Special notice to ALL WHO
DENY two seedline, #12
By: Teacher Clifton A.
Emahiser
1012 North Vine Street
Fostoria, Ohio 44830
Phone (419)435-2836
As I have stated previously,
�We are at WAR�, and I am not referring to our present so-called war on
�terrorism.� While the current war concerning �terrorism� is taking on large
proportions, it�s only a mere skirmish in comparison to the great 7,000 year WAR
of the �children of darkness� against the �children of light� foretold in
Genesis 3:15. Every night White women are going to bed and waking up in the
morning pregnant by a member of another race. In this greater war, we are taking
tens of thousands of casualties nightly. While this large-scale War is going on,
the Church sits idly by claiming its Christian in nature, and they assert
everything is all right as long as the other person has been �saved.� And, in
the face of this great peril, the anti-seedliners refuse to point out the true
enemy. They insist it�s all a problem with the �flesh� or something �spiritual�!
Oh, they will recognize that Genesis 3:15 speaks of One �seed� in the form of
the Messiah, but stubbornly deny the �serpent� has �seed� also. I will repeat
again: If there was no �seed� of the serpent to bruise the heel of Messiah, then
we have no Redemption! Now, I would say that�s a very dangerous and
irresponsible position! One person wrote me a letter and said: �it�s 99.9%
religion, not race.� That also is a most risky position. I wrote him back and
told him he could point his sword at religion, but I would point mine at a
walking, talking breathing, genetic enemy. I don�t know how he gets religion out
of �seed�, (zera). Furthermore, he also had much training at a seminary.
Well, the subject of �seminary� is what we are going to deal with in this paper.
One thing I have noticed in the Anglo-Israel message is that many who have been
trained in seminaries are the very ones who take a position against Two
Seedline.
I believe the reason for
this is because in the various church seminaries the students are taught a
religious system called �hermeneutics.� We�ll take a look at that system in this
article. I think you will find it doesn�t have a very commendable background.
The greatest problem with people coming into Identity is that they tend to bring
with them their former church�s dogmas. With the Identity message, one must wipe
the slate entirely clean and reconsider all things from a new perspective. It
seems like everything is just 180� from what we were always taught. Our Savior
instructed us that we must become as a �little child� or we are not fit for the
Kingdom, Matthew 18:3. A child has a clean mind without any preconceived ideas.
Even Paul had to go to Arabia for three years to get rid of his Phariseeism,
Galatians 1:17-18. The problem in Identity is: a lot of people haven�t been to
the desert yet, especially former seminary students who keep patching over
Scripture attempting to put new wine (teachings) in old bottles, Luke 5:36-39.
In getting into this topic about �hermeneutics�, I will start first by quoting
the Encyclopedia Britannica, ninth Edition, 1894, volume 11, page 671,
the topic being �Hermes�:
�... The name of
Hermes seems during the third and following centuries to have been regarded as a
convenient pseudonym to place at the head of the numerous syncretistic writings
in which it was sought to combine Neo-Platonic philosophy, Philonic Judaism and
cabbalistic theosophy, and so provide the world with some acceptable substitute
for the Christianity which had at that time begun to give indications of the
ascendency it was afterwards to attain ...
�... The
connection of the name of Hermes with alchemy will explain what is meant by
hermetic sealing, and will account for the use of the phrase �hermetic medicine�
by Paracelsus, as also for so-called �hermetic freemasonry� of the Middle Ages
...�
The anti-seedliners accuse
us Two Seedliners of using Talmudic teaching when many of them have been trained
in seminaries using �cabbalistic theosophical� thought. For further information
concerning this type of teaching I will now quote from The New International
Dictionary of the Christian Church, J. D. Douglas General Editor, page 466,
the topic being �Hermetic Books�:
�This collection
of writings deal with religious and philosophical subjects and reflects a degree
of syncretism with reference to Platonic, Stoic, Neo-Pythagorean, and Eastern
religious thought. The collection dates from the second or third century and is
ascribed to Hermes Trismegistus which represents a later designation for the
Egyptian god Thoth, who was said to be the source and protector of all
knowledge. The literary form of the Hermetic Books is basically that of the
Platonic dialog. The single most significant of the several writings is
�Poimandres�, which tells of the soul�s ascent to God through the various
spheres of the planets.�
We find more concerning this
type of teaching in the Nelson�s New Illustrated Bible Dictionary, page
558:
�Hermeneutics ... � the principles and methods used to interpret Scripture.
Bible scholars believe a biblical text must be interpreted according to the
language in which it was written, its historical context, the identity and
purpose of the author, its literary nature, and the situation to which it was
originally addressed.�
This all sounds good, but
let�s investigate this thing a little deeper from The Illustrated Hand-Book
To All Religions, � 1877, excerpts from the �Preface�:
�� The Primitive
Church, for instance, would appear to be a congeries [a collection or heap] of
discordant opinions, whose very names and titles are almost innumerable. Yet in
fact there were but two great parties � the orthodox Christian on the one hand,
and the heretical on the other; and these latter, amidst their infinite
varieties, are all reduced to two � the Gnostics, who corrupted the Gospel by an
admixture of Greek philosophy or Persian magianism, or both; and the Arians, who
lost themselves in speculations upon the Divine nature, and especially the two
natures of Christ. All the controversies of the Reformation hinge again upon the
one question of Sacramental Grace. And in our own times, apart from individual
quarrels, eccentricities and errors, there are but three important differences
in matters of doctrine through the whole of Christendom, namely, the Sacramental
System of the Greek and Roman Churches, the Evangelical doctrines of
Protestants, and the Rationalist of Neologian Creed ��
We really need to look into
this matter about the �Gnostics.� We find this in the same book on pages
210-216:
�Simon Magus
is the generally reputed founder of the Gnostics; but Gnosticism was nothing
else than the philosophical system of the times, leavened with a slight infusion
of Judaism, and a still slighter portion of Christianity. It exhibited itself in
its early days at Alexandria, whence it spread through Eastern Christendom.
Alexandria was at that time the great seat of philosophy. It contained a vast
number of Jews; and, being the great emporium of trade, it was of course much
frequented by the early Christians � Amongst the intellectual idlers of a
thriving city, the Platonic philosophy had superseded the coarse and vulgar
forms of the old Egyptian superstition. The Alexandrian Jews were infected with
it; for their language was Greek, and many of them had an extensive acquaintance
with heathen literature. On the other hand, the Platonists studied the Jewish
Scripture, and saw in them traces of pure and sublime theology � They even
asserted that Plato had borrowed from the writings of Moses. Thus a compromise
was attempted between the creeds of Moses and of Plato. There was a third
element of error in the Persian or Magian doctrines; for Alexandria, open to the
teachings of Greece on one side, was equally exposed to the fantastic theories
of Orientalism on the other. And thus from these three sources � the philosophy
of Plato, the religion of Moses, and the Magian superstition � a new system was
created; this was Gnosticism � it did not arise within the Christian Church, but
it very soon infected the pure stream of Gospel truth � It was unquestionably
the most formidable opponent with which the early Church had to contend � The
Gnostics practiced magic, which they learned from the East � Christianity no
sooner appeared than the Gnostics incorporated it into their system, but so as
not merely to corrupt, but to subvert it � but they [the Gnostics] taught also
that the body of Jesus was a phantom, and that Christ was neither born, nor
suffered upon the cross � Thus the doctrine of the atonement and of faith in the
death of Christ found no place whatever in their system � From St. Paul�s first
Epistle to the Corinthians, it is evident that Gnosticism had already shown
itself in Greece. He repeatedly used the term, gnosis, in a peculiar
sense, as arrogated by a certain party, e.g., 1 Cor. 8:1 � The Gnostics denied
that there was, in any sense, a resurrection of the body � Whatever the
Christians said of a resurrection, they interpreted figuratively; according to
them, the Gnostic rose from death to life when he was initiated in their
mysteries and made perfect in their knowledge � Simon Magus was probably the
first of the Gnostics who engrafted the name of Christ into their system; he and
his followers maintained that the body of Jesus was a phantom � but they utterly
denied the doctrine of his atonement. In fact, when a Christian adopted the
Gnostic views, he ceased to be a Christian, for he renounced his faith in a
Redeemer and his hope of a resurrection. In the first century the Church of
Christ, with one voice, agreed in this view of the Gnostic system: namely, that
Gnostics were not Christians � The Greek philosophy, and particularly the
writings of Plato, were the fashionable study, and therefore, we may venture to
say, were embraced by great numbers by whom they were imperfectly understood.
And yet something more certain, more religious, was wanted. This the Jew
supplied, and Gnosticism was formed � Gnosticism was an attempt (so far as it
assumed the Christian garb) to effect a compromise between the gospel and
heathenism as refined by philosophy and leavened with Judaism � From its
expiring ashes Mohammed kindled a new and fiercer flame. Gnosticism, with its
magic, its angelic powers, its mystical dogmas, its affected contempt of the
body and of death, and its real licentiousness, was absorbed into the system of
the impostor, or fanatic, of Mecca.�
Jeffrey A. Weakley, along
with several other anti-seedliners, accused us Two Seedliners of practicing
Talmudic Judaism. Now, I ask, who�s really practicing the religion of �Judaism�?
Again, on page 488 of the same book we read this:
�Anti-Trinitarians
� Cerinthus was doubtless contemporary with St. John, although he may have been
alive after the death of that apostle. He was a Jew, who had studied philosophy
at Alexandria, but he spent the greater part of his life in Asia Minor. His
system was probably a mixture of Judaism, Gnosticism and Christianity. Iren�us
makes him a complete Gnostic, saying of him. �He taught that the world was not
made by the supreme God, but a certain power (the demi-urgos) separate from him,
and below him, and ignorant of him. Jesus he supposed not to be born of a
virgin, but to be the son of Joseph and Mary � born altogether as other men are
��
Next from this same book we
read this on page 500:
�New Platonics or
Ammonians. � So called from Ammonius Saccas, who taught with the highest
applause in the Alexandrian school, about the conclusion of the second century.
This learned man attempted a general reconciliation of all sects, whether
philosophical or religious. He maintained that the great principals of all
philosophical and religious truth were to be found equally in all sects, and
that they differed from each other only in their method of expressing them �
Ammonius supposed that true philosophy derived its origin and its consistence
from the Eastern nations, that it was taught to the Egyptians by Hermes, that it
was brought from them to the Greeks, and preserved in its original purity by
Plato, who was the best interpreter of Hermes and the other Oriental sages. He
maintained that all the different religions which prevailed in the world were,
in their original integrity, conformable to this ancient philosophy; but it
unfortunately happened, that the symbols and fictions under which, according to
the ancient manner, the ancients delivered their precepts and doctrines, were in
process of the time erroneously understood, both by priests and people � Taking
these principles for granted, Ammonius associated the sentiments of the
Egyptians with the doctrines of Plato; and to finish this conciliatory scheme,
he so interpreted the doctrines of the other philosophical and religious sects,
by art, invention, and allegory, that they seemed to bare some semblance to the
Egyptian and Platonic systems ��
We get more on this topic
from the Collier�s Encyclopedia, � 1981, volume 2, pages 373-375. This
time we see a Catholic priest bringing into that church the very same thing
which the Protestants continue to this very day. This quotation will be excerpts
from their article about �St. Thomas Aquinas�:
�From the earliest
days of his teaching it became apparent to his contemporaries that he was laying
the foundations of a veritable revolution in theology and philosophy � His
meeting at Orvieto with his fellow Dominican, William of Moerbeke, led to
William�s translation of the writings of Aristotle from Greek originals and to
Thomas� series of commentaries, in which there is a careful effort to arrive at
Aristotle�s essential teachings �
�Summary. Thomas
broke sharply from the so-called Augustinian tradition, which was essentially a
form of Neo-platonism, albeit a Platonism in which many Aristotelian notions had
found a place. His work represents the renewal of Christian thought in the light
of a metaphysic and theology whose conceptual systematization was expressed in
terms of the principles of Aristotle � Perhaps the most fundamental change made
by him was his extension of Aristotle�s doctrine of potency and act to the
relation between an essence and the act of existing which actualized it �His
philosophical indebtedness to Aristotle should not be minimized. One has only to
read his theological works to realize the esteem in which he held the
philosopher ��
We find even more in the
Encyclopedia Britannica, ninth Edition, 1894, volume 11, pages 664-665,
concerning �Hermeneutics�:
�� He (Hillel) was
also the first to formulate definite rules by which the rabbinical development
of the law should proceed. These canons of interpretation were seven in number,
afterwards increased by Rabbi Ismael to thirteen by the addition of seven new
rules and the omission of the sixth, and looked to the construction of Biblical
warrant for precepts which it was wished to prove implicit in the law � This
regard for it, which was never wholly disowned, ultimately took shape in the
improved rabbinical hermeneutics of the Middle Ages. In the writings of such
rabbis as Saadias Gaon, Jarchi, Rashi, Kimchi, Maimonides, Abarbanel (a line of
expositors extending from the 10th to the 16th century, we find, alongside the
traditional rules and explanations, a scientific recognition of the
interpreter�s duty to give the literal sense as well as a practical application
of the principles of grammatical and historical exegesis to the Old Testament �
The hermeneutics developed among the Hellenistic Jews had marked characteristics
of its own. These interpreters, departing from the exclusiveness of rabbinical
devotion to the Old Testament revelation, and from the pure Hebraism of native
Jews, brought to the study of the sacred books a range of ideas derived from
Hellenic culture. They had to devise a hermeneutical procedure which would
harmonize their new ethnic learning with the traditional estimate of the Jewish
Scriptures. To the theosophic Hellenist, and specially to the Alexandrian Jew,
acceptance of the plain sense was often an impossibility. A reconciliation was
sought by the use of allegorical interpretation. This method was also pursued by
the Rabbinical exegetes. It is embraced in the Halachic hermeneutics, and is
seen in the distinctions drawn by Palestinian Jews between the body and the soul
of text � The coryph�us in this hermeneutical practice was Philo (born perhaps
about 20 B.C.), although he had predecessors in Aristobulus (180 B.C.),
Josephus, and others. He devoted himself mainly to the exposition of the
Pentateuch with the view of explaining the realism and anthropomorphism of the
Old Testament in a way to suit the philosophy of the time. Wishful to retain the
Alexandrian Jew�s regard for Moses as the supremely inspired prophet of God and
the oracle of all mysteries along with adherence to the current Platonism and
theosophy, he supposed that the Mosaic writings contained a twofold mode of
teaching, a popular representation of God and divine things and a spiritual � On
the other hand as extraordinary development was given in the rabbinical
hermeneutics by the Kabbalists of the Middle Ages, who used the devices of
artificial interpretation in order to find an Old Testament basis for their
mixed Neo-Platonist, Gnostic and Sab�an culture. The Kabbala (�what has been
received�, �tradition� �) had its roots in the ancient doctrine of numbers, for
which the Jews were probably indebted to the Chald�ans � By the combinations and
permutations of letters, the interchange of words of equal numerical value and
similar artifices, new meanings were extracted where the proper sense
seemed poor, and acceptable meanings found where offence was felt ��
We will now see more on how
the �Jewish� Kabbalah fits into this thing from Encyclopedia Britannaca,
ninth Edition, 1894, volume 13, page 822:
�To obtain these
heavenly mysteries, which alone make the Torah superior to profane codes,
definite hermeneutical rules are employed, of which the following are the most
important. (1) The words of several verses in the Hebrew Scriptures which are
regarded as containing a recondite [hard to understand] sense are placed over
each other, and the letters are formed into new words by reading them
vertically. (2) The words of the text are ranged in squares in such a manner as
to be read either vertically or boustrophedon [alternately from right to left
and from left to right]. (3) The words are joined together and redivided. (4)
The initial and final letters of several words are formed into separate words.
(5) Every letter of a word is reduced to its numerical value, and the word is
explained by another of the same quantity. (6) Every letter of a word is taken
to be the initial or abbreviation of a word. (7) The twenty-two letters of the
alphabet are divided into two halves; one half placed above the other; and the
two letters which thus become associated are interchanged. By this permutation
[modification], Aleph, the first letter of the alphabet becomes Lamed,
the twelfth letter; Beth becomes Mem, and so on. This cipher
alphabet is called Albam, from the first interchangeable pairs. (8) The
commutation [back and forth] of the twenty-two letters is effected by the last
letter of the alphabet taking the place of the first, the last but one [next to
last] the place of the second, and so forth. This cipher is called Atbash.
These hermeneutical canons are much older than the Kabbalah. They obtained in
the synagogues from time immemorial, and were used by the Christian fathers in
the interpretation of Scripture. Thus Canon V., according to which a word is
reduced to its numerical value and interpreted by another word of the same value
is recognized in the New Testament ��
I don�t know whether or not
you fully fathom the significance of what you have just read, for if this is
true about �Jewish� hermeneutics and the Kabbalah, they have wrongly
interpreted, or even changed some of the meanings of the Hebrew Scriptures with
their Chaldean hocus-pocus. Not only that, but some of the early Church fathers
followed this system of interpretation to a some degree. Is it any wonder, then,
that we have occasional difficult and questionable Bible passages to deal with?
With some passages, we then have to wonder whether what we are reading is
�Yahweh breathed� or is some �lying divination� by a �false scribe�, Ezekiel
13:6; Jeremiah 14:14; Zechariah 10:2. We are instructed in Scripture to verify
everything with witnesses, so when we encounter a difficult passage, we need to
consider the CONTEXT in which it is written. When we consider what we
know today as so-called �Christianity�, learning that it is an admixture of
Aristotelian logic, �Jewish� hermeneutics, Greek philosophy, Persian magianism,
Judaism, Platoism, Gnosticism, Eastern Mysticism, Spinozism, Maimonides-ism and
Kabbalism, what should we make of all of this? Do you now comprehend why we must
do as our Messiah taught, and start all over again from the beginning? The
Scriptures truly describe our �righteousness as filthy rags�, Isaiah 64:6.
Matthew 6:22-23 says:
�22 The light
of the body is the eye: if therefore thine
eye be single,
thy whole body shall be full of light. 23 But if thine eye be evil, thy whole
body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be
darkness, how great is that darkness.�
This is comparable to a
person who, learning the true Identity Message, keeps one eye looking back to
the Aristotelian philosophized, Gnosticized, Judaized, Kabbalahized, and Eastern
mysticized corrupted form of �Christianity.� We cannot live in both of these
worlds at the same time, for a mind that is divided (afflicted with double
vision) is in total darkness. The Bible tells us further, James 1:8: �A
double minded man is
unstable in all his ways.�
It is not speaking of the physical eye, but the eye of the mind. Just because
your preacher may be blinded by his seminary training, that is no reason you
need to be blinded also! Not only is our eye to be single, but if we have two
eyes (eyes of the mind; one seeing true light and one seeing evil wisdom), we
are to pluck out the one seeing evil, Matthew 5:29:
�And if thy
right eye
offend thee,
pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that
one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be
cast into Gehenna.� [Heb. Gehenna,
as opposed to Abyss, �pit.�. Also, see Matt. 18:8-9; Mark 9:43-47; Zech. 11:17.]
The result of having two
eyes is to have two masters, and being a slave to both. In that way, a man will
not amount to much for either. Men might work for two employers, but no slave
can be the property of two owners; one is either in Yahweh�s employ or in
Satan�s. If the mind�s eye be full of Greek philosophy, Persian magianism,
Judaism, Platonism, Gnosticism, Eastern Mysticism, Spinozism, Maimonides-ism and
Kabbalism like those who are taught in seminaries, what good are they to the
Almighty? I am fully persuaded that this �one seed� only teaching is
coming from students trained in seminaries or by people under their influence.
Manly P. Hall in his An Encyclopedic Masonic, Hermetic, Qabbalistic and
Rosicrucian Symbolical Philosophy page CXIV, shows that Hermeticism is
considered synonymous with Qabbalism and that the tenets of Hermeticism are
interwoven with Qabbalism:
�The theories of
Qabbalism are inextricably interwoven with the tenets of alchemy, Hermeticism,
Rosicrucianism and Freemasonry. The words Qabbalism and Hermeticism
are now considered as synonymous terms covering all the arcana and esotericism
of antiquity. The simple Qabbalism of the first centuries of the Christian Era
gradually evolved into an elaborate theological system, which became so involved
that it was next to impossible to comprehend its dogma.�
(With all this, one can now
better understand 1 Corinthians 1:19-31 and Romans 1:21.)
HOME
