The Bible and interracial marriage
by Carl Wieland
Fabric textures by: ©iStockPhoto.com/StockCube ©iStockPhoto.com/il67 ©iStockPhoto.com/de-kay
Even though the Bible makes it clear that all people are descended from Adam and
Eve (so they must be very closely related),1
there are still misconceptions among some Christians surrounding ‘race’.
Surprisingly, perhaps, this can include concerns about the idea of marriage between
two believers from different so-called races.
But these concerns have no basis in either science or the Bible. Science has finally
caught up with God’s Word in affirming how very closely related we all are
at the genetic level. Evolutionary thinking has, historically, exacerbated racism
dramatically. Darwin believed that some groups were less evolved toward humanity
than others—with his own group, unsurprisingly, the most evolved. Darwin’s
ally in Germany, Haeckel, even attacked the Bible for its antiracism.2
Evolutionary thinking has, historically, exacerbated racism dramatically.
It’s not as if we can solve all society’s problems with race by simply
decreeing, on the basis of our close relatedness, that there is no such thing as
race. If that were so, then there would be no such thing as racism, or discrimination
by race. Nor would there even be the question of ‘interracial marriage’.
In short, the word ‘race’ still conveys everyday meaning; we recognize
that some are more closely related to us (and hence look more similar to us) than
others.
But what ‘group differences’ exist are trivial, as modern discoveries
in human biology and genetics now confirm. Things such as skin, hair or eye colour
involve no structures or functions unique to any group, just various amounts of
the same stuff. All people have the same ‘sunscreen’ skin pigment melanin;
those with more melanin, generally labelled ‘black’, are really more
dark-brown. Those with less, called ‘white’, are really light brown—often
pinkish, because of insufficient melanin to screen the redness of their small blood
vessels. And there are many shades in between.
The Bible, science, race & culture
Unlike any other creation book you have ever read
A blow-by-blow tour of race-related issues across the world, with amazingly apt
anecdotes and analogies revealing a wealth of research and life experience all in
one volume. Combines sensitivity with a rejection of ‘political correctness’.
For many, this immensely readable work will make ‘the lights go on’—not
just about race but the whole biblical ‘big picture’ of human history.
Dr Jerry Bergman wrote: “In short, it is superb!”
For more reviews and to read sample sections go to OneHumanFamily.ME or OneHumanFamily.US.
|
People with blue eyes have no unique colouring chemical; it’s that same stuff,
melanin. It’s simply the way the light scatters from a lesser amount of melanin
(just as the sky is blue because of the scattering of light from air molecules,
enhanced by fine dust particles). Similarly, those genetically programmed to produce
a lot of melanin in their hair will have brown or ‘black’ hair. And
those with a little bit have blond hair.
Incidentally, it’s easy to explain how groups of people with differing characteristics
distributed variously across the world could have arisen very rapidly. The Bible
describes an event at Babel that provides the right conditions—the breakup
of a population into a few dozen smaller ones that became isolated from each other.
The world’s population, having recently emerged from a ‘near-extinction
event’,3 all spoke
the same language. A small number of new languages (which form the ‘roots’
of today’s language family ‘trees’) was suddenly and supernaturally
imposed upon this group.4
The resultant confusion and likely hostilities meant that each group rapidly fulfilled
God’s stated purpose for this event, namely to spread people over all the
earth. In effect, the event imposed a virtually instant social and then geographic
(hence reproductive) isolation from each other. Each group carried a different subset
of the total ‘gene pool’. Chapter 18 of The Creation Answers Book explains in detail how
this would have led to the sorts of genetic groupings (including visible traits)
we see in human populations today. Thus, racial differences, though not the purpose
of this Babel event, were a side-effect.
Desperate attempts have been made to use this and other portions of the Bible to
justify the status quo in societies with slavery and/or segregation. However,
following that fairly drastic initial divine ‘nudge’, humanity has long
ago amply observed God’s command to fill the earth. There is no suggestion
in Scripture that God forbids either migration from one place to another, or marriage
between one ethnic group and another.5
The Bible does counsel believers not to marry unbelievers (2 Corinthians 6:14). And in Old Testament times, the Israelites
were not to marry outsiders. But they were allowed to if the outsiders
converted to faith in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob—such as occurred
for Rahab and Ruth, ancestors of Jesus (Matthew 1). This shows that the issue was religious, not
racial or even cultural.
Culture matters
Common sense indicates that groups that have a longer history of isolation from
each other, both geographically and linguistically, will have developed greater
differences in their respective cultures. Interracial marriage will therefore often
mean that one is marrying someone from a different culture. So,
there are ‘wisdom issues’ to consider. Cultural differences can arise
even when two people are of the same ‘race’, e.g. a typical English
person marrying a typical Russian. Even those speaking the same language, such as
Americans and Australians,6
are often surprised at how great the cultural differences can be.
Cultural differences can greatly enrich both persons’ lives, but they can
also bring a unique set of problems. Couples wise enough to seek counselling7 on various matters prior to
betrothal should consider such things, too. It helps to be able to anticipate the
sorts of problems that may arise, and bring the issues out into the open. The intention
is to try to minimize problems should the marriage proceed.
Dogs and the dogma of ‘racial purity’
One of the issues in the way people see interracial marriage has, I think, to do
with misconceptions about the idea of a so-called ‘pure race’. I recall
listening once to a talk by CMI colleague, Peter Sparrow. With his trademark wide
grin and booming voice, Peter made a statement which even startled me (it certainly
seemed to shock many in the audience). He said (emphasis his): “Adam and Eve
were the ultimate mongrels!”
When you think about it, he was absolutely right. The problem is that we have been
conditioned to think of genetically depleted populations as ‘pure’ in
the sense of somehow ‘better’. In fact, it is the ‘mongrel’
combinations in both animals and humans that have the greater genetic richness,
more like the originals that God created directly.
When we start with the real history of mankind given in God’s Word, we see
why there are no biblical or biological barriers to interracial marriage.
A good illustration of this involves domestic dog breeds. Starting from a ‘mongrel’
dog population, breeders have been able to select out many different ‘pure’
breeds—varieties as different as, say, Great Danes are from Chihuahuas. But
by isolating certain characteristics, breeders have had to ignore others. Thus,
by breeding for ‘Chihuahua-ness’ (including ‘tininess’),
some of the genes for ‘Great-Dane-ness’ (such as ‘hugeness’)
were lost in the process—and vice versa. So, if all dogs in the world ceased
to exist apart from Chihuahuas, one could never breed something like a Great Dane
again. To ‘rebreed’ a Great Dane, one would need the genetic richness
and variety in that original mongrel population.8
So the ‘pure’ breeds are in fact thinned out and genetically depleted
populations. They are more specialized, but also less able to vary and adapt further
by selection. Similarly in human populations; Adam and Eve could not have been,
as they are often depicted, pale-skinned with blue eyes and blond hair, or they
could not have given rise to all of the different varieties of humans. They would
likely have been ‘middle of the road’ in most characteristics, thus
providing for the great range of variety observed in their offspring.
In such things as skin shade, hair and eye colouring, they were likely a medium
brown. The descendants of people who have such a rich genetic endowment can then
express a great range of variation as these genes recombine. Their skin shading
can range from ‘white’ to ‘black’ and every shade in between.
This is beautifully illustrated in the ‘two-tone twins’ example (left)
favoured by CMI speakers. The two beautiful twin9
baby girls shown were able to express that amazing level of variety in one generation
because their mother and father (pictured) are themselves the product of ‘mixed’
marriages. In short, when two people from different races intermarry, they gain
a greater richness and variety in their genes, closer to the original.
How sad that so many, inspired by evolution, or by others who have been, have put
so much fanatical passion into preserving their particular ‘pure race’.
Many have killed, and even willingly died, for this ‘cause’. Once one
sees it for what it is—one’s genetically depleted race—it doesn’t
sound like a cause worth wasting any breath on, let alone dying for.
The bottom line
When we start with the real history of mankind given in God’s Word, we see
why there are no biblical or biological barriers to interracial marriage. In fact,
there are positive aspects to it. Since the spouses in such a marriage are generally
going to be less closely related than two of the same ethnic group, they are likely
introducing greater genetic variety into their offspring.10
Related articles
Further reading
References and notes
- See for example Luke 3:23–38, Acts 17:26, 1 Corinthians 15:45. Return to text.
- E. van Niekerk, Ernst Haeckel:
a hostile witness to the truth of the Bible, creation.com/haeckel2, 3 March
2011. Return to text.
- The Flood of Noah—8 people only survived.
Return to text.
- Genesis Chapters 10 and 11. The distribution of these new
languages seems to have been along extended family lines. See also Wieland, C.,
Towering change: Were all of today’s thousands of languages separately
created? And if not, have languages evolved? Creation 22(1):22–26,
1999; creation.com/babel. Return to text.
- This is expounded and argued in detail in my book One Human Family: The Bible, science, race and culture.
Return to text.
- Well, sort of the same language.
 Return to text.
- E.g. from an experienced pastor with the appropriate level
of godly common sense. Return to text.
- ‘Pure’ lines in the world of show-breeding are,
incidentally, also much more likely to suffer from the effects of accumulated mutational
defects because of inbreeding. See Cosner, L., A parade of mutants
pedigree dogs and artificial selection, Creation 32(3):28–32,
2010; creation.com/pedigree. Return to text.
- Heterozygous or non-identical twins, clearly.
Return to text.
- Also, the offspring are less likely to inherit genetic defects
from their parents; see creation.com/races.
Return to text.
| Anthony P said “Thanks for your … website, it’s really easy to navigate and it is a massive bonus to be able to read back-issues of your magazines … without your ministry I probably wouldn’t be a Christian today. Thank you so much and keep up the good work.” So help us do just that!  | | |
|
