Re: Subject: Re: Four items of possible controversy

From: Michael Roberts (michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk)
Date: Mon Nov 17 2003 - 12:41:32 EST

  • Next message: Ted Davis: "Dawkins to speak at Harvard on "Religion of Science""

    This I took down from the Talkorigins website. It is similar to the old
    Dutch Reformed (Much Deformed) Church stuff of 30 years ago to support
    Apartheid. Some of the stuff I have from my sojourn there is pretty awful.

    It is pretty sick isn't it? Now if my name was Ken Ham I would say every YEC
    was a racist. But then I do base my ethics on Leviticus 19!!!.

    Regards

    Michael

    *******************************************

    Is the ICR's Henry Morris racist?

    By Richard Trott
    enry M. Morris, among many other creationists, has tried to discredit
    evolutionary theory by arguing that evolution is a pillar of racism. For
    example, in The Troubled Waters Of Evolution (1974), Morris writes (p. 164):

    As the 19th century scientists were converted to evolution, they were thus
    also convinced of racism. They were certain that the white race was superior
    to other races, and the reason for this superiority was to be found in
    Darwinian theory.
    It is instructional to examine the following passage by Morris in that
    light. [1] I should note first, however, that I personally don't believe
    that Morris is a racist. Morris may have simply written this particular
    passage somewhat more carelessly than he should have. Or it may reflect
    views Morris once held years ago but no longer holds. Still, considering his
    attempts to tie evolution to racism, it is quite interesting to see Morris,
    in a creationist context, deal with race in a way that would give comfort to
    racists. Morris's reactions to questions about this passage are also of
    interest.

    From Morris's The Beginning Of the World, Second Edition (1991), pp.
    147-148:

    The descendants of Ham were marked especially for secular service to
    mankind. Indeed they were to be 'servants of servants,' that is 'servants
    extraordinary!' Although only Canaan is mentioned specifically (possibly
    because the branch of Ham's family through Canaan would later come into most
    direct contact with Israel), the whole family of Ham is in view. The
    prophecy is worldwide in scope and, since Shem and Japheth are covered, all
    Ham's descendants must be also. These include all nations which are neither
    Semitic nor Japhetic. Thus, all of the earth's 'colored' races,--yellow,
    red, brown, and black--essentially the Afro-Asian group of peoples,
    including the American Indians--are possibly Hamitic in origin and included
    within the scope of the Canaanitic prophecy, as well as the Egyptians,
    Sumerians, Hittites, and Phoenicians of antiquity.

    The Hamites have been the great 'servants' of mankind in the following ways,
    among many others: (1) they were the original explorers and settlers of
    practically all parts of the world, following the dispersion at Babel; (2)
    they were the first cultivators of most of the basic food staples of the
    world, such as potatoes, corn, beans, cereals, and others, as well as the
    first ones to domesticate most animals; (3) they developed most of the basic
    types of structural forms and building tools and materials; (4) they were
    the first to develop fabrics for clothing and various sewing and weaving
    devices; (5) they were the discoverers and inventors of an amazingly wide
    variety of medicines and surgical practices and instruments; (6) most of the
    concepts of basic mathematics, including algebra, geometry, and trigonometry
    were developed by Hamites; (7) the machinery of commerce and trade--money,
    banks, postal systems, etc.--were invented by them; (8) they developed
    paper, ink, block printing, movable type, and other accoutrements of writing
    and communication. It seems that almost no matter what the particular device
    or principle or system may be, if one traces back far enough, he will find
    that it originated with the Sumerians or Egyptians or early Chinese or some
    other Hamitic people. Truly they have been the 'servants' of mankind in a
    most amazing way.

    Yet the prophecy again has its obverse side. Somehow they have only gone so
    far and no farther. The Japhethites and Semites have, sooner or later, taken
    over their territories, and their inventions, and then developed them and
    utilized them for their own enlargement. Often the Hamites, especially the
    Negroes, have become actual personal servants or even slaves to the others.
    Possessed of a genetic character concerned mainly with mundane matters, they
    have eventually been displaced by the intellectual and philosophical acumen
    of the Japhethites and the religious zeal of the Semites.

    Morris concludes that this is not racist by invoking a strange definition of
    racism. Somehow, if other human beings are responsible for the plight of a
    group of people, that is racism; however, if someone (such as Morris)
    believes that a general line of people (such as the Hamites) are "possessed
    of a genetic character" that makes them innately less "intellectual,"
    "philosophical," and "religious" than the other approximately two-thirds of
    humanity, this is not racism. (Although it was not his intention to make
    Morris's passage look even worse, Jerry Bergman has brought it to my
    attention that in at least one edition of the Morris book--probably the
    first edition--it's not "genetic character" but "racial character.")

    Morris, for additional mitigation, couples this with an allowance for
    individual exceptions. Morris writes (ibid., p. 148):

    These very general and broad national and racial characteristics obviously
    admit of many exceptions on an individual genetic basis. It is also obvious
    that the prophecy is a divine description of future facts, in no way needing
    the deliberate assistance of man for its accomplishment. Neither Negroes nor
    any other Hamitic people were intended to be forcibly subjugated on the
    basis of this Noahic declaration. The prophecy would be inevitably fulfilled
    because of the innate natures of the three genetic stocks, not by virtue of
    any artificial constraints imposed by man.
    I questioned Henry Morris about this issue personally in North East,
    Maryland, on July 18, 1993 shortly after he made an address at a Christian
    service. Morris claimed that these pronouncements are not racist because
    there are "black Jews" and black "Indians" who are not Hamitic. (Note that
    this appears to be flatly contradictory to Morris's claim, quoted above,
    that "all of the earth's 'colored' races,--yellow, red, brown, and black"
    may be Hamitic.) Furthermore, Morris pointed out that there are whites who
    have been "slaves" and are Hamitic. These white Hamites are not mentioned in
    Morris's book. Morris also confirmed for me that he believes that African
    Americans are Hamitic.

    It may be difficult for some to understand why I conclude that Morris is, in
    fact, not really a racist. After all, Morris has written that the "racial
    character" of a certain population results in that population being "less
    intellectual," "philosophical," and "religious" than the other approximately
    two-thirds of humanity. Furthermore, Morris sometimes defended these
    statements to me and other times simply contradicted them, but never
    rescinded them. However, I believe that it is possible for generally
    tolerant individuals to occasionally slip up and write something careless
    and insensitive. These errors do not necessarily reveal anything sinister,
    and an individual's beliefs and views change over time. I am happy to give
    Morris the benefit of the doubt.

    Notes
    [1] A special "thank you" to Dan Ashlock for tracking down the relatively
    obscure Morris book, The Beginning Of the World, in a library at Iowa State
    University.

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "John W Burgeson" <jwburgeson@juno.com>
    To: <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
    Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
    Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 3:07 PM
    Subject: Re: Subject: Re: Four items of possible controversy

    > Michael wrote: "Also people like Henry Morris as well puts forward the
    > myth of Sons of
    > Ham being negroes and are of limited intelligence."
    >
    > I was unaware of this -- can you give me a citation?
    >
    > Burgy
    >
    > www.burgy.50megs.com
    >
    >
    > ________________________________________________________________
    > The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
    > Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
    > Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
    >
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Nov 17 2003 - 12:58:13 EST