|
| |
The Cursed Ones
This is a study to show that the Jews cannot be saved; as they are The Cursed Ones. There
are many who refuse to believe in Satan; and there are ever more that believe that he
exists. Many will argue that the word Satan means "an adversary" and they are
right for he is an adversary to Yahweh.
Then there are those who ask, "If there is a God then why does He allow evil to be in
the world." This could be answered in many ways.
1). If God had destroyed Satan and the angels that followed him; then the other beings in
heaven would have served God because they feared Him, and not because they loved Him;
which is what He wants most of all.
2). If God had destroyed Satan and the angels that followed him; then the other beings,
because of their fear of Him would have immediately began to plot on how to overthrow Him,
out of their fear. And this God did not want to happen, because that would literally
destroy His creation all together.
Therefore, God had to allow Satan to run rampant on the earth, and cause men to lust after
money, sex, drugs, and every other kind of immoral thing imagination.
We must remember that to us, death is the end of all things and after that we know
nothing. But death is nothing to God, for He can raise people up by merely speaking to
them and telling them to rise and live again. Therefore, since this is the case, He can
allow all the evil things to happen on earth, and show the other beings that Satan's way
is wrong and evil; So when He destroys Satan and his angels, and those who follow him on
earth, then the other beings will know that God is right, and His way is just and fair.
Therefore, they will love Him because He has shown them over thousands of years and rivers
of blood spilled by Satan and his children the Jews; so when they are rounded up and
bundled and then thrown into the fire; the other beings will know once again that God is
just and that His Laws, Statutes, and Judgments bring happiness, love and well being to
all who follow them. And they will love Him with an everlasting devotion.
Let us start in the beginning. Satan, of course, was not a serpent. The thing that
deceived Eve and seduced her was not a scaly thing wriggling on the ground. The Hebrew
word Nachash means "enchanter" or "magician."
Serpent: Strong's Concordance: #5175 nachash (naw-khawsh'); from 5172; a snake (from
its hiss): KJV-- serpent.
#5172 nachash (naw-khash'); a primitive root; properly, to hiss, i.e. WHISPER A (MAGIC)
SPELL; generally, to prognosticate: KJV-- X certainly, divine, ENCHANTER, (use) X
enchantment, learn by experience, X indeed, diligently observe.
A fallen angel, retaining still a lot of his angelic powers, no doubt could be very much
of an enchanter and magician. Now his children, (and I mean children, not just followers)
through the centuries used a serpent as a symbol or emblem of their ancestor, until
finally they attached a secondary meaning of serpent of the word. But it is not in the
root meaning of the word at all.
At this point many will say that an angel did not do this because there is no such thing
as an angel nor a devil or Satan. Yet Christ Himself said that He saw Satan fall from
heaven as lightning:
"After these things the...And he said unto them, I BEHELD SATAN AS LIGHTNING FALL
FROM HEAVEN." (Luke 10:1, 18)
Thus Christ told us about Satan when he was cast out of heaven:
"And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan,
which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast
out with him." (Revelation 12:9)
Then Jude tells us:
"And THE ANGELS which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he
hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great
day." (Jude 1:6)
The Bible was never so ridiculous as to suggest that a snake accomplished all this. In
Genesis 3:1-3, you remember Satan said to Eve,
"Why, is it really true that God said, You can't eat of any tree in the Garden?"
And she replies to him, (here is how it reads in the Hebrew):
"And the woman said unto the enchanter, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the
Garden,"
but (now I am quoting from the King James Version and I am going to correct it as I go)
"...of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the Garden, God has said, Ye
shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die."
Now let us see what it actually says in the Hebrew: "Fruit" is the Hebrew word
"pirchach" meaning progeny, brood, children, descendants. Do you talk about the
children of a walnut tree or an apple tree? Of course you don't.
Now, of the pirchach, of the descendants, of the tree which is in the midst of the garden,
God has said, "Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it." And that word
"touch" is the Hebrew word "naqa" which is a more polite expression,
meaning, "to have sexual intercourse with." Do you need to be warned not to have
sexual intercourse with an apple? Of course not. It isn't that kind of tree.
God had millions of the pre-Adamic Asiatic and African peoples around; if he just wanted
somebody wide between the shoulders and narrow between the eyes, to spade up the Garden,
he had them.
He didn't have to create a special being for that. Satan had been the Governor of this
Planet until he forfeited the right to it by rebellion. God sent Adam here (and you
remember that the last verse in the third chapter of the Gospel of Luke tells you that
Adam was the Son of God: it doesn't say that about any of these pre-Adamic peoples
mentioned in Genesis chapter 1. (See the books: Pre-Adamites; A book entitled,
"Preadmites," or a demonstration of the Existence of Men Before Adam; together
with a study of their condition antiquity, and Racial Affinities, and Progressive
Dispersion Over the Earth, by Alexander Winchell, LL. D., and published by S.C. Griggs and
Company, London: 1880, which contains 500 pages. Another book entitled, "Adam and The
Adamite" or, The Harmony of Scripture and Ethnology by Dominick Meausland, Q.C. LL.
D., London: Richard Bentley, New Burlington St. England 1864)
Adam was the son of God and God created Adam here to carry out His will and to take over
by force, kick Satan out and govern this Planet.
Adam and Eve were not supposed to intermingle with these people. If these Negroes and
Mongoloids were all that God wanted, He already had them. What He created was a different
and separate being to have a different sort of person, which the Mongoloids and the
Negroids could never produce.
Such a being was to "till" the ground; this the races God created BEFORE Adam
and Eve never did. First God told us:
"And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field
before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was
not a man to till the ground." (Genesis 2:5)
Then He said:
"Therefore the LORD God SENT HIM FORTH FROM THE GARDEN OF EDEN, TO TILL THE GROUND
FROM WHENCE HE WAS TAKEN." (Genesis 3:23)
The Hebrew word "Awdawm," which we translate Adam, means "of a rosy, fair
complexion." Adam was the first person of a specifically created new race. Adam and
Eve were told,
"To not mongrelize your race, with these pre-Adamite peoples in the world."
This was what God meant when He told Adam and Eve:
"And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the
sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree
of knowledge of good and evil." (Genesis 2:9)
God told Adam that he could eat of every tree of the garden, except the tree of knowledge
of good and evil:
"And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest
freely eat: But of THE TREE OF THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL, THOU SHALT NOT EAT OF IT:
for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."(Genesis 2:16-17)
Now when you come to Genesis 3:13 God has called Adam, Eve and Satan before Him to give an
accounting of their misdeeds; and according to your King James Version, Eve says,
"The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat thereof."
Here again is the Hebrew word Nachash meaning enchanter, but instead of
"beguiled" the Hebrew word "nawshaw" means "seduced." Now
"beguiled" is no more than "deceived."
Somebody who sells you some mining stock, in a mine that doesn't have any good ore in it,
beguiles you; but this word means "seduced." And Yahweh God said unto the woman
said, "The enchanter seduced me." That is what it says in the Hebrew, and Cain
was the product thereof. So in reply, in Genesis 3:15 God says (speaking to Satan):
"I will put enmity between thee (Satan) and the woman, and between thy seed and her
seed."
Now the same Hebrew word, "zehra," literally meaning "seed" (and it
could be used as grains of wheat for example, but it is used throughout the Bible as
meaning the descendants of a person too; children, (posterity), between Satan's seed
(zehra) and the woman's seed (zehra). In other words Satan was to have just as literal
"children" in this world as was Eve, because the very same word with the very
same meaning is used for it.
Serpent
"Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had
made. And he {serpent} said unto the woman {Eve}, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of
every tree of the garden." (Genesis 3:1)
(1) Snakes are to be feared, and it is not abnormal to fear them. To prove that even such
Godly men as Moses were/are afraid of snakes, we present the following from the Book of
Exodus. We begin with Moses standing before the burning bush:
"...the Lord said unto him, What is that in thine hand? And he {Moses} said, A rod.
And He {God} said, Cast it on the ground. And he cast it on the ground, and it became a
serpent; and Moses Fled from before it." (Exodus 4:2-3)
(2) So we can see that even Moses fled before a serpent/snake! It scared him and he fled
from it. Because man has a natural fear of them.
Yet here in Genesis Chapter Three, we have Eve having a discourse with a serpent/snake!
With no fear. I do not believe it for a minute. I don't know about you, but I do not
believe that Eve was having a conversation with a literal snake! Not for a minute. That is
simply to far- fetched to be believed literally.
(3) If a snake had come up to Eve she would have ran for Adam to protect her from it. She
would not have simply stood or sat there and had a casual conversation with it. No! A
thousand times No!!! She would not have just sat there and said: "Hello how are
you?" or some such nonsense. She simply would not have done that at all.
(4) Serpent is a strange word when we look at it in the scriptures. It is translated from
many different words, but it is used 38 times in the Old Testament. And is translated,
basically, from four different words.
But let's only deal with one #5175 in Strong's Concordance. It appears 31 times and every
time it is translated serpent. Now keep in mind there are three other words that are also
translated serpent in the Scriptures. And the total words are used some 71 times in all
the Scriptures. 38 times as serpent and about 24 times as dragons.
(5) What is a dragon, you ask. Well this presentation is about serpents not dragons and to
get into a long discussion about dragons would take us away from our intended subject. So
we shall leave that for others to contemplate. This is because we have a problem here in
Genesis 3:1 with Eve talking with this thing called a serpent.
(6) Now the scriptures say the serpent was more subtil. Well what does this word mean. To
arrive at a proper answer we will turn to Strong's Concordance again. Which says the word
"serpent" is "Nachas" or "naw-khawsh" (#5175). Which is a
non- Israelite name according to (#5176) -- "Nachash;" the same as #5175; the
name of two persons appar. non-Isr.
It also means according to #5175 a snake (from its hiss): serpent. From the #5172 which
means to hiss, i.e. whisper a (magic) spell; gen. to prognosticate -- enchanter, learn by
experience, diligently observe.
(7) Also, we find the following from the Second College Edition, New World Dictionary of
the American Language, p. 1300: 1. A snake, esp. a large or poisonous one. 2. A sly,
sneaking, treacherous person. 3. Bible Satan, in the form he assumed to tempt Eve. 4.
Music an obsolete, coiled, brass wind instrument of wood covered with leather. The
American Dictionary of the English Language, by Noah Webster 1828, Facsimile First
Edition, published by the Foundation For American Christian Education relates that serpent
means among others: a subtil or malicious person.
(8) The word prognosticate means to: 1. To foretell or predict, esp. from signs or
indications. 2. To indicate beforehand. (Second College Edition, New World Dictionary of
the American Language, p. 1135) The 1828 American Dictionary relates: 1. To foreshow; to
indicate a future event by present signs. A clear sky at sunset prognosticates a fair day.
2. To foretell by means of present signs; to predict. "I neither will nor can
prognosticate To the young gaping heir his father's fate." So now we can see that the
word "nachash" is linked to foretelling things. Or its linked to witchcraft
(whisper a magic spell) and humanism. It's linked to anything, other than the Word of God.
(9) Now let's look again at this word serpent, and we will see that every time it appears
in the Bible, it does not mean a serpent/snake. That sometimes it means either a person or
a nation. For example when Jacob/Israel was relating the gifts which were given to the
various tribes of Israel we find the following: "Dan shall be a Serpent by the way,
an Adder {snake} in the path, that biteth the horse heels..." (Genesis 49:17)
(10) Is someone going to try to convince us that Dan was to become a snake. I don't think
so. Do you? It is merely a figure of speech. It means that the tribe of Dan would, or the
people of the tribe of Dan would display the attributes of being sly, cunning, deceitful.
(11) The wicked are described as serpents/snakes:
"The Wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born,
speaking lies. Their poison is like the poison of a Serpent: They are like the deaf adder
that stoppeth her ear." (Psalm 58:3-4)
(12) Evil and violent men are described as serpents:
"Deliver me, O Lord, from The Evil Man: preserve me from The Violent Man; Which
imagine mischiefs in their heart; continually are they gathered together for war. They
have sharpened their tongues Like A Serpent; Adders' poison is under their lips.
Selah." (Psalm 140:1-3)
Thus we can see by these verses, anyone who is evil or wicked is described as being a
serpent or snake.
(13) Now let's examine nations because they are also very important to this presentation.
Turn to the Book of Isaiah where we find:
"In that day the Lord with His sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan
the piercing Serpent, even leviathan that crooked Serpent; and He shall slay the dragon
that is in the sea." (Isaiah 27:1)
(14) We see here that the Leviathan is a crooked and piercing serpent. It appears this is
an allegory, talking about the enemies of Israel.
(15) The nations that came against Israel are compared to this thing which is also
described as a serpent. And it appears that this would be a reference to the Grecian,
Turkish and Roman Empires of that day. This is generally accepted when one looks at the
narratives of the Bible.
(16) Now let's look at Jeremiah 8:17 for another:
"For, behold, I will send Serpents, cockatrices, among you, which will not be
charmed, and they shall bite you, saith the Lord."
(17) Here again we are not talking about actual serpents/snakes. Not at all. We are
talking about nations which will becoming against Israel. They will not be charmed and
they will bite you. At this point some will ask what do you mean they will not be charmed.
(18) For an answer turn to the Book of Second Kings Chapter Seventeen we find Assyria came
against what was left of Israel, and they told the Assyrians they would pay them a ransom
if they would not come in and harm them. That's charming them is it not? But if they
will not be charmed, then they will not accept their money, gold, silver or other
valuables. They will come in and bite you and destroy you. That is what Jeremiah is
telling them. So we can clearly see, They are not Serpents at all, they are the enemy of
Israel, who will come against them.
(19) There is another like story in Amos 9:3 and another in Isaiah 14:29. Those are good
stories and you should read them very carefully.
(20) We find allegories being used all through the Scriptures. No one has a problem with
Judah being called a lion's whelp (Genesis 49:9); Zebulun as a foal and an ass's colt
(Genesis 49:11); Issachar as a strong ass (Genesis 49:14); Naphtali as a hind {A red deer
-- one that is fully grown} (Genesis 49:21); Joseph as a bough {branch or limb of a tree}
(Genesis 49:22); Benjamin as a wolf (Genesis 49:27); All the tribes as a lion (Numbers
23:24; 24:9); Gad as a lion (Deuteronomy 33:20); Dan as a lion's whelp (Deuteronomy
33:22); Jesus as a Lamb (Throughout the Book of Revelation); Israel as a speckled bird
(Jeremiah 12:9); A nation of the East as a ravenous bird (Isaiah 46:11); Preachers as
fishers (Jeremiah 16:16); Pharaoh King of Egypt as a young lion and a whale (Ezekiel 32:2)
and Herod as a fox. (Luke 13:32) When the word "lion" is used for Judah, we are
trying to really emphasize the strength of Judah. And when we use the word
"serpent" we think of something sly, wicked, evil, cunning, something that hides
from us, has venom, that is strong and dangerous. And that is why the word serpent is used
many times as an allegory in the Scriptures.
(21) There are many more allegories which could be presented but we believe this should
suffice. Was any of these men such an animal or thing? Of course not! It is simply a
description of the characteristics of these separate individuals.
(22) Then we have the false doctrine of the Pharisees, Sadducees and Herod described as
Leaven. (Matthew 16:12)
(23) Thus we can clearly see that it is not at all unusual for a word to be used to
illustrate something more impressively. And that is what we are talking about.
(24) Most Christians do not have any trouble with any of these in the various verses of
Scriptures until we get to Genesis 3:1. For example if we go a little further we find:
"...thou shalt bruise His heel." Everyone knows that Scripture. And we find
another one "...It shall bruise thy head..." and no one has any problem relating
that to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and the evil one {which most people believe to be
Satan}. Nobody has a problem with that.
(25) Then: Why is it a problem when someone comes along and says The Serpent is not a
Snake! To some people that is a real problem: They want that Serpent to be a Snake!!! And
they will scream and rant like a spoiled child if someone disagrees with them.
(26) In our opinion that Serpent never was a Snake! In my opinion that serpent was a live
flesh and blood person. In my opinion it was no spiritual being, and that is not meant to
refute the Satan doctrine at all. We are simply saying that this thing we had in the
flesh, in the body, in the Garden of Eden, was not an invisible, negative entity. It was
not a Snake that walked on two feet. It was a humanoid. Just like you and I.
(27) Let's look at some of the characteristics of this particular serpent in Chapter Three
Verse One. One of the things we know, is that it is more wise than any beast of the field
which the Lord God had made. Is that not what it says? There word is subtil but we will
deal with that a little later.
(28) What is wisdom a trait of? Can you show us any animal in the animal kingdom which can
be wise, that can be sly, that can be crafty? They only do what they do by instinct, they
do not do it from reason. No animal operates from reason.
(29) Now one can condition response them, by exposing them to altering good with bad
conditions depending upon what they do in response to the stimuli given them. But that is
merely training them, that is not teaching them wisdom, that is not teaching them to
reason.
(30) Oh, the experiments with monkeys, where some scientists say they have taught a monkey
to talk; but again that is only the animal being taught to make certain sounds as a result
of varying stimuli given them. That is not the same thing. That is not the same thing as
being born with the ability to think and reason.
(31) Another thing about this serpent that everybody agrees upon, is that it walked erect
like a man. This is a natural human trait. It is not the natural reaction or trait of any
animal, much less a snake. You cannot find this ability in snakes.
(32) They do not stand up. Oh there may be some species which have small legs or the
semblance of legs but more than likely, if the scientists would be honest, they are a
species of lizard and not a specie of snake. There are some snakes which can raise their
heads up quite a bit, but still, they cannot stand erect.
(33) It has been said that apes are a form of the erectus, but that is simply not true.
They spend most of their time moving about on both their (hands) and feet. Oh they can
stand erect for short periods of time but their natural position is on all fours. And even
when they are standing erect they are bent over, they have a slight hump to their back
because that is not their normal stance.
(34) And besides that, can you imagine Eve standing or sitting in the Garden of Eden and a
great harry ape suddenly dropping out of a tree beside her and speaking to her. She would
have been gone like a bolt of lightening. She would not have stayed there with such an
animal.
(35) Now the third thing about this serpent was the ability to talk. To speak like a man.
Well things are getting worse all the time for those who want that serpent to be a snake.
There has Never been a snake with the ability to talk -- not then and not now, nor at any
time in the foreseeable future. They simply cannot do so.
They do not even have any vocal cords. Oh some will say what about the ass which spoke to
Balaam. Well let's look at it for just a moment.
"And Balaam rose up in the morning, and saddled his Ass, and went with the princes of
Moab. And God's anger was kindled because he went: and the Angel of the Lord stood in the
way for an adversary against him. Now he was riding upon his Ass, and his two servants
were with him. And the ass saw the Angel of the Lord standing in the way..." (Numbers
22:21-23)
(36) According to Strong's Concordance the word "ass" or "attuwn" #860
which is the same as "eythan" or "ethan" which means: "from an
unused root (mean, to continue); permanence; hence (coner) permanent; spec. A Chieftain:
hard, mighty, rough, strength, strong."
(37) So Balaam was riding upon a strong Chieftain. Not a Jackass as we know. We also find
that the word "ass" can also mean a #2544 "chamowr" or
"Canaanite." As black men were used to carry burdens and people in ancient
times; and some of the Canaanites were black, it is quite possible that Balaam was being
carried by a strong black Canaanite Chieftain. Which would explain the "ass'"
ability to talk.
(38) Now if we are going to attribute the talking in Genesis Chapter Three of a snake,
then it would appear that in this respect Satan has more power than God in that he was
able to make a serpent, who has no vocal cords, nor any organs capable of making or
forming words, speak.
(39) The fourth thing about this serpent, was his gift of reason; which is expressed by
his statement "...hath God said." That's reasoning. That's questioning. That's
showing an ability to think, to reason. Thus, the serpent had four attributes:
(1) He was wiser {more subtil} than any beast of the field,
(2) He could walk erect,
(3) He could speak, and
(4) He had the ability to think and to reason.
(40) One does not find those things in snakes: Not then and not now. THOSE TRAITS CANNOT
BE FOUND IN ANY ANIMAL OR SNAKE WHICH HAS EVER EXISTED UPON THE FACE OF THE EARTH. THEY
ARE FOUND, ONLY IN WHAT WE CALL TODAY, THE HUMANOID SPECIES.
(41) Then there is the problem of a snake or an ape coming up to Eve and speaking to her
without her running away. It is simply more than we can accept. It could not, it did not
happen that way. But he was, whatever he was, more cunning and wiser than any beast of the
field. Or any other species of beast.
(42) We can solve all these problems if we recognize that Adam and Eve were the first of
the White Race {which we will explain later}. Which would not preclude the existence of
other so-called humanoids existing along with them. With this, the problem simply goes
away. It does not exist any more, because it would make it possible for another humanoid
to exist at the same time as Adam and Eve.
This would also make it possible for someone to appear before Eve and not frighten her
away. Because she has seen him before, and has probably talked to him before. It would not
be a mystery to her, it would be no surprise either.
(43) Suppose that Adam and Eve were the only two people in the whole world and Eve walks
around a tree and there is someone there. And it's not Adam! What is she going to do. She
is going to scream for Adam and tell him; Adam you are not going to believe what I have
found. She would be concerned. No matter what it was, unless it was someone she had seen
before.
(44) Now if we assume that the serpent is another humanoid and not a snake, then the
problem goes away. Because the other races of the world can walk, talk, think, reason and
have wisdom.
The only thing left is what does the word "subtil" mean. Once again let's turn
to Strong's Concordance for an explanation. It is #6175 "aruwm" or
"aw-room" and means: cunning (usually in a bad sense), crafty, prudent, subtil.
This word "aruwm" has been translated only one time as subtil (Genesis 3:1) and
the other ten times it has been translated as crafty or prudent.
(45) Webster's gives a little different spelling, it spells "subtil" as
"subtle" and gives the following definitions:
(1) Thin, rare; tenuous; not dense or heavy [a subtle gas].
(2) a) Capable of making or noticing fine distinctions in meaning, etc. [a subtle
thinker].
b) Marked by or requiring mental keenness [subtle reasoning].
(3) Delicately skillful or clever; deft or ingenious [a subtle filigree].
(4) Not open or direct; crafty; sly.
(5) Delicately suggestive; not grossly obvious [a subtle hint].
(6) Working insidiously; not easily detected [a subtle poison]. (New World Dictionary of
the American Language, Second College Edition, p. 1420-21)
(46) Webster's 1828 Christian Dictionary gives the following:
(1) Thin; not dense or gross; as subtil air; subtil vapor; a subtil medium.
(2) Nice; fine; delicate. "I do distinguish plain Each subtil line of her immortal
face."
(3) Acute; piercing; as subtil pain.
(4) Sly; artful; cunning; crafty; insinuating; as a subtil person; a subtil Adversary.
(5) Planned by art; deceitful; as a subtil scheme.
(6) Deceitful; treacherous.
(7) Refined; fine, acute; as a subtil argument.
(47) Had Eve come into an adversary situation. You bet your boots she did. She had met
with a wise adversary; a deceitful and treacherous adversary.
Now the Judeo-Christian ministers say, "Oh that doesn't mean anything, because he
quotes Genesis 4:1:
"And Adam knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain."
Now you notice, what is not said is more significant than what is said. The Bible nowhere
says Adam begat Cain. Remember now, as you have read in the Old Testament, the monotonous
regularity with which it always says, "And so-and-so begat whozis and whozis begat
what's-his-name and what's-his-name begat somebody else," and so on. It was important
to know your ancestry in those days, because you didn't get your citizenship for two box
tops and a dime; you got it because your ancestors for twenty generations back were
Israelites, and no other way.
So Adam knew his wife, and she conceived. Now we can tell you something, and can prove
every bit of it by witnesses; we went to a movie one night and the next morning the sun
rose in the East.
Now we did not say the one caused the other. We said two things happened, one of them
first and the other second; and they did, but I never said they were cause and effect
here.
The Bible never says there was cause and effect here either. Now if you want further proof
out of this, you can go to the fifth chapter of Genesis which gives the list of Adam's
descendants, and you will notice that Cain is not mentioned. Neither Cain nor Abel are
mentioned among the descendants of Adam. And if you say Abel might have been omitted,
because we don't know, but he was probably killed before he left any descendants of his
own.
But that is not true of Cain, because the Bible traces Cain's descendants for six
generations, naming them on down the line. But never once does it say that Cain was a
descendant of Adam; never in any way, shape, or form or manner. The first time it
says Adam begat a child is Genesis 5:3:
"And Adam lived 130 years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and
called his name Seth." Not Cain.
So the Satanic blood line crept in, definitely, with Cain; possibly earlier among the
pre-Adamic peoples. Now there were pre-Adamic peoples who were not necessarily Satanic.
There were some pre-Adamic people into whom the Satanic blood line came and there were
even some of the descendants of Adam who probably mongrelized. In fact, it is evident that
they did from the very fact that those living around Noah were wiped out by the flood
because the Bible tells us that Noah was perfect in his ancestry (no mongrelization) and
he was the only one left in that area who was.
That is why the mongrelized Adamites around him were drowned in the flood. The real
descendants of Adam were multiplied, and then one comes to the fact of the Satanic blood
line getting in there.
Remember, God had announced His purpose, that He was going to take back the world from
Satanic domination, He was going to rule it according to His purposes, and He was going to
rule it through His children, going down through Adam. Now, what was the obvious move on
Satan's part to thwart that? Mogrelize the two blood lines, so he could sneer in God's
face and say, "These are my children; and where are Yours? All these have my blood in
them." And that is exactly what he set out to do.
Genesis 6:2 says,
"The Sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them
wives of all they chose."
Now you don't get the full significance of it in that translation, "the sons of
God." (beni-ha-elohim, the sons of the Elohim). Now you remember the Hebrew word El
(the mighty) is used as a title of God derived from it, eloa (singular) is practically
always translated God or a God, and is a correct translation. And elohim is the plural,
meaning gods.
In the 82nd Psalm it says,
"God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods."
He says to them,
"I have said, Ye are gods (Elohim); and all of you are children of the most
High." (Psalm 82:6)
Ferror Fenton relates this verse:
"I had said, that they seem to be Gods, And all as if Sons of the Highest; But yet
you shall die as did Adam, And fall, like each one of the Great."
As you can see the King James Version just says "gods" but it is a correct
translation of "the Elohim." "The sons of the Elohim saw the daughters of
Awdawm that they were fair."
The Elohim are "the children" of God, and to that extent distinct from the
angels, who are merely servant spirits. Now we are not given too much detail on the
rebellion that took place in Heaven, but the Bible very definitely suggests that along
with a number of the angels some even of the Elohim (sons of God) followed Satan into
rebellion.
Some people have tried to say, since the Adamite is spoken of as the sons of God, this is
merely the Adamites here. But "the sons of God saw the daughters of Adam that they
were fair and took them wives of all whom they choose."
And it is written with obvious disapproval. The male descendants of Adam were not allowed
by God's law to marry anyone but the daughters of Adam; so if they were marrying within
their own racial line here, it couldn't have been spoken with disapproval. So the
"beni-ha-elohim" are evidently of those Elohim who followed Satan into
rebellion.
Go into Genesis 6:4 speaking of the same thing, and again it is botched up in the King
James Version.
"There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of
God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became
mighty men which were of old, men of renown."
This is what it says in the Hebrew:
"There were Nephilim (the fallen ones) in the earth in those days."
They were fallen angels. That is what the Bible calls them in so many places, Jude 1:6:
"And the angels which kept not their first estate..." who had fallen from Heaven
and from their former powers. "When the sons of God," and it's again the
beni-ha-elohim, "came in unto the daughters of Adam..." So it's the same thing.
Therefore, we have the spreading of the Satanic blood line, and the Bible in Genesis
chapter 6 goes on to trace many of these descendants of the fallen angels. You find that
all through Palestine, on both sides of the Jordan River, clear down into Mount Seir, the
rugged mountain range southeast of the Dead Sea where Esau and his family lived, all
through there you have these various people with the Satanic blood line in them.
There are two different places, one in Isaiah, the other as in Ezekiel, where it speaks of
what it calls a King or Prince, in the one case of Babylon, and the other case of Tyre;
but nevertheless, it speaks of him in language which could not possibly apply to anyone
except Satan; indicating therefore that at some time or other, Satan had incarnated in the
form of these various kings; one king of Babylon, one king of Tyre.
Now don't think that is so impossible or unbelievable because, remember the many times
that the Old Testament tells of angels appearing in very solid form. They came and talked
with Abraham on several occasions; one of them, you will remember, wrestled with Jacob
almost all night.
Another came when the people of Israel were about to cross the Jordan River and take over
Palestine. Joshua, making a scouting trip around his camp, saw this armed man standing
there in armor and with sword, and Joshua asked,
"And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho, that he lifted up his eyes and
looked, and, behold, there stood a man over against him with his sword drawn in his hand:
and Joshua went unto him, and said unto him, Art thou for us, or for our adversaries? And
he said, Nay; but as captain of the host of the LORD am I now come..." (Joshua
5:13-15)
Turn to Isaiah 14:12-21 and note that this could not possibly apply to anyone except to
Satan himself; and then, taking it out of the King James Version too,
"How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut
down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I
will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also
upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north"
Satan is saying:
"I'm going to be the ruler over Israel (God's people). I will ascend above the
heights of the clouds; I will be like the most high."
But Yahweh God told Lucifer, the devil,
"Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit. They that see thee
shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the
earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms; That made the world as a wilderness, and
destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners? All the kings of
the nations, even all of them, lie in glory, every one in his own house. But thou art cast
out of thy grave like an abominable branch, and as the raiment of those that are slain,
thrust through with a sword, that go down to the stones of the pit; as a carcass trodden
under feet. Thou shalt not be joined with them in burial, because thou hast destroyed thy
land, and slain thy people: the seed of evildoers shall never be renowned." (Isaiah
14:15-20)
One could not say that about any kings of Babylon. The only one who may possibly have
failed to get burial and an elaborate tomb, and all that, might have been Belshazzar: but
he was nothing but an incompetent drunkard, and nobody ever could say of him that he was
the one who shook kingdoms, and so on. He didn't even rule Babylon. He stayed drunk.
These passages are speaking of none other than Lucifer. Note how it goes on (I am reading
from the same passage, Isaiah 14:21):
"Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers; that they do
not rise, nor possess the land, nor fill the face of the world with cities."
And that word translated as "children"is from the Hebrew word "beni"
(sons). So, Satan obviously was to have children who could be slaughtered, to keep them
from multiplying to the point where thy would take over and rule the world. Old Testament?
Sure. Now let us see what the New Testament has to say about it.
Many Judeo-Christian clergymen claim to be Christian; so we want to call his
attention to the words of Jesus Christ and see whether he is going to say Jesus Christ is
a liar or mistaken, or whether he is willing to admit, perhaps, he himself was mistaken,
because one cannot reconcile the two. Christ plainly, and in a number of places, says the
devil has "children," not mere followers.
Remember the parable of the Tares and the Wheat (Matthew 13:25-40); He spoke of the farmer
who sowed good seed in his field, and his enemy came along during the night time and sowed
these poisonous weeks; the tares among the wheat; and when the farmer's servants saw the
tares growing among the wheat they asked him, "Should we go and pull them up
now?"
And he said,
"No, you might pull up some of the wheat with them. Let them grow together until the
time of the harvest, and then the reapers will first gather the tares into bundles to be
burned, and then put the wheat in my barn."
Then He explains this parable to His disciples. In Matthew 13:38-39 He says,
"The field is the world; the good seed, are the children of the kingdom (and He uses
here the Greek word which is plural of 'hulos,' meaning sons - the good seed are the sons
of the kingdom); but the tares are the 'children' (same Greek word, huios) of the wicked
one."
So Satan has children in this world as does God.
Again, speaking to the Pharisees (who we know, were Jews), in Matthew 12:34 (The King
James Version botches it up to an extent that seems to me often to be willful), Christ
says,
"O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the
abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh."
But the word is not "generation" at all.
A generation is a number of people, of not too different age, living at the same time. You
for example constitute one generation. He wasn't talking just about the people living
then. They were not any more wicked than the generation that lived before them or the
generation that lived after them.
What He said was (it's the Greek word "genema" which means "children"
or "offspring"): "O children of vipers (snakes)...sure, all these centuries
you Jews have used the serpent as the emblem or symbol for your ancestor. All right,
taking you at your word, You children of serpents," right down the line; vipers. He
knew who they were. Again Matthew 23:29-35:
"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the
prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, And say, If we had been in the days
of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed
the prophets."
And here again is that Greek word "huios."
"Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. Ye serpents, ye genema (ye offspring,
children) of vipers. How can ye escape the damnation of hell? That upon you may come all
the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood
of Zacharias, son of Barachias, whom you slew between the temple and the altar."
Now does the Judeo-Christian clergy say that Jesus Christ was so unjust that He was going
to punish these Jews for the murder of Abel if they weren't even descendants of Cain? Of
course not. He was here tracing the "children" of the serpent; the enchanter,
Satan, down through the centuries, who had murdered the righteous, including all the
prophets, right down the line. So He said,
"Upon you (upon this 'people') these 'descendants of the serpent, will come the
responsibility for all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of
righteous Abel even unto the blood of Zacharias."
Throughout, the Bible speaks of two seed lines (and I do not mean merely somebody who has
been converted to good views or bad). The Bible makes no reference here as to what your
religious point of view may be; it is talking about literal "descendants."
We read in Romans 8:16:
"The Spirit itself bears witness with our spirit, that we are the 'children' of
God."
Now, the word children there; the Greek word "teknon" means one "born"
a child, not adopted. Nothing is more fallacious than this church doctrine about being
"adopted" children of God. You read what Paul said on this subject, and nothing
in it can justify the mistranslation of that as "adoption."
He says that before the coming of Christ we were held in bondage under the law, governed
strictly by the law, and he said we are just like an heir under age. He has inherited from
his father, who has died, all the estate; but he is still a minor, and he is not allowed
to take control of it.
He is under the control of trustees and governors, appointed guardians, appointed by his
Father, until he comes of age. And Paul says, all the time he is the owner of it all, and
yet he is controlled as though he is just a servant.
Now you couldn't say that about anybody who was adopted. If you take somebody else's
illegitimate child and decide you are going to adopt him, is he already the owner of your
property before you adopt him? Of course not. And Paul wasn't stupid enough to think he
was. Only the Judeo-Christian church-men are stupid enough for that.
What Paul was talking about was the coming of age ceremony by which they marked the fact
that the heir had now become of full age and his property was put into his hands to
control as an adult.
So here in Romans 8:16:
"The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of
God"
"teknon" one born a child, not adopted.
Romans 9:26 (and he is quoting from Hosea 1:10):
"And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not
my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God"
and it is that Greek word huioi - sons. We are the born; not adopted (or converted)
children of the devil, read Acts 13:8 which tells about a Jewish sorcerer, Elymas, who
opposed Paul when Paul was trying to make some converts.
Then Saul (who also was called Paul) filled with the holy Ghost, set his eyes on him and
said (in verse 9):
"O full of all subtility and mischief, thou 'child' of the devil (that Greek word
Huois - son) thou 'son' of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease
to pervert the right ways of the Lord?"
Paul was under no illusion, he knew them to be "children" of the devil, by
perfectly legitimate ancestry, for what it's worth.
The child of a cat is another cat, isn't it? The child of a Negro is a Negro; and a child
of God is what? Now he is not as wise, and he is not as powerful, and he is not as
important as his Father; but nevertheless he partakes (within his limitations) of a godly
nature.
And that is what the Bible tells us about; and that is exactly why we of God's people
Israel are held to so much greater responsibility than other people. After all, you cannot
expect a Negro to act like anything but a Negro; but a child of God is expected to act
like one.
Therefore, the child of a devil is what? Another devil, isn't he? John 6:70-71 is part of
a very important passage which began in this manner: Jesus asked His disciples who were
all gathered there,
"Whom do men say that I am?"
and they said
"Oh some say that you are this prophet or that one who has been reincarnated and come
back here."
The Christ said,
"Whom do you say that I am?"
and Peter spoke up and said,
"Thou are the Christ, the Son of the living God."
Christ then said,
"Blessed art thou, Simon, son of Jonah: because flesh and blood didn't tell you that
fact: it was my Father in heaven who told you that."
And He said,
"Upon this rock (Petra, the solid bed-rock of the earth) I will found My
church."
He didn't say He was going to found it on Simon Peter (Petros), a little stone. In Greek,
Petros means a little stone, just barely bigger than a pebble. Was He going to found His
church on a pebble that anybody could kick out from under it? No. "I will found it
upon Petra," the solid bed-rock of the earth.
Remember the example He gave, the parable wherein He said one man had built his house on
the sand and when the storm came along, the flood washed the sand out from under it and it
collapsed; but another man built his house upon the rock (Petra - the bed-rock) and the
storm beat upon it and couldn't do anything to it, because it was founded on a rock
(Petra). If any of you have ever been up to Yosemite Valley and seen that enormous cliff,
"El Capitan," you've seen a good example of what the Greeks meant by the word
Petra.
You could build a castle on that and nothing could blow it off or wash it away. So upon
this fact, that you have recognized who I am: the Christ, the Son of the Living God; upon
that I will found My church, and the gates of death shall not prevail against it. John
6:70-81 says,
"Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a 'devil?' He
spoke of Judas Iscariot, (a Jew; and a thief {John 12:6} the son) of Simon, for he it was
that would betray him, being one of the twelve."
Our Savior was not just being vulgarly abusive and calling people names, He never did
that. Oh, He denounced these Pharisees, He called them hypocrites, and they were; He
wasn't abusing them with lying epithets.
They were hypocrites, and He was accurate when He called them "children" of
serpents, they acknowledged the statement was true, for that was the emblem they had used
from ancient times. And when He said that one of them was a devil, He wasn't being
abusive, He was speaking the literal truth.
The first Epistle of John states the existence of these two seed lines. 1 John 2:29:
"If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that every one that does righteousness is
born of Him."
1 John 3:2:
"Beloved, now are we the sons of God (and here we have that Greek word teknon; born
child, not adopted, a born child of God)."
1 John 5:9-10:
"Whosoever is born of God does not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him; and he
cannot sin, because he is born of God."
1 John 2:23,
"Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father."
And in John 15:23, Jesus Christ Himself said,
"He that hateth ME hateth My Father also."
Now by that, he didn't mean that none of us commit any sins at all; because, if that is
the case, we would not have needed the sacrifice of Christ on the stake. We do all have
our sins; but you know people are divided into two classes; the ones who are only sorry
because they don't get a chance to sin more, and the others who are sorry because they
have sinned a little.
So what he means there, is, whoever is born of God doesn't habitually sin. So he says, in
verse 10, "In this the children (that Greek word teknon), the children of God are
manifest, and the children (and again it that same Greek word teknon) of the devil."
Remember he has talked about us as born teknon of God, and the others as the born teknon
of the devil.
1 John 3:12 says that as for those that are our brothers, not the children of Satan, that
we should love them and not be as Cain. The King James Version says,
"...who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother."
So the people who have Judeo-churchanity rather than Christianity say,
"Oh well now, you know it doesn't say that he was a son, it just means that Cain was
morally associated with Satan and was bad and reprobate, and so on."
As you know, different languages have their different idioms. In many languages one word
may have a meaning that can only be expressed by a phrase of several English words.
Nearly everyone has a King James Version of the Bible and know that in most editions of
it, some words are printed in italic and those words in italic are the words which the
translators added because they thought it was necessary to give the English the same
meaning that the Hebrew or the Greek had, without these added words.
The third chapter of Luke traces the genealogy of Jesus Christ, starting with Christ and
running back all the way to Adam. So let us start with Luke 3:23 as it reads in the King
James Version:
"And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the
son of Joseph, which was the 'son' of Heli (but those words 'the son' are in italic
showing that they were not in the Greek and the translators added them), which was the son
of Matthat, (again added in italic), which was the son of Levi (in Italics), which was the
son of Melchi (italics), which was the son of Janna,"
and so forth - all in italics.
You know all about these missions to the Jews; these were converted Jews. He says to them
(and you can just hear the ring of sarcasm in His voice),
"If ye continue in my doctrines indeed, then you shall be my disciples; and you shall
know the truth and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:31)
Immediately they bristled up at this and said, "What do you mean; make us free?"
They said,
"We are Abraham's seed and we have never been in bondage to any man."
And Christ said,
"I know you are Abraham's seed" (notice Christ said seed, not the children
of Abraham). Now to anyone who knew his Bible (and of a minister it is utterly inexcusable
that he does not know it: because, remember, this is the blind leading the blind into the
ditch, when an ignorant Judeo-Christian minister is leading his congregation); THIS ALSO
SHOWS THAT THEY WERE NOT REALLY CONVERTS TO CHRISTIANITY, BUT WERE ONLY PRETENDING TO BE
CHRISTIANS AND CHRIST SHOWED THEM UP FOR WHAT THEY WERE; DECEIVERS. Who was it who could
say that he was descended from Abraham and had never been in bondage to any man?
If these Jews were of any of the twelve tribes at all, they would have been in bondage the
first time in Egypt, wouldn't they? If they belonged to the ten tribed northerly kingdom
of Israel (and of the three tribes in Judea. It was only the city of Jerusalem and the
towns immediately surround it that were not also taken into the Assyrian captivity. It was
later that those in Jerusalem and the surrounding towns that were taken into the
Babylonian captivity), they would have been in bondage a second time in Assyria, wouldn't
they?
And if they belonged to the two tribed southern kingdom of Judah, they would have been in
bondage for the second time, in Babylon, wouldn't they? And they said, "We have never
been in bondage to any man," and Christ admitted the truth of that. He didn't deny
it. So they were not of any of the tribes of Israel whatsoever. Now who could say that,
nevertheless, 1,800 years earlier than that, Abraham was one of his ancestors - Esau?
Remember Esau and Jacob were twins, born with presumably) the same blood line: but Esau
married two Canaanite women in violation of God's law.
Therefore, he couldn't leave anything but mongrelized half-Satanic descendants, because
among these Hittite Canaanites you had the Satanic blood line.
What the Bible tells you about Esau selling his birthright to Jacob for a bowl of lentil
stew; that isn't when he lost it. That was merely a formal ceremony by which he gave up
any claim to it; but he lost it when he did the thing that rendered it impossible for him
to continue as the head of the clan.
His descendants from then on would be mongrelized, half Satanic. So recognizing that he
was already out of the line for leadership, he sold it for a bowl of stew. The Bible tells
you that Esau and his two Canaanite wives moved down to Mount Seir, a very rugged mountain
range southeast of the Dead Sea.
But Mount Seir is exactly where some of these people lived who were descendants of these
fallen angels. Go back to Genesis, chapter 6, and among the people who had the blood line
of the fallen angels were these Horites; the blood line of the fallen angels were these
Horites - the Horim, the cave dwellers who lived in Mount Seir.
Suppose a white man married two Negresses here, and then moved to the interior of the
Congo; and for the next 18 Centuries his descendants lived there with no one they could
marry except the Negroes around them; of course the last trace of white blood would have
vanished. Nevertheless, after 18 centuries of breeding into the Negroes they could still
say, "18 centuries ago we had one white ancestor."
Now these weren't Negroes; these were the Satanic Canaanites, but the principle is the
same. These Jews talking with Christ had identified themselves as Edomite Jews. Genesis
chapter 36 lists Esau's descendants. Verses 20 to 30 specifically list all the various
dukes or chieftains among the family of Seir, the Horite, Satanic line, including his
daughter Timna.
And Genesis 36:12 shows that Timna was a concubine to Esau's son Eliphaz and bore him a
son Amalek. And you remember what a pestilential lot the whole tribe of Amalek were. They
behaved, throughout, according to the Satanic blood line. You will find a good deal of
that in Exodus 17:8-16 and Numbers 20:14-21.
This same Satanic conduct on the part of the Edomites was repeated as opportunity arose.
Remember that when the people of Israel came out of Egypt in the Exodus and they wanted to
march on up to Palestine, they were attacked by the Edomites and driven back so they had
to detour around, down through the wilderness in the Sinai Peninsula.
Again, when the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem and looted and burned
the city and massacred a lot of the inhabitants, the Edomites came rushing in to help in
the massacre and plunder.
This is related in the Book of Psalms:
"REMEMBER, O LORD, THE CHILDREN OF EDOM IN THE DAY OF JERUSALEM; WHO SAID, RASE IT,
RASE IT, EVEN TO THE FOUNDATION THEREOF. O DAUGHTER OF BABYLON, WHO ART TO BE DESTROYED;
happy shall he be, that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us. Happy shall he be, that
taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones." (Psalm 137:7-9)
Rase: Strong's Concordance: #6168 `arah (aw-raw'); a primitive root; to be
(causatively, make) bare; hence, to empty, pour out, demolish: KJV- leave destitute,
discover, empty, make naked, pour (out), rase, spreadself, uncover.
Here we can see that while Esau/Edom (the Jews) were glad to see Jerusalem destroyed, and
wanted it leveled to the ground; and because of this God said that they are be destroyed.
The whole book of Obadiah is just one continuous condemnation of the Edomites, for the way
they acted, and predicting their eventual slaughter and punishment for it. Obadiah, verse
10:
"For thy violence against thy brother Jacob shame shall cover thee, and thou shalt be
cut off for ever."
Obadiah, verse 15;
"For the day of Yahweh is near upon all the heathen: as thou hast done, it shall be
done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head."
Obadiah, verse 18:
"And the house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the
house of Esau for stubble, and they shall kindle in them, and devour them; and there shall
not be any remaining of the house of Esau; for Yahweh has spoken it." Amen
Exodus 17:14-16:
"And Yahweh said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in a book, and rehearse it in
the ears of Joshua: for I will utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek from under
heaven. And Moses built an altar, and called the name of Yahweh; Nissi (Yahweh; our
banner). For he said, Because Yahweh hath sworn that YAHWEH WILL HAVE WAR WITH AMALEK FROM
GENERATION TO GENERATION (Amalek is an ancestor to the Jews; therefore, Yahweh will have
war against the Jews until they are totally destroyed)."
Now, how did these Satanic, mongrel, Edomite Jews get up there into Judea? They came in
two principal waves.
During the time that the southern kingdom of Judah was practically empty during the
Babylonian captivity, the Edomites were driven out of Mount Seir by a heavy invasion of an
Arab people, the Nabateans, from the east. So the Edomites were driven westward. Now they
couldn't go southwest or straight west: they would then be getting into Egyptian
territory, and they weren't strong enough to fight the Egyptians.
So they went slightly north of west and took over the southerly half of what had been the
kingdom of Judah, and settled there. When the little remnant came back from Babylon, the
Books of Ezra and Nehemiah show that 42,600, or something like that, came back.
But it lists them by their families; and if one runs those down they will find that
slightly over 8,000 of these were not from any tribe of Israel.
In other words, only 34,000 of the 42,000 that came back were Israelites of the tribes of
Judah, Benjamin, and a few Levites among them. Now they were too few to drive out these
numerous and warlike Edomites; all they could do was settle in the little territory left
to them.
To give you an idea of the size of that; the entire territory of the twelve tribed nation
of Israel before it broke up, set down here in Southern California, would extend from the
Mexican border to the southerly part of Los Angeles; and inland from the coast it never
was more than 40 miles wide.
Now divide that into thirds. The northerly two thirds of that comprised the kingdom of
Israel - the ten tribed, northern kingdom. So only the southerly one-third of that was the
Kingdom of Judah.
Now of that one-third, take out the southerly half of that, now occupied by the Edomites,
and the little strip left is all that remains for the true Judaites and Benjamites to
settle in.
Before the captivity, the tribe of Judah had been on the south, the tribe of Benjamin on
the north, with the city of Jerusalem lying right on the boundary line between them. Well,
they sorted themselves out as well as they could, the way they had been before; Judah on
the south, and Benjamin pushed to the north.
But Benjamin couldn't just move up to the north a little bit, because north of them was
Samaria (remember I said, dived this twelve tribe territory into thirds) the middle third
constituted Samaria.
Isaiah and Kings and Chronicles tell you that when the Assyrians captured the northern
kingdom of Israel and deported all its people, they brought other people from Assyria and
settled them in Samaria. Now it purposely failed to say they settled anybody in Galilee,
the northern most portion; because they didn't, they left it vacant.
No the Benjamites were pushed to the north by the Judaites, as they returned after the
captivity. They just couldn't move up into Samaria: that was fully settled. So they had to
leap-frog over Samaria to the vacant Galilee, to the north of that.
Remember, up in Galilee was Christ's home town of Nazareth, He was born in Bethlehem,
close to Jerusalem, but his family home was in Nazareth. Remember He got nearly all of His
converts in Galilee; and of the twelve disciples only Judas was a Jew. The Bible calls him
Judas Iscariot; and there is no such word as "Iscariot" in any language known to
man.
It is a corruption of the Hebrew word "ish Kerioth," meaning, a man of Kerioth,
and Kerioth was a little village in the southwesterly portion of Judea, in the
territory occupied by the Edomites. So Judas was an Edomite Jew, and he was the only Jew
of the twelve; the other eleven were all Galileans, therefore, Benjamites.
Now, again, consider Pentecost, when the people were gathered there and the Holy Spirit
came upon the disciples (and remember they were all there except Judas Iscariot), they
began speaking to this assembled multitude in a wider number of different languages. And
how astonished the people were, when they heard the disciples speaking all these different
languages, which obviously they didn't know. They said, "Aren't all these
Galileans?" They were, as all the remaining disciples were.
"Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were
unlearned and ignorant men, they marveled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had
been with Jesus." (Acts 4:13)
South of what was left of the territory of Judah is where the Edomite Jews settled, and of
course, pestiferous people always, they were constantly raiding the southerly boundary of
Judea, the way their descendants with their Khazar brothers are raiding the Arabs'
territory today.
A leopard doesn't change his spots, you know. And for a long time after the return from
the Babylonian captivity, the people in Judea were a conquered province of one empire or
another; Syria or Egypt, and finally Rome.
But they got their little flare-up of independence under the Maccabee kings, beginning
about 150 B.C., and about 120 B.C., John Hyrcanus, one of the Maccabee kings (who had by
that time a good disciplined army) got tired of these Edomite Jewish raids on his southern
border, and he marched down there and defeated them thoroughly. Remember that Saul, the
first King of all the Israel tribes, was told by God,
"You go down there and you absolutely exterminate these Edomites: don't you leave one
of them alive." (paraphrased)
But he didn't do it, and when he came back the prophet Samuel said,
"Because you have disobeyed God, He has deposed you from being king, and He is going
to put a better man in your place." (paraphrased)
Approximately 900 years later, John Hyrcanus made the same mistake. After he had defeated
the Edomites, he then decided he was going to be a missionary; he would convert them to
the religion of Judaism.
So he offered them the choice; he would spare them if they would accept the religion of
Judaism (which was not the religion of the Old Testament, ever; it was what they had
brought back from Babylon with them the Babylonian Talmud; in Christs' day it was known as
the tradition of the elders, it was not codified into writing until 400 A.D. into the
Talmud).
The late Rabbi Stephen S. Wise said it so briefly and accurately, I have never been able
to improve on his words. He said,
"The return from Babylon and the introduction of the Babylonian Talmud marked the end
of Hebraism and the beginning of Judaism."
The people of the Old Testament were real Hebrews and the religion God had given them
could well be called Hebraism. And of course, the Talmud-Judaism began as they destroyed
the religion of the Old Testament. But in Christ's time they had not yet given it the name
of the Talmud: they called it "the tradition of the elders."
Remember how often Jesus Christ rebuked them for following their tradition. "Why have
ye by your tradition set aside the laws of God?" He was referring to the Talmud. So
John Hyrcanus was going to be a Jewish Billy Graham of his day: he was going to make
converts.
He said,
"If you will adopt the religion of Judaism, I will give you full citizenship in the
kingdom of Judea. If you don't, I will cut your throats."
Well, you know that is the most effective missionary technique they have ever developed,
even Billy Graham doesn't make converts that fast.
Of course, the converts he makes with the sword are of doubtful validity. So the Edomites
adopted the religion of Judaism and were accepted in full citizenship in the kingdom. Now
you will find that described in great detail in the one reliable history of that period;
Josephus, in his history, "Antiquities of the Jews," Book 13, chapter 9.
The second wave of Edomites came in when the Edomite chieftain Herod conquered and became
king of Judea, under the Roman Empire. He was a very able, very evil scoundrel. He raised
a large sum of money by taxation and by raiding his neighbors, and with it he bribed Mark
Anthony who was over Egypt with the Roman legions, in addition to his own Edomite troops,
for a conquest of Judea.
And, with the Roman troops and his own, he did capture Judea. In 40 B.C., the Romans
recognized him as governor with the title, Ethnarch, and in 37 B.C., they formally
recognized him as the local King of Judea. Of course, he was subject to Roman foreign
policy but he had complete self-government at home. As Rome served as an occupying army,
much the way our American troops do in Germany.
Now he had come in with a conquering army and, of course, his Jewish Edomite followers
came in, for the sake of the plunder they could get (just as they did Germany, and are
trying to do to Switzerland for the plunder they can get). So they overran the place.
You may learn how much about these events by reading Josephus' "Antiquities of the
Jews," Books 14 to 18. In his other history, the "Wars of the Jews," Book
4, chapters 4 and 5, Book 5 and chapter 6 and thereafter, he tells of the horrible conduct
of these Edomite Jews within the besieged city of Jerusalem while it was undergoing siege
by Titus in the year 70 A.D.
Their robbery and massacre of the inhabitants inflicted probably more casualties than the
Roman army did. In the Jewish Encyclopedia, the article "Edom," (in the edition
I used to look it up, it was Vol. 5, page 41), the article "Edom" concludes with
these words:
"The Edomites are found today in modern Jewry."
These Edomites had come in first, when they were given full citizenship by John Hyranus,;
second, they had come in as a wave of conquerors under Herod (that is the same Herod who
tried to murder Christ as a baby). they had overrun the land, they had the entire civil
and religious government, until the death of Herod in 4 B.C.
Then Herod left the kingdom of Judea, by will, to his son Herod Archelaus. The Romans were
too wise to trust somebody with the kingdom when they didn't know anything about him.
They gave him a trial period as governor, under the title, Ethnarh; and he gave them 10
years of the most miserable misrule that any nation ever had, 4 B.C., to 6 A.D., and the
people finally petitioned Rome to send a Roman to govern them.
Now remember the people didn't like the tyranny of Rome a bit: but when this was so bad
they said, "We would rather be governed by a foreigner, a Roman," you can
understand how bad it was.
The Romans tried Herod Archelaus, found him guilty of misrule, and banished him to Vienne;
and from that time on there were a series of Roman governors called procurators: Pontius
Pilate was number six in that series. So the military government was entirely in the hand
of the Roman procurators.
The collection of taxes for Rome was entirely under the supervision of the Roman
procurator. On the other hand, these Herodian Jews had control of the entire religious
government and the temple. They also had control of the civil government, in all respect
concerning purely local self-government; could collect their own taxes, and so on.
You remember, when the priests were getting greatly upset about Jesus's teachings they
said,
"If we let Him alone, all men will believe on Him; and the Romans will take this
place, this kingdom, away from us." (John 11:50; 18:14)
The way the Judeo-Christian clergymen have taught it, that is meaninglessly stupid. They
pictured Christ as a whining, cringing, milk-sop, going around, whimpering to people that
they ought to be good.
If that was all He did, these Jews would not have honored Him even with their contempt,
much less be worried about Him. He was exposing and explaining to the people, the utter
evil of the Jewish economic and religious system under which they were living.
The Jews said,
"Look, if we let Him alone, He is going to awaken the people to these evils. They
will petition Rome just as they did with Herod Archelaus, and the Romans will kick us out
of here."
This is what the Judeo-Christian clergymen will not do and God says about these false
teachers, Jeremiah 23:16-22:
"Thus saith the LORD of hosts, Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that
prophesy unto you: they make you vain: they speak a vision of their own heart, and not out
of the mouth of the LORD. They say still unto them that despise me, The LORD hath said, Ye
shall have peace; and they say unto every one that walketh after the imagination of his
own heart, No evil shall come upon you. For who hath stood in the counsel of the LORD, and
hath perceived and heard his word? who hath marked his word, and heard it?...I have not
sent these prophets, yet they ran: I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied. But if
they had stood in my counsel, and had caused my people to hear my words, then they should
have turned them from their evil way, and from the evil of their doings."
That is what they were talking about. So here were these Edomite Jews, who said to Jesus
Christ, "We are descendants of Abraham."
They were illegitimate descendants of Abraham but, nevertheless, descendants of Abraham,
and they said, "We've never been in bondage to any man." And Christ said,
"That's right." Now continue that same passage through John 8:31-44, and you
will come to the place where Christ tells them that they were the children of their
father, the devil, and they would do the lusts of their father, the devil and that they
were not of God. (John 8:47)
Christ recognized the two seed lines, He didn't say, "Well, you have adopted some of
the bad principles of the devil." He said,
"You 'are' the children of your father the devil." (John 8:44)
Then Christ said it another way when He said later on in John:
"He that is of God heareth God's words: YE (Jews) THEREFORE HEAR THEM NOT, BECAUSE YE
(Jews) ARE NOT OF GOD." (John 8:47)
So the entire Bible, Old Testament and New Testament, recognizes the two seed lines. The
Adamic seed line coming down through a carefully selected best one in each generation,
right on down to Abraham, Isaac, Israel and then on down through the twelve tribes of
Israel. The seed, the children of God and the seed, the children of Satan; some of whom,
the most pestiferous of them, have come down through the line of Cain.
The Bible says that Cain said, "Why, you've driven me out of this land where the
descendants of Adam would be." And he said, "Wherever I go, whoever meets me
will kill me."
And in those days there were a lot of places that weren't too hospitable to strangers. If
as the Judeo-Christian preachers say, Adam and Eve were the parents of the only people on
earth (the only other child had been Abel and he was dead); now with Cain driven away from
Adam and Eve, out into some other part of the earth, who was he going to meet there to
kill him?
And you remember, it says that he very speedily found enough people, that with them he
built a city. So the Bible recognizes these pre-Adamite races. But God said,
"Well, I'll put a mark on you, so that people will recognize you and not kill
you."
What was this mark? Did God tattoo something on the sole of his foot or where he would sit
down on it? No long before any hidden mark could possibly have been seen, he would have
been killed. God had to put it where it was the first thing they would see, and He
put it where it was the first thing they would see, and He put it right in the exact
geometrical center of his face: that big Jewish nose which they have borne ever since, and
the sculptured monuments of the ancient empires show it.
The ancient kings were extremely vain of the conquests they had made. The pharaohs of
Egypt, the kings of Babylon, the kings of Assyria, the kings of Persia, all left
elaborately carved monuments telling how they had captured this city or that, and
massacred so many of its inhabitants and made slaves of the others, and took so much loot,
and so forth.
In addition to the inscriptions they nearly always had a carved panel illustrating this,
showing some of the captives. Now wherever any of these show an Israelite, it is
invariably a straight nose, typical, what we would call an Anglo-Saxon, Germanic,
Scandinavian or Teutonic type of face. But where it shows these Canaanite peoples, it is
always a typical hook-nose Jew.
The evidence of the Bible, the evidence of archaeology all show one thing, definitely,
right down the line: the existence of the Satanic seed line, and the existence of the
other seed line of God's own children.
There are some who say they are Jew lovers. Which makes others wonder how they can say
that and in the same breath say they are Christians, which means to follow the Lord Jesus
Christ; Who was God in the flesh, here on earth in a flesh body.
God asks a question in 2 Chronicles:
"Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the LORD?..." (2
Chronicles 19:2)
They ignore the writings of the Jews themselves when they say they are not Israelites.
Things like Under the heading of "A brief History of the Terms for Jew" in the
1980 Jewish Almanac is the following:
"STRICTLY SPEAKING IT IS INCORRECT TO CALL AN ANCIENT ISRAELITE A 'JEW' OR TO CALL A
CONTEMPORARY JEW AN ISRAELITE OR A HEBREW." (1980 Jewish Almanac, p. 3).
Again:
"The current expression 'Judeo-Christian' is an error which has altered the course of
universal history by the confusion it has sown in men's mind, if by it one is meant to
understand the Jewish origin of Christianity; for by abolishing the fundamental
distinctions between Jewish and Christian messianism, IT SEEKS TO BRING TOGETHER TWO IDEAS
THAT ARE RADICALLY IN OPPOSITION. By laying the accent exclusively on the 'Christian' idea
to the detriment of the 'Judean' it conjures away monotheistic messianism - a valuable
discipline at all levels of thought, and reduces it to a purely confessional messianism,
preoccupied like Christian messianism with the salvation of the individual soul. If the
term 'Judeo-Christian' does point to a common origin, there is no doubt that it is a most
dangerous idea.
"It is based on a 'contrdictio in adjecto' which has set the path of history on the
wrong track. It links in one breath TWO IDEAS WHICH ARE COMPLETELY IRRECONCILABLE, IT
SEEKS TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DAY AND NIGHT OR HOT AND COLD OR
BLACK AND WHITE, and thus introduces a fatal element of confusion to a basis on which
some, nevertheless, are endeavoring to construct a civilization. Christianity offers to
the world a limited messianism which it wishes to impose as the only valid one...Even
Spinoza, who was further than any other thinker from the historic messianism of Israel,
wrote: 'As for what certain churches say, that God assumed human nature, I must confess
that this seems to me as absurd as saying that a circle assumed the shape of a square...'
"(Spinoza, goes ahead and says) The dogmatic exclusiveness professed by Christianity
must finally end...It is the obstinate Christian claim to be the sole heir to Israel which
propagates-anti-Semitism. This scandal must terminate sooner or later; the sooner it goes,
the sooner the world will be rid of the issue of lies in which anti-Semitism shrouds
itself." (Joshua Jehouda, l'Antisemitisme Miroir du Monde, pp. 135-136; Judaism and
the Vatican, Vicomte Leon de Poncins, pp. 30-31).
When the Jew lovers are shown that the Jews are actually the descendants of the ancient
Khazars, they laugh it off and say that is just so much nonsense. Again they disdain the
words of the people they "love" who say in their encyclopedias:
New Standard Jewish Encyclopedia, page 179,[GCP pg 68] "ASHKENAZI, ASHKENAZIM...
constituted before 1963 some nine-tenths of the Jewish people (about 15,000,000 out of
16,5000,000)[ As of 1968 it is believed by some Jewish authorities to be closer to
100%]"
And of course they ignore such as the following, because it does not adhere to their
particular beliefs which is everything but Christian.
JUDEO-CHRISTIAN HERITAGE A HOAX: It appears there is no need to belabor the absurdity and
fallacy of the "Judeo-Christian heritage" fiction, which certainly is clear to
all honest theologians.
"THAT 'JUDEO-CHRISTIAN DIALOGUE' IN THIS CONTEXT IS ALSO ABSURD AS WELL STATED IN THE
AUTHOR-INITIATIVE RELIGIOUS JOURNAL, JUDAISM, Winter 1966, by Rabbi Eliezar Berkowitz,
chairman of the department of Jewish philosophy, at the Hebrew Theological College when he
wrote:
"As to dialogue in the purely theological sense, nothing could be more fruitless or
pointless. JUDAISM IS JUDAISM BECAUSE IT REJECTS CHRISTIANITY; and CHRISTIANITY IS
CHRISTIANITY BECAUSE IT REJECTS JUDAISM. What is usually referred to as the
JEWISH-CHRISTIAN TRADITIONS EXISTS ONLY IN CHRISTIAN OR SECULARIST FANTASY."
There is no doubt this is true! And the fantasy exists in Christian and Secularist minds
only because it was implanted there by the persistent propaganda of the masters of
intrigue of the ADL-AJC Network. Nevertheless, there can be no doubt that knowledgeable
theologians, Jewish and Christians who constantly allude to "our Judeo-Christian
heritage" are for their own specious purposes perpetuate a grotesque and fantastic
hoax.
The attitude of Jesus Christ to this sect is definitely expressed in the New Testament.
Ask yourself the following questions regarding present day Jews Then you decide from the
Word of God, WHO IS TRUE ISRAEL.
1). Have the Jews been a blessing to all nations?
2). Have the Jews been "CIRCUMCISED IN THE HEART?"
3). Do the Jews glorify Jesus Christ?
4). Do the Jews declare that Jesus is God?
5). Do the Jews show forth the praises of Christ, God's Son?
6). Have the Jews carried the message of Salvation to the ends of the Earth?
7). Do the Jewish people have God's Spirit in their hearts?
8). Was the New Covenant (Testament) written to Jews or Israelites and what is the
difference between the two?
9). Are the Jews the "LOST SHEEP OF THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL?"
10). Are the Jews the "CHILDREN OF GOD, SCATTERED ABROAD?"
11). Are the Jews the servants of God?
12). Are the Jews a Holy Nation and People?
13). Are there any Jews mentioned in the "FAITH CHAPTER" of Hebrews 11?
14). Are the Jews a righteous nation?
15). Are the Jews bringing forth the fruits of God's Kingdom?
16). Are the Jews kind to strangers in their midst?
17). Are the Jews called the "CHILDREN OF THE LIVING GOD?"
18). Do the Jews admit that they are not God's People?
19). Do the Jews have all of God's Word?
20). Are the Jews a Great and Mighty Nation?
21). Do the Jews possess the "GATES OF THEIR ENEMIES?"
22). Are the Jews a "COMPANY OF NATIONS?"
23). Are the Jews above all people in moral excellence?
24). Are the Jews today called through Isaac?
25). Have the Jews ever lost their identity?
26). Have the Jews ever been called by a "NEW NAME?"
27). Are the major heathen nations aligned against the Jews alone?
28). Are the modern day Jews described as "A GREAT LION?"
29). Did the Jews deliver Jerusalem from the power of the heathen?
30). Has the Jewish people ever had the name of "GREAT?"
31). Have the Jews been foremost in ending slavery?
32). Have the Jews been great colonizers?
33). Do the Jews recognize Jesus as Messiah?
34). Does your pastor teach that the "JEWS ARE ALL OF ISRAEL?"
35). Do you honestly know what the Bible teaches about the Jews and Israel?
"Although the Jews have appeared in the histories of other nations throughout the
centuries, they were never able or willing to establish a nation of their own (They did
take control of the Khazar nation, once the king had accepted Judaism as his and his
peoples religion in 740 A.D. And they had a very large kingdom at that time but it didn't
last very long until True Israelites defeated and destroyed their kingdom).
"They remain forever desolate in this regard. The only way the Jews got possession of
Palestine was by using other people to steal it from the Turks and Arabs for them. The
so-called 'Israeli' state is nothing but a parasitic state, since it is occupied by
parasites.
"The Jews get billions of dollars from Germany as 'reparations' and 'restitution
payments' for its alleged 'war crimes' against Jews. They get billions more every year
from the United States. IT (Israel; the Jews) HAS TO STEAL OR BUY TECHNOLOGY FROM WESTERN
NATIONS (The many nations of Israel) AS THE JEWS HAVE NOT THE CREATIVITY TO DEVELOP THEIR
OWN.
"THE JEWISH STATE OF ISRAELI WOULD COLLAPSE IN A MINUTE WITHOUT THE CONTINUED
SUPPORT, PROTECTION AND ASSISTANCE FROM JACOB/ISRAEL (The White Nations of Christendom).
IT IS NOT, NEVER HAS BEEN, AND NEVER WILL BE A SELF-SUSTAINING NATION." (Charles A.
Weisman, Who is Esau-Edom?, pp. 27-28).
The Jews again tell Christians, such as those that say they love them, but they ignore it
because they choose to, not because it is not true, but because they do not have the moral
courage to admit they have been deceived.
No matter what they claim, the Jews DO NOT BELIEVE THE WORDS OF CHRIST:
"There never was a time when any Jew believed that Jehovah spoke to Moses or to the
Prophets in any other sense than we believe today that God - that is, existence - reveals
himself through the minds of a Spinoza, a Hegel, a Marx, an Einstein and the like."
(A Program for the Jews and Humanity, Harry Waton, p. 217)
This is born out in scripture for in the parable about Lazarus and the Rich Man, we are
told about the Jews:
"...They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them." (Luke 16:29)
The Jews seemingly convert to Christianity only to bring in damnable heresies and false
doctrine:
"A JEW REMAINS A JEW EVEN THOUGH HE CHANGES HIS RELIGION; a Christian which would
adopt the Jewish religion would not become a Jew, because the quality of a Jew is not in
the religion but in the race. A Free thinker and Atheist always remains a Jew."
(Jewish World, London December 14, 1922)
In fact the purpose of the Jews is to destroy the Christianity they hate:
"THE JEW IS NOT SATISFIED WITH DE-CHRISTIANIZING, HE JUDIAZIZES, HE DESTROYS THE
CATHOLIC OR PROTESTANT FAITH, he provokes indifference but HE IMPOSES HIS IDEA OF THE
WORLD OF MORALS AND OF LIFE UPON THOSE WHOSE FAITH HE RUINS. HE WORKS AT HIS AGE OLD TASK,
THE ANNILATION OF THE RELIGION OF CHRIST." (Benard Lazare, L'Antisemitism, p. 350;
Rabbi Benamozegh, quoted in J. Creagh Scott's Hidden Government, page 58).
Christ came only to the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel:
"These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of
the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But GO rather TO THE LOST
SHEEP OF THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL." (Matthew 10:5-6)
"But he answered and said, I AM NOT SENT BUT UNTO THE LOST SHEEP OF THE HOUSE OF
ISRAEL." (Matthew 15:24)
Christ came "only" to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, He did not come for
any other people or any other race; He came only to the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel.
God asks a question in 2 Chronicles:
"Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the LORD?..." (2
Chronicles 19:2)
For those that love the Jews; I ask should you love them that hate our God? For Christ
said that the Jews Hated Him, and He was God in the flesh:
"But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto
them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but
Caesar." (John 19:15)
Here the people living in Jerusalem, who people today know as Jews (they were people who
lived in Judah, but were not Israelites. Just the same as a person originally from Mexico,
but was born in Texas; that person would be a Mexican, but he would also be a Texan. The
same applies to the Jews, they were a people different from the True Israelites, but were
called Judeans because they were born and lived in Judea), but were really the descendants
of the mixed breed between True Israelites and the other races and people in the area of
Palestine; were saying that they would not have Christ to rule over them but wanted Caesar
instead. But we know this to be another Jewish lie, because they were constantly in
rebellion against Rome.
"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither,
and slay them before me." (Luke 19:27)
Here Christ said to bring His enemies, the Jews, and slay them before Him. And that will
be done, for most of the Jews in the world today are right here in the United States, and
will be slain before the Lord here, and there will be none of them left.
"As for what you say about their making attempts on your lives: MAKE YOUR SONS
DOCTORS AND APOTHECARIES, THAT THEY MAY TAKE AWAY CHRISTIANS' LIVES. (The Revue des etudes
Juives, by James de Rothschild, published in 1889 two documents)
Following are many verses showing that God hates the Jews and will totally destroy them at
some point in the future.
"See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make
alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand. For I
lift up my hand to heaven, and say, I live for ever. If I whet my glittering sword, and
mine hand take hold on judgment; I WILL RENDER VENGEANCE TO MINE ENEMIES, AND WILL REWARD
THEM THAT HATE ME. I will make mine arrows drunk with blood, and my sword shall devour
flesh; and that with the blood of the slain and of the captives, FROM THE BEGINNING OF
REVENGES UPON THE ENEMY. Rejoice, O ye nations, with his people: for he will avenge the
blood of his servants, and will render vengeance to his adversaries, and will be merciful
unto his land, and to his people." (Deuteronomy 32:39-43)
"So LET ALL THINE ENEMIES PERISH, O LORD: but let them that love him be as the sun
when he goeth forth in his might..." (Judges 5:31)
"Let God arise, LET HIS ENEMIES BE SCATTERED: LET THEM ALSO THAT HATE HIM FLEE BEFORE
HIM. As smoke is driven away, so drive them away: as wax melteth before the fire, so LET
THE WICKED PERISH AT THE PRESENCE OF GOD." (Psalm 68:1-2)
"Arise, O God, plead thine own cause: REMEMBER HOW THE FOOLISH MAN REPROACHETH THEE
DAILY. FORGET NOT THE VOICE OF THINE ENEMIES: THE TUMULT OF THOSE THAT RISE UP AGAINST
THEE INCREASETH CONTINUALLY." (Psalm 74:22-23)
"Therefore saith the Lord, the LORD of hosts, the mighty One of Israel, Ah, I WILL
EASE ME OF MINE ADVERSARIES, AND AVENGE ME OF MINE ENEMIES." (Isaiah 1:24)
"Thine hand shall be lifted up upon thine adversaries, and ALL THINE ENEMIES SHALL BE
CUT OFF." (Micah 5:9) (KJV)
"The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, TILL I MAKE THINE ENEMIES THY
FOOTSTOOL?" (Matthew 22:44; Mark 12:36) (KJV)
"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for YE COMPASS SEA AND LAND TO MAKE
ONE PROSELYTE, and WHEN HE IS MADE, YE MAKE HIM TWOFOLD MORE THE CHILD OF HELL THAN
YOURSELVES." (Matthew 23:15) (KJV)
"WHEN PILATE therefore heard that saying, HE BROUGHT JESUS FORTH, and sat down in the
judgment seat in a place that is called the Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha. And it
was the preparation of the Passover, and about the sixth hour: AND HE SAITH UNTO THE JEWS,
BEHOLD YOUR KING! BUT THEY (The Jews) CRIED OUT, AWAY WITH HIM, AWAY WITH HIM, CRUCIFY
HIM. Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? THE CHIEF PRIESTS ANSWERED, WE
HAVE NO KING BUT CAESAR (Thus the Jews rejected the idea that Christ might rule over them,
because they are not Israelites)." (John 19:13-15) (KJV)
"But those mine enemies (the Jews), which would not that I should reign over them,
bring hither, and slay them before me." (Luke 19:27) (KJV)
"The strongest supporters of Judaism cannot deny that Judaism is
anti-Christian." (Jewish World, March 15, 1924)
There is Edom [Esau is called Edom in Genesis 36:8. And Edom is in 'Modern Jewry' Jewish
Encyclopedia, 1925 edition, Vol. 5, p. 41.
"I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not
Esau Jacob's brother? saith the LORD: YET I LOVED JACOB, And I HATED ESAU, and laid his
mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness. Whereas Edom 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. And your eyes
shall see, and ye shall say, The LORD will be magnified from the border of Israel. A son
honoureth his father, and a servant his master: if then I be a father, where is mine
honour? and if I be a master, where is my fear? saith the LORD of hosts unto you, O
PRIESTS (there is no doubt that this is speaking of those Jews who pose as Christian
priests, ministers, and etc. Also the so-called Judeo-Christian clergy that are deceiving,
and polluting God's word every day, while they pose as His servants), THAT DESPISE MY
NAME. And YE SAY, WHEREIN HAVE WE DESPISED THY NAME? YE OFFER POLLUTED BREAD UPON MINE
ALTAR; AND YE SAY, WHEREIN HAVE WE POLLUTED THEE? IN THAT YE SAY, THE TABLE OF THE LORD IS
CONTEMPTIBLE." (Malachi 1:2-7)
"As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated." (Romans 9:13)
Yahweh again and again states that He will totally destroy the Jews, who are Edom, and
Idumea:
"THE SWORD OF THE LORD IS FILLED WITH BLOOD...AND A GREAT SLAUGHTER IN THE LAND OF
IDUMEA." (Isaiah 34:6)
John the Baptist called the Jews vipers:
Vipers: Thayer's Definition: #2191 echidna-a viper, offspring of vipers; addressed
to cunning, malignant, wicked men.
Christ in Matthew 12 said that the Jews were evil:
"O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the
abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh." (Matthew 12:34)
Christ again condemns the Jews:
"Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?"
(Matthew 23:33)
Again in Luke John the Baptist relates that the Jews were vipers:
"Then said he to the multitude that came forth to be baptized of him, O generation of
vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?" (Luke 3:7)
In Timothy we are told:
"Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with
all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound
doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching
ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto
fables." (2 Timothy 4:2-4)
Then we are told that the Jews:
"FOR THERE ARE MANY UNRULY AND VAIN TALKERS AND DECEIVERS, SPECIALLY THEY OF THE
CIRCUMCISION (the scribes, Pharisees, and Sadducees; known to the world today as the
Jews): WHOSE MOUTHS MUST BE STOPPED, WHO SUBVERT WHOLE HOUSES, TEACHING THINGS WHICH THEY
OUGHT NOT, FOR FILTHY LUCRE'S SAKE (Have you not noticed that all the Judeo-Christian
clergy and are Jews are always teaching others how to get rich, but in reality they are
the only ones getting rich off the dumb goyim, the Christians who listen to these
religious hucksters). One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians
are always liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them
sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; NOT GIVING HEED TO JEWISH FABLES, AND
COMMANDMENTS OF MEN (the teachings of the Learned Elders), THAT TURN FROM THE TRUTH (the
Jews turn you from the truth, to their fables). Unto the pure all things are pure: but
UNTO THEM (the Jews) THAT ARE DEFILED AND UNBELIEVING IS NOTHING PURE; BUT EVEN THEIR MIND
AND CONSCIENCE IS DEFILED. THEY PROFESS THAT THEY KNOW GOD; BUT IN WORKS THEY DENY HIM,
BEING ABOMINABLE, AND DISOBEDIENT, AND UNTO EVERY GOOD WORK REPROBATE. (Titus
1:10-:16)
Now there are some who will say you are not consistent, because you speak of the Judeans
as Jews and the Jews as Jews. This is because they do not wish to receive the truth about
the Jews; they have believed a lie and don't wish to admit it to themselves or to anyone
else.
They would rather worship those who Christ hates than denounce them. So they will try in
every way to deny these verses and twist them around so as to deny the truth that is in
them.
"THE JEW...IS NOT CONTENT MERELY TO DESTROY CHRISTIANITY, but he preaches the gospel
of Judaism; he not only assails the Catholic or the Protestant faith, but he incites to
the unbelief, and then imposes on those whose faith he has undermined his own conception
of the world, of morality and of life. HE IS ENGAGED IN HIS HISTORIC MISSION, THE
ANNIHILATION OF THE RELIGION OF CHRIST." (Benard Lazare, Antisemitism: It's History
and Causes, Translated by Britons Publishing Co., London (1967), p. 158).
Over the last 400 years the Jews have cause almost every war fought in that time, through
their treason, subterfuge and influencing worthless, traitous politicians.
"WARS ARE THE JEWS HARVEST, FOR WITH THEM WE WIPE OUT THE CHRISTIANS and get control
of their gold. WE HAVE ALREADY KILLED 100-MILLION OF THEM, AND THE END IS NOT YET."
(Chief Rabbi in France, in 1859, Rabbi Reichorn).
Matthew relates John the Baptist when speaking to the Pharisees and Sadducees:
"But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said
unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance: And think not to say within yourselves,
We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to
raise up children unto Abraham. And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees:
therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the
fire." (Matthew 3:7-10)
1). Therefore the enemy (the Jews and there helpers are) to be destroyed, or taken off the
earth. (Exodus 17:14; Numbers 16:26; 24:20; Deuteronomy 7:6; 1 Chronicles 17:9; 2 Samuel
4:11; 7:10; Job 11:20; 18:5; 18:5; 21:17; 21:30; 31:3; Psalm 1; 69; 9:5-6; 9:16-17;
11:5-7; 31:17; 34:21; 37:8; 37:10; 37:14-15; 37:20; 37:28; 37:34; 37:38; 58:10; 68:2;
75:10; 92:7; 101:8; 104:35; 106:18; 112:10; 139:19; 145:20; Proverbs 2:22; 5:22; 10:30;
11:5; 13:9; 21:7; 24:20; 2 Esdras 13:9-11; 13:25-38; Eccesiastes 8:10; Jeremiah
6:29; 8:10-15; Ezekiel 20:37-38; 35; Isaiah 2:1-9; 11:4; 14:1-29; 25:1; 30:27; 34:5-8;
51:34; 65:12; 66:15-16, 24; Obadiah 1:1-10; 15-21; Nahum 1:15; Zephaniah 1:3;
Zechariah 14:21; Malachi 4:1-2; Matthew 3:12; 13:36-38; 13:49-50; 21:41; 25:41; Luke
19:14, 27; 2 Thessalonians 2:8; 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12) Jude 1:1-12). To show that the
Jews are Yahweh and Yeashua's enemies: (Psalm 17:9; 22:16; 27:2)
There are those who say, "My closest friends are Jews, and they don't adhere to the
Talmud." This is a lie generated to fool Christians and it does its work very well.
"The Talmud must not be regarded as an ordinary work, composed of twelve volumes; it
posies absolutely no similarity to any other literary production, but forms, without any
figure of speech, a world of its own, which must be judged by its peculiar laws.
"The Talmud contains much that is frivolous of which it treats with great gravity and
seriousness; it further reflects the various superstitious practices and views of its
Persian (Babylonian) birthplace which presume the efficacy of demonical medicines, or
magic, incantations, miraculous cures, and interpretations of dreams. IT ALSO CONTAINS
ISOLATED INSTANCES OF UNCHARITABLE JUDGMENTS AND DECREES AGAINST THE MEMBERS OF OTHER
NATIONS AND RELIGIONS, AND FINALLY IT FAVORS AN INCORRECT EXPOSITION OF THE SCRIPTURES,
ACCEPTING, AS IT DOES, TASTELESS MISREPRESENTATIONS.
"The Babylonian Talmud is especially distinguished from the Jerusalem or Palestine
Talmud by the flights of thought, the penetration of mind, the flashes of genius, which
rise and vanish again. It was for this reason that the Babylonian rather than THE
JERUSALEM TALMUD BECAME THE FUNDAMENTAL POSSESSION OF THE JEWISH RACE, ITS LIFE BREATH,
ITS VERY SOUL, NATURE AND MANKIND, POWERS AND EVENTS, WERE FOR THE JEWISH NATION
INSIGNIFICANT, NON-ESSENTIAL, A MERE PHANTOM; THE ONLY TRUE REALITY WAS THE TALMUD."
(Professor H. Graetz, History of the Jews).
We are told by Ezekiel:
"Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Surely in the fire of my jealousy have I spoken
against the residue of the heathen, and against all Idumea, which have appointed my land
into their possession with the joy of all their heart, with despiteful minds, to cast it
out for a prey." (Ezekiel 36:5)
This is in response to the Jews, the Edomites, the Idumeans saying:
"Thus saith the Lord GOD; Because the enemy hath said against you, Aha, even the
ancient high places are ours in possession." (Ezekiel 36:2)
Then God tells them:
"The word of the LORD came again unto me, saying, Son of man, set thy face against
the Ammonites (the people who later became known as Jews), and prophesy against them; And
say unto the Ammonites, Hear the word of the Lord GOD; Thus saith the Lord GOD; BECAUSE
THOU SAIDST, AHA, AGAINST MY SANCTUARY, WHEN IT WAS PROFANED; AND AGAINST THE LAND OF
ISRAEL, WHEN IT WAS DESOLATE; AND AGAINST THE HOUSE OF JUDAH, WHEN THEY WENT INTO
CAPTIVITY; BEHOLD, THEREFORE I WILL DELIVER THEE TO THE MEN OF THE EAST FOR A POSSESSION,
AND THEY SHALL SET THEIR PALACES IN THEE, AND MAKE THEIR DWELLINGS IN THEE: THEY SHALL EAT
THY FRUIT, AND THEY SHALL DRINK THY MILK...BECAUSE THOU HAST CLAPPED THINE HANDS, AND
STAMPED WITH THE FEET, AND REJOICED IN HEART WITH ALL THY DESPITE AGAINST THE LAND OF
ISRAEL; BEHOLD, THEREFORE I WILL STRETCH OUT MINE HAND UPON THEE, AND WILL DELIVER THEE
FOR A SPOIL TO THE HEATHEN; AND I WILL CUT THEE OFF FROM THE PEOPLE, AND I WILL CAUSE THEE
TO PERISH OUT OF THE COUNTRIES: I WILL DESTROY THEE (the Jews); and thou shalt know that I
am the LORD. Thus saith the Lord GOD; BECAUSE THAT MOAB AND SEIR (the Jews) DO SAY,
BEHOLD, THE HOUSE OF JUDAH IS LIKE UNTO ALL THE HEATHEN; THEREFORE...BECAUSE THAT EDOM
HATH DEALT AGAINST THE HOUSE OF JUDAH BY TAKING VENGEANCE, AND HATH GREATLY OFFENDED, AND
REVENGED HIMSELF UPON THEM; THEREFORE THUS SAITH THE LORD GOD; I WILL ALSO STRETCH OUT
MINE HAND UPON EDOM, AND WILL CUT OFF MAN AND BEAST FROM IT; AND I WILL MAKE IT DESOLATE
FROM TEMAN; AND THEY OF DEDAN SHALL FALL BY THE SWORD. AND I WILL LAY MY VENGEANCE UPON
EDOM BY THE HAND OF MY PEOPLE ISRAEL: AND THEY SHALL DO IN EDOM ACCORDING TO MINE ANGER
AND ACCORDING TO MY FURY; AND THEY SHALL KNOW MY VENGEANCE, SAITH THE LORD GOD."
(Ezekiel 25:1-14)
Jeremiah tells us the same thing, only in different words:
"CONCERNING EDOM, thus saith the LORD of hosts; IS WISDOM NO MORE IN TEMAN? IS
COUNSEL PERISHED FROM THE PRUDENT? IS THEIR WISDOM VANISHED?...I WILL BRING THE CALAMITY
OF ESAU UPON HIM, THE TIME THAT I WILL VISIT HIM...I HAVE MADE ESAU BARE, I HAVE UNCOVERED
HIS SECRET PLACES, AND HE SHALL NOT BE ABLE TO HIDE HIMSELF: HIS SEED IS SPOILED, AND HIS
BRETHREN, AND HIS NEIGHBOURS, AND HE IS NOT...FOR, LO, I WILL MAKE THEE SMALL AMONG THE
HEATHEN, AND DESPISED AMONG MEN. THY TERRIBLENESS HATH DECEIVED THEE, AND THE PRIDE OF
THINE HEART, O THOU THAT DWELLEST IN THE CLEFTS OF THE ROCK, THAT HOLDEST THE HEIGHT OF
THE HILL: THOUGH THOU SHOULDEST MAKE THY NEST AS HIGH AS THE EAGLE, I WILL BRING THEE DOWN
FROM THENCE, SAITH THE LORD. ALSO EDOM SHALL BE A DESOLATION: EVERY ONE THAT GOETH BY IT
SHALL BE ASTONISHED, AND SHALL HISS AT ALL THE PLAGUES THEREOF.
As in the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah and the neighbour cities thereof, saith the
LORD, NO MAN SHALL ABIDE THERE, NEITHER SHALL A SON OF MAN DWELL IN IT." (Jeremiah
49:7-18)
In Ezekiel 5:11-12 God said:
"Wherefore, as I live, said the Lord God, Surely BECAUSE THOU HAST DEFILED MY
SANCTUARY WITH ALL THY DETESTABLE THINGS, AND WITH ALL THINE ABOMINATIONS, THEREFORE WILL
I ALSO DIMINISH THEE: NEITHER SHALL MINE EYES SPARE, NEITHER WILL I HAVE PITY. A THIRD
PART OF THEE SHALL DIE WITH THE PESTILENCE, AND WITH FAMINE SHALL THEY BE CONSUMED IN THE
MIDST OF THEE; AND A THIRD SHALL FALL BY THE SWORD ROUND ABOUT THEE: AND I WILL SCATTER A
THIRD PART INTO ALL THE WINDS, AND I WILL DRAW OUT A SWORD AFTER THEM."
Amos related about Edom:
"Thus saith the LORD; FOR THREE TRANSGRESSIONS OF EDOM, and for four, I WILL NOT TURN
AWAY THE PUNISHMENT THEREOF; BECAUSE HE DID PURSUE HIS BROTHER WITH THE SWORD, AND DID
CAST OFF ALL PITY, AND HIS ANGER DID TEAR PERPETUALLY, AND HE KEPT HIS WRATH FOR
EVER." (Amos 1:11)
And again Amos tells us concerning Edom:
"In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the
breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of
old: THAT THEY MAY POSSESS THE REMNANT
Isa 34:5
5 For my sword shall be bathed in heaven: behold, it shall come down upon Idumea, and upon
the people of my curse, to judgment.
(KJV)
OF EDOM, and of all the heathen, WHICH ARE CALLED BY MY NAME, SAITH THE LORD THAT
DOETH THIS." (Amos 9:11-12)
Isaiah said:
"For my sword shall be bathed in heaven: behold, it shall come down upon Idumea
(Esau/Edom), AND UPON THE PEOPLE OF MY CURSE, TO JUDGMENT. THE SWORD OF THE LORD IS FILLED
WITH BLOOD, it is made fat with fatness, and with the blood of lambs and goats, with the
fat of the kidneys of rams: for the LORD hath a sacrifice in Bozrah, AND A GREAT SLAUGHTER
IN THE LAND OF IDUMEA." (Isaiah 34:5-6)
We will close with the following words from Ezekiel:
"As thou didst rejoice at the inheritance of the house of Israel, because it was
desolate, so will I do unto thee: thou shalt be desolate, O mount Seir, and all Idumea,
even all of it: and they shall know that I am the LORD." (Ezekiel 35:15)
Therefore, there is no doubt that the Jews are the cursed ones and will be ultimately
destroyed by Yahweh in His fierce anger. Thus fulfilling the parable of the Tares and the
Wheat, where the evil tares are bound up and thrown into the fire.
| |
|