A few months ago, Rev. Chris Strevel decided he was going to weigh in on the wicked sinfulness of Kinism. I no longer identify as a Kinist since so much slander has been heaped upon that label. I’ve just decided to give it up rather than try and save it from the calumny, slander, libel and straw-man caricatures heaped on it by the Cultural Marxists and their legion of fellow “Reformed” travelers. So, instead of cleaning out the Augean stables of the misinformed, malignant and useful idiots, I’ve decided to open new stables with a new classification called “Familialism.” Now, sure as every Captain has a Tennille and as sure as every Green Hornet has a Kato and as sure as every R.C. Cola is accompanied by boiled peanuts Familialism will be slandered, libeled, purposely misinterpreted and soiled by the Cultural Marxists and their fellow travelers, but then we will just move on to Oikophilia. I have as many classification as the Communist have false fronts.
Having said that, though the concept itself, quite independent of the affixed category label needs to be defended and so I pause to defend the concept (again) against the usual ill informed, misinformed, and unwilling to ever be informed suspects. This time we have (again) another “Reformed minister” seeking to shine the light of Jesus on the evils of Christian social order. Our most recent contestant is one Rev. ChrisStrevel.
I will fisk this article in order to politely offer that the author is an Emperor who is wearing no clothes. Rev.Strevel’s article is titled, “Grace and Race.”
Rev. Strevel writes, (Hereafter — RCS)
The apparent lone gunman in the recent California synagogue shooting was a 19-year old member of a Reformed Presbyterian church. Assuming his on-line manifesto is a true statement of his views, he was motivated by a white nationalist, Jew-hating, conspiracy-obsessed worldview. One version of this social philosophy goes by the name of Kinism, which maintains that God intends for the various races to remain distinct. Its adherents blame a worldwide Jewish cabal for virtually every ill of our society, call interracial marriage between Christians intrinsically sinful, and believe that the European race and subgroups within it are intrinsically or at least historically superior to other races.
Rev. Bret responds, (Hereafter — RBM)
1.) How can it be denied with a straight face that historically speaking, White Western Christian Civilization has not been superior to African “civilization,” Chinese “civilization,” or Australoid “civilization?”
And it all depends on what he means by intrinsically superior as to whether or not that is so. Certainly White Christians are not made of better ingredients but if you combine the impact of generations of Christian civilization on the gene pool I suspect that makes a difference.
If the architecture of Gothic and Baroque cathedrals, the literature of Dante, Shakespeare and Milton, the science of Galileo and Newton, the legal systems of Rome and the Common Law and the philosophy and theology of Augustine, Aquinas, Calvin and Edwards do not attest the superiority of traditional, white European Christian culture over every other culture in the past 1500 years, then just what would Rev.Strevel uphold as an example of practical, temporal accomplishments of Christian society?
2.) If White Christians have NOT been superior to other races in terms of creating Christian civilization then who has been superior or is that not a question we are supposed to ask? And if nobody has been superior or inferior in terms of building Christian Civilization then are we not right back to the ‘all cultures are equal nonsense?’
3.) The Kinists I have known do hate Talmudists who embrace that Jesus is boiling in Semen in hell, just as they hate those who embrace the Koran, just as they hate Atheists who are seeking to run Christianity out of the public square. I should think Rev.Strevel would hate the wicked as well.
4.) The White Christian Kinists I have known do embrace White Nationalism just as my Black Christian Kinist friends embrace Black Nationalism and my Filipino Christian Kinist friends embrace Filipino Nationalism and my Indian Christian Kinist friends embrace Indian Nationalism. I’m not sure where the evil is in any of this. Maybe Rev.Strevel can identify the problem here. Is his problem with just White Nationalism or all Nationalism’s? And if he has a problem with White Nationalist but not other Nationalists why is that? On the contrary if he has a problem with all Nationalism does that mean Rev.Strevel is an Internationalist in his social order philosophy?
5.) In terms of “conspiracy,” Scripture clearly teaches that Conspiracies exist. We read of the Kings conspiring together against the Lord Christ in Psalm 2. We read of the Jews conspiring to kill Jesus and then conspiring to lie about Jesus’ Resurrection. For Rev.Strevel to complain about people who believe in conspiracy testifies Rev.Strevel’s own lack of familiarity with the Scripture which teach the Conspiracies happen routinely.
6.) Of course the opposite of the belief that God intends for the races to remain distinct is to believe that God desires for the races to be mixed so that all colors bleed into one. Rev.Strevel’s seeming conviction here seems to stand in contrast with Acts 17:26,
26 From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands.
7.) It is true that some Kinists call all interracial marriages between Christians sinful. It’s also true that some Kinists don’t call all interracial marriages between Christians ‘sinful.’ Some Kinists will say instead that normatively inter-racial marriage between Christians is not wise, but if contracted should be supported as much as feasibly possible. The Kinists who refuse to say that interracial marriage between Christians is sin are not energetic in their support of contracting such marriages because statistically speaking such marriages typically don’t have as high of a success rate as intraracial marriages. Rev.Strevel commits the logical fallacy of a hasty generalization here. He shouldn’t feel too bad about that because legion is the name of those who do the very same thing.
8.) I suspect that Rev.Strevel likewise believes in White superiority and I believe that we could call as a witness for Rev.Strevel’s belief in White Superiority Rev.Strevel’s own library. Rev. Streevel’s library of theology books, which will likely be from at least 99% white authors, will testify to the fact that Chris already understands white superiority. His bookshelves are testifying every day against his contrary assertion that he does not believe in White superiority.
9.) The idea that the shooter at Poway was animated by Kinism is pure slander and a violation on Rev. Strevel’s part of the 9th commandment. That has become rather routine in certain quarters of the Reformed Church. No Kinist embraces the notion that an individual randomly going all murderous is the answer to where we are currently at in this moment.
RCS writes in his Grace and Race article,
“Were it not so divisive, dangerous, and detrimental to the gospel, this social theory would be laughable. The church of the Lord Jesus Christ is one body made up of various tribes, tongues, nations, and races (Rev. 7:9).”
1.)Strevel asserts that Kinism is divisive, dangerous, and detrimental to the gospel,without proving it. Our honored Reverend by asserting Kinism is divisive, dangerous, and detrimental to the gospel has just indicted the very Christian social theory that has guided Western Christian Civilization for 1000 plus years. I tend to think instead that it is Rev.Strevel who is laughable.
2.) Apparently Rev.Strevel finds Dr. Gerharrdus Vos to be laughable,
“Nationalism, within proper limits, has the divine sanction; an imperialism that would, in the interest of one people, obliterate all lines of distinction is everywhere condemned as contrary to the divine will. Later prophecy raises its voice against the attempt at world-power, and that not only, as is sometimes assumed, because it threatens Israel, but for the far more principal reason, that the whole idea is pagan and immoral.
Now it is through maintaining the national diversities, as these express themselves in the difference of language, and are in turn upheld by this difference, that God prevents realization of the attempted scheme… [In this] was a positive intent that concerned the natural life of humanity. Under the providence of God each race or nation has a positive purpose to serve, fulfillment of which depends on relative seclusion from others.”
Don’t miss that Dr. Vos says that the social theory that Rev.Strevel’s is pushing is “pagan and immoral.” Dr. Carl F. H. Henry, like Dr. Vos has no problem with the social theory thatStrevel refers to as “laughable.”
When the magazine, Christianity Today, turned to the question of segregation in 1957, Dr. Carl F. H. Henry wrote that civil rights legislation ending segregation would be morally problematic,
“Forced integration is as contrary to Christian principles as is forced segregation,” he argued. “A voluntary segregation, even of believers, can well be a Christian procedure.”
3.) No Kinist has ever denied that the body of Christ is one spiritual body made up of various corporeal tribes, tongues, nations, and races. However, the unity of this spiritual body of Christ does not negate the reality that as that body incarnates itself on earth it incarnates itself in keeping with national and ethnic Churches. Rev.Strevel seems to mistake unity for uniformity. There can be unity among distinct National ethnic people group Churches. Most Reformed Pastors used to be aware of the theological concept of the One and the Many.
4.) If Rev.Strevel happened upon a group of Korean Kinists worshiping together in a Korean Reformed Church would this upset him? If not then why does Rev.Strevel get so exercised by the fact that White Westerners might likewise desire to worship together as a distinct people under the Lordship of Jesus Christ?
5.) Dr. John Frame doesn’t seem to have the problem with the social theory which Rev.Strevel can’t swallow,
“Scripture, as I read it, does not require societies, or even churches, to be integrated racially. Jews and Gentiles were brought together by God’s grace into one body. They were expected to love one another and to accept one another as brothers inthe faith. But the Jewish Christians continued to maintain a distinct culture, and house churches were not required to include members of both groups.”
“Racism, Sexism, Marxism”
Since all “speak the language of Canaan,” whatever their particular language may be, inclusion based upon “one Lord, one faith, and one baptism” is the most fundamental bond of all who call Jesus Christ “our elder Brother.” When our earthly connections lead to hate and bloodshed, we have denied the gospel of grace. When race, rather than God’s marvelous grace, defines us, we have denied our essential and eternal brotherhood. Neither Christ nor his apostles ever called the church to remain “ethnically pure.” This is an impossible dream based upon fear and pride, not upon God’s word.
1.) No Kinist ever denied that entry into the Church is by the blood of Jesus Christ nor that said entry makes people of different blood, race, tribe and language spiritually one in Christ. Yet, spiritual unity does not mean that our differing bloods, races, tribes, and tongues disappear. Rev.Strevel seems to forget that grace does not destroy nature but restores nature.
2.) No Kinist has ever advocated hating other Christians from other National or racial or linguistic or tribal churches. It’s a lie to imply that they have. Christian Kinists consistently affirm that it is the essence of love to our Christian neighbors to respect who the Creator God has made them to be. We do no insist that they have to become White before they become Christian and we do not expect to be told we must become polyglot in order to become Christian.
3.) There is the faint whiff of gnosticism in Rev.Strevel’s approach here. Rev.Strevel seems to be implying that when we become Christian all the categories we were created with blow away like smoke. Grace destroys nature. God’s grace is our primary definer but being primarily defined by grace doesn’t mean secondary corporeal definers cease to exist. Charles Hodge understood this,
Paul had two classes of brethren; those who were with him the children of God in Christ; these he calls brethren in the Lord, Philip, i. 14, holy brethren, &c. The others were those who belonged to the family of Abraham. These he calls brethren after the flesh, that is, in virtue of natural descent from the same parent. Philemon he addresses as his brother, both in the flesh and in the Lord. The Bible recognizes the validity and rightness of all the constitutional principles and impulses of our nature. It therefore approves of parental and filial affection, and, as is plain from this and other passages, of peculiar love for the people of our own race and country.
Commentary Romans 9
Would Rev.Strevel accuse Dr. Charles Hodge of denying our eternal and essential brotherhood? Is Rev.Strevel entangled in some form of Gnosticism?
4.) Rev.Strevel writes of “our essential and eternal brotherhood.” Now, some may think this a quibble but since the creature is not and can not be eternal (Eternality being an non-communicable attribute) how is it that he can write of “our eternal brotherhood?”
5.) It seems to me that when Christ told the Apostles to disciple the NATIONS he implied that they would be discipling ethnically distinct people groups who were people groups, at least in part, because of their descent from a common ancestor.
6.) Can Rev.Strevel show me in Scripture where we have the authority to destroy the Nations in favor of a Marxist dystopia where ethnic distinctions are cast into oblivion? If in the book of Revelation we find the presence of Nations what authority do we have to disregard ethnic groupings? How can Jesus Christ be King of Kings if people groups disappear? Jesus Himself in Matthew 25 judges the Nations. How can Jesus do that if Nations as ethnic groupings disappear?
7.) I fear that this hatred of the Nations as God as ordained nations is based on Rev.Strevel’s fear and pride and not on God’s Word. That the early Church respected ethnic groupings is seen in Paul’s dealing with the Gentiles where he did not require them to become cultural Jews before becoming Christians. God Himself is a respecter of Nations as He sees fit to sustain their existence into the New Jerusalem (Rev. 21-22).
Historically, the church has ever sought to bring in all within its pale, so that our fallen hatred of other races and tongues might be replaced by the communion of the saints. Some of our great theologians in the past and most faithful brothers in the present have been of non-European descent. I feel hardly any affinity with my white unbelieving neighbors, but much more with those who share “like precious faith,” whatever their nationality. It is God’s grace that makes one people to rise by faith and enjoy his earthly blessing (1 Cor. 4:7). Should that people reject his grace, like present-day Europeans and Americans, their race will not preserve them from sinking into blindness and barbarism.
1.) No Kinist disagrees with the first sentence above. Black Kinists, White Kinists, Yellow Kinists, Brown Kinists have the most intense Christian fellowship I know and that without ever giving up being Kinist. Rev.Strevel’s implied insistence that Kinists are haters is a hateful thing for him to be saying against other Christians.
2.) Some … but of course most of our great theologians have been of European descent. Even those theologians who weren’t of European descent most of them would still be descended from Japheth. Still, we tip the cap to any God fearing theologian who God has raised up to teach His people. I know I’ve profited greatly from chaps like Thomas Sowell.
3.) We agree with Rev.Strevel that God is judging present day Europeans and Americans for rebelling against God’s grace. We also insist that God is judging the non-Caucasian peoples by making them a people with no roots or sense of belonging.
4.) Rev.Strevel admits that he has hardly any affinity for his white unbelieving neighbors. However, Rev.Strevel doesn’t mention how much affinity he has for his non-white unbelieving immigrant neighbors. Why is it that I tend to believe that Rev.Strevel has more affinity for his non-white unbelieving immigrant neighbors than he does for his unbelieving white neighbors.
5.) And here is an interesting question. Does Rev.Strevel have more affinity for his own family who are believers than he has for non-white immigrant believers? And if he does should he feel guilty? And if he doesn’t, then how is Rev.Strevel not a Kinist?
“To some disturbed, frustrated, or marginalized individuals, violence appears the sole remedy to preserve American and specifically white, European, Christian culture.”
One can’t help but wonder if in this statement Rev.Strevel is indicting Charles Martel, Charlemagne, John Sobieski, Jean LaVallete, Don Juan, St. King Louis, Godfrey of Bouillon , Baldwin, Philip I, Raymond IV and countless numbers of other Christian men who used violence as the sole remedy during their time to preserve European Christian culture?
This is not to sanction violence, it is merely to say that as the book of Ecclesiastes teaches there is a time and a place for everything under the sun and so we should be careful about making blanket condemnations.
“Compounding these evils, a growing number of American Christians have embraced the lie that race, along with gender and sexual orientation, is an artificial construction… “
At this point Rev.Strevel’s eyes seem crossed. Chris seems to have contradictory ideas on what he’s talking about. Race and ethnicity matter except when they don’t matter. They’re important except when they’re not. It is but it isn’t. It will but it won’t. It can but it can’t. They do but they don’t. One can only admire this Kalergi Clergy brilliance.
“With respect to the hordes of displaced people throughout the world, we must recognize that men and women will seek greater freedom and prosperity. War, disease, poverty, persecution, and tyranny have often resulted in mass migrations.”
And further we must recognize that men and women will seek to protect their borders in order seek the same greater freedom and prosperity. Also, we must realize that tyranny is driving mass migrations.
“What is our national identity? Free bread and schools for everyone? Let us be very honest and clear. Neither whites nor blacks are indigenous to this land. The Europeans came here and claimed land that others occupied, perhaps haphazardly and not like we occupy our lands with clear title and fences, but they were here. We often went to war with them and met their self-defense efforts with bloody violence. Discipleship efforts were made by some, but the musket was the final solution.”
1.) Let us keep in mind in the paragraph above that Strevel sounds like a Cultural Marxist. He has bought into both their nomenclature and their worldview.
2.) There were people who occupied the land before the Indians who occupied the land. What of their claim? Some research suggest those earlier people were Europeans.
3.) We went to war with them because they were SAVAGES, as noted by Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence, and were killing our ancestors. Yes, I’m sure that pagan white people took advantage of them as well at times but to suggest that it was a one way street is just historically stupid and indicates a laziness in consulting the original sources. Has Rev. Strevel read the character of these people he is weeping over? These people groups were not the noble savage as romanticized about in Kevin Costner’s “Dances with Wolves.” They were, in many instances, a savage and ruthless people given to torture and violence.
” One also thinks of the Southwestern United States and our infamous Mexican wars. Perhaps God is giving these lands back to their original inhabitants. “
1.) Our infamous Mexican wars? Why does Rev. Strevel just assume that the Mexicans were innocents and we were the evil persecutors? Again .. this is the Cultural Marxist line. According to Rev. Strevel should we start speaking of St. Santa Anna?
2.) Perhaps God is seeking to wake us up so that our lands aren’t surrendered to the pagans?
“Frankly, those who are so anxious to defend their white heritage had better reckon with its very checkered past and apostate present. It is easy to blame “them,” but let us look in the mirror. Jews and immigrants are not to be blamed for our present ills. Blame professing Christians, if you want to blame anyone, for they had the keys to our national door. It was white Christians who lost mainline denominations to liberalism and venerable institutions to strident progressivism and radicals. It was white Christians who lost this nation to the forces of globalism, centralized banking, paper money, and political polytheism. We have no one to blame but ourselves. We did not listen to our Lord. “If you continue in my word, you shall be my true disciples.”
1.) This is true but the conclusions Rev.Strevel draws from it are asinine. So, because our Father’s sinned by giving up their heritage therefore we should not seek to gain it back by indicting the Talmudist and the pagan Minority who are trying to destroy us? Doesn’t repentance look like no longer giving in to God’s enemies? Yes, we sinned but repentance means running out God’s enemies.
“If we humbly accept his chastening, then he deals with us as with his beloved children (Rev. 3:19). His main work is not to preserve a particular nation but his holy nation, his blood-washed church. She will survive and thrive if she builds upon him as her Rock and Redeemer. We shall face opposition for our allegiance to him, especially in these times. If you are going to die, however, or go to prison, let it not be because you fought as a foolish partisan for whiteness but as a faithful servant of the King of kings.”
1.) What if you fight as a partisan for your fellow White Christians against those who would destroy the Christian faith by destroying the historic carrier of Christianity — White people?
2,) Again, the assumption here by Rev.Strevel are Baptistic. He is emphasizing the acts of individuals and missing that God saves by nations.
Citizens of this country are rightly alarmed by mass illegal immigration, for we have laws that allow for peaceful integration into our society. However, as we cannot pay our own national bills, how can we take multitudes under our roof when our house is falling down? If our concern is cultural preservation, the question must be asked, “What culture?” A Christian nation? Whiteness is not Christian.
1.)Strevel hints at the disaster that illegal immigration is as combined with mass welfare for all. Such a combination guarantees the eventual collapse of what we know as these united States of America.
2.) It is true that “Whiteness is not Christian,” though during the last 750 years if one wanted to locate Christian civilization one had to go to White countries. It is true that we are no longer a Christian nation but that is, in part due to people like Rev. Strevel not seeking to salvage the shards of Western Christian civilization that yet remains. We will have no hope of Reformation if Rev. Strevel’s ideas about ethnicity being marginally important are hearkened to.
Churches must minister the gospel and tangible love to the oppressed who come here seeking refuge. God has brought these strangers here, even as we once came as strangers and pilgrims. We must also recognize that this will create problems, for most races – ask anyone living in New York City – prefer to maintain their separate customs and connections. This is not racism. It is the way God made us. His grace in Christ as it subdues our hearts to teachableness will certainly help us live together peacefully, but his grace does not nullify our race, preferences, and laws. And where we do not all speak the language of Canaan, of God’s true grace in Christ, this places a tremendous discipleship responsibility and pressure upon us. We must love and minister while we maintain clear separation from evil, disciple the lost, and wait upon God to sort out the mess created by rebellion against him.”
1.) Yes churches must minister the Gospel to all who come under her voice.
2.) The talking of the “oppressed,” proves that Strevel has fallen into the language pit of the Cultural Marxists. God does not care about the reprobate oppressed any more than the reprobate oppressors as they are all outside of Christ
3.) God has brought these strangers here? Well, yes, according to His decree but not as consistent with His precepts. When we failed to stop this immigration horde we were violating God’s law.
4.) To compare our arrival here with the current illegal immigrant horde is apples and sandpaper. We came to a wilderness and carved civilization out of that wilderness. They are coming to civilization and turning it into a desert again.
5.) Law preferences? This guy is a theonomist? He doesn’t understand that law preferences occur because of the different Gods who are served?
6.) We are to wait on God and not clean up this mess ourselves as we adhere to God’s revealed precepts?
“He has aligned and realigned men and nations many times before, and he is doing it again. It is an uncomfortable process,”
What is happening is NOT the realigning of nations it is the destruction of nations. One would think a wise man would understand the difference. And as men of God we need to resist the destruction of nations for a new world order. I don’t see Rev. Strevel getting close to resisting destruction.
If we humbly accept his chastening, then he deals with us as with his beloved children (Rev. 3:19). His main work is not to preserve a particular nation but his holy nation, his blood-washed church. She will survive and thrive if she builds upon him as her Rock and Redeemer. We shall face opposition for our allegiance to him, especially in these times. If you are going to die, however, or go to prison, let it not be because you fought as a foolish partisan for whiteness but as a faithful servant of the King of kings.”
1.) Rev. 3:19 doesn’t say what Strevel says it says.
3:19 Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest and repent.
Accepting God’s chastening does not mean we give up on our people — neither Christians nor our non-Christian kinsmen. Instead we plead with them to repent that God might visit seasons of restoration upon us. Strevel seems to suggest that repenting means we roll over and just accept conquest by those who clearly hate Christ.
2.) What if you fight as a partisan for your fellow White Christians against those who would destroy the Christian faith by destroying the historic carrier of Christianity — White people? Why is it foolish to be a partisan for White Christians but not foolish to be a partisan against White Christians?
3.) Again, the assumption here are Baptistic. He is emphasizing the acts of individuals and missing that God saves by nations.
4.) If a Nation has been Christian in its history then it is a false dichotomy to posit that God’s main work is NOT to preserve a particular nation but it is to preserve the Church. If the nation has been largely Churched — an expression of the Kingdom of God – then it seems that God’s main work is to preserve both.
The Reformed clergy, generally speaking, are terrible to the point of horrid on this subject matter. Most of them have adopted, in one form or another, the nomenclature and mindset of the Cultural Marxist worldview to one degree or another. That this is so is seen in Rev. Strevel’s piece, but he is only one example of many.
This reality communicates a broader and deeper problem in the Reformed and Evangelical community. That deeper problem is the inability to think critically outside the boundaries that are being set for us by the cultural gatekeepers of an increasingly wicked culture. Because the clergy corps has become hemmed in by the strictures placed on us by our cultural Marxist enemies they are reinterpreting Christianity through the prism of Cultural Marxism with the effect that Christianity is no longer Christianity. Because of these blinders much of the Christian clergy just ignore any evidence to the contrary that testifies against their “new and improved” Christianity opting instead to ignore the quotes, testimonies, and sermons of Church Fathers from previous generations.
This subject of races, peoples, and nations up until 1950 or so was one where the Church actually had a subject where following Saint Vincent of Lérins we had a slice of the faith “that was being held which has been believed everywhere, always, by all.” However, to our modern clergy all of that is irrelevant.
God grant us grace to think His thoughts after Him.