This Forum is now inactive and has been replaced by a new Christogenea Forum. You may browse here but there are no updated threads or new posts since January 1st 2017. Forum members please see THIS NOTICE for information concerning your account at the new forum.

Old Testament Discussion

Old Testament religious discussion apart from Biblical history

Re: Old Testament Discussion

Postby Steve » Mon Nov 08, 2010 10:42 pm

JamesTheJust wrote:From other Adamic women. We know that there were many other Adamic nations, but YHWH chose Israel of all the Adamic families. Following the history of our race, we see the Egypt fell, Assyria fell, Bobylon fell, as well as all other Adamic nations (familes).

But we are told that Japeth would make it tents within the Israel. We also know that there was a method by which an Israelite could marry a non-Israelite, BUT ADAMIC spouse and within three generations, the offspring were allowed to enter into the temple.


We are told that Japheth would make his tents with Shem, not Israel.

But an Israelite from a non-Israelite mother would be able to enter the temple in the first generation; unless the Israelites married their sisters!

Why do you say "spouse", instead of "wife?
Are you suggesting an Israelite woman could marry a non-Israelite man, and have Israelite children?
Steve
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 2:12 am

Re: Old Testament Discussion

Postby JamesTheJust » Tue Nov 09, 2010 2:03 am

We are told that Japheth would make his tents with Shem, not Israel.


And what is your point? Japeth does IN FACT make his tents within the Israelite nations TODAY and has for the entire history of Europe!

Why do you say "spouse", instead of "wife?
Are you suggesting an Israelite woman could marry a non-Israelite man, and have Israelite children?


As long as the spouse is Adamic then YES!

Are you saying that the husband cannot be sanctified through the wife and the wife sanctified through the husband?

The bible is about a race of people. From this race, YHWH choose one family to be the becon and the way home. Adam and Eve were not Israelites, but they are no less included in the plan of salvation. Abraham, Noah and even Shem were not in any way shape form or fashion, Israelites, but they are most certainly included in the plan of ultimate salvation.
Ye chosen seed of Israel's race, ye ransomed from the fall, hail him who saves you by his grace, and crown him Lord of all. Hail him who saves you by his grace, and crown him Lord of all.
JamesTheJust
 
Posts: 553
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2009 2:44 am
Location: Arizona

Re: Old Testament Discussion

Postby Steve » Tue Nov 09, 2010 4:01 am

And what is your point? Japeth does IN FACT make his tents within the Israelite nations TODAY and has for the entire history of Europe!


Do you have a Bible verse for that, James?

Are you suggesting an Israelite woman could marry a non-Israelite man, and have Israelite children?
As long as the spouse is Adamic then YES


Then shouldn't there be about 24 tribes, since Jacob's daughters were also Israelites?
Are you saying that the husband cannot be sanctified through the wife and the wife sanctified through the husband?

No, I'm not saying that at all, since I don't know what "sanctified" means.
What does "sanctified" mean, James?
The bible is about a race of people. From this race, YHWH choose one family to be the becon and the way home.

What do you mean by "home"?
Adam and Eve were not Israelites, but they are no less included in the plan of salvation. Abraham, Noah and even Shem were not in any way shape form or fashion, Israelites, but they are most certainly included in the plan of ultimate salvation

What is the nature of "ultimate salvation"?.....Where is it enjoyed?

My questions are sincere, James....thank you!
Steve
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 2:12 am

Re: Old Testament Discussion

Postby JamesTheJust » Wed Nov 10, 2010 4:49 am

Do you seriously believe that a White Israelite woman, marrying another White man, would have bastard children? No one today knows for sure if ALL White people are old Israelite stock. It was impossible to tell. Even the Assyirans where Adamic and even of Shem, but they were not "Israelites".

Are you saying that such a woman's children are bastards?
Ye chosen seed of Israel's race, ye ransomed from the fall, hail him who saves you by his grace, and crown him Lord of all. Hail him who saves you by his grace, and crown him Lord of all.
JamesTheJust
 
Posts: 553
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2009 2:44 am
Location: Arizona

Re: Old Testament Discussion

Postby Steve » Wed Nov 10, 2010 12:49 pm

JamesTheJust wrote:Do you seriously believe that a White Israelite woman, marrying another White man, would have bastard children? No one today knows for sure if ALL White people are old Israelite stock. It was impossible to tell. Even the Assyirans where Adamic and even of Shem, but they were not "Israelites".

Are you saying that such a woman's children are bastards?

No , James.....I'm not suggesting any of those things.
Do you believe that all non-Israelites are bastards?
If not, then why do you think I believe it?
But forget about these rhetorical questions, let's get back to my original questions that you haven't answered.
Japeth does IN FACT make his tents within the Israelite nations TODAY and has for the entire history of Europe!


Do you have some Bible verses for that, James?
Are you saying that the husband cannot be sanctified through the wife and the wife sanctified through the husband?

I don't know what "sanctified means. What does "sanctified" mean?
The bible is about a race of people. From this race, YHWH choose one family to be the becon and the way home

What do you mean by "home"?
Adam and Eve were not Israelites, but they are no less included in the plan of salvation. Abraham, Noah and even Shem were not in any way shape form or fashion, Israelites, but they are most certainly included in the plan of ultimate salvation

What is "ultimate salvation"? Where is it enjoyed?

I'm new to Christian Identity, James; I'm trying to learn. I don't want my house built on sand.
Steve
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 2:12 am

Re: Old Testament Discussion

Postby EighthDayWoman » Wed Nov 10, 2010 5:59 pm

Steve, I am not James but the Bible verse for the question you ask is Genesis 9:27 God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

There are many essays with references on the Christogenea site. Please feel free to read them because they will no doubt answer many of the questions you are seeking on this matter.

Excerpt: Race of Genesis 10 by William Finck

The Japhethites: Gen. 10:2-5

Gomer (Gen. 10:2). Difficult to document, the historian Josephus made the mistake of associating Gomer with the Kelts, an error probably derived from an early Greek name for them, Κιμμέριοι, and many of his copyists have followed this mistake, which is based solely upon this phonetic similarity. That the Kelts actually sprung from a portion of the children of Israel deported by the Assyrians (see Missing Links Discovered in Assyrian Tablets by E. Raymond Capt) is evident from many factors, including their late (7th century B.C.) appearance in history, their location today, and their role in history in fulfillment of many of the prophecies concerning Israel: a topic beyond the scope of this discussion. Simply note that the “Galatians” of Paul’s epistle are Kelts, and Paul certainly was writing to Israelites. By contrast, in Ezekiel chapter 38, Gomer is allied with those who are in opposition to the children of Israel, which makes it easy to accept A. Koestler’s statements concerning Togarmah, outlined below. Some commentators feel that Hosea’s taking of a wife named Gomer (Hos. 1:3) is an indication that Gomer was one of the tribes that the Israelites were dispersed among after their deportation by the Assyrians. This hypothesis is quite credible, though I have not been able to positively identify any tribe of the secular records with Gomer.


The sons of Gomer (Gen. 10:3). Arthur Koestler, a jew who writes from a jewish perspective, claims that Togarmah is the common ancestor of the Uigur, Dursu, Avars, Huns, Basilii, Tarniakh, Khazars (see Cush below), Zagora, Bulgars and Sabir, on p. 72 of his book The Thirteenth Tribe. Along with Gomer, Togarmah is allied against the children of Israel in the last days, at Ezek. 38:6, where he is placed in the far north, and surely among the Asiatic hordes of the former Soviet Union. Riphath, or Diphath, is unmentioned elsewhere in the Bible, except for a copy of Genesis chapter 10 found at I Chronicles chapter 1. Ashkenaz, however, is more easily identified. Mentioned at Jer. 51:27 along with Ararat and Minni (both part of modern Armenia), Ashkenaz is there shown to be not far from the ancient land of the Khazars, once a great empire, and of which modern Kazakhstan is a remnant. In the first millennium many of the Edomites and other Canaanites who had adopted Judaism migrated to Khazaria, and the Khazars, beginning with their king, had converted to Judaism. The jews being absorbed into the general population, these people adopted the name Ashkenaz, or “Ashkenazi jews”, for Ashkenaz was recognized as an ancestor of the original Caucasian population of the area.


Magog, Tubal and Meshech (Gen. 10:2). Over 1500 years before the Germanic Rus conquered the land which bears their name today, Ezekiel wrote of Rhos (LXX) or Rush (A.V.) being the leader (“prince”) of Gog, Meshech and Tubal (Ezekiel chapter 38). This is by no means a coincidence, but rather a clear manifestation of the Divine inspiration of the prophet.


In light of the relationship which the Rus were to have with Magog, Meshech and Tubal, which Ezekiel chapter 38 illustrates, Herodotus mentions two tribes among those under Persian dominion, the Moschi and the Tibareni (3.94, 7.78), in a convenient geographic location that without stretching the imagination we may associate these ancient Japhethites with the dwellers around the Russian cities of Moscow and Tobolsk. Strabo discussed the Moschi and the Tibareni in his eleventh book, and relates that land formerly held by the Moschi, whom he placed just south of Colchis in the Caucasus mountains, was encroached upon by the Colchians, Armenians and Iberians (11.2.18). Of course the Iberians are Hebrews, a part of the Scythians who stayed put, rather than moving northward through the Caucasus with their fellows, and Armenia can be shown to be a Hebrew word meaning “mountain parts”.


Whoever Magog may have been in prehistoric times, we can be certain that his descendants are found among those gigantic (“Gog”) mixed masses of Caucasian – Mongol – Chinese – whatever blood who are found inhabiting much of Asiatic Russia today. Mongolia and Tibet, homes of anciently mixed races with a clear Adamic cultural influence may be guessed. Professor L. A. Waddell, who wrote in the first quarter of the 20th century, produced several books which illustrated the Aryan origin of cultures in India and in Tibet.


Madai (Gen. 10:2) is identifiable with the Medes, which is evident simply by checking both terms in Strong’s Concordance. The Greeks wrote “Mede” as Μ͡ηδος, the ‘η’ in English being either an ‘a’, or an ‘ê’ or ‘e’. Herodotus wrote that “These Medes were anciently called by all people Arians” (7.62), although it is more likely that the term “Aryan” was rather used by Israelites who once sojourned in Media (with which Dr. George Moore agrees in his The Lost Tribes and the Saxons of the East and the Saxons of the West…), since the term Ar-ya appears to mean “Mountain of Yahweh” in Hebrew (i.e. Dan. 2:45), and that the Greeks had Israelite tribes in Media confused with actual Medes. Regardless, the Medes fulfilling a destiny in history which the prophets had already assigned to Madai (i.e. Isaiah chapter 21; Jer. 25:25 and 51:11 and 28; Daniel chapter 8), there should be no doubt of this identification.


There are good indications that the Medes are found in the Slavs of today. The Slavs may be traced to a people that the Romans and Greeks called Sauromatae (Sarmatians). Diodorus Siculus, discussing certain Sakae (Scythian) Kings, states that “It was by these kings that many of the conquered [by the Scythians] peoples were removed to other homes, and two of these became very great colonies: the one was composed of Assyrians and was removed to the land between Paphlagonia and Pontus [modern day Turkey along the southern shore of the Black Sea], and the other was drawn from Media and planted along the Tanaïs [a river north of the Caucasus mountains which empties into the Black Sea from the northeast], its people receiving the name Sauromatae. Many years later this people became powerful and ravaged a large part of Scythia...” (Diodorus Siculus 2.43.5-7). And with this, we having so many Slavs among us today, we have the realization of the fulfillment of Gen. 9:27, which will be discussed below.


Javan (Gen. 10:2) is also identified by Strong in his Concordance with the Ionian Greeks, as the Septuagint translators also seemed to do, rendering the Hebrew word (3120) as Ἰωύαν (Iōuan). This is not out of fancy, for on the Behistun Rock (and other Eastern inscriptions) these Greeks are called “Yavana”, and Sir Henry Rawlinson wrote “Ionians” there in his famous translation of that inscription. Other Persian inscriptions assure this same connection (see G. Moore’s The Lost Tribes… and E. R. Capt’s Missing Links…). These Ionians once inhabited the coasts of Anatolia [modern Turkey] and many of its islands, that land called Ionia generally, and also were the founders and principal inhabitants of Athens.


The sons of Javan (Gen. 10:4). Of the sons of Javan, all are identified with the sea trade with Tyre in Ezekiel chapter 27: Elishah at 27:7, Tarshish at 27:12, Kittim (or Chittim) at 27:6 and in the Septuagint, Dodanim which is a mistake by the Hebrew copyists for Rodanim (as Strong’s attests), at 27:15 (where the A.V. has “Dedan”), or “Rhodians” (Ῥόδιοι) in the LXX. Elishah and Kittim are both identified with Cyprus, with several varying spellings of these names found in ancient inscriptions. Kittim is the word for Cyprus throughout the Hebrew prophets. Rodanim are the Greeks of Rhodes, as identified in the LXX. Tarshish is a region of southern Spain known as Tartessus. The Ionians (or Javan) are connected with Tyrian sea trade also at Ezek. 27:13 and 19, mentioned with Dan: for a portion of that tribe also settled Greece at an early time, and were known as Danaans.


The “ships of Tarshish” are mentioned in Kings, Chronicles, Psalms, and several of the prophets. Although a separate and quite lengthy topic, it can be convincingly demonstrated that the Phoenicians of Tyre and elsewhere were the Israelites – called Phoenicians by the Greeks – right from the pages of the Bible, with much evidence also added by secular historians. Carthage was a Phoenician colony of Tyre, and the Carthaginians eventually controlled the land we call Spain today, then called Iberia, “Hebrew” or “Eber” land, just as the land south of the Caucasus mountains, where the deported Israelites first settled and became known as Scythians, was also called Iberia, even in Roman times.


Diodorus Siculus (25.10.1 ff.) discusses wars between the Carthaginian Hamilcar Barca and the “Iberians and Tartessians” in the third century B.C. Herodotus (4.152) is writing about a period much earlier than his own, even pre-dating the Trojan War, and speaking of Tartessus in southern Spain says, “This trading town was in those days a virgin port, unfrequented by the merchants”. The Trojan War was 200 years before King Solomon’s ships, so Herodotus surely seems to have been accurate, and his calling Tartessus a “trading town” illuminates the Scriptural record. In their Greek-English lexicon, Liddell & Scott readily identify Τάρτησσος as “the Tarshish of Scripture”.


Tiras (Gen. 10:2) is in Strong’s Hebrew spelling “Thiyrac”. Mentioned nowhere else in the Bible (except in the copy of Genesis chapter 10 found at I Chronicles chapter 1), many writers have made perfect etymological and ethnographical sense in connecting these people to the Thracians north of Greece. In later history the land of Thrace is instead occupied by Greeks, as Makedonians and Thessalians, and Strabo is confused as to whether one tribe in the area, the Treres, are Kimmerian (Kelts) or Thracian (13.1.8, 14.1.40). The Thracians were not considered Greeks but rather barbarians (Strabo 7.7.1), and had colonies in Asia (Strabo 12.3-4), and also with the Eneti settled the area around Venice (Strabo 12.3.25). The Phrygians of Anatolia are said to be Thracians (Strabo 7.3.2, 7.25, and 10.3.16).


Modern anthropologists, archaeologists and historians often discuss the “sea peoples”, whom they usually claim were Caucasians who came from the Aegean area and invaded the Mediterranean. The true origin of the “sea peoples” are as the Japhethites of Genesis chapter 10, who were spread along the waterways from the Caspian and Black Seas to as far west as Spain, and at a very early time. Contrast Gen. 10:5 with 10:20 and 10:31, where the Japhethites were specifically assigned the “isles” or “coastlands”, but not the Hamites or Shemites, though the Hamitic Philistines also plied the waves, and only after a considerable time were these peoples rivaled at sea by the Israelite Phoenicians.


There is a certain prophecy, at Gen. 9:27, which reads, “God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant”. Without discussing the part concerning Canaan, this will be discussed briefly here.


It is evident that Yahweh surely did enlarge Japheth, for these tribes were spread out over a great area along the southern coasts and eastern borderlands of Europe. Although a separate and lengthy topic, once it is realized that not only the Phoenicians of Tyre, Sidon, Byblos (et al.), northern Africa, the Greek and Italian islands, Spain and Britain, but also the Keltic and Germanic peoples, and the Trojans and Illyrians and Parthians, among others, were all descendants of the Shemitic Israelites, and most of whom had moved into Europe, along with other Shemites such as the Lydians (see Lud below), only then may the oracle at Gen. 9:27 (and most other prophecies in the Bible) be manifest and appreciated.


Aside from the peoples of Meshech and Tubal having been conquered by, and living among the Germanic Rus (and we see here that the Slavic tongue prevailed in Russia), and the colony of Medes moved by the Israelite Scythians to the Tanaïs, which later became known as Sarmatians, and later than that as Slavs, these things already discussed above, the other Japhethites moved all along the Mediterranean coasts and into Europe.


The Getae and the Daci are described by Strabo as being akin to the Thracians (Tiras) and having the same tongue (7.3.10, 13), these inhabiting a great part of both sides of the lower Danube. Although Strabo considered everything north of the Danube as Germany (2.5.30, 7.1.1 et al.) this particular area is historically Slavic. The Greek Ionians also made many settlements. The Ionians of Phocaea in Asia Minor were called by Herodotus “the first of the Greeks who performed long voyages” (1.163), and these alone founded Massalia (Marseilles) on the coast of France, Maenaca in Iberia, Elea in Italy (Strabo 4.1.4, 3.4.2, and 6.1.1) among many others. Italy was also settled by the Trojans, and especially Rome (Strabo 6.1.12 and 14), the Ionians of Asia Minor (Strabo 6.1.14, 6.2.2), the Athenians who were also Ionians, and the Achaeans who were Danaans (Strabo 6.1.10, 11, 13, and 15).


With so many Slavs, along with the races of Southern France and Italy, among us today, Japheth certainly is dwelling in the tents of Shem unto this day."

sanc·ti·fy   /ˈsæŋktəˌfaɪ/ Show Spelled[sangk-tuh-fahy] Show IPA
–verb (used with object),-fied, -fy·ing.
1.to make holy; set apart as sacred; consecrate.
2.to purify or free from sin: Sanctify your hearts.
3.to impart religious sanction to; render legitimate or binding: to sanctify a vow.
4.to entitle to reverence or respect.
5.to make productive of or conducive to spiritual blessing.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Origin:
1350–1400; < LL sānctificāre (see Sanctus, -ify); r. ME seintefien < OF saintifier < L, as above

—Related forms
sanc·ti·fi·a·ble, adjective
sanc·ti·fi·a·ble·ness, noun
sanc·ti·fi·a·bly, adverb
sanc·ti·fi·ca·tion, noun
sanc·ti·fi·er, noun
sanc·ti·fy·ing·ly, adverb
non·sanc·ti·fi·ca·tion, noun
pre·sanc·ti·fy, verb (used with object),-fied, -fy·ing.
self-sanc·ti·fi·ca·tion, noun
un·sanc·ti·fy·ing, adjective


—Synonyms
1. bless, hallow, anoint, enshrine, exalt.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sanctified

Now check me if I am wrong here but according to the geneology of the Bible, Jacob's name was changed to Israel. Noah, Shem, Japeth, and Ham could not be called Israel at that time because Jacob was not even born yet, thus they were Adamic.
Genesis 11: 10 These are the generations of Shem etc...etc...until verse 27: These are the generations of Terah: Terah begat Abram.
Thus...Abraham, Isaac, then Jacob who were all of the Adamic race.
But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. Luke 19:27
User avatar
EighthDayWoman
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2010 1:02 pm

Re: Old Testament Discussion

Postby Steve » Wed Nov 10, 2010 10:41 pm

Thank you for your comment, Eighthdaywoman!
But you misunderstood my question to James.

James said: "we are told that Japheth would make his tents with Israel"
And I said: "We are told that Japheth would make his tents with Shem, not Israel"
And you proved what I said.

I wasn't looking for a dictionary definition of "sanctified"; I wanted to know what James meant by "sanctified", when he said: "Are you saying that the husband can't be sanctified through the wife....."

Which one of your 12 dictionary definitions would fit this context?
The only one that would seem to fit would be, "to render legitimate".
When a woman "sanctifies" a man, does she change his DNA?

"Israelite" can't be a biological distinction; it must be a legal distinction.
Jacob was the only full blooded Israelite; some of his sons were half Israelite, half Rachelite; some were half Leahite; some were half Handmaidenite; and unless they married their sisters, their children were only one fourth Israelite, biologically speaking.
Steve
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 2:12 am

Re: Old Testament Discussion

Postby Filidh » Tue Mar 27, 2012 12:59 pm

(Yeah, the thread is old. Necromancy isn't anti-Christian in the case of forum threads, though. )
Israelite can be a biological distinction when it refers to a descendent of Jacob who, while not necessarily being a pure-blooded Israelite, is still a pure-blooded Adamite.

When James said:"we are told that Japheth would make his tents with Israel";
and you then claimed that:"We are told that Japheth would make his tents with Shem, not Israel";
and you then claimed additionally that: Eighthdaywoman proved what you said;
you use disconnected logic, not taking into account that: Japheth dwells with Shem's offspring, Israel - he still dwelt with Shem, but as Shem's descendents became Israel, he then dwelt with Shem still - though Shem was at this point largely called Israel.

When an Israelite woman sanctifies a non-Israelite, Adamic man, or the other way around, she sanctifies the marriage through creating children of partial-Israelite, wholly Adamic descent. Thus, the husband is sanctified through the wife's bearing of his children, and rendered legitimate as such.


Using the same logic you use to render half-Israelite Adamites non-Israelites, the fruit of the trees of Eden that Adam was permitted to eat of would thus be non-Adamic on the basis of the partiality of their lineage (half-Adamite).
real name's trevor :-)
Filidh
 
Posts: 311
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 1:51 am

Re: Old Testament Discussion

Postby Arabel » Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:49 pm

I've alway's wondered about Eastern Europeans/Slavs. If the Slavs today are decended of Japeth, does this then mean that Japeth's decendants are still in existence today? In several articles I have read that Slavics and Eastern European are mixed with Mongoloid. But I dont know that this mean every single one is. Would a half British, half Slavic Person still be an Israelite. I know several people who have this mixture. Slavs look very extremely white to me by the way.
Arabel
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 7:35 pm

Re: Old Testament Discussion

Postby JamesTheJust » Fri Jun 22, 2012 10:12 pm

LOL!

You know, every time the conversation goes in this direction, I understand the meaning of "the HOPE of our salvation".

Can everyone here state with absolute certainty, that their blood is pure Adamic, let alone Shemitic or Israelite?

We have the hope of our salvation, based on the fruits of our lives. Other than the occasional kike infiltrator, we in CI have indeed been blessed with the truth.

We strive; we fall. We pray; we're lifted up.

I'll be glad when this is over.
Ye chosen seed of Israel's race, ye ransomed from the fall, hail him who saves you by his grace, and crown him Lord of all. Hail him who saves you by his grace, and crown him Lord of all.
JamesTheJust
 
Posts: 553
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2009 2:44 am
Location: Arizona

PreviousNext

Return to Old Testament Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron