In Partnership with Yahweh, A Critical Review of a Sermon by Bertrand Comparet

In Partnership with Yahweh, A Critical Review of a Sermon by Bertrand Comparet

Not counting his commentary series on the Revelation, which we do not plan to critique here, there are nearly 130 sermons posted at the Bertrand Comparet archive at Christogenea. Now, over these past few years, we have already critiqued about a third of them, and we have greatly expanded on more than a few, such as his sermons on Ruth and Esther, and especially his sermon on Christianity in the Old Testament. Our first critique of his work was his sermon on Esther, which we discussed over three of our own presentations in the Spring of 2015, and we have presented commentary on about three dozen of his other sermons since then.

To us this undertaking is important, because for so many Identity Christians, Bertrand Comparet’s work provided a foundation for their understanding of Scripture and was instrumental in helping them to develop a basis for the substance of their faith. Therefore, if we take our faith seriously, that basis must be continually contemplated, measured against Scripture, and if one tenet or another is not upheld by Scripture then we must allow ourselves to be corrected. As we read in the 119th Psalm: “12 Blessed art thou, O LORD: teach me thy statutes. 13 With my lips have I declared all the judgments of thy mouth. 14 I have rejoiced in the way of thy testimonies, as much as in all riches. 15 I will meditate in thy precepts, and have respect unto thy ways. 16 I will delight myself in thy statutes: I will not forget thy word.”

But Bertrand Comparet is not the only Identity teacher or pastor from the past which we have critiqued, and we have treated Wesley Swift, Charles Weisman, and even our dear friend Clifton Emahiser in the same manner, always trying to be as objective as possible. Clifton actually enjoyed, and often watched my critiques of his work in person, even when he did not participate. In fact, we have critiqued many more of Clifton’s papers than those of any other writer, and I feel at least partially responsible for many of them because I worked with Clifton and edited most of them. So our objective is certainly not to trash the graves of dead men, but rather, we seek to build up an even more solid foundation for our faith, in which we endeavor to examine all things and find what is true, and to cleave to that, as Paul of Tarsus advised the Romans, in chapter 12 of his epistle, to “ 2 … be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.”

Now in our endeavor to advance that objective we shall critique this sermon, which is titled In Partnership with Yahweh, because it is highly illustrative of some of the most fundamental differences which we have with Bertrand Comparet. These differences have been the cause of many disputes between ourselves and many long-time Christian Identity adherents over the past twenty years, and regardless of how much we respect Bertrand Comparet, some of his work is still very much in need of correction. However even doing this, we have already critiqued some of the ideas he presents here in relation to another of his sermons, titled Noah's Flood Was Not World Wide, which we presented here in September of 2020. So we shall borrow some of our criticisms for this sermon.

Essentially, our concept of partnership with Yahweh, especially on a national level, is strikingly different than Comparet’s concept. Comparet believes that the Christian Israelite should be concerned with civilizing the non-Adamic races, while we would contend that such an endeavor was a mistake from the beginning, and we should have instead pushed them all aside as we ourselves grew as a race. Comparet also believed, as we shall see later in this sermon, that Christians should be active and engaged with their governments, which we do not accept either. Christians are not to love the world, but come out from the world. The governments, even in Comparet’s time, are infested with demons. Christians should not have fellowship with demons. These differences are crucial, and the conflicting concepts are irreconcilable. In our opinion, Comparet’s path, which was the same as that of the British empire, has inevitably led to our situation today, and it has played us right into the hands of our enemies. But in our opinion, our path is the only way to the Kingdom of Heaven, and it is our path which is supported by the words of both Christ and the prophets.

So with that we shall present and critique In Partnership with Yahweh by Bertrand L. Comparet. This copy of the sermon, like most of the others in our collection, was originally transcribed by Jeanne Snyder from recordings, and later digitized for publication on the internet by Clifton Emahiser, who added some notes of his own. We will retain Clifton’s notes and present them here also, as we are accustomed to doing when we critique these sermons.

In Partnership with Yahweh by Bertrand L. Comparet

As those of you who listen to these lessons know, Yahweh’s people, the Israel of the Bible, survive today in the form of the nations we roughly classify as Anglo-Saxon. From its first establishment as a nation, Israel has been selected by Yahweh, for a most unusual honor. Israel was to work with Him in establishing His kingdom on this earth.

This label of Anglo-Saxon used to identify the children of Israel in the world today is unfair in light of history, as it is much too narrow. The scattered tribes of Israel are found in practically, if not all, of the White or formerly White European nations. At least many, if not most, of the Whites in Germany, France, Italy, Scandinavia and elsewhere are related peoples descended from the same ancient tribes, and they were never called “Anglo-Saxon” even if they are German Saxons. Then while making a reference in this context to Germanic peoples, while that label is somewhat more accurate, it is still too narrow. The Kelts, many Slavs, and whatever remnant of the original White population is left among Iberians, Romans, and Greeks may also lay claim to this heritage. This association of Israel exclusively to Anglo-Saxons is a remnant of British-Israel thinking in Comparet’s vernacular and this too must be corrected.

Continuing with Comparet, where he correctly speaks about true Israel:

Such a partnership has not been offered to any other people. In Leviticus 20:24-26 Yahweh said, “I am Yahweh your God, which has separated you from other people. And ye shall be holy unto Me: for I Yahweh am holy, and have severed you from other people, that ye should be Mine.” In Deuteronomy 7:6 Yahweh said, “For thou art a holy people unto Yahweh thy God: Yahweh hath chosen thee to be a special people unto Himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth.” Through another prophet, recorded in Amos 3:2 Yahweh said, “You only have I known, of all the families of the earth.”

While all of this is fine so far, in anticipation of what Comparet is about to say we must state that Yahweh had chosen the children of Israel to establish His Kingdom not for the benefit of any of the other nations, but at the expense of other nations, even of other Adamic nations. This we read in Isaiah chapter 43: “3 For I am the LORD thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour: I gave Egypt for thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee. 4 Since thou wast precious in my sight, thou hast been honourable, and I have loved thee: therefore will I give men for thee, and people for thy life.” Then again, in Isaiah chapter 60: “16 Thou shalt also suck the milk of the [nations], and shalt suck the breast of kings: and thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.” Finally, in Isaiah chapter 66: “12 For thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will extend peace to her like a river, and the glory of the nations like a flowing stream: then shall ye suck, ye shall be borne upon her sides, and be dandled upon her knees.” In those passages, it is clear that Yahweh God had given up other nations for the sake of the children of Israel, and that in their captivity, they would enjoy the wealth which had been possessed by other nations, the “milk of the nations” and the “glory of the nations”, as we would prefer to render gentiles as nations, which is much more accurate.

So even after the Assyrian captivity, which is the time when Isaiah had written those words, Israel would continue at the expense of other nations, and not for their benefit, and the passages which Comparet has just cited we may use to disprove what Comparet is about to assert:

As Yahweh’s partners, our task is two fold. (1) To keep order among the turbulent and warlike nations. (2) To be Yahweh’s witnesses to the truth of His word and the excellence of His laws. This was both at home and by colonizing the world, all over the globe.

Yahweh expressly gave us our orders as His policemen in the world. For example Jeremiah 51:20 tells us, “Thou art My battle axe and weapons of war: for with thee will I break in pieces the nations, and with thee will I destroy kingdoms.” We know that the surviving descendants of the ancient Edomite Jews originated present day communism. They are the leaders of communism in all nations today, where they still carry on their ancient hatred of Christianity.

In Ezekiel 25:14 Yahweh said, “And I will lay My vengeance upon Edom by the hand of My people Israel: and they shall do in Edom according to Mine anger and according to My fury; and they shall know My vengeance, saith Yahweh.” This we have never done in all past history. We know that it is our duty which we must still perform. Today, most people join the thoughtless and ignorant in denouncing colonialism as a nasty word. However, Yahweh expressly commanded us to colonize the world. For example in Genesis 28:14 He said, “Thou shalt spread abroad to the west and to the east, and to the north and to the south.”

Here Comparet speaks of colonialism, but these passages which he has cited have nothing to do with colonialism. They have nothing to do with governing other nations and policing other races of people. Rather, the purpose of God for Israel is outlined in Isaiah chapter 27 where we read: “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.” So if the purpose of Israel is to fill the face of the world with fruit, how could that happen, if the children of Israel are to “keep order among” and actually civilize all of the other and even non-Adamic nations? With that, Israel would be competing with those nations for resources, rather than sucking their milk and taking their glory for themselves. That is actually the historical experience of the Israelite Christian nations of today, and they are now overrun by those over whom they had previously ruled. But instead of colonizing and civilizing them, Israel should have been simply trampling them over and pushing them out of the way.

So we read in Jeremiah chapter 46: “27 But fear not thou, O my servant Jacob, and be not dismayed, O Israel: for, behold, I will save thee from afar off, and thy seed from the land of their captivity; and Jacob shall return, and be in rest and at ease, and none shall make him afraid. 28 Fear thou not, O Jacob my servant, saith the LORD: for I am with thee; for I will make a full end of all the nations whither I have driven thee: but I will not make a full end of thee, but correct thee in measure; yet will I not leave thee wholly unpunished.” If the children of Israel had remembered their identity and acted properly, then heeding the words of Jeremiah they may have known not to benefit those of whom Yahweh intended to “make a full end”. Where have the children of Israel been driven to, if not to all of the lands which they inhabited or have colonized since Jeremiah wrote those words? And the same words appeared earlier in his writing, in Jeremiah chapter 30.

Then notice how Comparet made a special mention of Edom, citing Ezekiel chapter 25. While the words are indeed unfulfilled, as he correctly attested, do they really belong in this context? Or did Comparet imagine that only Edom would have such a fate, and not the other races? In another prophecy of Edom found in the Book of Obadiah, we see a passage similar to what Comparet cites from Ezekiel here, where it says “ 18 And the house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau for stubble, and they shall kindle in them, and devour them; and there shall not be any remaining of the house of Esau; for the LORD hath spoken it.” But before that, earlier in Obadiah, we read: “15 For the day of the LORD is near upon all the [nations]: as thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head. 16 For as ye have drunk upon my holy mountain, so shall all the heathen drink continually, yea, they shall drink, and they shall swallow down, and they shall be as though they had not been.” This agrees with the “full end” of all the nations to which Israel had been scattered which was prophesied in Jeremiah.

So why should the children of Israel have tried to civilize the savage races of whom Yahweh had promised to make a full end, and of whom Yahweh had attested that “they shall be as though they had not been”? Who are these nations feeding on Yahweh’s holy mountain, which is an allegory for the children of Israel, if they are not all of the heathens which the children of Israel have in the past tried to civilize, but whom have now in turn overrun the children of Israel?

Bertrand Comparet was infected with what we call Dominion Theology, which stems from a British-Israel interpretation of Scripture beginning in Genesis chapter 1, where we read: “ 26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.” The Dominion Theology interpretation of that passage insists that Israel should rule over all of the other nations and races, but it is not what the passage itself states. The Hebrew word for dominion,רדה or radah (7287), is a verb which primarily means to tread or subjugate something, as Strong’s defines it, and as it is also primarily defined in the original Gesenius Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament. So it is also to subdue, or to rule or have dominion in that sense. Therefore the Adamic race was to tread upon and subjugate everything else which lives upon the earth, but other people are not mentioned in that passage. Other races were here, such as those which descended from the Nephilim, but they are not found in Genesis chapter 1. Likewise, the commission was given to all of the children of Adam, and not to Israel exclusively.

Likewise, we read in Genesis chapter 9, in the Word of Yahweh where He addressed Noah after the flood: “1 And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth. 2 And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered.” This is the attitude that the Adamic man should have toward the other races, that they should be in fear and in dread. But there is no explicit commandments anywhere that the Adamic man should try to civilize them, police them, or force them to maintain any sort of order. Whenever it has been tried, the Adamic man has suffered greatly and the other races have received the advantage.

Comparet often cited the Smith & Goodspeed translations of Scripture, or even other versions where he thought they were acceptable. But quite frequently he also cited Ferrar Fenton. In Part 7 of his Revelation commentary, Comparet referred to Fenton as “a stickler for accuracy”. But while he seemed to have a good understanding of some things, in our own evaluations of Fenton’s translation we have noticed some serious errors. For example, in Genesis chapter 10, in each of verses 5, 20, 31 and 32, Fenton seems to have "missed" a 3rd person plural pronoun. Where I say “missed” I am being sarcastic, rather than polite, as they must have been purposely ignored.

This facilitated his renderings, whereby he imagined that the sons of Noah had settled “amongst the gentile tribes”, or “among the heathens” rather than, as the King James and the Greek of the Septuagint would have it, "in their nations", or "after their nations", which the Hebrew certainly supports - and insists upon – according to all of the resources which I have available. Then again, in 1 Chronicles 4:40 Fenton translated the verse, in part, “... For the previous inhabitants there were Blacks.” This was spoken of Gedor, a mountain town in the land of Judah, and there is no record of negroes ever having dwelt in Judah in Biblical or historic times. But the King James Version has “... for they of Ham had dwelt there of old.” and that is agreeable to both the Hebrew and to the Greek of the Septuagint. So we read in Brenton’s translation of the Greek: “... for there were some of the children of Cham who dwelt there before.”

This further reveals the fact that Ferrar Fenton had accepted the Jewish myth that Ham was cursed, and for that reason he was black, which the Roman Catholic Church had also accepted. But there is no basis for that myth in Scripture, and Ham was never cursed. Furthermore, archaeology proves that all of Ham’s original descendants were White, and not black at all. Only some of them had later been race-mixed and became black on account of it, at a much later time in history. Where in Isaiah chapter 43 Yahweh had stated that He gave up Egypt, Ethiopia and Seba, it is obvious that He gave them up to niggers, which had already happened by the time when Isaiah had written those words, around 698 BC. There was a revival in Egypt some time later, but it did not last for very long.

But it is also obvious, that Fenton’s translations were meant to lend support to the British-Israel concept of Dominion Theology, whereby the British Empire was imagined to have been doing the work of Yahweh by attempting to civilize the beasts. But if the British Empire was the model which Yahweh had wanted for the children of Israel, why did it fail? And why is the American empire which replaced it failing, although it changed little of the British objectives? Why are England and America both now overrun by those very same beasts, who never truly became civilized and who now seek to destroy them? A bad result should lead to repentance and reconsideration of one’s ways. But for now we shall continue with Comparet:

In Isaiah 54:2-3 Yahweh said, “Enlarge the place of thy tent, and let them stretch forth the curtains of thine habitations: spare not, lengthen thy cords and strengthen thy stakes. For thou shalt break forth on the right hand and on the left; and thy seed shall inherit the nations, and make the desolate cities to be inhabited.” When we obeyed these commands, we brought peace and civilization to Africa, India, the Near East, Southeast Asia, Cuba, Indonesia, and the Philippines. Now that we have shirked our duty and abandoned these places, are the natives of Palestine and Indonesia as well off as they were under the British and the Dutch? We, in our turn, by this cowardly failure to do our duty, have only gained the hatred of the world.

Comparet’s mention of Palestine and Indonesia in this context seems to be disingenuous. The British mandate in Palestine was terminated in 1948, to the full satisfaction of World Jewry. Israel had been recognized as an independent and sovereign state by the United Nations in 1947 an became a member of that organization in that capacity in 1949. The Jews did not want British rule and did what they could to end it. Neither did the Arabs want British rule in Palestine, and they had organized armed revolts against the British throughout the 1930’s. Indonesia was formerly the Dutch East Indies, but it was occupied by Japan during the Second World War as the Netherlands itself was occupied by Germany. After the war, the Indonesians themselves declared independence and resisted armed Dutch attempts to regain control of the colony. The Netherlands was not able to once again exert effective rule, so it recognized the independence of Indonesia in 1949. Comparet makes it sound as if the British and Dutch had abandoned a collection of poor and needy peoples who were otherwise docile and obedient to the West, but that is not the case in any of his examples. Colonization and the attempt to civilize beasts was a mistake on the part of Christendom, and the West is paying dearly for the policy today.

Here Clifton also took issue with this last statement of Comparet’s, and he made the following remarks in a critical note:

While I give much credit to Comparet for his teachings, I must take exception to some of his commentary in this lesson, as I have also done with some of his other messages. He makes the statement here: “When we obeyed these commands, we brought peace and civilization to Africa, India, the Near East, Southeast Asia, Cuba, Indonesia, and the Philippines. Now that we have shirked our duty and abandoned these places, are the natives of Palestine and Indonesia as well off as they were under the British and the Dutch? We, in our turn, by this cowardly failure to do our duty, have only gained the hatred of the world. Both at home and in other lands we colonized, we were to establish the laws of Yahweh.” At another point Comparet says: “We have ceased to police the heathen ... and bring education and civilization to the world.”

I fail to see how policing and educating the heathen has anything to do with enlarging the place of our tent, or stretching forth the curtains of our habitation, or lengthening our cords and stakes as described by Isaiah 54:2-3! By enlarging the place of our tent, and stretching forth the curtains of our habitation, and lengthening our cords and stakes, we expel the heathen from off the land he occupies, leaving him to perish. This is what we have failed to do; not to police and educate! If we have failed our duty, why did Yahshua Christ Himself limit His coming to the “lost sheep of the house of Israel”?

In his first epistle, the apostle Peter, speaking to “sojourners of the dispersion” of Israel scattered throughout Anatolia, had written, in chapter 2: “9 But you are an elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people, so that you should proclaim the virtues for which from out of darkness you have been called into the wonder of His light, 10 who at one time were ‘not a people’ but now are the people of Yahweh, those who ‘have not been shown mercy’ but are now shown mercy.” That last line is from a prophecy for Israel found in Hosea chapter 1, and it can only apply to Israel. With that we see that the commandment for Israel to be a separate and peculiar people is as valid in the New Testament as it was in the Old Testament. But if we attempt to make the other nations and races as ourselves, how could we uphold our obligation to be a peculiar people?

Comparet also held conflicting beliefs simultaneously. Here he said that the nations of Christendom failed to do their duty, in a cowardly manner, because they abandoned the task of bringing “peace and civilization” to the savage nations. So in another context, in his sermon titled The Sheep and the Goats, we read the following:

Of all satanic false doctrines, this is one of the worst. It is completely contrary to the Bible, which always teaches division and segregation of the races. Yahshua always said that He had come to divide and separate not to mix everyone together. In Matthew 25:31-33 He says, “And when the Son of man shall come in His glory and all the holy angels with Him, then shall He sit upon the throne of His glory: And before Him shall be gathered all nations: and He shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats; and He shall set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left.” Note that this is not the judgment of individual persons, but a division and separation of nations. He goes on to tell how the sheep nations are given the kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world while the goat nations are cast into the fire prepared for the devil and his angels. Who are these nations? A sheep nation can only be a nation made up of sheep and a goat nation one consisting of goats. Therefore, let’s find out who are the sheep?

Then, after producing some of the Scriptures which attest that the sheep are exclusively the children of Israel, Comparet continues and says:

A sheep is a sheep by its genetic nature, it’s race, it can’t become a goat by straying away from the flock. The goats run with the flock, but that can’t make sheep out of them, you simply can’t make a sheep out of a goat, and Yahshua never tried to!! As you already know, the Jews are not any part of Israel, and never were. Therefore, Yahshua never tried to make converts of them. To the contrary, He always taught among them in public using parables which they could not understand, but Yahshua explained the parables privately to His disciples who were Israelites. He stated His reason for this in Mark 4:11-12, “Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of Yahweh; but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables: that seeing, they may see but not perceive; and hearing, they may hear but not understand: lest at any time they should be converted and their sins be forgiven them.” Accordingly, in John 10:26-28, “But ye believe not, because ye are not of My sheep, as I said unto you. My sheep hear My voice.”

A little further on Comparet asserted that “Goats cannot become sheep!” We would completely agree with his statements in these paragraphs. But even after attesting that “the goat nations are cast into the fire prepared for the devil and his angels”, he said in that same sermon that:

The blessings of peace, good government, education, sanitation, good health, prosperity, and civilization, can be given to those who are of another race. It is not to be given to those who would seize it for themselves saying, “We are just as much sheep as you are. We make ourselves sheep by saying so.”

Here Comparet made his own false division of goat nations, which is not supported in history or in Scripture, where a goat is a goat and no better than other goats. But we shall continue:

They must recognize Yahweh’s own order of things. He gives His commandments and His instructions on how to obtain His blessings, to His people Israel. We are to obey His commandments and demonstrate to the world how obedience to Him has made us the have nations, compared to the pagan have not nations. If they will come to us for instruction in His laws, we who are His witnesses will instruct them and they can grow into civilizations as far and as fast as they will obey.

So even there Comparet sought to make other races into so-called “have nations”, in spite of his testimonies that only Israel are the sheep, that goats cannot be sheep, and that all of the goats are ultimately destined for the “fire prepared for the devil and his angels”. So now the nations formerly known as Christendom have abandoned Christianity, and they are flooded with Africans, Arabs, Asians, South Americans and all the formerly colonized nations who are devouring the flesh of Christians. This is the fruit of our efforts to civilize them, and they have used our civilization against us. Rather than rejecting Dominion Theology, Comparet has put the blame on Christians! So Bertrand Comparet fell completely into the trap of the devil in this regard, and the next step would be to teach Critical Race Theory as Christianity!

But this is more incredible to me because it misses a significant aspect of Scripture. The fact that our race has attempted to civilize the savage races is not good in the eyes of Yahweh, as He commanded us to be a separate and holy and peculiar people. So we have done this in a state of sin, and the act itself is a sin. While Yahweh must have known what we would do, it is not His divine will that we had done so. In the Old Testament, for example in Hosea chapter 2, we learn that international trade with heathens is a sin for which the ancient children of Israel were punished. Teaching them the law and compelling them to live by it would not make them sheep, yet Comparet thought that by that even the heathens would be blessed. Yet there is not one explicit command in the Old Testament for Israel to teach other races the law. How could we even attempt to enrich other races, if they are all goats destined for the lake of fire?

In another sermon, titled Gathering the Tares, Comparet is seen to be in conflict with himself once again where he said:

This gathering of the individual tares among us is exactly parallel to the similar gathering of the beast nations in this same judgment. Yahshua prophesied it in Matthew 25:31-34, 41. “When the Son of man shall come in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then shall He sit upon the throne of His glory: And before Him shall be gathered all nations: and He shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: and He shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on His right hand, Come ye blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. ... Then shall He say unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels.” Of course there must be a division, separation, and discrimination, to say it plainly. This is the purpose for which Yahshua came. In Luke 12:51 Yahshua says, “Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you nay: but rather division.”

So the goats among us are a sin which only Yahweh God can correct in the end, and that is a promise seen not only in the words of the prophets, but throughout the parables and Revelation of Yahshua Christ. We should have never colonized and sought to civilize the other races. We should only have pushed them aside and kept ourselves separate from them.

Now we shall read one more sentence from Comparet and comment further:

Both at home and in other lands we colonized, we were to establish the laws of Yahweh.

But I would assert that we would have established the laws of Yahweh, if we did not seek to include the other races in any of our establishments. The name Jacob is said to mean one who supplants, not one who capitulates. In his sermon titled Let’s Review the Diagnosis, Comparet offered a list of passages by which the children of Israel could be identified, and among them is a mention of their role as the “Custodian of Yahweh’s word. Psalm 147:19-20; Isaiah 59:21.” But is it true that the children of Israel were merely custodians of the Word of God, a word which implies that perhaps they not only kept it but also had dispensed it for the use of others?

In that passage of Psalms which he cited we read: “19 He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel. 20 He hath not dealt so with any nation: and as for his judgments, they have not known them. Praise ye the LORD.” If the other nations and races did know the law then, how or why should they have it made known to them now? I had long believed this was a psalm of David, but later I learned that the Greek of the Septuagint credits it to the prophets Haggai and Zechariah, who lived at the same time of the return to Jerusalem and building of the second temple. There it is obvious, that the prophets had rejoiced because Yahweh did not give His law or His Word to any other nation. Were those prophets also cowards, because they rejoiced that ancient Israel never shared the law with any other nation?

In Isaiah 59:21 we read, beginning in verse 20: “20 And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the LORD. 21 As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever.” So the children of Israel would have the Word of God, but there is not one word there concerning sharing it with other races. The sharing of Bibles with other races and the efforts to lead them to Christ is a product of egalitarian humanism, it is Jewish, it is not the divine will of God. It leads to universalism, not to Christianity.

Continuing again with Comparet, in reference to his statement that Israel should establish the law of God among the other races in their colonies:

This was so that all the world might see a practical demonstration of the peace and prosperity that would follow. In Isaiah chapter 43 Yahweh said, “But now thus saith Yahweh that created thee O Jacob, and He that formed thee, O Israel: Fear not; for I have redeemed thee, I have called thee by My name: thou art Mine. Ye are My witnesses, saith Yahweh, and My servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe Me, and understand that I am He: before Me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. This people have I formed for Myself: they shall show forth My praise.”

It does say that in Isaiah chapter 43, right after Yahweh professed that He would give up other Adamic nations for the sake of the children of Israel. But here we also see how the children of Israel are Yahweh’s witnesses: “that ye may know and believe Me”, and no other reason is given. The children of Israel are Yahweh’s witnesses, but not in the way in which Comparet had imagined. Rather, their having multiplied into many nations and their later having accepted the Gospel of Christ is proof that Yahweh is true and that is how they are His witnesses. Their subsequent history has proved that He is true because it has proved that He keeps His Word, even in spite of the disobedience of Israel, but not for the benefit of other nations and races. Furthermore, the keeping of the law of Yahweh by itself does not make peace or prosperity. The good king Josiah, who led a revival of the worship of Yahweh in Judah, was nevertheless killed in battle at the hand of the Egyptians. Only Yahweh grants peace and prosperity, and man cannot assure it to himself by his own actions.

It may be argued that the apostles were told to announce the gospel “in all the world”, as we read in Matthew chapter 24 where Christ is recorded as having said “14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.” Yet long before any missionary ever set foot n sub-Saharan Africa or the Far East or South America, Paul of Tarsus had professed that the task had already been accomplished in his time where he wrote in Colossians chapter 1: “4 Since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus, and of the love which ye have to all the saints, 5 For the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, whereof ye heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel; 6 Which is come unto you, as it is in all the world; and bringeth forth fruit, as it doth also in you, since the day ye heard of it, and knew the grace of God in truth.” Then in Romans chapter 10, speaking of the Gospel: “18 But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.” The world to which the apostles were to bring the Gospel was the Roman world, and the task was accomplished by the time of Paul of Tarsus, as he had professed in those two epistles. Since Christ had only come for the “lost sheep of the house of Israel”, the other races and nations who were outside of that world never had any need to hear it, or to hear the law.

Continuing again with Comparet:

The reward for this was to be very great. Besides the prosperity which would result from living under Yahweh’s laws, we were to be greatly honored. In Exodus 19:5-6 Yahweh said, “Now therefore, if ye will obey My voice indeed, and keep My covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto Me above all people: for all the earth is Mine. And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation.”

Priests are servants of God, or a god, and each of the children of Israel are priests in the Biblical and Christian sense of the word if they serve Yahweh their God. But properly, a priest does not choose for himself how to serve a god. The Levitical priests were given very specific instructions as to how to serve God. But Christians are a kingdom of priests only if they obey Christ and keep His commandments. So Christ had said that “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel”, and in no place did He ever tell those sheep to feed other nations, or especially any of the goats, with His Word. The children unintentionally drop crumbs on the floor, which are then eaten by the dogs. But that is not a commandment of the Father.

After exhorting his readers through several chapters of the epistle to the Romans that they should conform themselves to Christ, live by the Spirit rather than by the flesh, and keep the commandments of the law, Paul of Tarsus wrote, in chapter 12, that “1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.” The word for service in that verse is λατρεία, which was often used in Greek, and in the Septuagint, to describe the services which a priest performs for a god, or for God. Paul used it in Hebrews chapter 9 where he wrote: “1 Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.” The word appears once again in that context in verse 6 of the same chapter. So Christians must serve God by doing the things which God commands of them, which is by keeping His commandments, loving their brethren, and conforming themselves to Christ. Christians cannot serve God by serving and teaching other races, as He did not commands that, and as He commands that they remain a separate people.

But Comparet also had a strange concept of the so-called Millennium or Millennial Kingdom, which was very much like the typical Judaized Christian interpretation of a portion of Revelation chapter 20. He thought the Millennium, or thousand-year rule of Christ was still in the future, not understanding that verse 5 of the chapter contains an interpolation which forces such an interpretation. So believing that it was in the future, he wrote in another sermon, titled Israel in the Book of Revelation:

During this age, Yahshua rules the beast nations with a rod of iron, compelling them to live by the laws of Yahweh. Micah 4:3-4 promises, “And He shall judge among many people, and rebuke strong nations afar off; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore. But they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree; and none shall make them afraid: for the mouth of Yahweh hath spoken it.”

Since, in Comparet’s view of the Millennium, Christ returns personally to rule over the so-called “beast nations”, and then at the end of a thousand future years those nations rise to battle against Israel, then Micah chapter 4 cannot apply to the so-called Millennium, and Comparet is taking the citation out of context. Rather, that prophecy in Micah chapter 4 applies to a period after the return of Christ where all of the goat nations are already in the Lake of Fire. The “millennium” is already past, and the Camp of the Saints is currently surrounded by all of the other and so-called “beast nations”, the goats of the parable of Christ. Aside from that difference, we shall continue to read from that sermon where he said:

The beast races have lived under their own rule, according to their own ideals, for well over six thousand years of continuous tyranny, cruelty, poverty, disease, misery and filth. They have rejected the laws of Yahweh, so they must receive the consequences of their own choice.

The truth is that they never had the laws of Yahweh in order to reject them. So now we continue as Comparet abuses a Proverb:

Proverbs 1:29-31 tells it thus. “They hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of Yahweh: they would none of My counsel: they despised all My reproof. Therefore shall they eat of the fruit of their own way, and be filled with their own devices.”

Here Comparet also takes the Proverb out of context, since in Proverbs chapter 1 Solomon is speaking of sinners, and since only Israel had the law, only Israel could sin. Solomon was not making this statement in reference to “beast nations”. So to continue with one more short paragraph:

During the millennium, they will be compelled against their will by a rod of iron, to live in obedience to Yahweh’s laws and they will see what peace and prosperity result from it. Yet, they will not be convinced, for it is not in their nature to understand it. Yahshua explained all this in John chapters 14-17. Yahshua said, “And I will pray the father, and He shall give you another comforter, that He may abide with you forever: even the spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive.”

So Comparet is only assuming that Christ would rule over “beast nations” in a future thousand-year period. But that is not necessarily what the Revelation itself had stated. However even if he was correct, how can he imagine that the children of Israel without Christ had any commission to civilize and teach the law to other nations before the return of Christ? Comparet himself had said that “During this age, Yahshua rules the beast nations with a rod of iron, compelling them to live by the laws of Yahweh.” So once again, and in a more subtle manner, Comparet contradicted himself. But the truth is that the millennial period of Revelation chapter 20 is past, all of Europe was ruled by Christ for at least a thousand years, and it ended at roughly the same time that the colonial period was coming to its apex. But it had nothing at all to do with “beast nations”. It only concerns the nations of Israel, which is White Christian Europe at that time.

So with Comparet wanting us to go out and civilize the savage nations, which six hundred years of Christian missionaries and governments have thus far failed to do, how is his position any different than that of a Jesuit or an Evangelical Protestant? This position is disappointing, and it must be corrected if Identity Christians have any care for truth. In the Old Covenant, the Levites had served only Israel, and in the New Covenant, the children of Israel should serve one another in Christ. In that sense the saying is also true, that we cannot serve both God and Mammon. We cannot love our brethren, and at the same time exhaust our efforts for the benefit of the other races.

All Christ had required of His disciples is summarily expressed in John chapter 15: “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. 11 These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full. 12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. 13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. 14 Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you.” Doing this is the only way to have partnership with Yahweh. So the apostle John wrote in his first epistle, in chapter 5: “1 Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him. 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.”

Now the subject which Comparet had expressed in the title of this sermon, In Partnership with Yahweh, has multiple aspects. So where Comparet continues he speaks of tithes in relation to the ancient Levites and to modern times, and tithes are the subject for the balance of the sermon:

The strange part of this remarkable partnership is the way income from it was divided. Yahweh surely is the senior partner, yet He took only 10% as His share and gave the 90% to us, the junior partners. The rules are first given in Leviticus 27:30-32, a tithe of 10% of all the increase is holy unto Yahweh. It is His share of the nation’s income. Under Yahweh’s kingdom, this would replace all ordinary taxes. This tithe was paid to the Levites, who made up the entire civil service, not only of the temple but of all the civil government. They, in turn, paid 10% of their share to the priests. Numbers 18:24-28. Then for organized charity, there was another tenth every three years. This made up all the taxes paid in Yahweh’s kingdom.

The three-year law for charity is found in Deuteronomy chapter 14: “27 And the Levite that is within thy gates; thou shalt not forsake him; for he hath no part nor inheritance with thee. 28 At the end of three years thou shalt bring forth all the tithe of thine increase the same year, and shalt lay it up within thy gates: 29 And the Levite, (because he hath no part nor inheritance with thee,) and the stranger, and the fatherless, and the widow, which are within thy gates, shall come, and shall eat and be satisfied; that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all the work of thine hand which thou doest.” The stranger in that passage is a גיר, or geyr (# 1616), a sojourner with an expectation of hospitality, and not simply any alien. The Canaanites whom Yahweh had commanded the children of Israel to destroy were strangers, but certainly had no just expectation of hospitality.

In Scripture it is fully evident that Yahweh had only commissioned the Levites to serve Him by serving the children of Israel, and perhaps 10 percent was greater than a proportionate share as they were only one-twelfth of the twelve tribes. Now our modern governments are focused on all of the world’s nations and races, and the demand on the people has increased exponentially. But where Comparet continues by contrasting the obligations of secular society today, he himself does not make that association directly:

Under our present system, just our federal income tax alone starts with 20% on the poorest taxpayer. Instead of encouraging prosperity, it punishes the prosperous with an increasing tax running up as high as 75%. This is just the beginning. On top of this, you pay a multitude of federal excise taxes, most of which you don’t recognize as taxes, because they just increase the price of the things that you buy.

The highest U.S. Income Tax bracket was 91% in 1963, 77% in 1964, and it was cut to 70% in 1965. There were anomalies from 1968 through 1970, where the rates fluctuated from 71.75% to 77%. It was 75% for only one year, in 1968, when it was 75.25%. Later, in 1982, it was cut to 50% and lowered much further in 1987 and 1988. But I would not use this to try to date Comparet’s sermon more precisely, since he may have had only approximate and dated information. However it does loosely support the assertion which we shall make a little further on, that Jerry Brown must already have been governor of California, so it may be dated to 1975 or later.

Comparet continues to complain about modern government tax burdens in contrast to the Biblical law:

Then there is your state income tax, and the state corporation tax, which is just another expense of doing business, so the corporations just raise the price of their goods and services to cover it. You, the individual consumer, pay them all. Then there are the state, city or county sales taxes, another 8% or more. Don’t forget the city and county property taxes, not to mention the various city, state and county license taxes. Over 40% of our entire national income is consumed in these many taxes. We are paying over 40% instead of the 13 1/2% we would pay under Yahweh’s kingdom. No nation, in all of history, has long survived after taxation passed the 30% mark. We are already well past it and the politician’s voracious appetite is raising taxes higher and higher.

Here Comparet read the law of the tithe in Deuteronomy chapter 14 as a separate tithe, distinct from the tithe of the Levites, so he divides an additional tenth for a one year over a three year period. But even if it were a separate, three-year tithe, it would still be an additional tenth of all three years on top of the yearly tenth for the Levites, and the total amount would be twenty percent rather than ten. While specific methods of paying the tithe seem to be ambiguous, reading all of that chapter it is apparent that perhaps the tithes were only paid once every three years, and it was never more than a tenth.

Comparet continues speaking of contemporary times:

The fact that you have chosen to support Brown and Johnson, “Soapy” Williams and Humphrey, Ben Gurion and Tito, communist premier Gomulka of Red Poland and Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, does not relieve you of your honest duty to give Yahweh his 10% share as senior partner. This 10% is Yahweh’s money. After all, if you expect Him to work for the firm as one of the partners, isn’t it right that He should receive His share of the profits? If He doesn’t get it, can you expect Him to be a working partner indefinitely?

Here Comparet does help to date this sermon for us, to a degree. Being a Californian, the reference to Brown must be to Jerry Brown, the governor of California from 1975 to 1983, the year in which Comparet had died. All of the others mentioned here were prominent during a much wider span of time, from the 1950’s through the 1970’s. So while these examples given by Comparet are from a period of several decades, we would assert that the sermon must date from after Jerry Brown became governor of California in 1975.

He reminds us of this in Malachi 3:8-10, “Will a man rob Yahweh? Yet ye have robbed Me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed Thee? In tithes and offerings. Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed Me, even this whole nation. Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in Mine house, and prove Me now herewith, saith Yahweh, if not I will not open the windows of heaven and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.”

Even these words of Malachi are in the context of admonitions to the Levitical priesthood in the days of Malachi. I would refrain from projecting them onto Christians today. But while I disdain speaking of tithes, Christians are obliged to help one another, and to assist the weak or elderly or other truly disadvantaged of their brethren among them. Paul of Tarsus was at times sustained by the assemblies,which he mentions in 2 Corinthians chapter 11 (11:9), and which he asserted as a right in 1 Corinthians chapter 9 (9:11). Paul had also taken collections for those who preached the gospel and who could not work, speaking in reference to the saints in Jerusalem in Romans chapter 15 (15:27), 1 Corinthians chapter 16 (16:1) and 2 Corinthians chapters 8 and 9 (8:4; 9:1, 12).

At the end of the sermon Comparet reveals that this is his objective, to make certain that his listeners give their tithes to him or to others like him, where he says “Why don’t you take Him at His word by paying Yahweh’s tithe to support the work of bringing His word to the people.” But Paul never demanded a tithe, and he never demanded any particular amount or any requirement to give anything to anybody. Rather, he was only grateful to those who could give assistance according to their own desire and ability. The demand for tithes ended with the Levitical priesthood, but Christians should all understand the obligation to give what they can or do what they for their communities.

Continuing with Comparet:

When we are able to get back to the kingdom of Yahweh, which we will do when Yahshua returns, we will be freed of our present crushing burden of unjust taxation. We will only pay to Yahweh His share of the income and have all the rest for ourselves. We won’t need Social Security, for we will all be able to save plenty out of our own earnings. Think what you could do if you were allowed to keep the income that is rightfully yours, but which your politicians now steal to give it to your enemies all over the world!

There was no permanent income tax in the United States until 1913, but all through time people were compelled to support their governments, whether it was Levites or medieval feudal lords. But the burdens of old all pale in comparison with the demands of modern governments, and most people are too ignorant to see that they are now little but slaves.

In the meantime, remember that neither you as an individual nor the nation as a whole can say, I am in business for myself, this is all mine. You are just a junior member of a partnership whose senior partner is Yahweh. As a nation, we have failed to operate the business partnership. We have ceased to police the heathen, we have ceased to colonize and bring education and civilization to the world. We have stolen the senior partner’s share of the profits. You, as an individual, may not be able to influence national policy enough to get us back on the right track, but how hard did you try?

Why would modern Christians want to influence national policy, as if they could ever outspend or outvote the antichrist Jews who now control their currency, and through that, all of their politics and the entire economy? No, Christians are obliged to hate the world, and to separate themselves from it. We should be influencing our brethren to separate themselves from the world. While we will not discuss it here, in many ways Comparet believed that America was still a Christian nation with a Christian government, but that had not been the case for well over a hundred years at the time when he gave this sermon. Christians are to come out from the world. As James wrote in chapter 4 of his epistle: “4… whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.”

Now Comparet concludes his sermon:

In any event, you as an individual can still deal honestly and fairly with your senior partner. He is your partner in your own business. Why don’t you take Him at His word by paying Yahweh’s tithe to support the work of bringing His word to the people. Just see what blessings He will give you as His faithful partner!

This is why I disdain speaking of tithes, as those who do always manage to sound like grifters or swindlers, even when they are not. While I doubt it was intentional, here Comparet is imitating Joel Osteen, hanging a carrot in front of his listeners and promising them prosperity if they pay their tithes to their pastors. No man can make such a promise, and in fact, Christians should only expect their faith to be tried in this world, and hope to be rewarded in the next, no matter how much they may tithe. No matter how much a Christian can give to his pastors or to the needy in his community, he is not going to buy his way out of the inevitable trials of our faith. Then with that, there are many other ways to earn treasure in heaven which Comparet neglected to mention here, such as helping the poor or less fortunate or even the more heavily burdened of one’s brethren. No pastor needs ten percent of the annual increase from his entire congregation, and if he did, well, he might become like Joel Osteen, but that is not a good fate.