This Forum is now inactive and has been replaced by a new Christogenea Forum.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.

2 Seedline vs. 1 seedliners

This forum is for discussions and questions concerning Christian Identity direction, doctrine and debate.

2 Seedline vs. 1 seedliners

Postby PhillipWMorrow » Thu Jun 18, 2015 7:30 am

I for one am perplexed by these "ministers" who preach a one seedline, no Satan and no angels doctrine. I see them posted up on other sites and one in particular (Ted R. Weiland) really gets my goat. Why do these people call themselves Christian Israel Identity? Another at benwilliamslibrary.org has Bible courses and I decided I would do the one on Acts only to discover he did not believe in angels as spiritual beings and said when mentioned in the Bible they are merely "messengers" in the flesh and blood. There is even some doubt he believes in a literal Satan. What is going on?? :twisted:
User avatar
PhillipWMorrow
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 12:16 pm

Re: 2 Seedline vs. 1 seedliners

Postby Nayto » Thu Jun 18, 2015 1:53 pm

There are a few of us here who believe there is no supernatural "Satan" or "demons" currently, including myself. I certainly believe there are fleshly demons and satans on the Earth though. Also despite this belief, I strongly believe in two seedlines: Adam's seedline and every other bipedal mongrel that walks the Earth.

I've never heard of anyone not believing in the existence of supernatural angels though.

Any one of us would be happy to answer questions, but if you want to debate the matter I would strongly suggest getting acquainted with the literature from both sides first. Otherwise there is a lot of redundant discussion with the risk of it getting heated.

I like to think in spite of our differences in belief, the middle ground of two seedline as I explained above removes the need for animosity. Bill's semi recent research on Genesis has helped to create that middle ground. We don't agree on everything, but we agree where it matters.

(I don't want to presume to speak for others on the forum, but this represents my perception and opinion of the matter.)
Nayto
 
Posts: 1151
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 6:06 am

Re: 2 Seedline vs. 1 seedliners

Postby Kentucky » Thu Jun 18, 2015 4:57 pm

PHILnBOAZ wrote:I for one am perplexed by these "ministers" who preach a one seedline, no Satan and no angels doctrine.

I don't know of anybody who calls themselves "one seedline" except for the adversaries or satans that use misnomers to divide and conquer; and these people are dual seedliners who think a simplistic soundbyte resolves the many issues which they are incapable of discussing in a civil manner. I know, because these unnamed troublemakers have been falsely accusing me of the most ridiculous and preposterous things for years that have nothing to do with theological resolves. Everybody in Christian Identity should believe in two seedlines if they are to believe Gen. 3:15. It's kind of no-brainer ya know. The real issue is a literal personified "Satan" but evidently that object of discussion is skirted for a "straw man" argument under the illusion of "one seedline." And when somebody intentionally convolutes this subject with a myriad of other peripheral subjects, they are not being intellectually honest. Isn't that perplexing? I will not dignify or give free advertising to these false accusers, but our forum is well aware that it is highly unlikely that these interlopers are racially pure Israelites; one even had the audacity to say that 15% mixed blood can still be considered White. And you should be perplexed that they slander Bill as much as myself, Nayto and others, for daring to challenge their doctrine. In fact, Bill has written about this at the following link: viewtopic.php?f=46&t=3765

Some of my best friends still believe in a literal personified "Satan." So what, it's not a litmus test for fellow laborers in the vineyard for the coming harvest; it's never been a prerequisite for being a believer and follower of Christ; and loving your neighbor as yourself is not predicated on fallen angels. There's bigger fish to fry, like "turning the hearts of the fathers to the children, and turning the heart of the children to their fathers."

I see them posted up on other sites and one in particular (Ted R. Weiland) really gets my goat. Why do these people call themselves Christian Israel Identity?

Weiland gets my goat also. He calls himself CI because he stands for the basic premise of who true Israel is. After that it is downhill. It is not fair to lump all people who have a different perspective on "Satan" with universalist clowns like Ted. That is not only slavish and ignorant of the facts, but accusing one man of sin for the sins of another. Since when has sin been transferable or interchangeable?

Another at benwilliamslibrary.org has Bible courses and I decided I would do the one on Acts only to discover he did not believe in angels as spiritual beings and said when mentioned in the Bible they are merely "messengers" in the flesh and blood. There is even some doubt he believes in a literal Satan. What is going on?? :twisted:

Ben Williams was the successor to Pastor Sheldon Emry and his tenure at America's Promise was short-lived when he denied the deity of Christ (among other things). He doesn't believe in a literal "Satan" and neither do I, but I resent people throwing the baby out with the bathwater, when many of us see the failure of many of his other doctrines. There are going to be people in our midst with their pet doctrines and denominational baggage that they drag into Christian Identity, but that should not distract us from our primary mission. We can have intelligent discussions about these things, but they should not hijack the principle premises of what our message is i.e. who the true Israel is and who the imposters are.... period. My priority is not to determine the origin of jews thousands of years ago, but to equip the saints for spiritual warfare against the children of darkness in the here and now.

Mark
User avatar
Kentucky
 
Posts: 1803
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 2:20 am

Re: 2 Seedline vs. 1 seedliners

Postby MichaelAllen » Thu Jun 18, 2015 8:55 pm

Mark,

Well said Sir.
MichaelAllen
 
Posts: 253
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 1:35 pm

Re: 2 Seedline vs. 1 seedliners

Postby Gaius » Fri Jun 19, 2015 12:31 pm

MichaelAllen wrote:Mark,

Well said Sir.


Agree with Michael Allen.

The issue raised seems to have the same value as Ultramontanism did in its day.

"... But the moment we were successful in placing this problem before the German people in the light of an idea that would unite them in one struggle the Jew reacted. He resorted to his old tactics. With amazing alacrity he hurled the torch of discord into the patriotic movement and opened a rift there. In bringing forward the ultramontane question and in the mutual quarrels that it gave rise to between Catholicism and Protestantism lay the sole possibility, as conditions then were, of occupying public attention with other problems and thus ward off the attack which had been concentrated against Jewry. The men who dragged our people into this controversy can never make amends for the crime they then committed against the nation. Anyhow, the Jew has attained the ends he desired. Catholics and Protestants are fighting with one another to their hearts' content, while the enemy of Aryan humanity and all Christendom is laughing up his sleeve ..."

Mein Kampf. Vol 2 Chapter X "Federalism as a Mask" (Ralph Manheim translation)

http://hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/
What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?
(Romans 8 v 31)
User avatar
Gaius
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 8:27 am
Location: Ulster

Re: 2 Seedline vs. 1 seedliners

Postby Catherine » Sun Jun 21, 2015 2:29 pm

And, it is precisely all the differing views of exactly what true doctrine is that has separated us into fighting factions instead of the white people pulling together. I agree, we need to not let our doctrines separate us or we will be no more. I'm not saying we should allow down right filth into our camps. But, somewhere, somehow, we all have to get on the same page and first and foremost is WHO WE ARE.
Jer 17:14 Heal me, O LORD, and I shall be healed; save me, and I shall be saved: for thou art my praise.
Catherine
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 12:20 pm
Location: Texas

Re: 2 Seedline vs. 1 seedliners

Postby PhillipWMorrow » Wed Dec 16, 2015 7:02 pm

Catherine wrote:And, it is precisely all the differing views of exactly what true doctrine is that has separated us into fighting factions instead of the white people pulling together. I agree, we need to not let our doctrines separate us or we will be no more. I'm not saying we should allow down right filth into our camps. But, somewhere, somehow, we all have to get on the same page and first and foremost is WHO WE ARE.

Isn't it our doctrines that establish who we are ? I am perplexed by those who say there is no "literal" Satan. Who was it Michael went to war w/? If we don't share doctrines then we can't share in a "religion"! I also laugh at the people who claim that Angels are nothing more than messengers. Were we made "a little lower than a messenger". If there is no Satan who was the 'literal" father of the jews ? This is a tool of the dispensationalists who "spiritualize" Israel and the church. If it wasn't a real "flesh and blood" Satan who tempted Christ who was it ? I refer to those who deny the "2 Seedlines" as 1 Seedliners.
User avatar
PhillipWMorrow
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 12:16 pm

Re: 2 Seedline vs. 1 seedliners

Postby PhillipWMorrow » Wed Dec 16, 2015 7:23 pm

tarim basin.jpg
tarim basin.jpg (17.79 KiB) Viewed 3161 times

A 1 Seedliner are those who deny the 2 Seedline doctrine. So now if there is no literal Satan then who was it Michael went to war against ? If there are no Angelic spiritual beings and Angels are merely "messengers then who was it we were made "a little lower than" ? A messenger ! I'm denounced a heretic for denying the local flood theory. Are rainbows a local phenomenon ? By the way the Tarim Basin is NOT surrounded mountain ranges.
User avatar
PhillipWMorrow
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 12:16 pm

Re: 2 Seedline vs. 1 seedliners

Postby Nayto » Thu Dec 17, 2015 3:01 am

PHILnBOAZ wrote:Isn't it our doctrines that establish who we are ? I am perplexed by those who say there is no "literal" Satan. Who was it Michael went to war w/? If we don't share doctrines then we can't share in a "religion"! I also laugh at the people who claim that Angels are nothing more than messengers. Were we made "a little lower than a messenger". If there is no Satan who was the 'literal" father of the jews ? This is a tool of the dispensationalists who "spiritualize" Israel and the church. If it wasn't a real "flesh and blood" Satan who tempted Christ who was it ? I refer to those who deny the "2 Seedlines" as 1 Seedliners.


You're raising points which have been debated countless times. Also labeling those who disagree with you with your own pet names is not helpful at all.

One does not have to believe in a literal, supernatural Satan roaming the Earth in order to believe in two seed lines; Adam and mongrels.

Like I said before, I would suggest reading the following to get your mind into the camp of those you want to debate with. I'm not saying I agree with everything here 100%, but it sure is a great start:

http://www.sheldonemrylibrary.com/Satan ... oversy.pdf

http://kinsmanredeemer.com/articles/satan

Then I would suggest having listened to most of Bill's work, but particularly Answers in Genesis and Christ Reich series.

PHILnBOAZ wrote:If there are no Angelic spiritual beings and Angels are merely "messengers then who was it we were made "a little lower than" ? A messenger !


I don't think there is anyone here who doesn't believe in the existence of angels.

PHILnBOAZ wrote:I'm denounced a heretic for denying the local flood theory. Are rainbows a local phenomenon ? By the way the Tarim Basin is NOT surrounded mountain ranges.


You're welcome to denounce the local flood theory, but you just need to have a really, really good argument for it and be able to counter the evidence which is the foundation for our current understanding.
Nayto
 
Posts: 1151
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 6:06 am

Re: 2 Seedline vs. 1 seedliners

Postby Joe » Thu Dec 17, 2015 8:38 am

Nayto wrote
Then I would suggest having listened to most of Bill's work, but particularly Answers in Genesis and Christ Reich series.

I think Nayto was referring to 'Pragmatic Genesis' rather than 'Answers in Genesis'. That will certainly address your question about the flood and two seed-line.

This one explains the flood, but the pragmatic Genesis series covers many of your questions.
http://christogenea.org/podcasts/explai ... ic-genesis
...and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.
User avatar
Joe
 
Posts: 1664
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 1:23 pm

Next

Return to Christian Identity Directions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron