Tag: multi-ethnic relations

Have you ever noticed the ethnic reconciliation that exists in the future world of Star Trek.(remember this series began in the late sixties, so think metaphors and allegories in a turbulent time of our history) All sorts of strange, exotic and unique humanoids live together in harmony that is usually disrupted only by an outside alien force or rebels within the utopian, discovered and civilized galaxy.
There are marriages between Vulcans and humans that produce Mr. Spocks and the struggles of deciding how to live between two worlds.
The original essental crew is comprised of an African (and a woman at that) named Uhura, a Russian named Chekov, a Japanese American named Sulu, a Vulcan named Spock, a southerner named Bones and a midwesterner named Kirk (whose character is loosely based on Horatio Hornblower)
There are still some Klingoncentrics and Romulancentrics who see humans as a lower species of the evolved orders who at best should only be occasionally tolerated because of their inferiority.
However, with this unity in diversity, there is one thing that is absent: any sense of absolutes that govern morals or ethics with the exceptions of murder, rape and pillage.
So, if mating, for example, is an instinct that carries little or no responsibility with it because all the offspring are turned over to eunuchs and professional mothers, one may think it odd, but that is their culture.
If the singular goal of the Federation of Planets is to bring peace to the galaxy and let each culture live in Utopian bliss., then there is no need for truth as an absolute. The only truth is the need for each culture to promote this peace for the well being of one another and ultimate success as living organisms that can reason and act accordingly.
Everything comes to fulfilment through negotiation and compromise based on reason, logic and as a common goal a peaceful co-existence with galactic neighbors. Cultural exchange and free market enterprise are the tools for galactic peace and harmony. An integrated hierarchy of rule and an integrated force of military/explorers and scientists can accomplish anything. Higher and lower life forms can interact to defend and save the galaxy from intruders and rebels because everyone acknowledges that Utopia, although demanding, is desirable and attainable and does not require absolutes.
This is wonderful in the context of a fantasy world, but it is not the reality of a world bound in sin, which results in ethnic hatred and racial prejudice. Sadly, even the greatest vehicle by which true reconciliation is granted to the human race, the Body of Christ, is a tragic failure.
We have been asked to address how we can improve the state of the church in relation to racial reconciliation.
Obviously, the first step is to recognize that the church has problems with deliberate segregation and prejudice.
Once this is recognized there is hope for working our way through a number of solutions and bringing true reconciliation, ethnically, within the body of Christ.
Let me ask you a question. During the O. J. Simpson debacle (it was which ever side was right or wrong) how did you respond to the deliberate politics of racism.
Was he guilty because he was rich and black? Was he innocent because he was black and had overcome the gangs and the hood and was very talented? Guilty because he was married to a white woman and in the end they both got what they deserved? Guilty but got off because of his wealth? Guilty but had to be let loose or once again America might burn.
What was the significance of seeing OJ with a Bible in his hands? Was black America being emasculated once again through the trial of a successful black? Were whites getting even because of all the “reverse discrimination” that was on the increase?
Or was the OJ thing nothing but another indicator of how deeply ingrained racism is in the American conscience: corporately, institutionally, in families, in our neighborhoods and let’s not forget the church.
Use the OJ thing as a barometer of your own failings in the matter of racial reconciliation. How well did you hold up, biblically, during the whole series of events? What glasses did you view it through?
How many cross cultural relationships have you attempted to build since then?
The first step in building an honest relationship across ethnic lines is to make acquaintance with someone. (Big revelation right?). This needs to be done intentionally.
You may have to go out of your comfort zone because you may sense that you have nothing in common with someone who is not of your ethnic origin.
But we all have many things in common.
First of all, we are all created in the image of God and are marred and scarred by sin. We are common in our sinfulness and imperfection. Second, death is common to all men and all men are made common in death. Third, many women and men are wives and husbands, mothers and fathers. Some due to various circumstances are single parents. Others are not married. Professional people have something in common with their peers just as construction workers share in a number of common experiences. Everybody wants some sense of meaning for their lives, although many are living in despair and are overcome by their circumstances
If we are truly saved, we have the same Saviour and Sovereign God.
Yet, there are some differences that could keep us apart, even as Christians, especially if we do not know what it means to develop a Christian mindset in a pagan world, which is essential for reconciliation.
If I have a Euro-centric mindset, I may believe that all of the greatest achievements in history came from the mind of Western Europeans. But don’t forget, that’s where the (racist) Crusades and two world wars began.
If I have an Afro-centric mindset, I may celebrate the heritage and amazing feats and incredible knowledge of the Egyptian Dynasties. But don’t forget that they were a slavemaster nation, one of the worst of antiquity and God crushed Pharaoh.
All of us will have some kind of baggage to bring to the relationship table.
It may be bias or prejudice, but in Christ each can be overcome because in Him we are one new people.

In March of 1963 on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, Dr.Martin Luther King gave his I Have a Dream speech. The eloquence of his oratory matched the conviction of his heart.His words were the revelations of a visionary leader of a movement that would neither ultimately succeed nor ultimately fail.
Peter Marshall, late Chaplain of the US Senate said, “I would rather fail in a cause that will ultimately succeed than succeed in a cause that will ultimately fail.”
The speech was filled with imagery that stirred the imagination and kindled the fires of emotion in Americans who were exhorted to take responsible, peaceful action toward the elimination of racism in America. In contrast to the voice of pacifism and non-violence, there were the voices that advocated violence and were opposed to the mainstream message and methods of the movement.
These voices devastated the hopes for a true coalition of black leadership.The message of rage and racism within the Black Power Movement was articulated by Malcom X, Stokely Carmichael, Huey Newton, Eldridge Cleaver, Angela Davis and lesser known indiviuals. They represented The Nation of Islam, SNCC, The Black Panthers and other groups. More voices of opposition added to the turmoil. George Lincoln Rockwell spewed forth his Aryan rhetoric through the American Nazi Party and of course there was the ever present K.K.K.
These were the days of white faced mobs, springing up like hedges along the Civil Rights Marchers pathways, faces snarled with hatred and spitting venemous words of scorn at them.
These were the days of the famous and the infamous proving, once again, that the Bible accurately describes humanity as being depraved, wicked and sinful, (Mt. 15:18-20).
But, these were also the days of seeing the gift of a moral conscience because we are created in the image of God, yet marred by sin. A conscience that can still respond to the inequities in our society that are the result of our common sinfulness (Rom.3:23).
From Selma to Memphis, the consequences of the fall of man in the Garden of Eden were repeatedly illustrated and seared into the memories of a generation.
But Dr.King had a dream.
Curiously, there was one voice that was ambivalent and strangely silent. Barely a whisper came from this voice although it had a presence in every urban center, suburb and rural area of America. Generally, the voice of the “evangelical” white church was not heard.
Jews, Catholics and Christians from the mainline and liberal churches were in the mix. Some were killed – black, white, Jew and Gentile. But where was the evangelical church, white or otherwise.
This brings us to the essential factor as to why the Civil Rights Movement did not ultimately succeed nor can it succeed as men might hope it will. The underlying theological presuppositions upon which the movement was based were not biblical. The presuppositions of the universal fatherhood of God and the universal brotherhood of man are contrary to our biblical understanding of man.
The key theological presupposition in the I Have A Dream speech is evident:
“And when this happens, when we allow freedom to ring, when we let it ring from every tenement and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God’s children (author’s emphasis), black men and whitemen, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will beable to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, Free at last, free at last. Thank God Almighty, we are free at last.”
The freedom and brotherhood that Dr. King so earnestly desired cannot become a reality when we honestly and biblically assess human nature. Human nature is bound as a slave to sin (Rom.6:17). Without the Gospel and the reconciliation of God and man first, there can be no true reconciliation between men (Eph.2:14-17).
God is the Creator of all and the Father only of those who believe in Christ and repent of their sin.
To be free at last can only be accomplished through the cross and Christ’s resurrection.
Without Christ, the dream is a humanistic desire for a Camelot that man can never create. There was no happy everaftering for King Arthur, nor is there for us, unless Christ is our King and Sovereign Lord.
Many of the leaders in the movement were also trained in Eastern Mysticism meditation techniques and they embraced the philosophy of Mahatmas Ghandi which only obscured the truth of Scripture. Hindus and Brahmans and other Eastern religions believe in the universal fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man and that many roads lead to heaven. This is anti-Christian.
Why were these ministers of the gospel so eager to embrace teachings that are so far removed from the truth of the Bible?
Although I do not agree with the theology of either Dr. King or Billy Graham, can you imagine what might have been if Billy Graham and Dr. King held a joint evangelistic crusade in Selma, Birmingham, Atlanta or Memphis?
Can you imagine addressing racial prejudice by preaching the gospel and being ministers of reconciliation in our multicultural societies today or tomorrow?
Would Dr. King envision that the body of Christ, at least as he understood it, with it’s many hues, continues to and may even take the lead in promoting segregation in America forty-four years after saying, I have a dream...
A more in depth article is available at www.fbceny.org/articles/king1.pdf