“If a man say, I love God, and hateth his
brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath
seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?” (1 John 4:20)
The sin of racism,
the sin of hating others, belittling them, and making fun of them
because of their race is a great evil, and should be regarded as
satanic behavior. However, when racists twist God’s Word, and try to
use the Bible to sanction and justify their evil behavior every
Christian has a responsibility to condemn and denounce their false
doctrine, lest they bring shame to the name of Christ.
CAIN
I have heard
racists twist the words of Genesis 4:15, “And the LORD set a mark upon
Cain, lest any finding him should kill him,” by claiming that God
turned Cain black. However, the Bible says no such thing! Those who
make such claims are shamelessly reading their own bigotry into the
text, while ignoring what the words actually say. In fact, when I
pointed out that the Bible does not tell us what color the mark was,
one man brushed aside what I said by claiming that the only color of
ink they had back then was black, as if God used ink. [That comment
caused the word “stupid” to go through my mind.] When I pointed out
that the words “set a mark upon” indicate that the background color was
a different color than the mark, that statement was also brushed aside.
Since the Bible
says nothing about the color of the mark, those who assume that the
mark was black are adding to what the Bible says, and when they pass
that addition off as the Word of God, they are lying in God’s name
(Proverbs 30:6). The same holds true for the claim that the mark
consisted of skin color, or that it was hereditary. The mark could have
been a red checkmark for all we know, and there is nothing in the Bible
about it being hereditary. [Compare Proverbs 30:6 with Revelation 21:8]
HAM
Another passage of
Scripture that is twisted to support racism is the story of Ham’s
mockery of Noah.
“And
Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard: And he drank
of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. And
Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told
his two brethren without. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid
it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the
nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw
not their father’s nakedness. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew
what his younger son had done unto him. And he said, Cursed be Canaan;
a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. And he said,
Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. God
shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and
Canaan shall be his servant” (Genesis 9:20-27).
Those who twist
that section of Scripture to support racism usually assume that the
curse was upon Ham, that the curse made his skin black, and that the
phrase “a servant of servants shall he be” justifies enslaving his
descendants. However, the Bible says no such thing! At the same time,
they ignore the fact that the nations of Babylon, Assyria, Egypt, and
Canaan are descended from Ham, and that those nations are part of the
white race, not the Negro race. [In the Bible, Egypt is called the
“land of Ham,” Nineveh is called the “land of Nimrod,” and we are told
that Nimrod (Ham’s grandson) founded Babel. Psalm 106:22, Psalm
105:23,27, Psalm 78:51, 1Chronicles 4:40, Micah 5:6, Genesis 10:9-11.]
Furthermore, it is
ridiculous to assume that the grandchildren of Noah only married their
own brothers and sisters, never cousins. And, if the grandchildren of
Noah married cousins, there is no way that each of Noah’s sons could
have fathered a separate race. Therefore, it is far more realistic to
believe that we are all descended in some way from all three of Noah’s
sons, than to claim that they each fathered a different race. After
all, Noah’s sons were all living at the same place when he planted his
vineyard, there was no reason for their children not to intermarry, and
physical attraction is not about to limit itself. Moreover, we know
that there was intermarriage after the time of Noah. Hagar was an
Egyptian, as was the wife of her son Ishmael, making the children of
Ishmael three quarters Hamite (Genesis 21:21). In fact, because of such
intermarriage the Hebrew language is part of the Hamito-Semitic family
of languages. And, it was that family of languages that produced the
alphabet.
In order to justify
their bigotry, racists sometimes claim that Ham’s name (which means
heat, hot, or brown) is proof that he was brown. Again, they
conveniently forget that Noah never placed a curse upon Ham, that the
Bible says nothing about the color of his skin, and that he could have
been given that name because he was born on a hot day, or for a dozen
other reasons.
Although Canaan was the one who actually received Noah’s curse, his
descendants settled in the area that later became Israel and Lebanon.
Those living in Lebanon were known to the ancient world as Phoenicians,
and ships from their port city of Tyre carried trade goods throughout
the Mediterranean world (2Samuel 24:7). They established a colony in
Tunisia, which in turn established colonies in Spain, and their ships
may have even reached England. At any rate, they were, and are, white
people. In fact, the well-known actor Danny Thomas is Lebanese.
[Note: In a way, the curse
directed at Canaan was fulfilled when some of his descendants were made
“hewers of wood and drawers of water” Joshua 9:21-27.]
THE
WOMAN OF CANAAN
A third passage of Scripture that is twisted to
support racism has to do with the words of Christ to the woman of
Canaan.
“Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and
Sidon. And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and
cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my
daughter is grievously vexed with a devil. But he answered her not a
word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away;
for she crieth after us. But he answered and said, I am not sent but
unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Then came she and
worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. But he answered and said, It is
not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs. And she
said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their
masters’ table. Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great
is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was
made whole from that very hour” (Matthew 15:21-28).
Those who claim that Jesus spoke to this woman in the way that He did
because she was black are slandering Christ. If they would simply look
at what the Bible says, they would learn that she was an idolater (not
one of the “children”), and therefore not entitled to even come to God
in prayer. The reference to Tyre and Sidon tells us that Jesus was in
or near Lebanon, and the fact that she is called “a woman of Canaan”
makes it clear that she was Lebanese. Therefore, Jesus would have been
deceiving both her and us if He had simply given her what she wanted
without making it clear that she had no right to expect anything from
God. Furthermore, since the Jews often held idolaters in contempt, she
may have come to Christ expecting Him to say the things that He said,
and He may have gone along with it in order to bring out her faith. At
any rate, the claim that she was a black woman is false.
SLAVERY
Because those who twist Scripture to support racism
were originally trying to justify slavery, they sometimes appeal to the
fact that the Bible does not explicitly condemn slavery. However, what
they fail to understand is that slavery like war, disease, and polygamy
is only in the world because of sin. Just as no one should want war or
disease simply because they are a divine judgement on sin, no one
should want to see people enslaved.
Therefore, when the Bible tells slaves to obey their
masters, it is not because slavery is good, but because God did not
want the slaves that believed to be persecuted for their faith.
Likewise, He did not want them to turn their masters against the faith,
or conduct themselves in a way that would cause slave owners to try to
stamp out Christianity among their slaves, or keep them from spreading
their faith. Nevertheless, whenever Christianity has become the
dominant religion, slavery has been abolished.
Finally, read the following passage carefully, and
ask yourself if it sheds any light on the question of why slavery led
to an outpouring of God’s wrath on both sides during the American civil
war.
“Thou
shalt neither vex a stranger, nor oppress him: for ye were strangers in
the land of Egypt. Ye shall not afflict any widow, or fatherless child.
If thou afflict them in any wise, and they cry at all unto me, I will
surely hear their cry; And my wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you
with the sword; and your wives shall be widows, and your children
fatherless” (Exodus 22:21-24).
[Note: God law takes such a strong
stand against the slave trade, that Joseph’s brothers would have been
put to death had they been living under the law of Moses (Exodus 21:16,
1Timothy 1:10).]
CONCLUSION
The words, “All
liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and
brimstone” are God’s word of warning to all who lie in His name
(Revelation 21:8). And, the words, “Woe unto them that call evil good,
and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness;
that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter” are His warning to all
who twist His Word to justify their sin (Isaiah 5:20).