26 Theses in Defense of Ethnic Nationalism and Westphalian Sovereignty

Lev. 19:17 ‘You shall not hate your [c]fellow countryman in your heart; you may surely reprove your neighbor, but shall not incur sin because of him. 18 You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the sons of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself; I am the Lord.

Deut. 17:14 “When you enter the land which the Lord your God gives you, and you possess it and live in it, and you say, ‘I will set a king over me like all the nations who are around me,’ 15 you shall surely set a king over you whom the Lord your God chooses, one from among your countrymen you shall set as king over yourselves; you may not put a foreigner over yourselves who is not your countryman. 

Deut. 28: 43 The alien who is among you shall rise above you higher and higher, but you will go down lower and lower. 44 He shall lend to you, but you will not lend to him; he shall be the head, and you will be the tail. 45 “So all these curses shall come on you and pursue you and overtake you until you are destroyed, because you would not obey the Lord your God by keeping His commandments and His statutes which He commanded you. 46 They shall become a sign and a wonder on you and your descendants forever.

Numbers 33:55 But if you do not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you, then it shall come about that those whom you let remain of them will become as pricks in your eyes and as thorns in your sides, and they will trouble you in the land in which you live.

Rom. 9:1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost,That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:

Friedrich Engels, The Principles of Communism 1847,

“— 22 — What will be the attitude of communism to existing nationalities?

The nationalities of the peoples associating themselves in accordance with the principle of community will be compelled to mingle with each other as a result of this association and thereby to dissolve themselves, just as the various estate and class distinctions must disappear through the abolition of their basis, private property.”[1]

As I have already pointed out, the racial conspiracies of today are Jesuit controlled, but do involve many Jews, in order to destroy the race, culture, finance, and governments of those nations that broke away from the Holy Roman Empire and dispersed the King James Version Bible, the English language and the Protestant Reformation all over the world, and also to punish their rivals in the traditionalist Catholic congregations.  That is why Colonialism is so demonized in the Jesuit controlled Western University via Georgetown University.The white Protestant people brought white Protestant Bibles and white Protestant Religion to the peoples of the Earth. Those white Protestant peoples generally apostatized from their Fathers’ faith and now they are the targets of relentless hatred and Genocide.  In the corner with this Genocide is the Pseudo-Biblical Christian Right, who, fawn to the Cultural Marxists, afraid, that in their desire to come to power in America, attention to racial issues will present an obstacle to their goal. They don’t care about the well-being of black Americans. They hardly know anything about them.  All they care about is removing the obstacles to their power over the entire nation:  Nationalism, and in particular, Southern White Nationalism, and Black Nationalism, with all its racial baggage. Both White and Black Nationalism imply that the powers of the coming Pseudo-Biblical Christian Right, will be limited and the American Nation split into pieces. They refuse to settle for only a piece of America. They want the whole pie. White Nationalism and Black Nationalism are huge obstacles in their way. What then is the basis for racialism, Nationalism, and racial separation in general?

Here is list of summary arguments in defense of Biblical Racialism (Kinism) against the Alienist-anti racist position:

1. The Theocracy that Yahuwah established was endogamatic.[5] Moses teaches,

Lev. 21: 14 A widow, or a divorced woman, or one who is profaned by harlotry, these he may not take; but rather he is to marry a virgin of his own people

Lev. 22:12 If the priest’s daughter also be married unto a stranger, she may not eat of an offering of the holy things.

Deut. 25:5 “When brothers live together and one of them dies and has no son, the wife of the deceased shall not be married outside the family to a strange man. Her husband’s brother shall go in to her and take her to himself as wife and perform the duty of a husband’s brother to her.

Deut. 23:2 No one of illegitimate birth shall enter the assembly of the Lord; none of his descendants, even to the tenth generation, shall enter the assembly of the Lord.

The word here for illegitimate is mamzer. This exact word is used in Zech. 9:6 and is translated mongrel.

Zech 9:6 And a mongrel race will dwell in Ashdod, And I will cut off the pride of the Philistines.

Hosea 5:7 They have dealt treacherously against the Lord, For they have borne strange children. Now the new moon will devour them with their land.

The word strange here is zuwr. This word is used many times to refer to ethnic foreigners. Interracial marriage here is condemned. Moreover Heb. 12:15 reads “See to it that no one comes short of the grace of God; that no root of bitterness springing up causes trouble, and by it many be defiled; 16 that there be no immoral [6] or godless person like Esau, who sold his own birthright for a single meal.”

We do not read of any technical fornication on the part of Esau. What we read of is the pain that interracial marriage brought upon his family:

Gen. 26. 34 When Esau was forty years old he married Judith the daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and Basemath the daughter of Elon the Hittite; 35 and they brought grief to Isaac and Rebekah.

Folks, if the Bible was indifferent to race, the entire Old Testament makes no sense whatsoever. The Bible teaches that Yah the one God chose a specific race of people to be his chosen race. The distinctions between Jew and Gentile, native and alien in the Torah also make no sense. It cracks me up how Christians make such a big deal about supporting Israel, and making a specific point to finger a particular racial tribe as being the tribe to treat well in order to receive God’s blessing on one side of their mouth and then on the other tell me that the Bible is indifferent to race. Ok Christian, so if the Bible is indifferent to race, why then do you believe that if we do not support a certain racial tribe that God’s judgment will come upon us?

Then of course we have the appeal to Moses’ marriage to the Ethiopian woman in Numbers 12.

First, Miriam and Aaron were not condemned for having a problem with Moses’ marriage. They were condemned for challenging Moses’ authority. Verse 2 says, “Has the Lord indeed spoken only through Moses? Has He not spoken through us as well?” And the Lord heard it.” Moses was not sinless folks. He was rebuked on other occasions for refusing to circumcise his child.[7] Yah even considered killing him over this. Anyway, Moses did not consummate this marriage. The Book of Jasher, quoted in, Joshua 10:13 and 2 Samuel 1:18, states,

73: 30 So Moses took the city by his wisdom, and the children of Cush placed him on the throne instead of Kikianus king of Cush.31 And they placed the royal crown upon his head, and they gave him for a wife Adoniah the Cushite queen, wife of Kikianus.32 And Moses feared the Lord God of his fathers, so that he came not to her, nor did he turn his eyes to her.33 For Moses remembered how Abraham had made his servant Eliezer swear, saying unto him, Thou shalt not take a woman from the daughters of Canaan for my son Isaac. 34 Also what Isaac did when Jacob had fled from his brother, when he commanded him, saying, Thou shalt not take a wife from the daughters of Canaan, nor make alliance with any of the children of Ham. 35 For the Lord our God gave Ham the son of Noah, and his children and all his seed, as slaves to the children of Shem and to the children of Japheth, and unto their seed after them for slaves, forever.[8]

I thought I would add and emphasize verse 35 just to torture the minds of the Christian Marxists just a little bit more.

Clearly, race was a huge issue in the Jewish Commonwealth. If interracial marriage is so essential to the unity of Messiah’s Congregation and a denial of it is heresy, then it would appear that the Christian anti-racist position makes interracial marriage mandatory to achieve that perfect unity.

2. The traditional Racialist explanation for the origin of the 3 human races is that Yahuwah sovereignly caused Shem, Ham and Japheth to be born with their distinct race’s characteristics. Distinct race and ethnicity was intended by God before Babel, thus it was not a consequence of sin. Just as God sovereignly caused the peoples of Genesis 11 to speak different languages he caused these racial traits between Shem, Ham and Japheth.  The Pseudo-Biblical Christian Right has no explanation as to how the races came to be. If they admit that Shem, Ham and Japheth are the Fathers of the 3 great races, they must admit this was Yahuwah’s design because these men were born before the flood. They must also then admit that their integration policies are thereby destroying Yahuwah’s original design and will.

3. Also, the Bible says that after the flood, yet before the Tower of Babel [9], Yahuwah divided the earth in the days of Peleg.[10] Thus God’s intention for man to be separate was not a result of the sins at Babel. It was God’s intention all along, just like distinct races were intended by God all along.

4. Yahuwah’s curse of Ham [11] proves that Yahuwah is a Racialist and that he does not affirm Universal Equality.

The Truth About Genesis 9 and Race Relations; Can You Handle The Truth?

Genesis Chapter9; Does it Really Compass the Whole Line of Ham or Just Canaan’s Line?

5. Naboth was acting according to Tribal-Ethno Nationalism, that is the preservation of a bloodline upon a specific geographical location, in 1 Kings 21 when he refused to sell the land of his Fathers to Ahab stating, “Far be it from me, by יהוה, that I should give the inheritance of my fathers to you!”

6. As a general principle, Israel served as an example of nationhood that the rest of the nations were supposed to emulate.[12] In Deut. 17 rulers were to be chosen among the ethnicity of Israel.[13] In Deut. 23 we are faced with heavy racial prioritization in Israel’s assemblies.  Non-Israelites were called strangers or sojourners and were to be treated with courtesy and fairness.[14] However, so far from proclaiming the merits of diversity, Yahuwah proclaimed that he would send foreigners to sap the wealth of Israel if they disobeyed him.[15]

7. Yahuwah denied the principles of universal equality among mankind when he ordained ethnic Israel, the Hebrew race, as his chosen people, above the peoples of other nations.[16] This supremacy is recognized in the Renewed Covenant as well.[17]

8. The Greek word for nation in both the Tanach and the Renewed Covenant is ethnos. This is at the root of our word ethnicity.  Ethnicity has been the foundational principle upon which all human nationhood has been understood. How else do you define a nation without an ethnic group of people living upon a specific geographical location?[18]

9. In Romans 9:3 the apostle Rav Shaul proclaims his abiding racialism stating, “For I could wish that I myself were accursed, separated from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh”. And again at 16:7 “Greet Andronicus and Junias, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners, who are outstanding among the apostles, who also were in Messiah before me.” And again at 16: 21 “Timothy my fellow worker greets you, and so do Lucius and Jason and Sosipater, my kinsmen”.

10. We read in Rev. 21:24 “the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it (heavenly Jerusalem): and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.” Here we have the existence of distinct nations, thus distinct ethnicities in the time of the news heavens and the new earth! Messiah did not come to heal these supposed fractures in humankind. These distinctions are indicative of a Utopia, not of decline. Moreover, if Yah intended for the Renewed Covenant to abrogate the principles of Gen. 9-11,  and the people at Pentecost to amalgamate into one body politic, then he would have caused them to start speaking one language, as in the days of  the Tower of Babel. BUT HE DIDN’T!

11. If someone argued that our resurrected body will not have a distinct race I wonder, is it not going to have a distinct gender? If not, how is this not blatant Neoplatonism and Gnosticism? This is one of my many curiosities into the Gnostic essence of Christian Theology.

12. The great Puritan Matthew Poole, in his Synopsis Criticorum, the greatest synopsis of all Biblical commentaries in the history of the world, affirmed the existence of other sub-races besides the one human race, in The Exegetical Labors of the Reverend Matthew Poole Translated by the Rev. Steven Dilday, Volume 1: Genesis 1-9, “The Greeks recognize Iapetus, that is, Japheth, as the originator of their race[19]…And if it is likely that the Assyrians deified Nimrod, a foreigner, by the name of Jupiter Belus, why would not the Libyans also consecrate Ham, the progenitor of their own race, by the name Jupiter Hammon?”[20]

Some try to use Malachi 2:10 to avoid the existence of distinct races but the verse is clearly talking about the Hebrew tribe and their specific ordination from their Father Abraham. It has nothing to do with Universalism or Cosmopolitanism.

13. The Christian Doctrine of the Trinity is connected to Communism.[21] The Triune God doctrine teaches an absolute egalitarianism with no private property to buttress the Absolute Simplicity of the divine essence.

14. If the book of Galatians destroyed ethnic distinctions, then it by definition destroyed nations, the ethnos. The Neoplatonic and Eastern Orthodox principle of Huperousia is connected to this. You lose your distinction as a race. You are dissolved. This is monad thinking, it is connected to the Philosophy and the Politics of the late Roman Empire which the Catholic Church inherited after Rome’s Fall.

15. In recent history, Multiculturalism resulted in intense racial conflict in Yugoslavia, the Soviet Union, Chechnya, Abkhazia, Bosnia, Dagestan, and Czechoslovakia. It is fomenting massive hatred and violence in this country. Will we see race war? The famous Thomas Sowell is even convinced we will.

16. The anti-racists have no explanation for the huge supremacy Jews and especially white Europeans have with the history of technology and economics. The Asians are also advanced but the Africans have done nothing but infuse cultural degeneration in Western Civilization. They couldn’t even  figure out how to build a sea worthy vessel or a bridge before they left Africa. Obviously the differences in these peoples are real and obviously the races are not equal in intellectual ability.

17. Gen. 9-11 lays the groundwork for all of the Bible and human life. The Renewed Covenant does not need to speak to racial issues, just like it does not speak to Consanguinity, Bestiality, etc. These issues were dealt with in the Torah and do not need to be repeated in the Renewed Covenant. That is why Paul does not mention racial issues much.

18. Schwertley is operating off of a conflation between church and state. One-ness in Messiah refers to religion and spirituality. Our racialism pertains to the secular realm (which is not free form religious influence but logically distinct and functionally distinct).

19. The word Racism is used 19 times in Schwertley’s work. A term that he cannot use because he believes there is only one race. (P.S. The term racist is communist.[22]) Therefore, according to him, there does not even exist anything called interracial marriage because there is only one race.

20. In Gal 3:28 Rav Shaul was simply stating that race or gender does not bar one from entering the Covenant of Abraham, via Messiah. Theonomy Resources nor Schwertley answer the problem with the male and female. If this passage is doing away with racial distinctions it is doing away with gender distinctions. It follows very clearly then that women can become Elders and marry each other. This is why liberal denominations have flourished so well in our post racial society: by taking these anti-racial interpretations of Rav Shaul and the Law. Be consistent guys; Let women be preachers and let gays marry. That is the consistent logical implication of your beliefs. Also this passage would only speak to those who are in Messiah. What of those outside of him? Do they get de-racialized because of Messiah too? Do we have the Eastern Orthodox Christus Victor Universal atonement raising its head here? Thus, the context here is not secular and racial. It is ecclesiastical. Yehoshuwah dissolves the significance of race as it regards covenant status. He does not dissolve race itself. Thus the Christian anti-racist position conflates substance with mode and circumstance.

21. Theonomy Resources repeats the confusion that Kinism means you hate people because they are a different race than you are. I am still waiting for the argument why that is the case. I don’t believe it. I am also still waiting for the logical connection between being friends with people of other races and an obligation to miscegenation with them.

22. The anti-racist position operates off of a Plotinian dialectic. Why do they give us only the options of Universalism or Sectarian racial hatred? Why can’t the tribes remain separate in order to keep the peace between the races?

23. The anti-racists have no answer to the anti-white violence whites have suffered recently in modern civilization.[23]

24. The anti-racist Christian position is overly unrealistic and most importantly, unbiblical regarding group relations. The Torah, which Messiah clearly stated he did not come to abolish[24], protected Israel tribally by demanding Israel to distinguish between personal dynamics and group dynamics. Lev. 19:17-18, which is substantially repeated in Luke 6:27-36 and Mat. 5:43-44 which teaches us to love our personal enemies; that is, those who have personal grievances with us or we with them. However, with reference to group dynamics, Yah commanded Israel to be ruthlessly vengeful with those groups of people who were historical threats to Israel whether they were foreign or domestic.[25]

25. Brian Schwertley thought he had refuted the Kinist position when he listed many passages in the Bible that defend the proposition that Yah allowed the Absorption of Non-Jews into the Covenant People with Full Rights as God’s People.  The problem is we are not talking about people being absorbed into our race. We are talking about the destruction of the Japhethite race.

26. Ephesians 2 and the middle wall is not talking about the Ceremonial Law. This is Christian mythology. It is not referring to the ceremonial law.[26]

————————————————————————————————————

http://theonomyresources.blogspot.com/2010/08/refuting-kinism-part-1-acts-1726-27.html

Reply to Theonomy Resources

By race I am not limiting marriages between body politics but to the 3 great races.

Blacks and Muslims do not target us because we are English, or Scottish, or German. They target us because we are white. Theonomy Resources: tell us how you plan to solve the problems these sites have cataloged:

http://whitegirlbleedalot.com/

http://blackracismandracehatred.blogspot.com/

http://topconservativenews.com/category/crime/hate-crime-murder-crime/

http://topconservativenews.com/category/crime/

In general, some immigration is ok; 2-3% immigration and even miscegenation does not threaten the race. After 4 or 5 generations a mixed person could look exactly the same as the general race. However, this is an extraordinary situation the white race finds itself in in the 21st Century. We are being exterminated[27] and thus we will not be mixing with any people for quite a long time.

Theonomy Resources’ notion of absolute equality is ridiculous: Yahuwah denied the principles of universal equality among mankind when he ordained ethnic Israel, the Hebrew race, as his chosen people, above the peoples of other nations.[28] This supremacy is recognized in the Renewed Covenant as well.[29] Yahuwah’s curse of Ham[30] also proves that Yahuwah is a Racialist and that he does not affirm Universal Equality.

The great Puritan Matthew Poole, in his Synopsis Criticorum, the greatest synopsis of all Biblical commentaries in the history of the world, affirmed the existence of other sub-races besides the one human race, in The Exegetical Labors of the Reverend Matthew Poole Translated by the Rev. Steven Dilday, Volume 1: Genesis 1-9,

“The Greeks recognize Iapetus, that is, Japheth, as the originator of their race[31]…And if it is likely that the Assyrians deified Nimrod, a foreigner, by the name of Jupiter Belus, why would not the Libyans also consecrate Ham, the progenitor of their own race, by the name Jupiter Hammon?”[32]

Some try to use Malachi 2:10 to avoid the existence of distinct races but the verse is clearly talking about the Hebrew tribe and their specific ordination from their Father Abraham. It has nothing to do with Universalism or Cosmopolitanism.

————————————————————————————————————

http://theonomyresources.blogspot.com/2010/08/refuting-kinism-part-2-genesis-118-9.html

Theonomy Resources quotes John Robbins,

“Do not harass Moab, nor contend with them in battle, for I will not give you any of their land” (verses 5, 6, 9). Continuing commercial relations are not forbidden, but continuing military and political relations are. Borders were instituted for the purpose of separating rulers, not peoples, from each other.” John W. Robbins, The Sine Qua Non of Enduring Freedom, “The Trinity Review,” July-August 2010 (Unicoi, TN: The Trinity Foundation).”

>>>So militaries and soldiers are not peoples?

TR again,

“Good thing Abraham wasn’t a kinist.  Instead of refusing to leave his kindred on the grounds that the doctrine of kinism requires one to remain with his people, Abraham obeyed God. ”

>>>That is a special occasion arising from redemptive purposes. The same is true of Yehoshuwah. He was given a special occasion with a command to suffer which Yah gives to no one else.[33]

“(1) If the “genetic differences” of those of different “races” render it impossible for “races” to coexhist, then why do kinists fear that coexhisting “races” will, like those at Babel, unite in rebellion against God?”

>>>It is not something future. They are rebelling against God.  Through some manipulative Marxist revolutionary like Nimrod people are forced into unity much like what happened here in the U.S. during and after the Civil Rights era. The unity does not have to be peaceful. You are conflating the substance of the action with its quality.

“(2) If national boundaries were permanently set at Babel, then everyone would be faced with the impossible task of tracing their ancestry all the way back to where they originally lived, and then resettling there.”

>>>Well, this is only true of white people in North America, South Africa and the blacks who’s ancestors were taken from Africa.  Yeah, the American experiment is a peculiar institution no doubt. However, to make this Country (Don’t forget the South African Boers), which was founded by people running for their lives from the Inquisition, the rule and not the exception is a mistake. I used to work for an Indian man who had immigrated here 17 years ago, but before that his bloodline had lived in India for thousands of years.

“(3) This previous point makes white American kinists hypocrites.  How can they support living in America when non-white people groups lived here before them?  Should not white American kinists move to Europe?”

>>>No. It was a necessity that we moved here due to persecution and for my part, the Natives tried to kill us so many times that it justified their annihilation in these parts of the South.

Why Did the White Europeans Come To North America?

Did the White People of the Original Jamestown Settlement, Pursuant to the Establishment of the Colony of Virginia, Obtain Land and Influence by Conquest and the Genocide of Native Americans? I Deny

How Did the White Men from England Take Possession of Kentucky?

“(4) Since there has been so much “racial mixing” since Babel, one has a hard time knowing which of the “races” he really belongs to, or how “pure” of a member of a “race” he actually is.”

>>>The blacks and the Muslims and the secular anti-white Jews don’t seem to be too confused. In general, they see a white face and they want to crush it.

“5) If people can only dwell with those of their “race,” then they would have to find out all the different “races” they are part of (since there has been so much “racial mixing” throughout the centuries), and cut their bodies into pieces and have their body parts shipped to the lands of different “racial” groups in proportion with how much they are part of any given “racial” group.  So, for instance, someone who is 90% white, 5% Asian, and 5% black could have 90% of his body parts shipped to Europe, 5% to Asia, and 5% to Africa.”

>>>Absurd. The male line defines what tribe one is from. Trace back through your fathers and you will come to a specific tribe.

“6) If each “race” must dwell in isolation from others, what about someone who is, for example, part white and part black?  Is he a unique “race,” or two “races”?  Can he choose to live in either Europe or Africa?  Or must he go and start his own country?  Of course, with all the “racial mixing” throughout the centuries, it’s hard to know if anyone in particular is “racially pure.”

>>>Usually, mixed peoples side against their white side as they are programmed to do. In that case they should go with the race they side with. We are not suggesting that the whole world submit to our leadership, only that we have a right to organize together and start our own white nation.

———————————————————————————————————–

http://theonomyresources.blogspot.com/2010/08/refuting-kinism-part-3-galatians-328.html

“If you raise this verse [Ga;. 3:28] against a kinist, he might say something like this:

“If you believe this verse refutes kinism, then you are saying that there are no distinctions whatsoever between people. Thus, for example, you are saying that it is permissible for men to marry men, since according to your interpretation there are no distinctions between male and female.”

However, one does not have to affirm this absurd interpretation to see how this verse refutes kinism. Galatians 3:28 refutes kinism in its emphasis on church unity and fellowhip.”

>>>Rav Shaul was simply stating that race or gender does not bar one from entering the Covenant of Abraham, via Messiah. You never answered the problem with the male and female. If this passage is doing away with racial distinctions it is doing away with gender distinctions. It follows very clearly then that women can become Elders and marry each other. This is why liberal denominations have flourished so well in our post racial society, by taking this anti-racist, ridiculous, interpretation of Rav Shaul and the Law.

 “A parallel passage to Galatians 3:28 reads:

“Here there is not Greek and Jew,circumcised and uncircumcised,barbarian, Scythian, slave, free; but Christ is all, and in all.” (Colossians 3:11)”

>>>But that would only speak to those who are in Messiah. What of those outside of him? Do they get de-racialized because of Christ too? Do we have the Eastern Orthodox Christus Victor Universal atonement going on here?

“Paul affirms the necessity of fellowship between Christians of different people groups (e.g., Greek, Jew, barbarian, Scythian). They are to be patient with one another, bear with one another, and forgive one another. They are to engage in “teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs.”

>>>When has a Biblical Racialist-Kinist ever taught that white people are to never speak to people of other races or necessarily rebuff them or be rude to them?

“Therefore, any doctrine or practice that makes unlawful distinctions between Christians based on race, ethnicity or national origin is a violation of the Lord’s most basic commandment to be as one and love one another and hence, a disciplinable offense (Gal 3:28, Rms 14:10,19 Phil 2:1ff).” Brian Abshire, The Royal Race of the Redeemed (August 14, 2010, International Institute for Christian Culture)”

>>>Notice he conveniently leaves out gender because he knows too well that Gal 3:28 mentions gender distinctions. Be consistent guys. Let women be preachers and let gays marry. That is the consistent logical implication of your beliefs.

“So, are you a kinist? If so, and if you desire to be segregated from Christians of other “races,” you might just get your wish and be segregated from them for all eternity in Hell.”

>>>LOL! Eternal hell? Hmmm…I thought I read somewhere about the soul being destroyed in Hell?[34] And what is more sickening is that right after telling people, the Kinists, that because they want to be free from persecution, rape, pillage and murder from black people who hate them, they are going to hell, Theonomy Resources waxes pietistic,

“One’s attitude toward God’s people reflects one’s attitude towards God Himself:…
“Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God. Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love.” (1 John 4:7-8)”

>>>You are one sick pup Theonomy Resources. I would like to see your mouth filled with gravel.

“Kinism opposes the attitude of God Himself towards His people.  Contrary to God accepting and fellowshipping with His people unconditionally through the merits of Jesus Christ, kinism upholds accepting and fellowshipping with God’s people conditionally through the “merits” of “race.”  While Scripture says, “Therefore,accept one another, just as Christ also accepted us to the glory of God” (Romans 15:7) (NASB), kinism says, “Reject one another on the basis of ‘race’.”

>>>What does Rav Shaul mean by accept? To a Jew, the thought of Gentiles in any number coming to the true God was laughable.  Even after Messiah had clearly given His will for the Gentiles in Matthew 28:19-20 we find that the apostles in Acts 11 were still not taking this command seriously. Peter was harassed by the brethren (!) in Acts 11 due to his recent dealings with the Gentiles.  Even after the clear command of Messiah in Matthew 28 the Yahudim are uncomfortable with the Gentiles hearing the Word of Yah and they were also uncomfortable with Peter eating with them. This ethnic distinction is even clearer in verse 15 when he says, “And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them just as He did upon us at the beginning.”  The chapter progresses to shed light even on the reaction of the brethren, when they say, “Well then, God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life.”  The most telling passage in this chapter is in verses 19-20 where we read, “So then those who were scattered because of the persecution that occurred in connection with Stephen made their way to Phoenicia and Cyprus and Antioch, speaking the word to no one except to Jews alone. vs. 20 But there were some of them, men of Cyprus and Cyrene, who came to Antioch and began speaking to the Greeks also, preaching the Lord Yehoshuwah.” This verse makes very clear that for a time the Jews thought that Messiah died to be the propitiation for theirs sins and not to those of the whole world. This is the exact sense I believe John is using in 1 John 2:2 when he addresses the Jews and corrects their thinking that salvation belongs only to them.

So by accept Rav Shaul is referring to religion, not to miscegenation. Kinists admit that people of other races can believe in Messiah and receive saving benefits from him.

————————————————————————————————————

http://theonomyresources.blogspot.com/2010/09/refuting-kinism-part-4-luke-1030-37.html

Theonomy Resources begins with the often repeated confusion that Kinism means you hate people because they are a different race than you are. I am still waiting for the argument why that is the case. I don’t believe it. I am also still waiting for the logical connection between being friends with people of other races and an obligation to miscegenation with them.

————————————————————————————————————

http://www.reformedonline.com/uploads/1/5/0/3/15030584/kinist_heresy.pdf

Reply to Schwertley

The word Racism is used 19 times in this work. A term that he cannot use because he believes there is only one race.

Schwertley, in typical Yankee douche-bag form, states,

“Genesis 9:20-27 …Racists have appealed to this passage for more than one hundred and fifty years…Does the curse on Canaan or the statement of judgment toward Ham justify the position that black Africans would always be an inferior, subject peoples? The answer is definitely not!… Ham is not cursed, no matter how freely proslavery men may have employed this text.”

>>>This has been refuted in such detail I see no more reason to continue:

The Truth About Genesis 9 and Race Relations; Can You Handle The Truth?[35]

Genesis Chapter9; Does it Really Compass the Whole Line of Ham or Just Canaan’s Line?

See also The Book of Jasher Chapter 73:35.

This is why white men in the North America, especially in the South, have had an aversion to white-black marriage. The blacks are under a curse that speaks to their general savage disposition.  Truth hurts. Can you handle it?

After reading these links, Schwertley should apologize publicly with great  embarrassment and humiliation.

As a side note, Gen. 9-11, lays the groundwork for all of the Bible an human life. The Renewed Covenant does not need to speak to racial issues, just like it does not speak to Consanguinity. These issues were dealt with in the Torah and do not need to be repeated in the The Renewed Covenant. That is why Paul does not mention racial issues much.

Schwertley is operating off of a conflation between church and state. One-ness in Messiah refers to religion and spirituality. Our racialism pertains to the secular realm (which is not free form religious influence but logically distinct and functionally distinct).

“Blood ties do not lower crime rates and stop wars.”

>>>This is completely absurd. Race is the #1 reason for hate crime. I have already documented this in great detail but here is more:

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf, Pages 11-15

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/hc0309.pdf, Quotation from page 7,

“From 2003 to 2009, the greatest percentage of hate crime victimizations were against white, non-Hispanic individuals”

Milan Bruijnzeel, writer for American Renaissance states in Race in Eastern Europe [October 18, 2012],

“Failed multi-ethnic states

Communism had yet another effect on Eastern Europe: It held multi-ethnic states together. Once the centralizing power of the state was weakened, suppressed nationalism tore apart both Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union. There was war in Chechnya, Abkhazia, and Dagestan, and Czechoslovakia separated into its component parts.

The Yugoslav wars are classical examples of how ethnic tensions can lead to massacres. If even ethnic Europeans cannot live together in one state, why does the political elite believe Europeans and non-white immigrants can live together?

The Yugoslav wars were notorious for war crimes and ethnic cleansing. Even today, more than a decade after the war, mass graves are still being discovered. The wars were a conflict between the nations of Serbia and Croatia, but also between Christians and Muslims. The Muslims have been in the area for centuries and are a remnant of the Ottoman Empire. They have lived among Christians this entire period, but the sudden flare up of animosity shows how dangerous “diversity” can be, even if it has seemed peaceful on the surface for generations.

Slobodan Milosevic, Radovan Karadzic, and Ratko Mladic are all names that have been widely associated with war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and genocide. All three are Serbian Christians who were politicians and military officers during the war, and their trials at the International Court in The Hague have been widely reported.

However, the Bosnian/Muslim side was hardly innocent. Men such as Sefer Halilovic, Naser Olic, and Rasim Delic were responsible for murders, torture, and rape, but only served short prison sentences or were even acquitted of charges. By the time of the NATO bombings of Serbia at the end of the war in 1999, the West had officially decided that Serbia was responsible for the war and had to be punished.

As American General Wesley Clark explained during the bombing of Serbia:

Let’s not forget what the origin of the problem is. There is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That’s a 19th century idea and we are trying to transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multi-ethnic states.

Men such as Ratko Mladic are portrayed as monsters by the Western media but they are heroes for many Serbs. The Bosnians were the official victims, so they have not been pursued for war crimes with the same vengeance.

An estimated 140,000 people died in a war that was a direct outgrowth of trying to manage a multi-ethnic state of the kind General Clark was trying to build. The term “balkanization” comes from this area because it already had a record of ethnic conflict, but perhaps the war’s greatest shock was that it happened in Europe, which was supposed to be beyond violence of this kind.”

http://www.amren.com/features/2012/10/race-in-eastern-europe/

———-

“The high crime rate among non-white immigrants is due to their unbiblical worldview, not their skin color. Real Christian blacks, Mexicans and Vietnamese, etc.  do not commit crimes and go on welfare. Real Christians do not use race to favor one group in the church or society over another.”

>>>You are delusional Mr. Schwertley. First, you offer no evidence for your claims. Second, your assertions fly in the face of the thousands of cited evidences of non-white on white hate crimes that happen all over the West and particularly in America. White people are the most hated people on the earth and until you recognize this fact you are nothing but a professional liar aiding the Genocide, rape, pillage and murder of your own race. Schwertley simply does not understand the last 60 years of human history. It was not what Paul was dealing with in the 1st century.  Yes, right now, it is only about white people. We should not allow any immigration or miscegenation for at least 100 years.

Schwertley continues to show his Yankee hatred with his insolent “southern white cracker” phrase he uses about us throughout this article.

How does he explain the huge supremacy Jews and especially white Europeans have with the history of technology and economics and how the Africans have contributed virtually nothing to technology and Economics? On the contrary, the Africans have been a burden in every land they have influence. These people could not even figure out how to build a Sea Worthy vessel or even a bridge before they left Africa.

“The only way to have a common, lasting heritage and culture is to have a common faith. One’s faith determines culture, not the other way around. Culture to a large degree is an external manifestation of faith.”

>>>Take our own country for example. The Yankee Abolitionists used the black race as leverage against their economic opponents in the South to justify the destruction of their economy and the structure of their government and of the entire country. Now, having established these points of the condemnation of slavery and racial equality, completely contradicting the Torah, the Churches were logically forced to admit the Bible had errors in it, giving birth to the modern liberal Church. Speak with the local Lesbian female Liberal Minister and her Ace of Spades in a discussion of Biblical inerrancy is slavery and the racial history of blacks in America. Basically, integration is the platform for a fifth column pursuant to class warfare and civil war.

“If we took some real Christian families from Greece, Africa, Spain and China and put them on an island there would be no oppression, murder or suffering.”

>>>Sure Mr. Schwertley! The Abolitionists in this country were all real Christians Mr. Schwertley, and their doctrines, excuse me YOUR doctrines, have resulted in the Cultural Marxism we have today.

“Nazi Germany demonstrates what happens to a nation or culture that abandons the Christian faith.”

>>>Actually, the Nazis were reacting against the previous Communist administrations that were spreading irreligion and immorality all over Germany. It is the same story that we have here. You create mass racial, religious and cultural degeneration; add in an economic collapse, which infuriates the population to blame the current administration and all its policies; this provides justification for a reactionary movement of ultra-Right Wing Fascism to swing the pendulum back in the opposite direction.

“Soviet Russia is another good example. These nations (Russia and Germany) did not have a race problem, but a faith problem.”

>>>Absurd! This was already pointed out by Bruijnzeel above. The Soviet Union broke over ethnic disputes. One such tension was between the Russians and the Kazakhs.

http://www.nytimes.com/1987/01/11/world/origins-of-kazakhstan-rioting-are-described.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazakhstan#Kazakhstan_under_Soviet_Rule

“Culture is an expression of faith; indifferent elements of a culture, like eating rice and fish instead of wheat and beef are adiaphora and irrelevant.”

>>>Just because a matter of cuisine is indifferent to Dogmatic Doctrine, does not mean it is indifferent to culture. Part of Culture is Geographic location and the animals and plants that are indigenous to the region. Those plants and animals make up the bulk of the cuisine and are a huge part of the culture. I can’t believe this man who is so careful on so many matters is writing like a complete novice on this issue.

Schwertley complains that Kinism replaces the work of Messiah and the Holy Spirit with race as the moral preservative.

“In other words, the gospel of Jesus Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit that flow from His perfect work are not enough to restrain sin, hatred and crime.”

>>>This is silly. The work of Messiah and the HS are necessary but not sufficient conditions for a successful society. Obviously, we need to implement Yah’s laws. According to Schwertley’s logic we don’t need establishment either. We don’t need government to reform a society because J-J-J-J-Jesus can do it all. No need for police officers or fireman. All we need is J-J-J-J-J-J-Jesus!

Strangely, Schwertley quotes Rushdoony as saying,

“All differences must be suppressed in favor of the anonymity of union. The good life and the full life are in and through the State. The theological requirements for the unity of the godhead require this faith in the unity of humanity, its one true god. Hence, ‘Let us build us a city,’ a one-world order, and usher in paradise apart from God.” He [Rushdoony] continues: “In terms of all this the meaning of the proclamation ‘Let us make us a name,’ becomes clear: let us be our own blessing, our own Messiah, savior and god.”

>>>I have already documented how the Christian Doctrine of the Trinity is connected to Communism.

The Triune God doctrine teaches an absolutely equal social order with no private property to buttress the Absolute Simplicity of the divine essence.

“By adopting the language of the macro-evolutionists of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries and then applying it to different nationalities (which treats the various people groups as intrinsically different with regard to their being), the kinist is in line with secular humanistic racist propaganda. Such thinking, obviously, has nothing to do with the Bible.”

>>>The great Puritan Matthew Poole, in his Synopsis Criticorum, the greatest synopsis of all Biblical commentaries in the history of the world, affirmed the existence of other sub-races besides the one human race, in The Exegetical Labors of the Reverend Matthew Poole Translated by the Rev. Steven Dilday, Volume 1: Genesis 1-9, “The Greeks recognize Iapetus, that is, Japheth, as the originator of their race[36]…And if it is likely that the Assyrians deified Nimrod, a foreigner, by the name of Jupiter Belus, why would not the Libyans also consecrate Ham, the progenitor of their own race, by the name Jupiter Hammon?”[37]

“Thus, the idea that dark skin is a sign of a curse is complete nonsense. Dark skin is simply better suited to hot, tropical, sunny climates. (The idea that dark skin is a sign of the curse comes from the view that the word Ham means black, or sunburned. This is nonsense. The meaning of the name Ham is not clear.)”

>>>Can Schwertley provide any evidence that the color of black skin is a curse according to Kinist literature? If not is this just another case of his demagoguery to divert the readers attention from the fact that he has no case? Or is it simply a blatant violation of the 9th Commandment?

“Biblical Examples that allow for the Absorption of Non-Jews into the Covenant People with Full Rights as God’s People ”

>>>My problem is not absorption, it is genocide.  Of course some integration, which portion can be easily absorbed into the race, is allowed in the Torah. This is not what we are faced with today. We are faced with wholesale Genocide and displacement.

“This does not mean that different languages or nations will be abolished but that the enmities, diverse worldviews and hatreds will be eliminated by the Spirit’s application of the death and resurrection of Christ to the world.”

>>>This is ad hoc. If Galatians destroyed ethnic distinctions, then it destroyed nations, the ethnos.  The Neoplatonic and Eastern Orthodox principle of Huperousia is connected to this. You lose your distinction as a race. You are dissolved. This is monad thinking.

“The middle wall of partition has been broken down at the cross and thus we are to consider people of other races, nations and languages who are Bible-believing Christians to be our brothers”

>>>So what of those of other peoples that are not “Bible-believing Christians” [The correct language is Yahudim or Natsarim]? Here the Neoplatonism of Christianity raises its head again. Salvation dissolves one’s humanity into monadic transcendence.

Schwertley quotes Spurgeon,

“They were strangers from the covenant made with Israel. But through the sacrificial death of Christ, Gentiles have been made fellow citizens with all the Jewish saints. “In any part of the Christian church all national distinctions are swept away, and we are no more foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens of the saints and of the household of God…. God has leveled up the outcast and despised Gentiles and has admitted us to all the privileges of his ancient covenant, making us heirs of Abraham…. He has given us all the blessings which belong to Abraham’s seed, because we too possess like precious faith as the father of the faithful himself had”

>>>Notice he says “in any part of the Church”. Thus, the context here is not secular and racial. It is ecclesiastical. Yehoshuwah dissolves the significance of race as it regards covenant status. He does not dissolve race itself. Thus the Christian position conflates substance with mode and circumstance.

“Paul says that the Gentiles are no longer aliens or strangers from the covenant nation. The middle wall of partition (the ceremonial law) that separated the two peoples is gone. The two are now one new man.”

>>>This is Christian mythology. It is not referring to the ceremonial law.

 


[3] This order was created by the Vatican in the 16th Century to destroy the Reformation and repair the Holy Roman Empire.

[4] Talk to any socially active liberal and they will consistently quote literature produced by JesuitGeorgetownUniversity.

[5] Jewish Encyclopedia, “Marriage”

“Kinship and Marriage.

In the earliest Hebrew history endogamy prevails; particular care is taken that Isaac and Jacob shall contract marriage only with their own kin. The Canaanite wives of Esau were “a grief of mind unto Isaac and to Rebekah” (Gen. xxvi. 34-35; comp. xxvii. 46). Some of the sons of Jacob also departed from this custom (Gen. xxxviii. 1-2, xli. 45). Moses married outside his own people, but he was a fugitive, and became an adopted member of his wife’s tribe (Ex. ii. 21; comp. iv. 18). It was, nevertheless, looked upon as right and fitting that marriage should take place within the circle of one’s own kindred (Gen. xxiv. 2-4, xxix. 19; comp. Judges xiv. 3).

However, the changed conditions subsequent to settlement in Canaan made an intermingling of races inevitable (see Judges iii. 6; Ruth i. 4; II Sam. xi. 3; I Kings vii. 14; I Chron. ii. 17; II Chron. xxiv. 26), and the custom of the kings in making foreign alliances by marriage favored this (II Sam. iii. 3; I Kings iii. 1, xi. 1, xvi. 31). The Deuteronomic law forbids marriage with the Canaanites, but, apparently, makes an exception to the endogamous rule in favor of the Edomites and Egyptians (Deut. vii. 3, xxiii. 7; comp. Ex. xxxiv. 16). The period of the Exile and the century following was also a period of laxity, but strict laws prohibiting marriage with the foreigner were enforced in the time of Ezra and Nehemiah (Ezra ix. 10; Neh. xiii. 23-30).

The older custom of intermarriage within the circle of kinship was governed by no strict rules. Of course marriage with a daughter or uterine sister was not tolerated, but there was no bar to union with close relatives on the father’s side, and even down to the Babylonian exile such unions appear to have been common (Gen. xx. 12; Ex. vi. 20; Num. xxvi. 59; II Sam. xiii. 13; Ezek. xxii. 10-11). Deuteronomy prohibits certain marriages with near relatives (xxii. 30; xxvii. 20, 22-23), but the most elaborate legislation in this direction is found in Leviticus (xviii. 7-17, xx. 11-21). According to this law a man may not marry his mother, stepmother, mother-in-law, father’s sister, mother’s sister, paternal uncle’s wife, half-sister, stepsister (daughter of stepmother and her former husband), sister-in-law (brother’s wife), living wife’s sister, daughter-in-law, stepdaughter, granddaughter, or daughter of stepson or stepdaughter. It is clear that marriage with a deceased wife’s sister is not forbidden, but it has been argued that the near relatives of the wife equally with those of the husband are within the forbidden degree to him and that, as the wife’s mother and daughter are barred, so also, by analogy, is the wife’s sister. Whatever its anomalies or defects, there is no doubt that by this law a high ideal of domestic and social purity was maintained. The pre-Islamic Arabic custom, authorized by Mohammed, was closely similar.”

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10432-marriage

[6] The Greek word is πόρνος/pornos. This is a sexual sin.

[7] Exo. 4:24-26

[9] Gen 10:1

[10] Gen 10:25

[11] Some people say that the black skin is also a part of the curse of the Hamites. I reject this. My view is that Shem, Ham and Japheth came into the world sovereignly endowed with their specific race’s characteristics. The curse upon the Black Hamites is a bereavement of blessing and thus a subjugation extending from the word of God, “visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children” Exo 20:5, not just one child.

[12] Deut 4:5-7

[13] This is to be the example for Gentile nations as well: Isa. 49:23

[14] Ex 12:48-49, 22:21, 23:9, Lev 19:10, 19:33-34, Lev 23:22, 24:22, Num 9:14, 15:15-16, 15:29-30

[15] Deut 28:32-36 (Is this not exactly what is happening to America?

[16] Deut.10:15, 26:19

[17] Romans 1:16, 2:8-10, 3:3

[19] Pg. 419

[20] Pg. 432

[23] These are some of the thousands of examples:

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf, Pages 11-15

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/hc0309.pdf, Quotation from page 7,

“From 2003 to 2009, the greatest percentage of hate crime victimizations were against white, non-Hispanic individuals”

http://whitegirlbleedalot.com/

http://blackracismandracehatred.blogspot.com/

http://topconservativenews.com/category/crime/hate-crime-murder-crime/

http://topconservativenews.com/category/crime/

[24] Mat. 5:17-19

[25] Num. 25-31, Deut. 25:17-19, 13: 12-16, Exo. 32: 26-29

[28] Deut.10:15, 26:19

[29] Romans 1:16, 2:8-10, 3:3

[30] Some people say that the black skin is also a part of the curse of the Hamites. I reject this. My view is that Shem, Ham and Japheth came into the world sovereignly endowed with their specific race’s characteristics. The curse upon the Black Hamites is a bereavement of blessing and thus a subjugation extending from the word of God, “visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children” Exo 20:5, not just one child.; Our gloss of the black race pertains to nature not to person. An individual person may break free from the effects of the curse of the race through Messiah but that does not deny the fact that the curse on the race still exists.

[31] Pg. 419

[32] Pg. 432

[34] Mat. 10:28

[35] For evidence that Ham’s line had black skin: Jer. 13:23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin Or the leopard his spots? Then you also can do good Who are accustomed to doing evil.

[36] Pg. 419

[37] Pg. 432

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s