A Revolution of Hypocrisy

Are we all susceptible to bouts of hypocrisy? Yes, just think about the current U.S. political system and how our politicians demonize the opposition by bringing up something they did in the past, while completely ignoring their own missteps.

Well, I’m not too bothered about politicians or voters being hypocrites. These days it seems that the main job of a politician is to stay in office by saying things they think the majority of voters want to hear, and their supporters vote for them because they only hear what they want to. I don’t like hypocrisy, but it’s so hard to see it in ourselves, and very easy to see in others, especially those in the public eye.

What does bother me though is when someone in leadership of a political movement claims to be a Christian, and does not portray characteristics of Jesus Christ. Thankfully, the person I’m talking about isn’t creating policy for us. He is however, in a position where people will listen to him, and they may get confused as to what an actual Christian should look like.

Yeah, yeah I know, every Christian stumbles in that regard; doing something that doesn’t quite match up with the claim of being Christian. However, what I’m going to discuss impugns this person’s claim to be a Christian, but only because what he says impugns the motives of Jesus Christ. I would just say this: If you’re prepared to publicly make the types of statements this person did, then you should also be prepared for public scrutiny by anyone who hears you.

The person I’m talking about is Hawk Newsome, the Greater New York Black Lives Matter (BLM) president. I don’t want to get into the politics of BLM, and I’m not here to argue about whether or not their claims and goals are legitimate. No, I’m writing this post to discuss the finer points of one statement made by Mr. Newsome. Actually there are two statements I want to talk about, but the first one takes precedence.

Here’s Newsome’s first statement: “I love the Lord and my Lord and Savior”. Now, on its face, his statement is good. It sounds like he loves God the Father, and Jesus Christ. However, this statement was made towards the end of an interview with Fox News personality, Martha McCallum. At the beginning of the interview, McCallum quotes Newsome where he says “violence is sometimes necessary in these situations”, and then she asks “what exactly is it that you hope to achieve through violence?”

Based on his answer, Newsome sounds quite offended that McCallum would ask him that. Newsome then goes on to justify violence by bringing up the American Revolution, as well as non-specific instances of when the U.S. government deposed unnamed leaders of unnamed countries, and replaced them with our own leaders. I’m not saying that deposing and replacing leaders hasn’t happened, though is it really comparable to the current situation with BLM?

The only way I can see the resemblance is if Newsome believes BLM is the revolution, and they are currently seeking to depose our government leaders. Excuse me, I thought the U.S. was founded by men who understood the history of tyrannical rule and the American Revolution was the means to escape it, not promote it. If BLM is a revolution, it’s using tyranny as their means, and seeks to destroy history by tearing down statues.  Better watch out everyone, one false move from your past and they’ll want to tear you down as well, even if you’re one of them. No one will be safe in a system like that; just look at what happened in Seattle.

Newsome goes on to say that any American citizen who doesn’t agree with his analysis of the use of violence is an extreme hypocrite. Can that really be true? We’re all hypocrites and you’re not? As if every U.S. citizen has to agree with violence as a means to an end, by virtue of being a U.S. citizen. Hawk, have you ever read the Bible? You say that you love Jesus, but it seems like you actually love His adversary’s way of doing things. My suggestion for everyone would be to go read the Sermon on the Mount, found in the book of Matthew, chapters 5-7.

Let’s look at just a couple things Jesus said. “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.” (Mathew 5:9) Or how about this one: “But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven…” (Matthew 5:44-45) That’s really strange, Jesus advocates for making peace, and loving people that persecute you. You’d think that by your actions Mr. Newsome, that Jesus, whom you claim to love, would be advocating burning, looting, and the destruction of property.

Let’s see if anyone else in the Bible thinks Jesus’ words mean anything. In the book of James it says this: “Now the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace.” (James 3:18) What? James agrees with Jesus, that being righteous comes through peace? How disturbing. Let’s see, what other crazy ideas we can find in the Bible. Oh, here’s a good one: “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law. And those who are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, provoking one another, envying one another.” (Galatians 5:22-26)

What strange concepts for people to live by, who “love their Lord and Savior”. This is a great place to transition over to Newsome’s second comment. Incidentally, both comments came after McCallum quoted Dr. Martin Luther King, which must’ve hit a nerve. After claiming that he loves Jesus, Newsome goes on to describe Jesus as “the most famous black radical revolutionary in history”. This is where you hear the needle scrape across your favorite vinyl, and the room becomes dead quiet.

Jesus was not “black”; Jesus was not “white”. Jesus was from the Middle East; a Jew. That is verifiable, and there are genetics that can prove that Jews were never “black”. DNA evidence also shows that Egyptians in the time of Christ were not “black” either, as some like to claim. They say that Jesus went to Egypt as a place to “blend in” with the black population when on the run from King Herod. In the future I want to dedicate a post to this very topic because it seems people want to make a racial issue out of whom Jesus was, which is antithetical to whom Jesus is. As to the idea that Jesus was a “radical”, let me flip that on its head.

What if, all of humanity is the radical and Jesus is not? What if the person who created this world is the one who determines what is normal, and what is radical? If you put your thinking cap on for about two seconds, Jesus can only appear “radical” if you think that loving your neighbor as yourself is a strange doctrine, and the mayhem of burning, looting, and tearing statues down is the righteous way.

This leads me to another saying of Jesus: “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thorn bushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit…” (Matthew 7:15-17) What is Jesus saying here? Look at what they do, not what they say, to figure out if they’re Christians or not.  Mr. Newsome, you are a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

Newsome then goes on and compares himself to not only his version of Jesus, but to Dr. Martin Luther King as well. Neither Jesus, nor Dr. King advocated violence in their seeking of change; though Newsome at the end of the interview told McCallum that what he wants is “black liberation and black sovereignty, by any means necessary.” Does that sound like Jesus or Dr. King to you?

Let’s consider Newsome’s closing remarks with the fact that earlier in the interview he says he neither condemns, nor condones violence. To me, that sounds like a false statement when you want something by “any means necessary”, and your own “disciples” are out there committing these acts of violence. That leads me to something else Jesus says: “But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.” (Matthew 5:37)

What does that mean? Don’t say one thing and really mean another. You can’t claim you’re neutral about violence, and then say “by any means necessary” as a way to accomplish your goals; it’s hypocritical. Own your violent ways Mr. Newsome; at least you won’t look like a hypocrite, as you like to accuse all Americans of who disagree with you.

I guess the only way Newsome couldn’t be considered a hypocrite in any regard is if he’s referring to some other lord, or a different lord and savior when he says that he loves them; you might picture that one with a pitchfork, a pointy tail, and horns. (Romans 6:16 / 2 Timothy 2:26)