Randy Watkins, (who I don’t know from Adam) left a comment on Iron Ink in response to one of my posts on Kinism. The comment was so good I thought I would turn it into a short post. Randy wrote asking;
“My question would be – do you even understand the Gospel? Do you even know Jesus? Kinism is nothing but pseudo-sterilized racism.”
Thank you Randy for these questions. Let’s take them one by one.
First, I do understand the Gospel. The Gospel is announcement of the good news that Jesus Christ, being the long promised Messiah, came to live, die, resurrect, ascend and sit in session at the right hand of God to vindicate God’s name and to provide redemption for all who call upon the name of the Lord. The Gospel teaches, Randy, that Christ can do this because he was the penal substitutionary atonement who provided satisfaction, by the spilling of His blood, in the place of sinners who deserved God’s wrath for committing the sin(s) of rebellion against a thrice Holy God. In and by His death Christ turned away the wrath of God (propitiation) by taking away our sins (expiation) so that men could have peace with God. In this sacrifice Christ pays the ransom price required for sin committed by sinners and in doing so is the means of our reconciliation. The Gospel teaches that the elect have the righteousness of Christ imputed (put to their account) to them while their sins are imputed to Christ. In light of this finished work of Christ for the elect God commands all men (regardless of race, ethnicity, or religion) to repent and so be united to Christ and numbered among the people of God. This Gospel pronouncement is to go out to every tribe, tongue, and nation, in their tribes, tongues, and nations.
As to your second question, by God’s grace alone I have been knowing Jesus now for over 60 years. Jesus means “Jehovah is salvation,” and knowing Jesus means knowing Him as Prophet, Priest, and King sent by God to speak for God, to be the Priest who offered up Himself as the sacrifice for sins, and to rule as God’s mediatorial King in all matters. Further, Jesus was and is the living incarnation of God’s law. Jesus, as the Lion of the tribe of Judah, remains a Judahite and son of David even now and has gathered to Himself a church that is characterized as a confederated church where each national Church together comprises the one people of God. The fact that Jesus has no other Church except a confederated church comprised of different National churches is explicitly taught in Revelation 21
22 But I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. 23 The city had no need of the sun or of the moon to shine [l]in it, for the [m]glory of God illuminated it. The Lamb is its light. 24 And the nations[n]of those who are saved shall walk in its light, and the kings of the earth bring their glory and honor [o]into it. 25 Its gates shall not be shut at all by day (there shall be no night there). 26 And they shall bring the glory and the honor of the nations into [p]it.
Finally, Randy, you say that “Kinism is nothing but pseudo-sterilized racism.” I’m sure in a Cultural Marxist worldview that is an insult. However, I don’t live in a Cultural Marxist worldview. To be honest… racism, pseudo-sterilized or otherwise, really has no meaning and is just a pejorative intended to end the conversation. Randy, the word “racism” means everything and so means nothing. Water off of a duck’s back my friend.
May God bless you and keep you Randy Watkins.
I can’t be a racist. Some of my best friends are black people.
LOL … even when that’s true they’ll call you racist for bringing that up.
In this fallen world, even pure Gospel issues have a nasty tendency to get mixed up and mingled with grubby secular business. Like during the Reformation era, there were many, many noble men whose hearts were aching to hear purified Biblical doctrine of salvation – but the Protestant camp also contained many, many cynical people who had earthly interests in their mind first and foremost, especially how to get their hands on the property of the RCC. His highness Henry VIII of course is the most notorious example of this – there was no room in his heart for any genuine Protestant sentiment, he actually bloodily persecuted sincere Reformers, but still led England to the camp of Reformation for his own worldly reasons.
Because of this sort of “mingling,” RC propagandists have ever since shouted the accusation that the Reformation was, beneath its surface, just a pious pretext to rob the church, and otherwise indulge in fleshly passions (E. Michael Jones is an example of a Papist who is still going on with this narrative.) Devout Protestants for their part can draw the lesson that even the noblest of causes can easily draw shady associations to itself.
And like the issue of church property was the big material reality hanging in the background in the 16th century, racial politics play that part today. Kinists must make sure that God’s glory and truth is what they are seeking first and foremost, and not just cynically empowering their own tribe. They need to careful and discerning, and make sure that their enemies will not have cause to yell that they are just seeking to whitewash and baptize “racial vainglory” and whatnot. Just like the Reformers had to guard themselves against the accusation that they just sought to enrich themselves and their followers by attacking the Roman church.
I have no idea what anyone means when they say “secular” if by that they mean “having a conviction that is not religious in its beginning point.”
I do agree that theology can take a pietistic mask in order to achieve some other end besides a proper theological take. People are always using God as an excuse for their greed, avarice, lust, etc.
Indeed, I would go so far as to say that there are many grifters out there who are cozying up to Christian Kinist themes all the while denouncing the idea that they are “Kinists.” These chaps are grifters and would never take a truly Christian position if it could not enrich them at the same time.
I’ve learned tons from E. Michael Jones but he is just terrible on both the race issue and the Protestant and Roman Catholic issue. Whenever I am reading him and he starts on that I just start skipping those pages.
I agree about the dangers of Kinism becoming a ideology that seeks to sinfully dominate other peoples. Indeed, I have long said that it will eventually be the Kinists who will be the ones who have to rise up to speak against the pendulum swinging so far that legitimate impulses to protect the Ordo Amoris becomes ugly racial vainglory.
Good counsel on your part Viisaus.
“Indeed, I would go so far as to say that there are many grifters out there who are cozying up to Christian Kinist themes all the while denouncing the idea that they are “Kinists.” These chaps are grifters and would never take a truly Christian position if it could not enrich them at the same time.”
When any cause begins to achieve considerable success in earthly politics, it soon attracts shifty opportunistic elements. The historian T.B. Macaulay describes what happened to the Puritans after they had triumphed in the English Civil War:
https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/1468/pg1468-images.html#linknoteref-17
“Thus it was with the English Nonconformists. They had been oppressed; and oppression had kept them a pure body. They then became supreme in the state. No man could hope to rise to eminence and command but by their favour. Their favour was to be gained only by exchanging with them the signs and passwords of spiritual fraternity. One of the first resolutions adopted by Barebone’s Parliament, the most intensely Puritanical of all our political assemblies, was that no person should be admitted into the public service till the House should be satisfied of his real godliness. What were then considered as the signs of real godliness, the sadcoloured dress, the sour look, the straight hair, the nasal whine, the speech interspersed with quaint texts, the Sunday, gloomy as a Pharisaical Sabbath, were easily imitated by men to whom all religions were the same. The sincere Puritans soon found themselves lost in a multitude, not merely of men of the world, but of the very worst sort of men of the world. For the most notorious libertine who had fought under the royal standard might justly be thought virtuous when compared with some of those who, while they talked about sweet experiences and comfortable scriptures, lived in the constant practice of fraud, rapacity, and secret debauchery. The people, with a rashness which we may justly lament, but at which we cannot wonder, formed their estimate of the whole body from these hypocrites. The theology, the manners, the dialect of the Puritan were thus associated in the public mind with the darkest and meanest vices. As soon as the Restoration had made it safe to avow enmity to the party which had so long been predominant, a general outcry against Puritanism rose from every corner of the kingdom, and was often swollen by the voices of those very dissemblers whose villany had brought disgrace on the Puritan name.”
You gave a good answer to the Randy fellow. To conflate the gospel with modern racial thought is akin to conflating the gospel with 20th century feminism. I had a former Reformed pastor tell me I “needed Jesus” a few years ago after I quoted Jesus and Dabney to him, and asked him pointed questions (such as defining the alleged sin of “racism” that he accused me of. Randy could be just a brain addled liberal, or perhaps he (and the fellow I talked with) were so offended by you because he or his family have married outside of God’s kin bounds…
Hello Joe,
I don’t know Randy but my guess is that like so many other putative Christians today he is just a normie and has drank the egalitarian Kool-Aide.
Thank you for dropping by.
Indeed !
https://share.evernote.com/note/97e9893b-4e92-5c1a-4fc9-4eb7da9e499c
Excellent brother Loew! Thank you for posting those.
More on Cretians
https://share.evernote.com/note/86e06e57-e67f-ba06-d970-cf13479ea1f5