Racism and the importance and necessity of forgiveness

I originally wrote this a couple of days after the events in Charolettsville, Va. (Aug 2017). I was not going to publish it on this blog in part because there were many others raising good and thoughtful points. However, since the media seems to have only gone further over the top in trying to fuel the flames of division, and the insanity has continued and even escalated; I felt it was time to throw in my 2 cents. 

There is much anger and confusion over *these events. A large part of the problem is several on each side of this event (conflict) are accusing the other side of attitudes or actions (fueled by the media, "protesters" and various "gatekeepers") of guilt by association... as if merely being a certain race somehow means you are a bad person or a racist. This assertion is totally based on identity, the essence of *identity politics. It has nothing to do with the actual conduct of a given individual. It is assigning guilt by association.

For example, does anyone think it is fair to be looked upon or treated like a criminal (in the case of a "black" person or another person "of color") or as a racist (in the case of a "white" person) because a small percentage within a given "group" are criminals or racists (whether in the past or the present)? 

The unfortunate reality is bad people within "our group" may unfairly and poorly reflect on us, but this doesn't automatically mean we hold the same views or treat others in the same way as those actually guilty of wrongdoing. Guilt by association is all too common with how different groups view one another today - and I would suggest their are deliberate attempts to promote this (mainly be the news media, but also in sports and other arenas) and create even greater division. This is the essence of stereotyping. 

I am placing these various identities in "quotes" because this is the unfortunate state of things. Group identities have wrongly been imposed on various groups by others (whether within or outside of our "group"). Identity politics in truth is divisive; I would argue by design. And unfortunately it appears to be a primary tool of those who use it [such as the media and supporters of these different groups] to do exactly that, create division. Just labeling oneself (or being labeled) as a white this or a black that separates/divides instead of unifies.

We may be different in certain superficial ways but the reality is we are all humans created in the image of God and as has been said, we all bleed the same red blood. So inherently, by Gods design, the most important, common, and fundamental things about us are far more significant (primary, not secondary) than the differences. 

Is it fair to be stereotyped? I think we can all agree it is not. The black man has all too often been suspected of wrongdoing merely for being black. This is wrong. No one (regardless of what "group" or "race" we are) wishes to be accused of something merely because of the "group" we are "in" or because of the actions of others within "our" group. All of us have experienced being accused of something we are not guilty of merely because we are in a certain group i.e. guilt by association. No one likes it and rightfully so.

Denouncing wrongs and taking action

So how can we best address this? Is complaining or striking out in anger with accusations, verbal attacks, or destructive behavior the solution? I trust everyone can agree, this is not the solution. Martin Luther King Jr., a primary figure in the civil rights movement and the movement as a whole did not advocate violence.

Some thoughts:

We must denounce the wrongdoing from within our own "group" in the clearest and strongest terms. For sake of this discussion and some examples, the "white man" must clearly denounce racism. There is never a justification for it, ever. For the "black man" he must clearly denounce the crimes of gang violence or other things a black man is all too often falsely associated with merely by virtue of his color/race. To not do so by either could communicate we condone harmful behavior by individuals within "our group." And if we condone it, we in effect are agreeing with it. 

 

Racism is racism...crime is crime regardless of who's involved or what reasons are given to justify it. Harm is done irregardless of the reasons. It also does not matter who promotes or condones it. It is wrong and should be clearly called out when and where appropriate by those within the accused group.  The universal problem is we are quick to see inconsistencies in "someone else's group" and slow to see it in our own. 

The other way to separate ourselves from the things we are falsely accused of is to prove by our actions, we are wrongfully accused. If we wish to not be falsely accused of certain views or behaviors, we must be careful not to conduct ourselves in a way that might associate us with the bad elements within "our group" i.e. our own race. 

For example, though this may not at all be the reason we behave a certain way and indeed be unfair, it would likely not be wise to fly a confederate flag in our front yard or place one in the back window of our truck or drive around blasting "gangsta" rap, flashing "gangsta" signs and wearing "gangsta" paraphernalia (I am using more extreme examples to make the point clear). These things send out a signal to others that we may hold to views, attitudes, and behavior that are actually not ours. Fair? Maybe, maybe not. Some might simply like rap music or the history that the Confederate flag represents (those quick to assume the worst and racists in general [on both sides] would likely disagree). 

We may participate in a certain behavior (though not likely, which is exactly my point... it's not likely) because we are used to it or comfortable with it culturally. It's what we know and grew up with. So our participation may be innocent in this sense. Then we are surprised by the reaction we experience when we conduct ourselves in ways we are familiar with that have no racial motive for us personally. They were simply a part of our culture growing up. When we are mistreated for such behavior, we may grow angry (where there previously was none) at the false accusation and began to hate our attackers. This is a vicious and self-feeding contributor to racial tension when there was no racial motive in the beginning. 

Nevertheless, if our goal is to avoid being wrongly associated with or accused of certain views or attitudes, even though it may be unintentional by us, we may wish to consider how we may play a part (no matter how unintentional) in contributing to any harassment, mislabeling and mistreatment. 

We have a choice. We can react with anger or decide to disassociate ourselves with those things that cause us to be viewed wrongly. 

Granted, you may rightly feel it is wrong to be accused of holding a certain view because of what may be very innocent (possibly unconscious) behavior patterns and that it's the responsibility of others to figure it out. I tend to feel if they misread me, it's their problem, not mine. But the reality is if we wish to live in harmony and understanding we can make a difference and play a role as well, even if we are perfectly innocent. As believers, we are not only offended but instructed to be mindful of conduct that might be offensive to others even if in itself is not wrong. 

Otherwise, the other option is to simply not care what others think, which is not necessarily a bad thing but might not be the most loving and considerate thing either. To use a biblical example, if eating meat sacrificed to idols offends my brother, don't eat it. Bottom line? No one wishes to be viewed with suspicion regardless of what group someone tries to put you in but the reality is it happens. So how do we respond?

My personal view is if someone makes an incorrect assessment of me I simply prove them wrong by my words and actions i.e. I don't give them reason to believe their view (prejudice) is correct (there are always instances where no matter what we do, we will still be falsely accused or mistreated, however. Christ would be an example). If some are so close-minded they aren't willing to see the truth, I move on and pray for them.  I have found trying to "prove" my position is often pointless. People are pretty vested and locked into their views unfortunately because it's tied so strongly to their personal identity. 

I don't believe we are obligated to persuade someone who is close-minded nor should we feel sorry for ourselves and allow ourselves to be offended if and when rejected by others. Blaming ourselves is also counterproductive. I may feel sorry for them and their being close-minded, but that is now their problem. I am always willing to talk if someone is open, however. But if not, there is nothing I can do other than pray. Yes, we are called to love our enemies but we are also told not to cast our pearls before swine (i.e. do not offer to someone something they don't appreciate/value or have an interest in receiving). 

Peer pressure and identity

We also may actually need to think about changes that could cause us to be accused by our peers of being an "Uncle Tom" or a "n*gger lover".  Unfortunately, this happens all too often and is a big reason people don't stand up. Being accepted by our peers can have a very strong hold on us which is a big problem for some who don't have a strong (or any) sense of identity and their value in Christ. 

As believers, this should not be difficult however as our identity is rooted in Christ and not a particular group. The stronger we identify with Christ the less we need to identify with anything or anyone else. To say it practically I am beloved by God first, I am an American second, a husband or father, a [your occupation] and a [your race...black, white, Asian, brown person etc] last, in that order. Flipping this order is a great part of the reason for so much tension today. The further we get away from God as a society the more we tend to flip this. 

Note race must be last, not first. If this is a problem for you, it reveals how much your identity is rooted in something other than Christ. Race will be a minor aspect of who we are if we have a strong identity elsewhere. As the saying goes we need to be color blind. And for right now, emphasizing our race (regardless of who's doing it) and seeing everything through racial glasses is the least helpful thing we can be doing, particularly now with all the tension and "race bating" that goes on by many of the "gatekeepers" i.e. media, "higher education," politicians, entertainment, sports and other so-called "leaders" etc.   

Did white people in the past mistreat the black man/women? Yes. As a white man I denounce this mistreatment in no uncertain terms. This is what I can and should do. 

However to hold me responsible for the wrongs of someone in the past who just happened to be of the same race is not the fault of those who were not there and did not participate in that behavior. This would be the same as saying all Germans today are Nazi's because Hitler, who live over 70 years ago, was German. Being connected by nationality or race does not mean I am connected in attitude, view or action of those criminals who happened to be the same nationality or race as me. We each are responsible for our own actions and attitudes and should be (and will be one day) accountable for them, not those of others.

Racism is not my problem

What about racism? Is it unique to any one group? Is it not an issue with any group and exists in varying degrees within all ethnic groups. If so (and I believe it is), to decry one form of racism and not others is hypocritical. If it is wrong for one group, is it not wrong for other groups... for ALL groups, regardless of who that might be, in what form it might take or when and where it happens (happened)?

Some believe racism does not exist within their own group but only in others. Is this true? Is there not racism within groups of all kinds? If so, why do we tolerate (or not call out) racism among some but not others? Are some forms of racism ok, while others are not? Of course not. 

Now let's take it a step further. What if you are accused of being a racist by another who you know happens to be racist themself (someone from "another" group), what would you think, how would you feel? Would you be able to hear or accept their accusation or criticism? Should you hear it?

I am not giving answers at the moment or justifying any form of racism in asking, I am simply raising questions for us to ponder. Questions I don't presently hear discussed in all the current outrage being expressed these days. Without discussion, there will be no understanding of the grievances felt by others regardless of which "side" one sees themselves on. This is a time to look in the mirror, not point fingers. If we don't this country will continue to be torn apart and we will all suffer. I would suggest none of us (not necessarily individually but the various groups) are without guilt.

The simple reality is we all prefer hanging with those most like us, whether that be by age, gender, hobby interests, etc. It is more comfortable. Is this a kind of racism? I am not saying it is or isn't, I am just pointing out this is common with *all groups, including you and I. When Christ said to love our neighbor as ourselves, this also means treating others like you would naturally if they were someone who is just like you, whether they actually are or not. He didn't say love your neighbors if they are like you (look like you, act like you, have a similar background, tastes, and culture like you with the same interests as you, etc) and avoid those who aren't. 

As a side note I have had two long term accountability partners in my life that span 20 years. I had virtually nothing in common with either of them socially, historically or culturally. Both of them came from a different time in our culture (one was older and one younger, one was of Mexican decent (his parents were from Mexico) and a former Marine and I was a former "child of the 60's" who called his kind "jarheads" and "spics" when I was a young stupid kid) but what we did have in common which created the absolute strongest bond and totally nullified any of that was our mutual desire to know and honor God and our love for Jesus. Because that was our main connection, it was so strong it overroad everything else. As a result we actually came to enjoy each other socially. Image that!

Some answers to this current issue of racism.

1. Racism is a form of hatred of our fellow man/women and is wrong and dangerous!

2. To excuse your own hatred and racism because the one you hate is a racist doesn't justify yours and overrule point 1. You can and should hate racism but that doesn't justify hating another person because of their race. Racism is wrong, no matter who expresses it or what reason is given. As my dad used to always tell me "two wrongs don't make a right."

3. To say racism is present only in one particular race is also dangerous. I raise this because this is more common than is currently acknowledged. This double standard fuels resentment by whoever comes up on the short end. In some ways it may be more dangerous because it allows someone to play the victim and hide behind their own racism, all the while pretending to be virtuous in their hate and anger against another person's racism (as if theirs doesn't exist or is justified because it's directed at the racism of others). It must be called out on all sides. Racism is racism. It doesn't matter who participates or why. All of it is wrong.


Two things needed to diffuse the hate and anger of racism

Now there is one major problem with everything I have said so far. Not that I think it's untrue but that it focuses only on one side of the problem i.e. the offense. There is an entirely different side to this. Maybe the most important side. That is forgiveness? Where does that come into all this? 

There are two things needed to properly address racism. One is when you are guilty, to fully acknowledge the wrong, hurt and suffering it causes (or has caused) i.e. seek forgiveness when and where necessary and appropriate and denounce and abandon it if and when guilty. This is critical and often lacking (if someone isn't personally a racist they, of course, should not apologize for being one, simply because they aren't; but it is certainly appropriate to express regret and sorrow for the racism of others i.e. for them being mistreated (I am not talking about slavery. Though unfortunate and not to be made light of, that is history. It is not the present experience of most today...at least not in its past form. I am talking about present mistreatment, which is what I have been addressing so far). 

But in addition to acknowledging mistreatment of others, without forgiveness by those who have been wronged, healing can never occur and nothing will be resolved. To say it another way, you can't control the behavior of others, but you can control your own attitude, outlook, and how you handle being mistreated. 

Sadly some racists will never acknowledge their wrongdoing. However those offended can still do something. If we are believers we can keep it from going beyond ourselves and passing it along, thereby helping prevent its spreading and continuing the damage. This may seem unfair, but much in this broken world is and God promises the scales of justice will one day be balanced. Certainly, the attitude of Christ in his mistreatment would be our example here e.g. "Father forgive them for they do not know what they do."

Why is forgiveness is more critical 

Because EVERYONE offends and everyone is offended at one time or another. Certainly, some are more offended than others (no one, however, was more mistreated than Christ himself). At some point, there not only needs to be a full and clear admission of wrongdoing but also forgiveness by those wronged or there will only be ongoing hatred and destruction; not just to others but to ourselves and those around us. 

Addressing offenses is so critical the bible calls both parties to address it even if or when the other party does not.

1.     The offender is called to ask for forgiveness whether the offended grants it or not.

And

2.     The offended are called to forgive whether the offender asks for it or not.

Both are accountable to do their part regardless of what the other party does.  

What is the significance of this dual responsibility? The only one who can actually cut the fuse of hatred is the one offended. Why is this? Is it because the offender has no responsibility? No, he/she is totally responsible and will be held accountable for their actions one day; if not now certainly in eternity. The unfortunate reality is the offender may never acknowledge their wrongdoing and often don't. Again, we can't control the behavior of others, we can only control our own conduct, attitude, and outlook.

What do we do then? Just seethe in our hatred? Because we all sin and offenses are unfortunately part of living in a broken world, at some point we have to forgive or our bitterness will destroy us. We are instructed to let no root of bitterness take hold (Hebrews 12:15) as it will not only destroy us but also those around us we are responsible for and called to love. Offenses are the unfortunate fruit of our rebellion against God himself. Ultimately, the only thing that prevents sin from "landing," taking root, and destroying others is the forgiveness of those offended.

And this is rooted and grounded in Christ himself. He did what was necessary to bring forgiveness to all who will accept it by taking on himself the consequences of all offenses (our own and that of others) so they are no longer held against us (assuming we accept his offer). And in so doing he even asked for the forgiveness of those who killed him...who committed the ultimate oppression against him if you will.  

We are also cautioned that we will not be forgiven if we refuse to forgive others. I think this is saying if we can not find it in our heart to forgive it may be because we have not yet fully recognized our own offenses (toward God first as well as others) and accepted God's forgiveness for our wrongdoing. Forgiveness (being able to forgive others) is the fruit of being forgiven first. It is virtually (if not actually) impossible to forgive if we do not acknowledge our own offenses and accept forgiveness i.e. if there is no forgiveness for others we may be a person who hasn't yet accepted the forgiveness of God. If we believe there is no forgiveness for us, we will have no forgiveness in our hearts for others. 

But it goes even deeper. We can never be forgiven if we do not realize we need it first i.e. that we are all offenders. And our biggest offense is not doing right by God i.e. not giving God what he rightfully deserves...all honor and due respect. If you are offended for not being given proper respect, what about your not given him proper respect? 

Why does he deserve honor and respect? Because all we have and are is from him yet we act as if it is not.

He has done everything necessary to forgive our wrong of not acknowledging his rightful honor, by putting that offense on Christ on our behalf; for our sake. Yet, we reject his offer; the offer of ultimate and total forgiveness. This is an insult to the work and offer of Christ from which there is no remedy. Not because one is not available but because it is the only one that exists yet we reject it. 

To be forgiving, you must first be forgiven. 

For more discussion on being offended click here

For a discussion on why and how we must distinguish culture from race click here. 

______________________________________________________________

*Divide and conquer is also the strategy and approach communists have used to take over a standing political/economic system. i.e. creating class warfare such as the "bourgeois vs the working class" i.e. the "haves" vs the "have nots." This is a "divide and conquer" strategy. In this present conflict, attempts are being made to create division primarily along racial lines, not necessarily economic lines as is the Bolshevik revolution.  Some may feel use of this strategy i current racial tensions is speculative and only a theory but history tells us it is worth paying attention to.

Everyone prefers hanging with "their tribe" more than with another. Why is this? We all like what is familiar. It is what we are most comfortable with. Having to navigate new "territory" culturally is uncomfortable. I felt this most keenly when I moved from a church in Southern California where the average age was in the early 50's, to a church in central Texas, where the average age was in the early 30's (I was 61 at the time). I must confess it was awkward. During light chit chat, all the conversations were around songs, movies and the like that I was not familiar with. I totally didn't get the humorous references to a certain sitcom, movie or song. No longer having or watching TV the last 8 years didn't help. I was definitely "out of touch" and out of place. 

Should my new church have made a greater effort to include me and been more sensitive to my needs and interests? What I experienced wasn't a racial difference but a chronological one, but a difference none the less. One I didn't like. 

Is this wrong? Whether it is or not it's certainly common with everyone. We all hang with and talk about what we are most familiar with. Is this a kind of racism? It certainly includes some of the things we feel about other ethnic groups different from us. If it is similar to racism, aren't we are all guilty? What is it I am describing exactly? We call it prejudice. Prejudice isn't always racial, but racism is always an expression of prejudice. Interestingly, prejudice is defined as unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes formed beforehand, especially of a hostile nature, regarding an ethnic, racial, social, or religious group. So who decides where reasonable feelings and opinions cross over the unreasonable ones. The party on the other end of those attitudes feels them just the same. 

I concluded, by the way, our calling is to love others, not to be loved by others. I already knew this but had to apply it in a new and very practical way. So I focused on how to minister to my new church family. But it is easy to become and play the victim, though this clearly isn't God's call. It certainly has helped me to understand how others can fall into a victim mindset. It has also helped me to deepen my walk with God.

If you wish to hear more about what I learned through this process click here.

 

Values, culture and racism

Can certain elements within a culture be wrong? 

What drives and shapes a culture? 

Are racism and culture somehow connected?

Culture in great part is the fruit of a given groups values. What we value shapes the way we conduct our lives. For example if a people group values art, art will be a major part of their culture and history, or music, or colorful attire and so on. 

Over time a people ¹group with similar values will repeat certain conduct driven by those values which eventually becomes a pattern or part of that groups *culture. 

You may have heard of a sports team talking about how a new coach or players changed the culture of the team. In essence, they are saying there was a change in values i.e. what is most important.

Is there such a thing as ²right or wrong, good or bad culture? It depends. Many aspects of a culture are likely neutral and based on the unique talents, skills, environment, and resources distributed throughout a people group. However, the degree to which our values are aligned with God's values is the degree to which our culture will honor God. 

*NOTE: 

• A "group" can be identified by ethnicity, region, religion, the objective or goal of the group as a whole, vocation, world view or any other common yet distinguishing feature of that group. 
• Also in discussing "culture" I am including behavior patterns that can be moral, immoral or amoral.  

²I am also assuming there is real objective morality. Many today reject the notion of an absolute right and wrong i.e. there is no objective moral standard. This will not be a topic of this paper, but if you wish to explore this issue more click here and here.

Certain aspects of any culture are more God-honoring than others. Likewise, a culture that is less in line with God's values overall will be less honoring to God than one that is. Not because we say so, but because God does. 

God says, for example, loving others as we would have them love us is better - a good or higher value - than coveting or stealing our neighbor's property or taking our neighbor's life. 

A culture built on the former (on love) honors God and is therefore superior to one built on the latter (envy, revenge, disrespect, or destruction), not only morally but practically or functionally. Cultures that ignore these absolutes never reach the potential of the strengths or abilities of its people and can - and usually do - ultimately self destruct or languish over time. The reasons? It simply goes contrary to our individual as well the world's design. 

In a word, a culture built on God's value system aligns with how we are designed to function and generally flourishes long term over and against one that isn't. Good - i.e. God honoring - values cause a culture to flourish, bad - God dishonoring - one's cause it to languish. 

Culture in itself is not sacred. Only God and his standard of love is. To the degree a culture embraces God's standard, it becomes sacred. To the degree it doesn't, it is not.

A classic illustration is when a spiritual awakening occurs within a particular people group or community. Before such an event, a group might display certain cultural characteristics that are destructive and harmful such as a high murder or theft rate or a high level of substance-abuse, familial abuse or infidelity, etc. After such an event many of these kinds of behaviors either diminish considerably or may disappear altogether  -- while those qualities which are amoral usually remain. That group or community becomes kinder, more diligent in good deeds, often more stable and productive economically, and frequently experiences a significant reduction in crime. Such events have occurred to all kinds of people groups historically ³regardless of race or ethnicity of the group. For some examples click here.

³Race (ethnicity) is irrelevant to God as far as our being in a relationship with Him and aligned with His design. He has no racial preference. He neither regards nor discards ones race over other races. To use a biblical description God is "no respecter of persons" i.e. He has no regard for those distinguishing characteristics man values above and apart from Him, genetic or otherwise.

Culture and race are not one and the same

Though culture, values, and race are often very closely connected, they are distinct. One does not automatically or necessarily follow the other. 

To say it another way, we must identify and isolate bad behavior and distinguish it over against a supposed "bad group." There are no bad groups per se. A particular behavior, on the other hand, can be right or wrong within any given group. 

The standard is entirely different. Morality is the standard, not group identity. The focus should not be a group but on appropriate or inappropriate (i.e. moral or immoral, loving or selfish) behavior. Certain behavior is inappropriate no matter which people group takes part -- e.g. virtually everyone recognizes things such as lying, stealing or murder is wrong. They undermine trust. A society can't function well without trust or an overall morality, i.e. the recognition and execution of right and wrong behavior. 

If we do not distinguish the difference between morality and race, we fall into the common mistake made today that all people within a given group are bad because a particular behavior is common to that group e.g. all cops are bad because there are some bad cops or all Latinos are gangsters because some are gangsters, or all liberals or conservatives are bad because some are bad, etc. 

Many wish to tie race (or ethnic group) and culture together as if they are the same. They are not. Because of this, if someone questions a certain aspect (behavior) of a groups culture -- regardless of which group is questioning or being questioned -- some will cry racism when it has nothing to do with race i.e. it's not genetic its spiritual, moral and/or philosophical i.e. determined by their beliefs and values. (Keep in mind I am assuming there are absolutes i.e. there are things that are always right or wrong regardless of what group we are a part of e.g. loving our neighbor versus desiring or stealing our neighbor's stuff etc.)

For example, if theft or murder or familial abuse -- or whatever deficiency or vice common to a group -- is more statistically common within a certain people group, to raise this fact is not racial, it's moral. We are addressing a specific behavior, not an emotionally charged racial matter. 

Values that are contrary to who God is and who we are -- as God's image-bearers -- corrupt any group regardless of its ethnicity-color-race etc.

The objective standard of loving and honoring God has absolutely nothing to do with one's race or the color of one's skin and everything to do with the beliefs and disposition of one's heart. All peoples are equally able to display or not display God's majesty and beauty because all of us -- regardless of race or background etc -- are created in God's image.

To say it another way, there is nothing innately valuable or odious about any culture simply by virtue of ethnicity or skin color. Again, determining what is good or bad within a culture is measured by a totally different standard than ethnicity. 

Anything within a culture that seeks to honor God should be embraced and anything that dishonors him should be abandoned, regardless of what group these qualities are or are not present in, be that western, eastern, middle eastern, African, Latin, Asian or any other people group.

Western Culture

What made western culture flourish morally, in work ethic and materially/economically, etc over other cultures had nothing to do with the skin color of those in that region and everything to do with the influence of Gods values/standards/laws expressed in and through God's people (the church universal). This was a major foundation for the development of the European culture during the Byzantine period and later on in the Reformation.

Of course along with strengths were also vices. Vices and strengths are a part of all cultures -- all cultures, after all, are made up of broken people -- depending on how closely a people group adheres to God's direction or not -- vices are due to our rebellion from God's prescribed directions; virtues are due to being aligned with those directions. The issue becomes which culture is more virtuous with less vices. Again we must look to an absolute standard outside ourselves to determine this i.e. to God and his law of loving him with all we are and have and our neighbors as ourselves. 

What we call "Western Culture" in turn spread to North America via the pilgrims and separatists who had high regard for God's laws/design. This is not to say the church -- made up of fallen people -- was (or is) perfect but simply recognizing the nature and extent of it's more positive than negative influence.

To say it another way, if the racial makeup of the group that settled in and developed the west were Latin, Asian or Negro (I use Negro technically, not derogatorily) versus Caucasian, and had the same value system, the outcome would have been *exactly the same.

*There may be slight genetic variations within a given people group possibly resulting in a minor difference in how those values would have been carried out e.g. as a people group, Asians tend to have higher IQ's and are smaller in stature than Caucasians. However, how much of this is environmental is uncertain. Some say 50/50, others suggest difference %'s. Asians growing up in the same western Europe region with the exact same environmental factors such as geography, diet, and climate etc may in fact turn out exactly the same in group characteristics similar to Caucasians  i.e. larger in stature with a slightly lower IQ. On the other hand, Caucasians living in the locations Asians lived, with the same diet, my turn out smaller in stature with a higher IQ. For an interesting discussion on this particular point click here. 

However, overall, to say one race is superior to another or preferred over another merely by virtue of race or skin color i.e. genetics, -- which was also the Aryan argument used by the Nazi's -- is the essence of racism no matter who holds such sentiments and what color one's skin is i.e. it's just as wrong and destructive for one race as it is for another.

The unfortunate reality is racism is generally a part of every people group and not unique to Caucasians, contrary to increasingly common assertions by the progressive side of the political spectrum.

All groups display different innate qualities genetically that are strengths or weaknesses compared to other groups -- again how many environmental factors come into play, if at all, is uncertain. All groups are each unique and bring something unique and of value to the human family, that others don't. This simply makes them different, not necessarily superior or inferior overall. In this sense, diversity is good because it expresses a facet of God's image that other groups or individuals do not. So in this way this expression of uniqueness would be superior to those who do not display it simply because something others don't display is experienced and shared.

This is also true among siblings within a given family -- who are obviously of the same ethnicity. Certainly, no one would argue one child is more or less worthy of the parent's love and honor within a given family. But they will all have their own unique strengths or lack of them and make unique contributions. They all have their place and play a significant role in the family unit.

There can be superior cultures. There are never superior races.

To give higher regard to certain values and behavior over others is good and right. To give higher regard or respect to one race over another is not -- which is not the same as having a fond affection for the neutral or best things in our own culture. This is normal and true of all cultures. Considering one race as superior to another however is the essence of racism, regardless of which people group displays this view. This means whites, blacks, Latinos, Jews, Asians, and so on can all have racist tendencies. It is the dilemma of being broken as a human race.

The biggest factor that overrides all of this is our commonality. We are all beings created in the image of God and are equally invited to be in a relationship with God and able to do so. All groups reflect his glory in our own unique way. Again, "God is no respecter of persons" i.e. He doesn't have a higher regard for your "station" in life over another's.

This was also recognized by the founders of America in our founding documents -- even though not consistently put into practice. It was because of this world view expressed within those documents and their writers that slavery was finally abolished -- even though abused by some in the beginning. It was followers of Christ who were the primary agents of its eventual abolition -- William Wilberforce, a committed Christian, was the key leader of the abolition movement in England, whose effects were eventually felt in America leading to the eventual abolition of slavery on both sides of the Atlantic. 

The constant focus on America's past mistakes out of the many good values it was built on is simply an attempt to divide us as a nation.

We must always pursue and embrace superior (i.e. God-honoring) values but reject racism in all its forms no matter what culture or sector of society it is found in, for all men and women are equally in God images and therefore have dignity; all are created to honor God. We must, therefore, embrace all fellow humans equally as God's image-bearers, no matter what their race or skin color.

But equally true, we must recognize and be aware there is behavior that is contrary to our design and destructive to our fellow man thereby dishonoring to God as well, no matter what race displays this behavior. Pointing out destructive behavior is not racial or racist, it's moral and deals with the flourishing and betterment of all men and women as well as honoring to God.

For a discussion on racial tension and keys to diffusing it click here. 

For a discussion on a personal experience of discrimination click here 

For a further discussion on identity politics click here

Identity politics and God's word.

One of the subtle issues of ¹Dispensational Eschatology is "identity politics." 

It's not obvious on the surface, but when you look closely, this teaching places a certain nation/race on a pedestal above all others. The Jewish race. The nation of Israel is viewed by many - mainly within, but also outside the church - as the "apple of God's eye." To even question this superior status is considered antisemitic by some - i.e. racist. 

The irony is if this high view were held toward any other race - such as Hitler's so-called Ayran race -  It would be racist, and people would rightly be up in arms protesting. 

I am not suggesting at all that Israel was unimportant or insignificant. They certainly were and played a unique and vital role in God's plan of redemption, as well as on the stage of human history. Nor am I suggesting we should not ²support national Israel today. Any nation that promotes freedom, especially if surrounded by a region of hostility toward that freedom, deserves our ²support. But to accurately assess national Israel's true significance in God's eyes, we must explore God's words in the bible. God must be true even if every man is a liar. 

³If you wish to explore this more click here.

If someone does not view Israel as superior to other nations some will object and ask "Isn't the nation of Israel God's chosen people; special above all others?" The short answer is yes, but to answer that question properly and completely, we must ask the bigger underlying questions. e.g. to what end was Israel chosen for and was that purpose ever carried out? If so, how and when? 

The longer answer is they were chosen to be the nation through which the promised Messiah came, and he did (though orthodox Jews believe the Messiah's coming is still in the future). And He came not just as the Deliverer of the Jews only, but the Savior of the entire world. For a more thorough discussion on this click here.

The general issue with identity politics.

What does any of this have to do with identity politics? In essence, identity politics says one's individual value or worth is determined by one's group, race, nationality, etc. However, when you follow this through logically, isn't this in fact at the heart of racism - i.e. one group or race being superior (or inferior) to others. This is saying I am better (or worse) than you simply because I belong to a particular race or group. Or, I can do no wrong because I belong to a certain group e.g. a person of color - any color or lack of it - can't be racist because they are the victim of racism. A certain group could get away with many things others would never be able to do if they were considered superior to others. 

But this is not true, no matter who asserts it. This is a form of group or ethnic supremacy if you will. Not unlike the "white supremacy" label we hear thrown around today. A kind of ⁴ethnic-based identity -- exactly the opposite of the message of grace. 

In God's economy, identity is based on something much greater and far more significant. God calls us to ground our identity in who we are as His image-bearers first, as well as ⁵who he has made us to be in Christ, not in our ethnicity, group, gender, culture, worldview, etc. The teaching of the Bible shatters all boundaries of race, gender, or any other difference.

Gal 3:25  But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian,
Gal 3:26  for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith.
Gal 3:27  For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
Gal 3:28  There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:29  And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to ⁴promise.

The above "group" - God's group if you will - is the only group we can ultimately and legitimately base our identity on. Being part of this group has nothing to do with race and everything to do with grace.

This is not a point of pride, but of humility, since it's based on grace and not our ethnicity, culture, efforts, some assumed "birthright" or anything that has to do with humanity seeking to bolster their identity apart from and outside of God, their Creator. 

This is also unifying because being an image-bearer of God includes everybody, so in this sense -- the way most define a group -- it is not a group at all because we all belong to it. 

Also, being remade in Christ's image is available to anybody and will be denied to no one who desires to enter onto this path i.e. it excludes no one and is freely offered to anyone. 

These aspects of our identity are determined by no less than God Himself -- the Creator of us all -- making them the only legitimate grounds for our identity and of far greater significance than anything offered or asserted by men.

Ironically, those who scream ⁶loudest about racism are usually those who look at the world exclusively through an "identity politics" - i.e. racial - filter. The problem is that this creates an "us-them" mindset and division instead of unity. 

A lot of accusations about who is being more divisive are thrown around these days. However, if we stop and think about it, we will find identity politics at the heart of this divisiveness, not racism in the classical sense e.g. whites vs blacks, Aryans vs Jews, etc. Those who are least racist are the least likely to think in racial terms - e.g. I am not a brown, white, or black woman or man I am simply a fellow human being created in the image of God, just like you are, regardless of race, gender, age etc.

The truth is we are all created in God's image, and our value is not rooted in our group, race, nationality, or gender...at least not in God's eyes (this, of course, includes Jews). So in the most basic and vital sense, as bearers of God's image, we are all the same in the eyes of God; we are all ⁷equally created to know and experience God in all his beauty, majesty, love, and goodness. We are all members of the human race who have equal access to God in and through Christ and are equally valued by God regardless of group, race, gender, etc.

We see this in the Gospel of John by Christ himself when he said the following to the Samaritan women at the well...

20  (the women said) 0ur fathers worshiped on this mountain, but you say that in Jerusalem is the place where people ought to worship.” 21 Jesus said to her, “Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. 22 You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 But the hour is coming, and is now here, when true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him. 24 God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” 25 The woman said to him, “I know that Messiah is coming (he who is called Christ). When he comes, he will tell us all things.” 26 Jesus said to her, “I who speak to you am he.” John 4:20-26

Note Christ said he's seeking people whose heart (i.e. "... in spirit and truth...") is after him, not those who come from any particular group, race, or area i.e. not the heart of a Jew, white, black, yellow, brown, or any other specific race, but all hearts. When you understand that Samaritans were considered "half-breeds" by the Jews - not unlike the Muggle-born "mudblood", Hermione Granger, in the Harry Potter series - this conversation with a Samaritan woman becomes even more significant. 

In addition, he was having a conversation with a woman. Women were considered second-class citizens by that culture and time (but obviously not by Christ). And you certainly didn't hang out with a woman alone, one on one, even in public. This was considered taboo. When you look at the context of this conversation, his disciples' response subtly hints at this taboo.

Am I saying it is wrong to love our heritage? Not at all. To the degree it honors and displays the beauty and diversity of God, it is a good thing. However, it is not the ground on which we base our identity and worth. 

There is nothing wrong with cultural diversity. It can be a good thing to display the vast creativity of God. It is just not the ultimate thing we base our identity on.

For a discussion on why and how we must distinguish culture from race click here. 

For a discussion on the image of God click here

For a discussion on Dispensationalism click here.

For a discussion on the promises made to Abraham click here. 

___________________________________

Footnotes:

¹I am not looking to single out Dispensationalism for its own sake but because of its widespread support in the evangelical Christian community, the subtle effect of this view is significant and worth mentioning.

²I'm not saying financial support necessarily but verbal or moral support assuming they (or anyone else we support for that matter) are acting morally and legitimately in self-defense. 

³For more on that promise click here

⁴One group is more valuable than another because of their ethnicity, thereby deserving greater respect.

⁵However, this does not make Christians superior to non-Christians because it is a status given to us as a gift and available to anybody who will receive it.

⁶I'm not saying there is no racism or that racism shouldn't be addressed, I'm saying those who see everything through a racial filter (identity politics) are likely the most racist. Those who don't are the most "colorblind." 

To say it another way, the most racist among those who read this will probably scream loudest that this article is racist and antisemitic. To assert a person of color can be a racist is taboo or that all "whites" are not automatically racist by being white, will upset some. 

⁷This also happens to be the worldview of the founders of this nation - that all men are created equal - even though not fully put into practice initially. However, this view eventually became the impetus and basis for the abolition of slavery. The foundation of truth laid in the founding documents of the "great American experiment" ultimately won out, even though a significant compromise over the equal value of the black man was initially made in order to form a union of the 13 original colonies that later became the United States of America i.e. our nation. Contrary to much of the present-day narrative, most of the founders were opposed to slavery and this compromise. An accurate and revealing depiction of this battle and compromise is shown in the second episode -- titled "Independence"-- in the HBO miniseries "John Adams."