“Blood ties are the only natural and workable basis for a healthy society not subject to the ideologies of fallen man. We believe this is the normative system for our people.”
http://spiritwaterblood.com/about/
I take it from this statement that the only marriages which kinism sanctions are incestuous marriages.
To marry someone who is not a close blood relative would not be a natural and workable basis for a healthy society.
So what types of incestuous marriage does kinism favor? Maternal incestuous marriage? Paternal incestuous marriage? Sibling incestuous marriage?
Is kinism a new type of Calvinism that asserts that God only elects your kin?
ReplyDeleteGiven its Libertarian commitments, is kinism a new type of Arminianism?
ReplyDeleteArminianism is for "whosoever will" and thus cannot be racist. It doesn't have eletist tendency of Calvinism.
ReplyDeleteBEOWULF2K8 SAID:
ReplyDeleteCalvinism is also for "whosoever will" and thus cannot be racist.
But in Arminianism, there's no guarantee that "anyone will." Thus, Calvinism doesn't have callous indifference of Arminianism.
There is a guarantee the many will because Arminianism asserts that the basis of election is foreseen faith. "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren." (Rom 8:29) As many as God foresaw would believe (on the conditional: if he sent his Son to the cross and if he ordered their physical circumstances in this world via his graceful providence to be such that they would hear the gospel [as he did with Cornelius])--as many as he foresaw would believe, he subsequently predestinated to be conformed to the image of his Son.
ReplyDeleteBeowulf said:
ReplyDeleteThere is a guarantee the many will because Arminianism asserts that the basis of election is foreseen faith.
This assumes that many will have faith. And what guarantee is there that many will have faith? If you answer affirmatively, then on what basis do you affirm this?
Mark
i) Proegno doesn’t mean “ to foreknow.” It means “to choose beforehand.” Even Witherington, in his commentary on Romans, admits that much.
ReplyDeleteii) Furthermore, even if it did mean “to foreknow,” Rom 8:29 doesn’t say that God chooses anyone on the basis of foreseen “faith.” You’ve interpolated that condition into the text.
For a full-blown critique of conditional election, cf.
http://blogs.lifeway.com/blog/edstetzer/Welton%20Election%20and%20Effectual%20Calling.pdf
"This assumes that many will have faith. And what guarantee is there that many will have faith? If you answer affirmatively, then on what basis do you affirm this?"
ReplyDeleteOn the basis that God foresaw that many would believe and that he told us so in the Bible.
"i) Proegno doesn’t mean “ to foreknow.” It means “to choose beforehand.” Even Witherington, in his commentary on Romans, admits that much."
There are two "fore-" verbs in Romans 8:29. There is proegno which is a conjugation of proginosko meaning "to foresee" and there is prowrisen which is a conjugation of proorizo "to predetermine." You are confusing the two. Now, because they mean different things, the passage says "whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate" (KJV) and "whom He foreknew, He also predestined" (NASB) and "whom he foreknew he also predestined" (NRSV) and "those God foreknew he also predestined" (NIV) and "whom he foreknew he also predestined" (ESV). According to your MISINFORMATION, however, the passage ought to be translation "whom he predestined he also predestined" which is just plain asinine. Every translation cited above shows that there was both foreknowledge and predestination, and the predestination was based on the foreknowledge.
Very cute, Steve.
ReplyDeleteConnecting close blood relatives with incest is like sovereignty with the problem of evil.