As most readers of Iron Ink know I have had a long running contest with most (not all) of the clergy in the Reformed world on the issue of their incipient Gnosticism. Usually, this contesting comes in the context of Kinism which is merely just historic traditional Christianity. However, because the Reformed Church has become so ridden with the Gnostic impulse in this country we have to give an aspect of basic Christianity a defining word of its own. That word is Kinism.
I must say, probably to my shame, that I have become very impatient with the attacks on Kinism from the Reformed clergy, if only because after 20 years of me dealing with this subject it seems these people are impervious to not only learning but even to hearing what I, and others, have been saying. I mean this material is so simple that even a toddler can understand and yet we find men trained in seminary — their numbers being legion — continuing to say the stupidest of things such as we find most recently from Rev. Aldo Leon.
The good Rev. wrote, amidst other banalities that fell from his fingertips on the subject;
“What do R2K and Kinists have in common?
And then answered his own question;
Rev. Aldo “Gnostic” Leon
What does societal X factor even mean?
I can only guess it means something like … “That factor in Christians which is supposed to make them different from everyone else.”
If that is accurate then what Rev. Leon is arguing is that because Kinists do not believe that grace destroys nature that therefore they fail the necessary X factor.
The whole quote belies the fact that Rev. Leon has been bitten by the Gnostic bug that has bitten so many Reformed clergy today who ignorantly rail against Kinism.
was a chap named Cerinthus. One day the Apostle John was bathing in a community wash center and while there St. John discovered that the Gnostic Cerinthus had entered into the public washing centered. Irenaeus records for us St. John’s reaction to the presence of this Gnostic,” John, the disciple of the Lord, going to bathe at Ephesus, and perceiving Cerinthus within, rushed out of the bath-house without bathing, exclaiming, ‘Let us fly, lest even the bath-house fall down, because Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within.'”
Gnosticism was a problem in the early Church and it has been a ongoing plague to the Church ever since.
Because the Gnostics considered the corporeal/material to be evil one of two responses were seen in the Church when it was infected with Gnosticism. The first was the response of denying to the body any and all pleasure often inflicting the body with pain because it was evil. The second response was that since the body was evil and since it couldn’t be escaped then it didn’t matter what someone did with the body. This led to all kinds of drunkenness, sexual deviance, and riotous living.
Today the Church continues to deal with the Gnostic impulse as is seen in the vituperation of the doctrine of Kinism. Kinism acknowledges the reality of the corporeal realm and insists that God delights in the differing races/ethnicities that He created. However the Gnostic Church with its Gnostic clergy come along and insist that the corporeal/material reality created and controlled by God as found in our human genetic constitution is a reality that can be undone when someone asks Jesus into their heart. Upon conversion we find our modernistic Reformed clergy effectively asserting that the material/corporeal reality vanishes. All the evil material genetic coding that is ours by way of creation is destroyed by Grace and we now are merely spiritual beings who need not be concerned with racial/ethnic realities. Before Christ we are racial/ethnic beings but upon conversion the Holy Spirit takes away our DNA and gives us a spiritual being-ness that transcends race/ethnicity.
This is nothing but the Gnostic Empire striking back at the Christian assertion that creation is a positive good that ought to be embraced.
Continuing with this commentary on Rev. Leon’s jejune assertions we note;
1.) Contrary to Leon, merely recognizing nature is not to defer to “some primacy of nature” as if God as creator is not over nature or does not continue to deign, as creator to name all the corporeal realm He created as “very good” — including the genetic reality of race/ethnicity.
2.) We ask Rev. Leon, if someone has parents who have red hair and they themselves as the child of those parents likewise has red hair is that deferring to some primacy of nature? Does Jesus take away someone’s red hair if and when they ask Jesus into their hearts? If not, why would we think that race/ethnicity goes away or becomes completely irrelevant upon conversion?
Really, we say again, anybody who anathematizes Kinism is a Gnostic.
My frustration find me grasping for words to communicate how dumb this kind of Gnosticism is and that especially when found those who are supposed to be the ones who are holding forth the light of truth for God’s assembly. That’s my analysis. I end this piece by quoting a couple of my Christian friends as they commented on this piece of torpidity as coming from Rev. Leon’s fingertips.
“Nature and grace. God is the source and author of both. This nit wit is asserting that nature has some existence independent of its creator or at least in his rejection of Kinism suggests that grace obliterates God created racial distinctions rather than enabling unity between those distinctions.
He’s (Rev. Leon) stupid. ”
Mark Chambers
“It never ceases to amaze me all the convoluted gibberish these guys get up to in aims of denying the obvious. Nature is a means of God. In fact, ‘nature’ encompasses all means in general. And the Reformed have always held that God works through means because He is their author who declared them good from the beginning, and worketh all things according to His will and to the good of those who love Him. Nature therefore cannot be anathematized without inditing God Himself.
But the Gnostics of our day see themselves as something wholly apart from nature and God’s means. They seem to adopt a vague theory of theosis in which they transcend matter and means into identity with God Himself. Which really makes it another permutation of the devil’s primordial offer for man to be as God.”
Dan Brannan
In the end the humor in all this is that Rev. Leon, who apparently is writing a book against R2K “theology” is the one who shares common ground with the very thing he is writing against. By railing against Kinism the good Reverend is covered with the same dank smell of Gnosticism that so completely perfumes R2K theology.
What can I say?
It is a mad mad mad mad world.
“The first and most resilient heresy the Church faced and continues to face is Gnosticism, which in part, is the insistence that the corporeal is evil.”
Evil, or just plain meaningless. But the Gnostics were not alone in this mentality (they were just the ones who tried to smuggle this alien doctrine into the Christian camp), as the great pagan religion of Buddhism shared (and still shares) many of their anti-incarnational premises, which so admirably serve ecumenical or syncretistic purposes:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/chj/chj14.htm
“Buddhas and Saviours are but waves that appear on the surface of the ocean of God’s love. They come and they go, and men talk of their deaths or their Nirvanas; but the ocean of God’s love is unchanged. Only the surface waves have changed. It was thus that Nāgārjuna was able to recognize the essential oneness of Amitābha, of Vairoc’ana, of S’akyamuni. It was thus that the Mahāyāna faith, of which he was the great doctor, was able to adapt itself to the Taoism of China, to the Shinto of Japan. It was thus that the Buddhist gnosis of the second century tried to overthrow the Christian faith of the Catholic Church. Docetism is nothing but the Madhyamika doctrine applied to the problem of getting rid of the offence of the Cross and the uniqueness of Christ.”
And such ideas had their consequences:
https://archive.org/details/edgarquinethisea00heatuoft/page/302/mode/2up?view=theater
“Since the dogma exacts the abolition of all private or collective personality, Buddhism left to itself tends to a rejection of such ideas as the Nation, the State, the Government, the only true society being the Monastery. The true believer has no country but the convent; and as all that recalls individual right is contrary to the spirit of his religion, it follows that he can possess nothing of his own. The Buddhist, from his very nature, belongs to the mendicant orders. All alliance, except with the invisible, being wrong, marriage is condemned; but since in this exaggerated idealism each reform goes so far as to become impossible, polygamy is simply corrected by celibacy, property by almsgiving. The rigorous consequence of Buddhist dogma would result in the absolute extinction of humanity.”
And this Gnostic cursing of flesh is indeed inspired (besides pandering the “anti-racist” Zeitgeist) by spiritual pride. For only by that method can you entirely rise above the lowly world of matter, above your created nature, and live in spirit alone – like God.
https://archive.org/details/edgarquinethisea00heatuoft/page/300/mode/2up?view=theater
“Excess of spiritual ambition united to excess of humility, is the characteristic of Indian thought. For while man, on the one hand, claims to become not only equal to God, but God himself; on the other, this arrogance is soon disturbed by the contrary sentiment: he confesses that before he can deify himself he must lose all consciousness of himself, BEFORE HE ADORES HIMSELF HE MUST ANNIHILATE HIMSELF [my emphasis]; so that the consummation of the god in him is only attained when there remains nothing more of the man.”
Friedrich Nietzsche, that often-perceptive rebellious pastor’s son, also realized this inspiration behind the apparent “humility” of the monkish distortion of Christianity:
https://archive.org/details/humanalltohuman033380mbp/page/n155/mode/2up?view=theater
“In every ascetic morality man worships one part of himself as a God, and is obliged, therefore, to diabolise the other parts.”
In other words, only by dropping off your flesh can your spirit rise up to the divine world of spirit and live with gods. Does not sound so Christian any more, does it?
We could quite seriously, or perhaps in a bit paradoxical, cheeky manner, make the argument that in today’s world, RACISM IS A SIGN OF HUMILITY. To be precise, by recognizing race in yourself and others you honestly acknowledge your own limited, created nature and are not putting on overly “spiritualist” pretensions, acting like you were some “pure,” fleshless cosmopolitan spirit that has been freed from his carnal limitations.
Moreover, as this Alt Right article puts it, national pride acts as an antidote to imperialist-cosmopolitan pride – better to be the prince of your own people than a well-paid lackey of an alien empire (Mel Gibson’s “Braveheart” film also has the same theme):
https://counter-currents.com/2021/04/barbarians/
“But the tribal life means we abjure glory and greatness within the empire, meaning our greatest potential will never be fulfilled.
Having a rooted identity comes at a price. As Mishima was told by a Leftist student, to have a national identity is to be limited—and as Mishima replied, that’s okay. All of us who are here made Arminius’ choice—rather than soaring into the great imperial heavens, chasing glory and prestige, we elected to inhabit a smaller, more intimate, dare I say, cozier space. The price, of course, of imperial height are our roots, our flesh, and blood, our children, born and unborn—our lives, which are ground away into nothingness by the relentless Mammon-machine of Empire. But how is one to reach ever-higher if one is weighed down by smelly, flabby flesh?”
But of course, there IS also the kind of racism or tribalism that is not pleasing to God, which is animalistic hatred of strangers, like that of a rabid dog that barks at and bites all those that come near it, and which also involves general bestial indifference towards any spiritual matters, thinking that flesh is all that there really is. This kind of mentality can also get a religious cover, though. Talmudic Jews who deny that the goyim have been created in the image of God showcase that kind of attitude.
I’m pretty sure that most of them deny race before conversion because “there is only one race, the human race”. That said, racial turmoil is a product of the Babel nature of governments. It is governments that mix non compatible groups. Segregation is the pattern of distribution that happens naturally every time people are left to their own. People want to live among their own kind. Social homogeneity occurs naturally every time the hand of the almighty Babel State is removed. The Chinese in NYC naturally gathered together in a concentration called Chinatown. Jews gather together wherever you find them, the Dutch Reformed practice kinism more faithfully than any other tribe. The blacks concentrate themselves together as well and we have seen them form groups, such as college graduations, where whites are specifically excluded. It’s just the evil Anglos that are forbidden from thinking of themselves and functioning as a group. They must be diluted and alloyed. And they will be hectored and badgered until they comply and breed themselves out of existence. What we see now is the messianic machinations of international Marxist Babel implementing bussing on a global scale. It’s entirely unnatural. They are driving human herds like cattle from the middle east into Europe and from Central and South America into North America. There is not one thing natural about it. It is all the work of governments, 100%.