Africa Australia Christian Living Ethics Justice Theology

A.S.K 30 – Why Did God Make the Whites Superior to Us?

This weeks A.S.K question is I think appropriate for Christmas.  Christ came as the Saviour of the world.  Racism is a great curse and blight on the human race.  I was sent this heartfelt question from a teenager in Africa.  When I discussed this at a school in West Sydney I was approached by a young girl from Africa who was in tears – partly of gratitude and partly because of the horror of racism that she had experienced.  She loved this chapter….Happy Christmas to all – especially to our African brothers and sisters (going by previous years we can expect sadly to hear of some massacre by Islamists in some church somewhere on the continent – how long?, O Lord, how long?

Screenshot 2019-12-23 19.23.46

BIBLE READING: Acts 17:16-34

TEXT: From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his off spring.’ (Acts 16:26-28)

The problem here is not with God but with man. God did not make the whites superior to Africans. He made all human beings equally in his image. The trouble is that we have turned away from God and as a result have turned on one another. “What causes fights and quarrels among you? Don’t they come from your desires that battle within you?” (James 1:1).

The question is more why were the European nations able to conquer most of the world? And why did they enslave some people? Again none of this is new – as the Bible indicates – slavery has always been a part of fallen human culture. Over a million white Europeans were enslaved by Arab traders in the Middle Ages. Africans enslaved and sold one another. In the 17th and 18th Centuries European slave traders took millions of Africans to the West Indies and America to staff their plantations. It was a shameful and disgusting trade that only ended after the campaigns led by that great Christian reformer, William Wilberforce.

Missionaries like David Livingstone and Mary Slessor from my own country were instrumental in campaigning against slavery within Africa. But slavery still exists in different forms today. There are people who are trafficked as sex slaves – tens of thousands of people throughout the world are enslaved in this way. There are other milder forms. When rich countries like my own can’t get people to do what we consider demeaning or hard jobs, we import people from poorer countries, pay them less and exploit them. That is a kind of ‘wage slavery’.

But what you are also asking is why some white people consider themselves to be superior to other races – especially Africans. Racism exists in every culture. Racism is the belief that just because of our skin colour we are superior. White racism today is not so much tied in with skin colour but with a kind of social Darwinian view that the highest evolution of the human species are largely white middle-class liberals. Social Darwinianism stemmed from Darwin’s theory of evolution.

Did you know that the full title of his influential work The Origin of the Species was On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life? Those who accepted Darwinian evolution naturally thought that their race (white European) was the favoured race. This has had incredibly harmful consequences.

I am writing this from Australia where at the beginning of the 20th Century white Europeans hunted aboriginal people as though they were animals. One of the most extreme examples of this I have come across is the 19th Century writer HG Wells; famous for books like The Invisible Man and War of the Worlds. In his New Republic he answered the question as to how the New Republic would deal with the ‘inferior races’ such as the black, the yellow man etc. He stated, ‘Well, the world is a world, and not a charitable institution, and I take it they will have to go.’ He made it quite clear what he meant – the extermination of inferior races. Here was a white liberal progressive arguing that because other races were inferior they would have to go.

Of course today all liberal progressives would shout out loud their anti-racist credentials and how they believe that all humans are equal. But I’m not sure on what rational basis they base this. It is only Christianity with its view that all human beings are created in the image of God that provides a real basis for equality and diversity.

I think that you will still find that most white liberal progressives believe that their culture is superior and should be imposed upon the rest of the world. That is why you often get Western ‘charities’ or government agencies giving aid to Africa with conditions attached. They want to impose their views on issues such as abortion and sexuality on all the countries of the world. I once received a letter from the Ghanaian ambassador to the United Kingdom thanking me for speaking up for his country and pointing out as you did, that so many in the West seem to think that the West is superior and African countries backward.

My view is that the Western countries are sinking backwards into a Greco/ Roman/Pagan view of the world…my hope and prayer is that the African countries will not follow us but rather lead us back to Christianity. We need more missionaries from Africa. Come over and help us.

CONSIDER: How can we combat the challenge and sin of racism? How can African nations grow and develop as Western nations decline?

RECOMMENDED FURTHER READING: Mary Slessor – A Life on the Altar for God – Bruce McLennan

PRAYER: Our Father in Heaven, We thank you that all human beings are made in your image. We thank you that you have created us in different races and placed us in different nations – that all might reach out for you and find you. Lord, forgive us when we are racist and think that because of our skin colour or culture we are superior to others. Bless the people of Africa and continue to bring many in that wonderful continent to know, love and serve you, in Jesus name, Amen.

Scotland’s Shame as Political Leaders Embarrass Ghana

A.S.K 29 – Why Did God Make Hitler?

You can still order A.S.K!

amazon UK, US or Australia

Or better still go into your local bookshop and order it….there are bulk discounts as well from Ten of Those 

If you have read the book and would like to review it – can I encourage you to do so on Amazon.  The more the merrier….

0DC87E0B-BBAC-44FE-840D-3443A4D5BF2A-316326742-1566763973167

33 comments

  1. we can expect sadly to hear of some massacre by Islamists in some church somewhere on the continent

    And the Christian terror groups in Africa, Anti-balaka and Lord’s Resistance Army, to name just two… Or is that too awkward to mention?

    1. It’ not too awkward to mention – just embarrassing for you. When you Google just to get confirmation of your own bias (the one is as bad as the other) it leads to this kind of false equivalence. Facts and figures can help with your prejudice. Tell us how many Muslims have been killed by Christians and vice versa. The LRA are no more Christian than you…the anti-Balaka are a real mix of militias some of whom claim to be Christian. What were this ‘Christian’ terror groups? Which church do they belong to?

      1. The LRA are no more Christian than you…the anti-Balaka are a real mix of militias some of whom claim to be Christian

        Mmmm, I bet most Muslims say that about ISIS…

      2. Which shows how many Muslims you talk to! I have yet to meet a Muslim who denies that ISIS are Muslim. They will say they are bad Muslims….Also support for ISIS runs at around 20-25% amongst Muslims in the West….

      3. Exactly, just as you consider the Lord’s Resistance Army, for example, “Not Very Good Christians”… But they’re still Christians; fundamentalists, fighting and murdering tens of thousands in the name of Yhwh, with the goal of creating of a Christian theocratic state based on the Ten Commandments.

        Sort of like a Caliphate, wouldn’t you say?

        And while on the subject, we should mention the Christian (Baptist) Théodore Sindikubwabo
        who ordered the Rwandan genocide.

      4. No – they are not Christians in any sense. They don’t follow Christ or biblical teachings…but I realise you have to have this equivalence…but its false and ignorant…

      5. I’m not saying they’re “good Christians,” just that they consider themselves “good Christians,” much like Hitler considered himself a very “good Christian,” and ISIS consider themselves very “good Muslims.”

        It seems, what makes a “good Christian” is somewhat subjective. Just this week we’ve learned of the US Washington state Republican senator, Matthew Shea, charged with domestic terrorism for, amongst other things, building a Christian army of young men ready to fight a “Holy War” following his manifesto: Biblical Basis for War , which states:

        “If they do not yield — kill all males”.

        Is Shea a “good Christian”? You might think so. You might not. He, however, thinks himself a very good Christian.

        So, I hope you can see, your Christmas warning about Islamist attacks on Christians lacks much needed balance. After all, those who pay attention to history will of course remember that the Christian terror group, Lord’s Resistance Army, conducted one of the worst massacres in contemporary African history over Christmas, 2008, slaughtering over 620 people across five villages.

        So, your line above should really read: Let us hope no harm comes to *anyone* due to religious violence.

        Apart from that, I hope you have a very merry Christmas, David. Are you travelling back to Scotland to be with family, or will you have an Australian Christmas?

      6. But you are speaking out of ignorance. Do they say they are ‘good Christians’? And what makes a Christian is not subjective at all – its only subjective to you – because that’s the way you want it to be. You go far more by your feelings – rather than facts and rationality.

        I will be celebrating Christ’s birth here in Australia – sadly as Christian minister I don’t earn enough to add to the carbon footprint of the world by flying back to Scotland! Have a good Christmas.

      7. And what makes a Christian is not subjective at all

        Of course it is, and Matthew Shea (the US Christian terrorist leader) is a perfect example. He considers himself a fantastic Christian, doing EXACTLY what a Christian should do. Hitler thought himself a very good Christian, and many, many church leaders agreed. I can give you direct quotes from church leaders (Cardinals, Bishops, and priests) praising Hitler and the Nazi’s as Christians, including:

        Cardinal Michael von Faulhaber
        Bishop Hans Meiser
        Catholic Hierarchy of Austria
        Cardinal Theodor Innitzer
        Fulda German Bishops’ Conference
        Bishop Rackl of Eichstätt
        Kirchenrat Leutheuser
        Cardinal Adolf Bertram

        And

        Father Senn, who published these words on the 15th of May, 1934:

        [Adolf Hitler is] the tool of God, called upon to overcome Judaism…

        Was Hitler a good Christian? You say No. Others say Yes. Self-evidently, it’s subjective.

      8. It’s the level of ignorance that you demonstrate which is breathtaking – combined with your willingness to quote mine from Wiki or Google. Hitler did not consider himself to be a ‘very good Christian’. Your opinion that he is, is what is entirely subjective. You feel it must be true, you want it to be true and so and behold it IS true. Have you actually read anything Hitler wrote? Mein Kampf? (I mean the whole book not the selective quotes from atheist memes). ANy of his speeches or letters or table talk? Have you read any of the major biographies – Taylor, Toland, Kershaw, Martin and others? Do you actually know anything about Hitler, Weimar Germany or Christianity? Your posts betray a shocking ignorance – in historical terms its on a par with flat earthism.

      9. Proving it’s subjective is the easiest thing imaginable.

        Go spend a moment on the blog All Along the Watchtower and you can see Christians criticising Christians for not being “good” Christians.

        Goodness, just look at the evangelicals today in the US and their unwavering support for the most vile man to ever hold office: Donald Trump.

        Do you think those Christians are “good” Christians?

        I bet you don’t.

        Hitler did not consider himself to be a ‘very good Christian’.

        He most certainly did, and I can FILL this thread with direct quotes of him saying exactly this. What I find most telling, though, is the secondary sources (the Cardinals, the Bishops, and the priests) praising Hitler as a being a “good Christian.” Like Kirchenrat Julius Leutheuser, addressing German Christians in Saalfeld, August 30, 1933, who said:

        Christ has come to us through the person of Adolf Hitler.

        And yes, I have read a lot on the subject, and if you had you’d know Table Talk is a fraudulent work; a bogus work with deliberately faulty translations, inserted words, invented text, interpolations, no source material, recollections that are simply false, and full of “blatant distortions.”

        For example, this here is a straight out lie, a forgery, an interpolation. It was simply made up:

        “Science cannot lie, for it’s always striving, according to the momentary state of knowledge, to deduce what is true. When it makes a mistake, it does so in good faith. It’s Christianity that’s the liar.”

        And this… simply false, an invention of the so-called ‘editor’:

        “Our epoch will certainly see the end of the disease of Christianity.”

        Virtually every supposed anti-Christian thought “attributed” to Hitler in this shoddy work is either deliberately mistranslated or faked. For goodness sake, Trevor-Roper, the ‘editor’, was a central figure in the “Hitler Diaries” hoax. In fact, he’s been involved in hoax after hoax after hoax concerning Hitler and the Nazi’s.

        Did you not know this, David?

        You need to do some reading.

        But again, I’m not arguing Hitler (or US evangelicals) are good Christians. I’m not arguing that the Lord’s Resistance Army are good Christians.

        I can’t, because it’s clearly subjective.

        The point I was making, which you seem to want to ignore, is that your line above in the post should really read: Let us hope no harm comes to *anyone* due to religious violence.

        It seems to me that that is what a “Good Christian” would say…

      10. I ask you what books you have read…and what letters or original speeches from Hitler you have read. You can’t answer (which itself speaks volumes) yet you say you can fill this page with Hitler saying ‘exactly’ that he is a a ‘very good Christian”. All that means is that you quote mine using Wiki – but feel free to go ahead and give us those quotes in context where Hitler claimed to be a very good Christian….Your comments about Trevor Roper are ridiculous – he got one (major) thing wrong and was not involved in ‘hoax after hoax re Hitler. He was the Oxford Professor of History but you of course, with your extensive reading and knowledge know better! In case you wonder – Hitler hated Christianity (as the religion of the Jew and also his major rival in Germany). Next time do your homework…

        Yes – I realise that for you everything is basically subjective. YOu feel that God does not exist and you interpret everything – including history, science etc – through that feeling.

      11. Professor Diethelm Prowe (German History Expert):

        “[Table Talk] has been proven to be wholly unreliable as a source almost a decade ago”

      12. It’s not only that you don’t read books….you don’t even read (or comprehend) the comments in debates you are involved in. Of course the Table Talk was a forgery – but not by Trevor Roper. He was just taken in. But he did not do as you claimed in your earlier post. Like your knowledge of HItler I suspect your knowledge of Trevor Roper is miniscule…but I guess that won’t stop you commenting – or quote mining to confirm your prejudice…just go and do it elsewhere.

      13. And what makes a Christian is not subjective at all

        Were those who invented the Apostles Creed good Christians?
        Was Theodosius a good Christian?
        Were the Crusaders good Christians?
        Were the crew of the Enola Gay good Christians?

        Perhaps it would be prudent if you identified exactly the traits that make a good Christian , David?

      14. I suggest you read the Bible and find out what Jesus says about what a Christian is. Try to avoid your own prejudices and don’t comment on the basis of your ignorance.

      15. David have you ever used Google in your life?

        Goodness me – if I could be bothered I’d look through your previous posts and tally the number of times you have dealt with a view contrary to yours by declaring someone has simply looked up something on the internet and posted it here and that somehow or another this renders that opinion null and void.

      16. Yes – because sadly that is the norm. I find that many people (including most fundamentalist atheists) have a position, don’t bother to read contrary views, and instead just use Google to find something to confirm their bias. Usually the accusation is fair – rarely does someone come back and evidence that they have actually done some serious reading and research.

      17. john zande wrote: “Hitler thought himself a very good Christian, and many, many church leaders agreed.” and quoted one, “Father Senn, who [wrote] ‘[Adolf Hitler is] the tool of God, called upon to overcome Judaism…’ ”
        I don’t know anything about Senn, but the quote itself does not show that he thought Hitler to be a good Christian. In the Old Testament, God used the Babylonians as a tool to punish the Israelites, without any implication that they were good for doing so. That Senn thought that God might have used Hitler does not imply that Senn thought him a good Christian.

        Also, Hitler tried to undermine Christianity, as he knew that he could never win it over.

      18. “Proving it’s subjective is the easiest thing imaginable.”—john zande
        You seem to think that the fact that people have different views proves that something is subjective. Do you therefore think that evolution is subjective, because there are people who disagree?

        “…just look at the evangelicals today in the US and their unwavering support for the most vile man to ever hold office: Donald Trump.”
        That he is “the most file man ever to hold office” is utter garbage. Well, leftist garbage at least. And clearly their support of him is not “unwavering”, if you’ve seen the news in the last few days. Further, I’ve heard some American Christians say that they voted for Trump not because they liked him, but because the alternative was worse. But clearly, he has done a lot of good (assuming that you think that some of the things he has done are good things, which it seems leftists refuse to do).

        “I can’t, because it’s clearly subjective.”
        It’s not subjective. The criterion is straightforward: do they follow what the Bible says or not? Hitler didn’t. The LRA doesn’t.

        “Let us hope no harm comes to *anyone* due to religious violence.”
        If you want to expand what David said, why stop at “religious” violence? Why not include ALL violence, including such things as violence against the unborn? Or are you infatuated with “religion”

  2. Hi Jzande- happy holidays.
    Fortunately though we do not have to rely on opinion to determine what and who is a Christian.

    Scripture itself sets the parameters; so we need not rely on they who want to guide the narrative.

    Some time ago I asked (many of your brethren) to cite a command in the New Testament where any believer is told to maim, destroy, or kill?

    I should remind you that it was Stephen who was pelted to death by the religious who thought they were doing God a favour.

    All he did was faithfully execute the reminders to the stubborn/ to they whose own history was chiseled in unbelief- but you know that right? Yet you would claim Christians as somehow guilty of killing Stephen. No.

    Christians are not the murdering kind that so fit the template of atheism and lying history.

  3. “That is why you often get Western ‘charities’ or government agencies giving aid to Africa with conditions attached.“

    This describes what happens when Christianity mixes with charities and agencies as well though. Christianity is notorious for tying the necessity of conversion to aid both in the past and now. I’m not sure about this country but aid money from America is always affected by the religious lobby that demands for example things like schools teaching ‘abstinence only’. I don’t deny that secular organizations do it but Christians are just as guilty of ideological colonialism.

    1. Yes there are Christian groups who go for the ‘rice Christian’ approach. It is wrong and foolish. And self defeating. I would like to see evidence of a charity that demanded abstinence only. I do know a concrete example of where Western liberals were prepared to sacrifice thousands of lives for the sake of their ideology.

      In Uganda the church and the government came up with the ABC policy to deal with Aids. Abstinence, Be Faithful and Condoms. Western liberals condemned it – but it worked. Western liberals on the other hand would prefer to spend a fortune subsidising drugs like Prep so that they can continue with their sexual promiscuity. As always it’s the poor who pay the price.

      1. I do know a concrete example of where Western liberals were prepared to sacrifice thousands of lives for the sake of their ideology

        The Catholic Church had a similar approach (in Africa) regarding HIV/AIDS and contraception.

    2. David said that thinking themselves superior is why you often get Western agencies attaching conditions. He didn’t say that all cases of attaching conditions indicate thinking that one is superior. That’s a straight-out logical fallacy.
      You could get an agency attaching conditions for other reasons, and you haven’t shown that Christian groups do it for the reason that David was claiming.

      David, I’m looking forward to hearing you at Belgrave Heights.

  4. David writes re Darwin: “Did you know that the full title of his influential work…?”

    Since Darwin wasn’t addressing the question of human origins nor “race” in ‘The Origin’, but such finer nuances as to how varieties and species evolve — from cabbages to pigeons — your remark was utterly irrelevant and meaningless. That sort of commentary is barely a cut above the most abject of YEC sites.

    Darwin wasn’t even convinced the concept of human “races” existed, as passages in ‘The Descent of Man’ reveal.

    The problem of where to lay the blame for racism lies elsewhere.

    1. I realise you have to defend Darwin – but he did blinked what race was and he was addressing the he question of race. Hence the title. Social Darwininism led to the racism of liberals like HG Wells and others. It was believed that white Western European liberals were at the top of the evolutionary tree.

    2. “The problem of where to lay the blame for racism lies elsewhere.”
      Blame can of course be laid in multiple places. But Darwin was a big part of it. Stephen Jay Gould wrote “Biological arguments for racism may have been common before 1850, but they increased by orders of magnitude following the acceptance of evolutionary theory.”

  5. No, David, Darwin needs no defending. You need to actually read him better, rather than going by the title alone.

    Common mistake on the part of evangelicals.

  6. David,
    in the extract from the “Why I am not an Atheist” debate that you attached to your A.S.K. 29 post — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fOP0tELg3c&feature=emb_logo — Matt Dillahunty made a couple of cardinal mistakes that his admirers seem incapable of learning from. That should not stop us from learning what they won’t.
    Actually Matt’s first mistake — like a moth drawn to the flame — was to read into your reference to Auschwitz, a point that you were not making. It seemed to him that you had trapped yourself and he thought to spring the trap. As soon as he realized that you were talking about atheism’s inability to deal with evil he should have left Hitler well alone but instead he went where there was no need to go, effectively entrapping himself.
    I suppose when he’d accused you of dishonesty earlier in the debate, it was difficult for him to heed the warning that Hitler had been the precise focus of your uncompleted doctrate studies. His resort to spreading probably means that he realised he was in a hole but his admirers seem to interpret that dubious schoolboy debating technique as him going in for the kill and maybe he deluded himself that that was what he was doing.

    How should voters in Washington State know to reject Matt Shea and his ‘Christian Identity’ cronies? The Bible rule of discernment is quite correct for — Matt. 7:16 — ‘You will recognise them by their fruits … .’

    Yours,
    John/.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *