Christian Israel has a problem. The problem is one of Identity. For those who are new to this message, it is clear to us that the Jewish people are impostors to the claim of being Israel. Of this there is no doubt. The problem is who exactly is a Jew and how do we define the word ‘Jew’ so as to include the correct categories of people and to exclude the wrong categories of people.

Our problem is twofold: First is the problem of definition. The second is the problem of perception. We need to get clear on what the definition is and then we need to understand how perceptions have blurred or obscured the proper definition. Only a thorough analysis of the historical, racial and religious differences between Judahites versus Jews and, also, Israelites versus Jews can give us the answer. The novice will say that there is no difference between Jews and Israelites. That is the opinion of the parrot that has been trained by the rabbis and the Judeo-Christian Pharisees, such as Falwell, Hagee, Robertson and others, who teach lies and who make a living by blurring true distinctions so that criminals can pose as saints.

The point of this essay will be to suggest a proper usage of the word ‘Jew’ which accurately distinguishes between what they say they are and what they truly are. For example, the Jews say they are "Semites," but they have falsely labeled themselves as such, while the real Shemites, the Anglo-Saxon, Celtic and Caucasians of the European Dispersion, do not even realize that they are Shemites. One of our problems is that the Jews themselves are evasive and elusive about who or what a Jew is. Some say a Jew is a member of a particular race, namely, that of Shem. But this suggestion is easily disproven by two racial facts: 1.) Jews are virtually all of mixed race, especially the Ashkenazi Jews who actually have no Shemitic blood in them at all; and 2.) there are many other ethnic groups, such as Arabs, Palestinians, Turks, etc., who, like the Jewish people, are of partially Shemitic heritage. Many of these groups actually have more Shemitic blood in their veins than do the Jews. The only point of agreement among Jews here is that one must have a Jewish mother in order to be born a Jew, but that begs the question of her racial origins as well. Few Christians bother to point out that there is a major discrepancy between this Jewish maternal rule and the Biblical reckoning of lineage through the father. Where is the Scripture that allows this change in doctrine?

Now, since the Jewish claim to the land of Palestine is based on their supposed "Semitic" heritage, then virtually all the peoples of the Middle East have just as much right to Palestine as they do. If, on the other hand, the Jewish claim on Palestine is due to their supposed stewardship of the Bible, then the Jews are equally unacceptable because the Jewish people, despite their claims, have NEVER practiced the laws of the Bible. They have always practiced their own version of Scripture. It is today known as the Talmud. The rabbis make no distinction between the Torah (the Law and History Books of Moses) and the Talmud (rabbinical commentaries that carry as much or more weight for Jews than the writings of Moses). Few Christians are even aware of the Talmud and the Talmud’s frequent contradiction of the Mosaic Law.

Some Jews say that to be Jewish you only have to belong to or ascribe to a certain religious point of view: Judaism. But there are Orthodox, Conservative, Liberal, Hasidic, and other types of religious Jews who disagree among themselves what constitutes a religious Jew. Others say that you can be a "spiritual Jew" by merely sympathizing with whatever a particular Jew says. As can be seen, there is no real agreement even among Jews as to what the definition of the Jew is. But this vagueness is a deliberate tactic employed by the rabbis so that they can be evasive about their origins and still claim to possess the heritage of Israel and Judah.

But rather than try to sort through what the Jews say about themselves, there is a much easier way to determine what a Jew is; and that is by comparing the Jewish people, both in terms of their racial make-up and their religious beliefs, to the Judahites of Scripture. What we will discover is that the Jews have deliberately obfuscated their racial and religious origins in order to impersonate the REAL Judahites and the REAL Israelites of Scripture. That they have succeeded in fooling the entire world into believing that they are the People of the Book is the fulfillment of the prophecy in the Book of Revelation that says they are "the beast that deceiveth the whole world." (Rev. 12:9) Also, Rev. 2:9 and 3:9, properly translated, reveal that there is an active impersonation going on. Those passages should read "those who say they are Judah but are not." Has there ever been anyone out there saying "I’m a Jew" who really isn’t? The fact is that non-Jews, except for Hollywood actors looking for work, have no desire whatsoever to call themselves "Jews." No one is trying to impersonate a Jew. It’s the Jews who are impersonating Judah.

We all have heard stories about identity theft; and these stories always involve a crook stealing the identity of another individual. This is an easy thing to do these days. It is incomprehensible to most Bible students that one people can impersonate another people, but this is exactly what the Jews have done. They have successfully passed themselves off as Israelites and Judahites when they are really the Synagogue of Satan, i.e., "wolves in sheep’s clothing".

Before proceeding with the Biblical analysis of the word ‘Jew,’ it is important that we state a modern definition of Jewry, so that we have a basis of comparison between who and what the Jews are today versus what they claim to have been. My argument is that the Jewish people have not changed at all since the days of the Scribes and Pharisees. This is saying a lot, because I believe it is true that the Jewish people, of all races and cultures on the face of the earth, have not evolved one iota in the last two thousand years. They are today just as barbaric a people as they were then; and I’m NOT referring to the people of the House of Judah nor the people of the House of Israel. These latter two groups have indeed evolved greatly, having been a blessing to all the world, with our technological inventions, agriculture, science, art, medicine, sanitation, architecture, music and religion. I am, of course, referring to Anglo-Saxon Israel, the True and Only descendants of the Twelve Tribes of Israel, which EXCLUDES the impostor Jews, who were never of either House, although they claim to be. But if you expect anything other than lies from the synagogue of Satan, then you will be fooled indeed.

I think a modern, fair and accurate definition of ‘Jew’ is this: "A person who is a member of the ethnic group whose religion is Judaism." Of course, this definition leaves open whether the individual is religiously pious or atheistic. The key to understanding who a Jew is is to understand their intense ethnic exclusiveness/chauvinism based on 1.) their religion and 2.) their self-perception as an exclusive group. In addition, the popular perception is that the Jews are of Judah and Israel. That is a false perception. That is why I did not include it in the definition. Somehow, our language must be made to conform to reality. This means that we must disabuse ourselves of the traditional association between Jewry and Judah. We must stop thinking as the rabbis have programmed us to think. We need to come up with our own language and our own definitions of words that conform to reality. Accomplishing this will get us out from under the psychological yoke that Esau/Jewry has imposed upon us as prophesied by Isaac in Gen. 27:40. As Jacob posed as Esau before Isaac, Esau is today posing as Jacob. As long as Esau gets away with posing as Judah and Israel, the world is under their spell. As my colleague Arnold Kennedy put it: "Our enemies are determined to continue with the greatest hoax of identity fraud in history." This spell must be broken.

Just because a word is seen in Scripture does not mean that it belongs there. There are other words, such as ‘Gentile,’ that don’t belong in Scripture either. It has been in the interest of Jewry to invent and use these words in order to convey the impression that the Bible is about them when, in fact, they are not God’s chosen people at all. Strong’s Concordance carries out this mythology by providing us with Jewish definitions of certain words. These Jewish definitions of words must be exposed as self-serving attempts to cloud the racially exclusive message of the Bible, namely, that the Bible is to, for, by and about only True Israel. The Law and the Covenants were given exclusively to Israel, not to the Jews. And the Covenants were never transferred from Israel to "the Church," as the Dispensationalists claim. The Covenants were never given to anyone but Israel. The Bible says that Israel would be known by a "new name" and that we would be Yahweh’s witnesses. The Jews have come to witness only for themselves, as their Talmud and their Mishnah attest. It is only White Christian Israel that has witnessed the Scriptures to the world. We are the ones who printed the Bible in over four hundred languages and preached the Gospel, both Old and New Testaments, to the world. The Jews have done no such thing. The extent of their teaching is that they claim that the Torah was delivered to them for safekeeping; but they have not done that either. They have tampered with it and they have defiled it. Jewish teaching on Scripture is a carefully guarded secret except for their self-praising soundbytes of false information. To find out what their religion actually teaches, you have to read the Talmud, which is their substitute for the Bible.

When was the first or the last time you heard a rabbi expounding on Scripture for the benefit of the masses? When have you ever heard a rabbi teaching the world about the Covenants made exclusively to Israel? It has never happened. They have NOT been God’s witnesses. By their fruits, they actually witness for another god entirely. They cannot afford to go into Biblical expositions because there is so little about them in Scripture, unless, of course, you start to study Esau. In fact, the rabbis have ceased general proselytizing for fear that too many non-Jews will wake up to their charade. Hence, the numbers of Jews have remained small because you can only entrust so many people with such gigantic lies. The few Jews (Koestler, Lilienthal, Freedman, Fagan, Roth, Bernstein, and others) who speak the truth about the Jewish Impersonation of Israel routinely get shouted down, excommunicated or liquidated.

One of the words the Jews use as a weapon against us is ‘nation.’ In the Hebrew, it comes from the word ‘goy.’ In the Greek, it comes from the word ‘ethnos’ and from the word ‘Hellene.’ The rabbis of Judaism have conditioned us to use the word ‘goyim’ to mean "non-Jews." This is an ABSOLUTELY FALSE definition, even though that’s how Strong’s Concordance defines it.

If the word ‘goyim’ means "non-Jews," then how do you explain Gen. 17:5? It says,

"Neither shall thy name be anymore called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee."

Now, the word here translated as "nations" is ‘goyim.’ As such it is correctly translated. But let’s apply the Jewish definition of the word and see how senseless their definition really is!

"for a father of many non-Jews have I made thee."

By selectively translating ‘goyim’ as either "nations" or "non-Jews," the rabbis of deception accomplish their Babylonian purpose: confusion. By their own self-serving definition, which suits them well in most cases where they wish to impersonate Israel, in this case it fails to include Jews as being among the nations of Abraham!!!! This is an oversight that their deception has failed to take note of. And this is why the verse is correctly translated in the KJV. Since Abraham was not a Jew in the first place, and since the Ishmaelites, Brahmins, Israelites and Saxons came from his loins, he was indeed, "the father of many nations." And, indeed, these are all "non-Jewish" nations. But is this what they want the Bible to say? Clearly, their definition of ‘goyim’ is ridiculous. The correct translation of ‘goyim’ is "nations." And, depending upon the context of the specific verse, ‘goyim’ can refer to Israelite nations or non-Israelite nations. By paying James Strong to redefine ‘goyim’ as meaning "non-Jewish," they have tampered with Scripture in order to promote themselves as the people of the Book.

To suit their own aims, they have inserted ‘non-Jews’ in place of ‘goyim;’ and this is a major deception.

Another word they use to fool us is ‘Gentiles.’

For the word ‘Gentile’ (from the Greek #1672), here is what Strong would have us believe: "… a Hellen (Grecian) or inhabitant of Hellas; by extension a Greek-speaking person, especially a non-Jew: -- Gentile, Greek."

Now, I contend that this word, ‘Gentile,’ is another candidate for the scrapheap, because it simply does not mean what the Jews or their apologists say it means. That fact is that most of the Greek-speaking world at the time of the writing of the New Testament were the Israelites of the Dispersion. As I was researching my book, The Great Inpersonation, I opened the Book of James, reading it with a critical eye for the first time. My jaw dropped! I even cried because I realized the significance of it right away. The Book of James opens with this statement: "To the Twelve Tribes scattered abroad, greetings."

Strong’s definition of ‘Gentile’ gives us the same logical problem as the word ‘goyim.’ Because Israelites and Jews have been falsely equated in our minds, a rabbi or a Judeo-Christian would insist that these "Greeks" are non-Israelite "Gentiles"! But the Apostle James clearly addresses them as the Twelve Tribes! There is no mistake in the Book of James. There were no Jews among those Dispersed Tribes, only Israelites! The mistake is in the false equation! – and in the false definitions! The fact is that the word ‘Gentiles’ rarely refers to non-Israelites. The word ‘Gentile’ really means – are you ready, folks? – a RACE, or a TRIBE. This is from the Greek word, ‘ethnos.’ (Strong’s 1484.) For this word, Strong pulls the same nonsense, adding interpolations such as "…specifically a foreign (non-Jewish) one (usually by implication pagan): -- Gentile, heathen, nation, people."

Ladies and gentlemen, Strong has done an abominably dirty deed. He has replaced antonyms for synonyms, opposites for equalities. This is deception, plain and simple. It’s the Jews who are, in fact, the heathen and the pagans, for they are history’s most blatant impostors to the name of Israel! By juxtaposing the word ‘Jew’ with ‘Israel’ and ‘Judah,’ and by likewise suggesting that ‘heathen’ and ‘pagan’ are the opposite of ‘Jew,’ the world has been quite thoroughly deceived! [By the way, it has come to my attention that the more recent printings of Strong’s Concordance differ from my old, 1970’s edition. There is no doubt in my mind that the newer versions have even more pro-Jewish interpolations than the older ones. It is possible that James Strong did not author these interpolations at all. Later editors could have inserted these pro-Jewish notes. The Jews are constantly rewriting history to praise themselves and to make Christendom look shallow.]

If you will simply read your Bible, you will find that ‘ethnos,’ depending upon the context, can mean an Israelite nation, a non-Israelite nation, or both lumped together, as in all nations. It NEVER has the specific meaning of "non-Jewish." That is a BOLD-FACED LIE! It is a Satanic interpolation of the most clever kind! Strong’s first two definitions, namely "race" and "tribe," are the correct definitions. All the Jew-business added afterwards is trickery. Again, organized Christian scholarship is either in complete ignorance of this fact or they are accepting payment for shoveling this lie around like so much pig manure! These pulpitmasters should be wearing dungarees, folks! – and their props should be pitchforks, not Bibles and podiums, for all the truth you are getting from them!

There is something wrong with the definition, especially the part that gratuitously adds "especially a non-Jew." That part of the definition is an interpolation, that is, a Satanically-inspired, Jewish lie! It is not true that all "Gentiles" are non-Israelites. It is true, however, that almost all Israelites are non-Jews! So, Strong and the Jews have shot themselves in the foot again, because when the New Testament refers to the Gentiles of the Dispersion, it is most definitely referring to non-Jewish Israelites! Of course, no rabbi will admit that there is such a thing. They have taught for centuries that the House of Israel, i.e., the "lost Ten Tribes," have totally disappeared from the pages of history, never to be found again.

Au contraire! Pardon my French! Add another false teaching to their list of thousands upon thousands of lies! Truly, Judaism is the religion of lies, and Jewry is the Synagogue of Satan, for by their simple use of deceptive words, they have almost managed to destroy the True Israel of Scripture! Truly did Hosea say, "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge." (Hos. 4:6)

One of the most common mistakes of Judeo-Christianity is the doctrine called Dispensationalism. Dispensationalism teaches that the Jewish people, by having rejected the Messiah, forfeited their right to the New Covenant and, as a result, the New Covenant was given to the "Gentile" (meaning "non-Jewish," of course) Christian Church instead. So, they refer to the Old Testament as the "Jewish Dispensation" and the New Testament as the "Church Dispensation."

This doctrine is completely unscriptural nonsense. There is not a single thread of truth contained in it. Even most Jews reject this theory, calling it "Replacement Theology," because it dictates that the Jewish people were replaced by the Church. Well, both groups are completely wrong because the Jewish people never were, are not now, and never will be Israel. Their heritage is distinctly Edomite, not Judahite. Since the Jewish claim to the name of Israel is a historical lie, they were never the people of the Covenant. Having never possessed the Covenant, how can the Covenant be transmitted from them to some church?

The truth is that True Israel, the Anglo-Saxon, Celtic and Caucasian peoples of this planet, ARE the Covenant People. The Law and the Covenants were delivered EXCLUSIVELY to us and to NO ONE ELSE. Thus, we have always possessed the Covenants and we never gave them to the Jews or to some church, although the Jews are doing their best to get us to GIVE AWAY OUR INHERITANCE. If we are stupid enough to do this, then the Jews deserve it.

The Old Testament was delivered exclusively to the people of Israel, not to the Jews. There were NO JEWS in the Egyptian captivity. There were NO JEWS in the Assyrian Captivity. There were NO JEWS in the Babylonian Captivity. There were NO JEWS at Mt. Sinai. There were NO JEWS among the Twelve Tribes of Israel. Adam was not a Jew. Enoch was not a Jew. Noah was not a Jew. Shem was not a Jew. Abraham was not a Jew. Isaac was not a Jew. Jacob was not a Jew. But Esau, Jacob’s brother, became a Jew by lending his name to the race of people known as Edomites, who were of Hittite and Canaanite stock. Not even Judah was a Jew. No Judahite was ever referred to as a "Jew." Throughout their entire Old Testament history, the House of Judah and the Tribe of Judah were simply called "Judah." They NEVER called themselves Jews. Just as the American Indians never referred to themselves as "Indians," the Judahites never referred to themselves as "Jews." This is a modern interpolation imposed upon the Old Testament by those Edomites who are still today posing as Judah and Israel.

The modern definition of ‘Jew’ is presumed by most people to include their ancestry as the Tribe of Judah. Since that is a false assumption, it is entirely incorrect to apply the word ‘Jew’ to those Judahites who are falsely claimed as their ancestors.

Throughout Old Testament history, the Judahites and the Edomites were separate, warring nations. Then, during the latter part of the intertestamental period, from about 300 to 150 BC, a period which included the blaspheming of the Second Temple by the Greeks, the nation of Judah gradually became known as "Judea." The reason for this name change is very simple. It came as a result of the merging of two separate and distinct nations into one shaky and corrupt political unit. As one of my correspondents has referred to it, it was a "shotgun wedding," and an interracial one, to boot! Josephus, the Judahite historian of our people Israel, tells the story in great detail. (As part of this historical Jewish deception, his books have been mistitled The Antiquities of the Jews and the Wars of the Jews. The real titles should be The Antiquities of Judah and the Wars of Judah.) The fact that the entire world of Christian scholarship considers Josephus to be "a Jew" is a triumph for rabbinical Jewry. The Jews must promote the false equation, Jew = Judahite, in every document, on every page and in every title. If they do not, Joe Christian might get suspicious!!

In the Antiquities of Judah, at Chapter V, Paragraph 2, Josephus, the JUDAHITE historian, tells us this about the time period of the Roman occupation: "wherefore there are but two tribes in Asia and Europe subject to the Romans while the ten tribes are beyond Euphrates till now, and are an immense multitude, and not to be estimated by numbers." The two tribes are, of course, Judah and Benjamin, while the ten not subject to the Romans are also in Asia and Europe, but out of the Roman sphere of influence. The Asian Tribes (meaning those who resided in Asia Minor, equivalent to Turkey today), by that time, were thoroughly Hellenized. They all spoke Greek and most were in danger of being Romanized as Judea was being Romanized. These Israelites had grown to such an immense multitude that their numbers could not be estimated. Indeed, the population of both European and "Asian" Israelites had grown into the millions; and they all eventually became known as the Caucasians!

I will briefly summarize the referenced time period here:

The perceptive reader will understand that Judaism is actually the Replacement Theology, for it replaces Judahites and Israelites with Edomite Jews and it replaces the Mosaic Law with the Talmud, the "tradition of the elders," as Yahshua Messiah called it.

The key to understanding the Jewish impersonation of Judah is to understand that the Jews, as led by the scribes and Pharisees, originated in Edom, not in Judah. Both racially and culturally, the Edomite Jew is the impersonator of Judah and Israel. Until our people understand this, there will forever be confusion between these two entirely disparate groups of people. (Contrary to the popular Jewish myth, Christianity does not owe its origins to Judaism. On the contrary, Christianity is the religion of the New Covenant of Israel, the legitimate heir of the Mosaic tradition. Judaism is an impostor and a usurper. In fact, Judaism represents all things antagonistic to Mosaism and Christianity.)

With this historical background, let us get back to our subject:

As with the OT, the NT was also delivered to Israel exclusively. Although the English translations of Scripture do not readily demonstrate this, simple word studies prove beyond any doubt that all of the Gospels and the Epistles were written exclusively to the lost sheep of the House of Israel and to no one else. Those who are interested in more proof should access our "Saul/Paul Controversy Series" at our website www.anglo-saxonisrael.com. That series is in the "Forum" page. Also, I highly recommend two books by Pastor V.S. Herrell, The History of the Bible, and Forbidden Truth. The former book explains how the Masoretic Text, a translation of rabbinic origin, came to be the favored source text of the King James Bible. Pastor Herrell therein shows how the Masoretic rabbis intended to minimize the importance and the impact Yahshua Messiah by changing the original Scriptures to suit their own doctrine. He points out numerous discrepancies between the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint, which was the Greek language translation (circa 300 BC) of the Old Testament done by JUDAHITE scribes, not by Jewish scribes. During the First Millenium AD, the Jews had tried, in vain, to convince Christians that the Septuagint was inferior to their doctrine, so the Masoretes went about editing their own version with the intention of eventually selling it off to the Christian world as authentic. By the way, this information is known to virtually all Christian scholars, but they make light of it or ignore its implications.

The book, Forbidden Truth, takes numerous words from the original Greek New Testament and translates the passages according to the racial connotations that the words had when they were composed. This book is quite literally explosive in its proof of the racially exclusive message of the New Testament. A tidbit: Here is the KJV translation of II Timothy 1:3: "I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers with pure conscience, that without ceasing I have remembrance of them in my prayers day and night." Now, even this translation, for one who is racially aware, indicates that Paul is talking about his Israelite forefathers and no one else. The context is Paul’s Israelite forefathers. For comparison, here is Herrell’s translation based on the actual meanings of the Greek words: "Thanks have I to God, whom I worship from my racial ancestors in a racially pure conscience, how unceasing I have remembrance concerning you in my prayers night and day." Big difference, eh? Pastor Herrell thoroughly documents how the racial exclusivity of the NT has been deliberately watered down so as to promote universalism in the churches.

[Pastor Herrell’s books are available from Herrell Brothers Publishing House, POB 130, Kodak TN 37764-0130. Their website is www.christianseparatist.org.]

We must understand that, in the cases of both the OT and the NT, the Edomite Jew lurks behind two millennia of deceit that have been foisted upon an unsuspecting Christian world in order to convince us that the Jews are "God’s chosen people" and that race doesn’t matter! This, in spite of the fact that the Jews positively DEMAND their own version of religious and cultural exclusivity. They take absolute pains to make sure that THEIR exclusivism is not called by the more than accurate pejorative, "racism." At the very least they can be accused of cultural chauvinism! In the last two thousand years, the Jews have failed to assimilate into any nation they have ever invaded. Like the true parasites that they are, they always form, according to their own religion and culture, a State Within A State, which ensures that the Jewish ethos will thrive within the host nation. Then, through usury, bribery, deceit, debauchery, infiltration, and sabotage, the Jews eventually take over the country or they get kicked out before they can overthrow the government. This is the Forbidden History of the Jews that the non-Jewish citizens of the target country usually learn too late. Once these historical Jewish patterns of deceit and treachery are understood, a nation can arm itself and prepare to dislodge the parasite. The dislodging is rarely peaceful.

Once we understand from the Bible that the Jews are Edomites pretending to be Judah, then the Bible comes alive with vibrant truth about race and religion. "Beware of wolves in sheep’s clothing" might as well say "Beware of Jews pretending to be Israelites." Jesus also promised us there would eventually be a Great Awakening when He said: "Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free." It is no coincidence that the Renaissance occurred as the Jews were being kicked out of virtually every nation in Europe during the 13^th and 14^th Centuries. It is a simple medical fact that once the parasite is dislodged, the body of the victim begins to recover its health.

In defining Jews as an ethnic and cultural group, we must at all times bear in mind that they are NOT Israel, NOT Judah, NOT Jacob, NOT God’s chosen people, NOT the people of the Book, and certainly NOT the Covenant People. As explained in the brief historical sketch above, the actual derivation of the Sephardic (Edomite) Jews is through the Canaanites of Idumea who were given the name of Edom, Jacob’s brother. Esau’s name was changed to "Edom." When Esau married into the Canaanite/Hittite people, those people were henceforth called "Edomites" by our people of the House of Israel and by our people of the House of Judah. The Idumeans were a separate nation of these Canaanite Edomites. Of this, there is absolutely no historical doubt. And since the Pharisees came from this stock of people, any definition of the word ‘Jew’ must take into account their non-Jacobite ethnic status. We must call a spade a spade and stop using the word ‘Jew’ as the Jews have conditioned us to use it. We must start using the word as it accurately describes the reality, history and the ethnicity of the people that the word designates. The false equation must be exposed.

I must state here, as well, that I believe that the Hittites were the survivors of the short, stocky, hook-nosed, receding-foreheaded people of ancient Sumeria whose origin is unknown. Dr. Wesley Swift has surmised that they came along with the fallen angels. The ancient documents of Sumeria refer to these people as the "blackheads," because their physical features stood out so prominently from the other peoples of the land. The average Sephardic Jew of today still carries with him these genetic features. As the Bible says, "The show of their countenance doth witness against them." You can see their Jewishness in their faces.

Now, this derivation of the Sephardic Jew from Esau/Edom still holds true today; but we also have to factor in the Ashkenazi Jews into today’s Jewish population. The Ashkenazi are of an entirely non-Shemitic line of descent whose ancestors never set foot in the land of Judea. Being another mixed racial bag, the Askenazim/Khazar people are composed primarily of Japhethites, Mongolians, and Hittite/Edomite stock, plus every other racial type that would be found in eastern Europe and western Asia. Of course, Mongolian blood includes a large portion of Chinese blood, so that cannot be ignored either. Thus, the only connection between the Sephardic Jews and the Khazar Jews is the fact that the Sephardic Jews migrated up into the land of Khazaria and intermarried with them. Ultimately, the miscegenated people of Khazaria CONVERTED to Judaism in the 8^th Century AD. Thus, all Jews of Eurasian origin are definitely non-Semitic. This is a historical fact that has become very well known despite Jewish denials.

The Jewish charade as Israel and Judah gets more and more fantastic as more and more facts are revealed about their racial and religious background. The amazing thing is that anybody believes their story considering how patently fraudulent the entire story is. But that is how the con-artist operates. He stays in business until the scam is revealed! What makes the scam so rich and so hard to discern is the fact that the con-artist has hired a bunch of false priests to dupe and fleece the flock.

For a moment, let’s go back to the time of Jacob and Esau and find out the real cause of strife between those two brothers who came from the womb of Rebekah, Isaac’s wife. By the way, Rebekah is my Biblical heroine. If she hadn’t overruled Isaac and insisted that Jacob get the blessing instead of Esau, we’d all be Jews today. (Frightening thought, isn’t it?) Although Esau was the firstborn and therefore had the right of primogeniture, that is, the right of inheritance of the eldest son, Esau rejected his primogeniture by virtue of marrying outside of his race. Now, every orthodox commentary, Christian or Jewish, on the dispute between Esau and Jacob will tell you that Jacob was the bad guy, having tricked his brother Esau out of the right of inheritance. But none of these commentaries will ever talk about the fact that the REAL REASON that Esau lost the right of inheritance is the fact that he was a race-mixer.

These Bible commentators will wax profound about Jacob’s craftiness in impersonating his brother in order to receive Isaac’s blessing; but the blessing and the inheritance are two separate issues. The fact is that the impersonation was Rebekah’s idea, not Jacob’s, so the attempt by these theologians to smear Jacob is transparent, once you read the passages for yourself.

Genesis 25 tells us of the encounter between Jacob and Esau where Esau sells his birthright for a bowl of lentil soup. (That must have been some really good soup!) Jewish tradition actually states that Esau had just come back from a raid (Esau was a highwayman, i.e., a robber) that had gone bad and he was exhausted and out of breath from having been pursued by his intended victims. Those intended victims were still hot on his trail, in pursuit with the object of killing Esau. This would explain Esau’s haste in selling his birthright. This is a Talmudic, not Biblical, teaching about Esau. Be that as it may, the Bible records the fact that Jacob made the offer and Esau accepted it.

Now, here’s the billion dollar question: Would you regard your birthright so lightly as to sell it for a bowl of porridge? Rather than reveal any craftiness on the part of Jacob, the story reveals the unacceptability of Esau, for he cared not at all for his heritage and posterity. He was a vain, selfish man who disregarded his parents, his religion and his racial heritage. And, he even thought to murder his brother, Jacob. In this regard, he was very much like Cain.

Genesis 26:7 tells us that Rebekah’s skin was noticeably White, and that she was very beautiful. Isaac feared that his non-White neighbors would seek to kill him in order to steal her and do horrible things to her. Gen. 26:34 tells us that Esau married two females of these non-White Hittite "daughters of Heth," Judith and Bashemath. Verse 35 tells us of Isaac and Rebekah’s attitude toward these two females: "which were a grief of mind unto Isaac and Rebekah." Because Esau married outside of his race! The kept theologians and pulpitmasters will never point this out. Lest you think I am exaggerating the racial consciousness of our people in those days, at Gen. 27:46, Rebekah makes this pronounced, racially-conscious statement: "I am weary of my life because of the daughters of Heth: if Jacob take a wife of the daughters of Heth, such as these which are the daughters of the land, what good shall my life do me?" In other words, Rebekah is saying that "If Jacob marries one of these so-and-so Hittite women, I will just die!" Do you think it’s fair to say that Rebekah was prejudiced against these Hittites? Yes, she was.

Since Esau/Edom rejected his Israelite heritage, he became an outcast and his name became a curse because he was a law-breaking race-traitor. The Biblical race-consciousness of the Israelites became immediately apparent to me when I started reading the Bible for myself, instead of letting the whorepastors and pulpitmasters do the reading and the interpreting for me. From beginning to end, the Bible is replete with the message of the exclusiveness of Israel and the Adamic White Race. There is simply no doubt about this; but the racial message has been painted over the document by deliberately false and misleading language, in much the same way as when one painting can be painted over by another, obscuring the masterpiece that is hidden underneath.

Speaking to the people of Israel, Amos 3:2 tells us: "You only have I known of all the families of the earth." What part of "You only" don’t you understand? Surely, you cannot imagine that those baby-killing, home-bulldozing, communism-creating genocidal maniacs called Jews are God’s chosen people? Don’t be ridiculous! If you believe that, then the Bible is a closed book to you.

The Book of Obadiah explains to us Yahweh’s own anger and hatred toward Esau/Edom…not just Edom the man, but Edom the people. I’m not going to quote from it. I want you to read it for yourself as an assignment as soon as you get done reading this essay. No one in Churchianity will ever talk about the book of Obadiah or about Edom because study of that Book raises the question, "Who is Edom?" Today’s Jews and today’s Judeo-Christian Pharisees do not want you to understand that the Jewish people originated in Edom even though the Jewish Encyclopedia admits this as a fact: "Edom is in Jewry." -- Jewish Encyclopedia, Volume 5, p.41.

Now, knowing the ethnic differences between Edomites and Israelites, it should be obvious that the word ‘Jew’ should not be applied to anyone of either the House of Judah or the House of Israel. The Jewish people are simply a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT RACE. Actually, Yahshua Messiah refers to them as a brood, or breed of vipers. Technically, they are a mixed breed, not a race. Hence, anywhere the word ‘Jew’ is applied to either of these Houses, it is a false assignation; and the Jews know it is false. It is our people who still don’t understand.

The word ‘Jew,’ as it appears in the King James Version, comes from two words which have completely different meanings: Judah and Judean. The Hebrew forms of these two words are Yehuda and Yehud. The Greek forms of these two words are Iouda and Ioudaios. It is important to point out that in the Hebrew form, which conveys the meaning of the times, the word ‘Yehuda’ meant a Judahite and the word ‘Yehud’ meant the nation of Judah or the land of Judah. At no time in Old Testament history did the nation of Judah or any Judahite refer to itself or himself or herself as "Jew." Even though Strong’s Concordance defines both words using the word, ‘Jew,’ that is a modern and false assignation which those people never used to apply to themselves.

Strong’s #3061, for Yehud, states, "contracted from a form corresponding to 3063 [which is the word Yehuda]; properly, Judah, hence, Judaea: -- Jewry, Judah, Judea."

Everything following the word ‘hence’ in this "definition" is interpolation, not definition. An interpolation is an alteration, usually deliberate, of the original meaning of a word. In Old Testament times, the Judahites NEVER referred to themselves as "Jews" nor did they refer to their nation as "Judea." The word ‘Judea’ only occurs once in the entire Old Testament, at Ezra 5:8, and there it is used as a reference to the "province" of Judea, which at that time was composed of non-Judahites and a racially mixed multitude of Shelahites, Samaritans and Canaanites. Those people had taken over what was the land of Judah when the True Judahites had been taken captive to Babylon. The Books of Ezra and Nehemiah leave us no doubt that there was a racial and ethnic house-cleaning -- "ethnic cleansing," if you will – that took place when the True Judahites returned from Babylon. [For a thorough historical study of the time period, please refer to my article, "The Origin of Talmudism," on our website. Here is the url: http://www.anglo-saxonisrael.com/newsletter/2005_09_01.php]

What I am saying is that, despite Strong’s definition, ‘Judea’ IS NOT a synonym for ‘Judah.’ ‘Judah’ is a racial, tribal term. ‘Judea’ is a territorial term. The etymology of the word ‘Judea’ begins at a later date, namely around 150 BC. This was the time that the Tribe of Judah and House of Judah became united with the Edomite nation of Idumea. If you combine the words ‘Judah’ and ‘Idumea’ and contract them together, you get ‘Judea.’ Let’s put it into the form of an equation: Judah + Idumea = Judea. It can be clearly seen from both Scripture and all available secular histories that Judah and the Judahites were of a particular race, namely the White, Adamic, Aryan Israelites of the House of Judah. No admixture of another race was conceivable to the Judahites of Judah, period. But, Judea is a completely different story. Being a nation conceived in adultery (race-mixing, as in "adulteration of the blood"), Judea was substantially different in ethnicity compared with the previous nation known as the "land of Judah," which was exclusively of Judahite extraction. Hence, the two words, ‘Judah’ and ‘Judea,’ cannot possibly be synonymous. It is the rabbis of Judaism and their duped and hired servants who wish to cloud this issue.

But the word ‘Jew’ treats these two distinct groups as being synonymous. This is like trying to find a word that means "white blackness" or "evil goodness," or "skinny fatness." Once you understand the true meanings of ‘Judah’ and ‘Judean,’ this self-contradiction becomes obvious. Equating races with nations is like equating apples and oranges. The rabbis have successfully obscured the difference between apples and oranges by throwing them into the same basket.

Now, in New Testament times, the ethnicity of the territory had changed, with a mixed multitude having become "acceptable," at least to the Edomite Jew, Herod the Great. Herod was indeed a Judean; but he was most certainly not a Judahite. This one example alone proves the case that Judahites cannot be equated with Judeans. If this fact is true of Herod, it is true for all other Judeans of Edomite descent; and it is in fact true for all people who call themselves "Jews." Unless we use words to accurately convey the racial, ethnic and religious reality of the times, we are speaking gibberish; and that is exactly what the Talmudic rabbis want us to do. The example of Herod is proof positive that Strong’s definition is flawed, because it simply does not follow that, from one being a Judean, that one is automatically a Judahite. The two words are two separate categories of being: one is a racial, tribal term; the other is merely a territorial, or national term. Stated in strict logical terms with respect to Judahites who resided in the territory of Judea: All Judahites were Judeans; but not all Judeans were Judahites. In short, all of those who dwelt in Judea who were of mixed race ancestry were outside the pale of Judah; but they were still Judeans if they were citizens of that state. This is the simple, racial, religious and historical fact.

We have to understand that, before the merger of Judah and Idumea, the nation consisted exclusively of the racial category of Judahites of the House of Judah, which included the Tribe of Benjamin and the priesthood of the former Tribe of Levi. After the merger, this racial exclusivity was no longer legally mandated in the nation of Judea. Such a development would have been impossible in the land of Judah. In fact, in America we had a similar episode, namely the Civil War, which resulted in Blacks receiving citizenship in a nation in which, prior to the War, only Whites could be citizens. The Civil Rights Movement of the Sixties, again fomented by the Jews, gave Blacks equal voting rights. Has our nation been the same since? I don’t think so. Things have gotten progressively worse for White Christendom in America since this legislative coup by the Jews. Since the Mosaic Law forbids race-mixing for all Israel, the merger also changed the religious policy of the land. If the Jews were Israelites, they would obey this law.

Instead, the Jews have always been in the forefront of promoting race-mixing among Whites. The more Whites mix their own blood with that of other races, the more Whites tend to die out. This, the Jews know very well. It is their international program of racial genocide against us. I call it "silent genocide," because so few of us realize that that’s what it is.

Idumean religion, which consisted of Babylonian paganism, received official sanction in the land of Judea because of Antipater and Herod; and the blending of the two religions, Babylonian paganism and the Mosaic Law, led to the emergence of a new priesthood. This is why the Pharisees, the originators of the religion called Judaism, began to be more and more powerful Judea. The Pharisees did not and could have had any influence as long as the Levites were still in power and the Law of Moses was still the law of the land. In fact, there is no historical evidence of any kind that would indicate that the Levitical priesthood of Judah was opposed by any other sect or priesthood until the days of Hyrcanus, Antipater and Herod. The Levites are mentioned only four times in the whole of the New Testament. This is adequate witness that their power, influence and role had been displaced by the Pharisees. Despite what happened to the Levites, not all of the hereditary offices of Judah had been replaced by Idumeans. The fact is that, even during the height of the Pharisees’ power, the Twenty-Four Courses of service at the Temple was still a hereditary Judahite commission. These twenty-four families were selected by David and their names are recorded at I Chron. 24. Although they lacked political power in Judean times, the Courses were not yet taken over by the mixed-race Jews. They were sometimes priests, but usually they were assistants who helped in the rituals and workers doing the maintenance of the Temple grounds, guard duty, etc.

So, now it is time to make a categorical assertion that I feel is incapable of dispute: The religion called Judaism is a hybrid of Babylonian paganism and the Mosaic Law. It is NOT the original. The Pharisees, by virtue of their usurpation of the priesthood in Judea, falsely claim to be the originators of and the stewards of the Mosaic Law. By virtue of this usurpation, the Pharisees also claim to be the people, Israel, who are the subject and object of the Old Testament. The claim that the Judaism is of the Old Testament is ridiculous on its face.

Technically, the word ‘Jew,’ as applied to the Scriptures, DOES NOT BELONG IN SCRIPTURE, certainly not in the Old Testament, for in those days the House of Judah was endeavoring at all times to remain racially and religiously separate from all of the people around it. Although there was great difficulty in maintaining this racial purity, the House of Judah was able to do this much better than the House of Israel, which was exiled for its race-mixing into the wilderness, where there were no other races to mix with, except for literal barbarians with whom we could only be at war. This was Yahweh’s solution to our deliberate fornication problem.

Note this well: The fact is that the word ‘Jew’ completely obscures the racial and religious differences between the Judahites and the Judeans of Edomite extraction. This factor of confusion is very important for the race-mixing Jewish rabbi. If they can get us to buy into their use of language, True Israel is sunk! The word ‘Jew,’ as used, can, and does, mean BOTH Judahite and Judean. But this is absurd! It is like using the word ‘blite’ to mean BOTH "black" and "white." It’s like calling both Chicago Major League Baseball teams "The Jews." Can you see the scoreboard? Final score: The Jews 10, the Jews 9. The score tells you the numbers, but you still have no idea whether the South Side team won or the North Side team. The rabbis of Judaism thrive on this kind of confusion. They have even convinced their own people that there is no difference between Jews and Judahites; but this is the biggest lie in history. Virtually all Christian scholars have fallen for this abuse of language, not realizing the true ethnic origin of the Jewish people. The rabbis have done a magnificent job of obscuring the racial, ethnic and religious differences between the Jews and the Judahites.

Now, the New Testament presents a different problem with respect to the use of the word ‘Jew.’ Yahshua Messiah, the Apostles, the Disciples, the people of Judah and the Israelites of the Dispersion, whenever they were in the land known as Judea, were always in the company of a mixed multitude. Still, these people did everything possible to fight against the political change that the Edomite Jews had foisted upon their nation. As related in the paragraph on Pastor Herrell above, the language of the New Testament testifies of this racial reality once the deliberate interpolations are seen for what they are: distortions of history and of Scripture.

The definiton of ‘Iouda’ (#2448) is, according to Strong’s Concordance: "of Hebrew origin [3063 or perhaps 3194]; Judah (i.e., Jehudah or Juttah), a part of (or place in) Palestine: -- Judah."

Now, this is actually a very good definition. It does NOT include any superfluous mention of Jews or Jewry! Miracle of miracles! Yet, the reference to Palestine is certainly anachronistic, because that territory was not so called by anyone in those days. Until scholars started to call it such retroactively, after the Jews were expelled in 70 AD, only then was it called "Palestine." This is actually a very modern usage. Where Strong suggests Palestine, it should read "the land of Judah." Also, by this time in history, the country was beginning to be known, especially by outsiders, as Judea, so it is odd for Strong to use ‘Palestine’ instead of ‘Judea.’ Although this is not such a blatantly bad example as those under discussion, such anachronistic usages help to create confusion.

The definition of ‘Ioudaios’ (#2453) is: "from 2448 (in the sense of 2455 as a country); Judaean: -- i.e., belonging to Jehudah: -- Jew (-ess), of Judea." Strong, the Talmudic rabbis, and all Judeo-Christians fail to take cognizance of the fact that a Judean is not the same as a Judahite. This is the exact magnum opus interpolation of Scripture. Thus, for Strong to suggest that all Judeans are of or "belong to" Judah is, on his part, a historically naïve statement or a deliberate lie. Either way, the definition is defective, for it fails to take into consideration the ethnic, cultural and religious changes that took place in Judea from 150 BC to 70 AD. The fact is that a revolution had occurred – a coup, in fact – which had dethroned the House of Judah and replaced it with the House of Edom. Was Russia the same place after the Bolshevik coup? Its Anglo-Saxon leadership was replaced with Jewish leadership. The Jews of Czarist Russia also pretended to be patriots while in the act of assassinating the Czars and the officials of the government!

Failure to account for such a vast change is the same mistake that one would make by failing to mention the citizenship differences between the ante-bellum days of the South versus the days after the Civil War, or the differences between rural Dixie and the industrial North. Sure, they were both "America," but they were two distinct cultures. Also, if you speak of the ante-bellum Southland, you cannot compare it with racially integrated America today. They are two different worlds, quite literally. This avoidance of distinctions is the type of subterfuge that goes into the usage of the word ‘Jew.’ Playing fast and loose with this word is something that the scholarship of official Christianity has done for centuries. The Talmudic rabbis started this charade two millennia ago, and it is to the great credit of the Christian Identity Movement that this imposture is finally being exposed for all the world to see. Those who have eyes to see, open them up. Those who have ears to hear, unclog them.

Given all of the above, can we afford to take a Jew’s word, or even James Strong’s word, that ‘Iuoda’ and ‘Ioudaios’ are perfectly synonymous? I am completely confident that one day soon our people will understand this simple fact: THE JEWS ARE NOT ISRAELITES, NOR ARE THEY JUDAHITES. THEY ARE IMPOSTORS. Hence, the word ‘Jew’ should NEVER be applied to a Judahite or to an Israelite. There is no such thing as a "true Jew" versus a "false Jew." All Jews are phony Judahites who also pretend to be Israelites and Shemites and Hebrews, etc., etc., etc. That is the reality. The word ‘Jew’ should only be applied to the impostors, for that is what they are. There is no reason whatsoever to substitute the word ‘Jew’ for the word ‘Judah.’ This only creates confusion. The word ‘Jew’ should be excised from the Old Testament of the Bible.

Let me here proffer a more succinct definition of a ‘Jew’: A Jew is an impersonator of Judah who worships Satan in the name of Moses. Think about that for a minute. This is, in fact, the true meaning of Rev. 2:9 and 3:9. Since Deut. 23:2 specifically puts ALL mongrels OUTSIDE of the Congregation, it matters not whether the Jew is a half-breed or a no-breed. Only pure-blooded Israelites are allowed in the Congregation of Yahweh. Only we are His offspring. The other races are outside of this family. The Jews are interlopers who claim to be us. It is not possible to become a convert to another race. The process of conversion to a specific religion does not make one a racial Judahite or a racial Israelite. That is out of the question. Since the Pharisees usurped both the nation of Judah and the Old Testament, it follows that they are the impostors, par excellence. Since the Bible is a book to, by, for and about the Adamic Race, it is, therefore, a racist, exclusivist book; but it is not, therefore, a supremacist book. We are here to re-establish Yahweh’s government on earth. That is our commission, though we have so far failed miserably at this task.

The question for the other races is this: "Do you want the Jews to administer the affairs of this planet, or do you want law-abiding Israelites to do the job?" Have you had enough of Jewish "help" for your race? The Jewish-inspired Welfare State has done nothing but destroy your family life and lowered your potential. The Jews have done nothing but set an example of dishonesty, treachery and treason. Every race on this planet should understand the Jewish Agenda by now.

The Edomite Jew first makes his outward appearance in the New Testament, although the predecessors to the scribes and Pharisees are mentioned in the Old Testament. They are the "false scribes" and the Nethinim and other Edomites who were attached to the House of Judah, primarily to the Royal House of David, as bookkeepers, hired help and some were even employed as mercenaries. They were not permitted to intermarry with nor live among the true Judahites, but we can be sure that they always tried to finagle their way in. During the reigns of Saul, David and Solomon, Judah and Israel made war against the Edomites and Canaanites; but there were always certain groups, such as the Kenite scribes, who were useful to the administration of Israel’s affairs because they had skills (metalsmithing, reading, writing and arithmetic) that Israelites didn’t have enough of.

Now, since the New Testament does make a distinction between Judahites and Judeans, we should follow suit. Hence, it is perfectly legitimate to call the Pharisees of Edomite extraction and their Edomite racial brethren "Jews." Here, the word simply refers to their status as citizens of the hybrid nation, Judea. This hardly makes them Judahites. As long as we can tell an impostor from a real Judahite, then we know how to use the word ‘Jew.’

The only real difficulty arises when we try to talk about the true Judahites of Judea during the reign of the Jews. How do we distinguish them from the Edomite Jews?

Despite the fact that today’s Christians have been duped into following rabbinical heresies promoted by the Baal pulpits of the whorepastors, we would not refer to those of our duped brethren as Jews, even though their religion is more Judaistic than Christian. The same rule would apply to those duped Judahites who, in many cases against their better judgment, sided with the Pharisees and actually participated in the execution of Our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, Yahshua Messiah. Does that make them Edomite Jews? Of course not. One who is deceived cannot be judged by the same stiff standard that the deceiver will be judged by; but they must be judged for their lack of love for the truth. The second half of Hosea 4:6 tells us, "…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." It is the lying priests of Churchianity, in collusion with the Jews, that have caused us to reject knowledge. May they be doubly damned for their crimes, race-traitors that they are!

What will it take for our sleeping brethren to open their Bibles and see the truth? While the whorepastors shout "Jay-zus, Jay-zus, Jay-zus," their sheep are being fed to the wolves. I’m sure that many of today’s Christians would still not recognize the Messiah if He walked among us because He would lambaste the Jews, their favorite people, from here to kingdom come, just as He did at the First Advent. These sheeple still do not understand. These Judeo-Christians would have yet another agonizing decision: to follow the likes of the Kikes, Falwell, Hagee, Van Impe, Robertson, Graham, et al, or to follow Yahweh’s Law!!!!

Just as Judeo-Christianity and True Christianity are today 180 degrees apart, so were the Judahites and the Jews of the time of Christ. So, I say again, a Judahite should NEVER be referred to as a "Jew." That is automatically erroneous and demeaning. When the New Testament speaks of Jews, it is almost always in a derogatory sense. The Gospel of John, not to mention the rest of the New Testament, cannot be understood any other way. The Jews are the consummate evil of the time! Were it not for the ridiculous and deceptive interpolations of the Judaizers, there would be no such confusion as to whether someone is a "good Jew" and a "bad Jew." There is this temptation to call a "good Jew" a Judahite; or to call the "bad Jews" Judaics; but that is still inaccurate. A Jew is a Jew is NOT a Judahite. A thousnad million times, a Jew is NOT a Judahite. We must counter the lie the Synagogue of Satan has based its empire upon.

When John tells us that "Jesus would not walk in Jewry, because the Jews sought to kill him," this usage is accurate, because John is describing the Pharisee impostors and their followers, even though the actual word used for "Jewry" and ‘Jews’ is ‘Ioudaios,’ i.e., "Judean." But these are the Pharisaic Judeans, whom we know to be impostors! If the word used had been ‘Ioudah,’ then it would have to be translated as "Judahites" to be accurate. In the Old Testament, the word ‘Jew’ is always a false substitute for ‘Judah.’ Wherever it occurs, scratch it out and replace it with ‘Judah,’ for that is the true meaning of the Hebrew. In the New Testament, the context must be taken into consideration, but even there, the decision is usually easy.

Armed with the knowledge of the true distinctions between Jews and Judahites, all one has to do is look at the context of a particular verse to determine whether Judahites or Judeans are meant. If, in addition, the Pharisees or Edomites are being discussed, then the word ‘Jew’ is fully justified, for they fit our definition of "impersonators pretending to be Judah." Otherwise, leave it as "Ioudah’ or ‘Ioudaios.’ This is clear enough without even getting into the Jewish Question. Just as Southerners don’t want to be called "Yankees," we should not force people into categories they do not belong in.

Many writers have tried to resolve this confusion by referring to the evil Jews as "false Jews" and the "good" Jews as "true Jews." Although well-intentioned, there is a real problem with this point of view. The "false Jew" versus "true Jew" thesis assumes that some Jews were, at one time or another, Judahites. That is a false assumption. Just because the Jews want us to believe that they were at one time Judahites is no reason to believe them! It is merely one more false dichotomy that confuses our thinking. Or, just because some True Judahites may have converted to the religion of Judaism, that does not make them racial Jews or Edomites! One may make a case for them being "spiritual Jews," but that still does not convert these Judahites into Edomites or into half-breed Idumean/Judahite mongrels. They are not allowed into the congregation of Yahweh. Deut. 23:2 and virtually the whole Bible attest to the separateness of Israel and to this prohibition against mongrelization. To allow Jews into our congregation makes a mockery of the exclusivity doctrine. That is the simple fact. That was the sin of Hyrcanus; and that sin is being perpetuated by Apostianity today!

A true Judahite can convert to Judaism and, later, with repentance, come back into the fold. A real Jew cannot become an Israelite, no matter how much he repents of his Jewishness! Comprende?

Recall my updated definition of a Jew: A Jew is a impersonator of Judah who worships Satan in the name of Moses. Can this definition be applied to True Israelites or True Judahites, even to those who worship the Jews as "g-d’s ch-chosen"? I don’t think so! There are two considerations that have to be met to define a Jew: 1.) racial status and/or 2.) religion. Therefore, all non-Judahites who practice the religion of Judaism or adhere to its anti-Christian prejudices can safely be called a Jew. For a racial Judahite or Israelite to be considered a Jew, that would be by conversion only. But the number of racial Israelites who have officially converted to Judaism is almost zero. Even in the days that Yahshua walked the earth, only those who were duped by the Pharisees were of that persuasion. Many of these were easily converted back to the true faith by Paul, Peter, James, etc.

If you want to call these traitors "Jews," feel free to do so. Like Esau, they become your permanent enemy if they do not repent.

Given all of the above racial, religious and semantic history, the question of "Who is a Jew?" ought to be very easy to answer.

In every possible way, the Jews cannot be considered as part of our congregation. My proposal is this: From now on, the word ‘Jew’ will be applied exclusively to the impostors and/or their mixed multitude. The word ‘Jew’ should never be applied to True Judah or to True Israel. The Bible is OUR Book, not the Jews’ book; hence, we are the ones who decide what the words contained therein should mean. It’s about time we did so.

When Paul says, as the KJV has it at Romans 2:17, "Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the Law, and makest thy boast of God," he is saying, technically, "Judean," for the original Greek there is ‘Ioudaios,’ meaning "of a country." But since both we and Paul know that the Jews are neither Judahites nor do they rest in the Law, but constantly reinvent their own tradition, we understand that he is talking to the Israelites of the House of Judah. Thus, the correct translation is "thou art called a Judahite," or, even better, "thou art called Judah." The same is true of the word ‘Gentile,’ which can, depending upon the context of the passage, refer to Israelite nations, non-Israelite nations, or both. We have been confused as to the Bible’s teachings on race and heritage because too many editors haven gotten hold of it and they have tried to tell us that it means the exact opposite of what it really says. This is called Universalism. There is NO WAY that the Israelites and Judahites of those days were teaching Universalism or Catholicism.

Keeping the distinction between the True Judahites and the impostors in mind, the usage proposed in this essay will forever eliminate the confusion caused by the rabbis and their war of words against us. I have been doing this for many years. Ever since I started writing my book, The Great Impersonation: How the Anti-Christ Has Deceived the Whole World, I was aware of the racial exclusivity of Scripture. Having this awareness, I was on constant lookout for interpolations that do not belong in Scripture. In the New Testament, the word ‘Jew’ can almost always be substituted for the word ‘Judean.’ It depends upon the context, but the word ‘Jew’ should NEVER be substituted for the word ‘Judah’ or ‘Judahite.’ That is always wrong. Try reading the Gospel of John with this distinction in mind and you will see what I mean. No more confuzion. (Not a misprint!)

So, was Jesus a Jew? Well, since He was of a different Race and since He taught a doctrine that was the antithesis of that which is taught by the Pharisees and today’s Jews, what do you think?

At John 3:10 Yahshua calls Nicodemus a "master of Israel." Why did He not call him a "master of Jewry"? John 1:19 states: "And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou?" Even orthodox scholars have admitted that the New Testament seems to use the word ‘Jew’ as if the Jews were aliens to Jesus and His people. Jesus tells us very clearly, "I come not but unto the lost (exiled) sheep of the House of Israel." We are the people that fell because of Adam and Eve’s fall, so we are the only people that needed to be redeemed. The Jewish people were never involved in any part of our history except as our enemies. Then, one day, our enemy moved in with us and claimed to be our brother. Then he stole our identity and he is now trying to possess everything we own. Are we going to let him get away with it?

Was Jesus a Jew? Absolutely not! He was a Judahite and an Israelite. He was OUR kinsman and OUR Redeemer. He came NOT for the Jews. The proof is at Matthew 13:15 where, speaking of the scribes and Pharisees and their spies an their followers:

"For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them."

Well, if He came to save Israel, then who are these people whom He would not save? Who else but the Edomite Jews who were, and are, of the Synagogue of Satan? But this is not the "God loves everybody" Jesus of the Fallen Away Church! Is it possible that there is a people that Jesus refused to love? Yes, it is. Because He refused to convert them or heal them! Why would He refuse to do so?

The Old Testament answer is at Malachi 1:2,3: "…yet I loved Jacob, and I hated Esau."

The New Testament answer is at II Peter 2:1-4:

"But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that brought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction." {Observe here that it was and is the Jews who have "privily" brought in these damnable heresies, denying that Jesus is Lord. The Shabbez Goyim (our race traitors) are just their hirelings.} "And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of." {The Jews again are guilty of speaking evil of Christianity!} "And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you who: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth and and their damnation slumbereth not." {It is Esau who is coveting the birthright that he stupidly gave away. Which ethnic group is it that uses feigned words at almost all times? And which ethnic group makes merchandise of everything, including human life? Now, here’s the coup de grace: "For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment…"

The sentence is declared again at verse 9: "The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished."

You see, the Jews are these fallen ones who have been cast down to earth and reserved for judgment. Yahweh the Father has already passed sentence upon them. Yahshua the Son cannot overrule the Father and try to pardon those who are merely here in a holding cell awaiting execution! That’s why He will not try to convert them or heal them! They have already been tried and sentenced. Yahshua said "I and my Father are one." He cannot contradict the will of the Father, so He dare not pardon those who have been condemned to the second death, the death of the soul!

It was Adam’s job to carry out the sentence: execution! But the Serpent in the Garden outwitted Adam and Eve by mixing his seed with her seed. Adam was sent here to displace the race of fallen angels represented by the Serpent in the Garden. The Jews are his children. The Jews know that we Adamites are here to displace them. That’s why they are always trying to displace us! Now, this displacement need not have been a violent one. The Adamites were sent here to quarantine the Jews away from all of the planet’s indigenous races upon whom the fallen angels were feeding. Just as Lucifer totally rebelled against Yahweh, the Jewish people have rebelled against Yahweh also. They refuse to serve Him; and they refuse to serve His Son. And they hate us because they know that we, the Anglo-Saxon, Celtic and Caucasian people, being Yahweh’s offspring, are His people.

When the parasite broke out of quarantine, he infected us as well! After we fell, it took 4,000 years for us to regain cognizance of who we are and so that our genetic code could be cleansed of the pollution. This was only a partial awakening. We had to remain separate from all the other races so that we could regain strength and awareness, coming out of our coma. The last two thousand years – our Grace Period -- have been an object lesson to us that the fallen ones WILL NOT REPENT. The lesson for us is that we must resist behaving like Jews no matter how profitable it appears. "Be ye therefore wise as serpents yet gentle as doves." (Matt. 10:16) We must prove that we cannot be corrupted! Those of us who endure until the end will receive the reward of the 144,000. We will be the Bride of Christ and receive the Kingdom. This is how the fallen ones will be displaced. Forever.

At the Second Coming, Yahshua will clean house; and we, His brethren, will be his army.

In explaining the parable of the wheat and the tares to His Apostles, Yahshua says this:

"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; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be at the end of this world. The son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend; and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear." (Matt. 37-43.)

We have our Father, Yahweh; and the Jews have their father, the devil.

John 8:42-44: "If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but He sent me. Why do ye not understand my speech? Even because ye cannot hear my word. Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of you father will ye do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is the father of it."

The impostor race can do nothing but lie! It is their genetic heritage from Satan through Cain, the scribes and Pharisees, and now the Talmudic rabbis.

Do you understand what is getting ready to happen? The Judgment Day is upon us, so we had better choose the right side or we will be gathered up with the tares and be burned with them. The Jews have already made up their minds that they will not serve anyone but themselves. They will not worship the Creator that gave them being and against whom they rebelled. So, it’s over for them. Anyone who tries to convert them is wasting his breath. They will just laugh at you, mock you and sneer at you. They would rather be dead than obey His Law, so the Father has no choice but to put them out of their misery.

There is a difference between the punishment of Esau and Israel. Israel will be chastised. But this is the chastisement of purification. The Father has taken us out to the woodshed for a good whipping because we have been rebellious; but most of us have been rebellious unknowingly, because we have been deceived.

Listen to the prophet Micah as he speaks to Israel:

"And I said, Hear, I pray you, O heads of Jacob, and ye princes of the house of Israel; Is it not for you to know judgment? Who hate the good and love the evil; who pluck off their skin from off them, and their flesh from off their bones; who also eat the flesh of my people, and flay their skin from off them; and they break their bones and chop them in pieces, as for the pot; and as flesh within the cauldron. [The lies of the false priests cause our sons and daughters to be used as cannon fodder for the Zionists. With traitors like these, who needs devils?] Then shall they cry unto Yahweh, but he will not hear them: he will even hide His face from them at that time, as they have behaved themselves ill in all their doings. Thus saith Yahweh concerning the prophets that make my people err, that bite with their teeth [that lie through their teeth], and cry, Peace; and he that putteth not into their mouths, they even prepare war against him. Therefore night shall be unto you, that ye shall not have a vision; and it shall be dark unto you, that ye shall not divine; and the sun shall go down over the prophets; and the day shall be dark over them." (Mic. 3:1-6.)

The chastisement of Judah and Israel will be devastating, but Jacob will not be thoroughly consumed. "And the remnant of Jacob shall be in the midst of many people as a dew from Yahweh, as the showers upon the grass, that tarrieth not for a man, nor waiteth for the sons of men. And the remnant of Jacob shall be among the nations in the midst of many people as a lion among the beasts of the forest, as a young lion among the flocks of sheep: who, if he go through, both treadeth down, and teareth in pieces, and none can deliver."

The false priests of the House of Israel are always telling us that "God loves everybody," so don’t worry about any chastisement. What our people don’t realize is that these false priests are working for the devil. Yahweh will make an end of these false priests, rest assured.

Though their will be remnant of Jacob remaining, Esau is another story. Yahweh’s punishment of Esau will be merciless because they have shown Jacob no mercy. Esau will be destroyed because of his knowing, total rebellion.

"For behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith Yahweh of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch." (Malachi 4:1.)

Does this sound like a slap on the wrist or total destruction? Yahweh means to make an end of evil. Don’t be a stupid child who is trying to stand in His way because you foolishly have sympathy for the devil! He will strike you down as surely as He will strike them down for joining with them in their rebellion against his Word. Only the fools who listen to the "feel good" Gospel of Churchianity believe otherwise. I would love to preach the Rapture if I thought there were any truth to it; but you know as well as I do that we will all be tried by fire. The survivors will live to see the Kingdom. I would be remiss in my duty as a watchman and servant of Israel if I failed to deliver this warning. The barbarians are inside the gates, and my people are so sheepish that they are being mowed down and they know not what is happening.

The lives of Esau and Jacob were living metaphors for the final battle between the Adamic people and the fallen angels who were put on this earth for the express purpose of judgment! They are not going to go quietly. Their attitude is: "If I have to go, I’m taking as many people as I can with me." Mixing their seed with ours was their last gasp attempt to avoid the sentence being carried out. They knew that this would put Yahweh in the position of having to punish His own children as well as themselves. Their maneuvering has bought them six thousand years of time; but the time is up. Esau was a race-traitor who joined with the enemy, and so are the false priests of today’s Churchianity. Get ready to see them burn.

I am constantly being accused of "racism" by the thin-skinned Israelites who do not see what is happening. They do not see that the barbarians mean to kill us and enslave us just as surely as Russia was liquidated and enslaved by the Bolsheviks. They go around pretending that these things never happened or that such things can never happen again. Look around you, folks. It IS happening again. You have to be completely blind not to see it.

I gladly accept the charge of racism, just as a father defends his children from an attack by marauders, I defend my people Israel from the real racists who disguise their racism as religion. Is it "racism" to defend your friends and family from destruction? On the contrary, it is your duty. Don’t be so blind as to let words prevent you from doing your duty.

This is a life and death struggle between good and evil. Evil cannot co-exist with good. Evil is not just some metaphysical concept. It resides in human beings. It must have carriers; and the Jews are its carriers. Evil must and will be destroyed. The Jews are the personification of evil on this planet; and they, Esau/Edom, will be destroyed. Yahweh has promised us that this day will come. All the signs are before us. The Judgment Day is here. Now, we have to decide whose side we are on.

Could two groups of people, Judah and the Jews, erroneously referred to by the same word possibly be any more different? Put Yahshua, a tall, straight-nosed, blond-haired Aryan, next to Rabbi Schwindler, a short, black-haired, hook-nosed, hump-backed Kike. Do you see any similarity? The first step in coming out of Babylon is the elimination of confusion.

May Yahweh bless us all with the Great Awakening.