Darwin and Racism
A common tactic for ceationist is to link Darwin to racism, slavery and hitler. It is a bizarre idea because well, what are we supposed to think? Darwin was a racist, therefore his ideas must necessarily be wrong? How does that work? Or are they saying we should pretend Darwinism is wrong? You know, like they do. It just makes no sense. Virtually all biologists today accep the theory of evolution because of the overwhelming evidence and the opinions of he originator of the theory are irrelevant.
But what makes this tactic so odious is that the links to Christianity are far stronger. This is part one in a series of four posts.
Compare to what Darwin said:
Darwin uses terms like "savage", but these were standard terms of the age, and here he is advancing the claim that really we are all alike, all just one race. Think about that. While Lincoln was talking about the white race being different to the black race Darwin was arguing there was only one race.
Unfortunately, creationists are in the habit of deliberately misrepresenting Darwin and the theory of evolution, and a clear example can be seen here, where these "liars for Jesus" pretend that:
This is the opposite of what Darwin was arguing for. But hey, why worry about the truth when you have religious dogma to promote?
Another example here:
And another here:
The Old Testament is full of racism, right down to the Israelites being God's chosen people. God makes it clear he does not what them marrying foreigners (blood purity was as important to God as it was to Hitler). These verses are sadly typical of many in the Old Testament.
Some Christians will point out that the directive to love your neighbour is clearly anti-racism, but that rather depends on what you consider a neighbour. As these two verses make clear, only a fellow Israelite counts as a neighbour.
Jesus himself was a racist, calling a Canaanite woman a dog:
Jesus' message was not for the gentiles, after all, it was the Jews who were God's chosen people.
Jesus was quite clear that all he cared about was his own people, the Jews. His instruction to love your neighbour is actually better translated as love your fellow Jew (see here). When St Paul started to spread Christianity among the gentiles it causes a big rift in the early church (and St Paul actually said some good things, such as Galatians 3:28).
Now remember, these Creationists are telling us we should give us evolution because of the racist roots they pretend it has. Should we not also give us Christianity because of its racist roots?
In fact, the modern creationist movement is full of racism itself:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/racism.html
http://chem.tufts.edu/science/Stear-NoAiG/no-AiG/cg_science_of_racism.htm
Also worth looking at the constitution of the KKK.
https://archive.org/stream/ConstitutionLawsKnightsOfKKK/constitution%20laws%20knights%20of%20KKK_djvu.txt
But what makes this tactic so odious is that the links to Christianity are far stronger. This is part one in a series of four posts.
Racism
Darwin wrote in the language of his time, and in our time, it certainly is not "politically correct". So before looking at what Darwin said, let us see the language a contempory of his used. This is from a debate Abraham Lincoln was having before getting elected to be US president, and going on to abolish slavery.... I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, [applause]-that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. ..
- Abraham Lincoln; Fourth Debate with Stephen Douglas, September 18, 1858It is worth pointing out that Lincoln was trying to get elected, so perhaps was telling people what they wanted to hear, but the point is this was what they wanted to hear; most people at that time just accepted that "there is a physical difference between the white and black races".
Compare to what Darwin said:
But the most weighty of all the arguments against treating the races of man as distinct species, is that they graduate into each other, independently in many cases, as far as we can judge, of their having inter-crossed. Man has been studied more carefully than any other animal, and yet there is the greatest possible diversity amongst capable judges whether he should be classed as a single species or race, or as two (Virey), as three (Jacquinot), as four (Kant), five (Blumenbach), six (Buffon), seven (Hunter), eight (Agassiz), eleven (Pickering), fifteen (Bory St. Vincent), sixteen (Desmoulins), twenty-two (Morton), sixty (Crawfurd), or as sixty-three, according to Burke. This diversity of judgment does not prove that the races ought not to be ranked as species, but it shews that they graduate into each other, and that it is hardly possible to discover clear distinctive characters between them.Charles Darwin; The Descent of Man, 1871
The American aborigines, Negroes and Europeans are as different from each other in mind as any three races that can be named; yet I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Feugians on board the "Beagle," with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded negro with whom I happened once to be intimate.- Charles Darwin; The Descent of Man, 1871
...
There is good evidence that the art of shooting with bows and arrows has not been handed down from any common progenitor of mankind, yet as Westropp and Nilsson have remarked, the stone arrow-heads, brought from the most distant parts of the world, and manufactured at the most remote periods, are almost identical; and this fact can only be accounted for by the various races having similar inventive or mental powers.
Darwin uses terms like "savage", but these were standard terms of the age, and here he is advancing the claim that really we are all alike, all just one race. Think about that. While Lincoln was talking about the white race being different to the black race Darwin was arguing there was only one race.
Unfortunately, creationists are in the habit of deliberately misrepresenting Darwin and the theory of evolution, and a clear example can be seen here, where these "liars for Jesus" pretend that:
Darwinian evolution was (and still is) inherently a racist philosophy, teaching that different groups or “races” of people evolved at different times and rates, so some groups are more like their ape-like ancestors than others.
This is the opposite of what Darwin was arguing for. But hey, why worry about the truth when you have religious dogma to promote?
Another example here:
So the fact of the different races is attributed by evolutionists to the belief thatThe sad fact is that many honest Christians are fooled by these lies, and end up believing the falsehoods (which is one big reason I started this blog).
one race is more evolved (superior) and that another race is less evolved – closer to
our common ape-like ancestor (inferior). Yes, full-blown racism, though nicely
hushed up in today’s evolutionist textbooks and all other evolutionism throughout
global academia, the media, the political arena, the seminaries, and even the Black
community.
And another here:
Darwin was a racist, pure and simple. Why can’t people just accept that fact, and get PAST it?You know what? Pretending it is a "fact" does make it one. Not in the real world anyway.
What of the Bible?
It might be instructive to see how the Bible handles racism...The Old Testament is full of racism, right down to the Israelites being God's chosen people. God makes it clear he does not what them marrying foreigners (blood purity was as important to God as it was to Hitler). These verses are sadly typical of many in the Old Testament.
Deu 7:1 When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you many nations—the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites, seven nations larger and stronger than you— 2 and when the Lord your God has delivered them over to you and you have defeated them, then you must destroy them totally.[a] Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy. 3 Do not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughters to their sons or take their daughters for your sons, 4 for they will turn your children away from following me to serve other gods, and the Lord’s anger will burn against you and will quickly destroy you.
Joshua 23:12-13 "if ye do in any wise go back and cleave unto the remnant of these nations, even these that remain among you, and shall make marriage with them and go in unto them and they unto you: know for a certainty that they shall be snares and traps unto you and scourges in your sides and thorns in your eyes, until ye perish off from this good land which the Lord your God has given you."
Ezra 9:2 "For they have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons: so that the HOLY SEED have MIXED themselves with the people of those lands: yea, the hand of the princes and rulers hath been chief in this TRESPASS."
Nehemiah 9:2 "And the seed of Israel separated themselves from all STRANGERS and stood and confessed their sins, and the iniquities of their fathers."
Nehemiah 10:30 “We promise not to give our daughters in marriage to the peoples around us or take their daughters for our sons.
Hosea 5:7 "They have dealt treacherously against YAHWEH: for they have begotten STRANGE children:"
Some Christians will point out that the directive to love your neighbour is clearly anti-racism, but that rather depends on what you consider a neighbour. As these two verses make clear, only a fellow Israelite counts as a neighbour.
Leviticus 19:17 “‘Do not hate a fellow Israelite in your heart. Rebuke your neighbor frankly so you will not share in their guilt.
18 “‘Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord.
Jesus himself was a racist, calling a Canaanite woman a dog:
Mat 15:25 The woman came and knelt before him. “Lord, help me!” she said.
26 He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”
27 “Yes it is, Lord,” she said. “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.”
Jesus' message was not for the gentiles, after all, it was the Jews who were God's chosen people.
Mat 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans.
Jesus was quite clear that all he cared about was his own people, the Jews. His instruction to love your neighbour is actually better translated as love your fellow Jew (see here). When St Paul started to spread Christianity among the gentiles it causes a big rift in the early church (and St Paul actually said some good things, such as Galatians 3:28).
Now remember, these Creationists are telling us we should give us evolution because of the racist roots they pretend it has. Should we not also give us Christianity because of its racist roots?
In fact, the modern creationist movement is full of racism itself:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/racism.html
http://chem.tufts.edu/science/Stear-NoAiG/no-AiG/cg_science_of_racism.htm
Also worth looking at the constitution of the KKK.
https://archive.org/stream/ConstitutionLawsKnightsOfKKK/constitution%20laws%20knights%20of%20KKK_djvu.txt
26 He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the little cats.”
ReplyDelete27 “Yes it is, Lord,” she said. “Even the little cats eat the scraps that fall from their master’s table.”