Tonight, on the Worldview Weekend Hour, the social and theological liberalism of a very well-known pastor. His name? John Piper. He speaks before thousands, and his books have been read by millions. He's a neo-Calvinist. Many young people read him, and now he's picked up the Black Lives Matter movement. He says Christians should not own guns. And he's backing the idea of taking a knee during the national anthem.
How might a well-known pastor, like John Piper, be used by the social progressives to bridge the conservative and liberal wings of evangelicalism? And are the evangelical leaders and pastors who speak with, quote, and promote John Piper becoming bridges to liberalism? The Worldview Weekend Hour begins right now.
Welcome to the Worldview Weekend Hour. I'm Brannon Howse. Thank you so much for joining us. Well, on October 6th, 2017, John Piper is well known to many. As I said in the introduction, his books have sold millions, and he has spoken before thousands, including upwards of 20,000 young people in the Georgia Dome for the Passion Conference. I think he has spoken for that many, many times. So he's read by young and old and, likely, some pastors you know.
Is the worldview and theology of John Piper influencing your pastor, your child, or your grandchild? You need to know about the worldview of John Piper. Tonight we'll start out looking at his worldview from the social policy area. Next week, we'll get into his promotion of what he calls Christian hedonism. It sounds like an oxymoron, doesn't it, Christian hedonism? But he's promoted it since about 1986 when his book on this topic came out.
Does John Piper also promote antinomianism? Does he reject the idea that the law is for today; that the Ten Commandments, which nine of the ten are repeated in the New Testament, are not for believers today? So we'll then look at his, I believe, liberalism in theology, next week. This week, we will discuss, what I believe, is his liberalism in the social arena.
I've been watching John Piper for many years. I'm not aware that I have done a television program exclusively on him ever. I have talked about him periodically on radio, but I've never devoted an entire television program to him. I am tonight because after spending several years watching him, I now believe that those who embrace a biblical worldview must begin to warn about neo-Calvinist leaders like John Piper.
The term "neo" means "new," and so, we call him a neo-Calvinist, or one of the new Calvinists. In fact, his books are read by people who don't even call themselves Calvinist or reformed. So I think it's important for you to understand that John Piper is read across denominational lines. He's someone who influences many people, even if they don't call themselves a Calvinist. So I think he's someone you need to know about.
On October 6th, 2017, he wrote an article, "Lecrae, 'White Evangelicalism,' and Hope." The article was about a black rapper, supposed to be a Christian rapper, by the name of Lecrae. And Lecrae has supposedly divorced white evangelicalism, and John Piper on October 6th, 2017, wrote an article. In fact, he was also written up in Christianity Today. The headline? "John Piper's 'thankfulness' at Lecrae's 'divorce' from white evangelicalism is good news for the church."
Well, I didn't really know there was a white evangelicalism, a black evangelicalism, an Asian evangelicalism, a Hispanic evangelicalism. I was under the impression that we are one blood, Acts 17. That's what it says; we're one blood. There are not many races, folks. There's one race. Acts 17 makes it very clear. There are many people groups, but there's only one race, the human race. Of course, there's the saved and the unsaved race, but biblically speaking, there's only one race. So, I wasn't aware that there was a white evangelicalism, a black evangelicalism, an Asian evangelicalism, an Hispanic evangelicalism, and we could go on down the line. I thought we were of one church. One church, with one Lord, one Savior; that there was no Jew, nor Greek, nor Gentile.
And unfortunately, many people have now bought into the social-progressive ideas of this race baiting and dividing people, instead of being, well, what we are here in America, E pluribus unum, "of many, one." Well, the church is "of many, one," the body of Christ, but I guess there's a white evangelicalism and black evangelicalism, and I guess Lecrae has divorced white evangelicalism. I find this rhetoric very disturbing, and I think it plays right into the hands of the dividers and the race baiters, and the communists, as you will see in just a minute. But Piper has written an article on this, as I said, October 6th, 2017.
Well, before we get to that, you need to maybe hear a little bit about Lecrae. He's a, quote, "Christian," end quote, black rapper. And he has performed in many churches throughout America, of all nationalities or people groups. But all of a sudden, he started speaking out about Ferguson and the Michael Brown issue when he was shot–when he tried to get into the squad car of a police officer and wrestle his gun away from him, Michael Brown ended up being shot.
And many people were upset that the police officer was not indicted, although the evidence seemed to point to the fact that the police officer was afraid for his life when this young man literally climbed into his car, reaching for his gun and wrestling him for his service revolver or service weapon that, I guess, went off in the car. That officer then got out of the car, and it is said that the young man backed up and began to charge at the police officer.
Well, now, if your gun has already been almost wrestled away from you, and now you're outside the car with this very big guy, and he was a rather large, stout guy, and he's coming at you and running at you – which that was the report – and he gets on top of you and he takes your weapon, do you not fear for your life? And indeed, I guess the officer did fear for his life, and so when the young man would not obey his orders and came running at him, the officer fired and he was killed.
Well, a grand jury decided the officer was well within the legal scope of deadly force. But others did not feel that way, and as we know, the Ferguson riots took off. And out of that came Black Lives Matter and many other movements that have not desired, I don't think, to look at the issues on a case-by-case basis and say, "Is there injustice here or is there not?"
There's been a desire by the agitators, by the race hustlers, by the communists to hijack important issues and use them for division. And this goes all the way back to at least the 1960s, as we'll see tonight. And high-ranking FBI agents, the assistant director of the FBI, the director of the FBI in the '60s all were warning that communist groups would hijack racial issues to create dissension and division, and to agitate for chaos and eventually for actual guerrilla warfare in the American streets.
And as we're filming here today on October 10, 2017, Antifa, a communist group, is now calling for a civil war to begin in America on November 4th, 2017. Maybe nothing will happen; maybe something will – we'll be covering it. But they're using the issue of race, and taking things out of context – like Ferguson and what happened to Michael Brown with that police officer – they're taking those things out of context in order to try to paint America as a racist place. And the reason America is such a bad country and has racism is because of two things: Christianity and capitalism. And we've covered that a lot over the last several weeks on many programs.
And indeed, that is the narrative that's now being picked up by the communists, and has been for a long time: America is an evil place, and all source – the entire source of oppression and suffering comes from Christianity and capitalism. And so, America is an inherently evil place. That's the narrative. And they're using this false narrative – propaganda – to agitate for chaos, for conflict. And even in the 1960s, the FBI was warning that such communist agitators wanted guerrilla warfare to break out in the streets of America.
Well, sadly, I believe many people are buying into this without looking at each individual case one at a time and saying, "Was there something done here that should merit a police officer being charged? And do we take certain situations out of context and make them into something they weren't in order to divide people?"
Well, Lecrae says that things changed for him in 2014, after the Michael Brown incident, and that then his audiences went from about 3,000 people at times to 300 people. And I guess now he is divorcing white evangelicalism, and apparently John Piper is jumping on this bandwagon and writing about it. Listen to this audio clip of Lecrae on this topic.
Lecrae: When Michael Brown was murdered, I just assumed that all Christians felt the way I did: this is terrible. You know, like, oh, this is horrible. And so I just put it out there, "Hey, guys, isn't this bad?" And man, you would've thought that I had just said that Jesus was not real. You know what I mean?
Female: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm, mm-hmm.
Lecrae: And so the visceral attacks that came my way were like a shock to my system, and it was like an awakening, like, "Hey, you know, I mean, this is – everybody's not – doesn't see things from the way you see things, brother."
Lecrae: So that was some – that did some identity work, and then from there, I think that was the jolt that made me realize, okay, all is not well. [end quote]
So the Michael Brown incident changed things for him. Now, the reason I'm bringing this up is because that led, again, to this article by John Piper in which John Piper said some very disturbing things. He went on to talk about the phrase "identity work." He's quoting here "racial identity development." The phrase "identity work" is an allusion to the term "racial identity development work" that many younger blacks are forced to undertake. Lecrae interviewers said it may be required by events like a presidential election.
We're making such an issue of race that it's dividing people, and again, that's the goal: stirring up conflict; not having us come together as one and understand that we are one blood, one race, the human race, different people groups, but one race. Now we have to have racial identity work, and Piper is playing right into it.
John Piper goes on to state that this, quote – speaking of himself in the third person – "John Piper and a few million other supposed natives didn't vote for Donald Trump. We don't think unrepentant lurchers should be president." And he goes on to say, "We don't think Robert E. Lee is a simple embodiment of nobility. We don't think the Confederate flag can fly with impunity. We don't think kneeling for justice denigrates the other flag."
Well, let me just stop right there. Again, I don't know why some of these guys want to weigh in on these kind of issues instead of just preaching – issues I don't think they really are qualified to speak on, but Piper seems to want to do that.
Now, in regards to the Confederate flag, originally this flag, numeral "ten" on it, stood for states' rights, the Tenth Amendment of the US Constitution and state rights. The flag, however, has indeed been hijacked by people who we would definitely, I think, call racists. And I think it's probably not a good idea to fly the Confederate flag, just the same way most of us would not go around wearing a rainbow T-shirt or rainbow button because the rainbow has been hijacked now to stand for the LBGTQ community. Well, the Confederate flag, for many, just stood for state rights during the Civil War. But it has been hijacked and has become, for many, a symbol of racism, and so I think it's wise not to fly the Confederate flag.
However, what disturbs me is that Piper goes on to write, after speaking of the Confederate flag, quote, "We don't think kneeling for justice desecrates the other flag." Well, first of all, I don't appreciate his referring to the American flag as "the other flag." Secondly, I do think that kneeling during the national anthem does indeed show disrespect not only for the symbol, but for the service.
Many of us, as Christians, know that we do not worship the American flag. We don't worship the American flag. We don't pledge allegiance, if you will, in that way, but we do certainly recognize the symbol of the American flag. And we have come, as a nation, to identify the American flag often with service, sacrifice, freedom, liberty, one laying down their life. In fact, the Bible says, "Greater love hath no man than he lay down his life for a friend." And how many flag-draped coffins have come home because men and women have laid down their life for you and for me?
And, folks, that's what many of us associate the flag with: sacrifice, the lives of those who have served. Some of them died in service. Others served, lived a long life, passed away, but their flag – the flag is still draping their coffin. They have a flag-draped coffin. Why? Because they served.
And so the flag, for many, symbolizes something. It's a symbol of service. It's a symbol of sacrifice. It's a symbol of E pluribus unum, "of many, one." We are different in many ways, but we come together as one nation. And that's the flag.
In fact, these NFL players wanting to take a knee during the national anthem, (I think they are disrespecting the American flag), maybe they don't understand the American flag was actually the flag of the Union soldiers during the Civil War. And so are they not disrespecting the men who fought and helped to end slavery, if indeed you believe that's the primary reason the Civil War was fought?
But think about, again, what the flag means. How many of us have seen the footage of a gravesite service where a flag-draped coffin of a military soldier is carefully folded by the honor guard into a triangle and delivered to the next of kin, often parents or a spouse? That's what we identify the flag with often, isn't it?
So when people disrespect the flag, many of us believe they're disrespecting the sacrifice and service of others that allows us to gather together, and have freedom, and have a ballgame, and enjoy a hot dog and a Coke. It's not honoring and remembering with reverence the lives that have laid down that we might enjoy our everyday life and the simple pleasure of a ballgame.
So, John Piper, I think you're on the wrong side of this one. I think taking a knee and making a political statement during the national anthem does desecrate the American flag.
So John Piper's jumped in on this, and I'm not shocked, because I believe he has been a social and theological liberal for some time. I think we'll prove that in the next two programs.
Well, Piper has also jumped on the bandwagon of supporting Black Lives Matter, even though he knows Black Lives Matter has been promoted by three openly confessing communist queers. And yet he still promotes Black Lives Matter. Listen to this first audio clip.
John Piper: Last year, 2015, there were widespread protests under the banner of Black Lives Matter, largely because of some high-profile cases in which police killed unarmed black men – the question, whether it was warranted or not. And that's, of course, the tip of the iceberg, because there were about 100 of those, and most of them were not high profile in 2015. I saw a statistic that there were 102 unarmed black men killed by police, and that compares in its rate to a rate five times larger than the killing of unarmed whites. So you can get a feel for why there might be some concern and the emergence of something like Black Lives Matter. [end quote]
One hundred percent false. He's giving out false information. This is what the leftists, the progressives, the communists, the agitators want you to believe. They want you to believe that cops are inherently racists and gunning down innocent black men at higher rates than they do the white men. This is nothing less than undermining government, authority, law, order.
My friends, sometimes police officers are bad cops. You have bad cops; you have bad doctors; you have bad lawyers; you have bad pastors. And when they're bad pastors, they're called hirelings. In any profession, you're going to have some bad apples, right? But that doesn't mean the whole bucket of apples is rotten because you have a few who are bad. And yet the progressives, the Marxists, the agitators, the communists want to create a disrespect for law and order so that there is chaos, and then they can take advantage of the chaos.
Remember the four stages of bringing about a revolution, according to the KGB officer who defected in the 1980s and gave an interview on video? Demoralize, destabilize, chaos, and then normalize the new big-government progressive/socialism/communism. You demoralize, and you take away all morality. You destabilize.
One way you destabilize a society is no longer having respect for law and order, for police, for the authority. And yet the Bible tells us that authority is from God in the area of civil government. God created family government, church government, and civil government. And police officers, elected officials are there to reward the righteous, and punish the wicked, and keep a stable and just society so that all the different institutions God created – church, family, and government – can operate in their given spheres complementary to one another.
And so, when you bemoan police officers with lies and make them out to be evil people who are all racists or out hunting down black men and killing innocent black men at higher rates than white men, which is not true, as we'll see in a minute, you're deliberately undermining the fabric of a society that is to respect those who are worthy and due respect. Now, some leaders are not worthy and due respect, and then we have to go about it in the right biblical and constitutional way to deal with that.
But these are magistrates, and the Bible says, in Romans 13, that you are not to fear the government if you do what is right. But if you're not doing what is right, you should fear the government, because the magistrate and the government has the sword, and they do not bear the sword in vain and they could take your life, capital punishment, or kill you defending themselves or someone else.
But this bemoaning of police is the very local, community level of rebellion that begins to create movements like Black Lives Matter, that are communist movements, that are all stooped largely in misinformation, a false narrative, propaganda, in order to stir up chaos so you can demoralize, destabilize, have chaos, and then normalize the new norm.
So when John Piper talks about black men being killed at higher rates than white men, this is wrong. Here's an article from PoliceOne.com: "Cops hesitate more, err less when shooting black suspects, study finds." The article says, "With the turmoil in Ferguson, Missouri, the latest example, activists and many reporters would have us believe that police officers are prejudiciously trigger-happy when dealing with black suspects. But a scientific study from Washington State University-Spokane suggests just the opposite. In truth, according to the findings from the research team's innovative experiments, officers were less likely to erroneously shoot unarmed black suspects than they were unarmed whites – 25 times less likely, in fact. And officers hesitated significantly longer before shooting armed suspects who were black compared to armed suspects who were white or Hispanic."
So, again, John Piper is putting out false information, the talking points of the progressives and the liberals. In fact, at AmericanThinker.com: "Study: Cops kill more whites than blacks." The article cites from The Washington Times, "As researchers are quick to point out, FBI data on police shootings by race is notoriously incomplete," which may explain why Peter Moskos, assistant professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice at the University of New York, decided to use figures from website Killed by Police." So here's another study.
"Based on that data, Mr. Moskos reported that roughly 49 percent of those killed by officers from May 2013 to April 2015 were white, while 30 percent were black. He also found that 19 percent were Hispanic and 2 percent were Asian and other races."
So, again, if there's all this racism, why do we not see more Hispanics and Asians being shot? His website posted last week, on his blog Cop in the Hood, arrived with several caveats, notably that 25 percent of the website's data, which is drawn largely from news reports, failed to show the race of the person killed. Killed by Police lists every death, justified or not, including those in which the officer had been wounded or acted in self-defense. "The data doesn't indicate which shootings are justified – the vast majority – and which are cold-blooded murder – not many, but some. And maybe that would vary by race. I don't know, but I doubt it," Mr. Moskos said on his blog.
While not strictly a scientific approach to an analysis, as a look at raw data, it's convincing. Quote from the Washington Times, "Mr. Moskos listed two possible reasons for the racial disparity. The first is that police assigned to largely black neighborhoods face, quote, 'more political fallout when they shoot and thus receive better training and are less inclined to shoot,' end quote." The article says, "The second is that police assigned to black communities with high crime rates are more accustomed to dangerous situations and thus are more likely to be able to resolve them without resort to lethal force," end quote.
Two different studies, folks, that show that what John Piper's putting out is not true, and it's not helping. And I believe it helps to add to the agitating and race baiting and the division, and we don't need this, and we certainly don't need this coming from America's pulpits. But, my friends, that's exactly what the communists want. The communists, going back many generations in this country, openly talked about the need to hijack the pulpits of America with this kind of progressive talk if they wanted socialism and communism to succeed. Listen to this next audio clip of John Piper on Black Lives Matter.
John Piper: I googled and found, oh, there's a website called BlackLivesMatter.com. And I read it, and oh my goodness, it was awful. [Laughs] I mean, I didn't like it, because it featured three women who claimed to be the founders of Black Lives Matter – Alicia Garza, Opal Tometi, Patrisse Cullors – and they self-identify as, quote, "clear" – "queer" – not "clear" – "queer black women." And in big, bold banners on their "herstory" – not "history" – "herstory" page, they say that they are queer-affirming and transgender-affirming. Well, this did not excite me – as, of course, it wouldn't most of my Christian black brothers and sisters – and I was so surprised, I tweeted this link so that people could be aware of these roots.
Well, a few weeks later, I was in Louisville with the Together for the Gospel team, which included Thabiti Anyabwile. And if you don't know Thabiti, he's a black pastor in Washington, D.C., and he is, as everyone who knows him realizes, intellectually, theologically, culturally highly intelligent, highly articulate, highly courageous, highly levelheaded, and not a pushover. [Laughs]
Male: No, he's not.
John Piper: And he let me know, clearly, that wasn't helpful. [Laughs] That kind of thing, unqualified, no-context, was in the give-and-take we were having around the table – we did it for two, three days, great friendships there, a lot of blunt, in-your-face talk at that meeting. And he helped me see, for the mass of ordinary folks, black folks in particular, that website is a non-issue, it doesn't even exist. They don't even know it's there, it's not driving anything, and therefore, my call, now, my learning afresh of needing to make distinctions between, one, a patently true slogan – "Black Lives Matter" – and, two, ideological roots of a name that may be the real roots, or they may have been co-opted – I mean, the name may have been co-opted. [end quote]
Both of these men, by the way, speak for the Together for the Gospel Conference. It's shocking, the people who speak for that conference – Thabiti, Piper, Matt Chandler, and some of these other guys who are pushing Black Lives Matter, white privilege – this is the playbook of the communists, the progressives, the socialists, the agitators, the globalists, the George Soros-types and others.
And why some of these so-called conservative pastors show up over there to speak for this conference with these men and give them credibility is beyond me. I believe these men are becoming what I call "bridgers." Some of the so-called conservative theological pastors, who have openly spoken against social justice, progressive ideas, liberalism, theological liberalism, social liberalism, socialism – but then they turn around and they run and speak for things like the Together for the Gospel conference, where you have people like John Piper, Matt Chandler, Thabiti, guys who are pushing Black Lives Matter, white privilege, and many of these other things that are completely opposite of a biblical worldview. These things are not only unbiblical; they're dangerous from a social perspective and a national security perspective.
What's shocking to me, frankly, my friends, are the pastors in America who have become useful idiots for either the Marxists or the Muslims. Now, again, that's not calling someone a name. That is an historical term. And in fact, it was very popular, under the people like Lenin, to call people a useful idiot who thought they were going to gain some kind of power or control, whether they were an educator or a columnist or someone in the media, who would push the agenda of the progressives or the communists, and that they would get some power as well when the communists took over. And of course, they don't, and then they scream and holler, and the communists eliminate them. And that's how they end up being used and turn out to be wrong, thus idiots, and it's usually the useful idiots who are the first to go when a revolution occurs, because they realize they're not going to get a piece of the pie and they scream the loudest and they're eliminated.
So when you call someone a useful idiot, as I explain all the time, because we have new people all the time, I'm not calling someone a name; it's an historical term. But I am shocked at the number of so-called pastors, and religious leaders, evangelical leaders, writers, authors, etc., who have become useful idiots for spewing the talking points, misinformation, propaganda war, false narrative of the Marxists and the Muslims.
And so, he mentions Thabiti. Well, again, Piper, Thabiti, Matt Chandler – these guys all run and speak at some of the same conferences, like Together for the Gospel, as he mentioned, in Kentucky. Some of these so-called conservative pastors run and speak there; thus, I believe many of these conservative pastors and evangelicals are becoming a bridge between the conservatives and the liberals, and the conservative pastors are being a bridge to them. They're helping, I believe, to validate – "Well, he must be okay. So-and-so speaks for him. Well, he must not be all bad, because look at the conservative guys who speak with him."
Now, this is not guilt by association, folks. This is guilt by participation. These guys should not be participating in conferences, Bible conferences, where they open the word of God with men that, I believe, are helping to confuse true Christians, and non-Christians, by pushing the talking points and false narrative of the progressives. And it's shocking to me that some of these men on the conservative side are still sharing the platform and thus becoming a bridge to the liberalism for others.
Well, Thabiti is – who Piper quotes, who has also tweeted his support for Black Lives Matter, told Piper, "It wasn't helpful that you tweeted out information about Black Lives Matter." What's wrong with tweeting out the website, saying, "Hey, go check it out; see what they're all about?” Because as you heard Piper say, when he went to the website, he was shocked to find out, hey, these people are self-identifying queers and communists. So why is it not helpful, Thabiti, for Christians to go do some research?
Why would Piper say that the website is a non-issue, that black folks don't know the website even exists? I found that a little troubling. What, do you mean black people don't use the Internet? Black people don't know how to find the website? Why would he say that it's a non-issue, black people don't even know the website exists? Why would he say that, and how does he know that to be true? That's a ridiculous statement, in my opinion.
But notice, again, Piper has done his own homework, realized who these people are. Now Thabiti, this black pastor, tells him, "Hey, that's not helpful, pointing that out." Well, yeah, we should point it out so we can understand what is the worldview behind hijacking the Civil Rights movement.
Yes, there are legitimate issues where we see police brutality. Yes, there are legitimate issues where we sometimes see a white suburban kid get into trouble, marches in with his daddy's lawyer, and gets probation. But the black, poor student, who doesn't have the money and the high-powered lawyer, commits the same crime, walks into the courtroom, and does jail time. Does that happen? Yes, it does. Yes, it does. And there are a lot of reasons why that happens. Some of it is because of the good-ol'-boy club of the judges and the prosecutors and the defense lawyers and them running in some of the same circles.
Are those legitimate issues to be discussed? Absolutely. I find it appalling and disgusting, because Lady Justice should be blind. One should not get different treatment than another for the same crime just because they have money. I would also venture to guess there are some black students who can walk in there with their father's high-powered lawyer and get the same treatment as the affluent white family, where maybe even a white kid who walks in, who isn't affluent, gets thrown into jail as well. I would venture to guess you'd find that it has a lot more to do with money than it does what people group they're from.
So we can talk about those issues, and we should. But we should be careful not to be using the talking points and the lies of the left to undermine the nation, to undermine national security, to create bitterness and strife and feuding and division among people – racial division, economic division. We shouldn't be doing that, and yet I think people like John Piper are doing that, when they have clearly done their homework – "Hey, wait a minute, these are communist queers. Maybe we should take another look at this – no, Thabiti says, don't do that." No, you should. Listen to this next clip by John Piper.
John Piper: Patently, black lives matter. That's true. And before – this is another little lesson, maybe; I'm just sticking this in – before we say anything like "All lives matter," before we say that, we need to pause, because if you quickly add that, it sounds like a rebuke. It sounds like a minimizing of what was just said. It sounds like the point that was trying to be made isn't worth being made. So you don't want to make that point. You don't want to say that. So you'd learn that pretty quickly in that conversation if you added, "All lives matter." Of course that's true, all lives matter, but oh, how timing matters and how context matters. [end quote]
So now if you say "All lives matter," that's offensive. So if someone says "Black lives matter" – and they do matter – but you respond, "Yeah, but you know what? All lives matter, all lives matter," that's now offensive, you're not to say that, John Piper? See, again, I believe he's falling right into the trap of the social progressives, and I think that's because he's a social liberal.
Well, this was a warning back in 1961. October 19, 1961, the assistant director of the FBI, a man by the name of William C. Sullivan, warned Americans not to let their pastors and clergy be hijacked by the communist, socialist, progressive agenda. He delivered a speech at Highland Park Methodist Church in Dallas, as I said, October 19, 1961. Here is what he said. It sounds like it could've been given today.
[quote] “Failing to recognize obvious communist propaganda in petitions, open letters, clemency appeals, pamphlets, etc.; mistaken notions that clergymen can work with communists for peace, civil rights, ending racial discrimination, etc., without harming religion and strengthening communism; confusing the values of communism with those of Christianity; confusing the social doctrines of Karl Marx with those of Jesus Christ; a tendency to reject or drastically dilute the supernatural content of religion in favor of a naturalistic form of humanism, which can make it hard to logically take a stand against communism."
He goes on to warn, "Show a proneness to join organizations without questioning their real sponsorship, direction, policies; making statements and drawing conclusions relative to foreign policy, economics, and domestic politics which exceed their field of competence," [end quote.]
You know what that sounds like today, don’t you? Well, you have men like John Piper and others jumping in on Black Lives Matter, showing a proneness to join organizations without questioning their real sponsorship, direction, and policies. Well, isn't that what John Piper was told by Thabiti? "Well, that's not helpful, pointing all that out." No, you should question: Who are these people? What are their goals? Or, indeed, the clergy will be hijacked by communist agendas and campaigns.
Notice that the assistant director of the FBI, Mr. Sullivan in 1961, warns of clergymen making statements, drawing conclusions relative to foreign policy, economics, and domestic politics which exceed their field of competence. I cannot tell you the number of times I hear so-called pastors making comments about topics that they have no business commenting on. You know they don't know diddly-squat about some of the things they're talking about. They have not done their homework. They don't know about issues such as what white privilege is really all about, where it comes from, what the people who teach it and write books on it have actually said their agenda involves. You would hope they don't know this. You would hope they don't know this; otherwise, they really are complicit in what they're doing.
You see many of these so-called pastors who are talking about the environment and creation care – they're not meteorologists. They don't understand the science of this matter. We see many so-called clergy talking about economic issues, again, social justice issues. They don't understand these issues. Most of them have never run a business. All they've ever done is draw a paycheck from other people's hard work. So, again, they start speaking about things they have no business speaking on, and that's what the assistant director of the FBI was warning about back in 1961.
Listen to this; this comes from February 1967. FBI chief J. Edgar Hoover told Congress this, quote: "Communists and other subversives and extremists strive and labor ceaselessly to precipitate racial trouble and take advantage of racial discord in this country. Such elements were active in exploiting and aggravating the riots, for example, in Harlem, Watts, Cleveland, and Chicago." Don't think for one minute that's not what we're seeing in America right now.
Again, November 4, 2017, many of these Black Lives Matter-type groups are calling for beginning these Antifa groups – they're calling for the beginning of a civil war, November 4, 2017. Whether something happens or not, I don't know.
But the point is, they use the issues of the day and hijack them for their own agenda. These people don't care about you; they don't care about racial issues; they don't care about justice. They're all about revolution, their communism. In fact, former communist Phillip Abbott Luce wrote a book called Road to Revolution. And in this book, he said that the communists were, quote, "In the center of these riots and did everything possible to expand and extend the riot condition," speaking of the riots in cities across America.
J. Edgar Hoover went on to list, before a committee, this, which sounds, again, like Black Lives Matter here in 2017, but this was many years ago. The head of the FBI writes, "Communists seek to advance the cause of communism by injecting themselves into racial situations and exploiting them, one, to intensify the frictions between blacks and whites, to prove that discrimination against minorities is an inherent defect of the capitalist system; two, to foster domestic disunity by dividing blacks and whites into antagonistic, warring factions; three, undermine and destroy established authority; four, to incite black hostility toward law and order; five, to encourage and foment racial strife and riotous activity; number six, to portray the communist movement as the champion of social protest and the only force capable of ameliorating the conditions of the black and the oppressed," end quote.
Hoover goes on to say, "In fact, almost 50 years of Communist Party activity in the United States cannot be minimized, for it has contributed to disrupting race relations in this country and has exerted an insidious influence on the life and times of our nation. The net result of agitation and propaganda by communists and other subversive and extremist elements has been to create a climate of conflict between the races in this country, and to poison the atmosphere," end quote. Folks, that sounds just like what's happening in America today, does it not?
So, again, John Piper would do well to not be spewing, I believe, the talking points and propaganda information, propaganda war, of the communists and leftists as found in the Black Lives Matter movement.