Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1901-12-04
ORIGIN OF THE NEGRO.

ORIGIN OF THE NEGRO.
The Scriptures Are Searched Fol-
Light on the Question.
The following interesting article or
the origin Of the Negro, from the per
Of Rev. DR.. ]. B. Mack, Of Fort Mill, is
reproduced from the Charlotte Observ-
er, Of last Sunday:
Whence the Negro? This Is a dark
subject, an exceedingly perplexine
problem. Yet its solution Is vital to
some doctrines Of the church, and also
vital in determining the nature Of our
national government. Indeed II we
think Of the strange introduction OF
Negro slavery into our land and its Pc
culiar phases in colonial days; If we
notice how it colored almost every
question in congress from 1889 to 1861;
If we study the causes of our great
civil war; If we consider how this mat
ter has made the south almost solidly
Democratic and the north almost SOL
idly Republican from 1868 to 1900, we
must conclude that this problem has
been the main pivot of our national
differences and doings. This being the
case, it Is clear that Gods Providence
intends for our nation to solve this
problem. AS the Lord made Esther to
be Queen Of Persia for a special pur-
pose, so He has made our country to
be a queen among the nations Of this
world for a wonderful work, viz: The
determining Of the relations Of the va
rious races to each other, and especial
ly the relation Of the white man to the
Negro. Hence we have in our land all
Of the four races: the white man OF
Europe, the red men Of America, the
yellow man of Asia and the black man
Of Africa.
The position of the Negro has ever
been very varied and always peculiar
Some have regarded him as beast
others as an inferior race Of mankind
and others as the image Of God cut In
ebony as the white man Is that Image
cut in ivory. Today in some states the
Negro can vote, hold office and inter-
marry with the whites. In other states
he can vote and hold Office, but Tile
line Is drawn at marriage. In other
states he is voted sometimes even af-
ter he is dead) but cannot ride In the
same car or eat at the same table with
white folks; while in some others even
the right Of voting is virtually denied
him.
Now is it right to make these distinc-
tions? Is it right to debar the Negro
from voting and from holding office, II
he is intelligent? Is it right to forbid
his eating and drinking and marrying
with white folks anywhere, provided
the whites are willing? The answer to
these questions depends on the answer
to the question whence the Negro?''
Let me mention you four answers:
I. Evolution asserts that from the
mud came a mollusk, then a reptile,
then a bird, then a beast Of low grade,
then a monkey, then Negro, and then
the higher grades Of men up to the
white man. This is an easy way to ac-
count for the origin Of the Negro, and
as false as it Is easy. Science denies
it; for 1t has never yet found the miss
ing link" between the reptile and the
bird, between the bird and the beast,
between the monkey and the man.
Scripture denies It; for its affirms that
the Divine law Is that like begets
like" Racial instinct denies 1t; for ev-
cry true white man abhors the thought
of deriving existence from Negro ances-
tors. Religion denies it; for the idea OF
our blessed Savior being descended
from a Negro Is revolving to the Christ
ian heart.
II. That the Negro is talking beast;
a being In human form, but without q
soul. Such say that the Hebrew word
"chai," in Genesis l, "a, which is trans
lated beast" does not mean a quadru-
ped but a biped, and refers to the Ne
gro. But this Is not true; for repeated
ly in the Bible does "chai" mean
quadruped. To see the absurdity OF
this theory you have only to read the
11th chapter of Leviticus, where three
times the Israelites are granted per-
mission to eat the "chai." If thai
word referred to the Negro, then the
Jew would have one article Of food fal
more repulsive even than swine's flesh
This theory is worse than untrue, FOL
it robs untold millions of their immor'
tai souls and of any hope Of salvation
It Is contrary to Scripture and Is con-
tradicted in it's influence and results.
III. That there were two distinct
creations of man. There was first the
creation Of mankind in general, which
would include all the inferior races, anc
this is recorded in Genesis /, 26. Their
came the creation Of the white man, the
royal race of earth, and this Is record
ed in Genesis /, q. This theory bases
it's claim upon four things in these
two verses.
CD. The first word in verse q Is i'm
properly translated 80" 1t should be
translated and" which proves thai
verse q is not explanatory Of verse 26
but implies an additional fact, viz: an
other creation.
(2). The word used in verse rs to de-
scribe what God did is 'asah," which
only means to make or manufacture
while in verse q it Is "bara," which
means to create and Is the highest and
strongest word to describe Gods pow
err Hence as the word used Is higher
and nobler in verse q than in verse 26
it is argued what was created was
higher and nobler.