McAtee Repudiates Dr. Jeffrey Stevenson’s Article on “A Word to Kinists” V

“The church is composed of a multitude drawn from every tribe, language, and nation—all of whom stand equally in need of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Now, the Kinist will readily affirm this point in word. He will say that the gospel is for all people without distinction. But this verbal concession collapses under the weight of his own system.

For if, as Kinism maintains, certain races are marked by enduring genetic deficiencies—moral or cultural traits that the gospel does not fully overcome—then the universality of the gospel is not truly believed but merely stated. In such a framework, the gospel may be offered to all, but it is not equally powerful for all. It becomes, in effect, a partial remedy—sufficient for some peoples but inherently limited in its transforming ability among others.”

Jeffrey Stivason
A Word to Kinists?

Bret responds,

1.) You were good in the first paragraph until the last sentence of that paragraph. The system of Biblical Christianity which includes Kinism has no collapse.

2.) No Kinist says that people with mental deficiencies such as retards are not elect. We believe that retards can be converted. Kinists believe, along with Scripture, that people from every tribe, tongue, and nation, in their tribes, tongues, and nations, will have elect drawn from them and be present at the great marriage feast of the lamb. Kinists, like the Apostle Paul (See Romans 9:1-3) would have never denied that there would be Cretans in heaven.

3.) Nobody denies that sanctification works in all peoples that are converted. What is denied is that all peoples will be equally sanctified. For example, converted Headhunting people groups will not likely be equally sanctified as compared to a people group converted who had been leavened with cultural Christianity for generations.

4.) So, Jeffery, we see you are a liar and have violated the 9th commandment by writing what you write above.

Stivason writes,

The New Testament proclaims a Christ who breaks down dividing walls, who creates one new man in place of the old divisions, and who renews fallen sinners without regard to ethnicity or lineage. But Kinism reintroduces those very barriers under the guise of “nature,” suggesting that grace is bounded by blood.”

Jeffrey Stivason
A Word to Kinists

Bret responds,

1.) Here is a fine argument on Stivason’s part on why grace destroys nature. If you believe that grace destroys nature but instead believe that grace restores nature then you are just fine with Stivason’s asinine conclusions.

2.) The one new man that the Spirit creates refers to the SPIRITUAL union that believers of all races have in common. However, Jeffrey, justification does not mean copulation. The distinctions that God created us with do not disappear upon conversion. I mean… think about it Jeffrey, isn’t it the case that “the one new man in Christ,” also includes females? Does that mean that gender goes away upon conversion? Now follow me here Jeffery … if you can … if gender doesn’t disappear with the one new man in Christ why would you think that race/ethnicity would disappear upon conversion?

For Pete’s sake … even John Calvin, the Kinist, is against you here,

“Regarding our eternal salvation, it is true that one must not distinguish between man and woman, or between king and a shepherd, or between a German and a Frenchman. Regarding policy, however, we have what St. Paul declares here; for our, Lord Jesus Christ did not come to mix up nature, or to abolish what belongs to the preservation of decency and peace among us….Regarding the kingdom of God (which is spiritual) there is no distinction or difference between man and woman, servant and master, poor and rich, great and small. Nevertheless, there does have to be some order among us, and Jesus Christ did not mean to eliminate it, as some flighty and scatterbrained dreamers [believe].”

John Calvin (Sermon on 1 Corinthians 11:2-3)

3.) You use the term “grace is bounded by blood.” Kinists, believing covenant theology, might indeed believe that. We do believe that because of God’s grace, God’s favor runs in familial lines. However, I suspect you mean by that phrase that “grace is negated by blood,” which all Kinists reject. If God could save the sons of Japheth, despite their current high handed rebellion against His Word (as seen in what your writing) then God can save any people group. God can even save Stivasons.

4.) Again, you have violated with unwholesome speech the 9th commandment by what you have written. Please repent.

McAtee Repudiates Dr. Jeffrey Stevenson’s Article on “A Word to Kinists” IV

For example, he (Sam Ketcham) has obviously confused means and merit. “Reformed theology readily affirms that God uses means (language, education, printing presses, roads, political stability). But Ketcham’s statement goes beyond means and speaks of “superior culture, language, and race” as contributing causes. Second, Ketcham reintroduces grounds for boasting—not in Christ, but in one race’s superiority to that of another. And third, to argue the gospel succeeded because of racial or cultural superiority implicitly denies that the gospel is equally at home in every culture, a point upon which Scripture insists (e.g. Col. 1:23).”

Jeffrey Stivason
A Word to Kinists

1.) Here Stivason is being disingenuous. Ketcham, clearly affirmed that all of this was caused by the Holy Spirit. However, the Holy Spirit uses secondary causes in order to achieve His ends. Ketcham nowhere even hinted that those spreading the Gospel have earned or achieved merit or preformed a meritorious work. It is NOT claiming merit by saying that a race, language, or culture is superior if one admits (as Sam has) that superiority is all due to God’s grace.

2.) Stivason’s boasting claim is just stupid. How can Ketcham be accused of boasting when he explicitly says that the Holy Spirit gave success. If Sam is boasting he is boasting in God’s favor and gifts. To God alone be the glory.

3.) Sam never argued that the Gospel succeeded because of racial or cultural superiority. Sam argued that the Gospel succeeded because of the Holy Spirit’s use of the racial and cultural superiority of those He gifted to the work to be accomplished. To God alone be the glory.

Stivason writes,

“But why does it always come down to skin color for the Kinist? Why not eye color, birth hospital, or shoe size? Perhaps another question. Why does Kinism seem to fixate on Blacks and Jews? The likeliest answer is that Race Realism is really race hatred masquerading as love for those who are actually despised.”

Jeffrey Stivason
What is Kinism

Bret responds,

1.) It comes down to skin color you idiot because skin color is the leading indicator for race, though race is not limited to the reality of skin color. For example, it is possible for a black albino to be birthed but the fact the albino does not have black skin does not prove that the person is not black. Are you trying to be stupid Stivason?

2.) Perhaps Kinists speak on blacks and Jews because blacks and Jews are a large problem in our culture. Have you seen the FBI crime rates for blacks? Have you not read on the history of conflict between Jews and Christians? The question might be turned on you Jeffrey, “Why do you ignore the social order problems related to Jews and blacks?” “Why do you fixate on Kinists when all Kinists are trying to do is to get you notice reality?”

3.) Committing the sin of noticing is not the same thing as race hatred, though that certainly would work well for you in all your hatred for Kinists.

4.) You do realize Jeffrey, don’t you, that there are those who are black, brown, yellow, and red who are also Kinists? I mean, Jeffrey, it is not only white people who are kinists. Aren’t you being kind of racist when you hint that only white people are kinists?

5.) Stivason’s very question, which he seems to think is a slam-dunk refutation of Kinism, only proves he has no idea what Kinism is. That’s the most charitable take possible on it because the alternative would be to assume that Stivason knows he is entirely misrepresenting the issue. We are assuming mere ignorance and arrogance on his part because that is more gracious than assuming Stivason to be a rabid Liar.

McAtee Repudiates Dr. Jeffrey Stivason’s Article on “A Word to Kinists?” III

“Brothers and sisters, the gospel may not make you able to jump higher or lift heavier weights, but it can and will sanctify your character, conforming you to the image of Christ; and to believe differently is serious error. It’s part of the Kinist heresy.”

Jeffrey Stivason

A Word to Kinists

1.) This is the teaching that grace erases nature. If owning the Gospel does not make one jump higher or lift heavier weights it likewise is not going to take away genetic predispositions touching genetically patterned character flaws. Now, what sanctification will do is have you embrace those realities about yourself as besetting sins, and sanctification will grant you grace to grow in resisting those peculiar temptations but grace does not alter who we are genetically. Grace does not change my genes so that now can jump higher or run faster and it does not change my genes so that the stubbornness of one descended from the Scots is eliminated after conversion. Grace may turn stubbornness into determination so one is conformed to the image of Christ but it does not erase that genetic predilection. Nature is real.

2.) Hence the heresy that Stivason is teaching here is Gnosticism. Material reality (Genetics) is waved away by this Gnostic elimination that the corporeal is real. Stivason desires to denies nature and nurture insisting that spiritual supernature make nature and nurture to be nothing. Grace destroy nature and nurture for Stivason. He is a Gnostic.

Stivason writes in his article,

Kinism, and by extension Race Realism, fails to understand something vital. Genetics are not the source of blessing. The gospel is the source of blessing. Samuel Ketcham illustrates this error in a Substack article titled “Race and Nature,” stating, “When the white man took the true religion around the world, the Holy Spirit made their mission effectual. But to deny that their superior culture, language, and race had anything to do with it—is foolish.” In this statement, Mr. Ketcham has undermined the Reformed gospel.

Jeffrey “Gnostic” Stivason
A Word to Kinists

Bret responds,

Is it not the creator God who was and is the source of our genetics? If the creator God is the source of our genetics then why can genetics not be a blessing from God as the source from whom all blessings flow?

For Stivason to insist that what Sam Ketcham wrote is denying the Gospel is just top shelf lunacy. First, Sam clearly and unambiguously says that “the Holy Spirit made their mission effectual.” Is Stivason actually saying that the Holy Spirit made their mission effectual apart from the superior aspects of the culture, language, and race which the creator God Himself blessed the white race? If Stivason is saying that Stivason is denying Biblical Christianity for Gnosticism.

McAtee Repudiates Dr. Jeffrey Stivason’s Article on “A Word to Kinists?” II

:Early on in their journey, Paul and Silas picked up a new protégé, Timothy, who was the product of an interracial marriage. His mother was a Jew and his father a Gentile. Yet, his reputation within the church is foregrounded. Timothy was “well spoken of” by the brothers. Put another way, Paul and the brothers did not rebuke Timothy’s mother for spoiling the bloodlines or mixing the races. Timothy was recognized as a godly and useful brother. The church loved him.”

Jeffrey Stivason

A Word to Kinists

Bret responds,

No Kinist would say that someone who is the offspring of a mixed race marriage could not be a godly and useful brother. Second, all because Timothy’s mother was not rebuked does not therefore mean that the Apostles thought marriage between Jew and Gentiles was a good idea to be pursued as normative.

Jeffrey Stivason writes,

Where does the Kinist obtain the idea of forbidding intermarriage? In other words, why shouldn’t races intermarry?

Jeffrey Stivason

A Word to Kinists

“To return to the Biblical doctrine, a wife is her husband’s helpmeet. Since Eve was created from Adam and is Adam’s reflected image of God, she was of Adam and an image of Adam as well, his ‘counterpart.’ The meaning of this is that a true helpmeet is man’s counterpart, that a cultural, racial, and especially religious similarity is needed so that the woman can truly mirror the man and be his image… Cross-cultural marriages are thus normally a failure.”

R. J. Rushdoony

“Institutes of Biblical Law” (Vol. 1), page 357

The Kinist would only add that “Cross-racial marriages are thus normally a failure.”

Also on this score we would quote Dr. John Edwards Rice, one of the founding fathers of the PCA,

“No human can measure the anguish of personality that goes on within the children of miscegenation… Let those who would erase the racial diversity of God’s creation beware lest the consequence of their evil be visited upon their children.”

John Edwards Richards
One of the founders of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA)

“The vast majority of good thinking people prefer to associate with, and intermarry with, people of their respective race; this is part of the God-given inclination to honor and uphold the distinctiveness of separate races. But there are many false prophets of oneness, and many shallow stooges, who seek to force the amalgamation of the races.”

Dr. John E. Richards
One of the Founders of the PCA

McAtee Repudiates Dr. Jeffrey Stivason’s Article on “A Word to Kinists?” I

Jeffrey Stivason

A Word To Kinists

1.) Let’s be clear here. What Stivason, following Poplin, would have us to believe is that races should intermix and not remain in their allotted boundaries set up by God. This follows the clearly articulated belief system of the Marxists and cultural Marxists, who have likewise articulated this very same belief.

2.) It does not necessarily follow that all because someone believes that races should not intermix and should remain in their allotted boundaries therefore the person believing that premise also believes in racial superiority. That is a non-sequitur by both Stivason and Poplin.

3.) What could be the case instead is that Kinists believe that superiorities and inferiorities are present in all the particular races and as that is so those superiorities and inferiorities should be respected.

4,) Notice how we begin with Kinism and soon enough we learn that Kinism is a synonym with race realism. This is contrary to the ARP report which defines Kinism and race realism very differently at the beginning of the report. It seems these chaps can’t get their definitions down.

5.) The Apostle Paul clearly thought the Jews were superior to other peoples. Listen to how he speaks,

What advantage then has the Jew, or what is the profit of circumcision? 2 Much in every way! Chiefly because to them were committed the [a]oracles of God.

In having the advantage over the Gentile Paul is saying that the Jews were previously superior because they had the oracles of God.

Is God guilty of the terrible sin of Kinism?