Biblical Commentary

The Gospel of Luke, Chapter 10 – August 10th, 2012

This is the continuance of our presentation of the Gospel of Luke, which has been interrupted since we discussed chapter 9 on July 20^th. In the closing of Luke chapter 9 we saw the account of the Transfiguration on the Mount, where Christ was said to have appeared and conferred with two men. Those two men were fully esteemed by the apostles who witnessed it to have been Moses and Elijah. Christians must know, that if Yahweh our God and our Creator does not transcend the physical world, and that if He has has no efficacy to act within His creation, and if there is not more to that creation than what we commonly perceive, including our own beings, then indeed we have no hope in the world and it is inevitable that evil shall prevail – for we as a race and as a society are currently headed straight for the pits of hell. In truth, there is more to the Creation than what we perceive, and there is more to our being than this short life of flesh. In the end, the Creator God shall not be mocked by the bastardization of His creation. Those of our Adamic race who love Him shall indeed overcome the world.

The Gospel of Luke, Chapter 9 – July 20th, 2012

1 Then calling together the twelve He gave to them power and authority over all demons and to cure diseases, 2 and sent them to proclaim the Kingdom of Yahweh and to heal those with illnesses.

There are two words in the New Testament which are nearly always translated as devil in the King James Version. They are διάβολος (Strong's # 1228) and δαίμων (1142) or its diminutive form δαιμόνιον (1140). A διάβολος is literally an accuser, and by implication a false accuser. It is the root of our English word diabolical. The word is translated as slanderer in 1 Timothy 3:11, but is it elsewhere devil. A δαίμων or δαιμόνιον is the Greek word from which we get the English demon. The diminutive form δαιμόνιον was also used by secular Greek writers, and I will conjecture that one’s interpretation of it is dependent upon one’s perspective – whether one is Christian or pagan - to denote “the divine Power, deity, divinity...” but also “a spirit, a being inferior to God...”, both according to Joseph Thayer's Greek-English lexicon and also in secular Greek writers cited by Liddell & Scott is it defined as “...an inferior divine being, a demon”. A δαίμων (found in the N.T. only at Matt. 8:31) is according to Thayer “a god, goddess; an inferior deity...” in the common Greek language. In the New Testament, these words describe evil spirits.

Satan is NOT in Heaven! Last week I had a conversation with Don Spears. Don is a dear friend and a good brother, and I really and honestly did not want to try to beat up on him in a debate, especially since I would have had to out-yell him in his own home just to get a word in, something which I did not desire to do. So I basically left it to him to convince me that Satan was in heaven, which he believes, and in the end I am not convinced. Don's highly charged emotional arguments are not enough to persuade me, especially when all of his Scriptural references offer only inferences and not one clear indisputable witness to prove his point. Don insists that Satan is in heaven, and he says that if I do not understand that, then, as he insists, I do not understand the spiritual things of God. Yet in the passage he referred to, Paul was talking about the things of God, and not about the things of Satan which are opposition to God.

The Gospel of Luke, Chapter 7 – July 6th, 2012

Last week we talked about the purpose of the Sabbath. This is something that practically every Biblical commentator misses or skims over in the words of the prophets, and I have been guilty of doing so myself. The words of Yahweh our God in Hosea concern the ancient Israelites, who are about to be deported into captivity by the Assyrians. In Hosea 2:11, Yahweh said through the prophet: “I will also cause all her mirth to cease, her feast days, her new moons, and her sabbaths, and all her solemn feasts.” Likewise, the Septuagint at Hosea 2:11 says “And I will take away all her gladness, her feasts, and her festivals at the new moon, and her sabbaths, and all her solemn assemblies.” So we see that these things as they were known to the Israelites of the ancient kingdom are removed. Now, as it was stated here last week, it should be clear as to why Paul said in Colossians chapter 2: “16 Therefore no one must judge you in food and in drink, or in respect of feast or new month or of the Sabbaths, 17 which are a shadow of future things. Whereas the body is of the Anointed”. 

The Gospel of Luke, Chapter 6 – June 29th, 2012

Last week discussing Luke chapter 5 we saw at the end of that chapter that Christ pointed out the resistance of people to change from their tired old worn-out doctrines. He did so by illustrating the love of people for the old wine – representing the doctrines which they are accustomed to, over an acceptance of the new wine which is the revelation of truth in Him. He said at Luke 5:39 “And no one drinking the old desires the new, for ‘the old’, one says, ‘is good’.” We have seen for 2,000 years now the willingness of people to cling to the same old Pharisaical ideas, found also in the Roman Catholic church and wherever there is a professional priesthood, rather than read their Bibles and see the clear message of the gospel. Christ said “If you love Me, keep My commandments”. He vociferated those commandments. We must love God, our parents, and our brethren, or racial kindred. That is all that we must do. The other commandments repeated in the New Testament mostly tell us what we must not do, things such as steal, murder, and commit adultery. Everything else that the professional priesthood claims that we must do is a doctrine of man, and not a New Covenant commandment of our God. That is especially true of the sacramental rituals. Yet the New Testament scriptures also tell us that we do not need the priesthood itself: for we are all priests unto Yahweh our God, when we serve our brethren and our White Adamic nations. When we submit ourselves to professional priests, to do their desires, they become our masters and we are disconnected from our God, because no man can serve two masters.

The Gospel of Luke, Chapter 5 – June 22nd, 2012

Last week discussing Luke chapter 4, it was made evident in more than one way that the “devil” of the temptation of Christ was most certainly an actual person. While many may believe that Satan is still in heaven, as the Romish Catholics would like for us to believe, Christ said “I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven”, and He was speaking in the past tense. It is clear that He intended the past tense, since He then proceeded to liken certain people in first century Palestine as serpents and scorpions, thereby relating them to Satan just as the vision in Revelation chapter 12 describes Satan. In that chapter, the Revelation says that Satan, “that old Serpent” who is also the devil – which is representative of all those who took part in that original rebellion against God – was cast out of heaven, that his place in heaven was found no longer, and that he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. Since Satan is “that old serpent”, this has already happened long ago, before the events of Genesis chapter 3, and no creative interpretation of any other Scripture may turn these words of Christ into a lie. Satan walks amongst us, in the form of his seed - as Genesis 3:15 attests - and he has done so ever since he was cast out and our Adamic race was created. The devil is not in heaven, but in his dominance of our world it is evident that he does try to create his own perverted version of heaven.

The Gospel of Luke, Chapter 4 – Christogenea on Talkshoe, June 15th, 2012

Last week I gave here an opinion on the genealogies of the Christ. I expressed the belief that the genealogy recorded in Matthew was the descent according to the succession of the throne of David, while the genealogy recorded in Luke was the natural genetic succession – that there were at least two redemptive marriages (in addition to the story of Ruth and Boaz) which are not evident in the incomplete records which we have in our Scriptures. Until firm Scriptural evidence is produced which may convince me otherwise, I shall stand by that opinion.

Before beginning with Luke chapter 4 this evening, I want to illustrate something which further highlights and substantiates my opinions not only concerning the genealogies, but also concerning the life of Mary the mother of Christ, and the children which she had after the birth of Yahshua her first-born (Luke 2:7). I have asserted that James, Joses and Jude, called “the brethren of the Lord” in several places in Scripture, were the children of Mary by a later husband, a man other than Joseph. I have caught some criticism for this assertion – but I still insist that it is correct. James the brother of Christ is called the “son of Alphaios” in three gospels, Matthew (10:3), Mark (2:14, 3:18) and Luke (6:15).

The Gospel of Luke, Chapter 3 – Christogenea on Talkshoe, June 8th, 2012

Last week we demonstrated that the οἰκουμένη, the inhabited world, was the living space of the civilized White races in the eyes of the Greeks and Romans. The κόσμος was the order or arrangement, and therefore the society of the οἰκουμένη – which in the time of Christ never included the alien races. Therefore understanding that the alien races were never meant to be a part of the Biblical context, there is no impetus, and certainly no Biblical commission, to extend the grace of Yahweh our God to alien races today. It is actually detrimental, as recent history certainly proves, to the health and security of our κόσμος to do so. It is even suicidal of our race to insist upon including these aliens.

It was argued here last week, that Christ was most likely born in the late fall or early autumn of 3 BC. That argument is for the most part based upon Luke's opening statement in this chapter, that Yahshua's ministry began around His thirtieth birthday, which was in the fifteenth year of Tiberius. Many modern commentator's actually go so far as accusing Luke of error here, as if they themselves can actually know better from the incomplete records which we can muster today. A 3 BC registration, in time for the celebration of Rome's 750^th year, and Augustus' 25^th as emperor, coincides with this fifteenth year of Tiberius and the fact that Christ is now thirty years of age, the age when a Hebrew man may begin serving his people publicly. We should insist that Luke is true, and that the modern commentators are in error.

The Gospel of Luke, Chapter 2 – Christogenea on Talkshoe, June 1st, 2012

Over the last two weeks, we elucidated the exclusivity of Luke's gospel, and also showed that Luke's gospel was indeed the gospel of Paul as well. This must be remembered wherever Paul's epistles are considered. We also saw that claims of the scoffers, those who say that a virgin birth occurred in many ancient religions long before the time of the Hebrew promise of such a thing , and furthermore that Christianity had borrowed the idea, those claims are fully discredited by any serious and honest scholarship. Among other things, one more important aspect of this gospel that was attested here last week, is how the accounts in Luke of the promises for the people of Israel which were being fulfilled in Christ actually fit in perfectly with the teachings of Paul in his epistles, which were all written to dispersed Israelites. This will be the primary subject of a talk I shall give this Sunday at the Fellowship of God's Covenant People here in Kentucky.

The Gospel of Luke, Chapter 1 Part 2 – Christogenea on Talkshoe, May 25^th, 2012

Last week we ended with the account of the virgin conception of Christ, in Luke chapter 1 verses 30 through 38, and that is where we shall commence this week. We must bear in mind, that if we are persuaded that God made man, then we should be just as persuaded that it is half the task for Mary to have conceived Christ without a man. While previously discussing these things, we saw that the promise of a virgin birth and of a Messiah resulting from that birth existed from at least 732 BC, when the prophet Isaiah had written his prophecies concerning them, which are found primarily in Isaiah chapters 7 and 9. We then examined some of the attacks on Christianity made by those jews who seek to belittle it, who lie about the origins of the Bible, and we saw their lies discredited. Ancient mythology was developed out of the meshing of fact and fancy, the need to pass down a heritage of knowledge and experience intertwined with the human desire for entertainment. Therefore we find that many of the myths of the related surrounding White nations had themes and stories similar to those found in the Hebrew Bible. This alone betrays the common original heritage of the White nations. The jew craftily twists all of this out of context, in order to discredit it all. In the end, it is only the jew who should be discredited. This week we shall begin with the same passage, starting at Luke 1:30, which we left off with last week and we shall discuss certain elements of it from a different perspective.

The Gospel of Luke, Chapter 1 – Christogenea on Talkshoe, May 18^th, 2012

In order to discuss Luke, and his relationship to Paul, and his importance in preserving the Gospel, it may be better to quote Irenaeus in order to show the attitudes of the most early Christian writers, whose attitudes concerning Luke, Irenaeus represents rather well. Irenaeus was the bishop of Lugdunum, in Gaul, which is present-day Lyons, France. He died circa 202 AD, and his most famous work, Against Heresies, is generally esteemed to have been written about 180 AD, nearly 150 years after the Crucifixion and 85 years after the apostle John wrote down the vision of the Revelation. His name means peaceful in Greek. Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp, who in turn was said to be a disciple of the apostle John himself. Polycarp, like John, lived a very long life, from circa 65 to 155 AD.

Epistle of Jude - 05-11-2012

This name is actually Ioudas, the Greek form of Judah as is evident in the genealogies given in Matthew and Luke. Aside from the patriarch, there were two men in the New Testament associated with Christ who had this name Ioudas, and others who also bore it were mentioned. Attempting to distinguish these men is sometimes difficult, and therefore this epistle was entitled Jude in the A.V., although where he is mentioned in Scripture he is Judas, and the spelling is the same as that given also for that infamous apostle, Judas Iscariot.

Eusebius doubted the canonicity of Jude. Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History at 6:14 discusses the work of the earlier Clement of Alexandria, and Eusebius states of Clement that “In the work called Hypotyposes, to sum up the matter briefly, he gave us abridged accounts of all the canonical Scriptures, not even omitting those that are disputed, I mean, the Book of Jude, and the other general epistles.” Unfortunately, so far as I have seen, Eusebius does not elaborate to tell us why these epistles were disputed. Fragments of the work of Clement of Alexandria found in the writings of Cassiodorus show that he esteemed this Epistle of Jude to be canonical on other occasions as well as those cited by Eusebius, and he even quoted it at length along with some commentary....

The Prophecy of Joel, Part 2

We shall begin with Revelation 20:7-10, from the King James Version: “7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, 8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. 9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them. 10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.”

For a thousand years in Christian Europe did the true people of God prevail over the Jew, who collectively is Satan, or the Adversary. The Jew had plotted against Christianity and the people of Europe from the time of Christ (and for thousands of years before that, if Old Testament history were truly understood). Upon the emancipation of the Jew in the early days of Napoleon, instigated by the French Revolution, the Jew became free and equal citizens of Christians in Europe. From that time, Satan has used the false ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity, in one form or another, to gather all of the world's hominid beasts into Christians lands, where they are hostile both to Christianity and to the White race which are the true people of God. That is where we are today, at Revelation 20:9. Now to read from Joel chapter 2, which is a promise of deliverance:

The Prophecy of Joel, Part 1

This program, because of technical difficulties at Talkshoe, was held on the Christogenea Chat Page and Christogenea Live! Streaming Radio, which was a necessary first at Christogenea.

The following is from the Thomas Nelson Publisher's King James Study Bible, copyright 1983 by Thomas Nelson Inc. While I would usually not read anything like this from mainstream commentaries, they do get some things right, and I read this here for it's testimony of the nature of Joel's prophecy, which is actually pretty fair and decent considering it was originally a product of Liberty University.

“Joel is a highly emotional prophecy, rich in imagery and vivid descriptions. In it two unique events, not to be forgotten, are compared. These two events are to be committ­ed to the descendants of the people. [Oddly, they deny this of the New Covenant today!]

“Historical Setting. Joel was one of the earliest prophets of Judah. The specific place from which Joel wrote is not known. Since he was a resident of Judah and Jerusalem, he likely wrote his prophecy from there. His frequent calls to blow a trumpet in Zion, to consecrate a fast, to proclaim a solemn assembly, and to gather the people together to come before the Lord lend credence to the view that the prophecy was issued [verbally] from the temple court.

2 Peter Chapter 3 - 04-06-2012

Peter wrote his first epistle to the Israelites of the ancient Assyrian and earlier dispersions, who were dwelling in western Anatolia, mostly as Greeks, Romans, Scythians and Galatians. People of other Adamic, but non-Israelite, origins also lived in western Anatolia at this time, such as Ionian Greeks and Lydians. The context of his first epistle also demonstrates that these people were already established in Christ, and that Peter was only edifying that establishment. Presenting Peter's first epistle here several weeks ago, certain statements from that first letter were illustrated in order to demonstrate just who his intended audience was. Among them were 1 Peter 2:10, 2:25 and 4:3 which all prove that Peter was not writing to Judaeans, but to the dispersion of Israel from the Assyrian deportations and beforetime, because the things which Peter cites could only refer to them, and could never refer to the Judaeans of the remnant 70-weeks' Kingdom, nor could they ever refer to people who were not descended from the ancient Israelites in the first place.

2 Peter Chapter 2 - 03-30-2012

In the first chapter, the thrust of Peter's message was in support of the truth of the Gospel accounts. Here in the second chapter, he addresses the nature of the adversaries of that Gospel.

II 1 Now there were also false prophets among the people, as even among you there shall be false teachers who shall introduce destructive systems of philosophy, even denying the Master who has bought them, bringing upon themselves quick destruction, 2 and many shall follow in their licentiousness, because of whom the way of truth shall be blasphemed, 3 and with greediness they shall make profit from you with fictitious words, for whom from of old their judgment is not idle and their destruction does not sleep!

This statement of Peter's may seem on the surface to be oriented towards a universalist type of thinking, where it can be imagined that Peter is saying that Christ purchased the false prophets with His blood, and therefore the false prophets also may be redeemed. But that is not the case which Peter is making. Rather Peter states, “from of old their judgment is not idle”, as the destruction of the ungodly had been ordained long beforetime. Peter is discussing the body of the people as a whole, who have always had false prophets among them. The false prophets and wolves in sheep’s' clothing are apparently Israel, they claim to be Israel, but they are not truly Israel and therefore their judgement is ordained from of old. Denying the Master, they must be tares, and not wheat. Peter is talking in terms of what was apparent in his day, and not in terms of genetics. The books of genealogy were long lost.

2 Peter Chapters 1 through 3 - 03-23-2012

Here are the comments of Eusebius on 2 Peter, from his Ecclesiastical History, Book 3: Chapter III. The Epistles of the Apostles.

“1 One epistle of Peter, that called the first, is acknowledged as genuine. And this the ancient elders used freely in their own writings as an undisputed work. But we have learned that his extant second Epistle does not belong to the canon; yet, as it has appeared profitable to many, it has been used with the other Scriptures. 2 The so-called Acts of Peter, however, and the Gospel which bears his name, and the Preaching and the Apocalypse, as they are called, we know have not been universally accepted, because no ecclesiastical writer, ancient or modern, has made use of testimonies drawn from them. 3 But in the course of my history I shall be careful to show, in addition to the official succession, what ecclesiastical writers have from time to time made use of any of the disputed works, and what they have said in regard to the canonical and accepted writings, as well as in regard to those which are not of this class.” From a footnote (20): “Although disputed by many, as already remarked, and consequently not looked upon as certainly canonical until the end of the fourth century, the epistle was yet used, as Eusebius says, quite widely from the time of Origen on, e.g. by Origen, Firmilian, Cyprian, Hippolytus, Methodius, etc. The same is true, however, of other writings, which the Church afterward placed among the Apocrypha.”

1 Peter Chapter 3 - Christogenea on Talkshoe 03-16-2012

Last week we saw that in 1 Peter chapter 2 the apostle admonishes his readers: “13 You must be obedient to every authority created by mankind on account of the Prince, whether to kings as if being superior, 14 or to governors as if being sent by Him for the punishment of evil-doers but for the praise of those doing good. 15 Because thusly is the will of Yahweh: doing good to muzzle the ignorance of foolish men, 16 as free men yet not as if having freedom for a cover for evil, but as servants of Yahweh.” These words are very much like those of Paul of Tarsus in his letter to the Romans, in chapter 13.

1 Peter Chapter 2 - 03-09-2012

Discussing the first chapter of 1 Peter we saw that Peter was indeed addressing the uncircumcision, who were Israelites of the Old Kingdom that were dispersed in ancient times, which Peter by this time had fully understood, even though he had not understood it at the time of the events which were described in Acts chapter 10, which actually occurred some years before the writing of this epistle. We also saw how Peter directly connected the Old Testament and the New where he wrote of things such as the “foreknowledge of Father Yahweh in a sanctification of the Spirit in obedience and a sprinkling of the blood of Yahshua Christ”, which we see in the opening lines of this epistle.

1 Peter Chapter 1 - 03-2-2012

Each of the epistles of Peter are disputed by various critics. The first is rejected because its language is considered to be the highly polished work of an educated man. The second is oft rejected because it was disputed at an early time, it is not often quoted in early Christian writings, and its language is often quite rough. The differences are easily accounted if it is understood that 1 Peter, which is more or less a formal treatise, was probably related by Peter and penned by Silvanos, which is evident in 1 Peter 5:12 where it says “By Silvanos the faithful brother, as I reckon, I have written to you”, and 2 Peter was more of an informal letter that Peter may have written himself since no one else is mentioned. Both epistles are written to the same audience. While there are only what may or may not be allusions to 2 Peter in Clement and in Justin, the epistle is quoted by Hippolytus. It was later disputed by the Catholics (I use that word here with a capital C, in its more modern sense), such as Eusebius who called it one of the “disputed books”, along with Jude. While 2 Peter is little attested, that would not be alarming for a letter that is more-or-less an informal follow-up to the first longer and more formal treatise. I will offer more in its defense when presenting it later this month. As for 1 Peter, it is often quoted and always thought to have authentically belonged to Peter by significant early Christian writers. For instance, Irenaeus quotes 1 Peter 2:16 in Book 4, Chapter 16 of his Against Heresies, and 1 Peter 1:8 in Book 4, Chapter 9 and in Book 5, Chapter 7. Irenaeus also often calls Mark the “interpreter of Peter”, meaning that Mark wrote Peter's gospel. Likewise, Clement and Tertullian also quote from this first epistle of Peter on various occasions, as do other early Christian writers.