The World of Hate vs. Love, John 15:19

The World of Hate vs. Love, John 15:19

After bringing our Commentary on the Gospel of John to its completion, I thought perhaps it is appropriate to take a moment to hear from Clifton Emahiser. I am considering a commentary on the Wisdom of Solomon, alternating with my planned commentary on the epistles of John, and do not yet know which book I want to begin with first. Since beginning my New Testament commentaries with Matthew in 2011, I have been alternating between Old Testament and New, so I will probably continue after that pattern.

Here I am going to present and comment on a paper by Clifton Emahiser, titled Who’s Who in the World of “Hate” versus “Love”, for which Clifton used as its basis the words of Christ in John 15:19. According to Clifton’s records, this essay was written in April of 2012. While it may not be entirely possible for me to do, especially as Clifton himself had made the original presentation, I am going to at least try to present this in a way which makes it palatable for denominational Christians.

One hurdle we have in bringing people to understand our Christian Identity profession is where Judeo-Christians, or perhaps they would be better called denominational Christians, believe that God is love, as the apostle John had taught in 1 John chapter 4, but then they somehow misconstrue that teaching to believe that God is only love. The result is that these people then make Love their god, rather than love the God of the Bible. It is a form of idolatry by which they may as well be worshipping Venus, the pagan goddess of love, rather than Christ.

However confusing lasciviousness for “love”, many of these same people, in their private lives often end up sacrificing themselves to Cupid. So we may see how Christian love is often confused with what the world says is “love”, and that in turn becomes perverted into an acceptance, if not an engagement, in sodomy and fornication. These things, which the world calls “love”, God actually hates, and Jesus hates them too. As Christ had told His disciples, in John chapter 14, “If ye love me, keep my commandments.” But when you attempt to tell a denominational Christian that God also hates those who do these things, who transgress the law, they are difficult to convince because they have been interminably inculcated with the notion that “God is love”.

The inculcation is so strong, that when thinking that God is love, they generally do not consider that God is also many other things, among them being Creator, Father, Lawgiver, Judge and King. To be a lawgiver and a judge, God is also a Critic and a Punisher. Here I use the word critic in the sense of its original meaning, which is from the Greek word κριτικός, an adjective form of the noun κριτής which is a judge. So in order to be a judge, there must be things which God hates, and for doing those things He punishes men.

In Roman mythology, Cupid was born of Venus and Mars, the pagan god of war, so in essence even the ancient pagans knew that you cannot have love without hate. We would not commend idolatry, but the ancient pagans certainly understood the world better than most of today’s denominational Christians.

We read in Isaiah chapter 13 in the Word of Yahweh God just one of the many consistent promises of what He will do with sinners: “9 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it. 10 For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine. 11 And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible.”

Denominational Christians often reply that the Old Testament God is mean-spirited, and even call Him hateful, but that Jesus has mercy and forgiveness. They fail to understand that the mercy and forgiveness which is in Jesus was promised only to a certain people by that same Old Testament God, on the condition that they repent of their sins. Repenting from sin requires a cessation of the sinful activity, however many denominational Christians do not seem to understand that. Then again, they are also inculcated with misconceptions of the scope of the mercy and forgiveness of Christ.

It is clear even in the New Testament that Jesus will not have mercy or forgiveness on all people. The same judgment which is described in Isaiah is also described in the Revelation, in chapter 19, where it begins with the description of Christ at His promised return: “11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. 12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. 13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. 14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. 15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. 16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.” The Almighty God is that same Old Testament God who had promised to destroy the wicked.

The Word of God which is Christ is found in the words of that Old Testament God, and Christ came to uphold His commandments, as He Himself had said that “Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” He was not speaking merely of what is finished at the Cross, but of the passing of heaven and earth, of the final day of the judgment and wrath of God, for example, as it was described by Peter in his first epistle, which was written over 30 years after the Cross: “10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.”

It is true that God is love, but God also hates, and all Christians should enquire into the Word of God to see what it is that He loves, and what it is that He hates, lest in that day they may be found on the wrong side, regardless of what church they go to or what they claim to believe. As we read in Matthew chapter 7, in the words of Christ Himself: “21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” So Christ clearly said that those who do the will of the Father, that mean-spirited hateful Old Testament God, shall enter the Kingdom of Heaven. It behooves Christians to study in order to find just what is that will.

The apostle Jude, the brother of Christ, wrote in his epistle in reference to the sinners of his own time: “14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, 15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. 16 These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men's persons in admiration because of advantage. 17 But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; 18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts. 19 These be they who separate [ἀποδιορίζω, or make divisions for] themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.”

The same Jesus in reference to whom Jude had written those words had Himself told the world that the God of the Old Testament was His Father, and He said “7 If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you. 8 Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples. 9 As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love. 10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.” These words are from the same passage in John chapter 15 from which Clifton found the basis for this paper:

Who’s Who in the World of “HATE” vs. “LOVE”, John 15:19

by Clifton Emahiser

It is glaringly clear that from time immemorial the world and Christianity have had two opposing criterion (Greek kriterion, means of judging) to define the scope of “love” and “hate”.

Here Clifton is not speaking of Christianity in the sense of denominational Christianity which is found in the churches, but in the sense of true apostolic Christianity, the sort of Christianity which is found in the teachings and gospel of Christ. Every denomination assumes they are one and the same, yet they all have differences with one another. They are certainly not the same, and the gospel of Christ betrays them all in one way or another. So Clifton proceeds by asking:

In order for every Christian to have absolutely no doubt in their mind as to the Biblical positions of “hate” and “love”, I will now quote Christ at John 15:18-25:

“18 If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. 19 If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. 20 Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also. 21 But all these things will they do unto you for my name’s sake, because they know not him that sent me. 22 If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloak for their sin. 23 He that hateth me hateth my Father also. 24 If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both me and my Father. 25 But, ... that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause.”

There is much that can be said of this passage, as it clearly conflicts with the denominational Christian teachings and interpretations of John 3:16. But what they fail to realize is that the “world” is not the planet, and there is a world which God created, and that is the world which He loves. Then there is a world which lies in wickedness, as the same apostle John stated in his first epistle, and that is the world which hates Christ and His disciples. Christ did not come to save that world, the world which James told Christians they must despise, but He did come to save the world which He created. So Clifton makes an assertion which on the surface seems to have nothing to do with sin, but if the historical context is examined, it has everything to do with ancient sins that had been committed, and which have never yet been repented of:

There is positively no way one can comprehend this passage unless one establishes and differentiates who the “ye” and the “they” are! The “ye” are a small number of Christians representing a smattering of two of the twelve tribes of Israel, while the “they” represent the Edomites who were converted to the religion of the Judahites, recorded by Josephus at:

Antiquities 13.9.1: “... Hyrcanus took also Dora and Marissa, cities of Idumea [Edom], and subdued all the Idumeans; and permitted them to stay in that country, if they would circumcise their genitals, and make use of the laws of the Jews; and they were so desirous of living in the country of their [Edomite] forefathers, that they submitted to the use of circumcision, and the rest of the Jewish ways of living; at which time therefore this befell them, that they were hereafter no other than Jews.”

A footnote on the same page makes the following comment: “This account of the Idumeans admitting circumcision, and the entire Jewish law, from this time, or from the days of Hyrcanus, is confirmed by their entire history afterwards. This, in the opinion of Josephus, made them proselytes of justice, or entire Jews. However, Antigonus, the enemy of Herod, though Herod were derived from such a proselyte of justice for several generations, will allow him to be no more than a half Jew. Ammonius, a grammarian, says:– ‘the Jews are such by nature, and from the beginning, whilst the Idumeans are not Jews from the beginning ... but being afterwards subdued by the Jews and compelled to be circumcised, and to unite into one nation, and be subject to the same laws, they were called Jews.’ Dio also says:– ‘That country is also called Judea, and the people Jews; and this name is given also to as many as embrace their religion, though of other nations’.”

Now Clifton adds short a note:

Actually Herod was a full Edomite.

In the footnote, Whiston, a product of the Church of England, considered proselytes of the Judaeans, along with Josephus, to be proselytes of “justice”. However it is clear in the Gospel that Christ considered such converts of the Judaeans to be twice-fold the children of hell, as He had told the Pharisees in Matthew chapter 23. Furthermore, Josephus attested several times in his writings that Herod was an Edomite on both sides of his family, mother and father, making him a full-blooded Edomite. But evidently Antigonus, who was also a product of his own time, considered Herod a half Judaean merely for being a convert. From the 2nd century before Christ, from after 129 BC, which is the period in which these events recorded by Josephus had happened, the Judaeans believed that they could convert aliens to Judaism and that they would be accepted by God, even though that was contrary to the law and had been thoroughly repudiated in the books of both Ezra and Nehemiah less than 400 years before.

Here Clifton only cited one instance of these forced mass conversions of Canaanites and Edomites to Judaism, while Josephus records others later in Book 13 of his Antiquities. Just over 30 years later, in the time of Alexander Janneus, one of the successors of John Hyrcanus, Josephus wrote that he had defeated and converted the non-Israelite inhabitants of at least 30 other towns or regions of Palestine. Once the Romans had come, around 63 BC, and subjected Judaea and made it into a single kingdom, and later a province, all of the inhabitants were ultimately converted to Judaism and united under the Edomite king Herod. Another historian, Strabo, in Book 16 of his Geography written about 70 or 80 years before Josephus, had also attested that Judaeans and Idumaeans, or Edomites, as well as others, were all living together in Judaea and sharing in the same customs.

So Clifton attempts to explain how this can lead us to understand the difference between the “you” and the “them” in that passage from John chapter 15:

Now we know why Christ said “their law”, inasmuch as the Edomites agreed to keep them, although Christ knew they really couldn’t keep the law because Esau mixed his genetics with Hittite women, making all of his children “bastards”, or children of adultery, breaking Yahweh’s law of kind after kind! For this very reason it recorded Yahweh’s hatred for Esau at Malachi 1:2-3: “2 I have loved you, saith Yahweh. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob’s brother? saith Yahweh: yet I loved Jacob, 3 And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.”

The distinction between Jacob and Esau goes back a lot further than Malachi, and Esau was diminished on account of his sin of race-mixing long before the time of Malachi. Esau was the eldest of the two sons, yet even before they were born or committed any sin, as Paul of Tarsus had explained, Yahweh God had said to Rebekah that “Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger” in Genesis 25:3. So even though they were brothers, it was prophesied that ultimately the result would be that they become “two manner”, or different kinds, of people.

Then in Genesis chapter 27, after seeing that her son Esau had taken wives of the accursed Hittites, we read: “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?” As a result, Isaac turned to Jacob, who had already received the blessings and the birthright of his father and elder brother, and we read: “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. 2 Arise, go to Padanaram, to the house of Bethuel thy mother's father; and take thee a wife from thence of the daughters of Laban thy mother's brother. 3 And God Almighty bless thee, and make thee fruitful, and multiply thee, that thou mayest be a multitude of people; 4 And give thee the blessing of Abraham, to thee, and to thy seed with thee; that thou mayest inherit the land wherein thou art a stranger, which God gave unto Abraham.” The rest of the Scripture is the account of the results of Jacob having received the blessing of Abraham, because he obeyed what his father had told him.

But Clifton continues by discussing God’s hatred for Esau:

Now, before we get all-bent-out-of-shape over this passage where Yahweh declares His “hatred” for Esau, which Paul repeated to the Romans, let’s take into consideration David’s Psalm 137:7, 9 pertaining to the Edomites, and whether or not it falls into the category of “hatred”: “7 Remember, O Yahweh, the children of Edom in the day of Jerusalem; who said, Rase it, rase it, even to the foundation thereof. ... 9 Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy [Esau’s] little ones against the stones.”

Here Clifton made a mistake attributing the 137th Psalm to David. In the King James Version, and apparently in the Masoretic Text, the prefaces on the Psalms were not always preserved. In the Greek manuscripts of the Septuagint, some begin this Psalm with the words “For David”, while others have “For David, from Jeremias”. That is not necessarily Jeremiah the prophet. The opening line of the Psalm implies that it was written by the waters of Babylon by a Judahite who was taken captive, as a lamentation over Jerusalem and Zion, the city of David. In that manner, the reference is an actual historical reference, as the Edomites were confederates of the Babylonians when they destroyed Jerusalem.

The apocryphal book of 1 Esdras, a better copy of Ezra than what we have in the Masoretic Text, affirms this. In 1 Esdras 4:45 we read, where it is speaking of the time of Zerubabel: “45 Thou also hast vowed to build up the temple, which the Edomites burned when Judea was made desolate by the Chaldees.” Where God had told Rebekah that “the elder shall serve the younger”, the Edomites were subject to Israel for several centuries from the time of David, but revolted and broke free, later submitting to and being in league with the Babylonians who destroyed Jerusalem.

The Edomites were rewarded for their treachery, since, as it is also prophesied in Ezekiel chapter 35, after Israel and Judah were taken into captivity the Edomites moved north and took most of their then-uninhabited cities for themselves. By the time that the Hellenistic period had begun, Idumaea had occupied the lands which were formerly southern Israel and Judah. Those are the people John Hyrcanus and Alexander Janneus had later defeated and forced to convert to Judaism, and according to Josephus, they were happy to comply. They were happy to comply because before John Hyrcanus, the Book of Maccabees describes how the high priests who had preceded him had constantly tried to drive them out, even burning their cities to the ground, but repeatedly they returned. So John Hyrcanus changed that policy and began converting them instead, making thousands upon thousands of them twice-fold the children of hell.

Oddly, Clifton continues his discussion of the 137th Psalm by quoting a translation of the Septuagint, and it has the preface informing us that it was written to David by Jeremias, but Clifton must have overlooked it. I know this because I have Clifton's copy of Thomson’s Septuagint on the shelf next to my desk. However since I edited practically all of Clifton’s writing, I must accept at least partial blame for the oversight. So Clifton continues:

Charles Thomson’s (Secretary of the Continental Congress) Septuagint has this to say on Psalm 137:7, 9:

“[7] Remember, O Lord, the children of Edom; who in the day of Jerusalem said, Rase! Rase! down to its foundation! ... [9] Happy he who shall render thee thy recompense; for what thou hast done to us! Happy he who shall seize and dash thy infants against stones!” [Clifton then responds:] Now don’t get mad at me! I didn’t write the Bible! The Edomite-jews’ own version of the Masoretic Text reads at Psalm 137:7, 9:

“7 Remember, O Lord, against the children of Edom The day of Jerusalem; Who said: ‘Rase it, rase it, Even to the foundation thereof.’ ... 9 Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the rock.” [Clifton then responds:] So the Jewish Publication Society of America has published their own demise, which will yet come to pass!

Early Christians used the Septuagint, or something very close to what we call the Septuagint today. Most citations of the Old Testament which are found in the New Testament are from the Septuagint. That the Masoretic Text is not a perfect copy of the ancient Scriptures is proven in the citations of Josephus, for example, and it can be established that neither the Masoretic Text nor the Septuagint are perfect. What we call the Masoretic Text usually refers to the Leningrad Codex, or also the Aleppo Codex, both of which date only to the 10th century. They are the oldest copies of the Masoretic Text which were considered to be complete, although it is now reported that portions of the Aleppo Codex have been missing since 1947.

Clifton continues in response to the words of the Psalm:

When commenting on Malachi 1:2-3, most unenlightened Christians will reply: “The Lord really didn’t hate Esau – it’s just that He didn’t love Esau as much as He loved Jacob.” Well, I say: “Pile it higher and higher!” The word “hated” in verse 3 is #8130 in Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary: “... sânê, saw-nay´ a primitive root; to hate (personally) ...” In the case of Leah and Rachel (Jacob’s wives), this same word is used indicating that Jacob hated Leah, but Yahweh opened her womb.

But the context of Malachi 1:3 is more like Deuteronomy 7:9-10 where it says:

“9 Know therefore that Yahweh thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations; 10 And repayeth them that hate him to their face, to destroy them: he will not be slack to him that hateth him, he will repay him to his face.”

Paul cited Malachi where God had professed that He hates Esau in Romans chapter 9, and the Greek word Paul used there means nothing but hate, as the opposite of love, as one would hate an enemy. The prophecy of the opening chapter of Malachi, that God would destroy the desolate places rebuilt by Esau, has never been fulfilled. When Jerusalem was rebuilt in the days of Ezra and Nehemiah, Israel did the rebuilding, not Edom, so it was not fulfilled in 70 AD because when the Edomites were converted to Judaism, Judaea was not desolate. But how could Edom “RETURN and build the desolate places”? Only because it was the Edomites who were the Jews that were run out of Judaea by the Romans, and it is the Edomites who returned to rebuild the desolate places in the modern age of Zionism. Now Clifton explains why God hates Esau:

Arrogantly, Esau, (brother of Jacob) imagined he could marry alien Hittite women and his parents (Isaac and Rebekah [descendants of White Shem and Peleg]) should accept them and any children born to those evil females (narrow between the eyes and ugly protruding noses similar to Barbra Streisand and Jimmy Durante.) That should teach us a lesson today, that we dare not race-mix and produce bastard offspring and still expect to be blessed of Yahshua Christ! The words of the song are untrue, as “Jesus” doesn’t “love all the children of the world, red or yellow, black or white”! The truth is: Yahshua Christ loves only the White children of Israel! There is no greater “hate” than for a pure White person to engage in miscegenation with an alien race. It’s tantamount to spitting in the faces of one’s father and mother, as well as the face of the Almighty!

We know that Clifton’s explanation of why God hates Esau is true, because it is the same reason given by Paul of Tarsus in his epistle to the Hebrews. There, in chapter 12, Paul wrote as a warning that Christians should be found: “15 Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled; 16 Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright. 17 For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.” In fact, Esau was rejected by his own mother, who acted to ensure that Jacob received the blessings and birthright, and that Jacob married a woman of his own race.

Fornication is defined by Jude as the “going after of strange flesh”, and Paul used the same word to describe that same sin in 1 Corinthians chapter 10, referring to the time in Numbers chapter 25 where the men of Israel joined themselves to the daughters of Moab. That is what Esau did, and we also know that from the words of his own mother in Genesis chapter 27, which we have already cited.

So in Romans chapter 9, Paul prayed for the Israelites in Judaea, but he explained that “they are not all Israel, which are of Israel”, and said that his prayer was only for his “3… kinsmen according to the flesh: 4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises”. So even Paul asserted that those things were only for Israel “according to the flesh”, and he went on to compare Jacob and Esau, discounting the Edomites because they were in Israel, but they are not of Israel. So later in the chapter he repeated the words of Malachi, that God hates Esau, and he referred to the Israelites as vessels of mercy, but the Edomites as vessels of destruction. So even in the New Testament, God continues to hate Esau.

For this reason, Christ told His adversaries, in John chapter 10, “26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.” The people of Judaea who turned to Christ lost their identity as Judaeans, becoming “one in Christ” with Greek and Roman Christians. But those who rejected Christ, who rejected Him because they were not His sheep in the first place, as He had told them on several occasions, they retained their identity as Judaeans, and later in history they began to be called Jews.

Today Christians are wrongly taught that these Jews are “God’s chosen people”, while Jews themselves hate the name of that same God, and use their self-proclaimed status to rule over the world. What did Christ say about the so-called “princes of this world”? The apostles lived in “fear of the Jews”, as John had written on several occasions, and today the Jews profess to be the critics, or judges, of every thing is right and wrong, promoting what God hates and despising what God loves. So Clifton continues:

We are told at Isaiah 5:20: “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Isn’t it ironic today that if a White person loves and honors his own race, that the enemies of Christ call it “hate” or a “security threat group”? Does that mean that if we would kill our own father and mother, that that would be “love”? This is what the killers of Christ – the Edomite-jews – would have us to believe!

Throughout the time of his prison ministry, most of the people who received Clifton’s Watchman’s Teaching Letters and who corresponded with him regularly were prisoners, myself included. So during that time, as he corresponded with prisoners, or especially as he received new requests to be added to his list by prisoners in certain States, his material came back as rejected for reason that Christian Identity in general was categorized as a “Security Threat Group”, just as it is by various government agencies. Of course, this is all in spite of the fact that many more Jews, Muslims, and even Roman Catholics have committed heinous and violent crimes in the names of their religions, but the government was more afraid of the writings of a little old barber in rural Ohio. For some reason, fortunately, I was able to do my own writing and correspond with Clifton for over eleven years with only minor interruption.

Christian Identity today is considered “hate”, even under circumstances where there is no expression of hatred for other races, be they Jews or not. Simply for the fact that we love and prefer our own people, our own race, and recognize them as the children of God, we are hated. But the Jews can falsely claim to be “God’s chosen people” and assert for themselves a virtual immunity to charges of racism, and it is not considered “hate”. But as for the Jews, since denominational Christians have accepted their claim that they are “God’s chosen people”, Christians now virtually worship Jews instead of Jesus.

Yet the Scriptures tell us to reject the Jews, and to love our own brethren. So Clifton continues in that aspect and says:

My Bible tells me that if I don’t love my brother, I haven’t seen the light, 1 John 2:9-11:

“9 He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his [racial] brother, is in darkness even until now. 10 He that loveth his [racial] brother abideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him. 11 But he that hateth his [racial] brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hath blinded his eyes.” When it says “brother” here, it is speaking of one’s White Caucasian Israelite brother! What did you think it meant, for goodness sake? This amounts to Christian racism pure and simple, and Christ is our example to keep our Israelite genetics undiluted!

This is true, as where Paul had prayed for the unbelieving Judaeans, he prayed only for those who were “my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: Who are Israelites”, so Paul counted his brethren, his kinsman, as those who were directly related to him by blood, “according to the flesh”, and not merely those who were believers with him in the same religion. They were kinsmen and brethren in spite of the fact that they continued to reject Christ, for which reason he prayed for them. The Christians which Paul had called brethren elsewhere in his epistles, he understood to be descendants of the so-called “lost tribes” of Israel, as he professed in Acts chapter 26 and elsewhere that his ministry was to bring the gospel to them. Paul never prayed for Edomites and never considered them to be his brethren. But the fact that Paul compared Jacob and Esau in Romans chapter 9 reveals that he had the same understanding described in Josephus, that many of those in Israel who were not of Israel were actually of Esau. So now Clifton continues from another perspective, endeavoring to prove the importance of the Biblical concept of racial purity:

Christ, in His sermon on the mount, announced to His Israelite followers that they were “the salt of the earth” at Matthew 5:13 thusly: “Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour [3471], wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.” Christ is as much as saying, “if one has committed miscegenation by mixing one’s race with an alien, the product of that mixing is, good for nothing ...” What conscientious grandfather or grandmother would want a “good for nothing” grandchild? Yahweh knows they deserve better, and so does the rebellious White Israelite race-mixer! The only way salt can loose its savor is to mix it with a foreign substance! What’s so hard to understand about that? Got any of those “good for nothings” in your family tree? It appears that Yahshua Christ was a real hate-monger! Or is it the fornicator (i.e., race-mixer) who is the real hate-monger?

Those who love Christ keep His commandments, the commandments of God in the Old Testament, and display their love for their brethren by keeping those commandment, as John taught in his first epistle, in chapter 4, “2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments. 3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.”

Denominational Christians may protest and assert that Christ was speaking in reference to His teachings, or to faith, but the faith of Christianity, as Paul explained it in Romans chapter 4, is the faith which Abraham had that his offspring would become many nations, and inherit the earth among other things. The apostles brought the gospel to those nations, and now they await the return of Christ where they shall inherit the earth. Christ, having taught His disciples that they must keep His commandments, race-mixing fornication is a transgression of the law, and the first century Judaeans were mingled among the Edomites, who were bastards. For that reason, Paul of Tarsus in that same chapter of Hebrews where he said that Esau was a fornicator, warned that if one is without chastisement, the correction which results when a father punishes a son, then one is a bastard, and not a son.

Christ was speaking not to disciples whom he knew personally and had spoken to, but rather, to a vast multitude of people, Israelites in Galilee. So he said to them “YOU are the salt of the earth”. Not the faith, not the gospel, not the belief, not His words, but YOU, the people themselves, even though it is evident that up to that point they had made no profession of faith.

Clifton continues on this subject of salt, and describes the Greek word which the King James Version translates as “lost its savour” in Matthew 5:13::

The Greek word for the phrase “lost its savor” above is 3471, a verb [μωραίνω] derived “... from moros (3474, μωρός), foolish. To make dull, not acute ....”, New Testament Word Study, by Spiros Zodhiates, p. 1001. Isn’t this exactly what happens to the offspring due to committing miscegenation? ... a child dull of spirit (i.e., mentally deficient)? Thayer, in his Greek-English Lexicon on this same word has in part: “... in biblical Greek a. to make foolish ...” What could be more foolish than producing a half-breed mamzer by breaking Yahweh’s law of kind after kind? When are we going to wake up and realize that Christ is using “salt” as a metaphor for genetics?

At Matthew 5:13, Christ was also prophesying that as long as the salt had not lost its saltiness [had not become foolish], corruption would be hindered from growing out-of-control, but once the salt had become diluted, due to miscegenation, moral corruption would grow unrestrained. That is what we see happening on a significant scale today!

One must be blind in order not to see that the Jews in this last century have instigated all of our major wars, have introduced all sorts of filth and pornography into media and entertainment, led the parade for feminism, and so-called reproductive rights and civil rights, and Jews have been the principal actors and agitators behind Communism, Internationalism, Globalism, Open Borders, and every other method of attack against White Christian society. To do this, the Jew secularized society by abusing Christian laws and documents and exploiting once-Christian courts in order to remove God and Christ from the public notice, from the schools and from all branches of government, and then as a people we began our slide over the precipice of oblivion and down into Sodom and Gomorrah. Speaking of our wars, Clifton says:

To show the reader that this is the correct context of what Christ conveyed to His followers, I will relate an incident that happened when Germany invaded Leningrad [Stalingrad] during WW II.

From uk.answers.yahoo.com we read: “Why did Germany invade Poland in 1939? ... A super state was well within Hitlers grasp, but guessing wrongly [attacking Stalingrad] and ignoring the basic laws concerning the welfare of mankind, then sending in the hated SS, meant he lost everything. If you watch old newsreels you’ll see German troops were welcomed as heroes, with flowers, bread and salt ...”

I do not know why Clifton chose this obscure source to try to make his point. The full answer is still available at its original source, which is linked here, but I will include a screen capture in case it disappears. The source is not scholarly, and some of the answers are foolish or very incomplete, but there are some later ones which are better and do reflect the actual truth. However in Clifton’s citation he provided the original question, and only part of a single answer. If I had to guess why he did this, it was to show the value of salt, especially in a time of war. But in his own answer he takes that a step further:

Although the above quotation is written from a Bolshevik-jewish perspective, it does show that some of the inhabitants of Leningrad looked upon the German soldiers as “the salt of the earth”, and that they had come to preserve their [Leningrad’s] way of life. Indeed, a significant number of the German soldiers were pureblooded Israelites, and they were fighting to preserve their “Aryan” race.

The original reply which Clifton cited to the question “Why did Hitler attack Poland?” rambled on to describe the later battle of Stalingrad, formerly named Tsaritsyn, so the writer did not say those things in relation to the initial attack on Poland, and Clifton further confounded that with Leningrad, the former St. Petersburg, in his assessment of the answer. The German armies failed to capture either city, the battle for Stalingrad failing and ending in the surrender of the German 6th Army after only five months, although they held Leningrad under siege for two-and-a-half years. However Germany did capture and occupy for several years the Ukraine, Belarus, and the Baltic republics, where the German armies were seen as restorers of Christianity and saviors from Communism, and the Communist governments were all dominated by Jews since the very beginning of the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917. Poland was attacked for several reasons, but mostly to deliver the inhabitants of the German city of Danzig, which was forcibly removed and given to Poland after the First World War, from Polish violence and oppression. The English were agitating the Poles to commit atrocities against the German population of Danzig in hopes of igniting a war with Germany which Hitler did not want, but to which he finally relented.

However where salt is concerned, Clifton does better:

“Salt” is a big subject, and there are over 14,000 uses for it. Salt can be found in liquid (brine) and solid (halite) form. Christ was referring to the halite form in His sermon. Of the halite form, the purer salt was used for eating, while the impure (insipid) type was used in walking and wagon paths, no doubt to impede the growth of weeds. We have somewhat the same use today for halite salt. Like in Christ’s time, the purer halite is used for eating, while the impure halite is used to spread on our highways for tire traction and ice removal (or in other words, trampled underfoot). In Christ’s day eating quality halite was hard to find, and was usually shipped in from remote locations.

Salt truly is good for nothing when it is trampled under foot, and does render the ground sterile for quite some time. So salt tossed out and trampled under foot becomes as poison to the community, just as race-mixed generations are poison to the rest of the race. In Judges chapter 9, it is related that Abimelech, a son of Gideon, put down a revolt at Shechem and “and he took the city, and slew the people that was therein, and beat down the city, and sowed it with salt” (Judges 9:45). Ancient inscriptions suggest that the Assyrians and Hittites also had such a custom. Now Clifton concludes his discussion of salt:

One remote place where salt was mined (today known as Hallstatt, Austria) was in operation an estimated 7,000 years ago, which includes the entire Roman period. Some say 4,000 years, but nevertheless a long time. As good quality halite salt preserves food, so pure genetics preserves one’s race!

Hallstatt must have been originally named for salt, as the Greek word for salt is ἅλας, or halas. Towns to the northwest are Hallein, where there are famous salt mines known as Salzbergwerk Dürrnberg, and Salzburg. The German for salt is salz, but the Latin word is sal or salis.

Now Clifton continues from another entirely different perspective:

RACISM, BIBLICAL & U.S. CONSTITUTION

All law in the United States of America is subject to the U.S. Constitution, and the first Paragraph (preamble) sets the context for the rest of the document thusly:

Now while Clifton’s premise seems good, I would rather believe that originally, the Constitution was intended to be subject to the laws of the States, since when the Constitution was signed, the States were delegating only certain specific powers to the federal government, and retaining all other powers and authority for themselves. This concept has also been turned on its head these last 240 years. Clifton continues by citing the preamble:

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish the Constitution for the United States of America.”

Inasmuch as all of the 25 men who wrote and signed the United States Constitution, including the Preamble above, were Caucasian-European-Americans demands ourselves and our Posterity, that the Beneficiaries also be Caucasian-European-Americans! Any additions to the Constitution which include more than “Caucasian-European-Americans” are illegal, and should be summarily deleted! We already have immigration law in our Preamble! After all, Matthew 18:18 states: “Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Our forefathers made a binding constitutional pact with their descendants, and Biblically, it is required of Yahweh to be kept! Only we Whites are their “Posterity”, and we expect it to be executed as written, because we have firm legal standing!

Clifton is correct in all of this, but America was subverted from the beginning, and when certain of the individual States stood up for their rights in 1860 and withdrew from the Union, the pact having been violated, the result was a war which ended in tyranny as those who would subvert the intent of the founders had gotten the victory. For many of us, however, that war is not yet over, and we know that ultimately we shall prevail, as the motto says, Deo Vindice, or God will vindicate.

Some may argue that we have an obligation to the former occupants of America, but the Bible says otherwise at Joshua 14:9: “And Moses sware on that day, saying, Surely the land whereon thy feet have trodden shall be thine inheritance, and thy children’s for ever, because thou hast wholly followed Yahweh my God.” This was spoken by Moses which, at that time, applied primarily to the land of Canaan. But previously, at Gen. 28:14, Yahweh promised Abraham: “And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed shall all the [Isaac-son Israel] families of the earth be blessed.”

This was the original promise of how far and wide the White descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob would tread their feet. It should be evident, at the present time, there is no place left on the face of earth that these offspring haven’t “trodden” under their feet! Thus, the promise of Yahweh includes the entire world which is manifest at:

Isaiah 43:5-8: “5 Fear not: for I am with thee: I will bring thy seed from the east, and gather thee from the west; 6 I will say to the north, Give up; and to the south, Keep not back: bring my sons from far, and my daughters from the ends of the earth; 7 Even every one that is called by my name: for I have created him for my glory, I have formed him; yea, I have made him. 8 Bring forth the blind people that have eyes, and the deaf that have ears.” Who else but the pure White Caucasian-Europeans does this refer to? Because of these promises and the prophecies of our future, we have become the most “hated” people on the face of the earth!

Clifton would have done well here to cite Isaiah 27:6 here where Yahweh God had said “6 He shall cause them that come of Jacob to take root: Israel shall blossom and bud, and fill the face of the world with fruit.”

If Christ came so that not one word of the prophets would fail, then these words cannot fail, yet they were spoken of the people of Israel and Judah who were taken into captivity by 700 BC, by the time of Hezekiah king of Judah, and none of those people were ever called Jews. The denominational Christians should want to find out the identity of these people, because these are the true sons and daughters of God. The only answer is in what we call Christian Identity. We know that the White nations of modern Europe descended from those same ancient Israelites, and Clifton continues in that regard:

We are hated both because of what the Bible declares and the phrase “to ourselves and our Posterity” in the U.S. Constitution! That is why our U.S. Constitution has been under continual attack almost from the birth of our nation! We suffer this “hate” because we have allowed aliens to be seated in our government as judges, legislators and presidents. Here again, our Almighty gave us specific instructions at Deuteronomy 17:15:

“Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom Yahweh thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger [5237] over thee, which is not thy brother.” This means everyone from president of the United States down to the janitor of the county or city courthouse! There are several Hebrew words for “stranger”. This particular one is Strong’s #5237, “... nokrîy, strange, in a variety of degrees and applications (foreign, non-relative, adulterous, different ...)” Translated in the KJV as: “alien, foreigner, outlandish, strange (-r, woman).” As far as I am concerned, this is a “stranger” of the very worst kind! (See also 1 Sam. 10:24; 1 Chron. 22:10; & Jer. 30:20-22.)

Clifton made those citations as other examples where the children of Israel should set one of their own as their ruler. While Clifton is not quite correct in his understanding of the word nokriy, it is perfectly clear that the children of Israel were never to set strangers, people of other races or nations, over them in authority, and would have nothing but trouble if they did. First century Judaeans allowed Edomites to rule over them, and the result was the “fear of the Jews” expressed by the apostles of Christ if anyone perceived or admitted that He was the Messiah. Today Christianity is once again being pushed out of society for those same reasons, and by those same people, the Edomite Jews. Do not be surprised if they attempt to ban Christianity once again, although they have already banned it in practice by labeling true Christians as “hate groups” or “security threat groups”.

Not only Christianity, but any expression of love for and pride in the White race by White men and women is also being demonized. There is a popular meme in circulation based on screenshots of Google searches and Wikipedia results, where at Wikipedia terms such as Black Pride, Asian Pride, Gay Pride and Hispanic Pride, or its variants, are spoken of positively, described with positive attributes, in glowing terms. But at the same time, White Pride is derided as racist and hateful and it is ridiculed. Now, referring to the three passages which Clifton connected to Deuteronomy 17:15 where it said that the children of Israel must take rulers from among themselves, rather than of strangers:

Of these three, Jeremiah 30:20-22 is a prophecy of the United States, which was true at our beginning. But we have digressed to the bottom portion of dung in the out-of-doors two-hole backyard privy:

“20 Their children also shall be as aforetime, and their congregation shall be established before me, and I will punish all that oppress them. 21 And their nobles shall be of themselves, and their governor shall proceed from the midst of them; and I will cause him to draw near, and he shall approach unto me: for who is this that engaged his heart to approach unto me? saith Yahweh. 22 And ye shall be my people, and I will be your God.”

For their entire period in captivity, the children of Israel were ruled over by foreign emperors or foreign kings, and even in modern Europe their kings were often from other nations, such as the Normans or Saxons who came from the Continent to rule England, or the Hapsburg dynasty of Austria whose sons had ruled many nations in Europe. So perhaps this does describe America after its independence from the English king, but it may also describe many of the modern nations of Europe just as well, and the White nations which came from other European colonies, such as Canada, New Zealand, Australia or South Africa. There certainly are other prophecies which describe America. But in any event, the period of self-rule in the age of Liberalism did not last very long, and now we are ruled by a different sort of tyrant: the international Jew, in the form of international banks and corporations which control every government, and of which the principals are the very descendants of those same Edomite Jews whom Christ had called the “princes of this world”, and that is the world which Christians must hate, because that world hates Christ as well as White Christians. Now Clifton continues with a list of the enemies of ancient Israel, but the descendants of these same people are also the enemies of today’s Christians:

The king and prophet, David, gave us a list of the enemies that hate us at Psalm 83:1-18:

“1 Keep not thou silence, O God: hold not thy peace, and be not still, O God. 2 For, lo, thine enemies make a tumult: and they that hate thee have lifted up the head. 3 They have taken crafty counsel against thy people, and consulted against thy hidden ones. 4 They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance. 5 For they have consulted together with one consent: they are confederate against thee: 6 The tabernacles of Edom, and the Ishmaelites; of Moab, and the Hagarenes; 7 Gebal, and Ammon, and Amalek; the Philistines with the inhabitants of Tyre; 8 Assur also is joined with them: they have holpen the children of Lot. 9 Do unto them as unto the Midianites; as to Sisera, as to Jabin, at the brook of Kison: 10 Which perished at Endor: they became as dung for the earth. 11 Make their nobles like Oreb, and like Zeeb: yea, all their princes as Zebah, and as Zalmunna: 12 Who said, Let us take to ourselves the houses of God in possession. 13 O my God, make them like a wheel; as the stubble before the wind. 14 As the fire burneth a wood, and as the flame setteth the mountains on fire; 15 So persecute them with thy tempest, and make them afraid with thy storm. 16 Fill their faces with shame; that they may seek thy name, O Yahweh. 17 Let them be confounded and troubled for ever; yea, let them be put to shame, and perish: 18 That men may know that thou, whose name alone is Yahweh, art the most high over all the earth.”

Here Clifton also erred where he identified the author of this Psalm as David, which he apparently took for granted. But the preface says that the author of this Psalm is Asaph, a prophet of the captivity who is credited with at least a dozen of the Psalms. This Psalm was clearly written from the perspective of the captivity, as the lands of Israel and Judah had already been emptied of their inhabitants, and now these other peoples have all come to inhabit the cities for themselves.

All of these nations had mingled themselves with aliens, the Canaanites and Kenites, the descendants of Cain, and Rephaim, the giants who were Nephilim, descendants of the “Fallen Angels”, and other races of obscure origins that are not even explained in Scripture. Today they are arabs and Jews and other races, and they all stand against Whites and against Christ. These are the same enemies from which the children of Israel had expressed a expectation of deliverance, as the purpose of Christ was announced in Luke chapter 1: “70 As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began: 71 That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us; 72 To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant; 73 The oath which he sware to our father Abraham…”

Once all this Biblical history is properly understood, the inevitable trail leads back to Genesis chapter 3, as Clifton concludes:

THE HATE OF THE SERPENT vs. THE HATE OF THE WOMAN, Gen. 3:15:

“And I will put enmity (HATE) between thee (the serpent) and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” Here both the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman are plural, but used collectively as singular types of seed, and in the case of the woman include both the Adamic people and Christ.

This is the same hate which the world has for Christians, it is the reason for the hate which the Jews have for Christians, and it is the reason why Christians should hate the world, because it operates in accordance with the same “Princes of this world”, by whom Christ had meant to describe the Jews. The proof is in the words of Paul of Tarsus, as he also mentioned them in 1 Corinthians chapter 2: “6 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought: 7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: 8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.” For that same reason, James wrote in chapter 4 of his epistle: “4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.”

If one professes to be a Christian, yet he is a friend of the world, he is not a Christian at all. Today’s denominational Christians actually love the world, its organized sports, is entertainments, television and movies, games and other distractions. They embrace sodomites and fornicators, and worst of all, they worship Jews instead of Jesus. Hypocrisy is very difficult to admit, but to recognize it is the first step to repentance.

As for denominational Christians who would still protest at what has beeen said here, they must ask themselves, if Jesus loves everybody, why does He threaten to kill children? In Revelation chapter 2 we read, in the message to the Church at Thyatira: “20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication [race-mixing], and to eat things sacrificed unto idols. 21 And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not. 22 Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds. 23 And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.”

Notice that Christ did not threaten to kill the fornicators themselves, who will merely be punished. But He threatened to kill the children of the fornicators, because ostensibly, they are bastards, the products of fornication. Jesus does not love red, yellow, black and brown, but only White Israelites, and the rest shall go into the Lake of Fire.