The basic frame for the Anti-Christian rhetoric in the “Afrocentric” movement basically boils down to the fact that because Eurocentric Christians enslaved Africans, these people blame not those people but Christianity itself. In their mind, any Afrikan who is Christian is therefore unconscious, following a supposedly “white” religion, and assorted other rubbish. The problem is the facts don’t work for the thesis. Christianity and Judaism are Afrikan in origin. The scriptural tradition is Ethiopian and Somalian and Egyptian in origin with some elements from central and southern Afrika as well and did not begin with Constantine or King James or any of that. That is the Eurocentric and NOT the AFRIKAN narrative concerning Christianity. Until Pope Gregory almost all of the images coming out of Christian expression were in fact Afrikan ones and so the association of “whiteness” with Christianity is much like its association with everything else, a product of the advent of the concept out of German philosophy in the 14th century and then compounded with the colonial and enslavement period that followed. They confuse all of that with the religion as a whole and its entire history (which they do not adequately study and don’t care to, because it contradicts their narrative and ideology) and so they aim their attack on slavery on Christianity and Christians as a whole. They turn what should be a legitimate critique of some Europeans into an attack on all Christian believers and Afrikan ones in particular. It becomes ignorance and its cousin anti-Christian bigotry disguised as Afrikan enlightenment when there is little or anything Afrikan about it. Even worse, it usually throws in a fictionalized, ideological Kemet and acts as if Kemet was the sole source of Christian ideas which is also false. They try to equate Christianity to various ancient Egyptian traditions, ignoring the rest of the continental contribution to the faith AND misrepresenting Kemetian theology. All of this happens because none of these people really have any scholarly training in this stuff. They simply recycle Eurocentric knowledge that matches their ideology and that becomes their reading as if mere reading and writing what someone else wrote is scholarship. All you need then is the online or fake Ph.D and someone else in the movement to vet you as an expert and it’s on. Then you’re set up for videos, dvds, and lectures by the ignorant masses and the lie you told to begin with, now becomes the truth that you can sell to fellow ignorant people and wanna be anti-Christians or other religious bigots and prejudiced people. Part of the reason this rolls is because certain people WANT to attack Christianity and blame it for slavery so they want to validate all this bogus scholarship and they do. Or they want to go into some magical Kemet that was racialized and never existed in history in that way and they make that up. It’s kind of like science fiction where you mix a piece of truth with some fiction and a lot of myth and ideology and you call that info and then like a snake oil salesman or pitchman who wants to sell you the Brooklyn bridge and make you feel like you are actually buying something, they do the rest. The most vocal antichristian or Afrikemetological voices are people who do not have scholarly expertise in those fields. They are ideologues hiding behind the ignorance of our people about them and in some cases making money and getting status when they really are not who they say they are. I could ignore them, but I can’t when they attack the faith with false information, I can’t when they attack Afrikan believers as if to be Christian is existentially to be unconscious (particularly a dumb idea given that Afrikans were Christians before there was a Europe or even that specific term), or as if to be Christian is to endorse white supremacy or necessary to believe in a “white” God or any of that. They act as if there is one monolithic Christianity (there isn’t and never has been) and they refer to none of the specific real theologies that exist today. Even the Roman church has abandoned a large part of Constantinianism. Theirs is usually a made up fusion of Roman Catholicism and US protestant slave theology. Those things did exist but not at the same time or place or in the same theological tradition and they were never individually or collectively ALL of Christianity or its source and never believed by all Christians even DURING the slavery period. The strongest antislavery voices in the Afrikan community as well later the strongest anti-segregation and racism voices were Christians, so there is an empirical bald-faced lie involved here and beside the fact that this stuff is factually errant, in practice it leads us to more division as it separates Afrikan Christians (more than half of our people and growing and soon to be the largest group of Christians on earth) from the movement. They simply tune it out and the real critiques of Christianities that need to be had, go by the boards as they associate Afrikan movement with anti-Christianity and use these people and their stupidity and profiteering as evidence. They make MY job harder. I want thinking Africa-centered Afrikan Christians. It’s hard to get there when you have anti-Christian bigots trying to repackage themselves as scholars or Afrikan historians or whatever it is they THINK they are.
Garvey was a Christian. So was King. So where almost ALL of the historically revolutionary ancestors who helped us get to the point where I can say these words openly. So the idea that you disrespect them by attacking them and their faith and those who follow it today is for be ANTI-Afrikan (as we do not do that), unnecessary (since Afrikans are syncretic and tolerated many belief systems before colonialism side by side and still do in many places today until the West interferes), and EVIL. The only reason I am perhaps the only voice is that this anti-Christianity in the movement, grounded in ignorance is assisted by the lack of study of many Afrikan Christians of their own faith history and so they either do not know enough to respond to this or they are afraid, thinking that it may be true. I am not in that position.