Biblical Discussion

This was originally recorded June 5th, 2016.

Sorry, no transcripts or notes for these discussions are available. Everything said here is certainly documented somewhere else at Christogenea.

A presentation of Born Under Contract, a paper written by Clifton Emahiser

Here we are going to present an article written perhaps 12 years ago by Clifton Emahiser, which is entitled Born Under Contract. This article aims to demonstrate that the promises made to the Old Testament patriarchs by Yahweh had confined all of their legitimate descendants under a covenant, which is essentially a contract, and that they themselves would have no choice in the matter. In the ancient world, a father had property rights and the power to make such life and death commitments over his offspring, and the offspring had no say in the matter. So, for example, Abraham had an inherent right to place his son Isaac on the altar and sacrifice him to the will of his God. Now, I said legitimate descendants, because the contract was accompanied by a law which forbade illegitimate descendants from reaping its benefits.

Here the sophists and scoffers may say something like, ‘oh, that is not true, the law was not given until Mount Sinai.’ However the Scripture proves otherwise. Abraham was chosen by Yahweh, as we read in Genesis chapter 26: “5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.” So a little more must have been given to Abraham than what the Scripture describes. The proof is in the fact that Abraham had every concern over who his son Isaac, who would inherit the covenant, would marry. This is found in Genesis chapter 24: “1 And Abraham was old, and well stricken in age: and the LORD had blessed Abraham in all things. 2 And Abraham said unto his eldest servant of his house, that ruled over all that he had, Put, I pray thee, thy hand under my thigh: 3 And I will make thee swear by the LORD, the God of heaven, and the God of the earth, that thou shalt not take a wife unto my son of the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I dwell: 4 But thou shalt go unto my country, and to my kindred, and take a wife unto my son Isaac. 5 And the servant said unto him, Peradventure the woman will not be willing to follow me unto this land: must I needs bring thy son again unto the land from whence thou camest? 6 And Abraham said unto him, Beware thou that thou bring not my son thither again.” A generation later, Esau had disregard for this, and his mother made certain that it cost him his share in the inheritance of Jacob. She is recorded in Genesis chapter 27 as having exclaimed: “46 And Rebekah said to Isaac, I am weary of my life because of the daughters of Heth: if Jacob take a wife of the daughters of Heth, such as these which are of the daughters of the land, what good shall my life do me?” To this we see Isaac’s response, in Genesis chapter 28: “1 And Isaac called Jacob, and blessed him, and charged him, and said unto him, Thou shalt not take a wife of the daughters of Canaan.” So the patriarchs, and the matriarchs, were properly racists.

Christogenea Saturdays, December 26th, 2015. This is our final program for this year. Next week, or technically on January 4th, Christogenea.org turns 7 years old. It was founded the first week of January, 2009. We pray that this is only our beginning, and praise Yahweh for what we have been able to do thus far.

Tonight we are going to present the short essay Nine Covenants with Adam-Man by Clifton Emahiser. We remember that this is one of Clifton's first essays which he had distributed to his prison ministry as a brochure, probably back in 2001 or 2002. I remember proofreading this essay for him way back then, and it contains some concepts which in the narrower historical focus of the history of the children of Israel and the New Covenant, are often forgotten among Identity Christians today. We will present Clifton's paper, and hopefully edify it in some degree, by addressing some of the questions it may raise.

Methods of Interpreting Prophecy, Part 2: An Examination of Matthew Chapter 24

In our last presentation on this topic, I had said that none of the Preterists had produced an exegetical commentary proving their position. That is not entirely true. V. S. Herrell supposedly has produced such a commentary, titled “The Apocalypse of Jesus Christ”, a book said to number 300 pages. But I cannot find it anywhere. So my statement may as well stand. This is a man who, in one of his own articles titled What is White? had referred to himself as “God's anointed minister in this generation”. So God's anointed minister wrote a book on the Revelation that supposedly proves the preterist position, and it cannot be found. You would think that God's anointed minister would want to make his work available for anyone to read.

Methods of Interpreting Prophecy, Part 1: A Review of Clifton Emahiser's article Roman Catholic Origin Of Both Futurism & Preterism

We are going to begin a new endeavor, and continue it, as we have time, interspersed with the other ongoing projects we have here on Christogenea Saturdays. We will simply call this series Interpreting Prophecy. We do not know if it will be two, or three, or fifteen segments. But we will continue this until we feel we have said the things which are necessary to say.

Tonight we shall start this series by presenting Clifton Emahiser's fall, 2010 article titled Roman Catholic Origin Of Both Futurism & Preterism Clifton begins by referring to another paper he had written at the time, answering the heresies of Ron Wyatt. We shall present the text of Clifton's paper, add some of our own comments, and also add some material from early Christian writers to show, in part, their view of Biblical prophecy.

Here we will make a critical presentation of Bertrand Comparet''s sermon, Ruth was an Israelite, offering our own commentary on Comparet's original material, Clifton Emahiser's notes on the sermon, and our own research in addition to theirs, hoping to edify and substantiate Comparet's premise. This version of the sermon is available at Christogenea. It is from the book Your Heritage, which was digitized with critical notes by Clifton A. Emahiser:

It is unfortunate that many preachers, in their ignorance, teach so many false doctrines. One such false doctrine is the statement that Yahshua was not of pure Israelite blood, they say one of His ancestors was Ruth, a Moabitess. From the use of this term they believe that she was racially, not just geographically, a Moabite, in this they are greatly mistaken.

The territory of the Moabites was originally east and northeast of the Dead Sea. It extended from the Arnon river on the south to the Jabbok river on the north. Then their territory went from the Dead Sea and the Jordan river on the west, across the plains and foothills, into the mountains to the east. From the name of the people who lived there, it was called Moab. It kept that name for many centuries after all the Moabites were gone from it.

Some of the topics discussed:

The Kentucky Court Clerk: no man or bureaucrat can serve two masters.

Ezekiel 38 and 39: The Immigration Problem Revisited

Reception of the Truth is a gift from God and for it we must not despise our less fortunate brethren.

Our streams are set to cut over to re-runs at 10:30 PM EST, and we ran twenty minutes past that without even realizing it. We are sorry for the inconvenience to those who were listening!

Some of the topics discussed:

Does Acts 16 teach Personal Salvation? Not by any means!

Why did John the Baptist rebuke the Edomite Herod according to the law?

Is there a cookie-cutter method by which to introduce people to Christian Identity?

Russians and White

Brunettes and White

Who may be Jew: the de Medicis, Calvin, Putin, the questions often raised.

A short answer to Calvin's error, and that of Arminius as well.

Christogenea Saturdays, June 6th, 2015 - Esther: Fraud or Fable? Part 3

In the first part of our presentation refuting the canonical status of the Book of Esther, we showed that historically, the Esther narrative does not fit into the rule of any of the kings of Persia, from the earliest of them all the way down to the last of them, for the entire 200-year span of the Persian empire. We also presented textual evidence of the rejection of Esther by the writers of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the sect of Judaeans at Qumran. Additionally, we showed that the supposed events portrayed in Esther are impossible in light of the records of Ezra, Nehemiah, Daniel, and the minor prophets of the second temple period, which are Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi.

Then in the second part of our presentation of the arguments against the veracity of the Book of Esther, we began following Bertrand Comparet's sermon against the book. Doing this, along with Comparet we pointed out several inconsistencies in the story itself, as well as several historically ridiculous situations which the book expects us to accept. Among the inconsistencies is the fact, recorded by both the prophet Daniel and by the Greek historian Herodotus, that the Kings of Persia were forbidden to change any laws or decrees which had been made before-time. Yet in the Esther story, even though the story itself also informs us of this Persian custom, the king is seen making such changes which are impossible because of the custom. Among the historically ridiculous situations, we saw that the king had issued a lengthy proclamation that all of the Jews throughout the empire would be put to death, on a specific date eleven months from the date that the proclamation was made. Yet there was no Exodus, and no uprising. Among the inconsistencies we pointed out, the story purports that only two months later the King of Persia had apparently forgotten that he made such an important proclamation.

Esther: Fraud or Fable? Part 2

In Part 1 of Esther: Fraud or Fable? this past Saturday we hope to have established as fact that the Esther narrative does not fit into the histories of any of the kings of Persia, especially taking into consideration the circumstances of Ezra and Nehemiah and some of the internal circumstances of the Esther story, such as the chronology which the book itself provides. We had walked through each of the Kings of Persia, from Cyaxares all the way down to Darius III, the last Persian king, and illustrated the problems which materialize with identifying any one of them as the King of Esther.

We also spoke at length about the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the fact that not only is any portion of Esther entirely missing from those scrolls, but in addition, the Feast of Purim is not mentioned in any of the extensive calendrical writings found among the scrolls. Now, as we have often discussed before at Christogenea, the Dead Sea Scrolls can with certainty be dated to the time of Roman rule over Judaea and while Jerusalem was still intact, to the 130-year period between 65 BC and 65 AD. So the sect which created those scrolls obviously did not have the Esther story among their holy scriptures.

The Book of Esther, Fraud, or Fable? Part 1

“Oh no”, some would say, “now he's attacking the Bible!” Well, whose Bible is that? And what is the Bible? The books which we call the Bible were compiled into a single volume by men, and originally many of them were argued over at great length. Of the 66 books (they are not all “books”, but we will call them “books” for our purposes here) in the King James Version of the Bible, 65 certainly belong there. However the original King James Version of the Bible contained 80 books. The Geneva Bibles which were published in the 16th century and which were the Bibles of the first American protestants also contained 80 books. Someone before us must have attacked the Bible 14 times, because 14 books are already missing! Those 14 books are sometimes published separately and are called the “Apocrypha”. Reportedly, Martin Luther was the first to have published a Bible with these 14 books placed under that special designation, and the Geneva and King James Bibles followed his lead. The typical Catholic Bibles have 72 books, because they retain 6 books from the Apocrypha as well as the 66 found in the King James Version.

But other ancient scriptures exist which are not in the Bible, and were quoted by the apostles as scripture, yet they are not found in the Apocrypha. For a clear example of this, there is Jude 14, where the apostle quotes Enoch. The passage is famous, where it says “14 And Enoch, seventh from Adam, prophesied to these saying 'Behold, the Prince has come with ten thousands of His saints 15 to execute judgment against all and to convict every soul for all of their impious deeds which they committed impiously and for all of the harsh things which the impious wrongdoers have spoken against Him!'” But no such prophecy from Enoch is found in the Old Testament as we have it today. So there are books which the apostles themselves esteemed as Holy Scripture, which never made it into our Bibles at all.

The Importance of Paul of Tarsus to Identity Christians

Before commencing this program, I must make a confession, so that nobody is confused from the start. Myself and my ministry and all of its efforts are firmly grounded in the immutable fact that all of the promises of Yahweh God and of Yahshua Christ (or Jesus) which we have in our Bibles are absolutely 100% racially exclusive to the Saxon and Keltic and related peoples. There are no exceptions. All of the promises of God are made to one race of people only, who today are more loosely identified as White Europeans or Caucasians. Of course, even these labels are not specific enough, however listeners who are already Identity Christians should know what we mean when we use them. Nobody who has ever followed our work at Christogenea could fairly accuse us of being universalists in any sense of the word.

What we believe about the Bible can and should be described in two ways: first, it is Covenant Theology. We understand Covenant Theology to be the belief in God's Word as He made it: the covenants with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and to their seed are made exclusively to their genetic descendants, and nobody else. This is an honest acceptance of the Word of God as He imparted it to men. Secondly, it is Christian Identity, or more fully Christian Israel Identity. It is Christian Identity because we seek to identify through both Scripture and history, with the support of language and archaeology, exactly what people on the earth today are the beneficiaries of those Covenants: who the children of Israel are, and who they are not, according to that same Word of God. It is the truth of Covenant Theology which leads us to the need for Christian Identity. Therefore to accurately understand Christian identity, one must first realize the truth of Covenant Theology.

"8 The Lord GOD which gathereth the outcasts of Israel saith, Yet will I gather others to him, beside those that are gathered unto him.9 All ye beasts of the field, come to devour, yea, all ye beasts in the forest.10 His watchmen are blind: they are all ignorant, they are all dumb dogs, they cannot bark; sleeping, lying down, loving to slumber. 11 Yea, they are greedy dogs which can never have enough, and they are shepherds that cannot understand: they all look to their own way, every one for his gain, from his quarter. 12 Come ye, say they, I will fetch wine, and we will fill ourselves with strong drink; and to morrow shall be as this day, and much more abundant."

In this program we discussed evidence of the transition from a racist, nationalist attitude in Egypt circa 2300 BC to a diverse, multi-racial attitude circa perhaps 1700 BC.

We also discussed ancient Egyptian and Sumerian attitudes concerning life after death, the continuation of the spirit of Man, the underworld, Hades or the Netherworld, demons and other related topics, first from Egyptian myths, and then using the ancient Sumerian legend Inanna's Descent to the Nether World as the focal point for the discussion.

This program is a discussion based upon Appendix B of the Christogenea New Testament, The Devil and Satan. The program was meant to be a recapitulation of some of the basic proofs of Two-Seedline theology expressed in the Pragmatic Genesis series, as well as a discussion of some of the false claims of our detractors and some of the differences which we have with the older Two-Seedline teachers such as Wesley Swift and Bertrand Comparet, and the reasons for those differences.

Satan is not in heaven (Revelation 12).

Lucifer is not Satan, but every Lucifer is a satan (Isaiah 14). What Lucifer really means is explained fully.

The King of Tyrus was not Satan, nor was the Prince of Tyrus (Ezekiel 28). Where is the Garden of God?

The Son of Perdition is not Satan, but rather is the antichrist Jew and they are all satans (2 Thessalonians 2).

The Romans crushed Satan in Jerusalem, but he later moved to Pergamos! So how can he be in heaven? (Romans 16:20, Revelation 2)

and more...

An answer to all those who would infect Christian Identity with universalist ideas by abusing the stories of the Gibeonites, the Canaanite Woman, the Samaritan Woman and the Parable of the Good Samaritan.

Bristol, Tennessee "Pastor" grovels for a donation from one of those "spots" in our "feasts of charity".

Jude 12-13: " 12 These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots; 13 Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever."