“Put plainly, the man (Timothy) of mixed heritage humbled himself for the sake of those who prized ethnic purity. The so-called “interracial” man did not recoil from racial exclusivists; he moved toward them in costly love, seeking not to preserve boundaries, but to bring them into the fullness of the gospel.”
A Word to Kinists?
No, Timothy humbled himself for the sake of those who were without God and without hope. The fact that Jews prized ethnic purity was ancillary to that. By Stivason’s logic, Titus, who was not circumcised, did not desire to bring the Jews into the fullness of the gospel.
When we look at all the evidence, it’s clear that Titus’ case was all about defending the freedom Christians find in Christ, whilst in Timothy’s case, it was all about utilising that same freedom to win more souls for Christ. It was freedom that led Paul not to allow Titus to be circumcised, and it was freedom that led Paul to allow Timothy to be circumcised, 1 Corinthians 10:23-24. Because this is true, we should not force men to become Alienists anymore than Titus was forced to become circumcised.
Finally, using Stivason’s own logic, we might ask doesn’t Stivason love non Christian Kinists enough to move toward them in costly love, seeking to preserve boundaries, and so bring them into the fullness of the gospel?” If Timothy could be circumcised for the sake of winning Jews to Christ, can’t Stivason embrace Kinism for the sake of winning Kinists to Christ?
Stivason writes,
“There is a vital lesson here for us. When the church fixes its gaze on Christ—even in a case like Timothy’s circumcision, which served to set Christ before those still living in the shadows—the result is strengthening, unity, and growth. But when the church turns its attention to skin color or ethnic distinctions, it shifts from Christ-centeredness to man-centeredness, and, in doing so, it becomes weak.
This is not a small or secondary matter. If left unchecked, such a focus does not merely distract—it can eclipse the gospel itself. And where the gospel is eclipsed, love will not long remain. Brothers and sisters, we must guard against anything that would displace Christ at the center. Let us be vigilant, then, to keep our eyes fixed on Him alone, for only there do we find the power that builds up the church and binds us together in true gospel love.”
A Word to Kinists
Bret responds
2.) Kinists teach “All of Christ for all the nations.” How in the world is that man-centered over Christ centered? This is more 9th commandment violation coming from Stivason.
3.) I see little evidence of the Church being strengthened, unified, and growing in light of the embrace of Stivason’s antiChrist Alienism. Indeed, what I see is the Irwyn Ince type of embarrassments that recently plagued the PCA. The Church in the West is more weak than it has been in generations. A quick glance at the decline in Church attendance witnesses that truth.
4.) Stivason’s last paragraph explains why Kinists oppose the Alienism of NAPARC. This debate is indeed not a small and secondary matter. If the Alienism in NAPARC wins out the Gospel of Jesus Christ and all of Biblical Christianity will return to the Babylonian captivity that Luther lamented over.
5.) Stivason and his Alienist cohorts are giving us a Christianity that is diametrically opposed to the Christianity found in Scripture. May God grant them repentance and the joy of knowing the Lord Christ who is and will be worshiped by people in every tribe, tongue and nation in their tribes tongues and nations.
