Questions for Devon Dick

Published: Monday | December 28, 2009


Kadene Porter, Contributor


Dick

I have noticed lately that church leaders are becoming rather confused. Sometimes they make statements that contradict the Bible and the clear pronouncements of God Himself. Rev Devon Dick made a statement in his column on December 24 'Bleaching Jesus' that blew me straight out of the water.

He claimed, among other things, that "By becoming flesh, God was affirming that flesh is wholesome, noble and has dignity. Furthermore, all human life has worth and all are equal before God".

I groaned when I read that, since the Bible teaches the opposite. Flesh "wholesome ... noble ... having dignity"? Where on earth did he read that, when one of the central themes of the Message is that the "flesh profiteth nothing"?

Why, Why, Why?

And if all human life were equal before God, why was there a "chosen people" and who gave them permission to go and destroy entire ethnic groups for the purpose of taking their land? Why were the firstborn in Egypt killed? If God wanted to show his power so much, why didn't he just kill the Pharoah himself and set up someone who would give the Israelites leave? Why destroy the innocents?

Why couldn't he have caused a deep sleep to fall upon the Egyptians and allow the Israelites to leave, with the dignity of human life intact? No; there had to be bloodshed for His chosen to depart. And they left so much blood in their wake as they plundered their way into Canaan. Now, where is the dignity and nobility in the lives of those so wantonly destroyed?

There are many instances of this in the Bible, the senseless slaughter. It actually shows, although the faithful hate to admit it, that all life is NOT equal before God, and in the Old Testament you were of no value except you were Jewish.

Stop pretending

The fact that slavery was condoned in both the Old and New Testaments is another fact Rev Dick may not want to acknowledge. Owning another human being makes a bold statement that the possession was not equal to the owner. And women were not treated equally to men. Among other things, a young girl was to be stoned if she was not a virgin on her wedding night, but nowhere does it say that the man she married had to be a virgin. Why don't we stop pretending these 'preachments' make sense, and that the God portrayed in the Old Testament was just, full of mercy and righteous, when all his actions were the complete opposite?

Or maybe Rev Dick has a different Bible from mine?

Regarding Rev Dick's statement: "This bleaching of Jesus is partially responsible for our self-hate, disregard for things African and persons of colour, and lack of self-belief in dealing with our serious socio-economic problems. For many, Black is a symbol of evil, wickedness, backwardness and superstition", are we sure it has anything to do with Jesus? There are parts of Africa where they haven't heard of him and still they hate themselves.

Ignorance

The Africans need no help to hate things African. I think it has to do with ignorance, illiteracy and superstition, like the belief that demons are responsible for illnesses, and that God punishes through natural disasters and disease. I was horrified to learn that witch doctors in Tanzania have convinced people that their potions become more potent if they contain the body parts and organs of albinos. So these poor melanin-deprived people have to either flee their country or go into hiding, because of this ignorance and backwardness. It has nothing to do with a Eurocentric Jesus.

Education is all that's needed to help people understand the world around them, so they do not put their faith in inanimate objects and fantasies, and enable them to think things through.

The church officials need to lose their insecurity, and allow folks to ask them hard questions, for much of the message make no sense.

Feedback may be sent to columns@gleanerjm.com


 
 
 
The opinions on this page do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner. The Gleaner reserves the right not to publish comments that may be deemed libelous, derogatory or indecent. To respond to The Gleaner please use the feedback form.