This is my one hundred and eighty-ninth 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 48,

THE DIVORCE & RECONCILIATION:

With the last lesson, WTL #188, I repeated an article I had previously written, The Insane Doctrine of Personal Salvation vs. Covenant Theology, #1. With this lesson I will repeat part #2 of the same paper:

The doctrine of “personal salvation”, as promoted by nominal churchianity, is founded on the false premise that somehow Christ came to sacrifice Himself on the cross to give the whole world, no matter what race, an opportunity to decide whether or not they want to accept Him and enjoy the benefits of His Covenant. Such an assumption immediately makes Yahweh a 2nd class god! Poor old God, can’t do anything right!

As I demonstrated in paper #1 on this subject, if one will only read John 15:13-17; John: 6:44-45, 65; & 1 John 4:9-10, he will discover that it is Yahweh in the flesh (as Yahshua) who does the “choosing”, “drawing” and “loving”, and He chose only Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and his twelve sons, and their offspring. Therefore, it is impossible to have both “personal salvation” and “Covenant Theology” in the same Bible!

Now, I won’t condemn any White Israelite who has made a decision for Christ, but I would remind him that Yahweh in the flesh (as Yahshua) decided on him when He purchased him on the cross, before he ever made such a determination! Nominal churchianity would have us believe that we first accept Jesus Christ as our personal savior, and after we have done so, then second, He will purchase us. That elevates man’s decision over and above Yahweh’s decision! That’s why I said, “that makes Yahweh a 2nd class god!”

At this time I will critique an article that appeared in Destiny Magazine for March, 1949 entitled “The Interdependence of the Two Testaments”, by Henry D. Houghton. I will not quote from it, but I will use important views drawn from him. If you have that particular issue, you may read it for yourself.

There are ideas spread abroad among the various denominations of nominal churchianity that the New Testament not only supersedes the Old, but also revokes many of Yahweh’s national promises so clearly recorded therein. Not only this, but Israel’s status or standing in the New Testament is altogether altered in nature from that of the Old. They would have us to believe that the Old Testament was made with the converso Edomite-jews, while the New Covenant, or as we know it, the “New Testament” was made with some people wrongly identified as “Gentiles”. By this false assertion, they make the claim that the New Testament repeals the Old. Nothing could be more damnably false and overwhelmingly disastrous. Yet unfortunately, many believe such nonsense!

How these strange suppositions were spawned by the clergy and absorbed by the laity is incomprehensible, if not completely dumbfounding in nature, for there is not a solitary passage in Scripture which supports such an invalid determination. The New Covenant is nothing more than the renewal of the Old Covenant mentioned at Jeremiah 31:31-32, and repeated at Hebrews 8:8-9:

“³¹ Behold, the days come, saith Yahweh, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: ³² Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith Yahweh ...”

Notice how the New is a renewal of the Old Covenant, and an uninterrupted working out by Yahweh of His one complete preordained plan. Observe also that, the beneficiaries remain the same, i.e., “... the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah ...” Nothing about “Gentiles” here! The Latin word “Gentile” is correct when properly applied, but the definition of this word IS NOT nor EVER WAS a “non-jew”. At Jeremiah 31:31-32, the New Covenant was a future promise, and at Hebrews 8:8-9, it is recognized as a Covenant fulfilled!

It is alleged by some, however, that Yahweh, long after the time of the prophets, disinherited the twelve tribes of old Israel for their sins, and brought in a new spiritual Israel – the Christian church – to take the place of the literal physical line of Israel, which Yahweh had finally given up on and forever cast off! This allegation, however popular it might be, is altogether false, and directly opposed by all Scripture, especially Jeremiah 31:37, which reads:

“Thus saith Yahweh; If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith Yahweh.”

I would point out to the reader at this very time, July 5, 2012, that astronomers are testing out a new system of 66 telescopes in Chile to measure the universe, which leads them to believe that there are many universes, not just galaxies or solar systems, but many other universes besides our own with their own galaxies and solar systems. So, we can be quite safe in believing that the twelve tribes of Israel will NEVER be permanently “cast off”! For all those who reject the Old Testament (and many do, especially romish catholics), let’s consider Paul’s words at Romans 11:1-5:

“¹ I say then, Hath Yahweh cast away his people? Yahweh forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. ² Yahweh hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to Yahweh against Israel, saying, ³ Yahweh, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. ⁴ But what saith the answer of Yahweh unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. ⁵ Even so then at this present time [during Paul’s lifetime] also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.”

This passage demonstrates that no matter how great the sins of the twelve tribes of Israel, Yahweh was not going to cast them off without providing a way back to Him! It should be pointed out that Jeremiah’s prophecy at 31:37 was made 115 years AFTER the northern ten tribes of Israel were banished out of their land for their sins. This shows that Yahweh resolved that under absolutely NO CIRCUMSTANCES WHATSOEVER would He disinherit or cast off Israel forever! If one will but read the entire content of Jeremiah chapter 31, he will find it contains wonderful promises and predictions for all of Israel, some of which are absolutely unconditional. This chapter covers a lot of subjects which demand our careful attention. Probably the most important fact that every serious Bible student should understand is that it was written in regard to the twelve tribes of Israel, and not to the converso Edomite-jews, as nominal churchianity so falsely contend. It’s about time that we expect the Words of our Almighty Yahweh to be carried out in to-to (i.e., in the whole), and applied to the correct people!

In spite of all of this evidence to the contrary, for one reason or another, there has grown up in the rank and file of the clergy, along with much of the laity in nominal churchianity, the mistaken idea that the two separate Testaments are made with two different peoples, and that somehow the authority passed away and ceases to belong to whom it was originally promised, and somehow another people – the Gentiles (a Latin term found nowhere in the original Bible text) – have superseded them and inherited the New Testament, making void Yahweh’s unconditional, everlasting Covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and his offspring – implying that Yahweh lied, making Him an indian-giver. Is there no end to the length people will go to twist Holy Writ?

Other people regard the New Testament as a hasty standby device to meet the embarrassing and unexpected emergency situation that the Old Testament had failed Yahweh’s expectations. On that failure the New Testament was made necessary by Yahweh’s sudden unforeseen change of plans. In fact, the dispensationalists claim the Almighty has changed His plans time and time again. They claim He tried His first plan for a thousand years, and when it didn’t work out, He tried a new plan for another thousand years. In fact, such people as these claim that the Almighty has now changed His plans six times, and when He returns at His Second Advent, it will be His seventh change.

No true conception of the Scriptures can correctly be arrived at while such errant views are held, for they are violently opposed to the Word of Yahweh, and are in direct conflict with both the Old and New Testaments. To show this glaring conflict, it must be demonstrated that the whole of the conception and operation of the New Testament comes out of the Old. To reject the Old Testament would be like bulldozing the foundation out from under one’s house. That house would no longer be livable! Remove the Old Testament out from under the New Testament, and the New Testament would no longer be comprehendible! Secondly, removing the authority of the Old Testament would be like building a house from the top downward. Try doing this sometime by taking an extension ladder and anchoring it some way so it won’t fall over; put on a nail sack and take some nails and a hammer to the desired height of the roof, and start nailing shingles on the thin air, and see how far you get! These illustrations might seem to be quite foolish, but it is no more foolish than removing the authority of the Old Testament leaving the New Testament without any foundation!

When are nominal churchianity ever going to learn that Yahweh doesn’t have a new plan or purpose, but He is continuing with His original plan and purpose in the New Testament? It is not a new plan; it is the old. It is not with a new people; it is with the old. It is not a new device; it is the old. This was made very clear when the angel Gabriel announced to Mary the birth of Christ, who would become the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world, at Luke 1:32-33:

“³² He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and Yahweh shall give unto him the throne of his father David: ³³ And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.” If the Old Testament lost its authority with the arrival of the New, then the angel lied to Mary! Zacharias, filled with the Holy Spirit at Luke 1:68-72, prophesied saying:

“⁶⁸ Blessed be Yahweh, the Mighty One of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, ⁶⁹ And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; ⁷⁰ As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began: ⁷¹ That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us; ⁷² To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant ...” If the Old Testament lost its authority with the arrival of the New, not only did the angel Gabriel lie, but most, if not all, of the Old Testament prophets lied also! When are all of these false allegations going to stop?

It now becomes apparent that the New Covenant DID NOT destroy the Old Covenant. Simeon, filled with the Holy Spirit, spoke of Christ as, “A light to lighten the [lost Israel nations], and the glory of the people of Israel” (Luke 2:32). This text is correctly understood as meaning: “A light to lighten the [lost Israel nations – not the converso Edomite-jews] and the glory of Thy people, the twelve tribes of the children of Israel.” On the converso Edomite-jews, check Josephus’ Antiquities, book 13, chap. 9, par. 1:

“... Hyrcanus took also Dora and Marissa, cities of Idumea, and subdued all the Idumeans; and permitted them to stay in that country, if they would circumcise their genitals, and make use of the laws of the Jews [sic Judaeans]; and they were so desirous of living in the country of their [Edomite] forefathers, that they submitted to the use of circumcision, and the rest of the Jewish ways of living; at which time therefore this befell them, that they were hereafter no other than Jews.” [underlining mine] A footnote on the same page makes the following comment on this passage:

“This account of the Idumeans admitting circumcision, and the entire Jewish law, from this time, or from the days of Hyrcanus, is confirmed by their entire history afterwards. This, in the opinion of Josephus, made them proselytes of justice, or entire Jews. However, Antigonus, the enemy of Herod, though Herod was derived from such a proselyte of justice for several generations, will allow him to be no more than a half Jew [i.e. half Judahite and half Edomite]. Ammonius, a grammarian, says:– ‘the Jews are such by nature, and from the beginning, whilst the Idumeans are not Jews from the beginning ... but being afterwards subdued by the Jews [sic Judahites] and compelled to be circumcised, and to unite into one nation, and be subject to the same laws, they were called Jews.’ Dio also says:– ‘That country is also called Judea, and the people Jews; and this name is given also to as many as embrace their religion, though of other nations’.” Therefore, I use the phrase, “the converso Edomite-jews”, and now you know the reason why! The term “converso” is from the Latin, meaning “to turn around”. You’ll not find the definition in most English dictionaries. An alternate phrase might be, “the impostor turn around Edomite-jews.” No sooner had the Edomites been converted to Israeliteism than they began their evil effort to subvert the context of our Holy Scriptures to suit their wicked cabalism called today, The Babylonian, or Jerusalem Talmud. Christ Himself designated this corruption of the Bible as “the traditions of the elders”! Not the Judahite elders, but the converso Edomite-jew elders! There’s a big difference! Although the converso Edomite-jew Masoretes did a hatchet job on our Holy Scriptures, they failed to corrupt every truth, and we must be very careful to divide the truthfulness from their intentional fraud. Remember, the ultimate sin is to MIX good with evil, and it begins by mixing truth with a lie!

Nominal churchianity continues to insist that all of the Old Testament laws “have been done away with”, but should they carefully examine Scripture, they would discover it was the ritual laws only that were discontinued at Christ’s crucifixion, for He fulfilled all of the ritual laws. Some laws can be fulfilled while other laws cannot, and there are a lot of differences between the two. Colossians 2:13-14 explains how some of the laws were fulfilled:

“¹³ And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; ¹⁴ Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross ...”

Please notice this passage is speaking only of “the handwriting of ordinances that was against us”, not the entire law. It is highly dishonest to interpret this passage to mean such a thing! What, then, was the “ordinance” that was against the twelve tribes of Israel? The answer is: It was the law of remarriage to Israel’s former Husband after being divorced from Him. This ordinance is found at Deut. 24:1-4:

“¹ When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. ² And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man’s wife. ³ And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife; ⁴ Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before Yahweh: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which Yahweh thy Elohim giveth thee for an inheritance.”

It is imperative that we understand that Yahweh is not going to break His Own Law! Yet Hosea 2:7 declares:

“And she [Israel] shall follow after her lovers, but she shall not overtake them; and she shall seek them, but shall not find them: then shall she say, I will go and return to my first husband; for then was it better with me than now.”

How, then, is it possible for Israel to return to her first Husband, Yahweh? The answer is: The only way that Israel can return to her first Husband is if Yahweh would come in the flesh as Yahshua and offer Himself on the cross, and suffer death on behalf of Israel. This He did, and by doing so “Blotted out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us ...” Nominal churchianity by-and-large are blind to this “blotting out”, and teach personal salvation in its place. Yahweh never married anyone other than the twelve tribes of Israel; nor did He divorce anyone other than the twelve tribes of Israel; nor did He offer Himself on the cross for anyone other than the twelve tribes of Israel! When are we ever going to learn that we can’t even have a 1% comprehension of the New Testament without first having an all-inclusive understanding of the Old!

Christ’s red-letter words speak loud and clear on this subject at Matt. 5:17-19: “¹⁷ Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. ¹⁸ For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. ¹⁹ Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”

This is not voiding the law, it is confirming the law; it is not revoking, but a teaching example of its fulfillment. This demonstrates beyond all doubt that those old Israelite prophecies and promises are backed up by Christ’s authority and are still in force! Nominal churchianity today, for the most part, ignores this straightforward declaration of our kinsman Redeemer as the sole purpose for His coming!

It is a very dangerous proposition to sit in judgment of Almighty Yahweh, or attempt to dictate to Him on what terms His favors shall be dispensed or who has the right to receive them! The only hope for those under His Covenant with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and his offspring lies in establishing the limits of that legal instrument, not twisted or altered truth, rearranged to satisfy some men’s play-pretty doctrinal theories! Altered truth is unmitigated error, gross and shameful, and can never take the place of Yahweh’s genuine Truth! A good example of this is Paul’s statement at Rom. 8:3-5:

“³ For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: ⁴ Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of Yahweh, and the promises; ⁵ Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, Yahweh blessed for ever.”

Generally speaking, nominal churchianity would spiritualize this passage, while its meaning is definitely literal! Think about it! Are we really to believe that Paul’s “... kinsmen according to the flesh ...” are “spiritual”? This is not “spiritual” seed that Paul is speaking of. “My brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh”, said he. To this same fleshly brethren he says, “pertaineth the adoption [present tense] and the covenants ... and promises.” Lest again a spiritual seed be imagined here, he adds, “Whose are the fathers”, thus plainly and definitely fixing all of these great possessions upon a literal seed. This absolutely does not favor the casting-off forever theory, nor yet that of a displacement by a so-called “Gentile church”! It is evident that if Yahweh were going to permanently cast off Israel, Paul knew absolutely nothing about it, for he distinctly asserts, in unmistakable terms, quite the contrary! My hope is, with this essay, the reader is now more aware of the difference between “personal salvation” vs. “Covenant Theology”, for without the Covenants, we surely have nothing!

We will now change our subject from “divorce” to “reconciliation”, and I will again quote Henry D. Houghton from Destiny Magazine, December 1949 entitled Redeemed:

“REDEEMED! What a glorious word it is. Who can measure it? How deep, how high, how broad? It speaks of a love that would not let us go; that works, that plans, that toils, that suffers and, best of all, triumphs. It suggests bands of steel binding the redeemed in an unbreakable bond to the Redeemer. It does not depend on worthiness of merit. It works and wins in spite of great unworthiness and demerit, and is everlasting in its operation and its effects.

“But who are the redeemed? The evangelical churches would say at once, ‘All those who believe in Christ.’ But is this so? Any man can purchase or buy, if the owner is agreeable to sell, but only the original owner of a thing can redeem it. And he can redeem whether the temporary owner is willing or not. It is his inalienable right which no one can deprive him of. But nothing not one’s own can be ‘redeemed.’

“Paul clearly distinguishes between ‘redeemed’ and ‘purchased’ in Acts 20:28:

“‘Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.’

“Take any great city – London, for instance – there are millions of things in that city I can buy if I have money enough, but there is not one thing in it that I can redeem, because I have nothing belonging to me there. Take another city where I might have some small article – say, a watch – in pawn. Although there may be half a million people in that city, not one of them can redeem my watch, because it is not theirs to redeem. Nor can they buy it till I, the owner, by lapse of time, show I surrender my right to redeem. It is mine, though temporarily in the possession of another.

“Now, then, apply all this to the case of the Church and its explanation of the word ‘redeemed.’ Did the Church belong to God before and somehow He lost it to another? That is obviously wrong. God may, indeed does, offer salvation to the Gentiles [sic Genesis 10 White nations] and the heathen [sic pagans of both Israel and the Genesis 10 White nations], but only His ancient people can be ‘redeemed.’ What does the Bible say about the captive daughter of Zion?

“‘Thus saith the Lord, Ye have sold yourselves for nought; and ye shall be redeemed without money.’ (Isa. 52:3.)

“‘... O Israel, Fear not: for I have redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy name; thou art mine.’ (Isa. 43:1.)

“Here is the declaration of the Divine right of redemption. No other has any claim. He says as a result of that redeeming, ‘Thou art mine!’ No one has a right to dispute it; none can say Him nay.

“In Zechariah 10:8 God says of Ephraim:

“‘I will hiss for them, and gather them; for I have redeemed them: and they shall increase as they have increased."

“Then He states further in Isaiah 63:4:

“‘For the day of vengeance is in mine heart, and the year of my redeemed is come.’

“The ‘day of vengeance’ refers to the Day of the Lord when all His enemies will receive their punishment and be condemned to destruction. But at the same time the Lord announces, ‘And the year of my redeemed is come.’ What is that? It is the great year of God’s open acknowledgment of Israel as His people.

“But does the New Testament bear out this interpretation and application of the word ‘redeem’? It very definitely does so. Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist, was filled with the Holy Ghost when he prophesied:

“‘Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people.’ (Luke 1:68.)

“When Mary and Joseph brought the child Jesus into the Temple to perform the custom of the law, Simeon, a just and devout man, was there who, the Scriptures state, was waiting for the consolation of Israel. Taking the child in his arms, he said:

“‘Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word: For mine eyes have seen thy salvation, which thou hast prepared before the face of all people; A light to lighten the Gentiles [sic Israel nations], and the glory of thy people Israel.’ (Luke 2: 29-32.)

“Anna, a prophetess, coming in at that moment:

“‘... gave thanks likewise unto the Lord, and spake of him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem.’ (Luke 2:38.)

“Many years later the two disciples who walked along the road to Emmaus actually said to the Redeemer Himself:

“‘But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel ...’ (Luke 24:21.)

“In Galatians 3:13 Paul exclaims: ‘Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law.’ That was the way Israel was held in bondage. They had broken the law, but through Jesus Christ came the great redemption which Paul proclaimed. The fact that they were under the law showed very plainly that they were Hebrews to which Paul appealed, for the Gentiles [sic non-Israelite nations] never had been under the law. In Romans 2:14 Paul speaks of the ‘Gentiles [sic nations], which have not the law,’ showing very plainly that the commands of the law never came to the heathen or Gentiles [sic non-Israelite nations].

“Redemption is an everlasting work, as the writer of the Book of Hebrews points out:

“‘Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.’ (Heb. 9:12.)

“One of the singular and distinguishing things our Lord said, which is utterly ignored by the Church today, and which cuts right across many theories, is this: ‘... I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.’ (Matt. 15:24.)

Weymouth’s translation is even more forcible: “I have no commission except to the lost sheep of the House of Israel.”

Ferrar Fenton says: “I was not sent to other than the lost sheep of Israel’s house.” No matter how the Church may desire to wipe that out, it had better leave it alone, for it must be faced. It cannot be explained away. Indeed, it is in exact fulfillment of Isaiah 53:5 & 8:

“‘He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. ... for the transgression of my people was he stricken.’

“Christ Himself went even further, and commanded the disciples to do the same as He:

“‘... Go not into the way of the Gentiles [sic the other White non-Israelites of the Genesis 10 nations], and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.’ (Matt. 10:5-6.)

“So, then, the first statement explains His work. Israel, however, had hers; but she must hear the Gospel first. Therefore, just as He was leaving them, having laid down His life and taken it again, having wrought out the great redemption for Israel, He commanded them to go and take His truth, His message, His Gospel, to all Creation”. [Note: Mark 16:9-20 is not in original MS. And if it were, the final phrase of verse 15 is singular and has a definite article, “to all the creation”, i.e., all Adamic man (cf. Rom. 8:35-39. Balance of comment deleted.]

“Having accomplished His work, He bade Israel take up hers. His was to make Israel in truth the Kingdom of priests (administrators), a holy people, and show Israel to whom they were to minister as a Kingdom of priests – even the whole wide [sic White Adamic] world. Israel was redeemed for such a purpose.

“Redeemed! The word speaks of an unexpected forcible exercise of a long-dormant right and claim – a reestablishing of a supposed forfeited right by a forcible reclaiming of the goods.

“‘Sold yourselves?’ Alas, how true of Israel. Nevertheless, the Owner has His rights and He declares they shall be exercised, ‘Ye shall be redeemed without money.’ And so she was when the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31:33-34, was brought in, which Christ our Lord accomplished:

“‘This cup is the New Covenant ratified by My blood which is poured out on your behalf.’ (Luke 20:20, Weymouth Trans.)

“But has God really any rights in modern Israel, represented by the nations of the Anglo-Saxon-Celtic peoples? Undoubtedly He has, for He has declared it to be so a hundred times. And more, He has declared most positively that those rights shall never be surrendered:

“‘I ... have severed you from other people, that ye should be mine.’ (Lev. 20:26.)

“‘For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God: the Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth.’ (Deut. 7:6.)

“David later said: ‘... thou hast confirmed to thyself thy people Israel to be a people unto thee for ever: and thou, Lord, art become their God.” (II Sam. 7: 24.)

“Seven hundred years afterward God confirmed it all by saying through Isaiah:

“‘This people have I formed for myself; they shall shew forth my praise.’ (Isa, 43:2I.)

“While salvation is individual, redemption is national. God said to the nation:

“‘... O Israel, thou shalt not be forgotten of me. I have blotted out, as a thick cloud, thy transgressions, and, as a cloud, thy sins: return unto me; for I have redeemed thee.’ (Isa. 44:21-22.)

“‘... declare ye, tell this, utter it even to the end of the earth; say ye, The Lord hath redeemed his servant Jacob.’ (Isa. 48:20.)

“No failure can be possible, for the Redeemer has come! Now the House of Israel looks forward to His return in an even greater role, and through Hosea 13:^:9-10 the triumphant announcement is made:

“‘O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself; but in me is thine help. I will be thy king!’ ...”

This is my one hundred and ninetieth 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 49,

THE RECONCILIATION (i.e., Redemption):

With the last lesson, WTL #189, we discontinued the larger portion of our research concerning the subject of “divorce”, and started the subject of “reconciliation”. The subject of “reconciliation” should not be confused with the topic of “salvation” as “reconciliation” and “salvation” are two entirely separate matters! “Redemption” carries with it the concept of purchasing back something one once owned. For a good definition of our subject, I will cite The Popular And Critical Bible Encyclopedia And Scriptural Dictionary, ©1904, vol. 3, p. 1433:

“REDEEM, REDEEMED ...

“1. To redeem is to buy back persons or things formerly sold, by paying a due price for them (Lev. xxv:25).

“2: To deliver from distress and bondage, by the exertion of great power and love (Deut. vii :5; xxxii:6).

“3. To deliver men from the broken law, sin, Satan, an evil world, death, and hell, by the price of Jesus’ obedience and suffering, and by means of the enlightening and sanctifying power of his Spirit (Luke i:68; Gal. iv:4, 5; Tit. ii :I4 ; 1 Pet. i:I9), they are ‘redeemed from the earth,’ from among carnal men, and ‘to God,’ into a state of fellowship with, and voluntary subjection to him (Rev. v:9; xiv:3).

“4. To ‘redeem time’ is, under the conviction of misspending much of it, to double our diligence in the improvement of what remains for us (Eph. v:16). The children of Israel are called ‘the redeemed of the Lord’ [sic Yahweh] (Isa. xxxv:9; lxii:12), as returning from Babylonian captivity. (See REDEEMER; REDEMPTION.)

“REDEEMER (Heb. ... go-ale', a primitive root, to redeem).

“The Hebrew ‘goale,’ or kinsman-redeemer, who was also the nearest of kin, was to exert himself in favor of his destitute kinsman. If he had, through poverty, mortgaged his inheritance, the goale was to buy it back. If he had sold himself into slavery, the goale was to pay his ransom. If he was murdered, the goale was to avenge his blood. If he died childless, the goale might espouse his widow, and raise up seed to him; but it does not appear that he was obliged to do this, except he was an unmarried brother (Num. v:8; xxvii:11; xxxv; Deut. xxv:I-8; Ruth iii, iv; Lev. xxv: 25; Jer, xxxii:7, 8).

“General Applications.

“(1) God is called a ‘Redeemer;’ with mighty power and kindness he rescued the Hebrews from their bondage and trouble, and often delivers the oppressed; and he, through the blood of his Son, saves from deep slavery and woe under the broken (i.e. a violation of, ed. CAE) law, to endless glory and happiness (Isa. lxiii:I6).

“(2) Christ as a ‘Redeemer;’ by his righteousness, he paid the price of our redemption; by his intercession he pleads for and procures it; by his Spirit he applies it to our soul (Job xix:25; Isa. lix:20).

“(3) Christ is our ‘redemption’; our deliverance from sin, and all its effects, is through his blood and Spirit (Eph. i:7; Col. i:14; Heb. ix:12); and begins in our forgiveness, is carried on in our sanctification, and perfected in our eternal blessedness, when, at the resurrection, our very bodies shall be delivered from all the effects of sin; and this entrance on eternal glory is called our ‘redemption,’ as it brings the deliverance to its perfection (Luke xxi:28; Ram. viii:23). It is called the ‘redemption of the purchased possession,’ as we then enter on the full possession of what Christ has purchased; or it is the ‘redemption of the peculiar people’ (Eph. i:14). Christ died for the ‘redemption of transgressions,’ that is, that he might make full satisfaction for them (Heb. ix:15). He is made of God to us ‘redemption;’ he is prepared and given of God to us as an all-sufficient Savior; as the purchaser, price, treasury and substance of our everlasting deliverance from sin and misery to holiness and happiness (1 Cor. i:30). We are justified through ‘the redemption that is in him,’ the ‘redemption-price’ of his righteousness; and partaking of him, as made of God to us ‘redemption” (Rom. iii:22).

“REDEMPTION ... (Heb. pawdaw', to sever), in theology, denotes our recovery from sin and death by the obedience and [the] sacrifice of Christ, who, on this account, is called The Redeemer (Isa. lix:20; Job xix:25).

“(1) Our English word redemption is from the Latin redemptio, and signifies buying again; and several words, in the Greek language of the New Testament, are used in the affair of our redemption, which signify the obtaining of something by paying a proper price for it; sometimes the simple verb, to buy, is used; so the redeemed are said to be bought unto God by the blood of Christ, and to be bought from the earth, and to be bought from among men, and to be bought with a price; that is, with the price of Christ’s blood (1 Cor. vi:20). Hence, the church of God is said to be purchased with it (Acts xx:28). Sometimes a compound word is used, which signifies to buy again, or out of the hands of another, as the redeemed are bought out of the hands of justice, as in Gal. iii:13, and Gal. iv:5. In other places the word denoting ransom is used, or others derived from it, which signifies the deliverance of a slave or captive from thralldom, by paying a ransom price for him; so the saints are said to be redeemed not with silver or gold, the usual price paid for a ransom, but with a far greater one, the blood and life of Christ, which he came into this world to give us a ransom price for many, and even himself, which is antilutron, an answerable, adequate, and full price for them (1 Pet. i:18).

“(2) The evils from which we are redeemed or delivered are the curse of the law, sin, Satan, the world, death, and hell.

“(3) The moving cause of redemption is the love of God (John iii:16).

“(4) The procuring cause, Jesus Christ (1 Pet. i:18, 19).

“(5) The ends of redemption are, that the justice of God might be satisfied; his people reconciled, adopted, sanctified, and brought to glory.

“(6) The properties of it are these: (a) It is agreeable to all the perfections of God; (b) what a creature never could obtain, and therefore entirely of free grace; (c) it is special and particular; (d) full and complete; (e) and, lastly, is eternal as to its blessings.”

In each of the three volumes of this work, at the bottom of the back of the title page, a short interesting message is given thusly:

“THIS WORK IS SUPPLIED ONLY THROUGH AUTHORIZED CANVASSERS. BOOKSELLERS CANNOT OBTAIN IT.” [Note: I purchased my three volume set from a used bookstore.]

From this concise notice, one can surmise that this three volume Biblical Encyclopedia was sold by commissioned traveling salesmen making arrangements with pastors and congregations for special meetings to present the qualities of their product. First of all, these “canvassers” would of necessity be a Christian themselves, and secondly, he would out of necessity have to be quite familiar of the contents of the books he was taking orders for! Inasmuch as the “canvasser” would be visiting every church denomination, the author of the three volumes would have to face a conglomeration of beliefs, forcing both the author and “canvassers” to walk a theological tightrope, and yet promote Biblical truth. Therefore, I will quote the author’s statement of intent:

“INTRODUCTION: THE present [1904 A.D.] age is preeminently one of research and inquiry. The comparative sciences, relating to every realm of knowledge, have brought to the earnest student material for thought and investigation never before accessible.

“It has been more than half a century since the Biblical cyclopaedias by Kitto, Robinson and Watson were issued, and nearly as long since the scholarly works by Dr. William Smith appeared. All of these are now far out of date, and there is a growing demand for a help to Bible study in similar form, but containing the latest and best results of modern scholarship, arranged in the most convenient manner for ready reference, to take their place. The advancement in Biblical and physical learning in the last fifty years, and the clearer understanding of many things concerning the Jewish [sic Israelitish] and contemporaneous oriental nations as well, have made great changes in Biblical reference works essential to intelligent investigation. In the light of modern science the ablest minds of the day are re-examining the claims of the Bible to be the Word of God. Its unity and consequent integrity have been challenged. New statements of Biblical truth are being made and new methods of interpretation employed. But it still maintains its supreme place as the Book of books. It has been cast into the furnace of criticism, heated seven times hotter than for any other book, and it has come forth without even the smell of fire upon its sacred leaves. The result of this testing process has been to reduce the study of the Bible to a science, which is pursued with a greater or less degree of intensity and application by people of intelligence generally. To commit portions of it to memory, to be catechised in its doctrines and to enter into its devotions are not adequate Bible study. These are elementary steps in securing scriptural knowledge, but they do not unfold all the truths which thoughtful people seek after. The liberation of the human mind from bondage to creeds has ushered in an era of independent thought. But while this age is one of reason, it should not be in the light of facts before us, any less one of devotion. Science is the handmaid of religion, as has been devoutly said, and where pure religion abounds, the highest degree of intelligence is attained. Men who are thoroughly loyal to the Bible as the unimpeachable word of God, have been foremost to strengthen the hand of the archaeologist and to furnish the means which enable him to bring from the long buried past the story of the nations and the individuals mentioned in its sacred records. Their faith has taken a firmer hold upon its authenticity and inspiration through the surprising results which have been attained. From sunburnt bricks and monuments of stone, disentombed from mounds of ancient ruins, new witnesses have come forth bringing invaluable testimony to the accuracy of the Hebrew writers.

“Unfriendly critics had decided long ago that some of the cities mentioned in the Old Testament were purely mythical, but the spade of the explorer has revealed the foundations of the cities themselves. It was held that the names of certain kings were merely allegorical or the interpolation of some ignorant scribe, but in several instances the documents and inscriptions of these kings have been found, and even their bodies have been produced as incontrovertible evidence of the accuracy of the record of the sacred writings. More light is also continually breaking upon the Scriptures by reason of the progress made in Biblical Literature and Hermeneutics through the superior critical scholarship of the day.

“The aim of the Editors of this Encyclopaedia is to furnish a work of ready reference for ministers, Sunday School workers and Bible students of every class, including the general public. It will be found to contain the best information accessible upon all the varied themes of Bible lore. It is especially rich in the results of the most recent discoveries in Bible lands. The pick and spade of the archaeologist have forced the ancient ruins to yield up treasures richer than the gold of Ophir. The decipherment of historic inscriptions in the palaces and upon the tombs of ancient monarchs have added a constantly increasing accumulation of testimony to the truthfulness of the Biblical record. Claims of adverse criticism have been dispersed in the light of these discoveries as clouds of fog and mist before the shining of the ascending sun. The growing intelligence of the people demands familiarity, not only of the ministry, but of all who teach the Bible, with current facts which will enable them to arm the minds and hearts of the young with weapons defensive and offensive against the stalking foes of Christianity, namely, doubt, agnosticism, and scholastic infidelity. Such facts have been collated and arranged in this work in the most convenient form for reference. As a critical and popular Encyclopaedia and Dictionary it will meet the needs of both men^. of learning and of those who have not received a classical training. To produce accuracy and fullness, more than one hundred and twenty writers have contributed articles to these volumes. Most of them are specialists in History, Geography, Philology, Ethnology, Theology, or Archaeology, and among them are several of the greatest scholars of Europe and America. Never before have the services of so remarkable a corps of contributors been secured for any popular Biblical reference work. These writers differ in their opinions and views, and are alone responsible for them. But the whole work has been prepared on such a basis that it may confidently be regarded as a safe and reverent guide to the meaning of the Holy Scriptures. On controverted points in criticism and theology, as well as on ecclesiastical subjects, the questions at issue have been presented calmly and thoughtfully by recognized leaders of the different schools under discussion. The book has thus been divested of sectarian features and appeals to the whole Christian Church. Every Cyclopaedia of value has been consulted in the preparation of this work; and to these due credit has been given in specific articles. Much that was pertinent in the scholarly work of Kitto has been reproduced, and the names of the distinguished men who contributed to it have been given. Inasmuch, however, as conditions have so materially changed since that work was written, it has been necessary to thoroughly revise the articles which have been utilized, eliminating those features that have been rendered invalid by reason of later discoveries and the advanced scholarship and science of the present day, and adding the features which are necessary in order to render them entirely modern and conformable to the knowledge now extant. In the practical, devotional and figurative treatment of many of the subjects Brown’s Dictionary of the Bible, which is unexcelled in these particulars, has been freely used.

“The plan of this Encyclopaedia embraces many features of great advantage over other similar works. Among these, some of the most notable are the following:

“1. The Hebrew and Greek words at the heads of all articles are pronounced phonetically and their literal definition given, by which the reader is enabled to have a working knowledge of these languages, so far as such words are concerned, with little or no outside assistance. The English pronunciation of each Bible term is also indicated by diacritical marks in the body of the work; and in the Appendix all these words are grouped together alphabetically and pronounced by the phonetic method.

“2. In these busy times it is often necessary to read rapidly, and yet intelligently, and therefore, to aid: the eye and fix the attention, subheads and other convenient modes of division are employed in this work which enable one to see at a glance the part which may be especially sought.

“3. There are many helps to Bible Study which cannot advantageously be placed in the body of such a work as this, yet which are frequently needed in the study of the Scriptures. Such features have been embodied in a conveniently arranged Appendix, which will be found to contain much matter of value and interest designed to aid in the study of the Bible. These have been carefully prepared especially for this work, and we feel warranted in the belief that taken together with the body of the work. they make this book unrivaled, in its kind.

“It is confidently claimed that no other popular Biblical encyclopaedia or dictionary approaches this in completeness, or presents such a great number of points of interest, convenience and usefulness.” [End of Introduction of The Popular And Critical Bible Encyclopedia And Scriptural Dictionary.]

Although good data on this subject is hard to find, the above source is not the only one I have to substantiate our subject. Of all the definitions for the English words translated “redeem”, “redeemed”, or “redemption”, the main one we are interested in is the one articulated “gâ’al” from the Strong’s Hebrew #1350 thusly:

“1350. ... gâ’al, gaw-al´; a primitive root, to redeem (according to the Oriental law of kinship), i.e. to be the next of kin (and as such to buy back a relative’s property, marry his widow, (etc.):– [KJV]: X in any wise, X at all, avenger, deliver, (do, perform the part of near, next) kinsfolk, (-man), purchase, ransom, redeem (-er), revenger.”

Inasmuch as the Hebrew word “1350. ... gâ’al, gaw-al´;” demands a “next of kin” to be a “redeemer”, how does that qualify anyone other than a White Adamite? So Benjamin Franklin was correct where he stated in his 1751 Observations Concerning the Increase of Mankind, Peopling of Countries, etc., writing (which can be found at www.ditext.com/franklin/observations.html):

“And while we are, as I may call it, Scouring our Planet, by clearing America of Woods, and so making this Side of our Globe reflect a brighter Light to the Eyes of Inhabitants in Mars or Venus, why should we in the Sight of Superior Beings, darken its People? Why increase the Sons of Africa, by Planting them in America, where we have so fair an Opportunity, by excluding all Blacks and Tawneys (i.e., browns and yellows), of increasing the lovely White and Red (i.e., rosy flesh-tone people)?

From the 14-volume Webster’s Unified Encyclopedia and Dictionary, we find the following definitions for the English words, “redeem”, “redeemer”, “redemption” & “redemptioner”, vol. 11, (topics alphabetically arranged):

“redeem (rēdēm´) v. 1 To ransom from bondage. 2 To make atonement for, as, to redeem a fault. 3 To free from incumbrance, as by paying a mortgage or other debt. 4 To pay, as a note. 5 To fulfill, as a promise. 6 To show a better way of life at the sacrifice of oneself. -able adj.”

“redeemer (rē dēm´ēr) n. One who frees by paying a price: the Redeemer, Christ,”

“redemption (rē demp´ shun) n. The act of freeing or state of being freed by payment of a ransom or price. redempt´ible adj. – redemp´tive, redemp´tory adj.”

“redemptioner (rē demp´shun ēr) n. One who came to America in Colonial times by selling his labor for a certain time in exchange for passage across the Atlantic.”

There are two Greek words in the New Testament translated “redeem”, “redeemed” or redemption, and they have the Strong’s numbers 3084 and 3085, and are articulated loo-tro´-o and loo´tro-sis.

“G#3084 ... loo-tro´-o ... To bring forward a ransom. The active verb is not used of him who gives, but of him who receives it; hence to release on receipt of a ransom. In the middle voice, to release by payment of a ransom, to redeem; in the passive, to be redeemed or ransomed, Thus loo-tro´-o means to receive a ransom. In the New Testament, used in the middle voice in Luke 24:21; Titus 2:14; it denotes that aspect of the Savior’s work wherein He appears as a Redeemer of man [sic Adam]-kind from bondage (1 Pet. 1:18). This bondage was still regarded quite generally as oppression in Luke 24:21 because of the deficient understanding of Christ’s death by the Emmaus disciples. [Zodhiates’ N.T. Word Studies, p. 930.]

“G#3085 ... loo´tro-sis. ... feminine noun from loo-tro´-o (3084), to release on receipt of a ransom. The act of freeing or releasing, deliverance. In Biblical Greek, redemption, deliverance, not with reference to the person delivering, but to the person delivered, and, therefore, in a passive sense like most substantives ending in -sis (Luke 1:68; 2:38). Used of redemption from guilt and punishment of sin brought about by expiation (Heb. 9:12; Septuagint: Lev. 25:48; Ps. 111:9; 130:7).” [Zodhiates’ N.T. Word Studies, p. 931.]

While Zodhiates does quite well explaining the New Testament Greek in all of its peculiar grammatical technicalities, he misconstrues “redemption” to mean individual “personal salvation” rather than “covenant theology”! Thus, no allowance is made for Yahweh’s (1) courtship, (2) marriage, (3) honeymoon, (4) estrangement, (5) divorce, (6) reconciliation, or (7) remarriage to the twelve tribes of Israel. When Yahweh came as Yahshua to pay the ransom price for the twelve tribes of Israel, He died on the cross to purchase every racially pure White-Adamite, past, present and future without exception. However, all the descendants of Isaac (past, present and future) would remain free, while those not under one of the nine covenants of Adam man would remain bond servants to the free. Recorded in Scripture are nine major Covenants between Yahweh and Adam-man. They are as follows: (1) Edenic, (2) Adamic, (3) Noahic, (4) Abrahamic, (5) Mosaic, (6) Palestinian, (7) Davidic, (8) Solomonic, and (9) The New Covenant.

The Edenic Covenant made Adam, being created in Yahweh’s own image, responsible to multiply, populate and subdue the earth. Adam was, therefore, given the office of priest-kingship and became Yahweh’s vice-regent, being accountable to Him in all his realm. Adam not only became king, but also high priest; making him Yahweh’s representative on earth to rule over all things therein. Thus, he found himself in charge of the whole visible creation before him, to contemplate and to make himself comfortable therewith. He was different from all men that had been before, inasmuch as he was both flesh and Spirit. The new element in the creation of Adam was being “in the image” and after the “likeness” of Yahweh Himself. In this context, it showed his ability to have communion with Yahweh; and later made the Incarnation of the Word possible. In being fruitful, Adam became responsible for bringing forth a race after his own likeness. Contrary to today’s pseudo-science, considering all the varieties found among men, they are not all of the same family or species.

Time brought the need for a helper who would be compatible to himself. His bride was formed from one of his ribs taken from his side as he slept. Upon receiving her, Adam was given head-ship over her. Adam, by being in charge, found himself responsible for any and all of Eve’s actions. Therefore, when Eve ate of the forbidden fruit, it was the same as if Adam had eaten of it himself. (There are other ramifications to this story which I don’t have room enough to present here.) Because Adam was the son of Yahweh, Eve’s sin, through Adam, was placed upon Yahweh’s head. Because Yahweh was married to Israel, when we as Israel sinned, it was laid to Yahweh’s charge. That is why He had to suffer death in our place. Thus, Adam became responsible for his own household throughout the ages (1 Corinthians 11:8-9). Shame wrought from either party reflects on the other, but, in the end, is charged to the Almighty for He is their maker. In creating Eve, her flesh was of Adam’s flesh. The only way a couple can be of one flesh is to marry one of their own race.

Hardly had Eve been given to Adam as a mate of his own flesh and bone than Satan entered the scene representing the family tree they were warned not to “eat” or “touch” (Hebrew terms, in this case, having sexual connotations). Thus, Yahweh placed a curse on the product of that unholy union, initiating a continual life and death struggle between the offspring of the serpent and her offspring. The woman’s seed, therefore, is not that of the serpent, but of Adam. The Adamic covenant reads as follows:

Genesis 3:14-15: “¹⁴ And Yahweh said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field, upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shall thou eat all the days of thy life. ¹⁵ And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her [Adam’s] seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.”

Since Eve’s seed is the same as Adam’s, the war of Genesis 3:15 is between Adam’s descendants and Cain’s. Nowhere in the Bible is Cain included in the genealogy of Adam, and the descendants of Cain, to this day, trace their lineage through their mother. Genesis 3:15 is called “The Protevangelion”, which means “first Gospel”, therefore, no Gospel message is complete without it. It predicts a perpetual ongoing hostility between the descendants of Satan and the woman (she representing White mankind). The power of Satan was ultimately to be destroyed by the very offspring of Adam and Eve whom he had deceived. Though the seed of the woman are many, ONE would come to destroy the descendants of the serpent and their works. Adam is not mentioned in the Protevangelion (Genesis 3:15), therefore, the address is not to Adam and Eve, but to Eve and the serpent alone. Some suppose this passage to apply to a certain “enmity” between men and serpents (snakes); this is fantasy rather than reality. The cursed serpent was to “eat dust”, and that is why today they live off the refuse of junkyards and landfills. By the way, there is not a single snake species which eats and digests dust as its food. Here, the “dust” is symbolic of the serpent’s sauce rather than his meat; while creeping and groveling upon the earth, in taking food, he must necessarily also consume the dust and filth. That is why today’s Edomite-jews make a lot of money from pornography and everything immoral. Not until the total destruction of one or the other will the enmity of the two seeds end. The Protevangelion is therefore the earliest pronouncement of the Gospel; the long conflict between the literal children of Yahweh and the literal children of the evil one. (Be cautious of most Bible commentaries on this subject!)

The Noahic Covenant: Genesis 6:18: “But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons’ wives with thee.”

Genesis 9:1; 7-9; 11: “And Yahweh blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth ... bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein ... And Yahweh spake unto Noah, and to his sons with him, saying, And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you ... neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth.”

We could go into a long dissertation concerning the various details of Noah’s flood, but in this limited space it is paramount to demonstrate the most important facts. [1-10-2014: Edited sentence because I have changed my position as restructured here: First of all, the purpose for the flood was to destroy from the face of earth all the White-Adamites and many of the products of the mixed-race marriages between the “sons of heaven and White-Adamic women. ed. C.A.E. Reason: because “man” at Gen. 6:3 is Strong’s #120.]: The reason Noah and his family were preserved is because they were “perfect in their generations.” Here, the Hebrew word for “generations” means “race”, Wilson’s Old Testament Word Studies, by William Wilson, page 184. Wilson specifically designates Genesis 6:9.

Yahweh made a covenant with Noah that: “neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood.” But, it is more serious than it sounds, for it is recorded at a future time, under similar circumstances; and for the same reasons, that the same thing will happen, except by fire:

2 Peter 3:6-7: “⁶ Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: ⁷ But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.” (See also: Ob. 18; Ezek. 39:6, 9; Mt. 13:42.)

One can almost visualize in their mind a holy fire from the Almighty moving at the speed of light in and out of every home where one of these resides, severing out and destroying those of mixed race; probably similar to 2 Kings 9-14 where fire came down out of heaven and destroyed two squads of 50 men of the king in Elijah’s presence. If this analogy is true, with all the multiculturalism and miscegenation that is going on during our present day, it would appear the undertakers all over the world are going to be quite busy.

Highlights Of The Abrahamic Covenant:

Genesis 13:16: “And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth: so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed be also numbered.”

Genesis 15:5: “And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.”

Genesis 15:9-10: “And he (Yahweh) said unto him (Abram), Take me an heifer of three years old, and a she goat of three years old, and a ram of three years old, and a turtledove, and a young pigeon. And he took unto him all these, and divided them in the midst, and laid each piece one against another: but the birds divided he not.”

Genesis 17:4-7: “As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shall be a father of many nations. Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee. And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee. And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be an Elohim unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.”

Genesis 22:15-18: “And the angel of Yahweh called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time, And said, By myself have I sworn, saith Yahweh, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son: That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; And in thy seed shall all the [Israel] nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.”

Genesis 28:13-15: ... I am Yahweh the Mighty One of Abraham thy father, and the Mighty One of Isaac: the land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed. And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed shall all the [Israel] families of the earth be blessed [i.e., Mark 7:27-28]. And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and will bring thee again into this land; for I will not leave thee, until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of.” (to be continued)

This is my one hundred and ninety-first 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 50,

THE RECONCILIATION (i.e., Redemption):

With the last lesson, WTL #190, we were reviewing an essay I had written several years ago entitled Nine Covenants With Adam-man. With this lesson, I will continue where I left off in that lesson:

2 Peter 3:6-7: “Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.” (See also: Ob. 18; Ezk. 39:6, 9; Mt. 13:42)

One can almost visualize in their mind a holy fire from the Almighty moving at the speed of light in and out of every home where one of these [nonwhite bastards] resides, severing out and destroying those of mixed race; probably similar to 2 Kings 9-14, where fire came down out of heaven and destroyed two squads of 50 men of the king in Elijah’s presence. If this analogy is true, with all the multiculturalism and miscegenation that is going on in our present day, it would appear the undertakers all over the world are going to be quite busy.

THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT

Genesis 13:16: “And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth: so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed be also numbered.”

Genesis 15:5: “And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.”

Genesis 15:9-10: “And he (Yahweh) said unto him (Abram), Take me an heifer of three years old, and a she goat of three years old, and a ram of three years old, and a turtledove, and a young pigeon. And he took unto him all these, and divided them in the midst, and laid each piece one against another: but the birds divided he not.”

Genesis 17:4-7: “As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shall be a father of many nations. Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee. And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee. And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be an Elohim unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.”

Genesis 22:15-18: “And the angel of Yahweh called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time, And said, By myself have I sworn, saith Yahweh, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son: That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; And in thy seed shall all the [Israel] nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.” [Israel blessed primarily; others indirectly.]

Genesis 28:13-15: “... I am Yahweh the Mighty One of Abraham thy father, and the Mighty One of Isaac: the land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed. And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed shall all the [Israel] families of the earth be blessed [i.e., Mark 7:27-28]. And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and will bring thee again into this land; for I will not leave thee, until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of.”

Genesis 32:12, 28: “And thou saidst, I will surely do thee good, and make thy seed as the sand of the sea, which cannot be numbered for multitude ... And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with Yahweh and with men, and hast prevailed.”

Genesis 35:11: “And Yahweh said unto him (Jacob), I am Yahweh Almighty: be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins.”

While not all the above is promised directly to Abraham, these passages are all basically The Abrahamic Covenant. These promises constitute the basic message of the entire Bible, and are speaking of Yahweh’s Kingdom. Because space will not allow it, I cannot go into all the details of the Abrahamic Covenant in this presentation. I did a paper entitled Born Under Contract in which I covered most of the particulars of which you may want to obtain a copy.

In that paper, it was explained that, if one is born of a certain lineage, he is under the above Covenants from his very first breath, which he cannot in any way annul; how anyone else wanting to be under the Covenants is excluded; that those who are under these binding obligations will be chastised until they finally comply with the terms set forth, and how they have no choice in the matter. If you are of an Anglo-Saxon, Scandinavian, Germanic, Scottish, Irish, Danish, Dutch, French, northern White Italian, White Spanish or related background, you are under these Covenants whether you approve of them or not.

The Kingdom is spoken of in the book of Revelation, chapter 21, as a city four-square having twelve gates, and is called the New Jerusalem. It is not an ordinary city like Detroit, Indianapolis, Denver or someplace like that, which, when we arrive, we see a city-limits sign telling us where we are. We are told this city has foundations made up of jasper, sapphire, chalcedony, emerald and many other precious stones. These very same stones were in the breastplate of the priests. Therefore, these foundation stones represent the people that make up the twelve Tribes of Israel. This city has a great high wall, and on each of its four sides are three gates with the names of the twelve patriarchs. Therefore, the only way to enter that city is by way of the patriarch of one’s lineage. The great high wall separates those on the inside from those on the outside. It is, therefore, a wall of racial segregation. Though the enemy today is persistently trying, in all his power, to break down this wall, it has a very firm foundation, and, in the end, he will fail.

THE MOSAIC COVENANT

There is much that could be said concerning the Mosaic Covenant, such as the exclusion of relationships to other foreign sovereign powers. Broadly speaking, the Mosaic Covenant included the Ten Commandments portraying one’s duty to the Almighty and his fellow Adamic man. No society can long exist without laws and ordinances for they will revert to anarchy. Thus, was commanded blessings for obedience and cursings for disobedience of Yahweh’s Laws. Adam-Israel are the only people who have ever been under the Law of Yahweh. Not going into all of this in detail, we will dwell mainly on the most important feature of the Mosaic Covenant; the marriage of Israel to Yahweh:

Deuteronomy 26:17-18: “Thou hast avouched Yahweh this day to be thy Elohim, and to walk in his ways, and to keep his statutes, and his commandments, and his judgments, and to hearken unto his voice: And Yahweh hath avouched thee this day to be his peculiar people, as he hath promised thee, and that thou shouldest keep all his commandments.” (These are Israel’s wedding vows.)

Later, Israel would break these vows, making it mandatory for Yahweh to divorce her. By Law, the two parties could never remarry unless one or the other were to die. By Yahweh coming in Adam’s flesh and dying at Calvary, He made it possible for a reuniting of the two parties, which is defined as Redemption.

THE PALESTINIAN COVENANT

Deuteronomy 30:19: “I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live.”

While this is not the Palestinian Covenant in itself, this is the warning for not obeying the provisions thereof:

Deuteronomy 28:1, 15: “And it shall come to pass, if thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of Yahweh thy Elohim, to observe and to do all his commandments which I command thee this day, that Yahweh thy Elohim will set thee on high above all nations of the earth ... But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of Yahweh thy Elohim, to observe to do all his commandments and his statutes which I command thee this day; that all these curses shall come upon thee, and overtake thee.”

To understand, it would be necessary to read all the blessings and cursings of Deuteronomy chapters 27 & 28. Yahweh had commissioned Israel to kill every member of the race-mixed group of Canaanite nations, man, woman and child, without mercy, Exodus 15:14-16; 23:32-33; 34:11-12; Deuteronomy 7:1-3; 20:16-17. Not only did they refuse to destroy those peoples, they adopted some of their abominable ways which brought the cursings upon them. I am going to use only one example of the cursings:

Deuteronomy 28:43-44: “The stranger that is within thee shall get up above thee very high; and thou shalt come down very low. He shall lend to thee, and thou shalt not lend to him: he shall be the head, and thou shalt be the tail.”

This has been literally fulfilled in the central banks which are today in all Israel lands. In the United States, we have the Edomite-jewish-communist controlled Federal Reserve System (fifth plank of the Karl Marx manifesto). This is the same agency which collects the communist Federal income tax under the name of The Internal Revenue Service (second plank of the Karl Marx Communist Manifesto). As the curse says, we will borrow from the Edomite-jew, but he will not borrow from us. Ironically, the Edomite-jews are the same people we refused to destroy when we were in Palestine.

THE DAVIDIC COVENANT

1 Samuel 16:13: “Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren: and the spirit of Yahweh came upon David from that day forward.”

Psalm 89: 34-37: “My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips. Once I have sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto David. His seed shall endure for ever, and his throne as the sun before me. It shall be established for ever as the moon, and as a faithful witness in heaven.”

Jeremiah 33:20-21: “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; Then may also my covenant be broken with David my servant, that he should not have a son to reign upon his throne ...”

David, as a lad, was a shepherd. He spent many days and nights tending his father’s sheep. The sheep could never be left alone for there were a tremendous number of wolves in those days. Because of the gun, in our day, the wolf population has been brought under control. David’s defense against the wolves was a slingshot. No doubt he practiced by the hour to become proficient with it, so, when it became necessary, he could kill a wolf with the first shot. Later, as a young man, he would put his skill to good use by killing a giant. Thus, David the warrior killed many men; a man after Messiah’s own heart, foreshadowing His glorious return.

Many might say, “Yahweh has broken his word to David, as the Throne of David was nonexistent in Palestine for nearly 600 years during the inter-testament period.” Though Zedekiah was taken captive to Babylon, and all of his sons killed before his eyes, he still had an heir, because in Israel there was a provision for daughters to inherit the throne if there were no male descendants (Numbers 27:7-8). Thereafter, Jeremiah took Zedekiah’s two daughters (Ezekiel 17:22-24) to Spain and Ireland. No sooner had Jeremiah arrived in Ireland with Tea Tephi (Zedekiah’s daughter of the Pharez royal family) than he arranged for her marriage to Eochaidh, the Heremonn, a prince of the Tuatha de Danaans on his mother’s side and a direct descendant of Fenesia Farsa, and of the line of Zerah, twin brother of Pharez of the Royal House of Judah. This united the Royal Houses of Pharez and Zerah as a co-regency under the lawful order of Solomon on the female side. Lastly, Yahshua has yet to be crowned King at His Second Advent as a Nathanite with Solomonic lawful authority.

THE SOLOMONIC COVENANT

2 Samuel 7:12-16: “And when thy (David’s) 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. He (Solomon) shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men: But my mercy shall not depart away from him ... And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.”

What we must understand is: this our Messiah got His authority from Solomon’s throne, but He was not from Solomon’s bloodline. Actually, Yahshua was from the bloodline of Mary through Nathan, Solomon’s brother. Solomon’s line followed on down through Judah’s Kings to Jeconiah, when a curse was placed that none of Jeconiah’s seed would ever again sit on the throne, Jeremiah; 22:30. At the time of the Incarnation, Mary’s husband, Joseph, was a descendant of the cursed Jeconiah. Because Yahshua became the legal son of Joseph, Joseph was able to pass on the throne to the Messiah without the curse falling on Him. Although Solomon’s bloodline didn’t follow on down to the Messiah, it did bypass Jeconiah’s curse through Zedekiah’s daughter, Tea Tephi, going on to Ireland.

THE NEW COVENANT

Hebrews 8:8-11 & (Jeremiah 31:31-32): “... Behold the days come saith Yahweh, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith Yahweh. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith Yahweh; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them an Elohim, and they shall be to me a people. And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know Yahweh: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.”

It’s saying here that the teaching of, “you must know the Lord” is going to be discontinued. It’s simply amazing, for this is exactly what Judeo-churchianity is teaching today. It’s incredible, because it was never true in the first place, for He does the choosing, not us.

Many today call themselves “New Testament Christians.” The question arises: What is a New Testament Christian, anyway? Some seem to be under the impression that the Old Testament dealt with the Edomite-jews and the Law; that somehow the Almighty had been unsuccessful with the Edomite-jews and, when they rejected Him, He decided to extend the plan of salvation to the so-called “Gentiles.” Many flatly state the New Testament church is not connected with Old Testament Law; that the Law was abandoned at the Cross and the emphasis is now on Grace, suggesting “whosoever” may come. Since the expression “New Testament Christian” is used so widely, maybe it would be well if someone would explain what the term “testament” means. Just what is this New Testament? If one is going to use the term, and teach it to others, they surely ought to know what the term means! Both the word “covenant” and the word “testament” come from the Greek word #1242 in the Strongs Concordance. Both words simply mean “contract.” All these nine Covenants we have been considering are thus contracts.

In a covenant or contract, it is important to have all the parties named, as any contract which fails to name the parties is worthless. So, too, the contract must specify the performance expected from each of the parties, spelled out in lawful terms. Contracts are binding on all parties, and each of them can lawfully force the others to perform exactly as set forth. Well, who are the parties of the New Testament? Does your Bible specify the party of the second part as the “Gentiles”, or “whosoever will?” The answer is NO! This exclusive contract is made only with two entities: the House of Israel and the House of Judah! The next question is: If you are not a member of either of these two houses, what right do you have to the New Testament contract, whatever the lawful terms are? It’s obvious, you don’t have any right whatsoever!

Some argue the “Gentiles” are “grafted” in, and are granted a place under the Covenant. One should be reminded that only olive branches can be grafted into olive trees. It should be noted, the olive tree is Israel’s symbol, so it is not talking about someone else. Others argue non-Israelite Gentiles became “spiritual Israel.” No such term exists in all Scripture! Therefore, the parties named in the New Testament are the same parties of the Old! Almighty Yahweh has not changed His mind and abandoned His people Israel and Judah in favor of “all men” or “whosoever will”, but made His New Testament with the very same people as before. What legal right would the Almighty have for changing the parties mentioned in the contract in the middle of the stream? We may break the terms of our obligations, but Yahweh would never think of such a thing; and it is blasphemous for anyone to even suggest such a thing, for it accuses Him of fraud by forgery.

The plain truth is: the New Testament was never made for a so-called “church”, “Gentiles”, or “whosoever”, and the Bible never suggests otherwise. Rather, it specifies a very distinct racial, national entity, with implications based on Yahweh’s Law. The New Testament went into effect the very instant Yahshua died and gave up the ghost.

Contrary to some, Yahweh does not promote universalism! What is universalism but Catholicism? What is Catholicism but pluralism? What is pluralism but multiculturalism? What is multiculturalism but International Edomite-jewish Communism? What is International Edomite-jewish Communism but Covenant-defrauding, modern-day judeo-churchianity? [End of my essay, Nine Covenants With Adam-man.]

From all of this, it might appear that only the White Israelites will be in the future resurrection, but such a conclusion is not correct. As a matter of fact, every pureblooded White Adamic person will be resurrected, all the way back to Adam. However, it will be only the pureblooded White Israelites who will be remarried to Yahweh in the flesh, Yahshua the Christ. It is important to notice that the Covenant originally given to Abraham was repeated to Isaac at Gen. 26:2-5:

“² And Yahweh appeared unto him [Isaac], and said, Go not down into Egypt; dwell in the land which I shall tell thee of: ³ Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee; for unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these countries, and I will perform the oath which I sware unto Abraham thy father; ⁴ And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the [Israel] nations of the earth be blessed; ⁵ Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.”

This repeated Covenant to Isaac alone indicates that Ishmael, son of Abraham by Hagar, and the offspring of Abraham by Keturah were bypassed by Yahweh and were not included under the Abrahamic Covenant. So, not only did the Covenant-line follow Abraham but also Sarah. How could it be otherwise when both Hagar and Keturah were rejected as true heirs of the Covenant? Maybe a better way of stating this situation is that Sarah was Yahweh’s favorite wife for Abraham. She must have been quite a woman!

It is recorded at Gal. 4:27-31: “²⁷ For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband. ²⁸ Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. ²⁹ But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. ³⁰ Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. ³¹ So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.”

This last passage is based on Gen. 21:9-12 where it states:

“⁹ And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, which she had born unto Abraham, mocking. ¹⁰ Wherefore she said unto Abraham, Cast out this bondwoman and her son: for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac. ¹¹ And the thing was very grievous in Abraham’s sight because of his son. ¹² And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called.” It should be very clear here that Sarah caused Ishmael, the son of Hagar, to be disinherited! Sarah goofed up once by suggesting that Hagar produce Abraham an heir, but she wasn’t about to blunder again by letting Ishmael become that heir instead of Isaac! This is Covenant Theology at its highest level! It’s the difference between being “bond” or “free”! Covenant Theology began with the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and his twelve sons, and comes on down to us through the patriarchal father of each succeeding family. We can be thankful for our grandmother Sarah, and how she unyieldingly stood her rightful, lawful ground! (Can anyone imagine Yahweh telling Abraham, “In Ishmael shall thy seed be called”?) Had not Sarah stood up to Abraham, that is what might have happened! This is not the only time that a Covenant lady had to step into the fray and rectify an injustice. After all, Sarah was just acting like a she-bear protecting her natural-born cub.

The sundry commentaries really have twisted Gal. 4:22-31 up like a pretzel. Adam Clarke, in his 6-volume Commentary, managed to make a couple of observations on vv. 23 & 29, which are worth mentioning where they read: “²³ But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. ... ²⁹ But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit.” Clarke states in part, vol. 6, p. 228: “... Was born after the flesh – Ishmael was born according to the ordinary course of nature, his parents being both of proper [reproductive] age, so that there was nothing uncommon or supernatural in his birth ... By promise – The birth of Isaac was supernatural; the effect of an especial promise of God, and it was only on the ground of that promise that it was either credible or possible.” In other words, Sarah’s womb, along with her other female reproductive parts were essentially dead! Therefore, for Sarah to conceive past her childbearing time of life was an act of Yahweh’s Spirit resurrecting her womb, along with her other female reproductive parts, from the dead! For one who is a descendant of Isaac through Jacob, you in like manner are brought forth from the dead womb of Sarah. Hence, to be lineally from Sarah is to be categorically “free”. Otherwise one is categorically a “bond-servant.”

When are we ever going to learn that we as descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob can do absolutely nothing to bring ourselves to Yahweh! I have said it before, and I will repeat it again, “The highest level of Israel Identity is Covenant Theology.” I have spent many of my 87 years in churchianity, and I can attest that the churches I attended and the many sermons I have heard taught very little about the Biblical Covenants, and when they did, they twisted them up like pretzels. In the book of Genesis, we have a very abbreviated story of the creation; Noah’s flood; the tower of Babel; and starting with Genesis chapter 12, we have the call of Abraham. With the call of Abraham, and throughout the rest of the Bible, the context is about one man (Abraham) and his family, and no one else! There were eight other Covenants with Adam-man, and all of Adam’s descendants will be in the resurrection. However, all those born of Sarah will be “free”, while those not born of Sarah have been “bond”. Other than these, I believe that the priest-line from Adam, Abel, Seth, Enos, Cainan, Mahalaleel, Jared, Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech, Noah, Shem, Arphaxad, Kainan, Salah, Heber, Peleg, Rue, Serug, Nahor, and Terah, as firstborn priests of the order of Melchizedek, (of which Christ became the greatest) will hold a special place among the Patriarchs, equivalent to those under the Abrahamic Covenant. (The Bible does not record the origin of the nonwhite races, nor do they fall under any of Yahweh’s nine covenants with Adam-man! It’s a joke to believe otherwise!) To give a concise history of this period, I will cite The Popular And Critical Bible Encyclopedia And Scriptural Dictionary, vol. 3, p. 1524:

“SARAH (sa´rah). 1. Heb. ..., saw-raw´, princess, originally ..., saw-rah´ee). The wife of Abraham, ten years his junior, married to him in Ur of the Chaldees (Gen. xi:28-31; xvii:17). She was also his half-sister, being the daughter of his father, but not of his mother (xx:12). Her name was originally Sarai, meaning perhaps princely or contentious. When Abraham departed from Haran to go to Canaan, Sarai was about sixty-five years old (xii:4). Evidently she was a well-preserved woman; for she lived to be one hundred and twenty-seven years old. Shortly after leaving Haran, when about to enter Egypt, Abraham feared lest her beauty should attract the Egyptians and lead to his murder, and he represented that she was his sister, when taken by Pharaoh, keeping back the fact that she was his wife. Years later he did so again at the court of Abimelech, king of Gerar (xx:1-18). Why he did so it is not stated, nor is it said that Abimelech was influenced by her beauty. The king of Gerar may have thought of the desirability of an alliance with the powerful Hebrew chieftain, and, with this end in view, determined to take a woman of the immediate family of Abraham into his harem, as was frequently done by princes of that period when they concluded alliances.

“(1) Hagar. Sarai had a female slave, Hagar, but she herself worked for the household with her own hand (Gen. xviii:6). Sarai was childless; and when about seventy-five years old she concluded that she was an obstacle to the promise made to Abraham of numerous posterity, and she entreated her husband to take Hagar as a secondary wife. He did so, apparently without asking divine direction before doing so, and became the father of Ishmael (xvi:1-16).

“(2) Birth of Isaac. Afterwards Sarai, when about eightynine, received a promise from God that she should herself bear a son (comp. Heb. xi:11, 12), and in the course of a year gave birth to Isaac, the child of promise. It was when this promise was made to her that God changed her name to Sarah, meaning princess (Gen. xvii:15-22; xviii:9-I5; xxi:1-5).

“(3) Expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael. When Isaac was weaned, she was provoked with Ishmael’s ill usage of the boy, and never rested till Hagar and Ishmael were both expelled from the family.

“(4) Death. Not long after the intended sacrifice of Isaac (which she seems to have known nothing of till it was over) Sarah died at Kirjath-arba (Hebron) at the age of 127 (xxiii:1, 2), and was buried in the cave of Machpelah, which Abraham purchased at that time for a family sepulcher.

“(5) New Testament Reference. St. Paul represents her as a noted believer, an eminent pattern in the honoring of her husband, and an emblem of the covenant of grace [sic Yahweh’s choice], and the gospel dispensation (Heb. xi:11; 1 Pet. iii:6; Gal. iv:22-31).”

What it all boils down to is: If one is a descendant of Sarah, one is born from Sarah’s resurrected womb by a miracle from Yahweh, and had that life-giving miracle never happened, we wouldn’t be here and exist as a people today. That’s why it is so important to keep our family lines free of racial contamination, as no other people were ever born from a womb resurrected to life once that womb was dead. Thus, the act of race-mixing on the part of a White Anglo-Saxon-Israelite is tantamount to allowing Sarah’s womb to return to a state of deadness once more, and producing “confusion of face” and deadness-of-Spirit in down-line progeny without remedy, for as Philip Jones says in his book Racial Hybridity, p. 38:

“Once Mixed, Always Mixed – When the races mix, genes become hopelessly intertwined and nothing can ever be done to unscramble the mixture. No amount of breeding will breed back a mongrel into a pure-bred. It has been said that once the chromosome is halved, it is lost irretrievably.

“David Jordan says: ‘Two individuals of diverse race differ in a very great number of genes: In crosses the genes of the two races become inextricably intermingled in many different combinations. Consequently the different characteristics of the two races likewise become inextricably combined. After a cross, there is no chance of recovering either pure race in later generations’ (Jordan, David Starr. The Blood of the Nation. Boston, 1902, p. 70 – emphasis added [by Philip Jones]) ...”

Racial purity is serious business, and only pureblooded White Adamites will face the Judgment. Odadiah 16 reveals the fate of the nonwhite races, and those who have racially mixed with them:

“For as ye [nonwhites] have drunk upon my holy mountain [Israel nations], so shall all the heathen drink continually, yea, they shall drink, and they shall swallow down, and they shall be as though they had not been.” (read entire chapter)

This is my one hundred and ninety-second monthly teaching letter and completes 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 51,

THE RECONCILIATION (i.e., Redemption):

With WTL lessons 190 & 191, we summarized the nine covenants that Yahweh made with Adam-man, and how Yahweh miraculously resurrected Sarah’s dead womb back to life again, resulting in all of her down-line descendants being born “free” rather than as “bond slaves”. Thus, Sarah played just as important a role in the Covenant as Abraham did. As a matter of fact Ishmael, Abraham’s first son by Hagar, was rejected because he was born after the “flesh” rather than after the “Spirit”, as Isaac was. (See Gal. 4:22-31.) Therefore, all we Israelites who are descended from Sarah should be very thankful to Yahweh for this special God-given privilege (an especial benefit granted as an advantage of favor). Knowing all of this, how can any White Anglo-Saxon Israelite of the twelve tribes dishonor this “advantage of favor”, the privilege of being “born free”, and then throw this “God-given privilege” to the wind by committing miscegenation? Yet, since Ed Sullivan introduced the Beatles on television in 1964, our impressionable, immature White Israelite men and women (mostly women) started to mix their genetics with alien nonwhites on a gargantuan scale! Data is found at the following website:

http://www.edsullivan.com/artists/the-beatles

“On February 9th, 1964, The Beatles, with their Edwardian suits and mop top haircuts, made their first American television appearance – LIVE – on The Ed Sullivan Show. A record setting 73 million people tuned in that evening making it one of the seminal [i.e., relating to seed or semen – a Freudian slip?] moments in TV history. Nearly fifty years later, people still remember exactly where they were the night The Beatles stepped onto Ed Sullivan’s stage ... [brackets mine]

“The story of how The Beatles landed on The Ed Sullivan Show began with the group’s formation in Liverpool in 1960. They spent their first couple of years playing in small clubs throughout Europe. During late night gigs in the city of Hamburg, Germany, sometimes playing as long as eight hours a night, The Beatles perfected their act. However, it was not until an appearance on the British television show, ‘Val Parnell’s Sunday Night at the London Palladium’ and the 1963 release of their first album, Please Please Me that ‘Beatlemania’ began to spread. That March the album hit number one on the British charts, and by the end of the year, The Beatles’ music permeated UK radio. The ‘Fab Four’ even performed for the royal family. It was only after this burgeoning success at home did The Beatles and their manager, Brian Epstein, choose to launch their American invasion. They decided when they had a #1 song on the U.S. charts, then they would lock in the date of their Ed Sullivan debut ....”

Let’s now critically evaluate the English terms “seminal” and “semen” from the 1996 Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary:

“sem·i·nal (sem´ə nl), adj. 1. pertaining to, containing, or consisting of semen. 2. Botany of or pertaining to seed. 3. having possibilities of future development. 4. highly original and influencing the development of future events: a seminal artist seminal ideas. [1350-1400; Middle English <Latin seminalis, equivalent to semin- (synonym of semen) seed, semen + -alis - al¹] -sem´l·nal´l·ty, n. -sem´l·nal·ly, adv.”

“se·men (se´men), n. the viscid whitish fluid produced in the male reproductive organs, containing spermatozoa. [1350-1400; Middle English <Latin semen seed; akin to serere to sow¹]”

So, now we should better comprehend what is meant by “the seminal moments in television history.” In other words, the Ed Sullivan show introducing the Beatles was nothing more than an Edomite-jewish Broadway theater display to sexually excite the adolescent audience watching on stage and on television, in order to launch a race-mixing revolution. I will now quote from David A, Noebel’s The Marxist Minstrels, A Handbook On Subversion Of Music, from chapter 12, entitled “Tampering With Our Teenagers”, pp. 44-47:

“America’s children are not the only targets of the Communists. Also included in their ingeniously conceived master music plan are America’s teenagers. Since rhythmic activity music ceases to be effective by early adolescence, the music designed for high school students is extremely effective in aiding and abetting demoralization among teenagers; effective in preparing them for riot and ultimately revolution to destroy our American way of life and the basic Christian principles governing that way of life.

“The music has been called a number of things, but today it is best known as rock ’n’ roll, beat music or simply Beatle-music. Even Time magazine admitted that ‘there was obviously something visceral’ about the music since it has caused riots in countless communities. Riot-causing it is, but it is also a noise which causes teenagers to experience countless side effects, detrimental not only to the community, but also to the individual and the country.

“Henry David Thoreau predicted in 1854 that music would some day destroy England and America. With today’s beat ‘music’ churning destruction throughout the length and breadth of England and America, Thoreau’s prophecy could be fulfilled sooner than most would care to contemplate.

“It took Lenin little time to realize that music played a vital part in the cohesion of society. He also realized that one sure way to destroy an enemy society was to destroy that society’s music. This is exactly what his disciples have set out to do.

“In his How Music Expresses Ideas, Sidney Finkelstein, the recognized cultural spokesman for the Communists in the USA, sets forth the program with little ambiguity. Finkelstein calls for the destruction of the barrier between classical music and popular music and insists that African music is the true epitome of popular music. The goal is to inundate the American people with African music and disparage the importance of good classical and standard musical forms!

“Time magazine’s analysis of the origin and influence of rock ’n’ roll could hardly please Finkelstein more. The only mistake in Time’s analysis was its failure to mention Africa. It stated, ‘The origins of rock ’n’ roll go deep – Deep South, U.S.A.’The full truth is that it goes still deeper – the heart of Africa, where it was used to incite warriors to such a frenzy that by nightfall neighbors were cooked in carnage pots! The music is a designed reversion to savagery!

“Race-conscious Time admitted that ‘One of the first white disc jockeys to play these ‘race records,’ as they were known in the industry, was Cleveland’s Alan Freed, a flamboyant, rapid-fire pitchman who sang along with the records, slamming his hand down on a telephone book to accentuate each beat!’

“Alan Freed has been recognized as the father of rock ’n’ roll. Upon his death at forty-three in a Palm Springs, California, hospital a UPI dispatch commented, ‘Freed’s career went downhill after a payola scandal.’ Time magazine detailed the UPI dispatch, ‘Freed was indicted for accepting $30,000 in bribes from six record companies for pushing their releases.’ According to the District Attorney’s office of the County of New York, ‘Freed was accused of the crimes of requesting and accepting gifts and gratuities, was agent and employee of another, in violation of Section 439 of the Penal Law of the State of New York, from the following companies: (1) Action Records, Inc., (2) Alpha Distributing Co., (3) Superior Record Sales Co., Inc., (4) United Artists Records, Inc., (5) Cosnot Distributing Corporation, (6) Cosnot Distributing Corp. of Cleveland and (7) Roulette Records.’

“Freed was fired by radio station WABC (New York City) for refusing to answer questions concerning a possible payola scandal. He self-righteously answered that such an investigation was ‘an insult to my reputation for integrity.’

“Today all major record companies are flooding (nearly 800 releases per week) our teenagers with a noise that is basically un-Christian, mentally unsettling, revolutionary and a medium for promiscuity and the drug culture. The consequences of this type of ‘music’ have been staggering. In Jacksonville, Florida, 6,700 rock ’n’ roll fans were sent into a ‘screaming, fighting frenzy in the Jacksonville coliseum ... Twenty police officers on duty at the show were swamped and called for reinforcements ... they (according to one police officer) were like a herd of cows stampeding.’

“In Long Beach, California, ‘a mob of more than 4,000 teen-age girls poured out of the Long Beach Arena Sunday afternoon after a ‘Beatles-type’ rock ’n’ roll performance, and caused a melee (i.e., brawl) which injured three police officers, damaged three vehicles and sent seven of the girls to the hospital.’

“In an earlier incident in Long Beach, the newspapers reported that ‘More than a dozen policemen fought a valiant but losing ‘battle’ with 5,000 frenzied, screaming teen-age girls in the Long Beach Arena Friday night before halting the show in self-defense.’

“Further up the coast in San Francisco, ‘A mob of howling teenage boys and girls, at least 1,000 strong, rampaged through Mission district last night, inflicting heavy damage to automobiles and shops ... The trouble, theorized Police Sergeant William Mikulik, can be attributed to the strange powers of a rock ’n’ roll singer.’

“Subsequent to the above melee in San Francisco, another rock ’n’ roll entourage plagued that city with the following disease: ‘Four teenagers were stabbed, another was kicked until bloody and a policeman was mauled last night after a performance by the British rock ’n’ roll group, The Animals. Police riot squads with dogs took an hour to break up gang fights outside the Cow Palace after The Animals played to about 3,500 young fans. The gangs fought with knives and tire chains. Three teen-age boys suffered deep stab wounds while outside the arena. Another was stabbed while in front of the bandstand.’ One police officer said The Animals ‘wound up the crowd so tight they snapped.’

“In Los Angeles, the Herald-Examiner reported, ‘some 15,000 teenagers kept a date with mass hysteria at the Sports Arena, bowling over police officers and gatecrashing to see England’s newest singing group, the Rolling Stones.’

“Lt. T.E. Barnes commented that the ‘girls just develop mass hysteria.’ Some had to be ejected because they were ‘uncontrollable’ and others fainted. One girl, according to the press report, ‘ripped off her blouse and threw it over a ten-foot partition.’ But another ‘wild-eyed teenager topped that performance by taking off her bellbottomed slacks and tossing them in the dressing room. A long coat kept her decent.’

“When the Beatles presented one of their earlier ‘concerts’ in Vancouver, a hundred persons were stomped, gouged, elbowed and otherwise assaulted during the twenty-nine minute performance. Nearly 1,000 were injured in Melbourne, Australia. In Beirut, Lebanon, fire hoses were needed to disperse hysterical fans. In the grip of Beatle fever, we are told, the teenagers weep, wail and experience ecstasy-ridden hysteria that has to be seen to be believed.Also, we are told, teenagers ‘bite their lips until they bleed and they even get overexcited and take off their clothes.’ To understand what rock ’n’ roll in general and the Beatles in particular have been doing to our teenagers, it is necessary to return to Pavlov’s laboratory. The Beatles’ ability to make teenagers weep and wail, become uncontrollable and unruly, and take off their clothes and riot is laboratory tested and approved. It is scientifically induced artificial or experimental neurosis.”

Ibid. chapter 13, entitled: “Pavlov’s Conditioned Reflex Technique”, pp. 48-57:

“Ivan P. Pavlov, the eminent Russian physiologist, was invited to Moscow as the personal house guest of Nikolai Lenin, the father of the Bolshevik revolution. Pavlov expressed confidence that his findings on conditioned reflexes and inhibitions would be a blessing to mankind someday in its struggle against human ailments. Lenin had other plans. Remaining in Lenin’s home for three months, Pavlov penned a 400-page manuscript for the Communist dictator regarding his findings. Upon reading the manuscript, Lenin exclaimed to Pavlov, you have ‘saved the Revolution.’

“‘What Lenin did not tell Pavlov,’ commented Edward Hunter, ‘was that he had come to realize how impossible it was that he would ever obtain the people’s willing cooperation in changing human nature and creating the ‘new Soviet man.’ He saw in Pavlov’s discoveries a technique that could force it upon them.’

“Mr. Hunter observes the interesting fact that ‘Pavlov's manuscript, which became the working basis for the whole Communist expansion-control system, has never left the Kremlin.’

“Much overt Pavlovian material has, however, been inflicted upon the unsuspecting American public. Herbert A. Philbrick, nine years an undercover agent for the Federal Bureau of Investigation and author of I Led Three Lives, remarked in one of his many speeches, ‘I learned as a member of the Communist Party – sitting in these deeply conspiratorial meetings night after night – that the Communists concentrate a great deal on something which they call Pavlovian psychiatry. Sometimes they refer to it as Soviet psychiatry.’

“Pavlov, in his many experiments with animals and human beings, discovered specific scientific procedures to produce artificial neuroses in dogs and men. In studying and relating these experiments, one is immediately impressed with the almost perfect analogy between what our youngsters experience under Beatlemania and the technique inflicted on Pavlov’s dogs to develop ‘artificial neurosis.’

“For example, Dr. Bernard Saibel, child guidance expert for the State of Washington, in his account of a Beatle ‘concert,’ declares that the hysteria experienced by these teenagers caused many of them to become ‘frantic, hostile, uncontrolled, screaming, unrecognizable beings.’

“These characteristics are all mentioned by Pavlov in his account of producing an artificially neurotic state in his animals. In one experiment, he writes, ‘this excitation could not be stopped in any way, whether by shouting, petting or striking the animal, which became absolutely unrecognizable.’ In another experiment, the Russian physiologist relates, ‘Now we produce the neurosis ... during the experiment the dog was extremely excitable ... [experiencing] chaotic condition of the nervous activity ... the animal was intolerant and uncontrollable.’ In still a third experiment, Pavlov observes, ‘Its weakening results in an abnormal predominance of delay and other normal phenomena of which inhibition is a part, expressed also in the general behavior of the animal, struggling, impatience, unruliness and finally as pathological phenomena.’

“All these experiments were related to the production of neuroses in dogs. The human parallel is described in his Lecture XXIII, ‘Application to Man.’

“Pavlov found that his dogs generally fell into the four classical types or temperaments of Hippocrates: the extremely excitable, the extremely inhibited, and the two moderate types: quiet and lively.

“He generally refers to the above as three main groups: (1) the excitatory group; (2) the inhibitory group and (3) the central group with two types.

“He devised three scientific methods (two basic) to produce neurosis in animals. One method involved overstraining or overexciting the excitatory group of dogs with extremely strong stimuli. A second method involved overstraining the inhibitory group with a strong or a very protracted inhibition. Finally a third method involved a clashing or collision of the excitatory and inhibitory processes, thereby producing neurosis. In Pavlovian terminology, ‘The conditions for the transition into a morbid state are quite definite. Two of these are well known. These are: very strong external stimuli and the collision of the excitatory and inhibitory process.’

“To emphasize the seriousness of the resultant mental disorder, Pavlov carefully observes, ‘Experimental neuroses are usually permanent, affecting an animal for months and even years.’ Elsewhere he states, ‘In both cases the normal relation between excitation and inhibition has disappeared. We call this a nervous breakdown, and these destructions of equilibrium in the nervous system we consider as neuroses. They are real neuroses, one showing a predominance of excitation, the other of inhibition. It is a serious illness, continues months, and is one for which treatment is necessary.’

“Rock and Neurosis – We contend that rock ’n’ roll, certainly a strong external stimulus, is producing this artificial type of neurosis in our teenagers, and causing teenage mental breakdowns to reach an all time high. And, no more scholarly statement of the relation between ‘wild’ music and neurosis can be found than Dr. Howard Hanson’s comment in The American Journal of Psychiatry, ‘The music ... is frequently crass, raucous and common-place, and could be dismissed without comment if it were not for the radio whereby hour after hour, night after night, American homes are flooded with vast quantities of the material. To its accompaniment our youngsters dance, play and even study. Perhaps they have developed an immunity to its effects – but if they have not, and if the mass production of this aura drug is not curtailed, we may find ourselves a nation of neurotics which even the skill of your profession (psychiatry) may be hard-pressed to cure.’ And since this violent, orgiastic type of music is aired nearly twenty-four hours a day across this nation, his comment on mental sanity and radio is most important: ‘For in this day when through the radio the country is literally flooded with sound it seems logical to assume that music is destined to play an important part in helping to preserve mental sanity on the one hand or, if misused, to add to the emotional strain of an age already overtaxed by disruptive forces.’

“Considering Dr. Hanson’s statements in the context of current conditions, the following quotation from Edward Hunter’s work on corticovisceral psychiatry merits attention: ‘If brainwashing can make a single individual neurotic, what about the inhabitants of a village, or a city, or even a country? ... The only possible conclusion is that a long range program is being pursued which, if left unhindered over a long period, will make whole populations just as neurotic as a single individual.’ We are contending that perverted music is one major contributing factor in this long-range program!

“Now, in the constant, destructive noises called hard rock or ‘Beatle music,’ our teenagers could well be experiencing all three of the neurotic techniques discovered by Pavlov.

“In the first place, artificial neurosis is produced by a ‘continually increasing tension of the excitatory process.’ Rock ’n’ roll is just such a cumulative, tension-producing stimulus. Teenagers are thrown into a tremendous frenzy as the tension is built up through the beat of the drum and other instruments, and it is just such a stimulation of tension that is causing many teenagers in the so-called excitatory group to suffer artificially induced neurosis. In pre-Freudian terminology, the disease would be termed neurasthenia and hysteria.

“Secondly, ‘The inhibitory process likewise may be weakened either through strain or through collision with the excitatory process. Its weakening results in an abnormal predominance of delay and other normal phenomena of which inhibition is a part, expressed also in the general behavior of the animal, struggling, impatience, unruliness, and finally as pathological phenomena, e.g., neurasthenic irritability; in man as a hypomaniac or manic condition.’From this description there seems little doubt that teenagers in the inhibitory group are also affected, since rock ’n’ roll ‘concerts’ are producing this behavior!

“The final method of causing artificial neurosis consists in the clashing or collision of the excitatory and inhibitory reflexes. Pavlov relates two experiments in which metronomes were used to bring about just such a collision. In one experiment he used 30 beats a minute to establish the excitatory reflex and 15 beats per minute to establish the inhibitory reflex. In the other experiment he used 120 beats per minute to establish the excitatory reflex and 60 beats to establish the inhibitory reflex.

“Pavlov’s Dogs – Pavlov conditioned his dog to secrete saliva while a metronome beat 120 per minute. To accomplish this, the scientist used the same technique as in the earlier discussed experiment with the flashing light. Each day, as food was placed before the animal, the scientist would activate the metronome at 120 beats per minute. Finally merely setting the metronome at 120 beats per minute caused the salivary gland of the dog to secrete. Normally, a sound stimulus does not cause such a secretion, but through a synthetic path (the conditioning process) in the central nervous system of the animal the sound stimulus now calls forth abnormally the same response that the normal stimulus, i.e., the sight or smell of food, would bring forth. This conditioning process implanted in the animal was termed the excitatory reflex.

“Using the same animal, Pavlov then implanted another reflex designated as the inhibitory reflex. Here he conditioned the animal never to secrete saliva when the metronome operated at 60 beats per minute. This inhibitory reflex was firmly implanted in the animal by never feeding her while the metronome beat at that rate. The salivary gland of the dog was, of course, finally conditioned never to secrete saliva with the metronome set at 60 beats per minute.

“The animal, conditioned with two reflexes, the excitatory and the inhibitory, was then exposed to both metronomes at the same time or in rapid alternation. One metronome, beating 120 beats a minute, induced the gland of the dog to secrete saliva. The controlled situation, with its capacity to produce tremendous, internal, conflicting tensions, caused a breakdown which was termed by Pavlov artificial neurosis. ‘All these experiments,’ says Pavlov, ‘clearly bring out the fact that a development of a chronic pathological state of the hemispheres can occur from one or another of two causes; first, a conflict between excitation and inhibition which the cortex finds itself unable to resolve; second, the action of extremely powerful and unusual stimuli.’

“The last experiment, the clashing of the two reflexes, like the other two experiments of overstraining the excitatory or the inhibitory process, explains the process by which our young teenagers are being criminally seduced into this neurosis. Attending a Beatle ‘concert,’ these young people already possess what Pavlov would term a built-in inhibitory reflex. This has been implanted by their parents, churches, and society. It entails such things as decent behavior, prohibiting the coed from taking off her dress in public, tearing up the auditorium, creating havoc and battling with the authorities.

“Rock and Hypnosis – However, within twenty-nine minutes, the Beatles or any other rock group can have these young people doing these very things. Rock ’n’ roll, with its perverted music form, dulls the capacity for attention and creates a kind of hypnotic monotony which blurs and makes unreal the external world. ‘Earthly worries are submerged in a tide of rising exaltation ... the whole universe is compressed into the medium of the beat, where all things unite and pound forward, rhythmic, and regular.’ In the area of morals, ‘rock ’n’ roll treats the concept of love with a characteristic doubleness. The lyrics generally [in 1964] capitulate to the concept [of true love], but the music itself expresses the unspoken desire to smash it to pieces and run amuck.’ This was precisely what Dr. Ronald Sprenger, chief school medical officer of Nottingham, England, had in mind when he referred to rock ’n’ roll as the cause of sexual delinquency among teenagers. He also said, ‘Mass hysteria affects many to the stage of loss of consciousness and lack of thought for their immediate welfare.’

“With the previously instilled inhibitions prohibiting the teenager from committing acts of sexual and other delinquency, the external excitatory music creates exactly the opposite desires. The ensuing internal conflict causes a severe clash or collision of the two forces and the teenager breaks down with a mental condition identifiable as artificial neurosis.

“And, the frightening aspect of this mentally conditioned process is the fact that these young people, in this highly excited, hypnotic state, can be told to do practically anything – and they will.

“One can scarcely conceive of the possibility, but nevertheless the method exists, wherein the enemies of our Republic could actually use television and the Beatles (or any other rock ’n’ roll/folk group) to place thousands of our teenagers into a frenzied, hypnotic state and send them forth into the streets to riot and revolt.

“Dr. Andrew Salter, in his work Conditioned Reflex Therapy, laid down the physiological laws for such a probability. He mentioned three ingredients that are both necessary and sufficient to control human behavior. He said, ‘Hypnosis, word conditioning and emotional conditioning are thoroughly interwoven. They do not operate by different laws. They are aspects of the same laws. To understand those laws is to understand how to control human behavior.’

“Dr. Salter’s statement unpacked could well contain the modus operandi for riot and revolution. The Beatles, Rolling Stones or any rock group, for example, need only mass-hypnotize thousands of American youth, condition their emotions through the beat of their ‘music’ and then have someone give the word for riot and revolt. The consequences are imponderable. Watts, Detroit, New^,ark and its ‘Burn, baby, burn’ would fade into insignificance.

“And recently Modern Medicine stated that persons can be ‘hypnotized by television,’ according to Drs. Herbert Spiegel and James H. Ryan of Columbia University, New York City. These doctors contended that this technique ‘might be useful in mass education, group treatment, and research, but they also warned that ‘unscrupulous operators could confuse, exploit, and deceive hypnotizable persons.’ Since the subversive Fair Play for Cuba Committee was organized by two CBS newsmen, Richard Gibson and Robert Taber, and since J. Edgar Hoover admitted that Communists have infiltrated television, the Communists would not have too much difficulty finding their ‘unscrupulous operators.’ If this should ever come to pass, Aldous Huxley’s jewel, ‘Never before have so few been in a position to make fools, maniacs or criminals of so many,’ could be considered fulfilled.

“Dr. William Sargant, head of the Psychological Medicine Department at St. Thomas’ Hospital, writes: ‘Once a state of hysteria has been induced in men and dogs by mounting stresses which the brain can no longer tolerate, protective inhibition is likely to supervene. This will disturb the individual’s ordinary conditioned behavior patterns.’

“Sargant further states: ‘Normally, it seems, the human nervous system, like the dog’s, is in a state of dynamic equilibrium between excitation and inhibition. But if subjected to excessive excitation or excessive inhibition which Pavlov described in dogs, the brain then becomes incapable, for the time being, of its usual intelligent functioning.’ Under such a condition, Sargant states, ‘belief can be implanted in people, after brain function has been sufficiently disturbed by accidentally or deliberately induced fear, anger, or excitement. Of the results caused by such disturbances, the most common one is temporarily impaired judgment and heightened suggestibility’ ....

“Rock and Hysteria – Dr. Howard Hanson, commenting on the relationship between music and hysteria, remarks, ‘The mass hysteria present in recordings of the rhythmic chants of primitive peoples and the similar mass hysteria of the modern ‘jam-session’ indicates – at times, all too clearly – the emotional tension producible by subjecting groups of people to concentrated doses of rhythm.’

“Dr. Bernard Saibel, child guidance expert for the Washington State Division of Community Services, attended the Seattle performance of England’s Beatles at the request of the Seattle Times. He reported:

“‘The experience of being with 14,000 teenagers to see the Beatles is unbelievable and frightening.

“‘And believe me, it is not at all funny, as I first thought when I accepted this assignment.

“‘The hysteria and loss of control go far beyond the impact of the music. Many of those present became frantic, hostile, uncontrolled, screaming, unrecognizable beings.

“‘If this is possible – and it is – parents and adults have a lot to account for to allow this to go on.

“‘This is not simply a release, as I first thought it would be, but a very destructive process in which adults allow the children to be involved – allowing the children a mad, erotic world of their own without the reassuring safeguards of protection from themselves.

“‘The externals are terrifying. Normally recognizable girls behaved as if possessed by some demonic urge, defying in emotional ecstasy the restraints which authorities try to place on them.

“‘The hysteria is from the girls and when you ask them what it is all about, all they can say is, ‘I love them.’

“‘There are a lot of things you can say about why the Beatles attract the teenage crowd.

“‘The music is loud, primitive, insistent, strongly rhythmic, and releases in a disguised way (can it be called sublimation?) the all too tenuously controlled, newly acquired physical impulses of the teenager.

“‘Mix this up with the phenomena of mass hypnosis, contagious hysteria, and the blissful feeling of being mixed up in an all-embracing, orgiastic experience, and every kid can become ‘Lord of the Flies’ or the Beatles.

“‘Why do the kids scream, faint, gyrate and in general look like a primeval, protoplasmic upheaval and go into ecstatic convulsions when certain identifiable and expected trademarks come forth, such as ‘O yeah!,’ a twist of the hips or the thrusting out of an electric guitar?

“‘Regardless of the causes or reasons for the behavior of these youngsters, it had the impact of an unholy bedlam, the like of which I have never seen. It caused me to feel that such should not be allowed again, if only for the good of the youngsters.

“‘It was an orgy for teenagers.’

“According to Leonard Gilman, Schonaur insisted ‘that an increasing volume of sound in modern life – without adequate control of its character – is one of the causes of growing emotional instability in contemporary society.’ This is exactly what we are presently experiencing.” [Note: For the whole story, one will need to obtain a copy of the book, with its 346 pages of documented data.]

This is my one hundred and ninety-third monthly teaching letter and starts my seventeenth 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 52,

THE RECONCILIATION (i.e., Redemption):

While we are on the subject of “reconciliation”, it would be well to analyze the genetic lineage of Yahweh-in-the-flesh, whom we twelve tribes of Israel are about to remarry. This is something that all proposed parties to a marriage should seriously consider, especially the parents and grandparents of the betrothed, for each nuptial ancestor and descendant deserves a pureblooded offspring, kind-after-kind in the line of Adam. For this, I am going to review some important Biblical facts that I researched for a brochure entitled The Genealogy Of Yahshua The Messiah, date, Jan. 17, 2000:

THE CURSE OF JECONIAH (a.k.a. Jehoiachin or Coniah)

To understand what the curse of Jeconiah was, and is still all about, I am going to quote from the Believer’s Bible Commentary by William MacDonald, page 1204: “Of interest, too, is the mention of a king named Jeconiah. In Jeremiah 22:30, Yahweh pronounced a curse on this man:

“Thus says Yahweh:

‘Write this man down as childless,

A man who shall not prosper in his days;

For none of his [male] descendants shall prosper,

Sitting on the throne of David,

And ruling anymore in Judah.’

“If Yahshua had been the real son of Joseph, He would have come under this curse. Yet He had to be the legal son of Joseph in order to inherit the lawful rights of the throne of David. The problem was solved by the miracle of the virgin birth: Yahshua was the legal heir to the throne through Joseph. He was the real Son of David through Mary. The curse on Jeconiah did not fall on Mary or her child since she did not descend from Jeconiah.” [Note: Mary, the mother of Christ, didn’t always remain a virgin, as later she bore other children.]

For another reference from Jeremiah 22:24-30, concerning Jeconiah’s curse, I will quote from the Believer’s Bible Commentary by William MacDonald, page 1011:

“Prophecy against King Jehoiachin:– Coniah (also called Jeconiah and Jehoiachin), the fourth [son of] king [Josiah], would be taken captive by the Babylonians and would die in Babylon. None of his descendants would ever sit on the throne of David. No offspring of Jeconiah succeeded him to the throne. His replacement, Zedekiah, the last king of Judah, was his uncle. Charles H. Dyer comments: ‘This prophecy also helps explain the genealogies of Yahshua in Matthew 1 and Luke 3. Matthew presented the legal line of Yahshua through his stepfather, Joseph. However, Joseph’s line came through Shealthel who was a son of Jehoiachin (Jeconiah, Matt. 1:12; cf. 1 Chron. 3:17). Had Yahshua been a physical descendant of Joseph and not virgin-born, He would have been disqualified as Israel’s King. Luke presented the physical line of Yahshua through Mary, who was descended from David through the line of his son Nathan (Luke 3:31). In that way Yahshua was not under the ‘curse’ of Jehoiachin’.”

At this point, it is important to notice the curse of Jeconiah didn’t fall on Zedekiah, or his daughters who eventually went to Ireland. Being Jeconiah’s uncle, Zedekiah would be a generation older (or previous to Jeconiah’s burning of Jeremiah’s scroll). To amplify on the above two passages, I will quote from The International Bible Commentary by F.F. Bruce, page 1122: “Humanly speaking Yahshua’s claim to the Davidic throne depended on the willingness of Joseph, the legal heir, to accept Him as his son. Hence Matthew gives only Joseph’s version of the story ... Here let us note that apart from the divine activity in conception, Yahshua’s birth was completely normal. He was not conceived until Mary was married; betrothal was legally marriage.”

Returning now to quote again from the Believer’s Bible Commentary by William MacDonald, page 1204:

“This (Matthew’s) genealogy traces the legal descent of Yahshua as King of Israel; the genealogy in Luke’s Gospel traces His lineal descent as Son of David. Matthew’s genealogy follows his royal line from David through his son, Solomon, the next king; Luke’s genealogy follows the blood line from David through another son, Nathan. This genealogy concludes with Joseph, of whom Yahshua was the adopted Son, the genealogy in Luke 3 probably traces the ancestry of Mary, of whom Yahshua was the real son. A millennium earlier, Yahweh had made an unconditional agreement with David, promising him a kingdom that would last forever and a perpetually ruling line (Ps. 89:4, 36, 37) ... Yahshua united in His Person the only two bases for claims to the throne of Israel (the legal and the lineal) ...”

Quoting now from the Commentary On The Whole Bible by Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, page 881: “And yet it is here studiously proclaimed that Joseph was not the natural, but only the legal father of our Master. His birth of a virgin was known only to a few; but the acknowledged descent of his legal father from David secured that the descent of Yahshua Himself from David should never be questioned.”

Quoting from Insight On The Scriptures, volume 2, page 1226:

“ZEDEKIAH ... Son of Josiah by his wife Hamutal; last of the Judean kings to reign at Jerusalem. Upon his being constituted vassal king, his name was changed by Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar from Mattaniah to Zedekiah. During the 11 years of his reign, Zedekiah ‘continued to do what was bad in Yahweh’s eyes’– 2 Ki. 24:17-19; 2 Ch. 36:10-12; Jer. 37:1; 52:1, 2.

“MATTANIAH ( Ibid. vol. 2, p. 351) A son of King Josiah and the uncle of King Jehoiachin. He was put on the throne of Judah by Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, who changed his name to Zedekiah – 2 Ki. 24:15-17.

“HAMUTAL (Ibid. vol. 1, p. 1027) (Ha-mu´tal) [possibly, Father-in-Law Is Dew]. Daughter of ‘Jeremiah from Libnah’; wife of King Josiah and mother of Jehoahaz and Mattaniah (i.e., Zedekiah), both of whom reigned as kings over Judah – 2 Ki. 23:30, 31; 24:17, 18; Jer. 52:1.”

Again, in another article from The Popular and Critical Bible Encyclopedia and Scripture Dictionary, page 756, we get the following on the name, Hamutal:

“HAMUTAL... (Hebrew... kinsman of the dew), daughter of Jeremiah of Libnah, wife of king Josiah, and mother of Jehoahaz and Zedekiah, kings of Judah.”

From this, we know that Zedekiah’s mother, Hamutal, had a typical Hebrew name meaning kinsman as fresh as the morning dew. Have you ever gone out early in the morning and observed the sun shining on the dew? – with millions of droplets of dew shining like gems of crystal? – each drop of dew being pure, without contamination, representing purity of race? This is a name for an Israelite, not a race-mixed, rotten-fig-jew.

“JEREMIAH FROM LIBNAH (Insight On The Scriptures, vol. 2, p. 30) A man of the town of Libnah, a priestly city. He was the father of King Josiah’s wife Hamutal, who was the mother of King Jehoahaz and Zedekiah (i.e., Mattaniah). – 2 Ki. 23:30, 31; 24:18; Jer. 52:1; Jos. 21:13; 1 Ch. 6:57.

“JOSIAH (Ibid. , vol. 2, pp. 117-118) Son of Judean King Amon by Jedidah the daughter of Abaiah (2 Ki. 22:1), Josiah had at least two wives, Hamutal and Zebidah (2 Ki. 23:31, 34, 36). Of his four sons mentioned in the Bible, only the firstborn, Johanan, did not rule as king over Judah – 1 Ch. 3:14,15.

“After the assassination of his father and the execution of the conspirators, eight-year-old Josiah became king of Judah (2 Ki. 21:23, 24, 26; 2 Ch. 33:25). Some six years later Zebidah gave birth to Josiah’s second son, Jehoiakim (2 Ki. 22:1; 23:36). In the eighth year of his reign, Josiah sought to learn and to do Yahweh’s will (2 Ch. 34:3). It was also about this time that Jehoahaz (Shallum), Josiah’s son by Hamutal was born – 2 Ki. 22:1; 23:31; Jer. 22:11. ... About four years later (after the long procrastinated Passover) Josiah became father to Mattaniah (Zedekiah) by his wife Hamutal, – 2 Ki. 22:1; 23:31, 34, 36; 24:8, 17, 18.”

So far, it should be apparent that Yahweh-in-the flesh, as Yahshua our Messiah, was genetically a Nathanite rather than a Solomonite, although both Solomon and Nathan had the same mother, Bathsheba – the first wife of Uriah the Hittite – (“Hittite” in this case being an allegorical Hebrew expression meaning “a valiant warrior” – rather than a genetic Hittite! Yes, and David became an accessory to murder by arranging for Uriah’s death, in order to snatch Bathsheba from the Israelite warrior, Uriah)! Yes, and Yahweh-in-the-flesh as Yahshua was a descendant of this murderer, David, through Nathan. Yet, when Yahshua suffered death on the cross, His blood covered all the sins of every White Adamite under one of the nine Covenants, past, present and future, including David’s sin! The original marriage with the twelve tribes of Israel exclusively included the free-people under Sarah, and the remarriage will be exclusively with the same free-people of the same twelve tribes of Israel, past, present and future!

The Invisible Kingdom. After Messiah explains to Nicodemus both the physical and spirit dimensions of the Kingdom at John 3:8, He went on to compare the Spirit to the phenomenon of the wind:

“The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit [at conception].”

While the wind blows in a variety of directions, and we can hear its sound, perceive its operation in the motion of the trees, and even feel its touch, we cannot discern the air itself. The motion of the wind is imperceptible, but we can gauge it by its risings, fallings and changes of directions. We can only know that it exists by the effects which it produces. Like natural birth, the Spirit reproduces, by the law, “after its kind.” Live Spirit DNA cannot coexist with dead-of-spirit DNA,! In Scripture, both in Greek and Hebrew, the words “spirit” and “breathed” are constantly brought together. Therefore, inasmuch as Yahweh breathed into Adam His breath of life, we are both of the same Spirit.

As the Kingdom’s coming is imperceptible, Yahshua said, Luke 17:20: “The kingdom of Yahweh cometh not with observation.” Truly, the Kingdom must be reconciled with the Covenant, for we are legally His before our first breath!

However, a kingdom must have a king! We will now attempt to unravel the idiosyncrasies of the Davidic king line, and determine just how Yahshua Christ will inherit it from David. This will not be an easy task, and one will have to follow each turn of events and determine for himself what is correct and what isn’t:

FATHERED by DAVID & both mothered by Bathsheba:

 

Luke chapter 3	Matthew chapter 1
Nathan	Solomon
Mattatha	Rehoboam
Menan	Abijam
Melea	Asa
Eliakim	Jehoshaphat
Jonan	Jehoram
Joseph	Ahaziah
Juda	Athaliah
Simeon	Joash
Levi	Amaziah
Matthat	Uzziah (a.k.a. Azariah)
Jorim	Jotham
Eliezer	Abaz
Jose	Hezekiah
Er	Manasseh
Elmedam	Amon
Cosam	Josiah
Addi	Jehoahaz
Melchi	Jehoiakim
Neri	Jeconiah (a.k.a. Jehoiachin and Coniah, whom Yahweh cursed)
Salathiel (son of Neri)	Zedekiah
Zorobabel	Salathiel*
Rhesa	Zorobabel*
Joanna	Abiud
Juda	Eliakim
Joseph	Azor
Semei	Sador
Mattathias	Achim
Maath	Elias
Nagge	Eleazor
Esli	Matthan
Naum	Jacob
Amos	Joseph (husband of Mary & adopted Yahshua as his lawful son and heir, thereby Yahshua inherited the kingship through Solomon)
Mattathias
Joseph
Janna
Melchi
Levi
Matthat
Heli
Yahshua the Messiah

“¹⁷ The sons of Jeconiah, the prisoner, were Shealtiel his son, ¹⁸ and Malchiram, Pedaiah, Shenazzar, Jekamiah, Hoshama and Nedabiah.” (NAS)

If true, this is important, as Zedekiah had two daughters who could inherit the kingship if there were no surviving sons, and Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, had all of Zedekiah’s sons slain before his eyes, but Nebuchadnezzar was not aware that under Hebrew law, if there were no male children to inherit, the inheritance could be given to a female, (Num. 27:6-7).

I will now quote from Destiny Magazine for May, 1947 yearbook, “Study In Jeremiah” by Howard Rand p. 163, in part of an article entitled “Building and Planting”, which I also used in WTL #21:

“Jeremiah accomplished in its entirety the destructive phase of his commission and we have every reason to believe God would see to it that he was prepared to accomplish the building and planting for which he was also commissioned. The daughters of Zedekiah became the prophet’s wards and because God had promised that his covenant would not be broken with David, that he would never lack a son to reign upon his Throne, the building and planting obviously had to do with preserving this royal branch of the House of David.

“Daughters of Zelophehad: When Nebuchadnezzar killed [all] the sons of Zedekiah, allowing his daughters to go free, he did not know of the Israel law. Under a decision rendered by the Lord in the matter of the daughters of Zelophehad, a judgment was incorporated into the Israel Law of Inheritance to provide for the daughters so that they might inherit as though they were males when there were no sons. The case of Zelophehad’s daughters was presented to Moses when they appeared before him and demanded an inheritance in the land, for their father died leaving no sons: ‘And Yahweh spake unto Moses saying, The daughters of Zelophehad speak right: thou shalt surely give them a possession of an inheritance among their father’s brethren; and thou shalt cause the inheritance of their father to pass unto them’.” (Num. 27:6-7.)

This presents a problem concerning the curse of Jeconiah (a.k.a. Jehoiachin or Coniah)! Inasmuch as Zedekiah was Jeconiah’s uncle, his children were also of the line of David, and in the absence of sons and daughters, whom Jeremiah removed safely from Judah, were eligible for the inheritance and would be free of the curse of Jeconiah. Zedekiak was every bit as wicked as Jeconiah, and that may be the reason why Yahweh allowed Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, to slay all of Zedekiah’s sons! If this was the case, David’s throne was skating on pretty thin ice! We could almost say, “For the want of a woman, the Kingdom was nearly lost!” For the context of this subject, all the other passages in Holy Writ concerning the throne of David must be taken into consideration to comprehend all the ramifications involved!

What it ultimately amounts to is: If Jeremiah really took one of the two surviving daughters of Zedekiah from Tahpanhes in Egypt to Ireland, and then married her to Eochaidh, the Heremon of the line of Zarah-Judah, the British Royal family and throne do not entirely represent the throne of David, but are a co-regency, representing half a kingship of the tribe of Zarah-Judah and half a kingship under Pharez-Judah. Thus, the British throne does not fully personify the throne of David under Nathan or Solomon. Yet, when Yahshua Christ returns at his Second Advent, He will represent both Nathan and Solomon! Therefore the British throne is left wanting full authority!

Again, excerpts from Destiny Magazine for May, 1947 yearbook, “Study In Jeremiah” by Howard Rand pp. 163-164, in part of an article entitled “Building and Planting”, which I also used in WTL #21:

“Jeremiah in Ireland. There are two distinct phases to the Hebrew story concerning Ireland. One deals with the Milesian records, the history of which line originated in Egypt and Palestine, while the other line concerns Jeremiah and the King’s daughters, one of whom married Eochaidh, the Heremon of the line of Zarah, upon her arrival with the Prophet in Ireland.” ....

“Unknown Land. This statement is followed by the promise that Jeremiah would pass into a land which he did not know. Where was this unknown land to which he was to go? Before answering this question let us review the statements of other prophets. Isaiah tells us of a remnant that was to go forth from Jerusalem and escape from Zion, of whom he says: ‘And the remnant that is escaped, of the house of Judah, shall again take root downward, and bear fruit upward.’ (Isa. 37:31.)

“These promises are entirely overlooked by those who seek to end Jeremiah’s career in Egypt. It is well known that Jeremiah was fully alive to the importance of securing every evidence which might be of value in carrying out his work. He could not begin the building and planting until after the fall of Jerusalem and the dethronement of Zedekiah. This part of the mission must be completed somewhere, evidently somewhere other than in Palestine or Egypt. He could no more fail to accomplish this, or avoid its deliberate undertaking, if he was (Yahweh’s) agent, than he could prevent the preceding and predicted destruction of Jerusalem and Egypt to which he bore testimony.

“Long before the days of Ezekiel and Jeremiah, Nathan told David of this place of planting (II Sam. 7:10). We have already referred to Jeremiah’s purchase of the title deeds of Anathoth, concealing them prior to his departure from the land. To date this hidden evidence of Jeremiah’s right to Palestine has never been produced, for they were to continue in concealment for many days (Jer. 32:14-15), a period which evidently has not yet run out.

“Tea Tephi. Jeremiah had every means at his command to fulfill his mission, for he was as greatly honored and respected by the King of Babylon as he was persecuted by his countryman, who looked upon him as a traitor. After the capture of the city by the armies of Babylon, Jeremiah could go where he liked and do as he liked, and Bible history traces him to Egypt with the King’s daughters where he vanished from Biblical records.

“The signs of Jeremiah in Egypt are his own writings and the testimony of the Jews [sic Judaeans], all of which was corroborated by E. Flanders Petrie. Jeremiah disappeared with an escaped remnant from Jewish [sic Judaean] sight out of Egypt. That he doubtless visited Palestine to complete his work in gathering certain relics to be taken by him to the far country is clear from the record of the things he had with him when he arrived in that far country. Following the disappearance of Jeremiah from Egypt, there appears in western history a man with a group of people who answers in every respect to the description of Jeremiah and the remnant – who had with them certain valuable possessions. The evidence of all this from Irish history would fill a volume.

“To enumerate a few recorded facts, we have Tea Tephi (whose name means ‘tender twig’), a Princess from the East, coming to Ireland at this time. She was known as the King’s daughter, and her guardian was the prophet, Ollam Folla. With them was the Urim and Thummin breast plate, or the Jordan Moran, and the Stone of Destiny, or Lia Fail, which accompanied them to this Isle in the sea. The Harp of David hung in Tara’s Halls and the evidence also bears out the claim that the Ark of the Covenant accompanied this remnant to the Isles.

“The Irish Chronicles records the fact of the coming of an Eastern Princess. In these chronicles appears an interesting poem purporting to set forth the facts told by the Princess: ... ‘We were five that rode upon asses, And five by the mules they led - Whereupon were the things brought forth - From the house of God when we fled; The Stone of Jacob our father - The seat wherein Yahveh dwells - Upon Sacred things whereof the Book of the Prophet tells - And the signs of my father David, On whom was the promise stayed - Bright as the crown of the dawn, Deep as the midnight shade, * * * Upon me was that promise fallen. - For me was the Prophet’s toil. - He had signed me with David’s signet, - Anointed my head with oil. - He had set my hands to the Harp; - He had bidden me hold the spear [scepter]; - The buckler was girt to my bosom, - And Barach and he drew near - To set my feet upon Bethel, - The stone that is seen this day. - That my seed may rest upon it - Where’er it is borne away: - And its promises be sure beneath them, - Strong to uphold their throne; - Though the builders cast it aside, - It shall never be left alone’ ....”

Whether one believes all, part, or none of this, according to the Holy Word of Yahweh at Jer. 33:20-21, the throne of David (which to date remains Solomonic) has had to survive somewhere in this world, every single day and night since David was crowned king over Israel:

“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 [or daughter] to reign upon his throne ....”

“Year of Jeremiah’s Arrival: Mr. Thomas W. Plant in his article The Date of Jeremiah's Arrival in Ireland, Destiny for March, 1938, refers to his visit at Glastonbury, in the summer of 1935, when the subject of Jeremiah’s arrival in Ireland came up for discussion. He was asked by Mr. George Dansie of Bristol if he was interested in the decipherment of hieroglyphics. He was then shown a jumble of lines, circles, dots and spirals. Later, in a letter to Mr. Plant, Mr. Dansie wrote:

“‘These are the particulars that I gave you, when at Glastonbury, of the carved stone in the tomb of Ollam Fodhla, which is in Schiabhna-Cailliche, near Old Castle, Co. Meath, Ireland.

“‘It shows a Lunar Eclipse, in the constellation of Taurus, also a conjunction of the planets Saturn and Jupiter in Virgo.

“‘The prow of a ship is shown in the center, with five lines indicating the number of passengers it carried.

“‘On the left a part of the ship, which might be the stern, is shown and only four passengers, one having been left behind or lost as indicated by the line falling away from the ship. The wavy lines indicate the passage of the ship across the ocean, terminating at a central point on an island.

“‘Ollam Fodhla having been identified as Jeremiah, this stone would be a record of his journey from Egypt to Ireland, having in his care the two daughters of Zedekiah, and his scribe or secretary, Baruch, and probably an attendant for the two Princesses. [The fifth passenger might have been Ebed-melech, the Ethiopian.]

“‘One of the Princesses appears to have been left at a country en route.

“‘The date of arrival according to the necessary stellar calculations made by an expert, V.E. Robson (a friend of Mr. Dansie), being Thursday, 16th October, 583 B.C.

“‘At this date there was an eclipse of the moon in the constellation of Taurus, and a conjunction to within 10 degrees of Saturn and Jupiter in Virgo.

“‘The bird at the top may be a representation of Ezekiel’s eagle which carried the tender twig to a mountain in Israel.

“‘I believe the date of departure from Egypt was stated by Rev. W.M.H. Milner in an article or book, I cannot remember which, to be 584 B.C. At any rate, Mr. W. Campbell, writing in 1914, states that Jeremiah arrived in Ireland 230 years before the death of King Cimboath, which was in 353 B.C., and that, added to 230 years, gives us 583 B.C’. (See Northern British-Israel Review, Vol. 4, p. 171.)”

Again, one may believe all, part or none of this, but I will give the reader what documentation I have. It is found in Destiny Magazine in the May, 1947 yearbook “Study In Jeremiah” by Howard Rand, p. 165, in an article entitled “Building and Planting”. It is also found in Study In Jeremiah for which Rand is also the author, on pp. 279-299, and Rand supplies us with the required witnesses in V.E. Robson, W.M.H. Milner, and W. Campbell, and supposedly appeared in the Northern British-Israel Review, vol 4, p. 171. What is interesting, Rand supplies us with a facsimile of an Ogam inscription found near Old Castle, Co. Meath, Ireland as follows:

 

 

 

1.- Taurus the Bull, 2.- Moon; 3.- Earth; 4.- Eagle with twig; 5.- Sun; 6.- Jupiter 7.- Virgo 8.- Conjunction sign 9.- Saturn 10.- Ireland 11.- Boat with five passengers 12.- Ocean track 13.- Pleiades 14.- Boat with four passengers 15.- one passenger left off. – Back to Rand:

“Escaping Remnant. While Jeremiah prophesied that those who had gone down into Egypt would be destroyed by the sword and famine, he also said, ‘... for none shall return but such as shall escape’ (Jer. 44:14), indicating that a remnant would leave. The prophet also declared that the Lord would not prevent evil from befalling those who had gone down into the land of the Pharaohs against His command but he qualified this statement by referring again to a small number who would escape (Jer. 44:28).

“At an earlier date, during the time the prophet was experiencing troubles and turmoil in the violent opposition he was meeting from his countrymen, he exclaimed: ‘Woe is me, my mother, that thou hast borne me a man of strife and a man of contention to the whole earth! I have neither lent on usury, nor men have lent to me on usury; yet every one of them doth curse me.’ (Jer. 15:10.)

“The Lord then said to Jeremiah: ‘Verily it shall be well with thy remnant; verily I will cause the enemy to entreat thee well in the time of evil and in the time of affliction’ (Jer. 15:11).

“Unknown Land. This statement is followed by the promise that Jeremiah would pass into a land which he did not know. Where was this unknown land to which he was to go? Before answering this question let us review the statements of other prophets. Isaiah tells us of a remnant that was to go forth from Jerusalem and escape from Zion, of whom he says: ‘And the remnant that is escaped, of the house of Judah, shall again take root downward, and bear fruit upward’, (Isa. 37:31).”

This is solid Biblical evidence that Jeremiah and his small party (which included the daughters of Zedekiah) didn’t remain in Egypt, neither did they return to Judaea! Evidently, the Almighty had decided to keep that “unknown land” a secret to the majority of the people so Jeremiah and his party could dwell in safety, and the Solomonic throne could thrive, as was promised to David. Otherwise, we have a 2,500 year hiatus in Biblical history to account for! So, if Jeremiah and his party didn’t go to Ireland, pray tell, Where did they go?

The object of this lesson is to demonstrate to the reader the characteristics and genetic lineage of Yahweh-in-the-flesh that is going to remarry us, the twelve tribes of Israel. I would now invite the reader to do his own research, and prove this subject true or false!

This is my one hundred and ninety-fourth monthly teaching letter and continues my seventeenth 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 53,

THE RECONCILIATION (i.e., Redemption):

While we are on the fervent subject of the genetic lineage of Yahweh-in-the-flesh, it might be appropriate to expand on who are genetically pure and who are not. This is important, as only a kinsman can redeem a kinsman by Biblical law, Lev. 25:25; Psalm 111:9; Psalm 130:7; Luke 1:68-74; Eph. 1:7 (CNT).

Lev. 25:25: “If thy brother be waxen poor, and hath sold away some of his possession, and if any of his kin come to redeem it, then shall he redeem that which his brother sold.”

Psalm 111:9: “He sent redemption unto his people: he hath commanded his covenant for ever: holy and reverend is his name.”

Psalm 130:7: “Let Israel hope in Yahweh: for with Yahweh there is mercy, and with him is plenteous redemption.”

Luke 1:68-74: “⁶⁸ Blessed be Yahweh Elohim of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, ⁶⁹ And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; ⁷⁰ As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began: ⁷¹ That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us; ⁷² To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant; ⁷³ The oath which he sware to our father Abraham, ⁷⁴ That he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him without fear ....”

Eph. 1:7: “In whom we have redemption through His blood, the dismissal of transgressions in accordance with the riches of His favor ....” (CNT)

It appears, according to these Bible passages, that Yahweh doesn’t want any blacks from anywhere! He doesn’t want Eskimos! He doesn’t want the kind of American Indians that can’t blush! He doesn’t want the aborigine from Australia! He doesn’t want the cat and dog eaters from Asia! He doesn’t want the Arabs (the children of the bond woman, who later mixed their blood with Canaanites)! He doesn’t want the Japanese! He doesn’t want the Kurds from Kurdistan! He doesn’t want the “chinks” from China! He doesn’t want the “gooks” from the Philippines! He doesn’t want the Polynesians from Malaysia or Borneo! He doesn’t want any Hottentots from South Africa! He doesn’t want the Heinz-57 variety of squat monsters from Mexico and nearly everyone from Central and South America, who by-and-large have mixed their genetics with the Edomite-jews. And if it’s anything other than blushing White Israelites, He doesn’t want them either (including the new pope)!

The biggest problem we have today is: The greater part of nominal churchianity believes, and falsely teaches that all the various races came from Adam, and continued down-line through Noah and his three sons. Nothing could be further from the truth! To reduce this topic to the simplest clarification, there are three types of people in the world today. (1) There are people born of Yahweh in His Image, (2) There are people born of this world (i.e., fallen angel-kind mixed with animal-kind, and (3) A race-mixed conglomeration consisting of Adam-kind mixed with fallen-angel and animal-kinds, and considered a Biblical “bastard”. Therefore, anyone who is not a pure descendant of Adam is a GMO, (i.e., genetically modified organism). To make a common analogy, a horse mixed with a donkey is a mule! Therefore, GMOs are nothing new, and the pure White-Caucasian-Europeans are NOT GMOs. Today, we have mule-people running around all over our White lands! The Bible calls them “outlandish”, meaning, “foreign, alien, odd, strange, peculiar, fantastic, bizarre, graceless, tasteless, vulgar, wild, curious, erratic, uncouth & weird”. They are all of these things and more! The bottom line is: Yahshua Christ never commissioned His disciples to take the Gospel to these unclean corrupted creatures! As a matter of fact, the blind shepherds standing behind their pulpits in nominal churchianity don’t even understand what the Gospel (i.e., the good message) is all about! So they offer the Gospel to the wrong people, for whom it was never intended! There is one thing we can be pretty damn sure of, and that is: There’ll be no GMOs at the marriage supper of the Lamb, Rev. 19-7-9!

“⁷ Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. ⁸ And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints. ⁹ And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of Yahweh.”

Getting back to basics, without (1) the courtship, (2) the marriage, (3) the honeymoon, (4) the estrangement, (5) the divorce, (6) the reconciliation, and (7) the remarriage of Yahweh-in-the-flesh, or Yahshua to His Cinderella bride, the twelve tribes of Israel, then the term “Gospel” means absolutely nothing! Yahweh never married any GMOs in the first place! He never had a honeymoon with any GMOs! He never became estranged from any GMOs! He never divorced any GMOs! Hence, it would be an impossibility to reconcile with someone He did not marry! And since He never married any GMOs, He sure as hell isn’t going to “remarry” any GMOs! There’ll be no place in Yahshua’s Kingdom for GMOs, as GMO-people will be a thing of the past!

Nehemiah 13:23-27 speaks of outlandish-people thusly:

“²³ In those days also saw I Judahites that had married wives of Ashdod, of Ammon, and of Moab: ²⁴ And their children spake half in the speech of Ashdod, and could not speak in the Judaeans’ language, but according to the language of each people. ²⁵ And I contended with them, and cursed them, and smote certain of them, and plucked off their hair, and made them swear by Elohim, saying, Ye shall not give your daughters unto their sons, nor take their daughters unto your sons, or for yourselves. ²⁶ Did not Solomon king of Israel sin by these things? yet among many nations was there no king like him, who was beloved of his Elohim, and Elohim made him king over all Israel: nevertheless even him did outlandish women cause to sin. ²⁷ Shall we then hearken unto you to do all this great evil, to transgress against our Elohim in marrying strange wives?” Therefore, we don’t have to guess twice to understand what Ezra and Nehemiah thought about GMO-bastard-people! To support this fact, I will cite Heb. 12:6-8:

“⁶ For whom Yahweh loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. ⁷ If ye endure chastening, Yahweh dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? ⁸ But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards³⁵⁴¹, and not sons.”

William Finck, in his Christogenea New Testament translates this passage thusly:

“⁶ ‘... For whom Yahweh loves He disciplines, and He scourges every son whom He receives.’ ⁷ You endure discipline; as sons Yahweh engages with you. For what is a son whom a father does not discipline? ⁸ But if you are without discipline, of which you all have become partakers, then you are bastards³⁵⁴¹, and not sons.”

In Finck’s notes on Hebrews in his The Letters of Paul, he crossreferences this passage with Prov. 3:11-12 from the Septuagint:

“¹¹ My son, despise not the chastening of the Lord; nor faint when thou art rebuked of him: ¹² for whom the Lord loves, he rebukes, and scourges every son whom he receives.”

The bottom line is: Yahweh absolutely DOES NOT receive GMO-bastard-people as sons (nor daughters for that matter)! And for too many years we have sat idly by while allowing our shepherds to lie to us concerning this most serious matter! No wonder we have so many GMO-bastard-people hanging from our family trees! Maybe we should consider more seriously the welfare recipient who’s coming to dinner! You know, like the one with a baboon mouth, or the one with the slant eyes! Let’s examine the Greek term #3541, translated “bastard” at Heb. 12:8 from the New Testament Word Study by Spiros Zodhiates, p. 1014:

“3541 ... nóthos; genitive nóthou, masculine - feminine neuter nóthon, adjective. An illegitimate or misbegotten child, one who is spurious (Heb. 12:8).”

Synonym: pseudés (5571), false, untrue ....”

Antonym: gnésios (1103), ... from génos (1085), born. Of children meaning legitimate, lawfully born. In the New Testament, it means genuine, true, not degenerate [but true] as in Phil. 4:3 ....”

Since Zodhiates cites Strong’s Greek #1103, at Phil. 4:3, as a pure born (and we know it’s referring to a pure born Adamite), let’s take a look at it:

“And I intreat thee also, true¹¹⁰³ yokefellow, help those women which laboured with me in the gospel, with Clement also, and with other my fellowlabourers, whose names are in the book of life.” Now we can fully determine that only pureblooded Adamites have their names in the book of life! And that excludes all GMO-bastard-people!

William Finck, in his Christogenea New Testament renders this verse thusly:

“Yea, I ask you also, genuine¹¹⁰³ yoke-fellow, assist them, who with me contended together in the good message, and with Klementos and the rest of my colleagues, whose names are in the Book of Life.”

Nominal churchianity today are placing the “genuine” and the “illegitimate” together in a blender and churning them into a very distasteful “bitter gall”! Yes, that’s what GMO-bastard-people are, “bitter gall”, like that greenish bile secretion from one’s liver! There are no good GMOs, whether plants, animals or people! If one eats GMOs, one can get deathly sick, whether plants, animals or people! Eve “ate”, and she got deadly pregnant with that “bile-bastard”, Cain!

Cain, I believe, was the first humanoid GMO that had a blend of Adam-kind mixed with angel-kind. Of course, the fallen angels would have been White like Adam, but it is quite apparent that is where the similarity ended, for we are informed at Gen. 6:1-4 that such a mixture brought forth genetic misfits having maladjusted characteristics and behaviors. We know, when considering Gen. 6:1-4, that this kind of a mixture brought forth “giants”, and no doubt dwarfism as well. Mickey Rooney (real name Joseph Yule Jr.) would be a good example of dwarfism. Our White race has known from time immemorial that a horse mixed with a donkey produces a mule. No doubt this kind of mixture first happened millenniums before Yahweh created Adam! What we do know for sure is that a mule is definitely a GMO!

Yahweh strongly warned us against GMOs at Lev. 19:19, in part, thusly:

“Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed ....”

This is reinforced at Deut. 22:9”

“Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with divers seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled.”

As for the White Adamites under Yahweh’s covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the same idea is spelled out in the seventh of the ten commandments, at Exodus 24:14:

“Thou shalt not commit adultery.”

The seventh commandment was simply instructing the twelve tribes of Israel that they were not to race-mix their genetics with nonwhite aliens. Now, the Almighty didn’t make two commandments just alike. Believe it or not, He is wiser than that! The tenth commandment reads, at Exod. 24:17:

“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.”

One should be able to comprehend here that the seventh commandment is not the tenth commandment, and the tenth commandment is not the seventh! What we can see from all of this is: If a White Israelite (male or female) commits miscegenation with a nonwhite alien, it will produce a GMO-bastard. Today we have GMO-bastards running in swarms all over our Israel lands! And the Edomite-jews initiated it with their Pavlovian rock ’n’ roll supposed music, while supplying the hallucinogenic drugs to go along with it. To a great extent the hallucinogens resulted in interracial date-rape! Before the rock ’n’ roll era, alcoholic drinks (sometimes spiked with a drug) were used for date-rape. Of course, the Edomite-jews supplied the alcoholic drinks and the hallucinogenic drugs during the pre-rock ’n’ roll era. Drugs were becoming a problem during the big-band era among the members of the band (sometimes used to overcome fatigue).

We should take note here that Paul, at Phil. 4:3, called his coworkers “yokefellows”. This is important as Paul meant by this his kinsmen co-servants. Had they not been kinsmen, Paul’s whole message would have been misdirected, and the true Gospel shamefully disgraced! That’s what nominal churchianity does when they attempt to convert alien outlandish GMO-people to Christianity! Alien outlandish GMOs cannot become “yokefellows”, nor can they take any part in advancing Yahweh’s Kingdom. Alien outlandish GMO-people cannot become “yokefellows” no matter how much they might try! What is more, outlandish GMO-people do not have their names written in the Book of Life as Paul’s “yokeservants” did, nor can they ever attain such a status! Only the names of pureblooded White Adamites are written in the Book of Life, whether they request it or not, as they have no choice in the matter! If one should question whether one has a choice in this matter, one should examine Ezekiel 20:28-33:

“²⁸ For when I had brought them into the land, for the which I lifted up mine hand to give it to them, then they saw every high hill, and all the thick trees, and they offered there their sacrifices, and there they presented the provocation of their offering: there also they made their sweet savour, and poured out there their drink offerings. ²⁹ Then I said unto them, What is the high place whereunto ye go? And the name thereof is called Bamah unto this day. ³⁰ Wherefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith Yahweh Elohim; Are ye polluted after the manner of your fathers? and commit ye whoredom after their abominations? ³¹ For when ye offer your gifts, when ye make your sons to pass through the fire, ye pollute yourselves with all your idols, even unto this day: and shall I be enquired of by you, O house of Israel? As I live, saith Yahweh Elohim, I will not be enquired of by you. ³² And that which cometh into your mind shall not be at all, that ye say, We will be as the heathen, as the families of the countries, to serve wood and stone. ³³ As I live, saith Yahweh Elohim, surely with a mighty hand, and with a stretched out arm, and with fury poured out, will I rule over you ....” If one happens to be a pureblooded White Adamite, one can thank his fathers and mothers all the way back to Adam for keeping Yahweh’s genetic laws of “kind after kind”! And understanding this, it becomes one’s duty to do likewise for future generations! For doing so, we have no choice in the matter! It’s not true what some imply: “We are the master over our own destiny”! Prov. 14:11-12 states otherwise:

“¹¹ The house of the wicked shall be overthrown: but the tabernacle of the upright shall flourish. ¹² There is a way which seemeth right unto a man³⁷⁶, but the end thereof are the ways of death.”

This passage is repeated at Prov. 16:25-27, with added details:

“²⁵ There is a way that seemeth right unto a man³⁷⁶, but the end thereof are the ways of death. ²⁶ He that laboureth laboureth for himself; for his mouth craveth it of him. ²⁷ An ungodly man diggeth up evil: and in his lips there is as a burning fire.”

It should be noted that the Hebrew word for “man” here is Strong’s #376, ’iysh, which is a contraction of #582, ’ĕnôwsh, rather than the more dignified #120 for ’âdâm, although #120 for ’âdâm is used at Prov. 12:27-28 thusly:

“²⁷ The slothful man roasteth not that which he took in hunting: but the substance of a diligent man¹²⁰ is precious. ²⁸ In the way of righteousness is life; and in the pathway thereof there is no death.”

To be concise and to the point here, we are dealing with two types of men. (1) The walking dead for which there is no resurrection from the grave, and (2) The walking living, having Yahweh’s Spirit breathed into them, for which there will be resurrection! And as Paul said at Phil. 4:3, “... whose names are in the book of life.” If one is a White-European-Caucasian-Adamite who can blush, one received that “Spirit” at conception! Today the Edomite-jewish run abortion mills are murdering these Spirit-filled White-European-Caucasian-Adamite fetuses while still in the womb! Let them abort whomever they will of the nonwhite races, but aborting White-European-Caucasian-Adamite Spirit-filled fetuses is MURDER, plain and simple! Some might become quite incensed at such a position, but Yahshua, in His parable of the good and bad fish essentially prophesied with this very same sentiment regarding the future at Matt 13:47-50, which I will amplify:

“⁴⁷ Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea [of people], and gathered of every kind¹⁰⁸⁵ [i.e., gênôs, race]: ⁴⁸ Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good [racial kind] into vessels, but cast the bad [racial kind] away. ⁴⁹ So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked [GMOs] from among the just, ⁵⁰ And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.” Sounds like it’s going to be payback time; likewise Obadiah vv. 15 & 16:

“¹⁵ For the day of Yahweh is near upon all the heathen: as thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head. ¹⁶ For as ye have drunk⁸³⁵⁴ upon my holy mountain [Israel nations], so shall all the heathen drink⁸³⁵⁴ continually, yea, they shall drink⁸³⁵⁴, and they shall swallow down, and they shall be as though they had not been.”

The Hebrew word here for “drink” is Strong’s #8354, shâthâh, a primitive root; to imbibe (literally or figuratively). The KJV center column has “Or sup up”. The Franklin Dictionary-Thesaurus has: “eat the evening meal ... drink in gulps ....” This is mindful of how an animal eats and drinks, like for instance a dog.

A center reference takes us to Joel 3:17, which I will amplify:

“So shall ye know that I am Yahweh your Elohim dwelling in Zion, my holy mountain: then shall [New] Jerusalem [i.e., America & all Israel lands] be holy, and there shall no strangers pass through her any more.” Yahweh speed the day!

It is therefore evident that we Bible researchers should be aware of the difference between those born of God (i.e., Yahweh), and those born of this world, as those born of Yahweh have His Spirit, and those born of this world do not have Yahweh’s Spirit. Jude vv. 10-13 speaks of some of those born of this world:

“¹⁰ But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves. ¹¹ Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core. ¹² These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots; ¹³ Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.”

This passage is a good example of the result of race-mixing, the product we would consider corrupt GMO-bastard-people. Another passage one should be aware of in the same context is John: 8:21-24, which I will amplify for a better understanding:

“²¹ Then said Yahshua again unto them, I go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in your [GMO-bastard] sins: whither I go, ye cannot come. ²² Then said the [Edomite]-jews, Will he kill himself? because he saith, Whither I go, ye cannot come. ²³ And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world. ²⁴ I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your [GMO-bastard] sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your [GMO-bastard] sins.

John the Baptist connected Christ with the “bridegroom” in this next passage, John 3:27-31, thus it has everything to do with our remarriage to Yahshua, our former Husband:

“²⁷ John answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven. ²⁸ Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before him. ²⁹ He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom’s voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled. ³⁰ He must increase, but I must decrease. ³¹ He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: he that cometh from heaven is above all.”

At this point it is imperative that I quote John 3:3 for its proper context. One translation that gets it right is The Emphasized Bible by Joseph Bryant Rotherham, thusly:

“Jesus [i.e., Yahshua] answered and said unto him [i.e., Nicodemus] || Verily, Verily || I say unto thee: <Except one be born from above> He cannot see the kingdom of God [i.e., Yahweh] .”

The nonwhite races, all of which have a mixed genetic GMO origin, are considered as born of this world. Therefore, Adam, and Adam alone, like Yahshua Himself, is born from above. William Finck, in his Christogenea New Testament, also has it translated correctly as follows:

“Yahshua replied and said to him [i.e., Nikodemos]: ‘Truly, truly I say to you, unless a man should be born from above, he is not able to see the Kingdom of Yahweh’.”

So, what is there about being “born from above” that some of us don’t seem to understand? And, secondly, what is there about being “born of this world” that some of us don’t seem to understand? We are either GMO-bastards, or we are NOT! Hebrews 12:7-8 demonstrates the difference, and makes this subject quite clear:

“⁷ If ye endure chastening, Yahweh dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? ⁸ But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.”

A center reference takes us to Deut. 8:5-6, where the same theme is mentioned:

“⁵ Thou shalt also consider in thine heart, that, as a man chasteneth his son, so Yahweh thy Elohim chasteneth thee. ⁶ Therefore thou shalt keep the commandments of Yahweh thy Elohim, to walk in his ways, and to fear him.”

Psalm 78:1-6 makes it clear that Yahweh’s law was meant only for Israel under the covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and no one else, not even those White Adamites outside the covenant:

“¹ Give ear, O my people, to my law: incline your ears to the words of my mouth. ² I will open my mouth in a parable: I will utter dark sayings of old: ³ Which we have heard and known, and our fathers have told us. ⁴ We will not hide them from their children, shewing to the generation to come the praises of Yahweh, and his strength, and his wonderful works that he hath done. ⁵ For he established a testimony in Jacob, and appointed a law in Israel, which he commanded our fathers, that they should make them known to their children: ⁶ That the generation to come might know them, even the children which should be born; who should arise and declare them to their children ....”

To support this passage, Psalm 147:18-19 verifies that Yahweh’s law was meant for Israel alone:

“¹⁹ He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel. ²⁰ He hath not dealt so with any nation: and as for his judgments, they have not known them. Praise ye Yahweh.”

Deut. 33:1-4 also supports the concept of the law for Israel only:

“¹ And this is the blessing, wherewith Moses the man of Yahweh blessed the children of Israel before his death. ² And he said, Yahweh came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from mount Paran, and he came with ten thousands of saints: from his right hand went a fiery law for them. ³ Yea, he loved the people; all his saints are in thy hand: and they sat down at thy feet; every one shall receive of thy words. ⁴ Moses commanded us a law, even the inheritance of the congregation of Jacob.”

Ezekiel 20:37-38 gives us all the authority we need to remove these GMO half-breed-bastards out of our feasts of charity. This passage will be one of many we are citing in this lesson:

“³⁷ And I will cause you to pass under the rod, and I will bring you into the bond of the covenant: ³⁸ And I will purge out from among you the rebels, and them that transgress against me: I will bring them forth out of the country where they sojourn, and they shall not enter into the land of Israel: and ye shall know that I am Yahweh.”

At first this passage may not seem to mean much. I think that once we have studied it, its importance will become evident. First of all, we are not going to understand these two verses unless we consider the entire chapter (at least verses 1 through 44). Unless we understand to whom this is directed, the time frames to which it applies, and the circumstances surrounding it, we may lose the entire meaning of it. So, at this point, we shall read Ezekiel 20:1-11:

“¹ And it came to pass in the seventh year, in the fifth month, the tenth day of the month, that certain of the elders of Israel came to enquire of Yahweh, and sat before me. ² Then came the word of Yahweh unto me, saying, ³ Son of Adam, speak unto the elders of Israel, and say unto them, Thus saith Yahweh; Are ye come to enquire of me? As I live, saith Yahweh Elohim, I will not be enquired of by you. ⁴ Wilt thou judge them, son of Adam, wilt thou judge them? cause them to know the abominations of their fathers: ⁵ And say unto them, Thus saith Yahweh Elohim; In the day when I chose Israel, and lifted up mine hand unto the seed of the house of Jacob, and made myself known unto them in the land of Egypt, when I lifted up mine hand unto them, saying, I am Yahweh your Elohim; ⁶ In the day that I lifted up mine hand unto them, to bring them forth of the land of Egypt into a land that I had espied for them, flowing with milk and honey, which is the glory of all lands: ⁷ Then said I unto them, Cast ye away every man the abominations of his eyes, and defile not yourselves with the idols of Egypt: I am Yahweh your Elohim. ⁸ But they rebelled against me, and would not hearken unto me: they did not every man cast away the abominations of their eyes, neither did they forsake the idols of Egypt: then I said, I will pour out my fury upon them, to accomplish my anger against them in the midst of the land of Egypt. ⁹ But I wrought for my name’s sake, that it should not be polluted before the heathen, among whom they were, in whose sight I made myself known unto them, in bringing them forth out of the land of Egypt. ¹⁰ Wherefore I caused them to go forth out of the land of Egypt, and brought them into the wilderness. ¹¹ And I gave them my statutes, and shewed them my judgments, which if a man do, he shall even live in them ....”

This’ll give one some idea how Yahweh deals with His White Israelite people, whom He will remarry! If we don’t obey, He’ll chastise us until we do!

SO, WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? The problem is about how most everyone is trying to bring all the other races and sub-races into the Kingdom of Yahweh when the Scriptures expressly state otherwise, Amos 3:2 states:

“You [Israel] only have I [Yahweh] known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.”

Again, Yahshua stated, Matthew 15:24:

“But he [Yahshua] answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the [twelve tribes of the] house of Israel.”

Is it too hard to understand that Yahweh only wants Anglo-Saxon, Scandinavian, Germanic, Lombard, Celtic, Scottish, Irish, Danish, Icelandic, Welsh and related peoples? Well, from the “Identity” materials I have been reading for the last 30 years, it would appear that this is not generally understood by our people. Yes, there are a few of our people who understand this important fact, but they are scarce to say the least. It is now time to face this issue and bring it out into the open for everyone to see. Once it is, maybe then we can get a breath of fresh air instead of this old moldy stench we have been inhaling. The Scriptures do not teach anywhere, nor support that these other races, are going to be brought into the Kingdom, ABSOLUTELY NOWHERE! In fact, the Bible teaches quite the contrary!

Today we have people coming out of all the denominations (and thank Yahweh they are coming), Protestant, Catholic – and what have you? – into Israel Identity – and they have a tendency to bring along their ‘isms’. As a result, we have a multiplicity of ideas. We still have to deal the age-old problem of Ezra 9 and Nehemiah 10, which is much more serious. That being there are allegedly those coming among us who are not racially pure, like the Edomite-jewish branch of Christian Israel Identity (C.I.I.), scattering false doctrine from Chicago, Illinois!

This is my one hundred and ninety-fifth monthly teaching letter and continues my seventeenth 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 53,

THE RECONCILIATION (i.e., Redemption):

While we are on the subject of “reconciliation”, it will be well to review an essay I wrote some years ago:

THE LIE OF UNIVERSALISM, #1

With this essay, we are going to scrutinize a spurious, non-Biblical doctrine called, “universalism.” The idea of “universalism” actually started with the Edomite-jews and, therefore, falls under the category of “the leaven of the Pharisees.” Later, this doctrine was adopted by the “universal” Catholic Church (a church that assigns genetically pure White Israelites to a burning purgatory, while mollycoddling the worst kind of impure mamzer [i.e., crossbred bastard] sewer people among their congregation). Today, “universalism” is taught generally throughout all the mainstream churches of all denominations. One surely would think that such a doctrine would not be found in Israel Identity, for upon discovering our heritage as Israelites, we would understand we are the only people of the Book. 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.

Upon learning that Dave Barley (a supposed Israel Identity pastor) had invited an Arab to speak at his assembly, William Finck sent Barley a letter condemning such a blatant sham, which Barley conveniently claimed he never received. Whereupon, I took it on myself to circulate an open letter identical to the Finck had sent to Barley. That is when all hell broke loose. Barley in turn wrote a 12 page letter defending the Arab invitation in his: America’s Promise Newsletter: Dave Barley, Pastor; P.O. Box 157, Sandpoint, Idaho 83864, (208)265-5405: January/February 2004; Section I of III: From the Pastor’s Desk in part:

“... With that said, let us begin. You are apparently angry that I believe that an Arab can be saved and experience the salvation of Jesus Christ. Although I don’t mean to further anger or frustrate you, I also believe that all peoples of the earth can also partake of the salvation of Christ Jesus. I believe that the Word of God supports this conclusion ...” Then Barley cites: 1 John 2:2; John 12:32; Luke 3:6; Philipp. 2:10-11; Psalms 65:2; 1 Timothy 4:10; Col. 1:16-20 to support his faulty out-of-context hypothesis!

Not surprisingly, Stephen E. Jones and Jory S. Brooks are also against the teaching of the two seeds of Genesis 3:15, and fall into the category of antichrist, anti-seedliners. Ironically, the doctrines of “universalism” and “anti-seedline” are co-companion teachings, for when one is adopted, the other soon follows on its heels.

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 [the] 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. In Old Testament times, non-Hebrews could join themselves to the Chosen Nation through faith in Israel’s God. (Isa. 56:3-8 [which Jory S. Brooks takes entirely out-of-context]). Under the same principal in New Testament times, by faith in Israel’s Savior and God-In-Flesh, Jesus Christ, non-Israelites in a sense inherit some of the blessings given to Israel. We might therefore say that they are ‘EXPERIENTIAL ISRAELITES’, a term coined by Bible teacher and author, Dr. [ha!] Stephen E. Jones, for those who, while not physically Israelites, come under some of the Israel covenental [sic] 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.” [pile it higher and higher – CAE]

This statement is totally unscriptural and is a lie right out of the pits of hell, and “Dr.” Stephen E. Jones holds a Masters 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 Salvation). Universalism is also antichrist inasmuch as it nullifies both the Old and New Covenant which our Kinsman Redeemer died for. If, as both Brooks and Jones imply, non-Israelites can come under those Covenants, then He is no longer a “Kinsman Redeemer.” There is no such thing as “universal Redemption.” Since Jory S. Brooks uses Isaiah 56:3-8 as justification for such a supposed interpretation, let’s take a look at it:

“³ Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to Yahweh, speak, saying, Yahweh hath utterly separated me from his people: neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree. ⁴ For thus saith Yahweh unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant; ⁵ Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off. ⁶ Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to Yahweh to serve him, and to love the name of Yahweh, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant; ⁷ Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all [White Adamic Israelite] people. ⁸ Yahweh Elohim which gathereth the outcasts of Israel saith, Yet will I gather others to him, beside those that are gathered unto him.”

Had Brooks and Jones ever read Hebrews 11:11-13, they would have known who the “strangers” of verses 3 and 6 of Isaiah 56 are:

“¹¹ Through faith also Sarah herself received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised. ¹² Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as good as dead, so many as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable. ¹³ These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.”

Had Brooks and Jones checked Genesis 23:4 they would have discovered that Abraham called himself a “stranger”. Had Brooks and Jones ever read 1 Chronicles 29:15, they would have discovered that David said:

“For we are strangers before thee, and sojourners, as were all our fathers: our days on the earth are as a shadow, and there is none abiding.”

Additionally, had they ever investigated Psalm 39:12 they would have read:

“Hear my prayer, O Yahweh, and give ear unto my cry; hold not thy peace at my tears: for I am a stranger with thee, and a sojourner, as all my fathers were.”

We must understand that once the northern Ten Tribes had been divorced by the Almighty along with most of Judah, they were cut-off from the Covenant and became estranged to Him. The tribes, being cut-off from the Covenant, became like a “eunuch” or a “dry tree.” For that period, Israel’s seed had been cut-off, so figuratively, the simile of a “eunuch” is appropriate. Upon understanding that Israel was the “eunuch”, there is no longer a conflict with Deut. 23:1. This passage is not talking about bringing non-Israelites under the Covenant, but quite the opposite. Once Yahshua died for our Redemption, we were then brought back under the New Covenant, which includes only the House of Israel and the House of Judah, (Jeremiah 31:31; Hebrews 8:8).

Some may argue that the “stranger” in Isaiah 56:3 & 6 is #5236 instead of #1616. When Israel was divorced, they became equivalent to non-Israelites until Yahshua purchased them back, so #5236 is not out of order in this passage. Jamieson, Fausset & Brown’s Commentary, page 582, on this passage describes #5236 thus: “the man – Hebrew, enosh, ‘a man in humble life’, in contradistinction to Hebrew, ish, ‘one of high rank.’” In this sense the meaning of enosh is very fitting, for Israel was humbled when she was put away and punished, Deut. 28:44. That verse reads:

“He shall lend to thee, and thou shalt not lend to him: he shall be the head, and thou shalt be the tail.”

To show that the divorced Israelites were considered “strangers”, all one need do is read Ezekiel 14:5: “That I may take the house of Israel in their own heart, because they are all estranged from me through their idols.”

Then in Ephesians 2:12 & 19: “That at that time ye were without Messiah, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without Yahweh in the world .... Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of Yahweh.”

Again in Colossians 1:21: “And you that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled.”

Also we must consider 1 Peter 2:11: “Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul.”

Deuteronomy 28:43 proclaims that Israel would become lower than the stranger and humbled below the enosh. Since only Israelites were given the Ten Commandments, Isaiah 56:3-8 could only be speaking of Israel and Judah. The Almighty never commanded any non-Israelites to keep His Sabbath, as keeping His Sabbath is a sign that we are under His Covenant. Verse 1 says: “...for my salvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed.”

It would seem that this is referring to the First Advent. If so, this passage is speaking of the Gospel being presented to the true Israelites at their new home in Europe. Naturally, part of the Gospel would concern itself with keeping the Sabbath. Then verse three comes into play: “Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to Yahweh, speak, saying, Yahweh hath utterly separated me from his people: neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree.” When we understand that this verse is speaking of Israel, and Israel only, it is a very impressive verse. Here, “the son of the stranger” [Israel] is not to say: “Yahweh hath utterly separated me from his [my] people, neither let the eunuch [Israel] say, Behold, I am a dry tree.” Had our Kinsman Redeemer not paid the price for us, we were doomed to remain a “dry tree.” With the race-mixing that is going on at the present time, we are headed in that direction, for hybrid-mamzer-bastards are quickly becoming fastened to our Israelite family trees. And, Brooks and Jones are not helping us any by preaching “universalism.”

Verse 4 speaks of taking hold of the Covenant. As Yahweh’s Covenant is a closed corporation, only Israel and Judah qualify as parties thereto. In fact, no others need apply! Then in verse 5, Yahweh gives us his promise:

“Even to them [lost Israel] will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off.”

Here, we Israelites of Israel and Judah are the “sons” and “daughters”. Then the promise is made to give us an “everlasting name” that shall never again “be cut off”. Again, in verse 6, Israel is referred to as “the sons of the stranger”.Then in verse 7, another promise is given to Israel:

“Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.”

Though now our burnt offerings and sacrifices are in a different form, all our efforts to advance the Kingdom are recognized by Him. The “holy mountain” can only be the Israel nations where He has planted us. Furthermore, the only way our nations can be holy (set apart) is to be racially pure; a holy people for a holy (set apart) nation. Then, and only then, can “mine house” be called “an house of prayer for all [Israelite] people.”

Then in verse 8 it says: “Yahweh Elohim which gathereth the outcasts of Israel saith, Yet will I gather others to him, besides those that are gathered unto him.”

As the prophet was prophesying concerning a small remnant that later remained at Jerusalem, the “others” would be those dispersed into Assyria, and then into Europe and the United States and other Israel countries. There is no place for non-Israelites in Isaiah 56:3-8!!! “Dr.?” Stephen E. Jones, HA!!!

In this same brochure by Jory S. Brooks, under the subtitle “Can God’s Promise Be Broken?”, he agrees with M.R. DeHaan, saying this: “Dispensationalist scholar, M.R. DeHaan, correctly pointed out the purpose of Israel being a chosen people: ‘To lead all the rest of the nations to Him.’ God promised to Israel in Isaiah 49:6-8, ‘I will also give thee for a light to the nations, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.’ This is a promise by God that Israel would be His worldwide agent in salvation. It is indisputable that salvation concerns faith in Jesus Christ ... In the Abrahamic Covenant, God promised in Gen. 22:16-18, “By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord, for because thou hast done this thing, and not withheld thy son, thine only son: That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven ... And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed ...’ But as we saw in Isaiah, Israel was indeed promised to be a Spiritual blessing to all nations on earth ....”

It would appear that if a Scripture can be taken out-of-context, there are a lot of false teachers out there ready, willing and eager to do it! As we observe this, we can know beyond all doubt this concept of “universalism” is coming from both Stephen E. Jones and Jory S. Brooks. Stephen E. Jones has several other disciples wind-sniffing his scent like the “swift dromedary” and “wild ass” of Jeremiah 2:21-25. As there are several false premises involved in Brooks’ suppositions, they need to be addressed. As one of the Scriptures cited by Brooks out-of-context is Isaiah 49:6-8, let’s read it:

“⁶ And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles [sic Israel Nations], That thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth. ⁷ Thus saith Yahweh, the Redeemer of Israel, and his Holy One, to him whom man despiseth, to him whom the nation abhorreth, to a servant of rulers, Kings shall see and arise, princes also shall worship, because of Yahweh that is faithful, and the Holy One of Israel, and he shall choose thee. ⁸ Thus saith Yahweh, In an acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee; and I will preserve thee: and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages.”

Right away, all the universalists jump on the sentence: “I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth”, and apply it to non-Israelites. Had Brooks and Jones continued to read verse 9, it would have been more apparent who the “Gentiles” of verse 6 were: “That thou mayest say to the prisoners, Go forth; to them that are in darkness, Shew yourselves. They shall feed in the ways, and their pastures shall be in all high places.”

To see who the “Gentiles” are that Isaiah is talking about, we need to go to Romans 9:23-26: “²³ And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, ²⁴ Even us, whom he hath called, not of Judah only, but also of the Gentiles [Israel nations]? ²⁵ As he saith also in Osee [Hosea], I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved. ²⁶ And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living Elohim.”

If one will go to Hosea 1:10 and 2:23, one will discover that the “Gentiles” of both Romans 9:24 and Isaiah 49:6 are no other than the divorced and put away and punished lost sheep of the House of Israel. To claim these so-called “Gentiles”, in these passages, are non-Israelite people is a lie of dastardly proportions, and there is no room for “universalism” here.

These are similar to the “Gentiles” spoken of in Matthew 4:14-15 which says:

“¹⁴ That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias [Isaiah] the prophet, saying, ¹⁵ The land of Zabulon and the land of Nephthalim, by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles; ¹⁵ The people which sat in darkness saw great light; and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up.”

This area was occupied by Benjamites at the time of the Messiah, from whom He got all His disciples except one.

There is also Luke 2:25-32 which spells out that the “Gentiles” in that passage are identical to Israel:

“²⁵ And behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him. ²⁶ And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen Yahweh’s Messiah. ²⁷ And he came by the Spirit into the temple: and when the parents brought in the child Yahshua, to do for him after the custom of the Law, ²⁸ Then took he him up in his arms, and blessed Elohim, and said, ²⁹ Master, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word: ³⁰ For mine eyes have seen thy salvation, ³¹ Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people; ³² A light to lighten the Gentiles [Israel Nations], and the glory of thy people Israel.”

You will notice that Luke didn’t record Simeon saying anything about waiting for the consolation of any non-Israelites in this passage. That excludes any other subject except “the consolation of Israel” to and including verse 32. Therefore when it says “all people” in verse 31, it is speaking of “all Israel people”. Then in verse 32, it might appear to some that it is speaking of two subjects: (1) Gentiles, and (2) Israel. In the first place, it should have been rendered Nations, not the Latin term Gentiles. But one might argue the word “and” is used between two phrases making it two different subjects. The English term “and” is #2532, and is kaí in the Greek and is a copulative conjunction. Richard A. Young, in his Intermediate New Testament Greek, page 62, shows the rule under the subtitle: “The Article with Nouns Connected with kaí [and in Greek]. “When two nouns are separated by kaí and each noun has its own article, the author intends a distinction between them. When the two nouns are separated by a kaí and only the first has an article, the author intends for the reader to group the two nouns together in some fashion .... [Granville Sharp] stated: ‘When the copulative kaí connects two nouns of the same case, [viz. nouns (either substantive or adjective, or participle) of personal description respecting office, dignity, affinity, or connection, and attributes, properties, or qualities, good or ill,] if the article, or any of its cases, precedes the first of the said nouns or participles, and is not repeated before the second noun or participle, the latter always relates to the same person that is expressed or described by the first noun or participle: i.e. it denotes a further description of the first named person.’” As the Greek article does not appear before both nations and Israel, there are not two different subjects involved. In other words, nations [Gentiles] and Israel are identical. Thus, there is no Biblical support of “universalism” at Luke 2:25-32!

I am advised on the Greek as follows: For those skilled in Greek, a translation of Luke 2:32 might be stated thus: “A light for a revelation to the Nations and honor of Your people Israel” (with “the” being added), which is a most literal translation, the word “revelation” being from a noun, APOKALUPSIS (apocalypse), and not a verb as the A.V. interpretation implies. It may also be translated “for a revealing of nations and ...” The only variations among the different manuscript editors here concern punctuation, and that is always arbitrary. Looking at Berry, he has “a light for revelation of [the] Gentiles and glory of Thy people Israel”, but he is lost inasmuch as he doesn’t understand the Israel Message, but was honest about the Greek articles. To some this verse means that the Nations of Israel were to be revealed, and they certainly were by Paul. Those nations being only the nations promised to Abraham by Yahweh.

As I stated before, the word “and” in Luke 2:32 is a “copulative conjunction.” The word “copulative” is akin to the word “copulation”, like in sexual intercourse. That may be a homely ribald way to illustrate a “copulative conjunction”, but it implies “a direct connection.” A “conjunction” is a word that joins other words together. The two words in our verse are “nations” and “Israel.” In other words, “nations” [Gentiles] and “Israel ” are identical!

In short, both Jones and Brooks evidently don’t know (or don’t care to know) the Greek language (and in particular the Greek article). And we should avoid, at all cost, looking to people like M.R. DeHaan for guidance on this subject as Jory S. Brooks recommended. By not checking the Greek, both Jones and Brooks have perpetrated violent injury to Yahweh’s Word!

“Edomite-jewish” UNIVERSALISM

From The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, an article by Isaac Landman, Ed. NY, 1943:

“UNIVERSALISM AND PARTICULARISM ... Universalism is that theory or doctrine of religion which views the entire universe as a unit, the creation of emanation of one, single, and therefore, God.

“The implications of universalism are far-reaching. It denies absolutely the existence of gods or of supernatural beings or powers other than God Himself. It affirms that He is universal in time as well as in space, eternal. A corollary [logical deduction] of this doctrine of the eternality [having no end] of God, the Creator, is that creation was not momentary, merely at the beginning of existence, but continuous, that accordingly God controls or governs the universe, that divine purpose animates existence and fixes a definite goal for nations and individuals, live, more or less consciously, in accordance with divine purpose, either fulfilling it, and so realizing their destiny, or frustrating it, and so living contrary to God’s will for them. A further corollary of the doctrine of universalism is the unity of mankind, that nations and individuals have relationship with each other, a duty to or a purpose for each other: that all men are children of the universal Creator or Father, are therefore brothers, that mankind therefore constitutes one vast universal family; and that accordingly the duty of man, in fulfillment of eternal, divine purpose, is eventually to achieve this universal family unity, this brotherhood of individuals and nations. This will result in the cessation of all warfare and strife, hatred and competition, injustice and oppression, and the establishment of universal and eternal peace, justice, truth and love. The attainment of this goal by men is God’s universal purpose for His creatures. History is but the record of man’s way of living and of his attempt, or failure to attempt, to achieve this destined goal. In this sense the universal God, eternal in time, is the God of History. All this is implicit in the concept or doctrine of universalism.”

Does any of this sound desirable to you? Is this the kind of world you want for your children? Does this sound like the Kingdom for which our Redeemer died? I don’t know whether you realize it or not, but you have just received a sermon from Satan himself. Look at all the “benefits” he is offering you, at least for a price: (1) a divine purpose for all living men, (2) all nations and men living and fulfilling a divine purpose, (3) discovering God’s will for them, (4) a relationship with all nations and individuals, (5) everyone living for a divine purpose to all men, (6) having only one divine Father or Creator [Lucifer], (7) all men being brothers in a universal family, (8) a divine purpose to achieve brotherhood, (9) a cessation of warfare, (10) a cessation of strife, (11) a cessation of hatred, (12) a cessation of competition, (13) a cessation of injustice, (14) a cessation of oppression, (15) the establishment of eternal peace, (16) the establishment of justice, (17) the establishment of truth, (18) the establishment of worldly brotherly love. In other words, one giant mass of impure, mongrelized, bastard flesh. All these tenets of universalism amount to a complete surrender to a Luciferian world with the seed of the serpent winning over the seed of the woman.

This is the same brand of “universalism” being taught by the likes of Stephen E. Jones and Jory S. Brooks. And, Dave Barley, among others, who are perilously tailgating close behind them. [End of citation from my The Lie Of Universalism, #1.]

William Finck, after reading a copy of Dave Barley’s August/ September 2003 newsletter, was compelled, out of his Biblical responsibility, to write Mr. Barley, as Scripture instructs. Mr. Barley has since claimed that he never received such a letter, which is very doubtful. Mr. Barley, upon receiving the letter and reading a few lines, probably pitched it in the nearest trash can, thinking, no doubt, he would never again hear from William. Elsewhere we have published William (Bill) Finck’s original letter to Mr. Barley, and also Dave Barley’s reply which was in his January/February, 12 page newsletter, entirely devoted to rebutting Bill’s original letter to him. I had scanned Mr. Barley’s January/February issue, and the contents were produced immediately after Bill’s initial letter to Barley. Following Barley’s very inept “response” to Bill’s letter (who Barley addresses as Mr. Smith), Bill’s very comprehensive reply to Barley’s January/February news letter was presented in its entirety.

Barley stated in part: “What is the issue? Well, believe it or not, the issue is over whether or not an Arab, a non-Israelite can be a Christian, but in reality, it is more than that. It is about the Everlasting Power of the accomplished work of Christ upon the Cross.” In Barley’s response to Finck (in order to somehow support his position on universalism), Barley cited Gal. 6:14 which states:

“But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world^G2889 is crucified unto me, and I unto the world^G2889.”

It should be pointed out here that Barley has made an appalling miscalculation in the Greek language, believing that the translated English “world” includes all races of people, including arabs. Strong’s Greek describes “kosmos” thusly:

“2889 ... kōsmōs, kos´mos; probably from the base of 2865; orderly arrangement, i.e. decoration; by implication the world (in a wide or narrow sense including its inhabitants, literally or figuratively [morally]):– ....”

Therefore, the Adamic people are the only race who came into existence in an “orderly arrangement”. All the other nonwhite peoples came into existence through the chaos of miscegenation (racemixing), especially the arabs, whom Barley mollycoddles!

THE WORD “ARAB” IN SCRIPTURE:

The term “arab” in the Strong’s Concordance is #’s 6154 and 6151. Strong’s defines #6154 as:

“6154 ... ‘êreb, ay´-reb; or ... ‘ereb (1 Kings 10:15), (with the article prefix), eh´-reb; from 6148; the web (or transverse threads of cloth); also a mixture, (or mongrel race):– Arabia, mingled people, mixed (multitude), woof.”

“6151 ... ‘arab (Chald.), ar-ab´; corresponding to 6148; to commingle:– mingle (self), mix.”

The root of this verb in Strong’s is #6150, and is defined:

“6150 ... ‘ârab, aw-rab´; a primitive root [rather identical with 6148 through the idea of covering with texture]: to grow dusky at sundown:– be darkened, (toward) evening.”

Dave Barley, would you please explain how the arab people are an “orderly arrangement”? Inasmuch as the arabs are a mixed race people, their genetics are all scrambled together with several other nonwhite tribes, and thus at war with these other genetic mixtures within themselves. Dave Barley, why do you insist upon fostering an arab-of-the-month club to come to your church, and allow that misfit to stand behind your pulpit? A “misfit” is “a person poorly adjusted to his environment”, and that is exactly what an arab amounts to! Inasmuch as an arab is a mixture of several kinds, he is multiple-minded, or as Scripture states it, James 1:8: “A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.” Gen. 16:12: “And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man’s hand against him....” The Bible classifies the arabs as a “hedge of thorns” at Hos. 2:6!

This is my one hundred and ninety-sixth monthly teaching letter and continues my seventeenth year of publication. Since WTL #137, I have been continuing a series entitled The Greatest Love Story Ever Told, and ever since have been expanding on its seven stages: (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 55,

THE RECONCILIATION (i.e., Redemption):

Before we go much farther with this theme, it would be well to clearly distinguish three separate entities, whom many mistake for one, (1) the house of Israel, (2) the house of Judah, and (3) the converso Edomites who submitted to circumcision about 130 B.C., from whence Judaism arose (Josephus’ Antiq.,13:9:1, plus footnote in the Whiston edition, printed by Kregel), whom Christ will destroy rather than marry. It is imperative here that we comprehend some of the underhanded, vile schemes the Edomite-jews planned and executed in the past, and will use against us again in the future if they get a chance! To demonstrate the inconceivably malignant mind of the Edomite-jew, I will quote from The International Jew, a one volume work prepared by Gerald L.K. Smith, abridged from the 4-volume original as published by the industrial leader, Henry Ford Sr., which originally appeared as periodicals in The Dearborn Independent, published by the Ford Motor Co. I will cite from chapter 7, which I have edited to read “How The [Edomite-]Jews Use Power”. We must note that unfortunately, Ford took it for granted that the Edomites were of Judah I will likewise amplify through editing the portion cited to improve the reader’s perspective of the text found at pages 94-109:

“The Seventh Protocol of the Learned Elders of Zion:

“‘To each act of opposition we must be in a position to respond by bringing on war through the neighbors of any country that dares to oppose us, and if these neighbors should plan to stand collectively against us, we must let loose a world war.’

[Comment by Clifton A. Emahiser: To understand the implications of this protocol, one must consider all of the wars from the present all the way back to the time of Cain, who murdered Abel.]

“Two organizations, both of which are as notable for their concealment as for their power, are the New York Kehillah and the American [Edomite-]Jewish Committee. The Kehillah is the most potent factor in the political life of New York; it is the organization which today wields so large an influence on the rest of the world, which consciously issues a program which on one side is pro-[Edomite-]Jewish and on the other anti-Gentile [Latin for same family or race; not anti-semite]. It is the central group, the inner government, whose ruling is law and whose act is the official expression of [Edomite-]Jewish purpose. It offers a real and complete instance of a government within a government in the midst of America’s largest and politically most powerful city, and it also constitutes the machine through which pro-[Edomite-]Jewish and anti-Gentile [Latin for same family, same race; not anti-semite] propaganda is operated and [Edomite-]Jewish pressure brought to bear against certain [Christian-] American ideas. That is to say, the [Edomite-]Jewish government of New York constitutes the essential part of the [Edomite-]Jewish Government of the United States.

“The word ‘Kehillah’ has the same meaning as ‘Kahal’ which signifies ‘community’, ‘assembly’ or ‘government’. It represents the [Edomite-]Jewish form of Government in dispersion. In the Babylonian captivity, in Eastern Europe today, the Kahal is the power and protectorate to which the faithful [Edomite-]Jew looks for government and justice. The New York Kehillah is the largest and most powerful union of [Edomite-]Jews in the world; the center of [Edomite-]Jewish world power has been transferred to that city. That is the meaning of the heavy migration of [Edomite-]Jews all over the world toward New York in recent decades. It is to them what Rome is to the Catholic and what Mecca is to the Moslem.

“The Kehillah is a perfect answer to the deceptive statement that the [Edomite-]Jews are so divided among themselves as to render a concert of action impossible. That is one of the statements made for Gentile [Latin for same family, same race; not anti-semite] consumption [see Matt. 12;26, ed. CAE.]. All experience shows, even to the most casual observer of [Edomite-]Jewish activities, that the capitalist and the bolshevik, the rabbi and the union leader are all united under the flag of [false] Judah. Touch the conservative capitalist who is a[n] [Edomite-]Jew, and the red communist who is also a[n] [Edomite-]Jew will spring to his defense. It may be that sometimes they love each other less, but altogether they hate the non-[Edomite-]Jew more, and that is their common bond. The Kehillah is an alliance, more offensive than defensive, against the ‘Gentiles’ [substitute for true White Israel].

“It is a strange and impressive spectacle which the Kehillah presents, of a people of one racial origin, with a vivid belief in itself and its future, disregarding internal differences, to combine privately in a powerful organization for the racial, material and religious advancement of its own race, to the exclusion of all others.

“The American [Edomite-]Jewish Committee came into being in 1906. There had been a government investigation into the ‘White Slave Traffic,’ the result of which was a direct set of public opinion into channels uncomplimentary to the [Edomite-]Jews, and a defensive movement was begun. The Kehillah organized protests against the statement by General Bingham, then police commissioner of the City of New York, that 50 per cent of the crime in the metropolis was committed by Jews. Very soon afterward, General Bingham disappeared from public life, and a national magazine of power and influence which had embarked on a series of articles setting forth the government’s finding in the White Slave investigation was forced to discontinue after printing the first article.

“The Kehillah has mapped out New York just as the American [Edomite-]Jewish Committee has mapped the United States, and practically every [Edomite-]Jew belongs to one or more lodges, secret societies, unions, orders, committees and federations. The list is a prodigious one. The purposes interlace and the methods dovetail in such a manner as to bring every phase of American life not only under the watchful eye, but under the swift and powerful action of experienced compulsion upon public affairs.

“At the meeting which organized the Kehillah a number of sentiments were expressed which are worthy of consideration today. Judah L. Magnes, then rabbi of Temple Emanuel, chairman of the meeting, set forth the plan:

“‘A central organization like that of the [Edomite-]Jewish community of New York City is necessary to create a[n] [Edomite-]Jewish public opinion,’ he said.

“Rabbi Asher was loudly applauded when he said: ‘American interests are one, [Edomite-]Jewish interests are another thing.’

“The delegates at the first open meeting in 1906 represented 222 [Edomite-]Jewish societies – religious, political, industrial and communal. Just over a year later the number of [Edomite-]Jewish organizations under the jurisdiction of the Kehillah aggregated 688, and in 1921 well over 1,000. When the aggressive program of the Kehillah to make New York a[n] [Edomite-]Jewish city, and through New York to make the United States a[n] [Edomite-]Jewish country, was announced some of the more conservative [Edomite-]Jews of New York were timorous. They did not expect that the American people would stand for it. They thought the American people would immediately understand what was afoot and oppose it. There were others who doubted whether the same Kehillah authority could here be wielded over the [Edomite-]Jews as was wielded in the old country ghettoes. An official of the Kehillah wrote:

“‘There were those who doubted the ultimate success of this new venture in [Edomite-]Jewish organization. They based their lack of belief on the fact that no governmental authority could possibly be secured; in other words, that the Kehillah of New York could not hope to wield the same power, based on governmental coercion, as the Kehillahs [i.e., sanhedrin] of the Old World.’

“There is much in this paragraph to indicate the status of the Kehillah in [Edomite-]Jewish life. Add to this fact that all the [Edomite-] Jews who entered America lived under the Kehillahs of the old world, whose power was based on coercion, and the situation is simple. Regimentation, the destruction of individual liberty which has risen to curse the world, is the basic principle of [Edomite-]Jewish government of the Jews, by the Jews.

“What else can happen when [the] world government of the Gentiles [Latin for same family, same race; not anti-semite] by the [Edomite-]Jews for the bankers becomes established?

“However, the misgivings of some [Edomite-]Jews were not justified. The Americans made no protest. The Kehillah went ahead with its campaign and America submitted. New York became [Edomite-] Jewish. American life, American thought and American politics became [Edomite-]Jewish-dominated in the decades that followed. But with it all, the [Edomite-]Jews exhibit a sense of the insecurity of this usurpation of power. It does not belong to those who have seized it; it does not belong either by right of numbers, or by right of superior ability, or yet by right of a better use made of that power. They have taken power in America by audacity; they have taken it in such a way as to make resentment of it seem like an anti-racial movement – and that is why they have held it as long as they have. That is the only way to explain the meekness of the Americans in this matter, and it also accounts for the sense of insecurity which even the [Edomite-]Jews feel in the position they hold. The American is the slowest person in the world to act on any line that savors of racial or religious prejudice. This makes for a seeming aloofness from matters like the [Edomite-] Jewish Question. This also leads uninformed public men to sign protests against ‘anti-Semitism’ which are really designed to be protests against the publication of [Edomite-]Jewish facts. The foundation, organization and rapid success of the Kehillah in New York is an object lesson set in the sight of the world, as to what the [Edomite-]Jew can do and will do when he exalts himself to the seat of rule.

“As to the Kehillah being officially representative, it may be added that the Kehillah has in it representatives of the Central Conference of American Rabbis, Eastern Council of Reform Rabbis, Independent Order of B’nai B’rith, Independent Order of B’rith Sholom, Independent Order of Free Sons of Israel, Independent Order of B’rith Abraham, Federation of American Zionists – orthodox Jews, reform Jews, ‘apostate Jews,’ rich Jews, poor Jews, lawabiding Jews and red revolutionary Jews. At the 1918 Convention there were present: Jacob H. Schiff, banker; Louis Marshall, lawyer, president of the American [Edomite-] Jewish Committee; Adolf S. Ochs, proprietor of the New York Times; Otto A. Rosalsky, judge of the General Sessions Court; Otto H. Kahn, of the banking house of Kuhn, Loeb and Company – AND – Benjamin Schlesinger, who had lately returned from Moscow where he had a conference with Lenin; Joseph Schlossberg, general secretary of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America; Max Pine, also a recent consultant with the Bolshevik rulers of Russia; David Pinski; Joseph Barondess, labor leader. The high and the low were there; the first world war was closing, the Russian revolution had been won. Judge Mack, who headed the War Risk Insurance Bureau of the United States Government, and the little leader of the reddest group in the East End – they all met in the Kehillah, as [Edomite-]Jews. Adolph Ochs of the great New York Times, together with the most feverish scribbler on a Yiddish weekly that calls for blood and violence, all of them of all classes, bound together in a solidarity which has been achieved by no other people so perfectly as by [false] Judah. Banded together for the purpose of ‘protecting [Edomite-]Jewish rights’.”*

[Editor Smith’s Note: * “The Kehillah has now expanded its work and influence internationally in the powerful organization known as the World Jewish Congress.”]

“The [Edomite-]Jewish Demand For ‘Rights’ In America:

“What rights have Americans that [Edomite-]Jews in America do not possess? Against whom are the [Edomite-]Jews organized and against what? What basis is there for the cry of ‘persecution’? None whatever, except the [Edomite-]Jews’ own consciousness that the course they are pursuing is due for a check. The [Edomite-]Jews always know that. They are not in the stream of the world, and every little while the world finds out what [these false ones of] Judah always knows. The program of the Kehillah was ostensibly to ‘assert [Edomite-]Jewish rights.’ No [Edomite-]Jewish rights have ever been interfered with in America. The expression was a euphemism for a campaign to interfere with non-Jewish [i.e., their war against White’s] rights.

“The New York Kehillah is the pattern and parent [Edomite-] Jewish community in the United States, the visible entourage of the [Edomite-]Jewish government, the dynamo which motivates those ‘protests’ and ‘mass meetings’ which are frequently heralded throughout the country, and the arsenal of that kind of dark power which the [Edomite-]Jewish leaders know so well how to use. It is the ‘whispering gallery,’ where the famous whispering drives are originated and set in motion and made to break [out] in lying publicity [all] over the country. The liaison between this center of [Edomite-] Jewish power and the affairs of the people of the United States is made by the American [Edomite-]Jewish Committee. The Committee and the Kehillah are practically identical as far as the national [Edomite-]Jewish program is concerned. Through their foreign associations they are also identical as far as the world program is concerned.

“The United States is divided into 12 parts by the American [Edomite-]Jewish Committee and every State belongs to a district headed by the most powerful and representative [Edomite-]Jews. The Committee represents the focusing point of the religious, racial, financial and political will of [Edomite-]Jewry. It is also the executive committee of the New York Kehillah. New York [Edomite-]Jewry is the dynamo of the national [Edomite-]Jewish machinery. Its national instrument is the American [Edomite-] Jewish Committee. Among its direct leaders and supporters today are the owners of powerful newspapers, officials in Federal, State and City administration, influential office holders on public boards and corporations, members of the judiciary and police departments, financiers and heads of banking houses, mercantile and manufacturing establishments, labor leaders and political party organizers of all colors.

“There are certain announced purposes of these associations, and there are certain purposes which are not announced. The announced purposes may be read in printed pages; the purposes not announced may be read in the records of attempted acts and achieved results. To keep the record straight let us look first at the announced purposes of the American [Edomite-]Jewish Committee, then of the Kehillah; next at the line which binds the two together; and then at the real purposes as they are to be construed from a long list of attempts and achievements. The American [Edomite-]Jewish Committee, officially organized in 1906, announced itself as incorporated for the following purposes:

“‘1. To prevent the infraction of the civil and religious rights of the [Edomite-]Jews in any part of the world.

“‘2. To render all lawful assistance and to take appropriate remedial action in the event of threatened or actual invasion or restriction of such rights, or of unfavorable discrimination with respect thereto.

“‘3. To secure for [the Edomite-]Jews equality of economic, social and educational opportunities.

“‘4. To alleviate the consequences of persecution wherever they may occur, & to afford relief from calamities affecting [Edomite-]Jews.’

“It is an exclusively [Edomite-]Jewish program. The Charter of the Kehillah empowered it, among other things, to establish an educational bureau, to adjust differences between [Edomite-]Jewish residents or organizations by arbitration or by means of boards of mediation or conciliation; while the Constitution announces the purpose to be:

“‘To further the cause of [Edomite-]Judaism in New York City and to represent the [Edomite-]Jews in this city with respect to all local matters of Jewish interest.’

“Where the American [Edomite-]Jewish Committee and the Kehillah join forces is shown as follows:

“‘Furthermore, inasmuch as the American [Edomite-]Jewish Committee was a national organization, the [Edomite-]Jewish Community (Kehillah), of New York City, if combined with it, would have a voice in shaping the policy of Jewry throughout the land. It is expressly understood that the American [Edomite-]Jewish Committee shall have exclusive jurisdiction over all questions of a national or international character affecting the [Edomite-]Jews generally.’

“It will be seen, therefore, that the Kehillah and the American [Edomite-]Jewish Committee are one. The capital of the United States, in [Edomite-]Jewish affairs, is New York. Perhaps that may throw a sidelight on the efforts which are constantly made to exalt New York as the spring and source of all the thoughts of the day. (Editor Smith’s Note: and now the seat of the United Nations system of world government!) New York, the [Edomite-]Jewish capital of the United States, has been made the financial center, the art center, the political center of the country. But its art is oriental sensuousness, its politics those of a[n] [Edomite-]Judaized Tammany. It is the home of anti-American propaganda, of pro-[Edomite-]Jewish hysteria, a mad confusion of mind that now passes all over the world as the true picture of America.

“The doctrine with which so large a mass as the citizens of America have been inoculated is making havoc with the whole American program today. It is ‘broadening’ America out of all semblance to its distinctive self and blurring out of recognition those determining ideals and ideas on which American institutions were based.”

“[EDOMITE-]JEWISH RIGHTS” CLASH WITH AMERICAN RIGHTS: This study of the [Edomite-]Jewish Question in the United States is not based upon religious differences. The religious element does not enter except when it is injected by the [Edomite-]Jews themselves; they persistently inject it in three ways: First, in their allegation that any study of the [Edomite-]Jews is ‘religious persecution’; second, by their own records of what their activities in the United States consist of; third, by the impression which is very misleading if not corrected, that the [Edomite-]Jews are [somehow] the Old Testament [Israelite] people. The [Edomite-]Jews are not the Old Testament [Israelite] people and the Old Testament can be found among them only with difficulty. They are a [Canaanite-]Talmudical people who have preferred the volumes of rabbinical speculation to the words of the ancient prophets.

“In this series of articles we have set aside every non-Jewish statement on this religious question, and have accepted only that which proceeds from recognized [Edomite-]Jewish sources. It has been most illuminating, in studying the proceedings of the New York Kehillah and the American [Edomite-]Jewish Committee, and their affiliated organizations, as represented by their activities throughout the country, to find how large a part of these activities have a religious bearing, as being directly and combatively anti-Christian.

“That is to say, when the [Edomite-]Jews set forth in the public charters and constitutions of their organizations that their only purpose is to ‘protect [Edomite-]Jewish rights,’ and when the public asks what are these ‘[Edomite-]Jewish rights’ which need protection in this free country[?], the answer can be found only in the actions which the [Edomite-]Jews take to secure that ‘protection.’

“Thus interpreted, ‘[Edomite-]Jewish rights’ seem to be summed up in the ‘right’ to banish everything from their sight and hearing that suggests Christianity or its Founder. It is just there, from the [Edomite-] Jewish side, that religious intolerance makes its appearance.

“ATTACKS ON CHRISTIANITY: Previous to the formation of the Kehillah and the [Edomite-]Jewish Committee, this sort of attack on the rights of Americans was sporadic, but since 1906 it has increased in number and insistence. Under cover of the ideal of Liberty we have given the [Edomite-]Jews liberty to attack Liberty. What America has been tolerating is intolerance itself. Let us look rapidly down the years and see one phase of that attack. It is the attack upon Christianity. Here are a few items from the record. They are recorded over a period of years following the rise of [Edomite-]Jewish power in America:

“1899-1900. The [Edomite-]Jews attempt to have the word ‘Christian’ removed from the Bill of Rights of the State of Virginia.

“1906-1907. The [Edomite-]Jews of Oklahoma petition the Constitutional Convention protesting that the acknowledgment of Christ in the new State constitution then being formulated would be repugnant to the Constitution of the United States.

“The [Edomite-]Jews force The Merchant of Venice to be dropped from public schools in Texas, Ohio.

“1907-1908. Widespread demand by the [Edomite-]Jews for the complete secularization of the public institutions of this country, as a part of the demand of the [Edomite-]Jews for their constitutional rights.

“Supreme Court Justice Brewer’s statement that this is a Christian country widely controverted by [Edomite-]Jewish rabbis and publications.

“[Edomite-]Jews agitate in many cities against Bible reading. Christmas celebrations or carols in Philadelphia, Cincinnati, St. Paul and New York met with strong [Edomite-]Jewish opposition.

“1908-1909. Protests made to Governor of Arkansas against ‘Christological expressions’ employed by him in his Thanksgiving Day proclamation.

“Professor Gotthard Deutsch protests against ‘Christological prayers’ at the high school graduating exercises at Cincinnati.

“[Edomite-]Jewish community in Tamaqua, Pennsylvania, defeats resolutions providing daily Bible reading in schools.

“Local Council of [Edomite-]Jewish Women of Baltimore petitions school board to prohibit Christmas exercises.

“Boycotts were instituted in New York against merchants who opened on Saturday.

“Special efforts at this period to introduce the idea of the [so-called] Jewish Sabbath into public business. [Edomite-]Jews refused to sit as jurors in court, thus postponing cases.

“1909-1910. On demand of the [Edomite-]Jews, the school board of Bridgeport, Pennsylvania, votes to discontinue the recitation of the Lord’s Prayer in the school.

“In Newark, New Jersey, the rabbis ask the night schools to discontinue Friday evening sessions, because the [so-called] [Edomite-] Jewish Sabbath begins at sundown on Friday.

“The work of introducing the idea of [Edomite-]Jewish national holidays into public life especially active.

“1910-1911. An attempt to have Hebrew officially recognized was frustrated by Supreme Court Judge Goff.

“Chicago [Edomite-]Jews have election date changed because the official date fell on the last day of the Passover.

“[Edomite-]Jews oppose Bible reading and singing of hymns in Detroit schools.

“Rabbis force Hartford, Connecticut, school board to drop The Merchant of Venice from reading list.

“New York Kehillah does two contradictory things; favors bill to permit [Edomite-]Jews to do all kinds of business on Sunday, and pledges itself to co-operate in the strict enforcement of the Sunday laws. [Comment by Clifton A. Emahiser: This is solid evidence that the Edomite-jews, after manipulating the White Caucasians out of business, would then open up their stores seven-days-a-week!]

“1911-1912. [Edomite-]Jews in Passaic, New Jersey, petition school board to eliminate Bible reading and all Christian songs from the schools.

“At request of a rabbi, three principals of Roxbury, Mass., public schools agree to banish Christmas tree and omit all references to the season from their schools. [The manger-scene should really be displayed in September, CAE]

“A[n] [Edomite-]Jewish delegate to the Ohio Constitutional Convention suggests that the Constitution be made to forbid Christian religious references in schools.

“The Council of the University Settlement, at the request of the New York Kehillah, adopts this resolution: ‘That in the holiday celebrations held annually by the Kindergarten Association at the University Settlement every feature of any sectarian character, including Christmas trees, Christmas programs and Christmas songs, shall be eliminated.’

“1912-1913. [Edomite-]Jews at Jackson, Tennessee, seek an injunction to prevent the reading of the Bible in City schools.

“Annual Convention Independent Order B’nai B’rith at Nashville, Tennessee, adopts resolution against reading of the Bible and singing Christian songs in public schools.

“Chicago Board of Education, scene of much Jewish agitation, approves recommendation of sub-committee to remove Christmas from the list of official public holidays in schools.

“1913-1914. The energies of the [Edomite-]Jewish powers were concentrated on the task of preventing the United States from changing the immigration laws in a manner to protect the country from undesirable aliens.

“1914-1915. More Kehillah attempts to secure modification of the Sunday laws.

“1915-1916. [Edomite-]Jewish opposition to various movements towards making the schools free to use the Bible.

“1916-1917. [Edomite-]Jews busy carrying out an immense campaign against the ‘literacy clause’ of the Immigration Bill.

“On demand of the [Edomite-]Jews the New Haven Connecticut, Board of Education prevents the reading of The Merchant of Venice, and extends the prohibition to ‘Lamb’s Tales from Shakespeare.’

“1918-1919. Provost Marshal Crowder, in charge of the Selective Draft U.S. Forces, had issued an order to all medical examiners, under direction of the Surgeon General, stating: ‘The foreign-born, especially [Edomite-]Jews, are more apt to malinger than the native-born.’ Louis Marshall, head of the American [Edomite-] Jewish Committee, telegraphed demanding that the ‘further use of this form shall be at once discontinued.’ President Wilson ordered the excision of the paragraph.

“The United States Shipping Board sent an advertisement to the New York Times, calling for a file clerk and stating that a ‘Christian’ was preferred – by which is meant always a non-[Edomite-]Jew – the paper rejected it. Louis Marshall again went into action and protested to Bainbridge Colby, Woodrow Wilson’s Secretary of State, demanding ‘Not because of any desire for inflicting punishment, but for the sake of example and the establishment of a necessary precedent this offense should be followed by a dismissal from the public office of the offender, and the public should be informed the reason.’ Attention is called to the tone which the American [Edomite-]Jewish Committee adopts when addressing high American officials in the name of Jewry [as if they were Israelites of the tribe of Judah, which they are not]. It is not to be duplicated in the addresses of any other representative of any other race or faith.

“The Plattsburg Manual, published for officers in the United States officers’ training camps, contained the statement that ‘the ideal officer is a Christian gentleman.’ The A.J.C. at once protested against ‘Christological manifestations,’ and the Manual was changed to read ‘the ideal officer is a courteous gentleman.’

“The Anti-Defamation Committee claimed that 150 American cities had excluded The Merchant of Venice from the public schools.

“1919-1920. The Kehillah was so successful in its campaign that it was possible for a[n] [Edomite-]Jewish advertiser in New York to say that he wanted only Jewish help, but it was not possible for a non-Jewish advertiser to state his non-Jewish preference.

“And so it goes on, year after year, right up to the present day. The incidents quoted are typical, not occasional. They represent what is transpiring all the time in the United States as the [Edomite-]Jews pursue their ‘rights.’ There is no interference with [Edomite-]Jewish ways and manners. The [Edomite-]Jew may use his own calendar, keep his own days, observe his own form of worship, live in his own ghetto, exist on a dietary principle all his own, slaughter his cattle in a manner which no one who knows about it can approve – he can do all these things without molestation, without the slightest question of his right in them. But, the non-Jew is the ‘persecuted one.’ He must do everything the way the [Edomite-]Jew wants it done; if not he is infringing on [Edomite-]Jewish rights ....”

It is simply absurd to believe that Yahweh, as Yahshua, will marry or remarry such an evil, genetically degenerated people! However, by-and-large, this is what is taught by many in Christian Israel Identity (C.I.I.), especially among the British-Israel group. Nonetheless, we will continue to pray concerning this dilemma; that Yahweh Almighty will open the eyes of those who mistakenly identify the Edomite-jews as the true house of Judah! Plainly put: today’s Israelis (i.e., Edomite-jews) are neither Israel, nor are they Judah.

Eusebius, The Church History, (I.7), translated by Paul L. Maier, p. 34: “When the line of Jewish [sic Judaean] rulers ceased, the orderly succession of high priests from generation to generation fell into instant confusion. The reliable Josephus reports that Herod, once made king by the Romans, no longer appointed high priests of the ancient line but obscure sorts instead ....”

These “obscure sorts” were by-and-large converso-Edomite-jews, who were put in charge of the Temple at Jerusalem during the time of Yahshua Christ at His First Advent! They were the Canaanite “dogs” (i.e., “assembly of the wicked”) prophesied at Psalm 22:16!

Knowing of these crimes, the ball is now in the reader’s court!

This is my one hundred and ninety-seventh monthly teaching letter and continues my seventeenth 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 56,

THE REMARRIAGE (i.e., The Second Advent):

There is so much confusion concerning Yahweh’s original marriage to the twelve tribes of Israel at Mount Sinai; only to be divorced later for her unfaithfulness (in which case Yahweh’s own law forbade a remarriage forever). All the twelve tribes found themselves hopelessly separated from Yahweh without remedy! The only way out of the predicament was if one of the spouses were to die, it left the surviving spouse free to remarry. Inasmuch as Yahweh had the ability to arise from the dead, He volunteered to sacrifice Himself on the cross for His Cinderella bride. This lawfully allowed Yahweh to come as Yahshua, in the flesh, and purchase back His Covenant people, and absolutely no one else! However, though all the White Adamic race will be in the Resurrection, only the twelve tribes of Israel will be remarried!

Because there is so little knowledge among Yahshua’s people concerning events leading up to and during the Second Advent of our Messiah, much uncertainty exists. The Second Advent is but a sequence of discrete incidents set to occur in a systematic, orderly fashion! Scripture gives us only a glimpse of what all of these awe inspiring experiences might be, so we’ll just have to wait and see.

Howard B. Rand, in his 3-volume Documentary Studies, vol. 3, which chapter is titled “He Is Coming”, pp. 364-365 cites Gabriel’s Annunciation to Mary, in part:

“The Angel’s Statement: First, it is well to carefully note what the Angel Gabriel told Mary concerning the future of Jesus [sic Yahshua] Christ her son. In the Annunciation we find eight definite promises given:

‘1st) Mary, a virgin, was to conceive.

2nd) A son was to be born to her.

3rd) His name was to be called Jesus [sic Yahshua].

4th) He would become great.

5th) He would be called the Son of the Highest.

6th) He would be given the Throne of His father David.

7th) He would reign over the House of Jacob forever.

8th) Of His Kingdom (the House of Jacob) there would be no end’.” ....

“Time of Restitution: The last three promises have not been fulfilled as yet, nor can they be until a future date. Their very nature makes His return essential because He is to reign upon the Throne of David over the House of Jacob forever. This is to take place at the consummation of the age in the restitution of all things [all things between Yahweh and Israel, cf. Matt. 17:11, Mal. 4:4-6] according to Peter, who informed us after the ascension, and at the time of Pentecost, that the restitution would not take place until The Christ, who had ascended into heaven, would come again. The apostle stated that the suffering of Jesus Christ had now been fulfilled, as predicted by the prophets, and the present need was for men to repent so that their sins might be forgiven before the times of refreshing would come from the presence of the Lord [sic Yahweh]. He then concluded his remarks [from Acts 3:20-21]:

“‘²⁰ And he [God] [sic Yahweh] shall send Jesus [sic Yahshua] Christ, which before was preached unto you: ²¹ Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God [sic Yahweh] hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began’.”

I would point out to the reader that I only rate Howard Rand about 50%, but usually the 50% that he does get right is outstandingly excellent. With this subject, I will be following the outline from an article Rand wrote in his Destiny magazine for June of 1955 entitled, “Enoch and Noah”, found at pages 119-122 of his yearbook. For this article, his subtitles are, “The Groups Involved”, “As the Days of Noah”, “The Methuselah Sign”, “Preservation of Israel”, “Enochs of This Age”, “Selections and Separations”, “Spirit of Expectancy” and “The Mid-Region”.

Under the subtitle “The Groups Involved”, Rand states: “When the time comes, it will not only be the living who will be involved, but out from among the dead there will be a resurrection of those who are spiritually qualified for their part and place in the phenomena of the Second Advent. Among the living those classified as ‘overcomers’ will discover that certain aspects of that Advent will directly concern them, and them alone, for special provisions will have been made for them to ‘escape’ that which is coming upon the earth. Then there are those Christians who having accepted the Lord [sic Yahshua] as their personal Savior, are nevertheless, to attain unto this high calling. They will be called upon to face the difficult times intervening between the Lord’s [sic Yahshua’s] appearing and His triumphant return .... At that time the ungodly and the wicked will come face to face with Divine judgment for it will be the Great Day of God’s [sic Yahshua’s] Wrath. The confederacy under the leadership of Gog will be defeated and the armies of the heathen will face annihilation.”

Here Rand mentions the “overcomers”, but doesn’t explain what the term “overcomers” means! To do a comprehensive study on this translated expression, one would of necessity check every Hebrew and Greek word that has been translated, “overcome”, “overcomer”, “overcometh”, and “overcame”. Here is a list of them: H1464, H1413, H2476, H3201, H3898, H7292, H1986, H5674, G3528, G2274, G2276, G2364, G2590, G2901. I have checked through several of Rand’s publications, and I have nearly everything he ever authored, and I now realize that one would have to scrutinize every time he expressed the concept “overcome”, and analyze the context it is written in. In the above case, Rand could only have had Rev. 21:7-8 in mind, which reads thusly in the KJV:

“⁷ He that overcometh³⁵²⁸ shall inherit all things; and I will be his El, and he shall be my son. ⁸ But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.” The following is the definition from Strong’s Greek Dictionary:

“3528. ... nik-ah´-o; from 3529;to subdue (literally or figuratively):– [in KJV as]: conquer, overcome, prevail, get the victory.”

“3529. ... nee´-kay; apparently a primitive word; conquest (abstractly) i.e. (figuratively) the means of success:– [in KJV as]: victory.”

Spiros Zodhiates, in his The Complete Word Study Dictionary New Testament, gives us a more comprehensive definition of G3528:

“3528. ...To be victorious, prevail Rom. 3:4 quoted from Septuagint: Ps. 51:4 where the Hebrew word means to be pure; (Rev. 5:5). Used transitively meaning to overcome, conquer, subdue (Luke 11:22; Rom. 12:21). Spoken of Jesus [sic Yahshua] or His followers as victorious over the world, evil, and all the adversaries of His kingdom with the accusative expressed or implied (1 John 5:4, 5; Rev. 3:21; 12:11; 17:14). In the perfect, for present or future (John 16:33; 1 John 2:13, 14; 4:4). As a participle, without any qualification, he that overcometh (Rev. 2:7, 11, 17; 3:5; 21:7). Used in an absolute sense in the nominative. (Rev. 2:26; 3:12, 21; 15:2). Of the adversaries of Christ’s kingdom as temporarily victorious (Rev. 11:7; 13:7).

“Derivative: Strong’s G5245 ...hoop-er-nik-ah´o ... from 5228 and 3528; to vanquish beyond, i.e. gain a decisive victory ...”

Let us now analyze the Biblical passages cited by Zodhiates in order to understand the context at Rev. 21:7-8:

Charles Thomson’s Septuagint, Ps. 51:4:

“Against Thee [Yahweh] especially I have sinned; and in Thy sight done this evil. So that Thou must be justified in Thine acts, and must overcome^G3528, when Thou judgest.”

KJV Ps. 51:4: “Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear²¹³⁵ when thou judgest.”

As one can clearly see, there is a glaring difference between the Septuagint and the KJV! The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible has the following on this passage:

“[Against you and you alone have I sinned, and] do[ne what is evil in your sight], so [that] you are proved right [in your sentence and without fault when you pass judgment].”

Strong, in his Hebrew Dictionary defines 2135 thusly:

“2135 ... zaw-kaw´: a primitive root [compare 2141]; to be translucent; figurative to be innocent:– [in KJV as]: be (make) clean, cleanse, be clear, count pure.”

“2141 ... zaw-kak´: a primitive root [compare 2135]: to be transparent or clean (physically or morally):– [in KJV as]: be (make) clean be pure (r).”

These Greek and Hebrew definitions might seem to be in conflict, but I believe each definition is suitable in its own peculiar way. The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible seems to make more sense than either the Masoretic or Septuagint text on this particular passage. And while we are on the subject of purity, it might be well to quote Lam. 4:7:

“Her [Israelite] Nazarites were purer²¹⁴¹ than snow, they were whiter than milk, they were more ruddy in body than rubies, their polishing was of sapphire ...”

How does one get an accursed swarthy converso-Edomite-jew out of this verse? Benjamin Franklin, in his Observations Concerning the Increase of Mankind, Peopling of Countries, etc. stated in part: “... of increasing the lovely White and Red? But perhaps I am partial to the Complexion of my Country ...”

Getting back to David, who was begging mercy for the breaking of the Tenth Commandment, for envying Bathsheba, another man’s wife, and in the process placing her Israelite husband Uriah at the head of his army knowing full well it would endanger Uriah’s life. (Uriah wasn’t actually a Hittite, but acquired the reputation of fighting fiercely.)

After surveying every possibility of what “overcomers” might mean above, I am not sure whether Howard Rand used it correctly at Rev. 21:7-8! I will now quote the passages of Scripture which Zodhiates cited in relation to the Greek wordnik-ah´-o, Strong’s #3528.

Rev. 5:5: “And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed³⁵²⁸ to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.” Note: This is Yahshua Christ doing the “prevailing” (i.e., “overcoming”).

Luke 11:22: “But when a stronger than he [Yahshua] shall come upon him, and overcome³⁵²⁸ him, he taketh from him all his armour wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils.”

Rom. 12:21: “Be not overcome³⁵²⁸ of evil [by one of your brethren whom has become an enemy], but overcome³⁵²⁸ evil with good.”

1 John 5:4, 5: “⁴ For whatsoever is born of Yahweh overcometh³⁵²⁸ the world: and this is the victory that overcometh³⁵²⁸ the world, even our faith. ⁵ Who is he that overcometh³⁵²⁸ the world, but he that believeth that Yahshua is the Son of God [i.e., is both Son and Father]?

Rev. 3:21: “To him that overcometh³⁵²⁸ will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame³⁵²⁸, and am set down with my Father in his throne.”

Rev. 12:11:“And they overcame³⁵²⁸ him [i.e., that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan] by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.”

Rev. 17:14: “These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome³⁵²⁸ them: for he is Sovereign of sovereigns, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen [i.e., the twelve tribes of Israel], and faithful.”

John 16:33: “These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome³⁵²⁸ the world.”

1 John 2:13-14: “¹³ I write unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome³⁵²⁸ the wicked one. I write unto you, little children, because ye have known the Father. ¹⁴ I have written unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I have written unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the word of Yahweh abideth in you, and ye have overcome³⁵²⁸ the wicked one.”

1 John 4:4: “Ye are of Yahweh, little children, and have overcome³⁵²⁸ them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.”

Rev. 2:7, 11, 17: “⁷ He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh³⁵²⁸ will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of Yahweh ... ¹¹ He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; He that overcometh³⁵²⁸ shall not be hurt of the second death ... ¹⁷ He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh³⁵²⁸ will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.”

Rev. 3:5: “He that overcometh³⁵²⁸, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.”

Rev. 21:7: “He that overcometh³⁵²⁸ shall inherit all things; and I will be his El, and he shall be my son.”

Rev. 2:26: “And he that overcometh³⁵²⁸, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations ....”

Rev. 3:12: “Him that overcometh³⁵²⁸ will I make a pillar in the temple of my El, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my El, and the name of the city of my El, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my El: and I will write upon him my new name.”

Rev. 15:2: “And I saw as it were a sea of glass mingled with fire: and them that had gotten the victory³⁵²⁸ over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name, stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of Yahweh.”

Rev. 11:7: “And when they shall have finished their testimony [i.e., the lost sheep of the house of Israel and the house of Judah in Europe], the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome³⁵²⁸ them, and kill them.”

Rev. 13:7: “And it was given unto him [i.e., the papacy of the romish catholic church] to make war with the saints [i.e., the twelve tribes of Israel in the holy roman empire], and to overcome³⁵²⁸ them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.”

What is important from these various Biblical passages is: Who is overcoming whom, and why and what are they overcoming? Sometimes it is Yahshua Christ who is doing the overcoming; sometimes it is the White-Adamite-Israelite who is trying to overcome a fault of his own, or sometimes it is the White-Adamite-Israelite who is overcoming some obstacle for which Yahweh has commissioned him to perform. Sometimes, by the permissive Will of Yahweh, it is the enemy (the great dragon, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan) who, collectively, are allowed to overcome the White-Adamite-Israelite people as a deserved punishment. Therefore, it is imperative that we check the context of each designated passage, so we don’t attempt to overcome something for which we are not commissioned, nor try to do before its prophesied fulfillment.

THE FALL AND RISE OF YAHWEH’S UNFAITHFUL WIFE

This is concisely stated at Hosea 2:7-16 thusly:

“⁷ And she [i.e., the twelve tribes of Israel] shall follow after her lovers, but she shall not overtake them; and she shall seek them, but shall not find them: then shall she say, I will go and return to my first husband; for then was it better with me than now. ⁸ For she did not know that I gave her corn, and wine, and oil, and multiplied her silver and gold, which they prepared for Baal. ⁹ Therefore will I return, and take away my corn in the time thereof, and my wine in the season thereof, and will recover my wool and my flax given to cover her nakedness. ¹⁰ And now will I discover her lewdness in the sight of her lovers, and none shall deliver her out of mine hand. ¹¹ I will also cause all her mirth to cease, her feast days, her new moons, and her sabbaths, and all her solemn feasts. ¹² And I will destroy her vines and her fig trees, whereof she hath said, These are my rewards that my lovers have given me: and I will make them a forest, and the beasts of the field shall eat them. ¹³ And I will visit upon her the days of Baalim, wherein she burned incense to them, and she decked herself with her earrings and her jewels, and she went after her lovers, and forgat me, saith Yahweh. ¹⁴ Therefore, behold, I will allure her, and bring her into the wilderness [i.e., America and other Israel lands], and speak comfortably unto her. ¹⁵ And I will give her her vineyards from thence, and the valley of Achor for a door of hope: and she shall sing there, as in the days of her youth, and as in the day when she came up out of the land of Egypt. ¹⁶ And it shall be at that day, saith Yahweh, that thou shalt call me Ishi; and shalt call me no more Baali.”

Inasmuch as we are interested in the Second Advent of Yahshua Christ, verses 15 and 16 are of special concern. From The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, Old Testament we read:

“15. Vineyards, which speak of prosperity and fruit-bearing, would be given by God [sic Yahweh] to his restored people. The valley of Achor is described as a door of hope. There, centuries before, Achan had died as the troubler of Israel (Josh 7:25, 26). Only through Achor, trouble, could Israel come back to fellowship with the Lord [sic Yahweh] and its resultant blessing. God [sic Yahweh] would thus restore the days of her youth. When youthful Israel crossed the Red Sea, she had a song (Exo. 15:1-19). As she lost her first love, the song was quieted; but Hosea pictures repentant, restored Israel as again singing. 16. Restored Israel would address God [sic Yahshua] as Ishi, literally, my husband, a word of tenderness. Baali is a synonym of ishi, but it contains the word Baal (master), the name of a Canaanite deity. For this reason it was associated with idolatry and rejected by Hosea. The Baalim (v. 18) will not be mentioned by restored Israel, who then will be true to her Lord [sic her Husband, Yahweh].” From A Commentary, Critical and Explanatory, on the Old and New Testaments we read on this passage:

“15. from thence – returning from the wilderness. God gives Israel a fresh grant of Canaan, which she had forfeited; so of her vineyards, &c. (Hos. 2:9, 12).

“‘Achor – that is ‘trouble.’ As formerly Israel, after their tedious journey through the wilderness, met with the trouble resulting from Achan’s crime in this valley, on the very threshold of Canaan, and yet that trouble was presently turned into joy at the great victory at Ai, which threw all Canaan into their hands (Jos. 7, 8); so the very trouble of Israel’s wilderness state will be the ‘door of hope’ opening to better days. The valley of Achor, near Jericho, was specially fruitful (Isa. 65: 10); so ‘trouble’ and ‘hope’ are rightly blended in connection with it.”

From the 3-volume The Popular and Critical Bible Encyclopedia and Scriptural Dictionary, vol. #1, pp. 37-38 we, read the following:

“ACHAN ..., aw-kawn’, troublesome, Josh. vii:i). In the parallel passage (1 Chron. ii:7) the name is spelt ... aw-kawr, and as it has there the meaning of troubling, it is thought by some that this is an intentional change after the fact, to give the name a significant reference to the circumstance which renders it notorious.

“While it and his army were besieging Jericho it was put under that awful ban of which there are other instances in the early Scripture history, whereby all the inhabitants (excepting Rahab and her family) were devoted to destruction, all the combustible goods to be consumed by fire, and all the metals to be consecrated to God [sic Yahweh].

“(1) Vow of Devotement. This vow of devotement was rigidly observed by all the troops when Jericho was taken, save by one man, Achan, a Judahite, who could not resist the temptation of secreting an ingot of gold, a quantity of silver, and a costly Babylonish garment, which he buried in his tent, deeming that his sin was hid (Josh. vii: 20-22). But God [sic Yahweh] made known this infraction, which, the vow having been made by the nation as one body, had involved the whole nation in his guilt. The Israelites were defeated, with serious loss, in their first attack upon Ai; and as Joshua was well assured that this humiliation was designed as the punishment of a crime which had inculpated the whole people, he took immediate measures to discover the criminal.

“(2) Punishment of Achan. As in other cases, the matter was referred to the Lord [sic Yahweh] by the lot, and the lot ultimately indicated the actual criminal. The conscience-stricken offender then confessed his crime to Joshua; and his confession being verified by the production of his ill-gotten treasure, the people, actuated by the strong impulse with which men tear up, root and branch, a polluted thing, hurried away not only Achan, but his tent, his goods, his spoil, his cattle, his children, to the valley (afterwards called) of Achor, north of Jericho, where they stoned him, and all that belonged to him; after which the whole was consumed with fire, and a cairn of stones raised over the ashes (Josh. vii:25). The severity of this act, as regards the family of Achan, has provoked some remarks. Calmet says: ‘The sentence passed on the family of Achan may be justified by reflecting, (1) that probably he was assisted by them in this theft; for, if not, (2) he could never have secreted such articles in the earth under his tent, without being observed and detected by them, who, ought to have opposed him, or immediately to have given notice of the transaction to the elders. As they did not do this, they became, by concealment, at least, partakers of his crime.’ Kitto, however, disagrees with this position, and says: ‘Instead of vindicating it, as is generally done, by the allegation that the members of Achan’s family were probably accessories to his crime after the fact, we prefer the supposition that they were included in the doom by one of those sudden impulses of indiscriminate popular vengeance to which the Jewish [sic Israelitish] people were exceedingly prone, and which, in this case, it would not have been in the power of Joshua to control by any authority which he could under such circumstances exercise. It is admitted that this is no more than a conjecture; but, as such, it is at least worth as much, and assumes considerably less than the conjectures which have been offered by others’, (Josh. vii:26).”

Ibid. “ACHAR ..., (Hebrew ... aw-kawr', trouble), another form of the name Achan, given to him in 1 Chron. ii:7 ....”

KJV: “And the sons of Carmi; Achar, the troubler⁵⁹¹⁶ of Israel, who transgressed in the thing accursed²⁷⁶⁴.”

“5916 .... aw-kar´; a primitive root; properly to roil water; figuratively to disturb or afflict ....”

“5917 .... aw-kawr´; from 5916; troublesome;Akar an Israelite ... (compare 5912).”

“5912 .... aw-kawn´; from an unused root meaning to trouble;troublesome;Akan, an Israelite ...(compare 5917).”

“2764 .... khay´ -rem; or (Zech. 14:11)

.... kheh´ -rem; from 2768; physically (as shutting in) a net (either literally or figuratively); usually a doomed object; abstractly extermination: – [in KJV as]: (ac) curse (-d, -d thing), dedicated thing, things which should have been utterly destroyed, (appointed to) utter destruction, devoted, (thing), net.”

My purpose here is to demonstrate why Achan received such a severe judgment for stealing what already belonged to Yahweh and the commonwealth of the twelve tribes of Israel. Yahweh had given the Israelites specific instructions at Josh. 6:18-19:

“¹⁸ And ye, in any wise keep yourselves from the accursed thing, lest ye make yourselves accursed, when ye take of the accursed thing, and make the camp of Israel a curse, and trouble it. ¹⁹ But all the silver, and gold, and vessels of brass and iron, are consecrated unto Yahweh: they shall come into the treasury of Yahweh.”

A somewhat similar type of mandate was given Israel while they were wandering in the wilderness earlier atDeut 7:22-26: “²² And Yahweh thy Elohim will put out those nations before thee by little and little: thou mayest not consume them at once, lest the beasts of the field increase upon thee. ²³ But Yahweh thy Elohim shall deliver them unto thee, and shall destroy them with a mighty destruction, until they be destroyed⁸⁰⁴⁵. ²⁴ And he shall deliver their kings into thine hand, and thou shalt destroy⁶ their name from under [the starry] heaven⁸⁰⁶⁴: there shall no man be able to stand before thee, until thou have destroyed⁸⁰⁴⁵ them. ²⁵ The graven images of their gods shall ye burn with fire: thou shalt not desire the silver or gold that is on them, nor take it unto thee, lest thou be snared therein: for it is an abomination to Yahweh thy Elohim. ²⁶Neither shalt thou bring an abomination into thine house, lest thou be a cursed thing like it: but thou shalt utterly detest it, and thou shalt utterly abhor it; for it is a cursed thing.”

“8045 .... shaw-mad´; a primitive root; to desolate:– ... [in KJV as]: destroy (-uction), bring to naught, overthrow, perish, pluck down, X utterly.”

Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament on:

“8045 .... to destroy – (a) to lay waste cities, altars, Lev. 26:30; Num. 33:52. More frequently – (b) to destroy persons and peoples, Deut. 1:27; 2:12, 21, 22, 23; ... subst. destruction, Isa. 14:23.

“Niphal, passive– (1)to be laid waste, as a field, Jer. 48:8; hills, Hos. 10:8. (2) to be destroyed, cut off, of peoples, Deut. 4:26; 28:20; and of individuals, Gen. 34:30; Psa. 37:38.”

From the 3-volume The Popular and Critical Bible Encyclopedia and Scriptural Dictionary, vol. #1, p. 218, we read the following:

“BABYLONISH GARMENT: (Heb. ad-deh´reth shin-awr´, cloak of Shinar or Babylon).

“The garment which Achan stole at the destruction of Jericho (Josh. vii:21 ) is described by Josephus as ‘a royal mantle all woven with gold.’ But no accurate description is possible. Babylon was famous for the products of the loom.

“Josephus (Ant. v:1, 10)gives rein to his imagination, and describes it as ‘a royal garment woven entirely of gold,’ or ‘all woven with gold.’ There is no doubt that a dress of this description would be ‘goodly’ in the extreme. The probability is that it was a garment of embroidered stuff, such as Babylon was famed for (cf. Pliny, viii:74, and Martial, Ep. viii:28) .... (T. G. Pinches, Hastings’ Bib. Dict.).”

Ibid. 212: “The temples contained imitations of the supposed real dwellings of the gods (house of the great mountain of earth, house of the fundament of heaven and earth, house of heaven, etc.). The great ocean that surrounds the world was represented in a temple of Lagash by a basin; the ‘chamber of destiny’ was imitated in Esagila.

“Of course, the oldest temples were of a modest construction, but the kings were always engaged in repairing and embellishing the houses of their gods; and in the times of Nebukadnezar the Great, the chief-temple of Babylon was a complex of temples, surrounded by a huge wall, with large courtyards and a great ziggurat of seven stories.

“The priests were persons of great influence, not only by their position in the temples, but also by their knowledge. People wanted them for the writing of contracts, for medicaments, exorcisms, and forecasts. In many instances we find women as priests, even royal princesses. Their revenues consisted in parts of the offerings and in the profits from the possessions of the temple. The kings endowed the temples with fields, slaves, necessaries of the service (oil, incense, meal, and animals), and in many instances priests lent silver or corn [grain]; especially in the older times they are usually the bankers.”

From A Commentary, Critical and Explanatory, on the Old and New Testaments at Josh. 7:21 :“21. a goodly Babylonish garment – literally, ‘a mantle of Shinar.’ The plain of Shinar was in early times celebrated for its gorgeous robes, which were of brilliant and various colors, generally arranged in figured patterns, probably resembling those of modern Turkish carpets, and the colors were either interwoven in the loom or embroidered with the needle.”

From this evidence, it is more-than-likely that Achan had intentions of opening himself a bank, where he and his family could make loans upon usury, and start climbing the social ladder.

Secondly, we are promised at Hosea 2:15 that we Israelites would be given “... the valley of Achor for a door of hope ...” Here, Achor is a variant of the name of Achan. In other words, we should be thankful to our Almighty Father and Husband for allowing us to be experiencing our present financial troubles (including the Great Depression of 1929), for to us these troubles are our “... door of hope ...” Who are the people today who have stolen all of our gold and silver and hid it under the floor of their tent, replacing it with un-money created out of thin air, and then have the audacity to charge sweat and blood compound interest on top of the principal to accumulate hundreds of times over the original amount borrowed? These same people are related to the half-breed Hittite pharaoh of Egypt who ordered all the male children of the twelve tribes to be drowned in the Nile river upon birth (just as Obama would have it today). These same people are related to the Edomite Herod the Great, who ordered the murder of all the Israelite children in Judaea, in order to murder the newborn Yahshua Christ, but ended up murdering many Benjamite baby boys instead. Praise Yahweh, for our valley of Achor (i.e., trouble) is our door of hope! However, how much more trouble can we endure? Of all the Babylonian monetary, political and false religion we are suffering, the declining purity of our White Adamic race is our greatest “trouble”!