A Response to Bibleinfo’s Justification of Miscegenation

 A Response to Bibleinfo’s Justification of Miscegenation

Thomas Allen

[Editor’s note: Bible verses cited in the article are in the appendix except Genesis chapter 34 and Deuteronomy 23:2, which is given in the text. Also, only part of the verses in Numbers 12:1-5 is given in the appendix.]

Bibleinfo (https://www.bibleinfo.com/en/questions/what-does-bible-say-about-interracial-marriages, accessed August 10, 2023) asserts that the Bible does not forbid interracial marriages. However, it does demand that Christians should not marry non-Christians. To support its assertions, it cites 2 Corinthians 6:14 (Christians are not to marry non-Christians) and Numbers 12:1–15 (Moses’ Ethiopian wife).

According to Bibleinfo, a Christian should only marry a Christian; the person’s race is irrelevant. To marry outside one’s religion is to be unequally yoked. However, to marry outside one’s race is not unequally yoked. Bibleinfo errs.

2 Corinthians 6:14 is a recommendation and not a commandment. Moreover, it discusses religion but does not discuss race.

Further, Paul gives different advice in 1 Corinthians 7:12-13. Paul recommends that Christians who are married to non-Christians should remain married unless the non-Christian wants a divorce. (1 Corinthians 7:15).

Two Old Testament stories refute Bibleinfo’s claim. They are Dinah’s marriage and Joseph’s marriage.

Chapter 34 of Genesis tells the story of Simeon and Levi, two of Jacob’s sons, slaying a city of Hivites over the issue of interracial marriage. The prince of the Hivites wanted to marry their sister, Dinah. So, the Hivites of this city offered to intermarry with the Hebrews. Before they could intermarry, Simeon and Levi told the Hivites that they needed to convert to the Hebrew religion. The Hivites converted and were circumcised. Thus, the two people would not be unequally yoked religiously. Now both of them were of the same religion, the Hebrew religion, and, therefore, equally yoked religiously. However, they differ racially and, therefore, were unequally yoked racially. The Hebrews were Aryans; the Hivites were Aryan-Melanochroi hybrids (or possibly Melanochroi). Simeon and Levi slew the Hivites not because of religious differences, for they were of the same religion. They slew them because of racial differences. Slaying the Hivites prevented miscegenation and racial amalgamation. Thus, being racially yoked, i.e., of the same race, is more important than being religiously yoked, i.e., of the same religion.

In Genesis 41:45 Joseph married the Egyptian Asenath, the daughter of Potipherah, a priest of On. At this time, Egyptians were of the same race as the Israelites.  She bore Moses two children: Manasseh and Ephraim. Being the daughter of an Egyptian priest, Asenath was almost certainly a worshiper of Egyptian gods and not of Jehovah. Her name means “worshiper of Neith.” She may have converted later, but no evidence is given of such conversion. These verses show that the Scriptural prohibition against mixed marriages is racial and not religious. A footnote in The Berkeley Version of the Bible to Genesis 46:20 affirms this: “Her training of Manasseh and Ephraim would hardly be in the Hebrew faith.” Therefore, Joseph married someone of his race who most likely was not of his religion. Thus, being racially yoked is more important than being religiously yoked.

(“Egyptian” is the translation of Mizraim. For much of its ancient history, two racially distinct people inhabited Egypt. They were the Mizraim, who were Aryans, and the Pathrusim, who were Melanochroi (also called Homo brunus and brown Caucasians). The Mizraim lived mainly in Lower Egypt and were the Egyptians encountered most often by the Israelites. The Pathrusim lived mainly in Upper Egypt although they were not uncommon in Lower Egypt. These Pathrusim are the ancestors of today’s Fellahins. [See False Biblical Teachings on the Origins of the Races and Interracial Marriages by Thomas Coley Allen.])

As the stories of Dinah and Joseph’s marriages show, being equally yoked racially (of the same race) is more important than being equally yoked religiously (of the same religion).

Concerning Moses’ wife, Bibleinfo makes the same error that most people make. Because most translations claim that the wife whom Miriam and Aaron spoke against was an Ethiopian, they assume that she was a Black woman from the region south of Egypt. (The people south of Egypt to northeast Kenya were and are Melanochroi; they are not Negroes, Blacks.)

In Exodus 2:21, Moses marries Zipporah, the daughter of Reul, a Midianite.  In Numbers 12:1 Moses had married an Ethiopian or a Cushite. (“Ethiopian” is the translation of Kûwshîy, which is literally “Cushite.” Cush refers to Arabia in general, and Cushite refers to the people of Arabia in general. [For proof that Cush refers to the Arabian Peninsula, see “Cush and Ethiopia” by Thomas Allen.]) Moses’s wife was a Midianite and a Kenite and also a Cushite. Cush was a region, Arabia. Midian was an area within this region. The Kenites were a tribe or people inhabiting this area. An example of an English colonist who came to the United States helps illustrate this phenomenon. An Englishman living in Virginia could correctly be called an American (Cushite), a Virginian (Midianite), or an Englishman (Kenite). So closely related to the Israelites were the Kenites that they were later considered a part of Judah (1 Chronicles 2:55; 1 Samuel 27:10). The woman referred to in Exodus 2:21 is the same woman referred to in Numbers 12:1. The Bible gives no indication of Moses ever having more than one wife. Therefore, Moses’ wife was of the same race as he was, so miscegenation did not occur.

Like many people, Bibleinfo claims that Miriam was stricken with leprosy (Numbers 12:10) because she and Aaron condemned Moses for marrying a woman of a different race. This was not so. God would not punish them for rebuking Moses for sinning. Aaron and Miriam questioned Moses' authority. They questioned his office as God's spokesman and prophet (Numbers 12:2, 6-8). Questioning God’s appointment of Moses as His spokesman and coveting that position is what caused Miriam’s affliction.

Moreover, Bibleinfo asserts that Rahab, a Canaanite prostitute, was an ancestor of Jesus. Again Bibleinfo errs; she was not an ancestor of Jesus. (For proof, see “Rahab” by Thomas Allen.)

Like all proponents of miscegenation, Bibleinfo ignores Deuteronomy 23:2. If they do consider it, they mistranslate mamzêr. Deuteronomy 23:2 (“No half-bred [mongrel] may be admitted to the assembly of the Yahweh; not even his descendants to the tenth generation may be admitted to the Assembly of Yahweh” – NJB.) summaries God’s attitude toward miscegenation and interracial mating. (For a discussion on Deuteronomy 23:2, see “Commentary on Deuteronomy 23:2" by Thomas Allen.) To prevent interracial breeding, God ordained racial segregation and separation.

As shown above, Bibleinfo is misleading people and is justifying the sin of miscegenation, interracial marriage. For more on the Bible’s condemnation of interracial marriages, see these books and articles by Thomas Allen: Integration Is Genocide, False Biblical Teachings on the Origin of the Races and Interracial Marriages, “Does God Abhor or Approve Miscegenation?” and “The Bible, Segregation, and Miscegenation.”

Appendix

The verses cited below are from the World English Bible.

Genesis 41:45: Pharaoh called Joseph’s name Zaphenath-Paneah. He gave him Asenath, the daughter of Potiphera priest of On as a wife. Joseph went out over the land of Egypt.

Genesis 46:20: To Joseph in the land of Egypt were born Manasseh and Ephraim, whom Asenath, the daughter of Potiphera, priest of On, bore to him.

Exodus 2:21: Moses was content to dwell with the man. He gave Moses Zipporah, his daughter.

Numbers 12:1: Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of the Cushite [Ethiopian] woman whom he had married; for he had married a Cushite [Ethiopian] woman.

Numbers 12:2: They said, “Has Yahweh indeed spoken only with Moses? Hasn’t he spoken also with us?” And Yahweh heard it.

Numbers 12: 6-8: He said, “Now hear my words. If there is a prophet among you, I, Yahweh, will make myself known to him in a vision. I will speak with him in a dream. 7 My servant Moses is not so. He is faithful in all my house. 8 With him, I will speak mouth to mouth, even plainly, and not in riddles; and he shall see Yahweh’s form. Why then were you not afraid to speak against my servant, against Moses?”

Numbers 12:10 The cloud departed from over the Tent; and behold, Miriam was leprous, as white as snow. Aaron looked at Miriam, and behold, she was leprous.

1 Samuel 27:10: Achish said, “Against whom have you made a raid today?” David said, “Against the South of Judah, against the South of the Jerahmeelites, and against the South of the Kenites.”

1 Chronicles 2:55: The families of scribes who lived at Jabez: the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, and the Sucathites. These are the Kenites who came from Hammath, the father of the house of Rechab.

1 Corinthians 7:12-13: 12 But to the rest I—not the Lord—say, if any brother has an unbelieving wife, and she is content to live with him, let him not leave her. 13 The woman who has an unbelieving husband, and he is content to live with her, let her not leave her husband.

1 Corinthians 7:15: Yet if the unbeliever departs, let there be separation. The brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us in peace.

2 Corinthians 6:14:  Don’t be unequally yoked with unbelievers, for what fellowship do righteousness and iniquity have? Or what fellowship does light have with darkness?

Copyright © 2024 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More religious articles.

The Spirit of Man

The Spirit of Man

Thomas Allen

In “The Soul,” I showed that the Hebrews believed that the soul was mortal and ceased conscious existence when the body died. On the other hand, pagans believed that the soul was immortal. When the body died, the soul was liberated from the body to continue conscious existence elsewhere. In that article, I mention the spirit of man in passing and that like the soul, it ceased to exist when the body died.

In Babylonian Connection Between Ancient and Modern Religions (Phoenix, Arizona:  America's Promise, 1978), Stephen E. Jones gives an excellent explanation of the spirit of man (pages 20-23). A summary of his explanation follows.

Some theologians argue that the spirit of man is that part of human nature that allies with God. Also, some identify the spirit of man as what makes man a rational being. Nearly all believe that the spirit like the soul is immortal and continues to exist beyond the death of the body.

However, the Hebrew understanding of the spirit of man is the breath of God that animates the soul, which gives the body life. Thus, the soul of man contains the life-giving spirit of God. That is, the breath of life is the spirit of life. The Hebrew word for “breath” and “spirit” is the same word.

And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. (Gen. 2:7)

According to Genesis 2:7, God gave man whom he formed from dust life when He breathed the breath or spirit of life into his nostrils.

(For my life is yet whole in me, And the spirit of God is in my nostrils); (Job 27:3)

As stated by Job, a person lives if he continues to breathe. Once he ceases to breathe, his body, soul, and spirit die and cease to have any conscience existence.

According to the Hebrews, man is not a spirit. Man is composed of a body (flesh) and soul (blood). His spirit is merely the air in his lungs. When one breathes, the lungs give life (spirit) to the blood (soul). Then, the blood transfers life-giving air to the body. Thus, the spirit gives life to a person, but it is not the actual person. Like the air that a person breathes, the spirit is something that the person uses, but it is not the person.

At death, the body, soul, and spirit return to the original state where they wait until the resurrection. Upon death, the body returns to dust; the soul returns to Sheol (Hades), i.e., nonexistence; the spirit returns to God from where it came. Consequently, death is a reversal of creation.

At death, the spirit (breath) separates from the soul (blood). “When the breathing stops, the blood loses its life supply, and both flesh and blood begin to corrupt in death. The air (spirit) neither lives nor dies; it simply gives life for a season and then returns from whence it came” (pp. 21-22). 

The Bible describes death as follows:

and the dust returneth to the earth as it was, and the spirit returneth unto God who gave it. (Eccl. 12:7)

Thou hidest thy face, they are troubled; Thou takest away their breath [spirit], they [the people themselves] die, And return to their dust. (Ps. 104:29)

According to Acts, David is not in heaven. (For David ascended not into the heavens: . . . [Acts 2:34]) Therefore, “that the spirit returning to God does not imply that the person goes to heaven” (p. 22).

Likewise, when Jesus said, “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said this, he gave up the ghost” (Luke 23:46), his spirit went to God, but he did not spend three days in heaven with his Father. John 20:17 proves that he did not go to heaven when he died. Jesus said to Mary, “Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended unto the Father.” Furthermore, Peter states that Jesus’ soul went to Hades, oblivion, where it had no conscience existence (Acts 2:31). 

Thus, neither man’s soul nor spirit is immortal. They cease existence when the body dies. Only when God resurrects the body do they return as they returned to Jesus when God raised Jesus from the dead.

Copyright © 2022 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More religious articles.

More Random Religious Thoughts

More Random Religious Thoughts

Thomas Allen

Discussed below are eternal and immortality, Lucifer, Revelation, Saul’s age when he began his reign, Mariology, a time without the Moon, and the Philippines and the Baptists.

Eternal and Immortality

Many people confuse “eternal” with “immortality.” They are different. An eternal being has no beginning and no end. An immortal being has a beginning but no end. Once born or created, an immortal being never dies or ceases to exist.

Are humans naturally immortal? Daniel 12:2 suggests that they are not. Daniel 12:2 reads, “And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.” According to this verse, only many dead are awake, resurrected; the others remain asleep, dead, in the grave. Those who are not resurrected appear not to be immortal. Once they die, their bodies and souls appear to remain dead forever.

Furthermore, the Hebrews believed that the body and soul were so intertwined that when the body died, the soul died with it. Consequently, the soul is not naturally immortal. It remains dead and unconscious until God resurrects it to immortality.

Lucifer

Many theologians teach that Lucifer, Satan, the Devil, is a pure spirit being. Therefore, he is indestructible and must live for all eternity. First, Lucifer is a created being. Since he is created, he has a beginning. An eternal being has no beginning. Consequently, he cannot be eternal. Second, to claim that he must live forever declares that God is not omnipotent. If God is omnipotent, can He not uncreate (annihilate) what He has created? Third, God is omnipresent. Therefore, wherever Lucifer is, God is also. (Being omnipresent, God fills every particle, wave, frequency, or whatever Lucifer is made of.) How can a being as holy as God tolerate the eternal presence of a being as evil as Lucifer? At some point, God must terminate and annihilate Lucifer. Fourth, God is omniscient. Therefore, God always knows the existence of Lucifer. How can His Pure Holiness tolerate knowing the existence of Lucifer, who is pure evil, forever? What God does not know cannot and does not exist. Consequently, at some point Lucifer must vanish because God ceases knowing him, knowing about him, and knowing of him. Contrary, to what most theologians teach, Lucifer is not indestructible and does not live forever.

True Luciferians, such as Albert Pike, consider Lucifer to be Yahweh’s, Jehovah’s (Adonai or Adonay as Luciferians call Him), equal. Lucifer is their god, and Satan, who is a different being and Lucifer’s subordinate, is the prince of the world. Luciferians believe that Lucifer is the God of Light and the God of Good; Adonai (Yahweh) is the God of Darkness and the God of Evil. Lucifer is or was the highest, brightest, and most intelligent of God’s creatures and held the highest office in heaven next to God Himself. They also believe that Satan is the elder brother of the Archangel Michael and that God sent Michael to earth as Christ Jesus. (Jehovah’s Witnesses also believe that the Archangel Michael and Jesus are the same person.) Both Satanists and Luciferians believe that Jesus failed in his mission when he was crucified. Unfortunately for the Luciferians and Satanists, but fortunately for the followers of Christ, Lucifer and Satan lose.

Another Look at Revelation

In Mysteries of Ancient South America, Harold T, Wilkins cites H. S. Bellamy, who argues that Revelation is the history of a great cataclysm caused by a pre-Lunar satellite of the earth coming to close to earth and being destroyed by the earth, which caused large parts of the satellite to crash into the earth.

How Old Was Saul When He Began to Reign

How old was Saul when he began to reign? The number is lacking in the Hebrew text, so many translators guess at the number. The American Standard Version and several other translations guess 40 years.  The New International Version and other translations guess 30 years. Several translations, such as the Revised Standard Version, leave the number of years blank. A few follow the King James Version and claims that Saul reigned one year; thus, they avoid giving his age when he began his reign.

Mariology

Mariology is the body of beliefs or dogmas concerning the Virgin Mary. It is a set of doctrines that Catholics accept and advocate, which Protestants reject.

Both Protestants and Catholics agree that Mary is the mother of Jesus. Moreover, except unitarians, both agree that Jesus is God. Therefore, if Mary is the mother of Jesus and if Jesus is God, then logically Mary is the mother of God. However, Protestants reject the idea that Mary is the mother of God. Therefore, Catholics are logical, and Protestants are illogical. (For unitarians, this issue is not a problem since they reject the notion that Jesus is God. Thus, they hold that Mary is the mother of Jesus, but she is not the mother of God because Jesus is not God.)

When Jesus was promoted to God, his office as the mediator between man and God became vacant. Catholics promoted Mary, the Mother of God, to the office of the mediator. Since Protestants reject the notion that Mary is the mother of God, they logically have not recognized her as the mediator. Consequently, they had to find another solution. For the most part, they use mental gymnastics to explain this problem away by making God the mediator between God and man.

Thus, both proclaim that Paul erred when he wrote, “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” Both covertly claim that Paul was too ignorant to understand and express deep theological ideas. Whereas, the Catholics assert that Paul should have written “the woman Mary” instead of “the man Christ Jesus,” Protestants believe that Paul should have written, “the God Christ Jesus.”

If Jesus is God as both Catholics and Protestants maintain, then Catholics believe logically about Mariology, and Protestants believe illogically about it. Moreover, both disagree with Paul about who is the mediator between God and man. Is the mediator Mary or God? Both concur that the mediator is not the man.

Was There a time without a Moon

Some allusions to the time before there was a Moon may be found in the Scriptures. In Job 25:5 the grandeur of the Lord who “Makes peace in the heights” is praised and the time is mentioned as “before [there was] a moon and it did not shine.” Also, in Psalm 72:5 it is said: “Thou wast feared since [the time of] the sun and before [the time of] the moon, a generation of generations.” A “generation of generations” means a very long time. Thus, much time elapsed between the appearance of the sun and the appearance of the moon.

The Philippines and the Baptists

One good thing came from President McKinley’s war to steal the Spanish empire from Spain. He stole the Philippines and, thus, gave the Baptists a retirement home. Where else can a good Baptist retire and have maids, cooks, gardeners, and other servants and live a lifestyle that he could not afford if he remained at home in the United States and have all of it paid for by the folks back home? As long as he tells them about the great missionary work that he is doing, they gladly and gracefully support him.

Copyright © 2021 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More religious articles.

The Soul

The Soul

Thomas Allen

Is the human soul immortal or mortal? Does the soul continue to exist consciously after the body dies? Or, does it die when the body dies?

There are two views of the nature of man. One is the dualistic view, which is the popular Christian view and the pagan view. The other is the holistic view, which is the Hebrew and Biblical view.

Greek, Egyptian, and other pagan philosophers claim that the soul is immortal and continuous a conscious existence after the body dies. According to the pagan Greeks, the soul is trapped in a material body. When the body dies, the soul is liberated and continuous a conscious existence elsewhere because the soul is immortal and, therefore, indestructible. Consequently, a person cannot really die; he merely transitions to another form. Death is merely the separation of the soul and the body.

The Hebrews claim that the soul is mortal and dies with the body — that is, its conscious existence ends with the death of the body. Since the soul animates the body, it dies (ceases to have consciousness) when the body dies; it not a distinct substance. When the body dies, the soul ceases its function of the animating life-principle of the body, and, therefore, it also dies. Furthermore, according to the Hebrews, the soul and body are an indissoluble unit. Moreover, man does not have a soul; he is a soul.

While the pagans teach a dualistic nature of man (the soul is immortal and the body is mortal), the Hebrews in the Old Testament teach a holistic view (both the soul and body are mortal). The pagan view asserts that the body, which is mortal, and the soul, which is immortal, are two different substances that coexist within one human being. Nevertheless, they are two characteristics of the same person. Thus, human nature consists of two entities (a body and a soul) that function independently — the dualistic view of man.

Contrasting with the pagan idea is the Hebrew. The Hebrew idea is that of an animated body, and the soul animates the body. When one dies, the other also dies. Both the body and the soul are mortal. Consequently, human nature is an indissoluble unity where the body and soul are different aspects of the same person — the holistic view of man.

For the Hebrews of the Old Testament and the early Christians of the New Testament, immortality is a gift from God given at the resurrection. Immortality is not an innate human possession as the pagans and orthodox Christians teach.

Tertullian and Origen introduce the Greek notion of an immoral soul into Christianity. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas expounded this pagan dualistic view of human nature. Consequently, the pagan dualistic concept of man became the orthodox Christian doctrine.

During the Reformation, Calvin, Luther, and most other Protestant leaders maintained that the soul was immortal. According to Calvin and Augustine, when the body dies, the souls of believers enjoy blessings in heaven while the souls of unbelievers suffer torments in hell. (However, the Anabaptists preached the Hebrew holistic concept of the soul, i.e., the soul is mortal and ceases conscious existence when the body dies.)

Adherents of the pagan dualistic nature of man believe that death is the separation of the immortal soul from the mortal body. At the resurrection, the immortal soul is reunited with the body. Today, most Christians believe in this dualistic doctrine.

Conversely, adherents of the Hebrew holistic nature of man believe the soul like the body is mortal and, therefore, dies with the body. At the resurrection, the whole person, body and soul, is resurrected.

What Is the Soul?

What is the soul? The soul is the life-giving force; it is man’s consciousness and awareness. Consequently, the soul is that part of a being that interprets the outside world through the senses. It interprets what one sees, hears, tastes, smells, and feels. Therefore, the soul and not the brain is what sees, hears, tastes, smells, and feels. It is what perceives and evaluates. (Further, the soul is what gives all living creatures their life, consciousness, and awareness.  Consequently, all animals, plants, fungi, protists, and monerans have souls.)

Moreover, the soul is the seat of one’s emotions, personality, intellect, and memory. As such, it is what makes a human being human. It is that part of a person that believes, decides, reasons, judges, rejoices, sorrows, loves, hates, doubts, and the like. Furthermore, from the soul come man’s moral and religious attributes.

The soul is the mind as opposed to the brain. (Some theologians claim that the spirit of man is the mind instead of the soul. [See the last paragraph for a discussion on the spirit of man.]) Through the soul does a person perceive and understand the material world. However, the soul does not reside in the brain and has no corporal nature. On the contrary, the soul is distinct from and independent of the brain.

Although signals received from the senses are analyzed in the brain, the soul is what understands and gives this information meaning and significance. The brain merely serves as a vehicle delivering information to the soul. The soul observes and interprets the information formed in the brain.

The existence of the soul refutes materialism, and, therefore, it repudiates Darwinism and evolution. Materialists believe that the movement of chemicals in the brain controls a person’s thoughts, emotions, and actions. Blind, unconscious atoms and electrical signals cannot be the source of awareness, perception, thought, beliefs, emotions, and the like.

Some theologians distinguish between the soul of man and the spirit of man. For these theologians, the soul of man is identified with the secular exercise of an individual. The spirit of man is that part of human nature that allies with God. Also, some identify the spirit of man as what makes man a rational being. However, many treat the soul and the spirit as two names for the same entity. This article does not distinguish between the two.

Reference

Bacchiocchi, Samuele. Popular Beliefs: Are They Biblical? Berrien Springs Michigan: Biblical Perspectives, 2008.

Davis, John D. The Westminster Dictionary of the Bible. Revised by Henry Snyder Gehman. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: 1944.

Douglas, J.D. et al., editors. The New Bible Dictionary. Grand Rapids: Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962.

Jacobus, Melanchthon W., Edward E. Norse, and Andrew C. Zenos, editors. A New Standard Bible Dictionary. New York, New York: Funk & Wagnalls Co., 1926.

Martin, William C. The Layman’s Bible Encyclopedia. Nashville, Tennessee: The Southwest Company, 1964.

Tenney, Merrill C., editor. The Zondervan Pictorial Bible Dictionary. Grand Rapids: Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1967.

Yahya, Harun (Adnan Oktar). Darwin’s Dilemma the Soul. First English edition. Editor Tam Mossman. Translator Carl Nino Rossini. Istanbul, Turkey: Global Publishing, 2008.

Copyright © 2021 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More religious articles.

 

Israel Identity

Israel Identity

Thomas Allen

Israel Identity, also called British-Israelism, Christian Identity, and Kingdom Identity, claims that the lost tribes of Israel became the Germanic and Celtic tribes that invaded Europe and settled in Western Europe. The following presents Charles Weisman’s version of the Israel-Identity doctrine as it relates to salvation as given in Is Universalism of God? In this book, Weisman refutes the doctrine of the Universalists that all humans are eventually saved regardless of race or merit.

Weisman appears to be a Calvinist — only more so. Calvin believed that God arbitrary chooses whom to save to everlasting life and whom to condemn to everlasting torment without any foreknowledge of merit. (Thus, Calvin declared that God is not omniscient.) Unlike Calvin, who seems to believe that people of every ethnicity and race have a chance of salvation, Weisman seems to argue that only the unmixed descendants of Israel are saved. However, he is somewhat fuzzy about non-Israelite Whites. Sometimes, he seems to allow the descendants of Abraham (except the Arabs) and possibly Heber a chance of salvation. At other times, he seems to include non-Hebrew Whites in the salvation lottery, but, at other times, he excludes them.

Like all Israel Identity adherents, Weisman includes all Israelites and their modern-day descendants in the salvation lottery. Nevertheless, he is unclear about which Israelites are saved. Does God save nearly all, most, many, or just some? (Israel Identity adherents run the gamut from nearly all to just some.) According to Weisman, if a person is saved, he is merely a robot whom God has programmed to believe in Jesus — although he is not this blatant. As mentioned above, Weisman is hazy about whether God chooses any non-Israelite White for salvation, although he seems inclined to believe that God does not choose any non-Israelite White for salvation. However, he is certain that God chooses no nonwhites for salvation, and, by that, He condemns all nonwhites to eternal damnation.

At the time of Israel’s birth, circa 1844 or 1837 B.C., and the Israelite migration to Egypt around 1715 or 1706 B.C., Whites inhabited most of the Middle East, and much of Egypt and North Africa. Whites also inhabited Europe then. Consequently, Whites vastly outnumbered the Israelites, who were probably less than 100 persons. (Pure Israelites were 13.)

As far as known, none of Israel’s sons married their sisters. Thus, none of Israel’s daughters-in-law were true Israelites. According to the Bible, Joseph married an Egyptian by whom his sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, were born. (According to most Israel Identity adherents, the descendants of Ephraim inhabit England, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Manasseh’s descendants inhabit the United States.) How can the descendants of Israel’s sons be pure Israelites if their mothers were not genetic Israelites?

Since the Israelites settled in lands, such as Mesopotamia, Syria, Asia Minor, North Africa, and Europe that already had a population of Whites greater and often much greater than the Israelite immigrants, what happened to these non-Israelite Whites? The Israelites did not kill all of them or even most of them. Apparently, the Israelites lived among these other Whites or alongside them.

Moreover, how does one distinguish between an Israelite White European and a non-Israelite White European? Like other Israel Identity adherents, Weisman does not satisfactorily answer this question. The closest that he comes to an answer is to declare that the people of the Nordic racial type are true Israelites. If true, this suggests that other Whites are either non-Israelite Whites or a mixture of Israelite and non-Israelite Whites.

As God saves only true Israelites, then He condemns these other Whites to eternal death. Consequently, since only a small number of Europeans are Nordic, God condemns most Whites to eternal death. (Exposure to the sun is the easiest test to determine if one is a Nordic. While most Whites tan when they expose themselves to the sun, Nordics redden.)

That most Israel Identity adherents are Nordic is highly unlikely. Moreover, that most Israel Identity adherents are some pure descendants with no admixture of non-Israelite Whites is even more unlikely. Therefore, if Weisman is correct, few, if any, Israel Identity adherents qualify for God’s salvation lottery.

In his book, Weisman exposes the error of the doctrine of the Universalists that all humans regardless of race or merit are eventually saved to everlasting life in heaven. He does so by arguing that God chooses only Israelites for salvation to everlasting life. Nevertheless, at times, Weisman suggests that some non-Israelites Whites are saved, while at other times, he suggests that no non-Israelite Whites are saved. Like other Israel Identity adherents, he fails to explain how one distinguishes between an Israelite White and a non-Israelite White. However, he is certain that God chooses not to save any nonwhites.

In part, Weisman condemns the Universalist salvation doctrine because it reduces the need for repentance and salvation and removes the fear of judgment; thus, it creates a false sense of security. Such notions encourage licentiousness and otherwise unchristian, unholy lifestyles. Yet, the salvation doctrine of Weisman does the same thing — even more so. As God has already decided whom He will save, then how a person behaves or what a person believes is irrelevant. If behavior and belief are important to salvation, then God programs the person to be saved how to behave and what to believe.

Since God never saves nonwhites, then their behavior and beliefs do not matter. They may as well live by their passions and appetites. Likewise, the same is true for Whites. Since no one knows for sure whether he is an Israelite or whether God has chosen him — although, like all other Israel Identity adherents, Weisman is convinced that he is an Israelite whom God has saved — he may as well act the way that he wants to act and believe whatever he wants to believe. God’s choice and his ancestry decide his salvation and not his behavior or beliefs.

However, Weisman is correct in that Universalism is an egalitarian doctrine that  leads to and encourages the sin of miscegenation. Moreover, Universalism is a false doctrine. Nevertheless, the Israel-Identity doctrine that Weisman substitutes for it is highly questionable.

Copyright © 2020 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More religious articles.