Slave of Christ. Husband. Father of two. Particular Baptist. I have determined to know nothing except Jesus Christ and Him crucified.
Joined March 2010
- Tweets15.2K
- Following2.6K
- Followers1.8K
- Likes38.5K
This is what happens when you have an agenda combined with some of the worst hermeneutical skills imaginable.
This section of Joel Webbon's "white genocide" book is part of his frantic ranting about some tweet that @piratechristian posted.
Webbon presents Romans 9:3–5 as if he's quoting the ESV but he actually mixes wording from different translations to suit his purposes.
Although the ESV does use the word "race" in verse 5, the Greek text contains no corresponding word for race. The Greek phrase is ἐξ ὧν ("ex hōn"), meaning "from whom." The ESV translators chose “from their race” to communicate Israelite ancestry, whereas the NASB translates it “from whom,” despite the fact Webbon incorrectly invokes the NASB as support.
Also, the Greek word συγγενῶν ("syngenōn") in verse 3 means "kinsmen" or "relatives," which is precisely how the ESV translates it. Webbon conflates two different Greek expressions and treats an English translator's interpretive wording as though Paul explicitly employed a biological racial category. Nobody needs to deny biological ancestry or familial descent to reject modern racial classifications as unchanging categories established by Scripture. Paul clearly identifies his physical kinship with the Israelites and Christ's descent from them, but the existence of biological ancestry does not establish Webbon's particular understanding of race.
The NETTR mindset is so crazy that it’ll get Reformed CN dudes to call a Sola Fide denying, Trent affirming, Purgatory believing, “Only Catholics are in heaven” stating Anglo-Catholic a Christian.
This was true two years ago & it’s true now.
Christ is King; He reigns on His throne and no political leader gains office without God’s good & wise providential care.
“For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God” (Rom. 1:13b).
All Christians should want a nation where these verses apply.
“So now, O kings, show insight; Take warning, O judges of the earth.
Serve Yahweh with fear And rejoice with trembling.
Kiss the Son, lest He become angry, and you perish in the way, For His wrath may soon be kindled. How blessed are all who take refuge in Him!”
- (Psalm 2:10-12 LSB)
“God blesses us, That all the ends of the earth may fear Him.”
- (Psalm 67:7 LSB)
“Sing to God, O kingdoms of the earth, Sing praises to the Lord, Selah.”
- (Psalm 68:32 LSB)
“And let all kings bow down to him, All nations serve him.”
- (Psalm 72:11 LSB)
“May his name endure forever; May his name increase as long as the sun shines; Let all nations be blessed in him; Let all nations call him blessed.
Blessed be Yahweh God, the God of Israel, Who alone works wondrous deeds.”
- (Psalm 72:17-18 LSB)
Here is how I perceive NETTR.
The CN crowd certainly isn’t required to speak out against and correct every aberrant expression from people in their camp, even ones that go beyond being polemical such as those who claim things like “black people are subhuman” or “Hitler was a Christian Prince.”
However, there is a massive difference between saying, “I can’t spend all my time fighting those guys when there are more important things to talk about,” and creating chain posts of countless CN guys supporting and avowing such statements.
It’s like when Reformed folks debate non-Calvinists on matters of Soteriology or God’s sovereignty and some random Hyper Calvinist shows up and starts spouting nonsense like “Lucifer is God’s sock puppet,” or “God does author evil/sin.” The Reformed camp does respond to them, but after a certain point those Hyperists get ignored because there aren’t enough hours in the day to continuously correct the Hypers. The confessionally/historically Reformed aren’t required to speak out against every Hyper on this platform.
However, and here is the big distinction: none of the confessional Reformed folks are creating chain posts avowing and supporting the Hyperists out of some silly notion of “No Enemies in the Reformed Camp” for the sake of gaining ground.
The CNs are acting like rabid anti-Calvinists who won’t dare spend any time correcting or distancing themselves from heterodox or even unorthodox views so long as they can pitch their tent in the “We hate Calvinism” camp. So to the CNs will gather to themselves anyone who will agree with them on their core views, regardless of how far they may stray in terms of conclusions they reach.
Yes, we laugh because Calvin’s actions prove that he is a hypocrite who can’t live in accordance with the standards that he and his friends promote on their platform. Not a single person is laughing because of the mere fact that he is getting married. In fact we welcome his interracial marriage as a net positive. Your camp is the one who objects to it.
When random Joe black man gets married to a white woman 20 years his senior (a white woman whose young genes could be used to make more white children) then it’s not ideal nor advised; in fact according to Webbon it’s White Genocide.
When Calvin “The Protestant Reformation was Jewish” Robinson, as a 50-50 white/black man gets married to a white woman 20 years his senior then it’s perfectly acceptable.
I guess access to white women being white privilege only applies in some cases. For your friends you’ll make exceptions because… NETTR, amirite?
Well, well, well, how the turntables.
This kind of radical change in ideology in such a short period of time is why I ask: “why demand that we take the time to ‘do the reading’ if what you write is just as susceptible to change within a couple of years of it being published?”
Isn’t it fascinating how his partners and friends are actively participating in interracial marriages that result in White Genocide while they simultaneously rant and rage against interracial marriage because it results in White Genocide?
But now the standards have shifted, yet again. I was told recently that we in the non-CN side “need to do the reading.” Ok, cool. Sure. I don’t mind doing the reading.
But… will that book printed and published in October 2026 even be relevant and reflect their view by the time October of 2027 rolls around?
The Tragedy of White Genocide
A further distinction must be made between “permissibility” and “engineering”.
Something may be morally permissible in isolation while still being promoted systemically for destructive ends.
In the modern West, interracial marriage—particularly for White Europeans—has been relentlessly promoted through media, advertising, and institutional messaging. The pattern is not organic representation of demographic reality; it is asymmetrical and strategically targeted.
White heterosexual couples, the only biological arrangement which produces White children, are conspicuously minimized.
Against the backdrop of abortion access on demand, mass immigration, and the normalization of gay marriage, the promotion of interracial marriage functions not merely as representation, but as demographic strategy.
One need not believe in conspiracies to observe incentives, patterns, and outcomes.
In this context, it is reasonable to say that interracial marriage, while morally permissible in individual cases, is being used instrumentally at the macro level to accelerate the dissolution of a particular people.
To deny this is not charity; it is willful blindness.
I just got word that a white pastor in my area, who fully embraces the liberal agenda, is going to give his white daughter away to a half-white, half-black man who is 20 years her senior.
Isn’t that just… outrageous! It’s White Genocide! Anon CN army, arise and be stirred to battle!
This new “The Empire and Anakin were the good guys” discourse has the same energy as the woke Leftists writing Rings of Power when they made the Orcs into “relatable families of immigrants.”
It’s little more than a sad and desperate attempt to keep gaining attention.
So, on the one hand this group will bloviate about interracial marriage not being “God’s normative/ordinary design,” while on the other hand they’ll partner with a man who emphatically states “I am no race mixer” as he gets engaged to a white Lutheran. Keep in mind, per his own words, he is someone who is “the result of race mixing.”
Shouldn’t Robinson have sought out a person to marry who is of the same race mixed percentage as he, rather than marrying a white woman and thus race mixing?
Oh, and I’ve heard it said by some of the more radical individuals in that camp (which the likes of Webbon and Sauve openly avow because “NETTR” amirite?) that “Access to White women is White privilege.” So… what are you guys gonna do about this? Just turn a blind eye because you can’t be bothered to apply your ever changing standards to real life?
We used to recognized Eternal Functional Subordination as a heresy.
I guess embracing it is fine if that means defending Webbon's terrible theology.
This reminds me of Provisionists embracing Kenoticism and Monotheletism to stick it to the Calvinists. Same energy.
The truly pathetic part about this is how almost none of the CN folks are willing to distance themselves from this vile take. Thankfully a small number have, but it should concern all that so many on that side don’t want to.
But I guess when “sinning in the right direction,” is acceptable for sexual deviancy (because it achieves a certain goal) then “sinning in the right direction” in favor of child sacrifice of those deemed to be “subhuman” is also acceptable if the goal of an all white nation is achieved.
So much for natural law being a staple of the CN worldview. It can be embraced or jettisoned depending on the need of the moment, it seems. With standards like thay who needs consistency?
Credo Calvin retweeted
Joel Webbon's "white genocide" book FALSELY attributes a quotation to Calvin because the AI he used to write picked up a footnote that references Calvin in the 3rd person as Calvin himself.
To my none CN friends, here is a set of questions I’ve been asking folks in real life who don’t agree with Christian Nationalism of any stripe:
Do you pray for the salvation of your political leaders, local and federal? If so (and you should absolutely do that, per 1 Tim. 2:1–2), and God grants them repentance and faith, what then? They became Christians while holding political office, what do you suggest then? Should they step down from their post, or should they begin leading politically with policies that honor God’s Word and God’s Law?
If yes to the last question, then how is that not a form of Christian Nationalism?
It really is simple: if you are in the United States illegally, whether you are a faithful Christian or a pagan atheist, you should be subject to the law of the land.
I would also argue that if you are a professing Christian you have a moral obligation to not knowingly/intentionally be in a country illegally.
I know it’s hard to apply this standard when it’s someone you know and love, but the law is the law. The structures in place to control immigration should be enforced, regardless of who is involved.
