This is my one hundred and seventy-seventh monthly teaching letter and continues my fifteenth year of publication. Since WTL #137, I have been presenting a series entitled The Greatest Love Story Ever Told, and have been expanding on its seven stages ever since: (1) the courtship, (2) the marriage, (3) the honeymoon, (4) the estrangement, (5) the divorce, (6) the reconciliation, and (7) the remarriage.

THE GREATEST LOVE STORY EVER TOLD, Part 36:

THE ESTRANGEMENT continued:

In lesson #’s 175 and 176, we examined the description of a process in Jeremiah chapter two that anticipated a time when Yahweh (the Husband) would have no alternative but to cast the twelve tribes of Israel (the wife) out of His house. Matters continued to go from bad to worse until we Israelites came to a time of great apostasy, as it was recorded in the book of Hosea. The ten northern tribes of the house of Israel would be the first to become castaways. The situation continued to deteriorate and reached an appalling low described at Hosea 5:6-7:

“⁶ They shall go with their flocks and with their herds to seek Yahweh; but they shall not find him; he hath withdrawn himself from them. ⁷ They have dealt treacherously against Yahweh: for they have begotten strange children: now shall a month devour them with their portions.”

The Hebrew word here rendered “strange” in the KJV is zuwr, meaning given over to idolatrous impurities such as committing adultery (i.e., fornication, which includes race-mixing in the Greek) with the non-white heathen around them. The Strong’s number for the word rendered “strange” here is 2114, and is defined thusly:

“2114 ... zûwr, zoor; a primitive root; to turn aside (especially for lodging); hence to be a foreigner, strange, profane; specifically (active participle) to commit adultery:- KJV (come from) another (man, place), fanner, go away, (e-) strange (-r, thing, woman).” A “participle” is defined: “verb form with functions of both verb and adjective.” In other words, both to describe an action and participate therein! Therefore, if one is going to participate in miscegenation (race-mixing), Yahweh will send a parasite to devour that participant’s possessions, if not their very life, in less than a month (thirty years in prophecy). There is no other parasite more bloodthirsty than a Canaanite-Edomite-jew! What we need is some real strong “moth” repellent! One should reference Proverbs 5:15, 17, where it states:

⁵ Drink waters out of thine own cistern, and running waters out of thine own well ... ¹⁷ Let them be only thine own, and not strangers’²¹¹⁴ with thee.”

Four particular parasites are mentioned at Joel 1:3-5:

“³ Tell ye your children of it, and let your children tell their children, and their children another generation. ⁴ That which the palmerworm hath left hath the locust eaten; and that which the locust hath left hath the cankerworm eaten; and that which the cankerworm hath left hath the caterpiller eaten. ⁵ Awake, ye drunkards, and weep; and howl, all ye drinkers of wine, because of the new wine; for it is cut off from your mouth.” Today, we would identify such parasites as Edomite-jews, negros, mexican, and other half-breed beings sucking the lifeblood from the White Israel nations!

In order to comprehend the message which the Bible conveys, it is necessary to meticulosly analyze each passage in its entirety! When one does so, one will encounter many words and subjects which will necessitate searching other Scriptures which support the passage which the reader has determined to examine. Study goes far beyond just surface reading, or a casual scan of the text. We must, at all times, take into consideration the original language the passage was written in, for what it appears to express in English may not be at all what the writer intended to impart. Additionally, if the reader is not familiar with the original language, it will be necessary for that person to invest in some reliable Bible dictionaries and lexicons. Once the reader establishes the definition and/or definitions of a word or phrase, then one must determine the part and/or parts of speech to understand how the word or phrase is generally applied. It is not unusual sometimes to spend four to eight hours of study on a single word. For Instance, the Hebrew word “âdâm” is used four ways: (1) #119 as a verb, (2) #120 as a noun masculine, (3) #121 as a noun or pronoun masculine, and (4) #122 as an adjective. While I have several lexicons and dictionaries both in book form and in electronic digital programs, I find The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew And English Lexicon especially useful in determining the proper parts of speech.

I still use the KJV, as it is keyed to the Strong’s Hebrew and Greek numbers. Having these numbers allows me to search in several ways to authenticate the original intention of the writers! I hate to rain on your parade, but if you are one of those who believe the KJV is God-breathed, the King James Version of the Bible often applies the wrong part of speach to a word or phrase. William Finck confirmed this several times in his audio podcast. Fortunately, Finck proofreads all of my lessons and special articles, and he lets me know quite quickly if I have made a linguistic error of some kind. Finck uses and highly recommends the Liddell & Scott Greek Lexicon. However, no matter how favorable a Biblical dictionary or lexicon might be, even the best that we have are polluted with a certain amount of unsavory churchianity dogma. That is why we need White Israelites who are able to “discern both good and evil”, Heb. 5:14!

With all of these study habits addressed, we will continue with the subject of Hosea the Prophet. In the first four chapters of Hosea we become familiar with his life and his very important utterances, especially concerning the northern ten tribes of the house of Israel. In chapters one and two the prophet recounts the sad story of the rejection and punishment, and follows with Israel’s regathering and ultimate restoration in the last days. In chapter three, Hosea points to the impending judgment and desolation of Israel for being unfaithful to her Husband, Yahweh, after which all of Israel would seek Yahweh in the latter days. Whereupon, Yahweh would deliver all of Israel, and restoration would follow. In chapter four, Hosea makes it clear that apostate Israel would not escape the wrath of Yahweh, but that punishment would surely follow. Hosea then outlines the severity of the punishment which would ultimately come to them.

Priests Condemned: Starting with the fifth chapter of Hosea, and continuing through the thirteenth, Hosea then directs his prophecy against an apostate priesthood at Hos. 5:1 thusly:

“Hear ye this, O priests; and hearken, ye house of Israel; and give ye ear, O house of the king; for judgment is toward you, because ye have been a snare on Mizpah, and a net spread upon Tabor.”

Contrary to the generally accepted belief, Mizpah does not imply benediction, but was rather a symbol for the necessity of watchfulness, separating those who might take action to harm one another, as Laban and Jacob might have done at Gen. 31:49. The name “Mizpah” means “watch tower”, (Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament):

4708, 4709 [4709 is an orthography variation of 4708, Strong]: “... (‘watch-tower.’ ‘lofty place’), [Mizpah], n.pr.lok. (nomen proprium, proper name; and loci, proper name of place, [Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius]) – (1) of a town of Gilead, Judges 10:17; 11:11, 34; Hos. 5:1; more fully, Judges 11:29 ... As to the origin of this place, see Gen. 31:49 – (2) of a town of the Benjamites, where the people were accustomed to assemble, Judges 21:1; 1 Sam. 7:5. It was afterward fortified by Asa, to guard the frontiers against the kingdom of Israel (1 Ki. 15:22; 2 Chr. 16:6); and at length it was made the seat of the Chaldean governor, Jer. 40:6; compare Neh. 3:7, 19 ....”

There you have it: two towns by the name of “Mizpah”, one in Gilead and one in Benjamin. The one we are interested in at Hosea 5:1 is the one that was in Gilead. And indeed its name was “a symbol for the necessity of watchfulness”! At least, that’s what Asa made it. It would appear to me that if we are going to study the book of Hosea, and he mentions “Mizpah” at 5:1, we surely should figure out what he is talking about.

Hosea was simply declaring that the priests, who should have been tending to their duty upon the watchtower, should have warned Yahweh’s people of impending danger. But were rather becoming a snare by allowing and countenancing the house of Israel to entangle themselves in idolatry which would entrap them into committing adulterous fornication, which is race-mixing. Probably the most lamentable words in all Scripture are recorded at Hosea 4:17: “Ephraim is joined to idols: let him alone.” Here Ephraim represents the northern ten tribes of the house of Israel!

Surely Paul’s words were inspired when he wrote his epistle to the Ephesians at 2:12: “That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens [Greek: alienated] from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without Yahweh in the world ....”

Adam Clarke, in his 6-volume Commentary, vol. 4, p. 663 makes the following observation on Hosea 5:1: “Verse 1. Hear ye this O priests] A process is instituted against the priests, the Israelites, and the house of the king; and they are called on to appear and defend themselves. The accusation is, that they have ensnared the people, caused them to practice idolatry, both at Mizpah and Tabor. Mizpah was situated beyond Jordan, in the mountains of Gilead; see Judg. xi. 29. And Tabor was a beautiful mountain in the tribe of Zebulun. Both these places are said to be eminent for hunting, &c.; and hence the natural occurrence of the words snare and net, in speaking of them.”

Prayers Unheard: What the prophet declared to the ecclesiastical leaders of his day, which contributed to the general over-all apostasy of that time, could be resoundingly repeated, with emphasis, to our modern-day assemblies of nominal churchianity – all 666 flavors of them! Hosea’s message was not a very popular one, as he pointed out the misdeeds of the people, declaring in no uncertain terms that their evils were not hid from the sight of Almighty, Omnipresent Yahweh! Hosea emphasized to the leaders of the house of Israel that the iniquity they were committing impeded their opportunity to return to their only true Husband!

Hosea also took this occasion to point out that the house of Judah had also stumbled, and that although both Judah and Israel might still offer sacrifices, it would not, however, release them from their misdeeds, which had become so great in magnitude that Yahweh simply refused to listen any longer to their prayers. Hosea also took this occasion to point out to the house of Israel that “they have begotten strange [bastard] children”, which I have already covered.

Betraying Yahweh: The phrase, “betraying Yahweh”, is of explicit interest, for it signifies: “to violate a trust” and/or “to deliver over to the enemy through disloyalty or treachery” that which belongs to Yahweh. Parenthood among the Israelites carried with it a sacred trust of raising up children in the knowledge and admonition of Yahweh. As a matter of fact, this was part of the marriage Covenant between Yahweh and His Cinderella bride, the twelve tribes of Israel, at Deut. 6:1-7:

“¹ Now these are the commandments, the statutes, and the judgments, which Yahweh your Elohim commanded to teach you, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go to possess it: ² That thou mightest fear Yahweh thy Elohim, to keep all his statutes and his commandments, which I command thee, thou, and thy son, and thy son’s son, all the days of thy life; and that thy days may be prolonged. ³ Hear therefore, O Israel, and observe to do it; that it may be well with thee, and that ye may increase mightily, as Yahweh Elohim of thy fathers hath promised thee, in the land that floweth with milk and honey. ⁴ Hear, O Israel: Yahweh our Elohim is one Yahweh: ⁵ And thou shalt love Yahweh thy Elohim with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. ⁶ And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: ⁷ And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.”

During his time, Hosea informed his fellow Israelites, and wrote it down for all succeeding generations, that any failure to carry out these Divine injunctions would be considered a betrayal of Yahweh Himself. Having willingly neglected instruction with regard to Yahweh’s Commandments, and a lack of faith in their Husband – sort of like women’s rights today – they became vulnerable to every evil Satanic influence. Then – as today – they became a prey to the Arch Enemy of Yahweh – now known as Edomite-jews – and became targets for Satan’s exploitation, and were no longer of any value to Yahweh’s Kingdom! As a result, all twelve tribes of Israel became estranged from their Husband, and no longer worthy of the name of “Israel”, but would be downgraded to the level of a “stranger”, without any hope! When I say, “no longer worthy”, I include myself!

Responsibility of Parents: The iniquitous problems during Hosea’s time period are amazingly similar to our own day – and the failure of parents to bring up their sons and daughters to fear and obey the admonitions and knowledge of Yahweh, doom us to the same decline that our ancient Israelite ancestors experienced. Today, instead of raising up our sons and daughters to obey Yahweh’s Commandments, we permit the State to raise up our sons and daughters in accordance to the ten planks of the Karl Marx Manifesto! So, we have a choice between Yahweh’s ten Commandments or Satan’s ten planks!

You’ve probably been told the LIE that Communism is dead. Don’t you believe it! Communism is alive and well, especially in these United States of America. Let’s, for a moment, review the ten planks of Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto:

1) ABOLITION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY.

2) HEAVY PROGRESSIVE INCOME TAX.

3) ABOLITION OF ALL RIGHTS OF INHERITANCE.

4) CONFISCATION OF LAND.

5) CENTRAL BANK.

6) GOVERNMENT CONTROL OF COMMUNICATIONS & TRANSPORTATION.

7) GOVERNMENT OWNERSHIP OF FACTORIES AND AGRICULTURE.

8) GOVERNMENT CONTROL OF LABOR.

9) CORPORATE FARMS, REGIONAL PLANNING.

10) GOVERNMENT CONTROL OF EDUCATION.

There you have it. One can either bring up their children teaching them the tenets of Yahweh, or one can allow the liberal-trained college graduates to do so, those who were instructed in multicultural behavior modification, and end up with a mulatto in one’s family tree, and paying dearly for the so-called privilege of being politically correct! One should rather consider the tremendous responsibility placed upon parents in the sight of Yahweh, from whom not a single thing is hid, who requires that parents, train their children to respect and obey His Commandments. Primarily, the failure to train the children lies with the mothers, who would rather become a professional senior executive of some fortune-500 company rather than a faithful housewife to her husband and family. But ultimately, this is the man’s responsibility. Today, the majority of our beautiful young White women aren’t looking for a husband, but a negro, or mexican, or mongolian sex-partner – any thing other than a Christian White man!

When new generations in White Israel are not trained up to know Yahweh, His judgments will not be long delayed. Hosea portrayed the first stage of that judgment in terms of the brutal discipline that overtook Benjamin for their indulgence into bisexual and homosexual activity. He used Gibaeh as an example, where the men of Benjamin mistreated a Levite’s concubine, a crime which led to the slaughter of all the men of Benjamin except three hundred in Judges chs. 19 thru 21.

Evidently the women of Benjamin must have also become lesbians, as they were all destroyed when the cities of Benjamin were completely burned to the ground by fire. Otherwise, there would have been no need for the other tribes of Israel to contributing virgin females to the remaining three hundred male Benjamites who survived the three days of war. The bisexual behavior of the men of Benjamin suggests strongly that the women of Benjamin may have been partly responsible for the unnatural sexual activity of the men. During our own day, with numerous White Israelite women jumping in bed with nonwhite men have caused a severe lack of White Israelite women for the men. Being I was born in 1927, I witnessed a period of time, up until the early 1960s, when the majority of women still behaved like women should. By-and-large in the early 1960s, it was the White Caucasian Israel women who first broke Yahweh’s law of kind-after-kind in significant numbers!

Because of this kind of activity, Hosea exclaimed at 5:8:

“Blow ye the cornet in Gibeah, and the trumpet in Ramah: cry aloud at Bethaven, after thee, O Benjamin.”

House of Iniquity: Therefore, what is meant by blowing “the trumpet in Ramah” denotes a city on the border of Benjamin, and would signify a signal marshaling for invasion and war. The citing of Beth-aven was indicative of the state of apostasy in which Israel found herself, starting with the dividing of the twelve tribes into the house of Israel and the house of Judah. Actually, there were five different towns in Israel by the name of “Ramah”: in Benjamin, in Simeon, in Asher, in Naphtali, and in Ephraim. To give the reader a better description of the Ramah in Benjamin, I will quote from the 2-volume Insight on the Scriptures, vol. 2, p. 731:

“RAMAH: (Ra’mah) [Height]. The Hebrew word signifies a height or a high place. (Eze. 16:24) It was used as a proper name for a number of locations in Israel.

“1. A city in the territory of Benjamin. In Joshua 18:25 it is listed between Gibeon and Beeroth. Apparently it was near Bethel, which city was in the south of Ephraim’s territory. (Judg. 4:5) A Levite traveling north past Jerusalem came to Gibeah, with Ramah evidently just beyond. (Judg. 19:11-15; Hos. 5:8) And it was in the neighborhood of Geba. (Isa. 10:29) These references combine with testimony of Eusebius in identifying Ramah in Benjamin with the locality of modern er-Ram, which is about 8 km (5 miles) north of Jerusalem, 3 km (2 miles) north of Gibeah, 5 km (3 miles) east of Gibeon, and 3 km (2 miles) west of Geba. The city is on an elevation, as the name implies.

“During the divided kingdom, Ramah came in for considerable attention, located, as it was, near the border between Israel and Judah and the north-south road of the hill country. King Baasha of Israel began to expand or fortify Ramah in Benjamin while warring against Asa (1 King. 15:16, 17; 2 Chr. 16:1). But when the king of Syria attacked Israel from the north, Baasha’s attention was diverted and Asa took Ramah as well as the building materials Baasha had been using there, using these to build up neighboring Geba and Mizpah. (1 Ki. 15:20-22; 2 Chr. 16:4-6) It appears that, when Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 B.C., the Jews [sic Judaeans] taken captive were assembled in Ramah before being moved to Babylon. (Jer. 40:1) After the exile Ramah was repopulated. – Ezr. 2:1, 26; Neh. 7:30; 11:33.”

From the 2-volume Insight on the Scriptures, vol. 1, p. 293:

“BETH-AVEN: (Beth-a’ven) [House of Hurtfulness (Something Hurtful)].

“1. A town in the territory of the tribe of Benjamin, close by the ancient city of Ai. (Jos. 7:2; 18:11, 12) It was in the wilderness, located east of Bethel and west of Michmash, and became involved in an outstanding battle when Saul and Jonathan routed the Philistines from this latter city. – 1 Sam. 13:5; 14:23.

“2. In lamenting the idolatrous conditions to which Israel had turned in his time, the prophet Hosea mentions Beth-aven together with Gibeah and Ramah, other prominent cities of Benjamin. (Hos. 4:15; 5:8; 10:5, 8) It appears that the prophet applies the name in a derogatory sense to the city of Bethel, which at one time had been a ‘house of God’ but had now become a ‘house of what is hurtful’ because of the calf worship instituted there. – 1 Ki. 12:28-30.”

From this Biblical data, we can readily see that “Bethel” means the “house of El”, while “Beth-aven” means “house of naught”, or “house of iniquity”. Jereboam profaned the location which belonged to the “House of El” by reestablishing the worship of the golden calf, by placing one at Bethel and another at Dan. Thus, the House of El became the house of iniquity!

Using Benjamin’s gross sexual-impropriety as an example, and his subsequent nearly complete annihilation by his brother tribes, we can begin to comprehend how dangerous idol worship was in Hosea’s day, and still is today. Today idol worship consists of watching nonwhites running up and down football fields and basketball courts, and a thousand other types of interracial activities, especially in bedrooms. Whenever White Israelites engage in such gross sexual impropriety – and cheering for nonwhites at ball games encourages gross sexual impropriety – the judgment of Yahweh is not far behind. A case in point is when Benjamin was fighting his brother tribes on the third day of battle, and the men of Benjamin looked behind them and saw their cities were entirely engulfed in flames, completely consuming their homes, the women, any children, and the elderly men. No doubt, the Canaanite-jews of their day taught the Benjamite tribe the art of gross sexual impropriety, like the jewess, Dr. Ruth, taught gross sexual impropriety on television in our day!

Upon seeing their cities burning, the Benjamites lost heart to continue the battle, and turned their backs on their pursuers, who in turn decisively defeated them with great slaughter. (See Judges ch. 20)

Coming Desolation: After reminding Isreal’s priests of the incident with the tribe of Benjamin, Hosea predicted the downfall of the ten tribes of Israel as well as the two tribes of Judah, at Hos. 5:2-6:

“² And the revolters are profound to make slaughter, though I have been a rebuker of them all. ³ I know Ephraim, and Israel is not hid from me: for now, O Ephraim, thou committest whoredom, and Israel is defiled. ⁴ They will not frame their doings to turn unto their Elohim: for the spirit of whoredoms is in the midst of them, and they have not known Yahweh. ⁵ And the pride of Israel doth testify to his face: therefore shall Israel and Ephraim fall in their iniquity; Judah also shall fall with them. ⁶ They shall go with their flocks and with their herds to seek Yahweh; but they shall not find him; he hath withdrawn himself from them.”

This declaration just proclaimed by Hosea was to announce to the ten northern tribes, collectively called “Ephraim”, the terms of the punishment which was about to be heaped upon them. Neither would Judah escape, for Hosea also accused their rulers of corruption and practicing injustice! Hosea likened the failure of the rulers to deal righteously with their subjects as one who removes ancient landmarks, an unlawful act severely condemned under the prenuptial marriage agreement Israel made with her Husband, Yahweh, at Mt. Sinai (Deut. 19:14). The result was that Yahweh allowed an enemy to invade their land and make it desolate, in fulfillment of the curses that Moses had said would come upon Yahweh’s people should they ever turn away from their nuptial agreement with Him.

Hosea then condemned Ephraim (i.e., the ten tribes of the house of Israel) as disheartened and impoverished, for they had willingly followed the idolatrous practices of Jeroboam. For this Deut. 28:33 was tragically fulfilled, time and again, which states:

“The fruit of thy land, and all thy labours, shall a nation which thou knowest not eat up; and thou shalt be only oppressed and crushed alway ....”

Forbidden Alliances: Once alliances are made with alien non-kinsmen, prosperity soon evaporates into thin air. Yahweh had warned through Hosea this very thing, at 5:12-14:

“¹² Therefore will I be unto Ephraim as a moth, and to the house of Judah as rottenness. ¹³ When Ephraim saw his sickness, and Judah saw his wound, then went Ephraim to the Assyrian, and sent to king Jareb: yet could he not heal you, nor cure you of your wound. ¹⁴ For I will be unto Ephraim as a lion, and as a young lion to the house of Judah: I, even I, will tear and go away; I will take away, and none shall rescue him.”

The next four passages are examples of how the twelve tribes were emphatically warned against making pacts with non-kinsmen:

Exo. 23:31-32: “³¹ And I will set thy bounds from the Red sea even unto the sea of the Philistines, and from the desert unto the river: for I will deliver the inhabitants of the land into your hand; and thou shalt drive them out before thee. ³² Thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor with their gods.”

Exo. 34:12-16: “¹² Take heed to thyself, lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land whither thou goest, lest it be for a snare in the midst of thee: ¹³ But ye shall destroy their altars, break their images, and cut down their groves: ¹⁴ For thou shalt worship no other god: for Yahweh, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous Elohim: ¹⁵ Lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and they go a whoring after their gods, and do sacrifice unto their gods, and one call thee, and thou eat of his sacrifice; ¹⁶ And thou take of their daughters unto thy sons, and their daughters go a whoring after their gods, and make thy sons go a whoring after their gods.”

Deut. 7:1-3: “¹ When Yahweh thy Elohim shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou; ² And when Yahweh thy Elohim shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them: ³ Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son.”

Judg. 2:1-2: “¹ ... I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you. ² And ye shall make no league with the inhabitants of this land; ye shall throw down their altars: but ye have not obeyed my voice: why have ye done this?”

It is recorded at Joshua 9:3-8, 15, that even Joshua was deceived and that all of Israel had disobeyed Yahweh’s command:

“³ And when the inhabitants of Gibeon heard what Joshua had done unto Jericho and to Ai, ⁴ They did work wilily, and went and made as if they had been ambassadors, and took old sacks upon their asses, and wine bottles, old, and rent, and bound up; ⁵ And old shoes and clouted upon their feet, and old garments upon them; and all the bread of their provision was dry and mouldy. ⁶ And they went to Joshua unto the camp at Gilgal, and said unto him, and to the men of Israel, We be come from a far country: now therefore make ye a league with us. ⁷ And the men of Israel said unto the Hivites, Peradventure ye dwell among us; and how shall we make a league with you? ⁸ And they said unto Joshua, We are thy servants. And Joshua said unto them, Who are ye? and from whence come ye? ... ¹⁵ And Joshua made peace with them, and made a league with them, to let them live: and the princes of the congregation sware unto them.”

To get an idea of just what a league would bring about to Ephraim and Judah, I will quote from the History Of Assyria, by Olmstead, pp. 504-505, under the chapter heading “Heirs Of The Ages”:

“... The true Assyrians were Semites and close to the desert; thus they brought with them, almost undiluted, the truly desert, that is, Semitic point of view. Comparative assimilation of the various elements had been completed by the time that Assyria became a worldpower, but the fusion was in many respects imperfect. The lower classes were in a state of inferiority amounting to serfdom, and the different dress of nobles and commons, as we see them, for example, in the gate sculptures of Shalmaneser III, points in the same direction. All now spoke the Assyrian language and appeared to have left behind their peculiar, non-Semitic characteristics.

“It was not from these lower classes that the complexity of Assyrian culture was to develop. A period of Shumerian control is indicated by the names of the sanctuaries and by early examples of art, and this cultural element was emphasised when Ashur fell under the physical control of the Babylonia of the Ur dynasty. The Amorite dynasty of Babylon was likewise under considerable indebtedness to the Shumerian civilisation, but in race they were close to the Assyrians, and their lordship over Ashur strengthened the Semitic features.

“More mature consideration indicates that the unlikenesses between the two civilisations are as great as the similarities. The chief cause, it will soon be recognised, is the fact that while the culture of Babylonia was always local and somewhat nationalistic, that of the Assyrians was almost from the beginning imperial in that it rested on the subjugation and incorporation of peoples of different languages, races, and cultures, not to speak of a difference in political organisation far greater than was to be detected between the city-states of the alluvium. Thus the Assyrian empire rested upon a far more complex grouping of peoples than had ever before been seen. A glance at the ancient ethnographic map will confirm this to the fullest satisfaction ....”

When all of Israel, and about two-thirds of Judah, were deported into Assyria, as a result of their Yahweh given punishment, they found themselves among a multiracial, multicultural, cosmopolitan environment similar to New York, N.Y. of America today. II Esdras 13:41-42 informs us: “⁴¹ But they took this counsel among themselves, that they would leave the multitude of the heathen, and go forth into a further country, where never mankind dwelt. ⁴² That they might there keep their statutes, which they never kept in their own land.” The “statutes” would require disinheriting mixed-race children!

This is my one hundred and seventy-eighth monthly teaching letter and continues my fifteenth year of publication. Since WTL #137, I have been continuing a series entitled The Greatest Love Story Ever Told, and have been expanding on its seven stages ever since: (1) the courtship, (2) the marriage, (3) the honeymoon, (4) the estrangement, (5) the divorce, (6) the reconciliation, and (7) the remarriage.

THE GREATEST LOVE STORY EVER TOLD, Part 37:

THE ESTRANGEMENT continued:

In lesson 177, I brought forward the inspiration of the book of Hosea concerning the estrangement process which eventually caused the whole house of Israel, and approximately two-thirds of the house of Judah, to be taken captive into Assyria on four different forays by various Assyrian kings. As I stated near the end of WTL #177: When all of Israel, and about two-thirds of Judah, were deported into Assyria, as a result of their Yahweh-given punishment, they found themselves within a multiracial, multicultural, cosmopolitan environment similar to New York, N.Y. of America today. The original King James Bible included the Apocrypha, where at II Esdras 13:39-45 we are given substantial evidence of why and where they went from there:

“³⁹ And whereas thou sawest that he gathered another peaceable multitude unto him; ⁴⁰ Those are the ten tribes which were carried away prisoners out of their own land in the time of Osea the king, whom Salmanasar the king of Assyria led away captive, and he carried them over the waters and so came they into another land. ⁴¹ But they took this counsel among themselves, that they would leave the multitude of the heathen, and go forth into a further country, where never mankind dwelt. ⁴² That they might there keep their statutes, which they never kept in their own land. ⁴³ And they entered into Euphrates by the narrow passages of the river. ⁴⁴ For the most High then shewed signs for them, and held still the flood, till they were passed over. ⁴⁵ For through that country there was a great way to go, namely, of a year and a half: and the same region is called Arsareth.”

From this passage I will concentrate on II Esdras 13:41-42 where it states: “⁴¹ But they took this counsel among themselves, that they would leave the multitude of the heathen, and go forth into a further country, where never mankind dwelt. ⁴² That they might there keep their statutes, which they never kept in their own land.”

This is extremely important, for if Israel and the part of Judah that were taken into Assyria resolved to “keep their statutes which they never kept in their own land”, it would include the ten commandments, especially “Thou shalt not commit adultery” (i.e., race-mix)! To accomplish such a goal, they would have had to do as Ezra did at Ezr. 10:2-3, 5-12:

“² And Shechaniah the son of Jehiel, one of the sons of Elam, answered and said unto Ezra, We have trespassed against our Elohim, and have taken strange wives of the people of the land: yet now there is hope in Israel concerning this thing. ³ Now therefore let us make a covenant with our Elohim to put away all the wives, and such as are born of them, according to the counsel of Yahweh, and of those that tremble at the commandment of our Elohim; and let it be done according to the law ... ⁵ Then arose Ezra, and made the chief priests, the Levites, and all Israel, to swear that they should do according to this word. And they sware. ⁶ Then Ezra rose up from before the house of Elohim, and went into the chamber of Johanan the son of Eliashib: and when he came thither, he did eat no bread, nor drink water: for he mourned because of the transgression of them that had been carried away. ⁷ And they made proclamation throughout Judah and Jerusalem unto all the children of the captivity, that they should gather themselves together unto Jerusalem; ⁸ And that whosoever would not come within three days, according to the counsel of the princes and the elders, all his substance should be forfeited, and himself separated from the congregation of those that had been carried away. ⁹ Then all the men of Judah and Benjamin gathered themselves together unto Jerusalem within three days. It was the ninth month, on the twentieth day of the month; and all the people sat in the street of the house of Elohim, trembling because of this matter, and for the great rain. ¹⁰ And Ezra the priest stood up, and said unto them, Ye have transgressed, and have taken strange wives, to increase the trespass of Israel. ¹¹ Now therefore make confession unto Yahweh Elohim of your fathers, and do his pleasure: and separate yourselves from the people of the land, and from the strange wives. ¹² Then all the congregation answered and said with a loud voice, As thou hast said, so must we do.”

Inasmuch as Ezra and all his Levites, along with Judah and Benjamin resolved all this, those taken captive to Assyria could do no less! From the substantial evidence in II Esdras, we can be quite sure that these Israelite captives enforced something quite similar to what we just witnessed from the book of Ezra. While we don’t have any record of how this might have been done, anthropologically, there is evidence that Caucasian blood made its way to the Indians of India, where they use the caste system to place themselves at social levels according to how much mixture (ratio of white to dark) they might be. Not only that, but there are people both in China and Japan who are almost entirely white, showing an infusion of Caucasian blood. Therefore, I can imagine a possibility that the castoff half-breeds of Israel and Judah made their way from Assyria to India, China and Japan. If such was the case, when the twelve tribes made their way into Europe, there wouldn’t have been anyone of mixed-blood among them! That is why, I believe, we have the witness of II Esdras 13:39-45. And if Israel and Judah didn’t castoff the offspring of their miscegenation, they didn’t “keep their statutes” as it is recorded they resolved to do.

How did the Israelites travel on their “great way to go”?: In order to find out, let’s go to Hosea 12:8-10:

“⁸ And Ephraim said, Yet I am become rich, I have found me out substance: in all my labours they shall find none iniquity in me that were sin. ⁹ And I that am Yahweh thy Elohim from the land of Egypt will yet make thee to dwell in tabernacles, as in the days of the solemn feast. ¹⁰ I have also spoken by the prophets, and I have multiplied visions, and used similitudes, by the ministry of the prophets.”

The New American Standard Bible reads:

“⁸ And Ephraim said, ‘Surely I have become rich, I have found wealth for myself; In all my labors they will find in me No iniquity, which would be sin.’ ⁹ But I have been Yahweh your Elohim since the land of Egypt; I will make you live in tents again, As in the days of the appointed festival. ¹⁰ I have also spoken to the prophets, And I gave numerous visions, And through the prophets I gave parables.”

As Bertrand L. Comparet explained, the Assyrians wouldn’t let the Israelites build cities for fear that they would fortify them, and they might throw off Assyria’s control over them. Instead, the Israelites were allowed only small wretched hovels or tents to live in. Actually, this way of living became advantageous to the Israelites, as they could mount a tent on a four-wheeled wagon (what we now call a “covered wagon”) and become quite mobile. When we came to America, we were still using covered wagons on our way to populate the West. Even today, we work all week long to perfectly manicure every blade of grass in our lawn, and then pack a tent, or hook up a house-trailer or jump into a motor-home and go out somewhere and light up a barbecue, and play in a patch of weeds. In a way, the people who go camping quite often during the temperate seasons of year are keeping the Feast of Tabernacles almost on a weekly basis. It’s the type of activity that keeps families together; that is, if one camps with his own kind. Surely one would not want to swim in the same swimming pool with an n-word. C-words and n-words are to be kept segregated in all social intercourse, all political intercourse, all religious intercourse, all monetary intercourse, and especially, all sexual intercourse!

What we have to understand is, where the KJV renders “tabernacles” at Hosea 12:9, it is describing tents. Christ spoke of His body as a Temple (i.e., tabernacle or tent) at John 2:18-21:

“¹⁸ Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things? ¹⁹ Yahshua answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. ²⁰ Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? ²¹ But he spake of the temple of his body.”

Paul speaks of the body as a temple at 1 Cor. 6:18-20:

“¹⁸ Flee fornication (i.e., race-mixing). Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication (i.e., race-mixing) sinneth against his own body. ¹⁹ What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit which is in you, which ye have of Yahweh, and ye are not your own? ²⁰ For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify Yahweh in your body, and in your spirit, which are Yahweh’s.

There are problems with both “temple”, (Strong’s Hebrew #1964) and “tent”, (Strong’s Hebrew #168), for they are words derived from Latin, and no writer of Biblical Scripture ever wrote in that language. Although these two Strong’s numbers represent two different Hebrew words, the subjects of both are closely related. Though I have a mountain of data, both books and electronic programs, information concerning Strong’s #’s 1964 & 168 are somewhat hard to come by. On the term “tabernacle”, the 4-volume The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, vol R-Z, p. 498 clears up the matter somewhat where it states:

“TABERNACLE. ... dwelling ... to dwell. A sacred tent, a portable sanctuary, said to have been erected by Moses. It was the place at which the God of Israel revealed himself to and dwelt among his people. It also housed the ark and accompanied Israel during the wilderness period. It is stated that it was located in several places in Canaan after Israel’s settlement in that land and finally was replaced by Solomon’s temple ....” [underlining mine]

Ibid: p. 534: “TEMPLE, JERUSALEM. There were in the biblical period three successive temples in Jerusalem on the same site: [1] Solomon’s, [2] Zerubbabel’s, and [3] Herod’s. The site is identified without question; it is that of the presently standing and justly famous Muslim shrine known as Qubbet es-Sakhra, the “Dome of the Rock” (sometimes incorrectly called the Mosque of Omar), completed in A.D. 691 ...” [brackets and underlining mine]

We see two important facts revealed in the above two paragraphs: (1) that the “Temple” was a replacement for the “Tabernacle” tent, and (2) There were three Temples built at Jerusalem on the same site, and all three were destroyed. Most Bible students forget to count Herod’s temple as the third one. There were three; NOT two! And there will NOT be a fourth temple at Jerusalem, (Jer. 19:11)! To get a better handle on this topic, I will quote from the 3-volume The Popular And Critical Bible Encyclopedia, vol. 3, pp. 1640-1641:

“TEMPLE: ... hay-kawl’, or ko’desh, sanctuary or ... bayth-yeh-hovaier’, house of Jehovah). The Septuagint translation usually renders ... hay-kawl’, ‘temple,’ by oi-kos ... but in the Apocrypha and the New Testament it is generally called toh hee-er-on ....”

“1. Solomon’s Temple. (1) Conception. After the Israelites had exchanged their nomadic life for a life in permanent habitations, it was becoming that they should exchange also their movable sanctuary or tabernacle for a temple. There elapsed, however, after the conquest of Palestine, several centuries during which the sanctuary continued movable, although the nation became more and more stationary. It appears that the first who planned the erection of a stone-built sanctuary was David (I Chron. xxviii:12, 19), who, when he was inhabiting his house of cedar, and God had given him rest from all his enemies (2 Sam. vii:12; 1 Chron. xvii:1-14; xxviii:1 sq.), meditated the design of building a temple in which the ark of God might be placed, instead of being deposited ‘within curtains,’ or in a tent, as hitherto. This design was at first encouraged by the prophet Nathan; but he was afterwards instructed to tell David that such a work was less appropriate for him, who had been a warrior from his youth, and had shed much blood, than for his son, who should enjoy in prosperity and peace the rewards of his father’s victories (1 Chron, xxii:8). Nevertheless, the design itself was highly approved as a token of proper feelings towards the Divine King (2 Sam. vii:1-12; 1 Chron. xvii:1-14; xxviii).”

Ibid. pp. 1626-1627: “TABERNACLE: ... (Heb. ... o’ hel mo-ade’, tent of assembly, from a root, to fix or appoint time and place of meeting)” ... “1. Names. Kimchi explains the name thus: ‘And thus was called the o’-hel-mo-ade, because the Israelites were assembled and congregated there, and also because he (Jehovah) met there with Moses,’ etc. It is from the Hebrew word meaning tent of testimony, or to witness. The Septuagint almost constantly uses the phrase, tent of testimony. The Vulgate has tabernaculum fæderis, tent of the covenant. With this rendering agrees Luther’s Stiftshutte. The Chaldee and Syrian translators have, tent of festival.”

Other Hebrew terms are: “1. Soke, Heb. ... sook-kaw’, both from saw-kak’, to entwine, are used to denote a booth, a hut (Lev. xxiii:34; Ps. lxxvi:2; Job xxxvi:29; Is. iv:6; Amos ix:11; Zech, xiv:16). 2. Sik-kooth’, employed to denote an idolatrous booth which the worshipers of idols constructed in their honor, as was the tabernacle of the covenant in honor of Jehovah (Amos v:26).

“The Greek terms for tabernacle are: (1) Skaynay’ ..., any structure made of skin, cloth, green boughs, etc. (Matt, xvii:4; Mark ix:5; Luke, ix:33, John vii:2; Heb. xi:9, etc.): The ‘tabernacle of Moloch’ (Acts vii:43; comp. Amos v:26), was a portable shrine, in which was carried the image of the god. (2) Skay’no-mah ... , used of the tabernacle, etc. 2. Three Tabernacles: We may distinguish in the Old Testament three sacred tabernacles:

“(1) The Ante-Sinaitic, which was probably the dwelling of Moses, and was placed by the camp of the Israelites in the desert, for the transaction of public business (Exod. xxxiii:7). (2) The Sinaitic Tabernacle. The Ante-Sinaitic tabernacle, which had served for the transaction of public business probably from the beginning of the Exodus, was superseded by the Sinaitic: this was constructed by Bezaleel and Aholiab as a portable mansion house, guildhall, and cathedral, and set up on the first day of the first month in the second year after leaving Egypt. Of this alone we have accurate descriptions. Philo (Opera; ii, p. 146) calls it transported temple, and Josephus’ (Antiq. iii, 6, 1), a portable traveling temple. It is also sometimes called ‘temple’ (1 Sam. i:9, iii:3). (3) The Davidic Tabernacle was erected by David in Jerusalem for the reception of the ark (2 Sam. vi:17), while the old tabernacle remained to the days of Solomon at Gibeon, together with the brazen altar, as the place where sacrifices were offered (1 Chron. xvi:39, and 2 Chron. i:3).

“3. Of the Principal Tabernacle: The second of these sacred tents is, as the most important, called the tabernacle par excellence. Moses was commanded by Jehovah to have it erected in the Arabian desert, by voluntary contributions of the Israelites, who carried it about with them in their migrations until the conquest of Canaan, when it remained stationary for longer periods in various towns of Palestine.”

As the reader can clearly see, by-and-large the principal difference between “temple”, (Strong’s Hebrew #1964) and “tabernacle”, (Strong’s Hebrew #168) is that a “tabernacle” is a moveable sanctuary, while a “temple” is an immovable sanctuary. It is also evident that the pagans have their “temples” and “tabernacles” to their false gods, and that the twelve tribes of Israel had “tabernacles” and “temples” to our One True Elohim, Yahweh.

THE MENTION OF A “KING JAREB” CREATES A CHRONOLOGICAL PROBLEM AT HOSEA 5:13 & 10:6:

Hos. 5:13: “When Ephraim saw his sickness, and Judah saw his wound, then went Ephraim to the Assyrian, and sent to king Jareb: yet could he not heal you, nor cure you of your wound.”

Hos. 10:6: “It shall be also carried unto Assyria for a present to king Jareb: Ephraim shall receive shame, and Israel shall be ashamed of his own counsel.”

In my research for this lesson, I was following the outline of an article entitled “The Prophet Hosea” that Howard B. Rand had written in his Destiny Magazine, August, 1954 Yearbook p. 270, where he stated: “Jareb is thought by some to be an epithet applied by Hosea here in Chapter 10:6 to the King of Assyria. In a footnote in The Companion Bible, reference is made to Professor Sayce’s Higher Criticism and Monuments (pp. 416-417), where it is stated that Jareb may be the birth name of the usurper Sargon II, the successor of Shalmaneser ....”

Not trusting The Companion Bible, references, and knowing it had something to do with archaeology, I decided to search the Internet, typing in “King Jareb, Assyrian Monuments”, and after opening a few websites I finally hit pay-dirt at: http://nabataea.net/solhez.html

The following excerpts from will serve as a critical review:

“.... CONTACT WITH JAREB KING OF ASSYRIA: From the time of Ben-hadad II of Damascus and the first mention of Jehu upon the Assyrian monuments down to the early part of the reign of Jeroboam II there is no real difficulty in paralleling the Assyrian records with the Scripture account, as we have now seen, provided the Assyrian dates are raised eight years.

“Also we saw before, that after 738 B.C. there were no difficulties in the parallel chronologies. But in the interval, after the death of Shalmaneser IV, between 781 and 738 B.C., the chronological problems are plentiful.

“The Bible chronology just here is unquestionably longer than the Assyrian eponym lists. By some authorities there is a difference of as much as fifty-one years, and they have argued that many years have been omitted from the Assyrian lists. If there was an omission – and it seems necessary to believe this is so – our shorter Bible chronology makes it only eight years (certainly not over twelve years), and a small omission such as this would be less noticeable on the monuments than one of fifty years.

“It is indeed remarkable that just where an omission in the Assyrian yearly eponym names has been suggested, the Scriptures should twice mention an Assyrian king whose name has not yet been found in any inscription.

“Hosea in the latter years of the reign of Jeroboam II., 804-763 B.C., says: ‘When Ephraim (the northern kingdom of Israel) saw his sickness, and Judah saw his wound, then went Ephraim to the Assyrian, and sent to king Jareb: yet could he not heal you, nor cure you of your wound’ (Hosea v 13), and again he prophesies that Israel’s idol god ‘shall be also carried to Assyria for a present to king Jareb’ (Hosea x 6). Some able scholars have maintained that the translation in these passages might be ‘the hostile king’ instead of ‘king Jareb,’ but if the translation of both the King James Version and the Revised is correct we have a very interesting confirmation of an omission in the Assyrian records; and this king’s reign would serve to fill the gap left in the Assyrian dates by the longer chronology of the Bible. With this alteration, the king list for Assyria, from Shalmaneser IV to Tiglath-pileser IV will be as follows:

“Shalmaneser IV 791-781 B.C.
Ashur-dan III 781-772 B.C.
Jareb (?) 772-764 B.C.
Adad-nirari IV 764-754 B.C.
Ashur-nirari V 754-745 B.C.
Tiglath-pileser IV 745-727 B.C.”

[Note: However it must be noted, that according to at least one copy of The Assyrian King List, Ashur-dan III ruled for eighteen years, and not for ten. Therefore Jareb may well be a Biblical nickname given to this king, which is William Finck’s interpretation from his own commentary on Hosea. This list is found on pp. 564-566 of Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, J. Pritchard ed., Princeton Univ. Press, 1969. Because of fragmentary records and other difficulties, an exact chronology of the period which satisfies all issues is difficult to determine. - WRF] ... (back to article):

“CONTACTS OF MENAHEM OF ISRAEL WITH PUL OR TIGLATH-PILESER IV: Menahem, king of Israel, reigned for nearly ten and a half years, 762-751 B.C. At some time within these ten years, Scripture tells us, ‘Pul the king of Assyria came against the land: and Menahem gave Pul a thousand talents of silver, that his hand might be with him to confirm the kingdom in his hand ... So the king of Assyria turned back, and stayed not there in the land’ (II Kings 25:19, 20). Thus we see that Menahem and Pul were contemporaries for a part of their reigns at least. When we turn to compare this account with the Assyrian records we find both agreement and difference; agreement of records, but apparent difference in chronology.

“Tiglath-pileser IV of Assyria, is called ‘Pulu’ by the Babylonians, and thus the Pul of the Bible seems clearly to be the same as Tiglath-pileser. In the palace of Tiglath-pileser IV at Nimroud, a number of inscriptions have been found, one of which apparently confirms the view that Menahem and Tiglath-pileser were contemporaries. The name of the king is broken away at the beginning of this inscribed wall tablet, but as it came from the palace of Tiglath-pileser IV it has been ascribed to him with the rest of the inscriptions from the palace. Esar-haddon, who reigned half a century later, began to remodel this palace for his own use, and the inscribed wall tablets suffered much at his hands. He evidently intended to erase the inscriptions they bore, preparatory to displaying on them records of his own exploits and wars, but his death stopped this destructive work and saved many of the original records from complete oblivion. (Barton: Archaeology and the Bible, p. 424)

“While the particular tablet referred to above is much defaced, yet on it are plainly read, among those who paid tribute to Assyria, two names well known to us from the Scriptures, ‘Resin of Damascus’ and ‘Menahem of Samaria.’ (Rogers: Cuneiform Parallels, p. 316; Barton: Archeology and the Bible, pp. 424-425)

“This confirms the Biblical record in stating that Menahem paid tribute to the king of Assyria, and remembering that Tiglath-pileser IV was also known as Pulu, we have only what we might have expected. But the moment we begin to look at the dates difficulties arise to face us, for Menahem died in 751 B.C., six years before Tiglath-pileser took his seat on the throne of Assyria in 745 B.C., as recorded in the eponym canon. (Rogers: Cuneiform Parallels, p. 234) And beside this, Assyriologists have ascribed the payment of tribute, recorded in this inscription, to the campaign Tiglath-pileser is known to have made into the west in 738 B.C., thirteen years after Menahem’s death, and which campaign, as we have already mentioned, fits with the one the Bible speaks of as occurring in the reign of Pekah (II Kings 25:29). Clearly we must reconsider the accepted chronologies here just to discover the real truth of the matter. We have no ground to question the accuracy of either the Bible account as it has come down to us through the centuries, or of the Assyrian tablets recovered from the dust of many years; the trouble is far more likely to be in the way we have used these records, and the dates we have ascribed to them. Let us therefore look at some of the proposed ways of getting rid of the difficulty.

“It has been contended that the Biblical Pul is not the same as Tiglath-pileser, and I Chronicles 5:26 has been quoted to support this; it reads, ‘And the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, and the spirit of Tilgath-pilneser king of Assyria.’ This would indicate two persons, but others have maintained that the passage should be translated, ‘the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, even the spirit of Tigath-pilneser.’ If the Biblical Pul should be a different person to Tiglath-pileser (and we do not know that he was the only king to be also named Pul) it would relieve the problem from the Scripture side, but quite fails to shed any light on what we find in the inscriptions. It still does not make Menahem’s reign as late as 738 B.C. when he is sup-posed to have paid tribute to Tiglath-pileser IV.

“Some have arbitrarily overlapped the reigns of the Israelite kings to bring Menahem down to 738 B.C. But this rude attempt to force the Bible into agreement with our construction of Assyrian chronology has many objections to face. There is nothing in the Scriptures to indicate that Menahem’s reign overlapped that of Pekah. Secondly, such overlapping throws the chronology and history of Judah into the utmost confusion. Also the relation of the Bible chronology to the Egyptian dates is seriously disturbed. And, finally, such over-lapping is not in harmony with the earlier contacts between Israel and Assyria.

“Instead of arbitrarily overlapping the reigns of the kings of Israel, which method only lands us into more difficulties than we had before, let us turn to the Assyrian inscriptions to see if they can have any other construction placed upon them.

“The eponym list fixes the accession of Tiglath-pileser as ‘on the thirteenth day of the month of Iyyar’ (April-May) in 745 B.C. following a revolt in 746 B.C. (Rogers: Cuneiform Parallels, pp. 234 ... 308; Barton: Archeology and the Bible, p. 424) Previous to this his name appears to have been Pulu, but he adopted the time-honoured name of Tiglath-pileser when he ascended the throne. (Barton: Archeology and the Bible, pp. 65-66) Neither was he of the royal line. It may not be without significance that the Bible gives the name of the Assyrian king who invaded Israel in Menahem’s reign as Pul instead of Tiglath-Pileser which is used uniformly elsewhere in the Book of Kings. Is it therefore possible that Tiglath-pileser or Pul made this invasion before the year 745 B.C.?

“Now it is a fact that the eponym list does record two western campaigns that would fit with the date of Menahem’s reign, 762-751 B.C. The first one was in 755 B.C., ‘against the land of Hadrach’ (connected with Damascus in Zechariah 4:1), and again the next year, 754 B.C., ‘against the land of Arpadda’ (Rogers: Cuneiform Parallels, pp. 233-234) The former one came the closest to Israel. The date of this campaign against Hadrach would be the sixth or seventh year of Menahem, but as yet we have no indication that Pulu had any connection with this expedition. Turning again to Tiglath-pileser’s account of the western wars of 734-732 B.C., we read his words: ‘[Bit-Khumria] (i.e., Israel) all of whose cities, on my former campaigns I had added [to my territory] ... into captivity had carried.’ (Rogers: Cuneiform Parallels, p. 319) If Tiglath-pileser had added these cities of Israel to his territory on his ‘former campaigns,’ then he must have invaded Israel at least twice before this. One of these two times would be the western campaign of 738 B.C., which as previously remarked is evidently the one referred to in II Kings 15:29. But the eponym list before this records no other western campaign reaching as far as Israel until we come back to the one against Hadrach in 755 B.C.

“Is this the date when he made the earlier of those ‘former campaigns’ against Israel?

“It is here especially interesting to note that both the Scriptures and the inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser or Pul (granting that the two names belong to but one person) agree in this important fact, that this king of Assyria made three campaigns against Israel. Both sources agree the first was during the reign of Menahem of Israel. Both again agree the third was that which saw the siege and fall of Damascus, 733-732 B.C. Both once more agree in regard to the second campaign: Tiglath-pileser referring back to it states that all of these cities of Israel he had then taken, and ‘... into captivity had carried, [and] had left for him (for Pekah the king) Samaria alone’ (Rogers: Cuneiform Parallels, p. 319) while the Bible records: ‘In the days of Pekah king of Israel came Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria, and took Ijon, and Abel-beth-maachah, and Janoah, and Kedesh, and Hazor, and Gilead, and Galilee, all the land of Naphtali, and carried them captive to Assyria’ (II Kings 15:29). Truly, but ‘Samaria alone’ was left to Pekah their king!

“The agreement that there were three invasions is perfect, our difficulty lies in determining the correct date for the first invasion. It should be remarked that the same tablet which bears the name of Menahem, also speaks of ‘Azariah of Ja’udi’ and it is still not perfectly clear if this is not Uzziah (Azariah III) of Judah ....

“SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL CONTACTS: Having now gone over the points of historical contact of the Assyrians with the Hebrews, and of the Hebrews with the Egyptians, within the period we undertook to deal with, we find that while there are some difficulties, on the whole there is remarkable agreement. For instance, apart from historical contacts with Assyria, if we had no Assyrian records, we would have no difficulty in placing the Scripture history side by side with the Egyptian chronology and linking every point of contact together with great ease.

“From the mention of Shishak in Solomon’s time, 958 B.C., to the appearance of Tirhakah in 701 B.C. is, in the Bible, 257 years, exactly the same interval as given in Breasted’s Egyptian Chronology, 945-688 B.C., and the intervening points of contact are also spaced to harmonize perfectly. This should not be overlooked, for it shows we are on firm ground. Each source of chronological data mutually confirms the other.

“Again, turning to the Assyrian records, as already mentioned more than once, after 738 B.C. there is perfect harmony with the Scripture chronology. The earlier contacts with Assyria also agree if we are willing to raise the Assyrian dates by eight years, and to fill the gap left in the eponym canon with Jareb king of Assyria, twice mentioned by Hosea [which, as has been explained, may not be necessary - WRF]; and this leaves the mention of Menahem by Tiglath-pileser IV as the only serious difficulty remaining. We have tried to find a solution to that also. But even so, we find much confirmatory data, and regardless of whether one prefers to accept the chronology of the Bible or the commonly used Assyrian dates, they are compelled to acknowledge the other source of chronological material as not only important, but possessing a high degree of reliability ....”

If upon studying these excerpts as a critical review you do not fully grasp them, put them on the back burner until you have time to do them justice. I hope you caught the sentence, “It shall be also carried unto Assyria for a present to king Jareb ...” (Hos. 10:6). This was one or both of the golden calves that Jeroboam had set up in Bethel and in Dan. Surely, Ephraim was taught a humiliating lesson!

This is my one hundred and seventy-ninth monthly teaching letter and continues my fifteenth year of publication. Since WTL #137, I have been continuing a series entitled The Greatest Love Story Ever Told, and have been expanding on its seven stages ever since: (1) the courtship, (2) the marriage, (3) the honeymoon, (4) the estrangement, (5) the divorce, (6) the reconciliation, and (7) the remarriage.

THE GREATEST LOVE STORY EVER TOLD, Part 38:

THE ESTRANGEMENT (of Benjamin) continued:

With this segment of our story, we will consider the marriage, estrangement and divorce peculiar to the tribe of Benjamin, in contrast with that of the other eleven tribes. Adam Rutherford authored a small booklet of 39 pages on this subject entitled Iceland’s Great Inheritance, where he did quite well. However, he made the typical British-Israel mistake of confusing today’s contemporary converso Edomite-jews with the true tribe of Judah. This misconception is not unique to British-Israel, but also with nearly all, the other denominations of Christianity, except for those in Christian Israel Identity! Anyone who is not familiar with how the Edomites were converted to Israelitism should read Josephus’ Antiquities, book 13, chapter 9, paragraph 1, and the footnote at the bottom of the page. Once one studies this passage in depth, one will no longer come across as a blathering idiot repeating the lie that “the (Edomite-)jews are God’s chosen people!” There are three different entities that must be treated separately, (1) the house of Israel, (2) the house of Judah, and (3) the Cain-Canaanite-Edomite-jews. Christ proclaimed the following to #(3) at Matt. 23:35:

“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 ye slew between the temple and the altar.” So it appears that if we are going to run our mouths, we better know what we are talking about! The importance of properly identifying Israelites would also apply to the tribe of Benjamin! Reading now from Rutherford’s work:

“ICELAND’S GREAT INHERITANCE

“Iceland is unique amongst the nations of the World. As this little country is isolated, being separated from all others by hundreds of miles of ocean, one might have expected the Icelanders to be a backward race, lacking in civilisation and far behind the times, but instead, we find the reverse of this to be true, for Iceland is the most highly cultured nation in the World to-day, as the following facts regarding this remarkable people clearly show:

“1. [At Rutherford’s writing], There is no expenditure on armaments in Iceland the money being spent on culture instead. Consequently, there is neither army nor navy and there are no fortifications.

“2. In proportion to the population, there are more books and periodicals published in Iceland than in any other country.

“3. The poor people speak the language of the country in the same manner as the university professors, hence there are no dialects or slang, and there is less difference between the commonly spoken speech and the written language than exists in other lands.

“4. ‘The Icelandic Language was already moulded into a powerful and flexible instrument of written thought when nobody (in Europe) outside Iceland attempted to write a book except in Latin,’ and ‘the love of literature and poetry has been kept alive and unbroken all these centuries.’ “In the twelfth and thirteenth centuries Iceland produced more vernacular literature than any other nation in Europe and from that time, love of information has been a distinguishing feature of the Icelanders.’ (Chambers’ Encyclopædia.) The number of poets is proportionately greater than in any other country. ‘Icelandic literature is in some respects unique in World literature. It is almost as old as the nation that created it and covers a longer period than any other literature in any modern European language. It is recorded in a tongue which has changed so little from that spoken by the settlers a millennium ago, that any child can understand the oldest Icelandic writings almost as easily as if they had been written yesterday. It has always been the property of the common people, who have made no small contribution to it.’ (Iceland, p. 133, by Thorsteinn Thorsteinsson.)

“5. Illiteracy is unknown in Iceland.

“6. Not only do the Icelanders accept Christianity, but the Established Church of Iceland is of the very best type, viz., evangelical and tolerant. [We in Christian Israel Identity, of course, have different standards for measuring the efficacy of churches. ed. W. Finck.] Iceland is the one country wherein the whole nation voluntarily support the Church and dwell together in Christian unity.

“What a record! This surely looks as if Divine Providence has isolated and prepared the Icelandic nation for a special purpose. True, Iceland is a tiny nation, but the Scriptures inform us that the Almighty at times chooses to use ‘the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty.’

“The similarity of the position of Iceland to-day in relation to the other nations of Christendom to that of the Tribe of Benjamin amongst the other tribes of Israel in Biblical times is very striking, as will be seen from the following section A compared to section B:

Section A: “BENJAMIN: 1. The Tribe of Benjamin was by far the smallest of all the Twelve Tribes of Israel.

“2. Benjamin, the ancestor and federal head of the Benjamites, was the youngest of all Jacob’s twelve sons, from whom the respective tribes of Israel originated.¹

“3. At one time Benjamin ‘ravined as a wolf’, but in the end, proved to be the tribe truest to the Faith, and all Twelve Apostles of Christ were ultimately chosen from that one Tribe.² The Benjamites (or Galilaeans, as they were later called) followed the Saviour by the thousand. (It was the [Edomite-]Jews of Judaea who rejected Him and had Him crucified.) [correction in brackets mine]

“4. The Benjamites were liberty-loving and tolerant in religion. It was the most famous Benjamite of all, the great Apostle Paul, who said: ‘Where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty’ “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free.’ (2 Cor. 3:17; Gal. 5:1.)

“5. The Benjamites (Galilaeans) were the first to translate and preach the Scriptures in other languages (Acts 2:6-11).

“6. Benjamin was the light-bearer of the tribes of Israel.”

Note #1: “Benjamin was born near Bethlehem, and of Jacob’s twelve sons he was the only one born in the Holy Land. The name “Benjamin’ means ‘son of my right hand.’ Joseph and Benjamin were children of Rachel, who had no other sons. Although Reuben was Jacob’s first-born he forfeited the birthright which was transferred to Joseph, the second youngest son (1 Chronicles 5:1, 2). The first-born was entitled to a double portion of the inheritance, hence Joseph’s posterity formed not one tribe, but two, viz., Ephraim and Manasseh (these being the names of Joseph’s two sons) and on the division of the land of Canaan these each received their own portion of territory in like manner to the other tribes. Hence, Ephraim, Manasseh and Benjamin were by blood more closely related to each other than to the other tribes of Israel.

Note #2:“Dean Farrar states that all the Twelve Apostles of Christ, with only one exception, were of the Tribe of Benjamin, and that one exception was of the Tribe of Judah [sic Canaanite-jew], viz., Judas Iscariot, the only one that proved unfaithful. The Temple Dictionary of the Bible, under the caption ‘Galilee’ states that eleven of Christ’s chosen Apostles (i.e., all of them except Judas Iscariot) were Galilæans – the terms Benjamites and Galilæans being synonymous. But Judas Iscariot’s place was eventually filled by a Benjamite, hence, in the end, all the twelve chosen Apostles of Christ were Galilæans (Benjamites) as stated in Acts 2:7. [correction in brackets mine]

[Comment by Clifton Emahiser: In the 22nd Psalm, it is prophesied that Christ would be crucified by “... the power of the dog ...” (vss. 16 & 20). The term “dog” is an idiom for “Canaanite” in both the Old and New Testaments. Therefore the members of the true pureblooded Judahites are not dogs, and Rutherford is mistaken, claiming Judas Iscariot was of the tribe of Judah!] ... [Also, whether Matthew was a Benjaminite is debatable. W. Finck ed.] Back to Rutherford:

Section B: “ICELAND: Iceland is the smallest civilised nation, not only in Europe, but in the whole World.

“Iceland became inhabited last of the European countries, and is therefore the youngest of them all.

“The Icelandic forefathers, as Vikings, also ‘ravined as a wolf’, but in the end, Iceland likewise proved truer to the Faith than any other country. To-day, although there is full religious liberty, almost everybody in Iceland accepts Christianity. ‘From the first the Icelanders have been an almost homogeneous people as regards church and religion, and religious controversies may be said to be unknown in the country.’³

[Comment by Clifton Emahiser: It is my belief that Benjamin has already become a “light” to our Israelite nations in these latter days. This all happened with a man named John Wilson. Many make the claim that the name Wilson means son of Will, but I will have to disagree. Today we have many surnames derived from the animal known as a wolf such as: Wolf, Wolfe, Wolff, Wolffe, Wolfeson Wolveson. Inasmuch as the Hebrew does not use a, e, i, o, or u as vowels “wolf could be “walf, welf, wilf, wolf, or wulf. If the “wilf” were applied it would be “wilf-son”, or Wilson, if applicable to a tribal heritage.]

From The Youth Message, London, England. Reproduced from Destiny Magazine, January, 1948.

“John Wilson by Marie King

“John Wilson was born at Kilmarnock, Scotland, in 1779 and commenced his Inquiry into the Israelitish origin of the Anglo-Saxons in the year 1837. Studying at great length in the library of Trinity College, Dublin, he succeeded in tracing the Anglo-Saxons as far back as Media.

“In the following year he gave a series of lectures which proved to be most successful. Owing to their popularity, he published his lectures in book form in 1840 under the title Our Israelitish Origin, in which he traced the migrations of the peoples of Israel as they made their way across the continent of Europe to these Isles. He brings evidence to bear from Diodorus and from Ptolemy, supporting the earlier history of the Israelites. He studied the works of Rawlinson, Herodotus and Josephus and quotes extensively from Sharon Turner.

“The Lectures given by John Wilson attracted the attention of very distinguished men, amongst them being none other than the eminent Sharon Turner himself, also Piazzi Smyth (Astronomer Royal for Scotland and one of the first interpreters of Great Pyramid prophecy), the Rev. F.R.A. Glover (compiler of the genealogical chart of Her Majesty Queen Victoria), and Dr. George Moore, author of The Lost Tribes, or Saxons of the East and West ....

“In Mr. Wilson’s house near St. Pancras the ‘Anglo-Israel Association’ was founded (1874) .... Let us conclude with a few words of this worthy gentleman, the Rev. John Wilson:

“‘Upon this nation, and the ‘multitude of nations’ to whom they have given and are giving birth in all ‘the ends of the earth’, has fallen the lot of ministering the Word of the Lord (Yahweh) to all the nations of the earth. God (Yahweh) has done for them, and enabled them to do, great things for themselves and others. But in nothing have they been more signally favored than in this, that to them has been committed that which was taken from the Jews – the keeping of the oracles of God (Yahweh) – the ministration of the Bread of Life to all [Israel] people – causing to be proclaimed in all languages ‘the wonderful works of God (Yahweh).’ Soon may the Spirit be poured upon us from on High, giving a clearer understanding of the words which have been uttered; so that all our lives and voices shall be attuned to welcome our returning King, who is about to come forth in glorious majesty to reign ....” Back to Rutherford:

“The Icelanders are also very liberty-loving and tolerant in religion. The Established Church of Iceland is the Evangelical Lutheran Church. ‘The Icelandic Church has always been liberal in her views, even the so-called orthodox branch of it.’⁴ As a result of the great tolerance exercised by this Church, sectarian bodies are extremely few and inconsiderable. The fact that the census of 1930 showed that there were only 1,503 people in the whole of Iceland who do not associate themselves with the Established Church, speaks very creditably for the nation.

“The oldest known translation of the Scriptures (O.T.) in any living language is that in Icelandic (12th century).

“Iceland is pre-eminently the enlightened and cultured nation of Christendom.

Note #3: “Iceland, Handbook by Thorsteinn Thorsteinsson, pp. 120-122.

Note #4: “Ibid., p. 122.

“From the foregoing it will be seen that we could appropriately speak of Iceland as the Benjamin of Christendom. As little Benjamin ultimately became the great light-bearer, can it be that little Iceland is destined to become a great light to the nations? The Biblical prophecies indicate that it will be so.

“Both Christ and Daniel inform us that the present age is to culminate in a climax of unprecedented trouble upon the nations (Matt. 24:21. Daniel 12:1). That terrible trouble which will smash to pieces all tyrannical and unjust institutions that oppress humanity (Zephaniah 3:8; James 5:1-4)_, is to be but the painful transition which will usher in a new and better age, the Golden Age of prophecy. This is repeatedly declared in the Bible. For example, that world-wide trouble and what follows is described in Zephaniah’s prophecy just referred to: verse 8 depicts the trouble, but verse 9 following declares, ‘For then (after the trouble) will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the Lord, to serve Him with one consent.’ Again, Isaiah, chapter 34, gives a vivid picture of the world tribulation, whilst the whole of the next chapter, 35, tells of the glorious time to follow, and is one of the loveliest chapters in the whole Bible.

“Isaiah, chapter 24, also portrays the great final cataclysm upon the nations, but shows that there will be one place that will shine forth as a beacon light in that dark night of worldwide trouble, and that the people there will be found worshipping and singing songs of praise to God, for in the middle of that chapter of woe there is interjected these words: ‘They shall lift up their voice, they shall sing for the majesty of the Lord, they shall cry aloud from the sea. Wherefore glorify ye the Lord in the fires, even the name of the Lord God of Israel in the isles of the sea. From the uttermost part of the earth have we heard songs, even glory to the righteous.’ (Isaiah, 24:14-16. English Bible.)

“Three particulars are given concerning this place from which songs and thanksgiving are to be heard in the midst of a troubled world:–

“1. The place is insular, for the songs of praise are stated to rise ‘from the sea’, ‘from the isles of the sea’. The Old Testament of course was written in Hebrew, but the Hebrew word for ‘sea’ and for ‘west’ is the same, namely ‘yom’. As there are no islands of any consequence that are not in the sea, the proper translation evidently is, ‘isles of the west’. The only important islands in the west are the British Isles and Iceland, but the following considerations show that one of these islands in particular is referred to in the first place, and that it will be the people of that island who will ultimately incite the inhabitants of the other isles to sing also.

“2. These insular people are described in the prophecy as living amidst fires. In our world the only fires of nature that we know of are volcanoes, and Iceland is the only one of these islands that has active volcanoes. Not only so, but in proportion to its size, Iceland contains more volcanoes than any other country in the world. In modern times, the tremendous outpourings of white-hot lava in Iceland are unexampled anywhere else in the World. As comparatively recently as 1783 the great Laki Craters threw out a lava stream about 45 miles in length and 15 miles in breadth. Stefán Stefánsson in his book on Iceland says that this is ‘by far the greatest on record and ‘unparalleled on the Earth in historic times’.’ So far as is known, this is the biggest fire the World has ever seen since man was upon the Earth. The whole country of Iceland was formed by fire; it owes its existence entirely to volcanic action, and the many geysers and hot springs to be found all over the island are connected with the volcanic fires below. Iceland is known to Europeans as ‘The Land of Fire.’⁵ Truly, the Icelandic nation has lived amidst fires!

Note #5: “It is also referred to as ‘The Land of Fire and Frost.’ Iceland was originally called Snowland. Although the climate in the lower lands of the south-west is remarkably equable, the interior of Iceland contains huge snowfields. Perpetual snow occupies over 5,400 square miles of the country, and the snow-line in the north of the island is only 2,000 feet above sea-level.” [continuing:]

“The Hebrew word ‘urim’ translated ‘fires” in the above quotation from the English Bible also means ‘lights’. The only great natural lights in our world are the Polar Lights (The Northern Lights or Aurora Borealis and the Southern Lights or Aurora Australis) and the only island nation living sufficiently near either Pole to see these lights vividly from all parts of their country is Iceland.

“3. The prophecy locates this insular country as being in ‘the uttermost part of the earth’ or as the ancients said, the ‘ultima thule’. The expression was at one time applied in a general way to the far north, but later became localised to Iceland. Sir Richard Burton has written a work of two large volumes entitled Ultima Thule: this work is a description of Iceland, which this author calls ‘The Canaan of the North’. Iceland is certainly at ‘the uttermost part of the earth’, for beyond it there is nothing but the ice-bound Polar Sea. The north coast of Iceland touches the Arctic Circle ....”

I will now quote from Symbols Of Our Celto-Saxon Heritage by W.H. Bennett, pp. 62-63:

“BENJAMIN

“In considering the Wolf as the emblem of Benjamin, we should remember that, after the division of the Twelve Tribes into two nations, the Tribe of Benjamin was so closely tied to the much larger Tribe of Judah, and for so long a time, that its own identity was partially obscured. Further, during the nearly four hundred years that these two tribes, Judah and Benjamin, formed the Kingdom of Judah, the national emblem of the kingdom was the Lion of Judah. Consequently, the Wolf was seldom used and in time became more of a tribal memory than a used emblem.

“However, there is some evidence which suggests that among the Northmen or Norsemen, the people who formed the northern wing of the Saxon migration across Europe, there were some who used the Wolf as an emblem. Many of these settled in Scandinavia, giving their name to Norway and later to Normandy in France.

“So far this writer has been unable to check the accuracy of the claim that the emblem of the Norsemen who invaded and settled in France was a Wolf, and that some of their descendants, the Norman invaders of England, also had the Wolf as their emblem. However, according to an item of the Research Department of the British-Israel World Federation, London, England, which appeared in the New Vision for July 1969, we read:

“‘It is a matter of the greatest interest that Hugh Lupus, nephew of William the Conqueror, used the Wolf as his personal device at the time that Heraldry was first introduced.

“‘We should also note the claim that Norway was about to give official recognition to the Wolf as a racial emblem of its people just before the Germans took over the country in the Second World War. This claim is that a monument consisting of a column with a Lion at the top and with its base guarded by four Wolves was in process of preparation when the Germans struck. Though the wooden prototype of this column disappeared during the German occupation, a photograph of it was taken and is reproduced herewith [in his book].”

Ibid. pp. 166-171:

“Israel Emblems in Scandinavia

“ICELAND

“As we continue our search among the Celto-Saxon nations for heraldic evidence of our Israelitish identity, we now turn to Iceland. While the number of emblems used by this section of the Celto-Saxon people is not large, those which they do have are very interesting.

“It will help our understanding of the significance of these emblems if we realize that, because of its geographical position in the midst of the stormy North Atlantic, there has been little immigration into Iceland since the country was first settled in the 9th and 10th centuries by Norsemen from Scandinavia and Denmark. Consequently, almost all of the people of Iceland have a Norse ancestry and, as such, are descendants of the northern wing of the great Saxon migration which swept north-westward across Europe from the western shore of the Caspian Sea, in the centuries immediately before the beginning of the Christian Era.

“Having had little contact with other peoples for a long period of time, the legends, folklore and emblems of the people of Iceland must have been derived from their Norse ancestors and before that from the Saxons. Evidence of this is to be seen in the fact that at least two of their national emblems are also the emblems of other sections of the Celto-Saxon people. Consequently, as the Saxons first appear in history in Iberia and Albania on the western shore of the Caspian Sea, it follows that the legends, folklore and emblems of the Icelandic people must go back to the approximate time and place where the Israel tribes disappeared and the history of the Saxons began.

“The importance of this becomes apparent when we consider the fact that when the Norsemen first arrived in Iceland they settled in, or were divided into, twelve communities or districts. While this may have been the result of local conditions, nevertheless, it is certainly reminiscent of the Twelve Tribes of Israel. Interesting, too, is the fact that even as the Twelve Tribes of Israel were divided into four Brigades of three tribes each, so also the twelve original settlements in Iceland were divided into four districts or provinces.

“Viewing this similarity from a heraldic standpoint, perhaps we should also note that the emblem on the shield in the original Icelandic Arms consisted of twelve bars. These could symbolize either the original twelve communities of Iceland, or the descent of the people of Iceland from Twelve-tribed Israel or both.

“Further, ancient Israel, before its division into two nations, had a national standard on which were the likenesses of four beasts (living creatures), the emblems of the four Israel Brigades. Likewise, in the folklore of Iceland there are four legendary beasts called the Land Guardians, two of which, a Man and a Bull (Ox), are the same as two of Israel’s four Brigade emblems. These Land Guardians appear today as supporters in Iceland's national Arms ...

“Having noted the heraldic significance of the Man and the Bull in the Arms of Iceland, let us now consider another creature which appears above the Bull. It is called a Vulture. Yet, as represented in these Arms, it bears very little resemblance to a Vulture. Rather it has the appearance of an Eagle.

“The possibility that, in the ancient folklore of the Norse people, this third Land Guardian may have been an Eagle is supported by another of Iceland’s traditional emblems. This one, called a Falcon, is not now used in the national Arms but it remains one of Iceland’s traditional emblems. The use of the name Falcon, however, tends to obscure the fact that the falcon is the nearest relative of the eagle, and that the Eagle was one of the ancient emblems of the Norsemen from whom the Icelandic people are descended.

“Further, the Eagle was the chief emblem of Norway and Denmark during the years that people were leaving there to settle in Iceland.

“So, in view of the fact that two of Iceland’s four emblems, the Man and the Bull, are identical with two of Israel's four Brigade emblems, that Iceland’s Falcon emblem seems to have been derived from an older Norse emblem, the Eagle, and that one of Israel’s other Brigade emblems was an Eagle, we accept it as a reasonable deduction that in early Icelandic or Norse times, the emblem now called a Falcon was an Eagle and that this is also the true origin of the Vulture emblem in the Arms. Leif Ericson’s Raven emblem may also be only a variation of the ancient Eagle emblem of the Norsemen.

“What then of the Dragon, the fourth supporter in these Arms? Having seen that the Bull and the Man are two of Israel’s four Brigade emblems, and if we accept the assumption that the Vulture emblem was originally an Eagle, then the fourth emblem should be a Lion for, as we have seen, the emblems of Israel’s four Brigades were a Lion, a Man, an Ox and an Eagle. How then does a Dragon appear in the Arms of Iceland in the place of the Lion?

“We are aware, of course, of the legend of the Land Guardians, but this is hardly the answer. Rather this is probably a distortion of a Norse folk tale which was told before Iceland was settled. Further, it implies that the Land Guardian emblems were derived from the legend, whereas the truth is more likely to be that the legend was derived from the emblems.

“However, in returning to our question, we should note that at one time Iceland did have a Lion among its heraldic emblems. This was not the tawny [brownish-yellow] Lion of the Brigade of Judah but the Rampant Red Lion of the Zara Branch of the Tribe of Judah. Having used this emblem in the past, why was it not used in the Arms? Certainly there is no Dragon in the heraldry of ancient Israel and, as Iceland’s other emblems proclaim its Israelitish identity, why was the Dragon chosen?

“To this question we have, so far, been unable to find a satisfactory answer. An interesting point about it, however, and one which may eventually provide a clue, is that this same substitution of a Dragon for a Rampant Red Lion also occurred in Wales. Originally the Rampant Red Lion was the emblem of all Britain, but in Wales, at some time in the past, this Lion was replaced by a Dragon.

“Hidden away in the early history of Iceland there is an interesting item which, though not a part of Icelandic heraldry, is, nevertheless, related to an emblem which appears in the heraldry of some of the other sections of the Celto-Saxon people.

“Though previously an independent republic, Iceland, in the year 1262, came under the rule of the King of Norway who appointed a viceroy (Earl) to govern the country for him. As evidence of his appointment and authority, the King gave this viceroy an emblem (a grant of Arms) and a Horn. Likewise, in the early history of York Minster, we have a record more than a thousand years old of a transaction by which a Saxon or Danish nobleman of Yorkshire gave a piece of land to York Minster by a Deed which consisted of a Horn filled with wine. They still have the Horn.

“While a further study of this use of a Horn as a Deed of land and as a symbol of authority might yield interesting results, we do know that the Horn is an heraldic device in the Arms of several places in Britain, the Netherlands and Denmark, and also in the Arms of several of the Scottish Clans. Further, as we saw in our study of Israel’s tribal emblems, a Horn was one of the emblems of the Tribe of Ephraim.

“As an exclusive Israel emblem, a Horn would have no meaning for any other people. Consequently, its use by the King of Norway as a symbol of delegated authority and its recognition as such by the people of Iceland, is one more bit of evidence pointing to the Israelitish origin of the Norse people both in Iceland and Norway.

“Even without these interesting deductions, however, the fact remains that in their use of the Man, the Bull and the Falcon (Eagle) as their national emblems; the people of Iceland officially declare their Israelitish identity.”

In this lesson we are also interested in how the “seven times” punishment period (2520 years) applies to the Benjamites who were taken into the Babylonian captivity in 580 B.C. and would have lasted until 1941 A.D. Adam Rutherford, in his Iceland’s Great Inheritance gets this period correct, but mistakenly tries to include those whom we know as the Edomite-jews from 603 B.C. until 1918 B.C who were never in a “seven times” punishment at any time. On page 25, Rutherford states:

“... Applying the Divine measuring rod of Seven Times, we find that 2,520 years from 580 B.C. bring us to A.D. 1941 ... From the political standpoint, it is interesting to note that the Dano-Icelandic Act of 1918 (‘The Magna Carta’ of Iceland) provides that after the end of 1940, i.e., on or after 1st January 1941, either country may demand that negotiations be opened up for the further revision of the relationships between Iceland and Denmark. The exact words of the Act (Section VI, paragraph 18) are:

“‘After the expiration of the year 1940 the Rigsdag as well as the Althing may at any time demand the commencement of negotiations respecting the revision of this Act.’

“As the year 1941 will mark the extreme time-limit of the Seven Times on Benjamin we would naturally expect that at that time Benjamin-Iceland will begin to enter into the fulness of her destiny as Light-Bearer, and that the fulfilment of Isaiah 24:14-16will begin to come into operation in a more marked degree ....”

Be that as it may, Rutherford has provided us with substantial evidence that indeed Benjamin served their allotted “seven times” punishment (actually their divorce period).

What really happened in 1917-1918 was that the British drove the Turks out of Palestine, and it came under the rule of king George VI, a bona fide descendant of David. Therefore, neither Balfour, President Truman, nor the United Nations had any Biblically lawful authority to grant Palestine to the Edomite-jews! Today, the TRUE house of Israel and the TRUE house of Judah are in their “appointed place” to “move no more” (2 Sam. 7:10)!

This is my one hundred and eightieth monthly teaching letter and completes my fifteenth year of publication. Since WTL #137, I have been continuing a series entitled The Greatest Love Story Ever Told and have been expanding on its seven stages ever since: (1) the courtship, (2) the marriage, (3) the honeymoon, (4) the estrangement, (5) the divorce, (6) the reconciliation, and (7) the remarriage.

THE GREATEST LOVE STORY EVER TOLD, Part 39:

THE ESTRANGEMENT (of Benjamin) continued:

With this issue, on the subject of the tribe of Benjamin, we’ll continue where we left off in WTL #179. There really is more to it than a casual once-over reading can comprehend. I ended WTL #179 thusly:

What really happened in 1917-1918 was that the British drove the Turks out of Palestine coming under the rule of king George VI, a bona fide descendant house of David. Therefore, neither Balfour, President Truman, nor the UN have any Biblical lawful authority to grant Palestine to the Canaanite-Edomite-jews! I will now repeat what I have written before in other papers somewhat edited:

Once we perceive the relevance of 1917 in this chain of events, we will see clearly how all this fits together (for the tribe of Benjamin). We must first take into consideration that all the tribes of Israel were given a “seven times” punishment period, or 2,520 years. As each tribe was taken into captivity at different dates, therefore each individual tribe’s punishment ended in a corresponding manner at the end of its 2,520 years, (Judaea & Jerusalem no exception). The starting date for Jerusalem’s 2,520 years of punishment was November/ December 604 B.C., and is called “the times of the Gentiles” in Luke 21:24. (And has no relevance to the converso Edomite-jews.) If one will check the history of Jerusalem from 604 B.C., he will find Jerusalem was continually under foreign powers until 1917 A.D., for a total of 2,520 years, when Palestine became a British Mandate under King George VI, a bona fide descendant of David. 1917 was the year that General Allenby captured Palestine and entered Jerusalem with true Israelite soldiers from Britain, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and a few minor contingents of non-Israelites from India, Egypt, Singapore, Hong Kong and the West Indies (As Birds Flying by Andrew Adams, page 42, and caution is advised on this source). King George VI lived until 1952, long enough to make a decree on Palestine which has never been countermanded by Queen Elizabeth II.

For documentation on King George VI’s decision concerning Palestine, I will now quote from the book Understanding The Dead Sea Scrolls, chapter 1, by Harry Thomas Frank, page 8: “His Majesty’s Foreign Office had somewhat irresponsibly decided that since the problem of Palestine could not be solved by reason they would withdraw, leaving the two sides to decide the issue by blood.”

Another unusual source that correlates the 2,520 years as the “times of the Gentiles”, similar to the book As Birds Flying, is the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ book, Babylon The Great Has Fallen! They have some things correct on pages 179-180, (though caution is recommended from that source): “But in a symbolic or prophetic year, the number of days is fixed at the unchanging number of 360, and each day thereof stands for a whole year. ‘A day for a year, a day for a year.’ – Numbers 14:34; Ezekiel 4:6.

“In the prophetic book of Revelation a thousand two hundred and sixty days are spoken of as being equal to a ‘time and times and half a time’, or three and a half times. (Revelation 12:6, 14) If we divide three and a half (3.5) into a thousand two hundred and sixty days, it gives us three hundred and sixty (360) days to a ‘time.’

“Accordingly, a symbolic or prophetic ‘time’ would Scripturally equal three hundred and sixty (360) years. If, now, three and a half symbolic ‘times’ amounted to 1,260 symbolic days, that is to say, 1,260 years, then twice three and a half (or seven) symbolic ‘times’ would be twice 1,260 years, that is to say, 2,520 years. Thus the ‘seven times’ that are mentioned in Daniel 4:16, 23, 25, 32 in connection with the tree dream would stand for two thousand five hundred and twenty literal years ... In the fulfillment of the greater prophetic meaning, the ‘seven times’ or 2,520 years began to count when Jehovah God let go the world domination as represented by his typical kingdom on earth ... By count, then, those Gentile Times, those ‘appointed times of the [non-Israel] nations’ ... would end 2,520 years ... about ... 1914.”

They’re three years off on their arithmetic, but one can see what is meant by the “times of the gentiles”, and for 2,520 years (the land of) Judaea was ruled by foreign powers. As we have already noted, something important happened in 1917, when Jerusalem was delivered to the British after the “seven times.”

THAT BRINGS US TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY

Some people are under the delusion that because the United Nations recognized the establishment of the counterfeit so-called “State of Israeli”, at the behest of Harry Truman, that that makes them a bona fide nation of the world. Nothing could be further from the truth. Lawfully, Palestine came under British rule under the British Mandate, and remains that way today in Yahweh’s sight. That means we have two kinds of people in that area today; squatters and trespassers. On December 11, 1917, when General Allenby entered Jerusalem, after the Turks had evacuated the area and the Mayor of Jerusalem presented a letter of surrender, that completely and Lawfully settled the matter to our present day.

To show that the British government was Lawfully in control, the following documentation is found in Behind The Balfour Declaration by Robert John, pages 32 & 74: “Letter of November 2, 1917 – the ‘Balfour Declaration’ – from the Foreign Secretary, A.J. Balfour, to the head of the Rothschild banking family, pledging the support of the British Government for the idea of a Jewish National Home in Palestine.” In addition to that letter, an almost word-for-word similar draft was cabled by Balfour to [Colonel] House in Washington on 14 October, but with the extra passage shown here in brackets: “... Dear Lord Rothschild, ... I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty’s Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet ... ‘His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people [race], and will use its best endeavours to facilitate achievement of this object; it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country [by such Jews who are fully contented with their existing nationality and citizenship]’. ... I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.”

Let’s review the directives set forth by His Majesty’s Government by the above letter and cable, along with the one previously cited. Both were issued in 1917, one October 14th and the other November 2nd. The first stipulation stated: “it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.” The second condition being: “the rights and political status enjoyed in any other country [by such Jews who are fully contented with their existing nationality and citizenship].” Now have those “Jews” who eventually settled in Palestine lived up to those Lawful directives? All you have to do is watch television and you can observe they are breaking these regulations on a daily basis. After about thirty years of this defiant behavior, His Majesty’s Government issued another Lawful directive, which I cited before and will repeat here, from the book Understanding The Dead Sea Scrolls, edited by Hershel Shanks, chapter 1, by Harry Thomas Frank, page 8: “His Majesty’s Foreign Office had somewhat irresponsibly decided that since the problem of Palestine could not be solved by reason they would withdraw, leaving the two sides to decide the issue by blood.” I do not agree that this was an “irresponsible” decision on the part of His Majesty’s Government, but rather a very rational one! Again, all you have to do is watch television and you can observe this directive continually being carried out on a daily basis! Unless Queen Elizabeth II repeals it, it will remain in effect until Messiah’s return at His Second Advent (Matthew 18:18-19). Don’t look for conditions to change in Palestine, even though we pump billions of dollars in that direction, and promote never-ending peace conferences. What the King has decreed is what will be done, come hell or high water! “Blood” is what the King decreed and “blood” is what we will continue to behold on the part of both parties!

We should notice one very important aspect of the King’s directives, he never decreed a State for the “Jewish race”, only a home land, so they had to pursue the objective of statehood by a different avenue. In his book The Zionist Connection, Alfred M. Lilenthal covers this topic on page 75:

“Britain as the Mandatory Power absolutely refused to participate in any implementary measures to effectuate partition. The general consensus of the Security Council indicated opposition to carrying out the General Assembly Resolution of November 29, thus in effect vitiating [impairing] partition. Unless the U.S. took some action for establishment of an administration to govern Palestine, chaos threatened.

“As the bitter battling between the Jewish Agency and the Palestine Higher Committee accelerated – the Arab states indicated they planned military intervention on May 15, the date of the Mandate’s end – the U. S. proposed a temporary trustee-ship, setting aside partition ‘without prejudice to the character of the eventual political settlement’, and called for a special session of the General Assembly.

“Impelled by reports from many quarters, Truman for some time had been entertaining serious private doubts, never publicly expressed, as to the sagacity and practicability of the partition decision. In a blunt report to the Security Council on February 16, 1948, the United Nations Palestine Commission pointed out that it would require ‘military force in adequate strength’ in order to be able to implement the partition resolution. The hopes of a peaceful transfer of responsibility from the British Mandatory Power to the Arab and Jewish states had vanished when the Arab Higher Committee, the most authoritative spokesman for Palestine’s Arab community, indicated they were deliberately planning ‘to alter the plan by force.’ The commission feared that May 15, the date set for the transfer, would usher in ‘a period of uncontrolled widespread strife and bloodshed’.”

From this, it should be quite obvious the so-called “transfer of power” was never Lawfully conducted, at least from the standpoint of the Almighty. Therefore, the authority of the British King still stands!

I have repeated the above, although somewhat edited, in several papers. So what does it all boil down to? What it amounts to is the fact that today’s Cain-Canaanite-Edomite-jews have the blood of Canaan with his curse; Esau with his forever rejected offspring, and the blood of cursed Cain, (known also as “Kenite” & “Rechabite”) ancestry. The curse on Cain is that he would forever be a vagabond, never to find a place he could call home. Their history is replete with cases in point. They haven’t found a place yet to call home, Palestine no exception! If Palestine would qualify as a homeland for the Kenite-Edomite-jews, then the prophet Samuel was a liar! 2 Sam. 7:10 states:

“Moreover I will appoint a place for my people [the twelve tribes of] Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place of their own, and move no more; neither shall the children of wickedness afflict them any more, as beforetime.”

If the Kenite-Edomite-jews are of the tribe of Judah, as Adam Rutherford, in his Iceland’s Great Inheritance claimed, then there would be no prophetic way for the tribe of Judah to return to Palestine! What is there about the words “move no more” that we don’t seem to understand? To give the reader a general, but concise, overview of Viking history pertinent to our study, I will quote from The World Book Encyclopedia (© 1970), vol. 19, pp. 294-297. This source will reveal important history of the Israelite tribe of Benjamin. This will also coincide with an important passage of Scripture:

“VIKING was a member of the Scandinavian bands of sea rovers who launched a series of devastating and successful raids on England, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, and Spain between the 700’s and the 1100’s. The vikings also explored and settled Greenland and Iceland. They tried to establish settlements in America, but did not succeed.

“Vikings were also called Northmen, Norsemen, or Danes. They were a Nordic people, and were the ancestors of the Norwegians, Swedes, and Danes of today.

“They spoke a German dialect that resembled the language spoken in England at the time. The vikings used the Runic alphabet.

“The vikings were an adventurous people who loved war and fighting. They were skillful and daring seamen. They were also the most efficient shipbuilders in Europe. Their swift, high-prowed ships carried raiding parties to most of the known world at that time and across the Atlantic to the unknown. The vikings killed, stole, and burned wherever they landed. The churches of Europe offered a special prayer for help against the vikings. It was ‘God, deliver us from the fury of the Northmen.’

“One of the major causes for the viking invasions was the growth of population in their own countries, which increased the need for land and for other sources of income. Political conditions at home may have added to this restlessness. In addition, the vikings were always a seafaring people, who lived near or on the shores of the sea. The term viking may have come from the old Norse word vik, meaning bay or inlet. It was easy for these people to take to their ships and seek fortunes elsewhere when the situation became serious at home.

“Viking invasions were at first simply acts of piracy and plunder. But, in many cases, they led to important settlements. The vikings strongly influenced the development of Europe for many years. The daring and imagination with which they roamed the seas gave rise to many colorful stories and poems, called sagas, about their deeds. But fiction can hardly surpass the amazing reality of viking deeds.

“Life of the Vikings

“The Work of the People. The vikings did not spend all their time at sea or in raiding. They planted crops in the spring before they set out on raids, and returned in the middle of summer to harvest them. After the harvest, the raiders left home again, and did not return until winter.

“During the winter, the vikings spent their time at home preparing for next year’s raids. They also enjoyed playing various games during the long, cold evenings. They played a game similar to chess, and various dice games. The king and the nobles often had special entertainment such as horse fights, performing dogs, music, or jugglers, for their guests.

“Some of the vikings worked in the cod, herring, and seal fisheries. Others made salt or tar. Two important occupations were the making of metal tools and weapons, and shipbuilding. The vikings were amazingly skillful shipbuilders and navigators. They usually built small, shallow ships, about 70 feet long and 16 feet wide. But they did construct some ships that measured as long as 300 feet. The ships were propelled by oars, with sometimes a single sail to help in maneuvering. The ships usually carried small crews of about 30 or 40 men. But they were so skillfully made and so daringly handled that the vikings could go anywhere in them.

“Characteristics. The ferocity of the viking raiders terrified the people of Europe. Not only were they cruel, but also they carried on their raids with zest and efficiency. The viking raiders struck swiftly and secretly.

“After hiding their boats, they pounced on their unsuspecting victims. The raiders had the upper hand before the invaded people knew what had happened. They killed, robbed, burned, and then escaped with such thorough preparation and with such speed that their victims had no opportunity even to try to punish them.

“The vikings seemed to go mad during the heat of battle. Berserker, their name for a warrior, has come to be associated with insanity. These warriors seemed to enjoy destroying their victim's property, and went about it with horrible thoroughness. Fire was one of their favorite weapons. The vikings were equally merciless in killing the defeated, slaying not only men but also women and children. They often raided religious centers, because these were good sources of booty, and were poorly defended.

“Although the vikings fought with savage cruelty, they had great courage. They enjoyed fighting, but they also loved adventure, as their amazing voyages show.

“The qualities of intelligence and imagination that made the vikings such good navigators helped them in other ways. They soon learned to find and steal the horses when they invaded a village or town. As they began to settle in the invaded areas, they became skillful horsemen. Some of the invaded people learned to protect themselves against the swift raids of the vikings by surrounding their cities and towns with stout walls. But the vikings quickly learned how to besiege and subdue walled towns. They also became masters in fortifying the places that they captured.

“The vikings learned rapidly from the more civilized people they attacked. For example, they quickly adopted the Christian religion. The vikings originally worshiped the Norse gods, such as Odin and Thor. In the 800’s, Christian missionaries began to travel among them to preach their religion. Before long, many vikings in Ireland, England, Normandy, and the Scandinavian countries became devout Christians.

“As the vikings became more civilized, they gave up their cruelty and their savage love of destruction. Another impressive sign of the viking’s intelligence was their ability to shift from piracy to peaceful and productive commerce. It is true that the viking pirates destroyed much. They disturbed the old way of life in medieval Europe. But this often permitted experimentation and the growth of new ideas. By quickly changing from pirates to traders, the vikings helped develop commerce. The viking invasions helped create a new Europe.

“Viking Invasions

“The viking voyages and conquests include the sea-roving activities of the Swedes, Danes, and Norwegians. Medieval writers did not always distinguish carefully from what country their attackers came. They often used such terms as viking, Northman, or Dane in a general way. But it is possible to discover what areas each of the different Scandinavian peoples invaded.

“The Swedish Vikings raided along the rivers of Germany, and conquered the area that is now western Russia. Small bands of Swedish sailors, called Varangians, established themselves on the shores of the Baltic Sea, the Gulf of Finland, and Lake Ladoga in the 800’s. From there, they sailed up the Volkhov River and crossed the Dnepr River.

“The Varangians built forts that soon became towns and trading centers. Kiev was the capital of the Varangian state. The word Russia may come from the name of a Varangian tribe, called Rus, or Rhos.

“The Varangians soon pushed south from their strongholds on the Dnepr River to the Black Sea, and from there to the Bosporus. They raided and pillaged the entire area. In the early 900’s, they attacked Constantinople (now Istanbul). The Byzantine emperor had to pay a large sum of gold in order to save the city. The courage, daring, and skill of these raiders impressed the Byzantines, and the emperor set up a special Varangian guard for his personal protection. The Varangians were too few in number to maintain their identity over so great a stretch of land. By the year 1000, they had merged completely with the surrounding Slavic peoples.

“The Danish Vikings raided England, France, Spain, and areas along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea. Their travels covered most of western Europe. They sailed up such great rivers as the Elbe, Garonne, Loire, Rhine, Rhône, Schelde, Seine, and Somme. Few of the larger towns in this area escaped their destructive raids. Many of them suffered repeated attacks. For example, the Danes destroyed Paris in 845 and 856. They besieged the city again in 885. This time, the Frankish emperor Charles the Fat paid the Danes to keep them from destroying it again. Many cities of Spain, including Seville, suffered from the attacks of the Danes.

“These tireless raiders sailed through the Strait of Gibraltar into the Mediterranean Sea. They attacked Provence in southern France, the Balearic Islands, and Italy. The Danes also defeated the Moors in Morocco.

“The Danes in England. The Danish raids on England began late in the 700’s, and continued for more than 300 years. In the late 800’s, a powerful Danish force established a base on English soil at York. The Danes marched from this base to conquer wherever they could. They were particularly successful in Northumbria, East Anglia, and the northern half of Mercia. The territory they controlled was called the Danelaw, and they forced the English to pay a tax, the Danegeld. The invaders met strong opposition from Alfred, King of Wessex. Alfred checked the forward progress of the invaders in 878. His success against the Danes is one reason for his title of ‘Great’.

“For a time, Alfred’s successors continued to hold back the Danes. They even recaptured some territory. But new raiding parties attacked England in 980. Both Danes and Norwegians took part in these raids. Olaf Trygvasson, also called King Olaf I of Norway, joined King Sweyn Forkbeard of Denmark in the early 990’s. These two viking leaders had one success after another. They returned home in 995, but Sweyn resumed the attacks in 1003. His raiders swept through England.

“In 1013, Ethelred, King of Wessex, fled the country and Sweyn became King of England. His son Canute, or Knut, succeeded him. Canute later became king of Denmark and Norway also. Under Canute, the vikings held a huge empire and completely controlled the North Sea. After he died, they lost control of England.

“The Danes in France. The vikings who occupied and gave their name to Normandy in northern France were mostly Danes. Rollo, or Hrolf, led the vikings in a long and bitter struggle with Charles the Simple, King of the West Franks. King Charles could not drive the invaders out, and they could not gain ground against the Franks. In 911, the invaders and the invaded reached an agreement. King Charles recognized Rollo as duke of Normandy. Rollo became a Christian, and pledged his loyalty to the king. He also agreed to defend Normandy and help repel future invaders. The Danes of Normandy kept in touch with their homeland for a long time. Scandinavian influences still remain, particularly in the names of places and even in the clothes and customs of the Norman people.

“The Norwegian Vikings traveled to such areas as the Faeroe Islands, Greenland, the Hebrides, Iceland, Ireland, the Orkney Islands, Scotland, and Vinland (the mainland of North America). The influence of the Norwegians in Scotland and Ireland lasted throughout the Middle Ages. They founded the city of Dublin in about 840. It was the center of viking power in Ireland for many years.

“The exploration and settlement of Iceland and Greenland were more daring and colorful than any other Norwegian exploits during the viking period. The literature of Iceland tells the story of these fearless Norwegian sailors.

“Some of the Icelandic sagas tell of Norwegian voyages to America. According to the sagas, Bjarni Herjulfsson was the first viking to see North America, when a storm blew his ship off course. Herjulfsson did not land on this new territory. But Leif Ericson supposedly visited the land. He named it Vinland. The sagas tell of trips from Greenland and Iceland to Vinland for about 12 years.

“For many years, scientists tried to discover exactly where the vikings established settlements in North America. In 1961, Norwegian archaeologists discovered the remains of a viking settlement near Flower’s Cove in northern Newfoundland. Many scientists accept the ruins as proof that vikings lived there about A.D. 1000. Some believe the ruins may be the remains of Ericson’s settlement in Vinland.”

The passage of interest is this: “The Varangians built forts that soon became towns and trading centers. Kiev was the capital of the Varangian state. The word Russia may come from the name of a Varangian tribe, called Rus, or Rhos. The name Rus, or Rhos may be the name “Rosh” at Gen. 46:21:

“And the sons of Benjamin were Belah, and Becher, and Ashbel, Gera, and Naaman, Ehi, and Rosh, Muppim, and Huppim, and Ard.” The prudent Bible student will have to use his own best judgment, but if Rus, or Rhos means Russia, it surely fits. However that might be, more importantly, historically we find the tribe of Benjamin in Russia as Vikings!

We will now turn to the 6-volume Cyclopædia of Universal History by John Clark Ridpath, vol. 2, pp. 293-294 for further information. You will notice the mention of the Khazars, which will be of special interest to Israel Identity:

“The authentic history of Russia begins at a period somewhat later than that of the Scandinavian nations. There is a sense, however, in which the statement may be reversed, for the tribes inhabiting the vast region now included under the name of Russia were better known to the Greeks and Romans than were those of the Baltic provinces. The names Scythian and Sarmatian are sufficiently familiar as the tribal epithets by which the peoples of the great north-eastern steppes were designated.

“During the great ethnic movements of the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries Russia was the principal field on which and over which the powerful nations of Goths, Alans, Huns, Avars, and Bulgarians marshaled their hosts for the subjugation of the West. At a later period the Slavonic tribes first appeared on the scene – unless, indeed, these were the descendants of the ancient Sarmatians. Their first impact was upon the Finns, whom they drove from their native seats. Many, however, remained, and were blended with the dominant Slavs. From this union and amalgamation sprang the modern Russians.

“Soon after the Slavic tribes gained the ascendency they founded the towns of' Novgorod and Kiev, which became the capitals of the two divisions of the country. In the course of a century the former principality was invaded by the Rus out of the North, and both Slavs and Finns were reduced to a tributary relation. Several times the Slavic tribes revolted; but finally, despairing of success, they invited the great Rus prince, Ruric, to come to Novgorod and be their king. In the year 862 he came with his brothers Sinaf and Truver, and then and there was founded the Russian Empire.

“From this time until nearly the middle of the eleventh century the family of Ruric occupied the throne. On the death of the great chieftain, in 879, the succession passed to his cousin Oleg, who reigned for twenty-three years. During this time the principality of Kiev was conquered and added to that of Novgorod. The Khazars between the Dnieper and the Caspian were also subdued, and the Magyars were driven out of Russia in the direction of Hungary. Oleg next made war on the Byzantine Empire, and pressed upon the Greeks with such force that in 911 the Emperor was obliged to consent to a peace in every way advantageous to the Rus.

“After the death of Oleg, in the following year, Igor, son of Ruric, came to the throne, and reigned for thirty-three years. His career was that of a warrior. He first put down a revolt of the Drevlians on the Pripet, and then vanquished the Petchenegs, who had their seats on the shores of the Black Sea. Afterwards, in 941, he engaged in a war with the Greek Emperor, but was less successful than his predecessor. In a second conflict with the Drevlians he was defeated and slain, and the crown passed to his son Sviatoslav, under the regency of Olga, his mother. This princess became a convert to Christianity, and the new faith gained a footing at Kiev.

“The Emperor, however, remained a pagan, and devoted himself to war. He made campaigns against the same nations that had felt the sword of his father and grandfather. The Bulgarians also were at one time his enemies, and were defeated in battle. While returning from an unsuccessful expedition against the Greeks of Constantinople Sviatoslav was attacked and killed by the Petchenegs, through whose country he was passing. On his death, in 972. the Empire, which was now extended to the sea of Azov, was divided among his three sons, Yaropolk, Oleg, and Vladimir. The first received Kiev, the second the country of the Drevlians, and the third Novgorod. The brothers soon quarreled and went to war. Oleg was slain and Vladimir fled. Yaropolk gained possession of the whole country, but Vladimir gathered the Rus tribes to his standard, returned against his brother, put him to death, and secured the Empire for himself. He then conquered Red Russia, Lithuania, and Livonia. He became a Christian, married the sister of the Greek Emperor, and received the title of the Great. Under his influence and example Russia turned from paganism to Christianity. Churches rose on every hand; schools were founded, and new cities gave token that the night of barbarism was lifting from the great power of the North.

“Vladimir left twelve sons to contend for the crown. On his death civil war broke out among them, and several of the claimants were slain. At length Sviatopolk, son of Yaropolk, himself an adopted son of Vladimir, hewed his way to the throne over the bodies of three of his foster brothers. Yaroslav, one of the surviving sons of the late Emperor, allied himself with Henry II of Germany and returned to the contest. The struggle continued until 1019, when a decisive battle was fought, in which Sviatopolk was signally defeated. He fled from the field and died on his way to Poland. After this crisis the Empire was divided between Yaroslav and Metislav, but the latter presently died, and the former became sole ruler of Russia ....” (continued WTL #181)

This is my one hundred and eighty-first monthly teaching letter and starts my sixteenth year of publication. Since WTL #137, I have been continuing a series entitled The Greatest Love Story Ever Told, and have been expanding on its seven stages ever since: (1) the courtship, (2) the marriage, (3) the honeymoon, (4) the estrangement, (5) the divorce, (6) the reconciliation, and (7) the remarriage.

THE GREATEST LOVE STORY EVER TOLD, Part 40:

THE ESTRANGEMENT (of Benjamin) continued:

To fully understand this lesson, one will have to review or acquire WTL #’s 179 and 180, for they are fundamental to our story. As the reader will soon observe, this account of the history of the tribe of Benjamin is much broader in scope than most Bible students ever thought possible. We will now pick up where we left off in the last lesson with the 3-volume Cyclopædia of Universal History by John Clark Ridpath, vol. 2, pp. 295-296:

“To this epoch belong the beginnings of art and learning in the Northern Empire. The works of the Greeks began to be translated into Slavic. Learned institutions were founded in various cities, and scholars were patronized and honored. The Russian customs and usages were compiled into a code of laws, and amicable relations were established with foreign states. Three of the daughters of Yaroslav were taken in marriage by the kings of Norway, Hungary, and France – a clear recognition of the rank of the new Russian Empire among the kingdoms of the earth.

“In the year 1051 Yaroslav established the succession on his son Izaslav, but portions of the Empire were to go to the three brothers of the heir expectant. They were to acknowledge the eldest as their sovereign. In the same year the Emperor died, and the four brothers took the inheritance. The result was that the unity of the Empire was broken. Each of the rulers became independent; the feudal principle came in, and Russia was reduced to a confederation. Thus weakened, the frontiers were successfully assailed by the Poles, Lithuanians, Danes, and Teutonic barons. Such was the condition of affairs when Europe forgot her own turmoils and sorrows in a common animosity against the Infidels of the East.

“In close ethnic affinity with the Russians were the primitive Slavic tribes of Poland. Of these peoples the most numerous and powerful were the Polans, who ultimately gave a name to the amalgamated race. The mythical hero of this branch of European population was Prince Lech, brother to Rus and Czech, so that tradition as well as history associates the Poles and the Russians. Another fabulous leader was Krakus, the reputed founder of Cracow. The first historical ruler of Poland was Ziemowit, who was elected king in 860.

“But the annals of the first century of Poland are very obscure, and it is not until 962 that we reach the solid ground of authenticity with the accession of Miecislas I. This prince took in marriage a Bohemian princess, by whom he was induced to become a Christian and to urge upon his people the abandonment of paganism. In common with so many other rulers of his time he adopted the fatal policy of dividing his kingdom among his sons. Civil wars and turmoils ensued until what time Boleslas, the eldest of the claimants, subdued his brothers and regained the sovereignty of all Poland. He received the surname of the Brave, and vindicated his title by successful wars beyond the Oder, the Dneister, and the Carpathian mountains. His right to reign was acknowledged by the Emperor Otho III., but at a later date he engaged in war with Otho’s successor, Henry II. Afterwards he was called into Russia as arbiter between Novgorod and Kiev. In the civil administration he was still more successful than in war. He encouraged the industrial and commercial enterprises of the kingdom and promoted the cause of learning. He held his turbulent subjects with a strong hand and administered justice with impartiality. He assumed the state of a king, and had himself crowned by the Christian bishops. On his death, in the year 1025, the Polish crown descended peaceably to his son Miecislas II. whose brief reign was followed by the regency of his widow Rixa; for the Prince Casimir, her son, was not yet old enough to assume the duties of the government. The regency went badly, but when Casimir arrived at the regal age he took upon himself the crown and gained the sobriquet of the Restorer.

“In the year 1058 the Polish king died, and was succeeded by his son Boleslas II., who reigned for twenty-three years. Soon after his accession he became involved in a war with the Bohemians, over whom he gained a decisive victory. Afterwards he was summoned into Hungary to decide a dispute relative to the crown of that country, and a like mission to Kiev was successfully accomplished. Returning from that city he acquired in his own government the reputation of a tyrant. At last he filled the cup of public indignation by slaying St. Stanislas, bishop of Cracow, who had reprimanded him for some of his acts. He was driven from the throne, and in 1081 died in exile. His half-imbecile brother, Ladislas Herman, succeeded to the crown of Poland, wore it for a season, and then abdicated to accept the less dangerous distinction of a dukedom. – Such was the condition of Polish affairs when Urban II., pursuing the policy of Gregory the Great, summoned the council of Clermont and exhorted all Christendom to lift the Cross against the Crescent.”

Not only did the tribe of Benjamin settle in Iceland, but they are also a major factor in the racial makeup of Russia. I will now quote from Russia, Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow, edited by Victor Pavlenkov, Peter Pappas, pp. 24-30, subtitled “Chronology”, and this will be a critical review as the authors are addressing a subject similar to mine. I do, however (although their conclusions are excellent), reserve the option of criticizing their work where criticism is needed:

“RUSSIAN CHRONOLOGY

“862 AD – Viking family of Rurik takes over Novgorod, a northern Slavic city, establishing the dynasty which will last until the 16th century. Rus’, or Russia, as the country came to be known, was located on the way from Scandinavia to Byzantium (Constantinople), which at that point in time was a major economic and political power. The legend that Rurik was summoned to Novgorod to rule, persists in Russian mythology until today.

“863-885 – Two Byzantine monks, Cyril and Methodius create the first Slavic written language (Cyrillic alphabet).

“882 – Oleg, a Rurik-successor, captures Kiev and makes it the capital of Rus’.

“907 – Oleg conducts an expedition, conquering Constantinople.

“941 – Rurik’s son, Igor, who succeeded Oleg, conducts a raid on Constantinople.

“957 – Olga, Igor’s wife, who succeeded him, is baptized.

“989 – Conversion of the Russians from Slavonic paganism to Byzantine Christianity by Vladimir. Faced with the necessity of adopting a monotheistic religion for the unification of his people, Vladimir pondered Catholicism, Judaism, Islam and Byzantine Orthodoxy. According to the legend, Catholicism was rejected because of its ‘gloominess’, Judaism – because Jews had no home, Islam – because of its prohibition of alcohol. Churches in Byzantium were so magnificent that the ambassadors of Vladimir felt in Heaven inside them. Along with the new religion came Byzantine culture which the young Russian culture absorbed intensely. Churches and new houses were built. Many Greek books were translated. Chronicles were written.

“1030 AD – First school is started in Novgorod by Yaroslav ‘The Wise’ (1019-1054).

“1054-1073 – Russkaya Pravda (Russian Truth), first Russian code of laws, is written.

“1147 – First mention of Moscow in a chronicle.

“1221 – Nizhny Novgorod is founded.

“1237-1240 – Mongolian invasion under the leadership of Baty Khan (grandson of Genghiz). Kiev falls in 1240.

“1240 – Alexander Nevsky, prince of Novgorod, defeats invading Swedes on the Neva.

“1242 – Alexander Nevsky defeats the German Order on Lake Peipus. He later travels to Mongolia to see the Khan and dies on the way back. His descendants were to become Muscovite princes.

“1237-1480 – The Mongolian Yoke. Mongolian domination during this period separated Russia from the rest of the world and left its legacy forever in the formation of national character. A weakened Russia was also attacked on the West by Germans and Lithuanians, separating Kievan Rus’ into Western and Eastern parts. This period sees the emergence of Moscow as a major principality under the rule of Ivan I Kalita (1328-1340), who rose to prominence by collecting large tributes from the rest of Russia for the Mongols. It was his grandson, Dmitry Donskoy (1359-1389), who was able to achieve the first military victory over the Tartar/Mongol forces at Kulikov Field in command of unified Russian troops.

“1326 – Seat of church Metropolitan transferred to Moscow.

“1380 – The first major military defeat of Tartar/Mongol forces at Kulikov Field by Dmitry Donskoy.

“1382 – Moscow is burned by Tokhtamysh, ensuring a century of continuing, if waning dominance by Mongols.

“1453 – Capture of Byzantium (Constantinople) by the Ottoman Turks. Russia remains the major Orthodox power.

“1472 – Marriage of Ivan III (1462-1505) to Sofia Palaeologa, niece of the last Byzantine emperor. The legacy of Byzantine Orthodox Christianity would lead towards the establishment of the idea of Moscow being ‘The Third Rome.’

“1478 – Incorporation of Novgorod into Moscovy by Ivan III, marking the end of Novgorod as a democratic republic which had a general assembly – the Veche, and whose trade missions established Russian cities as far as the Urals.

“1480 – Ivan III ends tributes to the Khans. Mongols come to Russia, but leave without engaging Russian troops at the river Ugra. At the beginning of the Mongol Yoke, Russia consisted of a large number of principalities often at war with one another, after the era of Mongol domination, Russia is a unified country under the leadership of Moscow.

“1485-1516 – Construction of a new Kremlin in Moscow.

“1547-1584 – Ivan IV (‘The Terrible’). The reign of Ivan IV saw Russia defeat its traditional enemies, the Tartars, on the Volga (Kazan and Astrakhan), wage wars against Poland and Sweden for possession of the Baltic, expand to the Urals and Siberia, and fortify its southern frontiers with establishment of the Cossacks. It was also a reign of terror and of the establishment of absolute power with the help of a special police force – oprichniki. In a fit of rage, Ivan IV killed his own son in 1582. The ‘Times of Troubles’ (Smuta) were to follow.

“1558 - 1583 – Livonian War against Poland and Sweden.

“1564 – First book printed in Moscow.

“1565-1572 – The reign of terror (oprichnina).

“1570 – Ivan ‘The Terrible’s’ pogrom of Novgorod.

“1581 – Yermak’s expedition begins the conquest of Siberia.

“1601-1613 – The ‘Times of Trouble’ (Smuta). Ivan IV’s last son, the feeble-minded Fyodor, inherited the crown in 1584. But it was his brother-in-law, Boris Godunov, who ruled until his death in 1598. Fyodor was the last Rurik on the Russian throne. Boris Godunov became a first elected tsar in 1598.

“1598-1605 – Boris Godunov’s reign was marked by major famines and the appearances of the self-declared sons of Ivan with a claim to the throne supported by the Polish army, the Cossacks, and some nobility. Boris Godunov also institutes a system of serfdom, contributing to the unrest among peasants.

“1601-1604 – Famines.

“1606-1607 – Peasants revolt under the leadership of Bolotnikov.

“1610-1612 – Poles occupy Moscow.

“1612-1613 – Nizhny Novgorod’s popular militia headed by Minin and Pozharsky frees Moscow from Poles. Poles are defeated as Cossacks side with militia.

“1613 – Mikhail Romanov is elected Tsar (Caesar) by Land Assembly. The Romanov dynasty would rule Russia for the next 304 years.

“1649 – Ulozhenie, a Law Code which legalizes serfdom.

“1652 – Nikon becomes church patriarch and immediately sets out to reform Russian Orthodoxy in order to bring Orthodox rituals to uniform code. While the reforms were mostly concerned with rituals, they were fanatically opposed by large parts of the population, who came to be known as ‘Old Believers’, and who viewed the reforms as a sign of foreign influence. They were severely persecuted, whole villages were burned. Their leader, the monk Avvakum was burned alive. This schism, known as Raskol (Split) alienated a large part of the Russian population and persists in the church today.

“1670-1671 – Revolt of Sten’ka Razin. Protesting the heavy taxes on his booty from the Caspian Sea, Sten’ka and his Cossacks deposed the governor of Astrakhan’. His revolt proved popular with the unhappy peasants but crumbled under the pressures of fighting the regular army. Sten’ka Razin was publicly beheaded on Red Square in Moscow.

“1689-1725 – Peter The Great, grandson of Mikhail Romanov. Peter’s push toward progress and westernization was achieved through the creation of a military-industrial complex out of the country. Peter’s opening to the West was achieved by military victories in the Great Northern War (1700-1721) with Sweden, and by the establishment of a new capital in St. Petersburg. The creation of the Russian Navy (1695) and subsequent conquests in the Far East made Russia a world power. Peter brought education, the establishment of legal law, and encouraged contact with the West and the immigration of Europeans.

“1725 – Academy of Science is founded.

“1755 – Moscow University is founded by Mikhail Lomonosov, who is considered a founder of Russian science.

“1762-1796 – Catherine The Great. A German princess on the Russian throne, she treated men as kings treat their mistresses and oversaw a major expansion of Russian borders, consolidating the western push by Peter. From colonization of Alaska (1784), to the incorporation of Crimea (1783) and Ukraine (1786), and through three partitions of Poland (1772-1795), Russia conducted many wars in their push to the West and South. At the same time Catherine continued a tradition of inviting the immigration of foreigners, and the development of science and education.

“1772-1774 – Revolt of Pugachev.

“1787-1792 – Wars with the Turks.

“1801-1825 – Alexander I, grandson of Catherine. During his reign a proposal for constitutional monarchy and the reform of serfdom was drafted by his minister, Speransky, but never brought forward.

“1812 – Napoleon’s failed invasion. Battle of Borodino. The burning of Moscow by Russians. Napoleon’s retreat which ends with Russian troops occupying Paris in 1814.

“1817 – Nizhny Novgorod Fair is established.

“1817-1864 – Caucasus War. Russia conquers Caucasus in a bloody and costly war as it battles for domination of the region.

“1819 – University founded in St. Petersburg.

“1825 – Decembrists’ uprising after the death of Alexander I by army officers and intellectuals. The Decembrists are considered the forefathers of the revolutionary movement.

“1825-1855 – Considered a reactionary, Nicholas I saw his country undergo industrialization and the creation of the powerful social stratum of intelligentsia. The Crimean War (1853-1856) underscored the weaknesses of serfdom-based economy.

“1855-1881 – Alexander II. This Tsar ended the unsuccessful Crimean War and completed the conquest of the Caucasus (1859). He also oversaw the abolition of serfdom (1861) and far-reaching judicial reforms, only to be assassinated by the revolutionaries who preached terrorism. (1881) While the abolition of serfdom released a peasant from a noble’s ownership, the peasants were left in communes (obshina) with no individual ownership of land. This period also sees a strong, organized revolutionary movement by part of the intelligentsia, expansion to the East, taking over Middle Asia, and the occupation of Manchuria.

“1894-1917 – Nicholas II, the last tsar.

“1904-1905 – Russo-Japanese War.

“1905 – Revolution of 1905.

“1906 – First Duma.

“1906-1911 – Prime minister Stolypin puts down a revolution with hangings and institutes land reforms aimed at the dissolution of obshina and at populating Siberia and Kazakhstan. He is assassinated by a revolutionary and his reforms fail.

“1914 – World War I starts.

“1917 – February revolution. Abdication of Nicholas II. October revolution by Bolsheviks under the leadership of Lenin.

“1917 – Establishment of Cheka (Secret Police).

“1918 – Murder of Tsar and his family. Peace treaty between Russia and Germany.

“1918-1920 – Civil War. Bolsheviks consolidate power, fighting peasant revolts, and White armies. They practice a policy of War Communism, resulting in famine and mass executions.

“1921 – New Economic Policy (NEP) begins, as central government frees the restrictions on trade and gives peasants the land.

“1924 – With Lenin’s death, Stalin slowly takes over the power.

“1929 – End of NEP. Industrialization and collectivization begins. Collectivization forces peasants into kolhoz (collective), over which the government has total control, using state enforced famine (1931-1933), which resulted in the loss of 9 million peasants. Industrialization was based on forced labor of prisoners.

“1930-s – Mass terror practiced by Stalin’s secret police.

“1934 – Nizhny Novgorod is renamed Gorky in honor of the revolutionary writer.

“1936-1938 – Mass execution of Soviet Army commanders, show trials of Zinovyev, Bukharin, et al.

“1939-1940 – Molotov-Ribentropp peace treaty between USSR and Germany. Russia occupies Eastern Poland and Baltic states.

“1941-1945 – Great Patriotic War with Hitler’s Germany. USSR looses 27 million people. Victorious conclusion of the war allowed Stalin to occupy Eastern Europe as was agreed at the Yalta Conference (1945) with Roosevelt and Churchill.

“1946 – Beginning of the Cold War. USSR sets up puppet governments in Eastern Europe and organizes Warsaw Pact.

“1953 – Death of Stalin. Execution of Beria (Chief of Secret Police).

“1954 – Process of amnesty for political prisoners and the beginning of political and cultural thaw.

“1956 – 20th Party Congress. Khrushchev denounces Stalin’s cult of personality. Hungarian revolution quashed.

“1959 – Khrushchev visits USA.

“1961 – Yuri Gagarin is the first man in space.

“1962 – Worker protest against price increases is put down in execution style in Novocherkassks.

“1964 – Khrushchev ousted.

“1964-1982 – Leonid Brezhnev rules the country in what later would be described as the ‘years of stagnation’.

“1966 – Sinyavsky and Daniel political trial for publishing abroad is the beginning of the confrontation between the KGB and the dissident movement.

“1968 – Soviet occupation of Czechoslovakia.

“1971 – Solzhenitsin, a writer who became known for his description of labor camps during Stalin’s time, is deported from USSR.

“1975 – Sakharov, a nuclear scientist who became an outspoken human rights activist wins Nobel Peace Prize.

“1979 – Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

“1980 – Sakharov exiled to Gorky.

“1985 – New leader, Gorbachev calls for perestroika.

“1986 – US/Soviet summit in Reykjavik (Reagan and Gorbachev). Amnesty of political prisoners begins. Nuclear disaster at Chernobyl.

“1987 – Sakharov released from exile.

“1988 – Ethnic unrest begins in the Caucasus, the Baltics and Middle Asia.

“1989 – Yeltsin and Sakharov elected to Parliament. Soviet troops pull out of Afghanistan. General strikes of miners. Berlin Wall comes down. Warsaw Pact is disbanded.

“1990 – Yeltsin resigns from Communist Party.

“1991 – Yeltsin becomes first democratically elected Russian President.

“1991 – August Coup by Communist renegades. Yeltsin, a defiant Russian President, barricades himself in the Parliament building – the White House, with a leader of Parliament – Hazbulatov and Vice-President Rutskoy. Yeltsin emerges triumphant after three tense days. (One of the people who spend this time with Yeltsin is Boris Nemtsov, a representative from Gorky. He later becomes governor of the Nizhny region as the city is given its original name of Nizhny Novgorod.) Yeltsin disbands the Communist Party and retires Gorbachev. At a meeting with Ukrainian and Belorussian leaders, Yeltsin disbands the Soviet Union, and former Soviet republics become independent states.

“1992 – Privatization begins with issues of vouchers. Prices are freed as inflation reaches 1000%. Treaties on the recognition and security with former republics are signed. Organized crime penetrates the economy as the Soviet management apparatus crumbles.

“1993 – Yeltsin disbands Congress and orders troops to bomb and storm the White House, arresting Rutskoy and Hazbulatov. Election of the first State Duma. Referendum on reforms and new constitution passes and new Russian Constitution becomes law.

“1994 – Russian troops are sent into Chechnya as Russia tries to maintain its hold on the Caucasus.

“1995 – The war with Chechnya intensifies, as Chechens conduct raids into Russian territory and take hostages. Communists win in Duma elections.

“1996 – Yeltsin narrowly wins elections, with Communists coming in a strong second place, as he promises the end of war in Chechnya. A strong third runner-up, Lebed, wins a place in the Yeltsin government. As Yeltsin suffers from serious health problems, Chechens retake the capital – Grozny. Lebed is sent as an emissary to Chechnya and brokers a peace plan.” (end of Russian timeline)

Notice that this uncritical timeline was presented so that a general chronology of Russian history may be understood. Among the diverse ethnicities found in Russia, any pure descendants of the tribe of Benjamin would be hard to determine. My evaluation is that a substantial portion of the White Ukrainian farmers were Benjamites, of whom 20,000,000 were murdered or starved to death by the Edomite-jewish Bolsheviks. The Bolsheviks were mostly jews, especially in their leadership. Also, when the Soviet system was dismantled under Yeltsin, most of the state property also ended up in the hands of jews, who obtained it for a small fraction of its actual value. For more data on Benjamin, I will now reference the website:

 

 

http://www.ensignmessage.com/iceland.html

“The Icelanders are the descendants of the Israelite tribe of Benjamin, God’s protected favourite. When Moses blessed the 12 tribes of Israel, we read:

“And of Benjamin he said, The beloved of Yahweh shall dwell in safety by him; and Yahweh shall cover him all the day long, and he shall dwell between his shoulders.” (Deut. 33:12) Iceland has thus not been invaded since the first Icelandic parliament (the Alting) was formed in 930 AD. The same can hardly be said of any other North-West European people!

“The smallest of the tribes of Israel:

“After the 12th century BC, the tribe of Benjamin was numerically the smallest of the tribes of Israel. The tribe’s territory was also one of the smallest, but also one of the most important. Likewise are the Icelanders one of the smallest North-West European peoples. They must, at least, be the smallest North-West European people with an independent country of their own. (The Faroe Islanders are numerically smaller, but do not have full independence.).

“Icelandic men and women of different origins: In 874 AD the Norwegian chief Ingolfur Arnarson was the first to settle permanently on Iceland. The later Norse settlers were primarily Norwegians, but there were also Danes, Swedes, and Norse-Gaels among them. Geneticists from Oxford University have shown that the Icelanders, by and large, descend from Norse men and Celtic women. These geneticists write that: ‘numerous slaves were captured by the Vikings in their raids on the coastlines of the British Isles, and many of the slaves were taken to Iceland. The majority of these slaves seem likely to have been female’.”

“Benjamite men and women of different origins: Like the modern Icelanders, the tribe of Benjamin’s men and women also descended from different tribes. In the 12th century BC, when the tribe of Benjamin was at war against the rest of the tribes of Israel, all the Benjamite women were killed, and only 600 Benjamite men survived (see Judges chapters 19-21). In order that the tribe of Benjamin would be able to survive, the 11 tribes fetched 400 young female virgins in Jabesh-Gilead, and let the Benjamite men take them for wives. Thus the tribe of Benjamin survived (see Judges chapter 21). When the patriarch Israel blessed his 12 sons, he said of Benjamin: ‘Benjamin shall ravin as a wolf: in the morning he shall devour the prey, and at night he shall divide the spoil.’ (Genesis 49:27) This prophecy was both fulfilled in the tribe of Benjamin in the 12th century BC, and also in the formation of Icelandic people in the 10th century AD. because they are one and the same tribe!

“Benjamin and Joseph: The patriarch Benjamin had only one full brother, Joseph. Their mother was Rachel. The other 10 patriarchs had the same father, but different mothers. Those that study the tribes of Israel almost all agree that Great Britain is of Joseph, and of the Ephraim branch of Joseph in particular. (Ephraim was Joseph’s son.)

“A Swiss DNA analysis institute which compares the DNA of modern indigenous European peoples with the DNA of antique people has shown that the United Kingdom is 75% Celtic, 13% Germanic and 12% Viking, while the Irish Republic is 88% Celtic and 12% Viking. The Icelanders, who, as mentioned above, are of Norse-Celtic ancestry, are thus closely related to the peoples of the British Isles. In fact Iceland seems to be genetically as closely related to the United Kingdom as to Norway (88% Viking and 12% Germanic) and Denmark (60% Viking and 40% Germanic).

“Geography of Benjamin and Iceland: When the 12 tribes of Israel lived in the land of Israel, Benjamin’s territory was around Jerusalem, which was the main city in Benjamin’s territory. Benjamin shared borders with Ephraim, Dan, Judah, and Reuben. Like Benjamin shared borders with Ephraim, so is one of Iceland’s closest neighbours the United Kingdom, which is the tribe of Ephraim. Like Benjamin shared borders with Dan and Judah, so was Iceland a part of the Kingdom of Denmark between 1380 and 1944. Denmark consists of the tribe of Dan through the Danes, and the tribe of Judah through the Jutes.

“Benjamin and Dan: Iceland was under the Crown of Denmark from 1380 to 1944. Not only were Benjamin and Dan neighbouring tribes, but in the Biblical lists of the tribes there sometimes is a special connection between Benjamin and Dan. When the 12 tribes are listed in the Bible, the tribes which have a common mother are usually listed together, i.e. Joseph & Benjamin, Dan & Naphtali, Gad & Asher, etc. But in some places Dan is mentioned together with Joseph and Benjamin. In Ezekiel’s description of the gates of the New Jerusalem, there are three gates on the east side: “... and three gates; and one gate of Joseph, one gate of Benjamin, one gate of Dan”. (Eze. 48:32) Here Gad, Asher and Naphtali are listed separately (Ezek. 48:34).

“In 1st Chronicles, Dan is again listed along with Joseph and Benjamin, while Naphtali, Gad, and Asher are mentioned separately:

“These are the sons of Israel; Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun, Dan, Joseph and Benjamin, Naphtali, Gad, and Asher.” (1 Chron. 2:1-2)

“Adam Rutherford’s Iceland book: Adam Rutherford, a scholar on the tribes of Israel, wrote in May 1937 the book Iceland’s Great Inheritance, where he identified the Icelanders as the descendants of the tribe of Benjamin. By calculating ‘the seven times’, Rutherford calculated that Iceland would gain complete independence around 1941. The seven times are 2520 years (7 x 360 years) where Israel, after having sinned, was liable to be oppressed by other nations. Rutherford counted 2520 years from the fall of Jerusalem in 603 BC, and arrived at 1918 AD, and 2520 years from the final deportation of Benjamin in 580 BC, and arrived at 1941 AD. In 1918 Iceland gained independence within a personal union with Denmark ....”

Substantial evidence shows that John Wilson was a Benjaminite from The Youth Message, London, England. Reproduced from Destiny Magazine, January, 1948 by Marie King: “... His revered remains were accompanied by a large number of persons to the cemetery, where they were laid beside his wife’s. A well executed granite headstone was erected bearing these words: ‘Here Rest The Mortal Remains of John Wilson, Author of Our Israelitish Origin, And of His Faithful Helpmeet, Agnes Wallace Wilson. ‘In sure and certain hope of the Resurrection to Eternal Life Through our Lord Jesus Christ.’ His coat of arms is on the cover of Lights and Shadows by Elizabeth Wilson, 1881. It contains a wolf rampant, under three stars, with a demi-wolf for crest, and ‘Facta non Verba,’ (deeds not words) for the motto. The name Wilson is said to be derived from wolf, the zodiacal emblem of Benjamin; the stars are taken as referring to Ephraim, Manasseh and Benjamin.”

All we can say of this is: “Thank Yahweh for John Wilson, his mother & Miss Cummins!” Like the twelve light-bearing disciples chosen by Christ (Paul replacing Judas), all were Benjaminites. And as the Benjaminite disciples spread the light of the Gospel to the lost tribes of Israel, John Wilson the Benjaminite spread the light of the Elijah Message of Malachi 4:5-6 to our people today!

This is my one hundred and eighty-second monthly teaching letter and continues my sixteenth year of publication. Since WTL #137, I have been continuing a series entitled The Greatest Love Story Ever Told, and have been expanding on its seven stages ever since: (1) the courtship, (2) the marriage, (3) the honeymoon, (4) the estrangement, (5) the divorce, (6) the reconciliation, and (7) the remarriage.

THE GREATEST LOVE STORY EVER TOLD, Part 41:

THE ESTRANGEMENT (of Benjamin) continued:

To fully grasp this lesson, one will need to review or acquire WTL #’s 179, 180 & 181, for they are essential to the story of Benjamin’s destiny! Presently, we are interested in how many Russian Benjamites died as a result of the Bolshevik-jewish revolution. For this, I will cite pre-Bolshevik history from the 1894, 9th edition of The Encyclopedia Britannica, vol. 21, pp. 74-75 & 86-88 (although not perfect in every aspect, at least at that time, Britannica was free of yiddish control):

pp. 74-75: “The above-described features of the physical geography of the empire explain the relative uniformity of this wide territory, in conjunction with the variety of physical features on its outskirts. They explain also the rapidity of the expansion of Slavonic colonization over these thinly peopled regions; and they also throw light upon the internal cohesion of the empire, which cannot fail to strike the traveller as he crosses this immense territory, and finds everywhere the same dominating race, the same features of life. In fact, in their advance from the basins of the Volkhoff and Dnieper to the foot of the Altai and Sayan Mountains, that is, along nearly a quarter of the earth’s circumference, the Russian colonizers could always find the same physical conditions, the same forests and prairies as they had left at home, the same facilities for agriculture, only modified somewhat by minor topographical features. New conditions of climate and soil, and consequently new cultures and civilizations, the Russians met with, in their expansion towards the south and east, only beyond the Caucasus, in the Aral-Caspian region, and in the basin of the Usuri on the Pacific coast. Favored by these conditions the Russians not only conquered northern Asia – they colonized it.

“The total population of the Russian empire was stated at 102, 000,000 by estimates made in 1878-1882; but it is multiplying rapidly, and, the surplus of births over deaths reaches nearly 1,250,000 every year, it must now be somewhat more than 106 million.

“Within the empire a very great diversity of nationalities is comprised, due to the amalgamation or absorption by the Slavonian race of a variety of Ural-Altaic stems, of Turco-Tartars, Turco-Mongolians, and various Caucasian stems. Statistics as to their relative strength are still very imperfect, and their ethnical relations have not as yet been completely determined; but, considered broadly, they may be classified as follows:

“A. The Letto-Slavonians comprise (a) the Lithuanians and Letts on the lower Niemen and Düna, and (b) the Slavonians, that is, the Poles on the Vistula and Niemen and the Russians – Great, Little, and White – whose proper abodes are in European Russia, south of a line drawn from the Gulf of Finland to the middle Volga. Spreading from this region towards the northeast, east, and southeast, they have colonized northeast Russia, the Ural region, Caucasus, Siberia, and large parts of the Kirghiz Steppe, – the leading feature of their colonization having always been penetration in compact masses among the original inhabitants. Thus, on northern Caucasus the Russians (chiefly Little Russians) already constitute a compact rural population of nearly 1,500,000, that is, about a quarter of the total population of Caucasia. In Western Siberia the Great Russians already number more than 2,300,000 agriculturists, constituting four-fifths of the entire population; in Eastern Siberia they number more than 1,000,000, that is, probably more than the original inhabitants; and the Kirghiz Steppe has also begun rapidly to be colonized within the last twenty years. It is only in the more densely peopled Turkestan, and in the recently annexed Transcaspian region, that Russian settlers continue to bear but a small proportion to the natives (who are more than 4,600,000 strong). The Slavonians altogether number more than 75,000,000, of which number 5,600,000 are Poles.

“Swedes (310,000), Germans (1,240,000), Roumanians, Serbs, etc., may number altogether about 2,500,000.

“B. A great variety of populations belonging to the Caucasian race, but not yet well classified, some of which are considered to be remainders of formerly larger nationalities pushed aside into the mountain tracts during their migrations, are met with on Caucasus. Such are the Georgians, Ossetes, Lesghians, who fall little short of 2,500,000, and the Armenians, about 1,000,000.

“C. The Iranian branch is represented by some 130,000 Persians and Kurds in Caucasia and Transcaucasia, and by Tajihs in Turkestan, mixed with Turco-Tartar Sarts. The nomad Tsigans, or Gypsies, numbering nearly 12,000, may be mentioned under this head.

“D. The [ed. non-] Semitic branch consists of upwards of 3,000, 000 Jews in Poland, in west and southwest Russia, and on Caucasus and in the towns of Central Asia, and of a few thousand Karaite Jews.

“E. The Ural-Altaic branch comprises two great subdivisions – the Finnish and the Turco-Tartarian stems, mixed to some extent with Mongolians. The former occupy, broadly speaking, a wide stretch of territory to the north of the Slavonians, from the Baltic to the Yenisei, and include the Baltic Finns, the Northern Finns, the Volga Finns, and the Ugrians. The Russians have already spread among the last two in compact masses, and, while some stems, like the Ostiaks, are rapidly disappearing, others, like the Mordvinians, Permians, etc., are losing their national character, and becoming assimilated to the Russians. The West Finns alone have fully maintained their national features, and happen to have constituted a nationality developing into a separate state.

“The Turco-Tartars (nearly 10,000,000) comprise the Tartars, the Bashkirs, the Kirghizes, the Uzbegs, and the Turcomans of the AraI-Caspian region, the Yakute on the Lena, and a variety of smaller stems in East Russia and Caucasia. They occupy another broad belt which extends from the Aral-Caspian depression to the eastern parts of the Arctic coast.

“F. The Mongol-Manchurian stems of the Tunguses, and the Golds, and the Manchus proper, come next, occupying the eastern parts of the mountain-belt and the plateau itself in Siberia, the Tunguses also projecting northwestwards, so as to separate the Yakuts from their southern Turkish brethren. Small stems of the same family also pass a nomad existence in the basin of the Amur. They are rapidly diminishing in number, and can hardly be estimated at more than 50,000.

“G. The Mongolian branch is represented by nearly half a million of Kalmucks on the Altai outskirts of the great plateau and around the Caspian, and by nearly 250,000 Buriats in and around the Baikal depression.

“H. A variety of stems, not yet well classified, are met with on the Pacific coasts. Such are the Tchuktchies, the Kamchadales, the Koryaks in the northeast, the Ghilyaks on the Amur, and the Ainos in Saghalin.

“Statistics of the relative strength of different nationalities in the Russian empire, which, however, must be considered only as rough estimates, are given (in millions) in Table I. [not shown here]

“The area and population of the various divisions of the Russian empire are given in Table II. [not shown here] ....

“The Russian empire falls into two great subdivisions, the European and the Asiatic, the latter of which, representing an aggregate of nearly 6,500,000 square miles, with a population of only 16 million inhabitants, may be considered as held by colonies. The European dominions comprise European Russia, Finland, which is in fact a separate nationality treated to some extent as an allied state, and Poland, whose very name has been erased from official documents, but which nevertheless continues to pursue its own development. The Asiatic dominions comprise the following great subdivisions: Caucasia (q.v.), under a separate governor-general; the Transcaspian region, which is under the governor-general of Caucasus; the Kirghiz Steppes; Turkestan (q.v.), under separate governors-general; Western Siberia and Eastern Siberia ....”

Ibid. pp. 86-88: “It appears certain, moreover, that in the 7th century southern Russia was occupied by the empire of the Khazars (q.v.), who drove the Bulgarians, descendants of the Huns, from the Don, one section of them migrating up the Volga to found there the Bulgarian empire, and the remainder migrating towards the Danube. This migration compelled the Northern Finns to advance farther west, and a mixture of Tavasts and Karelians penetrated to the south of the Gulf of Finland.

“Finally, it is certain that as early as the 8th century, and probably still earlier, a stream of Slavonian colonization, advancing eastward from the Danube, was thrown on the plains of southwestern Russia. It is also most probable that another similar stream – the northern, coming from the Elbe, through the basin of the Vistula – ought to be distinguished. In the 9th century the Slavonians already occupied the Upper Vistula, the southern part of the lake region, and the central plateau in its western parts. They had Lithuanians to the west; various Finnish stems, mixed towards the southeast with Turkish stems (the present Bashkirs); the Bulgars, whose origin still remains doubtful, on the middle Volga and Kama; and to the southeast the Turkish-Mongolian world of the Petchenegs, Polovtsi, Uzes, etc.; while in the south, along the Black Sea, extended the empire of the Khazars, who kept under their rule several Slavonian stems, and perhaps also some of Finnish origin. In the 9th century also the Ugrians are supposed to have left their Ural abodes and to have crossed southeastern and southern Russia on their way to the basin of the Danube.

“If these numerous migrations on the plains of Russia be taken into account, and if we add to them the Mongolian invasion, the migration of South Slavonians towards the Oka, the North Slavonian colonization extending northeast towards the Urals and thence to Siberia, the slow advance of Slavonians into Finnish territory on the Volga, andat a later period their advance into the prairies on the Black Sea, driving back the Turkish stems which occupied them, – if we consider the manifold mutual influences of these three races on one another, we shall be able to form a faint idea of the present population of European Russia.

“If the Slavonians be subdivided into three branches – the western (Poles, Czechs, and Wends), the southern (Serbs, Bulgarians, Croatians, etc.), and the eastern (Great, Little, and White Russians), it will be seen that, with the exception of some 3,000,000 Ukrainians or Little Russians, in East Galicia and in Poland, and a few on the south slope of the Carpathians, the whole of the East Slavonians occupy, as a compact body, western, central, and southern Russia.

“Like other races of mankind, the Russian race is not a pure one. The Russians have taken in and assimilated in the course of their history a variety of Finnish and Turco-Finnish elements. Still, craniological researches show that, notwithstanding this fact, the Slavonian type has maintained itself with remarkable persistency – Slavonian skulls ten and thirteen centuries old exhibiting the same anthropological features as are seen in those of our own day. This may be explained by a variety of causes, of which the chief is the maintenance by the Slavonians down to a very late period of gentile organization and gentile marriages, a fact vouched for, not only in the pages of Nestor, but still more by deep traces still visible in the face of society, the gens later on passing into the village community, and the colonization being carried on by great compact bodies. This has all along maintained the same characters. The Russians do not emigrate as isolated individuals; they migrate in whole villages. The overwhelming numbers of the Slavonians, and the very great differences in ethnical type, belief, mythology, between the Aryans and Turanians, may have contributed in the same direction, and throughout the written history of the Slavonians we see that, while a Russian man, far away from his home among Siberians, readily marries a native, the Russian woman seldom does the like. All these causes, and especially the first-mentioned, have enabled the Slavonians to maintain their ethnical features in a relatively high degree of purity, so as to assimilate foreign elements and make them reinforce or improve the ethnical type, without giving rise to half-breed races. The maintenance of the very same North-Russian type from Novgorod to the Pacific, with but minor differentiations on the outskirts – and this notwithstanding the great variety of races with which the Russians came in contact – cannot but strike the observer. But a closer observation of what is going on even now on the recently colonized confines of the empire – where whole villages live, and will continue to live, without mixing with natives, but very slowly bringing them over to the Russian manner of life, and then very slowly taking in a few female elements from them – gives the key to this prominent feature of Russian life, which is a colonization on an immense scale, and assimilation of foreigners, without in turn losing the primary ethnical features.

“Not so with the national customs. There are features – the wooden house, the oven, the bath – which the Russian never abandons though lost amidst alien populations. But when settled among these the Russian – the North-Russian – readily adapts himself to many other differences. He speaks Finnish with Finns, Mongolian with Buriats, Ostiak with Ostiaks; he shows remarkable facility in adapting his agricultural practices to new conditions, without, however, abandoning the village community; he becomes hunter, cattle-breeder, or fisherman, and carries on these occupations according to local usage; he modifies his dress and adapts his religious beliefs to the locality he inhabits. In consequence of all this, the Russian peasant (not, be it noted, the trader) must be recognized as the best colonizer among the Aryans; he lives on the best terms with Ostiaks, Tartars, Buriats, and even with Red Indians when lost in the prairies of the American Far-West.

“Three different branches, which may become three separate nationalities, can be distinguished among the Russians since the dawn of their history: the Great Russians, the Little Russians (Malorusses or Ukrainians), and the White Russians (the Bielorusses). These correspond to the two currents of immigration mentioned above, the northern and southern, with perhaps an intermediate one, the proper place of the White Russians not having as yet been exactly determined. The primary distinctions between these branches have been increased during the last nine centuries by their contact with different nationalities, – the Great Russians taking in Finnish elements, the Little Russians undergoing an admixture of Turkish blood, and the White Russians submitting to Lithuanian influence. Moreover, notwithstanding the unity of language, it is easy to detect among the Great Russians themselves two separate branches, differing from one another by slight divergences of language and type and deep diversities of national character, – the Central Russians and the Novgorodians; the latter extend throughout northern Russia into Siberia. They correspond, perhaps, to subdivisions mentioned by Nestor. It is worthy of notice, moreover, that many minor anthropological features can be distinguished both among the Great and Little Russians, depending probably on the assimilation of various minor subdivisions of the Ural-Altaians.

“The Great Russians number about 42,000,000, and occupy in one block the space enclosed by a line drawn from the White Sea to the source of the western Düna, the Dnieper, and the Donetz, and thence, through the mouth of the Sura, by the Vetluga, to Mezeñ. To the east of this boundary they are mixed with Turco-Finns, but in the Ural Mountains they reappear in a compact body, and extend thence through southern Siberia and along the courses of the Lena and Amur. Great Russian nonconformists are disseminated among the Little Russians in Tchernigoff and Moghileff, and they reappear in greater masses in Novorossia, as also in northern Caucasia.

“The Little Russians, who number about 17,000,000, occupy the Steppes of southern Russia, the southwestern slopes of the central plateau and those of the Carpathian and Lublin mountains, and the Carpathian plateau. The Sitch of the Zaporog Cossacks colonized the Steppes farther east, towards the Don, where they met with a large population of Great Russian runaways, constituting the present Don Cossacks. The Zaporog Cossacks, sent by Catherine II. to colonize the east coast of the sea of Azoff, constituted there the Black Sea and later the Kubaiñ Cossacks (part of whom, the Nekrasovtsy, migrated to Turkey). They have also peopled large parts of Stavropol and northern Caucasia.

“The White Russians, mixed to some extent with Great and Little Russians, Poles, and Lithuanians, now occupy the upper parts of the western slope of the central plateau. They number about 4,300,000.

“The Finnish stems, which in prehistoric times extended from the Obi all over northern Russia, even then were subdivided into Ugrians, Permians, Bulgarians, and Finns proper, who drove back the previous Lapp population from what is now Finland, and about the 7th century penetrated to the south of the Gulf of Finland, in the region of the Lives and Kors, where they mixed to some extent with the Lithuanians and Letts.

“At present the stems of Finnish origin are represented in Russia by the following: (a) the Western Finns; the Tavasts, in central Finland; the Kvanes, in northwestern Finland; the Karelians, in the east, who also occupy the lake-regions of Olonetz and Archangel, and have settlements in separate villages in Novgorod and Tver; the Izhora and Vod, which are local names for the Finns on the Neva and the southeastern coast of the Gulf of Finland; the Esthes in Esthonia and northern portion of Livonia; the Lives on the Gulf of Riga; and the Kors, mixed with the Letts; (b) the Northern Finns, or Lapps, in northern Finland and on the Kola peninsula, and the Samoyedes in Archangel; (c) the Volga Finns, or rather the old Bulgarian branch, to which belong the Mordvinians (q.v.) and perhaps the Tcheremisses in Kazañ, Kostroma, and Vyatka, who are also classified by some authors with the following: (d) the Permians, or Cis-Uralian Finns, including the Votiaks on the east of Vyatka, the Permians in Perm, the Zyrians in Vologda, Archangel, Vyatka, and Perm, and the Tcheremisses; (e) the Ugrians, or Trans-Uralian Finns, including the Voguls on both slopes of the Urals, the Ostiaks in Tobolsk and partly in Tomsk, and the Madjares, or Ugrians.

“The Turco-Tartars in European Russia number about 3,600,000. The following are their chief subdivisions. (1) The Tartars, of whom three different stems must be distinguished: (a) the Kazañ Tartars on both banks of the Volga, below the mouth of the Oka, and on the lower Kama, penetrating also farther south in Ryazañ, Tamboff, Samara, Simbirsk, and Penza; (b) the Tartars of Astrakhanat the mouth of the Volga; and (c) those of the Crimea, a great many of whom have recently emigrated to Turkey. There are, besides, a certain number of Tartars from the southeast in Minsk, Grodno, and Vilua. (2) The Bashkirs, who inhabit the slopes of the southern Urals, that is, the Steppes of Ufa and Orenburg, extending also into Perm and Samara. (3) The Tchuvashes, on the right bank of the Volga, in Kazañi and Simbirsk. (4) The Mescheriaks, a tribe of Finnish origin which formerly inhabited the basin of the Oka, and, driven thence during the 15th century by the Russian colonizers, immigrated into Ufa and Perm, where they now live among Bashkirs, having adopted their religion and customs. (5) The Tepters, also of Finnish origin, settled among Tartars and Bashkirs, together with the Mescheriaks, also in Samara and Vyatka. They have adopted the religion and customs of the Bashkirs, from whom they can hardly be distinguished. The Bashkirs, Mescheriaks, and Tepters have rendered able service to the Russian Government against the Kirghizes, and until 1863 they constituted a separate Bashkir and Mescheriak Cossacks army, employed for service in the Kirghiz Steppe. (6) The Kirghizes, whose true abodes were in Asia, in the Ishim and Kirghiz Steppe; but one section of them crossed the Urals and occupied the Steppes between the Urals and the Volga. Only the Horde of Bukeeff inhabits European Russia, northeast of Astrakhan, the remainder belonging toTurkestan and Siberia.

“The Mongolian race is represented in Russia by the Lamaite Kalmuks, who inhabit the Steppes of Astrakhan between the Volga, the Don, and the Kuma. They immigrated to the mouth of the Volga from Dzungaria, in the 17th century, driving out the Tartars and the Nogais, and after many wars with the Don Cossacks, followed by treaties of mutual assistance for military excursions, one part of them was taken in by the Don Cossacks, so that even now there are among these Cossacks several Kalmuk sotnias or squadrons. They live for the most part in tents, supporting themselves by cattle-breeding, and partly by agriculture.

“The [CAE ed. non-] Semitic race is represented in Russia by upwards of 3,000,000 Jews and 3,000 Karaites. The Jews first entered Poland from Germany during the crusades, and soon spread through Lithuania, Courland, the Ukraine, and, in the 18th century, Bessarabia. The rapidity with which they peopled certain towns and whole provinces was really prodigious. Thus, from having been but a few dozens at Odessa some eighty years since, they make now one-third of its population (73,400 out of 207,000). The law of Russia prohibits them from entering Great Russia, only the wealthiest and most educated enjoying this privilege; nevertheless they are met with everywhere, even on the Urals. Their chief abodes, however, continue to be Poland, the western provinces of Lithuania, White and Little Russia, and Bessarabia. In Russian Poland they are in proportion of 1 to 7 inhabitants. In Kovno, Vilna, Moghileff, Grodno, Volhynia, Podolia, and probably also in Bessarabia and Kherson, they constitute, on the average, 10 to 16 percent of the population, while in separate districts the proportion reaches 30 to 36 percent (50.5 in Tchaussy). Organized as they are into a kind of community for mutual protection and mutual help (the Kahal), they soon become masters of the trade wherever they penetrate. In the villages they are mostly innkeepers, intermediaries in trade, and pawnbrokers. In many towns most of the skilled laborers and a great many of the unskilled (for instance, the grain-porters at Odessa and elsewhere) are Jews. In the 16 western provinces of Russia they numbered 2,843,400 in 1883, and about 432,000 in five Polish provinces. Less than 600,000 of them inhabit villages, the remainder being concentrated in towns.

“The Karaites differ entirely from the Jews both in worship and in mode of life. They, too, are inclined to trade, but also successfully carry on agriculture. Those inhabiting the Crimea speak Tartar, and the few who are settled in western Russia speak Polish. They are on good terms with the Russians.

“Of West Europeans, only the Germans attain considerable numbers (upwards of a million) in European Russia. In the Baltic provinces they constitute the ennobled landlord class, and that of tradesmen and artisans in towns. Considerable numbers of Germans, also tradesmen and artisans, were scattered throughout many of the larger towns of Russia as early as the 16th century, and to a much greater extent in the 18th century, German artisans having been invited by the Government to settle in Russia, and their numbers having steadily increased since. Finally, numbers of Germans were invited in 1762 to settle in southern Russia, as separate agricultural colonies, which gradually extended in the Don region and in northern Caucasia. Protected as they were by the right of self-government, exempted from military service, and endowed with considerable allotments of good land, these colonies are much wealthier than the neighboring Russian peasants from whom they have adopted the slowly modified village community. They are chiefly Lutherans, but many of them belong to other religious sects, – Anabaptists, Moravians, Mennonites (about 40,000). In certain districts (Akkerman, Odessa, Berdiansk, Kamyshin, Novouzensk) they constitute from 10 to 40 percent of the total population. The Swedes, who number about 300,000 in Finland, hardly reach 12,000 in European Russia, mostly in the Baltic provinces.

“The Roumanians (Moldavians) number not less than 800,000, and are still increasing. They inhabit the Governments of Bessarabia, Podolia, Kherson, and Ekaterinoslaff. In Bessarabia they constitute from one-fourth to three-fourths of the population of certain districts. On the whole, the Novorossian governments (Bessarabia, Kherson, Ekaterinoslaff, and Taurida) exhibit the greatest variety of population. Little and Great Russians, Roumanians, Bulgarians, Serbs, Germans, Greeks, Frenchmen, Poles, Tartars, and Jews are mixed together and scattered about in small colonies, especially in Bessarabia. Of course, the Greeks inhabit chiefly the towns, where they carry on trade, as also do the Armenians, scattered through the towns of Southern Russia, and appearing in larger numbers only in the district of Rostoff (10 percent of population).

“However great the variety of nationalities inhabiting European Russia, its ethnological composition is much simpler than might at first sight be supposed. The Russians – Great, Little, and White – largely prevail over all others, both numerically and as respects the territories they occupy in compact bodies. Central Russia is almost purely Great Russian, and represents a compact body of more than 30,000,000 inhabitants with but 1 to 5 percent of admixture of other nationalities. The governments on the Dnieper (Kieff, Volhynia, Tchernigoff, Podolia, and Poltava), as also the adjoining districts of Kharkoff, Voronezh, Kursk, and Don, are Little Russian, or Ukrainian, with but a slight admixture of White and Great Russian, and some 12 percent of Jews. The Poles there number only 3 to 6 percent of the population – chiefly landholders – and are hated by the Ukrainians.

“Moghileff, Vitebsk, and Minsk are White Russian, the Poles constituting only 3 percent of the population (16 in Miusk). In other Bielorussian provinces, the White Russians are mixed either with Lithuanians (Vilna), or Ukrainians (Grodno), or Great Russians (Smolensk), and their relations to Polish landlords are no better than in the Ukraine. The Lithuanians prevail in Kovno, where they are 80 percent of the population, the remainder being chiefly Jews (10 percent), Poles (3 percent), Great Russians (3 percent), Germans, etc.

“In the Baltic provinces (Esthonia, Livonia, and Courland) the prevailing population is Esthonian, Curouian, or Lettish, the Germans (landlords, or tradesmen and artisans in towns) being respectively only 3.5, 6.8 and 7.6 percent of the population. In the three provinces, Riga included, they hardly reach 120,000 out of 1,800,000 inhabitants. The relations of the Esthes and Letts to their landlords are anything but friendly. [The Esthes certainly seem to be the Aestii of Tacitus’ Germania, who dwelt on the Baltic in early Roman times. The Letts were used by the Bolsheviks in large numbers as mercenaries against the Russians whom they subjected.]

“The northern governments of St. Petersburg (apart from the capital), Olouetz, and Archangel contain an admixture of from 12 to 28 percent of Karelians, Samoyedes, and Zyrians, the remainder being Great Russians. In the east and southeast provinces of the Volga (Nijni, Simbirsk, Samara, Penza, and Saratoff) the Great Russians again prevail (88 to 65 percent), the remainder being chiefly Mordvinians, rapidly Russifying, as also Tartars, Tchuvashes, and Bashkirs, Germans in Samara and Saratoff; and Little Russians in the lastnamed. Only in Kazañ and Astrakhan do the Great Russians number less than one-half of the aggregate population (42-43 percent). In the Ural provinces of Perm and Vyatka Great Russians are again in the majority (92 and 81 percent), the remainder being a variety of Finno-Tartars. It is only in the southern Ural governments (Uralsk, Orenburg, Ufa) that the admixture of a variety of Turco-Tartars – of Kirghizes in Uralsk (23 percent), Bashkirs in Orenburg and Ufa (22 and 23 percent), and less important stems – becomes considerable, reducing the number of Great Russians respectively to 72, 67, and 32 percent of the aggregate population of these three provinces.

“Of the Turco-Tartars of eastern Russia, the Bashkirs often revolted against Russian rule, and the traffic in Bashkir lands, recently carried on by the Orenburg administration, certainly does not tend to reconcile them. The Tcheremisses have often joined the Bashkirs in their revolts, but are rapidly losing their nationality. As regards the other Turco- and Finno-Tartars, the Mordvinians really have been assimilated to the Russians; the Moslem Tartars of Kazañ lived till recently on excellent terms with their Russian neighbors and would have continued to do so had no attempts been made to interfere with their land-laws.

“In western Russia, while an antipathy exists between Ukrainians and Poles, the Russian Government, by its harassing interference in religious, educational, and economical matters, has become antagonistic, not only to the Poles, but also to the Ukrainians; printing in Ukrainian is prohibited, and ‘Russification’ is being carried on among Ukrainians by the same means as those employed in Poland. The same is true with the Esthes and Letts, whom the Government, while countenancing them to some extent in their antipathy to the German aristocracy, has not yet found means to conciliate ....”

Somewhere in all of this Russian history are to be found a good portion of the tribe of Benjamin. While we are interested in finding the Benjamites among this Russian history, a divergent subject came to the fore which is worth touching upon. I refer to:

“The Karaites differ entirely from the Jews both in worship and in mode of life. They, too, are inclined to trade, but also successfully carry on agriculture.” This would suggest that there may be a racial strain among the jews who do not have the curse of Cain upon them! I checked with Heinrich Graetz’s History of the Jews, vol. 3, p.134, and it says this about the Karaites in part: “... placed the chief of the party and his adherents under a ban of excommunication and excluded them from the pale of Judaism ...” Of course, further research on this subject of the Karaites would be highly advised! Like many other jews of Eastern Europe, however, the Karaites seem to range in features from blond to arab types. I have introduced the names of many strange geographic regions, countries, provinces, cities, towns and many different tribes of people living within them. In the next lesson, WTL #183, I will attempt to sort most of them out!

This is my one hundred and eighty-third monthly teaching letter and continues my sixteenth year of publication. Since WTL #137, I have been continuing a series entitled The Greatest Love Story Ever Told, and have been expanding on its seven stages ever since: (1) the courtship, (2) the marriage, (3) the honeymoon, (4) the estrangement, (5) the divorce, (6) the reconciliation, and (7) the remarriage.

THE GREATEST LOVE STORY EVER TOLD, Part 42:

THE ESTRANGEMENT (of Benjamin) continued:

With my last few lessons pertaining to the tribe of Benjamin, it has been my objective to verify that our Almighty Yahweh married all the twelve tribes of Israel, and because of the disobedience of all the twelve tribes, it was necessary to divorce all twelve tribes, and put them away in punishment for seven times (2520 years, Lev. 26: 15-19):

“¹⁵ And if ye shall despise my statutes, or if your soul abhor my judgments, so that ye will not do all my commandments, but that ye break my covenant: ¹⁶ I also will do this unto you; I will even appoint over you terror, consumption, and the burning ague, that shall consume the eyes, and cause sorrow of heart: and ye shall sow your seed in vain, for your enemies shall eat it. ¹⁷ And I will set my face against you, and ye shall be slain before your enemies: they that hate you shall reign over you; and ye shall flee when none pursueth you. ¹⁸ And if ye will not yet for all this hearken unto me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins. ¹⁹ And I will break the pride of your power; and I will make your heaven as iron, and your earth as brass ....”

A good example to show the sin of adultery that had brought all of this on the twelve tribes of Israel, is found at Ezra 9:1-3, 6-10:

“¹ Now when these things were done, the princes came to me, saying, The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the people of the lands, doing according to their abominations, even of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites. ² For they have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons: so that the holy seed have mingled themselves with the people of those lands: yea, the hand of the princes and rulers hath been chief in this trespass. ³ And when I heard this thing, I rent my garment and my mantle, and plucked off the hair of my head and of my beard, and sat down astonied ... ⁶ And said, O my Elohim, I am ashamed and blush to lift up my face to thee, my Elohim: for our iniquities are increased over our head, and our trespass is grown up unto the heavens. ⁷ Since the days of our fathers have we been in a great trespass unto this day; and for our iniquities have we, our kings, and our priests, been delivered into the hand of the kings of the lands, to the sword, to captivity, and to a spoil, and to confusion of face, as it is this day. ⁸ And now for a little space grace hath been shewed from Yahweh our Elohim, to leave us a remnant to escape, and to give us a nail in his holy place, that our God may lighten our eyes, and give us a little reviving in our bondage. ⁹ For we were bondmen; yet our Elohim hath not forsaken us in our bondage, but hath extended mercy unto us in the sight of the kings of Persia, to give us a reviving, to set up the house of our Elohim, and to repair the desolations thereof, and to give us a wall in Judah and in Jerusalem. ¹⁰ And now, O our Elohim, what shall we say after this? for we have forsaken thy commandments, ¹¹ Which thou hast commanded by thy servants the prophets, saying, The land, unto which ye go to possess it, is an unclean land with the filthiness of the people of the lands, with their abominations, which have filled it from one end to another with their uncleanness.”

From his booklet End Time Revelation, William V. Fowler states:

“Going back to God’s warning of the seven times punishment to be meted out to Israel if she persisted in her sinful ways, it is logical to assume that the starting date of that punishment period would start from the date of the removal of Israel from her homeland in Palestine.

“A study of the dates of the various tribes being taken into captivity will show that they were not all taken captive at one time. In fact, many years were recorded between their captivities and thus the punishment period of 2520 years would start and end at different times for the various tribes of Israel. Now by adding 2520 years to the starting date of each of the tribes of Israel going into captivity, one comes to the date of the founding of an Anglo-Saxon Scandinavian-Germanic-Celtic nation, into an independent nation. In the case of Ephraim, it was the founding of the empire, (Commonwealth), (England-Scotland-Ireland). With the rest of the nations, it was either the ratification or election of a new constitution, destroying monarchical systems, or by a treaty leading to a constitution.

“Biblical chronological research, together with a study of the background of the nations aforementioned, reveals the startling new yet not so new revelation that the tribes of Israel, the seed of Abraham, did become nations as prophesied by God’s Covenant to Abraham. The nations of Israel stand revealed as becoming the following nations of today:

See chart below

 

Date of captivity		Date came out
Manasseh (Gemini)	732 B.C.	1789	UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (Election & Ratification of Constitution
Zebulun (Cancer)	730 B.C.	1791	France (New Constitution)
Ephraim (Gemini)	721 B.C.	1800	Great Britain (United Kingdom of)
Issachar (Aquarius)	712 B.C.	1809	Finland (New Constitution)
Asher (Libra)	712 B.C.	1809	Sweden (New Constitution)
Gad (Sagittarius)	712 B.C.	1809	Italy (Overthrow of Papal Govern- ment)
Simeon (Aries)	709 B.C.	1812	Spain (New Constitution)
Naphtali (Capricorn)	707 B.C.	1814	Norway (New Constitution)
Reuben (Taurus)	707 B.C.	1814	Holland (New Constitution)
Dan (Scorpio)	707 B.C.	1814	Denmark (Peace Treaty - Peasants became free holders)
Benjamin (Virgo)	603 B.C.	1918	Iceland (Treaty of Independence)
Judah (Leo)	603 B.C.	1918	Germany (Rep. and New Constitu- tion)
Levi (Pisces)

 

[Note by Clifton A. Emahiser: While I agree with much of William V. Fowler’s chart, I cannot vouch for every detail of it. For instance, I have other data that claims the tribe of Zebulun to be Holland rather than France. On the other hand, borders had a way of expanding and decreasing from time to time, so originally France may be correct. Also, people are portable, so a certain geographic area may have represented more than one tribe at various times. Back to Fowler]:

“Through Biblical records and historical records these facts can be pieced together. Egypt dealt Nebuchadnezzar a minor defeat in 601 B.C., however, Nebuchadnezzar still retained control of the land from the Egyptian river unto the river Euphrates. This army, returning from Egypt about 600 B.C., defeated Jehoiakim. We know that for 3 years previously Jehoiakim was a servant of Nebuchadnezzar. (2 Kings 24:1-2) For it is recorded, ‘Nebuchadnezzar King of Babylon came up, and Jehoiakim became his servant three years’. We all realize therefore that Jehoiakim became his servant in 603 B.C., let’s also realize that Jehoiakim did not just lay down and say; here let’s make me your servant. When the Bible says, ‘come up’, it means to lay siege. It is this author’s belief that in 603 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to Jerusalem and surrounding towns. Benjamin fell along with Judah in 603 B.C., and became a slave. Then in 600 B.C. Jehoiakim rebelled and was defeated shortly thereafter.

“If you take the 2520 years time cycle and apply it here, one quickly finds out who Benjamin and Judah became. Exactly 2520 years from 603 B.C. (Benjamin’s captivity date) Iceland took its firststeps towards becoming an independent nation by a Treaty of Independence in 1918 A.D. with Denmark. (Remember you add one and one quarter years conversion factor B.C. to A.D.). Exactly 2520 years from Judah becoming a conquered slave, Germany approved its New Constitution and became a Republic. Germany therefore, is true Judah, and not the Jews.

“Josephus records that there was a large portion of the three southern tribes carried into Babylonian captivity by King Nebuchadnezzar. Seventy years later when Judah was allowed to return to their homeland, although still in subjection, only some forty-two thousand (Neh. 7:66) went back into Jerusalem to rebuild the temple.

“While in Jerusalem a majority of the forty two thousand intermarried with the people of the land, (Cannanites – Babylonians), [sic Babylonians were not all Canaanites, ed.] adopted the Babylonian financial system, political system, and ecclesiastical system ... In marrying the peoples of the land who were the Edomites, [i.e., Idumeans and non-Israelite tribes settled in Samaria ed. CAE], their children took on the dark complexion and features of these people. This was a serious offense of God’s Laws, and Commandments, for Israel was not to intermix or intermarry with the people of other races, and caused this portion of Judah to be branded by the ‘shew of their countenance doeth witness against them’. (Isaiah 3:8-9). This is markedly shown, even today in their descendants, by the Hittite cast, kinky hair and hooked nose. Generally, the Israelites were tall and fair, as we find in the Irish, Scots, German, the pure English and the Norwegians. Also it might be noted that Christ was not of the polluted seed line but of the pure seed. A descendant of David, a son of Judah, he came out of the seed of those that kept their seed line pure, the 7,000 that remained pure in their genealogy and did not mix. (So Jesus Christ was not a Jew or the cursed ones of Israel as the Jews were known ....”

[Note by Clifton A. Emahiser: William V. Fowler was a better than average Israel Identity teacher, though he taught some things I simply cannot accept, but he did exceptionally well on some portions of prophecy. I would rate him about 70%.]

Inasmuch as this series of lessons specifically concerns the tribe of Benjamin, how does Yahweh’s “seven times punishment” include them? It should be noted that the “seven times punishment” is equivalent in prophecy to 2520 calendar years! However, not all of the twelve tribes of Israel were divorced and carried into captivity at the same time, but spanned a period of 129 years to take place between 732 to 603 B.C. Likewise, not all of the twelve tribes of Israel came out of their seven times punishment at the same time but spanned a period of 129 years from 1789 to 1918 A.D. I should emphasize again, there was not a single Israelite tribe that was not divorced and placed in a “seven times punishment”! Psalm 14:1-7 prophesies of it thusly:

“¹ The fool hath said in his heart, There is no Almighty. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good. ² Yahweh looked down from heaven upon the children of Adam¹²⁰, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek Elohim. ³ They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one. ⁴ Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread, and call not upon Yahweh. ⁵ There were they in great fear: for Elohim is in the generation of the righteous. ⁶ Ye have shamed the counsel of the poor, because Yahweh is his refuge. ⁷ Oh that the salvation of Israel were come out of Zion! when Yahweh bringeth back the captivity of his people, Jacob shall rejoice, and Israel shall be glad.”

Paul quotes part of the above passage at Romans 3:10-12, 23:

“¹⁰ As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: ¹¹ There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after Yahweh. ¹² They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. ... ²³ For all [twelve tribes of Israel] have sinned, and come short of the glory of Yahweh ...” So it should be quite clear, all the twelve tribes of Israel, the ‘Cinderella bride and wife’, were unfaithful to her Husband, Yahweh! What it amounts to is: We who are Israelites living today were all divorced from Yahweh before we were ever born! Not only that, but we were purchased back by Yahweh in the Flesh, as Yahshua, before we were ever born! And we have no other choice in the matter than to be thankful and accept His Precious Free Gift!

When are we ever going to learn we are already bought and paid for? Here is 1 Cor. 6:18-20, amplified:

“¹⁸ Flee fornication [i.e., miscegenation]. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication [i.e., miscegenation] sinneth against his own body. ¹⁹ What? know ye not that your body is the temple of [Yahweh’s] Holy Spirit which is in you, which ye have of Yahweh, and ye are not your own? ²⁰ For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify Yahweh in your body, and in your spirit, which are Yahweh’s.

William Finck in his Christogenea New Testament translates this passage as follows:

“¹⁸ Flee fornication. Every error which perhaps a man may make is outside of the body, but he committing fornication, for his own body he fails. ¹⁹ Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit in you? Which you have from Yahweh, and you are not your own? ²⁰ Indeed you have been purchased for a price; so then you honor Yahweh in your body.”

AMAZING ACCURACY OF PROPHECY FULFILLMENT

ADDS TO ONE’S FAITH

Referring to William V. Fowler’s chart, it is simply uncanny how each individual tribe of Israel served their allotted “seven times punishment” (2520 years), perfectly on schedule from beginning to end. The odds of just one tribe of Israel fulfilling their punishment perfectly on schedule is beyond comprehension, let alone all the other eleven tribes of Israel doing likewise. The odds of such a multiplicity of events happening by chance must be at least a trillion to one! I am sure, once the reader comprehends and proves this fact for himself that his mind will be thunderstruck for some time to come!

But these multiple events are not the only amazing prophecy fulfilling incidents that are revealed in these staggered“seven times punishment” periods of the twelve tribes! If one will peruse William V. Fowler’s chart closely, he will notice how, at the close of each staggered “seven times punishment” period, each particular Israelite tribe changed their form of government from the traditional king to some other form of government. This again is amazingly uncanny. However, with this lesson, we are particularly interested in the Tribe of Benjamin.

It all goes back to Israel’s early history in the promised land of Canaan. After the twelve tribes of Israel had fled Egypt, Yahweh had taken them as His Cinderella bride at Mt. Sinai. Then, failing to invade and conquer the Canaanite tribes of the land of Canaan, they spent a chastisement period in the open desert. After being disciplined for 40 years, with a new generation of Israelites, they entered and conquered much, but not all, of the Promised Land. After a few more generations, the tribes of Israel observed the kings who ruled over the various Canaanite tribes, and envied the Canaanite type of leadership. In doing this, the twelve tribes of Israel rejected the rule of their Husband, Yahweh, for a Canaanite type of kingship. After the twelve tribes of Israel adopted an earthly monarchy, everything was downhill from that point on. What followed was a series of backslidings and revivals of the twelve tribes for the next approximately 329 years, or until the beginning of the first Assyrian captivity of the ten northern tribes.

The story of the twelve tribes of Israel rejecting their Almighty for an earthly king is recorded at 1 Sam. 8:1-18:

“¹ And it came to pass, when Samuel was old, that he made his sons judges over Israel. ² Now the name of his firstborn was Joel; and the name of his second, Abiah: they were judges in Beersheba. ³ And his sons walked not in his ways, but turned aside after lucre, and took bribes, and perverted judgment. ⁴ Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah, ⁵ And said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations. ⁶ But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto Yahweh. ⁷ And Yahweh said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them. ⁸ According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee. ⁹ Now therefore hearken unto their voice: howbeit yet protest solemnly unto them, and shew them the manner of the king that shall reign over them. ¹⁰ And Samuel told all the words of Yahweh unto the people that asked of him a king. ¹¹ And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots. ¹² And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots. ¹³ And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers. ¹⁴ And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants. ¹⁵ And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants. ¹⁶ And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work. ¹⁷ He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants. ¹⁸ And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and Yahweh will not hear you in that day ....”

Thus, we Israelites were warned ahead of time what would be the negative outcome if we continued to demand a Canaanite type of king, even though chosen from among our Israelite brethren. Yahweh so much as told the prophet Samuel, ‘So they say they want a king like the Canaanites? So a Canaanite type of king they will get! And while I am punishing them, they’ll come crying early, but I will not hear them until they have served every last day of their ‘seven times punishment’!’ One by one, over a period of 129 years, all of the twelve tribes (including Benjamin) finished serving their punishment periods by 1918 A.D.; but as each punishment period expired, the converso Edomite-jews were Johnny-on-the-spot to take over where Yahweh’s punishment periods left off! I hope this explanation, with the help of William V. Fowler’s chart, will help the serious Bible student to recognize a few of the mile-markers in our Israelite history as predicted by Yahweh through our prophets, many of which are already fulfilled.

HOWEVER, THIS IS NOT THE END OF THE STORY

We must remember that David’s throne is within the house of David (a separate house within the house of Judah), and was established in perpetuity (i.e., forever). David’s throne did not end with Zedekiah, nor did Yahshua Christ accept the kingship during His sojourn on the earth during His First Advent. Yet, several Biblical passages prove beyond all doubt that Yahweh promised David that he would never want for a man to sit on his throne “for evermore”:

Psalm 89:3-4, 34-37:

“³ I have made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn unto David my servant, ⁴ Thy seed will I establish for ever, and build up thy throne to all generations. ... ³⁴ My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips. ³⁵ Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto David. ³⁶ His seed shall endure for ever, and his throne as the sun before me. ³⁷ It shall be established for ever as the moon, and as a faithful witness in heaven.”

2 Samuel 7:12-13, 16:

“¹² And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. ¹³ He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever.... ¹⁶ And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.”

1 Samuel 8:23-25:

“²³ And he said, Yahweh Elohim of Israel, there is no Mighty One like thee, in heaven above, or on earth beneath, who keepest covenant and mercy with thy servants that walk before thee with all their heart: ²⁴ Who hast kept with thy servant David my father that thou promisedst him: thou spakest also with thy mouth, and hast fulfilled it with thine hand, as it is this day. ²⁵ Therefore now, Yahweh Elohim of Israel, keep with thy servant David my father that thou promisedst him, saying, There shall not fail thee a man in my sight to sit on the throne of Israel; so that thy children take heed to their way, that they walk before me as thou hast walked before me.”

2 Chronicles 13:5:

“Ought ye not to know that Yahweh Elohim of Israel gave the kingdom over Israel to David for ever, even to him and to his sons by a covenant of salt?”

2 Chronicles 21:7:

“Howbeit Yahweh would not destroy the house of David, because of the covenant that he had made with David, and as he promised to give a light to him and to his sons for ever.”

Jeremiah 33:20-21, 25-26:

“²⁰ Thus saith Yahweh; If ye can break my covenant of the day, and my covenant of the night, and that there should not be day and night in their season; ²¹ Then may also my covenant be broken with David my servant, that he should not have a son to reign upon his throne; and with the Levites the priests, my ministers ... ²⁵ Thus saith Yahweh; If my covenant be not with day and night, and if I have not appointed the ordinances of heaven and earth; ²⁶ Then will I cast away the seed of Jacob, and David my servant, so that I will not take any of his seed to be rulers over the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob: for I will cause their captivity to return, and have mercy on them.”

Psalm 132:10-12:

“¹⁰ For thy servant David’s sake turn not away the face of thine anointed. ¹¹ Yahweh hath sworn in truth unto David; he will not turn from it; Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne. ¹² If thy children will keep my covenant and my testimony that I shall teach them, their children shall also sit upon thy throne for evermore.”

From these passages, it should be quite clear there would never come a lapse of time when David wouldn’t have one of his descendants on a throne somewhere in the world ruling over a portion of the twelve tribes of Israel! And that would include the Vikings who were by-and-large representative of the tribe of Benjamin, whether in Iceland or Russia. In other words in 862 A.D., when the Viking families of the Novgorod sent to Scandinavia for a king, they in turn received one named “Rurik”, surely a Judahite descendant of the house of David. Here below is documentation from my The Problems With Ezekiel 38 & 39:

“The ninth chapter of the work of the Emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus on the administration of the Eastern Empire, written about the year 950, is entitled About the Rhôs who came from Russia to Constantinople with their boats. These boats, the Emperor tells us – canoes, indeed, they might be translated, the Greek word employed meaning “made out of a trunk” – started from outer Russia, assembling below Kiev, in order to pass in company that long series of rapids which the Dnieper forms for a distance of fifty miles. The imperial author gives the name of these rapids both in ‘Sclavonic’ (Slavonic) and in ‘Russian.’ The Russian words are pure Scandinavian. Not only this, but all the members of the Russian royal family (of the House of Rurik), as well as of the Russian noblemen or private persons who are mentioned in the early chronicles, have pure Scandinavian names. Rurik and his fellows were as much ‘Northmen’ as those who forced their way into the British Isles – the ‘Rus’ were undoubtedly Norman. At this time, the story is starting to get very interesting. We know that the word ‘Northmen’ refers to Norway. We also know that the people of Norway are from the tribe of Benjamin. We know that the symbol of Benjamin is the Wolf. We have evidence indicating that William the Conqueror was probably of the tribe of Benjamin. The tribe of Benjamin was evidently quite active in Russia as well as in Norway and England. As a matter of fact, these Benjamite Northmen had a big part in breaking down and causing the fall of the Empire of the Khazars of Ashkenazim” (i.e., converso-jews).

I will now take some excerpts from the book The Thireenth Tribe by Arthur Koestler. It is not our object here to get into that subject, but because we want to document the activities of the Benjamite Northmen in the land of Russia, it will help to quote some excerpts from his book, chapter III, “Decline” (meaning the decline of Khazaria). We will pick up his comments on page 85, where he is telling the effects which the Rus (Vikings) were having on the one hand, and the Arabs on the other:

“The potential enemy against whom this impressive fortress was built by a joint Roman-Khazar effort, was those formidable and menacing newcomers on the world scene, whom the West called Vikings or Norsemen, and the East called Rhous or Rhos or Rus.

“Two centuries earlier, the conquering Arabs had advanced on the civilized world in a gigantic pincer movement, its left prong reaching across the Pyrenees, its right prong across the Caucasus. Now, during the Viking Age, history seemed to create a kind of mirror image of that earlier phase. The initial explosion which had triggered off the Muslim wars of conquest took place in the southwest region of the known world, the Arabian desert. The Viking raids and conquests originated in its northernmost region, Scandinavia. The Arabs advanced northward by land, the Norsemen southward by sea and waterways. The Arabs were, at least in theory, conducting a Holy War, the Vikings waged unholy wars of piracy and plunder; but the results, as far as the victims were concerned, were much the same. In neither case have historians been able to provide convincing explanations of the economical, ecological or ideological reasons which transformed these apparently quiescent (dormant) regions of Arabia and Scandinavia quasi-overnight into volcanoes of exuberant vitality and reckless enterprise. Both eruptions spent their force within a couple of centuries but left a permanent mark on the world. Both evolved in this time-span from savagery and destructiveness to splendid cultural achievement.

“About the time when Sarkel was built by joint Byzantine-Khazar efforts in anticipation of attack by the eastern Vikings, their western branch had already penetrated all the major waterways of Europe and conquered half of Ireland. Within the next few decades they colonized Iceland, conquered Normandy, repeatedly sacked Paris, raided Germany, the Rhône delta, the gulf of Genoa, circumnavigated the Iberian peninsula and attacked Constantinople through the Mediterranean and the Dardanelles – simultaneously with a Rus attack down the Dnieper and across the Black Sea. As Toynbee wrote: ‘In the ninth century, which was the century in which the Rhos impinged on the Khazars and the East Romans, the Scandinavians were raiding and conquering and colonizing in an immense arc that eventually extended southwestward ... to North America and southeastward to ... the Caspian Sea.’

“No wonder that a special prayer was inserted in the litanies of the West: A furore Normannorum libera nos Domine. No wonder that Constantinople needed its Khazar allies as a protective shield against the carved dragons on the bows of the Viking ships, as it had needed them a couple of centuries earlier against the green banners of the Prophet. And, as on that earlier occasion, the Khazars were again to bear the brunt of the attack, and eventually to see their capital laid in ruins. Not only Byzantium had reason to be grateful to the Khazars for blocking the advance of the Viking fleets down the great waterways from the north. We have now gained a better understanding of the cryptic passage in Joseph’s letter to Hasdai written a century later: ‘With the help of the Almighty I guard the mouth of the river and do not permit the Rus who come in their ships to invade the land of the Arabs ... I fight heavy wars [with the Rus].’

“The particular brand of Vikings which the Byzantines called ‘Rhos’ were called ‘Varangian’ by the Arab chroniclers. The most probable derivation of ‘Rhos’, according to Toynbee, is ‘from the Swedish word ‘rodher’, meaning ‘rowers’. As for ‘Varangian’, it was used by the Arabs and also the Russian Primary Chronicle to designate Norsemen or Scandinavians; the Baltic was actually called by them ‘the Varangian Sea’. Although this branch of Vikings originated from eastern Sweden, as distinct from the Norwegians and Danes who raided Western Europe, their advance followed the same pattern. It was seasonal; it was based on strategically placed islands which served as strongholds, armouries and supply bases for attacks on the mainland; and its nature evolved, where conditions were favourable, from predatory raids and forced commerce to more or less permanent settlements and ultimately, amalgamation with the conquered native populations ....” I would disagree with Arthur Koestler! The Vikings DIDN’T amalgamate with native populations at that time!

This is my one hundred and eighty-fourth monthly teaching letter and continues my sixteenth year of publication. Since WTL #137, I have been continuing a series entitled The Greatest Love Story Ever Told, and have been expanding on its seven stages ever since: (1) the courtship, (2) the marriage, (3) the honeymoon, (4) the estrangement, (5) the divorce, (6) the reconciliation, and (7) the remarriage.

THE GREATEST LOVE STORY EVER TOLD, Part 43:

THE ESTRANGEMENT (of Benjamin) continued:

In the last lesson (WTL 183), it was demonstrated how the tribe of Benjamin was divorced and placed into a “seven times punishment” (i.e., 2520 years), as the other eleven tribes of Israel were. Now some of the early British Israel writers erred by claiming that only the northern ten tribes (i.e., the house of Israel) were ever divorced. In doing so, they had to overlook one of the most important passages of scripture which proves that all the tribes of Israel were divorced and placed into a “seven times punishment” period. We find at Ezekiel 35:1-13:

“¹ Moreover the word of Yahweh came unto me, saying, ² Son of man (i.e. Adam), set thy face against mount Seir, and prophesy against it, ³ And say unto it, Thus saith Yahweh Elohim; Behold, O mount Seir, I am against thee, and I will stretch out mine hand against thee, and I will make thee most desolate. ⁴ I will lay thy cities waste, and thou shalt be desolate, and thou shalt know that I am Yahweh. ⁵ Because thou hast had a perpetual hatred, and hast shed the blood of the children of Israel by the force of the sword in the time of their calamity, in the time that their iniquity had an end: ⁶ Therefore, as I live, saith Yahweh Elohim, I will prepare thee unto blood, and blood shall pursue thee: [since] thou hast not hated blood, even blood shall pursue thee. ⁷ Thus will I make mount Seir most desolate, and cut off from it him that passeth out and him that returneth. ⁸ And I will fill his mountains with his slain men: in thy hills, and in thy valleys, and in all thy rivers, shall they fall that are slain with the sword. ⁹ I will make thee perpetual desolations, and thy cities shall not return: and ye shall know that I am Yahweh. ¹⁰ Because thou hast said, These two nations and these two countries shall be mine [i.e., old home of the house of Israel and old home of the house of Judah], and we will possess it; whereas Yahweh was there: ¹¹ Therefore, as I live, saith Yahweh Elohim, I will even do according to thine anger, and according to thine envy which thou hast used out of thy hatred against them; and I will make myself known among them, [i.e., the true tribes of Israel] when I have judged thee [i.e., Esau-Edom]. ¹² And thou shalt know that I am Yahweh, and that I have heard all thy blasphemies which thou hast spoken against the mountains [i.e., nations] of Israel, saying, They are laid desolate, they are given us to consume^H402 [i.e., eat, or use up, or inhabit undeservedly]. ¹³ Thus with your mouth ye have boasted against me, and have multiplied your words against me: I have heard them.”

Gesenius’ on H402: “... n.f. food, Gen. 1:29; 6:21; of the food of wild beasts, Jer. 12:9; food of fire, i.e. fuel Eze. 15:4, 6.” Surely here, the idea of the Edomite-jews being “consumed” are food or fuel for Yahweh’s fire! For a fuller explanation of H402, see Gesenius on H398. To understand the context of Eze. 35:1-13, we should take into consideration Eze. 16:1-3:

“¹ Again the word of Yahweh came unto me, saying, ² Son of Adam, cause Jerusalem to know her abominations, ³ And say, Thus saith Yahweh Elohim unto Jerusalem; Thy birth and thy nativity is of the land of Canaan; thy father was an Amorite, and thy mother an Hittite.”

At Eze. 15:1-6, the Amorite and Hittite are likened to a weak “vine tree” among the strong “trees of the forest”! This passage states:

“¹ And the word of Yahweh came unto me, saying, ² Son of Adam, What is the vine tree more than any tree, or than a branch which is among the trees of the forest? ³ Shall wood be taken thereof to do any work? or will men take a pin of it to hang any vessel thereon? ⁴ Behold, it is cast into the fire for fuel; the fire devoureth both the ends of it, and the midst of it is burned. Is it meet for any work? ⁵ Behold, when it was whole, it was meet for no work: how much less shall it be meet yet for any work, when the fire hath devoured it, and it is burned? ⁶ Therefore thus saith Yahweh Elohim; As the vine tree among the trees of the forest, which I have given to the fire for fuel, so will I give the [Amorite and Hittite] inhabitants of Jerusalem.” Inasmuch as the iniquities of the twelve tribes of Israel have not come to a final end, the greater part of these prophecies of “fuel for the fire” are yet to be fulfilled. And inasmuch as Benjamin was part of the southern house of Judah, surely there will be retribution on the evil “vine tree” for Benjamin’s sake. In short, the evil Amorite and Hittite “vine tree” is good-for-nothing!

BRITISH ROYAL FAMILY AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT STORY

Amongst the Adamic family of nations, marriages are very important, especially among the twelve tribes of Israel. There is the marriage of Yahweh to His chosen, the twelve tribes of Israel, and there are those marriages between Israelite men and women. And had Yahweh married any racial group other than the twelve tribes of Israel, it would have been adultery, a violation of His own commandment! So, there’ll be no blacks or yellows, or any other shade of darkness in His Kingdom! Sad to say, but some bad blood maneuvered its way into the British Royal Family. The reader should review a paper I wrote on this subject, How Long Can Elizabeth II Live? Since writing that essay, I have recently found more evidence that Philip Mountbatten had jewish ancestry. Before presenting that evidence, I will review part of what I wrote in that composition:

I said the following in lesson #49: ‘... from the news I notice the queen-mother of England is dead. I’m fully persuaded Elizabeth II is the last pureblooded descendant of David left to sit on the throne, while Philip Mountbatten and his heirs are of questionable blood presenting prophecy problems.’ Then again in lesson #50 I reiterated: ‘In the last lesson, I briefly mentioned that the queen-mother of Britain had died. I believe that this is a major mile-marker in time as to where we are today on Yahweh’s time-clock. I would remind you that Scripture says in no uncertain terms that there would always be a descendant of David on a throne somewhere until Messiah’s Second Advent. Conceivably, this could mean: if the present Queen Elizabeth II were to have a heart attack and die, and our Redeemer has not returned, the promise to David is a lie and our Bible is untrustworthy.

Some are of the opinion that if the Queen were to suddenly die, the throne could be transferred to another branch of the family. That would be the usual process, but those who make that statement don’t take into account there were only to be three “overturns”, Ezekiel 21: 27, and all three have already happened (i.e., Jerusalem to Ireland, to Scotland, to England). Queen Elizabeth II undoubtedly represents the last surviving pureblooded heir to the throne on behalf of the third “overturn.” Let’s now document why the tainted-blood offspring of Elizabeth by Philip are unqualified to take that throne.

Philip was of the line of Battenberg until the name was changed to Mountbatten. ... The Encyclopedia Britannica (1963), volume 3, page 281: “Battenberg, the name of a family of German counts, which died out about 1314, whose seat was the castle of Kellerburg, near Battenberg, in Hesse. The title was revived in 1851, when Alexander (1823-88), a younger son of Louis II, grand duke of Hesse, contracted a morganatic marriage with the Polish lady, Countess Julia Theresa von Hauke (1825-95), who was then created countess of Battenberg. In 1858 the countess and her children were raised to the rank of princes and princesses of Battenberg, with the title of Durchlaucht, or serene highness ... In 1917 the eldest son of this union, Louis Alexander (1854-1921), who had become an admiral in the British navy, was created marquess of Milford Haven ..., and, at the request of King George V, the members of the family who lived in England renounced, in 1917, the German title of prince of Battenberg and adopted the surname of Mountbatten. The second son, Alexander Joseph (1857-93), was elected Prince Alexander I of Bulgaria in 1879 ... Henry Maurice, the third son, married on July 23, 1885, Beatrice, youngest daughter of Victoria, queen of England, became a naturalized Englishman and was appointed captain general and governor of the Isle of Wight and governor of Carisbrooke. He died at sea on Jan. 20, 1896, of a fever contracted on active service with the British troops during the Ashanti War. The fourth son, Francis Joseph (1861-1924), married in 1897 Anna, daughter of Nicholas I, prince of Montenegro, and was the author of Die volkswirtschaftliche Entwicklung Bulgariens von 1879 bis zur Gegenwart (1891).

“The only daughter of the princess of Battenberg, Marie Caroline (1852-1923), married in 1871 Gustavus Ernest, prince of Erbach-Schönberg. Princess Alice of Battenberg (b. 1885), daughter of Prince Louis Alexander, and Victoria Eugénie (Princess Ena of Battenberg; b. 1887), only daughter of Prince Henry Maurice, were both married before 1917, the former to Prince Andrew of Greece and the latter to Alphonso XIII, king of Spain. Prince Henry’s youngest son, Maurice of Battenberg, was killed in action near Ypres on Oct. 27, 1914 ...”

LET’S EXAMINE THE EVIDENCE

It seems that we have a castle by the name of Kellerburg, near a town called Battenberg in an area known as Hesse in Germany. It also appears that there was a family of German counts that lived there until they all died out in 1314. That area seems to have been settled mostly by Kelts in early times. Did the family physically die out, or did the succession of royal authority die out? It makes a lot of difference. Be that as it may, it also appears that this heir-apparent, Alexander, married a Polish lady. Again, one must ask the question, what kind of ladies might one find in Poland at that time (actually Warsaw)? Then, we are told there was a “morganatic marriage” arranged between this Polish lady named Julia Theresa von Hauke and Alexander. Interestingly, we have another morganatic marriage to compare with that of Alexander to Julia Theresa von Hauke. The party was Constantine Pavlovich (1779-1831), grand-duke and cesarevitch of Russia, born to Paul Petrovich and Mary Feodorovna. His grandmother, empress Catherine II, arranged for his marriage to Juliana of Coburg, which failed miserably. Later, he fell in love with a Polish lady, Johanna Grudzinska, and signed a paper resigning all claim of succession to the throne. Question: Why wasn’t Alexander required to sign a similar paper?, or did he? ...

The bad blood followed down from Julia Theresa von Hauke to her son Louis Alexander Mountbatten, to his daughter Victoria Alice of Battenberg, to her son Philip Mountbatten (Queen Elizabeth II’s husband), to his son Charles, Prince of Wales (whose very telltale appearance defies all reasonable doubt of a “Jewish” bloodline connection) ...

Because this may be somewhat confusing, I will show you that alleged bad bloodline from a different perspective:

1. Julia Theresa von Hauke.

2. Louis Alexander Mountbatten.

3. Victoria Alice of Battenberg.

4. Philip Mountbatten.

5. Charles, Prince of Wales.

Thus, I will repeat what I said before: The present Queen Elizabeth II is the last pureblooded Israelite of the Tribe of Judah, of the House of David, to sit on David’s throne, and she has no legitimate heirs to take her place. If anyone has evidence to the contrary without an additional “overturn”, let’s please see it!

I am usually very careful of quoting anything from wikipedia, but in this case it is so damning to the Mountbatten ancestral line, and substantiates so well our subject, I decided it was imperative that I use it.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Alice_of_Battenberg we read:

“Princess Alice of Battenberg, later Princess Andrew of Greece and Denmark (Victoria Alice Elizabeth Julia Marie; 25 February 1885 – 5 December 1969), was the mother of Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, and mother-in-law of Queen Elizabeth II.

“She was congenitally deaf, and grew up in Germany, England and the Mediterranean. After marrying Prince Andrew of Greece and Denmark in 1903, she lived in Greece until the exile of most of the Greek royal family in 1917. On returning to Greece a few years later, her husband was blamed in part for the defeat of Greece in the Greco-Turkish War (1919–1922), and the family were once again forced into exile until the restoration of the Greek monarchy in 1935.

“In 1930, she was diagnosed with schizophrenia and committed to a sanatorium; thereafter, she lived separately from her husband. After her recovery, she devoted most of her remaining years to charity work in Greece. She stayed in Athens during the Second World War, sheltering Jewish refugees, for which she is recognized as ‘Righteous Among the Nations’ at Yad Vashem. After the war, she stayed in Greece and founded an Orthodox nursing order of nuns known as the Christian Sisterhood of Martha and Mary.

“After the fall of King Constantine II of Greece and the imposition of military rule in Greece in 1967, she was invited by her son and daughter-in-law to live at Buckingham Palace in London, where she died two years later. Her remains were transferred to the Mount of Olives in 1988.” [underlining mine]

First, what is Yad Vashem? Answer: the World Center for Holocaust Research, Education, whose motto is Isaiah 56:5 taken out-of-context: “Even unto them will I give My house And within My walls a monument and a memorial Better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting memorial, That shall not be cut off.” (jewish translation of the Old Testament by the jewish publication society of America.) Note: this is their punctuation, not mine!

Alice of Battenberg was born congenitally deaf and she was diagnosed with schizophrenia and committed to a sanatorium ... Inasmuch as the Edomite-jews are a mixture of many races, they are susceptible to many physical and mental abnormalities and unique diseases. Although deformities can show up in any race, the Edomite-jews seem to be plagued out-of-proportion, over-and-above the average population, with everything from giantism to dwarfism. To what extent this congenital deafness affected Alice of Battenberg we are not told, but we know she was able to mother five children. See Internet: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090324070404AAqnll5 where we find the following:

“Princess Alice had four daughters: Margarita (1905-1981), Theodora (1906-1969), Cecile (1911-1937), and Sophie (1914-2001), as well as only son Philip (b.1921).

“Princess Alice suffered from a mental illness, what is known today as bipolar disorder. Symptoms were inappropriate elation, impulsiveness, extreme motor activity, religious fervor complete with visions. Princess Alice was convinced that she had the gift of healing; during one manic episode she said that she was a saint, and the bride of Christ. She went through periods of listlessness, euphoria, she lost weight, suffered from headaches. It is her bipolar disorder that broke up her marriage. Alice was placed in a clinic at Tegel, Germany, where she was diagnosed by Freudian psychologist, as a schizophrenic paranoid. Treatment at that clinic only helped a little and she was placed in a Swiss psychiatric hospital, Bellevue Clinic, for over two years. After the sanatorium, she lived a nomadic existence, traveling with help to Italy, Switzerland, Germany and living a quiet existence in hotels and rented rooms. She wrote to her children, but didn’t see them for five years. Gradually, she recovered.

“Her daughter, Cecile died in an air crash in 1937. Philip asked for a small piece of the airplane and was quite affected by the early death of his sister.

“I don’t think any child inherited Alice’s disability (deafness). Alice started an order of nuns called The Christian Sisterhood of Martha and Mary; they were a nursing order. Alice also helped Jewish refugees escape from the Gestapo, while she was living in Athens. Alice was decorated with The Royal Red Cross in recognition of her wartime services. Alice got things organized so that clothes for troops and refugees were made, hospitals were set up, nurses, doctors, housing and schools were also set up. Alice even helped with nursing duties herself, even assisting with operations.”

It is also important to point out that NONE of Alice’s children should be considered European Royalty, which include: (1) Princess Margarita of Greece and Denmark; (2) Princess Theodora of Greece and Denmark; (3) Princess Cecilie of Greece and Denmark; (4) Princess Sophie of Greece and Denmark; and (5) Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.

Left: Alice of Battenburg’s jewish features show through.

Right: Shows the jewishness of the Grandson of Princess Alice of Battenburg, Charles Prince of Wales.

If congenital deafness isn’t bad enough, add schizophrenia and one has a situation like a loose cannon that’s liable to explode in any direction at any time. Schizophrenia is a psychosis usually affecting younger people, characterized by disturbances in thinking which are often bizarre and seem to separate one’s thought process from one’s emotions.

Inasmuch as Alice of Battenberg was the grandmother of Charles Prince of Wales, we can see how Charles might have inherited some of her genetic defects. Funny thing, three of Alice of Battenberg’s girls appeared to be pure Anglo-Saxons, but that is how racial hybridity works. In fact Charles Prince of Wales’ hybridity didn’t show up until the second generation after Alice of Battenburg. Philip Jones, in his book Racial Hybridity, demonstrates several examples of this phenomenon. Actually, according to Philip Jones’ research, no single cell is a blend of the two races involved. What really happens in hybridity is, portions of flesh are made up of some cells identical to one ancestor, other cells to another. This sometimes shows up as dark spots mixed at random with white spots, similar to a leopard on the skin of a mulatto. However, this phenomenon is not only on the surface of the skin, but distributed throughout the entire body, inside and out! Any organ of the body, including the brain, has this same leopard-effect. It’s too bad that we haven’t, as yet, invented an instrument able to detect these random blotches of isolated diverse flesh. The sad part of this story is the fact that the dark blotches of flesh are at war with the light blotches of flesh, and there is no remedy, other than death! No doubt, this “leopard-effect” is what caused Alice of Battenberg’s schizophrenia!

We will now critique a sentence from the wikipedia article which I cited, where it stated:

“She (Alice of Battenberg) stayed in Athens during the Second World War, sheltering Jewish refugees, for which she is recognized as ‘Righteous Among the Nations’ at Yad Vashem.” This short statement speaks volumes! First of all, it reveals to us that Queen Elizabeth II knew exactly what kind of family she was about to marry into prior to her wedding. I had the documentation at one time that Benjamin Disraeli, years before, had told Queen Victoria (and I will paraphrase it) that “... you Englishmen and we jews are the same people ...” If I remember correctly, it was in a publication from The Christian Crusade Church out of Metarie, Louisiana. I must have loaned that issue out, and never got it back, so you’ll have to prove this Disraeli statement for yourself. I have read in another place that Queen Elizabeth had hoped to live long enough to turn her throne over to Jesus Christ. I have this documentation around here someplace, but you will have to take my word for that one also. It all boils down to the fact that Queen Elizabeth II knows a lot more than we realize! I believe that Queen Elizabeth II naively believes Benjamin Disraeli’s lie, and would rather fight than switch her position. Let’s face it, the whole Royal family of Britain are promoters of Edomite-jewish Zionism. No doubt, Queen Elizabeth II probably thought she was doing God a favor when she married Philip Mountbatten!

My gut feeling is that Prince Charles of Wales might have a mental problem similar to that of his grandmother, Alice of Battenburg. If Prince Charles had all of his marbles, surely Queen Elizabeth II could have ceded the throne of England over to Charles long ago. What is she waiting for? Or, maybe somewhere along the way, “Alexander (1823-88), a younger son of Louis II, grand duke of Hesse, contracted a morganatic marriage with the Polish lady, Countess Julia Theresa von Hauke (1825-95)”, and possibly had to sign an agreement that he would forfeit any and all inheritance to the throne in perpetuity if he went through with the marriage! These are two very probable reasons why Queen Elizabeth II hasn’t ceded her throne over to Prince Charles of Wales, as he is still #1 Heir-Apparent. Of the two possibilities, I lean toward the suspicion that Prince Charles may have a syndrome similar to that of his grandmother. If such should be true, it has been a well-kept family secret.

If for some reason, Queen Elizabeth II doesn’t trust Prince Charles to take the throne, surely she could have skipped over Charles and chosen Prince William, who is #2 Heir-Apparent. Although, had Queen Elizabeth II skipped over Prince Charles in favor of Prince William, nearly everyone would be asking, “what’s the matter with Charles”, and the hushed-up family secret would be a secret no more. For that matter, maybe Queen Elizabeth II has some hidden reason for not trusting Prince William to take the throne. According to Time Magazine, Summer Double Issue for July 8th & 15th, 2013, p.49, they have William and Kate’s expectant baby listed as #3 Heir-Apparent, whether it is a boy or a girl.

Additionally, I do not believe it was just happenstance that there was a movement afoot to change the rule of Heir-Apparent from the firstborn Royal male child in the United Kingdom to the firstborn Royal male-or-female. I realize that Queen Elizabeth II does have some shirttail relationship problems on her Husband’s side of her house, namely the corrupt line of Prince Philip Mountbatten. One can quickly conjecture that the whole reason for such a move was to skip both Prince Charles and Prince William in order for Queen Elizabeth II to have a female ‘spitting image’ of herself to be the next Queen, and to usurp the king’s rightful position. I’m convinced Queen Elizabeth II is praying the baby will be a girl. However, the English King Line is already corrupted with a descendant of Cain, and there is no remedy that can correct the situation. Once mixed, always mixed! Not only this, but it appears that presently, Queen Elizabeth II represents the end of the whole Windsor line of Heir-Apparents! Or should we say ‘dubious heir-apparents?’

Then we are told that: “Princess Alice was convinced that she had the gift of healing; during one manic episode she said that she was a saint, and the bride of Christ.” From this bit of information, it appears that Alice of Battenberg’s family line were made up of cryptomarrano converso-jewish who had been converted to Catholicism. Then, Princess Alice bought into the contemporary deceptive tenets of jewish pentecostalism, which is a false doctrine to the core. Here, for clarity on the subject, only pureblooded Israelites can be “saints” or “the bride of Yahshua Christ!”

In his book Kings & Queen of England, David Williamson sums up Queen Elizabeth’s reign thusly, on p. 122:

“During the course of her lengthy reign, the queen has set about presenting herself as everything a 20th-century monarch should be, winning praise for her dignified acceptance of her duties and responsibilities and making efforts to communicate with her subjects on a regular basis, while never reducing the mystique of royalty by becoming too familiar. As head of the Commonwealth she has undertaken many strenuous tours all over the world with unflagging enthusiasm.

“Two more sons were born to the queen, Prince Andrew Albert Christian Edward on 19 February 1960, and Prince Edward Anthony Richard Louis on 10 March 1964.

“An accumulation of problems has grown around the royal family in recent years. Prince Charles, Prince of Wales, was married at St Paul’s Cathedral on 29 July 1981 to Lady Diana Spencer, youngest daughter of the 8th Earl [of] Spencer. After the birth of two sons, Prince William Arthur Philip Louis on 21 June 1982 and Prince Henry Charles Albert David on 15 September 1984, the marriage encountered difficulties and the prince and princess separated in 1992. A divorce was finally agreed on and made absolute on 28 August 1996. Diana, Princess of Wales, enjoyed a tremendous popularity, not only for her beauty and vivacity but also for her devotion to many charitable causes and her campaign for the banning of landmines throughout the world. The nation was stunned when she was killed in a motor accident in Paris in the early hours of the morning of 31 August 1997. Her former husband escorted her body back to London and her public funeral at Westminster Abbey was the occasion of an outpouring of public grief and emotion probably greater than anything seen in this country before.

“The marriage of the queen’s second son, Prince Andrew, Duke of York, also foundered, as did the first marriage of her daughter Anne, Princess Royal, although the latter has remarried ....”

[Note: By the way, Princess Anne shows her jewishness more so than her brother, Prince Charles of Wales!]

What we can be sure of is, the throne of David is here to stay, but this later jewish corrupted house of Windsor will be relegated to the trash heaps of history. The only Windsors to survive are those who are genetically pure Israelites.

When Adam said of Eve, Gen. 2:23 “This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh ...” it means he and Eve were both genetically pure (i.e., kind after kind of the same race), thus marriage being permissible. The same is true of Christ and His Assembly, Eph. 5:30: “For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.” Therefore, both He and His Israelite-sheep being pure Adamites (i.e., kind after kind), it was and is permissible for Yahweh in the flesh, as Yahshua, to remarry His pure Israel-sheep. Inasmuch as Yahweh limits Himself to kind after kind, it is paramount that His Israel sheep do likewise between Israelite men and Israelite women! Anything else is not a legitimate family. To marry someone other than kind-after-kind is Biblical adultery! Hence, only pure White Adamite Caucasian Israelites will be in Yahshua Christ’s Kingdom. Actually, every pure White Adamite who ever lived will be in the Resurrection, but the pure White Israelites will be the cream-of-the-crop.

This is my one hundred and eighty-fifth monthly teaching letter and continues my sixteenth year of publication. Since WTL #137, I have been continuing a series entitled The Greatest Love Story Ever Told, and have been expanding on its seven stages ever since: (1) the courtship, (2) the marriage, (3) the honeymoon, (4) the estrangement, (5) the divorce, (6) the reconciliation, and (7) the remarriage.

THE GREATEST LOVE STORY EVER TOLD, Part 44:

THE DIVORCE (Bolshevik war in Chicago):

In the last lesson (WTL 184), we covered how bad blood has polluted the British Royal Family. While we have pretty well completed the “estrangement” period of Israel’s marriage to her husband, Yahweh, I discovered one more important development concerning the tribe of Benjamin and the Vikings which we should not overlook. This story occurred right here in the United States, and is conveyed to us by Elizabeth Dilling in her great reference work entitled The Red Network, under the subtitle, “I Am Not Interested” (and concerns how Communist organizations persecuted the Benjamite-Ukrainians in America), pp. 59-61:

“Police line the streets when the Red flag is paraded down the streets of Chicago, in defiance of the Illinois sedition law. Any week one may attend immense revolutionary Red meetings, which are given ample police protection. In fact, the Daily News last year reported that the only unseemly incident in one Communist parade was when a Red flag was snatched from the hands of a marcher by a bystander, but that it was quickly restored to the Red by the police.

“The Chicago police department granted a permit for a parade Sunday, December 17th, 1933, of loyal Ukrainian-Americans who, after a service in their church, wished to march to a hall to hold a meeting and raise funds to try to save their relatives in the Russian Ukraine, now being ‘liquidated’ – deliberately starved to death – by the Soviet government. Even pro-Soviet news reporters estimate the deaths by such starvation during the last year as numbering in the millions, while the American Communist press maintains that such ‘liquidation’ of bourgeois elements who object to Soviet tyranny and destruction of religion, must go on until Russia is a ‘pure’ Communist state.

“Dr. Emil Tarnawski, loyal American citizen, and president of the affiliated Ukrainian-American societies of Chicago, with some 10,000 members, also Lt. Nelson E. Hewitt, warned the Chicago police department, asked for special police protection for this parade, and told them that a secret meeting of the Reds had been held to plan an attack on the parade and that Dr. Tarnawski and many of his people had been personally threatened with death if they marched.

“But only two policemen were with the 3,000 Ukrainian-American marchers at the time the Reds attacked them by first throwing Communist leaflets from above, then, as they looked up, throwing down bricks in their faces from an elevated station platform. Hundreds of Communists along the sidewalks simultaneously rushed in from both sides, and assaulted them with iron pipes, tools, brass knuckles, etc. They tore the American flag to pieces, and about 100 were injured. I personally saw many bandaged heads at the Ukrainian meeting which I addressed. Dr. Tarnawski received a severe leg injury and for some time was unable to walk. The communist Daily Worker reported the attack jubilantly as a Communist triumph.

“Judge Gutnecht (see Robt. Morss Lovett in ‘Who’s Who’), who heard the cases the next day, was reported in the press as criticizing the police for having only arrested Communists, and not the Ukrainians whom they had attacked as well! When their cases were tried only two received ten and two received thirty days in jail for this bloody attack!

“When sixteen of us, including Mrs. Tarnawski, as a delegation representing various patriotic societies, called upon Chief of Police Allman the following Tuesday and laid the facts before him, I attempted to show him a copy of the ‘Red Front of U.S.A.,’ a Communist revolutionary military publication which boldly lists recruiting stations in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, etc. where Reds are urged to sign up for military training for just such attacks, and in order to give the police ‘their due’ in strikes and riots, to ‘open food storage places,’ and says, ‘Any day may be the beginning of the revolutionary struggle’ and that ‘the dashing to pieces of the whole apparatus of government is in the period of revolutionary uprising, thus easier to accomplish. The Chicago office, 101 S. Wells St., Room 707 ... meets at 2322 W. Chicago Avenue’ (near where the attack occurred). Chief Allman said, ‘We have recognized those people now.’ (We have not recognized the overthrow of this government.) He refused to look at this Red publication, saying very coldly, ‘I am not interested.’

“While Chief Allman has been often praised by radicals and by the 1932 report of the Red-aiding Chicago Civil Liberties Committee for his ‘enlightened attitude’ toward ‘civil liberties’ for Communists, some of us are still interested in civil liberties for Americans, in the protection of the American flag, and the enforcement of the Illinois State sedition law. The attorney for the Ukrainian-Americans called upon the Federal authorities the same day and was told that they are no longer interested in Communist activities. Is anyone interested? Are you? What are you going to do about it?”

Because Elizabeth Dilling directed us to see Robt. Morss Lovett in ‘Who’s Who’ (p. 302), we will do that next:

“LOVETT, ROBERT MORSS: University of Chicago. Professor; executive board A.C.L.U. Chicago Committee; national committee A.C.L.U.; director and one of four incorporators of the Garland Fund; leader of communist National Student League at University of Chicago 1932; Russ. Reconst. Farms, 1925; endorser Communist Janowicz, candidate for Alderman 5th Ward, Chicago, 1933; League For Independent Political Action; national Committee On Militarism In Education; national president League For Industrial Democracy; national committee All America Anti Imperialist League; National Committee to A.S.M.F.S.[?]; American committee World Congress Against War and Student Congress Against War (University of Chicago); chairman executive committee Sacco-Vanzetti National League; associate editor ‘New Republic’; advisory committee Kentucky Miners Defense and Relations Committee of Chicago. (I.W.W., Industrial Workers Of The World); National Mooney-Billings Committee; was president of communists’ Federation Press League, when organized in 1922; Fair Play to China; Debs Memorial Radio Fund Committee; India Freedom Foundation; American Committee on Information about Russia; chairman Chicago Emergency Committee Strike Relations; National Mooney Council of Action, 1933; arrested with picketers at strike of communist Needle Trades Workers Indiana University, June 29, 1933; Humanist; executive committee National Council Protection [for] Foreign Born Workers. 1927-1930; endorses ‘Professional Patriots’; Cong. Exp. Radicals [Radical forces are drawn from all classes, from the dumbest type of ‘proletarian’ ed.]; American Committee for Spanish American War; July 26, 1933 Advisory Associates Bulletin said: ‘When ‘Comrade’ Lovett was up for trial he used the old Communist tactics of demanding a jury trial. We have checked up on the trial and find some peculiar circumstances. He was tried in the jury court, but there was no jury trial. Judge Gutknecht, the judge of the Boys’ Court, was brought down to the jury court and turned both Lovett and McKenna loose and cautioned the State’s Attorney not to try to file further charges against the two for inciting to riot. Lovett brought with him to court, probably as character witnesses, Jerome Davis, Soviet sympathizing Yale professor, Henry P. Chandler, former president and ‘liberalizer’ of the Chicago Union League Club, Annetta Dieckmann, industrial secretary of the Y.W.C.A., Morris Topchevsky, artist of the communist John Reed Club, and others.’; sponsor communist Chicago Workers Theatre, 1933; committee U.S. Congress Against War; Griffin Bill sponsor; national committee League Against Fascism, 1933; National Save Our Schools Committee; People’s Legislative Service; national council Berger National Foundation; chairman Chicago Forum Council; board League for Organization Progress 1931; Emergency Committee Strike Relief 1933; see Hands Off Committees; lives at Hull House, Chicago; National Committee to Aid Vic. G. Fascism; national Friends Of The Soviet Union. 1934; Conference Progressive Political Action campaign committee 1934.” [Note: I have tried to change all of the many abbreviations Elizabeth Dilling used in this paragraph concerning Robert Morss Lovett into full words where I could, but I may have slipped on a minor few. Also, where needed, I did some editing in brackets.]

Now that Elizabeth Dilling has cited the Y.W.C.A. to be subversive, let’s take a look at what she exposes about that organization, on pp. 250-252:

“Y.M.C.A. AND Y.W.C.A.

“A speaker for the Young Communist League drew attention at the Chicago Coliseum Communist mass meeting for Barbusse, Oct. 23, 1933, to the placards placed around the walls announcing their ‘Preliminary Youth Conference Against War, Wednesday, Nov. 1st, Y.M.C.A. Central College, 19 South La Salle St., Room 360.’ The Communist press records many similar incidents.

“While exposures in the press of communistic activities of the Y.M.C.A. in Asia and Europe and of dynamite found in the Y.M.C.A. and complicity of Y.M.C.A. officials in Cuba, and the prevalence of League for Industrial Democracy Socialist-Communist literature and influence in student Y.M.C.A. college branches, arouse comment from time to time, it is still generally supposed that the ‘C’ in Y.W.C.A. and Y.M.C.A. stands for ‘Christian,’ not ‘Communist.’

“The publications of the Y.W.C.A. National Board would seem to make this a question. The Camp Gray (Saugatuck, Mich.) Conferences for Y.W.C.A. leaders, held each summer for consecutive groups, in 1932 used their own song sheet with the official Communist revolutionary song ‘The Internationale’ (four verses) and ‘Solidarity Forever,’ the I.W.W. song by Ralph Chaplin who served five years in the penitentiary for sedition. The latter is sung to the tune of ‘Battle Hymn of the Republic’ at Communist meetings. The next year (1933) they printed a Conference book and entitled it ‘Solidarity – ‘For the Union Makes Us Strong’’ (from words of Chaplin’s I.W.W. song). They included the entire Industrial Song Sheet of 17 songs of the Y.W.C.A. National Board and added, besides, the following Communist songs:

“COMINTERN

“From Russia victorious – The Workers October, – Comes storming reaction’s – Regime the world over. – We’re coming with Lenin – For Bolshevik work, – From London, Havana, Berlin and New York. – Rise up fields and workshops, – Come out workers, farmers; – To battle march onward, – March on world stormers – Eyes sharp on your guns, – Red banners unfurled; – Advance proletarians to conquer the world.”

“RED MARCHING SONG

* * * * * *

“Hear our voices, hear our marching, – Hear how they make the despots quake! – We are treading rapidly – The mountain paths to victory! Etc., etc.

“ARISE YOU WORKERS

“Arise you workers, fling to the breeze – The scarlet banner, the scarlet banner, – Arise you workers, fling to the breeze – The scarlet banner triumphantly.

“Chorus

“Wave scarlet banner triumphantly, – Wave scarlet banner triumphantly, – Wave scarlet banner triumphantly, – For Communism and Liberty! Etc., etc.

“This conference book, ‘Solidarity,’ thanks Miss Annetta Dieckmann, Chicago Y.W.C.A. secretary, for having secured the use of this camp for summer conferences since 1925. She is also listed as a group leader, and Sonya S. Forthal (said to be wife of Dr. J.G. Spiesman of 222 N. Oak Park Ave., Oak Park, Ill.) as leader of Political Action. The pro-Soviet talk on Russia of Lucy Carner, ‘Executive of Industrial Department on National Board since 1924,’ is also summarized in it.

“The Industrial Song Sheet used in this conference book is also issued separately by the Y.W.C.A. National Board. It includes but two verses of the Communist ‘Internationale.’ But one of the two chosen is the anti-religious one:

“THE INTERNATIONALE

“We want no condescending saviors, – To rule us from a judgement hall, – We workers ask not for their favors; – Let us consult for all.”

* * * * * *

“Refrain:

“’Tis the final conflict – Let each stand in his place – The International Party – Shall be the human race. Etc.”

“The Communists sing it with the difference of one word: ‘The International Soviet shall be the human race.’

“‘Solidarity Forever,’ by Ralph Chaplin, is included, as is the Communist song ‘The Advancing Proletaire,’ which expresses anything but the Christian spirit:

“We are coming unforgiving – And the earth resounds our tread. – Bone and sinew of the living, – Spirit of the rebel dead, – You who sow’d the wind of sorrow – Now the whirlwind you must dare, – As you face upon the morrow – The advancing Proletaire.

“‘I’m Labor’ is No. 10, a very good class-hate selection:

“I’m very humble, I’m Labor. – I rarely grumble, I’m Labor. – In summer heat and winter gale, – I pack a load or swing a flail; – But some one else rakes in the kale, – I’m Labor (All: He’s Labor)

* * * * * *

“From birth to death my life is spent – In hovel shack or tenement; – But still some landlord gets the rent,– I’m Labor! (All: He’s Labor!) – I have no say, I’m Labor. – I just, obey, I’m Labor. – I slaved through years of hate and war – Or spilled my own or my brother’s gore – But did I know what the shootin’s for? – I’m Labor (All: He’s Labor). Etc., etc.

“‘Nations Come and Join Us’ and ‘We Shall Be Free,’ Socialist Party songs, the communist Russian ‘Work Song,’ ‘Over All the Lands’ by Communist Anna Louise Strong, ‘Song of the Workers’ (‘Men who toil like bosses, Will you serve the bosses, And bow down to heels of steel?’ etc.), are included. Also ‘Comrades Join the Mustering Forces’:

“Comrades join the mustering forces; – Lift your eyes from work and hear – High above the grind and rattle – The Internationale sounding strong and clear. Etc.”

“All of the 17 songs are somewhat similar with the exception of two Negro spirituals. These two are the only songs that mention the word ‘God’ and not one song in the book alludes to Christ in any way.

“The ‘Program Exchange’ issued by the ‘Laboratory Division, National Board Y.W.C.A., 600 Lexington Ave., New York, additional copies 25 cents from the Woman’s Press,’ says (p. 4) :

“‘Someone has said ‘the excuse for being of Association Music is its relation to program.’ How then are labor songs tied into workers education in the Y.W.C.A.? ...

“‘Such songs as ‘Solidarity Forever,’ ‘Song of the Workers’’ (Men who toil like hosses, etc.), ‘from the Vagabond King, and local adaptations of the ‘Song of the Flame’ are similarly excellent devices for arousing class consciousness through participation. (Emphasis supplied.)

“‘So many groups are becoming interested in Russia that the ‘Internationale’ with its stirring call to action and world brotherhood can be used increasingly. This song offers immediate discussion material for communism and socialism, internationalism, etc. ... Many so-called ‘Red’ songs can be altered a bit by groups studying Russia to fit the various stages of social awareness of the groups.’

(p. 13): “‘The Friends of Soviet Russia’ (Communist) ‘offer us exhibits of pictures on work life among the Soviets. They will prepare special exhibits for groups studying special subjects. There is no charge except postage. They suggest that clubs use their magazine ‘Soviet Russia Today’ for pictures and facts. Subscriptions are $1.00 a year. If clubs sell 5 or more subscriptions they may make 25 cents on each subscription. Address 80 East 11th St., New York.’ (Communist hdqts.)

“‘The League for Industrial Democracy, 112 East 19th St., New York, has the best bibliography we have seen. It deals with Social Reconstruction and covers biography and drama as well as general fiction and economics. Order it for advanced girls, for committees and for setting up conferences. Price 5 cents.’ (The Socialist L.I.D. is closely associated with the Y.M.C.A. and Y.W.C.A.).

“‘A new interest in public ownership’ of public utilities with ‘study and action in this field’, on p. 10 (Socialism), and ‘more knowledge about free dental, lung and heart clinics, about birth control, about how to learn to dance’, on p. 2, and ‘music and worship groups united in writing a new grace that should express new social thinking uninhibited by the traditional feeling of personal religion attached to the old hymn tunes’, on p. 5, are suggested.

“An ex-Communist tells me [Dilling] that Eleanor Copenhaver, National Industrial Secretary of the Y.W.C.A., has recently married Sherwood Anderson, prominent Communist worker. There should be a thorough investigation made of the whole personnel and program of the Y.W.C.A. and either a change of name or a change of National Board policy made. Why should Christians support those who ‘wave scarlet banner/s triumphantly for Communism and Liberty?’”

We learn more concerning Professor Robert Morss Lovett on page 226 of Elizabeth Dilling’s book:

“SCOTTSBORO COMMITTEES OF ACTION

“Several hundred local Committees in cities all over the United States had already been formed by the communist I.L.D. in May 1933. Their purpose is to stir up race and class hatred and distrust of our form of government among Negroes and to show them that ‘class solidarity’ with the revolutionary Communists against the ‘boss class’ of whites is their only hope of justice and equality.

“‘The National Scottsboro Committee of Action is a united front body supporting the fight of the International Labor Defense for the Scottsboro Boys and the enforcement of civil rights for Negroes,’ said the communist Daily Worker, May 12, 1933, in describing a meeting of 4,500 persons held at Rockland Palace, N.Y. City, the night before to greet the Scottsboro committees’ marchers (to President Roosevelt). Richard B. Moore, colored Communist organizer, Ruby Bates, and others succeeded in stirring up a hysteria of class hatred, evidently, in this audience. ‘Strikes for the enforcement of the Bill’ (for Negro rights) ‘and freedom of the Scottsboro Boys must be brought into existence,’ declared Moore. ... A most impressive part of the meeting was when Moore declared ‘We know who the rapists of America are.’ The audience broke into a tremendous ovation that lasted over three minutes and women shouted ‘Tell the truth brother. You’re on the right way.’ Moore received an ovation when he exposed the white ruling class as rapists and oppressors also of white women workers.’

[Note: The Scottsboro Boys were nine black teenage boys accused of rape in Alabama in 1931.]

“The Chicago Scottsboro Action Committee, which is headed by Professor Robert Morss Lovett of the University of Chicago, staged an interracial dance at the colored ‘Savoy Ballroom’ (South Parkway near 47th St., Chicago), Aug. 19th, 1933, arranged under the name of ‘Freedom Ball’ and supported by various intellectual Communist-Socialist sympathizing radical educators, ministers, etc. The national executive committee of the National Scottsboro Committee of Action as printed in the Daily Worker, May 3, 1933 ....” (also printed in Elizabeth Dilling’s book.)

MY WHOLE PURPOSE FOR CITING ELIZABETH DILLING

All during this series on the Israelite tribe of Benjamin, I have been able to trace their migrations throughout Europe, Britain, Iceland and Russia, but I was lacking documentation that the Edomite-jews had murdered and starved to death 20,000,000 White Benjamite-Ukrainians during the Bolshevik Revolution. To verify that this assertion is factual, I will cite a portion of an 8-page pamphlet entitled Judaism And Bolshevism, A Challenge and a Reply, Some Facts concerning Bolshevism, Judaism, Christianity, International (Jew-Controlled) Finance, Bolshevism and Zionism, by A. Homer, as appeared in the Catholic Herald, Oct. 28 & Nov. 4, 1933:

“BOLSHEVISM OFFICIALLY ATTRIBUTED TO JEWS.

“The British Government published a White Paper (Russia No. 1, April, 1919) in which was contained a report from M. Oudendyk, the Netherlands Minister at St. Petersburg, who was watching British interests during the Bolshevik Revolution. M. Oudendyk states :

“‘I consider that the immediate suppression of Bolshevism is the greatest issue now before the world, not even excluding the War which is still raging, and unless as above stated, Bolshevism is nipped in the bud immediately, it is bound to spread, in one form or another, over Europe and the whole world, as it is organised and worked by Jews, who have no nationality, and whose one object is to destroy for their own ends the existing order of things.’ (Italics by A. Homer).

“This report, dated September 6th, 1918, was forwarded by Sir M. Findlay from Christiania to Mr. (later Lord) Balfour. Incidentally, the above passage was deleted from a subsequent abridged edition of the said White Paper.

“The following facts demonstrate the part played by Jewry in the furtherance of Bolshevist activities:

“1. The hostility of both Capitalistic and Socialistic Jews to the Tzarist Regime is a matter of history.

“According to their own claims (The ‘Maccabean,’ New York, 1905) the Jews were the most active revolutionaries in the Tzar’s Empire. The Jewish Banker, the late Jacob Schiff, of the powerful banking group, Kuhn Loeb and Co., aided Russian revolutionaries. According to the Jewish Encyclopaedia, 1925, Jacob Schiff financed Japan against Russia in the war of 1904 to 1905.

“2. Jews engineered the Russian Revolutions of 1905 and 1917.

“From statements made by Sokolow, the Zionist leader, in his book, ‘The History of Zionism,’ and by other Jews, it is apparent that Organised Zionism played an important part in Bolshevik activities in Russia.

“The success of the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution was made possible by the financial support and influence of International (Jew) Financiers. (Vide: ‘The Sisson Report’ published by the American Committee of Public Information, 1919. ‘The Times,’ February 9, 1918).

“3. Statesmen representing the Allies, in 1919, endeavoured to secure the recognition and representation of the Bolshevik Government at the Peace Conference at Versailles.

“Wickham Steed, Editor of ‘The Times,’ at the period of which he wrote in his book, ‘Through Thirty Years,’ stated, regarding this move:

“‘The prime movers were Jacob Schiff, Warburg, and other International Financiers who wished, above all, to bolster up the Jewish Bolshevists in order to secure a field for German [i.e., Ashkenazi] and Jewish exploitation of Russia.’

“4. International Finance (which is Jew-dominated) found abundant credits for the Five Year Plan.

“Krassin served as one of the post-war links between Jewish and other finance and the Bolsheviks.

“The intrigues by which financial credits apparently made to Germany reached Russia have been denounced in the U.S.A. Congress and elsewhere. The statements have not been refuted by the German [i.e., Ashkenazi]-American-Jew Bankers thus implicated.

“5. That there is some alliance between the Bolshevik leaders, the avowed enemies of Capitalism, and the World’s Super-Capitalists must be inferred from the fact that Felix Warburg, in 1927, was given a ‘Royal’ welcome to Russia, in spite of his association with the Federal Reserve Bank of America, and with the Banking Group of Kuhn Loeb and Co!

“THE BOLSHEVIK GOVERNMENT IN RUSSIA

IS IN ACTUALITY A JEWISH GOVERNMENT

“The Soviet movement was a Jewish, and not a Russian conception. It was forced on Russia from without, when, in 1917, German [i.e., Ashkenazi] and German-American-Jew interests sent Lenin and his associates into Russia, furnished with the wherewithal to bring about the defection of the Russian armies, and the overthrow of the Kerensky Provisional Government, which was ‘proAllies’. Thus:

“1. The Movement has never been controlled by Russians. For,

“(a) Of the 224 revolutionaries who in 1917 were despatched to Russia with Lenin to foment the Bolshevik Revolution, 170 were Jews!

“(b) According to ‘The Times’ of 29th March, 1919, ‘of the 20 or 30 commissaries, or leaders who provide the central machinery of the Bolshevist movement, not less than 75 per cent are Jews ... among the minor officials the number is legion.’

“(c) According to official information from Russia, in 1920, out of 545 members of the Bolshevist Administration, 447 were Jews!

“2. The ‘benefits’ of office under the Bolshevik regime have been reaped by Jews :–

“The number of official appointments that have been bestowed upon Jews during the Soviet Regime is entirely out of proportion to their percentage in the State.

“The population of Soviet Russia is officially given as 158,400, 000, the Jewish section, according to the Jewish Encyclopaedia, being about 7,800,000. Yet according to “The Jewish Chronicle’ of 6th January, 1933:–

“Over one-third of the Jews in Russia have become officials.”

“3. ‘Anti-semitism’ in Russia is now classed as counter-revolutionary and is punishable by death.

“4. It is significant that the Red Five-Pointed Star, which in former time was the symbol of Zionism and Jewry, is now the symbol of the Russian proletariat.

“BOLSHEVISM, JUDAISM, CHRISTIANITY.

“Bolshevism was enforced in Russia by means of confiscation, terrorism and murder on a scale of unprecedented magnitude. According to Bolshevist figures and other estimates, in the Revolution some 20,000,000 lost their lives, either by violence or from starvation and disease. Of these people some 1,766,118 persons had been executed before February, 1922.

“The ‘Terror’ has become a permanent institution by which the Bolshevik (Jewish) Government maintains its tyrannical power over the enslaved millions of Russia and pursues its war on religion.

“These statements may come as a shock to many readers, both Christian and Orthodox Jew, who may have condemned the activities and actions of the Bolshevists without realising where the true responsibility lay. They will be further disturbed to read from ‘The Jewish Chronicle’ of April 4, 1919:

“‘There is much in the fact of Bolshevism itself, in the fact that so many Jews are Bolshevists, in the fact that the ideals of Bolshevism at many points are consonant with the finest ideals of Judaism.’

“And from the ‘Jewish World’ of March 5, 1923:

“‘Fundamentally, Judaism is Anti-Christian,’ an expression of opinion which is by no means new to the ‘Jewish World,’ for, in its issue of February 9, 1883, there appeared the following:–

“‘The great ideal of Judaism is ... that the whole world shall be imbued with Jewish teachings, and that in a Universal Brotherhood of Nations – a greater Judaism in fact – all the separate races and religions shall disappear.’ (Italics by A. Homer).

“Bernard Lazare (a Jew) in his book, ‘L’Antisemitisme,’ asserts (translation), p. 350:–

“‘The Jew is not satisfied with de-Christianising, he Judaises, he destroys 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 annihilation of the religion of Christ.’ (Italics by A. Homer).

“The wholesale persecution, torture and murder of Christians by Bolsheviks, in Russia and elsewhere, would therefore appear to be the logical and practical application of the above ‘ideals’ as foretold by Wilhelm Marr in 1879 and by Dostoievsky in 1880 ....”

It is now high time for every White person calling themselves “Christian”, who having read the facts presented in this essay, to do their own research on the subject to ascertain whether it is true or not! A Christian, once convinced of the truth of this matter, is under Biblical obligation to witness to others the danger it poses to our race. Not to do so is criminal, and is the sin of omission, which is greater than the sin of commission! Originally the Bolshevik revolution started in 1917 in Russia, but by 1933 it was being fought in Chicago, Illinois, here in the United States, and has never stopped, but assumed other labels. In Chicago, the communists started out singing little musical ditties to the melody of Christian melodies. By the 1960s, the communist’s music was designed around the ew Pavlov’s experimentation with dogs, which was based on jewish hypnotism to alter the mind, inducing suggestions and impulses, arousing emotion and even bodily action, such as premature sexual orgasms. This type of discordant sound can induce everything from hypnotic unconsciousness to a dis play of mad rage. Should Bolshevism ever run its full course, there’ll be no White people left alive in this world. In C.I.I. it’s called “Two-Seedline Racial Identity”, found at Gen. 3:15 (a doctrine only a fool would deny). Our enemy is aiming for the complete annihilation of the White race, while the clergy in nominal churchianity sits slothfully by in their easy chairs!

This is my one hundred and eighty-sixth monthly teaching letter and continues my sixteenth year of publication. Since WTL #137, I have been continuing a series entitled The Greatest Love Story Ever Told, and have been expanding on its seven stages ever since: (1) the courtship, (2) the marriage, (3) the honeymoon, (4) the estrangement, (5) the divorce, (6) the reconciliation, and (7) the remarriage.

THE GREATEST LOVE STORY EVER TOLD, Part 45,

THE DIVORCE:

With WTL #’s 183, 184, & 185 we have pretty much completed the “estrangement” of the twelve tribes of Israel (the last being Benjamin), along with the present genetic corruption in the British Royal line of Heir-Apparent would-be kings or queens. To get a good start on the subject of the divorce, we need to know just who was divorced from whom. To avoid a lot of confusion on the “who”, I will cite Ephesians 4:4-6: “⁴ There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; ⁵ One Master, one faith, one baptism, ⁶ One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.” Here the body is the “church” (i.e. the “ekklesia”) a word which can only apply to one family within the White Adamic race! And there is no such thing as an “allegorical Israelite”, as Stephen E. Jones and Jory S. Brooks insist.

Strong’s “4983 ... soma, so'-mah, meaning [in part]: “... 2) the bodies of plants and of stars (heavenly bodies) 3) is used of a (large or small) number of men closely united into one society, or family as it were; a social, ethical, mystical body 3a) so in the New Testament of the church [i.e., ekklesia] 4) that which casts a shadow as distinguished from the shadow itself.”

And inasmuch as aliens are forbidden to be in the assembly, assuredly they will not enter into the kingdom as Stephen E. Jones insists they will. Unfortunately, there are those who have dragged this “mainstream” Pharisaical doctrine into the Israel Identity Message. Foremost among these are Stephen E. Jones and Jory S. Brooks.

In a brochure entitled The Hebrew Foundation of Christ’s Church, Jory S. Brooks attempts to bring non-Israelites into the Kingdom. In a diagram in column 4, he tries to show there is a “physical” Israel and an “allegorical” Israel. Then under the subtitle “Israel’s Relation To The Church” he says the following:

“‘The second illustration above demonstrates the true relationship between Israel and the church. The Bible shows clearly that Israelites were the first converts to the faith, came to knowledge of Christ in great numbers, and formed the core of the Church. Not all Israelites believed in Christ, but a large proportion of them did, and formed the foundation of the New Testament Church. These Israelites then went out and converted others, Hebrews and non-Hebrews; these latter becoming a form of allegorical Israel ...” However, as Strong’s explains on the “body”, ‘... 4) that which casts a shadow as distinguished from the shadow itself’.” Sorry, Stephen E. Jones and Jory S. Brooks, the “shadow” races are not getting into the Kingdom!

Brooks continues: “We might therefore say that they are ‘EXPERIENTIAL ISRAELITES’, a term coined by Bible teacher and author, Dr. Stephen E. Jones, for those who, while not physically Israelites, come under some of the Israel covenental blessings through faith in Christ. The combination of both groups, Christian physical Israelites and Christian ‘Experiential Israelites’, constitutes Christ’s true Church. The body of Christ is therefore physically and allegorically Israelite throughout. This explains the otherwise inexplicable fact that the New Covenant was made only with Israel (Heb. 8:8-9), a point which has caused untold confusion among those who teach that Christ’s Church is non-Israelite.”

This statement is totally unscriptural and is a lie right out of the pits of hell, and “Dr.” Stephen E. Jones holds a Master’s in subterfuge. Not only does Jones teach universalism, but he is a vicious antichrist, anti-seedliner (antichrist in the sense that he denies the Satanic seedline that was to bruise the Messiah, and if He was not bruised, then we have no Redemption). Universalism is also antichrist inasmuch as it nullifies both the Old and New Covenants for which our Kinsman Redeemer died. If, as both Brooks and Jones imply, non-Israelites can come under those Covenants, then He is no longer a “Kinsman Redeemer”. The bottom line is, if Christ were to marry any non-Israel, non-Adamic people, He would be guilty of COMMITTING ADULTERY! “Allegorical Israelites” or “EXPERIENTIAL ISRAELITES”; they surely have to be kidding! IT’S PREPOSTEROUS! Not only that, but it is BIBLICALLY CRIMINAL!

At Matt. 27:51-52, it speaks of an “earnest” (a down payment or pledge) on a future resurrection to take place in the latter days:

“⁵¹ And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; ⁵² And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, ⁵³ And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.” Notice especially “... and many bodies of the saints which slept arose ...” Only White Adamic Israelites are saints! Here the Greek word for bodies is the same Strong’s #4983 ... soma, so'-mah, as found in the passage at Ephesians 4:4-6! Therefore, in both places “body/ies” equal one genetic group of people! Hence, Yahweh married and divorced only that one particular “body” of people! One is either under the covenants promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, or one is not! Neither can one who is not under these covenants elect to be a participant in them, nor can one under these covenants elect not to be under the obligations and responsibilities they entail. Neither the “elect” nor the “non-elect” have a choice in the matter! If one is not born of the chosen line of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, then one cannot share in the benefits allotted to Abraham’s Isaac’s and Jacob’s family heritage, for Ephesians 4:4 states: “... There is one body ....” Paul then informs us in Eph. 5:30 that this one body is “of his flesh, and of his bones”, and therefore it cannot be multi-racial. So the little ditty that goes: “Jesus loves all the children; all the children in the world; red or yellow, black or white ...” is entirely opposite to what the Bible really proclaims at Ephesians 4:4-6, and many other related passages! William Finck, in his Christogenea New Testament, translates Ephesians 4:4-6 thusly:

“⁴ One body and one Spirit, just as you have also been called in one hope of your calling. ⁵ One Prince, one faith, one immersion, ⁶ one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.”

But this begs the question, Where would we find this “body” of people today, inasmuch as they were cast out of their Canaan-land upon being divorced? The story starts at 2 Sam. 7:10 where it states:

“Moreover I will appoint a place for my people [the twelve tribes of] Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place of their own, and move no more; neither shall the children of wickedness afflict them any more, as beforetime.”

This begs a second question, If the twelve tribes of Israel are prophesied to leave their home in old Canaan-land, and settle somewhere else, and NEVER return, who in the world are the people settling there today, calling themselves Israelis? Not only that, but it is prophesied that the genuine twelve tribes of Israelites would find it a very bloody task to attempt a return to Palestine, (Hosea 2:6):

“⁵ For their mother hath played the harlot: she that conceived them hath done shamefully: for she said, I will go after my lovers, that give me my bread and my water, my wool and my flax, mine oil and my drink. ⁶ Therefore, behold, I will hedge up thy way with thorns, and make a wall, that she shall not find her paths.”

Here the key phrase is: “... I will hedge up thy way with thorns ...” To comprehend this phrase, one must understand that the term “thorn” is an idiom for race-mixed people, like the Arabs! If one will but consult the various maps of the Near East around Palestine, they will clearly see that Palestine is completely surrounded on all sides by large Arab populations. The Arabs are the “wall” that Yahweh allowed to develop as a “hedge” of “thorns” to prevent the twelve true tribes of Israel from returning. Thus the Arabs would block true Israel’s paths. The Crusaders attempted to return, but they could not for long hold their old homeland.

From a 3-volume set of books entitled History Of The World, by John Clark Ridpath, we learn the following concerning the Crusaders:

Ridpath On Crusaders, vol. 2, p. 304: “The result was as revolting as the beginning was abominable. The superstitious horde fell upon the Jewish colonists in the cities of the Rhine and the Moselle, and began to rob and murder. The victims of the atrocity had, under the protection of the barons of the towns, become prosperous and wealthy. This circumstance whetted the appetite of the vile rabble, who pretended to see in the Jews only the enemies of Christ. They proposed to begin the holy war by exterminating the foes of God in Europe before proceeding against those in Asia. The blood of the unoffending Israelites [sic Canaanite-jews] flowed in torrents, and their homes were ravaged and destroyed. In spite of the protests of the Romish Church, under whose call the Crusade had been begun, the Jews were massacred by thousands, and other thousands, in order to save themselves from a worse fate under the brutal swords of their persecutors, threw themselves into the flames or rivers.”

Ridpath On Crusaders, vol. 2, pp. 326-327: “A few days after the capture of Jerusalem the Western princes met to consider the disposition to be made of Palestine. The almost inevitable solution was the conversion of the country into a Christian state. The form of government was, of course, that feudal type of monarchy which then prevailed throughout Europe. It devolved upon the princes to choose a king, and to this task they set themselves with alacrity. Of the leading Crusaders, those who were eligible to the high office were Robert Short Hose of Normandy, Robert of Flanders, Raymond of Toulouse, and Godfrey of Bouillon. From the first the tide set strongly in favor of the last named duke. Short Hose and the Count of Flanders both announced their intention of returning forthwith to Europe, and as to Raymond, his haughty bearing and impetuous temper made him unpopular as a leader.” ... “Thus, on the 23d of July, in the last year of the eleventh century, the Holy Land with its capital, once the City of David and the Christ, now wrenched from the dominion of the Turks by a series of exploits of well-nigh inconceivable audacity, was erected into a feudal monarchy after the European fashion, and placed under the suzerainty of Godfrey, duke of Lorraine, destined for the present to suffer more ills in defending than he had borne in conquering his heritage, and hereafter immortalized by the muse of Tasso as the hero of the Jerusalem Delivered.” ... “As soon as the monarchy was proclaimed, the king-elect repaired with the pilgrim princes to the Church of the Resurrection, and there took an oath to reign according to the laws of justice and honor. Hardly was this ceremony ended, when the startling intelligence was borne to the city that a powerful Moslem army, led by Afdhal, one of the most valiant emirs of the East had reached Ascalon, and was searching for the force of Crusaders, sufficiently strong to offer battle.”

Ridpath On Crusaders, vol. 2, p. 328: “The battle of Ascalon was decisive of the present fate of Palestine. For the time the Turk was hurled from his seat. With the accomplishment of this result the prime motive of the Crusade was satisfied. Many of the princes now made preparation to return to Europe. The eccentric Raymond, however, had sworn never to see the West again. He accordingly repaired to Constantinople, and received from the Emperor as the portion due his heroism the city of Laodicea. Eustace of Bouillon and Robert of Flanders returned to their respective countries, and resumed possession of their estates. Here they passed the remainder of their lives in prosperity and honor. ...”

Ridpath On Crusaders, vol. 2, p. 329: “The valorous Tancred carried the war still further into the sultan’s territories, whereupon a Saracen army was sent out from Damascus, and the adventurous Crusader was about to be cut off. Godfrey hurried to his assistance, and the Moslems were defeated in battle. Returning to Jerusalem, the Defender of the Holy Sepulcher passed by way of Cesarea, and was met by the emir of that district, who made him a seemingly courteous offer of fruits. The unsuspecting Godfrey accepted and ate an apple. Doubtless it had been poisoned, for the prince immediately sickened. He was taken in haste to Joppa, where he lingered until the 18th of July, 1100, when he died. ...”

Ridpath On Crusaders, vol. 2, p. 331: “The Christian kingdom of Palestine was divided into the four great fiefs of Jaffa, Galilee, Cesarea, and Tripoli, and over each was set a baron who was the vassal of the king. The one fatal weakness of the situation lay in the fact that while a constant stream of pilgrim warriors was setting towards Jerusalem, another stream fully as copious was flowing back into Europe. Even at the time of greatest solidity and peace the number of knights and soldiers resident in Palestine was never sufficient to defend the country in the event of a formidable invasion by the Moslems.”

Ridpath On Crusaders, vol. 2, p. 332: “Another circumstance tending to undermine the foundation of the kingdom was the rapid deterioration of the people of the West under the conditions of life in Syria. The resident Crusaders were brought into communion and fellowship with the native Christians of the country – Syrians, Greeks, Armenians; – a nerveless race of Orientals, destitute of the warlike vigor of the Western pilgrims. Besides, the Mussulman peasantry remained in the villages and continued to cultivate the soil. After the lapse of a few years these diverse races began to commingle, and a new type of population was produced, inheriting but little virtue from either line of parentage. These hybrid inhabitants were known by the name of Pullani or Poulains – a degenerate stock deduced from a bad cross under the influence of a baleful climate and diseased society.”

Ridpath On Crusaders, vol. 2, p. 347: “The Meander was barely fordable, if fordable at all, by infantry. Conrad, however, eager to reach the foe, and believing that his men could swim or struggle through the deeper part of the current, drew up the Crusaders on the hither bank, exhorted them to heroic battle, and gave the order to plunge into the stream. The command was obeyed with alacrity, and so great a number of warriors rushed into the river that the current was broken above and the waters ran away from below, leaving the bed almost as dry as the banks. Great was the amazement of the Moslems at this, to them, miraculous phenomenon. Believing that their enemies were aided by supernatural powers, they made but a feeble resistance, and then fled in a route. The Germans pursued the flying foe, and slaughtered them by thousands. Years afterwards their bones might be seen bleaching in heaps along the bank of the Meander.

“The effect of the victory was very inspiriting to the Crusaders, who began to draw the fallacious inference that they were invincible. From the Meander, Conrad took his way in the direction of Iconium. Still at the mercy of his Greek guides, he was led into the defiles near that city, where the sultan had collected an immense army to oppose his further progress. While the Germans were making their way through a narrow pass, they beheld above the hill-crests the spearheads and turbans of what seemed an innumerable host of Moslems. Great was the disadvantage at which the Crusaders were placed in the battle which ensued. Encumbered with heavy armor, it seemed impossible for them to reach and smite the light-armed Saracens, who swooped down on them from above. It was not long until the line of march was blocked up with the dead bodies of German warriors. Thousands upon thousands were slain; and Conrad had the infinite chagrin of seeing his army melting away under the blows of an enemy who, from his inaccessible position, suffered scarcely any losses.”

Ridpath On Crusaders, vol. 2, pp. 356-357: “... Of all the leading sovereigns of Europe, only the Christian rulers south of the Pyrenees – who were themselves sufficiently occupied with the Mohammedans at home – failed to cooperate in the great movement which was now organized for the recovery of the Holy Land from the Infidels. Henry Plantagenet of England, Philip II. of France, Frederick Barbarossa of Germany, and Popes Gregory and Clement, all alike vied with each other in promoting the common cause.

“Nor had the people lost while the kings had caught the enthusiasm of war. The popular impatience could not await the slower preparations of prudent royalty making ready for the struggle. Thousands upon thousands of pilgrim warriors, unable to restrain their ardor, hurried to the seaports of the Mediterranean, and embarked at their own expense to imperiled Palestine. The maritime Republics of Italy, more than ever before, came to the front as the carriers of the numerous bands that now urged their way to the East. Not only the ports of Italy, Southern France, and Greece furnish[ed] an outlet for this tumultuous movement, but those of the Baltic, the North Sea, and the British Channel in like manner sent forth their hosts of warriors.”

Ridpath On Crusaders, vol. 2, pp. 357-359: “In traversing the Greek Empire, Frederick [Barbarossa] met with the same double-dealing and treachery which had marked the course of the Byzantines from the first. At times the fury of the German warriors was ready to break forth and consume the perfidious Constantinopolitans, but Barbarossa, with a firm hand, restrained them from violence. Sharing their indignation, however, he refused to accept the invitation of the reigning Caesar, Isaac Angelus, to visit him in his capital. With an eye single to the work in hand, he crossed into Asia Minor, and began the herculean task of making his way towards Antioch. In this movement he was opposed, as his predecessor had been, by every inimical force in man and nature. He was obliged to make his way through heated deserts and dangerous passes with the Turcoman hordes darkening every horizon and circling around every encampment. But they were never able to take the old hero off his guard. He overcame every obstacle, fought his way through every peril, and came without serious disaster to Iconium. Here he was confronted by the sultan, whom he defeated in battle, and whose capital he took by storm. By this time the name of Frederick [Barbarossa] had become a terror, and the Moslems began to stand aloof from the invincible German army.”

Ridpath On Crusaders, vol. 2, pp. 359-363: “At this juncture a new figure rose on the horizon – a warrior armed cap-a-pie, riding a powerful war-horse, brandishing a ponderous battle-axe, without the sense of fear, stalwart, and audacious, a Crusader of the Crusaders, greatest of all the mediaeval heroes – young Richard Plantagenet the Lion Heart, king of England. In that country Henry II., founder of the Plantagenet dynasty, had died in July of 1189. The siege of Acre was then in progress, and Frederick Barbarossa was on his march to the Holy Land. King Henry himself had desired to share in the glory of delivering Jerusalem from the Turks, but the troubles of his own kingdom absorbed his attention. Greatly was he afflicted, or at least angered, by the conduct of his sons, Richard and John. The former was headstrong, the latter cunning, and both disloyal to their father and king. Richard had conceived a romantic affection for Philip Augustus of France – a prince of his own age, and with something of his own audacity. ... With the opening of spring, the two kings made ready to set out for the East. Philip departed first. After an auspicious voyage, he arrived in safety in Palestine, and joined his forces to the army before Acre. Richard, on the other hand, had ill-fortune. Off the coast of Crete, his squadron was shattered by a storm. Two of his vessels were wrecked on the shores of Cyprus; and, although he himself had reached Rhodes when the news overtook him that the stranded crews had been robbed and detained as prisoners by the Cypriots, he turned about to avenge the injury. Disembarking his troops, he took the capital of the island by storm, and put the governor in chains. And, to add insult to ignominy, the chains were made of silver. The inhabitants of Cyprus were made to pay dearly for their aggression, for the king levied upon them a tribute as heavy as their offense had been rank. ... Arriving at Acre, the English king was received with great enthusiasm. His astonishing audacity and prowess were precisely the qualities needed in the Christian camp before the fortress. On his appearance, notwithstanding the serious illness with which he was prostrated, new life flashed through the dispirited ranks. His battering engines seemed to work with the vigor of his own will. He became the Achilles of the host, whom nothing could resist or divert from his purpose. The repeated and unwearied efforts of Saladin to relieve and reënforce the beleaguered garrison were repulsed as fast as made. The inhabitants of Acre found themselves in the grip of a giant. The walls were broken on every side. The garrison was reduced in numbers and driven to despair. Saladin at last gave a reluctant assent, and Acre, hitherto impregnable, surrendered to the Crusaders.

“In the hour of victory the character of Ceour de Lion revealed itself in full force. Without the show of courtesy to Philip, he took possession of the palace for himself. He would not brook even a protest against his arbitrary and high-handed proceedings. Perceiving that Leopold, duke of Austria, had planted his banner on the wall, Richard seized the standard and hurling it into the ditch, set up the banner of St. George in its stead; nor did Leopold dare to express by other sign than silent rage his burning resentment.

“The sultan was obliged to make terms most favorable to the Christians. Fifteen hundred captives held by him were to be given up. Acre was to be surrendered, and the garrison ransomed by the payment of two hundred thousand crowns of gold. The victorious kings agreed on their part to spare the lives of the prisoners. The Moslem camp before Acre was broken up and the army withdrawn in the direction of Damascus. The Lion Heart having detained about five thousand hostages, permitted the remaining inhabitants of the captured city to depart in peace. And now followed a scene terribly characteristic of the bloody annals, ferocious spirit, and vindictive methods of the age.

“Saladin failed either through negligence or inability to pay to the victors within the prescribed time the stipulated ransom for the captives of Acre. Thereupon Richard fell into a furious passion, and the Moslem hostages to the number of five thousand were led out from the walls to the camps of the French and English and there beheaded in cold blood, and so little was the humanity of the great Crusader shocked, that he complacently beheld the end of the horrid tragedy, and then wrote a letter in which his deed was boasted as a service most acceptable to heaven.”

Ridpath On Crusaders, vol. 2, pp. 383-385: “... It seemed necessary to find a scapegoat, on whose head might be laid the sin and ignominy of the failure. Popular indignation with a due apprehension of the facts pointed to Pelagius, and great odium was set against his name. But Honorius III., who had now come to the papal throne, defended his legate from the aspersions of his enemies; and, in order that the blame might rest upon some one sufficiently eminent to bear the disgrace, His Holiness laid the charge of failure at the feet of Frederick II. ... It soon appeared, however, that Frederick was not to be moved by such imputations of dishonor. The Pope accordingly changed his tone, and undertook to accomplish by policy what he could not effect by upbraiding the imperial Crusader. ... The scheme amounted to this, that the kingdom of Jerusalem should become an appanage of the German Empire. John of Brienne was most willing to give up the shadowy distinction with which he had been honored and to escape from the perils of Syrian warfare, and Frederick was equally willing to accept a trust made palatable by such a gift as the Princess Iolanta. Accordingly, in the year 1225, the project was completed, and the Emperor solemnly bound himself to lead an army to the Holy Land for the reestablishment of the kingdom planted by Godfrey in the City of Zion.

“The event showed, however, that Frederick was slow to fulfill what he had so readily promised. A period of five years elapsed and still he was not ready to depart for the East. Pope Honorius died and was succeeded by Gregory IX., who espoused with zeal the enterprise which his predecessor had not lived to see accomplished. Unable to urge the Emperor to go forward by any milder persuasion, His Holiness excommunicated him, and finally forbade him to do the very thing which he had so long refused to undertake. This last measure seems to have aroused the perverse Frederick [II] by the law of contradiction, for setting at naught both the threats and the interdicts of the Pope, he collected a small squadron and departed for Palestine.

“The armament with which the Emperor, still under the ban, set out on his mission consisted of only twenty galleys. Those who had had experience in the long-continued wars with the Infidels were excited to contempt on witnessing the departure of the ruler of the German Empire with such a force on such an expedition. It was not long, however, until their contempt was turned into wonder at the extraordinary success which attended the arms of Frederick. Notwithstanding the anathemas of the Pope, and the unwearied efforts of that potentate to defeat his plans and cover him with disgrace, the Emperor made all speed to Acre, and there with his handful of soldiers prepared for the reconquest of Palestine. Both the Hospitallers and the Templars, acting under the commands of the Pope, withheld their support, and Frederick was left with only his own troops and the Teutonic knights. Such, however, was the vigor of his movements that many of the Syrian chivalry were impelled by a sense of shame, even against the papal interdict, to join their German brethren in their struggle with the Infidels.

“Having made every thing secure at Acre, Frederick courageously set his forces in motion toward Jaffa. Contrary to expectation, this stronghold was taken from the Turks, refortified, and garrisoned. It appears that Frederick, more wise than his predecessors in the Holy War, had conceived the project of playing off the sultan of Damascus against his brother of Cairo, and of gaining through their conflict of interests and ambitions what the other Crusaders had failed to reach – the recovery of Jerusalem. But before he was able to achieve any results by this shrewd policy, Coradinus died and Camel was left without a rival to contend with the German invaders. Frederick, however, was not to be put from his purpose. He pressed forward from Jaffa in the direction of the Holy City, and the Infidels fell back before him. Bethlehem, Nazareth, and other important places were taken without a battle, and so great was the alarm both in Jerusalem and in Damascus that the sultan made overtures for peace. Thus, against all expectation (unless it were his own), Frederick found himself in a position to dictate terms almost as favorable as might have been obtained by the conquerors of Damietta. Nor has any one ever been able to discover the nature of the motives which he was able to bring to bear on the sultan to secure so favorable a settlement. It was stipulated that henceforth all Christians should have free access to the Holy City; that the Mohammedans should approach the temple on Moriah only in the garb of pilgrims; that Bethlehem, Nazareth, and other recent conquests should remain to the Christians; that the peace should not be broken for a period of ten years

“Great was the wrath of the Pope on hearing of the victory of the excommunicated prince. The whole power of the Church was rallied to deny and explain away the signal success and good fortune of Frederick. The latter, however, was now in a position to laugh at, if not despise, his enemies. Preferring to consider himself under the ban, he determined to celebrate his coronation in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. Nor durst the Moslems offer any opposition to the ceremony. The Emperor accordingly entered the city with his train of Teutonic Knights and soldiers, and, repairing to the altar, took therefrom the crown and placed it on his head; for the patriarch of Jerusalem, fearing the Pope, refused to perform the crowning, nor would the Templars and Hospitallers be present at the ceremony. Thus, in the year 1229, the Fifth and least pretentious of all the Crusades terminated with complete success. The victorious Emperor returned to Acre, and then set sail for Europe, followed by the plaudits of his own countrymen, but jeered at and scandalized by the papal party throughout Palestine. It had already come to pass that Rome looked with greater aversion and hatred upon a heretical and disobedient Christian than upon the worst of the Infidel Turks.

“Such was the anger of the papal party against him by whom the restoration of Christian influence in the Holy Land had been achieved, that no efforts were made to conserve the fruits of his conquests. Not satisfied with this negative policy, the adherents of Gregory began a series of active aggressions against Frederick, looking to the undoing of his Imperial title, and the sapping of the loyalty of his subjects. Bitter were the persecutions which were directed against him. When the Empress Iolanta died at the birth of her son, the anti-German party insisted that the child should be discarded along with its father, and that the crown of Jerusalem should be given to Alice, daughter of Isabella and Henry of Champagne. The latter claimant went over from Cyprus to Syria to set up her pretensions, whereupon, in 1230, a civil, war ensued between her adherents and the supporters of Frederick. The party of Alice had greatest numerical strength, but the Teutonic Knights remained loyal to their Emperor, and more than counterbalanced the advantage of his enemies.

“After the strife had continued for a season, a reconciliation was effected between Frederick and the Pope. The settlement was without any sincere foundation on either side, but was sufficiently meritorious to bring about a peace in Syria. But in that country the mischief had already been accomplished. More than half of the time of the truce concluded by the Emperor with Sultan Camel had already run to waste, and nothing had been done towards securing the conquests made by the Germans in Palestine ....” Although there is much more to this story, in the end, the Pope’s several Crusades had lost, and the “hedge” of “thorns”, as prophesied, is still in place in the Middle East!

Really, this “hedge” of “thorns” covers an area larger than the Middle East, comprising Libya, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Afghanistan and Pakistan, all surrounding and including Palestine. The Crusaders couldn’t conquer and occupy it. The Soviets tried to conquer part of it, but had to turn tail and retreat from Afghanistan. Then, the United States, with her allies from NATO (including England) decided to conquer both Iraq and Afghanistan, which has cost many thousands of lives, with nothing gained other than a lot of costly bloodshed from the prophesied “hedge” of “thorns”!

This is my one hundred and eighty-seventh monthly teaching letter and continues my sixteenth year of publication. Since WTL #137, I have been continuing a series entitled The Greatest Love Story Ever Told, and have been expanding on its seven stages ever since: (1) the courtship, (2) the marriage, (3) the honeymoon, (4) the estrangement, (5) the divorce, (6) the reconciliation, and (7) the remarriage.

THE GREATEST LOVE STORY EVER TOLD, Part 46,

THE DIVORCE:

In many of my previous lessons, I have covered much concerning Yahweh’s divorce from His Cinderella bride, the twelve tribes of Israel. With this lesson, we’ll examine both the Biblical and secular concepts of what constitutes a divorce. Should one investigate the various Biblical dictionaries on the subject, one will find little-to-nothing regarding this all-important theme, and what little can be found is grossly inadequate. It should be noted that “divorce” or “divorcement” in Hebrew, and both Koine and Septuagint Greek, simply means “a cutting off” or “a separating”. I will start this discourse by citing Matthew 1:18-25:

“¹⁸ Now the birth of Yahshua Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. ¹⁹ Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily. ²⁰ But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of Yahweh appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. ²¹ And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Yahshua: for he shall save his people from their sins. ²² Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of Yahweh by the prophet, saying, ²³ Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. ²⁴ Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel Yahweh had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: ²⁵ And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Yahshua.

 

One little side note here: Oftentimes there are disputes as to what kind of creatures these angels are (or for that matter, fallen angels). We know that at times, “angel” can simply mean “a messenger”, as witnessed in this passage. On occasion, an angel can be a mortal man, but a mortal man cannot appear to another mortal man in a dream, so the angel of Yahweh that appeared to Joseph in his dream had to be something other than a mortal man. I personally am not an interpreter of dreams, nor can I understand my own dreams, and I really have a problem with those tongue-wagging pentecostal-types who claim they carry on “conversations with God!”

The above quoted passage in Matthew speaks volumes concerning the subject of divorce! As a matter of fact this passage is parallel to that of Genesis 3:1-6, plus v. 13:

“¹ Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which Yahweh Elohim had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath Elohim said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? ² And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: ³ But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, Elohim hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. ⁴ And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: ⁵ For Elohim doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. ⁶ And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat ... ¹³ And Yahweh Elohim said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.”

From the Aramaic Targum, called pseudo-Jonathan, on Genesis 3:6, which is unique inasmuch as it identifies the angel Sammael as the “serpent”:

“And the woman saw Sammael, the angel of death, and she was afraid and knew that the tree was good for food, and that it was a remedy for the enlightenment of the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise. She took of its fruit and ate and also gave (it) to her husband and he ate.”

Again, the Aramaic Targum pseudo-Jonathan, on Genesis 4:1: “And Adam knew that his wife Eve had conceived from Sammael the Angel (of death) and she became pregnant and bore Cain. And he was like those on high and not like those below. And she said: ‘I have got a man from the angel of the LORD.’”

This rendition of Genesis 4:1 is interesting, for it speaks of the “angel of death” plus “like those on high” and “like those below.” This seems to accord with John 8:23, where Yahshua told the Canaanite variety of jews: “... Ye are from beneath; and I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.” Satan was on high until his fall, when he fell like lightning; Luke 10:18.

The Palestinian Targum to Genesis 4:1: “And Adam knew his wife Eve, who had desired the Angel; and she conceived, and bare Cain; and she said, I have acquired a man, the angel of the Lord ...”

In another Rabbinic work: Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer, 21: “And she saw that his likeness was not of earthly beings, but of the heavenly beings, and she prophesied and said: I have gotten a man from the Lord.”

For more on these verses from the Aramaic Targums, read my essay, The Problem With Genesis 4:1.

What we see here is: as Joseph had to make a decision to keep Mary, the mother of Christ, Adam had to make a similar choice to keep Eve, rather than divorce her because of her adultery with the serpent! Therefore, Adam ended up with a second-handed woman! We can be sure that this is how it happened, as Gen. 4:3-7 states of the two half-brothers:

“³ And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto Yahweh. ⁴ And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And Yahweh had respect unto Abel and to his offering: ⁵ But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell. ⁶ And Yahweh said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? ⁷ If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his [Abel’s] desire, and thou shalt rule over him.”

In Holy Writ, only firstborn sons can inherit the priesthood and offer sacrifices! Therefore, Cain was claiming the family priesthood because he was the firstborn of Eve by the serpent, and Abel was claiming the family priesthood since he was the firstborn of Eve by Adam. Read vs. 7 over again very carefully! Hybrids are never accepted!

From this Biblical account of the story of the creation of Adam and Eve and the narrative explaining the battle for the priesthood between Cain and Abel, we can comprehend that the potential for a divorce existed, had Adam chosen that prerogative. Had Adam desired a pure virgin instead of Eve, it would have required Eve’s death by stoning at the hand of Adam himself, leaving Adam again without a “help meet”, and we can only conjecture what would have happened in such a case. What we do know is: Yahweh laid down the law to Eve at Gen. 3:16, saying in part, “... thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.” Therefore, Yahweh had decreed that a woman is entirely out of her place when she attempts to rule over Adam-man! The problem we have today is, there are very few men left who are capable of ruling over a woman, let alone a family of one or several children! One can generally spot those men who are capable of ruling over their house; they take on the responsibility of a wife and family, stop running all night with the boys, and stay home where they belong.

Had Eve found her proper place in life, it would have been unnecessary for Yahweh to remind her, “... thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.” As a result, being of the weaker gender, she let the serpent (i.e., Satan) rule over her. This shows that Eve wasn’t satisfied with being a helpmeet to Adam, but decided (like the White women of today) to have full control over her own body, and abort (actually murder) any child she was carrying at will, so she could get a position with a Fortune five-hundred company run by some Edomite-jew. First of all any unwanted pregnancy by such a woman is only half of her body, as she only contributes 23 chromosomes to the genetics of that child, while the male she had sex with contributed the other 23 chromosomes from his body. Therefore the male has as much say in the matter as the female, but the male is never consulted, giving the female superior dominance over the male. Secondly, if the White Adamic female doesn’t mate with a White Adamic male (i.e., kind after kind), Yahweh requires that both the White Adamic mother and bastard child be “aborted” by “stoning”! Such a woman is not a “helpmeet” to anyone! So, again, we see what kind of punishment Eve deserved, had Adam chose to enact it, Lev. 20:16:

“And if a woman approach unto any beast, and lie down thereto, thou shalt kill the woman, and the beast: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” Here, “beast” is an idiomatic pejorative for a two-legged nonwhite person. This is the best reason in the world why every God-fearing White Adamic-man should have complete ruler-ship over his own household! That, however, doesn’t give him license to be a tyrant! But, how can a good God-fearing man enforce Yahweh’s law of “kind after kind” as long as the pastors in churchianity continually promote sending missionaries to the nonwhite lands of the earth, or encourage nonwhite aliens to attend and enter into fellowship with the White-Caucasian-European-Americans in their congregations?

ORIGIN OF WHITE ADAMIC MARRIAGE BY DIVINE ORDER

The Divine origin of the institution of marriage of the White Adamic people is recorded at Gen. 2:18-25:

“¹⁸ And Yahweh Elohim said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. ¹⁹ And out of the ground Yahweh Elohim formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. ²⁰ And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. ²¹ And Yahweh Elohim caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; ²² And the rib, which Yahweh Elohim had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. ²³ And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. ²⁴ Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh ....”

It is quite apparent from this passage that it is not natural for Adam-man to live alone without a wife to call his own. Neither is it natural for a White Adamic couple to get a divorce one from the other. It usually takes a third party to cause a split to occur between the bonded married couple, and this third party is usually influenced by the “seed of the serpent” via his several criminal agencies. Therefore, Satan is forever playing his deceptive game of the eternal triangle. All Satan has to do is make the grass appear a little greener on the other side of the fence, and this is exactly how Satan seduced Eve, and it nearly caused a divorce between Adam and Eve, our first parents. Although It should be noted that Yahweh, being a just Elohim, placed the blame for Eve’s sexual seduction squarely on the serpent, whose seed in Cain was totally rejected forever!

As Adam had every right to put Eve away, as Joseph had every just reason to put away Mary, the mother of Christ, so under some circumstances can a woman dissolve her tie of marriage from a man, Exo. 21:7-11:

“⁷ And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do. ⁸ If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her. ⁹ And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters. ¹⁰ If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish. ¹¹ And if he do not these three unto her, then shall she go out free without money.”

Note on vs. 7: An Israelite was not allowed to sell his daughter except under extreme financial stress – when he reached the point where he no longer had any tangible or intangible assets left at his disposal, even the clothes on his back; and he only had this alternative as long as she remained unmarriageable. At first it may seem strange that such a law should have ever been given; but let it be remembered that this servitude extended at the utmost only six years; and in some cases was equivalent to an apprenticeship where the parents would bind the child for seven years, during which time the child was given a weekly allowance.

Note on vs. 9: He, the master, is obligated to give the purchased daughter the same dowry he would give to one of his own family daughters. We further learn from these laws that if the master’s son marries the purchased daughter by the master’s consent, the master is obligated to treat her in every respect as a daughter; and if the master’s son should marry a second woman (as vs. 10 alludes to) the master’s son, in such a case, would be obligated to make no abatement (i.e., reduction) in food, raiment or duty of marriage (i.e., cohabitation, sexual activity) to the master’s son’s first wife. And should the master’s son not be able to supply all three of these, the purchased daughter can go free, without money (i.e., divorce the master’s son), and be free to marry another! And if the master’s son should think he needs two wives, let him be prepared to work twice as hard to support them, or any children he might father by them! Yes! Women have rights too!

This should also show that any man taking a wife is obligated to furnish her with food, raiment, duty of marriage, and a roof over her head. Should such a husband, after taking on the responsibility of a wife, start chasing other women and share some of his duty of marriage with them on the side, he is no longer worthy of the woman he swore to be faithful to, and like the purchased daughter of vvs. 7-11 his duty of marriage is diminished, and his promise has been broken. Therefore, such a woman should have the same right, and be able to free herself from the unfaithful husband by divorce, and be free to marry another worthy of her affection! Of course, Exo. 21: 7-11 is only instructing White Israelites! If it’s not White Adam-kind after White Adam-kind, it’s not a marriage! It’s an affair! It’s miscegenation!

There are two sides of the coin, though, for a woman to become divorced from her husband: (1) If a woman finds herself married to a man who will not furnish her with food, raiment or duty of marriage, she can free herself by leaving him, never to return, or (2) If the husband has furnished his wife with food, raiment and duty of marriage, and she is unfaithful and commits adultery with another man, she can expect to be divorced, never to return to that particular husband, Deut. 24:1-4a.

Let us next examine Yahweh’s Sovereign Will toward marriage and divorce found at Matt. 19:3-9: “³ The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? ⁴ And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, ⁵ And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? ⁶ Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. ⁷ They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? ⁸ He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. ⁹ And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication⁴²⁰², and shall marry another, committeth adultery³⁹²⁹: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.”

It should be noted that Yahshua Christ used two different Greek words for sexual misconduct, fornication⁴²⁰² and adultery³⁴²⁹. It should be noted that the Greek word “fornication” covers a wider range of sexual misbehavior than does the Greek word “adultery”. Fornication would cover all of the sexual deviations that were carried on by the Canaanite nations of the Old Testament, which we find at Leviticus 18:24-25:

“²⁴ Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you: ²⁵ And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants.”

We will not read the whole chapter here, but just point out what kind of people they were according to this chapter:

0. The sons were having incest with their mothers.

0. The fathers where having incest with their daughters.

0. The brothers were having incest with their sisters.

0. The fathers-in-laws were having incest with their daughters-in-laws.

0. The nephews were having incest with their aunts.

0. The uncles were having incest with their nieces.

0. The brothers-in-laws were having incest with their sisters-in-laws.

0. The sons-in-laws were having incest with their mothers-in-laws.

0. The grandfathers were having incest with their granddaughters.

0. The grandsons were having incest with their grandmothers.

0. They were laying every man carnally with their neighbor’s wife.

0. They were also committing homosexuality.

Even this doesn’t cover the entire gamut of what all the Greek word “fornication” could include! Now the sexually clean spouse has every lawful right to divorce their partner in marriage who is guilty of any kind of “fornication”! The Greek word “fornication” also includes “race mixing” in the New Testament, as verified by Hebrews 12:14-17:

“¹⁴ Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see Yahshua: ¹⁵ Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of Yahweh; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled; ¹⁶ Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright. ¹⁷ For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.” Esau joined himself to non-Hebrew women: Two Hittites, one so-called Hivite, and one of Ishmael’s daughters, and put them all in a blender by fathering their children! So now we know what the phrase “root of bitterness” stands for. What does the “root of bitterness” accomplish? Answer: The unforgivable sin of causing one’s pure White seedline to become defiled, without a cure throughout all downline generations!

A racially clean White spouse simply cannot continue to live under the same roof with a husband, wife or child who has eaten of the “root of bitterness”, as it would give license to other clean members of the family-line to do likewise. It would spread like wildfire! So when Christ used the Greek term “fornication” at Matt. 19:9, it covered a lot more sexual territory, and was to be distinguished from mere “adultery”. Now the Hebrew word “adultery” in the Old Testament is primarily “race mixing”, but occasionally can mean humbling another man’s wife or husband. Exodus 20:14 should really state: “Thou shalt not mix thy race.” The 10th Commandment directs in part: “... thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife ....” Yahweh is surely intelligent enough not to make two Commandments just alike, but that is how the majority of people read it! The fact of the matter is: White people don’t have nonwhite people for “neighbors”, even though the nonwhite people might live next door! Of note here, any of the many types of “fornication” is grounds for a divorce! Even divorcing a whole family, or an entire church for that matter! 2 Cor. 6:14-17, amplified for a better understanding:

“¹⁴ Be ye not unequally yoked together with [nonwhite] unbelievers: for what fellowship hath [White] righteousness with [nonwhite] unrighteousness? and what communion hath [the children of] light with [the children of] darkness? ¹⁵ And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? ¹⁶ And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye [Whites] are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. ¹⁷ Wherefore come out from among the [nonwhites] , and be ye separate, saith Yahweh, and touch⁶⁸⁰ not the [nonwhite] unclean; and I will receive you ....”

“‘touch’ in the Greek, ^#680 ... haptomai, meaning in part: 1) to fasten one’s self to, adhere to, cling to 1a) to touch 1b) of carnal intercourse with women or cohabitation ....” (BibleWorks).

An occasion for the forceful putting away (a type of divorce from foreign women) is found at Ezra 9:1-3, 6-7:

“¹ Now when these things were done, the princes came to me, saying, The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the people of the lands, doing according to their abominations, even of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites. ² For they have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons: so that the holy seed have mingled themselves with the people of those lands: yea, the hand of the princes and rulers hath been chief in this trespass. ³ And when I heard this thing, I rent my garment and my mantle, and plucked off the hair of my head and of my beard, and sat down astonied. ... ⁶ And said, O my God, I am ashamed and blush to lift up my face to thee, my God: for our iniquities are increased over our head, and our trespass is grown up unto the heavens. ⁷ Since the days of our fathers have we been in a great trespass unto this day; and for our iniquities have we, our kings, and our priests, been delivered into the hand of the kings of the lands, to the sword, to captivity, and to a spoil, and to confusion of face, [i.e., miscegenation] as it is this day.”

This violation for breaking Israel’s marriage Covenant with her Husband, Yahweh, is found at Deut. 7:1-8:

“¹ When Yahweh thy Elohim shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou; ² And when Yahweh thy Elohim shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them: ³ Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son. ⁴ For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods: so will the anger of Yahweh be kindled against you, and destroy thee suddenly. ⁵ But thus shall ye deal with them; ye shall destroy their altars, and break down their images, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire. ⁶ For thou art an holy people unto Yahweh thy Elohim: Yahweh thy Elohim hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth. ⁷ Yahweh did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye were the fewest of all people: ⁸ But because Yahweh loved you, and because he would keep the oath which he had sworn unto your fathers, hath Yahweh brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you out of the house of bondmen, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.”

The only people Yahweh ever married were the White Adamic Israelites – the only people Yahweh ever divorced were the White Adamic Israelites – and the only people whom Yahweh (as Yahshua) will remarry are the White Adamic twelve tribes of Israel, and absolutely no one else! And those Israelites who have a percentage of Canaanite or other nonwhite blood in their woodpile, WILL NOT become part of the Bride of Christ; for ONCE MIXED, ALWAYS MIXED!

What we do comprehend in studying this incident in the book of Ezra is the undeniable fact that any Israelite, man or woman, has positively no lawful standing once they have joined themselves to a Canaanite, or some other nonwhite race. Any so-called union with such a racially alien person is a violation of Yahweh’s law of kind after kind! We only have to examine the incident where Judah joined himself with a Canaanite woman, whose father was named Shuah, at Genesis chapter 38, and by this Canaanite woman were born three half-breed sons, Er, Onan and Shelah. As time passed, Judah was faced with finding a wife for his hybrid son, Er. However, Judah tried to match Er up with a purebred White woman by the name of Tamar, whereupon Yahweh killed Er. Not learning a lesson from this, Judah tried to match up Onan with Tamar, and likewise, Yahweh killed Onan. Finally, Judah got the significance that Yahweh is not pleased with plural ethnicity, and didn’t try again with Shelah. As time transpired, Judah’s illegitimate sex-partner died, and Judah realized that his union with the Canaanite woman was entirely for naught. Judah, finding himself without any legitimate children, realized his union with the Canaanite didn’t constitute a true marriage, so he was back to square one, a single unmarried person.

To make a long story short, Tamar, not wanting any hybrid Canaanite children, tricked Judah in living up to his compact with her to supply her with pure White Semitic seed, which resulted in the birth of twins, Pharez and Zerah, whom Judah fathered.

However, in the process of these twins being born, Zerah’s arm appeared as though he would be the first born. Quickly, the midwife tied a scarlet thread around Zerah’s wrist, for being the “firstborn” was very important in Israelite inheritance. But Zerah pulled his arm back, and then the entire body of Pharez came forth, making him “firstborn” rather than Zerah.

Hence, if one were to count the offspring (both legitimate and illegitimate) of Judah, it would be as follows: (1) Er, (2) Onan, (3) Shelah, (4) Pharez, and (5) Zerah. Therefore, we must ask the question: “Why then are Pharez and Zerah counted as numbers one and two?” The simple answer is: those not racially pure are not counted as part of the family, tribe or nation, as they are not of Yahweh’s pure “kind after kind” Creation!

With this lesson, I have endeavored to present some of the Biblical cases of divorce, but there are many more examples in addition to what I have cited here. Through my eighty-six years, I believe I have witnessed almost every type of marriage and divorce one might imagine, and there are hardly any that comes anywhere close to perfect. Even Yahweh’s marriage to the twelve tribes of Israel was not a perfect marriage, or there never would have been a divorce in the first place. Not only that, Christ’s ancestral line had many individuals who were downright sinners, and bad examples of righteousness. However, the genetic line of Christ was flawless, and without any “root of bitterness”. So whatever kind of complicated marriage one might encounter, or be a party to, regardless of how many wives, husbands or children involved, all the parties thereto must be of pure White-Caucasian-European lineage. Personally, I only ever knew one virgin White-Caucasian-European-American wife; ditto for her with me, so I don’t have an ax to grind!

It may seem strange to some, but even Paul alludes to marriage, he being a father to the Ekklesia at 1 Cor. 4:15 and Philemon 10-13. I will cite William Finck’s Christogenea New Testament:

1 Cor. 4:15: “Although you may have a myriad of tutors among the Anointed, certainly not many fathers; indeed in Christ Yahshua through the good message I have begotten you.”

Philemon 10-13: “I exhort you concerning my child, whom I have begotten in these bonds, Onasimos ¹¹ whom at one time was useless to you but now is useful to you and to me. ¹² Whom I have sent back to you, he that is my own affections, ¹³ whom I have wished to detain for myself in order that in behalf of you he may minister for me in the bonds of the good message.”

We really shouldn’t overlook the Levirate marriage law. Rousas John Rushdoony (whom I seldom quote), in his book The Institute Of Biblical Law has this to say in part, pp. 375-376:

“The Levirate ... The family was basic to Biblical society and culture; The bastard was cut off from church, and state, insofar as any legal status was concerned ... The purpose of Hebrew polygamy, which was usually bigamy, to be accurate, was thus the perpetuation of the family. Moreover, in terms of the facts, as Mace pointed out, ‘we are bound to envisage the community as being in general almost entirely monogamous.’ ... The one exception permitted is the law of the Levirate (Deut. 25:5-10). According to the law, if a man died childless, his next of kin had the duty to take the widow as wife and rear up a family bearing the name of the dead man. This law was older than Moses, and was applied in Judah’s household (Gen. 38:8).”

In Scripture, racial purity and the family unit have the highest priority, and the Levirate law helped insure these very goals. From the nonwhite’s worldly point of view, this is considered nonsense and a gross contradiction. But Christ proclaimed to them: “... Ye are from beneath; I am from above ...”, John 8:23.

 

This is a non-copyrighted teaching letter. Please feel free to make as many copies as you wish, but not to edit.