Monday, December 31, 2007

Thoughts on racism (part 7)

[To read the entire series, click on "racism" on the sidebar under "POSTS BY CATEGORIES".]

Why kinists hide in the shadows (from

Open Letter To A Self-Important Gossip

While we find ourselves bemused that our comments on the hothouse strangeness, outright idiocies, and virulent gossip of the anti-patriarchism crowd, and Cynthia Gee in particular, have engendered such an impassioned response, we are not so foolish as to believe she has anything in mind other than the febrile attempt to expose us to public scrutiny and try us in the court of fashionable (heretical) opinion, in the hope that such personal exposure might provide impetus to a smear campaign similar to that being conducted against a former Kinist, once associated with this website. This is why we write under a nom de plume (or nom de guerre, if you will). The champions of “free speech and open discourse” seem to enjoy placing anonymous calls to employers and pastors when they can’t shout down your ideas with insults. Since we have mouths to feed, we’ll, pass on the ritual seppuku.

Hhhhmmmm...if kinism is so Biblical, so non-racist, and so impossible to refute (the anonymous author of the above later wrote, "While we don’t hold out hope that she will prove more formidable than any of Kinism’s previous opponents, who now speak into their beards, as it were...") then what on earth do kinists have to fear from anonymous calls to employers and pastors? They should be able to quickly convince these men as well. Or perhaps they are really afraid of more of their own numbers becoming "former kinists"?

These men so lack the courage of their convictions that they lurk in the shadows. My only hope is that they possess enough of a conscience to be rightly ashamed of the philosophy they espouse. If so, may that shame grow into true repentance.

CORRECTION: While the author's name (John Marshall) does not appear on the article page itself, it does appear on the main page linking to the article. Of course, this is probably just a "nom de plume", but I wanted to be accurate.


  1. My response...

  2. "in the hope that such personal exposure might provide impetus to a smear campaign similar to that being conducted against a former Kinist, once associated with this website."

    Are they referring to Chad Degenhart? Is he this former kinist, once associated with this website? Where is the public statement from Chad recanting his kinist beliefs and repudiating them as unbiblical? If he is a "former kinist", he should have no problem doing this.

    "This is why we write under a nom de plume (or nom de guerre, if you will). The champions of “free speech and open discourse” seem to enjoy placing anonymous calls to employers and pastors when they can’t shout down your ideas with insults. "

    In other words, we are chickens and we know how repugnant our beliefs are so we have to hide them under a bushel.

    Who made anonymous calls to employers? Who made anonymous calls to pastors? This sounds like an appeal to sympathy but these things are simply not true nor has any evidence been shown that this was done. There was nothing anonymous about anything and as far as I know no one made an anonymous call to a pastor or employer. Or maybe they are talking about Matt Chancey and Harry Seabrook but that has nothing to do with Chad or this situation.

    "Since we have mouths to feed, we’ll, pass on the ritual seppuku."

    This is nothing but a ploy for sympathy. No one is asking them to commit hari kari. All they have to do is be men and own up to what they believe. Aren't they called to give an answer in season and out? Since when was any apostle afraid of not being able to feed mouths? I never saw any apostle shrink away from persecution on the account of the Gospel. They thought it an honor to suffer for righteousness' sake.

    Everyone has mouths to feed and if our beliefs are so right and wonderful and biblical then why hide them? What does that have to do with feeding mouths? Or maybe they should take that as a hint that something is wrong with their ideology?

    Also, they need to learn that discussing a public leader's teachings is not gossip. They are hypocrites if this is their definition of gossip. They discuss Doug Phillips, Doug Wilson, RC Sproul Jr and other public leaders all the time. And they do so in a not-so-gracious manner many times. How is this gossip?

    They are full of hot air and they are making false accusations in order to garner sympathy. Who is speaking into their beards about this issue? They are the ones who are hiding and expunging all their teachings from the internet. They are the ones who are speaking into their beards.

    They are not fooling anyone with their blustering words.

  3. Cynthia, I also thought your post on kinism was excellent:

  4. “They should be able to quickly convince these men as well. Or perhaps they are really afraid of more of their own numbers becoming “former kinists”?”

    So just who is this “former kinist”, indeed? I doubt that it’s Chad Degenhart, since as far as anyone knows, he still is one of their number. And who is supposed to have made these anonymous calls to employers and pastors? I seem to remember something of that sort going on, about a year sgo — I believe that Kinist Harry Seabrook took down his blog after it was hacked, and Matt Chancey commented on that, and then, when Brandon Giromini disagreed with some of what Chancey had written, a fellow from Malaysia emailed him and threatened to tell Brandon's boss that HE was a kinist, unless he kept his mouth shut and went along with what Chancey had written:

    (from “Simply Christian”

    ” I received the following threat from “Marco Hansen” via the contact form on my website supposedly somewhere in Malaysia:

    Hey Brandon:

    Are you really sure you want to take exception with Matt’s analysis of LG? I have it from the horses mouth that the reason why Harry took down LG was because he was afraid of losing his job. Notice that Matt’s article mentioned his place of business? His site wasn’t “hacked.” If you keep this up you are going to be branded as a Kinist. I don’t want to believe you are probably a “kinist” or at least comfortable dialoging with them just like Jennifer Epstien is? I guess you wouldn’t want people to make the same association with the Kinist as they did with Jennifer now would you? If I were you, I would get out of this whole debate because you are going to make yourself look really bad once the truth comes out.

    So, please take this advice from someone who doesn’t want to see you go down like the rest of the MW cabal.(emphasis mine)

    So unless I agree 100% with “independent investigator” Matt Chancey’s analysis in regard to the alleged hack of Little Geneva, I will be labeled a kinist? In my article correcting Matt Chancey’s analysis I focused on hacking the Wordpress database username and password. I clearly stated that I did not support Little Geneva or it’s kinist theology.

    “Red and Yellow, Black and White: They are precious in his sight. Jesus loves the little children of the world.”

    It is written that man is made in the image of God1. Furthermore, man, as God created him, was very good2. The Lord Jesus Christ came to save all men, first the jew and then the gentile3.

    I affirm that all men and women have fallen from the grace of God and are in desperate need of a Savior, regardless of race4. I affirm that through the Lord Jesus Christ, those that are foreknown of God are predestined, called, justified and glorified, regardless of race5. I affirm that God is no respecter of persons: but in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him6. I affirm that the world is not spiritually divided by race but only by saved and lost, sheep and goats, the quick and the dead.7. I affirm that Christians should not separate one from another8, but be joined in charity9.

    This entry was posted on Monday, January 22nd, 2007 at 8:20 pm and is filed under Christianity, Matt Chancey, Threats and Allegations. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

    4 Responses to “Threats and accusations Part 2”
    Lin Says:

    January 22nd, 2007 at 9:13 pm
    This is just about the sickest thing I have seen. You and Elizabeth are in my prayers.

    Lynn Says:

    January 22nd, 2007 at 9:43 pm
    Brandon, this kind of thing is like lancing a real big sore and having all the ugly pus come seeping out, and it only serves to show me how political these people are. There is nothing Christian or biblical about a threat like that. It also makes me very suspicious about how much Doug Phillips really wants reconciliation. You are in my prayers.

    Frank Vance Says:

    January 22nd, 2007 at 10:18 pm
    Brandon, as you say you’re not the only one who’s been threatened like this. Even long before Matthew Chancey started writing his “independent investigation” I received mysterious emails implying that if I didn’t exercise my influence to silence Ministry Watchman’s exposés of Doug Phillips that I would personally be labeled as a “kinist.” These men are only helping to confirm what we already know of them.

    BGiromini Says:

    January 29th, 2007 at 2:04 pm
    Lin and Lynn, thank you for the prayers. The first time I read the email, I thought it was a veiled threat, but after subsequent readings, it is so blatantly obvious what the author was trying to convey. I keep it up on the refrigerator to remind me of the mentality of those who resort to threats. I do believe that the phone call to Harry Seabrook at work was a power move to show that he can be found and they could get him fired for his online activity. 100% politics. I also strongly believe that the comments in the threat against me about naming Seabrook’s place of business are a subtle reminder that if they found where Harry worked they can find where I work. If you read my wife’s post on you will know that I have talked to my boss, and already warned him about potential phone calls.

    Oh, and if anyone had any doubts, I am 99.9% certain the name is a fake and that the person was using a proxy service to hide their true IP address. Also, does anyone else find it highly coincidental that the night before Chancey names me as a small player in the conspiracy, I get a threatening email warning me to get out of the whole debate…

    I was doing my bible study this past weekend and noticed something interesting about threats and who makes them. I might post an article soon about it.

  5. I had an interesting experience last night at a New Year's party. An old friend sat with me for a bit and said he was surprised at how much racism still exists in our country, and from those who profess Christ, too! I was taken aback, because of all the internet writing we've done recently about this issue, so I asked him what he meant.

    He said he was at a Promise Keeper's rally in the '90s in the Dallas/FW area, and he met with some protesters outside the stadium. He politely took their literature, told me they appeared to be "KJV-only-ites," but what they were especially protesting was for racial separation and against PK's stance on race relations among Christians. I told him about Kinism, that I thought, from what I have read, that it is different from the Randy Weaver (of the Ruby Ridge massacre -- and I'm not blaming Weaver for that, believe me) type White Separatism, but that they clearly endorsed, by a lot of their writings still on the internet, of territorial borders based on ethnic/racial lines, and of deporting any other race out of Kinist territories, including Jews and Arabs.

    I told him their writings appear to be quickly vanishing off the internet, but that quotes have been copied and survive on sites they can't do anything about, and what still remains on their site is quite racist yet.