[CFT: We are republishing this article with editorial updates that improve ease of reading, citations, and organization.]
Here we will take a look at another chapter from Charles A. Wiseman’s book, Is Universalism Of God? — this time addressing the actual meaning of “strangers” in the Bible — a term that universalists often cherry pick and exploit to suit their non-scriptural egalitarian agenda, all the while ignoring the original Hebrew words from which it is translated into English — along with its often-nuanced original context.
[CFT: We previously published another chapter from Wiseman’s same book on the problematic nature of the Great Commission as promoted by universalists.]
Wiseman writes:
The Strangers In The Bible
Egalitarians and Universalists use several arguments and doctrines in which they use the term “strangers” to mean “races other than Israel.”
However, there are actually several different Hebrew words that are translated as “stranger.” — listed here by their Strong’s numbers, pronunciations, general definitions, and references:
#1616 geyr — a guest, a foreigner, alien sojourner (Gen. 23:4; Ex. 2:22 & 20:10; Lev. 17:12; Deut. 10:19).
#2114 zuwr (zoor) — to turn aside, a foreigner to the land, profane, from adultery, honor as a visitor or guest, a stranger to the family or household (Deut. 25:5; 1 Kings 3:18; Job 19:15; Prov. 6:1 & 20:16
#5235 noker (no-ker) — something strange, calamity, a strange or unhappy fate, one who has a misfortune (Gen. 17:12, 17:27; Ex. 12:43; Ob. 1:12)
#5236 nekar (nay-kawr) — foreignness, heathendom, alien, strange gods (Deut. 31:16 & 32:12; 2 Sam. 22:45; Neh. 9:2 & 13:30; Psa. 18:44; Isa. 62:8; Ezek. 44:7 & 9; Mal. 2:11)
#5237 nokriy (nok-ree) — strange, foreign, foreigner from a far land, non-relative, different, a non-Israelite people (Deut. 15:3, 17:15, 23:20, 29:22; Judges 19:12; 1 Kings 8:4 & 11:1; Ezra 10:2; Neh. 13:27)
#8453 toshab (to-shawb) — a sojourner, as distinguished from a native citizen, an emigrant (Ex. 12:45; Lev. 22:10, 25:23, 35:47; Psa. 39:12)
As it can be seen, there are several different Hebrew words which have been translated into the one English word “stranger.”
The egalitarians and universalists who use certain verses involving the word “stranger” never, of course, specify which word is being used to prove their doctrine.
They also diligently avoid other verses that use the term “stranger” which clearly show persons who are separate from — or unequal with — God’s people.
The assumption that the term “stranger” must mean someone of another race is in itself rather bizarre since the term never carries that meaning in the English language. When we meet someone we don’t know, we might say, “How’s it going, stranger?” The term simply means someone you do not know.
The identity and status of the “strangers” in the Bible cannot be interpreted by assumption or by a universal application of one definition.
We need to determine which word is being used — and the context in which it is used — in order to determine the person’s identity and relationship to Israel.
Further, we cannot have interpretations which are inconsistent with established biblical doctrines or principles or laws of God.
As we will see, a “stranger” can be one from another family, city, tribe, nation, or race.
The first use of the term stranger in the Bible is in Genesis 15:13, where Abraham was told that his descendants would be strangers in the land of Egypt.
Geyr
The word stranger in this verse is Strong’s #1616 (geyr) — and simply means that the Israelites would be foreigners of the nature of a guest — at least that is what they were in the beginning:
“God said to Abram, “Know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, where they will be enslaved and oppressed four hundred years. This laid the foundation for the law.”
—Genesis 15:13
And again in:
“Thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian; because thou wast a stranger in his land.”
–Deuteronomy 23:7
Here the word stranger is again Strong’s #1616 (geyr) — implying a visitor or guest, or someone traveling through the land.
A geyr in Israel had certain rights and obligations to abide by the laws in the land:
In Ezekiel 47:22, where the land is being divided among the tribes of Israel, it is said that:
“The strangers (geyr) that sojourn among you, which shall beget children among you; they shall be unto you as born in the country among the children of Israel; they shall have inheritance with you among the tribes of Israel.”
The geyr (visitor) here is like the Israelites being a geyr in Egypt — where they came among those of their own race and those they married, as with Joseph’s wife (Genesis 41:40), who became members of the house of Israel.
There are well-known examples of pure Adamic individuals who were not Israelites — but by marriage they or their children became members of the Covenant people; such as with Moses marrying a Midianite (Exodus 2:16-22).
It is interesting to note that the geyr stranger is often contrasted with the nokriy (#5237) stranger — as in Deuteronomy 14:21 where both terms are used but treated differently:
“You shall not eat of any thing that dies of itself: thou shalt give it unto the stranger (geyr) that is in thy gates, that he may eat it; or you may sell it to an alien (nokriy): for thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God.”
—Deuteronomy 14:21
Those who were strangers (geyr) or travelers were to be treated with more respect because the food had to be given to them, whereas it could be sold to the alien (nokriy).
Nokriy in the above context of Deuteronomy 14:21 could mean one who is of another family, or another tribe, country or race, with a strong distinction implied — generally denoting one who is outside a certain group.
Rachel and Leah said that they were considered strangers (nokriy) by their father because “he has sold us” (Genesis 31:15). They were now outside their father’s household since they were part of Jacob’s house.
One who was very much separated or alienated from his kindred or household may be regarded as a nokriy by them (Job 19:15).
As David said in a time of distress,
“I have become an alien (nokriy) to my mother’s children”
—Psalms 69:8
This describes a difference in mind and attitude between the parties involved — not a difference in race or national origin.
Nokriy
The term “stranger” is also used to describe those outside the Hebrew race:
“Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother.”
—Deuteronomy 17:15
Here the word “stranger” is Strong’s #5237 (nokriy), which clearly means a non-Israelite or one outside the Hebrew race — for the “stranger” is one who is not “from among thy brethren.”
This type of “stranger” is outside the scope or body of people that could be called “thy brethren” — and for Israelites he is not just one who is a foreigner, but one who is foreign to their own people or race.
Since the king or ruler is chosen of God, it is God who desires this racial qualification. If we apply this same principle to America, we should not have any black, Oriental, Mexican or Jews in government or political positions.
The reason for this would be the same as it was for the Israel people — that those of other races would “introduce strange customs or usages.” [see Matthew Henry, Commentary on the Whole Bible, p.190.]
[CFT Note: Weisman’s use of the word “race” here introduces some unnecessary confusion — as the Israelites and the Genesis 10 nations were racially identical — as Genesis 5:1 tells us, “This is the book of the generations (genealogy) of Adam. In the day that God created Adam in His own likeness.“
A better word choice here for Weisman would be “ethnicity” rather than race — for example, the Norwegians and the French are the same race but different ethnicities.]
The Israelites were repeatedly warned of how other races would lead them away from God:
Exodus 34:13-14
Upon completion of the Temple, Solomon prayed to God on a variety of things including that if a foreigner (nokriy) — one not of Israel — shall come to pray at the Temple, that God should hear his prayer and do what the foreigner asks:
1 Kings 8:41-43
2 Chronicles 6:32 & 33
However, God never responded to this request as He did to other aspects of Solomon’s prayer.
In fact, allowing foreigners who are not kindred to the Israel people in the land was Solomon’s undoing:
“Solomon loved many strange (nokriy) women” [including Moabites, Edomites, Hittites and Canaanites]
—1 Kings 11:1-2
[CFT Note: Originally the Moabites, Edomites, Hittites and Canaanites would have been unmixed Adamites — and therefore of the same “race”. That over time these tribes became mixed is clear — for example, Joseph married an Egyptian woman at a time when the Egyptians were still unmixed Adamic — but just look at the Egyptians today — not the same race.
For more on this subject, see our essay:
Ruth Was A Moabite — But Does It Even Matter?
Solomon’s lust for foreign women angered God and it caused Solomon to sin. This same problem occurred in the days of Ezra, when some of the priests and people had taken strange (nokriy) wives:
These marriages to non-Israelites again caused idolatry in the land. This problem was well known — and it became to ask God to keep one from the flattering (convincing) tongue of a strange (nokriy) woman:
So generally nokriy is contrasted with Israel as a race:
“We will not turn aside hither into the city of a stranger (nohriy), that is not of the children of Israel; we will pass over to Gibeah.”
—Judges 19:12
To the Hebrews the nokriy was regarded as a lower status being who was not to be treated equally with an Israelite — thus, every seven years an Israelite was to cancel the debts of his “neighbor, or of his brother,” but could reinstate the debt on a foreigner or nokriy (Deuteronomy 15:1-3).
Also,
“…to a stranger (nokriy) you may lend upon usury; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury.”
—Deuteronomy 23:20
[CFT Note: Just because the Israelites regarded a nokriy as a lower status person doesn’t mean they were, therefore, necessarily non-Adamic.
Any people who practiced paganism would have been considered “lower status by the Israelites — and that includes, for example, the Israelites of the lost ten northern tribes — which is why the Judean Israelites saw them as low-status “dogs.”
For more on this subject see our essay:
Evidence That The ‘Canaanite’ Woman In Matthew 15 And Mark 7 Was An Israelite]
Nekar
A term closely related to nokriy is nekar (Strong’s #5236), which generally means “foreign” and is used in reference to “strange (nekar) gods,” as being those gods of other nations or foreign to the Israel people:
That which came from the hand of a nekar could not be offered to God:
“Neither you nor a foreigner shall present food to your God from any such animal. They will not be accepted on your behalf, because they are deformed and flawed.”
—Leviticus 22:25
The nekar are not circumcised in heart:
“In addition to all your other abominations, you brought in foreigners uncircumcised in both heart and flesh to occupy My sanctuary; you defiled My temple when you offered My food—the fat and the blood; you broke My covenant.”
—Ezekiel 44:7
These “foreigners” (nekar) are described as Canaanites and Philistines:
“And the LORD said to Moses, “You will soon rest with your fathers, and these people will rise up and prostitute themselves with the foreign gods of the land they are entering. They will forsake Me and break the covenant I have made with them.”
—Deuteronomy 31:16
In Isaiah 60 to 62 — which deals with Israel’s glory after her affliction and the Good News of Salvation — the nekar are not made equal with Israel, but rather are in submission to Israel and have become their servants:
“The sons of strangers (nekar) shall build up thy walls, and their kings shall minister unto thee.”
And the sons of the alien (nekar) shall be your plowmen and your vinedressers (Isa. 61:5).
—Isaiah 61:5
And the sons of the stranger (nekar) shall not drink your wine, for which you have labored.”
—Isaiah 62:8
Zuwr
Another word translated as “stranger” is the word zuwr (Strong’s #2114), which is used in a rather general sense to mean an outsider — thus one who is outside the Levitical or Aaronic priesthood is a stranger or zuwr:
Numbers 3:10 & 3
Speaking on Leviticus 22:10, one commentator states the following:
“There shall no stranger eat of the holy thing. The portion of he sacrifices assigned for the support of the officiating priests was restricted to the exclusive use of his own family. A temporary guest or a hired servant was not at liberty to eat of them. The interdict is repeated (v. 13) to show its stringency. All the Hebrews — even the nearest neighbors of the priest, except the members of his family — were considered strangers in this respect — that they had no right to eat of things offered at the altar.”
–Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, Commentary on the Bible, Vol. I, p. 89
A zuwr here is an outsider or layman,
“…i.e. , one not a priest, nor a member of a priest’s family, even though he be an Israelite — see Exodus 29:33.”
–J.R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible, 1960, p. 98.
It is also recorded that if a priest’s daughter is
“…married unto a stranger (zuwr), she may not eat of an offering.”
—Leviticus 22:12
So if she was married to a man, say, from the tribe of Manassah, he would be a zuwr (stranger) despite being an Israelite — or one who is outside the Levitical tribe.
Likewise, children of another household than God’s are zuwr:
“Against YHWH they dealt treacherously, For they have begotten strange sons, Now a month consumes them [with] their portions.”
—Hosea 5:7
Zuwr are also in antithesis to Israel:
Zuwr could be used as one who is outside a family:
“When brethren dwell together, and one of them hath died, and hath no son, the wife of the dead is not without to a strange man; her husband’s brother doth go in unto her, and hath taken her to him for a wife, and doth perform the duty of her husband’s brother.”
—Deuteronomy 25:5
And zuwr can also describe someone outside those living in a house:
Or even a friend:
“My son! if thou hast been surety for thy friend, Hast stricken for a stranger thy hand.”
—Proverbs 6:1
One can even be a stranger (zuwr) to his own brethren:
“A stranger I have been to my brother, and a foreigner to sons of my mother.”
—Psalms 69:8
The term zuwr is also sometimes translated as “estranged” to show a separateness or removal from something:
Conclusion
There is nothing in regards to the term “stranger” in the Old Testament that shows that other races are placed on an equal footing with Israel — or are brought into the covenant relationship with God.
In fact, there are many passages demonstrating that Israel is to be delivered from non-Israelites:
“To deliver thee from the strange woman, From the stranger who hath made smooth her sayings.”
—Proverbs 2:16
“And ye have known that I am YHWH your God, Dwelling in Zion, My holy mountain, And Jerusalem hath been holy, And strangers do not pass over into it again.”
—Joel 3:17
This breakdown of the word ‘stranger’ is spot on. So many people twist biblical concepts for their own agenda, but when you dive into the original meanings, it shifts the whole narrative. If you’re curious about some fun distractions while pondering these deep topics, check out this game: Snow Rider 3D.
The Swedes and other Scandinavians are the descendants of the ancient Israelites not the britbongs.
Jesus was a Jew…. Yes or no?
Who’s Who in Jewry books list for anyone interested,I didn’t know King Canute banished the Jews?
The Jewish year book 2015 List of UK Jews and Organisations.
https://odysee.com/@louismarschalko:2/The-Jewish-year-book-2015-List-of-UK-Jewsand-Organisations.:a
King Canute banishes the Jews from England.
William the Conqueror brings Jews from Rouen
Settlement of Jews in Oxford.
Attacks on Jews in Eastern Counties.
Birth of Rabbi Moses Maimonides.
Massacre of Jews in Cliffords Tower, York.
Jews of Norwich accused of ritual murder.
Jews of Lincoln accused of ritual murder.
Who’s Who in World Jewry a biographical dictionary 1987
https://odysee.com/@louismarschalko:2/Who's-who-in-world-Jewry-_-a-biographical-dictionary-1987:8
Who’s Who In American Jewry 1928
https://odysee.com/@louismarschalko:2/whoswhoinamericanjewry1928:3
Whos Who in World Jewry 1955
https://odysee.com/@louismarschalko:2/whoswhoinworldjewry1955:2
New World Jewry, 1493-1825 requiem for the forgotten Seymour B. Liebman New York 1982
https://odysee.com/@louismarschalko:2/New-World-Jewry-1493-1825-requiem-for-the-forgotten-Seymour-bLiebman:e
American Jewry – The Tercentenary and After, 1694-1954 Eugene Kohn 1955
https://odysee.com/@louismarschalko:2/American-Jewry_-The-Tercentenary-and-After,-1694-1954-Eugene-Kohn-1955:a
May 7, 1934, Stalin created the Jewish state of Birobidjan (or Birobidzhan) in Russia. Birobidjan was the first territorial-administrative entity in the world designated for the Jewish people on the basis of their Jewish nationality. It was located on the border of Russia and China.
Stalin is the perfect example of how Jewish Christianity and Communism work together. He officially reopened the Orthodox Church to build a propaganda base to enforce the Soviet State during the war. They simply put KGB agents in the top ranks of the Clergy. The old churches and clergy where liquidated for being a pro-czarist element along with millions of normal people, nothing else. The church minted thousands of icons depicting Stalin as a saint.
https://odysee.com/@louismarschalko:2/Millions-of-Jews-Shipped-to-BirobidjanRussiaPutin-Letter:a
December 5, 1939.- The expulsion of Jews into Russian territory, in partic-ular, did not proceed as smoothly as had apparently been expected. In practice, the procedure was, for example, that at a quiet place in the woods, a thousand Jews were expelled across the Russian border ; 15 kilometers away, they came back, with the Russian commander trying to force the German one to readmit the group.
https://odysee.com/@louismarschalko:2/2015.499061.nazi-soviet-relations:5
The Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry Walter N. Sanning, A.R.Butz, Germar Rudolf Holocaust handbooks series, volume 29
https://odysee.com/@louismarschalko:2/TheDissolutionofEasternEuropeanJewryWalterNSanningARButzGermarRudolfHolocausthandbooksseries,volume29:a
Statistics of the Evacuation of Jews from the Reich March 23rd 1943 ,1.45 million East to Russia from Eastern provinces.
https://odysee.com/@louismarschalko:2/www-yadvashem-org-about_holocaust-documents:b
Not like the other Jewz
The JWO FILE Jew World Order https://odysee.com/@louismarschalko:2/JWO-March-2025:2
https://i.imgur.com/QFEXJdz.jpeg
Jake G
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xd-5e72KWUg&list=PLD4Acl4MFwCauRU4ix0Rdyn3sP7o1iFsm
How did Adam and Eves children procreate withough committing incest?
I know they had atleast 3 sons Cain, Abel and Seth but also other children.
After watching Jesse Lee Peterson on a Hodgetwins video and a Roseanne video he seems to be living Luke 17 verse 21. And watching Larry Elders on a Jesse Lee Peterson video he seems more Republican than most. I’m not red or blue but white. Maybe dogs do get crumbs from their masters table. It seems that black people can crawl out of the swamp too. Jesse Lee Peterson knows he wouldn’t be who he is without being born in a white America. He loves to say he loves white people and that white people need to have more white babies.
This thread is wild. The whole Christian Identity thing is bizarre. Its one thing to have unique interpretations, but saying non-whites arent even human is just, I dont know, crazy. And the whole strangers debate is interesting, but using biblical passages to justify racism is twisting things. Its like, sure, the Bible talks about separation, but to say only Adamites are the real humans and the rest are lesser beings is just, again, out there. Its sad that people get so caught up in these racial theories that they lose sight of the real issues.
football bros,
You epitomize the reality of society of not only a heavily indoctrinated population, but one completely incapable of any form of critical thinking.
“Its one thing to have unique interpretations, but saying non-whites arent even human is just, I dont know, crazy.” – actually what’s even more crazy is to call Adamic man human. The reality is all non Adamites are human but NOT Adamic. I have come to find that there are three beings on this earth – Adamic, Man and Human. There’s no point in me going deeper into this conversation as it would be completely wasted on you. You, however, have your football, your TV, your entertainment after all don’t you?
“but using biblical passages to justify racism is twisting things.” I suggest reading Christians for Truth’s article – A Christian Response To ’10 Reasons Why Racism Is A Sin’ By The Gospel Coalition
Racism is a social construct. It was created for one reason and one reason only – to control. Trotsky coined the word, to justify communist takeover of countries (read Jewish usurpation.
If you wish you educate yourself, read what has been written on this website. If you choose not to, then by all means, continue wallowing in your ignorance. It’s really no loss, as Adam’s descendants need critical thinker, not football bros.
— football bros —
Do you honestly believe you just made a convincing argument???
Are you bored? You shouldn’t be. There are plenty of foosball games to watch on tv these days.
Um, this stuff IS the real issue. The rest comes thru this.
[and not all would say non Adamic people arent “human+ – which is open to interpretation -, just not the same as Adamic folk. A different kind of bipedal humanoid if you will.] And not all that appear human are tho, for sure.]
Real issues….such as…..American football????
Football bros
Even if the pre-Adamic idea was a mistake, I believe that white people are better off without Black and Brown people around. They are sick, with the mentality that they have the right to parasitize and oppress people and groups that are socioeconomically better than them.
Even as a teenager, I thought this way before reflecting and seeing how wrong it is. They are also dishonest with vulnerable people. My sick mother has some properties that she rents out, and, if my father and I are not present, all the Brown and Black tenants are late with the rent. The only exceptions are the white tenants.
They also like to make excuses to deny the obvious. A quick look at the comments on YouTube, and you will see that they are denying that the murderer of the Ukrainian girl was racially motivated and that he was just mentally ill. I could write a book with over 1,000 non-religious reasons why Black and Brown people should not immigrate, not only to Western countries but also to safe non-Adamic nations like Japan, and, just making it clear, that all their flaws are not those of a minority of them, and, in fact, as a Brown person who has extensive experience with my people, I would say that 95% of them are like this
This IS a real issue. The core of issues in fact.
Just keep drinkin the Kool aid bro…
“The Hidden Hand: Unraveling the Rothschilds & Israel” [EXCERPTS]
“Rothschilds are not Jewish but Babylonian Rādhānites (Turkic, Persian, Khazarian, Sogdian, Chinese).
The Rādhānites are an ancient merchant-banker group that controlled the banking and commerce of the Silk Road trade of the Babylonian Empire among China, Europe, and North Africa, extending all the way to Iceland.
The Babylonian Rādhānite people-group originated in Kish around 5300-4300 BC, initiating practices of usury (debt slavery), human slavery, and sacrifice of the innocents. They ran the banking, tax collection, government, commerce, public works, and law of Babylon/Baghdad.
They were identified as Rādhānites ca. 800 AD from their geographic location being a wealthy southeastern suburb of Baghdad named Rādhān between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. There they ran the Silk Road settlement banks—as they had done for millennia. Earlier they were identified in history from the extensive banking archives of the Egibi and Murašû families ca. 600 BC. who some historians even call “the Rothschilds of Babylon.” They have identified as “Jews” for four millennia, but were in fact an admixture of Silk Road people groups (i.e., Turkic, Khazarian, Persian, Sogdian, Chinese, even Indian).
These non-Jewish merchant-bankers were so deceptive that St. John the Revelator actually called them out in Revelation 2:9 (to the Church in Smyrna): “I know about the slander of those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan.” St. John also called them out in Revelation 3:9 (to the Church in Philadelphia): “I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars—I will make them’ come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you.”
Notably, the cities he references are Smyrna and Philadelphia two cities along the Silk Road to the seaport at Smyrna where goods were onboarded and taken to Italy, Spain, North Africa, France, Britain, and the rest of Northern Europe, even to Iceland.
The Boston Brahmins, from the late 17th century into the modern era, maintained a European banking operation in Smyrna. They utilized smaller, faster American ships for both the African slave trade and the opium trade with China, where the British East India Company waged two Opium Wars to sustain their exploitation and control over the Chinese population through opium addiction. (Note: Smyrna is the ancestral hometown of JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon. His family name is Papademetriou.)
They renamed themselves “Ashkenazi Jews” in the 11th century after the Seljuk Turk Muslims drove them out of Baghdad (100 years before the Crusades) and forced them to flee with their Solomon’s banker gold into Europe. They concealed their pagan worship of deities like Mammon, Ba’al, and Moloch. These were some of the demon gods worshipped by Solomon’s 700 princesses, wives and 300 concubines (“Solomon did evil in the sight of the Lord”).
Against God’s prohibitions, the Bible says Solomon conceived offspring among Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites. He built pagan temples for his 1000 princesses, wives and concubines. 1 Kings 11:1-8. In short, self-named Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews have no or few Hebrew or Semitic DNA markers today. (Frontiers in Genetics). See also Bibliography following.
The Rothschilds, rising to prominence in the 18th century, called themselves Jews and are heirs to this tradition, eventually controlling global finance in Germany and France, then through The City of London since its 1067 charter (The City of London Charter). The historical facts show that Jewish identity is a façade founded in the control of usury and slavery since ancient times.
———- skipping —-
The Rothschilds Misled Evangelicals into Supporting British Zionism
The Rothschilds funded Cyrus I. Scofield, a contentious figure with a history of fraudulent activities, to create a Bible Commentary, published by Oxford University Press and still highly influential, which molded evangelical views on End Times prophecy.
This annotated Bible sought to convince American evangelicals to endorse British Zionism and the Rothschild-supported purchase of Palestine, promoting a “Jewish” Israel, despite the primarily Babylonian Rādhānite lineage of its advocates. This departed from traditional Christian teaching, maintained since the Resurrection, that the Christian Church, fulfilled in Jesus Christ, is the new Israel, and the Hebrew people, as a distinct entity, had ceased to exist through intermingling with the Whore of Babylon (Revelation 17)—the Temple of Ishtar in Babylon, among others.
——— skipping —-
Antisemitism: A Manipulated Narrative
The Rothschilds, linked to Babylonian Rādhānite origins, have historically and presently leveraged accusations of antisemitism as a strategic shield. Their ties to figures like Jacob Frank, who championed Sabbatean Frankist debauchery that flagrantly broke Jewish law and openly practiced Satanism, fueled controversy. When faced with criticism of their immoral actions, they deflected by loudly proclaiming “Antisemitism!” to silence detractors.” [CONTINUES]:
SOURCE:
https://stateofthenation.info/?p=31363%5D
On many paintings and later photos leading figures like Columbus, Newton and Teddy Roosevelt make the m sign with their hands which some argue is a sign for them being marrano jewish is that something you heard about?
Here`s a link.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7233791/
Not all theories claim its a gesture for jews. Some openly anti jewish figures makes it to like Martin Luther and Hitler, ofcourse that could be a proof for that they are controlled opposition but it could also mean that the handsign mean something else.
Martin Luthers anti jewish writing in his later years could ofcourse be a way of covering the tracks and that the reformation was a jewish supported event to divide the church. But sure the Vatican was infiltrated and corrupted to. It isn`t easy to delve through the fogs of history.
Here is another interesting link which claim that the triad claw handsign indicates jewish ancestry.
https://libraryofrickandria.com/triad-claw/
Would be interesting to hear/read your take on it. The amount of historical figures who makes the sign is astounding.
These examples from the OT of how Israelites should treat different kinds of strangers who come amongst them must have informed what John advised here:
“Anyone goes too far, and not abiding in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. The one abiding in the teaching, this one has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into the house, and do not tell him to rejoice. For the one telling him to rejoice partakes in his evil works.”
–2 John 1:9-11
Hard to imagine that the Israelites of old would have treated strangers more liberally and tolerantly than the Israelites in Judea at the time Christ. Peter wouldn’t even sit down and eat with an uncircumcised Israelite.
Thoughts anyone?
“If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into the house”
Considering Mathew 15:24 and the 7th commandment, only pedigree Adamites are in question here. Therefore strangers are only those within your people and no one else CFT. We should have sectioned ourselves off, long ago, from all peoples who are not of our own. It’s really that simple and the very reason that our civilization is being destroyed is because of migration of aliens coming into our lands, regardless of mass migration or not. The minute they arrive the seed of destruction is planted.
Peter, today, would have been an outcast, a social pariah as he wasn’t part of the hippy cult that’s engulfed the western civilization. As it states in Revelation 10:9-11:
“And I went unto the angel, and said unto him, Give me the little book. And he said unto me, Take it, and eat it up; and it shall make thy belly bitter, but it shall be in thy mouth sweet as honey.
And I took the little book out of the angel’s hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter.
And he said unto me, Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.”
Our only way forward is the complete removal of all non Adamites in our lands. Trading could be acceptable, although there would be every chance of sabotage. We cannot give the world Christianity as it is not for them. And as for those Adamites who continue to reject the message of Yahushua and to live under YHWH they also must be removed to another land as well for remaining within ours, they will continue to sew the seeds of discord.
God bless
Marcus
Yes, but anyway, we live on the same earth, and the resources of the 3rd world countries, although limited, are abundant at the moment. Even if you can convince the public that the Non Adamic are Nephelins (or something similar), I doubt that a scenario where white countries invade non-Adamic countries, in order to eliminate them and obtain their resources, will happen. So, a pragmatic solution would be to demand birth control from poor countries, with some kind of excuse, such as reducing environmental damage. If they refuse, hunger can be used as a weapon, through economic sanctions
Dante,
I would never call for any invasion of any other country. This is what’s got the Israelites into the mess that they’re in today (wars in the middle east essentially was the excuse needed for the Jewish puppets in government to start playing on the heartstrings of the people, to allow millions of ‘refugees’ from those lands).
I wouldn’t demand birth control for two reasons; firstly it’s incredibly draconian and secondly, how they choose to live their lives, in their lands is their business.
The pragmatic solution would simply be to shut them out of our world. Don’t allow them into our lands and certainly don’t continue with that kicked off with ‘Live Aid’ of 1985 – helping them sustain their population and grow, unnaturally. The best way to deal with overpopulation is to only allow the number of people in a land to equate to the amount of food that can be grown. Shut off all western aid. Africa’s population is so large because when YHWH’s trying to remove them naturally, the Jews are feeding them, helping them grow in population then shipping them into the west to destroy us.
God bless
—- Marcus —-
“….Therefore strangers are only those within your people and no one else CFT …..”
This reads as a slight rebuke to CFT. Nowhere in the writings of CFT do I get the impression “Strangers” should be applied to any thing else but Adamic Man.
If anything …… I am the one who has proposed the idea and I only do this as a way for people to actually contemplate this reality and then REJECT it because in reality, it is IMPOSSIBLE.
Because it is 2025, and it is politically and physically impossible to CORRECT all the wrongs our Ancestors committed, we have to “walk” on this Earth carefully.
Ex — I will not walk into an all black church (and we’ve got plenty here in Georgia) and walk up to the podium and yell to the audience that they have no business reading the Bible and praying to a God.
Right or Wrong — the last thing I think the White Peoples of the Earth need right now is for all the non-adamic people to realize that “law and order” doesn’t apply to them. How many non-adamic peoples are guided by principles from the Scriptures??? Probably, not very many honestly.
Non-whites living in White Nations for the most part just want to live their lives in peace and make money and do what makes them feel good. Would they rise up and kill us if given the authority? Probably most will Yes.
Off Track Here ……………..
I want White Racial Universalists who come here to seriously ask themselves this Question —- “What advantage to the Kingdom of God do non-white peoples bring to the table? ”
If they truly meditate on this question — the answer is — Nothing. Literally, nothing.
Cheap Labor. That’s about it. Ironically, I needed a parking place for a Travel Trailer so I hired a White Landscape Company to built a retaining wall and fill it in with gravel and crush and run etc., etc. Not cheap. Over $5000.
Guess who shows up to do the work? A mestizo and his wife. They labored out in the 90 degree heat plus humidity all day. It was good work, actually. But I think about what this Company just made off me. They probably paid this couple peanuts.
Rambling again.
If non-whites can be STRANGERS …………….. there is a whole set of Requirements that they will never meet. They can’t possibly qualify as “strangers” and inherit Eternal Life. They follow our laws because they have to. Not because they want to. This reality is being revealed more and more as our society decays. All the blacks, asians and mexicans from the 50’s and 60’s who assimilated because they had to — what are their descendants doing today? Just the opposite. The are un-assimilating.
We need White Christians to start asking themselves hard questions. Non-whites are clearly not Israel. They are not “gentiles”. So, where do they fit? Nowhere. If there WAS a chance, it would be Strangers, but thinking about the mechanics of this classification, quickly reveals it is impossible. They will NEVER behave towards us as our guests.
Question to you Marcus — do you think it was possible for non-adamic peoples to have wandered through the Camp of Israel circa Pre-AD? What race would they have been? In my thinking, it couldn’t have been blacks. They would be in the heart of central Africa. Maybe the yellows?
If non-adamics wandered through the Camp of Israel — how do you think (opinion) they dealt with them?
Can there be made any Scriptural response?
Cheers.
It’s hard to respond to this because you wouldn’t get specific about your concept of guests.
—– Autumn —-
Why do you care? Serious question. I don’t mean any offense here. I’m just very curious.
Do you “Desire” to be a Guest of Israel?
Not sure why you insist on knowing specifics of being a Guest in a home not your own.
West,
I don’t mean to insist. I’m not trying to waste your time. But it seems important to the thoughts about us “others” you’re wrestling with here and I am very curious. I am American. You aree pretty sure that, from your perspective, that means I am already in a house not my own.
So I am curious. I might not be as convinced as Dante, but I am not just screaming bigot either. It’s an honest question.
—- Autumn —
Why do you care?
You see, this is the issue. You don’t care. You will never understand because you can’t.
You do not wish to Serve and Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. You admit so. You are “Jewish”.
West
They follow our laws because they have to. Not because they want to. This reality is increasingly revealed as our society decays. All the Blacks, Asians, and Mexicans of the 1950s and 1960s who assimilated out of necessity—what are their descendants doing today? Exactly the opposite. They are desassimilating.
I don’t need a religious book to know that killing, stealing, and cheating are wrong; it’s a matter of conscience, not of gaining credit with some deity. As for whether they would kill you if they had the opportunity, I’m not sure. Just because they’re rude or jealous of you doesn’t mean they would go so far as to kill you. But I answer for myself, and it’s not my fault if others think differently. As for the question of assimilation, what would that be? Following the Laws and keeping the yard clean is quite easy. Maybe you’re referring to subjective aspects like mannerisms and culinary preferences, but that’s insignificant.
Hello West, I hope you are well.
It was somewhat of a ‘confusion’ reply to CFT precisely because, as you correctly stated: “Nowhere in the writings of CFT do I get the impression “Strangers” should be applied to any thing else but Adamic Man.”
My confusion was in the case that we know strangers are fellow Adamites, so why bring it up again. My mind was working overtime thinking they were implying ‘immigrants’. So, apologies to CFT in my incorrect assumption.
“Because it is 2025, and it is politically and physically impossible to CORRECT all the wrongs our Ancestors committed, we have to “walk” on this Earth carefully.”
I disagree. I think we very much can correct the wrongs of our ancestors. Ironically, going into a black church is precisely what you need to do. We all need to do it.
Here in my home city in Scotland, there was some sort of church gathering, in the centre, where a preacher was inside a gazebo spreading the word of the gospel, in the usual, liberal Christian way – hippies is what I call them. He was surrounded by a clear influx of African immigrants, handing out leaflets for the church. Unlike in the US, Christianity here, in Scotland, is struggling terribly because it’s a hippie cult. So they’re more than happy to get newcomers into their congregation, even though they’re the very aliens they shouldn’t be allowing in.
“Right or Wrong — the last thing I think the White Peoples of the Earth need right now is for all the non-adamic people to realize that “law and order” doesn’t apply to them.”
I think they did, long ago, certainly by their actions, certainly. And yes, they certainly would rise up and are just waiting to, but their numbers are still far too small, not only in the US, but the UK & Europe, although they’re numbers are rapidly increasing courtesy of the fact that white procreation rates, in the west, are dropping by 30% every generation, while African population is growing by 110% and other non whites (excluding Asians) is growing by 72% every generation. You don’t need a degree in maths to work out the inevitable outcome of that scenario.
“I want White Racial Universalists who come here to seriously ask themselves this Question —- “What advantage to the Kingdom of God do non-white peoples bring to the table? ””
I’m not the one you’re asking this to but yes, they bring nothing at all. They are the monkeys to the Jewish organ grinder – entertainers and nothing more. However, although those in positions of power and authority are DEI hires, there are those non whites that embrace western culture and civilization and do succeed. That is when they accept that the western civilization is NOT theirs, are guests in the west and respect that they’re allowed to live within, to thrive and prosper, ignoring all the liberal slur words thrown around to sew discord among the whites and non whites, by the usual suspects.
“They can’t possibly qualify as “strangers” and inherit Eternal Life. They follow our laws because they have to. Not because they want to.”
When you have no redeemer, nor an afterlife, then what else is there to do but to strive for a material existence and success? And as you later state the very concept of integration is simply not possible for obvious reasons. Integration is a code word for annihilation. And yes, America and London show precisely what happens when you allow immigration and worse, positions of power and authority – races will always protect their own, outside the white race, that is (courtesy of decades of ideological subversion).
“We need White Christians to start asking themselves hard questions. Non-whites are clearly not Israel. They are not “gentiles”. So, where do they fit? Nowhere.”
Precisely, but it’s a making the whites understand this. The very promotion of ‘racism’ is anathema to Adamites. I looked on YT for ‘Christian Identity’, the other day and it’s classified as a racist, white supremacist, hate organization, as is to be expected.
“Question to you Marcus — do you think it was possible for non-adamic peoples to have wandered through the Camp of Israel circa Pre-AD? What race would they have been? In my thinking, it couldn’t have been blacks. They would be in the heart of central Africa. Maybe the yellows?”
I agree in that blacks would have been nowhere near Israel and the middle east. There would have been mixed Ethiopians and Arabians. The first mention of ‘Arab’ in the bible, to denote a people, is 2 Chronicles 17:11 at the time of King Jehoshaphat who reigned over the Kingdom of Judah from approximately 873 to 849 BC.
And as for Asians, West, I really don’t know. It’s something I’m no doubt going to be looking into, but I’ve got other pressing knowledge avenues to go down first.
“If non-adamics wandered through the Camp of Israel — how do you think (opinion) they dealt with them?”
If they had and there’s a possibility, it would have been as traders. I really can’t give you an opinion on that as I haven’t one.
God bless
Marcus
Let’s be realistic, white people going around shouting that black people can’t be Christians isn’t going to happen at the moment. The CI or at least something that prevents white people from miscegenating like Kinism are just niches.
People in general only embrace these types of ideologies when they are extremely pressured and lose their material comfort. So, probably the CI or something close to it will only become popular when race relations get much worse, and when that day comes, white people will be much less numerous.
—– Marcus —–
Appreciate the response. I enjoy the “fellowship”.
Communicating in this way can sometimes be misunderstood/misconstrued etc., etc. So know that I am not against you or antagonistic in any way. If I have an issue with something you say or believe that I think is Essential for the Body of Christ, I would be very specific. We are just spit balling here.
Cool?
You said — “….going into a black church is precisely what you need to do. We all need to do it….”
Question — “And then what?”
Play that out for me. Cheers.
“Question to you Marcus — do you think it was possible for non-adamic peoples to have wandered through the Camp of Israel circa Pre-AD? What race would they have been? In my thinking, it couldn’t have been blacks. They would be in the heart of central Africa. Maybe the yellows?”
Red. Egypt still has a number and they have thought of themselves as red historically. Of course there’s Hermetics at play to, but the skin color of many ME is reddish like American Indians. I think this is why certain circles, having found Egyptian bronze age stuff in NE use to think Indians might have been a branch of older Egyptian peoples. Brownish was around to, but only the light variety. Ironically the yellower peoples would have been the Greeks, with a strong olive/green undertone to their skin. Israelites also had this Greekish undertone. You can see it in Southern Europeans, Wales, and parts of Ireland today.
Creat
Wouldn’t olive skin tone be indicative of some non-Adamic ancestor? What about people who have white skin and black hair, and sometimes blond, but have dark eyes? Is someone with non-colored eyes a non-Adamic?
Dante,
Solomon had black hair
West,
I’ll keep my replies, from now on, succinct. If, that is, I choose to continue commenting here on CFT.
OWPAH
Yes, but his eyes were colored. My question is whether dark eyes are a sign of a non-Adamic ancestor, whether in someone with black or blond hair.
Marcus wrote, “Considering Mathew 15:24 and the 7th commandment, only pedigree Adamites are in question here. Therefore strangers are only those within your people and no one else, CFT.”
Rather odd you’d say this considering that’s the view that most of our articles take, and that’s certainly the thesis of this article above.
What we were asking was whether anyone thought that the verse from 2 John was based on the OT teachings of how to treat “strangers” — as it seems to be a basic Israelite teaching about dealing with outsiders.
CFT,
Forgive me if it came across as, somewhat of, a rebuke I didn’t mean it too. As I replied to West, I was confused as your stance would have been that strangers would mean those of Adamite bloodline but distant cousins. My mind went from 1st to 6th gear and I assumed you were implying non Adamites in relation to today.
God bless
I have a few thoughts.
I have shared my story several times. I came OUT of the Judeo-christian, Evangelical, Modern Christianity Monolith that DOMINATES Christendom today.
We would be very hard pressed to find an actual Brick and Mortar Church that does NOT fall in line with the Teachings of this Monstrosity. I call it “Christendom”.
There are a few “Israelite Identity” bricks and mortars scattered across the United States, but when I have researched them and read their Statement of Faith — much of it is just REPEATED mantra, minus the teaching that Europeans are the Israelites of Scripture. While everything else remains the same.
SPCIFICALLY — “Salvation”. What happened on that Cross? What was the Atonement all about.
This is a detailed conversation — but simply — pretty much every Brick and Mortar that I have researched ALL believes in this Idea of —- Once Saved Always Saved. Now, they word it differently and sometimes very craftily. No one really likes this adage — Once Saved Always Saved. So they dance around it with other complicated terminology.
But the bottom line is this —– A Christian can Fall from Grace. We must “Continue” in the Faith and this “continuance” doesn’t happen subconsciously. It requires ACTION. Free Willed Action. “Walk in the Spirit, and you will not commit the works of the flesh…”
WALK = Action. Decision making.
The day that I finally rejected Eternal Security, was the day that I actually started to READ the Scriptures with Clarity. It all made sense. OSAS made no sense. “Never really saved to begin with” never made any sense either. Gas Lighting.
The Verse you cited is a Perfect Example. What does it say? A person will SHARE in the evil works of the unbeliever.
But then no one ever asks what are the Consequences of such action?
How about —– “….. become a Friend to the World and you will make yourself an Enemy of God….” (my paraphrase)
What happens if you make yourself an Enemy of our God???
Hardly a man asks this question. I can’t imagine one still holds on to Eternal Life while being an enemy of God.
This is ALL a result of Modern Christianity. Whether you hear it sitting on a pew or whether you read it in a book, video, audio etc., etc.
There is NO FEAR OF GOD anywhere. Hardly.
I’m glad you pointed this verse out because it was a Teaching that struck my conscience 20 years ago. I’m so glad and thankful I “listened” to that voice in my soul.
How many of us have “Friends” that we share in their evil? We tell ourselves, “… I am trying to witness to them silently through my life….”. I’ve heard that one before.
Paul makes an interesting distinction between Peoples. Friendships Vs. Associations.
Friendship is full accountability. Associations are the people we have to interact with daily in life. We don’t get close. But we seek Peace with all men. If they have Questions, we answer. If they don’t heed, we shake the dust from our feet and move on, being careful not to “tolerate” their lives. Become partakers of their evil SIMPLY by not saying or doing anything while they dine with us in our homes (metaphorically).
Plot against South Africa is another article this one was Plot against the church by Maurice Pinay.
https://christiansfortruth.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/The-Plot-Sgainst-South-Africa.pdf
“This book is composed of the second half of Maurice Pinay’s Plot Against the Church. It focuses on a widely misunderstood topic: the long struggle of faithful Catholics against the treachery and interference of malicious Jews, especially those who have infiltrated the Church and harmed her from within.
Virtually all Modern Church histories avoid the topic, either by failing to disclose any treachery by Jewish actors, or by failing to identify the Jewish background of certain heretics, or by dismissing long-standing Christian distrust of Jews as mere superstition or prejudice. Contemporary Christians, who consider themselves well educated, may be shocked to find out just how serious and long-standing the Church’s problem with “Jewish” subversion really is. The information in this book is a badly needed corrective to the ‘sanitized’, pro-Jewish Catholic histories that are found in virtually all modern Catholic institutions.
Pinay’s book was published in 1962, prior the the Second Vatican Council. It’s purpose was to warn Catholics of the danger posed by enemies of the Church who have infiltrated her ranks, and intend harm. Since the book was written in the early sixties, the first half (Volume I) focuses largely on the problem of “Communism” and world revolutions, since those were the visible crises on the minds of most people. The authors point out that almost all the Communist and revolutionary movements rocking governments around the world were the work of Jewish agitators and intellectuals. They are aware they will be called “anti-Semitic” but want to establish the malice and perfidity of the semitic race beyond a shadow of a doubt before recounting the long struggle of the Catholic Church against Jewry. (Volume II).”
Here is an interesting link for you at CFT to read, Plot against the church by penname Maurice Pinay. You probably heard of it but I post the link if you by any chance have not.
https://www.heritage-history.com/index.php?c=read&author=pinay&book=plot2&story=fifth
Im not saying everything is correct in the book but it is interesting to read. It was handed out to cardinals at Vatican II. Probably written by a group of conservative catholics who saw the great conspiracy against the Church by the jews and wanted to fight that infiltration.
Have a nice day
freeride,
Thank for the reminder — we have lots of books here in our library, but not that one for some reason — read it years ago, but it’s important.
We added it:
https://christiansfortruth.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/The-Plot-Sgainst-South-Africa.pdf
Check out our article on this subject:
How Converso Jews Used The ‘Holocaust’ To Shame The Catholic Church Into Accepting Vatican II ‘Reforms’
https://christiansfortruth.com/how-converso-jews-used-the-holocaust-to-shame-the-catholic-church-into-accepting-vatican-ii-reforms/
Im white with blue eyes and gray dark hair and I wonder what is your view about israelite purity? Can you be 100% pure if you have dark hair or do you need to have blond or red hair?
Perhaps a complicated question to answer.
Many vital historical persons in white history have dark hair so if all whites were blond and red haired originally it is quite far back that was the norm. Today the overwhelming majority of those that identify as whites have brown, gray or black hair but the fact that those identify as white doesn`t necessarily make them 100% white. But what are your view?
And if a blond or red headed person has one ancestor that isnt blond or red headed is that enough to make them not perfect in their generations?
Or did also biblical pure israelites sometimes have dark hair?
Ofcourse a white person with dark hair can be purer then a white person with blond hair there are jews with blond hair but in general people look at blond and red as a sign of purity especially by those that have these haircolours.
Any comments?
Freerider,
King Solomon had raven (black) hair. Although, eye colour seems to be an important issue, due to the 7500 ears old blue eyed indicates that Adam had only blue eyes, meaning Eve would have also had blue eyes, since she was a female copy of him.
freerider,
The short answer is that, no, none of us know how racially pure we are; however, it is a mistake to therefore conclude that we are probably mixed. See:
How Do I Know I’m An Israelite?
https://christiansfortruth.com/how-do-i-know-im-an-israelite/
People mistakenly believe that blue eye color is a major indicator that you are racially pure — after all, 30% to 40% of Jews have blue eyes — so all that this proves is that Ashkenazis have a lot of white admixture.
Every white person in Europe carries the blue eye gene — even the ancient Greeks and Romans write about their eye color as being blue and grey though not exclusively.
As far as Adam and Eve go, to conclude that they had the same eye color is logical — however, to also conclude, therefore, that they did not carry the genes for other eye colors we now see in the white race is an error — same with blond hair.
Notice how the majority of Scandinavian children are born with blond hair — however, by adulthood, their hair color can often change to brown — does that mean they carry impure genes? That’s faulty logic.
Every white person in Europe carries the blue eye gene — even the ancient Greeks and Romans write about their eye color as being blue and grey though not exclusively.
Brown eyes on Europeans are far lighter than on any other race — if you shine a light on European brown eyes, you will be astonished how light they are compared to Africans or Asians.
Blonde hair, especially on our women, is highly valued because it is rare — but women often find darker hair more masculine — and depending on the different isolated tribes in early Europe, it would be easy to see how one might favor on color for breeding over another.
Europeans had mate selection choices that all other races do not — for us, it’s a smorgasbord, but for other races, it is the same meal every day — as an 18th century British poet and hymnwriter, William Cowper (pronounced “Cooper”) wrote, “Variety is the spice of life.
What would our lives be like if every White person had blond hair and blue eyes? Creepy? Monotonous? What makes blondes, and redheads often so striking is that they are still relatively race among Whites.
Actually the redhair/blue eye combination is the rarest phenotype among all Europeans.
If they were the majority instead and brown being the rarest, would you therefore assume brown is the eye color of Adam and Eve?
The Biblical Meaning Of Color — How White Is Associated With God, Adam, Israel, Christ And Christians
https://christiansfortruth.com/the-meaning-of-color-in-the-bible-how-white-is-associated-with-god-adam-israel-and-jesus-christ/
However, God never answered this request, as He did with other aspects of Solomon’s prayer. So, if God doesn’t hear the prayer of a non-Israelite (indifference), isn’t it much more rational to assume that they are not God’s creation?
I know the Bible is about the generations of Adam, but we all live on the same planet, and the planet has limited resources. It would be completely acceptable to invade the lands of non-Adamites and enslave or eliminate them in order to obtain resources.
After all, according to you, we are (soulless) animals. For example, in my country (Brazil), hunting wild boars is sometimes permitted because they consume wildlife resources.
Regarding usury, you are correct. It is not against the law to charge abusive interest from other peoples, so, by this logic, white people shouldn’t complain about Jews who exploit people with usury.
— Dante —
Quite honestly, I wouldn’t care so much that Jews charge Interest …. IF ….. IF …
They were actually loaning real money.
Maybe they loaned actual Gold in the past and charged interest. That is fine with me. But, since the creation of Fiat monies ….
they ain’t loaning s@it that was theirs to begin with.
If a man loans me $1000 of his own money to save my butt, I’m not offended he gets something out of it. The man who loans money and doesn’t expect to gain ….. that is the righteous man.
The Bible is pretty explicit – you/we do NOT charge usury to a countryman. THERE is the crux of the biscuit – ‘To a Brother/countryman/ etc ‘ – depending on translation. Charge interest all you want to a foreigner, i.e. nonIsraelite. Just no usury to a brother, whether its real money or not.
Of course, following this concept was the genesis of WW2… but its still the Truth.
Dante,
We live on the same plane not planet. There are no planets, galaxies or any universe, as described by NASA and other space agencies. There is the firmament and above it, water – lots of it.
You are correct. The non white peoples are not YHWH’s creation. The answer is in Genesis 1 and Genesis 6 – Adam, man and woman and the Sons (and daughters) of God (1 Enoch = watchers).
The sad, sad, sad reality is that the 9th commandment was broken and this has caused untold chaos around this world. All the non white peoples had their own cultures, civilizations and pantheons. These peoples ARE the creation of the Nephilim and their sinning with the beasts. All non white people ARE chimeras. They are the forbidden union spoken of in the 7th commandment and Deuteronomy 23:2 and the very reason why YHWH gave the order for the Israelites to destroy those mentioned in Deuteronomy 20:17.
The interesting part about Darwinism is that he was correct that primates are ancestors, but wrong in stating that they were the ancestor of man. The non white peoples, sadly, are not man nor woman. They are male and female of their species. Did you ever wonder why all the different hominid skulls that were found came into being? They are the evidence of the different evolution of Nephilim and animal offspring in their various stages of evolution into more ‘human’ form.
“After all, according to you, we are (soulless) animals” – this isn’t CFT’s view. This is the ONLY view there is, straight out of the bible. Why, for example, would YHWH create ‘pre-Adamic’ peoples (as CFT believe and I respectfully disagree with) who were not only forbidden for Adamites to breed with but more so, could never be redeemed by Yahushua? All of those created within Genesis 1 were so and not one of them was an African, Asian, Polynesian, Amerindian or Australasian. Indian people, however, the lighter skinned ones, I believe to have something to do with creation and ‘beast of the field’, but I’m still looking into that.
Look, I’m really sad that this state of affairs has happened – the mass mixing of peoples. It is the greatest weapon the enemy has to destroy YHWH’s creation and courtesy of more and more mass migration, letting in more and more Muslims, the deadly enemy of Christians for millennia, it is bringing the end of the Adamites, faster than ever. I’m truly, truly sorry that you have been lied to, by the wicked Christian Universalists, who ignore scripture while wallowing in what can only be described as a modern day ‘hippie cult’. They have given you false hope, having you believe you can be something you never can and an after life as described within the bible, for those Adamite peoples who embrace Yahushua. There is nothing worse than promising another what you can never deliver them and this is why honesty must always reign supreme in every exchange, regardless.
I can’t give you the answers you seek for what happens to you after life. However I believe, most likely, you will go to Sheol, as will all, Adamite included (who do not embrace Yahushua). This is not, what Hollywood, Jews and the Greeks like to promote as the utter nonsense of a Hell or an afterlife (all created to control and nothing more). It’s simply death – lights out – no pain, no suffering, no endless torment, just end of existence.
God bless
Marcus
I understand, but do you believe in the double lineage of Cain, being the son of the Serpent? The word used to refer to Cain is “Ach,” which means “Brother,” not “half-brother.”
I could be mistaken, but Ishmael and Isaac, despite being half-brothers, have the word “Ach” (Brother) to indicate kinship. I asked someone at Christogenea that if Eve ate the Fruit (Sex), then does that mean that Adam also slept with the serpent? It doesn’t seem to make sense.
And if we, who are not, God’s creation, do you think He will exterminate us all eventually? I want to believe that God will have mercy on at least some of us who don’t hate white people and let them live out their mortal lives.
Dante,
I am still deciding on the two lineage bloodline. Genesis 3 certainly implies something more went on than the mere eating of an apple yet the Apocrypha promote that Cain and Abel were born 18 years after expulsion from Eden. If, as we take the dual lineage and apple event as sex, then it certainly implies that a ‘ménage à trois’ may have taken place…or more. Again, we do not know what happened. It may very well have been the first homosexual act in the bible. After all, there was no ‘law’ as such yet (that we know of). I can’t give a yea or a nay for this as I’m still looking into this.
“And if we, who are not, God’s creation, do you think He will exterminate us all eventually?” – all will die and go to Sheol. I really think you need to stop looking at the concept of ‘extermination’. You are not guilty of any wrongdoing. Only those who are will be judged. As I stated, I think the case will simply be that all non Adamite (and lost Adamites) will simply die and their journey will end. When you get knocked out, you don’t remember anything – just darkness, no consciousness, nothing. That’s what will happen when you die, not what Hollywood and the western entertainment systems like to promote in their many sci-fi/fantasy shows. That’s nonsense.
And finally, as for the Book of Enoch and the Nephilim, remember that not only did the watchers (sons of YHWH) directly disobey YHWH, by choosing the daughters of Adam and Eve, but the Nephilim also violated YHWH by sinning with the beasts. This is why they were punished, not because they were created unlawfully. As stated, it will simply be death. Only a very small number of Adamites will move onwards in their soul’s journey. I predict that the overwhelming majority of Adamites and those who call themselves Christians will go to Sheol and remain forever. They will not be resurrected.
Dante, Christianity and the bible is something that you should not concern yourself with. It has no place in your life. It is only for the Adamites and no one else. You should not worry about that which you have no control over and find happiness in the time you have left. Needless worry will only make you unhappy.
God bless
Marcus said
“Dante, Christianity, and the Bible are things you shouldn’t worry about. They have no place in your life. They are only for the Adamites and no one else. You shouldn’t worry about what you have no control over and find happiness in the time you have left. Unnecessary worries will only make you unhappy.”
It’s hard to say what happiness would be like, but without Christ, the only thing left is to live a futile and materialistic life. If you convince people of color that they are not human, it would only destroy the fragile social fabric and invite them to act solely on their base instincts of violence. Not that I’m that kind of person, but at best, people would do good only if they gained something in return.
Dante,
Interestingly enough, you and all non whites ARE human. It’s the white people, the Adamic peoples, who ARE NOT human. Why use two words for one definition? Why use ‘man’ and ‘human’?
This is a long discussion, as it coincides with so much more, but for layman terms, the concept of ‘human’ relates to Darwinist thought and race, more correctly a mitochondrial Eve in Africa.
So, human in the sense for blacks and Asians? Yes, but whites – no. So you don’t need to convince them they’re not human, but they do need to know they are not man and woman. Instead they are male and female of their separate species.
Now how will they be when they find that out? Yes, most likely blacks will react to how they react to anything that they disagree with – violence. But let’s look at the reality here, Dante; they are only in the west because of slavery and only know of the life they live as a result of being within white civilization.
Had there been no slavery, they’d be in some mud hut, in Africa, living their daily existence, no different to all remote African tribes exist. So, in the meantime, while the truth remains hidden, the non white population grows, the white population decreases and the Adamic peoples are sitting on a ticking timebomb, whose detonation increases with, non white population growth.
“…but at best, people would do good only if they gained something in return.” – if you’re doing good for reciprocation, you’re not a good individual are you?
The problem, as stated, is deception and the longer the deception continues, the worse it gets for my people and everyone in general, because once the truth comes out, on who the non-white peoples really are, that Darwin evolution is nonsense, that all previous intelligent anthropologists were correct (even Darwin wanted to classify blacks as another species of human) that we’re not all from the same progenitor, then there will be violence and bloodshed on a horrific level.
Better to let the truth out and prepare for the inevitable outcome, while the numbers are at least more ‘favourable’ to whites.
God bless
Marcus
Yes, but I don’t see white people spreading CI (Christian Identity) in any significant way. A while ago, I talked about identity with some white people, and a good portion, including white nationalists (who should be more receptive), rejected the message.
Today, we have artificial intelligence, and so far, I haven’t seen a single video about Europeans being the 12 Tribes, except for TruthVids. See an example of Black Hebrews.
https://youtu.be/lwIpNPeFkwU?si=CBOZ0j4wrGfpvdQI
Marcus
But what about mixed European peoples like those from Southern Europe? It seems that they have a very low amount of non-Adamic blood, if you follow a strict standard that a single drop of non-Adamic blood is enough, then wouldn’t these people also be considered Man and Woman?
Marcus
And finally, regarding the Book of Enoch and the Nephilim, remember that not only did the Watchers (sons of YHWH) directly disobey YHWH by choosing the daughters of Adam and Eve, but the Nephilim also violated YHWH by sinning with the beasts.
So, you’re saying that non-whites are not the creation of the fallen angels, but rather of their Nephilim children? But that doesn’t make sense. Giants couldn’t have given rise to so much diversity in such a short time, and non-whites are more ancient than the Adamic race.
CFT even has an article that talks about God seeking a mate for Eve, implying that there was already some species, similar to humans, on earth.
Dante,
Firstly, the black Hebrews? 🤣🤣🤣.
Secondly, as for CI amongst nationalists, the majority, sadly, believe in mythology, over Yahushua and YHWH. It’s up to them to wake up. You can lead a horse to water….
Thirdly, many Southern Europeans are mamzers/hybrids. Take Italy, for example and you’ll find that they were under Muslim rule for a long time. The same with Spain. The mix happened there, just as it happened in the middle east, north and east Africa before. This is captured in the movie ‘True Romance. They are not YHWH’s creation.
Fourthly, “So, you’re saying that non-whites are not the creation of the fallen angels, but rather of their Nephilim children? But that doesn’t make sense. Giants couldn’t have given rise to so much diversity in such a short time, and non-whites are more ancient than the Adamic race.” – The Nephilim sinning with the beasts is where the Asian and Black species came from. As for YHWH looking for a mate for Adam, well, he’d already created them (Genesis 1). He specifically wanted Eve, from Adam to create his own, unique, with a soul, being.
Remember that it states that when Yahushua returns it will be as in the days of Noah – the whole world and 99% of Adamkind will be corrupted. Then the purge begins.
A friend of mine met a woman the other day, whom she’s been having a friendship with. She tells me she’s whiter than white, yet her father is Jewish and her mother is half European and half Polynesian. She said she never would have guessed. You cannot tell today, simply by looking. Most people who look white have non white blood in them and most blacks, in the west, have white blood also.
God bless
Marcus
The only way to know who is a pure Adamic is through unbiased genetic testing, so unless mixed-race whites die out supernaturally (God sending angels to eliminate them or something like that) many pure whites would die as a side effect of the purge.
Marcus
When Yahushúa returns, it will be as in the days of Noah—the entire world, and 99% of Adam’s race, will be corrupted.
Well, based on the argument that the word “Man” applies only to the pure Adamic race, it makes no sense to say that the reason for the flood was miscegenation. Besides the fact that the Bible canon gives no account of non-white beasts in Noah’s time, God, when He analyzed people’s hearts and saw that they were all evil (having dark thoughts is also a sin), used the word “Man,” which indicates that the woman with whom Cain had children may have been a pure Adamic. Again, the word used was a reference to an Adamic creature. I may be mistaken, but in the small region of the Dead Sea, that would be the site of Noah’s flood, there were no people of sub-Saharan or Asian lineage.
The Bible says that Noah was perfect in his generations, but this may indicate that Noah’s predecessors were righteous people, not necessarily a reference to Adamic purity.
Dante wrote,”The Bible says that Noah was perfect in his generations, but this may indicate that Noah’s predecessors were righteous people, not necessarily a reference to Adamic purity.”
This is incorrect — Genesis 6:9 reads, “These [are] the generations of Noah: Noah [is] a righteous man; he has been perfect among his generations; Noah has habitually walked with God.”
https://biblehub.com/genesis/6-9.htm
God preserved Noah for two reason: he was righteous (and blameless) AND because he was perfect in generations, which here means, “genealogical registration, genealogies, account, birth, order of their birth.”
https://biblehub.com/hebrew/8435.htm
This would imply that there were descendants were were not perfect in their genealogies or generations. However, this does not imply that all of those who were destroyed in the Flood were race mixed — others were destroyed because they were not righteous and obeyed God.
Noah’s preservation was a foreshadowing of Israel’s salvation through Jesus Christ — that is why the New Testament gives Jesus’ genealogy, as a model for His righteous believers.
Dante,
“The only way to know who is a pure Adamic is through unbiased genetic testing….”
Firstly, I do not know where you are from. Dante, whether a pseudonym, appellation or surname is Italian in origin and as you know, the Islamic invasion mixed the blood there.
Secondly, those nations who were not invaded and resisted Islamic and Mongol invasion will most certainly be pedigree peoples. When I say pedigree I mean Adamic and not mixed with bloodline from Deuteronomy 23:2 or non Adamic peoples.
The invasion of Africans and Asians and other non Adamic peoples is a modern phenomenon.
“Well, based on the argument that the word “Man” applies only to the pure Adamic race, it makes no sense to say that the reason for the flood was miscegenation.”
It makes every sense!
The Adamic people were within the confines of the flood. In order to protect what was left of his creation (Noah’s family) he brought about the purge. Had he not, his creation would have ultimately been destroyed. And that is why it states in Matthew 24: 37-39.
“But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.”
There will not be many left to be saved, as illustrated above.
“Besides the fact that the Bible canon gives no account of non-white beasts in Noah’s time, God, when He analyzed people’s hearts and saw that they were all evil (having dark thoughts is also a sin), used the word “Man,” which indicates that the woman with whom Cain had children may have been a pure Adamic. Again, the word used was a reference to an Adamic creature. I may be mistaken, but in the small region of the Dead Sea, that would be the site of Noah’s flood, there were no people of sub-Saharan or Asian lineage.”
I don’t want to go into this, deeper that is, here because I’m writing a book about my hypothesis on Genesis, the Sons of God and the creation of the non Adamic peoples. However, the ‘Sons of God’ were not all destroyed in the flood. Many, I believe, had already inhabited other parts of the world and there they sinned with the beasts, like the Nephilim and created the Africans and Asians. The flood was a temporary measure, to give Noah a head-start, to give his family leeway and to reboot, if you might say, the Adamic bloodline a second time. Just as if you plant a rosebush in a garden, you pull away all the weeds around it, dig up the earth and give the bush a chance at growth – this, to me, was the reason for the flood. YHWH knew that corruption had already taken root, throughout the modern world. He simply did his best to keep Noah’s family safe and then it was a matter, from thence onwards, to obey him.
The flood was local. After all, how on earth were there the other races of giants, living in Canaan – the Rephaim, Anakim, Emim and Zamzummim? And of course the other giants all over the world who also existed?
What I discuss, Dante, has nothing to do with the blacks and Asians. They don’t play a part in the bible, at all, for they are irrelevant in the context of scripture. I also don’t believe that the ‘beasts of the field’ were blacks either. I am far more inclined to believe that they were almost identical to white people, looking very similar to North Indian peoples – the Brahmins.
God bless
Dante wrote, “…But do you believe in the double lineage of Cain, being the son of the Serpent? The word used to refer to Cain is “Ach,” which means “Brother,” not “half-brother.”
I could be mistaken, but Ishmael and Isaac, despite being half-brothers, have the word “Ach” (Brother) to indicate kinship.”
You are correct — we looked into the use of “ach” to describe Cain a while back — and since The Serpent is not Adamic, and therefore not “kindred”, Cain could not be considered a legitimate “ach” as is the case with Ishmael and Issac.
In Genesis 4:9-10, God twice directly acknowledges that Cain’s brother “ach” is Abel. The Bible is internally consistent, but two-seedline is not, though they think they are.
Marcus
As for the Book of Enoch, let’s say it is real; my situation would only get worse, because it is said that when the Nephilim died, their souls were trapped on the earth, wandering. Some theorize that the spirits of the demons are actually the Nephilim who died.
Israel Only —
Not to beat a dead horse — but I can’t help be intrigued by this developing drama that is occurring on a Facebook group calling themselves “Israel Only”.
I have followed them for about a year. I followed them because they were dogmatically Israel Only in the beginning. Many members wrote great articles proving the Covenantal Message i.e., Jesus came only for Israel.
Well … just in the past few weeks, all of a sudden there is now a coordinated attempt to redefine IO to include “proselytes”.
Here is their Major Problem —
they all, to a man, are assuming into their theology the heresy of Racial Universalism i.e., “all One Blood”. They, of course, don’t like my comments making a distinction between Adamic Man and non-adamic persons. But that is no surprise.
I include a recent article which makes the case for “Converts” —
Start –
“…Recently, bloodline-only IOers have claimed that the covenantal-inclusion model of IO isn’t “IO”. Their arguments assume that Israelite identity was strictly genetic, and they ignore the extensive evidence of covenantal inclusion found throughout the Hebrew Scriptures and affirmed in the New Testament.
Indeed, Old Testament scriptures clearly show that Torah-based, covenantal inclusion, not genealogy alone, determined who was considered ‘Israel’. For example…
Exodus 12:48–49 and Numbers 15:15–16 explicitly declare that the same law and the same covenant apply to both the native-born and the sojourner who joins Israel. Proselytes—those who underwent circumcision and kept the law—were legally and covenantally Israel, regardless of biological descent.
Remember, Paul said in Galatians 4:5 that Jesus came to redeem those under the Law. This means that Jesus came to redeem proselytes too. This places proselytes firmly within the IO paradigm.
Those in the bloodline-only IO group also claim that Nicolas must have been a bloodline Israelite because he received the Holy Spirit. Their reasoning goes like this:
Premise 1: The Holy Spirit was only given to bloodline Israelites.
Premise 2: Nicolas (Acts 6:5) received the Holy Spirit.
Conclusion: Therefore, Nicolas must have been a bloodline Israelite.
This line of reasoning assumes what it needs to prove—namely, that only biological Israelites could receive the Holy Spirit. It takes that as a non-negotiable premise, and then uses it to define everyone who received the Spirit as a bloodline Israelite, even when the text suggests otherwise. That’s the very definition of circular logic.
The New Covenant promise of the Spirit was fulfilled to Israel. Throughout its history, Israel consisted of not just biological descendants but also those grafted in through faith and obedience (see Acts 2:39 and Isaiah 56:3–8). Estranged Jews, proselytes, Samaritans and gentile descendants of the ten northern tribes were all within Israel’s covenantal structure.
Thus, the idea that IO becomes “no longer IO” when it recognizes covenantal inclusion is false. The covenantal-inclusion model of IO is simply a more consistent and biblically grounded form of IO that honors the legal structure of Israel’s covenant identity, rather than reducing it to a flawed and rigid biological essentialism.
The covenantal inclusion model of IO also preserves the core interpretive framework that defines the view: the Bible’s redemptive narrative is exclusively about Israel, and its promises, covenants, law, salvation, Spirit, resurrection, and judgment were directed only to those within Israel’s covenant structure—not to humanity at large. The difference between “bloodline-only IO” and “covenantal inclusion IO” isn’t a change in scope, but in how ‘Israel’ is defined—either rigidly by genealogy or faithfully by covenantal participation.
The covenantal inclusion model of IO simply affirms what the scriptures have consistently taught for centuries: that non-Israelites could become Israelites through Torah-based mechanisms—circumcision, law-keeping, joining the assembly—and were then subject to the blessings, curses, and eschatological hopes of Israel. These proselytes were no longer “outsiders” but were legally reclassified as part of Israel, just as Leviticus 19:34 and Isaiah 56 affirm.
The covenantal-inclusion model of IO also maintains IO’s essential point: no one outside the covenant of Israel was ever part of the biblical story. It also explains how figures like Ruth, Rahab, and Nicolas the proselyte could be part of the elect community without undermining audience relevance or biblical consistency.
So rather than abandoning IO, the covenantal-inclusion model corrects and refines it. It removes the unnecessary and unscriptural obsession with bloodline purity and instead upholds the legal and covenantal definitions of Israel that the Law, Prophets, and Apostles used. It keeps the redemptive narrative tightly tethered to Israel—just as IO requires—but allows for the scripture-sanctioned expansion of Israel through lawful inclusion, not universal invitation.
Personally, I see similarities between the bloodline-only IOers behavior in response to covenantal inclusion and how cults exclude those who don’t agree with their doctrine. It’s a fear response, and I think unnecessary.
In the words of Jason DeCosta…
“I tend to not to not keep a death grip on the biblical story like some IO’ers do. I like to let the story breathe and let it air out and give it some room to flow. And if that means that an outsider joined Israel in the old covenant times, I’m cool with that. If that means they got certain levels of blessings that came with the covenant, I’m cool with that. If that means that they got the entire blessing and somehow were raised on the last day,,, I’m even okay with that. I believe that letting the story breathe and giving it some room doesn’t really strain it and allows it to say what it says…..”.
End —
It is interesting that some don’t object to the convert allowance, but when I insist it is “racial” … then they object.
Which is more dangerous — the Jewish Question. or the Racial Question?
My opinion — we can’t fix the racial question without exposing the Jewish one.
— Israel Only —
This is Great! I commented to the author of the above article that the Scriptures are written TO and FOR the Generations of Adam Man and Adam Man only (excluding pre-adamic hominin).
Here was his Response — “… Adam wasn’t a real person. He was an archetype of Israel. There were no real people of Genesis 10 nations, because there was no real Adam. The sooner you understand this, the better off you’ll be…”
Wow. This is all a perfect example of my new Adage — – “…. Scriptural Truths are NOT Intellectual Endeavors…”
Here is a group of people — admittedly non-christians, who once intellectually discovered the Obvious — the Covenants were given to Israel and Israel Only —
Who LACK the Spirit to be able to pull it altogether.
I actually have respect for the black Hebrew Israelites. Another good example. They have just enough intelligence to read the Bible and understand that Israel is Central and Israel Only. Some get ‘marriage’ right as well. Another obvious teaching that is now blurred through the lens of man’s selfish desires.
PS …. the sooner I understand this, the sooner I will be “better off”. What on earth does this mean I wonder? It must be nice to arrive at the conclusion that “you” are your own god. Talk about Liberty!
Correction —
My adage should read
“… Spiritual Truths are not Intellectual Endeavors…”.
There is a “Spiritual” aspect to Scriptural Knowledge.
One must have the Holy Spirit to understand the deeper meanings.
Most of Scripture is not Rocket Science.
But the whole world would be “Christian” absent the Holy Spirit.
This is off topic, but I’m curious about everyone’s opinion on a guy named Corey Mahler. He had a debate with James White a couple of months ago and the topic was “Can the Holy Spirit sanctify a black Christian as much as a white Christian?”
I didn’t watch the entire debate, but the gist of it was Mahler cited crime statistics in support of his position which was no and White countered that because statistics have anomalies and Mahler agreed with that he therefore lost his argument.
The comments on the debate were telling and not surprising: “He (Mahler) has a low opinion of God.”
Another one was something like this: “He theology is Darwinian”.
I happen to believe that yellow, black and red races are Pre-Adamic and therefore not included in salvation. I don’t think Mahler even makes that argument thus the focus on sanctification.
Curious as to what everyone’s thoughts might be.
—- SC Rebel —
Do you have a Link to this interview/debate? I don’t recognize either names.
My Opinion — I was a Universalist, even for a few years of hearing and receiving the truth of Israelite Identity.
The last 20 years of my life haven’t been great, considering I’ve lost my entire family and social circle from my previous life as an Evangelical Judeo-Christian. To fill that companionship void, I’ve acquired many dogs since then. Some were “working dogs” and others were like my own son — especially my first dog right after the separation.
I would love to see my dogs in Eternity. This is the Empathy that I have and which God has given all White men. Although that “empathy” can be stifled in some. Actually many, as most White people have zero empathy for their own Kind. Or at least put other Kinds on the same level of concern. Will I see my dogs in Eternity? I don’t know. It probably won’t matter once I’m there.
My Point — At first my empathy swayed me in the direction that SURE, non-adamics can find Eternal Life. But as the years progressed, and my “definition” of what it means to be a “Christian” changed ………………..
Where I am at today is this —- I will believe it when I see it in reality. Where are they??? 2 Billion Christians on the Earth. Where are they???
If they are anything, they would be Strangers passing through, in my opinion. So, what are the requirements of their love for God in this regard? I don’t know. It is something that needs to be addressed. I have a few ideas, but I am pretty much an island here.
Lately, I am hearing on FaceBook Christian Identity people make the claim that there will be BOTH in the “Kingdom” but will be on the Outside. I can’t remember the verse off hand.
This is my problem with Eschatology. I am a Preterist until proven otherwise. Or I should say — I am a Partial Preterist until I see “future” prophecies fulfilled before my very eyes. So, their “Outside the Kingdom” theology is most likely out of Context. It doesn’t make any sense to me. We are talking Eternity here. I think they believe there will be a time before Eternity where Jesus comes to earth and reigns physically and there will be non-adamics who receive Him.
I don’t know. I will believe it when I see it. Certainly not SOLID enough to form doctrine around. Ex: Since they will be on the “Outside” in this millennial reign, then they can be “christian” today blah, blah, blah. I honestly think most White People lack the courage to just say what they really believe. This “Racist” Label/Accusation cuts deep. Most people would rather be an adulterer before they are ever a racist.
Non-adamics in other countries ………………
If they can be filled with the Holy Spirit, my Question is — Why are they not waking up to the Truth of True Israel? Shouldn’t the HS reveal this to them? They could be coming to our defense, if they were truly filled with the HS. Are they waking up to the Jewish Question??? No. No other race is coming to our defense.
Kevyn Reid of Americas Promise Ministries just did a Sermon on this Topic. He is ABSOLUTE in his position that non-adamics can receive Eternal Life. You may want to listen to his Scriptural Support. I found it lacking, quite honestly. A good example, in my opinion, of not wanting to be called a racist.
Link is in this thread somewhere. Peace.
I’m surprised such a group exists on FaceBerg. You would think they would have shut it down by now.
“My opinion — we can’t fix the racial question without exposing the Jewish one.”
I agree 100% with you on this one. One only needs to read what they say about our Lord and us to see who is the bigger threat.
It took me a LONG time to realize that fact.
— SC Rebel —
There are CI people/groups on Facebook ONLY because most are controlled opposition. Most are Universalists and the others — “All Israel Will Be Saved”. So …. FB isn’t too concerned.
Not sure if you caught a few comments I made about a Group calling themselves “Israel Only”. They are not racial.
But at first they turned out very good articles proving the “Israel Only” thesis. Well …… out of nowhere this group turned and went Universalist. It was interesting to watch. I can’t help but think this was intentional. But then I often give the Jew too much credit. It was most likely Supernatural. Men moved by the spirit of anti-christ.
Where is that Link for the Interview?
— CFT —
Are you aware of any of your articles, or perhaps somewhere else, someone has addressed “Nicolas of Antioch” — Acts 6:5.
I am following a Face Book Group called — Israel Only. It is a group of diverse “christians” who recognize that the Covenants were given to Israel and Israel only. They even acknowledge that the “gentile” i.e., the Nations, are physical born Israelites of the Dispersion.
However — there is now a new trend of thought which includes “the Proselyte” into the Covenant(s). They use Nicolas as proof —
“..Therefore, brethren, seek out from among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business; 4 but we will give ourselves continually to prayer and to the ministry of the word. And the saying pleased the whole multitude. And they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit, and Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte from Antioch, whom they set before the apostles; and when they had prayed, they laid hands on them….”
I think their argument is that because Nicolas is singled out as a “proselyte”, therefore, he must not be an Israelite.
The word “proselyte” does come up a few times in the Scriptures. How are we treating that word?
From Vines Dictionary —
Proselyte:
akin to proserchomai, “to come to,” primarily signifies “one who has arrived, a stranger;” in the NT it is used of converts to Judaism, or foreign converts to the religion of Israel, Mat 23:15; Act 2:10; 6:5; 13:43. There seems to be no connection necessarily with Palestine, for in Act 2:10; 13:43 it is used of those who lived abroad. Cp. the Sept., e.g., in Exd 22:21; 23:9; Deu 10:19, of the “stranger” living among the children of Israel.
Strongs #4339 — proselytos — is not discussed in this article “Strangers in the Bible”. Is there a difference between the Stranger and a Proselyte? I think not. But I need to know how to respond.
This Israel Only Group, who was very EXCLUSIVE, is now all of a Sudden Inclusive. It is weird to watch. When once Israel was a homogenous people — now they are like the Israelites in the 10 Commandments. LOL
Weird group because they do not consider themselves “Christians” presently. They are all to a man Preterists, so ….. “christianity” is a past reality. It is very weird. But they have written some great Israel Only articles.
Thanks!
So when the Jews tell us to take in Third World refugees into our white nations because the Bible tells us to “welcome the stranger”, does that mean they are lying and we don’t have to? Tikkun Olam, goyim!
It’s a jew. It’s lips are moving. What do you think?
Many universalist Christians equate “strangers” with “the nations”, and they extend the definition of “nations” to mean any and every country that ever existed or will exist, but that’s simply not what “nations” means in the context of the Bible.
“Nations” is very specific in its meaning, and it refers to the original Genesis 10 nations. “Nations” are not countries, but rather particular tribes or bloodlines descended from Adam.
“Nations” is not an all-inclusive term the way most judeo-Christians misuse it.
The Bible tells you what “nations” means — terms like “all people” and “all nations” have a biblical context and meaning that is very different from what modern readers take them to mean.
Unfortunately, so many Christians read the Bible literally when it should be metaphorically or figuratively.
They have no concept of figures of speech and idioms that were used by the Gospel writers and Paul, who most certainly would not have understood “all nations” to include even those tribes in the deepest darkest jungles of Africa and Asia.
Yet most Christians simply ignore the historical context of when the Bible and Gospels were written and make up their own modern context, and risk completely misunderstanding the original intention of the Scriptures.
“The True Origin of the Jews”
“Thus we can see clearly that neither Esau nor any of his descendants were Israelites. But all of his children from that time on could be classified as Jews. Also, his descendants could be called brothers to the Arabs, because he married one of Ishmael’s daughters.
The first time that a mixed multitude is mentioned in the Bible is in Exodus 12:37‑38:
“And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children. And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle.”
Then the mixed multitude is mentioned again in Nehemiah:
“Now it came to pass, when they had heard the law, that they separated from Israel all the mixed multitude.” (Nehemiah 13:3)
There was another group of mixed breeds which came back from the Babylonian captivity with SOME of the True Israelites which returned to build the Temple. During this time the priests found that many of the Israelites had married into the other races, and had strange wives (meaning they were not Israelites) and were told to separate themselves from them:
“Now it came to pass, when they had heard the law, that they separated from Israel all the mixed multitude.” (Nehemiah 13:3)
[Continues]:
http://israelect.com/reference/WillieMartin/OriginOfTheJews-1.htm
I’m still partial to the 1 Kings 11 implication, that Edom was repopulated by Israelite soldiers copulating with Edomite women ~1000 years BC, and that these people became the Jews.
Recently we had an article here about the futility of preaching the Gospel to the third worlders, asserting that they aren’t called to it as it is only for Adamics. The same goes for Judaism, as many (particularly South Koreans) are exposed to it, but they cannot become Jews, despite trying.
As the Jews explain, the goyim lack a soul, the “neshamah”, and therefore they can’t become Jews. Could their neshamah be their genetic tie to Esau?
…and in Matthew 13:39-43….the {{{TARES}}} are the DE FACTO {{{workers of iniquity}}} bound for the
“Eternal ovens of Truth”…..and there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth!
So are you saying that all “tares” are irredeemable, incapable of repentance? Matthew 13:39 is addressing Israelites, so wouldn’t that suggest that Israelites can be both wheat and tares, depending on whether or not they are “workers of iniquity”? We know that Israelites can indeed be “workers of iniquity” because God issued them a bill of divorce for their unrepentant sinning.
An Israelite is wheat, non Isrealites are tares. Tares are only capable of iniquity, because that is what tares are. A goat can not change into a sheep.
Is Matthew 13:39 exclusively referring to Israelites? If nothing else, I thought that the nations were allowed in, or is this a difference between the kingdom of and assembly of God?
Is this verse in the vein of the leopard being unable to change its spots; How could a grown weed transform into wheat?
And before any universalists get ahead of themselves and start quoting the New Testament, the Israelite disciples of Christ would have understood these OT meanings of “stranger”. The “new covenant” didn’t nullify the meaning of these words.