Part 6: The Clash of the Bloodlines | Anglo-Saxon Israel

Judgment Day Perspectives

By Eli James. E-Newsletter Volume II, #7, July 29, 2005.

The Enmity, Part 6: The Clash of the Bloodlines (Subtitle: Was There Race-Mixing in the Garden? – Or, Eli Just Won’t Leave It Alone!)

Introduction to Part 6

Ladies and gentlemen, I have decided to pull a “Star Wars” trick and publish Part 6 of “The Enmity” before Parts 2 through 5. My plan was to use recent archeological findings and present them as a case for re-examining the Book of Genesis, Chapters 1 – 4. The point of all of this is to demonstrate a consistency between natural history and biblical history. I believe that Yahweh has judged this planet on two previous occasions, once in the year 10,500 B.C. and once at Noah’s Flood. He has judged this planet twice already for the sin of race-mixing and He is getting ready to do so for a third and final time.

Recent events, however, have persuaded me that I need to go directly from Part 1 to Part 6. The reason for this is that my advocacy of the Two-Seedline position has attracted a number of hostile responses; and I do not want to let these challenges go unanswered. I fear there is a clash developing between the Seedline and Anti-Seedline camps, and I do not wish this to get out of hand. The tenor of most the Seedline critics is such that Seedliners are either stupid, crazy or dishonest to teach what we do. They think that we are distorting Scripture into an impossible interpretation.

So, let me state the Two-Seedline position very clearly and succinctly so that there is no mistake about what we are teaching:

Two-Seedline teaches that there are two distinct family trees traceable from Genesis 3:15. In that verse Yahweh speaks directly to nachash, the “Serpent” of the Garden, “I will put enmity between thee and the woman, between thy seed and her seed.” In The Enmity, Part 1, I detailed the Scriptural listings of these two family trees. One is the Tree of Seth; the other is the Tree of Cain. This article can be accessed at in the Archives Section. These two Family Trees are the Seedline of the Adamites and the Seedline of the Canaanites. These two seedlines have been at war with each other since Yahweh made His declaration in Gen. 3:15 and as a direct result of Eve’s sin. The descendants of Cain are known as the Canaanites. These Canaanites were later joined by the Edomites so that Canaanites and Edomites are synonymous terms after their merger. The descendants of Adam later came to be symbolized by the Israelites because all of the Covenants God made to Abraham were later restated to Israel exclusively. Jacob/Israel and Esau/Edom were twin brothers, just like Cain and Abel. Edom had an intense, murderous hatred for his brother Jacob, just as Cain had for Abel, but Jacob’s mother, Rebekah, saw to it that Esau could not harm his brother. Today, the descendants of the Israelites are known as the Anglo-Saxon, Celtic and Caucasian peoples. The descendants of Esau are today known as Jews.

In general terms, the flow of descent is as follows:

The Seed of Seth…………………….The Seed of Cain

Enos……………………………….Tubal, Jubal, Tubal-Cain Noah……………………………….Canaanites, including giants Shem……………………………….Post-Diluvian Canaanites Abraham…………………………….Hittites, etc. Jacob/Israel………………………..Esau/Edom Although Esau was the twin brother of Jacob, he married into the line of Canaanites. His family tree offspring were henceforth known as Edomites. Thus, Edomites are NOT Shemites, nor are they Israelites. Anglo-Saxons………………………..Jews

“Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with diverse seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled. (Deut. 22:9)

If this commandment applies to the seed of plants and animals, how much more does it apply to Adamite seed? The fact is that the seedline of Seth is a pure-blooded, undiluted, unadulterated family tree from Yahweh to Yahshua, as recorded in Luke, Chapter 3. The White (Adamite) peoples of this planet are all related to this tree. The bloodline of Cain is a mixed (“defiled”) race from Cain down to the present. The Jews are no exception to this rule as the Jews are NOT a pure race but a MIXED BREED who also practice a particular religion. This religion, Judaism, IS NOT the same religion that was practiced by the Hebrews and the Israelites. Their religion is based on the Talmud, which is the rabbinical interpretations of Scripture, not Scripture itself. Despite Jewish claims of Shemitic descent, their religion, contrary to Yahweh’s frequent exhortations for Israel to remain separate, preaches race-mixing as a virtue (especially for Adamites) and it has done so since the days of Cain.

Although Genesis 3:15 clearly talks about two “seeds,” some Anti-Seedliners dispute the use of the word ‘seedline’ as a synonym for ‘seed.’ But the verse clearly predicts the enmity between these two seeds. Two-Seedline doctrine declares that these seeds are two Family Trees; and the Enmity that exists between them is still functioning in the world today.

Both Cain and Abel had Eve as their mother. The crucial matter of disputation is whether or not Adam fathered Cain. Two-Seedline teaches that Cain and Abel were half-brothers, having had different fathers. Specifically, Abel was fathered by Adam; but Cain was sired by Nachash, the “Serpent.” The Anti-Seedliners maintain that it is impossible to interpret Scripture as teaching the two father scenario.

This is the gist of the dispute; and I am going to do my best to explain why we Two-Seedliners teach what we do. The reason why I have decided to publish Part 6 before the others is in the interest of expediting the dialogue between the two viewpoints. At the moment, within Christian Identity, this issue threatens to create a schism. This is the last thing I would want to see happen. I love my Adamite Christian brethren, no mater what their position is on any religious issues. At the same time, I will not compromise what I believe to be the truth. In spite of the Anti-Seedliners’ incredulity and scorn, there is no doubt in my mind that Two-Seedline is the true story of the Bible. I would ask that any Anti-Seedliner please continue reading because what I have to say is very serious. I beg your indulgence because this is not a trivial matter and the case against Two-Seedline is not as solid as most skeptics presume.

Charles A. Weisman, an Anti-Seedliner, in his book entitled What About the Seedline Doctrine?, explains it this way:

This book examines a rather popular but controversial teaching commonly called the “seedline doctrine.” It should more correctly be called the “Cain-Satanic Seedline doctrine.” The basic concept of the seedline, or blood descent, is actually very prevalent within Scripture. The Bible places great importance on such words as children, son,
father, seed and generation. It traces genealogies, records ancestry, and follows tribal lineage. The Bible as we know it would not even exist without the concept of seedline. In fact, Christianity could not legitimately exist without the concept of seedline. The Messiah, the Redeemer of Israel, was to come from a specific seedline, and if Jesus was not of this seedline, he is not the Messiah. Thus his seedline is meticulously recorded in the Gospels. (p.2)

Weisman sounds almost like a Two-Seedliner! So, what’s the problem?

The real stumbling block is Genesis 4:1, which says, “Adam knew his wife Eve; and she conceived and bare Cain.” The Anti-Seedliners maintain that this passage is cut and dried – i.e., there exists no way to inject a third party, nachash, into this relationship. These skeptics insist that Eve could not possibly have conceived by anyone other than Adam. Two-Seedliners, on the other hand, maintain that the original Hebrew script leaves plenty of room for another interpretation. In addition, there is a wealth of extra-biblical information and commentary which establishes Two-Seedline as a legitimate interpretation of Genesis 3:15 and Genesis 4:1. (A thorough analysis of Genesis, Chapter 4, will be reserved for Part 7 of this series.)

The Plan of the 6-Part Series

Here is the overall Plan:

The Enmity, Part 1: The Two Bloodlines. The Enmity, Part 2: The Fall of Atlantis The Enmity, Part 3: The Earth Recovers The Enmity, Part 4: Genesis 1 in the Light of Pre-History The Enmity, Part 5: Adamites Versus non-Adamites The Enmity, Part 6: The Clash of the Bloodlines The Enmity, Part 7: Yahshua and the Two Bloodlines

If you are unfamiliar with the issue of the two Family Trees outlined above, I suggest that you read The Enmity, Part 1 first and then come back to this one, Part 6.

Major Objections to the Two-Seedline Doctrine

Numerous Anti-Seedliners, such as Ted Weiland, Ric Niemela, Stephen E. Jones, Jack Mohr, and others, have stated that the trees in the Garden of Eden can only be literal, wooden trees and that the fruit spoken of can be only literal fruit, such as apples and oranges. Although they concede that the word ‘apple’ is not mentioned in Genesis 2-4, they insist that either 1.) some sort of literal fruit is meant or 2.) the “evil fruit” is simply a general reference to disobedience. No other interpretation is possible or credible.

First, let me say that I have much respect for each of these gentlemen. Ted Weiland is the author of the book, God’s Covenant People, Yesterday, Today and Forever. This book is an Identity classic, a must read for every Christian Identity student. It is a great introduction to Identity, especially for the new seeker.

Ric Niemela is a tireless Identity spokesman and defender, having issued numerous tracts and letters in defense of Christian Identity. In fact, our website, Anglo-SaxonIsrael.com, contains his article, “The Tares Have Risen Above the Wheat.” It is an excellent discussion of Matthew, Chapter 13 and how the Jews are the tares (weeds) of that parable. The Parable of the Wheat and the Tares is explained by Niemela in exceptional detail from the Identity perspective.

Stephen E. Jones is the author of an outright masterpiece entitled, The Secrets of Time. That book lays out Yahweh’s timetable of Law and prophecy, showing exactly how Israel has failed to keep to His Law and seasons. The Secrets of Time lays out God’s Plan, from beginning to end, with scholarly precision.

Jack Mohr I considered to be a personal friend. He and I corresponded frequently over the years; and I spoke to him by phone a few days before he died in July of 2003. He was a regular speaker at the annual Christian Patriots Defense League Conferences which went from 1978 to about 1986. Jack Mohr, a Korean War veteran and arch anti-communist, was always the headline speaker. After his speeches, he would hold court and answer questions from those who remained. He was engaging, approachable and made himself available to all who had questions. He delighted in sharing his Identity knowledge. You can access one of his anti-Zionist exposures at .

What I am getting at here is that I respect the work of all of these men. At the same time, I strongly disagree with their Anti-Seedline positions and statements. Lately, the rhetoric of the dispute has become rancorous, even descending to the level of name-calling by both sides. I would like to diffuse this situation; but the anti-seedliners need to suspend what I perceive to be their “I’ve heard it all before” attitude and really listen to what we have to say, because the jury is still out on this issue, and there is real scholarship on the other side.

The Two Teams

Seedliners…………………………Anti-Seedliners Dr. Wesley Swift……………………Howard B. Rand Bertrand Comparet…………………..Ted Weiland William Gale……………………….Stephen E. Jones Dan Gayman…………………………Ric Niemela Clifton Emahiser……………………Jack Mohr Richard Butler……………………..Chuck Kuhler Dan Johns………………………….Dave Barley Eli James………………………….E. Raymond Capt William Fink……………………….Sheldon Emry A.E. Kennedy……………………….Charles Weisman William Fowler……………………..John L. Bray James E. Wise………………………Earl Jones Nord Davis…………………………Pete Peters Arnold B. Murray……………………Jeffrey A. Weakley W. G. Finlay……………………….Lloyd Palmer Scott Stinson Willie Martin Robert Miles

From the list above, you can see that there is no shortage of scholarship on either side. If any of those still living feel that I have wrongly categorized them, please contact me and state your position.

Misconceptions About the Jewish People

Before getting deeply into the subject of the two bloodlines, one historical issue must be clarified. This issue bears directly on how numerous biblical verses are understood. It is a fact that most people assume that the Jews are Israelites. I cannot stress strongly enough that this idea is false. My book, The Great Impersonation, How the Anti-Christ Has Deceived the Whole World, details the 2,000-year-old Jewish pretense and masquerade as Israel. This book tells the parallel stories of True Israel and of those, the Edomite and Khazar Jews, who have been pretending to be us. Although the word ‘Jew’ is technically derived from the words ‘Judah’ and ‘Judean,’ a Jew is NOT a Judahite. A Judahite is a 100% lineal descendant of the patriarch, Judah. No admixture of alien blood is allowed. This excludes half-breeds (mamzers). God’s Law explicitly forbids race-mixing for Adamites and Israelites and Judahites. One look at the Jewish visage and a little bit of historical understanding proves conclusively that the Jewish people are neither Israelites nor Judahites. On this point, most CI teachers agree irrespective of their position on the bloodlines.

So, why is this important? Because Yahweh’s Covenants, which were made exclusively to Israel, are being claimed by a usurper, the Jewish people, under the direction of their priesthood, the rabbinate. Fraud should be exposed wherever it is found; and fraud on so gigantic a scale as this must be shouted from the housetops. The Jewish impersonation of Israel is the basis of their claim to Palestine. They are impostors, usurpers and murderers, in the name of Judah. “The Jews are God’s chosen people.” “The Jews are God’s chosen people.” “The Jews are God’s chosen people.” …ad nauseum. The world has heard this lie billions of times. No amount of repetition makes the statement any truer. It is, in fact, the BIGGEST LIE OF HISTORY. Since th
eir occupation of Palestine is based on this historical fraud, everything they do there is evil; and anyone who supports them in this evil is also doing evil, whether intentionally or unintentionally.

Unfortunately, there are those in the Christian Identity Movement who do not fully understand the nature of this evil.

British Israel Versus American Israel

Under the heading of the Anti-Seedliners, I first listed Howard B. Rand. Mr. Rand has written numerous books explaining the doctrine of Christian Identity. His book, Study In Revelation, is by far the best book ever written on the subject of the Book of Revelation, or the Apocalypse of John. Mr. Rand details, with historical precision, the exact fulfillment of virtually every prophetic statement contained in the Apocalypse. The only drawback to this book is, since it was written in the 1950’s, Mr. Rand had to guess about what we have lived through since then. Nevertheless, I would have to say that this one book, with the exception of Bertrand Comparet’s taped sermons on this subject, makes all other commentaries on the Apocalypse look childish. That is how highly I think of his work.

But Mr. Rand had a blind spot. He thought the Jewish people were the tribe of Judah! It is understandable why he thought this. He was of the British Israel school of Identity. The basic difference between British Israel and American Israel is that the former teaches what Mr. Rand believed, that the Jews are descended from Judah. American Israel, on the contrary, understands that the Jewish people are neither Israelites nor Judahites. He, along with Herbert W. Armstrong and other American followers of British Israel, taught that the Jews are the Tribe of Judah and that the German people are descended from Japheth, the brother of Shem.

Rand and Armstrong have it backwards. The fact is that the German people are descended from the Jutes, Saxons, Sueves, Goths, Teutons, and other Germanic tribes, all of whom are directly descended from the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel. As the name implies, the Jutes were Judahites. History records that the vast majority of the Judahites and Benjamites were also taken captive along with the Ten Northern Tribes as part of the Assyrian Captivity, 745-715 B.C. Only Jerusalem and its immediate vicinity were not taken captive at this time. Hence, people from all twelve tribes were taken to Media and placed there by the Assyrians. The various tribes made their escape directly west across Asia Minor or north through the Caucasus Mountains. (This event was prophesied in Isaiah 11:16). The latter migration path cited above explains how the Israelites came to be known as the “Caucasians.” These facts are detailed in my book and also in Ted Weiland’s book, God’s Covenant People.

On the other hand, numerous authors, including Jewish authors, such as Alfred Lillienthal, The Zionist Connection, Benjamin Freedman, Facts Are Facts, Myron Fagan, The Illuminati, and Arthur Koestler, The Thriteenth Tribe, have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Jews of Eurasian extraction are descendants of the Khazars, who themselves are descended from Ashkenaz and Gomer, of the family tree of Japheth. Despite their claims to the contrary, 95% of today’s Jews are not descended, even partially, from the family tree of Shem. For this reason, they cannot possibly be Shemites! So, when someone accuses me of being an “anti-Semite,” I tell them, “How can I be an anti-Semite? I AM A SEMITE!”

Why would British Israel teach that the Germans are not our racial kin? The reason is that Britain fought two World Wars against Germany; and the resultant massive wartime propaganda demonized Germany in the minds of the British people to such an extent that even Christian Identity in Britain was affected. Howard B. Rand was affected by this propaganda as he came into the Christian Identity Movement via British Israel. Because of this bias, British Israel teaches some absolutely amazing absurdities about the Jews and Judah; and many Americans have been influenced by this false teaching.

In his Study In Revelation, Howard B. Rand, as a commentary to Rev. 2:9 and 3:9, says the following:

“There are those who declare they are Jews, but in reality are the synagogue of Satan. When Jewry crucified Christ they ceased to be Jews in a spiritual sense. Until then, God had been with them but now their place of worship, the synagogue, had become the abode of the adversary.” [p. 12]

Mr. Rand is clearly confused for the aforementioned reasons. He thinks that the Jews were, at one time or another, Judahites. Like so many other deceived people, he thought that the Jewish people originated in the Judahites of the land of Judah. I can assure you that this is not possible. Just because the rabbis have very cleverly and deceitfully used the word ‘Jew’ to apply to both themselves and to the House of Judah does not mean that they ever were the latter! If an actor impersonates your brother, does that mean that he IS your brother? Just like Eve, the true Israelites have allowed themselves to be fooled by some very clever, diabolical deceptions.

E. Raymond Capt suffers under the same illusion. In his book, Missing Links Discovered in Assyrian Tablets, he says,

“After the Babylonian Empire was overthrown by Cyrus, king of the Persians, the exiled Judeans were allowed to return to their homeland. Of the hundreds of thousands originally taken captive, less than 50,000 accepted the invitation to return to Palestine. It is this ‘remnant’ that became known as the ‘Jews,’ a name meaning ‘remnant of Judah,’ and never having been applied to any branch of the Semitic peoples prior to the Babylonian Captivity.” — p. 93.

Unfortunately, Mr. Capt has got this completely wrong. I have nowhere else found a definition of ‘Jew’ meaning “remnant of Judah.” It is simply a matter of historical fact that this remnant of Judah fully retained the name, ‘Judah,’ and they were not known, ever, as Jews, because the Jews, unlike Judah, have always practiced race-mixing and have always practiced a different religion. The people of Judah called their nation “Judah” until the day that Judah and Idumea, a nation of Edomites at the southern border of Judah, were merged by King John Hyrcanus of Judah around 150 B.C. Until that date, there was no such thing as a Jew.

A Jew is one who pretends to be a Judahite, or, perhaps, better, a Jew is a counterfeit Judahite. Rev. 2:9 says, “I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich), and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews [Judahites], and are not, but are of the synagog of Satan.” Rev. 3:9 tells us, “Behold, I will make them of the synagog of Satan, which say they are Jews [Judahites], and are not, but do lie; Behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.”

Is it conceivable that Jesus is talking here to the Jewish people, after he has identified them as the “children of the devil”? He is talking to the House of Judah! Who is it that is impersonating Judah? Judah cannot impersonate Judah. Judah IS Judah. It is the Jews who are impersonating Judah and Israel. These two statements make no sense otherwise. Who on earth would want to impersonate a Jew anyway? Obviously, the above translation is terribly defective, and it obscures the historical, cultural and ethnic distinctions that must obtain between two mutually exclusive and antagonist groups: Jews and Judahites! Don’t confuse the two! Jesus is talking to Judah and Israel and is warning us about this great impersonation by the Edomites who have usurped the name of Judah.

By inventing this term, “spiritual Jew,” Mr. Rand and Mr. Capt have bought into the Jewish charade and are thus unaware of the nature and extent of this imper
sonation. They seem to think that the Judahites who returned from the Babylonian Captivity underwent some sort of spiritual transformation and became Jews as a result. Obviously, a Judahite can become a Jew by conversion to their religion. But can a race-mixed mamzer (Jew) ever become a Judahite? Hardly. Yahweh was never with the Jews because the Jews have always been the children of a lesser god – the god that encourages race-mixing in direct opposition to Yahweh! The Jews have never worshipped Yahweh. They only pretend to. They have always been deceivers and they will remain deceivers because that is their nature. It is in their blood.

I believe the source of this confusion can be traced to a rabbinical statement which many of our people have latched on to as if it were solid history. Here is the statement: “The return from Babylon, and the adoption of the Babylonian Talmud marks the end of Hebrewism, and the beginning of Judaism.” — Rabbi Stephen F. Wise, Chief Rabbi of the United States.

Too many people have taken this statement to be historically accurate. In fact, it is pure rabbinical deception of the most clever kind. The “good” rabbi knows that most of us don’t know the history of our own people, so he gets away with several historical inaccuracies in this one, short statement. Most Christian Identity adherents know that there must have been a historical time when there was a shift in religious teaching, from the Law of Moses to Talmudism. The statement above appears to pinpoint this transition to the time of the return of Judah from the Babylonian Captivity. The genius of this deception becomes evident when it is realized that most people will assume that, because our people were held captive so long in Babylon, THEY MUST HAVE PICKED UP BABYLONIAN TEACHING THEN AND THERE. But the fact is that they did not. The Books of Ezra and Nehemiah prove conclusively that the remnant that returned from Babylon completely rejected Babylonian teaching and returned, under the guidance of those two priests, to God’s Law.

In fact, Yahweh Himself declared that the House of Judah was to be taken captive to Babylon “for their good”! (Jer. 24:5) If Rabbi Wise’s statement were true, it would have been a total catastrophe for Judah! The return from the captivity, contrary to Rabbi Wise’s statement, which is believed by so many, instead inaugurated a Golden Age of Mosaic Law, NOT Talmudism. Indeed, if this were not the case, the Messiah could have never come to a people so completely adulterated as the Jews! The racial descent laws had to apply or Jesus could not have been born! So, whom are you going to believe, the Bible or a rabbi?

Here is the whole prophecy from Jeremiah, Chapter 24, giving us the distinction between the good figs and the evil figs:

“Thus sayeth Yahweh, the God of Israel; Like these good figs, so will I acknowledge them that are carried away captive of Judah, whom I have sent out of this place into the land of Chaldea [Babylon], for their good. For I will set mine eyes upon them for good, and I will bring them again to this land: and I will build them, and not pull them down; and I will plant them, and not pluck them up. And I will give them an heart to know me, that I am Yahweh: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God: for they shall return to me with their whole heart.” (Vs. 5-7)

In complete fulfillment of this prophecy, Ezra and Nehemiah reestablished the racial laws forbidding intermarriage. They found the old Jerusalem books of genealogy (Neh. Chapter 7) and threw out of the congregation all of those who could not verify their 100% Judahite lineage! Does this square with what Capt and Rand teach? No, it does not. Rabbi Wise’s statement is calculated to deceive in five ways: 1.) It presumes an identity between Judahites and Jews. 2.) It creates a plausible yet false scenario for the change from Hebrewism (the Law of Moses) to Judaism (Talmudism). 3.) Contrary to what he says, the Talmud was NOT adopted by those who returned. The Bible teaches otherwise. Here, Rabbi Wise is attaching a false sense of antiquity to Judaism. Judaism was started by the scribes and Pharisees. The sect of the Pharisees did not appear in history until the merger of Judah and Idumea in 150 B.C. This merger was accomplished by virtue of the anti-Mosaic decree of King John Hyrcanus of Judah. The resulting nation of mixed multitude came to be known as “Judea.” 4.) The Talmud, the written version of the oral traditions and teachings of the Pharisees, was not encoded until 500 A.D. 5.) Hebrewism never died. It was restored and energized by Ezra and Nehemiah. It was subsequently defended by the Maccabees; and it was kept alive by the early Christians, and it is today known as Christian Identity.

It is imperative that we understand our true history in order to determine exactly where and when the Jewish heresy began to displace the Mosaic Law. Consequently, it is an anachronism to refer to any Judahites before 150 B.C. as Jews! They were Judahites who practiced the Mosaic Law. They were not mamzers who practiced Talmudic Judaism! I cannot stress these distinctions enough. It is imperative that we understand the cultural, racial, historical and religious distinctions between Judahites and Jews. I hope this analysis is sufficiently clear so that we can recognize how the Jews have created a false history for themselves so as to confuse even our most erudite scholars, such as Capt and Rand.

Here are the historical facts: The Pharisees are the originators of the religion known as Judaism. As usurpers later empowered by King Herod, who was an Idumean/Edomite put in place by the Roman authorities over the people of Judah, who were NOT HIS RACIAL KIN, the Pharisees began to infiltrate the priesthood of Judah at all levels. The historian, Josephus (who was not a Jew but a Judahite whose family was of the first of the 24 courses!), tells us that, with regard to the ruling priesthood, Herod had all of the racial Judahites murdered and replaced with Edomites! Now do you see how the transition from Hebrewism to Judaism really took place? It all started shortly before the time of Christ.

I feel very secure in declaring that American Israel has a much more accurate view of our true history than British Israel. The British Empire has been a lackey of Jewish international finance since before the American Revolution. Remember, folks, the Jewish bankers were the ones who instigated King George against the Colonies. It was Jewish debt money imposed upon the Colonies that was a major reason – if not THE major reason – for the revolt of the Colonies.

American Israel is under no illusions about economic reality today. We know that the Federal Reserve System is a Jewish banking fraud; and we are not going to deny our mistakes, in the interests of nationalism, to make ourselves look good.

Identity Lite

“Identity Lite” is the name I have given to those members of Christian Identity who downplay the race issue. The very word, ‘Identity’, means that we identify with Israel of the Bible. These Israelites were commanded, time and time again, to separate themselves from the other ethnic groups by which they were surrounded. They were commanded by Yahweh to not only remain separate from but to EXTERMINATE the mixed-race Canaanites, because the Canaanites were so evil that Yahweh had declared the death penalty upon them. (See Ex. 23:28; 33:2; 34:11; Num. 21:3; the entire book of Joshua; Judges, Chapters 1-3; and many other scriptures.) But we failed to do the job because our people, unlike the pre-Adamite savages of this world, did not have the stomach for killing toddlers and infants! Why would Yahweh order us to exterminate them unless they were of the irredeemable, evil seed, as per Gen. 3:15? I know that the modern, genteel White Christian does not like to address this reality of an angry God; but the da
y of Judgment is also known as the day of His vengeance; and He will have His vengeance in spite of genteel opinions. Please read Psalm 94 for confirmation of this.

Am I advocating that we go out and start clubbing Jews over the head? No, I am not. Jesus advised us to tarry until he comes. We are to come out of Babylon and build Israelite communities which cannot be infected by the Jewish parasite. What I am trying to convey to you is the Divine Imperative for us to remain separate and distinct from the Jews, so that a pure-blooded remnant will survive the cleansing that is coming. This is what the parable of the Wheat and the Tares is all about. The day is surely coming when we will have to defend ourselves from their ethnic cleansing programs which they have instituted against us: massive immigration, race-mixing propaganda, anti-Christianity, communism, Zionism, etc., etc. All of these things the Oberjuden (high Jews) have done both secretly and openly against us while the average White Christian is blissfully unaware. These things are the historical evidence of the Jew’s biological hatred of Whites.

I fear that there are those in CI today who are trying to appear “non-racist.” There is no possibility that CI will go mainstream. CI is biblically mandated separatism. Those who wish not to offend “polite society” are an offense to Yahweh Himself. I understand that we have to speak softly in order not to alienate newcomers to the movement. BUT WE OURSELVES CANNOT BELIEVE NON-EXCLUSIVIST DOCTRINE! If we water down God’s truth in our own minds so that it might be more palatable to the sleeping sheep, we risk falling back asleep ourselves. (Another fall, no less!)

Points of the Debate

Some of the major objections the anti-seedliners have to our scholarship consist of the following:

1.) Genesis 3:15 can only be taken literally and not interpreted as meaning sexual seduction.

2.) The very idea that Eve was sexually seduced is vulgar and tantamount to blasphemy.

3.) Two-Seedliners quote the Talmud in order to document the fact that Eve was sexually seduced by the Serpent.

4.) We rely on the Aramaic Targums and other non-Canonical sources of information.

5.) The Two-Seedline doctrine is a recent innovation unsupported either by Scripture or traditional commentators.

6.) Genesis 4:1 stands as written and understood by them. There is no problem with the text or the translation.

So, let’s examine some of these claims to see what the two sides have to say.

Literal Versus Figurative Interpretation of Genesis 3:15.

Our study text, again, is: “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.”

Anti-Seedliners are adamant in insisting that the sexual interpretation of Genesis, Chapter 3 is preposterous. Let’s see how the Bible uses the various words in that Chapter to see if the Two-Bloodline interpretation has any merit.

Statement #1: The trees of the Garden can only be literal trees, not family trees.

Response: After Moses declares that Yahweh had made Adam “out of the dust of the ground,” Genesis 2:9 reads, “And out of the ground made Yahweh God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.”

First, let us look at Strong’s definition of ‘ground,’ #127, adamah (pronounced “ad-aw-maw”): “soil (from its gen. redness): — country, earth, ground, husband [-man] {-ry}, land.

Most dictionaries list the most common meaning first and the least common last. I want to point out three meanings which do not imply literal dirt: husband, husbandman, husbandry. These three words are references to people, not dirt.

Next, the word ‘tree.’ ‘Tree’ is Strong’s #6086, ets (pronounced “ates”): …a tree (from its firmness); hence wood (plur. sticks)…carpenter, gallows, helve…pine, plank, staff, stalk, stick, stock, timber, tree, wood.

Notice in the middle of all those definitions the word ‘carpenter.’ This is a reference to a person, not a piece of wood.

In William Wilson’s Old Testament Word Studies, under the word ‘tree,’ we are given this defintion: 3.) A tree; often collective trees; green trees the righteous, dry trees the wicked, Ez. 20:47; 17:24, all trees of the field, all men, the high tree, lofty and powerful, the low tree, the weak and contemptible.

Question: Are literal trees capable of righteousness or wickedness?

George M. Lamsa, in his book, Idioms In the Bible Explained, gives us the following idiomatic meanings: ‘garden’: metaphorically, a wife, a family; tree of life in the midst of the garden: sex; posterity, progeny. “Tree of life”: eternal life.

If the anti-seedliners are arguing that all idiomatic language must be translated literally, then about a quarter of translated literature would never be understood. Certainly, poetry and much fiction could not even be translated, because such language is often highly figurative. But idioms are different in that the expressions have very specific meanings that cannot be deduced from the literal definitions of the words employed. One has to know the history of the language in order to understand the meanings of idioms.

In the following verses, Scripture clearly equates trees, sticks, branches, roots and boughs with human beings:

“Joseph is a fruitful bough” – Gen. 49:22. According to the logic of the anti-seedliners, God is declaring that Joseph is a literal clump of small branches. Holly, perhaps?

“Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel, his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make of them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.” — Ezek. 37:19. Is Yahweh declaring that He is going to turn these Israelites into literal pieces of wood?

“If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men” — II Sam. 7:14

“Remember thy congregation, which thou hast purchased of old; the rod of thine inheritance, which thou hast redeemed.” — Psa. 74:2.

“And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots.” — Isa. 11:1. Here we have the words, ‘rod,’ ‘stem,’ ‘branch’ and ‘roots’ all referring to the family tree of David and Messiah. Are we to understand these terms as literal pieces of wood, as the anti-seedliners would have us believe, or is the Father Himself using figurative language to convey the idea of a Family Tree?

Hundreds of examples can be adduced to show the legitimacy of translating such words as referring to human beings, not literal trees or wood. Trees bear fruit. Is the expression, “fruit of the womb” a reference to fruit that you put on a table for consumption?

Let’s Eat!

Statement #2: The word ‘eat’ can only mean eating literal food.

Response: Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance tells us that one of the meanings of the word ‘eat,’ akal, is LAY. When Eve admitted to being beguiled by nachash, was she admitting to being raped? “He tricked me!” she said. One of the definitions of the word ‘beguiled,’ nasha, is “seduced.” Genesis 3:13 tells us “And the woman said, the serpent beguiled me and I did eat.” Why should “And the deceiver seduced me and I did lay” be deemed impossible in the light of these alternative meanings?

I submit that one of the listed me
anings ought to be “partake,” because “to partake of” covers a wide variety of indulgences. Does “and I did partake” not cover the possible meanings being discussed here?

Here follow some biblical verses in which the meaning of the word ‘eat’ is clearly sexual:

“Such is the way of an adulterous woman; she eateth, and wipeth her mouth, and saith, I have done no wickedness.” — Proverbs 30:20. The context of this passage is adultery. Eating and adultery are compared synonymously.

“And they called the people unto the sacrifices of their gods; and the people did eat, and bowed unto their gods.” — Num. 25:2. Here is a good spot for the word ‘partake’ in place of ‘eat.’

The Wycliffe Bible Commentary has this to say about the above passage, page 145: “The subject THEY is feminine, referring to the daughters of Moab with whom the men of Israel committed fornication.”

“Stolen waters are sweet, and bread eaten in secret is pleasant.” – Prov. 19:7.

Now, let’s read Genesis 2:17 in the light of the above context:

“But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in that day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.”

We all know what it means to “know” in the biblical sense. It means sexual intercourse. This verse is talking about “knowing” good and “knowing” evil. Good knowing is “kind after kind.” Evil knowing is mixing forbidden seed. The “forbidden fruit” is the race-mixed children of forbidden “eating.” And the “tree of knowledge of good and evil” is the tree of mixed offspring as a result of miscegenation.

Now, Genesis 3:15 warns of the enmity between the two resulting offspring. The Father is warning Eve of the potential death of the White Race due to race-mixing. He is NOT warning her of her own immediate death due to poisoning by the “literal fruit.” If that were the case, she would have died then and there. But, no, the consequences bear upon her offspring, not just her. If the meaning is non-sexual, how can the consequences of her sin bear upon future generations of Adamites? Look at what is happening in the world today. The White Race is being ganged up on by all of the other races through immigration and miscegenation. Which ethnic minority is encouraging these other groups to race-mix with us? It’s the offspring of the other seedline.

Singular Versus Plural

One of the stranger accusations hurled against two-seedline doctrine is that we distort Scripture with our interpretations. But just observe the contortions that our adversaries go through in order to argue against us. The second clause of Genesis 3:15 states: “it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.”

Statement #3: According to the anti-seedliners, the “bruising” does not refer to offspring in the plural but only to Jesus Christ in the singular.

The problem with this statement is that the preceding clause most definitely refers to offspring, which is always a collective noun. Collective nouns can be treated grammatically as being singular, but their meaning is always plural in the sense of a collection or group of individuals. The word ‘seed’ means “progeny, offspring, children” in so many instances that this point cannot be debated. So, instead of debating that point, the anti-seedliners jump to the second clause and try to infer that it is not referring to the collective offspring of Eve but to the singular child, Jesus. Actually, I agree that this passage is a prophetic reference to Jesus Christ. But it ALSO means offspring in the collective sense. How else would Messiah come in the flesh anyhow? – except through all of the intermediary offspring from Seth to Mary – as even Charles Weisman admits! The seed of all of the intervening generations is an absolute biological necessity for Jesus to be born in the flesh, of the seed of David. How can these generations be ignored in the light of the first clause of the sentence?

Grammatically, since the pronouns (‘it,’ ‘thy,’ ‘thou,’ and ‘his’) of the second clause are direct references to the collective offspring of the first clause, there is no justification in assuming either one to be singular. The words ‘head’ and ‘heel’ are clearly figurative, so no direct, one-to-one correspondence can be assumed with regard to the first clause. If I say “You children are buzzing like a beehive,” the subject (children) is literal but the object (beehive) is figurative. The first is collective; the second is singular. I am still talking about a collective group of children in spite of the fact that I have used a singular noun to describe them.

In effect, the anti-seedliners are admitting that there is some sort of enmity between the Serpent’s seed and the seed of the Woman, but they try to limit the “seed of the Woman” as a reference to Jesus Christ only. They think that by changing the value of the expression “his heel,” they can circumvent the seedline argument that the enemy seedline began with Cain. But since the Adamic seedline is reckoned patriarchally, the word ‘his’ is merely a reference to the male seed (sperm) that follows in these generations. And the fact is that, throughout history, True Israel has been followed around by Jewry wherever we have gone. They have been nipping at our “heel,” not just the heel of Jesus Christ! They simply will not leave us alone. The story of White Civilization is the story of how True Israel builds kingdoms and nations after which the Jews slither in, like snakes in the grass, and then subvert our culture with their usury and their pornography, gambling, infiltration of our institutions and other vices. The language of Genesis 3:15 fully bears this out.

The Serpent had his head bruised once by Titus, the Roman General of Israelite stock who destroyed Herod’s Temple. It has yet to be crushed by Jesus Christ at the Second Coming. The Serpent’s head was also bruised by Joshua, Saul, David, and all of the other Israelite Kings who made war against the Canaanites. We, as a race, have, by ignoring the constant threat that the Jews pose to our civilization, allowed them to nip at our heels throughout history. At least twenty-two times in the history of Europe, the Jews have been evicted from our nations because of their subversive culture. Because we are always looking ahead, we have failed to watch our backside; and the Jews always attack us from behind, from their familiar position, hiding in the grass, like serpents, waiting for a chance to bite.

Idiomatic Hebrew

In any language, words can have multiple meanings. If there is any doubt as to the intended meaning of any word, it is always prudent to determine, to the best of our ability, the context of any given passage. In real estate, the three most important factors in selling and renting are “Location, location, location.” In translation, the three most important factors in determining meaning of a doubtful passage are “Context, context, context.” The meaning of a word and the sentence in which it is used depends on its context. The meaning is not automatically determined by the most common definition.

In addition, when we translate from one language to another, we have to take into account expressions, such as idioms and figures of speech, or the translation will be hopelessly lacking.

Idioms are very common expressions which can be at complete variance from the literal meaning. Take, for example, the expression, “Can I give you a lift?” I’m sure that this idiom hearkens back to the horse and buggy, stagecoach days when a person often needed help getting up into the buggy or stagecoach. Today, whoever uses this expression means “Can I give you a ride?” or “Can I take
you to your destination?” The word ‘lift’ has nothing to do with riding in a vehicle. Its dictionary definition is “to raise up.” Yet, everyone who uses this expression knows that it means “Can I give you a ride?”

Ancient Hebrew was no exception. Idiomatic expressions abound in Scripture and, in order to understand a given passage, one MUST take into account idiomatic usage before assuming a literal interpretation. Unfortunately, the King James Version of the Bible, has, among its many faults, a severe lack of consideration for idiomatic expressions in its translation. Other faults include the fact that it is based on the Jewish Masoretic text. The Masoretes were Pharisaic Jews who rewrote the Old Testament in order de-emphasize the prophetic role that Messiah Jesus would play. They also took out the 7000 instances of the word ‘Yahweh’ and replaced it with LORD. Their excuse for doing this is the claim that “The name of g-d is too holy to be pronounced.” However, there is nothing in Scripture which validates this claim. The claim is Talmudic, not Biblical!! On the contrary, the Bible repeatedly admonishes us to “Publish the name of Yahweh.” (Deut. 32:3), not deny its use. The Third Commandment says we are not to take His name in vain. It does not say we are to stop using it. How can you take His name in vain if you don’t use it? This is a blatant example of false Jewish piety. With Rothschild’s trillions, the rabbinate spends man-years of time devising slogans which will deceive the goyim.

Another one of their brilliant deceptions is the claim that the rabbis “study” the Torah. Yes, they study the Bible, but they don’t TEACH it, nor do they practice it. They teach the Talmud instead. Those who don’t understand the nature of Jewish deceptions naturally assume that they teach what they study! The sheep are so gullible, aren’t they?

If we are using exclusively a text that does not take idiomatic expressions into account, we have a serious problem. We are missing out on the meanings employed by the original authors. The translators have let us down.

The fact is that, idiomatically, the words “tree”, “fruit”, “branch” and “seed” are repeatedly used in the Bible to refer to human offspring, the genealogical tree. There is no justification for us to deviate from this dual usage of words, literal and idiomatic. If an idiomatic expression is used more than once in Scripture, and consistently so in different Books, then we have to give serious thought as to whether to translate literally or idiomatically. This is nothing less than honest scholarship.

Given everything presented here up to this point, the anti-seedliners’ blanket denial of idiomatic usage is absurd. From the point of view of scholarship, it is an untenable position. It will not do to simply declare idiomatic interpretations invalid. You have to give an account of why a literal translation is preferable to the idiomatic translation. The anti-seedliners have not done this; nor is it likely that they can do it with regard to Genesis Chapters 2-4.

The anti-seedliners are adamant that these words can only be taken literally. They insist that any figurative or idiomatic interpretation which implies sexuality is invalid. Given the above examples cited from Scriptures outside of Genesis 3 and 4, can this proposition be taken seriously? By not taking Hebrew idioms into account, the anti-seedliners have jumped to a premature conclusion. In essence, what they are saying is “You can only use my interpretation. You cannot use your idiomatic interpretation.” I’m afraid that this is simply a closed-minded attitude, and we all must understand it for exactly what it is.

Another great example of an idiomatic expression is “turned into a pillar of salt.” When Lot’s wife looked back at Sodom and Gomorrah, was she transmogrified into a literal pillar of salt? Possibly, but the idiomatic expression we are dealing with is still used in the Middle East today to mean “petrified with fear.” Evidently, what she saw was quite astounding and terrifying. Scripture just leaves it at that. If she were turned into a literal pillar of salt, then the experience would have killed her. If she was frozen in her tracks from terror, she may have recovered. Then again, she might have been scared to death, literally.

The word translated as “pillar” in Gen. 19:26 is #5333, netsib, meaning “stationary, i.e. a prefect, a military post, a statue….” The implication is standing erect or standing still, like a soldier at attention. As listed in Strong’s Concordance, this is the only use of this word in Scripture. A more common word for pillar is #4676, matstsebah, meaning “something stationed, i.e. a column (or memorial stone).” Here we have a slightly different shade of meaning, implying something set in place, like a stone pillar.

Here, again, the idiomatic meaning of an expression must be considered to see what the writer truly intended.

Since the translators of the KJV were apparently not aware of this idiom, they were left with only one possible translation: Lot’s wife was literally turned into salt. Does the punishment fit the crime? Or was she, as the idiomatic translation implies, petrified by fear? Do you, dear reader, still think idiomatic expressions should always be translated literally? At the very least, the reader should be made aware of the idioms so he can consider the alternatives. Apparently the anti-seedliners are either unaware of the idiomatic nature of ancient Hebrew or they don’t want you to consider it. Wouldn’t you want to know about any relevant idioms? Wouldn’t you want to know that, if someone wanted to give you some “ecstasy,” it is only by means of a dangerous drug?

An Analysis of Genesis 3 and 4

The two-seedline translation of Genesis 3:15 would read thus: “And I will put enmity between thee and her, between thy offspring and her offspring; her offspring shall bruise your head, and your offspring shall bruise his heel.”

It goes without saying that “seed” cannot do any bruising and that any literal seed cannot have enmity toward each other. I contend that a careful reading of the rest of Chapters 3 and 4 completely validates the bloodline interpretation.

Gen. 3:1: “Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which Yahweh Elohim had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath Elohim said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

Now, the Hebrew word ‘nachash’ has several meanings. Yes, it can mean a literal snake. But it also means “to hiss, whisper (a magic spell), enchanter, enchantment, incantation, snake (from its hiss), serpent.” Given this range of meanings, by what authority do the skeptics declare that only a literal snake can be meant? From their literalist position, they are actually saying that the snake raised up and spoke! Now, if little Miss Muffet was scared off her tuffet by a little spider, you can imagine what a talking snake would have done to her! She would have high-tailed it out of there, to use a figure of speech from the Old West. But no, some anti-seedliners insist that this was a literal snake that spoke to her. And this snake was able to tempt her into eating a piece of fruit! And then this snake disappeared, never to be heard from again, leaving Eve holding the piece of fruit as evidence. Should this interpretation really be taken seriously?

Gen. 3:1 contains the expression, “beast of the field.” What is a beast of the field? Professor Charles Carroll, in his book, The Tempter of Eve, explains, from a comparative study of many verses of the Bible, that the beast of the field is capable of speech, has hands and feet, and can even worship God. Thus, the “beast of the field” is clearly a humanoid. Professor Carroll claims that it is a refere
nce to Negroes. Whether it means Negroes or some other species is not clear to me because it can mean any or all of the other races that we know existed before Adam was formed. The fact is that we are dealing with ANOTHER RACE. This proves that there were other races in existence at that time, and, as such, it is clear evidence that Eve was dealing with a humanoid, not a snake.

Now, the verse tells us that the serpent was more subtle than any of these people. Since the “serpent” is being compared to a race of people, should we not consider Genesis 2-4 from the perspective that this nachash was a humanoid? The next few verses describe how nachash smoothtalks Eve into defying God’s law.

Verse 5 says this: “For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.” Now, this enchanter was actually telling Eve the truth. It is true that God does know that, if she does what he, nachash, wants her to do, she will have known good AND evil. What the serpent was doing was piquing her interest, tempting her into an unusual experience. “You’re really gonna love this, Eve. There’s no harm. Try it, you’ll like it.” We hear this same refrain behind nightclubs and dance halls today…also in the back seats of numerous cars.

What “gods” is he talking about? The nephilim (fallen angels), perhaps, of which he was an example? The nephilim were known for mixing their seed with humans.

Verse 6: “And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.” Certainly, the serpent had convinced her that the exceptional experience he promised her would be harmless. Of course, he lied. Are literal snakes capable of lying? Are literal trees capable of lying? How does a literal tree, or its fruit, make one wise?

Now, here is where the anti-seedline position begins to fall apart, because from here on, the context is indisputably sexual. Verse 7 says: “And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.” How does eating literal fruit relate to nakedness? Why did they have to cover their genital areas with clothing if their sin was some kind of culinary mistake? – or some kind of unnamed sin? If the sin were related to the mouth, then the punishment should have been to wear face masks! Surely, the Father does not punish us in unusual ways. And, as we all know from our common law, the punishment must fit the crime! What did Adam and Eve do that required a punishment to be imposed upon their sex organs?

Verse 11: Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat? Again, what does nakedness have to do with the eating of literal fruit?

In Verse 12, Adam tries to pass the buck, blaming his complicity on Eve. In Verse 13, Eve says: “The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.” Now, let me remind you that one of the meanings of the word ‘beguiled’ is “seduced.” Seduction is a sexual act. We want to choose the meaning which best fits the context of the passage(s). Based on the known alternative meanings of these words, it could easily have been translated as “Nachash seduced me and I did lay.”

In Verse 14, Yahweh condemns the Serpent to his lowly status for the rest of his days. If the Serpent were a literal snake, how would crawling on his belly be a curse? The anti-seedliners would have us believe that God is saying, “Hey, you snake, from now on you will crawl on your belly like a snake!” But, clearly, the Serpent’s status is here being LOWERED TO THAT OF A SNAKE, if only in figurative language. If nachash was a literal snake, this would be no curse at all, for crawling on his belly is nothing out of the ordinary – for literal snakes!

Verse 16: “I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow shalt thou bring forth children [Can you hear Eve saying, “Because I ate a piece of fruit?”]; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over you.” What does childbearing (conception) have to do with literal fruit? But if the “eating” that Eve did was of a sexual nature, then you can understand why Yahweh was so upset with her. And what about the latter clause of this sentence? Was her previous desire NOT EXCLUSIVELY TO HER HUSBAND, ADAM? Why would Yahweh have to even mention this if she had not desired someone else? And, apparently, she had not yet been subject to his rule…until she “ate” of the ”forbidden fruit.”

Yahweh had made them for each other. Eve was even made out of Adam’s side (rib). Would not her desire be automatically for him and him alone? (Kind after kind. Like begets like.) Think about it. Even today, White women, much more than White men, stupidly intermarry with other races, thinking they are “doing good” while actually contributing to the destruction of their own race. Because nachash APPEALS TO HER EMOTIONS OF SYMPATHY FOR “THOSE LESS FORTUNATE,” Eve loses her perspective and commits racial suicide. It is up to our menfolk to rectify this situation because our women apparently cannot or will not do it.

In Verse 17, Yahweh curses the ground of the earth because of the “tree” sin they have committed. The verse concludes with the statement: “In sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life.” This “eating” is really serious business, isn’t it? If it was just a piece of fruit, or some vague unnamed sin, why would Yahweh heap curse upon curse, sorrow upon sorrow, especially upon her conception and child-bearing? Could it be because this was “eating” of a sexual nature and not the end of it either? Could it be because this meant the beginning of six thousand years of sorrow? Race-mixing creates forbidden fruit, such as Cain! We are still eating the bitter fruit of race-mixing today, aren’t we?

At the Last Supper, Jesus broke bread and said to the Apostles, “Take, eat; this is my body.” (Matthew 26:26) Was He asking them to literally EAT His body? Was Eve EATING literal fruit?

Now, before I quote Genesis 4:1, I want you to understand something. Up to this point, with all of the curses, shame, and nakedness, Adam has not yet “known” Eve! Yet, her womb was cursed; and her childbearing, and that of future generations of Adamite women, was to be done in pain. We call it “labor.” If she had mated only with her blood-kin husband, would such a curse have been issued by Yahweh?

Genesis 4:1: “And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from Yahweh.” Evidently, Eve was still under the spell of nachash, because, obviously, Cain was not of Yahweh. We already know from Verse 16 that she was unfaithful to her husband. Why didn’t she say, “I have gotten a man from my husband, Adam?” Was there something remarkably different about Cain that he didn’t resemble Adam? Or was this just wishful thinking on her part?

Verse 2: “And she again bare his brother, Abel.” Eve does not make any remarks about Abel. You should all know that it is possible for a woman to be pregnant by two different men at the same time. The offspring are called “twins” but it should properly be called a “dual pregnancy.” It is also possible for a woman to be pregnant at the same time by two men of different races. If you do not believe this, then just look up “heteropaternal superfecundation” in your encyclopedia or search for it on your browser, and you will find a host of references and examples. Superfecundity is the ability to conceive by two different men at the same time.

Eve was sexually know
n by nachash in order for Cain to have been conceived. Cain may have been humanoid, but he was not an Adamite. After murdering Abel, Yahweh drove him out of the land, and put a mark on him so that no one would try to slay him. Why this mark? My opinion is that Yahweh wanted Cain and his offspring to survive because it is part of His plan to judge the Serpent seed. In order for Genesis 3:15 to be fulfilled, both seedlines had to survive into the future, with the First Advent redeeming the sin of Adam – remember, this was A PERSONAL BLOOD SACRIFICE, not a mere field offering – and the Second Advent instituting judgment upon the evil seed. Again, why a blood sacrifice for the sin of Adam and Eve if only literal fruit or only mental seduction is involved? Jesus Christ shed His own blood so that our blood might be cleansed of its contamination. “For the life of the flesh is in the blood.” (Lev. 17:11) Adam and Eve fell (and so are we fallen because we are their descendants) because their blood became polluted (mixed) with that of the Serpent (nachash) race. Once Eve’s womb was polluted, there was nothing Adam could do about it. Can you imagine his disappointment?

Incidentally, the name, Abel [#1893], is based on the Hebrew words, ‘habal’ [#1891], meaning “..to lead astray: — be (become, make) vain,” and ‘hebel’ [#1892], meaning “..emptiness, vanity…transitory…unsatisfactory.” Adam’s disappointment is reflected in the name, Abel, because he knew that Eve’s womb, and blood, had been contaminated.

This is why Jesus had to shed His own blood, as our Kinsman Redeemer, following the law of cleansing, or atonement for sins. If Adam and Eve’s sin were only mental seduction, WHY WOULD LITERAL BLOOD HAVE TO BE SHED FOR THE ATONEMENT? Remember, the Old Covenant was “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.” Jesus died in order to make an end of these blood sacrifices, but He could only do it with His own Blood, as the scapegoat for our sins.

Does Satan Exist?

It seems that part of the anti-seedline argument is that two-seedliners place too much emphasis on the existence of Satan as an evil-doer and that we blame him too much for our mischief. I agree 100% with the sentiment that no one should use “the devil made me do it” as an excuse for their wrong behavior; but I know of no two-seedliner who suggests that anyone should use such an excuse. On the contrary, all of the Two-Seedliners listed earlier are consistent on the subject of moral culpability. They all teach that we are responsible for our own actions. If someone tempts us into doing evil, we are just as responsible as if we thought the whole thing up by ourselves. The involvement of a tempter does not make the crime any less a crime, or any less our own fault. I would say that the two sides are in agreement about this.

All we are saying is that the Serpent of the Garden is the same entity that has plagued our people for centuries. Judaism and Jewry have a spirit which directs them. That spirit is in their blood. But the crimes of the Jews are far worse than tempting us. Their modus operandi is DECEPTION. Deception and temptation are two different animals. We often give in to temptation of our own free wills, usually knowing better. Deception is when someone tricks us into doing evil and we don’t even realize that it is evil. That’s why it is so insidious. Yahweh tests us; but He does not deceive us! Satan is a deceiver, not just a tempter! Through deception, completely innocent people are made to bear the brunt of deeds performed with no malicious intent. Christians are constantly being victimized by Jewish scams that involve neither temptation nor consent on the part of the victim. Communism and the Federal Reserve System are two perfect examples of how the Jews trick us into disobeying God’s Law…and we don’t even know it! Communism and socialism are soft-peddled in our educational institutions as if they were just systems of politics. Liberals swear and completely believe that they are doing good! This is indoctrination and brainwashing, pure and simple. People assume that the Fed is part of our government when, in fact, it is a private, profit-making banking conglomerate which robs the entire nation of its wealth. Have the American people been tempted to accept this system or have they been tricked by the Zionists and the government? Law + responsibility = Liberty. Lawlessness + deception = tyranny.

How, in these two examples, have the people yielded to temptation? Temptation is an invitation to do that which you know is wrong. Deception is taking advantage of people’s ignorance.

Did the people knowingly create these corrupt institutions? No, they did not. They were created by Satan, or, if you prefer, by his worldly agents, the Jews. Satan is the deceiver in spiritual form. The Jews are the deceiver in human form. Jesus tells us: “Be ye therefore wise as serpents, yet gentle as doves.” (Matt. 10:16) Is Satan a fictitious entity, as the anti-seedliners would have us believe? To quote an anonymous source: “The personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the living shape of the Jew.” I think it is fair to say the Jewish people, with their enthusiastic acceptance of the justified use of the lie, are led BY A DIFFERENT SPIRIT. Where does that spirit reside? It is in their blood, because they have a different father.

Yahshua told us who their father is:

“You are of your father, the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning [Who was the first murderer in the Bible?], and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies” (John 8:44.)

If this statement does not convince you that the Jews are of a totally different nature from Israelites, then you simply don’t understand the Bible. Since the Jews are Canaanites, Edomites, and Khazars, they cannot be Israelites; and since these people have victimized the guileless Israelites for the last six thousand years, the book of Obadiah pronounces Yahweh’s judgment upon these people at the Great Day of Yahweh.

Anti-seedliners have issued many statements in defense of their belief that Satan is a fictitious character invented by the Catholic Church in order to deceive us. But, the fact is that the Bible clearly teaches that Satan is both a spiritual being (in the Book of Job, chapters 1 & 2, and in Revelation) and that he has a worldly empire. Just because a phony priest uses a concept for his own devious purposes does not mean that the concept is false. Questions: Does Yahweh have an Adversary or does He not? Do we have an Adversary or do we not? We are not saying that this Adversary is God’s equal. We are merely asserting that Scripture tells us that the Adversary and his earthly children are making war against us. This is not just an inner turmoil. This is a literal war (in heaven and on earth) and we should not minimize its seriousness by minimizing it as mere temptation. Satan and his followers are the rebellious ones who EXISTED BEFORE ADAM WAS FORMED! So, how can they be mere figments of our imaginations? Nor is their biological hatred toward us imaginary.

It doesn’t matter what word you use to designate this deceiver (Lucifer, Sammael, Satan, Adversary, etc,), he and his offspring are very real. Genesis 3:15 is very clear about this. This entity we call Satan is simply the highest ranking spirit of the rebellion. To deny his existence is to deny that Yahweh has an Adversary. If Yahweh does not have an Adversary, then who is He condemning in Genesis 3:14? Is He condemning Eve’s lust or the deceptions of nachash? The two are not the same.

A question for True Israel: Are His enemies your enemies?

The word ‘enmity’ implies an adversarial r
elationship between two beings. In no way can Gen. 3:15 be interpreted as Eve versus her own sinful nature! The fact is that SHE HAD NO SINFUL NATURE BEFORE SHE WAS DECEIVED! Gen. 2:25: “And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.” The word ‘naked’ in this verse and in subsequent verses of Gen. 3 comes from the Hebrew root aram, #6191. The definition is “to be (or make) bare…to be cunning (usually [but not always — EJ] in a bad sense)…take crafty [counsel], be prudent, deal subtilly.” But, before they sinned, they had nothing to be ashamed of. Wow! Did Adam and Eve learn craftiness from eating an apple, or from one mere instance of mental seduction? How does a tree teach you that you are naked? Can eating one apple impart craftiness even when you are tricked into eating it? For how many generations must you suffer for this one act of mental deception?

Let us consider the anti-seedliner position that the “tree of knowledge of good and evil” means “mental seduction.” If Yahweh is perfect and without sin, and Adam and Eve are His literal children, as all Identity teachers say, then how did evil get into us? Adam and Eve would not be thinking any evil thoughts. We did not know cunning (in the negative sense) and we did not know evil, so how could these mental processes get started in us? The evil had to be injected into our blood before we could think evil thoughts or commit evil deeds! This is what the Bible is telling us!

Also, the word ‘ashamed’ comes from the Hebrew buwsh, #954, meaning “to pale…to be ashamed…to be disappointed, or delayed…confounded, confusion, become dry, delay, be long.” But before the seduction, they were NOT ashamed, confounded or confused in their nakedness! How could eating a piece of literal fruit cause us to be ashamed of our nakedness? And how could we become mentally confused when the Bible says we were NOT CONFUSED? What kind of confusion are we talking about here: mental or genetic? The mental confusion came in as a result of the genetic confusion.

The aim of the Adversary is to get you to follow his program instead of Yahweh’s. When we do his deeds (spiritual, mental, and physical) and when we worship him instead of the Creator, we give him life. The life of the parasite depends upon the blood of the host. This is not about food. This is about BLOOD. The Adversary is both spiritual and physical; but if those of us in the physical world would reject him and stop entertaining his deceptions, especially the confusion he causes through race-mixing, his food source would dry up. Deception and parasitism go hand in hand. The problem is not so much that some people, known as Satanists, follow him consciously. These people are a small minority. The real problem is that a great majority of people unknowingly follow him, doing evil while thinking they are doing good. For Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. (II Cor. 7:14.) As in this quotation, the Bible repeatedly refers to Satan and the Devil as an individual having his own mind and will.

Ever since the Enmity was declared, Jewry has been on a mission to destroy White Christendom. They have followed us, pestered us, hounded us, corrupted and deceived us in order to exploit and destroy us. They are the children of the Devil, given to deception and spite. Like a snake in the grass, they have crawled on their belly, lying in wait for us in order to bite our heels from behind, like the cowards they are, just as Genesis 3:15 describes. Like children of darkness, they prefer the back rooms and the hidden places, where they connive, cheat, steal and plot.

We, on the other hand, deal in the public square, in the sunlight, showing ourselves openly, without malice. In fact, our propensity for honest and open dealing creates an easily bruised “Achilles heel” when interacting with the dishonest. For as we declare the truth, which is our nature to do, the deceiver then uses this against us to destroy us. Perhaps there exists no better object lesson why Yahweh demands us to remain absolutely separate from the Jews. To the extent we interact with these deceivers, we are unable to prevent them from subtly parasitizing us, precisely because we possess an innate proclivity to tell the truth. Indeed, our worst trait is our gullibility in our dealings with the Jew. The different nature of these two peoples is so obvious it hardly requires mention. Given this reality, it has been prophesied that the woman’s seed will one day wake up, totally annoyed and frustrated by the connivings of the Jews, and in a fit anger, turn around and crush the head of the Serpent’s seed – with Yahweh’s blessing and assistance. The prophecy of Gen. 3:15 has yet to be fulfilled; and when it is, it will be with a vengeance.

Yes, it is true that we Israelites can be our own worst enemies (our own worst adversary), but it is not true that we have precipitated history’s greatest crimes. These have always been accomplished by the bestial Jew in his war against us. His dealings with us have always been ruthless and merciless, fomenting wars which have destroyed millions of Israelites. His economic policies (usury) have always sucked out our lifeblood and have ruined marriages, families, homes and nations. In turn, we have always dealt with the Jew as if he were an equal. This is a courtesy that he never shows us. While the Jew assumes the posture of victimhood, a quick glance at history proves that the Jew has deliberately intended numerous wars and revolutions while we have been the victims of his treacheries. Therefore, it is plainly untrue and simplistic to say that Eve’s problem is her internal struggle with her own carnal nature or moral inadequacies. Let us not blame the victim for the conman’s games.

This is not just a morality tale. This is a survival tale; and it is obvious that the Adversary is a flesh and blood creature that lives outside of Eve’s conscience or control. Indeed, our efforts to “Christianize” this Adversary have been met with nothing but scorn, ridicule and bad faith. From his lofty position of economic and social control, he looks down his crooked nose at us with a hauteur mitigated only by his fear of retribution. Thus he fears exposure as if it were death itself! Like Jacob struggling with the angel through the night, we have had a very long night. The only hope for us is to fully comprehend our national, racial and religious plight and deal with the Adversary according to our Father’s instructions. We are to institute His Law on planet earth by severing all ties with the Jewish menace.

We are to “come out of Babylon.” When America severs its slavish ties with the Israeli State, Zionism and Jewry will suffer a drastic cut in their food supply. When the Jew sees that we are about to do this, he will panic; and we will at once gain the upper hand. Yahweh will then fully support us because we will be showing awareness of our mission. 9/11 was a gigantic deception by the Jew against us. Slowly but surely, White Christendom is seeing through the Jewish imposture of victimhood; and the White man is becoming angry.

Credulity

In light of the foregoing discussion, the skeptics still would tell us that it begs credulity that Eve had sexual relations with nachash. This they consider unbelievable and outside the scope of the Bible story. At the same time, they are totally credulous with respect to the notion that Eve’s problems are all the result a conversation with a talking snake. In addition, they are totally credulous with respect to the notion that Eve was only partaking of literal fruit or some mental seduction, even though this deed resulted in numerous punishments directly affecting both the nature of our sexual reproduction and, thus, future generations of Adamites. This we refer to as “The Fall.” Their position is completely unable to explain the connection between the “tree,” t
he “fruit,” and the severity of the consequences. Therefore, it seems to me that the more credible position is Two-Seedline.

The Organic View of Judgment

One might well ask: “If the Serpent seed is so evil, why doesn’t God just kill them all Himself”? I don’t think it’s that simple. If, as Revelation tells us, that the Serpent was cast out from heaven, and was cast down to earth for judgment with one-third of the angels that rebelled along with him, then what we have is a cancer of the Universal body. If one third of your body were infected by cancer, could the doctor just cut it out without killing the patient? No. The only cure for this disease is to strengthen the immune system and send in the killer cells to wipe out the cancer. Herein lies the problem: This cancer is highly intelligent and it fooled the White Blood Cells (Adamites) into sharing their DNA, thus compromising the immune system.

Folks, the body politic is very sick from the machinations of a very clever parasite. Paul confirms this universal illness: “For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. For the creature was made subject to vanity [remember Abel], not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope, Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now…For whom He did foreknow, He did also predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.” (Romans 8:19-29.)

We, Israel Restored, are the hope of creation. Are you up to the task? Armed with the Truth, we are the antibodies that have been created to kill the disease, to crush the head of the serpent at the Judgment Day. Jesus Christ Himself will return to oversee the operation…but He has to have a willing and competent cadre of Israelites, the Overcomers also known as the 144,000, to be the medicine according to the Plan. When will we stop taking the advice of Jewish doctors (Pharisees)?

The worst thing you can call a Jew is a “parasite.” This is the one appellation that they truly detest, because it strikes home; and, deep inside, they all know it. The history of the Jews is their parasitic relationship to the White Race. They thrive best when they can invade the White Nations and breed and multiply into a parasitic infestation, resulting in an infection. The reason Jews can’t have a civilization of their own is because Yahweh cursed Cain and his seed with the inability to grow food (Gen. 4:12). Ouch! The only way the Jew can prosper is to finagle his way into White society and take control of our institutions so as to get his tentacles into us and draw his food from us. In the process, he steals our women and he encourages other races to mix with us so that we would become weaker and stupider and no longer be a threat to him. Taking advantage of our good will, the Jews have done this to us umpteen hundred times and still we let them get away with it! – but not any more.

Interestingly enough, there is a similar human disease which affects women much worse than men. It is called Candida albicans. A Candida yeast infection is a parasitic infection which fools the body’s immune system into attacking the body’s own cells, rather than attacking the invading yeast cells. Pretty smart, eh? Isn’t that what the Jews have done to us over the last six thousand years? Candida feeds off sugar like Jewry feeds off our good will. The Rothschilds perfected the technique of arranging wars in which White Men of different nations slaughter each other while the Jew Bank profits. Our own Revolutionary War is an example. So is the Civil War. So were WWI and WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Bosnia, Iraq, and…who’s next? The Zionist financed Bolshevik Revolution, in reality coup by Jews over Christian Russia, claimed over sixty million victims! Can this type of genocidal hatred, over thousands of years, be anything but Satanic? The parasite has fooled us into killing each other so that he can thrive. Is all of this bloodshed the result of our giving in to carnal temptations?