What to reject and what to keep?

[wmfinck]

Men (and women) find Christian Identity from one teacher or another, and once they see the basic principles of certain elements of the message, and how that justifies their inborn feelings about the "world", they feel that they have "arrived".

From that point, they often fall into a new paradigm where they are so secure in their new beliefs that once again, they are resistant to change and criticism. The teacher that brought them to CI becomes their new Pope, and is viewed as if he were infallible. The emotional attachment becomes stronger than the desire to study the scripture for themselves.

But all men are fallible. And the attitude that your pastor or teacher is somehow inspired by God and cannot be fallible is one reason why there are so many divisions. Another reason is that the teachers themselves come to feel as if they are authorities, and therefore cannot look at anything in a different light.

Everybody wants to believe that where they are at is the place to be, which is a recipe for disaster because none of us are yet with Christ.

This is one reason why "stiff-necked" is such an appropriate description for Israel in scripture.

The first rule of Israelite Union should be this: Christ is King, and there are no vicars, because all other men are indeed fallible.

The clinging to things like water baptism are most immediately illustrative of this predicament. I would ask Nico to go ask Hallimore or some of the others who practice water baptism why they are doing it.

I think Nico basically said that "Jesus was baptized, so we should also be baptized". This is the sophistry of men. The same argument can be used to justify our sitting on asses and triumphantly entering the gates of Jerusalem. But the IDF would probably shoot all who would try. Jesus was scourged, spat upon, and crucified, and can we drink the cup which He drank?

Such justification for water baptism is therefore absurd. Especially when water baptism is not the baptism of Christ, as Christ tells us it was the baptism of John. I am only using this as one example where we can indeed disagree to the point of division, because there is no man who will compel me to undergo a ritual of this type.

Men often cling to certain professions because they have baggage from denominationalism. This is the reason for the remnants of many errant teachings in Christian Identity. I came to CI as an apostate. I can make mistakes, but I certainly had no denominational baggage that I can blame them on. So I look at things from an entirely different perspective than many others have.

As for Scripture, Malachi explains exactly why John was baptizing with water, Leviticus explains exactly why Christ was baptized in water, and the Book of Acts explains why we no longer have any need to be baptized at all, in concert with several of the epistles and statements recorded in the Gospel of John. I do not think this has been adequately explained in the past. I expound on all of these things at length, so I will not explain it further here. But this leads me to address further of Nico's statements.

If men were going to read my work and stop there, thinking they have "arrived", I would beg them to move on. We all need to study further, and if you think you should stay at Hallimore, or Comparet, you are seriously mistaken. Hallimore is evidently stuck at Comparet, so he will never know better. When men who do study further find me, I hope that they become my peers, and not my followers. I would not want followers, because all Christians should only follow Christ. If we put men onto pedestals, how are we not idolaters?

If I make a mistake, I pray that I make it because I have not studied enough, and not because of hardness of heart or because I am stiff-necked. I also pray that in spite of those same reasons, once I do study enough, or once I hear better from another, that I can correct it or be corrected.

[wmfinck]

Now to address another facet of Nico's response.

I had asked you to go listen to my podcasts for this reason: Can two walk together, except they be agreed?

To me, the idea that non-Whites should ever be given the Word of our God is so antithetical to Christianity that it is indeed satanic. The idea that men must undergo rituals in order to "join the club", so to speak, is so pharisaical that it is also satanic.

We join the club when we are conceived in the womb, but we really became members when we were conceived in the mind of God before the world was framed. The idea of undergoing rituals in order to belong to something is a satanic idea. We are all in the image of our Creator - if indeed we are Adamic men and women, and no ritual can transform us into anything other than what we were created.

The Word of God is only for the children of Israel, and Yahweh never licensed the children of Israel to share it with anyone. I just wrote an article in this regard, "Who are the Peacemakers?", which was also the introduction to Saturday's program. When Israel is obedient to the law, Israel is blessed with peace, and the non-Israelite nations are put in fear of them. That is the Word of God, and you can find it in Deuteronomy. If we "Christianize" the non-Israel nations, we shall be cursed, and we shall certainly not be blessed!

These things, Nico, which I saw in your posts, represent what I had perceived as differences between us which are so fundamental that they cannot be rectified. You would need to listen to hundreds of my podcasts before you could understand why, in these areas, I am so different from Comparet, Swift and Hallimore.

But I know that I am right, because the Catholic compulsion to enforce rituals, and the Jesuit and British Israel aspirations to some so-called "dominion theology" are all anti-Christ, and I know the Scripture to fully support and illustrate my assertions.

Therefore, until you hear my viewpoints, you will continue to think that Comparet et al. were correct, and we will never have true unity in these important matters.

I have often said that we owe a debt of gratitude to men like Swift and Comparet. Gale and Emry and others should not be overlooked either. But they were all fallible men, and we must take what is good, and correct what is bad, and we must do that according to Scripture. If I cannot point out Comparet's errors, then he is an idol, and no longer a man.

However I am not an idolater.

[wmfinck]

I don't know if you tuned in for Bill's 2 programs this last weekend, celebrating 5 years of regular weekly studies, but he asked that I call in and I prepared a little for the show by looking at the suggested themes in this forum: Christian Identity Directions. Your thread here struck a chord with me and so I resurrected it and brought up a quote from you during the show. You said, "A united church would get rid of the problem regarding false Identity pastors who simply self-promote themselves and become a leader without any criteria. Having and a set standard and minimal criteria would get rid of the infighting and false preachers." I knew what you were getting at, but perhaps it was taken out of context or I didn't preface the subject adequately. The reaction was, "But we shouldn't mimic judeo-Christians."

Mark, I apologize if you think I dismissed the topic without proper consideration. I understand the need. But I also think that I understand the dangers. Perhaps one day soon we can do a program together on this topic alone?

[Joe]

Bill says

When men who do study further find me, I hope that they become my peers, and not my followers. I would not want followers, because all Christians should only follow Christ. If we put men onto pedestals, how are we not idolaters?

Your work and that of those who came before provides many with the tools they need to see the Bible more clearly. A simple framework is conveyed, that can be adapted for others, for their own understanding.

What you provide are simple and useful tools, I combine your instruction with Clifton's etc to shape my own. The bread is in Scripture, that is where we work for ourselves, I know that Scripture is not for private interpretation, but we all must learn for ourselves.

Information is difficult to convey, this may be the cause behind some division ...but behind it all, we are drawn by His message. Bill cannot provide the understanding one gets from Scripture itself, nor can any other brother, that is beyond words. That is between me and God.

I am working towards other things, Bill has his place amongst the brethren and I have mine. Mine is to determine if Bill provides useful tools that I can use, to shape my own using what my brothers and fathers share. Why call him good... he is just a man doing his job for the brethren. I have different skills and a different role, I don't see myself being able to challenge most of Bill's (CI in general) framework, but I do want to understand how to use those tools, and why they work the way they do ...honing the edge for my own sight.

My prayers are private, and are more important than anything Bill can ever provide.I prayed to God before I knew His Name, I desired to know His way and His Laws before I knew the Bible, even while in bondage, in a squalid pig pen. I yearned for CI before I came to CI. My faith is in God, conviction and faith cannot be conveyed to others.

[Nayto]

Where in that text does it talk about non-Whites receiving the Word of God? (sincere question)

[Kentucky]

Mark, I apologize if you think I dismissed the topic without proper consideration. I understand the need. But I also think that I understand the dangers. Perhaps one day soon we can do a program together on this topic alone?

No need to apologize. The program had a good pace and your response was quite natural. I got to get in my 2 cents in at the end of the Saturday program and qualify the subject a bit more. I think everybody that comes on board to Christian Identity has their own level of understanding and naturally gravitates to whatever sources of information they like. This has a positive and negative aspect to the greater concerns we have for the body of Christ, the body politic, the ecclesia, because most people want to belong to something good. However, the predators amongst us also understand the dynamic of corporate Israel. I guess the topic begs the question: what are the standards of CI? It goes without saying that whatever those standards are, they should be for the good of our race and something that no one should have any difficulty accepting. I think the direction that Christian Identity takes is on the minds of a lot of people. Sometimes it's a rather rocky road, not knowing whether to make peace or to make war. A "minimal criteria" would be like a rudder on a boat, taking us into the safe harbor of the Kingdom, in contradistinction to the roaring waves of hell. I can see where the tumult often burns out some of our adherents. The last thing I want to be responsible for is not heeding the admonition of I Thes. 5:19, "Do not quench [exterminate] the Spirit." Blessings to the brethren.

Mark

[wmfinck]

Where in that text does it talk about non-Whites receiving the Word of God? (sincere question)

Nayto, I did not think you would ask an insincere question. Here is what Nico said which I would object to:

First two points you'd have the speak with the author, who is no longer with us. He was purely against mongrels and against mixing, but he used to say that better they are Christian rather than Muslims. Most likely the points referred to non-Israelite Whites. As stated only if all Whites have been preached to then there could be time for mongrels. One way or another I don't think we're here to waste time on mongrels and the idea behind converting them would simply be to stop Islam and other religions, not to bring them in to us.

Now Nico objects to bastards, which is fine, but where Nico said "and the idea behind converting them would simply be to stop Islam and other religions, not to bring them in to us", and there he is apologetic for the idea rather than rejecting the idea outright.

We should not care one whit about the religion of mongrels and niggers. We do NOT want them to be Christian, because being Christian is not a "religion", it is Yahweh God upholding His covenant with the members of a particular race of people.

The idea that other races should ever receive the Word of God is one which puts us right on the slippery slope to hell, or at least to the dilapidated state where we are today. Make Pedro think he can be a Christian, and tomorrow he will be in bed with some dumb-assed White man's daughter. No way around it. On the other hand, Yahweh our God warned us to have nothing to do with them. There is no compromising this position.

Please see this:
http://saxonmessenger.christogenea.org/ ... eacemakers
and this:
http://saxonmessenger.christogenea.org/tolerance-evil

Hope this helps.

[wmfinck]

PS:

Did Yahweh tell Israel of their neighbors "Read them My law, and they will get along with you"?

Hell no! He told them "You keep My law, and they will be in fear of you"!

As it was then, it is no different today. God does not change.

This is why I told Nico that we had fundamental differences which could not easily be rectified.

[NicoChristian]

Once again I need to clarify my position as I' m being lugged in with Eli. I do not support preaching to wogs. In the past due to being taught by other CI teachers I may have thought they were God's creation. I never thought they could be saved, but I thought they could be blessed if they lived according to God's laws. Even at the time I only believed so after the last white man had been converted. Since coming to Christogenea I changed my position. I no longer believe so, since coming to Christogenea that feeling deep down inside that wogs cannot be from God has been confirmed. I've changed a lot of my views because I reallized they were wrong. Bill said we'll be unable to work together, are you looking to update zogbots? Half joke half truth. I come to Christogenea to support it and I know you like extra traffic.

I'm not mad but I'm offended that you suggest I support anything towards mongrels. You shouls know I harbour no such doctrines. I was quoting what my late friend said and have since rejected the idea. The 14 points were written 4 years ago, was witten for South Africans and was edited later. I no longer promote it as it is, I was asked to show it and I did. When asked about supporting mongrels I said no, quoted the author's views which I add may also have changed. I support Christogenea, I have listened to many podcasts and read many of the articles. I was more active on the internet previously, but have lost faith or interest in it's use. I don't oppose it but I prefer real-life activism, combat training, practical activities and lessons and survivalism, etc. That's my callling and I do it rather well.

As to water baptism I was admittedly ignorant on the subject and subsequently read the article realizing my view may need some revision. This is one of the many griefs I have with the internet, we don't know each other, quickly form uninformed opinions and often are unable to properly express ourselves. A final confirmation I do not support non-whites, believe they are from God or believe they can learn our ways.

[SwordBrethren]

Where in that text does it talk about non-Whites receiving the Word of God? (sincere question)

Nayto, I did not think you would ask an insincere question. Here is what Nico said which I would object to:

First two points you'd have the speak with the author, who is no longer with us. He was purely against mongrels and against mixing, but he used to say that better they are Christian rather than Muslims. Most likely the points referred to non-Israelite Whites. As stated only if all Whites have been preached to then there could be time for mongrels. One way or another I don't think we're here to waste time on mongrels and the idea behind converting them would simply be to stop Islam and other religions, not to bring them in to us.

Now Nico objects to bastards, which is fine, but where Nico said "and the idea behind converting them would simply be to stop Islam and other religions, not to bring them in to us", and there he is apologetic for the idea rather than rejecting the idea outright.

We should not care one whit about the religion of mongrels and niggers. We do NOT want them to be Christian, because being Christian is not a "religion", it is Yahweh God upholding His covenant with the members of a particular race of people.

The idea that other races should ever receive the Word of God is one which puts us right on the slippery slope to hell, or at least to the dilapidated state where we are today. Make Pedro think he can be a Christian, and tomorrow he will be in bed with some dumb-assed White man's daughter. No way around it. On the other hand, Yahweh our God warned us to have nothing to do with them. There is no compromising this position.

Please see this:
http://saxonmessenger.christogenea.org/ ... eacemakers
and this:
http://saxonmessenger.christogenea.org/tolerance-evil

Hope this helps.

Stoddard once wrote that it was better that Africans/Blacks practice Christianity instead of Islam because Islam would reinforce their violent tendencies. I prefer to see all non-whites practice Islam, voodoo, atheism, or whatever tribal religion they have. It makes them less respectable in polite Christian society and it makes them much less likely to be able to assimilate and gain access to White women.

If every single negro in America were to begin practicing Islam it would cut down on White-Black race-mixing by at least 80% as White people who don't care about race would easily decline to go with a Muslim, especially a militant Nation of Islam type Muslim.