Biblical Discussion

TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 36

Here we shall continue in our endeavor to show that the apostle John had described the antichrist as men who were not of his own people, but who were among his people and had denied Christ. Then at the end of 1 John chapter 2 where he described these men to his readers as “them that seduce you” it becomes evident that he was describing men who had been surreptitiously infiltrating the body of the people of God and corrupting it with false teachings. Doing this, it is further evident that he was essentially describing the same men that the apostles Jude, Peter and Paul had also warned Christians about in their own epistles, men who were infiltrators and corrupters of the body of Christ.

TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 35

Over the past two weeks we discussed the racial aspects of the messages of the apostles found in 2 Peter chapter 2 and in the epistle of Jude. In those chapters, we believe it is quite clear in the context of their remarks that the apostles had described a different race of people, men who could not have been of Israel because they were born into corruption and destruction, men who had surreptitiously infiltrated the body of the people of God and corrupted it with false teachings. Both apostles also warned that in their own time as well as in the future, men connected with those same intruders of old both were and would be infiltrating Christian assemblies and acting in that same manner. Now we shall endeavor to show that the apostle John had described these same men in different ways, something which Paul of Tarsus had also done.

TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 34

Last week we discussed the racial aspects of the message of 2 Peter chapter 2, where it is clear in the context of his remarks that the apostle was describing a different race of people with a different origin than the Israelite Christians to whom his epistle was addressed. In that chapter, the apostle had warned of men who could not have been of Israel, and he related them to fallen angels and professed that they were born as “natural irrational animals into destruction and corruption”. And that they were cursed children, among other things which indicated that he was speaking of a race of men, and not merely of a collection of wicked or sinful individuals. Furthermore, on that same basis they evidently never had any opportunity to repent and join the body of Christ, and Peter attested that their fate is to be consigned to the “mist of darkness… for ever,” from of old, which is, from ancient times.

TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 33

Now that we have completed a discussion of particular passages in the epistles of Peter where certain terms are either mistranslated or misunderstood, we would like to discuss certain statements and descriptions in the epistles of James, Peter and Jude which demonstrate that differences between particular people are indeed racial in nature, and that the concept of race as we know it was certainly understood and recognized by all three apostles. Then we hope to discuss the descriptions of the antichrist in the epistles of John, which also correlate with what we shall see here in 2 Peter and in Jude.

47) James and the appearance of your race

First, we must understand that James had addressed his epistle to the “twelve tribes scattered abroad” and therefore none of what he wrote is meant for any other people but the members of those twelve tribes. James was not writing to Judaeans, as it is evident that he remained in Jerusalem until he was killed by the Sadducees around 61 AD, a crime which was recorded by Flavius Josephus. So James’ salutation is a proof in itself, since with only one recorded exception, that of Anna the prophetess, by all ancient accounts there were never more than a remnant portion of three tribes from Judah, Benjamin and Levi which had returned from captivity to rebuild and inhabit Jerusalem, along with parts of Judah and Galilee.

TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 32

Having finally completed our discussion of particular passages in Paul’s epistles where certain terms are either mistranslated or misunderstood, we now hope to do that same thing in regard to the so-called “Catholic Epistles”, which itself is an errant Church term for the epistles of James, Peter and Jude. Like Paul’s writings, these also have many errors of interpretation, or blatant mistranslations, than do the Gospel accounts or the Revelation, which cause the New Testament itself to be misunderstood. But while James is usually reckoned as the first of these epistles, we will reserve it for later, and begin with 1 Peter.

46) Specific NT verse misteachings, mistranslations or corruptions in the epistles of Peter and James

Peter opened his first epistle with the following salutation, as the King James Version has 1 Peter 1:1: “Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia…”

TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 31

We are finally reaching the end of our discussion of particular passages in Paul’s epistles where certain terms are either mistranslated or misunderstood, adversely affecting the interpretation of the Scriptures throughout the New Testament. As we have already explained, due to the nature and purpose of Paul’s writings there are more of these than there are in all of the other New Testament Scriptures. So here we will discuss a few passages from the epistle to the Hebrews, and from the pastoral epistles which Paul had written to Timothy and to Titus.

45 continued) Specific NT verse misteachings, mistranslations or corruptions in the epistles of Paul

So now our discussion brings us to the epistle to the Hebrews. While even in the King James Version there are not many particularly errant mistranslations in Hebrews, at least which concern our purposes here, there is nevertheless much confusion over the epistle, regarding whether Paul was actually the author or when or for what purpose it was written. However it is clear to me that Paul was the author, that the epistle was left unsigned and that Paul did not mention his own name for a reason, and that the epistle was written shortly after his arrest in the temple in 58 AD, but before he was sent as a prisoner to Rome.

TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 30

We once again continue our discussion of particular passages in Paul’s epistles where certain terms are either mistranslated or misunderstood, adversely affecting the interpretation of the Scriptures throughout the New Testament. As we have already explained, due to the nature and purpose of Paul’s writings there are more of these than there are in all of the other New Testament Scriptures. Essentially, the churches claim that Paul changed Christianity from a focus on Jews to a universal focus, and that is a perversion of the entire message of the Gospel of Christ, and also of the often-stated purposes and intentions of Paul himself, who meant only to bring the Gospel to the lost sheep of Israel, doing what Christ had commissioned him to do.

45 continued) Specific NT verse misteachings, mistranslations or corruptions in the epistles of Paul

We have already addressed many elements of Paul’s epistles to the Romans, Corinthians, Galatians and Ephesians, and now we will turn to his epistle to the Philippians. Once we are able to demonstrate the numerous King James Version errors in translating the many words and verses which we have selected for these presentations, and properly translate those words and verses, a very different picture of the purpose and substance of the ministry of Paul of Tarsus comes to light, and his words are seen to correspond to all of the words of the ancient prophets relating to the children of Israel.

TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 29

Here once again we continue our discussion of particular passages in Paul’s epistles where certain terms are either mistranslated or misunderstood, adversely affecting the interpretation of the Scriptures throughout the New Testament. Due to the nature and purpose of Paul’s writings there are more of these than there are in all of the other New Testament Scriptures.

45 continued) Specific NT Verse misteachings, mistranslations or corruptions in the epistles of Paul

Discussing the epistle to the Galatians, we hope to have demonstrated that Paul’s language in chapters 3 and 4 of that epistle had purposely described the narrow the scope of the Gospel as being for one particular race of people, to the descendants of only one of the sons of Abraham as opposed to the other sons which Abraham had fathered. Doing that, Paul also identified that race of people, in part, where he told the Galatians that is was they who were under the law and who were therefore redeemed in Christ. Comparing our interpretation of Paul’s epistle to the words of the prophets, the two are in complete agreement, while the mainstream interpretations set Paul in absolute opposition to the prophets. By that we should know that our interpretation is true.

TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 28

Here once again we continue our discussion of particular passages in Paul’s epistles where certain terms are mistranslated or misunderstood, and adversely affect the interpretation of the Scriptures throughout the New Testament. Due to the nature and purpose of Paul’s writings there are more of these than there are in all of the other New Testament Scriptures. And once again, while there are many more mistranslations in Paul than what we shall present here, we will only focus on those which concern nation, race and the scope and purpose of the Gospel.

45 continued) Specific NT Verse misteachings, mistranslations or corruptions in the epistles of Paul

So we covered much of Galatians chapter 3 in our last presentation, and in verses 15 through 18 we found that it was not Jews and Jesus which Paul was contrasting. That view is contrary to all the other statements of Paul as well as the promises of the prophets and the Gospel of Christ. Rather, Paul was comparing the seed of Jacob as the heirs of the promise in contradistinction to the seed of Esau, Ishmael and Abraham’s other sons. This agrees with all of Paul’s other statements concerning the seed and the promises, especially in Romans chapters 4 and 9.

TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 27

Here we shall continue to discuss particular passages in the epistles of Paul where certain terms are mistranslated or misunderstood, and adversely affect the interpretation of the Scriptures throughout the New Testament. As we have already explained, because of the nature and purpose of Paul’s epistles there are many more of these than there are in all of the other New Testament writings. Once again, while there are many more mistranslations in Paul than what we shall present here, we will only focus on those which concern nation, race and the scope and purpose of the Gospel.

45 continued) Specific NT Verse misteachings, mistranslations or corruptions in the epistles of Paul

When we discussed words which were generally mistranslated or misinterpreted throughout the Gospels or New Testament as a whole, there were a few that we did not list immediately, probably because they are not an issue until we get to the epistles of Paul or the other apostles. So in our last presentation we discussed the word saint, and here I believe it is necessary to discuss another word, which is anointed, or Christ where it refers to Yahshua, as the word χριστός is an adjective and it does not always refer to Christ even where it appears in Scripture. There is actually a 3,300-word essay explaining this at Christogenea, however I will attempt a summary here, as it is important to understanding passages in Galatians and elsewhere in Paul’s epistles.

TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 26

In our last presentation we began discussing particular passages in the epistles of Paul where certain terms are mistranslated or misunderstood, which also adversely affect the interpretation of the Scriptures throughout the New Testament. There are many more of these in Paul’s epistles than there are in all of the other New Testament writings, and certainly because of the nature and purpose of the epistles themselves. Once again, while there are many more mistranslations in Paul than what we shall present here, we will only focus on those which concern nation, race and the scope and purpose of the Gospel.

TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 25

In the last few presentations in this series we have been discussing particular passages in the New Testament where certain terms are mistranslated or misunderstood, which also adversely affect the interpretation of the Scriptures throughout the New Testament. Now we have finally reached the epistles of Paul, where more such mistranslations or poor interpretations are found than in any other books of the New Testament. Many of these had to even be purposeful, as they are quite blatant. There are actually many more mistranslations in Paul than what we will present here, where we will only focus on those which concern nation, race and the scope and purpose of the Gospel.

TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 24

In the last few presentations in this series we have been discussing particular passages in the New Testament where certain terms are mistranslated or misunderstood, which also adversely affect the interpretation of the Scriptures throughout the New Testament. While we cannot discuss every error of interpretation, we have endeavored to address the passages which would change one’s view of Scripture, and potentially one’s entire worldview, once they are translated properly and understood correctly within the context of the entire Scripture. With these interpretations which we uphold to be correct, all of the seeming conflicts and inconsistencies within Scripture vanish, God is no longer the hypocrite which the denominational churches make Him out to be, and we can know that God is true. So now, continuing with Proof 44, we are in the midst of the Gospel of Luke, as we had left off with the parable of the unrighteous steward in chapter 16.

TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 23

In our last presentation, of Proof 44 in this list of 100 proofs, we discussed particular passages in the Gospel of John where certain terms are mistranslated or misunderstood, which also adversely affect the interpretation of the Scriptures throughout the New Testament. While we did not discuss every possible error of interpretation in John, we sought to address the passages which would change one’s view of Scripture, and potentially one’s entire worldview, once they are translated properly and understood correctly within the context of the entire Scripture. With these interpretations which we uphold to be correct, all of the seeming conflicts and inconsistencies within Scripture vanish, God is no longer the hypocrite which the denominational churches make Him out to be, and we can know that God is true. So now, continuing with Proof 44, we will endeavor to do this same thing in the so-called Synoptic Gospels, which are Matthew, Mark and Luke.

44) continued: Specific NT Verse misteachings, mistranslations or corruptions in Matthew, Mark and Luke
 

While there are not a lot of mistranslations or misunderstandings in the Synoptic Gospels, there are some critical ones, and we have already spoken about some obvious misunderstandings. For example, where in Matthew 3:7 we see John the Baptist calling certain of the Pharisees and Sadducees a “generation of vipers”, the word translated as generation is γέννημα, which literally means offspring. So in essence, John is calling the parents of these men vipers, and not the men themselves. The same phrase appears where Christ used it in the same manner of His adversaries in Matthew chapters 12 and 23. The use of the phrase proves that there is an actual race of men referred to as vipers in Judaea at the time of Christ, or both He and John are mere slanderers, the parents of these men not being present to defend themselves against the accusation.

TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 22

In our last presentation, which was Proof 43 in this list of 100 proofs, we discussed particular passages in the Old Testament where certain terms are mistranslated or misunderstood, which also adversely affect the interpretation of the Scriptures throughout the entire Bible. Doing that, we did not discuss every possible error of interpretation in the Old Testament, but rather we only sought to address the passages which would change one’s view of Scripture, and potentially one’s entire worldview, once they are understood correctly within the context of the entire Scripture. With these interpretations which we uphold to be correct, all of the seeming conflicts and inconsistencies within Scripture vanish, God is no longer the hypocrite which the denominational churches make Him out to be, and we can know that God is true. So now, here beginning with Proof 44, we will endeavor to do this same thing in the New Testament.

TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 21

Having finally finished with Proof 42 and our discussion of words which are generally mistranslated or misunderstood throughout the Bible, now we turn to particular passages where certain words are mistranslated or misunderstood, which also adversely affect the interpretation of the Scriptures throughout the entire Bible.

43) Specific OT Verse misteachings, mistranslations or corruptions

Genesis 2:9

The first misteaching, of course, is not to properly recognize the allegories of Genesis chapters 2 and 3, even if they cannot be fully understood until Christ explained them in the parables and visions of the Gospel and Revelation. In Genesis chapter 2 there are two trees which are different from all the other trees. All of the actual wooden trees created by God were made to come out of the ground, and they were made to be good for food, but two other trees are mentioned apart from those trees, as we first read in that same chapter: “9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.”

Throughout Scripture trees are used as allegories for races or nations of people. But later, in the Gospel, Christ identifies the Tree of Life where He says in John chapter 15: “1 I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman. 2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit. 3 Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. 4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.” Proclaiming that He is the “true vine” also reveals the possibility that there is a spurious vine.

TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 20

This is our fifth discussion of point 42 in TruthVid’s 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White. Once again, we have already explained that this review of the meanings of certain words does not explicitly prove the race of the Israelites. But understanding the true meanings of many Biblical terms does help to prove that word meanings were obfuscated by the churches so as to distort the many other evidences that the message of Christ and His apostles and prophets is solely intended for White Europeans.

42 continued) Major word mistranslations or misunderstandings that occur repeatedly throughout the Bible.

Satan and the Devil

The word satan is a common Hebrew word which was used in the New Testament in a particular manner, and therefore in order to properly understand what it means we must examine its use and meaning in Old Testament Hebrew. In many passages, it is clear that a satan is only an opponent or adversary, and in many different contexts the word was applied to men. For example, David was called a satan or adversary to the Philistines in 1 Samuel 29:4, and Hadad the Edomite was called a satan, or adversary, to Solomon in 1 Kings 11:14. Rezon the son of Eliadah was also a satan or adversary to Israel in the days of Solomon, in 1 Kings 11:25. From the perspective of men, even an angel of Yahweh was an adversary, or satan to Balaam in Numbers 22:22. Then in the same context later in the chapter, at 22:32, the same word, satan, is a verb translated as withstand.

TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 19

This is our fourth discussion of point 42 in TruthVid’s 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White. Once again, we have already explained that this review of the meanings of certain words does not explicitly prove the race of the Israelites. But understanding the true meanings of many Biblical terms does help to prove that word meanings were obfuscated by the churches so as to distort the many other evidences that the message of Christ and His apostles and prophets is solely intended for White Europeans.

42 continued) Major word mistranslations or misunderstandings that occur repeatedly throughout the Bible.

In our last presentation of this series, we discussed the various terms for man, which are adam and enosh, and we found that adam is a racial designation, describing a single race of man, but that enosh is the general term for man in the sense of a mortal hominid. Then we examined the words for bastard and found that bastard is also a racial designation, but describes someone who is not of an authentic race. Now we shall discuss another misunderstood term which is also a racial designation similar to bastard, but from a different perspective, and that is the term arab.

TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 18

This is our third discussion of point 42 in TruthVid’s 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White. As we have already said, this review of the meanings of certain words does not explicitly prove the race of the Israelites, but it does show that word meanings were obfuscated so as to distort the many other evidences that the message of Christ and His apostles and prophets is solely intended for White Europeans.

42 continued) Major word mistranslations or misunderstandings that occur repeatedly throughout the Bible.

Adam, enosh and mamzers: Man, man and bastards.

First, we must address a false claim in Christian Identity circles that the word enosh is a precise reference to so-called men of other, non-Adamic races. That is not true. The fact is that examining the listings in Strong’s Concordance for the English word men, it is very quickly realized that men of the race of Adam were very often referred to with the word enosh. Rather, the Hebrew word enosh, Strong’s # 582, is related to and derived from the word anash, Strong’s # 605, which means frail or feeble, and therefore enosh refers to man as a mortal being.

TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 17

Here we continue our discussion of point 42 in TruthVid’s 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White. While this review of the meanings of certain words does not explicitly prove the race of the Israelites, it does show that word meanings were obfuscated so as to distort the many other evidences that the message of Christ and His apostles and prophets is solely intended for White Europeans.

42 continued) Major word mistranslations or misunderstandings that occur repeatedly throughout the Bible.

Generations or Races?

In 1 Peter chapter 1 we read where Peter addressed his intended readers and called them: “the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia”. But that word stranger is not ξένος, which commonly referred to a stranger or foreigner. Neither is it ἀλλογενὴς, which refers to someone of another race – in a narrower sense than we use the term race, but which is translated as stranger in Luke chapter 17. Rather the word in 1 Peter chapter 1 is παρεπίδημος, which describes “one who comes from a foreign country into a city or land to reside there by the side of the natives”, which is a sojourner. This translation of different words with different meanings into the same English word, stranger, is also a source for confusion.