Last week, Amber Guyger, a former white police officer, was convicted by a diverse jury1 of murder for shooting Botham Jean, a black man, in his own apartment last year. The case initially made headlines for being a rare conviction of a police officer in an apparently unjustified shooting, but was quickly overshadowed by Botham’s brother’s, Brandt, victim impact statement.
In it her told her, “I forgive you. If you go to God and ask him, he will forgive you…I love you just like everyone else. And I’m not going to say I hope you rot and die just like my brother did, I personally want the best for you…I want the best for you because I know that’s exactly what Botham would want you to do, and the best would be to give your life to Christ.” He then asked the judge if he could hug Guyger, a request the judge granted. The video was seen by millions across the country as a remarkable display of love and forgiveness towards the murderer of his brother. Christians especially rejoiced at the powerful display of the Gospel that was proclaimed through Brandt – that even a murderer like Guyger could find forgiveness in Jesus and could be reconciled with those who would have every reason to hate her, but some professing Christians were not so pleased.
The following day, Jemar Tisby, President and co-founder of The Witness, penned an article2 filled with unbiblical ideas that will only serve to increase ethnic animosity instead of heal it, something that is sadly commonplace with him. Tisby has openly praised racist heretics like James Cone3, has promoted segregation in the church, refused to go to church with white people after Trump was elected, among many other unbiblical and destructive ideas that are beyond the scope of this article.
Instead of using this event as an opportunity to proclaim the Gospel’s ability to heal the deepest of wounds and bridge the ethnic divide to the watching world, he used it to criticize those who rejoiced at the incredible display of Gospel forgiveness modeled by Brandt.
In his article, he claims, “This moment was especially celebrated by white Christians. It seems to indicate a desire to hastily move on from the wrong done and offer a perfect picture of reconciliation.” Not only is such a charge demonstrably false4, the claim that people of a particular skin tone are celebrating in order to sweep the situation under the rug is uncharitable, incendiary, and assumes the worst of motives without evidence, but he doesn’t stop there.
He further claims, “But when another black man has been murdered by a person charged to “serve and protect,” forgiveness should neither be demanded nor assumed.” On what biblical basis does Tisby make this claim? He offers none as there is no argument. Forgiveness should not be given because it is demanded or assumed, but because God commands us to forgive. Jesus says, “For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you, but if you do not forgive others their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses” (Matthew 6:14-15). There is no footnote in Matthew that says that forgiveness can be withheld due to centuries of slavery, systemic oppression, unjustified shootings, or anything else. If we will not forgive others for the ways that they have sinned against us, we cannot expect that God will forgive the ways that we have sinned against him.
Tisby’s argument continues to devolve as the article goes on to the point of being logically contradictory. He continues, “A society built around white superiority is also built around white innocence — an assumption of the intrinsic moral virtue of all white people and the purity of their intentions regardless of impact. White innocence assumes black forgiveness.” If we have a society that is built on white innocence (another claim that he does not attempt to prove), why was Guyger not only tried, but also convicted of murder? If society believes that whites are inherently innocent, why would black forgiveness be assumed, when there is nothing that needs forgiving?
Later, he makes a stunning claim, that when taken to its logical conclusion, is a denial of the Gospel itself. He writes, “No one should expect swift mercy from every black person. And the risk of offering such speedy forgiveness is that not nearly enough attention is given to the injustice itself…Instant absolution minimizes the magnitude of injustice. It distracts attention from the systemic change needed to prevent such tragedies from occurring.” There is no room for such thinking in the Christian church. What happens when a person repents and believes the Gospel? “Instant absolution.” The Christian is immediately reconciled to God. If this were not enough, as Reformed Christians, we believe that God chose to save us in eternity past. Before we were born or had done anything good or bad (Romans 9:11), God chose to give his people “instant absolution.” The timing of forgiveness has nothing to do with the monstrosity of the injustice. Our crimes against God are infinitely worse than what Guyger did to Botham and his family, yet he offers us all “instant absolution.” On the cross, Jesus received the perfect justice that our sins deserved to secure us that “instant absolution” that Tisby despises. Tisby’s demands that justice happen before forgiveness is granted is antithetical to the Gospel. God saves us by faith, not by works, yet Tisby demands that the work of justice be done before forgiveness and absolution is granted.
This is not to minimize the need to seek justice in society. The same God that gives us “instant absolution” commands, “Learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression; bring justice to the fatherless, plead the widow’s cause” (Isaiah 1:17). Justice is important, as Christ had to receive the justice due our sins so that we could receive “instant absolution.” In what was a far more balanced discussion, Dorena Williamson of Christianity Today explained that just as Brandt Jean’s forgiveness toward Guyger is important, so his mother’s call for full justice is equally important. His mother claims that the Dallas police department acted corruptly during the investigation despite the guilty verdict that was achieved. Such accusations are serious, and the people of Dallas should do everything they can to ensure that their police and justice system operates in a manner in accordance with God’s law. In light of this, the gravity of injustice, both known and alleged, only magnifies the beauty of the forgiveness. If such forgiveness that Brandt granted was truly wonderful, how much more the forgiveness that Jesus granted to us when our crimes were infinitely worse?
As David French put it, “He didn’t just forgive her, by embracing her and letting her cling to him, it was as if he took on part of the burden of her sin.” Forgiveness is not easy, as we are releasing the person from the debt that they owe in the ways that they have sinned against us. Brandt’s forgiveness of Guyger was costly, but he knows that the forgiveness Jesus purchased for him was infinitely more costly, as the sin that Christ took on for him is infinitely greater than the sin he “took on” for Guyger. This is the message of the Gospel that Brandt lived out before Guyger and the watching world – a Gospel that Tisby does not understand.
Men such as Tisby remind one of the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant. Just as the servant was forgiven an unpayable debt that he owed the king, yet demanded the pittance that his fellow servant owed him, so Tisby demands of white people, “Pay what you owe” (Matthew 18:28), without regard to the infinitely greater sin debt he owes to God. What happens to unforgiving men like him? On the Last Day, Jesus will say, “You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me. And should not you have had mercy on your fellow servant, as I had mercy on you” (Matthew 18:32b-33)? And in his anger Jesus will deliver him to the jailers until he can pay his debt, a debt that he will never be able to pay back, because he did not forgive his brother from his heart (Matthew 18:34-35).
In his seminal work, Black Theology & Black Power, Cone writes the following, which sheds significant light on Tisby’s thinking in this area:
“Reconciliation on white racist terms is impossible, since it would crush the dignity of black people. Under these conditions blacks must treasure their hostility, bringing it fully into consciousness as an irreducible quality of their identity. If white people insist on laying the ground rules for reconciliation, which can only mean black people denying the beauty of their blackness, then black people must do everything within their power to destroy the white thing. Black people can only speak of reconciliation when the black community is permitted to do its thing.”5
James Cone
Such repulsive, Gospel-denying venom from someone who Tisby calls a “theological legend” is fully apparent in his own writing – a spirit a bitterness and hostility that is antithetical to Christ’s message of reconciliation. True reconciliation only happens on God’s terms, not on the terms of racial tribalism, whether white or black.
During his ministry, Jesus warned us about men like Jemar Tisby. “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will recognize them by their fruits.” (Matthew 7:15-16a). Tisby comes into the church under the pretense of bringing racial reconciliation and greater unity. This is a worthy and biblical goal. Christ came and died “that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility” (Ephesians 2:15b-16). We have unity in Christ, yet due to our sin, our unity is imperfect, yet Tisby, through his bitter, unforgiving spirit, has proven time and time again that he is not an agent of unity, but a sower of division in the body of Christ, giving forth bad fruit instead of good. May we reject false teachers like him who “cause division and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that we have been taught” (Romans 16:17) and uphold godly men like Brandt Jean who model the true forgiveness and reconciliation that is found in Jesus.
Those interested in exploring this topic in greater depth should consult the following resources:
- Jemar Tisby, Do You Do Well to be Angry? by Grayson Gilbert (For those with time restraints, this is the best resource to examine.)
- Kyle and Jemar Have Revealed Who They Are, We Should Believe Them by YouTuber AD Robles (Fair warning; this one gets very heated.)
- Botham Jean, Amber Guyger Trial from CrossPolitic (Podcast link, begins at 47:33)
- When Forgiveness Isn’t Woke Enough from the Just Thinking podcast
- The jury consisted of eight women and four men. Including four alternates, there were seven blacks, five non-black people of color, and four whites. (PDF link)
- PDF link
- Evidence of racism and heresy can be seen here, here, here, and here.
- Evidence of non-whites rejoicing in this can be seen here, here, and here. Push-back against Tisby specifically can be seen here, here, and here.
- James Cone, Black Theology & Black Power (1969; repr. Maryknoll, NY: Orbid Books, 2018), 163-164.