Other Two-Seedline Papers

A Brief History of the Edomite-Satanic-Devil, Herod the Great!

From the 1894, 9th edition of The Encyclopædia Britannica, vol. 11 of 25, pp. 674-675, under the subtitle “Herod”, we read (edited to improve understanding):

HEROD was the name of a family of Idumæan origin, which displaced the Asmoneans [or Levitical Hasmoneans] as the rulers of Judæa. The founder of the dynasty, and its most notable representative in every way was Herod the Great, who was king of the Jews [sic citizens of Judaea] for about thirty-seven years, from 40 to 4 B.C.

[Critical note by Clifton A. Emahiser: CONFUSED DATING OF WISE MEN: Most Biblical commentaries have Herod the Great’s death at 4 B.C. which conflicts with Luke 2:1-23. However, Insight On The Scriptures, volume 1 of 2, p. 1093, under subtitle “Date of His Death“ says in part: “A problem arises with regard to the time of Herod’s death. Some chronologers hold that he died in year 5 or 4 B.C. Their chronology is based to a large extent on Josephus’ history. In dating the time that Herod was appointed king by Rome, Josephus uses a ‘consular dating, that is, he locates the event as occurring during the rule of certain Roman consuls ... This might indicate that the date of his death was 2 or perhaps 1 B.C.” This agrees with a 3 B.C. date for the birth of Christ. It is quite clear that the wise men visited Christ at Galilee about two years after the manger scene at Bethlehem. Christmas, as celebrated today, does not separate these as two different events. It would seem, if we are going to celebrate Christ’s birth, we would keep these two events in their proper order!] – Back to The Encyclopædia Britannica:

Herod’s father [and Grandfather] were named Antipater [whom the latter], during the troubles which broke out in the family of Alexander Jannæus, attached himself to Hyrcanus, the weak-minded son of Alexander. In this way Antipater, though an Idumæan, soon became the most powerful man in Judæa, and in the Alexandrian war gave such effectual help to Julius Cæsar that the dictator made him procurator of Judæa, Hyrcanus being high priest (47?) B.C.). The same year, at the age of twenty-five, Herod was appointed governor of Galilee by his father. He soon gave proof of the remarkable energy of his character in rooting out the banditti who infested his province; but his summary measures gave a handle to the enemies of his house at Jerusalem, and he was summoned before the sanhedrin. There he appeared, not in the garb of an accused person, but gorgeously attired, and attended by a guard of soldiers. He found it expedient, however, to withdraw from Jerusalem without awaiting the sentence. He retired to Syria, where he was met with a gracious reception from Sextus Cæsar, who appointed him governor of Coele Syria. Herod now marched with an army against Jerusalem, but at the persuasion of his father and brother was induced to depart without exacting vengeance on his enemies. After the death of Cæsar, the fortunes of Herod were affected by all the changes which befell the Roman state. When Cassius took the command in the East, and began to gather his strength for the final struggle which was decided at Philippi, Herod managed to win his favor by the readiness with which he raised his share of the heavy exactions imposed upon the East. About the same time his father was poisoned, and to Herod fell the task of avenging his death, as well as of supporting the interests of his house in Palestine. After Philippi he gained Antony over by large presents of money. He and his brother Phasael were appointed tetrarchs of Judæa. In 40[?] B.C., the Parthians appeared upon the scene, overran the whole of Syria, and placed on the throne of Judæa Antigonus, son of Aristobulus, and representative of the rival branch of the Asmonean [or Levitical Hasmonean] house. Herod was completely overpowered; and, after placing his relatives in safety, so far as he could, he hastened to Rome to lay his case before Antony and Octavianus. He succeeded beyond his expectation, for, while he meant only to advocate the claims of Hyrcanus the Asmonean [or Levitical Hasmonean], the two heads of the state made him king of Judæa. Herod returned home without delay, and set about the task of winning the kingdom allotted to him. Owing chiefly to the slackness of the Roman generals who should have helped him, it was three years before he succeeded in taking Jerusalem (37? B.C.). Before that event he had married the beautiful Mariamne, a[n Israelite] princess of the Asmonean house, a grand-daughter both of Aristobulus and Hyrcanus.”

Contrary To Genesis 4:1, Adam Was Definitely Not Cain’s Father!

The cited verse above, from the KJV, reads: And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord.” This verse seems to have been corrupted even before the Septuagint!

I will cite some of the oldest manuscripts we have access to in an attempt to restore the original meanings to some current errors. An important witness is the Hexapla, and I will cite the 1881, 15-volume Library of Universal Knowledge, vol. 7, p. 514:

HEXAPLA (Gr. hexapla, ‘the sixfold’), a celebrated edition of the Septuagint version, compiled by Origen for the purpose of restoring the purity of its text, and bringing it into closer agreement with the original Hebrew. Owing to the multiplication of transcripts of the Greek text, numerous errors had crept in; and in the frequent controversies which arose between the [Judaeans] and the Greek or Hellenist (q.v.) Christians, the latter, in appealing to the Greek text, were often mortified by the discovery that it by no means represented faithfully the Hebrew original. In order to meet this evil, Origen undertook to provide a means of at least verifying the genuine Greek text, as well as of confronting it with the original. With this view he prepared what is known as his Tetrapla, or ‘fourfold’ version, which he afterwards extended into the hexapla. The Tetrapla contained, in four parallel columns, the Septuagint version, together with those of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion. The hexapla contained, in addition, the Hebrew text, together with a transcript of that text in Greek characters. In some parts of the Old Testament there were superadded one, two, and even three other versions; so that in some parts the work contains nine columns, whence it is occasionally designated the Heneapla, or ‘ninefold.’ Of the origin of these latter versions little is known.

“The hexapla, however, was something more than a mere compilation of these versions. In the margin were given notes, chiefly explanatory, as, for instance, of the Hebrew names. But a still more important characteristic of the work were its restorations and corrections of the original, in which Origen was guided chiefly by the version of Theodotion. This, however, he did not effect by arbitrary alterations of the received text; but, while he retained the common text, by indicating with the help of certain signs (an asterisk for an addition, an obelisk for a retrenchment), the corrections which he sought to introduce. Both these texts, the common (koiné ekdosis)and that of the hexapla, are found combined in existing MSS. The hexapla, as a whole, has long been lost; several editions of those fragments of it which it has been possible to recover have been printed; by far the most complete of which is that of the celebrated Benedictine, Montfaucon (2 vols. fol., Paris, 1714), which retains, so far as it was preserved in the MSS., the arrangement and even the asterisks and obelisks of Origen. For a more detailed account, see the preface and Præliminaria of this learned work.” (Incidentally, these two large volumes are in PDF, and can be downloaded from my website: Volume 1, Volume 2)

The Fingerprints of the Offspring of Cain

In his booklet The Seed of the Serpent, James E. Wise wrote in part:

In the California Jewish Voice, a publication, dated August 17, 1956, there is an article which we think should be at least mentioned in part. It says: ‘The Jews in all parts of the world are members of a Mediterranean racial group having distinct genetic factors not found among non-Jews, two Israeli scientist reported here this weekend at the first International Congress on human genetics.’

The Israeli scientist, Dr. Leo Sachs of the Weizmann Institute, and Dr. Bat-Miram of the Israel[i] Institute for Biological Research, used fingerprint patterns in their investigations. After examining 4,000 prints of immigrants to Israel[i] from Poland, Germany, Iraq, Egypt, Morocco, Yemen, Bulgaria, and Turkey, the scientist found a unique pattern of loops, whorls, and arches which could not be found in samples of fingerprints of non-Jews which they studied.”

Who Are the Jews?

For this subject I will be quoting in part from a monthly publication called American Renaissance, vol. 19, No. 5, dated May 2008. This publication then does a critical review of Jon Entine’s, Abraham’s Children: Race, Identity, and the DNA of the Chosen People, Grand Central Publishing, reviewed by Thomas Jackson. I will include my own criticism, both pro and con, in brackets and bold and underlined type. I do not consider Thomas Jackson’s critical review to be perfect, but he does bring to light the DNA of the people falsely claiming to be Israelites – but do lie, Rev. 2:9 and 3:9:

... I know the blasphemy of them which say they are [of Judah] , and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.” ...

Analytical Review of Philip Jones’ The Negro, Serpent, Beast and Devil, #6

As I was proceeding with my constructive criticism through Jones’ book, I arrived at the end of page 29 and discovered that pages 30 and 31 were missing. So the reader will understand, several years ago Philip xeroxed his book (evidently selling out all of the books he had printed up) and voluntarily gave me a xeroxed copy of this work. By far, though, Philip Jones’ best work was his Racial Hybridity, which everyone in Israel Identity should have a copy of in their personal library. However, on a few subjects, he and I don’t exactly see eye-to-eye. But for now, we will concentrate on the subject at hand.

Although I don’t have a copy of pages 30 and 31, the last three lines on page 29 gave me a clue to what Philip had addressed on these two missing pages. On the last three lines Philip states in part:

Some writers say that Ham sinned against Noah by castrating or sodomizing him (Thomas F. Gossett, Race:The History Of An Idea In America, 2nd Ptg. Dallas. 1964), but it is more reasonable to see that Ham raped his own ....” [end of page]. Undoubtedly, Philip continued stating on the next page, “mother”.

Adam Clarke’s 6-Volume Commentary Declares: “Devil” & “Ape” Have The Same Name

Should one neglect to identify the Biblical “beast of the field” as being the “devil”, one is inviting one’s son, daughter, grandson, or granddaughter to take one as an intimate companion (and a terrible misfit at that)! A “misfit”, as an entity, is one not suited to his position or associates; a maladjusted alien unfit for companionship. So if one desires to have some “devils” hanging from one’s family tree, just keep watching the “devils” running up and down the football fields and basketball courts, or whatever other activities the “devils” engage in! Just continue to support the games the “devils” engage in, and they’ll end up engaging in sexual intercourse with one’s daughter or son! And woe to the Israel Identity pastors who continue to claim that Yahweh God created those “devils”, and that He proclaimed them as “good” in the first chapter of Genesis!

Again, I will show evidence that the “devil” and the “ape” have the same name! Also, that “Satan” is likened to an “orangutan”. To document this, I will use Adam Clarke’s 6-volume Bible Commentary, vol. 1, pp. 47-50, under “Notes On Chapter III”, and especially on the terms “nachash” and “beast” at Genesis 3:1.

Analytical Review of Philip Jones’ The Negro, Serpent, Beast and Devil, #5

At the beginning of this series of papers, I did not explain fully my decision to critique the work of Philip Jones, which I will now reveal in greater detail:

When I began researching and writing back in the mid 1990’s, I wrote several short 3 or 4 page compositions defending Two Seedline doctrine, and distributed them to about 25 people attending Identity meetings near Perrysburg, Ohio. At that time Two Seedline had become very unpopular, and many scoffed at it in very abusive terms. At the time the leader of the group died, and one of his sons took over. Later, I found out that one of the daughters of this family had married an aboriginal mongolian type of American Indian. Thus, the father, just before he died, became a strong advocate of James Bruggemam’s doctrine of universalism. When his son took over the meetings, each week he would review one of Bruggemam’s audio cassette tapes, and we would have a warmed-over James Bruggeman lesson! Later, I was to learn that a number of so-called pastors in Identity had managed to demean the Two Seedline doctrine of Gen. 3:15 to an all-time low. Upon learning of this, I decided to take all of my short compositions, which made a 52 page, 8½ x 11 booklet entitled Research Papers Proving The Two Seedline Seduction Of Eve, and managed to circulate about a hundred copies throughout the United States.

A little later, someone, somehow, got a copy of my booklet to Philip Jones. I have never met or talked to Philip on the phone, but through our exchange of information, I learned that Philip held a racial position that was 180 degrees opposite to that of his brother, Stephen E. Jones. Of the various information that Philip sent me it included a free off-the-press copy of Racial Hybridity and a loose-leaf copy of his 120 page book, The Negro, Serpent, Beast and Devil. However, Philip overlooked sending me pages 30 & 31 of The Negro, Serpent, Beast and Devil.

Analytical Review of Philip Jones’ The Negro, Serpent, Beast and Devil, #4

At the end of paper #2 of this series, it was shown from the Aramaic Targum pseudo-Jonathan that it was not a negro who seduced Eve, but the fallen angel Sammael, at Genesis 4:1! Some may scoff at the Aramaic Targums, but Aramiac Targum paraphrases were first used at Nehemiah 8:8. Not only that, but the Aramaic Targums of Genesis agree with Rev. 12:3, 7-9, where “that old serpent” that seduced Eve is also “called the Devil, and Satan. which deceived the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.” Hence, Philip Jones errs by claiming the serpent was not a fallen angel! We will now pick up Philip at p. 15:


We have seen already that Nachash alone was punished to walk on his belly and eat dust, we find that Eve too was personally punished to bring forth children (literally ‘sons’) in sorrow or heartache. She was to discover to her dismay that she had been a party to a sin which produces wicked fruit, or seed. Matthew 13 calls that fruit ‘tares’, or weeds. Tares have a leavening effect upon wheat, or bread. The negro named Nachash sowed the wicked seed, but Eve nurtured it. Therefore Eve named her firstborn ‘Cain’, which means acquired or purchased. Eve exclaimed in Gen. 4:1, ‘I have gotten (bought) a man from the Lord,’ because Cain was paid for at a high price. Hence God told Eve that her desire (her sexual attraction) would be for her husband, Adam (Gen. 3:16).”

[Comment by Clifton A. Emahiser: First of all, we should consider the Aramaic Targum, called pseudo-Jonathan, on Genesis 3:6, which is unique inasmuch as it identifies the angel Sammael as the “serpent”:

And the woman saw Sammael, the angel of death, and she was afraid and knew that the tree was good for food, and that it was a remedy for the enlightenment of the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise. She took of its fruit and ate and also gave (it) to her husband and he ate.” And again, the Aramaic Targum pseudo-Jonathan, on Genesis 4:1:

And Adam knew that his wife Eve had conceived from Sammael the Angel (of death) and she became pregnant and bore Cain. And he was like those on high and not like those below. And she said: ‘I have got a man from the angel of the LORD.’” [back to Philip Jones]

Should there be any question whether Eve could have Cain by Nachash, and Abel by Adam, (Christian Vanguard, No. 32, July 1974, p. 4, Black And White Twins Born To Mother) has given examples of twins, one black and the other white, being born to a White mother. The phenomenon is called superfetation. Homer Brown, in his booklet Who Was the Only Woman in Scripture Ordained to Carry the Word? p. 30, says: ‘Superfetation is a double pregnancy in which the two fetuses were conceived at different times. Being of different age, they are different in size’. The two fetuses are not true twins, for they are not the offspring of one father, and they can be born several days or even weeks apart. This seems to have occurred in the case of Cain and Abel (see Gen. 4:1-2).”

Analytical Review of Philip Jones’ The Negro, Serpent, Beast and Devil, #3

At the end of paper #2 of this series, it was shown from the Aramaic Targum pseudo-Jonathan that it was not a negro who seduced Eve, but the fallen angel Sammael, at Genesis 4:1:

And Adam knew that his wife Eve had conceived from Sammael the Angel (of death) and she became pregnant and bore Cain. And he was like those on high and not like those below. And she said: ‘I have got a man from the angel of the LORD’.”

We will continue in this third paper to make our way through Philip Jones’ book, p. 12, giving criticism where criticism is due, and acclaim where honor is due:

Today, however, we still find negroes who are ‘knee-benders’, literally and metaphorically ... in mind and body. None of them [negroes from the Gold Coast] can straighten their knees. When at work in the fields, they do not stoop like white people; their heads being thrown back, their knees bent, their legs bowed out, their feet flat, hips thrown upward, their abdomens are brought parallel with the earth, as if moving over its surface on their bellies .... We have only to look at them eating the bread which they prefer to all other kinds of bread, the ash-cake, and to witness their fondness for the ashes, and eating dust by the handfuls, to see re-written upon living negroes, a translation of the Hebrew words, ‘and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life.’ The iron wire-muzzle that used to be so common, fastened and locked around the negro’s mouth and face, to prevent him from eating dust, has gone pretty much out of use since the negro has been brought more immediately into the light of civilization and Christianity. But even yet, they are the only people in the world who are the victims of that peculiar disease called dirt-eating, cachexia Africana, or negro consumption. Long ago I wrote a treatise on it. I proved it to be a disease of the mind, occurring in consequence of the negro not being properly governed, and his falling back under the empire of his indigenous superstition. Happily, as foretold, the seed of the woman is bruising the head of the serpent, and Christianity is setting the poor negro free from slavery to that evil spirit, which seizes upon him whenever he gets beyond the hearing of the crack of the white man’s whip (The Diseases and Physical Peculiarities of the Negro Race, by Dr. Samuel Cartwright, vol. 11, pp. 135-136). So says the honorable Dr. Samuel Cartwright (1793-1862).

Analytical Review of Philip Jones’ The Negro, Serpent, Beast and Devil, #2

As we make our way through Philip Jones’ book with the above title, we (myself and the reader) will find ourselves at variance with some of his faulty premises. Philip is a researcher and scholar par excellence, but he has picked up some excess baggage somewhere along the way. Philip may have read the 1970 book God’s Law by Mrs. B.J. Gaillot, Jr.

In her book, chapter 2B, p. 40, under “Black Genealogy Difference of the Seeds”, in part: “... But after the curse of Cain, God put the mark upon him, which made him the first negro ...” Well, this isn’t exactly the position taken by Philip Jones, but it will serve as an example how some faulty premises are formed.

We will now pick up Philip Jones on page 7, under the heading “The Relationship between the Negro and the White Man” thusly:

The origin of the negro race is clothed in uncertainty, because the negro has not had the intelligence or the foresight to keep records and history of himself. Whites have the Bible to refer to when they want to explain where they originated from, but the negro has nothing to show for all the years of his existence. Now the negro has been told by well-meaning missionaries that he can adopt the Bible as his history book also, since Adam was supposedly the first person to inhabit Planet Earth. But this is where people go wrong. Adam was not the first person, he was the first White person, so the Bible cannot be so easily transferred over to become a book for all ‘races’.

Analytical Review of Philip Jones’ The Negro, Serpent, Beast and Devil, #1

There is a scheme going on today to demonize anyone who would use the term “black” in Latin (i.e., nig´er) as politically incorrect. There is one thing that Philip Jones and I have in common; we are both White. “White” translated into Latin is albus, like in “albino”. I am quite sure that neither Philip nor I would consider it an insult to be called an “albus”. Rather, we would regard it as a badge of honor! I would state that Philip Jones is quite an accomplished scholar and researcher, but there are a few areas where we don’t agree, and I would like to share these points of dissent.

Jones states: “INTRODUCTION: The assumptions which we make in this book are that Adam was not the first man on earth, he was the father of the White Race alone, made in God’s image and likeness, and that the negro was created before Adam and not in the likeness or image of God. We also hold, like ‘Ariel’ and Professor Charles Carroll, that there were originally only two races, the negro and the White, placed on this earth. The rest are thus hybrids of the two. Originally we had intended to include the negro and an explanation of hybridity together in one volume, but we decided against it due to the abundance of relevant facts uncovered in our extensive research. Therefore we would suggest that the reader consider this book to be Part 1 on the subject of race. What questions are not cleared up in this volume we trust will be answered in one of the other volumes soon to follow.

We use the term negro rather than black to describe the darker race, because the race has traditionally been known by that name. In Hebrew the term is niggar, in Syro-Chaldaic nig'ar, in Latin nig'er, in Portuguese and other modern languages negro. Furthermore, there are very few pure blacks alive today, even in Africa.”

The Curse on Cain Proven, Part Three

Repeating, the topic of this discussion is based upon Gen. 4:11-12, where Cain had murdered Abel, which states: 11 And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother’s blood from thy hand; 12 When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth. [underlining mine]

Before we jump to any conclusions, we will have to examine just what kind of a situation we have here. The first thing we have to grapple with is the fact that only Adam was created to be a farmer, Gen. 2:5:

And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for Yahweh Elohim had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not an [Adam-] man to till the ground.”

In this third paper on this subject, I will quote from a book entitled Zionist Relations With Nazi Germany, by Faris Glubb. The author is a jew, and he uses all jewish sources. Under his introduction, he states in part: “... The information on this subject is available, but has not yet been gathered together on a single comprehensive study. This study is intended, at least partially, to remedy this deficiency ....”

The Curse on Cain Proven, Part Two

Repeating: The topic of this discussion is based upon Gen. 4:11-12, where Cain had murdered Abel, which states: 11 And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother’s blood from thy hand; 12 When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth. [underlining mine]

Before we jump to any conclusions, we will have to examine just what kind of a situation we have here. The first thing we have to grapple with is the fact that only Adam was created to be a farmer, Gen. 2:5:

And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for Yahweh Elohim had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not an [Adam-] man to till the ground.”

The Curse on Cain Proven

The subject of this discussion is based upon Gen. 4:11-12, where Cain had murdered Abel, which states:

11 And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother’s blood from thy hand; 12 When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth. [underlining mine]

Many have formed an incorrect premise that Cain and Abel were pure genetic blood brothers, only because Gen. 4:1 is a corrupt passage in the original Hebrew. The Interpreter’s Bible, a twelve volume collaborative work of 36 ‘consulting editors’, plus 124 other ‘contributors’, makes the following observation on this verse, vol. 1, p. 517:

Cain seems originally to have been the ancestor of the Kenites ... The meaning of the name is ‘metalworker’ or ‘smith’; here, however, it is represented as a derivation of a word meaning ‘acquire’, ‘get’ – one of the popular etymologies frequent in Genesis – hence the mother’s words I have gotten a man. – From the Lord (KJV) is a rendering, following the LXX and Vulg., of ’eth Yahweh, which is literally, ‘with Yahweh’, and so unintelligible here (the help of [RSV] is not in the Hebrew). It seems probable that ’eth should be ’oth – so, ‘the mark of Yahweh’ – and that the words are a gloss ...” [underlining mine]

Secondly, The Interpreter’s One-Volume Commentary On The Bible, edited by Charles M. Laymon, makes the following comment on this passage, on page 6: “... under circumstances which are obscure (vs. 1b can scarcely be translated, still less understood). His younger brother was named Abel, which suggests the Hebrew word for breath.”

Therefore, if Genesis 4:1 is “unintelligible” and “can scarcely be translated, still less understood”, how can one prove anything by quoting it? Additionally, if the words are “a gloss”, where is the foundation for any premise assumed from this verse alone?

The Battle for the Priesthood

What is virtually overlooked in the story of Cain and Abel in the fourth chapter of Genesis is the fact that they were both offering a sacrifice, and in the Bible, only priests were authorized to do so. Secondly, unless circumstances prevented it, it was always the firstborn son that was given this dignity. Inasmuch as we understand that Eve was the mother of both Cain and Abel, it is obvious that Cain was the firstborn of the serpent (i.e., Satan), and that Abel was the firstborn of Adam.

Because it is a subject of such great magnitude, we must prioritize our investigation of it with an eye on the subject at hand. It may come as a surprise to many of you, the symbol of the Shepherd Kings is the Sphinx and the first Shepherd King was Adam. The priesthood was called the Order of Melchizedek. Howard B. Rand, in Destiny magazine, October, 1962 wrote an article “Enoch’s Mission and Shem’s Responsibility” (1962 Destiny yearbook pp. 201-204). Now quoting in part:

Order of Melchizedek. When Shem with his followers came out of Egypt, they founded at Jerusalem the city destined to become the City of David and also the capitol of the Kingdom of God when Jesus Christ, who is of the Order of Melchizedek, returns to rule as King of kings and Lord of lords.

Two-Seedline In England In 1277



The Mystery of Satan and the Devil

by B.F. Jackson

[An Effort To Correct An Error - see the notes by Clifton A. Emahiser]


 Have you ever wondered what Jewry’s Luciferian priesthood mean in protocol No. 14 which says: "Our philosophers will discuss all the shortcomings of the various beliefs of the non-Jews. But no one will bring under discussion our faith from its true point of view since this will be learned by none save ours, who will never dare betray its secret"?


 What is that "faith"? What is its true point of view? We are told it is Judaism which rests on the foundation of the belief in the God of the Old Testament Israel and Jewish Freemasonry, the latter of which is the practical application of the theory of the brotherhood of man, fraternity, equality and liberalism for the maximum harmony in human relations; and the Masonic rituals are the dramatization of the construction of King Solomon’s Temple which symbolizes the construction of the above-mentioned spiritual and ethical qualities in God’s chosen people of Israel, or Jewry.


The British Israel World Federation, Judah, DNA and the jews

Click here for Clifton Emahiser and William Finck in a discussion of The British Israel World Federation, Judah, DNA and the jews

Program notes, Yahweh’s Covenant People, April 10th, 2010

Topic: The British Israel World Federation (BIWF), the jews, Judah, and DNA.

This program addresses the BIWF paper found at http://www.britishisrael.co.uk/showart.php?id=46

William Finck’s notes:

First, the language of DNA researchers has been built from the ground up by evolutionists who have many preconceived notions that lead to false assumptions. They define certain features of DNA as “mutations” (although they have never really witnessed as much) and they define a series of differences as “genetic drift” (although they have never actually seen genes drift).  Scientists guess that these “mutations” occurred 15, 25, or as long as 60 thousand years ago.  So reading any articles which discuss DNA, one must be careful not to fall into the language-trap that has been devised into making the false theory of evolution sound as if it is inevitable.

Also, genetic research assumes that the people in areas today, excluding Europeans, have always inhabited those areas.  So therefore arabs and jews are wrongly labelled “Semites”, and the mixed-race peoples found today in the Caucasus Mountain regions are considered Caucasians, a term formerly used of White people exclusively.

Two Seedline Taught In Dead Sea Scrolls, #2

As I said in Two Seedline Taught In Dead Sea Scrolls, #1, should you desire more insight on the Scriptures, I highly recommend you investigate the Dead Sea Scrolls. One should never go about making remarks on a subject unless they have thoroughly studied the issues involved. Sadly, many in the Identity Message today do just that, on a variety of subjects, especially the antichrist, anti-seedliners and those preaching universalism (that is, to attempt to bring the other races, termed “heathen” in the Bible, via the backdoor of the Kingdom under our Covenant). To all the apologists for the other races, I say this: It is high time to either get fully into Israel Identity or get entirely out. Should you decide on the latter, I suggest you return to the Jew-deo-unchristian churches, from where you came, to preach your anti-seedline and universalist doctrines. Astonishingly, there are so-called Identity “teachers” who erroneously call themselves “pastors” who are advocating that even the impostor “Jews” can be saved if only they will accept “Jesus Christ” as their personal Savior. In Detroit, at a small Identity church, they have a “Jew” in the congregation. There could be nothing more out-of-place than a black, Mongolian or “Jew” at an Israel Identity meeting. When Identity starts bringing such people into its meetings, they cease to be “Identity” gatherings.

Our people must start to understand that we are in a RACE WAR, and have been for over 7,000 years. That RACE WAR started in Genesis 3:15 and 4:1, and has continued until this very day. The antichrist, anti-seedliners falsely claim that RACE WAR is a “flesh war.” Yes, there are problems with the “flesh”, but this RACE WAR is an entirely different and far more serious matter. This RACE WAR is a genocidal war designed to completely destroy an entire race of people, that being the White Anglo-Saxon Race. One need only look around himself to observe it happening right before his very eyes on a daily basis. I highly recommend that those so-called “Identity pastors” who are apologizing for the other races start preaching “segregation” and “separation” from them as the Bible so loudly proclaims. When I hear those so-called “Identity ministers” apologize for the other races, saying we should be ashamed of such an attitude, I realize they are actually helping the enemy’s cause. Ted R. Weiland is one of them. I am fully persuaded that when Weiland stands before the Almighty in judgment, Yahshua will ask him, “Why did you give aid and comfort to My enemies?”

Two Seedline Taught In Dead Sea Scrolls, #1

Should you desire more insight on the Scriptures, I highly recommend you investigate the Dead Sea Scrolls. You should first study the history of how and when they were discovered. This can be done by reading the introductions of several books that have been published on this subject. One such book I suggest for this is Understanding The Dead Sea Scrolls edited by Hershel Shanks © 1992, published by Random House, NY. Though Shanks is a “Jew”, the book is a collection from several Dead Sea Scroll authors. It is also necessary to understand who wrote them and copied most of the books of that pre-New Testament period including many of the books we now have in our present Bibles. Additionally, we must analyze the text and context of the Dead Sea Scrolls themselves. Wherever they already agree with our present Bibles, we must be thankful, but where there are discrepancies, we must resolve them. One such discrepancy is found in 1 Samuel 11:1-3. The scroll in question is designated 4QSama, and was found in cave #4. The following represents an omission at the beginning of that chapter. Please get your Bible and turn to 1 Samuel 11; then read the following in italics; then continue reading in your Bible from verses 1-10, omitting the word “Then” in verse 1:

“[Na]hash, king of the children of Ammon, sorely oppressed the children of Gad and the children of Reuben, and he gouged out a[ll] their right eyes and struck ter[ror and dread] in Israel. There was not left one among the children of Israel bey[ond the Jordan who]se right eye was no[t put o]ut by Naha[sh king] of the children of Ammon; except that seven thousand men [fled from] the children of [A]mmon and entered [J]abesh-Gilead. About a month later ...” (Now read verses 1-10, and also check Josephus’ Antiquities 6:5:1):

For many of you this newly discovered evidence will pique your interest. Before you are aware of it you will be deep in research on the Dead Sea Scrolls while others will shun this testimony, fearing it will undermine their mental equilibrium. Unfortunately, new insight is not for everyone, and we will always have people among us who will fight anything they cannot comprehend, or who are impervious to new discoveries of old data. Many suchlike are among the anti-seedliners.