In my world, such people if upon being instructed in the Christian faith on this matter continue to insist on “cosmopolitanism,” “Liberalism” and “Alienism,” are outside the faith.
Category: Alienism
Have We Gone Too Far With This Christian Nationalism / Kinism?
As the heat has been turning way up recently on the Christian Nationalism debate (people use all kinds of different phrases for that debate) lately, I have noticed more than a few people trying to find the middle of the road. These are the “split the middle” types seeking to insist that all sides on the debate are in error.
I offer two quotes as examples;
“The reason that there is so much heat (instead of light) being generated surrounding some aspects of Christian Nationalism is partly because of two ditches that need to be avoided:
One side seeks to ‘ethni-tize’ everything (or make it all about ‘clanship’ as David Schrock has said), ultimately mimicking some sub-biblical philosophy, and the OTHER side seeks to spiritualize everything – to untether natural relations – and disparage family, land, or any shared historical affinities.
Both are unbiblical and idiotic.”
Jim Brushtune
Reformed Baptist Pastor
“Kinism is a poisonous, unbiblical overreaction to the left’s social justice and CRT.”
Reformed Rican
First, we might note that this is a little evidence that the Overton window is shifting ever so slightly on the subject. As recent as just a year ago, people would not have suggested that there was some truth in Christian Nationalism insisting that the problem with CN is that it has gone to far. A year ago people were still, in the main, raining down anathemas on all ethno-nationalism type of arguments.However, one has to realize that this “middle of the road” nonsense is just not sane. Keep in mind that in the last 60 years or so we have lived through social revolutionary times and each decade as seen that Revolutionary activity push the culture increasingly to the left. Because this is so, any counter-revolutionary activity (such as Christian Nationalism) in any degree looks Revolutionary to the leftist Revolutionaries and the hoi polloi rank and file who have had their minds captured by the left.
This means that the least push for Christian Nationalism/Kinism/racial-realism or ethno-nationalism is going to be seen by the hoi polloi middle as something that is automatically extreme no matter how slight that push is. As such, the “middle of the roaders” who desire to say that we have to deal with two extremes are seeking to codify where the left’s revolutionary impulse has taken us over the last 60 years. To be sure, they may want to undo the most recent push of multiculturalism with the success of the trannie and sodomite leveling but they would never want to go back to the days when the US was a 88% white and largely Christian nation. Why, that would be to make everything about “clanship” or, alternately, that would be a poisonous unbiblical over-reaction. In the words of guys like Andrew Sandlin or Doug Wilson that would be akin to “Nazisim.”
And yet that is the world that for the first twenty years of my life that I lived in. Now, to insist that world was a good place and to be preferred as having greater stability as compared to and with what we have now is considered turning everything into clanship and practicing a poisonous unbiblical over-reaction.
Championing what we were in 1980 societally is not Nazism, no matter what Doug Wilson or Andrew Sandlin tell you. Those of us who desire a Biblical Christian Nationalism that honors the various white Anglo-Saxon Christian regional flavors that used to characterize these united States is not trying to ethnic-ize everything. Instead it is merely to want to honor our Fathers who combined a love of nation with a love of their own respected regions (regionalism).
So, beware the “split the middle” type arguments. The numbers of those arguing for the “Nazi” position are so minuscule there is no need to take them seriously. Oh, there is no doubt, that those Nazi minority types out there will be pointed too as “classical Christian Nationalism” but that is all done to poison the Christian Nationalism pool.
Those who are seeking to reason that people (Kinists, Christian Nationalists, ethno-nationalists, racial-realists) on all sides are wrong are themselves wrong. The Christian Nationalists are not seeking to ethnic-ize everything and the Kinists are not a unbiblical poisonous reaction, though those on the moderate left and the far left want you to think so.
From The Mailbag — Pastor, Kinism isn’t a Salvation Issue”
Dear Pastor;
“Kinism isn’t a salvation issue and so Pastor Bret you are in error to make it such an issue.”
Herod Knave
Dear Herod,
Well, as the first heresy that was fought in the NT even and has been fought tooth and nail ever since was Gnosticism and as it is this same Gnosticism that is driving opposition to Kinism I would say you just don’t know what you’re talking about. Alienism vs. Kinism is indeed a salvation issue when you realize that it is a heresy (Gnosticism) that is pushing the opposition to Kinism.
Dear Herod,
Well, as the first heresy, Gnosticism, that was fought in the NT forward (see Colossians and I John, as well as I Timothy) and likewise has been fought tooth and nail ever since and as it is this same Gnosticism that is driving opposition to Kinism I would respectfully say you just don’t know what you’re talking about. Alienism vs. Kinism is indeed a salvation issue when you realize that it is a heresy (Gnosticism) that is pushing the opposition to Kinism.Gnosticism is the disease Herod, and opposition to Kinism is one symptom. St. Paul under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit certainly thought that Gnosticism was a salvation issue.
Next, when we consider that opposition to Kinism is not only Gnosticism but also a Egalitarianism that levels and destroys God ordained hierarchies and distinctions so that eventually the outcome of this will be the destruction of the distinction between God and man I think we must conclude Herod that this is a salvific issue. When considering these matters, Herod, one must not only look where we are but where a particular mode of though will take us. Anti-Kinism will eventually take us, unless manfully opposed, to the destruction of the distinction between Creator and Creature. Alienism (that which opposes Kinism) is a distinction eating world and life view and it is indeed aiming at the destruction of Biblical Christianity. If it were to be given its head there would be no salvation to be seen as necessary.
Thanks for writing,
Pastor
Pointing Out The Errors of Leithart On Nationalism
“Conservatives often present the nation as a throwback to pre-modern forms of political order, a restoration of natural, organic bonds in place of anemic cosmopolitanism and multiculturalism or the purely functional relations of the market. Nationalism promotes Gemeinschaft against the prevailing Gesellschaft. While nations existed in the pre-modern world, national-ism is arguably a product of post-Enlightenment political thought.”
On The “Nation” of Christian Nationalism
First Things
President of the Heretical “Theopolis Institute”Don’t miss the word “arguably” in the quote above. It is our clue that Leithart knows that this point is traversing thin ice. The whole point is arguable because long before “post-enlightenment” one finds OT Israel practicing a unmistakable Nationalism. Strangers couldn’t join the worship cult in Israel for three, or 10 generations, while some strangers never were to be welcomed in. Boundaries for each tribe belonging to the nation were strictly set. The genealogies of the OT demonstrate that Israel was very specific about marrying within the lineage lines of the nation. This all sounds like Nationalism to me. To suggest that Israel in the OT didn’t practice nationalism is just insane, and thus so is Leithart’s “arguable” statement.Dan Brannan offers that Leithart’s error is magnificent;
“The idea that nations never had a concept of sustaining themselves prior to the Enlightenment isn’t just wrong, but precisely the opposite of the case. It was the Enlightenment which proposed the abnegation of both local provinces and nations as a great good. Leithart is a buffoon.”
Despite these observations some will still argue, that “of course, Leithart does have a point. The modern nation state is a post French Revolution phenomenon. Lincoln ushered it in here, unfortunately.”
In response to that line of reasoning we note;
1.) This is a severe misreading of history as one could just as easily argue that the modern nation state arose with the Reformation but that was 275 years prior to the French Revolution and of course was being driven by a completely different set of ideas then those ideas which drove the French Revolution.
2.) Lincoln ushered in a Consolidated Nation State here but that doesn’t mean that Americans before Lincoln didn’t have a sense of unity in their diversity, thus having a kind of Nationalism.
We see Nationalism prior to the Enlightenment in the works of Wm. Shakespeare (1564-1616) who was often referred to as “England’s national poet.” Sounds like English nationalism to me in Richard II;
This royal throne of kings, this scepter’d isle,
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
And again later we hear Christian nationalism with a whiff of antisemitism from the Bard;
This nurse, this teeming womb of royal kings,
Of the world’s ransom, blessed Mary’s Son,
As Darrell Dow notes;
“Peter Leithart looks to his right and sees a political movement and proceeds to pick it apart –to deconstruct. The goal is to suppress action. As such he is a Regime Theologian.”
This is not the first time that Leithart has inveighed against Nationalism. He seems to have no problem with Christianity being the faith of the land but the notion of Nationalism leaves him with a case of the hives. This is true of many in the CREC as well. These folks salute the flag of “propositional nationalism,” believing that as long as people from all over the globe, who are migrating here, regardless of their third world status, are “Christian” then everyone is going to get along just fine. This theory though, is just a Christian version of NWO Globalism. It is our current Evangelical/Reformed leadership’s impersonation of Saruman to the Sauron played by the globalists like Schwaab, Gates, and the World Economic forum types. In order for a nation to be cohesive it must have not only a common faith, but it also must have a common genetic heritage. Heterogeneity in either faith or genetic heritage is sure to find people living in the same geographic area at one another’s throats.
Christian Nationalism is the only way forward because the only option in lieu of that is Pagan Nationalism or Pagan Internationalism. There will be no such thing as Christian Internationalism until Christ returns in order to rule over the confederated Christian Nations that are each pledging fidelity to Him in their own nations.
Believing in Race Makes One A Darwinist?
I had a friend and supporter of IronInk write in asking me to respond to this article;
https://1819news.com/news/item/amie-beth-shaver-black-history-month.
I will write a few words but the articles I link below completely demolishes the premise of the article in the first link;
https://www.businessinsider.com/boy-needs-bone-marrow-transplant-mixed-race-finding-match-difficult-2022-3?op=1
We are told by the author of the article of her listening to a pod-cast. She learned from that podcast of;
“Their two-part Episode 19 – in which they discussed National Geographic 2018 article about race being a primarily made-up label with no scientific or genetic basis – reminded me about Acts 17:26.”
So, race has no scientific or genetic basis, per this idiot podcast (a view that is even heard from many if not most pulpits today) and yet the second article linked above clearly demonstrates that when one needs a bone marrow transplant suddenly race is real.
A USA Today article from 2019 also reinforces that idea;
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/05/30/family-3-year-old-leukemia-plead-bone-marrow-transplant-donor/1293400001/?fbclid=IwAR1Ga8b-ANH_miBY_912zk5uq7P0rRRJh-uOH2d9i-Y0ifu1bdPbkWdbfRo
Latinos, for instance, have a 46% chance of finding a match, and blacks have a 23% chance of a match, according to Schatz.
She didn’t know how likely it is to find a multiracial match though the registry, only that the chances are even lower for people like Ailani, whose life now depends on it.”
Look, though it seems painfully obvious, you can’t tell me that “there is no such thing as race,” or that, “race is a social construct,” or that, “race is merely about pigment,” (all jejune drippings we get from modern clergy as well as others) and then turn around and tell me that the genetic realities of race become an obstacle when doing a bone marrow transplant. Clearly, race exists and no amount of denial is going to change that reality.
Further, this also makes it clear that believing that race is real does not make one a Darwinist anymore than believing that “Fudruckers” is the best Burger joint makes one a hamburger. Darwin, and his intellectual heirs may have wrongly obsessed over race, and even made wrong conclusions and theories regarding race, but Darwin did not invent race anymore than Newton invented gravity.
Elsewhere in the first linked article we find,
And when did people start buying into the hideous notion that one race was superior to another?
Superiorities and inferiorities run through all the distinct races. Look at the National Basketball Association (NBA) and you’ll discover by way of observation that Blacks are, generally speaking, superior athletes when compared to other races. Likewise, when one looks at building beautiful civilizations, one discovers that White Christians are, generally speaking, superior at building beautiful civilizations to other races. Secondly, all superiorities of all races in all fields is completely according to the God of the Bibles appointment and sovereignty so that no race should boast as if their superiority is by their genius absent of God’s ordaining decrees.
So, there is nothing hideous in the notion that differing superiorities and inferiorities run through different races.
In conclusion, we quite agree that there is indeed one human race but within that one human race God has, in His providence, created a diversity of races. Further, within the diversity of each race God has, in His providence, ordained a diversity of ethnicities within each race.
This is clearly hinted at in Acts 17:26
26 From one man he made all the nations…
One man… many nations. Keep in mind that nations in the NT understanding means “a descent from a common patriarch.”
God Himself is both One and Many and the creation that fell from His hand is likewise both One and Many. The reality of race is one illustration of the creational One and Many. The different races though descending all from their Father Adam are a portrayal of God’s unity and diversity.
So, remember there is just one race, and all the distinct races God ordained comprise the human race.