Versión de HTML Básico
The Racial Issue in Biblical Perspective
275
apostolic church to Jews, Samaritans, and Gentiles on a nondiscriminatory
basis (Rom. 10:12; Gal. 3:28; Eph. 2:11-22). These same oversights char
acterize the use by racists of Jesus’ reluctance in responding to an appeal
from a Syrophoenician woman (Mark 7:24-30; compare John 4:7 42).
The failure of first-century Christians like Paul to attack slavery is some
times given as a precedent for toleration of the status quo in race relations.
Paul’s advice to Philemon, in counseling him with respect to the proper
treatment of Onesimus, a runaway slave about to be returned to him, calls
into question this view of Paul’s stand on slavery. In verses 15-16 he wrote
Philemon thusly: “For perhaps this is why you lost him for a time, that you
might have him back for good, no longer as a slave, but as more than a
slave—as a dear brother, very dear indeed to me and how much dearer to
you, both as man and as Christian”
(
n e b
) .
This and other such passages
prompted P. T. Forsyth to say of slavery: “The New Testament does not
destroy it, but its gospel does.”
It is sometimes argued that God’s choice of Israel serves as proof of the
divine subordination of certain races. This argument rests on two mistaken
assumptions: (1) that the people of Israel can be identified on racial grounds;
(2) that this choice carries with it privileges without price. The prophets
challenge this first assumption by interpreting rebellion against God, irre
spective of race, as cause for exclusion from the benefits of God’s promise to
Israel. By making participation in these benefits available to all on the sole
conditions of faithfulness to God and loving service to neighbor, irrespective
of race, Jesus and the apostles deny all possibility of identifying the people of
God on racial grounds. All major contributors to both Testaments stand the
second of the above assumptions squarely on its head. God’s choice of Israel,
along with the privilege of becoming the object of God’s love, carries with it
the responsibility of service as the agent of God’s love and purpose. Just as
God’s love manifests itself to all without regard for race, we are prohibited
from being choosy in determining the objects of our love. That this role
entails no special privileges or immunities is amply attested by the experi
ence alike of the people of Israel and Jesus of Nazareth. The New Testament
repeatedly assures us that we can expect much the same treatment as they
received as the reward for our service as the agents of God.
Biblical Warrants for Racial Inclusiveness
The practice of racial inclusiveness within Christianity has certainly not
kept pace with its articulation of racially inclusive pronouncements. Yet our
churches’ proclamations on the issue of race, even in countries such as our
own, in which for generations public statutes lent sanction to racially dis
criminatory practices, have for decades been remarkably free of reservation
and ambiguity. . . . [H|ven if grudgingly, we had to admit that the call to