799 Part 5: Some Spiritual & Moral Truths in Gen. 1-11, continued. (Part 5, Chapter 5) b] The Old & New Testament Jew-Gentile distinction. The New Testament sometimes uses a threefold distinction of Jews, Gentiles, and Samaritans (Acts 1:8), or a “Greeks” and “Barbarians” distinction (Rom. 1:14). But it most commonly uses a Jew-Gentile distinction (e.g., Rom. 1:16). One element for understanding the racial universality of the Gospel is the Jew-Gentile distinction. E.g., the racial universality of the Gospel is taught by it in Gal. 3:28, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” And God’s will for the preservation of the Jewish race in Rom. 9-11, manifests his will for racial preservation and associated opposition to generalized miscegenation. Thus e.g., as discussed in the following Part 5, Chapter 5, section c, Bob Jones Sr. (d. 1968), who was a past master of some key elements of Biblical racial morality, to wit, segregation and opposition to mixed marriages, so used this Jew-Gentile distinction for the purposes of e.g., teaching racial segregation. And likewise, the Jew- Gentile distinction is seen in both segregation and prohibition of racially mixed marriages in Acts 15 & 21 as discussed at Part 5, Chapter 5, section e, “Mixed Marriages,” infra , where it is noted that the holy Apostle, St. Paul, died a martyr’s death that men might know that God’s will is for the segregation of the races. But for our immediate purposes in this section, two matters are of particular note with respect to the racial order of Gen. 9:25-27. Gen. 9 & 10 distinguishes between a broad Shemitic group that includes Semitic Mediterranean Caucasoids, Elamite Australoids, and Mongoloid Mashites; and also “Semite” in a broad sense of the Semitic quaternary race inside the Mediterranean tertiary race of the Caucasoid secondary race inside the human primary race (see Rainbow Racial Classification System at Part 5, Chapter 5, section d, infra ), which I use the term “Semite” for in distinction to the wider Shemites that also includes Australoids and Mongoloids; and also Semites in a narrow sense of the Jewish race (Gen. 9:26) (as opposed to Jewish proselytes and their descendants, e.g., Ashkenazi Jews; cf. Acts 2:10). Thus the Jews hold a special place in artistically typing the wider Shemitic groups. So too, in the Jew-Gentile distinction, we thus see an element of this Shemitic blessing of Gen. 9:25, as once again, the Jews of the Semitic Mediterranean Caucasoid act to artistically type the Jews in this bi-polar racial distinction of Jews and Gentiles. And also there is a matter of relevance to the racial order found in Gen. 9:27. A brief reference was made in Volume 2, Part 5, Chapter 5, section a, Key 2, supra , to the fact that the white Japhethites of “Gomer” to “Dodanim” (Gen. 10:2-4) are selected to represent “Gentiles” in the terminology of “the isles of the Gentiles,” with the further discussion of this matter then left to this section. The relevant words of Gen. 10:5 read 800 in the Hebrew, “ ’ijjey (the isles 1) haggojim (of the nations 2);” and are rendered in the Septuagint as Greek, “ nesoi (the isles 3) ton (of the 4) ethnon (Gentiles 5);” in the Vulgate as Latin, “ insulae (the isles 6) gentium (of the Gentiles 7);” and then in the Authorized Version as “the isles of the Gentiles.” In the New Testament, we find the root Greek word here found in the Septuagint of ethnos , frequently means “Gentiles” (e.g., Matt. 4:15; Acts 4:27; Rom. 1:13; 2:14,24). E.g., “Even us, whom he hath called, not the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles 8?” (Rom. 9:24). But the New Testament also uses the Greek word, ‘Ellen / Hellen, meaning a “Greek,” as a synonym for a Gentile (e.g., Rom. 10:12; I Cor. 1:24), e.g., “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek 9” (Rom. 1:16). In post New Testament times, due to miscegenation, southern Europe in general, and for our immediate purposes, Greece, became mixed race. But before racially mixed marriages destroyed its Aryan qualities, Greece was a white Caucasian land (and its old aristocracy kept these qualities). This is significant because it means that when a Jew-Gentile distinction is used in the New Testament, the racial type conceptualized is always a “Greek” i.e., a white Caucasian. Thus as with the usage of “Gentiles” here in Gen. 10:5, this New Testament usage of white Caucasians to type Gentiles in contrast to Jews, also reflects the God established racial order of Gen. 9:25-27, in which the master races are the white Japhethites and light brown Jewish Semites (Gen. 9:25-27). 1 Hebrew, “ ’ijjey (‘the isles,’ masculine plural noun, from ’iy). 2 Hebrew, “ haggojim (compound word, ha / ‘the,’ definite article + gojim [dagesh forte in ‘g’ makes it double ‘g’ in this compound word], masculine plural noun, from goy; here is a noun construct chain which acts to give it the genitive case, ‘of nations’).” 3 Greek, “ nesoi (nominative plural feminine noun, from nesos ).” 4 Greek, “ ton (genitive plural neuter definite article, from to ).” 5 Greek, “ ethnon (genitive plural neuter noun, from ethnos ).” 6 Latin, “ insulae (nominative plural feminine noun, from insula ).” 7 Latin, “ gentium (genitive plural feminine noun, from gens ).” 8 Greek, “ ethnon (genitive plural neuter noun, from ethnos ).” 9 Greek, “ Helleni (dative singular masculine noun, from Hellen).” 801 (Part 5, Chapter 5) c] Bob Jones Sr. (d. 1968) – A past master of Biblical racial morality on segregation & opposition to mixed marriages. The methodology in Bob Jones Sr.’s technique for teaching racial morality can be viewed as a fivefold presentation. The same broad type of methodology can also be found among a number of Anglican authors in Robert Ingram’s Essays on Segregation (1960), which is a work that was recommended to me by the Baptist, Ed Ulrich (d. 2009) of Bob Jones University 10 . Therefore Bob Jones Sr.’s fivefold presentation can be seen as being typical of a broad structure used by other contemporary Protestants of the USA, albeit with the qualification that different persons using this type of presentation made their own additions and refinements to this broad methodological template. In studying the statements of Bob Jones Sr. (1883-1968), with respect to the Biblical teaching about racial morality, we are sitting at the feet of a generally good and wise past master of some key elements of racial morality, namely, man’s racial unity in Adam for the purposes of soteriology; and finer racial divisions of mankind relevant to both racial segregation and opposition to racially mixed marriages. That does not mean one must necessarily replicate the fivefold technique for teaching racial morals in precisely the way he did, but it does mean that in broad terms it is one way to do so. But while I would regard the broad five-fold methodology used by Jones and others, supra , as sound, I would disagree with the details in some of Jones finer developments inside the five broad categories. E.g., he integrates some elements of Dispensationalism into his second category. Furthermore, in his fifth category, his favourable references to the American civil war (1861-1865) Confederate General, Robert E. Lee (d. 1870), involves a number of issues that are largely tangential to the issues that I am addressing in this section. However, to the extent that negro slavery and therefore racial matters were one element of the American civil war, and to the extent that Bob Jones Sr. was clearly an American Deep South confederate identifying figure, I shall include reference to this civil war in categorizations of his statements under the fifth element. But in doing so, it should be clearly understood that I do not endorse or support civil war against “the powers that be” (Rom. 13:1), other than to fight for the lawful power, such as fighting for “the king” (I Peter 2:17) against republican revolutionaries. Thus I do not support acts of terrorism or sedition or civil war even where I agree that those in power are tyrants , such as the vile and abominable Roman Emperors of New Testament times. For instance, Caligula (Regnal Years: 37-41 A.D.), who engaged in incest with his sisters (Exod. 20:14; Lev. 18:11; Rom. 13:9), was a cruel murderer (Exod. 20:13; Rom. 13:9), and who wickedly claimed he was a god (Gen. 3:5; Exod. 20:3; Rom. 1:20; Jas. 2:19), and so he blasphemously ordered (Exod. 20:7; Rom. 2:24; Col. 3:8) that a statue of himself as a god be erected in the Jewish Temple at Jerusalem, although due to his early death this never happened (Josephus’s Antiquities 18:8 & 19:1:14); or Nero (Regnal Years: 54-68 A.D.), under whom transpired The First Primitive Persecution of Christians recorded in Foxe’s Book of Martyrs (1563); or Domitian (Regnal Years: 81-96 A.D.), under whom 10 Ingram, T.R., Essays on Segregation (1960), op. cit. 802 transpired The Second Primitive Persecution of Christians recorded in Foxe’s Book of Martyrs 11 . Thus on the one hand, I do not endorse or support all of Bob Jones Sr.’s views and values in the finer details he sometimes gives in the five elements of his presentation format.