: "Get used to it!"

Whites, as well as some blacks, will find the encounter of Black Power a terrible experience. Like the people of Jesus’ day, they will find it hard to believe that God would stoop so low as to reveal himself in and through black people and especially the "undesirable elements." If he has to make himself known through blacks, why not choose the "good Negroes"? But, that is just the point: God encounters men at that level of experience which challenges their being. The real test of whether whites can communicate with blacks as human beings is not what they reply to Ralph Bunche but how they respond to Rap Brown.

67

It is important to remember that the preaching of the Word presents a crisis situation. The hearing of the news of freedom through the preaching of the Word always invites the hearer to take one of two sides: He must either side with the old rulers or the new one. "He that is not far me is against me:" There is no neutral position in a war. Even in silence, one is automatically identified as being on the side of the oppressor. There is no place in this war of liberation for nice white people who want to avoid taking sides and remain friends with both the racists and the Negro. To hear the Word is to decide: Are you with us or against us?

73

If there is any contemporary meaning of the Antichrist (or "the principalities and powers"), the white church seems to be a manifestation of it. It is the enemy of Christ. It was the white "Christian" church which took the lead in establishing slavery as an institution and segregation as a pattern in society by sanc­tioning all-white congregations. As Frank Loescher pointed out, its very existence as an institution is a symbol of the "philosophy of white supremacy.""

88

There is a need for a theology of revolution, a theology which radically encounters the problems of the disinherited black peo­ple in America in particular and the oppressed people of color throughout the world in general.

89

The black revolution is the work of Christ.

113

It (the black church) is revolu­tionary in that it seeks to meet the needs of the neighbor amid crumbling structures of society. It is revolutionary because love may mean joining a violent rebellion.

116

Just as the black revolution means the death of America as it has been, so it requires the death of the Church in its familiar patterns.

118

Because Black Theology has as its starting point the black condition, this does not mean that it denies the absolute revelation of God in Christ. Rather, it means that Black Theology firmly believes that God’s revelation in Christ an be made supreme only by affirming Christ as he is alive in black people today. Black Theology is Christian theology precisely because it has the black predicament as its point of departure. It calls upon black people to affirm God because he has affirmed us.

121

Black Theology must say: "If the doctrine is compatible with or enhances the drive for black freedom, then it is the gospel of Jesus Christ. If the doctrine is against or indifferent to the essence of blackness as expressed in Black Power, then it is the work of the Antichrist:" It is as simple as that.

123

If eschatology means that one believes that God is totally uninvolved in the suffering of men because he is preparing them for another world, then Black Theology is not eschatological. Black Theology is an earthly theology! It is not concerned with the "last things" but with the "white thing." Black Theology like Black Power believes that the self-determination of black people must be emphasized at all costs, recognizing that there is only one question about reality for blacks: What must we do about white racism? There is no room in this perspective for an eschatology dealing with a "reward" in heaven. Black Theology has hope for this life. The appeal to the next life is a lack of hope. Such an appeal implies that absurdity has won and that one is left merely with an unrealistic gesture toward the future. Heavenly hope becomes a Platonic grasp for another reality because one cannot live meaningfully amid the suffering of this world.

125

This is the key to Black Theology. It refuses to embrace any concept of God which makes black suffering the will of God. Black people should not accept slavery, lynching, or any form of injustice as tending to good. It is not permissible to appeal to the idea that God’s will is inscrutable or that the righteous sufferer will be rewarded in heaven. If God has made the world in which black people must suffer, and if he is a God who rules, guides, and sanctifies the world, then he is a murderer. To be the God of black people, he must be against the oppression of black people.

The idea of heaven is irrelevant for Black Theology. The Christian cannot waste time contemplating the next world (if there is a next). Radical obedience to Christ means that reward cannot be the motive for action. It is a denial of faith to insist on the relevance of reward.

127

To carve out a Black Theology based on black oppression will of necessity mean the creation of new values independent of and alien to the values of white society. The values must be independent because they must arise from the needs of black people. They will be alien because white American "Christian" values are based on racism.

131

Black Theology advocates a religious system of values based on the experiences of the oppressed because it believes white values must either be revolutionized or eliminated.

Such a value-system means, of course, an end to the influence of white seminaries with their middle-class white ideas about God, Christ, and the Church. This does not necessarily mean burning of their buildings with Molotov cocktails. What is meant is a removal of the oppressive ideas from the black com­munity which the seminaries perpetuate. We must replace them with black consciousness-that is, with Nathaniel Paul, Daniel Payne, Nat Turner (not Styron’s), Marcus Garvey, Elijah Muhammad, and Malcolm X.

135

Because Black Theology is biblical theology seeking to create new value-perspectives for the oppressed, it is revolutionary theology. It is a theology which confronts white society as the racist Antichrist, communicating to the oppressor that nothing will be spared in the fight for freedom. It is this attitude which distinguishes it from white American theology and identifies it with the religionists of the Third World.

136

  
The revolution which Black Theology advocates should not be confused with some popular uses of the word. When Billy Graham can speak of a need for a revolution, we clearly require a tighter definition of the term. Revolution is not merely a "change of heart" but a radical black encounter with the struc­ture of white racism, with the full intention of destroying its menacing power. I mean confronting white racists and saying: "If it’s a fight you want, I am prepared to oblige you." This is what the black revolution means.

  It is important not to confuse protest with revolution. "Revolution is more than protest. Protest merely calls attention to injustice….

In contrast, "revolution sees every particular wrong as one more instance in a pattern which is itself beyond rectification. Revolution aims at the substitution of a new system for one adjudged to be corrupt, rather than corrective adjustments within the existing system. . . . The power of revolution is coercive."  The pre-Civil War black preachers were revolutionary in that they believed that the system itself was evil and
consequently urged slaves to rebel against it.

137

The revolutionary attitude of Black Theology stems not only from the need of black people to defend themselves in the presence of white oppression, but also from its identity with bibli­cal theology. Like biblical theology, it affirms the absolute sovereignty of God over his creation. This means that ultimate allegiance belongs only to God. Therefore, black people must be taught not to be disturbed about revolution or civil disobedience if the law violates God’s purpose for man. The Christian man is obligated by a freedom grounded in the Creator to break all laws which contradict human dignity. Through disobedience to the state, he affirms his allegiance to God as Creator and his willingness to behave as if he believes it. Civil disobedience is a duty in a racist society. That is why Carnilo Torres said, "Revolutionary action is a Christian, a priestly struggle."

143

Whether the American system is beyond redemption we will have to wait and see. But we can be certain that black patience has run out, and unless white America responds positively to the theory and activity of Black Power, then a bloody, protracted civil war is inevitable. There have occasionally been revolutions -massive redistributions of power-without warfare. It is passionately to be hoped that this can be one of them. The decision lies with white America and not least with white Americans who speak the name of Christ.

150

For white people, God’s reconciliation in Jesus Christ means that God has made black people a beautiful people; and if they are going to be in relationship with God, they must enter by means of their black brothers, who are a manifestation of God’s presence on earth. The assumption that one can know God without knowing blackness is the basic heresy of the white churches. They want God without blackness, Christ without obedience, love without death. What they fail to realize is that in America, God’s revelation on earth has always been black, red, or some other shocking shade, but never white. Whiteness, as revealed in the history of America, is the expression of what is wrong with man. It is a symbol of man’s depravity. God cannot be white, even though white churches have portrayed him as white. When we look at what whiteness has done to the minds of men in this country, we can see clearly what the New Testament meant when it spoke of the principalities and powers. To speak of Satan and his powers becomes not just a way of speaking but a fact of reality. When we can see a people who are being controlled by an ideology of whiteness, then we know what reconciliation must mean. The coming of Christ means a denial of what we thought we were. It means destroying the white devil in us. Reconciliation to God means that white people are prepared to deny themselves (whiteness), take up the cross (blackness) and follow Christ (black ghetto).

To be sure, this is not easy. But whoever said the gospel of Christ was easy? Obedience always means going where we otherwise would not go; being what we would not be; doing what we would not do. Reconciliation means that Christ has freed us for this. In a white racist society, Christian obedience can only mean being obedient to blackness, its glorification and exaltation.

151

Therefore, God’s Word of recon­ciliation means that we can only be justified by becoming black. Reconciliation makes us all black. Through this radical change, we become identified totally with the suffering of the black masses. It is this fact that makes all white churches anti-Christian in their essence. To be Christian is to be one of those whom God has chosen. God has chosen black people!


Obama and Jeremiah Wright, his spiritual guide.
Wright was the most prominent preacher of Black Liberation Theology

The Hate That Hate Produced By Mike Wallace

This is an old documentary by Mike Wallace about Black Nationalism, made in 1959, before America became politically correct in a pathological sense. It deals mainly with the black-supremacist Nation of Islam, the largest Black Nationalist sect, but also with other groups. Black Liberation Theology of Obama’s sect in Chicago was canonized in the late 1960’s. The foundation books were written by a college professor and it appeals for that reason to black urban professionals, like Obama, but if you study the theology and compare to the scripture of the Nation of Islam, it is easy to recognize that the two doctrines are closely related. The founder of Back Liberation Theology, James H. Cone, said that he combined the beliefs of Malcolm X, a member of the Nation of Islam, and Martin Luther King, Jr. It is clear, however, that the central tenets, come from Malcolm X and not the non-violent, more traditional Christianity of Martin Luther King.

The Nation of Islam is not orthodox Islam, but a cult-like, black sect. It could be considered to be a racist off-shoot of the Jehovah’s Witnesses that was influenced by Gnostic groups, such as Freemasonry and related groups. The Islamic motif comes actually from the Shriner’s, a group that is associated with Freemasonry. The Nation of Islam has always used the Bible more than they rely on the Koran. There doctrine is based mainly on the apocalyptic books of Daniel, Ezekiel and Revelation.

The documentary deals mainly with the black-supremacist Nation of Islam, the largest Black Nationalist sect, but also with other groups. Black Liberation Theology of Obama’s sect in Chicago was canonized in the late 1960’s. The foundation books were written by a college professor and it appeals for that reason to black urban professionals, like Obama, but if you study the theology and compare to the scripture of the Nation of Islam, it is easy to recognize that the two doctrines are closely related. The founder of Back Liberation Theology, James H. Cone, said that he combined the beliefs of Malcolm X, a member of the Nation of Islam, and Martin Luther King, Jr. It is clear, however, that the central tenets, come from Malcolm X and not the non-violent, more traditional Christianity of Martin Luther King.

The story on the Internet is that the head of the Nation of Islam, then Elijah Muhammad, called a meeting of a few dozen black ministers. A few weeks later a full-page ad was taken out in the New York Times that announced a new more aggressive, black version of Christianity would be developed. A couple of years later, James H. Cone published his first book on Black Liberation Theology, entitled “Black Theology and Black Power.” The doctrine of Black Liberation Theology is also black supremacist and similar to a pseudo-Christian version of racist, Gnostic doctrine of the Nation of Islam.


Why label Obama Marxist/Communist?

Branding Obama a “Marxist” or a “Communist” is just not an effective charge. Many on the left side of the political spectrum think that being socialist or even a Marxist is perfectly acceptable and a good thing. For that reason, accusing Obama of being a Marxist, does not impact his base support much, or even that of those more in the middle. Also, it is not clearly documented anywhere that he is a Marxist or Communist.

However, the doctrine of his church is black nationalist and is very well-documented in the foundation books on Black Liberation Theology by James H. Cone. Obama’s self-described spiritual guide, Jeremiah Wright, said in a national television interview that Black Liberation Theology is the doctrine of their “church.” It is fundamentally based on racism and sedition, equating white society to the Antichrist and holding that the black race is the manifestation of God on earth and has a divine mission to destroy America and the white race. It is socialistic in that it calls for wealth redistribution by means of destruction of the current democratic system. Black Nationalists have often worked with communists, because they have a common goals of destruction of the American democratic system and so-called world liberation.

Marxism is not the only socialistic ideology and Marxism/communism is not based on racist or on religious belief. Black Liberation Theology is religious belief — though it is definitely not Christianity as most people know it — and it is fundamentally based on racism and hatred of the American system and white society.

The truth is that Obama mixes the characteristics of a number of different religious sects and quasi-religious ideologies. To be exclusive about labeling him one thing or the other can be counter-productive, because the argument becomes about whether that one characterization is correct. Name-calling can be effective, but do not be limited to one classification and do not let the argument be limited to one definition about whether he is a communist, a black Nazi, and Islamist an anarchist or whatever, because his radicalism has a lot of different aspects and he will work with a lot of different extremist groups to achieve his goal, the downfall of America as we have known it.

Racism and sedition should not be acceptable on either side of the political spectrum in a president and the public ought to demand that he resign, due just to his racist religious background, which has been charged in the conservative media (such as by Sean Hannity), but never fully explained in depth and detail with much accuracy.

Obama's spritual guide, J. Wright.

Bringing out that his religion is racist breaks a couple of taboos against publicly criticizing a religion, especially that of a black man as being racist. However, it should be done on a large scale to put his supporters on the defensive for a change and make them explain why we should have a president, whose religion has been for 20 years that white society is the “Antichrist” and America the demonic tool of the Antichrist and the root of evil in the world.

Conservatives, as well as others with any sense of fairness at all, ought to be outraged by this. We should not be required to read his mind to find out whether he really believes this crackpot, racist doctrine, or not. It is also not about whether he can actually carry out the destruction of America and the white race as this pathological and perverse cult-like religious doctrine prophesies will be led by a “black messiah.” It’s about him being in such a racist religious sect in the first place, which is outrageous and unacceptable for a president. The media, even the conservative media such as Fox News, has never fully explained Obama’s racist religion to the public and that is outrageous.

If you have any doubt about this, you can buy the books by James H. Cone from Amazon and decide for yourself. Click the link below for dozens of quotes from Cone’s first two books.

Some excerpts from Cone’s books on Black Liberation Theology

Because a person presents a disarming and pleasant public demeanor, does not necessarily mean that he harbors no racial animosity or bigotry for certain ethnic or social groups. David Duke and Georg Haider proved that racism can be hidden behind a pleasant demeanor. It is reasonable and you are perfectly entitled to assume that anyone, who belongs to such a racist sect for 20 years, understands the doctrine and is an adherent of it. Obama should be called to account for it, but he never was by the media or opposition politicians, who should have investigated this and explained it. It is still not too late for the public to insist that he be held responsible for it. His political agenda, seems to be very much in line with the racist version of “social justice” described in the doctrine of Black Liberation Theology, which holds that America is responsible for the oppression of non-white peoples and must, for that reason, be destroyed, in order to end oppression and to create a world Utopia. Obama should be openly challenged on these points.

Obama Explains Benefit of Racial Hatred of Whites

Obama Justifies Black Racism

In this excerpt below from his book “Dreams from my Father” (page 196 of the paperback edition) Obama explains how racial hatred and scapegoating of whites can provide a beneficial effect for blacks. Such racism and scapegoating is used by black nationalist and Afrocentric groups, such as the Nation of Islam, the New Black Panther Party and his own church, Trinity United Church of Christ of Chicago. Obama is describing a time that was before he joined Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity church. So, it shows that Obama was well-aware of the racial hatred of such groups, before he even met Jeremiah Wright. His conclusion is that such racism may be a necessary evil to improve the condition of the black race.

The same kind of “therapy” also produced a great improvement in the self-esteem of many Germans in the 1930’s and 1940’s. It is a proven technique! Though Obama claims that he does not personally feel good about such racial hatred, one has to take into account that he has a political career to protect. He could hardly say outright that he approves of racism without harming his career. However, he did join Wright’s church, which has a black nationalist doctrine, based on racial hatred and extreme anti-Americanism. Actions speak louder than words.

Obama demonstrates his general familiarity with the racist doctrine of black nationalism by discussing the finer details of the racism contained in the autobiography of Malcolm X and quoting Marcus Garvey, the father of the modern black nationalist mass movement. One of Garvey’s famous quotes, which Obama uses is a call for the black race to rise, “Rise up ye mighty race!” From reading other parts of this book, it is very obvious that Obama understood quite well the basic racist tenets of Black Nationalism at least since he was a teenager in Hawaii. This is to be expected, because he is not unintelligent and was very interested in exploring his black identity. He was fascinated and preoccupied with all things having to do with black culture, including black nationalism. The entire book is about his search since childhood for racial identity.

The doctrine of Trinity Church is based on Black Liberation Theology, which is a more sophisticated, pseudo-Christian version of the black identity theology of the Nation of Islam. Black Liberation Theology was written by a black professor in a seminary, James H. Cone. It is somewhat less direct in its racism and seems designed to be more socially acceptable in order to spread the racist concepts and extreme anti-American bigotry of the Nation of Islam among black urban professionals and black churches.

The theology of the NOI is not orthodox Islam but is branch of a wider black identity cult movement, whose various branches present a facade as Judaism, Islamic or Christian. They are really none of these religions, but closely-related black sects, based on a common, similar Gnostic doctrine, which all hold the black race to be the chosen people or actually God and the white race to be the ultimate evil or the devil.

When an author wants to express a controversial view in a book, but not have it blamed on himself, sometimes he will use a third party to state what they want to say. Rafiq, in this excerpt that follows, has never been identified with a real person and some people think that he is just a literary construct by Obama, which allows him to discuss the racism of Black Nationalism, while attempting to maintain some personal distance for himself. Obama writes in his analysis below that he does not feel good about it, but that racism may be necessary to improve the condition of the black race. This is the wrong conclusion! — especially, for a president of the United States!

When the two of us were alone, though, Rafiq and I could sometimes have normal conversations. Over time I arrived at a grudging admiration for his tenacity and bravado, and, within his own terms, a certain sincerity He confirmed that he had been a gang leader growing up in Altgeld; he had found religion, he said, under the stewardship of a local Muslim leader unaffiliated with Minister Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam. “If it hadn’t been for Islam, man, I’d probably be dead,” he told me one day. “Just had a negative attitude, you understand. Growing up in Altgeld, I’d soaked up all the poison the white man feeds us. See, the folks you’re working with got the same problem, even though they don’t realize it yet. They spend half they lives worrying about what white folks think. Start blaming themselves for the shit they see every day, thinking they can’t do no better till the white man decides they all right. But deep down they know that ain’t right. They know what this country has done to their momma, their daddy, their sister. So the truth is they hate white folks, but they can’t admit it to themselves. Keep it all bottled up, fighting themselves. Waste a lot of energy that way.

“I tell you one thing I admire about white folks,” he continued. “They know who they are. Look at the Italians. They didn’t care about the American flag and all that when they got here. First thing they did is put together the Mafia to make sure their interests were met. The Irish—they took over the city hall and found their boys jobs. The Jews, same thing . . .you telling me they care more about some black kid in the South Side than they do ’bout they relatives in Israel? Shit. It’s about blood, Barack, looking after your own. Period. Black people the only ones stupid enough to worry about their enemies.”

That was the truth as Rafiq saw it, and he didn’t waste energy picking that truth apart. His was a Hobbesian world where distrust was a given and loyalties extended from family to mosque to the black race — whereupon notions of loyalty ceased to apply. This narrowing vision, of blood and tribe, had provided him with a clarity of sorts, a means of focusing his attention. Black self-respect had delivered the mayor’s seat, he could argue, lust as black self-respect turned around the lives of drug addicts under the tutelage of the Muslims. Progress was within our grasp so long as we didn’t betray ourselves.

But what exactly constituted betrayal? Ever since the first time I’d picked up Malcolm X’s autobiography, I had tried to untangle the twin strands of black nationalism, arguing that nationalism’s affirming message-—of solidarity and self-reliance, discipline and communal responsibility—need not depend on hatred of whites any more than it depended on white munificence. We could tell this country where it was wrong, I would tell myself and any black friends who would listen, without ceasing to believe in its capacity for change.

In talking to self-professed nationalists like Rafiq, though, I came to see how the blanket indictment of everything white served a central function in their message of uplift; how, psychologically, at least, one depended on the other. For when the nationalist spoke of a reawakening of values as the only solution to black poverty, he was expressing an implicit, if not explicit, criticism to black listeners: that we did not have to live as we did. And while there were those who could take such an unadorned message and use it to hew out a new life for themselves—those with the stolid dispositions that Booker T Washington had once demanded from his followers—in the ears of many blacks such talk smacked of the explanations that whites had always offered for black poverty: that we continued to suffer from, if not genetic inferiority, then cultural weakness. It was a message that ignored causality or fault, a message outside history, without a script or plot that might insist on progression. For a people already stripped of their history, a people often ill-equipped to retrieve that history in any form other than what fluttered across the television screen, the testimony of what we saw every day seemed only to confirm our worst suspicions about ourselves.

Nationalism provided that history, an unambiguous morality tale that was easily communicated and easily grasped. A steady attack on the white race, the constant recitation of black people’s brutal experience in this country, served as the ballast that could prevent the ideas of personal and communal responsibility from tipping into an ocean of despair. Yes, the nationalist would say, whites are responsible for your sorry state, not any inherent flaws in you. In fact, whites are so heartless and devious that we can no longer expect anything from them. The self-loathing you feel, what keeps you drinking or thieving, is planted by them. Rid them from your mind and find your true power liberated. Rise up, ye mighty race!

This process of displacement, this means of engaging in self-criticism while removing ourselves from the object of criticism, helped explain the much-admired success of the Nation of Islam in turning around the lives of drug addicts and criminals. But if it was especially well suited to those at the bottom rungs of American life, it also spoke to all the continuing doubts of the lawyer who had run hard for the gold ring yet still experienced the awkward silence when walking into the clubhouse; those young college students who warily measured the distance between them and life on Chicago’s mean streets, with the danger that distance implied; all the black people who, it turned out, shared with me a voice that whispered inside them-“You don’t really belong here.”

In a sense, then, Rafiq was right when he insisted that, deep down, all blacks were potential nationalists. The anger was there, bottled up and often turned inward. And as I thought about Ruby and her blue eyes, the teenagers calling each other “nigger” and worse, I wondered whether, for now at least, Rafiq wasn’t also right in preferring that that anger be redirected; whether a black politics that suppressed rage toward whites generally, or one that failed to elevate race loyalty above all else, was a politics inadequate to the task.

It was a painful thought to consider, as painful now as it had been years ago. It contradicted the morality my mother had taught me, a morality of subtle distinctions between individuals of goodwill and those who wished me ill, between active malice and ignorance or indifference. I had a personal stake in that moral framework; I’d discovered that I couldn’t escape it if I tried. And yet perhaps it was a framework that blacks in this country could no longer afford; perhaps it weakened black resolve, encouraged confusion within the ranks.

Desperate times called for desperate measures, and for many blacks, times were chronically desperate. If nationalism could create a strong and effective insularity, deliver on its promise of self-respect, then the hurt it might cause well-meaning whites, or the inner turmoil it caused people like me, would be of little consequence.

Obama Longs to Expunge his White Blood

Obama’s first biographical book, “Dreams from my Father,” reveals that he has a lot of issues with Americans and white people (collectively) that were in large part fostered in him by his mother and maternal grandparents, who were self-hating whites and self-hating Americans. At one point, Obama writes with resentment of white people, who allowed their dogs to relieve themselves on the grass in front of his apartment building. No one appreciates that behavior, of course, but Obama is still holding such a grudge against the white race twenty years later that he felt it necessary to include this in his book, because a couple of white people let their dogs crap on the grass in front of his apartment building!

He also notes elsewhere that his mother declared to his Indonesian step-father that Americans are “not my people.” “Dreams of my Father” was written before Obama thought he could be president and for that reason he shows a side of himself that he would not later divulge. Below is a passage in which he writes of Malcolm X’s desire to expunge his white blood and Obama, comparing himself to Malcolm X, remarks wistfully that his white blood will always be with him, as well. Obama also muses that sometime in the future he may need to leave his white family members behind. The book is full of such remarks dealing with racial resentment. The entire theme of the book is about Obama’s neurotic hangups and preoccupation with racial issues.

… I had begun to see a new map of the world, one that was frightening in its simplicity, suffocating in its implications. We were always playing on the white man’s court, Ray had told me, by the white man’s rules. If the principal, or the coach, or a teacher, or Kurt, wanted to spit in your face, he could, because he had power and you didn’t. If he decided not to, if he treated you like a man or came to your defense, it was because he knew that the words you spoke, the clothes you wore, the books you read, your ambitions and desires, were already his. Whatever he decided to do, it was his decision to make, not yours, and because of that fundamental power he held over you, because it preceded and would out-last his individual motives and inclinations, any distinction between good and bad whites held negligible meaning. In fact, you couldn’t even be sure that everything you had assumed to be an expression of your black, unfettered self—the humor, the song, the behind-the-back pass—had been freely chosen by you. At best, these things were a refuge; at worst, a trap. Following this maddening logic, the only thing you could choose as your own was withdrawal into a smaller and smaller coil of rage, until being black meant only the knowledge of your own powerlessness, of your own defeat. And the final irony: Should you refuse this defeat and lash out at your captors, they would have a name for that, too, a name that could cage you just as good. Paranoid. Militant. Violent. Nigger.

Over the next few months, I looked to corroborate this nightmare Vision. I gathered up books from the library——Baldwin, Ellison, Hughes, Wright, DuBois. At night I would close the door to my room, telling my grandparents I had homework to do, and there I would sit and wrestle with words, locked in suddenly desperate argument, trying to reconcile the world as I’d found it with the terms of my birth. But there was no escape to be had. In every page of every book, in Bigger Thomas and invisible men, I kept finding the same anguish, the same doubt; a self-contempt that neither irony nor intellect seemed able to deflect. Even DuBois’s learning and Baldwin’s love and Langston’s humor eventually succumbed to its corrosive force, each man finally forced to doubt art’s redemptive power, each man finally forced to withdraw, one to Africa, one to Europe, one deeper into the bowels of Harlem, but all of them in the same weary flight, all of them exhausted, bitter men, the devil at their heels. (Here Obama uses a play on a standard Black Nationalist term for whitey, the “devil.”)

Only Malcolm X’s autobiography seemed to offer something different. His repeated acts of self—creation spoke to me, the blunt poetry of his words, his unadorned insistence on respect, promised a new and uncompromising order, martial in its discipline, forged through sheer force of will. All the other stuff, the talk of blue-eyed devils and apocalypse, was incidental to that program, I decided, religious baggage that Malcolm himself seemed to have safely abandoned toward the end of his life. And yet, even as I imagined myself following Malcolm’s call, one line in the book stayed me. He spoke of a wish he’d once had, the wish that the white blood that ran through him, there by an act of violence, might somehow be expunged. I knew that, for Malcolm, that wish would never be incidental. I knew as well that traveling down the road to self—respect my own white blood would never recede into mere abstraction. I was left to wonder what else I would be severing if and when I left my mother and my grandparents at some uncharted border.

And, too: If Malcolm’s discovery toward the end of his life, that some whites might live beside him as brothers in Islam, seemed to offer some hope of eventual reconciliation, that hope appeared in a distant future, in a far-off land. In the meantime, I looked to see where the people would come from who were willing to work toward this future and populate this new world.

Note: The Black Liberation doctrine of Obama’s church teaches that reconciliation means submission to the will of the black man and Malcolm X had the same concept. That is, the current system is evil and reconciliation means that you have to submit to his conditions, such as become a Muslim. This kind of “reconciliation” is still very much a racist concept.

Is Obama Muslim?

Elijah Muhammad, Prophet of the Nation of Islam, taught that blacks are born muslims. Cosmic symbols on his fez signify that the black man is the master of the universe.
Obama might be termed an ethnic Muslim or cultural Muslim, because he embraces his father’s family with is a traditionally Muslim family. His documented religion is, however, the Black Liberation Theology of Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago.

The doctrine of the so-called church where Obama was a member for 20 years is not Christianity, but has a kind of Gnostic doctrine and was inspired by the Nation of Islam. The Nation of Islam is not orthodox Islam either, but also has a Gnostic, black cult doctrine. The NOI was started by a group of not very educated men and the head, Elijah Muhammad, used to fret that they needed professional types to build a “black nation.”

Black Liberation Theology can be seen as a pseudo-Christian version of the Nation of Islam. It has a doctrine written by a professor that appeals more to black urban professionals, like Obama, and has also been useful for spreading the concepts of the NOI into black churches and the general, black population.

Elijah Muhammad taught that his version of Islam is not a religion, but that blacks are naturally born Muslims. They have a Nazi-like concept that all culture and knowledge come from the black man, the “original people.” The sects that are based on the Elijah Muhammad’s Black Nationalism borrow a lot of concepts from his writings, which are considered to be scripture by his followers. Obama may feel that he is, at root, a Muslim, in the sense of Elijah Muhammad.

Obama campaign poster with radiant halo, similar to that used in images of Elijah Muhammad.
Obama is certainly very sympathetic to Islam, due to his family background and the connection of his Gnostic pseudo-church to the Nation of Islam cult. Black Liberation Theology is compatible with Islam in its ethics, justifying whatever is necessary to destroy the white man and to bring down America. He is also anxious to cooperate with Muslims to achieve his anti-American agenda. The doctrine of his pseudo-church is worse than that of Islam in any case, calling more specifically for the destruction of America and white society by any means necessary. People should take the time to read the foundation books on Black Liberation Theology by James H. Cone, available from Amazon. They are short, inexpensive books that give you a much better idea of the religious nature of Obama’s agenda against America, whites and the orthodox Christian church. It holds that all three must be destroyed in order to bring on the millennial utopia or kingdom of God on Earth, which in their doctrine will be a physical theocracy led by a black messiah. The doctrine teaches that the black messiah will be an ordinary man who exalts himself to that god-like status, by struggle against white society. Because they are self-exalted, more than one messiah is possible at the same time.

Louis Farrakhan, the current head of the Nation of Islam, who was a disciple of Elijah Muhammad, implied during the campaign (Feb., 2008) at his “Saviors’ Day Conference” that Obama is a black messiah. Note that “Saviors’ ” is plural on Farrakhan’s podium in the clip below. The black vote shifted from Hillary to Obama at about that time, just as Michelle Obama had predicted about three months earlier in an interview on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” program.

Louis Farrakhan Hails Obama As The Black Messiah