Biblical Discussion

Clifton Emahiser and William Finck, this program is based on Clifton's article, The Great Two Seedline Controversy War In Identity

The original Talkshoe audio recording of this program was of a very poor quality. This recording has now been replaced with one we made ourselves, except for the first 6 minutes and 23 seconds, which are from the original because our recording was started late. After the 6:23 mark, the audio quality is fine. If you are one of the first 59 people who downloaded this podcast, we apologize for the inconvenience and encourage you to download it again.

Thank you, and praise Yahweh!
William Finck

This presentation is based on William Finck's 2007 essay The Problem With Genesis 6:1-4.

Clifton Emahiser and William Finck discuss one of Clifton's latest essays: The Battle for the Priesthood

Christogenea Saturdays - 2012-03-03 - Translating John 1:11-13

If indeed we care about our culture, our race, or our heritage in the first place, we may read the Bible, and other works of our historical literature. From them we formulate a weltanschauung, a world-view, based upon what we believe that those books are telling us. Many of us, too lazy to read and research for ourselves, base our world-views upon the opinions of others, and what they think those books might be saying. It is from this formulated world-view that we judge what is right, and what is wrong. Jacob was blessed, because he followed after the world-view of his parents and his God. Esau was cursed, because he had no care for his heritage and based his actions upon his own judgements. Each of us makes a choice, to be like Jacob, or to be like Esau.

This presentation is based on two essays available here: The Seed of Inheritance.

This presentation is based on the essay Heirs of the Covenant, along with a discussion of Isaiah 45:25 and Romans 11:26: Which part of "ALL" don't the pharisees understand?

This presentation is based on William Finck's 2007 essay, first published by Clifton Emahiser in December, 2007. It has more recently been replaced with an update. See Shemitic Idioms and Genesis Chapter Three, Revisited

Scriptures used for the program:

Ezra 9:10-12 KJV: “10 And now, O our God, what shall we say after this? for we have forsaken thy commandments, 11 Which thou hast commanded by thy servants the prophets, saying, The land, unto which ye go to possess it, is an unclean land with the filthiness of the people of the lands, with their abominations, which have filled it from one end to another with their uncleanness. 12 Now therefore give not your daughters unto their sons, neither take their daughters unto your sons, nor seek their peace or their wealth for ever: that ye may be strong, and eat the good of the land, and leave it for an inheritance to your children for ever.”

James 4:4: “Adulterers! Do you not know that the love of Society is hatred for Yahweh? He therefore who would desire to be a friend of Society establishes himself as an enemy of Yahweh!”

Mark 12:29, from the KJV: “And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord.” 

Amos 3:2: “You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.” 

This presentation is based on William Finck's 2007 essay, Misconceptions Concerning Paul and the Church

Presented in this podcast are William Finck's Broken Cisterns essays, Part 1 and Part 2

This presentation is based on the essay Baptism - In What?

See our essay Sin and the First Epistle of John for the original paper on this topic.

With Clifton Emahiser - See Clifton's series on the topic at http://emahiser.christogenea.org. There were no real notes for this segment, however citations were taken from 2 Peter chapter 2, Jude, and the paper found here titled The Problem With Genesis 6:1-4

Here is one citation referenced for this program: 

Dialogue of Justin, Philosopher and Martyr, with Trypho

Chapter IV.—The Soul of Itself Cannot See God.

“‘Is there then, ’says he, ‘such and so great power in our mind? Or can a man not perceive by sense sooner? Will the mind of man see God at any time, if it is uninstructed by the Holy Spirit? ’

“‘Plato indeed says, ’replied I, ‘that the mind’s eye is of such a nature, and has been given for this end, that we may see that very Being when the mind is pure itself, who is the cause of all discerned by the mind, having no colour, no form, no greatness—nothing, indeed, which the bodily eye looks upon; but It is something of this sort, he goes on to say, that is beyond all essence, unutterable and inexplicable, but alone honourable and good, coming suddenly into souls well-dispositioned, on account of their affinity to and desire of seeing Him.’

“‘What affinity, then, ’replied he, ‘is there between us and God? Is the soul also divine and immortal, and a part of that very regal mind? And even as that sees God, so also is it attainable by us to conceive of the Deity in our mind, and thence to become happy? ’

“‘Assuredly, ’I said.

“‘And do all the souls of all living beings comprehend Him? ’he asked; ‘or are the souls of men of one kind and the souls of horses and of asses of another kind? ’

See Clifton's paper The "Little Horn" of Daniel 7:8.

The first two parts of this series of essays exhibited many plain errors in the translation of the King James Version of the Bible, which clearly contradict the often-heard claims that the famous Authorized Version, as it is also called, is indeed the inspired Word of God in English. Unless one wants to purport that the God of the Bible is the author of error, then the King James Version cannot be deemed infallible. It has even been demonstrated, by the very words of the Westminster Confession formulated in the year 1643, that those very men who first elected the King James Version as their official version of the Bible fully understood and professed that the original languages must be appealed to whenever there is a question of doctrine. A sufficient number of these questions have already been raised here from the King James translations of the letters of Paul and certain statements in the writings of John and in the other epistles. While it has been demonstrated that there are many plain errors in translation in the King James Version, if there is one only, then can we imagine the book to be infallible? Of course we cannot, and we must examine the scripture from sources as original as possible – for it is our Christian duty.

Written at Westminster Abbey by the scholars of the Anglican Church at the behest of the English Parliament in 1643, The Westminster Confession of Faith was also accepted and adopted by many other denominations both in England and abroad. As we see in Chapter 1, Section 8 of the Confession, the churchmen at that time - just over thirty years after the institution of the King James Bible by the Anglicans - did not even consider the A.V. by itself to be the inspired word of God, but admit instead the authority of the original languages. The veracity of this statement as it appears in the Confession has been verified from several sources. From Chapter 1, Section 8, of The Westminster Confession of Faith:

The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which at the time of the writing of it was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical; so as in all controversies of religion the Church is finally to appeal unto them. But because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God who have right unto, and interest in, the Scriptures, and are commanded, in the fear of God, to read and search them, therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come, that the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship him in an acceptable manner, and, through patience and comfort of the Scriptures, may have hope.

Examining the claim made by many modern sects, that the Authorized King James Version of the Bible (the A.V.) is in itself the “inspired word of God”, we must ourselves ask this: Is God the author of error? Did Yahweh reveal His Word directly to man in the English language in the year 1611? If it can be shown that the King James Version of the New Testament contains at least some errors, then it should be reasoned that this version – no matter how venerated – was also translated by fallible men. Certainly the language of the New Testament – Koine Greek – is still quite well known to us, there having been a tremendous body of written literature which used it, in addition to what we see in the New Testament. We have much more classical Greek literature available to us than even classical Latin. Here we shall see just how well it was known by the translators of this venerated edition of those writings which we commonly call the Bible. The first part of this examination shall commence with a walk through some of the translations found in the epistles of the apostle Paul.  

Program Notes: Adultery and Fornication

Many people, myself included, assert that the word adultery in the Old Testament means race-mixing. And while I would still assert that this is true, it is not to be told from the definitions of the word as they are given in Strong's Concordance or in Gesenuis' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon. For that reason, and for the way in which the word is used in some Biblical contexts, it is easy for a scoffer or a doubter to refute the assertion that the word is used to describe race-mixing. So here we shall do a study of this word, and some other words which are necessary to gain an understanding of the difference between adultery and fornication.  

Program Notes – William Finck's July 24th Presentation for the European Fellowship Conference (See the audio & file links at the bottom of the page):

What is the Bible?

Most Christians tend to have a Bible version which they love above all others, and which to them, as they are often taught to believe, represents the inerrant Word of God. But is that a healthy Christian attitude, inasmuch as Christians are urged by scripture in nearly any translation, to prove and to scrutinize all things? We have been raised and taught to love our King James Version, or Luther's version, and much esteem is held for these books among the English or German peoples. These versions contributed so much to Western culture that they even helped build and unify our very languages! But are they really scripture? Should they be blindly accepted as inerrant? The King James version has thousands of known mistranslations. It can clearly be demonstrated that nouns were translated into verbs, verbs into nouns, and even that the grammatical object and subject were reversed in many sentences. Could these errors possibly be by the inspiration of Yahweh? Or rather, do Christians not have an obligation to examine all of these things? Here we will discuss the possible avenues of investigation, since most Christians seem to be ignorant of the sources of their dearest treasure: which is their Bible.