The Clergy Claims TARES are WHEAT & GOATS are SHEEP

 The moral to the story is: Don’t send your preacher or priest on an errand to the grocery store, for it’s hard to tell what he might come back with! In some ways, this paper parallels my essay Clergy Claims God Committed Fraud. It is sad, but all of this lack of Biblical comprehension on the part of the Clergy is quite appalling, to say the least! In particular, we are referring to Matt. 13:24-30, 36-42 where the “TARES” and “WHEAT” are addressed by Christ. At Matt. 25: 30-34, Christ speaks of the “SHEEP” and the “GOATS”. These four terms are deliberately cloaked in idiomatic language, called “parables”, and unless we grasp what a parable is, we will never identify what the parable is teaching! At Matt. 13:34-35 and Mark 4:33-34 the subject of “parables” is elaborated on, stating:

Matt. 13:34-35: “³⁴ All these things spake Yahshua unto the multitude in parables [G3850]; and without a parable [G3850] spake he not unto them: ³⁵ That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables [G3850]; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.”

Mark 4:33-34: “³³ And with many such parables [G3850] spake he the word unto them, as they were able to hear it. ³⁴ But without a parable [G3850] spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples.”

Both of these passages are related to Psalm 78:2, but we must read Psalm 78:1-5 to understand the context in the New Testament:

“¹ Give ear, O my people [Israel], to my law: incline your ears to the words of my mouth. ² I will open my mouth in a parable [H4912]: I will utter dark sayings of old: ³ Which we have heard and known, and our fathers have told us. ⁴ We will not hide them from their children, shewing to the generation to come the praises of Yahweh, and his strength, and his wonderful works that he hath done. ⁵ For he established a testimony in Jacob, and appointed a law in Israel, which he commanded our fathers, that they should make them known to their children ...”

Therefore, a parable is a “dark saying”, intended only for Israelites to fathom the meaning thereof! My concise definition of a Biblical parable, gleaned from several Bible dictionaries, is:

Parable: A short, simple, figurative story designed to communicate a literal truth. In other words, a parable is a story or saying familiar to the listeners in their own common surroundings in time and place to drive home a point. Thus, the “figurative story” and the “literal truth” are two separate topics. Hence, it is a serious mistake on the part of the Bible student to attempt to literalize a figurative parable!

Becoming aware that the “tares” spoken of at Matt. 13: 24-30, 36-42 are the racially mixed descendants from cursed Cain amalgamated with cursed Cannan (known as the ten Canaanite nations at Gen. 15:19-21 from whom Esau also took wives) who were later proselyted to what is now called “Judaism”, and that the “wheat” are the Israelites from the twelve tribes who kept their racial lines pure, the meaning can “literally” be understood as tare-people and wheat-people. [The “tare-people” always leave a poison footprint!]

From the Pictorial Bible Dictionary by Merrill C. Tenny we read on page 621 in part: “PARABLE ..., Gr. parabolé, (likeness), derived from the Greek verb parabállo, composed of the preposition para meaning beside and the verb bállo, to cast. A parable is thus a comparison of two objects [side by side] for the purpose of teaching ...” [brackets mine]

This agrees with Strong’s Greek Dictionary, if one will follow it all the way through

“3850. ... parabŏlē ... from 3846; a similitude ...”

“3846. ... paraballō... from 3844 and 906; to through alongside ...”

“3844. ... para ... a primary preposition; properly near, i.e. (with genitive) from beside (literally or figuratively) ...”

“906. ... ballō, ... a primary verb; to throw (in various applications, more or less violent or intense) ...”

We can see from this that Christ took a figurative similitude and slammed it down beside a literal truth with His parables! For instance, in His parable of the talents, Christ was not condoning the practice of usury, but was encouraging persons with only one talent not to bury it, but to assist in some small way those that have the ability to advance the Kingdom Message. To state it another way, a Biblical parable is a veiled statement to reveal a dark saying to a select audience, while confusing those who are not genetically appropriate to enter the Kingdom nor hear and understand the Kingdom Message. Christ made this very clear at Matt. 13: 10-13, 16 as follows:

“¹⁰ And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them [non-Israelites] in parables? ¹¹ He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. ¹² For whosoever hath [the genes of Jacob], to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not [the genes of Jacob], from him shall be taken away even that he hath. ¹³ Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they [not being of the seed of Jacob] seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. ... ¹⁶ But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear.” [brackets mine]

The mystery of understanding Christ’s parables comes from a sixth-sense (a power of perception beyond the five senses) breathed into Adam-man by Yahweh called the “Spirit” (Gen. 2:7), which none of the non-Adamic races have. Therefore, the nonwhite peoples cannot discern between the vehicle of the parable and the element of truth it conveys. What a waste of time, effort and money to send Bibles to Nigeria, or Canaanite-jews for Jesus!

Now that we know significantly of what a parable consists (and further study on the subject would be advisable), let’s turn to the parable of the WHEAT and the TARES. As I stated in the title of this paper, our present-day traitorous clergy boldly proclaim that “the jews are God’s chosen people”, when really they are the tares of Matt. 13:24-30, 36-42:

“²⁴ Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: ²⁵ But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. ²⁶ But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. ²⁷ So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? ²⁸ He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? ²⁹ But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. ³⁰ Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn. ... ³⁶ Then Yahshua sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field. ³⁷ He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; ³⁸ The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; ³⁹ The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. ⁴⁰ As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. ⁴¹ The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; ⁴² And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.”

I hope your Bible center-reference is as honest as mine, where referring to the “tares” of verse 38, it sends one to Gen. 3:15; John 8:44; Acts 13:10 & 1 John 3:8. (See my essay, A King James Version Bible With A Good Center Reference Teaches And Proves Two Seedline.) The two opposing seedlines of Genesis 3:15 are the children of Yahweh (i.e., the White Adamic race) vs. the children of Satan (falsely identifying themselves today as “Israelis”, they are rather Canaanite-jews, or devils walking in our midst in shoe-leather, Rev. 2:9 & 3:9). It is because the Clergy has by-in-large overlooked the historic Complete Works of Josephus that we don’t comprehend that today’s jews are related to Esau’s Hittite wives and other Canaanite tribes to varying degrees (including the “Kenites” of Gen. 15:19 who are actually descendants of Cain) that the clergy continues to repeat the lie that “the jews are God’s chosen people”, and nothing could be farther from the truth.

Josephus’ Antiq. 13.9.1: “Hyrcanus took also Dora and Marissa, cities of Idumea (Edom), and subdued all the Idumeans; and permitted them to stay in that country, if they would circumcise their genitals, and make use of the laws of the Jews; and they were so desirous of living in the country of their forefathers, that they submitted to the use of circumcision, and the rest of the Jewish ways of living; at which time therefore this befell them, that they were hereafter no other than Jews.”

A footnote on the same page makes the following comment on this passage:

“This account of the Idumeans admitting circumcision, and the entire Jewish law, from this time, or from the days of Hyrcanus, is confirmed by their entire history afterwards. See Antiq. 14.8.1; 15.7.9. War 2.3.1; 4.4.5. This, in the opinion of Josephus, made them proselytes of justice, or entire Jews, as here and elsewhere, Antiq. 14.8.1. However, Antigonus, the enemy of Herod, though Herod were derived from such a proselyte of justice for several generations, will allow him to be no more than a half Jew, 15.15.2. But still, taken out of Dean Prideaux, at the year 129, the words of Ammonius, a grammarian, which fully confirm this account of the Idumeans in Josephus: ‘The Jews,’ says he, ‘are such by nature and from the beginning, but Phoenicians and Syrians; but being afterwards subdued by the Jews and compelled to be circumcised, and to unite into one nation, and be subject to the same laws, they were called Jews.’ Dio also says, as the Dean there quotes him, from book 36.37:– ‘That country is also called Judea, and the people Jews; and this name is given also to as many others as embrace their religion, though of other nations ...’” [Note: The term “Phoenician” may be misleading here, as by the time the Idumeans were converted to judaism, most of the original Phoenicians were far removed to other places, and only denotes a geographic area (cf. Matt. 15:22-27 & Mark 7:26).] [“jew” is a non-word]

In his book The Controversy Of Zion, © 1978, published by Dolphin Press, Natal, South Africa, Douglas Reed states in part the following excerpts on pp. 52-53:

“These chaotic centuries brought in their course the second significant event of the period: the enforced conversion of the Idumeans to Jehovaism (‘Judaism’) is a word apparently first used by the Judean historian Josephus to denote the culture and way of life of Judea, as ‘Hellenism’ described those of Greece ... Evidently there was much intermingling for whatever reason. The Jewish Encyclopedia says that ‘early and late Judah derived strength from the absorption of outsiders’ and other authorities agree, so that anything like a purebred tribe of Judah must have disappeared some centuries before Christ at the latest. ... the Judaists of the world, although obviously they were not [all] descended from Judah, became again a community separated from mankind by a rigid racial ban. ... Fervent Zionists still beat their heads on a wall of lamentation when they consider the case of the Idumeans ... The problem of what to do with them apparently arose out of the priests’ own sleight-of-hand feats with history and The Law. ... He (Hyrcanus) disobeyed that law, and contented himself with the forcible conversion. But by so doing he made himself a capital transgressor, like Saul, the first king of the united kingdom of Israel and Judah long before ....”

The clergy do likewise when they proclaim “the Jews [meaning the Idumeans] are God’s chosen people”! Thus, the clergy have become accessories-after-the-fact to the Idumeans’ crime, and are just as guilty of a capital offense. Under Old Testament law, there was absolutely no forgiveness for such a capital crime. Under the New Testament there is forgiveness under Christ’s blood for producing a half-breed, but one must send his sins forward to the Judgment rather than let his sins follow him there. When we pander to these false satanic jews, who were responsible for killing 20,000,000 White Ukrainian farmers in Russia, while claiming to be “God’s chosen”, it gets to be pretty damn serious a problem, not to know who the TARES and WHEAT represent!

The problem we have is, our people are reaching non-Biblical conclusions when reading their Bibles. When we counsel such people that the TARES are the descendants of Cain mixed with the other nine Canaanite nations mentioned at Gen. 15:19-21, the reply we usually get is: “All of Cain’s descendants were drowned in Noah’s flood.” Had those people who give such a reply checked the first nation mentioned at verse 19, they would discover it cites the “Kenites”! Secondly, had they taken the time to look up “Kenite” in their Strong’s Concordance Hebrew Dictionary, they would have discovered that it is Strong #’s 7014 & 7018 “... Qayin”, meaning Cain. Now the Bible states clearly that there were only eight White Adamic people on Noah’s ark, so how did Cain’s descendants survive a so-called worldwide flood and still be in existence until the time of Abraham 1000 years later (according to Septuagint chronology)? It is obvious that Noah’s flood wasn’t worldwide! How about some scholarship rather than ignorant conjecture! For goodness sake, do not confuse the Kenites of Abraham’s time with Moses’ in-laws by the same name, as Moses’ in-laws were racially distinct from the Kenites associated with the ten Canaanite nations! Jethro was called a Kenite because he was a smith, whereas in other Scriptures the Bible explains that by tribe he was a Midianite. Yet the labels at Gen. 15:19-21 are strictly tribal, and not to describe vocation.

TARES & GOATS HAVE A SIMILAR ORIGIN

Now that we see that the “TARES” which Christ addressed were a conglomeration of Canaanite tribes mixed with the descendants of Cain, and that Cain was fathered by Satan, we will now investigate the origin of the “GOATS” at Matt. 25:32-34, 42:

“³² And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: ³³ And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. ³⁴ Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world ... ⁴¹ Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels ...”

From The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1, ch. 4, Dialogue of Justin Philosopher and Martyr, with Trypho: “‘... The Soul of Itself Cannot See God.” – “‘Tell me, however, this: Does the soul see [God] so long as it is in the body, or after it has been removed from it?’ – “‘So long as it is in the form of a man, it is possible for it,’ ... ‘And what do those suffer who are judged to be unworthy of this spectacle?’ said he. – ‘They are imprisoned in the bodies of certain wild beasts, and this is their punishment’.” [emphasis mine] (See my Angels That Sinned “Chained In Darkness”, 2 Pet. 2:4 & Jude 6 (#1). It would appear “the angels that sinned” are genetically mixed ½ & ½ with animal-kind/s! Until we comprehend there is no record that Yahweh created the nonwhite races, we are naïvely doomed to adopt dangerous premises. Justin was taught by the disciples of Christ, and he lived in the succeeding generation after the disciples.

The first thing the detractors to this creditable evidence will cry out is: “Such a thing as ½ angel and ½ animal couldn’t happen”. Well, tell that to the big six chemical companies which are already majoring in genetic engineering: Monsanto; DuPont; Syngenta; Dow; BASF; and Bayer Cropscience, plus dozens of others! Don’t say the fallen angels couldn’t have done such a thing when these chemical companies are already accomplishing unimaginable achievements in test tubes. Remember the TV series Touched By An Angel, where the leading role was played by a negress? A better title might have been “Touched By A Fallen Angel”.

In researching this subject, I also find it strange that “devils” in the Old Testament is Strong’s #8163 “sâ‘îyr” and has essentially the same meaning as “satyr” in the Greek, so evidently they have a similar etymology. In fact, the KJV translators translated #8163 as “satyr” at Isa. 34:14! I will show evidence that the Greek term for the Hebrew #8163 “sâ‘îyr” also has connotations of an “ape”. Pliny used the word to indicate a kind of ape.

The World Scope Encyclopedia, under the topic “Satyrs” doesn’t indicate whether this was Pliny the Elder or Pliny the Younger, but it doesn’t make any difference as they were both highly educated men, and Pliny the Elder (23-79 A.D.) oversaw the education of Pliny the Younger (61-115 A.D.), his nephew. Pliny the Elder majored in “Natural History” (zoology). These men were Roman citizens, and Pliny the Elder published upward of 2,000 volumes of his works, and I am sure he knew the difference between an ape and a goat! So, with this, we have the Plinys agreeing with the Arabic finding of Adam Clarke, that the devil had some connection with an ape. While Clarke was a master of several languages, and had read extensively the many Classics, evidently he never read Pliny’s Natural History, or didn’t catch the connection between an ape and the Greek “satyr” when he read it.

How an ape became a goat among the Greeks can only be conjectured. Maybe it was because the Greek islands and peninsulas were not a natural habitat for them, and over time the Greeks substituted the goat in place of the ape. However it may have happened, we should not discard the entire analogy of the satyr being half goat and half man! Inasmuch as Yahshua Christ separated the sheep nations from the goat nations, surely He wanted the Greeks to comprehend the bastard status of the half goat and half man nations. So He had to state His admonitions in words they would understand! Paul made it very clear at Hebrews 12:8 that there are but two kinds of people, “sons” and/or “bastards”, and nothing in between! The only way that that could be accounted for is the fact that the “angels who sinned” had mixed their genetics with animals, as well as Adam-kind, on separate occasions! Had the Greeks still understood the ape connotations of their earlier art and sculpture, I am sure that Christ would have used “ape nations” rather than “goat nations”. There is also the possibility that the later Greeks confused earlier Greek legend equating satyrs with apes as relating to the wild goat – the Bezoar, or Cretan wild goat (Capra aegagrus) which is reddish-brown in winter, of which only a few remain.

Inasmuch as today we follow the terms “sheep nations” and “goat nations”, I will quote some excerpts from The Complete New Testament Word Study Dictionary by Spiros Zodhiates, on page 655, pertaining to Strong #’s 2055 & 2056, the two Greek words for “goat”:

“2056 ... Used as the emblem of wicked men because of their inferior value (Matt. 25:32 ... ) ...”

“2055 ... Sheep and goats pasture together, but never trespass on each other’s domains; they are kept together but they do not mix; they may be seen to enter the fold in company, but once inside they are kept separate.” It should also be noted that the four-legged goats of Christ’s time and locality were mostly black. Could that be a factor in His parable? Also, what other reason do we need for complete (100%) segregation?