Refuting Universalism

With the first three installments of this theme we covered many of the benefits of being a pure White Caucasian; that we find ourselves in a delicate balance with our solar system and environment. Song 5:10-15 states:

In order to get the context of Jude 12, we really should read vv. 9 through 12 thusly:

“⁹ Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, Yahweh rebuke thee. ¹⁰ But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves. ¹¹ Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core. ¹²These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots ....”

With the first two installments of this theme we covered many of the benefits of being a pure Caucasian. We find ourselves in a delicate balance with our solar system and environment in many ways, especially our light spectrum, which works with our translucent skin to absorb vitamin D. We should therefore avoid over-covering ourselves with clothing, or applying excessive sun block to frustrate this natural benefit of which nonwhites are greatly deficient.

We will continue this subject by quoting Lam. 4:7:

“Her [Israelite] Nazarites were purer than snow, they were whiter than milk, they were more ruddy¹¹⁹ in body than rubies, their polishing was of sapphire ...”

Question: What is there about the purity of “snow” that we don’t seem to understand?

Divers Seed Defiles Families, Deuteronomy 22:9 and Leviticus 19:19

by Clifton Emahiser

Some clarifications in brackets by William Finck, for Clifton’s original see the PDF

 It is glaringly clear that from time immemorial the world and Christianity have had two opposing criterion (Gr. kriterion, means of judging) to define the scope of “love” and “hate”.

In order for every Christian to have absolutely no doubt in their mind as to the Biblical positions of “hate” and “love”, I will now quote Christ at John 15:18-25:

“¹⁸ If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. ¹⁹ If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. ²⁰ Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also. ²¹ But all these things will they do unto you for my name’s sake, because they know not him that sent me. ²² If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloak for their sin. ²³ He that hateth me hateth my Father also. ²⁴ If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both me and my Father. ²⁵ But, ... that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause.” [underlining mine]

We are about to examine how the Latin word “gentile” was introduced into our present Bibles. Yes, “gentile” is a Latin word, but no Bible writer ever used the term as there is no such word in Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek. The first time that the Latin word “gentile” ever appeared in any Bible is when Jerome translated the original manuscripts from Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek into Latin! Secondly, and more importantly, in Jerome’s day, the Latin term “gentile” (gentilis) never had today’s corrupted definition meaning “non-Jew”. The Junior Classic Latin Dictionary published by Wilcox & Follett Company in 1945 defines gentilis: “of the same clan or race”, surely a word consistent with all of Scripture (Amos 3:2, Matt. 15:24 etc.).

Following Jerome’s example, the later English translators chose the Latin gentilis, “gentile”, for their translations in place the original Greek word ἔθνος (ethnos) because Jerome, when he made the Latin Vulgate, used the word gentilis to translate the Greek ἔθνος into Latin. In other words, Paul was sent to the people of his own ethnicity. How, where or when the term “gentile” first took on the corrupted meaning of “non-Jew” cannot be definitely determined, but that was NOT the original meaning in Latin! Nor is the word “gentile” found in any of the Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek manuscripts! Paul never uttered or wrote the word “gentiles”! Rather, Paul used only the Greek word τὰ ἔθνη “the nations”, and knew that he was going to those same nations found at Genesis 17:6 and 35:11. To use the term “gentile” in an improper manner only exposes that person’s lack of intelligence!

We are about to do a critical review on a two tape series (audio cassette tapes) made by James Bruggeman entitled “The History of the Doctrine of Universalism.” It will be somewhat like a debate in nature with James Bruggeman presenting his views and I will break in from time to time to show where he is in error. This doctrine of “Universalism” is a very dangerous and unscriptural doctrine and it is time for it to be exposed for what it is.