Belief in white Jesus linked to racism

[Bucky Ball]

Care to provide references for the unsupported assertion concerning "a basic hermeneutic among traditional Christians ?
I seem to recall St. Paul saying (and hearing this preached from High (church) Anglican and liberal Roman pulpits :
1 Corinthians 15:17-19 : "And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is in vain; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost.
If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied."

I very much doubt that the very close (end-point practical) similarity between the Medieval "Cloud of Unknowing" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cloud_of_Unknowing
the "Dark Night of the Soul" (John of the Cross / Teresa of Avila) and for example Chinese Tao Mysticism, and agnostic atheism are even on the horizon of more than 5 Christians in the entire world. If Christians bought into "allegory" that would not be so. There is no widespread concensus in Christianity, AT ALL, or even "many" who've heard about the resurrection as allegory, (as in Progressive Christianity), where, as Dr. B.B. Scott says, (in "The Trouble With Ressurection") Jesus was metaphorically "exalted" (as Hebrew Apocalyptic heroes were "exalted") (the Greek word used in Paul for "raised up", and not "risen from the dead").

And actually it matters a very great deal. In many places in 2021 a literal interpretation is what Fundamentalist Christians in huge numbers demand and espouse. 
Did Jesus rise from the dead or not ? While my exposure was entirely non-Fundamental(ist) the unsupported assertion "among traditional Christians" is entirely false. 
And the importance of YOUR question, seems to have been forgotten from a couple days before. It was important for you to challenge. 

I would say that most likely that the majority of the people were Bible literalists, up until the 19 th century.

You keep repeating this. I'm looking for some kind of scholarly, historical source. 

So am I. It was important enough for you to make an issue of it. 
The links you provided in the copy-pasta bibliography do not suffice, unless you'd care to summarize each one. 

"Thomas (Aquinas) believed that the historical sense of Scripture was of primary importance: "all the senses are founded on one - the literal - from which alone can any argument be drawn, and not from those intended in allegory, as Augustine says".

"That signification whereby things signified by words have themselves also a signification is called the spiritual sense, which is based on the literal, and presupposes it". http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1001.htm#article10 Summa Theologica I, q. 1, art. 10, reply to objection 1
Reply to Objection 1. The multiplicity of these senses does not produce equivocation ... because the things signified by the words can be themselves types of other things. Thus in Holy Writ no confusion results, for all the senses are founded on one - the literal - from which alone can any argument be drawn, and not from those intended in allegory, as Augustine says (Epis. 48). http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1001.htm#article10 Summa Theologica I, q. 1, art. 10, reply to objection 1

Also in the Summa Theologica I, q. 102, art. 1, Aquinas discusses the question of whether Paradise was a literal place or a figurative, spiritual place, and concludes that it was both:
I answer that, as Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xiii, 21): "Nothing prevents us from holding, within proper limits, a spiritual paradise; so long as we believe in the truth of the events narrated as having there occurred." For whatever Scripture tells us about paradise is set down as a matter of history; and wherever Scripture makes use of this method, we must hold to the historical truth of the narrative as a foundation of whatever spiritual explanation we may offer."

https://www.angelfire.com/linux/vjtorley...ys%20(Epis.