Category: Ethnic considerations

RS writes,

I have been receiving emails from Iron Ink for about 2 yrs and I always enjoy reading them. I am trying to learn more about kinism. At this point it is a highly contentious term and I would like to know more about it. I believe that my husband and myself are of this persuasion but whenever race is brought up in conversation at our church, the claim being made is that it is sinful.

BLMc responds,

Rachelle, it seems at time that the only thing that the modern church can get outraged by any more is a truth that is clearly taught in Scripture;

https://thereformedconservative.org/ai_story_collection/on-natural-communities/?fbclid=IwAR0DzGsPf28-mx_o0NtwgXbI6s8YIPQaVmT5NEgCXP4fBzuQ0gChQA-_6TY

A Biblical Defense of Ethno-Nationalism

And has been so been universally held throughout Church history that it can be said that it is a doctrine that has been believed in all times and in all places where God has been pleased to grant the Church orthodoxy. The evidence is magnificently overwhelming that the Church has always been kinist.

https://www.amazon.com/Survey-Racialism-Christian-Sacred-Tradition/dp/B0CTKVNRMB/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2ITK8GFTO6SYO&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.7iYkqY9EgikRnF3WFhqTdeUWTw5fLBUEX8nVaGauE9XWlumcv2XjEVZoUGSQRAL7AX2uv6wXL2JYbPemruKuHfu9gTf6QeI1xr_quRLH0OqQU_nMnqdzjCLcM6pE-Z5Pqr7-GkOmN-OM0DNGiclYXCAsjk0g-epAM1Z8lVjBj6LAliiRvmxpHuN2BAqmqRWqUypD5ZkgkxOEDtgvE8h1KjcXDir4Y4aYpl095uC0Pfw.2s-FcGjCt9AhHLPfi8ezl9ELZvg9lm-ZNqnWKFZUkB0&dib_tag=se&keywords=A+survey+of+Racialism+in+Christian&qid=1709072263&sprefix=a+survey+of+racialism+in+christian%2Caps%2C136&sr=8-1

Even into the mid 20^th century the Church was Kinist or, if one prefers proto-kinist. Indeed, up until the last 30 years or so we didn’t even need a term such as “Kinism” because what is taught by Kinism was once just assumed to be part and parcel of the idea of Christianity. So, while we will talk about Kinism here, let it be said that I’d prefer to just talk about standard Christianity because that is all Kinism is.

So, it is simply the case that those at your church who are saying that “Kinism is sinful,” are themselves in sin since they are calling evil something that God calls good.

Kinist is indeed a “contentious term,” but then so was “Christian” once upon a time.

Rachelle writes,

I don’t believe it is a sin. I’m not able to effectively defend the arguments being made against kinism because I am learning myself. Our eyes have recently been opened to so many things we thought we knew, from the War between the States, or what we thought we knew about the “Civil war” to what we thought we knew about Hitler and the Jews. All lies, especially the one about not seeing color and only whites are racist. I don’t know why my husband and I are being made aware of so many issues that the church seems to be completely in the dark about, nothing special about us, they just seem to be very real threats and you are the only one we have found to write about it plainly in your articles.

Bret responds,

It is not a sin. Indeed kinism is righteousness. Opposition to Kinism is wicked.

Don’t be too discouraged that you are not able to make counter arguments against those who berate you. We have all so grown up in this anti-Christ egalitarian mindset that it is only with difficulty that we beign to see through the shell game the opposition is playing on us.

There are others out there writing on this subject. Here are a couple good links;

https://tribaltheocrat.com/2013/08/what-is-kinism/
https://faithandheritage.com/blog/

Now, in providing these links I do not affirm that I agree everything that you will find in them. I would agree with much of it. However, all I’m trying to do here is to show that writing on this subject is not somehow unique to me.

Rachelle writes,

I recently got into a conversation at church about kinism, it got a bit heated. I was attempting to make a case that it is not sinful to be a kinist.

Bret responds,

Yes, conversations surrounding can get a bit heated. I have been involved in them for a very long time now. I am sorry that you are drawing fire for a doctrine that is essential to the Christian faith. I genuinely wish I could there be with you to defend you from the slings and arrows. I’ve been wounded myself repeatedly in these kinds of conversations. I have been consigned to the deepest hell by those considered pillars in the Church. All that for merely defending the faith once and forever delivered unto the saints.

RS writes,

I sent my Pastor your blog and asked for him to look at it and give me his thoughts. This is what he shared with me:

Bret responds,

Rachelle, I am going to tell you before I wade into this that your Pastor’s response is an absolute embarrassment to the historical Reformed faith. It is an embarrassment to him as it testifies he has little ability to rightly divide the Scripture. It is an embarrassment because it demonstrates an ill educated man. Geoff may be a nice guy. He may make great conversations and he may be able to run a great church service, but this reasoning below is beyond horrid as well will soon see.

Pastor Geoff writes

“I finally got around to reading through this article. My initial response is that there is nothing objectionable to noting differences between cultures or races on a very broad level. A couple of things that do create a fairly serious problem:

The derogatory tone toward his opponents (ie. “per this idiot podcast”) is not in line with 2 Tim 2:24-26. That same attitude comes out in his other posts and some of the comments that he makes on his blog. Most people that adopt this posture are struggling with pride, though I admit I do not know this man at all;

Pastor Bret responds,

First, as to the appeal to being nice (for lack of a better word) as found in II Timothy. I certainly agree. How could I not? But let us not forget that II Timothy must be read in conjunction with the not nice engagements we find in Scripture. Would Pastor Geoff say that St. Paul was violating II Timothy when he told the Galatians that he wished that they would go all the way and emasculate themselves. How about when St. Paul said of his opponents, “Let them be anathema (eternally cursed)?”

Then, of course there is the example of our Lord-Jesus who did not mince words with his opponents. “Whited sepulchers, filled with dead men’s bones.” Then there is this passage;

44Woe to you! For you are like unmarked graves, which men walk over without even noticing.” 45 One of the experts in the law told Him, “Teacher, when You say these things, You insult us as well.” 46“Woe to you as well, experts in the law!” He replied. “You weigh men down with heavy burdens, but you yourselves will not lift a finger to lighten their load.

Jesus is told basically, “You’re not being nice,” and He responds with another verbal left hook to the jaw.

John Calvin gives solid counsel on this matter;

“The pastor ought to have two voices: one, for gathering the sheep; and another, for warding off and driving away wolves and thieves. The Scripture supplies him with the means of doing both.”

So, Rachelle, I have two voices and I deal with packs of wolves on a continuous basis and when I deal with wolves I offer no apology for using direct and stern language.

This was the pattern of the Reformers. Luther and Calvin especially could be both salty and earthy when necessary.

Look, this is not some small subject. If we lose here Rachelle so that egalitarian Christianity covers the globe we will further descend into a new Babylonian captivity of the Church. The effort to avoid that is worthy of some directness and perhaps even invective.

Of course I struggle with pride. What son of Adam doesn’t? But to suggest that I struggle with pride because I’m defending Biblical Christianity must give way to a counter idea that I am full of zeal for God’s honor on this matter. At least I an not crafting whips in order to whip the backs of my enemies who are dishonoring God. And that is what opposition to Kinism is… it is dishonoring God. Opposition to Kinism is a means of destroying Christianity by the work of humanism that would erase all the distinctions that God ordained.

I mean, can’t people see where we are and how we got here? I can draw a straight line connecting the dots that began with the pragmatic denial of racial distinctions beginning with Virginia vs. Loving, to the unmaking of womanhood by the attack on the distinction of femininity engaged in via the Griswold vs. Connecticut and Roe vs. Wade decisions, to the attack on the distinctions required for sexual relations in Lawrence vs. Texas, and for marriage in Obergefell vs. Hodges to the current attack on distinctions between what even constitutes male vs. female. Kinism stands against this destruction of the distinctions that God ordains and the root of all these distinction denials began with Virginia vs. Loving. Historically, behind all our history stands the French, Russian, and Chinese Revolution which each and all warred against God ordained distinctions and all ended in rivers of blood and mountains of skulls.

The goal in all this? To destroy the distinction between God and man. In such a way man can finally ascend to the most high and proclaim his divinity. We will never roll back this warfare against God ordained distinctions until we roll back the first one. Pull the root and the plant will die.

So, this is not an intramural battle. This is not an unimportant issue. If we lose here Christians return to the catacombs. We can not ignore any aspect of this battle hoping to avoid the fight without being called “unfaithful.”

Rachelle, I sense you are groping towards this realization. I urge you to continue to pursue truth. I’m glad to answer any questions you might have.

Pastor Geoff writes,

It is unclear to me what the significance of this observation is simply stated on its own.

Bret responds,

Well, I think above I gave the significance of my observation.

Pastor Geoff writes,

What is he arguing to be the impact or importance of these broad “superiorities”?

Bret responds,

Let’s be clear here. It’s always been my position that superiorities and inferiorities run through all races. If one looks at the NBA or NFL one might rightly conclude that Blacks have a superiority in athletics. That is just one example of the importance of these broad superiorities. If one looks at the civilizations built by the Christian white man one might say there is a broad superiority that has some impact when compared to the civilizations built by the pagan Aztecs or by Genghis Khan or Pol Pot or Mao or some other Asian dictator, or even when compared to Christian Auca Indians, or the Christian Sawi of Papua, New Guinea.

The impact or importance of that? Well, I should think that is now fairly obvious.

Pastor Geoff writes,

Is he just saying Italians are good at pasta and Indians at curry?

Bret responds,

“No.”

Excerpt from a Tucker Carlson interview;

For example, there is a guy, Richard Frye — he is one of the top autism researchers in the world — and he has admitted, ‘Hey, all of us top autism researchers that vaccines cause autism but we’re just not allowed to talk about it. And so Richard Frye will never publicly talk about that vaccines cause autism because if he did his funding would go away and so it is a matter of self-preservation. He basically has to remain silent and he can do his work to combat autism but he just isn’t allowed to tell the world that vaccines cause autism. But he makes a decision, and his decision is based on sort of a risk benefit.

The reasoning is; ‘If I tell the world that vaccines cause autism, I am caput in terms of being a researcher’ he’ll never get any dollars of funding again, and I can’t help my patients. They’ll take my license away. They’ll take my funding away. They’ll destroy me. I will not be able to contribute any more as to what the cure is. So he basically remains silent for self-preservation. Now if he, and all of his peers were to get together in unison and say; ‘ ‘hey vaccines cause autism. We are the 20 top researchers in the world and we’re telling you vaccines cause autism. We need to stop this (denial). We need to let people know we need to let people know of the connection. That could possibly change everything or it could result in those twenty researchers essentially being disenfranchised, being kicked out of their jobs, not being able to help autistic kids anymore and so it is a risk for them and they don’t play the risk.

Steve Kirsch
Entrepreneur/ Researcher  

Now what Kirsch notes above is interesting and worth a post by itself but that will have to be done by some Medical Doctor who knows about vaccines and autism. The direction I want to take this is the sociological implications of this statement. If what Kirsch says above is true about hard science matters like the connection between vaccines and autism (and later in the interview he goes on about the connection between Covid vaccines and health related crisis after receiving the covid vaccine) then how much more true is this kind of phenomenon for matters that are likewise clearly true but are only historically substantiated and not scientifically substantiated?

There are now two long books that I know of which substantiate exhaustively, via the quotes of the Church fathers from history that Christianity and the Church has always, without reservation, embraced and taught some form of the doctrine of racial realism. Here is a link to the most recent release;

Yet, if one agrees with the Church fathers on this issue, nay, especially if one quotes the Church fathers on this issue one is a pariah in the conservative ecclesiastical community. Like the connection between vaccines and autism, the connection between kinism and Church history is indisputable and so unchallengeable.

But none of it matters. As Kirsch notes about Scientists working on autism and seeing a connection between vaccines and autism, so churchmen today dare not make a connection between church history and .ethno-nationalism without being utterly ruined.

I know of some cases where clergy are like the scientists that Kirsch describes in the quote above. They understand that kinism is the Biblical norm and what the church has believed in all times and in all places where God has granted the Church orthodoxy and yet they refuse to say that racial-realism is what God’s word teaches for fear of being destroyed. So, I get from them the assurance that they agree with me but they dare not say so publicly lest they be destroyed.

It is madness to believe that God’s Word and church history confirms something but that you dare not say out loud what God’s Word teaches for fear of the consequences. This used to just be called cowardice. I’m sure that instead the folks in question would prefer to use the word “prudence.”

Dear Bret;

Does it occur to you that maybe the reason the Jews are so hostile to Christian nationalism (and so supportive of things you hate like religious pluralism, equality, and globalism) is that many centuries of Christian nationalism gave them pogroms, expulsions, inquisitions, and the Holocaust? Maybe if, instead of Jews, Christians had been on the receiving end of that, you might see the wisdom in tolerance and pluralism too?

If you’re going to persecute people, they’re going to fight back, so in that sense Christian nationalism is simply reaping what it sowed.

Kathleen Zelinski

Hello Kathleen Zelinski.

Yes, it occurred to me, but thank you for giving me an opportunity to answer my own questions. After it occurred to mee that the Jewish people might have a reason for being the way they are I went and did my research and realized that it was really the case that the reason Christians are so hostile to Jewish people is that for many centuries the Jewish impulse and goal as been to destroy Christianity. The things you claim about above either were defensive measures on the part of Christians, or as myths that Jewish people have made up to smear Christianity.

This clip demonstrates the view of many of the Jewish people (practicing or not) against Christ and Christianity, and provides insight into the intellectuals among the especially the “secular” Jewish people;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCBmJV5VSI8

Lets look to your litany of things you think I should look into. First, the whole myth about the Inquisition is ably dismissed by Rodney Stark in his book, “Bearing False Witness: Debunking Centuries of Anti-Catholic History.” As another example when we look at the Holocaust numbers and methods we see that they themselves are largely debatable. See the literature that came out of the Ernst Zundel trial in Canada. Even Auschwitz in 1992 reduced by 2million the number of people who died there from the original accounts that stood for 45 years before they were changed. The Jewish Bolsheviks in the USSR easily killed as many Christian Ukrainians in the Holodomor as died at Aushwitz. Sorry, Kathleen, I just don’t agree with your interpretation of history and I’ve read the literature that substantiates my convictions.

You might find these books helpful:

Bible —  Keep an eye on all the persecutions of Christians by Jews in the book of Acts
The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit — E. Michael Jones
The Holocaust Narrative — E. Michael Jones
Bearing False Witness — Rodney Stark (Stark also has a chapter where he discusses the myth that Pope Pius was against German Jewish people)
The Jewish Threat — Joseph Bendersky
The Plot Against the Church — Maurice Pinay
Ron Unz (Himself Jewish) writes a lot of great stuff on this issue. See His “Understanding World War II: Essays on the Shaping Event of Our Modern World”

On the issue of so many many expulsions from European nations (Ulysses S. Grant even expelled them from the US South during the Civil War for awhile because they were being such a menace) have you ever asked yourself “what did the Jewish people do wherein they found themselves expelled over and over and over again from Christian Nations?” I mean is it even possible that they brought it upon themselves by their behavior?

Finally, in terms of pluralism… well, pluralism is a myth. As we are seeing pluralism is just a backdoor method to dilute Christian influence so that Jewish influence can be inordinately high.

Here is what the Presbyterian minister Dr. D. James Kennedy said about tolerance;

“Tolerance is the last ‘virtue’ of a depraved society. When you have an immoral society that has blatantly, proudly, violated all of the commandments of God, there is one last ‘virtue’ that they insist upon: tolerance for their immorality.” 

I have many more book recommendations I could offer if you are interested. I have read a good deal on this subject because I wanted to cover all bases on such an important subject. I just didn’t want to overwhelm you by giving too many recommendations at once. I have read tons of the literature written by Jewish authors surrounding the Holocaust also. Indeed, I have a nice little library. I also took a whole semester class in Undergrad (circa 1981) on “The Holocaust,” where we were taught all the usual tropes, read all the pro-Jewish books, and viewed all the propaganda film that came out of that time period. I merely believe that one has to look at this issue with a wide angle lens considering centuries of history and not merely 12 or so years in Germany — as horrendous as those years may have been.

Thanks for stopping by at Iron Ink Kathleen. We try to give air time to all kinds of opinions here. I trust that your hope for eternity is rooted deeply and only in Jesus Christ — Lion of the Tribe of Judah.