Rohan Had Come at Last
August 12, 2010 
68 Comments
John Lofton wrote on his Facebook page: “Would you want your daughter to marry a Kinist? No, you would not.” He tried to be clever again by pretending not to know his own race. Then our friend Chad reminded him that he called himself white while interviewing the Reverend Doctor Anthony Bradley Jr. Lofton insisted that he never said it, Chad proved that he did, and then Lofton went right back to insisting that someone show him a Bible verse that mentions the white race. Side-splitting hilarity! Especially the song that Mark Chambers posts.
“Praise the Lord for the gift of laughter.” ~ William Shakespeare
Lofton gets upset because Kinism is “about race,” which is like complaining that Calvinism is about depravity. He denies that Rushdoony agreed with Kinists that the gospel was never intended to annihilate racial distinctions, as the popular interpretation of Galatians 3:28 would have it. To disprove him, Bret McAtee posts a few quotes that are well-loved on our side:
Rush: Today there are both liberals and conservatives who categorically deny that there is even such a thing as race. Of course you and I both encountered that… It is given scientific respectability, and then a number of scientists ridicule the idea that there are such a thing as races.
(pregnant pause)
Well (exasperated snicker), some of the races of the world are championed because they insist on their integrity, and we’re told we cannot believe in it. So it is a very, very absurd and contradictory situation.
Otto Scott: Well, it is much like Dr. Johnson’s response to Bishop Berkeley when Berkeley said, “Nothing material is real.” Johnson kicked a stone and said, “I refute him thus.”
(Rush laughs)
Otto Scott: And those who say there are no races should look around.
Rush: Yes.
“Man is now defined as humanity rather than the individual, and this great one, humanity, to be truly a unity, must exist as one state. In this picture, any assertion of individuality, local or national independence, or the reality of races, is viewed with hostility and as a sign of mental sickness; it is an assertion of plurality which challenges the reality and unity of the universal.” ~ R.J. Rushdoony, The One and the Many, p. 17
The entertainment value is always high around Lofton. It’s hard for us Kinists to be humble because the anti-Kinists make it so easy for us. The two loneliest people in the world are the Maytag repairman and the Kinist apologist in search of a challenging debate.
One thing that always amuses us about online discussion threads is the asinine assumption by one or both sides that an explicit Bible verse, or the absence thereof, can end all debate. There is a popular variation on this theme among anti-Kinists, which leads them to counter any quote that we appreciate with another quote from the same person to show that he must not have really been a Kinist. But of course, by approving of a particular quote, we never mean to imply that we approve of everything else the subject said or did for the rest of his life. Steve Halbrook at Theonomy Resources is a Reformitard whose “proofs” for the “heresy” of Kinism are usually ridiculous and irrelevant, but occasionally he posts something of interest.
It’s fascinating that Greg Bahnsen was so double-minded. He sounds just like a Kinist here, echoing that famous quote from Rushdoony that gives anti-Kinists fitful sleep:
It would seem obvious to many people, that when we talk about the external relationship of the family, that there is to be discrimination after all. And what I mean by that is that you can’t form a family on the basis of an inter-racial union; that a man of one race and a woman of another should not be joined together in union. That is, the family should be an external example of racial discrimination. It’s not that you don’t, for instance, judge that a Negro family is just as much a family as a white family is a family. What we’re saying is that the very constitution of the family must express racial discrimination. There ought to be no inter-racial marriage, to put it very plainly.
Then, for some inexplicable reason, he contradicts this, saying that the biblical “grounds of discrimination…are religious grounds,” and the “form of discrimination is never racial in the Bible.” This is contradicted by Ezra and Nehemiah, for starters, but we Kinists agree that people of different religions should not intermarry. We have also not condemned inter-ethnic marriage, but rather have advocated a return to biblical property laws. According to Bahnsen, “The Bible does not present grounds to charge a man with immorality for marrying a woman of another race.” We have shown that it is an explicit violation of the Fifth Commandment, but there is an element of truth in Bahnsen’s statement, in that most violations of the Fifth Commandment do not necessarily carry civil penalties. One can be immoral in a multitude of ways without being “charged” with immorality. The issue is whether anti-Kinists are correct that a nation can legitimately outlaw miscegenation, as Americans once did. If you ask them, they’ll tell you that such laws are sinful, and then they’ll give you an earful of their unilateral pronouncements of “heresy.” But notice that Bahnsen took a very different approach, as self-contradictory as he was: “[L]et’s be good brothers and sisters in Christ and disagree, one, in a good spirit and secondly with the attitude of edifying one another.” He did not conclude that those who disagreed with him on the subject of interracial marriage are heretics, and neither do we. The anti-Kinist is another creature entirely.
Also, see this letter from Mark Rushdoony explaining why his father “was not a Kinnist” [sic]. The reason: “He saw the crucial unity to be that of faith, not race.” As everyone should know by now, we agree with this statement. It doesn’t change the fact that race is a major component in being uequally yoked, and not the only component, as Rushdoony himself recognized. His exact words were that a marriage even between believers could be unequal, and the burden of the law is against interracial marriages. Still, he very likely believed that two Christians of different races could share the same “culture” in some cases. I have no reason to doubt that this was his belief, but I would call it very inconsistent because it assumes a definition for “culture” that does not really exist. Surely the anti-Kinists agree, because they categorically deny that any marriage between believers can be unequal. This is why it’s so funny to see them scramble to salvage Rushdoony’s reputation and enlist the son of the great theologian to rescue him from the bony clutches of the wicked Kinists. It’s a futile effort, because they know that they can never fully agree with Rushdoony themselves (or Greg Bahnsen either). Mark Rushdoony’s “war bride” excuse does not touch on the main point of disagreement – that marriages between Christians can be unequal and outlawed. What Rushdoony actually said in his commentary on unequal yoking is true; even more true than he might have realized. It causes anti-Kinist theonomists such anguish that they would purge it from the record if they could. The smarter anti-Kinists know that they can’t cede an inch of ground on this point, because to do so would validate Kinist beliefs. At any rate, what Rushdoony actually said or practiced is far less interesting than watching the damage control of the hysterical heresy-hunters. Too much fun! We tried to warn them that they could not continue to ignore us, as they’ve done for so many years, and now they finally agree with us.
“Well gang, I had to go back on my convictions. I’ve met a woman! She’s half-Ugandan and half-Montagnard Vietnamese. She doesn’t speak a word of English, but I love her. We don’t have a blessed thing in common and her family hates my guts, but I know she’s the one. I realized she was a Christian when at an altar call she shook her head up and down when someone was waving a Bible in front of her face. Truly, love conquers all. And I believe any opposition to the marriage or problems that occur will only be as a result of Satan trying to ruin the testimony of the unity we have in God.” ~ Kerry Culligan, master satirist
“I’m awake. I won’t be going back to sleep.”
If you want an example of how neo-Babelists refuse to cede an inch of ground on similitude in marriage, here’s a sermon in which Voddie Baucham blames evolution and racism for the tendency of all people to believe what their eyes and experience plainly tell them: that races exist. He doesn’t bother touching on the fact that Christians have always recognized and respected racial differences and racial boundaries, long before Darwin dreamed up evolution. “Where did multiple races come from if everyone descended from Noah? There is only one race.” He rejects even the suggestion that it is “better” or “wise” for a man to marry within his own race. Baucham asks this question of Bob Jones University: “How can you have interracial dating if you believe, according to Genesis 10, that there is but one race? You can’t.” Aside from the fact that this contradicts what Ken Ham teaches—that there are two races: Christians and non-Christians—it is an example of how neo-Babelists recognize only the blood covenants of the immediate family and the entire world, with nothing in between. This contradicts everything that our Christian forefathers believed. It also contradicts the historic understanding of nationhood. The word “nation” means “to be born,” but Baucham denies that “nation” has any relation to “race.” Since we’re all born, we must all belong to the same nation, and if there is only one nation, there must be no need of it. Eureka! “One People, One Race, One Church” is Baucham’s unitarian way of putting it. He announces that Adam and Eve could only have been a “middle-brown” color to produce all the races that now exist. Therefore, Adam must have looked like a Venezuelan in the congregation named Javier. Javier tells Baucham that where he’s from, in mestizo South America, the genes are so mixed that men and women of the same color can have children of a very different color. Baucham exults that this is exactly what happened to Adam and Eve! Therefore, our “racist” Anglo-Saxon ancestors should have been more like the Spanish and Portuguese, who freely intermarried with Indians and slaves and replaced their high standing in the world with general chaos. Oh, and he says that the term “African-American” is racist. I was glad to hear this, because now I can charge most of the Church with racism for using the word. They are already convinced that racism is sin, so this seals the deal. The last line of the sermon is priceless: “Fall on your face before our Jewish, middle-brown Savior and beg Him to cleanse you…”
“[T]he difference between the Caucasian, Mongolian, and negro races, which is known to have been as distinctly marked two or three thousand years before Christ as it is now, must have required countless ages to develop and establish… [T]hese varieties of race are not the effect of the blind operation of physical causes, but by those causes as intelligently guided by God for the accomplishment of some wise purpose… So God fashions the different races of men in their peculiarities to suit them to the regions which they inhabit.” ~ Dr. Charles Hodge
“I mean that God bade me love one spot and serve it, and do all things however wild in praise of it, so that this one spot might be a witness against all the infinities and the sophistries, that Paradise is somewhere and not anywhere, is something and not anything.” ~ G.K. Chesterton
Some of you might remember that Badonicus publicly humiliated Doug Phillips by mocking his History of the World Super-Conference, which was at least 98% white history, as taught by 100% white speakers. Immediately after this, Baucham began to make appearances at Vision Forum events. Sadly, Phillips has never thanked Badonicus for assisting with his sanctification. I wonder why finally hiring a token was so important, if race doesn’t exist.
“There is neither zebra nor donkey, despite what your lying eyes might tell you, for we are all herbivores in one pasture.” ~ Galatians 3:28
Gen5 raises an excellent point here, which is that genetics have fallen along with the rest of creation, but it’s obvious that genetics are not fallen equally for all people. (See the Calvinist doctrine that all men are totally but not utterly depraved.) This means that some people are more predisposed than others to certain sins, like drunkenness, but the act of drunkenness itself is a sin regardless of who commits it. “The remedy, recommending alcoholics abstain completely and avoid temptation, does not deny the sufficiency of the Gospel to save alcoholics.” Men are more prone than women to certain sexual sins, and are more likely to subsidize sex industries like pornography and prostitution. “It is not denying the sufficiency of the Gospel to recommend men take precautions to avoid temptation in this area.”
None of the above bothers most politically correct Christians. What bothers them is the idea that certain genetic predispositions are distributed unevenly among different ethnic or racial groups… The PC Christian wants an easy solution: just convert Africa, and all its inherent problems would be solved. That African Christians still live in squalor is ignored. The real solution for Africa, however, is summed up by Alexander Stephens, Vice President of the Confederacy. He said that we cannot hope to teach Africa the law of Christ until they learn the law of Adam: “By the sweat of your brow you shall earn your bread.”
We know of very few blacks who respect property rights. (Nothing is more racist than private property. As they’re discovering up in Canada, blacks “have the last word on how people are allowed to use their property. If blacks don’t approve of a certain use, then it’s racist, and can’t be allowed.”) How then can we believe that very many blacks understand the gospel? As Gen5 says, “only property rights provide a positive feedback loop enabling the development of virtue. (George Mason, in the Virginia Declaration of Rights, ranked property right up there with life and liberty.) This is where Gen5 gives us one of his typically brilliant observations, which is that neo-Babelist, egalitarian “Christians” are really white supremacists, because they believe that “unless blacks produce societies every bit as functional as whites, this necessarily means a denial of the Gospel. In other words, unless blacks become culturally white (from their perspective white culture is simply the universal Christian culture), they haven’t been sufficiently converted.” Adopting children of other races (preferably from overseas) is a big hit among these supremacists because they believe that the children must be “totally isolated from their indigenous culture” and be assimilated to white ethnic culture, which is given the euphemism “Christian culture” by the supremacists. This is why Brian Schwertley can say that blacks have so many problems, despite calling themselves Christians, because they are not “solid” Christians and don’t have the proper “worldview.” It is for this very reason that postmillennialists leap from the reasonable belief that all nations of the world will be converted to the faith to the preposterous idea that human biodiversity will be washed away by the deluge of “the gospel,” levelling all differences among men and making them equally “white.” Press them on the subject, and they will always push the proof for this five hundred or a thousand years into the future, long after they will have to answer for being wrong.
What comes to mind when you read that “unless blacks produce societies every bit as functional as whites, this necessarily means a denial of the Gospel”? {cue Jeopardy music} I know someone out there is thinking it: The Brown vs. Board of Education decision. The idea behind this judicial tyranny was that unless the racial achievement gap is actually closed, blacks could not be said to be free of white “oppression” and “racism,” even if all resources were equal between white and black schools.
“Liberalism has essentially admitted that closing the ‘achievement gap’ means separating black children from their parents as much as possible.” ~ Generation5
Only by mixing the races together and hoping for white-to-black osmosis could the liberal dream be realized. The legalization of racial intermarriage followed closely in its wake. And of course, the racial achievement gap is still intractable today because of those pesky little things called genes. The very same Christians who call themselves “conservatives” have adopted this liberal program. When they call “racism” a “denial of the gospel,” they are only being consistent with their nation-wrecking liberalism.
The hope that Europe can be preserved by simply converting Muslims (who are Arabs, with an average IQ comparable to Mexicans, and will manifest their Christianity in a different, likely culturally incompatible way) is a false hope; even if converting them would solve the problem, hoping for the mass conversion of aggressive, hateful idolaters is not a rational political strategy. Large-scale conversions are rare, extraordinary acts of Providence, and it is foolish to “bet the farm” of our homelands on this happening, even if one accepted the proposition that converted Arabs could preserve European civilization.
Yet the closer to obvious reality we get, the stronger the denials get. This is classic psychology: Denial, Anger, Bargaining before Acceptance. We are witnessing the grieving process for our nation, as its terminal state becomes more and more obvious.
Kinists should be encouraged that we have now reached the anger stage. The frothing rage of the PC crowd with their cries of “heresy” (sermons these cowards never preach toward real modern-day heretics, like say Rev. Jeremiah Wright) is the first break in the dam.
Another great point made by Gen5 is that whites may not even be inherently more virtuous than blacks. Who has killed more people, whites or blacks? I’m inclined to say that whites have killed more. Whites like to drop bombs on the enemies of Jews and banksters rather than gun people down in the streets, but they probably have the higher tally. “They just have more self-control, due to enhanced intelligence, and the ability to delay gratification.” These qualities are crucial to building civilization, which is why everyone agrees that non-Christian Scandinavia is far better than Christian Africa.
Gen5 outlines the diversity of thought among Kinists. He calls Kinism “the most thorough form of Christian anti-Marxism, a rejection of the reduction of all men to interchangeable parts.” The nice thing about diversity of opinion is that understanding is enriched from a multitude of perspectives. And since no one is likely to call himself a Kinist if he’s a shrinking violet, there has been a wellspring of thought across the entire spectrum of the movement, and this is quite encouraging.
Be sure to see the latest edition of The Kinist Review. Here are some excellent samples: “The One and the Many” and “A Kinist Elucidation.” Thanks to John Marshall, Laurel Loflund, and the other contributors for their tireless work in defense of Christendom.
The Kinist believes that a human being participates in a general human nature by his identification with a tribal particularity because he cannot perfectly exemplify particularity individually—by doing so, he would cease to participate in a shared essence—and he cannot perfectly exemplify universality individually—by doing so, he would invalidate his individuality. Therefore, consideration of the human race as a tribally subdivided composite maintains the essential dialectical tension of the concept of humanity and enables predication about individual human beings—and groups of humans—that is truthful and rational. We have Scriptural warrant, by deduction from the genetic lineages that feature prominently in the first chapters of the book of Genesis…
As Calvin tells us, knowledge of ourselves and knowledge of God are inextricably linked. If one is wrong, the other is sure to be wrong, for we are created in God’s image. As Cornelius Van Til said, “The whole problem of knowledge has constantly been that of bringing the one and the many together.” Thus, the Gnostics, both new and old, who are defined by what they “know,” or think they know, fall into heresy because they accept dualism. The Kinist positively delights in the One and the Many.
Unlike all pro-white atheists and neo-pagans, we recognize “that the essential feature of the Adamic kind is unrighteousness. The grand, unifying feature of human nature is its inclination to rebellion.” Therefore, we “must presuppose the ontological Trinity as our starting point.” As Van Til knew, there can be no knowledge at all without this starting point. The non-Christian also believes that the Many sprang from the One, but without personality and without law. Their poor attempts to imitate the One and the Many never fail to result in monism and pantheism, absolute unity and conformity, which results in “an ugly, disorderly cacophony that is only sustained by tyranny.” This is also why the anti-Kinist Christian is discovering that his disdain for racial and national borders is actually hindering the spread of the gospel.
Here’s a must-read article from David Yeagley, our favorite Injun.
Why are American white women so anxious to adopt a “dusky little heathen” child from the Third World?
It’s the latest fad of the White Woman Saviour, and it carries high status. A white American woman must adopt a Third World child (preferably a non-white) to really keep up with the savior image…
Do these white women have any knowledge, or even concern, about the foreign child’s present and future feelings, or the adopted child’s psychological development?…
I say American white women should adopt American white children. This business of bringing in the “dusky little heathen” is racism. It is an incredibly careless, selfish move, actually. It is bad for the child, and for the country. Yes, it is a noble instinct in the American white woman. It truly is. But, it is gone awry at this point, and needs advice and guidance.
Perhaps the white race needs some humility at this point. The white woman should honor her own white race. Does she feel above race? Does she really feel so superior to other races as to save them? I say her white “racial” capital has used up. She needs to love her own race. If she doesn’t, she is a curse to the country. Beware.
Yeagley is one of the first we’ve seen, besides us, to identify this cosmopolitanism as being driven by middle-aged white women. He makes the added point that, having been stripped of their bond to the patria through the blood, as would normally be the case in a healthy, “racist” society, the adoption of dusky strangers fuels a phony “patriotism.” Pseudo-Christian perpetrators believe that they’re growing the kingdom of God. But in fact, a God-fearing people appreciates God’s gifts. Those who have rejected the transcendent God seek transcendence elsewhere, and the more alien the better, in their diseased minds.
The Washington Examiner is taking a lot of heat for this fair interview of Jared Taylor. The interviewer apparently doesn’t realize that it is HATE to be fair to our kind. Instead, we’re supposed to be called names that have nothing to do with what we believe. It also helps if we can be shouted down on TV talk shows.
First, it is obvious that most people prefer the company of others of their own race. Forced integration therefore causes tension and resentment.
Second, race is an important element in individual and group identity, which means it is impossible to build a society in which race does not matter.
Third, people of different races build different societies. Blacks—wherever they are found in large numbers—establish communities with certain characteristics, and whites and others do the same.
Fourth, the combination of the first three factors means that racial diversity is a source of constant conflict. This is blindingly obvious, yet one of the requirements of respectability in this country is to pretend—and to repeat loudly at every opportunity—that diversity is a strength.
Fifth, the evidence is overwhelming that there is a substantial genetic contribution to well-established racial differences in average IQ. North East Asians living in America have higher incomes, better test scores, and more education than whites because they are, on average, smarter. Whites are smarter than Hispanics, who are smarter than blacks. It is vital to recognize this because otherwise “society” (meaning whites) is blamed for the failures of blacks and Hispanics.
Finally, race realism recognizes that whites have legitimate group interests just like everyone else.
“Even an amoeba has a sufficiently high IQ to want the species of amoebas to survive. Only White people have such a low IQ that you have to coax them to survive and walk them through all the logical premises of why life is better than death. I can’t fathom this.” ~ Sam Dickson
Obamination, who has previously called himself a “mutt,” says that blacks in America are “a mongrel people… I mean we’re all kinds of mixed up. That’s actually true of white people as well, but we just know more about it.” The audience tittered knowingly, and no one was alarmed by his statement of obvious fact that blacks are mongrels, having only the faintest connection to their own sires. But can you imagine the flaming hell that would descend upon the head of a white man who stated the same objective fact in public? We hate double standards and refuse to abide by them. Obama is half-right and all-black, so to speak. Blacks in America are about 25% white, but the same is not true for whites. Most whites have no black ancestry at all. About 30% of whites are between 2% and 20% genetically black due to their adultery. There is only one reason why we are still white, despite having lived among blacks for more than 400 years. It is because our godly, honorable, Christian forefathers were what Communists call “racists.” They were Kinists who differed sharply with the understanding of Scripture that is now popular.
The president’s malicious comments about whites are a case of misery loving company, similar to how teenagers convince each other to lose their virginity so that they can all be equally riddled with guilt. Obama has been so anguished by his biracial, fatherless, kinless mutthood that his whole life has been an attempt to identify as legitimately black. Steve Sailer wrote an excellent book about this. Now Obama wants the rest of us to be just like him, and “Christian” preachers are working hard to comply.
Little Indian, Sioux or Crow,
Little frosty Eskimo,
Little Turk or Japanee,
O! don’t you wish that you were me?
~ Robert Louis Stevenson
Like a tree:
You can see that Negroes are far removed from the rest of mankind, but the branches of the tree have a common trunk. When the branches of a tree get all wrapped around each other, they are pruned. This genetic distance diagram is taken from The History and Geography of Human Genes, by L.L. Cavalli-Sforza (1994), also reproduced on page 429 of The g Factor by Arthur Jensen.
In our own American history, the illegal 14th Amendment to the Constitution was the most effective of all anti-Kinist measures. It made phony “citizens” of blacks, then went on to ban prayer in schools and public displays of the Ten Commandments, legalize abortion, make “citizens” of anchor babies, and allow faggots to pretend that they’re married. James is partially correct: “You can thank Martin Luther King and his crusade to make it illegal to recognize important distinctions between human beings for this. Had the courts never thrown out laws against interracial marriage, we wouldn’t even be having this discussion.” But the real problem began at the passage of the 14th Amendment, which was the unfortunate fruit of the North’s sectionalism and the genocide of the South. Now marriage itself has been found to be in violation of the holy doctrines of Equality.
Listen to Don Imus, of “nappy-headed ho” fame, explain to Jew Chris Wallace the wonders that the 14th hath wrought.
Opponents of faggot marriage and abortion are like “white supremacists,” according to Tea Partiers.
In similar news, a graduate student at Augusta State University has been ordered to enter a “remediation program” if she persists in her “hateful” religious beliefs.
You can thank Martin Luther King and his “civil rights” crusade for this, Judeo-Christians. For decades, you’ve been celebrating his life and work, and the unconstitutional laws he got passed that abridged the freedom of “racists” and “bigots,” because you didn’t approve of their beliefs and convictions, and regarded them at “hate.” And now that your own convictions and beliefs have been declared “bigotry” and “hate,” and are being trampled in the name of civil rights, there’s really not a whole lot you can say in protest. You reap what you sow.
Here we learn that Robert Lewis Dabney, the greatest theologian in the history of the Southern Presbyterian Church, should not be called a great theologian because he was not even a Christian. So says one of the revolutionary Negroes who is trying to anathematize “racists.” He also says that refusing to celebrate interracial marriage should be a confessional show-stopper for anyone seeking to be ordained. He writes, in the Dr. Anthony Bradley style of broken English, that pagans have the correct opinion on interracial marriage, and the church needs to be more like them:
If pagans (ie. [sic] non-Christians) can somehow conclude that their [sic] is nothing wrong with interracial marriage, despite not having their hearts regenerated, then how can Christians who claim to have their hearts regenerated then [sic] have such terrible attitudes?
Such liberals, in the spirit of Attorney General Eric Holder, always call for an “honest dialogue” with “cowards” on race. No sooner do we Kinists take the opportunity to state our views on the subject than we are being excommunicated from churches, shouted down as heretics, and persecuted in other areas of life. The liberal “dialogue” always turns out to be a monologue.
R.L. Dabney prophesied the rise of the Rev. Dr. Anthony Bradley Jr. and others of his revolutionary stripe:
[Union with the Northern Presbyterian Church] means, of course, that we must imitate the church which absorbs us, in the ecclesiastical amalgamation with negroes; accepting negro presbyters to rule white churches and judge white ladies; a step which would seal the moral and doctrinal corruption of our church in the South, and be a direct step towards that final perdition of Southern society, domestic amalgamation. And the time would come in the South—yea, in the North also, as it found itself encumbered with this gangrened limb—a mulatto South, when all who had lent a hand, under the prompting of a puling sentimentalism, to this result, would incur the reprobation of all the wise and good, in terms as just, and as bitter, as those visited on Benedict Arnold.
For, let any man look on the negro character calmly, and he will see that the introduction of any, the smallest, element of negro rule into our church, means moral and doctrinal relaxation, and ecclesiastical corruption, poisoning the life-blood of our churches, just in degree as it is extended. The sentimentalist may exclaim; Why cannot a negro be converted? Cannot a negro become learned? Yes; possibly he may; but, if converted, he will not be perfect; and as sure as nature, one of his remaining imperfections will be his race feelings. Sentimentalists may shout that “Christianity knows no castes”; that “all caste-distinctions are unchristian”—which I here denounce as scripturally and historically false—but whether we will or not, the negro is going to keep himself a caste, as to Southern Presbyterians. And in every issue where the rival and opponent of white Southern Presbyterianism is going to attack principles dear to us, the negro is going to side with that assailant. Witness the fact that, in all secular issues, he infallibly sides with the assailant of all vital Southern interests, even when the negro is thereby hurting his own interest. And this he does, usually, with a regularity exactly proportioned to his professed “culture.” Once more, negro Christianity may foster in them personal virtues in individual actions; but I observe that never yet has negro religion elevated the best of them to that stage of conscience so vital for a ruler in a free, constitutional, spiritual commonwealth like our church, which prevents wrong-doing in associated actions, where the responsibility is veiled by forms of law and combination of many agents. I know some very good Christians among them—sincerely devout, prayerful, diligent, chaste, charitable, educated, intelligent, wholly above individual larceny. But I have invariably seen the best of these, as partisans, concur actively, without qualm of conscience, in the foulest and most putrescent party actions by which the South has been disgraced. Such is the average, Christianized intelligence and conscience of that race at this time. Merge our churches with the North, and at once we poison the noble Synods of North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia with the infusion of the black “Synod of Atlantic”; with the prospect of the similar corruption of our whole Southern church.
Go ahead, call Dabney a racist. Call him a white supremacist too. Call him a hatemonger and a thousand other words that you’ve learned from the anti-Christs at the SPLC. But the one thing you will never do—because you couldn’t do it if your life depended on it—is prove that Dabney was wrong.
“It is ascertained that they used their religious assemblies, which ought to have been devoted to better purposes, for forming and maturing their plans, and that their preachers were the leading men.” ~ Robert E. Lee, commenting to his wife on the murderous rebellion in Southampton, VA, that was inspired by Nat Turner
To appease Negroes in Bradley’s new PCA, Randy Nabors, a white man who “pastors” a church in Chattanooga that is explicitly dedicated to race-mixing, is “married” to a black woman, and who speaks in a ghetto dialect, proposes this political litmus test for the clergy: “no one should be ordained in the PCA unless that person can articulate the denomination’s racial history and explain how the denomination has or has not reconciled that history with the imperatives of the Gospel.” Bradley asks: “Can the PCA afford to miss another opportunity to, in the words of a landmark Spike Lee film, ‘do the right thing?’” (You expected, perhaps, a reference to Pride & Prejudice?)
“Negro worship is necessary in the scientific utopia of the modern white man for two reasons. 1) There must be a noble savage, some creature untainted by the sins of the fairy tale past of the European. The black man is perfect for the part. 2) Racial diversity is the precursor of sexual diversity. If racial distinctiveness is not a product of the benevolent, guiding hand of a creator, then racial Babylon is permissible and as a corollary so is sexual Babylon.” ~ CWNY
This reminds me of what Julian Huxley once said on a talk show: “I suppose the reason we leapt at The Origin of Species was because the idea of God interfered with our sexual mores.”
“Before the European fell in love with diversity, he was in love with Christ. From that love came everything good in European civilization. The diversity-loving liberals think they can eliminate the good things which they regard as evil, such as the respect for the child in the womb, the assumption of the superiority of European culture over all other cultures, the respect for patriarchy, and so on, and can just retain the things they still have a need for, such as wine and cheese parties, the right to travel through Europe, and marvel at the sight of the monuments to the faith they deplore, and so on, and so forth, ad nauseam, and on it goes. Every European liberal and halfway-house European thinks because he lives near a police station (which of course he theoretically deplores), lions no longer need cages.” ~ CWNY
Estonians deny that “diversity is our greatest strength.” Instead, they know that there is strength in kinship, traditions, and faith. Listen to this song sung by a whole bunch of fair and lovely white people:
Lyrics:
Keeping the beauty of fatherland.
Fighting against the enemy:
Pay attention, pay attention,
Pay attention, pay attention!
If you believe in yourself,
In opinions of the wise,
In shoulders of the strong,
In mightiness of the elders,
In nimbleness of young men,
In sisters, brothers,
Above all in yourself,
Then you get a better life.
Heretics! There’s nothing in the Westminster Confession about a “fatherland”! I’m going to ask my Reformitard friends to excommunicate all of the Baltic states, for good measure.
Here’s a little Japanese ditty for our neo-Babelist friends. I’m sure they’ll like it much better than racist Estonian folk music.
Have you seen this? Even the yewish Doctor has to bow to the naked Emperor.
http://cnn.com/video/?/video/bestoftv/2010/08/13/ac.laura.racist.cnn
Very interesting, Angus. To keep her career, Dr. Laura decided to apologize, but what she said in the recording is correct, and everyone knows it. It makes no sense at all to restrict the use of any word to one race. We “haters” really do hate double standards. Latin, not so much.
It sounds like the white guy found a real winner for a “wife.” I’ll bet she’s the epitome of Proverbs 31 and Titus 2. If only Rushdoony were still alive, he could tell us about how these two share the same “culture.”
“. . .Badonicus publicly humiliated Doug Phillips. . .”
Ah, those were the days. . .good times.
The percentage of whites with black blood you cite appears quite high at 30%. The research statistics I have seen put the number at about 5%. In addition, people everywhere tend to marry “in group,” which means that the number of whites with black ancestry tends to be concentrated in particular areas.
Speaking of black disdain for property rights and indifference to theft, 30,000 of them in Atlanta just got into a big fistfight over not being able to claim rent subsidies, paid by whites. I guess you have to take their word for it when they say they’re Christians.
Beauregarde, that comes from Mark D. Shriver, a molecular anthropologist at Penn State University. Scroll about halfway down this page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-drop_rule
We’ve seen ranges of 2-20% black among the 30% of whites who are mixed, but Shriver puts this black admixture at 2.3%, which is the equivalent of having had three black ancestors among one’s 128 great-great-great-great-great grandparents. Note that this is only true for 30% of whites. Contrary to Obama’s fantasies, 70% of whites have no black admixture at all.
I’m sure you’re right that this has been concentrated in trashy, urban areas. Adultery has broadened in recent years, but now the overall rate is slowing.
By the way, we have so much to write about. I still can’t believe the excellent job that Bill Rolen did in drawing confessions from Hutton Gibson on TPC. The interview has been splashed everywhere in the media, from Jimmy Kimmel to TMZ to mainstream newspapers. Those Political Cesspool guys know how to make the news like nothing I’ve ever seen. You could spend millions and not buy that much advertising. The SPLC must be suicidal.
“By the way, we have so much to write about. I still can’t believe the excellent job that Bill Rolen did in drawing confessions from Hutton Gibson on TPC. The interview has been splashed everywhere in the media, from Jimmy Kimmel to TMZ to mainstream newspapers. Those Political Cesspool guys know how to make the news like nothing I’ve ever seen. You could spend millions and not buy that much advertising. The SPLC must be suicidal.”
I haven’t heard about this story admin, probably because I’ve been under a rock lately. Could you elaborate?
I also wouldn’t mind knowing if we can distinguish b/w situations in which intermarriage would be considered adultery vs. fornication. Not that I’m skeptical of the kinist position on marriage. I just wouldn’t mind having some more weapons in my arsenal. Thanks.
Students of early Christian history should indeed realize that the “Gnostics” whom the church had to fight against were not presenting only some weird and confused theology, but subversive social ideas as well.
Although their theological position was itself quite subversive enough – by denying that this world was created and ruled by benevolent God, attributing it instead to malevolent Demiurge, they struck at the root of Christian (or even traditional-pagan) notion that earthly rulers and magistrates held their power “by the grace of God” (or gods). This delegitimized the whole ancient social system, as traditional authorities could be seen as mere contemptible puppets of demonic “archons” that had imprisoned holy souls in this wicked material world.
Both Socialist hyper-communalism and Anarchist hyper-individualism were widely cultivated in Gnostic circles (and even Fascist führerprinzip as Gnostic cult-leaders often taught their followers to obey them uncritically or even worship them as incarnate gods).
These were the sinister people that are alluded to in various New Testament passages, like 2 Peter 2 or Jude 1 for example. While the church was subjected to outward persecution by pagan authorities, these folks were simultaneously trying to infiltrate and corrupt Christian congregations. The Gnostic subversives shared “underground” status with them and saw the pool of Christian converts as a natural target for recruitment.
In fact, it is probable that the wild slanderous rumors that conservative Romans told about early Christians (like having sexual orgies during communion services) actually had some basis of reality in the activities of Gnostic “Christians” whom pagans could not or did not bother to differentiate from orthodox Christians.
French novelist Gustave Flaubert described in his hallucinatory historical novel “The Temptation of Saint Anthony” the antics of various wild Gnostic cults – modern liberal-Babelists still have some catching up to do to match them in outrageousness (if we do not count Jim Jones, who was almost a textbook example of suicide-prone Gnostic in modern Communist clothes):
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/25053/25053-h/25053-h.htm#Page_49
“Antony represses an exclamation, and immediately Basilides, catching him by the elbow:
“The Supreme Being, with his infinite emanations, is called Abraxas, and the Saviour with all his virtues, Kaulakau, otherwise rank-upon-rank, rectitude-upon-rectitude. The power of Kaulakau is obtained by the aid of certain words inscribed on this calcedony to facilitate memory.”
And he shows on his neck a little stone on which fantastic lines are engraved.
“Then you shall be transported into the invisible; and, unfettered by law, you shall despise everything, including virtue itself. As for us, the Pure, we must avoid sorrow, after the example of Kaulakau.”
Antony — “What! and the Cross?”
The Elkhesaites, in hyacinthine robes, reply to him:
“The sadness, the vileness, the condemnation, and the oppression of my fathers are effaced, thanks to the new Gospel. We may deny the inferior Christ, the man-Jesus; but we must adore the other Christ generated in his person under the wing of the Dove. Honour marriage! The Holy Spirit is feminine!”
Hilarion has disappeared; and Antony, pressed forward by the crowd, finds himself facing the Carpocratians, stretched with women upon scarlet cushions:
“Before re-entering the centre of unity, you will have to pass through a series of conditions and actions. In order to free yourself from the Powers of Darkness, do their works for the present! The husband goes to his wife and says, ‘Act with charity towards your brother,’ and she will kiss you.”
The Nicolaites, assembled around a smoking dish:
“This is meat offered to idols; let us take it! Apostacy is permitted when the heart is pure. Glut your flesh with what it asks for. Try to destroy it by means of debaucheries. Prounikos, the mother of Heaven, wallows in iniquity.”
SF, in general parlance, adultery means cheating on a spouse, and fornication means premarital sex. The biblical definitions of these words are broader, and both can encompass miscegenation.
The Greek word for adultery is “moicheuo,” which Kittel’s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament defines as “the intermingling of animals and men or of different races.” Broadly defined, adultery is the mixture of anything which by nature, religion, covenant, culture, or kind, should be separate. See Hosea 7:4,8.
“They are all adulterers, as an oven heated by the baker, who ceaseth from raising after he hath kneaded the dough, until it be leavened… Ephraim, he hath mixed himself among the people; Ephraim is a cake not turned.”
“Whoredom” begets “strange/alien children,” according to Hosea 5:3,7.
“I know Ephraim, and Israel is not hid from me: for now, O Ephraim, thou committest whoredom, and Israel is defiled… They have dealt treacherously against the LORD: for they have begotten strange children: now shall a month devour them with their portions.”
The Hebrew word for whoredom in verse 3 is “zanah,” which means “to commit adultery.” The anti-Kinist must conclude that if the alien children had been converted to the faith, there would have been no whoredom or adultery. But this is contradicted by the actions of Ezra and Nehemiah. Not a single alien child was even given the opportunity to “convert” or be circumcised.
Esau is called a “fornicator” (pornos) in Hebrews 12:16 because he engaged in unlawful sexual intercourse with five Hittite “wives.” This could not have been called an inter-religious marital relationship since both Esau and his “wives” are identified as profane. The only way to make sense of his fornication is that he mixed his blood contrary to the wishes of his parents. Of course, this also makes it adultery.
http://spiritwaterblood.com/docs/insaneracesermons.pdf
John Lofton is friends with the “Black Homeschoolers” Facebook page.
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1194956548&ref=share
Befriending self-consciously White Homeschoolers would be hateful and racist though.
This guy says Kinists are guilty of a capital offense, and the state should execute them.
http://www.facebook.com/ReformedDogmatist?v=wall&story_fbid=144445962251864&ref=mf
Anti-Kinists are known for their surplus of Christian charity.
Liberal infiltration of Christian churches in modern times has been like a brood parasite, “cuckoo plant” that fools the nursing Christian mother to think that liberalism is her legitimate offspring, and causes her to feed this enemy of hers at the expense of her real offspring.
Moreover, the grotesque sight of Christians aiding and abetting their leftist enemies (grotesque like seeing a small bird-mother feeding a huge cuckoo parasite) has the extra effect of causing observing outsiders (like Nazis, for example) to despise Christianity and lump it indiscriminately together with poisonous liberalism.
And that reminds me of how in early centuries, the aberrant behavior of heretical Gnostic sects that liked to employ the name of Jesus Christ in their magical rites caused Romans to view all Christians with similar suspicion of deviancy.
Besides corrupting Christian individuals, Gnostic infiltrators also made the whole church look bad in the eyes of the outside world, just like Satan had intended.
One thing that has always made hard to weed out Gnostic subversives is that they have no moral scruples against lying and dissimulation. Their principles usually permit them to deny in front of men what they truly believe in, should that denial be expedient for their cause and personal welfare. They even have typical esoteric occultist’s contempt for uninitiated simpletons who do not even deserve to have secret doctrines explained to them.
Gnostic-minded heretics have always been lurking in shadows through the church history, following Christianity like sharks follow ships:
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/hcc8.iv.xiii.xi.html
“The Libertines described by Calvin were antinomian pantheists. They confounded the boundaries of truth and error, of right and wrong. Under the pretext of the freedom of the spirit, they advocated the unbridled license of the flesh. Their spiritualism ended in carnal materialism. They taught that there is but one spirit, the Spirit of God, who lives in all creatures, which are nothing without him. “What I or you do,” said Quintin, “is done by God, and what God does, we do; for he is in us.” Sin is a mere negation or privation, yea, an idle illusion which disappears as soon as it is known and disregarded. Salvation consists in the deliverance from the phantom of sin. There is no Satan, and no angels, good or bad. They denied the truth of the gospel history. The crucifixion and resurrection of Christ have only a symbolical meaning to show us that sin does not exist for us.
The Libertines taught the community of goods and of women, and elevated spiritual marriage above legal marriage, which is merely carnal and not binding. The wife of Ameaux justified her wild licentiousness by the doctrine of the communion of saints, and by the first commandment of God given to man: “Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth (Gen. 1:28).
The Libertines rejected the Scriptures as a dead letter, or they resorted to wild allegorical interpretations to suit their fancies. They gave to each of the Apostles a ridiculous nickname. Some carried their system to downright atheism and blasphemous anti-Christianity.
They used a peculiar jargon, like the Gypsies, and distorted common words into a mysterious meaning. They were experts in the art of simulation and justified pious fraud by the parables of Christ. They accommodated themselves to Catholics or Protestants according to circumstances, and concealed their real opinions from the uninitiated.”
Those Kinists are a bunch of no goods. There should be a law.
“Blacks in America are about 25% white, but the same is not true for whites”
I once met a very nice older Negro. He boasted freely to me of his white great-grandmother. The man was very black.
That 30% of whites have black ancestry seems very high to me also. No doubt the majority of whom being born after 1990.
Very Good article once again! I think you guys know that I have a Chinese daughter that I (along with my now ex-wife)adopted. And I love her dearly of course, but I have to admit that after the adoption my marriage and life in many ways fell apart. And I can’t help wonder if God was actually displeased that I took her from her homeland, although my intentions were good. I’m very open to what God’s will is on this issue. I think many of the people that will not discuss the aspects of Kinism in a sincere exegetical way is due to having a “stake” in the situation such as a wife or relative that is of another race. I definitely want her to marry a Chinese man (if possible-since she has some significant learning disabilities), but I do want the truth (regardless of having a foreign daughter)on this matter and all Kinist biblical understanding as the scriptures reveal them . Keep up the great work!!
Thanks, Kerry. If you’re seeking the best for her racially and religiously, you’re doing the right thing, and she’ll thank you for it. Plus, as a result, you’ll be a powerful witness for the truth.
Mark, the 30% could be exaggerated. I myself would like to know how the figure was achieved. I didn’t think much of it at first because he’s saying that among those 30%, the amount of mixture is miniscule. Still, it seems to me that it should be in the single digit range.
On second thought, let’s say that a person has three black ancestors among his 128 great-great-great-great-great grandparents. He would have a WHOLE LOT of fifth cousins alive today who would share the same (indiscernible) ancestry, wouldn’t he? Would this explain the high 30 percent, or am I off in my math? This should be a Steve Sailer article.
Thanks for clarifying Admin about my previous question. That helps.
Kerry, I know many people who do exactly what you do with the best of intentions like yourself, and I do think that they argue the way that they do because of the stake that they have in the argument. It’s nice to see you respond in a mature way about it. I think that finding a Chinese suitor for your adopted daughter is the most loving thing that you can do.
Admin, I think that this IS a Steve Sailer article. I remember reading an article by Sailer where he gives figures for American whites with black ancestry at something like 2% and of those that do, most have only 1 of their great-great-great-great-great grandparents as black. The number of white ancestors for blacks is higher and Sailer suggests that this has lead to a divergence in the way that both races view race-mixing. I’ll try to find it and give you the link.
Admin, found the Sailer article but it was on the same Shriver data presented. Sailer said that 70% of whites have no black blood, those that do have on average only 0.7% (1/128) black ancestry.
http://www.isteve.com/2002_How_White_Are_Blacks.htm
I’d love to see what percentage of this 30 percent practiced jungle fever AFTER the civil rights legislation and ensuing amalgamation campaign by Jewish advertising/media/de-education.
Mongrels were rarely seen in my childhood; much more common now. Actually, my zip code demographics (being dominantly white) show mulattoes as the number two, above blacks and Asians. Very interesting. Anyone noticed the disproportionate number of mulattoes seen in advertisements? The Target in my area has a mulatto in about every clothing sign, yet they are less than 1 percent of our population here. It’s clearly not “good” advertising, but rather agenda based.
Kerry – Your statement in very true. I have a “relative,” that had his (white)daughter marry someone of a different race. His views were “close” to mine, but yet never spoken outwardly, for fear of being “un-Biblical” or “racist.” Now there is regret. He is going to want to love his grandchildren. He is a Southern Baptist. Everything has changed for him now.
confed,
Yes, definitely. The real blitz in pro-mongrelization through advertising picked-up steam in the mid-90′s and went into overdrive in the 2000′s. The bigger the company, the more apt to have a big jewish advertising firm “pushing the envelope”. McDonald’s and Coca-Cola might be the worst offenders.
It’s a pretty sweet deal for a propagandist. You get others to pay you and they take any blowback that comes. The big accounting firms–little known–might be known by 1 in 1000. The big advertising firms. . .1 in 100,000. . .if that. Yet their collective product pelts almost everyone constantly during waking hours, without critical consideration.
Sorry, I meant to address that to “cofed” not “confed”.
Same person, CL. Thanks for your comments.
I can’t imagine the thinking of the by-the-book marketers, who realizes that they are pissing money away by letting the Jews ruing their sales in the long run. I just pray that behind the scenes there is animosity developing between these companies and the Jews who are outsources for this crap. Soon they will be looking about their own board for these hooks.
Is “white” a “race?” Sez who?
John Lofton, Editor, TheAmericanView.com
Communications Director, Institute On The Constitution
Recovering Republican
JLof@aol.com
You’re back for more punishment, John? What are you, a masochist? You’re like the knight in that Monty Python movie who has his arms and legs hacked off and still wants to fight. “Tis but a scratch!”
That’s Lofton in black:
Answer the question “Admin”: Is “white” a “race?” Sez who?
John,
Race is an English receptor word used for translating the biblical concept of seed; that is, offspring, descendants, posterity, or children. The extension through like tribes is something the Bible calls a “nation”, which is not a proposition depicting a geographic area in which dwells any man who assents to a Constitution, but rather is a parallel word to “nativity” which etymologically extracts to “natal” and means hereditary bloodline, i.e., “race”.
The only step left is to find in the Bible the “white” man. And this is as easy as finding the Israelites, which by the way Scripture calls the “holy race” (Ezra 9:2). Anthropologically, they come from Noah’s son Shem; the white man from Japeth.
So asking where the Bible calls the white man a race is really a microcosmic version of asking where the Bible teaches that tribes may practice Biblical property rights and form their own nations.
I doubt you need proof of this, as it was as common the Biblical view as the 1790 Naturalization Act (which restricted immigration to free whites of good character) reflected the American View.
That would be useful to him if he were actually listening, Confed. The funny thing is that, by the very question, he has established that he disagrees with Rushdoony and Scott, yet we are supposed to take his word that Rushdoony was not a Kinist. This is like arguing with an obnoxious child.
Admin,
You’re right. I don’t know why we still try. I’d just love to have that obnoxious, presuppositional bagpipe on our side. I love how he crushes the infidel for departing from the Christian faith, but I fear he joins them in denouncing us. He must have given one of his daughters to someone foreign to his family tree.
Lofton knows good and well he’s wrong. As do most anti-kinists.
“for they loved the glory that comes from man more than the glory that comes from God.” ~ John 12:43
So, was Rushdoony wrong to marry a white/black couple, as his son Mark says he did?
John Lofton, Editor, TheAmericanView.com
Communications Director, Institute On The Constitution
Recovering Republican
JLof@aol.com
For-The-Record: I believe there have been, are and will be “offspring, descendants, posterity, or children.”
John Lofton, Editor, TheAmericanView.com
Communications Director, Institute On The Constitution
Recovering Republican
JLof@aol.com
I agree, Confed. It would be great to have Lofton on our side. He prides himself for hitting the hard topics with the truth, yet he cannot be honest on this topic. Perhaps it’s just too hard for him.
I think the first image of the facebook conversation proves his dishonesty on the matter. Saying one thing to a Kinist’s face, while saying the opposite on the radio. I guess it is to be expected with anyone who has a comfortable chair in front of a paying audience.
Oh to have more honest men amongst us in these dark times.
Recovering Republican? Is that like a recovering alcoholic, hiding hooch in the toilet tank?
If indeed Rushdoony married an interracial couple, all that shows is that he violated the principles he stated in Institutes of Biblical Law. A man violating his principles in no way proves that those principles are wrong.
I’m glad that John Lofton is recovering from Republicanism. Now if he would only recover from Babelism. . . .
John, Bill Cooper does an excellent job outlining the biblical origination of the white race. Its basically an expanded reiteration of the footnotes of my Reformation Study Bible on Gen. 10:
http://www.ldolphin.org/cooper/appen3.html
Cooper’s book AFTER THE FLOOD is a great resource — and its free online:
http://www.ldolphin.org/cooper/contents.html
John, the fact that you are friends on FB with “black homeschoolers” demonstrates that you know that there is a black race. Is it so hard to believe that there is a white race as well? Moreover I’m sure you’ve seen the linked interview with Bradley on the American View where you admited that you yourself were white. It’s not that hard to understand. If you prefer, you can call the white race the European race if it makes you feel better.
John, don’t be despondent, brother. Just as you found the pearls for swine verse to justify your last retreat, I found a fresh verse for you:
“For the Lord GOD will help me; therefore shall I not be confounded: therefore have I set my face like a flint, and I know that I shall not be ashamed.” -Isaiah 50:7
Stick it out a bit, Johnny. The Lord will be proud.
Is “white” a “race?” Sez who?
-Middle Class White Guy
.
.
Yes.
Who “sez” so?
Well, the Federal Government, The Supreme Court, Federal Courts, The Founding Fathers,
Local Government, Local Courts,\ various town councils and county regulations,
Governments all over the world in fact,
Public and Private schools, Universities, Forensics, Corporations, Unions, Churches, the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, Congressional Black Caucus, NAACP, ADL, SPLC, and all people of color everywhere. Just to name a few.
And though there are varying non-technical applications, when it comes right down to it, the political and social consensus is that people of European ancestry are what is called, White people.
.
.
…….In other words, every single social, cultural and political institution in America (in the world!), past and present, testifies to, and affirms, the unquestionable existence of a White race.
In fact the narratives surrounding colonialism, the Atlantic slave trade, Apartheid in South Africa, the “Civil Rights” movement, the ‘historical’ election of Barak Obama and so on, center on the explicit, self-evident, belief-held-by-all of the existence of a White race.
Now,
If you still claim to be uncertain of whether or not you are White, there are various procedures you can do to find out. One way would be the process of elimination (though I don’t recommend it).
For example, walk up to a random black guy on the street and ask him, “What’s up nigger!”
If you wake up several hours later in the hospital with multiple broken bones, then you’ll know you’re not black.
Then, pick a fight with a Mexican and call him a spic while you’re throwing punches.
If you find yourself in jail being charged with a “hate crime”, you’ll know you’re not hispanic.
And so on and so on…
But again, I don’t personally recommend going that route.
The simplest (and safest) way to know if you’re White, is if you find yourself feigning ignorance as to what race you are.
Because ONLY White people pretend race doesn’t matter or doesn’t exist.
…
That’s all true, Narrator, but Lofton isn’t listening because he’s a biblicist. If he doesn’t see the words “white race” in the Bible, he doesn’t believe that it exists. This also makes him a hypocrite, because he acknowledges that he belongs to the white race all the time. Still, Lofton is better than most. Far better.
No, “Scarborough Fayre,” it just means what I said, which was the word “black.” To say the word “black” does not then mean that I, necessarily, believe there is a black “race” or, for that matter, any kind of “race.” Sad to say, you exegete what I say no better than you do Scripture….
John Lofton, Editor, TheAmericanView.com
Communications Director, Institute On The Constitution
Recovering Republican
JLof@aol.com
Yikes! I’m a “Biblicist,” eh? — which means, I think, according to dictionaries I looked in, one who takes the Bible literally, “a Biblical scholar.” A Biblical scholar! Wow. Who knew? Not me. But, hey!, “admin” couldn’t be wrong so I guess I am a “Biblical scholar.” So, please, treat me with a little more respect.
But, no I’m just trying to emulate those said to be “more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so” (Acts 17:11.)
Not a bad idea, fellas (and ladies) — to check what you believe to see if it is in accord with the Bible, the Word of God. Because if you do not do this, you could find yourself believing a lot of stupid, sinful, idiotic, incoherent, laughable stuff — like “the Narrator’s” view that we know there is a “white race” because the “Federal Government” says so.
Now, there’s a credible source — the Federal Government! You need to disaffiliate with “the Narrator.” He’s the kind of guy who gives racism a bad name.
John Lofton, Editor, TheAmericanView.com
Communications Director, Institute On The Constitution
Recovering Republican
JLof@aol.com
John, I was very clear in what I meant by using the term “biblicist.” In fact, I could define the word as meaning a carrot, and this should not strike you race-deniers as unusual, since you are so adept at changing the definitions and common understanding of words. This is why you can never deny that we Kinists agree with our Christian forefathers, because to acknowledge it would expose you as having far less in common with them on the subject of race than you share with every Christ-hating revolutionary alive today.
John is better than most. I don’t know why he feels the need to split our hairs. What is often misunderstood is that “kinist” actually wish the best for other races. I wish the best for the Reformed Korean Churches & the Black Reformed Churches. I also wish the best for MY KIN. If there is no race, why are there Korean Churches & Black Churches. I would also ask, did Robert E. Lee, Robert Lewis Dabney and Stonewall Jackson understand that there was a Black Race & a White Race? I believe that these fine Christian men did……….and I have yet to find ANY proof that Rushdoony ever married people of different races. Mark refuses to give any further detail.
“If he doesn’t see the words “white race” in the Bible, he doesn’t believe that it exists.”
-Admin
Well he won’t find the words “racist” or “racism” in the bible either.
.
.
.
“like “the Narrator’s” view that we know there is a “white race” because the “Federal Government” says so.”
-Middle Class White Guy
.
.
.
Ahem, is that really what I said, John?
I wrote, to quote, “every single SOCIAL, CULTURAL (note: that includes Churches, John) and political institution in America (in the world!), past and present, testifies to, and affirms, the unquestionable existence of a White race.”
Oh, and I also pointed out, that In fact the narratives surrounding colonialism, the Atlantic slave trade, Apartheid in South Africa, the “Civil Rights” movement, the ‘historical’ election of Barak Obama and so on, center on the explicit, self-evident, belief-held-by-all of the existence of a White race.
Now, isn’t it a sin for you to lie John?
But, if you fess up, I promise I’ll forgive you. Okay?
.
.
.
“Because if you do not do this, you could find yourself believing a lot of stupid, SINFUL, idiotic, incoherent, laughable stuff — like “the Narrator’s” view that we know there is a “white race” because the “Federal Government” says so.”
-Middle Class White Guy
.
.
.
And what “sin” would that be, that you mention in the quote?
.
.
.
.
“You need to disaffiliate with “the Narrator.” He’s the kind of guy who gives racism a bad name.”
-Middle Class White guy
.
.
“Racism”?
Tell us John, if there is no such thing as race, then what, pray tell, is “racism”?
.
.
.
“But, no I’m just trying to emulate those said to be “more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so” (Acts 17:11.)
-Middle Class White Guy.
.
.
Boy, and your so humble too!
So, just in the few comments here, you’ve come across as dishonest, unethical condescending, pompous, self-righteous, self-glorifying, self-promoting and just downright petty.
You don’t sell swamp land in Florida to little old ladies do you?
…
If Lofton has essentially denounced Kinsim as racist and evil, why does he still post on this wicked, Nazi site? I have three theories, which are probably best viewed as weak (inclusive) disjunctions:
1. Lofton realizes his hide has been given a good public roasting. Thus, he resorts to red herrings with great tenacity. To keep a few cronies he must pretend he has rebuttals, and no better way to do this than to make noise. The lawyer maxim is “When you have the facts, pound the facts; when you don’t pound the table!”
2. Lofton agrees with the Kinists in his heart of hearts but has sold out to Jew Christ-haters. That is, in order to keep his otherwise radically conservative message on the air (syndicated to more than 35 cities in 22 states) he has to pull up short of addressing the race issue.
3. Lofton is furthering his education. That is, Lofton is both a Kinist and on to the Heebs. The reason he comes back for more punishment is to gain further clarity on issues he is (sadly) lately learning, while at the same time protecting his income and his name.
There it is.
Confed–
You are a charitable sort.
If John doesn’t think that race exists, then I suppose I have just as much right to speculate that he doesn’t exist. Maybe he’s just a social construct.
Tell me, “Luther,”: Do you have any objection to a “white” Christian marrying a “black” Christian? Thank you.
Tell me, “Luther,”: Do you have any objection to a “white” Christian marrying a “black” Christian? Thank you.
Considering Kinists have a problem with people that are unequally yoked in the race department taking each other on as spouse, I’m gonna go ahead and answer with a yes (a yes qualified by the millions of words we’ve all written on the subject).
I think that Christians, of all people, should have the most respect for the distinctions of God’s created order.
Love the Dabney quote. He was brilliant – and right! To think that our generation gets the likes of Brian Schwertley and John Piper. If it weren’t for sites like this, I’d despair. Thanks for all your hard work.
I’ve seen John Lofton posit the same question to Kinists again and again, asking whether we see black/white miscegenation as licit. The fact that he knows the answer before asking the question and that he never follows up on the inquiry after we respond to it should tell us that he believes he’s made some profound rhetorical flourish by “putting us hard to the question”.
He’s counting on the modern emotional response to ‘racism’ as his big gun. He cares little for what the scripture and reason tell us in the matter because he’s banking on egalitarian sentiment proving itself more potent than revelation.
Sorry, John. You can’t beat something with nothing.
He asked me about it on his wall recently Ehud and I likened it to polygamy and marriage across vast age differences. He said that he hasn’t thought about the issue in depth (ya right). You said it best that anti-kinists will swallow the camels of polygamy and pedophilia in order to strain at the perceived gnat of kinism and practice miscegenation.
J-Lo asked of me if God had accomplished any good because of ‘race’. It’s very simply put that God accomplishes good as He sees fit however He sees fit & if He uses a distinguished folk to overcome an evil than He has certainly blessed the folk He has used with that honor bestowed upon them. It’s not because He was impressed with the ‘race’ of the folk but when a every team wears a different uniform then all are witness to the difference & know one side from another.
He may as well have asked me if Satan will be forgiven if He repents. He figures on a “yes” answer to his absurd hypotheticals. J-Lo consistently looks for an AHAH! The “I Gotcha!” kind of nonsense.
-tkbk-
Was NEVER my Q, tkbk. My statement was that NOBODY ever did any good BECAUSE of their “race.”
John Lofton, Editor, TheAmericanView.com
Communications Director, Institute On The Constitution
Recovering Republican
JLof@aol.com
Lofton, your statement is stupid. No kinist has ever said that race is a primary causal reason for anything happening. God uses race in the same way that God uses gender, family, the church, etc. He uses these institutions to accomplish His purpose throughout history. Acts 17:26-27 states explicitly that God created ethnic boundaries in order that the ethnicitieS (plural) would grope for God and find Him. Notice that I am not saying that race saves anyone. All I’m saying is what every orthodox Christian in history has already said, that God makes use of means in accomplishing his purposes, and race is one of those means.
Mr. Lofton, you have the imperious habit of visiting Kinist websites or pages and posing questions which you anticipate will be answered. Setting aside the fact that, due to your calumnies and gross libels, you do not deserve an answer from any of us, (and that when we answer, we answer not the man but the question) as a courtesy to those of whom you make queries, I would like for you to return the kindness and answer the following question for us: do you believe that the bible defines nationhood (or nationality) in a way that is clear, unambiguous, and comprehensible to men of the present age? When you have answered, I will post a 2nd question. Will you hazard an answer?
Protestants should be aware of the significant role that ethnic nationalism (that is, a form of racialism) played in the Reformation – even though emphasizing this truth has not been PC thing to do for a long time.
For example, Czech nationalism was directly empowering the Hussite movement of Bohemia.(I have read – from mainstream history book – that John Huss considered an intermarriage between Germans and Czechs to be a grave sin!)
Later, German nationalism played a great part in the original success of Lutheran reformation – even most of those Germans who were not strict partisans of Luther were dead against the interference of Italian prelates and their Spanish enforcers in internal German affairs. THIS factor, pan-German solidarity, prevented Luther from being burned at the stake in the early critical years.
English nationalism likewise was closely connected with the success of Anglican reformation – “is an Italian priest to be a master over England?”. Et cetera.
So there is no point for Protestants especially to pretend that ethnicism has not played a big positive part in their history.
In modern times, even such otherwise non-PC RCs like G.K. Chesterton have enjoyed mocking Protestants that their movement was originally based on mere “unspiritual” national chauvinism and that they were lacking the true universality and internationalism that only Rome could provide.
(Meanwhile, liberal-apostate Protestants, like lily-livered Anglicans, are today deeply embarrassed when they recall such “bigoted” origins of their own churches.)
Roman apologists have criticized even the Eastern Orthodox churches in a similar manner:
http://www.catholicity.com/commentary/ryland/08198.html
“Having cut its ties with Rome, the Russian Church became a purely national church, and it’s impossible for such a church to exist independently of state control.
Indeed, Soloviev says, a state is justified in exerting its supremacy over a spiritual authority that only represents a particular national church.
…
Apart from communion with Rome, particular national churches can have no true unity. As those familiar with Orthodoxy well know, there’s no such entity as THE Eastern Orthodox Church. Soloviev explains that in the East there exists nothing but separate and isolated national churches. The unity that the separated Eastern Churches claim is “a unity based on a broad but hollow indifference, implying no organic bond and requiring no effective fellowship between particular Churches.” Consequently, Soloviev insists, among the Eastern Orthodox, the universal Church is merely a concept, an abstraction.
…
The Catholic Church is unique in several fundamental respects. It’s the only Church that contends for universal social unity against nationalistic and individualistic concerns.”
John Lofton, Editor, TheAmericanView.com
Communications Director, Institute On The Constitution
Recovering Republican
Alzheimer’s Patient
Petr,
Your comments are always fascinating. I hope you’re keeping track of your bibliography for the book you’re going to write for us.
I agree, Lazarus!
Synchronicity…just before coming to SWB I was reading Cambria Will Not Yield, and he was taking about “Halfway House Christians” I think this fellow you wrote about fits that bill quite nicely. Sadly what fills the pews and the pulpits, today, of so-called Christian churches are ANTI-CHRISTS. I do believe that.
“My friends, civilization may be a thin veneer, and the world today may be slimy with hypocrisy, but no man is justified in killing lions to feed dogs.”
Cole Younger, 1903
The Revolution inaugurated 1789 has overthrown both throne and altar of Catholic nations and has now succeeded at the level of universal Church with the establishment of the anti-papacy in 1958.
One of the fruits of this time for Catholics is the historical revisionism of the Roman Catholic writers.
For example, at the time of the Great Western Schism – the evangelism of St Vincent Ferrer to Europe and his mission to the Synagogue.
The scholar and revisionist Michael Hoffman: “Scant scholarly attention has been given to the study of the synchronicity between militant evangelism of Judaics as embodied by Ferrer and the rise of radical dissatisfaction with corrupt clergy and prelates as embodied by Luther.
Was Vincent Ferrer’s remarkable success in evangelizing Judaics coupled with his vision of the rise of Antichrist as a result of corruption in the Church, a twin -engine of the coming Rerformation?”
Judaism Discovered. Anno Domini 2008. p. 340.
St Vincent Ferrer’s vision is true.
The best efforts to fight the long defeat of centuries of infiltration within the Church right up to the highest offices and finally the overthrow of the Chair of Peter in Rome does mean that Rome will become the seat of the Antichrist.
The Blessed Virgin Mother of God stated this unequivocably at La Salette. Her statement bears an imprimatur – worthy of credence and no error against faith or morals.
From NT times, Rome was spiritually called Babylon (just as Jerusalem was spiritually called Sodom and Egypt). And the “the one who lets / prevents” this reality now has been taken out of the way.
So the way is clear for one world Bablylonian religion of all faiths and none to consolidate under the anti-papacy -based in Rome.
We see this clearly at the Asissi Abomination. All the Illuminists have written about the New Age Relgion which will have as its true hermeneutic – Judaism: namely the Noachida of Judaism and the Ka Ba’alah. What remains of the holy faith in the Modernist post conciliar Church under the antipapacy is being reconfigured to the Judaism.
“The Plot Against the Church” by Maurice Pinay (12 priests) documents the Judaic infiltration and takeover of the Church. The Publisher of the American Ed acknowledged with sincere thanks “the kind assistance rendered by those dedicated Christian patriots – both Catholic and Protestant, whose sacrifices and patience made possible the American edition.”
There are many examples in Pinay’s work which cite the work of Protestant missionaries in Russia and Eastern Europe. They were witnesses to the Judeo-Bolshevik Revolution in Russia and supplied the West with the names of the Russian clergy martyred for the faith – inside Russia and the nations that came under the Sovjet, virtually all.
The Judaics have extinguished the patriarchal lineages in the nations subject to the Judaic Revolution (Bolshevism) by the murder of the bishops.
They have extinguished those lineages through the Masonic infiltration whereby apostates, excommunicates in law, place themselves outside the Church.
In the West they have extinguished these lineages through the anti-papacy which has invalidated the sacramental rites – the eucharist and the consecration of bishops.
In fact, very few altars remain to the Church.
As much as I appreciate GK Chesterton, he did not forsee the role that is being played by the Protestants in the time of the Eclipse of the Church.
The holy faith is now with the laiety and very few priests and even fewer bishops.
Whereas the evangelism and militancy of St Vincent Ferrer against the Synagogue anticipates much of Reformation thinking on the role of the laiety and it lays the groundwork for the Roman Catholic counterRevolution.
He was truly ‘the Angel of the Judgement.’