The origins of racism; the story of the first "Phineas Priest"

Where does White Nationalism come from? The answer is complex and the sources of ideas for it are many, varied and not all of them are related to each other. But at least some of the rationale comes from religion.

For those in some degree of denial, please be aware that there is some biblical basis for the racism of White Nationalists; the story of Phineas, who murdered an inter-racial couple in cold blood. Some racists refer to themselves until today as "Phineas Priests."  https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/ideology/phineas-priesthood 

God apparently did not approve of inter-racial marriage. This story is not lost on racist leaning Christians. Here is an excerpt from the Old Testament in the Book of Numbers:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers+25%3A1-13

Numbers 25:6-13

6 Then an Israelite man brought into the camp a Midianite woman right before the eyes of Moses and the whole assembly of Israel while they were weeping at the entrance to the tent of meeting. 

7 When Phinehas son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron, the priest, saw this, he left the assembly, took a spear in his hand 

8 and followed the Israelite into the tent. He drove the spear into both of them, right through the Israelite man and into the woman’s stomach. Then the plague against the Israelites was stopped; 

9 but those who died in the plague numbered 24,000.

10 The Lord said to Moses, 

11 “Phinehas son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron, the priest, has turned my anger away from the Israelites. Since he was as zealous for my honor among them as I am, I did not put an end to them in my zeal. 

12 Therefore tell him I am making my covenant of peace with him. 

13 He and his descendants will have a covenant of a lasting priesthood, because he was zealous for the honor of his God and made atonement for the Israelites.”

The Terror in Orlando: You Can't Make This Stuff Up: Texas Lt. Governor believes "Something is Good Because God Says So!"

You can't make this up!  As if on cue, Texas Lt. Governor Dan Patrick tweeted the following, appearing shortly after the terror in Orlando, Florida.


My previous blog entry had a simple choice that we all, as moral individuals, have a responsibility to decide and then live by: Is Something Good Because God Says So?  Or is Something Good Because it Makes the World a Better Place?

Obviously, Lt. Governor Patrick has made his decision.  If God says so, it is good.  This would probably be comforting to those who sympathize with the terrorist perpetrator.  Am I exaggerating or misconstruing Mr. Patrick's intent?

Here is what he said afterward in defending himself: “The verse has nothing to do with God’s judgment on any one person or a specific group of people. If some chose to read into it what they wanted they either have never read Galatians Chapter 6 or have misread it,” he said.  “Some wanted the post pulled down and others did not. Let me be clear, I didn’t pull down the FBI post & tweet because God’s word is wrong. His word is never wrong,” Patrick wrote. “Taking down his word would be like tearing a page from the Bible because we didn’t like what God was telling us. I took it down to stop the hateful comments and the misinformation being spread of God’s message to all of us- straight or gay.”

Yup, God is never wrong so the perpetrator had no choice, did he, Mr. Patrick?  And who says we can't agree on religious matters?

The Terror in Orlando: Is Something Good Because God Says So?

It is perhaps the central philosophical/theological question of all: Is Something Good Because God Says So?  Or is Something Good Because it Makes the World a Better Place?

What do YOU believe?

The perpetrator (I will not repeat his name here) of the horrific killings in Orlando, Florida earlier today, June 12, 2016, probably believed the following; that gays were an abomination and that God (the one that he believed in, not the one YOU might believe in) endorsed the killing of gays and their sympathizers.

From the Koran (7:80 - 7:84) "And (We sent) Lot when he said to his people: What! do you commit an indecency which any one in the world has not done before you? Most surely you come to males in lust besides females; nay you are an extravagant people. And the answer of his people was no other than that they said: Turn them out of your town, surely they are a people who seek to purify (themselves). So We delivered him and his followers, except his wife; she was of those who remained behind. And We rained upon them a rain; consider then what was the end of the guilty."

The "rain" referred to above is probably something like "brimstone" which would lead to the death or "the end of the guilty."

This is not much different than the following from the Old Testament which is actually more clear in  its viciousness: (Leviticus 20:13, New International Version) "If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."

One would think that since the source of belief in the Christian God and the Muslim God (and Jewish God) are the Holy Books quoted above, that opposition to homosexuality would be common among Christian and Muslims.   One would be correct in thinking that.  It is only very recently in the history of Christian society that homosexuality has approached majority acceptance and indeed not nearly all American or other Christians are on board with that opinion just yet.  Ted Cruz was infamously endorsed for President by a Pastor this year who prefaced his endorsement with his reminder that homosexuals should be executed according to his infallible Bible.  Ted was pleased with the endorsement.  (Go to "Why Is the Media Ignoring Ted Cruz’s Embrace of ‘Kill the Gays’ Pastor?"" http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michelangelo-signorile/post_10496_b_8544540.html .)

So I ask you again; what do YOU believe?  Is Something Good Because God Says So?  Or is Something Good Because it Makes the World a Better Place?

Of course I can hear you objecting by saying that the "True God" would NEVER tell you to do something that is wrong.  The problem is that the perpetrator of the horror in Orlando would agree.  Yes, ISIS would agree.  Bin Laden would have agreed.  ALL the terrorist fanatics would agree.  That is the problem - if God says to do it, it becomes the RIGHT thing to do.  It becomes the thing you MUST do.  This argument is of no use.

This leaves basically the final feeble argument against where we are inevitably heading; the objection that the perpetrator did not believe in the one "True God."  His God was a "false" God and the answer/solution is to believe in the "True God."

What is a "false" God?  Answer:  Basically a "false" God is what  the other guy believes in.  What you believe in is the "True God."  And what your "True God" says to do is, of course, "good."

And, of course, the perpetrator believed he worshiped the one and only "True God."  That was his opinion and your opinion is no more than that - an opinion.  As much as you'd like to transform your opinion on the  nature of the "True God" into a fact, you cannot do it anymore than the perpetrator could do it.  At the very best all you can do is present the evidence for the one "True God" and test your conclusion.

Unfortunately even believers often admit that their God cannot be tested.  The Book of Job reminds us "who are we to question God?"  The evidence for which God is the "True God" is not evidence at all; instead belief in the "True God" is built upon faith - and faith is supposedly a gift from very the same True God whom we are trying to test and by no definition of the word can "faith" be considered reasonable evidence.  Furthermore I have never heard a rational process for determining which faith is a "True  Faith" and which faith is not.  To claim that there are many contrary "True Faiths" is to accept that sometimes 2 = 3.  Is a God that is Jesus the same as a God that is not Jesus?

Is your faith the "True Faith"?  Is your Holy Book the "True Holy Book"?  Is your God the one "True God."  For all of these questions the perpetrator of this act of terror and all other religiously inspired acts of terror, would  answer "yes".  These fallible humans all elevate their fallible opinions to indisputable facts.  Conversely, reasonable persons understand that the "facts" they believe are true are conditional and probable - not certain and taken on faith.  Reasonable persons use evidence, logic, and science and accept that "facts" can be tested and subject to disproof.

Those who instead rely on faith for determining their absolute truths all uniformly and conveniently claim that reason, evidence and science cannot answer the deepest questions of human existence while implying that their personal opinions CAN answer them in an absolute manner.  This certainty on the part of the faithful in knowing the Truth is seen as a virtue by them as opposed to the incredible danger and arrogance it actually presents.  The scientific viewpoint is uncertain, conditional, testable and ultimately far more  humble.

If you have managed to read this to this point, I will ask one final time: Is Something Good Because God Says So?  Or is Something Good Because it Makes the World a Better Place?

Duck Dynasty: Religion is no excuse for bigotry

"Duck Dynasty" patriarch and reality TV star Phil Robertson recently said in response to a question during a magazine interview about what, in his mind, is sinful, "Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men."  Mr. Robertson ignores the fact that bestiality is certainly possible and probably more prevalent among heterosexuals than homosexuals; he simply equates homosexuality with perversion without offering any evidence or ethical reasoning other than his own admittedly bible-based moral code. 

This blind obedience to a primitive moral code is not unique or rare; many religious fundamentalists such as Sarah Palin, a former candidate for Vice President, voiced their support for Mr. Robertson.

Palin wrote, "Free speech is endangered species; those 'intolerants' hatin' & taking on Duck Dynasty patriarch for voicing personal opinion take on us all."

This is pure hypocrisy; Ms. Palin has no problem criticizing others with whom she disagrees.  She offers no First Amendment excuse for them when she does so.

Palin and Robertson are both also under the misconception that religious belief allows one to be unethical towards others, in this case, homosexuals.  Religion is no excuse, however. If your religion condones unjustified bigotry, it is a bigoted religion.  Also, the First Amendment does not shield one from criticism of one's religious beliefs - indeed, the First Amendment protects the rights of all to criticize religion or anything else.

Hopefully, at some point, enough in society will come to choose an ethical approach in their lifestance as opposed to merely hiding behind belief and obedience; that is when real moral progress will be made.