A Critical Review of The Sheep and The Goats, by Bertrand Comparet

Christogenea is reader supported. If you find value in our work, please consider donating to keep it going! See our Contact Page for more information.

  • Christogenea Internet Radio
CHR20200228-Sheep-Goats-Comparet.mp3 — Downloaded 1459 times


A Critical Review of The Sheep and The Goats, by Bertrand Comparet

On tape this was actually only a ten-minute sermon, but we may make it a 75-minute discussion. I have included a copy of the original sermon below. As with all of the Comparet sermons transcribed by Jeanne Snyder and then digitized by Clifton Emahiser, some editing and changes were made, so none of these are word-for-word from Comparet, but they are close enough to be accurate representations of what he said. But I cannot even know if the audio version which I have is the same as what Jeanne had originally transcribed.

I remember first learning about Christian Identity from a small collection of books that did not say much at all about those races which were outside of the Scriptures, or at least, which were not direct subjects of the Scriptures. There was E. Raymond Capt’s Abrahamic Covenant, Bertrand Comparet’s Your Heritage, Robert Balacius’ Uncovering the Mysteries of Your Hidden Inheritance, even William Cameron’s The Covenant People. Cameron is more famous for his work on The International Jew for Henry Ford’s paper, The Dearborn Independent, but few people familiar with that also know that Cameron was an Identity Christian. At that early time I also read quite a few things from Wesley Swift, and also from Richard Kelly Hoskins, Howard Rand, Frederick Haberman, and at least half dozen other Identity writers.

Back then I also subscribed to a paper called The Jubilee, printed somewhere in the Pacific Northwest, I think in Oregon, which in each issue had run an article by Ted Weiland. So in hindsight, it is not a wonder the paper was rather soft on the race issue, and even then I recognized Weiland’s universalism. So I never read more than a couple of his articles, and I never renewed the subscription. But after reading a few dozen or so Identity books and a host of other materials – although I don’t remember exactly how much I read, as this was back in 1997 and early 1998 – I began to realize that there were vast differences of opinions among various Identity writers concerning certain very important subjects.

Later, reading about the history of Christian Identity itself, I began to realize that there were different reasons for all of those varying opinions. One reason is personal context, referring to the attitudes and opinions, or the worldview, which is formed by the time and place in which one lives, and also by one’s own experiences. Another is the fact that people often seek to justify their own opinions and sentiments through Scripture, rather than forming their opinions and changing their sentiments by conforming themselves to Scripture. Sadly, there are too men who want to verify their own feelings rather than inquire as to how God Himself feels about a thing, and we have such men in Christian Identity as well as in the denominational churches.

The best general example of this phenomenon is the early variant of Christian Identity which is called British-Israel. The Ferrar Fenton Bible was made by a British-Israel adherent and it purposely mistranslated important passages in order to support British-Israel doctrines. English patriots who were proud of their empire accepted the heresy of Dominion Theology in order to justify the empire. Then later, and evidently because Jews were so prominent in British Society in the mid-19th century, it also accepted the lie that the Jews were Judah, and imagined some sort of Biblical brotherhood between Saxons and Jews.

But this should be no wonder, since one of its most prominent early writers was a banker named Edward Hine, who also helped to demonize the German people as “Assyrians” and “Huns”, when even earlier British Identity writers or their immediate sources, such as Sharon Turner, knew that the Germans were indeed kindred to the English. The favorable position given the Jews which Hine had espoused and successfully promoted was absolutely contrary to that of the earlier John Wilson, whom Hine had supposedly studied and followed. So British-Israel doctrines were formed in a manner which accommodated and justified both the British Empire and world Jewish financial hegemony, as well as British hatred for Germany, while making excuses for the peculiar Jewish religion. If Christian Identity is true, there could have been no greater poison by which to destroy it.

Howard Rand was an early-20th century American Christian Identity writer and author who subscribed to at least most of the British-Israel professions. There were others similar to him, of course, and some of them much more popular, like Herbert W. Armstrong. But by then the might of the Anglo-American alliance was shifting to the Americans, although all along it has really been held by the Jews, so there were some modifications which had to be made in matters of doctrine and interpretations of prophecy. Then, since the early Christian Identity interpretations of prophecy which were dependent upon the circumstances of the British Empire, or later, on the circumstances of the Cold War, even they had to be improved. At Christogenea, we do our best not to speculate over what might happen according to the present political circumstances, however given the present political circumstances that is practically impossible to avoid. If we were living and writing in the days of Comparet, we may also have more closely agreed with his interpretations of prophecy.

However unlike many of the other British-Israel offshoots, Howard Rand did not accept the lie that the Jews were Judah, correctly believing them to have been Canaanites or Edomites. William Cameron was just as early, or earlier, and neither did he accept the lie that the Jews were the tribe of Judah. From that point, I do not know the entire story of American Christian Identity between Howard Rand and the later Christian Identity writers and other figures of the 1950’s and 1960’s, such as Gerald L. K. Smith, William Gale, Wesley Swift, Bertrand Comparet, and others, but it is not hard to see the results of how Christian Identity had developed. These later men certainly followed the better path which Rand and Cameron were on, understanding that the Jews were indeed descended from the Edomites, and that all of the Jewish claims concerning their identity are ahistorical lies. While some Jews descended in small part from Judah, the Jews certainly are not of Judah, and now we can explain exactly why that is so, with precise historical and Biblical proof.

More than any of these men, I liked Bertrand Comparet, because he was the most practical, always simply sticking to the Biblical facts as he saw them, in spite of some of his flaws.

But from before the time of Howard Rand, it seems that Christian Identity truths have been revealed to men who subsequently left Roman Catholicism, or their Baptist, Episcopalian, Methodist, Lutheran or other churches, but they all began preaching a variant of Christian Identity which had blended in with their Catholic, Baptist, Episcopalian, Methodist, Lutheran or other doctrines. I see this phenomenon in many contemporary Christian Identity writers, although I won’t go down the list here. Whatever they had been raised with, they never completely shed from their worldview. In addition to that, there are those who still believe that the Jews are Judah, or a portion of Judah, or there are those who believe that the Jews are rejected only because they deny Christ, or because they mixed their race, while others are more correctly persuaded that the Jews are devils. But then, on the other hand, there are so-called Identity Christians who believe that there is no devil, or that there are no devils, and that only the flesh is the devil.

One element which Rand had missed, however, was reaching back further than Canaan or Esau to determine why they and their offspring were rejected, and even cursed by God. The conclusion to that study is what we call Two-Seedline. So there are Identity Christians who are stuck in British-Israelism, and never made it to the next step of revelation, which was Howard Rand. Then there are Identity Christians who made it to Rand, and never got to the next step, which is the level which Swift, Gale and Comparet had attained. However Swift, Gale and Comparet had other shortcomings, such as the ridiculous belief in an 8th-Day Creation, which they used to account for the existence of other races, but which is certainly not true, and that leads us to where we are at Christogenea today.

I have seen Identity Christians on each of these steps who refuse to believe that there can be new revelations of truth. But we never claimed to have new revelations. We only claim to have a slightly better understanding of Scriptures which have been with us from the beginning. Apostolic Christianity was persecuted out of existence in the first century after Christ. The resulting churches were Judaized in their thinking, accepted so-called “Replacement Theology”, and had no concept of the only true theology, which is Covenant Theology. So the Scriptures were always read and translated from a universalist perspective, and we assert that the situation led to many errors of interpretation, some of which were purposeful and blatantly contrary to the meanings of words in the original languages.

It is for only about 170 years that the Scriptures have been read by anyone from a proper Covenant Theology perspective. The only translation ever made from that perspective was Fenton’s, until recently, and Fenton’s translation is flawed because it began with the supposition that Dominion Theology is true, which it is not, and purposely mistranslated certain words and phrases in order to support that supposition. So as a result, out of all of these stopping-points, these different levels of understanding, there is no consistent Christian Identity profession, and some differences have much graver consequences than others.

The worst, by far, are those Identity Christians who would attempt to make Christians out of the other races, even the Jews, like trying to turn pigs into plow oxen or draft horses could ever end in success. Among these are Eli James, Ted Weiland, Charles Weisman, Stephen Jones, James Bruggeman, and many others. Even Pete Peters had a long-running fetish for negros. Some of these call themselves racialists, or merely separatists, while accepting other races and even gifting them with blessings, which is contrary to the admonitions of Scripture. Most of these deny what we call “Two-Seedline”, while others profess to believe it, but they do not really believe it. Some of them really believe in four, six, eight or maybe even ten seedlines, attempting to assign various fates to different races of people, fates which are not found in Scripture.

So what we have in Christian Identity is, basically, a mess. Like the proverbial bowl of spaghetti, the mess is so complex that I know I am not even adequately explaining it here, but I am endeavoring to abbreviate a long story. Basically, at first I had perceived that there are two general camps, which are Two-Seedline deniers who tended towards universalism, and Two-Seedline adherents who are generally opposed to universalism, or so I thought. In addition to these I later found that there are fringe groups, such as the “no devil” people, who are mostly adherents to the work of Sheldon Emry, but they are much smaller in number. Then there are other fringe elements, like the UFO enthusiasts who followed kooks like Noah Fredericks. These fringes we will not discuss here this evening.

After over eleven years of devoting practically all of my time to study and to helping Clifton Emahiser, when I finally got out of prison in December of 2008, Eli James, whose real name I later found out is Joseph November, had invited me to do a podcast. Since I had little else to do at that time, being out of prison for only a couple of days, I was more than happy to comply. Eli was recommended to me by an old friend, Ralph Daigle, who was once and for a long time a fellow-pastor with James Wickstrom in Michigan. After our first podcast, a discussion of part of Paul’s epistle to the Galatians which was also with Pastor Ken Gregg, Eli kept inviting me back and I kept complying, and we ended up working together for just over two years, doing two podcasts a week almost every week. Throughout most of that time, Eli seemed to agree with me on nearly every aspect of the issue of race in Scripture. Every podcast we did together is still posted at an archive at Christogenea, so the assertion is relatively easy to prove. Then something happened which Clifton and I had always suspected may happen, and which Clifton had anticipated would have happened much sooner.

In the later half of 2010, Eli began to vocally disagree with us on the issue of race. Then he began to publish articles misrepresenting our positions as he argued against us. Eventually that forced our split in January of 2011. Some time after we split, I learned that Joseph November was Eli’s real name, when he swore to me some time earlier that it was only an alias. Eli’s early photos did raise suspicions, but because of his profession I was compelled to give him the benefit of the doubt. He certainly looked White in person, but it was years before I learned that he had for a long time had vitiligo, a disease which turns the skin white. If I could have known that, and if I knew his real name before we worked together, we certainly would never have worked together. He still denies that November is his real name, but it is easy to prove because Joseph November owns his car, his house, several other pieces of Eli’s real estate, and he is the father to his daughters Elizabeth and Stephanie November. Joseph November is also listed as the principal owner of his business, which is called “Eli James Publishing”. It is also relatively easy to prove that November is a Jewish name, and not a German name, as Eli also asserted at that time. That leads me to speculate concerning the reasons for Eli’s vocal and hostile departure, as they go beyond his own personal predicament. Around that same time, as I also found out later, his daughter became engaged to marry an Egyptian named David Takla. Also at the same time, his daughter Stephanie had a Chinese boyfriend. All of this is documented at the Forum at Christogenea, in a members-only section, but much of it is also found at a website called Anglo-Saxon Israel, where much of our dispute with Eli is mirrored.

But I am not explaining all of this in order to revive an old dispute. In my mind, I won that dispute nine years ago, and I continue to win it with every podcast I produce even if some people are too stupid to realize that. But rather, I seek only to make manifest the fact that all to often, men look to Scripture in order to justify themselves, and they form doctrines from their own reasoning and circumstances, rather than agreeing with the Scriptures and conforming themselves to Scripture. When they do this, it always causes controversies and contradictions. But when men are comfortable where they are, with their current level of understanding, and they can continue to justify and validate it in their own minds, they will always be reluctant to expend any further effort to seek out a higher truth, and they reject it when they are confronted – especially if it makes them uncomfortable.

When Eli James and I split, he coined a term to describe what both myself and Clifton and had taught from Scriptures concerning the non-Adamic races, and he called us “exterminationists”. Of course, we saw through that as just another manifestation of the typical Bolshevik tactic of dehumanizing and then demonizing one’s enemies, and the Jews are adept at that tactic. That is also what they did to Christ when they exclaimed “He has a devil”, and today they do it to every man who resists Jewish supremacy. But as Eli did that, he also claimed that he was following on the footsteps of Swift and Comparet, two of the most prominent “Two-Seedline” teachers of the past. With that assertion, he also claimed that Clifton and I were hateful and we made innovations justifying our hate, and at least a few people believed him. But it is certainly not true.

While Clifton and I each believe that we have improved on Comparet’s message, we both also believe that Comparet would have agreed with us if we ever could have spoken with him. We are also convinced that concerning what Eli had slandered as “exterminationist”, Comparet also already agreed with, because unlike Eli, we actually read all of Comparet’s sermons. In fact, most of Comparet’s sermons which are posted at our archive at Christogenea were manually digitized by Clifton from facsimiles of Jeanne Snyder’s original transcriptions. So this evening I am going to present this sermon from Bertrand Comparet in order to show that he certainly did agree with us in this regard.

But first, I will make a disclaimer. Comparet did not agree with us on the origin of the non-Adamic races. Rather, he believed in that 8th-Day Creation that we have soundly rejected. While I have not yet attempted a formal commentary on Genesis, which I never even believed I could do without first having finished my ongoing commentary on the New Testament, I did refute the misguided concept of an 8th-Day creation in the opening segments of a series of podcasts I began in October of 2013 titled Pragmatic Genesis. But more importantly, Bertrand Comparet does generally agree with us on the ultimate fate of the non-Adamic races, so the universalists who pretend to Christian Identity, such as Eli James, certainly cannot claim to represent the traditional form of Christian Identity which Comparet exemplifies. This we shall see as we present and discuss Bertrand Comparet’s sermon.

This was taken from Jeanne Snyder’s compilation of Comparet’s sermons found under the title Your Heritage, and digitized for electronic distribution by Clifton A. Emahiser, who added some of his own notes. We shall also include those here.

THE SHEEP AND THE GOATS by Bertrand L. Comparet

Today our newspapers, radio, television, every media of public communications, is turned into a propaganda machine flooding us with Red inspired propaganda against all discrimination. They demand complete integration of all races, first in the cafes and hotels, then in the schools and finally in the churches. They have induced fellow traveler clergymen to preach integration from their pulpits. Though first they denied it, these propagandists now admit that intermarriage and mongrelization of the races is their real purpose. Sometimes they try to justify their activities by preaching false doctrines of a so-called universal brotherhood of man and fatherhood of God.

Here Comparet exhibits a very narrow perspective, where he seems to think that our system is good, and Communism bad, while Jewish bankers were behind the success of both Capitalism and Communism, and both have the same Jewish agenda.

The dawn of Liberalism brought with it concepts such as egalitarianism and the universal brotherhood of man. For over three hundred years now we have been fed these ideals in our propaganda, and in one way or another most all of us have accepted them to some degree. But not long ago, relatively speaking, the other and non-Adamic races were not even considered to be people, and all Christians understood that Jews were devils, even if they understood it only because they believed the gospel of Christ. Most men today do not even realize how deep their own indoctrination is, even when they claim to know better. Comparet is right, in that today many so-called churches do indeed encourage race-mixing as a path to world peace and harmony, and he wrote this at least 40 years ago. Continuing with Comparet, for just a couple of sentences:

Of all satanic false doctrines, this is one of the worst. It is completely contrary to the Bible, which always teaches division and segregation of the races.

Up to this point even Ted Weiland would agree with Comparet. But as he proceeds, here is where they would begin to argue, and for Weiland even to lie about the intent of the Scripture:

Yahshua always said that He had come to divide and separate not to mix everyone together. In Matthew 25:31-33 He says, “And when the Son of man shall come in His glory and all the holy angels with Him, then shall He sit upon the throne of His glory: And before Him shall be gathered all nations: and He shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats; and He shall set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left.”

When I split with Eli James, he also tried to explain this parable away as a judgment of individuals, claiming that even goats had an opportunity to do good, as a superficial reading of the parable suggests. At the time, on February 7th, 2011, I responded with a podcast titled Jeremiah 31: Beasts, Sheep and Goat Nations. When we split several weeks earlier, Eli and I were in the middle of a series discussing Jeremiah, and it was conveniently terminated just before this segment was scheduled. So I subtitled it “The program that Eli James couldn't do.” I do not remember everything I said, since there were no prepared notes and it was all extemporaneous. However here Comparet says a lot of what I would also assert, and he condemns the notion that this represents a judgment of individuals, so we continue:

Note that this is not the judgment of individual persons, it is a division and separation of nations. He goes on to tell how the sheep nations are given the kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world while the goat nations are cast into the fire prepared for the devil and his angels. Who are these nations? A sheep nation can only be a nation made up of sheep and a goat nation one consisting of goats. Therefore, let’s find out who are the sheep?

Now Comparet did not discuss the parable of the sheep and the goats beyond this point. Rather, he went on to discuss the sheep from other perspectives and other scriptures. But it is obvious that he agreed that the sheep and the goats were distinguished by their appearance. A shepherd does not inquire of sheep or goats as to whether they were good or bad, so that a bad sheep may be treated as a goat or a good goat as a sheep. Rather, the shepherd separates the animals by their race, or species, on site, because goats cannot be sheep and sheep can never be goats, regardless of what they do.

When we split Eli James tried to insist that this parable was about the individual behavior of sheep and goats, and twisted it to support universalism, but here we see that Comparet would not have agreed with that.

One other thing that Eli James did not realize, and that Comparet did not mention here, is why the goats were judged and condemned so harshly. Christ told the sheep, at Matthew 25:40, “Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” But then Christ told the goats, at Matthew 25:45: “Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.” So it is clear that the goats are judged not according to how they treated one another, but according to how they treated the sheep, and for that they are all condemned.

One other thing which Comparet had apparently never understood, is our assertion as to why the goats share the same fate as that of “the devil and his angels”, and that is because their origin was with “the devil and his angels”, for which reason in Genesis Yahweh had created only one race of man, the Adamic race, whereas we have all of these other races among us today, which the Revelation describes as the flood from the mouth of the serpent. But Comparet did well in other respects, so we continue:

You who have listened to these lessons for some time, know the Israel of the Bible, Yahweh’s chosen people exist today in the Anglo-Saxon, Scandinavian, Germanic nations, not the Jews. We have proven this many times and need not repeat it here.

Of course, we understand that there are other historically White nations which have also descended in whole or in part from the Israelites of Scripture, beyond those which Comparet mentions here. However his description will suffice for our purposes this evening, so again we continue:

It should not surprise you to learn that Yahweh’s chosen people Israel, constitute the sheep nations, as the Bible says. For example Psalm 100:3, “We are His people and the sheep of His pasture.” Jeremiah 50:6 confirms this. “My people hath been lost sheep: and their shepherds have caused them to go astray.” Ezekiel chapter 34 promises, “Behold I, even I, will both search for My sheep and seek them out. As a shepherd seeketh out his flock in the day that he is among his sheep that are scattered, so will I seek out My sheep and will deliver them out of all places where they have been scattered in the cloudy and dark day. ... And as for you, O My flock, thus saith Yahweh, behold, I judge between cattle and cattle, between the [sheep] rams and the he-goats.”

Evidently Clifton added the word sheep in brackets before the word ram.s Of course, the rams are the males of the flock, so they are also sheep. Reading the Scriptures, from beginning to end it is absolutely clear that in the Word of God the references to sheep describe only the children of Israel, and no others. So Comparet continues:

Fulfilling these words, [the words of Ezekiel chapter 34] Yahshua said this was His mission. In Matthew 15:24 He said, “I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” He taught His disciples this was to be their purpose also. In Matthew 10:5-6 we read, “These twelve Yahshua sent forth and commanded them saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”

While this verse sounds appropriate, I have before explained that prior to Peter’s vision, the apostles would have understood the words of Christ in that passage to be a reference to those of Israel of the circumcision only. Only later, as it is revealed in the epistles of Peter and James, and especially of Paul, did the apostles learn the history and scripture which led them to the “twelve tribes scattered abroad”. Many of the Samaritans and so-called “gentiles” in Palestine at the time had indeed descended from the twelve scattered tribes. Comparet continues to make his case on the difference between sheep and goats, and scores some very excellent points:

A sheep is a sheep by its genetic nature, it’s race, it can’t become a goat by straying away from the flock. The goats run with the flock, but that can’t make sheep out of them, you simply can’t make a sheep out of a goat, and Yahshua never tried to!! As you already know, the Jews are not any part of Israel, and never were. Therefore, Yahshua never tried to make converts of them.

While it is true that the Jews are not truly Judah, nor of any other tribe of Israel, this is somewhat of an over-simplification and therefore it is not entirely accurate. If it is not entirely accurate, some critic may use it to somehow prove that everything we say is wrong. Jews undermined Western Civilization through such criticism, bu publishing voluminous tomes which criticized everything. So we must strive to represent the Bible and Biblical history as accurately as possible.

The Judahites of Jerusalem did forcibly convert the Edomites and other Canaanites to Judaism for the most part, and approximately, between the years 129 BC and 76 BC. But then they began to intermarry with the Edomites, so that some of them can claim to have been descended from Judah. Even the first Herod, who is identified as an Edomite by Josephus, had married into the family of high priests, the Hasmonaeans, by taking to wife Mariamne the daughter of Alexander II, who was high priest when Jerusalem was conquered by the Romans in 63 BC. Herod, in league with the Romans against his wife’s family, eventually eliminated all of them and became king himself. But here, our point is this: by the time of Herod there were no barriers to the intermarriage of Judahites and the supposedly converted Edomites, and it had evidently even become quite common. In that is the origin of the Jews, and in John chapter 8 they denied being children of fornication, while Christ insured them otherwise. So, after accurately professing that Christ had never tried to convert them, Comparet continues and says:

To the contrary, He always taught among them in public using parables which they could not understand, but Yahshua always explained the parables privately to His disciples who were Israelites. He stated His reason for this in Mark 4:11-12, “Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of Yahweh; but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables: that seeing, they may see but not perceive; and hearing, they may hear but not understand: lest at any time they should be converted and their sins be forgiven them.” Accordingly, in John 10:26-28, “But ye believe not, because ye are not of My sheep, as I said unto you. My sheep hear My voice.”

The very fact that there are people “without”, or outside, that there were people who were purposely excluded from Christianity even before the gospel was to be taken to the people, proves Two-Seedline, that there were people whom Christ would never want to convert. Comparet continues:

Yahshua warned all Christians not to try to give the blessings of His kingdom to people who couldn’t understand and appreciate it. In Matthew 7:6 He commanded, “Give not that which is holy unto dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet and turn and rend you”. But, we always have to try and show God how much better we are than He is, so we always violate His commandments.

And this is also absolutely true, as we observe it in the words and actions of Eli James, Ted Weiland, Charles Weisman, that even men who profess to know their Christian Identity will nevertheless make excuses for so-called “people” who are not a part of the Covenants and who have no part with Christ. I have heard ridiculous arguments such as “oh, the Canaanite woman was a dog, but that does not mean that all Canaanites were dogs”, or “… that does not mean the other races are also dogs.” Of course, I am paraphrasing, but where we have wheat and tares, or sheep and goats, or sons and bastards, there are always only two parties, one which is completely destroyed, and the other which is completely saved, and there is never a third, neutral category. Yet many of these Christian Identity so-called pastors, such as Eli James, are always trying to create a third category on their own.

But Christ had said, as it is in Matthew chapter 13, that “38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; 39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.” And even if we understand that word world to be society, as we also assert, then we must understand that wherever we have brought our society, that is become a part of our world. So Yahweh said in Jeremiah, on two occasions, in chapters 30 and 45, but here from chapter 45: “28 Fear thou not, O Jacob my servant, saith the LORD: for I am with thee; for I will make a full end of all the nations whither I have driven thee: but I will not make a full end of thee, but correct thee in measure; yet will I not leave thee wholly unpunished.” With this understanding we may be able to see how Comparet certainly does agree with our position on the issue of race, as he continues and says:

The pearls Yahweh has given us are freedom, wealth and power. We cast them before the jungle savages of the Congo and the murderous hordes of China. As He warned us, they trample our gifts in the mud of their evil desires, then turn upon us to destroy us. We give that which is holy, our Christian religion, which the savages can no more understand than they can astronomical mathematics, to those whom Yahshua calls dogs and the natural, inevitable result is the many Christian missionaries in China, who are already murdered or slowly dying in prison. Many Christian missionaries are fleeing the Congo to escape being eaten.

This is actually recorded as having happened on far more than one occasion. Comparet passed in 1983, but I am certain he would have been entertained by an August, 2007 article in the British newspaper, The Telegraph, which was titled Cannibal tribe apologises for eating Methodists. One line of the article reads: “A tribe in Papua New Guinea has apologised for killing and eating four 19th century missionaries under the command of a doughty British clergyman.” Earlier, in November of 2003, another British newspaper, The Guardian, ran a similar article titled Fijians apologise for eaten missionary. It opens by saying “Fijian villagers wept yesterday as they apologised to descendants of a British missionary who was eaten by their ancestors more than 130 years ago.” A brief survey of Google results for the words “missionaries eaten cannibals” reveals that missionaries have been eaten by South Pacific islanders, Southeast Asians, Africans, Mexicans and South Americans. So the problem, and the inherent character which these tribes exhibit, is far-reaching among non-White races. If any of these tribes have “apologized” it is only under the compulsion of the more powerful Western civilization which has attempted to change that inherent character. But once they are left to their own devices, as we now observe in many Western cities, they quickly revert to their natural behavior. We cannot change goats into sheep. So Comparet again continues:

Do you think that we were supposed to convert all the world? Men have said that, but Yahweh said the exact opposite. In John 17:9 Yahshua said, “I pray not for the world, but for them which Thou hast given Me; for they are Thine. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.” In John 6:35 Yahshua said that He Himself is the bread of life. But in Matthew 15:22-28 when the Syrophoenician woman asked His help as Son of David, the head of Yahweh’s people Israel, He refused. He told her it was not right to take the children’s bread and cast it to dogs. Not until she recognized that she could not approach Him as one of His people and said, “Yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their master’s table”, did He then grant her request.

This situation is even more complex, as one must understand the customs of noblemen and suppliants at that time, and that Christ was following the custom of honoring the suppliant, which was quite ancient. We have discussed this several times, but mostly fully in an August, 2013 presentation titled The Canaanite Woman: The Biblical Perspective. Significantly, the fact that Christ healed the woman’s daughter does not mean that Canaanites or other races may be redeemed or saved, however if we did not have this episode then we would not have had an illustration of the important racial message which it contains. So certainly even this was within the Provenance of God, for which to further explain His purpose. Continuing with Comparet:

The blessings of peace, good government, education, sanitation and good health, prosperity, in short, civilization, these can be given to those who are of other races. It is not to be given to those who would seize it for themselves saying, “We are just as much sheep as you are. We make ourselves sheep by saying so.” No, they must recognize Yahweh’s own order of things. He gives His commandments and His instructions on how to obtain His blessings, to His people Israel. We are to obey His commandments and demonstrate to the world how obedience to Him has made us the have nations, compared to the pagan have not nations. If they will come to us for instruction in His laws, we who are His witnesses will instruct them and they can grow into civilizations as far and as fast as they will obey.

There is nothing in Scripture that informs us that the law was to be given to other races, or even that other races in their nations would be forced to obey the law. David himself, in the 147th Psalm, had rejoiced that the law was given only to Israel, and that Yahweh had not given it to other nations. So to an extent, Comparet believed in Dominion Theology, but at least he also knew that it was destined to fail, for reasons we shall explain later.

While we generally agreed with Comparet up to that last paragraph, here we must sharply disagree. While Comparet’s final conclusion is correct, that all the goat nations ultimately go into the Lake of Fire, the fact that other races have benefitted from us has always been an aspect of our punishment. They always come to rule over us when we share our blessings with them, and this is also an aspect of the blessings of obedience and the curses of disobedience found in the books of the law, in both Leviticus and Deuteronomy. Comparet is using the discourse between Christ and the Canaanite woman to create a doctrine, but it is not a fit doctrine, as it conflicts with other Scriptures.

First, the children of Israel were punished for free trade with other nations, as we read in Hosea chapter 2: “5 For their mother hath played the harlot: she that conceived them hath done shamefully: for she said, I will go after my lovers, that give me my bread and my water, my wool and my flax, mine oil and my drink.” Yahweh had commanded the children of Israel to be a separate people, and that command still stands. But Yahweh knew that the opposite would happen, so in that same place, where it was prophesied that they would realize their error and return to God in Christ, we read: “7 And she shall follow after her lovers, but she shall not overtake them; and she shall seek them, but shall not find them: then shall she say, I will go and return to my first husband; for then was it better with me than now. 8 For she did not know that I gave her corn, and wine, and oil, and multiplied her silver and gold, which they prepared for Baal.” Trading with non-Adamic, non-Israelite nations, we benefit them, and therefore we benefit their gods. But rather than benefit ourselves, we debase ourselves with the vile practices we pick up from the aliens, ands we were also warned of that in Scripture.

Then, where it is even speaking of other Adamic nations, the children of Israel were told in Isaiah chapter 60 that in their captivity: “9 Surely the isles shall wait for me, and the ships of Tarshish first, to bring thy sons from far, their silver and their gold with them, unto the name of the LORD thy God, and to the Holy One of Israel, because he hath glorified thee. 10 And the sons of strangers shall build up thy walls, and their kings shall minister unto thee: for in my wrath I smote thee, but in my favour have I had mercy on thee. 11 Therefore thy gates shall be open continually; they shall not be shut day nor night; that men may bring unto thee the forces of the Gentiles, and that their kings may be brought. 12 For the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish; yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted. [The goats are judged because they did not care for the sheep.] 13 The glory of Lebanon shall come unto thee, the fir tree, the pine tree, and the box together, to beautify the place of my sanctuary; and I will make the place of my feet glorious. 14 The sons also of them that afflicted thee shall come bending unto thee; and all they that despised thee shall bow themselves down at the soles of thy feet; and they shall call thee, The city of the LORD, The Zion of the Holy One of Israel. 15 Whereas thou hast been forsaken and hated, so that no man went through thee, I will make thee an eternal excellency, a joy of many generations. 16 Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Gentiles [Nations], and shalt suck the breast of kings: and thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob. 17 For brass I will bring gold, and for iron I will bring silver, and for wood brass, and for stones iron: I will also make thy officers peace, and thine exactors righteousness.” Then in Isaiah chapter 61: “6 But ye shall be named the Priests of the LORD: men shall call you the Ministers of our God: ye shall eat the riches of the Gentiles [Nations], and in their glory shall ye boast yourselves.”

With this it should be evident, that the children of Israel scattered broad should rightfully have been enslaving all other people, as the early Germanic tribes had done, and taking whatever belongs to them for their own. Then, those nations who would not serve them should have been killed. That is the commission in Isaiah, and once again we failed to live up to it, but ultimately it shall be completed in Christ. As he continues, however, Comparet does have the correct conclusion:

Russia and China have taken only our manufacturing technology, not our religion or our ideals. They have learned to make tanks, cannon, bombs and bayonets, but the brutal, tyrannical horror they have in their lands is not civilization by any standard. Goats cannot become sheep!

Comparet, a product of the Cold War, was a little hard on Russia. Originally, at least in the late Medieval period and into modern times, Russia was a great Christian nation comprised of mostly Germanic and Slavic tribes, which had become an empire ruling over people of many other races. Then Communism practically eradicated public expressions of Christianity in Russia, but that does not mean that all of the people ceased to be Christians. There certainly were White Christians in Russia as Comparet wrote, although they were a minority of all who came to be called “Russian”. Now continuing with Comparet:

Yahweh’s truth is eternal, it never changes with the times and fashions. His word is still true today, as He told the prophet in Amos 3:2, “You only have I known of all the families of the earth.” It is still true as Isaiah 63:17-19 says, “Oh Yahweh, why hast thou made us to err from thy ways and hardened our hearts from Thy fear: Return, for Thy servant’s sake, the tribes of Thy inheritance. The people of Thy holiness have possessed it but a little while. Our adversaries have trodden down Thy sanctuary. We are Thine: Thou never barest rule over them: they were not called by Thy name.”

Here Comparet is in conflict with himself, as he knew that Yahweh would never rule over the other races, yet earlier he expressed the concept that the other races would be blessed if they allowed the children of Israel to rule over them. Ultimately, his understanding does agree with our position, as he moves towards his conclusion:

Do you think this will ever change? No, for in the book of Revelation, Yahweh has given us a picture of the New Jerusalem, the eternal city of Yahweh, coming into existence to last forever. This is after the millennium and He says in Revelation 21:12 this city is surrounded by “a wall great and high and 12 gates, and names written thereon which are the names of the 12 tribes of the children of Israel.” There is only one way to enter into that city, it is to go in through a gate and the only gates are the 12 tribes of Israel. We are told in Revelation 22:14, “Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.”

Comparet was a bit of a futurist in that he thought the thousand-year rule of Christ, the so-called millennium, was still in the future. But the insertion of a line into Revelation 20:5 forces one to make that conclusion, so it wasn’t entirely his fault, as he never really studied the original Greek manuscripts. If he had, he may have also realized that the line concerning the resurrection of the dead was not original, and that the millennium was already in the past. This is one thing which distinguishes my own work from that of Comparet, or even of Clifton Emahiser.

This is the source of his mistake where he thought perhaps the other races would be blessed if they accept the rule of the children of Israel. In Revelation 20:5 there is a line which causes one to believe that Christ would rule over all races in a future millennium, after a partial resurrection of the dead, where it says “But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.” That line iu not found in the oldest manuscripts, and is not original to John’s writing. But after that, there is a thousand-year rule of Christ, and then Satan comes out of the pit to gather all nations against the Camp of the Saints. So Comparet, accepting the veracity of that line because he never studied the original manuscripts, was misled and forced to the position which he espoused. He imagined that Jesus, after a resurrection of the dead, would rule over all nations for a thousand years and then somehow fail, because Satan would be able to gather all nations against His rule. That is not true. Once the spurious line is removed, all the pieces fall into place and the veracity of a historical interpretation of the chapter becomes evident.

Now Comparet correctly concludes:

Don’t apologize for being one of Yahweh’s sheep, a citizen of a sheep nation. Be proud of it, be worthy of it and walk, rejoicing in your destiny.

And of course, we do not have to apologize. All we have to do is realize that if our birth was from above, meaning that we were born of the Adamic race created by God, then our destiny is in His Kingdom, and we can never change that for ourselves. But if one is not of the Adamic race, he has no such future in the Kingdom of God, and nothing he does can ever change that.

Now Clifton has a few notes, which we saved for the end:

Critical note by Clifton A. Emahiser:

Comparet did a much better job with this presentation by putting the other races in their proper place, which is no place at all. When he said: “Goats cannot become sheep!”, he was right on target. Comparet rightly quoted Amos 3:2, “You only have I known of all the families of the earth.” Comparet could have reinforced this passage by quoting Daniel 2:44 which says: “And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.” The German tribes, who were the good-figs of Judah, fulfilled Daniel’s prophecy here. If the true Israelites are the only people “known” by Yahweh, and “the kingdom shall not be left to other people”, how can anyone attempt to include the other races in the Kingdom? How can a member of a goat race accept Yahshua Christ as their personal savior? There is absolutely no way a goat can accept Yahshua Christ as a kinsman redeemer for a goat is not a kinsman!

Although Comparet did well with this theme, he did an about-face when he said: “The blessings of peace, good government, education, sanitation, good health, prosperity, and civilization, can be given to those who are of other races”, and secondly, “If they will come to us for instruction in His laws, we who are His witnesses will instruct them and they can grow into civilizations as far and as fast as they will obey.” Question: If we do all this for the other races, is this not casting our pearls before swine? Has not history proven all of this to be a futile effort?!

As I have said, neither Clifton nor I have ever pretended to be pronouncing “new revelations”. We have only given further study to what was already there, to what has always been there, and properly, new revelation only comes from deeper study of the original source materials from a better perspective. That better perspective was originally attained by the archaeologists of the 18th and 19th centuries who had discovered the monuments and inscriptions which enabled Bible students in Europe to realize the truth of their Christian Identity. However they only patched that understanding over their old Judaized forms of denominational Christianity. Now, a hundred and seventy years later, and with the gift of their perspective, we have been able to study the Scriptures much deeper than our predecessors were able to do, and that better perspective has indeed given us a much greater understanding. But we were only able to do what things we have done upon the foundation of Covenant Theology, without all of the baggage of universalist church doctrines, so we have indeed arrived at conclusions which even Comparet did not have. However these are not innovations, they are all documented in Scripture, and in spite of the things he did not have, Comparet certainly did agree with our final conclusion. The goats cannot ever become sheep, the sheep all go into the Kingdom of God without exception, and the goats all go to “the fire prepared for the devil and his angels”, without exception.

We don’t want to mock our fellow sheep when they do not understand these things, but rather, we pray that they do eventually choose to investigate and understand them. As for the wolves in sheep’s clothing who have seen these things and refuse to accept them, who instead choose to contend with the Word of God, they deserve to be mocked. Rather, Identity Christians must understand that British-Israel, Howard Rand, and even Capt, Swift, Comparet and all the others were only stepping-stones on the path to a better understanding. But that better understanding can only come from studying the Scriptures from their original languages, because all prior translations were made from the perspective of Replacement Theology, and from continuing the work begun by Rand and Comparet, which is to put the Scriptures, translated as clearly as possible, into their proper historical context. That has been our sole endeavor these past twenty years, and while we may not be perfect, Yahweh willing we shall improve that path and repair or remove all the loose and broken stones for those who follow after.


CHR20200228-Sheep-Goats-Comparet.odt — Downloaded 24 times
The_Sheep_and_the_Goats.mp3 — Downloaded 60 times