A Racist Gets Schooled

Okay so I am dumb and don't really understand what exactly this guy did. Can you explain...

You just earned some cold, hard treasure in Heaven, Josiah! Way to shut down those poser-Christians!

stina, click on the screen shots of his original post. if there are special places in hell, this guy will have one that's nice and hot.

...but I thought Israel was irrelevant?

I can't read it. It's too little.

If you can't read it, roll your mouse over the image and hold it there - an icon with arrows should appear at the bottom right of the image. Click on it - it should expand the image to full size.

Man, Josiah, what a find - it makes me physically ill.

After about 15min of boiling anger I've calmed down just a bit on this one and have migrated to an odd mixture of pity and contempt. This guy is offensive on so many fronts it's nearly comical - unfortunately there's nothing funny about hate or watching someone act out on their lunacy.

I hope he has some clinical diagnosis that explains the level of insanity that runs through his site. It seems like a bad dream - some bizarro cult that's feed by corrupt blend of psudo-Reformed thought, fear, LSD and dementia.

Harry Seabrook's Patriarch's Path Profile

He likes chili

Harry apologizes for something

Look, you morons, Harry didn't post that stuff. I did. He hosts my site, he doesn't write it. Not that he's too worried about some pansy driving by and taking a picture of his house. And that last freakin' commenter is obsessed. You folks need to get a grip. Show me where I'm wrong from the Bible. Yeah, that would be a good start. Or just keep calling Harry, who never even wrote the stuff, a Nazi.

You guys rock.

Josiah, thanks for giving Steve and me a good laugh with the images you used as replacement. Very clever.

Wouldn't it be nice to be able to pin a neat clinical diagnosis on this kind of hate? Borderline personality disorder or antisocial personality disorder--some label to explain why such evil exists. For some reason, blaming a psychosis seems to make us feel a little safer. Not to discount the validity of psychological disorders, but unfortunately the more obvious and likely diagnosis is two words: total depravity. This man is unrestrained by God's grace in his life and is embracing his sin nature.

Instead of trying to pin a neat clinical diagnosis on me, it would be really "nice" if you could just show me from the Bible where I'm wrong, and where I've said anything that's untrue, that you somehow seem to think constitutes "hate". You hate me and call me names for saying the same things that RL Dabney, the great Presybterian theologian said, and for believing what virtually all our people believed for centuries and centuries, up until about 50 years ago.

Hey Badonicus, if Harry doesn't mind his address posted, how 'bout you give us your real name and address? You in the Naples area too?

Why don't you post yours Kathryn?

No offense (well, maybe lots of offense) to one of the 4 theologians you've ever read, but R.L. Dabney was a racist too.

No shit, Sherlock. Now, for the fourteenth time, can you do anything to refute the things he said besides call him a name?

Badonicus, can you post a link to your beliefs about the types of relationships that you believe are appropriate between white and black people? Both romantic and non-romantic ones.

never mind - I think I've found a great deal of it.

I was reading your friend Harry's response to RC Sproul Jr. In it, he admits more than once that the Bible does not call interracial marrying a sin. If that is the case, then I don't understand the opposition to it. Simply noting that interracial marriage is rare does not, to me, provide much help either (which seemed to be one of the things Harry emphasized in his response to Sproul). If it is not a sin, then why the hostility towards it? Why even bother to get worked up over it - particularly since you're ridiculing a family who are not even in your own state, and who are believers and therefore (presumably) have a connection to you that should transcend race.

Harry has refined his views since he wrote that, and believes, just as almost all of our ancestors believed, that interracial marriage is a wicked sin.

The Gospel transcends race, but it certainly doesn't obliterate it. And if it did, then how could we argue against gay marriage? For the Gospel transcends gender just as it does race, according to Galatians 3:28

IR marriage used to be illegal in this country, until the Supreme Court invalidated those laws. At the time, something like 85% of people disapproved of IR marriage. Bigger majorities than those today who disapprove of homo marriages.

We all know that if it weren't for the laws against IR marriage being tossed, we wouldn't even be having a discussion about gay marriage, let alone seeing them actually taking place. Ignoring the distinctions that God has created is not wise, and when you saying race isn't important, it won't be long until people start saying sex isn't important. People are just people, man. The only thing that matters is if 2 people love each other. That's what we were told about IR marriage, and that's what we're being told about gay marriage.

And should anyone be foolish enough to deny that legalizing IR marriage led directly and ineluctably to gay marriage, let them go read the actual decision of the Mass. Supreme Court legalizing gay marriage. In it, they referred to the Loving v Virginia case 25 times. That's the case where the Supreme Court invalidated all laws against IR marriage.

Hmmm Cant find direct reference in scripture about Pigment and the way it relates to uor station in life hmmmmm... maybe the good Lord above is letting us figure out that one on our own

Badonicus, let's start with the language - if that's not spewing hate, I'm not exactly sure how to characterize it. It's certainly not love, compassion or concern, all of which you would seem to be injoined to show to others by the religion you claim to honor. Psalm 1 says, "Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked or stand in the way of sinners or sit in the seat of mockers." If you aren't "mocking" people what are you doing? It seems like you are mocking people.

It also might be a good idea to acquaint you with linking law in terms of permissible uses and re-uses of content that you did not create yourself. I'd suggest some folks get themselves a lawyer. Seems like an ideal opportunity for pro bono work.

Acts 18:26 and 27 states, "And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth. And has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings, so that they should seek the Lord in the hope that they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us."

Thanks for posting that, Og. Yes, God appointed their boundaries, and we've messed with them. F Nigel Lee has discussed this, and said it wasn't wise. But he's probably a racist, too, huh?

Ed, if what I wrote is "hate", then what in the world would you say about Nehemiah? He didn't just criticized racemixers; he cursed them, beat them, and ripped their hair out.

Address "one blood " u avoider u

"One blood" is a bigger problem for you than it is for me. I've never claimed that racial groups have different kinds of blood. But you seem to be implying that if all men share "one blood", it therefore means that there aren't any significant differences between people, and that therefore it's wrong to oppose multiracialism, integration, and IR marriage. Clearly, this passage encompasses the much maligned pair "Adam and Steve". Well, God made Adam and Steve of "one blood", and if "one blood" means there's no such thing as racial differences, it must also mean there's no such thing as gender differences. If it all boils down to blood, it all boils down to blood. Period.

You haven't really addressed my question about mocking. Please tell me how you aren't mocking.

In terms of Nehemiah, you've got to look at the whole passage of Nehemiah 13. To really want to apply Nehemiah, you'd have to say that we should only marry Jews and those who adopt Judeism since that's what he believed at the time. Nehemiah was not punishing them for leaving Christianity, but for abandoning the God of Israel. Let's not cherry-pick scripture here. I'm fairly certain you wouldn't agree that we should only marry the Children of Israel, but that's exactly what Nehemiah demanded. It's also important to notice that the reason given that he rebuked, cursed, and beat some of them is not because they were of another race, but because, "Half of their children spoke the language of Ashdod or the language of one of the other peoples, and did not know how to speak the language of Judah." (Neh. 13:24) and "Was it not because of marriages like these that Solomon king of Israel sinned?" (Neh. 13: 26a) Note that it doesn't say that Solomon's marriages were sin, but that it was because of his marriages (where the wives did not share Solomon's faith) that he sinned?

Wow your logic is realy bad , No I think Adam and Steve are not compatable for a whole set of different reasons ... One is obvious B. can u guess what that is? Yipes I just realized my time is up for chatter with u. Life must go on

It's also important to notice the context of the whole passage, the results of intermarriage on faith and observance thing was important to Nehemiah, but it's mentioned in the midst of a much larger list of issues. This is also not a passage dealing with commands, but instead is a narrative of what happened and what he did. What Nehemiah did is not explicitly endorsed by the text or made normative

I think you're really discounting the transforming power of Jesus and the result of His transforming power on our view of the law. Jesus has fulfilled the law - setting us free from its tyranny and told us to love our neighbors as ourselves. Who is your neighbor? It's illustrated perfectly in the parable of the Good Samaritan. Please note that the Samaritan's are exactly who Nehemiah is referring to, yet the Lord picks this race, dispised and hated by the Jews of His day, to be represented by the one who shows us what a true neighbor is.

no sense "reasoning" with this guy. "pearls to swine" and all that. I'm sure he's enjoying the attention too.

Lots of godly men in the Bible mocked. Look at Elijah. There are many others. The passage you refer to is talking about those who mock God. Get yourself some good commentaries.

I hate to break it to you, but, uh, Nehemiah didn't practice Judaism. He was a Christian. Read your Bible. Judaism is the perversion of OT Christianity, or Phariseeism, which is what modern day Orthodox Jews practice. I'm curious-what sort of church do you go to that teaches that Nehemiah practiced Christ denying Judaism, and not Christianity? Has your pastor never read in the New Testament where it says they followed Christ in the wilderness?

And you say that NH was only upset about the language? Right. Then why did he tell them to divorce their wives, and abandon their mixed race kids? Pretty harsh measures over a little diversity. All he had to do was tell them to spend time on language instruction. And what did the little kids do to deserve to have their dad walk out on them? Especially the infants, who didn't even speak any language? But do you see any exceptions, where NH told them to hang on to the little ones? No, he simply told them to abandon their IR marriages and mixed children. Pretty harsh. Besides, the very crowd attacking me would no doubt insist that bilingualism is one of the "blessings" of diversity.

"I think you're really discounting the transforming power of Jesus and the result of His transforming power on our view of the law. Jesus has fulfilled the law - setting us free from its tyranny and told us to love our neighbors as ourselves."

Really? Jesus fulfilled the law and set us free from it? But gay marriage is wrong? Or did Jesus only overthrow those sexual laws that you don't like, and just happened to endorse the ones you do like?

Oh, yes. I've failed to mention that I am a homosexual, and Jesus is pretty clear about giving a big "thumbs up" to rabid faggotry.

Look, if there's any love, kindness or concern for others coming out of you, it's hiding itself pretty well. For someone claiming Christ, it seems that you don't take his commands about loving your neighbor, your enemies, etc. very seriously.

A number of the "learned men" you seem to love to quote would have attempted to have civil discourse, but it seems that's not really possible at this point. If this is a conversation about who is angrier or who can just spew invective longest, I'm glad to concede. You win that battle - it wasn't the one I was fighting. I was hoping we could discuss on a level somewhere beyond a spitting contest, but spit away if you choose. I'm engaging with the second half of the "Love your enemies" verse at this point.

I'm absolutely blown await that you find my comments on this thread "angry" and characterize it as "spewing invective". I really am blown away. I think that says a lot more about you than it does me. When did Christians become a bunch of pansies?

And, in case anyone is too dumb to figure it out, I didn't post the comment above claiming to be a fag.

Hey arent we all a bit mixed already?
If you are "pure race" please go ahead and stay that way. Do you have papers by the way?

But seriously B. I wonder how do you feel about, say a 1/2 Italian 1/2 Swed marrying a 1/2 Irish 1/4 English 1/4 bloggers choice?

Speaking of mixed... did anyone notice the family pic Harry posted of his wife & kids? Kinda dark aren't they? Makes one wonder...

Hey Barb! How's it hangin'?

Thank you so much for this lovely entry. Anyone is welcome to drive by my house anytime, wherever it may be, and take a nice picture of my Glock. Please drive by slowly because my aim is sometimes erratic but my 8yos has a much steadier hand.

The reasons for prohibitions against interracial marriage in the OT have nothing to do with interracial marriage being inherently evil - just like the prohibitions against eating pork have nothing to do with pork being inherently evil.

If you actually bother to read the contexts surrounding the OT prohibitions against mingling with other races, you will find that the issue is religious, not racial. The Jews are God's unique and holy people, and they are not to marry into Gentile races and cultures, just as they are not to allow Gentiles to worship with them, or eat pork.

This finds NT fulfillment in the prohibitions against marrying unbelievers, since the people of God in the NT are defined by faith in Christ, not a nationality like the OT.

And calling the religion of the OT "Christianity" is highly suspect; it would make a lot more sense to call Christianity "Judaism," and claim modern Judaism is a result of infighting.

Tell it to Nehemiah, Phil. If it was a religious issue, and not a racial issue, the book makes no sense. If what you say is correct, then why didn't Nehemiah simply tell the husbands to instruct their wives and half breed kids in the covenant? Why did he tell them to ABANDON them instead? And if it was a religious issue, then how in the world could Nehemiah justify kicking infants and toddlers out of the covenant? They surely weren't old enough to be practicing idolatry.

Oh, and Phil, you're extremly confused and bibilically ignorant if you really believe what you wrote about Christianity and Judaism.

Not a good sign.

Bardonicus has a good question to Phil, but I think I see a reasonable answer. God told his people to abandon the idolaters and their children because he wanted to purify his people. Israel had been (and will again be) corrupted by marrying idolaters and then being overcome by the darkness of the idolatry. God told them to abandon the idolaters because he knew that his people were too weak to not be negatively effected by them.

aduff,
How were 6 month old and two year old children practicing "idolatry"? And how are grown men so weak that they would be overcome by the idolatry of two and three year old kids?

I don't think the children were a direct problem (i.e. they were practicing idolatry). It's the fact that they were children of an idolatrous parent that made them a problem. The Israelites, just like many modern Christians, were great at bending God's rules (Israelite Man: "God said to abandon the idolaters, but surely he wouldn't want me to get rid of my son's mother, so I think it'll be o.k. to keep her around"). It seems to make sense that God wasn't giving them much room to bend his rules by telling them to get rid of the children as well.

I don't oppose gay marriage, so I don't see the relevance of bringing it up. I'm also not a theonomist, so that may be part of it..

And can you provide me with where you're getting the 85% statistic which states that that many people oppose interracial marriage? Even if that statistic was true, it would still not ultimately help your argument. After all, what percentage of the United States do not support theonomic ethics, yet presumably in your mind, theonomic ethics is correct regardless of its popularity. So tell me why it should matter, from the point of view of ethics, what percentage of the people support or oppose anything.

And its a logical fallacy to say that legalizing interracial marriage led to gay marriage. Post hoc ergo propter hoc, right? Establishing causality is not so easy as simply quoting a course case.

Interesting that your friend Harry now believes interracial marriage is a sin when, not too long ago, he explicitly said in his correspondence with RC Sproul Jr. that it was most certainly not a sin. Do you happen to know, off hand, what percentage of Reformed theologians support that view - not simply among living folk, but historically? That does seem the more relevant thing for you, and I cannot imagine that it would be anything more than a fraction. After all, the bible's condemnations of Israel intermarrying - which I believe must be where you and he are getting the idea that it's wrong - can and always has been interpreted as typological language. That is, we are not to be unequally yoked with the non-believer. . But even in Israel, if an individual wished to convert to Judaism, and they underwent the appropriate prescribed ceremonies, they could marry that person, despite the difference in background. Boaz and Ruth come immediately to mind, but there are more general descriptions of how this is to be accomplished in the ceremonial laws. I seem to remember a section discussing marriage to conquered people - ie, after Israel has defeated an enemy, and the people are taken as slaves, a man could take as a wife one of the women, only after she underwent extensive ceremonial cleansing. Once that occured, she was grafted into the community of God's people, receiving more or less full rights appropriate for her gender in that time of redemptive history, and they were married. That law seems to undermine any racial argument, which if were correct, would lead me to think that even after conversion occured, racially different individuals could never marry. But we see this being allowed.

Badonicus, you never answered the question about a "1/2 Italian 1/2 Swed marrying a 1/2 Irish 1/4 English 1/4 bloggers choice?"

Is that wrong too?

Okay, Badonicus!

New City Fellowship is out of your league. You could never understand the good this Church does.

I have known Pastor Nabors for more than ten years and I must warn you, you can never measure up.

I no longer even attend NCF but only because I feel the Lord wants me where I am now, not because I don't want to be back.

I'll add you to my prayer list.

Scott,
I'm not your secretary. You can look up the facts about opposition to IR marriage yourself. They're not difficult to find at all. And I didn't hang my argument on them, I was simply pointing out that Judeochristian family value types, which would include many of the readers here, love to point out that most people oppose gay marriage, and use that to bolster their case against gay marriage.

Speaking of which, if you're so far gone that you can't figure out why homo marriage should be opposed, I really don't have much interest in discussing anything with you.

If you're really interested, dig through the archives at my blog. But I have no time to waste on someone who thinks fag marriage should be legal.

This is completely off subject, but I can't help but rant on comments like Gregg's last (I'll add you to my prayer list). This type of comment is something I see often during the course of Christian discussion. I think that they are rarely genuine; rather, they communicate a "I'm good, you're bad and I'm going to help you" attitude that is pompous and devoid of any real compassion or love.

Gregg,
Are you honestly going to pray for Badonicus? If so are you going to do so in a spirit of dependence, love, and humility?

yes, I am

I ask others to pray the same for me

Mrs. Seabrook that's really cool you have a glock. And I'm sure Harry has a steadier aim.

as for the gay marriage issue...

ever heard, "hate the sin, not the sinner?"

as for the gay marriage issue...

ever heard, "hate the sin, not the sinner?"

What the hell are you babbling about? Now it's "hate" if we believe fags can't get married? You people are sick. We don't let brothers and sisters or grandfathers and granddaughters get married to each other, so I guess that's HATE too?

That's why I laugh when imbeciles call me a Nazi. Terms like "nazi", "racist", "antisemite" are simply slurs we put on people who haven't bought into quite as much liberalism as we have. Check out my archives, and you'll find an article about a web forum for newspaper copy editors, where they discuss what to do with letters from "hatemongers". And who are the hatemongers they're talking about? Well, they list several-racists, antisemites, people opposed to illegal immigration, people opposed to gay marriage, and members of Concerned Women for America.

Anyone who disagrees with a liberal is a racist antisemitic Nazi.

And now we've got "Christians" who say that opposing gay marriage is "hating the sinner".

Your pastors must all be real proud.

Bad, you're guilty of being a hatemongering anti-semtic nutjob not because you oppose marriage, and not because you oppose liberalism, but because you hate, categorically, and extend that hate into some socio-religious political schema. That stuff is going to eat you alive, and my hope is that you'll be the only one it destroys and kills before you implode.

Not everyone here believes that gay marriage should be permitted by the church. Nor do we all label someone a Nazi as the only possible alternative to liberalism. Certainly, there is a rampant demoralizing of the church all in the name of "tolerance" (which is indeed sad), but gay marriage and IR are NOT the same thing.

Your habit of taking scripture out of context is the true offense, here. I'm sure your pastor is equally proud.... or maybe he IS.... which is worse.

Q,
You wouldn't have any idea what Biblical hate even is. Preferring my own people, and wanting to see them prosper, isn't hate. Neither is criticizing other groups, or pointing out differences. And you're against "hate", but you've posted personal information about a family of people, including several small children, who had nothing to do with my posts. And you're encouraging people to hassle them. And they're doing it. They got a harassing phone call at 2AM this morning. But encouraging people to do that isn't "hate". That's just Christian love in action, right?

Badonicus,

From your blog:

"Orthodox Jews, who proudly practice Phariseeism, are dangerous lunatics."

Yeah, you're just "pointing out differences", and we're doing the hating....

Right....

Whethery it makes you cry or not, that's simpy a fact. Read the article. They think it's a sin to turn the stove on during the sabbath or Passover, so they leave open flames burning for up to a week in their apartments. That's lunacy.

They've had thirty five fires in a couple months in one apartment complex because of this. And the other day, 3 kids died because of it. So it's very dangerous.

In what way are people who leave open flames burning in small apartments for a week at a time NOT dangerous lunatics?

No crying here, Bad... just pity.

My comment was meant to show how you do just as much "labeling" as you accuse others of doing to you....

You would do well to spend a little more time reading the gospels and studying the character of Jesus. You claim to follow him and his precepts.... How closely do you think your behaviors fall in line with his?

Would you care to answer the question?

One more time.

In what way are people who think it's a horrible sin to turn on the stove on the sabbath or Passover, but think it's perfectly alright to leave open flames burning for a week at a time to get around the rule, and cause 35 fires in one complex in a few months, and cause 3 kids to die...in what way are they NOT dangerous lunatics?

I'd be happy to.... I believe that open flames in apartment complexes are very dangerous, and I believe it shows a lack of judgement on the part of the individuals that did this.

HOWEVER, lack of judgement is not a racially distinct characteristic. I'm sure you can sympathize.

....are you also willing to label white/anglo-saxons as lunatics were they to commit a similar offense?

Or are white people not capeable of evil...?

For people who all claim to follow Christ we sure like to throw around pointless insults. How about we pray for our words to be seasoned with grace and love?

Bad,
I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on my last post.

These guys are tards that want attention...yep definately a case of pearls to the swine here.

just checked out Badonicus' site and I realized that his post of JQR's info and pics reminds me of what Islamic Jihadists would do to Christian Missonaries when they would go there to preach the gospel. Print their address, picrures all in an effort to have Chritian hating radicals assasinate them.

You're messin with the wrong group of people Buba badonicus.

heh..."do you have papers" that's for awesome.

and Mr. Seabrook, your glock sucks if you can't fire it right you should look into maybe a colt defender .40.

This conversation has really gotten off course, which conveniently for some, turns attention away from the original problem: the degradation of the Huffine's website, blog, and family picture. Sure, this Badonkadonkas guy has bought into all sorts of bad theology and has a handful of comebacks and criticisms that he's no doubt memorized for times such as these, but the real issue is that he attacked (without cause and with malice) people he doesn't even know. Of course someone like this is incapable of being persuaded by truth, reason or love...especially when arguing over the specifics of a soapbox he is so dedicated to standing on. Regardless of your thoughts, beliefs, or biblical interpretation, the Huffine's deserve an apology for having to be unwilling recipients of your "opinions," if nothing else...or does the bible free us from repenting for such flagrant wrongdoing?

ya, he got my name, address, and phone number wrong too. That's what really ticks me off.

Micah, You are right. However, I doubt the Huffines will get an apology from Badonicus until Mr. Huffine repents and leaves his evil wife and child.

I don't have to tell Nehemiah it's a religious issue. He already says it in 13:25-27 - the issue with Israel and foreigners is that foreigners lead Israel away from YHWH. Notice the direct comparison with King Solomon. This is what Nehemiah is so upset about - love and diplomacy with foreign nations led to the tolerance and adoption of their gods. If this is purely a racial issue, then why does Nehemiah bring up Solomon, and why does he repeat several times that the issue was that the foreigners caused him to sin?

Note also the prior verses where he is upset at how the Israelites are being absorbed into the culture of Ashdod. This is coupled with his lament over Sabbath observance. In other words, Israel is losing their identity as the people of God, and they are becoming like the other nations.

How can you read the entirety of Nehemiah where his complaint is coupled with Sabbath observance and foreign gods and come away with the problem being purely racial?

In the OT, there is no distinction between ethnicity and spirituality. You are either Jewish and God's holy nation, or you are a heathen that is not to be a bedfellow (metaphorically or literally) with God's people.

This is probably why Nehemiah doesn't suggest "covenant nurture" or whatever the hell you said. Jews in the OT are not evangelistic, although rare converts did exist. No, what we see is Nehemiah's attempt to "purify the church," and this is done, in this passage, by ousting all foreign influences. In fact, given the comparison with Solomon, it seems that Nehemiah's position is that the foreigners are leading Israel to their gods, and are not interested in being Jewish.

This is why the NT fulfillment is a prohibition against marrying unbelievers. Where is the NT prohibition against interracial marriage?

Also, you never said why my assertion about Christianity being a reform of Judaism was somehow more ignorant than calling a group of people Christians who existed millennia before Christ. You just said it was an ignorant assertion without any argumentation to back it up.

That's no way to argue your point. Unless of course, your point has no logical support.

Perhaps not even then. It blows my mind that Heaven and the Gospel might actually be big enough for liberals like me and hardcore theonomists like this guy...it's much more tempting to think that everyone interprets the bible like I do, but that's obviosuly not the case. There are of course various issues we all sort of agree to disagree on, but when I saw and read what this guy was doing to NCF and the Huffine's...and all in the name of some twisted form of christianity? I'm anxious for the day we all see glass that is no longer dimly lit...

For anyone in the Charlotte, NC area looking for an incredible church that has an african-american senior pastor and a caucasian associate (my brother-in-law), check out www.christcentralchurch.com.

Harry, I cannot find the name of your church on your blog. Are you a member of a PCA church, and if so, would you mind posting its name?

Harry? Who are you talking to? I'm not Harry, and if you want to ask him something, email him, or go to his website.

Whether or not Harry Seabrook initially posted the attack on the Huffines and NCF is irrelevant, because once he discovered what Bad wrote, he then posted his own little rant, including reference to the "ugly Huffines" and praising Bad for what he posted. And, Bad is obviously a coward given that he is allowing Seabrook to take the heat while refusing to identify himself.

By the way, I think it's absolutely hilarious that a bunch of white supremists decided to set up shop in Florida, of all places. Would have thought they'd pick somewhere a little whiter, like Montana or something. Instead, they pick a state where the governor's wife is Mexican and the governor speaks Spanish at home. Go figure.

Would you care to answer the question?

My bad. Can you post your church's name? I could not find it listed on your blog.

I already answered it, but it got deleted.

But yes, if you find me a group of WASP's that believes it's a horrible sin to turn on the stove on the sabbath, but it's just fine to leave an open flame burning in their apartment for a week to get around the rule, I'll be happy to call them dangerous lunatics.

Good luck finding a group of WASP's like that. Because, that sort of thing is peculiar to Judaism. It's why Jesus hated and denounced the Pharisees, because they had perverted the law. Modern Orthodox Jews will proudly tell you that they practice Phariseeism. And the Bible isn't their holy book. Their holy book is a collection of rabbinical sayings called The Talmud. You may have heard of it. It's what Jesus referred to as "the traditions of men".

Why do you want my church's name?

So, are we giving up on Nehemiah?

If someone so biblically ignorant and confused as I am can swat your "exegesis" so easily, just imagine what a smart guy could do to it!

"Whether or not Harry Seabrook initially posted the attack on the Huffines and NCF"

Calm down, girlfren'! What attack? Criticism is not attacking. Pointing out that someone proudly posts evidence of his sin on the web is not attacking. Calling something a sin is not attacking. Nobody attacked NCF or the Huffines. "Ugly family"? It's not a reference to their looks. We'd say the same thing if two women "married" each other had kids, no matter how pleasant to look at they are. But there's no getting around it, White are far more beautiful than blacks and other races. And right there is all the reason you need not to mix your genes with theirs.

Dear God, can I watch as you spew these people from your mouth on judgment day?

amen

[-p]

You're right.... I'm sure no WASP has ever started a fire. I'm sure no WASP has ever fired a gun. I'm sure no WASP has ever raped or murdered anyone, stolen property, abandoned their family, lied, cheated, or harmed anyone in any way.

It doesn't take a genius to find evil in this world. But it's pure ignorance to try to assign it to a particular race or creed. We are ALL SINNERS in desperate need of God's forgiveness. That means me, that means you, and anyone else who ever drew breath.

I wanted to contact your pastor and ask him if he knew you posted this material publicly. I also was curious as to whether he shared your beliefs. And I was also wondering if it was a PCA church (my denomination).

Ah...there it is. You can dress it up, but sooner or later the "systematic thought" charade will collapse to the outright vitrioloc hate it really is.

Let me get this straight. You have no problem with sodomite "marriage", and you want to turn me in for opposing interracial marriage? And you're a member in good standing of the PCA?!

BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

I rest my case.

You're right.... I'm sure no WASP has ever started a fire. I'm sure no WASP has ever fired a gun. I'm sure no WASP has ever raped or murdered anyone, stolen property, abandoned their family, lied to anyone, cheated anyone, or harmed anyone in any way.

It doesn't take a genius to find evil in this world, but it's pure ignorance to try to assign it to a particular race or creed. We are ALL SINNERS, and in desperate need of God's forgiveness. That means me, and that means you, and that means anyone who ever drew breath.

And I quote from here:

"...since Jews hate Jesus Christ and his Word, they have to go..."

"...Jews hate White people, and they really, really, hate Jesus Christ. And they're in charge now. So get used to it. Because they're going to start rubbing it in our faces..."

"I thought the standard story was the Germans were slaughtering Jews; now it turns out that it was half breeds that had Hitler's panties in a bunch."

"...there's always the inconvenient fact that Jews were wailing about a "holocaust" of SIX MILLION dead Jews..."

"...Thoroughly modern, as in thoroughly Jewish, as would be expected in any product of the Time-Life empire. And just like the rest of the Jewish media, it's hellbent on normalizing and glamorizing anything that's ugly, alien, perverted, pornographic, crude, etc., and marginalizing and ridiculing the good, the wholesome, the normal. Oh, it's got some inoffensive stuff in it, but that's just there as filler."

"...And the woman they chose to honor on their cover is currently starring in an ad campaign for The Gap which is all about miscegenation-tens of millions of White girls have seen her dressing provocatively for, dancing seductively with, being held by, and grinding up against Negro rock star Lenny Kravitz. That's what the Jews at LIFE and HBO want your daughters talking about and doing; the last thing they want is them marrying while they're young and having lots of White babies. And if, God forbid, your daughters are hateful enough to bring more White babies into the world, well the Jews at LIFE are prepared for that contingency, too. Near the back of the magazine is a guide to the weekend, and one feature is "Guest Critic", where they invite a celebrity in to review a movie. The inaugural issue features Rufus Wainwright reviewing Mean Girls. And who is Rufus Wainwright? Why, he's the faggot folk rocker who told the New York Times last year that he has fantasized about sex with children. All this in a "mainstream" family publication. Welcome to Main Street, in the new improved, diversity enhanced, Jewish America."

Nuts.

The moron laughs

[-p]

I said this:

"Calm down, girlfren'! What attack? Criticism is not attacking. Pointing out that someone proudly posts evidence of his sin on the web is not attacking. Calling something a sin is not attacking. Nobody attacked NCF or the Huffines. "Ugly family"? It's not a reference to their looks. We'd say the same thing if two women "married" each other had kids, no matter how pleasant to look at they are. But there's no getting around it, White are far more beautiful than blacks and other races. And right there is all the reason you need not to mix your genes with theirs."

Q replied:

"Ah...there it is. You can dress it up, but sooner or later the "systematic thought" charade will collapse to the outright vitrioloc hate it really is."

So, exactly what did I get wrong? You keep throwing out terms like "hate" and "vitriol" and "nazi", but you never show me where I'm wrong about anything.

Why is that exactly? When did calling someone a name become an argument?

"White are far more beautiful than blacks and other races. And right there is all the reason you need not to mix your genes with theirs." -- Badonicus

And there it is, folks: thinly-veiled foolish, militant ethnocentrism (read: racism).

"Why is that exactly? When did calling someone a name become an argument?"

"Oh, and Phil, you're extremly[sic] confused and bibilically[sic] ignorant if you really believe what you wrote about Christianity and Judaism."

They aren't named Bubu they're defenitions...defenitions of what you are and what you believe in.

[-p]

Phil: I believe he was talking about the "bibilical" cord. You know, that thing that hangs out of your KJV 1611 that you use to mark pages.

"thinly-veiled foolish, militant ethnocentrism"

Actually, it just happens to be the absolute truth. And we all know it. And you just make a fool of yourself when you argue that the black race is just as aesthetically attractive as Whites. That's insane. All you're saying is you've rejected any standards of physical beauty. Which, as I say, is insane.

What about an ugly WASP? Or are there not any of those either.....

BADONICUS: If the Bible is your absolute standard for discerning what Truth is, then kindly point out to me the red letters where Jesus explicitly decrees that black people are less "aesthetically attractive" than white people.

You can't?

That's what I thought.

And who said I was advocating the rejection of "standards of physical beauty?" I'll wager your own "aesthetic appearance" is less than satisfactory.

Oh, and I like the way you always capitalize "Whites" and write "blacks" in lowercase.

Really damned cute.

I, get lost. You keep repeating the same argument, which has nothing to do with my positions at all. I explained to you why I called Orthodox Jews whose crazy religion is constantly causing fires "dangerous lunatics". And you won't admit that they're dangerous lunatics, And when I point out that their dangerous lunacy flows right from their antiChrist religion, you come back with a line about some white people have started fires too.

Now beat it.

What about the Jewish race? Are they, in your mind and based on your opinion (be careful, that which you're confusing with "truth" is actually subjective), as equally unattractive as the african-american race? Wasn't Jesus Jewish? How do you handle or dismiss this?

Because a person disagrees with you that the black race is as aesthetically attractive as the white race, they've "rejected any standards of physical beauty"? Where did you find this standard, just out of curiousity?

now we are on to beauty?

I was always taught to look for inner beauty instead of physical beauty. Even the beautiful people (as attributed by their physical looks) can be ugly if their heart is in the wrong place.

That aside, I think Badonicus should forfeit his church name & contact info. I think that anyone not ashamed of their beliefs, should have no problem providing that sort of information. I think we should all pass out our church credentials (id start, but i have no membership right now).

We might all do well to consider Christ's words in Matthew:

Matthew 5:22-24

22"But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, 'You good-for-nothing,' shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, 'You fool,' shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell.

23"Therefore if you are presenting your offering at the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you,

24leave your offering there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and present your offering.

In one sense Bad it boils down to different assumptions and different heart commitments. I think your actions, words, and thoughts fall outside of historic Christianity and the Gospel. To be frank I have a hard time believing you love and have faith in the same Jesus Christ I do that I read about in His Word and commune with via the Lords Supper, The Spirit, and the Body.

Heck, in the most practical sense, I'd put even money that you attend a "house church" and rarely, if ever, can be found darkening the doors of a local body of worship. I'd also put even money that you got to that point through a pattern of attending churches, becoming more and more radical and contrarian, and "church hopping" or "church splitting" until you ended up at home. That's my read on the situation, if you're an adult married male.

My point is that it seems like name calling from varying sides because we're talking about different brute assumptions about the world and Christ. You approach and interpret the world through a harsh and rigorous set of rules, comprised of stringent neo-Reformed theonomy and racial purity.

It makes perfect sense then that you would see me, and Huffine, and a majority of the world as somehow corrupt and utterly evil. It fits with where you're coming from.

Huffine and I, and a vast majority of the PCA, OPC, and the "church" for the most part don't see the world so black and white, at least not on those issues. Life and Christ aren't things that can be summed into is brute Reformed theological assertions and racial purity. Those aren't OUR assumptions.

I think we for the most part go about our lives in an interesting and diverse dynamic of what it means to love Christ more and love one another more, because we have the brute assumption and heart commitment which is faith in Jesus Christ.

And I have a hard time when reading my Bible, looking at Christ and His life and works, coming up with anything even remotely close as to what your suggesting, in fact, it seems downright contrary. Hence, the majority of the Church and the World is oddly unified on the conclusion that you're a hateful, vitriolic, racist nutjob. It's a completely understandable conclusion to draw, because our brute assumptions about the World are so diametrically opposed.

My hope is that somebody, somewhere, will be patient enough to show you that your thinking isn't in line with the Church tradition and isn't in line with Scripture. I'm certainly not sanctified enough to pull it off. It takes a certain level of spiritual maturity to have ones friends called ugly in a hateful fashion without wanting to take a bat to the insulter-s head. I'm just not that person.

But again, I do think this whole wacky situation is ultimately a good one, because alot of people are now personally aware that fruitloops like you do exist, and that sooner or later the Church is going to need to figure out a way to really minister to you and your "kin" as you call it. Because ultimately we want you and yours to be part of the Kingdom that isn't of this world, that isn't bound by race or class or geography, or denomination or any earthly, material, created definitions.

Anyways, in my mind that's real kinship.

NO, I will not "admit" that THEY are lunatics, because the article involved only a few INDIVIDUALS. Read my post.... I acknowledged that the INDIVIDUALS showed lack of judgement. But this is not race specific, and it's pure ignorance to say that it is.

You're only irritated with my repitition because you've got NOTHING worthwhile in reply. You're the one who can't admit that all of your arguments are subjective.

It's funny how you told Jimmy to "beat it," like he was on the front porch of your house. You're such a bully Badonkadonkas...it's makes me laugh. Do you borrow your monkier from the Battle of Mons Badonicus? Why not use your real name once in a while...it would be much more personal. Still no answer of where or if you go to church...that's a let down.

I thought it was funny how he told "I" to "beat it" like Michael Jackson. Now there's another cat with race issues.

Excellent comments, Siah. I might just add the clarification that I don't think this is about being too theologically precise or the existence of clear-cut theological categories, because I do believe that such things exist, and I'm pretty sure you do as well.

In fact, one of my problems with Yoantisemite Sam here is that he has no theological basis whatsoever, but as you can see, having any kind of biblical support (or umbilical support - thanks Jim) just isn't important to him. I find that the more rabidly racist someone is (and, I hate to say it, the more rabidly theonomic someone is), the less the Bible actually matters. It's the angst that matters.

As far as I'm concerned, there's not a lot left to say. Many people have capably challenged his theological and logical claims, and he's yet to put up any kind of defense other than to troll.

I'm sure I speak for virtually everyone when I say that my arms are getting tired from handing this guy's aesthetically-superior white ass to him.

Indeed, Phil.

Hey Bad,
Do you hold to the Athanasian creed even though it was written by a black Christian and even though it is heralded as a triumph of theological confession?
Do you herald Moses as a Covenant Mediator even though his wife Zipporah was black (Midianites are black, research your archaeology if you don't know this).
Do you ever stop to think that the vast majority of Christians that have lived in this world were and are not white? White Christians are the minority these days worldwide. Does it trouble you that God reached out to races that are not white? Does it trouble you to know that it was non-whites who actually brought the Gospel to uneducated Barbarians (i.e. your European ancestors) who were white?

Hey Baddy,

I'm curious what you think about this tid-bit:

1 Miriam and Aaron began to talk against Moses because of his Cushite wife, for he had married a Cushite. 2 "Has the LORD spoken only through Moses?" they asked. "Hasn't he also spoken through us?" And the LORD heard this.
3 (Now Moses was a very humble man, more humble than anyone else on the face of the earth.)

4 At once the LORD said to Moses, Aaron and Miriam, "Come out to the Tent of Meeting, all three of you." So the three of them came out. 5 Then the LORD came down in a pillar of cloud; he stood at the entrance to the Tent and summoned Aaron and Miriam. When both of them stepped forward, 6 he said, "Listen to my words:
"When a prophet of the LORD is among you,
I reveal myself to him in visions,
I speak to him in dreams.

7 But this is not true of my servant Moses;
he is faithful in all my house.

8 With him I speak face to face,
clearly and not in riddles;
he sees the form of the LORD.
Why then were you not afraid
to speak against my servant Moses?"

Sure seems like God was OK with this.

"White are far more beautiful than blacks and other races. And right there is all the reason you need not to mix your genes with theirs." -- Badonicus

If that is true, then how do you explain Halle Berry?

I guess Calvin was nuts. He said Moses' wife was not black. We've discussed this thing many times on my blog and Harry's blog, and we've both got a search feature. Knock yourself out. Same thing about Athanasius. There's no evidence at all that he was a Negro, or anything but White. Same deal with Augustine-he may have been born in Africa, but he most certainly was not Soul Brutha #1. And Phil says he's tired of refuting me? LOL. That's a good one. And when I defend my position, I'm just trolling. You guys slay me.

Oh Ray...take it easy man, some of us are at work. Do you think former Atlanta Brave standout David Justice ever kicks himself for leaving that amazing woman? How I wish I was a woman (and not a married man) so I could confess to a girl-crush...

Damn good point, Ray.

It wouldn't be the first time that Calvin was wrong about something. I believe he also believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary.

For one thing, Halle Berry is half White. She hit the genetic jackpot, a one in a million shot. Of course, her black dad walked out on her, but then that's neither here nor there, is it?

And we're talking about billions and billions of people. Of course there will be exception, but the general rule still obtains. I know a woman who's 6' 6' tall. And I STILL say men are bigger and taller and stronger than women, and so does everyone who's not hopped up on semitical correctness. The same thing applies to aesthetics. We all know Whites are far more attractive than blacks. Heck, just read what the Bible says about light and darkness. Is light preferable to darkness in the Bible, or are they equal?

Hello, Josiah. We obviously disagree on this matter, and there are high emotions on both sides. I propose that we respect our right to free speech and stop encouraging harrassment, as you did in your blog post. I will remove your contact information if you will remove mine. When I saw the picture of your family posted at Little Geneva, I began to worry that this might get out of hand. It seemed pretty funny before that.

Joanna Veith at World Magazine pulled Anthony Bradley's link to this page because she recognizes it as incitement.

But it is entirely within your right to believe that our "actions, words, and thoughts fall outside of historic Christianity and the Gospel." I just hope that this shouting match evolves into something more biblically substantive. We can have an honest debate if we try because we all (I think) recognize the supreme authority of Scripture.

Please consider my offer and let me know what you think. I would have emailed you privately, but I couldn't find your address.

HOLY OUT-OF-CONTEXT, BATMAN!!!!!

"Heck, just read what the Bible says about light and darkness. Is light preferable to darkness in the Bible, or are they equal?" -- Badonicus

What does the light have to do with race? That's a preposterous semantic stretch that digs far into the territory of lunacy.

AGAIN, If the Bible is your absolute standard for discerning what Truth is, then kindly point out to me the red letters where Jesus explicitly decrees that black people are less "aesthetically attractive" than white people.

"Slay you"? Don't tell me you're borrowing your lines from Geico commercials...we expect better from you Badonkadonkas. Man, when did Calvin become the final word on all things archeological and historical? Calvin was flawed, Athanasius was flawed, I'm flawed, you're flawed...besides, Moses certainly wasn't caucasian...come on, your brain might be washed whiter than snow, but you can look at a map and spot the Middle East, Greece, Rome, Israel...the Old Testament (which seems to be the only part of the bible you've highlighted) didn't take place in France or Germany.

You still havene't answered my question about the Jewish (Jewish like Jesus) race...are they beautiful?

"I guess Calvin was nuts. He said Moses' wife was not black."

So, since Calvin was a good theologian, it also means that he is an authoritative anthropologist, or did he whip out the Calvinscope and look back through time and see that she wasn't black?

Even if that were true THE POINT IS it was still an interracial marriage.

You also still have yet to defend your view of Nehemiah 13 or the covenant fulfillment of the ethnic-spiritual change from OT to NT. You have yet to show any NT laws against interracial marriage, which you won't find, because the significance of ethnicity has given way to faith in Christ as the "racial" dividing line, not Jew or Gentile, etc.

Instead of actually making a point, you are wasting oxygen trying desperately to convince people that ancient Africans were white.

You, sir, are a moron, and a disgrace to the heritage of Southern intellectualism.

Bad,
Are you relying on Calvin for your historiographical information? Give me a break. Surely, you must realize that WHITE people did not live in the area of the early church, they lived way to the north. I thought you Arian nation folks were all about Hitler's chosen race of pale skin and blue eyes. If so, I hate to tell you this, but you are either guilty of tolerance (you're letting people who aren't white into your category of being white) or your guilty of presentism (reading your own time period into another time period). I hate to tell you this, but the writers of the Bible were not white, in fact, there are no white people in the Bible. The white people were in places like Germania which sorry to say seriously lacked in education and culture in comparison to their darker brothers further down south.

white mother + black father = genetic jackpot

No wonder I'm so lacking in the looks department, both my parents were white! Damn providence...

There's no reason to believe that people like Alan Dershowitz and Woody Allen and Bette Midler are any relation to Jesus.

Call it hate, but I find my own people the most beautiful. I can't believe anyone would even have a problem with that. It's mind boggling that you folks are attacking us because we want to see our people survive, and not turned into browns and blacks through intermarriage.

I cannot understand how you're able to devote so much time and energy to even caring this much about who other people marry.

Funny.... I wonder if "they" feel the same way....

"I just hope that this shouting match evolves into something more biblically substantive. We can have an honest debate if we try because we all (I think) recognize the supreme authority of Scripture."

I have doubts you recognize the supreme authority of Scripture, and the way your boy has abandoned Scripture for anthropological arguments about white Africans demonstrates this to be true. You have commitments to a position, and you have found Scripture that "supports" your pre-established commitments. You did not derive them from exegesis.

This seems to indicate that your own views hold supreme authority, and Scripture is a secondary authority to which you will turn while it is convenient. This leads me to believe real debate is impossible. I'm just doing this for kicks. *waves at crowd*

Harry,

You seem like a calmer, more rational person (though still horribly misguided); can you please point out to us where God has revealed that IR marriage is a sin?

I know, I know--you've written tomes about it on your blog--but I don't have time read through your corpus right now. Just a few clear texts would be helpful. Thanks a ton.

So, Bad, would you say that white Europeans are the true Hebrews then?

Oh Badonkadonkas...you are a rascal! I never know when to take you seriously. It's so funny when you pretend to be scared about the survival of the white race...yes, we as white people are endangered...one day we'll be in museums. You're so tongue in cheek, so hyperbolic...it's a riot (but not like the R.I.O.T that contemporary christian music singer Carman brought about in the early 90's - that was a righteous invasion of truth). Why is culture so frightening to you? Why must you surround yourself only with people who look like you? What do you about the unattractive white people?

Paul, thank you for asking. I think this is what you're looking for:
http://littlegeneva.com/interracial.html

But I want to stay out of the debate. I'm more concerned about the posting of personal information and think that this should be out of bounds. I hope the rest of you agree.

By the way - and then I'll really leave - Badonicus is a very rational person. Ask him a sensible question (as Kathryn, who has a lovely voice, just did) and he'll answer it directly. If you throw ad hominem at him, he throws ad hominem back, and so do I.

That's a tough question. Why don't you just start calling people at 2am until you get the answer to your question?

So, Bad, would you say that white Europeans are the true Hebrews then?

Posted by: kathryn at May 4, 2005 03:35 PM

That's a tough question. Why don't you just start calling people at 2am until you get the answer to your question, Kathy?

Harry,
I'd be interested in a discussion of the question "Is it Biblically justifiable to marry across racial lines?"

Badonicus wrote: festering swill.

Harry Seabrook wrote: festering swill with a happy face.

In these two persons is proof that some fools not only drink from the toilet, but find their meals there too.

The Little Geneva cult uses the Bible the same way Jehovah's Wittnesses do- tear out little chunks and scream their moronic babble from them, whilst wiping their arse with the rest of the Word. No need to argue from scripture with them- they don't give a rat's ass about what God says.

There's no need to treat them like Christians- It's okay to mock them in true Carmel fashion.

Come on, Hairy! Come on, Badonprickus! Is this all you got?!? You haven't created the perfect Christian community yet! Maybe you haven't used the right kind of spray paint to color your neighbors properly, or perhaps you haven't found enough idiots to brainwash into your cult.

Harry, don't bother attempting to be respectable here or anywhere else. You haven't a shred of honor left. You host and endorse St. Nimrod, and claim him as your 'patron saint'. You've turned away from the authority given to the Church in the Word, and have made yourself a maverick- something that a Christian cannot be. You are scum below the scum. To hell with you, for that's where you are bound.

Badonicus- I'm happy that you are obviously an unmarried man, for the idea of you breeding is a detriment to humanity. However, I'd be happy to loan you some cash if you need it. You desperately need to get laid, as your blue balls are affecting your ability to reason. heck, even a blow-up doll might help.

Perhaps the problem is that Badonicus is actually JEWISH! Have you ever seen him refer to this mythical book called the New Testament? No, not Jew badonicus- only the Tanakh is in his library. Fight the power, Jewboy!

Crossguard

What do you about the unattractive white people?-- Micah Carver

That's me!

/me eagerly awaits the answer

"Ask him a sensible question (as Kathryn, who has a lovely voice, just did) and he'll answer it directly. If you throw ad hominem at him, he throws ad hominem back, and so do I."

K: So, Bad, would you say that white Europeans are the true Hebrews then?

B: That's a tough question. Why don't you just start calling people at 2am until you get the answer to your question?"

LOL! You could NOT write this stuff if you tried.

Harry,
I tried asking Badonicus sensible questions but I was ignored. I think he is more interested in being involved in the ad hominem contest.

Crossguard, that doesn't help much....

aduff, I do remember you were pretty sensible. But I was banned for a couple hours and lost track of the thread. Ask me again and I'll try to answer.

I didn't call anybody at 2am, and even if I did, how's that come anywhere near posting the Huffine's pictures all over the internet and saying the things that you all said about them.

Now, answer my question, are Europeans the true hebrews?

"Ask him a sensible question (as Kathryn, who has a lovely voice, just did) and he'll answer it directly. If you throw ad hominem at him, he throws ad hominem back, and so do I."

K: So, Bad, would you say that white Europeans are the true Hebrews then?

B: That's a tough question. Why don't you just start calling people at 2am until you get the answer to your question?"

LOL! You could NOT write this stuff if you tried.

Posted by: Phil at May 4, 2005 03:48 PM

Phil, you're such a tool. I asked Kathy that question for a very specific reason. Why don't you ask her what I'm talking about, and ask her how Harry has any idea what her voice sounds like since they've never met? M'kay, Phil? Get a clue, will ya, bro? Will ya just do that for me? Thanks!

We were discussing the nature of God's commands to not intermarry in Nehemiah. Here's the last part of the discussion.

B: If it was a religious issue, and not a racial issue, the book makes no sense. If what you say is correct, then why didn't Nehemiah simply tell the husbands to instruct their wives and half breed kids in the covenant? Why did he tell them to ABANDON them instead?

A: Bardonicus has a good question to Phil, but I think I see a reasonable answer. God told his people to abandon the idolaters and their children because he wanted to purify his people. Israel had been (and will again be) corrupted by marrying idolaters and then being overcome by the darkness of the idolatry. God told them to abandon the idolaters because he knew that his people were too weak to not be negatively effected by them.

B: How were 6 month old and two year old children practicing "idolatry"? And how are grown men so weak that they would be overcome by the idolatry of two and three year old kids?

A: I don't think the children were a direct problem (i.e. they were practicing idolatry). It's the fact that they were children of an idolatrous parent that made them a problem. The Israelites, just like many modern Christians, were great at bending God's rules (Israelite Man: "God said to abandon the idolaters, but surely he wouldn't want me to get rid of my son's mother, so I think it'll be o.k. to keep her around"). It seems to make sense that God wasn't giving them much room to bend his rules by telling them to get rid of the children as well. God understands that "a little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough". Leaving the children there would give the Israelites an excuse to leave the women there as well.

...once again... can't answer a question because he has nothing to say.

"I didn't call anybody at 2am"

Oh, is that right?

"and even if I did,"

You just said you didn't. Which is it?

"how's that come anywhere near posting the Huffine's pictures all over the internet and saying the things that you all said about them."

Um, waking someone's wife up at 2am to harass her and say terrible things to her is a little different than what I did. I didn't post anything "all over the internet". I posted their pic, which is freely available on the web, on my site. I said what they were doing is wrong, and their church is wrong. I never encouraged anyone to harass them or bother them in anyway. They're proud of the picture-that's why it's on the net. I simpy linked to it and discussed it. I didn't bother them, or post where they live, and I sure as hell didn't call his wife at 2am to harass her.

Some more Scripture for those who care about these sorts of things:

Titus 3:1-5

1 Remind the people to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready to do whatever is good, 2 to slander no one, to be peaceable and considerate, and to show true humility toward all men.
3 At one time we too were foolish, disobedient, deceived and enslaved by all kinds of passions and pleasures. We lived in malice and envy, being hated and hating one another. 4 But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, 5 he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy

Zing! Badonkadonkas you never quit do you? You and your "specific reasons," that's clever in so many ways...especially the evasive ones. And "Kathy?" What is this, casual Friday? I like how you use e-words like "m'kay," it shows me that you're internet savvy. If I had to guess your age I would say...nineteen. Tell me if I'm high or low. I'm basing my guess of your blind exhuberance and misplaced issue-specific passion, which is most often seen in neophytes who have just recently learned a bit of knowledge and are anxious to throw their pseudo-intellect weight around.

Bad: You NOT post their pic on your site. You hotlinked to those photos and STOLE bandwidth.

Well, if I stole bandwith, it was unintentional. I'm no techie. I link to pics all the time, and no one has ever told me it's stealing bandwith.

okay, after that..., I just had to...

Then you'll not having any problem taking the picture down then...will you? It would be awesome of you just to remove that whole thread/post from your blog as well...just as a favor.

Well, maybe you should apologize for your theft to the Huffine family.

"Phil, you're such a tool."

Yes. A racist-moron-argument-dismantling tool.

I am, however, glad you've dropped all pretense of this being about what the Bible says. It helps keep the discussion honest.

The imperfect internet race. Those who don't what bandwith is should be shipped away. HA! You suck dude.

Where in the Bible does it say not to call people at 2am?

Hey Harry,

I talked with Joanna after your wife did, and Anthony post's will be coming back up soon without your information on it.

As to whether or not I'll take your info off, I'm not so inclined to do it, largely because all of your personal information about me is incorrect, and even then, it doesn't worry me too much, and part of me feel good (most likely a sinful part) that you and yours are getting some crap for your racist beliefs.

But cooler heads, namely a few good friends have recommended I take it down. So I will because I respect them and trust their judgement.

"Then you'll not having any problem taking the picture down then...will you? It would be awesome of you just to remove that whole thread/post from your blog as well...just as a favor."

The picture's been down for quite some time. Well over 24 hours. And you people think I'm not internet savvy?

aduff, I haven't forgotten your questions. I'll get to them!

Don't forget mine:

I don't have to tell Nehemiah it's a religious issue. He already says it in 13:25-27 - the issue with Israel and foreigners is that foreigners lead Israel away from YHWH. Notice the direct comparison with King Solomon. This is what Nehemiah is so upset about - love and diplomacy with foreign nations led to the tolerance and adoption of their gods. If this is purely a racial issue, then why does Nehemiah bring up Solomon, and why does he repeat several times that the issue was that the foreigners caused him to sin?

Note also the prior verses where he is upset at how the Israelites are being absorbed into the culture of Ashdod. This is coupled with his lament over Sabbath observance. In other words, Israel is losing their identity as the people of God, and they are becoming like the other nations.

How can you read the entirety of Nehemiah where his complaint is coupled with Sabbath observance and foreign gods and come away with the problem being purely racial?

In the OT, there is no distinction between ethnicity and spirituality. You are either Jewish and God's holy nation, or you are a heathen that is not to be a bedfellow (metaphorically or literally) with God's people.

This is probably why Nehemiah doesn't suggest "covenant nurture" or whatever the hell you said. Jews in the OT are not evangelistic, although rare converts did exist. No, what we see is Nehemiah's attempt to "purify the church," and this is done, in this passage, by ousting all foreign influences. In fact, given the comparison with Solomon, it seems that Nehemiah's position is that the foreigners are leading Israel to their gods, and are not interested in being Jewish.

This is why the NT fulfillment is a prohibition against marrying unbelievers. Where is the NT prohibition against interracial marriage?

Also, you never said why my assertion about Christianity being a reform of Judaism was somehow more ignorant than calling a group of people Christians who existed millennia before Christ. You just said it was an ignorant assertion without any argumentation to back it up.

That's no way to argue your point. Unless of course, your point has no logical support.

Thanks, Josiah, and I'm glad to hear that Anthony will be sticking around. He's a rich source for material.

You can go ahead and continue giving us "crap" for our "racist" beliefs. I certainly don't want to hold you back (your artwork is very funny). I'm only concerned (both for your family and mine) that we eliminate all threatening language. There are some unstable people out there, and it really should worry you if it doesn't. I don't want to see anyone get hurt.

With that said, continue firing away, everybody!

AGAIN, BADONICUS: You did NOT post their pic on your site. You hotlinked to those photos and STOLE bandwidth.

You should apologize for your theft. I don't give a rat's ass if you think they're all hellbound deviants or whatever.

A theft is a theft is a theft, and whether or not you "knew" you were stealing is of no consequence.

Apologize, at least.

And you're in no way "savvy."

So, once again, why will you not answer my question: Are white Europeans the true Hebrews?

You're such a word twister Badonkadonkas...I told you that you were internet savvy, remember (it was because you used the e-word "m'kay," indicating to me that you do most of your communicating from the secrecy of the world wide web, and are therefore at least mildly fluent in the lingo of IM, etc.)?

You still never told me if Jewish people are attractive or unattractive (the answer will have to be based on your subjective opinions though...I have this sinking feeling that God hates it when you mock his word by removing the ever-important context).

And what of your church? Maybe Josiah was on target with his home church estimation. I just want to get to know you and I feel like you're hiding so much. Tell me your most embarrassing moment...

Allow me a quick "shout out" (isn't this what our rhythmically superior african-american brothers and sisters call it) to all the people who might remember me from the old days (prior to my transfer) at Covenant College. I know "Po Po" does...where's Kevin Courter, or Marcus Todd?

AHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! This is crazy. Bad. should not be even responded to. He is a case to study, he should be in a museum. We should be talking about him not to him. This is the kind of guy that should be sent to psychology labs and discussed and whatnot. He is insignificant outside of a purely educational context. He is nothing, and his views are nothing, and us trying to make sense out of them, Bible or no Bible is only making us stupider. He has no nutritional value, he is a marshmellow. Fun to eat, but worth nothing. One day he will die and the world will forget him, unlike the saints that he claims to be in line with. He will turn to dirt just like the black person who I hope he is buried next to, and after he dies he will learn his lesson but not from us. Talking to him is like watching TV, we should stop talking to him and read a book.

John,
Wow. How can you justify saying "he is insignigicant" and "he is nothing"? He is made in the image of God, dude.

Largely, I agree with you... but I still can't help feeling sad for where he's going to end up. Fortunately, we serve a soverign God who is in control of all these things....

haha that's the funniest thing I've read thus far John.

[-p]

John,
Wow. How can you justify saying "he is insignificant" and "he is nothing"? He is made in the image of God, dude. It's one thing to disregard a person's ideas and another to disregard a person.

I'm surprised nobody has brought up the statistically proven fact that black males have on average larger penii than white males.

I think this is the real crux of the white supremist racist nutjob's angst:

the deeply-rooted fear that their wives were once satistfied -or one day in the future might be satisfied- on a far greater level by a superiorily hung black man, then they with their inferior white penii could ever provide.

ha!, i KNEW that name sounded familiar.

I'm surprised that no one has brought up the fact that "Little Geneva" is the title of a song by Muddy Waters.

Ha!

Look me up in an old (98 or 99) Tartan...I'm right there! There's no denying that I, at one time, attended Covenant College. I wasn't an exceptional student, I was on chapel probabtion, my last year, but the ladies loved me and I always had a home on Team 13 (man on the hall indeed...). KP - I hope you still have your nickname spelled out on the windshield of your car...

I hope that some of you have kept up with Eric Spieker.

Ralph wrote: I'm surprised nobody has brought up the statistically proven fact that black males have on average larger penii than white males.

Nay, he wouldn't. If you ask a hooker, they'll tell you that it's a myth. And, since that's the kind of folks he associates with (er, patronizes would be the proper term), he wouldn't be aware of the 'fact' you presented.

He isn't insinicant when it comes to educational purposes. Like I said, I think we can learn alot about the human race from studying people like this guy. In that way he has a lot to offer. BUT, he is also like an old bitter man who lives in a cabin out in the woods, never takes care of his own problems, never betters the world, never has successful communication with anyone and dies alone. In that way, he is insignificant.

I may be in error.

Badshlongingus has made it clear that to him, racial mixing is a far greater sin than homosexuality. Add that to his lack of knowledge concerning black penises and his obvious clinging to the Tanakh, and we have the whole picture-

Baddonginchus MUST be a homosexual Jewish black-penisphobe! It all seems so clear now...

Crossguard

HaHaHa! That Ralph.Epstein is a hoot. Don;t you agree, JosiahQ?

;-)

Totaly off topic but,...

A military judge Wednesday threw out Pfc. Lynndie England's guilty plea to abusing Iraqi detainees at Abu Ghraib prison, saying he was not convinced the Army reservist who appeared in some of the most notorious photos in the scandal knew her actions were wrong at the time.

Um, she did not know what she was doing was wrong? rrrrrrright

you said you wanted pictures right?

Been quiet for a minute...lickin their wounds it seems.

[-p]

You're a little late there, Image. Somebody named Thomas posted a link to Google maps for that address. Thanks for chiming in, though.

WOW!

I know J.Q.R. a little, and enjoy reading his blog from time to time -- but this comment thread is unlike anything I have ever seen before.

I'm just glad that I'm neither religious or a racist, and therefore have no stake in any of this. I'm concerned by the level of hostility in many of these posts however; this ceased to be a "debate" long ago, and is now really sad and destructive -- from all sides.

I always thought Christanity was about 'love your neighbor' and 'everyone is created in God's image' and all that stuff. Looking through these posts though is only a reminder why I am not religious.

Crap! I just realized
I am sort of peach with a pinkish hue.
And I am going home to examine my wife..... very carefully. Shhh I think she is a bit more peachy than I.... no worrries I will expose her and all her wretched mostly peach with more of a hmmmm
olive undertoned family. I think I have seen them grow darker during the longer sunlight of summer.
The truth will be mine bwahahaha.
I really want your papers dammit!
and I think " pearls before swine ' is offensive if one is indeed the swine. Crap arent they pink!

Man I am mad I may have been "mixing my genes" all along. What to do ... What to do...hmmm. Who could I possibly find to bear children with that my genes ,"being good and rightly genes"would NOT mix. blechhhy.
I asked my sister what she thought since she had all that fancy genetic type science stuff in college, but dangdest thing.... she ran screaming.

P.S. I apologize for cursing in the previous message

A Grand Wizard goes to a doctor to hear the results of some blood work he has done.
The Doc says, "I have some good news and some bad news."
The good news is that you are going to die."
"That's the good news?" the KKK boy asks.
"What's the bad news?"
The Doc responds, "you have sickle-cell anemia."

Ain't nobody pure blood, nobody.

No Crm,
Christianity is about a Perfect and Holy God making a promise to redeem his very sinful and bad children. Through no act of theirs but by providing a mediator that would reconcile His people to Him.
He delivered that mediator prophesied throughout scripture in His Son.
Also, we are created in His "image" not like him.
But, yes you are correct we are called to love because" He first loved us " 1John 4:19
I for one do not hate Badonicus but I do disagree and enjoy the humor in what I find to be an impossible set of racial standards. I find it obvious in
scripture that God forbiding IM (when He did ) was for spiritual and prophetic reasons , not genetic, having nothing to do with white people.
Finally, I am no less a sinner than Badonicus "O,wretched man I am" Romans 7:24a
and fully in need of my savior.

1. Ben was working with me all afternoon. He was a little agitated, but he never lost his cool. We even worked out some really complicated database schema.

2. Laini wrote maybe the best piece on this subject: http://chattablogs.com/laini/ . Kind of humbling, though probably not for the right people.

3. Talk about genetic jackpot: have you seen ol' J-Ron lately?!? Man, whether you're talking brains or brawn, we're looking at presidential material here.

4. It's been nice not having Josiah argue with ME for the past couple of days!

5. For a completely different take on the whole racial bias thing, check out http://blackpeopleloveus .com . It's hilarious. Until you realize (if you're white) that it's poking fun at YOU! It's surprising how many stupid little racist idiosyncracies are ingrained into the most enlightened of us.

6. A blue-haired dyke-on-a-bike posted on Badboy's website and he probably didn't even know it. Speaking of, I'm still trying to figure out the relationship between the moniker "Badonicus" and lesbians. Something about a battle. I didn't quite get it in the 25 seconds I spent researching it, so if you can fill me in, please do.

7. You back-swamp Naples folks are welcome to visit us here in the St Elmo neighborhood of Chattavegas whenever you want. It's a great place to live, somewhere where blacks, whites and rednecks (and the occasional Latino) live next door to each other and generally get along fine. Birkenstocks, Bobcats and Boom trikes - they're all cool here!

CRM,
I'm with you. Christians can be real assholes in the name of Christ sometimes. It's like they feel justified in being jerks because they wrap religious language and feeling around their abuse.

CRM -

You're right, and maybe sometimes we crossed the line. Humans do that, sometimes.

But I think the anger is mostly coming from the fact that these people are claiming to be Christians, then proceeding to teach terrible things in the name of Jesus.

For example, imagine someone went around your town beating up women with a baseball bat, claiming to be you. Obviously, the action itself would be very upsetting, but wouldn't it have an extra edge because he was pretending to be you - associating you with these deeds in the eyes of the public?

That's what these people are doing. By pretending to be Christians, they are asociating our name and the name of Jesus with their own prejudices and agenda for racial purification. That's why it makes me mad, anyway. If they want to believe that stuff, I still hate it, but it's their right. But to believe that stuff and proclaim it's Christianity, that makes it virtually a personal slander.

What I have to keep in mind is that these people are just pawns of a very wicked kingdom, and largely cannot help themselves. They are not the real enemy.

It's too bad Badonicus isn't in the body of Christ, because he'd make a perfect asshole.

Og,
What message should CRM listen to from you? The one that you show through your attitudes and actions that communicates it is o.k. to abuse and discount someone if you diagree with them or your Christian rhetoric ("I am no less a sinner than Badonicus") that says you're no better than Badonicus? Actions speak louder than words, man. Sometimes I am ashamed to be called a Christian.