Fight Familism!
Basic to pagan familism is a theology of racism. Because the pagan family is seen by its defenders as a blood covenant, the question of inter-racial marriage becomes decisive. ~ Gary North
Fight Familism
by Rev. Jack O’Kobian
Modern Christians have made great strides against racism. But much more needs to be done if we are to be true servants of Equality.
Now we must confront a form of racism that most people don’t even recognize as such. This is the sin of familism, the preference for one’s children over other children. Admittedly this seems natural, but in the fallen world most sins seem natural. Only as we follow the spiritual truth of Equality can we rise above this sinful material world.
Do you doubt that familism is racism? Consider how racists often justify their hate by saying that it’s really no different from preferring one’s child. And consider how familists often use such terms as “my flesh and blood.” The similarity to the Nazi’s “blood and soil” is obvious. Only a bigot would disagree.
In the words of no less than Martin Luther King, the only basis for judging another human being is the “content of character.” Thus if a “father” prefers his “son” to another child who is morally superior to that “son,” he is clearly a bigot because he values flesh more than morality. Such a “father” clearly views his “family”—physical traits, genes and all—as a miniature Master Race.
While it is true that the Old Testament affirms family lineage and says “honor thy father and thy mother,” the law of the Old Testament no longer applies because now, under the New Testament, we are under grace instead of law. Jesus said, “call no man your father.” Grace is spirit and abolishes physical distinctions.
Throughout history we can see the evil caused by familism, wars of dynasty, family feuds, jealousy, and favoritism. Blood ties lead to bloodshed. It is the shame of the Church that Marxists have long understood the evils of familism better than Christians and have worked to attack this and other sins against Equality. Indeed, it was the Marxist Leon Trotsky who invented the term “racism.”
To fight familism, the Church must set the long-range goal of raising all children in common. In the words of Hillary Clinton, “It takes a village to raise a child.” As a preliminary step to that goal, Christian parents should make a practice of swapping their newborns with other “families.”
Some “mothers,” of course, will object, and they will play on the sentiments of a mother holding her infant child. Nevertheless, we must cut through this sentiment and understand the sin that motivates it. The extent to which a “mother” focuses on her child is the extent to which she tunes out other children—and that is hate.
Although abortion is a bad thing, it may be serving what is ultimately a good purpose. When a woman has the child in her womb killed, it desensitizes her to warmth and favoritism toward children of her own, and thereby opens her heart to impartial feeling toward all children. Gay marriage also may have a beneficial side by undercutting the prestige of familism.
We should never fail to denounce familism whenever we encounter it, even in tough cases. For example, if a couple has just lost its child in an accident, the moral response is to withhold sympathy for their grief. Tell the couple to “get over it” because there are plenty of living children around for them to love, many with a “content of character” superior to that of “their” deceased child.
Admittedly, the path to True Equality will not be easy, but it is the only way we can purge the sin of earth with the spirit of heaven. One day this love will trample out the vineyards of hate.
What church are you a pastor in?
It is biblically sound to place one’s immediate family above all others.
Timothy 5:8
“But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.”
This can’t be someone’s serious thoughts and attempt at reasoning. This can’t be real. Can it????
Nope, just irony.
The name “Jack O’Kobian” is meant to sound like “Jacobin.”
The Gary North quote is real though. Only pagans believe in blood covenants, says the Jacobin North.
“Thou shalt NOT commit murder”…And yet you claim abortion may actually be BENEFITIAL?! ALL SIN seperates us from God! ALL SIN carries the penalty of DEATH! Please diligently STUDY the WORD of God & BE CAREFUL what you teach! God will not hold you guilt-less for their sins!
Susan, your heart is telling you right. Anyone who would promote the attitudes portrayed in this satirical article should be eternally condemned.
Additionally, I wanted to interact with Gary North’s quote, but the link appears broken. I did a little Googlin’ and found the following:
Christian acknowledge that the church alone will survive as an institution in eternity. Both the family, and historical governments will disappear in eternity. Non-Christians have no biblical doctrine of eternity, so they deny this unique status to the church. This is why both familism (patriarchal clans) and statism have been the chief rivals of the church in history.
http://www.garynorth.com/freebooks/docs/a_pdfs/newslet/cr/9003.pdf
It is ironic to me that Gary blames non-Christian philosophy for creating “familism” (read: kinship loyalty) and “statism” (read: anything not in keeping with the Austrian school of economics), which allegedly have plagued the church for centuries, when about 90% of the material on his website comes from the minds of godless libertarian philosophers.
As usual Y2K Gary gets it wrong. Nations (ethnic peoples) will exist in eternity. See Revelation 22:2.
Good point Luther. But give his theonomic-libertarianism hybrid politics, North would see a nation as nothing more than any people within a given geography who submit to a covenantal arrangement–albeit one where freedom is emphasized and the spontaneous market is protected. In a word, a nation is free citizens.
But even the word nation belies such ignorance. As one writer has pointed out:
Nationality…
(parallel word) nativity
(extract root) natal
(translate) birth
(infer meaning) heredity
(reword meaning) bloodline
(reword meaning) race
“The point, however, is that citizenship is not nationality. Race is nationality. Citizenship is a legal thing. Nationality is a biological thing.”
In “Theonomy: An Informed Response” starting on page 261, Gary North lays out why the whole “seed mixing” concept has been abrogated.
He says there are three options:
(1) They are no longer binding because of a change in covenantal administration
(2) The link between corporate obedience and corporate blessings no longer applies in the NT,
(3) these laws still apply and a “horrendous covenantal judgment” is coming.
He concludes, and argues for (1)…I think any South African white would consider (3) at this point.
That’s very interesting, Shotgun. I would love to know what is his basis for arguing the first point. Is this also on the freebooks site? I take it that he’s associating it with the ceremonial law, which is obsolete.
The problem here for North is that ceremonial laws were only abrogated because they were fulfilled in the cross and empty tomb. How has Lev. 19:19 been fufilled? It hasn’t. It was important then and is still important today. As Matthew Henry wrote, “We must acquiesce in the order of nature God hath established, believing that is best and sufficient, and not covet monsters… As what God has joined we must not separate, so what he has separated we must not join.”
As Ehud wrote recently, “The laws regarding cattle haven’t chiefly to do with cattle, but with human relations.” Our forefathers were such stalwart and judicious men because they were all farmers. Farming teaches a man to deal with frustration. To be close to nature is to be closer to an understanding of God’s created order. The thought of mixing races revolted our fathers in part because they saw nothing of the kind in nature. Race-mixing is quite appealing to Negroes because they can’t recognize their own fathers in a line-up.
Here’s another interesting fact: The very first law introduced to mankind was “everything according to its kind.”
“Race-mixing is quite appealing to Negroes because they can’t recognize their own fathers in a line-up.”
Sublime, sir.
And the point about “Everything according to its kind” being the very first law introduced to mankind is beyond sublime.
North’s work can be found online:
http://freebooks.entrewave.com/freebooks/docs/html/gnti/gnti.html
He is responding to Vern Poythress who argues that the Theonomist must come up with some consistent way to apply OT case law to contemporary settings…a task Mr. Poythress wants to show is very difficult by using Leviticus 19:19 as an example.
North and Bahnsen disagree with Rushdoony on this point.
I’d like to look into their different applications of this verse and do a write up on it this weekend.
…or, maybe you guys know of someone who has already done a similar study?
Also…the page number I supplied is from the book. The PDF page number, I think is 280.
I’d be VERY interested to read that.
What a stellar analysis of one of the ‘thornier’ points of Theonomy, one that (I am sure) the anti-theonomists didn’t even think about when they railed against Bahnsen back in the 1980′s. But this clearly points out that the kinist position is not only logical, it is eminently biblical, and valid in the new covenant, for the “Bride of Christ” must be given ‘fair, without spot or wrinkle’ to Christ at the consummation of the age. Mamzers don’t fit into that, in either dispensation. Which is why Ez. 9:2ff. is in Holy Writ to this day…
Thanks, sirs. Thanks.
I get it; however, it still made me sick to read, on here especially. My opinion is that this MAY be better distributed somewhere off of the main site.
Your Brother in Christ,
Loren
BTW,
Awesome site!
Thanks much, God Bless!
Can you please go to:
http://www.naawf.blogspot.com/
and help me educate the modern Judeo–Christian’s about Israel and our people.
You guys are the only ones smart enough!