This is another classic post from Ehud. He shows, once again, that Kinism has always been consistent with the Faith. First, he makes the excellent point that no one really believes the Ken Hamite nonsense that the only requirement for a legitimate Christian marriage is one Christian man and one Christian woman. This is because marriage is never merely spiritual. If it were, a man would have "no legitimate basis for opposing the union of his eighteen-year-old (or sixteen, if you’re in Texas) Christian son to a fifty-year-old Christian woman (or any other such vulgarities)." In short, he would be unable to enforce equal yoking, which is his duty as a father. "Everyone knows, whether or not they admit it, that we ought to seek similarity in our bridegrooming after the exemplar of the first marriage (Matthew 19, Genesis 2:18-20)." Even the lying pastors who are trampling the Word of God with impunity these days know it full well.
Ehud shows us that unequal familial, hereditary, horticultural, and other ‘yokings’ are derived from the Seventh Commandment’s prohibition against adultery. "This explains why the Septuagint translators opted to use moicheuo (an inflected form of the Greek word moich) in Exodus 20:14 in the place of our word, ‘Adultery.’ The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament…defines moicheuo thus: ‘Of the intermingling of animals and men or of different races’… It is an inflected form of this exact word that was used by Aristotle to describe admixtures between dissimilar families of birds over against ‘true-bred’ species (Aristotle, Historia Animalium XI.32.6-10)." It’s also very interesting that the Oxford English Dictionary lists the words adulteration, debasement, and corruption as obsolete synonyms of the word adultery (as used by Ben Johnson in 1609).
Matthew Henry, in his commentary on Leviticus 19, states that "we must acquiesce in the order of nature God hath established, believing that it is best and sufficient, and not covet monsters. Add thou not unto his works, lest he reprove thee; for it is the excellency of the work of God that nothing can, without making it worse, be either put to it or taken from it, Ecclesiastes 3:14. As what God has joined we must not separate, so what he has separated we must not join, Deuteronomy 32:8."
This principle affects not just marriage but extended relations as well. In his commentary on Deuteronomy 23, Henry draws attention to Numbers 20:20, in which Israelites are told not to abhor their brothers, the Edomites. The people of Jacob had a greater loyalty to the people of Esau than to those further removed from them. And Ehud draws attention to this very important comment from Henry: "The unkindness of near relations, though by many worst taken, yet should with us, for that reason, because of the relation, be first forgiven."
Healthy and biblical marriages lead to healthy and biblical societies. Henry makes this startling comment on Deuteronomy 23: "See the mischief of marrying with strangers; for one heathen that was converted by it ten Jews were perverted… A sinful love leads to a sinful league." Ehud writes: "We see this very effect in the modern American experience as Non-Whites, irrespective of conversion status or espoused ‘Americanism,’ categorically reserve great scorn for all of our old national heroes: be it the Pilgrims, the Virginia Colony Planters, the Founding Fathers, the Frontiersmen or the Western Homesteaders—Non-Whites, even if Christian, generally disdain them all… They love America only insofar as it bears no resemblance to what it used to be. This is why and how Barack Obama has successfully campaigned under a political platform summed up in one word: ‘Change.’ This perspectival dissolution is precisely the sort to which Henry refers and which Nehemiah mitigated through stringent application of God’s Law—because acquiescence to the ‘exceptions’ in such matters only provides a foothold for the national revolution and desolation of Deuteronomy 28." Please take a moment to read Deuteronomy 28 and see if it sounds familiar.
In his Tract 1, On Envy and Jealousy, St. Cyprian explains: "That every person ought to have care rather of his own people, and especially of believers: The apostle in his first Epistle to Timothy: ‘But if any take not care of his own, and especially of those of his own household, he denies the faith, and is worse than an infidel.’ Of this same thing in Isaiah: ‘If thou shalt see the naked, clothe him; and despise not those who are of the household of thine own seed.’" Obviously, and contrary to all Ken Hamite bloodsmutters, "one’s own" are a subset of all believers. From Moses to Isaiah to Paul to Augustine to Henry, we see the principles of ethno-nationalism at work.
"[I]t is a mainstay of Reformed thought that a thing legislated in the Old Testament, if not abrogated in the New, stands. Call them what you wish—laws against hybridization, unequal-yoking, bastardization, or adultery—none is annulled in the New Testament." Thus, St. Paul does not qualify, redact, or augment Leviticus 19 but uses the term moicheuo when he writes Romans 13:9 - "You shall not adulterate" - i.e., "You shall not mix those things which are by nature, religion, covenant, culture, or kind, separate." This is why Rushdoony is able to clearly discern the intent of the law in 2 Corinthians 6:14 and conclude that some marriages, such as interracial marriages, even if between believers in Christ, work against the very purpose of marriage. They are "uncongenial," literally. For, as Rushdoony put it in his magnum opus, "a true help-meet is a man’s counterpart, that a cultural, racial, and especially religious similarity is needed so that the woman can truly mirror the man and his image… Basic to family law is the inner bond of blood and faith."
It comes down to this simple fact: If you profess to understand the importance of marriage but believe race is insignificant, you are duty-bound to read this short essay from Ehud and controvert it. Hint: Dismissing it as racism will only reveal your cowardice and/or ignorance.
I enjoyed seeing the comment from John Lofton at the bottom of the page.
Leave a Reply