Critics and Criticisms

Clifton Emahiser on Ted Weiland

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

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

The Higher Calling, a review of a Sermon by Bertrand Comparet

Perhaps it is fitting that each time I begin a review of a sermon by Comparet or Swift, or an essay by Emahiser, that I do so with reflections on my own early Christian Identity studies. However I had originally embarked on my studies because I was compelled by sermons such as these from Comparet or Swift, and I was helped along the way by Emahiser.

This sermon, however, is important to me because it shows that regarding one critical issue, I have always generally agreed with Comparet, while many other Christian Identity pastors or teachers and their followers have different opinions which are not so well-grounded in Scripture. Often, those who have disagreed with me on this issue have even attributed to Comparet a position which he did not hold. That critical issue is the fact that all Israel shall be saved.

That “all Israel shall be saved”, the Bible states rather plainly, as it is found in both the letters of Paul in Romans chapter 11 and in the prophecy of Isaiah in chapter 45. The Scriptures also lead us to make the same implication in many other places. But in spite of that, many Identity Christians argue against it, and even despise us for holding to the assertion. However we would assert that their doctrines are remnants of their denominational baggage, and they are not founded in Scripture.

What is Religion?

When I first came to Christian Identity, I gave much thought to the meaning of the word religion. Perhaps this sermon by Bertrand Comparet, titled What is Religion?, had helped to stimulate that process. The primary definition of the word religion in the Oxford Dictionary is “the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.” But although that is what it has come to mean, I believe the original sense of the Latin word from which it was derived has a much deeper meaning, and that this deeper meaning is relevant to our Christian Identity profession. The Latin word religio was used in a manner much like we use the word religion today. But the related word religo is a verb meaning to tie back or tie up, and religatio is a tying back or up. So, according to The New College Latin & English Dictionary, the word religiosus, which is probably the closest antecedent to our word religious, was used to refer to something which was “subject to religious claims, under religious liability.” Liability is “the state of being responsible for something”, so there is the connection to the meaning of the root word religo, in the sense of being tied or bound to a thing.

This in turn brings several Scriptures to mind. First, in Matthew chapter 18, we read in the words of Christ: “15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. 16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. 17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church [assembly]: but if he neglect to hear the church [assembly], let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.” Then, after admonishing His disciples about sin and guilt and the need to reject men who do not accept correction along those lines, Yahshua Christ had also said “18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 19 Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. 20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.” So binding and loosing are related to Christian fellowship and community, or communion, and that in turn is based on an abstention from sin and a keeping of the commandments of God. Paul’s example of such loosing is found in 1 Corinthians chapter 5, where he encouraged the assembly at Corinth to ostracize a fornicator from their community.

Christogenea Internet Radio, Friday at 8:00 PM Eastern

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Only True Adam of Genesis Chapters 1 and 2

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

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

A Critical Review of Bertrand Comparet’s Sermon I COME AS A THIEF

Here we are going to present a critical review of Bertrand Comparet’s Sermon I Come as a Thief. Doing this, we may be especially hard on Comparet for his failed view of eschatology, but before we criticize him we will also admit that, if we had lived in his same era, we too may have fallen into the trap which he did, believing that the end of the age was going to come to its conclusion in the Cold War with the Soviet Union and a nuclear conflagration and invasion of the United States by Communist hordes.

But we now see that the Communist hordes were here all along, and they have already come to control practically everything of note in America. They are called Jews, and have deceived us with party politics and capitalist internationalism while making our Western nations safe for Marxism and a flood of non-White so-called immigrants. These devils were still under much deeper cover in the 1960’s when Comparet was writing, and even he did not see what was truly going to come.

Does Prosperity Gospel Belong in Christian Identity?

To begin this evening, I am compelled to talk about a topic that I really do not like to talk about at all. But because there always seems to be some sort of controversy swirling around what I do and say at Christogenea, sometimes I am compelled to discuss certain things. I like to think that people choose to support my ministry because they understand that Christian Identity is truth, that it is the only truth, and that it needs to be set on a solid academic foundation from which it can be disseminated to more and more of our White European race, to those for whom the Faith is intended. We undertake that endeavor with the hope that eventually this truth prevails among our people. Supporting my ministry, people are showing their faith in my work, a vote of confidence in my ability to contribute in that endeavor.

Building that academic foundation takes a lot of work in research and writing, and then disseminating the results requires a lot of cost and a lot of labor for websites and servers and related expenses. Christogenea has in excess of a thousand dollars a month in such expenses, although that cost also covers a lot of other Christian Identity and White Nationalist websites. But this is not a fund-raiser, or an appeal for funds. Rather, it is to set the record straight about a few things, because of the divisions we have had within our Christian Identity community over this past year.

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

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

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

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

A Critical Review of Bertrand Comparet's Who Is Your God?

In my daily conversation and Social Media activities I frequently encounter situations which remind me of the fact that many old-time Christian Identity people do not like me, and do not like Clifton Emahiser, and for that reason they do not communicate with me and actually shun our work. This is true, of course, of all of those who deny Two-Seedline and the racial message of the Scriptures. But sadly, to me, it is also true of many who do understand the issue of race in the context of Scripture, and who would rather cling to the personalities of the past rather than examine and refine or correct their errors. They would rather cling to "muh Swift" or "muh Comparet" and remain in their errors, and that is actually a more subtle form of idolatry. They despise us for daring to challenge their old-time British Israel / Christian Identity dogma rather than study and consider what we have written. But in spite of the contention and the obstacles, our ministry grows each year. We pray that we remain on this course. We are not going to succumb to any desire for popularity, but rather we hope to get more and more of our brethren to understand this message in the face of adversity.

So here is yet another critique of Bertrand Comparet. We do this not to tear down one of our own teachers, but to show our appreciation for him while at the same time seeking to improve on his work, correcting things which must be corrected and, if we can, edifying places where he had left room for edification. We are all men, and all of us have room for improvement, or mistakes that may be corrected now or in the future. This printing of Comparet's sermon was transcribed and edited by Clifton Emahiser, and therefore we shall also include Clifton's critical notes in this presentation this evening.

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

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

 A Critical Review of Bertrand Comparet’s Christianity Discriminates and We Face the Future

The subtitle to this presentation should be: What should Christians be doing now?

We received a brief email the other day from someone who had recently joined the Christogenea Forum and it read, with a few small corrections: “This is supposed to be a Christian forum website but every thread I have come across has nothing but the words bastards, niggers and spics all over the conversations. Was God or Jesus racist? In this case, what would Jesus do? I am reporting this website.” Now, we don’t know why this person decided to join our Forum before realizing that we were not the usual run-of-the-mill worldly sort of lukewarm Christian group one may see in the denominational church organizations. However this post is exemplary of the lack of discrimination in our society, and we perceive that lack as a negative quality. This message also reflects the attitude of someone who confuses the Internet with those quasi-public websites like Facebook or Twitter, where you can simply report everything you don’t like and make it go away. But in fact, Yahweh our God is a racist, He does discriminate, and He is not going to go away.

This evening, as we travel to Tallahassee to participate in some activities with the League of the South later this weekend, we are going to present two short sermons from Bertrand Comparet, entitled Christianity Discriminates, and We Face the Future. The versions we have here were typeset and edited by Clifton Emahiser, perhaps twelve or fourteen years ago. Some of Comparet’s remarks may seem dated, as the Satanic plans of world Jewry have far advanced against Christendom since he presented these sermons in the 1960’s and 70’s, however the Biblical perspectives are timeless. We shall endeavor to augment them wherever we can.

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

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

A critical review of the sermon False Prophets, by Bertrand L. Comparet

It has been nearly two years since we have made a presentation from the sermons of Bertrand Comparet, and doing so once again we hope to offer both constructive criticism and also some clarification and edification of Comparet's work wherever we can. Doing this, we will also present the critical notes of Clifton Emahiser from his own publication of Comparet's work. These sermons were originally digitized by Jeanne Snyder, which is where I became familiar with them back in 1998, and then again by Clifton where he was compelled to offer several of his own remarks as appendices. We may move his remarks to pertinent sections of the sermon as we present it.

As I have explained in the past, we make these occasional presentations of Comparet’s material for two reasons. First, we as Identity Christians praise Yahweh our God with much gratitude for men like him, who helped to lead us to Christian Identity truth. And secondly, since no man is perfect, we can honor our teachers but we cannot worship them, we cannot imagine that they are infallible, and we cannot place any of them upon a pedestal. We are all mere men, we can all be criticized, and at times, at least, any of us may be wrong and require correction. Therefore it is our obligation to test the work of our teachers, and, when we can, to correct, improve and build upon that work in order to bring this truth which we have at least a little closer to its perfection. That being said, we know we will never achieve perfection, but we also know that there is always space for improvement.

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

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

The Gospel of Goddard? Or the Gospel of Christ?

Over the past year I have been very busy, not only with my own studies and writing, but with the real-world activities in which I feel it was necessary to participate, in New Orleans and Charlottesville and Shelbyville, and also in the care of our dear friend Clifton Emahiser and other things which have taken time away from my studies and kept us on the road and away from discourse in our Christogenea Forum and our wider Identity community. I am only a man, and I can only do so much at once.

So last week when I contacted a dear friend, now that I have some time and we had hoped to see him, he shied away with the statement that our lives are “going down a different path”. Immediately I knew what he meant. So this evening I am going to address a schism which has recently occurred among some of the friends who have in one way or another been associated with my ministry. This schism is not among them in particular, but between them and myself. Neither is it due to anything which I have said or done, but rather, it is because they have chosen to wander down a path of teaching with which I cannot agree. I even believe that this path is a wicked path, under which lies a diabolical religion of humanism and materialism, a love of mammon and a rejection of Yahweh and His Word, even if it is covered over with the veneer of Scripture.

The Flat-Earth Bible?

Tonight we are going to talk about Flat-Earth verses from the Bible. Some of these verses are also used to promote a geocentric view of the universe. So let me first state that Flat-Earth proponents usually also support geocentrism, but geocentrism does not necessarily require a flat earth, so the two concepts are separate. But we do not actually intend to discuss the merits or shortcomings of either of these theories. Here we only plan to discuss many of the Bible verses used to uphold these theories, and interpret what we believe these verses are really saying. It is more important to do this, as it should help to lay a solid foundation for real scriptural understanding.

Quite unfortunately, there is also a hollow-earth theory floating around Christian Identity circles. It is based on a spurious so-called secret diary that claims to be from Admiral Byrd and supposedly records observations he made while crossing the South Pole. Of course, the hollow-earthers in Christian Identity usually fail to mention the German U-boat sailor Karl Unger’s claim to have found “Rainbow Island” in the Hollow Earth at the South Pole, or the story of supposed Air Force Colonel Billie Woodward, that he and his sister were born in the Hollow Earth, and that both of them were hermaphrodites. The Hollow Earth tales are as Kosher as one can get, and when you combine them with the claims of a Flat Earth you rather appropriately end up with a bagel. Being Identity Christians, we should have a greater care to prove what is true, reject Jewish fables, and avoid swallowing such bagels.