Watchman Willie Martin Archive

Overview of the Sephardim and Asknazi Jews

Before we go into detail, on the subject we are about to consider, we would like to give you a short overview concerning the Khazars. You will notice the word Khazar is spelled various ways, so don’t let that confuse you as we go along.

                              THE FIRST JEWS

First let us make it abundantly clear that there were no Jews prior to the 1700s, for the letter “J” had not been invented prior to that time. “J: This letter has been added to the English Alphabet in modern days; the letter I being written formerly in words where J is now used. It seems to have had the sound of y, in many words, as it still has in the German. The English sound of this letter may be expressed by dsh, or edth. A compound sound coinciding exactly with of g, in genius; the French j, with the articulation d preceding it. It is the tenth letter of the English Alphabet. (Noah Webster’s First Edition of an American Dictionary of the English Language 1828 Edition)

Genesis 5:2‑3:

“Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created. And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth.”

Please note that neither Cain nor Able is mentioned in Adam’s line. Therefore, we can conclude from this that neither Cain nor Able were Adam’s children. For if they had God certainly would have instructed that they be noted as such.

Neither is there any mention of Cain and Abel in the Chronology of Adam listed in 1st Chronicles: “Adam, Seth, Enosh, Kenan, Mahalaleel, Jered, Henoch, Methuselah, Lamech, Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.” (1 Chronicles 1:1‑4) By this we know that none of the offspring of Cain were the seed of Adam, and were the seed of the Devil, just as Christ told us in John 8:44.

The very first people, that of the descendants of Adam, Seth, Abraham, Isaac (Whom we, the White Race is named after as instructed by Jacob/Israel in the 48th chapter of Genesis).

“The Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads; and let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth.” (Genesis 48:16)

This has been fulfilled, in that the Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, Scandinavian, Celtic and kindred people of the earth have been called “Anglo-Saxons” after the name of Isaac. And they have, have also, been called after Jacob/Israel because they have been called Israelites. These same people have always occupied the center of the earth, for they can be found to have created nations and civilizations just north and south of the equator.

However, we must mention here that Esau as the brother to Jacob; so he was NEVER an Israelite; but his seed would have been of mixed blood, because of his marriage to the Hittite women:

“And Esau was forty years old when he took to wife Judith the daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and Bashemath the daughter of Elon the Hittite.” (Genesis 26:34)

Then we are told in Genesis 28:8‑9:

“And Esau seeing that the daughters of Canaan pleased not Isaac his father; Then went Esau unto Ishmael, and took unto the wives which he had Mahalath the daughter of Ishmael Abraham's son, the sister of Nebajoth, to be his wife.”

Thus we can see clearly that neither Esau nor any of his descendants were Israelites. But all of his children from that time on could be classified as Jews. Also, his descendants could be called brothers to the Arabs, because he married one of Ishmael’s daughters.

The first time that a mixed multitude is mentioned in the Bible is in Exodus 12:37‑38:

“And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children. And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle.”

And the mixed multitude, as they have always done, caused Israel to sin in the wilderness and God slew a complete generation before He would let them enter into the promised land.

Then the mixed multitude is mentioned again in Nehemiah:

“Now it came to pass, when they had heard the law, that they separated from Israel all the mixed multitude.” (Nehemiah 13:3)

The word "Jews" is used for the first time in Scripture in the King James Authorized (KJA) version in this verse. If you own a 1592 copy of the Geneva Bible, or a 1611 King James version and will open it to this verse you will not find the word "Jew."

According to the Jewish Encyclopedia:

"Up to the seventeenth century this word was spelled in the Middle English in various ways:...Ieue, Ieu, Iwe, Iewe, Iue...corresponding to the Hebrew...a gentile adjective from the proper name 'Judah' seemingly never a;;lied to member of the tribe {of Judah}, however, but to members of the nationality inhabiting the South of Palestine. It appears to have been afterward extended to apply to Israelites in the North..." (The Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. VII, p. 174)

If you will once again look at 2 Kings 16:6 in an original 1611 KJA version, you will find one of these words - You will not find the word "Jews." And probably more interesting in this quote is the fact that the word "Ieue,' etc., was never applied to the tribe of Judah but to a nationality "inhabiting the South of Palestine." The encyclopedia fails to point out who these people were but it has previously been shown that the land South of Judah was occupied by the Shelah branch of Judah - a bastard son from his Canaanite wife.

The Jewish Encyclopedia, states: "EDOM IS IN MODERN JEWRY. (Jewish Encyclopedia, 1925 edition, Vol. 5, p. 41) Which is a true statement, based on the above information that we have seen in the Scriptures.

We know that these people are hated by Almighty God because He said so:

“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...” (Malachi 1:1-3)

“As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.” (Romans 9:13)

The Jews know this and they know they are not Israelites because they have admitted it, both here and in: Under the heading of "A brief History of the Terms for Jew" in the 1980 Jewish Almanac is the following:


There was another group of mixed breeds which came back from the Babylonian captivity with SOME of the True Israelites which returned to build the Temple. During this time the priests found that many of the Israelites had married into the other races, and had strange wives (meaning they were not Israelites) and were told to separate themselves from them:

“Now it came to pass, when they had heard the law, that they separated from Israel all the mixed multitude.” (Nehemiah 13:3)

The World Book omits any reference to the Jews, but under the word Semite it states:

"Semite...Semites are those who speak Semitic languages. In this sense the ancient Hebrews, Assyrians, Phoenicians, and Carthaginians were Semites. The Arabs and some Ethiopians are modern Semitic‑speaking people. Modern Jews are often called Semites, but this name properly applies ONLY TO THOSE WHO USE THE HEBREW LANGUAGE. 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."


To understand that the Pharisees at the time of Christ and those of Jewry in the 20th century are at least partial descendants of the children of the flesh, we must go back and begin with Judah, Jacob's 4th son of Leah and his descendants. The story of Judah's marriage and descendants is recorded in Genesis, Chapter 38.

    Genesis, Chapter 37 ends with Joseph being sold into Egypt and the story of Joseph starts again in Chapter 39. It is both interesting and strange that Chapter 38 should be placed at this particular place in the Scriptures about a subject totally unrelated to the former and latter chapters.

    We are told in verse 1 that Judah "went down from his brethren." This appears to have been an act of poor judgement such as later Dinah exhibited and was raped due to her poor judgement. We are not told the reason for Judah's poor judgement but it begins the history of conflict between Judah and his brothers which will continue till the later separation of the nation into the House of Israel and the House of Judah.

    Judah, being separated from his family ties, could and did fall prey to the women in the land who were not his kinsmen according to the flesh. We are told that Judah:

"...saw there a daughter of a certain Canaanite, whose name was Shuah; and he took her, and went in unto her." (Genesis 38:2)

This connection was contrary to the will of God and Judah should have known better from his upbringing if not the example of his fathers. His indiscretion or poor judgement in forming an alliance with the people in the land was a crime that produced bastard children. If this bastardization of Israel was to continue the chosen people would soon be assimilated into surrounding heathenism and would no longer be God's chosen people.

Thus we see the necessity for God to separate His people from these heathen peoples. In any event Judah took a Canaanite for a wife and had three bastard sons {sons born from mixed seed}: Er, Onan, and Shelah. We say bastard sons because in the Old Testament a bastard was a child born from a mixed marriage with an Israelite and another race. (See Strong's Concordance) When the time came that Er, Judah's eldest son, was to have a wife, Judah obtained for him a woman named Tamar.

We are not told how or why, but Er was "wicked in the sight of the Lord" (Genesis 38:7) and the Lord slew him. We are not told what this wickedness was but the word used here also means evil and mischief and these definitions lead many to believe this evil had something to do with the law. Being raised by his Canaanite mother, he would have become indoctrinated in the ways of the pagan Canaanites - not the ways of the Lord.

According to the law, Onan, Er's younger brother, had to marry Tamar and raise up seed to his elder brother, Er. However, Onan was wicked also, and refused to do this, spilling his seed on the ground. (Genesis 38:9)

This was probably because of the threat of losing the inheritance {that is, he would be raising up seed for his brother}, again, possibly from the training he received from his Canaanite mother.

In any event, God also slew Onan. Once again, according to the law Tamar should have been given to the third son, Shelah, that he might raise up sons for his elder brother.

However, by this time Judah must have been just a little bit concerned. After all, Tamar had already been the wife of two of his sons and both had been killed by the Lord.

Thus it is easy to understand his reluctance. Scripture tells us that Judah told Tamar to wait until Shelah was older; however, when he got older Judah failed or refused to give Tamar to Shelah. Tamar waited and waited but Shelah eventually took another for a wife, apparently with his father's blessing.

It is recorded in the 45th chapter of the book of Jasher that Tamar was a daughter from the genealogy of Elam, the son of Shem. That she was a daughter of Shem makes sense in view of what Judah said when he found out she was pregnant with child. Scripture records that it was reported to Judah that:

"Tamar thy daughter in law hath played the harlot; and also behold, she is with child by whoredom. And Judah said, Bring her forth, and let her be burnt."  (Genesis 38:7)

Stoning was the normal mode of capital punishment at that time in history - death by fire was not the normal procedure used to execute someone. Therefore it is significant that Judah pronounced death by burning for that was reserved for priests' daughters who brought disgrace upon the sacred office. The law states:

"And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire." (Leviticus 21:9)

Since Judah pronounced death by fire we are able to conclude that she must have been the daughter of a priest. However, one would think that if she was, she should be aware of the law prohibiting mixed marriages. But perhaps that was not the case.

Tamar could have been imported from another geographical area as was Rebecca for Isaac. Thus at the time of her arrival and marriage to Er and Onan she could have been unaware of the covenant God had made with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob/Israel. Not being aware of the covenant she would not know that the two men she married were half Canaanite and half Israelite and not legitimate heirs to the promise.

By the time Shelah had taken another wife, Tamar was probably educated in the covenant relationship with God and realized that even if she was given to Shelah, any sons from that union would not produce a bloodline heir.

This is about the only logical reason for her to play the harlot, entrapping Judah to become the father of her children (Pharez and Zerah) at the risk of being put to fiery death. It would also partially explain Judah's response when he found out that he was the father and stated: "She is more righteous than I; forasmuch as I gave her not to Shelah my son." (Genesis 38:26)

Although Judah may not have totally understood or admitted that his marriage to a Canaanite was in violation of the law, he is, at least, acknowledging that Tamar should have been the mother of children of the birthright. He must have understood this birthright problem sooner or later, as the scepter was not passed to Shelah, Judah's third and only surviving son from Shuah, but to Judah's firstborn son from Tamar who was named Pharez. This is evidenced by the fact that Pharez's name appears in the genealogies of Christ in Matthew 1:3 and Luke 3:23.

The union of Judah with Tamar produced the twin births of Pharez and Zerah, and once again Judah had three sons: 1). Shelah, who was a bastard {½ Canaanite & ½ of Judah} by his Canaanite wife; 2). Pharez; and 3). Zerah, the latter two both from Tamar. Pharez and Zerah being the sons of Judah, the son of Jacob/Israel, and Tamar the daughter of the genealogy of Shem, were full-blooded Israelites even though they were born out of wedlock.

The whole story is recorded in Genesis 38. These births produced three descendant lines from Judah which we will call Pharez-Judah, Zerah-Judah, and Shelah-Judah. The question now becomes, what happened to the three descendants of Judah: Pharez, Zerah and Shelah? It will simply be stated at this point in the study that Pharez and Zerah were children of the promise whereas Shelah was a child of the flesh and destined to become the father of the Pharisees. This study will not be concerned with Pharez and Zerah - only the family of Shelah will be addressed.


We need to keep in mind the fact that a strict genealogy was kept on each tribe. Even though Shelah was a bastard son of Judah, his genealogy is given in Scripture and his descendants can be traced to the city of Elath. In Chronicles it is recorded:

"The sons of Judah; Er, and Onan, and Shelah: which three were born unto him of the daughter of Shua the Canaanite. And Er, the firstborn of Judah, was evil in the sight of the LORD; and he slew him. And Tamar his daughter in law bare him Pharez and Zerah. All the sons of Judah were five. The sons of Pharez; Hezron, and Hamul. And the sons of Zerah; Zimri, and Ethan, and Heman, and Calcol, and Dara: five of them in all. And the sons of Carmi; Achar, the troubler of Israel, who transgressed in the thing accursed. And the sons of Ethan; Azariah." (1 Chronicles)

Verse 3 is unusual, as once a name is dropped from the promised seed line it usually does not appear in later genealogies. For example the descendants of Cain do not appear in the genealogies of Adam in Genesis, Chapter 5, or Matthew 1 or Luke 3. It is difficult to determine exactly when the Book of Chronicles was written, however verse 1 of chapter 9 states:

"So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies; and, behold, they were written in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah, who were carried away to Babylon for their transgression." (1 Chronicles 9:1)

Since the first 8 chapters deal with the genealogies of Adam to this statement in verse 1 of chapter 9, which refers to the Babylonian captivity, it seems apparent that this portion of Chronicles was not recorded until sometime after the Babylonian captivity (600 B.C.) - perhaps by Ezra or Nehemiah.

Again, all of Judah's sons must be important or they would not be recorded in Scripture, especially since the descendants of Shelah were not children of the promise. It should be noted that verses 5 and 6 list the descendants of Pharez and Zerah, and verse 8 begins with Ethan, a son of Zerah.

What is missing here are the sons of Shelah. But verse 7 seems to be completely out of place as it lists the genealogy of a person named "Carmi."

Carmi is not one of the five sons of Judah, nor is he listed in the Genealogies of Pharez or Zerah. The name also appears in 1 Chronicles 4:1, but it is still unclear whose son he was. However, it is most interesting that his son "Achar" is referred to as "the troubler of Israel, who transgressed in the thing accursed." (You can read the story about the thing accursed in Joshua 6:18) While it appears impossible to prove it, it is suggested that "Carmi" and his son "Achar," the troubler of Israel, were in the genealogy of Shelah.

We mentioned that these names were also listed in Chronicles, chapter 4, as follows:

"The sons of Shelah the son of Judah were, Er the father of Lecah, and Laadah the father of Maresbah, and the families of the house of them that wrought fine linen, of the house of Ashbea, And Jokim, and the men of Chozeba, and Joash, and Saraph, who had the dominion in Moab, and Jashubilehem. And these are ancient things. These were the potters, and those that dwelt among plants and hedges; thee they dwell with the king for his work." (1 Chronicles 4:21-23)

Again there is no mention of "Carmi" nor his son "Achar," but her we do have a reference to these descendants of Shelah being "men of Chozeba." Chozeba was a town in southwestern Judah and is also the town of Chezib of Genesis 38:5 and Achzib of Joshua 15:44. The words Chezib, Achzib or Chozeba mean "lying," "deceptive," "disappointing," or "failing." It is also interesting that Shelah-Judah was born in Chezib (Genesis 38:5) and it appears that his descendants centuries later inherited this same city.

In Joshua we find that:

"This then was the lot of the tribe of the children of Judah by their families; even to the border of Edom the wilderness of Zin southward was the utter most part of the south coast. And Keilab, and Achzib, and Mareshah; nine cities with their villages." (Joshua 15: 1, 44)

Thus we see that the town of "Achzib" was given to some descendants of Judah. Achzib or Chozeba was located in the valley of Elath. ELATH WAS IN OLD EDOM in the valley of Elath and north of Adullum. The word "Adullum" should ring a bell as that was the place where Judah went down from his brothers and took a Canaanite for a wife. This was on the extreme southern border of the Southern Kingdom of Judah at the northern end of the Gulf of Aquabah.

In fact most scholars seem to be in agreement that this area was actually outside the land inherited by Judah. This would make some sense as we know that a bastard could not even enter the congregation, even unto the tenth generation; (Deuteronomy 23:2) therefore it would also make sense that these Shelahites, being bastards, could not inherit land belonging to the children of the promise.

But this does not mean that they could not be given land on the southern border of Judah. The city of Elath was next to Ezion-geber, which would later become Solomon's seaport. Remember now that these Shelahites are ½ Canaanite, and the word Canaanite is defined in Strong's Concordance as merchants and traders. Doesn't it seem logical that merchants and traders would congregate in the cities, and especially in and around a busy seaport where they could engage in trade, commerce, and industry?

There is another reference to this city named "Achzib" in the Book of Micah where it states: "The house of Achzib shall be a lie to the kings of Israel." (Micah 1:14)

Is it just a coincidence that Shelah was born at "Chezib" which is basically the same word as Achzib? Is it coincidence that the word "Achzib so closely resembles and has the same meaning as "Achar," the troubler of Israel? Remember these words mean "lying," "deceptive," "disappointing," or "falling." Was it not a lie that Shelah was a true child of the promise? Would not their existence next to and/or as a part of Israel make any claim they would make as being a descendant of Abraham, (John 8) entitled to receive the promises, a lie or at the least a clever deception?


Elath or Eloth was a part of the land of Edom belonging to the descendants of Esau who were called Edomites an later Idumeans. Apparently Elath and Ezion-geber came under the control of Israel in 1040 B.C. by David's conquest of Edom as recorded in 2 Samuel 8:13-14.

This land is also mentioned as being under the rule of Solomon in approximately 1000 B.C. (1 Kings 9:26; 2 Chronicles 8:17) The land passed back into Edomite control in 890 B.C. during the days of Jehoarm, king of Judah. (2 Kings 8:20-22) 80 years later in 810 B.C., the city of Elath was rebuilt under the kingship of Azariah or Uszziah.(2 Kings 14:21-22 and 2 Chronicles 26:1-2) This historical background brings us to the time of the "Jews from Elath" as recorded in 2 Kings, Chapter 16, which states:

"In the seventeenth year of Pekah the son of Remaliah Ahaz the son of Jotham king of Judah began to reign. Then Rezin king of Syria and Pekah son of Remaliah king of Israel came up to Jerusalem to war; and they besieged Ahaz, but could over come him. At that time Rezin king of Syria recovered Elath to Syria, and drave the Jews from Elath..." (2 Kings 16:1, 5-6)

Keep in mind that the time frame is approximately 750 B.C., which is around 200 years after the split of Israel into the Houses of Judah and Israel in 975 B.C., and just before the beginning of the Assyrian captivity in 721-745 B.C. By this time Jotham was the king of Judah {the two southern tribes of Judah and Benjamin}, and Pekah was the king of Israel {the 10 northern tribes}.

It is the king of Syria, and Pekah, the king of Israel {not Judah}, who formed an alliance and went  to war against the House of Judah. During that war they were unable to take Jerusalem, but Rezin, king of Syria, was able to recover the city of Elath and "drave the Jews from Elath."

As previously stated, Elath was far south of the area inherited by Judah and was given to Shelah as an inheritance. Again this was probably done because as a bastard, he could not enter the congregation of Israel nor inherit with the children of Israel.

Remember, these people were part Canaanite, and in Strong's Concordance the word "Canaanite" means merchants and traders. Merchants cannot be merchants except in populated areas and therefore would have a propensity to migrate towards the cities, so it is logical to conclude that they were the ones who resided in Elath and were driven there-from.

It was from this area called Elath, and this area alone, that Rezin "drave the Jews." Ahaz, king of Judah {Southern Kingdom}, was still in Jerusalem and was never defeated nor was he driven anywhere. Pekah, king of Israel {Northern Kingdom}, apparently returned home.

Therefore, whatever "Jews" were driven from Elath were only a small portion of people located South of Judah - not all of the House of Judah, and none of the House of Israel.

Therefore, the word "Jews," as used in this verse does not include any people from the House of Israel and probably none from the House of Judah. This limits the use of the word "Jew" in the Old Testament to a very small group of people who resided in the town of Elath, who were most likely descendants of Shelah.

Scripture does not tell us where these so-called "Jews from Elath" went after being driven from Elath, but being traders and merchants they would be city dwellers, and it is probably safe to assume that they moved north to the walled city of Jerusalem. After Rezin "drave the Jews" from Elath the area was again populated but this time by Edomites.

According to Biblical scholar Alexander Schiffner: "The first reference to any Jews in Scripture is found in 2 Kings 16:6. The name was applied TO A REMNANT OF JUDAHS DESCENDANTS OF THE SHELAH BRANCH. Shelah-Judah was born in Chezib (Genesis 38:5) and his descendants centuries later inherited his territory. (Joshua 15:1, 13, 44) REMEMBER A STRICT GENEALOGY WAS KEPT OF EACH TRIBE AND BRANCH. (2 Kings 16:5-7; 1 Chronicles 2:1-15; Ezra 2:59, 62, 64; Matthew 1:1-25; Luke 3:23-38)

Chezib, (Genesis 38:5)  Achzib (Joshua 15:44) and Chozeba (1 Chronicles 4:21-22) refer to one and the same place. it was a town in the lowlands of western Judah and was given to the Shelah branch of Judah for their inheritance. (Joshua 15:1, 13, 44)

This then was the lot of the tribe of the children of Judah BY THEIR FAMILIES.'  The word Chezib, Achzh or Chozeba means 'deceptive' or 'failing' and the place received its name from a winter spring or brook, which failed in the summer heat. {Symbolic of the failing of the Shela branch of Judah under trial}. It was the place where Judah was at the time of the birth of his half-breed son, Shelah. (Genesis 38:5)

In 1 Chronicles 4:21-22 it is called 'Chozeba.' it is in the valley of Elath and north of Addulum. Note 2 Kings 16:6 - the first reference to this branch of Judah; 'the Jews of Elath.' The Jews are the remnant' of 'Yehudim' of Judah. This branch of Judah rejected Christ. They are the open witness, 'The shew of their countenance doth witness against them - their tongue and their doings are against the Lord - they declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not.' (Isaiah 3:8-9)." (From the "Five Sons of Judah," written by Alexander Schiffner, editor, Prophetic Herald, Spokane, WA)

James Fox, the author of several books, wrote of Shelah:

"The reason for the divergence of facial appearance between the true Hebrew or Abrahamic White-Race Men, and the Jews, is that the patriarch Judah disobeyed God's will at the outset by marrying a Canaanitish woman called 'Shua' (Genesis 38:1-5), producing descendants all half-castes, later known as 'Jews.'” (The Glorious Majesty of His Kingdom, J.S. Fox, 1 st ed., 1958, p. 10)

According to these authors, the "Jews of Elath" were the 'remnant' of 'Yehudim' of Judah, and verses 5 and 6 of 2 Kings, chapter 16, are the first reference to the mongrel Canaanite branch of Judah where they are referred to as "Jews." (Actually "Ieue," etc., in the 1611 KJA Version)

The use of the word "Jews" in 2 Kings 16:6 rather than "Ieues" has added to the misconception that the Jews are all of Israel, when it is obvious that in this verse only a small group of people were implied - those living in Elath - which omits the entire northern ten tribes and the majority of the House of Judah.

To get this short overview of this subject, we are going to quote first from the Collier’s Encyclopedia of 1985:

“KHAZARS [kaza’rz], a seminomadic tribe of Turkish or Tarter origin who first appeared north of the Caucasus in the early part of the third century. In the seventh century the Khazars conquered the kingdom of the Bulgars. They built up a strong and prosperous state, which attained its greatest size in the ninth century, when it extended from the Crimea to the middle Volga and westward to the Dnepr (Dnieper) River, including the city of Kiev. The Khazars developed some important commercial cities and carried on trade between Russia and Constantinople. The khaghan or ruler of the Khazars was also the religious head of the state. Tolerant of other religions, THE KHAGHAN WELCOMED THOUSANDS OF JEWS FROM ASIA MINOR AND THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE, as well as many Muslims and Christians. These three religious groups vied with one another to convert the Khazars, who had a primitive, idolatrous belief. In the eighth century (700s) Khaghan Bulan decided in favor of the Jews and accepted Judaism for himself and for his people, but the Khazar state continued religious tolerance. It was finally overthrown in 965 A.D., by a coalition of the Christian Russians and the Byzantines. The Khazars soon disappeared, either fleeing to Central Asia or intermingling with other peoples in southern Russia. The last vestiges of the Khazars in the Crimea were destroyed by the Greeks and Russian in 1016.

The important thing to note in the quote fro the Collier’s Encyclopedia of 1985, is the part we capitalized,


You have to understand that these Jews who were swarming into Khazaria were the Sephardim which were expelled from Jerusalem in 70 A.D. These were Jews that can be traced back to Cain. We are going to go into detail how these Jews from “Asia Minor and the Byzantine empire” happened to migrate to Khazaria. To show how the Khazars were converted to Judaism by these Asia Minor Sephardim Jews, we will use the Jew’s own history books and let them tell you in their own words. We are going to start with “The History Of The Jews,” by Heinrich Graets, volume III (of a set of 7 volumes), pages 138-140:

                         (The “Jews” Own Words)

“The heathen king of a barbarian people, living in the north, together with all his court, adopted the Jewish religion. The Chazars, or Khozars, a nation of Finnish origin, related to the Bulgars, Avars, Ugurs or Hungarians, had settled, after the dissolution of the empire of the Huns, on the frontier between Europe and Asia. They had founded a kingdom on the Volga (which they called the Itil or Atel) at the place near which it runs into the Caspian Sea, in the neighborhood of Astrakham, now the home of the Kalmucks. Their kings, who bore the title of Chakan or Chagan, had led these warlike sons of the steppe from victory to victory. The Chazars inspired the Persians with so great a dread that Chosroes, one of their kings, found no other way of protecting his dominions against their violent invasions than by building a strong wall which blocked up the passes between the Caucasus and the sea. But this ‘gate of gates’ (Babal abwab, near Derbend) did not long serve as a barrier against the warlike courage of the Chazars. After the fall of the Persian Empire, they crossed the Caucasus, invaded Armenia, and conquered the Crimean peninsula, which bore the name Chazaria for some time. Byzantine empires trembled at the name of the Chazars, flattered them, and other tribes, were the vassals of the Chazars, and the people of Kiev (Russians) on the Dnieper were obliged to pay them as an annual tax a sword and a fine skin for every household. With the Arabs, whose near neighbors they gradually became, they carried on terrible wars.

“Like their neighbors, the Bulgarians and the Russians, the Chazars professed a coarse religion, which was combined with sensuality and lewdness. The Chazars became acquainted with Islam and Christianity through the Arabs and Greeks, who came to the capital, Balanyair, on matters of business, in order to exchange the products of their countries for fine furs. THERE WERE ALSO JEWS IN THE LAND OF THE CHAZARS; THEY WERE SOME OF THE FUGITIVES THAT HAD ESCAPED (723) FROM THE MANIA FOR CONVERSION WHICH POSSESSED THE BYZANTINE EMPEROR LEO. IT WAS THROUGH THESE GREEK JEWS THAT THE CHAZARS BECAME ACQUAINTED WITH JUDAISM. AS INTERPRETERS OR MERCHANTS, PHYSICIANS OR COUNSELORS, THE JEWS WERE KNOWN AND BELOVED BY THE CHAZAR COURT, AND THEY INSPIRED THE WARLIKE KING BULAN WITH A LOVE OF JUDAISM.

“In subsequent times, however, the Chazars had but a vague knowledge of the motive which induced their forefathers to embrace Judaism. One of their later Chagans gives the following account of their conversation: ‘The king Bulan conceived a horror of the foul idolatry of his ancestors, and prohibited its exercise within his dominions, without, however, adopting any other form of religion. He was encouraged by a dream in his endeavors to discover the proper manner of worshiping God. Having gained a great victory over the Arabs, and conquered the Armenian fortress of Ardelib, Bulan determined to adopt the Jewish religion openly. The Caliph and the Byzantine emperor desired, however, to induce the king of the Chazars to embrace their respective religions, and with this intention sent Bulan deputations with letters and valuable presents, and men well versed in religious matters. The king thereupon arranged fro a religious discussion to take place before him between a Byzantine ecclesiastic, a Mohammedan sage, and a learned Jew. The champions of the three religions disputed the whole question, however, without being able to convince one another or the king of the superior excellence of their respective religions as compared with the other two. But as Bulan had remarked that the representatives of the religion of Christ and of Islam both referred to Judaism as the foundation and point of departure of their faiths, he declared to the ambassadors of the Caliph and the emperor that, as he had heard from opponents of Judaism themselves an impartial avowal of the excellence of that religion, he would carry out his intention of professing Judaism as his religion.”

We don’t know how much of the above quotation you understand, but we want to repeat the part capitalized as it is important in understanding what is going on here:


Now we have to find out what was going on in the Byzantine Empire in 723 A.D., and what “Emperor Leo” had to do with it. To understand this we will go to pages 122-124 of this same book, “The History Of The Jews,” by Heinrich Graetz, volume III (of a set of 7 volumes):

“At about this time the Jews of the Byzantine empire were subjected to severe persecution, from the effect of which they did not for a long time recover, and this, too, at the hands of a monarch from whom they had least expected hostile treatment. LEO THE ISAURIAN, the sone of rude peasant parents, having had his attention drawn by the Jews and the Arabs to the idolatrous character of the image-worship which obtained in the churches, had undertaken a campaign with the intention of destroying these images. Being denounced, however, before the uncultivated mob as a heretic and a Jew by the image-worshiping clergy, LEO proceeded to vindicate his orthodoxy by persecuting the heretics and the Jews. He issued a decree commanding all Jews of the Byzantine empire and the remnant of the Montanists (Christians looking for Yahshua’s return in their day) in Asia Minor to embrace the Christianity of the Greek Church, under pain of severe punishment (723). Many Jews submitted to this decree, and reluctantly received baptism; they were thus less steadfast than the Montanists, who, in order to remain faithful to their convictions, assembled in their house of prayer, set fire to it, and perished in the flames. Such of the Jews as had allowed themselves to be baptized were of the opinion that the storm would soon blow over, and that they would be permitted to return to Judaism. It was, therefore, only outwardly that they embraced Christianity; for they observed the Jewish rites in secret, thereby subjecting themselves to fresh persecutions. THUS THE JEWS OF THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE PINED AWAY UNDER UNCEASING PETTY PERSECUTION, AND FOR A TIME THEY ARE HIDDEN FROM THE VIEW OF HISTORY.

“MANY JEWS OF THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE, HOWEVER, ESCAPED COMPULSORY BAPTISM BY EMIGRATION. They quitted (left) a country in which their forefathers had settled long before the rise of that Church which had so persistently persecute them. THE JEWS OF ASIA MINOR (Byzantine) chose as their home the neighboring Cimmerian of Tauric peninsula (the Crimea), whose uncivilized inhabitants, of Scythian, Finnish and Slovenian origin, practiced idolatry. These Alani, Bulgarians and CHAZARS were, however, not jealous of men of other races, and of a different belief who settle din their vicinity. Thus, side by side with the Jewish communities which had existed from early times, there arose new communities on the shores of the Black Sea and the Straits of Theodosia (Kaffa), which lies opposite. From the Crimea the Greek (Byzantine Jews) spread toward the Caucasus, and the hospitable countries of the Chazars on the west coast of the Caspian Sea and at the mouth of the Volga (Atel). Jewish communities settled in Berdaa (Derbend), at the Albanian Gates in Semender (Tarki), and finally in Balanyir, the capital of the land of the Chazars. By their energy, ability and intelligence, the Greek-Jewish emigrants speedily acquired power in the midst of these barbarian nations, and prepared the way for an important historical event.”

What we have in the above quote on pages 122-124 are a large number of Sephardic (Cain Satanic) Jews migrating from Asia Minor of the Byzantine Empire into the land of the Khazars. There were thousands, if not tens of thousands of these Sephardic descendants of Cain in this migration! The conversion of king Bulan was in 740 A.D., and then the mixing of the Sephardic and the Ashkenazi started to take place. They have now had 1,275 year to mid the blood of Cain among themselves making them all Satanic.

Now let’s consider another Jewish source on this subject from, “The History Of The Jews,” by Paul Goodman (Revised And Enlarged By Israel Cohen), pages 87-89:

“The Chazars: The Jewish forces in Babylonia had been fatally weakened by the decay and final extinction of the venerable and universally received dignities of the Prince of the Captivity and the Gaonate; the Karaites had created the first and only irreparable schism in the body of Israel (the Jews, not true Israel); the once tolerant and enlightened caliphs had begun to persecute the unbelieving Jews and Christians with equal impartiality, EVEN THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE LEO THE ISAURIAN, BEING ACCUSED OF ‘EXECRABLE’ JUDAIZING TENDENCIES ON ACCOUNT OF HIS ICONOCLASTIC ACTIVITIES, CLEARED HIMSELF OF ALL SUSPICION BY SUBJECTING THE JEWS TO CRUEL PERSECUTION; yet these were only the labors preceding the birth of one of the greatest and most fruitful epochs of Jewish history. From widely different quarters, at the shores of the Euxine and the Gates of Hercules, on the banks of the Volga and the Guadalquivir, Judaism received unexpected accessions of strength, while on the Rhine also the old Jewish tree blossomed out with renewed splendor...

“Of greater consequence was the migration of the Jews along the trade routes of the Black Sea and the Volga. In this region lived the Chazars, a people of Tarter race, whose chagan, Bulan, together with his nobles, adopted the Jewish religion (about 740). From the scanty records that have been preserved of this Jewish kingdom of the Chazars, which subsisted for a period of about 250 years, it appears that it had its capital Atel, near the present Astrakhan, on the Volga, while the Chazarian territory stretched all over the south of Russia. The incursions of the Chazars were so dreaded by the Persians that they built a great wall across the Caucasus to keep them away, while imperial Byzantium had to buy off their hostility by ill-disguised payments, and the Russian dukes of Kiev were forced to recognize the authority of the Jewish chagans of the Chazars by a fixed tribute. The country of the Jewish Chazars was governed in a spirit of exceptional tolerance, so that, for instance, the supreme court of justice was composed of two Jews, two Christians, two Muhammadans and one pagan to represent the Russians and Bulgars. The chagan Obadiah, the successor of Bulan, invited a number of Jewish teachers into his country, to instruct the people in the tenets of Judaism, and it was only the difficulties of distance and travel which kept this Jewish State from the general knowledge of the Jews. It was through ambassadors from Byzantium that Hasdai ibn Shaprut, a Jewish statesman at the court of Cordova in the middle of the tenth century, became acquainted with the fact of their existence. And it is to an extant correspondence he initiated with the chagen Joseph that we are indebted for our information regarding the Jewish Chazars. They maintained their power until the year 969, when Sviatoslav, Duke of Kiev, conquered the capital and territory of the Chazars. Many of them withdrew to the Crimea, which also became known as Chazaria, but their political power had gone, and they were lost in the mass of Jews and Karaits who had settled there and in southeastern Europe generally.


"...Our first question here is, When did the Khazars and the Khazar name appear? There has been considerable discussion as to the relation of the Khazars to the Huns on the one hand and to the West Turks on the other. The prevalent opinion has for some time been that the Khazars emerged from the West Turkish empire.

“Early references to the Khazars appear about the time when the West Turks cease to be mentioned. Thus they are reported to have joined forces with the Greek Emperor Heraclius against the Persians in A.D. 627 and to have materially assisted him in the siege of Tiflis. it is a question whether the Khazars were at this time under West Turk supremacy. The chronicler Theophanes {died circa A.D. 818} who tells the story introduces them as 'the Turks from the east whom they call Khazars.'...”


"Khazar, an ancient Turkic‑speaking people who ruled a large and powerful state in the steppes North of the Caucasus Mountains from the 7th century to their demise in the mid‑11th century A.D...In the 8th Century it's political and religious well as the greater part of the Khazar nobility, abandoned paganism and converted to Judaism...(The Khazars are believed to be the ancestors of most Russian and Eastern European Jews)."


"Khazars, confederation of Turkic and Iranian tribes that established a major commercial empire in the second half of the 6th century, covering the southeastern section of modern European Russia...In the middle of the 8th century the ruling classes adopted Judaism as their religion."


"Ashkenazim, the Ashkenazim are one of the two major divisions of the Jews, the other being the Shephardim."


"Ashkenazim, the Ashkenazim are the Jews whose ancestors lived in German was among Ashkenazi Jews that the idea of political Zionism emerged, leading ultimately to the establishment of the state of Israel...In the late 1960s, Ashkenazi Jews numbered some 11 million, about 84 percent of the world Jewish population."


"Khazars, a NON-SEMITIC, Asiatic, Mongolian tribal nation who emigrated into Eastern Europe about the first century, who were converted as an entire nation to Judaism in the seventh century by the expanding Russian nation which absorbed the entire Khazar population, and who account for the presence in Eastern Europe of the great numbers of Yiddish‑speaking Jews in Russia, Poland, Lithuania, Galatia, Besserabia and Rumania."


"Khazars, a national group of general Turkic type, independent and sovereign in Eastern Europe between the seventh and tenth centuries C.E. During part of this time the leading Khazars professed Judaism...In spite of the negligible information of an archaeological nature, the presence of Jewish groups and the impact of Jewish ideas in Eastern Europe are considerable during the Middle Ages. Groups have been mentioned as migrating to Central Europe from the East often have been referred to as Khazars, thus making it impossible to overlook the possibility that they originated from within the former Khazar Empire."


"The primary meaning of Ashkenaz and Ashkenazim in Hebrew is Germany and Germans. This may be due to the fact that the home of the ancient ancestors of the Germans is Media, which is the Biblical Ashkenaz... Krauss is of the opinion that in the early medieval ages the Khazars were sometimes referred to as Ashkenazim ...About 92 percent of all Jews or approximately 14,500,000 are Ashkenazim."

The New Standard Jewish Encyclopedia, page 179,[GCP pg 68] "ASHKENAZI, ASHKENAZIM... constituted before 1963 some nine‑tenths of the Jewish people (about 15,000,000 out of 16,5000,000)[ As of 1968 it is believed by some Jewish authorities to be closer to 100%]"


Relates that the Khazar (Ashkenaz) Jews were/are the sons of Japheth not Shem:

"Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth: and unto them were sons born after the flood. The sons of Japheth;...the sons of Gomer; Ashkenaz..." (Genesis 10:1‑3)

Therefore, the Bible proves that the Ashkenaz Jews [Khazars] are not the descendants of Shem and cannot be Semite.


"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 Chronicles 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.”

The Encyclopedia Americana calls Hyrcanus a Jewish high priest [135‑105 B.C.] who forced the Idumeans to become "Jews." Idumea is the Greek for Edomites. The works of Josephes relates how the Idumeans were forced to accept Judaism. In the Bible Esau, Edo, Mt. Seir and Idumea are interchangeable for the offspring of ESAU, Jacob's twin brother.

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 Idumeans; 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 Idumeans 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 SEPHARDIM JEWS."


H. G. Wells, "It is highly probable that the bulk of the Jew's ancestors 'never' lived in Palestine 'at all,' which witnesses the power of historical assertion over fact."

Following is the story of the conversion of a tribe of people in Russia to Judaism and is the origin of more than 95% of the Jews of Eastern Europe. FACTS ARE FACTS, By Benjamin Freedman.

"Without a complete and accurate knowledge of the origin and history of the 'Jews' in Eastern is quite impossible for [Christians] to intelligently understand the harmful influence the Jews have exerted for ten centuries...

“You will probably be astonished as many Christians were years ago when I electrified the nation with the first publication by me of the facts disclosed by my many years of research into the origin and the history of the 'Jews' in Eastern Europe. My many years of intensive research established beyond the question of any doubt, contrary to the generally accepted belief held by Christians, that the 'Jews' in Eastern Europe at any time in their history in Eastern Europe were never the legendary 'lost ten tribes' of Bible lore. THAT HISTORIC FACT IS INCONTROVERTIBLE.


“Research also revealed that the 'Jews' in Eastern Europe WERE NEVER SEMITES, ARE NOT SEMITES NOW, NOR CAN THEY EVER BE REGARDED AS SEMITES AT ANY FUTURE TIME BY ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION. Exhaustive research also irrevocably rejects as a fantastic fabrication the generally accepted belief by Christians that the 'Jews' in Eastern Europe are the legendary 'Chosen People' so very vocally publicized by the Christian clergy from their pulpits..."

THE AMERICAN PEOPLES ENCYCLOPEDIA for 1954 at 15‑292 records the following in reference to the Khazars:

"IN THE YEAR 740 A.D., THE KHAZARS WERE OFFICIALLY CONVERTED TO JUDAISM. A century later they were crushed by the incoming Slavic‑speaking people and were scattered over central Europe WHERE THEY WERE KNOWN AS JEWS.

“It is from this grouping that most German, Polish and Hungarian Jews are descended, and they likewise make up a considerable part of that population now found in America. The term Ashkenazim is applied to this round‑headed, dark‑complexioned division."

Nathan M. Pollock has a beef with the Israeli government. His elaborate plans to celebrate this September the 1000th anniversary of the Jewish ‑ Khazar alliance were summarily rejected. An elderly, meek‑looking man who migrated to Israel from Russia 43 years ago.

He has devoted 40 of his 64 years trying to prove that six out of ten Israelis and none out of ten Jews in the Western Hemisphere are real Jews' Jews, but descendants of fierce Khazar tribes which roamed the steppes of Southern Russia many centuries ago.

For obvious reasons the Israeli authorities are not at all eager to give the official stamp of approval to Pollock's theories.

"For all we know, he may be 100 percent right,' said a senior government official. 'In fact, he is not the first one to discover the connection between Jews and Khazars. Many famous scholars Jews and non‑Jews, stressed these links in their historical research works. But who can tell today what percentage of Khazar blood flows in our veins..." (San Diego Union, August 28, 1966, Leo Heiman: Copley News Service)

From the above, we can clearly see that the Jews fully understand their Khazarian heritage as the third edition of the JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA for 1925 records:

"CHAZARS [Khazars]: A people of Turkish origin whose life and history are interwoven with the very beginnings of the history of the Jews of Russia. The kingdom of the Chazars was firmly established in most of South Russia long before the foundation of the Russian monarchy by the Varangians (855). Jews have lived on the shores of the Black and Caspian seas since the first centuries of the common era [after the death of Christ]. Historical evidence points to the region of the Ural as the home of the Chazars. Among the classical writers of the Middle Ages they were known as the 'Chozars,' 'Khazirs,' 'Akatzirs,' and 'Akatirs,' and in the Russian chronicles as 'Khwalisses' and 'Ugry Byelyye.'..."

The Encyclopedia Judaica:, Vol. 10, (1971) relates the following about the Khazars (Chazars):

"Khazars, a national group of general Turkic type, independent and sovereign in Eastern Europe between the seventh and tenth centuries A.D. DURING PART OF THIS TIME THE LEADING KHAZARS PROFESSED JUDAISM." (Encyclopedia Judicia, Vol. 10, (1971))


"Khazars, a medieval people, probably related to the Volga Bulgars, WHOSE RULING CLASS ADOPTED JUDAISM DURING THE 8TH CENT. The Khazars seem to have emerged during the 6th cent., from the vast nomadic Hun (Turki) empire which stretched from the steppes of Eastern Europe and the Volga basin to the Chinese frontier. Although it is often claimed that allusions to the Khazars are found as early as 200 C.E., actually they are not mentioned until 627...MOST JEWISH HISTORIANS DATE THE CONVERSION OF THE KHAZAR KING TO JUDAISM DURING THE FIRST HALF OF THIS CENTURY {A.D.}..."

ACADEMIC AMERICAN ENCYCLOPEDIA:, Deluxe Library Edition, Volume 12, page 66 states: "The Khazars, a Turkic people, created a commercial and political empire that dominated substantial parts of South Russia during much of the 7th through 10th centuries. DURING THE 8TH CENTURY THE KHAZAR ARISTOCRACY AND THE KAGAN (King) WERE CONVERTED TO JUDAISM."

THE NEW ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, Volume 6, page 836 relates:


COLLIERS ENCYCLOPEDIA: Volume 14, page 65 states:

"Khazars [kaza'rz], a semi-nomadic tribe of Turkish or Tatar origin who first appeared north of the Caucasus in the early part of the third century...IN THE EIGHTH CENTURY KHAGHAN BULAN DECIDED IN FAVOR OF THE JEWS AND ACCEPTED JUDAISM FOR HIMSELF AND FOR HIS PEOPLE..."

NEW CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA, Volume VIII, page 173 relates:

"The Khazars were an ethnic group, belonging to the Turkish peoples, who, toward the end of the 2d century of the Christian Era, had settled in the region between the Caucasus and the lower Volga and Don Rivers...

“At the beginning of the 8th century, dynastic ties bound the Khazars more closely to Constantinople, which led to a limited spread of Christianity among them. They also became acquainted with Judaism from the numerous Jews who lived in the Crimea and along the Bosphorus. When the Byzantine Emperor, Leo the Isaurian, persecuted the Jews in A.D. 723, many Jews found refuge in the Khazar kingdom, and THEIR INFLUENCE WAS SO GREAT THAT, AROUND THE MIDDLE OF THE 8TH CENTURY, THE KING OF THE KHAZARS AND MANY OF THE KHAZAR NOBILITY ACCEPTED THE JEWISH FAITH.


"Khazars (khah'-zahrz), a S Russian people of Turkic origin, who at the height of their power (during the 8th-10th cent., A.D.) controlled an empire which included Crimea, and extended along the lower Volga, as far E as the Caspian Sea. THE KHAZAR ROYAL FAMILY AND ARISTOCRACY CONVERTED TO JUDAISM DURING THE REIGN OF KING BULAN (768-809 A.D.) AND JUDAISM WAS THEREAFTER REGARDED AS THE STATE RELIGION..."

The Jewish author Alfred M. Lilienthal relates the following concerning Jewish history:

"...The existence of [The State of] ISREAL IS NOT FOUNDED ON LOGIC. IT HAS NO ORDINARY LEGITIMACY. There is neither in its establishment nor present scope any evident justice ‑ though there may be an utter need and wondrous fulfillment.'...

“Arthur Koestler answers this question with an emphatic 'NO!' In his 1976 best seller ‘The Thirteenth Tribe,’ the Author of ‘Darkness at Noon, Promise and Fulfillment,’ and ‘The Roots of Coincidence’ dropped another bombshell by PROVING THAT TODAYS JEWS WERE, FOR THE MOST PART, DESCENDANTS OF KHAZARS, WHO CONVERTED TO JUDAISM SEVEN CENTURIES AFTER THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM IN 70 A.D...THEREFORE, the GREAT MAJORITY OF EASTERN EUROPEAN JEWS ARE NOT SEMITIC JEWS AT ALL, and as most Western European Jews came from East Europe, MOST OF THEM ALSO ARE NOT SEMITIC JEWS.

“Thus, maintains Koestler, the veins of 45 percent of Israelis (save only the Arab and the Sephardic Jews), plus a big majority of JEWS AROUND THE WORLD, ARE UTTERLY VACANT OF CORPUSCULAR LINKS TO THE TRIBE OF MOSES AND SOLOMON...The Koestler thesis, however startling, IS IN NO WISE A NEW ONE. THE GENETIC KHAZAR DERIVATION OF MOST JEWS, ONLY THE SEPHARDIC MAY BE ACCOUNTED HEBREWS BY BLOOD, HAS BEEN LONG IF NOT WIDELY KNOWN...The home to which Weismann, Silver, Ben‑Gurion and so many other Ashkenazim Zionists have long yearned to return HAS most likely NEVER BEEN THEIRS...[it is an] anthropological fact, MANY CHRISTIANS MAY HAVE MUCH MORE HEBREW-ISRAELITE BLOOD IN THEIR VEINS THAN MOST OF THEIR JEWISH NEIGHBORS!

“Ironically enough, too, Volume IV of the Jewish Encyclopedia (as of the time of research, 1952), because this publication spelled Khazars with a 'C' instead of a 'K,' is titled 'Chazars to Dreyfus.'.

“And it was the famed trial of Captain Alfred Dreyfus, as interpreted by Theodore Herzl, that made the modern Jewish Khazars of Russia...forget their descent from converts to establish the State of Israel...



Now we shall investigate the history that led up to the persecution of the Sephardim Jews which ultimately drove them massively into the Khazarian Empire. The next quotation will be take from “The Story Of Civilization Part IV, The Age Of Faith,” by Will Durant, pages 425-426:

“Leo III (Leo the Isaurian) derived his cognomen (surname) from the district of Isauria in Cilicia; according to Theophanes he was born there of Armenian parentage. His father moved thence to Thrace, raised sheep, and sent 500 of them, with his son Leo in the bargain, as a present to the Emperor Justinian II. Leo became guardsman of the palace, then commander of the Anatolian legions, finally, by the convincing suffrage of the army, emperor. He was a man of ambition, strong willed, and patient perseverance; a general who repeatedly defeated Moslem forces greatly superior to his own; a statesman who gave the Empire the stability of just laws justly enforced, reformed taxation, reduced serfdom, extended peasant proprietorship, distributed lands, repopulated deserted regions, and constructively revised the laws. His only fault was autocracy.

“Perhaps in his Asiatic youth he had imbibed from Moslems, Jews, Manicheans, Monophysites, and Paulicians a Stoic-Puritan conception of religion that condemned the addiction of popular Christianity to image worship, ceremonialism and superstition. The Old Testament (Deuteronomy 4:15) had explicitly forbidden any ‘graven image of any figure, male or female, the likeness of any beast that is on the earth.’ The early Church had frowned upon images as relics of paganism, and had looked with horror upon pagan sculptures purporting to represent the gods. But the triumph of Christianity under Constantine, and the influence of Greek surroundings, traditions, and statuary in Constantinople and the Hellenistic East, had softened this opposition. As the number of worshiped saints multiplied, a need arose for identifying and remembering them; pictures of them and of Mary were produced in great number; and in the case of Christ not only His imagined form but His cross became objects of reverence; even, for simple minds, magic talismans. A natural freedom of fancy among the people turned the holy relics, pictures, and statutes into objects of adoration; people prostrated themselves before them, kissed them, burned candles and incense before them, crowned them with flowers, and sought miracles from their occult influence. In Greek Christianity especially, sacred images were everywhere; in churches, monasteries, houses and shops, even on furniture, trinkets, and clothes. Cities in danger from epidemic, famine, or war tended to rely upon the power of the relics they harbored, or on their patron saint, rather than on human enterprise. Fathers and councils f the Church repeatedly explained that the images were not deities, but only reminders thereof; the people did not care to make such distinctions.

“Leo III was offended by these excesses of popular faith; it seemed to him that paganism was in this manner reconquering Christianity; and he felt keenly that satire directed by Moslems, Jews and Christian sects against the superstitions of the orthodox multitude. To weaken the power of the monks over the people and the government, and win the support of Nestorians and Monophysites, he assembled a great council of bishops and senators, and with their consent he promulgated in 726 and edict requiring the complete removal of icons from the churches; representatives of Christ and the Virgin were forbidden; and church murals were to be covered with plaster. Some of the higher clergy supported the edict; the lower clergy and the monks protested, the people revolted. Soldiers trying to enforce the law were attacked by worshipers horrified and infuriated by this desecration of the dearest symbols of their faith. In Greece and the Cyclades rebel forces proclaimed a rival emperor, and sent a fleet to capture the capital. Leo destroyed the fleet, and imprisoned the leaders of the opposition. In Italy, where pagan forms of worship never died, the people were almost unanimous against the edict; Venice, Ravenna, and Rome drove out the Imperial officers; and a council of Western bishops summoned by Pope Gregory II anathematized the Iconoclasts; image breakers, without naming the Emperor. The patriarch of Constantinople joined in the revolt, and sought by it to restore the independence of the Eastern Church from the state. Leo disposed him (730), but did him no violence; and the edict was so mildly enforced that when Leo died (741), most of the churches retained their frescoes and mosaics unharmed.”

We will find some more information about the Jewish persecution that was going on as a result of the image breaking, at this period, from this same book, and we will quote again from “The Story of Civilization: Part IV, The Age Of Faith,” by Will Durant, page 389:

“The Byzantine emperors continued for two centuries the oppressive politics of Justinian toward the Jews. Heraclius (628) banished them from Jerusalem in retaliation for their aid to Persia, and did all he could to exterminate them. LEO THE ISAURIAN SOUGHT TO DISPROVE THE RUMOR THAT HE WAS JEWISH BY A DECREE (723) GIVING BYZANTINE JEWS A CHOICE BETWEEN CHRISTIANITY OR BANISHMENT. Some submitted; some burned themselves to death in their synagogues rather than yield.”

We are have to present a lot of history in order to make understandable the extent of the movement against the images and how it affected the migration of the Jews out of the Byzantine empire and into the friendly area of Khazaria. It was a natural movement for the Sephardic to make as the Khazars were very tolerant with all religions. Not only was Leo the Isaurain involved with this anti-image movement, but it continued altogether for 120 years by him and his successors. In 120 years, there was a lot of time for a great number of these Sephardic Jews to move out of the Byzantine Empire. We are going to use another quote from the “Manual of Universal Church History,” by the Rev. Dr. John Alzog, volume II (from a 3 volume work), pages 207-209, under the heading, “Byzantine Iconoclasts.” We wish to state here: although this comes out of a “universalist” manual, we do not promote universalism in any manner, shape or form. We use this reference for its historic value only!

“The origin of this deplorable controversy is usually ascribed to LEO THE ISAURIAN, a rude and ignorant soldier, who rising from the humbles walks of life, finally succeeded, by the aid of the army, in reaching the imperial throne (717 A.D. HAVING ALREADY EMPLOYED VIOLENT MEASURES TO COMPEL THE JEWS TO RECEIVE BAPTISM, and driven the Montanists to such a degree of desperation that they frequently resorted to suicide to escape his tyranny, he next turned his attention to the task of suppressing the use of images. He brought to the contest the fierce spirit of the law-giver of Mecca rather than the moderation of the one of Sinai, declaring ‘he could not enforce that Christ should be represented under the form of a dumb and senseless figure, made of coarse material and bedaubed with vulgar colors, and that such representations would shock both Jews and Muhammadans and repel them from Christianity. He therefore assumed the office of a self-constituted reformer of the Church, and set about putting an end to this superstition. He commenced by ordering Pope Gregory II to have the images and paintings on the walls  of the churches raised sufficiently high to be beyond the reach of the embraces and kisses of the devout multitude, thus, as he though, preventing profanation and removing the occasion of sin.

“Finding that his order was ineffectual, he published, in the year 726, in spite of the representations and protest of Germanus, Patriarch of Constantinople, and other theologians of the capital, an edict forbidding the veneration of statutes, images and mosaics, and the branding of the practice as idolatrous.

“This edict was shortly followed by a second (C.A.D. 730) of a far more severe and sweeping character, ordering the complete destruction of all images throughout the Western Empire. No words can convey an adequate idea of agitation and tumult which followed its promulgation. The question, unlike any abstruse definition of a dogma, or authoritative solution of a subtle point of metaphysics, was within the comprehension of the multitude, and bore directly upon their religious life and devotional habits. It has been said that if an order were issued at the present day (1872), commanding the breaking and destroying of all the statutes and images of the Blessed Virgin set up along the country highways and metropolitan thoroughfares of any Catholic country of Europe, no such revulsion of feeling would take place as that which followed the promulgation of Leo’s edict. The soldiers charged with its execution were treated with every sort of indignity, and frequently lost their lives in endeavoring to carry its instructions into effect.

“Above the bronze portal of the imperial palace stood a magnificent image of Christ, which was held in great reverence by the people. According to Theophanes and Cedrenus, the destroying of this was the occasion of a popular tumult, in which many of the participants paid with their lives the penalty of their devotion. When a soldier of the imperial guard had placed a ladder against the gateway, for the purpose of taking down the image, a number of ladies collected around begged him to spare it for their sakes. But, instead of heeding their remonstrances and acceding to their wishes, he struck the face of the image a blow with his ax; an act which so wounded the religious sensibilities, and so excited the indignation of the ladies that, forgetting for the time the gentleness of their sex, and yielding to the fierce impulse of the moment, they drew the ladder from under the soldier’s feet, precipitated him to the ground, set upon and murdered him.

The chief opposition came form the monks who supplied the images and the bulk of the people who entertained great reverence for them.”

We could go on with this subject about the images for a long time, but we think you can see by now the importance of these events in connection with the forced migrations of the Sephardic Jews out of the Byzantine Empire into the Khazar Empire. What is interesting in Arthur Koestler’s book, “The Thirteenth Tribe,” is the fact he only devotes a single phrase within one sentence about the persecution of the Jews in the Byzantine Empire. This is the phrase found on page 16, “in defiance of Christian proselytizing by Byzantium.” Koestler is not completely honest with his presentation. He tells you a lot of truth, but leave you with the impression that the Jews are a religion and not a race; which is true insofar as that goes. THE JEWS ARE OF MANY RACES, BUT THEY HAVE ONE THING IN COMMON, THEY ALL HAVE THE BLOOD OF CAIN FLOWING IN THEIR VEINS. We recommend that any of you who haven’t read his book to do so, but remember he has something to hide. Now on page 22, Koestler, for a moment lets the cat out of the bag in describing the looks of some of the Khazars.

“Lastly the Arab geographer Istakhri, one of the main Arab sources, has this to say: ‘The Khazars do not resemble the Turks. They are black-haired, and are of two kinds, one called the Kara-Khazars, (Black Khazars) WHO ARE SWARTHY verging on deep black as if they were a kind of Indian, and a white kind (Ak-Khazars), who are strikingly handsome.’ This is more flattering, but only adds to the confusion. For it was customary among the Turkish peoples to refer to the ruling classes or clans as ‘white,’ to the lower strata as ‘black.’

THIS DOES NOT ADD TO THE CONFUSION as these DARK HAIRED SWARTHY KHAZARS describes the Sephardic JEWS PERFECTLY. We think that Koestler is, again, trying to throw you off the track. We would trust the Arab before we would trust Koestler. No doubt, after the Jews from Asia minor was among the Khazars long enough, he was also referred to as a Khazar. Again, on page 25, Koestler mentions a very adept famed rhetorician by the name of Priscus of the Byzantine Empire.

“But Priscus also has anecdotes to tell about a people subject to the Huns whom he calls Akatzars; that is, very likely the Ak-Khazars, or ‘White’ Khazars (as distinct from the ‘Black’ Kara-Khazars).”

Now we will pick up another witness to this mixing of the Sephardim stock with the Ashkenazi stock. We are going to quote from an article out of “The Forum,” March 1926, volume LXXV, No. 3, entitled “The Pedigree Of Judah,” by Lothrop Stoddard, pages 16-18:

“The evolution of eastern Jewry is at once more obscure and more complicated. Their posterity was gravely compromised by the Mohammedan conquest and conversion of Mesopotamia and Persia in the seventh century A.D. Harried and persecuted by Moslem zealots, the Jews grew restless and sought an avenue of escape. They presently found it to the northward in the plains of southern Russia, where opportunities beckoned them, perhaps more favorable than ever before in their history.

“Southern Russia was then occupied by the people known as the Khazars. Precisely what the Khazars were racially is a much disputed point. Probably they were predominantly of broad-headed Turkish stock from Central Asia, together with a strong strain of flat-faced, short-statured Mongoloids from still farther eastward. They certainly built up a flourishing state which derived its prosperity from its command of the overland trading-routes between the Near and middle East, the Khazars being a mercantile town-dwelling folk.

“From the first they had been in contact with the numerous Jews of the Caucasus, and the two peoples had got along well together. Soon the Jews of Khazaria became so numerous and influential that they made a cultural and spiritual conquest of their hosts. The Khazars became converted to Judaism and established what amounted to a Jewish state.

“THIS ACTED LIKE A MAGNET TO THE  WHOLE OF EASTERN JEWRY, AND ONE OF THOSE VAST MASS-MIGRATIONS WHICH HAVE OCCURRED SEVERAL TIMES IN JEWISH HISTORY TOOK PLACE. In the eighth century A.D. (700s(), Mesopotamia, Persia, and the Armenian-Caucasian area still contained the bulk of the world’s Jewish population. By the end of the tenth century (900s) these lands were almost emptied of Jews. Lured to Khazaria as to the ‘Promised Land,’ Jewry pushed northward from Asia into southeastern Europe; swarming in by the hundred thousand, by sea, river, and by mountain trail.

“And during those two centuries was forged the Ashkenazic stock of today. THIS MIGRATION INVOLVED SWEEPING RACIAL CHANGES. In the first place, Jewry’s slow progress through the Armenian and Caucasian highlands implied a further admixture and strengthening of the Armenoid at the expense of the Semitic racial element.

“THEN, ONCE IN KHAZARIA, EXTENSIVE INTERMARRIAGE WITH THE CONVERTED KHAZARS RESULTED IN A FURTHER INFLUX OF TURKISH and MONGOLOID BLOOD. The result was a population prevailingly round-headed and thick-set, but with two outstanding facial types: the full-faced, hook-nosed Armenoid; and the flat-faced, squat-or-pug-nosed Mongoloid, respectively.

“The Semitic type must have almost entirely disappeared. The consequences of this racial transformation were as unprecedented as they were far-reaching. Hitherto the base elements in Jewry’s ethnic make-up had been either Semitic or Armenoid, waxing and waning in relative importance from age to age, it is true, yet still always preponderant, no other racial element having been sufficiently important to shake their join significance.



“Great as is the present difference between Ashkenazim and Sephardim, however, it is not quite as great as the divergence eight hundred or nine hundred years ago, owing to certain minor modifications which have since taken place.

“The evolution of the modern Ashkenazim was not quite complete. By the eleventh century, the Khazar empire, grown rich and warlike, collapse before the assaults of its enemies, and the Jewish masses again fallen on evil times, drifted slowly westward in search of better opportunities. Sweeping across southern Russia, they began to appear in Poland.

“This movement was soon accelerated by the action of the Polish Kings. Intent on building up a strong state, the Polish monarchs welcomed the Jews in order to build up a middle class devoted to industry and trade. IMMEDIATELY POLAND BECAME WHAT KHAZARIA HAD ONE BEEN; A MAGNET OF JEWISH MASS-MIGRATION. AND THESE JEWISH IMMIGRANTS, THOUGH MAINLY FROM THE EAST, CAME IN LESSER NUMBERS, FROM THE WEST AS WELL. Western Europe had by that time become the scene of bitter anti-Jewish persecutions, so that, there also, many Jews heeded the welcome summons of the Polish Crown. HERE, THEN, ON POLISH SOIL, THE LONG-SUNDERED BRANCHES OF JEWRY MET ONCE MORE. The immigration from Western Europe were, of course, Sephardim, and though too few in number materially to affect the Ashkenazic physical type, they did impose their superior culture and a debased form of their Germanic speech, which mixed with Hebrew, Slavic, and other linguistic-elements, constitutes the present jargon known as Yiddish, employed by the Polish Jews to this day.


There is a possibility that the Khazars may already have had some of Cain’s Satanic blood flowing in their veins before the mass-migrations of the Sephardim Jews into Khazaria and the conversion of King BULAN. We learn from Genesis 15:19-21 that the Canaanites (Jews) were made up from ten different nations.

The first mentioned of these nations were the ‘Kenites” who were descendants of Cain. The fourth mentioned are the Hittites. It is a pretty well accepted fact (even by standard Bible commentaries) that these ten nations mixed with each other to become commonly known as “Canaanites.” Knowing that the Hittites were among them, let’s take another quote from “The Forum,” March 1926, volume LXXV, No. 3, entitled “The Pedigree Of Judah,” by Lothrop Stoddard, page 12:

“Even more striking is the parallel between the ancient Hittites and a large proportion of the modern Ashkenazim. One cannot look at a Hittite sculpture without being struck by the ‘Jewishness’ of the face there depicted. The famous ‘Jewish nose,’ with its peculiarly hooked nostril, is found to be not exclusively Jewish, but to have been shared by the ancient Hittites, and also by modern peoples of the West Asiatic Highland. Many Armenians, Caucasian, and Anatolians today look so much like this type of Jew that it is practically impossible to distinguish them by their physical appearance.

“Here, then, we seem to have found two primal elements in Jewry’s racial make-up: an ancient cross between Semitic and Hittite-Armenoid stocks. Which was the original root? Almost certainly, the Semitic. The entire wight of evidence tends to show that the Jews were originally a tribe of nomadic Semites who migrated from the desert lands on the southward into Palestine; geographically a borderland between Arabia and the West Asian highlands. Here they encountered folk of Hittite-like stock and took up a certain amount of Hittite blood, though for a long time the Semitic strain must have predominated.”

Quoting from “The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, volume 3, page 782:

“KENITES...meaning (metalworkers, smiths). Clan or tribal name of semi-nomadic peoples of South Palestine and Sinai. The Aramaic and Arabic etymologies of the root gyn show that it has to do with metal and metal work (thus the Hebrew word from this root, ‘lance’). This probably indicates that the Kenites were metal workers, especially since Sinai and Wadi ‘Arabah were rich in high grade copper ore. W.F. Albright has pointed tot he Beni Hassan mural in Egypt (19th century B.C.) As an illustration of such a WONDERING GROUP OF SMITHS. This mural depicts thirty-six men, women and children in characteristic Semitic dress leading along with other ANIMALS, donkeys laden with MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS, weapons and an item which Albright has identified as a BELLOWS. He has further noted that Lemech’s three children (Genesis 4:19-22) were responsible for HERDS (Jabal), MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS (Jubal), and METAL WORK (Tubal-Cain, or Tubal, THE SMITH), the three occupations which seem most evident in the mural.”

2nd quote from the same article:

“THE EARLY MONARCHY. During this period a significant concentration of Kenites was located in the southern Judean territory. This is clear from 1 Samuel 15:6 and also from David’s relations with them.”

3rd quote from the same article:

“POSTEXILIC REFERENCES. In 1 Chronicles 2:55 the FAMILIES OF THE SCRIBES living at Jabaz are said to be Kenites. Apparently, during the kingdom and exile periods, certain Kenites had given up NOMADIC SMITHING and had taken on a more sedentary, but equally honorable PROFESSION OF SCRIBE.”

“Peake’s Commentary on the Bible,” page 114, has this to say about the name of the Kenites:

“The etymology of the name suggests THAT THEY WERE SMITHS OR ARTIFICERS, a theory which is supported by their association with the Wadi ‘Arabah, where there were copper deposits which had been worked by the Egyptians since the middle of the 3rd millennium.”

“Peake’s Commentary on the Bible,” page 181, we have more on the name of the Kenites:

“The name CAIN is generally taken by Semitic philologists to mean ‘smith,’ and regarded as the patronymic of the KENITE CLAN OF SMITHS.”

“The Jamieson, Fausset & Brown Commentary On The Whole Bible,” has this to say on Kenite, page 293:

“THE FAMILIES OF THE SCRIBES; either civil or ecclesiastical officers of the Kenite origin, WHO ARE HERE CLASSED WITH THE TRIBE OF JUDAH, NOT AS BEING DESCENDED FROM IT, but as dwellers within its territory, and in a measure INCORPORATED with its people.”

“The Matthew Pool’s Commentary On The Holy Bible,” has this to say on the Kenites, volume 1, page 779:

“THE SCRIBES; either civil, WHO WERE PUBLIC NOTARIES, WHO WROTE AND SIGNED LEGAL INSTRUMENTS; OR ECCLESIASTICAL...and are here mentioned not as if they were of the tribe of Judah, but because they dwelt among them, and probably were allied to them by marriages, and so in a manner incorporated with them. Which dwelt, or rather, dwelt; Hebrew, were dwellers. For the other translation, which dwelt,


Here is where these Pharisees, Sadducees and SCRIBES which Yahshua pointed out as being of their father the devil came from. When He said to them in Matthew 23:35 and John 8:44:

Matthew 23:35:

“That upon you (Jews) may came all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barchias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.”

John 8:42-47:

“Jesus said unto them (the Scribes, and Pharisees, the Jews), If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me. Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word. Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do...He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.”

John 10:26‑31:

“But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you...Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.”

Now that we have proven that the SCRIBES, PHARISEES and SADDUCEES of Yahshua’s time were descendants of CAIN.

Now that you have some understanding of the Jewish question, and understand that the blood of Cain is flowing in both the Sephardim and Ashkenazic branches of Jewry, take time and listen to some of the stupid statements made by people like Jerry Falwell, Jimmy Swaggert, Billy Graham, Mike Evans, Stephen Jones, and etc., and you will began to understand how false their teachings are.

They will tell you that the Jews of “Christ’s” time were pure blooded Israelites. What more proof do you need to understand they are teaching you lies?!?! We could gone on for several more pages with documentation that the Sephardim and Ashkenazi continued to mix since the conversion of Bulan. Some of the Khazars went to Spain while many many Sephardim went to Khazaria. It is our deepest desire that this presentation will clear up this issue in your minds so you can get it out of the way and go on to deeper truths. (Taken, in part, from a study by Clifton A. Emahisher’s Teaching Ministries, 1012 N. Vine Street, Fostoria, Ohio 44830, Phone (419) 435-2836)

Reference Materials