Christian Nationalism vs. Zombie Nationalism

I’m jumping ahead a bit here, but I want to write about the thing which, if one accepts it, then it brings into question all the assumptions of a nationalism based on the material instead of the spiritual. That thing is marriage. Here’s Jesus Christ on marriage:

He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”

Obviously the husband’s flesh is not fused to the wife’s so that it is materially inseparable, yet we must accept the truth of married oneness as real–more real than material flesh. In marriage it is in the flesh of the spirit that the two are truly made one. Whatever the spiritual flesh of the husband, so also the wife. The different genetics of a man and wife do not hinder this real union. In sane societies, and for the majority of history, that truth is an was recognized by even the laws of men who preceded Christ’s birth and those who never heard of Him after it.

Even legal prohibitions and taboos against inter-ethnic marriage are subject to this real law of the spirit. The prohibitions and taboos are attempts to stop the bringing together of what such prohibitors believe ought not be brought together, but the existence of the prohibition confesses it can be done. Which brings us to St. Paul

15 Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never! 16 Or do you not know that he who is joined to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For, as it is written, “The two will become one flesh.”

The modern thing for St. Paul to have said about Christians banging prostitutes was some form of annulment: “That didn’t count.” He doesn’t. Instead he doubles-down:

17 But he who is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with him. 18 Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body.

Here’s that more-real-than-material flesh of the spirit showing up again. A man is not penetrated by the woman; yet sexual immorality is inside his body. Gluttony, or the eating of things which are unclean (for that person) is certainly a sin which involves taking things into the body, yet Paul says it is a sin that is outside the body. Paul explains how this is so.

19 Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, 20 for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.

Later he will write to this same church:

16 From now on, therefore, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we once regarded Christ according to the flesh, we regard him thus no longer.17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come.

The passing away of the old and and the coming of the new is true of all those who are in Christ, and it is wholly true of those in Christ. Genetics can’t stop it because genetics are old, dead flesh.

In case my father ever reads this I should address the stumbling block put before us by Progressives who are sexually immoral and revilers and swindlers. It seems that every-other piece of media produced (not to mention the lives of our celebrities in sports and entertainment) sells the idea of interracial sex (especially of the black man and white woman variety) as if it were the pinnacle of human achievement.

We ought to recognize that it is a taunt aimed at take our minds off the real and focus on the worldly. It is false doctrine, a corrupt idol meant to stand in the place of the reality of unity in Christ, but which actually has nothing to do with the spirit and is full of spite. Progressives live according to the flesh, and they are portraying what should not be for others who live according to the flesh. It hits a lot of notes for them:

  • It flouts the spirit of the law of God to keep separate those things that ought not be brought together (though their standard is wrong because it is old)
  • It offends people who they hate and
  • It elicits revelry from other sexually immoral revilers and swindlers

Perhaps what I’m describing is difficult to comprehend… An analogy to the Progressive and materialist idol of interracial sex and marriage would be cannibalism. Jesus said at the Last Supper that this bread is His body and this wine is His blood, and we are to eat and drink it as if it were so[1]. The material idolatry of that reality is cannibalism. Have you noticed how rampant vampires, werewolves, zombies and other cannibals are these days? How many of those pieces of media feature interracial sex? All of them?

So if anyone is not in Christ and still of the flesh and the world and still blind to the truth: Do not partake in the eucharist, do not eat people, and do not have have sex with someone of another race.

I still have more to repeat from St. Paul, and will write more about the absence of Jews.

[1] The fact is we eat things as if they were those things even when they are those things. You eat cake as if it were cake. That you are actually eating cake doesn’t change that fact that you eat it as if it were cake.

Advertisements

19 thoughts on “Christian Nationalism vs. Zombie Nationalism

  1. I want to make sure I understand the point you’re making here:

    In an earlier you post you talked about nationalism and “The hope in nationalism is misplaced” because we (as believers) are members of a different nation (Christianity). I have been meditating on this idea and repeating it as I think it does much to help refocus Christians away from the election circus we are currently experience and remember who we truly represent (hint: Not Republicrats/Democrans).

    In the same way, are you saying in this post that inter-racial couples are wrong and the media focus of shoving inter-racial couples down our throats is wrong and should be opposed by Christians even though it appears to be a materially based argument? If we truly accept our roles as followers of Christ, the whole concept or inter-racial disappears because we now exist on a spiritual realm right?

    However, if we are not Christians living at the spiritual level, then inter-racial relations ARE bad because they are an affront to nationalistic ideals, which are but a shadow of the TRUTH of our equality in Christ? So to undermine nationalism/homogeneity (as the progressives do), is sin by virtue of the fact that it mocks Christian truth?

    TL/DR:
    Are you saying as Christians we should oppose inter-racial relationships because of motive (progressives desires to use it to mock Christian marriage) not because the actual substance of different races (which would be ok if 100% of the world were true believers) marrying is sin?

  2. @jpuckett

    In an earlier you post you talked about nationalism and “The hope in nationalism is misplaced” because we (as believers) are members of a different nation (Christianity). I have been meditating on this idea and repeating it as I think it does much to help refocus Christians away from the election circus we are currently experience and remember who we truly represent (hint: Not Republicrats/Democrans).

    You got it.

    In the same way, are you saying in this post that inter-racial couples are wrong and the media focus of shoving inter-racial couples down our throats is wrong and should be opposed by Christians

    Opposed is usually too strong a word. It should definitely be recognized, and it should never be lauded as an example of the freedom from the law we have in Christ because it is not. There are at least a few reasons for that; not the least of which is the fact that every marriage of two flesh into one is divine.

    So when I watch the BBC show Luther, I am aware that SJW writers are pushing an interracial marriage as a kind of usurping “do-gooder” (apologies to Alan) imitation of Christ–which is meant to stand in Christ’s place. I’m also aware that they’re trying to piss off the eyes-open “natural law” non-Christians out there who are “decent” according to the ways of the world.

    However, if we are not Christians living at the spiritual level, then inter-racial relations ARE bad because they are an affront to nationalistic ideals, which are but a shadow of the TRUTH of our equality in Christ? So to undermine nationalism/homogeneity (as the progressives do), is sin by virtue of the fact that it mocks Christian truth?

    I think I understand you understanding me… But let me be clear: The solution to immature Christians is for them to mature; not to tell them what they need is more nationalism.

    A similar case is St. Paul’s advice about eating the food which has been sacrificed to idols of false gods. Christians ought to know that all those gods are false and those idols inert. They also ought to know that all food is created by God, and that they may eat of it and should praise Him for it. However, in the case of Christian converts who are still immature and superstitious about false gods, then we must be careful how we interact with those foods around them. Ultimately, the answer isn’t to coddle the immature Christian, but to bring them up in truth. The truth is there are those in Christ and those without Christ, and a nationalism based on the material is a shadow.

    Are you saying as Christians we should oppose inter-racial relationships because of motive (progressives desires to use it to mock Christian marriage) not because the actual substance of different races (which would be ok if 100% of the world were true believers) marrying is sin?

    No. This gets ahead into another post, but I’m saying Christians should know what it means to be a Christian, and what it does not mean. We ought to be wise to the attacks and fraud.

    As it is, because so many Christians are ignorant, they are bamboozled by the interracial nonsense. Many believe they are somehow more Christian or more proved in Christ because they married a person of a different color and thereby show lack of racism, or because they adopted a baby from another country and “saved it from an impoverished life”.

    Look what happens in those cases: They are glorifying themselves; not Christ. The false idols of interracialism and progress has done its work.

    Being wise about this also helps me sympathize with a person living in the “shadow of nature” who is upset that his daughter is off at college dating a black guy, yet he lacks the vocabulary to complain about it and he would be derided by his peers if he did! In fact that can be an entry to a discussion about Christ.

    I know of a family of black Christians that don’t want their daughter to marry a white guy. I recognize that it is a sign of weakness in faith and knowledge, but it’s not worth fighting about. Regardless: What we Christians need is mature Christians who practice Christian truths.

  3. I know of a family of black Christians that don’t want their daughter to marry a white guy. I recognize that it is a sign of weakness in faith and knowledge, but it’s not worth fighting about. Regardless: What we Christians need is mature Christians who practice Christian truths.

    A man who recognizes that Christ proclaimed all foods clean, yet chooses to not eat Twinkies is not in and of itself a sign of weakness in faith and knowledge.

    In the same way, a family that recognizes that there is no Biblical prohibition against miscegenation, but prefers that their daughter not marry a white man because they feel it unwise, is not in and of itself a sign of weakness of faith and knowledge.

    All things are lawful, but not all things are expedient.

    While miscegenation is not a sin, in many cases it is unwise.

  4. @ Moose

    To be fair, ‘food sacrificed to idols’ is only about ‘foods that God has created.’ Not human inventions of food that ping all of the right tastes and correlate strongly gluttony (e.g. see food reward: salt, sugar, fat).

    That being said, interracial relationships can be unwise, especially depending on the surrounding community and culture. It definitely makes things harder… though ‘harder’ should not necessarily be a barometer for Christians. It is definitely a consideration. This has been my experience having been in several interracial [dating] relationships myself.

  5. @Cane:
    Thanks, I appreciate the detailed response.

    “The solution to immature Christians is for them to mature; not to tell them what they need is more nationalism.” YES!

    @Moose:
    “All things are lawful, but not all things are expedient.” -Exactly and to Cane’s point as well about being “more Christian,” motive matters.

    The good (worldly) action done out of the wrong motive still misses the point (Mark 12:41-44). Which is also a good reason to not judge others, as we are completely incapable of judging motive. Unfortunately, to point out unwise actions and natural consequences of decisions/actions in this society we are often demonized for the politically incorrect badthink even inside our churches.

    A little grace from all sides goes a long way.

  6. @MNM

    While miscegenation is not a sin, in many cases it is unwise.

    We should always be wise and there are many reasons a marriage might be foolish because of sin related to weakness of faith or knowledge. And I want to add especially that an individual’s freedom in Christ is not an excuse to flout an authority as an exercise in “pious rebellion”. I’m convinced there is no such thing.

    As an example, it would not be acceptable for a white daughter to tell her father that he needs to recognize her freedom in Christ to marry a black man and that he needs to get over it. She is to be obedient to her father. There are wider familial concerns even if we propose that this hypothetical black man is truly Christian. What about his family? I grew up in poor neighborhoods and played sports. My blacks friends never asked me to spend the night at their houses, or just hung out with me after school. They strictly limited our society to sports. If they–all professed Christians–can’t be friends, can they be one flesh in marriage?

    And the fact of the matter is that there are many who call themselves Christians, but who are either grossly immature Christians, or simply are not Christians at all. It would be foolish to marry an immature Christian from a family-ful of stunted believers and unbelievers who live and act according to the flesh.

  7. Pingback: Nothing Jew Under the Son | Things that We have Heard and Known

  8. So, in regards to the miscegenation discussion above, we can summarize it as this:

    Mixed-race marriage is marriage. It is not extra specially moral. Like all potential marriages, it is sometimes quite unwise. There is nothing laudable about being in a mixed-race marriage qua mixed-race marriage. There is also nothing laudable in being in a same-race marriage qua same race-marriage. In both cases, there may be prudent reasons one should not get married, and some of those prudent reasons may involve the race of the potential spouses, but not necessarily, and whether it does or not, there is nothing at all noteworthy about it.

    Sound about right?

  9. @MtC

    I would say, no, that’s not quite right because it’s not much good to a modern person who is unsure what to make of the convoluted mess in which we live. Your statement is one of fact. What I have wrote gives both fact and direction for our impulses; both the pure ones and the corrupted. Does that make sense?

  10. Ah, Cane posted before me.

    To potentially clarify: It’s the difference between principles and imperative.

    Most immature Christians live by imperative and in so doing become misaligned to Christ. They end up as Pharisees of the Law, lauding their own sanctity for the sins that the don’t do and the holiness at what they are doing. Obviously, this is not unlike progressives who attempt to distort facts and take the moral high ground.

    The main intent of the Scriptures is based in principles. It is the hard heartedness and ignorance as humans that want to literally and metaphorically “toe the line” between holy and unholy. This is why Jesus and the NT writers consistently are exasperated but prudent about things like food sacrificed to idols, sex, and whatnot.

  11. @DS

    It is my observation that most Christians live by both indicative and imperative, but have them all jumbled up which makes for no principles; no foundation. (“Status-signaling” is living by false indicatives.) It is easy then for the ungodly to undermine the principles and also slip false indicatives and imperatives into our minds just as idols were smuggled, and rationalized into, the OT Temples.

  12. Pingback: Miscegenation, sanctification, imperatives, and principles | Christianity and masculinity

  13. Confused probably because I’m not as deep a thinker as you are. Seems to come down to this. I’m a white guy and so are my sons. We want our women. We don’t want their women (and their women probably don’t want us either). There’s other arguments that can be made, some from a Christian perspective, some from a worldly perspective, but I think this is the knee-jerk reaction/reason.

  14. Cane, I have to ask… since I am the product of a “mixed-race” marriage, and thus what we used to call a “half-breed.” That leaves me in a bit of a theoretical quandary according to the race purists who seem to be popping into the manosphere with increasing frequency as of late. I frankly expect that sort of thing from the secularists at Chateau Heartiste – and I’m certainly not ignorant of the different bell curves for measurable traits between demographic groups, and what that means at the margins – but forgive me for sensing that you’re trying to have it both ways with regard to “flesh” and “spirit.” If I’m mis-reading you, please use my circumstance to clarify your position.

    FWIW, my father is a retired minister and my mother was a preacher’s wife for 34 years. I’m a retired Lieutenant Colonel with a combat deployment and a Masters degree, and my brother fathered two children within his marriage and brought his kids up in the church. They both graduated from a Christian school where I was a teacher for five years. None of us have illegitimate children or even an arrest record. We all pay taxes and are contributing members of society (with the possible exception of my niece, who seems to have gone off the rails after she left home). I can assure you that when my parents married in 1957 it was not to signal virtue or make some statement for racial equality… that sort of thing was pretty sternly frowned upon back then, in fact, and I’m not convinced that my paternal grandmother ever really got over the fact that she had half-spic grandchildren. If I were not already married, what would you suggest for a guy like me (there are a lot of us and more each passing year, so the question is not merely rhetorical)? (If that’s too “rhetorical” anyway, my brother is eligible to marry and the same ethnicity as I am.) Should I/he have stuck to other half-breeds with the same mix… or would either “half” have been okay? I get so confused when Christians start up the whole panoply of “Us and Them” divisions that the Apostle Paul so vigorously stomped on 1900 years ago when it was “Jews and Gentiles” versus our modern, Western delineations.

    So… am I White? Hispanic? Both? Neither? And who would it have been “okay” for me to marry (if anyone… and what is your reasoning behind your answer)?

  15. @Bruce

    I’m a white guy and so are my sons. We want our women. We don’t want their women (and their women probably don’t want us either). There’s other arguments that can be made, some from a Christian perspective, some from a worldly perspective, but I think this is the knee-jerk reaction/reason.

    To what are you referring as a knee-jerk reaction/reason.

    @Lyn87

    Long time no see.

    I have said Christians are members of the Christian Nation, and so are free to marry other Christians; provided it is otherwise prudential (parents approve, a reasonable expectation that the children will be accepted, the respective families aren’t hostile, etc.) Why are you asking me these questions?

    forgive me for sensing that you’re trying to have it both ways with regard to “flesh” and “spirit.”

    You are not alone! Most of the comments have been similar.

    Not anymore than Christians try to “have it both ways” when they say both that they are washed clean in the Blood of the Lamb, and yet still sin. I believe we Christians handle problems and questions of the mere legitimacy of race in almost exclusively false ways. I mean in ways which are counter to the Bible. There are the obvious examples of things like burning crosses; which I presume were sometimes done by genuine Christians yet with severe sins weighing them down. Then there’s the MLK approach and teachings: It has proved, I believe, worse because its falseness was more insidious. Christians aren’t to judge on the content of character, but on fruits. That’s not the same thing. Blood and parentage (which is what we are really talking about when we talk about race) does have behavioral implications. We shouldn’t ignore it, and when I meet someone who says he “does not see color” I know I’ve met a liar.

  16. Last I researched it there are no grounds to consider MLK a Christian

    His personal behavior and no recorded speeches about Christ as the son of God and savior

    Hard to get to the truth of it because his image has been scrubbed, family pulled his speeches from the interwebz and what not.

    Not to mention no one says Jessie Helms was wrong. Folks think he’s an @$$hole for mentioning the unmentionable but no one says Helms was off base

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s