Ethnicity and The Soul

Over the next couple of weeks J.D. Will be traveling so I, Ike Miller, will be posting a smattering of his greatest hits, thoughts on Church Philosophy and possibly some guest blogs.  J.D. also will be posting intermittently with thoughts and updates from his trip so be sure to check in for those. 

Here is a thought on faith and race relations that J.D. took note of from D.A. Carson:

D.A. Carson gave one the best explanations of ethnicity I’ve ever heard in his talk on 1 Corinthians 9 at the Gospel Coalition, 2009. Paul says that to the Jew he had to become a Jew, and likewise to the Gentile, he had to become a Gentile. What is striking about this is that with Jewness and Gentileness you had to be one OR the other... i.e., not being a Jew automatically made you a Gentile. Yet Paul saw himself, in Christ, as something altogether different, a "tertium quid." All Christians are in Christ, which is supra-race (Galatians 3:28). Paul now knows no one according to the flesh, which includes being black or white. So, to the Jews, he must become a Jew, even though ethnically, he already is a Jew. 

In the same way, to the white people, I must become a white person, even though my skin is already white—in Christ, I am not white any longer. I am only Christian. In other words, blackness and whiteness are not part of our soul. They are merely passing characteristics of our bodies. In the same way, black people in Christ must so embrace their new identity in Christ, that they must feel they must “become” black to other black people. Black people and white people are really part of a new identity altogether, a new race, which supercedes ALL characteristics of their human flesh.

Comments

[Reforming Bean]

I too appreciated the comments Carson made! However, I wonder if it is incorrect to state as you did that "blackness and whiteness are not part of our soul. They are merely passing characteristics of our bodies?" Doesn't such a statement overemphasize the value of the soul and minimize that of the physical bodies? Such a belief seems awfully similar to gnosticism... Our bodies, though now afflicted with the curse, will one day be resurrected and glorified!

[Beaning Reform]

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3)

Too many find their identity in their race, and too many more find it in their gender. Our identity is in Christ alone. Our race and our gender mean nothing in Christ. They don't exist.

[Reforming Bean]

Race, gender, etc. means nothing... agreed!

[An Ethnic Christian]

I have some serious problems with this interpretation of Carson’s talk and, ultimately, this depiction of ethnicity. I would like to ask some questions.

1. How does an individual who is a new creature in Christ live out his/her "supra-race" identity?

2. Is race/ethnicity only the color of one's skin? If it is not then how can we talk about race/ethnicity being tied to our flesh?

3. Is our flesh tied to everything that is created? If so, and our flesh is to be resisted, how do we make sense out of heaven being a place where every "tribe, nation, and tongue" is represented?

4. What role does ethnicity play in a Christian's life outside of its purpose for missions (i.e. becoming all things to all men)?

5. Are we to have a Christian identity which "supercedes ALL characteristics of [our] human flesh" or one that would make me "not [racial/ethnic] any longer" making me "only Christian?" These are clearly two different conceptions.

Finally, after listening to Carson’s talk myself I realize that he intends something very different by the “third position” or tertium quid than has been asserted here. Far from promoting some sort of colorblindness or ethnically neutral ontology for Christians, Carson actually points out that Paul understood himself to be ethnically Jewish. Carson references Romans 9:10 and that Paul sometimes makes distinctions between Jewish Christians and other Christians. Carson even says, “Paul knows full well that ethnically and racially at the end of the day he is still a Jew…there are many contexts in which he is grateful for his heritage and identifies with it.” However, in this context he speaks of his ethnic identity differently. So when Paul says that he becomes a Jew it does seem that he assumes he is not one. But as Carson points out, Paul is actually trying to show that in a certain sense he is not one, namely, that he is not under the law (which he highlights in the subsequent verse). The point of the tertium quid is that we are not slaves to our “rights,” as Carson puts it, ethnicity being one of them. This is in order that we might not think more highly of ourselves than we ought, or so cling to our “rights” (or ethnicity) to the point that we hinder the spreading of the gospel, and specifically for Paul this means not offending an immature brother in Christ who has a weak conscience. In other words, we as Christians should, as a result of our “third position,” be able to put off in a sense our rights in order to reach people with the gospel. If we were slaves to our ethnicity we would not desire to be flexible, as Carson puts it, in order to win someone outside of or inside of our ethnic group. Therefore, Carson is not trying to promote some sort of colorblindness, ethnically neutral identity, or dualistic framework.

[J.D. Greear]

Dear Ethnic Christian,

Yes, I don't think Carson was saying that Paul was somehow unaware or embarrassed that he was ethnically Jewish. Yet, as Carson asserts, here and in Galatians 3:28 he clearly says that Jewness and Gentileness is not part of his new identity in Christ. It's hard to make a stronger statement than, "In Christ, there is no Jew or Greek." Surely Paul would say that means in Christ there is no black or white. And, to "become a Jew" means that, in at least one sense, he didn't consider himself one. (As you point out, in a natural sense, however, he still saw himself that way.)

Thus, in Christ, am I really a white man? I'd say no, I'm part of the newly redeemed race, which is only one race. In Christ, is there truly "no" Asian, black, white or Hispanic?

Further, Paul says, "From now on we know no one according to the flesh." When you identify yourself as "an ethnic Christian," aren't you insisting we know you, even in your Christianity, still according to the flesh? I am not trying here to be antagonistic... so I hope it doesn't come across that way. But why is it part of our identity? When you call yourself 'an ethnic Christian,' aren't you implying you are something I am not? Am I not ethnic too, i.e. ethnically white? In Christ, there is, in at least one very important way, no more ethnicity. Our identity, in essence, is in Christ alone.

This does not mean we can't notice each other's cultures, or even embrace the cultural distinctives about ourselves. After all, Gal 3:28 does not mean either that we are all genderless and that dudes can marry other dudes. I am still a male, and, in the same way, still an American white guy.

Yet, Paul pretty boldly states that positionally, in Christ, I have a most fundamental identity beyond either of those things. I am part of a new redeemed race in Christ in which ethnicity and social status no longer matter.

The balance to this, that I am trying to work out, is how the Bible intends to celebrate the cultures to the point that we take them ALL (Rev 7:9, ch 22, etc) into heaven with thus. There is a forever preserved American Christianity, a Nigerian one, an Indonesian one, an Arab one, etc... but more fundamentally we are the new supra race in Christ.

My fear is that for most of us ethnicity has become some kind of defining idol we have added to the new humanity in Christ.

Reforming Bean, your comment is appreciated as well. Yes, I don't mean to imply gnosticism as if Christ only died for our "colorless soul," and I see how my statement could imply that... you are right, Christ, in every way, raises our physical body... yet, at the same time, Paul does say that in Christ there is no more Jew or Greek, and that now we know no one according to the flesh. He has made us all one by being raised as the Lord of all humanity. What is a better way of expressing that?

[Matt Lust (@DrLust)]

I think the real question is what is the difference between Christ and Culture.

Is Christ a Culture-Maker?
Is Culture a Christ-Maker?

Neither of these questions are easy nor will I answer them completely here in no small part because it is always at best tedious (academics and the like especially) and at worst dangerous when people start talking culture and Christ.

Staying for the moment strictly biblical Paul constantly argued that nothing was greater than the Cross. If you had the Gospel then it didn't matter whether you were Jew or Gentile you were the same. (Galatians 2 as one example)

So yes I agree with you JD that Paul would likely say there is no "black" and there is no "white" but I think he would say it much as Steven Biko, a contemporary of Nelson Mandela who died in prison in 1977. Biko, when asked by a white judge "why do you call yourself Black? you are more Brown than Black." replied "Why do you call yourself White? You
are more Pink than white."

In this we can see race in this context becomes a matter of social definition rather than culture or biological context.

Before I go on is I would like to point out that race and ethnicity are not the same thing and as such I am not discussing color based politics or other such foibles.

Paul I believe was speaking not on matters of biology but on matters of the heart. I too hope to discuss about the fact that as Christians we have to deal with the social and theological implications of culture as we follow Christ.

That being said, when a person makes a claim about their ethnicity they are by definition claiming a cultural influence in their life. Paul throughout his epistles discusses that to allow non-christ influences to overcome Christ himself is to destroy the message of Christ. He is constantly pleading with the churches he planted to not become divided over the practices of faith(we might say rites today) because rites are no where near as important as having the faith.

Paul did not say when preached from Mars Hill in Acts 17 "You men of Athens, I am asking that you cease being Athenians for yours is a wicked culture full of much idolotry. The culture the way of life I have as a Christian is so much better."

What he said was this:
""Men of Athens, I observe that you are very religious in all respects. 23 "For while I was passing through and examining the objects of your worship, I also found an altar with this inscription, `TO AN UNKNOWN GOD.' Therefore what you worship in ignorance, this I proclaim to you.The R1058 God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; 25 nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things; 26 and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation, 27 that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; 28 for in Him we live and move and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, `For we also are His children.' 29 "Being then the children of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and thought of man. 30 "Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent, 31 because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead." "

What he argued was that Athenian culture was not the problem but that since they were not following God they were missing the point. Some sneered but some desired to hear more. This is how it will always be with Christ and the Cross.

As such it is not necessary that to be a follower of Christ you must forsake everything about how you were raised and now embrace this new Christ culture. Yet the very act of following Christ should begin when a person recognize that how they have thought and acted is not how Christ would necessarily act or think.

Culture and Tradition in and of itself that is not a bad thing. Americans especially are very casual about our cultural differences. We speak of Californians as if they we were the happiest people on earth while New Yorkers are the rudest. We often speak about how bigoted Southerners are but praist the tolerance of Northwesterners.

We compare Urbanites to Suburbanites and Country Folk to City Dwellers. Our generic culture is such a kaleidoscope in America that we forget that the word "culture" does not cover the multitude of sins we think it does.

Faith is not a universal response to a individual truth. Faith is a individual's response to a universal truth.