Enmity, Part 4: The Book of Genetics,

Or, DNA and the Tree of Life

By Pastor Eli James
(With help from Arnold Kennedy and Stephen H. Anderson)

In formulating my own Two-Seedline philosophy, I am actually indebted to several non-seedliners, such as Mark Downey, Ted Weiland and Arnold Kennedy, all of whom understand that the Anglo-Saxon Caucasians are True Israel.   All of these gentlemen have taken non-seedline positions concerning most of the language of Genesis 1-4.  I do not consider these men to be an obstacle to my Faith.  Rather, I consider them to be a challenge to my ability to debate and persuade.  In analyzing their positions, I have gained a stronger conviction for my pro-seedline position, because their opinions have forced me to dig deeper in order to find answers for their objections.

My own position is that the “Tree of Life” refers to the DNA of the Adamic Race.  Although the late Arnold Kennedy was not a Two-Seedliner, his racial analyses of Scripture are very close to my own.   Having posted many of Arnold Kennedy’s writings on the internet, a common reaction has been: “I can’t believe he’s not a Two-Seedliner!”  Indeed, I begin Part 4 of the Enmity Series with an essay by Arnold Kennedy, as it gives a great introduction the subject matter that is covered in Genesis, Chapters 2 and 3.

{Note: Arnold did not believe in using the Sacred Names, Yahweh and Yahshua, so I have left his usage of LORD and Jehovah intact, as I do not believe in putting words in other people’s mouths. Also, Arnold and I had many heated debates over the Sacred Names issue, so I know he would not appreciate me changing his words to suit my taste!   – Eli.}

THE GENETIC CODE AND THE “BOOK OF LIFE”

By Arnold Kennedy

INTRODUCTION.

In the Bible pages, we find references to the “Book of Life”. When is someone’s name written into the Book of Life?  Popular religion would say that this happens when a person, “Gives his heart to Jesus”, “Is converted”, “Is born again”, or some such phrase. Then they sing songs like, “There’s a new name written down in glory, and it’s mine”. But is this true?  What is the verse below saying?

Rev.17:8 “They that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world”.

When were these names written into the Book of Life? Here it is said to be, “from the foundation of the world”. The word “world” here refers to the “kosmos” of Israel. Firstly we can look into the tense of the phrase, “were written”. This is perfect tense and passive in mood. The perfect tense is indicative of a completed action in the past that does not need repeating. The passive mood determines that the subject is the recipient of the action. That is, the subject did not have any part in causing it to happen. Thayer’s Lexicon gives “foundation” as “the injection or depositing of the virile semen in the womb”, or “of the seed of plants and animals”. We do not need to analyze the phrase, “the foundation of the world,” further to see that the view of popular religion is quite wrong. The Bible does not record any progressive or later entries into the Book of Life!  {Not only that, the word foundation, according to Thayer’s Lexicon, is more related to the word conception, so “conception of the cosmos [Israelite society]” is not a far-fetched translation! – Eli}

One conclusion that can be drawn from this verse is that all peoples’ names were not written into the Book of Life “from the foundation of the world”, as this verse says. [See also Rev. 3:8 and 20:15 for confirmation]. The phrase, “The foundation of the world” does not exactly parallel the Old Testament phrase, “The foundation of the earth”, but both are used in the sense of establishing something in the past, but detailed explanation of the difference is not necessary at this point. As to the time, Job 38:4-7 tells us it was, “When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy”. The word “names” as in, “whose names were not written”, does not refer just to identifying names given by parents, but is used in terms of everything that name covers, such as authority, rank, character or “being identified with”. What we will consider is whether or not what was “written in the book of life from the foundation of the world” might have something to do with genetic structure or DNA make up.

We will first explore this concept from part of Psalm 139. Reading the passage below carefully will immediately give some “feel” for the subject.

FROM PSALM 139.

There is a passage in this psalm that is well known, but a word and grammar analysis brings out more about what has been said above. In this, some of the word-meanings below come from The Theological Word Book of the Old Testament(Harris-Archer-Waltke).

Psalm 139, 13-17, “For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother’s womb. I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvelous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well. My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them. How precious also are thy thoughts unto me, O God!”

Even without detailed study from this passage, one can get a feel that a person’s genetic nature, and hence what he “is”, is determined before he is born. A word-study of some of the individual words in this passage will add to this conviction. The following word study may be “heavy going” for some people to start with, but it will soon become more interesting.

“REINS” [“For thou hast possessed my reins”] - (Strong’s 3629 kilyah..•

The word “reins” as “kilyah” is translated 18 times out of 31 occurrences as “kidneys”. These 18 times are used in relationship to the Old Covenant sacrifices and are about hallowing those who minister to God in the priest’s office -(Exodus 29:1ff). The selection of priests was race-tribe specific and the burning of the kidneys was performed after the girding of the priests with the robe of the ephod, the ephod itself, and the breastplate. The whole complex procedure that follows is to the following end:

Verses 45-46, “And I will dwell among the children of Israel, and will be their God. And they shall know that I am the LORD their God, that brought them forth out of the land of Egypt, that I may dwell among them: I am the LORD their God”.

This whole matter concerns only one race of people, namely “the Children of Israel,” and indicates the principle whereby God will dwell amongst His people. Furthermore it gives the conviction that God is “their God”, that is, He is “The God of Israel”.

In Job 16:13, and Lamentations 3:13, death and destruction are spoken of as arrows slashing the kidneys (reins). We will be seeing what these arrows are that which causes death. The other 13 times where the word is translated as “reins”, are used in connection with the behavior we allow, that is they are usually given in conjunction with the “heart”.

Psalm 7:9, “God tries the hearts and the reins”.

Psalm 16:6, “My reins shall instruct me”.

The “reins” are what we are, and the “heart” how we respond by our works. Vine’s Expository Dictionary gives “heart” as meaning, “Man’s entire mental and moral activity, both the rational and the emotional elements”. Other dictionaries give such as, “Used figuratively of the seat of emotion and affection”.

In the New Testament pages, there is only one translation as “reins”, and this again is joined with the word “hearts”.

Rev. 2:23, “I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works”.

The “you” in this passage are those within the churches; their works bring a reward. In Jeremiah 12:2 we see that God is far from the “reins” of the wicked, even when God is near in their mouths. This means that there are people in the churches who are “wicked” in this way. Medically today, we know that the function of the kidneys has to do with the purifying the blood!

Levit. 14:11, “For the life of the flesh is in the blood”.

The “life” = “nephesh”= “soul”. A pure (Israelite) bloodline is important to God.  {I’m hearing some of you say already, “I can’t believe he’s not a two-seedliner!” - Eli.} DNA is found within the blood as well as in every other cell of a person. There is therefore a strong connection between the blood and the soul.

“MADE”. [“For I am fearfully and wonderfully made”] - (Strong’s 6395 palah).

This particular word for “made” has a lot more to it than appears on the surface. The word is used in the sense of discriminating, as we see in usage such as:

1. The setting apart, or the discrimination between, the Land of Goshen from the rest of Egypt,

2. The angel of death discriminating between Egyptians and Israelites in the death of the firstborn children, and also of separating the cattle of each.

3. It is also used in the separating those God loves from all others.
In this verse under consideration it is Niphil [simple passive verb] Stem that gives the meaning as, “to put a difference” or “to separate one thing (or group) from all others”, or “to be marked out as being different”. So this phrase carries the idea, “I am fearfully and wonderfully different from all other peoples”.

In this Psalm, David is pointing out that this discrimination was made even when he was in his mother’s womb. This confirms what Paul said about election being made before a person has done good or evil. Because churches cannot accept this concept, they try to get around it by wrongly saying it means that God knew what a person was going to do ahead of time, applying this to all races.

“WORKS” [“marvellous are thy works”] – (Strong’s 4639 maaseh).

The particular word used is about God’s sovereign purposes and activity in a created world. It is not to be confused with Strong’s 4399 “melakah”. The difference is shown in Genesis One and Two where “bara” (created) is about the initiation of an undertaking and “asa” (formed) that is about the fashioning of something. This particular word for “works” is about the ethical obligation and response to the thing created, so here it is about God’s obligation to what he has formed. The meaning of the word “marvelous” tells us that the works of God are extraordinary and difficult beyond our understanding. Here we get a glimpse that there is this great difference between those “created” and the Adamic man who is “made” for the Potter’s purpose.

“SUBSTANCE” [“My substance was not hid from thee”] – (Strong’s 6108 “otsem”).

This is a little-used word that has been translated as “might”, “substance” and “strong”, and seems to be closely related to 6105 “atsam” or “bones”. Strong gives “bones” as one of the translations of “otsem”. It is used in Deut. 8:17 where it is translated as “might” in, “And thou say in thine heart, My power and the might of mine hand hath gotten me this wealth”.

In Job 30:21 it is translated as “substance” in “Thou dissolvest my substance”. The translation from the LXX is given as, “Thou hast put me to grief and cast me away from safety”.  These are somewhat different in translation and do not seem to match, but we can see from them that it seemed to Job that God had taken something precious from him. Putting it all together we can get the feel of what this is about. What God has given His people is something intrinsic or built-in. Where did this happen? It was before the “foundation of the earth” and it had happened in the mother’s womb, in their DNA. This is far from the churches’ “choose Jesus” concept.

“FASHIONED” “In continuance were fashioned” - (Strong’s 3335 “yatsar).

This word is translated as “ordained” in the ASV of this Psalm and as “planned” in 2 Kings 19:25. It is used about the shaping of an object, as in Isaiah 44:9-10 where an idol is pictured as being shaped by hammers. In 2 Kings 9:25; Isaiah 37:26; 46:11 it is shown to be used of God’s pre-ordained purposes. What happened in a mother’s womb was ordained and planned before the child was born. The child was shaped by DNA hammers!

The root word for “fashioned” is used of God’s formation of the nation of Israel in the sense of bringing it into existence, in the same way a Potter uses clay to make different vessels for different purposes. This is as we see in Romans 9:21, “Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?” Israel is made for a purpose that is not shared by other races. This is not immediately evident in the verse quoted, unless we note that Paul was referring to the OT text and this was in the context of the two Houses of Israel.

The fashioning already has taken place in the mother’s womb, and thus is not a function of a belief factor in the thing fashioned. The belief factor comes later in the vessel formed. This principle of fashioning is shown in Isaiah 51: 1-2, “Hearken to me, ye that follow after righteousness, ye that seek the LORD: look unto the rock whence ye are hewn, and to the hole of the pit whence ye are digged. Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah that bare you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and increased him”. That is, Israel was fashioned in Sarah’s womb. The individual application and the national application are really very little different. All this too is something churches will not subscribe to.

SEPARATION OF ISRAEL UNTO THE LORD

“PRECIOUS”. (“How precious also are thy thoughts unto me, O God!” –Strong’s 3365 “yaqar” )

There are 65 usages we could look at that tell us that this word conveys the idea of “heavy”, “honour” and “dignity”, and is about something which is considered valuable because of its intrinsic worth and separateness. {By the way, the same idea is conveyed by the word ‘Aryan,’ which means “noble ones.” – Eli} In Lamentations 4:2 we are told the “precious ‘sons of Zion’ ” are worth more than their weight in gold. But can this “preciousness” be lost or destroyed?

What a foreign (“strange” = nokriy) prostitute takes from an Israelite man is his precious life-[soul] -(Proverbs. 6:26). “For her house inclineth unto death, and her paths unto the dead. None that go unto her return again, neither take they hold of the paths of life”. This is what sexual relations with this particular foreigner also does to the soul (life).  {Are you listening, all you Odinists and White Nationalists, who think that you can get away with this offense and still claim to be “pure”?  – Eli}

The “None that go unto her return again, neither take they hold of the paths of life” indicates that an Israelite man can lose his precious life by having a sexual relationship with a particular foreign woman as signified by the word “nokriy”! [see Appendix “A”]. This shows the unforgiveable nature of this act.

Prov 23:33, “Thine eyes shall behold strange women, and thine heart shall utter perverse things.”

Prov 5:20, “And why wilt thou, my son, be ravished with a strange woman, and embrace the bosom of a stranger?”

The word “bosom” is not used of the breasts of a woman, as it is used of both males and females. It is a symbolic physical term that is figurative of what a person feels deeply and in an intimate way. The uttering of “perverse things” are words of idolatry; the word “perverse” is often used in the Bible of words that are being spoken.

These verses tell about whoredom with “strange” (= “nokriy”) women of a foreign race. Care must be taken here as there are other words concerning “strangers”, “foreigners”, “aliens” and “heathen”.  [A paper detailing these differences is available from UCOY? .  FIND THIS] It is the idolatry that follows whoredom that takes away a man’s precious life.

NOTE: It is commented here that Ruth and Rahab were Israelite in origin. Regarding Moses’ Ethiopian wife, she was Adamic and Hebrew in origin. Zipporah was the daughter of Reuel a Priest of Midian and is referred to as a Cushite. But one Biblical Cush was on the current Saudi Arabian peninsula. The eunuch who Stephen converted must have been white, as a black foreigner would have been stoned to death if he
approached the temple, under Israel’s law.

In the Bible there is a difference between foreign women that come from Abraham’s other wives, some other Adamites who have a residue of that spirit that was renewed in Abraham, and all others.  Those acceptable as a gene pool to take wives from, include such as the Midianites (virgins only) who come from Abraham and Keturah, and the other five sons from this union, from all other women.

Speaking about whoredom Hosea says:

Hos 4:14, “…therefore, the people that doth not understand, shall fall [or be cast aside].”

There is no “maybe” about this.

The Bible makes a difference between illicit sex between an Israelite man and a foreign (nokriy) woman, and illicit sex of the same man with an Israelite woman. Not that the latter may not be wrong; it is because the former is non-recoverable, whereas there is remedy in some circumstances with the latter. An example is the case of when Judah was tricked by Tamar when she posed as a prostitute. Judah did not die for this act with an Israelite woman. In this case it was Judah’s daughter-in-law and this happened after the daughter-in-law’s husband was dead (Genesis 38).

In some cases Israelite men were commanded to “raise up seed” to Israelite women they were not wed to. Jesus confirms this in Matthew 22:24, “Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother”. In Judah’s case, we have to note that Judah had previously married a Canaanite woman and through this union produced two sons, Er and Onan. The Canaanite woman disappears from history and God kills Er and Onan. {Arnold doesn’t mention a third son, Shelah, whose descendants became the Samaritans. – Eli}

In having previously married the Canaanite woman, there is no suggestion that Judah committed idolatry. Idolatry is the usual progression that follows racial intermarriage, over time, and is one aspect of what is so wrong with racial intermarriage. In reading this paper, please keep in mind that it is idolatry that is judged so severely.

TELEGONY (No adequate proof to date, but could be valid).

Another aspect may or may not be found in the argument as to whether or not the sexual act with a foreign woman must in some way affect the Israelite man’s blood or DNA in a way that is not recoverable, even if outwardly no blood transfer is made. This is the claim of what is called telegony. A Zebra stallion was mated with a mare and the foal had signs of stripes. Then the same mare was later mated with a purebred stallion, that the foal still had signs of stripes. It is claimed that somewhere in this mixed-“kind” sex act, some genetic transfer was involved!

Horse breeders claim that the purity of a thoroughbred is sometimes considered impure if the mare has been previously bred to another stud that was not a thoroughbred. There seems to be no firm medical evidence for telegony in the scientific sense, although there is evidence that stem cells from an embryo affect the mother for the remainder of the mother’s life. Although there is mention of telegony from antiquity, there seems to be little modern scientific “proof”, unless of course the evidence is suppressed. Dictionaries use the word “supposed” about telegony. No weight should be placed upon telegony until there is proper evidence from controlled research.  {You know as well as I do that Jooish Establishment science has no interest in this subject. Animal breeders swear by it, and they are more trustworthy than scientists who promote the Fable of Evolution. – Eli}

Regardless of whether or not telegony is valid, something happens that is irreversible in the case of whoredom with strange (nokriy) women. We are not told what this is in any physical sense.  What a man loses is his life, (the same word as that translated as “soul”). But to be complete, one must have body, soul and spirit, so any one of these is tied in with the other two. What cannot be undone or forgiven might well be the unforgivable sin. {What Arnold is saying here is that Fornication + Idolatry = the Unforgivable Sin. Fornication is the physical act of race-mixing. Idolatry is turning one’s heart away from Yahweh to some other god.  The former is a sin of the flesh; the latter is a sin of the heart.  When both the flesh and the heart are turned against Yahweh, that man is cut off from Israel. – Eli}

We cannot eliminate the possibility that there is a transfer of some sort through bodily contact or body fluids, although this does not appear to be likely in the light of present knowledge available. The word “touch” = (Strong’s 5060 naga) is used widely of bodily contact. Israelites are not even to “touch” dead bodies, lepers, certain animals, and even things belonging to wicked men. “Depart, I
pray you, from the tents of these wicked men, and touch nothing of theirs, lest ye be consumed in all their sins”(Numbers 16:26). We are not told exactly what happens, but we are told the touch of them and their property defiles. This is the same word translated as “unclean”, and usually this uncleanness was only for a period. Under the Law a sacrifice for this sin was mandatory.

The matter of whether this applies to non-Semitic foreigners only, part-Israelite women, and about Israelite women taking non-Israelite men as sexual partners will be considered further down in the paper under the heading, “Qualifications”. This is an emotional subject, and we must keep in mind that emotional arguments prove nothing.

“TOUCH” IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

The word “touch” (“haptomai” in the New Testament) is used the same way as “touch” in the Old Testament, as being about physical contact (including sexual contact). We see this in 1 Cor. 7:1, “It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. But yes, it is also used in the normal sense of any bodily contact as well.

In the following passage we are told to not “touch” unclean people.

2 Cor 6:17, “Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate … and touch not the unclean (thing).”

Paul is talking about people coming out from amongst people, not “things”. (The word “thing” is an added word). The “them” are people. Can any deny this? [“Thing” in the KJV and other translations is not in the Greek text as a word]. The “them” in this verse are “unclean” people that are not to be “touched”.  {So, if you are not even supposed to TOUCH them, HOW CAN SEXUAL INTERCOURSE BE ALLOWED?  Eh?  Are you beginning to understand how little distortions of Scripture destroy the true, racial message of the Bible?  Also, the word “things” was ADDED to the text by the KJV translators.  This addition makes it appear that the verse is talking about inanimate objects, rather than humans!!  Those jots and tittles add up to big piles of uncleanness, folks!! – Eli.}  “Unclean” (= akathartos) shows that there is a difference between ‘clean’ and ‘unclean’ (people), with the clean (people) not to ‘touch’ the unclean (people).

We are told, “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers”-(2 Cor. 6:14). The word “unbelievers” is “apistos” that means “without faith”, and this could well refer to non-Israelites who cannot ever possess the faith that was once (for all time) delivered to the saints (Jude 3).

This passage continues on to say:

2 Cor. 6:14-15, “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? Or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?”

The “yoke” here is with “heterozugeo” which means being yoked with people of “a different sort” [Vine’s dictionary], or “one who is not an equal” [Thayer’s Lexicon]. This again presents the racial separation of Israel from other nations. God also made clean and unclean animals and fish; each was born that way, and it is not unreasonable to suggest God created clean and unclean people likewise. {Remember, Yahweh told Noah to keep those clean and unclean animals separated in the Ark. – Eli}

The word “unrighteous” (= “anomia”) means “without law” and so in terms of the Law being given to Israelites only as a covenant, the “unrighteous” would mean non-Israelites. (See Isaiah 26:2, where Israel is described as “the righteous nation”). Throughout the entire Bible, we have a consistent theme; we find God always keeping a portion of His Order pure, separate and undefiled by not “touching” other races in a sexual way.

{Didn’t I tell you that you would be saying to yourself, “I can’t believe he’s not a Two-Seedliner”? – Eli}

EATING BLOOD.

Eating blood of any kind also appears to do something adverse. We are not told about this being anything physical, and medical evidence does not seem to be available. God said, “Wherefore I said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh: for the life of all flesh is the blood.” (Lev. 17.) This is not a prohibition of eating meat because we are told a number of times about not eating unbled meat, e.g. 1 Samuel 32-34.

Why the eating-blood prohibition? It is because the “life” (or “soul” -Strong’s 5315) of an Israelite person is precious to God. How precious? Man’s life exceeds the value of his ability to redeem himself by any of his own actions or assets. Nor can he offer himself. Consequently God alone can redeem His people, even at great cost. The Blood of Jesus is described as being “precious”, a word we saw above.

Speaking of Jacob, Isaiah 43:1-7 says, “Since thou wast precious in my sight, thou hast been honourable, and I have loved thee….. for I have created him for my glory, I have formed him; yea, I have made him”. We do not ever read of other races being “precious”. In saying this there is no direct connection of blood with DNA mentioned in this passage, but DNA is in the blood as in all other cells. As to what happens exactly, we are not told, and medical science seems to have made no mention to date. Some of what happens otherwise is discoursed in Appendix “B”.

“WRITTEN” [“In thy book all my members were written”] – (Strong’s 3789 kathab).

This word is used of something that is recorded in a permanent sense, but it is in the Imperfect Mood. This Mood describes a single action in the past in a pictorial way, and suggests there is some process before its full development. The word is much used in the Old Testament as referring to the keeping of records. The Ten Commandments were “written” by the finger of God. The idea is that which is written is not designed to be extinguished. Thus we have the idea of something being engraved or inscribed.

We do not find any reference to “write” or “written” in the Book of Genesis itself, but in Genesis 5:1 we find reference to the word “book”, so we will move onto that word.

BOOK [“In thy book all my members were written”] -(Strong’s 5612, “cepher”).

In this section we will look at Exodus 32 that is the story about when Moses went up the Mount of God and received the Ten Commandments. When Moses came down from the Mount, he found the people worshipping the golden calves Aaron had made. Here God tells Moses that he would blot the names of those who did this out of “His Book”. We must note that this was not expressly for sexual intercourse with foreigners; rather it was for worshipping the “gods of gold” as being foreigners’ gods.

This word ‘Book” is used in many general ways, such as mathematical activity, scribal traditions, legal documents, and official letters. It is also found as being records, such as, “The book of the wars of the Lord”, “The Book of Jasher”, “The book of the generations of Adam” and “The Book of the Covenant”. It is also used of genealogical records. But there is one special “Book”.

In the KJV of the Old Testament, there is only one passage with reference to “My Book” and three to “Thy Book”, besides that which we have seen in Psalm 139.

Exodus 32:32-33 is in the form of a conversation between God and Moses. “Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin--; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of THY BOOK which thou hast written”. And the LORD said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of MY BOOK.” 

The context of Exodus 32 is about those who were sinning against God in a particular way. The “Book” refers to one particular “Book” among other books. From Psalm 139 we have studied so far, we see this “Book” contains information about each person before they are born. Today we have discovered that this is found to be each person’s individual DNA. The offspring of Israel inherit their genetic code from their parents. As an Israelite can be blotted out of God’s Book, we need to be sure whether or not it is just for miscegenation, or that plus idolatry, or just for idolatry. The latter comes under, “Thou shalt have none other gods before me. Thou shalt not make thee any graven image”.

At first glance it might appear that any sin would cause Israelites to be blotted out in the sentence, “Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of MY BOOK”. Here we need to look at the context to see if any one particular sin is being referred to, because it is clear that there are other sins that can be forgiven. We will see the blotting out is for the idolatry that follows from race mixing.

In Exodus 32 where this passage comes from, the particular sin is one of idolatry. Thus we need to see what led to this idolatry. We read earlier in this passage, “a mixed multitude went up also with them”, and in this passage that Israel started to worship the gods of these foreigners. And then, “the people sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play”. We are told, “Moses saw that the people were naked”. What does the word “play” mean here? In the Piel-stem form [intensive active verb] used here, this is the same as that used about Joseph and Potiphar’s wife, that is, it is sexual. It is used elsewhere as in the phrase, “make love to us”. We can read a number of passages where the phrase, “play the harlot” are found. It is used of that sexual activity which went on in Sodom, and about Isaac “sporting” with Rebecca his wife.  So it is not hard to find the sexual connection of “rose up to play”, especially when done naked!

The indications are then that some Israelites had sexual relationships with the non-Israelite or part-Israelite mixed multitude who were traveling with them. Why say this? We read in Numbers 11:4, “And the mixed multitude that was among them fell a lusting”. The Hebrew word used here (‘avah’) is about bodily lusts and appetites. The passage goes on to tell us that what the Children of Israel (as opposed to the mixed multitude) wanted was just about food to eat. When God told Moses, “for thy people, which thou broughtest out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves”, it is about the people as a whole inclusive of both groups. We are told how they did this in, “they have made them a molten image”-(Deut. 9:12).

What does “corrupted” mean? Strong lists a number of translations such as, “to be marred, be spoiled, be corrupted, be corrupt, be injured, be ruined, be rotted”. The number of Israelites who sinned this way is given as being “about three thousand”-“And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men”. The Levites literally blotted these three thousand out physically by the sword! They were blotted out of
the “Book” as well! Those who had sinned had not sinned in ignorance, because the eternal Law of God was known long before it was given through Moses as a covenant to Israel.  {Note, carefully, folks, that sinning deliberately and sinning in ignorance are treated differently by the Law.  Those Israelites who have sinned in ignorance still have the right of forgiveness. – Eli} We see this when Isaac and Rebecca were grieved that Esau had taken wives from foreign (nokriy) peoples. Esau no longer could repent! That paints a very strong picture indeed!

The prime mover that led to idolatry was the association of Israelite men with certain foreign women. The sin was idolatry! For any Israelite man married to such a foreign woman, it would be hard not to compromise with a woman who could not “hear” the Word of God, and given time, the
Israelite man would compromise.  {It is important to note that idolatry is not merely the worship of carved figurines, or idols. There is also the concept of “idolatry of the heart,” which means deliberately turning against Yahweh in your mind and heart. Race-mixing is a violation of Yahweh’s Laws against “kind after kind.” Mongrelization is clearly forbidden in Deut. 23:2.  If your mind and heart have turned against Yahweh’s laws, you are liable to blotted out of the Book of Life. (Prov. 7:10-25; Ezek. 14:3.) For this reason, the very public stance of the Jews “against” idolatry is mere posturing, for the entire Talmud is idolatry of their hearts!!! Talmudic Judaism is nothing less than the TOTAL REJECTION of Yahweh’s Laws for their own, rabbinical traditions. Idolatry is not necessarily about the physical objects being worshipped.  It’s about putting other things before Yahweh. The rabbis of Judaism hide the idolatry of their hearts by outwardly rejecting physical idols; but their moral compass is totally against Yahweh’s Laws and favors their own interpretations of the Law.  From this perspective, there is no greater idolatry than Judaism, for it is based on the self-worship of the rabbis, placing their own opinions higher than Yahweh’s Laws. – Eli}

“HIM WILL I BLOT OUT OF MY BOOK”.

As there are different word forms for the word “book” we can go back to the Greek Septuagint to see if the form used in Exodus 32 is the same as that used in the “Book of Life” in the New Testament. In this way we can have an indication that we are not comparing apples with oranges. They are the same so it is likely that “My book” and “The Book of Life” are one and the same. We can look at this probability by comparing the phraseology found in both Testaments.

In both we find the similar connection between the words “book” and “the foundation of the earth (and world)”.

Rev. 17:8, “And they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world”.

As found in the Old Testament, we find the same New Testament reference to the certainty of people being taken out of the Book of Life. They are taken out for all time.

Exodus 32:33, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book.

The Book of Life is the Book of Genetics

Rev. 22:19, And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

Without searching out “The Scriptures” - that means the Old Testament as well as the New Testament - we could easily miss the reason why some will have their “part” taken from the Book of Life. The wrong attitude to “The Scriptures” is one reason why the churches miss the association between race mixing coupled with idolatry, as being the cause of names being taken out of the “Book”.

{I would think that the “wrong attitude” is the rejection of Israel’s racial and social separation from the other races of the world.  We are to be, as a people, the “city on the hill,” not evangelizers of individuals of other races. Nowhere do the Scriptures tell us to go out and evangelize the other races. This is based on the false definition of the word ‘Gentiles’ as meaning non-Israelites, when, in fact, the word ‘gentilis’ is Latin for “kinsman.”  We can only be the Chosen People by virtue of our separateness. The other races are to remain separate and distinct; but they will be blessed through us via our overthrow of the Serpent’s tyranny here on Planet Earth. If we engage in race-mixing, we do exactly what Satan wants us to do!!! This is why the Jews have been promoting race-mixing for US, while they hypocritically demand their right to retain their exclusive, anti-assimilation policy for themselves. This obvious double standard is totally ignored by the mainstream churches. – Eli}

What is the meaning of “His part” that is taken out of the book? Strong’s 3313 “mer’os” as translated, shows something assigned to a person; that is his destiny. When was this destiny established? It was “from the foundation of the earth”. That was when the Book of Life was written! {Recall Thayer’s definition of “foundation” as meaning the impregnation of the womb.  Race-mixing destroys this “foundation.”  – Eli}

Now we can give more shape to the doctrine of predestination and get a glimpse of what it is based upon.

Romans 8:29-30, For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

This verse carries on from the words, “according to his purpose” and the tenses of the verbs are all aorist. The word “predestinate” has to do with destiny being determined beforehand, and as we see and have seen, this was decided before “the foundation of the earth”.

Understanding more about the “Book” gives more shape to prophecy about the resurrection:

Daniel 12:1, And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written IN THE BOOK. And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

Here is “the Book” again. Who are those resurrected? It is, “The children of thy people”. That is, it is Israelites only who have not had their names taken out of the Book of Life! Those blotted out
inherit “shame and everlasting contempt”!

GOD’S INTENT TO MAINTAIN RACIAL INTEGRITY/PURITY IN HIS PEOPLE.

In case some have gotten the idea that racial intermarriage is acceptable if there is no idolatry, this is not so because it is against God’s Law.

Through the Bible we can note a determination by God to keep one selection of people genetically pure and those who transgressed this “law of God” were and will be, destroyed. The word “destroyed” is often the same word that is translated as “spoiled”. The temptation to transgress this law by yielding to the womanly wiles of foreign women is available and open to every man of the chosen race, as we find in the 13th verse of 1 Corinthians 10, below, “There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man”. The word “man” in context is the Israelite man. This does not say every Israelite man would be tempted, because we know this is not true. The background of the verse is about the time when Israelites had sexual relationships with Moabite women in the days of Balaam. Those who did have these relationships were slain! But this was not what they were slain for because of Midianite women came from an acceptable gene pool -e.g. Moses married a Midianite woman. {It is possible that many Midianites, apart from Jethro’s family, were practicing Baal-worship. (Num. 31:16.)  So, at this point in history, the Midianites were still of pure Adamic race, but they were dabbling in the race-mixing sex rituals of the Kenites and Canaanites.  Any virgin girls would obviously not have yet participated in such practices. – Eli}

Numbers 25:2, And the people did eat, and bowed down to their gods. And Israel joined himself unto Baalpeor.

They were slain for idolatry!

{I think that Arnold here misses a crucial point:  Since illicit sex of all types, including race-mixing, was a specific part of the rituals of Baal-worship, the Midianites in question were engaging in that activity as well.  I doubt that mere idolatry was the sole cause of Moses’ outrage with the Midianites. Arnold is correct in saying that the text doesn’t mention fornication, and that is why he says they were slain for idolatry; but fornication was a central focus of Baal-worship. This understanding makes the next verse more meaningful. – Eli.}

Deut. 4:3, Your eyes have seen what the LORD did because of Baalpeor: for all the men that followed Baalpeor, the LORD thy God hath destroyed them from among you.

Israelites are capable of loving the shameful things foreign people do.

Hosea 9:10, I saw your fathers as the firstripe in the fig tree at her first time: but they went to Baalpeor, and separated themselves unto that shame; and their abominations were according as they loved.  

{The sex rituals of pagan Baal worship routinely involved prostitution and orgiastic revelry, without regard to the race of the sex partner.  Only Israelite religion taught total separation of the races.  All other religions accepted it then and still accept it today. Thus, modern Judeo-Christianity is actually a form of paganism, because it rejects the segregation and predestination of True Israel. This eventuality was prophesied by Paul in II Thes. 2. – Eli}

Religious churches appear to know absolutely nothing about these inevitable consequences.

There is no indication that the returnees from Babylon at the time of Ezra and Nehemiah were indulging in idolatry (they did not get a chance with their tough leaders) and these returnees were not slain when they had taken foreign wives. But they had to divorce their wives and children. Neither was Aaron slain, even if he made the golden calves under pressure from the mixed multitude.

In Numbers 31, Moses had let the Israelites keep the Midianite women alive provided they were virginal. Moses was unhappy about this, and the, “keep them alive for yourselves” that he said, does not insist they were taken as wives to produce seed that would consider them to be Israelites. The Midianite males were all slain. But why is it virgin women only? Again this seems to be an area of mystery that is not defined. We have to consider whether there is an unknown physical “something” that happens with the sex act, or whether it is psychological or something else.  {As stated earlier, Arnold is overlooking the ritualistic sex that was part of all Baal-worship. These virgins could only be acceptable because they were still 100% Adamic in their DNA.  Their minds may have been polluted by paganism, but their bodies were still pure.  Moses would have been intimately familiar with the tribal associations of the Midianites, due to his living with Jethro for 40 years.  It follows that these virgins were the last generation of pure-blooded Adamic women within the tribe of Midian. Moses selected his wife, Zipporah, from the generation before this. If Zipporah were not a pure Adamite, Moses would have been violating Deut. 23:2. (“No mongrel shall enter the congregation of Yahweh.”) – Eli}

Because the answer is lengthy and has to do with “spirit”, it has been placed in APPENDIX “A”.

Now this same theme about idolatry is found through the New Testament pages.

1 Cor. 10: 6-18, Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted. Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.
8 Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand.
9 Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents.
10 Neither murmur ye, as some of them also murmured, and were destroyed of the destroyer.
11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples {Are you listening, Israelites?  Are you learning the lesson? – Eli}: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.
12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.
13 There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.
14 Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry.

The sin is idolatry! The Israelite sexual contact with the women of Moab led to the idolatry. We have to take note that this is a New Testament admonishment, and any modern church idea of, “That’s Old Testament stuff”, is not rational. We can also note here that these “Gentiles” were Israelites!

In the words, “not lust after evil things” the word “things” is (1938 epithumi), a word that means, “to lust for a lover”. The word “evil” here is “kakos” that means “intrinsically and fundamentally evil”.

{Ironically, the modern churches teach that race-mixing is acceptable.  Their gripe is against “sex outside of marriage.”  But even this complaint is hypocritical, as these “pastors” watch the institution of marriage fall apart.  Like the Pharisees, they pay lip service against illegitimacy while they stand by and do nothing about it.  In fact, the denominations (demon nations) teach that we should not be “judgmental” about such things!!!  Hence, divorce, illegitimacy and fornication are winked at, if not encouraged by these demon churches.  Has this priesthood fallen away or hasn’t it? – Eli} 

The same temptation to take a lover from foreign women is one that could be in the mind of every Israelite man. The fact of being tempted is not a sin. The God of Israel says His people are able to withstand this temptation and to have the means to escape this snare. But if they do not know it is a snare, they are the more likely to fall into that snare. More than that, if they are encouraged by their church leaders by wrong doctrine, Israelite men will be even more likely not to take heed to the “lest he fall” of verse twelve above.

Likewise today, as Jesus said of the teachers in His day, Luke 11:52, “Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered”.

Of church leaders we read, Jeremiah. 2:8, “They that handle the law knew me not: the pastors also transgressed against me, and the prophets prophesied by Ba’al, and walked after things that do not profit.”

Ba’al worship is what those who, “have forsaken the commandments of the Lord” -(1 Kings 18:18) are doing, even today. The definition has not changed! Ba’al worship is multi-racial and does not recognize the Lord as, “The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob”, as Elijah did on Mt.Carmel, and as God said to Moses, “I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob”-(Exodus 3:6 –Acts 7:32). Likewise the prophets of Jezebel worshipped Ba’al. The proportion of true prophets to false prophets was something like 1:800!! It is probably a similar ratio today.

Because the Law of God in regard to this particular sin is not taught in the churches, they are destroying God’s people through lack of knowledge.

Hosea 4:6, My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.

This passage about being destroyed for lack of knowledge is often used out of context. The next verse says, “They shall commit whoredom”. It must happen! It happens through lack of knowledge! This is because of the teachers and their lack of teaching about the Law of God. God says He will not only forget them, but He will also forget their children. Now we are getting some idea of how serious this is.

It was deadly serious in the case of Esau who could not find repentance. This is given to us as an example!

Hebrews 12:16-17, Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright. For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.

Esau was both a fornicator and a profane person. It was this combination that made him unable to find repentance. The 9th verse of I Corinthians chapter 10 reads, “Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents”. The word translated as “serpents” is derived from the word (Strong’s 3700 “optanomai”) that has the meaning, “to allow one’s self to be seen, to appear”. It shows what is in the inner self is manifesting outwardly. The Israelites that did this were also both fornicators as this applies to sexual acts, and profane in that they worshipped the gods of the Moabites. It was open to all to see.

We have seen what is shown in Exodus 32 as to how names are blotted out of “My Book” and how there is no forgiveness for this one particular combination of fornication and idol worship. This is summarized in the next passage:

Heb: 3:7-12, Wherefore (as the Holy Ghost saith, To day if ye will hear his voice, Harden not your hearts, as in the provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilderness: When your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my works forty years. Wherefore I was grieved with that generation, and said, They do always err in their heart; and they have not known my ways. So I sware in my wrath, They shall not enter into my rest.) Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.

This gives what happened in the wilderness as being an example. To depart from the living God is idolatry.

{And for those who believe that Paul teaches against the Law, why would he even cite these examples, except that we should not violate them? – Eli.}

THE GENETIC CODE

There are differing bodies and fleshes.

1 Cor. 15:38, But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body. All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.

Whatever natural “body” God has given is each is something that is pre-determined genetically. The Bible refers to man's offspring as the "SEED OF MEN". God refers to future generations as "SEEDS." He speaks of seeds as if He already knows what they are. Seeds are produced after a seed is fertilized and splits into two completely different cells with similar but different DNA instructions that will only apply to each particular new seed. God calls these containers of genetic instructions, "seeds." That is, the same set of directives that were ordained of God, are also written in the seeds of descendents. We observe this act of creation every time we plant a seed, and watch it grow. A baby is born according to the set of instructions written in the baby's seed. We are told in Genesis many times that everything brings forth “after his own kind”. Sets of instructions are written in the seed of all life on earth. These sets of instructions are written in coded form inside each cell of each seed. This coded set of instructions is not the “Living Word” of God that we call, “The Scriptures”, because the Words of God are Spirit (pneuma) and Life (zoe).

Regarding the Adamic man in Genesis Two, Jehovah “formed” a man from those who had been created by the Elohim in Genesis One, and breathed into him the breath of life. Eve was cloned from Adam, and became the mother of “all living”, that is, the mother of those with the breath of God potential in their genetic make up. Both non-Adamic man and Adamic man have physical life, but only those from the Adam-Seth-Noah-Abraham-Isaac line can have spiritual life. This life is activated in these by belief in Jesus Christ.

Seeds enclose the coded genetic directions of the Living God. These written directions located in the seeds, be it vegetable, or animal, contain the instructions that will command the elements of the earth, to bring forth life according to God's instructions written inside the seeds. Everything physical is made from the elements found in the dust of the earth.

Genesis 2:7, And the LORD God formed man of the DUST of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

This is not said of the men and women of Genesis One.

Now, to go back to the matter of race, we are told even from newspapers, that medical professionals must have matching candidates to enable organ transplants. If the donor organ's DNA language does not match the recipient's DNA language, the recipient's immune system will come into play and refuse the transplanted organ. The recipient's immune system will destroy the donor organ because of this genetic language barrier. This organ will be rejected because the donor's DNA and the recipient's DNA are not speaking the same genetic language. This is one reason why hospitals ask for racial backgrounds before treatment and surgery.

But when a donor and a beneficiary are closely related, such as a father and son, or mother and daughter, the operation is much more likely to succeed. This is because both of these close relatives speak pretty much the same genetic language, therefore the donor's DNA, and the recipient's DNA can communicate with each other and do not become antagonistic. That different races are mismatches in terms of genetic compatibility, tells us that there are intrinsic genetic differences between the races. There are of course other factors besides race that may cause mismatches.

Geneticists tell us that the genetic code consists of “words”. These “words” are commands. Words are made up of letters, and languages are made up of words. These words written in our DNA have power to command, instruct, and bring forth life according to the specifications of the DNA of a living cell.

Eternal Life is not written into the genetic code, but those with the genetic code of Israelites can come to have eternal life by belief. Jesus said of the Israelites, “I am come that they might have life, and that THEY might have it more abundantly”.

1 John 1:1, That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the word of life (Jesus).

1 John 5:11, And this is the record that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

The context is about Abundant Life, not physical life. The verse refers to what Jesus achieved by His death in giving to His people everlasting Abundant Life.

Philippians 2:16, “Holding forth the word of life; that I may rejoice in the day of Christ”. “Holding forth” means “taking heed to”. Jesus is that “WORD OF LIFE” made flesh.

Eternal life is given to the redeemed out of those written in the Book, who are worthy.

Rev. 5:9, “Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation.”

This does not say “of” every nation. It is of Israelites who are gathered “out of” or from amongst every race and place where they had been scattered. “Out of” does not mean “of”.

Rev. 20:15, And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Those to be burned are those conceived as tares, together with those corrupted Israelites who, “kept not their first estate”, and who were blotted out of the Book of Life. Those “written in the Book of Life” had had their names written in from, “The foundation of the world”. The tares were never written in! Those who were written in genetically can fail in their spiritual life by unbelief.

Heb 4:11, Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.

2 Peter 2:10, But rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall: For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Rev. 17:8 speaks about those, “whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world”. What then is a name? A “name” is not a mere tag of identification. It is an expression of essential personality or potential and identity. Those so named who are overcomers are to be given a “new name.” -(Rev.2:17 –3:12).

1 John 1:1, “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us”.

The “us” are the Israelite disciples. This is the condition of real fellowship, “And truly our fellowship is the Father and His Son Jesus Christ”.

Those of God’s race who believe are “fellows”!

Look well at the next verse:

1 John 3:9, Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

Most church people cannot make “head nor tails” of this verse and the translation does not help. At first glance it appears that there are people who cannot sin in any way at all. Popular religion wrongly changes the word “commit” to “practices”, because it uses this only in the spiritual sense. “Commit sin” is the single-word noun, “hamartia”. The word “born” should be translated as “begotten” and those “begotten” are those who come from the “sperma” of God. The “seed” is the grain or kernel that contains within itself the germ of the future plants. This “seed” is the DNA. If this DNA is unchanged in the present physical sense, then there is no missing the mark (sin) in regard to what the “seed” is. This is in the physical sense only, just as the “seed” of Abraham is physical. (In the spiritual sense though, this seed can sin by unbelief).

Always this “seed" brings us back to “the seed of Abraham”. This is a genetic seed selected by God before “having done good or evil” -(Romans 9:11, “Neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth.”)  It has nothing to do with being converted [to Judeo-Christianity – Eli]. But for this “seed” to become justified before God, it has to become converted to be like Abram whose works were counted to him for righteousness.

Luke 1:54, He hath holpen his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy; As he spake to our fathers, TO ABRAHAM, AND TO HIS SEED FOR EVER.

Who sows this good seed as the children of the kingdom?

Matt 13:37, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one.

Tares are grown from tare seeds. The genetic composition of tares cannot allow them to change into wheat. The destiny of the tares is for them to be “cast into the fire”.

Psalm 29 says many things the VOICE OF THE LORD brings to pass. It is the sort of thing we can read without taking in what it is saying.

Psalm 29:9, The voice of the LORD maketh the hinds to calve, and discovereth the forests:   When God speaks, things happen! But how do they happen? How does a hind know when it is time to give birth? It is triggered by its DNA! How do forests become “discovered” (A word meaning stripped of leaves). It is written into its DNA! The DNA then is a place where the VOICE OF THE LORD is heard in this respect.

We are told the voice of the Lord thunders. It thunders in both the physical and the spiritual realms. There are genetic commandments. There are spiritual commandments. The VOICE OF THE LORD is often connected in the Bible to the phrase, “Commandments of God”. The VOICE is described as being terrible! There is a very loud message in this! We can read about obeying the Lord in regard to not mixing seeds. There is no case for mixing the seed of one race with the seed of another race.

There is no case for the mixing of the seed of plants with the seed of animals in the sense of genetic engineering! But food and drink intake can indeed bring about physical changes that may affect future generations. This may be in another part of the genetic structure that is affected. We can witness what Jacob did.

Genesis 30:37, And Jacob took him rods of green poplar, and of the hazel and chestnut tree; and pilled white strakes in them, and made the white appear which was in the rods. And he set the rods which he had pilled before the flocks in the gutters in the watering troughs when the flocks came to drink, that they should conceive when they came to drink. And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstraked, speckled, and spotted.

We are not told if this goes on to the next generation when the “rods” were not put into the water.

Behavior can also bring changes that have the appearance of being within another part of the genes; we see this in the case of King David and his progeny.

2 Sam 12:10, Now therefore the sword shall never depart from thine house; because thou hast despised me, and hast taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be thy wife.

We see something like this in the case of the Rechabites.

Jer. 35:18, And Jeremiah said unto the house of the Rechabites, Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Because ye have obeyed the commandment of Jonadab your father, and kept all his precepts, and done according unto all that he hath commanded you: Therefore thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Jonadab the son of Rechab shall not want a man to stand before me for ever.

We have to distinguish between physical life and spirit life. Israelites have physical life only because Adam was constrained to live “as if he were a living soul” –(a better translation) - that is, as if he were (actually) a human being like those of Genesis One. The part of us that lives eternally does not carry any genetic material because:

(a) God is spirit, and not genetic
(b) Genetic material is needed only for reproduction and there will be no giving in marriage in eternity
(c) Jesus said that which is spirit IS spirit and that which is flesh IS flesh
(d) Spirit can exist without a body, but a body cannot exist without a spirit – that is why the natural body turns to dust and is never revived again, as such. When the transfiguration occurs, the physical body turns into an unconstrained spirit that can take a human (or probably any other) shape it wishes (or it may be constrained by the soul/personality to take only its own formerly, individual, recognisable human shape when it is manifested as a human being – but in its perfect physical form).

ALL THIS IS NOT THE POPULAR CHURCH TEACHING.

The popular teaching is that DNA or inborn “spirit” differences do not matter, because in that view it is only “belief” that matters. Today, the popular understanding is that all races come from one source and most Christian churches subscribe to this view, believing that race is a social or environmental phenomenon, rather than being biological and genetic. That races have perhaps 99% in common genetically is considered sufficient proof of this. But within that 1% difference are the characteristics of race, and what else is ignored is the matter of “spirit” that features through the Bible. Can “spirit” matters be identified genetically? There seems to be no experimental scientific evidence of it but possibly the experts do not look for this, although they freely speak about race-behavior genes. As this is a fact then environmental factors alone would not be all that affects behaviors.

Quoting from “Diversty in the Human Genome” by Glayde Whitney, we read:
“Genes govern every detail of every structure and function of every cell in the human body. Although they operate in constant interaction with the environment, genes control every physiological function, from growth to healing to digestion to data-processing in the brain – and they do so from conception to death. A tremendous amount of information – the entire biological blueprint for each individual human being – is contained in the genes.”

Until very recently most of our knowledge about genetics consisted of deductions from patterns of inheritance of traits among family members, and statistical inferences from traits in populations. We have known very little about the actual molecular chemistry of inheritance. This lack of knowledge has resulted in never-ending arguments about the causes of race differences.

For example, it is widely accepted among scientists (although rarely acknowledged in public) that blacks and whites differ substantially in average IQ. The never-ending arguments hinge on whether the cause of the difference is genetic or environmental. Over the last 40 years both environmentalists and hereditarians have generally agreed that an adoption study would settle the question. If black children, adopted and reared in middle-class white families, grew up to function intellectually and emotionally like whites it would be a strong argument for environment. If they grew up to function like blacks it would establish that the race differences were largely genetic.

Controlled studies have been made about racial behavioral differences on different planes. That these can be reproduced tells us there is a genetic dynamic that over-rides or modifies environmental factors. It might be put this way that a gene is like a match that on its own is little problem – it is environment that strikes the match. Actual behavior is effectively a combination of both.

But with Israelites an important feature is the matter of spirit.

Ezekiel 39:29, For I have poured out my spirit upon the house of Israel, saith the Lord GOD. Isaiah 44:3, I will pour my spirit upon thy seed, and my blessing upon thine offspring.

In the first verse the mood is perfect, that is, it is a done deed for all time. The second verse shows that the same applies to all the offspring of Israelites in the future. There is no mention of the Spirit being poured out upon any other race. In Joel’s prophecy, the context is that of Israelites, and so “upon all flesh” means “upon all flesh of Israelites”.

Israelites are free to use or to not use the spirit God has placed in them from conception. Being with foreign women creates a wrong environment and thus a wrong stimulus. Jesus said, “What is begotten of spirit is spirit and what is begotten of flesh is flesh”. Our spirit is contained in a mortal body and thus is subject to the needs of that body. Body, soul and spirit are intimately and inextricably intertwined during life.

Culture is the consequence of collective/community behavior that is inbuilt. Israelite culture changes when Israelites disobey God. Israelites are told, “Learn not the way of the heathen. - Jer. 10:1. This is precisely what the education system in white countries is encouraging led by the controlled media and many churches. We can see why God set boundaries to the different races. He even separated the inheritance area of each Tribe of Israelites!

In the Bible, the use of words, such as “generations” (in the sense of a genetic line of descent), are frequent.

Genesis 6:8-9, But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD. These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.

The word “generations” is a “gene” word. Biblical genetics is a neglected subject. In this respect we are told Noah was “perfect” (or complete) in his genes. This enabled him to walk with God. But why did Noah survive the flood? This passage goes on to tell us, “And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth”. The word “corrupted” is the same as that shown earlier in Exodus 32:7, “Thy people, which thou broughtest out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves”. How did they become corrupted (spoiled)? IT WAS BY NOT REMAINING “PURE” GENETICALLY, AS NOAH DID.

It was not the Ark that saved Noah – God had Noah build the Ark because he was “perfect in his generations”, and besides that, “He walked with God”. Racial corruption always tends towards to idolatry and not walking with God. There is much about “corruption” with this meaning through the Old Testament. Religious translation “doctors” have taken the scalpel to the matter of Noah being “perfect in his generations”. This has been taken out of most versions since the KJV. The version makers have been clever in excising similar things, thus deceiving the majority church people.  {And it demonstrates the deceit in the hearts of the editors and publishers!!! – Eli}

Yes, Israelites can be “cast off” and “cut off” for other reasons, but after punishment and chastisement they can be restored. They may sin until there is no healing (2 Chron 36:16 + Prov. 16:15). But when they commit idolatry they are “spoiled” and when “spoiled,” THERE IS “NO REMEDY.” The Book of Jude tells us about such people in the church scene who are, “not having the spirit”, and about another group, “hating even the garment spotted by the flesh”. The two groups are poles apart. The first group predominates in denominational churches. Ethnic churches are “not having the spirit” and could not possibly be any different!

There is a verse in picture form that may have a bearing on this subject. Amos 9:7, “For, lo, I will command, and I will sift the house of Israel among all nations, like as corn is sifted in a sieve, yet shall not the least grain fall upon the earth.”

The word “sift” is about shaking something to try to make it move, in this case it is the House of Jacob. The word “grain” = ts’eror denotes something packaged in a bundle, and is used of saving one’s life, as in the following verse:

1 Samuel 25:29, And though men be risen up to pursue thee, and to seek thy soul, yet the soul of my lord shall be bound in the bundle of life with Jehovah thy God; and the souls of thine enemies, them shall he sling out, as from the hollow of a sling”.

The word “sieve” is metaphorical of the discipline of God (Isaiah 30:28, Luke 22:31), and the phrase “bound in the bundle of life” is suggestive of what is bound or contained in a single grain, in that it contains the total DNA in a bundle. The words “bundle” and “grain” are the same word in Hebrew. God is going the terribly shake His people Jacob, and “All the sinners of my people shall die by the sword, which say, ‘The evil shall not overtake nor prevent us’ ”. Amos detailed the sins of the people and that those who would not listen would die. One could well ask what is going to happen to the “Rapture” enthusiasts who say they will escape tribulation!

Jacob’s Ladder

Jacob’s ladder is pictorial of the DNA helix. The word “ladder” is unparalleled and exclusive to Jacob, and is a perfect description of the genetic spiral ladder that science has recently discovered, Jacob being the father of the chosen exclusive Israelites. The Hebrew also means, “I lift up – I cast up – I exalt” or “the sum total”. These elohiym messengers (angels) knew the way for Jacob’s seed to receive an inheritance blessing.

Gen 28:13, And, behold, the LORD stood above it, and said, I am the LORD God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac: the land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed.  {This also confirms the dominion given exclusively to the Adamites in Gen. 1:26-27. – Eli}

But this is exclusive to Jacob and his descendants!

QUALIFICATIONS.

We must look at whether on not there are any qualifications or exceptions to what has been said above in connection with race.

(1). Israelite women having non-Israelite male sexual partners.

We can note here that the “blotting out” does not happen when an Israelite woman goes with certain foreign lovers, as it does with others. In the Books of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Lamentations, and Hosea, there are references to Israel (symbolized as a woman) as having many “lovers”. We are told in Ezekiel 23:7, “She doted with all their idols”. Israel played the part of a Harlot woman (Book of Hosea), BUT GOD TAKES HER BACK AGAIN. Two questions arise:

(a) Are these figurative of Israelites worshipping “Ba’al”?
(b) Are they of literal races, and if so, then what races were these lovers of?

In this paper, it is the latter we need to look at. Seven times the lovers are described as being “Assyrians”. Ezekiel 23:22 expands this to describe these lovers as being, “The Babylonians, and all the Chaldeans, Pekod, and Shoa, and Koa”. Looking into these words, we can see that all of these relate to one particular area that is the area from which Abraham originated. Further to this, in Ezekiel 23: 5 + 12 the Assyrians are described as being “neighbors”, a word that is sometimes translated as “kin” or “kinsmen”. Ezekiel 16:26 includes the Egyptians (of Hebrew origin) as “neighbors”. The word “Assyrian” comes from the name of the second son of Shem. There are many difficulties in matters of identification, for example, Yadi in Assyrian terminology meant Judah. The Assyrians referred to a Yadi in the northwest of Syria as well as Yadi of Judah in the South. An Assyrian inscription mentions Azaryah of Yadi campaigning in the north. Azaryah (also known as Uziah) was a king of Judah. Regarding Azaryah of Yadi he was contemporary with Jeroboam of Northern Israel and in alliance with him. Jeroboam was described as reconquering Hamath that belonged [previously] to Judah. Hamath as a geographical region (and not just a city) encompassed Yadi. It would stand to reason that Jeroboam reconquered Yadi in the north and returned it to the control of Judah in the south which at that time was ruled by Azariyah. But one thing seems certain and that is that these lovers were all “kin” in the sense of them all being Semitic in origin. This of course does not mean all other Semitic women are of an acceptable gene pool for taking wives from.

(2). Israelite men having part-Israelite women or non-Israelite Semites as sexual partners.

About an Israelite male having sexual relationships with part-Israelite women, a presentation can be made for acceptability in certain cases. For instance, we read:

Deut. 23:7-8, Thou shalt not abhor an Edomite; for he is thy brother: thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian; because thou wast a stranger in his land. The children that are begotten of them shall enter into the congregation of the LORD in their third generation.

[NOTE:  Clifton Emahiser has proven that this verse has been mistranslated due to a scribal error. Due to a lost jot or tittle, the word ‘Edomite’ should have been translated ‘Aramite.’  Here is the link:  www.israelitewatchmen.com/Emahiser/WTL-023.pdf – Eli]

The word “abhor” is used in the ritualistic sense, (Piel Stem). After three generations of marrying back into Israelite stock the offspring have again sufficient spirit-bearing capacity to again be acceptable to God. The NASB puts it this way, “The sons of the third generation who are born to them may enter the assembly of the LORD”. With Moabites and Ammonites the banned period is ten generations. With Canaanites the offspring are barred for “all generations” from being an acceptable gene pool to take wives from.  Some make the claim that “ten” in “ten generations” is a Hebraism meaning “for all time”, but if so, why would “all generations” be used in regard to the Caananites?  [Apparently, Arnold didn’t realize that all Edomites Are Canaanites. Therefore, Arnold would have agreed with Clifton about this passage being mistranslated, for he clearly agrees that Canaanites are unacceptable in all their generations!!!!!!!  - Eli.]

There is a further discussion about this in Appendix “A”.

In the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah, there are passages that appear to cut across what has been said so far.

Ezra 9:1-2, “Now when these things were done, the princes came to me, saying, The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the people of the lands, doing according to their abominations, even of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites. For they have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons: so that the holy seed have mingled themselves with the people of those lands.

The “doing according to their abominations” may not be about idolatry as practiced by all these peoples. It may be about such things as eating unclean food, as the word (Strong’s 8441 towebah) is used in the sense of the not keeping of God’s commandments as being an abomination. The point here is that those Israelite men who had taken foreign wives were not destroyed because there is no record of idolatry. Divorce was commanded, as the mixed marriages were contrary to the Law of God. The children were not to be considered to be Israelites and had to be divorced with their mothers.

Nehemiah says that the wives were taken from the Ammonites and Moabites only. These were of Semitic stock. What was demanded was the divorce of all the foreign wives and their children. The three generations factor had not been fulfilled because Judah had not been back in Palestine long enough at that time for that to have come to pass. What we are told in verse 13 is, “Our God hast punished us less than our iniquities deserve, and hast given us such deliverance as this”. What they did had been done in ignorance and God showed His great mercy when they paid the high divorce price in repentance. There was no idol worship committed in this case.

In Nehemiah 13:23, we read of a limitation as to who had married whom. “In those days also saw I Jews [Sic.  Judahites – Eli.] that had married wives of Ashdod, of Ammon, and of Moab”. The accounts in Ezra and Nehemiah have “Ammonites and Moabites” in common as being those from whom wives were taken. These were descended from Lot, and thus they were of kindred Semitic stock. There are other indications in the Old Testament about wives being taken from other Semitic stock in this manner. The male side of Ammon and Moab are permanently condemned.

NOTES: The reference to Ashdod is obscure. The LXX gives this word as Azotia, a word that is hard to trace in terms of word meanings and identity. The word “Ashdod” may refer to part-Israelites living there in that Philistine city. Another difficulty is found in Nehemiah 13:1, “On that day they read in the book of Moses in the audience of the people; and therein was found written, that the Ammonite and the
Moabite should not come into the congregation of God for ever”. This of course appears to conflict with the “tenth generation” factor as mentioned above, but when we look into the differences between “for ever”, “for ever and ever” and “for all generations”, we can see that the Moabite women were banned for a single “for ever” time period, and so this does not conflict with the “ten generations.” The Moabite and Ammonite males were banned for all time. [It could also be that intermarriage with these two tribes was forbidden from that time forward because they eventually became allied with the Canaanites, thus polluting their seedline forever and ever. – Eli]

THE UNFORGIVABLE SIN.

From Adam to Abraham, Adam’s pure line contained the breath of life [see Job], so where did the people come from who did not have the breath of life? These men and women originated from Genesis chapter One. Through misgenerative activity, pollution was introduced to the bloodstream of the sons of Adam, and we find that God sought to eliminate the products of such activity. Noah was “pure in his generations” -[Gen 6:9], and so he and his racially unmixed family were preserved whilst those outside of the ark were destroyed. This is only about those on the “face of the earth”, a phrase which does not mean the whole globe. Later, the Children of Israel were to destroy the mixed breed of the Canaanites. These could not “receive the things of the Spirit of God”. They could not witness in their spirit and say, “The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit that we are the children of God”-[Rom 8:16], as an Israelite is able to do. This principle is a continuing theme in the Bible.

Through Abraham and Sarah, God was restoring the spiritual power for Abraham’s seed to “become the Sons of God” [John 1:12]. God was making a new beginning with Abraham. None other than the seed of Abraham, through the child of promise, Isaac, has this opportunity or potential, as we are told, “In Isaac shall thy seed be called”-[Gen. 21:12, Heb.11:18]. Abraham’s seven other sons did not have this seed identity because they were not “In Isaac”. The descendants of Isaac were begotten of the Spirit from their conception. This is why those who believe among Isaac’s descendants are regarded as being anointed by the Spirit -[Gal 3:16]. Paul is able to declare, “Now He which stablishes us with you in Christ, and has anointed us is God who has also sealed us and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts” -[2 Cor 1:21-22]. In 1 Co. 2:7-16, Paul confirms this, telling the “brethren” [kinsmen of the same womb of Sarah] that they have not received the spirit of the world, but the Spirit of God-[v12]. He says that through this we might know [or comprehend] the things that are freely given to us, [the brethren], of God. He goes on to further declare that the “natural” man [those not born of Isaac’s line] cannot receive the things of the spirit of God. He agrees with Jesus who says that anyone who is not begotten of the original sowing [in the womb of Sarah] cannot “see” the Kingdom of God. Those who can are those “born from above” (not “again” as translated) in John 3:3, from the original sowing.

“Elohiym Seed”

What would happen if men who had the ability to see the Kingdom of God had children with women of other races who could not see the Kingdom of God? The consequence would children with a dilution or removal of their ability to “see” the Kingdom of God.

Malachi 2:14, Because the LORD hath been witness between thee and the wife of thy youth, against whom thou hast dealt treacherously: yet is she thy companion, and the wife of thy covenant. And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth.

The word “godly” here is ‘elohiym”. So we see that God is seeking an “elohiym” seed. The word “seed” is “zera”, a term used of the offspring of plants and animals, and so this is not any “spiritual” seed. An unfaithful Israelite husband who produced seed with a foreign woman would have children who were not “elohiym”. They are no longer one with God’s people. In the New Testament these “elohiym” people still exist. They are named here as being a “theos” sort of people in the New Testament.

3 John 6, “Which have borne witness of thy charity before the church: whom if thou bring forward on their journey after a godly (theos) sort, thou shalt do well”.

The word translated as “sort” means “worthy”. Who else would be counted worthy to judge angels but the “elohiym”? The “throne” is a place from which judgment flows.

Rev 3:21-22, To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne. He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

Rev. 3:5-6, He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels. He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

Has anyone ever heard a sermon about people who are “elohiym”? (See Psalm 86:6, Isaiah 41:23 and John 10:34).

Rev. 21:7, He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.

What do the “overcomers” overcome? This passage goes on to say something about “whoremongers”

But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

Overcomers do not commit whoredom with foreign women! Nothing has changed in the New Testament! The Old Testament pages are still relevant!

Numbers 25:1-3, And Israel abode in Shittim, and the people began to commit whoredom with the daughters of Moab. And they called the people unto the sacrifices of their gods: and the people did eat, and bowed down to their gods. And Israel joined himself unto Baalpeor: and the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel.

The racially mixed children can never become unmixed. The genetic mixture of the child has become fixed. There has been a sin against the “spirit” of separation. Jesus said:

Matt. 12:31, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.

We have read earlier, “None that go unto her return again, neither take they hold of the paths of life”. The consequences are identical!

TO CONCLUDE.

From the context of the Book of Jude, there are persons who are, “not having the spirit”, that are obviously found within the assemblies of God’s people. Like it was in Sodom and Gomorrah, these had gone after “strange (= “heteros” = not the same) flesh that was not matching theirs. They are as “the angels which kept not their first estate”-(Jude 6). Their mouths speak “great swelling words” and they like being admired-(Jude 13). [The televangelists and their imitators! – Eli] They may even be pastors, have ministries, church newsletters and sound more spiritual than others. They will practice a form of separation-(Jude 19).

To those untaught, the genetic code may seem far removed from the Gospel as commonly presented. But the real “great commission” is about the Kingdom of Heaven. This is the Kingdom that is to be restored to Israel. This Kingdom has a king, laws, territory and a particular people belonging to that king. The Gospel is addressed to Israelites and is about Israelites. It is to those whose names were written in the “Book of Life” and written there “before the foundation of the earth”. This is to whom the Gospel is addressed alone. The disciples were told to go to “all nations” where Israelites had been “scattered”. The message to these Israelites that were found within, but not “of” other races, is “Repent ye, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand”(Matt. 4:17).

Jesus said to His disciples, “But rather rejoice, because your names are written in heaven” (Luke 10:20). Jesus had not paid the price at that time! Each of these Israelite disciples’ names was already “written” (in the Book)!! They did not write them in themselves, or do anything to have their names written in, because the grammatical ‘voice’ of this statement is passive. Where were the names written? They were already written in heaven in God’s Book. When were their names written? Again, it was, “before the foundation of the world”.

The basis of being found written in the Book is a matter of genetic election, “according to the foreknowledge of God”(1 Peter 1:2). The one pure genetic code, or set of racial genes, is that which is written in the Book of Life. Every racial corruption by Israelites, who take wives from an unacceptable gene pool and who commit idolatry, causes their names to be blotted out of that Book.

This world’s system is not racist!
The church system is not racist,
But “the God of Israel” is racist!

{Bravo, Arnold!! – Eli}

God would not be known by that name, “The God of Israel” if He were not racist. We can presume all we like about the non-Israelite races and their destiny – there simply is no theme about them through the Bible!

{Actually, there is!  The seedline of the serpent in Genesis 3:15. – Eli}

But we do not have to presume about the other races. They are to be separated from Israelites. The politically correct crowd likes to say this is not so, saying things such as, “There is absolutely no question of any genetic differential”, or, “The genes of the different races are 99% the same”, to say they are not different. They do not present matters about racial genes, behavioral genes and “spirit”. Misinformation abounds. Truth is only found by them that seek it. The war to win minds is still on!

For those of a less scientific bent, the verses below are sufficient for them. But they may find it hard to locate a church that believes these verses.

Deut. 7:6, “For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth”.

Deut. 10:15, “Only the LORD had a delight in thy fathers to love them, and he chose their seed after them, even you above all people”.

1 Peter 2:9, “But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people”.

That is, there is one chosen race that is “special”, a word that means being “a valued property”. These had their genetic code written into the Book of Life, “before the foundation of the earth”! It is their responsibility to see that their names are not blotted out of the Book of Life!

APPENDIX “A”. MIDIANITE WOMEN. (A psychological view by R.N. Phillips of Sydney).

The Bible is ultimately concerned only with our soul/spirit and its acceptability to God. Our physical life is not worth two pence. When it comes to the matter of a partner, the Bible tells us that Adam went looking for a counterpart. It also uses the words ish and ishah to describe Adam and Eve and, on further investigation, we find the same words used to describe any matched male and female breeding pair (it is used of animals). In Adam and Eve's case, we know that Eve was the perfect counterpart for Adam, but to what degree or on which plane? Obviously they were the matched pair for the purpose of producing children, and one presumes they would have been well matched mentally, but not quite, because it was Eve who failed.

Genesis 2:24 tells in the English translation that the man and woman "shall be one flesh".  However, this is not what the Hebrew says -- it contains the Hebrew preposition, le, with the Shiva (like a colon under the letter), which should be translated: “shall be as if they are one flesh". In other words, they will cooperate and work as one towards common goals, physical and spiritual.

Every man and woman remembers the person and circumstances when they lost their own virginity. Nothing wipes that memory out. Therefore, any Midianite woman who had known a man would always have a knowledge and fondness for her Midianite man and would always have a certain reticence {sic, reluctance –Eli} in making the complete cultural shift and commitment to things Israelite. If nothing else, there would always be a longing for that man, given that he was taken from her by force. This is hardly the basis for a stable relationship with anyone of the race who slew her husband. So Moses' instructions were, if nothing else, based on sound psychological principles. A virgin Midianite girl had youth and inexperience on her side and certainly no strong bias against Israelites, other than for the familial ties to father and brother(s) who may have been slain.

But on top of the psychology of Moses' ruling, remember also that many of the Midianite women who had known a man had also been involved in the sex-based idol worship and that this led to the subsequent corruption of Israelites. How would anyone know if any particular, sexually active Midianite woman had been involved in either religious based sex practices and/or in corrupting Israelites? If the women who had been prostituting with the Israelites were committed to their cause and if those who had had any association with their sex-based religion were allowed to live, would they not continue to corrupt the ways of the Israelite men?  So on this level, Moses' ruling was also ruthlessly protective of Israelite way of life.

Did Moses intend that the virgin Midianites should be taken as wives, concubines or slaves? Let's check what we know.

Gen 25:2 - Midian is a son of Abraham and Keturah. Moses married a daughter of a Priest of Midian (Ex 2:18, Ex 3:1 and Ex 4:18 and in Num 12:1 she is also called an “Ethiopian”). In Exodus 18:10-11 Jethro (Moses' father-in-law) recognizes God and pronounces Him to be greater than all gods. In verse 11 and 12 he makes a formal sacrifice to God and the sacrifice is shared with Moses and Aaron. Moses would not have tolerated such a thing if Jethro had been a pagan priest and idol worshiper. In Num 10:29, Moses asked his brother-in-law, Hobab to go with them to Palestine - this demonstrates Hobab's complete acceptability as far as Moses was concerned and there is no mention of that being wrong. However, Hobab wanted to return to his land and his kindred but agreed to travel with them for a little while, at least.

This establishes that at least Midianite women (who were not idol worshipers) were acceptable in Israel at that time. The matters involving Jethro's sacrifice and Hobab imply that Midianite men who were not idol worshipers were also acceptable. However, Hobab did not have the wit to jump at Moses' offer to join Israel. Nor is there record of Jethro travelling with Moses, despite Jethro's proclamation. These observations suggest that although the Midianites had sufficient breath of life to recognize God, they did not have sufficient breath of life to recognize the advantages of joining up with Israel when they had the chance.

Note: On the basis of the names Balaam used for God (“Jehovah my Elohim” -Num 22:18; Jehovah their - Israel's - Elohim, -Num 23:21; El) and his vision of the angel, Balaam was a renegade Israelite who was living with the Midianites. He addressed all utterances to Elohim but he expected his answers from Jehovah. For his dealing with the elders of Moab and Midian, Balaam was killed when Israel attacked the relevant Midianite tribes.

In Deut. 20:14,15, Israel was allowed to take the women, cattle and children of the cities that were far off, but they were to take nothing living, man or beast, out of the cities of the people occupying the Promised Land.

It is interesting that five of the six nations mentioned in Deut 20:17 and six of the seven nations mentioned in Deut 7:1 also appear in Gen 15:19-21. If the ten nations in Gen 15:19-21 are all the nations occupying “The (that) Earth”, then it is reasonable to assume that the nations described as “far off” are the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites and Rephaim. The Kadmonites are thought to be the people of the East from whom Jacob selected his wives (Gen. 29:1).

{NOTE from Pastor Eli: I don’t know what Arnold’s source is for this statement.  The Book of Jubilees tells a different story:

The Wives of Jacob's Sons (xxxiv. 20-21)

20. And after Joseph perished, the sons of Jacob took unto themselves wives. The name of Reuben's wife is Adâ; and the name of Simeon's wife is Adîbâ’a, a Canaanite; and the name of Levi's wife is Mêlkâ, of the daughters of Aram, of the seed of the sons of Terah; and the name of Judah's wife, Bêtasû’êl, a Canaanite; and the name of Issachar's wife, Hêzaqâ; and the name of Zebulon's wife, Nî’îmân†; and the name of Dan's wife, Êglâ; and the name of Naphtali's wife, Rasû’û, of Mesopotamia; and the name of Gad's wife, Mâka; and the name of Asher's wife, Îjônâ; and the name of Joseph's wife, Asenath, the Egyptian; and the name of Benjamin's wife, Îjasaka. 21. And Simeon repented, and took a second wife from Mesopotamia as his brothers.

As you probably know, Judah bore Pharez and Zarah by Tamar, who was, according to Jub. 41:1, an Aramite.  Even though Judah and Tamar were never married, both Pharez and Zarah were racially pure; and this is why Pharez is accounted worthy to be in the lineage of the Messiah.  So, all of the sons of Israel had Adamite offspring of the nations of Noah’s descendants (Gen. 10).}

Later we are told that Ezra says that some of the people had married women who were classed as nokriy -(Ezra 10:2). This term is used of all the descendants of Canaan. It is doubtful that the Persians of the day can be described as nokriy because (a) Esther married the Persian King and (b) he was clearly in support of the Israelites against others who made up the empire.

Therefore, because of the acceptance of Esther's marriage, the Persians would appear to be of Shem's line whereas the women Ezra described as nokriy were of races that Israel was forbidden to marry.

The Amorites were the leading tribe of those that occupied the Promised Land. God told Abraham (Gen 15:16) that his descendants would take the Canaanite lands when the iniquity of the Amorites was full. Ellicott’s comments on this verse state:

"We learn from this declaration that the Canaanites were not extirpated by any willful decree to make room for Israel, but as an act of justice, like that which, because of their moral depravity, overwhelmed the Sethites with a flood. ... and we see also that if the Amorites had not made the scale of justice weigh down so heavily, they would not have been deprived of their country."

Hence we see that the Canaanites were unacceptable to God because they had failed to show any repentance during the 400 years (the four generations of Gen 15:16 - see Ellicott) allotted to them. The purpose of the 400-year period was to establish the fact beyond doubt. The factors of 400 are 4x10x10 - tested for a time that is more than sufficient to prove the point. [A similar meaning applies when Jesus said we must forgive each other “70 times 7” times.  But this only applies to our kinsmen friends and neighbors.  Other races were never intended to be our friends and neighbors. History has proven that whenever we try to treat them as such, they destroy our civilization. This does not mean that we can mistreat them.  It only means that we cannot have them as friends or neighbors.  Israel’s relationship with non-Adamic peoples is to be kept political, not personal – Eli.] This means that whatever amount of the “breath of life” they had inherited from Noah, there was insufficient of it left to bring about any national reprieve by the time of the Exodus. They were unable to produce offspring with enough breath of life to make any difference. On the other hand, we have seen that in the Midianites, who descended from Abraham, that some vestige of the spirit persisted in the form of Jethro's ability to recognize God as the supreme god. Furthermore, the Midianites were demonstrating this degree of spiritual capability at the end of the same 400-year period that the Canaanites were failing their test. Therefore, Moses’ allowance of the virgin women to survive and for them to be wives is in keeping with the observed facts about the state of the capability of the Midianites to at least recognize God -- AT THAT POINT IN HISTORY.

This now makes some sense of Deut. 31:10-14 which describes the circumstances under which one could take captive woman to wife. But it also follows, that that woman could not be a nokriy or zuwr, because that would contravene other laws. So the only way to satisfy this law was for the woman to be of the related “stranger” categories. The Israelites were told they must not take anything alive out of the nations that occupied the Promised Land. Given that Moses did not rebuke them for taking captives and cattle of the Midianites, it follows this battle had not taken place within the confines of the Promised Land. This further gives support for the "quality" of the Midianite bloodline -it had not been corrupted to the extent of the people of the land of Canaan.

When God told the Israelites to "smite" the Midianites, (Num 25:17) the scope of the meaning of the word in this context covers wounding and killing -- that is, to render great physical damage on the Midianites. It is clear from Judges 6:1 that the Israelites did not wipe out the Midianites. (So, another good reason for Moses to tell the Israelites to kill all the women that had known a man was that when word of that got back to the surviving Midianites, they would know there was no value in mounting a rescue for the surviving women folk - if any of the men should have enough courage to want to even contemplate it.)

[Throughout history, invading armies have always considered raping the women of the conquered people to be part of the “booty.”  Only the Adamites have never considered this to be acceptable, because race-mixing has always been considered unclean for us.  Arnold’s point is that these virgin Midianite women were considered clean by Moses and the Israelites. Thus, they could be taken as wives and concubines. – Eli.]

On balance, Moses' instruction to take the virgin Midianite women for themselves, and reading that as allowing them to be wives or slaves, is in keeping with the facts of their history to that point in time and it was in keeping with the Law. Moses' ruling had nothing to do with mysterious biological changes and there is no Scriptural evidence that such is the case. On the other hand, his ruling had everything to do with physical practicalities, religious practices and psychological realities. But over and above all of this, the matter of the Midianite virgins was applicable in that day and that day only. There are no grounds whatsoever to generalize what was acceptable for this people and apply it to all and sundry or to any other race of people for any other purpose. That is going way past the scope of all that is written in Scripture.  

APPENDIX “B”. (Eating Blood).

The stricture concerning blood is also a matter of belief. Either we accept who and what we are and we accept the symbolism for what blood represents at the level of the mind and spirit or we reject it. This is just the same as accepting the communion wine and bread as representing something different form the ordinary use of wine and bread. It is the same as dealing with the circumcision -- it has practical relevance, but its symbolical relevance is by far away more important.

Gen 9:4, But flesh with (Hebrew: beth – with, of accompaniment) life its soul (Hebrew: nephesh) (which is) its blood ye shall not eat.

The two phrases, its soul and its blood are substantives in Apposition and hence require which is in the translation to show the relationship.

Ellicott states:

“The words are remarkable. ‘Only flesh in its soul, its blood, ye shall not eat.’ The Authorised Version is probably right in taking blood as in apposition to soul, which word means here the principle of animation, or that which causes an animal to live. This is God’s special gift; for He alone can bestow upon that aggregation of solids and fluids which we call a body the secret principle of life. Of this hidden life the blood is the representative, and while man is permitted to have the body for his food, as being the mere vessel which contains this life, the gift itself must go back to God, and the blood as its symbol, treated with reverence”.

Hence this verse gives the explicit statement that the blood is the soul, meaning it is the seat of the soul and hence of life. The next verse continues: “And surely your blood, which is for your souls, will I require (that is, avenge); from every beast will I require it and from man: even from a man’s brother will I require the soul of man”.

The last clause literally is … “at the hand of man, at the hand of one that is his brother, will I require the soul of man”. This has nothing to do with the avenger of blood for accidental death.

Lev 17:11, For a soul (is) The flesh with The blood. And I have given it to you on the altar to atone for lives souls of you. For the blood, it by means of the soul will atone.

This verse tells us several things. Firstly, it defines a soul as having two parts, the blood and the flesh – which makes sense because neither can exist independently (in the normal physical sense). Secondly, it states that it is the animal’s soul that makes the “atonement” for our souls. Thirdly, because we cannot see the soul as a discrete entity, we are told the visible blood (as the seat of the soul) represents the soul in these ceremonies.

The only difference between Adam’s descendants to Abraham and the descendants of Abraham-Isaac is the manner in which their spirit is incorporated into each generation. In Adam’s line the amount of spirit present in Adam and Eve was spread across each generation (each individual receiving less as the number of people increased). In Isaac’s descendants, the same amount of spirit was conceived in each child and hence the pool was inexhaustible, irrespective of the number of people born.

Lev 7:11, For a soul (is) the flesh with (Hebrew: beth – with, of accompaniment) the blood. And I have given it (separate pronoun, for emphasis, referring to the animal’s soul) to you on the altar to atone for lives souls of you. For the blood, it (separate pronoun, for emphasis, referring to the animal’s blood) by means of (Hebrew: beth – by means of, denoting the thing which is supposed to be the means) the soul will atone.

Deut 12:23, For the blood, it (is) the life soul and ye shall not eat the life soul together with the flesh.

In total, these three verses show that the animal’s soul is not a substitute for our soul or our life – because if it were, it would mean an animal’s soul was acceptable to God. Rather, it is the belief associated with performing the sacrifice that provides the atonement. The animal’s blood was required to ceremonially sanctify the person so he could approach God in worship. As no one can approach God in human form, the blood of the animal represented the death of the person, family or nation (depending on the type of animal), so that the person could symbolically rise to the spirit plane. Thus the sacrifice reminds the person that, but for the Grace of God in allowing this means of reconciliation, his own soul would face eternal death. The fact that the person lives on after the sacrifice points to eventual resurrection and eternal life. That is why each and every offering (with one exception for the poor) required blood to be shed as the first step. (The sin offerings of Leviticus were specifically for sins of ignorance and were distinct from the other burnt sacrifices).

When we look at the New Covenant, we find that Jesus laid down His soul. (Greek: psuche) when He shed His blood for us (John 10:15,17). The expression, shedding blood means to die by other than natural causes, that is, to die early, of non-natural causes.) This means it is our souls that are doomed to die because of our sin and it is our souls that Jesus’ early death redeemed (because of His perfect life). We also know that Jesus became a spirit containing Abundant Life (Greek: zoe) – His soul (psuche) took on Abundant Life to live in its spirit form.

Hence, before his fall, Adam had three things (three is the number of completeness):

1. Soul – Hebrew: nephesh, Greek: psuche
2. Spirit – Hebrew: ruach, Greek pneuma
3. Abundant Life – Hebrew: neshamah chyim, Greek: pneuma zoe.

When Adam sinned:

1. He lost his Abundant Life.

2. He became flesh (Gen 6:3), as if he were of natural mankind, with his soul trapped by its dependency on blood.
3. He retained the breath of God (his spirit) in his nostrils. When the flood came, those with the spirit of God in their nostrils were drowned (except for 8 people – Noah and his family).

Lev 17:11 refers to “atonement”. This word, together with words such as expiation, oblation, remission and propitiation are used interchangeably and hence too loosely to understand what they mean in English. Without going into the Hebrew of the words (which is the subject of a separate study concerning sin itself), it is worth appreciating at least the English meaning of these words:

Deut. 12:23, For the blood, it (separate pronoun, for emphasis, referring to the blood) (is) the life soul and ye shall not eat the life soul together with (its) (Hebrew: am – with, in the sense of the same origin) the flesh.

These verses imply that blood donations and blood transfusions are highly inappropriate. They constitute giving away of soul on the one hand and the consumption of soul by somebody else. What is the difference between eating blood and transfusing it?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Thus concludes Arnold Kennedy’s word study on the Book of Life.  One inescapable conclusion that we can draw from this study is that DNA is part of the “foundation” (conception in the womb) of the Book of Life and the creation of the world.  I don’t see how any scientist could disagree with this.  All geneticists agree that DNA is designed to replicate itself indefinitely. There is no known mechanism of evolution at all!!  Indeed, the creation of separate and distinct species is based on separate and distinct DNA, as we know today.  Given the numerous repetitions of “kind after kind” in Genesis One and the clear commands by Yahweh that True Israel remain a separate and distinct people, there can no longer be any doubt that this is a RACIAL COMMAND. Those who believe otherwise are following the Jews in their attempt to destroy Yahweh’s order of creation.

Recall that Thayer’s Lexicon gives “foundation” as “the injection or depositing of the virile semen in the womb”.  Those, who have eyes that see, readily understand that the international Jewish campaign of “integration” is in reality a campaign of genocide against the White Race.  As I like to say in my public appearances, “Wake up, you stupid White People!”

Contrary to what is taught by the evolutionists, there is not one shred of scientific evidence that DNA alters itself to produce higher and higher species.  Quite the contrary, all of the scientific evidence points to only one conclusion: ALL DNA IS SPECIES SPECIFIC AND DESIGNED TO REPLICATE ITSELF IN PERPETUITY. 

This is Yahweh’s LAW OF GENETICS.  This is how Yahweh designed it; and this how it is. Anyone who tries to change this Natural Order is fighting against Yahweh.  We know who those people are.  I would challenge any biologist to disprove this law!!!

In the light of the foregoing discussion, and from the racially separatist argument that I have been promoting, it should be obvious that the Bible teaches that the Adamic Israelites are to remain separate from other races.  As I have been trying to show, our “salvation” depends upon it.  But the enemy below, here, on this plane, and in spiritual realms, is working overtime to prevent the dissemination of this knowledge from above.

Recap of Genesis 1, by Stephen Howard Anderson

Before proceeding to Genesis 2 & 3, I include this very recent translation of Genesis 1 to demonstrate that the word ‘Elohiym’ is, in fact, not the same as Yahweh and that it is a COLLECTIVE NOUN, meaning many beings taken as a single entity.    All of this “creation” is clearly stated as being performed by ELOHIYM in conjunction with Yahweh, not by YAHWEH personally. The whole operation was obviously designed and overseen by Yahweh, but it was a corporate/company job, not a quilt woven by a single weaver.  As you will see, my thesis is that the Creation of Genesis 1 was designed, directed and organized by Yahweh, but the actual work was done by the Heavenly Host, the Elohim, in obedience to His Commands.  The reason for making this distinction is this:

In Genesis 2, YHWH HIMSELF breathes the “breath of life” into Adam, thus distinguishing between the Adamites of Genesis 1 and THE ADAM of Genesis 2.  Like a critical operation in a hospital, the team of surgeons and nurses prepares the patient, opens up the cavity, and isolates the problem. Then, THE TOP SURGEON scrubs up, grabs his scalpel and approaches the patient.  HE HIMSELF performs this very critical phase of the operation, to make sure it is done right!

Mr. Anderson uses current language, which helps overcome the prejudices of the members of the Flat Earth Society, who translated the King James Version.

NOTES on Genesis, Chapter 1.
Copyright, Stephen H. Anderson.

1:1 In the beginning is one word in Hebrew, #7225 Bershiyth: chaotic #8414 tohuw and empty #922 bohuw are a wordplay.

1:2 had become #1961 is used in the past tense here, with the implication being the land was at one time NOT empty.

Darkness #2822 is also defined as ignorance, when used as a metaphor. There are abundant metaphors in use in the Old Covenant text. Read very carefully, and you can spot them.

1:3 Light #215/216 also is defined as enlightenment, another metaphor that works in conjunction with “darkness” in this first chapter. Ignorance, and then Enlightenment (or Wisdom).

1:4 As a metaphorical separation, enlightenment from ignorance.

1:5 Dusk #6153 marks the beginning of the Hebrew day. All Hebrew religious events use this system, as it is from Yahweh, and is Holy. This is used several times in Chapter 1.

1:6 Firmament in the KJV and others, is actually a dome of some substance used for physical separation of the waters in this time period. The possible destruction of this physical dome may be in conjunction with the deluge (flood) of Noach’s(Noah) time.

1:11 Each according to its species (4327) is the basis of racial law given by Yahweh. All mixing is expressly forbidden. Mixing of garments worn, the breeding of livestock, sowing of seed in a field (Lev.19:19), plowing with diverse animals (Deut.22:9—11), or an Israelite mixing with other races, as Esav (Esau) did.  Phinehas slew an Israelite having sex with a non-Israelite, and removed a plague from Israel (Num.25:6, 7, 8). It all begins right here in Chapter 1.

1:14 Lights here #3974 is not the same as light in 1:3 #215/216.

Please note - The word Elohiym, while of plural construction, is used here in a singular application.  In the Hebrew, this is used as an emphasis of His majesty and glory, and is common throughout this section of scripture.

(Genesis) Sepher Maaseh Berishiyth Chapter 1

1. In the beginning (7225 Bereshiyth) Elohiym (430) created (1254) the sky (8O64) and the land (776).

2. And the land (776) had become (1961) chaotic (8414) and empty (922); and darkness(2822) was upon the face (6440) of the deep (8415). And the Spirit (7307) of Elohiym moved (7363) upon the face of the waters (4325).

3. And Elohiym said (559) “Let there be light (215,216),” and there was light (215,216). [[1:3 2Macc 7:28, 2Cor 4:6]]

4. And Elohiym saw (7200) that the light (215,216) was good(2896): and Elohiym separated(914) the light(215,216) from the darkness(2822).

5. And Elohiym called(7121) the light(215,216) Day (3117) and the darkness(2822) He called Night (3915). And the dusk(6153) and the dawn(1242) were one(259) day.

6. And Elohiym said, “Let there be a dome(7549,7554) in the middle(8432) of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.”

7. And Elohiym made the dome, and separated the waters under the dome from the waters above the dome: and it was so.

8. And Elohiym called the dome Sky(8064). And the dusk and the dawn were the second day. [[1:6-8 2Pet 3:5]]

9. And Elohiym said, “Let the waters under the sky be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry ground(3004) appear”: and it was so.

10. And Elohiym called the dry ground Land(776); and the gathering together of the waters He called Seas(3220): and saw that it was good.

11. And said, Let the land bring forth(1876) grass, the grass(6212) yielding seed(2233), and the fruit tree yielding fruit(6529) according(834) to its species(4327), whose seed was in itself(2088), upon the land”: and it was so.

12. And the land brought forth grass, and grass(6212) yielding seed according to its species, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, according to its species: and Elohiym saw that it was good.

13. And the dusk and the dawn were the third day.

14. And Elohiym said, “Let there be lights(3974) in the dome of the sky to separate the day from the from night; and let them be for a sign(226), and for a fixed time(4150 and for days and years:
[[Note different light from 1:3 (3974)]]

15. And let them be for lights(3974) in the dome of the sky to give light(215,216) upon the land.”: and it was so.

16. And Elohiym made two great(1419) lights(3974); the greater(1419) light(3974) to rule(4475) the day, and the lesser(6996) light(3974) to rule the night: the stars(3556).

17. And Elohiym set(5414) them in the dome of the sky to give light(215,216) upon the land,

18. And to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light(215,216) from the darkness: and Elohiym saw that it was good.

19. And the dusk and the dawn were the fourth day.

20. And Elohiym said, “Let the waters bring(6213) forth(6440) abundantly(8317) the moving creature (8318) that lives(2416), and the fowl that may fly above the land in the open dome of the sky.”

[[1:20 moving creature #8318 is a swarm, or many small creatures]]

21. And Elohiym created(1254) great(1419) whales(8577) and every living(2416) creature(5315) that moves (8318), which the waters brought forth abundantly (8317), according to their species: and Elohiym saw that it was good.

22. And Elohiym blessed(1288) them, saying, “Be fruitful(6509), and multiply(7235), and fill(4390) the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the land.”

23. And the dusk and the dawn were the fifth day.

24. And Elohiym said, “Let the land bring forth the living(2416) creature(5315) according to its species, cattle(929), and creeping(7431) thing(5315) and living creatures(2416) of the land according to its species”: and it was so.

25. And Elohiym made the living creatures of the land according to its species, and every thing that creeps (7431) upon the ground(127) according to its species: and Elohiym saw that it was good.

26. And Elohiym said, “Bring into being(6213 adam(120) as an image(6754) and a resemblance(1823): and let them subjugate(7287) the fish of the sea, the fowl of the sky, the cattle, and all the land, and all the creeping things that creep upon the ground (776)

[[1:26 Wis. 2:23, Sir 17:3, 4 I Cor 11:7]]

27. So Elohiym created adam as an image, as an image of Elohiym created He(1931) him; male(2145) and female(5347) created He them.

[[1:27 Mt 19:4, Mk 10:6, adam (120) is not The Adam(121)]]

28. And Elohiym blessed them, and said, ‘Be fruitful, multiply, fill the land, conquer (3533) it: subjugate the fish of the sea, the fowl of the sky, and every living thing that moves upon the land”.

29. And Elohiym said, “Behold(2009), I have given you every herb bearing seed, which upon the face of all the land, and every tree, which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for food(402).

30. And to every living creature of the land, and to every fowl of the sky, and to every thing that creeps upon the ground(776), that lives, I have given every green herb for food”: and it was so.

31. And Elohiym saw every thing that He had made and, behold, it was very good. And the dusk and the dawn were the sixth day.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This concludes Mr. Anderson’s updated translation of Genesis 1.

Who Was In the Garden of Eden?

There are some within Identity who wish to argue that only the Adamites were created by Yahweh and that the other races were either created by some other means or were the product of genetic experimentation, combining Adamite DNA with animal DNA.  But Genesis 1 says that all of these creatures were created by the Elohim, so I cannot permit myself to make such a distinction.  Also, I have shown (in Parts 2 & 3) that the chay creatures (“beasts of the field” and “beasts of the earth” INCLUDE the two-legged variety of creature; and these creatures clearly PRECEDED the Adamites in the order of creation.   I’m sure that this type of genetic experimentation was going on, being conducted by the fallen angels, as happened in Genesis 6; but it can also be the case that all of these races existed before Genesis 2 and that the fallen angels were both race-mixing with these pre-existent races and also performing genetic experiments on them.  From the account in Genesis 1, there is simply NO DOUBT that these pre-Adamites were also created by Elohim.  Some two-seedliners like to argue that only the White Race was created by Elohim and that all other races are the product of genetic engineering, but Genesis 1 gives no hint of any such thing.  It clearly states that all living things were created by Elohim.  There is no doubt that such genetic manipulation has taken place; but it is not one of the themes of Genesis 1.

Regarding the mixing of DNA going on during the days of Noah, the Book of Jasher has this to say about the Fallen Elohim:

“And their judges and rulers went to the daughters of men and took their wives by force from their husbands according to their choice, and the sons of men in those days took from the cattle of the earth, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air, AND TAUGHT THE MIXTURE OF ANIMALS OF ONE SPECIES WITH THE OTHER, in order therewith to provoke the Lord; and God saw the whole earth and it was corrupt, for all flesh HAD CORRUPTED ITS WAY upon earth, all men and all animals.”  (Jasher 4:18.)

Just as these fallen angels did in the days of Genesis 2-6, the Jews today are doing and promoting the same types of fornication.  Like the fallen angels, they are the world’s FOREMOST HYBRIDIZERS AND RACE-MIXERS!!!

To understand Genesis 1-3, the important considerations are these: 1.) That ALL RACES existed on this planet BEFORE Yahweh breathed the breath of life into Adam in Genesis 2.  This refutes the notion that there were only three beings on this planet at the time of the Garden of Eden, namely, Adam, Eve, and Steve, er, I mean, Nachash!   2.) It is not possible that all races evolved from Adam and Eve.  This is the prevailing belief in the world today; and it is utter nonsense.  This notion is both scientifically and Scripturally untenable.  Genesis 2 & 3 cannot be understood as along as such myths are accepted.
 
Singular Or Plural?  Is ‘Yahweh’ Equal to ‘Elohim’?

Clifton Emahiser and myself have a divergence of opinion on exactly what Genesis 1-3 are describing.  He is a proponent of the Recapitulation Theory, which demands that we consider the story given about Adam in Genesis 2 as additional details to the introduction of the Adamites in Genesis 1:26-27.  We will consider the ramifications of the Recapitulation Theory in Part 5.  For now, we will focus on whether the concepts, Yahweh and Elohim are identical or not.  Emahiser considers this equation to be necessary for his Recapitulation Theory.

As I have detailed in the first three parts of the Enmity Series, I am an advocate of both the Gap Theory and the Recovery Hypothesis, both pertaining to Genesis 1.  The Gap Theory states that eons of time may have passed between Gen. 1:1 and Gen. 1:2.  The Recovery Hypothesis states that at some time before the “formation” of Adam in Genesis 2, the planet Earth went through a tremendous cataclysm, in fact, an extinction event, which wiped out many species of animals and nearly destroyed all of the various featherless biped races.  In my view, before this mass extinction event, the continent of Atlantis had contained a very highly advanced civilization.  But this civilization was involved in a series of wars, referred to in mythology as “The Clash of the Titans.”  Atlantis was ruled by a highly advanced race of White People, who are known to archeologists as “Cro-Magnon.”  The skeletons of Cro-Magnon are identical to the skeletons of modern Caucasians, with one exception: The Cro-Magnon had a larger skull capacity and, therefore, larger brains than White people have today.  How we have fallen!!!

In my view, these Atlantean Cro-Magnons are the Adamites of Genesis 1, the survivors of the extinction event.  It was the Fallen Ones (nephilim) who clashed with the Atlanteans in a series of wars.  This series of wars ended when the earth was struck by the asteroid, Phaeton, around 10,500 BC.  The impact of Phaeton caused the extinction event, thus making the Recovery Period necessary.  Thus, I see Genesis 1 as not merely a Creation Story, but also as a Recovery Story.

Clifton’s view of Genesis 1 is more orthodox, and it does not attempt to reconcile the Bible story with natural history.  His method is an attempt to maintain internal consistency within the first two Chapters of Genesis.  For this reason, he is an advocate of the Recapitulation Theory, which also requires, in his view, that Yahweh and Elohim be one and the same entity.  I will refer to this doctrine as the Equation Hypothesis.  I am not rejecting his doctrine entirely; I am merely pointing out the differences, so that the subject matter of Genesis 1-3 can be more completely understood.

The Equation Hypothesis

From one of Clifton’s web articles, I quote:

Inasmuch as every time in Scripture where the words Yahweh Elohim appear (which in every case is singular), every mention of elohim of Genesis chapter 1 is the same elohim as the Yahweh Elohim of chapter 2 and beyond. So with the criteria of John 1:1-3, the elohim of Genesis 1 can only be Yahweh Himself. Inasmuch as the “Word” at John 1:1-3 is none other than Yahshua Christ, Yahshua Christ can be none other than Yahweh Elohim incarnated into the flesh. At Genesis 1:26, as we have seen Heiser explain the Hebrew grammar, a singular-Elohim speaks to a plural entity, “Let us make man in Our image ...”, which shows that Yahweh was not alone before Adam was created, but rather was accompanied by a divine council, those called “ angels ” throughout the Bible, which helps to explain just how the event’s described by John at Rev. 12:7-9 may well be representative of things which happened before the creation of Adam, which Jude alludes to (Jude 6).

(Source:  http://emahiser.christogenea.org/Other%20PDFs/Yahweh%20singular-Elohim.pdf )

I maintain that the underlined statement in that paragraph is demonstrably false and that it is easily disproven.  Clifton and I have exchanged several emails on this point, and he has even found some theologians who agree with him; but I can find just as many who disagree.  In fact, the article referenced above contains a long debate between two theologians arguing for the opposite points of view, so it is really worth reading, because it provides good arguments for both sides. The reason why Clifton argues so fervently that Elohim must be singular is because Yahweh is singular; and if Yahweh is singular, and if Yahweh = Elohim, then Elohim must be singular, otherwise the two concepts cannot possibly be equated, just as the concept “one” cannot be equated with the concept “many.”

But the reality is that Yahweh is singular and Elohim isn’t.   And this is not based upon the opinions of scholars.  This is a fact derived from how the words are used in Scripture. For example, Jesus says, “Ye are gods.”  Yahshua was quoting the OT (Isa. 41:23), wherein it is said of us Israelites, “Ye are elohim.”  In both cases, the “Ye” are the children of Israel, which is a plural entity.  Although we have yet to achieve our god-like status (which is what Adam and Eve had before they “fell”), there is no way that we can be considered the equals of Yahweh, as Yahweh is our Creator.  The creation cannot possibly be equated with the Creator.  There is no way that these verses can be rendered, “Ye are Yahweh.”  Therefore, YHWH is not equal to Elohim. Yahweh is GREATER THAN the Elohim.  The Elohim are Yahweh’s “divine council,” as Mr. Emahiser even admits in the quotation above!  In my view, the Elohim are that very Council of Angels, who were with Yahweh during the creation of the physical Universe.  As Arnold Kennedy so eloquently explained above, the spiritual precedes the physical.  There was a spiritual creation which preceded the physical Universe; and the Elohim are the inhabitants of that spiritual Universe.

Now, if we are also a type of Elohim, i.e., gods, that does not make any one of us equal to Yahweh, the one and only El Elyon, the Most High God!  This is just one example.  All you have to do is to try to substitute ‘Yahweh’ for ‘Elohim’ in any given instance, and you will see for yourself that this cannot be done without putting limits upon Yahweh Himself.   If two concepts are equal, then they must also be synonymous.  It is obvious that we Christians have been conditioned to think of the Most High when we use the English word ‘God;’ but that is NOT how the Hebrews thought.  For them, Yahweh was the Most High (El Elyon).  The Elohim were/are the innumerable assembly of lesser beings who make up the Heavenly Host.  Even though the word Elohim is usually translated with the singular verb, it is because it is a reference to or the title of Yahweh’s position as the Most High God, the ruler over the Heavenly Assembly.  And this is how we are to understand the expression, Yahweh Elohim. 

In Isa. 45:5, Yahweh compares Himself to the Elohim: "I am the LORD [Yahweh], and there is none else, there is no God [Elohim] beside me."   In other words, there is no god like Him.  Nor are there any gods like Him. 

What about the expression, Yahweh Elohim, which is almost always translated as LORD God or “the LORD, your God”?  Can we freely substitute Yahweh for elohim, thus making the words say, “Yahweh, Yahweh” or “Elohim, Elohim” or “Elohim Yahweh”?  But such expressions are nonsensical.  If the two words are equal in meaning, as Clifton asserts, the redundancy would never be necessary.

Joshua 22:22, Dan. 2:11, and Dan. 11:36 contain the expression, “God of gods,” where BOTH the singular and plural translations are from the Hebrew ‘elohim.’  Why not singular in both cases?  Why not plural in both cases?  Because it wouldn’t make sense that way!  “Elohim” is even translated as “goddess” on two occasions (I Kings 11:5, 33).

I like this quotation from a theologian who agrees with Clifton that Yahweh is Elohim, but listen to what he also says:

The word Elohim, as mentioned before, appears many many times in the Old Testament. It is most often translated as "God" in the OT but is also translated as "gods" many times as well too. That’s right.  Elohim is the plural form of the word god. It is also important to note that in Hebrew, there were 3 cases: singular, dual, and plural. Singular = 1/ Dual = 2/ Plural = More than 2. The word elohim is thus "plural" denoting more than 2 gods. So why is "elohim" translated "God" in some places and "gods" in other places? It all has to do with the context of the passage AND the number of the VERB. If a singular VERB was used in the text, then the word was translated as "God" and normally capitalized because the implicit reference was to the "ONE" God of Israel: Elohim. When the VERB was plural in the text, the word was translated as "gods" and had an implicit reference to the heathen gods or to people acting as though they were some kind of god.
There are some theologies that would try to establish that Jehovah and Elohim are 2 separate and distinct gods. In other words, Jehovah could possibly be referred to as Elohim in the sense that Jehovah is a god, but in no way is it said or established that Jehovah IS Elohim or that Jehovah could be said to have been Elohim.

http://www.threemacs.org/library/trinity/AppendixG.html

Point #1:  The last sentence of this author is absolutely correct: Nowhere is it said in the Bible that Yahweh = Elohim!   If there were such a statement in the Bible, I would not be disagreeing with Clifton on this issue!  The Equation Hypothesis is just that:  a hypothesis, not a quotation! Point #2:  The expression, “God of gods,” is NOT dependent upon the count of the verb!!!  So, that statement is not correct either!!!  Point #3:  Yes, Elohim is the plural form of the word El.

Astoundingly, despite agreeing with me on Points 1 and 3, this author still goes on to say, “The only possible solution is that indeed, Jehovah IS Elohim. Both names refer to the ONE God of the Bible, not to two different gods. The compound name "Jehovah Elohim" occurs over 500 times in the Old Testament, each time referring to the ONE God of Israel, Jehovah. It IS Jehovah who has eternally existed as God and who created all things.”

I underlined the last sentence for a good reason.  It is not true that Yahweh eternally existed “as God.”  Since the word Elohim refers to a multiplicity of beings, they are also a part of Yahweh’s Creation.  Before anything was, there was ONLY YAHWEH.  Only Yahweh is the uncreated Being. Yahweh existed before the Spirit world and before the physical world.  This is one of the crucial differences between the concepts, Yahweh and Elohim. 

He winds up making the same argument that Clifton does:  “Yahweh is Elohim.”  But this is a conclusion, not a statement made in Scripture.  It is based on those passages which seem to agree with the Equation Hypothesis, while those that clearly do not agree with this proposition are conveniently ignored!!!  The fact that the compound name, Yahweh Elohim, is used over 500 times is no proof of their equality.  On the contrary, the compound is employed to provide emphasis, that emphasis being used to assert Yahweh’s company with and Majesty over the Elohim.Otherwise, the expression is redundant.  I have also provided examples where the word Elohimdoes not refer to Yahweh at all!!  All I have to do is to provide ONE Scriptural counterexample to disprove a thesis; and I have provided many.

Even Genesis 1 is inconsistent on this point, using the plural pronouns “us” and “our” to refer to Elohim in Genesis 1:26!!  Then, in Gen. 1:27, the singular pronouns “his” and “him” are used!   Talk about confusion!!!

From my perspective, whether or not the word ‘Elohim’ is a singular or plural noun is irrelevant. The fact is that this Hebrew word is a collective noun.  And all collective nouns, such as ‘band,’ ‘team,’ ‘company,’ ‘host,’ ‘nation,’ and ‘army,’ are nouns that consider a multiplicity of objects as one entity.  And this is demonstrably the case for the Hebrew word, ‘Elohim.’  In fact, there are different traditions between American English versus British English on this score.  For example, the British would say, “The band were [plural verb] good.”  In America, we say, “The band was [singular verb] good.”  The same collective noun is given a different count, using different verbs, by the two traditions. 

Here, I believe that American English is more correct, because such nouns can have an internal reference in the sentences in which they are used, and also to references in which the members within the group have differences.  For example: When the group is being considered as a whole, it is treated as a single entity: “The group was ready to go on stage.” But when the individuality of its members is being emphasized, ‘group’ is plural: “The group were in disagreement about where to go for dinner.”  So, the plural rendering should be reserved for references to differences within the group, whereas the singular reference should be used for the group as a whole.  Thus, in the same sentence, we can have: “The group was in great voice during the performance, but they were in disagreement about where to go for dinner.”

And this is how the word Elohim is employed in Scripture.  The fact that the singular verb is used more often does not change the fact that Elohim is a collective noun.
The following link provides a very good discussion of the different positions taken on the subject of the Elohim in Genesis 1.  The usual debate is between the Monistic position (most often asserted by Jews) and the Trinitarian position (most often asserted by orthodox Christians). 

http://www.biblicalheritage.org/Linguistic/HL/1-A/-elohiym.htm

For his own reasons, the Monistic position is the one taken by Clifton Emahiser and many others within Identity.  It essentially states the proposition that A.) Elohim = Yahweh.   The Trinitarian position asserts that B.) Elohim = the Trinity (Father, Son, Holy Ghost).

My position is that 1.) Yahweh is the Supreme Being and 2.) Elohim are the “Heavenly host” of lesser beings (gods, cherubim, seraphim, angels, archangels, spirits, morning stars, etc.), under Yahweh’s command.  So, I am neither a Monist nor a Trinitarian. 

The fact is that Monotheism is neither Monist nor Trinitarian.  These are simply the two main traditional contenders.  Does tradition make either of them correct?  True Monotheism merely asserts that Yahweh is the MOST HIGH GOD, the Supreme Being above all of the other gods.  (“There are gods many,” I Cor. 8:5.)  The Jews accuse Christians of being “dualists” because we believe that Jesus is also God (Elohim).  But, true Dualism is the position that Yahweh has an equal.  One such doctrine is that of the Demi-Urge, which asserts that the Adversary (Sawtawn) of Yahweh is His equal!!!!  Consequently, for this doctrine of Demi-Urge, the battle between good and evil (equally powerful gods) must go on forever.  But the Bible teaches that this conflict between Yahweh and His Adversary is only temporary.  The issue will be resolved in Yahweh’s favor on the Judgment Day.  The Adversary is doing his damnedest to keep the conflict perpetual.

The fact is that monotheism takes many forms.  Here is a good discussion:

The form of monotheism which is traditionally most common in the West (and which is too often confused with theism in general) is the belief in a personal god which emphasizes that this god is a conscious mind that is immanent in nature, humanity, and the values which it has created.[This is exactly my belief, so I wonder why this author considers this position to be unfortunate!! – Eli.  Read on:] This is unfortunate, because it fails to acknowledge the existence of great variety not only within monotheism generally, but also within monotheism in the West.   

On the one extreme we have the uncompromising monotheism of Islam where God is depicted as undifferentiated, eternal, unequaled, unbegotten, and in no way anthropomorphic (indeed, anthropomorphism - attributing human qualities to Allah - is considered blasphemous in Islam). At the other end we have Christianity which posits a very anthropomorphic God which is three persons in one. As practiced, monotheistic religions worship very different types of gods: just about the only thing they have in common is the focus on a single god.

The origin of monotheism is unclear. The first recorded monotheistic system arose in Egypt during the rule of Akhenaten, but it did not long survive his death. Some suggest that Moses, if he existed, brought monotheism to the ancient Hebrews, but it is possible that he was still henotheistic or monolatrous. Some evangelical Christians regard Mormonism as a modern example of monolatry because Mormonism teaches the existence of many gods of many worlds, yet worships only the one of this planet.

Various theologians and philosophers through time have believed that monotheism "evolved" from polytheism, arguing that polytheistic faiths were more primitive and monotheistic faiths more advanced - culturally, ethically, and philosophically. Although it may be true that polytheistic beliefs are older than monotheistic beliefs, this view is heavily value-laden and cannot be readily disentangled from attitudes of cultural and religious bigotry.

Source: http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/religion/blrel_theism_mono.htm

From this same website:  Henotheism is based upon the Greek roots heis or henos, which means one and theos which means god. This makes it sound like it should be a synonym for monotheism, but it's not, even though it has the same etymological meaning. Coined by F. Max Muller, the term henotheism refers to the worship in a single god which does not exclude the possibility of other gods who may be worthy of worship.

I didn’t even know there was a name for my theological position until I read this website!!   Now, I can be labeled with precision!  Henotheism is C.) Yahweh is the Most High God; and the Elohim are His subordinates.  In my version of henotheism, we are not to worship any other gods.  To acknowledge their existence is not the same as worshipping them.

Given this multiplicity of views on what monotheism actually means, there is still much confusion, even in the minds of those who think they know what they are talking about.  Because people use the word monotheism in different senses, they often do not realize that they really don’t agree on the definition until they start discussing the issue!!  That’s when the discussing turns into cussing!!!  For me, the confusion is resolved in a very simple way: There is only ONE YAHWEH, but many Elohim.  And this is how the Bible actually treats the subject.  If that makes me a henotheist, then so be it!  

In my view, the very construction, YAHWEH ELOHIM, which the KJV translates as “LORD God,” is a composite expression intended to convey the supremacy of Yahweh over the host of beings under Him.  This is what is called the “Majestic Plural.”  Yahweh is singular, being His Holy Name, the Name which belongs to no other; but Elohim is clearly plural, designating the Host of Beings subordinate to Him in the creation of the Universe.  Within this construction is the implication that the many come from the One, with the One being the Supreme Ruler over the Many.  Before this physical world of space and time was created, the invisible world was created, so that the physical world could be formed.  The Elohim are those many invisible gods, who were in the employment of Yahweh during the creation of the Universe.

I almost forgot to mention the additional fact that the Hebrew suffix “im” is like the English “s.”  Both are added to words to make singular nouns into plural nouns!  Thus, the singular El and Eloah become the plural Elohim.  The mere fact that collective nouns often take singular verbs is no proof of singularity!!

The Bible often talks about the “heavenly host,” which means an army of invisible beings.  This is a synonym for “elohim,” the invisible gods of Scripture.

From the article cited above:

The word `eloha "God" and its plural, `elohim, is apparently a lengthened form of `El (cf. Aramaic `elah, Arabic `ilah).  The singular `eloha is a relatively rare occurrence in the Bible outside of Job, where it is found about forty times.  It is very seldom used in reference to a pagan god and then only in a late period (Dan. 11:37ff; II Chron. 32:15).  In all other cases it refers to the God of Israel (e.g. Deut. 32:15; Ps. 50:22; 139:19; Prov. 30:5; Job 3:4, 23).  The plural form `elohim is used not only of pagan "gods" (Ex.12:12; 18:11; 20:31), but also of an individual pagan "god" (Judg. 11:24, II Kings 1:2ff.) and even a "goddess" (I Kings 11:5).  In reference to Israel's "God" it is used extremely often -- more than 2,000 times -- and often with the article, ha-`elohim, "the [true] God."  Occasionally, the plural form `elohim, even when used of the God of Israel, is construed with a plural verb or adjective (e.g., Gen. 20:13; 35:7; Ex. 32:4, 8; II Sam. 7:23; Ps. 58:12), especially in the expression `elohim hayyim, "the living God."  In the vast majority of cases, however, the plural form is treated as if it were a noun in the singular.  The odd fact that Hebrew uses a plural noun to designate the sole God of Israel has been explained in various ways.  It is not to be understood as a remnant of the polytheism of Abraham's ancestors, or hardly as a "plural of majesty" -- if there is such a thing in Hebrew.

It is quite correct to say that the word ‘elohim’ is not the Plural of Majesty.  It is the expression, Yahweh Elohim, that is the Plural of Majesty.  It means, Yahweh, Lord of Hosts.  A related expression is the “Most High,” an idea which also signifies more than one, because you have to have at least two for one of them to be the “most high.”

Why the Confusion?

 It is apparent to me that the ancient Hebrews had a more complex view of the invisible world than we do.  The modern word, ‘God,’ does not do justice to the ancient world view.  Because the Jews have suppressed the name of Yahweh, we Christians have come to use the word ‘God’ for the Most High, when, in fact, for the Hebrews, YHWH is the One and Only Most High. 

Isa. 40:13-14: “Who has directed the Spirit of Yahweh, or as His counselor has taught Him? With whom did He take counsel, and who instructed Him...?” 

No one else has instructed Him, for He is the Creator of all.

From the numerous inconsistencies covered in this essay, the simple fact of the matter is this: the word ‘Yahweh’ IS NOT EQUAL TO the word ‘Elohim.’  The two concepts are simply different and cannot be equated.  If they were synonymous, we could replace instances of the word ‘elohim’ with the word, ‘Yahweh.’  But this cannot be done without doing serious damage to the meanings of those passages.  All of this confusion has come about because of the Masoretic Text, which is a Jewish attempt to discredit Jesus Christ.  Jewish “monotheism” insists on only “one god” for the express purpose of denying that Jesus is God!!!  Since Judaism is not the religion of Moses, it can hardly be the inventor of any ancient traditions.  Theologically, Judaism is, in fact, an Epstein-Come-Lately.  Judaism was invented by the scribes and Pharisees during the First Century, BC.  It is no older than that.  Jesus Himself said to these hypocrites, “For had ye believed Moses, you would have believed Me!”  (John 5:46.)   Since Judaism is based on the Talmud, and NOT ON THE TORAH, it is an entirely fraudulent religion.

So, since all of this misuse of names has been deliberately fomented by these antichrists, we need to develop a Scriptural usage of these words, not a Jewish usage of these words.

Now, the Name Yahweh has a very specific meaning:  I AM THAT I AM.  Numerous scholars have written treatises and even books on the significance of this Name.  Typically, expressions, such as, “the Ever-Living,” “the Creator,” “the Eternal,” “He who will be that which He chooses to Be,” “Being,” “Consciousness,” come from these scholars in their treatises.  Strong’s Concordance (#3068) gives us this definition: “The Self-Existent or Eternal, Supreme Being.”   The verb form, hayah (#1961), of this word means, “to exist, be, become.”

Now, let’s compare this to the definition of elohim:  “Plural of 433, Elowah, Eloah [from 410: a deity or The Deity: - God], Gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used in the plural, thus especially with the article [the] of the Supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: - angles, X exceeding.  God, (gods) (-dess, -ly) X (very) great; judges, X mighty.

Since elohim is derived from El (#410), let’s have a look at the meaning of this word:  “Mighty, the almighty, but also used of any deity.”  From this definition of Elohim, it can be seen that the only time that the word Elohim is comparable to the word Yahweh is when the definite article, THE, is used before the word Elohim.  In all other cases, it is simply a reference to the multiplicity of gods.

Can it be any clearer that the attributes of Yahweh are different from the attributes of Elohim? 

Given the great disparity between the definitions and usages of the words Yahweh and Elohim in Scripture, it is abundantly clear that these two words CANNOT BE DECLARED TO BE SYNONYMS. The Equation Hypothesis may be crucial to Clifton Emahiser’s approach to Genesis1-3, but it is an unnecessary complication.  Once it is understood that all of the other races already exist in Genesis 1 before verses 26 and 27, the Two-Seedline Hypothesis is easily demonstrated.  These two verses talk exclusively of the White Race, Awdawm, which word means “to show Blood in the Face.”  The other races were created in previous verses.  Trying to establish an equality between these two disparate words only creates more confusion, which is something we wish to avoid, not encourage. 

YHWH is His NAME; and all of the other references to Him are descriptive titles, not names.  The following article explains the complexities involved in the Hebrew Yahweh and the various titles assumed by Yahweh.  It also explains the relationship between Yahweh and the assembled Host of Elohim:  http://www2.ida.net/graphics/shirtail/divine.htm

In Part 3 of this series, in my translation and discussion of Genesis 1, I chose not to translate the word ‘Elohim’ as “God.”  This is because the word ‘Elohim’ did not mean the same thing to the Hebrews as the word ‘God’ means to us.  In the Hebrew, it is a collective noun which signifies the heavenly host of beings that performed Yahweh’s instructions in creating the world.  Even if it is true that the word “Elohim’ is often inclusive of Yahweh, this IS NOT ALWAYS TRUE.  The fact that it often DOES NOT INCLUDE Yahweh means that we cannot make a one-to-one, synonymous correspondence.  Stephen H. Anderson chose not to translate it as “God” for the same reason.   It is more honest to leave a word untranslated than to translate it presumptuously.

For these reasons and many others, including the arguments of Arnold Kennedy herein, I cannot ascribe to the view that Yahweh = Elohim in Genesis 1 or anywhere else in Scripture.  To do it justice, I would have to write a thesis on the subject of the Hebrew and historical differences between the concepts of YHWH and Elohim (God); but that is beyond the scope of this sermon. The mere fact that Yahweh and the Elohim usually work together IN UNISON is no justification for ascribing identity between the two concepts.  The concepts are, in fact, quite different from each other, both by definition and usage.  I know that Clifton wants these two concepts to be identical for the purposes of his Recapitulation Hypothesis, but there are numerous problems with that as well, as we will see in the next installment of the Enmity Series, Part 5.

For now, the articles cited and arguments provided give us plenty of reasons why our modern concept of God confuses Yahweh with the Elohim and why we should not do this.  We also have to understand that there are good elohim and evil elohim (as in Gen. 6) and that Yahweh is above them all.  I’m sure that Clifton Emahiser does not want to say that Yahweh is evil at any time or in any sense.

Conclusion

My intention has been to show that in Genesis 1 the world was created by Yahweh via the agency of the Elohim and that the difference between Genesis 1 and 2 is that, in Genesis 2, YAHWEH HIMSELF BREATHS THE BREATH OF LIFE INTO ADAM.  And this is what makes the man, Adam, very special.  Yahweh Himself took a very personal interest in forming Adam and Eve.  In other words, the formation of Adam and Eve was so important to Him that He did not want any Elohim messing it up, so He did it Himself!  And this is the real difference between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2.   Note that Yahweh is not mentioned until Genesis 2:4.  None of the other races can say that Yahweh personally breathed the breath of life into them.  As is clear from hundreds of statements in Scripture, we Adamites are THE RACE pre-destined to be His representatives here on Earth, for the express purpose of overthrowing (Gen. 1:26-27) the tyranny of the fallen angels (ben-elohim), led by the arch-demon, Lucifer/Satan, the one who was cast out of heaven with his entourage, the ben-elohim (the sons of god  {elohim} in Genesis 6 and Revelation 12).  Note that these “sons of God” are NOT referred to as “Sons of Yahweh,” for they have already been disowned by Him. As the expression implies, they are actually fallen elohim.

I totally agree with Clifton that the Adamites of Genesis 1 are the same Race as the Adam of Genesis 2.  There is no doubt about this.  But I see problems with his Recapitulation Theory, which states that the Events in Genesis 2 are actually a recap of events that happened in Genesis 1.  Apparently, Clifton believes that the other races were formed from the Adamites by the fallen angels via hybridization.  This view assumes that, at one time, only Adamites and the Fallen Angels existed and the other races were created by genetic manipulation.  While I agree that such hybridization did take place, the fact is that the existence of the other races is already covered in Genesis 1: 24-25.  In Enmity, Part 3, I proved, from usages in Scripture, that the word ‘chay’ (the “beasts of the field” and “the beasts of the earth”), is a concept which INCLUDES the two-legged variety of beasts.  Jonah 3:8 is a perfect example of this.  This will also be further demonstrated when I translate Genesis 2 & 3, in Part 5 of the Enmity Series.

Thus, the other races were created by Elohim before the Adamites were created.  The KJV translators could not possibly have understood anything about the order of creation, as they were writing in the 16th Century, when there was no such knowledge as archeology or genetics.  From my perspective, then, any discussion of an “8th Day Creation” or recapitulation hypothesis is unnecessary, even if these ideas may have merit.  In my view, THE MAN, Adam, was very special indeed.  He was an individual chosen from among the existing Adamites, a special selection made by Yahweh Himself.  That specialness was intended to be physical immortality.  It’s too bad that he and his wife, Eve, lost that specialness with their sin.  In Part 5, it will be clearly demonstrated how our parents, Adam and Eve, lost their immortality.

Since the particular elohim of Genesis 6 were cast out of heaven by Yahweh, they cannot possibly be equated with Yahweh.  The great service that Christian Identity has done for our people, Israel, is to clear up the confusion that has been created by centuries of the abuse of language. Erroneous translations of Scripture have led to numerous modernist heresies.  These heresies have become the very “traditions of men” that Yahshua Messiah warned us about.  We only add to the confusion if we make false equations of words that have completely different meanings.  Indeed, that is how the Jewish Masoretes led us to abandon the Sacred Names, Yahweh and Yahshua.  By translating Yahweh as “Lord” and Elohim as “God,” we have lost the original meanings of these words.  In the same way, the Masoretic Text has led us to confuse ‘Elohim’ and ‘Yahweh,’ two concepts which can hardly be equated.  It is in this spirit of rediscovering the Hebrew usages that we must search the Scriptures.

Indeed, this is how I have made sense of the Scriptures for myself.  Before I became familiar with Christian Identity, it would never have occurred to me to do a word study of the original Hebrew and Greek words, using concordances, lexicons, and commentaries.  I’d still be wondering what so many confusing passages mean, like those Judeo-Christians who cannot get beyond a “global flood covering Mount Everest” and how it is possible for all races to evolve from two White people!!!!  Such absurd ideas have made Judeo-Christianity a laughing stock among rational people, and rightfully so. 

The Bible is true.  Judeo-Christianity is NOT!

Clifton Emahiser argues that the Elohiym of Genesis 1 MUST BE Yahweh.  I understand why he uses this argument, but that is NOT what the Hebrew says.  We cannot make the Scriptures say what we want them to say.  We must be true to the language.  I know that Clifton Emahiser makes his argument in order to prove that Adam was a very special person.  Our object is the same.  Our different approaches to the subject in no way affect the truth of Two-Seedline.  But it is clear to me that we cannot equate the two concepts of ‘Yahweh’ and ‘Elohim,’ no more than we can equate the concepts of white and black.  That is making an unnecessarily false argument to prove a point.  And the critics of Two-Seedline will take any dubious assertions, tear them apart, and use them as an excuse to toss aside any other, reasonable arguments.

Given the background information contained in the first four episodes of the Enmity Series, I think we are now ready to tackle Genesis 2 and 3, chapter and verse, with the understanding that all of the races of humanity were already on the planet and that the Garden of Eden was a special place set aside for the Predestined Race. 

Yahweh understood that, even before the creation of the world, that, once Free Will was given to certain angelic beings, a rebellion was not only possible, but inevitable.  It is from this rebellion that evil has come into existence.  Given this inevitability, He also fore-ordained their expulsion from heaven down to this planet, Earth.  (Rev. 12.)

This point of view is confirmed in the New Testament: “For it must needs be that offences come.”  (Matt. 81:7.)  Evil occurs because lesser beings have Free Will.  And sin comes via Israelites who disobey the Law.  But it has been ordained that even this will change, BECAUSE:

Within His all-knowing Mind, He also fore-ordained the existence of a Special, Anointed  Race of People, who would be His White Army of Judgment.  From the Two-Seedline perspective, we Adamites are that Race.  This Race, beginning with Adam and Eve, was intended to be immortal. But Adam and Eve, our parents, fell for Satan’s deceptions and race-mixed with the enemy, the children of the adversary.  This event deprived our Race of our intended immortality, which emanates from Yahweh’s Holy Spirit; but it did NOT destroy our DNA, which emanates from the biological, flesh side of the equation.  And this is how death was introduced to our Race.  Death was already here for the other races, including the Adamite, Cro-Magnon Whites.  This DNA was preserved through Seth and is distinguished from the DNA of all other races.  Although our Spirit bodies became tainted with deceivability and our physical bodies with mortality of the flesh, Yahweh also provided for a remedy; and that remedy occurred on the Cross.  Now, we have to accept His Sacrifice and Our Destiny, without guile, vanity, or complaint, freely and with full appreciation of who we are and why we are here, for the reward will be great!

Those Adamites of today, who either refuse to accept this testimony, or those race-traitors, who actually side with the enemy, will be bundled and burned along with the tares in Matthew, Chapter 13.  In addition, the Judeo-Christians, who reject this truth, are also the foolish virgins in the Parable of the Wise and Foolish Virgins.

Ever since Genesis 3:15, Lucifer and the Fallen Ones have been trying to destroy our Race.  Unable to kill us off, these fallen angels have been trying to brainwash us into subjection to the very tyranny under which the Fallen Ones have operated for untold generations before THE MAN Adam was formed.  They have arranged genocidal wars in which millions of Adamites have been brainwashed into killing each other in the name of phony ideologies, such as “democracy” and “communism,” “equal rights,” “diversity,” and the rest. 

All of this awful and awesome history has been necessary for Our Race to reawaken to our Divine Commission, which is to take dominion (Gen. 1:27) and institute the Kingdom of Yahweh.   The satanic Jew has done his absolute best to brainwash our Race into forgetting our Divine Commission.   But his counter-plan will not succeed.  This current generation will live to see Satan and his reptilian hordes overthrown, once and for all.

Rejoice ye in that day, and leap for joy: for, behold, your reward is great in heaven: for in the like manner did their fathers unto the prophets.  (Luke 6:23.)