By Davis Carlton

“I think anything close to Kinist ideology deserves to be taken to the woodshed like Jesus did the Pharisees. It’s in Kinism where you’ll find today’s synagogue of Satan circumcising themselves and their wives off from culture and the mission of postmill work.” – Darren Doane

Darren Doane is a member of Doug Wilson’s church and director of the documentary Collision about the debate between Wilson and atheist Christopher Hitchens…a step up from the Blink-182 music videos that Doane directed earlier in his career. Doane doesn’t like Kinism, as is apparent from his comment posted to Facebook earlier this week. He accuses Kinists of being like the Pharisees and the “synagogue of Satan” mentioned in Rev. 2:9 and 3:9. Those are some big accusations, to be sure! Hey Darren, quick question: What do you think of the actual practitioners of Judaism today? Are they at least a part of the “synagogue of Satan,” or is that being anti-Semitic? Never mind.

Anyway, Doane’s rhetoric is intentionally sloppy. The Pharisees cared about lineage. Kinists also care about lineage. Case closed. What other evidence do you need to conclude that Jesus’ public ministry was about doing away with national distinctions? Hitler was a dog lover and I also love dogs so Doane’s logic does seem air tight! But what is really so offensive about Kinism? Is it our opposition to miscegenation? We’re hardly in a position to enforce our opposition on society. Doane actually argues that Kinists are proponents of…incest! Here’s Doane’s take: “I would argue to want you see yourself reproduced is incest.” If it’s hard to believe what you just read you aren’t alone.

Doane’s sentiments are entirely at odds with what Christians historically believed about reproduction. In his Treatise 10, Cyprian of Carthage states, “[I]t is a source of joy and glory to men to have children like to themselves.” More quotes such as this can be found in Thomas Achord and Darrell Dow’s magisterial work Who Is My Neighbor?: An Anthology of Natural Relations. I highly recommend it. That being said, it shouldn’t be necessary to compile quotes from Church fathers who tell us that water is wet. We should be able to see that this is true simply by looking at the world around us.

The Bible itself provides the normative understanding of family life and procreation when it states that Adam “begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth” (Genesis 5:3). The promises that God made to Adam were inherited through his son Seth, and we can safely assume that the succeeding generations in Genesis 5 follow this same pattern as well. A man cannot be faithful to God’s command to be fruitful and multiply (Gen. 1:28) without reproducing himself. I enjoy seeing how my children resemble their aunts, uncles, and cousins on both sides of their family.

When Doane accuses Kinists of “incest” he is abusing the term and stripping it of anything remotely resembling a Biblical meaning. Incest actually refers to sexual activity within the prohibited degree of consanguinity or affinity as established by God. It does not and has never meant the desire to reproduce our traits in future generations. In the same thread Doane responded to criticism that he would prefer that his children resemble his wife rather than himself.

This was of course intended to be complimentary to his wife, but in reality it was a subtle insult directed not only at himself, but at his own family members as well. Darren Doane’s own physical traits are derived from his immediate parents and are shared with his siblings and other close family members. I wish those who were so doggedly opposed to Kinism would stop and consider what they are actually saying. We aren’t at liberty to redefine actual sins or to invent fake sins like “racism” in order to conform to modern sentimentality. This serves as a good example of how opposition to Kinism will place a man at variance with nature as God has created it.