Christianity in the Old Testament, Part 3, Bertrand Comparet's Sermon, with Commentary

Now Available: The Christogenea Commentary on Paul's Epistle to the Romans in softcover can now be purchased at

  Available Now: The Christogenea New Testament in softcover at

Available now at! ChristReich: A Commentary on the Revelation of Yahshua Christ

Don't miss our ongoing series of podcasts The Protocols of Satan, which presents many historical proofs that the infamous Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion are real, and that they have been fulfilled in history by the very same people who dispute their authenticity. Our companion series, The Jews in Medieval Europe, helps to explain how the Protocols have been fulfilled.

 Our recent Pragmatic Genesis series explains the Bible from a Christian Identity perspective which reconciles both Old and New Testaments with history and the political and social realities facing the Christian people of Yahweh God today.

A Commentary on the Epistles of Paul has recently been completed at 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 for his many foundational Christian Identity studies.

Visit the Mein Kampf Project at and learn the truth concerning some of the most-lied about events in history.

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

Visit - the official home of William Finck's work-in-progress commentary on the Revelation of Yahshua Christ.

  • Christogenea Internet Radio


Christianity in the Old Testament, Part 3, a continuing presentation of Bertrand Comparet's Sermon, with our own Commentary

In the portions of this sermon which we have already presented, Bertrand Comparet addressed some of the logical fallacies which are held by those who somehow think that the Old Testament and the New are separate books addressed to different groups of people. Then he presented some of the prophecies which should prove beyond doubt that the New Covenant was to be made with the same people who were at one time subject to the Old Covenant. In this context, he then discussed Genesis 3:15, Genesis 4:1, and the sacrifices of Cain and Abel described subsequently in Genesis chapter 4. From there he cited the Book of Job, and a Christian profession made by Job himself concerning his resurrection after death and his Redeemer, an obvious reference to Yahshua Christ. While we could not agree with some of Comparet’s assertions concerning the meaning of Genesis 4:1 or the age of the Book of Job, his elucidation of the Christian promises in these passages are certainly correct.

Now as we proceed with Comparet’s sermon, he continues by discussing a rather controversial topic, which is the call to Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac. There are many people who protest the connection of the Old Testament to our Aryan race for reason of the accounts of human sacrifice which it contains, and especially for the near-sacrifice by Abraham of his own son Isaac. We would assert that these people, including men who are supposed history experts such as David Duke, are highly illiterate. The following paragraph is from a presentation of Clifton Emahiser's paper, Born Under Contract, which I made here in June of 2016. I was addressing neo-pagans specifically, however the criticism applies just as well to so-called traditional Christians who also cast aspersions on the Old Testament:

Many of the neo-pagans who despise Christianity use Abraham’s offering of Isaac as an excuse. Yet the same neo-pagans would extol the virtues of their pagan gods, or properly, their pagan idols. They are ignorant of their own pagan traditions. In the Greek Epic and Tragic poets, there is a popular account, that Agamemnon the great king of the Greeks had sacrificed his own daughter Iphigeneia, whom he sent for under the pretext of a promise of marriage to Achilles. He placed her on an altar and sacrificed her to Artemis in exchange for the hope of having fair winds for the voyage to Troy, so that the Greeks could launch their attack against the city. The Eddas of Snorri also include references to human sacrifice, such as that of the Swedish king who sacrificed nine of his sons to Odin in an agreement to prolong his own life, which is a story found in the Ynglinga saga.

Here we will add that in all of the ancient accounts of the sacrifice of Iphigeneia by Agamemnon, even if Agamemnon was hated by his wife for the act and she later killed him, two things are nevertheless consistent, which are the facts that Agamemnon’s fellows approved of the matter, since it was to their benefit, and that the gods also approved of it, blessing Agamemnon by granting him his wishes for fair weather and smooth sailing. So the ancient Greeks worshiped gods which approved of and accepted human sacrifice, and that is true even if we want to accept the later revisions by some of the Epic and Tragic Poets, which claimed that Artemis swept up Iphigeneia and put an animal in her place, whisking the young lady off to some far-away temple in Aulis. In fact, we can see clear similarities between the Biblical account of Isaac, recorded in the Biblical literature in the 15th century BC, and the sacrifice of Iphigeneia recorded in the Greek poets over 700 years later.

Making this presentation, we proceeded by describing another instance of human sacrifice in Aryan literature, and saying:

There are many instances of human sacrifice in certain of the [Germanic] Eddas, but this one is probably, so far as I have seen, the most prolific…. This is from the Heimskringla or The Chronicle of the Kings of Norway - The Ynglinga Saga, or The Story of the Yngling Family from Odin to Halfdan the Black:


On or Ane was the name of Jorund's son, who became king of the
Swedes after his father. He was a wise man, who made great
sacrifices to the gods; but being no warrior, he lived quietly at
home. In the time when the kings we have been speaking of were
in Upsal, Denmark had been ruled over by Dan Mikellati, who lived
to a very great age; then by his son, Frode Mikellati, or the
Peace-loving, who was succeeded by his sons Halfdan and Fridleif,
who were great warriors. Halfdan was older than his brother, and
above him in all things. He went with his army against King On
to Sweden, and was always victorious. At last King On fled to
Wester Gotland when he had been king in Upsal about twenty-five
years, and was in Gotland twenty-five years, while Halfdan
remained king in Upsal. King Halfdan died in his bed at Upsal,
and was buried there in a mound; and King On returned to Upsal
when he was sixty years of age. He made a great sacrifice, and
in it offered up his son to Odin. On got an answer from Odin,
that he should live sixty years longer; and he was afterwards
king in Upsal for twenty-five years. Now came Ole the Bold, a
son of King Fridleif, with his army to Sweden, against King On,
and they had several battles with each other; but Ole was always
the victor. Then On fled a second time to Gotland; and for
twenty-five years Ole reigned in Upsal, until he was killed by
Starkad the Old. After Ole's fall, On returned to Upsal, and
ruled the kingdom for twenty-five years. Then he made a great
sacrifice again for long life, in which he sacrificed his second
son, and received the answer from Odin, that he should live as
long as he gave him one of his sons every tenth year, and also
that he should name one of the districts of his country after the
number of sons he should offer to Odin. When he had sacrificed
the seventh of his sons he continued to live; but so that he
could not walk, but was carried on a chair. Then he sacrificed
his eighth son, and lived thereafter ten years, lying in his bed.
Now he sacrificed his ninth son, and lived ten years more; but so
that he drank out of a horn like a weaned infant. He had now
only one son remaining, whom he also wanted to sacrifice, and to
give Odin Upsal and the domains thereunto belonging, under the
name of the Ten Lands, but the Swedes would not allow it; so
there was no sacrifice, and King On died, and was buried in a
mound at Upsal. Since that time it is called On's sickness when
a man dies, without pain, of extreme old age. Thjodolf tell of
this: --

"In Upsal's town the cruel king
Slaughtered his sons at Odin's shrine --
Slaughtered his sons with cruel knife,
To get from Odin length of life.
He lived until he had to turn
His toothless mouth to the deer's horn;
And he who shed his children's blood
Sucked through the ox's horn his food.
At length fell Death has tracked him down,
Slowly, but sure, in Upsal's town."

Now even though this King On is remembered in the Edda as a cruel man, he is also called a wise man, and the account nevertheless portrays Odin, the greatest of the Germanic gods, not only as approving of the king’s sacrifice of his own son and rewarding him for it, but also promising to reward him again and again if he continued to sacrifice all of his remaining sons. Therefore we see that from their own literature, which they often cite and which they claim to be holy, Germanic pagans worship a god who continually approves of human sacrifice.

Even more condemning, the pagan kings of the Greeks and the Swedes which we have just seen depicted in their own pagan literature had sacrificed their own children for their own personal gain and lust for riches or power. But on the contrary, Abraham was tested by Yahweh his God, to sacrifice his own son as a sign of his obedience. Abraham had nothing to gain by his sacrifice of Isaac, and everything to lose. And the act demonstrates not only the obedience of Abraham to his God, but also the obedience of Isaac to his father.

Another aspect of the Biblical account which is also quite contrary to the pagan acts of human sacrifice is that it implies from the beginning that Isaac was never actually going to be sacrificed. There were already promises to Abraham that his heir would come from his own loins through his wife Sarah. Sarah was extremely advanced in her years when Isaac was born, and by the time of the sacrifice she was far older. But the intention of Yahweh for Isaac was already expressed before he was born, where we read in Genesis chapter 17: “19 And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him.” The sacrifice of Isaac had not yet been demanded when this promise was given. Again, in Genesis chapter 21 where Sarah wanted Abraham to separate from Ishmael, we read where Yahweh tells him to: “hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called.” It is not until after this, that Abraham was tested and commanded to sacrifice his son. Having these promises, Abraham had no choice but to demonstrate his trust in the God who had made those earlier promises.

The Old Testament is ridiculed because Abraham was commanded to sacrifice his son. But today’s denominational Christians worship the Jews. Essentially, the Jews are their god, and they send their sons off in wars for the rogue Israeli state, sacrificing them at the demands of their god.

There are other aspects of the sacrifice of Isaac which can only be understood in the historical context of antiquity. Surrounding nations sacrificed sons and daughters to their pagan gods quite frequently, and this is evident in Scripture as well as in history and in records of antiquity contained in surviving inscriptions. Ancient Greeks, Etruscans, and Gauls as well as Aryan peoples as far east as modern China all engaged in human sacrifice at one time or another. So we cannot imagine that Abraham was not familiar with human sacrifice before he was commanded to sacrifice his own son by Yahweh.

One further aspect is of extreme ceremonial and legal importance. First, in the ancient world fathers had property rights over their wives and their children, so Abraham had every right to consign his son to his God. Next, it is evident throughout ancient literature, and especially that of the Greeks, that when a man placed something on an altar and dedicated it to a god, the object became the property of that god. So when Abraham placed his son on the altar and dedicated him to Yahweh, he essentially handed ownership of his son over to his God.

So according to the customs of the period, Yahweh taking what we may consider a legal possession of Isaac, He intended to preserve him, He substituted a more appropriate sacrifice in his place, and He proceeded to fulfill the promises which He had already made to Abraham concerning him. So we see that the Biblical account is just, that the God of the Bible is righteous, and that the pagans and others who scoff at the event are absolutely ignorant because their own gods demanded human sacrifice for far more trivial purposes.

Now we shall continue with our presentation and critical review of:

Christianity in the Old Testament by Bertrand L. Comparet, digitized From Your Heritage and prepared with Critical Notes by Clifton A. Emahiser. [Your Heritage was a collection of Bertrand Comparet’s sermons which were transcribed from audio tapes by Jeanne Snyder and made available through Kingdom Identity Ministries. Mike Hallimore now has it available under the title The Complete Works of Bertrand L. Comparet. Comparet had a booklet under the same title, Your Heritage, which should not be confused. So continuing with Comparet:]

Abraham also knew and expressed some of the basic ideas of Christianity. In Genesis 22:1-14 we read that Yahweh put Abraham to a severe test, He told Abraham to offer his beloved son Isaac, on the altar, as a burnt offering. Remember how much Isaac meant to Abraham. In addition to all the ordinary love of a father for his son, Yahweh had promised Abraham that the many great prophecies given to him would be fulfilled through Isaac. Then, when Isaac was still only a child, and none of the promises had yet been fulfilled, Yahweh suddenly commanded Abraham to sacrifice Isaac as a burnt offering! Did it mean that Yahweh had changed His mind and would not make good on His many promises? No, Abraham knew that Yahweh’s word was always reliable. Therefore Yahweh would find a way to fulfill His promises that through Isaac would be born a number of nations, destined to demonstrate to the world the goodness of Yahweh.

Actually Isaac must have been a little older than childhood, as he was grown enough to carry the wood for the sacrifice up the mountain, as we see in Genesis 22:6 where it says “6 And Abraham took the wood of the burnt offering, and laid it upon Isaac his son; and he took the fire in his hand, and a knife; and they went both of them together.” The next significant event which is recorded is the death of Sarah at 127 years old, 37 years after she gave birth to Isaac. The amount of wood sufficient to offer a man in sacrifice must have been considerable, so Isaac must have been old enough to carry such an amount. One popular recipe found on the Internet for cooking a whole 60-pound pig calls for five bundles of hardwood in addition to a bag of hard coal. The size of their bundle is not specified, but the ones which we purchase from stores for other reasons typically weigh about 20 pounds.

Comparet continues:

Abraham started out with Isaac for the place where he was to offer up the sacrifice, going cheerfully, not in the awful grief of a father about to not only witness, but even to cause, the death of his beloved son. He went in the serene confidence of one who knew that his God was always faithful. It records. “Isaac spoke unto Abraham his father, and said, My father and he said, Here I am, my son. And he (Isaac) said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering? And Abraham said, My son, Yahweh will provide Himself a lamb for a burnt offering.”

The sacrifice of Isaac foreshadows the ultimate sacrifice of Christ in many ways. They were both sacrificed on a hill or mountain-top in the same area, and they both carried to the respective sites of their sacrifice their own wood which was to be the method of their sacrifice, albeit in different ways. Furthermore, while Yahweh did indeed provide a lamb [or actually, a ram] to replace Isaac, the sacrifice of Christ was later depicted as that of a Lamb of God dying on behalf of Isaac’s descendants. As he proceeds, Comparet will explain this. But for now, he can only conjecture concerning what Abraham may have been thinking at this time:

Possibly his confidence might have been based in part upon the conviction that, if Yahweh did permit the death of Isaac, He would resurrect him, so that the promises would be fulfilled through Isaac. Remember that resurrection is a basic part of Christianity. By his own statement, Abraham also was calmly certain that Yahweh would intervene, providing a lamb for the sacrifice to be offered in place of Isaac, so that by the death of a lamb in his place, Isaac could be spared. This again, is the very essence of Christianity. In John 1:29 Yahshua is called the “Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.” In Revelation 13:8 Yahshua is called, “The Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.” Genesis 22 tells how Abraham’s faith was justified. Yahweh stopped him before any harm could come to Isaac and provided a ram, caught in a nearby thicket, for the sacrifice.

This incident of Abraham and Isaac was written in the Book of Genesis by Moses. Do you think Moses did not know the significance of what he had written? Not at all, the Bible itself tells us Moses was a Christian, does that surprise you? Hebrews 11:24-26 records, “By faith, Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter: choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season; esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompense of the reward.” Certainly you can’t have faith in something you have never heard of. It is clear Moses knew the significance of the symbolism in the Old Testament rituals which he told the people of Israel to use.

Here Comparet takes advantage of what is essentially a misunderstanding of the translators. So here we have another critical note by Clifton A. Emahiser. Clifton worded his notes in such a manner because his notes were appended in one body to the end of his publication, and he wrote:

Comparet also makes the statement: “Not at all, the Bible itself tells us Moses was a Christian, does that surprise you? Hebrews 11:24-26 records, ‘By faith, Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter: choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season; esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompense of the reward’.”

This passage at Hebrews 11:24-26 is an obvious mistranslation. Here… [the word] Christ is derived from “the anointed”, and it is simply saying that Moses would rather suffer the affliction of his people than to live in Pharaoh’s house! William Finck translates this passage correctly: “24 By faith Moses, becoming full-grown, refused to be called a son of the daughter of Pharaoh, 25 rather preferring to be mistreated with the people of Yahweh than to have the temporary rewards of error, 26 having esteemed the reproach of the Anointed greater riches than the treasures of Egypt, since he had regard for the reward.” (Anointed = Israelite people.)

This was the last of Clifton's critical notes for this sermon, but there is still a lot of material remaining to present. However we must state that the phrase ὁ χριστός can be interpreted either as the Christ, where we are certain that it stands as the title for Yahshua Himself, or as the anointed, where it stands as a title for the whole body of the people of Yahweh collectively, His anointed ones. Here in Hebrews 11 it clearly refers to the people, as Paul uses it to refer to the people of God he had mentioned immediately beforehand. The “the reproach of the Anointed” in verse 26 is simply another way to describe the “affliction with the people of God” to which he had referred in verse 25. Returning to Comparet:

Christianity is the central theme of the Old Testament, especially in the writings of Moses and Isaiah. The deepest religious truths therein are expressed symbolically in the sacrifices and rituals. Since they are not explained in words of one syllable for the benefit of the lazy, the uninterested and the shallow, they have not been perceived by churchmen whose religion never gets beyond mere emotionalism. These are the men who tell us Yahweh was mistaken in the Old Testament, that His plan would not work, because men in their wickedness were stronger than Yahweh. They would not let Him carry out His plans, so He had to abandon all this and start over again in the New Testament. Isn’t that an inspiring religion! They call themselves New Testament Christians, but they either won’t read or won’t believe the New Testament either.

Of course, Comparet refers to the professional clergy, which promotes the idea that God would replace His people rather than keep His promises. Likewise, they are replacing us today in spite of the fact that the American Constitution was written exclusively for one people, the Founders and their Posterity. So our clergymen replaced our race in their teachings on the Bible, and now they are doing it again in modern history, and on both occasions, the satanic Jews are the beneficiaries. Continuing with Comparet:

In this same New Testament Yahshua, to whom these Jews render lip service, calls their attention to Christianity in the writings of Moses. In John chapter 5 He twice called attention of the Jews to this fact saying, “Search the scriptures: for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and it is they which testify of Me.” The earliest book of the New Testament, Matthew, was not written until ten years after Christ spoke, so the scriptures He told them to read were necessarily those of the Old Testament. Yahshua told them, “There is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust. For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed Me: for he wrote of Me.” Can you be a New Testament Christian if you won’t believe Yahshua’s own words?

In Part 1 of this series we asked and answered the question, What is a Catholic? There we esteem to have proven that a true Catholic is one who accepts both Old and New Testaments in regard to himself, and therefore, in accordance with the promises and covenants of God as they were originally given, a true Catholic can only be an Identity Christian. Anything else falls short of, and even denies, the Word of Yahweh God and the words of His Christ as they are found in the Scriptures of both Testaments. Comparet continues:

We find the essence of Christianity clearly symbolized in the origin of the Passover. You remember Moses had repeatedly demanded of the Pharaoh of Egypt that he let the people of Israel go, and the Pharaoh had each time refused, despite the many miracles Moses worked bringing down plagues upon Egypt to show his authority. So Yahweh told Moses that one more plague would be sent upon Egypt, which would surely convince Pharaoh that he should let the children of Israel go. “Thus saith Yahweh, About midnight will I go out into the midst of Egypt: and all the first born in the land of Egypt shall die, from the first born of Pharaoh that sitteth upon the throne, even unto the first born of the maidservant that is behind the mill; and all the first born of beasts. But against any of the children of Israel shall not a dog move his tongue, against man or beast: that ye may know how Yahweh doth put a difference between the Egyptians and Israel.”

Note what this means, because of the stubborn wickedness of the Egyptians, the death penalty was to come upon them. Yet the children of Israel, who were also imperfect and sinful, were to escape this penalty. There was only one way in which they could be spared, by the ritual of the Passover. This Passover certainly symbolizes Christianity as the way of salvation from death.

And we may add, that just as the Pharaoh was stubborn regardless of the plagues brought upon his people, we too are stubborn and frequently we remain in our sin regardless of the plagues which it causes both ourselves and our people. So in that manner Pharaoh serves as a type for us all. In any case, only the Blood of the Lamb can save us. Comparet continues his own comparison:

The instructions for this ritual were given in Exodus chapter 12. “In the tenth day of this month they shall take to them every man a lamb, according to the house of their fathers, a lamb for a house… And ye shall keep it up until the fourteenth day of the same month: and the whole qahal [assembly - WRF] of the congregation of Israel shall kill it in the evening. And they shall take of the blood and strike it on the two side posts and upon the upper door post of the houses, wherein they shall eat it. And they shall eat the flesh in the night, roasted with fire, and unleavened bread; and with bitter herbs shall they eat it… And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where ye are: and when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and the plague shall not be upon you to destroy when I smite the land of Egypt. And this day shall be unto you for a memorial: and ye shall keep it for a feast to Yahweh throughout your generations; ye shall keep it a feast by an ordinance for ever.”

This symbolized Yahshua giving His life to save those who believe in Him. This festival was always kept in the Hebrew month of Nisan. This meal gave the Israelites strength for their forced march, that night and all the next day, leaving Egypt in the exodus. The lamb’s blood had to be placed outside the door on the two door posts and the lintel above the front door of each house. Although they were cruelly mistreated slaves in the land of their enemies, they could not eat the Passover supper in secret. Salvation from death came only to those who publicly proclaimed their faith that the blood of the lamb would save them.

Now Passover approaches and people often wonder when to celebrate it. There is a short article at Christogenea titled Dating the Passover, and it is clear that the Hebrew calendar being based on the natural phases of agriculture, [How Jewish is that? The Jews never engaged in agriculture!] the first day of the year must have been the first day of Spring, which is the Vernal Equinox. So it is quite apparent that Passover, being the fourteenth day of the year, should be celebrated each year beginning with the evening of April 2nd on our calendar, and that may be as close as we can come from what we can read in Scripture. Returning to Comparet:

This is clearly New Testament Christianity. First, the necessity for public confession of faith in the blood of the Lamb. In Matthew 10:32-33 Yahshua says, “Whosoever therefore shall confess Me before men, him will I confess also before My Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny Me before men, him will I also deny before My father which is in heaven.” Also read Luke 12:8-9. In Romans 10:9 Paul reminds us, “That if thou shalt confess, with thy mouth, Yahshua the Christ, and shalt believe in thine heart that Yahweh hath raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.”

We do not believe that public confession of Christ is necessary for salvation, since all Israel shall be saved and much of Israel in history had never even had a chance to hear the Gospel of Christ. However what Christ is telling us in that passage, is that those of Israel who confess Christ before men will have a greater commendation or reward for having done so. In turn, Paul is informing us that in the profession of Christ is an indication, or a “seal” as he put it elsewhere, of our salvation. Returning again to Comparet:

Eating the flesh of the lamb, to gain strength for the great effort of the exodus from the world and evil into salvation and the kingdom of Yahweh, is again clear Christian symbolism. In John chapter 6 Yahshua says, “I am the bread of life: he that cometh to Me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on Me shall never thirst. I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever: and the bread that I will give is My flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”

In Revelation chapter 7 we read of the children of Israel scattered among the nations: “These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.” Why did they come out of tribulation? Because they were the same Israelites who went into tribulation with the Assyrian and Babylonian captivities. Then in Revelation chapter 12, in reference to Satan and in a prophecy which applies this very day, we read of those same children of Israel: “11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.” Again returning to Comparet:

Perhaps some of you are wondering about the command in Exodus 12:24, “And ye shall observe this thing for an ordinance to thee and to thy sons forever.” Are we violating Yahweh’s law when we do not celebrated Passover as such today? [And where it says “forever” in the laws given at Sinai, “forever was contingent upon the obedience of the children of Israel. When they were disobedient, they were divorced and put off in punishment, and “forever” was ended.] No, you will note that the Passover ritual was an ordinance, all the religious rituals were stated as ordinances. There are four grades of divine law. (1) The commandments, which are the greatest rules governing man’s relation to his God. (2) The statutes, which are the rules for governing the nation, including many of the rules for man’s relation to his fellow man. (3) The judgments, which are the rules telling the judges how to decide cases between man and man. (4) The ordinances, which are the rules for the religious rituals and ceremonies. The commandments, statutes and the judgments are the rules which are forever necessary for a good life in this world and they are still in force. The ordinances governed only the religious ceremonies and rituals, and all of these were symbolic of the coming Savior and Redeemer, Yahshua.

Here we must disagree with Comparet once again, in some degree. Sodomites and fornicators are not being stoned in the streets, so the judgments are certainly no longer in force. The rules for governing the nation were also done away with, as read in Hosea chapter 3: “4 For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim: 5 Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the LORD their God, and David their king; and shall fear the LORD and his goodness in the latter days.” This prophesy referred to the state of the children of Israel in their captivity. All of the things which they would do without were the symbols of kingly and priestly authority, which were necessary for governing the nation. However we read in Isaiah chapter 7: “and within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people.” Part of the punishment of the children of Israel is that they would not again be ruled righteously until the coming of the Christ, but they would be subject to beast empires, beast governments. We are still subject to beast governments to this very day. Many of the laws which made them a visibly distinct nation were never imposed by Christ or the apostles, because they were explicitly for the Old Kingdom. Instead, Christians were told only that they must keep the commandments if they sought to please Christ. Comparet continues:

Since He had not come in Old Testament times, all the symbolism of the rituals looked to the future. But after Yahshua had actually come, we cannot go on proclaiming our faith that our Redeemer has not yet come but will come in the future. That would be a rejection of Yahshua who has already come. Therefore, only the form of the ceremony, not its eternal truth, is changed to a new form the last supper or communion, which proclaims our faith in a Redeemer who has already come. It is still the same eternal truth about the same Redeemer. It does not reject any of the truth implied in the Passover, it merely proclaims this as already accomplished.

We must disagree with Comparet on the nature of communion. In 1 Corinthians chapter 11, in the same place where Paul had said “For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come”, he also asked “What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? ” And he said “When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.” So we commemorate the death of our Lord Yahshua Christ as often as we eat and drink at home, and not in some church. Comparet continues:

Passover was on the 14th day of the Hebrew month Nisan. The Passover lambs were killed and dressed in the afternoon, ready for that evening’s Passover supper. The King James Bible wrongly translates this as in the evening. But the Hebrew said, between the evenings, which meant between the time when the sun first started toward sunset at noon, and the time when it finished its going down. Yahshua was crucified soon after noon and He died about 3 P.M., the Bible says, about the ninth hour. The Hebrew divided the night into watches and the day into twelve hours, beginning at sunrise, which came about 6 A.M. at that time of year, so the ninth hour was 3 P.M. Yahshua died right in the middle of the period when the Passover lambs were being killed, emphasizing the fact that He was our Passover.

It is recorded in John chapter 1 that John the Baptist, “looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God!” Later, Paul of Tarsus wrote to the Corinthians (1 Corinthians chapter 5), whom he also explained were indeed descended from the dispersed tribes of Israel, to “ 7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: 8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.” So here Comparet continues in regards to the leaven:

The next day, the fifteenth day of Nisan, began the seven days of the feast of unleavened bread. We find this in Leviticus 23:6-8, “And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of the unleavened bread unto Yahweh: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread. In the first day ye shall have an convocation: ye shall not do any servile work therein. But ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto Yahweh seven days: in the seventh day is an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein.” Like all the other festivals and rituals of the Old Testament, this feast of the unleavened bread is symbolic of Yahshua and His ministry.

Leaven was a symbol of sin, its fermentation being perhaps thought of as similar to putrefaction, the way just a little leaven introduced into the dough would soon spread through it all. Hence we find Yahshua warning His disciples in Matthew 16:6, to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees. Since Yahshua was the bread of life, as He explained in John chapter 6, the fact that, (1) Yahshua has saved us by His death in our place on the cross, followed by (2) the fact that our lives are thereafter sustained by His power, is symbolized by the Passover, followed by the feast of the unleavened bread. Yahshua’s perfection, free from all sin, is symbolized by the use of unleavened bread.

As we had seen citing 1 Corinthians chapter 5, Paul had compared leaven to malice and wickedness, and equated a lack of leaven to sincerity and truth. We would think that leaven represented lies and false doctrines as well as it does sin. Now Comparet continues with the next feast on the Christian calendar:

The third of the spring festivals firstfruits, came before the end of unleavened bread. On the first day after the sabbath following the Passover, was the firstfruits festival. It is mentioned in many places, Exodus 23:16, 34:22; Leviticus 23:10-14; Numbers 18:12-13, 28:16; Deuteronomy 18:4, 26:1-11, and the entire ritual is given in Deuteronomy 26:1-11. “And it shall be, when thou art come unto the land which Yahweh thy God giveth thee for an inheritance, and possessest it and dwellest therein: that thou shalt take of the first of all the fruits of the earth, which thou shalt bring out of thy land that Yahweh thy God giveth thee, and thou shalt put it in a basket and shall go unto the place which Yahweh thy God shall choose to place His name there. And thou shalt go unto the priest that shall be in those days and say unto him, I profess this day unto Yahweh thy God, that I am come unto the country which Yahweh swore unto our fathers for to give us. And the priest shall take the basket out of thine hand and set it down before the altar of Yahweh thy God. And thou shalt speak and say before Yahweh thy God, A Syrian ready to perish was my father and he went down into Egypt and sojourned there with a few, and became there a nation, great, mighty and populous: and the Egyptians evil entreated us and afflicted us and laid upon us hard bondage: and when we cried unto Yahweh, God of our fathers, Yahweh heard our voice, and looked on our affliction and our labor and our oppression: and Yahweh brought us forth out of Egypt with a mighty hand and with an outstretched arm and with great terribleness, and with signs and with wonders: and He hath brought us into this place, and hath given us this land, even a land that floweth with milk and honey. And now behold, I have brought the firstfruits of the land which Thou, O Yahweh, hast given me.”

This passage which Comparet cites, where it says in Deuteronomy chapter 26 that “a Syrian ready to perish was my father”, in reference to Jacob, supports our contention that there is a scribal error of Edom for Aram, or Syrian, in Deuteronomy 23:7 which we would read to say “ 7 Thou shalt not abhor an Syrian [Aram]; for he is thy brother: thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian; because thou wast a stranger in his land.” We would assert that the one passage certainly is a parallel to the other. Comparet continues to discuss the feast of firstfruits, which in the New Testament is called Pentecost:

The people in general have never shown any ability to understand the deeper truths of religion. Only a very few upon whom rests the spirit of Yahweh, have ever understood. Therefore, to keep the rituals in the mind of the people, Moses had to give a simplified explanation, within the range of comprehension of the average man. Consequently, he tied in the festival of the firstfruits with the idea of expressing gratitude to Yahweh for his gift of the promised land. But the promised land of Canaan was only for this world, a temporary value. What was the true promised land, the one which was eternal? It must necessarily be resurrection and continued life after the death of this fallen body. Therefore, that is the true symbolism of the festival of the firstfruits and that is the fulfillment which Yahshua gave it. On the morning after the Sabbaths, Yahshua was resurrected to demonstrate the reality of the redemption He had given us and this was on the exact day of the festival of the firstfruits. He always fulfilled the great reality on the exact day of the festival which symbolized that realty.

The assertion which Comparet makes here is indeed supported by Scripture. One example is in Hebrews chapter 11 where Paul wrote in reference to the Old Testament saints and said: “ 13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. 14 For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country.” So while they themselves lived in Palestine, that was clearly not the country they sought. Continuing with Comparet:

Yahshua carried out the symbolism of the firstfruits to the exact letter. Leviticus 23:10-11 commands, “The firstfruits offering shall be a sheaf of grain, a number of stalks, each with its head containing many individual grains; and the priest shall take the sheaf and wave it.” They were to publicly display it before Yahweh. When Yahshua was resurrected, He did not rise alone. Matthew 27:52-53 tells us, “The graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose and came out of the graves after His resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared unto many.” Thus He fulfilled the symbolism of the wave sheaf, containing many individual grains, by resurrecting many persons when He arose as the firstfruits from the dead and making public display of His victory over death.

Those who scoff at Christianity belittle such testimonies. However there were so many witnesses, men who were willing to die rather than to deny what they had seen, that soon the whole world, or society, would be Christian. To deny this today is to rebuke one’s own fathers, who knew better than to deny it. Comparet continues:

This is the correct interpretation of the symbolism that is shown by Paul’s words in I Corinthians 15:20-23, “But now is Christ risen from the dead and become the firstfruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterwards they that are Christ’s at His coming.”

The firstfruits festival came at the time of the barley harvest, for the barley harvest ripened several weeks before the wheat.

The Scripture is sometimes confusing in this regard. In Exodus chapter 34 we read: “22 And thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, of the firstfruits of wheat harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the year's end.” There is only one feast explicitly called firstfruits, and therefore that is the firstfruits of the wheat harvest. The earlier time of firstfruits is during the feast of unleavened bread, as Comparet has said previously, however it is not a feast by itself. As he has explained, and continues to explain, that is an offering of firstfruits commanded fifty days before the Pentecost, or feast of weeks. But he calls it a feast, and it is not a feast by itself. He continues in relation to the firstfruits offering during the Feast of Unleavened Bread:

The offering of the firstfruits at the temple was of only a small amount, a mere token as a pledge that when the major harvest, that of the wheat was brought in, the full tithe of the grain harvest would be brought to the temple. This was to be done at what the Bible calls, the feast of weeks, and which the churchmen, with the usual specialists’ delight in developing a jargon of their own, have chosen to call Pentecost.

We cannot agree that Pentecost was a word introduced by churchmen. It was actually used by the apostles themselves, in both the Book of Acts and Paul’s first epistle to the Corinthians.

Yahshua knew and respected the symbolism involved here. At firstfruits, He did not bring all the magnificent gifts He would give to His followers, He brought just a token resurrection of a few persons, to show how great would be His eventual gift to men. However, men must live out their lives under all the usual circumstances of this world, before they reach the stage of death and resurrection, so they need another gift before that time. What they need to bring them triumphantly through life is the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit.

So we must understand that those resurrected with Christ were represented by the firstfruits of Leviticus 23:10, the firstfruits offered during the Feast of Unleavened Bread, as Comparet is explaining. In that manner he correctly asserts that the firstfruits offering during that feast stands as an allegory of the resurrection of the saints described in Matthew 27:52-53. However the gathering of the Wheat began at the first Christian Pentecost, when the apostles received the Holy Spirit and began to spread the Gospel. That corresponds to the Feast of Weeks, which was the firstfruits of the wheat harvest, and that was called by the Greek word Pentecost in the New Testament. While there is not quite enough information in Scripture to understand the entire agricultural system of the Old Kingdom, it is also certain that the Feast of Tabernacles was a feast of the final harvest of the year. Comparet continues to speak of the significance of Pentecost:

Yahshua had promised them this gift in John 14:16-18. “And I will pray the Father and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you forever: even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth Him not, neither knoweth Him: but ye know him; for He dwelleth with you and shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.” So, at the time of firstfruits, Yahshua demonstrated the reality of His gift of resurrection by bringing several of the dead to life. It was not yet time for actual resurrection to come to everyone, so this was just a token given in pledge of the final harvest. With this proof, everyone could wait in serene confidence for what was yet to come. The rest of the harvest for man was to be demonstrated in its own good time, at the feast of weeks.

The feast of weeks and the feast of firstfruits were actually one and the same, as we have seen in Deuteronomy 34:22. But there waass the separate firstfruits offering during the Feast of Unleavened Bread. It is fully apparent in Scripture that there are three solemn feasts where the children of Israel were to gather at the temple each year, for example in Deuteronomy chapter 16: “16 Three times in a year shall all thy males appear before the LORD thy God in the place which he shall choose; in the feast of unleavened bread, and in the feast of weeks, and in the feast of tabernacles: and they shall not appear before the LORD empty.” The Feast of Weeks was called such because it consisted of seven weeks, which in the New Testament period was simply called Pentecost, which referred to the fiftieth day from the end of the Feast of Unleavened Bread. So the New American Standard Bible correctly renders Numbers 28:26 to read: “Also on the day of the first fruits, when you present a new grain offering to the LORD in your Feast of Weeks, you shall have a holy convocation; you shall do no laborious work.” Yet, as Comparet had said before, there was a firsfruits offering seven weeks before Pentecost, where he cited Leviticus 23:10-11 which state: “The firstfruits offering shall be a sheaf of grain, a number of stalks, each with its head containing many individual grains; and the priest shall take the sheaf and wave it.” Now he continues his discussion further from that same chapter of Leviticus:

The feast of weeks was celebrated on the fiftieth day after firstfruits, as specified in Leviticus 23:15-21. “And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the sabbath, from the day that ye brought the wave offering, seven sabbaths shall be complete: and even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall ye number fifty days: and ye shall offer a new meal offering unto Yahweh. Ye shall bring out of your habitations two wave loaves of two tenth deals: they shall be of fine flour; they shall be baked with leaven; they are the firstfruits unto Yahweh. And ye shall offer with the bread seven lambs, without blemish, of the first year, and one young bullock and two rams: they shall be for a burnt offering unto Yahweh, with their meal offering and their drink offerings, even an offering made by fire, of savour unto Yahweh. Then ye shall sacrifice one kid of the goats for a sin offering and two lambs of the first year for a sacrifice of peace offerings. And the priest shall wave them with the bread of the firstfruits, for a wave offering before Yahweh, with the two lambs: they shall be holy to Yahweh for the priest. And ye shall proclaim on the selfsame day that it may be an holy convocation unto you: ye shall do no servile work therein: it shall be a statute forever in all your dwellings throughout your generations.”

So there are two sets of firstfruits, the one at the end of the feast of unleavened bread, and another fifty days later. This can be confusing, and I myself have certainly been confused on this topic in the past. Comparet did well, however, to examine these feasts and realize the allegories they represent in relation to the events of the ministry of Christ. So he continues:

Note here some contrasts, which are intended to make clear the different things symbolized. In the feast of the firstfruits, the symbolism was that of Yahshua resurrected as the firstfruits from the dead. Since leaven symbolizes sin, there could not be any leaven in the offerings made on the day of firstfruits. [The “day of firstfruits” being the day during the Feast of Unleavened Bread. - WRF] Along with the sheaf of barley, the Israelite was to offer a he lamb of the first year without blemish, as a burnt offering, which symbolized Yahshua offering to pay the penalty of our sins. There was also to be an offering of fine flour mingled with oil, but not baked into a leavened loaf, nor could any leaven be included in the offering, as firstfruits must symbolize Yahshua who is without sin. But the feast of weeks, also called Pentecost, does not directly represent Yahshua, it symbolizes the true church and Yahshua’s gift of the Holy Spirit to the church.

Of course, where Comparet says “true church”, from his many other writings we know that he correctly refers to the body of the people of Israel, and not to the beast church organization in Rome.

Even the very best of men have some sins, even when called by Yahshua to be part of His church. Therefore, the wave loaves which symbolize the church were made with leaven. Note also that at the feast of the firstfruits, there was the offering of a sheaf of stalks of barley, each stalk having its head containing many individual grains. This symbolizing the many individuals to whom Yahshua brings the gift of life and resurrection. With the call to form His church, all the believers become part of one body, the church. As Paul points out in I Corinthians 10:16-17 saying, “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? For we, being many, are one bread and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.” Therefore, the offering at the feast of weeks is no longer a sheaf containing a multitude of individual grains, but of the wave loaves symbolizing the many believers having now become one church.

And surely Comparet intends to describe “many believers” from out of the greater number of the dispersed children of Israel. Now we will conclude with his final remarks on these feasts:

In fulfillment of this, at the feast of weeks or Pentecost, next following the crucifixion, the disciples were waiting in Jerusalem in obedience to Yahshua’s promise and command in Luke 24:49. “And behold, I send the promise of My Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.” Acts 1:8 promises, “But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Spirit is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses upon Me, both in Jerusalem and in all Judea and in Samaria and unto the uttermost parts of the earth.” At the feast of weeks, the Holy Spirit came upon them, as set forth in detail in Acts chapter 2 which began the work of the church, men united in their fellowship as parts of the mystic body of Christ. Remember, this was but the fulfillment of the promise symbolized in the feast of weeks in the Old Testament.

In the end, it becomes evident that the entire organization of the Old Testament ceremonies and rituals looked forward to Christ, and were imposed with the understanding that the people themselves would ultimately fail, so that we know with all certainty that God alone is perfect.

We shall discuss this and other aspects of Christianity in the Old Testament when we return with Bertrand Comparet’s sermon next week.