June 2019

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.

On the Gospel of John, Part 26: The Purpose of the Shepherd

CHR20190628-John26.mp3 — Downloaded 3666 times

 

On the Gospel of John, Part 26: The Purpose of the Shepherd

The Bible is not two different books. The most radical, and correct, meaning of the word catholic is “down whole”, and the earliest Church Fathers, such as Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian had used it to describe the reception of the whole of the faith, meaning the reception of both New and Old Testaments, as opposed to the rejection of one or the other by the Jews or by sects such as the Marcionites. One cannot properly understand the Gospel of Christ without first understanding the will of God which was expressed in the words of His prophets.

Neglecting the pericope of the woman caught in adultery, which clearly was not a part of John’s original gospel, it is evident that on the last great day of the Feast of Tabernacles, Yahshua Christ was teaching in the temple, as John begins to describe the events of that day in chapter 7 (7:37). Then, upon His having been confronted by His adversaries, we see Christ reveal their true nature in the lengthy exchange which He had with them, as it is recorded in John chapter 8. So upon departing from them, He is found outside of the temple where He then healed a man who was blind from birth.

This act led to another confrontation with those who were opposed to Him, in which He declared: “For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind.” They which “see not” are the lost sheep of the house of Israel for whom He had come, and “they which see” are the Judaeans who witnessed His acts and had heard Him speaking, but who nevertheless had rejected Him. This statement, from John 9:39, reveals the true significance of this event, where on this day He chose to heal such a man, as He had said earlier in that same chapter, when He was asked by His Own disciples why the man was born blind, that “Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.”

So it should be evident that the man’s very life stood as a parable in order to provide a lesson to the children of Israel: that the purpose of Christ on the day wherein John’s gospel records that He revealed the true nature and character of His enemies was to heal the children of Israel from their own collective blindness, as it is they who are identified in the Word of God which is in the prophets as being blind, “they which see not” for whom Christ had come so that they “might see”.

Standing in the assembly hall in Nazareth at the beginning of His ministry, as it is recorded in Luke chapter 4, Christ had read from Isaiah in relation to Himself, and announced that “18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, 19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.” Once one learns that His sheep are the children of Israel exclusively, and that His enemies are all children of the devil, that is how the blind can see.

On the Gospel of John, Part 25: How the Blind Can See

CHR20190621-John25.mp3 — Downloaded 3691 times

 

On the Gospel of John, Part 25: How the Blind Can See

As John chapter 8 came to a close, the enemies of Yahshua Christ had wanted to stone Him, since He exposed them for what they truly were: children of the devil and not true children of Abraham. Doing this, Christ did not confront them not on the basis of their genealogy, a knowledge of which had evidently been suppressed by the Herodians, nor did He confront them on the basis of the events in the recent history of Judaea, and the Edomite takeover of Judaea. Rather, Christ confronted them on the basis of their character, as it was their character which most effectively revealed their genealogy. If they were truly Abraham’s children, they should have exhibited a nature which is congenial to God, which Abraham had also done. Yahweh knows those who are His, as Paul informs us in 2 Timothy, and they should each have a disposition patterned after the character of the man which Yahweh had created. Even when he sinned, Adam did not dispute his punishment, and in the subsequent generations his sons continued to seek after the very same God who had prescribed that punishment. But Christ had informed His enemies that their apostasy was congenital, that it was due to the circumstances of their origins because Yahweh was not their father. So in that manner it was said elsewhere in the Gospel, such as in Luke chapter 6:43 For a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit; neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 44 For every tree is known by his own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes.

Therefore it is the nature of the beast, of those which are bastards, to contend with God, and the Jews who were contending with Christ knew exactly what He had meant when He told them that God was not their father, where they responded and said “We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.” When Christ answered this, He told them that they were liars, and that their true father was the devil. As we also discussed, Malachi had prophesied of this very thing, even of this very conversation, and his prophecy also explained that the reasons for the division among the priests was that they had transgressed the covenant of Levi, and that Judah had “married the daughter of a strange god”, a prophecy which was fulfilled in history as the remnant of Judah from the time of John Hyrcanus had begun converting Edomites and other Canaanites, systematically circumcising them and subsuming them into the citizenship of Judaea.

The absorption of the Edomites and others who adopted the customs of the Judaeans into the general population of Judaea was attested by the Greek historian and geographer Strabo, and explained in detail by the Judaean historian Flavius Josephus. The prophets Malachi and Zechariah in the Bible along with the recorded history of Judaea explain the words of Christ in John chapter 8, as well as those pertaining to impostor Judaeans in the Revelation, and the explanations of apostasy in the epistles of Paul, namely in Romans chapter 9, 1 Thessalonians chapter 2 and 2 Thessalonians chapter 2. In John chapter 8, Christ had explained the consequences of the things which those prophets foresaw in the events of history. Together all of this testimony creates a picture-perfect tapestry of the true nature and identity of the enemies of Christ, the synagogue of Satan of the Scriptures from which today’s Jews are all descended.

On the Gospel of John, Part 24: The Nature of the Beast

CHR20190614-John24.mp3 — Downloaded 4559 times

 

At the beginning of our last podcast I had presented a lengthy discussion regarding the recent assault on free speech being conducted by YouTube, the world’s only viable free video-sharing service, and some of the challenges which we face asserting our free speech rights on the Internet even when we host our own content. At that time I could not have known that I would face the prospect of troubles with my own hosting provider only five days later. As I write this, I have just received an answer to my defense of Christogenea against the claims of a certain non-White Social Justice Warrior who thinks that my website is unlawful because it offends him. I had already been shopping for new servers, only to get a head start if my defense did not prevail. Christogenea does nothing to violate the Acceptable Use Policies of its service providers, but quite frequently, those policies are often fluid and subject to change on short notice according to the whims of corporate lawyers.

There are a couple of start-up video sharing platforms that advertise themselves as free-speech alternatives to YouTube. One is Bitchute, and another is called Brighteon. But both of these have also already censored their users. Brighteon received pressure from its upstream providers over postings of the New Zealand shooting video, and had to remove it from their servers, thereby being forced to censor their own users. On some occasions censorship is merited, such as when it violates state or federal law. For example, one of the characters at the Daily Stormer complained that his open threats of violence against a certain tribal group were censored, but those threats were violations of the laws in every American jurisdiction, and certainly overseas. So Bitchute and Gab were probably trying to save a fool from himself.

I remember when the World Wide Web, which by popular misconception is considered by itself to be the Internet, was first opened to the public in 1993. Soon thereafter I had my own first website, but did not need a domain name because at that time Internet Service Providers were offering dial-up customers free websites in sub-folders on their own web servers. For a few years, the Internet was like a video game version of the proverbial Wild West, where anything went and if anyone didn’t like it, they just didn’t have to watch. Within a year, spam was ubiquitous in email and newsgroups, and it quickly became a plague. The Internet evolved around competing concepts. The first was the ideal of freedom of expression and free and open access to information, and the second was purely economic interest.

On the Gospel of John, Part 23: The Devil has Children

CHR20190607-John23.mp3 — Downloaded 6394 times


This week, YouTube has abruptly deleted the channels of the League of the South, Dennis Wise – who had at least four different channels, Hunter Wallace of Occidental Dissent, Rosette Delacroix, and many others who we would consider to be a part of what we may call the hard right. They even deleted some channels operated by people and organizations who we may think are actually rather innocuous and centrist mainstream Christians. As of this writing, the Christogenea and William Finck channels on YouTube have not been canceled, only because I generally do not publish any of my content there. However the accounts of several others who had published a significant amount of material from Christogenea have also been canceled.

Hard right thought, which is to us pure Christian Nationalist thought, tempers centrists and those marginal Christians who are willing to compromise with evil by reminding them continually of what is sin, and that alone helps to keep them from drifting even further to the left. Hard right thought helps to keep the perceived political center from sliding off into Sodom and Gomorrah. When such thought is removed from public view, when it is barred from public forums, especially because it is labeled as so-called “hate speech”, then the centrists and the compromisers feel more comfortable in tolerating the sins of the devil for the sake of their own peace and comfort. The devil knows what he is doing. Now a relatively small handful of internet media companies have become so big that they are the de facto public forums of the modern world. But because they are privately owned, they reserve a right to determine what is acceptable on their property. So they are slowly shutting all expression of traditional Christian thought and morality out of public view.