As I’ve said before try to keep in mind how mind numbingly stupid this position is. I know this because when someone who is mixed race comes in for a bone marrow transplant, the Doctors don’t say, “Hey, no problem. Race is a social construct and as such we’ll grab one of our Korean Janitors to give you some bone marrow.” No, when someone needs a bone marrow transplant suddenly race is seen to be as real as it never ceases to be and the poor kid who is mixed race is likely up crap creek in terms of finding a donor.
Denying the biological reality of race is just stupid and the preachers quoted below who embrace this stupidity should be marked out to be avoided. I would even go further and say anybody who makes league with these idiots and recommends them as a good source of truth likewise should be marked out as “there be dragons here.”
Bonaventure Hinwood
Race; Reflections of a Theologian, p. 103
And for the quotes that demonstrate that the modern “conservative” Reformed clergy are drinking deeply from the WOKE well.
Save your lives and the lives of your children. RUN from these false shepherds.
Doug Wilson
Owen Strachan
Dallas Statement on Social Justice
Voddie Baucham
Inspired by a friend’s post elsewhere. I added a few Carolina Reaper peppers and contributed a few observations of my own.
“Denying the biological reality of race is just stupid and the preachers quoted below who embrace this stupidity should be marked out to be avoided.”
It can be worse than merely “stupid.” If taken to its logical ultimate conclusions, denying material realities leads to Antichrist.
For it is written that
“every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist”
https://biblehub.com/1_john/4-3.htm
Old Gill commentary says:
“who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh; these were not the Jews who denied that Jesus was the Christ, though they would not allow that Christ was come in the flesh; but these were some who bore the Christian name, and professed to believe in Jesus Christ, but would not own that he was really incarnate, or assumed a true human nature, only in appearance; and denied that he took true and real flesh of the virgin, but only seemed to do so;”
https://biblehub.com/commentaries/2_john/1-7.htm
I am NOT interested in making Christian theology a mere hobby-horse for White racial interests. I am not using spiritual means for mere material ends. But this connection is genuinely sinister and needs to be studied. For it seems that without at least some amount of “racism,” you cannot affirm the true Incarnation of Lord Jesus Christ. Anti-racism leads to anti-sarkism, which leads to Hell.
I agree w/ you here but it is more difficult to draw the connections for people between this incipient Gnosticism and so their embracing of “anti-Christ,” than it is to merely say they are stupid.
But again, I agree w/ you that this is Manicheanism/Gnosticism.
I’m pleased with your commenting here. You bring some really great quotes to support your insights. Nice to have you aboard here.
To me, it seems rather clear that Christian “racists” must distance themselves from outright race-idolatry, the kind of stuff one could see in the Third Reich. Those guys actually DID worship their own race, or their own flesh and blood, as the manifestation of divinity. (Anti-Christian Nazis actually had their own “anti-colonialist” narrative, cursing the Frankish ruler Charlemagne who had forced pagan Saxons to adopt Christianity.)
Whereas Christian “anti-racists” must distance themselves from anti-sarkism, or perverted spirituality that belittles or denies the significance of natural material identities. Using the simple Gospel standard of judging the tree by its fruits, we can see that anti-sarkism has led the churches in bed with some of the worst worldly scum out there, like the Cultural Marxists.
(Btw, the ORIGINAL Communists were not exactly Gnostics, as they very much believed in material realities, emphasizing the importance of the “means of production,” industrialization and such. It is the decadent, feminized or faggotized neo-Communists or Cultural Marxists who are taking that route. Thus, the “Old Left” was able to produce some pretty fearsome fighters, like the Soviet defenders of Stalingrad for example, whereas “New Left” is producing mere confused genderqueers who live as parasites in the globalist-capitalist consumerist society.)
The original Commies were materialistic and evolutionary atheists. One can understand why they were so put out with Gramsci and the Cultural Marxists who denounced the Commie materialistic dialectic in favor of a cultural (non-material) dialectic.
The conservative Anglican J.N. Figgis argued in a similar manner against pacifism during the First World War:
http://anglicanhistory.org/england/jnfiggis/defects1917/13.html
“This brings me to the second point, the notion that all war is wrong. That notion rests on the presupposition best expressed by the great Quaker orator, “Force is no remedy.” The ground is different from that discussed above, and in some respects inconsistent with it. The former rests on materialistic arguments; this, on the contrary, is a perverted spiritualism. So far as I can understand it the claim that force is no remedy involves the notion that, since realities are spiritual, all attempts at achieving ends by material means are doomed to failure. This argument, then, rests on the idea of the godlessness of all the world of Nature; ultimately it is Manichean, seeking spirituality purely in abstraction, logically destructive of the Incarnation and the Resurrection of the Body.”
“There is only one race. The human race. And so I think races — the whole concept of races — is problematic. The one human race is divided by language. divided by culture, divided by tribes, divided by history.”
Doug Wilson
So Wilson slips in a synonym and hopes that no one will notice that Doug uses the word “tribe” in exactly the same way most folks use the word race. OK, I’m down with that. I tend to prefer Puritan English and the A.V. so “tribe” is a perfect word to use. Now is Wilson going to say that “tribes are a human construct” or “the whole concept of tribes — is problematic”? I think not. He knows that will lead to him looking like a complete fool. So he uses the synonym and hopes that no one notices. And it works a fair amount of the time. But not with me. Just be honest Doug, if five Irish nuns get on the elevator car that you alone occupy, you look up, see them, look back at what you were previously engaged in. If five Mormons get of with their white shirts and black name badges, you look up, see them and resume your business. If five Asians get on the elevator with laptops and pocket protectors for their pens, you look up and look back to your business. If five black gangbangers with gold teeth and pants halfway down their buttocks get on, you look up, grip a pen, your keys or anything else that can be used as a makeshift weapon, you show no fear, you look them in the eye and show them that you are alert and act with focus and intent, you have your back against the wall so no one can get behind you, you also push the button for the very next floor and pray you can get off in one piece. Why… well because they are from a r̶a̶c̶e̶ tribe known to be dangerous and violent. I’m sure Rev. Wilson appreciates that I didn’t use the R-word but instead used the T-word. It makes all the difference in the world…. to those are afraid to be honest.
“So Wilson slips in a synonym and hopes that no one will notice that Doug uses the word “tribe” in exactly the same way most folks use the word race.”
As they say, “The large print giveth and the small print taketh away.” Rather pharisaical or talmudic, touting your supposed moral superiority with big words, and then retracting their actual meaning “sotto voce”.