A critical review of the sermon Daniel's Fifth Kingdom, by Bertrand Comparet

William Finck
CHR20151218-DanielsFifthKingdom.mp3

Christogenea Internet Radio, Friday December 18th 2015.

Tonight we are going to present and discuss Bertrand Comparet's sermon, Daniel's Fifth Kingdom. We are doing this for several reasons. First, I have chosen to devote more time than usual concentrating on certain other tasks, mainly technical, and therefore I will not begin another in-depth Bible Study until early January, when we shall commence with our presentations of the epistles of Paul, picking up with his epistle to the Philippians. Secondly, last week we began addressing both futurism and preterism, which are methods of Biblical interpretation that more or less refuse to see, or even deny, the unfolding of the revelation of God throughout our actual history. Nowhere in the Old Testament prophets is a long-term unfolding of the revelation of God clearer than in the Book of Daniel.

Daniel has his critics, but of course they are nearly all Jews. Bertrand Comparet did another sermon which was a pretty good general address of some of those criticisms, entitled Daniel Freed From the Critic's Den, but because he only gave sermons they are not always well documented. So we hope one day to expound on that sermon also, and to add documentation. Ultimately, Daniel is proven to be true, and every Jew a liar. The Jews despise and reject Daniel not only because of his precise foretelling of the time of the advent of the Christ, but also because Daniel, along with the Revelation, prove conclusively that the Word of God is what we today would consider to be Euro-centric: that the White Christian nations of Europe are indeed the seed of Abraham and they are the nations which were promised to spring from his loins. That is also what Paul of Tarsus had taught throughout his epistles, and the truth of those assertions can be discovered in the classical histories and in archaeology.

A critical review of the sermon Historic Proof of Israel's Migrations, by Bertrand Comparet

William Finck
CHR20151030-Israel_Migrations.mp3

Christogenea Internet Radio, October 30th, 2015 - A critical review of the sermon Historic Proof of Israel's Migrations, by Bertrand Comparet

Since we are still on the road we are going to present another paper by Bertrand Comparet, along with some hopefully constructive criticism. We are doing this with the hope of putting Comparet's sermons in perspective. Over the years, we have had many critics who have expressed chagrin for many of the things we have said about Bertrand Comparet, or Wesley Swift and others, and that is quite unfortunate. We can appreciate our teachers, as we should. But we should not put them on pedestals. Rather, we must build on their work, and offer corrections when it is needed. So when we offer criticism of Bertrand Comparet, it should certainly not be seen as a condemnation of a good man. Rather, we must move forward from where he and others have left us, and continue to develop a better Christian Identity understanding, through further study of the Scriptures along with history and archaeology. Comparet helped to point the way, but he alone is certainly not the destination.

Last week, we presented a critical review of Bertrand Comparet's sermon Israel's Fingerprints. After doing so, this week we listened to a little more of Comparet's original recording. Disappointingly, we have found that apparently Jeanne Snyder had left out a portion of Comparet's words when she transcribed the sermon, or we may have been a little more critical of Comparet than we were. I do not know why Jeanne did that, and since she passed on in 2008 I may never know. But I do know that she had always seemed to be sincere and sought to defend Comparet and help protect his legacy. We can only be left guessing. Perhaps realizing that some of his comments on prophecy were not entirely accurate, she having had the benefit of maybe twenty additional years of hindsight, simply omitted some of his comments. For my part, I would rather she had transcribed all of Comparet's original words.

A critical review of Israel's Fingerprints, by Bertrand Comparet

William Finck
CHR20151023-Israel_Fingerprints.mp3

Christogenea Internet Radio, Friday October 23rd, 2015. A Critical Review of Israel's Fingerprints, by Bertrand Comparet.

Once again we are going to make a presentation from the sermons of Bertrand Comparet, and 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, and then again by Clifton where he was compelled to offer several of his own remarks as appendices.

We have chosen to undertake this endeavor for two reasons. First, we as Identity Christians praise Yahweh our God with much gratitude for men like Bertrand Comparet, who helped to lead us to Christian Identity truth, and upon whose shoulders we stand. On the other hand, no man being perfect, we can honor our teachers but we cannot worship them. We do not see any man as infallible, and we put no man upon a pedestal. When a man cannot be criticized, when a man cannot be wrong, that is idolatry and not Christianity. All men being fallible, 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 ever closer to its perfection. We being men can not actually expect to achieve that perfection ourselves, but in our endeavors to do so we can improve and build upon what we have, while also hoping to correct the mistakes of those before us as well as our own.

With this in mind, any criticism we offer is not to tear down the work of our predecessors. Rather, it is to build upon and improve that work, so that our Identity understanding of the Gospel of Christ is found to be without reproach. As Paul of Tarsus said in Ephesians, by the washing of the water of the Word of God the assembly of Christ may be found holy and without blemish.

Ruth was an Israelite; Ruth was not a Moabite by Race

William Finck
CHR20151016-Ruth_Israelite.mp3

Here we will make a critical presentation of Bertrand Comparet''s sermon, Ruth was an Israelite, offering our own commentary on Comparet's original material, Clifton Emahiser's notes on the sermon, and our own research in addition to theirs, hoping to edify and substantiate Comparet's premise. This version of the sermon is available at Christogenea. It is from the book Your Heritage, which was digitized with critical notes by Clifton A. Emahiser:

It is unfortunate that many preachers, in their ignorance, teach so many false doctrines. One such false doctrine is the statement that Yahshua was not of pure Israelite blood, they say one of His ancestors was Ruth, a Moabitess. From the use of this term they believe that she was racially, not just geographically, a Moabite, in this they are greatly mistaken.

The territory of the Moabites was originally east and northeast of the Dead Sea. It extended from the Arnon river on the south to the Jabbok river on the north. Then their territory went from the Dead Sea and the Jordan river on the west, across the plains and foothills, into the mountains to the east. From the name of the people who lived there, it was called Moab. It kept that name for many centuries after all the Moabites were gone from it.

Esther: Fraud or Fable? Part 3

William Finck
ChrSat20150606-EstherFable03.mp3

Christogenea Saturdays, June 6th, 2015 - Esther: Fraud or Fable? Part 3

In the first part of our presentation refuting the canonical status of the Book of Esther, we showed that historically, the Esther narrative does not fit into the rule of any of the kings of Persia, from the earliest of them all the way down to the last of them, for the entire 200-year span of the Persian empire. We also presented textual evidence of the rejection of Esther by the writers of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the sect of Judaeans at Qumran. Additionally, we showed that the supposed events portrayed in Esther are impossible in light of the records of Ezra, Nehemiah, Daniel, and the minor prophets of the second temple period, which are Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi.

Then in the second part of our presentation of the arguments against the veracity of the Book of Esther, we began following Bertrand Comparet's sermon against the book. Doing this, along with Comparet we pointed out several inconsistencies in the story itself, as well as several historically ridiculous situations which the book expects us to accept. Among the inconsistencies is the fact, recorded by both the prophet Daniel and by the Greek historian Herodotus, that the Kings of Persia were forbidden to change any laws or decrees which had been made before-time. Yet in the Esther story, even though the story itself also informs us of this Persian custom, the king is seen making such changes which are impossible because of the custom. Among the historically ridiculous situations, we saw that the king had issued a lengthy proclamation that all of the Jews throughout the empire would be put to death, on a specific date eleven months from the date that the proclamation was made. Yet there was no Exodus, and no uprising. Among the inconsistencies we pointed out, the story purports that only two months later the King of Persia had apparently forgotten that he made such an important proclamation.

Esther: Fraud or Fable? Part 2

William Finck
ChrSat20150523-EstherFable02.mp3

Esther: Fraud or Fable? Part 2

In Part 1 of Esther: Fraud or Fable? this past Saturday we hope to have established as fact that the Esther narrative does not fit into the histories of any of the kings of Persia, especially taking into consideration the circumstances of Ezra and Nehemiah and some of the internal circumstances of the Esther story, such as the chronology which the book itself provides. We had walked through each of the Kings of Persia, from Cyaxares all the way down to Darius III, the last Persian king, and illustrated the problems which materialize with identifying any one of them as the King of Esther.

We also spoke at length about the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the fact that not only is any portion of Esther entirely missing from those scrolls, but in addition, the Feast of Purim is not mentioned in any of the extensive calendrical writings found among the scrolls. Now, as we have often discussed before at Christogenea, the Dead Sea Scrolls can with certainty be dated to the time of Roman rule over Judaea and while Jerusalem was still intact, to the 130-year period between 65 BC and 65 AD. So the sect which created those scrolls obviously did not have the Esther story among their holy scriptures.

Esther: Fraud or Fable? Part 1

William Finck
ChrSat20150516-EstherFable01.mp3

The Book of Esther, Fraud, or Fable? Part 1

“Oh no”, some would say, “now he's attacking the Bible!” Well, whose Bible is that? And what is the Bible? The books which we call the Bible were compiled into a single volume by men, and originally many of them were argued over at great length. Of the 66 books (they are not all “books”, but we will call them “books” for our purposes here) in the King James Version of the Bible, 65 certainly belong there. However the original King James Version of the Bible contained 80 books. The Geneva Bibles which were published in the 16th century and which were the Bibles of the first American protestants also contained 80 books. Someone before us must have attacked the Bible 14 times, because 14 books are already missing! Those 14 books are sometimes published separately and are called the “Apocrypha”. Reportedly, Martin Luther was the first to have published a Bible with these 14 books placed under that special designation, and the Geneva and King James Bibles followed his lead. The typical Catholic Bibles have 72 books, because they retain 6 books from the Apocrypha as well as the 66 found in the King James Version.

But other ancient scriptures exist which are not in the Bible, and were quoted by the apostles as scripture, yet they are not found in the Apocrypha. For a clear example of this, there is Jude 14, where the apostle quotes Enoch. The passage is famous, where it says “14 And Enoch, seventh from Adam, prophesied to these saying 'Behold, the Prince has come with ten thousands of His saints 15 to execute judgment against all and to convict every soul for all of their impious deeds which they committed impiously and for all of the harsh things which the impious wrongdoers have spoken against Him!'” But no such prophecy from Enoch is found in the Old Testament as we have it today. So there are books which the apostles themselves esteemed as Holy Scripture, which never made it into our Bibles at all.