This is a series on a history that most Christians know nothing about; it is a history of both Israel, the Jews and Christianity. Christians know nothing about it because they have been too busy trying to make a living for their families; some because they are simply too lazy to study and obey God's Commandment to study to make oneself approved, a workman not ashamed. "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." (2 Timothy 2:15)
Many of the Judeo-Christian clergy tell lies and teach falsely because their congregations of make believe christians have itching ears and will listen only to that which they want to listen to. (2 Timothy 4:3) Because they cannot stand the truth, and must have lies and false doctrines and teachings given to them or they will not fill the church's plate and enrich the minister and build great buildings, empty of God's Word. "The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their means; and my people love to have it so: and what will ye do in the end thereof?" (Jeremiah 5:31)
In this series you will find out the origin of the stupid yellow ribbons that infest America on various occasions of grief and etc. Americans do not think about it, but yellow is the sign of a coward; such as the old saying that man has a yellow streak down his back because he is such a coward. And cowards, in deed, are the Jews for they ever work from behind traitors to our race who do their work for them for all to see, while the cowardly Jews remains hidden.
You will find out that our early church fathers hated the Jews with all their hearts, but the cowardly Judeo-Christian clergy of today will not tell you about it because of their cowardance. They are afraid of the Jews for several reasons, but the three main reason are (1) Most of them have their church mortgaged to the hilt and if they offend the Jews, the banks or loan companies will call in their notes; which they cannot meet; (2) The Jews will use their ownership and control of the media to destroy the reputation of the minister and the church; and (3) The Jews will turn lose the IRS on the church, the minister and the elders of the church and destroy them through their unending supply of money from the government.
I hope you enjoy this lesson in history as much as I did while I was putting it together. I remain Sincerely yours, In His Service, Willie Martin
Joannes Chrysostomus Joannes Chrysostomus, is generally known as St. Chrysostom: Patriarch of Constantinople, one of the most celebrated of the Church Fathers, and the most eminent orator of the early Christian period; born 347 A.D. at Antioch; died September 14, 407, near Comana, in Pontus. Chrysostom originally devoted himself to the law, but soon felt dissatisfied with this vocation, and at the age of twenty-three was made a deacon.
About fifteen years later (386 A.D.) he advanced to the rank of presbyter, and in 398 A.D. was appointed by the emperor Bishop of Constantinople. Having attacked the empress Eudoxia in his sermons, he was banished in 403 A.D., but was recalled soon after, upon the unanimous demand of his congregation. He repeated his attacks upon the empress, and was again banished in 404 A.D.; first to Nicaea, then to Cacusus in the desert of the Taurus, and finally to Pityos on the Black Sea; but he died while on the way to the last- named place.
The name "Chrysostomus" ('golden-mouthed'; = 'gold,' and = 'mouth') is a title of honor conferred on this Church father only. It was first used by Isidore of Seville in 636 A.D., and is significant of the importance of the man, whose sermons, of which one thousand have been preserved, are among the very best products of Christian rhetoric. As a teacher of dogmatics and exegesis Chrysostom is not of so much importance, although much space in his works is devoted to these two branches. Among his sermons, the "Orationes VIII. Adversus Judaeos" deserve special notice, inasmuch as they mark a turning point in anti- Jewish polemics.
While up to that time the Church aspired merely to attack the dogmas of Judaism, and did that in a manner intended only for the learned, with Chrysostom there began the endeavor, which eventually brought so much suffering upon the Jews, to prejudice the whole of Christendom against the latter, and to erect hitherto unknown barriers between Jews and Christians.
It was the existing friendly intercourse between Jews and Christians which impelled Chrysostom to his furious attacks upon the former.
Attack on Jews: Religious motives were not lacking, for many Christians were in the habit of celebrating the Feast of the Blowing of the Shofar, or New Year, the Day of Atonement, and the Feast of Tabernacles. "What forgiveness can we expect,' he exclaimed, 'when we run to their synagogues, merely following an impulse or a habit, and call their physicians and conjurers to our houses?' In another place Chrysostom says: 'I invoke heaven and earth as witnesses against you if any one of you should go to attend the Feast of the blowing of the Trumpets, or participate in the fasts, or the observance of the Sabbath, or observe an important or unimportant rite of the Jews, and I will be innocent of your blood.'
Not only had Chrysostom to combat the pro-Jewish inclinations of the Antiochians in religious matters, but the Jews were held in so much respect at that time, that Christians preferred to bring their lawsuits before Jewish judges, because the form of the Jewish oath seemed to them more impressive and binding than their own." (Jewish Encyclopedia, p. 75)
In a book entitled "Races in Europe," the author, William Z. Ripley, states under ethology: "The findings of physical anthropology show that, contrary to popular view, there is no Jewish race...Our conclusion then is final. It is paradoxical yet true, we affirm. The Jews are not a Race, but only a People after all."
Perhaps it can be understood why The World Book Encyclopedia states: "The Jews were once a sub-type of the Mediterranean race, but they have mixed with other peoples until the name Jew has lost all racial meaning."
From the above definitions it can be concluded that since the majority of people in modern Palestine and those who call themselves Jews are descendants from a "Turko-Finn, Mongolian tribal people" from Khazaria, they have never been a Semitic people. Therefore anyone who would be critical or oppose them cannot be anti-Semitic. They may be anti-Khazarian, anti-Jew, but certainly not anti-Semitic.
Opportunity Lost: The opportunity was being given to each of the three sons of Judah to prove their right to the throne. The male line of Pharez-Judah had failed. The daughter of Zedekiah, the last king in Jerusalem, was united to the male line of Zarah-Judah in Ireland. The Shelah-Judah remnant was given their opportunity and proved their unworthiness by crucifying the Son of God, Jesus Christ, WHO WAS NOT A JEW, as He did not come from the Shelah line.
Neither the Pharez branch nor the Zarah branch of Judah were Jews. The present House of Windsor has over it the combined line of Zarah-Pharez. Thus we can clearly see that First the Pharez Branch was exalted Then the Shelah Branch and at Present the Zarah Branch is Exalted.
Notice that in verse 27 there are three overturns, i.e., from Pharez to Zarah and, while hidden in Ireland, from 580 B.C. to Christ, the Shelah line was given the opportunity to prove their worth. Three overturnings - from Pharez to Shelah, from Shelah to Zarah and the final overturn to Christ the rightful heir. Also geographically this scripture is fulfilled; the throne was overturned from Jerusalem to Ireland, from Ireland to Scotland from Scotland to Westminster Abbey.
From there He whose right it is, Jesus Christ, the greater son of David, shall rule - from shore to shore and from sea to sea. The Jews were the 70 week (490 year) nation of Daniel 9:24-27. They finished their sanctuary work, just as Judas did, and are broken as a nation forever. Jesus knew who they were. (Matthew 23:1-39)
They were and are the cursed fig tree nation of Matthew 21:19 and are not of de facto nation today. They are the people who were deprived of the Kingdom. (Matthew 21:43) That Israeli thing in Palestine is the fulfillment of Daniel 11:14 and Matthew 24:15 and not Israel's return. (Jeremiah 50:4-6) The Jews are in Israel's land, but do not call themselves Israelite.
The letters "T" and "E" are missing. Could the "T" stand for the Cross and "E" for Ephraim, the head of twelve tribed Israel, both of which they must accept before becoming true Israelites. They were the blasphemers of Paul's day and did all they could to hinder the gospel. (Acts 13:44-47)
Have they changed in their attitude toward Christ and His Gospel up to this hour? The Canaanite anti-Christ spirit was manifest in their attitude toward Christ when they boastfully said: "We be not born of fornication," (John 8:41)
Their statement did not refer to Christ's virgin birth, for Mary hid that secret within her heart. (Luke 2:19) The Shelah-Judah Jews had access to Christ's genealogical record and referred to His descent from the supposed illegitimate Pharez branch of Judah. See how, centuries after the birth of Judah's three sons, the genealogical record of each family was kept separate. (Numbers 21:19-20)
In closing let us say that Christians who are giving all of Israel's promises to the Jews, that rejected nation, are doing great harm to the cause of Christ and will have to suffer the consequences. The Jews must be brought to Israel and to Israel's Christ, (Deuteronomy 33:7) "Bring Judah to his people" (i.e. Israel). This cannot be done by proclaiming lies, they must be told the truth. "Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free."
True love shows those we love the error of their ways. many do not understand what it is to "act in true love" toward the erring brother. Few words have suffered the abuse of inaccuracy and loose meaning in recent years than was "love." With a great many true love is but a synonym for moral laxity, weakness of character, a taking the line of least resistance, a quiet tolerating of what is wrong.
We have overlooked the folly of the blind and made excuses for their opposition to the Bible message for so long that we think it unkind for anyone to speak the truth. This reluctance to speak the truth is manifest in the home life, in the churches and in national and international affairs. Leniency and weakness have overridden truth and faithfulness and this laxity is misnamed "love."
Sentimentality which shrinks from "Hurting the Feelings" of other is ousting all concern for the glory of Christ and the honor of His house. God is "Light," (1 John 1:5) as well as "Love," (1 John 4:8) "Holy" as well as "Merciful," "Severe" as well as "Good," (Romans 11:22) and unless we want to grievously misrepresent the Divine character we must preserve a balance between the two sides.
The One Who Wounds You The Most May Be The Best Friend You Have: While the one who is silent about your sins and refuses to rebuke you for what is dishonoring to God, is your enemy and hates you. O, for the grace to say with the Psalmist: "Let the righteous smite me; it shall be a kindness: and let him reprove me; it shall be an excellent oil, which shall not break my head: for yet my prayer also shall be in their calamities."; (Psalm 141:5) "Reprove not a scorner, lest he hate thee: Rebuke a Wise Man, and He Will Love Thee." (Proverbs 9:8)
How few of the wise are now left? For me to tell a sinner that all is well with him in contradiction to what God's Word teaches, wouldn't help him, but rather it would lead to his sorrow and eternal loss. Likewise, in failing to tell the Jew the truth would be doing him a great injustice. "Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?" (Galatians 4:16)
The sons of Joseph were given the birthright (1 Chronicles 5:1-2) and Judah was never promised all of the land, (Genesis 15:18) never did Judah possess All of it. (Ezekiel 48:7) Except you repent (turn from your way of thinking as well as your attitude toward Christ and His Gospel), "Ye shall all likewise perish." You will perish individually just as you perished nationally, unless you repent.
Judah and Israel must walk together in the last days. "In those days the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel and they shall come together out of the land of the north to the land that I have given for an inheritance unto your fathers."; (Jeremiah 3:18) "And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble
The Outcasts of Israel, and gather together The Dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth. The envy also of Ephraim shall depart, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off: Ephraim."; (Isaiah 11:12-13) "In those of Israel shall come, they and the children of Judah together, going and weeping: they shall go, and seek the Lord their God. They shall ask the way to Zion with their faces hitherward, saying Come, and let us join ourselves to the Lord in a perpetual covenant that shall not be forgotten. My people hath been lost sheep: Their Shepherds have caused them to go astray, they have turned them away on the mountains: they have gone from mountain to hill, they have forgotten their resting place."; (Jeremiah 50:4-6) "Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will perform that good thing which I have promised Unto the House of Israel and To The House of Judah." (Jeremiah 33:14)
That good thing promised is the putting away of our sins by the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ and His return to take unto Himself the throne of His father David, "for the government shall be upon His shoulders and of the increase and peace of His government there shall be no end."
The Jews are fulfilling the prophecy of Ezekiel 11:15 in saying to Israel: "Get you far from the Lord: Unto Us Is This Land Given In Possession." Through their subtle political maneuvering they have placed, in both the Republican and Democratic platforms, a pledge to restore (?) Palestine to the Jews.
To restore, means to them, to bring back to a former state. When, we ask, did the Jews ever possess ALL of Palestine? Our blind political leaders will discover, to their sorrow, that they have made a promise they can never fulfill. To all Christians supporting the Jews in their unscriptural claims and demands for Palestine we say: You Will Find Yourself Fighting Against God.
Many wouldn't dare insist that Esau be given the birthright after he had been dispossessed. Yet continue to support the Jew, both morally and financially, in his futile attempts to regain something which was taken from him. (Matthew 21:19, 43) By doing so you prolong the suffering of the Jews and just might possibly bring the judgment of God upon your own head to your sorrow and loss, while the Jews goes to the slaughter in his vain attempts to "establish the vision." (Daniel 11:14)
We have found Israel under the leadership of Ephraim and Manasseh, not the Jews. We have identified Israel by their marks, by the things they are doing and the position they hold in the world.
The prophecies made concerning Israel are being fulfilled by the United States and the so-called Christian Nations of the world and not the Jews. The two sons of Joseph inherited the birthright and the name of Israel. (Genesis 48:16)
They are a great multitude in the earth, a nation and company of nations; possessing the gates of their enemies. They are God's battle-ax and weapons of war. They are the custodians of God's Word and they Glory in Jesus Christ. They have His Name.
True we do not serve Him as we should - far from it, but we have not nationally, as did the Jews, denied His Name. We have found Israel the positive witness and we have found that other family, the remnant of Judah, the Shelah-Jews, the negative witness. Remember that by the mouth of two or more witnesses shall every word be established.
The people said, "We are witnesses the Lord make the woman (Ruth) that is come into thine house like Rachel and like Leah, Which Two did build the house of Israel." (Ruth 4:11);
Jeremiah 33:14: "Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will perform that good thing which I have promised unto The House of Israel and to The House of Judah"
Jeremiah 33:24: "The Two families which the Lord hath chosen."
Jeremiah 31:31; and Hebrews 8:8: "I will make a new covenant with The House of Israel and The House of Judah."
Ezekiel 37:19: "Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold I will take the Stick of Joseph, Which is in The Hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the Stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand."
True love exhorts, rebukes, reproves and warns of dangers ahead and endeavors to win those outside of Christ at all costs. Are The Jews Israel? The popular aversion to the subject of race has contributed much to the prevailing blindness regarding the ethnic antecedents of the Jews. "The Brotherhood of man," a One-World, Universalist doctrine, censors any consideration of race in Bible exegesis.
This is most evident throughout the organized church where any suggestion that race could be a factor in the plans and purposes of God is anathema. This has brought about a strange paradox. The plain Bible teaching that the Lord God has "A Chosen People" is denied; if not in so many words, then by silently ignoring the numerous references regarding "the children of Jacob His chosen."
Virtually no credence is given to recognition of a chosen race by the main line church denominations; but, oddly enough, those who find racial distinctions the most objectionable are often the first to insist that "the Jews are God's chosen people."
Jesus exposed the age long Esau-Idumean conspiracy to displace the seed of Jacob in order to seize Israel's inheritance. He well knew of the Idumean Herod's plot to slay Him as the Christ child, and He knew the identity of those who still sought to kill Him in order to usurp His Kingship as the legitimate Heir to the Throne of David. John 7:1: “After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would not walk in Jewry, because the Jews sought to kill him.”
When Jesus' ministry was about to end, He left the safe environments of Galilee to confront the Jews in Jerusalem. To those who believed on Him, Jesus said: "...If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:32-33)
Then His enemies raised a racial question: "...We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?" (John 8:33) This was a tacit admission that, although they could claim descent from Abraham, they were not the seed of promise through Isaac and Jacob-Israel who had been in bondage in Egypt.
Jesus knew they were the descendants of Esau. When Jesus said "the scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat," He meant They had taken Control of the Government and Organized Religion. He characterized them as hypocrites: "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him two fold more the child of hell than yourselves." (Matthew 23:15)
Jesus identified them by their own admission: "...If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. Ye Serpents, Ye Generation (Race) of Vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar." (Matthew 23:20-35)
In His parable of the Nobleman, Jesus indicted those who would deny Him the Kingdom: "...his citizens hated him (Christ), and sent a message after him (Christ), saying, We (Jews) will not have this man (Christ) to reign over us." (Luke 19:14)
To them (The Jews), He (Christ) rendered a final verdict: "But those Mine Enemies (The Jews), which would not that I should reign over Them (Jews), bring hither, and Slay Them (Jews) before me." (Luke 19:27)
It should be understood that the term "Jew" in the English language Bibles is a contraction of the Hebrew word Yehu-dim, meaning "of Judah." Failure on the part of many to recognize the true identity of the House of Israel is at the epicenter of the widespread confusion regarding Biblical distinctions between Israel, Judah and the Jews. These are not, in any sense, synonymous terms.
Once these distinctions are clearly understood, one can begin to grasp the enormity of the deception on the part of "those who call themselves Jews" by assuming the mantle of Israel. It is most unfortunate that throughout so-called "Christian Orthodoxy," an oversimplified scenario persists that the ten "lost tribes" were assimilated by their Assyrian captors and, or absorbed among the Gentiles (Nations).
According to the common belief, all that survived of the twelve tribes was the remnant of Judah which was taken captive to Babylon and eventually, they say, returned intact to Jerusalem. This grossly mistaken concept ignores many factors; particularly that the vast majority of Judahites were also taken to Assyria to follow the path of their Israelite kinsmen in the great migration westward to settle the Isles and the Northern Coast lands of Europe.
According to the Biblical accounts and secular history, the major deportations of the Northern Ten-Tribed Kingdom of Israel were carried out by two Assyrian Monarchs, Tiglath-pileser and Shaimaneser. About this same period, 721 B.C., another Assyrian, Sennacherib, captured the forty-six strongholds or "fenced cities" of Judah. (2 Kings 18:13)
The captives of Judah were taken in the same northerly direction where Tiglath-pileser had taken their Israel kinsmen of the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben and Gad in 745 B.C. All of these children of Israel became part of the great migration to the appointed place, north and west of Palestine.
Only "the inhabitants of Jerusalem" within the city walls escaped the Assyrian conquests. What remained of this shattered remnant of Judah was further decimated while captive in Babylon. Little if any account is taken of the proselytes to Judaism who joined them during the captivity.
After seventy years, as many as desired to go were allowed to return to Jerusalem. This number included some of the remnant of Judah and the tribe of Benjamin, and the royal descendants of David, as well as a few of the tribe of Levi.
With them came many of the proselytes who were Hittites, Canaanites and Edomites; and among these were descendants of Ishmael and Esau who pressed the claim that Abraham was their father and thrust their company upon the returning remnant.
When they returned from Babylon, certain ones of the House of Judah and some of the priests intermarried with the inhabitants of the land and these intermarriages were severely condemned by Ezra and Nehemiah. (Ezra 9; 10; Nehimah 13:23-29)
While there were other admixtures in Judah, these forbidden marriages were mainly with Hittites of the former Canaanite empire. In time, this merging of Judahites with Hittites became identified as one of the racial types called "Jews."
Kimyarite (Himyarites) King Adopts Judaism and Converts His Army and People: “Kimyarite (Himyarite). (See Sabeans Jewish Encyclopedia, p. 403) Sabeans: The inhabitants of the ancient kingdom of Sheba in southeastern Arabia, known from the Bible, classical writers, and native inscriptions.
The genealogies of Genesis give three pedigrees for Sheba, the eponymous ancestor of the Sabeans, who is variously termed (1) the son of Raamah and the grandson of Cush, (Genesis 10:7; 1 Chronicles 1:9; comp. Ezekiel 27:22; 38:13) (2) the son of Joktan and a great-great-grandson of Shem, (Genesis 10:28; 1 Chronincles 1:22) and (3) the son of Jokshan and a grandson of Abraham by Keturah. (Genesis 25:3; 1 Chronicles 1:32)
There seem, therefore, to have been three stocks of Sabeans: one in Africa, (Comp. the Ethiopian city of Saga mentioned by Strabo, Geography, p. 77) and the other two in Arabia. Of the latter one is connected with the story of Abraham, and the other with that of the kingdom localized by Genesis 10:30, including the Joktanites generally, and extending ‘from Mesha, as thou goest unto Sephar, a mount of the east.’ (Genesis 20:30))
In Job 6:19 the Sabeans are mentioned in close association with the Temeans, an Ishmaelite stock (Genesis 25:15) that dwelt in Arabia. (Isaiah 21:14, comp. Jeremiah 25:23-24)
The Psalms and the prophetical books lay special emphasis upon the wealth and commercial activity of the Sabeans. The gifts of the kings of Sheba and of Seba to Solomon are noted in Psalm 62:10, gold being especially mentioned among these presents. (Psalm 62:15)
In both these passages the Septuagint, followed by the Vulgate, identifies Sheba with Arabia Isaiah 60:6 adds incense to the gifts which these countries were to bring. (Comp. Jeremiah 6:20) ‘Despite the collocation with Dedan in Genesis 10:7, 1 Chronicles 1:9 and Ezekiel 38:13, the merchants of Sheba, whom Ezekiel addressed in the words 'occupied in thy fairs with chief of all spices, and with all precious stones, and gold...' (Ezekiel 27:22) were doubtless Sabeans; but the reference in the following verse to the 'merchants of Sheba,' together with Haran, Canneh, Eden Asshur, and Chilmad, who by implication would be Asiatics, is probably a mere dittography, and is rightly omitted in the Septuagint.
The wealth of Sheba is indicated also by the list of the gifts brought by its queen to Solomon, and which were 'a hundred and twenty talents of gold, and of spices very great store, and precious stones: there came no more such abundance of spices as these which the Queen of Sheba gave to King Solomon.’ (1 Kings 10:10; 2 Chronicles 9:1-9; see Sheba, Queen Of)
The only mention of the Sabeans is a warlike connection is in Job 1:15, where they are described as attacking and killing the servants of Job to rob them of cattle; but according to Joel 4. (A.V. 3:8), they dealt in slaves, including Jews.
In the New Testament there is a reference to the kingdom of Sheba in the allusion to ‘the queen of the south’ (Matthew 12:42; Luke 11:31). Sheba must be carefully distinguished from the Cushite or African Seba, (Comp. Genesis 10:7; 1 Chronicles 1:9) as is shown by the discrimination between the ‘kings of Sheba and Seba.’ in Psalm 72:10, and by the collocation of Egypt, Ethiopia, and Seba in Isaiah 43:3, 45:13.
Strabo, basing his account for the most part on Eratosthenes, an author of the third century B.C., gives considerable information of value concerning the Sabeans. (Geography, ed. MÜller, pp. 768, 778, 780) Their territory was situated between those of the Mineans and Cattabanes; and their capital, Mariaba, stood on the summit of a wooded hill.
The country, like those adjoining, was a flourishing monarchy, with beautiful temples and palaces, and with houses which resembled those of the Egyptians. The mode of succession to the throne was peculiar in that the heir apparent was not the son of the king, but the first son born to a noble after the monarch's accession.
The king himself was also the judge; but he was not allowed to leave the palace under penalty of being stoned to death by the people. ‘Inscriptions of the Sabeans are numerous, but the information which these records furnish is comparatively meager.
They cover, it is true, a period of about 1,300 years, ceasing only with the extinction of the kingdom in the sixth century C.E. (A.D.); but only of the period just before and just after the beginning of the present era are they sufficiently abundant to allow even an approximation to a coherent history.
The earliest inscription known is one containing the name of Yetha-amara, who has been identified with the 'Ithamara the Sabean' of an inscription of Sargon dated 715 B.C. Besides the epigraphical remains, there is a large number of coins, dating chiefly from 150 B.C. to 150 C.E.
These are of special value for the history of the nation, even during its period of decline, since they bear both the monograms and the names of numerous kings. The Sabean inscriptions are dated by eponymous magistrates previous to the introduction of an era which has been identified with the Seleucidan (312 B.C.), and which has also been fixed by other scholars as beginning in 115 B.C., although there are traces of other chronological systems as well.
These texts frequently allude to commerce, agriculture, and religion. The chief articles of trade are the same as those mentioned in the Bible and the classics, with the addition of horses and camels. The agricultural texts are chiefly prayers for increase in crops and live stock, with the inevitable petition of the Semite for male offspring.
They contain also a number of plant-names, as well as occasional references to systems of irrigation. The military texts, in their accounts of successful raids on and repulses of other marauding tribes, confirm the allusion in Job 1:15.
The references to religion are for the most part names of deities; but the entire lack of description renders a reconstruction of the Semitic pantheon practically impossible. It is clear, however, from the appellations of the gods that the religion of Sheba closely resembled the pre-Islamic Arabian cult, and showed certain affinities with the Assyro-Babylonian system as well.
Among the Sabean gods the most important were Almakah ('the hearing god?'), Athtar (a protective deity and the male for of 'Ashtaroth,' to whom the gazel seems to have been sacred), Haubas (possibly a lunar deity), Dhu Samawi ('lord of heaven'), Hajr, Kainan, Kawim ('the sustaining'), Sin (the principal moon-god), Shams (the chief solar deity), Yata', Ramman (the Biblical Rimmon), El ('god' in general), Sami' (the hearing'), Shem (corresponding in functions to the general Semitic Ba'al), Hobal (possibly a god of fortune), Homar (perhaps a god of wine), Bashir (bringer of good tidings), Rahman (the merciful), Ta'lab (probably a tree-god), and Wadd (borrowed from the Mineans).
A number of goddesses are mentioned, among them Dhat Hami (lady of Hami), Dhat Ba'dan (lady of Ba'dan), Dhat Gadran (lady of Gadran), and Tanuf (lofty). It becomes clear, even from this scanty information, that the religion was in the main a nature-cult, like the other Semitic religions; and this is borne out by a statement in the Koran that the Sabeans worshiped the sun.
Few details of the cult are given, although there are frequent mentions of gifts and sacrifices, as well as of 'self-presentation,' a rite of doubtful meaning, but one which evidently might be performed more than once.
Ritual purity and abstinence of various forms also seem to have formed part of the Sabean religion, and the name of the month Dhu Hijjat or Mahijjat, the only one retained by the Arabs (Dhu'l-Hijja, the twelfth month), implies a custom of religious pilgrimage to some shrine or shrines.
To the account of the government as described by Strabo the Sabean inscriptions add little. The word for 'nation' is 'khums' (fifth), which apparently implies an earlier division of Arabia or of a portion of it into five parts; and the people were divided into tribes (shi'b), which, in their turn, were composed of 'tenths' or 'thirds.'
The kings at first styled themselves 'malik' (king) and, possibly later, 'mukarrib,' a term of uncertain meaning, while they afterward were called 'kings of Saba and Dhu Raidan,' and finally monarchs of Hadramaut and Yamanet as well.
There were likewise kings of a number of minor cities. From a late text which mentions a king of Himyar and Raidan and of Saba and Silhin, it has been inferred that the capital of Sheba was later removed to Raidan while the actual palace remained at Himyar, and that from this circumstance the dynasty and all that it ruled were formerly called Himyaritic (the 'Homeritae' of Ptolemy and of Christian ecclesiastical authors), a designation now generally discarded.
The state of society in Sheba seems to have been somewhat feudal to character. The great families, which evidently possessed large landed estates, had castles and towers that are frequently mentioned in the inscriptions; and remains of some of these buildings are still extant.
The status of women was remarkably high. The mistress of a castle is mentioned in one inscription, and the epigraphical remains represent women as enjoying practical equality with men, although a few passages imply the existence of concubinage.
The Sabean language belonged to the Semitic stock. While some of the inscriptions differ little from classical Arabic, most of them show a close affinity with Ethiopic. The weak letters occasionally possessed their consonant value as in Ethiopic, although they have become vowels in Arabic.
On the other hand, the article is affixed as in Aramaic, instead of being prefixed as in Arabic, and certain syntactic phenomena recall Hebrew rather than the South-Semitic dialects. The alphabet, which, like all the Semitic systems except Ethiopic, represents the consonants only, is plausibly regarded by man as the earliest form of Semitic script." (Jewish Encyclopedia, pp. 608-610)
Even before the captivities, the "inhabitants of Jerusalem" were already a heterogeneous composite of antagonistic groups which included the "good fig" Judahites and the "evil fig" Shelanite-Canaanite pseudo-Judahites the Jews.
When Nebuchadnezzar carried the "good fig" Judahites with Jeconiah and the princes of Judah to Babylon, (Jeremiah 24:1) the "evil fig" residue of Jerusalem was left under Zedekiah who reigned in Jerusalem for eleven years as Nebuchadnessar's puppet king. The appellation, "Jew," is a relatively recent term in Old Testament history.
The word, Jew, first appears in 2 Kings 16:6, in our English language Bibles as a slang contraction of the Hebrew, Yehudim, meaning "of Judah." Or of "the land of Judah." In fact, the origin of the term, Jew, does not antedate the return of the remnant of Judah from Babylon. During the captivity, many of the Babylonians who became proselytes to Judaism adopted the name, Diaspora, or "dispersion of the Jews," but they were neither of Judahite nor Israelite ancestry.
In Juda, what became known as "the nation of the Jews" consisted of the proselytes to Judaism who had swelled their numbers in Babylon. Judaism had Nothing to do with the Hebrew Religion. There were further mutations in Jewry. One occurred about 125 B.C. when the nation of the Idumeans was absorbed by the Jews. Another took place in Queen Esther's time in the Persian Kingdom when "many of the people of the land became Jews; for the fear of the Jews fell upon them." (Esther 8:17)
In his "Study of Esau-Edom in Jewry," C.F. Parker of London explains how the pseudo-Judahites brought in additional Esau-Edomites and Ishmaelites to help them gain control. So great was the number and influence of these interlopers that, during Jesus' ministry, He found them "sitting in Moses' seat," i.e., in complete control of the nation of the Jews, albeit subject to Rome. By the end of the tenth century A.D., the bulk of the world's Jewish population from Mesopotamia, Persia and the Armenian and Caucasian highlands had swarmed into Khazaria and intermarried extensively with the converted Khazars to produce the Ashkenazic Jews of Eastern Europe.
These Ashkenazim of Eastern Europe and the Sephardim of the Mediterranean basin have been recognized for over a thousand years as two sharply contrasted physical types within the Jewish fold. Together they comprise the major part of world Jewry. However, today, Judaism embraces many other peoples including such diverse races as the Black Jews of Malabar and Ethiopia and the Mongoloid Jews of China.
The Appellation, “Jew,” has been broadened to include Anyone of Whatever Race or Nationality Who Accepts the Faith of Judaism or who, without formal religious affiliation, regards the traditions of Judaism; its ethics, its folkways, its literature, as their own. The vast majority of Judah who, like their kinsmen in Israel, were taken captive by the Assyrians were Never known as "Jews" nor had they been called "Jews" while in Palestine.
They were Never part of the Jewish Diaspora which came out of Babylon and Egypt. As the historian H.G. Wells wrote: "The main part of Jewry was Never in Judea." (H.G. Wells, Outline of History)
While the children of Israel disappeared for a time from the pages of history, The Jews have always known who they were and the World has never been allowed to lose sight of them!
Because they have always sought to destroy Christians and Christianity whenever possible. The following Jewish attacks on Christianity are taken from the February, 1978 issue of the "Christian Vanguard."
1). 1954: ADL attorney Leonard Schroeter, is instrumental in preparing desegregation briefs for the NAACP for hearings before the U.S. Supreme court. He said "The ADL was working throughout the South to make integration possible as quickly as possible." (Oregon Journal, December 9, 1954)
2). 1957: Jewish rabbi attacks the Lord's Prayer in the schools. (NJO, February 8, 1957)
3). 1957: American Jewish Congress brought suit to have a nativity scene of Christ removed from public school property in Ossining, N.Y. The Jews obtained an injunction and planned to take the case before the U.S. Supreme Court. (Jewish Voice, December 20, 1957)
4). 1957: New Jersey Region of the American Jewish Congress urges legislature to defeat a bill that would allow prayer in the schools. (American Examiner, September 26, 1957) Have you ever thought about it: If the Jews God is the same one as the Christian's God, then why do they object to Prayer to God in the Schools? The answer is given in a 1960 Court case by a Jewess Lois N. Milman, If Christians would only listen and observe! "He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God." (John 8:47; 9:33; 1 John 3:10; 4:6)
5). 1960: Jewish pupil objects to prayer in schools. Jewess Lois N. Milman, objected to discussing God in the Miami schools because the talk was about "A God that is not my god." (How true this is) In a court suit she also objected to "having to listen to Christmas carols in the schools." (L.A. Times, July 20, 1960)
6). 1962: The American Jewish Congress has called the Philadelphia decision against Bible reading in the public schools a "major victory for freedom." A special three judge federal court in Philadelphia voided as unconstitutional Pennsylvania's law requiring the reading of ten verses of the Bible in public schools each day. (Remember the Jews claim that the first five books of the Bible is also their Bible. Do you begin to see what liars they are?). "The Bible was read Without Comment and objectors were Excused upon Request from parents...The Jewish Congress is a Major Force in Supporting Challenges to Traditional (Christian) Practices in the Public Schools." (Los Angeles Times, February 2, 1962)
7). 1963: Jews Bernard Roseman and Bernard Copley arrested smuggling in a large quantity of LSD-25 From Israel. The drug was manufactured at the Wiseman Institute in Israel. (Do you see now why the government cannot stop the drug traffic?) Jews repay Christian Americans for their Hospitality and Aid by Making Drug Addicts out of their Children. (Los Angeles Times, April 4, 1963)
8). 1972: The American Jewish Congress filed a formal protest with the U.S. Post Office Department about a stamp to be issued representing Christianity. (But the Jews clandestinely put a so-called star of David on a stamp issued by the Post Office.) The P.O. Department withdrew the stamp design to please the Jews. (Jewish Post & Opinion. August 17, 1972)
9). 1972: The Jewish Committee Against Religious Encroachment in Schools filed in Federal Court to have the Yule Pageant in Westfield, N.J. banned. The suit charged, "the pageant favor belief in religion over non-religion and favors the Christian Religion over others (Jews)." (New York Daily News, November 15, 1972)
10). 1973: Jewish State Senator Anthony Beilenson (representing Beverly Hills) brought pressure on state officials and had the nativity scene removed from the Capitol grounds because it offended the Jews from his district. (Sacramento Union, December 22, 1973)
11). 1976: Jewish owned movie studios in Hollywood produce two anti-Christian movies. "The Passover Plot" which portrays Christ as a revolutionary who uses drugs to trick people into thinking he was crucified. "The Sex Life of Jesus," Christ is portrayed in a series of sexual encounters including homosexual (Think about it: Time after time the Jews make movies portraying our Lord Jesus Christ as a Queer. How can ANY thinking Christian possibly believe these are God's People HOW STUPID CAN CHRISTIANS BE?) "Acts The Many Faces of Jesus" is built around the same theme. (Other movies made since 1976 with that same theme, that Jesus Christ was a drug addict and Queer are "Jesus Christ Superstar," "Last Temptation of Christ," "Heaven on Earth"; this one was not about Christ but about a fallen woman angel, "Oh God-1" and "Oh God-2" while these did not portray Jesus as a Queer they did portray Almighty God as a stupid mortal man -- and these are only a few of the many). (Tribune Review, November 16, 1976) Where the hell are our so-called Christian Ministers? That's right in their pulpits, on television and radio crying out for more money and letting these antichrist perverts go on blaspheming Almighty God the Lord Jesus Christ; While they suck up after these Satanic Creeps!
12). 1977: President Jimmy Carter forced to apologize to the Jews living in America for telling his Bible class the truth, that The Jews Killed Christ. (Jewish Press, May 13, 1977)
13). 1977: Russian Jews arriving in the U.S. given Medicaid by New York States as they claim being uncircumcised ruins their love life. They complain Jewish girls will not date them on Religious grounds if they are not circumcised (I Wonder if a Jewish boy has to show the Jewish girls his Privy Member before he asks her for a date?) Despite Constitutional separation of Church & State, New York and Federal authorities give these foreign Jews taxpayer money to be circumcised so the Jew girls will date them. (Jewish Press, November 25, 1977)
14). 1977: Jews urge Removal of Bible Toting Judge. The Anti-Defamation League sent a letter to the state Committee on Judicial Performance (California) to have Judge Hugh W. Godwin removed from the bench because "his Christian religious beliefs color the manner in which he dispenses justice." (L.A. Herald Examiner, June 24, 1977)
15). 1977: Lutheran Church leaders are calling for the deletion of the hymn "Reproaches" from Lutheran hymnals because the "hymn has a danger of fermenting anti-Semitism." The ADL sent a letter commending the president of the American Lutheran Church for the action.
16). 1977: The American Jewish Committee was responsible for the Episcopal Church removing two hymns "Reproaches" and "Improperia" from the Book of Common Prayer because they (truthfully) accused the Jews of the Crucifixion of Christ. Rabbi Marc Tannenbaum congratulated Episcopal Bishop Allin for "his historic act of respect for Judaism and friendship for the Jewish people." (Jewish Press).
17). 1977: The National Jewish Commission of Law and Public Affairs is now forcing cemeteries to bury Jews on legal holidays. Cemeteries were normally closed to burials on legal holidays. However, since the Jews bury their dead quickly after death they are now forcing cemeteries to make special rules for them. Jews have been instrumental in having Christian Crosses removed from graves in Veterans Cemeteries because the crosses "offend them." (Jewish Press, November 25, 1977)
18). 1977: U.S. Foreign Policy is now based on How Foreign Countries treat their native Jews. Senators Moynihan and Javits of New York, two ardent Zionists, notified the Soviet Government that grain shipments from the U.S. would be canceled if the Soviets tried Jewish trouble maker Anatoly Sheharansky. (So they sent him to the Israeli State). (Jewish Press, November 25, 1977)
19). 1977: Jewish leaders chastised Jews for celebrating Christmas and for trying to make their Hanukkah holiday like Christmas. Dr. Alice Ginott said, "(Jews) borrow the style if not the substance of Christmas and, believing they can Take The Christian Religion out of Christmas, create an artificial holiday for their children...Hanukkah symbolizes the Jewish people's struggle to maintain their spiritual (racial) identity against superior forces."
20). 1977: The Anti-Defamation League has succeeded in getting 11 major U.S. firms to cancel their ads in the "Christian Yellow Pages." To advertise in the CYP, people have to declare they believe in Jesus Christ. The Jews claim they are offended by the idea of having to say they believe in Jesus Christ and yet want to force their way into the Christian Directories.
21). "The rabbi of the 'Adath Yisrael' synagogue in Cleveland Park, Washington, dedicated his Sabbath sermon to the Jewish cultural and political center now being formed in America. "For the first time in American history," the rabbi said, "we no longer feel we live in the diaspora. The U.S. has no longer a government of Goyim, but an administration in which the Jews are full partners in the decision making at all levels. Perhaps the aspects of the Jewish religious law connected with the term 'government Goyim' should be re-examined since it is an outdated term in the U.S." (Remarks, October 16, 1995)
These Are Just a Few of the many attacks against Christianity by the Jews in the past several years. It is unfortunate, indeed, that the Christian clergy seems to be ignorant of, or apathetic to this plot to destroy everything they say they stand for as Christians. In fact, in many instances, they stand behind their pulpits and defend and support the very people who are pledged to destroy them. There is no doubt that thousands of Christian "Ministers" are deeply disturbed by the mysterious pressures from above, which often prevent them from exercising sound judgment. One outstanding Fundamentalist pastor, a leader in the Moral Majority, recently admitted to Lt. Col. Gordon "Jack" Mohr: "I am deeply disturbed by the Jewish influence behind the efforts to destroy the Moral Majority, even though we have been strongly pro-Jewish. But all the great Bible scholars and preachers of the Twentieth Century have said they were God's Chosen People, so I will have to go along with them." May God have mercy on us when we use this as the Criteria for Whether we are right or wrong! The greatest spiritual teacher of all time, our Lord Jesus Christ, spoke to the Jewish religious leaders of His time in no uncertain terms: "Ye (Jews) are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye (Jews) will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it." (John 8:44) Then Christ goes on in verse 47, speaking to the Pharisees once more: "He that is of God heareth God's words: ye (Jews) therefore hear them not, Because ye (Jews) Are Not of God." Does this sound like the Jews are the "Chosen People" to you? These same Jews had Already admitted they were Not Israelites in verse 33, when they told Jesus: "...We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man..." If they had been true Israelites, they could not have said this, since any bible Scholar knows the Israelites spent over 400 years in Egypt, many of which Were in Bondage. Yet their leaders told Jesus: "We have never been in bondage to any man." In John 10:26-28, Jesus spoke again to a crowd of Jewish hypocrites: "But ye (Jews) believe not, because Ye (Jews) Are Not Of My Sheep...My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish." Then in Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 we hear the final word of our Lord concerning these pseudo-Israelites, as He warns the church at Smyrna concerning them. He warned them of: "...the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan." How can our preachers ("Judeo-Christian Ministers") designate these blasphemers, whom Christ has cursed as "God's Chosen People?" In fact the Jews are desperately working toward the time when: "They shall put you (Christians) out of the synagogues: yea, The time cometh, that whosoever killeth you (Christians) will think that he doeth God service." (John 16:2 and Sepher Or Israel, Talmud) The following, in part, was taken from Facts are Facts, by Benjamin Freedman. Most of the confusion in the minds of Christians is unwarranted and unjustified. It would not exist if the so-called Christian Clergy had not aided and abetted the deceptions responsible for it. As a matter of fact, our Christian Clergy has committed TREASON -- as defined by the Constitution of the United States. "Treason against the United States (Or The Lord Jesus Christ), shall consist of...adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort (America and Christians send billions of dollars in military and monetary aid to the Israeli State to aid them in their murders and theft against the Palestinian people)." (Art. V, Sec. 3) With so many of our clergymen allies with their enemies it is no wonder we see spiritual sabotage on every hand. It is no wonder that millions of potential "front line" soldiers for Jesus Christ have become spiritual cowards; who hide in their spiritual foxholes, praying for Christ to return and rapture them out of the mess They Are Responsible For. Many in this category will be in for the "shock of their lives," so to speak, for they will be so tightly zipped up in their "shroud of self-righteousness" that they will not get unzipped in time to go with their Master when He does come. Remember Jesus said: "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven." (Matthew 7:23) The will of God goes a lot farther than knocking on doors and inviting someone to attend church; it goes farther than telling them about the love of God and the way to salvation. It means "front line duty" in the battle that rages.
To stop this spiritual surrender, we are going to have to have an "about face" on the part of our clergy. Christian organizations, such as the Moral Majority, will never reach their full potential, until their leaders will willingly and honestly point out who their enemies really are. Mr. Freedman puts his finger squarely on one of the major church problems when he told Dr. Goldstein: "The utterances by the Christian clergy, which confuses Christians the most, is the constantly repeated utterance that 'Jesus was a Jew.' This appears to be their favorite theme. It is a Misrepresentation and Distortion of an Incontestable Historic Fact...Informed, intelligent Christians, cannot reconcile This Unwarranted Misrepresentation and Distortion of Facts." Most competent Bible historians will admit that at no time in the New Testament is Jesus ever called a Jew and that, during His sojourn on earth, He was called a "Judean" by His contemporaries. He was also called a "Nazarene" and a "Galilean" but the Nazarenes or Galileans are Not given such a glowing account! The great Hebrew historian, Josephus, wrote many times concerning Jesus, but Never once Called Him A Jew. The church historian, Theoplylact, writing in 1080 A.D. said: "The city of the Judeans was taken, and the wrath of God was kindled against them: as also Josephus witnesses, that this came upon them on the account of the death of Jesus." When Pontius Pilate, the Roman Governor of Judea, allowed the crucifixion of Jesus, he had inscribed on the cross the Latin words: "Iesus Nazarenous Rex Iudeorum." He was expressing his sarcasm for the Jewish religious leaders who had pressured him into allowing them to execute a man he knew was innocent. Authorities on Latin will tell you this inscription means: "Jesus the Nazarene, ruler of the Judeans." By no stretch of the imagination does this read: "King of the Jews," And it was Not so translated in the 1611 printing of the King James Version of the Bible. During His lifetime, Christ was Never known as the "King of the Jews." Pilate knew that Jesus had been denied by the Jewish religious leaders of the people we now call Jews and that they were responsible for the false testimony they had brought against Him. Christ was crucified, by the Jews, not because of any guilt on His part. With the exception of a few of His followers, most of the Jews abhorred His teachings. There were only 120 faithful ones in the "upper room" on the Day of Pentecost.. (Acts 1:15) The fact that Jesus was never called a Jew, or was known by this name, cannot be erased by the "wishful thinking" of our theologians, no matter how hard they try to back the Jews. There is no factual foundation in history or theology, which would allow the word used by Pilate to describe Jesus as a Jew. The Greek word is "Ioudais" the Latin "Iudaeus," and the English translation can be nothing but "Judean." There is no way you can come up with a religious connotation for this word. During the time of Christ, at no place in the world, was there a religion known as "Jewish." Countless intelligent and informed Christians no longer accept unchallenged assertions by the Christian clergy that Jesus in His lifetime was a Member of a group in Judea which practiced a religious form of worship then known as "The Tradition of the Elders" and now know as "Judaism," or that Jesus in His lifetime here on earth was a Member of the racial group which today includes the preponderant majority of All The "Jews" In The World, or that the "Jews" throughout the world today are the lineal descendants of the nation in Judea of which Jesus was a national in His lifetime here on earth, or that the cultural characteristics of the "Jews" throughout the world today correspond with the cultural characteristics of Jesus during His lifetime here on earth and His teachings while He was here on earth for a brief stay. Christians, who follow the Lord's Commandment to study to make themselves approved, will no longer believe that the race religion, nationality and culture of Jesus and the race, religion, nationality and culture of the "Jews" today or their ancestors have a common origin or character. The resentment by Christians is more ominous than the Christian clergy suspect. Under existing conditions the Christian clergy will find ignorance is not bliss, nor wisdom folly. Christians everywhere are today beginning to learn the authentic relationship between the "Jews" throughout the world today and the "Judeans" who populated "Judea" before, during and after the time of Christ. Christians now insist that they be told correctly by the Christian clergy about the racial, religious, national and cultural background of the "Jews" throughout the world today and the basis for associating these backgrounds with the racial, religious, national and cultural background of Jesus in His lifetime in Judea. The intelligent and informed Christians are alerted to the exploded myth that the "Jews" throughout the world today are the direct descendants of the "Judeans" amongst whom Jesus lived during His lifetime here on earth. Many Christians today are becoming more and more alerted day by day why the "Jews" throughout the world for three centuries have spent uncounted sums of money to manufacture the fiction that the "Judeans" in the time of Jesus were "Jews" rather than "Judeans," and that "Jesus was a Jew." Christians are becoming more and more aware day by day of all the economic and political advantages accruing to the "Jews" as a direct result of their success in making Christians believe that "Jesus was a Jew" in the "secondary meaning" they have created for the 18th century word "Jew." The "Jews" throughout the world today and especially those in the Mideast, represent themselves to Christians as "Jews" only in the "secondary meaning" of the word "Jew." They seek to thereby prove their kinship with Jesus. They emphasize this Fiction to Christians constantly. But that Fable is Fast Fading. To allege that "Jesus was a Jew" in the sense that during His lifetime Jesus professed and practiced the form of religious worship known and practiced under the modern name of "Judaism" is false and fiction of the most blasphemous nature. At the time of the Crucifixion of Christ, Pontius Pilate was the administrator in Judea for the Roman Empire. At that time in history the area of the Roman Empire included a part of the Middle East. As far as he was concerned officially or personally the inhabitants of Judea were "Judeans" to Pontius Pilate and not so-called "Jews" as they have been called since the 18th century. In the time of Pontius Pilate in History there was no religious, racial or national group in Judea known as "Jews" nor had there been any group so identified anywhere else in the World prior to that time. Pontius Pilate expressed little interest as the administrator of the Roman Empire officially or personally in the wide variety of forms of religious worship then practiced in Judea. These forms of religious worship extended from phallic worship and other forms of idolatry to the emerging spiritual philosophy of an eternal, omnipotent and invisible Divine deity, the emerging Yahve (Jehovah) concept which predated Abraham of bible fame by approximately 2,000 years. As the administrator for the Roman Empire in Judea it was the official policy of Pontius Pilate never to interfere in the spiritual affairs of the local population. Pontius Pilate's primary responsibility was the collection of taxes to be forwarded home to Rome, not the forms of religious worship practiced by the Judeans from whom those taxes were collected. The Latin word "rex" means "ruler or leader" in English. During the lifetime of Jesus in Judea the Latin word "rex" meant only that to Judeans familiar with the Latin language. The Latin word "rex" is the Latin verb "rego, regere, rexi, rectus" in English means "to rule, to lead." Latin was of course the official language in all the provinces administered by a local administrator of the Roman Empire. This fact accounts for the inscription on the Cross in Latin. With the invasion of the British Isles by the Anglo-Saxons, the English language substituted the Anglo-Saxon "king" for the Latin equivalent "rex" used before the Anglo-Saxon invasion. The adoption of "king" for "rex" at this late date in British history did not retroactively alter the meaning of the Latin "rex" to the Judeans during the time of Christ. The Latin "rex" to them then meant only "ruler, leader" as it still means in Latin. Anglo-Saxon "king" was spelled differently when first used but at all times meant the same as "rex" in Latin, "leader" of a tribe. During the lifetime of Jesus it was very apparent to Pontius Pilate that Jesus was the very Last Person in Judea the Pharisees or scribes would select as their "ruler" or their "leader." In spite of this situation in Judea Pontius Pilate did not hesitate to order the inscription of the Cross "Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudeorum." By the wildest stretch of the imagination it is not conceivable that this sarcasm and irony by Pontius Pilate at the time of the Crucifixion Was Not Mockery of Jesus by Pontius Pilate, But Was Mockery of the Pharisees and the scribes; whom we know today as "Jews." After this reference to "Jesus the Nazarene Ruler of the Judeans" the Priests, Pharisees and scribes (Jews) forthwith proceeded to Crucify Jesus upon that very Cross. It was the Chief Priests, Pharisees and Scribes (The Jews), Who Crucified our Lord Jesus Christ: Not the Romans!!! If one is to be honest, it is Utterly Impossible to give any other English translation to "Iudaeorum" than "of the Judeans." Qualified and competent theologians and historians regard as incredible any other translation into English of "Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeorum" than "Jesus the Nazarene Ruler of the Judeans." At the time Pontius Pilate was ordering the "Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeorum" inscribed upon the Cross the spiritual leaders of Judea (The Jews) were protesting to Pontius Pilate "not to write Jesus was the ruler of the Judeans" but to inscribe instead that Jesus "had said that He was the ruler of the Judeans." The spiritual leaders of Judea made very strong protests to Pontius Pilate against his reference to Jesus as "Rex Iudaeorum" insisting that Pontius Pilate was not familiar with or misunderstood the status of Jesus in Judea. These protests are a matter of historical record, as you know, if you have read the account of the Crucifixion in the Bible. (John 19:21) The Gospel, by John, was written originally in the Greek language according to the best authorities. In the Greek original there is no equivalent for the English that Jesus "had said that He was the ruler of the Judeans." The English translation of the Greek original of the Gospel by John 19:19, reads "do not inscribe 'the monarch (basileus) of the Judeans (Ioudaios), but that He Himself said I am monarch (basileus) of the Judeans (Ioudaios)." "Ioudaia" is the Greek word for the Latin word "Iudea" and the English word "Judea." "Basileus" is the Greek for the Latin for "Basileus" in Greek. The English "ruler," or its alternative "leader," define the sense of Latin "rex" and Greek "basileus" as they were used in the Greek and Latin Gospel by John. Pontius Pilate "washed his hands" of the blood of Jesus and the protests by the spiritual leaders (Jews) in Judea who demanded of him that the inscription on the Cross authored by Pontius Pilate be corrected in the manner they insisted upon. Pontius Pilate very impatiently replied to their demands "What I have written, I have written." (John 19:22); "Nazarenus Rex Iudaeorum," or "Jesus the Nazarene Ruler of the Judeans" in English. The Inscriptions on the Cross Since the inscriptions on the cross has been brought up. We will try to explain the questions that the atheists and agnostics continually bring up, when tormenting baby Christians; those who have only recently accepted Christ. And in all too many occasions, older Christians who, after accepting Christ, simply sat back and never learned anything else. Each of the four Gospels gives a Different wording of these inscriptions: 1). Matthew 27:37: "This is Jesus, the King of the Jews." 2). Mark 15:26: "The King of the Jews." 3). Luke 23:38: "This is the King of the Jews." 4). John 19:19: "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews." Here again the difficulty is created by assuming that these Similar but differing records are Identical, without noticing the exact words which are written. It is universally assumed that there was only One, and then follow the efforts to explain the alleged "discrepancies" between the different version of it. If we note carefully what is actually said all will be clear. A). Mark 15:26: can be dismissed; for he does not say anything about a "title" (Gr. titlos, John 19:19) being put on the cross or anywhere else, which any one had seen. It is a question of the Lord's "accusation" or "indictment," or the ground or cause of His condemnation as claiming to be "the King of the Jews." B). John 19:19: speaks of a "title" written by Pilate, Before it Left Pilate's Presence; for no one suggests that Pilate went to the scene of the execution and wrote anything there. He had already "washed" his hands over the affair. In Pilate's writing the three languages were in this order: (1) Hebrew, (2) Greek, and (3) Latin (cp. D below). And it was read After the Cross had been set up. This was the one which gave rise to the argument between the Chief Priests (The Jews) and Pilate (John 19:21-22) and this argument took place before the parting of the garments (v. 23 and 24). C). Matthew 27:37: was the result of that discussion; for another "title" was brought and was "set up over his head," After they had "Parted His Garments," and having sat down, they watched Him there (v. 35 and 36). As there could hardly have been two titles at the same time, the former must have been taken down and the other substituted. We are not told how long the argument lasted or when it ceased, or what was the final result of it. D). Luke 23:38: a further result is seen for another was brought much later, close upon "the sixth hour" (v. 44), when the darkness fell. It was written with the languages in a different order: (1) Greek, (2) Latin, and (3) Hebrew (v. 38 -- but read the texts completely). It was put up "over Him" (Gr ep' auto, v. 38), "After the Revilings of the People" (cp. v. 35-37, with v. 38); whereas Matthew's (No. C) was set up Before the Revilings. (Matthew 27:37 with v. 39) The result is that: 1). Mark's was only His indictment. 2). John's was the First, written by Pilate himself (or at his order, in (1) Hebrew, (2) Greek, and (3) Latin, and was put on the cross Before It Left Pilate's Presence. 3). Matthew's was the Second, substituted for the first, in consequence of the arguments which took place, and was set up "over His head" After the garments had been divided, and Before the revilings. 4). Luke's was the Third (and last), put up "over Him," After the revilings, (Luke 23:35) and was seen just before the darkness of the "sixth hour" (v. 44). This was written in three languages but in a different order: (1) Greek, (2) Latin, and (3) Hebrew (v. 38). Not in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin, as No. B in John 19:19. (Companion Bible) Thus, such differences as these are marks of Divine accuracy; and, instead of being sources of difficulties, become, when rightly divided, the means of their removal. Jesus is first referred to as a so-called "Jew" in the 18th century editions in the English language of the 14th century first translations of the New Testament into English, and is the corrupted English word for the 4th century Latin "Iudaeus" found in St. Jerome's Vulgate Edition. Of that there is no longer any doubt. It is an acknowledge fact the word "Jew" did not appear in the English language until 1775. Prior to that time, it did not exist in any language on earth. It was introduced into the English language in a play (The Raven) written by an English playwright named Sheridan. It was completely unknown to Shakespeare nor was it known to the translators of the King James Version of the Bible in 1611. Contrary to popular opinion, Shakespeare wrote his "Merchant of Venice," (V. III i. 61). "I am an Iewe: hath not an Iewe eyes." To go back a bit further, the word "Jew" does not appear in the 1582 version of the Douay Bible, the official translation of the Roman Catholic Church. But it does appear in both that version and the King James Version, when they were revised late in the 18th Century. As we have stated, the word "Jew" was first introduced into the English language in the 18th century and its one and only implication, inference and innuendo at that time was "Judean." However, during the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries a well-organized and well-financed international "pressure group" (which later became known as Zionism) has created a so-called "secondary meaning" for the word "Jew" among the English-speaking people of the world. This so-called "secondary meaning" for the word "Jew" bears no relation whatsoever to the 18th century original connotation of the word "Jew." It is a misrepresentation. It is a Deliberate Lie Formulated by the Jews to Deceive Christians into support for a people who are the Enemies of Christ! The "secondary meaning" of the word "Jew" today bears as little relation to its original and correct meaning as the "secondary meaning" today for the word "camel" bears to the original and correct meaning of the world "camel," or the "secondary meaning" today for the word "ivory" bears to the original and correct meaning of the word "Ivory." Therefore, the "secondary meaning" today for the word "camel" is a cigarette by that name but its original and correct meaning is a desert animal by that name. While the "secondary meaning" of the word "ivory" today is a piece or box of soap whereas its original and correct meaning, the tusk of a male elephant.
The "secondary meanings" of words often become the Generally Accepted meanings of words formerly having entirely different meanings. This is accomplished by the expenditure of great amounts of money for well-planned publicity. So today if you ask for a "camel" someone will hand you a cigarette by that name. Today if you ask for a piece of "ivory" someone will hand you a piece or a box of soap by that name. You will never receive either a desert animal or a piece of the tusk of a male elephant; unless you specifically state that is what you want. We believe this illustrates the extent to which "secondary meanings" are able to practically eclipse the original and correct meanings of words in the minds of the general public. The "secondary meaning" for the word "Jew" today has totally eclipsed the original and correct meaning of the word Jew when it was introduced as a word to the English language. Well-planned and well-financed world-wide publicity through every available means and by every available media by well-organized "Jews" for three centuries has created a "secondary meaning" for the word "Jew" which has completely "blacked out" the original and correct meaning of the word Jew. There can be no doubt about that! There is not a person in the entire English-speaking world today who regards a "Jew" as a "Judean" in the literal sense of the word. But that was the correct and Only meaning in the 18th century. The generally accepted "secondary meaning" of the word "Jew" today is Falsely Presented by the Clergy with practically no exceptions is made of four FALSE universally-believed theories. These four theories are that a "Jew" is, (1) A person who today professes the form of religious worship known as "Judaism," and that it is the foundation of Christianity. (2) A person who claims to belong to a racial group associated with the ancient Semites. (3) A person directly the descendant of ancient nation which thrived in Palestine in Bible history. (4) A person blessed by Divine intentional design with certain superior cultural characteristics denied to other. The present generally accepted "secondary meaning" of the word "Jew" is fundamentally responsible for the confusion in the minds of Christians regarding elementary tenets of the Christian faith. It is likewise responsible today to a very great extent for the dilution of the devotion of the countless Christians for their Christian faith. The implications, inferences and innuendoes of the word "Jew" today, to the preponderant majority of intelligent and informed Christians, is contradictory and in complete conflict with incontestable historic fact. Christians who cannot be fooled any longer are suspect of the Christian Clergy who continue to repeat, and repeat, and repeat ad nauseam their pet theme song "Jesus was a Jew." Until it actually now approaches a psychosis. Thousands of Christians have come to the knowledge that they were "Brainwashed" by the so-called Christian Clergy on the subject "Jesus was a Jew." The resentment they feel is not yet apparent to the Christian Clergy. Christians will soon begin to demand from the Christian Clergy "The Truth, The Whole Truth, and Nothing But the Truth." Because they know it is time for the Christian Clergy to tell Christians what they should have told them long ago. Remarking about what took place in 1776, some Rhode Island Jews were overheard to say, in regards to the White American peoples' attitude about Jesus Christ, as their King: "Damn those fellows! We shall never be able to do anything with them, until we root out that cursed Puritanic spirit!" (The Puritan Ethic and the American Revolution, Edmund Morgan, William and Mary Quarterly, Vol. 24, p. 17) This was in response to such statements as the one made by governor, Jonathan Trumbull of Connecticut, who spoke out openly in defense of freedom: "It is hard to break connections with our mother country, but when she strives to enslave us, the strictest union must be dissolved...'The Lord reigneth; let the earth rejoice; let the multitudes of isles be glad thereof,' the accomplishment of such noble prophecies is at hand." And to a letter to the Board of Trade in England: "If you ask an American, who is master? He will tell you he has none, nor any governor but Jesus Christ." Which may have given rise to the cry which was soon passed up and down the length of America by the Committees of Correspondence: "No king but King Jesus!" The Jews are the most Deadly Enemy they have ever faced; The Jews are responsible for the outright murder of uncounted millions of Christians over the past 2,000 years; The Jews are even now working day and night to destroy this Great Christian Nation: The United States of America! It was the International Jewish Bankers who instigated the American Civil War! In respect to the Civil War, we will begin with several quotes from a book written in the last century. "It was to obey those bloody laws that Louis XIV revoked the Edict of Nates, caused the death of half a million of men, women, and children, who perished in all the highways of France, and caused twice that number to die in the land of exile, where they had found a refuge. Those anti-social laws, today, are written on her banners with the blood of ten millions of martyrs. It is under those bloody banners that 6,000 Roman Catholic priests, Jesuits and bishops, in the United States, are marching to the conquest of this republic, backed by their seven millions of blind and obedient slaves. Those laws, which are still the ruling laws of Rome, were the main cause of the last rebellion of the Southern States. Yes! Without Romanism, the last awful Civil War would have been impossible. Jeff Davis would never have dared to attack the North, had he not had assurance from the Pope, that the Jesuits, the bishops, the priests and the whole people of the Church of Rome, under the name and mask of democracy, would help him. These diabolical and anti-social laws of Rome caused a Roman Catholic (Beauregard a Jew) to be the man chosen to fire the first gun at Fort Sumter, against the flag of Liberty, on the 12th of April, 1861. Those anti-Christian and anti-social laws caused the Pope of Rome to be the only crowned prince in the whole world, so depraved as to publicly shake hands with Jeff Davis, and proclaim him president of a legitimate government. These are the laws which led the assassins of Abraham Lincoln to the house of a rabid Roman Catholic woman, Mary Surratt (a Jewess), which was not only the rendezvous of the priests of Washington, but the very dwelling-house of some of them. Those bloody and infernal laws of Rome nerved the arm of the Roman Catholic, Booth (a Jew), when he slaughtered one of the ignoble man in the history of America to that time. Those bloody and anti-social laws of Rome, after having covered Europe with ruins, tears, and blood for ten centuries, have crossed the oceans to continue their work of slavery and desolation, blood and tears, ignorance and demoralization, on this continent. Under the mask and name of democracy (which is in all reality Judaism) they have raised the standard of rebellion of the South against the North, and caused more than half a million of the most heroic sons of America to fall on the fields of carnage. In the very near future, if God does not miraculously prevent it, those laws of dark deeds and blood will cause the prosperity, the rights, the education, and the liberties of this too confident nation to be buried under the mountain of smoking and bloody ruins. On the top of that mountain, Rome (Judaism through the rule of the Black Pope) will raise her throne and plant her victorious banners." (Fifty Years In the Church of Rome, p. 289-291) Lincoln (Little has been published about the early life of Abraham Lincoln. However, during a search of some old property records and will in a small courthouse in central North Carolina, Alex Christopher the author of "Pandora's Box,"; in one of the old will books dated around 1840, he found the will of one A.A. Springs. Upon reading the will he was shocked and amazed at the secret that it disclosed, but one must remember that it is a known fact that wills, even though they are classified public records the same as property and corporation records, they are rarely combed through as he was doing at the time, and these records hold many dark secrets that can be hidden in public view, but are never uncovered because there are very few who research these old records. This practice of hiding secrets in public view and the conspirators can say, when faced with the facts and accused of concealing the records; they can reply "Well it was there in the public record in plan view for any and all to find." In the will of A.A. Springs was the list of his property. it went into detail to whom the property was to be dispersed and it included his children. Mr. Christopher and others were looking to find what railroads and banks this man might have owned and had left to his son Leroy Springs. He didn't find anything like that, but he did find the prize of the century. On the bottom of page three of four pages was a paragraph where the father, A.A. Springs, left to his son an enormous amount of land in the state of Alabama which amounted to the land that is today known as Huntsville, Alabama and then he went into detail to name the son and at first Mr. Christopher and the others with him couldn't believe what they were seeing, but there it was the name of the son and it was "ABRAHAM LINCOLN!" This new information that they had about the Springs (real name Springstein) family, this was just another twist to add to the already manipulative family. This new information about Lincoln built a fire under them to see where this new lead would take them, because everything they had found in the railroad and banking saga had been areal mind-bender. They figured this one would be the same; so they inquired at the local archives and historical records on families and found a reference to one Abraham Lincoln in the family genealogy of the family of the Carolina by the name of McAdden, in a published genealogy on the family. The family members in the Carolinas were in a limited edition that at one time could be found in the public libraries. The section on Lincoln and the story went something like the following: "In the late spring of the year of 1808 Nancy Hanks, who was of the family lineage of the McAdden family was visiting some of her family in the community of Lincolnton, North Carolina. While on her stay with family in the Carolina', she visited with many of the neighboring families that she had known for many years; one such visit was the Springs family. The sordid details had been omitted but obviously the young Nancy Hanks had found herself in a compromised position and was forced to succumb to the lust of A.A. Springs. She became pregnant as a result. There were no details of a love affair or an act of violence on a helpless female. Abraham Lincoln was the result of that act, which leads one to wonder if the name Lincoln was real or a fabricated name for the are of conception was Lincolnton. Was there really a Thomas Lincoln? Since the Spring were of the race that called themselves Jewish, that made Lincoln part Jewish and as part of the Springs family, he also became a relative of the Rothschild family by blood." The following information was derived from information that exists in the Smithsonian, National Archives, the Congressional Library, Courtroom Police files, public and private libraries and storage vaults across the United States and Europe: "Abraham Lincoln was slapped three times with a white glove by a member of the Hapsburg royal family of Germany (Payseur family relatives) during a White House reception in 1862. The German royal family member demanded a pistol duel with the, then, President of the United States, Abraham Lincoln. The blows to the face stunned Lincoln but he non-verbally refused to participate in the duel by bowing his head before walking out of the reception room. What had ol' honest Abe done to so enrage and up-set the royal European personage? It seems that the practice of promiscuity was running rampant in many families in those days and the German King Leopold had, had an illegitimate daughter named Elizabeth who was sent to America, where she lived in a very comfortable manner. Although Leopold could not recognize her position, he was very interested in her life. In the early or mid 1850s, Abraham Lincoln and Elizabeth began having sexual liaisons that produced twin daughters named Ella and Emily in 1856. The regal German father who was so royally up-set with ol' honest Abe probably had full knowledge of what the true blood line of Lincoln really was. Abraham's wife, Mary Todd Lincoln, did not find out about Elizabeth, Ella and Emily until 1865. Previous to being informed about Elizabeth and the twins, Mrs. Lincoln had developed a ravaging dependency on opium. Her main supplier of the drug was a former member of the Confederate Intelligence community, he was a former member because the Southern gentlemen did not approve of his drug pushing and unreliable behavior. It was because of his involvement with the Souther Intelligence Community, Mary's supplier - John Wilks Booth - knew about the lover and the illegal twins. After being spurned by the Confederate intelligence community, Mary's 'candy man' approached and became involved with the Rothschild Empire of Europe, for he realized the European banking moguls would be very interested in his pipeline to the White House. (At this time) Abraham was searching for an issue that would unite the North and South AFTER the Civil War ended. The issue needed to be popular to all levels of American citizenry so they could 'rally around the Stars and Stripes' thus rapidly healing the wounds of the bloodiest war in history. Lincoln was seriously considering one major movement or event that would galvanize his fellow Northern and Southern patriot countrymen into cutting loose the United States of America from the dictatorial grip of the Hapsbergs bloodline of banking control in Europe. All the time, the Rothschilds were trying to take control of the entire world monetary system, and at that time the Rothschilds were trying to get a foot-hold in America and find a way around the British, Virginia Company, and French Bourbon family that were gaining control in this country through government help... Lincoln found himself in real hot water, because under the Virginia Company covenant the 48 families that formed it were all of the Holy Grail Bloodline. This country was to be an extension of what all the royal families of Europe controlled. The royalty of Europe is Hapsburg, no matter what their name is. The royal family of England is one such example. Now what Lincoln did is he wanted to become independent of the cogenant (in favor of his family) on the Rothschild side...the Rothschilds and their family bloodline have always been undermining the affairs of the Hapsbergs and stealing the monetary control away from them. No matter what the history books say, the Rothschilds didn't get (total) real control on things in America and the Federal Reserve until the Springs usurped the Payseur family companies in the early 1920s... (But Lincoln had fallen from Rothschild grace also and so, due, in part to his Executive Order to print United States Greenbacks, thus interfering with the Jewish International Banks profits) It appears that the Rothschild family wanted Lincoln embarrassed to the maximum degree. (So) Mary Todd's drug dealer (John Wilks Booth) was hired to kidnap the President of the United States. Abraham would be put on a boat for a two month cruise of the Atlantic where he would be injected with and addicted to opium and then dumped on the streets of Washington. While the forcefully addicted President was stumbling around our nation's capital, the press would be informed of Elizabeth, Ella and Emily. The drug pusher (Booth) and collaborator (agent) of the Rothschilds had his perfect accomplice in the plot to kidnap and discredit the leader of the North American continent in the First Lady Mary Todd Lincoln. After being informed of Abe's lover and the twins and the kidnap plot by her drug supplier, Mary was promised that after her husband resigned or was impeached, she and Abe would be moved to Europe to live happily ever after with plenty of opium. Superficially Mary expressed a desire to live in Europe with plenty of opium and no Civil War or politics to distract her husband or family. But her drug suppler had totally underestimated the confusion, desperation and anger of Mary Todd Lincoln. The plotters decided the Presidential snatch needed to take place in a public, yet discreet location where minimum witnesses would be present. There were too many potential witnesses at the White House. Two hours before the capture was to take place, Mary Todd had on the floor, a tantrum, because Abe had decided not to go out of the White House that night. Mary's outrageous outburst caused Abe to change his mind and the First family departed. Several minutes after arriving at the kidnap location, Mary instructed the family bodyguard to take a position that placed the First Family out of his visual sight. The position also required the bodyguard to traverse several flights of stairs to reach Abe and Mary should he be needed for any reason...A wagon with a wooden cover arrived at the back entrance of the kidnap location with several men including Mary's opium supplier. The plan was for the drug pusher to traverse the backstairs entrance, silently move down a hallway, and open an unlocked door to a darkened room where Mary and Abe were sitting. After entering the room, Mary's drug man (Booth) would tell the President an urgent message was waiting for him at the War Department. Before descending down the backstairs, Abe would be knocked out with a chloroform loth. The kidnappers would load the limp body into the covered wagon and swiftly stow Lincoln on an opium boat for a novel 'cruise' of the Atlantic Ocean. When Booth actually opened the door to the darkened room where Abe and Mary were sitting, he went into a panic and shock. Abe was asleep with his head on Mary's left shoulder and the First Lady had her head turned toward the left looking at the door...When she was sure the man who opened the door was Booth, she turned and looked at the President to be sure the pistol she was pointing would explode beneath the lower left earlobe of her husband. Before Mary pulled the trigger, John Wilkes Booth, drug supplier to the First Lady, realized he was the patsy in all this mess. But he did not know if he was only Mary's patsy or also a chump for the Rothschild family. Were the men hiding around the back door of Ford's Theater there to help Booth with the kidnaping or there to point the false finger at the 'innocent' Booth? Booth was not about to run into the hallway or down the backstairs to find out the answer to that question. The only escape route was to jump the balcony and crash onto the stage during the performance. That night, Booth gave a literal interpretation of the theatrical phrase 'brake a leg' as he fractured one of his during his leaping act from 'lethally looney Mary' and the men lurking around the back entrance of Ford's Theater. In a novelty case on a wall in Ford's Theater is 'The Gun That Shot Abraham Lincoln.' If anyone (assassin) were to kill a head of state, they would use a revolver, because several bullets might be needed to accomplish the murder and stop any guards during the escape. One would only use a one-shot pistol if they were absolutely sure they had intimate access to the victim. The gun on the wall of Ford's Theater is a derringer-the perfect weapon for the left handed female assassin who did not attend her husbands funeral. Mary Todd was not hiding in her room due to overwhelming grief and sorrow; she was imprisoned in her room with two armed guards for two weeks after killing her husband.
In the 1860s, an act of Congress mandated the compensation of widows of former and active Congressmen, Senators, Vice Presidents and Presidents. The mouth and duration was ratified by both Houses of Congress for each widow. Mary Todd Lincoln applied for her widowers compensation three times and was denied the mandated compensation three times by both Houses of Congress. An unknown benefactor paid for Mary's passage to Europe where she died in small cottage in Germany. In 1867, the Secret Service was founded so that drunken municipal law enforcement could not unwittingly participate with drug-addicted First Ladies or Gentlemen in vengeful high-brow killings of philandering Presidents of the United States. (To cover up the murders committed which would reflect a bad light for the presiding Administration, such as the Foster murder is doing at the present time). Before Booth jumped out of the balcony of the Presidential Box of the Ford Theater, he shouted at General Riley and his wife who were sitting to the right-front of the Lincolns.'' Booth's words expressed his innocence but also sealed the fate of the Rileys. Within a week of the shooting, General Riley and his wife were packed off to an insane asylum where they both died of 'unknown causes' within 30 days of being committed." (Pandora's Box, by Alex Christopher, pp. 282-286)) Lincoln was quoted to have said (trying to shift the blame for the war to the Catholic Church, where some of the blame lay without doubt, because the bulk of Christians in the South were Protestants, and away from the Jews): "We owe it to the Popery that we now see our land reddened with the blood of her noble sons. Though there were differences of opinion between the South and the North, on the question of slavery, neither Jeff Davis nor anyone of the leading men of the Confederacy would have dared to attack the North, had they not relied on the Promises of the Jesuits (the Jews), that... The Money and the Arms of the Roman Catholic Church, and even the arms of France were at their disposal, if they would attack us (See how long the Dragon; Satan's Children have been working to enslave the entire world and destroy the memory of Christ and Christianity from off the face of the earth, and if possible at the same time to destroy True Israel the Anglo-Saxons, Germanic, Celtic and Kindred People). I pity the Priests, the Bishops and the Monks of Rome in the United States, when the people realize that they are in Great Part Responsible for the Tears and Blood Shed in this war. I conceal what I know, for if the people knew the whole truth, this war would turn into a religious war, and at once, take a tenfold more savage and bloody character. It would become merciless as all religious wars are. It would become a war of extermination on both sides. The Protestants of both the North and South would surely unite to exterminate the Priests and Jesuits, if they could hear what Professor Morse has said to me of the plots made in the very city of Rome to destroy this Republic, and if they could learn how the Priests, the Nuns, and the Monks, which daily land on our shores, under the pretext of preaching their religion, instructing the people in their schools, taking care of the sick in the hospitals, are nothing but the emissaries of the Pope, of Napoleon and the other despots of Europe, to undermine our institutions, alienate the hearts of our people from our Constitution and our laws, destroy our schools, and prepare a reign of anarchy here as they have done in Ireland, in Mexico, in Spain and wherever there are any people who want to be free... New projects of assassination are detected almost every day, accompanied with such savage circumstances that they bring to my memory the massacre of St. Bartholomew and the Gunpowder Plot. Our investigation indicates that they come from the same masters in the art of murder, the Jesuits. The New York riots were evidently a Romish plot from beginning to end. We have the proofs in hand that they were the work of Bishop Hughes and his emissaries. No doubt can remain about the bloody attempts of Rome to destroy New York, when we know the easy way it was stopped. I wrote to Bishop Hughes, telling him that the whole country would hold him responsible for it if he would not stop it at once. He then gathered the rioters around his palace, called them his 'dear friends,' invited them to go back home peacefully, and all was finished!...From the beginning of our civil war, there has been, not a secret, but a public alliance, between the Pope of Rome and Jeff Davis. The pope and his Jesuits have advised, supported, and directed Jeff Davis (through Judah P. Benjamin, also a Jew) on the land, from the first gun shot at Fort Sumter by the Rabid Roman Catholic Beauregard (Jew). They are helping him on the sea by guiding and supporting the rabid Roman Catholic pirate, Semmes, on the ocean... The pope has thrown away the mask, and shown himself the public partisan and the protector of the rebellion, by taking Jeff Davis by the hand, and impudently recognizing the Southern States as a legitimate government. Now, I have the proof in hand that that very Bishop Hughes, whom I had sent to Rome...is the very man who advised the pope to recognize the legitimacy of the Southern republic, and put the whole weight of his tiara in the balance against us in favor of our enemies! Such is the perfidity of those Jesuits (Jews)." (Fifty Years In the Church of Rome, pages 297-299) Under the guiding hand of Judah P. Benjamin (a Jew), chosen by the Rothschilds and the Church of Rome to represent the International Bankers, to do their work for them in the United States, was also the first advisor to Jefferson Davis, the President of the Southern Confederacy. Benjamin is reputed to be the "brains of the revolt," as he was also the Secretary of State of the Confederacy. Through the hands of this man, huge sums of money were provided to finance the destruction of this great New Christian American Republic flowed. The Confederacy fell and the men who had fought a valiant fight for what they believed right were thrown into the even greater travail of the Reconstruction; while Judah P. Benjamin, almost alone of the leaders of the South, forsook immediately the suffering people Who had Honored and Enriched Him, fled to England and was soon embarked upon a new career of distinction and wealth, Reminiscent of others of his religion (Jewish) dispossessed of their temporary cause and gains. While we are talking of the Civil War it behooves us to mention that Abraham Lincoln was assassinated by John Wilkes Booth (A Jew). That the plot of Booth, involved not only the assassination of Lincoln, which was accomplished, but also the assassination on the same night of the Vice President, Andrew Johnson, of the Secretary of State, William H. Seward, and of General Ulysses S. Grant. Seward, who was ill at his home, was stabbed, as was also his son, Frederick Seward, by David E. Herold (A Jew), a co-conspirator with Booth, who was hanged. The Vice President Johnson escaped injury, but George A. Atzerodt (also a Jew) was hanged for conspiring with Booth to kill him. General Grant, who was to have attended the theater with Lincoln that night, due to an unexpected departure for Burlington, New Jersey, was unharmed. "John Booth, A Jewish silversmith whose ancestors had been exiled from Portugal because of their radical political views. In London the refugees had continued their trade and free thinking, and John had married Wilkes' cousin. This Wilkes was the 'celebrated agitator John Wilkes of Westminster, London...John Wilkes Booth's father was Junius Brutus Booth." (The Mad Booths of Maryland) American Civil War and Captivity History often repeats itself, and like the ancient nation of Israel, America has been/is Undergoing a type of Captivity; the start of which as the Civil War of 1861. Not a physical conquest and captivity by foreign armies, but by stealthy encroachments against its founding legal principles, superseding them with new laws. Yet this is still a conflict. It is a conflict that seeks to conquer America and its people just as sure and complete as any physical captivity could have achieved. Like Ancient Israel, America's adversaries and captors were foreign aliens, however, they did not attack America from outside its boarders but from within them. This enemy was none other than an elite group of alien Jewish money powers who had gained financial control over Europe and now wished to likewise financially conquer America. Through the use of large banks, usury, loans, and commodity manipulation, the Jews were able to control the political arena in Europe. Their conspiratorial plan for America was to repeat this modus operandi through which they could form a "new order" of law and government. Perhaps the greatest and most tragic disaster in the history of the United States was the Civil War, or, the War Between the States, the South calls it The War of Aggression. The whole country is still paying for that evil Satanic war. ("Who can sum up the horrors and woes accumulated in a single war? War comes with its bloody hand into our very dwellings. Takes from ten thousand homes those who lived there in peace and comfort, held by the tender ties of family and kindred. It drags them away, to die untended, of fever or exposure, in infectious climes; or to be hacked, torn, and mangled in the fierce fight; to fall on the gory field, to ruse no more, or to be borne away, in awful agony, to noisome and horrid hospitals. The groans of the battle-field are echoed in sighs of bereavement from thousands of desolated hearths. There is a skeleton in every house, a vacant chair at every table. Returning, the soldier brings worse sorrow to his home, by the infection which he has caught, of camp-vices. The country is demoralized. The national mind is brought down, from the noble interchange of kind offices with another people, to wrath and revenge, and base pride, and the habit of measuring brute strength against brute strength, in battle. Treasures are expended, that would suffice to build ten thousand churches, hospitals, and universities, or rib and tie together a continent with rails of iron. If that treasure were sunk in the sea, it would be calamity enough; but it is put to worse use; for it is expended in cutting into the veins and arteries of human life, until the earth is deluged with a sea of blood... At times, the baleful fires of war light up half a Continent at once; as when all the Thrones unite to compel a people to receive again a hated and detestable dynasty, or States deny States the right to dissolve an irksome union and create for themselves a separate government. Then again the flames flicker and die away, and the fire smoulders in its ashes, to break out again, after a time, with renewed and a more concentrated fury. At times, the storm, revolving, howls over small areas only; at times its lights are seen, like the old beacon-fires on the hills, belting the whole globe. No sea, but hears the roar of cannon; no river, but runs red with blood; no plain, but shakes, trampled by the hoofs of charging squadrons; no field, but is fertilized by the blood of the dead; and everywhere man slays, the vulture gorges, and the wolf howls in the ear of the dying soldier. No city is not tortured by shot and shell; and no people fail to enact the horrid blasphemy of thanking a God of Love for victories and carnage. The Deums are still sung for the Eve of St. Bartholomew and the Sicilian Vespers. Man's ingenuity is racked, and all his inventive powers are tasked, to fabricate the infernal enginery of destruction, by which human bodies may be the more expeditiously and effectually crushed, shattered, torn, and mangled; and yet hypocritical Hunaity, drunk with blood and drenched with gore, shrieks to Heaven at a single murder, perpetrated to gratify a revenge not more unchristian, or to satisfy a cupidity and not more ignoble, than those which are the promptings of the Devil in the souls of Nations. When we have fondly dreamed of Utopia and the Millennium, when we have begun almost to believe that man is not, after all, a tiger half tamed, and that the smell of blood will not wake the savage within him, we are of a sudden startled from the delusive dream, to find the think mask of civilization rent in twain and thrown contemptuously away. We lie down to sleep, like the peasant on the lava-slopes of Vesuvius. The mountain has been so long inert, that we believe its fires extinguished. Round us hang the clustering grapes, and the green leaves of the olive tremble in the soft night-air over us. Above us shine the peaceful, patient stars. The crash of a new eruption wakes us, the roar of the subterranean thunders, the stables of the volcanic lightning into the shrouded bosom of the sky; and we see, aghast, the tortured Titan hurling up its fires among the pale stars, its great tree of smoke and cloud, the red torrents pouring down its sides. The roar and the shriekings of Civil War are all around us: the land is a pandemonium: man is again a Savage. The great armies roll along their hideous waves, and leave behind them smoking and depopulated deserts. The pillager is in every house, plucking even the morsel of bread from the lips of the starving child. Gray hairs are dabbled in blood, and innocent girlhood shrieks in vain to Lust for mercy. Laws, Courts, Constitutions, Christianity, Mercy, Pity, disappear. God seems to have abdicated, and Moloch to reign in His stead; while Press and Pulpit alike exult at universal murder, and urge the extermination of the Conquered, by the sword and the flaming torch; and to plunder and murder entitles the human beasts of prey to the thanks of Christian Senates. Commercial greed deadens the nerves of sympathy of Nations, and makes them deaf to the demands of honor, the impulses of generosity, the appeals of those who suffer under injustice. Elsewhere, the universal pursuit of wealth dethrones God and pays divine honors to Mammon and Baalzebub. Selfishness rules supreme: to win wealth becomes the whole business of life. The villainies of legalized gaming and speculation become epidemic; treachery is but evidence of shrewdness; office becomes the prey of successful faction; the Country, like Actaeon, is torn by its own hounds, and the villains it has carefully educated to their trade, most greedily plunder it, when it is in extremis." (Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma, pp. 124, 2970298)). It is still difficult to speak or write about it without angering someone, blacks, Northerners, or Southerners. Many people have been reluctant to argue over that unpleasant subject but unwilling to be silent when there was a need to speak, have told Northerners that it was less a moral concern and more economic and sectional hatred that governed the North. The rhetoric of a sizeable minority, mostly Jews, the Abolitionists, was anti- Christian and Unitarian. They were intensely interested in destroying the South, and their moral claims were questionable. The Southerners were also ready to allow, as did the Northerners, the extremists and hotheads to lead the way into an unrealistic war. The war came when the churches were at a low ebb theologically, although the South saw a major revival among the troops during the war. While the South was staunchly Christian, its leaders, especially secessionists, who were also mostly Jews, were not. Some significant facts must be remembered about the South. Savage called attention to a neglected fact: "Of the hundred and thirty anti-slavery societies organized in the country, more than two thirds were in the South." (Henry Savage, Jr., Seeds of Time, The Background of Southern Thinking, New York, N.Y. 1959, p. 62) There were good reasons for this. First, slavery was a very present fact to all Southerners. Second, Puritan faith had then centered in the South and deeply resented by Unitarians, strongly influenced many Southerners, although not very many of their politicians. Third, only one of sixteen Southerners owned eve a single slave. (Henry Savage, Jr., Seeds of Time, The Background of Southern Thinking, p. 82) There were various reasons for this. Some of the fifteen Southerners could not afford it. Others were against slavery. Other than South Carolina, Southern states favored abolition provided that the slaves could be repatriated somewhere, and, with some, their owners compensated. Fourth, many Southerners resented the power and pride of the slave- owning aristocracy. Even then, secession was not popular when first propounded by John C. Calhoun. Calhoun was a Northerner by education, a Yale man whose goal was to have Yale educate his sons. (John C. Calhoun, Nullifier (Indianapolis, Indiana: The Bobbs- Merrill Company, 1949). 31f) Calhoun himself was at Yale in Timothy Dwight's day, whose faith Calhoun rejected. Calhoun would not join the church, nor profess Christianity, nor even join the Moral Society. In the classroom, his disavowal of Christianity was open. (Margaret L. Coit, John C. Calhoun, American Portrait (Boson, Massachusetts, 1950), p. 27) When in politics, in Washington, D.C., he gave money to help build the Unitarian Church, and his name is found among the original members. Although he attended his wife's Episcopal Church when in the South, he bluntly announced on one occasion, "Unitarianism is the only true faith and will ultimately prevail over the world." (Margaret L. Coit, John C. Calhoun, American Portrait, p. 508) In his last days, with an echo of his childhood Calvinism, Calhoun spoke of his "unshaken reliance upon the province of God," (Margaret L. Coit, John C. Calhoun, American Portrait, p. 509) but not of Jesus Christ. Calhoun's perspective was important. More than a few prominent Southerners sought their education in New England colleges which were openly or tacitly Unitarian. The Timothy Dwights of the early years could not stem the tide. Unitarian and Transcendentalist thinking was either Hegelian or shared common roots with Hegel. Such thinking represented a major intellectual revolution in Europe with deep roots in the Enlightenment. Hegel best expressed the think of his and the previous era, namely, a radical belief in the conflict of interests. With the French Revolution, the Western world entered into the Age of Revolution, which is very much with us still. As against the Biblical Faith in an ultimate harmony of interests for the Godly, (Romans 8:28) this new belief was in a radical conflict of interests. Thus, the way to progress was revolutionary violence to establish justice, and hostile confrontations to resolve problems. Not moral suasion but bitter conflict was seen as the ethical course of action. This faith marked the Abolitionists in the North, most of whom were Unitarian. In the South, Unitarianism was not an organized ecclesiastical or intellectual cause as much as the tact premise of the secessionist leaders. Calvinist leaders in that cause were at the best rare. However, Enlightenment premises were popular among gentlemen, and these persons were receptive to the Unitarian developments there of. The secessionist leaders were not Calvinists, and they did share in the growing and tacit Unitarianism of the leaders of the day. Those men, North and South, who were not Christian, were not thereby neutral but rather were deeply influenced by a common media that prevailed in all of the United States. That media represented the culture of Enlightenment humanism. The philosophy of the modern era began with Descartes, whose "cognito, ergo sum," I think, therefore I am, was the starting point of philosophical inquiry. The Carthesian premise at once created a division in man's perspective between body and soul, between perceptions and reality, and between the inner and the outer worlds so that the concern was to bridge two realms. With Kant, the real world became the realm of the mind, and the reality was what the philosophical ("To study and seek to interpret correctly the symbols of the Universe, is the work of the sage and philosopher. It is to decipher the writing of God, and penetrate into His thoughts...To hold the full cup of thought to the thirsty lips of men; to give to all the true ideas of Deity; to harmonize conscience and science, are the province of Philosophy. Morality is Faith in full bloom. Contemplation should lead to action, and the absolute be practical; the ideal be made air and food and drink to the human mind. Wisdom is a sacred communion. It is only on that condition that it ceases to be a sterile love of Science, and becomes the one and supreme method by which to unit Humanity and arose it to concerted action. Then Philosophy becomes Religion...
Plato, writing to Dionysius the Younger, in regard to the nature of the First Principle, says: 'I must write to you in enigmas, so that if my letter be intercepted by land or sea, he who shall read it may in no degree comprehend it.' And then he says, 'All things surround their King; they are, on account of Him, and He alone is the cause of good things, Second for the Seconds and Third for the Thirds.' There is in these few words a complete summary of the Theology of the Sephiroth. "The King" is Ainsoph, Being Supreme and Absolute. From this center, which is everywhere, all things ray forth; but we especially conceive of it in three manners and in three different spheres. IN the Divine world (Aziluth), which is that of the First Cause, and wherein the whole Eternity of Things in the beginning existed as Unity, to be afterward, during Eternity uttered forth, clothed with form, and the attributes that constitute them matter, the First Principle is Single and First, and yet not the Very Illimitable Deity, incomprehensible, undefinable; but Himself in so far as manifested by the Creative Thought. To compare littleness with infinity, Arkwright, as inventor of the spinning- jenny, and not the man Arkwright otherwise and beyond that. All we can know of the Very God is, compared to His Wholeness, only as an infinitesimal fraction of a unit, compared with an infinity of Units. In the World of Creation, which is that of Second Causes (The Kabbalistic World Briah), the Autocracy of the First Principle is complete, but we conceive of it only as the Cause of the Second Causes. Here it is manifested by the Binary, and is the Creative Principle passive. Finally: in the third world, Yezirah, or of Formation, it is reveled in the perfect Form, the Form of Forms, the World, the Supreme Beauty and Excellence, the Created Perfection. Thus the Principle is at once the First, the Second, and the Third, since it is All in All, the Center and Cause of all. It is not the genius of Plato that we here admire. We recognize only the exact knowledge of the Initiate. The great Apostle Saint John did not borrow from the philosophy of Plato the opening of his Gospel. Plato, on the contrary, drank at the same springs with Saint John and Philo; and John in the opening verses of his paraphrase, states the first principles of a dogma common to many schools, but in language especially belonging to Philo, whom it is evident he had read. The philosophy of Plato, the greatest of human Revealers, could yearn toward the Word made man; the Gospel alone could give him to the world... The Deity of the early Hebrews talked to Adam and Eve in the garden of delight, as he walked in it in the cool of the day; he conversed with Kayin; he sat and ate with Abraham in his tent' that patriarch required a visible token, before he would believe in his positive promise; he permitted Abraham to expostulate with him, and to induce him to change his first determination in regard to Sodom; he wrestled with Jacog; he showed Moses his person, though not his face; he dictated the minutest police regulations and the dimensions of the tabernacle and its furniture, to the Israelites; he insisted on and delighted in sacrifices and burnt-offerings; he was angry, jealous, and revengeful, as well as wavering and irresolute; he allowed Moses to reason him out of his fixed resolution utterly to destroy is people; he commanded the performance of the most shocking and hideous acts of cruelty and barbarity. He hardened the heart of Pharaoh; he repented of the evil that he had said he would do unto the people of Nineveh; and he did it not, to the disgust and anger of Jonah. Such were the popular notions of the Deity; and either the priests had none better, or took little trouble to correct these notions; or the popular intellect was not enough enlarged to enable them to entertain any higher conceptions of the Almighty. Such were the popular notions of the Deity; and either the priests had none better, or took little trouble to correct these notions; or the popular intellect was not enough enlarged to enable them to entertain any higher conceptions of the Almighty. But such were not the ideas of the intellectual and enlightened few among the Hebrews. It is certain that they possessed a knowledge of the true nature and attributes of God; as the same class of men did among the other nations; Zoroaster, Menu, Confucius, Socrates, and Plato. But their doctrines on this subject were esoteric; they did not communicate them to the people at large, but only to a favored few; and as they were communicated in Egypt and India, in Persia and Phoenicia, in Greece and Samothrace, in the greater mysteries, to the Initiates... The religion taught by Moses, which, like the laws of Egypt, enunciated the principle of exclusion, borrowed, at every period of its existence, from all the creeds with which it came in contact. While, by the studies of the learned and wise, it enriched itself with the most admirable principles of the religions of Egypt and Asia, it was changed, in the wanderings of the People, by everything that was most impure or seductive in the pagan manners and superstitions. It was one thing in the times of Moses and Aaron, another int hose of David and Solomon, and still another in those of Daniel and Philo. At the time when John the Baptist made his appearance in the desert, near the shores of the Dead Sea, all the old philosophical and religious systems were approximating toward each other. A general lassitude inclined the minds of all toward the quietude of that amalgamation of doctrines for which the expeditions of Alexander and the more peaceful occurrences that followed, with the establishment in Asia and Africa of many Grecian dynasties and a great number of Grecian colonies, had prepared the way. After the intermingling of different nations, which resulted from the wars of Alexander in three-quarters of the globe, the doctrines of Greece, of Egypt, of Persia and of India, met and intermingled everywhere. All the barriers that had formerly kept the nations apart, were thrown down; and while the People of the West readily connected their faith with those of the East, those of the Orient hastened to learn the traditions of Rome and the legends of Athens. While the Philosophers of Greece, all (except the disciples of Epicurus) more or less Platonists, seized eagerly upon the beliefs and doctrines of the East, the Jews and Egyptians, before then the most exclusive of all peoples, yielded to that eclecticism which prevailed among their masters, the Greeks and Romans.... The spirit of the Vedas (or sacred Indian Books, of great antiquity), as understood by their earliest as well as most recent expositors, is decidedly a pantheistic monotheism; one God, and He all in all (this would be true because the founders of India were the sons of Abraham by Keturah, and by his concubines; therefore they would have knowledge of the One True God); the many divinities, numerous as the prayers addressed to them, being resolvable into the titles and attributes of a few, and ultimately into The One. The machinery of personification was understood to have been unconsciously assumed as a mere expedient to supply the deficiencies of language; and the Mimansa just considered itself as only interpreting the true meaning of the Mantras, when it proclaimed that, in the beginning, 'Nothing was but Mind, the Creative Thought of Him which existed alone from the beginning, and breathed without affiliation.' The idea suggested in the Mantras is dogmatically asserted and developed in the Upanischadas. The Vedanta philosophy, assuming the mystery of the 'One in Many' as the fundamental article of faith, maintained not only the Divine Unity, but the identity of matter and spirit. The unity which it advocates is that of mind. Mind is the Universal Element, the One God, the Great Soul, Mahaatma. He is the material as well as efficient cause, and the world is a texture of which he is both the web and weaver. He is the Macrocosmos, the universal organism called Pooroosha, of which Fire, Air, and Sun are only the chief members. His head is light, his eyes the sun and moon, his breath the wind, his voice the opened Vedas. All proceeds from Brahm, like the web from the spider and the grass from the earth...The great aim of reason is to generalize; to discover unity in multiplicity, order in apparent confusion; to separate from the accidental and the transitory, the stable and universal. In the contemplation of Nature, and the vague, but almost intuitive perception of a general uniformity of plan among endless varieties of operation and form, arise those solemn and reverential feelings, which, if accompanied by intellectual activity, may eventually ripen into philosophy... The unseen being or beings revealed only to the Intellect became the theme of philosophy; and their more ancient symbols, if not openly discredited, were passed over with evasive generality, as beings respecting whose problematical existence we must be 'content with what has been reported by those ancients, who, assuming to be their descendants, must therefore be supposed to have been well acquainted with their own ancestors and family connections.' And the Theism of Anaxagoras was still more decidedly subversive, not only of Mythology, but of the whole religion of outward nature; it being an appeal from the world without, to the consciousness of spiritual dignity within man....Thus the philosophic sentiment came to be associated with the poetical and the religious, under the comprehensive name of Love. Before the birth of Philosophy, Love had received but scanty and inadequate homage. This mightiest and most ancient of gods, coeval with the existence of religion and of the world, had been indeed unconsciously felt, but had neither been worthily honored nor directly celebrated in hymn or paeon. In the old days of ignorance it could scarcely have been recognized. In order that it might exercise its proper influence over religion and philosophy, it was necessary that the God of Nature should cease to be a God of terrors, a personification of mere Power or arbitrary Will, a pure and stern Intelligence, an inflictor of evil, and an unrelenting Judge. The philosophy of Plato, in which this charge became forever established, was emphatically a mediation of Love. With him, the inspiration of Love first kindled the light of arts and imparted them to mankind; and not only the art of mere existence, but the heavenly art of wisdom, which supports the Universe. It inspires high and generous deeds and noble self-devotion. Without it, neither State nor individual could do anything beautiful or great Love is our best pilot, confederate, supporter, and savior; the ornament and governor of all things human and divine; and he with divine harmony forever soothes the minds of men and gods... This metaphysical direction given to philosophy ended in visionary extravagance. Having assumed truth to be discoverable in thought, it proceeded to treat thoughts as truths. It thus became an idolatry of notions, which it considered either as phantoms exhaled from objects, or as portions of the divine pre-existent thought; thus creating a mythology of its own, and escaping from one thraldom only to enslave itself afresh. Theories and notions indiscriminately formed and defended are the false gods or 'idols' of philosophy. For the word idolon means image, and a false mind-picture of God is as much an idol as a false wooden image of Him. Fearlessly launching into the problem of universal being, the first philosophy attempted to supply a compendious and decisive solution of every doubt. To do this, it was obliged to make the most sweeping assumptions; and as poetry had already filled the vast void between the human and the divine, by personifying its Deity as man, so philosophy bowed down before the supposed reflection of the divine image in the mind of the inquirer, who, in worshiping his own notions, had unconsciously deified himself. Nature thus was enslaved to common notions, and notions very often to words." (Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma, pp. 7, 20, 99, 207, 247, 673, 678, 691, 693)) mind declared it to be. Thus, the real world was not the creation of God but the creation of the philosopher's mind. it followed, then, that the rational is the real. But what if some refuse to recognize that reality is what they define as real? What if, as with the Abolitionists, the reality is human freedom for all? Or if adherents of slavery see it as a condition inherent to slavery? What happens then? Without God and His law, man's recourse is to himself, or to his creature, the state. Reality is then not God, nor His created order and His law; it is instead what man declared is right the new reality is man's declared law, and the non-Christians in both North and South had their own vision of the right and the real. God was not in their picture. To read through the edition of John C. Calhoun's works, in the Cralle edition of 1851-1856, or the more recent and more extensive collection edited by W. Edwin Hemphill, is a chilling experience: there is no evidence of Christian thinking. In the North, the abolitionists wanted conflict, not resolution. Slavery could have been abolished had the North been ready to take practical steps, such as compensating the slave-owners and some kind of plan for the future of the slaves. The Abolitionists, however, wanted conflict, as did the secessionists by 1860. Lincoln, without war, would have been a stalemated President, with a hostile Congress in power. The demand in the radical circles both North and South was for conflict as the solution. Otto Scott has pointed out that, that at about the same time, many countries with a higher percentage of slaves freed them all peaceably; only the United States had a war over the matter. In the U.S., more than anywhere else, the common man was reasonably well informed and attuned to intellectual trends. In a travel essay written for a French magazine on his return from the U.S., Alexis de Tocqueville wrote, of frontier Michigan: "When you leave the man roads you force your way down barely trodden paths. Finally, you see a field cleared, a cabin made from half-shaped tree trunks admitting the light through one narrow window only. You think that you have at last reached the home of the American peasant. Mistake. You make your way into this cabin that seems the asylum of all wretchedness but the owner of the place is dressed in the same clothes as yours and he speaks the language of towns. On his rough table are books and newspapers, he himself is anxious to know exactly what is happening in old Europe and asks you to tell him what has most struck you in his country. One might think one was meeting a rich landowner who had come to spend just a few nights in a hunting lodge." This was in 1831. One can say that Toqueville found a superior settler without invalidating his point that the Americans in the most remote areas were not peasants but citizens of the Western world. This made them more readily susceptible to currents of thought than were rural peoples in Europe. There was another factor. The American War of Independence had been a legal break. The colonies were not under Parliament but the crown. They were chartered colonies. Under law, the agents of the crown, held by the ailing George III, were violating the charters and placing the colonies under Parliament. King George III was King of England, King of Scotland, King of New York, King of Massachusetts, and so on, all separate realms. Their powers were subverted, and the colonies were subjected to an armed invasion by Parliament This same scenario is happening today, and has been happening for the last few decades. America was under the Declaration of Independence, The Articles of Confederation and the Constitution, but is being invaded by the President, Congress and the Courts. Therefore, when the coming conflict, and there will be a conflict because evil men who control the Congress, President and Courts from behind the scenes wish such a conflict. But, praise Almighty God and the Lord Jesus Christ, this time they will be utterly destroyed, for Christ will come and rescue His Israel People from their evil grasp. In 1863, a monthly journal, "The Old Guard" began publication in New York, dedicated to the defense in effect of secession. "The Old Guard" cited publications of the 1776 era as justifications for 1860 and secession, and tellingly so. At the same time, however, a subtle shift had taken place. The War of Independence had become known as the American Revolution. Jacobinism flourished in the United States with the French Revolution, especially in Democratic circles. A legally faithful course of severance became confused with revolution. Alexander H. Stephens, the Confederate vice-president, in his great "Constitutional View of the Late War Between the States," defined the legalities of the war. But it was not Stephens who precipitated the war but men like Edmund Ruffin, known as a firebrand. The roots of that war are with us still. North, South, East and West, the belief in the conflict of interests is very great, and it still predisposes Americans to senseless divisions. The conflict of interests concept is born of a world view which is implicitly evolutionary, posits the struggle for survival, and sees that struggle as inherent to life, i.e., as metaphysical rather than moral, although the strubble can borrow moral coloration. The Calvinistic insistence on the moral antithesis seeks its resolution in conversion, in a new creation. The conflict of interest belief seeks its "resolution" in the obliteration of the opponent. It has led to the doctrine of Total War in the military sphere and elsewhere. Not surprisingly, the modern military strategy of Total War began in the so-called Civil War with men like Quantrill in the South (a guerilla), and General Sherman in the North. Its history is a grim one. One of the most startling spectacles of the, supposed, collapse of Soviet Communism was surely the Confederate battle flags which occasionally waved above the mass rallies of the Baltic peoples, as they demonstrated to press their claims of sovereignty. Not surprisingly, the pictures of those flags did not make it into the politically correct American newspapers. Still, their presence suggests that we may need to rethink our own view of America's secessionist history in light of the current popularity of post-communist secessionist movements. For too many, secessionism is an argument of convenience, wherein we take sides based on whether we like or dislike the seceding arty. Irish-Americans were almost deliriously supportive of the Irish Republic's secession from the United Kingdom. The Northern six counties remained loyal to Britain, based on ties of culture and relation. Interestingly, the Ulster Unionists have made folk heroes of such American Unionists as General (and later President) Ulysses S. Grant. Indeed, his biography is still sold by the ruling Ulster Unionist Party. As Britain prepares to abandon Northern Ireland, it shall be interesting to see if the Ulstermen shall remain so deeply committed to unionism, or suddenly find confederation, or even independence, as preferable to submersion into the Roman Catholic Republic to the south. If secessionism and unionism are, in fact, mere posturing the problem, then becomes one of identifying and formulating a principled basis for government itself, as it relates to place and culture, rather than expediency. For the Christian, one obviously starts with two basic Scriptural facts: 1). God divided the peoples of the earth at Babel, and 2). He established the bounds of the nations. The question is how properly to apply these foundational principles to the question of nationhood today. Furthermore, it is important that our view of secession and nationhood bee applicable to every circumstance, from the United States to the former Yugoslavia to the Hutu and Tutsi tribal wars of Africa. Diversity and Confederation: For the Founders of the American Republic, the answer was obviously conventional and constitutional. The notion that the American colonies were homogeneous is pure fiction. The colonies were certainly as distinct, at least regionally, as any parts of the United States are today. The Dutch influence in New York contrasted with the Quaker and German influence in Pennsylvania, the cavalier culture of Virginia, Puritan domination of Massachusetts, Huguenot immigration in the Carolinas, Spanish influence in Florida, Roman Catholic in Maryland, etc. The British had only recently established their dominance of the colonies by defeating the French during the French and India War (aka Seven Years War). It was the subsequent battle against Britain that temporarily allied the colonies with one another and laid the foundation for post-war confederation. The first attempt, codified in the Articles of Confederation, proved to have several flaws (at least to those who favored a strong central government) and was subsequently replaced with the current Constitution.
Over the next century, the South would flourish agriculturally, while manufacturing and commence grew rapidly in the North. This was not merely a feature of topography climate and opportunity, but also an outworking of cultural predispositions. In his book, Cracker Culture, Grady McWhiney argues persuasively that the South was (or became through immigration) culturally Celtic, while the North remained culturally British and German. His study of surnames showed that by a substantial margin, Southern soldiers were of Celtic descent. A substantial majority of Northern soldiers, on the other hand, bore British surnames. (Grady McWhiney, Cracker Culture: Celtic Ways in the Old South (University of Alabama Press, 1988), pp. 16-22). He then treats the reader to a delicious banquet of cultural traits that characterize Southerners; and Celts, to this day. Southerners betray their Celtic origins in their affection for oral history, ballads, romanticizing womanhood, exaggerated sense of honor (resulting in frequent duels and a propensity for violence), an undue affection for distilled spirits, affection for meat (especially port), preference for hunting over agricultural toil; in short, just about a perfect description of Southern culture, with the single exception of religion) The reason Southerners were able to maintain a relative degree of unity with their Northern counterparts was due, in no small measure, to the fact that the zealous Roman Catholicism which characterizes modern-day Ireland is of relatively recent vintage. McWhiney points out that the Irish immigrants to the Old South were decidedly not strong Roman Catholics and were quickly assimilated into the various branches of Protestantism then extant. That the states were able to confederate after the first War for Independence is testimony to the great men with whom God providentially chose to bless the respective colony-states. Modern history texts virtually dismiss these men's labors on behalf of confederation, along with confederation itself. The popular notion is that confederation was rejected and national unionism adopted, almost without debate. Only those completely unfamiliar with the history of the period could adopt such Northern revisionism with a straight face. The debate was intelligent and intense, on both sides. In the end, we adopted a federal system, not a national one. We must make the point, if not belabor it, that the debate over the Constitution was expressly ab out the nature of the proposed union and that states expressly articulated their understanding as to the dissoluble nature of the federal union, should that union exceed the bounds of its express powers. In reaction to the "Alien and Sedition Acts," the Virginia House of Delegates and Senate adopted the resolution put forward by James Madison, stating: "That this Assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the powers of the Federal Government, as resulting from the compact to which the States are parties, as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting that compact, as no further valid than they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact; and that, in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted, by the said compact, the States, who are parties thereto, have the right, and are duty bound, to interpose, for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining, within their respective limits, the authorities, rights, and liberties, appertaining to them." (Alexander H. Stephens, The War Between the States (reprinted by Sprinkle Publications, 576 Harrisonburg, VA  1994). The full text constitutes a part of the regular proceedings of the Virginia House of Delegates for 1798, and reiterated in the General Session of 1799- 1800) This resolution, first passed in 1798, was re-examined in the following Session and declared "(that) in its just and fair construction, it is unexceptionally true in its several positions, as well as constitutional and conclusive in its evidences." The sustaining resolution continues: "Clear as the position must seem, that the Federal powers are derived from the Constitution, and from that alone, the committee are not unapraized of a late doctrine, which opens another source of Federal powers, not less extensive and important, than it is new and unexpected." The Virginia Resolution then meticulously dissects the "new and unexpected" doctrine, reminding the Congress and other States how firmly proponents of the new Constitution had argued that powers not expressly delegated to the Federal government were reserved to the States, or to the People. (Alexander H. Stephens, The War Between the States, pp. 578-590) The battle was clearly joined, as the pragmatists incessantly sought to expand national power, dismissing the arguments of principle and constitutionalism. "Intangible Moonshine": In Dabney's day, such arguments as those presented by the constitutionalists were dismissed, in his words, as the "intangible moonshine of metaphysical ("Seneca, comparing Philosophy to initiation, says that the most sacred ceremonies could be known to the adepts alone: but that many of their precepts were known even to the Profane. Such was the case with the doctrine of a future life, and a state of rewards and punishments beyond the grave. The ancient legislators clothed this doctrine in the pomp of a mysterious ceremony, in mystic words and magical representations, to impress upon the mind the truths they taught, by the strong influence of such scenic displays upon the senses and imagination. In the say way they taught the origin of the soul, its fall to the earth past the spheres and through the elements, and its final return to the place of its origin (this doctrine is directly from the Jewish Kabbalah or Cabala), when, during the continuance of its union with earthly matter, the sacred fire, which formed its essence, had contracted no stains, and its brightness had not been marred by foreign particles, which, denaturalizing it, weighed it down and delayed its return. These metaphysical ideas, with difficulty comprehending by the mass of the Initiates, were represented by figures, by symbols, and by allegorical analogies; no idea being so abstract that men do not seek to give it expression by, and translate it into, sensible images... This was the great Mystery of the Ineffable Name; and this true arrangement of its letters, and of course its true pronunciation and its meaning, soon became lost to all except the select few to whom it was confided; it being concealed from the common people, because the Deity thus metaphysically named was not that personal and capricious, and as it were tangible God in whom they believed, and who alone was within the reach of their rude capacities..." (Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma, pp. 385, 700)) ideas." (Robert L. Dabney, Discussions, Secular (c. 1897, S.B. Ervin, Mexico, MO., Re-printed 1979 by Sprinkle Publications, Harrisonburg, VA)) He chronicles the changes wrought by the "new and unexpected doctrines" so cogently identified by Madison. From our perspective today, we can see that the flight from constitutionalism mirrored the ascendance of Unitarianism, itself a driving force behind the eventual War Between the States. There were prominent Unitarians on both sides of the conflict. John Calhoun, as well as Edmund Ruffin, who put fire to the first cannon at Ft. Sumter, were thoroughgoing Unitarians. It was in the North, however, that Unitarians had their most pernicious influence, holding the Union army to be the very Incarnation itself. In her Battle Hymn of the Republic, Julia Ward Howe writes, incredibly, "I have seen Him in the watch fires of a hundred circling camps/They have built to Him an altar in the evening dews and damps." While the writings of the Founding Fathers are replete with pleas for Divine protection and Providential favor, nowhere does one find a voice so presumptuous as to claim Divine attributes for the acts of mere men. This equating of Christ's mediatorial rule with earthly armies was heresy, pure and simple. It is the stuff of Crusade, Inquisition and jihad and has no place in Protestant theology or practice. God may, indeed, send Pharaoh to chastise His people, but having acknowledged His sovereignty at work, we err if we give Pharaoh any credit. In like manner, Southerners may receive God's chastisement in defeat, but it is a presumptuous Northerner indeed who would expect God's blessing for the destruction he visited on his neighbor. For those who insist on arguing from circumstance (rather than from the "intangible moonshine of metaphysical ideas"), let us consider who has received God's blessing, in fact? In the camp, tens of thousands of Southerners were converted by the Holy Spirit and returned home to raise Christian families. The marks of that tremendous revival are still evident in the distinctively Christian culture of the American South today. Would any Christian Southerner trade that spiritual victory for victory on the field of battle? Precious few, one would think. But what of the victors? After trampling the vineyards of wrath, did the Northern armies cease to be the Incarnate Christ, or did the messianic state simply replace by force of statute what had been won by force of arms? How do we explain the death of constitutionalism, the rise of statute law, ever-expanding centralized federal power and the other fruits of the Northern victory? Are these a falling away from, or the natural consequence of, presumption and self-will? Is it so far a journey from trampling the vineyards of wrath to "making the world safe for democracy?" George Washington warned against "entangling foreign alliances," but Woodrow Wilson plunged us headlong into a European War, presuming as did the liberals of a previous generation that government had a transcendent right to act as Mediator of Creation. In the League of Nations, ("In the management of the New World we give proof of our organization both for revolution and for construction by the creation of the League of Nations, which is our (Jews) work. Bolshevism is the accelerator, and the League of Nations is the brake on the mechanism of which we supply both the motive force and the guiding power... What is the end? That is already determined by our mission." (Comte de St. Aulaire); "The modern Socialist movement is in great part the work of the Jews, who impress on it the mark of their brains; it was they who took a preponderant part in the directing of the first Socialist Republic...The present world Socialism forms the first step of the accomplishment of Mosaism, the start of the realization of the future state of the world announced by our prophets. It is not till there shall be a League of Nations; it is not till its Allied Armies shall be employed in an effective manner for the protection of the feeble that we can hope that the Jews will be able to develop, without impediment in Palestine, their national State; and equally it is only a League of Nations penetrated with the Socialist spirit that will render possible for us the enjoyment of our international necessities, as well as our national ones..." (Dr. Alfred Nossig, Intergrales Judentum)) this liberal post-millenialism would assume Christ's role as Mediator of Redemption, as well. The God who "established the boundaries of the nations" would stay His hand of judgment for only a season before this modern tower of Babel came crashing down, as well. Undeterred, the enemies of Christianity would try again with the formation of the United Nations. From Lincoln's blue uniforms to Clinton's blue helmets, the tragedy of messianic interventionism travels a road strewn with the liberties, property and human wreckage of an idea gone terribly wrong. Heresy Today, Best-Seller Tomorrow: Is it not remarkable how easily Evangelicalism seems to adopt every stray-dog doctrine and movement for its own? If we object to the "baptized humanism" which lines the shelves of the typical Christian bookstore today, ought we not to seek out as rigorously what other historical and philosophical camels we may have swallowed before breakfast? What a comfort it must be to the Jewish charlatans and bamboolzers of every description to note how sanitized is our modern view of Abraham Lincoln, for example, a man who sought out Christians just to argue against Scriptural inerrancy and trinitarianism. At least four contemporary historians of his day relate that a friend named "Hill" burned a manuscript written by Lincoln in order to save "Honest Abe's" political career from ruin. The manuscript was an attempt to disprove the divinity of Christ. Though asked about it, Lincoln never denied or disclaimed the book (Charles L.C. Minor, M.A., LL. D., The Real Lincoln, (Everett Waddey Company, reprinted by Sprinkle Publications, Harrisonberg, VA, 1992). Minor collated materials only from among historians contemporary with Lincoln, and concludes Lincoln was "an infidel, and 'when he went to church, he went to mock and came away to mimic' (Lamar's Life of Lincoln, p. 487)..." Dr. Holland in his Abraham Lincoln, says (p. 286) that "twenty out of twenty- three ministers of the different denominations of Christians, and a very large majority of the prominent members of the churches in his home, Springfield, Illinois, opposed him for President. He says (p. 241), 'Men who knew him throughout his professional and political life' have said 'that, so far from being a religious man, or a Christian, the less said about that the better.'" The biographies Monor quotes are not generally considered anti-Lincoln. IN fact, many are considered quite flattering; however, they clearly paint a different picture than the one we currently are likely to view in modern treatments. "Hapgood's Lincoln (p. 291) records that the pious words with which the Emancipation Proclamation closes were added at the suggestion of Secretary Chase, and so does Usher (Reminiscences of Lincoln, p. 91), and so does Rhodes; and Rhodes shows him 'an infidel, if not an atheist,' and adds, 'When Lincoln entered political life he became reticent upon his religious opinions.' (History of the United States, Vol. IV, p. 213)...Leland says (Abraham Lincoln, Vol. II, p. 55): ...'It is certain that after the unpopularity of free thinkers had forced itself upon his mind, the most fervidly passionate expressions of piety to abound in his speeches.'" Shelby Foote's PBS Documentary "The Civil War" also briefly makes this point) Of course, we may substitute a pious sentimentalism and latter-day revisionism for the truth, but to what end? Let's get to the root of the matter. Many Christians want it to be simple: Lincoln good, slavery bad. But as in most controversies, it is not that simple. To suggest that any means were lawful to extinguish an unbiblical system of slavery in the South is a dangerous reductionism. That was the ethical foundation on which abolitionist John Brown stacked the corpses of his neighbors, murdered in their sleep in Lawrence, Kansas. It is not dissimilar to the blanket absolution some abortion abolitionists expect for their own acts of murder and mayhem, today. Both are lawless and, therefore, both are ungodly. We need not defend Kansas slave owners or murderous abortionists to condemn acts which break the civil covenant. Indeed, even magistrates may step beyond the pale of God's protection if their acts are unlawful. Such was the case when Northern leaders took to themselves powers which the Constitution never gave them. There were many in the North who abhorred slavery, but believed that it was a state issue beyond the reach of federal law. It is ludicrous, however, to suggest that hundreds of thousands of Southerners who did not own slaves would take up arms merely to defend an institution in which they had no interest. The motivating cause was, in most cases, a defense of home and family. As one Southern soldier was heard to respond when asked across the trench line why he, a poor sharecropper, was fighting, "Because y'all are down here." For many, it was as simple as that. The Call of Duty: For Southern Christians, there was a variety of opinion. Many were constitutionalists who were scandalized by Northern assaults on state's rights. A great many, like Southern Presbyterian theologian Robert L. Babney and fellow Presbyterian Thomas J. (Stonewall) Jackson, (Jackson remained an inspiration, even in death, to Christians of the South) believed that war would be a great evil. Both were signers of newspaper ads which ran in Virginia papers urging peace and reconciliation and opposing calls for secession and war. Still, when war broke out, they took up arms in defense of their homeland. Their position was totally consistent with their coventional and constitutional view and one most Christians today would do well to study. Deeper South, South Carolina Presbyterian theologian James Thornwell was an advocate of secession. Robert E. Lee and his family were devout Christians who pleaded for reconciliation rather than war. Lee himself was offered command of the Union armies, but recognized that his constitutional and conventual duty lay with his home state of Virginia. After a several-hour meeting across the Potomac in Washington, D.C., with his former commander and old friend, General Winifred Scott, Lee resigned his commission in the army and subsequently heeded the call of Virginia. (Burke Davis, Gray Fox (The Fairfax Press, New York, 1956), pp. 9-10) His Christian testimony was never questioned by friend or foe alike. The Good Civilization of the South: To what purpose do we so easily despise the shed blood of a generation, whose lives were laid down for a cause we claim to hold dear? Shall we eat the fruits of liberty while laying the ax to the tree which brought it forth? This is nothing more than presumption, pride and ingratitude. Far from disclaiming our rich heritage, or shunning it in embarrassed silence, true Southerners realize that the Old South passed from the scene not because it was good enough, but rather because it was too good. We do not speak of the sanctification of a people, for indeed, that is as much a fruit of the conflict as a precondition. Rather, we speak of a new order that arose, a new Pharaoh who "knew not Joseph." The citizens forgot their roots. The price of liberty, described by Jefferson as "eternal vigilance" simply was left unpaid by a generation preoccupied with commerce and urbanization. Dabney eloquently notes that; "...while we were contending for the rights and interests of the civilized world, nearly the whole world blindly and passionately arrayed against us...We were attempting to defend and preserve a system of free government which had become impossible by reason of the change and degeneration of the age. To the outside world they were to be one, to each other they were still to be equals and independent partners...The functions of the general government were to be few and defined, its expenditures modest, and its burdens in time of peace light. Such was the form of government instituted for themselves by our free forefathers; and well fitted to their genius and circumstances as communities of farmers inhabiting their own homes, approaching an equality of condition, and having upon the whole continent no one city of controlling magnitude or wealth. But this century has seen all this reversed because of Jewish subversion; and conditions of human society have grown up, which make the system of our free forefathers obviously impracticable in the future. And this is so, not because the old forms were not good enough for this day, but because they were too good for it." (Robdrty L. Dabney, Discussions, Secular, p. 3) Lest we think Dabney spoke only of a romanticized antebellum agrarianism, he adds that, "Our fathers valued liberty, but the liberty for which they contended was each person's privilege to do those things and those things only to which God's law and Providence gave him a moral right. The liberty of nature which your modern asserts as absolute license is the privilege of doing whatever a corrupt will craves, except as this license is curbed by a voluntary 'social contract.'" (Robert L. Dabney, Discussions, Secular, p. 6)
The Religion of the South: Make no mistake, the Jews hate Christ and Christianity with a passion that know no bounds. Therefore, they hated the South because of its adherence to Christianity and sought its total destruction. ("The division of the United States into two federations of equal force was decided long before the Civil War by the High [Jewish] Financial Powers of Europe. These bankers were afraid of the United States, if they remained in one block and as one nation, would attain economical and financial independence, which would upset their financial domination over the world. The voice of the Rothschilds predominated. They foresaw tremendous booty if they could substitute two feeble democracies, indebted to the Jewish financiers, to the vigorous Republic, confident and self-providing. Therefore, they started their emissaries to work in order to exploit the question of slavery and thus to dig an abyss between the two parts of the Republic. They made the rupture between the North and the South imminent! The master of finance in Europe made this rupture definitive in order to exploit it to the utmost. Lincoln's personality surprised them. His candidature did not trouble them; they though to easily dupe the candidate woodcutter. But Lincoln read their plots and soon understood, that the South was not the worst foe, but the Jew financiers. He did not confide his apprehensions, he watched the gestures of the Hidden Hand; he did not wish to expose publicly the questions which would disconcert the ignorant masses. And the Jews went anew to grab the riches of the world. I fear that Jewish banks with their craftiness and tortuous tricks will entirely control the exuberant riches of America, and use it to systematically corrupt modern civilization. The Jews will not hesitate to plunge the whole of Christendom into wars and chaos, in order that 'the earth should become the inheritance of Israel.'" (La Vieille France, No. 216, March, 1921)) To have any understanding the pre-War South, one must first note its religion. Henry Van Til has correctly noted, "religion and culture are inseparable. Every culture is animated by religion." (A.T. Robertson, Life and Letters of John A. Broadus (Harrisonburg, VA 1987), p. 21) The South was greatly influenced by the Second Great Awakening that impacted America in the 1800s (which was very dangerous for the Jews, so they had to put a stop to it before it could reach such a crescendo that no power could subdue it). Numerous denominations were affected. Unlike in the South, where the Second Great Awakening contributed to a near abandonment of Calvinist theology, ("As long as there remains among the Gentiles any moral conception of the social order, and until all faith, patriotism, and dignity are uprooted, our reign over the world shall not come...And the Gentiles, in their stupidity, have proved easier dupes than we expected them to be. One would expect more intelligence and more practical common sense, but they are no better than a herd of sheep. Let them graze in our fields till they become fat enough to be worthy of being immolated to our future King of the World... We have founded many secret associations, which all work for our purpose, under our orders and our direction. We have made it an honor, a great honor, for the Gentiles to join us in our organizations, which are, thanks to our gold, flourishing now more than ever. Yet it remains our secret that those Gentiles who betray their own and most precious interests, by joining us in our plot, should never know that those associations are of our creation, and that they serve our purpose. One of the many triumphs of our Freemasonry is that those Gentiles who become members of our Lodges, should never suspect that we are using them to build their own jails, upon whose terraces we shall erect the throne of our Universal King of the Jews; and should never know that we are commanding them to forge the chains of their own servility to our future King of the World... We have induced some of our children to join the Christian Body, with the explicit intimation that they should work in a still more efficient way for the disintegration of the Christian Church, by creating scandals within her. We have thus followed the advice of our Prince of the Jews, who so wisely said: 'Let some of your children become cannons, so that they may destroy the Church.' Unfortunately, not all among the 'convert' Jews have proved faithful to their mission. Many of them have even betrayed us! But, on the other hand, others have kept their promise and honored their word. Thus the counsel of our Elders has proved successful. We are the Fathers of all Revolutions, even of those which sometimes happen to turn against us. We are the supreme Masters of Peace and War. We can boast of being the Creators of the Reformation! Calvin (Phillip II, by William Thomas Walsh, p. 248: 'The origin of Calvin (whose real name was Chauvin) See also: Lucin Wolf, in Transactions, Jewish Historical Society of England, Vol. XI, p. 8; Goris, Les Colonies Marchandes Meridionales à Anvers; Lea, History of the Inquisition of Spain, III, 413)) was one of our Children; he was of Jewish descent, and was entrusted by Jewish authority and encouraged with Jewish finance to draft his scheme in the Reformation. Martin Luther yielded to the influence of his Jewish friends unknowingly, and again, by Jewish authority, and with Jewish finance, his plot against the Catholic Church met with success. But unfortunately he discovered the deception, and became a threat to us, so we disposed of him as we have so many others who dare to oppose us... Many countries, including the United States have already fallen for our scheming. But the Christian Church is still alive...We must destroy it without the least delay and without the slightest mercy. Most of the Press in the world is under our Control; let us therefore encourage in a still more violent way the hatred of the world against the Christian Church. Let us intensify our activities in poisoning the morality of the Gentiles. Let us spread the spirit of revolution in the minds of the people. They must be made to despise Patriotism and the love of their family, to consider their faith as a humbug, their obedience to their Christ as a degrading servility, so that they become deaf to the appeal of the Church and blind to her warnings against us. Let us, above all, make it impossible for Christians to be reunited, or for non-Christians to join the Church; otherwise the greatest obstruction to our domination will be strengthened and all our work undone. Our plot will be unveiled, the Gentiles will turn against us, in the spirit of revenge, and our domination over them will never be realized. Let us remember that as long as there still remain active enemies of the Christian Church, we may hope to become Master of the World...And let us remember always that the future Jewish King will never reign in the world before Christianity is overthrown..." (From a series of speeches at the B'nai B'rith Convention in Paris, published shortly afterwards in the London Catholic Gazette, February, 1936; Paris Le Reveil du Peuple published similar account a little later) in the North, Calvinism gained in influence. Prior to this spiritual revival, Presbyterians had churches and schools to meet their goal of training the covenant youth. However, with the God-sent revival, renewed impetus was given to doctrinal peaching and teaching accompanied by application of that doctrine to daily life. B.M. Palmer's biographer writes about the change God brought to the lower part of South Carolina as a result of the Great Awakening. "Horse-racing, gambling and hard drinking had prevailed to a considerable extent in early colonial times. Nor had these habits been uprooted by the preaching of Whtiefield, though they had been checked. But provinces connected with the Revolutionary War, the work of evangelical ministries of all denominations, and particularly the revivals under the Rev. Daniel Baker about 1831, did much to lift up the standard of morality and religion. The communities in which he grew up were Sabbath-observing, condemned worldly amusements, often thought to be entirely compatible with the profession of Christianity, and in general showed a sympathy with a mildly Puritan mode of Life." (Thomas Cary Johnson, The Life and Letters of Benjamin Morgan Palmer (Carlisle, PA 1987), p. 35) But just the opposite was happening in the North. Under the influences of the Jews Christianity morality and thought was in decline; until today there is little True Christianity left in the North. But not surprisingly Puritan writings were once again popular. Similar testimonies could be given for other areas throughout the antebellum South. The Southerners believed that God is sovereign in all things. He alone converts sinners. He is the Lord of all things. Thus Christians must see Christ not only as their Savior but also as their Master. They are to serve Christ not only on Sunday, but on all seven days of the week. No doubt they must be mindful of Christ's words, "Buy why do you call Me Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" (Luke 6:46) Southerners firmly held to the inspired, infallible Scripture as their rule of faith and practice. Scripture "is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, throughly equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16-17) One of many areas in which evangelicals had social impact in the South was in that of dueling. Among the wealthy, in particular, dueling was the traditional way to preserve one's honor and to settle arguments. To fail to answer a call to a duel was to brand oneself a coward. Societies were formed to promote reconciliation through mediation. (Anne C. Loveland, Southern Evangelicals and the Social Order 1800-1860 (Baton Rouge, LA 1980), p. 180-185) Although dueling did not end at this time, the labor of Christians called public attention to this unbiblical practice and provided solid moral basis for reform. The God who provided atonement for the elect through the active and passive obedience of His eternal Son, Jesus Christ, also provided for the daily needs that existed throughout His creation. Thus there was a daily dependence on God and a desire to walk by faith even in time of great trial and difficulty. Prayer, was important, as was daily obedience. It is not surprising that many Southerners took seriously their coventional responsibilities. Christians understood that through Christ, God had brought man into a saving relationship with Him. Homes in which there were one or more Christians were homes in which there were manifold opportunities to live out the Gospel and to sow good Gospel seen on the soil of unsaved hearts. Having a saving relationship with God meant, therefore, a change in relationships with others. Families often ministered to the needs of relatives; if a home or barn burned their neighbors would join in and rebuild; if sickness invaded ones home, the neighbors would pitch in and perform the chores until the sick returned to health. A neighborness that had long been abandoned in the North, because of the Jews influence to make money out of any tragedy of a Christian neighbor. A first cousin, a Christian, provided a home for J.H. Thornwell's widowed mother and her children. Such help was understood to be accompanied by a strong Biblical work ethic on the part of the person helped. Thus, Thornwell's biographer provides this insight regarding Thornwell's mother: "In the beautiful language of Rudolph Stier, 'Man lifts his imploring, empty hand to heaven, and God lays work upon it; thus hast thou thy bread.' By weaving, serving, and such forms of later as was suited to her sex, she was enabled, not only to 'give meat to her household' but to serve to them such elementary education as the neighborhood afforded." (B.M. Palmer, The Life and Letters of James Henley Thornwell (Carlisle, PA 1974), p. 14) Another incident in Thornwell's own family shows family ministry and the entrusting of itself to God's providential hand in the midst of trials. Following an illness of less than a week, his eldest daughter died at the age of twenty: "When it became apparent that she must die, he took his life into the adjoining room and there the two knelt and prayed for help and submission. At intervals, he read and prayed with the departing one; and she, in the triumph of her faith, became his comforter, and sought with words to reconcile him to the inevitable separation." (B.M. Palmer, The Life and Letters of James Henry Thronwell, p. 439) The scene becomes more poignant as the writer points out that this daughter was to have been married that week. The wedding announcements had already been sent out. Those traveling from a distance arrived in a timely fashion. Thus the wedding attendants became the pallbearers. She was buried in her wedding dress and the following was inscribed on her tombstone: "Prepared as a Bride Adorned For Her Husband." (B.M. Palmer, The Life and Letters of James Henry, p. 439-440) Thus even at death, Christians were comforted by their saving relationship with God. Through their tears they could at least smile in the blessed work of God in the lives of family members. This action is simply something that the Jews cannot understand and thus hate with undying passion. ("It is useless to insist upon the differences which proceed from this opposition between the two different views in the respective attitudes of the pious Jew and the pious Christian regarding the acquisition of wealth. While the pious Christian, who had been guilty of usury, was tormented on his death-bed by the tortures of repentance and was ready to give up all that he owned, for the possessions unjustly acquired were scorching his soul, the pious Jews, at the end of his days looked with affection upon his coffers and chests filled to the top with the accumulated sequins taken during his long life from poor Christians and even from poor Moslems; a sight which could cause his impious heart to rejoice, for every penny of interest enclosed therein was like a sacrifice offered to his God." (Wierner Sombart, Les Juifs et la vie economique, p. 286; The Secret Powers Behind Revolution, by Vicomte Leon De Poncins, p. 164) The Testimony of the Confederate Constitution: The Constitution of the Confederate States of America gives evidence that Christianity had influenced the South to such a degree that the region realized it must answer to God for its activities. It opens with these words: "We, the People of the Confederate States, each state acting in its sovereign and independent character, in order to form a permanent federal government, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity; invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish this constitution for the Confederate States of America." Each state recognized its own sovereignty and independence. However, that sovereignty was limited. There was a submission to the fact that God alone was supremely sovereign. He is almighty. Also, the South sought to be mindful that God holds nations, as well as individuals, accountable before Him. The South sought God's favor upon their action. Meeting in Augusta, Georgia, the newly formed Presbyterian Church in the Confederate States received the following resolution from the eminent theologian James Henley Thornwell, that he desired the Church to approve and send to the Confederate Congress for inclusion in the Confederate Congress for the inclusion in the Confederate Constitution: "Nevertheless we, the people of these Confederate States, distinctly acknowledge our responsibility to God, and the supremacy of His Son Jesus Christ, as King of Kings and Lord of lords; and hereby ordain that no law shall be passed by the Congress of these Confederate States inconsistent with the will of God, as revealed in the Holy Scriptures." (James Henry Thornwell, The Collected Writings of James Thornwell (Carlisle, PA, 1974), p. 556) However, there was insufficient time to fairly debate this resolution, and it was withdrawn. (B.M. Palmer, The Life and Letters of James Henley Thornwell, p. 507) Yet, it does provide further evidence of the Southern belief that man must live his life out under God not only within the family but also nationally. Further reason for the Jews hatred of the South and its people, so evident even today. Southerners also realized that coventional disobedience, if not repented of, would lead to God's judgment. (Deuteronomy 27) Anne Loveland provides these insights from her research: "Indeed, they pointed to epidemics, drought, panics, steamboat disasters, and other 'public calamities' as indications of God's disapproval and warnings of a worse chastisement yet to come. They saw the hand of Providence in all things; in 'national affliction' as well as blessings. Thus the nation of a social covenant between God and the American people was an integral part of their thinking. Evangelicals believed that so long as Americans followed God's laws, conducting themselves as befitted citizens of a Christian commonwealth, they might be expected to be rewarded with peace, well-being, and prosperity. However, if they departed from the path of righteousness; as evangelicals contended they were doing, then they must expect divine punishment." (Anne C. Loveland, Southern Evangelicals and the Social Order 1800-1860, p. 128) Southerners were particularly concerned about drunkenness, desecration of the Lord's Day, infidelity, and the rise of a democratic government that was driven by the people's will. This sort of reliance on Almighty God and the Lord Jesus Christ had to be stopped, before it could spread to the North; or the Jews would find themselves once again being driven from the United States as they had been from every other country in Europe at one time or the other. Americans could not be allowed to learn the great and wonderful blessings they could receive from such faith in God, and the White Americans would come to realize what a few had already learned, that the True Tribes of Israel were the Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, Scandinavian, Celtic and Kindred Peoples of the earth, and that the Jews were the Seed of Satan, murderers, thieves, and the sworn enemies of Almighty God and the Lord Jesus Christ. Being an agrarian society, there was much less movement in the South than in the North. Due to more available jobs, immigrants entered northern states much more frequently than they did in the South. With the maintenance of the status quo in the South it was easier to get to know people as people. Undergirded with the fact that other people are image-bearers of God, there was appreciation of the work and calling of others. Indeed, there were various classes in society with slaves being the lowest class. Only a small minority of Southerners held slaves: "It must be remembered as well that of the 5.3 million whites in the South, only about 300,000 were slave holders (about 6% of the population)." (Steve Wilkins, America: The First 350 Years (Monroe, LA 1988), p. 153) There was the recognition by the owners, that for the plantations to prosper the work of others was essential. Many Southerners did not see slavery as being in opposition to Scripture. Christians could point to numerous references to slavery in Scripture. Paul, for example, sent the slave Onesimus back to his master Philemon accompanied by a letter (Philemon 1). Many Christians in the South did not believe the church should speak to issues such as slavery. While condemning slave trade, the Southerners did not see the holding of these slaves as sin. It is only fair to point out that the slaves could not be immediately released. In the South there were free blacks and even black slave owners. Many slaves did not have sufficient money to buy property nor would they be able to easily find a job even if they were released. Many slaves had great respect for the white masters and realized that their condition here, especially as they had come to saving faith in Christ, was far superior to their former condition in Africa. Having inherited slaves from preceding generations or owning land worked with slave labor, many masters sought to provide for their needs, as both groups labored to make the plantations prosper.
Crucial Lessons for Today: From the examples given of the antebellum South, we can draw several enduring lessons for our day. A belief in God's Word as governing all of life must be the basic fact on which any society is to be properly built. Southerners believed their Constitution was God's Word. Thus they were to govern their lives accordingly. Southerners also took the U.S. Constitution seriously. Their representatives had ratified the Constitution in good faith that those written words were honorable and true. When they realized that the Federal Government was not going to honor the Tenth Amendment and instead limit the rights of states far beyond what the Constitution allowed, they believed they had no choice but to secede. Today many evangelicals rightly deny the unconstitutional actions of the various branches of government. As they fail to see the enemy of God, the Jews, pulling the strings of government from behind the scenes. Yet they fail to take seriously that higher Constitution, God's Word. The relevance of God's law is too often denied. Proponents of the continuance of the general equity of God's law often meet with more opposition from within the church than they do from the world itself. Christians must take seriously the inspired Word of God as our command word for daily life. As we proclaim this message, then we can begin to point out, without hypocrisy, the importance of the words of that lesser constitution; that of our own civil government. Overall, the South lived in terms of God's sovereignty. Naturally its citizens opposed the rising sovereignty of the central government. Removal of the constitutional limits to the sovereignty of the federal government would open the door to unbounded sovereignty at the national level. Such sovereignty could in time compete with God's sovereignty. Such a civil government could replace God as the one to whom future generations would look for cradle-to-grave security. Time has prove them correct, with the welfare state in effect today in America. With the Confederacy's defeat in 1865, the last one hundred and thirty years have been a time of increasing growth of civil government. The Confederate leaders were right. Under God, government must be limited. The individual must be self-governed. Family government and other realms of government must operate properly. Without Biblical government at the grass roots (individual, family), one can expect the rise of centralized government. A strong central government will not be properly changed unless there is a return to responsible self and family government. Our desire should not be for the South to rise again. It was not a perfect society in spite of its high regard for Christianity. History is linear; forward moving, not circular, longing for a return to a past day. We should be desirous of seeing the Biblical aspects of Southern culture become our practice. We need a return to honoring God and living out our covenant relationship with Him as basic societal principles. In His mercy, God allows the blessings of obedience to be operative for a thousand generations, (Deuteronomy 7:9) although the South lost the War, its region has been one to which many have desired to move. Even in our generation, the South is referred to as the "Bible Belt" because of the continuing influence of Christianity in its culture. Many will testify to the friendliness of the people. There is much family solidarity. It is in the Southern states, much more so than the North, that convicted murderers are executed. It was not until recent years that the Lord's Day has become, because of Jewish influence in business, just another business day by local store owners. At the same time we are increasingly seeing in the South a turning away from Biblical teaching resulting in consequences such as less respect for one another, the breakdown of family units through physical abuse, divorce, and the acceptance of other unbiblical practices. Too many Southerners have taken God's coventional blessings for granted, without realizing that these blessings are not our rights but indeed representative of God's mercy. Failure to believe that crime, family breakdown and social degeneration can move into rural areas, many Southerners have failed to stand against humanism and take seriously Christ's crown rights over all of life. Southern Christians have been slow to deal with social ills. Yet, looking at the social ills today (the modern welfare system that spans the races might well be viewed as a type of slavery), we realize that once in place, social problems are not reformed overnight. Many wish the South had acted in a Biblical fashion in dealing with slavery. However, it behooves Christians in our day to be busy applying Biblical truth to the social ills of our culture. To prepare for the war that is to come against the enemies of God and their allies. "How then was it that this Government (Northern American Federal Government), several years after the war was over, found itself owing in London and Wall Street several hundred million dollars to men who never fought a battle, who never made a uniform, never furnished a pound of bread, who never did an honest day's work in all their lives?...The facts is, that billions owned by the sweat, tears and blood of American laborers have been poured into the coffers of these men for absolutely nothing. This 'sacred war debt' was only a gigantic scheme of fraud, concocted by European capitalists and enacted into American laws by the aid of American Congressmen, who were their paid hirelings or their ignorant dupes. That this crime has remained uncovered is due to the power of prejudice which seldom permits the victim to see clearly or reason correctly: 'The money power prolongs its reign by working on prejudices." (Mary E. Hobard, The Secrets of the Rothschilds) Therefore, with a close study the "American Civil War" was fought because of financial interests, Jewish International Banking Interests: "If this mischievous financial policy (the United States Government issuing interest-free and debt-free money) which had its origin in the North American Republic during the war (1861-65) should become indurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its money without cost. It will pay off its debts and be without a debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous beyond precedent in the history of civilized governments of the world. The brains and the wealth of all countries will go to North America. That government must be destroyed or it will destroy every Monarch on the globe!" (London Times Editorial, 1865) At the head of this money power was the Jewish Rothschild family, who in 1857, met in London to devise a "divide and conquer" plan to destroy the economic freedom of the people of the United States. The Rothschilds had their agents planted in both the North and South to maneuver the country into Civil War. In the north they had the Jewish financier August Belmont. The Belmont financial interests were well recognized as being an "American representative of the European banking house of the Rothschilds." (See Harper's Encyclopedia of United States History, Vol. I, New York: Harper & Brothers Pub., (1912)) The Jewish lawyer, Judah P. Benjamin, was chosen by the Rothschilds to do their work in the South. He managed to become a "leader of the Southern wing of the Democratic Party" and as a U.S. Senator avidly "promoted secession." He consequently has been called "the brains of the revolt." Benjamin held several high positions in the Confederacy where he continued to direct the actions of the Confederacy according to the plans laid out by his masters in London and Paris. During the Civil War, the armies and governments of both North and South were financed with huge loans by the Rothschilds. These Jewish financiers understood all too well the principle that "the borrower is servant to the lender." (Proverbs 22:7) Their agents had strong influences on the treasuries of both governments to assure loans were made. Legally speaking the American Civil War, was not a war between "North" and "South," even though there were physical battles between them. In legal parlance, that war was an international conflict being waged by an alien race, the Plutocratic Jews, for the destruction of the law and government of the White Israelites of America - The Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, Scandinavian, Celtic and Kindred people. It was a war between two separate races who held two distinct ideals of law and morality. The Knights of the Golden Circle The division of the American nation and ensuing war was a necessary step to overthrow the true government and laws of the nation. This task was achieved by the Plutocratic elite through their use of the Jewish-Masonic organization known as The Knights of the Golden Circle. The purpose of this subversive organization is shown in the following excerpt: "Knights of the Golden Circle, the name of an organization founded for the overthrow of the Government of the United States. It was A Secret Society, and was first organized for action in the slave-labor States. The members were pledged to assist in the accomplishment of the designs of those who were intent upon the establishment of an empire within the limits of the Golden Circle. It was the soul of the filibustering movements in Central America and Cuba from 1850 to 1857; and when these failed, the knights concentrated their energies for the accomplishment of their prime object - The Destruction of the Union and the perpetuation of slavery." (Harper's Encyclopedia of United States History, Vol. V, (1912)) The Knights of the Golden Circle was a part of the Masonic Scottish Rite. Members of the Scottish Rite established the Knights of the Golden Circle in Cincinnati, Ohio, in 1854. Between 1855 and 1860, this secret order had recruited, armed, and trained about 100,000 men in Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Virginia, and Maryland. "While the Knights of the Golden Circle, the military preorganization of the Confederacy, was being organized under the control of the Scottish Rite's Northern chief, the Swiss J.J. Gourgas, and his lieutenant Killian Henry Van Rensselaer, the Southern Jurisdiction of the Rite was organizing the political leadership for the secession itself. The man in charge of this project was Albert Pike of Newburyport, Massachusetts." (Anton Chaitkin, Treason in America, 2d ed. (1985) p. 234) The order of the Knights of the Golden Circle were the instigators and promoters of political and physical rebellion throughout the South, they were the real "secessionists" and "insurrectionists." The true Southern leadership, including Jefferson Davis, Alexander H. Stephens, Robert E. Lee, 'Stonewall' Jackson, Sam Houston, and other such men were all against secession. Generally, the sentiment of the South was pro-Union and secession Was Not a popular movement. Robert E. Lee in a letter to his son, dated January 23, 1861, he wrote: "...I see that four states have declared themselves out of the Union; four more will apparently follow their example. Then, if the border states are brought into the gulf of revolution, one half of the country will be arrayed against the other. I must try and be patient and await the end, for I can do nothing to hasten or retard it. The South, in my opinion, has been aggrieved by the acts of the North. As you say, I feel the aggression and am willing to take every proper step for redress. It is the principle I contend for, not individual or private benefit. As an American citizen, I take great pride in my country, her prosperity and institutions, and would defend any state if her rights were invaded. But I can anticipate no greater calamity for the country than a dissolution of the Union. It would be an accumulation of all the evils we complain of and I am willing to sacrifice everything but honor for its preservation. I hope, therefore that all constitutional means will be exhausted before there is a resort to force. Secession is nothing but revolution. The framers of the Constitution never exhausted so much labor, wisdom, and forbearance in its formation, and surrounded it with so many guards and securities, if it was intended to be broken by every member of the Confederacy at will. It was intended for 'perpetual union,' so expressed in the preamble, and for the establishment of a government, not a compact, which can only be dissolved by revolution or the consent of all the people in convention assembled. It is idle to talk of secession. Anarchy would have been established, and not a government, by Washington, Hamilton, Jefferson, Madison, and the other patriots of the Revolution..." Lee closed with this realistic appraisal: "Still, a Union that can only be maintained by swords and bayonets, and in which strife and civil wars are to take the place of brotherly love and kindness, has no charm for me. I shall mourn for my country and for the welfare and progress of mankind. If the Union is dissolved, and the government disrupted, I shall return to my native state and share the miseries of my people; and, save in defense, will draw my sword on none." By the time the Civil War started the Knights of the Golden Circle claimed at least 65,000 armed and drilled recruits in the deep South. (Anton Chaitkin, Treason in America, 2d ed. (1985) p. 225) It was this military organization which became the heart of the Confederate States of America, who provided the military backbone and enforcement for the Confederate insurrection. The bulk of the true Southern mainstream was sucked into the whirlwind of their planned insurrection, being left with no choice but to fight in defense of the consequential retaliation to that insurrection. Nearly every aspect of the Southern policy on secession, war, and the formation of a new government was derived from members of the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry or the Knights of the Golden Circle. "The Secessionists, controlling the state governments of South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana, and Texas met at Montgomery, Alabama, under the chairmanship of Scottish Rite Supreme Council Member Howell Cobb. They announced the establishment of the Southern 'Confederacy,' and designated Jefferson Davis of Mississippi as President of their rump nation. He made fairly good window-dressing for their insurrection, being both a Southerner and an American." (Anton Chaitkin, Treason in America, p. 245) When Governor Sam Houston of Texas prevented his state from seceding from the union, he was deposed by a secessionist coup backed by thousands of armed paramilitary Knight of the Golden Circle. When Fort Sumter became the focus of strategic concern for the nation, members of the Knights of the Golden Circle served as officers in the South Carolina forces "to supervise the attack on Fort Sumpter which started the Civil War." (Anton Chaitkin, Treason in America, p. 224) Since the objective of this secret Masonic order was the "overthrow of the government of the United States, and destroy Christianity" they obviously had in plan the establishment of a new government, one based upon the law that guided their order, a Jewish Talmudic law, which is the basis of their de facto government. The Prize - The South's Wealth The assessed valuation of all United States property in 1860 was $12-billion. One-half of that was in 11 Southern States with only 8-million Whites. (Weep No More My Lady, W.E. Debnam, Graphic Press, Raleigh, NC 1950, p. 41) These 8-million Whites exported 57% of the total exports of the nation. The plan was to bind the South and take her wealth. With a bonus to Eliminate a Nation of Kings, The Natural Competitors of the Ultimate Ruler of the World. War would be necessary since the South could not be expected to willingly give away wealth that had taken over 250 years to accumulate. Then, too, war is good for business. In fact, it is the best of the several ways to force money to be borrowed into existence in a usury society. (Keynes, War Cycles/Peace Cycles, p. 201) The usual way the media goes about creating a war climate is: 1). "The enemy" must be made to appear unlawful. He must be made to appear criminal, one that must be restrained and punished for the good and safety of all. 2). The public must be made to believe that the enemy is going to attack them. If the enemy can be made to strike the first blow, opinions harden and unite on war, and "happy days are here again" as war contracts go out. Is there any doubt that this will work? Think about the wonderful results the media obtained in the so-called "Gulf War." Where they absolutely convinced most Americans that Hussein must be destroyed in Iraq or he would invade America next! The Chosen Issue - Radical Abolition The public issue of the day was the colonization program; the purchasing, freeing, and sending of the slaves back to Africa. It was a subject freely discussed in almost every social setting. It was on the tip of everyone's tongue; a subject ready for the media's propagandist twist. The media took Thomas Jefferson's abolition plan, adopted it, revised it by leaving out "compensation" and "repatriation," and started their own propaganda campaign. Jefferson's abolition plan minus colonization nullified all that the colonization plan was created to correct, the protection of the White workers from cheap alien labor and the protection of the White race from destruction through contact with strangers and learning their ways. And, of course, to prevent the inevitable interbreeding that always result when two peoples live in the same land. This selection of the abolition issue was a work of genius. it could not fail to succeed where a media monopoly existed. The way it was developed was even more inspired. The media stopped virtually all reference to colonization. They stopped almost all reference to payment for freed slaves. Abolition took on meaning that was harsh and sinister. It was the San Domingo campaign all over again, done by the same international bankers in the same manner. All that was new was the victim. The only topic the media discussed from 1830 on was the evil of slavery, a topic on which the entire nation agreed. The evil was embellished with reports of the brutality of slave owners. Not only were the slave owners brutes, but they were pictured as fiends who delighted in devising vile punishments to inflict on helpless Black wretches.
The story as it appeared in the northern media was the atrocity story, of which we have become so familiar: slave owners were treating slaves in a shameful manner, they were the servants of the devil and any punishment meted out to such evil creatures was too good. Northern city dwellers traveled very little in those days. They were dependent on others to furnish news of outside events. They only knew what they read in the newspapers and had no way of telling if the stories were true or false. But, they believed if the newspapers printed it; then it must be true. Because then, just as now, Americans could not bring themselves to believe that there were traitors who would destroy our country if only they could. If what the media said was actually going on in the south, if slaves were being beaten, starved, and maltreated wholesale for pleasure, and if good Black "Christian" slave families were being broken up and sold away from each other just so the plantation master could enjoy the female without the irate slave husband around, the hard opinions were justified. But, it was lying Jewish propaganda. It was "implied" at first, and later outright demanded, that instant freedom, minus payment and colonization, be granted these "poor" drown-trodden wretches from these slaveholding fiends, even if force had to be used to do it. The word "force" began to enter the papers with increasing frequency and urgency. Money was lavished on this new radical abolition campaign on a scale not seen since the French Revolution. Revolutionary tracts were printed and sent to the salves in the South by the case. As far back as 1835, John Quincy Adams noted in his diary: "Anti-slavery associations are formed in this country and in England and they are already co-operating in concerted agency together. They have raised funds to support and circulate inflammatory newspapers and pamphlets gratuitously, and they send multitudes of them into the Southern country into the midst of swarms of slaves." (Adams Diary, August 11, 1835. Quoted in Virginia's Attitude Toward Slaver, p. 178. Note the international scope of the campaign) This was Haiti all over again. The same sort of tracts had appeared among the slaves in Haiti to foment a revolt that exterminated the Whites. The main difference was that these were printed in English while those used in Haiti were in French. The content was the same, the style was the same, and the demands were the same. There were white refugees from Haiti living in Virginia who could identify the tracts and testify as to the results they produced. Margaret Mercer of Maryland, who had freed her slaves, was incensed by the writings of William Lloyd Garrison. In a letter to a friend she says: "This is my apology for feeling and expressing the deepest indignation against the man who dares to throw the firebrand into the powder magazine while all are asleep and stands himself at a distance to see the mangled victims of his barbarous fury." (Memoir of Margaret Mercer, Morris, p. 126) The amazing thing is that through it all the northern people hadn't the faintest idea that the media were trying to foment a slave revolt in the South, and were using them as pawns in the great game of war. They had no way of knowing. The tracts sent to the Southern slaves weren't the same as the editorials appearing in the northern newspapers. Each was slanted to its own particular audience. Money continued to pour into the campaign. The mails were full of insurrection propaganda. Southern reaction against this incendiary printed matter is given in the following letter by The Rev. Nehemiah Adams, of Boston, who visited Virginia in 1854. He wrote: "When these amalgamation pictures were discovered (pictures showing interracial couples in all sorts of poses)...Who can wonder that they broke into the post-office and seized and burned abolition papers; indeed no excesses are surprising in view of the perils to which they saw themselves exposed." (A South Side View Of Slavery, Adams, p. 108) In his message to Congress in December 1860, President Buchanan wrote: "The incessant and violent agitation of the slavery question through the North for the last quarter of a century has at last produced its malign influence on the slaves...Hence a sense of security no longer exists around the family altar. A feeling of peace at home has given place to apprehension of servile insurrection." George Lunt of Boston, wrote: "It thus appears that an active and alarming system of aggression against the South was in operation at the North thirty years ago, threatening to excite servile insurrection, to imperil union, to stir up civil war." (The Origin of the Late War, Lunt, p. 104) Professor John Burgess of Columbia University wrote: "If the whole thing, both as to time, methods, and results, had been planned by his Satanic Majesty himself, it could not have succeeded better in setting the sound conservative movements of the age at naught...No man who is acquainted with the change of feeling which occurred in the South...can regard Harper's Ferry villainy as any other than one of the chiefst crimes of our history..." Brown and his band had murdered five men and wounded some eight or ten more in their criminal movement at Harper's Ferry. In Kansas, Brown's gang mutilated prisoners by cutting off arms, etc. (See Otto Scott's The Secret Six, Times Books, 3 Park Ave. NY 10016) His activities were well publicized in the South. When the Northern media wrote approvingly of these acts the South's wrath knew no bounds. The south acted as people are supposed to act when being conditioned for war. "Add to this the consideration that Brown certainly intended the wholesale massacre of the Whites by the Blacks...it was certainly natural that the tolling of the church bells, the holding of prayer-meetings for the soul of John Brown, the draping of houses, the half-masting of flags, etc., in many parts of the North should appear to the people of the South to be evidences of a wickedness which knew no bounds..." (The Civil War and the Constitution, Burgess, Vol. 1, pp. 42-44) Slave owners in Kansas reacted to John Brown's attacks by organizing vigilante committees for their own protection as it was meant that they should. This played into the hands of the media. This defensive organization and its protective measures were interpreted by the press to their Northern readers as aggressive acts directed against all abolitionists. This was the justification they needed to assert that the North must now arm to protect itself against hostile and aggressive Southern slave owners who threatened to spread their evil society over all the country. The whole affair only cost a few hundred thousand dollars. America's Hidden Rulers The manipulation and instigation of the American Civil War by Jewish powers had profound legal ramifications. The Jews knew that such a war would cause both sides to violate fundamental principles and established Christian Laws. Both North and South violated the Law of God which says you shall not "fight against your brethren" without a just cause. Just as God brought Israel into alien captivity for its gross violations and unjust actions against its brethren, so too God brought about a captivity upon Americans by alien, Plutocratic Jews, not a physical captivity, but a legal captivity resulting in a legal revolution. The Civil War was, in a legal sense, an international war between America and the International Banking Monopoly of the Jews, and the victor of that war was the Jews. However, since they did not engage in any successful armed insurrection, as they did with Russia, (Jews had financed and were the prominent leaders of the Bolshevik Revolutions of 1905 & 1917 which overthrew the Christian nation of Russia. Jews have been the creators of Marxism, Communism, and Socialism. Cf., The national Geographic, Vol. XVIII, No. 5, May 1907, p. 302; The Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. XI (1905), p. 414) they had no right to physical occupation and control. But God gave America into their hands, by giving them legal control over the national government. The Civil War was the second step of the legal control and captivity the Plutocratic Jews had over the U.S. Government and legal system. The Civil Rights Acts, the Reconstruction Acts, the 14th and 15th Amendments were all revolutionary in nature, being based on Jewish-Socialistic-Communistic-Zionist principles which are contrary and foreign to the original American system. The Constitution, State autonomy, and the freedoms of the White citizenry were severe barriers for the advancement of these Judeo-Socialist principles. Since they did not possess physical control, the Jews could only make advancements against the States or citizenry by deception and legal entrapments. Surprisingly parallel to Lee's "secession is nothing but revolution" was Abraham Lincoln's view. We have previously noted Lincoln's primary commitment to the preservation of the Union. Although backed by Abolitionists, Lincoln's platform did even mention slaver, prior to his election as a so-called "sectional President" in 1860. Lincoln's first inaugural sums up his Constitutional perspective: "I hold that in contemplation of universal law and of the Constitution, the Union of these States in perpetual. Perpetuity is implied if not expressed, in the fundamental law of all national governments. It is safe is assert that no government proper ever had a provision in its organic law for its own termination. Continue to execute all the express provisions of our National Constitution, and the Union will endure forever, it being impossible to destroy it except by some action not provided for in the instrument itself. Again: If the United States be not a government proper, but an association of States in the nature of contract merely, can it, as a contract, be peaceably unmade by less than all the parties who made it? One party to a contract may violate it; break it, so to speak, but does it not require all to lawfully rescind it? Descending from these general principles, we find the proposition that in legal contemplation the Union is perpetual confirmed by the history of the Union itself. The Union is much older that the Constitution. It was formed, in fact, by the Articles of Association in 1774. It was matured and continued by the Declaration of Independence in 1776. It was further matured, and the faith of all the then thirteen States expressly plighted and engaged that it should be perpetual, by the Articles of Confederation in 1778. And finally, in 1787, one of the declared objects for ordaining and establishing the Constitution was 'form a more perfect union.'" From time to time one could find an agent or debtor of the Jews in political office to directly advance their cause and principles of socialism. The first president they had control over to some degree was the second Jewish President Woodrow Wilson, who paid his debts to them by signing the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. Franklin D. Roosevelt, the third Jewish President, has proven to be the greatest benefactor to the Jews for the destruction of fundamental American principles and the establishment of Marxist-Talmudic laws and Judaic-Socialism to that time. "Until Roosevelt became president, the Protestant elite both reigned and ruled in Washington. To be sure, Catholics and Jews had been rewarded with occasional appointments, but essentially the government had been run by Protestant descendants of old-stock Americans. When Roosevelt took office, he set the tone for an administration that recruited people on the basis of their intellectual and administrative talents, not their heritage. As a result, large numbers of Catholics, Jews, and blacks found opportunities to utilize their professional skills." (F.D.R. His Life and Times, Otis L. Graham, Jr., ed. (1985) p. 216) Roosevelt was very discriminatory in appointing to government positions only those who had "intellectual talents" geared towards the principles of Socialism-Zionism. While Jews constituted only about 3 percent of the population, "they made up 15 percent of the higher civil service and upper-echelon appointments during Roosevelt's presidency." Contemporaries sensed this over representation and denounced the so-called "Jew Deal" and its destructive measures. Roosevelt brought many Jews into the White House orbit and New Deal agencies. The Jew, David Niles of Boston, "roamed as a behind-the-scenes political emissary," and the Jewish attorney Ben Cohen from Indiana, "wrote some of the New Deal's most significant legislation." (F.D.R. His Life and Times, Otis L. Graham, Jr., p. 217) The Jewish financier Bernard Baruch was called "elder statesman because he has advised many Presidents." (This is America's Story, Howard B. Wilder, (1960) p. 508) Jewish subversives have also continued the use of private or secret organizations to alter or abrogate American principles by covert legal means and to gain further control of the government and people. Some of these include the Council on Foreign Relations, the Masonic orders, and the Trilateral Commission whose members are Presidents, Senators, and Judges, with their objective being a new (de facto) government. Martial Law Rule in America While much of the defacto nature of the government in America has been achieved by gradual and stealthy deviations from established laws and principles, certain principles surrounding American law and government were too prevalent to change except by force. Some of these principles include the fact that only White persons could govern or be citizens, that the States were independent political entities, and that the foundation of American rested on Christian principles. Martial law or military force is a common tool used in subverting or displacing the established law and to compel the citizenry to accept a change in the law. The exercise of martial law has been used by existing governments which desire to step outside its lawful bounds, thus governing unlawfully or in a de facto mode. It also has been used by subversive forces infiltrating a nation to overturn the existing government and law. Certain modes of martial law have been instrumental in bringing about a de facto government in America. We thus need to understand the nature and scope of martial law and how it has been used in the past. Martial Law and American Law: Martial law is essentially a system of rule through the use of military personnel. It is said to exist only when the nation is actually in a state war and when hostile forces have expelled the governing power and incapacitated its civil courts. It thus is instituted out of sheer necessity, and, since all civil authority is overrun, a military officer assumes authority. "Martial law is the law of military necessity in the actual presence of war. It is administered by the general of the army, and is in fact his will. Of necessity it is arbitrary; but must be obeyed." (United States vs. Diekelman, 2 Otto (92 U.S.) 520, 526 (1875)) The manner of government that prevails today would not only be foreign to the Founding Fathers, but would be repugnant to them as well. The 14th Amendment has steadily caused revolutionary changes in the principles and structure of the government in America. It has greatly influenced the acts of legislators, governors, presidents, judges, and bureaucrats. Due to this, the 14th Amendment (and supporting legislation such as the Civil Rights Acts) has been referred to as a "new constitution," as being a basis of new governmental powers. Wherever the tenets and principles of the "new constitution" are resisted, or wherever the original principles of American government and law (de jure) are supported or implemented, the "new" (de facto) government is quick to meet such measures with force, the same manner of arbitrary force which gave birth to the new government. The 13th and 14th Amendments (known as the "war amendment") along with the Reconstruction Acts, were the beginning of a de facto government, using force, fraud and usurpation to oust the original de jure government of America. "A de facto government is one that maintains itself by A Display of Force against the will of the rightful legal government, and is successful, at least temporarily, in overturning the institutions of the rightful legal government by setting up its own in lieu thereof." (Wortham vs. Walker, 128 S.W.2d 1138, 1145; 133 Tex. 255 (1939)) The U.S. Supreme Court in deciding on the nature of such a de facto government recognized it as "a government of paramount force." The Court further stated that: "(A de facto government's) distinguishing characteristics are (1), that its existence is Maintained by Active Military Power within the territories, and against the rightful authority of an established and lawful government; and (2), that while it exists, it must necessarily be obeyed in civil matters by private citizens who, by acts of obedience, Rendered in Submission to such force, do not become responsible, as wrongdoers, for those acts, though not Warranted by the laws of the rightful government." (Thorington vs. Smith, 8 Wallace (75 U.S.) 1, 9 (1868)) Modern Day Martial Law Rule This "government by force" is quite characteristic of the government that now rules America. Whenever traditional American principles are attempted to be upheld, such as those surrounding money and taxation, we see the National Guard, FBI, U.S. Marshalls, Federal Agents, SWAT teams or police sent in to prevent original principles from being exercised. It is not the money they are concerned about but rather the protection of one type of law from the influence of another. It is conflict between two diametrically opposing principles of law, that is to say, Talmudic law versus Christian law. It would be rather naive to view the illegal exercise of martial law acts as something that may have occurred during the Civil War, but had vanished along with the war. This notion is just as foolish as the belief that Martial Law was confined strictly to the Southern States during the Civil War. The events of that war established a foundation for that type of arbitrary and illegal rule which continues to this day. When the war ended, proclamations by Presidents Lincoln and Johnson declared that the "said insurrection is at an end." (14 Statutes at Large 812, 813 (April 2, 1866); 814, 817 (August 20, 1866)) However, the Reconstruction period proved that Congress did not feel it was at an end but rather continued to enact measures as though the war or "insurrection" still prevailed.
In the two proclamations declaring the insurrection to be ended, there was specific mention of every proclamation made by Lincoln during the war that dealt with insurrection, thus implying that these proclamations were revoked. However, Lincoln's "Marital Law Proclamation" was never mentioned and was never Specifically Revoked! The Civil War allowed new concepts in law and government to be instituted and used, concepts that were contrary to the principles of the Fundamental Christian law of America. These new, anti-Christ, anti-American concepts have periodically been exercised by the "Federal Government" to the present day. The crux of this new power is represented within the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments. Congress added to these amendments a Power Clause which said that, "Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation." Within these Amendments Congress bestowed arbitrary powers unto itself, giving it complete power over the status, life, liberty, property, due process, voting rights, privileges and immunities of colored persons. Now, not only was the Executive and the military to be the guardian and protector of the Negro, but Congress also. The intent of the civil war was not for the noble claim of "reserving the union" or even the destruction of slavery, but to elevate the black race and lower the status and freedom of the White Race, to divest the States of their rights and independent powers, and to dismantle the Christian foundation of the nation. This is too hard to deny since this was the outcome of the war and the trend followed by the government ever since. The enemies of Christian America never had the ability to invade the country and overturn its laws and principles of government as they did with Russia in 1917. Only be establishing a secret de facto government, one which can wield arbitrary force (martial law rule), could the traditional Christian American principles be superseded. The rights of the States have been the greatest obstacle of the plutocrat's plan to control the government and establish Talmudic/socialist/communistic/Zionist laws. Thus, it was not until the 1950's that any significant headway could be made in this plan. The Brown vs. Board of Education edict of the de facto Supreme Court in 1954 (347 U.S. 483), opened the door for offensive measures from the de facto Federal Government against the States and their institutions in regard to race. On September 24, 1957, the 5th Jewish President Eisenhower sent about 1000 Federal Troops to Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas, to force local school officials, "at the point of a bayonet," to integrate the school. This was an act of Martial Law, the arbitrary use of the military to govern civil matters. In September of 1962, when Governor Barnett of Mississippi prevented a Negro from entering the University of Mississippi, President Kennedy sent in Federal troops to override the State's decision on segregation and to force the University to admit the Negro. In 1963, Governor Wallace of Alabama "stood in the schoolhouse door" in order to prevent Federal Marshals from registering black students at the University of Alabama. Again Kennedy sent federal troops in to remove the Governor and overturn state law. The use of such force to unlawfully suppress the actions of the de jure government when the need arises is most often done under some form of martial law measures. It has of recent been the means by which the de facto government enforces its heavy progressive "income tax" against the white citizenry in an attempt to enslave them. The de facto government has raised an army of agents, bureaucrats and operatives to maintain and protect that tax system. Under the exercise of martial law powers, these "agents" will make warrant less searches, seizures, and arrests in order to suppress those that resist that system. Benjamin Franklin once stated: "The more the people are discontented with the oppression of taxes; the greater need for the prince (or government) has of money, to distribute among his partisans and pay The Troops that are to Suppress All Resistance, and enable him to plunder at pleasure. There is scarce a king in a hundred who would not, if he could follow the example of Pharaoh, get first all the people's money, then all their lands, and then make them and their children servants forever." (Documents Illustrative, p. 139. Spoken at the Constitutional Convention) Along these same lines Caesar was noted for saying: "With money we will get men, and with men we will get money." Any warrant less arrest by a peace officer, if challenged, is presumptively invalid, and the burden of proof is on the state or arresting officer to justify it as one not only authorized by statute, but as not violative of the constitutional guarantee against invasion of privacy. (State vs. Mastrian, 171 N.W.2d 695, 699; 285 Minn. 51. State vs. Rowe, 26 N.W.2d 422, 429; 238 Iowa 237. State vs. Johnson, 230 So. 2d 825, 830; 255 La. 314. Butler vs. State, 212 So.2d 573, 577) If the burden is not met, the arrest is unlawful. An unlawful arrest is a crime and usually classified as a gross misdemeanor. Because of this, when a peace officer makes an arrest without warrant, "he is a trespasser and acts at his own peril." (109 Dukes v. State, 137 S.E. 2d 532; 109 Ga. App. 825; People vs. Ward, 196 N.W.971; 226 Mich. 45; State vs. Mobley, supra, 105) In recent times, liberal arrests are made and justified because it is said the officer had "probable cause." As originally used under our constitutional system, probable cause was not an excuse or reason for arrest, it was one of the requirements for a warrant, "No Warrant shall issue but upon probable cause." The history of the use of arrests (especially of recent times) shows that police, sheriffs, marshals, etc., have not possessed the knowledge or respect for the rights of liberty and privacy which the Law of the Land proclaims for every citizen. An appalling number of arrests are illegal. Much of the blame for this rests with the "Slave mentality" which people acquired, and act like programed robots when it comes to the government or police telling them what to do, even when it flagrantly violates their rights. Under a government of slavery people are educated that government is supreme and cannot be resisted. Just as the peace officer must determine if the circumstances justify whether he can make an arrest, the citizen must determine if the attempted arrest is legal or not. It is a well-settled principle that a person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest and use what force is necessary in defense of his liberty: "The offense of resisting arrest, both at common law and under statute, presupposes a lawful arrest. It is axiomatic that every person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such case the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer and may be resisted by use of force, as in self-defense. (110 State vs. Mobley, 83 S.E.2d 100, 102) What rights then has a citizen in resisting an unlawful arrest? An arrest without warrant is a trespass, an unlawful assault upon the person, and how far one thus unlawfully assaulted may go in resistance is to be determined, as in other cases of assault. Life and liberty are regarded as standing substantially on one foundation; life being useless without liberty. And the authorities are uniform that where one is about to be unlawfully deprived of his liberty he may resist the aggressions of the offender, whether of a private citizen or a public officer, to the extent of taking the life of the assailant, if that be necessary to preserve his own life, or prevent infliction upon him of some great bodily harm." (111 State vs. Gum, 69 S.E. 463, 464; 68 W.Va. 105 (1910)) It has to be understood that the right to freely detain and arrest individuals is one of the most important tools a corrupt and despotic government has in maintaining control over the populace. In its eyes all arrests are lawful and all resistance to it is unlawful; even the slightest objection to the arrest is to be checked with extra-physical force. Resistance is an affront to the legal system and the jobs of those enforcing that system. If people can actually be conditioned to believe that the police can stop them and arrest them any time for any cause the policeman claims is justified (as they see on TV), then they have no liberty and are but slaves to be commanded and punished at the whim of their master, their god (the government). All de facto governments need a legal system that provides and supports the power to make liberal arrests so as to keep the principles of the de jure government from surfacing. In America the de facto government has established this "power" at both local and national levels. The entire concept of proper and lawful arrests under our American system has been further corrupted in order to further gain control over the citizenry. This has been achieved through a variety of methods used in conjunction with arrest, such as fingerprinting, measuring and photographing, blood tests, breath tests, etc., all before the person is ever convicted of any crime. As many courts have shown, such actions are a violation of one's right of privacy. "To charge that one's finger print records have been taken would ordinarily convey an imputation of crime, and very probably support a complaint for libel per se. In my judgment, a compulsory finger printing before conviction is an unlawful encroachment upon a person, in violation of the state Constitution. (113 People vs. Hevern, 127 Misc. 141; 215 N.Y.S. 417; McGovern vs. Van Riper, 43 A.2d 514, 521; 137 N.J. Eq. 24 (1924)) Was the act of the officers of the police department in compelling the petitioner to submit to having his photograph taken and these measurements and imprints (fingerprints) made a lawful, to such indignities, is certainly unnecessary in order to 'detect and arrest' him; for he must have been detected and arrested before he can be so dealt with. It is unnecessary to 'prevent crime,' for the acts for which indictment has been found, if criminal, have already been committed...The exercise of any such extreme police power as is here contended for is contrary to the spirit of Anglo-Saxon liberty. (114 Gow vs. Bingham, 107 N.Y.S. 1011, 1014-15; 57 Misc. 66 (1907)) To subject a person against his will to a blood test is an assault and battery, and clearly an invasion of his personal privacy...If we admit such an encroachment upon the personal immunity of an individual where in principle can we stop?" (115 Bednarik vs. Bednarik, 16 A.2d 80, 90; 18 N.J. Misc. 633 (1940)) A de facto government would have a great need for collecting data and information on those who would object to the new order of government, so they can be readily identified by its police forces. All of our traditional principles of natural liberty have now taken a back seat to the oppressive measures of a de facto government through its abusive use of arrest and forcibly extracting information from any citizen it may consider a "criminal." Due process of law requires a warrant to be issued prior to arrest; or in cases where the public security requires an arrest, the alleged offender is to be taken immediately before the nearest sitting magistrate that he may be dealt with according to law. He is not to be take to police headquarters to be photographed, measured, fingerprinted, and jailed. State Rights and Independence When the colonial States claimed their independence from Britain, they became "Free and Independent States," having "full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which Independent States may of right do." (Declaration of Independence, 1776) In other words, they became nations on the same footing as any other nation such as France or England. This was essentially their status after the adoption of the U.S. Constitution. "We choose rather to plant ourselves on what we consider impregnable positions. They are these: That a state has the same undeniable and unlimited jurisdiction over all persons and things, within its territorial limits, as any Foreign Nation; where that jurisdiction is not surrendered or restrained by the Constitution of the United States." (City of New York vs. Miln, 11 Peters (36 U.S.) 102, 139 (1837)) If the independent status and rights of the States were not retained under the U.S. Constitution, that document Would Never Have Been Ratified. Our American school children have been taught that the Civil War was fought over the slavery problem, but this was only a surface issue to hide the intrigue of the Great Red Dragon to foment one side against the other. After thousands of our choice White Israel sons and one of our greatest Presidents were murdered, our Great God stopped the slaughter of the Dragon By the Intervention of The Czar of Russia, whom God sent to our National Rescue, but unknown to Most Americans. After the Dragon saw that he could not destroy our nation through civil war, he undertook to destroy us in another manner. One of which was the passage of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution which for all practical purposes destroyed the Original Constitution. More on this later. "And the serpent (still in the guise of Rome and some of her apostate daughters of organized religion) cast out of his mouth WATER as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood." (Revelation 12:15) The word "water" has two meanings in Bible symbolism. 1). It means the "Word of God." 2). It means "peoples and races of humanity." And the serpent has used both meanings in trying to destroy the woman and her seed. So let's check out the first meaning. Ordinarily we think of the "Word of God" as being that which is spoken by only God or His Son Jesus Christ. But Satan who is the god of this World order and also the Prince and Power of the air, (2 Corinthians 4:2, Ephesians 2:2) has a word also which is taught as gospel. It is the wicked doctrines of devils and seducing spirits. Paul warns us of it in 1 Timothy 4:1-2, Peter in 2 Peter 2:1-3 of which he (Satan) has been flooding our Israel's Christian Kingdoms (nations) and is being preached as the "Word of God" and the "Gospel of Jesus Christ." Jesus said: "Many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ (men/women who come into our churches and say that Jesus is Christ); and shall deceive many...many false prophets (preachers, ministers and etc.) shall arise, and shall deceive many...there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect (they will be such great and convincing speakers that they will be able to deceive all but the very elect). Behold, I have told you before (He, Christ, has given us warning to watch and to study to make ourselves approved - be able to discern these false pastors and ministers (2 Timothy 2:15)." (Matthew 24:5, 11, 24-25) We can safely say our Nations have been submerged under its evil propaganda and influence. Paul said, when this wicked one, the Red Dragon, would be revealed, his coming is the working of Satan with all power, signs and lying wonders. So that the deceived, through strong delusion would believe a lie rather than the truth. (2 Thessalonians 2:8-11) What are some of these cunning lies taught today as the Word of God? Perhaps the first one we should deal with, is that the Jews are the "Chosen People of God." Millions of Christian people have been taught this damnable lie, this Satanic falsehood by the clergy of this nation (America), the nations of Western Europe, Australia, South Africa and New Zealand, until multiplied millions of people have given the International Esau-Edomite-Canaanite-Khazar Jew, a special treatment as the "Chosen of God" and a people who can do no wrong. With the Chosen People status afforded them by Organized Religion, they are hidden from their Red Dragon Identity, as The Children of Satan, and activities in this nation and the world. Jesus identified them in his day, and said: "Ye serpents (Satan is called that old serpent in the Scriptures, thus Jesus is saying they are serpents-Satan's Children), ye offspring of vipers (here Jesus identifies their fathers as being Satan's Children also), how can ye escape the damnation of hell (in other words Jesus is in effect saying The Jews Cannot be Saved!)?" (Matthew 23:33-38, John 8:37-45) Our clergy stand in the pulpits and declare that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were Jews and the Bible does not once declare that this is true. They were Hebrews, and the words Hebrew, Israel and Jew are not synonymous terms, as our nations people have been brainwashed to believe, so as to hide the "Serpent Jew" behind the Chosen People status. Furthermore, the Jews and organized religion have coined a dirty phrase to hang onto anyone who dares to expose their evil works. This phrase of words are called "anti-Semitism." But how can one be "anti-Semitic" when he is more Semitic than most Jews? Since the Jews are claiming "chosen people" status, then who in the world are all of these Anglo-Saxon, Celtic, Germanic and Kindred people God has been calling out of all the nations where he has scattered them, and is regathering them in America? Are we just "Gentiles" as we have been brainwashed into believing? No wonder the doctrine of America revealed as modern day Israel is heralded from the housetops of every organized church as false doctrine. To test the validity of this doctrine of Israel's identity, we present the following questions. Who is fulfilling the prophecy of Genesis 35:11 and Genesis 48:19 which was to take place in these last days? Have the Jews become A Great and Mighty Single Nation and also A Company of Nations, whose people are so great in number as to be as the sands of the sea or the stars in the heavens? Of course not. That is already fulfilled by the Anglo-Saxon, Celtic, Germanic and Kindred people, the White Israel People. Due to the tremendous amount of false teachings that have been done in regards to the Jews, perhaps it would not be inappropriate here to present a brief review of the history of the House of Israel, the House of Judah and the Jews, as related in the Scriptures.
From this point on it will be almost impossible to keep from repeating our self from time to time. I respectfully request that you take into consideration that fact and realize that this is because the three peoples are so intertwined in history that the threads must cross time and time again as we go along. Was Abraham a Jew? It has often been stated that Abraham was the first Jew. The Bible, however, never calls Abraham by that term and for good reason. The word "Jew" is merely the modern English contraction for the word "Judahite" or "Judean." Thus, the question is not really whether Abraham was a Jew or not; but rather, was Abraham a Judahite? That is, was Abraham of the tribe of Judah? Obviously not, for Abraham preceded the tribe of Judah by 3 generations. Abraham was a Semite (a descendant of Shem -- a son of Noah), and he was also a Hebrew (a descendant of Heber, or Eber). But to say that Abraham was a Judahite is to say the he descended from his own great-grandson! That is impossible. The descendants of Judah (Hebrew, Yehudah) were known as Yehudim, which means "Judahites." The New Testament, written in Greek, uses the term Ioudaioi, which is best translated "Judeans." It is somewhat confusing that almost all Bible translations employ the word "Jew" instead of Judahite of Judean. But once we learn to read Judahite or Judean, the distinctions in the Bible between Hebrews, Israelites, and "Jews" is clarified. But let us concentrate for now upon the various meanings of the Biblical term "Judahite." The Bible uses the word "Judahite" in three distinct ways: 1). One who is of the tribe of Judah in the racial sense; 2). One who is a citizen of the Southern Nation of Judah, including the tribes of Benjamin and Live; it may even include Canaanites and Edomites who are citizens of Judah; 3). One who is a follower of the religion of Judah as given by Moses and the Prophets. This usage is found in Esther 8:17 and Romans 2:28-29. The Edomite Connection The nation of Judah, comprising of a portion of the Israelite Tribes of Judah, Benjamin and Levi, were conquered and deported to Babylon 600 years before Christ. After a 70-year captivity, 50,000 of them returned to rebuild Jerusalem, Ezra and Nehemiah both had a difficult time keeping them from intermarrying with the heathen who had settled in Palestine during their absence. They often had to institute reforms to cleanse the people, even the priests from these unlawful marriage relationships. (Ezra 2:62, 9:1-2, Nehimah 7:64, 12:23-30). About a century and a half later, when Alexander the Great conquered the known world and set up his Greek Empire, the Greek language began to become the dominant language of the world. It was not long before the Hebrew term Yehudah ("Judahite") was replaced by the Greek term Ioudaioi ("Judeans"). This is why the New Testament (written in Greek) speaks of Judeans instead of Judahites. However, both terms have roughly the same meaning. Between the time of Nehemiah and the birth of Christ, the problem of intermarriage increased. The climax of the problem came about a century and a half before the birth of Christ, when the Judean, John Hyrcanus, conquered the heathen cities in Palestine and forced the Canaanites to become Judeans ("Jews"). Josephus, the Judean historian, writing in about 95 A.D. wrote of this: "Hyrcanus took also Dora and Marissa, cities of Idumea (Greek form of Edom), and subdued all the Idumaeans; and permitted them to stay in that country, if they would be circumcised, and make use of the laws of the Judeans; and they were so desirous of living in the country of their forefathers, that they submitted to the use of circumcision, and the rest of the Judean ways of living; at which time therefore this befell them, they were hereafter no other than Judeans." (Ant. Book 13, ch. 9 par. 1) A footnote in Josephus quotes Ammonius, an ancient grammarian, who says further: "The Judeans are such by nature, and from the beginning, whilst the Idumaeans were not Judeans from the beginning, but Phoenicians and Syrians; but being afterward subdued by the Judeans and compelled to be circumcised, and to unite into one nation, and be subject to the same laws, they were called Judeans." This same footnote also quotes Dio, the ancient historian: "That country is also called Judea, and the people Judeans; and this name is given also to as many as embrace their religion, though of other nations." Josephus continues his history of how the Judahites incorporated the Edomites and Canaanites and a history of the son of Hyrcanus named Aristobulus: "He was called a lover of the Grecians; and had conferred many benefits on his own country, and made war against Iturea, and added a great part of it to Judea, and compelled its inhabitants if they would continue in that country, to be circumcised, and to live according to the Judean laws. (Josephus Ant. Book 13, ch. 11, par. 3) Now at this time the Judeans were in possession of the following cities that had belonged to the Syrians, and Idumeans, and Phoenicians: (Here he lists 23 non-Israelite cities); which last (city) they utterly destroyed, because its inhabitants would not bear to change their religious rites for those peculiar to the Judeans. The Judeans also possessed others of the principle cities of Syria, which had been destroyed." (Josephus Antiquities Book 13, chapter 15, paragraph 4) This all took place at least a century before Christ. It is obvious, then, that by the time Christ was born a great host of the people living in Judea were Canaanites and Edomites by race, although they were Jews by religion and Judeans by citizenship. Even the ruling dynasty of the Herods were Edomites. Josephus speaks of: "Herod, who was no more than a private man, and an Idumean, i.e., a half-Judean" (Josephus Ant. Book 14, ch. 15, p. 2) A footnote here says: "Accordingly, Josephus always esteems him an Idumean, though he says his father Antipater was of the same people with the Judeans, and a Judean by birth, as indeed all such proselytes of justice as the Idumeans, were in time esteemed the very same people with the Judeans." The Esau-Edomite nation ("Idumea") ceased to exist as a separate nation at this point in history. And yet the Bible is clear that Edom would be the enemy of Israel in the latter days. How could these prophecies be fulfilled, if there are no Edomites left in the world? There is only one nation in the world that can prove ancestral ties with Edom, and the Jews themselves claim that dubious distinction. The Jews have thus adopted the materialistic and anti-Christ attitude that characterized the father of the Edomites, Esau. As judgment for their sins, including that of the Crucifixion of Christ, God cast them out of Palestine in 70 A.D. whereupon they fled to North Africa and Spain. We find what happened to them in The American People's Encyclopedia for 1954, page 15-492, under "The Jews." "Following their dispersal many spread across North Africa to Spain and during this movement converted many of the Berber tribes to Judaism. This had little effect on physical type, since most of the Berbers were likewise of that Mediterranean Race. That portion which moved into Spain and later northward achieved considerable wealth and prestige and became known as Sephardin Jews." There are two main racial branches of modern Jewry: the Sephardic Jews of Western Europe and the Ashkenazi Jews of Eastern Europe. Thus far we have dealt only with the Sephardic Jews, and in conclusion we may say that according to historians the Sephardic branch of modern Jewry is a mixture of Judean blood with that of Edom, Syria, Canaan, Phoenicia and North Africa (The Negro Races). Gog and Magog in Modern Jewry As Arthur Koestler pointed out earlier, Togarmah was a nephew of Magog. Here the plot begins to thicken, for most students of Bible prophecy will immediately recognize that name from reading Ezekiel 38 & 39. In these passages Togarmah, Magog, Meshech, and Tubal are all mentioned in connection with the great end-time invasion of the land of Israel. They are pictured as INVADERS, NOT AS ISRAELITES. The identification of the Jewish Khazars with Gog and Magog is very old, Koestler writes: "At some date earlier than 864, the Westphalian Monk Christian Druthmar of Aquitania wrote a Latin trestise 'Expositio in Evangelium Mattei,' in which he reports that 'there existed people under the sky in regions where no Christians can be found, whose name is Gog and Magog, and who are Huns; among them is one, called the Gazari (Khazars) who are circumcised and observe Judaism in its entirety.' This remark occurs a propos of Matthew 24:14 which has no apparent bearing on it and no more is heard of the subject." (The Thirteenth Tribe, p. 81) Koestler continues with the story of ibn Fadlan, an Arab traveler who visited Gazaris (the Khazars) in 922 A.D. concluding his account of his travels with these words: "The Khazars and their king are all Jews. The Bulgars and all their neighbors are subject to him. They treat him with worshipful obedience. Some are of the opinion that Gog and Magog are the Khazars." (The Thirteenth Tribe, p. 46) There is also evidence of an Edomite connection with the Khazars. The Jewish Encyclopedia, in commenting on the letter which Hasdai ibn Shaprut wrote to King Joseph, says: "In this letter Hasdai speaks of the tradition according to which the Chazars (Khazars) once dwelt near the Seir (Serir) mountains." The Bible identifies the Edomites as having lived in Mount Seir in Genesis 36:8: "Thus dwelt Esau in Mount Seir: Esau is Edom." The Communist Connection "Edom" literally means Red, and it is certainly no coincidence that the major theorists and financiers of World Communism have been Jews. That they should pick red as the color of their Edomite Banner is quite fitting. However, this color was associated with the Khazars many centuries earlier: "The legends which circulated among Western Jews in the Middle Ages provide a curious parallel to the Russian Bylinda. To quote Poliak again: 'The popular Jewish legend does not remember a Khazar Kingdom but a Kingdom of the Red Jews.'" (The Thirteenth Tribe, p. 135) When the Khazar Empire was finally destroyed by the Russians from the north, the Khazar-Jews began to disperse into what is now called Poland and Germany, as well as into other Eastern European lands. However, they continued to multiply and remained the most populous branch of World Jewry. The destruction of the Khazar Empire brought many Khazars into contact with their fellow Jews of the Sephardim. Together, they continued their anti-Christian activities, mainly through their practice of usury, until finally the Christian Nations of Europe began to banish them. And as they left their usurious monetary practices left with them, and the European Renaissance began. The so-called Dark Ages lifted. Koestler quotes Cecil Roth, a another Jewish Historian: "In a sense, the Jewish dark ages may be said to begin with the Renaissance." (The Thirteenth Tribe, p. 178) Thus it can be seen clearly, God blessed the Christian Nations when they expelled His Enemies of Edom, Gog, and Magog. But the tide changed when these Khazar-Jews of Gog and Magog finally succeeded in overthrowing the Russians in what became known as the Communist Revolution-Bolshevik Revolution of Russia in 1917, and with the slaughter of literally millions of Christian Russian People. This revolution was carried out with the monetary backing of the Jewish banking houses in Western Europe and America. Thus, the rise of Togarmah, Ashkenaz, Gog, Magog, Meschech (ancient name for Moscow which also sit on Seven Hills), Gomer and Tubal (ancient name for Tobolsk) as prophesied in Ezekiel 38 and 39, is none other than the rise of the Bolshevik Khazar-Jews of Eastern Europe. Prophecy is unfolding before our very eyes, but as long as the True Racial Origin of the Jews Remains hidden from Christians, few will understand how it is being fulfilled. The Soviet Khazar-Jews of Gog, Magog and Togarmah have already invaded Palestine and stolen it from the Arabs as Ezekiel prophesied. The Arabs know the origin of the vast majority of the Jews entering Palestine today, find it difficult to understand why Americans would support such an invasion. The Khazars were the traditional enemies of the Arabs during the Middle Ages, and so they recognize the true nature of the invasion. The Khazar-Jews who control the Soviet Government have tried to cover their historic tracks in order to prevent the Christians in the West from dropping their support for Jewish Zionism. They know that without such support from the Christians, their entire venture would be jeopardized. Thus, Arthur Koestler states: "It is sad to report in this context that more than a thousand years after the events under discussion, the Soviet regime has done its best to expunge the memory of the Khazars' historic role and cultural achievements." (The Thirteenth Tribe, p. 93) Bolshevism-Judaism-Communism-Zionism Bolshevism is an alien concept imposed upon the Russian people from the outside. It was never an indigenous Russian movement, but clearly an anti-Christian Eastern Byzantine system. Its tenants as set out by the Jew, Adam Weisaupt, professor of Canon Law at the University of Ingolstadt, Bavaria. The Odessa and Syrian Jews were responsible both for Bolshevism (Judaism) and dogmatic Zionism (Talmudism)...The Marshall Plan, looted, as we know, many shipments of foodstuffs, goods and weapons, and diverted them to the Haganah and Stern Gangs which were operating in Palestine, under the Command of the Jew, General Julius Klein. In any case, The Marshall Plan was designed to obstruct, not promote, the recovery of Jewry's most hated enemy, Germany, just as it was General Marshall who put the Communist Mass Murderer, Mao Tse Tung in power in China. Thus from the very beginning, Bolshevism was a Jewish thing, written by Jews, implemented by Jews, and largely financed by Jews and their surrogates. Secondly, all of the Czars were well-schooled in the Revolutionary-Avaricious- born-exploiters-ingrained-nature of the Jews! With this in mind the Czars enacted a set of laws and rules to protect the indigenous Russian political, economic, religious and cultural life, from the despoilers. From 1772 all Jews were confined inside the "Pale." They were free to do what they liked inside the Pales, but were forbidden to travel or trade beyond them. In other words, they were not allowed to prey on the non-Jewish inhabitants as is their custom, since time immemorial. Here began the first sproutings of Bolshevism-Judaism-Communism-Zionism, as the hybrid "language" of Yiddish was born. Thirdly, since Russia, which was a Christian Nation at that time, was the first to impose such hated restrictions upon Jewry, it was only natural; given the well-known Jewish characteristic of lust for vengeance to topple Russia first. Therefore, to hide their guilt, they intensified the propaganda to promote the false doctrine that "The Jews Were God's Chosen People." So much so that, millions of Christian people have been taught this damnable lie, this Satanic falsehood by the clergy of the Christian Nations of the West, until multiplied millions of people have given the International Esau-Edomite-Canaanite-Khazar Jew, special treatment as the "Chosen of God" and a people who can do no wrong. With the Chosen People status afforded them by Organized Religion, which they carefully subverted with traitorous agents in the seminaries, they are hidden from their Red Dragon Identity, as The Children of Satan, and activities in this nation and the world. Furthermore, the Jews and Organized Religion have coined a dirty phrase to hang onto anyone who dares to expose their evil works. This phrase of words are called "anti-Semitism." It is a weapon the Jews use freely. But the question remains; how can one be "anti-Semitic" when he is more Semitic than most Jews? The battle between Christianity and the Jews has been going on long before the physical birth of Jesus Christ. The war has been going on since early Biblical days and continues to the present. St. Eusebius of Caesarea made a distinction, "between Hebrews who were good men in the Old Testament and the Jews who were evil." St. Bernard said: "...The Jews are murderers, a race who had not God for their father, but the devil, and are murderers as he was a murderer from the beginning." (Sermon xxix, in Migne, Partologoia latina, Vol. CLXXXII) Bishop Agobard: "...the latter (Bishop Agobard) forbade the Christians to have any connections with Jews, because it was unworthy of the sons of light to contaminate themselves by associating with the children of darkness; it was unworthy too, of the impeccant and spotless Church, which must prepare for the heavenly bridegroom, to dishonor itself by any connection with the polluted, shriveled and repudiated Synagogue." (Anti-Semitism Throughout the Ages, p. 131) St. Hillary of Poitiers did not acknowledge a Jew's greeting in the street. "He believed that before the Jews received the law they were possessed by an unclean devil, who immediately returned after their rejection of Christ." (God's First Love, p. 37) St. Jerome: "I detest the Jews with an unutterable hatred because even to this day they are cursing our Lord in their Synagogues." (St. Jerome, quoted in Anti-Semitism Throughout the Ages, p. 125)
St. Gregory of Nyssa: "...Jews are the slayers of the Lord, murderers of the prophets, adversaries of God, haters of God, men who show contempt for the law, foes of grace....advocates of the devil; brood of vipers, slanderers, scoffers, men whose minds are in darkness, leaven of the Pharisees, assembly of demons, sinners, wicked men, stoners and haters of righteousness." (Oratio in Christi Resurrectionem, p. 52) St. Ambrose: "I declare that I set fire to the Synagogue, or at least that I ordered those who did it, that there might be no place where Christ was denied. If it be objected that I did not set the Synagogue on fire here, I answer that it began to be burnt by the judgment of God." (Letter XI. to the Emperor Theodosius) The false belief that the Jews are "just like us but a different religion" is the cause of much of our misfortune today. St. Bernard knew the Jews were Not just like us when he said: "The wickedness of the Jews consists not in their conduct, but in their Jewishness." (Thy Brothers Keeper, p. 30) By 1492 the Jews had become so powerful that so-called Christian Jews, or Marranos were in control of many key positions in Spain. Even today the Jews hate Queen Isabella of Spain because she had the Inquisition carry out the limpieza de sangre laws which made all Christian church leaders and those in the aristocracy prove with genealogies that they were of pure Spanish blood and had no racial mixture with the Jews. Pope Honorius III realized that mixing with the Jews was a crime against nature and, "...it has been decided that the difference in clothes the Jews of all lands should be distinguished from the Christians, lest they sinfully mingle with the women of the other...the Jews of your diocese do not observe this; with the result that under the veil of error this damnable intermingling be committed, we by Aposostolic Letters, order Your Fraternity to compel the Jews by means of punishment fixed against them at the General Council, without appeal, to wear clothes by which they may be distinguishable from Christians." (Honorius III to the Archbishop of Toledo, November 21, 1221) Gregory IX: "...Since we desire that the Jews be recognizable and distinguished from the Christians, we order you to impose upon each and every Jew of both sexes a sign; one round patch of yellow cloth or linen, to be worn on the uppermost garment, stitched over the heart and behind it, in order that they may be recognized." (Gregory IX to the King of Navarre, 1234, Amador De Los Rios, I, 362, II. 22, 197) As the Jews are claiming "Chosen People" status, then who in the world are all of these Anglo-Saxon, Celtic, Germanic and Kindred people God has been calling out of all the nations where He has scattered them; and is regathering them in America? Are we just "Gentiles" (non-Jews) as we have been brainwashed into believing? No wonder the doctrine of America revealed as modern day Israel is heralded from the housetops of every organized church as false doctrine. Due to the tremendous amount of false teachings that have been done in regards to the Jews, perhaps it would not be inappropriate here to present a brief review of the history of the House of Israel, the House of Judah and the Jews, as related in the Scriptures. From this point on it will be almost impossible to keep from repeating our self from time to time. So we respectfully request that you take into consideration, that fact, and realize that this is because the three peoples are so intertwined in history that the threads must cross time and time again as we go along. The Jews have thus adopted the materialistic and anti-Christ attitude that characterized the father of the Edomites, Esau. As judgment for their sins, including that of the Crucifixion of Christ, God cast them out of Palestine in 70 A.D. whereupon they fled to North Africa and Spain. They are constantly spewing out their propaganda of how they are being picked on and persecuted by everyone. Anti-Semitism is their pet cry and the mask behind which they hide. They continually spell out how Christians MUST help the Jews; and if they do not then they are really not Christians after all. They send out literally tons of literature that tells how we can, and must, funnel our money, efforts, time, energies, influence and personal work as individual Christians and Churches into Specific Jewish Programs, on how we as Christians Must buy merchandise offered by Jews, patronize Jewish businesses, to lobby the American Government to aid the Jews (to the tune of about 10-12 Billion per year in money and military hardware) and stop aid to those who oppose them or hinder their plans for world conquest. The dragon, or World Jewry, who created the Beast of (Revelation 16:13) which is World Communism, and has been a very handy tool in the hands of the dragon (also known as Zionism or Judaism). One might compare this with: "For this city hath been to me as a provocation of mine anger and of my fury from the day that they built it even unto this day; that I should remove it from before my face, Because of all the evil of the children of Israel and of the children of Judah, which they have done to provoke me to anger, they, their kings, their princes, their priests, and their prophets, and the men of Judah, and The Inhabitants of Jerusalem." (Jeremiah 32:31-32) Now if the inhabitants of Jerusalem were just some of the men of Judah, there would be no point in making the distinction here. Remember, the prophet Ezekiel was with the group who had been deported to Babylon. Jeremiah was never taken there, although the statement has been made many times by those who tried to put Jeremiah in Babylon, although the Bible, if they ever read it, would tell them the exact opposite. Jeremiah sent a letter to those Already in Babylon, telling them both sides of this prophecy: he said, "For this saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel; Let not your prophets and your diviners, that be in the midst of you, neither hearken to your dreams which ye cause to be dreamed. For they prophesy falsely unto you in my name: I have not sent them, saith the Lord. For thus saith the Lord, That after seventy years be accomplished at Babylon I will visit you, and perform my good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place. For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the Lord, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you an expected end. Then shall ye call upon me, and ye shall go and pray unto me, and I will hearken unto you. And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart. And I will be found of you, saith the Lord: and I will turn away your captivity, and I will gather you from all the nations, and from all the places whither I have driven you, saith the Lord; and I will bring you again into the place whence I caused you to be carried away captive. Because ye have said, The Lord hath raised us up prophets in Babylon; Know that thus saith the Lord of the king that sitteth upon the throne of David, and of all the people that dwelleth in this city, and of your brethren that are not gone forth with you into captivity; Thus saith the Lord of hosts; Behold, I will send upon them the sword, the famine, and the pestilence, and will make them like vile figs, that cannot be eaten, they are so evil. And I will persecute them with the sword, with the famine, and with the pestilence, and will deliver them to be removed to all the kingdoms of the earth, to be a curse, and an astonishment, and an hissing, and a reproach, among all the nations whither I have driven them: Because they have not hearkened to my words, saith the Lord, which I sent unto them by my servants the prophets, rising up early and sending them; b ut ye (Jews) would not hear, saith the Lord." (Jeremiah 29:8-19) Again we have two groups presented here. Part of the nation of Judah had gone into captivity already at Babylon, part of the nation of Judah remained still, in and around Jerusalem, and then of course they had the Jews among them in Jerusalem. Just as the Jews congregate in our big cities, New York, Los Angeles, Washington, and that sort of thing today, so did they in that day. Here we are presented with clear prophecies by Jeremiah, that even those not yet deported to Babylon were going to be, and yet somehow they wouldn't believe. There had been the one Babylonian conquest and deportation, and they wouldn't believe that there was coming another. Now why? Well, they wouldn't hear Jeremiah for several reasons. One of course is the natural dislike of bad news by evil men, and second was the supposed contradiction of Jeremiah by Ezekiel. Now Jeremiah had warned that this last king of Judah, Zedekiah, was going to be captured and taken to Babylon. Jeremiah 34:2-5, says: "Thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel; Go and speak to Zedekiah king of Judah, and tell him, Thus saith the Lord; Behold, I will give this city into the hand of the king of Babylon, and he shall burn it with fire: And thou shalt not escape out of his hand, but shalt surely be taken, and delivered into his hand; and thine eyes shall behold the eyes of the king of Babylon, and he shall speak with thee mouth to mouth, and thou shalt go to Babylon. Yet hear the word of the Lord, O Zedekiah king of Judah; Thus saith the Lord of thee, Thou shalt not die by the sword: But thou shalt die in peace: and with the burnings of thy fathers, the former kings which were before thee, so shall they burn odors for thee; and they will lament thee, saying, Ah lord! for I have pronounced the word, saith the Lord." Jeremiah told Zedekiah, he would be captured; he would be taken to Babylon; he would talk face to face with King Nebuchadnezzar, but he wasn't going to be put to death; instead he would die in peace. In Babylon, Ezekiel said to Jerusalem: "Say thou unto them, Thus saith the Lord God; This burden concerneth the prince in Jerusalem, and all the House of Israel that are among them. Say, I am your sign: like as I have done, so shall it be done unto them: they shall remove and go into captivity. And the prince that is among them shall bear upon his shoulder in the twilight, and shall go forth: they shall dig through the wall to carry out thereby: he shall cover his face, that he see not the ground with his eyes. My net also will I spread upon him, and he shall be taken in my snare: and I will bring him to Babylon to the land of the Chaldeans; yet shall he not see it, though he shall die there. And I will scatter toward every wind all that are about him to help him, and all his bands; and I will draw out the sword after them." (Ezekiel 12:10-14) You know how it is today: you can attend any church of Organized Religion and the preacher will take one verse, or sometimes just a phrase out of one verse, as his subject for his sermon of the day; that is his point of departure from the Bible, not to return to it. So in those days they were doing the same thing. Ezekiel said that Zedekiah should not see Babylon, so they said, "Well, that means he is not going to be deported there, and therefore the rest of us will not be." However, both of these prophecies were fulfilled in great detail. As we see from the following: "In the ninth year of Zedekiah king of Judah, in the tenth month, came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon and all his army against Jerusalem, and they besieged it. And in the eleventh year of Zedekiah, in the fourth month, the ninth day of the month, the city (Jerusalem) was broken up. And all the princes of the king of Babylon came in, and sat in the middle gate...And it came to pass, that when Zedekiah the king of Judah saw them, and all the men of war, then they fled, and went forth out of the city by night, by the way of the king's garden, by the gate betwixt the two walls: and he went out the way of the plain. But the Chaldeans' army pursued after them, and over took Zedekiah in the plains of Jericho: and when they had taken him, they brought him up to Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon to Riblah in the land of Hamath, where he gave judgment upon him. Then the king of Babylon slew the sons of Zedekiah in Riblah before his eyes: also the king of Babylon slew all the nobles of Judah. Moreover he put out Zedekiah's eyes, and bound him with chains, to carry him to Babylon. And the Chaldeans burned the king's house, and the houses of the people, with fire, and brake down the walls of Jerusalem." (Jeremiah 39:1-8) Josephus also records in some detail of the great accuracy of this prophecy. The city was taken about midnight, and Zedekiah with his family and a few retainers fled. The king could not go out any of the regular gates of the city, because these were all guarded by the besieging army. So they escaped out of the one little gate that had been overlooked, and they were probably disguised. But when the pursuers came into sight near Jericho, all those around the king scattered and fled, leaving Zedekiah and his family alone, to await capture. In keeping with the prophecy, Zedekiah was taken to Babylon alive; he was kept there a prisoner until he finally died of natural causes. He was not killed, but he went to Babylon, and he never saw it. So we can clearly see that this is an instance of the extreme accuracy of Bible prophecy. We know that on that second conquest of Jerusalem, not only Zedekiah, but probably most of the survivors were also taken to Babylon. It said there were left only some of the poorest sort of people of the land; which does not mean poor in the financial sense, but poor in the sort of people they were. In other words only the dregs of society remained in Jerusalem. Thus, we have here two kinds of figs: the good figs, and the bad figs. But, how are we going to sort them out? Who were the good figs? Remember Jeremiah 24:5 said they were among the Judahites who were taken into captivity into the land of Babylon, the land of the Chaldeans. We know that substantially the whole remaining nation of Judah was taken into the Babylonian captivity; we know that after the seventy years, when Babylon was conquered by the Medes and Persians (No doubt many of the military and officers were Israelites who had been taken captive by the Assyrians and transported in to the cities of the Medes. "In the ninth year of Hoshea the king of Assyria took Samaria, and carried Israel away into Assyria, and placed them in Halah and in Habor by the river of Gozan, and In The Cities of The Medes." (2 Kings 17:6) This is recorded a second time, for a witness: "And the king of Assyria did carry away Israel unto Assyria, and put them in Halah and in Habor by the river of Gozan, and In The Cities of The Medes." (2 Kings 18:11) We know that a substantial number of the nation of Judah was taken in the Assyrian captivity also. "Now in the fourteenth year of king Hezekiah did Sennacherib king of Assyria come up against all the fenced cities of Judah, and took them." (2 Kings 18:13) Thus the remaining nation of Judah, except for the poor: "Now when all the captains of the forces which were in the fields, even they and their men, heard that the king of Babylon had made Gedaliah the son of Ahikam governor in the land, and had committed unto him men, and women, and children, and of The Poor of The Land, of them that were not carried away captive to Babylon." (Jeremiah 40:7) Then after Babylon was conquered by the Medes and Persians, a remnant returned to Jerusalem, as the books of Ezra and Nehemiah record. Were these the good figs, those who returned to Palestine after the seventy years captivity? It would appear not; there are too many indications against it. God had said: "And I will be found of you, saith the Lord: and I will turn away your captivity, and I will gather you from all the nations, and from all the places whither I have driven you, saith the Lord; and I will bring you again into the place whence I caused you to be carried away captive." (Jeremiah 29:14) But, Babylon was not a lot of nations; it was only one nation and, in general one place, one territorial area. So those who returned with Nehemiah and Ezra had not been scattered; they were only in Babylon. Then Jeremiah, says of those who were the good figs: "For I will set mine eyes upon them for good...and I will plant them, and not pluck them up." (Jeremiah 24:) Now that doesn't fit those who came back to Jerusalem, because they came back for a few centuries of continuous trouble. Jeremiah goes on to say of the good figs: "And I will give them an heart to know me, that I am the Lord: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God: for they shall return unto me with their whole heart." (Jeremiah 27:4) Remember, those who returned to Jerusalem, with the exception of a tiny little minority among them, came back bringing with them the Babylonian Talmud, the "tradition of the elders" as they called it in Jesus Christ's day; they refused to receive Christ; and they refused His message. It is related that: "...He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him." (John 5:23) Again, "And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape. And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not." (John 5:37-38) And, "But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you...if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive." (John 5:42-43) And, "...Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me." (John 6:45) Again, "Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also." (John 8:19) Then, "...it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God: Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying." (John 8:54-55) They had to go to Babylon, and what happened to them there? We know that it was a large nation which was captured, and we know that about 50,000 came back, of whom slightly over 8,000 were not of any tribe of Israel whatsoever. So those who came back from Babylon were only some 34,000. What happened to the rest? Jeremiah himself told us what was going to happen to the rest, the good figs. "The word that the Lord spake against Babylon and against the land of the Chaldeans by Jeremiah the prophet. Declare ye among the nations, and publish, and set up a standard; publish, and conceal not: say, Babylon is taken, Bel is confounded, Merodach is broken in pieces; her idols are confounded, her images are broken in pieces. For out of the north there cometh up a nation against her, which shall make her land desolate, and none shall dwell therein: they shall remove, they shall depart, both man and beast. In those days, and in that time, saith the Lord, the children of Israel shall come, they and the children of Judah together, going and weeping: they shall go, and seek the Lord their God. They Shall Ask The Way to Zion with their faces thitherward, saying, Come, and let us join ourselves to the Lord in a perpetual covenant that shall not be forgotten." (Jeremiah 50:1-5)
Now you hear some people, who profess to know something of the Israel message, quoting this verse as though it were something to happen in the future. But, we must remember that Jeremiah has been talking specifically about the fall of Babylon, and said: "...in Those Days, and in That Time, saith the Lord, the children of Israel shall come." Well, we know of course that the ten-tribed northern kingdom of Israel, together with a considerable portion of the people of Judah and Benjamin, were deported by the Assyrians, and settled in an arc around the southern end of the Caspian Sea, where they became known as the Scythians. In 612 B.C., the nation of the Assyrians was broken up; their capital, Nineveh, was captured and destroyed; and the people that captured and destroyed it were an alliance of three: there were Scythians, in other words, the people of Israel destroying their Assyrian conquerors; and the Medes; and the Babylonians. They had formed that alliance against the Assyrians, and as such the Scythians were a very formidable military people; we always have been a formidable military people, throughout the history of our people. Then, later the Medo-Persian army came down and took Babylon, some of the ancient historians record that the Scythians swooped down into Babylonia, at that time, and gathered up most of the deported Judahites and Benjaminites. They took them back with them; in other words, they were about ready to start their march northward into Europe, and they would not leave the people of Judah and Benjamin behind, so they took their brethren with them. Thus, fulfilling the words of Jeremiah, when he said: "...in Those Days, and in That Time, saith the Lord, the children of Israel shall come, they and the children of Judah (Which would include Benjamin and the half tribe of Levi) Together, going and weeping: they shall go, and seek the Lord their God." In the Aprocrypha it is recorded that Esdras had been given a vision and the angel speaking to him refers to that: "And whereas thou sawest that he gathered another peaceable multitude unto him; those are the ten tribes, which were carried away prisoners out of their own land in the time of Osea the king, whom Salmasasar the king of Assyria led away captive, and he carried them over the waters, and so came they into another land. But they took this counsel among themselves, that they would leave the multitude of the heathen, and go forth Into a Further Country, Where Never Mankind Dwelt, that they might there keep their statutes, which they had never kept in their own land. And they entered into Euphrates by the narrow passages of the river...For through that country There Was A Great Way to Go, namely, of a year and a half: and the same region is called Arsareth. Then dwelt they there until the latter time." (2 Esdras 13:39-46) We know of course they went around the eastern end of the Black Sea. Some of them went through the mountainous region lying between the Caspian and Black Sea, the Caucasus Mountains, and because they came out of the Caucasus Mountains on their march into Europe, you note that many historians have called those people Caucasians; but they never ask, Who were they before they went through the Caucasus Mountains? Some others, of course, went around the easterly side of the Caspian Sea, and after they came to the north end of it, turned west and joined the other migration, and we know that they followed up the Danube Valley, for the major portion of their migration. This Arsareth was a northern tributary of the Danube river in modern Rumania, still bears the name Sareth. Now that is one of the places that they would have passed in their migration, so even the name of it was given. Now remember, of the good figs God had said He would plant them and not pull them down. We can see, even today, how God has prospered our people, the White Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, Scandinavian, Celtic and Kindred nations of Europe. But as to those who claim that heritage, falsely, the Edomite and Khazarian Jews who are occupying Palestine today, look what the first chapter of Malachi says of them: "The burden of the word of the Lord to Israel by Malachi. I have loved you, saith the Lord. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob's brother? saith the Lord: yet I loved Jacob, And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness. Whereas Edom (The Jews) saith, We are impoverished, but we will return and build the desolate places; thus saith the Lord of hosts, They (The Jews) Shall Build (Build up Jerusalem and Palestine), but I will throw down; and they shall call them, The border of wickedness, and, The people against whom the Lord hath indignation for ever." (Malachi 1:1-4) Ezekiel related the following: "Son of man, thy brethren, even thy brethren, the men of thy kindred, and All The House of Israel Wholly, are they unto whom the inhabitants of Jerusalem (The Jews) have said, Get You (Israelites) Far From The Lord: Unto Us (Jews) Is This Land (Palestine and Jerusalem) Given in Possession." (Ezekiel 11:15) He then told our Israel people: "Thus saith the Lord God; Because the enemy (The Jews) hath said against you, Aha, Even The Ancient High Places Are Our's In Possession...Therefore, ye mountains (Nations) of Israel, hear the word of the Lord God...Surely in the fire of my jealousy have I spoken against the residue of the heathen, and against all Idumea (The Jews) Which Have Appointed My Land (Palestine and Jerusalem) Into Their Possession with the Joy of all Their Heart, with Despiteful Minds, to cast it out for a prey." (Ezekiel 36:2-5) Now what about the people of Judah who came back to Jerusalem after the seventy years of the Babylon captivity? Daniel relates: "Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy." (Daniel 9:24) Well, when it came to the murder of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, that certainly was finishing the transgression; and little could be added after that. They came back for an evil destiny in itself, save for a little handful of them. Think about it, there were only about 5,000, or a little more, who were the converts in Christ's own time; and the rest were obviously riff-raff of the basest sort. Now those who came back to Jerusalem certainly didn't go and see Jesus Christ as Jeremiah related: "In those days, and in that time, saith the Lord, the children of Israel shall come, they and the children of Judah together, going and weeping: they shall go, and seek the Lord their God." (Jeremiah 50:4) There were two baskets of figs: one good and one rotten. Today in our land we have a people who claim American citizenship Along with their Israeli passport; they are here in our country, they vote in our elections when it is convenient to them; they claim to be Americans: But are they really? Upon examination, we find it is the same old thing. As Isaiah relates: "...Jerusalem is ruined, and Judah is fallen: because their tongue and their doings are against the Lord, to provoke the eyes of his glory. The shew of their countenance doth witness against them; and they declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not. Woe unto their soul! for they have rewarded evil unto themselves." (Isaiah 3:8-9) There is a long series of Bible prophecies concerning Assyria; not Assyria as it existed in Bible times, but what it was going to do in our own day; and you will find that those prophecies coincide exactly with the prophecies about Russia in the thirty-eighth and thirty-ninth chapters of Ezekiel. We know a lot of the surviving Assyrians fled northeast from their old kingdom into what is today known as southwestern Russia: Georgia and the Ukraine. We know that there was a heavy Jewish population there, and we know of course that the Jews are the complete masters of Russia today. Russia is also the birthplace of the Khazar Jews whose descendants make up about 90-95 percent of the Jewish population of the world today. Thus we can see that the identical prophecies, that the Assyrians were going to do this, and that, the Russians are doing today. But we are getting off track so lets continue. When the Assyrians captured the people of Israel, the ten-tribed northern kingdom and a large portion of the kingdom of Judah, and deported them, they were not about to let them settle down an build for themselves a large number of fortresses; they kept them a nomadic, agricultural, shepherd and cattle raising people. Contemporary history records that these Scythians made a raid clear down into Palestine. In fact, they reached the borders of Egypt before they were turned back, and they left a settlement in the Jordan Valley which was called Scythopolis, which was named after them. But it was against God's plan for them, to return and stay in Palestine, so He allowed the combined forces to push them on up into their eventual European homelands. "Therefore, behold, I will hedge up thy way with thorns, and make a wall, that she (Israel) shall not find her paths (Israel was not to return to Palestine)...she shall follow after her lovers (False gods), but she shall not overtake them; and she shall seek them, but shall not find them (Israel has looked for her false gods for many centuries but God says) Then shall she say, I Will Go and Return to my First Husband: For then was it Better With Me Than Now." (Hosea 2:6-7) The Medes and Persians, while they had received the help of the Scythians in destroying Babylon, they were ungrateful. Every king in those days felt his first order of business was to conquer as many of his enemies as he could, and the Medo-Persian armies turned against the Scythians. One of them was turned back with a frightful defeat and slaughter, but they gathered another one, and went out again against the Scythians, and these were primarily the ones on the western side of the Caspian Sea. These Scythians retreated before them, finally into the Caucasus Mountains, where there is a great pass; which has from that time until our own day, has borne the name, The Pass of Israel. The Jewish Communist Government in Russia may have changed the name, since they came into power, but, until then at least, it was known as The Pass of Israel; and it is the route of the Georgian Military road. This mountain pass came to a point where the mountains on both sides were so steep, that fighting along that surface was impossible. There is just a narrow, little bit of level ground at the edge of a river, because the river covered most of the bottom of this gorge, and here and there are places where great rocks barred the passageway and a few men could have defended it against an army of a million men, because only three or four at a time could pass. It was there the army of Darius finally gave up and turned back, as further pursuit was hopeless; and the place was named the Dariel Gorge, and has also borne that name down through the centuries to our present time. Remember, God was going to gather the good figs out of the many nations where He had scattered them, Well, now we know what happened to these Scythians: we know that while they were still in Scythia, two of the tribes were even then known as the Angles and the Saxons. We know the name of many of the others. They were called Getae, for a period of time. As time passed it became slurred and changed until finally became Goth. The Angles and Saxons historians have no difficulty in tracing, because the tribes of the Jutes, Angles, and Saxons settled in Northwestern Germany, along the border of the country, now known as Denmark. By the time the Goths were moving up through the Danube Valley, they were starting to be pushed westward by the great flood of mounted nomad warriors from Asia, under Attila the Hun. First, the Visigoths turned west; they were coming into the Roman empire then, and the Romans sent out an army which the Visigoths almost exterminated. So, the Romans gave them some land on the western side of the Danube river, to settle on, provided they would stay there. Where they were supposed to be peaceful settlers and give up their arms, and so; of course, as they did that, the Romans started oppressing them, and besides, there was also pressure coming from the east. This disarming of our Race is even now being attempted today, and if successful, it will end with the same result, our people becoming oppressed by the enemy. Who we believe to be the same enemies of ancient times; The Jews. So the Visigoths went on the march again. They went around the north end of the Adriatic Sea, then down into Northern Italy. Where in 408 A.D., they were threatening to capture the city of Rome. However, by that time, Rome had gone the way America is beginning to go at the present time. In the days of Rome's greatness, it was the Roman citizens themselves who made up the Roman Army, a well trained powerful army. But by now the Romans had grown soft, off the plunder of the other nations, and the Romans just couldn't be bothered with military service. So they were hiring mercenary soldiers to defend them, soldiers who fought, not because it was their country or the patriotic thing to do, but just because they were getting paid wages for it. Just as the Negroes are doing today. For the most part, they are not loyal to America, they are just serving in the army because it is easy and the pay is good. Remember the present furor, "We should not have a draft anymore, just have a mercenary professional army." The Romans saw they could not withstand this force of the Visigoths; so they bought them off, paying a very heavy ransom, tribute, and in that same year, 408 A.D., they pulled the last of the Roman legions out of Britain and brought them back to Rome in an effort to try and defend the city. In 410 A.D., the Visigoths resumed their attack upon Rome; captured it, and looted it. In fact, they had captured and plundered the whole northern half of Italy. Soon thereafter, in 412 A.D., the Visgoths, finding nothing left worth taking, pulled out. They then marched through Southern France, where a few of them settled; but the bulk crossed the Pyrenees and settled in Spain. And from the time they got there, somewhere between 415 and 420 A.D., they were the dominant ruling people in Spain until the Moorish conquest in 711 A.D. When the Moors came into Spain, attacking from the south, the Visgoths fought a rearguard battle as far as they could, but they were driven up into Northern Spain, and there today you will find tow completely different racial types in Spain. A dark Latin type, and a blue-eyed blond type, who are the pure descendants of the old Visigoths. About fifty years after the Visigoths came through, the other Gothic tribe, the Ostrogoths, came along the same route. Part of these Ostrogoths had gone up the Danube River, clear up to the shores of the Baltic Sea where they had settled in what became known as East Prussia, and is now under communist rule. But the rest of the Ostrogoths, or Eastern Goths, came down into Italy, again captured and looted Rome, and they set themselves up a Gothic Kingdom in Northern Italy that lasted, as an independent kingdom, about twenty-five years. They were then overthrown politically, but their people remained there, and it can be seen two distinctly different racial stocks. In the extreme southern part of Italy and in Sicily you have one type; in Northern Italy there is another type who are obviously of our own racial stock. They are the descendants of the Ostrogoths. Portions of them got into Austria and up into Switzerland, and again even in Switzerland there is not a pure race, but different racial types, part of whom are our people. Not all of the Ostrogoths went all the way up into the Baltic regions; some of them settled in the Danube Valley, and you will find what are obviously our Israel people in Hungary and in Czechoslovakia; not a hundred percent, because that area has been a battle ground for the invasion of many different people who have left some of their racial stock behind. But you will find there, quite a number who are obviously our people; Germany of course in its entirety, and the Scandinavian countries. Then, from the Jutes, Angles and Saxons (Germans), came the settlement of the British Isles after the withdrawal of the Roman legions. Some of these people, Armstrong and a few others, will try to tell you that England is going to have to be overthrown, as part of the collapse of the old Roman Empire, simply do not know their history. There wasn't an Englishman in England at the time when the Romans were there. English history, as such, begins with the landing of the Jutes, Angles and Saxons, and by that time the Roman army had been gone for nearly a century. So, an Englishman is, quite simply, a German who went for a boat ride, and a German is an Englishman who stayed home; and yet we let the Jews promote constant warfare between them. We must remember that God spoke in these passages we presented before, about the evil that had existed in the lands of Israel and Judah, provoking Him; and it did, because they had let themselves be corrupted by the Jews among them, exactly as we are today allowing ourselves to be corrupted by the Jews among us. Therefore, in punishment, we are having to go through disaster after disaster, just the same as those which fell upon our ancestors 2,500 years ago. Therefore, in fulfillment of the prophecies of Jeremiah, our people were scattered among a number of nations. They fulfill in all respects the description of the good figs; and the others: well, some were left behind, even after the second Babylonian conquest and deportation; those went down into Egypt, taking the prophet Jeremiah with them. And, as Jeremiah told them, they weren't going to escape from the Babylonians by going to Egypt, because they would be under Babylonian rule even there, and would be slaughtered. History does record that the Babylonians conquered Egypt shortly after that.
Jeremiah, of course, did not stay there for that; he had been warned of what was coming, and left with the two princesses, the daughters of Zedekiah, and finally landing in Ireland with one of them; the other one had married a Milesian King in Spain. Those who remained in Palestine, those who went to Egypt, and most of those that came back to Palestine, were the bad figs; and the rest, who went on to become the Israelites of today, were the good figs. Thus we can clearly see: Whenever God makes a prophecy, He carries it out in complete detail, exactly as He said it. After observing that Jeremiah devotes two entire chapters to making clear this vital distinction between Israel and Judah, How can anyone fancy that the Jews who are a very small fraction of mixed breeds of the Tribe of Judah, can possibly take the place of Israel? Another group that make up part of the English today, of course, are the Normans who came in under William the Conqueror in 1066 A.D., and those were not Latin French at all. History records that the Norse and Danish Vikings were a scourge of most of the known world for several centuries, at least along the Coast lands of Europe. Viking ships sailed up the Tiber to attack the city of Rome. Of course Rome was so well fortified, and the Vikings did not have the equipment or the training for conducting a long siege, so they could not capture it. But they did capture the island of Sicily and there was a Norman kingdom there for several generations. The Vikings harassed the coasts of France continually, and on three different occasions Vikings captured and looted the city of Paris. And finally one of the French Kings made a deal with one of the Viking Chieftains: He would give him the English Channel coastal province of Normandy, if the Vikings would settle there with their people, settle it thoroughly, and then act as a buffer against any further attacks; the agreement was made. Thus the people of Normandy, who came in with William the Conqueror were Norse Vikings. However, before that time, the Vikings had likewise harassed the British Isles, including Ireland. They established settlements on the coasts of England, in addition to conducting a great deal of piratical raiding, and a large number of them settled in Ireland. The early Irish histories record that one could hardly find a village in Ireland that didn't have some of these Norse Vikings among them. Therefore, in fulfillment of the prophecies of Jeremiah, our people were scattered among a number of nations. They fulfill in all respects the description of the good figs; and the others: well, some were left behind, even after the second Babylonian conquest and deportation; those went down into Egypt, taking the prophet Jeremiah with them. And, as Jeremiah told them, they weren't going to escape from the Babylonians by going to Egypt, because they would be under Babylonian rule even there, and would be slaughtered. History does record that the Babylonians conquered Egypt shortly after that. Jeremiah, of course, did not stay there for that; he had been warned of what was coming, and left with the two princesses, the daughters of Zedekiah, and finally landing in Ireland with one of them; the other one had married a Milesian King in Spain. Those who remained in Palestine, those who went to Egypt, and most of those that came back to Palestine, were the bad figs; and the rest, who went on to become the Israelites of today, were the good figs. Thus we can clearly see: Whenever God makes a prophecy, He carries it out in complete detail, exactly as He said it. Only The Inhabitants of Jerusalem Left This event occurred early in the reign of Sennacherib, who came to the Assyrian throne in 705 B.C. It is evident that he carried away all the people of the Kingdom of Judah except those who were shut up within the walls of Jerusalem. It was also, about this time that the Jews who were already in control of Jerusalem told the True Israelites to go far from them. "Son of man, thy brethren, even thy brethren, the men of thy kindred, and All the House of Israel Wholly are they unto whom The Inhabitants of Jerusalem have said, Get you far from the Lord (According to #1168 of Strong's Exhaustive Concordance the word lord here should be Baal, in other words the Jews god is Baal not Almighty God!): Unto us is this land (Here they, the Jews are already claiming Jerusalem and Palestine as theirs. Just as they do in modern times) given in possession." (Ezekiel 11:15) Many will disagree with this statement because they think that the inhabitants of Jerusalem consisted of people from the Tribe of Judah. This is not true. The people of Judah never consisted of more than a mere percentage of the population of Jerusalem. The following Scriptures well bear this out: "As for the Jebusites the Inhabitants of Jerusalem, the children of Judah could not drive them out: But the Jebusites Dwell with the Children of Judah at Jerusalem unto this day." (Joshua 15:63); "Moreover he made high places in the mountains of Judah, and caused the Inhabitants of Jerusalem to commit fornication, and compelled Judah thereto." (2 Chronicles 21:11); "Therefore thus saith the Lord God; As the vine tree among the trees of the forest, Which I have given to the Fire for fuel, So will I give the Inhabitants of Jerusalem." (Ezekiel 15:6) Fugitives Taken To Babylon "In 581 B.C. the few remaining Jews in Palestine allied themselves with the Moabites and made a last wild stand for independence. A final defeat followed by a final exile brought them to irretrievable ruin." (Passing Empires, by Maspero) How many were exiled at this time and how many exiled from Egypt we do not know. Note here that there were two groups of Jews in Egypt at the time Nebuchadnezzar conquered that country; those who dwelt in Egypt prior to the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, those who fled to Egypt after the murder of Geheliah. It was the descendants of these captives from Egypt and of the 4600 deported from Jerusalem, who returned from Babylon and established themselves as the Jewish Nation in Palestine. These did not include Jeremiah and the daughters of Zedekiah. Jews Increase In Babylon If the "residue" removed to Babylon numbered 15,000 as one writer estimates, they could have increased easily during their captivity, to the number indicated by Ezra (about 50,000). They were urged to marry and raise large families (Jeremiah 29:5-6); and they added further to their number by intermarriage with the Babylonians. The Jews were severely criticized for this practice. (Ezra 9:1-2, 10:10, 13:14 Nehemiah 13:23-26) How much of an alien admixture the Jews received from this source is not known, but it must have been considerable judging by the drastic action taken in the matter by Ezra and Nehemiah. "In those days also saw I Jews...and I contended with them, and cursed them (the Jews), and Smote Certain of them, and plucked off their hair, and made them swear by God..." (Nehemiah 13:23-25) Jews Who Returned To Jerusalem In Ezra 2:64-65, we are told that 42,460 of the congregation and 7,337 servants returned from Babylon; later arrivals brought the total to about 55,000. The servants were, of course, of alien or doubtful ancestry, otherwise they would have been numbered with the congregation. No doubt these servants were eventually absorbed and thus the Jews, in this manner alone, received an alien admixture of about one-seventh. The Jews intermarried with the Babylonians, Syrians and other races also, as previously pointed out, and such mixture with alien races seems have been sufficient to change the physiognomy indicated in Isaiah 3:9. Effects Of Intermarriage It should be noted that it is a biological virtue to keep the race pure. The Israelites (our forefathers) were instructed, time and again, not to mix with other races. For God knows that only a race of mongrels and a less intelligent, easily controlled progeny is produced. That is why the Jews are continually trying to deceive the White Race into marriage with those of other races, so that they will be more easily controlled. Historians and Public Misled Today it is quite generally held that the ten tribes were "lost" by being absorbed by other races. The popular belief seems to be that Benjamin, part of Levi, the Children of Israel who dwelt in the fenced cities of Judah, and those who joined Asa and Rehoboam for religious reasons, have long since amalgamated with the tribes of Judah, now all Israel is represented in the present day Jew. However, this is in error for Benjamin was told by God to go into the Assyrian captivity with the ten tribes of Israel. "O ye children of Benjamin, gather yourselves to flee out of the midst of Jerusalem..." (Jeremiah 6:1) Jeremiah was not addressing the people of his time alone but prophetically he set forth the inevitability of judgment whenever apostasy rears its head. In condemning Judah of his day, Jeremiah also condemned Judah of our Lord's time, for he was looking toward the future and saw spoiler after spoiler wasting and desolating Palestine until at length, in the fullness of time, the whole country would become desolate. The first general ruin was wrought by the armies of Babylon; the final one by the armies of the Romans. Jeremiah's condemnation is therefore much greater in scope than would confine it to his generation alone. It did condemn that generation but there was also the prophetic condemnation applicable to later generations which would become as corrupt and ungodly. It is because the messages of the prophets were addressed to more than their own people as the seers looked down the stream of time to the end of days, that their writings are recorded in the Bible as a warning to all the Israel people everywhere of the results of unrighteousness. This is not to be taken as proof their statements have no chronological timing. To do so is to entirely overlook the significance of Jeremiah's purpose when he paused in the midst of denouncing Judah for her sins to issue a warning to Benjamin. That tribe was informed of a time to come when a repetition of the evils of the prophet's day would again be in evidence in Judea. When that day came Benjamin was to give heed to the admonishment to flee Jerusalem and Judea. The fact that Jeremiah's warning to Benjamin was to be heeded by that tribe at a specified time centuries later, furnishes clear evidence of the reliability of the prophetic word. It was in our Lord's day that this tribe known then as Galileans, became the first Christians when they accepted the Messiahship of Jesus Christ. These Benjaminite Galileans heeded the warning and fled Judea just before the destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman armies under Titus in 70 A.D. The full significance of this warning becomes apparent when it is realized that Jeremiah turned from the immediate task of condemning the rulers and people of Judea to give Benjamin the sign which, if obeyed, would preserve them to carry out their task as "light bearers." Jesus Christ admonished His disciples to flee when they should see armies encompass the city of Jerusalem. (Luke 21:20-22) He did not refer to Jeremiah's admonition; instead, he was calling His disciples' attention to Daniel's prophecy. (Matthew 24:15) If he had cited Jeremiah, the identification of Benjamin and their mission as "light bearers" would have been made known, involving all that this would imply concerning the identification of Israel, long before God intended it should be recognized by either the House of Israel or the Christian world. The knowledge of Israel's identity was not to become generally known until the time of the end. Not understanding the Scriptures is the reason why the names Israel, Judah and Jew are held to be synonymous, Although no basis for such a belief is to be found in the Scriptures. Compilers of Encyclopedias and Dictionaries seem naively unaware of the fact that these names denote distinct groups among the descendants of Jacob/Israel. Once the Error is accepted that the terms Israel and Jew are synonymous, the flood-gates of error are wide open and there is nothing to hinder prophecies intended for Israel being applied to the Jews, even though the Holy Word says Plainly "Israel." Sennacherib's Raid Those who hold to this idea should remember that Sennacherib carried away all the people of the Kingdom of Judah except those who were shut up in the city of Jerusalem. Most of these captives were Judahites but among them were Benjaminites, Levites and elements of the other tribes. These captives were carried away one hundred years before the Babylonian captivity and were "lost" in the same manner as the ten tribes were supposed to have been lost. It matters little whether these Children of Israel, who dwelt in the cities of Judah were few are many in number; They simply could not have been any part of the ancestry of the Jewish which came into existence before Christ. The Evil Figs The basket of evil figs which were so bad they couldn't be eaten represented Zedekiah, King of Judah, and his princes. It will be seen that later on in the story that there was a discrimination among the members of Zedekiah's family; not all of them went into the basket of bad figs and came under the subsequent curse. Selection from among them was made when the King's daughters were set apart to continue the reigning line of kings upon the throne of David. Among the people whom Nebuchadnezzar left in the land were those numbered with the bad figs, together with the colony which had fled to Egypt to escape the King of Babylon and were dwelling there. Of them the Lord said: "And I will deliver them to be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth for their hurt, to be a reproach and a proverb, a taunt and a curse, in all places whither I shall drive them. And I will send the sword, the famine, and the pestilence, among them, till they be consumed from off the land that I gave unto them and to their fathers." (Jeremiah 24:9-10) It is certain that a remnant of the survivors of both groups of those carried away captive to Babylon returned to Judea and Jerusalem at the end of the 70 years. Some of that remnant were to be blessed. The family of Coniah of the House of David was so blessed in the birth of the Messiah, Jesus Christ. A remnant from the tribe of Benjamin also returned and became the Galileans who constituted most of the followers of Christ who accepted Christianity in the first century. But there also returned a remnant of those taken captive with Zedekiah whose descendants were the Jews of our Lord's day. Here are the bad figs of whom Jesus said: "If God were your Father, ye would love me...Ye (the Jews) are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him." (John 8:42-44) Can anyone say that in the subsequent history of the Jews, following their rejection and crucifixion of Jesus Christ, the curse pronounced upon the basket of bad figs has not been fulfilled to the letter upon this people? They have become a byword, a taunt and a proverb in all countries, "tossed to and fro" among the nations, and have been cursed and harassed as predicted. They continue even now under this condemnation in their continued rejection of Christ. Following the teachings of the Talmud, which Jesus described as the traditions of men, and which He condemned (Mark 7:7-9), this people have been a seed of evil in all nations because they have refused to accept Jesus Christ as the Messiah and keep His Commandments. Never has the history of any people shown a more noticeably accurate and literal fulfillment of published curses upon them than the history of the Jewish race, exemplified in the centuries of suffering and persecutions which they have had to endure. Nor are these days ended, for in their continued refusal to acknowledge the Messiahship of Christ they plan to take the Kingdom by force and occupy the land of Israel by violence. Their present attitude and acts will only increase and intensify their afflictions. The suffering of the Jew is in itself irrefutable evidence of the truth of prophecy, for the curse uttered by Jeremiah upon them and their children, and confirmed by the generation of our Lord's day who said, "His blood be on us, and on our children," (Matthew 27:25) is being intensified a thousand-fold in these latter days. It is this group that formed the Nucleus of the Jewish Nation. (Jeremiah 24:8) Compare the former verses of Scripture with those pertaining to Cain and his descendants. "And now art thou Cursed from the Earth...A Fugitive and a Vagabond shalt thou be in the Earth." (Genesis 4:11-12) Jews Are Not Judah We have traced the origin of the Jewish nation to a minor fraction of the Tribe of Judah, some elements of other Israel Tribes, and a goodly portion of alien admixture. This is residue, which developed into the Jewish Nation, cannot rightly be said to be the Tribe of Judah, any more than a fragment of a broken plate can be called the plate. While it is True "Some" of the Jews came partly from Judah, but they do not constitute the Tribe of Judah and cannot rightfully claim the prophecies for that Tribe or for any other Israel Tribe. It is evident that the writer of Acts thought of the Jews as distant from the Tribe of Judah. (Acts 26:7) This is made even more clear in James, where we find that James addressed his epistle to the "twelve tribes scattered abroad." The Jews were not scattered at the time James wrote this Epistle, but the twelve tribes, including Judah, were scattered. Thus the Scriptures do not recognize the Jews as Israelites!
Charter For The "Jewish Nation" The ninth chapter of Daniel contains the charter for the Jewish Nation: A nation destined to endure for seventy prophetic weeks; on a scale of a day for a year, or 490 years. (Ezekiel 4:6) This nation was chosen of God to supply the background and surroundings for the coming of the Messiah. (Daniel 9:24-27) When those purposes were accomplished, the Jews rejected Christ as their Savior when they cried, "Crucify Him, Crucify Him. His blood be on us and on our children." (Matthew 27:25) They rejected Christ as King, also, by declaring, "We have no king but Caesar." (John 19:15) The legitimate mission of the Jewish nation thus ended, and by their own actions they terminated their national charter even as Christ had previously told them: "The Kingdom of God shall be taken from you..." (Matthew 21:43) Note in this connection the marginal rendering of one in Daniel 9:16: "The Jews they shall be no more His People." The Bible commentator did not understand that The Jews, themselves, Were "never" God's People, only their forefathers who were Israelites before the intermarriage between them and the other races. The dispersion of the Jews begin when the Romans captured Jerusalem in 70 A.D. The dispersions and judgments pronounced upon the "residue" (Jews) in Jerusalem. (Jeremiah 24:8-10) have continued down through the centuries and the end is not yet. Ezekiel described the Jews in the following way: "Again the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, Son of man, cause Jerusalem to know her abominations, And say, Thus saith the Lord God unto Jerusalem; Thy Birth and Thy Nativity is of the Land of Canaan; thy father was an Amorite, and thy mother an Hittite...Thou hast slain my Children, and Delivered them to cause them to pass through the Fire for Them?...Thus saith the Lord God; Because thy filthiness was poured out, and thy nakedness discovered through thy whoredoms with thy lovers, and with all the idols of thy abominations, and by the blood of thy children, which thou didst give unto them; Behold, therefore I will gather all thy lovers, with whom thou hast taken pleasure, and all them that thou hast loved, with all them that thou has hated; I will even gather them round about against thee, and will discover thy nakedness unto them, that they may see all thy nakedness. And I will judge thee, as women that break wedlock and shed blood are judged; and I will give thee blood in fury and jealousy. And I will also give thee into their hand, and they shall throw down thine eminent place, and shall break down thy high places: They shall strip thee also of thy clothes, and shall take thy fair jewels, and leave thee naked and bare. They shall also bring up a company against thee, and they shall stone thee with stones, and thrust thee through with their swords. And they shall burn thine houses with fire, and execute judgments upon thee in the sight of many women: and I will cause thee to cease from playing the harlot, and thou also shalt give no hire any more." ( Ezekiel 16. Compare this with Revelations and the great whore Mystery Babylon) The Jews Were Never Lost NOR HAD THEIR NAME CHANGED Most people consider the Tribes of Israel "lost." Which is indeed true and it is also true, that the Tribes of Benjamin and Judah are also "lost." For ALL the Tribes of Jacob/Israel were to "lose" their identity. "And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying...They Shall Put My Name Upon The Children of Israel (Not on the Jews, but upon the Children of Israel)..." (Numbers 6:22, 27); "...And Thou Shalt Be Called By A New Name, which the mouth of the Lord shall name." (Isaiah 62:2); "...And Call His (God's) Servants (Israel) By Another Name." (Isaiah 65:15) However, The Jews Are Not Lost; They Have Never Changed Their Name; and Have Never Been Lost: For the World Has Never Been Permitted to Forget Them!!! They are parasites; Indeed they are like a cancer which has been slowly eating away at the Body of Christ: The Church, and the Children of Israel, the Anglo-Saxon, Germanic and Kindred people. To write a detailed history of the Anglo-Saxons would be to write of the blessings to all mankind. For God promised: "In Thee Shall All the Families of the Earth be Blessed." (Genesis 12:3) To write a detailed history of The Jews Would Be to write of wars, treason, intrigue, murder, the shedding of righteous blood and A Curse To All The Families of the Earth. for it is written: "I will deliver them (Jews) to be removed into all the kingdoms (nations) of the earth for their hurt, To be a Reproach and a proverb, a taunt and a Curse, in all places whither I shall drive them." (Jeremiah 24:9); "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!...Ye serpents, ye generation (Race) of vipers, How can ye Escape the Damnation of Hell? Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge In Your Synagogues (only the Jews have Synagogues), and persecute them from city to city: That upon you (Jews) May Come All the Righteous Blood shed upon the Earth, From the Blood of Righteous Abel (and who slew Abel, Cain, and Satan was Cain's father)." (Genesis 3:15) Therefore, Jesus is saying in effect: "You Jews are (Satan's Children)..." (Matthew 23:29-35); "And in Her (Mystery Babylon, Judaism, the Jews) Was Found The Blood of Prophets, and of Saints, and of all that were slain upon the Earth." (Revelation 18:24) Benjamin Franklin and John Crysostom Warned America About Their Enemies "The wickedness of the Jews consists, not in their conduct but in their Jewishness. The Jews are men possessed by an evil spirit and are habitual murderers and destroyers. We should not even salute them (speak to them or even acknowledge them), or have the slightest converse with them." (St. John Chrysostom, by W.R. Stephens p 133) Benjamin Franklin told our Forefathers: "In whatever country Jews have settled in any great numbers, they have lowered its moral tone; depreciated its commercial integrity; have segregated themselves and have not been assimilated; Have sneered at and tried to undermine the Christian Religion upon which that nation is founded by objecting to its restrictions; have built up a state within a state; and when opposed have tried to strangle that country to death financially, as in the case of Spain and Portugal. For over 1700 years the Jews have been bewailing their sad fate in that they have been exiled from their homeland, they call Palestine. But, Gentlemen, Did the World today give it to them in Fee Simple, they would at once find some cogent Reason for not returning. Why? Because they are Vampires, and Vampires do not live on Vampires. They cannot live only among themselves. They must subsist on Christians and other people not of their race. If you do not exclude them from these United States, in this Constitution in less than 200 years they will have swarmed in such great numbers that they will dominate and devour the land, and change our form of government (which they have done; they have changed it from a Republic to a Democracy), for which we Americans have shed our blood, given our lives, our substance and jeopardized our liberty. If you do not exclude them, in less than 200 years our Descendants will be working in the Fields to furnish them sustenance, while they will be in the counting houses rubbing their hands. I warn you, Gentlemen, if you do not exclude the Jews for all time, your children will curse you in your graves. Jews, Gentlemen, are Asiatics; let them be born where they will, or how many generations they are away from Asia, they will never be otherwise. Their ideas do not conform to an American's, and will not even though they live among us ten generations. A Leopard cannot change its spots. Jews are Asiatics, they are a menace to this country if permitted entrance and should be excluded by this Constitution." (Benjamin Franklin, who was one of the six founding fathers designated to draw up The Declaration of Independence. He spoke before the Constitutional Congress in May 1787, and asked that Jews be barred from immigrating to America. The above are his exact words as quoted from the diary of General Charles Pickney of Charleston, S.C.) God says in the Scriptures concerning the Jews: "Why boastest thou thyself in mischief...Thy tongue deviseth mischiefs...working deceitfully. Thou lovest evil more than good; and lying rather than to speak righteousness. Thou lovest all devouring words...God shall likewise destroy thee for ever..." (Psalms 52:1-5); "For a voice declareth from...Mount Ephraim...behold, publish against Jerusalem...Thy way and thy doings have procured these things unto thee; this is thy wickedness...Though thou clothest thyself with crimson, though thou deckest thee with ornaments of gold, though thou rentest thy face with painting, in vain shalt thou make thyself fair; Thy Lovers (the Communist countries) Will Despise Thee, They Will Seek Thy Life." (Jeremiah 4:15-16, 18, 30) Troubled Times For The Jewish People Immediately after their return from Babylon, the Jews had "troublous" times while building the Temple and walls about Jerusalem. Their condition was tolerable while they remained under the rather mild rule of Medio-Persia; but after the fall o f that Empire, the Jews were almost continually subject to persecution. Their condition became rather trying after the death of Alexander the Great, and was particularly bad after the battle of Ipsus (301 B.C.), when the Ptolemys became firmly established in Egypt, and when a few years later the Selucids became the masters of Syria: These powers becoming respectively the "King of the South" and the "King of the North" as mentioned in Daniel. These two nations were at war with each other most of the time, and Palestine, a strip of land bound on the West by the Mediterranean and on the East by the Jordan River and desert beyond, was a natural highway over which the contending forces of Egypt and Syria armies, the Jews having to exist under ever changing rulership. Antiochus The Worst Oppressor The worst period for the Jews came during the rule of Antiochus Epiphanes (175-164 B.C.). He took Jerusalem, slew 40,000 people and plundered the Temple. And as a crowning insult to the Jews, Antiochus had a sow butchered in the "Holy of Holies" and its blood sprinkled on the sacred things in the Temple (Many believe in error that this was the abomination of desolation as spoken of by Daniel). Antiochus sought to Helenize the Jews, with no little success, and was aided in that effort by some of the Jews themselves. Evidently he planned a totalitarianism where all the people in his realm should adhere to a uniform religious practice dictated by him, with death the fate of the non-conformists. Jews Come Under Roman Rule This brought on the Macabee wars which in turn brought the Jews a short-lived independence; but the successors of the Macabees soon promoted wars of their own and the fighting continued. At this time the Roman Empire was rapidly extending its rule; Syria became a Roman Province in 64 B.C. while Palestine and Egypt came under Roman rule soon thereafter at the request of the Jewish Pharisees. It is difficult to state at what time the Pharisees, as a party, arose. Josephus first mentions them in connection with Johathan, the successor of Judas Macabeus. (Ant. xiii) Under John Hyrcanus (135-105 B.C.) they appear as a powerful party opposing the Sadducean proclivities of the king, who had formerly been a disciple of theirs, through the story as told by Josephus is unhistorical. (Ant. xiii Jubilees, Book of, and Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs) The Hasmonean dynasty, with its worldly ambitions and aspirations, met with little support from the Pharisees, whose aim was the maintenance of a religious spirit in accordance with their interpretation of the Law. Under his widow, Salome Alexandra (78 - 69 B.C.), the Pharisees, led by Simeon ben Shetah, came to power; they obtained seats in the Sanhedrin, and that time was afterward regarded as the golden age, full of the blessing of heaven. But the bloody vengeance they took upon the Sadducees led to a terrible reaction, and under Aristobulus (69-63 B.C.) the Sadducees regained their power. (Ant. xiii) Amidst the bitter struggle which ensued, The Pharisees Appeared Before Pompey (Anglicized name of Gaseus Pompeius Magnus Imagnas), 106-48 B.C. Roman general and statesman; defeated by Julius Caesar) Asking him to interfere (Bring Palestine under Roman rule) and restore the old priesthood (which would destroy their opposition) while abolishing the royalty of the Hasmoneans altogether. (Ant. xiv) The defilement of the Temple by Pompey was regarded by the Pharisees as a divine punishment of Sadducean misrule. After the national independence had been lost, the Pharisees gained in influence while the star of the Sadducees waned. (The Jewish Encyclopedia, p. 666) Priesthood The Jews have never had a Priesthood that officiated at an altar. The Jews do not believe in the Altar!!! Only Christian Israel has consistently walked forward with a Priesthood throughout all the centuries of time since she was formed into a Nation and a Church at Mount Sinai in B.C. 1491 (Think about it America was declared discovered in A.D. 1492 but the voyage started in 1491!!!) No other people in the world have maintained a Priesthood except in the White Christian Caucasian Nations of the earth! This is a Certain Sign, an absolute footprint, that points to the identification of the Modern Anglo-Saxon Nations as being the Israelites of the Bible. Nothing else makes any sense whatsoever. American Christians Do Not Seek The Truth However, Christians of today will not search out the truth for themselves, instead they listen to the Prostitute "Ministers" who are owned body and soul by the Enemies of Christ; Satan's Children and Present Themselves as the "Chosen People of God." A Great Conspiracy What is the actual objective of the Zionists? It is certainly not benevolent and peaceful for their utterances and actions prove otherwise. What is their goal? The Scriptures are clear concerning a diabolical conspiracy to destroy the way of peace and enslave mankind. This entire program of evil would have been clearly recognized by Christian men and women long ago but for the skillfully prepared, deceptive teachings of the Clergy of Organized Religion, the Prostitutes of Zionism, as are the TV Clergy of today, who had everything to gain and so have falsified the facts regarding the identity of the race of the Bible and assigned to the Jews the promises and blessings which belong to the House of Israel. The result has been to give the Jew an entirely false position of supposed pre-eminence in the light of the prophetic word which actually he will never be able to occupy. The so-called Theologians have completely failed to examine the evidence to see whether the Jews are really entitled to the position the modern Organized Religions has assigned to them. The assumption that the Jews are all of Israel today has closed much of the Bible to Christian understanding. Furthermore, it has had far-reaching results in blinding men to the meaning of current world developments and it has materially assisted those who are endeavoring to acquire world rulership by furthering their subversive activities. This Christian leniency in regard to Jewish aspirations have been based upon the expectation that the Jews are to eventually come into world rulership. Thus, the Zionists, unsupported by any Scriptural evidence whatever to substantiate their claims, are moving toward the consummation of their plans for world rulership. And in so doing they are making world revolution and war inevitable which will climax in a reign of violence and bloodshed bringing the present age to its close. The Pity of it all, is. The Christian World is Responsible for much of this Planned Chaos, at least to the extent that they have extolled the Jews as God's People who are chosen to rule the world. Actually, the Zionists are seducing the nations of the world and they, The Jews, have deceived Christian People everywhere into believing, falsely, they are the Israel of God so that no active protest is made while they boldly pursue their aim to gain World Control. The fallacy of assigning to the Jews the prophecies and blessings pronounced upon the House of Israel is not in conformity with the great prophecies of the restoration of the House of Israel. The Zionists, however, are fulfilling ominous prophecies which foreshadow the coming of evil, not the coming of peace. Their move toward Palestine was a harbinger that the Great and Terrible Day of the Lord is very near.
Now let us continue. "And when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen (to the people who ruled over the vineyard), that they might receive the fruits of it. And the husbandmen took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another. Again, he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise (remember from the Old and the New Testament how when God sent prophets unto Israel, the leaders, or rulers would beat or kill them). But last of all he sent unto them his son (in other words God Almighty sent His Son the Lord Jesus Christ unto them, those who were ruling over a portion of Israel), saying, They will reverence my son. But when the husbandmen (the rulers, Herod, the Pharisees, Sadducees, the Jews) saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir (the Future King of Israel); come, let us (the rulers; the Jews) kill him, and let us (the Jews) seize on his inheritance (Notice, it was the husbandmen, the Jews, who were saying let us kill him (Jesus) and seize His inheritance. The vineyard (Israel) which was Already God's inheritance; So it is obvious that the Jews were attempting to replace Israel with themselves. Also Notice Jesus was not accusing the vineyard (Israel) of killing Him, but was instead accusing the Jews). And they (the Jews) caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard (What did they cast Him out of? They cast Him out of the vineyard, out of Israel. Then what did they do?), and Slew Him." (Matthew 21:34-39) Thus we can clearly see that this Parable plainly teaches that it was the husbandmen (the rulers of Israel, the Jews) who killed the Lord Jesus Christ. Now let us identify who the rulers over Israel were when the Son (the Lord Jesus Christ) of the householder (Almighty God) came into the vineyard (Israel). Turn with us to the 23rd Chapter of Matthew, where we find Jesus talking: "Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not." (Matthew 23:1-3) Therefore, who ruled over Israel when God sent His Son unto the House of Israel? The answer, of course, as we have seen; it was the scribes and Pharisees; the Jews, who were the rulers (the husbandmen) over Israel when Jesus came to earth. Now let's go on in Matthew 21 where Jesus is still talking to the Jews and says: "When the lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen? They (the Jews) say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons (remember there is a Scriptural principle that men will be punished according to their own thoughts. Also this provides and understanding as to why Jesus later said in that same chapter: 'Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.' (Matthew 21:43)). Jesus saith unto them (here Jesus is verifying what they have just said is true), Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner (He is quoting Psalms and Isaiah to prove that He (Christ) is that stone): this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? Therefore say I unto you (the scribes and Pharisees, the Jews, and non-believers), The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. And whosoever shall fall on this stone (Jesus) shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder. And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them (Finally after Jesus has finished His Parable the priests and Pharisees realized He was talking about them; that he knew who they were). But when they sought to lay hands on him, they feared the multitude, because they took him for a prophet (Here the Jews and non-believers would have killed Jesus right at that moment, except that they were afraid that if they did, the multitude would destroy them)." (Matthew 21:40-46) There are all too many Clergy of Organized Religion and others today who teach that the priests, scribes and Pharisees were Israelites. But I would point out to you that if the scribes and Pharisees were attempting to seize the inheritance, which is Israel, then how can you say they were attempting to seize themselves. No it is obvious to any thinking Christian, with any understanding at all, that the priests, scribes, Pharisees and Sadducees, The Jews, were not Israelites, but were instead Outsiders! This parable related that Jesus will utterly destroy these evil husbandmen, the priests, scribes, Pharisees and Sadducees, the Jews. But there are No Scriptures in the Old or New Testament which relate that Jesus is going to destroy Israel. However, there are hundreds of Scriptures which relate that Jesus will destroy His enemies. As a matter of fact the Gospel of the New Testament, is that Jesus came to redeem and to save Israel and Not to Destroy it! Yet it is made very plain in this parable that He will utterly destroy the husbandmen; the Jews when He returns. In John 15 Jesus again relates to His People (Israel/Christians): "Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they (scribes and Pharisees -- the Jews) have persecuted me, they (the Jews) will also persecute you ('Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city.' (Matthew 23:34))...But all these things will they do unto you for my name's sake, because they know not him (God) that sent me (Those who hated Him and persecuted Him; they will hate and persecute those who follow Him. This passage of Scripture alone should put Christians on notice that the Jews and non-believers will persecute and kill them (Christians) if they are able to obtain absolute control over them. But all too many Christians ignore these warnings and the fact that untold millions of Christians, in this century alone have been murdered by the Jews and non-believers, and think their non-belief will have no effect upon them. They have this belief because the false prophets, ministers, pastors or by whatever name they call themselves, Give no Warning From The Pulpits of America!) If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloak (no cover, no excuse) for their sin. He that hateth me hateth my Father also. If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both me and my Father (Here is another passage of Scripture that shows that anyone who hates Jesus also hates Almighty God. Thus it is abundantly clear: That anyone who teaches it is possible to hate Jesus while at the same time, love the God of the Old Testament Is A Liar! In fact that teacher is attempting to deceive you!)." (John 15:20-24) Now let us return once again to Matthew 23: "For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries (either of two small, leather cases holding slips, today, inscribed with Talmudic passages: one is fastened with leather thongs to the forehead and one to the left arm by Orthodox or Conservative Jewish men), and enlarge the borders (the larger the border the more influence one has pertaining to the Jewish religious laws) of their garments. And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi (Therefore, these words of Jesus Christ should help us (Christians) recognize and identify these men as Jews, who ruled over Israel and would persecute the believers in the Lord Jesus Christ)...But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in (They oppose the Kingdom of Heaven and try to keep other men out of it. Which means that today, as well as then, they would oppose the teachings of and about the Lord Jesus Christ: Even to the point of becoming members of the Clergy in order to teach false doctrines (Timothy 4) and Jewish fables (1 Titus 1:14) in their efforts to deceive men and prevent them from studying and understanding the Word of God and the Kingdom). Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretense make long prayer (Who has caused more widows and orphans than ungodly government? How many orphans and widows did it create in the no-win wars of Vietnam and Korea? Who has passed evil decrees (falsely called 'laws') depriving those helpless fatherless of their God given right to life and who has enforced and financially supported those decrees? Our Government! Try to tell those pure, innocent, Godly little babies as their limbs are sucked from their bodies into the sewers that there is no Government persecution. For further illustration and as a case in point, consider the so-called laws that government has passed and which the courts have promoted concerning probate. The late Robert Kennedy while Attorney General of the United States, once called probate 'a political toll both exacting tribute from Widows and Orphans.' Many a dead man has had the estate he built and saved for, stolen from his surviving widow and fatherless children through taxes, lawyers and court probate costs. Yet the same men who promote such robbery have their own holdings in trusts exempt from such theft. Lawyers love and prosper from the enactment of such evil statutes and guess who predominantly makes up Congress and the (Satan's) Supreme Court? Lawyers! A government composed of such men does not like a religious movement that would make such an exposure. This is not new for the Pharisee lawyers of Jesus' day did not like the old-time religious teachings of Jesus either.): therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation (There are two things presented here; (1) They are thieves and like to prey on the weak and helpless. (2) And while they do their evil works, they represent themselves as being very religious)...Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone (It appears that the Jews do pay tithes to some sort of church or religion but they oppose the law of God, judgment, mercy and all of the doctrines of the Christian faith)...Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness (In other words their outward appearances does not show their inward corruptness; they do not appear to be evil to the naked eye. So don't look for the Jews or other non-Christians by saying to yourself I will look for someone who looks evil and will thus recognize them as being unbelievers and a wicked person. Thus Jesus was telling us, as Christians, that they would appear outwardly as very religious and righteous men instead of men who are dead in sin)...Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous (Jesus is saying you killed the prophets and you will kill the righteous. Now many will wonder who the righteous are according to New Testament theologies? They are the Christian believers.). And say, If we had been in the days of our (the Jews) fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets (Do you understand what the scribes and Pharisees, the Jews are admitting to Jesus! They are admitting that it was their fathers who either killed the prophets or participated and were in fact instrumental in their deaths and persecutions! Jesus then goes on to verify that their testimony was true). Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. Ye serpents, ye generation (Race) of vipers (snakes -- the children of the serpent or Satan), how can ye escape the damnation of hell?" (Matthew 23:13-33) Now make no mistake we are not holding the House of Israel up as completely innocent; because it was THEIR Sins and Refusal to Obey God's Commandments, Laws and Statutes which brought about these curses and the shedding of innocent blood in the first place. For they have always been disobedient to God; which is why God referred to them as "wild grapes" in Isaiah 5:2. Now let us continue. "Beloved, believe not every spirit, but Try the spirits whether they are of God; because many false prophets are gone out into the world (This is an admonishment to Christians to beware and not believe just anyone who comes along and represents himself/herself as God's servant, because many of the anti-Christs do so in an effort to deceive them)." (1 John 4:1); "And they watched him, and Sent Forth Spies, Which Should Feign Themselves Just Men, that they might take hold of his (Jesus' sayings. The Jews and non-believers do the same today to the True Men of God who preach/teach the Gospel of the Kingdom of Christ) words, that so they might deliver him (Jesus/Christians) unto the power and authority of the governor (government)." (Luke 20:20); "For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ (telling men that Jesus was the Christ, which even the devils declare Jesus Christ to be the Son of God -- 'And when he (Christ) was come to the other side...there met him two possessed with devils...And, behold, they (the devils) cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God?') (Matthew 8:28-29); and shall deceive many." (Matthew 24:5) Perhaps the most successful programs, although little more so than the cry of anti-Semitism, against Christians for almost two thousand years, has been the Jewish control of propaganda and the painting of men of a color (presenting them as something) they are not. "...the Jews...when they saw him (Paul) in the temple, Stirred up all the People (just as they do today with their control of the news media), and laid hands on him, Crying out, Men of Israel, help (here again, just as today they (the Jews) cried out to the men of Israel (Christians) to help them in their evil deeds. Which is directly against God's commandment: '...the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience). Be not ye therefore partakers with them.'" Ephesians 5:6-7: "This is the man, that teacheth all men every where against the people (thus we see the Jews first use of what we know today as 'anti-Semitism' and the trying to persuade men that that is a crime), and the law, and this place (This is another way of accusing men of 'Sedition.')." (Acts 21:27-28) We also find in Acts the following: "But the Jews...moved with envy (jealously), took unto them certain lewd fellows of the baser sort, and gathered a company, and set all the city on an uproar (the Jews do exactly the same thing today whenever anyone hinders or threatens the fulfillment of their desires)...that have turned the world upside down (It is always upsetting to evil and wicked men, the Jews, when they are threatened with losing their control and are being exposed to the general public) are come hither also; Whom Jason hath received (notice how they attempt to make Jason guilty simply by association): and these all do contrary to the decrees of Caesar (today Christians are considered criminals because they refuse to obey some man-made laws such as the murder of unborn babies or oppose unjust laws such as the income tax laws. This because our government has become an outlaw and murderer: King Herod, The Baby Murderer, would, no doubt, blush and hang his head in shame at the amount of abortion blood that presently flows from Uncle Sam's and the Supreme Courts' hands; Pharaoh's River Nile never flowed with the number of murdered babies as now flows in the sewer lines of just one of the 'many' hundred abortion clinics which infest our land; The annual forceful plunder of American's tax dollars which occurs every year would embarrass even Marcus Aurelius; The use of those tax dollars in the murder of hundreds of innocent Palestinians through the ungodly and unholy alliance between the United States and the Christless bandit State of Israel; Our governments sanctioned affirmative action program - reversed discrimination - used against our White Anglo-Saxon People, makes Pharaoh's oppression look like a rest home in comparison and today's modern anti-Christ Supreme Court rulings no doubt please even Satan himself. 'By their fruits ye shall know them.' With such 'fruits' can there be any doubt that the modern brand of Judeo-Christianity which exists in America today is the old-time religion of history and Scripture as the Baal religion. For the Bible describes the Baal religion as one in alliance with ungodly government teachings of the people of blind submission and obedience.), saying that is another king (higher authority), one Jesus." (Acts 17:5-7)
Synagogue Name Changing If you will turn to "SHINNUY-HA-SHEM" in the Jewish Encyclopedia, you may read the synagogue formula for changing the name of an invalid so as to fool those nincompoop low-brow demons. Such saps! Owing to the Pythagorean belief in the potency of letters and numbers on their own account, changing a name can fool the silly things! Was Christ so wrong to call the Pharisees "Fools and blind!" (Matthew 23:17) with all their asinine books of the Talmud on vowings, etc., along with running a synagogue of Satan (Revelation 2:9; 3:9)? Did He KNOW His subject? Read the synagogue formula for fooling the sickness demons: "When the Righteous Judgement has already decreed death from illness, our saintly rabbis said: 'Three things annul the decree; and one of them is changing the name of the patient. We therefore, in conformity with their advice, have changed the name of (mention here the former name) to the name of (mention the adopted name) who is now another person" (Note: THAT ought to fool'em, telling that!) "The decree shall not have any force with regards to him..." The Jewish Encyclopedia relates the following about "amulets," in part: "By the employment of these amulets anlysis, sciatica, eye and ear ailments, leprosy, and other evils were to be cured. With a certain date fastened around the thigh, a man might enter a fiery furnace and came out unscathed." This is what the Jews say saved Shadrach, Meshack and Abednego whose story is told in Chapter Three of the Book of Daniel. (Daniel 3:16-27) "Material and inscription of the Amulet carried according to its purpose. By its means fish could be caught [This is what Jesus used to catch the many fish as related in Luke Chapter Five]; the love of a woman secured and retained [This is how Isaac obtained his wife in Genesis Chapter twenty-four]; the sea crossed dry-shod [Exodus Chapter Fourteen]; wild animals slain [Judges Chapter Fourteen]; terror diffused through the world [Ezekiel Chapter Thirty-Two]; communion had with the dead [1 Sam. Chapter Twenty-eight]; a sword obtained which would fight automatically for its owner [Deut. Chapter Thirty-two]; one's enemies set to tearing each other to pieces [Judges Chapter Six]; oneself rendered invisible; springs of water found [Exodus Chapter Seventeen]; cleverness attained [1 Kings Chapter Three]; and many similarly wonderful things accomplished in one passage a device that is frequently met with in Babylonian and Egyptian magic is mentioned; namely, the preparation of an image and working the charm desired by its medium. The prescription runs: 'If thou desirest to cause any one to perish, take clay from two river banks and make an image therewith; write upon it the man's name; then take seven stalks from seven date-trees and make a bow [here follows the word] with horsehair (?); set up the image in a convenient place, stretch thy bow, shoot the stalks at it, and with every one say the prescribed words...adding, 'Destroyed be N., son of N.!'" This is how Jews believe that these miracles were performed. Demonology of The Pharisees All forms of demonology were adopted by the Pharisees and incorporated into so-called Judaism. Demons of the privy, of the night, of every phase of nature, were and are catered to by the tenets and customs of this sect. The Talmud book of Yadayim (hands) is, for example, on ritual hand-washing in connection with Pharisee demonology. The Talmud is loaded with occult works and practices. The Pharisee custom in Christ's time of drizzling water alternately on the hands, to carry off demons (who presumably live in water) is still in force. The "Code of Jewish Law" (Schulchan Aruch), which is a digested "Mishna" of the Talmud, holds that an evil spirit takes over a sleeping person: "When he rises from his sleep the evil spirit departs from his entire body excepting from his fingers. From there the unclean spirit does not depart unless he spills water on them three times alternately. One is not permitted to walk four cubits without having his hands washed." (Schulchan Aruch, Vol. 1, Chapter II: Hebrew Publishing Co. 77-9 Delancey St. New York, copyright 1927). The Soncino Edition of the Talmud, in the Introduction to Yadayim (handwashing): "This...rite...formed one of the chief breaches between Jesus and the Pharisees." (p. 545) When the Pharisees came to Christ, baiting Him about His Apostles not doing these handwashing rituals, He came back at them, saying that they were hypocrites, 'teaching for doctrines the commandments of men...Full well ye reject the commandment of God that ye may keep your own tradition.'" (Matthew 15) Other such practices are condoned in Judaism. Despite Moses' orders (Deuteronomy 18:10-12): "There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or daughter to pass through the fire or that useth divination, or an observance of times [astrology] or an enchanter, or a witch, or a charmer or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a necromancer. For all that do these things are an abomination unto the Lord: and because of the abominations the Lord thy God doth drive them out from before thee." Yet all of these are permitted by Judaistic Pharisee scripture. (see Jewish Talmud, Sanhedrin 65a-b) Citing this very Scriptural passage, and reversing it, the Talmudic "sages" hold that calling up demons to aid with sorcery is not idolatry since demons are not thereby worshiped! The ancient practice of spirits speaking from the privates by soothsaying is dwelt upon in Judaism and this practice is loathsomely attributed to Jesus ("He practiced enchantment by means of his membrum" Talmud, Sanhedrin 105a-b) "Ye shall not use enchantment nor observe times." (another of Moses' admonitions in Leviticus 19:26) The "sages" also distort this clear scripture and declare: "This refers to those who practice enchantment by means of weasels, birds, and fish" -- thus forbidding what no one cares to do anyway, and so as to open the way for pagan practices elsewhere permitted. (Sanhedrin 65a) The Christian need not wallow in darkness. In the 1905 Jewish Encyclopedia it was already clearly written down that the Pharisees took over "Judaism," removed all "obnoxious verbiage" concerning God, such as attributing to Him Intelligence and control over this world and bestowed all Biblical powers ascribed to Him to lesser spirits, or "angelic powers." And, with the angelology and Demonology (of Babylon) and the Ma'asek Bereshit and Ma'aseh Merkabah, they nullified the Bible into pantheism. Anthropmophism, or attributing to God any human quality like Intelligence, Love, or Control, such as God gave man over the animal world, was and is "obnoxious" to the Pharisee (Jewish Encyclopedia). The Ma'aseh Mercabah and Ma'aseh Bershit are called in Judaism, the very basis of this occult gnosticism. Pretending to be based upon Genesis and Ezekiel's chariot throne of God vision (Ezekiel 1), this last "mystery" is called "Merkabah." The words "by other means" are the most significant in the definition of the Merkabah in the Jewish Encyclopedia (pp. 499-500): "The mysteries rest on the belief in the reality of things seen in an ecstatic state brought about by ablutions, fast, fervent invocations, incantations, and by other means...the Merkabah rider must provide himself with amulets or seals containing mysterious names...The central figure in the theophany, however, is the 'Prince of the Face,' Metatron...He is the one who imparted to man all the knowledge of heaven and of the past and the future." Even burning children to the demon Molech for black occult power is allowed today by the supreme scriptures of Pharisaic Judaism. Jewish Magic Rabbi Joshua Trachtenberg, listed in Who's Who in American Jewry, in his defensive yet illuminating book, Jewish Magic and Superstition (Behrmann's, N.Y., 1939), writing of the age-long reputation of Jews as practitioners of black magic and all occult demonistic rites, states (Second chapter, entitled "The Truth Behind the Legend"): "The sources indicate that Jews were at least acquainted with methods of inducing disease and death, of arousing and killing passion, of forcing people to do their bidding, of employing demons for divinatory and other purposes...We find accounts of the magician's power to project his soul to far-distant places, there to perform an errand, and then return to his comatose body." (Jewish Magic and Superstition, Behrmann's, N.Y., 1939, p. 13) "Jewish magic...functioned within the framework of the Jewish religion." (Jewish Magic and Superstition, Behrmann's, N.Y., 1939, p. 15) Rabbi Trachtenberg also states: "Knowledge of the names, through which Jewish magic worked, was inaccessible to women, for it required not only a thorough training in Hebrew and Aramaic, which most of them lacked, but also a deep immersion in mystical lore from which they were barred...Early mystical and magical lore was successfully guarded by a limited oral transmission. The secret lore of the Kalonymides [Note: who brought it from Babylonia]...was first written down in the 13th Century...Jewish life had turned more and more inward...and intensive study of the Talmud had become almost its sole intellectual pursuit...But the German Kabbalah never attained the theoretical depth of its Spanish counterpart, nor did it exert so much influence." (Jewish Magic and Superstition, Behrmann's, N.Y., 1939, pp. 16-17) "So we may say that every Jew whose desire led him thither essayed a little magic in a small way. But it was generally recognized that only a minor portion of the mystical lore had found its way into books; much of it remained private, jealously guarded property." (Jewish Magic and Superstition, Behrmann's, N.Y., 1939, p. 18) In the same work, and under the title of "Forbidden and Permitted," Trachtenberg says: "The Bible had pronounced an unqualified condemnation of sorcery. The Talmud...pursued its customary function of clarifying and classifying Jewish law, and so broke up the all-inclusive category of sorcery into several divisions..." Then are cited various hairsplittings, ending with an admission that the Talmud actually permits the very proscribed or forbidden acts denounced by the Bible. Trachtenberg sums up: "From a practical standpoint, they succeeded in effectively excluding from the proscribed 'magic' all the forms current among Jews." (Jewish Magic and Superstition, Behrmann's, N.Y., 1939, pp. 19-20) The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia cites Rabbi Tractenberg's Jewish Magic and Superstition as a rabbinical authority on these subjects. Habdalah Rabbi Trachtenberg: "On Saturday evening, during the Habdalah ceremony which marks the beginning of the new week, another libation was offered to the spirits, as part of the ritual. Some of the wine was poured upon the ground 'as a good omen for the entire week to symbolize good fortune and blessing.'" Rabbi Trachtenberg then proceeds to de-emphasize that this had any religious significance, and states: "Moses Mat in the 16th Century wrote that this practice is intended to 'give their portion to the company of Korah,' namely, to the powers of evil. And that portion was not inconsiderable. As one rabbi in Silesia remarked, 'If I had the wine that is poured upon the ground in Austria during Habdalah it would suffice to quench my thirst for a whole year!'" "This custom of pouring out some wine over which a blessing has been recited, which appears again in the wedding ceremony, may have been considered by some people not as an offering to the spirits, but as a means of driving them off." (Jewish Magic and Superstition, p. 167) Just preceding this, Rabbi Trachtenberg covers various food offerings to demons such as leaving a loaf of bread and cup of wine "left standing overnight," which, to quote, is categorized: "as 'setting a table for the demons.' Yet it continued to be done, sometimes with the frank admission that 'it extends fulness of blessing over the entire week.' During the Passover Seder a cup of wine is filled expressly for the Prophet Elijah, who is believed to visit every Jewish home on that occasion, and the door is opened for him to enter -- this time the offering is to a good spirit, rather than an evil one. But during the same service, there is a late custom, which arose in German-Jewish circles, to pour out a drop of wine at the mention of each of the ten plagues, possibly to placate the evil spirits, who may be impelled by the reference to so many disasters to visit some of them upon the celebrants. Israel Isserlein's biographer wrote of him, 'He always spilled some of the water from his cup before drinking,' thus observing a universal Jewish custom going back to Talmudic times. The explanation then given was that the water might have been contaminated by a demon --but obviously merely spilling some of it doesn't purify at all. The intention was to induce the demon to neutralize the possible ill effect of the water by making him a libation." (Jewish Magic and Superstition, Behrmann's, N.Y., 1939,, pp. 166-67) Tashlik and Kapparah Rabbi Trachtenberg cites the power of the Kapparah rites in Judaism. In the first editions of the Shulhan Aruch, an accepted code of Judaism compiled by Joseph Caro, his reference to Tashlik being a "silly custom" was deleted, according to Rabbi Trachtenberg, "under the influence of the 16th century Polish annotator, Moses Isserles...The various features of the ceremony accentuate its superstitions and even magical character." Tashlik is the current and ancient Pharisee custom of dropping crumbs into a river or body of water at Rosh-Hashona, or flapping the garments at demons, as the Hasidim Jews do, to appease them. Brooklyn and Manhattan bridges in New York, have been much used for this, says the Jewish Encyclopedia of 1905 (under "Tashlik"). Rabbi Trachtenberg also states: "Fowl are closely associated with the spirits in Jewish and non-Jewish lore, and are the commonest oblation to them...The cock is employed to represent a man, the hen, a woman, in many magic rites. The circles which are described about the head of the individual, and the numbers three and seven, are well-known magical elements. The words which effectuate the substitution have all the earmarks of a typical incantation. In the earlier texts the words 'this is my atonement' are not present; they were added so that the initials of the Hebrew terms might form the word hatash, 'which is the name of the angel appointed over this.'" Rabbi Trachtenberg continues: "The belief that evil spirits roost on roofs occurs often (the Talmud places them under the eaves)...In view of this requirement that the entrails be thrown on a roof acquires special significance. Thus analyzed there can be little doubt of the true meaning of the rite, which is still observed today. It is probably the most blatantly superstitious practice to have entered Jewish religious usage, for where the significance of other such practices has long since been lost sight of, the purpose of this is too apparent to escape the dullest wits...Not unrelated is the rite of Tashlik, observed on the first day of Rosh-Hashonah ...this ceremony represents merely the latest version of a complex of superstitious practices centering about the belief in the existence of spirits in bodies of water...in later times Tashilk was postponed if the first day of the New Year fell on a Sabbath on the ground that carrying bread was a violation of the Sabbath rules." (Jewish Magic and Superstition, Behrmann's, N.Y., 1939, p. 164-165)
Various "explanations" customarily used as a "whited sepulchre" coverup for the stark paganism of Pharisaism are here mentioned by Trachtenberg, and then: "These explanations only too patently evade the main issue, the bread offering to the spirits ...Under Kabbalistic influence an attempt was made to limit the rite to shaking one's clothes at the river-side..." (Jewish Magic and Superstition, Behrmann's, N.Y., 1939, p. 166) A picture appears in the Jewish Encyclopedia showing Jews with bags of bread at the river-side performing the Tashlik ceremony of appeasing the demons of the water.
The entire Jewish Talmud book of Yadayim ("hands") is based upon the superstition that demons live in water. The Talmudist's (Jewish) objective here is not cleanliness (when they chastized Christ for Him and His disciples not washing their hands), but getting the "demons" off into water. Small wonder that Christ would have none of the Pharisee hand-washing voodoo in His life, because of which the Pharisees upbraided Him mercilessly.
Lilith -- Favorite Demoness Of the hordes of demons the Jew who would win out must use and dismiss, none is more prominent than Lilith. Some of the amulets meant to keep her in check is presented on pages 549-50 of the Jewish Encyclopedia (under Amulet). Lilith is supposedly jealous of lying-in mothers and their new-born babies. Her main job is apparently "spawning demons."
In his above noted publication, Rabbi Trachtenberg repeats the Talmudic tale that "when Adam was parted from Eve, he had relations with female demons who bore him demonic offspring." He was at this for 130 years, we are told. Says Trachtenberg (Jewish Magic and Superstition, Behrmann's, N.Y., 1939, p. 37): "As a result of the legend of Adam's relations with Lilith (another spelling)...the Liliths were most frequently singled out as the demons who embrace sleeping men and cause them to have nocturnal emissions which are the seed of a hybrid progeny...As the demons whose special prey is lying-in women, it was found necessary to adopt an extensive series of protective measures against her...We seem to have her a union of the night demon with the spirit that presides over pregnancy, influenced no doubt by the character of the Babylonian Lamassu, and the lamiae and striga of Greek and Roman folklore."
Spirits and Cemeteries
"Obviously the spirits can help as well as harm the living...An observant visitor to the tomb of Simon bar Yohai, for instance, at Meron, Palestine, will discern a host of written entreaties for the saint's aid [Note: the 'saint' was a second century Talmudic voodoo-worker associated with the Zohar, principal multi-volumed work of the Jewish Cabala]...The ancient practice of visiting the cemetery to entreat the offices of deceased relatives or scholars persisted...In addition to such individual visits, there grew up the custom of the entire congregation repairing to the cemetery annually on several occasions, such as the seven 'rain fasts,' and on Tisha 'B'ab...and on the eves of New Year and the Day of Atonement, 'that the dead may beseech mercy on our behalf.'" (Jewish Magic and Superstition by Trachtenberg, p. 64)
"The custom of washing the hands after a funeral is very widespread... Efforts were made to find a Biblical precedent for this act, but...there was a general admission that it was done 'to dispel the spirits of uncleanness' which cling to one's person, these being 'the demons that follow them home.'" (Jewish Magic and Superstition, Behrmann's, N.Y., 1939, p. 179) Today, one may note Jews at such places as Temple Sholom, on Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, Illinois, dripping water on their hands after a funeral.
The Jewish Encyclopedia (under "Cemetery") refers to the custom of visiting the cemetery to consult the spirits, and cites the Talmud, Niddah 17a. There it is stated that one "spending a night in a graveyard in order that a spirit of uncleanness may rest upon him -- to enable him to foretell the future might sometimes be exposed to danger." (Talmud, Soncino edition, Naddah, p. 113)
Reference to this practice is also made in Sanhedrin 65b. That cemeteries are infested with spirits and demons is the general idea.
Rabbi Trachtenberg says: "The future is an open book to the denizens of the supernatural realm, and like the demons and the angels, the deceased can by eavesdropping pick up the latest decision of the court on high; 'they flit through the universe to hear what has been decreed.' Then they report back to intimates on earth, in dreams or personal appearances...But in general the spirit-world is chary of its secrets and can be induced to reveal them only by magical means...mystical invocations and occult rites are effective in forcing the dead to obey the magician's will. The art of necromancy is a specialized function of sorcery." (Jewish Magic and Superstition, p. 65)
And: "The official language of the celestial court is Hebrew...This principle was advanced in the Talmud." (Jewish Magic and Superstition, Behrmann's, N.Y., 1939, p. 74)
In a chapter "The War With the Spirits," Rabbi Trachtenberg states: "The methods of warding off the spirits fell into three general categories: 1. to drive them away ...2. to buy them off with gifts, to bribe them and thus conciliate them; 3. to deceive them by disguising their intended victims, or by pretending that the situation was other than what it was. Each of these methods, and often two or three of them combined, was known and employed by Jews even found expression in special ceremonies which have become part and parcel of Jewish ritual."
Rabbi Trachtenberg mentions putting a severed foreskin in a bowl of water, with attendants dipping their fingers in bloody fluid, and burying the circumcizer with the foreskins he has severed, as demonic ritual.
The unluckiness of even numbers except on special nights when four cups of wine, instead of an odd number may be imbibed, the protective, and divine nature of Talmud study for blunting demons, and the recitation of the Shema at night are noted by the Rabbi, and he states: "There was no attempt to disguise the purpose of this prayer-service; it was frankly admitted time and again that 'it exists only because of the demons.'"
He quotes: "'at my right Michael, at my left Gabriel, before me Uriel, behind me Raphael.' This is nothing more than the Jewish version of the ancient Babylonian incantation, 'Shamash before me, behind me Sin, Nergal at my right, Ninib at my left,' or 'May the good Shedu at my right, the good Lamassu at my left,' etc.'" (Jewish Magic and superstition, p. 156)
"The final weapon in the anti-demonic strategy is that of deceit." Apart from wailers at weddings to deceive the demons into thinking it a sad instead of glad occasion, breaking a glass at a wedding and the Shofar being blown to scare the demons, this strategy of deceit, says the Rabbi, is "most commonly employed in changing an invalid's name so that the spirits who might be charged with effecting his death would be unable to locate him...just as criminals adopt aliases to evade the police." (Jewish Magic and Superstition, Behrmann's, N.Y., 1939, p. 168)
Under "Shinnuy-ha-shem" in the Jewish Encyclopedia, one may read the synagogue formula for changing the name of an invalid so as to fool the demons: "When the Righteous Judgement has already decreed death from illness, our saintly rabbis said: Three things annul the decree; and one of them is changing the name of the patient. We therefore, in conformity with their advice, have changed the name of (mention here the former name) to the name of (mention the adopted name) who is now another person. The decree shall not have any force with regards to him..." Was Christ so wrong to call the Pharisees "Fools and blind?" (Matthew 23:17)
More on Ritual Murder
Over the centuries, and dating from the time of the Pharisee historian Josephus, in the 1st Century, Jews have repeatedly been charged with "ritual murder," that is, murder for purposes of paganistic black magic, charges always vehemently denied. Such denials are understandable, when one considers how loathsome such practices are.
The 1905 Jewish Encyclopedia relates: "It may be positively asserted that there is no Jewish ritual which prescribes the use of blood of any human being. Were there such a ritual...there would certainly be some reference to it in the colossal mass of halakic literature [Halakic means legal]..."
This is an evasion, because no one has accused Judaism of carrying all the bloody business of its demonism in the "halachah" or "legal" literature. Demonism belongs in the "Practical Cabala," the "theurgic" or wonder- working literature, the manuscripts for which are copied hand to hand. Occasionally one is printed in occult works. Blood, blood, blood is through it all.
One of the many charges of ritual murder was in Russia, in 1912, when Mendel Beilis was accused of this crime of murdering for the purposes of black magic. The American Jewish Committee succeeded in interesting journalists to such an extent "that the country was convinced of the infamous character of the charge." Christian ministers in the United States were induced to send protests to Russia. These "Christian divines" whom the Committee inspired to protest to Russia "disavowed their belief in the atrocious charge." (Communal Register, International Organizations, p. 1417)
The 1905 Jewish Encyclopedia elaborately denies the "Blood Accusation," but states: "Of the alarmingly large number of ritual trials only a few of the more important and instructive can here be mentioned." One hundred twenty-two are covered. Thirty-nine of these in one row bear dates in the 19th Century. These trials took place from Rumania, Prussia, Bohemia and Germany through to Russia, England and France.
Is it not strange that so many court trials have been held for so many centuries in so many different countries without any foundation whatever except some groundless prejudice? A reading of the section on "Superstition" in the Universal Jewish Encyclopedia will give a glimpse of occult practices of Judaism continuing today, foul practices such as "to fig," Kapporah, and the like. Rabbi Joshua Trachtenberg is cited as an authority as to his Jewish Magic and Superstition (Behrman's Jewish Book House, Publishers, 1939).
In it he seeks to erase the Ritual Murder charges of the centuries, referring to "the constant recurrence of child sacrifice in these trials and the importance of human blood in the witches' ritual...the most distinguishing elements in the technique of the sorcerer and the witch, as disclosed to popular view by the campaign of the Church." (Jewish Magic and Superstition, Behrmann's, N.Y., 1939, p. 9)
It is interesting to note that these occult practices are current. The late Dr. Dekker was at one time in the Communist movement, and told of being a member of the same occult group with Communist Party Chief Earl Browder, for the purpose of "influencing individuals."
The publication Ritual Magic is a good complement to Trachtenberg's Jewish Magic and Superstition and is a documented book which contains much material and some bloody manuscripts. It was authored by Professor E.M. Butler of Cambridge University (published by the University Press, 1949)
The vast scholarship, the documentation on this subject, are presented in a light hearted style not unmixed with awareness of the perils and the ghastly viciousness of the occult "arts" which translations of museum manuscripts must convey to any sane reader.
So reference is made in the Butler book to a branch of this demon magic as belonging to an earlier age: "to the world of the Akkadian- Chaldean 'Babylonian' inscriptions and of the Graeco-Egyptian papyri animated by the belief that the gods could and would support the magician in his dealings with the demons, if properly invoked; and that by the use of certain mysterious and ineffable names as well as other spells, they could be forced to do so even against their will. From the earliest times this extraordinary power was recognized as prone to abuse in the hands of 'black' magicians, but the Art itself was not only respectable, it was a high and holy one. Christianity altered all that, anathematizing magic..."
LaCroix on Moloch
As to the same rites, LaCroix states: "Moloch was represented under the figure of a man with the head of a calif...erected upon an immense oven, which was lighted to consume at once the seven kinds of offerings. During this holocaust, the priests of Moloch kept up a terrible music, with sistrums and tambours, in order to stifle the cries of the victims. Then took place that infamy cursed by the God of Israel: the Molochites abandoned themselves to practices worthy of the land of Onan [masturbation] and, inspired by the rhythmic sound of the musical instruments, writhed about the incandescent statue, which appeared red thorough the smoke: and they gave forth frenzied cries as, in accordance with the Biblical expression, they gave their seed [children] to Moloch." (History of Prostitution, Paul LaCroix, French author and historian: 1806-84)
Judaism Permits (Christian) Child Sacrifices to Moloch The whole Bible is full of and condemns the bloody business of pagan demonology, including Baal worship with its self-cutting with knives and Moloch worship with child sacrifice. Both are condoned or permitted by the modern Jewish Babylonian Talmud. Every form of ancient paganism decried by the Bible may be found under the "whited sepulchre" of so-called "Judaism," which is actually Pharisee paganism. "Christians," now, as formerly, would do well to read up on what the Bible condemns, and find those pagan murder practices have not disappeared from the Earth, nor from the "synagogue of Satan." Burning children to the demon Moloch is permitted today by the supreme legal authority of the so-called "Jewish" religion, which is the Babylonian Talmud, and, in particular, the Talmud book of Sanhedrin, Folios 64a-64b. Remember, the book of Sanhedrin is, according to its Introduction in the Soncino English translation of 1935, the "chief repository of the criminal law of the Talmud." To justify child sacrifices to Moloch, the Talmud once again cites Scripture, which clearly condemns such pagan practice, and then reverses the clear meaning of the Scripture with hairsplitting "exceptions" to justify these sacrifices. (Talmud, Sanhedrin 64a-64b) Thus, as Christ put it to the Pharisees, you make the "commandment of God of non effect. Ye hypocrites! Well did Esaias [Isaiah] prophecy of you, saying, This people draw nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." (Matthew 15:7) Christ also refereed to Isaiah 29:13. Isaiah well knew the breed of Satanists who used the Bible to destroy it. The "Mishna" of the Sanhedrin sets out to make the clear orders of Moses against burning or causing to be burned any child to Moloch by: 1) handing the child to Moloch, and 2) causing the child to be burned. But, note the "explanation" to the Talmudic Mishna, which states: "He who gives of his seed [children] to Molech incurs no punishment unless he delivers it to Moloch" (1) "and causes it to pass through the fire" (2) "If he gave it to Moloch but he did not cause it [the child] to pass through the fire, or the reverse" (i.e. cause his child to pass through the fire, but did not give it to Moloch) "he incurs no penalty unless he does both." At this point, does it really matter whether an innocent child has been burned in fire and also "given to Moloch" when its murder by fire is condoned if the latter proviso is excluded? In a footnote to the same Talmud "Mishna" reference it is explained: "(5) As two separate offenses, proving that giving one's seed [child] to Moloch is not idolatry." What foul idolatry! The same Talmud section subverts the Mishna exception "unless he gives it to Moloch" further to: "punishment is not incurred unless he delivers his seed [child] to the acolytes of Moloch." Thus, if one delivers his own child into the fire, for death, and to Moloch, there would be "no punishment." A further "explanatory footnote" says: "He explains this to be the meaning of the Mishna unless he gives it to Moloch (5). This proves that the offense consists of two parts; (1) formal delivery to the priests, and (2) causing the seed to pass through the fire." The same Talmud section includes the repetitional statement that: "the service of Moloch...is not included in general idolatry." Note: Reversing the chief idolatrous practice denounced by the Bible!]. In Leviticus 20:2 it is stated: "And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying...Whosoever he be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers [Jews] that sojourn in Israel that giveth any of his seed [children] to Molech..." Then treatment of a murderer is demanded: "He shall surely be put to death." As to this Biblical prohibition, the Talmud is a masterpiece of Satanism stating: "If one caused all his seed [children] to pass through the fire to Molech, he is exempt, because it is written, 'of thy seed' implying, but not all thy seed." In footnote 4 the Biblical citation as authority is given as the Leviticus reference referred to above. Thus, THE TALMUD "NULLIFIES" THE WORD OF GOD, REVERSING IT WHILE GIVING IT AS AUTHORITY, TO PERMIT MURDERING ONE'S CHILD IN THE SERVICE OF MOLECH! This cannot be from ignorance of God's Word, clearly cited, and is nothing but SHEER BLASPHEMY. Jews Not A Race "I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews [Judeans] and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan," said Christ from the Spirit to John, about 96 A.D. (Revelation 2:9; 3:9). At that time true Scripture believers had accepted Christ and called themselves Christians. The Sadducees had disappeared, according to the Jewish Encyclopedia, and the Pharisees were in complete control. Judaism was synonymous with Pharisaism (Jewish Encyclopedia, p. 666) The question arises whether the boasts of present day Pharisees "which say they are Jews [Judeans]" have any genealogical backing. Are the so-called Jews of today descendants of the patriarch Judah? The Bible is the best answer to this. And the answer is that THEY ARE NOT! There was barely enough record in Christ's time to identify Him and a few of His followers, as descendants of a certain Israel tribe. Paul was a Benjaminite, for example. Whether or not they were lineal descendants of the patriarch Judah, a sinner, was not the issue. They had had access to the Word of God, and instead, adopted a pagan tradition which nullified, as Christ said, the commandments of God (Matthew 15:3-9; Mark 7:5-9). Christ said: "Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition." Faith in God and His Word was the test. As Paul said: "For he is not a Jew [Judean], which is one outwardly...But he is a Jew [Judean], which is one inwardly...in the spirit...whose praise is not of men, but of god." (Romans 2:28-29) Again, Paul makes it clear that the promise of blessing through Abraham was Christ. "Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made, He saith not...seeds of many, but as of one ...which is Christ...There is neither Jew [Judean] nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." (Galatians 3:16, 28-29) The Prophet Isaiah was a prophet indeed when, after recounting the abominable practices of the Jews when he foretold: "And ye shall leave your name for a curse unto my chosen: for the Lord God shall slay thee, and call his servants by another name." (Isaiah 65:15) This was shortly after his Godly prophecy that Christ would be born from the line of Judah. "Thus saith the Lord...I will bring forth a seed out of Jacob, and one of Judah an inheritor of my mountains and mine elect shall inherit it...but ye are they that forsake the Lord..." (Isaiah 65:9-10) Christ Born of Judah It is as anti-Biblical to enthrone the abomination serving Pharisees [Jews] of today as it is to deny that Christ was born, as foretold, through Judah. Otherwise, He has not yet come. To Abraham, to Isaac, his son, to Jacob/Israel, his grandson, to David, of the same line, was a special revelation made that the Christ would be their descendant, according to the flesh. That line identified Him when He came. It did not furnish His Divinity. As Paul said: "It is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah." (Hebrews 7:14) The patriarch Jacob/Israel, about 1700 B.C., had foretold that He would be. On his deathbed, he likened the coming Christ to Shiloh, where rested the tabernacle of God. Jacob said: "The septre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be." (Genesis 49:10) And the semblance of a Judah kingdom in Palestine did not disappear until after Christ was born there. Jews Not "Semites" According to the current Jewish-American press, about half of the Jews in Israel today are Negroes and dark- skinned Orientals. A constant tug of war goes on, with continuous charges of "discrimination" raised by Oriental and Negro Jews against the Western Jews. The true facts thoroughly disprove any pretensions that today's so-called Jews are genealogically "descendants of the prophets," or a "race" of any kind. Shem, Ham and Japeth were the three race-founding sons of Noah. To be a Semite one must have descended from Shem, just as to be a Jew, genealogically, one must descend from Judah. Ham was the father of the abominating Canaan who mistreated Noah sexually (Gen. 9:25), and Canaan's descendants who peopled the Land of Canaan had the same proclivities. Thus, Moses, in leading the Israelites back from Egypt in 1491 B.C., warned them to make no marriages, no alliances with the Canaanites, or they might lose their faith and decency. And what is the Biblical record? Moses died in 1451 B.C., and Joshua actually led the Israelites into Canaan, or Palestine. They had been told in no uncertain terms that they could choose between life and death, blessing and cursing: "A blessing if ye obey the commandments of the Lord your God...And a curse if ye will not." (Deuteronomy 11:26-8; 30:19-20). The Israelites were to drive out the Canaanite abominators, and make no marriages or deals with them. The sons of the cursed Canaan fathered the Jebusites, Amorites, Girgasites, Hivites, Arkites, Sinites, Arvadites, Zemarites and Hamathites, according to Genesis 10:15-18 and 1 Chronicles 1:13-16. However, a reading of the books of Joshua and Judges will show that instead of driving out these Canaanite tribes, the Israelites mixed with them all and adopted their abominations. That is why the Prophets thundered and threatened, and the Northern, ten-tribe Israel Kingdom was deported by the Assyrians in 721 B.C., and "lost" by being strewn across their world empire. Before the foretold slaughter and deportation, with loss forever of national sovereignty of the Israel kingdom, for black magic pagan crimes, the Prophet Isaiah said: "His watchmen are blind: they are all ignorant, they are all dumb dogs, they cannot bark: sleeping, lying down, loving to slumber. Yea, they are greedy dogs which can never have enough, and they are shepherds that cannot understand; they all look to their own way, every one for his gain, from his quarter." (Isaiah 56:10-11) Thus he prophesied 760-698 B.C., and, in 721 B.C., the Israel kingdom was slaughtered and finished, unrepentant, unhearing. The fulminating by the Prophets continued against the people of the Judah-Benjamin kingdom around Jerusalem until they too were deported by the Babylonians in 606-586 B.C. A remnant returned in 536 B.C. Jews A Non-Racial Pharisee Sect Present-day Jews are a pot-pourri of every race of man, and they do not have any genealogical or racial derivation from the ancient peoples of the Holy Land. Since "Jews" were a mixed race from the beginning, the term "Semites" applied to them, admittedly, is silly. Thus, "Anti-Semitism," actually means "Anti-Pharisaism." The Chazars (Khazars), for example were, as we have already stated, were part of an Asiatic horde which adopted Talmudism in the 8th Century, when their King, Bulan, and his Court did so. Their descendants constituted the Ashkenaze Jews of Russia, Poland and Germany, who in turn migrated in large numbers to the United States. There have been Chinese "Jews" for centuries, also India "Jews," and Falasha Negro "Jews." The Negro Jews of New York City have asked for money for a synagogue, claiming that they numbered about 120,000 members, maintain five synagogues and needed money for more. Marilyn Monroe, Elizabeth Taylor, Negro Sammy Davis, and many others have been notable additions to the Pharisee sect of "Chosen People" Why Do They "Look Jewish?" A long article, with pictures and charts, in the Jewish Encyclopedia, under "Types, Anthropological," seeks to answer the question as to why there is a recognizable "Jewish look" as to so many self-styled "Jews." Subjects such as percentages of blonde and brunette types, their origins, skull formations, are discussed. Then, to quote: "What is popularly known as 'the Jewish eye' is not a correlation of definite anthropological measures or characteristics, but consists principally in a peculiar expression of face, which is immediately and unmistakably recognized as 'Jewish' in a large number of cases...It has also been remarked that persons who do not have the Jewish expression in their youth acquire it more and more as they grow from middle to old age." Illustrations of how Negroes, as well as Gentile adults and children, recognize this Jewish look, are related. That the "look" is not racial is illustrated by "the Little Russians, who apparently resemble their Gentile neighbors in every facial characteristic, but are differentiated from them by some subtle nuance which distinguishes them as Semites...It is seemingly some social quality which stamps their features as distinctly Jewish." The Anti-Defamation League of B'bnai B'rith has issued a series leaflets for Fireside Discussion Groups, Number 7 is entitled: "Three Questions Jews Must Answer." The question "Are Jews a Race?" is answered, briefly, with the conclusion that Jews are part of a "general admixture" of races. "Are Jews a nation?" is answered with the idea that Jews form parts of all nations; that some of them have the Zionist ideal of a Palestinian nation but "Jews have a consciousness of world unity." To quote: Jews are "definitely a type, and consciously a unity, we are an historic people -- a world community." The question "Are Jews a Religion?" is answered by the assertion that "There are hundreds of thousands of Jews who are unbelievers. Yet they still consider themselves Jews." The incident of Jews converted to Christianity [In my opinion -- there are about the same number of Christian Jews as there are Virgin Prostitutes!] asking to help build a Jewish Palestine is related, "It is true that there are hundreds of thousands of atheist Jews, but they need not fear to be represented by Judaism. Of this they may be sure; that Judaism will not misrepresent them." This is a good place to stop and agree on that point. As noted more fully elsewhere, aside from the "whited sepulchre" which constitutes the showmanship and trimmings of so-called "Judaism," its basic doctrine is that God is the "En Sof," a nature essence which has no attributes and can neither know nor be known. That is atheism and the basis of all pagan pantheism. Communism merely calls the same concept "dialectical materialism." The article ends: "In a race-mad world, we will not be one more race. In a world destroyed by nationalism, we will not add one more nationalistic fury. But in a world in which religion is trying to re-establish brotherhood, we...[are] the creators and bearers of one of the eternal faiths of the human race." But Pharisaism is not an "eternal" faith of the "human" race and, in truth, teaches as a basic law that only Pharisees are "men" or humans (Jewish Encyclopedia, under Gentiles, Vol. V, p. 619).
That "the synagogue of Satan," as Christ called Pharisaism (Revelation 2:9; 3:9) is "eternal," is denied by the whole Bible. The B'nai B'rith pamphlet previously quoted also states: "We want a world in which nationalism shall definitely diminish." And, Jews feel they belong to one world unity. When the Jews were expelled from Spain in 1492, the Jewry of northern Africa received them. When the Jews were expelled from Germany during the crusades, the Jewry of Poland received them.
When they were expelled from Poland in 1648, the reconstituted German community received them in turn; and when Eastern Europe sent its Jewish...exiles across the world, American Jewry helped them find a home, they have always welcomed their own exiles...We are the children of...a great and noble tradition. We were united by that tradition.
America Has A Talmudic Government
It is becoming ever more evident that the government of the United States, as well as our people, have become more and more Talmudic in concept and action. These statements seem so foreign to a nation whose roots were founded in Christianity. Many will, no doubt, ask what is meant by a Talmudic Government. So we present the following explanation for the growth of Talmudism in the United States.
As Solomon said in the Book of Ecclesiastes: "The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun." (Eccl. 1:9).
The concept of a Talmudic government has all been done many times in the past. The principles written in the Word of God are inviolate and we cannot escape them. What was Jesus talking about in Matthew 23:13 when He said: "But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in."
What did He mean by "kingdom of heaven?" It is that system of government here on earth that God has given us to follow. If we have a system of government that follows His precepts, we are blessed. If we deny His concepts we are cursed. It's that simple. Deuteronomy 28 tells it all. Jesus said that the Pharisees were making the commandments of God of non effect by the traditions of men.
In the book, The Wisdom of the Talmud by Rabbi ben Zion Bokser we read, "Prior to the destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E. (A.D.) the state was intermittently under the influence of the Pharisees, the forerunners of the rabbis who were the great builders of Talmudic law...Talmudic law came into its own after the destruction of the Temple. In the limited autonomy enjoyed by the Jewish community in Palestine and Babylonia, Jewish law was given far-reaching scope; and that law was the law as interpreted and administered by the rabbis."
Rabbi Bokser should have included the Roman Empire along with Palestine and Babylonia. In the very comprehensively-written book, The Jews in Roman Imperial Legislation by Ammon Linder, we find unequivocal evidence that the laws of the Roman Empire were materially influenced by the Talmudic concepts of law. (The Jews in Roman Imperial Legislation, by Amnon Linder) Thus we see something in common with each of these empires. They all fell ignominiously into ruin, never to return to the greatness they once had, because of the Talmudic influence. Has the Christian West fallen from its zenith of power and respect? Will it have been for the same reason, that of "making the Word of God of none effect?"
Oswald Spendler wrote in The Decline of the West: "I see in you all the characteristic stigma of decay. I can prove that your great wealth and your great poverty, your capitalism and your socialism, your wars and your revolutions, your atheism and your pessimism and your cynicism, your immorality, your broken-down marriages, your birth control, that is bleeding you from the bottom and killing you off at the top in your brains-can prove to you that these are characteristic marks of the dying ages of ancient states Alexandria, Greece and neurotic Rome."
What is it that causes once great an fruitful empires to fall? Isn't it when men and their rulers begin to believe that they can modify the Laws of God to conform to their own extenuating circumstances? Isn't it nothing but a repeat of the principle that we learned from Genesis 3 when Eve took from the tree of knowledge and thought she could discern for herself what was good and evil?
The Talmud is a huge comprehensive compilation of ideas and thoughts on the Divine Laws of God and how they can be modified to conform to the extenuating circumstances as required. Any nation that modifies or removes the Laws of God from their plan of government and replaces them with any or all of the concepts of the Talmud is destined to fall.
However, the Talmudists have always survived the fall of the nation and civilization because it is a government in itself; a government within a government and a government above a government. The government and the nation that the Talmud has influenced will fall but the Talmud itself remains intact. It was developed over a span of many years with the thought of survival for its people. In other words, the Jews are the greatest collection of traitors the world has ever know; they are not faitful, even to their own people.
Returning to The Wisdom of the Talmud by Rabbi Bokser we will read of the modifiers that change the black and white of the Laws of God to the grey areas that destroy a nation. "The pressure of a higher moral standard inspired the Talmudic liberalization of the Jewish criminal code. Capital punishment is provided in the Bible for a variety of crimes. But the rabbis, as we have already noted, found capital punishment reprehensible, and they rendered it almost inoperative by hedging it with conditions that made of the old law a dead letter. Thus they insisted that the commission of the culpable act must be preceded by a warning and by an expression of defiance on the part of the criminal in the face of that warning." (Sanhedrin 40a)
So here we have the statement for the desire of a "higher moral standard" on the part of the Pharasees and Talmudists. There is no higher moral standard than that of God's Word. We may not like to read of the so-called harsh renderings of justice that God demands but whenever we fail to heed them we fall as a civilization.
What does God say? "Whoso sheddeth man's blood by man shall his blood be shed." (Genesis 9:6) "So these things shall be for a statute of judgment unto you throughout your generations in all your dwellings. Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death." (Numbers 35:29-30)
It is the obligation of Christian government to provide for the execution of murderers. The officer required to execute the criminal guilty of a capital crime is exonerated from guilt: "If the revenger of blood (the executioner) kill the slayer; he shall not be guilty of blood." (Numbers 35:27) These laws pertain to a country in a tranquil state of peace. They DO NOT pertain to a state of war either within or without the country. Thus we have the stories of Ehud and Eglon as well as Jael and Sisera. This is not murder but killing in times of war.
The Laws of God are also specific about kidnaping and rape. These are death sentences "to remove the evil from among you."
Rabbi Bokser's book states, "Thus Rabbi Eliezer, who was an aristocrat, exempted arms from the prohibition of carrying unnecessary objects on the Sabbath. He regarded them as ornaments and they were to be worn as a normal part of a person's apparel. His colleagues, representing the point of view of the common people, forbade it. Citing the prophetic contempt for war and its implements, they branded the wearing of arms as a disgrace." (Mishnah, Shabbat 6:4)
In the book of Luke at the time of the last supper, Jesus spoke, "And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye anything? And they said, Nothing. Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his script: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." (Luke 22:35-36)
Our forefathers, not only here in the United States but in all of the nations of the Christian West, knew this principle of God very well. They knew that to conquer a nation it must first be disarmed. The American people refuse to be disarmed, in open defiance to Senator Metzenbaum's efforts and others like him who have the Talmudic concept of government.
Welfare A Talmudic Concept
Now, let's look at welfare. The book The Wisdom of the Talmud says, "The Talmud gives evidence of a continuously growing program of welfare legislation, in which ever wider sectors of social life were brought under the control of a law, whose motivating impulse was the welfare of the common man. Thus the law empowered the community to assume responsibility for elementary education and poor relief. It authorized the supervision of weights and measures, and of fair wages and prices to prevent unethical business practices." (Baba Batra 21a, 8b; Ketubot 49b)
Again, the Word of God says, "And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not wholly reap the corners of thy field, neither shalt thou gather the gleanings of thy harvest. And thou shalt not glean thy vineyard, neither shalt thou gather every grape of thy vineyard; thou shalt leave them for the poor and the stranger: I am the Lord your God." (Leviticus 19:9-10).
"Thou shalt not pervert the judgment of the stranger, nor of the fatherless; nor take a widow's rainment to pledge...When thou cuttest down thine harvest in thy field, and hast forgot a sheaf in the field, thou shalt not go again to fetch it: it shall be for the stranger, for the fatherless, and for the widow: that the Lord thy god may bless thee in all the work of thine hands. When thou beatest thine olive tree, thou shalt not go over the boughs again: it shall be for the stranger, for the fatherless, and for the widow. When thou gatherest the grapes of thy vineyard, thou shalt not glean it afterward: it shall be for the stranger, for the fatherless, and for the widow." (Deuteronomy 24:17-21)
"And the Lord spake unto Aaron, saying...And that ye may teach the children of Israel all the statutes which the Lord hath spoken unto them by the hand of Moses." (Leviticus 10:11)
In the past, the Christian church has always taken care of its own poor and provided for the welfare of the people. The body of Christ has always provided for the education of our children. From the earliest days in America, the teaching of the children was from books such as McGuffey's Reader and the Holy Bible. It is even now said among our people that the best way to teach a child to read, is to teach him to read the Bible. It is a gift of God.
It is demeaning and humiliating to force our poor to stand in line at the government welfare office to receive their sustenance. The system germinates fraud and theft by otherwise able bodied people. It creates a system of perpetual poor whose sole ambition is to have children who will likewise have the "profession" of being on welfare.
It causes distrust, disgust and anger among the average citizen who, living in a modest home, has to pay the taxes that builds the expensive, highly modern, public housing which is far better than their own home. Only to be torn apart by ungrateful blacks and other so-called minority groups.
Creator of The Law
Again from Rabbi Bokser's book The Wisdom of the Talmud we read the following which says it all, "The judge served in effect as a CREATOR of law and not only as its interpreter - a phenomenon which has been duplicated in every system of jurisprudence."
As our once great Christian Republic fell deeper and deeper under the spell of the Talmudic concept of law, we see the statement by Bokser that "The judge served in effect as a creator of law and not only as its interpreter..." becoming more and more the situation in America. The "separation of powers" concept within our system has been totally destroyed because of this Talmudic principle. A great share of our Legislators are also lawyers.
They belong to the American Bar Association and they are members of the bar. That makes them automatically a part of the Judicial Branch of government. They know that one day they will return to being a lawyer and they will serve under a judge. Thus, every law they enact, they think of in terms of the Judicial Branch and whether the judge will accept it or not. Making the judge, not only the interpreter of the law, but also its creator.
In Bokser's chapter titled Social Welfare and Personal Freedom we read of a Talmudic concept that has caused revolutions and insurrections among our Christian forefathers for centuries. "The social process frequently brings individuals into a position where they exercise power over the lives of others. In the social theory of Talmudic Judaism, it then becomes the task of the community to develop such instruments of social control as will rationalize that power with moderation and justice.
The Talmudists declared individual property rights as subject to their consistency with the public welfare. When it is to serve the public interest, these rights may be modified or suspended altogether. Basing its action on this principle, Talmudic legislation regulated wages and hours of labor, commodity prices and rates of profit. They held it was similarly the task of the community to provide other facilities for promoting the public welfare, such as public baths, competent medical services, and adequate educational facilities for all, at least on an elementary level." (Jebamot 89b; Baba Batra 8b; Sanhedrin 17b)
When and where in the history of our people did this Talmudic principle cause an insurrection that has been the shining example of our continuing fight for individual freedom and liberty? To find the answer, we must go back to England in the time of King William, the Conqueror. William was the last of the Norsemen from the area of Normandy, France. This part of France had been conquered and settled by the Norse people (Scandinavian) many year before.
Writing about William, "The very spirit of the sea-wolves who had so long lived on the pillage of the world seemed embodied in his gigantic form, his enormous strength, his savage countenance, his desperate bravery, the fury of his wrath, the ruthlessness of his revenge." (A Short History of the English People, by J.R. Green) This was the disposition of the man who conquered England and modified the old Saxon laws and customs. The entire system of civilization in England was modified, some changes for the better, some for the worse. But in general, as we shall see, the changes were toward the Talmudic concept of government. As the conquering King of England, he needed money, lots of it. He immediately introduced the feudal system to Saxon England. In the feudal system, the common man owned property only to the extent that he paid his "taxes" to the local baron or ruler. The local feudal lord then paid his taxes to the king. The feudal barons and lords were William's chosen men from France, of course. From Green's Short History of the English People, we read: "But the greatest safeguard of the Crown lay in the wealth and personal power of the kings. Extensive as had been his grants to noble and soldier, William remained the greatest land-owner in his realm. His rigid exaction of feudal dues added wealth to the great Hoard at Winchester, which had been begun by the spoil of the conquered. But William found a more ready source of revenue in the settlement of the Jewish traders, who followed him from Normandy, and who were enabled by the royal protection to establish themselves in separate quarters or 'Jewries' of the chief towns of England. The Jew had no right or citizenship in the land; the Jewry in which he lived was, like the King's forest, exempt from the common law. He was simply the King's chattel, and his life and goods were absolutely at the King's mercy. But he was too valuable a possession to be lightly thrown away. A royal judiciary secured law to the Jewish merchant, who had not standing-ground in the local courts; his bonds were deposited for safety in a chamber of the royal palace at Westminster, which from their Hebrew name of 'starrs' gained the title of the Star-Chamber; he was protected against the popular hatred in the free exercise of his religion, and allowed to erect synagogues and to direct his own ecclesiastical affairs by means of a chief rabbi. No measures could have been more beneficial (sic) to the kingdom at large. The Jew was the only capitalist in Europe, and, heavy as was the usury he exacted, his loans gave an impulse to industry such as England had never felt before. The century which followed the Conquest witnessed an outburst of architectural energy which covered the land with castles and cathedrals; but castle and cathedral alike owed their existence to the loans of the Jew...To the kings (William and the Norman kings that followed) the Jew was simply an engine of finance. The wealth which his industry accumulated was wrung from him whenever the King had need, and torture and imprisonment were resorted to if milder entreaties failed. It was the wealth of the Jew that filled the royal exchequer at the outbreak of war or of revolt. It was in the Hebrew (sic) coffers that the Norman kings found strength to hold their baronage at bay." It is as obvious as night follows day that these money lenders, just as the banks of today do, gave advice to the kings. Obviously that advice will have been according to their own mores and customs. "The golden rule, he who has the gold makes the rules." Thus, the Talmudic concept that rabbi Bokser revealed in his book The Wisdom of the Talmud became the civilization of the land starting at the time of the Norman kings in England. To emphasize this point, we repeat, "The Talmudists declared individual property rights as subject to their consistency with the public welfare. When it is to serve the public interest, these rights may be modified or suspended altogether...The century which followed the Conquest witnessed an outburst of arch itectural energy which covered the land with castles and cathedrals; but castle and cathedral alike owed their existence to the loans of the Jews." Public structures were built everywhere and their construction was of the most expensive type possible. Bridges were made of permanent stone, as well as other government buildings. The more expensive the building the more money that would be loaned at usury. But as Green in his book points out, "He was simply the King's chattel, and his life and goods were absolutely at the King's mercy." Another action that these Norman kings took was to confiscate the Jew's property at the time of his death. But that action didn't make any difference to the Jews. Because of the tremendous wealth to be made from usury, their children could create their own wealth in a very short time. If their children were started in the business while the parent was still alive, the usury system could be handed down without an inheritance problem. Thus we see another Talmudic principle, that of disallowing inheritance. We see that today in the Communist Manifesto along with all of the modern "social reforms." Control The Key Word The key word to the system is not ownership but control. The Jews, because of the instinct for survival, created the economic system in which they didn't need to own anything that would be taken from them at the time of their death. A system was developed that perpetuated the control of material wealth and not the direct ownership. Thus, the laws of incorporation were the result of the system that was started as a means of survival. The same can be said of the idea of the graduated income tax. The Norman kings extracted from these money lenders the capital they needed in direct proportion to the wealth of the money lender. The richer he was, the more money taken from him. The graduated income tax is also a Communist Manifesto concept. Confiscation of Private Property Another Talmudic concept that started in the days of the Norman kings was that of confiscation of private property for the king's (or government's) use. King William confiscated a tremendous amount of private property for the government's use in what was called Carte de Foresta, or Forest Laws. "The king having a continual care for the preservation of the realm, and for the peace and quiet of his subjects, he had therefore amongst many privileges this prerogative, to have his place of recreation whomsoever he would appoint." (Today confiscation is taking place on a daily basis in the name of the "War On Drugs." It is nothing but government theft, enforced by the gun) Thus, "for the preservation of the realm," we have the laws of Eminent Domain, which is the power of a government over all the property within its limits, by which it is entitled to appropriate, or to authorize the appropriation of, private property for public use, giving just (sic) compensation to the owner. We also have, as a part, of this concept of Carta de Foresta, the current mania of creating vast, "wilderness" tracts that will eventually be used as collateral for the public debt. This, is a part of what is called - "The World Conservation Bank." Private property is being confiscated at an alarming rate in the United States. Capital Punishment Laws Another Talmudic concept that King William initiated was that of dissolving the Capital Punishment Laws. Even though he would kill a man without batting an eye, so to speak, he did not believe in shedding blood by process of law. Thus, he initiated the concept of no capital punishment because of a "higher moral standard." The Norman kings continued to rule through four generations until the time of King John. The strong and authoritarian concept of government started by King William the Conqueror became more demanding for the English people. The concept of government spending using borrowed money was the accepted way. Capitalization of private enterprises using borrowed money at usury resulted in what appeared on the surface a better way of life for the English people. But the people were losing their cherished freedoms and liberty. Vast tracts of private property were confiscated by the government to be converted into forests and other uses for the "common good." The churches were told to stay out of government business. But it was in keeping with true Biblical principles that a change took place in England that proved that there was a law which is above the King and which even he must not break. The reaffirmation of the Supreme Law of inalienable rights for the common man is the great work of the Magna Carta. It was once again a man of God who brought about the confrontation between the barons and King John on an island in a marsh called Runneymede. The English church leader Anselm had earlier withstood William the Red, the son of William the Conqueror. The church leader Theobald rescued England from the lawlessness of Stephen, the grandson of William the Conqueror. And now it was Stephen Langton, the new archbishop of Canterbury who stood before the vicious King John. It was his intention to restore on a formal basis the older Saxon freedoms of the realm. For several months the nobles and the churchmen stood together against John. The several larger cities of England saw the churchmen and barons enter their cities and claim freedom and liberty. In London, the barons were organized under Robert Fitz-Walter, "the marshal of the army of God and holy church." It was the Talmudic principles of government that the Magna Carta addressed and it was the Christian church which showed the barons what needed to be done at Runnymede. (A Short History of the English People, J.R. Green) As a second witness to the analysis of history that has been described and to the understanding of what happens when a nation follows the Talmudic concept of government, the following is extracted from the book simply titled The Jews by the very well known author, Hilaire Belloc: "The Jewish element in this island (England), whatever it may have been during the Roman occupation, was of small account during the Dark Ages. Things changed at their close in the eleventh century. The Jew is the camp follower of each new economic movement among us and that is why one finds him in the wake of the Norman Conquest. Throughout the economic development which it began appears the secondary role of the Jew. Every one knows the mediaeval rule of Jewish Status. It was established here as everywhere else in Christendom. The Jew was the King's; that is, under the special protection of the State. If he were the subject of popular attack, that attack was an attack on the King's peculiar, and liable to speedy repression. The individual attacker was punished with special severity because the danger of mass-movement is always great where the populace is free to act in masses as it was throughout the middle ages, and the necessity for preventing individual attacks from spreading was correspondingly great. Now and then the popular feeling got out of hand and the monarch had to deal with numbers which he could not control; but as a rule the Jews, especially the rich Jew, enjoyed a privileged position, both in Northern France and throughout England. The Jew of the early Middle Ages in England was normally a well-to-do man and often an exceedingly rich man. Then, as now, a small number of Jews were the richest men of their time. He had mot of the finances in his hands, and this immense privilege (which he has lost), that he alone was allowed to practice usury. Here we must pause a moment to define usury." Usury "Usury then (as now) signified the receiving of interest upon unproductive loans. It is a practice which all moralists and all philosophers have condemned and which the Church in particular condemns. If you lend money to a man for a productive purpose: if, for instance, he is to buy a ship and trade with the money you advance, or to buy a farm and grow produce, then, of course, you are perfectly free to stipulate for a portion of the profit. But if you lend the money for a purpose not directly productive, as, for instance, to a man in grave necessity, or in lieu of charity, or to build such a building as a church, which will not produce a rent, or if in any other fashion you lend money to one who (to your knowledge) will not spend it in some reproductive agency, then it is immoral to demand interest. Now an exception was made in mediaeval Christendom in favor of the Jew. He was allowed to lend money at interest, even in the most grievous cases of necessity, and for services as unproductive as religion and war. The only stipulation was that the moneys saved from this lucrative practice returned to the Crown (in theory) upon the death of the licensee. In practice no doubt a very large part remained with the accumulator, who during his lifetime was enjoying the income he had acquired by usury, who could give it to his heirs while still living, and could use opportunities for secret investment, or pass it to the custody of others throughout international Jewry. But liquid sums left by him, the product of his usury, returned to the Crown upon his death. This was a great advantage to the Crown, not only in protecting the Jew from the native hostility of his alien hosts (and particularly of the populace), but in giving him that great privilege-a monopoly. The rate of interest was enormous. It varied from nearly 50 percent to over 80 percent. When Jews lent money on security the King was party to the safe custody of the security, and their privilege extended so far that they were exempt from the common law, and a case between an Englishman and his Jewish creditor could only be tried by a mixed jury in which the Jew's own compatriots were present in equal numbers with the English. All during the Angevin period Jewish financial domination continued, up to the end of the twelfth century and even into the beginning of the thirteenth. But with the first half of the thirteenth century, for some reason of which I have never seen a sufficient historical analysis and of which, perhaps, the full causes have been lost, the Jewish power began to decline very rapidly, so far as England was concerned. The Angevin period was when the French kings from the area of France called Anjou ruled over England. It is considered to be from 1154 A.D. to 1399 A.D. Of course, William the Conqueror was the first French King to rule England after he conquered the country. They were also known as the Plantegenet kings). And here it may be noted that the misfortunes of the Jews in any country never begin until their financial position is shaken. As long as they are the financial masters of the Government they are protected; but woe to them when they begin to lose their financial power! Then there is no longer any reason for supporting them either on the part of the governing classes in general or of the Executive in particular. Popular passion is let loose and disaster follows. At any rate, the thirteenth century saw in England a rapid decline of Jewish financial power and at the same time a rapid rise of official animosity towards them. They got poorer and poorer as the century proceeded. Their activities were at the same time more and more restricted. They had lent money largely upon land and yet, in the public interest, were at last forbidden to foreclose upon it. The final step came when their special license to practice usury was withdrawn by Edward I in the earlier part of his reign; and at last, in 1290, after increasing severities, they were all expelled from the country under penalty of death." (The end of the extraction from Hilaire Belloc's book). Notice that Mr. Belloc did not fully understand why the power of the money lenders declined in the first half of the thirteenth century. The reason is apparent when you associate not only the lending of money at usury but also the Talmudic concept of government with the conditions of the country at the time. Mr. Belloc hints at this association but still does not fully grasp the significance when he writes this in the introduction to his third edition of the book, The Jews: "The positive side of Jewish Communism as expressed by Mordecai himself (Marx) and by all the other exponents of it, Jew and Gentile, is their insistence on the control of the means of production, distribution and exchange, by officials of the community which turn out in practice to be in large proportion Jews." (The Jews, Hilaire Belloc)
It was the Magna Carta that was forced upon King John at Runneymede and caused the power of the Jews to wane and caused their eventual expulsion from the country.
1) Now we can understand why the Federal Reserve system has never been audited, let alone expelled from our country.
2) Now we can understand why we still have "star-chamber" courts where white collar crime is swept under the rug.
3) Now we can understand why billions of dollars can be stolen from the savings and loans associations, banks and other lending associations.
4) Now we can understand why the American taxpayers end up paying for it all.
5) Now we can understand why we can have insider trader frauds and the Americans who invested in those companies are losing their life's savings to Jewish Wall Street manipulators. Who are required to pay fines, to the government, and not to the men and women who lost those savings. Is that justice? I think not!
"John, by the grace of God, King of England, Lord of Ireland, Duke of Normandy, Aquitaine, and Count of Anjou, to his Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, Earls, Barons, Justiciaries, Foresters...and his faithful subjects, greeting. Know ye, that we, in the presence of God, and for the salvation of our soul, and the souls of all our ancestors and heirs, and unto the honor of God and the advancement of Holy Church, and amendment of our Realm...have, in the first place, granted to God, and by this our present Charter confirmed, for us and our heirs for ever:
'That the Church of England shall be free, and have her whole rights, and her liberties...We also have granted to all the freemen of our kingdom for us and our heirs for ever, all the underwritten liberties to be hand and holden by them and their heirs, of us and our heirs for ever...No scutage or aid shall be imposed in our kingdom, unless by the general council of our kingdom; except for ransoming our person, making our eldest son a knight, and once for marrying our eldest daughter; and for these there shall be paid no more than a reasonable aid. In like manner it shall be concerning the aids of the City of London.
And the City of London shall have its ancient liberties and free customs, as well by land as by water: furthermore, we will and grant that all other cities and boroughs, and towns and ports, shall have all their liberties and free customs. And for holding the general council of the kingdom concerning the assessment of aids, except in the three cases aforesaid, and for the assessing of scutages we shall cause to be summoned the archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls, and greater barons of the realm, singly by our letters.
And furthermore, we shall cause to be summoned generally, by our sheriffs and bailiffs, all others who hold us in chief, for a certain day. That is to say, forty days before their meeting at least, and to a certain place; and in all letters of such summons we will declare the cause of such summons. And summons being thus made, the business shall proceed on the day appointed, according to the advice of such as shall be present, although all that were summoned came not...
A freeman shall not be amerced for a small offense, but only according to the degree of the offense; and for a great crime according to the heinousness of it, saving to him his contentment; and after the same manner a merchant, saving to him his merchandise. And a villain shall be amerced after the same manner, saving to him his wainage, if he falls under our mercy; and none of the aforesaid americaments shall be assessed but by the oath of honest men in the neighborhood.
Earls and barons shall not be amerced but by their peers, after the degree of the offense...No constable or bailiff of ours shall take corn or other chattels of any man unless he presently give him money for it, or hath respite of payment by the good-will of the seller.
No constable shall distrain any knight to give money for castle-guard, if he himself will do it in his person, or by another able man, in case he cannot do it through any reasonable cause...No sheriff or bailiff of ours, or any other, shall take horses or carts of any freeman for carriage, without the assent of the said freeman.
Neither shall we nor our bailiffs take any man's timber for our castles or other uses, unless by the consent of the owner of the timber...If one who has borrowed from the Jews any sum, great or small, die before that loan be repaid, the debt shall not bear interest while the heir is under age, of whomsoever he may hold; and if the debt falls into our hands, we will not take anything except the principal sum contained in the bond.
And if anyone die, indebted to the Jews, his wife shall have her dower and pay nothing of that debt; and if any children of the deceased are left under age, necessaries shall be provided for them in keeping with holding of the deceased; and out of the residue the debt shall be paid, reserving, however, service due to feudal lords; in like manner let it be done touching debts due to others than Jews.
Nothing from henceforth shall be given or taken for a writ of inquisition of life or limb, but it shall be grated freely, and not denied...No freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or disseised, or outlawed, or banished, or any ways destroyed, nor will we pass upon him, nor will we send upon him, unless by the lawful judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land. We will sell to no man, we will not deny to any man, either justice or right...
If any one has been dispossessed or deprived by us, without the lawful judgment of his peers, of his lands, castles, liberties, or right, we will forthwith restore them to him; and if any dispute arise upon his head, let the matter be decided by the five-and-twenty barons hereafter mentioned, for the preservation of the peace...All unjust and illegal fines made by us, and all americaments imposed unjustly and contrary to the law of the land, shall be entirely given up, or else be left to the decision of the five-and-twenty barons hereafter mentioned for the preservation of the peace, or of the major part of the, together with the aforesaid Stephen, Archbishop of Canterbury, if he can be present, and others whom we shall think fit to invite...All the aforesaid customs and liberties, which we have grated to be holden in our kingdom, as much as it belongs to us, all people in our kingdom, as well clergy as laity, shall observe, as far as they are concerned, towards their dependents.
And whereas, for the honor of God and the amendment of our kingdom, and for the better quieting the discord that has arisen between us and our barons, we have granted all these things aforesaid; willing to render them firm and lasting, we do give and grant our subjects the underwritten security, namely that the barons may choose five-and-twenty barons of the kingdom whom they think convenient, and cause to be observed, the peace and liberties we have granted them, and by this our present Charter confirmed in this manner...Given under our hand, in the presence of the witnesses above named, and many others, in the meadow called Runneymede, between Windsor and Staines, the 15th day of June, in the 17th year of our reign."
This Charter clearly shows the disdain and disgust that our ancestors had for the Jews, and it was not because of some sort of anti-Semitism; It was because they are thieves, swindlers, murderers and rifraff.
But the principles of the World of God are always true. Eventually, the people understand that they are in bondage and they cry unto God. When the people truly repent for allowing these things to happen, God sends prophets to teach and then there is always another Gideon.
Winston Churchill made the following statement about the Magna Carta in his works A History of the English Speaking Peoples: "Now for the first time the King himself is bound by the law. The root principle was destined to survive across the generations and rise paramount long after the feudal background of 1215 had faded in the past. The Charter became in the process of time an enduring witness that the power of the Crown was not absolute.
The facts embodied in it and the circumstances giving rise to them were buried or misunderstood. The underlying idea of the sovereignty of law, long existent in feudal custom, was raised by it into a doctrine for the national state. And when in subsequent ages the State, swollen with its own authority, has attempted to ride roughshod over the rights or liberties of the subject it is to this doctrine that appeal has again and again been made, and never, as yet, without success." It was many centuries later, here in America, that an appeal was again made to that doctrine of inalienable rights because a government was "swollen with its own authority."
And now, near the close of the twentieth century, just two hundred short years later, another government, led by the International Jewish Bankers, has become swollen with its own authority and is riding roughshod over the rights and liberties of its subjects, its citizens. And it is for the exact same reasons as in the days of the Norman kings that the American people have become disenchanted with the process of government in our own land.
At first, the Talmudic system sounds so good. "Two chickens in every pot and from each according to his ability and to each according to his needs." We will have day-care centers for our children because this "great" system has forced nearly every mother to work to help purchase those "two chickens and the pot."
A. We now have great public works projects to bring the civilization up to the standards of ancient Rome.
B. We now have judges who MAKE the law instead of simply refereeing the actions of a trial by jury.
C. We now have jails full of people instead of retribution for all crimes except those which require the death penalty.
This "new" Talmudic concept gave us the public school system which require all students to proceed at the same pace regardless of individual abilities. As a result, this great system has given us students who score at the bottom scholastically among the industrialized nations. They are grossly overweight and physically out of shape. At the same time many think of themselves as being among the best, if not the best, in the world. Such a combination makes them "fat, dumb and happy."
Our country is dangerously close to a popular uprising. The one thing that is holding it back is the indifference among the average church leader. That is caused by the total misunderstanding of the misnomer "Judeo-Christian." That is a term of recent origin and in reality it CAN NOT exist. Some of these churchmen are slowly learning. It is either the Talmud or the Bible.
George Washington’s Surrender
"And many of the people of the land became Jews." (Esther 9:17) The confession of General Cornwallis to General Washington at Yorktown has been well hidden by historians.
History books and text books have taught for years that when Cornwallis surrendered his army to General George Washington that American independence came, and we have lived many years in happiness until the tribulations of the twentieth century.
Jonathon Williams recorded in his Legions of Satan, 1781, that Cornwallis revealed to Washington that, "a holy war will now begin on America, and when it is ended America will be supposedly the citadel of freedom, but her millions will unknowingly be loyal subjects to the Crown."
Cornwallis went on to explain what would seem to be a self contradiction: "Your churches will be used to teach the Jew's religion and in less than two hundred years the whole nation will be working for divine world government. That government that they believe to b e divine will be the British Empire. All religions will be permeated with Judaism without even being noticed by the masses, and they will all be under the invisible all- seeing eye of the Grand Architect of Freemasonry." And indeed George Washington himself was a Mason, and he gave back through a false religion what he had won with his army.
Cornwallis well knew that his military defeat was only the beginning of world catastrophe that would be universal and that unrest would continue until mind control could be accomplished through a false religion. What he predicted has come to pass. A brief sketch of American religious history shows us that Masonry has infused into every church in America with their veiled Phallic religion. Darby and the Plymouth Brethren brought a Jewish Christianity to America. Masons Rutherford and Russell started Jehovah Witnesses' Judaism which is now worldwide with their message of the divine kingdom. Mason Joseph Smith started Mormon Judaism with its Jewish teaching of millenialism. At the turn of the twentieth century there appeared the Scofield Bible with a Jewish interpretation of the prophecies.
With wide use of this "helpful" aid, almost all of the American churches have silently become synagogues. We now have Baptist Jews, Methodist Jews, Church of God Jews, apostate Catholic Jews, Fundamentalist Jews, and many Protestant Jews throughout America. We are aliens in our own country because of false religion. All are praying for divine deliverance into that "Divine Government" which Cornwallis knew to be the British Empire. A false religion has been used to deceive us into allegiance to our enemies of Yorktown and Bunker Hill, who in turn were under the complete control of the Jewish Cahalla.
No! Not a gun has been fired but the invisible malignant process of conquering America with the Jew's religion has gone on unabated. The Union Jack has been planted in our hearts with religious deception. All has happened "legally," "constitutionally" "freely" and completely within our most sacred trust, our churches. Religious deception is painless inoculation against truth. It cannot be removed from the conscience with surgery, yet it is the motivator of our actions and directly controls our lives. Once man gives over to false religion, he is no longer rational because he originates no original thought. His life is controlled by whomever controls his religion. The veil of false religion is the sword of Damacles and its power to control humanity defies even the imagination of the tyrants who use it.
This is not to say that George Washington was a traitor willingly, or even knowingly. He was beguiled into a Satanic religious order that insidiously controls men's minds. So have American statesmen and military leaders down through the years given aid and allegiance to the enemies of the United States because they did not have knowledge of the invisible subterfuge that stalks this land. Many eyes were opened when they read Wagner's Freemasonry An Interpretation [Given by Senator Joseph McCarthy, six months before his mouth was closed forever]. If every American would read it, they would no longer ask why and how all this has happened.
There is no doubt, if one will only look and learn. We are fighting a religious war. It is Judaism against Christianity. We have had a revival of ancient Rabbinism and it will be a surprise to many who truly love our Lord Jesus Christ to learn that the present teaching of the Kingdom of God is identical with first century Rabbinism. This is no accident. It has been carefully planned by the enemies of Jesus, and fed gradually to the people, until today, most of our churches are promoting Judaism in the name of Christianity.
Although the church denominations in the past have had differences of opinion on some doctrines, they ALL agreed that the true Kingdom of God is here on the Earth, and has been established in the New Jerusalem, the United States of America. It has only been in the last one hundred years or so, that the teaching of a still future, Kingdom of God has spread throughout the land, causing great confusion. It will help to know the true and the false teachings of the kingdom.
If you should read Spiritual Communism and The Union Jack, then you would understand that that the Pharisaic hypocrisy is not at its peak, with the entire world control by the invisible Pharisee Jew; and that they "stir up the people." (Acts 6:12; 13:50; 14:2; 17:13; 21:27) All over the world in every way possible, even manipulating the wars to whip communism, which they set up as a disguise. While controlling the right wing anti-communists by telling us horrible things about communism to keep us looking in that direction while the so-called "Chosen People" set up their One World Government, a New World Order, through the guise of Christianity.
All too many, today, believe that the Jews occupy Palestine in fulfillment of prophecy as declared by the Zionists; but all the prophecies relating to the Jews returning to Palestine were made before or during the time of captivity in Babylon, and all fulfilled at their return from Babylonia captivity. They occupy Palestine today in fulfillment of what Jesus said to them in John 8:44; that they would do the works of their father, the devil -- NOT in fulfillment of prophecy that has already been fulfilled.