A common maxim in Reformed theology is that “grace restores nature.” What is being communicated here is that once the Triune God visits a man with redemption that man becomes, over the course of time in light of ongoing sanctification, the best version of himself. Grace, in this understanding doesn’t make the man into something other than when he was when visited by and with grace but rather it restores what was taken from man by the fall and his sinful nature. So, because of this when a man or woman is visited by renewal unto eternal life he/she neither loses his maleness or femaleness. Neither do they lose their genetic predispositions, but grace restores those predispositions in a Christ honoring direction. In the same sense once a person is redeemed, they are not evacuated of their ethnic/racial identity. To insist that grace unmakes nature so that the convert is now something completely other than what they were before grace is a Gnostic position. It is a denial of nature and an insistence that grace un-anchors us from whom God providentially created us to be.
This is demonstrated in the reality that the Lord Jesus Christ, who is now at the right hand of the Father remains male, remains a member of the tribe of Judah, and retains His human nature. Even in resurrection (an event akin to our regeneration) Christ is not other than who He was, according to His divine and human nature, before His death and resurrection, though now glorified.
The scriptures teach that the Triune God ordained not only our redemption, but He ordained who we would be in creation as well. God ordained that we would be male or female. God ordained our genetic strengths and weaknesses. God ordained what family, tribe, nation and race to which we would belong. So, we see in scripture the beginnings of races, languages and nations according to God’s creational intent. These distinctions are maintained even after redemption. This is seen in texts like,
Rev. 7:9 After these things I looked, and behold, a great multitude which no one could number, of all nations, tribes, peoples, and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, with palm branches in their hands,
Rev. 5:9 And they sang a new song, saying:
“You are worthy to take the scroll,
And to open its seals;
For You were slain,
And have redeemed us to God by Your blood
Out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation,
Rev. 11:9 Then those from the peoples, tribes, tongues, and nations will see their dead bodies three-and-a-half days, and not allow their dead bodies to be put into graves.
Rev. 14:6 Then I saw another angel flying in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach to those who dwell on the earth—to every nation, tribe, tongue, and people—
Rev. 20:3 and he cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal on him, so that he should deceive the nations no more till the thousand years were finished. But after these things he must be released for a little while.
Rev. 20:8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea.
Notice the repeated mention of nations as nations being present in the New Jerusalem. This is testimony that grace does not destroy nature. This is testimony that it is not God’s intent for distinct nations to disappear into a Gospel blob that finds all colors bleeding into one. Christianity does not put humanity in a giant genetic blender while hitting the high-speed button. This was the agenda of those at Babel (Gen. 11). The agenda of a coffee-latte colored multi-racialist/cultural nation has always been the agenda of the Marxists. Always.
Our Lord Christ Himself maintained the creational distinctions ordained from eternity. Jesus, whose own genetic descent was instrumental to His Messiahship (Matthew 1, Luke 3, Romans 1:3), sent His disciples first only to the “lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Mt. 10:6, cmp. Mt. 15:24) yet later the resurrected and ascended Lord Christ directs St. Paul to the Gentiles (Acts 22:17-29 cmp. Acts 13:2-3). During His own ministry Jesus says,
16 And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd.
A fold is a portion of the larger flock. The Lord Christ has one flock, but that flock is made of folds that exist in many ethnic/racial places. The Church has a unity (one flock) found in a diversity of folds. In the Church there is unity in diversity. There are German folds, Japanese folds, Ndebele folds but together they form one flock with Christ the chief shepherd. The reality and even necessity of various folds does not negate the unity found in the flock (Church). Again, even in heaven these folds will be present as one flock. When the New Jerusalem is let down upon the New Earth in the eschaton (Rev. 21:1-3) we read
Rev. 21:24 And the nations of those who are saved shall walk in its light, and the kings of the earth bring their glory and honor into it. 25 Its gates shall not be shut at all by day (there shall be no night there). 26 And they shall bring the glory and the honor of the nations into it.
Here we see the creational distinctions that God ordained in Gen. 10:5, Dt. 32:8, and Acts 17:26 would be perpetually established into the eschaton.
5 From these the coastland peoples of the Gentiles were separated into their lands, everyone according to his language, according to their families, into their nations.
Dt.32:8When the Most High divided their inheritance to the nations,
When He separated the sons of Adam,
He set the boundaries of the peoples
According to the number of the children of Israel.
Acts 17:26 And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings,
The sin of Babel was the same attempt that modern man pursues now and that is the sin of amalgamation. The desire in Gen. 11 (Bable) was to adulterate the nations (adulterate in the sense of water down or dilute) with the humanistic purpose of fallen man apart from God seeking to “make a name for himself.” This attempt at adulteration/amalgamation of the races/nations is what the multi-racialist/culturalist pursues today. They are the intellectual descendants of Nimrod and Babel. The fact that many of these Babel-ites are clergy only increases their guilt.
The Scripture teaches that God condemned those who would remove these distinctions by means of amalgamation/adulteration.
Dt. 7:3 Nor shall you make marriages with them. You shall not give your daughter to their son, nor take their daughter for your son.
Ezra 9:10 And now, O our God, what shall we say after this? For we have forsaken Your commandments,
Nehemiah 9:2 Then those of Israelite lineage separated themselves from all foreigners; and they stood and confessed their sins and the iniquities of their fathers. (See all of Nehemiah 9-13).
Now the typical Evangelical and Cultural Marxist Reformed response to these passages is to insist that the only segregation/separation that God requires is a forbidding of marriage and breeding between believers and unbelievers regardless of their race/ethnicity. The problem with this defense against the clear teaching of Scripture is found in the abhorrence of Isaac and Rebecca as to Esau’s choice of wives. Gen. 25-28 teaches that one of Esau’s rebellions was his miscegenation. However, Esau was no believer marrying unbelieving women who were not members of the covenant. Esau was an unbeliever marrying unbelievers. Now combine this observation that Jacob in marrying Rachel was hardly marrying a daughter who wasn’t from a pagan family. (Witness her theft of her father’s gods.) Clearly, there is something other going on in the Holy record besides Isaac and Rebecca being put out because Esau as an unbeliever married unbelieving Hittites or Ishmaelite women or Jacob as a covenant child married Rachel who could not be considered a covenant member at this time. Clearly, there are racial/ethnic considerations going on here. Isaac and Rebecca are put out because Esau married outside his kin and Rebecca sends Jacob to her brother Laban to find a wife among her and Isaac’s kin, even if Rachel, the wife to be, was not at that time a servant of Yahweh.
Also, we need to consider in all this that in the Ezra and Nehemiah texts where the requirement is to send away all the foreign women that the Israelites had married, that the requirement was also to send away children of those unions. If it was the case that the problem was only that the Israelites had married unbelieving women why then were the covenant children of those unions also to be sent away? Clearly, God held there to be such a problem with these unions that both the foreign wives and the children born of those foreign wives had to be sent away. The issue here in Ezra and Nehemiah is not one only of unbelieving wives. The issue in Ezra and Nehemiah is also one of ethnic mixing that displeased the God of the Bible.
Underscoring all this is God’s instructions regarding beast and crop;
Lev. 19:19 ‘You shall keep My statutes. You shall not let your livestock breed with another kind. You shall not sow your field with mixed seed. Nor shall a garment of mixed linen and wool come upon you.
Rushdoony comments on this passage,
“These laws forbid the blurring of God-ordained distinctions. The nature and direction of sin is to blur and finally erase all the God-ordained boundaries … God’s laws are case laws. If vegetable seeds are not to be mingled, nor an ass and a horse crossbred, then in the human realm it follows that the confusion of God-ordained boundaries is even more serious.”
R. J. Rushdoony
Commentary on Leviticus – p. 230
A second’s thought understands that if God wants lesser distinctions retained how much more would we expect God to desire greater distinctions as between races to be retained?Now, in this discussion we take notice of the 7th commandment.
“Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery”
Adultery includes the obvious sexual sins that are commonly associated with it. However, the forbidding of “Adultery,” includes the forbidding of “Adulteration.” The adulteration that is forbidden includes a watering down or diluting of the original stock. When a marriage is contracted between people of different races the issue from that marriage is an adulteration from both racial stocks.
Calvin in his commentary on Genesis 36 touches the subject of adulteration,
24. This was that Anah that found the mules. Mules are the adulterous offspring of the horse and the ass. Moses says that Anal was the author of this connection. [131] But I do not consider this as said in praise of his industry; for the Lord has not in vain distinguished the different kinds of animals from the beginning. But since the vanity of the flesh often solicits the children of this world, so that they apply their minds to superfluous matters, Moses marks this unnatural pursuit in Anah, who did not think it sufficient to have a great number of animals; but he must add to them a degenerate race produced by unnatural intercourse. Moreover, we learn hence, that there is more moderation among brute animals in following the law of nature, than in men, who invent vicious admixtures.
John Calvin
Commentary — Genesis 36:24
Calvin clearly here shows the modernly ignored meaning of adultery: to bastardize/adulterate. While marital adultery (promiscuity) is definitely a sin, the inherent meaning of miscegenation/mongrelization is included in the word “adultery” and “adulterate” and that is all but forgotten in our modern context. As we have also seen in Genesis, God referred to Esau’s taking of wives outside his racial family as fornication (Hebrews 12:16)!
The reader would profit greatly from taking the time to learn about adulteration from this article
A Kinist Commentary on the Ten Commandments: The Seventh Word
Heritage Reformed people, following Calvin, have always had this abhorrence of all attempts to wipe out God ordained distinctions. We follow Calvin here,
“But the notion that what ails the world [inseparably from sin] is confusion had much practical value for Calvin … Thus, when Calvin associated disorder with obscurity, he could conceive of correcting it by sharpening the contours of the various entities composing the world; once one thing has been clearly distinguished, physically or conceptually, from others, it can be assigned its proper place in the order of things … Thus he abominated ‘mixture,’ one of the most pejorative terms in his vocabulary; mixture in any area of experience suggested to him disorder and unintelligibility. He had absorbed deeply not only the traditional concern for cosmic purity of a culture that had restricted mixture to the sublunary realm but also various Old Testament prohibitions. Mixture, for Calvin, connoted ‘adulteration’ or ‘promiscuity,’ but it also set off in him deep emotional and metaphysical reverberations. He repeatedly warned against ‘mixing together things totally different.’ …
The positive corollary of Calvin’s loathing of mixture was his approval of boundaries, which separate one thing from another. He attributed boundaries to God Himself: God had established the boundaries between peoples, which should therefore remain within the space assigned to them … ‘Just as there are in a military camp separate lines for each platoon and section,’ Calvin observed, ‘men are placed on the earth so that each nation may be content with its own boundaries.’”
W.J. Bouwsma
John Calvin: A Sixteenth Century Portrait — p.34-35
The reason this kind of defense of intra-racial marriage is necessary is due to the constant Cultural Marxist hyper push on achieving what those behind the Tower of Babel could only have dreamed of achieving. If this kind of push in the larger culture (Governments, Media, Hollywood, Advertising, etc.) didn’t exist these kinds of arguments here would not be needed. Clearly, it is not the occasional occurrence of a inter-racial marriage here or there that calls for this kind of clarity. What demands this kind of clarity is the ever-increasing achievement of the long-held Marxist dream of eliminating all races and nations. Further, what demands this kind of clarity is the clear intent to completely genocide the White race — particularly White Christians. Replacement theory is no myth.
It is obvious that this reasoning can be taken to extremes that I would not be comfortable with and that I would oppose. Being a believer in freedom of association, I would not support laws that would find the state trying to legislate on these matters. These matters are better being put under the government of the family. Further, I understand that inter-racial marriages are going to happen, as much as I don’t think that is profitable, especially for the children of such unions. Compassion on those children as well as on my people group requires me to speak as a Christian minister. What I am trying to lift my voice against is the current Babel zeitgeist that finds miscegenation being stuck in the face ad nauseum of what at one time was referred to as Christendom. There clearly is an agenda here and that agenda needs to be opposed the way Samson opposed the Philistines.
There is nothing that I oppose more than the presence of the New World Order in the Church and the attendant clergy who have reinterpreted Christianity through the lens of Cultural Marxist worldview.