Stuart DiNenno

“There is no doctrine revealed in Scripture for a merely speculative knowledge, but all is to exert a powerful influence upon conduct. God’s design in all that He has revealed to us is to the purifying of our affections and the transforming of our characters.” — Arthur Pink

@AdamPlewes You may be right.

The purpose of the system is what it does.

Desegregation led to many thousands of White women being raped by Black men, and many of them being murdered as well. White men who supported it then were traitors then, and White men who support it now are traitors now.

Thy wondrous loving-kindness show, thou that, by thy right hand, Sav’st them that trust in thee from those that up against them stand. As th’ apple of the eye me keep; in thy wings shade me close From lewd oppressors, compassing me round, as deadly foes. — Psalm 17:7-9, Scottish Metrical Psalter

What many Chrstians today fail to see is that Satan’s latest tactic is to destroy the Christian faith by destroying the people themselves who are the only ones that have faithfully preserved and propagated it (i.e., the European or White race). This is why I say that churches which go along with the anti-White and pro-Jewish agenda are satanic regardless of however accurate their theology might be—they are literally participating in a pro-death program. This is worse than theological error because theological error can be rectified, but the loss of a race cannot be rectified. So they are in grievous error who categorize this sin as something less serious than a failure to preach the gospel, and who view the churches that go along with the anti-White and pro-Jewish agenda as only errant institutions. The men who lead these organizations are satanically-driven enemies, and to merely call them apostates is to understate the case rather than to overstate it.

“The trouble is that, nowadays, there are so many who receive the testimony of God only so far as they can satisfactorily account for all the reasons and grounds of His conduct, which means they will accept nothing but that which can be measured in the petty scales of their own limited capacities.” — Arthur Pink, The Sovereignty Of God

If the Jews didn’t have their pseudo-Israel in the Middle East, Iran would be as much of a problem as Uruguay or Malaysia, and no Americans would lose their lives in a war against it.

@MizJChristian @dalepartridge "...the question is whether they are truly biblical." And the answer is that they are.

That’s the very point in question. We don’t preserve a view because it was held in the past; we preserve it if it is actually taught and supported by the whole of Scripture. Simply asserting that those positions are “correct and righteous” doesn’t establish that they are. That still has to be demonstrated from Scripture, not from tradition or historical precedent. 1 Thessalonians 5:21 calls us to test all things, not to assume they are right because respected figures held them. Bottom line: The question isn’t whether they are old; the question is whether they are truly biblical.

Many modern Christians would have excommunicated their forefathers. -Dabney for his views on race/marriage -Luther for his views on the Jews -Knox for his views on women -Mather for the Salem Witch Trials -Gouge for his view on patriarchy We’d reject many of our own heroes.

@MizJChristian @dalepartridge "Yes, many historical figures held views we would reject today, but that’s not a reason to preserve their errors." The reason to preserve these things is because they are correct and righteous.

I think this cuts in a different direction than you intend. Yes, many historical figures held views we would reject today, but that’s not a reason to preserve their errors. It’s a reminder that even influential voices can be wrong in serious ways. Scripture calls us to test everything and hold fast to what is good (1 Thessalonians 5:21). And this is exactly where Sola Scriptura matters: Scripture, not respected figures, is the final arbiter of truth. Bottom line: The failures of the past don’t validate error; they remind us that every belief must be measured against Scripture, not against the reputation of those who held it.

@dalepartridge We have a church that upholds not only all the men on your list, but all the beliefs listed as well.

It is very instructive to Christian worship today that during the instructions for worship in Exodus 39-40, the text says 18x something like "as the Lord commanded Moses." Lesson? God is making it very clear that His people are to worship Him according to His express command—not their own ideas or preferences.

Bless God, my soul. O Lord my God, thou art exceeding great; With honour and with majesty thou clothed art in state. With light, as with a robe, thyself thou coverest about; And, like unto a curtain, thou the heavens stretchest out. — Psalm 104:1-2, Scottish Metrical Psalter

It is not “Israel.” It is “The Zionist Entity.” National Israel ceased to exist in 70 A.D., never to be resurrected again. Iranian Muslims know better than American Christians on this point.

Yes and no. Of course, it is possible to hold to the futurist interpretation of Romans 11 and still properly condemn today's anti-Christ Jews. But false doctrine manifests itself in faulty practice, and I think the fact that almost all professing Christians who hold to the futurist view also practice an inordinate leniency toward the modern-day anti-Christ Jews, and that this has largely been the case among the Reformed even before the modern egalitarian age, is a manifestation of the doctrine's falsity.

@DinennoStuart @spanglermt Hence the need for my post. If someone believes in a futurist interpretation of Romans 11, it can't lead them to promote the Jewish people as they are today, but call them to repentance. The exegetical question of Romans 11 is another issue.

A futuristic understanding of Rom 11:26 must not lead Christians to accept and promote Jews as they are now, but to call them to repentance and faith in the one savior and Lord—Jesus Christ. To do otherwise is neither loving to Jews nor faithfulness to Christ. "And so all Israel shall be saved..." Rom 11:26

𝗜𝗳 𝗮 𝗰𝗵𝘂𝗿𝗰𝗵 𝘄𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗱𝗼𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗳𝗮𝗰𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗱𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝗶𝘁𝘀 𝗼𝘄𝗻 𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻, 𝘀𝘂𝗰𝗵 𝗮𝘀 𝗴𝗼𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗶-𝗪𝗵𝗶𝘁𝗲 𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗮, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗶𝘁 𝘄𝗮𝘀 𝘀𝗶𝗺𝘂𝗹𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗲𝗼𝘂𝘀𝗹𝘆 𝗳𝗮𝗶𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗮𝗴𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁 𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗺𝗶𝗲𝘀 𝗱𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗼𝘆𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗵𝘂𝗿𝗰𝗵, 𝘀𝘂𝗰𝗵 𝗮𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗶-𝗖𝗵𝗿𝗶𝘀𝘁 𝗝𝗲𝘄𝘀, 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘀𝗶𝗻𝘀 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝘄𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗹𝘆 𝘀𝗮𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗶𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴? First, there is straightforward unfaithfulness in the ministry of the Word. If a church’s teaching or practice positively facilitates the destruction of the people entrusted to its care, then it is failing to “declare the whole counsel of God” (Acts 20:27) and instead teaching in a way that produces harm rather than edification. This falls under the category of false teaching or corrupt doctrine, even if the error is practical or ethical rather than formally dogmatic. Second, there is culpable silence in the face of manifest evil, which falls under the broader heading of sins of omission. The prophetic office includes warning against injustice, violence, and destruction. Failure to oppose such things, when they are clear and pressing, is not neutral; it is a breach of duty (cf. Ezekiel 33 watchman language). Third, there is failure in pastoral responsibility toward one’s neighbor, intensified by proximity and obligation. Biblical ethics does not treat “neighbor” as an abstract idea; it recognizes specific, ordered duties. A church has heightened responsibility toward those immediately entrusted to it. Facilitating the destruction of the people among whom the church is set or refusing to defend them are violations of the sixth commandment, which not only prohibits murder, but requires the preservation of life. Fourth, there is dereliction of covenantal stewardship. The Bible consistently treats the church as a covenant community under obligation to preserve, transmit, and defend the faith across generations. Actions that contribute to the dissolution or destruction of the people among whom that covenant life is historically embodied can be construed as a failure to maintain what has been entrusted—analogous to the unfaithful steward. Fifth, there is fear of man and compromise with hostile powers. When a church does not stand against forces actively destroying both the people and the church itself, the root is in disordered fear, desire for institutional preservation, or accommodation to power. This is a species of unfaithfulness, closely related to idolatry in functional terms. Sixth, there is scandal and public offense, in the technical sense—public conduct that leads others into sin, confirms them in error, or weakens their obedience by presenting evil as acceptable. By aligning, actively or passively, with destructive forces, the church undermines its own witness and becomes a cause of stumbling. This is a serious ecclesial sin because it distorts the visible church’s testimony before both its own members and the outside world. Seventh, depending on how direct the facilitation is, one could also speak of participation in injustice or violence. Guilt is not restricted to direct perpetrators; it includes forms of cooperation, whether by endorsement, assistance, or willful inaction when action is required. The gravity of the situation is not derived from an abstract doctrine of “the nation” as such, but from concrete violations of divine commands, ministerial duties, and ordered obligations to those under the church’s care. If those violations are sustained, public, and defended rather than repented of, then we need to face the fact that we may be contending with an apostate institution.

“It's true that many are praying for a worldwide revival. But it would be more timely, and more scriptural, for prayer to be made to the Lord of the harvest, that He would raise up and thrust forth laborers who would fearlessly and faithfully preach those truths which are calculated to bring about a revival.” — Arthur Pink

The Jews are like a man you allowed to move into your house, who then threw out all your furniture and redecorated the place to suit his own taste, then tried to seduce your wife and abuse your kids, and then complained that there is an attitude of hate coming from you.

Blessed are they that undefiled, and straight are in the way; Who in the Lord’s most holy law do walk, and do not stray. Blessed are they who to observe his statutes are inclined; And who do seek the living God with their whole heart and mind. — Psalm 119:1-2, Scottish Metrical Psalter

@EhudWould @oldpathtreader That is true. I'm going to mention that to Roddie Bryan. I write to him often.

@DinennoStuart @oldpathtreader The McMichaels & William Bryan are serving life sentences w/o the possibilty of parole for loving their neighbors.

White people used to love their neighbors by keeping the colored folks out of their neighborhood.