This is my one hundred and seventy-second monthly teaching letter and continues my fifteenth year of publication. I started this series entitled The Greatest Love Story Ever Told with WTL #137, and have been expanding on its seven stages as follows: (1) the courtship, (2) the marriage, (3) the honeymoon, (4) the estrangement, (5) the divorce, (6) the reconciliation, and (7) the remarriage.
THE GREATEST LOVE STORY EVER TOLD, Part 31:
THE ESTRANGEMENT continued:
Recently I was reminded that many who have accepted the Christian Israel Identity Message (C.I.I.), are still not fully acquainted with Israel’s national Covenant Theology, and confuse it with personal salvation. Therefore, before I address more on “The Estrangement”, I will repeat an essay which I have distributed as a brochure for about 12 years:
CLERGY CLAIMS GOD COMMITTED FRAUD
This is a very serious charge to make against anyone, let alone the Almighty. I believe, though, once the evidence is weighed, there will be no alternative but to bring this very grave charge against Him, and penalize Him accordingly. After all, if He has committed such an appalling crime, why should He be treated differently from anyone else? The charge for this crime of fraud has already been alleged by a multitude of people, so it’s about time that charges are written up, and a summons be given Him to appear in court to face these allegations.
Before this charge of fraud is laid, let’s see just what the term “fraud” means. For this, we will use The World Book Encyclopedia, 1971, volume 7, page 421:
“Fraud is an intentional untruth or a dishonest scheme used to take deliberate and unfair advantage of another person or group of persons. Actual fraud includes cases of misrepresentation designed specifically to cheat others ... Actual fraud includes something said, done, or omitted by a person with the design of continuing what he knows to be a cheat or a deception. Constructive fraud includes acts or words that tend to mislead others ... Ordinarily, a person wronged by another’s fraud may sue the wrongdoer and recover the amount of damages caused by the fraud or deceit. But the person wronged must be able to prove damages ...”
In order to grasp how, when, where and why the Almighty allegedly committed fraud, it will be necessary to comprehend the various legal contracts in which He engaged Himself with Adam-man. These include (1) Edenic, (2) Adamic, (3) Noahic, (4) Abrahamic, (5) Mosaic, (6) Palestinian, (7) Davidic, (8) Solomonic, and, (9) The New Covenant. The New Covenant is the binding legal agreement for which the Almighty is alleged to have committed fraud.
Many today call themselves “New Testament Christians.” The single Greek word for both “testament” and “covenant” in the Strong’s Concordance is #1242. In other words, when one claims one is a “New Testament Christian”, one is, in effect, saying one is a “New Covenant Christian.” This Greek word #1242 is used 17 times as “covenant” and 11 times as “testament.” The word for “testament” or “covenant” in the Old Testament is #1285, beriyth, in the Hebrew, and means essentially the same thing as “testament” in the Greek. Whether you want to call them contracts, covenants or testaments, they all have some of the same elements and are binding legal instruments. The word “testament” or “covenant”, in the New Testament, is treated much like a man’s Last Will and Testament. In order for a Last Will and Testament to be effective, the testator must die. Therefore, when Messiah died, He made provisions for His named beneficiaries in His Last Will and Testament. Unless the beneficiaries are named, any Testament is useless. In all legal binding agreements, contracts, compacts, covenants, testaments, treaties, trusts, or whatever, the parties thereto must be named.
Now, let’s take a look to see who Messiah named as beneficiaries in His Last Will and Testament. In the Old Testament, this can be found in Jeremiah 31:31, and at Hebrews 8:8 in the New.
Jeremiah 31:31: “Behold the days come, saith Yahweh, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah.”
Hebrews 8:8: “... Behold the days come, saith Yahweh, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah.”
Are we going to contest His Last Will and Testament, claiming the Redeemer must have been mentally incompetent when He made it because we don’t approve of who His beneficiaries are? Do you suppose we could rewrite the terms of His Will to meet our approval? For it would appear, if we are not of the House of Israel or the House of Judah, we have no legal claim to His Will!
Now, let’s take a look at this thing from a different perspective. Say, that a person of a family of several brothers and sisters found out their last surviving parent intended to leave him/her out of his Will. Say this person slipped into the parent’s house, found the Will, put it into a typewriter which could lift the print of the named beneficiaries off of the paper, and placed his/her name in their place. Would not this be considered fraud? Maybe this person had a substantial moral right to be named in the Will, but the last living parent didn’t see it that way. The question again is: would this be fraud? Maybe this person had done more for his/her parents than any of the others, but again, would this be fraud? Any way one might want to look at it, it is out-and-out fraud!
Let’s now apply this same situation to the Last Will and Testament of Messiah, where He had named the House of Israel and the House of Judah as His beneficiaries. There have been hundreds, thousands, hundreds of thousands, and perhaps more who have tried to disenfranchise the names of The House of Israel and the House of Judah, and place “Gentiles”, “church”, “whosoever will”, and “all men” in their place!
Their excuse is: they say that “God” gave up on the “Jews” and decided that if they didn’t want to be “saved”, He would open the door to the “Gentiles.” Poor old “God”; can’t do anything right! So, what did the Almighty do according to these various pastors? He allegedly disenfranchised the names of the House of Israel and the House of Judah from His Last Will and Testament and inserted “Gentiles”, “church”, “whosoever will”, and “all men” in their place. Can we now see why “God” must be “indicted” and tried for fraud? Well, if one can’t trust “God” to keep His Word, who can one trust?
If the House of Israel and the House of Judah were the true beneficiaries of His Will, it would appear they have a very sound case against the Almighty in this lawsuit of fraud, for changing names in the Will after the fact. I wonder how much in damages the House of Israel and the House of Judah might sue for in such a case? I wonder if this could be considered a class action suit? If I were to be the legal advocate for either Israel and Judah, or for “God”, I believe I would choose Israel and Judah in preference to “God”, as “God”, in this case, allegedly has little to no legal standing.
This brings up another sticky situation: if the Last Will and Testament of the New Covenant can be broken by changing the names of the assigned beneficiaries, then all the aforementioned Covenants can also be broken, from Adam to Messiah. If this were the case, why did the Almighty even bother making covenants in the first place? What good is the New Testament if “whosoever” can break in and claim to be a party of the second part? If “whosoever” is the rightful heir; a New Testament wouldn’t have been necessary. How would you like it if you were named in a Will and the probate court designated “whosoever” as the beneficiary? Yet, this is exactly what most of the modern-day clergy in most churches are doing with the NEW TESTAMENT, thus making it a fraudulent document.
It is imperative we stress one more significant fact: If the New Covenant/Testament was lawfully bequeathed to the House of Israel and the House of Judah, what right do any other entities have to that claim? It is obvious; They have no right whatsoever!
Now that we have identified the House of Israel and the House of Judah as the proper beneficiaries within the context of the New Testament, let’s consider some of the other subjects which “surround” it. If you will look up the word “context” in the dictionary, it will tell you it means, “words surrounding a word or phrase.” In other words, the New Testament relates to the House of Israel and the House of Judah, and all other Scripture must “surround” or fit this concept. Let’s take a look at some of these Scriptures:
Acts 2:21: “And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall call on the name of the Messiah shall be saved.”
Under the rule that the New Testament must fit around or “surround” this verse, it must apply only to the House of Israel and the House of Judah. Anything else is criminal fraud!
Acts 17:26: “And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation.”
Here again, to be in context, this must apply only to the House of Israel and the House of Judah. From a first reading, it may not appear to be that way, but an Old Testament passage from which this Scripture is derived must be taken into account:
Deuteronomy 32:8: “When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.”
When it says in Acts 17:26: “And hath made of one blood all nations of men”, it is not talking about all the men on the earth, but the Adamic-Israelites of the House of Israel and the House of Judah. If all men were descended from Adam, why would it be necessary to set boundaries to enforce the segregation of Israel and Judah from other peoples? When Acts 17:26 speaks of all nations (ethnos/goy) being of one blood, contextually it means the nations of Israel and Judah being of the same bloodline. Here again, to apply “all men” to someone other than the House of Israel or the House of Judah is criminal! – Yes, criminal!
Acts 11:18: ... “Then hath Yahweh also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.”
The term “Gentiles” is an unfortunate translation, and has become one of the greatest stumbling-blocks to our Bible understanding. Actually, the word in the Greek is “ethnos”, from which we get the term “ethnic” today (check your dictionary). The Latin term “Gentile” is misapplied and only causes confusion, as it can refer to an Israelite or non-Israelite depending on the context. (That “Gentile” is Latin, check any English to Latin dictionary.) In the Strong’s Concordance, the so-called word “Gentiles” (the Greek ethnos) is #1484, which can mean (1) race, (2) tribe, (3) heathen, (4) nation, and (5) people; each to be applied in its proper context. The counterpart word in Hebrew is #1471, “goy”, and is translated in Genesis 17:4 as “nations”, where Yahweh promised Abraham: “... thou shalt be a father of many [goy] nations.” The proper context should then be “nations”, as most of the time (but not all) in the New Testament, when the word “Gentile” is used, it is referring to all the 12 tribes of Israel! Again, to place non-Israel “Gentile” names into His Last Will and Testament is criminal! Does your pastor imply “God” committed fraud? Why don’t you ask him! [end of my essay]
As for the personal salvation of each individual Israelite, it is recorded at Isa. 45:15-17: “15 Verily thou art a God(El)410 that hidest thyself, O God(Elohim)430 of Israel, the Saviour. 16 They shall be ashamed, and also confounded, all of them: they shall go to confusion together that are makers of idols. 17 But Israel shall be saved(yâsha‘)3467 in Yahweh with an everlasting salvation: ye shall not be ashamed nor confounded world without end.”
Again at Romans 11:25-26: “25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the nations be come in. 26 And so all3956 Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob ...”
Greek #3956 meaning: “(pas), 1) individually 1a) each, every, any, all, the whole, everyone, all things, everything 2) collectively 2a) some of all types”, Bible Works. Should one not like this meaning, one should simply take a razor blade and cut these two passages out of his Bible!
When it says that “all Israel shall be saved”, that is exactly what it means. Not only that, but all White Adamites will be resurrected all the way back to Adam, which will include all the aborted babies. But just because all Adamites will be resurrected doesn’t mean that everything will be peaches and cream, or fine and dandy! Nor does it mean that all the Adamites will be raised from the dead at the same time. Daniel the prophet wrote as follows at Dan. 12:1-2:
“1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. 2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.”
There is one thing that a White Israelite can have a choice in making, and that is when they come to an understanding that the Gospel encompasses (1) the courtship, (2) the marriage, (3) the honeymoon, (4) the estrangement, (5) the divorce, (6) the reconciliation, and (7) the remarriage of Yahweh to His Cinderella bride of the house of Israel and the house of Judah, they can decide to believe, or disbelieve! But whatever their decision, it won’t damn them to hell, although, by believing, and acting on that belief, their reward will be greater.
I would also like to comment on Dan. 12:1 above, as I believe we are now in the “... time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time ...”, but you will notice, “... at that time thy people shall be delivered ...” Notice that it is “thy people” [the twelve tribes of Israel], and not just any people. Proverbs 5:12-20 admonishes us to keep our race pure (KJV):
“12 ... How have I hated instruction, and my heart despised reproof; 13 And have not obeyed the voice of my teachers, nor inclined mine ear to them that instructed me! 14 I was almost in all evil in the midst of the congregation and assembly. 15 Drink waters out of thine own cistern, and running waters out of thine own well. 16 Let thy [Israelite] fountains be dispersed abroad, and [Israelite] rivers of waters in the streets. 17 Let them be only thine own, and not strangers’ with thee. 18 Let thy [Israelite] fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth. 19 Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; let her breasts satisfy thee at all times; and be thou ravished always with her love. 20 And why wilt thou, my son, be ravished with a strange woman, and embrace the bosom of a stranger?” Notice: There is no room here for congo-niggers like “little black sambo”, or mexican squat-monsters or other unclean races!
Adam Clarke, in his 6-volume Commentary, vol. 3, page 715 spells it out quite well (depending on what he considered a “bastard brood” to be):
“Verse 15. Drink waters out of thine own cistern] Be satisfied with thy own wife; and let the wife see that she reverence her husband; and not tempt him by inattention [failure to pay attention] or unkindness to seek elsewhere what he has a right to expect, but cannot find, at home.
“Verse 16. Let thy fountains be dispersed abroad] Let thy children lawfully begotten be numerous.
“Verse 17. Let them be only thine own] The off-spring of a legitimate connection; a bastard brood, however numerous, is no credit to any man.”
Then on verse 18, Clarke was a bit embarrassed to comment on sexual intercourse and stated in part: “Let thy fountain be blessed] ... But anatomical allusions must not be pressed into detail in a commentary on Scripture.” Question: Why not?
Verse 19. in part ... “Let her breasts satisfy thee] As the infant is satisfied with the breasts of its mother; so shouldst thou be with the wife of thy youth.”
Brenton’s Septuagint on this same passage reads:
“12 and thou shalt say, How have I hated instruction, and my heart avoided reproofs! 13 I heard not the voice of him that instructed me, and taught me, neither did I apply mine ear. 14 I was almost in all evil in the midst of the congregation and assembly. 15 Drink waters out of thine own vessels, and out of thine own springing wells. 16 Let not waters out of thy fountain be spilt by thee, but let thy waters go into thy streets. 17 Let them be only thine own, and let no stranger partake with thee. 18 Let thy fountain of water [i.e., sperm] be truly thine own; and rejoice with the wife of thy youth. 19 Let thy loving hart and thy graceful colt company with thee, and let her be considered thine own, and be with thee at all times; for ravished with her love thou shalt be greatly increased. 20 Be not intimate with a strange woman, neither fold thyself in the arms of a woman not thine own.”
Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown, in their 6-volume Commentary, vol. 3, pp. 427-428, states the following on this passage:
“15. Drink waters out of thine own cistern, and running waters out of thine own well. As all desire resembles thirst, to drink water means to gratify desire, and the woman is compared to a well. Embrace thine own wife, and enjoy her love alone. Enjoy only lawful pleasures. So the heavenly spouse is called ‘a fountain sealed’ (Song iv. 12; contrast ch. xxiii. 27, ‘A whore is a deep ditch; and a strange woman is a narrow pit’). To allay thirst at poisonous and filthy waters would be suicidal folly. In Eastern countries the two sources of supply of water are wells of living water and cisterns of rain water, covered over. The appropriateness of the image appears from the fact, that each house had its own cistern (2 Ki. xviii: 31; cf. the same image, ch. ix. 17; Isa. xlviii. 1; li. 1). – As heretofore he had warned the youth against the strange woman so now he exhorts to faithfulness to the lawful wife. 16. Let thy fountains be dispersed abroad, (and) rivers of waters in the streets –i.e., by being faithful to thine own wife thou shalt have an overflowing offspring from thee going forth into the streets to the various honourable duties of life (Num. xxiv. 7). As the wife is the well, so the children are the waters from it. An abundant progeny is a special gift from God (Ps. cxxvii. 3; cxxviii. 3). The promise here follows the precept in v. 15. The reward is the result of obedience. The negative reading rests on insufficient authority, ‘Let not thy fountains be dispersed.’ As to children ‘in the streets’, cf. Zech. viii. 5. The union of one husband to one wife tends to a numerous offspring; concubinage generally causes barrenness. 17. Let them be only thine own, and not strangers’ with thee. Let thy children know thee alone as their parent and do thou know them as the children of thyself, and not of strangers. The child of an adulteress or harlot, on the contrary, is the child of many fathers. Maurer, &c., understands ‘thy fountains’ (v. 16) of the wife, not of the children: Let thy wife be fruitful in giving birth to children. So here, Let thy wife be for thyself alone, and not common to thee with others. But the plural ‘fountains’ seems to refer rather to the children, as the singular, ‘thy fountain’ (v. 18), to the wife. 18. Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth. The first clause refers to verse 16, the second to verse 17. ‘Thy fountain’ is the womb of thy wife (Lev. xx. 18). Be so faithful to thy wife that God shall bless thee with a numerous offspring (Ps. cxxviii. 3, 4, ‘Thy wife shall be as a fruitful vine, &c. Behold thus shall the man be blessed that feareth the Lord.’ ‘Rejoice with,’ or ‘in the wife of thy youth,’ stands in beautiful contrast to v. 11, ‘And thou mourn at the last.’ Thou shalt have cause, when old and towards the end of life, to rejoice on account of thy long union with the wife whom thou didst wed in youth, the season of ardent love, and by whom thou hast a numerous offspring (contrast ch: ii. 17, where cf. note, Mal: ii. 14. 19. (Let her be as) the loving hind and pleasant roe – or antelope; chamois: from a Hebrew root to ascend or climb rocks. Emblems of beauty, love, and faithfulness (Sonq ii. 9; iv. 5; vii: 3). Let her be the husband’s chief delight. let her breasts satisfy thee at all times. ‘Satisfy’ – lit., ‘copiously water;’ i.e., satisfy thy (conjugal) thirst. Bayne translates, ‘inebriate’ ... and be thou ravished always with her love – lit., ‘err;’ i.e., be transported out of thyself with her love. If err, or be transported thou must let it be with thine own wife’s love, not with that of an harlot or adulteress (cf. v. 20). 20. And why wilt thou, my son, be ravished with a strange woman, and embrace the bosom of a stranger? When there are so many advantages in conjugal love, and losses in adulterous love, what madness, baseness, and danger it is to seek the embraces of a harlot or adulteress!”
Other Biblical passages cited by Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown will help clear up the idiomatic language used in Proverbs 5:12-20:
Song 4:11-12: “11 Your lips, O my spouse, drop as the honeycomb; honey and milk are under thy tongue; And the smell of thy garments Is like the smell of Lebanon. 12 A garden enclosed is my sister, my spouse, a spring shut up, A fountain sealed.”
Prov. 23:27: “For a whore is a deep pit, and a strange woman is a narrow pit.”
Prov. 9:16-17: “16 ‘Whoso is simple, let him turn in hither; and as for him who wanteth understanding, she saith to him, 17 ‘Stolen waters are sweet, and bread eaten in secret is pleasant’.”
Isa. 48:1: “Hear ye this, O house of Jacob, which are called by the name of Israel, and are come forth out of the waters [i.e., sperm] of Judah, which swear by the name of Yahweh, and make mention of the God of Israel, but not in truth, nor in righteousness.”
Isa. 51:1: “Hearken to me, ye that follow after righteousness, ye that seek Yahweh: look unto the rock whence ye are hewn, and to the hole of the pit [i.e., womb] whence ye are digged. 2 Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah that bare you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and increased him.”
Ps. 127:3-5: “3 Lo, children are an heritage of Yahweh: and the fruit of the womb is his reward. 4 As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man; so are children of the youth. 5 Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them: they shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate.”
Ps. 128:3: “Thy wife shall be as a fruitful vine by the sides of thine house: thy children like olive plants round about thy table.”
Song 2:7-10: “7 I charge you, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, by the roes, and by the hinds of the field, that ye stir not up, nor awake my love, till he please. 8 The voice of my beloved! behold, he cometh leaping upon the mountains, skipping upon the hills. 9 My beloved is like a roe or a young hart [soft and tender like kid gloves]: behold, he standeth behind our wall, he looketh forth at the windows, shewing himself through the lattice. 10 My beloved spake, and said unto me, Rise up, my love, my fair one, and come away.”
Song 4:5: “Thy two breasts are like two young roes that are twins, which feed among the lilies.”
Song 7:1-4: “1 How beautiful are thy feet with shoes, O prince’s daughter! the joints of thy thighs are like jewels, the work of the hands of a cunning workman. 2 Thy navel is like a round goblet, which wanteth not liquor: thy belly is like an heap of wheat set about with lilies. 3 Thy two breasts are like two young roes that are twins. 4 Thy neck is as a tower of ivory; thine eyes like the [blue] fishpools in Heshbon ...”
All of this has everything to do with Israelite Covenant Theology and nothing to do with personal salvation, as all Israel shall be saved! What we really should be considering is the judgment at Hebrews 9:26-28: “26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: 28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.”
Next, we must take into consideration just what Christ’s judgment is going to be like, found at 1 Cor. 3:11-15: “11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Yahshua Christ. 12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; 13 Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is. 14 If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. 15 If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.” [underlining mine] What is there about “... but he himself shall be saved ...” that we don’t seem to understand?
William Finck’s Christogenea New Testament is translated thusly on this same passage: “11 For another foundation no one is able to place besides that which is established, which is Yahshua Christ. 12 Now if anyone builds upon that foundation gold, silver, precious stones, timber, fodder, straw, 13 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. 14 If the work of anyone who has built remains, he will receive a reward. 15 If the work of anyone burns completely, he will suffer loss, but he himself will be preserved, although consequently through fire.” Again, what is there about “... but he himself will be preserved ...” that we don’t seem to understand?
The Greek word for the KJV rendering “saved” is: #4982 ... [sozo] ... (including all other cases) meaning: 1) to save, keep safe and sound, to rescue from danger or destruction 1a) one (from injury or peril) 1a1) to save a suffering one (from perishing), i.e. one suffering from disease, to make well, heal, restore to health 1b1) to preserve one who is in danger of destruction, to save or rescue 1b) to save in the technical biblical sense 1b1) negatively 1b1a) to deliver from the penalties of the Messianic judgment 1b1b) to save from the evils which obstruct the reception of the Messianic deliverance”, Bible Works.
Spiros Zodhiates, in his New Testament Word Study, states in part under Greek #4982, p. 1354: “(III) Specifically of salvation from eternal death, sin, and punishment and misery consequent to sin. To save, and (by implication), to give eternal life. Especially of Christ as the Savior ...” Zodhiates goes on to contradict himself, but at least he got this part right!
It may not seem so at first reading, but there is another verse at 1 Cor. 1:18 which we should consider: “For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.”
William Finck’s Christogenea New Testament translates this same passage thus: “(For the account of the cross is folly to those who are going to die, but to those who are being preserved, to us, it is the power of Yahweh.)” Therefore, it is paramount that we differentiate between “... them that perish ...” and “... us which are saved ...” We have already learned beyond all doubt that all of Israel will be saved, at Isaiah 45:15-17; Romans 11:25-26, along with Dan. 12:1-2. Of course, the resurrection would include all of the line of Adam. However, Abraham and his “chosen seed” that believed the Gospel would be the cream of the crop. (The line of Adam would be “... us which are saved ...”). On the other hand “... them that perish ...” would be all those who are not of the pure line of Adam, or non-Adamites! This is not the end of the story, for Obadiah 15-18 states:
“15 For the day of Yahweh is near upon all the heathen: as thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head. 16 For as ye have drunk upon my holy mountain [America, and other White Israel nations], so shall all the heathen drink continually, yea, they shall drink, and they shall swallow down, and they shall be as though they had not been. 17 But upon mount Zion [the White Israel nations] shall be deliverance, and there shall be holiness; and the house of Jacob shall possess their possessions. 18 And the house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau for stubble, and they shall kindle in them, and devour them; and there shall not be any remaining of the house of Esau; for Yahweh hath spoken it.”
Charles Thomson, in his Septuagint, renders this passage thusly:
“[l5] Because the day of the Lord against all the nations is near, as thou hast done so shall it be done to thee: thy dealings shall be returned on thy head.  For in the same manner as thou hast drunk on My holy mountain, all the nations shall be drunk up as wine. They shall be drunk up and swallowed down, and be as if they had never been.  But on mount Sion shall be safety and a sanctuary;  and the house of Jacob shall possess those who possessed them; and the house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph, a flame; and the house of Esau shall be as stubble; and upon these they shall kindle and consume them, so that there shall not be a torch-bearer to the house of Esau. For the Lord hath spoken.”
As one can clearly observe, the doctrine of Covenant Theology is quite different than that of churchianity’s teaching of personal salvation. Rather, what we need is “conversion” from following Baal to following the tenets taught by Yahshua Christ. It is amazing how the White Israelites of today cling to their Baal worship, and have done so ever since their dispersions from the land of Canaan to Assyria and Babylon, never to return. It doesn’t take very long, once one starts rejecting the various forms of Baal worship, for other members of one’s family, friends and coworkers to notice, and become offended!