A guest post by The Noticing Pleb
Almost three years ago, on Oct, 19, 2022 to be precise, the leadership of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod was – from their perspective – first afflicted with the Stone Choir. Much to their chagrin, the chorus has only grown, and not just among Lutherans but other Christians and even non-believers as well.
It is high time that not only the leadership of the LCMS but all Christians begin to ask “What does this mean?”. When the Iowa District East of the LCMS in its convention bemoaned the “errors of teaching and wickedness of life as are associated with Stone Choir and its hosts and followers” and went on to recommend that the entire LCMS condemn these in its upcoming 2026 convention, what should one think?
Words matter, and so should not the godly man take heed at such pronouncements from church authorities? That is the way things should work. That said, while the author’s own priorities have never been the perceived errors of the Stone Choir, he has noticed that most of the accusations leveled against them do tend to mirror the concerns of our peculiar age.
And it is also true that the topic the Stone Choir says they do not want to be known for – race or nation – is one of the topics the author has noticed the church has been studiously avoiding for years. Should anyone who has been paying attention to happenings in the West be surprised when the bold and brash Stone Choir shows up and starts to gain a following?
Would star LCMS pastor Bryan Wolfmueller ever have even gotten into this extremely important debate had the Stone Choir men not forced the issue?
This is no joking matter. Again, these men are having an incredible impact and their influence is growing daily. Some pastors and theologians are obviously very concerned about this. So what careful public refutation of their teachings based on careful biblical exegesis, study, and argumentation exists? Is the best construction being put on their words and actions? So far, the author has not seen this. He has, however, seen the conversation in the LCMS begin to shift.
Therefore, this article is an attempt to get a fair process started, to create something that can be built upon by any responsible and courageous church authorities. In this piece, ten basic accusations that the author has heard leveled against Corey Mahler and his co-partner Woe will be covered.
This article will simply attempt to create the best case for them against these accusations, what some these days call “steel-manning” their positions (instead of setting up strawman positions to knock down). Whether the Stone Choir itself appreciates my efforts here is neither here nor there. It is certainly an effort to be fair to them.
To be clear, no one should construe this article as an endorsement of the Stone Choir, as much as one might be convinced it must be. Simply put, the author would very much appreciate hearing careful, sober, and biblical analysis challenging them – as opposed to just emotional handwringing over horrible politics and mean tweets. Again, the key point is that they, like everybody else, deserve a fair trial free of misunderstanding, and even lies and obfuscation.
If even the worst criminals in our country are afforded a lawyer who will defend them in public, surely the Stone Choir can be defended. Any man who professes Christ and confesses the creeds of the church deserves nothing less from us. When their case has been fairly heard by reasonable and godly men and can be addressed honestly with the Word of God, then a proper decision can be rendered.
Do you really want to do this? Perhaps you should
Many might feel that they don’t have time for this but maybe they should reconsider. First, given the increasing influence and reach of the Stone Choir do you really feel you have that option? Second, and going along with this, they certainly cover important issues, and ones that many – particularly young men – increasingly care about. Third, it is in fact an act of Christian love to give someone your serious attention and really pay attention to what they say.
And then, of course, you will be far more prepared to deal with thorny issues when you can accurately represent those you recognize as your true opponents. Why? At the very least, because people who care about truth and pay attention will know that you are not lying about others – or even just unintentionally misrepresenting them out of ignorance. Even the world’s most highly intelligent people fail to be informed like they should before spouting off and embarrassing themselves and others. Don’t be guilty of the same thing.
Steel-Manning the Stone Choir versus 10 Accusations
1. Listening to them is to support them
Since LCMS men have been targeted for excommunication because they have apparently agreed with some of what the Stone Choir said (e.g. retweets) – or for even having had a conversation with them in public – the first accusation addressed here does not have to do with the Stone Choir per se.
Just because one carefully listens to another does not mean that they support them. For example, certain persons on the political right might be wise to listen to the Know Your Enemy podcast, which features two leftist men talking about prominent “conservatives” of the 20th century, their ideas, and the overall impact of these.
By listening, one will find out that a) many 20th century influential conservatives were often unable to conserve anything of real value, and b) intellectual leftists have the most extreme reactions to even the most mildly traditional ideas (think about their reaction to Charlie Kirk), and know they have enemies.
There is an explicitly Christian reason to do this as well. Can God bring anyone to repentance through your kind concern and confrontation? Even your enemies? Even Christians with the most extreme right wing views know that Jesus commanded the love of enemies and that he desires all persons to come to repentance and a knowledge of the truth. They just know too that they have real enemies.
Even if you are convinced your enemy is not saying anything good, you can still listen to them to help you formulate a response to them that might actually shake them out of their evil stupor. Remember, with God’s Holy Spirit anything is possible!
And is it possible that any who dare to listen to the Stone Choir will find themselves agreeing with much of the content? Perhaps. Start here and download this very engaging six hour podcast they did with, on the face of it, a very curious and more “normie” Will Spencer (a professing Christian and relatively recent convert from Judaism). Then also take into account that, under pressure, he did a complete 180 and disavowed them.
Would that more men and women would have courage to be honest about what they know but will not say.
And would that more men especially would listen, and, unlike Will, at least have the courage to say:
“At the very least, so many of the uncomfortable things they say are clearly true. And they point out things they have noticed first with others following along to this or that degree, months or years later. I certainly think that they cover critical topics that must be discussed in more depth and that their podcast is valuable and thought-provoking.”
However, are not heretics dangerous particularly because they say so much that is true? Indeed. One problem with heretics is that they, as they “pick and choose” (this is what heresy literally means), may paint a picture that is simply incomplete – even if they say so much that is true. Therefore, let’s continue to look at some common accusations against them and see if these men can be defended.
2. They have pagan and Darwinian views of the races
Is Corey Mahler at peace with “pagan neo nazism”? Is this an accurate read of the Stone Choir position? Are they basically saying that Christianity is the tribal religion of Europeans, the sons of Japheth?
No. They too believe that our ultimate battle is not against flesh and blood (Eph. 6). It is one thing to rely on the power of the flesh and it is another thing to not deny the realities of the body that God has gifted us with and uses in time. If someone asserts “there is one race, the human race”, the times actually demand that one not let this stand alone.
In other words, Liberians and Sudanese are real, and Africans are real. Japanese and Chinese are real, and Asians are real. Germans and Italians are real, and Europeans are real. Americans are real. Genealogies and marriages within one’s relations, relatively speaking, were never only important just to the biblical authors. Furthermore, differences and similarities between various distinguishable groups had been clearly recognized well before Darwin. Many are in denial here.
So on the contrary, Corey and Woe attempt to witness to pagans and Darwinists, particularly those concerned with moral degeneracy and the world’s ever more clear evil spirit.
If in his earlier days Corey seemed to veer towards syncretism in his efforts to witness to more traditional pagans, he has since that time changed some of what he says. If he did make such a mistake originally however, he would have gone no further than many other orthodox Christians have in their own attempts to find common ground with those they seek to evangelize.
In any case, according to Woe and Corey, they actually do not enjoy speaking about the matter of race. Then why do they do it so much? They say it is because this is the area where Satan is concentrating his attack (something they became particularly aware of after the LCMS’s response to the George Floyd incident). As one put it on X (who Woe re-posted): “One of the most eye opening things I’ve heard on Stone Choir is how the new attack front on Christianity is Galatians 3:28. Everything falls into place with that framework.” Rebellion against God’s created order is absolute poison. It must be dealt with by God’s rulers (Rom. 13).
Even though the following quote from Martin Luther is apocryphal, it was cited as his own even by the great Lutheran scholar Robert Preus, someone that knew the reformer’s thought very well:
“If I profess with the loudest voice and clearest exposition every portion of the Word of God except precisely that little point which the world and the devil are at that moment attacking, I am not confessing Christ, however boldly I may be professing Him. Where the battle rages there the loyalty of the soldier is proved; and to be steady on all the battle front besides, is mere flight and disgrace if he flinches at that point.”
This, also, is the orientation of the Stone Choir. Even if the “nation-state” of Germany did not exist until the late 19th century, Martin Luther, for example, certainly loved the German people. Of course his writings show he knew distinct Galatians and Germans and Italians not only existed but had a very rich history.
In like fashion, Europeans or white people – though separated into distinct nations – are to be associated with Japheth, for example, and this is not to be denied. Do the blessings God promised the sons of Japheth in the Bible mean nothing to modern Christians? Race is real; the testimony of history and the Bible itself clearly deals with these matters in depth.
Doctrine is life and all truth is God’s truth. It is like a golden ring where no break or even crack can occur. To deny any bit of it puts one’s soul in mortal danger. Should we who read of Paul’s own love for his race (Rom. 9:1-5) not tremble at our own cold hearts?
In further addressing the concerns about Darwinism, it is important to note that unlike possibly the greatest Lutheran theologian of the 20th century – at least according to the LCMS – the Stone Choir men do not believe in evolution and do believe that all men descend first from Adam and Eve and then from Noah.
3. They say people should be excluded from congregations on the basis of race
Wouldn’t excluding people from a congregation on the basis of race be against Christ’s teaching? Does the Stone Choir do this?
In general, Woe and Corey believe that nations are an extension of tribes, which are an extension of the families, and that they should be allowed to exist in peace with one another. While we have no indication from scripture that God has ordained Christian denominations, He certainly has ordained for there to be distinct nations, i.e. those descended from Japheth, Shem, and Ham! Japan should remain Japan (Elon was right!), Sudan, Sudan, Hungary, Hungary, Tonga, Tonga, and America, America (basically Anglo-Saxon)!
Exceptions to the rule – where one single-mindedly leaves his own people to become one with another (which takes several generations), even to die for another people group in battle – simply prove the rule.
This has nothing to do with Christian congregations. Here, Woe has asserted on a number of occasions that it is always the pastor’s duty to impartially welcome all comers regardless of race. Obviously, in this context, the congregation should follow the pastor’s lead. Elsewhere, he has stated that there is something called a pastoral heart, and that this is good – even as such pastors should have nothing to do with politics!
Let us be wise here. One can certainly understand that today there are many Christians who in their congregations would eagerly welcome anyone who sets foot in their door but who also believe they should support the current administration and ICE when it comes to deportation decisions. In staking out the positions that they do, Corey and Woe are simply upholding traditional Reformation two kingdom theology: all people have a right to preserve and maintain themselves as a “body politic”.
And yet, given some of the things that the largest Christian church in the world has been saying about immigration lately, it certainly does not seem to be a stretch that many who claim the name “Christian” and have more liberal tendencies would see this as hypocritical, heartless… evil. Who cannot hear them saying that even something like this looks down on, bears animus towards, and refuses to associate with those of a certain race – all simply because they are members of that race? Even if nations are real in some sense (that we evidently have no business trying to think about?), borders are certainly man-made and not of God!
1 Peter 2:9 says of God’s people “But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession…” Does the Holy Spirit build our understanding of the church by using words like race and nation carelessly – or by assuming that we can “get it”? God “put us into a new and different race”, to be sure, but, as with the marriage between Christ and the church, this reality simply builds on and assumes the first article (creation) reality.
4. They insist immigration is always and everywhere a sin.
Does the Stone Choir teach that anyone who supports immigration of any kind is outside the kingdom of God?
One must remember that even as there are commandments of God that must apply to all, there are other matters over which Christians may disagree. Still, individual Christians may often sound just as authoritative when they state something, following their own conscience (Romans 14:23, I Cor. 8:12)! Therefore, one must get into the weeds here a bit. Again, the church as a body commands certain things because it knows God has made them clear and they must be believed. This we call dogma, doctrine, or articles of faith. Other things are pious opinions, strongly held opinions over which Christians may differ.
At the same time, it seems even the strongest Christian proponents of immigration to America should have their limits. Eugene Peterson was a pretty mild-mannered Christian man. But when he had to deal with Deuteronomy 28:43-45 in his Message Bible his paraphrase of the same was particularly striking in its color:
“The foreigner who lives among you will climb the ladder, higher and higher, while you go deeper and deeper into the hole. He’ll lend to you; you won’t lend to him. He’ll be the head; you’ll be the tail. All these curses are going to come on you. They’re going to hunt you down and get you until there’s nothing left of you because you didn’t obediently listen to the Voice of GOD, your God, and diligently keep his commandments and guidelines that I commanded you. The curses will serve as signposts, warnings to your children ever after.”
This reminds the author of another thought-provoking opinion the author recently heard: If God is judging us, the proper response is to recognize it and repent, not receive it as a blessing of God and rejoice in our own destruction…. We have an obligation to seek the welfare of our own people. The only exception to that would be if you’re Jeremiah and God tells you not to pray for your people and tells you to defect to the Babylonians.
Some have equated the kind of immigration the United States is currently experiencing with war. Even many years ago, this was hardly a fringe belief (the author heard it discussed once on an NPR affiliate), and what is happening truly is unprecedented. And, if in a war, a person betrayed their country by allowing the enemy in, that kind of treachery certainly would qualify as not just any evil but a very large and consequential evil. Who, from whatever moderately sensible political orientation, would disagree with that?
When Woe says “[a]ll theology is political, and all politics is a religious confession” this is exactly correct. Regarding immigration the author thinks that even now, for him, supporting most any of it, “legal” or not, would be sin. And are even a small minority of the people being brought here true refugees in need, and because of real compassion on the part of our people?
To say the least, most any man will be skeptical of this, and some much more so than others! Do we want Yugoslavia? How many now have been repeating that America clearly needs a moratorium on immigration so the house can be put in order and some semblance of public trust can be restored? To not publicly say this and even fight for this – as the author is given the opportunity in appropriate contexts – would definitely be sin for him – and he will also try to convince others it should be for them as well.
At the same time, Christian brothers and sisters with differing convictions can be accepted insofar as they hold them without sin (obviously, finally falling into rank treachery regarding one’s own people is a grave sin). Even if, eventually, men tragically end up fighting on different sides as things deteriorate.
5. They say all interracial marriage is sin.
One has said of Corey’s position that “nearly everyone who marries outside their race is outside the kingdom of God.”
This should be disputed. Discussions in the previous three sections have talked about matters that are very important to the Stone Choir. Therefore, when Corey Mahler throws out consecutive “bombs” like “[a] man who cannot intuitively grasp that interracial marriage is sinful is unfit to be a theologian” and “[i]nterracial marriage is a tool of genocide”, one must grasp the above context. Why? Because Mahler has also stated that there is sin per se, and sin due to circumstances, with interracial marriage falling into the latter category. In addition, he has also stated that sometimes this really is more about wisdom than sin.
Even as he has cited the problem of organ donation matches, family concerns, and other practical realities like those above as important reasons not to marry interracially, Mahler has also stated that there certainly are circumstances where such marriages are good and wise. For instance, he has given the example of a Christian missionary in Japan taking a Japanese wife.
And here, consider Linnaeus from the Old Lutherans blog in his response to Pastor Warren Graff (commenting on Linnaeus’ debate with Bryan “I commune open communists” Wolfmueller):
“As regards Mahler, his position on miscegenation could not be more irrelevant to this debate on whether race exists. But as long as we’re talking about it, according to my understanding on Mahler’s position, he would be chiefly concerned with marrying a race which had developed on a different continent than one’s own. He may perhaps possess a lesser concern for marrying a member of a race which, while developing on the same continent, nevertheless had little history of intermarriage with one’s own, rendering children of the type produced by such a union an underrepresented oddity….”
Woe would seem to confirm this summary from Linnaeus in his response to a person who said “integration for non-whites isn’t impossible. But it is difficult, and many will simply be incapable at the individual level even amongst groups that would have the highest likelihood”.
He explained that it is possible to fully integrate into a foreign society when one and one’s progeny is determined to do so by marrying into it over three successive generations. In addition to leaving one’s previous people behind, this, of course, would take great commitment and love for one’s new people – like that displayed by Ruth in the Bible. And there, when speaking to the people, or nation, of Israel, God says: “You shall not detest an Edomite, for he is your brother; you shall not detest an Egyptian, because you were an alien in his land. The sons of the third generation who are born to them may enter the assembly of the Lord.” (see also Daniel 2:40-43)
At the very least, in lieu of the Tower of Babel, the Lord God has ordained the nations, separating them and yet also blessing each of them with His good gifts! (see Acts 17) Can any person justify the desire for the death of one’s own people? Without a clear word from the Lord, should any Christian ever be dead set to cause the absolute extinction of another group?
6. They assert there is no hope for blacks to be sanctified by God’s Holy Spirit.
Corey infamously debated “black sanctification” because of The Curse of Ham, and his article on the same remains unrefuted. People on the right are noticing and beginning to talk about this.
And this is an absolutely massive elephant in the living room of the Christian church. Even if one disagrees with his conclusions, Mahler’s piece is nevertheless extremely challenging and demands to be dealt with. Truly, biblical history and history in general has had an immense impact on contemporary political realities.
In Scripture, does the curse of Ham basically end with the destruction of the Canaanites alone? Recently, the author essentially heard the following from a man who has reflected on these matters: Anybody who looks at what the 16th and 17th century Lutherans taught on the matter will discover that they believed the curse was on Ham (someone like Abraham Calov, for instance, says that God told Israel Ham was cursed because it did not look like this – Egypt after all was a world power at the time). At the same time, it was not until the 19th century that people began to notice that the descendents of Ham were slaves (see, for example, the great LCMS Lutheran and contemporary of C.F.W. Walther, George Stoeckhardt). Of course one could either see this as 19th century racial theories alone or one could see it as a fulfillment of biblical prophecy.
In his debate with James White, Mahler made much of crime statistics indicating higher incidences of black violent crime worldwide. Some might object here and say: “But sanctification is not merely growth in impulse control. It is primarily growth in faith and love.” Of course, but is not what Mahler is contending for here really just a baseline of sorts? If you do not show impulse control that bridles violent crime like rape and murder, how can you be growing in love towards your neighbor? Mahler did say that black Christians are justified and sanctified like any other Christian as well, only that it is more difficult for them to be progressively sanctified.
Again, in defense of his argument, Corey referenced the stiff-necked nature of the Jews, referenced throughout the Bible, and one example he shared from that debate was from Matthew 11:21: “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes”. Even Jesus is implying here that some peoples are worse spiritually, not just politically.
Are realities like this the case only because of “cultural issues”? In other words, are they definitely things that can be alleviated or even eliminated with better culture and education? Consider that according to Mahler and Woe Africa’s troubles are foreseen in the Scriptures. For example, how different might things have been had they, following the Ethiopian eunuch, repented and spent the following time honoring the death penalty, enacting justice against their most naturally violent people?
It is a “what if” question we will never know the answer to. For God foresaw what we see today: the unfolding of each race in the past, with the immutable consequences of this playing out in time.
In their podcasts the Stone Choir has talked about how sin not only gets into our genes with original sin, but how – going hand in hand with epigenetics – it could also affect particular groups of men going forward, changing later generations for the worse, and making them more subject to demons. In effect, some blood is poisoned and some land cursed. When Cortez arrived in Central America he evidently believed that he had come to hell. We do know from the scriptures, for instance, that many evidently thought that nothing good could come from Nazareth. Certain places in the world are, at the very least, under the strong influence of specific demons (Daniel 10, Ephesians 6:12), though not, of course, without God’s allowance!
While all of this might sound exceedingly radical at first, is it not just as – or even more radical – to insist that the idea that culture is at least in some respects downstream from nature should not even be entertained? Is Ishmael really a wild donkey of a man or did he just grow up in a culture that made him that? Why exactly did the Lutheran Confessions – which all LCMS pastors are supposed to have subscribed to – consider him a “hereditary enemy”? At the very least, even the great reformer Martin Luther was not opposed to speaking about how human nature in general – and the particular natures of specific nations – could become worse over time.
7. They teach sub-Christian ideas about colonialism, slavery and polygamy
Had Adam and Eve not partaken of the forbidden fruit we would not have a world with tears, thorns, suffering, death, divorce, war, slavery, or polygamy.
That said, the law of God which Jesus Christ fulfills perfectly on our behalf comes to fallen men in a fallen world, not to the obedient angels. When the modern papacy leaves every impression that Christians must shun the death penalty – which obviously should remind us of the death penalty Christ suffered for us at the cross – the only proper Christian response is the one that Woe utters: “some of you just don’t think anyone should ever be killed. It’s an absolutely evil spirit”.
Prepare for the hardest part of this article. Maybe skip this section and come back later.
Who are the real radicals here? Who are the true revolutionaries and rebels?
A Christian might certainly hold the pious opinion that all enslaving or polygamizing is forbidden to him. He also might endeavor to prove to other believers that this should be the case for them as well. Certainly, every Christian, every slave of Christ, should recognize that even though God only warned about polygamy in reference to rulers being led astray by women and their foreign gods (Deut. 17:16-17), it is nevertheless also an aberration of God’s original intention.
At the same time, every single man’s conscience – whether they agree or disagree with one another – must be captive to the word of God, to the whole counsel of God. Therefore, what if one insists that those who say God allows for either slavery or polygamy can’t be a Christian? Then, with Galatians in hand, a Christian King, for example, might well be right to insist that at least he – like the patriarchs before him – may have slaves and other wives (though the danger of other leading men being encouraged by and following his example should not be lost on him). Especially if these men and women under him sought the same by their own consent (even if there is some “love-hate”), Christians should be particularly wary of any desires they have to “free” them from such arrangements.
It is interesting to note that in the October 2023 Lutheran Witness, the official publication of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, carefully written articles on slavery and polygamy were featured which in some respects essentially appear to agree with the position of the Stone Choir (they would, of course, never quote the late Tim Keller’s wife saying singleness is sometimes better than marriage apart from the critical I Cor. 7 context): there is no mention in these articles about either slavery or polygamy being sin, even if polygamy is said to be an error and violation of God’s original intent (which might imply that it is certainly a deviation from the ideal, yet not forbidden).
We recall that even if polygamy is to be considered sin, there were exceptions: God also commanded Levirite marriage and at least in one circumstance even blessed a man of great authority with multiple wives (2 Sam. 12:8). Presumably, in some extraordinary circumstances, this was, at the very least, a wise concession and men’s salvation and faith remained intact.
Discussions like these might also bring to mind other questions of history, such as the appropriateness of any war of aggression or even colonialism. Even if Corey Mahler is correct in his reading of the Curse of Ham, does that mean that God is most pleased with this arrangement, with forced slavery, even forced racial slavery?
Certainly, as noted above, we point out that God permitted Christians to have slaves and did not condemn this. And we note that throughout history, different people groups have always ended up as slaves, whether they be Syrians, Slavs, or Africans. And around 300 years ago, one continent – instead of just individual nations – began to be regarded worldwide as the slaves of others.
God used the Babylonians to punish Judah, but certainly still held it against the Babylonians! And yet here, no one should say that God condemns all slave owners who force slavery – and the nations who permit or even encourage this – even if such an arrangement is not His ideal, His best. And even if a particular Christian believes that all slave holding would be wrong for him and that he wants to convince others of the same.
Nevertheless, slavemasters can certainly behave in an evil fashion. Should the Christians in the world – whether they reside among the sons of Japheth, Seth, or Ham – ever cease to challenge those who chase after real tyranny, oppression, and war? Who appear eager for spoil or slaves or blood or all these things – who are finally eager to steal, kill, and destroy? How should Christians respond to the worldly reality of the “right of conquest”?
More to the point: can an appropriate manly aggression – a godly one that would take up the whip against the money changers in the temple when necessary for instance! – be retained when one insists that the only proper war must follow the Augustinian prototype of the just war – namely one taken up in defense of one’s own people, property, and place? Is any hesitancy here on the part of any Christian regarding the appropriateness of colonialism, for instance, simply due to a naivety about the horrendous evils of certain peoples, like the previously mentioned Aztecs?
8. Their broad denunciations of the LCMS clergy in particular and the “conservative” Christian Church in general are evil.
Woe and Corey have claimed they have evidence that some of the key leadership in the LCMS has worked with the terrorist organization Antifa and is committed to supporting pedophilia and other evils.
They see other members of the clergy, who they derisively call “clerics”, as indirectly supporting all of this by their lack of voice and action against confusing and false teaching.
Given the Synod’s own lack of response to their proven financial and material support of the LGBTQ+ agenda, one may be forgiven for wondering whether or not the Stone Choir men have sources who know things we do not. Presumably – given the nature of some of their attacks – they are eager for Matthew Harrison and other LCMS leadership to take them to court.
In this day as well, the word of God is indeed blasphemed because of His church. In many regards, the church is worse than pagans (I Tim. 5:9). Even if Woe and Corey do not appear to be holy men to many, many good Christian men share their concerns. A quote from Martin Luther, speaking about the Jews comes to mind:
“O you terrible wrath and incomprehensible judgment of the sublime Divine Majesty! How can you be so despised by the children of men that we do not forthwith tremble to death before you? What an unbearable sight you are, also to the hearts and eyes of the holiest men, as we see in Moses and the prophets. Yet these stony hearts and iron souls mock you so defantly…”
While their denunciations of the clergy and even the conservative Christian Church at large often appear to be overly severe, is it not likely that in Old Testament times men like Jeremiah would have appeared and much the same way? When it comes to our own cooperation with the world – and persistent desire to go along to get along – can we hear denunciations like this and always completely dismiss them? It does us all well to remember that cowards and the faithless will be thrown into the lake of fire – how do we perceive the fruit of our own courage, or lack thereof?
When things are as bad as they are, how confident can any man be that he has true faith? After all, when the Son of Man comes will he find faith on earth? Is the forgiveness we receive the forgiveness we bestow upon ourselves, a forgiveness that derives not from the true Jesus but a false Jesus we have made in our own image?
Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ Our Lord! For if the gospel of God’s free grace in Jesus Christ is even for – is especially for – failing and miserable and terrified Christians, it is also for those who have essentially been fake Christians up until this point. All this said, at the very least concerns about a faith that is entirely too weak – one that is nowhere near where it should be – certainly should not be dismissed too quickly.
Nor should our Lord’s warnings and exhortations about Him desiring either hotness or coldness be ignored or suppressed. We must strive to always be better. Also, seeing the LCMS as an institution beyond hope is not to see Confessional Lutheranism and Christ’s church as beyond hope.
9. Being proud white supremacists, they encourage hatred towards other groups
Like the Czechs and the Slovaks with their “velvet divorce”, Woe and Corey desire forms of ethnic and racial segregation. They are not the only ones who want this, but they are white, so it is evidently quite different in the eyes of many.
Still, regarding words towards other groups that many see as divisive and hateful, these are highly subjective matters. And these matters are not made any better given the unwillingness of most to have – or even allow – these kinds of difficult conversations.
In their podcasts, Woe and Corey, like Luther, give every impression one should avoid boasting in blood, lineage, or family. And as they have said, without Jesus, every race is just as damned. They also say that when it comes to your personal relations, you should be kind to all people from every race. So why do they often speak as they do on Twitter/X?
Consider that the rhetoric people use to ward off threats – or maybe even tries to prevent the worst when conflict between groups is inevitable – may sound similar. Could the majority of their rhetoric possibly be to avert and repel all the various kinds of attacks that are happening against white people today, who all know are not even “OK”?
Regarding supremacy, one notes that few will get upset when an American says that the English are superior to the French – or even that Americans are superior to the French! (everyone knows this) It is only in dealing with nations or races that everyone knows have truly struggled that people become greatly offended and feel that lines have been crossed. In addition, inferiority-superiority speech might function not only to counter disrespect and worse, but to increase morale among one’s own and allies in a time of conflict (“We are the better men; our cause, not theirs, is just!”).
This said, much like the social media presence of the President of the United States, it is certainly understandable that many would feel that the Stone Choir at times goes too far. Still, there is no doubt that many professing Christians also feel that the Apostle Paul himself goes to far when he says that man is the head of the woman, that the Jews are hostile to all mankind, that he wishes some of them would emasculate themselves, or that:
“One of them, a prophet of their own, said, ‘Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.’ This testimony is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth…”
Titus 1:12-14
One cannot sugarcoat this at all. These words are exceedingly direct and harsh. There is nothing gentle about these words and Paul gives every impression that he is looking down on the Cretans – even if he deftly uses one of their own poets to do it. This is true even if we know that Paul has better futures in mind for these Cretans and he certainly means to get them there! Unfortunately – contrary to the biblical admonitions to thankfully accept correction – many of us know from experience that people will often take offense at even the slightest insinuation that they are not everything that they should be. Perhaps this explains why God led Paul to be so harsh here.
“Speak the truth in love” the Christian says, in an effort to quote the Apostle Paul against himself. But do they even try? There is no unity and peace when there are lies that kill, reputations or otherwise. Sometimes hard words do need to be spoken, where courage is demanded – and not only from more hopelessly autistic types but those who are capable of operating in politically savvy ways. Speaking of which, in our day authorities in the UK have determined that “hateful retweets” can be a criminal offense.
They, targeting the right, say:
“The offense of incitement to racial hatred involves publishing or distributing material which is insulting or abusive, which is intended to or likely to stir up racial hatred. So if you retweet that, then you’re republishing that and then potentially, you’re committing that offense. And we do have dedicated police officers who are scouring social media. Their job is to look for this material, and then follow up with identification, arrests and so forth. So it’s a really, really serious [offense]. People might think they’re not doing anything harmful. They are, and the consequences will be visited upon them.”
One wonders how the current U.K. government would have seen the goals of America’s Founding Fathers – echoed by the Stone Choir – who deliberately restricted citizenship to “free white persons” (in the Naturalization Act of 1790) because they believed that only white men of northern European / Protestant extraction were able to responsibly use the freedoms granted by the United States Constitution.
After all, even if in its day this was considered radically generous – as evidenced by Benjamin Franklin’s and Woe’s own concerns about the German population – today such a view is not recognized as expansive, but only hateful.
10. They undermine the real article of faith by which the church stands or falls
This may appear to be the most difficult charge to defend against. Woe certainly courts controversy when he says whether Africans can be Americans is the question upon which the church stands or falls. In somewhat similar fashion, Mahler states that “[w]ithout the West, Christianity will wither and die” and that the Christian faith will be “[d]ead in under a century without men who are 145+[in IQ] to address novel issues and teach the teachers”.
So when they talk about the church standing or falling here, what are they talking about – in addition to the clear concerns they have about nations needing to be understood as distinct? Are they saying that since Christianity is linked to Japheth (Europe or White people) by both practical aspects (see above) and biblical prophecy that race is the article on which the Church stands or falls, at least in our age?
Is Satan’s effort to destroy white nations ultimately, more than anything, a Satanic plan to destroy the church? The ones who have been used by God the most in propagating the gospel? To be clear, scripture asserts that there is nothing Satan will be able to do such that the gates of hell will prevail against the church.
When Peter simply confesses the revelation God gave Him of Jesus Christ as the Messiah that is the thing which both builds and defends the church, regardless of anything else. Even if this means the church becomes exceptionally small and weak and few in number – for all intents and purposes appearing extinct – every Christian knows that Jesus Christ has absolutely promised that He will preserve His elect.
Obviously, the Christian fights that God’s church would be as big as possible! Nevertheless, it is essential to say the above because it is a doctrine for the Christian’s comfort. Being among the elect means being among those who are not only sanctified in the world but justified before God’s judgment throne by the blood of Christ as well. Here, as Christians always experience failure, faith like that of a child is urged. And, of course, if the nations of men or even the Stone Choir will not confess and proclaim this Christ as they ought even the stones will cry out! God’s kingdom comes on its own, without our prayer.
Therefore, putting the best construction on these matters, it appears that this must be Corey and Woe’s pious opinion – by which they mean with all their might to persuade as many as possible – namely, that God’s promise of a double blessing to Japheth in the Book of Genesis means that his sons will indeed – must! – play a key role in the latter days of the church. This is the best way to interpret all the facts, evidence, and inconvenient truths they point to.
And as regards America in particular, it is a nation derived from Japheth’s sons, specifically a branch off of England with other genetic and cultural contributions from other European nations. All should be convinced that these need to be preserved not only because they are God’s good creations but because they are essential to God’s plan!
To say the least, this is their very firmly held opinion, which they are convinced they have extremely good evidence for. As any observer will notice, they will vigorously endeavor to prove to you that this is plainly and demonstrably true.
That said, again, pious opinion is not absolutely related to the knowledge of God as is the matter of doctrine and dogma. Hearkening back to what was discussed regarding accusation #2 above, the real crux of the matter – related to the church’s true confession and hence its standing or falling – related to man’s salvation from its true enemies of sin, death, in the devil – related to the true spiritual life being given to those who are dead in sin – related to man created, fallen, redeemed, and resurrected to eternal life and not death, etc. – would seem to be summed up perfectly in what one Stone Choir proponent tweeted out some time ago now: “No man can unrepentantly defy nature and rightly receive and remain in the grace of Christ. To deny male and female is damning no matter what a man confesses about sola fide. The same is true about race.”
This, the Stone Choir would undoubtedly claim, is no pious opinion. As Corey puts it: “Anyone who denies the reality of race is an enemy of God and of all mankind.” Woe says “when you look at how families are discussed throughout Scripture it becomes clear that such lineal deviations are far more substantial than the two sexes”. God really cares about these things, even if the world does not. So, it is something that must be fought over, and if pastors and theologians do not recognize this, so much the worse for the pastors and theologians.
Do those men, after all, really want to deny this?:
Individual: Jesus
Family: Joseph
Clan: David
Tribe: Judah
Nation/Race1: Israel
Race2: Hebrew
Race3: Shemite
Species (Kind): Adam/Mankind
Do the Stone Choir critics really want to deny that all men “are consanguineous, but some are more consanguineous than others”? Are these not matters of real earthly descent in time, and hence historically immutable realities?
What does all of this mean? First and foremost, it means that souls are at stake and, at the very least, most all need to read this debate. If you have trouble understanding it, keep reading and asking questions until you do.
Why Write This Article?
Perhaps this article has angered you. Maybe you would love to know who the author is so you or his pastor can teach him a lesson of sorts. Of course he hopes you don’t try to do that. Hear him out.
The author believes he is basically responding to what he sees happening and is trying to fairly report on it and analyze it. He wants to love the truth, and especially the Truth, above all things. God will use this short piece as He pleases. The author only believes that it needed to be written and that if he had not done it someone else eventually would have. But maybe too late.
Then again, maybe the hour is already too late, but may God tarry with us.
Still, the author knows that many will object, because even as the Stone Choir podcast is more like NPR than Joe Rogan, their tweets/X posts often appear to many to strike a very different tone.
Not a few struggle to understand why, at times, Woe feels the need to be crude and foul. Furthermore, the Stone Choir often seems to many to be politically impossible – though perhaps less so day by day – in addition to being just “mean”. Why do they resort to so much name calling and insult? Why must both men, noticing the violence and problems of other races, feel the need to refer to them as sub-humans or “it”, regardless of how much a man may not reflect God’s image in his life? And of course, many good men are perplexed by Corey’s belief that Hitler was a Christian Prince (even if some will argue he was a Christian)!
Again, even if they are often extremely clever and subtle – constantly forcing people to question and re-evaluate their priors – why is so much of their speech so politically inflammatory?
One should note that they believe strongly that this is a time for war. And so they are attempting to lead as they can with the kind of uncompromising rhetoric and toughness this often involves. Of course this is not a conventional war – not yet at least – but a true war nonetheless, and one they believe many others will soon recognize is occurring.
One may argue that much of their rhetoric needs to be understood in this particular kind of context. They are especially speaking to those already a bit awake.
Must not all now ask: Have Woe and Corey helped cause political and religious division? Or are they responding to the political and religious division, even war, that has already been caused?
And are they responding to the church’s negligence in not holding more “democratic” impulses in check by the standard of God’s law? Has the church in fact been putting politics above theology for a very, very long time now? Have we loved “cultural preferences” – even relatively conservative cultural preferences – more than the word of God?
Are these questions really unthinkable?
Still, this article is not the place to address all of these particular issues in depth – even if they needed to be touched upon.
Instead, again, believing that everybody deserves a fair trial in God’s church, it has attempted to focus on the content of their positions, and to put forward a strong biblical case for these. Therefore, any who want to compose a responsible, truthful case against them should, in fact, find the content of this article helpful to consider.
What Might the Future Hold for the Church?
What does this mean for the LCMS and wider Christianity? In the LCMS at least, this is perhaps not too difficult to discern. Lay theologian Matt Cochran reports:
“President Harrison’s call for excommunication over novel (i.e. fake) sins like racism, capital punishment for sodomites, and the like is a backhanded attempt to establish a binding new confession of faith. So are the many stories I’ve heard of Lutheran churches withholding baptism from new converts who listen to Stone Choir or the dismissal of pastors who doubt the Holocaust. These are, for all intents and purposes, the beginnings of a new confession. It just happens to be one which syncretizes Christianity with Critical Theory….Those synagogues of Satan which continue to elevate the Postwar Consensus [see here] above the Word will draw the world and repel Christians…”
Perhaps a statement someone recently shared with the author condenses matters nicely, touching on another person well-known in LCMS circles for also questioning the Holocaust:
“The late Rev. Herman J. Otten was like a prophet to the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod. And as was the case with the prophets of old, Missouri’s reception of Otten’s preaching ranged from outright rejection and scorn, to at times a grudging admittance that he was right. The current leadership of Synod, particularly Matt Harrison, have crudely made it clear what they think of the Rev. Otten. But in a generation, the only heirs of LCMS that are still faithful and recognizable Christian will exclusively remember Rev. Otten as a scion of orthodoxy in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries.”
The ministry is not for weak men but strong ones, those whose strength is in the Lord (1 Sam. 30:6; Eph. 6:10; Heb. 12:12-13). Shepherds, like David, are to do battle with wild beasts. So pastors and theologians need to do their jobs and not rely on the few who are willing to be pariahs or worse. They need to intelligently and truthfully tackle the hardest of issues and not fail to speak the truth. Today.
Conclusion
A concluding word. Given the beliefs of many in the West in general and America in particular, it is understandable and even normal for those who listen to the Stone Choir to want them to be wrong. In the podcast and interviews at least, they at times concede as much about their own conclusions!
But at the same time, any Christian who listens to these men will undoubtedly find themselves persuaded to some degree. They are, after all, highly intelligent men who know their Lutheran theology and have thought much about the Christian’s life in a fallen world. There is irrefutable evidence that Corey reads the Bible daily. And they certainly do appear to believe what they are saying with all their hearts – and have indeed paid a heavy cost for it.
If there are no challenges to them that take their words seriously – and answer them effectively from the scriptures – what should we conclude? At the very least, is one not forced to soberly ask: “Are these men – who are so maligned – telling the truth? Even without the love I perceive they lack? Are they indeed God’s witnesses?”
May God grant His church wisdom. And come quickly Lord Jesus!