The Truth About Christianity, Race and Skin Color

Introduction

There is an ongoing debate about the essence of skin color and its relationship to the Bible. During these times of racial oppression and conflict, there’s a tremendous interest in the “black man’s” place in the Bible. Were there black people in the Bible and why are they so “unnoticeable?”

This presentation seeks to share with you the origin of race and the relevance of skin color to those that were living closest to the Messianic period. We hope to reveal the reason it is so difficult to recognize people of color in the biblical narrative and how the innocent distinctions of skin color became a means of devaluing human life.

The Research

David Goldenburg has conducted a tremendous amount of research attempting to debunk the idea that ancient Judaism was the source of what is now known as modern racism. He wants to demonstrate that rabbinic cultures were not representing racial biases as much as they recognizing human distinctions. He admits that those distinctions made in rabbinic literature may be perceived as racially oppressive in today’s world. However, this was not the intention of the earliest rabbis and Jewish thinkers.

The Environmental Theory

History shows that each race has a preference for their own race. This is not necessarily racist since at the fundamental level this preference is the natural instinct one possesses to be a part of a community. Communities are built on the desire to fellowship in common. It just so happens that language, skin color and ethnicity tends to be the things that bring commonness. However, I must say at this point that Christianity redefines what creates community, and the problem has been that we have continued to use the typical variables (such as race, ethnicity, skin color, and gender) for community than accepting the Christ-centered one. Therefore, Christian communities remain racially segregated.

Sextus Empiricus described it perfectly—each man agrees that beauty exists, but the dispute is not over beauty, but over what is beautiful. We simply have not agreed on what make’s one beautiful.

When the ancient groups described themselves, they described themselves with a sense of pride for their community. Goldenburg notes, by the second century, Jews saw themselves as neither white nor black, but in between. They were described as being light brown or a honey-color. The Greeks often described themselves in a similar way. However, it may not be concluded that there were no black Jews or black Greeks.

Goldenburg explains what the classical writers described as the environmental theory. The environmental theory says “that the environment determines the physical and nonphysical characteristics of humanity and thus accounts for differences among peoples.” This theory is extremely interesting—notice the link between the physical and nonphysical. Goldenburg shares, “as early as Herodotus and Hippocrates we see a direct link between physical and nonphysical characteristics (which are explicitly or implicitly considered as inferior or superior) and this link is a crucial component-in fact, the lifeblood-of racist thinking.” That is, classical writings include an idea of there being some relationship between physical and nonphysical characteristics that define a people racism. This theory has been used to categorize and stereotype people groups in Western civilization.