The Concept of “Race” in the Bible
“Race” refers to a group of humans possessing characteristics passed down genetically that are sufficiently
recognizable for distinguishing between groups. Such characteristics may be physical, including such external and
visible features as height, color of hair, kind of hair, and skin pigmentation. Others may be more subtle and involve
such matters as blood types (O, A, B, AB). It is unlikely any one individual ever possesses all of the characteristics
or traits that mark his or her race.
Misusing the Bible to Support Racism
Misusing Creation Texts. Although the only reference to “race” in the NKJV is Zechariah 9:6, and the subject of race is not developed in any
comprehensive way in the Bible, various passages of Scripture have often been used to promote racial prejudice.
Ranging from relatively harmless to extremely vicious, they tend to cluster around the early chapters of Genesis.
It has been suggested, for example, that the stories of Adam and Eve (Genesis 2–3) apply only to Caucasians. Others
have argued that Cain was the black ancestor of the so-called Negroid stock, a theory that plays into the hands
of racists (in the light of Cain's sinful behavior; see Gen. 4:1–15). Still others have proposed the especially
reprehensible idea that “(hu)man(kind)” in Genesis 1 refers to members of the Caucasoid race and that “beasts”
in the same chapter refers to members of the Negroid race, thus giving aid and comfort to those who might wish
to exercise dominion over their fellows since—by definition—“beasts” are sub-human. Needless to say, none of these
theories is worthy of adoption—or even consideration—by serious students of Scripture.
Misusing the Curse of Canaan. An equally false theory, however, has unfortunately gained popular belief
among some Bible readers. They have understood Noah's curse on Canaan (Gen. 9:25) and his blessing on Shem and
Japheth (Gen. 9:26–27) as providing adequate justification for the enslavement of blacks by whites. The theory
is usually connected to the possibility that the Hebrew word “Ham” (the father of Canaan) means “black.” But the
problems with this line of argument are many:
(1) The proper name Ham may very well not mean “black” at all.
(2) Even if it does, Noah's curse is not against Ham but against his son Canaan.
(3) All known peoples grouped under the name of “Canaanites” (descendants of Canaan) were Caucasoid, not Negroid.
(4) Nothing in the text of Genesis 9 indicates that the curse was lasting and could be expected to surface again
thousands of years after it was originally uttered.
(5) Noah's prediction that Canaanites would some day be subservient to S(h)emites was adequately fulfilled in,
for example, Joshua 9. Because the inhabitants of Gibeon and other cities (Josh. 9:17) had “worked craftily … and
pretended to be [peace-loving] ambassadors” (Josh. 9:4), Joshua said to them, “You are cursed, and none of you
shall be freed from being slaves—woodcutters and water carriers for the house of my God” (Josh. 9:23). In other
words, Noah's curse in Genesis 9 was part of the Lord's overall strategy of subduing the land of Canaan under the
leadership of Joshua and the armies of Israel.
Misusing other Biblical Passages. In addition, nowhere in the Bible is dark skin a sign of inferior status.
Job's skin became black as a result of his illness (Job 30:30). Although the Shulamite is “dark,” she is none the
less “lovely” (Song 1:5). Lamentations 5:10 states: “Our skin was black like an oven because of the terrible famine”
(KJV).
And as far as Jeremiah 13:23 is concerned, John Calvin notes appropriately that “learned men in our age do not
wisely refer to this passage when they seek to prove that there is no free will in man; for it is not simply the
nature of man that is spoken of here, but the habit that is contracted by long practice.” To put it in the vivid
imagery of the text itself, it is no more possible for people who are accustomed to doing evil to then suddenly
start to do good than it is for an Ethiopian to change his skin color or a leopard to change its spots. Just as
there is nothing inherently evil in the color of the leopard's spots, so also there is nothing inherently evil
in the color of an Ethiopian's skin—whatever that color might have been. The subject of Jeremiah 13:23 is not skin
color but the extreme difficulty of altering ingrained habits.
The Biblical Origin of Races
Simple: Derived from Noah's Three Sons. If the Bible speaks anywhere of the origin of what we would today
refer to as “races,” it is in Genesis 10 (often called the Table of Nations). In that chapter the people of the
Biblical world (basically the eastern Mediterranean basin) are divided on the basis of their descent from one or
more of Noah's three sons (Shem, Ham, and Japheth). Since the Hebrew word for “son” can also mean “descendant”
or “successor” or even “nation,” and since the word “father” can also mean “ancestor” or “predecessor” or even
“founder,” we should not be surprised that some of the “sons” listed in Genesis 10 are in fact ethnic or tribal
groups (see Gen. 10:13–14 and especially 10:16–18).
As it turns out, therefore, the Table of Nations is a kind of literary map of the ancient Near East. The “sons”
of Japheth (10:2–4) inhabited the territories north of Canaan and also lived in the maritime regions of southeast
Europe. The “sons” of Ham (10:6–19) settled down in Canaan and along the southern shores of the Red Sea (including
northeast Africa, notably Egypt). The “sons” of Shem included the Hebrew people (the “children of Eber,” 10:21)
and other S(h)emitic peoples such as the Assyrians, Arameans and Arabs (10:22–30). They occupied large tracts of
territory in western Asia.
Complex: Described from Many Perspectives. It is important to observe that the three main divisions of
peoples in the listing of nations (Gen. 10:32) are not always (or only) racial in origin. With respect to the “sons”
of Ham, for example, we are told that they were separated out “according to their families, according to their
languages, in their lands and in their nations” (10:20; see similarly 10:5, 31). “Families” is an ethnic term,
“languages” is a linguistic term, “lands” is geographic, and “nations” is political. It is clear, therefore, that
several criteria were used in describing the “ancestry” or location of this or that group of people. This may help
to explain why a few of them, such as Sheba (10:7, 28) and Havilah (10:7, 29), are listed more than once. Perhaps,
in one case, the division was based on ethnic or linguistic considerations while in another case a geographic or
political concern was most important. It is worth noting that skin color and other “racial” characteristics are
totally absent from the Table of Nations.
The Bible and Interracial Unity
Racial Intermarriage. Conveniently summarized in the genealogical lists of 1 Chronicles 1, the total
of nations is seventy, a number that often symbolizes completion: fourteen from Japheth (1 Chron. 1:5–7), thirty
from Ham (1:8–16), and twenty-six from Shem (1:17–23). Before the Israelites occupied Canaan, seven (again, a number
signifying completion) groups of people inhabited it: Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites, Hittites, Hivites, Jebusites,
and Perizzites (Deut. 7:1; Josh. 3:10; 24:11). Sometimes the list is reduced to as few as two (Gen. 13:7; 34:30;
Judg. 1:4–5) or expanded to as many as ten (Gen. 15:19–21)—another number often symbolizing completion.
Israelites sometimes intermarried with people from one or more of those nations (Gen. 34:2, 9, 16, 21). Since
all members of the human race are of the biological species Homo sapiens, such intermarriage is not wrong
in and of itself. But since marrying into a foreign tribal group implied accepting that group's religion, the people
of God were warned not to do so. Indeed, Nehemiah called curses down on a number of Jewish men in his day because
they had married women from Ashdod, Ammon, and Moab (Neh. 13:23–25). He reminded them that King Solomon had committed
a grave error in this regard: “Pagan women caused even him to sin. Should we then hear of your doing all this great
evil, transgressing against our God by marrying pagan women?” (13:26–27). The fact that the women were foreign,
or of another racial or ethnic stock, was not the issue. The sin was in marrying someone who was “pagan.” In short,
no Old Testament text should be interpreted as condoning racial prejudice or declaring any one “race” to be inherently
inferior to any other.
Racial Diversity in the Church. The teachings of Jesus and the apostles in the New Testament are equally
clear. Christ died to redeem everyone, and the gospel is to be “preached in His name to all nations” (Luke 24:46–47).
God loved all the people in the whole world so much that He gave His Son for them (John 3:16). Although in Jesus'
day Jews had “no dealings with Samaritans” (John 4:4), He made a special effort to minister to the needs of a Samaritan
woman (4:4, 10–26). Christ draws all people to Himself without regard for race or nationality (John 12:32). The
distinguishing mark of true disciples is love for every believer, regardless of race or color (John 13:34–35).
No ethnic group is inferior to any other (Acts 10:28). All nations have a common origin and constitute a single
human family (Acts 17:26). There is no partiality with God (Acts 10:34–35; Rom. 2:11), and we must follow his example
(James 2:1).
Diversity in the church, the body of Christ, is part and parcel of its unity (1 Cor. 12:12–20), and each member
of Christ's body, however weak or unpresentable, depends on all the others (12:21–27). Our unity in Christ transcends
all false distinctions, whether ethnic, social, or sexual (Gal. 3:28). The blood of Christ abolishes any barrier
that would tend to pit one group against another (Eph. 2:13–17; Col. 3:9–11). When the redeemed people of God stand
before the throne and the Lamb, they will constitute “a great multitude which no one [can] number, of all nations,
tribes, peoples, and tongues” (Rev. 7:9).
Christian Commitment to Racial Reconciliation
Minority racial groups can be brought into the mainstream of public life only if and when groups that are in
the majority welcome them to do so. Discrimination against minorities takes away from them the right to own and
possess. Segregation takes away from minorities the right to belong. Stereotyping takes away the right to be what
they are naturally and culturally. Racist actions spring from racist attitudes, and therefore people of good will
on all sides—members of majority and minority groups alike—must rid themselves of every form of racial prejudice,
whether blatant or subtle. Because racism is sinful, it must be rooted out wherever God's people harbor it or
find it. It has no place in any community of believers. It is sanctioned neither by common sense nor by Holy
Scripture.
Christians of every racial stock and ethnic groups must learn—and soon—to worship together, to study together,
to pray together, to have fellowship together, to live together in peace and harmony. Since we have already been
reconciled to God through Christ, we must now get on with the business of becoming reconciled to each other. The
same God who has committed to us the message of reconciliation (2 Cor. 5:19) has also given to us the ministry
of reconciliation (5:18)—first to Himself, and then to one another. It is not enough for us to love the Lord our
God with all our heart and soul and mind and strength. We must also take the second step: We must be willing—indeed,
eager—to love our neighbors as we love ourselves (Mark 12:30–31).
From Race & Reconciliation: Healing the Wounds, Winning
the Harvest by Jack W. Hayford with Greg Howse and Michael Posey. Copyright 1996 by Jack
W. Hayford.
