The gospel does not repudiate the existence of the nations. It Christianizes them as they maintain their unique cultural distinctives that do not conflict with the Christian faith.  In the New Jerusalem that comes down to earth, the Bible says, “The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it (Rev. 21:24).” Nations will not cease to exist in the new heavens and the new earth.  Jesus told us to disciple the nations, not to assimilate them.

When I was in my last year as a student at Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia in 1972, I had to preach my senior sermon under the tutelage of Dr. Jay Adams.  Videotaping was the new thing back then, and after the sermon was preached Dr. Adams would sit down in a small room with the student, and while playing the tape he would critique the sermon. I’m sure he heard better sermons than mine.
Dr. Adams was always honest and to the point. There was one thing he said to me that I will never forget.  “Larry, you need to either change your accent or go back to Appalachia.”  He was right and I went back to Appalachia.  I have been ministering here now for over fifty years.  Although the Appalachian Mountains extend from Maine to Alabama, the heart of Appalachia is southern West Virginia, Southwest Virginia, and extreme Eastern Kentucky—what might be considered coal country.
The heart of Appalachia is my heritage.  Traditionally, it has been a closed community because of its rugged mountains and its people who have a common ancestry.  Not many people move to the heart of Appalachia.  It developed a unique culture of its own and formed a distinct version of the English language. We shared a common religion, common habits, and common rituals.  For example, the rite of passage for a boy to become a man required hunting with a rifle (or preferably with a bow and arrow) and killing a deer, a male buck.  The number of points on the antlers added to your masculinity.
A common tale among my folks there in Appalachia was that the best place to find a wife was at a family reunion. Although, I did not meet my wife at a family reunion, I did meet her at a church picnic.  After we were married, she became interested in genealogy, and we soon found out that we were cousins. We were kin.  As a community-oriented people we tended to marry others within the Appalachian boundaries because we didn’t travel much beyond the mountains.
Before I was married, and after graduating from a local college, I moved away from Appalachia to attend Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia.  I soon felt a bit out of place in the big city.  Educationally, I was behind most students.  Culturally, I did not quite fit in. I found some American students to be condescending. I felt much more at home with fellow Asian students because it seemed to me that I was from a different country as much as they were. My roommates and best friends during my seminary years were from Korea and the Philippines. Living outside of Appalachia made me aware of how much I had in common with my own people back home, how much I had in common with minority groups, and how different I was from most other Americans.
Now to my point.  Having read much of the literature of Kinism and being from Appalachia, I often wonder if I am a Kinist (soft or hard?).  Samuel Sey’s recent article on The Aquila Report (Why Some Evangelicals Are Embracing Racism) pushed me to ask that question again, as I have asked myself many times in the past.
Any friendship with Kinists in the modern Reformed world is almost the kiss of death.  Kinism and Anti-Kinists are major enemies of each other. Most communications are filled with troubling language and inevitably someone on either side is accused of denying the gospel.   I have dear friends on both sides of the issue.  I don’t always agree with the Kinists and when I do disagree, they are quick to call my hand.  Among Anti-Kinists, I don’t usually even bring up the topic.  I read the literature from both sides of the isle, and I try to pick the choice nuggets from each.  Because of my experience in Appalachia, I can identify with some tenets of Kinism, and yet I’m still working on how this may apply to other people in different places.
I don’t believe interracial marriage is sinful.  For those who choose to make that decision, I am fully supportive, even though I believe it brings additional challenges with it.   Some of the finest Christian people I know are in interracial marriages. What bothers me today is that the modern media is normalizing it through popular venues such as TV commercials.  Individual choice among consenting adults is one thing.  Propaganda is another.
I have no problem with legal immigration. However, I am opposed to the invasion of illegal immigrants. The melting pot in America is quickly becoming a boiling pot.  I don’t believe multi-culturalism will survive in the long-run. I believe that nations are biblically defined by a common border, a common language, and a common religion (see my book on Critical Race Theory and the Church – Chapter 3).  In addition, my experience in Appalachia tells me that a common heritage is also critical.  Cultural Marxism is pushing the United States into tribalism, and the humiliation of this once-great country may soon be ahead of us.  I am afraid we interpret the Bible through the lens of American pluralism (now polytheism) more than we do through biblical categories.
The creation of languages at the Towel of Babel was not a judgment upon the concept of a nation per se.  It was a judgment upon a false religion that refused to implement the cultural mandate to subdue the whole earth (Gen. 1:28). God’s mandate required people-groups to spread across the entire globe, conquering all things on this earth for the glory of God, not building one large city with a tower reaching to heaven for the glory of man. Grace does not negate the creation of the nations; it redefines and redirects their goals in accordance with the words of Christ.
Having studied the arguments from both Kinists and Alienists (as they are called by Kinists), I could only wish that they could sit down at a table and discuss their differences in a civil way.  However, I don’t expect this to happen, no more than I expect a conversation between Christian Nationalists and their opposition.  I don’t expect these Christian leaders to talk to one another.  Just inflammatory words from both sides.  I’ve been around too long.  The future will reveal who was right and who was wrong. We’ll just have to wait and see, or maybe our grandchildren will see. In the meantime, the ammunition will continue to fly.
I believe Christians from various ethnicities can worship in the same local church.  We can all worship together.  However, I find that if different people-groups want to worship separately, it is not a sin.  In the PCA, more than 10% of our churches are Korean-American churches who speak the Korean language in their worship services. To help them in this endeavor, the PCA Book of Church Order has been translated from English into the Korean language.  Of course, they are welcome in traditional white Anglo-Saxon Christian churches, but they have chosen to worship in accordance with their own nationality, even as they live in America. They feel much more comfortable in doing so.  I have no problem with that.  They are my brothers and sisters in the Lord, and I respect their choice. On a denominational level where we all speak English we work well together. No one ever accuses them of being racists.
The gospel does not repudiate the existence of the nations. It Christianizes them as they maintain their unique cultural distinctives that do not conflict with the Christian faith.  In the New Jerusalem that comes down to earth, the Bible says, “The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it (Rev. 21:24).” Nations will not cease to exist in the new heavens and the new earth.  Jesus told us to disciple the nations, not to assimilate them.
Thus, am I a Kinist?  I married my cousin.  We have common ancestors.  We were both raised in the Appalachian culture, and we were both Presbyterians. We have been very happy and blessed. It’s natural to love your own people as we respect other people-groups as well. It has nothing to do with racism. My way is not the only way, but it has been a great blessing in my life.  In that sense, maybe you could even call me a hyper-Kinist.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

Humans are the only part of the physical world that can know love or truth or beauty. Humans are the only creatures that can use words and deeds to truly praise and worship their Creator—or reject and rebel against Him. Humans are the only creatures on earth that can sin, and they are the only creatures that God loved enough to redeem by the blood of His Son, so that our lives could go on forever with Him.

My children are amazing.
I don’t just mean that in the “proud papa” way—that they are the most intelligent, most athletic, most adorable children on the planet. All that is true, of course, but what I am thinking of is how amazing it is that they exist. That they have bodies and brains and breath. That each of them has a unique consciousness, a unique personality, and a unique set of likes and dislikes. Each of them is totally distinct from each other and from their parents.
Or maybe not totally distinct. If I look closely, I see my daughter smile in a way that looks just like her mother. Or my son makes an expression that floods me with memories of his great-grandfather.
Yet just a few years ago, none of these little ones existed. Then, in one instant, a part of me merged with a part of my wife, and our child was there. It happens in a flash (perhaps even literally). What was merely a couple of insignificant cells just moments before becomes something precious, something priceless, something of infinite worth.
That embryonic baby was too small to see or feel, but already distinct. Just a few weeks later, his heart would start beating, arms and legs would emerge, eyes and ears would begin to form. All of that was happening inside of my wife. And though her body was working very hard, the process was completely beyond her control.
It really is unspeakably profound. A woman’s body contains everything needed to produce another human being—everything except for one microscopic, essential component that can only come from a man. And it can only come in the most personal and intimate way possible.
Don’t let the fact that babies are born all the time dull your awareness of the glory and beauty of it. If it is a wonder and marvel that fruit can grow from a seed that came from a fruit (and it is), then how much more significant it is that a living creature can generate another just like it.
Read More
Related Posts:

Theologians refer to Christ’s work in terms of His active obedience and His passive obedience. In His passive obedience, He paid the penalty for sin; He atoned for sin. In His active righteousness, He earned righteousness on our behalf. No other message and no other means can save us or deliver us. Paul spent decades and piled effort upon effort in attempts to white-knuckle his way to God. All to no avail. Then, on the road to Damascus, Saul came to an end as Christ, “the Man in white,“ brought Paul to Himself.

Paul was likely one of the most intelligent people to have ever lived. He certainly is one of the best writers. He was extremely ambitious. He knew adversity, yet he persevered. If anyone “thinks he has reason for confidence in the flesh,” Paul tells us, “I have more” (Phil. 3:4).
Yet, Paul realizes that “whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ” (v. 7). He counts all his accomplishments, all his strivings after righteousness, as “rubbish,” a polite word for “dung.” All of Paul’s abilities and accomplishments simply serve to underscore his utter inability to achieve righteousness.
Instead of putting his confidence in the flesh, Paul learned to put his confidence in Christ and in the gospel. Paul wanted to be found in Christ. He writes, “That I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith” (v. 9). The theologian Francis Turretin expresses it this way:
God grant that, dismissing a vain confidence in our own merit, we may rest in the most perfect merit of Christ alone and so keep faithful in him and fight the good fight even unto the end that we might receive the crown of righteousness; due not to our merit, but most graciously promised to us from the heavenly rewarder.
Johnny Cash wrote a novel on the life of the Apostle Paul. Yes, one of country music’s icons and one of American music’s legends wrote a biography of Paul. Cash called it The Man in White, and it is a piece of genius. The “man in white” is actually not Paul. It’s Christ. Therein lies Cash’s genius. (Similarly, Augustine is not the main character in his autobiographical Confessions. God is.) Paul is not the main character in Cash’s biography. He’s the prominent and predominant character as the pages unfold. But all along, we get the sense that there is far more to the story than what we are seeing on the page. Behind the scenes of Paul’s life, there is One at work, orchestrating all the details to one desired end and one certain outcome.
Paul knew he had to put his confidence in the gospel, because nothing else can turn the human heart and nothing else solves the human dilemma. People think the human dilemma is many things. Some say it’s poverty or the unjust distribution of resources and wealth. Some say it’s war and our penchant for war. Some simply think the human dilemma is internal and psychological. As R.C. Sproul has often said, “The human dilemma is this: God is holy, and we are not. God is righteous, and we are not.” Our problem is not lack or abundance of wealth or resources. Our problem is not that we are a few degrees short of finding utopia. Our problem is the wrath of a holy God. No amount of righteousness that we might produce can solve that dilemma. Paul testifies to only one solution: the righteousness that comes through faith in Christ.
When we think of Luther’s main doctrine, we think of justification by faith alone. That doctrine hinges upon one word. In fact, the entire Reformation and the protest the Reformers launched against the Roman Catholic Church could very well be summed up in this one word: imputation. The doctrine of imputation teaches that our sin, which cuts us off and alienates us from a holy God, gets imputed to Christ. Christ paid the penalty for our sin, and so our sins are forgiven. The doctrine of imputation also teaches that Christ’s righteousness gets imputed to us. If Christ’s work only accomplished the forgiveness of sins, we would be right back to where we were in the garden before Adam and Eve ate of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.
Christ’s work overcame the curse and restored “Paradise lost.” Christ’s work also leads to “Paradise regained.” We now stand in the very presence of God clothed in Christ’s righteousness. The “Man in white” took our filthy rags and gave us His white, pure, and righteous robe. Paul says it plainly in 2 Corinthians 5:21: “He who knew no sin became sin for us that we might become the righteousness of God.”
Theologians refer to Christ’s work in terms of His active obedience and His passive obedience. In His passive obedience, He paid the penalty for sin; He atoned for sin. In His active righteousness, He earned righteousness on our behalf. No other message and no other means can save us or deliver us. Paul spent decades and piled effort upon effort in attempts to white-knuckle his way to God. All to no avail.
Read More