Addressing Charles Weisman’s What About the Seedline Doctrine? Part 22: The Devil as a Psychobabbler

Christogenea is reader supported. If you find value in our work, please help to keep it going! See our Contact Page for more information.

  • Christogenea Saturdays
ChrSat20200711Weisman22.mp3 — Downloaded 1391 times


Addressing Charles Weisman’s What About the Seedline Doctrine? Part 22: The Devil as a Psychobabbler

In Chapter 5 of his book, Weisman had attempted to smear our Christian Identity profession with claims that it came from Witchcraft, Gnosticism, Freemasonry, the Talmud, and the Kabbalah. But of course, all of these were actually Jewish, or heavily influenced by Jews, so he could have simply claimed that we got it from Jews. However we have proven throughout this series that our profession does indeed come from Scripture, and we have cited many Christian and non-Jewish sources to support it which are far older than the sources cited in Weisman’s allegations. Therefore all of these Jewish or Jewish-influenced philosophies actually began with basic truths and perverted them into lies, and as we also saw, their resulting lies are not at all similar to what we believe and demonstrate that the Bible teaches.

Now Weisman attempts to discredit us with another plainly Jewish tactic, which is a so-called “psychological study”. Since he denies the truth of Scripture, and even goes so far as to state that Christ was merely following along with Persian and Babylonian dualism, as well as reducing God Incarnate to the level of a common slanderer, he must imagine other and wicked reasons for the existence of our doctrine just like he claimed that there were other and wicked sources from which it originated. Here, Charles Weisman certainly is playing the role of a devil, which is a false accuser.

So now we shall present our criticism of chapter 6 of Charles Weisman’s book, What About the Seedline Doctrine?, and it is titled Why the Seedline Doctrine Exists. Here in this chapter, Weisman will admit, and even prove, many of the elements of our Two-Seedline belief, even while denying the necessary conclusions and the overall position. Weisman begins, at the top of page 50 of his book, under the subtitle:


Page 50:

Whenever we examine a doctrine, we should try to ascertain why it exists or what is the motive behind the doctrine. In other words, why do people believe or not believe in something. Is it because of faith, or is it because of pre-conditioning, social pressure, emotional appeal, self-righteousness, monetary security, or false piety. Thus the question of why a doctrine exists is a subject of psychology, the study dealing with the mind and with mental and emotional processes. It helps us understand human nature and what causes the mind and heart to act the way they do.

Of course all of this is useless rhetoric. Anyone who denies the actual reasons why something exists can always make up a list of excuses of why they think it exists, but that does not mean that any of it is true. This is the same manner by which Jewish critics had undermined Christianity itself among the academics of the last two centuries, seeing Jesus merely as some renegade Jew who got angry and started his own cult. Weisman also degrades Christ to that level, as he claims Christ was merely name-calling His enemies and following along with Persian and Babylonian dualism to account for their opposition to Him.

Now he continues by offering Scripture itself as a product of psychological analysis:

The Bible has much to tell us about psychology. It discuses the corrupt inner nature of man, the various virtues and vices people can have and why they have them, and tells us of the human “heart” and “mind” and how they function. The Bible tells us that people tend to believe something because it appeals to their inner nature, not because of sound reasoning on the matter.

The Bible may tell us something that can be squeezed into what the wisdom of men calls psychology, but modern psychology has little care for the Bible, or to properly distinguish the fleshly and spiritual aspects of men. Neither would the God of the Bible would care for psychology. Now Weisman cites three passages of Scripture which are often used, or rather, abused, by men who wish to denounce things that others have professed but which they themselves see as heresies:

Jer. 5:31 – The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their means; and my people love to have it so.

But what were the prophets prophesying falsely? Were they not in favor of international trade, with pursuing peace with aliens, with the race-mixing in Judah which is described in Jeremiah chapter 2, with the oppression by which certain of the people of Jerusalem were enriching themselves, as even many of their own countrymen were poor and oppressed? How does this relate to our Two-Seedline profession? Jeremiah 5:31 taken out of context can be used to smear anyone. Put it in its context, and it refers to the very specific deeds of a specific people.

2 Tim. 4:3, 4 – For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, wanting to have their ears tickled. And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned to fables.

Let’s read a larger portion of that passage from 2 Timothy chapter 4: “1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; 2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. 5 But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.”

So is Weisman guilty of what Paul told Timothy to watch for, when he degraded Yahshua Christ to the level of a slanderer? Or when he asserted that Christ was following Babylonian and Persian paganism? It is Weisman himself who is guilty of these things.

Next he cites Isaiah:

Isaiah 30:9, 10 – This is a rebellious people… Which say to the seers, “Do not see”; and to the prophets, “Do not prophesy unto us right things, speak to us smooth things, prophesy deceits.”

Is Two-Seedline something smooth, and easy to accept? There are actually harsh consequences for Christians who are persuaded by this doctrine as it changes their entire view of the world. Christ Himself said that the tares were planted by the devil, and there were plants that His Father did not plant, so is the teaching that there are genetically wicked people in the world actually deceitful? Then why is it rejected everywhere, rather than being popular? Or else, why did Christ Himself call His adversaries the offspring (generation) of vipers? Being called the offspring of vipers, is that not identifying the allegorical likening to vipers as a genetic condition? Or was Jesus a bad man because He said such things about the parents of His adversaries, whom He very probably had never even met? Was Jesus merely prophesying deceits? The fact that very few people can accept it does not make it true, but it does show that it is not “smooth”, which is something that is easy to accept and pleasurable to hear.

Now what was Isaiah referring to in that passage? He was warning that the children of Israel would be defeated and taken into captivity by the Assyrians, and the people were listening to prophets who deceived them by telling them that an alliance with Egypt would save them. Here Weisman had conveniently omitted part of verse 9, and it says in its entirety “9 That this is a rebellious people, lying children, children that will not hear the law of the LORD”. But we embrace the law, so this passage does not describe us. Weisman has therefore taken all three of these passages out of their context and applied them to us, and he is guilty of deceit.

Any such deceiver can take passages like these out of context and smear whomever does not agree with his own pet agenda, but that does not make it true. These passages prove nothing for Weisman. It is just rhetoric, and rhetoric does not prove anything by itself.

Page 51:

The Bible has many examples showing how people will follow, believe or adopt a concept or doctrine because of its appeal to their personal values or inner nature. Truth and the word of God will be rejected when such doctrines are presented.

But in the Bible, the examples of these false concepts never come from within the Word of God itself. In the Old Testament, they come from the pagan religions. In the New Testament, they come from the unBiblical so-called “traditions of the elders”, which is also the leaven of the Pharisees, or from the vain philosophies of men. But we actually believe the Word of God, and throughout our exposition of Weisman’s book, we have explained why we believe it as we do. Yet Weisman, by his own admission, does not believe the Word of God, as he himself had claimed that Yahshua Christ was only following paganism and is a mere slanderer.

Now he continues under the pretense that his premise is correct, which it is not, and he says:

Many popular Christian doctrines exist for this reason. For instance, the popular doctrine that people go to heaven when they die has no scriptural foundation. What the Bible does say is that in death man and beast are the same, they both rot in the ground and return to dust, and possess no state consciousness (Eccl. 3:19,20; 9:5; Isa. 38:18). This truth, however, is not appealing to our nature, thus we accept the fable that we go to heaven to be with Jesus and sit in the clouds because of its greater appeal.

Here we must also pause, because that is not what the Bible says. It is only what Weisman chose to read. First, here is Ecclesiastes 3:18-20: “18 I said in mine heart concerning the estate of the sons of men, that God might manifest them, and that they might see that they themselves are beasts. 19 For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity. 20 All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again. 21 Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth? ”

Weisman also cited Ecclesiastes 9:5, so we will first read 9:2-5, so that we see the context of the passage: “2 All things come alike to all: there is one event to the righteous, and to the wicked; to the good and to the clean, and to the unclean; to him that sacrificeth, and to him that sacrificeth not: as is the good, so is the sinner; and he that sweareth, as he that feareth an oath. 3 This is an evil among all things that are done under the sun, that there is one event unto all: yea, also the heart of the sons of men is full of evil, and madness is in their heart while they live, and after that they go to the dead. 4 For to him that is joined to all the living there is hope: for a living dog is better than a dead lion. 5 For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.”

Now of course, this is all true, and the best of men do suffer death just as the beasts. But are they truly dead? In Ecclesiastes 9:1, which sets the context for this entire passage, Solomon wrote: “1 For all this I considered in my heart even to declare all this, that the righteous, and the wise, and their works, are in the hand of God: no man knoweth either love or hatred by all that is before them.” The righteous and their works being in the hand of God, there is a life after death wherein the works of men are judged, and men are rewarded for their good works. At the very end of Ecclesiastes, Solomon repeats that concept once again.

We have demonstrated in our commentary on Ecclesiastes presented here in early 2018, Solomon had employed cynicism, sarcasm and irony throughout his work because, as he had frequently declared, all is vanity. But in the end, he found that even vanity is vanity, as he had proclaimed, at the end of chapter 12: “13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. 14 For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.” Saying that, Solomon certainly must have understood that “the spirit of man that goeth upward”, or there would be no purpose in God’s bringing every work into judgment, and no reward for the man who kept His commandments. Weisman evidently did not understand the overall scope, purpose and context of the work. All is vanity without God, but with God all is not vanity.

Solomon, in Ecclesiastes chapter 3, informs us that God subjected man to vanity in order to be tried by it. This we read in Ecclesiastes chapter 3: “10 I have seen the travail, which God hath given to the sons of men to be exercised in it.” So Paul of Tarsus repeats that concept in Romans chapter 8 where he said “ 20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope, 21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.” Being subjected to vanity in order to be tried, there certainly is something that remains after man has passed from that vanity, or there would be no point to it all.

Now we must examine this passage which Weisman cited from Isaiah chapter 38, which represents the words of king Hezekiah of Judah: “16 O Lord, by these things men live, and in all these things is the life of my spirit: so wilt thou recover me, and make me to live. 17 Behold, for peace I had great bitterness: but thou hast in love to my soul delivered it from the pit of corruption: for thou hast cast all my sins behind thy back. 18 For the grave cannot praise thee, death can not celebrate thee: they that go down into the pit cannot hope for thy truth. 19 The living, the living, he shall praise thee, as I do this day: the father to the children shall make known thy truth.” Does this establish Weisman’s claim, that there is no life or consciousness after death? It says that the grave and death do not praise or celebrate God, but that the living do praise Him.

In Matthew chapter 22 we read the words of Christ, which Weisman has already admitted he did not believe, where Christ said “ 31 But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, 32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. 33 And when the multitude heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine.” The Jews did not believe Christ, where He professed that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were living, and were not dead, but neither does Weisman.

In John chapter 8, Christ said to His adversaries “56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.” So we see that Abraham was indeed living. But the Jews did not believe it: “57 Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? 58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.” The Jews also did not believe that Yahshua was the Messiah, meaning that He was God Incarnate.

So in 1 Peter chapters 3 and 4, the apostle explained that Christ had preached to the spirits of the dead, as we read in the Christogenea New Testament: “18 Because Christ also suffered once for all errors, the just on behalf of the unjust, in order that He may lead you to Yahweh, indeed dying in the flesh but being made to live by the Spirit. 19 At which also going He proclaimed to those spirits in prison, 20 who at one time had been disobedient – when the forbearance of Yahweh awaited in the days of Noah’s preparing the vessel in which a few, that is eight souls, had been preserved through the water.” The “spirits in prison” were those wicked Adamites who died in the flood of Noah, and we see they really were not dead at all, but were only held in Hades until they could hear the gospel of Christ. So speaking of the sinners of his own time, Peter compared them to these to whom Christ had preached, in chapter 4 of his epistle where he wrote: “5 They shall give an account to Him who holds ready to judge the living and the dead. 6 Indeed for this also to the dead the good message has been announced, that they may indeed be judged like men in the flesh, but live like Yahweh in the Spirit.”

In 2 Corinthians chapter 5, Paul taught just what Solomon had in Ecclesiastes, with some elaboration where he wrote: “1 For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.” Paul was speaking of the spiritual body, the spirit with which the Adamic man is endowed, as being immortal. So he continues: “2 For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven: 3 If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked. 4 For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.”

Christians expect to pass into life when they die. This Christ also indicates in Matthew chapter 18, where He said “8 Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.” Now just because one may be cast into “everlasting fire” does not mean that one will, but Christ had said that “it is better for thee to enter into life”, which Christians expect to do upon death, and that is what Paul of Tarsus had also professed.

So Christians see that when they die, they pass into life, and Christ taught this same thing in the Gospel. So Paul continues and says: “5 Now he that hath wrought us for the selfsame thing is God, who also hath given unto us the earnest [deposit] of the Spirit. 6 Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord: 7 (For we walk by faith, not by sight:) 8 We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord. 9 Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him. 10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.”

From these Scriptures, we see that Christians have a strong reason to believe that they shall be present with God upon their death, but Weisman evidently did not believe them. The passages he chose in an attempt to refute this concept were taken out of context, and he did not understand them. Once again, Charles Weisman has proven that he is not a Christian. Now with offering any further substantiation for his claims, which he never properly established, he turns back to psychology:

If we don’t understand true human psychology, we are destined to fall into the traps and snares of our lusts, ego, vanity, emotions and heart— which “is deceitful above all things” (Jer. 17:9).

Do we really need to understand psychology in order to keep ourselves free of sin? Sin is transgression of the law, as the apostle John wrote in chapter 3 of his first epistle. In Romans chapter 7, Paul of Tarsus explained the struggle which every Adamic man has, between the fleshly desires and the will of the Spirit, explaining that as long as we hear the law and follow the Spirit, we will be kept from sin and death. Without the law, man does not know sin, but he can still commit sin, and therefore Paul had also exclaimed : “14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.” So in the very 1st Psalm, David had written “1 Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful. 2 But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.” However Weisman is not advocating a need to know the law; rather, he is advocating a need to know psychology! Weisman is a psychobabbler, no better than a Jew!

So now he concludes this section of his chapter by repeating the slanders of chapter 5 and claiming that psychology can prove them out. But discussing psychology here, he failed to prove them out:

Now why does this Satanic Seedline doctrine exist? After all, if you told some Christian that a certain belief can be found in paganism, Gnosticism, and Judaism, and is embraced in Masonic and Talmudic literature, they would stay away from it. So why then do people believe in the Satanic Seedline doctrine? The reason is to be found by a psychological study of the subject.

First, we have demonstrated that our belief does not come from Witchcraft, Gnosticism, Judaism, Freemasonry, the Talmud or the Kabbalah, and especially because those things all have fabulous interpretations of the so-called “serpent seed” that we have never accepted, and which themselves make a mockery of Scripture. But just because a basic concept or entity is mentioned in any those works does not make it wrong. The Masons want to build Solomon’s Temple, and that does not mean that the original Solomon’s Temple never existed. The Gnostics make caricatures of Cain and or Seth, but that does not mean that Cain or Seth had never existed. The Jews dispute with Moses throughout the Talmud, but that does not mean that Moses did not exist, or that the law as it is given in the Old Testament is all wrong, or that the Jews are ever right concerning anything that they say about Moses.

But this is also psychobabble. The reason why we believe Two-Seedline is found throughout Scripture, and also from history as Scripture itself informs us that we shall know men by their fruits. Weisman’s appeal to psychology, without any actual substantiation for his claims, is a weak appeal to an absolutely irrelevant and unstable authority. Psychology is subjective, it can be used to make practically any interpretation leading to some desirable conclusion look as if it was concocted.

Now Weisman continues under another subtitle:


The Satanic Seedline doctrine has an appeal or seems right because many of the basic elements which make it up exist in Scripture. The concept of seedline, as stated, exists throughout the Bible. The concept of Satanic, or that which is evil or in opposition to God, is certainly scriptural. Satanic persons, those who hate and are against God, are also quite prevalent in Scripture.

This does not merely “seem right”, it is right, because it is the entire theme of the Bible, which is evident from Genesis chapter 2 all the way to the very end of the Revelation of Yahshua Christ. Weisman evidently knows most of it, but denies it simply because he does not want to believe it. He even throws Yahshua Christ under the bus, by claiming that He was little but a slanderer and a follower of paganism, so that he could deny it. Here in the balance of this chapter, he will admit most of it is true, but continue to deny parts of it so that he does not have to accept the truth. So he asks:

Page 52:

But what about a satanic seedline? The existence of such a thing is also in Scripture. The Amalekites were an ungodly people who were always against God’s chosen people. Thus God said that He will “have war with Amalek from generation to generation” (Exod. 17:16). The seven Canaanite nations were so contrary to God that He told Israel to eliminate every last man, woman and child (Deut. 20:17). Thus as a race these nations were satanic without any redeeming qualities. The Edomites also constituted a satanic seedline, as they were always ungodly and against God’s people.

Weisman never explained why these races were “ungodly”, and why none of them could ever be accepted. There were many “ungodly” Israelites throughout history, but all of them have been promised forgiveness, repentance and reconciliation with God through Christ. But why is it that these others could never have such an expectation?

Here Weisman admits an important aspect of Two-Seedline, where without elaboration he admits that Yahweh God wanted to see every last man, woman and child of an entire race of people destroyed, on at least several occasions, and concedes that these races are “Satanic”. But why is that? Why would not one of Esau’s progeny be redeemable? Or one of the progeny of Canaan? Weisman cited Deuteronomy chapter 20 while also ignoring Genesis chapters 14 and 15. Therefore he never explained, or eluded having to explain, the presence in Canaan of the Rephaim giants, which were also said to have been Nephilim, or fallen ones. He also failed to explain the presence of Kenites, which he lied about in chapter 4 of this book, or of several other races in Canaan which did not descend from Noah, including the Zuzims or roving creatures, and the Kenizzites, Kadmonites , Perizzites and Girgashites. Since Weisman never mentioned them, he did not have to consider from whence they came, and the consequences of them being mingled with the Canaanites. This alone explains why Yahweh God wanted all of the Canaanites completely destroyed: because they were all mingled with the Nephilim, Kenites, and their abominations, the so-called “seed of the serpent” which Weisman also denies.

Finishing the paragraph, Weisman states:

Jesus spoke of “the tares” or “children of the wicked,” who were contrasted with the “good seed.” The tares are apparently a satanic group of people.

So Weisman makes a reference to the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares, but once again, he mentions them without elaboration. Perhaps he took for granted the notion that tares were only tares because they were followers of the devil, as he tried to say that the Jews who opposed Christ were devils only because they were followers of the devil, rather than having been planted by the devil.

So let’s read the parable, and then we will discuss the explanation of the parable, from Matthew chapter 13: “24 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: 25 But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. 26 But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. 27 So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? 28 He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? 29 But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.”

Now after this, Christ gave two other short parables, and Matthew wrote in summary that “34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: 35 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.” But then His apostles were troubled by the Parable of the Wheat and Tares, and later they had to ask Him about it. So we read further on in the chapter:

“36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field. 37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; 38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; 39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. 40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. 41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; 42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.”

First it must be understood that Christ is Yahweh God incarnate. That is how He was the “Spiritual rock” in the desert of the Exodus, as Paul explains in 1 Corinthians chapter 10. That is how He said that He was before Abraham. So because He revealed “things kept secret” from the beginning, this is what was not fully revealed in Genesis chapter 3, as Matthew had explained that Christ had fulfilled the declaration that “I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.” That assures that the things He referred to had actually transpired at the beginning of the world.

The enemies of God among the Wheat were actually sown by the devil, that same devil from Revelation chapter 12 and Genesis chapter 3. They were non-Adamic infiltrators among the people in the earliest days, just as the apostle Jude had explained “4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.” The Judaeans were not all Israelites, as Weisman insisted. Rather, many of them did indeed descend from those same Canaanites and Edomites whom Weisman himself admitted here were doomed. We have proven this from the epistles of Paul of Tarsus, the words of Christ, and the pages of Flavius Josephus and Strabo of Cappadocia.

As Christ also said, in Matthew chapter 15, “Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.” So there were races of men in Judaea who were not planted by Yahweh God, meaning that they were not Israelites, and that they were planted by the devil. Their origin was with the devil, not their belief, as they professed a belief in God, and as Christ also indicated, they would also ultimately profess a belief in Him – just like Charles Weisman professes a belief in Christ while denying that Christ was speaking the truth.

ChrSat20200711Weisman22.odt — Downloaded 23 times