Clifton Emahiser

The “Little Horn” of Daniel chapter 7, a review of a paper by Clifton Emahiser

In his monthly Watchman’s Teaching Letters for 2002, Clifton Emahiser had sought to explain elements of the books of the prophet Daniel and the Revelation in an endeavor to refute the fallacies of what we call Futurism and Preterism, and to demonstrate the importance of the historical, or Historicist interpretation of prophecy as a key to understanding the Word of Yahweh our God. Doing that, Clifton had many other digressions as he progressed, and he discussed the two different descriptions of a “little horn” in Daniel in different ways. This shorter paper, The "Little Horn" of Daniel 7:8, was compiled from those studies.

Among denominational Christians, there are many foolish ways to interpret Scripture, and many ways to describe or label them. There is futurism, full preterism, partial preterism, millennialism or chiliasm, amillennialism or chillegorism, premillennialism and postmillennialism, and some of these overlap or encompass one another. There are even panmillennialists, who apparently believe that in the end, eschatology is not important at all because evidently, they also believe that everyone gets a participation trophy from God.

Clifton Emahiser on Ted Weiland

Here I have decided to take a short break from my commentary On the Gospel of John, and have a little fun at the expense of a clown named Ted Weiland, a name which is probably too familiar to many of our listeners. But I guess some people will now wonder why I insist on doing this. The truth is that unlike many of the other men whom we have criticized over the years, most of whom we deeply respect in spite of any perceived flaws in their work, Weiland is still alive and well and spouting his nonsense under the pretense of being an Identity Christian, while he has willfully ignored all of our inquiries and criticisms. Weiland is actually a self-righteous universalist who would in effect eradicate Identity from Christianity altogether. But Weiland is also one of the ring-leaders of an entire circus of such clowns, which includes Stephen Jones, James Bruggeman, Jory Brooks and others. Two years ago I would have included Dave Barley in this list, but I have learned that he has openly recanted his former universalism, which is certainly to his credit. However while they are not quite as odious, Barley and Lawrence Blanchard and a few others still have subtle elements of universalism in their doctrines and scriptural interpretations.

Weiland had a book disputing our interpretation of Genesis chapter 3 titled Eve, Did She or Didn’t She? I never read it, but Clifton has a copy on one of the shelves here somewhere and if I ever do, I might have yet another presentation to write. But for that Clifton had criticized Weiland frequently in his Special Notices to All Who Deny Two-Seedline series, and when I presented that here in podcasts throughout 2017, I hope to have expounded upon those criticisms. That series of papers was written by Clifton throughout 2002 and 2003. Then later, as I have also explained elsewhere, our friend Tony Gonyer had written Weiland a letter in 2005, and that letter compelled me to also write to Weiland, which I did in August of that year. Weiland never responded to my letter, and Clifton had it published on the Israelect.com website, where he added some citations from Weiland which were representative of the things with which we took issue. Since I have come to control Israelect.com I redirect many of the papers there to where they are posted at Christogenea. Now since I have been released from prison, since very late 2008, I have encountered Weiland many times in social media, and I have confronted him each time in a kindly manner, but he has only scoffed at me and he has refused to discuss any of these issues with me. For that he certainly does deserve the label clown.

Christogenea Internet Radio, Friday at 8:00 PM Eastern

Clifton Emahiser rebuts Charles Weisman. In this recording, which has never before been published on the Internet, Clifton Emahiser takes turns playing a presentation by Charles Weisman disputing two-seedline, and then stopping the tape to answer Weisman's contentions.

Clifton called this a "mock debate", but it is actually more of a step-by-step rebuttal of Weisman's contentions. This may be the first recording which Clifton ever made, perhaps even as early as 1996 or 1997.

For that reason, some of Clifton's answers were not what they may have been as he advanced his studies over the subsequent years. His answer concerning Genesis 4:1 certainly would have been much more authoritative after 2004 or 2005. He nevertheless did very well defending many of our positions.

Listening to Weisman, he himself seems to have been answering two-seedline claims that were made in writing, perhaps by Clifton himself. While he may not have started his Watchman's Teaching Ministry by this time, Clifton was involved in correspondence and debate with many non-seedliners before he did so.

We thank our friends from the Gonyer family who made the presentation of this recording here possible.

This may be the first time ever that I discussed the same subject on Friday and Saturday of the same weekend. At least, if I ever did it before, I do not remember. But there are two reasons why I must do it tonight. First, because this material is halfway prepared before I type a word, and my time is worn thin these past few weeks. So I can prepare this in just a few hours and Clifton has already done much of the core research. Then secondly, because if I have to present an entire series from Clifton’s writings over a few short weeks, there are few subjects more important than this one.

The Only True Adam of Genesis, Part 4: Origin of a Heresy

Rejecting the so-called 6th & 8th Day Creation heresy is an absolute necessity if Identity Christians are ever to have a clear and unshakable racial concept based on Scripture. We need a clear and unshakable racial concept if we are to survive the trials with which we are faced at the present time. We do not need any capitulation to Jewish concepts, and we do not need compromise with non-Adamic so-called ‘people’. As I have said many times in the past, Yahweh did not create any of these non-White races and call them “good”.

But rejecting the idea that Yahweh created non-Whites is not the same as saying that Adam was the first intelligent bipedal hominid on the planet. In Matthew chapter 13, Yahshua Christ explains the parable of the wheat and the tares, which informs us that Yahweh planted one kind: wheat, and that the tares were planted by the devil. But the devil had to be somewhere in order to be able to infiltrate the field and plant the tares. In that same place, Christ declared that “I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.” So we cannot imagine that the entire truth of this planet and its history are revealed in the book of Genesis, if Christ Himself informs us that there were things which were purposely withheld from men until the gospel of Christ was proclaimed.

The Only True Adam of Genesis, Part 3: Adam’s Commission

We have been presenting this series, The Only True Adam, not only because I have been too busy with necessary but worldly tasks here at home to maintain my regular schedule, but also because we are constantly confronted both on social media and within our own real-world circle of associates with long-time Christian Identity adherents who believe that there were two distinct creations of man, each of them called adam, in the Genesis account in our Bibles.

The title of this series, first used by Clifton Emahiser several years ago, is a challenge to those people, that there is one – and only one – creation of Adamic man described in Genesis. The word adam is a collective noun referring to a race of men, as it says in Genesis 5:2 where we read “Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.” This is a clear reference to the day described in Genesis 1:26-27, and it uses identical language from that passage to describe that race. But the word adam can also be a proper noun, a name used to describe the first male of that race.

The Only True Adam of Genesis, Part 2: ADAM in the Hebrew in Genesis
 

It never ceases to amaze me, how many times I may state something that is based upon at least two or three witnesses in Scripture, along with studies of word meanings in the original languages, along with contextual support, and often even historical support, yet people simply dismiss it because it goes against something which they were taught in the past. They are so confident in their supposed knowledge that they absolutely refuse to consider the possibility that they may be mistaken. They are so emotionally attached to their teachers, who are only fallible men, that they will not even examine the facts which underlie a contrary opinion.

Nowhere in Scripture do I see this phenomenon more often than in discussions of the creation of Adam which is described in Genesis chapters 1 and 2. Many people who learned their Christian Identity from Bertrand Comparet, Wesley Swift, or Sheldon Emry are so certain that there was an 8th-Day Creation of Adam distinct from the explicit 6th-Day Creation that they simply refuse to listen to any contrary evidence whatsoever. There is nothing wrong with being loyal to our teachers, but real loyalty would require studying behind them, and being able to prove everything which they told us for ourselves. For this Christ Himself never said “just take My word for it”, but rather He always said “search the scriptures”. Real loyalty would also require a dialogue when different results are obtained through that study. This is why there are science labs in high schools, so that students can prove through demonstration the things which they hear in the lectures, rather than merely taking those things for granted. If you are the only student whose metal rod did not expand when it was heated, you might have some great new discovery, or perhaps you only made an error in your measurements, and that is much more likely to be the case.

The Only True Adam of Genesis Chapters 1 and 2

This evening I am going to present a pair of short essays from Clifton Emahiser, which were originally titled The Only True Adam of Genesis 1:26-27 & 2:7, parts 1 and 2. Some of the comments and data that I may add to these articles as we proceed, I have already discussed at length in various podcasts and articles at Christogenea, but especially in Part 1 of my own Pragmatic Genesis series. Clifton himself has another article on this topic, which he had written some time later, titled "Adam" in the Hebrew in Genesis, and in that initial segment of Pragamatic Genesis I expanded on that article.

I am not going to get into much depth on Hebrew grammar this evening, which is the main topic of Clifton’s other paper and that first part of Pragmatic Genesis. But here I will only say that adding a preposition or a definite article to a noun does not by itself make that noun represent something different from what it represents without the preposition or article. The people who push the idea of two distinct Adamic creations attempt to do just that, and by it they display their own ignorance.

Once again, Clifton Emahiser joins William Finck to discuss a series of essays addressing those who would claim that there is no such an entity as Satan.

Clifton's original series, found at his website, was written in late 2006 and through 2007.

Once again, Clifton Emahiser joins William Finck to discuss a series of essays addressing those who would claim that there is no such an entity as Satan.

Clifton's original series, found at his website, was written in late 2006 and through 2007.

Once again, Clifton Emahiser joins William Finck to discuss a series of essays addressing those who would claim that there is no such an entity as Satan.

Clifton's original series, found at his website, was written in late 2006 and through 2007.

Clifton Emahiser joins William Finck to discuss a series of essays addressing those who would claim that there is no such an entity as Satan.

Clifton's original series, found at his website, was written in late 2006 and through 2007.

Clifton Emahiser joins William Finck to discuss a series of essays addressing those who would claim that there is no such an entity as Satan.

Clifton's original series, found at his website, was written in late 2006 and through 2007.

Neighbors and Strangers, and Ted Weiland and other supposed Christian Identity pastors who cannot tell them apart.

The opening remarks concerning symbols and words have been moved to the Christogenea Forum.

The terms neighbor and stranger are among the most abused words found in the Holy Bible. The abuse is possible because these English words are void of the richer meanings of the Hebrew or Greek words from which they are translated. But of course, most all denominational Christians are unaware that the Hebrew or Greek terms have meanings which are far more specific than the English words which are typically employed to represent them. We have discussed these words in the past in certain of our Biblical commentaries, and now we will summarize those discussions here.

We will begin with the term neighbour. The following explanation is adapted from our presentations of Acts chapter 7 given here in June of 2013, and Romans chapter 13 given here in August of 2014.

It is fully evident that in this day and age most Christians are locked in the paradigms of this world, and they interpret their Bibles through those paradigms. But the patterns of thought were far different in ancient times, and it is there that we should endeavor to interpret Biblical language, in the context of the time that the words were used, as best as we can determine how words were originally employed. Christian attitudes concerning race and righteousness have been artificially manufactured by the international elite, which consists mostly of Jews, who control the media and publishing industries for over 200 years now. The concept of political correctness which holds sway over their minds is an invention of these global elites – these mostly Jewish masters who rule over them, that they may retain that rule without difficulty. So as we often like to say, the result is that today Christians worship Jews instead of Jesus.

By Clifton Emahiser with William Finck

Clifton's original papers on this topic:

Critical Review of E. Raymond Capt’s “Israel Judah and Jew”, Part 1

Critical Review of E. Raymond Capt’s “Israel Judah and Jew”, Part 2