• A Biblical Approach to Miscegenation

    A Biblical Approach to Miscegenation
    by Pastor Allen Truitt

    All too often these days when the issue of Biblical law, morals, or ethics comes up, we are rewarded with a response bordering on the supercilious (patronizing). If the issue becomes one of immigration. intermarriage, or miscegenation (race mixing), words like "bigot," "racist," or "supremacist" rear their ugly heads. Such is to be expected in a country which in the last 70 years has abandoned its Christian heritage and gone the way of social communism.

    This article is written with a common sense approach for those few Christians extant in our demoralized society who feel that they are not getting an honest opinion from their Pastors and who long to return to a morality borne of Biblical principles and who seek honest answers to serious questions. In this case: Is miscegenation or racial intermixture forbidden by the Bible?

    This is an important question and it seems now, in the dawn of the 21st century, it needs an answer more than ever. Indeed, this question is at the root of almost every problem ailing our nation today.

    Christians who have been around long enough to see America just 30 or 40 years ago remember a far better place, a safer place, where America was 80% White, the economy was stable, crime rates were much lower, and our communities were Christian. With the rapidly dropping birthrates of White Americans and a wide open immigration policy, the Christian landscape has changed drastically. The country is no longer majority White in some southern states, nor is it anything but nominally Christian.

    Even more disturbing is the fact that our children seem, more often than not, to be choosing mates who are not of their own race or religion. Indeed, this seems to be common in the sense that it serves as the 21st century "shibboleth" or litmus test to determine whether or not one is "racist."

    This concerns Christian parents, and it should! No Christian should feel ashamed for trying to protect his or her Cultural heritage or for seeking to protect their children from what they know instinctively to be a horrible sin.

    In this article, I will show you how God Almighty—Who is the final arbiter and Judge—feels about the issue of interracial marriage, miscegenation, or even non-White immigration—all of which are subject to the same Biblical analysis, essentially.

    What is Race?

    In the Creation story (Gen. 1:1-31) we find the conditions under which God set down His natural life order. Within this natural life order we find that as God created the world of living organisms, He created each perfect life form with nature's internal law to procreate or reproduce, each "after its own kind."

    The word "kind" is actually the Hebrew word "miyn" (which is from Strong's Concordance #4327) and it means "to portion out; a sort, i.e. species or kind."

    The Random House Dictionary of the English Language defines species as "a class of individuals having some common characteristics or qualities; distinct sort, kind." This is almost exactly Webster's Dictionary's definition for "culture." The Christian Naturalist, Dr. James Pritchard, defines species as "a race of animals or of plants marked by a peculiar character which it has constantly displayed, is termed a species." (Pritchard, Researches, p.105.) Race and species are therefore synonymous.

    The term "after its own kind" is found no less than 10 times in this first chapter of Genesis and it IS the natural life order of all of God's creation. This natural and most fundamental of laws is the law which governs the instincts of mankind and all of God's creatures. Evidence of this can be found everywhere in creation. Natural law governs the instinct of the sparrow, the hawk, and the hummingbird. It governs the reproduction of trees, plants, and even mushrooms. Fish, birds, animals, flora and fauna; all are subject to the law of nature. To rebel against nature is to rebel against God.

    That creation was meant to continue on this course and remain obedient to natural law is demonstrated in the words of the creator Himself, who said, "I am God, I change not" (Mal. 3:6), or David, the psalmist who declared, "Let them praise the name of the LORD, for He commanded, and they were created; He also established them forever; He made a decree which shall not pass away" (Ps. 148:5). In the Song of Moses, he says, "He is the Rock, His work is perfect" (Deut. 32:4). Furthermore, the Bible tells us unequivocally that it was the Creator Himself who designated the territorial imperative of men, or divided them according to race; "When the Most High divided their inheritance to the nations, when He separated the Sons of Adam, He set the boundaries of the people according to the number of the children of Israel" (Deut. 32:8; Acts 17:26). What this means is that the Father set aside what territories were to be designated to His chosen first, then portioned out the rest to mankind.

    In continuing with the creation story, we find creations perfection is illustrated in the words of God declaring "it was good" seven times during the creation process. The term "good" means "better, or best; goodly" in the Hebrew. No one, of course, would dare argue that creation was made perfect, but saying "it was good" seven times demonstrated the completion or put the seal of perfection on it, for that is the numerical meaning of "7"; perfection, completion.

    Violations of this natural life order were once rare and looked upon with abhorrence. The dog, for example, in ancient literature is noted as being looked upon with abhorrence because it was not only an unclean scavenger, but because it cross-bred and became mongrelized. Not all canines follow this unnatural pattern. Wolves, coyotes, the fox and other species of canine, though unclean in the Biblical sense, all obey the law of nature.

    In mankind can be found the most common occurrences of violation of natural law, or conflict with instinct. Through all of history there have been instances where miscegenation (race mixing) have taken place, and the Bible has made clear the practice was unacceptable and an abomination. In terms of Biblical use, the word "abomination" means that which causes one's stomach to revolt, or retch. More often than not when we read of an instance in the scripture where Israel committed this act, they were not actually "race mixing," per se. Many of the instances where wives or concubines were taken, they were taken from foreign nations but not foreign races. The Midianites, for example, were of the same racial stock as Israel, having come from the loins of Abraham through Keturah. It is best to seek out truth in scripture before accepting any conjecture from mainstream Pastors about how race mixing was "common." In these instances the captive women were either young, or virgins (possibly meaning the same thing), so as to avoid any amalgamation of foreign Culture. Never has there been an instance in scripture where we find God tolerating interracial unions.

    Individuals who were guilty of the crime of miscegenation were severely dealt with, and if not put to death, then certainly made to correct it, while the progeny of such illicit unions were "put out," never to be included in the inheritance of Israel.

    The progeny, or offspring, of such unions were called "mamzer" (Strongs #4464) which is a Hebrew word meaning "a mongrel, to alienate; i.e. one born from a Hebrew father and a Heathen mother." In the King James Bible, it is expressed by using the word "bastard." The same word is found in the Septuagint Greek version of the Bible as "allogenes", which is a combination of two Greek words, "allos" meaning other, and "genos" meaning race.

    The book of Deuteronomy, chapter 23, verse 3, makes it clear that "a bastard (Mamzer or Allogenes) may not enter into the congregation of the LORD, even unto the tenth generation"; tenth generation meaning, most likely, forever.

    The Flood

    It was ten generations after creation that we find the culmination of years of lawlessness on the earth and the sin of miscegenation taking place. In the days of Noah, the scripture records that the Sons of God (fallen angels) were committing miscegenation with the daughters of men. Context tells us that the angels had taken on flesh and mated freely with mankind—though there are several other texts which tell this story, such as the book of Enoch, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and others—and the progeny of this abominable union were giants.

    These giants grew to rule over men, and, in many instances, cannibalized them. They were cruel and devastating tyrants.

    These descendants of Adam not only freely mixed with the fallen angels (Nephelim) but also with other races. Mankind had completely rebelled against nature and nature's God. The book of Jasher tells us that "in those days took [men] from the cattle of the earth, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air, and taught the mixture of animals of one species with the other, in order therewith to provoke the LORD; and God saw the whole earth and it was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupted itself upon the earth, all men and all animals."

    This corresponds perfectly with Genesis 6:11-12, which says "the earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence. So God looked upon the earth and indeed it was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupted itself upon the earth." The word "corrupt" in the Hebrew is (#7843) "shachath" and means "to decay, ruin, corrupt, spoil(-er), utterly waste."

    Clearly the act of miscegenation was abhorrent to God, who had created a perfect creation only to watch it self destruct through rebellion and become unnatural. It is just such behavior that caused God to declare in Jeremiah 2:21, "Yet I had planted you a noble vine, a wholly right seed (#2233, zera meaning carnally; sperm) of the highest quality. How then have you turned before me into the degenerate plant of an ALIEN vine?"

    Here in Genesis, we find the sin so serious and widespread that God decided that what He had created needed to be destroyed and begun again. So, He found a pure and Godly man and his family to carry on the Adamic line. This man was Noah. Noah, we are told, was chosen because he was "perfect in his generation." This, in itself, is telling because the word "generation" in Hebrew is (#8435) toledah, meaning "descent, family, birth, generations." In other words, Noah was racially pure! This is in contrast with the common Judeo-Christian interpretation of the same verse which teaches that "perfect in his generations" means he was the most just and Godly man of his day. Of course, this is true, but only a half-truth. It was race at issue, and racial purity was the pre-requisite for the continuation of mankind.

    So, the creator did destroy "all the earth under the sky" and began again with Noah and his sons, all of whom met the same criteria as Noah. But not before He declared that because of the sin of miscegenation, mankind would no longer live extended life spans (as did those men before the flood) because they had now become flesh. He declared that the years of man "shall be as one hundred and twenty years" (Gen 6:3). True to His word, the years of mankind dwindled from that generation forward. Whereas Adam lived to be 930 years old, Seth 912, Enosh 905, Cainan 910, Mahalalel 895, Jared 962, Enoch 365 (then he walked with God), Methuselah 969, Lamech 777, and Noah 950, men after the flood with each successive generation saw a decline in longevity, until we find Joseph, who lived to be 110.

    The point being made here is that miscegenation perverts the perfection of mankind's inner mechanism which governs the health and healing process. When anything within nature becomes "hybridized," it becomes unnatural and frail. This is an axiomatic fact. Sickness and disease are the hallmark of mongrels.

    This extremely heinous event which precipitated the flood, an event which most Protestants see as the destruction of the WORLD, was caused by the act of RACE MIXING, plain and simple. This fact, of course, will not be taught in Sunday school, nor from the pulpit in the local Baptist church, but that makes it no less true.


    Found unabashedly within the narrative of scriptures is language that today would be determined to be "hate speech" by anti-God liberals. Israel was declared to be a "special people, above all people" and were called a "holy nation" (Ex. 19:6, Deut. 7:6; Ps. 4:3, et al.). These people were given the Law, in which can be found the Commandments, Statutes and Judgments (as well as the rituals of sacrificial laws which were done away with by Christ's sacrifice), all three of which are extant today, despite what our docile and compliant preachers claim.

    Within the Commandments themselves we find God further pressing the importance of purity in creation. The Seventh Commandment says "Thou shalt not commit adultery" in almost every known English text. The commandment against adultery is not just about marriage, however. In fact, I am here to tell you that this word "adultery" is the narrowest possible interpretation!

    It is clear that the word "adultery" should be replaced, at the very least with the word "adulterate." Why? Well, for one, the law prohibiting marital adultery is covered in the 10th Commandment which states "thou shalt not covet ... thy neighbor's wife," and it would be redundant to repeat the command.

    Second, adultery is in fact a derivative of adulterate, which Webster's defines as "to lower the quality, or make impure, esp. by adding inferior substances." This is the point made by the seventh Commandment! The same Commandment in the Anointed Standard Translation of the Holy Bible says, "Do not mongrelize!" You cannot get any more plain than that. It would be ridiculous to think that after having destroyed His initial creation, God would not give us a warning against this great sin in the hierarchy of His Commandments.

    The term adultery is also used interchangeably with the biblical terms "whoredom," "harlotry," and "idolatry." It is, for all intents and purposes, a word more often than not used as a generalization to point out the infidelity of mankind to the natural life order.

    It is used frequently as a metaphor. Examples are infidelity in marriage (Jer. 29:23; Lev. 20:10), national adultery (Jer. 3:8; Ezek. 23:9-10), Adultery with "trees" and "rocks" (Jer. 3:9), and other forms of Idolatry (Hos. 4:13; Ezek. 23:37).

    Instances having to do with multiculturalism (Jer. 5:7), Jerusalem favoring "strangers" instead of her husband God (Ezek. 16:32) and most notably the instance of Hosea 4, which states, "By swearing and lying, killing, stealing, and committing adultery, they lack all restraint, with blood touching blood." Adultery, in this instance, is implicitly a sin of interracial mixture; blood touching, or mixing with, other blood!

    Other examples in scripture which forbid "mixing" within nature include Leviticus 19:19 where we are commanded to keep our livestock pure, not to mix two diverse seeds in the same field (Deut. 22:9), and not to sew garments with two different thread types (Deut. 22:11), or to even plow a field with an Ox and Donkey together (Deut. 22:10).

    Ask yourself, if God shows such detail to seemingly unimportant matters as this in His Law against adulterating, why should we assume that He would allow us to debase and mongrelize His most perfect and pure creation: man? The truth is, each race, or species of man was created with its own distinct genetic code which in the Creator's perfect natural life order has its distinct place in creation.

    All the races of man, unadulterated, are good and serve their purpose. Keeping them pure is not a doctrine of hate; it is a doctrine of love. Love for the Creator's natural life order.

    Further examples in scripture dealing with this perfect law of purity are to be found in such places as Exodus 33:16, where God declared Israel to remain a separate people, or that they were to make no covenants with other people, particularly the mixed race Canaanites, nor allow them to live in their land (Ex. 23:32-33) and to never play the harlot with their gods (Ex. 34:12-16) and never to intermarry (Deut. 7:3-6; Ex. 19:5,6); all of which are a perfect reiteration of the Seventh Commandment not to adulterate.

    The Counsel of Balaam

    Another instance found in scripture of large scale intermixture of different cultures of people is when the Israelite nation made camp on the plains of Moab. This was done to the consternation of Balak, the king of Moab.

    He claimed that the people of Israel were too numerous and created a threat to the livelihood of the people of Moab. As a result of his fear, he sought out the pagan prophet Balaam to curse the people of Israel. What followed was the story of how God forbade Balaam from cursing Israel (Num. 22:9-12), and how he went anyway, yet failed several times to successfully curse Israel.

    Having failed to curse Israel, Balaam instead notoriously and insidiously informed King Balak of another way. He told the king that to defeat the Israelites, he must cause them to commit whoredom with the women of Moab, and by doing so, they would violate the laws of their God (Num. 31:16-18). This evil counsel became known as the counsel of Balaam.

    The book of Jasher records that the Moabites took "all their daughters, and their wives of beautiful countenance and comely appearance, and dressed them in gold and silver and costly garments" and set them in plain sight of the men of Israel (Jash. 85:52-56). Having done this, the men of Israel committed whoredom with the daughters of Moab, thus violating the law of God. The result of which was that the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and they were stricken with a pestilence wherewith 24,000 men of Israel died!

    It wasn't until Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, observed one of the leaders of Israel committing this act that "he went after the man of Israel into the tent [where he had taken the woman] and thrust both of them, the man of Israel and the woman [of Moab], through the body" (Num. 25:7-9). That very day the plague of Israel was lifted off Israel, and it was the "zealousness" of one valiant man who exercised the wrath of God and stood up against the act of rebellion against God.

    The leaders of Israel, who had committed this act of harlotry were "hung before the LORD, out in the sun, that the fierce anger of the Lord may turn away from Israel," and the rest were rounded up and killed (25:4,5).

    This may seem harsh, but such breeches of law are an abomination to God, and the punishment is, and should be, equally severe. It is such acts of adulteration that, much like those we see so often today in America, lead to wide spread acceptance and, ultimately, the death of beauty and perfection.

    Balaam, the prophet, was also killed (Num. 31:8) but his memory remains until this day, and in scripture he is looked upon as nearly satanic, or a paradigm of evil (Num. 31:8,16; Deut. 23:4,5; Josh. 13:22; Neh. 13:2; Micah 6:5; 2 Pet. 2:15; Judges 11; Rev. 2:14). In each of these instances he is referred to with contempt because of his despicable counsel.

    Race-mixing, or even the Judeo-Christian teaching of multiculturalism, is referred to as the Counsel of Balaam, or the Doctrine of Balaam. The last book in our Bible—Revelation, chapter 2, verse 14—condemns the church of Pergamos because "you have those who hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balak to put a stumbling block before the children of Israel ... and to commit sexual immorality." By all means, please see these things for yourselves. It is necessary that we ALL understand that miscegenation is evil.

    Ezra, Zerubbabel, and Nehemiah

    Yet another instance in scripture of large scale race mixing is found in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. These two books record the events which occur primarily after the return of the people of Judah (Judah, Benjamin and Levi) to the Judean province following the Babylonian captivity.

    To begin, we find that when the Judahites returned, they brought with them a spurious (mixed) multitude of approximately 11,000 people, whose names were not to be found in the genealogical register of the people of Israel. Obviously, these were "mamzers" or "bastards," so they were excluded from the priesthood as per Deuteronomy 23:2. It becomes clear then that while the people of Judah were in their Babylonian captivity, they took on foreign mates and/or had foreign offspring who could not be found in the register.

    Israelites were quite meticulous about keeping genealogical records, particularly of those involved in the Priesthood. Individuals within the nation could, and were often compelled to, recite their lineage for at least ten generations. Racial purity was a very important aspect of the people of God, and a matter of honor for all men. Not only in Israel, but men of all nationalities could, and did, recite their lineage as a matter of credentials in personal affairs. That people were raised well and proud of their heritage and came from good families was of paramount importance.

    During Zerubbabel's day, shortly after the return from captivity, it was noted that the "children of Israel who had returned ... ate together [with those] who had separated themselves from the filth of the nations," which is a good indicator that the problem was still extant then.

    An even better indicator can be found in Nehemiah's day (which occurred during the period of time between Ezra Chapters 6 and 7) where the problem seemed to have only gotten worse. In Nehemiah 9:2, those of Israelite lineage "separated themselves from all foreigners" and confessed their sins (10:28), then swore not to do it again (10:30).

    Interestingly, in chapter 13, verse 3, we find that the people of Israel after reading of the events at the Plains of Moab (which we earlier discussed) and the Doctrine of Balaam, "Separated all the mixed multitude from Israel," meaning they got rid of the non-Israelite people from their midst.

    Later still, in Ezra's day, the problem of mixture or adulterating with other people came to a head and it was noted that the "people of Israel ... have not separated themselves from the people of the lands ... for they have taken some of their daughters as wives for themselves and for their sons, so that the holy seed is mixed with the peoples of those lands .... Indeed, the leaders and rulers have been foremost in this trespass" (Ezek. 9:1-3).

    A rendering of the ninth chapter of Nehemiah is revealing as it tells us that race mixing was an abomination to God (v. 14), and that because of this horrible sin, the people could not "stand before [God]" (v. 15). Nehemiah's closing verses are a terrifying parallel to today's America. He says, "In those days I also saw Judahites who had married women of Ashdod, Ammon, and Moab. And half of their children spoke the language of Ashdod, and could not speak the language of Judah, but instead spoke the language of one or other people" (Neh. 13:23-24).

    So, the people of Judah called an assembly, and it was determined that the people had committed a horrible sin by intermarrying and that they would "put away" their foreign wives and their offspring (Ezek. 10:2-3). Of course, we know from the Biblical narrative that this did no good either, for the people were debased and only a remnant among them held true to the dictates of nature and nature's perfect law. And, of course, we now know that this was all a part of the plan of God, for how else would we have achieved the conditions which led up to the crucifixion of Christ?


    I have given these two superb examples in scripture to illustrate that more often than not, when large scale mongrelization, or any form of apostasy is going on, it is because the leaders and/or Elders of the people are foremost in the trespass! Those who are most trusted hold the greatest responsibility, and who we all look up to, were, and are, the ones most responsible for national apostasy and rebellion against God and nature. Once the leadership of the people becomes debased, the nation soon follows.

    Within the realm of Christian society, the true leadership is the church! In ancient Israel, the society was governed primarily by the theopolitical leadership of the nation, who were themselves governed by God and His perfect Law! When that leadership ceases to trust God, when it ceases to obey God, that leadership collapses ... and the nation follows!

    In America, the churches witnessed revolution and apostasy long before the government became morally and culturally bankrupt. The church and other religious cultural centers of America are the vanguard against corruption. It supplies the government with godly men, who in turn hold the government accountable. If the church fails in its capacity to supply godly men, the anti-Christ hordes and liberal fanatics will most assuredly supply them instead. And they have. What has followed is a nation with a sickness worse than any sickness of the body, but a moral sickness which is abhorrent to God! Its stench calls out for judgment, which no doubt will soon follow.

    You may say to me, "But Pastor Truitt, these things only apply to God's 'chosen people,' the Jews!" To which I would respond first by saying that the Holy Bible is a book which is written to, for, and about the race of Adam (Gen. 5:1). As such, it necessarily follows that the Israelites are in purview in the examples I've shown. Whether or not you know that White Anglo-Saxons ARE ISRAEL is irrelevant, because it remains the Godly paradigm at issue! That paradigm applies to us all. Natural law applies to us all.

    If obedience to these laws or intermixture are predicated on the Creator's natural life order, then doesn't that natural life order apply to all of creation?

    Forget what the mainstream pulpiteers have told you about how we are all "one race" in God's eyes—for they are no different than the failed leaders of Phinehas' day, or Ezra's day. Having read this article, you are now better educated than they too—for half of them are frauds who know almost nothing of scripture!

    The Ten Commandments, which, consequently, appear in the New Testament as well (Mark 10:19; Matt. 19:18-19; Heb. 4:4; Rom. 13:9) apply to all Christians! We are not at liberty to pick and choose which portions of the law we like or dislike. Particularly the natural life order of creation found in kind after kind!

    Forget what "they" tell you about the Bible, and read it for yourself. "What's good for the goose is good for the gander." If, as the judeo-Christian preachers preach, the law only applies to "Jews" and you believe in your heart it is good for them, why would you demand less for yourself? Or your children? We are all (black, White, Yellow and Red) perfect just the way God made us. Do not mongrelize, and don't let your children.

    As individuals, it is time we do as Phinehas or Nehemiah, and stand up and make a zealous stand against the abomination called race mixing. True, Phinehas did get pretty zealous, but we can always try the course of Nehemiah who, we are told, "contended with them, and cursed them, and struck some of them and pulled out their hair, and made them swear by God" that they would never race mix again!

    Do we care enough about our precious culture to protect it against those liars and anti-Christs who would see it die? Are we revilers of God's perfect creation? As Whites, let us restore ourselves to sanity and embrace what is holy and right. Separate from the mixed multitude, even if it is your local congregation!

    Commandments and Related Statutes

    The Ten Commandments are the most well known examples of God's Law. The people of Israel used to keep the Commandments posted on their door posts, and, up until very recently in American history, they were a part of everyday life in school classrooms. But the Ten Commandments are just one part of the Law. The Law is made up of the Commandments, Statutes, Judgments and rituals/sacrifices. Of these, the rituals/sacrifices were done away with by Christ serving as the final sacrifice to redeem His people.

    Each of the Ten Commandments calls into play a whole accompaniment of statutory law. The statutes lend clarity and understanding to the intent of each commandment with everyday situations. An example of this can be the 1st Commandment: I AM THE LORD THY GOD, WHICH HAVE BROUGHT THEE OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT, OUT OF THE HOUSE OF BONDAGE. THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GODS BEFORE ME (Ex. 20:1-3).

    As we follow this commandment through scripture, we find that all statutory law which falls under it adds up to a significant and wide variety of applications. The most obvious is that His people were to reject other gods, such as Molech, Chamesh, Baal, etc. Also, they were to worship Him according to the dictates of His WORD. They were first and foremost to obey His Law. They were to practice Sabbath keeping and perform sacrifices in a way that was pleasing to Him. They were to remain culturally pure by not mingling themselves with foreigners, and they were to remain ritually clean by practicing circumcision, etc. They were not to tempt or test Him, and they were to trust Him as their healer, and war god (among others) and never to use enchanters, witches, soothsayers, divinations or astrology. God (Yahweh) was to be their leader, and government, ideally, was to be theocratic.

    It becomes clear that the commandments each lean one on another as an integrated life law, each hinging on the next for support and clarity. Dozens of examples apply, a couple of which we've already seen. The Sabbath, for example, is covered in the 4th commandment, but the 4th commandment's obedience is necessitated by obedience to the 1st. Martin Luther, father of the Protestant reformation, said "He (Moses) wants you to know that the first commandment is the measure and yardstick of all others, to which they yield and give obedience." So it is with each commandment and its concomitant statutory law.

    When it came to the statutory law governing hybridization/mongrelization, however, it occurred to me that unless the 7th commandment was correctly interpreted to read "Thou shalt not ADULTERATE," this significant portion of statutory law would have no place in the ordered body of law. It would float out there, unconnected to any particular commandment.

    In doing research on the subject, I found that R. J.Rushdoony, in his Institutes of Biblical Law (Vol. I, p. 253-262) places that particular body of statutory law under the 6th commandment, which states: THOU SHALT NOT KILL! Rushdoony declares "A man can kill and eat plants and animals under the law; this is within God's Law. But to attempt hybridization to alter or transcend one of God's created 'kinds' is against His Law." Rushdoony equates mongrelization to murder and rightly so, for to mongrelize the perfection of God's intended creation is to kill it and render it impure.

    The scripture is also clear that the spirit of God will not dwell in an unclean Temple (1 Cor. 3:16-17; 2 Cor. 6:14-17) nor is the unclean or mongrelized allowed in the nation as we've seen already. In Pastor Russell Gray's article "Is There Forgiveness for Race Mixing? A Study on the Unforgivable Sin," he explores the question whether or not race mixing is actually blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. I believe he does an excellent job of proving that it is, and many brave Christians have arrived at the same conclusion. A half-breed (mamzer) is an abomination to God. The spirit of God cannot, and will not, dwell in such a temple. To create such a temple is to blaspheme the Holy Spirit.

    Whether we place hybridization under the 6th or 7th commandment, one thing is certain: To mongrelize or adulterate is death. It is classified right alongside both abortion and homosexuality in terms of Biblical Law in that it is a rejection of LIFE!

    How Civilizations Fall

    I have pointed out that disobedience to nature's law is disobedience to God. The success or failure of men on the world stage can be judged in terms of their obedience or disobedience to natural law. When men (men of every race) live in obedience to natural law, specifically in that they recognize and respect the territorial imperative designated by God in creation (Deut. 32:8; Acts 17:26), they are culturally prosperous and in harmony with themselves and nature. When clear demarcation lines are violated, there is war, chaos, and cultural diffusion until one culture or another is destroyed.

    Nature and nature's God have placed a natural and wholesome antipathy between races of men. So long as they maintain their own territories, such antipathies will not necessitate bloodshed.

    It is no surprise, then, that when God told Israel to enter and conquer Canaan, He gave them specific instructions to "utterly destroy them" (Deut.7:1-6) and to drive out the inhabitants of the land. Canaan was a land inhabited by the Canaanite descendants of Ham, but the land was clearly preordained and intended for the people of Israel, as can be demonstrated by scripture.

    In the same way, Europe, Australia, the U.S.A. and all White civilizations were intended for that race. Historical and empirical examples prove this out. History has also demonstrated the machinations of natural law, in that, when White civilizations have tolerated flagrant violations of the racial and territorial imperative, those White civilizations have—no matter how great—crumbled and decayed.

    No White civilization has ever survived the infusion of non-White racial stock into its society. Non-White immigration, whether it be in the form of forced servitude, or voluntary, eventually results in miscegenation. It is axiomatic (self-evident).

    The history of the world is positively littered with the archeological remnant of great White civilizations that have succumbed to internal cultural and racial decay due to large scale admixture. Examples are the Royal Dynasty of Sumer (c. 3100-2300 B.C.), Egypt (c. 2950-526 B.C.), Assyria (c. 2400-607 B.C.), Babylon (c. 2000-537 B.C.), Persia (c. 2000-331 B.C.), Israel (1453-585 B.C.), Carthage (814-146 B.C.), Greece (c. 750-168 B.C.), Parthia (c. 720 B.C.-227 A.D.), Rome (c. 500 B.C.-330 A.D.), and now South Africa, Rhodesia (Zimbabwe), Europe, Britain, and America will soon follow.

    All of these civilizations either collapsed or will collapse for the very same reason. They all suffer from the same hubris and arrogant pride as exhibited by Whites to this day. All were magnificent civilizations from which flowed the cultural genius of the founding race. Science, philosophy, agriculture, art and architecture thrived in these civilizations when they were culturally homogenous. But when they falsely believed that they could survive multiculturalism, they died rapid and merciless deaths. America will be no different if we do not take action to change it.

    The Founding of a Christian Nation

    It does no good to postulate about the future of a country unless we first look at its past. Only then can a diagnosis be made with any degree of accuracy.

    America's first permanent settlement was Jamestown, Virginia, in 1607, and it started with 104 colonists, all of which were White Anglo-Saxons. The colonies that followed never intended that the new nation should ever be anything other than White. The issue of race simply did not exist. It was taken for granted and was the furthest thing from the minds of the colonists. In that era, the issue of race simply did not exist, and people did not mix racially. It was very rare and frowned upon.

    The issue that concerned the minds of the colonists was wholly religious in nature. They fled an oppressive system that asserted its claim that church was subservient to and operated under the aegis of government, or the state. The colonists believed, and rightly so, that the state and its government should be subservient to the church; Christ as King, His people as subjects. At least one of the early American colonies can be described as being theopolitical in nature. That is, they understood that within Christianity there can be no separation of politics from religion. They believed that government should operate wholly on the Biblical paradigm.

    In the New Haven Colony, colonial law came substantially from the scripture. The people believed that Biblical law was all that was needed to govern themselves, so they adopted the law of God without any innovation:
    MARCH 2, 1641/42: "And according to the fundamental agreement, made and published by full and general consent, when the plantation began and government was settled, that the judicial laws of God given to Moses and expounded in other parts of scripture, so far as it is a hedge and a fence to the moral law, and neither ceremonial nor typical nor had any reference to Canaan, hath an everlasting equity in it, and should be the rule of their proceedings." (Records of the Colony and Plantation of New Haven from 1638 to 1649, by Charles Hoadly, p. 69.)
    This means, of course, that the whole Law of God (Commandments, Statutes and Judgments) were adopted as all that was needed to run the colony. One other such entry said,
    APRIL 3, 1644: "It was ordered that the Judicial Laws of God, as they were delivered to Moses.. .be a rule to all the courts in this jurisdiction in their proceedings against offenders." (Ibid. p. 130.)
    Having adopted the Judicial Laws of God, the colonists set about using them in every day affairs. They seemed to be quite serious about it as can be seen by the following example of a servant who was found in violation of Leviticus 18:23, which states, "Nor shall you mate with an animal, to defile yourself with it. Nor shall any woman stand before an animal to mate with it." It was recorded that,
    "One Hackett, a servant in Salem, was found in buggery with a cow upon the Lord's day." (The Polite Americans; A Wide Angle View of Our More or Less Good Manners over 300 Years," Gerald Carson, p. 7.)
    And so, in accordance with Biblical law, both the man and the cow were put to death.

    Negroes Brought to America

    It wasn't until 1619 that the first Negroes were brought to the new world on a Dutch slave ship. Slavery was a common practice in those days, though not strictly limited to negroes. There were many White slaves as well. In the book Why Civilizations Collapse by Drew L. Smith, he explains why White colonists did not perceive a threat from negro slaves. He says, "The slowness with which negro slavery developed in America ... was undoubtedly a factor that contributed to its acceptance by the colonists." He continues,
    "Moreover, the average colonial could never quite visualize the negro becoming a real danger to his civilization. The lowly status of the slave, and his complete subjugation to White control, placed him in such a position in White society that to consider him ever attaining a position of equality with White people was unthinkable."
    Indeed, it was unthinkable, at first. But ultimately Whites began to see a threat, numerically, at least. Slavers began to see such a profit in negro slaves that they came in droves. Once colonists began to notice this, they made attempts to curtail it. In 1698, South Carolina passed special laws to encourage the importation of White slaves as opposed to negroes. In 1708, Rhode Island, in an attempt to discourage importation of negro slaves, laid a tax on all negro slaves, followed by New York in 1709, Pennsylvania in 1712, and New Jersey in 1713. Ultimately, Georgia and Virginia passed laws forbidding importation of negro slaves altogether.

    Additionally, once the land became thoroughly saturated with negro slaves, it became necessary to pass laws that severely punished miscegenation (race mixing). Virginia and Maryland passed such laws in 1664, and Massachusetts in 1705-06. Eventually every state passed such laws. It was a practice that was looked upon with disgust and revulsion, and such laws were written to PUNISH what was already forbidden by Biblical Law. Drew L. Smith (ibid. p. 64) says, "it was felt that those few Whites who were without race pride should not go unpunished."

    The sad truth is that as men destroy or violate the clear demarcation created by God—for our good—we come into close contact with each other in violation of God's intended purpose. As will be the end result with prolonged exposure, men begin to "play God" and miscegenate. It should be pointed out that when a White slave owner mixed his seed with a female slave, the act was, scripturally speaking, no different than "one Hackett, a servant in Salem, [who] was found in buggery with a cow." The act remains a violation of Biblical Law, and the punishment the same: death. Scripturally speaking.

    By the time the people of the colonies decided to declare themselves free of English rule, the country was a well established ethno-state. Though slavery continued, laws were established to prevent racial intermarriage, and there was an informal policy of ethno-centrism. For example, only White men were fully men, negroes being considered 3/5 of a man for legal purposes, and were considered chattel property of Whites.

    The wording of the Declaration of Independence, which included the phrase "all men are created equal" was clearly never intended to mean that negroes were equal to White men, but rather to illustrate that colonists were equal in every regard to their English brethren. As proof, consider that the draftees were of 100% Anglo-Saxon descent, many of which were slave owners.

    The U.S. Constitution, written in 1787, is another document prepared by a 100% Anglo-Saxon convention. The "people" referred to in the preamble of the Constitution, and to whom the document applies, are specifically WHITE PEOPLE. The question of whether or not either of these documents give protection or rights to the negro was dealt with in the Dred Scott case, wherein Chief Justice Taney stated, "It is too clear for dispute that the enslaved African race were not intended to be included, and formed no part of the people who framed and adopted this declaration."

    Subsequent American history is testimony to the valiant struggle of Whites to maintain cultural control over their society. In retrospect, it becomes clear that the initial sin of violating the territorial imperative set in motion an historic battle of a good and wholesome people, on one hand, fighting to maintain a Christian society by setting legal boundaries to control mixture and maintain homogeneity and make the best of a bad situation. On the other hand, there has always been a large segment of society who reject God and Godly principles, labeling them "evil" and "discriminatory." These people, whom I call racial abnegators, live their entire lives in a debased state of defiance to nature and fight for the death of purity.

    In 1911, Representative Seaborne Roddenberry, of Georgia, attempted to pass a ban on interracial marriage by virtue of a Constitutional Amendment. He saw that several states could not be trusted to maintain anti-miscegenation laws, so he sought out constitutional protections. In his appeal to congress, he stated,
    "Intermarriage between Whites and blacks is repulsive and averse to every sentiment of pure American spirit. It is abhorrent and repugnant. It is subversive to social peace. It is destructive of moral supremacy."
    These were strong words which were not the least bit out of sync with public sentiment at that time, and, sadly, this amendment failed to pass congress. Irregardless, many states still had bans on interracial marriage, and it remained largely the policy of the states in this country for the next 300 years!

    Loving vs. Virginia

    In 1958, two Virginia residents, a White man named Richard Loving, and his "childhood sweetheart," a negress, left state and went to Washington D.C. to get married. It was illegal to do so in their home state. When they returned to Virginia, however, they were arrested under §20-58 of the Virginia Code, which smartly covered as a crime exactly such behavior as that exhibited by those two above. The crime of miscegenation in Virginia was a felony. §20-58 of the Virginia Code states:
    "If any White person and colored person shall go out of this state, for the purposes of being married, and with the intention of returning, and be married out of it, and afterwards to reside in it, cohabiting as man and wife, they shall be punished as provided in §20-59 and the marriage shall be governed by the same law as if it had been solemnized in this state. The fact of their cohabitation shall be evidence of their marriage."
    Section 20-59, which defines the penalty for miscegenation, provides:
    "If any White person intermarry with a colored person or any colored person intermarry with a White person, he shall be guilty of a felony and shall be punished by confinement in the penitentiary for not less than one, nor more than five years."
    At the October term of 1958, the Lovings were indicted, and on January 6, 1959 they pleaded guilty and were sentenced to 1 year in jail (the marriage being voided by Va. Code Ann. 20-57 which states, "All marriages between a White person and a colored person shall be absolutely void without decree of divorce or other legal process") but the judge suspended their sentence for 25 years on the condition that the Lovings leave state. The opinion of the trial judge was as follows:
    "Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay, red, and he placed them on separate continents. But for the interference with this arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix."
    This judge in 1959 understood what all un-reconstructed Whites know instinctually, and stated it unabashedly in his opinion to the court. This was common knowledge in the '50s.

    In contradistinction to that, we can look to the Justice of the Peace named Keith Bardwell, who just recently (Oct. 17, 2009) in Louisiana, refused to marry an interracial couple. This man, for 34 years, served as a Justice of the Peace and never once performed a single interracial marriage. He claims to have performed hundreds of black marriages, but on principle refuses to join interracial couples. He says that in such unions children suffer. This man told the truth, and for that he is now being demonized and called a horrible racist. My how our society has changed!

    In the 14 years leading up to the Loving vs. Virginia case, 15 states dropped their bans against interracial marriage. Afterward, 15 more states dropped their bans. The last two hold outs, remarkably, (and nobly I might add) were South Carolina, who in 1998 dropped its historic ban against marriage "of a White person with a negro or mulatto, or a person who shall have one eighth or more of negro blood," and Alabama, who overturned its law banning miscegenation in November of 2000!

    Now in America, there is literally no restriction on marriage which is based on Biblical morality. The issue of race and marriage is passé and has been replaced with the issue of same-sex marriage. All pretense at morality has been abandoned, and where once noble Whites worried about suitable marriage for their children, they now worry about whether or not we'll have enough children to sustain ourselves as a race.

    How did we go from on one hand having national policy rejecting as "repugnant" and "averse to the pure American spirit" the act of miscegenation, to one of attacking as "racists" those sane few who either read their Bibles and reject the anti-God abomination of race mixing, or simply understand that as a nation of race mixers, we must necessarily become culturally bankrupt?

    War of the Pulpit

    Ideological revolutions are won or lost depending on the vulnerability of the clergy. In my book Cultural Reconstruction, I noted that the religion of a people is always at the vanguard of every cultural revolution. If the clergy are strong in the WORD, they will make a stand against evil no matter how unpopular their stance. But a weak and compliant clergy will fail the people every time. When this happens, nations collapse.

    Liberalized clergymen have been at the helm of the push for equality and integration over the last 300+ years of American history. Those who were not actively involved remained deathly quiet for fear that they would be labeled "racists."

    Evil is a subtle tonic. It did not ask clergymen to fall in lockstep without first offering them an alternative belief system to that "rigid" and "demanding" one found in God's Law. That belief system is what I call anti-belief: Antinomianism.

    Antinomianism teaches that faith in Jesus frees men from the strictures and demands of the law, and that men are "dead" to the law. It is not a new teaching, for such changes in doctrine take time. The scripture says that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump, and antinomianism, over time, has become the foremost teaching in American churches. It can be summed up in the words of John Agricola, who in 1537 said, "Art thou steeped in sin—an adulterer or a thief? All who follow Moses must go to the devil; to the gallows with Moses!" Agricola pushed the idea that to obey the Law of God could only result in going to "the devil." The law became evil under this kind of thinking.

    The Joachimite Heresy is another example of bad doctrine that has infected the church. It teaches that there are three ages of man. The first age was the age of the Father; the age of justice and law. The second age was the age of the Son; of Christianity of the church, and of grace. The third age is the age of spirit; when men become gods and a law unto themselves. It is a play on the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, but just another form of antinomianism.

    The fallacy of this teaching is that since law is dead, man can no longer sin. When men become immune to sin, they are free to do anything they please without concern for judgment. This is evil. Antinomians have essentially done away with the entire Old Testament. Today, it is not at all uncommon to see a Christian with a copy of the New Testament only, and most have never read the Old Testament, having been taught it is obsolete in our age. The Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible has this to say in regard to this notion:
    "The time honored distinctions between the OT as a book of law and the NT as a book of divine grace is without grounds or justification. Divine grace and mercy are the presupposition of law in the OT; and the grace and love of God displayed in the NT events issue in the legal obligations of the New Covenant."
    I do not believe that Christians can understand the New Testament without having first read the Old. Attempting to understand scripture without first studying law is to deny scripture and reject God.

    There is no stronger recipe for disaster than to push antinomianism in a society governed by egalitarianisms. I do not like to oversimplify in an article, but there comes a point where an article will never end unless its content is limited. I believe that, like an octopus, or a hydra, evil works many fronts at once to achieve its goals. Within Christianity, Satan appears as an angel of light to fool the spiritually weak. Change within the church and its doctrine is dialectical in nature. It is a slow process of incremental change. Allow me to use this similarity to express how such change works:
    "During the recent occupation of the SORBONNE a student obliterated a large "No Smoking" sign near the entrance to the auditorium and wrote: "You Have The Right To Smoke" in its place. In due time another student added: "It Is Forbidden To Forbid." This slogan has caught on and is now appearing in many places which have been taken over by the students. In foot high letters in the Grand Hall of the Sorbonne, someone has written: "I take my desires for the truth because I believe in the truth of my desires!"
    Careful study will reveal just such a dialectic at work in the church. It began with one or two individuals introducing an idea based on their rebellion to law. In time others add on to this rebellious idea until it becomes doctrine, and ultimately, as is the nature of revolutions, sloganeering and philosophy. In Christian America the slogan is "Diversity is Our Strength!", but this is the end result of a long struggle against truth.

    The media helped to precipitate change through the use of subliminal messaging and finally advocating open rebellion against traditional Christian morals and values. It is rare that one can watch television these days where you do not have to see White women slobbering on negroes or homosexual love scenes. Our society is spinning out of control in rebellion against God.

    Our educational institutions have taught for years now the theory of evolution and the concept that race is not real. They teach that race is only skin deep and that we all share the same basic DNA. This is a lie, of course, but a complicated one that can be counted on to tickle the ears of 21st century reprobates.

    And, of course, the courts are at the very helm of the war on White Christian culture. Never in history has there been a more frantic push against God and Morality. The Supreme Court has almost single-handedly executed genocide on Whites and their fragile culture in the last 70 years. In 1946 the courts commanded the integration of the military. In 1954, Brown vs. Board of Education caused the integration of public schools. In 1964 there was the Civil Rights Act, and, eventually, Loving vs. Virginia allowed the death of purity as policy. This is just a few of hundreds of such cases where Whites have been attacked by the court. Each and every day there is another case reported in the mainstream press glorifying this "progress" in the war against morality.

    Now ask yourself why. Why the push for lawlessness and multiculturalism? If Christians think about it, they will see clearly that a mongrelized society is an Abomination to God! If we can all be made to believe that we can legally race mix and remain Christians, we will end up as Sodom and Gomorrah: a society completely dead to God and rejected by Him.

    Christians who have taken the time to read this article should see that over a period of time our nation has been desensitized and re-educated into a nation of anti-Christs. We have gone from being a homogenous society unashamed to protect our culture and with the ability to see what is obvious (there is no such thing as equality!) to a society of people who jockey for position to marry our beautiful daughters off to the nearest negro!

    The scripture is unchanging. It is not subject to the whims of man! It clearly tells Christians to come out from among them and to be separate. It tells us not to be unequally yoked with unbelievers! Trust God and His natural life order, and preserve your family in purity against that day of redemption.

    Race mixing is a plague against purity and an abomination to God! Shun it and those who practice it. Do not enter a church with a multicultural congregation, for you will not find God therein!

    May the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob bless you with truth. Amen.