Destroying Many by Peace, A Critical Review of a Sermon by Bertrand Comparet
Destroying Many by Peace, A Critical Review of a Sermon by Bertrand Comparet
While we love Bertrand Comparet for his many simple and straightforward exhibitions of Christian Identity beliefs in light of Scripture, and while his conclusions or insights into current events were often also good, sometimes he had an altruistic and naive view of history. So while many of our race even today are indeed being destroyed by peace, or even by “love”, perhaps it was Comparet’s altruistic attitude towards his own people and nation that led him to express certain naive sentiments concerning the history of that nation. While we certainly all have some blind spots in our views of historical events, here in the opening paragraph of his sermon on this subject, Destroying Many by Peace, that naivete is fully apparent. But sometimes Comparet did express the fact that America was led by corrupt politicians. Sometimes he expressed the fact that Adolf Hitler was often lied about, and that the so-called holocaust never happened, and he even called it a myth, which is true.
So in Part 11 of his Revelation sermons, as well as in his Your Heritage sermon, Comparet professed that the holocaust is a myth. In his sermon Babylon’s Money, Comparet rightly acknowledged that the cause of World War Two was the Jewish struggle to regain control of the German economy which Hitler had taken from them, and he even went so far as to say that by separating the Jews and retaking control of the economy, that “Hitler was starting to put into operation some of the laws of Yahweh and he was proving that, in spite of this Jewish boycott, Germany could become prosperous, by going back to the economic laws of Yahweh.” Comparet defended Hitler in other ways in Part 13 of his Revelation sermons, and then in his sermon on The Rod of Yahweh's Anger he lamented the fact that the United States had allied with the tyrannical Soviet Union against Hitler and Mussolini, describing it as an act of “hypocritical self righteousness”, which is also correct, at least on the surface of the issues involved. However here, as he opens this sermon by speaking of America’s wars, for some reason he portrays them generally as having been just, when most of them certainly had not been just.
DESTROYING MANY BY PEACE by Bertrand L. Comparet
As with all of our Bertrand Comparet sermons, this one also had been taken from Jeanne Snyder’s collection published under the title Your Heritage, and prepared for electronic publication by Clifton Emahiser, who had added some critical notes to each of them.
Now to commence with Bertrand Comparet:
We Americans are a peace loving people, we don’t envy our neighbors, their land or their wealth. We make no wars of conquest, so we find it hard to believe that others would attack us. We become involved in defensive wars because we suffer so much wrong without resistance that our long patience is mistaken for cowardice. Our enemies, both in other lands and within our own nation, take advantage of this. They know they can always lead us into traps by pretending they want peace. Russia is hard at this old trick right now, in the United Nations, vigorously helped by the so called neutral nations. How can there be any neutrality between good and evil? Yahshua said he who is not for Me is against Me.
So making this opening statement, this is the naivete of which we have spoken in reference to Comparet’s view of American history, and he also contradicts himself to some degree. America’s wars have not been just, and since 1860, they have all been wars of conquest. The so-called Civil War was entirely unconstitutional, whereby the remaining States in the Union had actually conquered the States of the Confederacy in an act of brazen tyranny. The Spanish-American War only justified overseas conquest and American Imperialism, and as a nation, we would have been much better off leaving the hordes of Caribbean savages in the hands of Spain. The First World War was an unjust act of tyranny against the German people on behalf of World Jewry which assured the Rothschilds and other Jews of London that England would control the trade routes from Europe to the East, eliminating competition from Germany in Asia and Africa. It also dismantled the Ottoman Empire and placed Palestine into the hands of World Jewry. The Second World War was also a war of conquest, whereby Germany became a veritable American colony, and American bases were planted throughout Europe and Asia, enforcing the will of World Jewry and international banks and corporations. These may not have been wars of territorial conquest, but they were certainly wars of military, financial and ideological conquest.
Neither were any of these wars defensive wars. The so-called Civil War was not fought over slavery, but rather, the slavery issue was exploited for the purpose of war, and the South was a victim. Cries of “Remember the Maine” were used to rally Americans to war against Spain, but the sinking of the USS Maine was caused by an accidental explosion and not a Spanish mine. So the actual reasons why these wars were initiated by the United States government was offensive, and not defensive. Japan was purposely prodded and baited into attacking an American port in 1941 by the Roosevelt administration, and Germany was never any threat to the United States. Neither was Korea, Vietnam, or Iraq. So Comparet has portrayed American wars through rose-colored glasses.
In his Revelation sermons, Comparet thought the United Nations was the second beast of Revelation chapter 13, which is not true. In actuality, as we have exhibited in our own more recent commentary on the Revelation, the United Nations is only an agency of the eighth beast of Revelation chapter 17 (17:11), which is the international banking system controlled by World Jewry. The United Nations is not a beast in its own right, but rather, it is just one way through which that eighth beast operates. So while Comparet may have been correct concerning the actions of the Soviet Union in the United Nations, the entire United Nations process is only a circus sideshow conducted as a pretense, so that people and local governments may believe that there is a semblance of democratic rule governing world affairs. What the United Nations does is virtually immaterial unless greater powers behind the scenes have demanded it, and the proof of that is in the many United Nations condemnations of Israel, and the many U. N. resolutions which have been defied by Israel over many decades. The United Nations only has teeth when it suits the whims of World Jewry and its international banks and corporations.
But here Comparet continues in that regard:
Most of our churches are to blame for our failure to recognize this devil’s trap for what it is, for it is clearly stated in the Bible, that book they so seldom read to you in church. As for the United Nations, that palace of strangers cursed by Yahweh, their talk of peace was exposed by the prophets 2,500 years ago. Psalm 28:3 [which is actually over 3,000 years old] calls them, “The workers of iniquity, which speak peace to their neighbors, but mischief is in their hearts.” Jeremiah 9:8 says, “Their tongue is an arrow shot out; it speaketh deceit: one speaketh peaceably to his neighbor with his mouth, but in his heart he lyeth in ambush.”
Further on we shall discuss this “palace of strangers”, however neither of the citations which follow that reference have anything to do with strangers. They both lament the actions of men towards their own neighbors. The Hebrew word for neighbor, רע or ריע, rea or reya, is a friend, companion or fellow and comes from a verb which means to graze together to pasture together. The meaning of the word is defined in the law in Leviticus chapter 19 where we read: “18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.” So a neighbor is one of one’s own people. Therefore these verses which Comparet cited relate to the behavior of people in a society disaffected from God, and not to international relations because a stranger is not one’s neighbor. While we suffer these things which the passages describe, we suffer them from our own brethren, regardless of what we may suffer on account of strangers.
Here Comparet also speaks as if the churches should care in the first place, but to them, it does not matter whether their pews and their coffers are filled with neighbors or strangers. The churches in America have already been communist for a long time. Even their doctrines are communistic. The concept that Jesus loves everyone regardless, and the doctrine of universal salvation, neither of which are actually found in Scripture, are both essentially communist. So the churches in the United States and everywhere throughout Christendom have failed mostly because their doctrines have been subverted by Judaism for 1,800 years, in varying degrees. But speaking of America, they also have failed even beyond that, because they have all sold themselves out to the government by signing 501c3 agreements with the IRS, which is the Central Bankers’ revenue collection agency. These agreements forbid churches from becoming involved in politics or openly supporting or denouncing political candidates or parties or intervening in any political campaign. In that manner, anything which the government or candidates for political offices may propose or endeavor is outside of the criticism or censure of the churches.
The following is from the IRS website under the title The Restriction of Political Campaign Intervention by Section 501(c)(3) Tax-Exempt Organizations:
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.
Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances. For example, certain voter education activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity. In addition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not be prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan manner.
On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.
So a pro-abortion candidate, or a Sodomite, cannot be opposed by a church without it risking its tax-exempt status. With that, wanting to keep their tax-exempt status, so that donors can continue to deduct donations from their taxes, the government extorts the churches into silence on all of the most important matters of American life and politics. Some churches may violate this agreement, but the government hammer may fall at any time, and in the past it has fallen – especially upon certain conservative churches.
Now, while the United Nations is often just as impotent as the churches, Comparet continues by discussing some of the events, or sideshows, playing out there in his time:
We see this at every session, Cuba and Venezuela talking loudly of peace, while they plot an invasion of Nicaragua. Nasser’s Egypt plotting the murder of the kings of Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Panama organizing the theft of the Panama Canal from us because we connived with Egypt for the similar theft of the Suez Canal. All over Africa, the negroes are planning wholesale murder of all the whites who brought them the only civilization they ever knew.
The intrigue between the rulers of Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt’s president Nasser occurred in the late 1950’s, so Comparet is speaking in very general terms here, and not merely of the events of any particular year. The Suez Canal was nationalized by Nasser in 1956, and the British accepted a compromise by which it remained in Egyptian hands. But the Panama Canal was not surrendered by the United States to Panama until 1977, and not completely until 1999. Comparet is at least partly correct, as the United States used financial and diplomatic pressure to force France and Britain to surrender claims to the Suez Canal, but that had little to do with the United Nations. Then, although the event helped to urge Panamanians to begin to revolt against American control of the Panama Canal, that dispute had already begun shortly after World War Two. A little further on we shall be able to better date this sermon.
Comparet was certainly right about Africa, particularly South Africa, where negroes have been murdering Whites, especially White farmers, literally by the thousands. But we have in the past decried what we have called “newspaper eschatology”. Reading the news and formulating one’s opinions based on what is read, one may arrive at a million false conclusions because things are not usually what the controlled media portrays.
We would see all of these events in a different light, as the rising up of the beast nations against the children of Israel and Anglo-American world domination, in preparation for the fulfillment of the Camp of the Saints prophecy of Revelation chapter 20, which is transpiring at this very moment. Before it could happen, exclusive Anglo-American domination over the world economy, shipping routes and markets had to wane and it continues to wane.
The “palace of strangers” reference which Comparet had made here is to a passage found in Isaiah chapter 25. As we have often discussed in relation to the prophets of the Old Testament, their words very often had an immediate application, leading to a short-term fulfillment of their prophecy, but also very often had far-reaching implications by which we may expect long-term fulfillment. So while in its immediate sense, Isaiah chapters 24 and 25 are a prophecy of what is about to come upon Israel and Judah at the hand of the Assyrians, it also has Messianic overtones for which reason it may be interpreted to have eschatological implications. But chapters 24 and 25 cannot be separated, and therefore the “palace of strangers” reference in the opening verses of Isaiah chapter 25 is descriptive of Jerusalem itself, which is the context from the end of chapter 24, and it is apparent elsewhere in the prophets, especially in Jeremiah chapter 2 and Ezekiel chapter 16, that there were indeed many strangers in Jerusalem, on account of which the city was turned to sin and had faced the wrath of Yahweh.
So while Comparet once did a sermon titled The Palace of Strangers, where he identified the prophecy of Isaiah with the United Nations building, and in his notes Clifton Emahiser at that time had agreed with that identification, here we must disagree. While the building housing the United Nations headquarters is in New York City, that whole city, also being the most significant financial center of the United States, is a palace of strangers. But so is the government capital in Washington DC, and every other American city is a “palace of strangers”. Every European capital is probably also a “palace of strangers” by now, except that I am not entirely certain about all of them. London and Paris are indeed both a “palace of strangers”. In Scripture, Jerusalem is the capital city of Israel and Judah, but in prophecy, Jerusalem often represents the seats of power and government of the children of Yahweh no matter where they happen to be, and today they are all palaces filled with strangers. So they shall all be torn down, and not just one building on the east side of midtown Manhattan. New York City was a “palace of strangers” long before the United Nations was even founded, as its population was a quarter Jewish before 1914. According to Wikipedia, there were 80,000 Jews in the city in 1880, and 1.6 million in 1920, which can also be verified from Jewish literature and publications from the 1920’s.
Now Comparet turns to elsewhere in Isaiah:
Isaiah 57:20-21 saw this restless evil, “The wicked are like the troubled sea, when it cannot rest, whose waters cast up mire and dirt. There is no peace, saith Yahweh, to the wicked.” In that parliament of evil, who exposes these plots, who demands the liberation of Eastern Europe, who frankly calls a spade a spade??? No one! Isaiah 59:4 ,8 tell about it, “None calleth for justice, nor any pleadeth for truth: they trust in vanity and speak lies.… The way of peace they know not: and there is no judgment in their goings: they have made them crooked paths: whosoever goeth therein shall not know peace.”
But the sins of our society are much deeper. When those million or so Jews moved into New York City after 1880, with countless other strangers from outside of our traditional Northwestern European roots, they were welcomed and caused to thrive, and most all of them were antichrists who were antithetical to Christian morals, and who in turn had promoted many other sins in American society. But it was not only New York, as Jewish and other alien immigrants moved to many other cities as well, all throughout America. Eastern Europe was ultimately “liberated”, at least on paper, but not for the liberty of its own people.
As for the passages cited by Comparet here, Isaiah 57:20-21 is part of a long Messianic prophecy and a promise of the Gospel of Christ, by which Yahweh God would proclaim peace to His people. That peace is realized only in an acceptance of the Gospel and a willing obedience to the laws of God as a result of that acceptance. So where it says “There is no peace … to the wicked” in verse 21, that is because Christ had come only to reconcile His people so that He may have peace with them, and with no others. But once again, the chapter divisions are artificial, and in the very next line, in chapter 58, we read “1 Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and shew my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins.” Without repentance from sin, there will be no peace even for the people of God, and by accepting those Jews who rejected Christ, the children of Israel everywhere had doomed themselves to suffering punishment in the resulting judgment. That is what society is experiencing now, and it has nothing to do with any so-called United Nations.
But Isaiah chapter 59 also describes the general condition of the children of Israel without repentance and reconciliation. So it is describing the sins of Israel before and during their period of captivity. It has nothing to do with strangers, or with any “palace of strangers”. Comparet is correct in some perspectives, but his overall worldview is worldly, and not entirely Biblical, so he is forced to take passages out of context in order to support his arguments. He does better where he speaks of peace:
Why haven’t the preachers of our churches taught us peace only comes from Yahweh, not from Russia? The Bible has told about it from the beginning. In Leviticus 26:3, 6 Yahweh promises us, “If ye walk in My statutes and keep My commandments and do them: ... I will give peace in the land and ye shall lie down and none shall make you afraid.” Psalm 119:165 says, “Great peace have they which love Thy law: and nothing shall offend them.” Isaiah 48:18 states, “O that thou hadst hearkened to My commandments! Then had thy peace been as a river and thy righteousness as the waves of the sea.” Instead of Yahweh, our people worship F. D. Roosevelt, Kennedy, Stevenson and Bridges, who tell us that the only way to peace is by surrender to Khrushchev’s demands. The devil’s peace on the devil’s terms. Hungary and Tibet know what kind of peace it is, yet many red clergymen and corrupted churches support this!
Former Democratic presidential nominee Adlai Stevenson died in 1965, and perhaps the reference to Bridges meant Henry Styles Bridges, a former governor of New Hampshire and then U.S. Senator from 1936 to his death in 1961. According to the Office of the Historian of the U. S. Department of State, in 1959 there was an intercepted invasion of Nicaragua by communists from Cuba, of which the Cuban government claimed ignorance, and there were other threats, so perhaps Comparet was referring to those here, where earlier he had spoken of the possibility of Cuba invading Nicaragua. Then perhaps where he referred to the Panama Canal, Comparet was only speaking of the first major event in the series of events that led to its surrender, which was a revolt against U.S. troops stationed there in 1964, as agitation to turn over control of the canal had increased since 1956. Khrushchev ruled the Soviet Union until 1964, and died in 1971. In any event, this sermon is difficult to date, but all of these factors being considered, a date no later than 1964-1965 is certainly plausible. This is important, in my estimation, because in 1964 America was seemingly, at least, a much Whiter country than it was at the end of Comparet’s life in the early 1980’s.
Comparet certainly was correct, that peace could not come from Russia, nor from anywhere other than Yahweh God. The children of Israel were explicitly warned on many occasions that peace came from God when they were obedient, and in the Gospel of Christ it was announced at the birth of Christ, as it is recorded in Luke chapter 2, “14 “Honor to Yahweh in the heights, and peace upon the earth among approved men.” Christians should not care if there is no peace among those who are not their own. So we read in the 37th Psalm: “8 Cease from anger, and forsake wrath: fret not thyself in any wise to do evil. 9 For evildoers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the LORD, they shall inherit the earth. 10 For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be. 11 But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace. 12 The wicked plotteth against the just, and gnasheth upon him with his teeth. 13 The Lord shall laugh at him: for he seeth that his day is coming. 14 The wicked have drawn out the sword, and have bent their bow, to cast down the poor and needy, and to slay such as be of upright conversation. 15 Their sword shall enter into their own heart, and their bows shall be broken.” Being obedient to God there is peace, and there is also no need to worry about one’s enemies. But since America has become saturated with Jews and other aliens, and has accepted all of their sins, there will be no peace. In that aspect Comparet continues, where it speaks in reference to pastors, and he says:
This also is in the Bible. Jeremiah 8:10-12, 15 records, “... for every one, from the least even unto the greatest, is given to covetousness; from the prophet even unto the priest every one dealeth falsely. For they have healed the hurt of the daughter of My people [but] slightly, saying, Peace, peace, when there is no peace. Were they ashamed when they had committed abomination? nay, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush.… We looked for peace, but no good came; and for a time of health and behold trouble.” Ezekiel 13:8-10 says to these ministers, “Because ye have spoken vanity and seen lies, therefore behold I am against you saith Yahweh. And Mine hand shall be upon the prophets that they see vanity and that divine lies: they shall not be in the assembly of My people, neither shall they be written in the writing of the house of Israel, neither shall they enter into the land of Israel: and ye shall know that I am Yahweh. Because, even because they have seduced My people, saying peace; and there was no peace.” There cannot be peace with evil. Yahshua warned us always to oppose and fight evil. In Matthew 10:34 He said, “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth. I came not to send peace, but a sword.”
These citations are fitting, as the churches are doing today just what the ancient priests, even the Levites, had done in Israel and Judah, where they lied to the people and dealt falsely with them for their own gain. Today the priests and pastors of denominational Christianity do that same thing, teaching false doctrines for their own gain, to maintain their own comfort in a wicked society.
In his previous paragraph, Comparet had spoken of peace on the devil’s terms, and if this sermon was written in 1964, he could hardly have seen what was coming! Perhaps the first height of depravity in America was reached with Loving vs. Virginia in 1967, the Woodstock concert in New York in 1969 and the Roe v. Wade decision which legalized abortion in 1973. But there were cases before these, such as Brown v. Board of Education, which indicated that the nation was already descending the slippery slope. Perhaps the level of depravity to which those events had led was not surpassed again until the Supreme Court’s Obergefell v. Hodges decision forced Sodomite marriage upon the entire nation in 2015.
Now where they once taught against race-mixing, which is fornication, where the government courts have forced it into law the churches now accept it, and even promote it. Where they once taught against Sodomy, now they accept and promote Sodomy. Yahweh God does not change, Scripture does not change, but all the churches have changed to accommodate World Jewry and government policy in spite of the God of the Scriptures and His commandments.
Depravity is a slippery slope, but none of these things were caused by the United Nations. So once again, the United Nations is not the source of our woes, and it should not have been the focus here. Rather, the serpent in the midst of the sea, referring to Isaiah chapter 27, is the source of our woes, as we had both admitted and accepted it when it moved in among us, and then we began to accept its sins. So now we do have “peace” on the devil’s terms, as red, yellow, brown and white, devil, beast, fornicator and Sodomite all live together happily ever after in a world which is slowly devolving into a living hell, and we are well past the point where only Yahweh our God can save us.
However while it was the devils within which had led us to destruction, Comparet continues to look without, where he continues and says:
We turn our backs on Yahweh and walk blindly into the trap every time some obvious villain says “peace.” Daniel 8:23-25 tells us, “And in the latter time of their kingdom, when transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance and understanding dark sentences shall stand up.” Never before have transgressors so come to the full. Khrushchev’s scowling face and communist double talk fulfill this to the letter. Daniel continues, “And his power shall be mighty and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper.” Never in all history has a nation risen to such power and destroyed so many nations by infiltration, corruption and treason, always delicately called liberalism.
Here Comparet almost got to the heart of the matter, even if he used a euphemism for Judaism, but he quickly turns back to the Soviet puppet. It is certain that Khrushchev was indeed a puppet, and when one is being attacked on the world stage, pone must discern between the puppets and the master, and go after the master. Khrushchev was only a puppet for the international Jews who controlled the Communist nations, but they also already controlled the capitalist nations. So Comparet continues:
Remember Khrushchev, drunk with power, strutting boastfully in the United Nations, and in the same breath talking peace and threatening destruction! Daniel says, “He shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace destroy many.” Weigh those words carefully, “Peace shall destroy many.” By the infamous peace of Potsdam, Russia was allowed to swallow all eastern Europe and North Korea.
Perhaps Khrushchev did do this in some way, but Khrushchev is certainly not the subject of Daniel chapter 8. At this point in this presentation we must take a lengthy digression, since in reference to this citation from Daniel, Clifton Emahiser had made an unusually long critical note. We will not agree with the contents of the note, nor with the citation as Comparet had employed it here, but first we will present Clifton’s note.
Critical note by Clifton A. Emahiser: While Comparet usually does quite well correlating most prophecies to history, he missed the mark when he said: “We turn our backs on Yahweh and walk blindly into the trap every time some obvious villain says peace. Daniel 8:23-25 tells us, ‘And in the latter time of their kingdom, when transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance and understanding dark sentences shall stand up.’ Never before have transgressors so come to the full. Khrushchev’s scowling face and communist double talk fulfill this to the letter. Daniel continues, ‘And his power shall be mighty and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper.’ Never in all history has a nation risen to such power and destroyed so many nations by infiltration, corruption and treason, always delicately called liberalism.”
Here we agree with Clifton, that Daniel chapter 8 has nothing to do with Khrushchev or Russia, but as Clifton proceeds, neither can we agree with him, and as we shall see, Clifton would not have even agreed with himself:
Daniel 8:23-25, at this passage, is rather referring to how the Edomite Herod in his degradation bought and sold the priesthood, for Onias was ejected for a sum of money to make room for the wicked Jason who in turn was supplanted for a greater sum by a more evil man (if possible) than he in the person of Menelaus who sold the golden vessels of the temple to pay for this sacrilegious purchase. Thus, transgressions were come to the full, before the Romans had commission to destroy Jerusalem and its temple. (Adam Clarke’s Commentary vol. 4, pp. 598-599.) It had nothing to do with Khrushchev. Otherwise, Comparet did quite well.
Here Clifton seems even more confused, since the account of Jason and Menelaus, both of whom had originally had Hebrew names but changed their names to Greek, which is a sign of Hellenization, is related by Flavius Josephus in the time of Hyrcanus I, many years before Herod was even born, in Antiquities Book 12 (12:239 ff.), and therefore this had nothing to do with Herod. Neither did this have anything to do with Onias, since Onias the high priest had died just before these men had disputed the high priesthood. But we shall continue with Clifton’s note:
Eusebius speaks of this in his The Church History 1:6, and my translation is by Paul L. Maier, pages 34-35: “When the line of Jewish [sic Judaean] rulers ceased, the orderly succession of high priests from generation to generation fell into instant confusion. The reliable Josephus reports that Herod, once made king by the Romans, no longer appointed high priests of the ancient line but obscure sorts instead, a practice followed by his son Archelaus and the Roman governors after him when they took over the government of the Jews [sic Judaea]. The same writer reports that Herod was the first to lock up the sacred vestment of the high priest and keep it under his own seal rather than priestly control, as did his successor Archelaus and the Romans after him.”
Where Eusebius spoke of this in relation to Herod, it is true, but it had nothing to do with the time of Jason and Menelaus in the days of Hyrcanus I, who died in 104 BC. Herod did not become king of Judaea until about 36 BC. Herod did kill off most the the princes of Jerusalem and the family of John Hyrcanus II, and therefore he began to appoint his own high priests, but that alone does not make Herod the subject of the prophecy in Daniel chapter 8. Herod never killed anyone by “peace”, but only by treachery and the sword. Now for the end of Clifton’s note, where he also continues to cite Eusebius:
Not only this, but once Herod took power he attempted to destroy all of Israel’s genealogical records, ibid. 1:7, page 37: “... So Herod, with no Israelite ancestry and pained by his base origins, burned the genealogical records, thinking he would appear of noble birth if no one were able to trace his bloodline from public documents. A few, however, carefully kept private records of their own, either remembering the names or finding them in copies, and took pride in preserving the memory of their aristocratic birth ...”
Here I do not know how or why Clifton had made this association of the little horn of Daniel chapter 8 with Herod the Edomite. This paper, like the rest of Comparet’s sermons which we have presented here over the years, had been prepared for electronic publication by Clifton but it had been originally transcribed from tape recordings by Jeanne Snyder. This sermon, according to Clifton’s records, was prepared for that purpose in October, 2007. When I created the Bertrand Comparet website at Christogenea, I used Clifton’s versions of the texts, but because he never asked me to proofread them, there are no notes from myself, with the exception of Comparet’s 14-part series on the Revelation which he did ask me to proofread.
So the issue is that this statement made by Clifton concerning Herod contradicts what Clifton himself had written earlier in his Watchman's Teaching Letter #54, for October of 2002, where he correctly asserted that “The ‘Little Horn’ Of Daniel 8:9 is Mohammad”, and gave William V. Fowler credit for the identification, citing page 131 of Fowler’s book End Time Revelation. I have never read Fowler’s book myself, but Clifton had cited him often.
When Clifton prepared Comparet’s sermons for publication, as Jeanne Snyder would not share her own electronic copies, and she had passed away in December, 2006, he never asked me to proofread or comment upon them, except for Comparet’s fourteen-part series on the Revelation. I would like to think that I would have caught this error, as it is a serious one. Because I never read many of these sermons in this format, until I have critiqued them here, I never even noticed this error until preparing for this presentation. Much later, in an October, 2010 paper titled The “Little Horn” of Daniel 7:8, Clifton referred to his earlier and more accurate assessment of Daniel chapter 8 where he wrote in part: “In lesson #54, we established that the ‘little horn’ of Daniel 8:9 was Mohammad. With this paper we will consider only the ‘little horn’ of Daniel 7:8.” So how or why he had made this error in 2007, I cannot know.
Mohammedanism, the so-called “religion of peace”, throughout history has indeed killed many millions of people in the name of peace, where the greedy Edomite king Herod had only killed for his own gain and glory. In Daniel chapter 8, there is a prophecy of a contest between a ram and a goat, and it is clearly fulfilled in the struggle between the Greeks and Persians. There we are informed that the little horn was to emerge “in the latter time of their kingdom”, referring to the successors of Alexander. So that cannot describe Khrushchev or the Soviet Union, but it very well describes Mohammad and Islam, the “religion of peace” which has destroyed many.
Returning to Comparet, while many of history’s tyrants and dictators have had common features, it is mostly because common traits are required to assume such a position, and history continually repeats itself. But just because one or two facets in the description of the little horn in Daniel chapter 8 may seem similar to aspects of a tyrant such as Khrushchev, that does not mean that Khrushchev is the subject of that prophecy. So now where we shall continue with Bertrand Comparet, where we shall also see that an earlier dating for this sermon is accurate, and it may have been even a couple of years before 1964. The Cuban Missile Crisis with Russia was in October, 1962. So Comparet continues:
Because we preferred Satan’s peace to that of Yahweh, Russia was given China, Afghanistan, Tibet, Iraq and now Cuba. Now our politicians want to talk disarmament with Khrushchev, knowing that he has never kept his word on anything! About the time Franklin Roosevelt came to power here, Dmitri Manuilsky said in Moscow, “War to the hilt between communism and capitalism is inevitable. Today, of course, we are not strong enough to attack. Our time will come in 20 to 30 years. To win, we shall need the element of surprise. So we shall begin by launching the most spectacular peace movement on record. There will be electrifying overtures and unheard of concessions. The capitalistic countries, stupid and decadent, will rejoice to cooperate in their own destruction. They will leap at another chance to be friends. As soon as their guard is down, we will smash them with our clenched fist.”
This evokes memories of the so-called “peace movement” of the late 1960’s, and the hippies and other reprobates with their “peace” signs and calls to love everybody. The “free love” concept was also a demand of the Bolsheviks in Russia, and forced on the people after their takeover.
While Comparet espoused dominion theology to some degree, whereby he thought that the children of Israel should civilize the world and govern it under the rule of law, in truth Russia could keep China, Afghanistan, Tibet, Iraq, Cuba and every other third-world non-White hellhole, and Christendom in the West would be much better off. Dmitri Manuilsky was a Ukrainian peasant born to an Orthodox priest, and a Bolshevik who became a Soviet politician and bureaucrat. He was one of the only old-line Bolsheviks who survived Stalin’s purges, and he lived until 1959. Continuing with Comparet:
Today this time has come. Everyone knows communists never keep their word in anything. They want us to disarm while they keep their secret stores of weapons, rockets and nuclear bombs to attack us with. Yet, our political leaders still propose to go through with this treachery. What is our reward for this folly? Isaiah 33:7 tells us, “Behold their valiant ones cry without: the ambassadors of peace shall weep bitterly. The highways lie waste, the wayfaring man ceaseth; he hath broken the covenant, he hath despised the cities, he regardeth no man.”
The citation from Isaiah 33:7 is appropriate, as it is a warning of the judgment about to come upon Judah for their sins, and is just as applicable today. Those who proclaim peace when there is no peace with God shall be judged in any age.
Here I would have to admit, that if I had done this same sort of work in Comparet’s time, I too may have thought that the end would come in the 1960’s or 1970’s in an armed conflict against the Soviet Union, which is what Comparet had thought, and which in light of prophecies such as Ezekiel chapters 38 and 39, would have been difficult to dismiss. Even today an armed conflict with Russia once again seems imminent, but in any case, it is not necessary as Satan already rules over America, and as the Camp of the Saints is already overrun by hordes of alien beasts from every corner of the earth.
Now Comparet awaits an event which never happened in his time, although he seems to have confidently expected it:
Devastation will come upon us from Russia’s treacherous nuclear bomb attack, which she will not fear to make after we have largely disarmed. Our military men are aghast at the treason and its consequences. Our diplomats wring their hands in hypocritical horror at the inevitable fruit of their connivance with evil. They appear shocked that the obvious result of their folly has come upon us, what reason is there for surprise? Our attempt to make the devil’s peace could not possibly have any other result.
In 1964, men were already at peace with the devil. The Jews had already controlled Hollywood, the Media, the morning papers, and the evening news. Even then, most everything that everyday people learned or believed was filtered through the Jewish-controlled media corporations and wire services. The average person accepted Jewish entertainment and the gradual decline in morality that accompanied it as it gained more influence in the wider society. Even the depravity at Woodstock did not manifest itself suddenly, but was nurtured and incubating for years on college campuses and in entertainment venues. It did not come from Russia, but from Jews, even if some of them had come from Russia. But the Frankfurt School and other Jews who were already long entrenched in America and plotting to subvert its Christian culture were operating in universities here since the 1930’s or in some cases even earlier.
White Christian Americans did not see this coming. Altruism is a good trait among one’s own people, who share the same general nature, culture and values. But it is deadly when exercised towards alien people who do not share those traits. Projecting our values upon those who do not, or even cannot share them is sort of like trusting a poisonous serpent enough to let it stay in one’s home. So altruism is indeed a virtue which can kill. Another way to destroy many by peace is to accept the sin of others. Once the adulterer, the Sodomite or the fornicator are accepted into a community, their sin becomes normalized, and as it spreads to others, it is overlooked, thereby beckoning the judgment of God. So in those cases, just as it was in ancient Israel, Russia, or some other enemy such as Negroes or Chinamen, are sure to come and inflict punishment on the entire community, or even the entire nation. The Negro crime in America today is a by-product of the sins of Americans, and entire communities suffer, the good along with the wicked. Being at peace with sinners is enmity towards God and invites His wrath.
But Russia’s peace was not necessarily the devil’s peace. Rather, peace with Jewry was the devil’s peace. Comparet was much like the average American in that respect, who was fearful of threats from outside while being oblivious to the much more dangerous threats from within. I hate to say it, but it is true: at least sometimes, Henry Ford, and even Joseph McCarthy were far ahead of Bertrand Comparet in this regard, even if Comparet noticed aspects of it in others of his sermons.
But he was not wrong about everything, as we approach the end of his sermon:
We read in the newspapers and we hear people say, we must keep on negotiating with Russia. As long as they are talking, they aren’t fighting. People also say, let’s make an agreement with Russia so we won’t have war. Making an agreement with Russia is exactly what will bring on war, Yahweh warns us of that. When we make a treaty with Russia for disarmament, millions of thoughtless fools will say, now we are safe, there won’t be war. But war will swiftly follow after that. The apostle Paul tells us in 1 Thessalonians 5:3, “For when they say peace and safety, then sudden destruction cometh upon them as travail upon a woman with child: and they shall not escape.”
This is true, of course, but Paul was not necessarily speaking of Russia. Rather, he was speaking of the enemies of Christ regardless of where they are, that once they become confident in their apparent victory, that is when Yahshua Christ returns to destroy them all. Paul therefore challenged his readers to keep strong in their faith, and arm themselves with it, in the hope that they could endure until that very day, and we should do the same. Now Comparet finishes his sermon:
Evil cannot be presented first in all its naked ugliness, but must first be disguised as good. Even then, those who read Yahweh’s warnings are not deceived. The fools who put expediency above right, who will abandon principle to get the support of minority groups, who put a political party above Yahweh, will this time pay the penalty of death. “By peace he shall destroy many.”
Here Comparet exhibits some excellent insight, since much of the evil perpetrated in the court cases and changes to laws in this country over the past hundred or so years has been in the name of some supposed good, and it is still that same way today, with practically every proposed change to our laws being for something “good”. Once again, Comparet cites Daniel chapter 8 out of context, where he repeats the words “by peace he shall destroy many”, but that is not a complete disservice. The same Jew who peddled democracy in the 18th century was the purveyor of Islam to the Arabic hordes of the 7th century, and they both disguised virtually the same tactics. Like democracy, Mohammedanism is also supposed to be colorblind, and all men are supposed to be equals. The result is always the lowest common denominator, over whom the Jew can more easily maintain his rule.