This is my one hundredth monthly teaching letter and continues my ninth year of publication. Starting with WTL #88 we have been continuing a series defending the apostle Paul from the horrendously false charges that are being hurled at his epistles, and these accusations have their origins among the lowest moral sources one can imagine. In the last lesson, we discovered that Yahshua Christ Himself highly praised the Ephesian assembly at Rev. 2:1-8, of which Paul was the founder. That assembly was blamed for having lost its “first love”, which surely shows that it was on the right path at its inception under Paul. Based upon this passage, either Yahshua Christ is a liar or the Paul-bashers are liars, and one can’t have it both ways! If the Paul-bashers are correct, Yahshua Christ did us a great disservice at Rev. 2:1-8, or if Yahshua Christ is correct, all the Paul-bashers are doing us a momentous disservice, reminiscent of the early centuries! We will now continue the subject with William Finck:
Here again we shall continue to address Clayton Douglas’ Paul-bashing article The Seduction: Judeo-Christianity OR Pauline Christianity? Saul of Tarsus: Paul. A different view, which he published in the December, 2003 issue of his Free American Newsmagazine, and there are still a couple of pages of this article to address before we can move on to the second part of Douglas’ Paul-bashing series. Quite humbly, I hope to have already well demonstrated that Paul-bashing is not a very profitable endeavor, if by the fruit of one’s labor one expects to profit in truth and understanding. Rather, the Paul-bashers rely upon the writings of the jews, anti-christs, liberals and sexual deviants to fortify their own distorted ideas, and in the balance of his article Douglas certainly continues this pattern, as we shall see below.
<Reference #36> Clay Douglas states: “Paul will be the first one to set up small communal units, stabilized with a chief for each, as well as a hierarchy, a ritual (baptism, prayer, Eucharist), and a teaching. Paul became the greatest ‘interpreter’ of Jesus’ mission who explained, in ways that Esu/Jesus himself never did, how Esu’s life fitted [sic] into a cosmic scheme of salvation and ‘grace’.”
William Finck answers <#36>: As we have previously seen, in section <#4> of this response back in WTL #93 and elsewhere, Douglas denies that Yahshua Christ was the Messiah, redeemer of Israel, foretold as a promise to us by so many of the Old Testament prophets. Douglas holds here the same position as the jews, and so it is no wonder that he hates Paul of Tarsus so viciously that he spews page after page of lies and misconceptions by which to blaspheme him!
That Christians throughout the οἰκουμένη (inhabited world) assembled themselves into “small communal units” was not an innovation of Paul’s, but a natural extension of already extant practices. Such communities were governed by elders throughout the histories of both Hebrews and Greeks. See James 5:14; 1 Pet. 5:1 ff. and compare those to 1 Tim 5:17 ff., to see that Paul contrived nothing new or unexpected. The Christian Community governed itself. Elders were elected by the assembly. The word translated in the A.V. “ordain” at Acts 14:23 and “chosen” at 2 Cor. 8:19 is χειροτονέω (5500) and primarily means “to vote for, to elect ... Passive to be elected” (Liddell & Scott), and Paul cannot be blamed for poor translations. These elders appointed “bishops” (Greek: “supervisors”) and “ministers” (Greek: “servants”), provided they were qualified (1 Tim. 3:1-13; 4:14). Not even Paul admitted to having direct authority over the assemblies (2 Cor. 1:24), and advised them that Scripture (the law and the prophets; Acts 17:2, 11; 18:28; Rom. 4:3; Gal. 3:22; 4:30; 2 Tim. 3:15-16) and the gospel (the words of Yahshua Christ; 1 Tim. 6:3-5) were the authorities. This model of Christian governance lasted until the time of Justinian, when the “universal” Romish church began to take form. Paul cannot be blamed for the devices of men of later centuries, and all who try are absolutely ignorant of history.
Neither did Paul contrive the baptism ritual, which had been employed by both Greeks (Aeschylus, Eumenides lines 448-452) and by the people of Palestine (see the Dead Sea Scrolls, 4Q414 [4Q Ritual of Purification A] fragment 12 for one instance), long before John the Baptist began his ministry. Both Paul (i.e. Eph. 5:25-27) and Peter (i.e. 1 Pet. 3:21; Acts 10:44-48; 11:15-16) realized some time after the first Pentecost that water baptism was certainly not a necessary ritual for Christians. Paul cannot be blamed that the Romish church adopted the practice, ritualizing it into one of their so-called “sacraments”. This is explained at length in my pamphlet “Baptism – In What?”. Neither did Paul ritualize prayer. Neither did Paul ritualize communion (properly only the sharing of things in common), nor can he be blamed for the so-called “Eucharist” ritual of the Romish church. Paul’s very Christian example of a simple communion (the sharing of a meal in common) can be found at Acts 27:33-36, and certainly no ritual can be extracted from that!
<Reference #37A> Clay Douglas states: “In other words, Paul taught that Christians would enter Heaven through ‘faith’ (Grace) alone. Jesus Christ/Esu Immanuel had taught that Christians would be judged on their ‘works’. It is also of import that Paul/Saul began to substitute the word ‘Faith’ for the required ‘Faithfulness’ which is carefully outlined in God’s Laws of the Old Testament. Hence, Paul taught that Christians needed to be full of ‘faith alone’ (Faith: Trust or reliance; a system of religious doctrines believed in.) in order to enter the Kingdom, contrary to both God’s Laws (Old Book) and Esu’s Teachings (New), which clearly stated that ‘faithfulness in the Commandments’ (and other Laws of God) (Faithfully: loyal, reliable, honorable, exact.) must be adhered to in order to enter the Kingdom. (Faith is the belief in an idea or cause. Faithfulness is following through on that code or credo with exacting actions.)”
William Finck answers <#37A>: Before discussing Paul’s views on faith and salvation, which surely will be discussed fully below, some of Douglas’ own contradictions must be addressed. Here Douglas has labeled “God’s Laws” the “Old Book”, and “Esu’s [sic Yahshua’s] Teachings” the “New.” Yet earlier, in section <#33> of this response to Douglas’ article in WTL #99, Douglas states that “His [Jesus’] writings had simply disappeared”! I must ask, Mr. Douglas, which is it? Do we have the utterances of Yahshua Christ, or not? In section <#13> (WTL #95) we see Douglas claim that “the scrolls of the teachings of Esu [sic. Yahshua]” were stolen. This, to borrow a line from Mr. Douglas and then use it in reference to him, is certainly “a classic example of ‘double think’”. When it suits Clayton Douglas, the teachings of Yahshua Christ are missing; elsewhere when it suits Clayton Douglas, the teachings of Yahshua Christ are in the New Testament. What hypocrisy Douglas resorts to! Clay Douglas purports to be expressing the teachings of Christ in section <#31> (“Jesus warned about the danger of false prophets”), and at section <#32> (“Jesus ... never stopped attacking the Jewish hierarchy ... Esu [sic] hadn’t chosen which of his disciples was the ‘worthiest’ ... he vaguely pointed at Peter ...”), yet out of the other side of his mouth, Douglas would tell us that his teachings were missing or stolen! Is Clayton Douglas a deceiver, or an idiot? Clayton Douglas continues ... :
<Reference #37B> Clay Douglas states: “‘... for by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God – not the result of works, so that no one may boast.’ [New Testament, Ephesians 2:8-9]
“Is it possible that Paul/Saul chose to infiltrate the ranks of this [sic] early Christians, teaching a doctrine that opposed Jesus on several fronts, replacing Jesus’ careful lessons with a selfish teaching of desire to gain a ‘free. gift’ of salvation based only on faith and completely devoid of any behavioral requirement or obedience to law? Has Paul distracted us, recrafting us all into deformed idiots fully embracing Communistic Humanism? ... ‘To be a great magician, one must be able to present an illusion in such a way that people are not only puzzled, but deeply moved.’ S. H. Sharp.”
William Finck answers <#37B>: Quoting yet another magician, Douglas again reveals his true intellectual pursuits. But claiming that Paul would have us embrace “Communistic Humanism” is another obviously hypocritical act on Douglas’ part, since he himself is a disciple of John Spong, “Humanist of the Year for 1999” as Spong’s own website boasts! Douglas himself is attempting a sleight-of-hand, destroying the noble Paul of Tarsus with the utterances of a cast of jews, anti-christs, liberals and sexual deviants! Yahshua Christ told us that we shall know them by their fruits. Over and over again Clayton Douglas verifies to us that he is in the same category with, if he is not himself, an anti-Christ jew.
To James, the idea of faith was separate from the idea of works, or good deeds, as evident at chapter 2 vv. 14-26 of his epistle. To Paul, the idea of faith included the idea of works, or good deeds. Often Paul contrasts faith to the “works of the law” (as the A.V. translates the phrase literally). Yet the “works of the law” are actually the “rituals of the law”, as the phrase is rendered in both my own translation of Paul’s letters, and in Ferrar Fenton’s version published about a hundred years ago. The “works” or “rituals” of the law are mentioned by Paul at Rom. 3:20, 27, 28; 4:2, 6; 9:11, 32; 11:6; Gal. 2:16 (trice); 3:2, 5, 10; Heb. 6:1 and 9:14. Paul, in the context of these chapters, certainly means those rituals which the law prescribed in ordinances and which have been done away with (Eph. 2:15; Col. 2:14; Heb. 9:1-10). While James was a contemporary with Paul, he received not the divine revelations that Paul was given.
The Old Testament law does not mandate kind deeds or acts of charity or love for one’s brethren, but only prescribes penalties for the crimes it describes and the rituals in its ordinances, along with some other things, such as feast days. Paul spoke of “obedience to the faith” (Rom 1:5) and expressly said that we do not make void the law through faith, but rather establish the law (Rom. 3:31). Paul says to the Ephesians: “For in favor you are being preserved through faith and this, Yahweh’s gift, is not of yourselves, not from works, lest anyone would boast, for His work we are, having been established among the number of Christ Yahshua for good works, which Yahweh before prepared in order that we would walk in them.” (Eph. 2:8-10, my own translation). Before Agrippa, Paul had testified that he preached the faith to those in Damascus and in Jerusalem, “... then all the region of Judaea and to the Nations I announced to repent and to turn to Yahweh doing deeds worthy of repentance” (Acts 26:20, my translation). Paul advised Timothy: “Likewise women in moderate attire are to adorn themselves with modesty and discretion, not in wreaths and in gold or pearls or in very expensive garments, but that which is fitting with women professing fear of God, through good works.” (1 Tim. 2:9-10, my translation) and “The errors of some men are manifest beforehand, going ahead to judgement, but others then follow after. In like manner also are the good works manifest, and those being otherwise are not able to be concealed.” (1 Tim. 5:25, my translation). Paul also said “To those who are wealthy in this present age, you exhort neither to be high-minded nor to have hope in uncertain riches, but in Yahweh who provides for us richly all things for enjoyment: to do good work, to be rich in good deeds, to be generous, sharing ...” (1 Tim. 6:17-18, my translation); “All writing inspired of God is also beneficial for teaching, for evidence, for correction, for education which is in righteousness, that the man of Yahweh would be perfect, having prepared himself for all good works” (2 Tim. 3:16-17, my translation); “Trustworthy is this saying, and concerning these things I wish for you to maintain strongly that those trusting in Yahweh should take care to prefer good works” (Titus 3:8, my translation).
Again, Paul told the Romans: “But in accordance with your stubborn and unrepentant heart you store up to yourself anger at the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of Yahweh, who ‘will render to each according to his works’. Surely to those with endurance in good works, honor and dignity and incorruptibility they seek, eternal life. But to those of contention, and they who disobey the truth, but are persuaded by injustice: anger and wrath, affliction and strait, on every soul of man who labors to accomplish evil ...” (Rom. 2:5-9, my translation). He also told the Corinthians: “For another foundation no one is able to place besides that which is established, which is Yahshua Christ. Now if anyone builds upon that foundation gold, silver, precious stones, timber, fodder, straw, the work of each will become evident; indeed the day will disclose it, because in fire it is revealed; and of what quality the work of each is, the fire will scrutinize. If the work of anyone who has built remains, he will receive a reward. If the work of anyone burns completely, he will suffer loss, but he himself will be preserved, although consequently through fire.” (1 Cor. 3:11-15, my translation).
It should be plainly evident that Clayton Douglas has misrepresented the teachings of Paul, taking portions of passages entirely out-of-context and criticizing things which he has neither truly studied nor does he understand. Good works were clearly a part of Paul’s definition of faith, clearly a necessary part of a Christian’s life, and shall certainly be rewarded appropriately and proportionally. Yet there is more which I am compelled to say here, but in a short space.
One will not find the word “grace” in my translations. Although the word χάρις (5485) may mean grace, it is also favor, and much more appropriately in the New Testament. On occasions much too frequent to list here, Yahweh promised “salvation”, or preservation to the children of Israel all throughout the prophetic writings. These promises were made despite the sins (errors, transgressions of the law) committed by the Israelites. If all those who have transgressed the law, or who have failed to love their brethren, were to be destroyed, Abraham could never have descendants “as the sand of the sea, which cannot be numbered” (Gen. 32:12 et al.), and he may not have had any descendants at all! The promises made to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were made regardless of the behavior of subsequent generations, which Yahweh must have foreseen. The promises of preservation (or “salvation”) to Israel were made without condition! The promises to redeem Israel were to all of Israel, and so Paul says “all Israel shall be preserved” (Rom. 11:26), and this teaching is in accordance with the prophets and with the parables of Christ. Israelites who in the end have no lasting good works are left with no reward, for which compare the above quoted 1 Cor. 3:11-15 with Luke 19:11-27. Israelites who are sinners are not admitted into the Kingdom, as Paul teaches everywhere, i.e. 1 Cor. 6:9-11; Gal. 5:19-21; Eph. 5:5. In contrast, the “goat” nations, the non-Israelites, are to be totally destroyed (i.e. Matt. 13:47-50; 25:31-41), and among these are the tares (Matt. 13:37-43), which Paul also identified as the bad-fig Edomite jews (Rom. 9:1-13, 21-23), who time and again Clayton Douglas prefers to follow! It is not Paul’s fault that all those who fail to see that the (pure) descendants of Abraham through Isaac and Jacob were favored simply because of their genes, also fail to distinguish the fate of Israelites, good and bad, from the fate of the bastard races, among which are the jews. Paul took his message only to the “lost” sheep of Israel, to those Nations which were descended from Abraham (Gen. 17:5, et al.), which all of his epistles demonstrate.
<Reference #38> Clay Douglas states: “Since Paul envisioned Jesus’ return in his own lifetime it is likely that Paul also conceived of a ‘timeless’ savior (The Interpreter’s Bible; Volume 11: Page 265) who would deliver those who believed in him (in other words, you only had to ‘believe’; no matter that you were the Texas Chain Saw Murderer. All ‘believers’ go to Heaven. According to Paul, Stalin’s there too! More on this a bit later...) Unfortunately, Jesus is reflected in Revelation stating just the opposite.
“‘Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense, to repay every one for what he has done.’ (Revelation 22:12; RSV)”
William Finck answers <#38>: Again Douglas is misrepresenting Paul’s teaching, as we have seen in the quotes of Paul’s letters in the previous section. Paul’s statement at Romans 2:5-9 is certainly not in conflict with Yahshua’s at Rev. 22:12! Douglas takes a couple of Paul’s statements, which for want of understanding he disagrees with, and because they are taken out-of-context and the rest of Paul’s writings are ignored, he makes accusations which have no merit whatsoever.
Regardless of what The Interpreter’s Bible says, Paul envisioned the return of Christ at any possible time, as all Christians in all generations should well have done. Of course, scoffers such as Douglas would not understand the necessity to do so. Read the words of Christ as recorded at Mark 13:32-37, where 13:35 says in part “Watch ye therefore: for ye know not when the master of the house cometh ...”, or the version at Matthew 24:36-44 which ends: “Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.” So also at Luke 12:40: “Be ye therefore ready also: for the Son of man cometh at an hour when ye think not.” So also at Luke 21:29-36! Whether Paul thought that the coming of Christ would be in 70 A.D. (i.e. Rom 16:20) or in 7000 A.D. is absolutely immaterial. What he taught was in line with the words of Yahshua Christ: that His coming may be at any time, and so therefore we should be prepared as if the time was imminent. Clayton Douglas whines that there is “little real information in the New Testament about the life and teachings of Jesus Christ” (see section <#13>, WTL #95), yet it is obvious that he doesn’t comprehend, or hasn’t read, the Scripture that he does have! Clayton Douglas can fall into only one of three categories: deceiver, because he understands all he has read, but dislikes it; deceived, because someone else, some jew scoffer, actually wrote these articles for him; or idiot, for writing so much about something he knows so little about (maybe two or all three)! Paul of Tarsus was certainly teaching all things according to the will of Yahshua Christ, which time and again we have seen from the law, the prophets, and the gospel.
<Reference #39> Clay Douglas states: “The question begs to be asked, ‘Why would Yahweh (God [sic)] and Esu Immanuel choose Saul the Pharisee to interpret Esu’s Teachings?’ Saul had cruelly executed thousands of early Christians. He loved torturing women and children alike, truly in a ruthless Bolshevik fashion. God’s Ten Commandments include ‘Thou Shalt Not Murder’ (the original Commandment used the term ‘Murder’, not ‘Kill’). Murder is NOT forgivable. God DOES NOT FORGIVE MURDER. IT IS SAID. Paul the Pharisee murdered and then murdered some more. Innocents. Thousands of them. He LOVED killing. But, we are to believe that Esu went directly to him and inspired Paul to ‘interpret’ Esu’s life and his teachings. Poppycock. Scriptures state clearly that God does not change. And, the Scriptures also teach us that ‘The Truth will set us free’.”
William Finck answers <#39>: Prior to his conversion, Paul was a zealous defender of the faith that he was raised in, not actually having known or heard Christ in person, and so not knowing any better himself. Paul was rounding up ‘heretics’ and bringing them to Jerusalem, where many of these people were imprisoned and executed after a vote was cast against them, for which see Acts 22:4-5 and 26:9-10. The phrase “I gave my voice against” at Acts 26:10 is from the Greek verb καταφέρω (2702) which is literally to bring down (L&S), and the noun ψῆφος (5586) which is a pebble, and the phrase describes how voting was conducted in an assembly, as the Greek custom also was, and is better translated here “I had cast a vote.” Paul’s actions, right or wrong, were in accordance with the leaders of his nation at the time, and conducted within the due process of law which that nation was operating under. We today see many otherwise decent men in our government, a wayward government which has perpetrated many evil deeds over the past 160 years, who have zealously taken up the cause to execute the government’s desires. And so we have seen the War of Northern Aggression, and the destruction of half a million Saxons, then the War to end all Wars, the jew propaganda which brought us World War I, and then World War II, which combined destroyed tens of millions of people, Saxon against Saxon. Were all of these men murderers? Or were only a few certain instigators responsible?
Paul was no murderer, and Clayton Douglas’ account of the actions described are absolute fiction. The jews create this same type of slander in reference to our German brethren during World War II, in their tales of the so-called ‘Holocaust.’ Clayton Douglas is their disciple. Now notice that Douglas accuses Paul as a “Bolshevik”, who were mostly jews, and in the next section he enlists the help of a true Bolshevik against Paul!
<Reference #40> Clay Douglas states: “The Following Article Was Originally Published In The January, 1928 issue of ‘THE CENTURY MAGAZINE’ A REAL CASE AGAINST THE JEWS MARCUS ELI RAVAGE (excerpted)
“‘But I tell you, you are self-deceivers. You lack either the self-knowledge or the mettle to face the facts squarely and own up to the truth. You resent the Jew not because, as some of you seem to think, we crucified Jesus but because we gave him birth. Your real quarrel with us is not that we have rejected Christianity but that we have imposed it upon you!
“‘Your loose, contradictory charges against us are not a patch on the blackness of our proved historic offense. You accuse us of stirring up revolution in Moscow. Suppose we admit the charge. What of it? Compared with what Paul the Jew of Tarsus accomplished in Rome, the Russian unheaval [sic upheaval] is a mere street brawl ...’
“Excerpted, Jewish Persecution series, The Great Hoax, Jackie Patru, Sweet Liberty.)”
William Finck answers <#40>: Here Douglas goes again, the supposed Christian American patriot quoting the words of yet another jew-devil in order to build his case against Paul. Douglas really doesn’t care about the teachings of Yahshua Christ. If he did, then he would obey them! When Christ told the jews that they were descended from the devil, and couldn’t possibly tell nor believe the truth (John 8:31-47), He wasn’t kidding, nor was He speaking vainly. Jews like Ravage would have us to believe the lie that both Yahshua Christ and the apostle Paul were jews! Rather, Christ was of the tribe of Judah and Paul of the tribe of Benjamin, and both in physical appearance like Anglo-Saxons. The jews are not Israelites, but are rather from the tribes of the Edomites and Canaanites descended from both Cain and the mixed (“Arab”) races. Since the jew Ravage’s initial premises are wrong, everything which follows is categorically false. The real hoax is that the jews are allowed to get away with th for all good works” (2 Tim. 3:16-17, my translation); /emeir claims, mostly because of people such as Jackie Patru and Clayton Douglas who quote and perpetuate their lies, rather than confront them!
<Reference #41> Clay Douglas states: “They would have us believe that the evil that is so prevalent in the world is the way it is because God has willed it to be so. It is God’s plan for ‘the end times’. This teaching has produced a ‘flock’ of religious people who have not only adopted this as the gospel, but have passed on to an unsuspecting world the atmosphere of complete ineptness, complacency, and downright laziness. We are lead [sic] to believe that not only is there nothing that we can do about this world situation, but there is nothing that should be done, because, after all, it’s Bible prophecy. Isthere any chance that all this complacency could be exactly what the enemies of Christ have masterminded for ages?”
William Finck answers <#41>: Those same prophets who had foretold the coming of Christ, even dating His coming to the year, over 500 years beforehand (see Daniel 9:24-27), also foretold the nature, identity and duration of the kingdoms of this world (i.e. Daniel chapters 2 and 7). These things were verified again by Yahshua Christ Himself in His Revelation to John (i.e. chapter 13). This was discussed earlier in this response, in section <#8>, WTL #94. The children of Israel were to be punished for 2520 years, the beast empires were to endure for 2520 years, and the Babylonian order was to endure for 2520 years, all three of these periods beginning at different times in the 8th to 6th centuries B.C., which is demonstrable through a study of Revelation and Daniel. Since Yahshua Christ fully verified these things not only in the Revelation, but at events such as those recorded in Luke 4:5-6 (Matt. 4:8-9) and Luke 20:24-25; (Matt. 22:17-21; Mark 12:14-17), then by his gainsaying Clayton Douglas makes himself one of the “enemies of Christ” that he so vainly whines about.
<Reference #42> Clay Douglas states: “‘One should not embellish or dress up C/phristianity: it has waged a WAR TO THE DEATH against this higher type of man.’ - Nietzsche, ‘The Anti-Christ’, Chapter 5, line 1. ‘I regard Christianity as the most fatal and seductive lie that has ever yet existed.’ - Nietzsche. ‘Paul UNDERSTOOD the need for the lie...’ - Nietzsche, [ibid.] Chapter 47, line 4. ‘Christianity was the vampire of the Imperium Romanum (Roman Empire) - the tremendous deed of the Romans ... was undone overnight by Christianity. - Is this still not understood?’ - Nietzsche, [ibid.], Chapter 58, line 8 ‘What he (Paul) divined was that with the aid of the little sectarian movement on the edge of Judaism one could ignite a ‘world conflagration’,... This was his vision on the road to Damascus: he grasped that to disvalue ‘the world’ he needed the belief in immortality, that the concept ‘Hell’ will master even Rome.’
“- Nietzsche,‘The Anti-Christ’, Chapter 58, lines I5-16. (From THE ANTICHRIST by Friedrich Nietzsche. Published 1895. Nietzsche - himself - was a rabid Anti-Christian as well as an ‘Illuminated’ philosopher. Nietzsche even referred to himself as a ‘madman’. However, he was also firmly against the Communist doctrines put forth by Marx and Engels.)”
William Finck answers <#42>: Again Clayton Douglas resorts to the perverse arguments of the humanist madman Friedrich “God is Dead” Nietzsche, a professed anti-Christian and therefore a man not qualified to objectively assess the validity of Paul’s Christian doctrines. Douglas quoted Nietzsche upon introducing his Paul-bashing articles, which was discussed on the last page of WTL #93. Just because Nietzsche was “firmly against the Communist doctrines put forth by Marx and Engels” doesn’t make him any good, or any sort of authority concerning Christianity. Contrary to popular jewish philosophy, the enemy of my enemy is NOT my friend! Neither does Nietzsche honestly characterize the fall of Rome. The eastern portion of the empire at Constantinople was more thoroughly Christian than the west when it fell, and lasted a thousand years longer! Rome in the west fell because its own immorality and decadence made it ripe for the Germanic armies which destroyed it, exactly as Daniel said would happen (Dan. 2:40-45), a thousand years beforehand! Nietzsche, a classics professor, should surely have been aware of all this, yet chose instead to create lies. Clayton Douglas is his disciple!
Nietzsche disqualifies himself as a classicist where he talks about the belief in immortality and the concept of “Hell”, for these beliefs were not only prevalent among the Old Testament Hebrews, but also among the Greeks going all the way back to Homer, and to the Germanic tribes even before their conversion to Christianity.
First, Yahshua Christ Himself mentioned Hades (a Greek word) and the “gates of Hades” (“hell” in the A.V.), for which see Matt. 11:23; 16:18; Luke 10:15; 16:23; Rev. 1:18; 6:8 and 20:13-14. Peter discussed the Spirit of Christ descending to preach “unto the spirits in prison” (1 Pet. 3:19). Strong’s lexicon defines sheol, Hebrew #7585, “hades or the world of the dead ... including its accessories and inmates.” The Greeks called this world Hades (Ἅιδης), in the 9th edition of the Liddell & Scott Greek-English Lexicon “the nether world ... place of departed spirits ...”, which was also called Tartaros (Τάρταρος) “the nether world generally.” Hesiod calls it “dim Tartaros in the depth of the wide-pathed Earth” (Theogony, 119). From the times of Homer, and probably much earlier, this was the abode of the souls of the dead, and in the Odyssey Homer devotes an entire chapter to Odysseus’ supposed visit to the place, conversing with the deceased. Homer and Hesiod wrote at least 800 years before Paul. In Euripides’ Alcestis, written 500 years before Paul, Heracles descends to Hades to bring the heroine Alcestis back from the dead.
In the Germanic literature which dates to a time long before the Christianization of the North, Niflheim is the underworld abode of Hel, or Hela, goddess of the dead, and the souls of the dead dwell there. Niflheim and Hel (from whence is the English “hell”) are mentioned in the Edda, i.e. the Voluspa par. 42 or The Lay of Vafthrúthnir par. 43. See The Poetic Edda translated by Lee M. Hollander, University of Texas Press and “Hel” in the index. These things were also published well before Nietzsche’s time, and being a Classics professor, he is without excuse if he was ignorant of them. The Voluspa appeared in Sharon Turner’s The History of The Anglo-Saxons when it was published in the 1840’s, as an appendix to Book 2 of that monumental work.
As Germanic heroes received immortality in Valhalla, and Greek heroes at Olympus or in the “isles of the blest” beyond the western sea, Enoch walked with Yahweh. These beliefs endured wherever our Saxon-Israelite race is found. Where are Nietzsche, Spong, Ravage, Douglas, and the rest of the jews, liberals, anti-Christs and Paul-bashers going? W.R.F.