What's wrong with racism?

[JGG]

Some Germans are Christians and many more are NOT Christians.

That's not how it works. You can't say that some Germans are not Christians. They all are.

What's the problem with that?

I am not sure I would characterize any Nazis as Christians.

They claim to be.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Is saying that Jews are deceitful racist? Why or why not?

Good question. I think it would depend on "who" is saying it: a mind that knows absolutely if this indeed is the situation in all cases, or in those cases to which this statement would apply, or a typically limited human mind that is essentially seeing local evidence and then projecting such a value (erroneously most likely) to the rest of a population.

Like in Rwanda when the Tutsis faced extermination, you would feel comfortable saying that the Hutu are a violent, murderous race?

No, because I know that whipping up a people group into a genocidal frenzy requires some complex social breakdowns. I wouldn't say the Hutu, necessarily all by themselves, are a violent and murderous people group.

Can I judge all Jews to be deceitful? All Hutu to be violent and murderous?

Nope. You can't. I can't. But an All-knowing God can ...

Great. Is it reasonable then to say that Jews are intrinsically deceitful?

No, not without God telling me that this is the case.........and besides, from the historical evidences, we can see that this isn't the case. Some Jews are deceitful---and prone to the same sins as the rest of the Gentile world---and some of them aren't. So, don't worry, you don't have to wipe up my philosophical blood today since I won't be getting impaled on any Horns of a Dilemma.

 

[Dave-W]

They claim to be.

I can claim to be Darth Vader too. Does not make it so.

 

[JGG]

Good question. I think it would depend on "who" is saying it: a mind that knows absolutely if this indeed is the situation in all cases

Bear with me. Because this is where my point comes in.

Now we know that God tells us that in terms of humans, our belief, character, morality, etc. are determined by race. If it was true for the Canaanites, then it is necessarily true for all races.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I haven't figured that out yet. Nothing springs to mind.

In dealing with people on here I've found that we can agree that racism is bad. But because we can't agree on what makes it bad, it's little more than saying that word has negative connotations.

So I'm hoping to be able to identify why racism is morally wrong (assuming it is).

As they say: better to be a racist than to be called a racist.

So...to be sure...you believe racism is bad?

 

[Ana the Ist]

I haven't figured that out yet. Nothing springs to mind.

In dealing with people on here I've found that we can agree that racism is bad. But because we can't agree on what makes it bad, it's little more than saying that word has negative connotations.

So I'm hoping to be able to identify why racism is morally wrong (assuming it is).

As they say: better to be a racist than to be called a racist.

So...to be sure...you believe racism is bad?

 

[JGG]

So...to be sure...you believe racism is bad?

I do.

 

[JGG]

I can claim to be Darth Vader too. Does not make it so.

Anyone can claim to be a Christian or Darth Vader. That doesn't make it so.

If Nazis claim to be Christians I will take them at their word the same as anyone else.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I do.

...and why do you think it's bad?

 

[JGG]

...and why do you think it's bad?

I'm far too interested in what everyone else has to say to add my opinion.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Bear with me. Because this is where my point comes in.

Now we know that God tells us that in terms of humans, our belief, character, morality, etc. are determined by race. If it was true for the Canaanites, then it is necessarily true for all races.

Yep. That's what the Bible says ... in one part of several contexts. But, I know, I know. You don't want to have to wade and work through those contexts because you don't think they're relevant. That way, you can more easily shuffle us on out into the bull ring where we can take our choice of one of two uncomfortable pointy objects.

Nice. Very nice, JGG.

 

[Chesterton]

I'm far too interested in what everyone else has to say to add my opinion.

lol. I'm gonna start a thread titled "What's Wrong With Cowardly Cop Outs.".

 

[JGG]

Yep. That's what the Bible says ... in one part of several contexts. But, I know, I know. You don't want to have to wade and work through those contexts because you don't think they're relevant. That way, you can more easily shuffle us on out into the bull ring where we can take our choice of one of two uncomfortable pointy objects.

Nice. Very nice, JGG.

By all means, explain context.

 

[JGG]

lol. I'm gonna start a thread titled "What's Wrong With Cowardly Cop Outs.".

That's a great idea!

 

[2PhiloVoid]

By all means, explain context.

Ok. You asked for it.

The first little excursion we'll be taking is to the book of Genesis. (Why start with the end when you can start at the beginning? )

EXHIBIT 1) Noah curses his grandson, Canaan, because Ham, Noah's son committed some kind of moral offense. So, from the line of Ham and Canaan, we supposedly later see the Canaanites come forth in the Old Testament narratives. Then, the Israelites come out of the line of Shem, one of Noah's two other sons. (Genesis 9:22-27)

Now, JGG, just with EXHIBIT 1 alone, would you say that with the narrow time implications within the genealogical connections presented therein that the Israelites are indeed a separate "race" from the Canaanites? [I wouldn't.] Moreover, would Noah's curse upon Canaan designate some "physical" difference in the Canaanite's appearance by which they would be later targeted for discrimination by the Israelites? [The answer is "no," unless you think being taller and stronger than an Israelite is something that would count as a racial characteristic. But, I get ahead of myself in saying this. We'll save this nuance for an upcoming Exhibit.]

More importantly, we should note that we're dealing with a narrative here in Genesis that is essentially a product of a later time and wrapped up contextually as a background explanation as to "why" the Canaanites were being picked on by the Israelites during the Conquest. It looks to me like the implication build into this initial 'explanatory' text is of a ... moral quality.

Shall we move on to EXHIBIT 2? [And yes, there will be several exhibits. ]

 

[JGG]

Ok. You asked for it.

The first little excursion we'll be taking is to the book of Genesis. (Why start with the end when you can start at the beginning? )

EXHIBIT 1) Noah curses his grandson, Canaan, because Ham, Noah's son committed some kind of moral offense. So, from the line of Ham and Canaan, we supposedly later see the Canaanites come forth in the Old Testament narratives. Then, the Israelites come out of the line of Shem, one of Noah's two other sons. (Genesis 9:22-27)

Now, JGG, just with EXHIBIT 1 alone, would you say that with the narrow time implications within the genealogical connections presented therein that the Israelites are indeed a separate "race" from the Canaanites? [I wouldn't.] Moreover, would Noah's curse upon Canaan designate some "physical" difference in the Canaanite's appearance by which they would be later targeted for discrimination by the Israelites? [The answer is "no," unless you think being taller and stronger than an Israelite is something that would count as a racial characteristic. But, I get ahead of myself in saying this. We'll save this nuance for an upcoming Exhibit.]

1500 years? I don't see why not. Before they became distinct ethnicities 500 years ago, the Hutu and Tutsis were one people. Creole is a distinct ethnicity, and they've only been around for about 300 years.

More importantly, we should note that we're dealing with a narrative here in Genesis that is essentially a product of a later time and wrapped up contextually as a background explanation as to "why" the Canaanites were being picked on by the Israelites during the Conquest. It looks to me like the implication build into this initial 'explanatory' text is of a ... moral quality.

Should we note that? Why?

Shall we move on to EXHIBIT 2? [And yes, there will be several exhibits. ]

By all means...

 

[super animator]

I'm far too interested in what everyone else has to say to add my opinion.

You could say " I am asking this to start a conversation".

 

[JGG]

You could say " I am asking this to start a conversation".

I just want to continue being the devil's advocate for this one.

 

[Far Side Of the Moon]

Origen is not gospel, but I feel you have missed my point.

God says that the Canaanites (who did exist) all share at least one attribute that makes them worthy to be executed by another race - the Israelites - who all share another attribute which endears them to God.

The moral of the story: racism is good. Even God says that members of a given race share attributes which favor or disfavor them to God. God is the Protoracist.

You are disgusting trying to justify racism and spweing hate...you do realize youre on a Christian site right ? Hate has no place here. Good bye.

 

[Far Side Of the Moon]

If I think I'm superior to you because my race is superior, and you believe we are equal, what do you call it?

But that's not even what I'm talking about. All I'm asking is why it's wrong to attribute things like intelligence, character, behavior, etc, to someone's race? Keep in mind that you're about to explain how God does just that.



Does racism necessarily mean superior?



So what you're saying, if I'm not mistaking you, is that all Canaanites were of deficient character that they did horrible things to the Hebrews. They were murderers and rapists and none were good. They deserved to be exterminated outright.

So, why is it wrong for me to say that all people of race x are deficient of character, or inteligence, humility, etc. Why would it be wrong to say that all members of race y are murderers, thieves and rapists?



I would say that the existence of racism, particularly racism justified in exactly the manner I'm using, suggests that there is controversy.

If you're uncomfortable with controversy, maybe discussion forums are not the place for you.



I'm really not. You're telling me that you can generalize behavior, character and belief across an entire race like the Canaanites or the Hittites to justify genocide. So why would it be wrong for me to generalize the behavior, character and belief of race x? How is racism wrong, when you yourself are justifying it? Why were the Nazis wrong for trying to exterminate the Jews? Why were the Hutu wrong for trying to exterminate the Tutsi?

If God tells us that behavior, character, belief, etc, are all attributable to race, how can it be wrong to be racist?

Your race isnt superior...you get sick and die like everyone else. Your mind set is completely alarming... Why are people like you who believe what you do even on this site ? Are you trying to "Wake people " up? No one is going to agree with your idiocy and hate.