Introduction

In our contemporary context we perceive the sinfulness of racism with unconventional moral clarity. Somehow, in a culture obsessed with ensuring that no one can make any claims about absolute and exclusive moral truths, the prevailing philosophies of the day have declared that racism is not only a self-evident moral wrong–but that it is the unforgivable sin. Capitalizing on this unexpected bout of sensitivity to conscience, loud voices have declared a number of particular corollaries to the premise of racism’s sinfulness–and have simultaneously declared that any opposition to those corollaries or the actions required by them is equivalent to the sin of racism itself.

We Christians must affirm unequivocally that racism is sin. However, we must also stop and think about the actual corollaries of the premise that racism is sinful—and reject those false conclusions which are themselves products of sinful thought. We must be able to take a stand against racism without resorting to sinful methods of thought or deed.

To do that, we must determine the underlying Biblical reasons as to why racism is sin. We must then commit to denounce and refrain from any method of responding to racism which itself is built upon the same sinful principles. We must be aware of other manifestations of those sinful principles in other contexts and undertake similar commitments. And we must adopt methods of response which are consonant with Biblical principles and truths about God and human nature—methods which demonstrate a true understanding of sin, justice, and mercy.

Fundamentally, the sin of racism is not primarily a sin against our fellow brothers and sisters of the human race. It is primarily a sin against God. And only when we accept that perspective can we understand how to respond to sin in all its manifestations–by seeking justice, loving mercy, and walking humbly with God. (See Micah 6:8).

Why is Racism Sinful?

Fundamentally, racism is man seeking to replace God. It is self-idolatry. It is a single human being or group of human beings who identify some arbitrary characteristic about their own or another’s appearance and assert superiority over other members of the human race by virtue of the possession of such characteristic. In this way, man seeks to play God over his fellow man by declaring that others—who are made in their image—have greater value than those whose image does not appear like their own. In this way man usurps the vertical relationship between man and God and places himself above other members of the human race.

Thus, racism is not sinful primarily because it oppresses our fellow man. If that were the case, we would still need to ask why it is sinful to oppress our fellow man.

Racism is not sinful primarily because it is an assertion of a lie. If that were the case, we would still need to ask why it is sinful to assert a lie.

Racism is not sinful primarily because it purports to recognize the inherent superiority of one group of human beings over another group. If that were the case, we would still need to ask why it is sinful to choose arbitrary characteristics to celebrate and others to denigrate.

No, racism is primarily sinful because it denies the truth of how we were all created in the image of God. Every human being bears the imago Dei, is of infinite worth, and is deserving of respect by virtue of innate human dignity. But that dignity was conferred by God in his perfect wisdom and love. The Bible teaches: “So God created man in his own image, / in the image of God he created him; / male and female he created them.” (Gen. 1:27). It goes on to confirm the value God placed on human life: “Whoever sheds the blood of man, / by man shall his blood be shed, / for God made man in his own image.” (Gen. 9:6). To deny this truth—and to replace this truth with a lie—is an attempt by the creature of man to usurp the authority of the creator God.

That vertical dimension of sin is quickly followed by the horizontal dimension—sin against fellow human beings. If man can assert his innate moral superiority as a matter of truth and fact, he can justify any number of subsequent sins. And in the case of racism—where members of one so-called race assert their superiority over members of other so-called races simply by virtue of such arbitrary distinctions—dominance is justified by appeal to mere outward appearance which is then deemed to have all sorts of other virtues and positive traits. It is only a short step from there to dehumanizing members of the other races–for once innate superiority and inferiority is presumed, the distance between one race and another is as far as God from his creation.

But such atrocities can only be justified if the vertical relationship is first usurped. And such atrocities can only be condemned if the sin of self-idolatry is clearly seen. For if it is not wrong to usurp the throne of God, then sin is simply the failure to successfully assert one’s will and use one’s power to remake the world as one sees fit. But if it is morally wrong to usurp God’s place, then one can condemn the subsequent sins which flow therefrom. In the Christian worldview, might does not make right. Right makes right.

So we Christians reject the fundamental premise of the racist, of the white nationalist, of the racial identitarian who deems himself to be superior to all others simply because of his arbitrary racial characteristics which he has seen fit to determine his identity. In fact, we confess that, in Christ Jesus, ethnocultural barriers are relatively meaningless. Instead, although they may serve as mere descriptors of various communities, they have no ultimate bearing on our true identity as sons and daughters of God and fellow heirs with Christ. (see Gal. 3:28 and Eph. 2:14–18; c.f. Rev. 7:9).

In the Christian worldview, we start with the premise that all human beings were created in the image of God. However, in his sin, the racist rejects this premise and assets instead that he was made in the image of God (and all others who share his racial characteristics) and that all members of other races were not made in the image of God. He usurps God’s rightful place and denigrates other bearers of the imago Dei.

However, as much the racist exploits the artificial split he has created between himself and the other, so does Jesus bridge the actual chasm between himself and us. Human beings, as beings created by God, necessarily the “others” to God. Rather than oppressing us, he freed us by condescending to incarnate as a human being—as a creature, as a true other. And then dying as a man and bearing our sins–the sins of another people. Jesus demonstrates what it truly means to seek the good of the other rather than the alternative.

So the alternative paradigm to the racist one is one of unity and humility. We must recognize our common brotherhood and, in unity, recognize our subservience and inferiority to Jesus—the gracious Lord who died for his creatures whom he loved. The paradigm in the Christian worldview is one where, rather than usurping the throne of God, we seek the glory of God and his kingdom. Rather than seeking our own superiority at the cost of the other, we seek healing in relationship and the flourishing of our fellow man. And again, this all stems from a proper understanding of the true nature of God, the true nature of man, and then of man’s true relationship to God.

How Should we (Not) Respond to Racism?

Thus, we Christians must recognize that methods matter. And a response to the evil of racism cannot adopt the same sinful principles in service of another goal and expect to hold moral authority.

In other words, the enemy of our enemy is not necessarily our friend.

Any response to racism which seeks to oppress other human beings, reach a preferred outcome by asserting lies, or even assert one group’s inherent inferiority for reasons of race is despicable, just like the evil it seeks to combat. Because ultimately this type of response is as sinful as the first type of racist. Historical wrongs cannot be rectified through contemporary sin. This is not the type of propitiation we need. For the Christian, the ends never justify the means—and a sinful end cannot justify anything.

We cannot hope to place ourselves on God’s throne and claim the mantle of the arbiter of right and wrong without standing condemned of idolatry. We cannot arrogate to ourselves the ability to exert our will to power (because it is now “our turn for dominance”) and avoid the wrath of God.

For this is the same type of sin in the vertical dimension which leads to the same types of atrocities in the horizontal dimension against our fellow human beings. All that changed is the group of people asserting which characteristics or secondary identities are of true importance. And nothing could be more false.

Instead, the Christian must take a stand for right and wrong, for the true nature of reality, as revealed to us by God in his grace. We stand for his justice and exhibit his mercy, rather than enslaving ourselves and others to the dictates of our emotions and anger. When appropriate authorities exert force truly for justice, then that is right and good. Petulant citizens who for any cause and for the sake of their desire to “express themselves” commit violence upon other human beings are nothing but bullies and sinful people who have indulged their sin. Those who seek the ascendancy of one race (or other identity group) over other people groups are seeking a sinful end.

We must also have faith in God’s sovereignty. We must have faith that he is more faithful than we will ever be. And we must have conviction that God is “[t]he Rock, his work is perfect, / for all his ways are justice. / A God of faithfulness and without iniquity, / just and upright is he.” (Deut. 32:4). We must remember that compared to God, we are all guilty. We must ask that in light of who Jesus is and what he has done—what is justice? What is fairness?

Finally, we must remember in the midst of our cultural moment, we have a faith of grace, not works. We do not need to worry that a failure to say everything on our minds will forever taint us with moral contamination and the sin of omission. We do not need to worry that association with sinful people will keep us from the love of God. We must repent of our sin, but we should not take on guilt which is not ours (including allegedly racial guilt imposed by others) nor hold on to guilt which is ours (including moral responsibility for the most vile acts) if Christ has already forgiven us.

Keeping all this in mind, we should listen to each other, and seek to understand. We should strive to make peace, to rebuke error, and to speak truth in love. We should seek to model such Christian community that a watching world can say only that the Holy Spirit is at work healing hearts and allowing our churches to transcend the schisms which tear other relationships apart. We should seek to instantiate the norms which we know to be true.

Other Idols of the Self

It is sometimes difficult to see past the symptoms for the disease. That is, to seek racial reconciliation is to seek to normalize certain moral truths about God and man. In order to do this, we must realize that racial strife is only one of many manifestations of sinful principles. Such principles are sinful because they first and foremost violate the moral law and truth of God, and therefore are universally sinful—even when expressed in different ways.

Murder, for instance, is sinful because it expresses in the most violent way possible that the killer’s interests or desires were more important than the victim’s life. Abortion is sinful for the same reasons. Sexism is sinful because it asserts that one sex is superior to the other. Classism is sinful because it asserts that one (socially constructed) class is superior to another.

We must stand against such things, no matter what form they take, while assuming a posture of humility since the differentiation of the principle from the manifestation and then the secondary conclusions which may or may not flow therefrom will take a great deal of careful thinking and honest discourse. We live in a culture which has determined that if I don’t like what you have to say, I just need to call you a vile term which everyone agrees demonstrates your sin, and then I have license to denigrate, disrespect, or even do violence to you. I have license to deny that you bear the image of God and have innate human dignity. But this type of response only instantiates further a subversion of the imago Dei, and is anything but civic discourse. Rather, when speaking with others, we must give the other person the benefit of the doubt and assume they are acting in good faith. Only then can we proceed in a spirit of mutual respect. We must be humble in the process of critical discourse as we identify the underlying presuppositions, derivative conclusions, and the truth and moral character of each. What we perceive one person to be saying may not be what was meant, or may actually be informed by a deficient and sinful view of God and man. In all things the Bible is our authoritative guide as to fundamental truths about God and man, the moral norms of behavior and structure which we should seek to make manifest, and the gospel message of ultimate reconciliation despite our sin.

Conclusion

If we believe that man is made in the image of God, we must first have a proper understanding of God, and then of the nature of his image bearers. And then we must commit to act consistently with those fundamental beliefs. We Christians must commit to seek the kingdom of God, the righteousness of God, and the glory of God. Only then will we be able to find and build the kind of community which honors both God and man.