Jimmy Stephens:
Corey already makes himself look like he’s lost his white pointed mask and his gym access.

Epic Burner:
That’s a really interesting visual perception you have. You wouldn’t happen to have any logical arguments on the side, would you?

Jimmy Stephens:
Too many. Here’s one:

P1. Race is a social construct.
P2. Social constructs do not track moral properties.
C: Therefore, race does not track moral properties.

Epic Burner:
You may as well have told me the sky isn’t blue. God tells us Himself that He created the races of men. And we’ve developed more than a few ways to detect the traits that define these categories. Come up with something interesting at least. Not this tired drivel.

Jimmy Stephens:
Please show me a chapter and verse where “black people” is a moral category of people. I’ll wait.

Epic Burner:
Why can we reliably predict the race of a human based on their organs if race isn’t a real category?

Jimmy Stephens:
You asked for a logical argument, but you can’t afford to follow your own standard. I’ll take that as a concession that you have no biblical evidence for your racial essentialism.

Unlike you, I start with the Bible, not superstitious speculation drawn from AI. So what does the Bible say?

Let’s read God’s own testimony:

“There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” — Galatians 3:28

“Here there is no Greek or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all and is in all.” — Colossians 3:11

“For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slave or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.” — 1 Corinthians 12:13

This is divine testimony. Will you submit to it?

Epic Burner:
The Bible says all Cretans are liars.

Jimmy Stephens:
Titus 1:12 is Paul quoting a Cretan poet about false teachers in Crete—not a divine stamp of racial hierarchy. If that’s your prooftext, you’ve already lost. That verse proves nothing except your inability to read Scripture in context.

If “Cretans are liars” establishes a racial category, then “all have sinned” (Rom. 3:23) establishes that all ethnic groups deserve annihilation. Want to go with that?

Epic Burner:
The Bible refers to Jews, Greeks, and many races. Are you saying it’s lying?

Jimmy Stephens:
No. I’m saying you don’t know how to read it. There’s a difference between mentioning ethnicity and moralizing it. The Bible refers to “Jews,” “Greeks,” “barbarians,” “Scythians,” and “Cretans”—but also tells us those categories have no bearing in Christ. Paul references them to show how they are relativized and overcome by union with Christ.

You’re confusing biological detectability with moral ontology. That’s the same mistake pagans and Darwinists make. Just because AI can pattern-match “racial” traits doesn’t mean those traits track moral worth. That’s metaphysically illiterate and biblically bankrupt.

And again—who told you “Jew” was a race by your definition? The New Testament doesn’t use your racial categories. You’re imposing a 19th-century taxonomy onto a 1st-century covenantal context.

You demanded logic, got Scripture, and now you’re appealing to vibes, pseudoscience, and decontextualized quotes. Let me know when you’re ready to submit to God’s Word instead of your Telegram group.

---

Addendum: Enter The Other Paul and the Christian Nationalist Attempt at Rebuttal

The Other Paul:
Both premises are laughably wrong. Race, denoting the formal collective of a people descended from founding ancestors, is both socially constructed and biological. For premise two, this is also stupid; almost all roles in human society are social constructs and yet carry moral import, e.g. the powers and duties of a police officer, or of kings/presidents.

TheSire:
That’s a category mistake. Those roles carry moral weight because they’re defined by covenant, office, and divine ordination (Romans 13). Their authority and responsibility derive from function within God’s providence.

Race, by contrast, is not a function. It is not a calling or office. It is a passive descriptor, often externally imposed. It’s not based on obligations to other persons.

Jimmy Stephens:
It sounds like maybe your notion of “social construct” is not the one in the argument—or you have a very different social ethic. Ancestry is not an idea that emerges from accidental social goals and practices. It’s a historic fact. Bahnsen already covered that.

There’s only one biological race: humanity. So under your definition, it’s moot to the topic my argument is addressing.

The moral import of a police officer is independent of any social construction surrounding his role.

Lastly, the only example of a “collective of people from a founding ancestor” with moral import is Israel. In every other case, identifying the founder is just (a) to make an arbitrary claim or (b) to identify someone’s arbitrary claim.