Ethnic considerations – Page 19

An Oldie but Goodie From Joe Carter (aka — Joke Harder)

“The alt-right is anti-gospel because to embrace white identity requires rejecting the Christian identity. The Christian belongs to a “chosen race” (1 Peter 2:9), the elect from every tribe and tongue (Rev. 7:9).

Joe Carter — Affectionately known as Joke Harder

The Gospel Coalition — 2018 Article

1.) False dichotomy

As if one can’t embrace their race or ethnic identity while at the same time embracing Christianity. Would Joe also say that to embrace maleness as part of one’s identity would be to require men to reject our identity in Christ?

2.) Incipient Gnosticism

Does Joe really believe that upon conversion those creational categories (such as race and ethnicity) disappear in favor of Gnostic “spiritual” categories that deny and erase creational realities?

3.) The Problem of those Nations in the New Jerusalem

Did Joe miss that part about the elect being from every tribe and nation?

If the elect are chosen from every tribe and nation who are we to say that tribes or nations don’t exist? The book of Revelation, which Joe cites as his spoof text itself mentions the presence of distinct nations in the new Jerusalem.

4.) Scripture says Joe is all wet

Consider how Paul retained his ethnic identity. Would Joe argue that St. Paul is ‘anti-Gospel?’

Romans 9:2 I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh.

Depending on which Alt-Right representative one considers the Alt-Right has its problems but to suggest that the Alt-right is anti-Gospel merely because it tells people it’s alright to embrace their God created and God-given racial and ethnic identity smells of sulfur and is the thought child of Satan’s offspring, Herbert Marcuse, and Theodor Adorno.

5.) Reductios Abound

‘To embrace [Carter] identity requires rejecting the Christian identity.’

‘To embrace [American] identity requires rejecting the Christian identity.’

‘To embrace [denominational] identity requires rejecting the Christian identity.’

We can play this game all day.

You see … the thing here is that it is not even close to being thoughtful. One would expect their ill 5 year old golden retriever to offer this up as a piece of solid reasoning. Instead we have the Church leadership going all profound on us with these “gems.” This would be profound if relayed through the sign language of Koko the Gorilla. But coming from a Homo Sapien?

Away with this Gnostic curse that has infiltrated and poisoned the church. Away with childish reasoning inspired by minds trained in Government schools and Cultural Marxist Universities and Seminaries.

Wherein Doug Wilson Goes All…. “Hey; Some sweJ Make Great Neighbors”

Today our favorite wordsmith penned a column titled; “Affection for Israel as Biblical Requirement.”

I must admit that Doug Wilson has an ability like few others to awaken Iron Ink from its dogmatic slumbers. Wilson has that ability to just make me slap my forehead and say … WTF? (What the facsimile?)

“Talmudic Judaism really was a distortion of God’s Word, but you can’t really draw a straight line from that to various modern ills like communism, environmentalism, globalism, and the like. A number of Jews went that direction, sure enough, but some other Jews went on to carve a cure for cancer out of a bar of soap, which made all the anti-Semites even more irritated. In other words, the Jews are a high performance people, and so when they are bad, they are really bad, but enough about the Frankfurt School, and when they are good, they are really good.”

Doug Wilson

1) Notice the craftiness and word wizardry of Wilson. Elsewhere in this column Doug will pen that being weJ has never been about blood but about covenant. Now, here there is a switcharoo because here sweJ are a high performance “people.” However, if one is a weJ, per Doug, only because of covenant and not because of blood, then how can we characterized sweJ as being a ethnic group of people who are by nature “high performance?”

2.) Can it really be said, when looking at the preponderance of historical evidence that sweJ (though what it is to be weJ is really up in the air given Wilson’s linguistic legerdemain) have been an equal blessing to Christians as they have been a curse? Is there no reason why Christians nations have over 100 times cast the weJ out of their countries? Is Wilson denying all the Medieval Church history that consistently found Mother Church in mortal combat with the sweJ?

Doug is putting his thumb on the scales here to suggest that “yeah, some sweJ have been real bad guys but there have been other sweJ who were really good guys so it all washes out in the laundry.”

Read your history. See the ongoing conflict between those whom Jesus called “a brood of vipers” (and what else is a brood of vipers but the seed of the serpent) vis-a-vis the Christian Church — sometimes referred to as the seed of the woman.

File Under: And another thing;

“One last thing. It is often said that Ashkenazi sweJ are not sweJ at all, and that there is not a drop of Abraham’s blood in their veins. And so it is maintained that this is all a lot of fuss and bother over a bunch of nothing. “A gift is not irrevocable if it was never given.” This overlooks the fact that being a weJ was always about covenant, and not about DNA…. Ashkenazi and Sephardic sweJ are sweJ by covenant. And because they are sweJ by covenant, it will be a piece of cake for God to graft them into the olive tree again.”

Doug Wilson

1.) Has Doug ever read Romans 9:3. Apparently no one told the Holy Spirit as he inspired St. Paul that that “being a Jew was always about covenant, and not about DNA.”

For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my KINSMEN ACCORDING TO THE FLESH.

2.) For the sake of argument assuming that Ashkenazi are originally Khazars and so not really blood sweJ, how can Ashkenazi non sweJ be disobedient Talmudic sweJ by covenant (and God certainly didn’t make a covenant with non racial Talmudic sweJ) if neither the original sweJ that covenant was made with were Talmudic nor the original Ashkenazi people didn’t embrace Talmudic Judaism until the 8th-9th century? How can a people in no way related by blood to the sweJ nor by related by covenant as seen in their identity as Talmudic sweJ be considered sweJ?

Doug, like Tolkien’s Saruman is losing his ability to cast a spell that people can’t see through.

Machen the Kinist

“Human institutions are really to be molded, not by Christian principles accepted by the unsaved, but by Christian men; the true transformation of society will come by the influence of those who have themselves been redeemed … [I]t is not true that the Christian evangelist is interested in the salvation of individuals without being interested in the salvation of the race.”

J. Gresham Machen

Christianity & Liberalism — pg. 158-159

Scary Kinism Defined & Examples Given — (Part V)

Kinism believes;

XVII.) That inequality has developed both along individual and racial lines, and that every race has its areas of superiority. That we should not be ashamed of those gifts God saw fit to bestow upon us, but enjoy them.

Distinct races, nations, and families vis-a-vis other distinct races, nations, and families because of the reality that they are distinct each have different superiorities and inferiorities that run through their reality. Not all of the races are an eye. Nor are all the races an ear.

Because it is God that causes us to differ we should not be made to feel guilt over our superiorities and we should be constantly asking for God’s grace to overcome our inferiorities.

God gifts all peoples who look to Him. We should pray that God would be pleased to allow us to use the giftedness He has appointed us to glorify His name.

Of course, Luciferian egalitarianism (but I repeat myself) would flatten out all these varied superiorities so that eventually all races would be reduced to the lowest common denominator and so would all be the same in our shared inferiorities. All the races would become equally inept.

XVIII.) That envy is a desire for equality taking the form of hatred of the superior. That the envious man begrudges others of their advantages, and rather than seeking to acquire those advantages for himself, instead seeks to destroy them so that all will be equal in their poverty of advantages. That envy motivates many minorities, and that separation is the only effective way to deal with it.

Envy desires to pull down the superior quite without desiring to become the superior itself. It is satisfied just with seeing the superior in the same squalor and dust in which it dwells. Further, the envy of the inferior can not be quenched even with the aid and assistance of the superior because all that aid and assistance does for the inferior is to remind them that they are inferior. Consequently, only the destruction of the house of the superior will satisfy the envy of the superior.

Marxist ideology has made a career of inflaming a not insignificant number of minorities with envy as well as many lower-class whites. As no lifting up of that minority class and their white brethren who are infected with envy is possible, given that envy only grows with being helped by the superior the only answer seems to be some kind of separation.

The idea of advancing social-order separation should come as a well-received prospect from many who are afflicted with envy since the white man is now considered a pariah by much of the minority community as seen in just one quote. Many more could be duplicated that reveals how evil the white man is per the minority community who live within our shared borders.

“The Reformed and evangelical tradition(s) has repeatedly, across centuries, found itself in collusion with the worst embodiments of white supremacy in America even while presuming its orthodoxy at each juncture.”

Rev. Duke Kwon
PCA Minister

What could be better news for minorities inflamed with the Marxist ethic and their white Marxist brethren than arrangements that would find them finally done with the racist white man? Separation seems to be an answer that would be well-greeted by all parties.

XIX.) That man, as a creature, is necessarily limited. That because he is limited, his responsibility to others is also limited. That human responsibility is Biblically regulated by relationship, such that we have a greater responsibility to our own family, race, town, state, region, and country, than we do to “the other”. That Christians should favor the native and the normal over the alien and the novel.

Equal universal love for everybody is at the same time a lack of unique particular love for anybody. Even the Pixar animated film “The Incredibles” understood that simple concept. Scripture calls us to Honor our Father and Mother and in doing so teaches that we are to prioritize them over other adults who are not our Father and Mother. The idea that I am to prioritize my own Father and Mother does not mean I hate every other adult who is not my Father and Mother. The idea that I am responsible to love everyone the same is an idea only a Marxist could love.

The implication of this is the truth that by helping everybody equally I may be hurting those I am called to help specifically. If I earn a paycheck week by week and spend it on the needy neighborhood children the consequence is that the children of my household who I am called to be specifically responsible for will become needy. Similarly, the elimination of borders here in the name of loving the world ends up being a bolus of hatred for our own people as seen in the economic impact, the breakdown of social infrastructure, and the increase of crime. This kind of love is a knife at the throat of our own children and our own countrymen –black, red, white, or brown.

That this has become so controversial is suggestive that are further down the road of Marxism than any of us would like to admit.

XX.) That placing burdens on people they cannot bear inevitably induces guilt. That a guilty man is an easily controlled man. That a man with impossible burdens will seek a more powerful entity to bear those burdens for him. That the most powerful earthly entity is the state. That the agents of the New World Order have a vested interest in inducing guilt as a means of control.

With the insistence that we must love everyone the same, there is failure since that is impossible. With failure comes false guilt. With false guilt comes contrivances to carry that false guilt. One contrivance is to enlist the state to carry the false guilt with the tacit agreement that the state will help carry the false guilt in exchange for the one carrying the false guilt to look to the state as the God who provides atonement. The dirty secret is that the state then keeps piling false guilt on the citizenry. The most recent false guilt is how we are guilty of not being WOKE.

This is integral to kinism because kinism sees the state being the primary agent which is advancing the 3multis, as well as polyglot marriages and transracial adoptions via false guilt.

Scary Kinism Defined & Examples Given — Pt. I

In this series planned for six entries, I am going to take something written by Mr. Mickey Henry on defining and giving examples of Kinism in action and provide some extra commentary.

Kinism recognizes that a basic harmony exists between the mind and the body, the spirit, and the flesh.
This is merely the Kinist recognizing that men have a modified unichotomous nature where though we can make distinctions between body and soul and the spirit and the flesh that the divorcing of mind from body and spirit from flesh is an unnatural occurrence. Men are at one and the same time an embodied soul and a soulful body. This means that kinists believe that racial and ethnic distinctions that are found in corporeal bodies mean distinctions in incorporeal souls. Because there is a basic harmony that exists between the mind and the body, the spirit, and the flesh, Kinists believe that that harmony of interests should be recognized and provided for in the social order. Quite clearly, while all men are ontologically equal, equal before God’s law, and equal in having a sinful nature, not all men are the same as seen in the differences that God has ordained for us in our corporeal existences.
That conversion often happens, but that the ordinary means by which the Church militant extends itself is through covenantal succession from Christian parents to
covenant children.

Kinists have the family at the center of their thinking. We believe in God’s covenantal faithfulness and that God is normatively pleased to call us to Himself in our generations. Kinists believe that it is the family and not the individual that is the primary building block for social order. This puts kinists at severe odds with all those who hold to the enlightenment project that championed what is called the social contract theory, based as it is on the sovereign individual.
That men are not born blank slates but inherit physical and mental characteristics, predilections, weaknesses, and strengths from their biological parents. That neither nature nor nurture is deterministic of behavior, but that both are highly influential.
The modern tendency is to absolutize nurture so as to believe that man is merely the sum of his experiences undergone in his environment. Kinists do not believe this understanding and believe instead that nature (genetics) has a role to play as well. Kinists are neither Skinnerians who believe if we could control a man’s environment we could make a man in the fashion we desired nor are Kinists genetic absolutists believing that man is merely the sum of his genes and no more. Kinists do not believe that if we could control all the genetic information we could make a man in the fashion we desired. Kinists, instead believe that by God’s sovereign appointment nurture and nature perform a dance in every human being so that in the end it is God alone who are making the people He desires.

Kinists also assert that as well as nurture and nature that what a man thinketh in His heart (believes) is formative for what kind of a man that a man will be. As such we see a supernatural element in what constitutes man that not even the combination of nurture and nature can fully explain.
That race is Biblically defined as common patrilineal descent. That, in consequence, race is the sum total of all the attributes a man inherits from his ancestors that he holds in common with his relatives, both near and distant.
The word race comes from the Latin “radix” and “radius” having the same original. According to Webster’s 1828 Dictionary the word “race” in this sense means;

1. The lineage of a family, or continued series of descendants from a parent who is called the stock. A race is the series of descendants indefinitely.

Clearly, substantially different physical and mental characteristics, predilections, weaknesses, and strengths as coming from different original biological parents yield different races.

Abraham Kuyper was getting at this point when he wrote;

“The Javanese are a different race than us; they live in a different region; they stand on a wholly different level of development; they are created differently in their inner life; they have a wholly different past behind them, and they have grown up in wholly different ideas. To expect of them that they should find the fitting expression of their faith in our Confession and in our Catechism is therefore absurd.

Now, this is not something special for the Javanese but stems from a general rule. The men are not all alike among whom the Church occurs. They differ according to origin, race, country, region, history, construction, mood, and soul, and they do not always remain the same, but undergo various stages of development. Now the Gospel will not objectively remain outside their reach, but subjectively be appropriated by them, and the fruit thereof will come to confession and expression, the result may not be the same for all nations and times. The objective truth remains the same, but the matter in appropriation, application, and confession must be different, as the color of the light varies according to the glass in which it is collected. He who has traveled and came into contact with Christians in different parts of the world of distinct races, countries, and traditions cannot be blind to the sober fact of this reality. It is evident to him. He observes it everywhere.”……

Abraham Kuyper:
Common Grace (1902–1905)