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: https://christogenea.org/podcasts/mp3feed. 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.

Topical Discussions, December, 2023

CHR20231208-Topical.mp3 — Downloaded 10271 times

 

Topical Discussions, December, 2023

I did not plan a topical discussion program this week, but I have been rather under the weather, having had a flu since Saturday, and heavy congestion, so if I disappear for a minute, it is only because I have been coughing rather consistently for several days, and hopefully it will not plague me too badly here this evening. Because I was sick, I decided to do this topical podcast, and even though each of the topics were at least partly prepared, it still took me nearly as long to complete as my last few Genesis commentaries. But maybe that is because I cannot focus up to my usual ability.

It also happens to be 15 years to the day that I arrived home from prison, in 2008. Technically, I was not really yes “out” of prison, but I was on home confinement for nearly the last three months of my sentence, which is a decision that was made at the halfway-house where I had spent about six weeks. Officially, my sentence was completed on March 6th, 2009. But by January 4th I was able to register the Christogenea.org domain name, and then start building my website. I had no idea how large of a project it would become, or how long I would be able to do it. But no matter how long I can do this, I praise Yahweh that I have been able to do it at all. Since Christogenea is also a costly venture, I will be here so long as I continue to get enough support to sustain it, and sometimes that is a challenge. So I still do not know how long I will be able to do it. Yahweh willing, I shall continue, and hopefully be at it at least as long as Clifton had persevered. I might need that much time just to be able to finish some of the things which I have already started.

Here I plan to discuss the meaning of the Hebrew word zuwr, which is often translated as strange or stranger, the true meaning of the word human, the meaning of the word adam, which expands on my recent offering in my Genesis commentary in several ways, and also the fact that the Greek word ἀρσενοκοίτης which was used by Paul in two of his epistles is Sodomy, or what we now call homosexuality, and it is forbidden in the New Testament just as it had been in the Old Testament.

On Genesis, Part 38: The Rejection of Esau

Genesis 26:34 - Genesis 27:46

CHR20231201-Genesis38.mp3 — Downloaded 7175 times

 

On Genesis, Part 38: The Rejection of Esau

Then Isaac had twin sons, Jacob and Esau, but neither would both of these sons share in the inheritance of their father, so the number of heirs was ultimately narrowed to one of them, and out of his eight sons and many more grandsons, only Jacob would inherit the blessings of Abraham. Like Sarah before her, Rebekah, the mother of Jacob and Esau, had also conceived with a promise, where she was told, as it is recorded in Genesis chapter 25, that “23 … Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.” There it is fully evident that Jacob and Esau would have very different destinies, even though they were both in the loins of their father when he was dedicated on the altar to Yahweh. So they both belonged to God, as Paul wrote of them much later, in Romans chapter 9, and asked “21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?” From there, he proceeded to explain that from one lump there had been created vessels of destruction, but from the other there had been created vessels of mercy, and these are Esau and Jacob and their respective descendants.

But the path to dishonor and destruction was made by Esau himself. His father Isaac was unmarried until he was forty years old, and had taken a wife only as soon as he had learned that his own father Abraham had procured a wife for him. Then Isaac had evidently remained content with that one wife for his entire life. His brother Jacob would remain unmarried, as we shall see here in this chapter and subsequent chapters of Genesis, until his father Isaac had sent him to Haran with instructions to take a wife from the house of his mother’s kindred. Many people seem to assume without studying, that Jacob was a young man when this happened, but in truth, he was seventy years old, which we shall discuss later. Then once Jacob arrived in Haran, when Rebekah’s brother Laban had laid upon Jacob a heavy burden in exchange for a wife, Jacob complied, choosing obedience to his parents rather than rebelling and returning to Palestine.

But as for Esau, he had evidently taken wives without any counsel from Isaac his father, by which he became the master of his own destiny. So Paul wrote later, describing Esau and making an example for Christians, in Hebrews chapter 12 where he had admonished his readers to be diligent “15 … lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled; 16 Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright. 17 For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.” There Paul indirectly informs us that the rejection of Esau was not only from Rebekah, but from Yahweh God Himself, and for the explicit reason that he was a fornicator. Yahweh God had foreseen Esau’s sin, and for that reason the Word of God informs us in Malachi chapter 1 that “2 … I loved Jacob, 3 And I hated Esau, …” a Scripture which Paul had cited in Romans chapter 9. That is also why Yahweh had informed Rebekah that her twin sons would have diverging destinies.

 

The White Friday Open Forum, November, 2023

CHR20231125-OpenForum.mp3 — Downloaded 31631 times

Just before 5:00 PM US Eastern time on Tuesday, November 28th, 2023 I replaced the original .mp3 file as it seemed to be skipping ahead, or for at least one listener, interminably looping at around 29:05 minutes. I apologize for any inconvenience. - wmfinck

Among the topics discussed:

  • The recent protests in Ireland, and the relative lack of protests in France under similar circumstances.

  • Genesis chapter 6 – fallen angels, their descendants, or both?

  • Marks on your forehead and arms: Phylacteries and the true meaning of the law in Deuteronomy 6:8 and 11:18.

  • Did Isaiah 27:1 have a dual fulfillment?

  • Differences between races in cognitive and inventive abilities, craniology, or phrenology, and brain development.

  • The perceived seat of a man's emotions in Greek philosophy and Hebrew Scriptures.

  • Empathy, emotions, altruism, intelligence capabilities among the races.

  • Evolution vs. Adaptation. Adaptation and genetic expression.

  • Racial intelligence, IQ, and the capacity for learning, intelligence and motivation, the uselessness of rote memory i.e. the advantage of knowledge vs. memorizing trivia.

  • Abilities of the Nephilim, origins of technology

  • Scripture should not contradict itself; an analogy comparing Scriptural interpretation to computer programming which was made here at Christogenea long ago. The point being that when a verse is interpreted, it cannot contradict any other verse in the Bible, or the interpretation will upset the whole program.

  • Reading Scripture with an intent to conform. The corruption of Christian doctrine in the early church. Preterism, Futurism, and the Catholic Church.

  • Newspaper eschatology: Current events and fear porn

  • The words adult and adulterate are from different Latin words, and not related directly, at least.

  • Our modern apostasy, of which the apostles warned. Paganism is Judaism.

  • The Torah, the Talmud, and Baby Rape, along with other damnable precepts of Judaism.

  • Dustin Nemos is trolling and grifting Identity Christians as he promotes and defends his own race-mixing.

  • Ezekiel 37:25 in light of 2 Samuel 7:10, and also the promises that Israel would inherit the world.

  • Understanding prophecy with hindsight, but not having the ability to use it to predict the future.

  • Revelation 20, Satan’s having been released from the pit and the emancipation of the Jews.

  • Food laws, fat, kidneys and other organs: Is the eating of organs prohibited in the Law?

  • Seven-year land Sabbath: Should farmers, and even individuals, still follow the land sabbath? Jubilees.

  • The laws of dowry and the rape of virgins leading to marriage, Deuteronomy chapter 22. Jacob and Laban.

  • Freemasonry and Albert Pike, the supposed letter to Mazzini. The Knight's Templars.

On Genesis, Part 37: The Incontinence of Men

Genesis 25:27 - Genesis 26:33

CHR20231117-Genesis37.mp3 — Downloaded 5794 times

On Genesis, Part 37: The Incontinence of Men

In our last discussion in Genesis, The Children of the Flesh, we hope to have fully elucidated the meaning of the words of Paul of Tarsus where he wrote in Romans chapter 9, as it is in the Christogenea New Testament, and he said: “8 That is to say, the children of the flesh, these are not children of Yahweh, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring.” Saying that, Paul then went on to describe the promise to Sarah, and then to Rebekah, whereby he illustrated the fact that only Jacob was ultimately the heir of Abraham, and out of all of the children of Abraham, the promises of God are given only to Jacob’s descendants. This was also the same illustration which he made in a different manner in Galatians chapter 3, an epistle which he actually wrote about two years prior to his having written Romans. Now from this point on in Genesis, Ishmael and the sons of Keturah are removed from the picture, and all future history, Biblical and otherwise, would revolve around the descendants of Jacob and Esau, as Jacob had merited the birthright which his older brother had despised, although after he lost it, Esau had hated his brother and wanted it back.

So the Edomites became predominant in Judaea in the centuries leading up to the ministry of Christ, and even today the descendants of Esau still think that they can have back the inheritance, in a rather indirect manner. But they never shall attain it, since they are all bastards, and the works of men are vanity in the eyes of God. But this dynamic nevertheless drives world events to this very day, as the Edomite Jews have forever been plotting to dominate and destroy Christians so that they may have the world to themselves, and this observation is true in spite of the fact that both parties are generally oblivious to this truth. In Romans chapter 9, where Paul had continued his discussion of the issue concerning the seed of Abraham, he compared Jacob and Esau, and described the descendants of Jacob as vessels of mercy, but the descendants of Esau as vessels of destruction. Doing all of this, in Paul’s epistles he was not innovating, but rather he was instructing Christians as to how the will of Yahweh God which was expressed in Genesis affects the Christian world, as the Word of God has not and does not change. To this day, the children of Esau and Ishmael and the others are still excluded from the promises of God, and they always shall be excluded, along with any other races who were not of Abraham or even of Adam in the first place.

On Genesis, Part 36: The Children of the Flesh

Genesis 25:1-26

CHR20231110-Genesis36.mp3 — Downloaded 6284 times

 

On Genesis, Part 36: The Children of the Flesh

In Genesis chapter 24 we observed A Proper Marriage and the lengths to which Abraham had gone in order to assure a fitting wife for his son Isaac. But here we must also note the lengths to which Yahweh God had gone in order to demonstrate, both for Abraham himself and as an example to Christians, that Abraham should also have had children born from his own proper wife, from a woman of his own kindred, an heir who was fitting to receive the inheritance and the promises of God. So in spite of the birth of Ishmael by a bondwoman, who was also apparently a descendant of Adam, Isaac was the son of the promise, and in Isaac would Abraham’s seed be called, as Paul of Tarsus had later explained, in Romans chapter 9 and in Galatians chapter 3.

But Abraham, with all of his noble spirit, was also only a man with his own fleshly desires, urges, and needs. So in accordance with those, there was not only the child who was born to him which was of the Spirit, which is, the son born in accordance with the promises of Yahweh God, but also children of the flesh, born after the desires of man. When the promises were made to Abraham it was clear that he would have an heir, but not heirs, and that was the express will of Yahweh found in Genesis chapter 15 where Abraham had tried to appoint a replacement heir, having thus far had no son of his own, and we read: “3 And Abram said, Behold, to me thou hast given no seed: and, lo, one born in my house is mine heir. 4 And, behold, the word of the Lord came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.” Abraham could not substitute his servant for an heir from his own bowels, and therefore neither can anyone else make any such substitution.

On Genesis, Part 35: A Proper Marriage

Genesis 24:1 - Genesis 24:67

CHR20231103-Genesis35.mp3 — Downloaded 4543 times

 

On Genesis, Part 35: A Proper Marriage

Discussing Genesis chapter 23 and the cave in Hebron which Abraham had purchased from the Hittites in order to bury his wife, we made an analogy by cross-referencing a statement concerning Abraham, and especially Sarah, which is found in Isaiah chapter 51. Perhaps the analogy was not decent, or appropriate for children, but it is nonetheless true. As it is in Isaiah, we can look at all of our mothers as a figurative pit from which we had emerged, as Sarah was described in that manner. Then we could only pray that our fathers are rocks like Abraham, who seems never to have wavered in his faith, and for that reason alone he was considered righteous by Yahweh God. But that does not mean that a woman is a mere pit, and in the end, as we also continued our analogy of the cave which Abraham had bought, all men also ultimately end up in some sort of pit, or at least, they all return to the dust and ashes from which they were made. However a proper woman is certainly more than a hole, and the grave is also More Than a Hole, at least for the children of Yahweh. So for that reason especially, both our women and our deceased ancestors should be venerated, because Yahweh shall once again raise all of those who have maintained the sanctity of their race out of the pit. It would be appropriate to repeat the analogy when we contrast Jacob and Esau in light of the actions of Rebekah, but perhaps we shall leave it here.

Now, coming to Genesis chapter 24, we have already discussed the first few verses of the chapter, in order to describe what should have been the first example to Esau as well as to all of the future progeny of Isaac. The example made here should have been followed by all of the seed of Abraham and Sarah, if they had indeed venerated and honored their ancestors, since if they seek the righteousness of God they are instructed to “1 … look unto the rock whence ye are hewn, and to the hole of the pit whence ye are digged. 2 Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah that bare you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and increased him”, as it is written in that chapter of Isaiah. The only way we can look unto them is to examine these accounts and consider the lessons which they offer, and the only way we can honor them is to imitate them, having learned from those lessons. Sarah knew that the son of a bondwoman should not have any shared inheritance with her son, and Abraham knew that Isaac should marry a woman of his own race, a woman who was much more than a mere hole, because thereby a man would only be committing fornication rather than being engaged in a proper marriage.

On Genesis, Part 34: More Than a Hole

Genesis 23:1 – Genesis 24:4

CHR20231027-Genesis34.mp3 — Downloaded 4754 times

 

On Genesis, Part 34: More Than a Hole

In the last presentation in our commentary on Genesis, which was titled The Dedication of Isaac, we had described the sacrifice of Isaac in that manner because it was not a sacrifice at all. Rather, it was a dedication, and Yahweh God never truly intended to have Isaac sacrificed in the first place, because He had already made promises to Sarah concerning the fate of the son which she had born when she was ninety years of age. Therefore Abraham, confident in the fact that Yahweh would keep his promises, seemed to have been relatively untroubled by the demand that he sacrifice his son, and proceeded to fulfill that demand without any qualms or objections. Doing that, he acted with absolute faith and a degree of obedience which throughout history has only been surpassed in the sacrifice of Christ Himself. The act of sacrifice for the reasons which Abraham was willing to comply with it, and for the reasons for which Christ had submitted to it, is in itself a profession in the eternal existence of the Adamic spirit and the ability of Yahweh God to resurrect that spirit from beyond death.

In the ancient world, fathers had property rights over their wives and their children, and the authority to determine their fates so long as they lived. In ancient Rome, these rights were codified into law as the Patria potestas, or Paternal power, wherein only the family patriarch had any rights in private law, only he had lawfully held all of the family property regardless of who in the family had earned it, and he even had the power of life and death over his children. Furthermore, he had that authority until he died, since there was no concept of an age of majority, or adulthood, as there is in Western society today, and while fathers could grant emancipation to a son, their daughters were typically consigned to the control of another man through marriage. If the daughter remained unmarried, when her father died she fell under the authority of her eldest brother. [1] So Abraham had every right to consign his son to his God, and in accordance with ancient custom, when a man placed something on an altar and dedicated it to a god, the object – or even a person presented at the altar – became the property of that god. When Abraham placed Isaac on the altar and dedicated him to Yahweh, he essentially relinquished to Yahweh his paternal rights over his son. That is also an act of sacrifice, as Isaac was dedicated by Abraham to the service of Yahweh, at the explicit request of Yahweh. A father had a right to do this in the ancient world, just as he had a right to expose an infant, if he so chose to do such a horrible thing, or to place a son or daughter up for adoption, or to sell one into slavery.

Topical Discussions, October, 2023

CHR20231020-Topical.mp3 — Downloaded 9742 times

 

Topical Discussions, October, 2023

If there is one thing which I have observed in many of the people with whom I have disputed aspects of Scripture or history over the last 25 years, it is the frequent attitude by which they feel that they can dismiss anything which they do not already know as being insignificant, and in that manner if they do not know it, it is easy for them to despise it, and just as often, they do not even want to hear it. People have a sense of pride in their own education, they often feel they have been taught everything they need to know by some school or church which they had attended at some point in life, and they generally feel that anything which they had not been taught in those places, or which they have not seen on television, is absolutely unnecessary and could not possibly improve on what they think they know, or even on what they really do know. What many men do not understand is that every educational program is biased in favor of its own constructs and opinions, which are presented as “facts”, and if you dispute any of the material along the way, outside of some narrow but acceptable corridors, you are very likely going to fail the course. Generally, schools are not corrected by any student, or even by any professor, at least without years of controversy and chastisement.

This is especially true among people with advanced university degrees. Men who may have a doctor’s title in some specific field often pretend to be an expert in other fields, and others often imagine them to be intelligent and therefore, to be learned in other fields. I have met several such men, but I have also met the opposite cases, men who had such degrees but who were humble and did not play doctor in other fields. No man can be learned in every field, and even the greatest polymaths only have time in a human lifetime to master and practice in a couple of fields, perhaps two or even three. Often, if you tell men something they have not figured out with their own expertise, or which was not included in their education, they despise it and dismiss it as fallacy. Often, they cannot imagine that someone with a lesser degree, or with no degree, can ever show them anything new. We even have such men among Identity Christians, where a man who is a doctor of some other unrelated field, often titles the correspondence or even the papers which he writes on the Bible with the word “doctor” attached to his name, as if that title should be considered authoritative in a field for which he has no doctorate. That is quite pathetic, and calling oneself a “doctor” outside of one’s own field of study is sort of like wearing a clown suit to a funeral. There are several others who write books related to Christian Identity, who use the title “doctor” attached to their names, and while they have worldly degrees in theology, they are only mingling Christianity with the perspectives of their worldly educations. One of them is currently teaching English to gooks in South Korea, as he writes books about the exclusiveness of the Bible for Israel. So should a double-minded man ever even be trusted?

On Genesis, Part 33: The Dedication of Isaac

Genesis 22:1-24

CHR20231013-Genesis33.mp3 — Downloaded 5916 times

 

On Genesis, Part 33: The Dedication of Isaac

In Genesis chapter 21 we had last seen Abraham at Beersheba, where he had made an oath with Abimelech. The only details we have of the contents of the oath were expressed in the words of Abimelech, where we read: “23 Now therefore swear unto me here by God that thou wilt not deal falsely with me, nor with my son, nor with my son's son: but according to the kindness that I have done unto thee, thou shalt do unto me, and to the land wherein thou hast sojourned.” That is an oath of mutual respect and general cooperation which would also have been passed down to each man’s descendants. Then, before the oath was sealed, Abraham added the stipulation that Abimelech acknowledge the digging of the well at Beersheba by Abraham, so that Abraham could keep it, and that was ensured by the grant of the seven ewe lambs which Abimelech had accepted. But it becomes evident much later, in Genesis chapter 26, that the Philistines of Gerar had transgressed the terms of the oath. When that happened repeatedly, Isaac returned to Beersheba, where he seems to have found refuge. Although apparently he had never sought any recompense for the transgressions of the Philistines.

Now the events described in this chapter of Genesis, chapter 22, are highly scrutinized and also highly criticized by various parties who are critical of Christianity, because they describe the near-sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham at the command of Yahweh his God. However we would describe this event as the dedication of Isaac, rather than as the sacrifice of Isaac, because the sacrifice was never completed, yet it nevertheless resulted in the dedication of Isaac to Yahweh God by his own father, who had the authority to do so. Then, as for the critics, they are generally ignorant of the seeming cruelty of the ancient world which surrounded the Biblical patriarchs, and they wrongly judge this event by modern standards of society, which have themselves developed out of Christian morality, rather than judging the event by the ancient standards of society under which the patriarchs had actually lived.

Yet comparing this event to many similar events which are evident in the ancient past, in the end we must conclude that Abraham’s sacrifice was an act of selflessness, whereas typically, human sacrifice in the ancient world was conducted out of acts of selfishness. For example, the pagan god Odin was said to have hung himself on the tree Yggdrasil for nine days and nights in order to gain knowledge of other worlds and so that he may understand the runes. [1] But the sacrifice of Christ by hanging on a tree, or a cross, was so that He would redeem His people from their sins [2], also receiving nothing for Himself in return, and that was its stated purpose even if the critics of Christianity do not understand how the act could possibly have achieved that objective.

On Genesis, Part 32: Digging Deeper

Genesis 21:21-34

CHR20231006-Genesis32.mp3 — Downloaded 5957 times

 

On Genesis, Part 32: Digging Deeper

In this second half of Genesis chapter 21, Abraham is found digging wells, and he and his servants must have dug at least a few wells before they finally dug one which they would keep. So it is with Christians, that they should be digging wells, but they should not necessarily keep all of them. In other words, Christians should be digging into the scriptures, both Old Testament and New, rather than simply believing some pastor or priest, and as Paul had written in Romans chapter 12, the Christian should be “2 … transformed by the renewing of [his] mind, that [he] may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.” If anything conflicts with the Word of God, it should certainly not be kept. Therefore, discussing the first half of Genesis chapter 21, which describes the birth of Isaac and the sending off of Ishmael for the benefit of Isaac, we sought to better understand the Christian Gospel of the New Testament by reviewing the manner in which Paul of Tarsus had explained the fulfillments of those promises to Abraham which are ultimately realized in Yahshua Christ. Doing that, we found that in Paul’s letters he upheld the exclusion of both Ishmael and Esau from The Seed of Inheritance as it is also described in Genesis, and that exclusion would naturally include all of their descendants, something which Paul had also explained in Romans chapter 9 and Galatians chapter 3.

Many modern Christian denominations dismiss the Old Testament as a Jewish book, imagining that it pertains to Jews and not to Christians. However that is not how the apostles of Christ had treated the scriptures which we now know as the Old Testament, and they frequently asserted that it pertained to Christians, but not to those who would remain in Judaism. The differences in these perspectives are resolved only in the understanding that the Old Testament truly pertains to all of the twelve tribes of Israel, not merely to Judaeans, and only small elements of two of those tribes were ever called by the name Judaean, which is the original source word for the modern words Jew and Judaism. Ten of those twelve tribes had long before been scattered abroad, along with a great portion of the remaining two, who were never called Jews. The word Jew is not directly from Judah, but from Judaea, which was a multiracial province of the Roman empire, and as Paul wrote in Romans chapter 9, “6 … For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel”, and therefore he prayed only for his “3 … kinsmen according to the flesh.” Likewise, Christ had told His adversaries “26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you”, as it is recorded in John chapter 10.

So the apostle Paul had also asserted in the 26th chapter of the Book of Acts that “6 … I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers: 7 Unto which promise our twelve tribes, instantly serving God day and night, hope to come. For which hope's sake, king Agrippa, I am accused of the Jews.” There, it is apparent that Paul did not count the Jews among the twelve tribes. Likewise, the apostle James had written his only surviving epistle “to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad,” as it states in its opening salutation. Later, in 2 Corinthians chapter 3, using an event from the life of Moses as an allegory in order to illustrate how only Christians could understand the writings of Moses, Paul would explain that only in Christ was the vail lifted which had covered those writings. So his point is that one must understand the words of Christ first, and then one may gain understanding to the true meanings of the Torah, or Pentateuch, the five books which are attributed to Moses.

Pages