October 2022

A Christogenea commentary On the Gospel of John has recently been completed. Many passages simply do not say what the modern churches think they mean! Don't miss this important and ground-breaking work proving that Christian Identity is indeed fully supported by Scripture.

Don't miss our ongoing series of podcasts The Protocols of Satan, which presents many historical proofs that the infamous Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion are real, and that they have been fulfilled in history by the very same people who dispute their authenticity. Our companion series, The Jews in Medieval Europe, helps to explain how the Protocols have been fulfilled.

 Our recent Pragmatic Genesis series explains the Bible from a Christian Identity perspective which reconciles both Old and New Testaments with history and the political and social realities facing the Christian people of Yahweh God today.

A Commentary on the Epistles of Paul has recently been completed at Christogenea.org. This lengthy and in-depth series reveals the true Paul as an apostle of God, a prophet in his own right, and the first teacher of what we call Christian Identity.

Don't miss our recently-completed series of commentaries on the Minor Prophets of the Bible, which has also been used as a vehicle to prove the historicity of the Bible as well as the Provenance of God.

Visit Clifton Emahiser's Watchman's Teaching Ministries at Christogenea.org for his many foundational Christian Identity studies.

Visit the Mein Kampf Project at Christogenea.org and learn the truth concerning some of the most-lied about events in history.

Christogenea Books: Christian Truths in Black and White!
Visit our store at Christogenea.com.

It is Enough to be an Israelite, But Enough for What?, Part 2

Submitted by William Finck on

CHR20221028-Comparet-IsItEnough02.mp3 — Downloaded 8750 times

 

It is Enough to be an Israelite, But Enough for What?, Part 2

As we had seen in Part 1 of our critique of Bertrand Comparet’s sermon, Is it Enough Merely to be an Israelite?, he had clearly taken Romans 11:26 out of the context of the epistle itself so that he could critique Paul, and he even accused Paul of having misquoted scripture. Then he denied the veracity of Paul’s statement that “All Israel shall be saved” where he compared it to Isaiah 45:17, while he ignored Isaiah 45:25. While for many other reasons we may love Bertrand Comparet, this approach to scripture is what even he himself had professed to have rejected, and he must be corrected. If we truly believe Yahweh our God, and if we love Yahshua Christ, then we shall seek to reconcile and understand all of Scripture, without ever assuming that one verse can cancel out another, or that we can arbitrarily pick a favorite and ignore others.

In Romans chapter 9 Paul began by praying for his kinsmen according to the flesh, those who truly were of Israel, as opposed to the Edomites in Judaea for which he had then contrasted Jacob and Esau. Continuing at the beginning of Romans chapter 10, he continued his prayer where he addressed his Roman readers and said “1 Brethren, truly the preference of my heart, and supplication to Yahweh is for preservation on their behalf. 2 I attest to them that they have zeal for Yahweh, but not in accordance with full knowledge.” So there he was still speaking of his “kinsmen according to the flesh”, of those true Israelites in Judaea for which he had prayed in chapter 9.

So where he was still discussing that same subject, Romans chapter 11 opens where Paul asked “1 Now I say, has Yahweh thrust away His people?…” and he contrasted the remnant of the obedient in the time of Elijah to what he had hoped would be a similar remnant of the obedient in Judaea in his own time. Then a little later he asked “7 What then, what Israel seeks after, this it did not attain to?…” and he answered his own question in the same verse as he continued and wrote: “But the chosen have succeeded, and the rest were hardened”. But who did Paul consider the chosen to be? Did he consider the chosen to be mere believers? Or did he consider the chosen to be all of Israel?

It is Enough to be an Israelite, But Enough for What?, Part 1

Submitted by William Finck on

CHR20221021-Comparet-IsItEnough01.mp3 — Downloaded 15456 times

 

Blindness is a Curse from God - Christogenea.org

Apparently VLC on Windows, which I have used to apply metadata for years, has been ruining podcasts. But only some listeners had problems while others did not. So once again, I have resampled and uploaded a new file, as of 11:30 AM on the 22nd. Thank you for your patience!

It is Enough to be an Israelite, But Enough for What?, Part 1

The medieval Roman Catholic paradigm relating to salvation and heaven, or judgment and hell, has been ingrained into all modern Christian theology to such a degree, having been imbued into our thought from perhaps as long ago as 1,800 years, that it may be one of the most difficult errors of Roman Catholicism to overcome. But it really cannot be overcome at all, until one learns the proper differences between the wheat and the tares, the sheep and the goats, and can identify the good race of fish in the parable of the net. While Bertrand Comparet did know those differences, in my opinion he nevertheless had not fully thought them out in other areas of Scripture, and especially in this area. But we can forgive him, since the subject of salvation and the common perception concerning salvation is probably the deepest rabbit hole in Scripture. No matter how many times one may read the promises to the fathers and the words of Christ, there is always that one verse by which one may imagine that a child of God may ultimately and eternally be cast into the pits of hell, or the Lake of Fire.

But in this light we must ask ourselves: Are the promises to the fathers unconditional guarantees, or are they merely the offer of an opportunity to men?

Then, if they are a mere opportunity: Are we subjected to vanity for our edification, as both Solomon (Ecclesiastes 1:13) and Paul of Tarsus (Romans 8:20-21) had attested, or as a business venture which we may win or lose at any given time?

For example, a man may be a perfectly pious Roman Catholic for many years, never having sinned, having a pious wife and raising pious children, and then one day his neighbor's wife begins hinting at him and making advances, hoping to tempt him into adultery. So the man resists his temptation for many months, and when he is finally about to give in, when he is weak, something happens and he is stricken dead. Just think of the odds. If he had been struck one day later, he may have had his neighbor's wife that afternoon, and spent an eternity in hell! But if he had been struck one week later, he may have had his neighbor's wife, felt sorry after the act and repented, gone to church on Sunday and confessed, and then in a few days he would enter into eternity in heaven! So long as he dropped some cash in the basket and said whatever prayers he was told to say for penance.

Bible Blunders, Part 1

Submitted by William Finck on

CHR20221014-BibleBlunders-01.mp3 — Downloaded 7052 times

 

Know Your History - Christogenea.org

The original podcast file was somehow corrupted and would not play. It has now been replaced. I apologize for any inconvenience. Being on the road, the Monday following the podcast I was finally able to edit the notes, and there I was also able to add a few short clarifications and make a few minor corrections.

Bible Blunders, Part 1

Here I am going to present something that I will call Bible Blunders. Ultimately this may turn into something of a series, so I will even add “Part 1”. When I made several Forum posts addressing certain things in Scripture which are commonly misunderstood, a friend suggested that I compile them into a program called Bible Mysteries, but these really are not mysteries. Rather, they are blunders because the solution to understanding them is in the Scripture, and for that reason we really have no excuse not to understand them. But some of these traps I have fallen into myself, not necessarily because I made the mistakes, but because we often trust others to be correct, especially our teachers, and we repeat things that they say without investigating them for ourselves. So here we are going to discuss queen Athaliah of Judah, a trap which I managed to avoid, and also the identity of the Rechabites of the Book of Jeremiah, and the “Kenites” of 2 Chronicles chapter 2, a trap which I was caught in until recently, because I followed older teachers without giving the subject a sufficiently full consideration.

Proof that Athaliah queen of Judah was not the daughter of Jezebel:

A version of this was originally posted at the Christogenea Forum on 17th July 2022.

Years ago, in June, 2009, I made a presentation called Women in the Genealogy of Christ. Only rather recently did I realize that it needs an update. That is because I never had a “church” background, and therefore I never knew that the churches teach that Jezebel is an ancestor of Christ. That is what at least most of them teach, and it is absolutely wrong. So in that early podcast, I discussed Tamar, Rahab, Ruth and Bathsheba, three of which women are specifically mentioned in the genealogy of Christ as it is presented in the Gospel of Matthew, but I never knew there was a need to discuss Jezebel. (Bathsheba is also referred to in Matthew, but not by name.)

Here I shall prove that Jezebel could not have been the mother of Athaliah, the queen of Judah, in spite of the fact that Ahab was her father. But this entire story of Ahab's descendants is sometimes confusing not only in the way in which years are reckoned but also because there are two men named Jehoram, sometimes also spelled Joram (in the King James Version): a son of Ahab and a son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah. There are also two men named Ahaziah: a son of Ahab and a grandson of Jehoshaphat, the son of Jehoram king of Judah. So when we mention Jehoram or Ahaziah, we always need to check to make certain we have the correct one.

On the Revelation of Yahshua Christ, Part 27: The City of God

Submitted by William Finck on

CHR20221007-Revelation27.mp3 — Downloaded 14954 times

 

John watching the City of God descend from Heaven
By Octave 444 - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, Wikimedia Commons.

On the Revelation of Yahshua Christ, Part 27: The City of God

Before we commence with Revelation chapter 21 and the City of God, we should pause to speak about the references to the Book of Life. This Book of Life, as we had mentioned briefly in our discussion of The Camp of the Saints, is not explicitly mentioned in the Old Testament (in the podcast version I failed to say explicitly, which I later added to the notes). But there certainly does seem to be at least one reference in the Old Testament to the same Book of Life of the Revelation, and that is found in Daniel chapter 12. Other passages may arguably be interpreted as references to the Book of Life, especially if they are taken out of context, so before we discuss the reference in Daniel, these passages we shall discuss briefly.

For example, in Exodus chapter 32 we read “33 And the LORD said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book.” This passage can indeed be interpreted in an ominous manner if it is taken by itself and cross-referenced to the verses where the Book of Life is mentioned in the Revelation. But that is not honest, and since all men sin and fall short of the glory of God, as Paul had professed in chapter 3 of his epistle to the Romans, and since in the sight of Yahweh no living man is justified, as David had professed in the 143rd Psalm, then the City of God would evidently be a very deserted place. But that interpretation, as we have also explained in our last presentation, is absolutely contrary to all of the promises of Yahweh and the parables and other statements of Yahshua Christ. To see why that verse from Exodus chapter 32 (32:33) should not be cross-referenced to the Revelation in that manner, we shall read a broader selection of passages from Exodus, to put it into its proper context.