Some advocates of the kinism heresy claim R. J. Rushdoony as one of their own. Of course, it should be noted that kinists are hypocrites for doing so, since Rushdoony was an Armenian immigrant and had an interracial marriage with an American.
A kinist society would never have accepted Rushdoony into the land, let alone his writings--for them it would be "unequal yoking."
A quote from Rushdoony that kinists use to support their position is the following from Rushdoony's Institutes of Biblical Law:
“Unequal yoking plainly means mixed marriages between believers and unbelievers and is clearly forbidden. But Deuteronomy 22:10 not only forbids unequal religious yoking by inference, and as a case law, but also unequal yoking generally. This means that an unequal marriage between believers or between unbelievers is wrong. Man was created in the image of God (Gen. 1:26), and woman is the reflected image of God in man, and from man (1 Cor. 11:1-12; Gen. 2:18, 21-23). ‘Helpmeet’ means a reflection or mirror, an image of man, indicating that a woman must have something religiously and culturally in common with her husband. The burden of the law is thus against inter-religious, inter-racial, and inter-cultural marriages, in that they normally go against the very community which marriage is designed to establish.
Unequal yoking means more than marriage. In society at large it means the enforced integration of various elements which are not congenial. Unequal yoking is in no realm productive of harmony; rather, it aggravates the differences and delays the growth of the different elements toward a Christian harmony and association.” Rousas John Rushdoony, The Institutes of Biblical Law (The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1973), pp. 256-57.Rushdoony is clearly speaking against interracial marriages, but by "race" does he mean skin color, or religion?
One might argue for the skin color view on the basis that Rushdoony opposes "unequal marriage between believers," and then goes on to give two instances of unequal yoking regarding marriages between believers: interracial and intercultural marriage.
|R. J. Rushdoony|
"I don't think Rushdoony meant under "inter-racial" the same thing so many Americans would understand. If anyone proposes he meant the slight 0.0002% differences in the DNA between people with different skin colors, then I will venture to propose that Rushdoony himself was Armenian, and certainly the differences in the DNA between Armenians and Irish, or Armenians and Anglo-Saxon are just as big as the differences in the DNA between Armenians and Africans, or between Irish and Africans." Bojidar Marinov, Facebook, July 14, 2010.
Note that he states that a woman must have religious and cultural commonality with her husband; conspicuous by its absence is racial commonality.
Keeping this in mind, following this statement he writes, "The burden of the law is thus against inter-religious, inter-racial, and inter-cultural marriages ..." The word "thus" means "therefore," so that this statement must be understood in light of what is said previously, and so Rushdoony here only forbids interreligious and intercultural marriages, and not interracial marriages based on skin color.
We will address how Rushdoony's use of the word "interracial" might mean interreligious shortly, but we will first note that the use of the word "thus" could present a problem to those who understand Rushdoony here to oppose interracial marriage in a physical sense.
For them, the statement where "thus" is mentioned would have to include an added concept not mentioned in the previous statement, which is awkward on the face of it, and this has problems making sense of the words that follow "inter-religious, inter-racial, and inter-cultural marriages"--"in that they normally go against the very community which marriage is designed to establish." These words appear to be immediately in light of the words of the previous statement which mentions only religion and culture--"a woman must have something religiously and culturally in common with her husband."
Or, those who understand Rushdoony here to oppose interracial marriage might see "thus" as reaching further back than just the previous sentence to Rushdoony's general condemnation of "unequal marriage between believers."
This appears awkward as well, since, again, the sentence in which the words "inter-religious, inter-racial, and inter-cultural marriages" appear seems to be immediately in light of the previous statement, "a woman must have something religiously and culturally in common with her husband."
By "inter-racial," Rushdoony might have in mind interreligious marriages, so that "inter-religious" and "inter-racial" are a complimentary repetition of the same concept. Such a repitition might be awkward, but not illogical; and we have already noted the awkwardness of the other interpretation of Rushdoony as well.
Indeed, the Bible itself identifies religion with race. On the Christian race, 1 Peter 2:9 reads: