Online Bible and Study Tools
Translate || Vine / Schaff || Alts/Vars/Criticism/Aramaic

 
 


End Times Chart


Introduction and Key

BOOKS:  BIBLICAL STUDIES (1500BC-AD70) / EARLY CHRISTIAN PRETERISM (AD50-1000) / FREE ONLINE BOOKS (AD1000-2008)



Church-State Relations and the Book of Revelation
An Introduction to The Parousia: A Careful Look at the New Testament Doctrine of the Lord's Second Coming
by James Stuart Russell (1878) // Written by
Todd Dennis, Curator
 


FREE ONLINE BOOKS    
 

 
Following is text found in "Identifying Identity," by Pastor Ovid Need. We urge you to order the book to help support the continuation of research and publishing of this kind of material. The suggested donation for "Identifying Identity" is $14.00, post paid. Ordering information is available at The Biblical Examiner.

FROOGLE

 

 


Identifying Identity

A Biblical Examination of assumptions found in
British-Israelism, Anglo-Saxonism, Christian-Identity.

By

Ovid Need, Jr.
(1992)

 

Following is the text as found in "identifying Identity," by Pastor Ovid Need. Most of the text will be posted. However, the very thorough index contained in the printed copy is not posted. We urge you to order the book to help support the continuation of research and publishing of this kind of material. The suggested donation for "Identifying Identity" is $14.00, post paid.

Introduction

Appearances over Scripture
Rules of Interpretation

Chapter I - Background

Basis for this Study
Religious New Speak
Holy History
Background
Scripture and History
A New Gospel Call
The Great Pyramid
Basic Problem
French Revolution

Chapter II - The Covenant

Good Men Involved
Heirship: A Legal Question
The Church
Covenant of Grace
Parts of the Covenant
Nations of the Covenant
Grace
Nations Included in the Covenant
Covenant
Fathers
The IF/THEN Covenant

Chapter III - Israel Identified

Israelites
Jews and False Assurance
The Promised Land Testimony of the OT
Testimony of Scholars Testimony of Church History
Testimony of Scripture
Gentile
Church
The Branch/The Church

Chapter IV - Seedline Doctrine

In The Beginning - Adam
Three Race Theory
No Documentation
Beast
Negro
Flood
Kingdom Parables Corrupted
Limited Atonement
The Gospel Truth
Race Mixing
Bastard

Chapter V - The Heart

The Heart and The Law
I.N.R.I.
King of the Jews
Jesus - The Name
The Word of God

Christ's Return

Chapter VI - Various Points

Positive
The Mixture
Hitler
Zionism
Esau-Edom Bondage and Esau-Edom
Conspiracies
Theology
Documentation
Scriptures
Geneology
Word-Studies
Word-Studies, America
America - The Word
Word-Studies, Saxon
White Race

Chapter VII - The Gospel

Hebrew/Non-Hebrew
Bewitchers
Identity and Sin
Lost
Soul
The Gospel

Chapter VIII - Conclusion

Patriots
Antagonism
Identity Answered

 

INTRODUCTION

The following study originated when this pastor received a fifteen part lesson series entitled "Star Wars," by Nord Davis, Jr., and a request to review the lessons. As "Star Wars" was examined and other material encountered and contemplated, the study expanded to include the general teachings of Anglo-Saxonism (A-S), British-Israelism (B-I), and/or Christian-Identity. Finally, it was edited to deal primarily with the reproduced Identity Doctrinal Statement. According to our study, we assume the reproduced "Kingdom-Identity" doctrinal statement at the end of this study reflects basic "Christian-Identity" theory. Obviously, not all identifying with Identity hold to all the points in the statement.

     Identity presents some assumptions making its theories plausible, appealing and maybe for some even acceptable. The following document uses Davis' material to go beyond a superficial look at Identity's presumptions. Because he takes Identity's basic doctrines to their logical extremes, he makes Identity's unBiblical absurdities even more absurd and easily recognized for their militancy against God. Therefore, many quotes from "Star-Wars" are used, recognized by their brackets, e.g. (#). Because Identity's basic postulations are so absurd, some Identity people may not confess, let alone develop, them; instead, they emphasize the appealing aspects of their theories, dismissing the absurd. To Davis' credit, he does take the "bull by the horns" (no pun intended), and builds his logical theories on Identity's basic foundation.

     Reading the reproduced doctrinal statement, one will find that the Identity authors represented herein do little more than provide their assumed "details" to fill the blanks within Identity's basic premises. We added paragraph numbers to the reproduced statement, and refer to them throughout this document, e.g. DS#. This author would say that a major difference in various Identity authors is each one's view of "salvation," which we will develop.

     Those holding some of Identity's more extreme views, e.g. Ingersoll and Davis, are probably "disowned" by the more "moderate" in the movement. From this author's understanding, though extreme views may be denied by many, if those who deny the views would be consistent with their personal Anglo-Saxon theories, they would also have to come up with some equally ludicrous conclusions.

     This author found it nearly impossible to keep to a "one time only" mention of Identity theories. Therefore, some points may be a little scattered, but are easily traced through the Index. If the reader will wade through the sometimes deep waters of the following study, he will find most of Identity's basic premises dealt with in the text. The Footnotes offer a great amount of pertinent information dealing with the subjects at hand.

     The following study presupposes that the reader is either very familiar with or will look up the Scriptures referred to in this study. Anglo-Saxonism knows how to use words and how to change good Bible words from their obvious Biblical meaning to its own personal meanings, suggestions and opinions. It well knows and speaks "Conservative, Patriotic, Christian" speech, making it extremely dangerous to the cause of Christ. But the words used are according to private interpretation, e.g. Grace, q.v.

     Appearances over Scripture

     In opening, let us refer to a couple of important points: First, it would be a foolish waste of time to examine all Bible doctrines and words misused by the over all Anglo-Saxon movement. Second, Davis likely reflects the attitude of those fully committed to Anglo-Saxonism, several times dismissing any source not agreeing with his "suggested word meanings;" he said, the "doubting student" who flees to good linguistic authorities to question his teaching is only one burden a teacher must bear. (45)

     We must conclude, therefore, that confronting those fully committed to Anglo-Saxonism with any material from any source, Bible, past or present theologians, word-studies, &c., not supporting their view of history will probably be useless. Davis says clearly that his understanding of history supports his theology; therefore, he will dismiss any criticism. 1.

     The following critique attempts to restrict itself to the more obvious, basic, unBiblical fallacies in overall Anglo-Saxon theories, or this critique would be a full 66 chapters, Gen-Rev. Though we mention some points, e.g. America, Hitler, &c., we do not attempt to pursue Identity's historical assumptions past New Testament times. Moreover, the following is not meant to do the thinking for the reader. The author hopes the reader will be motivated to continue his own thorough investigation into the issues raised and any issues of importance. The following, though, should give those interested a starting place for their research.

     Rules of Interpretation

     We should also refer to The Rules of Bible Interpretation upon which the following study is based. The Bible student knows that a primary rule of interpretation is that implied doctrine cannot be accepted over the clear, plain teaching of God's Word. Thus implications and/or obscure passages can only be understood in agreement with, or in light of, clear, plain passages elsewhere in the inspired Word of God. No verse will stand on its own, and assumptions must be avoided. 2

     While Davis explains, "Every doctrine I teach comes from two or more witnesses in the Bible," (22) his "thought-theology" (a term repeatedly used to degrade disagreement, e.g. 31) is woefully lacking Scriptural support whatsoever. Usually, he talks about Scripture teaching a particular point, but he has extremely little specific, supportive Scripture. Moreover, the vast majority of Scriptures used are totally void of, or contrary to, their context. Rather, Davis' supports some of his more non-traditional (we are being kind to a man who is not kind to those who disagree with him) doctrines with such statements as: "The Bible is clear to me.." and "There are two clues to my position..." (19), &c.3

     It appears that Identity is guilty of what many Christians are, and is thereby able to present a Scriptural appearance. It ignores: first, the passages' context; second, to whom passages are directed; third, the situations the passages were given to deal with, i.e. the purpose of the passages, and fourth, the New Testament explanation of the Old Testament passages.

     The major thrust of the following compares all-round Identity foundational teachings with Scripture, for if the foundation, i.e. basic theory, is corrupt, obviously the house built upon the foundation must be corrupt. 4 If the foundation, or center, of any theology does not hold, there is little need to examine what is built upon the broken foundation. Why examine for repair a broken building if its foundation is useless? Certainly, there will be exceptions, but if we do not seek to limit our study to an examination of major thoughts supporting Identity's house of theory, this study would result in a 66 chapter book, wearing both this author and the reader. 5.

     Identity builds its Anglo-Saxon house on what, in its eyes, is happening in history, so the following chapter examines the very basis of its theories.

     In making sweeping statements concerning Identity and its theories, we do not imply that all identifying with Identity hold to all the theories. We are herein dealing with GENERAL IDENTITY TEACHING as found basically in the reproduced "Kingdom-Identity's" doctrinal statement.


FOOTNOTES

1. Davis does no more than dogmatically restate Identity's position; see DS15 for Identity's use of their understanding of history to establish theory. Undoubtedly, we are all guilty of subjecting Scripture to history to one degree or another. The avoidance of non-Identity documentation for Identity's theories seems to be typical of Identity writers ordinarily. See Documentation, lack of. Back

2. Overall, Identity writers seem to violate almost every law of Biblical Interpretation. See Louis Berkhof, Principles of Biblical Interpretation, 1990, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan 59506. Back

3. There is a well-worn comparison between 2 Sa 17:23/Mat 27:5 & Lk 10:37. Using Davis' "two or more witness" study method that is evident in his lessons, Christ's command to Go, and do thou likewise would indeed tell all readers to go hang themselves: the two witnesses being Mat 27:5 & Lk 10:37. Is this sound study method? The reader will find it extremely easy to destroy Identity's foundation simply by placing misused Scriptures back within their Scriptural context and accepting the Word of God as the final authority. Therefore, it is considered redundant for both the author and the reader to examine the context of every passage misused by Identity. Back

4. Rom 15:20; 1 Cor 3:10-15; Eph 2:20, &c. Back

5. We use Davis' basic theories that he built on Identity's theories to expose and counter Identity's theories. Davis' theories are so broken up that it is pointless to pursue them to his conclusions. See "Should we study Identity's theology" in Chapter One. Personally, the more this author read Davis' material, the more he had to agree with the young men who Davis says inspired the lessons: ôBy this time, the young Bible students were completely baffled..." (8) This author finds Davis' inconsistencies make his doctrine extremely difficult to follow. The more his material is read, the more baffling it becomes. But we will do our best to follow his shattered line of thought. Time and his broken system of theology will only permit our examination of some of his general theories rather than a good, systematic examination. So obviously, there may be points dealt with in the following which are not points of his theology. It is extremely easy to misunderstand what he is saying. Furthermore, every time "Star Wars" or other Identity material is considered, many more points contrary to Scripture are observed. Hence we must limit our study to a few foundation stones of Davis' house which he builds upon Anglo-Saxonism's theories. Unlike the inspired Scripture which presents God's Word against all dissention, Davis uses ridicule against opposing views. He is especially antagonistic toward pastors who see not things his way, clearly violating 2 Tim 2:23-26. Back


CHAPTER ONE

[This Chapter Begins with a portion of Nord Davis' doctrine. For an explanation of the usage of Mr. Davis' statements, please refer to The Introduction].

We believe the White, Anglo-Saxon, Germanic and kindred people to be God's true, literal Children of Israel. Only this race fulfills every detail of Biblical Prophecy and World History concerning Israel and continues in these latter days to be heirs and possessors of the Covenants, Prophecies, Promises and Blessings YHVH God made to Israel. This chosen seedline making up the "Christian Nations" (Gen. 35:11; Isa. 62:2; Acts 11:26) of the earth stands far superior to all other peoples in their call as God's servant race (Isa. 41:8, 44:21; Luke 1:54). Only these descendants of the 12 tribes of Israel scattered abroad (James 1:1; Deut. 4:27; Jer. 31:10; John 11:52) have carried God's Word, the Bible, throughout the world (Gen. 28:14; Isa. 43:10-12, 59:21), have used His Laws in the establishment of their civil governments and are the "Christians" opposed by the Satanic Anti-Christ forces of this world who do not recognize the true and living God (John 5:23, 8:19, 16:2-3). [DS15]

 

We will open this study by examining a very basic premises of Anglo-Saxon theory, viz. assumptions presumably established by history rather than facts firmly established by Prophecy, the inspired Word of God. Davis' radical thinking along the Anglo-Saxon line of observation readily reveals the fallacy of establishing assumptions from history.1

     Basis for this Study

     Once Anglo-Saxonism's contention that dogmatic doctrine can be built upon perceived history is dealt with, there is little or no need to further investigate its teachings. The vast portion of its doctrine, therefore, is based upon the false foundation of the sands of history, not upon the firm rock of God's Word. It may attempt to place apparently sound Bible passages upon its faulty foundation, but its building blocks of Scripture passages do not change the fact: Identity builds upon history rather than Scripture. And its view of history is not honest history in many cases. Anglo-Saxon authors, Davis included, clearly tell us that they are presenting their ideas of what the Word of God teaches according to their understandings of history. 2

     Should we study Identity's theories?

     Verbalizing Identity's DS15, Davis says,

We might study for a long time trying to prove who Israel is in the world today. Why, instead, don't we find out who, according to appearances, has the promised blessings of the covenant? (paraphrasing the theme of Lesson One.)

     Identity author, Wm. Norman Saxon, in his book, The Reformation of Israel, said it like this:

Now in these "last days," the children of promise, who are descended from Abraham through Isaac and Jacob, can be readily identified. To find Jacob-Israel in the world today, all one needs to do is find the nations and people in whom the Lord's Covenant Promises have been fulfilled... What does history reveal about the heterogeneous pedigree of those who claim title to the Promise land and the very name, "Israel"? (See DS12, 13.)

     Identity theorizes that the literal, physical promises of God to Abraham belong exclusively to the Anglo-Saxon, White, Germanic, Caucasian race centered primarily in America. Thus America is the new covenant-land of Israel. (See America & Promised Land.) But rather than study and examine the holy Word of God to identify Israel, Identity uses outward appearance for its starting point. It thus builds a supposed Scriptural house upon the foundation of outward appearances. Based upon an apparent prosperity and a supposed leaning toward Christianity of the White Race, Anglo-Saxonism dogmatically holds that it is, as a supposed part of the literal "lost" tribes of Israel, the literal heir of the promises God made to Abraham (DS13, 14, 22, &c). But the Anglo-Saxon theory is built upon its view of history, not upon the inspired Word of God. Davis' own words say that his theology is based upon outward appearance; thus he and every other author who make such futile attempts are clearly disqualified as "Bible teachers." 3

     Though Identity tells us that its theories are not based upon Scripture, but upon its view of history, we will examine its Anglo-Saxon assumptions in the light of God's Word anyway. We also realize those committed to the theology of outward appearance will probably disregard the following study; it attempts to remain consistent with Scripture. Scripture and outward appearance very seldom correspond, 2 Cor 4:18. Moreover, the Christian is straightly commanded to search the Scriptures, not history, for the foundation of his theology. Thus when he searches outward appearances and non-Biblical, secular history for his foundation, he violates a very basic premise of God's law, Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me, John 5:39. Therefore, the following study is basically a search of the scriptures to answer the theories generally put forth by Identity.

     Those who reject Truth (i.e. the inspired Word of God) for error (i.e. outward appearances and non-Biblical, secular history) are identified as fools by the Spirit.4

     Those who build their houses upon non-Biblical sources, i.e. outward appearances and secular history, probably should not even be answered, Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him, Pro 26:4. But the next verse justifies the following lengthy study, Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit, v. 5.

     Religious New Speak

     Generally, Identity holds to: people other than Adam and Eve in the garden; a dominate White race who alone descended from Adam [DS17]; a local flood; appearances over the Word of God, and other miscellaneous ideas. Davis simply develops basic Identity theories; therefore, by examining the concepts he develops, the total absurdity and unBiblical nature of Identity's theories are readily apparent. This chapter will deal with appearances.

     When examining Identity material, there appears a dangerous thread throughout: it uses many good sounding, apparently Biblical terms, but it defines those words totally contrary to their Scriptural usage. It has developed a religious "New Speak" that is far more dangerous than our modern political "New Speak." Its "New Speak" makes Identity appear Biblically sound while militating strongly against God's Word, e.g. election, sovereignty, &c., which will be developed in the following analysis.

     The use of many familiar terms by Anglo-Saxon theorists appears to be intentional to win the reader's confidence. But on the other hand, the theorists may be totally convinced as are, for example, the Mormons & Jehovah Witnesses. The more convinced one is, the more convincing he is. At the first encounter with good Biblical words in Identity material, the reader is inclined to accept the words and their messages according to his proper understanding of Scripture. Later, the words may be defined according to the author's personal understanding; his definition may be close to or completely contrary to the Biblical meaning, but by the time the reader is told author's intended meaning of the word, he may have already accepted the theories built upon the words: the theories appeared, at first encounter, to be sound, Biblical theories because of the words used. Obviously, correct teaching clearly defines meanings and terminology "up front," then builds upon those established meanings.

     Scattered throughout Identity material are statements revealing its basic beliefs, but one must look closely to find them, for they may be hidden behind good, Biblical terms. Please note that as we point out various individual aspects of Anglo-Saxon theory, we cannot assume that all who identify with Identity hold all of these extreme theories. Putting DS1 into his own words, Davis says:5

As I am one of those whose theology is based strictly upon the Sovereignty of God (62, emp. added.)

     This dogmatic statement sounds very good, firm and trustworthy. Most Christians can make similar statements, but notice the use of the "Sovereignty of God:" Davis combines DS1 with DS15 & 16; develops their implications, and says,

This Seed of the Wicked One would be deliberately endowed by Almighty God within his genes, and set into motion in its programmed instincts and abilities, the overwhelming desire to murder, plunder and harass the Seed of the woman. Without the loving and direct intervention of God, as seen through the canon of Holy History, there is no doubt that this Wicked Seed would have been able to win over the Woman's seed. (52, emp. added.)

These children of Satan through [a supposed, continued, literal race of] Cain are a race of vipers, antichrists who have throughout history always been a curse to true Israel, the Children of God, because of the natural enmity between the two races... [DS16]6

     As a parenthesis, Identity defines the victorious Woman's Seed not as Christ, but as the Anglo-Saxon race. For upon the White Race is bestowed, says Identity, the blessings given to Abraham in Gen 12:3. [DS13] This absurd, heretical Anglo-Saxon theory is confirmed in its mind by its view of "Holy History:" "Only this race fulfills every detail of Biblical Prophecy and World History concerning Israel..." [DS15] (Though the thought itself is out of place at this point, we mention it to show that Davis simply gives his understanding to typical Anglo-Saxon theories)

     Holy History

     By strong statements concerning the Sovereignty of God not only does Anglo-Saxonism appear theologically sound, appealing to conservative Christians, but it correctly says that because history is subject to the Sovereign God, history is God's work. But the theory does not stop at its Biblical boundaries. Identity ignores Biblical boundaries and says that because history is the servant of God as it does God's bidding, it is holy, telling God's holy and just actions in time and space. At the very least, Identity thus exalts history to the level of Holy Scriptures. Consequently, its view of a supposed "canon of Holy History" permits Anglo-Saxonism to subject its theories to history over the canon of Holy Scripture. In other words, History is Holy because it is the work of a Holy God; therefore, Identity can safely understand Scripture in light of its perception of history. By its own admission, Anglo-Saxon theories do not find their roots in Holy Writ, but in "Holy History." Its foundation of sand is history, not His Story as Scripturally revealed.

     Willingly or not, Davis verbalizes DS 15 & 16 in his unBiblical attempt to build dogmatic theory upon a supposed "canon of Holy History:"

The key to understanding world and national events is found in the part played, in enmity, by those whose internal programming and spiritual loyalties lie with the Star of Moloch who are those of the Synagogue of Satan (59, emp. added. - See, Stars, 6 vs 5 pointed).

     "The key to understanding" events is observing the players in those events, "Holy History." Compare this idea of man to God's Word:

Ps 119:169 Let my cry come near before thee, O LORD: give me understanding according to thy word.

     The key to understanding events in time and space is understanding the Word of God.

     Thus we see that basically Anglo-Saxonism's theories are "Established in history. Verified by prophecy." 7

     Background

     Let us regress a little: H.W. Armstrong developed and effectively broadcast E.P.Ingersoll's argument presented in his 1886 book, "Lost Israel Found in the Anglo-Saxon Race or The Promises made to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, all fulfilled in the Anglo-Saxon Race." Ingersoll's subtitle clearly presents the foundation for his study, and reveals the basis of Anglo-Saxon theology: "Established in history. Verified by prophecy." 8

     Ingersoll's subtitle plainly identifies the major problem with Anglo-Saxonism, viz. his Anglo-Saxon theory was observed from history THEN verified by Scripture. Maybe Ingersoll's order of wording is coincidental, but it very adeptly describes Anglo-Saxonism's method of establishing its theories. Ingersoll's wording says that he was convinced from his observation of history of British-Israelism, then he sought Scripture to support his supposed view of history." Does this not reflect what has happened to the modern church? Pet theories are developed from history, then history and Scriptures are mingled together to develop "Biblical" theology.

     The Identity books this author has observed have a common trait: They use "secular" history to confirm their theories. They speak dogmatically in selected Scriptural areas, and then take that selective dogmatism into areas where the Word of God just does not speak: e.g.

Our Bible is a small section of human history seen in a special light. It is a very small segment of the total human story - with a window let into it. That section comprises the origin, organization and dispersion of Israel, and the coming of the Gospel - just that restricted portion of the flowing human story. And through the window of the Scriptures we are able to see God at work in history - the overtones, the underlying cause and significance, which secular history omits. What we see there prevents us evermore from reading history in the secular light. After our vision through that window, we evermore seek God in history... (The Covenant People, ę 1966, p 16).

     Anglo-Saxonism rightly establishes from Scripture that the Sovereign God controls every aspect of history, but it does not stop there. It departs far from Scripture in its theories; then flees to history to support those theories: "This theory," it would say, "is a fact because we believe history proves it, and history is inspired" because God controls it. Its areas of departure are legion, and far too numerous to mention.

     Generally, Anglo-Saxonism appears to base its most important and basic premise on "secular" history. Identity author Howard Rand, in his book The Covenant People, writes,

That is as far as written words of explanation can go. The fuller answer can only be found in the actual outworking in history of the purpose which was to be accomplished through the people so sovereignly chosen [by God]... 9

     Rand builds his case to a certain point from the Word of God. At that point, he admits that the Word of God will not lead to his desired conclusions: the White Race is Old Testament Israel. He then flees to his version of "Holy History" to confirm his suppositions about the White Race.. 10

Scripture And History

     Rand, and Anglo-Saxonism generally, appears to consider the Bible little more than a historical record to help him trace the White Race to his desired point, viz. the White Race is God's Elect people.

It is a thousand pities that the inclusive thought of God should have suffered in men's minds by being mixed with an exclusive thought of religion. Religion appears in the Bible only after man's unnatural, sinful departure from God's naturalness; that is, religion appears as an emergency element, a rescue force brought in because of abnormal human breakdown. And when it fulfills its part in the work of restoration, it will disappear (Ibid, p 2).

     Rand's brand of Anglo-Saxonism sees religion as an afterthought of the Father: "an emergency element, a rescue force..." But the honest Bible student knows that "religion" appeared before the foundation of the world, for then was Christ slain, Rev 13:8; "religion" appeared when God told Adam not to eat of the fruit of the tree, and "religion" will continue forever and ever as the redeemed worship and praise the Lamb forevermore. Moreover, Ezekiel's temple clearly spoke of the person of Christ and His body, the Church, Ez 40-48, John 2:19.

     Rand perversely uses unconditional election:

The Apostle Paul, in his Epistle to the Romans, also gives an answer to the question, Why? [is one and not another placed in the A-S races, ed] He said the chosen people still continued chosen even in this time because "the gifts and calling of God are not subject to change" they are absolute and unconditional (Rom. 11:29). There were no "ifs" in this great racial choice. It was not said, "If you obey me, you shall be my people." It was said, in effect, "You are my people and you shall obey me." And in that "shall" we may find a key to what we are going through today" (The Covenant People, pp 9, 10. See Branches & Rom 11:17).

     Certainly, we must say that the Lord alone chose our parents (Ps 127:3), but to use Rom 11:29 to teach this fact is clearly unBiblical. Paul is talking to the Gentiles, those outside the Jacob-Israel, v. 30, telling them that though Israel is their enemy for the gospel's sake at their present time, they [natural Israel] are beloved for the father's sakes. The gospel came to those outside Israel because Israel rejected it; therefore, though Israel was an enemy, his enmity against the gospel of grace through faith in Christ allowed the non-Israelite to be grafted into the root. V. 29 promises that, though at that time very hostile toward the gospel of Christ, Israel would be grafted back into the root from which he was broken off, v. 17. The reason Israel was broken off was because he, as does Identity at the end of the twentieth century, sought salvation through his natural birth, vv. 1-8. Moreover, Israel still had a distinct existence when Paul wrote Romans. Israel was not totally destroyed until AD 70 (See Josephus, q.v.).

A New Gospel Call

     Anglo-Saxonism is not new. In 1886, Ingersoll recounts how that while preparing a lecture on the Great Pyramid of Geezeh, he stumbled upon this statement by Prof. P. Smyth, Astronomer Royal to Scotland: "`The Anglo-Saxons being the identical descendants of the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel.'! so and so." Ingersoll contacted Smyth who sent him further material (majority of which was not Smyth's). Studying the material, Ingersoll became convinced and motivated,

...as by a divine injunction, "This gospel go thou and proclaim, till from on high thou art called home;" and I have not been disobedient to this heavenly vision. Not that there was any perceptible manifestation, as in the case of Saul of Tarsus, but the evidence of the identity of the Anglo-Saxons with the lost tribes of Israel became as convincing to me as the manifestation made to Saul, that Jesus Christ was he whom Saul was then persecuting; and from that time to this, I have endeavored to execute my commission to the utmost of my ability...11

     Does this not sound like a call to another gospel that Paul warned so strongly against, Gal 1; 2 Cor 11:3, 13, 14? Does the Word of God commission God's people to proclaim any gospel throughout the world other than the redemptive work of Christ and teaching all people to obey the Law-Word of God in every area of life and thought? Does God's Word call for the world-wide proclamation of any supposed identity of the Anglo-Saxons until time is no more?

The Great Pyramid

     James Hastings mentions Smyth as he traces ANGLO-ISRAELISM. Smyth's system of theology is consistent with the Anglo-Saxon system, history/prophecy. Smyth establishes his Anglo-Saxon theory from the history of the Great Pyramid:

The theory that the inhabitants of England are the descendants of the `lost' (?) Ten Tribes of Israel is held somewhat widely...

The earliest suggestions of an Israelitish ancestry of the English are to be found in John Sadler's Rights of the Kingdom (1649). These take the form of a series of parallels between English law and customs and those of the Hebrews and Jews. The name `Britain' itself is traced to a Phoenician source, Berat Anak (`The field of Tin and Led')...12

The modern movement owes its foundation to Richard Brothers (1757-1824), a half-pay officer of eccentric habits in the English navy. According to his account he was a Divinely appointed prophet. He described himself as a `nephew of the Almighty,' and claimed descent from David. Among his prophecies were those of the imminent restoration of Israel to the Holy Land, and the elevation of himself as prince of the Hebrews and ruler of the world. Brothers was confined as a lunatic, but succeeded in obtaining many admirers, among them Nathaniel Brassey Halket, M.P. for Lymington. The non-fulfillment of his prophecies sorely tried the faith of the believers, but through good and ill repute he retained the Loyalty of John Finlayson, previously a Scotch Lawyer with an extensive and lucrative practice... In 1840 the theory was adopted by John Wilson, who lectured and wrote widely on the subject... Other advocates in the nineteenth century were W. Carpenter (Israelites Found), F.R. A. Glover (England the Remnant of Judah), and C. Piazzi Smyth, the Astronomer-Royal of Scotland, who deduced from certain measurements of the Great Pyramid that the English were descended from the Lost Tribes. In 1871, Edward Hine published his identification of the British Nation with Lost Israel, of which a quarter of a million copies are said to have been sold. In the United States the leaders of the movement have been W.H. Poole and G. W. Greenwood. The theory has also been adopted to a slight extent on the continent, where, for instance, the hostility of the English to Napoleon and Russia, and the sympathy aroused by the Dreyfus cases are attributed to the cause... (Encyclopaedia of Religion & Ethics, vol. I, p 482)

     The Great Pyramid! What a wonderful, firm foundation upon which to build a system of theology. At least it is made of stone.

Basic Problem

     Thus the basic problem with Anglo-Saxon's theories and a reason it is so shattered and broken is readily apparent: it starts with personal observation and history, and then seeks prophetic support for what is observed. Consequently, its theology defies Scriptural systematization. Verbalizing DS15, Davis says,

Yes, they [non-Caucasians, ed] have been induced into making Christian professions, and to sing Christian hymns, but where is the national Christian fruit? (25)

     Hence Davis uses his personal observation to support Identity's contention that only the "White, Anglo-Saxon Race" can be "saved." [DS5, 8, 9, 12, 13, &c.] He condemns the myth:

that every race is fertile ground into which the so-called "spiritual seed of Christ can be sown and reap fruit." (25)

     Anglo-Saxonism argues from its personal observation of history that, in Davis' words, "Christianity has been the theology of the Caucasian peoples of the earth..." (25). It uses history to confirm Anglo-Saxonism's theory that it alone is the Elect, Godly Race. Davis develops DS15:

Only one race of people answers in every detail to the Bible picture of Israel in the "latter days," and that is the Caucasian race. They possess what Israel was to possess, and are doing what Israel was to do... (39)

     Identity, using its "canon of Holy History," appears to have sound Biblical authority to subject Scripture to history, but its system of theology, history/prophecy, is completely reversed from God's method, prophecy/history.

Established in Prophecy

     Verified by history! The ONLY WAY the Word of God can be properly understood is the way God presented it: God with us, Jesus, gives the example that must be followed. Though His method of teaching is clear throughout the totality of God's Word, Luke 24:4-48 is a quick and ready example: Christ says that proper theology is established in prophecy and verified in history. Moreover, throughout the earthly ministry of the Word of God, the Word consistently said, It is written to verify that which was taking place in history was already firmly established in prophecy. Whereas history/prophecy uses human understanding to examine God's workings in history, prophecy/history uses God's understanding to examine His workings in history. Thus any attempt to depart from God's order must lead to ungodly disorder. At almost every point, Identity builds on the sands of human understanding, observation, reason and secular history, thus leaving a great cloud of confusion and disorder behind (See Word Studies elsewhere in this document).

     Because the very foundation of Anglo-Saxonism is built upon the shifting sands of history instead of the rock of God's Word, we really need go no further in our study. But because this study was motivated by a request to review Davis' material, we will proceed. Using Davis' absurd statements which he builds upon Identity theories, we can easily see and apply the Truth to Identity's basic assumptions. 13

French Revolution

     In closing this chapter, let us make an important point. Anglo-Saxon theorists must change the meaning of the name "Saxon:" Contrary to Identity theory of a Godly "Saxon" race, the race was named for its clearly unChristian and warlike character.

     This author finds it interesting that a group calling itself "Jacobin- Son of Jacob..." was the arsonist that lit the fire of the French Revolution, which could be defined as the modern revolution and triumph of humanism and humanist law over Christianity and Christian law. The Jacobin Club argued that the enemy was at home, conspiracies were at work (in fact, it blamed conspirators for all the nation's ills while it fanned the fire), the Constitution was being undermined and that Patriots were being ignored. The "Son of Jacob's" call for Patriots to rise up and defend "the Republic" cost Louis the Sixteenth his head in January, 1793, his Queen, Mari Antoinette, her's in October, and untold tens of thousands of innocent people their's. Under the leading of the "Son of Jacob" Club, the religion of Patriotism replaced the church as Patriots were seen as the force to save the "Republic;" "Patriotism" was the new force for social change rather than the preaching of the gospel. Actually, the liberal church enabled the "Patriot Religion" to gain its popularity. 14

     Thus the "Son of Jacob" knew how to use the fears of the people - even fears of an invasion by a foreign army - and it rode the emotions, e.g. Patriotism, to gain its following and its goals.

     The true history of the White, Caucasian Race in anything but Godly.

 

Footnotes

1. This author found "Star Wars" very depressing. He did not believe that anyone could depart so far and clearly from Scripture as evidenced in "Star Wars" and still have good folks follow him into his void.Back

2. "Star Wars" is Davis' version of British-Israelism (B-I), Anglo-Saxonism (A-S), Christian-Identity, or "Armstrongism." Though this author has not studied the Identity movement thoroughly, he assumes that Davis departs farther from sound reason and common sense than it generally does.Back

3. Let us mention a couple points concerning Davis' supposed qualifications to correct 2000 years of proven Bible Doctrine: "I was given the Gift of Teaching..." &c. If one would follow his example and split hairs, then we must refer to Eph 4:11, And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers. Thus pastor-teacher is listed together, and Davis makes no profession of being an ordained pastor. (Davis is probably using 1 Co 12:28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues. Can we separate Ephesians' pastors from teachers based upon 1 Cor? Of course, we are not implying that all teachers must be pastors.) He also refers to receiving the Gift of Healing which could refer to his Doctorate in Naturopathic Medicine, probably as a student of the late Carey A. Reams, whom he mentions. Davis makes no claim to a background of theology or language, but classic economics, patriotism, Naturopathic Medicine and conspiratorial politics. (He knows how to use the language to appeal to patriots & those interested in conspiracies.) (40) Yet he presents himself as a language expert of the highest order, qualified to add to and take away from the Word of God and historically proven language studies such as Keil, Vines', Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament , Thayer, Webster, BDB, &c. Furthermore, he considers himself a theologian qualified to contradict some of the best men of the past several centuries, e.g. Hengstenberg, Oehler, Hodge, &c. Certainly, a background of theology or language is not necessary to understand and teach Scripture, for understanding comes from the Spirit, 1 Co 2:14. (Joseph Parker [1830-1902] missed the privilege of getting a college education. He "gathered his education by much reading, by attending lectures, by seizing upon any information, principle, or data he could come upon." Who Was Who.., pp 319, 320.) But no matter who the "Theologian" might be, his theology must be developed from the Word of God, not from "Holy History."

     As we mentioned in the Introduction, Anglo-Saxon theory was not developed from inspired Scripture, but from personal observations of history ("Established in history. Verified by prophecy"). Furthermore, unless one is very well-trained (self or advanced schooling) in Bible languages (Hebrew, &c.), he must rely on the works of others. Davis relies heavily upon his personal opinion of what a passage means to him, e.g. "suggested word meanings" (45), "in my opinion" (55), "I think" (50), "it seems to me" (48), "appears to me" (49), "as I see it" (49), &c, &c. In fact, there are very few pages in "Star Wars" where at least one similar phrase is not used. Clearly, "Star Wars'" assumptions are based upon Davis' personal view of history, as is Anglo-Saxon theory in general. Thus the entire Anglo-Saxon movement is built basically upon what appears to be taking place in history. All who examine outward appearances for the basis of theology are totally disqualified as any kind of a "Bible teacher." John 7:24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment. (According to the Word of God.) 2 Cor 5:12 For we commend not ourselves again unto you, but give you occasion to glory on our behalf, that ye may have somewhat to [answer] them which glory in appearance, and not in heart. It is a flagrant violation of Scripture to judge according to the appearance. We will deal with "fruit inspector" further on in this document. If the reader will be honest, he will find that the vast majority of Anglo-Saxon assumptions are based in its observation of history. Anglo-Saxonism presents apparently sound Biblical support for its assumptions from history, but its assumptions start from appearance, not Scripture. "Identity's" use of appearances to establish theories and its misuse of Scriptures certainly "Identifies" them NOT as defenders of God's Holy Word.Back

4. Ps 92:5, 6; Pr 12:15; 13:16; 18:2; 26:12; Ho 4:6. Paul said that he would not be a fool; for he would speak the truth, 2 Co 12:6. Obviously, Truth is not found in the Word of God; Truth is the Word of God, John 17:17, Col 1:5.Back

5. Both Davis and A-S theorists know proper terms to appeal to particular classes of readers, including "Patriots."Back

6. Eve's supposed sexual union with Satan is dealt with elsewhere in this document. See Eve. Back

7. History/prophecy, viz. the use of history to develop and/or confirm prophecy is a reason Davis' "Star Wars" is so shattered and disoriented with no apparent systematization. Davis' lack of systematization makes him difficult, if not impossible, to follow. Davis' "Star Wars" theory is clearly based upon his observation of history with many human illustrations, and THEN he seeks verification from prophecy. Back

8. True to Ingersoll's premise, History/Prophecy, p 75 says, "What people or nation soever, therefore, we shall find..." Thus unable to find Scriptural support for his theories & assumptions, he searches history.Back

9. The futile and fatal dangers of building doctrine upon any source other than the Word of God are discussed elsewhere in this document.Back

10. This author freely admits that the Word of God clearly tells us that the people of God are known by the outward working in history of the inner Spirit of God in their lives, Mat 7:20, 2 Co 5:17, Gal 6:15, &c. We are again confronted with the question, "Who is the present, literal Israel of God?" Is it the White Race? Is it those dwelling in Palestine? Or is it the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ redeemed from all nations and tongues and races? This question is answered elsewhere in the text.Back

11. Preface to Lost Israel Found, 1886, by E.P. Ingersoll. Ingersoll is only one of a long line of men who have sought the "Lost Tribes." "The belief that the `Lost Ten Tribes' of Israel lived and lives on as the Anglo-Saxon peoples is an ancient one."Back

12. "Its modern form as the Anglo- or British-Israelite movement is usually traced to John Sadler (1694) and the Richard Brothers a century later, but John Wilson's Our Israelitish Origin (1849) is epochal and the first Association was formed in 1879." Study-Graph, Survey of Major Cults, 1965, John H. Gerstner, Ph. D, Moody Press, Chicago 10, Il. Webster deals with parallels between different words and customs: see Webster in this document.Back

13. This author must admit that Davis was the most "chaotic" writer he has ever read. Though extremely difficult to make order out of his chaos, the following attempts to bring some order to his confusion. Back

14. Robespierre, The Voice of Virtue, Otto J. Scott, 1974, Mason & Lipscomb publishers, New York, pp 76, 114, 125, 148, 168, 215.Back

 

CHAPTER FOUR

 

Seedline Doctrine

Though many may have never heard of the "Christian Identity" movement, it appears to be gaining many followers, particularly in the West. Is the growing "Christian Identity" movement simply a curious aberration of Christianity, as those who follow that system would have us believe, or is it another religion in serious militancy against Biblical Christianity? Judge for yourself.

Though Identity's ideas have surfaced several times over the past centuries, it most recently reared its head in the '60s under the headship of H.W. and G.T. Armstrong and the "The World Wide Church of God." It was then known as "British-Israelism," or "Anglo-Saxonism."

One of the more corrupt and extreme aspect of the modern Identity faith is what is known as "Seedline Doctrine." Many who follow Identity will not admit to its extreme conclusion, "Seedline Doctrine." In fact, most Identity followers this pastor has met outright deny any connection with the "Seedline" aspect of their faith; however, if they will be consistent in their ideology that God has a special race of people on earth, they will reach the following conclusions:

[DS13] We believe God chose unto Himself a special race of people that are above all people upon the face of the earth (Deut. 7:6; Amos 3:2)...

[DS15] We believe the White, Anglo-Saxon, Germanic and kindred people to be God's true, literal Children of Israel...

[DS16] We believe in an existing being known as the Devil or Satan and called the Serpent (Gen. 3:1; Rev. 12:9), who has a literal "seed" or posterity in the earth (Gen. 3:15) commonly called Jews today (Rev. 2:9; 3:9; Isa. 65:15). These children of Satan (John 8:44-47; Matt. 13:38; John 8:23) through Cain (I John 3:12) are a race of vipers (Matt. 23:31-33), anti-Christs (I John 2:22, 4:3) who have throughout history always been a curse to true Israel, the Children of God, because of a natural enmity between the two races (Gen. 3:15), because they do the works of their father the Devil (John 8:38-44), and because they please not God, and are contrary to all men (I Thes. 2:14-15), though they often pose as ministers of righteousness (II Cor. 11:13-15). The ultimate end of this evil race whose hands bear the blood of our Savior (Matt. 27:25) and all the righteous slain upon the earth (Matt. 23:35), is Divine judgement (Matt. 13:38-42, 15:13; Zech. 14:21).

[DS17] We believe that the Man Adam (A Hebrew word meaning: ruddy, to show blood, flush, turn rosy) is the father of the White Race only. As a son of God (Luke 3:38), made in His likeness (Gen. 5:1), Adam and his descendants, who are also the children of God (Psalm 82:6; Hos. 1:10; Rom. 8:16; Gal. 4:6; I John 3:1-2), can know YHVH God as their Father, not merely as their creator. Adamic man is made trichotomous, that is, not only of body and soul, but having an implanted spirit (Gen. 2:7; I Thes. 5:23; Heb. 4:12) giving him a higher form of consciousness and distinguishing him form all the other races of the earth (Deut. 7:6, 10:15; Amos 3:2).

[DS18] We believe that as a chosen race, elected by God (Deut. 7:6, 10:15; I Peter 2:9), we are not to be partakers of the wickedness of this world system (I John 2:15; James 4:4; John 17:9, 15, 16), but are called to come out and be a separated people (II Cor. 6:17; Rev. 18:4; Jer. 51:6; Exodus 33:16; Lev. 20:24). This includes segregation from all non-white races, who are prohibited in God's natural divine order from ruling over Israel (Deut. 17:15, 28:13, 32:8; Joel 2:17; Isa. 13:14; Gen. 1:25-26; Rom. 9:21). Race-mixing is an abomination in the sight of Almighty God, a satanic attempt meant to destroy the chosen seedline, and is strictly forbidden by His commandments (Exo. 34:14-16; Num. 25:1-13; I Cor. 10:8; Rev. 2:14; Deut. 7:3-4; Joshua 23:12-13; I Kings 11:1-3; Ezra 9:2, 10-12; 10:10-14; Neh. 10:28-30, 13:3, 27; Hosea 5:7; Mal. 2:11-12).[1]

Thus the extreme (consistent?) Identity faith believes that both the Word of God and redemption were given through and restricted to a particular "Seedline," viz., the "Seedline" of Adam, the White, Caucasian Race. The logical conclusion of "Seedline" theory is that all non-White races are excluded from the redemptive work of Christ.

Certainly, Christians must agree that the Redeemer, Christ, was given through the line of Adam, but Identity departs far from God's Word: "Adam is the father of the White Race only." Thus it falsely teaches there was/is another race besides Adam's. Identity claims: 1) Christ, as the Kinsman-Redeemer, only died for members of the literal, twelve tribes of Israel; 2) salvation must be by grace through faith, but grace is defined as being born a White person of the literal twelve tribes of Israel who alone are capable of exercising saving faith. Confusing the literal promises to the Old Testament nation of Israel with the spiritual promises to the New Testament Israel of God (Gal 6:16), Identity's theory that only literal descendants of Old Testament Israel make up the New Testament Elect forces it to seek any possible supposed connection with the Old Testament tribes of Israel if there is to be any "salvation." [2]

Like many today who profess to believe God's Word, Identity divides Scripture into many small, unrelated and unconnected parts, e.g., it uses Rom 9:4, 5 & 7 as proof texts while avoiding v. 6, For they [are] not all Israel, which are of Israel. Thus it randomly picks and chooses the passages it needs to build its religion upon. Nor does Identity refer to the rest of Romans 9 where v. 30 clearly tells us that the righteousness of God is of faith, not of race as vainly claimed by Identity. Moreover, Christ died for the ungodly regardless of what race they are members, Rom 5:6. [3]

Identity's "Seedline Doctrine" merits serious attention, for, though it is not often connected with Identity, it is a basic tenet of the Identity religion. We will start at the beginning, and follow Identity's supposed "Seedline Doctrine" through the flood. (Obviously, not all who claim the Identity religion follow it to its logical conclusions, so they do not hold all its extreme views.) Commonly, Identity's authors corrupt words' meanings to support their theories. The above doctrinal statements strongly imply that: first, members of the White Race alone are the literal sons of God through Adam with "a higher form of consciousness" than other peoples of the world, and second, there had to be at least two additional races in the Garden■sons of Adam, ancestors of Cain (fathered by Satan through Eve) and the ancestors of the Negro.

In the Beginning - Adam

Identity uses a supposed word meaning for Adam to confirm its theory that Adam is the father of the White race only. Using Strong's #119 for Adam■"a Hebrew word meaning, `ruddy, to show blood, flush, turn rosy'■Identity's religion teaches that only the "blushing" race descended from Adam. However, a search for #119 will reveals only ten times #119 is used in the Old Testament, and none refer to the man Adam. Consequently, in order to support its theory, Identity must violate all manner of truth in word meanings.

According to the 1828 Webster: Adam, "The word signifies form, shape, or suitable form; hence, species." In addition, there are two interchangeable Strong's numbers for Adam, #120 & # 121:

#120: The ASV and RSV translates the same with notable exceptions. In Job 31:33 the RSV obscures the reference to Adam. Although the etymology of 'adam cannot be explained with certainty (cf. TDOT, I, p. 78), the word probably relates to the original ruddiness of man's complexion (cf. F. Maas, 'adam TDOT, I, pp. 78-79). This word for man has to do with man as being in God's image, the crown of creation...

#121: 'adam also refers to generic man as the image of God and the crown of creation or is a personal name... In the first three chapters of Gen there is a wordplay on man, mankind, the first man `Adam. 'adam connotes man in the image of God as to: soul or spirit (indicating man's essential simplicity, spirituality, invisibility, immortality), physical powers or faculties (the intellect and will with their functions), intellectual and moral integrity (true knowledge, righteousness, and holiness), body (as a fit organ of the soul sharing its immortality, and as the means through which man exercises dominion), and dominion over the lower creation. [4]

TWOT gives another word under its root word, Adam: 'adama, or ground, land, earth:

...Originally this word signified the red arable soil... The Bible makes much of the relationship between man ('adam) and the ground ('adama).

There is thus "ruddiness" in Adam's complexion, for he was taken from `adama,' the red arable soil. But contrary to Identity's contention, #119, "to show blood, flush, turn rosy," is not used to define Adam. Identity continually confronts us with suggested or imagined word meanings to support its faith. God help us when people follow this kind of vivid imagination.

Three Race Theory

Though [DS16] and [DS17] do not explicitly say three races, they clearly depend upon at least three races in the Garden. Though the Kingdom-Identity doctrinal statement failed to account for the three races, a popular patriot writer and well known Identity writer, Nord William Davis, Jr., attempts to develop and defend the three-race theory:

So beginning in Genesis 4 and 5, we see that mankind, so far as the historical players of the Bible are concerned, are divided along two distinct lines... Half this Biblical group is descended from Cain and the other half descended from Adam. This is one fact that most Christians never notice when they read their Bible without careful study... The half from Cain, Almighty God makes very plain, are forever barred from salvation...

The first presupposition...: In Genesis One there are two distinct racial lines set forth upon the Earth, and each of them God said was good. One of these, distinguished as the 'Beast of the Earth,' comprised the Negro and Mongoloid races who do not have the ability to show blood in their face. The other is the racial line from Adam who were clearly distinguished with the ability to blush, this can only be the Caucasian race... a remnant became the people of Jacob-Israel..., The Called from the foundation of the world. [5]

Starting where [DS16]-[DS18] leave off, Davis attempts to trace Identity's conjectured literal three races from the beginning, Eden. No doubt, he is compelled to develop Anglo-Saxonism's seed theory because he believes that "`rightly dividing the Word of God' includes as its basic and primary function rightly dividing the peoples of that word" into racial groups.

Davis builds his Identity "Garden" defense not in the Word of God, but from observing the various insects around his home in North Carolina. Because each bird and insect faithfully does its own preprogrammed thing and never infringes on or mixes with the "mental programming" of another, "would we not be foolish to think that he [the Creator] has done no similar work in the mental software of mankind, also?" Davis then defends the two races in the Garden theory, viz., "With the concept of the Bees, Birds and Beasts held firmly in mind..." [6] Thus he holds Identity's line that the Negro is not of the line of Adam. Davis is quite dogmatic in repeating Identity theory, viz., Cain, the first child born, was "fathered by Satan." Then Davis traces Anglo-Saxonism's assumed two distinct, physical, racial lines from Adam and Satan [DS16].

The first line is the Godly and pure racial line from Adam through Seth and later through Abraham and Jacob. Identity develops this line into Jacob-Israel (the twelve sons), the holy, elect nation of God that, as postulated by Identity, alone was given the Law and that alone Christ came to redeem as its Kinsman-Redeemer, i.e., the Anglo-Saxon race. [DS9] It is the "stock of people Christ came to seek and to save," (16) consisting of the only people to whom the Old and New Testaments are directed. (13) Identity identifies Jacob-Israel, not Christ, as the Seed of the Woman. (Ibid.) Furthermore, Identity claims that Jacob-Israel, the Anglo-Saxon race, will ultimately destroy from off the earth the Serpent's Seed, Esau-Edom, fathered by Satan. [DS16], [DS23]

The Identity religion's basis for a supposed "Seedline Doctrine" is its thoroughly unGodly, clearly unBiblical, perverse presumption that Satan was the literal father of Cain through an affair with Eve; Davis defends [DS16] thusly: Cain is not listed as a son of Adam in Gen 4:16-24. (16) [7] Davis development of Identity's heresy makes its evil readily apparent:

Nowhere in the Bible can you find it said that Cain, the acquired, was in the family or lineage of Adam. So that you will not miss this important fact, a triple witness of Adam's lineage is given in Genesis 5:3, 1 Chronicles 1:1, and Luke 3:38. Serious Bible teachers agree that Cain and Abel were twins, and the Word of God agrees, for in Genesis 4:3-4 the two boys came of age at the same time and presented their offerings on the same day. However, carefully examining Genesis 4:1, the Bible says that Adam 'knew' his wife and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, "I have gotten a man from The Lord." Even though Cain was her firstborn and she thought him at first to be her promised seed, she later acknowledges that it was Abel, not Cain, who was her promised seed. Do you now see why Scripture was written in that manner? It does not imply that Cain was Adam's first son, but if Abel was Adam's son, then Cain, the acquired was Nachash-Satan's son.

St. John states and it was recorded in 1 John 3:12-13 as: "Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he Him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous. Marvel not, my brethren, if the world hate you."

The word "of" in the Greek, clearly means that Cain was a literal seed of Satan. There is no other way to properly understand these verses. It cannot mean, as some suggest, some form of "spiritual" Satanic seed, a concept that is out of character with the whole character of the cannon of Scripture. (51-52) [Emp. his.] [8]

No Documentation

No documentation is offered for "of" clearly meaning "that Cain was a literal seed." Indeed, "of" is a Greek word: "The primary sense is departing, issuing or proceeding from; but this sense had been modified by usage." [9] Furthermore, Davis pulls his quoted passage completely out of its context to build his pretext: 1 John 3 is contrasting children of God... and the children of the devil..., v. 10. Accordingly, using Davis' Greek "expertise," we must also say that the children of God are literally and physically begotten "of" God. Of course, the logical conclusion of saying that the White, Caucasian, Aryan Race is the only Godly race would border on saying that God is its literal Father. But [DS17] holds that the Caucasian, Aryan Race is of Adam through Seth. Consistent the Identity religion is not! [10]

Furthermore, Scriptural genealogy follows the Godly line unless there is specific reason to follow the ungodly line, e.g., identifying the enemies of God's people. Therefore, there was no reason to list Cain as the son of Adam in Davis' Scripture reference. Moreover, the Word of God could not be clearer as the Spirit says, And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord, Gen 4:1. Also, the Lord Himself asked Cain, Where is Abel thy Brother? The Lord recognized both Cain and Abel as being sons of Adam and Eve. It takes an expert to make all mean something other than all, but there are many such modern "Bible scholars" with tremendous followings. [11]

As we see, this religion's second conjectured racial line is an ungodly line of Satan through Eve and later through Esau. This line is developed into Esau-Edom, an unholy, non-elect nation which can never be saved: they are forever at enmity with Almighty God Himself. [DS16] It is useless to present the gospel to this line of people, for God "literally condemned from birth as a matter of race" the line of Cain. (13) However, not all who hold the Identity faith will go as far as to say that members of Non-Caucasian races cannot be saved. We are dealing herein with an extreme, showing the antiGod absurdity of the overall faith.

Though the Lord says that Israel killed Him (Jn 7:19), Identity holds that a non-Israelite race, i.e., Cain, crucified Christ. [DS16] Identity traces two supposed distinct races of people to the present time, but we will not. The foundation, or center, of the theology does not hold; therefore, there is no need to examine what is built on the broken foundation. We only pursue enough to reveal Identity's theories in the area of the Seed.

Beast

In [DS17], Identity presents at least two races in the Garden, Adam's and Satan's; therefore, there must be an explanation for the non-Whites mentioned in [DS14], [DS17] & [DS18]. Reproduced below is Davis' development of the third race in the Garden; it clearly shows how ludicrous are Identity's unGodly theories. Admittedly, not everyone identified with the Identity religion holds these extreme positions, but if the followers of that faith are consistent with the "Special Race Before God" theory, they must develop a similar reprobate faith. [12]

Davis deals with Identity's non-White race "problem" by corrupting another word, beast. (45) He develops an idea that because Jonah 3:8 uses the word beast in such a way as to indicate that beasts have sins and hands, the word must refer to something or someone other than a four footed "beast." Thus in his mind, and maybe even to his readers', he changes the obvious teaching of the Spirit in the area of "all men" to support a very corrupt idea concerning Negroes, e.g., they are excluded from redemption because they are less than human:

The original Paleo-Hebrew word here could be interpreted as a large animal of either the two or four-lagged variety. In this case, because these beasts have hands, are sinners, cover themselves with sackcloth and ashes, and cry unto the Lord, they must be men which are identified elsewhere in Scripture as one of the various versions of beast such as chay, chevah, cheyva, and cheveh. The true Biblical meaning of beast, whether as behemeh or chay, being a non-white person... (45)

While there are several variations of this word, Chay, we will use Chay for this race of non-white people mentioned throughout Scripture in these lessons but let the student realize that I am aware of the variations... (46) [13]

Elsewhere, Davis follows the Identity faith by implying that the non-Whites were never subject to God's Law; therefore, they would not be sinners, for "sin is transgression of God's Law..." [DS9], [DS19] & [DS20]. But using Jonah 3:8 as he does above, Davis says that the non-White races are subject to God's Law. This pastor is without words to describe the inconsistencies. Defending [DS17] of the religion, Davis continues his assault against God, God's Word, the English language, human intelligence and common sense:

As you read the amazing story of Genesis, Chapter 3, there is no mention made of any surprise or fear on the part of Eve when confronted with the debating Chay proposing something new, exciting and forbidden. I like to think [emp. added, ed.] of this as one of the supervising Chay, selected by Adam because of some extra ability and talent. He could spend his time talking to the Mistress of the Estate while the other Chay did the work with Adam checking up on the Garden. Can you picture this? Doesn't it make more sense than a "talking snake?" (45. Emp added.) [14]

The word subtle here [Gen 3:1, ed.] does not mean clever as we think of it in English. The Hebrew word, aruwm, could be cunning in an evil sense, but most scholars, such as Ferrar Fenton define the word as "more impudent," as a person who does not know his place or station in life. You might also define it as "cocky" or lacking in modesty. So, if you mix immodest, cocky, contemptuous, cunning and impudent into one Hebrew word, then you can imagine what "subtle" means in this verse. See, if the thrust of the Church is going to be that all men are of the same blood, then they do not want you to think of Nachash as being a cocky, impudent Negro, but as merely a cunning snake who learned to talk. What nonsense? (Ibid. Emp. his.) [15]

Negro

In Lesson Seven, Davis continues Identity's war against God, developing [DS16]'s multiple races in the Garden. Though his theory appears extreme for Identity, is it, or is he simply developing the logical implications of that religion (that others fail to do, we will add)? When Identity says that Adam is the father of the White Race only, it must account for the non-White races. [16] Identity fails to account for those races with its supposed sexual union between Eve and Satan, for that union only produced one more race in the Identity religion. Davis solves the problem by introducing a non-White race into the Garden before the fall. He says that Nachash was the name of a Negro (Beast, or member of Davis' "Chay" race) who had Identity's supposed sexual affair with Eve. Actually, according to Davis, Satan used a Black man's body to implant his (Satan's) seed in Eve, resulting in Cain and his line. Therefore, instead of Eve eating of the forbidden fruit, she committed an act of adultery with this "Chay." Defending [DS16], Davis continues to build on its ruined foundation (by the way, he follows closely Scofield's notes for Isa 14):

Satan lost that war (Isa 14:12-32 & was cast out of heaven, ed.). So, the very first thing he did on earth was to seduce Adam's wife... Because of this act, God informed Satan that He would put a hatred between the children of Eve and his children springing forth from Cain... One group, generally those who come out of Evangelical Arminianism... teach that while Eve's Seed was a physical one in order to produce The lamb of God without spot or blemish, Satan's seed, they insist, is only a "spiritual seed." Cain was physical, they admit, but the motive that drives his genes is only spiritual. In contrast, I hold that both seeds had to be physical and that Satan did actually seduce Eve and bore his only physical son by her. (76, 77)

To use Davis' words, "What nonsense!" His theory supporting [DS16] is so obviously contrary to Scripture and good common sense that this pastor considers it a waste of God-given time to even read it. [17] He continues his diatribe against God: "I like to picture Eve..." (77) Thus though his picture of Eve's sin defends [DS16], it is a product of his own wild, vivid and corrupt imagination.

Leaving no stone unturned defending the Identity religion, Davis follows his "suggested word meanings" for beasts into Gen 9:5-6, beast■#2416, Chay. Because it makes no sense to Davis for God to require the shed blood of man from the hands of a beast, beast must, therefore, be talking of a person. Davis deduces from these verses, and many others, that the word beast means the non-Adamic, Negro race: [18]

As we have stated in the footlight (his version of footnotes, ed.), the best word (in Davis' opinion, not facts. ed.) for these Negro people would be Chay, Strong's Hebrew word #2416. However, a more generic word for Beast,... are from the Hebrew word behemah... (46)

Notice the remarkable, unique ability to change words with absolutely no Scriptural authority. Talk about "subtle trickery of language..."!!! (46. A term he uses against those who disagree with him.) Thus with amazing absurdity, Davis uses his unique ability to change the Jonah 3:8 word beast, #929, boehemah {be-hay-maw'}, to the Gen 1:25 word beast, #2416, chay {khah'-ee}. But Davis is not the first to use such "subtle trickery of language." Gen 3:1 best describes his kind of exegesis of God's Word. [19] Though the absurdity of [DS16] defies answering, we will attempt to Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

1) Brown-Driver-Briggs (BDB) gives not one hint that the word beast can refer to anything other than an animal:

#929 impeded in speech, tongue-tied; n.f. beast, animal, cattle. 1. of living creatures other than man... 2. opp. also to wild beasts... 3. rarely of wild beasts, esp. carnivora... #2416 n.f. living thing, animal (Zinj. wild beast...) 1. animal, as a living, active being... 2. life, only in late poetry... 3. appetite, activity of hunger... 4. revival, renewal... [20]

Davis, contrary to accepted understanding of a word's first mention, bases his meaning of both beast and cattle in Gen 1:25 upon his personally developed "suggested word meaning" for beast in Jonah 3:8. Thus Davis establishes his word meanings from passages that, in his mind, might suggest his "presupposition" that there are two distinct racial lines. (46) Then he goes back to apply his "suggested word meanings" in areas that are totally contrary to any good and proper understanding.

The work of Christ reverses the work of Adam, 1 Cor 15:21-23. Paul says that whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now, Rom 8:22, showing that the present conditions on earth are unnatural, brought about by sin. The results of sin include every creature, as the margin says, including the animal creation. Until now refers to the time of Christ, the Messiah. Christ broke the curse, including the curse against the animal kingdom, setting the captives free.

2) Gentiles are identified as the wild beasts of the field, and are contrasted with the sheep of Israel. [21]

The fact that peace prevails in the animal world, and also peace between man and beast, is then attributed to the universal prevalence of the knowledge of God, in consequence of which that destructive hostility between the animal world and man, by which estrangement and apostasy from God were so often punished, have entirely come to an end. (Keil, VII.287.)

3) Through Peter's vision, the Spirit identified the non-Israelite Gentiles with the wild beasts of the field, Acts 10. The apostles were of the various tribes of Israel; therefore, the Gentile nations were considered not of the 12 tribes. Cornelius might have even been Anglo-Saxon; we do know that he was a Roman centurion at Caesarea. [22] With Cornelius' conversion, the division between "Jew" (sheep) and "Gentile" (beast) was destroyed, Acts 11; Eph 2:18. Thus the wild wolf and the lamb lay down together, Isa 11:6; 65:25. [23]

Flood

Identity's [DS16]'s three distinct races in the Garden, Adam's son, Satan's son with Eve and a non-White race (theorized by Davis as the beasts of the garden) presents a problem, viz., the Flood. If universal, as God says, all races were removed from the face of the earth except Adam's race through Noah. So Davis deals with the Flood issue. [24] Davis' defense of [DS16] & [DS17] easily shows the unGodly foolishness of the Identity religion. The attack against God's Word concerning a worldwide flood must be maintained by the Identity faithful in order to bring the "race of vipers" through the flood, [DS16]. [25]

Obviously, the flood wiped out all of Cain's race, inundating [DS16] & [DS17], for only the line of Noah and the four wives came through the flood. Though not likely, the wives could have been from the line of Cain, but we can only speculate. A worldwide flood would destroy Identity's "race of viper;" hence, Identity's faithful must use human reasoning, secular history, ridicule and mockery in their attempt to debunk the Spirit's account of a worldwide flood:

If the Flood of Noah's day covered the planet Earth, swirling around for a year, it would have drowned not only the offspring of Angels with Adam's daughters, but also Satan's Seed that was to have enmity with the Woman's Seed. Do you see the conspiracy here? If Noah's family, consisting of eight people, were all that was left of mankind on the planet Earth, and they were all pure racial stock of Adam, then not only were Satan's seed lost forever, but also Chay's children (i.e., Negro, ed.). Has your preacher, who keeps telling you this worldwide Flood story, ever suggested that Chay's children were driven two by two, or really seven by seven, onto the Ark with the animals? No, he could not bring himself to teach that. Then, is he a secret evolutionist suggesting... This (doctrine of only one race emerging on earth as the result of a world flood, ed.) is pure nonsense and makes the Word of God of none effect. Think of all you have learned, and we are still only about five pages into the Bible. (56) [26]

Not one to allow the Spirit's teaching concerning Noah's worldwide flood to stand in his way, Davis flees to his "Holy History" to defend [DS16]:

Twenty years ago, I had a lecture entitled, "Missing the Boat," in which I set forth the clear facts, from the Bible and secular ancient history available in any encyclopedia, that the Flood of Noah's time was only local in nature... and unfortunately [the worldwide Noah's Flood story is, ed] believed by unthinking adults. (55. Emp. added.)

Davis uses name-implications, "symbology," and signs to help sustain Identity's contradiction of the Spirit's teaching concerning Noah's worldwide flood: "The Wicked Seed, known by their symbols and signs..." (56) Thus he uses not God's Word, but supposed symbols, signs and encyclopedias in Identity's vain attempt to overthrow the Word of God and trace a theorized race of people. What would one expect from "secular" encyclopedias written and published by avowed humanists militating against God and His Word? Obviously, their goal is to cast the law of God away and overthrow God, Ps 2. Those who debunk the Word of God concerning the flood conspire with and are joint heirs with the ungodly of Ps 2.

Davis also uses secular history■"any encyclopedia"to trace Egypt's history back to 3001 BC. He concludes, therefore, based upon secular, anti-God history, that "the Flood never touched Egypt, and since that is true, Noah's Flood was not worldwide." (55) But Davis fails to mention that one of Noah's grandsons was named Mizraim, Gen 10. The computer Bible program, Online Bible, gives this definition of Mizraim, Gen 10:6:

04714 Mitsrayim {mits-rah'-yim} dual of 04693; TWOT - 1235; AV - Egypt 586, Egyptian 90, Mizraim 4, Egyptians + 01121 1; 681 n pr loc Egypt = `land of the Copts' 1) a country at the northeastern section of Africa, adjacent to Palestine, and through which the Nile flows adj Egyptians = `double straits' 2) the inhabitants or natives of Egypt. Emp. added.)

Online Bible closely follows, without the Scripture references, BDB, p 595. So Davis, defending the Identity religion, not only changes Scripture to develop [DS16], but he also changes secular history, viz., Egypt was clearly settled by Mizraim, a son of Ham, a son of Noah, Ps 105:23, Israel also came into Egypt; and Jacob sojourned in the land of Ham. According to the Word of God, Egypt did not exist before Noah's flood. [27]

Kingdom Parables Corrupted

Logically, Identity's theory that the righteousness of God is by race must then apply the "Kingdom Parables" to the Anglo-Saxon race. Note how Identity wrest...scriptures unto its own destruction (2 Pet 3:16), the destruction of its followers and to the destruction of the clear teachings of God's Word. Identity author C.O. Stadsklev writes:

According to the prophets and the Lord's kingdom parables the identity of the Israel people was to be hidden until the time of the harvest, and the harvest is identified in the Scripture as being the end of the age, or the last days. Many people wonder why the truth that the Anglo-Saxons are Israel has not been more generally preached and taught. The answer is that according to prophecy their identity was to be hidden until the end of time... [28]

We must admit that Stadsklev is consistent with Identity's theory that only the Anglo-Saxon race is God's elect people, [DS13]. A basic fallacy of the Identity religion is its teaching that God's election is according to race rather than grace. Those committed to that religion "leave no stone unturned," searching Scripture, history, circumstances, opinions, &c., for any suggestion that might confirm their faith. Their preconceived faith determines what they find from their research just as Evolutionists' and Abortionists' preconceived faith determines what they find from their research.

Again, let the reader be reminded that not all identified with the Identity religion will follow it to its logical conclusion, the "Seedline Doctrine." (Of course, we must say the same about the Christian religion: Not all who identity with it will follow it to its logical conclusion.) However, to his credit, Davis (and Stadsklev) does follow and develop Identity's logical implications. Of necessity, Identity's "Seedline Doctrine" must account for at least three races in the Garden.

Limited Atonement

Limited Atonement Corrupted, we must add. Following Davis' "thought-theology" the best we can through his dense fog, we see him develop Identity's theory that Christ only came to save the Godly seed, Jacob-Israel, [DS5], &c. Developing Identity's corruption of Limited Atonement, it is useless to present the gospel to the ungodly seed, Esau-Edom. (Esau-Edom is developed elsewhere in Identifying Identity.) Remember, Identity defines the Godly Seed as the physical lineage of Abraham and the twelve sons of Israel, and defines the ungodly seed as the physical line of Satan through his and Eve's son, Cain. [DS13] Davis says it thusly:

There is not the first exception (to forbidding preaching to the nations outside Jacob-Israel, ed.). You will look in vain to find any suggestion of authorization that this Israelite kindred are to send missionaries or teach the truths of Almighty God to any of the heathen living around and among them. Quite the contrary, for Holy Writ is clear that God's Holy Nation was not to have anything whatever to do with these peoples... (16)

The Gospel Truth

No Scriptural support is offered for not preaching the gospel to any but Jacob-Israel. Moreover, several Biblical examples are ignored: 1) Jonah. The Lord not only commanded Jonah to go to Nineveh, that great city of Gentile pagans, but the Lord chastised him for refusing to take the message of repentance to them. Furthermore, the Lord clearly rebuked Jonah over his anger that the Lord called to repentance those outside of Israel; 2) not all of David's mighty men were Israelites, e.g., Uriah, the Hittite, 2 Sam 23:39; 3) Peter's vision, Acts 10. When Peter was called before the church at Jerusalem to answer for taking the gospel to those outside Israel, Peter defended his action from the prophet John the Baptist that the Gentiles are also granted repentance unto life, Acts 11:16, 18, [29] and 4) the Spirit expressly tells us who makes up the redeemed of all ages:

Re 5:9, And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation. [30]

Furthermore, Paul points out that Scripture itself foresaw that God would justify the heathen through faith, and points to the promised blessing to Abraham (Gen 12:1-3) as proof that people from every tongue and nation would be included in the call, Gal 3:8. The Spirit speaks so clearly that the redeemed are from every language group and nation under heaven that one would think He knew teachers would appear in the last days saying that salvation is by race and not by grace. [31]

Evidently, defending Identity heresy that the Word of God was, is and must go only to Jacob-Israel, Davis claims that both Ruth and Tamar were actually from Jacob-Israel's race:

...Ruth, the "Moabitess", further investigation establishes that she was of the stock of Israel living in Moab... (16, emp. added.) Judah's out-of-wedlock affair with this Israelite young widow (i.e., Tamar)... (20)

No investigative scripture is offered for either claim, but typical of Identity style, he uses personal illustrations for confirmation. Though implying that she was a Canaanite, Gen 38 does not give Tamar's lineage. However, she was clearly not a young Israelite widow, for Judah was one of the twelve sons of Israel. For Tamar to have been an Israelite widow, her father would have had to been one of Judah's brothers or his own father, Jacob. But the Spirit does speaks expressly that Ruth was a Moabite; thus she was not connected with Israel other than by marriage. We should also mention Rahab was a Canaanite harlot. Have those of the Identity religion placed their brains in neutral?

Race Mixing

Though socially, practically and Scripturally unwise to intermarry between races, the Scriptures only forbid marriage of incest (e.g., brother/sister, stepmother/son, and close relatives), of the offending party in divorce and between believers and unbelievers, 2 Cor 6:14. See [DS18].

Bastard

Davis defends and develops the Anglo-Saxon position that "Race-mixing is an abomination...," by saying that bastard,

...does not mean an illegitimate child... but... literally and positively meaning mongrel, i.e. a child of the union of an Israelite and any of the non-Israelites..." (24)

Furthermore, he implies that fornication is union between a member of Jacob-Israel and a member of Esau-Edom, i.e., interracial sex. (55) [32] The truth of the matter:

Bastard, - n.m. bastard, specif. child of incest... 1. lit. bastard, Dt 23.3. 2. perh. fig. coll., of mixed population Zc 9.6. (BDB, #4464, p 561.)

Bastard, - Only found in D 23:3 [H 3], it is used of an illegitimate child who is refused entrance to the congregation of the Lord until the tenth generation. Zc 9:6 may refer to an individual, but more likely it figuratively depicts the mixed population of Ashdod. It is possible that the Deut reference also refers to a child of mixed parentage - Hebrew and pagan. (TWOT, #1174.)

Davis builds a doctrine upon one phrase pulled from a study as he did with church. But let us consider a law and an illustration that destroys [DS18]: The law permitted an Israelite soldier to marry a non-Israelite woman, either a widow or virgin, Deut 21:10-14. This clearly tells us that contrary to Anglo-Saxon belief, purity of the blood line of the Israelite race was not a significant factor under the law; rather, the emphasis was on the purity of faith. In fact, the non-Israelite woman was given the full protection and benefits of the law. [33]

There are many illustrations that destroy anti-God notions about "bastard," but we will only mention one: Moses. According to Davis' theory, Moses was a fornicator and his children bastards. Moses, an Israelite, married a non-Israelite woman, Zipporah, a daughter of Reuel, priest of Midian, Gen 2:21, 22. Midian was a son of Abraham and Keturah; he was not, accordingly, one of the "Ten Tribes" of Israel, Gen 25. In addition, Moses married an Ethiopian woman for a second wife, Num 12:1. [34] Thus neither of Moses' wives were of the 12 tribes of Israel.

Consequently, the foundation of Identity's "Seedline Doctrine" is so thoroughly broken and plowed up by the inspired Word of God that it is useless to spend time examining the pieces of the wreckage of the building. But we could justify examining the ruins of Identity's building with a comparison to an inspector examining ruins to see why the building failed and as a warning to others. [35]

Pastor Ovid Need, Jr.

[The above is from chapter IV of Identifying Identity, by Pastor Need.]


End Notes

1. From a doctrinal statement by Kingdom-Identity Ministries, PO Box 1021, Harrison, Ark. 72602. We added the numbers for ease of reference: Quoted above are paragraphs [DS16], [DS17] & [DS18]. This doctrinal statement seems consistent with general Identity faith. Throughout this essay, we will place paragraph references, [DS#].

2. Though many have tried, all attempts to trace any supposed remnant of the twelve tribes of Jacob are totally and utterly futile. See The Wars of the Jews, Josephus, Bk VI.Ch VI.3. The archives were burned; therefore, it is now impossible for anyone to trace his lineage to Jacob as was required in Ezra 2:62. We must admit that God did chose to Himself a special race of people: the redeemed of all ages. This author is amazed at how completely Identity avoids the Book of Galatians. "The earliest suggestions of an Israelitish ancestry of the English are to be found in John Sadler's Rights of the Kingdom (1649). These take the form of a series of parallels between English law and customs and those of the Hebrews and Jews. The name `Britain' itself is traced to a Phoenician source, Berat Anak (`The field of Tin and Led')..." "Its modern form as the Anglo- or British-Israelite movement is usually traced to John Sadler (1694) and the Richard Brothers a century later, but John Wilson's Our Israelitish Origin (1849) is epochal and the first Association was formed in 1879." Study-Graph, Survey of Major Cults, 1965, John H. Gerstner, Ph. D, Moody Press, Chicago 10, IL.

3. Identity's answer, no doubt, is that only the White race is capable of saving "faith." If Identity remains true to its contention that the only method of conversion is through faith in the finished work of Christ for the repentant sinner, with nothing added nor removed, then this pastor would have a difficult time saying it does not offer genuine conversion. This Baptist pastor knows a great many Baptists who refuse to admit that conversion rests only in faith in the finished work of Christ; rather, they hold to, among other things, "Pray this prayer & you will be saved." See The Gospel Perverted, by this pastor.

4. Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (TWOT), #25 & 25a. The root of Adam is Strong's #119: "to show blood (in the face), i.e. flush or turn rosy: ...(dyed, made) red (ruddy)." However, though Identity uses Strong's definition of #119 to justify its stand that only the "blushing" race is the seed of Adam (i.e., the White, Caucasian race), #119 is never used in reference to Adam. Every serious Bible student should have TWOT in his library. See also Brown-Driver-Briggs, p 10a.

5. Star Wars, a fifteen part lesson series by Nord William Davis, Jr. Northpoint Teams, PO Box 129, Topton, NC 28781. The quotes are from pp 17, 46 & 47. Davis: "I prefer to be a student of conspiratorial political science and work toward the exposure of its tactics." P 40. Locations of quotes from Star Wars are identified in the text as (#). Though the more moderate followers of the Identity faith claim Davis does not represent that faith, Davis fills in the blanks ignored by the moderates. In fact, this pastor has been accused of "taking the low road" by using Davis to refute Identity heresy, but Davis does make the "reprobateness" of the Identity faith readily apparent. This pastor finds it amazing that a man who teaches such corruption as, "Eve bore a set of fraternal twins, the first born Cain physically sired by Satan and Abel literally sired by Adam," (51) is very distinguished in the "Christian" patriot movement: Davis' Sui Juris is highly respected and recommended by patriots. Have Christians left their thinking ability at home when they go to patriot meetings? Those who hold to "Seedline Doctrine" are clearly reprobate concerning the faith, 2 Titus 3:8, and Christians are straightly commanded by God, from such withdraw thyself, 1 Titus 6:5. Evil men cannot bring forth good fruit, Matt. 7:18. So why are Christians imbibing the fruit of those who hold to the "Seedline Doctrine?" See also 1 Cor 15:33, 2 Cor 2:17 & Jude 10. The multiple race theory & and the White race's ability to blush are major points for British-Israelism.

6. "To retrace our conceptual steps for a moment..." from the bees and birds to the point he is perusing. (54) He builds his theology upon his concepts of history, natural instincts, imagination and Scripture. But his understanding of Scripture is restricted to his concept of history.

7. Adding details to DS16, Davis says, "Cain (was, ed.) physically sired by Satan." (51) Davis develops Anglo-Saxonism in Lesson Thirteen by saying that because (John, ed.) The Baptist called the "Edomite Pharisee" vipers and Christ called them children of the devil, they actually literally descended from Identity's supposed physical relationship between Satan and Eve. (66, 68). Such exegesis is a logical result of taking everything in Scripture literally if at all possible.

8. "So, by Genesis 4, there are three seed lines on the earth: 1] Chay's purebred children living in the land of Nod happy and content in their creation. 2] Adam and Eve's purebred children, driven out of Eden and prevented from reentering the Garden or having access to the Tree of [the] Life, the Lord Jesus Christ. 3] Satan's Seed carried into the Earth by Eve, but having blended his seed through marriage with some of Chay's women then living east of Eden." Davis added "[the]." (52) God again reveals Davis' lies: Adam & Eve were driven out of the Garden before the birth of any children. Moreover, his perversion of the word "of" permits him to defend Identity's theory that the pharisees of Christ's day were from Identity's supposed literal seed of Satan, John 8:44.

9. Webster, 1828. Webster's 1828 Introduction alone refutes Identity's postulations.

10. Davis develops this idea in Lesson Two. Consistency to the Kingdom-Identity doctrinal statement requires that all modern day, anti-Christians be the literal, physical seed of Satan.

11. Cf. 1 Jn 3:12-15. We should mention at this point the NT genealogy records: Scriptural Genealogy was only traced to Christ, and from the time of Christ, genealogy was unimportant. Certainly, the NT authors referred back to the OT fathers of the faith, but their reference was for instruction, not a "genealogy" reminder, e.g., He 3:9, &c.

12. Certainly, we cannot deny that God may and does chose to exalt one nation or race above all others; this He has done in His Sovereignty throughout history, e.g., Babylon, Dan 4:26, 32, 35, &c. But it is the greatest of sins, pride, for any physical race or nation to consider itself exalted above all others, especially pride over being given the Law, Rom 11:21. See [DS18], [DS20], &c.

13. #929 - 929 b@hemah {be-hay-maw'}. Davis uses two spellings, behemah & behemeh. Geneva - "Not that the dumb beasts had sinned or could repent, but that by their example man might be astonished, considering that for his sin the anger of God hung over all creatures." Davis simply develops Identity's doctrine that the White Race has a "higher form of consciousness" than other races.

14. Davis holds that when God created the beasts of the field; "beast" also included the Negro: the non-white, non-blushing race. These beasts dwelt outside of the garden. "However, before Genesis 3, it (the work in the Garden, ed.) was by the sweat of Chay (the race of Beast, ed.), not Adam, that the work got done. These two races of men, designed and programmed by God to work harmoniously together, still do today if not incited to discontent by outsiders."

15. Fenton's translation, referred to several times by Davis, apparently is extremely corrupt. Geneva uses the word, fubtill. Marginal ref, "As Satan can change himfelfe into an Angel of light, fo did he abufe the wifedome of the ferpent to deceiue man... BDB gives absolutely no hint of "more impudent;" rather, "adj. craftiness, shrewd, sensible; 1. crafty, as pred., of serpent Gn 3.1..." P 791. See also TWOT, #1698. Moreover, Geneva says for faid to the woman: "God fuffered Satan to make the ferpent his inftrument and to fpeake in him."

16. "I like to think..." What kind of man likes to think such ungodly thoughts? Identity generally holds to a literal, Satanic seed through Cain, e.g., [DS16].

17. Contrary to popular opinion, there is no reference to Satan in this passage: Isaiah was talking of the then king of Babylon. See, Keil, VII.312; The Book of Isaiah, E.J. Young, I.441-2; The Pulpit Commentary, X.245-6; Clarke's Commentary, IV 4.82; Dictionary of the Bible, by James Hastings, III.159; TWOT, p 217; BDB, p 237, &c.

18. This pastor `feels' dirty & defiled even reproducing such harangues against God.

19. Actually, the amazing thing about such exegesis of God's Word is that others will listen to such teaching. But Eve did.

20. Davis never refers to BDB. We should mention that there are two views of beasts in Scripture: one figurative (spiritual), the other literal. First, spiritual: The peoples of the world from every nation unite in Christ. This conforms to Peter's vision of the sheet let down from heaven containing all manner of beasts (Barnes' Notes). Many times over, the Gentile nations are compared to the wild beasts of the field. The Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ changes the Gentile "wild beasts" into sheep in the new nation of God, the new Israel, the Church. Second, literal (Keil & Hengstenberg): the New Testament cross reference is Romans 8:19-22, which presents a very good argument for the literal view. Under Adam, the natural beasts had no fear and presented no threat to each other nor to people as they all gathered around Adam to be named. Furthermore, they all gathered to Noah and lived together peaceably in the Ark. In fact, implied is that until after the flood there were no dangerous animals, Genesis 9:2, 3. Gen. 1:30, God makes a point to tell us that all the animals ate grass for food. Dangerous animals are a result of man's sin. Furthermore, it is significant that the wild animals were no threat, but a blessing to the covenant-people while they were faithful to the covenant in Canaan, viz., the Lord used the wild beasts to help them conquer the land. The more they turned from the Covenant-God, though, the more dangerous the animals became. Cf. 2 Kings 17:26.

21. Barnes' Notes on Ez 34:24, 28; 44:3 & Mic 5:8. Hengstenberg, Christology, I.474, identifies the beasts as literal beasts, as does Keil, Isaiah 11:6-9. Furthermore, (as Hengs. points out) both man and the literal beast dwell together in peace under the Messiah, viz., `Church age.' What the first Adam lost in the fall, the second Adam, Christ, renewed.

22. "The centurion was of the Italian cohort, which, stationed at Caesarea, consisted of Italians, not of natives of the country, like many other Roman Troops in Syria... Cornelius was a Gentile, who, discontented with polytheism, had turned his higher interest towards Judaism, and satisfied a deeper pious want in the earnest private worship of Jehovah along with all his family. Judaism, as Stoicism and the like in the case of others, was for him the philosophical-religious school, to which he, although without being a proselyte, addicted himself in his heart and devotional life... ..he is simply put into the class of the Gentiles, - a circumstance which cannot be referred to merely to the want of circumcision, as the proselytes of the gate also belonged to the community of the theocracy, and had ceased to be non-Jews like absolute foreigners. And all the great importance which this even has in a connected view of the Book of Acts, has as its basis the very circumstance that Cornelius was a Gentile..." (Meyer's, IV.201-2) "The object aimed at in the whole vision was the symbolical divine announcement that the hitherto subsisting distinction between clean and unclean men, that hedge between Jews and Gentiles ! was to cease in Christianity, as being destined for all men without distinction of nation, vv. 34, 35" (ibid, 206, bold added). It would be useless to develop Peter's vision because Davis has protected himself from the "doubting student" elsewhere.

23. Of the NT word Gentile, Thayer gives 5 NT usages, one of which includes beasts: "1. a multitude (either of men or beasts) associated or living together ; a company, troop, swarm." #1484 - p 168. Though Thayer gives no Scriptural, only "secular," usage, Davis refers to beast as though it always referred to individuals. The Biblical division between Jew, Israelite and Hebrew can be quite confusing; Anglo-Saxonism makes very good use of any possible confusion for its own purpose of corrupting God's Word.

24. We hear Identity speakers say that the Flood issue is not important for their faith to hold together. But the Biblical account of the Flood is true; therefore, Identity's DS16 & DS17 are "flooded out," pun intended.

25. Note that as we examine the Word of God in this area, we are not cutting the reader off from secular history. What we are doing, though, and what must be done, is SUBJECT every historical record to the Word of God. When secular history and the Word of God contradict, which they do very often, the Word of God must prevail. The one who refuses to subject every thought to the Word of God is at war with God, antiChrist, 2 Cor 10:5.

26. The Angels, "...in my opinion, saw that Adam's daughters were fair, and took them for wives." (55) According to DS16, Cain actually resulted from Satan's sexual intercourse with Eve through the body of a Negro (Davis' version). DS16 claims that Satan's Seed, Cain's line, was alive and active at the time of Christ, and still is today. "[S]even by seven..." The animals taken by sevens into the ark were the clean animals for sacrifice to God after the flood. Is Davis thus suggesting that "Chays" (Davis' name for the Negro) were offered as sacrifices after the flood? Davis' defence of DS16 is as anitChrist as anything can be. 1 Pe 3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The exact same word, soul, is also used in Acts 27:37 referring to everyone on the ship with Paul. Thus soul clearly means any living person. (BDB, p. 677, #5590.) Cf. Jer 26:9, the inhabitants of the world... Though useless to argue with those who reject the final authority of God and His Word, let us mention God's Word: Gen 6:7 & 7:19 clearly state that everything under heaven (sky) was covered with water. Observe: whereas upon the earth could connote localized flooding, under heaven clearly covers everything, i.e., world-wide over every high place on earth.

27. Davis is not alone in his militancy against Truth, Biblical history, for other Identity writers defending A-S theories must do the same. The computer CDROM has placed good, Biblically sound research material within easy reach of all interested.

28. Tracing The Isaac-Sons - Anglo-Saxons, Pastor C.O. Stadsklev, Gospel Temple, Box 72, Hopkins, Minnesota 55343. Reprint from Truth and Liberty magazine, June-September, 1968. P. 1.

29. Davis holds that the John the Baptist never hinted that the "Edomite Pharisees" could enter the Kingdom of Heaven. "He [John] knew the people were from the Serpent's side of Genesis 3:15." (66) [DS16]

30. Thayer: Kindred, #5443 - all the persons descended from one of the twelve sons of Jacob; a race, nation, people; thus Israel. And Tongue, #1100 - the language used by a particular people in distinction from that of other nations... It serves to designate people of various languages. Thus the obvious reference is to all tongues and races originating at the tower of Babel. The same word is used in Rev 7:9; 10:11; 11:9; 13:7; 14:6; 17:15. Accordingly, contained among the great number of redeemed before the throne are people from every language group under heaven. And People, #2992 - a people, tribe, nation, all those who are of the same stock and language; univ. of any people. Thayer gives the same additional uses in Rev as he did under #1100. And Nation, #1484 - I do not know why, but neither Thayer nor Vine lists this Revelation usages of nation, (#1484) as Thayer does list it above for tongue (#1100). But, though avoiding the Revelation usages of nation, both Thayer and Vine define the word as meaning race, nation, foreign nations not worshipping the true God, pagans, Gentiles. According to Thayer, Paul uses nation to define the race of people outside of Israel to which he was sent by God with the gospel, Rom 11:13, 15:27; 26:4; Gal 2:12, 14; Eph 3:1, cf. 4:17.

31 "Yea, let God be true and every man a liar!" Rom 11:13. This pastor's prayer is that God would appropriately judge all seeking to pervert, subvert &/or change the Word of God in any way, Rev 22:18, 19.

32. By destroying God's definition of fornication and adultery, the logical conclusion of such foolishness is that any and all sex between people of the same race is legitimate in the eyes of the Lord. This does indeed appeal to the natural man.

33. "If an Israelite saw among the captives, who had been brought away in a war against foreign nations, a woman of beautiful figure, and loved her, and took her as his wife, he was to allow her a month's time in his house, to bewail her separation from her home and kindred, and accustom herself to her new conditions of life, before he married her. What is said here does not apply to the wars with the Canaanites, who were to be cut off (viz. chap. vii. 3), but as a comparison of the introductory words in ver. 1 with chap. xx. 1 clearly shows, to the wars which Israel would carry on with surrounding nations after the conquest of Canaan... By her master becoming her husband, she entered in to the rights of a daughter of Israel, who had been sold by her father to a man to be his wife (Ex. xxi. 7 sqq.)." Keil, I.406. The prospective husband had to pay a dowry, usually three years wages, for his wife. A wife that was not bought thusly was considered a concubine. Therefore, the non-Israelite woman was given the status of a fully endowed Israelite wife by God's Law.

34. Ethiopian. #3571 Kuwshiyth {koo-sheeth'} from 03569;; adj f AV -Ethiopian 2; 2, 1) a Cushite woman, Moses' wife so-called by Miriam and Aaron, #3569 Kuwshiy {koo-shee'} patronymically from #3568; TWOT - 969a; adj AV - Ethiopian 15, Cushi 8; 23 Cushi or Ethiopian = see Cushan "their blackness" 1) one of the descendants of Cush the grandson of Noah through Ham and a member of that nation or people 2) one of Joab's couriers 3) (TWOT) Ethiopian #3568 Kuwsh {koosh} probably of foreign origin; TWOT -969; AV - Ethiopia 19, Cush 8, Ethiopians 3; 30 Cush = "black" n pr m 1) a Benjamite mentioned only in the title of Ps 7 2) the son of Ham and grandson of Noah and the progenitor of the southernmost peoples located in Africa 3) the peoples descended from Cushn pr loc 4) the land occupied by the descendants of Cush located around the southern parts of the Nile (Ethiopia). Online Bible.

35. For further study, see Institutes of Biblical Law, II.597-605, GOD'S SON, ISRAEL: THE TOPOLOGY.

 

What do YOU think ?

Submit Your Comments For Posting Here
Comment Box Disabled For Security


 

 

Click For Index Page

Free Online Books Historical Preterism Modern Preterism Study Archive Critical Articles Dispensationalist dEmEnTiA  Main Josephus Church History Hyper Preterism Main

Email PreteristArchive.com's Sole Developer and Curator, Todd Dennis  (todd @ preteristarchive.com) Opened in 1996
http://www.preteristarchive.com