Love your neighbor as yourself.
This is a command by God. A great, flawless command, as all of His commands were (are).
It is important for Christians to accept what was told to us with no reservations. This was a command, not a recommendation. This is not wrong, nor is it incorrectly interpreted or added erroneously. It is fully right.
But that does not mean that leftists understand it. At all.
This statement is often used as an argument against speaking out against any of the ills of demographic diversity or sexual perversions. Such as in the image below:
Most people that use this tactic are not even Christians.
There are usually three targets that are used for this argument (three groups we should “love” unconditionally, according to them): the sinner, the ethnics, and the immigrants. Let us address each.
To begin, this misconception about loving thy neighbor shows how far the Christian Church has fallen. How lukewarm it has become.
The Church has not fallen because of some outsider threat, but because of pathetically weak internal ministers who refuse to stand for and preach the truth. They are afraid, so they stay silent on the controversial topics or only hit them occasionally, which then leads to blind people like the above who do not understand the full picture.
This “leadership” behavior is what leads to the leftist and lukewarm Christians. They just take what pieces they like and ignore the rest. I put leadership in quotes because it is not true leadership, because true leadership requires courage. Courage is hard to find in most modern churches that would rather just ignore the hard preachings in the Bible.
It is akin to the Westernized Islamists who take the Ayahs in the Quran, like Surah An-Nahl 16-18, and use it to proclaim that Allah forgives all:
And if you should count the favours of Allah, you would never be able to number them. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.
Which conveniently ignores the fourteen hundred parts in the Quran where Allah destroys everyone, and talks about how he is going to wreck all nonbelievers.
Christians do the exact same with certain quotes, one of which is Love Thy Neighbor.
(Another popular one is “Do Not Judge”—Even though we are explicitly commanded to judge in a certain way, but that is a topic for another day.)
The reality is more nuanced, on both sides.
Jesus loved. But he also rebuked. He healed and forgave, but then he commanded to go and sin no more. He spoke the truth with endless patience and care, but he also flipped tables and proclaimed he was coming soon with fire and punishment.
What this means is that a Christian should not love blindly. We must be observant. Because in that observation lies the ability for true agape love.
If you truly love your neighbor – you will hate the sin that is destroying them. I do love the misguided souls trapped in the LGBT chopping-genitalia manufacturing line, and it is because of that love that I continually cry out at them to get off the line before they are decimated.
God’s holy wrath will not be subsided, and I fear it, not just for me but for others as well. That is love.
I will love those who sin, and my love is shown through my forewarning them of the punishment to come if they do not repent. I also love my people, and do not want them controlled by unrepentant sinners.
The command is also to love thy neighbor as yourself. The leftists often leave off the last two words. If I sin, I sure hope someone would tell me so I can do my best to correct it. To truly love them as myself, it requires me to tell them of their error and help them avoid God’s wrath, as I would want done to me.
God hates sin. No Christian should condone, tolerate, or worse – actively support – what God hates.
God also hates those who He has given up on, that have turned from Him too often. Read up on reprobates here to get a handle on this subject: Understanding The Reprobate: Psychopath Reprobates. This is one of those uncomfortable truths that weak ministers no longer preach on, and that the vast majority of Christians do not understand, mostly due to the former problem.
Reprobates are no longer my neighbor. They are God’s enemies, and I don’t make friends with God’s enemies because I fear God. I will not love those who God hates.
God actually commanded us to throw them out of the city in the Old Testament and to not be around them at all in the New Testament. To truly love your neighbor: support a state that would expel the reprobates. To protect your neighbors from the reprobates, who are not one’s neighbor.
Then, there is the race issue. “Love your neighbor, so you must love everything the blacks and browns do”, is effectively what the image I linked above is saying.
I love all races and have no ill will toward anyone.
But, if you truly love the other races, you would grant them their own nation, their own state, their own political unit, their own culture, and their own independent ability to live. You would not restrict them from this. You would not force them to exist in some weird empire culture blob that destroys all unique cultures.
And if you truly loved your own, you would grant them the same.
I love the blacks in the States – even though it is becoming increasingly more difficult by the day – so I want them to have their own nation-state. Away and distinct from mine. They would be much happier under such a situation.
Just like I love my own people, so I want us to have our own nation-state, fully ours and free.
If we all had this, we would all be far better off and happier. Conflict arises precisely because we do not have this condition.
This is true love in action, not the fake love of just pretending like we are compatible while everything in society crumbles around us. Nationalism would create actual peace, something all Christians should strive for, unlike the empire-seeking world order we are currently dealing with.
Forcing everyone together and destroying cultural and national connections is not love. It is Satanic, and I do not mean that in the flashy “oooo-spooky” way. Satan quite literally will unite everyone using the Antichrist in the end times and has been working the same strategy since the Towel of Babel. Uniting what God has made separate is a telltale sign of Satan’s involvement.
The entire Old Testament is a story of one nation, which God commanded to be separate and pure – to not intermix with other nations. When Israel was being punished by God, they would be forced or allowed to intermix, and when they were being faithful, he would keep them separate. To then extrapolate this to mean that God wants one race, one government is folly.
God created different peoples and wants it that way. Who is man to destroy that?
Then there is the immigrant question. God’s law says to love the temporary transient and to not have separate laws for them to punish them harsher than the natives (Leviticus). But He does specify that they are temporary transients (read the Greek), and nowhere does He say that you have to let your entire nation be destroyed so they can live off of us or to bring them in so they can replace/harm us.
Nor does He even say to allow them to remain in your land indefinitely and intermix with your people. In fact, it is the opposite – He commanded them not to intermix. But to be nice to them as they traveling through.
Which is a great command that would make this world a lot more available and safer if we actually practiced it how it is clearly demonstrated in the Scriptures.
Furthermore, loving your own people requires protecting them from the harms wrought by mass immigration.
Modern people tend to forget that love does have a hierarchy. Jesus’ first Great Commandment was to love God, and later He said (Luke 14) “If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple.”
This wasn’t meant to be “hate” as we understand it, but a comparison between how much one should love God compared to their own family. E.g. God should be much higher.
Thus, there is a clear hierarchy for us to follow.
Further, in Timothy 5, God said: “But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” “His own” and “especially” are important here. “His own” is your community; your tribe; your nation. “Especially” implies a higher importance. We have to take care of our own. We cannot allow them to be harmed or abandoned.
Our religious faith is likewise not excluded. In Galatians 6, God says: “Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all, especially to those who are of the household of faith.”
So, the hierarchy should look like this:
- God
- Our Own Household (Fellow Family)/The Household of Faith (Fellow Christians)
- “His Own” (Community/Tribe)
- “His Own” (Nation)
- Others
I am not saying that certain groups should get more love than others. All should be loved. Do good to all. But if their interests conflict, we should follow the hierarchy. We must take care of our own first, especially our family and those of the household of faith. To deny them over others is to be worse than an unbeliever.
We are currently not taking care of our own (see things like Kensington). So we should start there, not with refugees. By focusing on the latter, we end up harming both.
Additionally, importing foreign hostile faiths and atheists is not accomplishing doing good to our household of faith. It is putting them in harm’s way and weakening them.
So, I have made the argument for the need to love our own national people regarding immigration, but the nationalist approach shows love to the outsiders, too.
Loving the immigrants is the same: they should be bettering their own lands and peoples. Bringing them here is a disservice to their people. How much better would the originating countries be if their best people stayed within them instead of immigrated out? The natives of both lands are harmed with mass immigration, especially the kind regarding skilled migrants.
In Romans, Paul says that “Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.” Stating sin to a sinner does no harm to them; but it helps them avert future harm and wrath. Fighting for independent nation-states need not harm anyone; it will give them their own land, culture, and people. But forcing demographic replacement does hurt the group being replaced. Taking care of transients but restricting their residency does not harm anyone; it merely protects the natives of both nations.
There is nowhere in our arguments that love does not shine through.
Therefore, in summary:
- I do love my neighbor by pointing out his sins and preaching to him the truth.
- I do not and should not love the enemies of God, who are no longer my neighbor because God has given them up.
- I do love my racial neighbors, by encouraging them to have their own nation-state, culture, and land that is separate from mine.
- I do love the temporary transient as they pass through my land, but they need to go back for their own nation’s interest and because I love my true (national) neighbor too much to sacrifice his well-being for theirs.
Let me wrap this article up with a quote from 2 Chronicles 19:2, where King Jehoshaphat learned the very lesson mentioned in this write-up – too much love – which led to utter military defeat:
And Jehu the son of Hanani the seer went out to meet him, and said to King Jehoshaphat, “Should you help the wicked and love those who hate the Lord? Therefore the wrath of the Lord is upon you.
And Psalm 97:10:
You who love the Lord, hate evil!
This argument of “the Bible says you should love your neighbor, so let me do whatever I want” is always incredibly blind and presented by people who have likely never even read the Bible, so we should not take it too seriously. But it is good for us to have quick, knowledgeable responses if we are ever asked.
So keep this one in your pocketbook. You never know when you may need it.
-By Kaisar
O I’m a good old rebel, now that’s just what I am. For this “fair land of freedom” I do not care at all. I’m glad I fit against it, I only wish we’d won, And I don’t want no pardon for anything I done.
Bravo, sir.
> “But, if you truly love the other races, you would grant them their own nation, their own state, their own political unit, their own culture, and their own independent ability to live. You would not restrict them from this. You would not force them to exist in some weird empire culture blob that destroys all unique cultures.”
This is the one way in-which D3R (Dems ‘R the Real Racists) is actually correct. Liberal Whites *are* de-facto far more racist than anyone who writes for Identity Dixie– they don’t like Black people, they like Black people insofar as they, wrongly, believe they’d adopt the attitudes and lifestyles of upper middle class White liberals (SWPLs, AWLFs, etc) if only they were “given a fair chance”
Quite right. Alfred Rosenberg said pretty much the same thing when he wrote:
“I have explained in many speeches that the veneration of Germanic blood does not imply contempt for other races but, on the contrary, racial respect. Since races, as the core of nations, are created by nature, the very respect for nature itself demands respect for such creations. The purpose of the large-scale development of peoples is the juridical recognition of racially conditioned families of people in their own homelands. Style, customs, language, are the manifestation of different souls and peoples; and just as these cannot be mixed without a resultant deterioration of their purity, so men, as their embodiment, and to whom they belong organically and spiritually, cannot intermingle.” p. 81.
Alfred Rosenberg, ‘Memoirs’
After reading “The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America” by Richard Rothstein, a liberal Jewish fellow, I’m stumped as to why any blacks would ever vote Democrat. Ford Motor Company, the federal housing program, insurance companies and even Democrat POTUS FDR were against integration. Yet, here we have blacks voting Democrat time after time after time. They listened to a senile man proclaim “you ain’t black” if you didn’t vote for him. They voted for him, he won and look at the mess we have now.
This is accurate, even though it pains me to say it because I do not want to give any credit at all to the D3R types. But, in this context, they are not wrong. As is sometimes the case, the average normiecon gets the right answer but by the wrong calculation.
People of color should love their white neighbors? Oh no, that would be racist.
Graham Greene wrote a book while traveling through Mexico incognito during the communist revolution there. When he came home to England in 1935, he said, from memory, “why do I dislike Mexicans so much? I come home to England and everyone is sitting around playing a new board game called monopoly. what is a house for? To build with Loving hands to provide shelter for a Loving family? What is property for? To plant a garden and watch Love grow in the back yard……”
Graham Greene. Lawless roads. 1935
Another good book on the communist revolution in Mexico.
‘No God Next Door’ Michael Kenney. 1935. The author of that book would wholeheartedly support this article. 400 hundred years of Catholic culture was completely sanitized from Mexico at that time.
I don’t mean to gush on Mexicans, but these social engineers don’t have Love in their hearts by sending them here, let me tell you.
Nation in the Bible is the Greek word Ethnos from which we get the word ethnic. Nations like the United States are really not nations but a conglomerate of nations. Blacks have benefited far more than they have suffered by being brought to America. But if it be argued that slavery was a moral wrong then the answer is not reparations but instead let those sections of the United States that are majority Black form their own self-autonomous region which in time can become their own Ethno-State. In the Bible there are several words translated as enemy. Love you enemies means go the extra mile to try to find common ground with your personal enemy. But we are not commanded to love God’s enemy. Contrary to popular opinion there are forms of White racialism that are benevolent and progressive based on separatism and mutual respect which disdains lording it over or exploiting non-Whites! To each his own.
Really good piece.
Who exactly is your brother, and who exactly are your neighbors? Good question.
“He [Jesus] replied to him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” Pointing to his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers. For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.”
-Matthew 12:48-50
This verse though, like Gal. 3:28, is frequently taken out of the context of all of Scripture to support an abolition of all distinctions and degrees in our love. I think Lancelot Andrewes, (who chaired the KJV Bible translation committee), really gives us some sound doctrine on this question:
“Every sinner, as he is a sinner, is to be hated; every man, as he is a man, is to be loved. Let us love men so that we love not their sins; and love them for that which God made them, not that which by sin they made themselves. For degrees, one man is nearer than another. It is certain there are degrees; for to omit our duties towards our parents is worse than to omit the same duties towards a stranger. The order of our love must be thus: to God, to our own souls, to the souls of our brethren before our own bodies, to our own bodies before other men’s, to the bodies of our neighbors.
[Of the bodies of our neighbors there are also degrees to be followed]: first, to them that have need; and of those, first to the household of faith (Gal. 6:10); and of them, first to our countrymen, brethren and companions (Ps. 122:8); and of these, first them that are our friends and acquaintances; and of them, first to them of our own household and kindred (1 Tim. 5:8); and of our kindred, first the wife (Gen. 2:24, 1 Sam. 1:8).
Of the manner of our love: ‘not so much as thyself, but after the same manner.’ Because thou lovest God, (and therefore all things which are God’s), for this cause love thy brother. pp. 172-3. The rule is that the love to myself must be the rule of the love to my neighbor, and so it is not required that I should do any more for my neighbor than I would do for myself.” p. 209.
Lancelot Andrewes, ‘Pattern of Catechistical Doctrine and Other Minor Works’
Great addition. I have not heard about this before—Thanks for sharing this.