In fact, this verse is not racist at all, as I will try to explain in what follows.
The text and its
correct interpretation
Here is the text of
Jeremiah 13:23:
‘Can the Cushite change his skin, or a leopard his spots?
If so, you might be able to do what is good, you who are instructed in evil.’
(CSB)
‘Cushite’ in this verse refers to dark-skinned people who
came from the land of Cush, the area immediately to the south of Egypt, where
modern day Sudan is located. Many translations have ‘Ethiopian’ in this verse
instead of ‘Cushite’, although modern-day Ethiopia is not really the same
location as ancient Cush. For our purposes, however, the details of this are
not important, because, regardless of its location, the inhabitants of Cush
were known for their dark skin. They were what we would describe as black.
In this verse God is
sharply criticising the Jewish people of Jeremiah’s day. He is saying that they
are so in the habit of doing evil, that there is no more likelihood of them
changing and doing good than there is of a Cushite changing his skin colour or
a leopard getting rid of its spots.
Changing the skin
colour of a human and changing the visible appearance of an animal are
obviously good examples of something that is impossible, which helps to drive
home how immersed in sin and evil the Jewish people of that day were.
I think the precise
examples of a Cushite and a leopard were chosen because they would both have
been unusual and attention-grabbing sights in Judah at that time.
Jews would have known
about dark-skinned people from Cush, but it seems that they would have been few
and far between in Judah, so if someone saw a Cushite, it would have been a
sight that caught people’s attention.
As far as leopards
are concerned, these animals clearly have a very distinctive appearance
compared to most other animals. And I think they would also have been rare in
Judah at that time, which would have made them stand out all the more when they
were seen.
The striking
appearance of dark human skin and leopard spots seems to have been why these
examples were chosen.
Answering an
objection
There are a couple of
different ways in which this verse is said to be racist against black people.
Firstly, it is
sometimes said that the way the verse sets a Cushite alongside an animal is
demeaning to the Cushite, as if to some extent the Cushite is being brought
down to the level of a mere animal.
This objection is
completely wrong. There is no more suggestion in this verse that the Cushite is
being brought down to the level of the leopard than there is that the leopard
is being raised to the level of the Cushite. Neither is being brought to the
level of the other at all.
Instead, what we have
here is simply one example of a striking appearance that is taken from the
world of human beings and another example that is taken from the animal
kingdom. For Jews of the day, the Cushite’s skin colour was an unusual and
striking sight among human beings, and the leopard’s appearance was an unusual
and striking sight among animals. Humans and animals are not being confused
here at all.
Answering a
second objection
There is a second and
more common reason why this verse is said to be racist against black people,
which has to do with the reference to changing appearance.
The Jewish people in
view in this verse are evil, and the verse is clearly implying that it would be
good if they were able to change for the better (although this is impossible).
Some therefore claim that the analogy of the Cushite requires that we
understand the verse also to be implying that it would be good if the Cushite
were able to change his skin colour. In other words, it is sometimes said that
this verse looks at dark skin colour negatively.
This objection also
completely misses the mark. Crucially, we need to take note of how in this
verse the Cushite’s skin and the leopard’s spots are parallel to each other.
The same point is being made about both.
So logically, if we
were to say that the verse is implying that it would be good for the Cushite’s
skin colour to change, we would also have to say that it is implying that it
would be good for the leopard to lose its spots.
But the verse cannot
possibly be implying that it would be good for the leopard to lose its spots.
Why? Because leopards look fantastic! And there is no doubt that it isn’t just
in our day that people think this. Surely people throughout history, including
in Jeremiah’s day, have thought the same. The way that the Romans, for example,
took great trouble to bring leopards to Rome is just one of many pieces of
evidence for this.
This verse, then, is in
no way implying that it would be good for leopards to change their appearance.
So it cannot be implying that it would be good for Cushites to change their
appearance, because exactly the same point is being made about the leopard and the
Cushite.
The comparison of
evil people with a Cushite and a leopard is therefore limited to the point that
there is inability to change. The comparison doesn’t include whether it would
be good for change to occur. Of course, it would be good if these Jews
were able to change, but this is simply not the point that is being made by
referring to the Cushite or the leopard. The point that is being made is
just that the Jews in Jeremiah’s day are as unable to turn away from their evil
as a Cushite is to change his skin colour or a leopard is to get rid of its
spots.
Summing up
The idea that Jeremiah
13:23 is somehow racist against black people, then, is completely mistaken. In
reality, this verse just mentions the skin colour of a Cushite as an example of
something that cannot change, without anything negative about the Cushite or
his skin colour being implied.
Moses married a
black woman
While we are on this topic, it is well worth noting that
Numbers 12:1-9 tells us that Moses married a black woman and that God approved
of the marriage.
In Num 12:1 we read:
‘Miriam and Aaron criticized Moses because of the Cushite
woman he married (for he had married a Cushite woman).’ (CSB)
In this verse the Hebrew adjective (koosheet) that is
translated ‘Cushite’ is closely related to the Hebrew noun in Jer 13:23
(kooshee) that is translated as ‘Cushite’ in that verse. There is no good
reason for thinking that these words have different meanings, which means that
Num 12:1 is telling us that Moses married a Cushite woman, who would surely
have been black.
We see from v. 1 that Miriam and Aaron criticised Moses
for marrying this woman. And then in verses 5-8 God rebukes Miriam and Aaron
for their attitude to Moses.
It is true that God’s rebuke seems to be at least mostly
because Miriam and Aaron were assuming more importance than they should have,
not specifically because they had criticised Moses’ marriage.
Nevertheless, there is no doubt that the passage is
implying that Moses did nothing wrong by marrying the Cushite woman. Verse 1
tells us that the precise reason Moses came under criticism by Miriam and Aaron
in the first place was because he married her. So when God then responds to
this criticism and describes Moses as ‘faithful in all my house’ in v. 7, this
has to mean that God had no objection to Moses’ marriage.
For yet another reason, then, the charge of racism
against black people that is sometimes levelled against the Bible fails
completely.
See also:
A Christian Perspective on Race and Racism
The
Arrogance and Hypocrisy of Western Society
“Human
Rights”: A Big Idol among Christians Today
No comments:
New comments are not allowed.