Made Up My Mind to Make a New Start
January 18, 2009 
45 Comments
…Leavin’ California With an Achin’ in My Heart.
Obama has been studying this picture of Idi Amin to prepare for Tuesday’s festivities.
Do they know what Lincoln actually did?
Cops are keeping us safe from racists. Even though the “racist” crime rate is statistically insignificant, it keeps these men employed, and they do look good in black. Besides, we need armed men at the ready when inappropriately-named children need to be abducted. Yes, children can now be taken from parents for thought crimes – in this case naming a child after a man who has been dead for 60 years. How about naming a child after a “racist” like Dabney? Is that also a hate crime?
The SPLC has struck paydirt after digging through a lot of inconvenient cases.
What the end of racism means to vastly-overrated actor Will Smith:
The idea of a black guy kissing a white girl on screen becomes huge news in the States. Outside the country it’s no big deal but in the US it’s still a big racial issue.
That’s because this country is still Christ-haunted, which is not the same thing as being Christian.
This conversation between David Duke and Michèle Renouf is appalling. The theme (repeated in Duke’s books) is that Jews are only acting like their Old Testament ancestors, and the dispensationalist Judeochristians who support Zionists have an Old Testament Christianity and don’t understand that Jesus came to preach Love and disown His war-obsessed Father. Renouf asks, What kind of God would we want to worship who commands ethnic cleansing? It’s hopelessly muddled and convoluted, and I wish that those who don’t understand the Bible, or the reasons behind God’s judgment, would not even talk about it. And above all, don’t expect the support of Kinists in this antinomian project. It grieves us because these are two modern-day heroes speaking. You might recall that Renouf stood with Dr. Fredrick Töben when he was being persecuted by anti-Christs and had very few friends in the world. Deeply grievous.
Some very interesting comments are here about Ehud’s witch hunt.
Don’t miss this very interesting exchange on two fascinating German Kinists from years gone by, Hamann and Herder. And just to give you a taste, notice the similarity between Herder’s mockery of French cosmopolitanism and what we hear from clergymen in our own time.
All national characters, thank God, have become extinct! We all love one another or, rather, no one feels the need of loving anyone else. We associate with one another, are all completely equal—cultured, polite, very happy! We have, it is true, no fatherland, no one for whom we live; but we are philanthropists and citizens of the world. Most of the rulers already speak French, and soon we shall all do so. And then—bliss! the golden era is dawning again when all the world had one tongue and language! There shall be one flock and one shepherd!
I think you understand why Dabney called Yankee race-mixers “Jacobins,” and we do the same. Men are not born free and equal, regardless of what Tom Jefferson thought. They are born helpless and dependent, and without community they would not exist at all. We see that the “general will” of the “American People” is an imperial proxy for rootless individuals, each one trying to outbid the others in the “marketplace of ideas.” Ethnonationalism, by contrast, is the collective expression of community. The empire, like a vacuum, seeks to unify all things to itself. But the ethnos is a symphony of the mystic chords of memory. One leads to alienation and sociopathy; the other to liberty. And liberty is the sworn enemy of equality, as we prove to you in one news story after another.
We Kinists view patriotism as an extension of family loyalty and kinship, and culture as an extension of genetic similarity and religious fidelity. This is why nations are called “motherland” and “fatherland.” Contrast this with the words of Eric von Kuehnelt-Leddihn in his book, Leftism Revisited:
Patriotism, not nationalism, should inspire the citizen. The ethnic nationalist who wants a linguistically and culturally uniform nation is akin to the racist who is intolerant toward those who look (and behave) differently. The patriot is a “diversitarian”; he is pleased, indeed proud, of the variety within the borders of his country; he looks for loyalty from all citizens. And he looks up and down, not left and right.
Yes, California is emptying of Whites because they are “diversitarians” who are “pleased, indeed proud, of the variety within the borders” of the state. Notice first of all that ideas like this are widely considered to be “conservative,” though they bear no resemblance to the past. Notice secondly that they seek to transcend partisanship, although this has never played out in practice. If anything actually transcends partisanship, it is the doctrine that nationhood is based on kinship.
“Union soldiers, whether in prison camps or in the field, were the most loyal to men who looked like themselves – of the same ethnicity and occupation, from the same state or hometown, or of the same age or related by blood,” says author Dora L. Costa, a UCLA economics professor. “We believe that by going back so far in time we’re getting at an effect that’s universal. This reaction to diversity may be hardwired into us.” ~ United States Civil War Illustrates Costs, Benefits Of Diversity, by Meg Sullivan, Imperial Valley News, January 14, 2009
(It’s always nice when the painfully obvious suddenly dawns on a college professor.)
“Our bond with Europe is a bond of race and not of political ideology. It is the European race we must preserve; political progress will follow. Racial strength is vital; politics a luxury.” ~ Charles Lindbergh
A frozen canal has helped the Dutch “rediscover national identity,” which Southern presbyterian pastors call heretical. “For us, it’s in our genes,” said a skating eugenicist with the stereotypical name of Gus Gustafsson. Now we get to the real reason for such high spirits: racism. “With an influx of immigrants, the country has been struggling to maintain what it considers its Dutch soul, and Gustafsson was one of many here who thought the skating experience enabled the Dutch to reconnect with their identity. ‘There were only Dutch people on the ice,’ he said. ‘I saw no people of Arab descent.’” If this keeps up, racists (meaning Whites) will get the idea that they can do other exclusionary things.
A WWII-era grave of 1,800 bodies has been found in Poland! Finally, we’re getting somewhere in uncovering the exactly six million Jewish deaths. Oh, wait, these are German skeletons. Sorry. Well, in spite of it, don’t forget that you’re supposed to believe everything the Soviets told us about gas chambers and the like. Why would they have lied? It was only after they were no longer American allies that they began to lie.
More lies about Poland. Hitler’s invasion of Poland is what really got the European war cooking. People forget that Jew-Bolsheviks were slaughtering Germans at the time in Danzig. They killed 5,500 in Bromberg alone, raped the women, and nailed the children to barns. As the death toll mounted to 58,000, Hitler repeatedly pled to the League of Nations for intervention. He was ignored, and so he invaded Poland. Who can argue that this was less justified than invading Middle Eastern countries and killing millions of civilians on Jew-manufactured evidence, as George W. Bush did?
Where is the billowing smoke and the piles of smoldering corpses in this aerial photo of Auschwitz taken at the height of the alleged extermination? There was probably a pool party that day, or a variety show in the Auschwitz theater.
We agree with Mark Weber: “No informed person disputes that Europe’s Jews did, in fact, suffer a great catastrophe during the Second World War. Millions were forced from their homes and deported to brutal internment in crowded ghettos and camps. Jewish communities across Central and Eastern Europe, large and small, were wiped out. Millions lost their lives. When the war ended in 1945, most of the Jews of Germany, Poland, the Netherlands and others countries were gone.” But as bad as this was, the lies that have destroyed countless lives are far worse.
The new gas chamber and the bloodthirsty Christians who have built it, brick by brick.
Bush obeys the commands of his masters, and Obama will do the same. Jews consider this to have been in bad form, only because word got out.
Terrorism or reprisal? It all depends on the pockets of your lobbyists.
The Federal Reserve is a privateer.
Jew Stan Lee has created the first queer superhero.
Not to be outdone, Rick Warren has released this album of his recent pastor’s conference:
Rick Warren and the Judeo-Christian tradition.
James Manning takes it to the lying preachers, and this one takes it back to him. At least, I think he does; I can’t understand a word of it. I can’t understand this either, but I think it has something to do with the regulative principle of worship.
Suddenly school integration is bad?
The size of Africa, rich beyond the dream of poet’s fancy.
One million Zimbabwe dollars are now worth 6 cents of our own worthless currency. This may not bode well for the future of Black self-government.
But here are some African “kings” who are pimping or styling, or however one puts it in the vernacular of the Rainbow Coalition. (LOVE that cattail skirt with armband accessories!)
James Edwards predicted it. This quote from the lieutenant is priceless: “We can’t say whether or not this shooting is in direct relationship to the movie ‘Notorious’ B.I.G. We just can’t say.” Yes, and we have no idea why the sun sets at the other end of the sky from where it rises.
Poofy dresses are racist, and those who wear them probably want to kill six million Jews, from the looks of it.
It had to be an awful feeling for the parents of Christian and Newsom to watch the “eyesore of evil” be destroyed where their children were held captive. As the walls were peeled away, they could see inside to the rooms where the terrible deeds occurred. Thank God it’s gone. Strangely, as Alex Linder told us, a couple of women moved into the house after the murderers were carted off to jail, and they were thrilled to be there. They had some stuffed animals lined up in the front window and told Alex that they had wanted to live there for a long time. I can’t fathom where they must have lived before if they thought that was a better neighborhood.
A time when children’s books were not obliged to be multiracial. More images of a more lovely world.
“There are only three things I’ve ever been afraid of: electricity, heights, and women.”
The return of real women. Praise the Lord! Most amazing of all, they actually use their breasts rather than pay to have them cut with scalpels.
Here is some old Lithuanian folk art, from a time when Whites loved themselves so much, and so passionately defended their culture, and had such vital connections to their ancestors and posterity, that they incorporated sexual imagery in their art:
On a related note, the chemist whose work led to the birth control pill has repented of the “horror scenario” and “catastrophe” it caused for the White birth rate. Sexual promiscuity is now considered normal in once-Christian Europe. “On the continent, he argued, there is now ‘no connection at all between sexuality and reproduction’… Djerassi described families who had decided against reproduction as ‘wanting to enjoy their schnitzels while leaving the rest of the world to get on with it’… In his view, young Austrians who fail to procreate are committing national suicide.” And then he goes “racist” and says that “if it is not possible to reverse the demographic decline, an ‘intelligent immigration policy’ will be necessary.” Babelist pastors frown on this hate speech since all people come from Adam and are therefore equally deserving of your children’s inheritance.
Charity has become coercion. If you adopt an off-White child and raise him in your church as an equal of the White children, you are coercing your neighbors to accept your anti-social behavior. Likewise, if your church “adopts” a savage, you have taxed your fellow citizens with the heavy burden of paying for health care, education, housing, etc. Charity, when detached from community, becomes an act of aggression, and despoils the community. This is essentially what has happened in California.
Oh heck, I have a treat for you now. As you probably know, Christians used to oppose usury until they started to rub shoulders with anti-Christs. And so I give you Gary North, Ian Hodge, S.C. Mooney’s brilliant responses to both, and more.
Winston Churchill said: “Every Jewish moneylender recalls Shylock and the idea of the Jews as usurers. And you cannot reasonably expect a struggling clerk or shopkeeper, paying 40 or 50 per cent interest on borrowed money to a ‘Hebrew Bloodsucker’, to reflect that almost every other way of life was closed to the Jewish people.” Well, you see, some people can’t be farmers, because they don’t like to get their hands dirty.
I hope you were able to hear this very good interview [Play] [Play] of Steve Sailer by James Edwards and Winston Smith. And if not, the magic of Al Gore’s Internet will bring it to you fresh. Sailer deserves a Pulitzer for reporting on “racist” things that no one else will touch, particularly about the Obamessiah.
Here’s another despicable reference to “Old Testament ethics”:
http://jezekiah.wordpress.com/2009/01/18/mass-murder-as-old-testament-ethics/
Note: The Tony Smith sermon is in four parts, and you don’t want to miss it. It says “Pastor Tony Smith preaching holiness” in the YouTube sidebar, and just a couple of the hundreds of things he rants about are drugged animals at the Atlanta Zoo and an $8 charge on his water bill. I can’t understand most of it though.
A comment to put Steve Sailer in his place!
http://isteve.blogspot.com/2009/01/other-46-states-start-to-notice-sand.html?showComment=1232316120000#c3147586014655315466
“The release of “Defiance” comes as Jewish partisans under Soviet command — who were operating near the Bielski hideout — have been accused of murdering Polish civilians in the villages of Koniuchy and Naliboki.
The Bielski brothers’ kin hotly deny they were involved in atrocities.”
From “Real ‘Defiance” family from Brooklyn”:
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/movies/2009/01/04/2009-01-04_real_defiance_family_is_from_brooklyn.html
The name Koniuchy may be unfamiliar to your readers.
Here’s a poem from Leo Yankevich regarding the massacre.
Koniuchy, Eastern Poland, 1944
Perhaps there are real angels who assist
the ghosts of martyrs to the other side,
since what is left behind cannot resist
the flames of hell? A family of three died
slowly at the hands of hateful men,
and Yaakov Prenner, holding match and gas,
looks at the residue of pain: a ten
inch block of wood lodged in the father’s ass,
skin peeled from the mother’s neck and back,
brain matter from the infant on the floor.
He knows the enemy will soon attack,
and that if caught he won’t survive the war.
In Yiddish he commands his men to pour,
to strike, and like Lot, never to look back.
Extraordinary! Thank you very much, Colin.
“Ehud’s witch hunt” Strange that you would classify Ehud’s situation as a witch hunt, a debate upon which you know so little about.
The debate between Ehud and his friends has always been about Biblical truth. Ehud could convince none of his life-long friends of his “Biblical” views after years of debate.
Ehud is a lifelong brother. I know more about him than any of you will ever know. We (his friends) pray for him often. That he has been led astray by hateful teachings and bigotry and has embraced an unbiblical doctrine saddens me more than you can possible imagine. It was no witch hunt, but an attempt to save a brother from the subtle deceptions of the devil.
My prayers go with Ehud and his family in their new life. I pray he finds a good Christian community to raise his family in. And I pray that God turns his heart and gives him wisdom to see through the lies that have ensnared him.
If Ehud couldn’t convince you of what he believes, don’t fault him for having bad views, as it’s only what everybody believed until a communist womaniser financed by the KGB came to preach the new gospel to a bunch of hippies. If you think his views are in any wise hateful and/or bigoted, you don’t have a very good handle on what he believes. The “lies that have ensnared him” are what the Christian men who lived and died on our precious soil believed and defended to the death. The “deceptions of the devil” are what European Christians have passed down for thousands of years, only to be sold for a mess of bland multi-cultural pottage.
The view that is most popular to-day, that requires integration as some twisted sort of sacrament, at the expense of the safety and future of our children, is about the most hateful thing I can imagine. It doesn’t say much for a man who claims to love God but hates his own brother.
That last part is somewhere in some big, important book. I’m damned near sure of it.
The “deceptions of the devil” are what European Christians have passed down for thousands of years, only to be sold for a mess of bland multi-cultural pottage.
-what does this have to do with mult-culturism? I could care less about the multi-culture blather than fills the media today. all I care about is what the Bible says. Sorry, you have been ensared as well.
The view that is most popular to-day, that requires integration as some twisted sort of sacrament, at the expense of the safety and future of our children
-our children are only in danger if we don’t give them a good Christian community to grow in. God tells us how to protect our children. Raise them in the fear and admonition of the Lord. It is God who protects the future of our Children. My job is to teach them all he has commanded.
It doesn’t say much for a man who claims to love God but hates his own brother.
-what brother do I hate? I happen to be quite proud of my Irish heritage. But it is just that, a heritage. A memory of where my family came from. It doean’t define where my fammily is going. God defines that. But you want me to hate a Christian brother because he doesn’t happen to be Irish. That’s absurd and unChristian. That is hateful. My brother is a fellow Christian. I welcome all Christians brothers because I know it is God who turns the heart of stone to a heart of flesh. It is God who takes a dead heart and gives it life. And thus it is God who makes us brothers. There are only two peoples in the world. Christian and non-Christian, Elect and non-Elect. Every man, woman, and child ever to exist falls into one of those two categories.
Not that I agree with what you think the founding fathers believed, but even if you are correct in your belif that church fathers and the fathers of our nation believed as you believe, it still doesn’t make it Biblical. Extra-Biblibcal evidence is no evidence at all. What does God say?
I don’t buy into the popular view. Popular Christianity is a mistaken as you are. I don’t buy into the Kinist view. God has defined who is a Christian and has defined fellow Christians as brothers. Unequally yoked has always been difference of religion (one God, first commandment). Race has never ensured being part of God’s kingdom (just ask the jews).
Ehud could never defend his view from scripture. And if you believe, as he does, that it is better to marry a non-Christian white, than a Christian non-white, than you, just like him don’t acknowledge what Scripture says unequally yoked is.
Stop trying to beat up a straw man. My views are supported by the Bible. I don’t turn to anyone but God for my answer. Now if you want to engage in Biblical discussion of Kinism, Unequally yoked, and such, great. If I have time, I’m open for the discussion. But I’m not going to continue this extra-biblical straw man argument.
My original posting here was to defend my church Elders whom were missrepresented. People used that missrepresentation to elevate Ehud, while at the same time claiming him a victim of a “witch hunt”. He is a victim of nothing. He has chosen his belief and he stands by his belief and lives with the consequences of those beliefs. He chose to begin and engage the debate for a very long period of time. He also chose to place himself under the authority of his Elders. He was brought before his Elders to present his “biblical” case to them. Apparently they weren’t convinced either. Their decision was to declare him unfit to be an Elder or even a teacher.
But enough with the discussion. Fringe is on and I must feed my addiction.
I understand that the Mormons baptize long-dead people in absentia for various reasons, some theological, some genealogical.
Perhaps sob76 and his cohorts will someday begin some sort of postmortem proceedings to help correct the Christian giants who lived before 1950, i.e., the majority of White saints who believed what kinists believe.
I am not being snide when I say that I have long expected sweeping denunciations of these men from the country’s pulpits. Perhaps they will eventually go so far as to excommunicate Dabney, Lee, Thornwell, Jackson, Luther, etc.
If Ehud’s patient explanations did not sway sob76 and the other fellows at his church…if the writings of some of the above-mentioned men did not convince them…if the holy Scriptures themselves can find no purchase in their indoctrinated hearts…then even Calvin himself, rising from the dead to point an accusing finger at their weakness would have no effect.
These men choose to believe a lie. Leave them to it. It’s where they’re comfortable.
There are a whole lot of Christians in churches who believe like Ehud does – they just don’t tell anyone about it. How many of us would be excommunicated for not believing in interracial marriage – that it’s a communist, Marxist plot and has nothing to do with the Bible; how many of us as Christian married couples would disciplined and considered fornicators because we don’t have marriage licenses? How many of us would be considered deliquent in doctrine because we’ve studied Romans 13 and know what it’s really talking about even though the majority of our pastors and the seminary professors who’ve educated them don’t? Many, many of us.
Dave, Wheeler, and Tired get to the heart of the matter, and Babelists like SOB don’t fully grasp the challenge they face if they feel like inventing new heresies. Their ignorance is spectacular, as they have all convinced themselves that their families are free-floating entities, in covenant with God or not, and that our broader heritage is just a “memory” of where our families “came from” and has nothing to with establishing and maintaining the “Christian community” that is so vital for families. Again and again, we prove to them that Christian faith is diminished in polyglot areas because the kin-community has lost that which made it a kin-community in the first place. Why would it retain its religion if its own blood matters so little? This is why SOB refuses to answer real-world questions about what he sees happening around him. He wonders why strangers are not equally enthusiastic about becoming as emasculated and deracinated as he. And with unsurpassed arrogance, he pretends that he is wiser than our Christian forefathers on these matters, even as he accuses us of believing what we plainly do not believe.
Ehud has responded to these comments here:
http://hearth–stone.blogspot.com/2009/01/nidingswerk.html
And just as we have seen here with SOB, the men of Ehud’s church refused to listen to his actual arguments. Instead, they built up their own ideas about Kinism in their own minds, and it took a long time before they finally relented in their witch hunt.
“This was, for a time, rather dismaying to me – the idea that despite my elaborate explanation and expositions from the text, that these otherwise intelligent fellows seemed incapable of actually hearing anything which I had to say of the matter. I suppose that in a certain vanity, I expected my simple, straightforward speech to be received accordingly but I know now that I underestimated the power of cognitive dissonance. These men were, on a gut level, committed to ‘reading between the lines.’ They were not quite so incapable but more precisely, unwilling to see me as advocating anything but genocide.”
Back when we were new to this game, our first reaction was to painstakingly analyze why we had failed to get our rather simple points across. How could we grasp the arguments from the other side so well and respond to each of their points so thoroughly, only to be met with none of the same? Needless to say, we now know that we have not been vague in stating our case or in misrepresenting our opponents. Not even those who disagree with us deny this.
We were once naive enough to believe that such controversies could be debated on their merits. But we see in this case what we have seen all along. Our opponents never want to debate anything, as you can see from the way SOB dodges the questions put to him. Instead, they resort to dirty attacks. Here you have a man who has not even read Ehud’s defense but tried him in absentia by saying “if this” and “if that” to his elders until they all wheezed and harrumphed and said, “Well yes, I think you’re on to something there.” And now, SOB has demonstrated to the world that he can’t even get the basic facts straight of what we believe, much less what his “close friend” believes, for whom he has prayerfully watched and waited, etc., etc.
Baloney.
Have you seen this?
http://cathcon.blogspot.com/2009/01/traditionalist-bishop-may-be-charged.html
I was going to send this to you anyway, but it fits very well with your discussion above. The bishop is so obviously intelligent, knowledgeable, discerning, and non-polemical. (If you play the video — hardly any of the bishop’s own words are included in the transcription below.) The things he says are nothing more than manifest facts. But the minds of the interviewer cannot grasp anything real. He is capable only putting things into boxes that have been pre-manufactured for him in his mind. For him, when he hears certain key words, he automatically pulls the lever marked “anti-semitism.” Just as for people like SOB, facts are capable of making no impression on their minds — all they need to know is that stuff that sounds like this goes into the box called “racism.”
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Ben14/b14vixpe.htm
This statement that is relatively modern (by Catholic standards) utterly condemns all usury. How so-called Catholics can appease their consciences when they participate in this “utopia of usury” in which we live is beyond me.
Excellent links, and I dearly love this statement: “If anti-semitism is bad, it is against the truth. When something is true, it is not bad. I am not interested in the word anti-semitism.” If I ever heard a Protestant minister say this, I would fall out of my chair. What if all White people suddenly became uninterested in politically-charged words? It takes tremendous courage on the part of the bishop, because he can go to jail for a long time, and it looks like they’re already working on indicting him. “Hate” sentences are never reduced because those who are convicted are too honest to recant, and the Jews love to punish them to the maximum extent of the law.
Your description of how this relates to SOB and his fellow ideologists is very good. They have little boxes of various shapes in their minds. Certain words they hear go directly into those boxes without being filtered by any other thought processes. Isn’t this the very definition of prejudice? And isn’t the opposite of this stimulus-response the definition of discrimination, as in the sense of discernment and perception?
Everything is upside-down with these people, just as when Ehud said that the people in his church could not get beyond the idea that his ancient opinions would lead to genocide, completely oblivious to the fact that they are the ones encouraging the genocide of our entire race, which they consider to be irrelevant and insignificant.
As for usury, I deeply appreciate the statement in your link that “One cannot condone the sin of usury by arguing that the gain is not great or excessive, but rather moderate or small.” This is where most Protestants have been deceived. To adopt a policy of usury is like dancing with the devil.
Talk about the straw man aruments. I am the first to accept facts, especially Biblical facts. Ehud himself was a large part of a major shift in my religous philosophy (he helped save me from the maze of Mormonism). While I am ever thankful to Ehud for planting the seed of doubt in my mind, it was God and Scripture that truly rescued me from that cult. I am the ultimate skeptic when it comes to the doctrines of man (a youth filled with lies masqueraded as truth ensured that). I have been persuaded often by scripture, and rarely by men. Yes, I live in a box. It’s called the Holy Bible. I readilly acknowldege the presupposistion that the Bible is the infallible Word of God. You can argue from Calvin, Augustine, or whomever you like (I happen to respect the writings of our church fathers) but they didn’t get everything right. And thier writing must be held in scrutiny of God’s Word just as all doctrine must be held in Scrutiny of God’s Word.
Ehud couldn’t convince me of his position because his Biblical arguments while remotely plausible, were far reaching and not in the clear reading of the text. He used the unclear to try to define the clear. That isn’t how you accurately interpret scripture. You always start with the clear and work towards the unclear. You claim I am clinging to a lie. If so, it is the lie I have learned from reading Scripture. Since I don’t believe Scripture lies, it must be you who is believing the lie.
Genocide is not a word or a notion I’ve ever used in this discussion. Yes someone you keep relating that notion to me. Must be an obsession of yours. It is God who blurs the racial lines when he declares us all ONE IN CHRIST. And quite frankly it is God who chooses which peoples will survive and which will fade into history. Kinist live in fear of a genocide by breeding “If you can’t get them out, breed them out”. God will preseve whatever races he choses to preserve or he will make new races. What we know is that God will preserve his Church and that it will grow and encompass the earth.. it will also be spread to all nations making all Christian nations brothers in Christ.
It really doesn’t bother me that you want to strive to preserve the Anglo Race or live in white communities. That in and of itself is not sinful. Pride in ones ancestry is not sinful. What is sinful is saying that God commands the preservation of ones race before the preservation of the church. What is sinful is saying there is a separation in God’s church based upon racial lines. God cleary commands the preservation of his church. But racial divides? The biblical facts don’t support that. To say that any who don’t cling to your code of racial separation are in sin, is heresy.
And no, I won’t be doing any baptisms for the dead. I had enough of that game in my Mormon youth. At least I got a free meal out of the deal.
I have no more time to engage the strawman you claim is my position. Maybe another day, but not before I have the chance to respond to Ehud’s last response.
And in the bible you will find that the world of nature is the world of God. Each after his own kind, seems to be God’s way; from the beginning, through Noah, and to our time in the present. That man is divided into separate nations is a recurring theme. The people of classical Babylon were directly compelled by God into separation. In revelations, this theme is repeated with the new whore of Babylon sitting upon a sea of races.
“And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.” rev 17:15
How one can follow the bible and insist upon playing along with ideologies which deconstruct God’s creation is beyond me.
“It is God who blurs the racial lines when he declares us all ONE IN CHRIST”.
It is you who stretch the scripture for a few verses earlier it states this oneness is through faith in Christ not intermarriage.
SOB: When have kinists ever claimed that “God commands preservation of race before the preservation of the church?” We don’t believe that. What we do believe is that the order of grace does not abolish the order of creation. Yes, all Christians are one in Christ, but does this oneness suggest, for example, that male and female Christians become exactly alike with no distinctions when they become Christians? Or, to take it back another step, does the oneness of God imply that Father, Son and Holy Ghost are not separate and disntict Persons? Yes, all Christians are brothers in a spiritual sense, but does that abolish the racial, ethnic and national traits that God has given them? As Paul said in Acts, God make the nations (ethnos) and divided them so that they might seek after God. Respecting proper distinctions is not “hate,” as the Marxists say, but an expression of love. Indeed, the Ten Commandments teach us that love of neighbor consists of respecting distinctions, e.g. property and family ties. One more question: Do you believe that races are the result of aimless evolution, or the purposeful acts of God. If you believe the latter, do you think it is proper for man to change and dilute what God has created?
“It is God who blurs the racial lines when he declares us all ONE IN CHRIST. And quite frankly it is God who chooses which peoples will survive and which will fade into history. Kinist live in fear of a genocide by breeding “If you can’t get them out, breed them out”. God will preseve whatever races he choses to preserve or he will make new races. What we know is that God will preserve his Church and that it will grow and encompass the earth.. it will also be spread to all nations making all Christian nations brothers in Christ.”
It’s statements like this, more than any number of powerful Jews hard at work to eradicate Christianity, that have made realists out of the white remnant. Doctrines like this should be put to death, for they are suicidal (as Dabney, surely, expressed).
And Admin, was the Lady incorrect? What god, indeed, would empower us with brains and yet still involve himself in our petty affairs, let alone inflict us with such misery?
A brave priest. Huh! Who’da thunk it?
Hi, MB, long time. You give the brain too much credit. You are unable to will yourself into immortality, yet the fact that you have been fearfully and wonderfully made indicates design and loving care. If a scientist cares for every “need” of his robots, how much more does our Creator care for the needs of we who have living souls? Some atheists have tried to deny the existence of the soul, and of love, beauty, logic, etc., but this is what we call suppressing the truth in unrighteousness.
As for misery, it goes with the territory of not being robots. It’s our own doing, and we’re expected to endure our chastisement, just as we expect from our own children. Fear not! The Book has a happy ending. Our God is both just and merciful.
over 1 million Negros in Washington for the iniggeration and only 3 missed work…..
Weber says, “Millions [of jews] lost their lives.” This is not consistent with the argument that the world-wide census before and after the war shows that jewish population increased. I don’t know if Weber uses that argument or not. But it’s frustrating. The holocaustians cannot put together a narrative of what happened that is self-coherent as well as consistent with all the “eyewitnesses.” But the revisionist narratives are also not consistent with each other.
It is frustrating, I agree, but Weber could be referring to all Jews in Europe who died or went missing, not just in Nazi-occupied territories. He could be agreeing with R.J. Rushdoony and the Centre Mondial de Documentation Juive Contemporaine that as many as 1.2 million died, but quite likely far less. Many who have done population studies say that about 300,000 are unaccounted, and so it could have been this many who died in the camps and elsewhere. Maybe less. I don’t have a problem with those who allow for a broad range like this, because they’re doing their best to base it on an analysis of the facts. I do have a huge problem with moronic Christians who are living in la-la land and think that questioning the Sacred Six Million number is not “holocaust denial.” Here’s an example of the morons:
http://right-mind.us/blogs/blog_0/archive/2005/08/12/35815.aspx
If Rushdoony were to publish his masterpiece, the Institutes, in Europe today, he would be sharing the same prison cell that awaits the good bishop. And nothing makes me angrier than “Christians” who think it’s perfectly appropriate for “anti-Semites” to lose their freedom, their livelihood, their fortunes, and their families for disagreeing with anti-Christs.
Many thanks to everyone for trying to talk sense to Sob76. You all now have a taste of what an Orwellian ‘crime-stop’ sort of pathology has taken root in the once conservative OPC. In the main they’re now taking Sola Scriptura in a manner wholly foreign to the historic Reformed faith. They are using all the same terms in their hermeneutics but filling them with alien content. To whatever extent this continues God is again separating us through language; they who deny all distinction and identity, recognizing no kin-loyalties, are being separated from us. We are witnessing a micro-cosmic Babelite dispersion before our very eyes.
I must say that you only embarrass yourself when you repeat the ridiculous claims of junk sources like “judicial-inc.biz”.
a) the Bromberg massacre was not committed by “Jew-Bolsheviks” but by nationalist Polish gentiles;
b) it happened on the 3rd of September 1939, two days AFTER the German attack on Poland had started – probably as an act of revenge. I would challenge you to produce an example of PRE-WAR massacre of Germans in Poland.
c) the number of Polish-German civilians killed in September 1939 was certainly not 58,000, which was actually a veritable “holohoax” claim made up later by Nazi propaganda. Even pro-German scholars like de Zayas think it was more like few thousand people altogether. See more here:
“German author Peter Aurich gave a number of German civilian deaths in Bydgoszcz as 366 deaths.[18] Hugo Rasmus estimates the number of ethnic German deaths in Bydgoszcz as “at least 415″.[3]”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloody_Sunday_(1939)#Bloody_Sunday
Luther, you nailed it. Thank you.
You said it, Ehud. This is a pivotal time in history, and some of us have eyes to see.
Petr, you could very well be correct, and I like the way you’ve carefully responded, giving detailed reasons why we’re wrong. I wish everyone who doesn’t like something he reads here would respond in such a way. Very commendable.
Now, let me tell you the problems I have. First, I hate Wikipedia, and you can see why if you look at the references. Almost every footnote comes from one book called “The Origins of the Final Solution: The Evolution of Nazi Jewish Policy.” So let’s not even pretend that this is an objective analysis. Secondly, Stalin invaded Poland only days after the Germans invaded. This is the same Stalin who slaughtered tens of thousands of Poles a few months later at Katyn. A few years earlier, he put hundreds of thousands in a mass grave outside Kiev and blamed it on the Germans, and the Americans defended the bastard because Hitler was the criminal du jour, and the truth about the tens of millions that Stalin killed would have put a damper on American war fever. The Germans even tried to raise these points in their defense at Nuremberg, and the Soviets shut it down. But now we know the truth about Stalin, and you’ll forgive me for being unimpressed with the Soviets as paragons of virtue from 1939 to 1945. I simply don’t believe anything they wrote in the history books. This doesn’t mean that the other side is correct by default, but it does mean that some hard evidence is required.
Luther
Comment:
SOB: When have kinists ever claimed that “God commands preservation of race before the preservation of the church?” We don’t believe that.
SOB -Well, I know a certain Kinist who, if given the choice, would choose to marry a white non-Christian, rather than a black Christian (or so he has said on more than one occasion). For me the choice is clear. My spouse must be Christian first and foremost. So maybe all Kinist don’t believe that, but some of you do. I apologize if I misrepresented your personal views. The majority of what I know about Kinism stems from my discussions with Ehud.
Luther – What we do believe is that the order of grace does not abolish the order of creation. Yes, all Christians are one in Christ, but does this oneness suggest, for example, that male and female Christians become exactly alike with no distinctions when they become Christians? Or, to take it back another step, does the oneness of God imply that Father, Son and Holy Ghost are not separate and disntict Persons? Yes, all Christians are brothers in a spiritual sense, but does that abolish the racial, ethnic and national traits that God has given them? As Paul said in Acts, God make the nations (ethnos) and divided them so that they might seek after God. Respecting proper distinctions is not “hate,” as the Marxists say, but an expression of love. Indeed, the Ten Commandments teach us that love of neighbor consists of respecting distinctions, e.g. property and family ties. One more question: Do you believe that races are the result of aimless evolution, or the purposeful acts of God. If you believe the latter, do you think it is proper for man to change and dilute what God has created?
SOB-God chose to separate men at Babel. Paul’s description of why he did this you quote rightly. Those at Babel were not seeking God and so God scattered them. He later chose to unite men in Christ. Both Jew and Gentile. Those who seek after God are united, not separated. It is proper to unite in marriage what God has united in Christ (it always has been). God’s purpose is fullfilled in both occassions. That you choose to attempt to preserve your race is not bothersome. As long as he or she is Christian, you are on solid ground. Be fruitful and multiply. That you call it sinful if you do not attempt racial preservation, but instead choose to yoke yourself with a Christian of a different race is what I find un-Biblical and sinful. Ehud would call me biased due to my marriage outside of my race. The reason I married out side of my race in the very church and by the very Pastor Ehud has mentioned, is because in Scripture, unequally yoked is a religious issue, not a racial issue. This has been my understanding of Scripture long before I even knew my wife. And this is the crux of our dissagreement. If I had fallen in love with a white Christian woman, than I would have married a white CHRISTIAN woman. But I fell in love with a Hispanic Christian woman, and thus I married a Godly woman. Her race is not an issue, her Faith is.
Thank you for addressing me and not a straw man.
marlon Says:
January 22nd, 2009 at 2:24 pm
“It is God who blurs the racial lines when he declares us all ONE IN CHRIST”.
It is you who stretch the scripture for a few verses earlier it states this oneness is through faith in Christ not intermarriage.
SOB -Marlon, you make my point for me, we are made one through faith. If we are one in Christ, how can it be a sin to marry someone you are one with through Christ? If this is a sin, than Christ’s sacrifice is somehow inadequate.
Ah, it all becomes clear. You’re cohabiting with a stranger. There’s a commandment against adultery, you know.
So the whole reason for God’s judgment at Babel was that the people were not “seeking God”? This fits with what I’ve heard from a race-mixing pastor I know who says that only “sinful man” can build Babel.
In the bible I find nothing wrong with marrying a non-christian. I must think that God would be quite pleased with a Christian taking a non-Christian wife. For husband and wife are as one flesh, and the non-christian spouse is more less christian by proxy.
1 Cor 7:12-14
“If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
And the woman which hath a husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.”
I for one, being unmarried, would be quite glad to bring a female of my kind back into God’s fold.
“That you call it sinful if you do not attempt racial preservation, but instead choose to yoke yourself with a Christian of a different race is what I find un-Biblical and sinful. Ehud would call me biased due to my marriage outside of my race…Her race is not an issue, her Faith is.”
Ah. Why could it not have been BOTH? ‘Not everyone that sayeth unto me, Lord, lord….’
As Mr. Admin notes, “You’re cohabiting with a stranger. There’s a commandment against adultery, you know.”
Why did you not look for a WHITE CHRISTIAN woman (a Sarah) instead of ‘burning after a non-Elect (Hagar) daughter of perdition? Sorry to be blunt, but you know, when Abraham sent out Gehazi for a wife for his Covenant son (!) he did NOT look for any old pagan pretty, but specifically told his servant to search for KIN to him, so that God’s Covenant Seed would CONTINUE to be ‘pure in his generations.’ For is not Christ, kin of Abraham?
On a personal/didactic note, when I lived in So. Cal, (back in the materialistic ’80′s) the choices of mates were simple- I could either date a CA. Beach/Bleach blonde, who wanted me to have my MBA and my BMW- in that order… or find a ‘good [Hispanic] Catholic girl,’ who wanted me to come home to meet ‘Mamacita.’ I said, “No way, Jose” to each of these choices. And for good reasons.
So, what did I do? I WAITED, PRAYED and SEARCHED- for over three years, until I found in my home state (I was not born in Californication – a VERY apt name for something less than a geography, and more a state of ‘mind’) a GOOD Scandinavian girl- White, blond, Christian, racially cognizant, and culturally/liturgically on a par with me. How did I do it? I TRUSTED IN GOD, just as Gehazi trusted Abraham’s TRUST IN GOD. And I was rewarded, far more than I deserved.
Clearly, how we met was nothing short of a MIRACLE. We now know (21 years later) it was predestined by YHWH God… oh, and I once was in the OPC, but found their anti-liturgical stances less tenable than even the RPCNA’s construct of exclusive psalmody. Loved the people in both groups, but ‘Orthodox Pharisees’ wasn’t just a name, if you crossed them. When I visited Rushdoony at his home after my wife and I were married, (before he passed away, RIP) and found a 1928 BCP next to his bible on his desk, and he stated he used it daily[!]- it was then I knew I needed to return to a catholic form, and a liturgically-based communion. If they (OPC) are now condoning race-mixing, have capitulated to the ‘spirit of the age,’ then they HAVE become nothing more than latter-day Pharisees- racially impure, straining at gnats and swallowing the camel of ‘inculturation.’ Just like the PCA’s Anfernee Bradley….
SOB: I know a certain Kinist who…would choose to marry a white non-Christian, rather than a black Christian…For me the choice is clear. My spouse must be Christian first and foremost.
ME: How about an Israelite with the choice of an non-Christian Israelite and a god-fearing stranger?
****
SOB: It is proper to unite in marriage what God has united in Christ (it always has been).
ME: Then let us unite daughter and father. Neither race nor gender is the issue, but faith.
Should you bring in the analogy of faith to qualify, then you are using our argument: God’s word qualifies the seemingly unrestricted statements such as Gal 3:28, as if the “for you are all one in Christ” means anything but a simple, powerful and hyperbolic comparison of the scope of God’s covenant salvation between two economies in redemptive history.
…As if because “Those who seek after God are united,” means, therefore, let them unite in bed.
“If we are one in Christ, how can it be a sin to marry someone you are one with through Christ?”
Subtle distinction here.
We are one in Christ — not one with one another. In other words, not “equal” to one another. I am a Jamaican, and thus I share the common ground of being Jamaican with all other Jamaicans.
Jesus prayed in John for believers to be one. In Acts we see differences of opinion among the apostles, different spheres of authority, different callings, yet they were one. The oneness of God is celebrated in distinctions and variations on a common theme — not in uniformity. The oneness of God is a tossed vegetable salad not blended puree.
We are one through faith is another way of saying we are now citizens of His kingdom (Col 1:13). But this obviously does not mean that social, racial, cultural, family and gender distinctions are erased. If this were so fathers could marry daughters, brothers sisters, adultery would be allowed etc.
If this is a sin, than Christ’s sacrifice is somehow inadequate.”
Christ’s sacrifice was for salvation. Is racial intermarriage a pre-requisite, or a by-product of salvation?
Just throwing out banal ramblings but it kills me how inevitably the kool aid drinkers insist you drink it too.
I’ve got Guyana Grape and Zimbabwe Zest. What kind do you want Mr Jones?
SOB, if you’re still reading this thread, I recommend to you a little book called “Integration is Suicide”. It is simply an honest and biblical assessment of the politics associated with integration and consequential miscegenation. It is an erudite work, not a juvenile White Supremecist rant against other races. It simply analyzes practices which the modern Church has accepted as biblical, when they’re anything but that. God fearing, biblical orthodox Christian men were not the ones promoting abolition, Southron reconstruction, Civil “Rights” and miscegenation. These things were all being promoted by Communist agitators and Unitarians who hated the sovereignty of God and His order of healthy separations. These wicked men had an agenda, and it was anti-biblical to the core.
Correction – the title of the book is “Creation is Genocide”.
ARGGH – “Integration is Genocide”. There, that’s it!
“Integration is Genocide”
is that liken to the “If we can’t get them out, we’ll breed them out” line of thought?
Thanks for the recommendation.
SOB, what are we going to do with these racist Japanese?
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/01/26/canon.babies/index.html
If they need a bigger tax base, there are millions of Koreans who want to live there. Are the Japanese guilty of excessive breeding (i.e., giving their people a future), or is that only a White crime?
Will you be sending any complaints to Canon like the first two comments on that page?
Admin, what on earth are you talking about. The command has always been for married people to “be fruitful and multiply”. My grandfather was one of 17. I’m one of 7. I have 3 little ones myself. Children are a gift from God. So please stop missrepresenting my position. There is no crime in any married couple obeying God’s command to be fruitful and multiply.
As for my bride, I yoked myself with a Christian wife as God commands. What God has joined let no man separate. God has joined me to my Christian wife. I have fulfilled the command to not be unequally yoked with non-Christians. God has blessed me with three wonderful children. Lord willing my children will grow up in a good Christian community and be God fearing Christian men and women. I find it sad that you think my marriage to a Christian woman adultery. God has blessed me greatly, yet your bias leaves you blind to the gifts God has given me.
Just because God gives instructions to those who are unequally yoked in marriage, doesn’t mean his command to not be unequally yoked is negated.
There are a lot of abusurd comments (father should marry thier daughters and such) to which I say, if you wish to beat up a straw man, go ahead. You are not addressing my Biblical Position and I’m not going to respond to it. To those here who wish to actually engage me, thank you for the honest discussion. To those here who wish to poke jabs at positions I don’t hold and have never claimed to hold, enjoy arguing with yourself.
How amusing that you dodge, weave, bob, and spin when asked questions that you can’t answer and call it failure to “engage” you. Here’s another one that you can hurdle: Are we in accordance with the will of God when we join together that which He has separated?
Hey SOB, what are we going to do about these racists who want to protect native species?
http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2009/01/campaigns_to_pr.php
It seems so Leviticus 19:19, right?
And I have to ask: Is your family dog a mutt so that he’ll feel more at home?
God joined what he separated in Christ
“There are a lot of abusurd comments (father should marry thier daughters and such) to which I say, if you wish to beat up a straw man, go ahead.”
SOB, they are only as absurd as your premises (“it is proper to unite in marriage what God has united in Christ”) which imply them. In offering a reductio, we are certainly engaging you and not some strawman. You are responsible for the premises that you present; we are merely saying that they prove too much.
“God joined what he separated in Christ.”
This shows how completely out of touch you are with the faith once delivered to the saints. How many Christians of the past can you name, or church pronouncements, etc., that confirm your liberal interpretation of Galatians 3:28; that distinctions, whether racial, sexual, or otherwise, were erased after the cross? Your liberal ideology is what has led to the idea that national borders are obsolete, heritage is insignificant, and the family is the final frontier of integration. You’re not getting the idea that spiritual communion necessitates physical amalgamation from the Bible. You’re getting it from Karl Marx, Leon Trotsky, Franz Boas, Gunnar Myrdal, and many others who hate your God, hate your Bible, and hate you.
Your asinine comments only prove that Ehud is correct, which we knew already.