Daily Kinist Quote — R. J. Rushdoony & McAtee on the Noble Savage NAPARC

“Norman Mailer has pointed out that the modern outsider to God and law finds his hero in the Negro, whom he sees as a ‘natural and social adventurer sworn against respectability, conformity, dullness, and emotional timidity. The modern ‘white Negro’ is a man who imagines the Negro to be the ideal man, a natural anarchist and nihilist, and therefore social hero. Moreover, to gain the acceptance of the Negro, irrespective of his character, is to gain a victory against law and standards in the name of equality.

“There is indication already of another ‘civil rights’ offensive as a next step after the Negro: ‘the sodomite may be partially replacing the Negro as an object of liberal solicitude and the prime test of liberal tolerance. If there is no God and no divinely ordained law, then not only does perversion have equal rights, but actually, truer rights, because Christian morality is seen as an imposition on an a dehumanization of man, whereas perversion is an act of liberty and autonomy for this school of thought.”

“In any case, the goal is, whether directly or slowly total destruction of Christian civilization. Some have called for … a long period of chaos and revolution, and the total destruction of civilization.”

R. J. Rushdoony
Roots of Reconstruction – p. 618

Much of this began with the age of Romanticism and its infatuation with the idea of the Noble Savage. Initially the noble savage was identified with the American Indian. Because the American Indian was untouched by civilization, the American Indian bore a automatic nobility about him per the Romanticists. As time continued the noble savage mantle passed on to others. In Rushdoony’s time it was the American Negro that was seen as the noble savage. Precisely because he was not civilized, as seen by crime rates, the civil rights movement latched on to the cause of the American Negro and the championing of civil rights became proof positive of one’s own nobility. To support the noble savage in one’s midst was to clothe one’s self with nobility.

As Rush mentions, the status of “more of a noble savage than thou” eventually passed on to the sodomite. Until the rise of the Tranny, it was the sodomite and lesbian who were the noblest of all noble savages. To be friends with a sodomite or a lesbian proved how much humanity one had, just as previously having friends among Negroes once proved how broad minded one was. Now of course the class of people who get to be designated “the most noble savage of all the noble savages” are those who have had their breasts or genitals removed. Well, unless they are out positioned by the pederasts and pedophiles.

Of course, all this corresponds perfectly with the cultural Marxist work of the long march through the Institutions. The Cultural Marxists have recruited these very same noble savages as well as the adjacent noble savages to overthrow civilization. Cultural Marxism was a good fit with American Romanticism in this regard. As such, it is the case, that the noble savages have turned our whole former Christian civilization into a vast jungle of savagery.

Even our “Conservative” Christian churches have pursued this Noble Savage theme as seen in their embrace of “MLK 50” and their embrace of Side-B sodomy and their embrace of Rev. Greg Johnson and Sam “honest, I can resist temptation” Allberry. The Christian churches with their overt hostility to traditional, heritage and historic Christianity are doing all they can to rid themselves of people who would write honest prose as I have given here. If they hated Rushdoony when he was alive (and they did) how much more do they hate anybody today who dares quote RJR approvingly? The “conservative” Christian church in the West today with their thoroughly Romanticist/Cultural Marxist inclinations is aiding and abetting the end of Christian civilization all in the name of being “nicer than Jesus ever was.”

This is all proven by the fact that NAPARC churches today would NEVER ordain a Knox, a Calvin (read his pamphlet on the Jews), a Chrysostom, a Machen, a Van Til, Luther, etc. The modern conservative church today is the enemy of historic Biblical Christianity. If you’re in one of these NAPARC churches (yes, I understand there are always exceptions) you are supporting the very thing that Rushdoony warned of in the quote. If you are supporting NAPARC churches and clergy (or the CREC) then you are “Noble Savage adjacent.”)

Rejoicing Over the Fall of Sam Allberry

“Statement from The Gospel Coalition’s Board of Directors

TGC was informed yesterday by Sam Allberry about “an inappropriate relationship with another man a few years ago” and that an announcement would be made today at Immanuel Church regarding his resignation as a pastor.”

Allberry, once an Anglican priest, had wormed his way to Reformed denominations being championed by other sodomite-adjacent clergy, advocating a position styled as “celibate but gay.” The whole side-b sodomy argument denied that the fact that men admitting that they were sexually attracted to other men was sin. The position that Allberry championed was that as long as a man remained celibate, he could continue in the ministry while having this un-natural lust.

That whole thing was warped from the beginning. What made it doubly warped is that so many of the Reformed clergy supported this kind of thinking as seen in the Greg Johnson case in the Presbyterian Church of America (PCA). In the PCA Rev. Greg Johnson took much the same position as Sam Allberry and there was found little will in the PCA to take disciplinary action against Johnson. Johnson finally left the PCA on his own accord taking the congregation he Pastored with him.

All that aside I want to briefly speak to much of the hand wringing that has gone on with the fall of Sam Allberry. In many quarters people are being tongue lashed by the same clergy who simped in support of Allberry and Greg Johson (and others like them) that we should not rejoice in the fall of Allberry. Sarcastic comments like, “Who could have ever seen this coming,” or, “I miss the good old days when clergy were drummed out of their congregations for liking women not their wives” were seen as being in “poor taste,” and “demonstrating a lack of maturity.” We are now being told that we should not rejoiced in the fall of Sam Allberry.

I dissent.

If you can’t rejoice over the fall of Sam Alberry your sentimental pietism is eating up your ability to think straight. The man was leading countless numbers of people into sin. He was mainstreaming sodomy in the “Conservative” “Reformed” denominations. The fact that the nonsense of someone advocating for a “celibate gay” position has been exposed ought to be reason to pop the cork on the finest champagne. It is a good thing that Sam Allbery has fallen if only to keep others from embracing the lunatic position of “gay but celibate.”

Understand the irony that is currently occurring in the PCA churches. This denomination can’t run out on a rail fast enough anyone who embraces the historic position of the church on race-realism while at the same time they couldn’t find the ecclesiastical will to even bring up charges against a man (Rev. Greg Johnson) who had spoken glowingly on the need to accept sodomites in the Church as long as they remained celibate.

It is one thing to admit one’s besetting sin. It is quite another to expect the Church to no longer call besetting sins, “besetting sins.” Men like Allberry and Johnson and their advocacy was proof positive that the Church no longer viewed sodomy or the desire for sodomy to be particularly heinous. The fact that all of this side-b sodomy was a mainstreaming of sodomy is seen in the fact that no one (yet) would use the same logic for side-b bestiality. No one would accept in the Church people who admitted into the mic that they had a physical attraction to farm animals, but it was all ok because they were celibate. Side-b sodomy is just as repulsive as side-b bestiality and yet clergy in the PCA refused to discipline it.

Of course, we pray that Allberry’s repentance after being caught is genuine. Of course we desire his genuine restoration. Despite those realities though we also rejoice that his hypocrisy has been exposed since it means that others won’t fall into the lifestyle he had been advocating.

Yes… I’m happy that Sam Alberry fell.

And so should all Christians.

I am also taking heed of myself lest I fall into some sin.

Pushing Back Against Slander Against Kinism by the CRCNA’s Reggie Smith IV

Reginald Smith, Head of the Race Relations Dept. in the CRCNA writes,

4. How did kinism come to light in the Christian Reformed Church? 

The overture that was sent to Synod 2019 resulted from a specific situation. A CRC pastor had been teaching and preaching kinist theology in his church for about a decade. Several attempts to deal with it through ecclesiastical means were used, but they did not stop the pastor’s actions altogether. In addition, the pastor made his perspective known through social media posts and the church website, publicly giving the impression of a tie between the Christian Reformed Church to kinist teachings. The pastor and his church have left the CRC, but during the deliberations of Synod 2019, several delegates gave testimony that the pastor was not the only one sympathetic to kinist theology. They commented they knew other CRC members who warmed to kinist ideas.

Bret responds,

1.) Reggie here tells a lie in the second sentence above. I was the person to which he is referring. However, the lie here is that I was a CRC pastor. I was NEVER an ordained Pastor in the CRCNA. I was someone serving as stated supply the whole time I pastored with a church that itself was never a particular church in the CRCNA.  So, when Reggie says “A CRC pastor had been teaching Kinism,” he is just lying since I was never ever a CRC pastor, according to their own book of Church Order.

2.) It is a lie that “Several attempts to deal with it through ecclesiastical means were used” to stop me from my Kinism. Not one person had a discussion with me on the subject before or after my departure. Nobody contacted me privately. There was one Classis where the BCO (Book of Church Order) was NOT followed and where something nebulous about “racism” was brought up. To this day I have no idea what they were talking about at that particular Classis meeting.

3.) Since I was never a Pastor of a CRC particular church, nor even a Pastor at all in a CRCNA church I’m completely unsure how anybody could tie the CRCNA to my Kinist (Christian) convictions.

The problem here is that the CRCNA dropped the ball. They allowed me to serve a mission church in their denomination without being ordained for over 25 years without making sure that I was a Liberal-tard like the rest of the clergy in the CRCNA.

4.) I very seriously doubt that there were any Kinists in the CRCNA. If there were or are they never made themselves known to me. The CRCNA is filled with lib-tards like Reggie Smith.

It should be said here that to a heretic, Christian orthodoxy is going to be accused of being heretical. That the CRCNA has labeled Kinism to be heretical only proves that the CRCNA is a heretical denomination accusing Christian orthodoxy of being heretical.

If Kinism is heretical … if I am a heretic … then Kinism and I as a Kinist are heretics together with all the Church Fathers throughout Christian history excepting the Levelers in history.

Pushing Back Against Slander Against Kinism by the CRCNA’s Reggie Smith III

Reginald Smith, Head of the Race Relations Dept. of the CRCNA writes,

3. Why do we need to refute the heresy of kinism?

The teachings of kinism sometimes exist in Christian Reformed churches. This teaching must be refuted because we, as Reformed Christians, believe that all people are image-bearers of God. We also believe that any type of hate and prejudice should be actively opposed by us as individuals and communally as a church. Consider, for example, these passages:

“You used to walk in these ways, in the life you once lived. But now you must also rid yourselves of all such things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander,and filthy language from your lips. Do not lie to each other, since you have taken off your old self with its practices and have put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge in the image of its Creator” (Colossians 3:7-10).

“Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard their own language being spoken. Utterly amazed, they asked: ‘Aren’t all these who are speaking Galileans? Then how is it that each of us hears them in our native language? Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs—we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!’” (Acts 2:5-11).

Bret Responds,

1.) Kinism being called “heresy” by the CRCNA, CREC, NAPARC churches is akin to Rome calling the Reformation heresy because they believed in Sola Scriptura. These people are merely excommunicating themselves. One must note how fascinating it is that the NAPARC churches which cast out the CRCNA a couple decades ago because the CRCNA was far too liberal is now agreeing with the CRCNA which is an extremely liberal Reformed denomination.

2.) Kinists, as Reformed Christians likewise believe that all people are image-bearers of God. However, Kinists, as Reformed Christians, do not believe that any type of hate and prejudice should be actively opposed by as individuals and communally as a church. We agree with the Psalmist that we should hate those who hate God and we should do so with a perfect hatred. We agree with the inspired Apostle in Romans 12 where, as inspired by the Holy Spirit, to “hate that which is evil, and cling to that which is good.” As such we hate the CRCNA when it loves what God hates and one thing God hates is levelers.

If Reggie Smith really wants to take seriously the Colossians passage, he cites he should cease with the slander he continues to throw at Kinists.

3.) No Kinist denies the reality of Pentecost. Indeed, Kinism insist that Pentecost proves Kinism since each man heard the Gospel in their own native language. In order for Reginald Smith’s interpretive prattling to prove his Alienism what would have had to occur at Pentecost was for each person from the varying nations to all hear the Gospel in some kind of Gospel Esperanto language. No Kinist denies that the requirement for all me everywhere to repent must go out to men from all tribes, tongues, races, and nations.

For Reginald to suggest otherwise is just slander or ignorance on his part.

Pushing Back Against Slander Against Kinism by the CRCNA’s Reggie Smith II

Reggie Smith Head of the CRCNA’s Race Relations Division;

2. What is the biblical evidence for kinists’ claims for racial separation? 

Kinists hold that God wanted to maintain distinctions. They look at Old Testament examples to demonstrate how God forbade interracial marriages between Israel and other nations, and they use this to justify the statement that God must also forbid interracial marriage today. Kinists use Genesis 1:25 and 11:7-9 to state that God mandated life based on kinship or relationships with people of “the same kind.”

Synod 2019 declared that this type of thinking is a heresy. It is incorrect to read these passages and say that God was concerned about ethnic background or skin color. Instead, the issue that God was expressing in these Old Testament passages was about keeping his people free of the detestable practices of other nations. Israel had to remain a faithful covenant partner to God alone and not be corrupted by their neighbors. In the New Testament, Christ broke down the wall of separation between Israel and other nations through the cross. For more information, see Acts of Synod 2019, p. 489-505.

Bret Responds,

1.) Here Reggie Smith faults Kinists for saying that “God wanted to maintain distinctions.” The obvious position for Reggie then is to insist that “God doesn’t want to maintain distinctions,” or perhaps “God doesn’t care about distinctions.” It is true that Kinists believe that God wants to maintain distinctions. It is also true that Kinists believe that people like Reggie believing that “God doesn’t want to maintain distinctions,” or, “God doesn’t care about distinctions” is the proof for the Kinist insistence that people like Reggie Smith are operating out of a Marxist world and life view. Consider that this idea that “God doesn’t want to maintain distinctions” is the exact same position that the Marxists have been aiming for since its inception as seen in the quotes now provided,

a.) ”What will be the attitude of communism to existing nationalities?

The nationalities of the peoples associating themselves in accordance with the principle of community will be compelled to mingle with each other as a result of this association and hereby to dissolve themselves, just as the various estate and class distinctions must disappear through the abolition of their basis, private property.”

~ Frederick Engels in “The Principles of Communism”, 1847

b.) “The equality of races and nations is one of the most important elements of the moral strength and might of the Soviet state. Soviet anthropology develops the one correct concept, that all the races of mankind are biologically equal. The genuinely materialist conception of the origin of man and of races serves the struggle against racism, against all idealist, mystic conceptions of man, his past, present and future.”

—Mikhail Nesturkh, Soviet anthropologist, 1959
“The Origin of Man” (Moscow)Mikhail Nesturkh, Soviet anthropologist, 1959:

c.) “The aim of socialism is not only to abolish the present division of mankind into small states and end all national isolation; not only to bring the nations closer together but to merge them….”

Vladimir Lenin
The Rights of Nations to Self Determination — pg. 76

d.) “… Just as mankind can achieve the abolition of classes only by passing through the dictatorship of the proletariat, so mankind can achieve the inevitable merging of nations only by passing through the transition period of complete liberation of all oppressed nations, i.e., their right to secede. “

Vladimir Lenin 
The Rights of Nations to Self Determination 

e.) “Even the natural differences within species, like racial differences…, can and must be done away with historically.” 

K. Marx’s Collected Works V:103,
As cited in S.F. Bloom’s The World of Nations: A
Study of the National Implications in the Work of Karl Marx, Columbia University Press, New York, 1941, pp. 11 & 15-19:

f.) “Full-scale Communist construction constitutes a new stage in the development of national relations in the U.S.S.R., in which the nations will draw still closer together until complete unity is achieved…. However, the obliteration of national distinctions and especially of language distinctions is a considerably longer process than the obliteration of class distinctions.”

Nikita Khrushchev

Thus, we see, that those like Reggie Smith are operating consistent with the Marxist playbook. Now Reggie Smith may not be a Marxist. He may just be stupid or ignorant. But either way, the fact that Kinists believe that God wants to maintain racial/ethnic distinctions has only been seen as somehow un-Christian since the rise of the Marxist fueled civil rights era.

2.) Instead of rehashing the Biblical argument for ethno-Nationalism I am providing a link below that gives a thorough Biblical case for Kinism. Reggie Smith, provided his intelligence doesn’t fail him, can see that the case extends far beyond the two passages he cites.

A Biblical Defense of Ethno-Nationalism

3.) As far as what CRCNA synod 2019 said, I can only quote the author of the book “The Jews and Their Lies.” Martin Luther said

“Unless I am convinced by the testimony of the Scriptures or by clear reason (for I do not trust either in the pope or in councils alone, since it is well known that they have often erred and contradicted themselves), I am bound by the Scriptures I have quoted and my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not recant anything, since it is neither safe nor right to go against conscience. May God help me. Amen.”

(Reply to the Diet of Worms, April 18, 1521)

Currently, the NAPARC denominations as well as the CREC (Doug Wilson’s personally owned denomination) and the CRCNA (being in league with a even more liberal constabulary of churches) are, on the issue of race and the JQ, are overturning what the church has taught in all times and all places where it has been orthodox. When any Church body tacitly or expressly embraces Marxist egalitarianism, it is irrelevant what pronouncements they make as well as all the gravitas wherein they make said pronouncements. As Luther might well have said, “It is just so much farting in the wind.”

4.) As Reginald says, it is true that God broke down the wall of separation between Israel and other nations through the cross. However, the wall of separation the cross brought down was the wall that forbad the Gentiles from having access to the inner courts in the Temple that were accessible to Jews only. The whole idea of the walls being broken down is to communicate that people from every tribe, tongue, and nation now have access to the Spiritual blessings found in Christ. Reginald has made a category error. All because men from all races have access to the God’s presence doesn’t mean that all races are required to cease being races. Reginald, as well as countless other conceptually barren folks are teaching here, with their insistence that the cross eliminates previous distinctions, that grace destroys nature. The Cross of Jesus Christ eliminates all social, racial, and class barriers so that all men can flee to Christ. As is said, “The ground is even at the Cross.” However, that is a matter of grace. The even ground at the Cross does not mean that all areas of nature are flatten out to become a egalitarian’s delight. All the Fathers who were not Anabaptists or nutcase Covenanters understood this. Even the Dutch Reformed understood this.

“Nationalism, within proper limits, has the divine sanction; an imperialism that would, in the interest of one people, obliterate all lines of distinction is everywhere condemned as contrary to the divine will. Later prophecy raises its voice against the attempt at world-power, and that not only, as is sometimes assumed, because it threatens Israel, but for the far more principal reason, that the whole idea is pagan and immoral.

Now it is through maintaining the national diversities, as these express themselves in the difference of language, and are in turn upheld by this difference, that God prevents realization of the attempted scheme… [In this] was a positive intent that concerned the natural life of humanity. Under the providence of God each race or nation has a positive purpose to serve, fulfillment of which depends on relative seclusion from others.”

-Geerhardus Vos,
Biblical Theology

We should allow Calvin to chime in against Reginald Smith’s and the CRCNA’s Marxist views;

“Regarding our eternal salvation, it is true that one must not distinguish between man and woman, or between king and a shepherd, or between a German and a Frenchman. Regarding policy, however, we have what St. Paul declares here; for our, Lord Jesus Christ did not come to mix up nature, or to abolish what belongs to the preservation of decency and peace among us….Regarding the kingdom of God (which is spiritual) there is no distinction or difference between man and woman, servant and master, poor and rich, great and small. Nevertheless, there does have to be some order among us, and Jesus Christ did not mean to eliminate it, as some flighty and scatterbrained dreamers [believe].”

John Calvin (Sermon on 1 Corinthians 11:2-3)

We clearly see in all of the above that Reginald Smith, the CRCNA, NAPARC, the CREC are all anti-Christ in the Cultural Marxist agenda that they are promulgating.