Racism! Now there is a conversation starter. There is little doubt that there is not a soul in the Western world who has not heard the term or witnessed an act that has been condemned as “racist”.

During the worship service on Sunday, Joe Morecraft raised the issue of Racism.[1] I must admit, it made me think. First, and woefully, it was the first sermon I had heard that made comment on such an important topic. Second, we live in a country where the “R” word is tossed about like political promises in an election year.

This led me to think that a few lines that might guide Christians through such a minefield may be of use. To this end, I endeavour.

Sadly, in the war to establish the mythical world of PC (Political Correctness), the first casualty was, indeed, the truth. People use much of the accepted nomenclature of PC, but do they ever really stop and ask what the term means.

A racist by definition is someone who considers their race to be superior and, consequently, all other races to be inferior. It is my contention that for such a view to be truly racist two elements must be prominent. 1. The viewing of external races must move from the idea of less to that of “other”.[2] In short, these others are dehumanised and therefore open to persecutory behaviour. 2. The persecution must be open and definable; whether this be aggressive and violent behaviour or the simple act of ostracising.

When we look around the world, we see many examples of true racism. Hitler is the prime example. It was also seen in the Rwandan Genocide of 1994, when the Tutsis were murdered by the Hutus. That this example is civil, and therefore classed as genocide, makes it no less a racist crime.

I would like you to focus on these examples momentarily because I want to dispel the first myth. Racism is not about different skin colours. As the above examples show, people of the same or similarly coloured skin can and do perpetrate violent, racist acts against one another.

This must be understood. The idea that racism is black against white; brown against yellow; or any other combination thereof, is myth. Racism is a disease of the heart, not of the skin.[3] It is a clash of worldviews, ideas, and ideals. Thus, any notion of skin colour or any other external as a motive must be discarded.

What defines racism is that the invective is directed to a people of a specific cultural or tribal group. If I hate one Australian, I am just a bigot. If I hate many, or most, Australians, I am a racist. Please understand this point well. Racism is the hatred of many in a specific culture or tribal group. Note, please, it is the same hatred, the same intolerance, the same bias. It is simply that it is given a new label when directed to the group.

In this way, it is like the old joke: To steal one man’s work is plagiarism; to steal many men’s work is research! Here, the essence of the adage is to assert that both situations involve stealing. It is simply that the label is changed dependent upon whether he steals from the one or the many. So, when discussing racism, the focus must be upon the heart that hates, regardless of whether it hates the individual or a group.

This leads us to dispel myth number two. This being the case, patriotism and justice, as but two examples, are not racism. Am I a racist because I love my wife and my family above other wives and families? Why then am I a racist because I would love my country above others?

When viewing the topic of justice, the Biblical command is that justice be equal to all. Thus, if a white man and a black man rob a bank together, why should one be given a different sentence? How is it racism to punish both equally?

To argue otherwise, is to state that there is no justice and no equality of persons before or at law. It is to basically accept the bribe and to allow the false witness, both of which are condemned in Scripture.[4]

Last, we encounter the big myth, myth number three – racism is Biblical! The obvious untruth of this statement should not need to be addressed. Sadly, however, it does.

I have heard people, like those belonging to the KKK, try and justify racism and murder on a Biblical basis. I have encountered an incipient racism amongst genuine Christians also. The common denominator seems to be the belief that the “mark of Cain”[5] refers to God turning Cain’s skin black.

The logic goes something like this: 1. Cain murdered Abel; 2. God turned Cain’s skin black as a sign; 3. All black people are therefore the descendants of a murderer; 4. Consequently, all black people are second rate and deserve death.

Even the genuine Christian, who may not want to “murder” all black people, still has some reservation regarding “that” skin colour and in some way views them as less – which should not be the case.[6]

So let us look at this supposed logic:

1. If a mark on the skin of Cain is God’s sign of displeasure, then we are forced to ask, what did the Indians, Asians, and Islanders do?

2.Why is it that the only presupposition acceptable is that God made man white and His mark of displeasure was to make the skin black? Maybe all men were made black and God’s mark of displeasure was to bleach us “whities”! Hmmm!!!

3. Reality check! No one knows what the mark was?[7]  Speculation has led to the bizarre. Speculation has led to murder! Without any concrete proof as to what the sign was, how dare we take such radical action as to murder or to look down our noses upon another?

4. The stupidity of those who rely on this nonsense is seen most vividly when we look at the text of Scripture. Cain was given a mark so that his life would be preserved! The mark was not to set him apart for death, but to make sure that he lived. Thus, it is both stupidity and impossibility to argue that the mark is a sign that we can kill the one to whom it was given. In fact, to do so, according to the text, is to invite wrath seven fold.

5. Then we must come to some really startling thoughts. Anti-Semitism. Jesus is a Semite! White supremacists. I doubt Jesus is white! Then we have the wonder of Jesus death. For whom did Jesus die? Says Scripture: “Worthy art Thou to take the book, and to break its seals; for Thou wast slain, and didst purchase for God with Thy blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.”[8] Oh dear! If Jesus died to bring men from every tribe, tongue, people, and nation, how then do we say that some peoples are less than people? How do we say that some skin colours are not worthy of temporal life, if Jesus died to give them eternal life?

If the Son of God loved peoples of all designs, how do we then say, on the basis of His Word, that it is alright to hate certain of these designs? One can only do so when love is replaced by hate.

Herein, we encounter the problem.

Of recent, at least in this country, the popular aphorism to counter the racist charge is, “I am not racist. I hate all people equally!” This saying came to my attention via a nephew. I confess that I have used it in jest. Yet, I now repudiate it. The simple fact is that when the Christian adopts such sayings as these, trite or otherwise, they are imbibing of the world’s standards.

The Christian’s response should not be one of hate toward his fellow man; nor should we be sucked into the modern jargon where the term hate is thrown around without care. Our maxim should be, “I am not a racist because Christ’s love constrains me to treat all equally!” If this is too long, then try, “I love until given reason to hate.”[9]

God judges the heart[10] and the action of the heart. As His people, so should we. As Christians, who know the depths and depravity of sin as well as the wonders of Christ’s redemption, we should never embrace any concept that judges another because of the colour of his skin, the shape of his face, or the colour of his eyes.[11]

Righteousness is and must be our only standard.[12] For this standard alone cuts true and straight. This standard alone looks beyond the morphology of man to see what he truly is. Moreover, the standard of righteousness applied must be God’s. Then and only then do we have an objective standard and a true measure.

The man who hates one is the same as the man who hates many. Change the label if you will, but it makes no difference. The heart that hates is the heart immersed in sin. The heart that hates is the heart untouched by Jesus Christ. Therefore, the heart touched by Jesus Christ must not hate any man on the basis of his skin colour or the region from whence he comes. The Christian, touched by redeeming love, must love. If hate becomes a necessity, it does so, not on the basis of outward appearance, but because of an ethical failure to adhere to God’s law.

The one who says he is in the light and yet hates his brother is in the darkness until now. The one who loves his brother abides in the light and there is no cause for stumbling in him. But the one who hates his brother is in the darkness and walks in the darkness, and does not know where he is going because the darkness has blinded his eyes (1 John 2:10-11).