More on Truth's Table

The other day I noted:

I also just started a book based on a podcast by three black women entitled Truth's Table, telling things through a black Christian women lens. So far, it is a good way to get a different perspective of things, even if I might not agree with the specific Christian views of the women in particular. This might be a good time just to let them express their own vision.

I finished the book, which is a collection of topics of life, love, and liberation by the three hosts (each have certain chapters) of that podcast. The book is not really (suffice to say) meant for me, namely, a white non-Christian male. 

Nonetheless, it has an educational value, and I am (mostly) inclined to let them see things in through their own ways. I don't want to "mansplain" (as someone accused me of online when she posted a comment that I thought could be read to partially refute what I said; I disagree though it might have been pedantic -- a fault of me at times) or need to be "decolonized" or something.  And, I am not really being sarcastic though maybe a tinge. 

A few quick things.  The women here are firm believers (one is listed as a "public theologian" and another a "senior pastor"and another wrote, e.g., a chapter on "disciplining the church" as a self-corrective.  The book, more chapters than others, has Christian references and analysis, including doctrinal (there is even a passing shot at Gnosticism) that let's say are not my general cup of tea. A little of that goes a long way for me.  

I'm not really going to spend time here to refute that here though again that isn't for me.  More general themes, including their clearly negative experiences with white churches ("white" here including leadership of churches with significant non-white membership), interest me more.  

The book has some strong anti-white vibes at some points.  Again, so be it, given the viewpoint.  But, at some point, I did say -- wait, isn't Christianity for all peoples?  There are a few points where a major draw of the religion is as much as its non-white origins in Palestine as any number of doctrinal points.  (I find the basic sacrificial aspects rather outdated; I favor if anything the "self-knowledge" approach swatted aside at one point).  

One thing that I find ironic regarding a book with a clearly feminine sentiment (black women Christian to me is the clear order here) is support of a religion that is framed in such masculine ways.  A creator God that is framed as "He" to me is just ridiculous at some point, even if logically in the context of the times back then.  The whole "son" bit also bothers me and the Twelve are all men too, even if (though some translations make this harder to catch) "apostles" is sometimes used broadly to apply to women.

At some point, the doctrinal stuff and to me repetition (one author to me did a better job of hitting to the core of the matter) that could have been condensed better (and it was somewhat doctrinaire, not written in down to earth ways) led the book to be somewhat tedious. 

The anti-white stuff at times also seemed heavy-handed.  But, and I'm not handwaving here, I firmly am aware that they are speaking with a heavy degree of compensating for the realities of power here. I still think the truth is a bit over.

Overall, I was glad to read the book.  It provided some good insights and to the degree I disagree (and each were generally of a liberal mindset, even if one chapter's reproductive freedom principles were framed somewhat opaquely), I should read more in that respect.  I readily admit that reading just plain conservative material is not something I do.