Christogenea Internet Radio Podcast Archives

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!

Click here for a simplified listing of titles and links for Biblical commentaries and related podcasts.

Click here for a simplified listing of titles and links for Historical commentaries and other podcasts.

Use this link for our podcast RSS feed: Christogenea cannot meet either Google's or Apple's "politically correct" content standards, so we have not listed our feed at the iTunes or Google stores. However the link to our RSS feed will still work in iTunes or in an Android podcatcher app.

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


Be like Christ

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.

On the Revelation of Yahshua Christ, Part 28: The Living Temple

CHR20221118-Revelation28.mp3 — Downloaded 9914 times


Living Stones

On the Revelation of Yahshua Christ, Part 28: The Living Temple

Before we commence with our commentary for Revelation chapter 22, which is the final chapter of the Revelation of Yahshua Christ, there are a couple of peripheral discussions which are fitting, which we have chosen to include here. The first is the vision of Ezekiel’s temple, which is interpreted in various ways. For example, many Jews see the vision as a description of a future and actual temple building in Jerusalem, whereas many Christians interpret it as some sort of allegory for the future Church and the Body of Christ. Of course, while the Jews wrongly interpret Scripture and prophecy in nearly one hundred percent of their attempts, we would reject both of those interpretations.

The second discussion is a brief explanation of the synthesis between the prophecies of Zechariah and the Revelation. During the preparation for this commentary I had thought to do so incrementally and at relevant points, but in the end I decided not to expound on Zechariah at length, since it would have required a rewrite or reproduction of large portions of our Zechariah commentary here, and I was already planning to include large portions of Daniel, for whom we do not yet have a commentary. However the parallels of Zechariah with the Revelation are certainly worthwhile of at least a summary recognition.

It is Enough to be an Israelite, But Enough for What?, Part 4

CHR20221111-Comparet-IsItEnough04.mp3 — Downloaded 6650 times


Jacob's Ladder

It is Enough to be an Israelite, But Enough for What?, Part 4 - Our Rebuttal to a Sermon by Bertrand Comparet

We have now taken three of these presentations to both present and critique the entirety of Bertrand Comparet’s sermon, Is it Enough Merely to be an Israelite?, which is contrary to our own view of Scripture, and, at least in our own opinion, we have discredited all of his arguments and all of his witnesses as either being inaccurate or as being irrelevant to the subject of eternal life. As we have seen, all of Comparet’s examples from Scripture concerned only temporal punishment or salvation, whereas he was errantly using them in a context which disputed the basis for eternal salvation.

But it is not sufficient merely to deconstruct what we believe are some of Bertrand Comparet’s errors, without offering support for our own position. So we also offered an allegory as we closed our arguments against him, that since he was a lawyer and we have cross-examined all of his witnesses, now we would present our own case. As we proceed, we shall also provide proof texts which inform us that these are indeed two separate issues, that eternal salvation and temporal salvation are two different subjects. It would be a joy to have Comparet here to cross-examine our witnesses, but of course that is not possible.

So here we shall present our own point of view, and our own witnesses which inform us that it certainly is enough merely to be an Israelite in order to attain eternal salvation. But that alone does not mean that there will be any reward in that salvation, so in our rebuttal we added the question, But enough for what? We will discuss that here as well, even if the full implications are not revealed to us in Scripture. As the apostle John wrote in chapter 3 of his first epistle, “2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.” In this area especially, we cannot claim to know anything more than what John had known.

It is Enough to be an Israelite, But Enough for What?, Part 3

CHR20221104-Comparet-IsItEnough03.mp3 — Downloaded 5768 times


Jacob's Ladder

It is Enough to be an Israelite, But Enough for What?, Part 3

Here we shall continue our presentation and critique of Bertrand Comparet’s sermon, Is it Enough Merely to be an Israelite?, but doing so I will probably have to repeat myself at least a few times. That is because Comparet opened his sermon by criticizing Paul of Tarsus in Romans chapter 11, where Paul had properly paraphrased the prophet Isaiah and said “all Israel shall be saved”, yet Paul was speaking of the salvation of the spirit and eternal life, within the context that temporal salvation may not be attained, whereas all of the examples by which Comparet attempts to refute him relate only to the temporal salvation of the flesh or the nation. Disagreeing with Paul where he said “All Israel shall be saved”, Comparet mentioned not one of the many promises of eternal salvation, resurrection, or redemption from death and the grave which are found in either the Old or New Testaments. He only mentioned Isaiah 45:17 while criticizing Paul, and neglected to note Isaiah 45:25, or perhaps he may have realized that he could not have justly criticized Paul.

But Comparet was a trained attorney, and an attorney is never going to introduce evidence which hurts his case. Here he has tried to make a case that Paul of Tarsus was wrong, and that all Israel shall not be saved, and it is our endeavor to defend Paul and his statement. So now, as he continues, while there are indeed many good ideas found throughout his sermon, he only provides examples, some of them quite lengthy, of temporal punishment and temporary deliverance. But those examples do not relate to any of the promises of eternal salvation found in Scripture, and it seems as if, at least in this sermon, Comparet completely failed to distinguish between the two, and to rightly divide the Word of Truth.

It is Enough to be an Israelite, But Enough for What?, Part 2

CHR20221028-Comparet-IsItEnough02.mp3 — Downloaded 7950 times


It is Enough to be an Israelite, But Enough for What?, Part 2

As we had seen in Part 1 of our critique of Bertrand Comparet’s sermon, Is it Enough Merely to be an Israelite?, he had clearly taken Romans 11:26 out of the context of the epistle itself so that he could critique Paul, and he even accused Paul of having misquoted scripture. Then he denied the veracity of Paul’s statement that “All Israel shall be saved” where he compared it to Isaiah 45:17, while he ignored Isaiah 45:25. While for many other reasons we may love Bertrand Comparet, this approach to scripture is what even he himself had professed to have rejected, and he must be corrected. If we truly believe Yahweh our God, and if we love Yahshua Christ, then we shall seek to reconcile and understand all of Scripture, without ever assuming that one verse can cancel out another, or that we can arbitrarily pick a favorite and ignore others.

In Romans chapter 9 Paul began by praying for his kinsmen according to the flesh, those who truly were of Israel, as opposed to the Edomites in Judaea for which he had then contrasted Jacob and Esau. Continuing at the beginning of Romans chapter 10, he continued his prayer where he addressed his Roman readers and said “1 Brethren, truly the preference of my heart, and supplication to Yahweh is for preservation on their behalf. 2 I attest to them that they have zeal for Yahweh, but not in accordance with full knowledge.” So there he was still speaking of his “kinsmen according to the flesh”, of those true Israelites in Judaea for which he had prayed in chapter 9.

So where he was still discussing that same subject, Romans chapter 11 opens where Paul asked “1 Now I say, has Yahweh thrust away His people?…” and he contrasted the remnant of the obedient in the time of Elijah to what he had hoped would be a similar remnant of the obedient in Judaea in his own time. Then a little later he asked “7 What then, what Israel seeks after, this it did not attain to?…” and he answered his own question in the same verse as he continued and wrote: “But the chosen have succeeded, and the rest were hardened”. But who did Paul consider the chosen to be? Did he consider the chosen to be mere believers? Or did he consider the chosen to be all of Israel?

It is Enough to be an Israelite, But Enough for What?, Part 1

CHR20221021-Comparet-IsItEnough01.mp3 — Downloaded 14238 times


Blindness is a Curse from God -

Apparently VLC on Windows, which I have used to apply metadata for years, has been ruining podcasts. But only some listeners had problems while others did not. So once again, I have resampled and uploaded a new file, as of 11:30 AM on the 22nd. Thank you for your patience!

It is Enough to be an Israelite, But Enough for What?, Part 1

The medieval Roman Catholic paradigm relating to salvation and heaven, or judgment and hell, has been ingrained into all modern Christian theology to such a degree, having been imbued into our thought from perhaps as long ago as 1,800 years, that it may be one of the most difficult errors of Roman Catholicism to overcome. But it really cannot be overcome at all, until one learns the proper differences between the wheat and the tares, the sheep and the goats, and can identify the good race of fish in the parable of the net. While Bertrand Comparet did know those differences, in my opinion he nevertheless had not fully thought them out in other areas of Scripture, and especially in this area. But we can forgive him, since the subject of salvation and the common perception concerning salvation is probably the deepest rabbit hole in Scripture. No matter how many times one may read the promises to the fathers and the words of Christ, there is always that one verse by which one may imagine that a child of God may ultimately and eternally be cast into the pits of hell, or the Lake of Fire.

But in this light we must ask ourselves: Are the promises to the fathers unconditional guarantees, or are they merely the offer of an opportunity to men?

Then, if they are a mere opportunity: Are we subjected to vanity for our edification, as both Solomon (Ecclesiastes 1:13) and Paul of Tarsus (Romans 8:20-21) had attested, or as a business venture which we may win or lose at any given time?

For example, a man may be a perfectly pious Roman Catholic for many years, never having sinned, having a pious wife and raising pious children, and then one day his neighbor's wife begins hinting at him and making advances, hoping to tempt him into adultery. So the man resists his temptation for many months, and when he is finally about to give in, when he is weak, something happens and he is stricken dead. Just think of the odds. If he had been struck one day later, he may have had his neighbor's wife that afternoon, and spent an eternity in hell! But if he had been struck one week later, he may have had his neighbor's wife, felt sorry after the act and repented, gone to church on Sunday and confessed, and then in a few days he would enter into eternity in heaven! So long as he dropped some cash in the basket and said whatever prayers he was told to say for penance.

Bible Blunders, Part 1

CHR20221014-BibleBlunders-01.mp3 — Downloaded 6245 times


Know Your History -

The original podcast file was somehow corrupted and would not play. It has now been replaced. I apologize for any inconvenience. Being on the road, the Monday following the podcast I was finally able to edit the notes, and there I was also able to add a few short clarifications and make a few minor corrections.

Bible Blunders, Part 1

Here I am going to present something that I will call Bible Blunders. Ultimately this may turn into something of a series, so I will even add “Part 1”. When I made several Forum posts addressing certain things in Scripture which are commonly misunderstood, a friend suggested that I compile them into a program called Bible Mysteries, but these really are not mysteries. Rather, they are blunders because the solution to understanding them is in the Scripture, and for that reason we really have no excuse not to understand them. But some of these traps I have fallen into myself, not necessarily because I made the mistakes, but because we often trust others to be correct, especially our teachers, and we repeat things that they say without investigating them for ourselves. So here we are going to discuss queen Athaliah of Judah, a trap which I managed to avoid, and also the identity of the Rechabites of the Book of Jeremiah, and the “Kenites” of 2 Chronicles chapter 2, a trap which I was caught in until recently, because I followed older teachers without giving the subject a sufficiently full consideration.

Proof that Athaliah queen of Judah was not the daughter of Jezebel:

A version of this was originally posted at the Christogenea Forum on 17th July 2022.

Years ago, in June, 2009, I made a presentation called Women in the Genealogy of Christ. Only rather recently did I realize that it needs an update. That is because I never had a “church” background, and therefore I never knew that the churches teach that Jezebel is an ancestor of Christ. That is what at least most of them teach, and it is absolutely wrong. So in that early podcast, I discussed Tamar, Rahab, Ruth and Bathsheba, three of which women are specifically mentioned in the genealogy of Christ as it is presented in the Gospel of Matthew, but I never knew there was a need to discuss Jezebel. (Bathsheba is also referred to in Matthew, but not by name.)

Here I shall prove that Jezebel could not have been the mother of Athaliah, the queen of Judah, in spite of the fact that Ahab was her father. But this entire story of Ahab's descendants is sometimes confusing not only in the way in which years are reckoned but also because there are two men named Jehoram, sometimes also spelled Joram (in the King James Version): a son of Ahab and a son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah. There are also two men named Ahaziah: a son of Ahab and a grandson of Jehoshaphat, the son of Jehoram king of Judah. So when we mention Jehoram or Ahaziah, we always need to check to make certain we have the correct one.

On the Revelation of Yahshua Christ, Part 27: The City of God

CHR20221007-Revelation27.mp3 — Downloaded 12236 times


John watching the City of God descend from Heaven
By Octave 444 - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, Wikimedia Commons.

On the Revelation of Yahshua Christ, Part 27: The City of God

Before we commence with Revelation chapter 21 and the City of God, we should pause to speak about the references to the Book of Life. This Book of Life, as we had mentioned briefly in our discussion of The Camp of the Saints, is not explicitly mentioned in the Old Testament (in the podcast version I failed to say explicitly, which I later added to the notes). But there certainly does seem to be at least one reference in the Old Testament to the same Book of Life of the Revelation, and that is found in Daniel chapter 12. Other passages may arguably be interpreted as references to the Book of Life, especially if they are taken out of context, so before we discuss the reference in Daniel, these passages we shall discuss briefly.

For example, in Exodus chapter 32 we read “33 And the LORD said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book.” This passage can indeed be interpreted in an ominous manner if it is taken by itself and cross-referenced to the verses where the Book of Life is mentioned in the Revelation. But that is not honest, and since all men sin and fall short of the glory of God, as Paul had professed in chapter 3 of his epistle to the Romans, and since in the sight of Yahweh no living man is justified, as David had professed in the 143rd Psalm, then the City of God would evidently be a very deserted place. But that interpretation, as we have also explained in our last presentation, is absolutely contrary to all of the promises of Yahweh and the parables and other statements of Yahshua Christ. To see why that verse from Exodus chapter 32 (32:33) should not be cross-referenced to the Revelation in that manner, we shall read a broader selection of passages from Exodus, to put it into its proper context.

On the Revelation of Yahshua Christ, Part 26: The Camp of the Saints

CHR20220930-Revelation26.mp3 — Downloaded 11736 times


On the Revelation of Yahshua Christ, Part 26: The Camp of the Saints

After explaining the parable of the tares of the field to His disciples, as it is recorded in Matthew chapter 13, Yahshua Christ then related to them the parable of the net, where it seems that this parable along with those of the treasure hidden in the field and the man seeking the pearl had all been meant to further elucidate the meaning of that parable of the wheat and the tares. In the manner in which Matthew recorded this, these parables were given to the disciples after they requested and received the explanation of the wheat and the tares. So we read, in the closing verses of that chapter, that “47 Again, the kingdom of the heavens is like a net having been cast into the sea and it gathers from out of every race, 48 which when it is full, bringing up upon the shore and sitting they gather the good ones into vessels, but the rotten ones they cast out. 49 Thusly it shall be at the consummation of the age, the messengers shall go out and they shall separate the wicked from the midst of the righteous 50 and they shall cast them into the furnace of fire. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth!” Next, after they received the explanation of the wheat and tares and these other parables, we read: “51 ‘Have you understood all these things?’ [and] They say to Him: ‘Yes!’”

The word for race in verse 47 of that passage is γένος, which is a race or a kind. It is the same word which we see in the Greek scriptures of the Septuagint where it says in Genesis chapter 1 that “25 … God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.” Likewise the underlying Hebrew word, מין or miyn (4327) is defined as a kind or species according to the Brown, Driver, Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon. Yahshua Christ having used these terms in His explanations to His disciples as they are in Matthew chapter 13, the disciples would have understood words such as γένος in the parable of the net, or σπέρμα, which is seed, in that of the wheat and tares in their plain, literal meanings, and not in the manner in which the philosophical so-called “Church Fathers” defined them centuries later, which are corruptions of those meanings. Just as in the ancient prophets, Yahshua Christ had employed many parallelisms, and the use of γένος in the parable of the net helps us to more definitively understand the use of the word σπέρμα in the parable of the wheat and the tares, that what God created is good, but the corruptions of men or of angels are wicked and in the end God shall not accept them since He does not accept bastards.

European Fellowship Forum, September 2022

ChrEuroForum20220925.mp3 — Downloaded 12947 times


Another discussion with our European friends and others.

Here we bantered about how to keep the Israelite feast days, how, why and a little about when; free will and sin; the recent experiences of some people falling ill with fatigue, and several other subjects. We also spoke of judgment, the law of God, and preservation, and had a brief report from a friend in the Donbas region. 

Can the ways of man be the Way of God? Can man understand the ways of God? Yes, according to the Scripture, by being obedient to the commandments of the law. 1 Kings 8:57-58; Isaiah 55:7-9; 63:16-17; 66:3; Ezekiel 18:24-32. This is why Christ is the Way, the Truth and the Life, although I did not mention that verse in the discussion.