I finally met Rev. Jesse L. Peterson (see his WND archives). Known as “the other Jesse,” he is doing wonderful work with at-risk youth in California through his organization, Brotherhood Organization of a New Destiny (BOND). Read some of the success stories.
BOND’s mission statement, “Rebuilding the Family by Rebuilding the Man,” is especially relevant to the black community, where fatherlessness has reached epidemic proportions. As you can guess, black liberals don’t like him, which means he’s one of my favorite people. 
An outspoken critic of liberalism and godlessness in general and Jesse Jackson and the NAACP in particular, Peterson is a Christian and activist who wants to topple so-called black leaders from their perches of privilege. Like me, he believes that the collapse of the family and immorality are the biggest problems in the black community, not racism. Every year he hosts a “National Day of Repudiation of Jesse Jackson,” an idea that should be more widespread, and actively fights to protect marriage.
Peterson contacted me for a radio interview last year, my first, after reading my review of Scam: How the Black Leadership Exploits Black America. Read Part I and Part II. Also see this post. Peterson is as plainspoken and to-the-point as I am.
Addendum: On February 24, I’ll see Jesse Peterson again, as well as meet other people I admire, such as actor Joseph C. Phillips and writer Peter Kirsanow. The Heritage Foundation is hosting a symposium.
You’re looking great, La Shawn!
Comment by Cindy Swanson — 02.21.05 @ 9:33 am
La Shawn:
You couldn’t have picked a more “solid citizen” than Jesse Lee Peterson for the photo.
This is a man who truly knows what the world is all about.
Comment by Frank Zavisca — 02.21.05 @ 9:37 am
LaShawn,
Can you give more information about conference headed by Rev Peterson on Feb 24? With a click to his site there is “black list” including those who called Colin Powell “House Slave” for being SOS! If the Secretary of State is “House Slave” for Colin Powell, what do they call Dr. Rice?
JMB
Comment by James M. Barber — 02.21.05 @ 9:55 am
Rev. Jesse sounds like he is doing great work!
Unfortunately the first thing I read on his site was, “Dr. King stood for racial unity, truth, and character.” That’s an odd way to describe someone who plaugarized his Ph.D. thesis, partied with two hookers while his wife was home, and lashed out in defense of the welfare state:
I bet Rev. Jesse could find a better candidate for restoring the black family. There’s just something profoundly disturbing about cheating on a Ph.D. in Theology.
Comment by Neal — 02.21.05 @ 10:00 am
It appears that you have been having a jolly good time over the past few days. Meeting people you respect is indeed a heady experience and it is always good to put a personal touch to the image you carry around from television, articles, and what not. It also makes them real, not Olympian, which helps one keep one’s sight level and one’s feet on the ground.
May God bless these experiences and use them to continue to mold you into the vessel he has destined you to be.
Grace and peace.
Comment by William Meisheid — 02.21.05 @ 10:05 am
Dear La Shawn.
I have enjoyed watching you, through the eye of your writing, at CPAC. You looked so happy that it made me happy.
Comment by Mike O — 02.21.05 @ 11:17 am
It’s kinda petty that he should have a day reserved for Jesse, when Mr. Jackson has been all but consigned to obscurity…very few people in the black community even respect Mr Jackson again (remember the ghetto movie Barbershop…..f#@# jesse jackson)
its sad that conservatives are fighting against ghosts like communism and jesse jackson
Comment by sabrina — 02.21.05 @ 11:19 am
“Scam” is a powerful book that all should read. Sadly, it isn’t surprising that it only took four responses to this post for someone to begin the denigration train.
Comment by Mark La Roi — 02.21.05 @ 12:16 pm
Big fan of Rev. Jesse. He needs more exposure!
Comment by The Anchoress — 02.21.05 @ 2:04 pm
Neal, I’ve read the stuff. My take on it is that MLK is only human & weak like St. Paul, Peter and ourselves. The derogatory stuff should be kept in mind, only to confirm his sinful state. This should have no bearing on diminishing his accomplishments, at the same time reminds us not to idolize him.
Also, some of that stuff is subjective and MLK is not here to defend himself. By the same token, Jesse Jackson, once upon a time did good and now offers no defense, rather rhetoric for his race-pimping over the past 30 years.
Comment by Andy — 02.21.05 @ 2:05 pm
This JESSIE PETERSON is the one who is suing JESSIE JACKSON over some incident and it looks like jackson’s rainbow has become tarnished with his own nefarious plans its time to take jackson down and out
Comment by firebird — 02.21.05 @ 2:31 pm
Neal,
I visited the second site you posted.
How utterly despicable, vile, slanderous, and evil.
Comment by jab — 02.21.05 @ 2:47 pm
Jab, that’s why I said it was subjective. Much of that plagarism meme either originated or got a strong boost from Stormfront or whatever that David Duke crap is called.
Comment by Andy — 02.21.05 @ 2:52 pm
A Roundup From the Sickroom
Haven’t the stamina to do a lot today, but wanted to point you this-a-way and that if you’re looking for interesting/maddening stuff to read.
Trackback by The Anchoress — 02.21.05 @ 3:52 pm
These are quotes come from listening to Jesse Lee Peterson’s radio show:
“Most Black people are not honest and don’t like to work.”
“Most Black preachers aren’t called by God, they are called by their mommas.”
“Most Black preachers teach hatred of Israel.”
“Most Black people, not all, but most, like lies over truth.”
“A lot of Christians aren’t really Christians, especially Black ones.”
“When it comes to sex, you can’t trust a Black preacher.”
“Blacks who complain should be put back onto the plantation so that they would know how to work.”
“Most Black men are not worth anything.”
“Black preachers are racists”.
LaShawn, would you like to discuss these quotes? When I tried to get clarification on 2 or 3 of them, he went into an attack on Jesse Jackson, Sr and Lewis Farrakan. He never addressed the question of how some of his statements can be quantified so they can be judged to be accurate or inaccurate.
Comment by DarkStar — 02.21.05 @ 3:55 pm
DS, you seem to be more concerned about Peterson uttering these words rather than whether they are true or false. I think there’s truth in every single one of them, particularly the “black Christian” remarks.
For instance, every time I hear about a black preacher knocking up one of his congregants, I’m not shocked at all. I hear about it too many times, and the shock value has long since worn off.
Black preachers that I’ve been exposed to have come up through the typical black church, the same kind I grew up going to. They “preach” a social gospel that has little to do with what’s found in the pages of the Bible. Jesse Jackson is an extreme example, a caricature, in fact, of the kind of black preacher I’m referring to. And I do believe that some go into the profession not as a calling by God, but a calling “by their Mommas.” In other words, they’ve been told they have the right speaking style or charm, and/or they think rhyming and shouting is what preaching is all about. Embarrassing in many ways.
And men, black or white, who knock up woman after woman and don’t raise or take care of their children aren’t worth anything. Your real problem with Peterson’s quotes is the fact that he focuses on blacks. You’ll have to get over that, DS. Like Peterson, my focus is on immorality in the black community because I know this is its biggest problem, not racism, whatever that means these days.
There are plenty of black liberal blogs out here that focus on the “evils” of whites.
Comment by La Shawn — 02.21.05 @ 4:12 pm
Ditto, La Shawn. If the shoe fits, then blacks need to wear it.
Sort of the track Coz is taking; ‘forget the garbage about white man this, white man that. The biggest problem in the black community are the blacks themselves.’
Comment by Andy — 02.21.05 @ 4:29 pm
Well said La Shawn.
Comment by Mark La Roi — 02.21.05 @ 4:31 pm
I loved what Cosby said. I do believe it applies to all races, but Cosby was making a very specific point directed at his race. A very fair and valid criticism of a society of children and adults more interested in the latest “buck-fifty” pair of shoes than learning how to read and write.
Liberals were up in arms, but I wasn’t.
Comment by Mike M. — 02.21.05 @ 4:35 pm
DS, you seem to be more concerned about Peterson uttering these words rather than whether they are true or false.
LaShawn, as I have said before, I’ve ASKED the man how he came about believing what he’s saying. He stresses, “I’ve said most, not all, but most”.
Well, I want some validation of most. I’m sorry if that appears to be asking too much.
For instance, every time I hear about a black preacher knocking up one of his congregants, I?m not shocked at all. I hear about it too many times, and the shock value has long since worn off.
But are they MOST or some?
Black preachers that I?ve been exposed to have come up through the typical black church, the same kind I grew up going to. They “preach” a social gospel that has little to do with what’s found in the pages of the Bible.
Well, now the one’s I’m most familiar with preach from the Bible and apply it to the things that are happening today.
And I do believe that some go into the profession not as a calling by God, but a calling “by their Mommas.” In other words, they’ve been told they have the right speaking style or charm, and/or they think rhyming and shouting is what preaching is all about. Embarrassing in many ways.
Guess what LaShawn? I agree. And some go into it thinking it’s what is being asked of them to do. But you know what? We both just used the word SOME.
Again, Peterson goes out of his way to say, “I’ve said most, not all, but most.”
Your real problem with Peterson’s quotes is the fact that he focuses on blacks.
LaShawn. Did you overlook his use of most vs some?
Like Peterson, my focus is on immorality in the black community because I know this is its biggest problem, not racism, whatever that means these days.
I don’t believe that racism is the biggest problem for Blacks. I’ve never written that is the biggest problem either.
If I used hyperbole about whites the same way that he uses hyperbole against Blacks, you would be all over me like white on rice.
Look at your own reply. Did you say most?
No.
Why not?
If he said some my keyboard would be quiet.
He’s preaching lies LaShawn.
Comment by DarkStar — 02.21.05 @ 5:01 pm
DS said; “Well, now the one’s I’m most familiar with preach from the Bible and apply it to the things that are happening today.”
Most vs some is all subjective.
How many is your MOST? Maybe my FEW outnumbers your most. IOW it’s all in your mind what it means
=======================
most(a): (superlative of `many’ used with count nouns and often preceded by `the’) quantifier meaning the greatest in number; “who has the most apples?”; “most people like eggs”; “most fishes have fins”
some(a): quantifier; used with either mass nouns or plural count nouns to indicate an unspecified number or quantity; “have some milk”; “some roses were still blooming”; “having some friends over”; “some apples”; “some paper”
==========================
If it’s true that Tommy has 20 apples, then which statement is a lie?
a) Tommy has the most apples
b) Tommy has some apples
c) Tommy has too many apples
d) Tommy a few apples
e) Tommy ain’t got no apples
Comment by Andy — 02.21.05 @ 5:35 pm
Andy, context means everything now doesn’t it?
Well, now the one’s I’m most familiar with preach…
Note that what’s bolded automatically restricts the universe of the set.
Note LaShawn’s comment to which I responded:
Black preachers that I’ve been exposed to…
Note that LaShawn’s comment also restricts the universe of the set.
I take no exception to her comment. I made a comment to demonstrate that my view is different. Wow… Differing points of view. What a concept.
Try again please.
Comment by DarkStar — 02.21.05 @ 6:48 pm
I may be dyslexic, but I’m not seeing the bolded and on second look, one’s threw my whole sense of context off.
Please try again.
On second thot forget it.
You HEARD Jesse talking on the radio and based on what you heard, you want to get pedantic over what is “IS”?
Are you sure you heard everything correctly or, did your radio occasionally go “fzzztp” and, you heard what you wanted to hear during that momentary lapse of intelligibility?
Do you even speak exactly as you write, or write exactly as you speak?
And why does the term “pedantic” ALWAYS come up when I respond to you? Note: “always” is a hyperbole, here.
Comment by Andy — 02.21.05 @ 9:01 pm
Typo correction
“I may be dyslexic, but I’m not seeing the bolded, and on second look, “one’s” threw my whole sense of context off.”
Preview could be my best friend
Comment by Andy — 02.21.05 @ 9:04 pm
As far as MLKjr goes, I make a distinction between his historic public accomplishments and his depraved personal life. God told Cyrus, King of Persia, that even though he was a horrible person but he would be used to accomplish God’s purpose.
My point is that Rev. Peterson is working hard to restore personal morality of blacks. He understands that this is the key to nearly all of their issues as a “culture”. Using MLKjr. as an icon for this effort just doesn’t make any sense.
Rev. Peterson’s comments about “black preachers” quoted above are nearly all apropos for MLKjr. I just hope he reads the links I posted takes them into consideration when editing his web pages.
Comment by Neal — 02.21.05 @ 9:26 pm
Neal,
who makes your list of “approved” Black preachers?
Comment by Mark La Roi — 02.21.05 @ 9:33 pm
LaShawn,
I’m curious, have you actually visited the websites that Neal linked to? Especially the second one which calls MLK a “beast”? It has articles by the likes of David Duke… and further links to white-supremicist neo-Nazi groups like Stormfront… it also has various anti-semitic diatribes…
The reason I ask is that you seem to take great care to monitor your comments section…
Comment by jab — 02.21.05 @ 9:48 pm
This comment should not be construed as accusing anyone or any political party of racist intent However, I do accuse at least one powerful Republican of taking actions that had a very profound racially prejudicial result. I know that a lot of people do not wish to look back at the election of November 2000, but look we must if we wish to understand why so many Americans feel that justice was denied.
The Washington Post’s Thursday, May 31, 2001 story Botched Name Purge Denied Some the Right to Vote begins thus:
TAMPA — Kelvin King was turned away from the polls here in November when records showed that he was ineligible to vote as a convicted felon. County election officials learned days later that King’s civil rights had been restored eight months earlier.
Sandylynn Williams had voted in every election since she was 18. But this time, election officials confused her with her sister — a felon who had once used Williams’s name — and refused to let her vote. . . .
The Tampa residents were among hundreds, perhaps thousands, of non-felons in Florida who civil rights lawyers contend were wrongly prevented from voting in the Nov. 7 election after state election officials and a private contractor bungled an attempt to cleanse felons from voter rolls.
The effort was so riddled with errors that a more precise tally will probably never be possible. But it is clear that at least 2,000 felons whose voting rights had been automatically restored in other states were kept off the rolls and, in many cases, denied the right to vote.
[Many paragraphs omitted]
The impact of the botched felon purge fell disproportionately on black Floridians and, by extension, on the Democratic Party, which won the votes of 9 out of every 10 African American voters, according to exit polls.
—
(Aside: if just 2000 Black Florida voters were illegally prevented from voting, and if those voters would have voted 80% to 20% for Gore over Bush, that’s a 1200-vote margin taken from Al Gore — who officially lost by just 537 votes.)
There’s much more. Please read the entire article.
Then take a look at the report of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights — specifically, the USCCR report on Voting Irregularities in Florida During the 2000 Presidential Election
Pay special attention to Chapter 5: The Reality of List Maintenance, which goes into much greater detail than the Washington Post story.
So, which individual Republican do I accuse of contributing to a racially prejudicial result? I’ll start with Katherine Harris, who served two roles: that of Florida Secretary of State, which is the state’s chief elections officer, and chair of the Bush-Cheney election campaign in Florida. Holding these two posts is an outrageous conflict of interest — one that I’m sure Republicans would be screaming about if the facts were just the opposite.
Without question, the Republican party has made great progress and has had admirable success in appointing blacks to high public office, and in promoting racial equality in other ways. However, knowing about the actions on the part of Kathleen Harris before the election of 2000 — and then knowing that Republicans elected her to the U.S. Congress — may begin to shed a little light on why many Americans remain unconvinced that the Republican party has made enough progress against racism.
(This is just the beginning. I could say much more about what happened in Florida in 2000, but I know from from experience that most Republicans are in denial, so I’ll stop here. Also, I won’t respond to comments suggesting that the Washington Post can’t be trusted.)
Comment by Anomalocaris — 02.21.05 @ 10:16 pm
You HEARD Jesse talking on the radio and based on what you heard, you want to get pedantic over what is “IS”?
Pedantic?
Good grief.
The man makes a comment, and then slows down his vocal delivery and says, “I said most, not all, but most” and it’s pendantic to note his use of “most”?
Comment by DarkStar — 02.21.05 @ 10:32 pm
It’s “pendantic” to call in, ask for clarification, but instead of getting clarification, have him change the topic to Jesse Jackson?
That’s pendantic?
Please, tell me how “Black preachers teach hatred of Israel” can be mistaken.
Comment by DarkStar — 02.21.05 @ 10:33 pm
Darkstar,
it seems that you don’t believe any Black preacher would teach hatred toward Jews and Israel. IF this is the case I can say that I have heard it with my own ears. I’ve heard it from preachers of other ethnic groups as well, but just want to be clear that NO group is free of this. Satan hates true Israel and breeds contempt for the Jews within every heart that provides fertile ground.
Comment by M. La Roi — 02.21.05 @ 10:57 pm
Whole thing comes back to “most” v. “some”–it’s semantics, sure, but it’s an important distinction. The “most” bit is problematic because Peterson shouldn’t get to be the arbiter of what “most” black folks do (like it or not, to the FOX News/dittohead crowd, he becomes the de facto arbiter of what black folks do/say/think) based on what is totally anecdotal evidence. That’s the problem.
Peterson’s jabbering about how most of my brothers and I are (1) lazy, (2) unable or unwilling to separate lies from truth, (3) not worth anything is absolutely vile, and (4) faux-Christians is just unsupportable in the aggregate. If that’s true of “most”, how to account for the rapidly expanding black middle class? How to account for the rise in homeownership? The rise in support for school prayer? The rise of black entrepreneurship? Admittedly, none of these points is, in itself, indicative of moral worth, but taken together, the progress of black people gives the lie to Peterson’s claim. He’s just wrong. He’s as guilty of being a “self-righteousness pimp” as any black liberal is of being a poverty pimp.
I suspect that most of Peterson’s “mosts” don’t apply to any of the black men who read your blog, LB. There may be grains of truth in his assertions, but they aren’t as widespread as he claims.
Saying “most black men are lazy” does absolutely zip positive for the black community. As for a substantive response, I like August Wilson’s (the pinko communist
):
“People kill me talking about [black folks] are lazy. [Blacks] worked four hundred years. And didn’t take no lunch break.”
I think that’s a line from Two Trains Running.
Comment by tvd — 02.21.05 @ 11:46 pm
DS,
Maybe because Jesse was expecting DS to call in to specifically discuss the meaning of most rather than discuss why they do it.
Then you turn around and want to take him to task with others about why he said most. Now that is what I call pedantic. Especially since we’re being asked to take it on your say so that he said so.
Can we agree that maybe Jesse is a sloppy speaker and should get in the habit of saying some instead of most more often?
If MLK was alive today and doing a radio show, you’d be like my 6th grade English teacher (appropriate analogy since Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level is 6.1, & Reading Ease is 77%) obsessing over his rhetorical license instead of the substance, and red-lining him for BLOOPERS like:
Use “I wondered whom he was talking about”, instead of “I wondered who he was talking about”.
Use “And that we don’t have to live the way we are forced to live”, instead of “And that we don’t have to live like we are forced to live”.
Use “Before I knew it, this demented woman had stabbed me”, instead of “Before I knew it I had been stabbed by this demented woman”.
Use “I do not fear any man”, instead of “I’m not fearing any man”!
“Because I’ve been to the mountaintop. ” Come now Marty, that’s just hyperbole because you have never been on any mountaintop.
Comment by Andy — 02.21.05 @ 11:57 pm
DS,
Rarely, do I comment on these trackballs because too many repliers are either speaking from emotion or doesn’t know what the —- they are talking about? Coming from a black republican male perspective that happens to be and grew up in the Black church. DarkStar, you are 100% right. Keep up the good critical thinking skills.
Did you know DS has his own blog? I encourage you to visit it more often. - Admin
Comment by GKP — 02.22.05 @ 9:57 am
it seems that you don’t believe any Black preacher would teach hatred toward Jews and Israel.
For goodness sake, did you read the comments where I focus on the word MOST? You could point out a number who may preach hatred of Israel, but is it a minority or a majority? A majority is the meaning of most.
Comment by DarkStar — 02.22.05 @ 11:02 am
Bold and italics tags are abrogated. Please use “strong” and “em.”
Comment by La Shawn — 02.22.05 @ 11:06 am
Maybe because Jesse was expecting DS to call in to specifically discuss the meaning of most rather than discuss why they do it.
If 1 out of 100,000 do it, is it even worth discussing why they do it? If 1 out of 1,000,000 do it, is it worth discussing why they do it? I would say no it’s not worth discussing.
There is no way to have a logical discussion about something if the parties involved can’t even determine the basis for the discussion.
Can we agree that maybe Jesse is a sloppy speaker and should get in the habit of saying some instead of most more often?
If Jesse did not make the habit of saying, “I’m not saying all, but most…” frequently, then your point would be one to consider.
Comment by DarkStar — 02.22.05 @ 11:08 am
TVD,
Of course it’s semantics, but the distinction is only important in who is saying it. If someone is given to understating, then their use of “most” would indicate a significant majority on the order of 80% or 90%. For some, 51% is sufficient grounds to say most.
The simple fact that morality in the black community is in the state that it is would seem to indicate that most preachers (I dare say 70%) ain’t preaching God’s liberal truth, rather their socialist view of what God ought to be saying.
By their fruits ye shall know…
Comment by Andy — 02.22.05 @ 11:27 am
DS, your attention to detail is slipping vis a vis HTML coding
Comment by Andy — 02.22.05 @ 11:39 am
DS said: For goodness sake, did you read the comments where I focus on the word MOST?
Did you answer my multi-choice question? Can you substantiate that <50% of the preachers are preaching the truth? Until someone can quantify it, it’s all subjective. You say most of the preachers you know are square. However, I say most of the preachers out there ain’t doing what God says, choosing to modify & consequently dilute His message.
Put it this way, ALL preachers who are active in promoting NAACP’s pogrom are heretics. ALL preachers who promote race-pimping don’t know the meaning of salvation, if they don’t understand God, how are they even going to be a positive influence in leading their flock to God?
We’re a nation of churches, there’s practically a church on every block, yet it is obvious that the Gospel ain’t sinking in with most congregations. If it were true, Klanned Parenthood clinincs wouldn’t proliferate in the urban communities. Gangstas wouldn’t be running the streets and parents would be spending more on Hooked on Phonics instead of shoes.
Coz wouldn’t even be having conversations. I mean for a liberal to come out and take the community to task because so-called Christians have failed is saying a lot!!!
Comment by Andy — 02.22.05 @ 12:14 pm
Breaking the Inner-city Monopolies
LaShawn Barber tells of meeting Rev. Jesse L. Peterson at the CPAC: … An outspoken critic of liberalism and godlessness in general and Jesse Jackson and the NAACP in particular, Peterson is a Christian and activist who wants to topple…
Trackback by The Bernoulli Effect — 02.22.05 @ 1:34 pm
Can you substantiate that <50% of the preachers are preaching the truth?
No. I also can’t substantiate that > 50% of the preachers are preaching the truth.
ALL preachers who promote race-pimping don’t know the meaning of salvation, if they don’t understand God, how are they even going to be a positive influence in leading their flock to God?
You do realize this cuts ALL ways, correct? If not, see Rev. Fred Price for details.
The simple fact that morality in the black community is in the state that it is would seem to indicate that most preachers (I dare say 70%) ain’t preaching God’s liberal truth, rather their socialist view of what God ought to be saying.
That’s an illogical statement.
Just because a preacher may preach the God’s Truth, it doesn’t mean all who hear it are going to live God’s Word.
Even those who are Born Again, still sin.
Comment by DarkStar — 02.22.05 @ 10:19 pm
But they are new creations in Christ, forgiven for those sins. The righteousness of Christ has been imputed to them, and God sees the sin no more. Yes, Christians are still sinners, but they are set apart in the eyes of God.
BIG difference between “saved” sinners and unbelieving sinners.
But I guess that wasn’t your point…
Comment by La Shawn — 02.22.05 @ 10:27 pm
DS,
I planned to end my previous comment with the something that could be construed as snarky, but held back, just in case you saw the logic of my statement. You didn’t, so here goes:
If you don’t know God, then you don’t know jack about the power to give freedom, hope and peace beyond understanding. This gift from God transcends race, poverty and whatever -ism you care to toss out there.
If you knew God, you’d also know that Satan works unceasingly to undermine the Gospel and prop up all flavors of false teachers to seduce the masses, each according to the lies they want to hear. In fact, if you know God, then you might be an Uncle Tom, and PROUD of it.
Comment by Andy — 02.22.05 @ 10:53 pm
BIG difference between “saved” sinners and unbelieving sinners.
I know the difference. My point was, Andy states that if a preacher were preaching from the Bible as it should be preached from the Bible, his flock would not sin or be less likely to sin. I’m saying it’s illogical because those who are saved, still are capable of sinning, even if forgiven of their sins.
Andy, I understand your last point but say what of it? I brought up Fred Price because he said esstentially what you are saying. After seeing division in the Body of Christ because of race, he decided to spend time, I think 1 year, addressing that issue. He didn’t care that SOME, not all white preachers essentially called him a “sellout” of sorts.
Comment by DarkStar — 02.23.05 @ 10:22 pm
DS, ok, I hear you, but it really isn’t so illogical.
Look at it this way, if preachers were preaching and calling sin sin, those living the Christian-only-on-Sunday life would find it a little too hot to be sitting in the pew Sunday after Sunday and would rather seek out a more “tolerant” church.
Not to mention that the Bible advises excommunicating members that refuse to toe the Biblical line. So your point about the flock sinning is partially correct in that they will sin, but when found out, they will be disciplined and restored. If they persist in sinning, they would be kicked out.
Do you see then that if 70% of the churches were of the “fire & brimstone” sort and with the sort of current percentages of Americans calling themselves Christians, our demographics would be totally different? Even if only 50% were on fire, the difference would be profound.
No one can ever quantify faith among believers, but intuitively, I’d say “true” urban preachers probably make up at best 10-15% of the churches in black communities. This is the trickle down effect that we see now where 1Peter 5:7 has been subverted to mean “Casting all your care upon your preacher/politician/government for they careth for you”.
Comment by Andy — 02.24.05 @ 12:01 am
Andy, the issue of free will, “fire and brimstone” not withstanding, still exists.
I can’t accept your number, even based on your definition, just because i think it’s a guess.
Comment by DarkStar — 02.24.05 @ 3:19 pm
DS, yes free will remains as always. And we agree to disagree on the approx numbers
Comment by Andy — 02.24.05 @ 5:49 pm
To All People Who Love The LORD OUR GOD,
Ihave heard about Jesse 2nd hand through my wife,
and I want to say ALL people should take his word as words that the Lord has given him. He has walked the road and knows that the hand of the Lord is upon him.
Comment by Tom Hogencamp — 02.26.05 @ 4:52 pm
Thank God For the Rev.Jesse L Peterson
Comment by Tom Hogencamp — 02.26.05 @ 4:55 pm
La Shawn,
I saw the show that was on C-SPAN on Satuday that Featured Rev. Peterson. What I do like about him is that he is trying to put his words into actions by making his BOND orginization focus on helping the young black youth that live in bad situations in the L.A. area. As a 29 year old black man I think that alot of the black Leaders like Rev. Jackson and Rev. Sharpton forget to do is actually focus on developing the younger generations and when they get together in these forums they always exclude the so called “Hip Hop Generation” and the black genration X (who are now the young black adults in the workforce.What hit me most is the Rev. Peterson and his bond mission statement: “Rebuilding the Family by Rebuilding the Manâ€. This hit my heart because I have always felt this way in my heart, the value of God and self respect was instilled into me by my parents ands I am father now. We need to get the family value instilled into the younger black youth because the young black community is embracing the “Thug” mentality as a cool way to be and this really SICKENS me! 40years ago if a black man did not have on a good pair of well dressed slacks and a good hard working job a black woman would not even give him the time of day but now these young black girls will not talk to a brotha if they do not dress like thug!!! I would like to see Rev. Peterson take his BOND organization nationwide all across the U.S., espically to places like Birmingham, Alabama (where I live ) and Atlanta, Georgia where there is a big population of blacks.
Sorry for the long comment. You and Rev. Peterson have similar ideas to what I think we need to do in the black community.
Comment by T.R. Scott — 02.27.05 @ 4:03 pm
Also, I think that both sides: The Rev. Jesse Peterson conservative black and the Rev Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton liberals all need to meet together and discuss this in a live public Forum somewhere (Like in Atlanta)to talk about the issues that are present in the black community. We do not need to bicker and fight among eachother because the main Focus is on rebuilding the community.The two sides remind me of Martin Luther King’s peaceful civil rights protests and Malcolm X’s “By any means neccessary” protest.Neither side could get together and join forces eventhough they had the same common cause(This is also known as the divide and conquer attitude that Willie Lynch told to The slave masters to practice–young black vs. old black, house slave vs field slave and light skinned black vs. dark skinned black and vice versa.
We need to realize that fighting and hating each other will get us no where. Remember that this is a battle between good spirits and evil spirits.
Comment by T.R. Scott — 02.27.05 @ 4:22 pm
To TR,
I agree it looks bad when black disagree, but a spade is a spade. We need to stop and modify Jessie Jackson’s behavior. His behavior and belief system is unacceptable. I am sick and tired of hearing the illiteration and tired poetry. People get excited, but he has NOT put together ONE action plan. I would like to see ONE action plan that he has completed that has WORKED!If he was a CEO, he would have been fired for lack of production.
Comment by Robert — 02.27.05 @ 11:48 pm