On Human Race: Racism

0:38 Welcome to the Stone Choir Podcast. I am Cory J. Mahler. And I'm Wo. If you are old enough, or maybe if you were poor enough when you were younger, you may remember those small square jumble toys that you could find at gas stations and at some toy stores back when toy stores used to exist. It was a you know plastic or sometimes if it was fancy a wooden grid with sixteen squares, so where there would be an empty spot and then a four by four grid. So you'd have fifteen pieces that were jumbled and you could move them around, rearrange them. And basically the premise of the little game, which is you know a way of parents distracting their noisy children in the back seat, was that when you rearrange those by moving the squares either up

1:24 or down, left or right, one by one until they all fell into place, you could see the finished pattern or you could see the picture, whatever it was. The reason I'm mentioning this up front is that today's episode is the last in one of these individual squares, individual pieces of a small puzzle, the we have been putting together uh throughout the course of the Stone Choir episodes thus far. So each episode is kinda one of those squares. It exists individually, it shows something, but as interlocking pieces, you get a larger and larger picture. And the metaphor doesn't work perfectly because these interlocking pieces can be arranged in lots of different ways because they're all basically just fundamental

2:03 truths. I'm going to I'm referencing this explicitly up front because I want to make it plea to you as you're listening to today's episode, which is the fifth and final episode in our series on race, to keep in mind the pieces that I'm going to explicitly mention up front for this reason. If as you're listening to today's episode, you and your mind cannot keep in context the other things that I'm mentioning from previous episodes, you're not gonna be able to come along with us. Even if you end up hating what we say and disagree with our conclusions, the only way you're gonna be able to even understand the framing of our argument today is if you keep some previous episodes in mind. So those are first, the episode on perfect hatred, where Corey and

2:49 I spent about an hour in total discussing specifically the eternal nature of God, the fact that God is unchanging. He has neither shadow, uh, he does he's the same yesterday, today and forever. There is no change in God. What is eternal is immutable. That's important because as we discussed in that episode, the definition of good and evil is in reference to God's nature. So that which is good, that which is morally good is that which is in accord with his nature, and that which is evil is that which is contrary to God's nature. I mention this as the first piece because sin is obviously evil. They're synonymous. In order for something to be a sin, it must be eternally sinful. There's no such thing as a new sin.

3:39 You don't discover sins. God doesn't change his mind. He doesn't say, well, this is bad, but now it's good. And we've in previous episodes, we've discussed some of the gotcha counterexamples. We're not even going to mention those today. They're rejected. If you need to go back to and listen to every previous episode, please do so. There they're actually there's a lot of good re-listening material there. When God says something is evil, it means it's contrary to his nature. That means forever, forever. So that's the first piece. The second piece comes from the episode that we did on the clarity of scripture. And that is principally that scripture is complete by itself. When God's eternal will, that is the law, is given to us

4:22 in Scripture, He doesn't give us everything. God doesn't tell us everything in the universe. God tells us everything that we need for the Christian life. He tells us everything that He knows we need for salvation. That includes every sin. In other words, there's nothing that can possibly be contrary to God's eternal will that is not listed in Scripture. Now, when we say that, it doesn't mean that Scripture has a literal list of every single sin. One of the great applications of some of Jesus teaching that Luther brought back to, for example, the Ten Commandments, was the understanding that when God says thou shalt not murder, the Pharisees wanted to do things like draw a line and say, Well, you know, can I

5:07 beat you to within an inch of your life? Now the Pharisees weren't doing that in particular, but they were doing that with other things. But that's the natural human gotcha reaction. Oh, I can't murder. How far how close to murder can I get? One of Luther's insights that plays out in the large and the small catechisms is that if you take the opposite of what murder is, you can view that as the totality of fulfilling thou shalt not murder, which turns don't murder a man, don't take his life unjustly, into do everything to support all of his bodily needs. That is fulfilling the commandment not to murder him. You don't even get anywhere close to it by doing everything in your power to cause the opposite outcome, to cause them to have

5:51 a long life and a healthy life. This is important because it means God didn't have to list every single sin when he gave us all of the outlines of morality. He tells us everything we need to know to judge whether or not something is a sin. And scripture is complete. So there are not going to be any newly discovered sins later on. And And if someone finds something in the world and then they think they found it in the Bible, well that's the third argument that I want you to keep in mind. And this is kind of the fuzziest of the three, but it's one that's been a thread throughout all of our episodes. It's in some ways an appeal to tradition, but not in the sense that Rome or the East will appeal to tradition.

6:33 We're not appealing to something that's outside of Scripture or outside of God's revealed will in Scripture. The argument that we want you to keep in mind is that if something is a sin, then something has always been a sin, and believers in God have always viewed it as a sin, or else they themselves sinned. That's kind of That's kind of a mouthful, but that's that's why I mentioned this this up front is that you have to hold all of this in mind simultaneously to be able to even frame what we have to say in today's episode. So I'm gonna I'm gonna say that one more time. If the Christian church has always viewed something as evil and we view it as evil today, that's something that we can count on.

7:15 Now it's not authoritative, but if the sc if the church has always pointed to it, then they're pointing to scripture, which is authoritative because it's God's eternal will. So that's step one, step two, step three. If you discover a new sin in the 20th century, that the church has never held, that was never discovered in Scripture, and in fact in God's eternal will as it's revealed in Scripture is fundamentally contravened in some very explicit ways, what you're dealing with is not a new sin that God has revealed. What you're dealing with is fundamentally a new religion, a new religion that is opposed to God. So episode five today, the conclusion of our series on race is about the invention of the doctrine of racism, which was imported from

8:03 outside of the church. It was invented by evil men. It was imported into the church, whether under false pretenses or through just guys who were trying to be holier than God, it doesn't matter. The genealogy of that idea is fundamentally evil, and the fruits of the idea that racism is a sin, that racism even exists, are fundamentally evil. So that's the premise of today's episode. Now there are lots of people online who say that Corey and I are racists, that we hate everyone, that we're just using this as an excuse. I think if you're still listening, you probably don't think that really holds water. Most people who actually listen find that we're generally pretty reasonable and pretty sane, even if you disagree with our conclusions.

8:44 And so I appreciate you continuing to hear us out. When we say that racism is not a sin we are doing it specifically in view of those first three things. That God's will is eternal, that scripture is complete, and that church teaching does not change over time. We are not the ones who are trying to break with God when we say that this thing, the world and indeed today the church calls a sin isn't a sin. So today we're going to be making the argument that the thing that you've been told, the thing that you've been told about racism, that it's an evil thing, that it's always been evil, and that you must stamp it out wherever you find it to serve God. The case we're gonna make today is that that itself is service

9:24 to Satan. And I don't say that to shoot you in the face because I know that probably mainly people listening today believe the racism is is a sin. And I don't want you to automatically drop that belief just because some podcaster tells you differently. I want you to go back to scripture and I want you to think about the arguments that we make from Scripture. We're not saying this in isolation. We're saying it in view of the entire history of the church, in view of everything that we know about God that's revealed in Scripture. So to begin with, we're going to talk about where racism as a concept came into American and Western culture. So if we want to look back to where this particular term, this

10:05 concept, this supposed sin, entered into Western culture. We don't have to look back as far as you may think, because it only dates to the middle of the nineteenth century, and not in English, English comes along much later for this. In the latter half of the nineteenth century, in French, there were some writers who were themselves nationalists, we would call them today most likely, who used this particular term to describe what they were advocating. And so they used this term in a positive sense to describe advocacy for their own people. And so this was used by French nationalists in the latter half of the eighteen hundreds. This was immediately picked up by their opponents, and their opponents used

10:57 it in order to attack them, to label them as being hateful with regard to other people, so this became a polemical term almost immediately. And it is that polemical context, that polemical content of the word that then carries over into English later on. And so the earliest sense of racism that we have, the earliest use of that term in English is 1902. But the term more or less disappears after that. It doesn't become common use, a common term in English until the 1930s. But it is worth noting that that usage in nineteen oh two was by a man named Richard Pratt. He was a Southern Baptist. I don't think in the the technical term of Southern Baptist we'd be using today, but he was a Baptist in the South who

11:54 was making the argument that we needed to destroy racism and classism. Those were the two things he was attempting to destroy by integrating everyone as fully as possible. Basically, he was advocating for a form of communism or Marxism in essence. He wanted the destruction of distinct cultures, the destruction of distinct peoples, distinct classes, in order to make everyone equal. And one of the ways that he advocated doing this was specifically with regard to the Amerindians. If you know about US history, this is not that long after we had some wars with some of the Amerindian tribes, and so he wanted to integrate them into U.S. culture, but he wanted to do that by destroying the Indian culture.

12:43 And he has some terms and some comments that would be rather inflammatory to most modern ears. But the way that he sought to do this, the way he worked toward his goal, was to create government schools and to use them to indoctrinate Amerindian children. Now, it's not always a bad thing to instruct the children of heathens because of course we did that as well as Christians in some parts of the world. We taught them to be Christians, that was how we spread the gospel. But in this case, his explicit goal was the destruction of the Amerindians as a people. That was his goal. And so that is in line, in fact, with what has become the goal of the modern anti racist. But to stay in the earlier years of this, it really comes

13:34 into English in, as I said, the 1930s. With the translation of a book from German. That book was published in 1933. The author fled Germany for reasons that should be apparent. This was Magnus Hirschfeld. We've mentioned him before he was the gentleman who started the sexual institute in Berlin that was the pioneering institute as it were in transgender surgeries, transvestitism, transgenderism, all sorts of things. Child prostitution. Basically every degenerate thing that's happening today but turned up to eleven. That was being done by Magnus Hirschfeld in Berlin until he was expelled, and so that was translated in nineteen thirty eight into English. The title of that book was in fact racism.

14:26 We will put for anyone who wants to read, I don't know, it's 300 pages or something, I believe, anyone who wants to read something that's quite tedious, but to see the genesis of these ideas, because you will see virtually every single argument made today by the so-called anti-racists, every one of them in this book. And so that's Magnus Hirschfeld, 1938, a book entitled Racism. And to be explicit, when when we say anti-racist, we're including everything the churches are saying today. Pastors quote this book unknowingly. They're quoting a Jewish homosexual who was one of the most degenerate and wicked men in human history that's known to man, he is the author of the doctrine of racism as it has been imported

15:12 into the West. And that's the reason one of the very first episodes we did was on the genealogy of ideas. Check your sources. Where are you getting stuff from? We had pastors quoting a Jewish sodomite who mutilated children for sexual perversion, so citing him in his arguments as doctrinally sound. This was not a man who got his doctrine from God. If you're getting your doctrine from him, where are you getting it from? And one of the reasons it's so important to recognize what Hirschfeld did, what he wanted to do, is that his ultimate goal, of course, as is made obvious by his so called institute in Berlin, which notably closed in May of nineteen thirty three by the national Socialists, that's why he fled and then continued to do things in exile.

16:04 But his ultimate goal was sexual liberation. He was very clear about it. That's what his goal was. But unlike some thinkers, he wasn't a dumb man, he was an evil man, it's worth noting. He recognized that in order to have the sort of sexual liberation that he wanted, which of again includes transgenderism and all these various other things, homosexuality, pedophilia. You name it, he wanted it. He knew that you had to destroy nations and cultures. You had to have an equalization of humanity. You had to have a restoration of Babel. He recognized that. And so that was his goal. That's why he wrote the book racism. That's why he advocated for these things. Because Because his ultimate goal was the complete destruction of humanity via

16:53 sexual liberation. Because of course that's his master's goal. That's Satan's goal. That's always one of his goals. It's always been one of his goals. But But just as a sort of historical anecdote, it is a sort of irony that almost every time this term has cropped up racism, the earlier form racialism. It was used first by advocates of nationalism and the nation and their own people, and then immediately picked up by Marxists and others, and they would run with it and use it as a term of derision, a term of attack, a term really used as the prelude to violence against the people they hated. And that happened in English as well, because the first popularization of the term was actually an American fascist, nineteen thirty six who wrote

17:44 The Coming American Fascism, but it was then immediately overtaken by Hirschfeld's book in nineteen thirty eight, and that became the sense of the term that everyone knows today. Almost no one in the English speaking world or really anywhere in at least the Western world today has an innately positive connotation for the word racism. It is always the negative connotation. It is always considered to be animus harbored toward others on the basis of their race, a desire to destroy that which is different from you. And that is because of these evil men who took the term and made it into a weapon. And Hirschfeld was one of the first to really systematize and flesh out the newly invented doctrine of racism, but he wasn't the first

18:35 to advocate it in in Europe. Uh Trotsky and the Communist Party saw it from the very genesis of the USSR, which was incidentally 90% Jewish controlled. The overthrow of Russia of the Russian Tsar was a racial civil war. It was Jews who murdered the Tsar's family and basically began the systematic extermination of Russian people and neighboring people. So there was always a racial element to what they were doing. And simultaneously they realized that in unifying the USSR, which was a number of loosely related nations, subjecting them under communist rule under one banner, the the hammer and sickle, was going to evolve involve breaking down these barriers. Now when you hear barrier, you think, oh, that's bad.

19:31 I don't I don't like barriers. I want to be unfettered. Well, barriers are not inherently bad. One of the functions of God's law is a barrier. It is a it is a curb to prevent you from jumping off the road because on the other side of the curb is a is a cliff where you will die if you jump the curb. So when the law is there as a barrier, sometimes that is there placed by God for your good. When there are national barriers, which is another way of saying in part borders and languages, these things are instituted by God to keep people separate. That has been God's plan from the gim beginning, as we've discussed in some of the previous episodes on race and others. God intended for mankind, human beings, to fill the world.

20:21 God equipped us with genes that would be differentiated as we became isolated in those places. And due to the false religion religion of Babel, where man wanted to be united in opposition to God, he then confused the languages to ensure that on the spot that separation would be triggered. And as it's recorded in Acts 1726, God established the boundaries of our dwelling places. Those are national boundaries, those are blood boundaries, and they're physical boundaries. We've mentioned before I said that you can look at a map, a relief map of Europe, for example, and you can clearly see the difference between Portugal and Spain from space, if you can see the mountain ranges. The same is true of Norway and Sweden.

21:07 Like if you look at a geographic map, it's like why are these different countries with in some cases fairly different cultures in some significant ways. When you look at a relief map and you see the mountain rangers, it's very clear where Portugal ends and Spain begins, and where Norway begins and Sweden ends. God did that. Man didn't do that. It wasn't man being capricious or just drawing straight lines on a map. When you see straight lines on a map, it means that a bunch of guys in a smoky back room were dividing up conquered territory. That is always where you're going to find the greatest strife because straight lines are not God's lines. Straight lines are not geographic boundaries. They're not rivers or mountains or any of those things that naturally

21:50 segregate one people from another. And so the problem that the USSR was solving, the Trotsky and the other communists were solving, after they had murdered the previous heirs of the Russian throne and conquered the satellite nations around Russia, they had to ensure that they could have the complete hegemonic rule of empire based not on religion, not on blood, and not even on soil, because we're talking about the USSR I think span like fourteen time zones. It was staggeringly huge. For them For them to rule that necessitated that they break down natural barriers through propaganda, through brainwashing. And so one of the very first things that Trotsky began to push and others began to push was the elimination of

22:42 any racial distinctions, but only in public, because the warfare of genocide against the kulaks, the holo Demor, where they literally starved millions of Ukrainians to death, deliberately by destroying their farms and stealing their food. Something that, oh, by the way, is literally happening in Europe in 2023. Farmers are being shut down in Denmark, food is being destroyed worldwide. It's the same people, one century after another, doing the same things from the same playbook. So when we talk about where did racism come from? It's a religious issue because this is a doctrine that has been imported into our churches, but it's also political in the sense that people are dying for failing to see what is going on in

23:31 the world. And you as a Christian man, if you're listening, you have a duty to your family, to your parents, to your children, to your neighbors, to your community, and to your nation to prevent evil from happening. And if you're blinded by what your churches are teaching by saying, Oh, racism is bad, you can't you can't do a racism. If that's a sin, then yeah, that takes precedence. If God says something is a sin, you don't do it If, however, and in this case it's true, the thing that the church is preaching is something that was imported from communist Jews in 20th century Europe, brought into our country onto our soil, and then brought into our churches. And today it's inescapable. Our own the Missouri Synod just put out a horrific statement, the

24:17 last the most recent of many going back to like nineteen fifty-nine, where they become increasingly strident against what they call the sin of racism. Nineteen fifty nine's an interesting date because prior to that, the Missouri Synod was itself segregated. The Missouri Synod itself had not spoken out against any of these things, which is why I made the third point in the preface. If the Christian doctrine has always been that any racial distinctions are impermissible and sinful, then the first seventy-five years of Missouri Senate history, first hundred years of Missouri Senate history, was open on repentance sin. There are those in the Missouri Senate who will now say that openly, but most don't.

25:02 And in your church bodies, if you're not Lutherans, they're doing the same thing. What you see is that this thing was brought in from the secular world. It was an invention that did not come from Scripture at all. It was brought into the churches, and just as we mentioned in some previous episodes, what's the thing that Christians want to do? You hear about a new moral tenet. You hear about some new sin. And you're like, oh no, I hope I'm not committing a sin. And that's in principle, that's the right impulse for any Christian. We do not want to sin. And if we say that we are friends free from sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. We know that we sin unknowingly at times. So it's not inherently bad for someone to come along and say,

25:47 hey, you're doing something you thought was okay, it was actually a bad thing. That's what we're doing here today. That's what we're doing with this this podcast. We're telling you that the thing that you thought was a service to God is in fact not a service to God. It is an attack on God. That is a necessary part of the Christian life, but it is also a vulnerability of every Christian because if someone can come to you and make a seemingly plausible scriptural argument in favor of something that's brand new, and if you adopt it wholesale as your own morality, if it's false, you have adopted a new religion. You have adopted a false religion, which is inherently worship of demons. It's teachings of demons and it's worshiping of false idols.

26:32 That those are the only two possibilities. Either you're obeying God with whatever doctrine you hold, or you are serving Satan. There's no middle ground where you can just sort of believe something that's contrary to what God says and be okay because he's not really looking, he doesn't care. If you say something in the name of God and it's not true, you're violating the second commandment. You're bearing his name falsely. So this is a discussion that we have to bring to the church today because when something came from the political sphere was imported wholesale under our churches, and today our churches are beginning to tear themselves apart in the name of anti-racism. If that were a fervor driven by love of God, it would

27:17 take place in a Christian way, which you know probably wouldn't necessarily look like fervor, and it probably wouldn't look like destruction, but it would also be consistent with 2,000 years of church history and six thousand years of the faith in God. What we find when we look at scripture is we don't see any of that. We don't see anyone saying the things that are called racist today, no one thought that for fifty, nine hundred years. And then in the beginning of the nineteenth century, first in in Jewish dominated communist Russia, and then the perverts of Weimar Germany, who then came here as part of the Frankfurt School and began corrupting our institutions in this country, all of them also have a religion.

27:59 And it's an old religion too, but it's not the religion of the one true God. And so this is a fundamental gospel matter. This is a matter about who is your God. We cannot have false sins and false sacrifices to the true God. Any false sin that you condemn is a sacrifice to Satan. And so when we find errors in the world imported into the church, it is of the most profound importance for our salvation, for the salvation of every man who listens to pastors who will in twenty twenty three will quote a Jewish sodomite who was butchering children for sexual pleasure in the thirties. If that's our guestone, if that's where we're getting our doctrine, we have ceased to be the church because God is eternal, scripture is

28:46 unchanging, and the church doesn't change its mind about things. And just to round out the information on Hirschfeld, it is worth mentioning that he specifically praises what the Soviet Union is doing at this time with regard to culture and race. That is an example he holds up as how he would like the world to be. And also, one of the most common pictures of Hirschfeld, if you happen to search for him, will show him reclining on a couch and looking at someone. It's sometimes cropped so you cannot see the other man sitting on the Ouch, well, the other man sitting on the couch is Hirschfeld's current catamite at that time. Hirschfeld then sixty four is looking at let me look up the name because it's a Chinese name, I do not have it memorized,

29:36 Li Shu Tong, who was at the time twenty four, twenty five. And so this is Hirschfeld attempting to spread his wickedness abroad, that he had explicitly attempted to spread feminism, homosexuality, and other degeneracy in China, and this was one of the men he was using to do that. And the final point on Hirschfeld. It is worth noting that God capped off the commentary on Hirschfeld's life by killing him two years after he was sent into exile. He died in France in nineteen thirty-five. And so this is the man we have pastors unknowingly quoting. This is the ideology. This is the source of the idea well, the ultimate source, of course, is Satan, but this is the human source, one of the sources of the ideology being advanced by supposed Christians.

30:35 And we we go back to one of our episodes Genealogy of Ideas Matters. What is the source of this thing that you are advocating? A tree is known by its fruit, of course, so you can look at the fruit of these ideas, what proceeds from them, and every time, its homosexuality, pederasty, transgenderism, it's all of these horrible wicked sins that proceed from this wicked tree. But you can also look to the root, because Scripture speaks of the root of things, and so if you are Christian, well your root is Christ, because He is the vine, He is the tree. What's the root of these ideas? The root of these ideas is Satan. The root of these ideas extends into hell. We see the wicked fruit, we see the wicked root.

31:30 How can Christians possibly advocate these things? In good conscience, supposedly. Many of them, of course, just have not looked into this, they haven't analyzed what they believe, they were told it in school, and so they unthinkingly regurgitate. But being a parrot is not actually a defense. God does not give you a blanket defense of ignorance, particularly not when it is willful ignorance. Because the truth of these issues is readily ascertained, it is readily found. Because the enemy celebrates this stuff. You could find all of this information on Wikipedia. This isn't hidden. None of this stuff is shoved under the rug or downplayed. They brag about this constantly. Hirschfeld is celebrated by the left.

32:25 He is celebrated by the anti-racists. He is celebrated by those who attend so-called pride parades. So this is not something that Christians have an excuse for defending for advocating. Your ignorance is not going to save you. Scripture is very clear about the proper teaching on these things, and so if you are instead of speaking the words of God after him, instead of speaking as Scripture speaks, if you are parroting the words of these evil men, you will one day have to answer for that. And that is why we are doing this podcast, that is why we started this series, that is why we are addressing this topic. Because we do not want you to stand before God with a copy of Hirschfeld's Magnum Opus in hand.

33:16 That's not a position in which we want any man to find himself. We want you to repent of believing wicked, evil things that the world told you to believe, and and instead believe what is found in Scripture, what is found in God's Word. Because God's Word is eternal truth. The things that God has said were true when He said them. They were true before He said them. They are true today, they will be true in eternity. The things said by these wicked men have always been lies, because they ultimately come from the father of lies. Christians do not live a life of lies. I'm not saying that all lies, in the sense we use the term in English, are wrong, because of course we're not going to take the crazy conscience example of saying you have to say that

34:04 your wife is home when a murderer comes to the door. No, we're not talking about that. When we say lies, we are talking about things that are contrary to truth with a capital T. Because God is goodness, beauty, and truth. The transcendentals matter. If you look at an ideology, if you look at a person, if you look at a thinker, if you look at philosopher, any of these things, if that thing, that person stands in opposition to goodness, beauty, or truth, you know it is not on God's side. Because God is those things. The people who are on God's side, the ideas that are on God's side, are in alignment with God's nature. Anti-racism is not. The argument that racism is a sin is not. Because anti-racism seeks to destroy the nations, seeks to destroy the peoples,

35:02 and those are part of God's good creation, because everything God creates is good. And so if you are seeking to destroy that which that which God created, you are on the side of evil. And so if your goal is to destroy the nations, you are on the side of evil. If your goal is to destroy beauty, you are on the side of evil. If your side does not comport with truth, well you are now defending a lie, you are on the side of evil. And that is why we are addressing this topic. That is why this topic is so vitally important. This is the wedge that Satan uses to topple the church. This is what he is using today, and it is very effective because virtually no Christians are standing against it. There are more pagans standing against this issue than Christians.

35:55 They're doing it ineffectually because they're pagan, it's ultimately doomed to failure from their side, because they are unwillingly also serving Satan in a different way, but they are still more correct on this specific issue than Christians. Of course that's only Christians of today because all of our forefathers believed what we are saying now instead of what the world is telling you that you have to believe. I think for the rest of this episode we are going to go through in particular what the LCMS has said most recently about racism. Specifically, we're going to let them make their own argument for why racism is a sin. And we're going to illustrate clearly how evil and antithetical to scripture,

36:41 their arguments are. Say that again. What the LCMS says about racism is fundamentally an attack on scripture itself. So for the rest of this, I'm we're just going to do some quoting and then some refutation kind of line by line. Uh we'll link this in the show notes, but there's an LCMS social issues page specifically on racism. That's the tag. And these are the first two paragraphs on that page quoting God's love for this world John three sixteen breaks down dividing walls between people Ephesians two thirteen and following as God's children, Christians love their neighbor as God loves them twenty five and following the separation of people into nations, languages, and groups is a result of the fall

37:27 into sin, Genesis 11, and is one of the aspects of a broken creation God restored through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. We eagerly await his coming when all will be one in him, Revelation seven nine, as pleases him as he created us to be. Now we've mentioned last episode we uh a couple episodes ago we talked about specifically Galatians 328 that again says there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female. And we talked about the fact, as we mentioned repeatedly, that these attacks against the notion that there is more than one race, that humanity is divided by God, biologically, sociologically, physiologically, genetically, that those divisions are either lies or they're evil.

38:21 And the Missouri Synod and frankly, almost all Christians today say both simultaneously, even though those are at odds with each other. So we're gonna go through this this statement and then the statement from the most recent Sonodical Convention and illustrate how deceptive the arguments are and how fundamentally at our odds with scripture they are. So, you know, it said God so loved the world, John 3, 16, okay, great. That's precisely why Jesus came and died for everyone, of every race, regardless of when or where they lived, regardless of what sort of life they lived, God died for everyone. No argument. As we've said over and over, this is not about soteriology. Those in the church who want to import the doctrine of racism

39:08 from Jewish sodomites want you to believe their racism is an attack on soteriology because that's what Lutherans and Protestants are really good at. We know how to defend soteriology. We know how to say you didn't save yourself. Jesus saved you. Yes. No one's disputing that. Jesus saved the African bushman with the lowest IQ, who's eaten the most of his neighbors imaginable, the most wicked, depraved man in the world, smartest, stupidest, it doesn't matter. Jesus died for the sins of every single one of them. No one disputes that. It's not in dispute. So that's the first point. We're dealing with straw man arguments. We're dealing with the opposite here. We're not straw manning the LCMS. We're going to tell you exactly what these people are saying.

39:55 Second argument. God's love for this world breaks down the dividing walls between people. And it quotes Ephesians or cites Ephesians 2, 13 through 16. I want to read that for you now. Ephesians 2. But now in Christ Jesus you who were once far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ, for He himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in the ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body, through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. I went and looked at the CPH commentary, uh it's Concordia Publishing

40:46 Commentary. So it's you know basically official doctrine from the Missouri Synod. What does the commentator say about Ephesians two? Both the Missouri Synod and is generally viewed by anyone reading this passage in context or out is that the dividing walls that it talks about breaking down are first and foremost soteriological. They're about the law condemning every man for our sins, my sins, your sins, Corey's sins, every man's sins. We are separated by God by our sin. And we sin because we're sinners. We were born with Adam's inherited sin, we spend our entire lives sinning. The only reason that we have faith is it was given to us as a gift. So when this passage in Ephesians talks down breaking down dividing walls,

41:35 it is first and foremost talking about breaking down the vertical wall between us and God. And then secondarily, there is, as is discussed in Galatians 3.28, the division of man from man, of one race from another race. So to Soteriologically. No, what that means is that when God breaks down the wall between you and a brother in Christ, the in Christ part is the important part. The African Christian is my brother in Christ. The African Christian is not my brother according to the flesh. We are made brothers by both being adopted as sons of God through Christ's blood. This is a soteriological passage. And so once again, we see that Christians are trying to take something that God has given for his comfort, for the comfort of

42:29 aggrieved souls who seek unity with unity with God through the blood of Christ. And what are we being told? We're being told first and foremost that this is about breaking down the barriers between men. And make no mistake, when this anti racism stuff comes up in churches, that's always first. It's always man to man. You need unity with the man next to you. You need unity with the man on the other side of the world. You as one race need unity with another race. Where does God come into it? Well, hopefully he'll come in later. And you know that you need God to do it. Maybe the other guy doesn't know it, but you get unity with him and then God will come in. That's what Satan says. Satan wants us robbing these passages of being about salvation.

43:15 He wants them to be about Babel. He wants to undo Babel. He wants to break down those dividing walls that God put up in Acts 17, 26, that He put up in Genesis eleven, when He confused man's language, and He scattered us across the face of the earth, and He established the boundaries of our dwelling places. God put up those walls and when Satan says, hey, let's have unity, God is always as far away from the picture as possible. Because if he can get brotherhood of man going on, it's a Babel family reunion. it's right back where we started with our rebellion against God immediately after the flood. And so the fact that the Missouri Synod would cite Ephesians 2 as something as an anti-racist passage robs it completely of the soteriological

44:02 impact that it has. And then it goes on to say Christians love their neighbor as God loves them. Yes, your neighbor is the man in front of you without regard to his race. But neighbor doesn't mean he necessarily lives there, it means he's adjacent to you. If there's a foreigner, if there's an alien who happens to be your neighbor, you treat him lovingly while he's your neighbor, but if he's an alien, he probably needs to go home. And that's between him and the prince. That's not for you to exact. But the fact that someone happens to be in front of you doesn't mean that he has to stay there forever. And so this is them importing the breaking down of the boundaries of th of our dwelling places, of saying there are no nations,

44:44 there's no blood, there are no countries, we're all just one man. It's let's just get back together and and get that magic back that we lost at Babel. And so the next part is the separation of people into nations, languages and groups is a result of the fall into sin. And of course that cites to Genesis eleven, which is the Tower of Babel and as we mentioned in the previous episode, very short section. It is literally a paragraph, depending on how you break up the sentences, but vitally important. Satan has had thousands of years to think about how he can use this to subvert the church, how he can use this to attack the people of God, and he's found a very effective way to do so with Marxism, with anti racism, with the accusation of

45:41 racism. And so we spoke about the narrative of the Tower of Babel previously. Nowhere in the narrative does it say that the separation into races, into peoples, is a punishment for Babel. The races are part of God's good creation from the beginning. We see that very obviously, because the genetics that make up the distinction between and among the races of men were present on the Ark, because of course they had to be present on the Ark, because every one is descended from those who were on the Ark. And so the distinction between the three great races of men, being the Japhethites, the Shemites, and the Hamites, comes primarily from the wives of Noah's sons. Doesn't take very much thinking to figure out why that's the case.

46:41 It's very obvious the sons of Noah and his wife are going to be genetically similar to each other. And so the distinctions we see in these populations can be. from the wives of Noah's sons. And we see this even today. You have the Neanderthal so-called DNA in Europeans, you have ghost DNA so-called in Africa, and you have Denisovan DNA so-called in parts of Asia. There are other things as well, but those are three good examples of this. And so when the LCMS attempts to say that the races are a punishment for Babel, they are accusing God's good creation of being something that it is very much not. It's very clear in this that the races are part of God's original design for man, because that is how man spreads out over the earth and lives in

47:37 the coldest parts of Scandinavia and the warmest parts of the tropics. That's what God's design for race is it separates man into groups to live in different geographic parts of the earth God created for men. That's all it is. There are ramifications, implications of that we've gone over in previous episodes, but fundamentally it was so that men could live in different parts of the globe in their own groups. What the LCMS is saying here is a total denial of that. They are accusing God of lying in scripture. The heinousness of this short paragraph on the LCMS website would be difficult to overstate. This is a wicked, evil paragraph written by men who clearly have seared consciences because they don't hear the word of God.

48:33 If they heard the word of God, they would They would read scripture and see that what they've said is wrong, see that what they've said is coming from the wicked culture and the men we previously described, and not from God's Word. And as I'm thinking about what exactly it is they're doing here, they're really doing something that is analogous to some historic heresies have argued That since the fall, man's nature is original sin. That's a heresy. And the reason that is a heresy, there are some complicated philosophical reasons, but the basic reason is that if you contend that man's nature itself is original sin, you are saying that Satan created man. And so original sin is a corruption of human nature.

49:29 That's the proper way to look at it. It is a very deep corruption. It is thorough to the point of being basically impossible to describe. It can be known only from scripture. But it is not man's nature. Man's nature is still good, because man's nature is God's creation, and what God creates is good. Even Even in our fallen state, even in our corrupted state, our nature, in so far as it is God's creature, is still good, corrupted by original sin, less than it should be, less than it will be again in paradise when it is restored, but still God's creature, still good. What is being done here is the same thing with regard to man's biology, with regard to man's physical nature. They are saying that since the fall, man's physical nature is sin.

50:28 Not that man's physical nature is corrupted by sin, influenced by sin, damaged by sin, all of which we affirm, all of which is quite obvious to anyone. I mean get into your thirties or your forties, stand up and listen to the noises your knees make. You can tell that sin has changed things But what they're saying is that man's physical nature is sin itself, that your race is sin, that your language is sin, that who and what you are, these things that God made, these things that God designed into creation, that are good because they are God's creation. The LCMS is saying that they are sin. And And so it's the same sort of error as saying that man's nature is original sin. They're saying that man's physical nature is original sin since Babel, apparently,

51:19 it's a second fall, which, typologically, yes, it's a second fall. But the consequences are not that your physical nature is sin. God made you whatever you are, French, German, Dutch Whatever you are, God made that. It is good in so far as it is God's creature. Are there corruptions that have crept in over time due to the consequences of sin? Absolutely. There are diseases that are endemic to certain populations. There are intellectual deficits that are endemic to certain populations. Those are the consequence of sin. Those are damage to the physical nature of man due to sin. But the physical nature of man itself cannot be sin, because to say that the physical nature of man itself is sin is to

52:13 accuse God of sin. To say that the race is our sin is to accuse God of sin. And that is what the LCMS is doing here, and Christians cannot do that. The most astonishingly wicked part of that paragraph is that it's self-refuting, because in the first sentence it says that languages and groups and nations are the result of the fall. And then in the second sentence, it says, we eagerly await Christ's coming when all will we be one in him, citing Revelation seven nine. Well you've probably mentioned you probably remember us talking about Revelation seven nine before many times. Here's what it says. After this, I, meaning John, looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples

53:03 and languages, standing before the throne and before the lamb clothed in white robes with palm branches in their hands. Now these Lutherans are saying race and language and nations, those are sins. Scripture says that those sins of the Missouri Synod stand before the throne of God intact. One of them is lying. Either God is lying about heaven, what heaven looks like or the Missouri Synod is lying about God. Because if language is the result of sin, then language is not present in heaven. There's a great talk that we will link from uh Pastor David Ramirez. He's one of the from one of the vanishingly small handful of faithful pastors that I'm aware of in the Missouri Synod at this time. He does a he did a talk two years ago or so

53:57 about Babel and about racism. And he specifically refutes everything that this Missouri Senate page says. He goes into detail, he does he does a great job analyzing it. For my and so you you don't need to take our word for it. We're not fringe. As Corey said, we're saying the same thing the Christians have always believed. This stuff that we're pointing out is novel. It's novel since the 50s, the nineteen fifties, not AD fifty. It wasn't like Paul came along and said, Oh, by the way, here's a new revelation. No. Nineteen hundred years later, a new revelation was discovered from the pits of Europe's hell. If nations and tribes and languages are sin, then they cannot exist before the throne of God.

54:43 That is a very fundamental element of the first point that I made at the beginning of the episode. God's will is eternal. Whatever is evil is contrary to his will. In heaven, nothing is contrary to God's will. Anything that exists before God can only exist because it is in accord with his will. God permits nothing anywhere near him that is not according to his will. So if languages are spoken that are different in heaven, then that's good. If there are nations, if there are tribes, that's races, and that's in heaven, that's good. Now the point that Ramirez makes in his article or in his speech was one that the Missouri Synod doesn't address here, but it's intimating, which is that Pentecost undid Babel, which is false doctrine, that

55:30 is absolutely not what happened. When Pentecost came, when the Holy Spirit alighted on their heads like tongues of fire, they began speaking the gospel and in the tongues of those who were present. It was a physical manifestation of the Great Commission. It was saying, yes, all of you Jews from all around the world who were here in this one place at this one time, who speak all these different languages, You are going to hear the gospel in your own native tongue. They couldn't understand anything else. They couldn't suddenly understand each other's speech. It was not an undoing of Babel. What God did is said the gospel is for all nations. It's for every people on the planet, which is what we believe,

56:13 because it's what Scripture says, and we are fearful of disagreeing with God because we know that we will face the judgment throne, and these confessions that we bring before God are how we will be judged. Christ's blood will cover our sins, but if we despise Christ's blood by calling God a liar, only God can do the math on what happens to Christ's propitiation for those who despise him. I don't think the odds are good. I but I don't know. That's for God to worry about. Uh we don't need to worry about other people, but we do need to worry about the fact that our own confession before God needs to be one that doesn't call him a liar. And so if you believe what the Missouri Synod says about racism,

56:56 then you have denied how we are saved. You have said the unification of man is paramount above God. Now that's not how they phrase it, but it's the only possible conclusion of these repeated attacks on Ephesians and Galatians and the other passages that talk about oneness. The oneness is brothers in Christ excludes unbelievers. And we talked about that before too. The in Christ part is only believers. The random Chinaman who has never heard the gospel is not my brother by any measure. He's not my brother in Christ. He's an enemy of God. Doesn't mean I can mistreat him, but he's you know eight thousand miles away. I don't care. He's not he's not my problem. He's not my brother in Christ because he's not in Christ.

57:41 If I have an African brother in Christ because he's in Christ, our brotherhood is through Christ. The oneness is shared through faith in God. But that implicitly excludes anyone who doesn't have faith in God. So that's a small number. So like even if your argument against racism, even if it were a real thing and not a made-up of demonic sin, even if it were real, if your fix is be one in Christ, that does nothing for the ninety-five, ninety-eight, ninety-nine percent of humans who are unbelievers because they are not in Christ. What do you do with them? Well, we evangelize, but God says the narrow path is not for everyone. There are many who will stray from it. The wide path is the path to damnation.

58:26 Most men take the wide path to hell. Our if the argument against racism is let's have oneness in Christ, that fixes nothing. The man in Africa who is my brother in Christ whom I'll never meet until we get to heaven isn't my problem. He's not my enemy. If someone comes here and they cause problems, then they're my neighbor, but that's an issue to be dealt with civilly. I can't say, well, I'm not going to be racist to Christians, but then what? I can be racist to non-Christians? We're trying to illustrate that these arguments fall apart internally. Like in two paragraphs, they've repeatedly contradicted scripture. They've contradicted themselves. And when you give the most cursory examination of the things that

59:12 they're saying, they r lead to preposterous and frankly evil conclusions. This is not the hallmark of sound doctrine. There's no other doctrine in the church that falls apart as soon as you look at it. That is the hallmark of a lie. That is the hallmark of something that comes from Satan. When you're told a lie your entire life and you just accept it unthinkingly. And then someday some man comes along and says, Hey, did you know X, Y, and Z? And begins dismantling those lies that you've held your whole life. It's going to be disruptive because suddenly you realize that these things that you thought were true, they just fall apart. As soon as you examine them, the lies stack up and you realize that there was nothing there.

59:56 It was only ever a facade over evil. And it was sold to you in a way that seemed good, and that's why you bought it. You weren't trying to buy evil, but you you were buying something that was disguised in the thinnest possible veneer of good. Everything underneath was not good. These are tough conversations because that's what we're telling you. That for those of you who are young enough, you've only ever heard about the doctrine of racism. If you're old enough, you never heard about it because it wasn't invented until living memory. Which again goes back to that third point I made at the beginning. New sins simply don't occur. And that's why it's so problematic, that's why it's so deadly that

1:00:35 we have churches like the Missouri Synod trying to proof text in the most ham fisted fashion, going in Going in and finding these verses that are about how we're saved before God and say, oh, that's that's actually undoing Babel. That's actually the brotherhood of all men. That's evil. That's destructive to the gospel. You don't save the gospel dot by destroying it. This is not Vietnam. You don't save the village by burning it. That's what's going on with these people. If this were sound doctrine, if racism were actually a sin that was held up by Scripture and by two thousand years of the Christian church, then you wouldn't have ham fisted arguments. You would have well fleshed out arguments that are coherent that ring

1:01:17 true because they would be true. We've just looked at two paragraphs here and spent fifteen minutes completely dismantling the number of lies in them. And that's not even scratching the surface. We're gonna get in a minute into one of the more detailed r resolutions that the Missouri Senate passed in 2019, but they're all this bad. W Cory and I have have read through almost all of them in the la fast last few days studying for this episode. They're all trash. They're all embarrassingly trash. There's it's not like there's some deep well of scholarship to it. That may actually be an understatement for most of them. Yeah. I'm well, we try to keep this clean, so I'm not yeah. It's that's fair, yes.

1:01:57 I yeah, you you you can imagine a stream of expletives and that would pretty much be our response to the degree of depravity in these statements. And frankly, these statements from the Missouri Senate are less bad than you'll get from the Methodists or from Elka or from other the some of the other denominations that are much further down the path to hell than us. But that's going to change because when when you treat the Word of God, when you treat scripture as toilet paper, that you can you know it's it's just it's it's depraved. it it it leaves me speechless to see how bad the arguments are. And yet what do we see? we see pastors on Twitter and elsewhere who link this racism page in their bios on social media to say, this is what I

1:02:45 believe. This is it. We got 'em now. We got those racists on the run. look at all these arguments. Well, I have looked at the arguments because I'm concerned about not a disagreeing with God. And when my church says, hey guys, you're disagreeing with God, I take that seriously. We should all take that seriously. If you're in a serious church body, it should be of concern if you're church says you are in error. When we look at the arguments, they're juvenile and they're retarded. They're clinically retarded. No insane intelligent man would ever put these arguments in front of someone. If I wanted to lie to you and convince you that scripture was was in accord with the doctrine of racism, I could

1:03:24 have made a page that might be convincing. It would be lies, but it would be much more convincingly deceptive lies than this. This is just childish trash. And it yet it's the best they have. Well, and just the idea that Pentecost undoes Babel and Anyone who thinks about that for more than ten seconds should figure out why that's ridiculous. What did Babel do? It confused their languages and caused them to spread over the face of the earth. Well, if we take the position of the LCMS and so many others, that one of the consequences of Babel, one of the punishments from God, is race, ethnicity, the separation into nations, if Pentecost undid Babel, they would have all become one race, speaking one language, then

1:04:18 and there. That didn't happen. Scripture would have recorded that if that had happened. And obviously. It's not happening now. When someone converts to Christianity, they don't start speaking Proto-Indo-European or whatever it happens to be the first language was, they don't suddenly change skin color. These things remain, and as noted, they remain before the throne of God as well, and that which is a consequence of sin is itself tainted by sin if it is not in fact sin itself. And so that which persists in paradise cannot be sin, cannot be a consequence of sin That's basic theology. And really Lutherans should be the last people to get this wrong. Because as I mentioned, this is just analogous to the heresies that

1:05:14 say that man's nature is original sin now, we have a very long article in the Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord in the Book of Concord on original sin that refutes all of these at length it is the same problem, the same thing we are fighting now. It's literally in our confession. Lutherans have no excuse to get this wrong. I will put it in the show notes. I'm not going to say everyone will be able to read it and understand it fully. It is written at a high level, but trudge through part of it. And to expound on, you said that these views when you analyze them they fall apart in your hands. I have an analogy for that that I think some people will enjoy. Growing up my mother had a pet raccoon.

1:06:03 Now that makes me sound like I am a little more backwoods than I actually am, despite living in Tennessee currently. This was in California. But she had a pet raccoon. One of the the fun things you can do, this may sound a little mean, but one of the fun things you can do with a a raccoon is you can give them food that falls apart. And if you know anything about raccoons, you know they wash everything they eat. So if you give them you know, American white bread, which is not bread, but that's a separate matter, or marshmallows or something like that. Well they go over to their little pond and they start washing it. And it disappears. And so they stand there confused as to how this food they

1:06:42 had that they really wanted to eat has disappeared, and they paw at the water, they dig for it, they get in the water, they can't find it, it's gone. Of course you give them something else to eat afterward. You're not trying to be mean to your pet. But we have that same problem with these lies, these false doctrines that get imported into the church. Because God's scripture is that pure, clean water. And if you take these lies and you expose them to that water, you expose them to God's word, they dissolve, they disappear, they're gone. And so you have men who are frantically searching in this water to find this wickedness that they stuck in the water and it's gone. Well, this is just like baptism.

1:07:25 If you're looking for your wickedness and your sin in the waters of baptism, something has gone horribly wrong in your doctrine. Because that was all washed away in baptism. When you were born again, when you became a Christian, when God gave you faith, if you were baptized as an infant, you may have come to faith through the word if you were baptized as an adult instead. But if you're looking for that sin, that pervertedness, that evil nature, the wickedness that was washed away in the water, what are you doing? If your doctrine, upon exposure to scripture, disintegrates in your hands. Why are you trying to rescue it? You have obviously believed a lie. Look to Scripture instead to see what it was you should have

1:08:11 been believing the entire time. If your doctrine cannot survive exposure to scripture, it is false, it is necessarily false, and as a Christian, you must reject it. One of the outs that you will sometimes find the more sophisticated defender of the newly invented doctrine of racism is to say, well, in scripture that's called partiality. And so if you're being partial, that's the same as committing racism if you're being partial on the basis of race at least. There's one particular passage in James I want to read from James 2, just briefly, but I'll we'll also link to a website where you can see where you can just you can search for yourself. You can go to any concordance and search for partiality.

1:08:57 And you will find I think many dozens, if not hundreds of instances of partial, partiality, being partial, showing up in both the old and the new testament. I want to give this example from James, and I'm going to characterize partiality in general to give you a sense of how far off the mark they are. And the reason I'm using the James one is it's one of the most popular. And it's also one that's explicitly self-refuting of the notion that it could possibly have anything to do with racism. My brothers, show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ the Lord of glory, for if a man wearing a gold ring in fine clothing comes into your assembly, and a poor man in shabby clothing also comes in, and if you pay

1:09:44 attention to the one who fit wears the fine clothing and say, You sit here in the good place, while you say to the poor man, you stand over there, or sit down at my feet, have you not then made distinctions amongst yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts. Listen, my beloved brothers, has not God chosen f for those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom, which He has promised to those who love him? But you have dishonored the poor man. Are not the rich the ones who oppress you, and the ones who drag you into court? Are they not the ones who blaspheme the honorable name by which you were called? If you really fulfil the royal law according to the Scripture You

1:10:23 shall love your neighbor as yourself, you are doing well. But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. Now there are two elements to this that are paramount. The first is it says in the middle there, have you not then made distinctions among yourselves and become become judges with evil thoughts? Now that judges with evil thoughts is really the center of that entire passage. It's not necessarily imparent from this one particular passage, but as I said, if you look at all of the other places in scripture where partiality is discussed, it's talking about judgment. It's talking about unfair judgment. In effect, uneven weights and measures. It's saying if two men come before you and you're in a

1:11:10 place to judge them, so it's not judging in the sense of prejudice that we use colloquially today, if a juror is prejudiced, that is in the technical sense, if a judge is prejudiced, that means that they have prejudged the outcome. That is the partiality that's being discussed here. So for example, if you're an attorney in a criminal case and you have a black defendant, you probably don't want to have twelve white jurors because everyone knows that there's if there's going to be bias, that's probably going to be in the direction of the outgroup. So they try to weed out anyone on the jury who might be prejudiced against the man because he's black, not because he's accused of a particular crime when has which has yet to be proven.

1:12:00 But if they just say that's a black guy, I think he probably did it, that's prejudice. That's what this is talking about. The sin of partiality is judging unfairly when something is brought before you to judge. But the reason I quoted James 2 is that look at the second part of that as well. Where if prejudice prejudice in the in the partiality sense, in the sin sense that God is condemning, is only about generalizations, then James II commits sin by what is said next. He says are not the rich the ones who oppress you and the ones who drag you into court? If your definition of partiality is to make distinctions among groups and to generalize. This is an act of partiality. This is sin. James II itself is the sin of partiality if it's about stereotyping.

1:12:58 Well and look at which specific one it is. This runs right back to the men the man we mentioned earlier. What did he link together? Racism and classism. What is this we see right here? This would be classism if it were the sin of partiality. And so it's worth noting that those constantly get connected down through the years. Classism, racism, all of these various things are connected because they are used to undermine and destroy nations, societies, and ultimately the church. That's why in twenty twenty three the Missouri Synod condemned the sin of gentrification because that's racial classism disrupting poor black neighborhoods to the benefit of whites. that's literally what gentrification means.

1:13:47 They can sugarcoat it. But when the the large catechism condemned that, that's what it's talking about. It's talking about racial and class warfare in the Marxist sense. It's all these things are a bundle. The reason we keep bringing up Marxism we're gonna do an episode where we specifically talk about Marxism. We're not trying to play political games and import some label. I've said many times I despise labels because there's so much baggage that comes with them. When we say Marxism, we mean it. This is a collection of religious beliefs imported by secular Jews into the West for the purpose of th overthrowing Christendom. And it's working beautifully. And we now have Christians eating it up left and right and

1:14:27 adopting it just as they've adopted this Marxist sin of racism as a new religion, they import all the rest because it's all part and parcel. Satan has his catechesis too. He has his commandments, he has his rules, he has his lists of beliefs that must remain inviolate. They're obviously always in popposition to God, but they're coherent within themselves. When you start looking at them in the context of Crypt of Scripture, they they dissolve like the white bread in the stream because there's nothing there, not logically and not theologically, but internally all these things are always a package. So like I said, go read James two, go read the other pass passages that talk about partiality, so that when you hear some

1:15:09 and say, Oh well, racism, that's just partiality based on skin color, if that's the case, then James II sins by committing the sin of partiality against the rich. Because it expressly says, Are not the rich the ones who oppress you. That's a generalization. That's saying all Cretans are liars. All rich are oppressors. That's obviously not a universal truth. There may be exceptions. That's why we mentioned Naxalt a few episodes ago. Not all X are like that is not a refutation. It is indeed the rich and the powerful who will use institutional power to destroy anyone who opposes them. That's That's sometimes used for evil. Sometimes when it's you know with institutional power is a Marxist term,

1:15:53 sometimes that just means a godly prince. When the godly prince executes those whom God says must be executed, that's not oppression, that's obeying God. And the fact that there are people who call themselves Christians who would condemn that tells you about their faith. It doesn't tell you about God and it doesn't tell you about whether the prince is being godly. So I just want to discuss partiality before we get into Into a resolution that was adopted at the last LCMS Sonodical Convention in twenty nineteen. Uh we'll link the full thing here. This was Resolution eleven oh four A to affirm the common humanity of all peoples and ethnicities. No say avoided using the word race or nation there because ethnicity

1:16:37 is sort of one of those magical voodoo words that can sort of encompass whatever you need without any letting anyone pin you down. When I say race or nation, I'm pinned down by that and I'm fine with that because it actually means something. When these guys say ethnicity, they're trying to avoid saying race because they want to play games that were about to illuminate. Of course the funny part is they're just they're just saying race, but in Greek. Which but yeah, exactly exactly they're just playing word games. But for exactly what the reason you said. Yeah. It's enough to play to the crowd and to sucker people along and get some get everyone nodding very concerned. Oh yes, no racism's bad.

1:17:16 We need to do whatever we can't affight it. Which again, if racism were actually a sin from God, that would be true. I am not condemning a Christian. We're not condemning Christians seeking to obey God. We are saying when a Christian obeys God, it's going to be doing the opposite of what these churches are doing to today about these very subjects. So I'm gonna read through this kind of pretty quickly and we'll we'll have some discussion around some of these, but I just want to illustrate again how flimsy, how pathetic these arguments are and how how fundamentally they contradict anything that can actually be used to substantiate a real sin that exists in the world. And that's fundamentally the problem.

1:17:57 If you fa if you want some different name for it, it doesn't matter. It's not a branding problem. It's not that well ra racism has a bad brand, but if we can adopt some other turn, we can we can import these beliefs 'cause they're that's that's what God wants. No. This falls apart because it's not scriptural. So overture resolution 1104A. Whereas all humanity shares a common origin and Eve. Well that's why we did episode one. We talked about that. Yes, there is a common origin. That does not mean that there are no races downstream from that. The races are emerged through Noah's lineage after the Tower of Babel. The differentiation occurred when mankind spread. Yes, all those genes are contained in Adam, but there's no going

1:18:42 back. That I have a tiny subset of the genes that Adam had by virtue of my English and German blood. Whoever you you are, wherever you live, whatever your ancestors are, you have a small subset of Adam's genes. You don't have all of 'em. He's the only one who ever had all of 'em. He had all of the genes for all of men. Ever since then it's been winnowed down and down and down. The races emerged through God's good order as he scattered us because we refused to go as we were bidden. He said, Fill the earth, be fruitful and multiply, fill the earth and subdue it. We said no, we want to stay in one place, we want to be one people. He said, Fine, I'm gonna confuse you. You're gonna be talking to your cousin, and you have no idea

1:19:23 what he's gonna say. You're gonna have to go in different directions. You probably have some cousins like that, you try to talk to and like I'm just there's no point. That's what happened to Babel. It was a one-way trip. And it was not only sociological, it was also genetic. That was the genetic breaking point for the three major races being separated across the face of the earth. God did that. So this first whereas is the first straw man that is being used in this resolution. Second, scripture affirms that God made from one man every nation of mankind to live on the face of the earth, which is funny. So that's uh Acts seventeen twenty six. Let me just bring that up real quick. They thought it was so important to use that verse and yet

1:20:08 they failed to even quote the entire verse. So here's the whole thing. And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on the face of the earth. That's the part they quoted. Here's the part that the Missouri Senate censored. Having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place. Huh. Boundaries and dwelling places? Well that sounds like prejudice. That sounds like partiality. What do you would that's separation? I thought we had oneness in Christ. How can you have oneness in Christ if there are boundaries of dwelling places? Well, that's what the next word has at. But this is what we're talking about. They have to cut off the middle of that sentence so that they can get away with the deception that they're undertaking here.

1:20:47 Then they say God shows no partiality, but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him. They quote Acts ten twenty Acts ten thirty-four and thirty-five. Great. We just talked about partiality. They want to introduce that term to conflate it with racism. So you're thinking, well, partiality, that must be the same thing as racism. There's another passage that's not in here, but I just want to bring it up again. We're talking about partiality. But if anyone does not provide for his relatives and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever. Is that Is that partiality? It's being partial. it's choosing distinctions among people.

1:21:29 It's saying my relatives are more important than my neighbors, that the members of my household are more important than my relatives. God says that. Is that partiality? Is that sinful? Well, if you adopt the secular twentieth century definition of racism that goes along with this corruption of the proper doctrine of partiality, which specifically again retur refers to judgment when you are placed in a position of judgment. Absent that you are free to know that a black man is 120 times more likely to murder you than a white man. In fact, you're not only free to know that, you're obligated to know that for the protection of yourself and of your family and of your neighbors. If you don't know that, that's sin.

1:22:14 That is foolish sin. That's not partiality. That's wisdom. See, when they use these terms, they twist them in ways they can they can box you in. Because you're not going to question. I mean, this this was this was approved by Synod at convention. That means it's effectively church doctrine now. The Missouri Senod says and believes this. Well, if you say anything that's contradictory to that, you may find yourself in trouble. The next passage says uh next whereas scripture emphasizes m humanity's oneness in Christ's reconciling work, which quotes uh second Corinthians five, fourteen and following. It's basically the same as the the Ephesians passage earlier. They're corrupting something where they're trying to take oneness in Christ and

1:23:00 conflate it with w oneness of humanity. Babel is oneness of humanity. Oneness in Christ is soteriological. It is not in this life. We don't get that in this life. We get it spiritually, but it still doesn't happen physically. And even in heaven, the distinctions are preserved, but it's distinctions with oneness restored through Christ. By trying to say humanity's oneness in Christ's reconciling work, they're trying to make you think, well, Jesus did the work and therefore we're all one, we're all reconciled, we're all one. That's simply not true. Oneness in Christ is predicated on in Christ. Unbelievers are not in Christ. So you see, this this whereas the substantiation for the condemnation of

1:23:48 of racism, it falls apart on its face because it excludes most of the very people that should be included for their purposes. That's why this stuff falls apart. it's it's logically incoherent. And that's why even if you don't agree with us, when you look at this and see how ham-fisted and retarded it is, it should fill you with deep concern that this is the best they can do. Because when you see the arguments that are made for other doctrines in the actual Christian faith, they don't look like this. They don't look like a mess. They're not this montage of I mean, this basically amounts to a ransom note with with letters cut out of magazines. That's the theological equivalent of what they're trying to pull off here.

1:24:32 Whereas Jesus sends his people to bring the gospel to all nations, or ethnos. Well, great, that's absolutely. The gospel is for all mankind, every descendant of Adam. That's regardless of race, of color, any d an any differentiation you could possibly imagine, concoct, or taxonomize, God God sent his son to die for all of them. No dispute. I just like that the author of this one couldn't even be bothered to pluralize ethnos. I mean all of our pastors learn Greek. Come on. At least use if you're going to say nations, at least pluralize the word. Yeah. At some point you have to wonder, like I I think they're not even trying. The next whereas, God has united all believers in Christ through holy

1:25:23 baptism. Okay, great. That's uniting all believers. The vast majority of humanity are not believers. So if you're trying to solve the new sin of racism, what good does this do you? I mean, yes, we would desire to baptize everyone, but until such time as they're Christian, they're not one in Christ. So I'm not trying to argue against the gospel being the solution to our problems. I don't want that to come across. That's not the case. But as a practical pragmatic matter, if the immediate concern is hatred of man against man. Yes, converting all men to Christianity solves the problem, but it doesn't change the nature of the man apart from sanctifying that nature. As we mentioned earlier, sanctified man's nature still has his race.

1:26:11 It still has his religion, even before the throne of God in heaven. If you're white, if you're black, if you're Asian, you're still gonna be Asian in heaven. You're still gonna be black, white, or Asian in the new earth, you're gonna have your body. All of this is Gnostic to say, oh, this oneness, oh, this unity, oh, that there's no sex, there's no it's all just one man, it's one in God. Well, that's a soteriological claim. It's not a claim about the nature of creation. God is not destroying creation on the last day, he is perfecting it. He is wiping away the evil and he is restoring the good, which is why our fallen dead bodies that have been planted in the ground when we're buried will be raised up and will

1:26:55 be perfected. It's still gonna be your body, just as it was Christ's body who was raised when they saw the scars, when they saw his side, it was his body. It was the very body that had been crucified. You get your body back to. Now we don't know if it's going to have the scars or what age you're going to be. It doesn't matter. It's going to be whatever God wants to be perfected. But this notion that unity in Christ, man, unity in God, man, that's soteriological. It doesn't eliminate physical reality. Because physical reality is not evil. What God has created is good. Even in its fallen state, it is not fundamentally opposed to God, which is a Corey the the point Corey made very well earlier.

1:27:38 To say that Satan has become the the author of creation is a new heresy. It's terrifying. It's the it's the death of Christianity. And yet we see it permeating all of these whereas is from well-intentioned people. Like it, I think these people are Christians. I just think they were idiots and no one stopped them because when this new religion was imported, everyone's like, Oh man, yeah, this you're right, it's in the Bible. We gotta find it somewhere. We gotta turn out these resolutions. Every the every three years we have to new resolution saying how much we hate racism. I would be embarrassed alone if not for the fact that this is so destructive to the faith. Because there are unbelievers who understand these

1:28:24 ontological created matters. They know that Africans are not identical to Europeans, are not identical to Asians, and that that actually means something. And so when we as Christians say, Nope, it's all the same, we look like idiots and they're simply not going to listen. And those are slow. They leave the church. They leave the church. they will never listen to people who lie to them about the one thing that they know. So this is not just about picking a fight that's some sort of culture war thing. This is about the gospel. This is about whether the men who are actively seeking and fumbling towards God in their blind paganism, when they stumble towards what we have told them is the opposite of the satanic world, and they

1:29:09 find the same Satanism in our halls and in our publications, they're never going to look again. They're going to say, yep, it's the same garbage I see everywhere else. I have one none of it. And they will revert into the most destructive and dangerous form of paganism imaginable, and that is a white man who has nothing to lose and everything to be angry about. That is not something we want to see in the world, and yet it's what these lies are guaranteeing for our future. Every time this Gnostic wickedness comes up, I think of Job because Job has one of the best refutations of all of this wickedness, this nonsense, and it's in chapter nineteen of Job. For I know that my redeemer lives, and at the last he

1:29:59 will stand upon the earth, and after my skin has been thus destroyed, yet in my flesh I shall see God, whom I shall see for myself, and my eyes shall behold and not another. People gloss over that when they read, Job, if they even bother to read the Old Testament. But this is the oldest book of the Bible, clearly stating, incidentally, my Redeemer, but also in my flesh I shall see God. If God raised me Chinese, it wouldn't be me. God has to raise me as a German with a little bit of Scottish, but he has to raise me as what he made me, or this verse is a lie. And it's not a lie because this is a promise from God He will raise you in your flesh on the last day, if you are a Christian.

1:31:00 And it is you as what you are, who you are. If he were to raise someone else, if he were to raise you as something else, it would not be you, and all of the promises in Scripture about the resurrection of the body and the life everlasting, all of them would be a lie. And And that's why we have to refute this pernicious lie that is creeping into the church. Because it is a denial of quite a bit of the creed, but it is certainly a denial of God as creator and of the resurrection of the flesh. This next whereas is where things really go off the rails. Listen to this closely. Racism is defined as a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and their racial differences produce an inherent

1:31:51 superiority of a particular race. That is quoted by Synod from Miriam Webster.com from their dictionary definition of racism. Definition two Prejudice, discrimination or to antagonism directed at someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior. And that comes from dictionary.com. Now, you may remember from I think it was in the genealogy of ideas episode where we I mentioned as often as possible, go back to the Webster's 1828 dictionary to see what the definitions of words used to be because we all know the words are getting redefined left and right faster than like printing can keep up. They will it introduce new definitions of words more than once a year to keep up with the current hysteria that's being introduced by

1:32:41 Satan in the world. So the fact that the Missouri Synod would go to two websites to get the current def dictionary definition of racism, even if it were real, even if it were actually a sin that God had ordained from before creation was something in opposition to his will, you would still think that they could do better than quoting an internet dictionary. Do you think it's a good idea to quote Miriam Webster? Well, let me give you another example. I looked up the definition of man. Yeah, if we're gonna take them at their word for what racism really means, and we're gonna make theological conclusions on Webster's dictionary definition of racism, what does Webster say about a man? Man, an individual human, especially an adult male human.

1:33:27 Huh. Well, okay, male, that at least kind of gives me some identifier. So what does male bean? Male a male person, a man or a boy. So basically dictionary definition two, see dictionary definition one. And then the second part of the definition of male of male at least gives a little bit of definition sort of an individual of the sex that is typically capable of producing small, usually motile gametes, such as sperm or spermatozoa, which fertilize the eggs of a female. So this obviously doesn't refer to humans in particular, it just means something that probably can produce sperm. And they say typically, not because they're just they're keeping in mind that maybe someone is infertile, is that there are males, according to

1:34:16 Miriam Webster, who do not produce sperm because they have ovaries. They're males with ovaries. They don't produce sperm. The uh the other definition of a related to being the sex that typically has the capacity producing having a gender identity that is opposite a female. Now we're off to the races. What's a male? It's the opposite of a female according to their gender identity. So here we finally get an actual concrete definition Gender Identity A person's internal sense of being male, female, some combination of male and female or neither male nor female. And the example that they give is great. Facebook provides more than 50 options beyond male and female for users to describe their gender identity, from gender questioning and neither to androgynous.

1:35:05 Now if you've kept up with any of the fight over the large cataclysm, this is the same doctrine that the Missouri Synod just introduced and it's like In its latest addition to the large catechism, they introduce gender identity as a confusion that someone may suffer from. They may be burdened with it. You may be burdened with transgenderism, according to Lutherans in 2023. So when we look at the dictionary definition from Webster of what racism is, we are going down we're not going down the path. We're in the same room. We're already in the room by adopting the term racism that Webster uses with the term that says what's a male? Well it's the opposite of a female and a female is the opposite of a male.

1:35:46 That means whatever your eyender your gender identity is, you choose if you're male or female. If you let the Missouri Synod and all these other denominations get away with castrating Galatians 3:28 and these other soteriological passages that say that sex is not a determinant for salvation. If you let them take the salvation part out of the equation, what are you left with? You're left with a person's internal sense of being male or female, or both, or neither, in varying degrees, because it's all shades. This is This is where our churches are at today. They're getting dictionary definitions and using them in theological statements that are so bankrupt that you cannot continue to be Christian if you come

1:36:31 into contact with this stuff for very long. These are false confessions. It is a false confession to say that male is well if you think you're male, then you probably are, until you change your mind. You might be a female again tomorrow. You might be something else entirely. Maybe you're a horse, maybe you're a zebra, maybe you're a fire truck. We'll find out tomorrow. That's not Christian. That is the opposite of Christianity. And anyone who believes and confesses that has denied his creator and is going to hell. These are not small matters. So when Webster's dictionary definition from the website is showing up as a definition that's going to be used to establish theological credentials, it's

1:37:11 just set it on fire. You don't even need to read, finish reading. But unfortunately, I did. And so you're going to be subjected to the rest of it because it keeps getting worse. Whereas racism denies the biblical truth that all humanity have a common origin in Adam and is contrary to the law of love. Ooh, the law of love. I didn't notice that. That's exciting. I felt the tingle. Love your neighbor as yourself and may involve in its various expressions the breaking of every commandment of the law. Oh man, that's that's just that's another episode all by itself right there. This one's unbelievable. You know this in the in I somehow managed to gloss over it or I wouldn't have uh it wouldn't have this worse than biscuit.

1:37:55 Most governing documents for church bodies and most governing document particularly for individual churches are terrible. Any attorney reads them and as an aneurysm, this is that level of bad. It's astonishing. There's nothing about this paragraph that is consonant with scripture or or competent or Christian It's not even coherent. Yep. Yeah. And that's the fundamental thing. Like is is you string together these whereas is we'll like I said, we'll give the links you can read it yourself. You know, we're we're going piecemeal and you know, maybe if you think we're being unfair or whatever, you can read it yourself. If you take all these whereas as a whole, it it's like being punched from fifteen different directions while you're drunk and blindfolded.

1:38:38 You don't know where you are and you don't know what's happening because there's no coherent argument being made. I'm gonna go back for a second to the previous one, the where what Webster says about racism. Says that race is a primary determinant of human traits and capacities. Well, what was the previous episode we just did about? It was about IQ. And the one before that was about behavior, about criminality. Our contention, based on created reality, based on facts, based on truth with a capital T, is that race is the primary determinant in your IQ. If you are African, your IQ is bounded substantially different than if you're Asian or you're European. Period. The definition of racism that the Missouri Senate adopted says that

1:39:22 that is condemned outright. That facts are now sin outright. If you believe that, you are going to hell unless you repent. So if you agreed for the last episode of the previous one, or frankly, if you agree with anything, we say the Missouri Synod says you are going to hell. For believing something contrary to scripture, no, it's not contrary to scripture. For bring believing something that's a lie, no. We established that those things are true. What is it contrary to? It is contrary to the dark prince who rules this age in this new religion that he has erected that's being called Christianity even among us. So when this wereas says that if you if you deny that I can't even read it again, it's so bad, like I

1:40:07 if truth is in opposition to your religion, your religion is no longer Christianity. It's that simple. That There's stone choir in a nutshell. You can delete any new episodes. That's it. If truth is an opposition to your crit your religion, your religion is not the Christian religion. All truth is encompassed in what comes from God. All lies are encompassed in what comes from Satan. That's it. Every argument we're ever gonna make boils down to that. But we have to fight these one by one because no matter how many of these lies we refute, someone will come along and say, Oh, well what about this next one? And what about this next one? Yes, those are all lies too. The things that are contrary to God's word, the things that are

1:40:50 contrary to reality are in fact teachings of demons. This synoptical resolution is teachings of demons in some pretty retarded demons. Satan was not sacked best. And the the moles are wearing collars and they also already have brain damage before we began. No one advances, at least no one on our side, no Christian who believes in the truths that we are highlighting connections Contends that humanity has disparate origins. No one advocates that. The polygenic theories or whatever it is you want to call them, that's Christian identity and whatever it is they call that weird sect in South Africa that believes that Africans are descended from the beasts of the field. I can't remember what they call themselves, but those are tiny little

1:41:39 cults that are irrelevant. No one on our side actually believes that the various races of men have different origins. No, we're all descended from Adam. We all confirm that. We're all descended from Noah. We confirm that. And so they're fighting against some weird straw man who basically doesn't even exist. And then I love the language and may involve. If you wrote that in a contract, I I'm going to fire you or throw something at you. That is such terrible may involve in various expressions breaking every commandment. What are you con If you're writing doctrine, if you are speaking for a church body, and theoretically speaking for the church, maybe you should actually be specific in what it is you are condemning, what

1:42:30 it is you're advancing, not maybe this thing exists that may possibly violate something somewhere and so we don't like it. That's not doctrine. That's not what the church should be writing and publishing. It's not what should be taught from our pulpits. And yet this is the twenty nineteenth synthesis of all previous resolutions that come out of the Missouri Senate. This isn't the dumbest even, but it's just the most recent. So it's one we're using just in his example. This is the best that they can do when they're advancing their own argument against us to say that we are going to hell for violating every commandment, for telling you the truth and agreeing with scripture and agreeing with 1900 years of the Christian church.

1:43:09 I'll take my chances on judgment day. But you as listeners, you need to figure it out for yourself and you need to do it in good conscience. Said repeatedly, don't just believe us because we say something or because we say we're clever or we sound clever or we sound mad and you like when people sound mad, that seems convincing. Those Those are not good reasons to believe someone. Believe God. And when someone makes an argument from scripture and from truth, believe that. And if a man consistently does that, maybe you should listen to what he says. You shouldn't always believe everything he says automatically, but he's probably someone worth listening to. The men who drafted this should be locked in a room and

1:43:47 it should be locked forever because no one should ever hear their voices. This is a calamity and it's continuing to accelerate. I'm only halfway through, so we're gonna try to speed up a little. Whereas racism has its roots in the sins of pride and arrogance, which have plagued humankind in every time and in every place, including the Christian church. What? I mean, yes, pride and arrogance are bad in circumstances. Was Was Solomon proud of being the wisest man on earth? Well, it was a gift from God. And God was so pleased with his wisdom to ask for wisdom that he blessed him with every w uh every blessing that a man could have. He had wealth, he had power, he had fame, he had enough women to get him into trouble and cause far worse problems for

1:44:37 him because he forgot God, because he started liking the women more. You can have so many blessings that you forget God. That's not God's fault. But when he had those things, was he arrogant? At some point probably, but when he was seen by the whole world as be being the wisest man on earth, which was the case, people came from all around us to hear his judgments because they were wise. The last episode that we did we talked about IQ and we discussed our own and we discussed the differences. This these people would absolutely condemn condemn us for arrogance, for telling the truth, for saying that by IQ standards, I'm six foot ten. Is that arrogant or is it accurate? Well it depends on what you do with it.

1:45:21 Is it arrogant to say that white people commit fewer crimes than Africans? Well, I guess it depends on what you do with it. But either way, it's a pretty relevant fact. And see, that's what this is structured around. They don't want you discussing facts. They literally forbid you to tell the truth. Is that coming from God? When they say, oh, that's that's sin. that's violating all the commandments, that's arrogance. You can't say that. We're all exactly the same. That's a lie. It's a demonic lie. And the lies continue. Well, in this one, I just one quick thing about one of the terms use here. I see this crop up all the time, and it is a problem in English. I'm not aware if it's a problem in most other languages, but

1:46:09 pride as a noun is neutral. You can have pride in something good, you can have pride in something wicked. It depends, it is fact specific as to whether that is good or bad. But when it comes to the adjective prideful, that has a negative connotation in English. However, people who use this argument always conflate being proud and being prideful. Being proud of something is not wicked. You can be proud of your ancestors. You can be proud of your accomplishments. You can be proud of your children. That's good because these are the things God has given you. Being proud of them is good. Being prideful is when you take it to an excessive and potentially sinful extent. And so they always conflate those terms.

1:47:02 They're never careful, some of them because they're stupid, but in general it's because there's wickedness underlying it. The goal is to make it so that well being prideful is wrong so you can't be proud of things either. And that is teaching you to reject the good things of God and not be grateful for the gifts he has given you, and that is sin. Absolutely. And it's it's it's one of the word games that continuously gets played among us in order not to advance truth, not to advance anything scriptural, but just to shut down the risk that someone might say something that violates the spirit of this age. That's what this entire document is about, is about making sure that the spirit of this age is never violated.

1:47:51 The next whereas racism harms its victims in body, mind, and spirit, and people in our communities and ministries have experienced such harm. What does that even mean? Like it's at this point they're just they're hysterical. Racism harms people and its victim in its in body, mind, and spirit. Well see they've detached a sin from the sinner. And I think that's one of the overarching problems with all these discussions. When it says whereas racism harms, it turns racism into this ambient thing, like it's some cloud that turns people inside out if you go inside it. That's not how sin works. you it would it's a common thing today to say something like whereas murder harms its victims and body, but you don't to say

1:48:42 murder harms is it's the passive voice murderers harm. Let's focus on the sinner and not only on the sin. What they're trying to do is to categorize and bundle up an entire collection of beliefs that are true and behaviors that don't don't exist in some cases. Bundem all together as a racism, mark it, seal it, box it up, and then put it on the shelf as this is rejected and condemned for all time. So that anything that's inside that box, you can't go near it. You can't open it up again. You can't examine the contents of this, because again, this was a resolution adopted at Sonon Convention. This is official doctrine now. It's something the members of the Missouri Senate are bound not to disagree with publicly or they, the pastors of the Missouri Synod, will

1:49:32 be expelled from synod to publicly disagree with this. That seems like a pretty big deal when something is so f riddled with lies and stupidity that it's difficult to even get through without losing your mind. Yeah, they want to make it that the concept harms. Of course we understand what they're doing. This is Frankfurt School, this is systemic racism, it's all those various things. That's what they're doing here, even if they didn't recognize it. I don't know who exactly drafted this, so I don't know if the person who drafted it knew what he was doing, but given how poorly worded it is, I suspect not. But it would be the equivalent of saying that the concept of adultery no, it's not the concept of adultery that harms.

1:50:11 It's you sleeping with your neighbor's wife. It is you the adulterer and her the adulteress that causes the harm, not the concept of adultery. And they're just doing the same thing here with racism for reasons we've gone into before and we'll go into in greater length in the future whenever we do Marxism in the Frankfurt School. It's the same sort of errors that permeate the large cataclysm where they just have these these These ambient sins that are just floating around and people are burdened with them and they're just happening and there are no specific actors unless you argue with them. And then there's someone specific to be condemned. But short of that, it's just floating. Next one, racism has no basis in scripture.

1:50:49 Well, if they'd stop there, they'd be absolutely right. That's the that's the only race the only whereas I can agree with. Racism has no basis in scripture. Absolutely factual. That's the amendment version. unfortunately, that's not what they meant. Notably. That's the amended version. This is the whereas they amended from originally saying. Oh you're right. Yeah. Whereas racism has no basis in science. Um Yes. I can see why they amended that one. Yeah. Yeah they the the the original wording that was was removed before this was finally adopted at convention was to remove the the claim that racism has no basis in science. Now I don't know the reasoning for that, but uh it would be just it would another be it'd be another case where they

1:51:30 were in error because the races are clearly different. The races are fundamentally objectively measurably different. That is not a soteriological claim. It is not a claim before the throne of God. It is a claim that the human beings in certain populations have different properties. That's simply true. The Missouri Synod condemns the truth, and so it's no surprise the path that it's chosen. But it goes on to say the racism has no basis in scripture or the Lutheran confessions, but rather is consistent with the atheistic evolutionary ideologies and movements that claim the supremacy of one group over another. Well We were a few to that in the in the first episode of these five talking about race.

1:52:10 There's nothing about acknowledging races of humans that requires macroevolution. You don't need fish becomes monkey becomes man to get from Noah to three different major racial populations. God did that. He did it in six thousand years. He did it in 4,500 years, in fact. And the differentiation, whether or not it continues to this day, the differentiation in terms of continuing to sub to have new subspecies produced or however you wish to categorize them, we are what we are. And there's no going back. You can't reverse engineer JF from a big collection of Europeans. That's the data has been lost. Well exactly. But what we actually explicitly reject the neo-Darwinian evolution or the new synthesis, whichever one it

1:52:59 is you subscribed, they're all false of course, but we explicitly reject it because we make the correct argument that speciation doesn't occur, but the division into subspecies does occur through the loss of information. Neo-Darwinian evolution, the modern synthesis, etc., all claim that through mutation and selection you can create new information, never demonstrated but always claimed. We explicitly reject that. We go out of our way to actually reject atheistic evolution in a coherent manner, instead of just throwing out catchwords, catchphrases, and hoping that someone will pay attention to us. And if someone is listening and they're trying to put the best construction on this and say, well, may Maybe they're not talking about you

1:53:50 two. You guys are Christians, you're not atheistic evolutionists, so that doesn't apply to you. No, it absolutely applies to us. This condemnation has been personally leveled at us by members of Synod in refutation of what we say about race. They absolutely insist that we are atheistic evolutionists, which is why they say we're going to hell. They're liars, but on all accounts, but there we are. And whereas the church is called to condemn sin in every form and manner, both in public and in private, including racism and all its expressions. Well neat, we got another catch-all there just to make sure that in the future this can be cited as a proof text to who knows what's gonna happen next. how far is is the the new religion of racism gonna go?

1:54:37 Tune into your next diversity, equity, and inclusion training in your local uh business to find out where it's going because the doctrine continues to evolve. Satan's not done with it. He's keeps delivering new truisms that are part of the anti-racist religion. And by inclusion of racism in all its expressions, the Missouri Senate has preemptively adopted all of those forever into the future. If something is called racism by the latest definition on where Merriam Webster dot com, Missouri Senate is saying yes, we condemn racism in all its forms. Whatever new expression you've discovered, we condemn that already. Which is a bold move. Uh not Christian, though. Whereas our Lord has commanded us, you shall love your neighbor as

1:55:22 ourself. Well, talked about this again many times. Your neighbor means means the man physically in front of you. Corey is not my neighbor. We don't live near each other. Cory is my brother in Christ, and he's according my brother according to the flesh. We are not neighbors. So all of these notions, the neighbor is this Mr. Rogers category of universal love. They're just bull. It's complete BS. It'S a lie. And it's a lie that has it's this it's a brain parasite that's caused men to lose sight of what scripture says very plainly about neighbors. Neighbor is an important category. We do not deny that. In fact it is we who uphold the scriptural teaching of neighbor over against those in the church today who will gladly despise their

1:56:08 own neighbors and go six thousand miles away to aliens who are not brothers according to the flesh, they're not brothers according to Christ, and they're not neighbors. They're complete aliens. Those are the men to whom our churches seek to minister. We are the only ones who are actually concerned about our neighbors. So if you want to emphasize neighbor, yeah, absolutely. But it's not a refutation of racism. And here's where things get particularly ugly, even relative to the rest of this. Whereas the Lutheran church Missouri Synod confessing its own faults and walking humbly in repentance before God has addressed racism and discrimination in ten synod conventions, resulting in convention resolutions such as, and they cite some,

1:56:53 and whereas the Committee on Theology and Church Relations February 1994 document, Racism and the Church states, we in the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod have before us a wonderful opportunity to commit ourselves to strive toward making racism a thing of the past and to demonstrate before a watching world how people of all cultures and groups can become a Become one in Christ, who has made of many one body for the edification of all. So the amazing thing about this section is that it says confessing our faults and walking humbly in repentance. Well, we're Christians. We don't confess faults, we confess sins. And a church body doesn't confess sins collectively, especially not ones that are not enumerated and are buried somewhere in the distant past.

1:57:42 So what they're doing here in twenty nineteen is they are throwing the church of the past, throwing the church that in the past behaved in a manner that considered itself consistent with scripture. They're saying that was evil. We condemn them and we're gonna confess our faults, but not confess our sins because well we're not sinners, obviously. and then goes on to say with the CTCR thing, we're doing it before the eyes of go of the world. Well there's a way in which that can be beneficial, but when you are adopting a worldly religion and saying, look at us, look at us, we're look how worldly we are. You said rel you said racism was a bad thing. Look how hard we're going at racism. We're condemning it in all its forms and all its ways.

1:58:29 This is our new religion. We are committed to destroying racism. Again, this has been going on since at least nineteen it's been going on no earlier than nineteen fifty nine. It really picked up in the 70s and then 1994 was when it hit its peak stride. Which is interesting because if you know anything about Missouri Synod history, in the seventies, the Missouri Synod was very close to complete apostasy. The St. Louis Seminary was itself entirely apostate. Almost Almost all of the s professors who were on the campus walked off with the student body because they rejected scripture, they rejected God. They went on to form one of the most virulent precursors to Elka. They went on to be the reason that Elka resorted to sodomy

1:59:16 and all of its other egregious demonic activities as quickly as it did. The Missouri Synod did that. That was growing in the seventies. The mistake that the Synod made was that we didn't drive out the men that those demonic professors taught. Those men continued in the Synod. So you have seminx in the mid-70s, and 1994 you have this thing, oh, before the eyes of God, we condemn all racism. And today these demons who celebrate that will say, look how faithful we were. We need to get back to that. When I see that on the timeline, what I see is the fruits of semenex growing to their full form and stature, where the men who were themselves apostate, because they were taught by apostate professors,

2:00:01 they believed the demonic lies that they were taught. They were teachers, they were professors, they were pastors in the Missouri Senate through the nineties. Things were getting really bad in the eighties and nineties precisely because we didn't root those men out. So yeah, there was a statement in ninety-four. It was also the I think the last one until this. There have been a couple middling ones, but the only big one was a ninety-four after the seventies. That's because seminx had more or less run its course. What we're seeing today is the aftermath where the next generation after the seminx demons are taking some new approaches, but they're still sticking to a lot of the old songbook because it worked really well.

2:00:40 And further resolved, it says that Synod in Convention publicly condemned the sin of racism in all its manifestations, giving honor to the Father from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named. Confessing the Son is basically the doxology. Like who's gonna vote against the doxology and the Trinity? that's how craven this crap is. Like you can't it's not enough just to say that well, this is a sin. You have to say it's a sin and we love Jesus in all these ways and everybody's saying Kumbaya and who's gonna vote against that? See, only the radicals who will call BS up front and say this is an alien teaching are the ones who are going to be resistant to it. So not only do they fill it with straw men, but they

2:01:22 fill it with this these decorations to legitimize it. Because if you say Jesusy stuff, this is the Jesus dust that they sprinkled on this pile. It goes on resolve that the members of the Senate encourage the church to utilize the ninety-four document, resolve the members of the congregations of the Senate, or encourage the works towards racial reconciliation and equality within the church and within society at large, praying that those who advocate racist ideologies and those who are deceived by them be brought to repentance, and that justice and healing may come to those who have been wounded, and be it finally resolved those followers of Christ, we are guard knowing according to the flesh.

2:02:01 We serve the one who has entrusted us to the message of reconciliation. That's reconciliation to God. Look at this. At the very end of this, they're destroying the gospel. They're destroying Scripture by saying reconciliation of man to man. You don't need any God in the picture. You're doing it for God, but you're doing it with one another. That is not scriptural reconciliation. In Christ, God is reconciling the world to himself. They actually cite that. I I'm just in awe. It's like watching a a a car wreck. And that's how it ends. That's the end of it. Uh Lord have mercy on us all. It's almost tempting just to end the episode there because it's so just so utterly evil and wicked and ridiculous simultaneously.

2:02:51 And I know that we often say, we have argued at length, do not call what is being done by the left, by the Marxists, etc., insane or woke or anything like that. But it can be both insane and evil simultaneously, and this manages to reach that. It is so incoherent as to be technically insane. The just the first bit, we regard no one according to the flesh. Okay, yes, you can cite scripture, but you're citing it in such a way that you are saying the opposite of what it says. Because if you want to use the meaning that they are advancing here, well, okay. Live like the crazy old Anabaptists used to. Because you may as well share your women, because if you regard no one according to the flesh, well that's she's not my wife,

2:03:42 that's just random flesh. That's not how this works. That's not what scripture means. This is not a denial of cre you cannot take scripture and make it in any part, in any subpart a denial of the reality of what God has created, a denial of creation. And that is exactly what they are doing here. This is the absolute worst kind of not even citation scholarship, because it's so bad It's picking out little bits of scripture and chopping it, not even whole verses, little snippets of verses, in order to advance in a mercenary fashion this wicked doctrine that came nowhere from scripture. This is Satan wasn't even this bad when he was trying to tempt Christ. He at least cited most of the verses he was citing.

2:04:36 He at least did that. You have to give Satan more credit than you give the men who wrote and voted for this, because if they voted for this, they are implicated in the wickedness because they signed off on it. And And since 2019, the LCMS has swung much further to the left than this document indicates. So we spent most of this episode talking specifically about, you know, this is this is a typical argument in favor of the doctrine of racism. Your churches, if they're not Missouri synod, have will advance very similar arguments because we said at the beginning, every argument that you will find about racism that doesn't explicitly cite scripture is gonna come from the pedophile Jew Magnus Hirschfeld's document from the 30s.

2:05:24 This stuff was written before any of these men were born. They're adopting and they're importing false theology from a false demonic religion. We've laid out clearly. None of this accords with scripture. even if you disagree with us, even if you disagree with our scriptural conclusions completely separate from that. If we didn't exist at all, no Christian in good conscience can read this document and these arguments and what's on the LCMS page about racism and come to the conclusion that they were produced by someone with the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit would not permit such lies to be done in his name. And yet here we have churches advancing lies that destroy Christianity. They destroy the gospel, they destroy the church, and they destroy creation,

2:06:11 and they destroy the order that God has established among us. There's one entity in the universe that seeks all of those outcomes, and his name is Satan. These advancements that are being pushed in the church, the reason that we're talking about it, the reason we're talking about this upsetting, divisive subject that nobody wants to hear about is that it's seminal. This is it. This is the solvent that Satan is using to dissolve the Christian church. It's not about Lutherans, it's not about our denomination or what goes on in St. Louis. This is the fight everyone is in. And we've all been capitulating to varying degrees at varying times. We're all on the same slippery slope. It's there's only one way any of this ends.

2:06:58 Well, two possible ways. Either the church is completely destroyed, which God promises he will not permit, or these vipers are rooted out and they're put to the sword by a godly prince. Because there's nothing else that's gonna stop this sort of evil in this life. And I'd prefer to see the end of the world as I sa as I said last episode. I don't mean that for that to be a black pill, it's just that when I pray thy kingdom come, I mean it. I I want God to come among us, not only on a daily basis, but to come finally and to end evil, to end our suffering, to end my evil. I I pray for God to take my life and to perfect it. And that's only gonna happen when I'm dead. Or if he comes when in the sky when I'm alive, I

2:07:42 will be struck down and and raised up a new man without any of this sin, without any of these problems or any of these concerns. It's up to God what he does in the future. But the task before every Christian on this day is not to just sit on a hillside and look at the sky and hope that Jesus will come back. I pray that that will happen, but day to day I am head down fighting this evil because when Christ comes back I would much prefer that he find me serving him faithfully than pursuing the lusts of the flesh that otherwise occupy my mind. If I can fight this instead of doing the evil that I would prefer to do, this is what I'm gonna do. Yeah, it's an easy choice because this evil is not only it's

2:08:24 not about our church. It's about it's about the whole Christian faith. And it's about everything that we have ever known and loved in history. There is no part of history that's connected to anything that the listeners of this podcast have any connection to that is not being destroyed today, physically destroyed. Statues torn down, paintings defiled, works of art erased, edited, eradicated. We're told that they never happened. We're told that the men who did them are evil. We're told everything that has ever existed in Christian history is evil. In their religion, they're telling the truth. All those things are evil to Satan. All those things were good according to God's perfect will, and that's

2:09:09 why they prospered among his people in Christendom. If Christendom is going to survive, it's going because men stop eating up these worldly satanic teachings of demons that continue to be imported in the church by men who say they're doing it in God's name. Magnus Hirschfeld brought it secularly, but he didn't bring it into the church. It was churchmen who brought it into the church. It was pastors and professors who said, ooh, that's a good idea. I want to use that in my next sermon. And we're off to the races. Cause you in the pews, are you going to listen to some jerk podcaster? Are you going to listen to your pastor? You should be able to listen to your pastor without flinching and without second guessing.

2:09:47 And I pray for the day when God will restore that to all of our churches. Until such day comes, we're gonna keep fighting this. We're gonna fe keep fighting wherever these lies are introduced. So there are not gonna be many episodes of Stone Choir that you find, you know, pleasing or relaxing. That's not why we're here. they're easy listening channels if you wanna just have your brain scratched. We're talking about where Satan is attacking and he's coming for every direction But race and racism is one of the chief ones today. And so that's why we spent I five episodes on this. I hope that folks have found some value in it. I hope you'll share with friends and family and people in your church who will receive it, uh as I've said before, people who

2:10:30 are told beforehand that Corey and I are wicked evil men will never listen in the first place for the most part. But if someone is a Christian who's trusted said, Hey, you should listen to this podcast. It's pretty good. I like these guys. I think they have some interesting things to say. The reaction is almost always, that was really interesting. No one who ever listens to us comes to the conclusion that we are the men who are being slapped among the pastorate up and down, from the left hand to the light right hand in the Missouri Synod, all of our pastors are slandering us today and virtually no one is defending our reputations. God sees that too, and He can take care of that. I'm not even worried about it.

2:11:08 But for you who are listening, thank you for spending the time with us. For you who share, we appreciate it. Keep spreading the word and keep spending time in scripture because all of this matters. It's not just the parts you like. It's not just the parts that make you happy and make you comfortable. Spend some more time in the parts of scripture that make you really nervous because that's that's the Holy Spirit in you saying, Hey, you missed a spot. And when the Holy Spirit tells you you should be nervous about something, you need to listen. Don't take it from our words. Take it from God. You will find these problems in Scripture when you contrast them with what you're hearing in the word today, and that's all we can

2:11:46 ask of anyone. I am ever so slightly tempted to add something about the immediately next resolution that was passed at that same convention just because of how atrocious it also is. Just read the title. I just want to I'll read the title and pull out one line because I think there's some deep abiding irony there, to encourage responsible citizenship and compassion toward neighbors who are immigrants among us. If you've been paying attention to Stone Choir thus far, you recognize already some of the problems with that, but I enjoy one of the resolved paragraphs part of it at least that the members of Synod be encouraged not to allow political divisions to become church divisions. Oops, they yeah, they've managed to violate it in both possible directions

2:12:46 at once by not upholding scripture when scripture and political divisions do happen to align, for instance, abortion, because we do have quite a few men and women in our pews with anti-scription scriptural positions on abortion and our pastors say very little about it. They say more than many denominations, that's certainly true, but not enough. And they violate it in the other direction by permitting actual politics in the most base mercenary sense to become real divisions in the church that rise to the level of expulsion and at least attempted excommunication. But To end on a different note, we routinely bring up the transcendentals. And I hope that you, as the listeners, understand why we continue

2:13:41 to do that. Everything against which we are fighting, against which we are speaking, the things against which we are pushing back violate the transcendentals, go against the transcendentals, because that which is evil is against good, that which is evil is against God's nature, is against God. God is his nature, the transcendentals are God's nature. Think about that, maybe replay it a couple of times to listen to exactly what I said. But when I list the transcendentals, I typically list the main three because that's just what is usually done in theology and philosophy. Beauty, goodness, truth, list them in whichever order you please. God's nature, of course, is one, and so the next one is being, because there are actually five core ones.

2:14:28 Being, because of course that which exists is greater than that which does not. It's the summary of that. But the fifth is the one that I want to end on here. And it is one of the most important in our modern context. The others are of course important because, as was just mentioned, we have monuments that are being destroyed, our artwork is being destroyed, things are being burned down, desecrated right and left, and of course well that's a fight against beauty. They're attempting to destroy beauty, and that's why you have brutalist architecture and things like that. Because oh A world that is against God, a society that is against God will produce only ugliness, because beauty is an attribute of

2:15:08 God, flows from God, as does goodness and truth. And so truth is being attacked. That's why we are pushing back against these things, because the things against which we are pushing back are all lies. They are fighting against truth. We are fighting for truth. So that's beauty and truth. Goodness, of course, everyone understands that implicitly to some degree at least, good versus evil. And I already mentioned being, but the fifth one is unity. And the reason no one ever tells you that the fifth transcendental is unity, the reason you may never have heard that before in your life if you haven't heard it from me, literally, is that because the cult that we have today, that is the official cult

2:16:00 of most Western governments, that is the cult of our corporations, that is the cult of our elites, that is the cult of our politicians, that is becoming the cult of what once were churches and now no longer are, is diversity, equity, and inclusion, or diversity, inclusion and equity if you want a better, more accurate acronym. And that first bit diversity goes directly against the transcendental of unity. And so, as with the others, if you have something, if you are following something, if you are advocating something, that pushes back against, refutes, disagrees with, rejects an attribute of God. Well, you are obviously not on God's side. You are standing on Satan's side. And so if you find that you are standing on the side

2:16:57 that is pushing diversity as some sort of highest good, some utmost value. You are pushing back against unity, you are rejecting one of the transcendentals, you are rejecting God, you are rejecting the faith, and you will spend eternity with your master. And you should think about that long and hard, because you cannot reject any of God's attributes without rejecting God. And so if you reject beauty, goodness, truth, being, or unity, and our modern cult that is taking over the Western world and the rest of it eventually, rejects each and every one. If you reject them, you are no Christian. You may do it incidentally accidentally for a period of time. But if you continue down that road, it is the wide path

2:17:54 and it leads to hell. The narrow path that leads to eternal life, to paradise, is in fact narrow. It is not the path that the bulk of the world is going to take. And so again, if you find yourself on the side pushing diversity, pushing anti-racism, pushing Marxism, pushing all these catchwords, pushing these wicked things as transcendental values, which they are not, then you are on the side that is against God, and you will spend eternity suffering his wrath for the sins that you took back and claimed as your own, even if you were a baptized child of Christ at some point, you can throw that cloak off, and you can be kicked out of the wedding feast. Those are the stakes, and that is why we are doing this

2:18:55 podcast, and that is why we will continue. Because the stakes quite literally are heaven or hell.