2005 Watchman's Teaching Letters

Watchman's Teaching Letter #92 December 2005


This is my ninety-second monthly teaching letter and continues my eighth year of publication. With this lesson, we’ll finish up with William Finck’s Open Letter Responding To H. Graber, where Graber makes all kinds of harsh allegations against the apostle Paul. In order to fully understand this last segment, it will be necessary for the reader to have read WTL lesson #’s 89, 90 & 91. In order to get started on this one, it will be necessary to backtrack from where we left off in the last one. H. Graber had just quoted from The History Of the Church, translation by G. A. Williamson, published by Penguin Books © 1965, revisions 1989, pages 195-196 where he didn’t properly identify his source. I had three sources of Eusebius and was fortunate to have the edition from which H. Graber quoted for which he so badly copied, riddling it with numerous errors, and reads from Graber’s Kingdom Courier thusly as <Reference S-2>:

“In their eagerness to find, not a way to reject depravity [sic the depravity] in [sic of] the Jewish scriptures, but a means to explain [sic of explaining] it away, they resorted to interpretations which cannot be reconciled or harmonized with scriptures, and which provides [sic provide] not so much a defence of the original authors, as a foolsome [sic fulsome, which means ‘offensive’] advertisement for the interpretors [sic interpreters]. Inigmas [sic ‘Enigmas’] is the pompous name they have given [sic they give] to the perfectly plain statements of Moses, gloryfying [sic glorifying] them as oracles full of hidden mysteries, and bewitching the critical factor [sic faculty] by their extravagent [sic extravagant] nonsense.” [My God! - Can’t H. Graber read? C.A.E.]

William Finck answers <S-2>: Here is either a purposely deceitful act on Graber’s part, or one of the most idiotic instances in the history of scholarship. Graber has taken a paragraph from Eusebius, and has claimed that these are the very words of the church historian “speaking of Paul”, when in fact Graber quotes a known liar whom most of the early church fathers condemned as such. Yes, the paragraph Graber cites is found in Eusebius, even though Graber could not cite it properly. It is apparent that Graber does not check out the context in which a passage is written, but chooses only a few short lines which he can force to fit his theory, no matter how nefarious the source might be. Yet checking the source itself, perhaps something Graber may have hoped that no one would do, we find the following:

Watchman's Teaching Letter #91 November 2005


This is my ninety-first monthly teaching letter and continues my eighth year of publication. With this lesson, we’ll continue with William Finck’s Open Letter Responding To H. Graber, where Graber makes all kinds of harsh allegations against the apostle Paul. You will need lesson #’s 89 & 90 in this series, or you will not fully understand this one. Here we must review a statement which H. Graber made at <Reference J>: “THE LAW: The doctrine of the professed apostle Paul very emphatically negates the Laws of God. BY WHAT AUTHORITY? We read in Rom. 1:17, ‘For therein is righeousness [sic] of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, the just shall live by faith.’ (Not the law) ... <Reference J-2>

William Finck answers <J-2>: Among other things in this paragraph, discussed above at <J>, Paul is accused by Graber of “many times” misquoting the Old Testament, a blatant lie once one sees that: (a) the majority of Paul’s quotes agree with the Septuagint rather than the A.V. (b) often Paul is simply paraphrasing rather than quoting (c) quote marks were not used in Greek, they belong to modern translators (d) the Old testament texts have not come down to us in perfect form, some New Testament quotes disagree with both the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint, and some of those do agree instead with the Aramaic Targums! (e) these circumstances exist in every New Testament book, not only in Paul (or Luke or Mark). Here Graber’s duplicity is quite obvious, for he is a liar and a fraud! The LXX version of Habbakuk 2:4 (by Brenton, and a fair rendering of the LXX Greek): “... but the just shall live by my [Yahweh’s] faith.” Who is a deceiver, but H. Graber? There is not any contradiction between Paul and Yahshua Christ, whom Paul follows!

Watchman's Teaching Letter #90 October 2005


This is my 90th monthly teaching letter and I will continue with William Finck’s an Open Letter Responding To H. Graber, where Graber makes all kinds of harsh allegations against the apostle Paul. You will need #89 in this series, or you will not fully understand this one:

 To continue by examining another part of this paragraph at <F>, I will discuss his lies concerning Galatians 4:14. Quoting my own translation of this verse: “And of my trial in the flesh you did not despise or loathe, but as a messenger of Yahweh you accepted me, like Yahshua Christ.” It may be proven (start by reading 4:15) that Paul’s “trial in the flesh” was his failed eyesight (see also Gal. 6:11), and he was here commending the Galatians for treating him respectably, even though he had such a disability. Paul is not elevating himself to the position of Christ, but rather is commending the Galatians for abiding by the words of Christ, expressed at Matthew 10:40: “He that receiveth you receiveth me”! Paul is being fair in his assessment. Is Mr. Graber? Who is a liar, but H. Graber? It is obvious that Graber does not know his Scripture, yet makes many accusations. The jews did the same thing to Christ!

<Reference G> H. Graber states:WORD OF GOD FIRST TO THE JEWS: In the above scriptures, Acts 13:46-47, Paul says that it was neccessary [sic.] that the word of God should first be preached to the Jews (Yehuwdiy). (Here we must understand that the words Jew and Israel are not synonymous.) We read in I Cor. 9:20, ‘And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews;’ We have no evidence in the Bible that Jesus Christ ever done [sic.] this, to the contrary, Jesus said, speaking of the Jews in Matt. 13:10-13, ‘And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? 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. For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not; from him shall be taken away even that he hath. Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.’ Also in Matt. [sic. 13:] 34-35, ‘All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, saying, I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundations of the world.’ Does this sound like Jesus Christ was trying to gain the Yehuwdiy (Jews)? Of course not, Jesus knew that the Jews are the children of the devil as He tells us in John 8:44. We read in Jude: 4, ‘For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.’ Certainly Jesus Christ knew who the Yehuwdiy are, and I believe that the learned Paul did too.”

Watchman's Teaching Letter #89 September 2005


This is my eighty-ninth monthly teaching letter and continues my eighth year of publication. With this lesson, we’ll continue our defense of the apostle Paul, which I initiated in lesson #88, where recorded history reveals its origin, showing Paul-bashing is nothing new. Most, if not all, of the condemnation of the apostle Paul is based on faulty research establishing flawed premises, and therefore, in the end, fostering spurious conclusions.

Watchman's Teaching Letter #88 August 2005


This is my eighty-eighth monthly teaching letter and continues my eighth year of publication. With this lesson, we’ll continue our defense series. With the last several lessons we’ve defended Herodotus, Josephus and Eusebius. Without these historians, along with several other classical historians, we would have little tangible evidence that our Bibles are true. Yet in spite of this there are those who would irresponsibly throw all this evidence to the wind, completely repudiating every thread of evidence. With this lesson we will start defending the apostle Paul’s writings. It is simply amazing how many in Israel Identity, and even those in mainstream churchianity, are jumping on the bandwagon to bash Paul. It has now risen to epidemic proportions and is still growing.

Maybe someone should organize a national book-burning meeting for all these historians’ writings along with Paul’s epistles. They (not I) could go around to all the new and used book stores and collect all these writings after they have cleared out their own basements and attics. They (not I) could pick out a central location in the United States convenient for all like minded to meet for this great event. Maybe they (not I) could find a source where they could purchase all the matches, kerosene and razor blades at wholesale prices. Of course, they (not I) would have to get a burning permit from some local government, so the fire department could be standing by preventing the blaze from getting out of control. Maybe, after they have removed all of Paul’s writings along with Luke’s from their Bibles, they could donate the paper to some recycling operation. If they are really all that serious about what they are promoting, they should do all this to testify to others of their beliefs. Like the old saying, Put your money where your mouth is.”

Watchman's Teaching Letter #87 July 2005


This is my eighty-seventh monthly teaching letter and continues my eighth year of publication. In the last several lessons I have been defending the writings of Herodotus and Josephus; and in the last lesson I extended it to include Eusebius. Not that we find all these sources perfect in all respects, but without their histories we would have little with which to confirm our Scriptures. Not only do we need Herodotus, Josephus and Eusebius, but we can use the witness of many of the other classical and early church writers’ histories. For instance, without Eusebius, we would know little about Constantine’s political and religious involvement with Christianity. Under Constantine, Rome adopted a single official religion. To say a single official religion” might be a misnomer, inasmuch as it was imperative for Constantine to unite the pagans with the Christians in order to gain the throne! And it has continued in that vein ever since, though Rome has forever fallen never to be established again. As Daniel said (2:35):

Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.”

Since it was prophesied that the iron” (and also clay”) representing the Roman Empire would be broken to pieces together, and become like chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them”, Daniel would become a liar if the Roman Empire were ever revived” again as nearly all the mainstream churches” so profusely proclaim. The real liars are the promoters and followers of the futurists’ doctrine dreamed up by a Roman Catholic Jesuit priest. The next time someone tries to convince you of futurism, quote them this verse. It might be well to memorize it by heart! You can mark it down in your little book that Tim LaHaye, Jerry B. Jenkins, Thomas Ice, and their ilk are all liars right out of the pits of hell. When are we ever going to study our Bibles? When are we ever going to study the histories available to us which support those Scriptures such as we read at Daniel 2:35? Without our history books, we have little evidence that Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome are all past history! Again, all that is left of the Roman Empire is broken pieces and chaff”, just as Jerusalem and old Judaea are the broken bottle” nation of Jeremiah 19:10; and none of these will ever be revived again –  ever! When it says “no place was found for them”, Daniel meant exactly what he said!

Watchman's Teaching Letter #86 June 2005


This is my eighty-sixth monthly teaching letter and continues my eighth year of publication. In the last lesson, I demonstrated how Eusebius highly respected the histories written by Josephus and used them extensively. Toward the end of the last lesson we saw how Eusebius understood that Yahshua’s prophecy at Matthew 24 was of the forthcoming destruction of Jerusalem and was not 2000 years in the future, as futurists claim, but imminent at His own time. In December of 2000, I had prepared a brochure on this, but I was rebuffed even by those in Israel Identity, so I put the article on hold until a more appropriate time. With Eusebius’ help in the last lesson, that time has come! I presented the first four paragraphs at the end of lesson #85, showing prophecy that Jerusalem would be plowed like a field at Jeremiah 26:18 and Micah 3:12, and it happened in 70 A.D. with Titus. Let’s now continue where we left off:




The passages cited above predict the utter destruction of the Temple and city of Jerusalem. This portion of Scripture represents a monumental turning point in history, as it brought to the fore the opposing forces of light and darkness. The Messiah voiced His utter disgust in loathing words against the Jewish” hierarchy. With a language of awesome severity, He denounced their hypocrisy. Truly the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent of Genesis 3:15 were in mortal combat at that time. This passage of Scripture is referred to as the Olivet Discourse.” For this presentation, I will be drawing material from about nine Bible commentaries for which space will not allow designation:

Matthew 24:1: And Yahshua went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.” Yahshua had completed His work in the Temple, never to return again, and His Glory departed with Him as it had with Solomon’s Temple before its destruction by the Babylonians. He had just placed a curse on the Jewish” nation by cursing a fig tree that it should never again bear fruit, Matthew 21:19; Mark 11:14. The fig tree represented the Jews” as having a profession, but bearing no fruit. The Jews” say the Temple was built of white and green-spotted marble. Josephus says the stones were white and strong; fifty feet long, twenty-four broad, and sixteen thick, Josephus Antiq. 15:11:3.

Watchman's Teaching Letter #85 May 2005


This is my eighty-fifth monthly teaching letter and begins my eighth year of publication. As of this date (4-9-05), Eugene (Buddy) Johnson has not repented of his blasphemous false teachings claiming that our Savior came from the Tribe of Ephraim rather than Judah, though this ministry has shown ample evidence of Johnson’s error and shared that evidence with him. Johnson further claims that Tamar (Judah’s intended daughter-in-law with whom he fathered the twins, Pharez and Zarah) was a Canaanite. I sent Johnson, nearly 10 years ago, a photocopy of The Book Of Jasher, chapter 45, verse 23 proving that Tamar was of the House of Shem, yet he continues to make that same charge that all the descendants of Judah and Tamar are Canaanite-Jews.” Since the Germans, Scots and Irish are direct descendants of Judah and Tamar (of which I am all three), Johnson strongly intimates that I am a Canaanite! Therefore, all of you who have German or Scottish or Irish lineage; Johnson is also claiming you are a Canaanite. I thought you ought to know this before you send him some of your hard-earned-money to promote his lies. Probably 95% of Johnson’s followers have German or Scottish or Irish blood and it is amazing to me why anyone would continue to take the time to listen to Johnson continue to blaspheme their lineage, as well as the lineage of Yahshua Christ Himself!

Over the last several lessons we have been determining the value of the writings of Herodotus and Josephus. According to some, we should relegate these histories to an infamy of the utmost degree. Some would have us believe that the evidence testified to by these two witnesses should be cast into the flame. While we are in the process of burning all the histories of Herodotus and Josephus, we will also have to burn all the writings of Eusebius’ The Church History, for Eusebius depends on Josephus as a foundation for his church history which covers the period from the time of Christ until the early 300rds A.D. Once we start this enterprise of book-burning, it appears there will be no end to our endeavor to destroy. I am not saying that Herodotus, Josephus or Eusebius were perfect, but who else do we have to support Scripture at these critical periods of time? There are some in Israel Identity who claim to be of the highest Biblical authority, who have never so much as cracked, nor do they own, one of these three men’s histories. All three of these histories could probably be purchased for less than $100, so there are few who have an excuse for not procuring, and then seriously studying them!

Watchman's Teaching Letter #84 April 2005


This is my eighty-fourth monthly teaching letter and ends my seventh year of publication. If you will remember, we are doing a series defending the writings of Josephus. It is not the objective here to imply that Josephus was perfect in all that he wrote, but he was a man of Israel who normally would have been a priest of the first of twenty-four courses had not Herod begun appointing to the priesthood non-Israelites of a non-Levitical background. Many today are accusing Paul and Josephus of being Canaanite-Jews. As Paul was not a Canaanite-Jew, but of the Tribe of Benjamin; in similar manner Josephus was not a Canaanite-Jew, but of the Tribe of Levi. This is important, as today we would be hard-pressed to prove many passages in our Bible without the writings of Josephus.

One of the very most important of Josephus’ writings is his recording of the absorption of the Edomites, which he surely wouldn’t have recorded had he been like Herod who burned all the genealogical records to prevent anyone from knowing his low, ignoble lineage. How foolish the charge that Josephus was an Edomite-Jew! We find this at Josephus’ Antiquities 13:9:1, which reads as follows:

But when Hyrcanus heard of the death of Antiochus he presently made an expedition against the cities of Syria, hoping to find them destitute of fighting men, and of such as were able to defend them. However, it was not till the sixth month that he took Medaba, and that not without the greatest distress of his army. After this he took Samega, and the neighboring places; and, besides these, Shechem and Gerizzim, and the nation of the Cutheans, who dwelt at the temple which resembled that temple which was at Jerusalem, and which Alexander permitted Sanballat, the general of his army, to build for the sake of Manasseh, who was son-in-law to Jadua the high priest, as we have formerly related; which temple was now deserted two hundred years after it was built. Hyrcanus took also Dora and Marissa, cities of Idumea, 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.”

Watchman's Teaching Letter #83 March 2005


This is my eighty-third monthly teaching letter and continues my seventh year of publication. We will continue here where we left off in the last lesson. Of all of Josephus’ works, none could be of greater value than his rendering of the Baal-Peor incident, where it was necessary for Yahweh to destroy 24,000 Israelites in order to halt the tide of miscegenation (race-mixing) with which the Israelites were seduced by the nefarious advice of Balaam to Balak. Had this continued, it would have destroyed the young nation before it could be established. This incident is so similar to what is happening in all our Israel lands today, that it is applicable to our present situation! Truly, the doctrine of Balaam” is alive and well in our day, and again, our race is on the verge of extinction! To demonstrate that Josephus was aware how serious a matter it was, I will now present his words without quotation marks from Antiquities 4:6:1-13:





1. Now Moses, when he had brought his army to Jordan, pitched his camp in the great plain over against Jericho. This city is a very happy situation, and very fit for producing palm trees and balsam; and now the Israelites began to be very proud of themselves, and were very eager for fighting. Moses then, after he had offered for a few days sacrifices of thanksgiving to God, and feasted the people, sent a party of armed men to lay waste the country of the Midianites, and to take their cities. Now the occasion which he took for making wars upon them was this that follows:–

2. When Balak, the king of the Moabites, who had from his ancestors a friendship and league with the Midianites, saw how great the Israelites were grown, he was much affrighted on account of his own and his kingdom’s danger; for he was not acquainted with this, that the Hebrews would not meddle with any other country, but were to be contented with the possession of the land of Canaan, God having forbidden them to go any further.So he, with more haste than wisdom, resolved to make an attempt upon them by words; but he did not judge it prudent to fight against them, after they had such prosperous successes, and even became out of ill successes more happy than before; but he thought to hinder them, if he could from growing greater, and so he resolved to send ambassadors to the Midianites about them. Now these Midianites knowing there was one Balaam, who lived by Euphrates, and was the greatest of the prophets at that time, and one that was in friendship with them, sent some of their honorable princes along with the ambassadors of Balak, to entreat the prophet to come to them, that he might imprecate curses to the destruction of the Israelites. So Balaam received the ambassadors, and treated them very kindly; and when he had supped, he inquired what was God’s will, and what this matter was for which the Midianites entreated him to come to them. But when God opposed his going, he came to the ambassadors, and told them that he was himself very willing and desirous to comply with their request, but informed them that God was opposite to his intentions, even that God who had raised him to great reputation on account of the truth of his predictions; for that this army, which they entreated him to come and curse, was in the favor of God; on which account he advised them to go home again, and not to persist in their enmity against the Israelites; and when he had given them that answer, he dismissed the ambassadors.

Watchman's Teaching Letter #82 February 2005


This is my eighty-second monthly teaching letter and continues my seventh year of publication. We are picking up where we left off in lesson #81. We were in the process of comprehending how archaeology is proving Josephus correct in various parts of his writings. We also saw how Josephus’ histories link quite well with certain Scriptures.

Watchman's Teaching Letter #81 January 2005


This is my eighty-first monthly teaching letter and continues my seventh year of publication. I’m sorry that I was unable to have this lesson ready for distribution for my February mailing. In the last two lessons I have been defending Josephus from the cruel charges being lodged against him by unresponsible parties who should know better! With this teaching lesson we’re going to see that archaeology is proving Josephus correct on many of his writings. This is not to imply that Josephus was perfect by any means, for he was a man as we. We will start with the subject of the temple built at Leontopolis in Egypt. As you may be aware, there was also a temple built at Elephantine on the river Nile. Leontopolis is a different temple at a different time. Let’s now pick up the documentation from The Archaeological Encyclopedia of the Holy Land (3rd ed.) by Prentice Hall Press.

YEHUDIYEH (TELL EL-); LEONTOPOLIS An ancient mound in lower Egypt, 20 miles north of Cairo. The site was excavated at the beginning of this [20th] century by W.F.M. Petrie on behalf of the British School of Archaeology in Egypt. The earliest traces of settlement go back to the early period of the Middle Kingdom, but the period of greatest interest is that of the 5th Dynasty, when the site was occupied by the Hyksos, who left a large fortified camp. The site was also inhabited at the time of the New Kingdom (18th Dynasty) and burials of this period have been found. The 20th Dynasty is represented by remains of a temple of Rameses III. There were also tombs from the time of the Late Kingdom. In the Ptolemaic period a new city, Leontopolis, was built on the site. By permission of Ptolemy VI Philometor, the high priest Onias, built a Jewish temple there; hence the Arabic name for the site, which means mound of the Jew’. According to (Josephus, Antiq. xiii, 62–73) this temple was built to the same plan as the Temple of Solomon in Jerusalem. It went out of use at the time of the war between the Romans and the Jews in ad 66.


Subscribe to RSS - 2005 Watchman's Teaching Letters