Oneness and Separateness


By Jim Jester

January 13, 2019

Scripture Reading: Genesis 34:1-4 (MKJV)

And Dinah the daughter of Leah, whom she bore to Jacob, went out to see the daughters of the land. And when Shechem, the son of Hamor the Hivite, prince of the country, saw her, he took her and lay with her, and humbled her. And his soul clung to Dinah the daughter of Jacob, and he loved the girl and spoke to the heart of the girl. And Shechem spoke to his father Hamor, saying, Get me this girl for a wife.”


There may be those out there in Internet land wondering why Identity pastors have nothing to preach about except race; and, saying, “Why don’t they preach about the love of Jesus or salvation?” I would answer them with this. 1) Who else out there is teaching this very important truth? 2) Enough pastors across the country already preach about “salvation” (and what they think it means) so why should we copy them? 3) We regret to sound repetitive, but we see the topic of race relations all through Scripture; which is something judeo pastors do not see at all. 4) The demographics of our country is nearly at the point of no return; thus, forever changing the racial face of America. 5) God has laid this responsibility upon us because we love the brethren, and we love the truth.

During the past year, there has not been one sermon at our church that has not touched on this subject to some degree or another. After all, we are Identity. And in this new year, this theme will likely continue. We feel God has laid this upon our hearts as pastors in unity of the truth in the Spirit of Christ.

Furthermore, we do not apologize for the message we bring. If we were to go through the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, our messages would be infused with racial consciousness throughout, because that is God’s intent with His covenants. Complete and full Truth cannot be infused into our people without this racial context. The Bible simply cannot be properly understood without this context. Therefore, we do not care if the judeo-Christian world, along with the rest of the world, attempts to demonize us with derogatory names such as racist, Nazi or hater. We consider it a badge of honor.

The portion of Scripture we opened with, is the opening paragraph of the account in Genesis chapter 34 of Jacob’s interaction with the people in Canaan, sometimes referred to in Bible headings as: “Dinah Seized in Shechem” or “The Defiling of Dinah”, etc. But there is more to the narrative than the dishonor of Dinah. In fact, the account reveals deception on both sides of this conflict. Therefore, we shall go through this chapter, verse-by-verse, and making comments.

Dinah Seized in Shechem

At this point in biblical history, the Israelites have migrated into central Canaan. They are not far from the city of Shechem, which is named after the prince of the land (Shechem), the son of Hamor the Hivite. The Hivites were more apt to be congenial than most of the other enemy tribes that opposed Israel. It was only recently that Jacob had bought a piece of land near Shechem from them:

And Jacob came in peace to the city of Shechem, which is in the land of Canaan, when he came from Padan-aram. And he pitched his tent in front of the city. And he bought a piece of a field, where he had spread his tent, at the hand of the sons of Hamor, Shechem’s father, for a hundred pieces of silver. And he erected there an altar, and called it El, the God of Israel” (Gen. 33:18-20, MKJV).

This reminds me of the disagreement between Abram and Lot; and so, they split up: “Abram dwelled in the land of Canaan, and Lot dwelled in the cities of the plain, and pitched his tent toward Sodom (Gen. 13:12).

In both cases we see that they “pitched their tents” toward a city (a figure for “settling in”). Often there is danger when choosing the more prosperous area to live rather than seeking the will of God in the matter. Lot suffered much because of his choice; and so, Dinah lost her honor because of her lack of discretion.

And Dinah the daughter of Leah, whom she bore to Jacob, went out to see the daughters of the land. And when Shechem, the son of Hamor the Hivite, prince of the country, saw her, he took her and lay with her, and humbled her. And his soul clung to Dinah the daughter of Jacob, and he loved the girl and spoke to the heart of the girl” (Gen. 34:1-3, MKJV).

The town and “the daughters of the land” attracted the young (14-16 yrs.) Dinah and so she went to the festival going on in Shechem. But maybe she was secretly interested in more than what the women were doing or wearing. Perhaps she was interested in the men of the city too. Perhaps the prince of the city had noticed her on other occasions, and she noticed him too. Was this a secret rendezvous? Could this be what we now call a “date?”

Speaking of a rendezvous, let’s consult the dictionary:

“A meeting at an agreed time and place, typically between two people. A place used for a rendezvous. A place, typically a bar or restaurant, that is used as a popular meeting place. Late 16th century from the French rendez-vous! ‘present yourselves!’” – Apple Dictionary

The word rendezvous, usually carries a sexual connotation and therefore could be used in reference to a date or meet-up. One would think that a church would never use this term; but guess what, one church did – Vouschurch. In hipster language, “vous” is short for rendezvous. The “vous” (rhymes with “you”), and it means “you” to the church because they care about people (all people). This term is usually pronounced “voo” (as in voodoo) or “voe” (as in doe). When Rick Wilkerson started his church in 2007, he called it the Rendezvous — or the Vous, for short.

Rich Wilkerson Jr., Kanye's Miami-Based Hipster Pastor, Preaches Controversial Brand of Christianity:


Here was the groom: poured into a slim Givenchy tux, hair mowed short, smile big. There was the bride: in Givenchy too — a white dress that modestly sheathed her Jessica Rabbit frame like cloud cover hiding an Alp. And there between the couple, his face bright as a polished coin, was a thin figure draped in white vestments trimmed with gold.

Before Heaven, Earth, and all of the telephoto lenses straining from a nearby hillside, Rich Wilkerson Jr. pronounced Kanye West and Kim Kardashian husband and wife.

It's not often that two of the most recognizable people on the planet get hitched — he, the most significant artist to rearrange the rap game in a decade; she, a reality star. When the pair strolled the aisle in a private ceremony in Florence on May 24, eager fingers the world over double-clicked "refresh" for the latest news. But there were few new details to report about the overexposed celebs. So, post-Kimye, entertainment writers fixed their sights on the ceremony's man of God.

"A Star Rises From the Kimye Wedding," TMZ crowed in an article about Wilkerson. "The Pastor Who Officiated the KimYe Wedding Is Almost as Stylish as Kanye West," Complex announced. Buzzfeed's take: "Wait, the Pastor That Married Kim and Kanye Is Super Hot."

Back at Trinity Church in Miami Gardens, news crews filled the parking lot looking for details about Wilkerson. "Can I just ask," TMZ founder Harvey Levin gasped on the gossip site's television show, "is he going to get a reality show?"

The 30-year-old pastor didn't exactly wilt amid the attention, because he isn't your average fourth-generation Pentecostal. He's a camera-ready natural charmer who lives in a sunny midtown Miami loft, knows the words to the hip-hop songs on the radio, and binge-watches HBO shows. He's not averse to the occasional beer, and he hangs at the members-only Soho Beach House (where memberships start at $1,000) when he's not jetting around the world for speaking engagements. And he preaches a decidedly open-door style of Christianity. "Everyone is welcome," Wilkerson announced earlier this summer from the stage of his church, a sentiment he repeats often. "I don't care about your religious background, sexual orientation, your skin color. You are welcome."

All of this places him at the front of a new wave of pastors rebranding the Christian message. Gone are old hymns, stodgy sermons, and xeroxed church bulletins; in are rap songs and high-def video messages, all led by pastors wearing AG leather jackets and Chuck Taylors. The smiley, hip take on religion is a 180 from the evangelicals stomping outside abortion clinics or telling the world that God hates fags. And it seems to be working. Each week, around 1,000 young worshipers turn up at the Vous, Wilkerson's Tuesday-night service in Miami Gardens.

This new style of worship has also attracted a considerable number of megawatt celebrities, extending a bridge between the upper echelons of pop culture — so often seen as amoral, opulent, and sex-soaked — and the church world. It's a relationship that critics say is too cozy. Wilkerson waters down strict Evangelical precepts for the sake of mainstream acceptance and turn down the volume on the Bible's harsher messages on topics like homosexuality, morality, and the End Times.

For Wilkerson, however, the moralistic gripes coming from his right are exactly why the church is in such an isolated state in the 21st Century. "I think a lot of people would be cool with Jesus; they've just met too many Christians," he says. "That's ruined it for them."

The sanctuary at Trinity Church doesn't look like the standard house of God. On any given Tuesday night, machine-coughed clouds, thick as river mist, slink along the ceiling's exposed girders in the hangar-like room. Rap music blares. The 20- and 30-somethings streaming through the door, about 70 percent black and 30 white, look like they've come straight from their personal stylists. The guys are gym-fit, the women runway-ready.

During each service, a ten-piece band bangs through a set list: a few rockers caboosed by a power ballad that surges into a boisterous sing-along. In recent months, the themes of Wilkerson's sermons have been based on songs from the Top 40: Drake's "Worst Behavior," DJ Snake and Lil Jon's club thumper "Turn Down for What," Beyoncé's "Drunk in Love." Onstage, Wilkerson has the same ease and energy as a practiced standup comic. Six-foot and change, with his sandy hair slicked into a retro swoop, he ranges the space, his voice — loose and twangy — scissoring apart the solemn church vibe of the room. "Dude," "bro," and "babe" stud his talk. 

So, not your grandmother's church service. But despite the humor and levity, the church's focus remains the headlining bout between God and Satan for the eternal salvation or damnation of souls. Wilkerson's church, however, departs from tradition.

He says salvation is two-pronged. It starts with simply declaring that you're ready to follow Jesus. "We believe that Jesus saves, and when you confess, you put your trust in Him, you repent of your sin, ask forgiveness, and your sins are forgiven," he says. "That's salvation for us."

This big spiritual moment happens at each service but is so subtle that you might miss it if you don't know what you're looking at. Toward the end of each Tuesday, Wilkerson or one of the other Vous preachers asks audience members to close their eyes and bow their heads. After some prayer, with keyboard tinkling in the background, the speaker, in a voice as soft as a meditation tape, asks for the people in the audience who want to confess themselves believers to raise their hands. Each night, arms flick up — that is the moment of confession, of declaring yourself.

Brett McCracken, an L.A.-based journalist, looked deeply at the new wave of churches adopting edgy messages and mainstream themes to attract a younger audience in a 2010 book, Hipster Christianity. He found that the essence of what's cool — ephemeral and self-gratifying — can run counter to the Bible's messages.

"A lot of the churches accomplish the goal of removing barriers of getting people into church. Some people who might never walk into a cathedral or church might actually walk into one of these hip churches," McCracken says. "There is a good contingent of evangelical people who do see this stuff and feel like it's a slippery slope, that we're selling out for the sake of 'cool.'"

Fergusson MacRay is harsher in his criticism: "To call these men pastors and their clubs churches is misleading to the general community and an insult to Christianity," spits the blogger, who runs Hillsong Church Watch, a website devoted to calling out contemporary preachers for flabby doctrine.

In an email, MacRay points out that traditional church services follow tight scripts. They emphasize man's fall from Eden and humanity's subsequent sinful state, God's wrath, and man's need to turn away from sin and believe in Jesus. "They would ALWAYS emphasize that Christ has done the work and has saved people in his grace and mercy — not by our own works," MacRay writes.

But the "New Age purpose-driven teachings" preached by contemporaries "are all about YOU living your best life now," the blogger charges. The music, jokes, and positive messages make the "audience feel good throughout and not really cause people to think things through." The message isn't about God and his word but "about you and what you must do to get a better life."

These preachers self-indulgently weave personal stories into their gospel message, MacRay says, and the moments in these services when people raise their hands isn't a true declaration for God but "proof to propel the preacher to success," where "they will play sappy music to manipulate people into believing that God is speaking to their hearts" and "dim the lights to emphasize intimacy."

"It's like comparing chalk to cheese," MacRay writes. "Wilkerson shows no biblical nor Christian depth behind the pulpit."

Nowhere is the tug of war between the purists in the Christian ranks and groundbreakers more apparent than on social issues. As McCracken's book points out, young preachers doing big numbers rarely get political. When asked about a powder-keg issue like whether homosexuality is a sin or should gays marry, Wilkerson declines to answer. "At our church, homosexuality is not a topic I like to chat about very much, but I don't talk about a whole lot of issues," he admits. "I talk about what Jesus is for, not what he's supposedly against."

He goes on calmly: "We deal with those case by case with people. I think it ends up becoming a topic that really only becomes a negative instead of a real conversation. What I mean by that is, somehow a person's behavior ends up representing their identity, and then good or bad, whether you agree or disagree, you end up standing for that person's identity or against. And I just don't ever want to be in that position." [End of Article]

In other words, this pastor will not take a stand for the Word of God! This so-called “church” is nothing but a night-club where young people of all races can meet up and possibly develop relationships; and, possibly some young White Christian girl will get herself into a similar predicament as did young Dinah with Shechem. Vous church is a faux church. “Churches” such as this know nothing about the Bible; and next to nothing about true Christianity. [Back to narrative.]

The Dishonor of Dinah

Continuing with our text, verse two says, “…Shechem, the son of Hamor the Hivite, prince of the country, saw her, he took her and lay with her, and humbled her.” And, in verse three he “spoke to the heart of the girl.” You could say that he promised her lots of things; after all, he was quite rich.

“Shechem, the prince of the country, but a slave to his own lusts, took her, and lay with her, it should seem, not so much by force as by surprise. Note, Great men think they may do any thing; and what more mischievous than untaught and ungoverned youth? See what came of Dinah's gadding: young women must learn to be chaste, keepers at home; these properties are put together (Titus 2:5), for those that are not keepers at home expose their chastity. Dinah went abroad to look about her; but, if she had looked about her as she ought, she would not have fallen into this snare.” – Matthew Henry

“Though freed from foreign troubles, Jacob met with a great domestic calamity in the fall of his only daughter. According to Josephus, she had been attending a festival; but it is highly probable that she had been often and freely mixing in the society of the place and that she, being a simple, inexperienced, and vain young woman, had been flattered by the attentions of the ruler’s son. There must have been time and opportunities of acquaintance to produce the strong attachment that Shechem had for her.” – JFB Commentary

Continuing with our text:

Genesis 34:5,  “And Jacob heard that he had defiled Dinah his daughter. And his sons were with his cattle in the field. And Jacob kept silent until they had come. 6  And Hamor the father of Shechem went out to Jacob to speak with him. 7  And the sons of Jacob came out of the field when they heard. And the men were furious, and they were very angry, because he had done folly in Israel, in lying with the daughter of Jacob. And it ought not to be done so.”

I can think that it “ought not to be done” for three reasons: 1) She was in his house. 2) She was not married. 3) He was the wrong race (the most important reason of all).

Why were her brothers so furious? One commentary reports:

“Michaelis mentions an opinion still entertained in the East which explains the excessive indignation kindled in the breasts of Dinah’s brothers, vie; that “in those countries it is thought that a brother is more dishonored by the seduction of his sister than a man by the infidelity of his wife; for, say the Arabs, a man may divorce his wife, and then she is no longer his; while a sister and daughter remain always sister and daughter” (vide Kurtz, ’Hist. of Old Covenant,’ (82) – Pulpit Commentary

The Offer

Genesis 34:8,  “And Hamor communed with them, saying, The soul of my son Shechem longs for your daughter. Please give her to him for a wife. And you make marriages with us, giving your daughters to us, and taking our daughters to you. 10  And you shall live with us. And the land shall be before you. Live and trade in it, and get possessions in it. 11 And Shechem said to her father and to her brothers, Let me find grace in your eyes, and whatever you shall say to me I will give. 12 Heap upon me ever so much price and dowry, and I will give according as you shall say to me. But give me the girl for a wife.”

Now Shechem was an honorable man (v. 19), albeit of the wrong race; and he truly loved Dinah and would give her anything she so desired. However, there is a problem. God’s people were not to covenant with other races or make marriages with them; even if some of them are more honorable than the rest.

When the LORD your God brings you into the land that you are entering to possess, he will drive out many nations before you: the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites, seven nations who are more numerous and stronger than you. So when the LORD your God delivers them to you and you have defeated them, then utterly destroy them. You are not to make any covenant with them nor be gracious to them. You are not to intermarry with them. You are not to give your daughters to their sons nor take their daughters for your sons, because they will turn your children from me to serve other gods so that the LORD’s anger blazes against you and swiftly destroys you by fire.” – Deut. 7:1-4, ISV

Although this command came to Israel later, God’s law was instinctively known to everyone as “kind after kind.” The sons of Jacob must have known this by plain observation or it was passed down to them by word of mouth.

The Counter Offer

Genesis 34:13, “And the sons of Jacob answered Shechem and Hamor his father, speaking with deceit because he had defiled Dinah their sister. 14 And they said to them, We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to one that is uncircumcised. For it is a reproach to us. 15 But in this we will agree with you, if you will be as we are, that every male of you be circumcised, 16  then we will give our daughters to you, and we will take your daughters to us, and we will live with you, and we will become one people. 17 But if you will not listen to us, to be circumcised, then we will take our daughter, and we will go. 18 And their words pleased Hamor and Shechem, Hamor’s son. 19 And the young man did not hesitate to do the thing, because he had delight in Jacob’s daughter. And he was more honorable than all the house of his father.”

Concerning this passage, one commentator says:

“But in this (i.e. under this condition) will we consent unto you: If ye will be as we be, that every male of you be circumcised (literally, to have circumcision administered to every male); then will we give our daughters unto you, and we will take your daughters to us (i.e. to be our wives), and we will dwell with you, and we will become one people.” This proposal was sinful, since:

1) They had no right to offer the sign of God’s covenant to a heathen people; 2) they had less right to employ it in ratification of a merely human agreement; and 3) they had least right of all to employ it in duplicity as a mask for their treachery.

But if ye will not hearken unto us, to be circumcised; then (we will not consent to your proposal, and) we will take our daughter — who was still in Shechem’s house — and we will be gone.” – Pulpit Commentary

A Secret Deal?

The proposal of the sons of Jacob is accepted by Hamor and Shechem, but they must now sell the idea to the townspeople.

Genesis 34:20, “And Hamor and Shechem his son came to the gate of their city, and talked with the men of their city, saying, 21 These men are at peace with us. Therefore let them live in the land, and trade in it. For behold, the land is large enough for them. Let us take their daughters to us for wives, and let us give them our daughters. 22 Only on this condition will the men agree to us, to live with us, to be one people, if every male among us is circumcised as they are circumcised.”

Now notice this; the verse that follows is different than the original previous offer found in verses 9 & 10 of the chapter (where they said, “make marriages” and “live with us”).

Genesis 34:23, “Shall not their cattle and their substance and every animal of theirs be ours? Only let us agree with them, and they will live with us. 24 And all that went out of the gate of his city listened to Hamor and to Shechem his son. And every male was circumcised, all that went out of the gate of his city.”

This is quite an addition spoken of in secret among themselves; and part of the strategy to make it sound acceptable to the townspeople. Were they plotting to dominate God’s people?

Jacob’s Sons Take Shechem

Genesis 34:25, “And it happened on the third day, when they were sore, that two of the sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, Dinah's brothers, took each his sword and came upon the city boldly, and killed all the males. 26 And they killed Hamor and Shechem his son with the edge of the sword, and took Dinah out of Shechem’s house, and went out. 27 The sons of Jacob came upon the slain, and plundered the city, because they had defiled their sister. 28 They took their sheep and their oxen, and their asses, and that which was in the city and that which was in the field. 29 And all their wealth, and all their little ones, and their wives, they took captive, and plundered even all that was in the house.”

So all this time while negotiations were going on and now the death of all the males; Dinah was staying in Shechem’s house. As we have seen in verse three, Shechem, “clave unto Dinah the daughter of Jacob, and he loved the damsel, and spake kindly unto the damsel” (KJV). He must have promised her many things, including his devotion. She could have been a queen since he was already a prince.

Who Was Right?

Genesis 34:30, “And Jacob said to Simeon and Levi, You have troubled me, to make me stink among those who live in the land, among the Canaanites and the Perizzites. And I, being few in number, they shall gather themselves together against me, and kill me. And I shall be destroyed, my house and I.”

Jacob only wanted peace. He did not want his sons to start any trouble by carrying this situation into violence. “You have made me look bad among those living in the land.” Simeon and Levi were quite vengeful, according to the prophecy:

Simeon and Levi are brethren; instruments of cruelty are in their habitations. O my soul, come not thou into their secret; unto their assembly, mine honour, be not thou united: for in their anger they slew a man, and in their selfwill they digged down a wall. Cursed be their anger, for it was fierce; and their wrath, for it was cruel: I will divide them in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel.” – Gen. 49:5-7

Most commentators condemn the actions of Simeon and Levi. While anger and revenge to the point of death were not necessary, in this case it appears to have been justified.

Last Words

Genesis 34:31, “And they said, Should he deal with our sister as with a harlot?” (MKJV)

It is known that the Hivites and other Canaanites used sexual practices in their worship rites to false gods. The sons of Jacob figured that Dinah was being used in this way since she was staying in his house. “There is to be no cultic prostitutes from among the daughters or the sons of Israel” (Deut. 23:17, ISV).

The sons of Jacob had to take a strong stand and in no way compromise or take part in pagan practices or people such as these Hivites at Shechem. The Law of our God forbids Israel to enter into covenant or marry these people; thus, becoming one with them.

These are the last words of the chapter. The writer of Genesis seems to be giving Simeon and Levi the last word in this account; therefore, the author, Moses, approved of their actions. “…And the men were grieved, and they were very wroth, because he [Shechem] had wrought folly in Israel in lying with Jacob’s daughter; which thing ought not to be done(v. 7). [End of Genesis 34 narrative]


Leviticus 20:22 tells us, “Ye shall therefore keep all my statutes, and all my judgments, and do them: that the land, whither I bring you to dwell therein, spue you not out. 23 And ye shall not walk in the manners of the nation, which I cast out before you: for they committed all these things, and therefore I abhorred them [hate, detest, loathe]. 24 But I have said unto you, Ye shall inherit their land, and I will give it unto you to possess it, a land that floweth with milk and honey: I am the LORD your God, which have separated you from other people. 25 Ye shall therefore put difference between clean beasts and unclean, and between unclean fowls and clean: and ye shall not make your souls abominable by beast, or by fowl, or by any manner of living thing that creepeth on the ground, which I have separated from you as unclean. 26 And ye shall be holy unto me: for I the LORD am holy, and have severed you from other people, that ye should be mine.”

We see in this passage that God Himself is the author of segregation and separatism. There are nations or peoples (races) that God actually hates; and, our God has separated His covenant people from such races. It is amazing to me that the judeo-Christian churches claim to know their Bibles and yet this concept of separateness (a main part of holiness) is totally foreign to their theology. Compare this biblical doctrine of separatism with these quotes:

“We deplore racial, religious, ethnic, or class antagonisms. Although we believe the cultural diversity and encourage racial and ethnic pride, we reject separations, which promote alienation and set people and groups against each other; we envision an integrated community where people have a maximum opportunity for free and voluntary association.” – Humanist Manifesto, 1973

Notice they say, “we reject separations.” Yet, God is the author of separation. They say, “we envision an integrated community.” According to God’s Word, if you integrate, you will amalgamate. To amalgamate is to mix, combine, or consolidate. It looks like the humanists; the globalists, the liberals and all judeo-Christians are rebuilding the Tower of Babel by gathering together those whom God has scattered.

“We are going to multiply the family under God as one big family. This is our ideology. So, here we have no discrimination between races, color, creed or any such thing as that – no national boundaries here either.” – [the alleged] Rev. Sun Myung Moon, Opening Day, 1/16/73

“In marriage there is no barrier of heart so there could be no barrier of race or nationality. There are no barriers in the world of love.” – Moon, Living Sacrifice, 5/8/77

Is there anything in these “Moonie” quotes that the average judeo-Christian church disagrees? I do not believe so. They agree with Moon, the humanists, the Hivites and the jews.


There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:28).

The judeo churches would have us believe that Paul is lumping everyone together with Abraham’s seed. And, since we are all the same seed then why not intermarry? But this verse has nothing to do with race. It is speaking of salvation provided for in the unconditional covenant that God made with Abraham. God did not require Abraham to make any vow (he was fast asleep). Salvation is of the Lord.

Marriage is a different issue altogether. There is a big difference between a birth and a marriage. Your natural birth and your spiritual birth are a one-way covenant based on God’s promise to Abraham and his descendants. A marriage is a two-way covenant between two people.

One cannot build a doctrine on just one Bible verse. Especially since there are so many other Bible references that forbid interracial marriage. Another rule of rightly dividing the Word of truth is that “vague” passages should not take precedence over clear passages.

Judeos have another problem, if they believe the above verse means all are one, racially, and can marry. The verse says, “male nor female.” Will they admit to homosexual “marriage”?

Many preachers are proclaiming that everybody is “one” regardless of race. Another verse they like to misquote are the words of Jesus, “all ye are brethren.” “But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren” (Matt. 23:8). Once again, the issue here is not interracial marriage, but rather a reproof of the scribes and Pharisees. Further, Jesus spoke to the multitude and His disciples. And who was the multitude? They were all Israelites. That is why He called them “brethren.”

Another commonly twisted verse to make room for the intermingling of the races is that God is “no respecter of persons” (Acts 10:34, Rom. 2:11, Eph. 6:9). They want us to think this verse says, “There is no respect of races with God.” But what does it really say?

“…Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him” (Acts 10:34-35).

Again, the passages refer to the opportunity of salvation, not race mixing. In all the contexts where this phrase appears, there is nothing that would lead anyone to believe that race mixing is justified in any social environment (schools, buses, churches, marriages). Social equality is not found anywhere! God is only talking about equality of opportunity to be justified and in all cases is dealing with spiritual issues.

Another verse commonly misunderstood is Ephesians 2:14, He (Jesus) “hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us” which is speaking of all Israelites, not all peoples or races on the globe. The “both” (or two; see Ezek. 37:16-17, parable of the two sticks) becoming “one” are the two houses of Israel becoming one again in Christ. The “us” in the verse is speaking only of the Covenant people of God, not all races. Paul proves this in all his letters by referring to the prophets of the Old Testament. Nowhere does Paul imply that all people on the planet are one. Again, this verse is not speaking of race mixing or marriage but of the common salvation and oneness of all Israelites.


At one time, nearly every state in the U.S. had anti-miscegenation laws. These laws were repealed by the Supreme Court (Lovings v. Virginia, 338 US 1) in 1967. Prior to the trial, the judge who ruled in this case, stated in an opinion that:

“Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and He placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with His 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 opinion is in harmony with Acts 17:26-27, “…he made of one every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed seasons, and the bounds of their habitation; that they should seek God (ASV). God’s reason for separateness is that they might know God’s will.

“Miscegenation is genocide; it is annihilation through assimilation! It is the most subtle way on earth to annihilate races. Those who interracially marry are guilty of racial genocide. …If all races mix, then there are no black, red, yellow, or white races.” – Dallas Jackson

Marriage Counseling

Some people have their reasons for marrying outside their race; but I can think of one reason not to – the Word of God forbids it! The Apostle Paul said that those who marry “shall have trouble in the flesh” (I Cor. 7:28). If this is true within the same race, how much more will issues become more complicated for those who marry outside their race?

There are six important facts that should be considered before entering into marriage (by pastor J. V. Foster, Interracial Marriage, 1980):

1. First of all is the importance of every race of people in maintaining their own cultural background. In many cases, this produces conflicts of interest in racially mixed marriages. The importance of maintaining certain cultural habits to a person will affect their relationship with another if they are not willing to make changes. No marriage can survive unless both parties are willing to “give up” a few things to make it work. It’s good parlor chatter to speak otherwise, but I’ve never seen it work in real life as pastor for over 20 years in counseling all kinds of marital problems.

2. The second is the emotional attitude and behavior. Because of the basic philosophy of different races, their emotional response to many negative or positive situations in the home will often produce a problem. This will occur not only in the area of religious beliefs and practices, but also in the area of facing difficulties in general. Acting and reacting because of pre-established emotional responses are based on fundamental religious beliefs, for instance, priorities or the value of life or property. In a crisis a person of one racial background will not be affected by what has happened, but the other who has a different set of values will be. Conflict develops between them because there’s always the idea that the “other” one doesn’t really care or understand the seriousness of the crisis. Many examples could be cited, but time and space do not permit herein.

3. Third is the genetic problem. This is a touchy subject for most, but we now have too much scientific evidence to deny that there is a genetic difference in the races. I am not offended by that, nor should the yellow man, nor the black man, etc. I think it’s a point to be proud of that God made a distinction between us in this area, because in the basic nature of man, he wants to be “different”, while the “socialistic” mentality is trying to put us all in the same pot and stir us into nothingness. Something deep within keeps saying, “God made us different for a reason; I’m not an accident and my people are not an accident.” The variety of contributions that each race can and does make to the world is amazing… God has created variety in the animal world, vegetable world, ether world, the mineral world, human world, and spiritual world; and all kinds and species genetically programmed to be what God intended them to be, to fulfill a destiny that genetic process alone can fulfill.

4. Fourth is the home environmental problem. The families usually don’t want interracial marriages to take place. Mostly, it’s not because of prejudice. It’s because of embarrassment. They are embarrassed to think that their son or daughter would fall in love with another race. Intelligent and godly people also realize that God made them and their family a certain way, and they’d rather not see their children change the genetic structure of the blood line. They are proud to be what they are, and they should be. Also, the public in general resents it. Persecution and pressure comes to bear on the couple and their offspring as a result. To young people, these don’t seem to be great obstacles, but as time goes on, they get weary of the battle. Marriage is a full time job, and the only job that exceeds it in work and responsibility is rearing children. Marriages that start between two of the same race, with plenty of money, good education, with both families happy about it, still have problems; and it’s a hard job to make it work. When you begin to add the handicaps of culture, emotional difference, genetic difference, and environmental conditions, the load is even greater. It’s hard enough to get along without four more strikes against you at the start. Once we are married, we find we must make many changes if we are to get along… without offence.

5. Fifth, is the scriptural evidence. There are so many Scriptures where our Lord had forbidden inter-marriage. Even if we don’t understand all the biblical reasons, it would be wise to take God at His word on the subject and accept His wisdom until we do understand all the whys.

6. Sixth, and perhaps the most important [an elaboration on the above]. We cannot use the “unity” we have in spirit to justify the mixing of “natural” seed on the basis that we are all one in Christ. Why? Because it is obvious that the death of our Savior did not change anything genetically. It did not change the emotional status of man, nor the social status, the physical status of things clean and unclean, the environmental status of man, nor did it nullify Scripture. God doesn’t establish laws in one part of the Book, only to change and violate them in another part of the Book.

Dangers in Miscegenation

Marriage is not only a social and legal relationship, but it is also proof of a union that can be achieved only when the genes of the partners truly unite. Marriage should be harmonious state of oneness, not discord and strife. Things that happen in the outside world have already happened on the inside world of the genes. If young people are not far-sighted enough to realize that disharmony occurs when two sets of genes of different races come together and that disharmony also occurs in the formation of mixed offspring, then as adults they likely will not understand that there is enmity between the races that can never be harmonized in the outer world as well.

We can observe in most mongrels what the genes must accomplish when forced to build a new creature. Each set of genes tries to build the individual after its own kind, while at the same time, tries to overcome what the other genes are building. The respective genes of each race are programmed to build structures that are inherently different in makeup. The effect is chaotic – the Bible calls it “confusion.” How can a marriage, or a nation, be built on such when harmony and good will is needed?

Philip Jones in his book, Racial Hybridity, 1979, reveals many physical problems that result from miscegenation:

“…The organism, with its double set of chromosomes, is in a sense a double personality. Those chromosomes derive from two markedly different stocks a certain degree of disharmony is only to be expected in humans as in animals, and also…of asymmetry in temperamental characters as much as in physiology and general build. So it is reasonable to expect that certain normal inconsistencies in the behavior of ordinary persons are likewise due to their being hybrids between stocks of different physiological and psychological make-up. Comparatively pure races and individuals certainly tend to be more stable in mind and body than do the newer, more heterogeneous peoples.” – Eldon Moore, Heredity Mainly Human, p. 88, London, 1934

“The morale of mongrelism partakes of the physical deformity, and the vices of the mind are as striking and constant as the defects of the body. A creature (or a nation) with half the nature and wants of the white man united in the same existence with those of the Indian (or other hybrids), is confronted with…a population…perpetually at war with itself.” – John Van Evrie, Negroes and Negro Slavery, p. 159, N.Y., 1861


“Van Evrie observes, that unlike animals such as the mule, mulattoes [which comes from ‘mule’] do not become sterile until the fourth generation (ibid, p. 146). In explaining why mulattoes are frequently sterile, Milunsky says, ‘Most causes of infertility can be traced to defects in the woman’s reproductive system. A significant number of those women…have blocked Fallopian tubes’ (Know Your Genes, p. 298, Boston, 1977). A very small number of those women have no ova at all. About 12 percent of all married couples are infertile today, with males being responsible 10-15 percent of the time (ibid, p. 144). When males are the cause, it is due to an insufficient number of sperm or too low quality of sperm. Mules, incidentally, do not have sperm.” – Jones, Racial Hybridity, p. 69


“Dr. Dixon writes, that the rise in disease cannot be blamed on viruses or germs, but on race mixing: ‘Look, and wherever you see the greatest intermingling of races there you see raging tuberculosis, carcinoma and struma in all their terrorizing forms…there you see the scientist with his microscope hunting for the enemy of life and health in the sputa, the excreta and the cell elements; when in fact the modification of the racial type, by the influence of some media not apparent in the cell elements themselves, altered in some way by miscegenation, generates this virus – these microbes, these bacilli, which claims for their victims more than twenty-five percent of the dying’ (Medical News, The Morbid Proclivities and Retrogressive Tendencies in the Offspring of Mulattoes, W. A. Dixon, M. D., Vol. LXI, 1892, p. 181). Bacteria have the same function everywhere in nature – to decompose dead or diseased tissues. They cannot feed on living substances. Any cell that cannot defend itself from ‘germs’ is either dead or unfit to live.” – Racial Hybridity, p.71

“Manoiloff writes in an article that there must be some specific substance in the blood that differentiates the races from one another. His experiments show that he was able to discover one way to tell the difference between Russian and Jewish blood, and he could tell if they had been mixed (American Journal of Medical Sciences, The Mulatto a Hybrid, Josiah Nott, M.D. Vol. 6, 1843, p. 11-21). All in all however, this is a science which has either been neglected or else is being conducted secretly. What, for instance, would the Red Cross say to the public if scientists were to reveal that races differ in blood makeup? The Red Cross has not separated blood donations according to race since World War II.” – Racial Hybridity, p. 75

“Sickle Cell Anemia is a blood disease prevalent among mixed-breeds, not pure negroes! Milunsky says that this desease occurs among Greeks and Asiatic Indians as well as negroes, causing about 100,000 deaths every year (Know Your Genes, Boston, 1977, p. 68). Dr. Rife adds: ‘Some of the hill tribes in western India have from 15 to 25 percent cell sicklers, although they show no other evidence of Negro ancestry’ (Race and Modern Science, Robert Kuttner, 1967, p. 135)” – Ibid, p. 75

In his book, Jones also mentions other blood diseases: Thalassemia, Tay-Sachs; also Idiocy and Imbecility; and a predisposition to Insanity. Fishberg reveals: “In modern times it was shown that the Jews in various countries are from two to four times more liable to insanity than the non-Jews among whom they live” (The Jews: A Study of Race and Environment, Dr. Maurice Fishberg, N.T., 1911, p. 338). He also mentions that dwarfs and pygmies are mainly due to race-mixing (The Negro Races, Jerome Dowd, Vol. I, N.Y., 1907, p. 5-6); and, that other bodily deformities, including the Mongolian Spot (or alleged “birth-mark”), develop because of racial contamination.


The founders of our country knew about some of the dangers of race mixing. Why would their motto, “E Pluribus Unum” (out of many, one), mean out of many races, one America? That is nonsense – ignoring true history and revising it for genocidal purposes. Their intention was in harmony with Scripture – out of many White cultures, one American nation.

Just two examples to prove this point: the Preamble to the Constitution and one of our Presidents.

1) “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

What is Posterity? “The offspring of one progenitor to the furthest generation.” And what is a Progenitor? “An ancestor in the direct line FOREFATHER”. – Merriam-Webster Dictionary

2) “I will say then, that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races [applause]; that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this, that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together, there must be the position of superior and inferior; and I as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.” – Abraham Lincoln, Debate at Charleston, Illinois, September 18, 1858.

And certainly, there are many more examples in history.

Listen to me, you who pursue righteousness, you who seek the LORD! Look to the rock from which you were cut, to the quarry from which you were hewn. Look to Abraham your father, and to Sarah who gave you birth. For when he was only one person I called him, but I made him fruitful and made him many.” – Isa. 51:1-2, ISV

Adamkind, God’s creation, was told to “be fruitful and multiply” (Gen. 1:28). We are “fearfully and wonderfully” made (Ps. 139:14). God’s purpose in creating our race was to honor Him by keeping His Law. “Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man” (Eccl. 12:13). Establishing His Kingdom is His will and our prayer, as exemplified by our Lord’s prayer (Lk. 11:2). His spirit is already in us from birth, as attested to by two verses in The Testament of Naphtali:

“For as the potter knoweth the vessel, how much it is to contain, and bringeth clay accordingly, so also doth the Lord make the body after the likeness of the spirit, and according to the capacity of the body doth He implant the spirit. And the one does not fall short of the other by a third part of a hair; for by weight, and measure, and rule was all the creation made.” – v. 14-15, The Lost Books of the Bible and The Forgotten Books of Eden, p. 251

Only the White race (Adamkind) has the capacity to house God’s spirit, for we are made in His image (Gen. 1:26) in order to be like Him. “Truly, I tell you with certainty, unless a person is born from above he cannot see the kingdom of God” (Jn. 3:3, ISV). God is in the White creation from conception. He merely needs the opportunity and occasion to manifest Himself and rule in the White man.

“All is race, there is no other truth, and every race must fall which carelessly suffers its blood to become mixed.” – Benjamin Disraeli, Prime Minister of Great Britain, in Tancred, by Frederick Warne, 1868.

Every civilization that has ignored the dangers of race mixing has been bred out and their culture and nation destroyed. Will Americans wake up one morning and ask themselves, what happened to our country; indeed, what happened to our race?! Sadly, most today, since they are racially ignorant, will not have a clue as to what happened. They just won’t get it because they have been convinced that all “people groups” are the same and there is no such thing as race. When they find themselves, pretty much alone, among hybrid people with all semblance of Christianity gone and society in turmoil, will they ask their religious and political leaders what they missed? They probably will not have a clue either, unless some of them have heard the teachings of Christian Identity. May God shake up and wake up the White man; is our prayer.