November 2009

A Christogenea commentary On the Gospel of John has recently been completed. Many passages simply do not say what the modern churches think they mean! Don't miss this important and ground-breaking work proving that Christian Identity is indeed fully supported by Scripture.

A Commentary on Genesis is now being presented. Here we endeavor to explain the very first book of the Christian Bible from a perspective which reconciles both the Old and New Testaments with archaeology and ancient history, through eyes which have been opened by the Gospel of Christ.

A Commentary on the Epistles of Paul has been completed at Christogenea.org. This lengthy and in-depth series reveals the true Paul as an apostle of God, a prophet in his own right, and the first teacher of what we call Christian Identity.

Don't miss our recently-completed series of commentaries on the Minor Prophets of the Bible, which has also been used as a vehicle to prove the historicity of the Bible as well as the Provenance of God.

Visit Clifton Emahiser's Watchman's Teaching Ministries at Christogenea.org for his many foundational Christian Identity studies.

Christogenea Books: Christian Truths in Black and White!
Visit our store at Christogenea.com.

Dumbest Quotes

Submitted by William Finck on

Dumbest quote seen in all of 2009:

On the Forum at Christogenea.org, in a post by a guy calling himself Dan, dated October 16th:

"I also believe Noah's wife, whom he took onto the ark, was a Serpent Seed, but, that she was NOT the mother of his three son Shem, Ham and Japheth."

Well Dan, this is DUMB. You are also accusing Noah, who was chosen by Yahweh because he was NOT a race-mixer, of BEING a race-mixer!!! How are you not a blasphemer?

The Song of the White Men

Submitted by William Finck on

THE SONG OF THE WHITE MEN
   by Rudyard Kipling, 1899

Now this is the cup the White Men drink
...When they go to right a wrong,
And that is the cup of the old world's hate -
...Cruel and stained and strong.
We have drunk that cup-and a bitter, bitter cup -
...And tossed the dregs away.
But well for the world when the White Men drink
...To the dawn of the White Man's day!

The King James Version of the Bible: Why Quote it?

Submitted by William Finck on

The King James version of the Bible has thousands of mistranslations. Some of the mistranslations are corrected by later versions, although many were not and neither can they be: for a true translation of the Greek would upset much of modern mainstream theological thinking, most of which is quite perverse. Nearly all - if not all - of the various translations of the Bible which are available were created under the auspices of one religious sect or another, and therefore each has its particular quirks reflecting various beliefs. This is apparent in my own translations of the New Testament, however I hope to have limited them to my treatment of the terms usually translated in other versions as "God" and "Lord". So, why quote the King James Version? The following explanation is from a recent email response to a friend:

Which Is It, "Lord", or "Yahweh"?

Many today are struggling with this very question. What other subject could be of more importance than the very name of our Creator? Maybe the following article will solve some of your uncertainties. If one wishes to find information on the term “Yahweh” it is somewhat hard to find. One reason is because in most encyclopedias it is listed under “Jehovah.” Also, in later up-to-date encyclopedias the information is rather suppressed. The following is a rather thorough, but not perfect, article on this subject found in the 11th edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica printed in 1910. We will not use the entire article as toward the end they get mired in the errant criticisms of the 1800’s humanists. Otherwise this article brings to light many historical facts on the topic. But like all testimony, it must be scrutinized! (Footnotes have been changed to paragraph notes at the end of each paragraph by the use of superscript numerals inside of brackets [ ] ):

JEHOVAH (Yahweh1), in the Bible, the God of Israel. “Jehovah” is a modern mispronunciation of the Hebrew name, resulting from combining the consonants of that name, Jhvh, with the vowels of the word adonay, “Lord,” which the Jews substituted for the proper name in reading the scriptures. In such cases of substitution the vowels of the word which is to be read are written in the Hebrew text with the consonants of the word which is not to be read. The consonants of the word to be substituted are ordinarily written in the margin; but inasmuch as Adonay was regularly read instead of the ineffable name Jhvh, it was deemed unnecessary to note the fact at every occurrence. When Christian scholars began to study the Old Testament in Hebrew, if they were ignorant of this general rule or regarded the substitution as a piece of Jewish superstition, reading what actually stood in the text, they would inevitably pronounce the name Jehovah. It is an unprofitable inquiry who first made this blunder; probably many fell into it independently. The statement still commonly repeated that it originated with Petrus Galatinus (1518) is erroneous; Jehova occurs in manuscripts at least as early as the 14th century. [1This form, Yahweh, as the correct one, is generally used in the separate articles throughout this work.]

Misconceptions Concerning Paul and the Church

So many men look at the oppressive behemoth which calls itself the Roman Catholic Church, and then foolishly place the blame for the creation of this monster and its offspring upon Paul of Tarsus, as if he ever developed such a thing. In doing so, these men are only repeating the romish church’s lies by which it claims an apostolic founding, and giving them credence as if they were true, which they certainly are not!

It should be evident to nearly anybody that the apostles probably wrote many more epistles than those which we have in our Bibles, that if we possessed them, we may possibly have a more complete picture of their ideal model for the function and structure of the truly Christian community. However, not out of line with that spirit of simplicity of life which is an object of Christian teaching, it may very well be that we need none other than the scant instruction which we do have. Here we shall examine precisely what the New Testament books, and especially the letters of Paul, really do say concerning the organization and management of a Christian community.

In the apocryphal books are found some writings, in the so-called epistles of Ignatius for instance, which do attempt to clarify or enhance the instructions in our Bibles (i.e., those of 1 Timothy). These writings must be rejected, viewed with suspicion not only because they often conflict with Paul’s writing, but also because they bear full support for the organized romish church structure as we know it. They are most certainly mere forgeries, and many commentaries have professed as much. All such post-apostolic writing shall be ignored here.

Christianity and Pharmaceuticals, Part 2

Submitted by William Finck on

Christianity and Pharmaceuticals, Part 2

A few days ago I put out an article of this title, and many people have made further inquiry, or were even upset, because they have already been captivated by the pharmaceutical industry by one means or another. Yet I shall stand by my article, even if it does not address the immediate needs of people in general, as being wholly Scriptural. However here I will attempt to put some things into perspective: for those who are currently victims of the medical/pharmaceutical complex need not do anything rash.

Paul told the Corinthians: “ A bondman, you have been called? It must not be a concern to you, but then if you have the ability to become free, rather you use it. 22 For he who is called a bondman in the Prince is a freedman of the Prince; likewise he who is called free is a bondman of Christ.” (I Corinthians 7:21-22, CNT )

Christianity and Pharmaceuticals, Part 1

Submitted by William Finck on

Christianity and Pharmaceuticals

The Greek words pharmakon, pharmakos, and pharmakeia are usually rendered “sorcerer” or  “sorcery” in the King James Version of the Bible.  That version was translated by 1611, and ever since then most theologians have followed in its footsteps, and have kept the interpretations of the medieval Englishmen of that time, while the rest of the world has become “modern”, and has updated its language.  Or have we?

Here are the definitions of those words, from Liddell & Scott’s An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon, Oxford University Press, Impression of 1999, First edition 1889.  I will supply English transliterations in place of all of the original Greek words:

pharmakon: “a drug, medicine, Homer etc.: the pharmaka applied outwardly were christa, egchrista, epichrista (ointments), and pasta, epipasta, kataplasta (plasters), Theocritus, Aristophanes; those taken inwardly brosima, and potima, pota, pista, Aeschylus, Euripides, etc… 2. In bad sense, an enchanted potion … so a charm, spell, enchantment … also a drug, poison … II. a remedy, cure, Hesiod …. ”
pharmakeia: “the use of drugs, potions, spells, Plato. 2. poisoning, witchcraft … Demosthenes. II. remedy, cure, Aristotle.”
pharmakos: “a poisoner, sorcerer, magician, N.T.”

Classical Records and German Origins, Index

Six essays and corresponding audio presentations explaining the origins of the Germanic people, from the Classical historians, archaeology and other resources.

Classical Records of the Origins of the Scythians, Parthians & Related Tribes

© 2006 William R. Finck Jr.

In the preface to Josephus’ Wars, the historian explains that he originally wrote the book in “the language of our country”, i.e. Hebrew or perhaps Aramaic, and sent it to the “Upper Barbarians”, among whom he then names as “the Parthians ... Babylonians ... remotest Arabians ... and those of our nation beyond Euphrates, with the Adiabeni.”

Except for the Parthians, Josephus’ designations here are geographical, where it is clear from the pages of his Antiquities that many of the Israelites of the Babylonian deportation still dwelt around Babylonia in his time (15.3.1), and this would include the “remotest” part of Arabia adjacent to Babylonia (cf. Acts 2:11; 1 Pet. 5:13). Also, Josephus attests that many Israelites of the Assyrian deportations were “beyond Euphrates until now”, where they were “an immense multitude, and not to be estimated by numbers” (11.5.2). Adiabene is that part of Assyria which, according to Strabo in his Geography, is not in Mesopotamia but which consists of the plains beyond the Tigris bordering Babylonia to the south and Armenia to the north (16.1.1, 19). Media borders Adiabene on the east.

Pages