On Human Race: Foundational Matters

Hosts

Woe

aka Eschatologuy

We are all sons of Adam — no Christian can deny this. However, we are not all sons of Japheth, nor are we all sons of Ham, and nor are we all sons of Shem. The descent of the nations (i.e., races) of man are given in the Table of Nations (Genesis 10). Nature is entirely in accord with Scripture. The nations can be seen in a number of ways — geographically, genotypically, behaviorally.

In this episode, we will be covering the fundamentals of human race. In a future episode, we will cover the theological import of these facts (if you are looking for Galatians 3:28, please wait for that future episode). This topic makes many Christians uncomfortable, but discomfort is not the standard — truth is. Test what we say against Scripture and against the natural facts.

Percentage of Shared DNA

Nothing we say in this episode (except some of the scientific matters) would sound at all out of place to the overwhelming majority of your ancestors — yes, even the Christian ones. So you must ask yourself: Was the Church and every Christian wrong for thousands of years or has the modern world drifted away from the truth? We can give you the information, but you must make that decision for yourself.

As we will cover in the episode, there are four categories of men when it comes to understanding and accepting the reality of race:

  1. the Atheist/Evolutionist (who can prove race from the science, but often denies it nonetheless);
  2. the Marxist (who once affirmed the reality of race, but now denies it for political purposes);
  3. the naïve Christian or otherwise (who holds ‘one race, the human race’, parroting the second category, perhaps unwittingly); and
  4. the Christian who affirms the reality of God’s created order, which includes race.

We are firmly in the fourth category. Listen carefully, and join us. God’s truth is always better than whatever anyone else can promise.

Subscribe to the podcast here.

Transcript

The transcript for this episode can be found here

Other transcripts can be found here

Comments?

Join the discussion on Telegram, visit the feedback form or comment below.

Reader interactions

20 Replies to “On Human Race: Foundational Matters”

  1. One race the human race. All made in God’s Image. But different Nations. Whose boundaries are set by God.

    Reply

    1. You should probably listen to the episode again. You missed some key information.

      Reply

      1. I am essentially in agreement. And it should certainly accord with everything in the Podcast.

        Nations are different Individual Ethnic groups of said Human race with distinct boundaries who are made in God’s Image.

        I certainly don’t consider them identical to states.

        Reply

        1. It is typically better to refer to the political entity as a “state” or a “country” and the people as a “race” or a “nation”.

          Reply

          1. Agreed.

            Interestingly the Greek word for Nation: “Ethnos”. Is the origin of the English word “Ethnic”. The Human Adamic Race composed of various Ethnicities(Nations). Should allow both equal dignity and accountability for all.

            Whilst accounting for all National/Ethnic differences. There is no need to dehumanize humans in order to hold them accountable and put them to death after a fair trial and death row.

            Since Genesis 9:6 involves an Image of God being put to death for committing sacrilege for murdering an Image of God. The OT Law involves due process and annihilation of wicked individuals in the community.

            Only such a thing would militate against the use of grisly torture as punishment for example.

  2. What’s interesting is the fact that. The equality of the sexes is posited as the Edenic Ideal:

    “I think there’s a danger of confusing ‘traditional Church of England doctrine’ with the teachings of the New Testament. Inequality of the sexes was part of the story (after the fall), but there is also a countervailing theme of radical equality and elevation of women’s status.”

    https://twitter.com/Dr_W_E_Bulmer/status/1616232556898226177

    But in reality as Adam named the animals. Adam also “Named” or “Classified” his wife as “Woman” for she was taken out of Man. Since in the Ancient World naming indicates dominion over a creature.

    In reality Eden already has Inequality built-in. Paradise is a Kingdom. Not an Egalitarian Utopia. And since Adam and Eve reflected Christ and the Church. And that wasn’t a contingency of the Fall.

    This is why their so called “Christian” ideal and their idea of Paradise is Communist. For Equality is synonymous with Eden.

    This is why dissolving all the Nations into Babel is also an Ideal.

    Reply

  3. Where can I find the info on the claims of the, let’s say, “lack of hybrid vigor” and increased infertility when it comes to mixed race couples? I looked at some of the links but couldn’t find the info there. Thank you.

    Reply

    1. If fertility is highest amongst third- or fourth-cousins, then it necessarily follows that there are negative consequences (e.g., lower fertility) of going outside that genetic pool. The surest signal of genetic fitness is fertility, after all. See, e.g., An Association Between the Kinship and Fertility of Human Couples.

      Reply

      1. @Corey J. Mahler

        Given that there are rare instances of international marriages allowed by God in Ancient Israel. The lack of blanket prohibition on such a practice. And God’s programmed in-group preference including marriages of those of the same Nation which means the majority will always be of the same Nation.

        I suspect that such a thing would allow for genetic adaptations to cross Nations if said traits are viable. As they are integrated in the margins.

        If such mixes are failures. Some of those at the margins dies. But if successful then good adaptations could spread.

        Like resistance to certain diseases. Or lactose tolerances. At least in regards to International Marriages. That means the optimum should be occasional but not common. And that is following the Ruth model “Your people are my people, Your God my God”.

        Very unlike how it happens in the modern day.

        Similar to cultural exchanges. Which is faster and less fraught with the same risk. But picking and choosing the best allows Nations to adapt in tandem according to their situations.

        Reply

        1. I am not sure that the genetics on this would work out in that way. We have no example of new information being created — only information lost. So any adaptation has come about through the loss of genetic information, which is not reversible. For what you propose to work, there would need to be a reservoir of useful information in one population that could be transplanted or infused into another population, which is a fairly complicated matter.

          Reply

          1. Peter Frost also has an article on how intense sexual selection on women lead to the multicolored nature of white Europeans:
            https://peterfrost.substack.com/p/a-people-of-many-colors

            The nature of hunting in Northern Europe led to a surplus of women of Operational Sex Ratio compared to Men on the marriage market. And the lack of logistics that enabled polygyny would have ensured the intensity of sexual selection held.

            Hence hair and eye color diversified.

  4. Israel is The Church, and The Church is Israel. The Holocaust is a joke, we’ve been lied to by fake scientists who do fake DNA research who spin [nonsense] to fit their evolutionary moloch ways.

    Old Testament Israel (The Church) was told to not marry outside Israel (The Church), and different “races” could be married (Ruth, Rahab, the Egyptians who fled with them, etc) as long as those other “races” became Israelites (Christians). In the New Testament we are told not to yoke ourselves to non Christians (non Israel) Paul explicitly says to not mess around with geneologies as genologies and Rascism is a Jewish/Talmudic/Moloch/Satan thing.

    The requirement for marriage is two believers, dedicated to serving the Lord together the best they can, raising any children God blesses them with, caring for children in their church that God gives to others, making their town better than it was before them, spreading the Good News, sharing the Sacraments together, there is absolutely nothing in Scripture or Church history that supports what you’re saying.

    Like I said, I’ll give you the warning Paul gave to the Early Church, stop worrying about geneologies like the Talmudic Moloch worshippers do.

    Your broadcast on lost topics like Usury, shaking rhe dust off our feet after witnessing with rejection, was pretty good.

    But this is some weird Darwin Talmudic Moloch madness here.

    I have FAR more, eternally more, in common with my Patriarchal Traditional African Confessional Lutherans than I do these “white” pagan witches, random white non-Christians, we are brothers and susters in christ, not in genealogy.

    Reply

    1. In the First Article of the Creed, we confess our belief in God, the Father Almighty, Maker/Creator of heaven and earth (which is to say all things). To deny the reality of Creation is to deny the Creator. Part of that Creation is the races of men, which can be readily proven (and has been many times, just recently with MRI data). The Church and nations are two separate things. With regard to the Kingdom of the right hand, there are certain considerations and duties, but this is also true with regard to the kingdom of the left hand. No, it is not enough simply to marry another Christian, because that would be considering only the right-hand Kingdom and ignoring the left. Listen to the entire series on race and you will see things more clearly.

      Reply

  5. Nice work. Now throw genetic corruption of the nephilim into the mix for a few thousand years, or the division of the days of peleg, ;).. j/k
    Seriously though, I’ll be recommending this heavily

    Reply

  6. Thanks for putting out these podcasts. They’re outstanding.

    When I looked at the World Map of Y-DNA Haplogroups, it looks like the closest haplogroup to Mt. Ararat is G2a. The same chart shows the “Adam” haplogroup near modern day Cameroon. Where was Eden? Most people say it was in modern Iraq, between the Tigris and Euphrates. Or was it in Cameroon? Or somewhere in between?

    Reason I ask is you still get this “we wuz kangs” out of Africa stuff, and this map appears to support that claim, when you follow the migrations from the Adam haplogroup through F. At least it doesn’t obviously refute it. Can you clarify? Thanks.

    Reply

    1. Given the Flood, I am not sure that we can really identify the location of Eden. Any attempts would merely be speculation. We just know where the Ark came to rest.

      Reply

  7. Jean Paul m Lorist Fri 22 Sep 2023 at 19:09 EDT

    I am 1/8th Argentine and 85% either Dutch/Germanic/English. My paternal great grandmother was Argentine in the sense that she was a Spanish European with tan skin and brown eyes and hair. My full sister has blonde hair and blue eyes looking pure Aryan. I have brown eyes and brown hair with a good tan, but a white facial structure nonetheless. It is interesting how genetics played out in this instance of my genetic background. I am very proud of my grandfather being a Dutch Afrikaner engineer and I am following down the same path. Furthermore, I have an affinity for the Spanish as well even though I am largely white, my looks could pass for Spaniard to some people, and some would be very surprised that I am mostly Germanic European. I was led to this podcast from the same patterns that are obvious today in the world around us and I recently came to Christ a few years ago. Thank you.

    Reply

  8. Did you ever consider the “Pre-adamite” thesis?

    Reply

    1. Scripture is very clear that Adam is father of us all and Eve is the ‘mother of all living’ — there are no humans who are not descended from Adam and Eve.

      Reply

Comment?