Who knew this face could generate so much hatred?

When I poured my bowl of Cheerios this morning for breakfast, I did not realize that I was making a political statement. I did not know that by eating these delectable little oats, I was standing up for my marriage. Silly me, I thought I was just having breakfast. You may be confused right now, if you have not been paying attention to the news cycle over the past week. To catch you up, Cheerios released a commercial on their YouTube channel that featured an interracial couple with a biracial little girl. The commercial sparked a myriad of racist comments and impassioned rebuttals that led the host of the YouTube channel to turn off the comments section and to remove all previously posted comments. If you have not seen the commercial, you can watch it here.

The purpose of the commercial was to inform the public “that Cheerios has whole grain oats that can help remove some cholesterol,” which can ultimately lead to having a healthier heart. This is an important message and one that, in the context of our fast food society, should not be taken lightly. According to the Center for Disease Control , “71 million American adults have high LDL, or ‘bad,’ cholesterol.” Also, “people with high total cholesterol have approximately twice the risk of heart disease as people with optimal levels [of cholesterol].” General Mills and the Cheerios brand were simply trying to do their part to help combat this issue, and used this brief and informative commercial to let us know that their product, on a small scale, could help reduce the risk of high cholesterol.

So what is the problem? The problem is that the commercial featured a cute little girl with kinky curls who had a white mom and a black dad. The point of the commercial was to talk about cholesterol. It is quite a shame that this message was completely missed, because in 2013, there are still people in this country who take issue with interracial relationships, specifically those between Blacks and Whites. Had a family of one race be featured, no one would have said a word about the commercial. I would venture to say that if another interracial relationship had been represented, like Asian and White or Black and Hispanic, there would not be this much pushback. In fact, I imagine a lot of people would have headed to their local grocery store to pick up a couple of boxes of Cheerios in hopes of fixin’ the ol’ ticker (rather than heading to a local gym). What if a homosexual couple was featured in this commercial? The country would probably applaud General Mills and the Cheerios brand for taking a stand for marriage equality.

What transpired on the Cheerios YouTube page is to be expected in a country with such deep-seated roots of negative race relations between Blacks and Whites. Considering my own history with racism, I am certainly not shocked that there are still many people out there that covertly harbor hate for people that look like me. I do not write this post in anger toward those cowards that chose to express their hate-filled words concerning those in interracial relationships. I write this post as a believer in Christ who not only identifies with the people in this commercial, but also sees a far deeper issue.

Racism at its core goes far past poor race relations between Blacks and Whites in this country. It goes deeper than Civil Rights and Southern slavery. Racism is a sin issue, and one that must be addressed from a position of prayer. As a black man who is married to a white woman and will have biracial children, I must see this situation from a spiritual perspective. It was not simply a group of racist people that caused such a firestorm over this commercial; it was a group of sinners in need of a Savior who shed His own blood so that he could gather “a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages” (from Revelation 7:9, ESV).

Followers of Christ serve a God that welcomes and celebrates racial diversity. In Christ’s Great Commission to the twelve disciples before His ascension, He charged them to “go therefore and make disciples of all nations” (from Matthew 28:19, ESV). Paul in his opening statements to the church at Rome wrote “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek” (Romans 1:16, ESV). In other translations of the Bible, the word “Gentile” appears in place of the word “Greek,” which then describes all those that are non-Jews.

From the beginning of time, God had it in His plan to bring all of the peoples of the world together. On the other side of eternity, there will be no racism. There will be no hatred or harsh words toward people who are different. There will be no judgment of others. There will only be a people; one people, gathered around the throne of King Jesus, singing praises to Him in one accord for all of eternity.

Until then, I will pray for those that are blinded by the “god of this world” into thinking that racism is OK. I will pray that they have an encounter with my gracious and loving Savior, who celebrates the differences displayed in all people throughout His creation. I will pray that the truth of the Gospel will transform their hearts to the point where they cry out in repentance. I will pray that they be so transformed that a commercial featuring an interracial couple with a biracial child would not offend them, but remind them of a future glory that is yet to be revealed.

I will pray…and eat my Cheerios!

The Pace Sisters are the latest in the line of black folks who want their lives fixed. But are we looking in the right place?

“Fix me” is the new black. Black people love being fixed, don’t we? There’s no other reason we gather in front of our televisions and computer screens on Thursday nights and have a running commentary on ABC’s Scandal. Never mind the illicit affair with the leader of the free world, Olivia Pope makes her living fixing people. The irony is that she can’t even fix herself. She’s broken. According to this piece in The Atlantic, she’s looking for a savior. The fixer screams from the bowels of her soul, “Fix me!” We watch because something resonates with us about this idea of repairing something that’s broken in our lives. We all experience brokenness on some level. So Shonda Rhimes has merely tapped into that subliminal desire to be fixed.

The OWN Network wasn’t too far behind. They recruited Iyanla Vanzant to host a show they decided to call Iyanla: Fix My Life (clever). Because we all need fixing, right? And predictably so, the show is now the number one reality show on the OWN network. Good job, Oprah: you’ve successfully perpetuated the myth in black people’s mind that we need other folks to fix us. So you go out and recruit a well-known name to step into celebrities’ lives and fix them. This weekend Iyanla was asked to fix the lives of legendary gospel group the Pace Sisters. So let me get this right: you invite a New Thought Priestess and “spiritual guide” who cloaks spiritual language in Gnostic thought to fix your life and expect it to go over well? Cool, cool. But I digress. In the episode, the Pace Sisters were invited to join Vanzant on a two-day retreat to get to the bottom of what was going on in their family. And boy did that ever happen.

In a lucid account, the elder Pace sister, Duranice, recalled a horrific incident of sexual abuse in her past. The visceral response from her sisters and viewers alike elucidates the horrid nature of sex abuse and its impact. Another sister, DeJuaii, also vulnerably shared about her personal life. ”I’m angry because I feel that my attraction to other women is wrong,” DeJuaii said, “that who I am is unacceptable because it embarrasses the family.” This caused another sister, June, to walk out of the room. When asked about it later, June stated, “I mean, we know better” (i.e., we were taught better than that). Vanzant scolded June for judging her sister and being saturated in a “dogma and a theology” that doesn’t embrace DeJuaii.

The lamentable thing I got from watching this is that it took a reality show for the sisters to discuss these issues. Growing up in a Pentecostal church, it’s very likely they felt they needed to suppress their issues rather than address them. Am I glad they started to talk about them? Yes. Am I happy about the fallout since then? No.

The Internet has been abuzz about the way some of the sisters treated DeJuaii’s discussion of her desire to be with women. One blogger is fed up with “nice-nasty” Christians like June. Another stated with frustration, “The closer I become acquainted with ‘devout Christians’ and those who represent leadership in the Christian community, the more I begin to feel like religion truly was created as a mechanism to control the masses.”

Unfortunately, many young, black adults share the same sentiments. Church is for those who want to be controlled. It’s stale, judgmental, and unattractive. This iconic group of black women who represent leadership in the church is full of dogmatic and legalistic robots. 

Honestly, the caricature has played out on Christian reality television for the past year. And there’s more to come. This fall, we’ll be “blessed” with the opportunity to look into the lives of a group of pastors in Los Angeles. The show is aptly titled “Pastors of L.A.” No matter what, with these shows, the audience walks away with one thought: the Black church is hypocritical. If this is the perception the networks are giving, who can blame them? The Pace Sisters did very little to ease the burden of Christians who try to prove to the world that not all Christians are hypocritical. They did very little to prove that there are rational, loving ways to address issues (e.g., homosexuality) that have been normalized in our culture. And that’s the problem with Christian reality television. It doesn’t accurately reflect the Christian reality—a reality steeped in deep commitment to Christ and real, perceptible engagement with the world around us.

The Pace Sisters were looking for answers. Olivia Pope is still looking for answers (“Dad?!?!”). Let’s be candid here. We’re all looking for answers. We all want our lives fixed. But here’s the true “reality”: brokenness is part of the human narrative. The events in Oklahoma a few days ago confirm this. And we all look for meaning and purpose. Unfortunately, we tend to look for that meaning and purpose outside of our Creator. That’s why we create dogmatic, legalistic rules without life transformation. That’s why we try to earn merit with God ourselves. That’s why we look to a man (or woman) to affirm us. That’s why we work so hard to climb the corporate ladder. But one Pauline truth is informative here: “In [Christ], all things hold together” (1 Colossians 1:17b). All things. Your marriage. Your life. Your pain. Your scars. Your finances. The only Person capable of fixing our lives is Christ Jesus. Iyanla can’t. Olivia can’t. Barack Obama can’t. Congress can’t.

So after we reach the end of our DVRed episode, after the shock wears off, after the social media commentary is over, we still need a Fixer. No cameras. No pretense. Just Him. *insert Shonda bulb flash*

Has the message of some of today’s Gospel music strayed significantly from the message of the Gospel itself?

I love Gospel Music. Traditional. Contemporary. Praise & worship. Choirs. Groups. Solo artists. Old and new. From Rev. So-and-So Presents… albums of the 80s to today’s Bishop So-and-So Presents… albums. I have even started to listen to some quartet and Christian hip-hop.

I love music. And I especially love music that exalts the Lord Jesus Christ. But my true love for Gospel Music has broken my heart.

In two ways…

First, I am grieved by the excessive commercialism of contemporary Gospel Music. I can cite various examples of this illicit love affair with the world. But there is an explicit seduction of the world on Gospel artists that burdens me: reality TV. What is this about? Why are Gospel artists joining the ranks of these mind-numbing reality TV shows? Don’t you now know that “reality TV” is an oxymoron?

Of course, Gospel artists are not the only ones joining this parade of worldly foolishness. It’s also preachers, preacher’s wives, and preacher’s daughters. More and more religious personalities are nakedly pursuing fleeting celebrity. We want to be famous, rather than promoting the name, message, kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Please to tell us you are doing this to expand the influence of Christ in culture. If that’s what you think, you are extremely confused. Deceived. Out of touch with “reality” (pun intended!). It is easier for the world to pull you down than for you to pull the world up. And in leaning over to reach the world, the church often falls in. And we are dragging the precious name of Jesus down with us.

Where did we get the idea that Christ wants us to help him be relevant in this God-ignoring society? The Lord commands us to be holy, faithful, obedient, wise, and loving. The Lord does not want us to show the world that we are regular people just like everyone else. The world already knows that! That’s why they don’t respect the church. We need to be different. Light. Salt. Our influence in the world happens by the difference Christ makes in our lives, not by blending in. The world cannot see our good works and glorify the Father in heaven by watching so-called Christian leaders divas argue, boast, shop, covet, date, lust, and complain on TV. Get real!

My heart is broken for another reason.

Not only are Gospel artists fallen in love with the world; even worse, they have fallen in love with Word of Faith theology. Prosperity Theology used to be on the fringes of the Christian landscape. Now these faith teachers are the mainstream. And many prominent Gospel artists have digested their unbiblical teachings and regurgitate them in their music.

As I listen to the new Gospel Music released, I am blown away by how talented Gospel artists are. The music, singing, and production can rival anything “secular” project. Unfortunately, I am hearing more thoughtful reflection in some Pop and R&B music than among those who claim to sing for the glory of God.

I buy a lot of Gospel Music. But I can commend very little of it for worship, private or corporate. Too much Gospel Music has too little gospel in it. It is not God exalting, Christ focused, or biblically saturated. It is fixated with self.

“It’s my season…”

“My harvest is coming…”

“What’s to come is greater than what’s been…”

“I don’t look like what I’ve been through…”

“Praise him till you get your breakthrough…”

“Speak those things that are not as though they were…”

“I’m taking back everything the devil stole from me…”

“Speak it into the atmosphere…” “

“I’m claiming my destiny…”

On and on it goes.

Just because you use biblical phrases does not mean you are communicating biblical truth. Cults play that game. Christian musicians and singers should not.

We need music that teaches truth (Col. 3:16), not just cherry-picks phrases that sound good. We need Gospel Music that proclaims the gospel! We need reverent, bible-rooted music that will lead worshipers to think deeply about Christ. We need musicians to record music that will lead us to sing to the glory of God, not just cheer-lead to get an emotional response.

Don’t look now, Gospel Artists, but the upstart Christian hop-hop artists are lapping you. Now, I am not a big hip-hop fan. And I don’t know any of these artists personally. But I am encouraged by their willingness to rap about God and Jesus and the gospel and holiness and doctrine. They are daring to compose and perform truth-driven messages, not mere foot-tapping music.

Gospel artists, please wake up! We are in a storm. And you are playing the Jonah, sleeping your way to Tarshish when you should be headed to Nineveh. The church – and the world – needs you to wake up and give up music about the true and living God!

Doug Williams (pictured above) is the first black quarterback to lead his team to a Super Bowl victory. (Photo Credit: John Biever/Sports Illustrated)

A week ago, a group of young, black men descended on the city of New York to fulfill their lifelong dreams—being selected in the National Football League draft. This week, pundits discussed the draft ad nauseam. Teams were graded for their picks. Players were analyzed to determine whether they’d fit their new teams’ culture. But not many of the pundits discussed the proverbial elephant in the room when it comes to black athletes—particularly quarterbacks.

The First
I remember it like it was yesterday. Watching Doug Williams hoist the Super Bowl XXII MVP trophy was a pivotal moment in my life. A black man. A quarterback. A leader—one who led his team to victory on one of the biggest stages in American television. He beat a quarterback that most feel is one of the best of all-time, John Elway. And he beat him handily: 42-10. It was a long road for Williams. He entered the league in 1978—the 17th overall pick. As the starting quarterback with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, he was paid less than 12 other quarterbacks in the league—backup quarterbacks that is. Not only was he the lowest paid starting quarterback, he wasn’t getting paid as much as over a dozen backup quarterbacks! But on January 31, 1985, he showed the world that he belonged.

Fitting In
Black quarterbacks have spent the past several decades proving they belong. Research conducted a few years ago showed that one of out every three black quarterbacks drafted are converted to another position. That same study revealed that, since the NFL draft’s inception, approximately 13% of the quarterbacks drafted were black. Of that number, only 2% were drafted in the first round.

There’s been a stigma attached to the black quarterback for a long time. They’re athletic, but don’t seem to be as cerebral as their white counterparts. Or at least that’s the perception of some. And they tend to base it on Wonderlic test scores from the NFL Combine. The Wonderlic test is a 12-minute 50 question exam designed to measure the learning and problem solving ability of employees. On average, NFL quarterbacks scored a 24 on the test. Notable Wonderlic scores for black quaterbacks? Vince Young scored a 6 the first time he took it. Former Kansas State quarterback Michael Bishop scored a 10. NFL bust Jamarcus Russell scored a 24 on the test. Quincy Carter, a former for my beloved Dallas Cowboys, scored an impressive 30. Notable Wonderlic scores for white quarterbacks? Dan Marino, Terry Bradshaw, and and Jim Kelly—all Hall of Famers— scored 15 on the test.

What does that tell us? Not much. Data is all over the place. Yet, black quarterbacks receive a higher level of scrutiny when it comes to reading defenses, memorizing playbooks, and leading NFL teams. Admittedly, black NFL quarterbacks have been hit and miss. From the late Steve McNair, who was inches away from becoming the second black NFL quarterback to win a Super Bowl to Colin Kaepernick, who broke Michael Vick’s single game postseason rushing record by running around, through, and over the Green Bay Pakers, black quarterbacks have had great success in the league. But there’s also the cautionary tale of JaMarcus Russell. Russell was selected first overall in the 2007 NFL draft (over some guy named Calvin Johnson). Russell had a strong arm and, as mentioned above, scored well on the cognitive testing in pre-draft camps. Neither translated well on the field (not to mention that he ballooned to around 300 pounds).

The Future
Last week, during the first round of the draft, Geno Smith sat. And sat. And sat. His name wasn’t called. Expected to be the first quarterback drafted, instead he was drafted in the second round. Ironically, E.J. Manuel, another black quarterback who wasn’t on most peoples’ radars, was drafted in the first round. As I watched the camera fixed on Smith late in the first round, I envisioned one of those “that awkward moment when…” memes. And I couldn’t help but think about black NFL quarterbacks’ struggles to prove themselves at a position traditionally dominated by their white counterparts. This year two of the eleven quarterbacks drafted were black. They also just so happened to be the first two selected in the draft. Progress? Only time will tell.

Iyanla Vanzant (pictured above) is a self-help author, life coach, and star of the hit reality-show “Iyanla: Fix My Life”. Her show airs on Saturdays at 9/8c on the OWN Network (Photo Credit: TVguide.com)

I first heard of Iyanla Vanzant in the ‘90s when I was a college student. Although I hadn’t yet developed my relationship with God, the spiritual message she shared on Oprah, my patron saint at the time, attracted me. Also, Iyanla’s story of ascent from welfare mother to lawyer inspired me. Her books — “Acts of Faith: Daily Meditations for People of Color”; “Faith in the Valley: Lessons for Women on the Journey to Peace”; and “The Value in the Valley: A Black Woman’s Guide Through Life’s Dilemmas” – delivered the self-empowerment messages I craved as I entered adulthood.

However, as my relationship with God deepened in my ‘20s, I realized that Iyanla was a Yoruba priestess and maybe I didn’t need to seek that kind of wisdom from someone who didn’t share my Christian beliefs. Still, I occasionally thumbed through her books to extract the positive messages without being lured into her belief system. And then, suddenly, I stopped hearing about her altogether. Apparently, while Oprah was grooming the self-help guru to have her own talk show – similar to the way she groomed Dr. Phil – Iyanla reportedly gave her an ultimatum: give me a talk show or I’ll secure one with another media outlet. Oprah did not give her a show, but Barbara Walters did. The talk show, however, was short lived, only lasting for one season. The loss of Iyanla’s talk show marked the beginning of her descent: her husband divorced her, she lost her daughter to cancer, and declared bankruptcy.

Once Oprah started the OWN network, the media queen and her protégé eventually mended their relationship. In February 2011, the two held a raw and honest multi-episode conversation and reconciliation that revealed what really transpired just over a decade earlier. After their exchange, Iyanla received an invitation to be an expert on “Oprah’s Lifeclass” show and, ultimately, an offer to host her own show, “Iyanla: Fix My Life”, on Winfrey’s network. I watched a few of the first season episodes, but this season has set media outlets and social media buzzing. The April 13^th season premiere featured DMX, a rap artist who has become as well known for his multiple arrests and erratic behavior as he is for his music, and his estranged teenage son Xavier. The episode made for gripping television: DMX nearly threatened Iyanla; shared tender moments with his son; and spoke in his trademark staccato speech patterns (which sound better in a rap song than an interview). The rapper, whose birth name is Earl Simmons, talked about being sent to a group home as a child, his drug abuse, meeting his now estranged wife Tarshera and cheating on her with multiple women. When the 90-minute show ends, the audience knows a lot about DMX and his family, but it doesn’t seem that DMX’s life has been “fixed.” In fact, he doesn’t want the show to be aired again and is reportedly planning to sue Iyanla.

In the second show, which aired April 20, Iyanla endeavors to fix the life of Sheree Whitfield, the former “The Real Housewives of Atlanta” star, and Bob Whitfield, her ex-husband and former Atlanta Falcons football player. From this episode, we learn that their marriage was troubled from the beginning: Mr. Whitfield wed his ex-wife because she was pregnant. Whitfield accused her of creating drama to be used as footage for the hit reality show and obsessing over the construction of her dream mansion Château Sheree. Sheree, on the other hand, accused her former husband of being a deadbeat dad because of his refusal to pay child support and take care of their two children. By the end of the episode, both parties readily admitted they don’t like each other and Iyanla admitted that she had not “fixed” their lives.

Today’s episode will feature popular Atlanta DJ “Sasha the Diva,” her 17-year-old son, and her new husband. Apparently, the son she raised as a single parent is acting out now that his mother has gotten married. I heard Sasha speaking about the episode a couple of weeks ago as she was the host of a seminar at a bridal show I attended. She said before she called Iyanla, she thought she was going to have to either choose her son or her husband, but Iyanla helped her to maintain both relationships. Well, I guess we will have to see for ourselves what transpires because if the past two episodes have been any indication of what is to come, there will be a whole lot of business sharing but not as much fixing.

Nevertheless, I must admit that I am a fan of the show. Iyanla has highlighted issues impacting the black community – such as drug abuse, single parenthood and blended family drama – in a way that addresses them without exploiting them. At the same time, I wonder if being on a single episode is helping families resolve issues that will likely take years of counseling to address. And while I haven’t heard Iyanla make any pointed references to her religious beliefs, I wonder if she is promoting them in any way as she counsels her show’s participants. Her new show is entertaining and educational, but Christians may need to be discerning about her advice.

Shai Linne has created waves in the Christian music scene with his recently released single, Fal$e Teacher$. The song names prominent pastors and televangelists that Linne suggests are wolves in sheep’s clothing. (Photo credit: Covenant.edu)

When it dropped, the reaction that I saw across my social media feed consisted of a lot of raised eyebrows, tilted heads, and furrowed brows.

Wow… he really went there.

Shai Linne, the standard-bearer for reformed theology in hip-hop, released a song called “Fal$e Teacher$,” in which he castigates the erroneous, prosperity-based, word-of-faith teachings of many high-profile ministers, and then in the chorus, calls them out by name. Joel Osteen and T.D. Jakes are just a few of the names that Linne identifies as false teachers.

In this video, he explains his reasoning for the single (part of his recent album Lyrical Theology, Vol. 1), specifically citing widespread deception regarding prosperity doctrine on the continent of Africa. According to Linne, the export of these ideas to unreached communities in Africa is even more dangerous, because many of these African listeners and viewers are mired in even deeper and more extreme levels of poverty. This prosperity thing must work, Linne says they’re probably thinking, since so many Americans have bought in.

I share an extreme distaste for most of these big-name ministries, for most of the same reasons. Because I care greatly about the destruction that such false teaching can unleash in the lives of naïve Christians who lack discernment, I am glad that Shai Linne has renewed his effort to address these heretical doctrines.

(*cue my Stephen A. Smith voice*)

HOWEVAH… I wish he wouldn’t have done it this way. Not the naming-names, thing. In principle, I don’t have a problem with that. I agree with Shai that there is significant Biblical precedent for naming names, most prominently with Paul publicly opposing Peter’s favoritism in Galatians 2.

No, for me, the most problematic part is in the title and the chorus. The single doesn’t just refer to false teaching, but it calls out false teachers. It crosses the line from holding public ministers accountable for the words and actions into publicly name-calling and denouncing their whole ministry. Depending on how you interpret 2 Peter 2:1-3 (which was quoted in the song), it’s possible to conclude that Linne is even questioning their salvation.

I am reminded of the words of hip-hop intellectual Jay Smooth, whose video blog “ill doctrine” blew up in 2008 when he offered people tips on how to tell someone that what they said sounded racist. Even though the issues are different, the concept is similar. When trying to hold someone accountable for something bad, it’s always better to focus on what they did rather than who they are. The former has a much narrow focus, whereas the latter gets into much bigger issues that are easier to derail.

So even if, for example, there is plenty of evidence to convict Paula White of having espoused and transmitted false doctrine, simply labeling her as a false teacher makes it too easy for her allies (in this case, her son who manages the ministry) to defend the totality of her ministry without addressing specific allegations.

In the headline, I used the term “false positive” – this is not an accusation that Shai is being deceptively nice. It’s a medical term, which describes “a test result that wrongly indicates the presence of a disease or other condition the test is designed to reveal.”

False positives are a major problem in medical diagnosis, but not because patients are often diagnosed as sick when they’re perfectly healthy. What happens more often is that patients who truly are sick get misdiagnosed, and then are given treatment that relates to the overall problem, but lacks certain nuances that could more precisely aid their recovery.

Whether intentionally or not, by releasing “Fal$e Teacher$,” Shai Linne gave the impression that all of the ministers named are cancerous toxins in the worldwide church, who should be, if not removed from ministry outright, at least avoided at all costs. These are sweeping accusations that, in my opinion, should not be done without providing or referencing specific evidence and proof – and in the song, he declares them over twelve people (in order: Joel Osteen, Creflo Dollar, T.D. Jakes, Joyce Meyer, Paula White, Fred “KC” Price, Kenneth Copeland, Robert Tilton, Eddie Long, Juanita Bynum, and Paul Crouch).

Now I’m not a fan of any of these names, but how fair is it to compare the ministries of Joyce Meyer and Robert Tilton? I don’t know, and that’s the point – Shai Linne provides very little contextual differentiation between them to justify his declaration of their heresy, only that they’re all in the same hellbound boat (“if you’re living your best life now, you’re headed for hell”). What then of any potential truth intermingled within the heresy? Or does one errant sermon, video or sentence corrupt the whole thing?

In his YouTube’d explanation (yes, I really just used the word “YouTube” as a verb), Shai mused that it had been ten years since he had really taken on this subject, which caused me to reflect on his original take on the matter, “Issues,” from 2003’s Urban Compositions.

This, to me, is a more well-rounded and more interesting song.

In it, he definitely attacks pastors who propagate the prosperity gospel (check this lyric: “I know this iced-out pastor, the brotha’s large / my man wanted to go to his church, but couldn’t afford the cover charge”). But its chorus also includes the phrase, “only Christ can separate the wheat from the tares,” a reference to Jesus’ parable of the weeds in Matthew 13:36-43.

Shai would be wise to revisit both the song and the parable. In it, Jesus describes a farmer who allow both wheat and the weeds to grow side by side, because trying to pull out the weeds could damage the still-growing wheat. It’s good to hold public ministers accountable to things they do and say that contradict Scripture, but labeling them as “Fal$e Teacher$” has the potential to undercut any of the gospel truth they might have preached alongside the heresy. And the people who get hurt – again –are those who follow those ministers, who haven’t yet developed the ability to eat the meat and spit out the bones, so to speak. After living under these faulty teachings, a believer who is suddenly exposed to the truth in such a harsh manner runs the risk of throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

My advice to Shai Linne: keep doing your best to promote Godly truth, but trust God to pull the weeds in His timing.

——–

Editor’s Note: Bradley Knight, Paula White’s son, released a statement in response to Shai Linne’s song. Linne  subsequently released a statement responding to Knight with specific examples of what he considers to be false teaching by Paula White.

Chadwick Boseman portrays Jackie Robinson in Brian Hegeland’s new film about the baseball legend, 42. (Photo credit: ABCnews.com)

Athletics unifies Americans in a way that few activities do. With the exceptions of church attendance, shopping, and voting, it is perhaps the most visible thread of a shared culture within our country. At the same time, athletics is occasionally a forum that settles events whose origins arise elsewhere. Brian Helgeland’s 42 narrates the story of how Jackie and Rachel Robinson, Wendell Smith, and Branch Rickey – to name a few prominent characters in a larger story – confronted racism in the United States by addressing segregation within America’s favorite pastime, baseball. The biopic, which grossed $27.4 million during the weekend, opening in the number slot. Moreover, the cast delivers earnest performances: Chadwick Boseman portrays Jackie Robinson; Nicole Beharie, Rachel Robinson; and Harrison Ford, Branch Rickey. Given its emotional resonance and the intrinsic pull of its story, 42 delivers an adequate but underwhelming version of Robinson’s story.

The film’s primary territory extends from 1945 to 1947, covering Robinson’s stint with the Montreal Royals in 1946 and the 1947 Brooklyn Dodgers season, which commenced with his Major League Baseball debut on April 15^th, 1947. Of particular note, 42 highlights the story of Wendell Smith, the Pittsburgh Courier journalist who chronicles the pioneering Major League Baseball debut of Robinson. The film’s accent on the Robinson-Smith relationships highlights the fact that the emergence of Jackie Robinson is coterminous with the ascent of black sports journalists. The legend of Hank Aaron, for instance, is connected to the work of the black sports journalists. The movie, moreover, rightly implies that Robinson’s pioneering career cleared the pathway for future African-American players.

The film deserves credit for painting a relatively nuanced picture of racism in the 1940’s. The most effective scenes cover the polarities of racial anxiety and racial acceptance: one of the Robinson’s teammates refuses to continue his shower when Robinson enters the locker room; another teammate is initially afraid to be seen with Robinson, but eventually embraces the opportunity to play alongside him as a show of support for integration within baseball.

42 avoids exploring what Robinson’s legacy means for diversity within the MLB (particularly at the executive level) and the role of contemporary black athletes within our society. Additionally, by portraying wholly idealized versions of Robinson and Rickey, the film misses an opportunity to help audiences see how the aforementioned men are lauded for generally choosing virtue over vice – rather than being construed as transcendent racial heroes. Nevertheless, 42 is a feel good movie that performs the essential role of a biopic – its honors the life of its subject. It’s also family-friendly entertainment that displays an intact black marriage in a cinematic landscape that is largely devoid of those elements. Take your friends and loved ones to see the film and let us know what you think.

Nonso Anozie portrays Samson in the History Channel miniseries on The Bible

The choice to cast Nonso Anozie (a black man in a bad dreadlock wig) as Samson as is in no way an attempt to demonstrate the visual and ethnic diversity of the ancient Near East in which this story is set, specifically the West Asian, East and North African context of the scriptures. The absence of characters of African descent up to this point makes that clear. (Just as the use of Black and Asian actors for angels makes them wholly “other” in the cast and not legitimate human bodies.)

That Samson is a big black man with brutish strength and a predilection for white women is no accident in this casting or production. One of the hallmarks of Rona Downey’s and Mark Burnett’s vision of the Bible is the erasure of Afro-Asiatic Israelite ethnic identity and its replacement with a white, American fundamentalist Christian identity. They do this in several ways.

1) Casting: they cast an abundance of white American and European actors and occasionally paint some dirt on their faces to make them look a little brown. Consider the creation of humanity, told in a flashback. Humanity was created from the humus, an earthling from the earth, in Hebrew an adam from the adamah. Instead of the rich brown-red soil native to Israel, Palestine, and the Great Rift Valley which descends from the Holy Land down into Kenya and Tanzania, the producers use sandy white soil from which springs a sandy white man. However, Satan is played by a Middle Eastern man, Mohamen Mehdi Ouazanni. While widely advertising a “Hispanic” Jesus, the producers actually cast a Portugese actor, Diogo Morgado, with white skin as Jesus. His skin has to be white since Roma Downey (of Touched By An Angel fame, part of the powerhouse team along with Mark Burnett behind this anachronistic whitewash of the bible) cast herself as the Blessed Virgin Mary – shades of Mel Gibson casting a white Jesus so he could insert his own feet into certain shots.

2) The second way the production replaces authentic Israelite identity with a white American fundamentalist and evangelical construction is in the use of quintessentially American race motifs like that of the big black buck or Mandingo, the brutishly strong, bestial black man and his preferential taste for white women. By transforming all of the Afro-Asiatic Israelites into white people, “simply” casting an Afro-British actor as Samson stages a lynching propaganda piece that the Klan would be proud of under the cover of the bible and “diversity.”

3) The third re-writing strategy of the team involves gender. The Bible is an androcentric and patriarchal text. It is also a text that has many women’s narratives, including those of strong women wielding power and authority in spite of their patriarchal and androcentric context. There is no room in the Burnett-Downey recreation of the Bible in their own image – right down to their own skin tones – for strong biblical women so they simply exclude them. A partial list of the women who have been cut from the narrative include: Yocheved, Moses’ mother and the Hebrew midwives Shiphrah and Puah, Zipporah, Moses’ wife and her sisters so that Moses is not the product of a strong community of women all of whom save his life in different episodes, but a lone ranger, a man who became a hero on his own. Hoglah, Milcah, Maacah, Noah and Tirtzah, the daughters of Zelophehad who are mentioned in more biblical books than there are Gospels, for whom God changed inheritance laws in the Torah that women might receive an inheritance – not worthy of attention. The great woman-warrior, Prophet and Judge (sharing those titles with Moses and Samuel and no one else, not even Joshua) Deborah, who ruled the nation – excised. Hannah, the theological revolutionary who taught the priesthood how to pray – unnecessary.

There is a final whitewashing, silencing strategy employed by the producers. That is sanitizing genocide, slavery – when the Israelites are the slavers, sexual violence, and heterodox theologies. The Bible is a wonderfully rich, complicated, challenging, illuminating, revelatory text. It is also horrifically violent and does not say what we want the way we want it to. We must take it in its entirety seriously as a cultural and historical artifact and as scripture – if that is our confession. But this series erases the texts in which Joshua and the Israelites slaughter babies, kill their mothers, fathers and brothers and take their sisters as war-brides as long as they haven’t had sex – prepubescent girl-children – on the orders of Moses and God. They ignore the texts in which God calls for the enslavement of non-Israelites and their children in perpetuity – the scriptural and theological basis for the Atlantic slave-trade and American slavocracy. They ignore the texts in which entire ethnic groups are exterminated by divine command. And they even ignore the horrific sexual violence perpetrated against women and girls within Israel: Lot’s offer of his daughters to be raped by a mob, Israelite fathers selling their daughters into sexual slavery with the permission of God and Moses, a Judge of Israel sacrificing his daughter like an animal and celebrated as a hero of faith in the New Testament, abduction, rape, forced pregnancy used repeatedly as tools of war. Bathsheba’s abduction and rape recast as consensual adultery.

In the American context when rape is being redefined while male bible-thumping legislatures require physicians to forcibly insert instruments into women’s vaginas one day and deny them access to legal medical procedures the next, it matters that and how the Bible is being distorted in primetime. Whereas evangelical leaders like Jim Wallis watched with “great delight,” I watched with horror.

In the American context the Israelite identity has been claimed by Christians and particularly by Western, European Christians who were also constructing the categories of white into which they placed themselves and the Afro-Asiatic Israelites. And, the United States was viewed, claimed and seized as a new Canaan for the new Israelites to conquer and subdue, hosting the reincarnation and reenactment of biblical slavery painted in black and white. This is why the whitewash of the bible on the History Channel is so pernicious. It is a continuation of slave-holding racist exegesis. And they ought to be ashamed.

—

Editor’s Note: This article was originally published on WilGafney.com

50 Cent at the Daytona 500, where he garnered headlines for a failed attempt to kiss ESPN sportscaster Erin Andrews. Andrews is a spokesperson for SK Energy, the energy drink company cofounded by 50 Cent. (Photo Credit: Marc Serota/Newscom).

Recently it was announced that Erin Andrews, a prominent ESPN sportscaster, is the newest spokesperson for an energy drink owned by rapper and entrepreneur 50 Cent. Days before the announcement, Andrews and 50 Cent made the news during coverage of the Daytona 500. While Andrews was scrambling live on air for an interview with Danica Patrick, the popular female driver on the racecar circuit, Andrews just happened to bump into 50 Cent, who is apparently a motorsports fan as well. The rapper (I respect his marketing genius) attempted to kiss Andrews, but she turned away. The video of the “non kiss” went viral across the Web, garnering substantial attention on social media. In a Huffington Post article posted after her spokesperson deal announcement, Andrews explained that the incident “was my fault,” while mentioning – yet again – the energy drink. Annual spending on energy drinks is estimated at $2.3 billion and it is the fastest growing segment of the soft drink industry.

There’s nothing wrong with journalists promoting a product if it falls outside of their coverage beat and they disclose their relationship to it. Andrews disclosed her relationship to SK Energy after the “non kiss” news event. If someone wants me to pitch a brand, I’ll take the check, as long as I believe in the product. But pitching can be a problem if it involves manufactured news.

Product placement in journalism is becoming more and more of an issue as large corporations take over news organizations and the Internet continues to disrupt traditional revenue models. TV news anchors have been on air live sipping iced coffee paid and provided for by the brand. In 1999, The Los Angeles Times was ripped for a scandal over its revenue sharing agreement with the Staples Center in which part of the deal was to publish a 168-page supplement.

Product placement can erode journalism’s critical role as the defender of the public trust. Soon, we may not be able to tell if what we’re consuming is objective news or a marketing script. During the second inauguration of President Barack Obama, CNN reporters commented on how many people were taking photos with a particular brand of mobile phone and its compatible tablet. Innocent statements? Maybe, but then again CNN anchor Don Lemon has been very giddy on twitter and elsewhere about his affinity for the same brand.

If the people can’t trust the press to deliver real straight news, then whom can they trust? This is where the Church can do some good. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution reads:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

There’s a reason why the Founders put the Church and the press in this clause, which is at the heart of what keeps Americans free. The Church and the press are two important institutions that deal with our minds. How we think determines what we do. If you can control a person’s thoughts, you can control his life. As mega corporations gain more control of the media, through ownership and advertising, and use that power to influence and control the government through lobbying and elections, we will be living within a very different America.

Preachers often rail against the media from the pulpit, yet underutilize the media’s power on behalf of the Kingdom. When people distrust the information they’re getting in the world, we must ask: can they honestly turn to your church for the truth? Congregations can learn something from Andrews and 50 Cent and become more media savvy.

Concerning that show, I got caught up. I love seeing intelligent, articulate, attractive, powerful, relevant, and well-dressed Black women on movie and television screens as much as the next sista. Trust me. The scenes are all the more interesting and impactful when played by such a well-versed and talented actress as Washington. But when all of that window dressing simply becomes trapping for yet another powerful woman who succumbs to the desires of her lustful heart (especially with a married man), all of the respect stored up for the character burns up in smoke. It’s hard to keep cheering for Washington’s character, Olivia Pope, when you know her affair will ultimately result in a loss for all parties involved. Olivia, her lover, and his pregnant wife all lose and that’s the real sad story for many in today’s society.

Actress Kerry Washington accepts the Outstanding Actress in a Drama Series award for “Scandal” during the 44th NAACP Image Awards. (Photo Credit: Jim Ruymen/Newscom)

I want more for Olivia and I want more for us. Behind the camera lens of Scandal is the show’s creator and writer, Shonda Rhimes. Rhimes’ writing is outstanding and the story lines are compelling. She constantly keeps us on the edge of our seats. That’s what makes the show great and so easy to watch. All of her characters are power players, fast talking, and quick on their feet as they engage in a game of chess with each other’s lives. The actors are all phenomenal, but at the end of the day, it’s Rhimes who is in the ultimate position of power.

Through this political drama, Rhimes uses her power to celebrate the stories of those thirsty for greed and power, those with murderous hearts, those who are unapologetic about living lives of lies and deceit, and those involved in unhealthy, adulterous and unnatural relationships. Although Olivia’s entourage refers to themselves as “gladiators in suits,” there are little redemptive qualities in any of the show’s primary characters. It doesn’t take long to figure out that there are no good guys or gals, and that’s the gist of Rhimes’ creation.

Yet my primary issue is neither with Washington nor Rhimes; my concern is with the Christian women and men like me who watch this show weekly with no discernment. I have seen professing Christians defend the show to the nth degree. “Why criticize a work of fiction?” they ask. My first conviction concerning this question came on the day of the Newtown school shootings. The night prior to that horrific event, I watched an episode of Scandal where an assassin killed an innocent family including two small children and their dog. The next day, a Facebook acquaintance and fellow Christian found it hard to reconcile approving of the murder of innocent children on a television, while at the same time being appalled when a similar, yet worst, event happens in real life.

The sad truth of our culture—and Ebony’s publishers play on this reality—is: The lines between fact and fiction, what’s real and what’s fantasy, have become quite blurry. This is the result of a booming market for “reality” shows, over exposure to strangers through virtual lives and social media, the sensationalism of our news reporting (How often do you witness a positive news story?), and the senseless pandering of our politicians. I won’t forget how angry I was when Sarah Palin used careless “lock and load” language all over a news broadcast, and the young man who locked and loaded just days after Palin’s rant. Was this a coincidence? His response resulted in the deaths and injuries of several human beings, including U.S. Representative Gabby Giffords. Because this is the culture we live in, we must all be more responsible concerning the use of our power and how we choose to engage our mediums of communication.

We should not use our power to only serve our own self-interests. Many thoughtful African-Americans thought this was the case with BET’s founder, Bob Johnson, and hence they tuned him and the station out. We should not neglect the opportunities to use our power for good in this world, and I believe the messages and images of Scandal present a missed opportunity. Ebony reports that Washington “is the first Black woman to star in a major network American TV drama since 1974.” Therefore, Washington’s accomplishment is worthy of celebration. In addition to Scandal, Rhimes is also the creator, head writer, and executive producer of the dramas, Grey’s Anatomy and Private Practice, both of which at the core tell the stories of flawed humans who are helping and healing other people. Am I looking for all perfect characters on every show? No. Am I advocating for an all Christian line-up with shows full of Christianese language? Not at all.

However, I do believe in a culture where the line between fiction and nonfiction, truth and lies, and fantasy and reality is becoming more unclear, we have to question what is means to have power, and consider the consequences of how we use our power to engage the world. I agree with Kerry Washington that, “Power is always about choices.” Washington chooses which roles she plays. Rhimes decides how she uses her power to tell stories and send messages into the world. As a consumer, I no longer choose to watch Scandal. As a writer, I challenge you to consider: What kind of empowerment do we, as a community of Black people, really want? What will you do, and what should we all do with power once it is obtained?