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 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.

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

Epistle to the Romans

Romans 2:9-10: “9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; 10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile.”

First, that term Jew should be Judaean, as it should be throughout all of the New Testament, and Judaea was a Roman province consisting of various races of people, but in Paul’s writing we should interpret it to refer to Israelite Judaeans, as later in Romans chapter 9 he explains that the covenants and promises are only for Israel, as opposed to the Edomites in Judaea.

But here we want to focus on the phrases “and also of the Gentile” and “and also to the Gentile” in these verses. In this passage, and also in Romans 3:9, 1 Corinthians 10:32 and 12:13, and twice in John 7:35, the King James Version translated Ἕλλην (1672), which is the Greek word for Greek, as gentile instead of Greek. This is quite dishonest, since Paul consistently used the Greek word ἔθνος to refer to the nations, and the King James Version frequently translated ἔθνος as gentile – or sometimes heathen or nation – everywhere else it appears. But Ἕλλην is a specific word meaning Greek, and nothing else. Therefore here in this passage, the scope of Paul’s statements was Judaeans and Greeks, and nobody else.

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.

Who is Your Savior? A Review of a Sermon by Bertrand Comparet

Perhaps six or eight weeks ago, we learned of a group which claimed to be Christian Identity, but which has been led off into believing a Roman Catholic heresy which is called “trinity”, which is of course a word, and a concept, that is not found in Scripture. Some members of this group are, or were, also participants in Christogenea forums. So at first we addressed this by presenting a paper from Clifton Emahiser titled The Day The Word Became Flesh, and now we shall address it further by presenting a Bertrand Comparet sermon titled Who is Your Savior? Doing this, our main point is to show that traditional Identity Christians such as Comparet understood that the “trinity” heresy is incompatible with Biblical Christianity.

For many simple reasons, the Roman Catholic trinity heresy, and we will call it Roman Catholic because that is where it began, with the development of the Roman Catholic Church, is absolutely incompatible with what we call Covenant Theology, and therefore it is incompatible with our view of Christian Identity, as Identity is based on Covenant Theology. It is also idolatry, as it forms the One True God into three different persons, perverting the Biblical perception of elements of His Being into the image of man. The worst aspect of this is the Catholic claim that the Holy Spirit, which is the Spirit of God, somehow becomes a person separate from God the Father and His Christ, simply because of “love”. From here, the possibilities for continued sophistry and idolatry are endless.

But a critical foundation for understanding both Covenant Theology and the true nature of Yahshua Christ is an understanding of the relationship between Yahweh God and the children of Israel. When Yahweh took the children of Israel to Himself as a peculiar people, He was expressing His purpose to keep the promises to Abraham, and at the same time the collective people of Israel, the nation, was considered His bride. Thus we read in Isaiah chapter 54: “5 For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called.” While there are many other witnesses to this concept in the Old Testament, this one should suffice here.

Being the Creator of Israel, Yahweh was also the Father, so from that perspective we read in Isaiah chapter 63 where, in a prophetic manner, the children of Israel are portrayed as saying: “16 Doubtless thou art our father, though Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel acknowledge us not: thou, O LORD, art our father, our redeemer; thy name is from everlasting.” Of course, this portrayal was made of a time future to Isaiah’s own, and it depicts the circumstances of the children of Israel in captivity, put off from God for their sins, which is the very reason they needed to be redeemed.