Addressing Charles Weisman’s What About the Seedline Doctrine? Part 7, Evil for Wicked or Good

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

  • Christogenea Saturdays
ChrSat20200328Weisman07.mp3 — Downloaded 2860 times

Addressing Charles Weisman’s What About the Seedline Doctrine? Part 7, Evil for Wicked or Good

Here we shall continue our address of chapter 3 of Charles Weisman’s book, which is simply titled “The Serpent”. As I had said before we began this endeavor in our last presentation, because this is probably the most important chapter in his book, we may present and address every single paragraph, so that none of our detractors can claim we purposely missed anything which they may then imagine that we cannot answer.

At the beginning of his chapter on “The Serpent”, we have already discussed most of the points made by Charles Weisman where he had presented a list of uses of the words satan and devil as they are found throughout the Scriptures. His biggest mistake, in my opinion, was his failure to distinguish between these words where they appear as simple nouns or adjectives or where they appear as a Substantive along with a definite article. The word diabolos is an adjective which can mean slanderer. But when it appears with a definite article it is used as a noun to describe a particular slanderer. Then where the definite article appears with a noun, it is referring to a known, particular instance of the given noun, rather than to just any instance. In other words, satan or a satan, without the definite article, describes anyone who at one point or another may be an adversary, but the satan, with the definite article, describes a particular and already known entity which is an adversary. Weisman exploited his examples of the use of these words by not explaining that difference. So thus far in his arguments in this chapter, Weisman has lied by omission.

So where we left off, we will repeat the last item in Weisman’s list of examples, because we did not discuss it sufficiently:

  • Oppressive governmental authorities are the devil (Eph. 6:11,12; Rev. 2:10).

And this too is a lie, because it is an oversimplification. First, the children of Israel had sinned collectively, as it is described in 1 Samuel chapter 8, because they were to have no governmental authority at all, and when they insisted on a king, Yahweh told them that they had rejected Him as king, and therefore they would suffer under earthly kings. That suffering was not a decree of punishment, but rather, Yahweh was only telling them what the natural outcome of their decision was going to be.

However oppressive governmental authorities by themselves are not the devil. What Yahweh told the children of Israel would happen to them under a king, in 1 Samuel 8:11-18, had happened under Saul, David, Solomon, and all their successors. But David and Solomon were not devils, and neither were their governments.

Because the children of Israel sinned, after they were put off in punishment in the Assyrian and Babylonian captivities, it was then prophesied, especially in Daniel, that they would be punished for a fixed period of time, and suffer under oppressive governments. One of those oppressive governments would be Assyria, another Babylon, another Persia, another that of the Greeks, and finally that of the Romans. Other prophecies in Daniel describe what would happen later, after the passing of Rome. Yet Cyrus, the King of Persia, while he was a part of one of those beast empires, was described as a “man more precious than fine gold ” by Yahweh Himself in Isaiah chapter 13. Then in chapters 44-45 we read, where Yahweh is first referring to Himself speaking of Cyrus: “44:28 That saith of Cyrus, He is my shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure: even saying to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be built; and to the temple, Thy foundation shall be laid. 45:1 Thus saith the LORD to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him; and I will loose the loins of kings, to open before him the two leaved gates; and the gates shall not be shut…” [The reference to the gates is to the famous gates of Babylon, which were later opened to Cyrus without his having to broach the walls of the city, nearly 200 years after Isaiah had written.]

Now Cyrus conquered Babylon, as it says in Isaiah 45:1 he subdued many other of the surrounding nations, and he later died in his attempt to conquer the Scythians to the north, who were certainly a great number of the children of Israel in captivity. All of the nations which became subject to him or who fought with him would certainly have considered him as an oppressor. But the Word of God considered him to be anointed by God, a man more precious than gold who would serve the Will of Yahweh. This is only one more example where a so-called “oppressive governmental authority” is certainly not the devil, and once again Charles Weisman is exposed to be a blatant liar.

In fact, in Romans chapter 13 Paul described how governments serve the will of God as He uses them to punish disobedient men. In the provenance of God, even wicked governments are tools employed by Him. As Paul explains it, governments, whether they are good or wicked at any particular time, are serving the purposes of God Himself to punish the wicked or to reward the good, even if the rewards are not immediately perceived. So earthly governments were ordained by God, because the children of Israel had abandoned Him and sought an earthly king, but that does not mean that governments in general can be described as “the devil”, as we have seen governments which God Himself considered to be good, governments which He formed to do His Will.

Weisman cited Ephesians chapter 6, verses 11 and 12 where he said here that “oppressive governmental authorities are the devil”, but we must once again ask, did Paul actually write what Weisman concluded in this statement? In the King James Version those verses read: “11 Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. 12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” A precursory reading immediately reveals that Paul did not say that we wrestle against high places, but “against spiritual wickedness in high places.” Paul did not say that we wrestle against rulers but “against the rulers of the darkness of this world”. There is a difference between oppressive government and wicked men who introduce evil into the government.

Weisman also cited Revelation 2:10, but ignored verse 9, which we will not ignore: “9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan. 10 Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.” Now if there are people who claim to be Judaeans but are not, who are they? And if they are a “synagogue of Satan”, meaning an assembly of Satan, are they not the Jews who were truly Edomites and Canaanites and were persecuting Christians at this very time? So it is not government which is the devil, but evil influences within government which may be devils.

Furthermore, writing Ephesians about 2 years after he wrote his epistle to the Romans, Paul was not contradicting himself with his statements in Romans chapter 13 where he said “1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.” Rather, Paul was teaching that earthly rulers were ordained by God, but that God-fearing Christians should not be in fear of those earthly rulers. Peter taught virtually the same thing, in fewer words, where he said in chapter 2 of his first epistle “13 Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; 14 Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.” [Peter mentioned a king in that passage, not an emperor, because he was writing in Babylon to Mesopotamians who were under the rule of the Parthians.] So Christ had also said “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.” But at the same time, writing those lines in Ephesians Paul was teaching that God-fearing Christians would resist the evil within government by keeping obedience to God.

So it is not “oppressive governmental authorities” which are the devil, but it is certain men who come to power within governments who are often devils, or even men who have the power to control entire governments, as a particular devil offered to Christ, in Luke chapter 4 where we read: “5 And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. 6 And the devil said unto him, All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it.” The devil was a man who had the kingdoms of that society in his pocket, and we see the same is true of many devils of modern times, such as a Rothschild or a Sassoon or a Soros.

However Weisman proceeds as if at least most of his assertions could not be challenged, while we have challenged and discredited practically all of them, either by showing why they are not relevant to the issue, or by demonstrating that they prove our point and not his. So he concludes that:

Though a few of these usages may be debatable, most are not. The point is that the words “devil” or “satan” are obviously not given one single meaning, usage or identity throughout Scripture. But that is how Christendom has interpreted and used these words. Christians have used them to always mean a supernatural, god-like, invisible entity that causes evil, problems and tribulation upon man. This is also the concept employed by adherents of the Satanic Seedline doctrine, since that doctrine requires the existence of a supernatural satanic being.

Now Weisman is correct, that denominational Christendom and the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox churches have traditionally interpreted these words as he describes. They also often failed to distinguish the adjective and noun forms of these words from their use as a Substantive or as a proper noun. Many early Two-Seedline teachers followed these same mistakes, but that is not our fault, and of course we believe that Two-Seedline is true, although we differ from them in many ways.

But recognizing the instances where the adjective is used as a Substantive, and where the nouns accompanied by a Definite Article are used as a proper noun, specifying a particular entity, is necessary to determining how these words were actually intended to be understood by the authors of our Scriptures. If Weisman did understand those uses, which I doubt because he seems to only have known Greek and Hebrew words from concordances and a couple of lexicons, then he must have purposely ignored it for this book.

However even if we understand that there are tangible devils and a tangible Satan, we do not misinterpret these words. In the manner in which Weisman describes We do not think that the terms Devil or Satan “always mean a supernatural, god-like, invisible entity that causes evil, problems and tribulation upon man”. In fact, we do not think that those terms ever mean that, although from our Scriptures we must believe that there were entities called demons, which are disembodied wicked spirits. But while we recognize the possibility of disembodied spirits called demons, we do not rely on there any so-called disembodied spirits or demons for any aspect of our Two-Seedline profession.

Rather, we believe that the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil represents a race, or actually, what we today would call races, of so-called people who are physically descended from another race, called in the Scriptures by the term fallen angels, and the collective of those people are Satan and the Devil, while any one of them may be a Satan or a Devil at any given time. While Adamic men and women sin, it does not make them Satan, and while sometimes devils appear to do well, that does not make them children of God. We will discuss all of this further, as we reach the appropriate points in Weisman’s book.

Our point of view fully accounts for something which Weisman had himself professed, but which Weisman could not explain, and that is how a “serpent”, an intelligent individual with its own order of things and contrary to the order of God, was in the garden to seduce Eve in the first place. Our viewpoint, once all these things are studied, is the only point of view which is consistent with all Scripture. For now we shall continue.

Page 21:

It cannot conclusively be said that devil or satan must mean the serpent, or that the serpent must be interpreted as the traditional concept of satan. Therefore quoting the book of Revelation which states, “that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan” (Rev. 12:9; 20:2), is not definitive as to what the serpent is or can be called. Nor is it definitive as to who or what the devil or satan is or can be called. It is only one of many usages of these terms. If we say the serpent is a reptile, it cannot be said that “reptile” always means the serpent, as other things are also called reptile. It is a generic or comprehensive term like the term “devil.”

As we have explained, there are many times when men can be a satan, meaning an adversary, or a devil, meaning an accuser. But frequently in Scripture when the adversaries of God are referred to, they are called “the satan” or “the false accuser”, terms which refer to specific entities, and the serpent of Genesis is equated in the Revelation to a specific Satan and a specific accuser. Weisman is lying by omission by purposely failing to recognize this. The phrase ὁ διάβολος is not generic. It represents a specific class of people. So Peter used a definite article where he warned Christians that ὁ ἀντίδικος ὑμῶν διάβολος, or “your adversary the devil” walks about as a roaring lion, “seeking whom he may devour.” Peter was certainly not referring to “your adversary the flesh”, but he was referring to fleshly devils. In fact, we mentioned in our last presentation where Luke identified a spirit-demon with the words ὁ διάβολος, in Acts chapter 10, and if a spirit-demon can be a devil, as that passage in Luke proves, then Weisman is dead wrong in his assertion that the devil is the flesh.

Continuing with Weisman, where we are still on Page 21:

As to whether the serpent of Genesis 3 is a supernatural being, or evil angelic entity, commonly called the Devil or Satan, is another critical question. The Satanic Seedline proponents insist that it is so, but such a proposition has no support in the Pentateuch which has no reference at all to these terms, as the Bible scholar George Lamsa [citing his book, Old Testament Light, with which we also disagree] states:

“The term Satan or ‘devil’ was not known to the early Hebrews, nor does it occur in the early books of the Bible. Evidently, these terms were used later when the Israelites came in contact with the people who believed in two gods, the god of good and the god of evil. The Babylonians and the Persians accepted the doctrine of dualism, with two powers; good and evil.”

In Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28, we read that God was known to cause every type of evil and problem — social, political, economical, agricultural, and personal. It is plainly obvious that upon reading such verses that the early Hebrews were not “dualists.” Thus Moses and the early patriarchs would not have thought of a supernatural entity of evil when they wrote the Genesis account of the serpent.

Now we left off one sentence short of the end of this paragraph, which we shall continue below, but first we must address this statement which Weisman attributes to George Lamsa. First, we are not dualists. We do not believe in a wicked power that is somehow equal to the power of God. We do not believe in a spiritual Satan who has power over the lives of men. But in the New Testament, men and women were indeed vexed and even possessed by demons, which were wicked spirits, and we have shown that in the books of Moses, the Pentateuch, the existence of those demons was recognized, and men who were taken to idolatry were worshipping such demons. Furthermore, another word translated as devil also referred to a hairy goat, and the Greeks used that same Hebrew word to describe men who were half goat, and who were given to revelry and sexual promiscuity, and evidently, as it is described in those same books of Moses, the people were also worshiping those.

Job is an early book of the Bible. The circumstances in which it was written, the descriptions of the surrounding tribes, and the genealogy of one of its principle characters, who was named “Elihu the son of Barachel the Buzite, of the kindred of Ram” all date the life of Job to the early Judges period. Yet in Job, Satan is indeed used with a definite article to denote a particular adversary, and not just a personal enemy of Job himself. So George Lamsa, like Charles Weisman, is also a liar. Before the time of David, and long before the Babylonian exile, Satan, demons, and earthly devils, or satyrs, were all mentioned in Scripture. Now Weisman continues with this lie and says:

But Hebrew theology changed at the Babylonian Exile:

“In pre-exilic Hebrew thought the figure of Satan was entirely unknown. The absolute monotheism of normative Hebraism affirmed that there was only one divine power, one God, and, in purposed refutation of the dominant Persian dualism of the day, that He was the creator of both light and darkness, the source of evil as well as good (Isa. 45:6-7). But to the popular Hebrew mind of that day dualism seemed to solve conveniently one of the baffling problems of existence, the problem of good and evil, and so, contrary to the tenets of official Hebraism, evolved the figure of Satan, patterned obviously after the Zoroastrian power of evil, Ahriman. Actually Satan never had any place in the theology of normative Hebraism.” [Citing An Encyclopedia of Religion, edited by Vergilius Ferm and published in 1945.]

First, to believe this is to believe that our Bibles are a lie, that post-exilic Hebrew Scriptures are worthless because they adopted concepts which they borrowed from pagan nations, and that the New Testament is worthless for that same reason. So essentially, Charles Weisman is as much a Jew as the average Rabbi Shekelstein, because to him the Bible is not Scripture, it is not the Word of God, but rather it is some sort of politically manipulated ploy. No wonder Weisman dismisses or corrupts many of the words of Christ in his assault on Two-Seedline.

The recognition of a tangible Satan is not the recognition of a divine power, and the recognition of demons, something which Moses also recognized, does not necessitate any profession that demons are also divine – even if in their own use of the term, the ancient Greeks were referring to what they considered to be lesser gods. But in reality, Weisman is creating straw man arguments by which he will ultimately foist his devil-is-the-flesh heresy, thereby persuading us that we are all the same, because there is no such thing as devils in the flesh.

So his lie continues:

There also is little that can be used to support an evil, supernatural being called “Satan” in the Old Testament. The satan in Job never had any power of its own to afflict Job. Rather this satan asked God that certain things be done to him and God did them (Job 2:3-5,10). When God asked this satan where he came from, he said he came from “walking up and down” in the earth (1:7). He did not say he was “cast out of heaven,” but inferred he was some man who was simply an adversary of Job and God.

Here again Weisman is lying. In Job chapter 1, Satan had complained that God protected Job. So Satan challenged God and said “11 But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face.” In response to that challenge, we read: “12 And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD.” So the Sabeans, a formerly Semitic arab tribe immediately raided Job’s estate. Then where it says in verse 16 that “the fire of God is fallen from heaven, and hath burned up the sheep, and the servants, and consumed them”, that is only how the servant of Job himself had interpreted the event. Then in turn, the Chaldaeans raided Job’s estate. Perhaps after departing from the presence of God, Satan had gone off to hire both the Sabeans and then the Chaldaeans to do so.

Then in Job chapter 2 Satan is still vexed by Job’s righteousness, in spite of what he suffered, and Satan once again challenged God. But where God said “although thou movedst me against him, to destroy him without cause”, we only see an admission that all things are in the hands of God in spite of the fact that this Satan was an adversary to God. So Satan challenged God again, and we read: “ 6 And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, he is in thine hand; but save his life. 7 So went Satan forth from the presence of the LORD, and smote Job with sore boils from the sole of his foot unto his crown. 8 And he took him a potsherd to scrape himself withal; and he sat down among the ashes.”

Satan, not God, had smitten Job with boils. That does not make Satan a god, but rather, even the sorcerers of Egypt could turn staffs into snakes before Moses and Aaron. Just how Job had been smitten with the boils we are not informed, but perhaps Satan hired a doctor to give Job a vaccine. What type of sorcery Satan may have used is immaterial. So Weisman tells only half the story, and he refuses to see that Satan is a permanent adversary to God and that this is an account of how Satan challenged God to test the fate of Job, and God accepted the challenge, if for no other reason than we may have this record and learn from the fate of Job.

Why did Weisman not consider that God never admonished Satan to keep his law, to love his “brother” Job and not to envy him or covet his wife or his goods? But the presence of Satan, a permanent adversary to God, a man walking to and fro on the earth, is only explained by our Two-Seedline belief, and there is much that Weisman did not consider, or he purposely avoided any such consideration.

Page 23:

It is clear from Scripture that all the evil, problems, afflictions, and troubles of a supernatural nature or origin that came upon Israel in the Old Testament were done by God, not a supernatural satan or devil. What, then, would be the need or purpose for the existence of such an entity?

Of courser, we do not claim that the devil is supernatural, but we know that the “devil” is representative of a race of people who are opposed to God. In the Revelation they are described as a race of angels, or fallen angels, who rebelled against God. While heaven is not necessarily the sky, if angels fell from heaven and in Job Satan is walking around on the earth, then that adversary is merely a representative from that race of angels. They can indeed be traced through Scripture, and we will do that as this series of presentations proceeds.

Here Weisman cites for support Isaiah 42:24; 45:7; 54:16; Jeremiah 11:11; 18:11; Proverbs 16:4; and Psalms 90:3. We will briefly review each of these Scriptures.

Isaiah 42:24 Who gave Jacob for a spoil, and Israel to the robbers? did not the LORD, he against whom we have sinned? for they would not walk in his ways, neither were they obedient unto his law.

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

Isaiah 54:16 Behold, I have created the smith that bloweth the coals in the fire, and that bringeth forth an instrument for his work; and I have created the waster to destroy.

Jeremiah 11:11 Therefore thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will bring evil upon them, which they shall not be able to escape; and though they shall cry unto me, I will not hearken unto them.

Jeremiah 18:11 Now therefore go to, speak to the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying, Thus saith the LORD; Behold, I frame evil against you, and devise a device against you: return ye now every one from his evil way, and make your ways and your doings good.

First, none of these passages forebode supernatural affliction upon Israel, so Weisman has yet another straw man argument. Rather, they are all warning that Israel would suffer for their sins, and it was the Assyrians and Babylonians, along with some of the other surrounding nations, whom Yahweh had brought against Israel in order to effect their punishment for sin.

In reference to these five passages, Weisman does not even ask the identity of the spoilers and robbers. He uses them to try to prove that all evil comes from God, but that is not true. There is evil which God uses to effect His Will in the world, which is evil in the eyes of men, but good in the eyes of God. Going back to our example of Cyrus, Yahweh said of him “whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him; and I will loose the loins of kings”. Now to Yahweh, Cyrus’ actions would be good. But if one were a conquered Babylonian or Assyrian, would they be good then?

Likewise, Yahweh told the children of Israel to kill all of the Canaanites, to drive them out of their lands. When they failed, He said, in Numbers chapter 33: “55 But if ye will not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you; then it shall come to pass, that those which ye let remain of them shall be pricks in your eyes, and thorns in your sides, and shall vex you in the land wherein ye dwell.”

Where He also warned them, in Deuteronomy chapter 31, we see how they would be pricks in their eyes: “16 And the LORD said unto Moses, Behold, thou shalt sleep with thy fathers; and this people will rise up, and go a whoring after the gods of the strangers of the land, whither they go to be among them, and will forsake me, and break my covenant which I have made with them.”

From that early time the Canaanites were a source of vexation to the children of Israel, however we understand that to be another manifestation of the enmity between the two seeds of Genesis 3:15, because the Canaanites are in part descended from Kenites and Rephaim, and other races which were not of Adam. In Judges chapter 3, we see a list of the places from where the children of Israel had failed to drive out the Canaanites.

So when the children of Israel sinned to the point that they were put off in punishment, Yahweh used those other races and nations to effect that punishment, and every one of these Scriptures which Weisman has cited relate to that punishment. While it is evil in the eyes of men, it is nevertheless good in the eyes of God, who said in Amos chapter 3: “2 You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.”

There is evil which is only evil in the eyes of men, as Yahweh God uses wicked men, men who have no capacity to be anything but wicked, like the Satan in Job, to punish the good people, His people, when they sin. So Weisman did not consider the nature of the robbers, or the nature of the Canaanites, or of any of the vehicles which Yahweh has employed to punish the children of Israel. The Babylonians, who were Chaldaeans, and the Assyrians certainly were created by Him. Yet Yahweh used Babylonians and Assyrians to punish the Israelites.

Some men who sin have an opportunity for repentance, and here Weisman himself cited Psalm 90 where it says: “3 Thou turnest man to destruction; and sayest, Return, ye children of men.” Yahweh sends men off into their apostasy, and Yahweh calls on them to repent. But the Satan of Job was never called on to repent in spite of his hatred and envy of Job. Satan never had any opportunity to be a Christian. So some men do not have an opportunity for repentance, and all they do is evil even if Yahweh uses their evil to effect His Will, and here Weisman also cited Proverbs chapter 16 where it says: “4 The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.”

These are the same entities who are used as a scourge against the children of Israel, to correct them. He is using them as a scourge against the children of Israel today, as they are the flood which the Serpent has sent out of its mouth in order to persecute the seed of the Woman. But the wicked are never corrected. Instead, in Matthew chapter 25 we are informed that all of the so-called goat nations have their destiny in “everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels”. Then in the Revelation and in the epistles of Jude and Peter we see an entire class of people who face this same destiny. Jude and Peter both explain that these men who infiltrated Christian assemblies and corrupted them were ordained such a destiny “before of old”, but that they would be among Christian congregations taking advantage of Christians and their blessings.

Yahweh certainly did make the wicked for the day of evil. Yahweh created the “angels that left their first estate”, and Yahweh must have foreseen what they would do after their rebellion. But their rebellion is not from God, and He cannot be blamed for their sin. So there is evil in the eyes of men, and then there is true evil, which is rebellion against God that cannot be repented of, the unforgivable sin of corrupting His creation – the sin of racer-mixing. Paul explained that Esau could not inherit the blessing because he was a fornicator, a race-mixer, in Hebrews chapter 12. So in the end, they shall all be destroyed. Two-Seedline is true, and Weisman is purposely obscuring the issues in order to keep it from men.

But while Yahweh takes credit and responsibility for His Creation, He Himself cannot be blamed for their sins. He cannot be forced to accept the outcome of their sins. For that reason Paul had written in that same chapter of Hebrews that “7 If ye endure chastening, God 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.” Chastisement is not merely suffering, but it is suffering handed down from above in order that a son be corrected. It was Yahweh’s purpose to correct Job, to allow Satan to punish Job for Job’s correction. But Satan himself was not corrected in the process, Satan was still Satan. Bastards have no opportunity for redemption. The bastard nations are all goats destined for the Lake of Fire, the same fate awaiting the devil and his angels.

Once you realize that there are two different groups of nations in the world, with different origins and destinies, there is no choice but to admit that Two-Seedline is true. Except for the Sheep and the Goats, we have not even yet discussed all the other parables and sayings of Christ which prove this, waiting to get to Weisman’s discussion of some of them.

ChrSat20200328Weisman07.odt — Downloaded 310 times