Pre-Adamite origin

[Michael]

DamienNewman wrote "The evolution theory for non-Whites is plausible indeed"



Evolution is an unproven theory. Therefore, there must be a different plausible explanation for the existence of the non-Adamic races.

What we do know is that:
(1) The Fallen Angels were on Earth before Yahweh created Adam and Eve.
(2) Various animals and living things were created by Yahweh before Yahweh created Adam and Eve.
(3) The earliest dated Caucasian remains found are very recent in history, being around 10,000 years old, and found in the Mesopotamian area. Whereas remains of the negriod and mongoliod races are dated at 100s of thousands of years old. The Scriptures date the creation of Adam around 4000BC, being in line, give or take the not exact carbon dating process, with the discovery of the earliest Caucasian remains.
(4) Modification of the genetic make up of a living organism is possible, without the death or lowering of the reproductive ability of the resulting modified organism occurring.
(5) Scripture says that there are living things on earth that are not planted by Yahweh.

We can assume that the body of Angels held the knowledge of the building blocks of life used by Yahweh in His creations. This is a reasonable assumption, as this knowledge is now known to a certain extent to "science" today in respect to DNA/RNA etc. With this knowledge, along with the will to use it to corrupt Yahweh's creation, it is reasonable to posit that the Fallen Angels corrupted some of Yahweh's creation before the creation of Adam and Eve, and the results of which are the Non-White races today.

It is also an interesting fact that today it is the large Edomite owned corporations that are the purveyors of GMO crops. They have corrupted Yahweh's wonderful plant creations and are speading these abominations throughout the world. History repeats itself.

[Kentucky]

DamienNewman wrote "The evolution theory for non-Whites is plausible indeed"



Evolution is an unproven theory. Therefore, there must be a different plausible explanation for the existence of the non-Adamic races.

I think Damien was reading between the lines of my commentary, in which I carefully did not use the word evolution, which is indeed an unproven theory as are all assumptions. Speculating on the origin of pre-Adamic hominids, therefore, is just that... speculation. It could have been some kind of 'planet of the apes' in which the truth of the matter is stranger than science fiction. We assume that there was no intelligent life forms, indigenous to earth, and yet as early as the Great Pyramid of Giza, we can't figure out how they did it! In my humble opinion, there are just some things that God deems none of our business. What I do know is that the non-Whites who roam the earth today, seeking whom they may devour, are anathema to our liberty in Christ. Let the catholics debate how many angels dance on the head of pin.

Mark

[Kentucky]

Satan is also a tanglible entity, which cannot justly be denied.

That's a good way of putting it Bill. In my opinion, a lot of confusion could have been averted if 'sawtawn' had not been transliterated and then later mystified with the traditions of man. There's plenty of adversaries (satans) of God and the White race that qualify as tangible entities. I pray for the day that they become intangible and extinct.

Mark

[Lang]

Mark,

I read a book in which they give a lot of archeological information, saying that pyramids and other wonders on the Earth who supposedly were built by non-whites were actually built by whites. Also, in this book they say the white man was in America before the natives, and that or they killed us there or we mixed with them. They give the Solutreans and the "Clovis point" as proof.

[Nayto]

Lang do you mind giving the title and author of that book? I wouldn't mind reading it.

[Lang]

WN Debate Booklet - The zionist attack on white civilization.

[DamianNewman]

Yeah, and isn't it true that non-Whites aren't pure in race as we are?

I still did not study much about the mongol and negro races being actually mongrelized. But if they evoluted from apes of course that they are mongrels as hell

I've become more open to the possibility of these entities, I just need to be sure if it's biblical, so I'll check out your podcasts and such.

An interesting subject I'm very curious about but still did not find an answer in CI is the demoniac possession theories. I tend to believe that it's false, but I'm not sure. I've been always been a fan of terror movies, so if it exist or not is a hot topic for me.

I definitely think that demon possession is fake. The diverse diseases the Son of God got rid of were not what you'd see in "The Exorcist".

Yeah, and isn't it true that non-Whites aren't pure in race as we are?

That is true. A good book I have been reading (and recommending too much) is Racial Hybridity by Phil Jones. You can find it on the Christian Identity forums.

http://www.thechristianidentityforum.ne ... ridity.pdf

japanese, chinkonese, injuns, ladinos, 'American' nigros, arabs, jews ...all mixed. The 'Australian' aboriginie may be supposed to be a 'pure-breed' by some (not me), as with congo niggers ...but are they really 'Men', they seem more like animals to me.

I am sure there are other books, that probably have some problems but which express the idea that niggers come from apes ...like 'erectus walks among us', also at that forum.

I didn't mean to be so confrontational in my original post, you're a top-bloke. I was just trying to show you some materials that helped me form my views on the subject.

Wow, that's great - I've been wanting to have something about that, because if it is indeed true only Whites are a pure race, that has big implications.

It's fine with me since I'm happy to have different views being discussed. We're all Christians so there's no bad blood to worry about.

Please don't use the term "evolution" for something which is the exact opposite, the most hideous crime ever, the devolution/dissolution of the divine order.

Nice point.

I have many times stated, as the Bible teaches in the New Testament, and which is evident but not explicit in the Old, that one is either part of the Creation (the people "born of God" in John chapter 4) or one is part of the Corruption (the people born "or the world"), as Paul says that people are either sons or bastards (Hebrews 12). Out of the mouths of two witnesses, or three...

In the parable of the net there are "bad" kinds (genos, or races) of fish. But Yahweh God did not create anything "bad". Everything He created, His Word says is "good".

Since only Adam and Christ can claim to be direct sons of God, then only the Adamic race is "born of God", and all others must therefore be born "of the world", or in other words, NOT created by God.

Thus is the sin of Jeremiah chapter 2, which can never be washed, and the broken cistern which can never hold water. (http://christogenea.org/BrokenCisterns)

That is why a bastard shall never enter the congregation of Yahweh - and "tenth generation" is merely an allegory, since after nine generations a bastard is still a bastard and the counting starts afresh each generation!

To attribute the non-White races to the creation of God is to contest with these simple concepts of Scripture. All those who do are hopelessly blind, or have an agenda because they too are part of the corruption.

Thanks for making this clear: You're either an Adamite or a mongrel. Regardless of the origin of mongrels, we can be sure in knowing that only Whites are of God.

[Staropramen]

We can assume that the body of Angels held the knowledge of the building blocks of life used by Yahweh in His creations. This is a reasonable assumption, as this knowledge is now known to a certain extent to "science" today in respect to DNA/RNA etc. With this knowledge, along with the will to use it to corrupt Yahweh's creation, it is reasonable to posit that the Fallen Angels corrupted some of Yahweh's creation before the creation of Adam and Eve, and the results of which are the Non-White races today.

Bill has cited "the Book of Giants" from the Dead Sea Scroll Enoch literature as a source, albeit fragmented, for this possibility

[Joe]

^That link is in my original post, it was 'The Problem with Gen 6:14', just reiterating in-case you forgot the name of it.

@Damian
There is a thread here with some really good docos on evolution, especially the one posted by Bahr. The top post is great also as it is a short video that exposes snickering professors for what they are.

viewtopic.php?f=49&t=5264

[DamianNewman]

^That link is in my original post, it was 'The Problem with Gen 6:14', just reiterating in-case you forgot the name of it.

@Damian
There is a thread here with some really good docos on evolution, especially the one posted by Bahr. The top post is great also as it is a short video that exposes snickering professors for what they are.

viewtopic.php?f=49&t=5264

Thank you.