The attacks against the biblical doctrine of Kinism continue and it is past apparent that people (Alienists) are getting desperate. We saw that previously in some of the really inane things Rev. Toby Sumpter said that we interacted with on Iron Ink. Not to be outdone by Rev. Sumpter a new contestant steps forward to see if he can out stupid Rev. Sumpter in his claims. Frankly, we have now arrived at the point where Kinists don’t have any need to refute the things that are being written because the depth of torpidity that the Alienists are reaching are making such large craters of stupidity that the Kinists can just point and roll their eyes. Indeed, there is a old political principle that states that if your opponent is blowing himself up, shut up and get out of the way.
However, having said that, as a Kinist, I have to understand that many people might look at an argument and have a instinct that there is something wrong while not being able to put their finger exactly on the problem. So, with that in mind we turn to a recent column by one Samuel Sey. I don’t know much about Sey except he is some kind of African married to a white woman and I only know that because Sey goes out of his way to tell everyone that in his column, which can be found here;
We are not going to look at all Sey says, choosing instead to point out the really really dumb stuff;
Samuel Sey writes (hereinafter SS)
“Kinism is an ideology within some Reformed circles that teaches that a person’s so-called race makes them “kins” or related to people within their racial group. According to Kinists, all white people have a shared ethnicity and culture that should be preserved. Therefore they support racial segregation in communities and families. Meaning, they’re especially opposed to immigration (not just illegal immigration) and “interracial” marriage.”
Bret responds,
1.) Well, yes, if one traces the descent of the sons of Europe back far enough they will find that they are descendants of a common father, just as when one traces the descent of the sons of Africa back far enough will discover that they are descendants of a different common father. As such, they are indeed “kin.”
2.) Kinists believe, not only that white people should be preserved but also that all races should be preserved. However, since it is the white race that is being pursued that it might be replaced, white Kinists perhaps spend a wee bit more of time saying, “excuse me, but I quite desire my people to continue as a people. I mean, I don’t want to be pushy or anything like that, but I’d prefer very much if my people did not experience genocide.”
That genocide is on the table can be seen from quotes like this;
“My concern is doing away with Whiteness. Whiteness is a form of racial oppression. Sure the suggestion is that is somehow possible to separate Whiteness from oppression and it is not. There can be no White Race without the phenomena of the White supremacies. In the same way if you abolish racial oppression you do away with Whiteness. Treason to Whiteness is loyalty to humanity. The task is to bring these minorities together in such a way that it makes it impossible for the legacy of Whiteness to reproduce itself.”
Noel Ignatiev
Harvard Professor
3.) It is true that Kinists believe that white should have communities that uniquely belong to them, just as Israel belongs to the Jews, just as China belong to the Han people, just as Zimbabwe belongs largely to the Shona people. So, color Kinists guilty that we desire our own Christian communities, with our own Christian cultures, speaking our own language, having our own Christian history, customs and habits.
4.) From this it naturally follows that Kinists are not excited by a immigration policy that has as its core goal, to change the community. This is the goal of the current so called US immigration policy.
5.) Finally, it is true that Kinists oppose inter-racial marriage as a general rule because Kinists realize that if inter-racial marriage is pursued as a matter of policy the results is genocide of white people. Did I mention that Kinists are opposed to experiencing genocide?
6.) Another reason that Kinists oppose inter-racial marriage is because Kinists understand that strong marriages, like strong communities, are begun and maintained when the people entering into marriages have as much in common as possible and since Kinists understand that there is, normatively speaking, a strong continuity between race and culture, therefore Kinists, desiring that marriages be strong, discourage inter-racial marriage due to the differences that the prospective bride and groom will bring into the marriage. Kinists perfectly understand that some inter-racial marriages will exist and we will do our best to support these marriages, however we will not encourage them for our children. None of this is controversial in the least as our Christian Fathers understood this principle and we simply agree with our Fathers as against the current Babel zeitgeist;
Causes of Separation in 1973 (PCA separates from PCUS);
The Socialist, who declares all men are equal. Therefore there must be a great leveling of humanity and oneness of privilege and possession.
The Racial Amalgamationist, who preaches that the various races should be merged into one race and differences erased in oneness.
The Communist, who would have one mass of humanity coerced into oneness by a totalitarian state and guided exclusively by Marxist philosophy.
The Internationalist, who insists on co-existence between all peoples and nations that they be as one regardless of ideology or history.
Dr. John Edwards Richards
One of the founders of the Presbyterian Church in America (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.”
Dr. 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
So, Kinists do think that inter-racial is almost always unwise and even often sin and we are not ashamed in the least to stake out that position, since in staking out such a position has the felicitous outcome of perhaps saving people from getting into a unhappy marriage.
SS writes,
However, their soft form of Kinism isn’t any less destructive than a soft form of critical race theory.
Bret responds,
Actually, this is not a point that is in SS’s interest to push lest soft Kinists conclude that if their weak (soft) Kinism isn’t any less destructive than a soft form of CRT then they might as well go ahead and become hard Kinists.
SS writes,
These Kinists are significantly smaller in number and influence than professing Christians who’ve embraced critical race theory. However, they’re less uncommon than you might think.
Bret responds,
Be afraid SS. Be very afraid because our numbers are growing and momentum is on our side.
SS writes accusing Dr. Stephen Wolfe of Kinism, (if only)
“While intermarriage is not itself wrong (as an individual matter), groups have a collective duty to be separate and marry among themselves…there is a difference between something being sinful absolutely and something being sinful relatively. Interethnic marriage can be sinful relatively and absolutely.”
“People of different ethnic groups can exercise respect for difference, conduct some routine business with each other, join in inter-ethnic alliances for mutual good, and exercise common humanity (e.g., the good Samaritan), but they cannot have a life together that goes beyond mutual alliance…What I am saying is that in-group solidarity and right of difference along ethnic lines are necessary for the complete good for each and all.”
In the book, he also positively quotes white nationalist Sam Francis. If you’re unfamiliar with him, American Renaissance (a white supremacist website) said “Francis was the premier philosopher of white racial consciousness of our time.”
Sey now quotes Andrew Torba,
“God created different ethnic groups. To preserve them is to preserve God’s creation and is therefore an inherent good.”
Bret responds,
I like those quotes SS. Keep them coming.
SS writes,
Like all racists, Kinists are fundamentally foolish. God ordains ethnicity, but he didn’t create all ethnicities in the Garden of Eden. Meaning, my Akan ethnicity or Fanti tribe didn’t exist in the Garden. My race existed in Adam and Eve, but my ethnicity didn’t. Humanity—the human race—was created in the Garden, but our ethnicities were ordained by God over time.
Bret responds,
1.) Given how dumb SS is, I take it as a badge of honor to be called fundamentally foolish. Thank you Samuel.
2.) If God has ordained races/ethnicities our knowing how it happened doesn’t matter. The fact that God ordained races/ethnicities is all I need. Thanks SS for making that point.
3.) Not to state the obvious SS, but you do realize that what you are promoting is precisely what was being promoted at the Tower of Babel right?
SS writes,
Therefore, since our ethnicities didn’t exist at some point in the past—we shouldn’t attempt to preserve them in the future. The purpose of ethnicity isn’t to preserve our image, it’s to preserve the image of God. He will do whatever he wants with our ethnicities for his glory (Rev. 5:9-10)
Bret responds,
1.) I think that first sentence above was cribbed by SS from Nimrod as he sought to build Babel.
2.) Unless, SS thinks that the Kinists thought world will lead to the extinction of the human race, I’m pretty sure that the image of God is going to be preserved in the Kinist world.
3.) Revelation 5 is completely irrelevant to this argument as Kinists believe that people from every tribe, tongue, and nation, in their tribes, tongues, and nations will be present in the new Jerusalem.
4.) It is true that God will do whatever he desires with our races/ethnicities. But as God made His mind known about this project to sink the world into one latte colored world where raceS/ethnicitieS don’t exist, Kinists are on solid ground in rejecting this aspect of the New World Order agenda that SS is pursuing.
SS writes,
So although I want my pre-born son to look just like me, just like the average Akan or Fanti person—I want him to look more like Christ. That’s why I married a godly woman, though she has a different ethnicity so that we can raise a godly son.
Bret responds,
Non-sequitur.
1.) Presumably godly women existed among the Akan and Fanti people that SS could have married, thus not contributing to the “Christian” version of the New World Order agenda.
2.) Is SS arguing that a mixed-race child is automatically going to look more like Christ than a child from the union of two Akan/Fanti people?
3.) Is SS arguing that the issue of godly white women is more likely to be godly than the issue of godly Fanti/Akan women?
4.) Does SS realize that he could have had a son who would have looked both like him and like Christ? He did not have to decide between the two.
5.) Understand that there is a confusion of categories going on here. When we look like our parents that is genetic coding. When we look like Christ that is being transformed by the Holy Spirit.
SS quote Sam Francis,
“At a time when anti-white racial and ethnic groups define themselves in explicitly racial terms, only our own unity and identity as a race will be able to meet their challenge.”
Bret responds,
I agree 100%. If we do not embrace what Francis offers above we will at best experience replacement and at worse we will experience genocide. Only the insane use arguments putatively drawn from Scripture to support their replacement or genocide.
SS writes,
But we’re not called to repay evil for evil, racism for racism, Kinism for critical race theory.
Bret responds,
The evil is NOT found in racial/ethnic unity as that is shaped and influenced by Biblical Christianity. That kind of racial/ethnic unity will understand that there is a need to do good to the whole household of faith regardless of race/ethnicity.
The evil found in racial/ethnic unity is found when it is shaped and influenced by CRT, Cultural Marxist categories. So, the unity that Christian whites have to find, per Francis, is a unity that is founded upon Christ having as its primary purpose to thoroughly crush the WOKE agenda that the minority community has been, unfortunately, sucked into supporting. The very same agenda that Sey is supporting, with some kind of “Christian” patina covering the same agenda.
Let me say it plainly… Sey, is doing the devil’s work, perhaps with the best of intentions, by being an advocate of the WOKE agenda.
SS says,
Sin is sin, on the right or the left. Kinism is just as evil as critical race theory. So Kinists are not our allies. They’re just as opposed to Biblical views on race as critical race theorists.
Bret responds,
As we have seen, “I don’t think so.”
SS writes,
Brothers and sisters, our primary goal as Christians isn’t to destroy woke ideology. No, our primary goal is to destroy every argument and every lofty opinion against the knowledge of God—from conservatives or leftists (2 Corinthians 3-6).
Therefore our primary goal isn’t to win elections, our primary goal is to win souls. We can’t be faithful to God by embracing or tolerating any form of racism.
Bret responds,
1.) Yet, another really dumb statement. Our primary goal as Christians is glorifying God by destroying every argument and every lofty opinion against the knowledge of God, which both CRT, and Samuel Sey’s opinions are.
2.) Since Kinists are racists in the way that God requires, then we can not be both Christian and tolerate the utter torpidity of one Samuel Sey.
3.) Our primary goal is not to win souls. Our primary goal is to speak the truth and let God worry about what souls are or are not saved in that context.
Brilliant! Thank you for keeping at it, Rev McAtee. This is such a breath of fresh air. Unfortunately it is rare to find an alive and fearless defence of the truth in the “Church” nowadays. Although all Bible readers should be up to it, unfortunately too many “Christian” minds seem to have been addled by the drug of liberalism – which is to say they are too easily taken in by Satan’s lies.
Acts 16:9, “There stood a man of Macedonia, and prayed him, saying, Come over into Macedonia, and help us.” , and thus the beginning of white (European) privilege. Paul was moved to turn to the gentiles when the Lord commanded, “I have set thee to be a light of the gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.” (Acts 13:47).
As you have said several times in the past, “white men and women, by God’s grace alone, have been the chief civilizational carriers of biblical Christianity.” Many falsely believe that in order to say this that you must believe that our people are inherently or genetically superior to all others, when the reality is that a supremely gracious God has ordained this people to accomplish His will in this respect, all to His glory alone. All that is good of the European peoples is a gift from the giver of all good gifts, making us greater debtors to that grace. What a powerful, and humbling, thought.
That was tough to read. I felt very embarrassed for SS. As you demonstrated, his statements too often had failing premises or he didn’t support his viewpoint.
It is like he’s not been cross-examined or debated before, or thought about the ramifications of his thinking.
Yikes, I don’t think I would have had the love or courage to post that once I realized how embarrassing it is to him.
To me, it’s another example of how emotional posturing often trumps truth in our circles.