January 2018

The Protocols of Satan, Part 34: Above the Law

 
00:00

 

The Protocols of Satan, Part 34: Above the Law

In the last installment of these Protocols of Satan, we discussed the legal concept by which corporations are somehow perceived as artificial persons, and are therefore granted all of the rights and privileges of actual citizens. But in reality, when they do wrong they face none of the actual burdens of the penalties which real persons face. Then we attempted to demonstrate the hypocrisy of this, and show that there are indeed counter-arguments that corporations are not persons at all, and that there is no actual body of legal justification which has ever explained how corporations are persons. This we did citing articles by several lawyers and law students. As a digression, in reality the debate does not matter, because as so-called legal scholars argue over the centuries, corporations purchase the outcome of election after election, using their comparatively vast wealth to nominate the candidates of all parties so that they can never really lose the political debate.

This all leads to another concept which we began to explore: the fact that there is no substantial basis in our legal systems by which corporations are justly punished for any crimes which they commit. So we gave some historic background on early corporate America, where we hoped to show that the concept of a corporation is relatively new in history, and mostly developed as this young nation developed. So in reality, a corporation is also a product of Liberalism – and those of us who understand the real forces behind the development of Liberalism should also understand that the same dark forces have always been behind the concept of the corporation in the reality of the modern system of capitalism.

Doing that, we also explained the concept of limited liability and how the owners of a corporation can never be held liable for damages beyond the value of their original investments, no matter how much damage their corporation may do to others. Then we presented some data showing that as early corporations developed, not only were their owners separated from any real liability for potential wrongdoing, but as the corporations themselves developed, ownership and typical corporate management also became isolated one from another. So the average citizen who owns stock in a corporation has no say in its operation, where corporate managers have become a class unto themselves.

Ecclesiastes, Part 2: Vanity and Deliverance

CHR20180112-Ecclesiastes-02.mp3 — Downloaded 689 times
 
00:00

 

Ecclesiastes, Part 2: Vanity and Deliverance

Presenting the opening chapters of Ecclesiastes, we showed how this work was attributed to King Solomon from the earliest times, and also how it accords very well with the life of Solomon, once we realize that it must have been written in the later part of his life. Only in the life of Solomon do we find someone who could have had the experiences of this writer, who called himself the Preacher but who also claimed to be a son of David and king over all Israel. Then in addition to these assertions, there is also the confession of an abundantly opulent lifestyle which the historical Scriptures describe for us in the life of Solomon. Writing this book, the Preacher is now reflecting back on that life and assessing its value.

Ecclesiastes was written to lament the plight of man, that none of the works of man seem to be of any benefit to him at the end of his life, because he must leave the fruits of them to others. Realizing this, the Preacher turned to mirth and decadence, but neither did he find any satisfaction in those things. Making our own assessment of his words, we explained that the Preacher had purposely employed skepticism as a teaching method throughout his discourse. All is vanity, he proclaimed, but what he really meant to say is that all is vanity without God, something which is further revealed to us as we make our way through these subsequent chapters of his work.

Ecclesiastes is poorly understood by many Bible readers, since the skepticism it expresses is often mistaken for Scriptural truth. But rather, that skepticism is merely used as a literary device in order to demonstrate that without God, man has no hope at all. Regardless of what he does with his life, in the end he dies like all other men, and all are eventually forgotten. Reading the book, Christians should understand that the conclusions of the skeptic are wrong, because there is a God. The Preacher makes that expression where he declares the importance of keeping the Law. Here in this chapter, chapter 3 of Ecclesiastes, the Preacher informs us that it is God who subjected man to this travail, for man to be exercised in vanity. If man is being purposely exercised in vanity, then there must be something for him beyond this life, or the exercise itself would be in vain. Here we must ask, does even God act in vain?

A critical review of the sermon False Prophets, by Bertrand Comparet

 
00:00

 

A critical review of the sermon False Prophets, by Bertrand L. Comparet

It has been nearly two years since we have made a presentation from the sermons of Bertrand Comparet, and doing so once again we hope to offer both constructive criticism and also some clarification and edification of Comparet's work wherever we can. Doing this, we will also present the critical notes of Clifton Emahiser from his own publication of Comparet's work. These sermons were originally digitized by Jeanne Snyder, which is where I became familiar with them back in 1998, and then again by Clifton where he was compelled to offer several of his own remarks as appendices. We may move his remarks to pertinent sections of the sermon as we present it.

As I have explained in the past, we make these occasional presentations of Comparet’s material for two reasons. First, we as Identity Christians praise Yahweh our God with much gratitude for men like him, who helped to lead us to Christian Identity truth. And secondly, since no man is perfect, we can honor our teachers but we cannot worship them, we cannot imagine that they are infallible, and we cannot place any of them upon a pedestal. We are all mere men, we can all be criticized, and at times, at least, any of us may be wrong and require correction. Therefore it is our obligation to test the work of our teachers, and, when we can, to correct, improve and build upon that work in order to bring this truth which we have at least a little closer to its perfection. That being said, we know we will never achieve perfection, but we also know that there is always space for improvement.

Ecclesiastes, Part 1: Methods of The Preacher

CHR20180105-Ecclesiastes-01.mp3 — Downloaded 1388 times
 
00:00

 

Ecclesiastes, Part 1: Methods of The Preacher

Before beginning a commentary on Ecclesiastes, let me first make the confession that none of my commentaries on Scripture are founded on worldly learning. I never went to Bible school, I never studied other mens’ commentaries, and I have little idea what the supposedly learned men say about most aspects of Scripture, or about individual books of Scripture. Neither am I going to research any of them for any particular commentary. With only a few exceptions, on the infrequent occasions where I have tried to read a popular commentary on a portion of Scripture, I have been disappointed, and sometimes even angered by what I have seen. For the most part, my only experience with the popular commentaries is through the editing work which I have done for Clifton Emahiser, who quotes from them frequently.

So when I write my own commentaries, I seek out only what information I can glean from or about the oldest available manuscripts, and I base my commentaries on what I have come to understand from Scripture itself and from classical histories and whatever I remember from my own readings of these and other works, such as the apocryphal literature or the ancient inscriptions of the neighboring cultures. Therefore, whether I say anything new, or whether I repeat anything old, for me to contend with or to mimic any of the traditional commentaries is not premeditated. Rather, I only seek to provide a discussion of Scripture through the lens of that proper covenant theology which is found in our Christian Identity understanding.

However, in my readings of archaeological journals and other worldly sources I am familiar with at least many of the claims of the critics of Scripture. Concerning this particular book, Ecclesiastes, they point to Aramaic or Persian words or other seemingly foreign aspects of its language, and they assert their own interpretation of these things in order to cast doubt upon the veracity of authorship, whether it be claimed or attributed. Here I will only state that their presumptions do not make inevitable their conclusions, as other reasons may also be given to explain the circumstances. The ancient Hebrews did not live in a vacuum, and often they did have foreign influences. For that they were even chastised by Yahweh their God. The ancient Hebrews themselves also greatly influenced the surrounding nations. Under David, and for a long time after David, they did indeed occupy and rule over all of the lands from the River of Egypt to the Euphrates River, and at least as far north as Hamath. So Solomon ruled over a great part of the Aramaic speakers of his time.