Hate crimes, segregation, and prejudices against people of different cultures and ethnic backgrounds not only exist in America, they seem to be on the rise again. So after acknowledging this unfortunate reality, it may seem odd to hear that I cannot believe in the idea of racism; but neither should you! Please allow me to explain why:
The term “Race” used to describe and divide humanity is an evolutionary construct that has been widely accepted—most often blindly. This anthropological ideology—which views man not as an image bearer of God but as an evolving group of various monkeys (or something of the sort)—not only divides humanity, it also insists that a hierarchy be established and fight for supremacy. Many well-established scientists understand this reality: “Race is a social construct derived mainly from perceptions conditioned by events of recorded history, and it has no basic biological reality.”
In spite of the theory’s overwhelming acceptance, no scientific/biological evidence exists to objectively believe that man consists of differing races.
In fact, to believe that man consists of races is to believe in an unscientific construct that throughout its history has only divided mankind and brought about pain and suffering. The theory of races is simply a segregating social construct that enables social control. The American Anthropological Association explains:
“Historical research has shown that the idea of “race” has always carried more meanings than mere physical differences; indeed, physical variations in the human species have no meaning except the social ones that humans put on them. Today scholars in many fields argue that “race” as it is understood in the United States of America was a social mechanism invented during the 18th century to refer to those populations brought together in colonial America: the English and other European settlers, the conquered Indian peoples, and those peoples of Africa brought in to provide slave labor.” 
Similarly, Psychologist Guy Harrison states,
“Races are not naturally occurring subspecies of human beings. They are the artificial creations of our cultures. Therefore, attempting to solve the problem of racism by asking for tolerance between races is like turning up the air conditioner in a burning house because you don’t like the temperature.” 
The idea of “human races” is simply a concept created by men who rejected God and His creation of man. Since this wrong philosophy is merely a man-made construct then the logical question that follows is: “who is responsible for such a segregating and devaluing anthropological theory?” The answer is none other than Charles Darwin. Though Darwin did not create the idea, the global acceptance of his theory of evolution enabled its popularity and eventual acceptance. In his book, The Descent of Man, Darwin asserted that:
“The sole object of this work is to consider, firstly, whether man, like every other species, is descended from some pre-existing form; secondly, the manner of his development; and thirdly, the value of the differences between the so-called races of man [emphasis added].” 
Darwin not only separated mankind into races, he also saw humanity as strictly a material matter of evolution; lacking moral value. With such a wrong and divisive starting point to his anthropology, Darwin could not avoid fitting man into a system which demanded that one “race” be strong in order to survive and that all other “races” be devalued. He states:
“Be enquired whether man, like so many other animals, has given rise to varieties and sub-races, differing but slightly from each other, or to races differing so much that they must be classed as doubtful species . . . the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace throughout the world the saved races.” 
Darwin considered some races as not even the same species and even suggested that those who are not among the “saved races” need to be replaced.
Today, the ever-growing acceptance of evolutionary thinking has led to a deeper belief in a plurality of races rather than one created human family. While not all people who claim to believe in evolutionary theory are prejudice, evolutionary theory itself teaches and promotes not simply segregation, but a domination and devaluation of other “races” in order to survive. In fact, as Darwin himself stated, to believe in evolution demands both that the ideology of “races” be accepted and that each “race” be organized into a “value system.” Merriam Webster’s Dictionary describes racism as: “the belief that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.” In other words, to believe in the differing human “races” is racism. This belief demands that people be placed into a system of hierarchy. Neuroscientist, Carl Hart explains,"before proceeding I also need to clearly define one more term: racism. So many people have misused and diluted the term that its perniciousness gets lost. Racism is the belief that social and cultural differences between groups are inherited and immutable, making some groups inalterably superior to others . . . . I never want to give the impression that I am overemphasizing its force or exaggerating when I use the word. I mean precisely the role that the belief in innate racial inferiority plays in shaping group behavior." 
“Isms” typically reflect a belief in something, and racism is no different. However, the term “racism” is often viewed to be a type of prejudice. In truth, however, the prejudice is the natural and expected result of believing in a plurality of races. To state it differently, the ideology of evolution created the construct of races, and this theory demands people to institute a hierarchal system that elevates their own race above all others. The American Anthropological Association explains,
“From its inception, this modern concept of “race” was modeled after an ancient theorem of the Great Chain of Being, which posited natural categories on a hierarchy established by God or nature. Thus “race” was a mode of classification linked specifically to peoples in the colonial situation. It subsumed a growing ideology of inequality devised to rationalize European attitudes and treatment of the conquered and enslaved peoples. Proponents of slavery in particular during the 19th century used “race” to justify the retention of slavery. The ideology magnified the differences among Europeans, Africans, and Indians, established a rigid hierarchy of socially exclusive categories underscored and bolstered unequal rank and status differences, and provided the rationalization that the inequality was natural or God-given. The different physical traits of African-Americans and Indians became markers or symbols of their status differences.” 
There is no way to avoid the truth that Darwin’s theory of evolution—suggesting that the strong should survive—calls for war, violence, and devaluing of the variety of “sub-races” as a necessary part of the “Great Chain of Being.” Truly, evolutionary thinking is racist, divisive, and insists that prejudices be formed. Former research professor at Harvard University and rationalist, Dr. Bruce Lipton, realizes that violence and human struggle are important aspects of Darwinian Theory. He explains,
“Unfortunately, we conveniently “forgot” about the cooperation necessary for evolution when Charles Darwin emphasized a radically different theory about the emergence of life. He concluded 150 years ago that living organisms are perpetually embroiled in a “struggle for existence.” For Darwin, struggle and violence are not only a part of animal (human) nature but the principal “forces” behind evolutionary advancement. In the final chapter of The Origin of Species: By Means of Natural Selection, Or, the Preservation of Favored Races In The Struggle For Life, Darwin wrote of an inevitable “struggle for life” and that evolution was driven by “the war of nature, from famine and death.” Couple that with Darwin’s notion that evolution is random and you have a world, as poetically describe by Tennyson, that can be characterized as “red in tough and claw,” a series of meaningless, bloody battles for survival [emphasis added].” 
He later states,
“While Darwinian Theory specifies that the purpose of life’s struggles is survival, it does not specify a means that should be used in securing that end. Apparently, “anything goes” in the perceived struggle because the goal is simply survival—by any means. Rather than framing the character of our lives by the laws of morality, the neo-Darwinians of [Ernst] Mayr suggests that we live our lives by the law of the jungle.” 
When God’s moral law is substituted for utilitarianism and Darwinian Theory is applied, then hatred, prejudices, division, violence, bloody battles, pride, segregation, and the “law of the jungle” are unavoidable. Once a value system (spoken or not) has been imposed upon the “races”—and it must happen with evolutionary thinking, then violence and hatred toward the lesser or “sub-races” is inevitable.
If society as a whole chooses to place their faith in evolutionary thinking, then racism (of which I mean the belief in races and its prejudices) will flourish and violence and mental and physical segregation will continue to increase. It is no wonder then, that segregation and violence against humanity is on the rise as Darwinian Theory continues to grow in popularity and to be propagated to the youngest of children within the American public school system.
Likewise, it is no wonder that marches and organizations meant to spread love and bring various groups of people together cannot work within evolutionary thinking. Empathy makes no sense in an anthropological system that views man as a material mass who must fight for his existence and survival. In fact, neuroscientist, David Eagleman remarks of the evolutionary idea that suggests that the strong should survive. He states,
“When we think about human evolution, we’re all familiar with the concept of survival of the fittest: it calls to mind the picture of a strong and wily individual who can outfight, outrun, or outmate other members of its species. In other words, one has to be a good competitor to thrive and survive. That model has good explanatory power, but it leaves some aspects of our behavior difficult to explain. Consider altruism: why does survival of the fittest explain why people help each other out?” 
Unless the underlying theory of evolution is denied, love is an illogical evolutionary practice. We cannot continue to believe in evolution and racism and propose empathy or love as a solution to deal with hate, ignorance, and pride. Dr. Harrison explains.
“Overt racism and all other destructive but less obvious race problems are unlikely to ever go away no matter how much love and tolerance we pour on the fire. What is needed is a game-changer, an awakening to the reality of who we are as revealed by science. . . We have only ourselves to blame. Anthropologists have been pointing out that races are cultural creations for more than fifty years. Unfortunately the general public never got the memo. But forget the herd’s direction and make sure you see biological races for what they are. It is vital to have a sensible view of your relationship with the greater human family. Simply put, race belief has no place in the mind of an enlightened 21st century person.” 
If racism is to truly end, then man’s view of origin, anthropology, and theology must fundamentally change away from evolution and back to the biblical creation account. In fact, the traditional evolution of man provides a great illustration of the inherent racism in evolutionary thought; it views man as progressing from monkey to missing link, to African, to Asian, and culminating as a Caucasian (see image below).
Thankfully, there is an alternative belief or worldview that unifies mankind and benefits everyone. In contrast to secular evolutionary views that segregate and establish a hierarchy of cultures, God sees man as one creation; His image bearers. Acts 17:26 states, “And he made from one man [“blood”] every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place.” Likewise, Genesis 1:26-27 says, “Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” To truly believe in God means that mankind is not viewed as separate races; but as one unit of created image bearers. God is not concerned at all about nationality, geographical locations, physical characteristics, or citizenship. Instead, He desires the gospel to reach all people in all nations (e.g., Matthew 28:16-20). The Bible also does not encourage men and women to race against each other in order to survive; rather it admonishes us to love God and our fellow humanity (Matthew 22:36-40).
Ironically, the term race can be defined as “a contest or rivalry involving progress toward a goal.”  The “human race”—if you still wish to call it that—made God their rival/enemy in Genesis 11 and established as their goal to ascend into heaven, exult their own name instead of God’s, and thwart His plans (vs. 4). The ideologies of evolutionary theory and humanism echo these same destructive goals, and these humanistic goals—that oppose God and divide man—represent why God divided man into different cultures and geographical locations.
It is here in Genesis 11 that we also discover how various societies were formed within God’s creation of man. At the tower of Babel, God divided humanity into various physical traits, languages, geographical locations, and customs. But Scripture does not declare mankind to ever be anything other than one singular group of image bearers with equal value—no matter how they are categorized.
Just as Darwinian Theory exults man, reveals pride, and furthers man as an enemy of God, mankind at the tower of Babel was attacking God’s authority and asserting their own will and self-worship. One of the lessons that can be learned from this historic account in Genesis 11 is that the result of man’s pride—in the end—is never unifying. Instead, man’s pride and his denial of God bring discord and violence to society. Racism is a false belief, but pride and hatred are sadly abundant in American culture. The more arrogant humanity is before God, the more segregated and like the people at the tower of Babel they become. Whether in antiquity or in present day America, the idea of a human race reflects an evolutionary ideology with the goal of opposing God and controlling man.
Unfortunately, many people who have claimed Christ throughout church history (even today) have been deceived into thinking that the evolutionary ideology of “races” should be imposed upon society. Some have even wrongly imposed these theories upon Scripture to promote godless ideologies. While we can certainly declare these men and women’s teaching as wrong, unbiblical, and attribute their behavior to either their ignorance, pride, or hatred, we must not impose their mistake upon God or His Word and imply that this is a biblical position. God never uses the term or idea of race anywhere in Scripture, and He asserts that mankind is a unified group who bears His likeness and who are descendants of Adam.
But we must not only reject the Darwinian idea of races or racism, we must also dogmatically reject the evolutionary ideology that seeks to lead God’s image bearers away from God and segregate them from each other. In its place, we must turn back to the rightful view of man’s origins, which states that all men are created equal in God’s eyes (Colossians 3:11), are descendants from the same bloodline (Acts 17:26), and are all in need to accept God’s love that unifies mankind (Matthew 22:37-40; Philippians 4:1-5). This love not only unifies all men and women who genuinely receive it, but it also unifies individual men and women with their Creator who no longer judges them to be an enemy of God (Ephesians 2:1-10).
So how should we respond to these facts and how can we change man’s thinking to reflect reality? First of all, we must turn from Darwinian thinking that demands the propaganda of races and racism be embraced. Second, we must view our physical differences as blessings of God and not as signs that we are different families. Within almost every family, there exist numerous physical differences, and we both recognize and appreciate these variances. Yet because we are confident of the bloodline, we never assume that having a different eye color, hair color, or different tones of skin color makes us a different race, and neither do we devalue our family members because of our differences. In contrast, evolutionary ideology has taught many to dismiss this same reason and logic when it comes to geographical locations, languages, and skin tones. But we are one big created family who can enjoy our cultural, physical, and geographical differences without segregation, prejudice, or hatred.
Third, along the same line of reasoning, we must truly love others as God loves us. Since we are a big family, we need to embrace each other and put an end to our segregation, hatred, and ignorance. For example, we need to stop propagating the idea of “interracial marriages”; we are all of the same bloodline so the term is useless. Additionally, we can celebrate our differences, but still always rejoicing in our unity. Likewise, we must put an end to organizations that single out groups of people to celebrate and advance their cause over others. These types of organizations do nothing more than to fuel the Darwinian doctrine of racism and hierarchy. Fighting for one group’s rights does not eliminate racism; it promotes it. Likewise, having hateful groups who ignorantly demoralize and devalue other people cannot be tolerated, and we must lovingly rebuke those who are arrogant and hateful and gently educate those who are ignorant. If we as a unified people are tired of racism, and I know I am, then the only remedy is to stop believing in it and stop promoting the false doctrine of evolution that demands segregation and devaluing of human life. What our society needs is to humbly turn back to God and to love each other.
Notes and Citations:
 R.L. Hotz, “Race has no Basis in Biology,” Cincinnati Enquirer (Feb. 20, 1997); p. A3.
 American Anthropological Association, “AAA Statement on ‘Race’”: Available from http://www.americananthro.org/ConnectWithAAA/Content.aspx?ItemNumber=2583; Internet.
 Guy Harrison, “Four Simple Reasons Smart People Shouldn’t Believe in Races,” (Dec. 23 2013): Available from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/about-thinking/201312/four-simple-reasons-smart-people-shouldnt-believe-in-races; Internet.
 Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (London: John Murray, 1871), 2-3.
 Ibid., 9-10; 201.
 Carl Hart, High Price: A Neuroscientist's Journey of Self Discovery That Challenges Everything you know about Drugs and Society (New York: Harper, 2013), 14.
 American Anthropological Association, “AAA Statement on ‘Race’”: Available from http://www.americananthro.org/ConnectWithAAA/Content.aspx?ItemNumber=2583; Internet.
 Bruce H. Lipton, The Biology of Belief: Unleashing the Power of Consciousness, Matter & Miracles (N.Y.: Hay House, 2005), 10-11.
 Ibid., 158.
 David Eagleman, The Brain: The Story of You (N.Y.: Pantheon Books, 2015), 147-48.
 Guy Harrison, “Four Simple Reasons Smart People Shouldn’t Believe in Races.”