Black Liberation Theology Misinterprets the Bible

It would do many American Christians good to listen to the likes of Thabiti Anyabwile (seen in the video) who serves as the Senior Pastor of First Baptist Church of Grand Cayman (Cayman Islands).

Black Liberation Theology originated on July 31, 1966, when 51 black pastors bought a full page ad in the New York Times and demanded a more aggressive approach to eradicating racism. James Cone and Dwight Hopkins are considered the leading theologians of this theology.It was Cone who in 1969 Black Theology and Black Power (1969). In the book, Cone asserted that not only was black power not alien to the Gospel, it was, in fact, the Gospel message for all of 20th century America.

James Cone defines the theology as thus: “Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community … Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.” [A Black Theology of Liberation By James H. Cone 1990 ISBN-10: 0883446855 Page 27]

“God’s presence in the world is best depicted through God’s involvement in the struggle for justice,” says Anthony Pinn, who teaches philosophy and religion at Rice University in Houston. “God is so intimately connected to the community that suffers, that God becomes a part of that community.”

Dwight Hopkins, a professor at the University of Chicago Divinity School, explains that the central text for black liberation theology can be found in Luke 4:18, where Jesus outlines the purpose of his ministry. “Jesus says my mission is to eradicate poverty and to bring about freedom and liberation for the oppressed,” Hopkins says. “And most Christian pastors in America skip over that part of the book.” Hopkins attends Trinity United Church of Christ, where Rev. Wright just retired as pastor.

Of course the problem is that Jesus neither said that his mission was “to eradicate poverty” nor did He claim to bring freedom and liberation to all oppressed people. In fact in Luke 4:21, Jesus was quoting from Isaiah 61:1-2, and He claimed, after reading the Isaiah passage in a Jewish synagogue, that His ministry was the fulfillment of this prophecy. In fact, Luke also wrote the Book of Acts and explained that the ministry of Jesus was continued through the Apostles and the Church.

So the question is: who exactly is the poor, the captives, the blind and the oppressed Isaiah was referring to? Who was Jesus and the Apostles and the Church coming to save? The answer is God’s Israel. Beuken (1989) explains that Isaiah 61 is an “interpretation” of Isaiah 40-55. In light of Isaiah 40-55, the Isaiah 61 outlines the Messiah’s goal of reversing the fortunes of God’s oppressed people with the arrival of the eschatological era of the Messianic reign of Christ. Jesus came to die for the sins of the elect and to rise from the dead to ascend to the eternal Throne of David at God’s right hand.

In other words, this prophecy and its fulfillment in Jesus Christ is not aimed at the salvation of all oppressed people. It is specifically referring to the salvation of God’s true Israel. Jesus Christ is the Heavenly Treasure to the poor, spiritual sight to the spiritually blind, and the Redeemer of the spiritually oppressed. Indeed this prophecy of Isaiah was fulfilled in Jesus Christ and is manifested in the New Covenant church and will be fully consummated in the Second Coming of Christ.

Hopkins charges Christian pastors with skipping parts of this passage. But I wonder why Hopkins and Jeremiah Wright and Black Liberation Theology only proclaim the “feed the poor and free the oppressed” part of this passage and SKIP the “give sight to the blind” part? They treat the words “poor” and “oppressed” in a literal sense, but they know they cannot literally heal the blind. Their inconsistent hermeneutic is thus exposed and their political agenda is thus outed.

Linda Thomas, who teaches at the Lutheran School of Theology in Chicago, says the whole point of it is to challenge the powerful and to raise questions for society to think about. Thomas says if white people are surprised by the rhetoric heard from the likes of Jeremiah Wright, it’s because most have never visited a black church.

“I think that many black people would know what white worship is like,” Thomas says. “Why is it that white people don’t know what black worship is about? And I think that is because there is this centrality with white culture that says we don’t have to know about that.”

No, Linda, we know what Black Liberation Theology is about. And it is not about the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The true Gospel sufficiently confronts racism in the only manner that shall be successful. Black Liberation Theology misuses the Bible to confront racism with other forms of racism. Such efforts are futile and such misuses of the Holy Scripture are abominable.