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

Christogenea is reader supported. If you find value in our work, please help to keep it going! See our Contact Page for more information or DONATE HERE!

  • Christogenea Saturdays


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.

With these things in mind, any criticisms which we offer are not intended to tear down the work of our predecessors. Rather, our hope is to build upon and improve that work, so that eventually, our Christian Identity understanding of the Gospel of Christ is found to be without reproach, because we certainly are assured that it is true. With this we shall proceed with Bertrand Comparet’s sermon, False Prophets:

For many years Christianity has been under constant, bitter and treacherous attack, until the major churches are now in disorganized retreat. The attack, by those who are openly atheists or communists, has done little damage, as it could not appeal to anyone but our enemies, in any event. The most vicious attack, and the most successful, has come from men who have gained high positions of power in church hierarchies. They have used this power to destroy everything the Christian churches have stood for over the centuries, everything that brought Christianity greatness and kept it great. It is the old Marxist strategy of infiltration and subversion from within.

We do not know with any precision when Bertrand Comparet actually wrote any of his sermons. Sometimes he may mention a contemporary event, something that was newsworthy at any particular time, and that may give us a reference. Most of his sermons which have survived to us seem to have been given in the 1960’s or 1970’s, and he passed away in 1983. One day I hope to excavate the many letters I received from Jeanne Snyder, as she and her husband George were personal friends of Bertrand and Inez Comparet throughout the time of his ministry, and garner whatever details I can. Over nine years now I have wanted to do that, and still have not had the opportunity.

Having passed in 1983, Comparet did not get to witness the much greater degree of apostasy which has occurred since that time. He died when the great pretender, Ronald Reagan, was at his political zenith and the evangelical so-called “moral majority” was receiving a lot of press in the hostile media. The popularity of the Christian Patriot militias seemed to be growing, and America was still Christian in appearance, while now Christian America is now marginalized and practically ridiculed. The result is that the Judaized denominational churches have retreated further and further from Scripture, and it seems that with each passing year they devise new ways to exhibit their complete capitulation to the designs of world Jewry. Comparet continues with his own perception:

The first step of this plot, was to keep the church congregations ignorant of the real Biblical basis for Christian doctrine. The average man has no training in analysis of the Bible. And if he wished to, he could not spare the great amount of time necessary for the years of studies which are required.

We would state that the real subversion of Christianity began when converso Jews started writing Bible commentaries in the 13th century, but that is an entirely different story. At least the medieval church clung for the most part to the moral doctrines of Christianity. Early American Christianity was still amenable to nationalism, to the maintenance of separation among the races, and upheld Christian morality in most other ways, such as the open expressions of hostility towards sodomy. It is hard to imagine that even Comparet envisioned how far the churches would retreat from that state in which he observed them in the 1960’s.

As for the amount of time it takes to truly come to know the Scriptures, Comparet is absolutely correct. Bible colleges can not truly afford students enough time to learn much of anything beyond a system of doctrines, even after four years of study, or even eight years, and that could never be enough time for anyone to intimately understand the Scriptures. And the curriculum, which is deficient in language studies, history, archaeology and other necessarily related studies, would probably have to be expanded to at least 20 years to provide the brightest students with the solid foundation required to properly guide a Christian assembly. This is impossible to provide under today’s capitalist system, where even churches are now only businesses.

Continuing, Comparet elaborates on this subject:

Let’s face it, the average man doesn’t have the capacity to undertake such a study independently. He must trust his minister to give him the results in a predigested form. However, his trust is far too often betrayed. How much of what is actually in the Bible were you ever taught in your church? Think back over your own church-going experience. On how many Sundays did your minister ever tell you what was in more than just one verse of the Bible? Remember, he took just one verse as his text. That is the point of departure at which he left the Bible, never to return to it during that sermon. The rest of the sermon may have caused you to admire the cleverness of the man. However, when did he give you word for word, what the Bible itself said?

I remember noticing, just a few months ago, that the text for the Sunday morning sermon, in one of the great churches here in southern California was, “The Horse That Played Baseball”! Naturally, I would not expect a modernist minister to know anything about the Old Testament. He would be strangely proud of his ignorance saying he was a New Testament Christian. Very well, let him now produce the verse in the New Testament where he found the text for that sermon!!

The superficial nature of most church sermons is a result of superficial study. While I have personally only seen a few sermons in Protestant churches, and as a youth, many more in a Catholic church, they are very much the same. There is one verse of Scripture which is illustrated by the life experiences or moral proclivities of the priest or pastor, with the addition of contemporary anecdotes mixed with some church dogma. Some of these may be encouraging or uplifting, and they may even uphold some element of Christian morality, but they rarely represent even a shadow of the depth of the teachings of Christ. If they did, the people may begin to question some of those church dogmas, and entire organizations would crumble. For that reason, the Roman Catholic Church began to inhibit the study of the Bible. Today’s Protestant churches have found different and far less noticeable ways to do that same thing. Comparet continues to discuss the ludicrous sermon about the horse that played baseball:

In my library, I have eleven different translations of the Old Testament and twenty-one different translations of the New Testament, and you cannot find that sermon in any of them. Was it possibly an attempt to amuse the congregation, in the hope of getting more of them to attend the services? They could get enough amusement at the movies, but where can they hear the word of God instead of the word of man, if they can’t get it in their church?

A few years ago, I watched a sermon in Bristol, Virginia, just so that I could begin to understand what went on in a typical Protestant mega-church, which in this case was a Baptist denomination. There was at least twenty minutes of music, some sort of pseudo-Christian contemporary-style pop music, and then a twenty-minute sermon which was mostly occupied with jokes and self-promotion of the church itself. This accompanied a vague moral message on sexual immorality and marriage, which may have actually spanned ten minutes, and in which there was a vague reference to Samson and Delilah. This was followed by another twenty minutes of music, and it was over. The people in attendance may as well have been at a pop music concert that was interrupted by some public announcements, and that is certainly how they acted. Since coming to the Florida Panhandle, which is actually a part of what is called the Bible Belt, we attended a few more of these churches and saw very similar exhibitions before determining that our experience was complete. Now we are also convinced, that the churches do little besides keep people entertained, socially engaged, and captivated by false doctrines which are perpetuated by their so-called experts. Continuing with Comparet, he speaks of the modern subversion of churches:

The first step of the plot is, as I said, to keep the congregations ignorant of what is really in the Bible. Go to almost any church you may select, and you will see a clear demonstration of the success of this step. The next step is to fill this vacuum with false doctrines which are not derived from the Bible. Any man-made doctrine can be dressed up plausibly in nice words. Look at communism for example, you know how they actually behave in every country they control. You know the brutal massacre of whole classes of the population, and the degrading slavery and poverty they force upon those who are allowed to survive. But you certainly don’t find any of this in communist literature. They talk as though communism were the most compassionate, generous and warm hearted movement which has ever existed. But man-made doctrines can also be dressed up in nice words and then passed off as religion, and so they are.

Accompanying this presentation at Christogenea we will include a photograph of a Lutheran church in Denver, Colorado. On the illuminated billboard outside of the church are the words “We celebrate Evolution. Seminar February 11th, 9:00 AM”. Of course, there is no evolution in the Bible, but Yahweh our God said “Let there be...”, and there it was. We see many such church billboards in our travels, and usually do not think quickly enough to take photographs while driving by at 45 or 70 miles an hour. Many of them hint at entertaining, or capitulating to the secular world in one way or another, while few of them actually express Christian principles. Continuing with Comparet:

The process is simple and familiar. First they attack the existing social institutions of our civilization as cruel and evil. When this comes from your minister, the man you have been taught to regard as a man of God, it is very easy for him to give you a guilt complex about every actual virtue you may have. The ministers preach that you are selfish, because you love the members of your own family more than you love the people who would reduce your neighborhood to a jungle in which no woman is safe at night. Indeed, they have already reduced Washington DC to a jungle, in which a woman is not safe even in the daytime or in the corridors and yards of the government buildings. These ministers and priests preach that you are wicked and unchristian because you don’t want to bring this blight into your own neighborhoods, and make it a menace to your own teen-aged children. When your own minister, the man you have been led to trust tells you this, it is hard to avoid a sense of guilt.

Those who have preached such things to you are false prophets, who actually bring you satanic doctrines, under the false guise of Christianity. The very Christ, to whom they give nominal lip service, warned us of them. In Matthew 24:24 and Mark 13:22 Yahshua Christ warned us that one of the signs of the end of the age would be the coming of false prophets. They would teach a false Christ instead of the real one. This is exactly what we are seeing today on a vast scale.

Not only do these false prophets urge us to accept the hordes of Asian, Latino and Negro savages into our cities and neighborhoods, but into our own homes. Another trend which Comparet could not have foreseen is that for over a decade now the denominational churches have been openly encouraging White Christian families to adopt alien children, and tens of thousands of families have now done that very thing. It seems to us that this is the true Mark of the Beast in modern times, as those who oppose the destruction of our race lose their jobs and are unwelcome in many businesses. Now Comparet continues, and gives us some indication of when this sermon may have originally been written, although we do not know really know how recent the reference was when he made it:

The most outstanding example of this, which has come to my notice recently, is an article in the May 18, 1965 issue of Look Magazine. The director of The National Council of Churches’ commission on Religion and Race, makes a bitter and abusive attack upon the white race, supposedly in the name of religion! The article contains so many utterly false statements that I cannot let it go unchallenged. It is my purpose to take up his points one by one and prove their falsity.

The director of the National Council of Churches begins by making this astonishing statement, and I quote him: “For years, most of our churches have aided and abetted the Anglo-Saxon white conspiracy. If an indictment were to be prepared, it might very well read like this: The Christian churches have not influenced their adherents to practice racial justice in housing, education, job opportunity and public accommodations. The Christian churches, in their own internal life, have practiced discrimination and built barriers to prevent open membership in the very household of faith.”

Here we have to interrupt Comparet before he himself responds. A household is something which typically belongs to a particular family. Nobody can join a household at his own whim. Christ came only for the lost sheep of the house of Israel. The New Covenant, as it is prophesied in Jeremiah chapter 31 and explained in Hebrews chapter 8, is for the house, or household, of Judah, and the house or household of Israel, for members of a particular family. They are the household of the faith, as Christ came to fulfill the promises made to the fathers, which is attested in the Gospel of Luke.

This particular director of the National Council of Churches used the phrase “household of the faith”, which may cause some Bible readers to vaguely recall Paul’s epistle to the Galatians, in a way that is entirely contrary to its original meaning – especially as Paul himself had used it. But when Bible colleges program their students to understand terms in a manner which is contrary to their original meaning, to seduce them into believing that Christianity can be for anyone, how many years of study would be required to deprogram them from such a brain-washing? And who can afford to sit in a classroom for twenty years, under today’s economic circumstances? Who would or even could support a Christian Identity monastery? That is what we need, but it is not evident that we shall have it in this world. Now Comparet makes his response and says:

Since this man appoints himself the supreme authority on what constitutes Christianity, we are entitled to test his knowledge of that subject. And he who claims authority to bring an indictment, might prepare to hear the defense against his charges. [Comparet was an attorney and a prosecutor.] Of course the Anglo-Saxon white Christians are proud of their race and we want to keep it pure. We honor the equal right of the negro and the Asiatic to be proud of his race, and want to keep it pure so that it will continue to have the qualities of which he is proud. While I don’t condone the Black Muslims’ threat of violent revolution, I do respect them for their own self respect. They should be proud of being negroes and don’t just want to become an imitation of white men. In that spirit, they can accomplish wonders in raising the negro to a level higher than he has ever attained in the past. However, we insist on that same right for ourselves. We want to be able to be proud of the white race and its accomplishments. The right to preserve it free from any dilution and mongrelization, which would forever destroy its present great qualities.

This too is part of our struggle, that while Comparet’s words sound just and noble, they are a position of compromise. As soon as one sees these other races as potential separate-but-equals in the world, one is standing on a position of compromise with Jewish egalitarianism. As soon as we believe that the negro can be raised to a higher level of civilization, we imagine that perhaps we should assist him in so doing. That is contrary to all of the observable nature and history of the negro, and the typical negro is not pure, but a bastard with both White and Jewish genes mixed with his own. Comparet’s attitude, which to this very day is also shared by David Duke and much of the so-called alt-right, as well as by many so-called Identity Christians, accepts the false notions of Jewish Egalitarianism which insist that other races can be equal, and merit equal respect and acceptance.

In truth, these other so-called races are not even people. These spots in our feasts of charity are “evil beasts, made to be taken and destroyed”, according to the apostles themselves. Comparet’s attitude sounds good, but making his arguments based on worldly terms, he concedes that the world sets the moral standard. We should not make that concession. The Scripture tells us that there is no place for the tares with the wheat, or the goats or wolves with the sheep, and if we do not come to terms with that then we shall never be able to look at the other races appropriately: as the flood from the mouth of the serpent – something which even Comparet acknowledged in other contexts.

In Deuteronomy chapter 11, Yahweh speaks to the children of Israel not only with the conquest of Canaan in mind, but with the fulfillment of all the promises to Abraham in mind, who was to inherit the earth. So Yahweh says: “22 For if ye shall diligently keep all these commandments which I command you, to do them, to love the LORD your God, to walk in all his ways, and to cleave unto him; 23 Then will the LORD drive out all these nations from before you, and ye shall possess greater nations and mightier than yourselves. 24 Every place whereon the soles of your feet shall tread shall be yours: from the wilderness and Lebanon, from the river, the river Euphrates, even unto the uttermost sea shall your coast be [so there was really no end to it]. 25 There shall no man be able to stand before you: for the LORD your God shall lay the fear of you and the dread of you upon all the land that ye shall tread upon, as he hath said unto you.” When we obey Yahweh our God, the only thing we should expect from the other races is that they flee in fear of us, but we want nothing to do with them.

Concerning these statements by Comparet, Clifton Emahiser made the following critical notes:

Comparet is one of my favorite Israel Identity teachers. Had it not been for his writings, I might never have come to the comprehension which I now have. But after many years of my own research, I now realize he did not have all of the correct answers, although I still rate him 90% plus. With his present lesson, I don’t agree where he said: “We honor the equal right of the negro and the Asiatic to be proud of their race, and want to keep it pure so that it will continue to have the qualities of which they are proud. While I don’t condone the Black Muslim’s threat of violent revolution, I do respect them for their own self respect. They should be proud of being negroes and don’t want to become an imitation of white men. In that spirit, they can accomplish wonders in raising the negro to a level higher than he has ever attained in the past.”

Comparet’s premise is that there is such a thing as a pure negro or Asiatic (mongolian). Yet, Yahshua Christ taught that there was a “bad” racial kind at Matt. 13:47-50 which I will amplify as follows: “47 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea [of people], and gathered of every [racial] kind: 48 Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good [racial kind] into vessels, but cast the bad [racial kind][genetically] wicked from among the just, 50 And shall cast them [the bad racial kind] into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.” The key word in this passage is “kind” from the Greek #1085, genos, meaning “race”. (Check Vine under “kind”). We can be sure, then, that the non-white races were never created by Yahweh, and that Yahshua Christ Himself is a racist. [This is the end of Clifton’s note.]

Here it is apparent, that we have so far wandered from the truth that we can even find it difficult to offer arguments based on truly correct Biblical terms. So Comparet continues arguing from this worldly viewpoint, although I am certain he did not recognize his error for what it is:

For any man to call this basic right a conspiracy, is crass impudence which should not pass without rebuke. It is a fair example of the tactics of the extreme left in their infiltration and subversion of the white Christian culture from within. If the white race were the hard-hearted monsters, which our enemies pretend we are, this tactic would be a total failure. It is only because the white race, above all others, is conscientious and deeply concerned with being righteous in all their dealings with others. Only because of this can these infiltrators can give some of our people a guilt complex by means of false accusations.

Actually, our enemies understand that Whites are generally altruistic, and that we too easily project our own values onto others. Those are the main characteristics of Whites which have been exploited in the promotion of egalitarianism. Comparet continues by describing some of the other noble virtues which our enemies exploit:

The white Anglo-Saxons have a record of love and charity which stands absolutely alone in all of history. Find me just one black nation in all of Africa, which today is pouring out its wealth to help others, even to help their fellow negroes. Don’t tell me they are too poor to help anyone! Their vast wealth of minerals, the plantations in their fertile soil, these produced wealth when the white man operated them. Remember, that was one of the favorite accusations of our professional bleeding hearts, that the white man was exploiting the wealth of Africa.

Find me just one Asiatic nation which is prodigally pouring out billions of dollars in aid to others, even to their fellow Asiatics. Don’t tell me they can’t do it. Japan is one of the world’s great industrial nations. The rice, rubber and tin of southeast Asia brought in great wealth while the white man ran this area. China’s poverty is the obvious and inevitable fruit of the way the Chinese are running it. The British were accused of pumping great wealth out of India. Now the British are gone, why can’t the Hindus spread some of that immense wealth around, if they claim they are our equals? If there isn’t any wealth there, why and how can they falsely accuse the British of exploiting it?

The truth is, of course, that all of these nations would still be living on the level of the Stone Age if they had not been industrialized by Whites. Whites, or perhaps Jews who pass as White, oversee these nations to this very day through the oversight of international agencies and banks, and that is probably all that keeps them from reverting to the Stone Age. So even Comparet gives them too much credit. Historically, Asiatics devour all of their substance without consideration for securing their future through husbandry, in much the same way that negroes do. So they also become scavengers. Comparet continues:

Never make the mistake of doubting that this is a black revolution. The negro congressman, Adam Clayton Powell, said this about it: “The white man is running scared. The whites won’t interfere with you. We are now in the majority in the world. The whites are afraid of us. The negro has to learn how to fight. This is a black movement. It is ridiculous for the white man to try to lead the negro.” This is our land! The White Christians have made it what is. We stand in the middle of the black man’s revolution and make no mistake about it! This is a revolution. No black man should be anything but a fighter. [I am not certain of the content of this last line, as the recording is broken. Perhaps it should be “no black man should be considered anything but a fighter”, in the revolution against Whites - WRF]

The negro Adam Powell was also nearly half White, and could sometimes pass for being white. He was born to parents of mixed races from Virginia and West Virginia. But he properly identified as a negro and held a congressional seat from New York City for 30 years until 1971. Having a Master’s degree in “religious education” from Columbia, Powell was one of the original race-baiting negro so-called “pastors” of what Comparet appropriately terms the “black revolution”. He was succeeded in Congress by another upstart negro, Charles Rangel. Comparet continues:

Christianity, and the true church, have always been the solid core around which our civilization was built. Our present civilization is the visible expression of those ideals. Like all human efforts, it has some imperfections. However, it is in every respect the highest civilization the world has ever seen. Not one of its critics would like to live anywhere else in the world. This is the most eloquent testimony to the virtues we have developed.

There are those who are trying to reverse all of our efforts and take this civilization out of the control of the white men who created it. They want to give complete mastery to the various alien minority groups, who now hold the balance of power. These men also want to abolish the barriers which have thus far prevented the large scale mongrelization and eternal destruction of the white race. Perhaps they have some fatuous notion there is some vague good in all of this. In truth, it is the height of wickedness.

These words one could see posted today on Facebook or other social media by some alt-Right pundit. But the alt-Right pundits are fifty years behind our Christian Identity teachers. Identity Christians have been saying these things for fifty years, or even longer. There is nothing new in the alt-Right, and they would be better off to listen to Identity Christians because we certainly have a record which demonstrates that we know exactly what is going on in the world around us. The alt-Right pundits are merely behind-the-curve mimics.

With his having cited this 1965 article in Look Magazine, and his reference to the negro Adam Powell, we can confidently date this sermon to between 1965 and 1970, and it was probably closer to 1965. Now, a little over 50 years later, even Comparet may be astounded by how far the Satanic forces have been able to advance this agenda. But where he continues, he also seems to have imagined that the battle was already lost:

Americans successfully resisted these attempts, to subvert our civilization, until a new weapon against us was discovered. The infiltrator’s weapon was the infiltration of our churches and under the guise of modernism, to change church doctrines until our clergy would constantly condemn our people for wanting to keep the good heritage which Yahweh has given us. This tactic has been amazingly successful, because our ministers have long ago ceased to tell us what is in the Bible. They have only taught us the church doctrines of modernism, occasionally reinforced by a partial quotation of a single Bible verse, taken out of context. Then they apply this verse to something the Bible was not talking about.

So we see that what the so-called Christian churches teach is not Christianity, but rather, it represents the subversion of Christianity. Today there are people who blame Christianity for our problems, but what they think they know of Christianity is not Christianity at all.

In this modern era, the churches surrendered themselves to the government so that they could function free of the burden of taxation. Doing so, they admit their true nature of being businesses rather than churches. They are part of the commercial establishment of Mystery Babylon, and they have become agencies upholding government policy just like any other public institution. Since empire is the policy, out of necessity of survival the churches formulated doctrines which agree with the policy of empire. In ancient Babylonia, the priesthoods functioned to support and uphold the authority of the kings in that same manner. Comparet also understood that this relationship between church and government was very old, where he continues and says:

This is not new, it is just a repeat performance of the same attack upon our religious beliefs. It is performed in the same way and with the same success as in the time of the prophet Jeremiah. In Jeremiah 5:30-31 we were warned, “A wonderful and horrible thing is committed in the land: the prophets prophesy falsely and the priests bear rule by their means; and My people love to have it so: and what will ye do in the end thereof?”

A vision of this evil was also given to the prophet Ezekiel. Yahweh showed him how the corruption of the true religion had penetrated to the very temple itself, under the leadership of the priests. Then it brought upon them the Babylonian captivity as a punishment, just as in our own days the same evil will bring equally severe punishment. As Yahweh said in Jeremiah 12:10, “Many pastors have destroyed My vineyard.” How true this is today!

Of course, in ancient Israel the priests were only seeking to uphold the desires of the kings, who had themselves turned to Baal worship and the inclusion of those of other races, so that they may augment their own political power. The priests should have held the line and rejected the innovations of the kings. But likewise, our modern churches should have upheld the Scriptures and rejected the American empire. Instead, they have taken to ordaining sodomites as bishops. Now Comparet goes back to address the article he was discussing:

Let’s get back to the article in Look Magazine dated May 18, 1965. The writer tries to make us believe that Yahshua Christ wanted everyone jumbled together in an indiscriminate hash. The writer calls Yahshua, the head of the church, the friend of Samaritans, the destroyer of class distinctions of all kinds. Except for the words the head of the church, the other descriptions are totally false, as I will now prove.

Of course, Marxists pastors betray themselves as soon as they so much as mention class distinctions. Comparet continues:

First let’s take up the phrase, friend of Samaritans. The Bible only records two instances in which Yahshua had anything at all to do with Samaritans. One instance was recorded in Luke 17:12-19 which tells that Yahshua healed a group of ten lepers, and one of the ten was a Samaritan. The other incident recorded in John chapter 4, tells how Yahshua talked for a few minutes with a Samaritan woman who gave Him a drink of water. On the request of the Samaritans, who lived in the village, He stayed there for two days and preached to them. Does this make Him a friend of the Samaritans? Remember, Yahshua also preached to the Pharisees. Who will pretend that this shows that He was the friend of the Pharisees?

The episode in John chapter 4 actually informs us that many of the so-called Samaritans were of the “lost sheep of the house of Israel”, so Samaritans cannot be generalized as aliens. Comparet did not entirely understand this, so his message is somewhat divided in this respect, where he continues and says:

What does the Bible tell us about Yahshua’s real attitude toward the Samaritans? In Matthew 10:5-6 we read that He sent out His 12 disciples on a preaching mission. He forbade them to even so much as enter a city of Samaria. “These twelve Yahshua sent forth, and commanded them saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritan enter ye not: but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” By Yahshua’s express command, they were not to try to convert the Samaritans, but to take the message to the true Israelites.

The apostles, as it is made evident in Acts chapter 10, were not aware of the ancient Israelite identity of many of the people of the surrounding nations. So they would have understood Christ at that time to be referring to the circumcised, for they themselves were raised up to have nothing to do with the uncircumcised. Before the Passion of Christ, the uncircumcised of Israel were no better than the other races in the eyes of God. Later, many Samaritans were indeed found to be acceptable, once the resurrected Christ gave the apostles their commission for the reconciliation of all of Israel.

The subversion of Christianity began as soon as the various Christian churches permitted themselves to be organized under the empire in the 4th century AD. From that time, the meaning of the word catholic was corrupted to mean universal, where it originally described the acceptance of the writings and contents of both the Old and New Testaments of Scripture. Only someone who was under both covenants could really accept them both, but by the time of Christ the so-called “lost” Israelites had indeed come to dominate the old world, in the form of Dorian and Macedonian Greeks, and Romans, and Parthians, and Phoenicians, and Galatae and Scythians. All of these descended from the ancient Israelites, separating themselves from the main body of the old kingdom over the eight hundred years of its history.

Now Comparet continues:

Was Yahshua the destroyer of class distinctions of all kinds? Both Matthew 15:22-28 and Mark 7:25-29 record the incident of a woman of the Phoenician coast of Syria, who asked Yahshua to heal her daughter. She first appealed to Yahshua as Son of David, the way a true Israelite could appeal to Him. Matthew 15:23 records, “He answered her not a word.” When she still followed Him, asking for help, did He invite her to join the disciples? Definitely not! Yahshua refused her again saying, “I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”

We learn that this woman was a Canaanite from the Gospel of Matthew, and not a mere Syrian or Phoenician, so she was certainly not a candidate for conversion to Chrisatianity, and she was never treated as such.

When the woman still persisted, Yahshua told the woman that it was not proper to take the children’s bread and give it to dogs. Does that sound like the destroyer of class distinctions of all kinds? Not until she recognized and accepted her place, and acknowledged the good things of the kingdom of Yahweh, including healing of the sick, must first come to the true Israel. After Israel, the benefits could come to the others when they were ready to accept them in the right spirit. Not until then did Yahshua heal her daughter. After Yahshua called the woman a dog, she answered him, “Yes, master: yet the dogs under the table eat of the children’s crumbs. And he said unto her, For this saying, go thy way: the devil is gone out of thy daughter.” You notice the woman did not become angry at being called a dog. Did she understand more than the present day ministers and priests do?

While there were both Scriptural and cultural reasons why Christ had fulfilled the Canaanite woman’s request, here again we see Comparet succumb to the idea that this act can be extended into a concept which imagines that the other so-called races can somehow receive continued blessings in this manner. The truth is that their blessings are our punishment for our own sins, but ultimately they are all goats, and not sheep, whose destiny is the “fire prepared for the devil and his angels”. One instance of mercy for a dog is not going to change that. Comparet continues:

There is still more. Remember that every time the disciples traveled between Judea and Galilee, they passed through Samaria, there were a few Samaritans in Judea and Galilee also. Did this friend of the Samaritans seek to bring them into the church? Certainly not! In Matthew 7:6, Yahshua warned His disciples, “Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.”

This would of course be true of some Samaritans, as it was also a race-mixed region by the time of Christ, just as Judaea was. The key to understanding these things is in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, and also in the history of the intervening period which is wanting in our Bibles. But the important point of Comparet’s message is to realize that Yahshua Christ certainly did make distinctions, and those distinctions were made along ethnic lines. Thus he continues:

Yahshua wasn’t so foolish as to think His disciples were going out to the barnyard to preach to the four-footed animals there. These dogs and swine, of whom He spoke, were all of the two-footed varieties. They were men but, not the kind of men who should be brought into His church on a basis of equal and indiscriminate fellowship. [They were men only in the sense of being adult male hominids. - WRF] The entire Bible record of Yahshua’s whole earthly life, shows that He was carefully selective of those whom He brought into His church. The only exception was Judas Iscariot, and that was for the purpose of allowing the prophesies of Yahshua’s martyrdom to be carried out. Besides, it was a good lesson that if a Jew could walk with Yahshua for three years, and still betray Him, can we ever trust a Jew?

It can be established that Judas Iscariot certainly was an Edomite Judaean, and therefore he can be identified with those people who are now known as Jews. But he was chosen for the express reason that he would ultimately be the betrayer of Christ. For Christ Himself had said, as it is recorded in John chapter 6: “70… Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?” Then He said in John chapter 13: “18 I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but that the scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me.” Comparet then says:

The writer of the article in Look magazine also makes the absurd statement, “it is only by mutilating Christ that men can justify theories of racial superiority.” Remember that Yahshua stood firmly upon the fact that He was not sent to anyone but the lost sheep of the house of Israel. If that is not the strongest theory of racial superiority, how could you make it any stronger?

There are of course many instances of Scripture where racial distinctions are made, and racial preference was shown by Yahweh God and Yahshua Christ. In Deuteronomy chapter 23 we see that bastards are rejected by God, and in his epistle to the Hebrews Paul proclaimed that if one is a bastard, one cannot be a son, explaining that Esau was rejected for his fornication. Esau had Canaanite wives, and therefore Canaanite children. As late as Revelation chapter 2 Yahshua Christ declares that He will destroy the children of such fornicators, which are race-mixers. So Comparet concludes:

Yes, these left wing modernists are ashamed of Yahshua’s own words, and they try to make a socialist out of Him. Yahshua gave them their answer in Mark 8:38. “Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of Me and of My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed when he cometh in the glory of His Father with the holy angels.”

Believe me! I don’t envy these modernists their position, but it is one of their own choice!

Comparet is too kind, labeling these false prophets as mere “modernists”. Isaiah describes the day when “the vile person shall be no more called liberal…” But the churches are even worse, since their interests are financial, and commercial, rather than Christian. Like Esau, they have all sold themselves into whoredom for the sake of their bellies. That is the choice they have made.

We can live and admire Bertrand Comparet, but at the same time we must recognize that his message left room for improvement. That is our constant endeavor, because his message is true.