Watchman Willie Martin Archive




          Mon, 15 Oct 2001 19:35:48 ‑0700


         "Andy" <[email protected]>


         [email protected]


         "Holy_War@yahoogroups. com" <[email protected]>

‑‑‑‑‑Original Message‑‑‑‑‑

From: Bob Jones [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 19:22

To: Pastor Bob Jones


Importance: High



              Many have heard, and are very familiar with, the terms

"Irish" and "Scottish", and really don’t know the difference

between the two. The Irish and Scots are really the same people

except they arrived in Britain two thousand years apart. The

ancestors of the Irish arrived in Britain about 1600 B.C., while the

Scots arrived about 501 A.D. It is simply amazing that two groups of

the same people would wander through the earth and end up

locating within a few miles from each other two thousand years

later in Britain. Because there are two different groups of the same

peoples concerned here, we will have to treat them separately

even though they came from the same family. We will first

investigate the background of the


              The Irish are a very ancient people, and their history

covers a large span of time. If we will take the time to do a little

arithmetic, we will soon see we are talking about approximately

3,500 years or better. With the United States being 223 years old

(1999), you can see the Irish history is about 18 times as old as we

are. When one

considers all the things that have happened since 1776, it is

staggering to imagine what has happened to the Irish people over a

period of 3,500 years.

              It all started when a very grand lady by the name of Tamar

had twin boys by her father‑in‑law. A lot of people judge Tamar as a

woman with a low moral reputation. This is because they don’t

know all the details of this complicated story. In the birthing

process, it appeared that the one twin (Zerah) was going to be born

first as he put out his hand. The midwife put a scarlet thread around

his hand to mark the firstborn child. To the midwife’s amazement,

the other twin (Pharez) proceeded to come out first. It was always

of the utmost importance to identify the firstborn in the case of

twins, for the firstborn received the birthright. Today, both the Irish

and Scots claim the emblem of the hand with the scarlet thread (or

the red hand), showing they are of the Zerah branch of Judah. To

bring you this 3,500 year old history, I will be quoting from various

authors who have written various phases of this history.

              If you will remember, Judah (and I am not talking about

"Jews") was to be the royal tribe, Genesis 49:9‑12:

               9 Judah is a lion’s whelp: from the prey, my son, thou art

gone up: he stooped down, he couched as a lion, and as an old

lion; who shall rouse him up? 10 The sceptre 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. 11 Binding his foal

unto the vine, and his ass’s colt unto the choice vine; he washed

his garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes: 12 His

eyes shall be red with wine, and his teeth white with milk.

              With this passage, we can already see more symbology of

Judah appearing. To get started with this almost forgotten history

of the Irish (as being Zerah Judah), I will quote from Father

Abraham’s Children, by Perry Edward Powell, Ph. D., pages 98‑101;

              Let us put it in a different way, here is the beginning of

royalty. What else does scepter mean? Judah led in the conquest

of Canaan and received the first and

choicest portion. David raised it to pre‑eminence over the tribes

and the nations. He is the first king of the Judah‑Pharez line, and he

did not appear for seven hundred years. Was there and is there an

older line of royalty? The answer is, Yes. The Judah‑Zerah [line]

was royal from the beginning. The two royalties are now merged

and have been for centuries in the British royal house. And how

long shall we have royalty? ‘Until Shiloh comes.’ [The future] Shiloh

came to Bethlehem, the first Advent, and will come again [as

Shiloh] at the end of time, the second Advent. Royalty is eternal.

The throne of David is everlasting. There is no royalty in Europe but

descends from Judah. And the Judah‑Zerah royalty is, we repeat,

seven hundred years older than Judah‑Pharez because it began at

once. You can read Genesis 38 to see how royalty began [but there

is much more to talk about].

              Another great event is recorded in Genesis 46:12, [if we

dare mention it]. Here we can read the census of those of the

family of Jacob who went with him into Egypt,

eventually into Egyptian bondage though they did not know it at the

time. Pharez took with him his two sons, (which did not include

Shelah). Now Zerah went alone. No son accompanied him. We will

see where the son later traveled. Here is the inference and the

conclusion, The Trojan‑Welsh by‑passed the Egyptian captivity, and

all other captivities and have never been in slavery to any man, in

any land, at any time. (Slight changes or additions in brackets


              Zerah’s son Ethan, very wise, and indeed this line of

Judah‑Zerah is the only royal line termed wise, on the other hand

led his people north, from Egypt where he was born, into what is

now Asia Minor, and his son Mahol continued likewise. Mahol’s heir,

Darda, reached the western shore, where on a commanding site, he

founded the metropolis of Troy. The date is 1520 B.C. Here the city

flourished for nearly four hundred years. Darda first saw the straits

that separated Europe and Asia and gave them his name,

Dardanelles. Darda also founded a fort here that is named after him.

But the greatest honor is recorded in the Bible, Solomon was ‘wiser

than all men; than ... Darda the son of Mahol.’ Thus great was the

founder of Troy and the sire of the Trojan race whose children

abide with us still. Troy fell because her sons had an eye for the

refined and beautiful in woman (sic). Her descendants have that

exquisite eye still and are naturally very proud of the

accomplishment. ...

              When Troy fell she did so to arise on another shore in

eternal and imperial splendor. I am not referring to Italy. That

empire though long was ephemeral (short‑lived). Italy is an

interlude only. Aeneas, a member of the old royal family, attained

the kingship, led the saddened Trojans around the Mediterranean

Sea, as graphically described in the Aenead, and finally brought

them to their new home on the Tiber in Italy. Including this Italian

interlude, the Trojan period embraced 417 years.

              Here on the Tiber happened a very sad event, too sad to

be recalled, and would not be except for its denouement (final

outcome). Brutus was one day hunting

with his father Silvius, when he spied the prey, as he thought, and

let fly an arrow. On running up he was shocked and grieved to find

that he had killed his own  father! Some people then, as now, were

censorious and Brutus departed from the new colony, from which

later sprang Rome, and with his royal followers, went to Greece,

rallied the enslaved Trojans, defeated King Pendrasus, thus erasing

the defeat of Troy, and as victor exacted these terms; he must give

his daughter Ignoge for wife, furnish a big fleet of ships fully

provisioned, for his emigrant force of seven thousand men, and

free permission for them to sail unmolested. ...

              Brutus, now with an object and direction, steered west

through the straits (pillars) of Hercules, then northward along the

east Atlantic main, across the English

Channel to the present river Dart, and up its stream to Totnes

where stepping on a large stone he landed on the great island

which was ever to bear his name as a memorial among the proud

nations of the world. This rock, more famous throughout the

centuries than Plymouth Rock, is marked as Brutus Rock, and has

been visited perennially by people of all nations, all ranks, and all


With his people he explored the whole island and he apportioned to

each one according to his rank and services. At last he decided the

proper place for his capital, a choice bank of the Thames river, so

named for a stream, Thyamis, in Epirus from which he first sailed,

and there he built his metropolis, and according to the advice of the

oracle, he named it Tri Novantum, New Troy. This name it

bore for over eleven hundred years when King Lud at the

beginning of the Christian era built her walls and renamed her

Luddun, Lud’s wall, easily refined into London. London is also

derived by some from Llandin, meaning ‘Sacred

eminence.’ London dates from three hundred‑fifty years before

Rome. Why should Rome be called the Eternal City?

              If you are of Irish or Scottish descent, this history, as told

here, may seem strange and wonderfully astonishing. I am sure

many of you have never heard anything quite like this, or were

never taught anything remotely comparable in school. We really

shouldn’t take the word of one writer concerning this history

though. In the booklet, Our Neglected Heritage, "The Magnet of The

Isles", by Gladys Taylor, vol. 3, page 27 we read this:

              The Reverend William Milner, in his chart of The Royal

House of Britain, gives the two grandsons of Judah, Calcol and

Darda, as Cecrops and Dardanos. The more we study the classical

references to these founders of cities, dynasties and legal

systems, the more they appear to resemble Calcol and Darda, who

were the children of Zarah, a migrating section of the family of

Judah, the sceptre tribe. Were the grandsons of Judah beginning to

put into effect the responsibilities of their tribe as kings and

administrators? ...

              After the fall of Troy, the royal house of Dardanos was

divided and scattered. Caesar claimed descent from Aeneas and

Virgil wrote the Aeneid to proclaim this fact. From Ascanius Julius,

son of Aeneas and Creusa, daughter of Priam King of Troy, came

the Julian family of Rome and also Brutus the Trojan, grandson of

Ascanius, who gathered together a band of Trojan exiles, soon after

the fall of Troy and traveled westward to Britain. This could have

been a considerable migration. From a wealth of Greek and Latin

literature dealing with the departure of the Trojans, notably the

Trojan Cycle, listed by Proclus in the

second century A.D., we gather that Aeneas departed from Mount

Ida with 88,000 Trojans and built a fleet of 332 vessels. We leave

Aeneas in Italy and follow Brutus and his companions to Britain.

              What this information is telling you is, if you are Irish you

are directly related to the Trojans, or if you are Scottish, you are

indirectly related, and both the Irish and

Scottish are direct descendants of Judah, or Israelites. And what

may seem more astounding, the so‑called "Jews" are not now, nor

ever were Israelites. They are actually descendants of Cain the




              This is a true story which very few have any knowledge of

today. The facts of its existence have been almost totally erased

from history. Although, almost forgotten by those who should be

concerned the most, there is substantial evidence extant to prove

it's existence beyond all doubt. Actually the Irish church was

established in 37 A.D. To have an understanding of the Irish church

is an all important fact in understanding Irish genealogy. To get

started with this phase of our perusal (study), I am going to quote

again from the book, Father Abraham’s Children, by Perry Edwards

Powell, Ph. D., pages 140‑142:

              Now we come to the missionary movement of Joseph of

Arimathea, who was appointed by Philip the apostle. After the

passion of his Nephew, persecution fell

heavily upon the infant church. The Jew and the Roman were bitter

persecutors but he knew where there was no persecution, but

protection. However, he was seized, and since the Jew could not

kill [under the Law directly], he and Lazarus and Mary and Martha

his sisters, Mary Magdalene, Marcella, Maximin, and others, all

objects of especial Jewish hostility, were ‘exposed to the sea in a

vessel without sail or oars.’ They drifted to Marseilles, southern

Gaul, where they arrived in a famished condition. The Arimathean

knew the territory and friendly traders, and was aided on his way,

the destination of which was now Britain. Here they eventually

arrived and came to rest in Ynis Avalon, Glastonbury, where he

rested and soon began his labors for his Nephew. The year was 37

A.D. On his tomb is the epitaph: Ad Britannos veni post Christum

sepelivi — Docui — Quievi. ‘I came to the Britons after I had buried

the Christ. I taught. I have entered on my rest.’

              Thus was established the first above ground church in the

world at Glastonbury, in Britain. I am sure there are many who have

never heard this particular story of Joseph of Arimathea, and fewer

yet understand its importance. For more insight on Joseph of

Arimathea, I will quote, The Traditions of Glastonbury, by E.

Raymond Capt M.A., page 22:

              Several ancient manuscripts indicate that after the Passion

of Christ, Joseph of Arimathea was commissioned by St. Philip, the

Apostle, to take the Gospel to Britain. One such manuscript is the

‘Victory of Aurelius Ambrosius’ by Gildas Albanicus. It asserts

plainly that Britain received the Gospel in the time of Emperor

Tiberius, and that Joseph was sent, with others (after the

dispersion of the Disciples) to Britain by St. Philip. There, Joseph

was to lay the foundation of the Christian religion. The author gives

the date ‘about the year of Our Lord 63’ and adds that Joseph

stayed in Britain the rest of his life.

              Another manuscript, ‘De Antiquities of Glastonbury’ (1908),

contains this entry in the opening chapter: ‘St. Philip ... coming into

the country of the Franks to preach ... converted to the Faith, and

baptized them. Working to spread Christ’s word, he chose twelve

from among his disciples, and sent them into Britain. Their leader, it

was said, was St. Philip’s dearest friend, Joseph of Arimathea, who

buried the Lord.’ (Translated from ‘De Antiquite Glastonbiensis

Ecclesia’ 1240)

              We can see from this, that outside of a few at Jerusalem,

the Gospel was first preached in Britain. This brings up one of the

most misunderstood, one of the most

misrepresented, and one of the most misquoted passages of

Scripture in the Bible. Almost everyone misunderstands it, or has a

twisted conception of its meaning. This Scripture is Romans 1:16

which reads, (KJV):

              For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the

power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew

first, and also to the Greek.

              It’s not talking about the Canaanite "Jews" here, it’s

speaking of the Judahites in Britain, and they got the Gospel

message first just as it says! It should say: To the

Tribe of Judah in Jerusalem and in Britain first, and also the Greek,

and they were all Israelites, and nothing but Israelites! It was

through Judah in Britain that the Gospel message was sent to all

the other Israelite tribes. The few of Judah at Jerusalem, at this

time, are hardly worth mentioning. For more documentation, we

turn to the book, St. Joseph of Arimathea At Glastonbury, by Lionel


Lewis, pages 92‑93:

              Cardinal Baronius, the great Church historian, and most

learned librarian of the Vatican, in his Ecclesiastical Annals, on

which he spent 30 years, under the year A.D. 35, states that in that

year Joseph of Arimathea, Lazarus. Mary, Martha, Marcella, their

maid, and Maximin (blind from birth until healed by Yahshua) a

disciple, were put by the Jews into a boat without sails and oars,

and floated down the Mediterranean and landed at Marseilles, and

thence Joseph and his company crossed into Britain, and preached

the Gospel there, and finally died there.


              In the book, St. Joseph Of Arimathea At Glastonbury, by

Lionel Smithett Lewis, it says this of King Lucius, (page 35):

              St. Joseph’s little circle of twelve disciples was kept going

by anchorites (hermits) — as one died another was appointed; but

in [the] course of time a certain      slackness seems to have come

over them. William of Malmesbury tells us that the holy spot at

length became a covert of wild beasts. Then in the days of Good

King Lucius aforesaid came a revival. Llewrug Mawr, Llewrug the

Great (grandson of Saint Cyllinus and great‑grandson of

Caractacus), nicknamed Lleiver Mawr or the great luminary (hence

his Latinized name of Lux or Lucius), was king of Britain in the

middle and towards the end of the 2nd century. He increased the

Light that the first missionaries, the disciples of Christ, had brought,

by sending emissaries to Eleutherius, Bishop of Rome, requesting

him to send missionaries to Britain. The Welsh Triads tell us that

Eleutherius, in response, sent Dyfan and Fagan, Medwy and Elfan,

all of them British names in A.D. 167.

              Actually, the "Bishop of Rome" spoken of here, at this

time, was of the British church at Rome (Basilica Di Pudenziana)

from where King Lucius received "missionaries." British king

Caractacus’ daughter (Claudia), married Pudens of 2 Tim. 4:21, all of

whom were converted by the influence of the Irish British church,

of which the Apostle Paul had direct contact. It is obvious that the

entire history of Britain cannot be presented in this format,

therefore I will give a general outline during this period:

                1.B.C. 55. Invasion of Britain by Rome under Julius


                1.A.D. 37. Joseph of Arimathea establishes first above

ground church in the world at Glastonbury, in Britain.

                1.A.D. 43. Edict of Emperor Claudius to exterminate

Christian Britain.

                1.A.D. 52. Caractacus taken prisoner to Rome along with

Bran, his three sons, and daughters — including Linus and Claudia

of 2 Tim. 4:21.

                1.A.D. 53. Pudens and Claudia (Gladys) of 2 Tim. 4:21


                1.A.D. 60. The Boadicean War.

                1.A.D. 156. Good King Lucius, by edict, proclaims Britain

the first Christian nation.

                1.A.D. 290‑300. The Diocletian persecution.

                1.A.D. 306, At Britain, at his father's death, Constantine

declares himself Emperor of Rome.

                 1.A.D. 411. Rome withdraws troops from Britain.

                1.A.D. 449. Angles, Saxons and Jutes invade Britain for

the next two centuries driving the British Culdee Celts to the

extreme west.

              We read the next sequel, from The Origin and Early

Christianity In Britain, by Andrew Gray, D.D., pages 60‑62:

                          THE BRITISH CELTIC CHURCH

                           ALMOST FADES FROM VIEW

              But the whole of the western part of the country remained

un‑ conquered. Strathclyde, including the country from the Clyde to

the Dee, the Kingdom of Cumbria; North Wales, or Cambria; South

Wales, and Devon and Cornwall, with part of Somerset and the

sacred Avŕlon, remained purely British. This land the English called

Welsh‑land, or the "Land of the Foreigner", Welsh being the name

which the Germans applied to all nations speaking languages of

Latin descent ... and they found that all was lost, then, in A.D. 587,

they were forced by               persecution to fly and join their

brethren in Wales.

              To those parts we must now look for the Primitive Church

of Britain. It was shut off from, and perhaps to a considerable extent

forgotten by, the larger portion of

Christendom; but it now formed a closer alliance with the sister

Churches of Ireland and Scotland. It was conscious of no

submission to any foreign Church, but gazed fondly back to

Jerusalem and the Holy Land rather than to Rome. It had its own

Liturgy, its own customs, its own peculiar (although erroneous)

cycle of computing Easter. (Note: If they were keeping Passover at

the time of the full moon regardless of the day of the week, as in

the East, it was not erroneous.) It was orthodox in faith. It had, as

we learn from Gildas, a regularly ordained Episcopate. It believed

its Bishops to be the successors of the Apostles, and its priests

claimed the power to bind and loose. ...

              It is of the greatest importance that we should gather all

the information possible concerning the Church in Wales, and get

as definite an idea of it as we can. There are, unfortunately, those

who erroneously suppose that the link between the early British

Church and the Church of England of the present day, was broken

by the Saxon invasion; and that the present Church of England

arose in

the time of Augustine, deriving its origin from Rome through him,

and not, as we are bound to maintain, from the Apostles and

Jerusalem in unbroken, continuous descent, through the British or

Celtic Church. ... The Saxon invasion had destroyed civilization and

Christianity in the larger part of England proper, but a remnant was

driven westward, and found its home in Wales. ...

                         THE BRITISH CELTIC CHURCH


              The Celtic church was finally driven to the extreme west of

the region because of the two hundred years of Saxon invasions.

The Saxons were, by this time, in possession of over 75% of the

land. It appeared, again, the light might flicker and finally go out on

the church which was started by Joseph of Arimathea, but

suddenly the light recovered to shine even brighter. For this part of

the story, I will quote from a secular source of history, The Story Of

Civilization, Part IV, "The Age Of Faith", by Will Durant, page 532:

              As Germanic invasions of Gaul and Britain had driven

scholars from those lands to Ireland, so now the wave returned, the

debt was paid; Irish missionaries flung

themselves upon the victorious pagan Angles, Saxons,

Norwegians, and Danes in England, and upon the illiterate and

half‑barbarous Christians of Gaul and Germany. with the Bible in

one hand and classic manuscripts in the other;

and for a time it seemed that the Celts would win back through

Christianity the lands they had lost to force. It was in the Dark Ages

that the Irish spirit shone with its strongest light.

              The greatest of these missionaries was St. Columba. We

know him well through the biography written (c. 679) by Adamnan,

one of his successors at Iona. Columba was born at Donegal in 521,

of royal stock; ... he was a saint who could have been a king. At

school in Moville he showed such devotion that his schoolmaster

named him Columbkille — Column of the Church. From the age of

twenty‑five he founded a number of churches and monasteries, of

which the most famous were at Derry, Durrow, and Kells. But he

was a fighter as well as a saint, "a man of powerful frame and

mighty voice"; his hot temper drew him into many quarrels, at last

into war with King Diarmuid a battle was fought in which, we are

told, 5000 men were killed; Columba, though victorious, fled from

Ireland (563), resolved to convert as many souls as had fallen in

that engagement at Cooldrevna. He now founded on the island of

Iona, off the west coast of Scotland, one of the most illustrious of

medieval monasteries. Thence he and his disciples brought the

Gospel to the Hebrides, Scotland, and northern England. And there,

after converting thousands of pagans and illuminating 300 "noble

books", he died, in prayer at the altar, in his seventy‑eighth year.

                           THEN ENTERS AUGUSTINE

              You will notice in the last paragraph above, the Celtic

missionaries converted northern Saxons in England, but not the

southern Saxons. To convey the story of how they were converted

to Roman Catholicism, I will relate the story from the book, The

Horizon History Of Christianity, by Roland H. Bainton, pages


              Augustine commenced in Kent under the favor of Queen

Bertha, a Christian queen (Merovingian French princess, obviously

a British Celtic convert) eager to

convert her pagan husband. King Ethelbert was willing to grant

Augustine an audience but only out of doors, where Augustine

would be less able to exercise what the king supposed were

magical powers; for he was reputed to be able to make tails grow

on the backs of those with whom he was displeased. The king was

so far persuaded that he granted land for the foundation of a

monastery at  Canterbury, ever after to be the seat of the English


              The reason, today, we are so unaware of the fact that the

British church was the true church established by Joseph of

Arimathea, by the direction of St. Philip, is

because most all the records have been destroyed. There have

been enough records to survive, though, to establish beyond all

doubt that the church of Britain (not to be confused with the present

day Anglican Church of England) was the true church, before being

Romanized. For this reason most everyone has assumed that the

true church was the Roman Catholic Church, which is entirely false.

Neither the Roman Catholic Church nor her Protestant daughters

represent the true church established by our Messiah. There was a

church established at Rome, and Linus (the son of Caractacus) was

appointed by the Apostle Paul to be the first Bishop, and it was not

related in any way to the Roman Catholic Church, ever! It was


Basilica Di Pudenziana (also the Palace of the British). I will quote

from, The Drama of the Lost Disciples, concerning this true British

church at Rome, by George F. Jowett, page 125:

              The church still stands and can be seen in what was once

the palatial grounds of the Palatium Britannicum, a memorial to the

Christianizing endeavors of St. Paul and the expatriate (exiled)

royal British family at Rome with Rufus Pudens. The church is

recorded in Roman history under four different names: 1. Palatium

Britannicum; 2. Titulus; 3. Hospitium Apostolorum; 4. Lastly, as St.

Pudentiana in honour and memory of the martyred daughter of

Claudia Pudens, by which name it is known to this day.


              For this information, I am going to quote from the book The

Origin and Early History of Christianity In Britain, by Andrew Gray,

D.D., pages 88‑89:

              It will be seen that the transaction, on the part of the

Roman Pontiff at least, was of the most deliberate and carefully

calculated kind. It is a little marvellous (sic) that Romanists of

to‑day in Ireland are so ill at ease under English rule. ...Henry,

under various pretexts, with the sanction and approval of the Pope,

took his armies to Ireland. The Irish chiefs, taken singly, soon

submitted to him, and paid him homage. The Bishops agreed to an

ecclesiastical union with the Church of England. Then Henry, to suit

his own ends, handed over the Irish Church to the Pope of Rome.

By these unwarranted acts schism was introduced, and Bishops

and priests were appointed by order of the Pope. A few of the

Bishops still continued to assert an independent position, and

offered here and there a spasmodic resistance, but the

independence of the Celtic Church was gone. She had been

betrayed by the King of England and the Pope of Rome. Irish

national independence, and Irish ecclesiastical independence

terminated practically together, and in both cases by fraud and

grasping usurpation. The fate was sealed when Gelasius,

Archbishop of Armagh, visited Dublin in 1172, and made his formal

submission to King Henry II. From this date to the Reformation the

papacy held sway, and the history of the 350 years which followed

the Synod of Cashel — when the Irish Church agreed to an

ecclesiastical union with the English — is indeed a dreary one.


              For information pertaining to "The Donation Of

Constantine" I will quote from: The Horizon History Of Christianity,

by Roland H. Bainton, pages 243‑244:

              We do find skepticism of a sort in the form of historical

criticism used to expose the spuriousness of famous forgeries and

to examine sacred documents

critically. Historical criticism was a by‑product of studies by the

Humanists, whose profound interest in the antique encouraged a

pure Latin style. Through their comparison of classical and

medieval Latin, there arose an awareness of

philological (study in literature and linguistic) development. "The

Donation of Constantine", upon which the papacy long based its

claims to dominion, was exposed as a forgery by Lorenzo Valla.

The language, he pointed out, was not that of the age of

Constantine. In the document there were references to the

iconoclastic controversy of the eighth century. Documents of the

period of Constantine never once mentioned the Donation, and at

no time during that emperor’s reign did the popes actually exercise

the authority Constantine was supposed to have bestowed upon

them. Valla disproved also the common assumption that the

Apostles’ Creed was the work of the twelve apostles. More daring

was his application of historical, critical methods to the study of the

Bible, even though he came up with no startling conclusions. As far

as the Church was concerned, Valla’s demonstrations were not

especially disturbing. She could survive the exposure of forgery.

(See also, The Story Of Civilization; Part IV, "The

Age Of Faith", by Will Durant, pages 525‑526, along with footnote.)

             Clifton A. Emahiser’s Teaching Ministries

               1012 N. Vine Street, Fostoria, OH 44830

                               Phone (419)435‑2836

                     Yahoo! Groups Sponsor


For the King of kings!

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

Holy_War‑[email protected]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Reference Materials