Denial of Evolution Is a Form of White Supremacy
BY ALLISON HOPPER, JULY 5, 2021
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/denial-of-evolution-is-a-form-of-white-supremacy/
The global scientific community overwhelmingly accepts that all living humans are of African descent. Most scientific articles about our African origins focus on genetics. The part of the story that is not widely shared is about the creation of human culture. We are all descended genetically, and also culturally, from dark-skinned ancestors.
It so happens, I don't know how dark that's supposed to be, but OK.
I want to unmask the lie that evolution denial is about religion and recognize that at its core, it is a form of white supremacy that perpetuates segregation and violence against Black bodies.
Pretty certain she has an axe to grind.
At the heart of white evangelical creationism is the mythology of an unbroken white lineage that stretches back to a light-skinned Adam and Eve. In literal interpretations of the Christian Bible, white skin was created in God's image. Dark skin has a different, more problematic origin. As the biblical story goes, the curse or mark of Cain for killing his brother was a darkening of his descendants' skin. Historically, many congregations in the U.S. pointed to this story of Cain as evidence that Black skin was created as a punishment.
OK, the problem is just this is not true.
As the biblical story goes, the curse or mark of Cain for killing his brother was a darkening of his descendants' skin.
Here is the Biblical story, Genesis 4:
10 And he said to him: What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth to me from the earth.
11 Now, therefore, cursed shalt thou be upon the earth, which hath opened her mouth and received the blood of thy brother at thy hand. 12 When thou shalt till it, it shall not yield to thee its fruit: a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be upon the earth. 13 And Cain said to the Lord: My iniquity is greater than that I may deserve pardon. 14 Behold thou dost cast me out this day from the face of the earth, and I shall be hidden from thy face, and I shall be a vagabond and a fugitive on the earth: every one, therefore, that findeth me, shall kill me. 15 And the Lord said to him: No, it shall not be so: but whosoever shall kill Cain, shall be punished sevenfold. And the Lord set a mark upon Cain, that whosoever found him should not kill him.
Now, if the mark, according to the Biblical story itself had been dark skin, we might expect this to be explained in the next verse, just after we first mentioned it, if it wasn't there. Let's go to the next verse:
16 And Cain went out from the face of the Lord, and dwelt as a fugitive on the earth, at the east side of Eden. 17 And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived, and brought forth Henoch: and he built a city, and called the name thereof by the name of his son Henoch.
Oh, no mention of dark skin ...
18 And Henoch begot Irad, and Irad begot Maviael, and Maviael begot Mathusael, and Mathusael begot Lamech: 19 Who took two wives: the name of the one was Ada, and the name of the other Sella. 20 And Ada brought forth Jabel: who was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of herdsmen.
Still no mention of dark skin ...
21 And his brother's name was Jubal; he was the father of them that play upon the harp and the organs. 22 Sella also brought forth Tubalcain, who was a hammerer and artificer in every work of brass and iron. And the sister of Tubalcain was Noema. 23 And Lamech said to his wives Ada and Sella: Hear my voice, ye wives of Lamech, hearken to my speech: for I have slain a man to the wounding of myself, and a stripling to my own bruising. 24 Sevenfold vengeance shall be taken for Cain: but for Lamech seventy times sevenfold.
STILL no mention of dark skin ... was Allison Hopper wrong? Just check one more verse of the story, shall we?
25 Adam also knew his wife again: and she brought forth a son, and called his name Seth, saying: God hath given me another seed, for Abel whom Cain slew. 26 But to Seth also was born a son, whom he called Enos; this man began to call upon the name of the Lord.
Oh, another story begins, even!
I guess Allison Hopper was wrong, after all ... what is the Catholic exegesis of this? I mean about the mark? Here is bishop Challoner:
[15] "Set a mark": The more common opinion of the interpreters of holy writ supposes this mark to have been a trembling of the body; or a horror and consternation in his countenance.
STILL no mention of dark skin ??? By the way, the Haydock Bible has two comments on the verse, the above being the only one where the mark is mentioned.
What about the Protestant views? Here is Calvin, clearly agreeing with Challoner:
And the Lord set a mark. I have lately said, that nothing was granted to Cain for the sake of favoring him; but for the sake of opposing, in future, cruelty and unjust violence. And therefore, Moses now says, that a mark was set upon Cain, which should strike terror into all; because they might see, as in a mirrors the tremendous judgment of God against bloody men. As Scripture does not describe what kind of mark it was, commentators have conjectured, that his body became tremulous. It may suffice for us, that there was some visible token which should repress in the spectators the desire and the audacity to inflict injury.
Calvin, Genesis 4, verse 15
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/cal/genesis-4.html
I have trouble finding a comprehensive link to Luther's commentary, there may be different versions. Here is a history of this interpretation, which says that the idea came, not with Catholicism, not with the Reformation, but with the Enlightenment (a dark period for black people!), quote and link:
Another interpretation has a disturbing, racist legacy: the idea that the mark of Cain is dark skin. Although nothing in the Bible suggests it is related to skin color, the motif that Cain was cursed with blackness—and that black people are cursed as well—was common from the 18th and into the 20th century. Together with the more common motif that Noah’s son Ham was cursed with black skin and his descendants condemned to slavery (based on Gen 9:20-25), this interpretation of Cain’s mark was deployed to justify the slave trade, and some religious denominations in America used it to support segregation and the exclusion of African Americans from church leadership.
Mark of Cain
Eva Mroczek, Bible Odyssey
https://theturkeytraveler.bibleodyssey.org/articles/mark-of-cain/
So, again, no, not the story, just an interpretation of the story, not a currently widespread or a traditionally widespread, just a formerly widespread (among Protestants of the US) interpretation.
Shocker, it seems Allison Hopper is wrong! What are her qualifications, again?
Allison Hopper is a filmmaker and designer with a master's degree in educational design from New York University. Early in her career, she worked on PBS documentaries. More recently, she's been creating content for young people on the topic of evolution. She has presented on evolution at the Big History Conference in Amsterdam and Chautauqua, among other places. Learn more about Allison and her projects at http://www.spiralzoom.com/. She recently completed a short animation titled Evolution and YOU!a>
Stories by Allison Hopper
https://www.scientificamerican.com/author/allison-hopper/
So, basically, her qualification is being an artist. Nevertheless, what she published in may give her views more credit than they deserve:
Scientific American covers the most important and exciting research, ideas and knowledge in science, health, technology, the environment and society. It is committed to sharing trustworthy knowledge, enhancing our understanding of the world, and advancing social justice.
Meaning, it will risk publishing lies by certain types of social justice warriors who have another axe to grind than against injustice ...
At the heart of white evangelical creationism is the mythology of an unbroken white lineage that stretches back to a light-skinned Adam and Eve. In literal interpretations of the Christian Bible, white skin was created in God's image. Dark skin has a different, more problematic origin. ... The fantasy of a continuous line of white descendants segregates white heritage from Black bodies.
Well, no. In Young Earth Creationism, all men descend from Adam and Eve, all have unbroken lines back to them. Nowhere did mankind start anew from someone not descended from them (even if some would say the Nephelim risked becoming that, if they partly descended from angels). And like both White and Black have unbroken lines, it is not a reason for segregation between them. By contrast, some who deny Adam and Eve are ancestral to Black, who did and do argue for Segregation, including the Klan, are Old Earth Creationists.
Now, I think a Professor of law may sometimes be less oversensitive to guilt by association over three degrees of separation than this type of artists.
School of Law Faculty Directory
North Carolina Central University
https://law.nccu.edu/faculty-directory/
And he obviously does not feel segregated by the Genesis story:
"Renowned Professor Debunks Evolution: Unveiling the Truth!" with Professor Major Coleman
Anil Kanda, 14 Jan. 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K24xdkRa0sI
So, perhaps credit a black Professor over a white Artist, when it comes to deciding what's a racial slur against his people?
Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Venerable Bede
27.V.2024
No comments:
Post a Comment