God and Race: Book Review

I have spent many years wading through the history and ugliness of race relations in our culture and throughout the church.  There are some ugly moments, especially in America, for the church to deal with in regard to racism.  The evangelical support for Slavery in the mid and late 1800s and of segregation thereafter are a blight on our tradition. Theologically, these arguments for slavery never held any water, neither did arguments for racism or segregation. And, over time, faithful readers of the Bible were the ones to embrace abolition and end segregation. But we must also understand historical context, many Christian abolitionists wanted to abolish slavery at the founding even though some of them, hypocritically, held slaves themselves.  George Washington, a reluctant but firm abolitionist late in his life, freed all the slaves he owned upon his death. Better late than never I suppose. Within this historical context we can find the words of Charles Finney, a staunch abolitionist, to be a light into why Christians were not more forceful in their pursuit of abolition:

“Br.

Weld, is it not true, at least do you not fear it is, that we are in our present course going fast into a civil war? Will not our present movements in abolition result in that? … How can we save our country and affect the speedy abolition of slavery? This is my answer.… If abolition can be made an appendage of a general revival of religion, all is well.”

Finney desired abolition to be bloodless, of course, his words here proved prophetic for bloodshed was indeed on the horizon. In light of this history, it behooves the Christian in the 21

^st

century to desire a possible way forward into the future, unified with brothers and sisters in Christ of every skin color. I am convinced that most Christians desire this, but the cultural climate and the political movements of our day obfuscate the issue. Many groups smuggle in distinctly anti-biblical worldviews that cannot be embraced, some outright lie about history and situations to make a profit, and others espouse that the only way to correct past discrimination is to enact future discrimination. All these movements muddy the waters.  I, myself, have spent countless hours trying to understand and come to grips with how to help heal the seemingly broadening racial divide in our country. Upon this journey I made a few commitments:

1. I will not sacrifice truth for applause regardless of what names I may be called in the process.

2. I will not sacrifice biblical principles for unbiblical ones in pursuit of unity.

3. I will not allow emotions to guide my principles or my understanding of the truth.

With those commitments in mind I read, watched, and listened to both sides as I formulated my own opinion on the matter. I read things from

White Fragility

,

The Color of Compromise

,

How to be Anti-Racist

, and

Critical Race Theory

(select sections) to

Fault Lines

,

The 1619 Project Critique

,

How to Destroy America in Three Easy Steps

to the book I am going to review today:

God and Race

. I could go in depth and critique all these books, but space and time simply do not allow for that.  Instead, I will take the time to review the book which I believe does the most good for the church:

God and Race

by John Siebeling and Wayne Francis. This book is not without its warts, but what it does well, it does very well. As I spent time reading other books/articles in this adventure I was struck by a sense of hopelessness. Two sides talking past each other and using attacks such as calling someone a racist and then pretending (as Delgado does) as if this is not a big deal because racism is, at its core, ordinary. Or calling a group of people Marxists and Marxist sympathizers, which Voddie Bauchem seems to do. There could be elements of truth in both statements, or in neither, but one thing is for sure, neither book proposed a legitimate way forward. The same can be said for other prescriptions –

stay silent and listen, silence is violence, speak up and speak out, see something say something.  It can all be very confusing and paralyzing. There does not seem to be a coherent path forward offered by either side.

But God and Race does offer one. The book was authored by two pastors.  One in New York (Wayne Francis) and one in Memphis (John Siebeling). Both are pastors of Mega Churches.  In full disclosure, one of the ways I was turned on to this book was through my own brother who, until recently, attending John Siebeling’s church in Memphis, Tennessee.

God and Race

is not a perfect book, but it is a book with a

purpose

beyond ideological hand wringing and internet plaudits. Wherever you land on this hot button issue today know that you will not agree or like some things in this book. However, if you are a Christian, I believe you will find the aim of the book refreshing. As a Christian, the question should be, how can I be a part of the solution without sacrificing truth for narrative based on empathy and love? I think this book, for the most part, knocks that goal out of the park. There are certainly things in this book that I do not agree with and that I find troubling but that does not hinder the value of it. To start, let’s talk about what this book does not do well:

What Does this Book do Poorly?

One of the things this book does poorly is that it overstates the case and sometimes does not allow for the full truth to be explained so that it can maintain its posture and talking points. For instance, on pages 72-79 Siebeling tries to briefly sum up America’s history with racism. A historical treatise boiled down to 7 pages is a heck of an endeavor, so I do not envy Siebeling here.  The first section he attempts to explain is the 3/5 compromise. As a history buff myself, who spent much time studying the 3/5 compromise, my interest was piqued.  But Siebeling only gets the 3/5 compromise partly right

(which is not necessarily his fault, many people make the same mistake).

He is right in that the compromise was a strategic step towards abolition.  The choice, early on, was clear, compromise on slavery or have two separate countries.  Some might say that should be an easy decision but given the perils of the Revolutionary War and the prospect that unity must be maintained to remain free from English rule, it is not nearly as cut and dried as one might suppose. The main issue I have with Siebeling’s characterization of the 3/5 compromise comes from this line:

“While this compromise was strategic on the part of the North and ultimately aided in abolishing slavery, it highlighted a terrible reality in our country: we saw Black people as being less than fully human.”

But this isn’t true. A slave was not counted as 3/5 of a person at all. It was not broken down individually, it was the general population.  If you are going to keep slaves, then we will only count 3/5 of the

total

slave population in your population count towards representation in congress. This would incentivize freeing slaves to drive up your population count and give you more representation. In other words, the compromise actually sought to expose the hypocrisy of the South, inflate the representation in the North, and end slavery through legislation without bloodshed.  Ultimately, it did not work out that way, but the compromise was never an admission to seeing a certain race as only partly human. Other issues with the book are similar.  The handling of George Floyd on page 56 asserts a racial component that has never been legally alleged in the case.  This treatment of Floyd also reduces the altercation to that of profiling when Floyd had a rap sheet longer than a CEO’s resume.  Keith Ellison, Democrat Attorney General of Minnesota, said this of not charging officer Derek Chauvin with a hate crime:

“I wouldn’t call it that (a hate crime) because hate crimes are crimes where there’s an explicit motive, and of bias. We don’t have any evidence that Derek Chauvin factored in George Floyd’s race as he did what he did.”

The treatment of the George Floyd situation also leaves out the lethal amount of fentanyl in his system. It would have been possible to include these facts while also pointing to the emotional and historical implications of seeing what Chauvin did to Floyd, and, in my opinion, it would have proven the case more credible in desiring to move beyond it together. Likewise, on page 79, John talks about the infamous “Hands up don’t shoot” narrative of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri:

“Though there is a dispute over whether or not he said those words before he was shot by the police officer, the message is clear: privilege can cause you to perceive even open hands as a threat from minorities.”

This story has been thoroughly debunked since Eric Holder (of President Obama’s DOJ) found that Michael Brown never raised his hands in that manner, had lunged for the officer, reached for his gun and punched him repeatedly in the face.

“…The popular hands-up storyline, which isn’t corroborated by ballistic and DNA evidence and multiple witness statements, was perpetuated by Witness 101. In fact, just about everything said to the media by Witness 101, whom we all know as Dorian Johnson, the friend with Brown that day, was not supported by the evidence and other witness statements.”

This is the most egregious misstep of the book. Using the Michael Brown case and playing into the lie of Witness 101 that has been disproven over and over again by the FBI and DOJ does not aid in the book’s cause. To get people to move past “white knuckles” you must not clobber them with half-truths and lies. There is a lot that this book does that is good, but these retelling of racial incidents from only one perspective is not one of them, and actually plays to undermine the overall message of book, in part, but not in whole.

What Does this Book Do Well?

If this book handles history with mediocrity and plays into half-truths and lies of some of its examples then why recommend it?  Well, because of what the book does well. Despite these missteps the book itself does something that I have never seen a book do on this topic – it gives homework, and each chapter has a “heart check.” These heart checks are often based in biblical principles and meant to get the reader to look inward and decide if they are being open hearted to what God is telling them through reading the book. Make no mistake, this book will not make sense to the non-Christian, whether conservative or liberal. I found Wayne Francis’ portions of the book much more enjoyable than John Siebeling’s. Francis weaves storytelling, heart wrenching admonitions and humor well throughout his sections. In one of the more powerful moments in the book Wayne shares a story of being pulled over by a police officer in a neighborhood.  The altercation ended without incident except for the fact that Wayne felt (and perhaps was) profiled, but Wayne didn’t stop there.  At the end of the chapter, he even thought of other reasons why the officer may have been so gruff with him. Wayne brings raw honesty of his past (racist comments towards his mother as a child) and a pastoral perspective. The white reader will surely know that he/she does not know what it is like to be black in America, but it gives us a window into historical hurts and narratives that do damage to the community. If anyone thought that racism itself was no longer an issue in our society, all one would have to do is read Wayne’s heart wrenching accounts of personal racism in multiple sections of the book.  These stories, combined with a biblical and pastoral perspective serve the church well and encourage the reader who has not experienced racism to empathize with brothers and sisters who do, and be part of the change we hope to see within the church. Probably the most powerful moment in Wayne’s writing comes when he says this:

“For Black people, that means we have to forgive White people of previous and present injustices. And we have to do it while not harboring hatred and racism toward White people”

This is a marked departure from the perspectives of Ibrim X Kendi and Robin DeAngelo. This is an admirable and Christ-like tone to carry.  It is, in all seriousness, a rather dangerous thing for a man like Wayne to say, but he did say it.  Because he was modeling Christ. The book also gives the reader ideas of how to move forward. Each part is accompanied by “A practical response” which gives the reader a tangible and specific exercise to try. It does not matter what race the reader is, these practical responses hold weight for all people. For instance, the final “practice response” encourages the reader to start a “diversity group” to talk about different perspectives through a book or Bible study. An encouragement I thought to be rather profound, and again, in contravention of non-Christian racial reconciliation resources. Perhaps the best part of this book is the authenticity in caring for the church from both pastors, and the desire to see the church grow into a diverse body of believers that exemplify the type of unity that Jesus calls for in John 17.  Whether or not you agree with all of it this book is definitely a must read, and worthy of the time and effort to take seriously. John and Wayne are frank in their discussions, honest about not having all the answers, and forthright in their desire to base everything on the gospel. It is a well written and encouraging resource.  If you were going to read one book this February – I would recommend

God and Race.

Overall I give this book an 8 out of 10… maybe an 8.5.

You can purchase the book on

Amazon

and you can even get a

study and curriculum

to use with a small group as well. If you're not a reader check out the YouTube series at

The Life Church

that covers the book in detail (and more).

For those that may be wondering why I spent less time quoting the book in this section than in others let me say this - I want you to buy and read the book. I do not want to give away the good stuff for free!

As always – stay reasonable and God bless.

Notes

https://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-33/why-christians-supported-slavery.htmlhttps://www.mountvernon.org/george-washington/slavery/ten-facts-about-washington-slavery/#:~:text=Despite%20having%20been%20an%20enslaver,owned%20in%20his%201799%20will.https://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-33/abolitionists.htmlhttps://uca.edu/training/files/2020/09/black-Lives-Matter-Handout.pdfhttps://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/14/magazine/1619-america-slavery.htmlhttps://www.d11.org/cms/lib/CO02201641/Centricity/Domain/3824/Ibram%20X%20Kendi%20Book%20Quote%20-%20%20We%20need%20discrimination%20today.pdfhttps://www.amazon.com/White-Fragility-People-About-Racism/dp/0807047414<8>

https://www.amazon.com/Color-Compromise-American-Churchs-Complicity/dp/0310597269https://www.ibramxkendi.com/how-to-be-an-antiracisthttps://erikafontanez.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/richard-delgado-et-al-critical-race-theory.pdfhttps://www.voddiebaucham.org/fault-lines/https://www.amazon.com/1619-Project-Critique-Phillip-Magness/dp/1630692018https://www.amazon.com/Destroy-America-Three-Easy-Steps/dp/006300187Xhttps://www.amazon.com/God-Race-Moving-Beyond-Knuckles/dp/0063087227https://thelifechurch.com/locations/new-yorkhttps://johnsiebeling.com/https://www.historycentral.com/Revolt/stories/Hang.html God and Race, pg. 74 https://www.britannica.com/topic/three-fifths-compromisehttps://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/550211-minnesota-ag-explains-why-floyd-death-not-charged-as-hate-crime/https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/09/us/derek-chauvin-trial-george-floyd-day-10/index.html God and Race pg. 79 https://www.facinghistory.org/resource-library/hands-dont-shoot-built-lie God and Race pg 65 God and Race pg. 88