“Kinism is backwards theology; it is man trying to justify his own prejudices with the Bible, rather than letting his prejudices be transformed by it.”
2026 ARP Study Committee Report
1.) Note, there is no definition of Kinism in this report that a Kinist would recognize as Kinist therefore what is being reported against is a straw man.
2.) If Kinism is a backwards theology then all our fathers were backwards theologians since, as the anthologies, “Who Is My Neighbor,” and “A Survey of Racialism in Sacred History,” both demonstrate with quote after quote from the centuries of the Christian faith that Kinism is what the church has believed in all times and in all places where it has been orthodox. The ARP and other NAPARC churches are seeking to overturn the Christian faith in the name of Cultural Marxis egalitarianism
3.) Kinism has demonstrated that it is in keeping w/ the prejudices of the Bible. In point of fact, to be anti=Kinist is to be worse than an infidel we are told by Scripture.
4.) Only someone with prejudices against what the Bible teaches on Kinism could conclude that men who teach what is consistent with the Bible on Kinism are men “trying to justify their own prejudices with the Bible, rather than letting their prejudices be transformed by it.”
5.) Men who say what the ARP has said are Anathematizing the Christian faith and are serving the interests of Cultural Marxist egalitarianism.
The oppose “kinism” because it’s a code word that sounds more ominous than the overused “racist” accusation. As far as I’m concerned, all those looking to cast stones should be forced to marry their daughters off to negroes. Walk the walk, don’t just talk the talk. Either that or shut up. It’s like the trans guy that won’t slice it off. Slice it or shut it I say.
BTW, the most consistent practitioners of kinism are the Dutch. They mostly only marry other Dutchmen. And yet they often make the loudest noise about kinism.
“In point of fact, to be anti=Kinist is to be worse than an infidel we are told by Scripture.”
Clearly some kind of GOLDEN MEAN should be reached between this kind of anti-Kinism on one hand, and race-idolatry on the other.
It has occurred to me that perhaps we could borrow an idea from RC/EO churches – their infamous latria/dulia distinction between improper and proper forms of worship – and use it in its “proper place,” so to speak, using that principle much better than they themselves could.
We could give our race or ancestors or lineage the rightful kind of veneration and honor, but refrain from any idolatrous adoration of our race (which yet was and is all too natural for pagan peoples, with their near-universal practice of ancestor worship). This approach would satisfy both traditionalist and modernist demands on a reasonable manner. Veneration, not adoration, of our ethnos!
Sounds good to me. I have no interest in worshipping my ancestors. I do have an interest in respecting and honoring them.
Bret