Watchman Willie Martin Archive

                                       Addressing the Origins of False Doctrines

Before getting started on our walk through Daniel and Revelation, we should consider how false opinions get started. It’s like the mistaken conclusion by some that Ruth was a Moabite; and that Moses married a black woman. Today, that untrue concept is being used by the enemy through nominal churchianity to promote multi-culturalism. If one will consult Bertrand L. Comparet’s word “Ruth Was An Israelite,” one will see that the Israelites had driven the Moabites out of the land of Moab 150 years previous to Ruth’s time. Therefore, Ruth was only a Moabite geographically; not genetically.

                                      Was Christ Born In A Different Bethlehem?

Another such false teaching being promoted in some circles of Israel Identity is built on 1 Samuel 17:12 which says in part:

“Now David was the son of that Ephrathite of Bethlehem-judah, whose name was Jesse; and he had eight sons...”

They incorrectly conclude from this that our Messiah was from the Tribe of Ephraim rather than Judah. Here again, it is speaking geographically instead of genetically. This can be corroborated by the following:

“Bethlehem Ephratah.”“Eprathah, Genesis 35:16, 19; Ruth 4:11 (land, region) (1) pr. N. of a town in the tribe of Judah, elsewhere called “Bethlehem (Genesis 48:7); more fully “Bethlehem Ephratah (Micah 5:1) (a) i.q. ___À Psalm 132:6; comp ____À No. 2. (3) pr. n. f. 1 Chronicles 2:19, to; 4:4. ____À m.—(1) an Ephrathite, or Bethlehemite, 1 Samuel 17:12. Pl. _____À Ruth 1:2. (2) an Ephraimite, Judges 12:5; 1 Samuel 1:1; 1 Kings 1:27. (Gesenius’ Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament Scriptures, translated by Samuel Prideaux Tregelles, LL.D., Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, p.73)

672: ___À_Ephrâth, ef-rawth’; or ____À_Ephrâthâh, ef-raw’-thaw; from 6509; fruitfulness; Ephrath, another name for Bethlehem; once (Psalm 132:6) perh. For Ephraim; also of an Israelitish woman:—Ephrath, Ephratah. 673: ____À_Ephrâthîy, ef-rawth-ee’; patrial from 672; an Ephrathite or an Ephraimite:—Ephraimite, Ephrathite. (The Exhaustive Concordance of The Bible: Showing Every Word of the Text of the Common English Version of the Canonical Books, and Every Occurrence of Each Word in Regular order; together with a Comparative Concordance of the Authorized and Revised Versions, including the American Variations; also brief Dictionaries of the Hebrew and Greek Words of the Original With References to the English Words: by James Strong, S.T.D., LL.D., Published by Abingdon Press, New York, p.16

EPHRATAH. 1. Called also Ephrath. The ancient name of Beth-lehem-judah, Genesis 35:16, 19; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; Psalm 132:6; Micah 5:2. (Topical Bible A Digest of the Holy Scriptures, by Orville J. Nave, A.M., D.D., LL.D., Chaplain in the Army of the United States, published by The Southwestern Company, Nashville, Tennessee, p. 344)

EPHRATAH or EPHRATH (_ph-ra-tah or _ph’rath), (1) The ancient name for Bethlehem. (The Pouloar and Critical Bible Encyclopeædia and Scriptural Dictionary, Edited by Rt. Rev. Samuel Fallows, A.M., D.D., LL.D., volume 1, p. 605, published by The Howard-Severance Company (1920), Chicago)

EPHRATAH, EPHRATH, EPHRATHAH...3. The ancient name of Bethlehem or the district around it. This name is attached to that of Bethlehem in the great prophecy of the place of the birth of Christ. (Micah 5:2) (New International Bible Dictionary, based on the NIV, Editors J.D. Duglas and Merrill C. Tenney, p. 318, Published by Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49530)

Eph’ratah or Eph’rath...2. The ancient name of Bethlehem-Judah, as is manifest from Genesis 35:16, 19;  48:7. (A Dictionary of the Bible, edited by William Smith, LL.D., p. 181, published by Thomas Y. Crowell & Co., 13 Astor Place)

Eph’ratah or Eph’rath...2. The ancient name of Gethlehem-judah. Genesis 35:16, 19; 48:7. (Peloubet’s Bible Dictionary, Edited by F.N. Peloubet, D.D., Publishers The John C. Winston Company, Philadelphia, and Chicago, p. 183)

Eph’ra-thah...1. The original name of Bethlehem in Jude. (Genesis 35:19; 48;7; Ruth 4:11) It is sometimes called Bethlehem Ephrathah. (Micah 5:2) (The Westminister Dictionary of The Bible, by John D. Davis, Ph.D., D.D., LL.D., Revised and Rewritten, by Henry Snyder Gehman, Ph.D., S.T.D., p. 169, The Westminister Press, Philadelphia)

Ephrath, Ephratha. The ancient name for Bethlehem Judah. Rachel was buried near there (Genesis 35:19); it was the home of Naomi’s family (Ruth 4:11) and of David (1 Samuel 17:12), and was the Messiah’s birthplace. (Micah 5:2) (New Concise Bible Dictionary, Edotor: Derek Williams, p. 150, Inter-Varsity Press, Leicester, England Lion Publishing, Oxford, England, Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Wheaton, Illinois, USA)

EPHRATAH...2. The ancient name of Bethlehem of Judah. (Genesis 48:7; Ephrath, NIV) The prophet Micah refers to the town as Bethlehem Ephrathah. (Micah 5:2) His prophecy that the Messiah would be born here was fulfilled in Jesus Christ. (Matthew 2:6; Ephratah, KJV) (Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Dictionary, p. 408, Nelson, Nashville, Tenn.)

EPHRATHAH...2. Evidently the earlier name of Bethlehem or a name applied to the area around it. The names of Bethlehem and Ephrathah are used jointly in several texts. The account of Rachels death relates that she was buried ‘on the way to Ephrath (Ephrathah) that is to say, Bethlehem.” (Genesis 35:16, 19; 48:7) (Insight on the Scriptures, volume 1, Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, International Bible Students Association, Brooklyn, New York)

Eph’ratah...2. The ancient name of Bethlehem in Judah (Genesis 35:16, 19; 48:7) both of which passages distinctly prove that it was called Ephrath or Ephratah in Jacob’s time. The meaning of the passage, “Lo, we heard of it at Ephrath” (Psalm 132:6), is much disputed. The most obvious reference is to Bethlehem, which is elsewhere known by that name. (Unger’s Bible Dictionary, by Merrill F. Unger, Moody Press, Chicago)

EPHRATHAH...2. The ancient name of Bethlehem of Judah. (Genesis 48:7) The prophet Micah refers to the town as Bethlehem Ephrathah. (Micah 5:2) His prophecy that the Messiah would be born here was fulfilled in Jesus Christ. (Matthew 2:6; Ephratah, KJV) (Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Editor Herbert Lockyer, Sr., p. 347, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Camden, New York)

EPHRATHAH...2. A city in Judah; identified with Bethlehem. Since, however, there is a significant denotation of the family of David as Ephrathites (Ruth 1:2; 1 Samuel 17:12), the two cities were evidently not identical, but Ephrathah was an older settlement which became absorbed into Bethlehem. It was still separate in the time of the patriarchs, for Rachel died on the way there. (Genesis 35:19, see Rachel’s Tomb) In one passage the names are combined as Bethlehem Ephrathah. (Micah 5:2—H 5:1) (The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, An Illustrated Encyclopedia, in four volumes, p. 122, Abingdon Press, Nashville, New York)

EPHRATH, EPHRATHAH...1. A cit or area in Judaea which is connected with Bethlehem. Possibly it was ordinally independent but was absorbed into Bethlehem at a later date. Elimelech and his family were “Ephrathites from Bethlehem.” (Ruth 1:2; cf. 1 Samuel 17:12) The two places are identified in the compound form (Micah 5:2) and as the burial place of Rachel. (Genesis 35:19; 48:7) 2. Since the burial place of Rachel is elsewhere set in the territory of Benjamin (1 Samuel 10:2; Jeremiah 31:15) and since Genesis 35:16 suggests a considerable distance between Bethlehem and Ephrath, the parenthetical references in Genesis 35:19 and 48:7 often have been regarded as inaccurate glosses. This would indicate a third Ephrath, on the northern border of Benjamin. (The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, in Five Volumes, volume 2, p. 335, Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49506)

Beth’lehem. 1. One of the oldest towns in Palestine, already in existence at the time of Jacob’s return to the country. Its earliest name was Ephrath or Ephratah (see Genesis 35:16, 19; 48:7), and it is not till long after the occupation of the country by the Israelites that we meet with it under its new name of Behlehem. After the conquest Bethlehem appears under its own name Bethlehem-judah. (Judges 17:7; 1 Samuel 17:12; Ruth 1:2-2) The Book of Ruth is a page from the domestic history of Bethlehem: the names, almost the very persons, of the Bethlehemites are there brought before us; we are allowed to assist at their most peculiar customs, and to witness the very springs of those events which have conferred immortality on the name of the place. The elevation of David to the kingdom does not appear to have affected the fortunes of his native town.

The few remaining casual notices of Bethlehem in the Old Testament may be quickly enumerated. It was fortified by Rehoboam (2 Chronicles 11:6) By the time of the captivity, the Inn of Chimhaim by Bethlehem appears to have become the recognized point of departure for travelers to Egypt. (Jeremiah 41:17) In the New Testament Bethlehem retains its distinctive title of Bethlehem-judah (Matthew 2:1, 5), and once, in the announcement of the Angels, the “city of David.” (Luke 2:4; comp. John 7:42)...2. A town in the portion of Zebulun named now here but in Joshua 14:15. (Dictionary of the Bible, p.85, Edited by William Smith, LL.D., Thomas Y. Crowell & Co., 13 Astor Place)

Therefore, it would appear that this false teaching is being promoted because of last one from the Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia. Yet all the others mentioned say that Bethlehem and Ephrathah are one and the same place.

The next thing these proponents do is point to Genesis 49:24 where it says in part concerning Jacob’s blessing on Joseph: “...(from thence is the shepherd, the stone of Israel)...” they will imply by this that the “shepherd” or “stone” is Yeashua the “rock,” and that He descended from Joseph rather than Judah. Note: these words are in parentheses, and represent only a notation by some copyists. Believer’s Bible Commentary, by William MacDonald makes that same error. Some of these proponents go so far as to claim there was never a David nor a Bethlehem-Judah; only Bethlehem of Zebulun.

They might have gotten away with this, but in 1993, Seymore Gitin, digging for the W.F. Albright Institute of Archaeology, unearthed a piece of stone at Tel Dan inscribed in Aramaic “King of Israel” and “House of David.” These proponents will also point to the 15th chapter of Joshua claiming Bethlehem is not mentioned among Judah’s cities. They should check the LXX on Joshua, for it is listed at 15:59. The reason 1 Samuel 17:12 designates Bethlehem as “Bethlehem-judah is to distinguish it from Bethlehem-Zebulun. Had there been only one Bethlehem, it wouldn’t have been necessary to make that distention. Judges 17:7 speaks of “a Levite” of “Bethlehem-judah.” Are we also to make him of the Tribe of Ephraim? It seems that if a Scripture can be taken wrong, there is always going to be someone out there to do it. Again, “Ephrathite” in 1 Samuel 17:12 is not speaking of the Tribe of Ephraim, but of a city.

                                         False Doctrine Placed in the Scriptures

                                                             By Kenite Scribes

In the Books of The Chronicles we find recorded there the names and the genealogies of the Tribes of Israel and where their portions of the inheritance is listed.

“These were the sons of Caleb the son of Hur, the firstborn of Ephratah; Shobal the father of Kirjath‑jearim, Salma the father of Bethlehem, Hareph the father of Beth‑gader. And Shobal the father of Kirjath‑jearim had sons; Haroeh, and half of the Manahethites. And the families of Kirjath‑jearim; the Ithrites, and the Puhites, and the Shumathites, and the Mishraites; of them came the Zareathites, and the Eshtaulites. The sons of Salma; Bethlehem, and the Netophathites, Ataroth, the house of Joab, and half of the Manahethites, the Zorites. ‘AND’ THE FAMILIES OF THE SCRIBES which dwelt at Jabez; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, and Suchathites. THESE ARE THE KENITES that came of Hemath, the father of the house of Rechab.” (1 Chronicles 2:50-55)

Other genealogies in the Bible go into great detail and never leaves out a son! (Especially a firstborn son) If one reads Genesis 4:1 correctly, as depicted, it is not there either. Why is Cain totally left out?? Cain's descendants are mentioned separately in Genesis 4:17‑24 and it doesn't list Adam as the father of Cain! WHY???

The next place we find Cain in the Scriptures is Genesis 15:19 and we will have to read verses 18 through 21:

"In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates: The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites, And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims, And the Ammonites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites." (Genesis 15:18‑21) (KJV)

One of these nations among the Canaanites was the KENITES (#7017 Strong's) which were DESCENDANTS OF CAIN. Being that Cain was of the SATANIC SEEDLINE, he would infect his satanic blood AMONG ALL THESE TEN NATIONS. And the "Kenizzites" were Edomites.

In the Peake's Commentary on the bible, page 116 we find this about this mixed group of nations spoken of in Genesis 15:19‑21:

"When the Israelites entered Canaan they found there a VERY MIXED population generally designated by the term Amorite or Canaanite."

The Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible, Abridged by Ralph Earle, page 38, says: "The Kenites. Here are ten nations mentioned, though afterwards reckoned but seven; see Deuteronomy 7:1; Acts 13:19. Probably some of them which existed in Abram's time had been BLENDED with others before the time of Moses, so that seven only out of the ten then remained."

Kenites: "[KEE nights] (metalsmiths)‑‑ the name of a wandering tribe of people who were associated with the Midianites (Judges 1:16) and, later, with the Amalekites (1 Samuel 15:6). The Kenites lived in the desert regions of Sinai, Midian, Edom, Amalek, and the Negev. The Bible first mentions the Kenites as one of the groups that lived in Canaan during the time of Abraham (Genesis 15:19); their territory was to be taken by the Israelites (Numbers 24:21‑22). The Kenites were metal craftsmen who may have traced their ancestry to TUBAL‑CAIN (a descendant of Cain) (Genesis 4:22). (from Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary) (Copyright (C) 1986, Thomas Nelson Publishers)

The Wycliff Bible Commentary, editors: Charles F. Pfeiffer & Everett F. Harrison has this to say on page 8, and this quote will cover Genesis 3:14‑15: "CURSED (arûr) ART THOU. The Lord singled out the originator and instigator of the temptation for special condemnation and degradation. From that moment he must crawl in the dust and even feed on it. He would slither his way along in disgrace, and hatred would be directed against him from all directions. Man would always regard him as a symbol of the degradation of the one who slandered God (cf. Isaiah 65:25).

HE WAS TO REPRESENT NOT MERELY THE SERPENT RACE, BUT THE POWER OF THE EVIL KINGDOM. As long as life continued, men would hate him and seek to destroy him. I WILL PUT ENMITY. The word "êbâ" denotes the blood‑feud that runs deepest in the heart of man (cf. Numbers 35:19‑20; Ezekiel 25:15‑17; 35:5‑6) THOU SHALT BRUISE (shûp).

A PROPHECY OF CONTINUING STRUGGLE BETWEEN THE DESCENDANTS OF WOMAN AND OF THE SERPENT TO DESTROY EACH OTHER. The verb shûp is rare (cf. Job 9:17; Psalm 139:11). It is the same in both clauses.

“When translated ‘crush’ it seems appropriate to the reference concerning the had of the serpent, but not quite so accurate in also rendered lie in wait for, aim at or (LXX) watch for. The Vulgate renders it "conteret," "bruise" in the first instance and in this famous passage, CALLED THE PROTEVAGEFIUM, FIRST GOSPEL, the announcement of a prolonged struggle, perpetual antagonism, wounds on both sides, and eventual victory for the seed of the woman. “God's promise that the head of the serpent was to be crushed pointed forward to the coming of Messiah and guaranteed victory. Thus assurance fell upon the ears of God's earliest creatures as a blessed hope of redemption."

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 etymologis of the root ‘gyn’ show that it has to do with metal and metal word (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 cooper ore. W.F. Albright has pointed to the 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 HEARDS (Jubal), 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 cited above and also from David's relations with them.”

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: "The etymology of the name suggest 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.

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 CLASSIFIED 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 778:

"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 thy 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, MAY SEEM TO INSINUATE THAT THESE WERE DESCENDANTS OF JUDAH, WHICH THEY WERE NOT; but his translation ONLY SIGNIFIES COHABITATION WITH THEM, for which cause they are here named with them.”

All these things the Jews do today, here in America. And because Christians have listened to the lying, deceiving, traitorous, Priests of Baal, the Judeo-Christian Clergy they have almost destroyed our nation and are fast destroying our people.

                                                    Who Were/Are The Kenites?

It is obvious from all this that the scribes in the House of Israel, in the days of the Kings, were Kenites, and that the title of scribes was kept in the family so-to-speak, just as it is in some parts of the world today. So it is obvious that the Israelites allowed them to stay in the land with them because they were the Kenite Scribes that were living in Canaan when Israel first come into the land. After their 40 year trek through the wilderness in their escape from Egypt.

For it is the land of Canaan that Yahweh told Abraham:

“In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates: THE KENITES, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites, And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims, And the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.” (Genesis 15:18-21)

These verses are witnesses that Yahweh gave the land to Abram (before He changed his name to Abraham) and some 400-500 years before the Children of Israel returned to the Promised Land under the leadership of first Moses and then Joshua.

Kenites: Strong’s Concordance #7017 Qeyniy (kay‑nee'); or Qiyniy (1 Chronicles 2:55) (kee‑nee'); patronymic from OT:7014; a Kenite or member of the tribe of Kajin: KJV ‑ Kenite.

Kenites: Strong’s Concordance #7014 Qayin (kah'‑yin); the same as OT:7013 (with a play upon the affinity to OT:7069); Kajin, the name of the first child, also of a place in Palestine, and of an Oriental tribe: KJV ‑ CAIN, Kenite (‑s). (Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek‑Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright (c) 1994, Biblesoft and International Bible Translators, Inc.)

Which shows that a Kenite are identified with the descendants of Cain or Kajin. Therefore, Kenites are the descendants of Cain. And since Cain intermarried (mixed race) with pre-Adamic peoples and thus the Kenites were only a partially of Adamic stock; THEY WERE DEFINITELY NOT FROM THE TRIBE OF SHEM, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT SEMITES.

“The Kenites were a nomadic people whose original home was in the region just south of Palestine, and they were loosely associated with the Amalekites. Balaam, in his prophecy recorded in Numbers 24:20-23, spoke of the Kenites in connection with the Amalekites. “And he took up his parable, and said, Balaam the son of Beor hath said, and the man whose eyes are open hath said: He hath said, which heard the words of God, and knew the knowledge of the most High, which saw the vision of the Almighty, falling into a trance, but having his eyes open: I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh: there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth. And Edom shall be a possession, Seir also shall be a possession for his enemies; and Israel shall do valiantly. Out of Jacob shall come he that shall have dominion, and shall destroy him that remaineth of the city. And when he looked on Amalek, he took up his parable, and said, Amalek was the first of the nations; but his latter end shall be that he perish for ever. And HE LOOKED ON THE KENITES, AND TOOK UP HIS PARABLE, AND SAID, STRONG IS THY DWELLINGPLACE, AND THOU PUTTEST THY NEST IN A ROCK. NEVERTHELESS THE KENITE SHALL BE WASTED, until Asshur shall carry thee away captive. And he took up his parable, and said, Alas, who shall live when God doeth this! And ships shall come from the coast of Chittim, and shall afflict Asshur, and shall afflict Eber, and he also shall perish for ever. And Balaam rose up, and went and returned to his place: and Balak also went his way.” (Numbers 24:15‑25)

Jeremiah the Prophet wrote that Yahweh did NOT speak to, NOR did He give any command to Israel concerning burnt-offerings or sacrifices in the day that He brought them out of Egypt.

“For I SPAKE NOT UNTO YOUR FATHERS, NOR COMMANDED THEM IN THE DAY THAT I BROUGHT THEM OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT, CONCERNING BURNT OFFERINGS OR SACRIFICES: But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you. But they hearkened not, nor inclined their ear, but walked in the counsels and in the imagination of their evil heart, and went backward, and not forward.” (Jeremiah 7:22-24)

Here we can see that Jeremiah has declared that the Kenite scribes had falsified the Law by writing lies into it. This was because the Kenites were worshipers of Baal, and the fact that animal sacrifice was a very important part of the worship of Baal, Jeremiah’s proclamation and denunciation would seem to be substantiated.

Therefore, it is clear that it was the Baal worshiping Kenite Scribes who tampered with the Word of Yahweh. For He would not have commanded His Israel People, to practice the same rites of animal sacrifice that were so important to the Canaanitish worshipers of Baal? Yahweh commanded Israel not to follow the ways of Canaan.

                                                  Sacrifices and Burnt Offerings

Joshua tells us in so many words that Yahweh did not ever seek sacrifices as he said:

“That we have built us an altar to turn from following the LORD, or if TO OFFER THEREON BURNT OFFERING OR MEAT OFFERING, or if to offer peace offerings thereon, LET THE LORD HIMSELF REQUIRE IT.” (Joshua 22:23) Therefore, we can clearly see that Joshua did not recognize that burnt offering or meat offering was ordained by Yahweh; or he would never have said “Let the Lord Himself require it.”


Our Redeemer Yahweh told His people to hear Moses and the Prophets. For Yahweh said to His Israel People while they were wandering in the wilderness: “Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.” (Exodus 19:5-6)

We also find that a little later on in the Book of Leviticus 26:3-12 these words: “If ye walk in my statutes, and keep my commandments, and do them...And I will walk among you, and will be your God, and ye shall be my people.” Nothing is said about sacrifices or offerings here. So we must conclude that the Kenite, the Jewish scribes distorted the Word of God to say things that it is not supposed to say.

One prime example of this is in Deuteronomy 23:7; Have you ever wondered about this verse and its seemingly contradiction to what the rest of the Scriptures say about Edom. Well many of us have and we present the following from Pastor Clifton A. Emahiser, 1012 N. Vine Street, Fostoria, Ohio 44830; Phone No. (419) 435-2836.

As I promised you in my last teaching letter #22, I am going to clear up and document the problem with Deuteronomy 23:7. As I told you before, there are approximately 27,000 transnational errors in our present Bibles. Some translations by various translators have attempted to clean up many of these discrepancies, but the errors are very numerous and overwhelming. The translation of Deuteronomy 23:7 is one of them. I will start by quoting this passage: “Thou shalt not abhor an Edomite; for he is thy brother: thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian; because thou was a stranger in his land.”

From this verse it would appear that we should welcome all Edomites into our congregations with open arms, and with no questions asked, and that we are somehow guilty of some dire contemptible sin for even thinking an evil thought against them. I ask you: Is this not the impression which seized upon you when you read this passage for the first time? Remember the guilty, dirty, condemning feeling which overcame you for even giving the Edomites the slightest hint of disparaging thought, that possibly Yahweh might suddenly kill you in your very tracks for even blinking an eye?

If this has been your reaction when reading this passage in the past, forget it, for that is not what this verse is saying; not even remotely. I happened upon this verse many years ago when I was listening to a presentation by an Identity speaker who was making reference to the Edomites by using this verse as one of his points. At the time, I decided to look into the Hebrew meaning of the word “Edomite” for myself. I found the Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance Of The Bible,” assigned the term “Edomite” the Hebrew word “130 which says:

“130 ... Edômîy, ...Edôwmîy, ed-o-mee’: patronymic [derived from father’s name] from #123; an Edomite, or descendant from (or inhabitant of) Edom: Edomite. See #726 Which had the following to say:

#726 ... Arôwmîy, ar-o-mee’; A CLERICAL ERROR FOR #130; an Edomite (as in the margin): Syrian.

At once the truth struck me (and this was about 15 years ago), for if the proper rendering was “Syrian” instead of “Edomite,” it would make all the difference in the world. Over the years, since that time, I have pointed this clerical error out to many people of our persuasion. At the time, I knew this made more sense if Deuteronomy 23:7 were to correctly read “Syrian” rather than “Edomite” for the Syrians were Abraham’s relatives, in which case this verse would read:

“Thou shalt not abhor a SYRIAN: for he is thy brother, thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian; because thou wast a stranger in his land.”

Over the years, I have been satisfied that the word should have been Syrian instead of Edomite. I remember one party who challenged me, indicating that it was only a clerical error, and really didn’t mean anything. I finally came to the conclusion that it would be a hard proposition to prove and decided not to push the point openly any further.

That is, however, until recently, when I was preparing for this lesson, I accidentally discovered what the CLERICAL ERROR was. I will now reveal to you how I made this discovery. As I had decided to take up the topic of Esau, I was in the process of reading anything and everything I could find on the subject. I was reading along in “The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible,” volume E-J, page 24, under the subtitle Edom, when I read this:

“...there are places where, because of the similarity between the letters _ (d) and _ (r), the text has wrongly read __À, ‘Aram’ (i.e. Syria), and ____À, ‘Arameans” (i.e., Syrians), for __À, ‘Edom,’ and ____À, ‘Edomites,’ such as 2 Kings 16:6; 2 Chronicles 20:2, where the KJV has followed the MT, but the RSV has followed an emended text.

“Note: I have followed the Hebrew characters as faithfully as I know how to do on my computer; I may have made a mistake ... The main thing to notice here is the ‘similarity between the letters _ (d) and _ (r). You can see very readily, that a very small slip of the pen can change the word from Edomite to Samian, or Syrian to Edomite. I will enlarge these two Hebrew letters and place them side by side so you can observe the difference in them:


With this very small change in the Hebrew writing, and the word can be changed from Syrian to Edomite! Think of it this way, syRian or eDomite. By this above slight change, the Hebrew ‘r’ sound is changed to a ‘d’ sound. Since I originally wrote this, I now realize that the small remnant of Judah from Jerusalem who went into Babylonian captivity spoke Hebrew when they went in and spoke Chaldee when they came out seventy years later.

Also, when they went in they were using a rounded style of Hebrew to write in, and when they came out they were using a square style of Hebrew. Is it possible that the changing from a rounded style to a square style produced such an error? Well, if it did, how many other mistakes are there because of this? After all, it is absurd to believe we should not “abhor an Edomite” when the Almighty hates them Himself.

“And I HATED ESAU, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness. Whereas Edom saith, We are impoverished, but we will return and build the desolate places; thus saith the LORD of hosts, They shall build, but I will throw down; and they shall call them, The border of wickedness, and, THE PEOPLE AGAINST WHOM THE LORD HATH INDIGNATION FOR EVER.” (Malachi 1:3-4)

“And Edom said unto him, Thou shalt not pass by me, lest I come out against thee with the sword...And he (Edom) said, Thou shalt not go through. And Edom came out against him with much people, and with a strong hand. Thus Edom refused to give Israel passage through his border: wherefore Israel turned away from him.” (Numbers 20:18-21)


[EE dum ites] descendants of Edom, or ESAU; an ancient people who were enemies of the Israelites. During the days of Abraham, the region which later became the home of the Edomites was occupied by more than one tribe of non‑Israelite peoples. When Esau moved to this region with his family and possessions, the HORITES already lived in the land Genesis 36:20. Edom and Israel after Kadesh Barnea. After the years of wilderness wandering, Moses wanted to lead Israel northward to Canaan across Edom into Moab. The king of Edom, however, refused them passage (Numbers 20:14‑21), forcing them to bypass Edom and Moab through the desert to the east (Judges 11:17-18. Later in the journey northward to Abel Acacia Grove in the plains of Moab across from Jericho (Numbers 33:48‑49), Balaam prophesied that Israel would one day possess Edom.  (Numbers 24:18).

From the Conquest Until the Division. In dividing the land of Canaan after the conquest, Joshua established Judah's border to the west of the Dead Sea and to the border of Edom (Joshua 15:1,21). During the reign of Saul, Israel fought against Edom (1 Samuel 14:47).

But Edomites at times served in Saul's army (1 Samuel 21:7; 22:9). David conquered Edom, along with a number of other adjacent countries, and stationed troops in the land (2 Samuel 8:13‑14). In later years, Solomon promoted the building of a port on the northern coast of the Red Sea in Edomite territory. He also built a smeltery nearby as a significant part of his developing copper industry. (1 Kings 9:26‑29).

After the Division. During the time of the Divided Kingdom, a number of hostile encounters occurred between the nations of Judah or Israel and Edom. During Jehoshaphat's reign, Edomites raided Judah but were turned back. (2 Chronicles 20:1, 8). An attempt to reopen the port at Ezion Geber failed (1 Kings 22:48); and the Edomites joined forces with those of Judah in Jehoshaphat's move to put down the rebellion of Mesha of Moab. (2 Kings 3:4‑5) During the reign of Joram, Edom freed herself of Judah's control (2 Kings 8:20‑22), but again came under Judah's control when Amaziah assaulted and captured Sela, their capital city. Edom became a vassal state of Assyria, beginning about 736 B. C.

Edom the Place of the Nabateans. After the downfall of Judah in 586 B. C., Edom rejoiced (Psalm 137:7). Edomites settled in southern Judah as far north as Hebron. Nabateans occupied old Edom beginning in the third century B. C., continuing their civilization well into the first century A. D. During the period from about 400‑100 B. C., Judas Maccabeus subdued the Edomites and John Hyrcanus forced them to be circumcised and then made them a part of the Jewish people. The Herod family of New Testament times was of Edomite stock.

Since no written Edomite records have been found, knowledge of the Edomites comes mainly from the Bible, archaeological excavations of their ancient cities, and references to Edom in Egyptian, Assyrian and Babylonian sources. (from Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary) (Copyright (C) 1986, Thomas Nelson Publishers)

E'DOMITES (e'do‑mits). The descendants of Esau, who settled in the S of Palestine and at a later period came into conflict with the Israelites (Deuteronomy 23:7); frequently called merely Edom (Numbers 20:14‑21; 24:18; Joshua 15:1; 2 Samuel 8:14); etc.)

Country. Edom ("Idumaea," KJV) was situated at the SE border of Palestine (Judges 11:17; Numbers 34:3) and was properly called the land or mountain of Seir (Genesis 36:8; 32:3; Joshua 24:4; Ezekiel 35:3, 7, 15). The country lay along the route pursued by the Israelites from Sinai to Kadesh‑barnea and thence back again to Elath (Deuteronomy 1:2; 2:1‑8), i.e., along the E side of the great valley of Arabah. On the N of Edom lay the territory of Moab, the boundary appearing to have been the "brook Zered." (Deuteronomy 2:13‑14, 18).

The physical geography of Edom is somewhat peculiar. Along the western base of the mountain range are low calcareous hills. These are succeeded by lofty masses of igneous rock, chiefly porphyry, over which lies red and variegated sandstone in irregular ridges and abrupt cliffs with deep ravines between.

The latter strata give the mountains their most striking features and remarkable colors. The average elevation of the summit is about two thousand feet above the sea. Along the eastern side runs an almost unbroken limestone ridge, a thousand feet or more higher than the other. This ridge sinks down with an easy slope into the plateau of the Arabian Desert. Although Edom is thus wild, rugged, and almost inaccessible, the deep glens and flat terraces along the mountainsides are covered with rich soil, from which trees, shrubs, and flowers now spring up luxuriantly.

People. The Edomites were descendants of Esau, or Edom, who expelled the original inhabitants, the Horites. (Deuteronomy 2:12) A statement made in Genesis 36:31) serves to fix the period of the dynasty of the eight kings. They "reigned in the land of Edom before any king reigned over the sons of Israel;" i.e., before the time of Moses, who may be regarded as the first virtual king of Israel. (cf. Deuteronomy 33:4‑5; Exodus 18:16‑19). It would also appear that these kings were elected. The chiefs ("dukes," KJV) of the Edomites are named in (Genesis 36:40‑43) and were probably petty chiefs or sheikhs of their several clans.

History. Esau's bitter hatred toward his brother, Jacob, for fraudulently obtaining his blessing appears to have been inherited by his posterity. The Edomites peremptorily refused to permit the Israelites to pass through their land. (Numbers 20:18‑21) For a period of 400 years we hear no more of the Edomites. They were then attacked and defeated by Saul. (1 Samuel 14:47) Some forty years later David overthrew their army in the "Valley of Salt," and his general, Joab, following up the victory, destroyed nearly the whole male population (1 Kings 11:15‑16) and placed Jewish garrisons in all the strongholds of Edom. (2 Samuel 8:13‑14)

Hadad, a member of the royal family of Edom, made his escape with a few followers to Egypt, where he was kindly received by Pharaoh. After the death of David he returned and tried to excite his countrymen to rebellion against Israel, but failing in the attempt he went on to Syria, where he became one of Solomon's greatest enemies. (1 Kings 11:14‑22)

In the reign of Jehoshaphat (875 B.C.) the Edomites attempted to invade Israel in conjunction with Ammon and Moab but were miraculously destroyed in the valley of Beracah. (2 Chronicles 20:22, 26) A few years later they revolted against Jehoram, elected a king, and for half a century retained their independence. (2 Chronicles 21:8)

They were then attacked by Amaziah, and Sela, their great stronghold, was captured (2 Kings 4:7; 2 Chronicles 25:11‑12) Yet the Israelites were never again able to completely subdue them. 2 Chronicles 28:17)



On the conquest of Judah, the Edomites, probably in reward for their services during the war, were permitted to settle in southern Palestine and the whole plateau between it and Egypt; but at about the same time they were driven out of Edom proper by the Nabateans.

For more than four centuries they continued to prosper. But during the warlike rule of the Maccabees they were again completely subdued and even forced to conform to Jewish laws and rites and submit to the government of Jewish prefects.


Immediately before the siege of Jerusalem by Titus, twenty thousand Idumaeans were admitted to the Holy City, which they filled with robbery and bloodshed. From this time the Edomites, as a separate people, disappear from the pages of history. Scriptural indications that they were idolaters (2 Chronicles 25:14‑15, 20) are amply confirmed and illuminated by discoveries at Petra. For a discussion of the degrading practices of Edomite religion, see George L. Robinson, The Sarcophagus of an Ancient Civilization. (bibliography: D. N. Freedman and E. F. Campbell, eds., Biblical Archaeologist Reader 2 (1964): 51‑58; T. C. Vriezen, Oudtestament Studien 14 (1965): 330‑53; N. Glueck, The Other Side of Jordan (1970); D. J. Wiseman, ed., Peoples of Old Testament Times (1973), pp. 229‑58). (from New Unger's Bible Dictionary) (originally published by Moody Press of Chicago, Illinois. Copyright (C) 1988.)

                                               Was Christ The Prince of Peace?

Next let’s take up the belief of many that Christ came as the Prince of Peace. At the Passover Christ (Yahweh) caused the attention of the disciples toward the need for to be armed, for a probably confrontation with the Jews. He was quite adamite in telling them of the need to be able to defend themselves.

“And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing. THEN SAID HE UNTO THEM, BUT NOW, HE THAT HATH A PURSE, LET HIM TAKE IT, AND LIKEWISE HIS SCRIP: AND HE THAT HATH NO SWORD, LET HIM SELL HIS GARMENT, AND BUY ONE. For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. And THEY SAID, LORD, BEHOLD, HERE ARE TWO SWORDS. And he said unto them, It is enough.” (Luke 22:35-38)

The Judeo-Christian preachers never say anything about this, because they don’t understand a thing about it; and so avoid talking about it as if it were some unknown subject best left alone. I get so sick of hearing that Christians are not supposed to defend themselves. Such teaching is not Scriptural; IT IS THE TEACHINGS OF COWARDS AND TRAITORS (And most of those who cry out Christians are not to defend themselves from the evil ones, will fight to the death so that a woman and a doctor can murder her baby in the womb) TO ALMIGHTY GOD AND THE LORD JESUS CHRIST.

No one has any objection to the Blacks defending themselves; nor for the Jews to teach to every Jew a 22. But let a Christian defend him/herself that brings on all kinds of outcries from those who profess themselves to be such great Christians that they can reprimand their brothers and sisters, when in fact, they are nothing of the sort and don't know what being a Christian is.

Almost immediately after an attack on a Christian, criticism is leveled at that person who dares to defend him/herself. Many times the police will admit that without such defense the person could have been mugged, raped or worse, but the attack was cut short by the prompt action of the man or woman who fought back. Yet our so‑called religious leaders, and other so‑called Christians will take it upon themselves to condemn that act of defense.

It is of course inconsistent to condemn violence and then to condemn those who resist violence. One cannot weigh the defender in the same scales as the aggressor. THE INNOCENT HAVE A RIGHT TO PROTECT THEMSELVES FROM THE GUILTY! The Law of God states:

"If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed." (Exodus 22:2)

If killing a thief is acceptable to God then how much more would be the act of the brave young man or woman who shot back at the attacker and cut short their attack on them.


Make no mistake about it, God is not a pacifist (Ezekiel 14:21; Deuteronomy 32:39‑43); neither is Jesus a pacifist (Matthew 21:12‑13; Luke 22:36; Revelation 14:19‑20; 19:11‑16) nor is the Bible a pacifist document (Num. 1:2‑3; Judges 3:2; Psalm 144;1‑2).

For Christ told us that He:


There are 6 different words for "kill" in the Hebrew. The Bible clearly distinguishes between premeditated murder (which is what the 6th Commandment forbids: "You shall do no murder"), accidental manslaughter, killing an enemy in the heat of battle, the killing of animals, execution of criminals for capital offenses and self defense.

Pacifist Christians are inconsistent Christians; they are double minded, and the Scriptures state:

"A double minded man is unstable in all his ways. Pacifism is an un‑Biblical position. God's Word commands that murderers be executed (Genesis 9:6; Exodus 21:12‑16; Leviticus 24:17‑22; Numbers 35:33). Civil government is appointed to ‘BEAR THE SWORD...He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.’" (Romans 13:4)

The Judeo-Christian preachers, ministers, priests, or whatever they care to call themselves, in my opinion, are cowards and are afraid to preach the truth. They stand behind the pulpits and cry out that “Christ was the Prince of Peace” and that we should not fight for Yahweh will do it for us.

Yahweh told us to “buy a sword”; “arm yourselves.” These are in contrast to what He said previously when He told them to “turning the other cheek.” (Matthew 5:39) However, the Judeos overlook the fact that the earlier teaching was aimed toward the Israelites. It was a comment upon their unforgiveness that the Jews had brought into their midst by the lying, deceiving scribes; the Kenites. When Christ said that the two swords were enough, to the Judeo-Christian mind, that is a statement which does not compute to them. They simply don’t understand it, and the Baal priests in the pulpits, on television and on radio will not explain to them.

Yet Christ (Yahweh) told them that He could call angels to defend Him if He wished: “Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?” (Matthew 26:53)

                                                         John 3:16 Is It Biblical:

We find this in the: Original New Testament (ONT)

(See Authentic New Testament). Footnote: While much that was in his documentary source (the Memoirs of John the Priest) has been adapted by the Greek author to bring the text into line with his ideas, as here, some passages, largely by way of commentary, stand out as his distinctive contribution. Whenever possible attention has been drawn to these, as in this instance, and some have been placed below the main body of the text and in slightly smaller type. The present passage is John 3:16‑21. [This passage has been so placed by the translator].

The Ferrar Fenton Bible Translation has the following in bracket indicating that the verse WAS ADDED BY THE TRANSLATORS at some point in time.

[For God so loved the world that He gave the only‑ begotten Son, so that every one believing in Him should not be lost, but have eternal life. For God did not send His Son to the world that He might condemn the world; but that He might save the world through Him...] and ends with John 3:21, Therefore it would appear that all the verses from John 3:16 forward to John 3:21 were added.

It appears that John 3:16 was not in the original Gutenberg Bible. You can see for yourself at the following url:

                                                                               Love Not The World

"Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him." (1 John 2:15)

If this is true, and we believe that it is, then why would Yahweh say that He so loved the world? We don't believe that He would do so.

Now the question that was put forth that so many began jumping up and down because it was even  suggested that John 3:16 should not be in the Bible.

"For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?" (Matthew 16:26)

We also have the testimony of Luke:

"...take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares. For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth. Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man." (Luke 21:34‑36)

James said:

"...know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." (James 4:4)

In Colossians we are told:

"Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth." (Colossians 3:2)

Yet John 3:16 is a direct contradiction to the above verses.

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

Therefore, we must research the word "world" and see what it actually means.

World: Strong's Concordance: #2889 kosmos (kos'‑mos); probably from the base of 2865; orderly arrangement, i.e. decoration; by implication, the world (in a wide or narrow sense, including its inhabitants, literally or figuratively [morally]):  KJV‑adorning, world.

World: Strong's Concordance: #2865 komizo (kom‑ id'‑zo); from a primary komeo (to tend, i.e. take care of); properly, to provide for, i.e. (by implication) to carry off (as if from harm; genitive case obtain): KJV‑‑ bring, receive.

World: Thayer's Definition: #2889  kosmos‑

1) an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government

2) ornament, decoration, adornment, that is, the arrangement of the stars, ‘the heavenly hosts,’ as the ornament of the heavens. 1 Pet. 3:3

3) the world, the universe

4) the circle of the earth, the earth

5) the inhabitants of the earth, men, the human race

6) the ungodly multitude; the whole mass of men alienated from God, and therefore hostile to the cause of Christ

7) world affairs, the aggregate of things earthly the whole circle of earthly goods, endowments riches, advantages, pleasures, etc., which although hollow and frail and fleeting, stir desire, seduce from God and are obstacles to the cause of Christ

8) any aggregate or general collection of particulars of any sort

a) the Gentiles as contrasted to the Jews (Romans 11:12 etc)

a) used of believers only, John 1:29; 3:16; 3:17; 6:33; 12:47 1 Corinthians 4:9; 2 Corinthians 5:19

World: Thayer's Definition: #2865  komizo‑

1) to care for, to take care of, to provide for

2) to take up or carry away in order to care for and preserve

3) to carry away, to bear off

4) to carry, to bear, to bring to, to carry away for oneself, to carry off what is one's own, to bring back

a) to receive, to obtain: the promised blessing

b) to receive what was previously one's own, to get back, to receive back, to recover

Now does it make sense that Yahweh would tell us that He loved world affairs, the aggregate of things earthly  the whole circle of earthly goods, endowments riches, advantages, pleasures, etc., which although hollow and frail and fleeting, stir desire, SEDUCE FROM GOD AND ARE OBSTACLES TO THE CAUSE OF CHRIST.

WORLD: "World is also associated with mankind. Christ said of His disciples, 'Ye are the light of the world' <Matthew 5:14>. OFTEN WORLD IS USED TO INDICATE 'THE MEN OF THIS WORLD' WHO ARE SAID TO LIE IN WICKEDNESS. <Ephesians 2:2; 1 John 5:19> THE MEN ARE CALLED 'THE WORLD,' not only because they compose the greater part of the world's population, but mainly because they pursue and cherish the things of this world. The Psalmist describes these men 'as having their portion in this life.' <Psalm 17:14>

"World may also denote the fleeting character of life's riches and pleasures and the folly of making them of central importance in life. ‘Will a person gain anything if he wins the whole world, but loses his life?’ <Matthew 16:26>. (from Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Copyright (C) 1986, Thomas Nelson Publishers)

Now John 3:16 makes even less sense, and it certainly appears that it does not belong in the Bible or men have been interpreting it in error for a long period of time. It would appear that John 3:16, like the rest of the Bible is making reference only to the Israelites in the world; not to all mankind.

When reading John 3:16, seldom does the Judeo‑ Christian clergy mention the following verse: "For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved." (John 3:17)

This is very clear, if men of Yahweh will only look with their eyes open and not closed by the lying, deceiving Judeo‑Christian clergy, that John is speaking of the Israelites who were, even then, scattered all over the earth. He is not speaking of the blacks, Chinese, and the other races or peoples, he is speaking only of the world of Israelites.

But men will deny this because their eyes have been blinded to the truth as the scriptures say:

"Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. And THEN SHALL THAT WICKED BE REVEALED, WHOM THE LORD SHALL CONSUME WITH THE SPIRIT OF HIS MOUTH, AND SHALL DESTROY WITH THE BRIGHTNESS OF HIS COMING: Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness." (II Thessalonians 2:3‑12)

We full well realize that many will say we are the ones deceived, not them. But you be the judge, if we are explaining this and MOST WILL DENY IT, and we know that most are deceived, who is telling the truth. It is those who are few in number, whom the masses will deny.

Many people who claim to be Christian don't know the meaning of the word; for they think all they have to do is run down to the altar and bow down on their knees and pray and that is accepting Yahshua as their savior. IT IS NOT. For they will go out and not think about church again for the next week when they attend church again.

Oh yes some will listen to the television preachers, or listen to the radio preachers, never knowing that these people are not teaching them a thing; but are only regurgating a politically correct sermon from some book or set of books. Therefore, they have wasted that much time listening to them because they have not learned anything about Yahweh's Word or His Laws, Statutes, and Judgment. Yet they will listen to these same television evangelists, and radio evangelist tell them that Yahweh's Laws have been done away with. Which is a bald faced lie. They have not been done away with, for if they had then there would be no more sin, and if there were no sin then Yahshua died in vain.

"Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law." (1 John 3:4)

Therefore, if the Laws of Yahweh have been done away with then what law are the sinners breaking in order to have to be saved from their sins. No it is not possible for the Law to be done away with and any preacher or teacher that tells you that is a liar and the truth is not in him.

"He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him." (1 John 2:4)

We know just from observation that it is the jews who love the world, and all the material goods, gold, silver and things of value. Yet they are the ones who will be totally destroyed in the end, by God’s Servant Race, the Anglo-Saxon, Germainc, Scandinavian, Celtic, Nordic, Slavic and kindred people of the so-called Christian Nations of the West.

                                                                   Born Again

Hebrews 12:8 says we are either “sons” or “bastards,” and there is anything in-between. And all this bull manure about being “born again,” (John 3:3), is totally an incorrect translation and interpretation.

That verse is not saying “born again” but “born from above.” Actually if one will check that verse out, it is saying one must be “born of the correct race.” To show you this, we will investigate the meaning of the word “born” as used in John 3:3 which has the Strong’s number #1080 in the Greek.

For this we will go to The Complete Word Study Dictionary New Testament, by Spiros Zodhiates, page 364. Zodhiates tells us this word means “generation, kind, offspring”...and the primary definition is: “Spoken of men, to beget”...”Spoken of women, to bear, bring forth”...”To be begotten”...”To be born as used generally...” In other words, when an Adamic White person is born in the flesh, he is also born of the Spirit. Other races are not “born” of that Spirit, nor can they ever be.

“Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.” (Ecclesiastes 12:7)

Zodhiates points out that “born” as used here (#1080) gennao, is from #1085, genos, which in turn means “offspring,, lineage, stock...” You can also check this with Strong’s, but you must follow-through to #1085 to get the entire meaning. If you should check only the word #1080, gennao, you will not understand the full implications, for it is speaking of race. John 3:31 makes it clear there are “heavenly” people from above and people “that are of the earth...earthly...” Our redeemer told the Jews, John 8:23:

“Ye are from beneath; I am from above: YE ARE OF THIS WORLD, I AM NOT OF THIS WORLD.

Thus, like us, He was also born from above; i.e., of the White Race.

We don’t want to leave the impression that we should not be converted though. It’s not a matter, as the Babylonian prostitute preachers imply, that one should “accept the Lord Jesus Christ as our personal Savior.”

It’s not a question of whether we accept Yahshua, but whether or not He accepts us and calls us to be His servants. Inasmuch as He died two thousand years ago for our Redemption, He has already accepted us. To be truly converted, we must accept His Redemption, which brings about communion! Conversion does not consist of being “regenerated by the Spirit,” but of being “turned around” (an about-face). Where in the past we were “sinner” (breakers of Yahweh’s Law), we do a 180 and start, to the best of our ability, to keep His Laws.

There are many who are reading this have experienced conversion. Whatever kind of prayer we made at that time, it was necessary for the Spirit to intercede on our behalf. (Romans 8:26) It’s only conjecture what kind of “groanings” of the Spirit might have “uttered,” but perhaps it might have gone something like this:

“Here is an Israelite under the Covenant of Abraham who has come to the realization that he/she is a Lawbreaker and wishes to plead the blood of Redemption on his/her belief. He/she promises hereafter, based upon the light of the written Word, do his/her best to reject the leaven of the Pharisees, and to return to the faith of the Patriarchs.”

Don’t worry about the exact words you might have prayed at your conversion for the Spirit interceded and presented them before the Throne in an appropriate manner. Also, don’t distress yourself about all the members of your family in who were never converted.

If they were not converted in this life, they will be in the next, for it is written:”...every [Adamic] knee shall bow to me, and every [Adamic] tongue shall confess to God.” (Romans 14:11) Some of us Adamite-Israelites send our sins ahead to the judgment, while for other Adamite-Israelites, their sins will follow them to the Judgment. (1 Timothy 5:24) And that is no sign the latter are going to be assigned to a burning hell. They will be in the kingdom too. But aren’t you glad you settled the account ahead of time?

To show you the Judeo-Christian clergy are still holding the position on the parable of the wheat and the tares which they learned, among other places, at the Christian Leadership College in Denver, Colorado, the following statement is made:

“Instead, this parable [of the wheat and tares] is simply contrasting righteous Israelites with wicked Israelites..”

To believe such a thing, they are implying that agriculturally wheat has the same genetics as darnel (tares). If, as he contends, the only difference between wheat and darnel are “righteous” and “wicked” Israelites, in essence they are claiming wheat and darnel (tares) are genetically identical. It would seem, with this conclusion, that Messiah is somewhat incompetent in presenting His teachings by way of parables. Or rather, could it be that the Judeo-Christian clergy are ones who is incompetent in understand them?!?! Yahshua said that He spoke in parables so some, the Jews, would not understand. For YAHSHUA NEVER INTENDED THE JEWS TO BE CONVERTED.

“For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; LEST AT ANY TIME THEY SHOULD SEE WITH THEIR EYES, AND HEAR WITH THEIR EARS AND SHOULD UNDERSTAND WITH THEIR HEART, AND SHOULD BE CONVERTED, AND I SHOULD HEAL THEM.” (Matthew 13:15)

Reference Materials