[** Export to PDF](/wp-admin/tools.php?ghostexport=true&submit=Download+Ghost+File&pdf=113)
Few are more confident in their beliefs regarding Christianity than unbelievers, and that is especially true for those modern progressives who refer to themselves as “Christian” yet substitute their political ideology for actual theology. Such people are often referred to as “Churchians” because they attend church yet are most assuredly not Christians in any substantive way. They are often found espousing progressive policies such as abortion, gay marriage, female promiscuity, and the like while claiming all the while that their positions are biblical. Traditionalist Christians may be used to hearing atheists and pagans claim that Jesus was a Marxist hippy, but progressive Churchians gleefully make the same claim to subvert Christianity for their own ends.

A good example of Churchian theology can be found on the website of Dr. Camille Lewis, the former chair for the Department of Rhetoric and Public Address at Bob Jones University. Now, it may seem odd at first to think a department chair at a fundamentalist evangelical university would be classified as a liberal, but any doubts can be put to rest by the fact that she discusses how she is “triggered” by her time working at BJU (Source). Of particular interest, however, is her post discussing a 1960 sermon by Bob Jones, Sr., in which he argued that segregation of the races is necessary because God divided mankind and such divisions should remain (Source). The theology of this is sound as has been discussed here previously, albeit Jones relies entirely on Acts 17:26 when the point could have been expounded upon, but the sermon is prefaced with Dr. Lewis’s own anti-racism as an attack more on her former employer than anything. This in and of itself speaks volumes as she makes no effort to refute either Acts 17:26 as written or as understood by Jones. She simply takes it for granted that he is incorrect because she believes that anything “racist” is inherently wrong.

Still, since Dr. Lewis makes no direct effort to counter the sermon, we must instead look to the comments under her post in which her similarly liberal followers discuss it further. One going by the name of “George” said, “At the Tower of Babel God confused the languages. So anyone who has mixed heritage such as the English and Scottish or Scot Irish contravenes the tenet laid out,” and he followed with, “The problem is these white bigots have changed the Bible to suit their needs. At the Tower of Babel God confused the languages. Now, if you look at the formation of white America, they violated this tenet.” He was not done either, and he further asserted that race “was never an issue” and that “white American settlers” had “violated God’s law by inter-marrying,” so “the existence of white America … was a mistake.” Another user going by “Jon” claimed that following the Bible “would mandate that Whites leave the American continent, that we cease usage of the internet (and other boundary jumpers), and stop world language studies (post-Tower of Babel condition).”

In essence, “George” and “Jon” are both using the same argument: namely, multiculturalism is fine and racism is silly because the existence of whites alone violates God’s will regarding the Tower of Babel. They also make claims about the meaninglessness of race, but their argument inherently concedes that Jones may have had a point with his sermon yet dismiss it. If whites violate God’s will by “mixing” despite having different ethnic languages, they assume then that all other divisions created by God are also null and void. This is actually a fairly common argument put forth by Churchians to justify their overlooking all of the verses in the Bible that make it clear that God divided mankind on purpose. If our ancestors broke God’s law as set forth at the Tower of Babel, then all subsequent sins on the same topic are irrelevant because our very existence is a sin in and of itself, or so their convoluted thinking goes. As expected, this “liberal theology” is flawed at best.

First, let’s consider what the story of the Tower of Babel actually says. Genesis 11:1-9 tells us that the whole of mankind possessed a single language, which allowed them to work together, and, in their hubris, they attempted to build a tower to Heaven. When God saw what they were attempting, He divided mankind into languages and spread them across the face of the Earth. Following the liberals’ reasoning, Europe is home to different languages, and that must mean that God intended for Europeans to remain entirely divided. Of course, liberals do not actually believe that, but the attempt is rather to take the true theological argument and oversimplify it to the point of ridiculousness. If you deny their premise, they will simply declare that you have negated your own argument regarding other races. In truth, they are demonstrating their own ignorance at best, or their own dishonesty at worst, and this is made obvious by the field of linguistics.

These “theologians” apparently do not realize that modern languages are not representative of languages even a few centuries ago. For example, the vast majority of languages spoken by white people today are part of the Indo-European language family as they all share a common ancestor. European branches of this family include Albanian, Baltic, Celtic, Germanic, Hellenic, Italic, and Slavic. Branches of the family outside of Europe include Armenian and Indo-Iranian. Let’s look to the Germanic branch to understand what this means. Today, a person who speaks English may not understand a person who speaks German, but both languages are Germanic and can be traced back to Proto-Germanic. In the case of English, the modern language began to develop in the 17th century from Early Modern English, which itself had developed in the 15th century from Middle English, which developed in the 12th century from the Old English of the Anglo-Saxons. For its part, modern German can ultimately be traced back to Old High German.

Now, let’s consider the Tower of Babel within this context. Obviously, white Americans are not “a mistake,” and an Englishman with a Scotsman in his family tree is not somehow a walking embodiment of sin because both the English and Scots share common Indo-European ancestry. Similarly, the Niger-Congo language family covers virtually every language spoken by Negroids in Sub-Saharan Africa, so two black people would not violate the “Babel tenet” even if they are from different tribes, nations, or what have you. There are, however, some cases where a difference could be claimed despite the people otherwise being related. For example, the Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans are all related as East Asian Mongoloids, but they belong to Sino-Tibetan, Japonic, and Koreanic language families, respectively. Of course, that is not particularly relevant since the liberals’ point hinges on the claim that whites violate God’s will, which is patently false.

It is also important to highlight the fact that the reason that God confounded the language of mankind was because the men had decided they could reach Heaven on their own. In other words, they believed they were on par with God. A person learning another language, using the internet, or even traveling abroad is obviously not an example of trying to actively subvert God’s will, which is what “Jon” had implied. Traditionalists are not the ones attempting to place themselves above God, but it is rather the progressive “Churchians” who believe their modern political ideology is more sound than the Lord’s will. They clearly embrace sin while claiming that Jesus would never punish them because He loves them unconditionally, and the Lord would have never made them the way they are if they were supposed to be different. This just further demonstrates their fundamental misunderstanding of the faith, their willful dishonesty, or both.

Deuteronomy 32:8 tells us that the Lord “separated the sons of Adam, [and] he set the bounds of the people.” Acts 17:26 tells us that God “made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth,” and it reiterates that He “determined … the bounds of their habitation.” Now, if God made the nations of men, set the bounds of their habitation, and confounded their languages, how can the Bible be read to justify the multiculturalism and multiracialism espoused by these liberal Churchians when their ultimate desire is a single, brown race speaking a single, muddled language while declaring that sins are righteous? In short, progressivism is wicked at its core, and they seek to subvert God’s will and construct their own Tower.