It's always a dilemma knowing whether to respond to the cultural idiocy espoused by fringe activists or not. On the one hand, addressing the topic generates increased attention and focus on radical ideas, and also lends an undeserved legitimacy to their ramblings. On the other hand, failing to rebuke bad ideas can allow them to fester and potentially persuade otherwise rational minds that, for whatever reason, don't see the glaring foolishness that animates them.
This is where I always find myself when it comes to latest outburst of intentionally inflammatory rhetoric from race-baiting grifter Shaun King. King is a highly suspect figure even among progressive racialists given the high probability that he is a white man posing as black for profit and prestige. Evidence surfaced years ago that his parents are both white, prompting King to offer a rushed explanation that his mom had an affair with a black man, making him biracial. Despite lucrative offers to charity, King refuses to take a DNA test to prove his claim.
Beyond that scandal, King is notorious among left-wing activists for raising large amounts of money for Black Lives Matter and other causes, but then never disclosing where that money is spent. Coupled with his precarious relationship with truth-telling, whose unsubstantiated and ultimately untrue rumors have ruined more than one innocent person's life, King is anything but well-respected.
He also claims to have been a pastor for a number of years.
Still, with millions of followers across social media platforms, it's silly to pretend that his words don't influence. And therefore when he says things like this, I don't think we can pretend he's speaking into a vacuum:
Is there a call to church vandalism here? That's possible, though I would hesitate to say it's explicit. Perhaps King means that responsible church leaders will initiate an orderly removal of these white Jesus representations. But he surely wouldn't pretend to be unaware that the popular method of "bringing down" statues right now is anything but peaceful and orderly.
Is there biblical illiteracy here? Without question. According to Scripture, Mary and Joseph sought to hide in neighboring Egypt, to protect toddler Jesus from the murderous edict of Herod the Great, not to "blend in" as cultural lookalikes.
Is there unsubstantiated and wild accusation here? Of course. There is no evidence whatsoever that the voluminous depictions of Jesus created by European artists and sculptors were part of some clandestine attempt to advance white supremacy.
But leave all that to the side and realize that the far greater issue here is that any preoccupation with, or even consciousness of, the skin tone of Jesus of Nazareth provides jarring evidence that a person has totally missed everything meaningful about Him.
Certainly, if a white supremacist couldn't worship a dark or olive-skinned Christ, they are lost.
But if Shaun King or anyone else couldn't worship a light-skinned Christ, they are just as lost.
The reason for that is simple. If skin-tone motivates or prevents your worship, it is skin-tone you are worshiping – not the Savior.
The truth is that we don't have any idea the relative melanin amounts that existed in the skin of the incarnated Son of God. Historians can make predictions based on their best understanding of the ethnic make-up of southern Judea at the time of Christ's birth. But even those are guesses that have to account for the relatively frequent ethnic interruptions caused by the migration of various nationalities and people groupings.
That's why, as Christianity spread in every direction throughout the first century and following, cultural representations of Jesus took on the ethnicity of the people creating them – something that actually demonstrates in a powerfully moving way that Jesus embodies hope and salvation for all mankind.
Given that the United States was colonized by Europeans, it is a completely logical and exceedingly inoffensive reality that most Jesus representations we inherited would mirror theirs.
That isn't white supremacy any more than black representations of Jesus in Africa are demonstrative of black supremacy. Paintings or stain-glassed images of a white Jesus are nothing more than cultural tradition, which is the true object of King's rage.
In other words, the activist has done nothing in this entire sorry episode besides reveal, perhaps in a grotesque demonstration of self-loathing, the startling degree of hatred he himself harbors towards white people and white culture.