If I can get to the heart of the anti-human-biodiversity sentiment of many Christians, on some level I think it is a denial of God’s sovereignty and Providence in the area of biology, particularly biology among groups.
Here are some propositions nearly all would agree with:
1. Some people seem more prone to certain sins, and in some cases there is a genetic basis for this. Bipolarism, which has a strong genetic component, is one example; these individuals have a much harder time controlling themselves when manic, with drug use, promiscuity and abuse of family members more likely. The sins are still sins, but there is a contributing factor, fallen genetics, and these genetics are not equally distributed among all individuals and families. It is not denying the sufficiency of the Gospel to recommend that bipolar individuals take appropriate medication to minimize their pre-existing tendencies.
2. Similarly, alcoholism is largely genetic. Drunkenness is a sin for both the alcoholic and non-alcoholic, yet the alcoholic is much more likely to commit this sin due to genetic factors beyond their control. The remedy, recommending alcoholics abstain completely and avoid temptation, does not deny the sufficiency of the Gospel to save alcoholics.
3. Moving on to groups, it is self-evident that sexual sins of all kinds are much more prevalent in men that women. This is largely due to male testosterone levels, which are genetically based. Yet sexual sin is equally sin for men and women. It is not denying the sufficiency of the Gospel to recommend men take precautions to avoid temptation in this area.
None of the above bothers most politically correct Christians. What bothers them is the idea that certain genetic predispositions are distributed unevenly among different ethnic or racial groups. More precisely, I think it is the degraded conditions of blacks that make them most uncomfortable. As I told a friend recently, it’s a really hard pill to swallow to accept that black societies are the way they are through Providence. Black societies consist of people made in the image of God that live in self-made conditions not fit for animals; precious little babies starve to death because their fathers waste all of their time and money loafing around, spending whatever little money they have on cigarettes, prostitution and gambling. Whenever the Christian religion enters a black society, it is quickly degraded into various forms of voodoo, or else, as in the case of Africa today, morphs into the heretical prosperity gospel, where wealthy charismatic preachers milk their poor, pathetic flocks for what little resources they have so they can live in luxury. How can the leaders of black societies live with themselves, as they enjoy obscene luxury while their own brothers and sisters are hungry, thirsty and diseased?
It is too much to take in. The PC Christian wants an easy solution: just convert Africa, and all its inherent problems would be solved. That African Christians still live in squalor is ignored. The real solution for Africa, however, is summed up by Alexander Stephens, Vice President of the Confederacy. He said that we cannot hope to teach Africa the law of Christ until they learn the law of Adam: “By the sweat of your brow you shall earn your bread.”
Until property rights are respected in Africa, and this only likely under the leadership of another race, it will be extremely difficult to make true converts, as only property rights provide a positive feedback loop enabling the development of virtue. Any conversions, and to be sure there are some, will be going against the grain of the society instead of with it. The early Church, for example, after some initial persecution, generally had their property rights respected in the Roman Empire; the Pax Romana was a key enabler of the growth of the early Church. As the fruits of self-control and self-discipline borne of the Holy Spirit came to harvest, the society around them came to see the nobility of the Christian faith relative to decadent pagan Rome. In Africa, a single Christian farmer who diligently works to provide for his family has much less assurance that he will not be killed or stolen from. Without the rule of law and property, conversions are going to be very hard to come by.
Furthermore, even in African societies where property rights are respected, there are likely to be limitations on what they can achieve from our perspective, simply due to the fact that they are different than us. The PC Christian view, then, is somewhat inherently white supremacist (put this in your pocket: when they call you a racist, call them a PCWS, a politically correct white supremacist). Their premise is unless blacks produce societies every bit as functional as whites, this necessarily means a denial of the Gospel. In other words, unless blacks become culturally white (from their perspective white culture is simply the universal Christian culture), they haven’t been sufficiently converted. To pick on RC Sproul, Jr., it seems their picture of an ideal society consists of a group of coffee-colored people of no particular race who go around wearing kilts and generally exhibiting a rural, Celtic culture. Conveniently for RC, his ethnic culture is simply redefined to be Christian culture. This is why RC endorses adopting blacks instead of seeking to convert them in their own cultures: from his white supremacist perspective, blacks can only be sufficiently converted when totally isolated from their indigenous culture.
I think the PC crowd may have an insufficient appreciation for both Providence and grace. Unless blacks behave exactly like whites, they can’t really be saved, since the more virtuous aspects of white behavior, in their view, are entirely due to their conversion and sanctification. While the behaviors exhibited by blacks, even nominally Christian ones, may be more depraved than whites, it is still entirely possible, and likely, that Christian blacks are showing fruits of salvation, just on a relative scale. They are less depraved than they otherwise would be given their genetic limitations. Yet even once converted, their limitations are such that it may be wise, from a political perspective, to limit their numbers in any Western society one wishes to preserve.
And despite all of this, God’s incredible grace can still save them. The black murderer on death row, who killed someone in a fit of rage borne of low intelligence and higher testosterone levels, can still love Jesus and be part of the elect. Relative to Christ, good little Christian white folks have no more saving virtue than the black murderer. Yet it is likely wise (if one is interested in preserving Western Civilization), given crime statistics, to limit the number of blacks in a society, even Christian ones, because of their enhanced proclivity to crime.
It’s as if the politically correct Christians want to say that unless blacks act exactly like good little Christian white folks, they can’t be saved, since one of the proofs of salvation, inherent to their view, is that groups of Christians of all colors will have exactly the same proclivities. Unless the endgame is a multi-ethnic Thomas Kinkade painting, the Gospel is insufficient!
It is on this point that I must admit some sympathy for the writings of the black Reformed author Anthony Bradley. An undercurrent in his writing is resentment towards the white middle-class culture he is forced to more-or-less assimilate to in order to remain employed in white Christian circles. He wants to be culturally black, which is a healthy instinct. I disagree with his remedy of trying to remake the white church more to his own liking, but I respect the sentiment of his ethnic solidarity. I can easily see where a black man would find the assumption of many white Christians that black Christianity must manifest itself in the same way as white Christianity to be insulting. The proper thing, of course, would be for Bradley to move to Haiti or Africa (or downtown Detroit) to work for the Gospel among his own people, expressing that faith in a way that is natural for them.
I think if you look at the indigenous black churches of the American South you get a picture of what African Christianity, at its best really, can look like. Much of the leadership is corrupt, having sold its soul to the Democratic Party. The worship is not regulative to say the least, yet we can see glimpses of how God has expressed Himself in black people. The passion and intensity of their worship, while not something I seek to emulate, is something I can respect and appreciate as part of the tapestry of the Church.
I’ll admit one more thing to you: I don’t even think white people are necessarily inherently more virtuous. They just have more self-control, due to enhanced intelligence, and the ability to delay gratification. A black man insulted may simply kill the offender on the spot, whereas a worldly white man is more likely to feel the same thing but calculate that such an action would land him in jail, so he plans his revenge in a more circuitous, passive-aggressive (and more legal) way. The spirit of the sin is the same, as Christ reminded us. Yet, when one is trying to build a Western society, it is clear that the passive-aggressive white man “fits” better than the black who kills in a rage. Human societies are to this extent on an orthogonal plane to questions of sin and salvation. All men are equally depraved, but the expression of that depravity is different in different societies, and some groups are simply incompatible with others.
As the police fraternities remind us, there is a thin blue line that protects society from anarchy and mayhem. Once criminality reaches a critical mass, for example as in Africa, Detroit or Mexico, the costs of controlling it spiral out of control and the criminal elements themselves step into the vacuum of authority.
So the hostility to notions of human biodiversity among PC Christians is indicative of how absolute human equality is essential to their worldview. Their white supremacism is expressed in their assumption that their particular society is the Christian society, and any differences in societal quality are just indications that those other societies are just not sufficiently Christian. Their view is obviously false by observation (non-Christian Scandinavian countries are better places than Christian African countries), but they are emotionally wedded to human equality. For some, it may be a security blanket, as it allows them to deny what’s in front their face: namely, that white Americans and Europeans have created quite a mess for themselves by inviting a coming majority of Third World peoples in their lands. As an example, I give you the example of this video, something I’ve received in my email dozens of times from mainstream conservatives:
This is conservative schizophrenia on steroids (how do you like that mixed metaphor?). They walk right up to the truth, showing explicitly the consequences of immigration and differential birthrates among people. Everything but the last 30 seconds is like an article from American Renaissance.
Note, then, how the obvious solution is ignored. The solution to Muslim immigration to Europe is the same today as it was in the time of Charles Martel, Ferdinand and Isabella: kick them out. Share the gospel with them in their own country, heck give them a Bible and a tract as a parting gift as they fly back to Hellhole-istan, but send them back.
The hope that Europe can be preserved by simply converting Muslims (who are Arabs, with an average IQ comparable to Mexicans, and will manifest their Christianity in a different, likely culturally incompatible way) is a false hope; even if converting them would solve the problem, hoping for the mass conversion of aggressive, hateful idolaters is not a rational political strategy. Large-scale conversions are rare extraordinary acts of Providence, and it is foolish the “bet the farm” of our homelands on this happening, even if one accepted the proposition that converted Arabs could preserve European civilization.
Yet the closer to obvious reality we get, the stronger the denials get. This is classic psychology: Denial, Anger, Bargaining before Acceptance. We are witnessing the grieving process for our nation, as its terminal state becomes more and more obvious.
Kinists should be encouraged that we have now reached the anger stage. The frothing rage of the PC crowd with their cries of “heresy” (sermons these cowards never preach toward real modern-day heretics, like say Rev. Jeremiah Wright) is the first break in the dam.