I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.

You, no doubt, recognize these immortal words of Martin Luther King, Jr. They express one of the most profound ideas that animated the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 60s in America. This one sentence lays out the very foundation of Dr. King’s activism.

As we look at it more carefully, we need to note that Dr. King’s dream comes specifically from a biblical worldview. He was a Baptist pastor, and his entire justification for leading the civil rights movement was based on the biblical belief that “all men are created equal” – the very same belief that informed those who wrote the Constitution of the United States.

In recent times, in American society, the idea of white privilege has been pushed front and center. The underlying concept of white privilege is that white people in American benefit in an unfair way in society from the fact that they are white – beyond what is commonly experienced by non-white people. That is, they benefit from unearned and unacknowledged advantages just because of the color of their skin. The implication is that since white people have this built in advantage, there is a deep seated unfairness in society; and because of that unfairness, white people should voluntarily take themselves down a notch by deferring to people of color as it relates to jobs, wealth, educational opportunity, and other areas of life.

Of course, there is unfairness in the world no matter where you look, but the source of the unfairness is not, and has never been, based on race. On a surface level, in particular circumstances, there may appear to be a racial cause. But immediately, when you peel back the first layer and look below the surface, it becomes obvious that the problem is not anyone’s skin color, but has to do with worldview beliefs; and anyone who tries to deal with the problem based on race will never solve the problem – they will only shift it to another place.

The Source of the Belief about White Privilege
The very idea of “white privilege” emerges directly out of a naturalistic worldview – the belief that the natural universe is all that exists. While many people will look at this definition and complain that it has nothing to do with the topic of white privilege, they would be completely wrong. The truth is, the naturalistic worldview is not merely about what exists in the material universe, but is also about the implications of those beliefs – particularly as they are expressed in the realm of morality. Since in Naturalism the natural universe is all that is acknowledged to exist, the only possible source for morality is the opinion of human beings.

While there is no objective basis in Naturalism for putting forth a moral point of view, the worldview itself has a built in set of presuppositions that create a framework of moral assumptions. This is all based on the belief that since the natural universe is all that exists, everything had to have come into existence by natural means – thus evolutionary theory is the only accepted possibility. That being the case, the survival of the species becomes, by default, the most fundamental moral foundation. With that foundation, certain moral beliefs emerge. These include:

Priority of the Collective – The species, not the individual, is the priority. This emphasis informs one’s beliefs about rights and responsibility. What is best for the collective (based, of course, on the assumptions of those who hold power) must take priority over individual rights. If the interests, property, or even the life of an individual clashes with the best interests of the collective, the rights of the individual can legitimately be infringed.

Class Structure – Society naturally arranges itself into classes. These classes can be based on education, race, social status, and other categories. While many who hold to Naturalism say they aspire to a classless social structure, in the real world they look to various societal institutions to lead society. And, of course, the people who lead these institutions must make up the ruling class (which is by default at a higher level than anyone else), and their preferences determine what is acceptable and not acceptable (what is moral) in society.

Relativistic Moral Foundation – As Naturalists acknowledge no objectively real moral authority, it is left to human beings to create their own. The moral beliefs that come to hold sway in society, then, are those that are based on the preferences of the people who hold power over society.

Rule of Persons – Again, the lack of belief in an objectively real moral authority does not provide for the possibility of an objectively right set of moral beliefs. Thus, the law also must be created based on the priorities of those who hold power. If their priorities change, the various expressions of morality as they play out in society can also change. This results in the rule of the powerful as opposed to the rule of law.

Social Justice – Justice, also has no objective basis since there is acknowledged no objective source for determining what is just. Justice becomes what those in power deem it to be. As such, the execution of the law as it relates to accomplishing justice is based on the preferences of those who hold power. These leaders are the ones who decide what “sins” need to be punished in society in order to maintain stability in the collective. The result is that justice is meted out based on the subjective beliefs of those in power.

The Problem With Naturalistic Morality
The big problem with naturalistic morality is that it does not reflect actual reality. God does exist and he has revealed himself to mankind. In revealing himself, he has revealed that his personal character is the objective foundation for all morality. Human beings don’t get to make it up for themselves. Tying that back to the MLK quote at the beginning of this article, a part of that objective morality is expressed in the truth that “all men are created equal. What this means is that the very idea of “white privilege” is a non-biblical concept. In God’s created order, there is no such thing as privilege based on ANY race.

Moral Principles That Come out of a Biblical Worldview
Christian morality has an entirely different foundation than naturalistic morality. Christian morality understands there to be an objectively real basis for its existence. It begins with the understanding that God exists as an objectively real person who has a particular character that is innately right and true. It then asserts that he has revealed those character elements as the basis for moral beliefs, and that these moral beliefs are objectively true and right. Thus, right morality is not a matter of keeping a particular set of moral laws, but of becoming a person who also exhibits those character traits in everyday life. This principle is the very foundation of Christian morality. It is expressed in the following themes:

Individual Focus – Rather than a focus on the collective, biblical morality has an individual focus. There are, certainly, principles that apply to social structures, but the beginning place is with individuals. Every person must come to God as an individual, and each is responsible to him based on individual actions. With this as a starting point, there is a focus on individual rights, individual freedom, and personal responsibility, as opposed to a hierarchy of social classes.

Objective Moral Foundation – As was mentioned above, morality has an objective foundation. Human beings don’t get to determine for themselves what is right and wrong – God has revealed it.

Rule of Law – Since there exists an objectively real right and wrong, human beings are under an obligation to understand what that is and to do what is right. In society, this leads to the principle of the rule of law. The idea is that what is right should be enshrined in the laws of society, and people who do what is wrong should be judged based on the objectively real law rather than on the subjective preferences of those in power.

Equal Justice Under the Law – Since law is based on objectively real moral truths, then justice also has an objective foundation. People are not judged based on the preferences of those in power, but equally based on what is actually in the law; there should be equal justice under the law.

What Does this Mean for White Privilege?
As can easily be seen by comparing the expressions of Naturalism and Biblical Theism, there is a very different understanding as to how reality is structured. But what does that mean when it comes to the concept of white privilege?

The primary difference is in how humanity is viewed. In Naturalism, human beings are understood to be nothing more than physical animals that must figure out their own way to get along in order to accomplish the most important goal – the survival of the species. On the other hand, Christian Theism sees human beings as persons created in God’s image whose most important goal is to enter into an eternal relationship with God.

If Naturalism is true, then identifying people based on physical characteristics, such as race, can be a convenient way to create social order. Using this particular approach, groups of Naturalists can create societal circumstances that advance what they think is the best way to promote species survival. There need be no consideration of the sanctity of life because the human animal is understood to be nothing more than one natural animal creature among many. There is no objective meaning to the concept of human rights because there is no objective criteria for establishing it – all morality is relative. And there is no compulsion to promote the equality of all humans because those in power get to create the rules that suit their vision for promoting species survival.

In Christian Theism, it is not the survival of the species that is of utmost importance, but the purposes of God. He has revealed that he created mankind in his image for a purpose – relationship with himself. This means that human life is innately valuable, and is not to be devalued based on ANY physical characteristic. It means that human rights do have an objective foundation based on the character of God as he has revealed it to mankind. It also means that when considering the place of individuals in society, that evaluation should be color-blind. God has revealed that all men are created in his image and are equal in his sight.

The ultimate implication then, as it relates to “white privilege,” is that thinking in racial terms is actually immoral. There are principles from God’s revelation that point us to how we ought to evaluate other human beings. These include such things as:

  • God deals with people as individuals, not as classes, and we should have that mindset, as well.
  • God sees hearts, not skin color, so race (nor any other physical or material characteristic) should not be used as the criteria for judging others.
  • There are people of every race who are privileged as it relates to societal advantages, and others who are not. God does not judge people based on their outward circumstances, and neither should we.
  • Ultimately, all people descended from God’s original creation. The fact that various groups of people have ended up in different places, circumstances, and even racial groupings, does not change that. God sees all individual humans as persons created in his image, and we, too, should not evaluate people based on personal biases or ancestry.
  • God is the originator of morality, and every person is judged by his standard whether they like it or not. As such, human judgments should not be based on the preferences and prejudices of the people who hold power in society. Rather, there should be a recognition of objective right and wrong based on God’s revelation that results in equal justice under the law.

Some people will look at this list and call it naive. However, it is not naive if it actually represents reality – which it does. God does exist. He created mankind in his image and values every human. He evaluates the lives of individuals based on his own character, and he expects human morality to reflect that.

The use of the rod of “white privilege” (or any other kind of material category) to elevate or denigrate any group of people is not a Christian concept and is immoral. It only leads to hatred and division. It is not of God, and all Christians should reject it out of hand.

© 2018 Freddy Davis

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *