ICR made their standard charge that racism comes from a belief in evolution.
This is absolutely unbiblical. Racism comes from sin of man and has been
around with us for a long, long time. Long before Darwin ever lived.
Henry Morris has praised Louis Aggassiz as an early creationist, He wrote:
"The most eminent scientists of the nineteenth century were the great
physicists, Lord Kelvin (1824-1907) and Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879), along
with the great biochemist and bacteriologist Louis Pasteur (1822-1895). In
addition to their numerous key scientific contributions, they were vigorous
opponents of evolutionism, as were such great scientists as the mineralogist
David Brewster(1781-1868), the geologist Louis Agassiz (1807-1873), the
German pathologist Rudolph Virchow (1821-1902), the entomologist Henri Fabre
(1823-1915), and many others.
"All of these men were believers in God, Christ, the Bible, and
creation, and yet they were each able to make contributions in science of
uniuqe importance and lasting influence." Henry Morris, The History of
Modern Creationism, p. 27
[In passing, I might mention that Virchow, who is also one of these
"believers," and "creationists", believed that human races came from
separate stocks (see Trinkaus and Shipman, The Neanderthals, 1992, p. 110)
and he was a material reductionist. (ibid., p. 114) But it is true that
Virchow was against the Aryanism widespread in Germany during his life. But
Virchow would not be recognizable as a creationist today.]
Following a list of great scientists, which contains Agassiz's name, Morris
writes:
"These men, as well as scores of others who could be mentioned, were all
creationists, not evolutionists, and their names are practically synonymous
with the rise of modern science. to them, the scientific enterprise was a
high calling, one dedicated to 'thinking God's thoughts after Him,' as it
were, certainly not something dedicated to destroying creationism." Henry
Morris and Gary Parker, _What is Creation Science?_ 1987, p. 20
In probably the most boring creationist book, Wendell Bird continually
claims Agassiz as a creationist. and America's leading biologist (The Origin
of Species Revisited,) In vol I Bird writes:
"Other early creationists such as Agassiz..." p. 85
"...great scientists such as Agassiz of Harvard, who held to a scientific
theroy of creation that found data that organisms appear endowed from the
beginning of their existence with all their characteristics. p. 447
In Vol. II Bird writes;
"Creationist conclusions were also reached by Agassiz of Harvard, 'America's
leading biologist' at the time of Darwin..." p. 201
"Mid-nineteenth century creationists included paleontologists Louis Agassiz,
..." p. 219
"Professor Louis Agassiz of Harvard was a leading creationist scientist in
this period, was the world's leading ichthyologist and 'America's leading
biologist' according to Gould, and was 'beyond question one of the ablest,
wisest, and best informed of the biologists of his day who was so
influential that 'every notable teacher of natural history in the U.S. for
the second half fo the 19th century was a pupil either of Agassiz or of one
of his students', according to the Encyclopedia Britannica." p. 321-322
see similar Bird quotes on p. 336 and 444
Thus, if Agassiz is a godly man, thinking God's thoughts after him and was a
creationist, uninfluenced by the racism of evolution, then why did Agassiz
write this?
****REPUBNANCE FOLLOWS*****
"It was in Philadelphia that I first found myself in prolonged contact with
Negroes; all the domestics in my hotel were men of color. I can scarcely
express to you the painful impression that I received, especially since the
feeling that they inspired in me is contrary to all our ideas about the
confraternity of the human type (genre) and the unique origin of our
species. But truth before all. Nevertheless, I experienced pity at the
sight of this degraded and degenerate race, and their lot inspired
compassion in me in thinking that they were really men. Nonetheless, it is
impossible for me to repress the feeling that they are not of the same blood
as us. In seeing their black faces with their thick lips and grimacing
teeth, the wool on their head, their bent knees, their elongated hands, I
could not take my eyes off their face in order to tell them to stay far
away. And when they advanced that hideous hand towards my plate in order to
serve me, I wished I were able to depart in order to eat a piece of bread
elsewhere, rather than dine with such service. What unhappiness for the
white race-0- to have tied their existence so closely with that of Negroes
in certain countries! God presereve us from such a contact." Gould,
Mismeasure of Man, 1981 p. 44-45 cited by Wolpoff and Caspari, Race and
Human Evolution, 1997 p. 88
Even Henry holds to Arthur Custances Racial views and cites Custance in The
Biblical Basis of Modern Science, p. 441. Custance held that each racial
group had certain skills not held by other racial groups. According to
Custance, Hamitic peoples were to be servants par excellance. And Henry
happily cites Custance's work. Many blacks have found this offensive. I
don't blame them.
ICR should cease their shameless slurring of evolutionists and ask
themselves several questions.
Why if racism comes from evolution, was slavery introduced by a CHRISTIAN
NATION (Britain) PRIOR to Darwinism?
Why were Indians in the America's slaughtered by the Spanish who were
Christians and did not believe in evolution? Listen to what Latourette says,
"...But everywhere in the beginning and in most regions later on the only
labourers available were Indians. The Indians, then, must be induced to
work, by peaceful means if possible, by force if need be. In Mexico and
Peru the Indians had been accustomed to toil in the mines and in the fields
for thei own superiors, and the coming of the Spaniards meant simply, from
this standpoint, the exchange of one set of masters for another. In many
other areas, however, among them the scene of the first Spanish settlements,
the West Indies, the aborigines had not been inured to that kind of
discipline. In consequence, the efforts of the Spaniards to obtain labour
were accompanied by the greatest cruelty and the grossest barbarities and
entailed for the natives untold suffering.
"The most flagrant of the abuses seem to have been concentrated in
the first years of the settlements. As has so often been the case in the
impact of one race upon another, in the first stages the worst passions
seemed to be called out in many of the conquerors. At the beginning, a
large proportion of the Spaniards came to the New World unmarried or without
their wives. Illicit relations with Indian women inevitably followed, with
much of violence and lust. Narratives of the time give lurid pictures of
rape, of wholesale slaughter, and of great dogs being loosed on the
terrified natives." Kenneth Latourette A History of the Expansion of
Christianity: Three Centuries of Advance, 1500 A.D. to 1800 A.D., (Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 1939-1967), p. 89
None of these Spaniards had ever heard of Darwin.
Don't point a finger at the Catholics over this. A protestant group, The
Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, owned and
maintained two plantations with lots of slaves. (Latourette ibid. p. 233)
And remember that prior to Darwin, most of the slave holders in the south
went to their protestant churches on Sundays and sang their hymns. In fact,
Henry's own denomination, the Southern Baptists, split with their northern
brethren over the issue of slavery. Those in the south, believed in slavery
and they didn't believe in evolution.
Having been raised Southern Baptist on the periphery of the Old Confederacy,
I can remember quite well the adults discussing in the 1960's (by those who
rejected evolution) the issue of whether or not blacks should be allowed to
attend our services if they chose to come to our doors. Some deacons were
quite willing to bar the door.
My purpose is not to knock any particular denomination here. Christians have
much to be ashamed of in the area of racism. My own mother who claimed to
be a christian never forgave me for marrying "an Arab". She said some
pretty nasty racially-based things about my soon-to-be bride (now of 25
years duration), and she did not believe in evolution and went to our
Southern Baptist church each Sunday, Sunday Night, Wednesday and Revival.
ICR should also ask why what happened today, happened. I went to the Byron
Nelson Golf tournament. I watched Tiger Woods tee off and walk down the
fairway to the first hole. All along the path, you could tell where this
young black man was by the applause which followed his footsteps along the
fairway. I would bet that most of the people out at the tournament believe
in evolution, yet their cheers and support for Woods would say that they are
not racists. If they were racists, they would have booed.
ICR should be ashamed of itself for its continuing misrepresentation of
history and slurring the good names of many christians and non christians
alike who are not racists. ICR's actions are despicable and should be
condemned by all.
Racism comes from the sinfulness of man. It does not come from anywhere
else. I would ask all young-earth creationists to call off this
evolution-is-the- cause-of-racism business.
Of course, their actions will not be condemned by young-earth creationists.
I will not respond to anything on this issue.
glenn
Foundation, Fall and Flood
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm