A Christian Survey of World History

Islam – The Frontier Age, II


*This is an unedited and unoffical print version of R.J. Rushdoony’s lecture.

R.J. Rushdoony: 00:03 Yes, here. He’s describing something of the work of these monks. The place where he governed shows how frugal he and his predecessors were, for there were very few houses besides the church found at their departure. Indeed, no more than were barely sufficient for their daily residence. They had also no money, but cattle, for if they received any money from rich persons, they immediately gave it to the poor. There being no need to gather money or provide houses for the entertainment of the great men of the world, [Gorsuch 00:00:42] never resorted to the church except to pray and hear the word of God. The king himself, when opportunity offered, came only with five or six servants, and having performed his devotions in the church, departed. If they happened to take a repast there, they were satisfied with only the plain and daily food of the brethren and required no more, for the whole care of these teachers was to serve God, not the world. To feed the soul, not the belly.

R.J. Rushdoony: 01:14 For this reason, the religious habit was at that time in great veneration, so that wheresoever any clergyman or monk happened to come, he was joyfully received by all persons as God’s servant, and if they chanced to meet him upon the way, they ran to him and bowing, were glad to be signed with his hand or blessed with his mouth. Great attention was also paid to their exhortations, and on Sundays they flocked eagerly to the church or the monasteries, not to feed their bodies but to hear the word of God. If any priest happened to come into a village, the inhabitants flocked together to hear from him the word of life, for the priests and clergymen went into the villages on no other account than to preach, baptize, visit the sick, and in a few words, to take care of souls. They were so free from worldly avarice that none of them received lands and possessions for building monasteries unless they were compelled to do so by the temporal authorities, which custom was for some time after observed in all the churches of the [Northumbrians 00:02:26].

R.J. Rushdoony: 02:27 Now, the priests at that time were married. During most of the Middle Ages, they were married, but the monks were not, of course, and so they could come and go. Even among the most savage of pagans, they very quickly established their power. The venerable Bede said they would run to these monks when they saw them coming, to be blessed or to take their problems to them. Why? Because these men wandering here, there, and everywhere would apply the law of God to the problems as men, and countered them, to the disputes among men.

R.J. Rushdoony: 03:10 As a result, their presence everywhere was welcomed, and any wealth they had was given for the use of the people. They took care of the poor, they established schools later to educate the young, they established hospitals, and they would keep moving on always. The monks, therefore, were an instrument created by God of tremendous power in that era. After that era, they became more or less useless, as after the year of 1000 approximately, the churches were established. Civilization, that is urban life, had developed. There was a stable society more or less, and the monk, except as a reforming influence from time to time, was less needed.

R.J. Rushdoony: 04:16 In the days after the fall of Rome, the monk was of tremendous importance, and of all the monks, the most important were those from Scotia. In those days, Scotia was not Scotland. It was Ireland, except for the North of Ireland. That was known as Scotia. The Irish monks were the teachers of Greek and Hebrew to Europe. They had the closest contact with Byzantium, with Armenia, and with Assyria, so the Christian countries of that part of the world. In their cemeteries, you find that they had monks from those countries in their orders as well, so that the inscriptions in many areas will have inscriptions in languages that are anything but Gaelic.

R.J. Rushdoony: 05:20 Their dedication, their work, everything they did was done with such an intense dedication, especially the Irish monks, that they were of the civilizers of Europe. In the text, I quote on page 129, the kind of work they did is they copied manuscripts of the Bible. You wonder how anyone with the naked eye could do the work they did. Page 129, the second paragraph. “The illuminated manuscripts of Ireland, especially the Book of Kells, are without equal in the Western world. The fine and accurate detail is such that a tradition arose that angels did the work, because later generations said, ‘How could a human being do such detailed and fine work?'”

R.J. Rushdoony: 06:16 JO Westwood has said of one manuscript, “I have counted in a small space, measuring scarcely three-quarters of an inch by less than half an inch in width,” now, that’s less than the upper part of your thumb, “not fewer than 158 interlacements of a slender, ribbon-like pattern, formed of white lines, edged by black ones, upon a black ground.” Now consider the eyesight and the fine hand required to do that. This was the kind of thing that these Irish monks were doing. They brought a mastery to everything, whether it was teaching, whether it was missionary work, or whether it was the artwork in their manuscripts. It was almost unbelievable in its character.

R.J. Rushdoony: 07:22 Let me read further from James Westfall Thompson, this little note about these Irish monks. “What the Irish monasteries represented in this whole cultural development is well-expressed by an American scholar. They were schools all the way from kindergarten to university, hospitals, hotels, publishing houses, libraries, law courts, art academies, and conservatories of music. They were houses of refuge, places of pilgrimage, marts for barter and exchange.” Incidentally, the Jews would use them as a storage place for goods that they didn’t dare keep in their homes. They had a working agreement with them. They would work very closely with them. They knew nobody would rob the church, except occasionally some marauding king, but in normal circumstances, that was the safest place. “Marts for barter and exchange, centers of culture, social centers, newspaper offices, and distilleries. A score of other public and practical things were they. Garrisons, granneries, orphan asylums, frontier fort, post office, savings bank, and general store for surrounding agricultural districts. We carelessly imagine the early monasteries as charnel houses of cant and ritual, whereas they were the best oiled machines for the advancement of science, the living accelerators of human thinking, precedent to the University of Paris.”

R.J. Rushdoony: 09:17 Now, this is a very important thing to understand. Of course, one of the weaknesses of man is that when man finds that something works, he thinks it’s the only thing that’ll work. This has been one of the weaknesses of the church of Rome. It continues trying to make things work because they once worked. The monks were in that period the greatest instrument of their day. After the year 1000, their importance waned. Since the Reformation, their influence and importance has been a minor one in relationship to the amount of money that they have cost.

R.J. Rushdoony: 10:07 Tracts were a tremendously important thing in the last century, and Protestants used tracts to remarkable advantage, and millions upon millions of people throughout the Western world were reached with the use of tracts. The tracts don’t have their same value today, but we still continue publishing reams of tracts. They have only a minor value now. That’s compared to the last century. In other words, to be a pioneer, you have to recognize that in a particular age, a particular thing is necessary, so that if we are going to be pioneers in a time that needs reconstruction, we have to think specifically in terms of what is needed in our time. Otherwise, we’re living in terms of the past. Today, one of the key answers is the Christian school movement, but we need to develop other answers in other fields to be pioneers for our day.

R.J. Rushdoony: 11:34 The importance of the monks was all the more to be emphasized because many of the top clergy, as well as the rulers, were only nominally Christians. For example, here is a famous bishop, Gregory of Tours. Let me say parenthetically first, one of the real problems in this era with regard to the clergy was simony. That is, the buying and selling of offices. This continued until fairly recent times. In fact, this was the problem in the Church of England after the reformation. The monarchy made bishop ricks and important deanships and the like political plums, so that many of the … Well, the overwhelming majority of churches in England of any consequence had as their deans, or their rectors, or their bishop, a man who never saw the church. He was living in London and was very often a profligate man. Morally derelict. It was a political reward for him.

R.J. Rushdoony: 13:04 Now, because of this, the majority of the clergy of any consequence were worthless, and this is what Gregory of Tours said, he himself an indication that not all bishops were bad. But some of his portraits throw a glaring light on the life of Merovingian Gaul, what is now France. [inaudible 00:13:30] were a precious pair of Bishops. They went about armed not with the heavenly cross but with the helm and [inaudible 00:13:37] shirt of the world. And are said to have slain many of the foe with their own hands. These are direct quotes from Gregory or [Tours 00:13:46]. They passed most of their nights in feasting and drinking so that while the clergy were celebrating mathans in the cathedral church, they were calling for fresh cups and keeping up their libations. No word was there of God upon their lips, nor did they remember the order of the services.

R.J. Rushdoony: 14:07 Not til the return of dawn did they rise up from the banquet. Then they put on soft garments and all be drowsed and sunken wine, slept on until the third hour of the day, nor did there fail them women with whom to be defiled. When they arose, they took a bath and laid down to feast anew. Leaving the table at evening, they were soon greedy for their supper again, which lasted until the morning light. Thus they did day after day. Bishop [Unius 00:14:39] of Annis was over much addicted to wine and often was so grossly drunken that he could not stir a stick. Then he says, as late as the eighth century, [Montacus 00:14:51] complained to the Pope of the Frankish, or French, clergy. “Religion is trodden under foot. Manifests are given to greedy laymen or unchased and publican clerks. All their crimes do not prevent their attaining to the priesthood. At last rising in rank as they increase in sin, they become bishops. And those of them can both that they are not adulterers or fornicators, are drunkards given to the chase and soldiers who do not shrink from shredding Christian blood.” Because of this kind of situation, the monks in particular, had an important role to fill. Futilism was the life of the day and I think perhaps the best way to define futilitsm is again to turn to Thompson. And Thompson tells us, and I quote, “This process of decentralization when completed, power slipping from the hands of the monarch into the hands of private persons,n when monarchy had become little more than a name is called futilism. It was thus a radical decentralization of society.” The idea of sovereignty was virtually unknown. It belonged to God, not to man. Now, during that era of course, there was a great deal of corruption. There were many, many rulers and lords who were degenerate and we know what the bishops were like because I read about their conduct just now.

R.J. Rushdoony: 16:46 But, because of the decentralization, there was the possibility of reform. Whenever men gave their tithe money to monks or priests who were a forming element, because of the tithe, the reform was constant and there was progress. One thing more before we conclude and have questions, it was not only an age of pioneers, a frontier age when the foundations of Western liberty were laid down, but it was also an age of invention. I have a great deal incidentally to say about the origins of constitutionalism in this futile era in the chapter, which is very important. I won’t go into it now. But until the industrial revolution, no era had the introduction of more inventions than the so-called Dark Ages.

R.J. Rushdoony: 17:51 This is an important fact. It was indeed an age of pioneering, of the development of new ideas, new thought, new ways of doing things. And as a result, the progress was very great. We owe a great deal to the frontier age. Our liberties come from it. Today we are trying to overthrow that era, to wipe out everything that it gave us. It is interesting that one historian, a Catholic, liberal Catholic who is now in this country, has said that there is more hope of a revival in this country because the United States is closer to the Middle Ages than Europe. Now what did he mean by that? Well, when I wrote this independent republic, I said that our federalism was derived from futilism.

R.J. Rushdoony: 19:07 The decentralization of society, the emphasis on the local government. It seemed ridiculous to many people at the time and I had a lot of negative results on it. In fact I just got a letter from a student I’d never heard of a couple of days ago and he sent me a copy of his term paper, which was about me. Not entirely friendly and this is one of the things that he thought was so ridiculous when I thought America had a futile heritage. But we do. This is why the possibility of doing something is better here. We have that background via Puritanism, local self government, the centrality of the county in our social order. A county, coming from the word count, a local unit of rule as the basic government.

R.J. Rushdoony: 20:18 And our law structure still has so many futile aspects to it. The Christian futile kind of law. But a Catholic historian feels there is more hope here in this country and that if there is a renewal of Western civilization, it will have to come out of this country. This makes it doubly important for us to remember, we are pioneers. If we apply the faith to a collapsing world in terms of reconstruction. Let us pray. Almighty God, our heavenly father, we thank thee that thou hast called us to be pioneers. And hast given us the blessed assurance that we shall conquer in Christ. That greater is he that is in us than he that is in the world. Teach us therefore, so to walk that we may ever triumph in thee. And wheresoever we establish ourselves there is thy conquered ground. Bless us for this purpose, in Jesus’ name, Amen.

R.J. Rushdoony: 21:41 Now, questions about any aspect of our two chapters. Yes?

Speaker 2: 21:49 Well this isn’t exactly about the two chapters, but reading about [inaudible 00:21:53] from the chapter just made me think about Ishmael the son of Abraham, but there’s no relation is there? But what happened to Ishmael, God promised him that there would be some major [inaudible 00:22:09].

R.J. Rushdoony: 22:10 Yes.

Speaker 2: 22:10 Do we know what nation that is?

R.J. Rushdoony: 22:12 Well, the Arabic peoples do claim and with some reason that they are descendants of Ishmael, yes. And of course, one of the things they particularly resent is that they are backward. And the Jews, who are related people, if they have any Jewish blood in them, are so far in advance. This is one of a very painful problems for them over there. A scholar who was there not too long ago, and to his own account seen the mailing list, who’s very distressed about the conflict between Jew and Arab. He feels and he has lectured to Jews and Arabs alike on this. He has said it’s a mistake for the two of you to fight. You should work together because you are being exploited by the two superpowers, the USSR and the USA.

R.J. Rushdoony: 23:14 Each is using you for their own ends. And as long as you’re hostile to each other, you will only serve their ends and your only possibility of escaping being their victims is to become friends. That’s one of the things that hampers this friendship is that it’s an unequal one. They are backward. Yes.

Speaker 3: 23:43 Regarding [inaudible 00:23:44], that is still in effect. Cushman from Boston has [inaudible 00:24:00].

R.J. Rushdoony: 23:59 I don’t know.

Speaker 3: 24:00 Yes, I know the story on that.

R.J. Rushdoony: 24:03 Yes. Of course, that’s done with political offices now, very much. But it was one of the corrupting practices which prevailed throughout the Middle Ages and well into the modern era. Yes.

Speaker 4: 24:19 What is the Jews [inaudible 00:24:20]?

R.J. Rushdoony: 24:20 What?

Speaker 4: 24:20 What is the Jews [inaudible 00:24:21].

R.J. Rushdoony: 24:21 Well, that’s a problem that not even the government of Israel likes to deal with. Technically a Jew is somebody who is descended from Abraham. But the sad fact is that none of them can prove it. In every country they have had converts so that when the Jews went into Russia or Germany or Poland or Switzerland or France or Spain or whatever country, many peoples who did not want to become Christians, when they saw the old religions collapsing, would become Jews. So which among the Jews is a blood Jew or a religious Jew? So how are you going to define a Jew today? As a religious group or as a racial group?

R.J. Rushdoony: 25:15 Some emphasize the religious aspect and others the racial aspect. It really is neither because a lot of Jews have no religious faith at all. And most synagogues are empty. On the other hand, if you define it racially, you’re really in trouble. Now, technically in Israel, you are a Jew if your mother was. This has also led to some problems because some are very bitter about the fact that because their mother happened to be a German who married their father, they are automatically not a Jew. But that is the law in Israel. Of course, it’s been the law for a while now in Jewish communities everywhere, so that’s technically true here also in this country.

R.J. Rushdoony: 26:12 And yet the families don’t like it you see. So they have a problem. Shall we define it religiously or racially or really do either?

Speaker 4: 26:21 [inaudible 00:26:21] Jewish [inaudible 00:26:22].

R.J. Rushdoony: 26:21 Yes.

Speaker 4: 26:24 Its who I am. So I can understand what they were arguing about.

R.J. Rushdoony: 26:31 Right. Well it’s this. Shall we define it religiously or racially and they can’t define it either way so they are in limbo as it were. What is a Jew is an unanswerable question today. Yes.

Speaker 5: 26:44 I [inaudible 00:26:45] so my conclusions about Jews there. I would like to think that the [inaudible 00:26:52] influence in the Middle Ages were Israelites and since Israelites are not Jews, I would like to think that the Jews were the destructive forces of civilization, whoever wanted to crucify Jesus [inaudible 00:27:13]. I wonder if one could justify that verification for the fact or not that [inaudible 00:27:21] the Middle Ages were not Jews, but were Israelites along with the people who feel like Israel and Israelites are the Western people and are not the Jews who were the external religion that crucified Jesus and crucified every true worshiper.

R.J. Rushdoony: 27:42 That’s the British Israelite position, which of course I think is, without any foundation. The idea rests on the myth that the 10 Northern tribes were lost physically. They were not. They were right there in Jerusalem and in Judaea at the time that our Lord was crucified. They were the Galileans, the 10 Northern tribes. They weren’t up in Denmark or in England or elsewhere as some have claimed. Now there were Jews and Israelites gathered throughout India on business. So you could find them in England and elsewhere at that period.

R.J. Rushdoony: 28:27 But these, the traitors, were particularly Jews because the Galileans, or the 10 Northern tribes, had more or less become indifferent to the law. And it was the Jews in particular who were faithful to the law and were the ones that applied it. We know a great deal about who they were. We have their documents and they were clearly Jews, refugees from Judea. Yes.

Speaker 6: 29:04 I don’t know what you’re doing. You call that [inaudible 00:29:08]. They do have a lot of [inaudible 00:29:11] argument. Some of the [inaudible 00:29:13].

R.J. Rushdoony: 29:13 Well, yes, they feel that they do. But the thing is that their argument has never stood up anywhere in terms of meeting the evidences of people who differ with them. When they’re, in their own circles, they sound very convincing. Now, there are evidences of the Jews and the Norther tribes, the Israelites as they call them, in England, in Germany, Denmark, everywhere. That’s true. You can find evidences of them in Japan. But you can also find evidences of them in Africa.

R.J. Rushdoony: 29:51 And none of the British Israelites claim the Negroes. Yet, the evidences of the Jews throughout the African tribes is very great. In fact, it’s better than the evidences for them among the Anglo-Saxon peoples. The witch doctors of the African tribes almost certainly were Israelites. Almost certainly. They were a superior element. They actually are a hereditary group who to this day are somewhat lighter of complexion in spite of all the breeding with others there. Well, do these identity people claim that the Africans are theirs? No.

R.J. Rushdoony: 30:37 You see, it proves too much. I can show you evidences that say any number of peoples could be found in any number of countries. For example, I’m an Armenian. You could go to Ireland and you find so much of Armenian, the language and traces in Ireland, you could say there are Armenian people. You could say the same thing for the people of Central Europe and Germany. Why as a matter of fact, up until World War I, they were talking Armenian in some parts of Germany and Poland.

R.J. Rushdoony: 31:14 And Hitler’s tank general, Hans [Gudarian 00:31:17]. Well that name is obvious. It’s Armenian you see. For the same case, you could take, say the Germans. And you could turn up Germans with Genghis Khan and [inaudible 00:31:35] and so on. So, it just depends on the case you’re trying to prove. It doesn’t make, you see, the Chinese Germans, or the Chinese Armenians because the Armenians were over there too. Any more than finding straight examples of these peoples in Europe, in the British Isles, makes them Israelites. For example, one of the points they make, the identity people, is that the Scythian are ostensibly one of the tribes [Ithsacar 00:32:12]. Sacar peoples. Scythian. And therefore, the Scythian as the tribe of Ithsacar went through Russia, up through Germany and wound up in Scotland and England and so on.

R.J. Rushdoony: 32:35 Well first of all, you very definitely can trace the Sacar peoples, the Scythian, into Scotland, wandering groups of them. They left their marks in the language very definitely. No mistaking that. They left relics from, oh outer Mongolia, inner Mongolia, all the way across Scotland. People in those days were nomadic and they moved around more. They were an advanced people. Their gold sculpture and all that’s been uncovered in some places in central Asia is fabulous. But, the case breaks down first of all in that the people of Scotland, in spite of the influx of Scythian were not Scythian. Some of them came in and were incorporated. Second, the Scythian were not the tribe of Ithsacar. They were a separate people of whom we have record long before the so-called 10 tribes were lost.

R.J. Rushdoony: 33:43 So you see, by taking these linguistic coincidences, Saca is Sacar. They make a case which seems very reasonable to people. Like, Britain supposedly coming from Beirut covenant. So the British man is the covenant man. That these are just coincidences of words and you can find these coincidences in various other languages all over the world. So the case is simply weak when it is examined by scholars.

Speaker 6: 34:26 I may have just asked you this question. As far as the Sacar, I appreciate what you’re saying. But isn’t one of the big arguments Poland’s identity rests [inaudible 00:34:42]? Isn’t the fact that they’re trying to give some status to [inaudible 00:34:47] tribes which have no records seemingly in the Bible and yet just the two tribes of Judaea. When Judea [inaudible 00:34:56] right. Who cherishes the record of all these [inaudible 00:35:01] people? For some reason or the other, only those two tribes carried through the record of all location.

R.J. Rushdoony: 35:08 Yeah. No, that’s not true.

Speaker 6: 35:11 Well, what we know is the Jew, who comes from these two tribes.

R.J. Rushdoony: 35:17 No, because in the New Testament, you can encounter people. If you go through and check the references to the Israelites, you find people of these various tribes. Simian, Benjamin, Saint Paul is of the tribe of Benjamin. You can find Levi. You can find Dens. You can find all various peoples identified with these different tribes. But most of the time, these other peoples are called simply Galileans, the Northerners.

Speaker 6: 35:48 Yes, but they were separated from the old Israel. It is your point now that they were a separate tribe. But for some reason or the other, the history of what we call a Jew today has come from those tribes, definitely who the Asians wherever they’ve gone, they’ve never, for some reason or another, had other tribes and the remaining 10 tribes that was seemingly lost or scattered. But just to those in the Southern end. Now why?

R.J. Rushdoony: 36:14 Oh, well very simple. During the so-called Dark Ages, most of these Israelites either became Judean, that is they united themselves as Simian had done and Benjamin had done centuries before. Simian just moved South and became a part of Judea. These Northerners either united themselves or they just dropped out and became Pagans totally. Lost all context with the faith. But, the didn’t drift around and become other peoples. And the idea that the Anglo-Saxon peoples are descended from them is a myth. There isn’t one serious scholar who believes it.

R.J. Rushdoony: 37:00 And of course, what this does as in the hands of Armstrong and his group and others, they end up by saying salvation is by race, not by grace. This becomes blasphemy, purical blasphemy. Some of these people are very well meaning and I know one or two of their clergy and I think very highly of them although I disagree with them. They are very kindly, well meaning men. Some of them are good in certain points of the law in emphasizing the law. But basically, to say that salvation is by race rather than grace is blasphemy. This is the thing that Dan to the [inaudible 00:37:45] before God.

R.J. Rushdoony: 37:48 They were going to reduce everything to race. Actually it was a theory in our Lord’s day that the Pharoses propounded that the merit of Abraham was such that any Jew to the end of time, any Israelite to the end of time let me say, if he called upon Abraham’s name, would be saved. Because the works of Abraham were so great that it would save every Jew and Israelite to the end of time. Yes.

Speaker 7: 38:20 Could you give us the name of that record that you’re reading there? What volume?

R.J. Rushdoony: 38:28 Oh yes. This has been reprinted. It’s James Westfall Thompson, An Introduction to Medieval Europe, 300 to 1500. James Westfall Thompson and Edgar Nathaniel Johnson. But it’s basically Thompson’s work. Let’s see. We have time for just one or two more quick questions. Someone who hasn’t yet.

Speaker 8: 38:57 Well in Israel today, you see more of a commonistic condition than there was religious life now?

R.J. Rushdoony: 39:06 It’s a [inaudible 00:39:07] socialistic state. It is socialistic. It has no religious position and this is why the orthodox Jews weep at the Wailing Wall. Because Zionism should mean a religious stand. It should stand for the City of God and it’s a [inaudible 00:39:28] socialistic state.

Speaker 8: 39:29 Is this why the Jewish man doesn’t want to be deported back there then.

R.J. Rushdoony: 39:34 I don’t know anything about that. Yes.

R.J. Rushdoony: 39:38 Yes.

Speaker 9: 39:38 No longer any need for this genealogical interest.

R.J. Rushdoony: 39:49 Right. Yes, Romanism is a kind of [inaudible 00:39:57]. It is related to British Israelism and it again makes salvation a racial matter. This is why they’re having problems with the negro situation because they hold that a negro cannot be saved.

Speaker 10: 40:20 Well I’m not [inaudible 00:40:25] racist and being our salvation. [inaudible 00:40:35]. I think it’s horrible that we’re trying to define Israel as an identity apart from Jewishness, that Israel and the people of God and the people of Abraham being those who worship. They are not Jews. Not as a racial thing, but as a separation from a [inaudible 00:41:18] to try to appropriate the same to Christ who crucified Christ.

R.J. Rushdoony: 41:24 It doesn’t make much sense to me because you want to say yes, the Jews today are a secular humanistic people. But why do you have to try to create a mythical Israelite when what God says emphatically in his word that the Israel of God is the people of God who believe in him. Now that’s all we need. So why do we have to try to find a blood line back there as though blood meant anything. This is to become a [inaudible 00:42:02]. This is why Mormonism, British Israelism is a kind of revived [inaudible 00:42:07]. It emphasizes race. And it does lead to a deformation of the gospel.

R.J. Rushdoony: 42:17 We don’t need that. We have the truth of God, the scripture. So why do we have to try to hunt up some mythical Israelites who are non existent and try to trace our ancestry to them?

Speaker 10: 42:28 Well, it’s the Jews that are [inaudible 00:42:30] .

R.J. Rushdoony: 42:31 Of course they are, but do you have to be?

Speaker 10: 42:33 No. But we can point it out to say [inaudible 00:42:37].

R.J. Rushdoony: 42:37 We’re not claiming to be.

Speaker 10: 42:41 They do when they claim the [inaudible 00:42:43] Abram and David.

R.J. Rushdoony: 42:45 Well, our answer to that is that sons of Abraham are those who are the sons by faith. That’s our answer. All right. Why do we have to go into the racial question? We become guilty of the same thing. Most people who oppose the Jews end up by becoming no different than the Jews.

Speaker 11: 43:09 [inaudible 00:43:09] criticism about the racial question.

R.J. Rushdoony: 43:12 Yes.

Speaker 11: 43:13 My father was Lebanese. My mother was German. We know that those are two races that the Jews really opposed. But I don’t involve that racial thing at all in my criticizing. As this man pointed out, I don’t think there’s a group anywhere today that is trying to tear down Christianity more than the Jews.

R.J. Rushdoony: 43:35 I would disagree with that. I think the group trying to tear down Christianity more than anyone else are the clergy, the so-called Christian clergy. They’re the ones who are doing more damage, say in the last 10 years than the Jews and Muslims have done in the past 2,000. When you consider what the clergy are doing. They’re taking the name of the Lord in vain. The name of Christ, they are teaching the numerology. What I cited a few weeks ago, a professor not too far from here in a major educational institution said, “On our campus, it’s the religious centers…”

Rev. R.J. Rushdoony (1916–2001), was a leading theologian, church/state expert, and author of numerous works on the application of Biblical law to society. He started the Chalcedon Foundation in 1965.  His Institutes of Biblical Law (1973) began the contemporary theonomy movement which posits the validity of Biblical law as God’s standard of obedience for all. He therefore saw God’s law as the basis of the modern Christian response to the cultural decline, one he attributed to the church’s false view of God’s law being opposed to His grace. This broad Christian response he described as “Christian Reconstruction.”  He is credited with igniting the modern Christian school and homeschooling movements in the mid to late 20th century. He also traveled extensively lecturing and serving as an expert witness in numerous court cases regarding religious liberty. Many ministry and educational efforts that continue today, took their philosophical and Biblical roots from his lectures and books.

Learn more about R.J. Rushdoony by visiting: https://chalcedon.edu/founder