Mohler: The Central Tragedy of this Case Remains—Trayvon Martin Belongs to Us All

I just read the article, and I disagree with his perspective in making Trayvon Martin sound like an innocent little boy who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. He seems to agree that Trayvon’s death was racially motivated, which is hooey, hokum, and blarney. Martin was not a sweet little boy just out buying Skittles. His Twitter name was NO_LIMIT_NIGGA and his tweets- laced with obscenities and vulgarities- give a very different picture, along with pictures of him smoking dope and wielding a gun.

Race had nothing to do with this incident until the media got involved- while Zimmerman shouldn’t have followed Martin, Martin shouldn’t have jumped on him and tried to pummel Zimmerman into the pavement.

If you listen to the most recent interview with Rachel Jeantel, in her phone conversation with Trayvon, she suggested that the guy who was following him (Zimmerman) might be a rapist. So why did Trayvon lie in wait to attack Zimmerman? Could it be because Trayvon thought Zimmerman was gay?

I think painting this as a racially motivated crime in any way is irresponsible.

I agree that we should be compassionate- a young man’s soul has gone into eternity, most likely a Christless one. Two families are grieving, and a nation has been, yet again, divided unnecessarily.

But let’s not romanticize or candy coat what happened. Black or white or Venusian, anyone who attacks another person who is carrying a firearm is likely to get shot.

[Pastor Doug H]

The central tragedy is very simply how everything is made into a political issue, for political gain. The local law enforcement and local prosecutor did not see any reason to charge Zimmerman with anything. The FBI’s report said there was no element of racial hatred. Instead from Washington to Tallahassee (Ds & Rs) decided to score political points.

The verdict did not appease this desire, so now the the top law enforcement in the nation is setting up a website to collect information on Zimmerman’s hatred of blacks http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/07/feds-want-zimmerman-any-way-they-c… .

I would submit to you as Christians we need to have the discussion amongst church leadership and with our congregations how to respond to a government that will not stop until it gets its way. The topics are plentiful, gay-marriage, social justice vs committing ourselves to a gracious God, 2 Peter 2:3-3, what the works worthy of repentance look like…

I personally feel that Mohler and others have missed the central issue and that is “we the people vs the government” and how we as Christians need to respond accordingly.

I can see how Peter would have wanted us to revolt against the US government…because the US government has murdered Christians in organized pogroms, lit them on fire to light up their garden parties, and thrown them into hand-to-hand combat with wild animals.

The central tragedy is that a boy was killed. Whether or not Zimmerman was guilty….Trayvon did not deserve to die when he left home to get a snack. Zimmerman’s aggressive pursuit caused Trayvon to attack him. Trayvon’s attack caused Zimmerman to shoot him. But why did a 17 year old boy need to die to test gun rights, racial tensions, and the “liberal media”?

How on earth do you come to the conclusion that the tragedy is that the situation was politicized? I still value human life a little more than that.

First of all, I want to thank everyone who has contributed comments. Thoughtful, godly, and respectful comments from many different point of view on a very timely subject!f Well done and Christ honoring!!

In my humble opinion, Mohler’s mistake comes from his statement that the verdict in the Zimmerman case has divided our nation. This is a very common mistake. The verdict has not divided us, the verdict has revealed the deep divide that already exists.

Perhaps, if we as servants of the gospel can begin with this truth: we minister the Gospel in a culture that is vastly different from a biblical view of the sanctification of saints. Perhaps then, we can both 1) be a people who emphasize personal responsiblity for our actions (one side of this debate) as well as 2) compassionately try to walk beside those to whom may minister, regardless of their heritage (Mohler’s side of the debate)

At least, we could begin here.

Sure, but again, it’s really the reactions of outsiders that are demonstrating this problem, not the case itself.

Yes, but isn’t that enough reason to realize that pontificating about who was really to blame won’t accomplish much of anything? At this point, whatever else, the verdict is in. It’s time to deal with those left.

To use your analogy, what Mohler is doing is similar to attempting to give people comfort about the eternal state of someone that everyone knows demonstrated evidence that they did not know God, but that evidence is being glossed over. When there is objection to that glossing, one of the other mourners is telling us we are missing the big point that people need comfort and healing and confidence that God saves sinners, even though the rest of the mourners know that this sinner by all accounts had no use for God, so such comfort is irrelevant, and if based on false information, is not really helpful.

Still, there is such a thing as tactful presentation. In a funeral of someone like you cite, you can avoid putting them in Heaven, but still say something like, “If __________ were here today, ______ would want you to know…” and then preach the gospel. It’s not the time to say “Hell can’t burn hot enough,” or to rehearse their flaws. That’s not glossing over. That’s tact.

What would be accomplished if Mohler had said, “The photos of Trayvon Martin shown to the world show a normal, happy, 17-year-old boy. A boy who had been living with his mother, but had been sent to be with his father after an incident in school. BUT, those photos glossed over the HARSH REALITY…” I’ll tell you- you would have a bunch of affluent American Christians confirmed in their sense of superiority- “There are people out there who are a threat, a menace. Punk had it coming…”

I ask you- is there no room for us to look at people like TM with a measure of compassion? I mean, sensations beyond pity, a Godly sorrow that will drive you to invest meaningfully and try to make a difference? Mohler didn’t gloss over anything. He chose to emphasize the parts that were both true and would evoke something we could identify with, regardless of our skin color and so on. It might be somewhat selective, yes- but it seems to me the kind of selectiveness that is very much compatible with Philippians 4:8.

Greg, what would be accomplished if Mohler had actually reported the truth instead of the distortions the media has been feeding us?

His overall point - there needs to be some solution to the racial division in America - is not what anyone here is objecting to.

That they are objecting to is his apparent willingness to perpetrate the myths that are being built up around the case.

Don, to repeat/build on what I said in my reply to Dave Barnhart, sensitive, selected, and tactful communication is not the same as perpetrating myths. Plenty of other sources are dispensing “the facts.” Why does Mohler need to duplicate them? On the other hand, few are calling for the kind of response he is. And again, getting tied up in the accusation of apparent “media conspiracy” that Albert Mohler is now complicit in ::rolleyes:: is a convenient way to breeze by the important application he is making- an application that needs to be made, no matter what Trayvon Martin’s Twitter handle was.

Lambasting Mohler for perpetrating myths is a dubious exercise. There are only two possible “myths” possible in that article that I can find.

One is about whether Zimmerman was “ordered” to stop pursuit. Whether it was an order and whether 911 operators can give orders is debatable I suppose but if I was told that by a 911 operator, I would see it as an order. I think most of us would. At any rate, it is a gray area.

Second, there is the positive portrayal of Martin. There are clearly two sides to that too. Some seem to want to focus on the negative (the twitter handle, drugs and so on). But teenagers do have problems and Martin did too. I would not want people writing off my children just because they got into some trouble.

Disagree with Mohler if you want. But it is going too far to accusing him of parroting myths. I think it is ungracious.

GregH, the myth he is perpetrating—or if not perpetrating, then at least not refuting—is that race has been proven to have anything at all to do with this incident.

[Greg Linscott]

Don, to repeat/build on what I said in my reply to Dave Barnhart, sensitive, selected, and tactful communication is not the same as perpetrating myths. Plenty of other sources are dispensing “the facts.” Why does Mohler need to duplicate them?

Come on, Greg. Everyone who makes any statements on this issue should do everything they can to report the facts accurately, i.e., to tell the truth. I don’t have any problem with Mohler’s thesis as far as I understand it. But he put himself in a fairly indefensible position by making inaccurate (or false) statements.

But he put himself in a fairly indefensible position by making inaccurate (or false) statements.

What statements do you understand to be blatantly false?

Don Johnson, what are these inaccurate statements?

[Greg Long]

GregH, the myth he is perpetrating—or if not perpetrating, then at least not refuting—is that race has been proven to have anything at all to do with this incident.

Again, a highly debatable issue and for sure one that the black community would differ with you on. I also know that neither side can prove their point unless they can find a way to read Zimmerman’s mind. And race seems to have been an issue in Martin’s mind if not Zimmerman.

[GregH]

[Greg Long]

GregH, the myth he is perpetrating—or if not perpetrating, then at least not refuting—is that race has been proven to have anything at all to do with this incident.

Again, a highly debatable issue and for sure one that the black community would differ with you on. I also know that neither side can prove their point unless they can find a way to read Zimmerman’s mind. And race seems to have been an issue in Martin’s mind if not Zimmerman.

None of those making an issue of race are decrying Martin’s racism…just what they perceive to be (by reading his mind) Zimmerman’s racism!

Come one now. Let’s be honest here. How many of you would even care about the outcome of this trial, if Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman were both Caucasian males from the state of Texas? I doubt there would be many comments on here from most of you. Definitely none from Greg trying to persuade us that Trayvon Martin belongs to all of us, and how we need to take ownership of Trayvon’s death.

If anything, this whole thread would have been focused on the issue of second amendment rights, and the right to defend ourselves from an attacker- Which I am sure most of you would have been supporters of.

[christian cerna]

Come one now. Let’s be honest here. How many of you would even care about the outcome of this trial, if Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman were both Caucasian males from the state of Texas?

Not the outcome of the trial. Mohler advanced a thesis but many here think he did so on the basis of factual errors/falsehoods/mistakes — you pick the descriptor.