Is The United States Really Free?

A Once Moral Government Of The People

Is The United States Really Free?

A Once Moral Government Of The People

Kenneth W. Billings

April 8, 2026

CHAPTER I

Early Immigration For Whites Only

Righteous racial and cultural discrimination: white-only early immigrants

The United States began as a nation for whites. The Constitution was signed by 39 out of 39 white men. Not all of the delegates appeared or signed it, and George Washington is noted as signing it first. The religion of early Americans was generally Protestant. Christianity and the protection of white homogeneity had a great influence on the legal system that developed in the following decades.

Naturalization Act of 1790: “This law limited naturalization to immigrants who were free White persons of good character.” (United States)

Not only were the citizens of the US designed by law to be white, but they were directed to be sexually moral and faithful to their families.

Moral status quo: men of the USA expected to keep clean marriages

An adulterer (philanderer) was not tolerated. According to 8 CFR § 316.10(b)(2)(vii), can you imagine how well our country could have been if it had kept the beginning moral against whoremongering and remarriage. A nation for the white citizen that forbade immorality!

Good moral character (United States § 316.10)

White sovereignty: have we crossed the line of no-return

People of today are still expected to have racial discernment and respect toward homogeneity and genetic, family lineage. It is improper for a national leader to think to give the nation's founders' inheritance to others (through Affirmative Action and illegal immigration). Ruth of the Bible respected the race and sovereignty of those who received her. Politicians who subvert and pervert racial establishment work to the contrary and for Satan. Rehnquist, O’Connor and corrupt judges as such deserved no place in once homogeneous America.

Evolution, divine blessing, history and recent centuries apostasy

As the world evolved, the Lord scattered (Gen. 11.8) the peoples. Shemitic and Japhethic (white) people were advanced through the blessing of Noah (Gen. 9.27). However, the race-mixing complexion of the globe seems to imply the wicked of the world are rejecting the divine institution or trend and principle of racial homogeneity, and turning back toward the tower of Babel and lawlessness. They call it “diversity”. They slanderously refer to former White superior position and seemingly almost any current White advantage as White supremacy, but at the same time accept non-Whites having special favor of quotas and Affirmative Action.

Noahides

Some haters of God and unbelievers in the Lord Jesus Christ say that people should live under the simple culture and laws established in the days of Noah. That was the first law era. Nevertheless, if they include the book of Numbers and chapter 36:5-13, they would find they themselves don’t have a gene pool to follow the later Hebrew law.

However, you can't just ignore the fullness of the Torah because laws changed from the beginning law era unto the second law era, Deuteronomy. A person needs to know the second law also, especially Dt. 18:15... this leads to learning the Tanakh and the New Testament. Attempting to live in a past religious era cannot fulfill the expectation of living righteously today. It would be denying prophecy and fulfillment of the law (NT).

Those that say particular, racial blessing and genealogical lineages (races and subraces) do not exist defy the words of Noah. Some sub-races became extinct, for example, the Hebrew tribes, but the Gentile sub-races and tribes continued without biblical requirement of intra-tribal continuity as the Hebrews (Nu. 36. 5-13).

God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. (Gen. 9.27)

Japhethites (white people) are blessed under Noah's blessing... “יַ֤פְתְּ אֱלֹהִים֙ לְיֶ֔פֶת” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Gen. 9.27), which I transliterate,  “Yaft Elohim leYefet” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Gen. 9.27), and paraphrastically translate as “Let God widely open in abundance to Japheth” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Gen. 9.27). To add and continue in that blessing, a person needs to follow the message of Jesus Christ (read the NT, fulfillment of the law).

On the bright side of Noahic spoken destiny, Japheth, the progenitor of the white people, was enlarged and privileged. God “opened” him: made him spacious, wide, open... perhaps pertaining to his mental abilities also. His descendants carried on and brought civilization (Christianity) to the world after the fall and dispersion of the Hebrews (descendants of Shem, a darker colored people in between the white and the black). The ministry of bringing God's message to people of the world was extended beyond the Hebrews, a reddish people. Europe, Asia, South Africa, North America and many other pilgrimages of faithful, white men (USA) were blessed and brought forth great religious, moral standards and industry.

Governments and spiritual wickedness in high places

Considering all the works and antagonism of man and demon against God and the blessings of the descendants of Japheth, the White still has many blessings and an inherent desire to lead and share his wealth (spiritual, intellectual and material). The antagonist can persecute only to the degree that God allows, but he can't change God's will and lastingly overthrow his design! The Anti-Christ himself will only be permitted a temporary rule.

Spiritual advancement: love God’s direction and one another

Finally to my Japhethic kindred, let no one deceive you and take away or lessen your Japhethic and genetic lineage blessing. Phenotypic, genealogical and genetic purity is part of the divine, racial and sub-racial architecture. Noah was blessed of God, and this blessing is divinely natural and has genealogically and genetically continued for millennia. More importantly, remember to study the Scriptures with faith and by all means receive the blessing of salvation by calling out to God. “All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.” (Jn. 6.37) Love all peoples but be genealogically and genetically wise, intelligent and protective.

Recognizing our personal faults, overthrow and demise

Nevertheless, as to our own nation, good moral protections of early America have been perverted and ignored. Our nation has not enforced good law as to homogeneity and morality. Many of our own have stood against us, and the Bible. They chose “strife” against White sovereignty, human ideas and “rivalrous ambition”, my translation (Westcott and Hort, Gal. 5.20), against biblical laws and institution, which were previously adapted to and written in the early Constitution.

The word, “αἱρέσεις” (Westcott and Hort, Gal. 5.20), which I tranliterate as “haireseis” (Westcott and Hort, Gal. 5.20), and paraphrastically translate as “rivalrous ambition” (Westcott and Hort, Gal. 5.20), denotes the temperament of our condition during the Civil War. Against one another, theologically, politically and socially we have suffered quarrels, “ἔρις” (Westcott and Hort, Gal. 5.20), which I transliterate as “eris” (Westcott and Hort, Gal. 5.20), and translate as “strife” (Westcott and Hort, Gal. 5.20). Probably worse, we also have suffered enmity against one another, “ἔχθραι” (Westcott and Hort, Gal. 5.20), which I transliterate as “ekthrai” (Westcott and Hort, Gal. 5.20), and translate as “hatred” (Westcott and Hort, Gal. 5.20). It eventually led to one side killing (James 4.1-2) the other side.

A good lesson to learn is that we need to look back into time and revert to our early ways wherein we were blessed as one homogeneous people and re-build upon the concepts and what our ancestors started, and with God leading:

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, 23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. 24 And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts. 25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. (Gal. 5.22-25)

Community living

I attempted to start a community and grounds to accomplish things I believed in. I failed. I wasn’t able to obtain the funds for one thing, let alone getting others to agree. Other races have been successful at making their own communities; however, mine was multi-lateral and a little different so as to include all races. Nevertheless, just because I wasn’t successful doesn’t mean Whites should quit trying their own methods. As a guideline, if I were to draw up a document for a Japhethic Christian ethno-community, it would be similar as follows:

The Japhethic, Christian Ethno-Community

1. Racial Homogeneity: We want all Japhethites to have a place to live among themselves in their homelands, a place for whites to enjoy the partnership of other Japhethic whites and to have a white posterity. In the United States that would assume private farmlands or reservations of some sort with Internet communication available. All members must be required to be at least 87 ½ per cent white (Japhethic).

   An exception to the racial homogeneity rule would be to allow other races with multi-lateral values of homogeneity to live there until they had enough members to develop their own homogeneous community elsewhere. A high dominant-race percentage would be required of the non-Japhethic races also; hybrids of a low dominant-race percentage cannot be accepted. Of course tribal homogeneity respect would be required and no inter-racial romance (Shechemism) would be tolerated among existing races. The beginning, most numerous people of one race would determine a racial community and the accepted people of other races would be able to live there with respect to the hosting group and their leadership and racial advancement. Unacceptable disagreement with the desire of separation even as in Nehemiah 9:2, 13:3, Ezra 10:3 and other righteous reasons and leadership of the hosting community would be evident reason for excommunication and departure of an antagonist and perhaps reason for all dissenters to begin a group elsewhere. Ideas of multi-racialism and multi-culturalism are in direct contradiction to our enterprise.

   Phenotype would be a basic and simple way of establishing racial distance. A register and demographic location should be required for all three races if necessary. It would prevent the centuries “Jew” myth, and establish genealogy and genetics as part of homogeneous demographics. The only person or group required to prove their genealogy (Ezra 2:61-63) without a broken link in the pedigree chain back to the time of Ezra and Nehemiah would be the one who claimed to be a “Jew”. Gentiles were never specifically commanded and required to have intra-tribal register.

   Religion and Ethnic Culture: Christianity must be determined through Scriptural authority. Anyone holding to the “Jewish” or Roman Catholic religion is reason for disqualification. Our guidance must come from the Holy Scriptures: The Christian ethno-community concept cannot be divided by Roman Catholicism, its contrary teaching of sacraments to the teachings of the apostles and prophets, and rule from Rome. (Acts 15) The elders and apostles were established in Jerusalem, not Italy. We must follow men of the paper (Scriptures), not men of the cloth. Men err, the Scriptures do not. Therefore, we realize adverse religions can't really agree, so we must draw the line at the start.

   An exception to the adverse religion denial would be to those willing to convert from religions that divert from Christianity to complete respect of the Bible as the sole authority of moral and ethic. Therefore, the community could possibly consist of people of different colors and different religious backgrounds, however, respect of the homogeneity rule would be the deciding factor.

   Honor of two genders: Gender must be defined through birth nature having precedence. Generally, men must be providers and women homekeepers. Male and female attributes are manifested in a decent and orderly way through the design and judgment of our Creator. Abomination (male effeminacy or desire of the same sex, or female hardness and ferocity), mockery tolerance and defiance of the Lord would be reason for excommunication.

   Pure and loving marriage would be protected through engagement of chaste-only couples, guarantors and proper wedding ceremony. Remarriage and cuckoldry cannot be accepted. Local church officers must be qualified.

   Finance: Members would have to agree to join financially and legally to build or buy real estate and supplies. No usury shall be tolerated among one another. We can only tolerate a form of husbandry and restricted capitalism to be the basis of our finance system, putting the values of racial homogeneity and perpetual inheritance first. Imperialistic oppression and totalitarianism must be avoided. See the George Orwell documentary.

   Work: Every male member should have a job. If the community is built on a collective farm, the members of the determined-race community must have right to the superior jobs on the farm. If it is a White farm, the White has superiority, if it is a Black or other race farm, they have the right to superior position. The idea is to build together multi-lateral communities and that those of inferior positions will be attracted to go to a community of their own race, which would give them access to superior position in that particular community. It would also prevent initial investors and anyone from being without a home until they could move unto a community of their like-race and culture.

   Priorities: God's interests and institutions must be our goal. We can allow people of various religions up to an extent but they must not harm our biblical goals or offend our Christian values. No religion shall be allowed to attempt to deny the deity of Christ or try to replace the authority of the Holy Scripture. God sets up nations and brings them down. We do not want to do anything to provoke Him to cause our fall: we must abide in His covenant in order to continue to be blessed as a people. We especially do not want to tolerate murder, adultery and repetitious rebellion such as drunkenness or drugs. Deceived pastors and people living in remarriage according to the redaction (second law) and not repenting toward annulment, undefiled marriage and fulfillment of the law cannot obtain membership. Such sins and crimes must be punished to the extent of eventual expulsion after confiscation and repayment for costs. Minor crimes can be given prison sentences with effective, Christian remedial schooling to prevent continuance of bad habits.

   Divine Architecture: Individual, family structure and paternal posterity is a design of God.

We may never in our current position and status quo be able to politically reinstate our early, national morals because as time goes forward, seemingly the non-White immigration and multiplication, culture, apostasy and immorality increases. However, if some want to try, I believe they should. It is not an easy task to build theological farms that congrue with early American values. When “democracy”—“a one-people government” becomes a multi-people government, the numbers may be too great to overcome.

Justified White genealogical and phenotypical favor

Jesus guarded and took care of his people, the Hebrews. When he spoke to the woman of Canaan, he made it clear that the righteous take care of their own race, who have a specified culture—the OT. law (at that time).

The woman of Canaan observed the racial premise that Jesus the Christ preferred the Jew before herself (Mt. 15. 21-28). She was obliged to respect the sovereignty and blessings of another people above her own.

This particular event in the Scripture proves there is such a thing as righteous, genealogical (racial) discrimination as to Hebrew vs. non-Hebrew peoples. She acknowledged Jesus' racial judgment. She did not promote the false concept of racial nihilism for people to be “colorblind”. She did not suppress racial consciousness, truth and reality. She did not attempt to cause national faction (Gal. 5.20) and riot. She did not ask for the Canaanite dream and equal rights. No, she accepted what she was taught.

Nevertheless, she wanted the blessing and healing of Jesus. She received it. Blessing came without “diversity” doctrine, it came through accepting the status quo of the genealogical distance and culture of peoples, faith and asking. The woman of Canaan must be remembered!

When the Christians of the early US landed upon its shores, they wanted to establish a place for their people and their culture, not the religion and culture of former England, not the religion and culture of the Indians, they wanted their own white establishment and it eventually became a nation. As you see by their naturalization law (above), they were successful in the beginning.

Now, let’s go back to the sexual morality issues

Polygamy was permitted in the Old Testament (Ex. 21.10); that is, the males were permitted several wives—not the wives were permitted several husbands. Although, such as the marriage laws may have been previously, monogamy was instituted according to the teachings of the NT. There was at most one wife among the New Testament church leaders; and in some cases, such as the Apostle Paul's—none! (I Tim. 3.2, 12; 5.9; Tit. 1.6)

Adultery was looked down upon and righteous people feared God

However, on the other hand, Jesus Christ said to the scribes and Pharisees of Jerusalem, “… Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?” (Mt. 15.3) Although God is willing that every person repent of his or her sins (2 Pet. 3.9), and to come unto the knowledge of the truth, and to be saved (1 Tim. 24.4), he deals in this life with those who sin. People should fear God, and not sin—the Bible tells me that God says, “Vengeance is mine” (Rom. 12.9). God will judge whoremongers and adulterers (Heb. 13.4). I believe he will also take vengeance upon those claiming to be his preachers who promote and condone such evil.

Allow me to be theoretical

God has earthly ministers to administer vengeance upon those who do evil. Until the legal administration conceives the appropriate direction, and the appropriate direction can only come from the Holy Proceeds—the Holy Bible; until the legislative officials, the legal ministers of this nation concede to God's word; only then, may the unGodliness, oppression and abuse which results from unlawful sexual activity, adultery, be dealt with appropriately from a legal standpoint. Every person will have to stand before God someday and give an account of himself (Rom. 14.11), and those who have been unfaithful will suffer the vengeance of eternal judgment. (Heb. 6.2; Jude, v. 7)

Need beyond politics, men with gifts of God

However, politics or legal administrators cannot cure a social disease such as sin. The church must lift up God's standards as a spokesman and witness for the Lord. Society must be reached by God's word and redeeming power. God is calling people everywhere to revere him and to walk in love, caring for one another. There is no substitute for God's word or his prophetic ministers (the church). Religion, politics, education and economic prosperity will only end in futility without the restoring power of God.

The United States claims to be a nation under God; therefore, it should seek instruction by God's commandments, for it is written: “Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments, which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the Lord” (Lv. 18.5). Of course, man cannot be justified by works of the law, but rather only by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. However, the OT. laws were not man-made cultural refinements; they are a genuine guideline.

Thus, concerning the marriage law according to the Bible, it should be a national goal to preserve unity in marriage: “So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.” (Rom. 7.3). The only way a woman may marry more than one time is that she become a widow before the second marriage. I discussed in my other, free book, “Nature, Theology, Law, Prophets And Fulfillment” what Biblically constitutes marriage; but for a basic, clear understanding, see my paper “Illusion.”

Compromise

Sadly though, the marital principle has not been adhered to by the public nor the government. I can remember years ago when Hollywood stars and people of power, such as military personnel (of course these were not the only ones), were permitted to divorce and remarry even though adultery was illegal and generally looked down upon by society. The Japhethic and Anglo Saxon people had a strong voice in the US at that time and had formerly made a great stand for life-long monogamy, especially in relative respect to anti-Christian religions such as “modern Judaism” and Islam; however, to mention one reason, due to the increase of sexual corruption of their own people and nation, their honor decreased. A nation can't be ruled for any great length of time by a people who don't possess and promote self-rule. Jesus would have us to conduct harmless, undefiled lives and provide honestly for our families.

Even though our primary objectives should not be political, our manifest, spiritual weaknesses show up in politics and other governmental business. In ancient days, Jesus himself was not excluded from those that received tribute (Mt. 17.24-27). Ironically, now so-called “minorities” and non-Japhethic (non-white) immigrants avoid, if not evade, paying taxes and spend our tax money in this country. They even have better economic opportunities through reverse discrimination and Affirmative Action than the native heirs in some instances.

In view of obedience to God’s commandments

In retrospect from a political view, if the government would have sanctioned years ago government employment benefits such as job training for better skills, or an opportunity for a higher position to only those that complied with Biblical chastity laws, then there would have been an economic incentive for people to live clean lives. This would have diminished the opportunity of the wicked to have wealth and power and it also would have put pressure on politicians to remember to honor sexual morality. Since the government, having been influenced formerly to a great extent by Christianity but not completely overcoming the ancient, error of Herod the king, and the lusts of its modern, religious, political and military authorities, it became lax and did not encourage and promote sexual morality nor did it clamp down on the breaking of moral law. Therefore, the opportunity for unGodliness to spread throughout the country was less restrained. Now our future lies in how well we govern our own lives in an immoral, apostate and violent, internationally bonded economic nation.

God’s law vs. civil law

Man is subject to both God's law and civil law; however, in case of a conflict between God and government, every person should trust and obey God (Eph. 6.12). Risking his life for God's sake, John the Baptist disputed with King Herod. Because this great prophet did not compromise God's word with the politically influential Herodias, her sin of adultery was exposed; and God's kingdom regulations were exalted above all earthly authority. No person, regardless of his, or her, power or position, is excluded from the accountability to obey the laws of the sovereign God.

Good preachers or prophets can have a positive effect on government and the people. Even if the leader doesn’t listen, others still get the message. When John the Baptist, a prophet which Jesus himself said none was greater, reproved Herod, he set an example for NT prophets to proclaim God’s law before human desire of a king.

Prophets keep the people in line with God’s written word

John the Baptist was faithful, even unto death. To the nation’s detriment, we don’t have many prophets like that today in the US. Many will condone the sin of remarriage and commit the same sin themselves before their political leaders.  

1 At that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus, 2 And said unto his servants, This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead; and therefore mighty works do shew forth themselves in him. 3 For Herod had laid hold on John, and bound him, and put him in prison for Herodias’ sake, his brother Philip’s wife. 4 For John said unto him, It is not lawful for thee to have her. 5 And when he would have put him to death, he feared the multitude, because they counted him as a prophet. 6 But when Herod’s birthday was kept, the daughter of Herodias danced before them, and pleased Herod. 7 Whereupon he promised with an oath to give her whatsoever she would ask. 8 And she, being before instructed of her mother, said, Give me here John Baptist’s head in a charger. 9 And the king was sorry: nevertheless for the oath’s sake, and them which sat with him at meat, he commanded it to be given her. 10 And he sent, and beheaded John in the prison. 11 And his head was brought in a charger, and given to the damsel: and she brought it to her mother. (Mt. 14.1-11)

It isn't possible to serve God and to break his law at the same time! Jesus came to fulfill the law, not to destroy it. Purity in marriage began with Adam and Eve and is expected today. Christians must not be hard-hearted as the people were under the “second law” of Moses; we must follow purity in marriage even as the Lord Jesus demonstrated to his antagonists.

We have many marriages today that are not lawful, not based on purity. They can't be amended to make them pure; they must be annulled. Marital relationships are not the most important thing in life. Obeying God is!

Today, promotion of virginity and pure marriage is rare. However, God's men are obligated to remain faithful, even at the cost of being hated and persecuted. Even though the prophet John the Baptist died for his message of morality, his precept continues and those who disobey bear their disgrace. “Marvel not, my brethren, if the world hate you.” (1 Jn. 3.13)

Keeping pure theologically and physically

A person can deviate theologically as to purity as well as physically. We must scrutinize the teachings of denominations and renounce them when they lead others astray or when they teach contrary to what the written word does. Roman Catholicism and the sacraments are contrary to the teachings of the apostles and prophets. Things like that grieve the Lord, and I personally believe it may bring chastisement upon anyone who commits such things. Many other denominations do contrary things also. The church is the body of believers throughout the world belonging to Christ, no one needs a denomination; all need the guidance of the written word.

God’s law vs. church rule

There is a conflict between God's law and church law at times. Paul admonished the church of Corinth concerning impurity that a little leaven leavens the whole lump (1 Cor. 5.6). He told them to put away that man who was living with his father's wife from their presence (1 Cor. 5.13). The church must not lower its standards from the teachings of the Bible to the influence and teachings of men, and especially not to the lusts of men! If people in the church are allowed to do just what they desire, rather than abide in Christ, where will the conviction of sin come from? Members of the church should exemplify the light of God. When the church suffers from theological or physical disobedience to God, to whom do the people of the world have to look unto for an example? It is the duty of the church to invite sinners to repentance and belief in Jesus Christ, but not to condone the sin of one who walks in error to encourage such a one to keep his or her membership (without conviction of sin, remorse and repentance); hence, an adulteress continuing in her sin must be removed from the assembly. See my paper “Excommunication.”

If there happens to be a case where the woman has committed adultery and she repents: she must put away her second man, and live without any more men—including her former husband (Dt. 24.4). Note that Jesus encouraged the precept of unity; however, he did teach one exception to the rule—“except for fornication” (Mt. 5.32). The concentricity of sexual morality according to the Scriptures is a perfect and excellent guide to interpretation; that is, if a verse is taken in its context, it will not deviate to the contrary with another verse also taken in its context. Afterward, in the above situation, a defiled wife would have to be directed to live a single life. Nevertheless, when a woman marries, it is for a lifetime, and only the death of her husband shall annul the spiritual accountability and responsibility so as to allow her to marry (regardless of the husband's circumstances).

However, if you will notice, many churches today are more like the Pharisees who transgressed God's commandments. The transgression is sexual immorality and adultery in our time and country. Sexual abuse of children, necking, seduction and rejection of marriage among teenagers, and divorce and remarriage have been a problem long before Roe v. Wade. The sale of contraceptives and the rise of homosexuality has been a part of the American culture for decades. Fetal abortion in its late stages is no longer a shocking occurrence.

If we really love someone, the best way to help them is by following the Bible. We all have relatives and friends who need guidance. We are not cruel (as some may say to their own absence of righteous judgment) because we should want to obey God's commandments. Following Jesus without turning to the right or the left is the only way that will please God. The Lord demands total surrender—no compromise whatsoever. Only faithful works are acceptable: not those which are presumptuous or cognizant of error—any substitute method will end in defeat and loss. We should show love unto others as God has shown love unto us; therefore, we should give them a Godly example of obedience to God and the Scriptures in word and deed. We should not partake in the deception of people who make excuses and try to justify themselves in contradiction to Biblical teaching. “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” (Mt. 5.18).

Faith brings works

“Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.” (James 2:18) If Jesus is in a person's heart, that man will manifest it through his works, through the changes he makes for Jesus. Many of us have made changes because we know what God wants from us, works that please, following his commandments. If we have to give up booze, so be it. If we have to give up bad relationships, so be it. It is what God thinks is important that matters to us, not our fleshly desires. (Galatians 5:19-24)

False marriage plague

Today, we have a terrible problem with fornication. There are pastors of large congregations that don't acknowledge the virgin female premarital sex bond (Ex. 22, Dt. 22) and marry off unchaste women to an unlearned man. The point I want to get at is this: a Christian will have to acknowledge God's commandments through studying the Bible, not listening to men. He will have to overcome ignorance of God's word by learning and studying. Then, a Christian will make changes even with close relationships if he or she has to, but there are many today that are not in chaste marriages. So, how about those who say they have faith and do not have works, will they change later? Or will they continue as they are? If they really belong to God, I believe God will bring conviction upon them and they will even make marital change and annulment if they are in error.

OT. polygamy

Holy men of Israel in the Old Testament had several wives, polygamy. Of course, the women were not permitted to have several husbands at the same time (polyandry). A study in the light of the history of David, king of Israel, reveals that David was a blessed and great man having several wives and concubines. David married Michal, the daughter of Saul (1 Sa. 18.27). Abigail became the wife of David (1 Sa. 25.42). David took Ahinoam of Jezreel for his wife also (1 Sa. 25.43).

David was thirty years old when he began to reign (2 Sa. 5.4). He had three wives at this time, except Saul had given Michal, David's first wife, to Phalti, the son of Laish, who was of Gallim (1 Sa. 25.44). “And David went on, and grew great, and the Lord God of hosts was with him” (2 Sa. 5.10). God did not have any contempt toward David for having more than one wife—the Lord God of hosts was with him. David “perceived” that the Lord had established him king over Israel, and that He had exalted his kingdom for His people Israel's sake. David knew that the Lord was making him great (2 Sa. 5.12). God was with David, and David took more wives yet, and concubines (2 Sa. 5.13). And David inquired of the Lord, saying, “Shall I go up to the Philistines? wilt thou deliver them into mine hand?” And the Lord said unto David, “Go up: for I will doubtless deliver the Philistines into thine hand” (2 Sa. 5.19). We may correctly infer that David had fellowship and favor of the Lord while simultaneously having several wives and concubines.

Monogamy is a post-polygamy institution

Polygamy was permitted in the Old Testament (Ex. 21.10); that is, the males were permitted several wives—not the wives were permitted several husbands. Although, such as the marriage laws may have been previously, monogamy was instituted according to the teachings of the New Testament. There was at most one wife among the New Testament church leaders; and in some cases, such as the Apostle Paul's—none! (I Tim. 3.2, 12; 5.9; Tit. 1.6)

God ordained marriage. The first woman, Eve, was made from the flesh, from the “rib” of the first man, Adam. When God took the rib out of Adam, he took it out of the inner part of Adam's flesh. The origin of Woman is due to God's creative work upon Adam's rib. Adam related to Eve as “bone from my bones and flesh from my flesh” (Gen. 2.23).

Therefore, by general trend before marriage occurs, first of all, a man shall “leave” his father and mother. When a man is old enough to date and support himself, he does not want to stay with his mother and father all the time as a child does; rather, he has less need of the support of his parents so he becomes more independent—enough so that if he chooses to take a wife—he leaves his parents. When he unites with his wife, the couple becomes one flesh (Gen. 2.24).

“Unite” means in this instance for a man to remain attached unto his wife. Eve was flesh of Adam's flesh, so when a woman marries a man, she becomes flesh of the husband's flesh. She may not have been made out of the rib of her husband as Eve had been, but there is a spiritual bond—being attached, being part of one another's lives mentally, physically, emotionally, an ordained unity—one flesh.

When marriage takes place, there is an end to the separate life of the male and the separate life of the female. The single quality of life bonds into a marital unity: “they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh” (Mk. 10.8). God's plan of regeneration is of purity, from one entity, as it was with Adam and Eve.

God is the one who ordained marriage. He has established the marital law: these laws concern a male lying with a virgin female (Ex. 22.16, Dt. 22.13-20, 28, 29). Thus marriage of a virgin female occurs in one of three ways: choice, seduction and rape. The only other type of sanctified marriage that may occur is due to the death of a spouse, concerning a person as distinguished above, as is referred to in Rom. 7.3. The death of a spouse does not desecrate an opportunity to marry; fornication does and devastates. (Mt. 5.32; 19.9) When a couple enters into marital unity according to God's specified marital establishment, then it is God who has joined them together. The Lord warns that no one should separate this marital yoke (Mk. 10.9). Therefore, concerning a case of choice, it is very important that a man and woman soberly cherish one another as a prospective future mate and perhaps offer prayer before ever completing the sexual act which constitutes marriage. (It is a blessing to the soul for a person to establish the practice of reading, praying and fasting before his or her pre-marital years.)

Marriage due to seduction

Now let's consider a less mutual happy case. For instance, in a case of seduction of a virgin female who is not betrothed (pledged to some man by the father of the female), the issues of virginity and non-betrothal, and bride price are essentials according to Ex. 22:16. Even if the father refuses to give his daughter to the man (the father has the authority to finalize the decision), the bride price is still due from the seducer and hypothetically, the daughter would be directed to live a single life similar as a bride separated from her husband (Ex. 22.17) because the marital physical part of the bond was completed but not officiated with parental approval.

By the way, the ancient, but good and healthy tradition of betrothal needs to be learned, practiced to some extent and revived in our apostate era. It would be wise for a father to anticipate a bride price for his daughter. Suggestively, for instance, a father before giving his daughter in marriage so that he could have some assurance that she will be taken care of by a faithful man with a good Biblical foundation could demand first that a prospective son-in-law read the New Testament in Greek. A man who really loves a woman would want to do something for her, please her male parent and God. Imagine what a difference this would make! Ignorance of this custom and coming short of its principles has caused family leadership and unity to deteriorate, and unchastity to abound.

Contrarily, Esau caused his parents to have grief when he married (Gen. 26.34-35). Today many parents bring grief to their children by not caring and preparing them for marriage. Rules alone will not work; there must be parental love and example. It is almost rare today if you find men and women knowledgeable and firm enough to train their young women according to the standards set forth in Titus 2.2-4. However, even though most people, including many Christians, have not been well acquainted nor properly understood this custom, at least, always remember female virginity is an essential factor in marriage and virgin female chastity is prerequisite to an opportunity for marriage. Look unto the Bible for spiritual direction; do not be misled by the leaders of our time. Many of the people today who are esteemed great in religion have been irreligious, and social prosperity has been neglected and trampled upon in this area. Furthermore, modern law courts have added to overlook consistently the issues concerning the Biblical institutions of marriage.

Marriage due to rape

Having discussed briefly choice and seduction, let's see what the OT. says concerning the institution of marriage due to rape. Society has been influenced through the law courts and media that this is a crime, rather than a marital institution or both. However, if the female was a virgin and she was not pledged to a man, she was considered a wife in God's sight. The man was not able to divorce her ever (Dt. 22.28-29). Nevertheless, there may be miscegenation refusals, instances and reasons where a parent may negate virgin loss of virginity and marriage. Nevertheless, according to OT. law and NT fulfillment, the unmarried ex-virgin would still be considered defiled and unable to fulfill a chaste marriage with another man (MT. 19.9). Such women should not attempt dating and would be required to remain single today.

Dowry brides: virgins before marriage

The Biblical precept of marriage as a dowry bride is a physical sexual act between a virgin female and a male (Ex. 22.16; Dt. 22.13-21, 28-29): not a mere contract—once again I recommend that you see my paper “Illusion.” Sexual fornication is a physical sex act which results in unchastity whereas marriage does not; fornication is a form of betrothal defilement before consummation (Mt. 19.9), different than adultery, an act of remarriage after consummation with a former, legitimate wife. However fornication can occur through lesbianism and other horrible sexual acts before and after marriage. Don't reply upon the best dictionaries for the definition of the word, study Scripture from its context. A woman was condemned to death in the OT. for an unchaste act such as promiscuity while still living in her father's house (Dt. 22.21); and both offenders were condemned to death for adultery (Dt. 22.22). These strict laws were designed by God to purge the evil from the land. The Lord wanted to free the people from sexual uncleanliness. These laws are still useful today (I Tim. 1.8-11).

Curse of unrighteous preachers

However, condemnation to death did not continue in the early church; although, righteousness, inheritance, vengeance and the eternal judgment of God was preached. Before David became king of Israel he had enemies among God's people and those that were not God's people against him. Pressure was upon him, and great numbers tried to prevent him from inheriting the good things that he did (1 Sa. 26.19). Beware, the wicked try to destroy the good inheritance—even eternal life—of the righteous, the innocent and those that would come unto God. Paul warned that there were some men troubling the church and would pervert the gospel of Christ. Then he gave his judgment: “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed” (Gal. 1.7-8). Take heed: “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom? Be not deceived: neither fornicators ... nor adulterers”—people who live in sexual immorality are not able to be saved except they should repent (1 Cor. 6.9).

Discrepancy must be explained and corrected

In Ezra's day there was a terrible sin among God's people. They had married foreign wives against the law of God. Today, there is a similar sin in the church against God's marital establishment and covenant: Sexual uncleanliness is widespread. Many of the popular leaders called “Christian” condone and promote this abomination among those that call upon God.

Note: According to the Old Testament, when rape of a virgin occurs, she is required to marry the rapist. (Please acknowledge this rule did not violate the genetic, race prescription in Nu. 36:5-13. Also, note the intolerance of the attempted, inter-racial marriage of Dinah, and the sharing of posterity of Ishmael by Sarah. Racial and cultural homogeneity is expected to be preserved.) This sexual assault may have been considered a great loss to the female victim, but if the sexual aggressor was a boyfriend or someone that the father accepted as a good man but just couldn't handle his sexual appetite at the time, he may have been obligated to approve it.  Nevertheless, the father has the authority to finalize the decision as to marriage according to particular circumstances of seduction.

Sanctity of a marital relationship

The consequences when a woman commits adultery are severe. The defilement of her marital relationship is irreparable. She cannot be restored to her former family because of uncleanliness (Dt. 24.4). Through ignorance of God's marital principles and desiring not to abide alone, many such women have complicated matters through remarriage. I wish men and women would realize how serious the sanctity of a marital relationship is. It is essential to family unity, especially when raising children. When the sanctity of a marital relationship is broken, it afflicts everyone in the family. When a woman cheats on her husband to the degree of physical defilement, the premise for divorce is precipitated. Then the only remedy is to put away the adulteress. It is very difficult for children to live without their mother; but nevertheless, it is much better for the children to live with one parent than to have to live in an unclean house wherein the adulterous woman is imposing her disgrace upon the whole family.

Those among the church that are willing to separate themselves from this unGodly group and do the will of God will be lights among this perverse and crooked generation. The Bible encourages us to be strong in doctrine. We need to study the word of God in order that we may withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand, and have victory over the wicked one.

We need to respond similarly as Ezra and the people who feared God's word and gathered around him. We need to tremble at God's word, pray, confess, weep, and throw ourselves down before the mercy of God. We need to be honest and forward as Shecaniah, admit our sin and resolve it in a Godly manner (Ezra 10.2). Perhaps, all hope will not be lost. A penitent woman who has committed this sin may repent, confess and be forgiven, live a separated and single life never to remarry, and even join the church. See my paper “Official Business”:

Billy Graham adultery promotion

Children may be sanctified through believing in the Lord Jesus Christ; they are not responsible for their parent's sins. The mother of Jeph'tha-e was a harlot. However, he is noted one of the great faith men in the book of Heb., ch. 11. That proves children of unclean parents cannot only be clean, but precious to the Lord, and great helpers to God's people and the world. (By the way, every woman in these terrible times should know that God wants to bless every unborn child regardless of the sins of the mother. Thus, no abortion should ever take place.)

Billy Graham’s open advice to commit adultery to a divorcee

Paul is strongly giving instructions to “those who have been married”—“ge-ga-may-ko'-seen”, my respective, translation and transliteration (Westcott and Hort, 1 Cor. 7.10), which I would add it translates as though they continue to exist as being married—the verb is a perfect participle. In my paraphrastic form, he says the message is not from himself, “but from the Lord”—“ouk ego' alla' ho ku'rios” (Westcott and Hort, v. 1 Cor. 7.10); “the wife from the husband is not to be separated”—“gunai'ka apo' andro's ma' choristha'nai” (Westcott and Hort, 1 Cor. 7.10), and if she be separated, let her either “abide unmarried”—“mene'to a'gamos” (Westcott and Hort, 1 Cor. 7.11) or “be joined back with the husband”—“to'i andri' katallanga'to….” (Westcott and Hort, 1 Cor. 7.11)

Thus, in case of a separation among the mates there are two choices:

(1) the woman must live separated without marrying anyone else: “mene'to a'gamos” (Westcott and Hort, 1 Cor. 7.11), or

(2) she may be reconciled to her husband, my paraphrastic translation: “be joined back with the husband”—“to'i andri' katallanga'to….” (Westcott and Hort, 1 Cor. 7.11) However, having wisdom and taking thought of the Deuteronomy abomination, there is a danger in separation, because if the woman subsequently commits adultery, then according to Dt. 24:4, she would forfeit her opportunity of reconciliation to her husband due to defilement. Then, after having been defiled, she would have to remain alone at least as long as her husband is alive.  

According to my translation and transliteration, the Lord said to, “let her abide unmarried”—“mene'to a'gamos” (Westcott and Hort, 1 Cor. 7.11). She must live as a single that is restricted so as not to date or court, different and not as a chaste widow, who could marry again (1 Cor. 7:39). 

Now, let’s look at what happens when a divorcee does not obey the Apostle Paul and Jesus Christ and finds and marries another spouse. This is called adultery.  A formerly married woman could not remarry in the second law era without a writing of divorce—divorce papers (Dt. 24.1-3) or it would be considered adultery, a death-penalty offense. Although later as to New Testament spiritual progression and fulfillment of the law, the reproof of Jesus Christ was more strict as to the concept of adultery and condemned remarriage (another marriage of a woman after leaving a legitimate husband). Perhaps this increased moral fulfillment pertaining to the correction of infidelity in sexual relationships of a future era (the new covenant) is hinted in Malachi 3:1-5.

And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery. (KJV, Mt. 19.9)

We know that a marriage of betrothal could be annulled due to female defilement, but the word “fornication”, which I transliterate “pornei'ai” (Westcott and Hort, Matt. 19.9), may have a different connotation than just from a betrothal defect, which seems to be the pertinent matter in this verse.

Perhaps, it may also connote toward immorality in general and include a broad sense of sexual defilement.

Nevertheless, dissecting the verse, the first part of the compound predicate, whosoever “… shall put away…” (KJV, above in v. 9) or using a more modern term, “divorces” his wife, only legally and spiritually stops the current relationship of marital uncleanliness due to the fornication phrase—“… except it be for fornication… ” (KJV, Mt. 19. 9) or in other words, “except for immorality”—the offense (see Eph. 5:5), the lack of morality, divine and pure union structure and holiness (Eph. 5.22-33); it is the second part of the compound predicate that reveals the committing of adultery—and “… whoso marrieth her which is put away… ” (KJV, Mt. 19.9) or in my paraphrastic perception of the meaning of the earlier English language, “marries” a “divorced woman”.

Manuscript and text discernment

However, there is a great discrepancy here as to Mt. 19:9 (KJV): some earlier Greek texts do not say a “divorced woman”, but, according to my perception, transliteration and translation, say merely “a'llan”—“another woman” (Westcott and Hort, Mt. 19.9)—which I transliterate from part of the verse, “… gama'sai a'llan moicha'tai” (Westcott and Hort, Mt. 19.9).

Exception phrase: female promiscuity prevents a legitimate marriage

Both texts, the English (KJV, Mt. 19.9) and the Greek (Westcott and Hort, Mt. 19.9), due to my perception and understanding of the exception phrase, “except it be for fornication” (KJV, Mt.19.9), imply a promiscuous woman can’t establish a legitimate and binding marriage. (If she were not unchaste, according to my view of the Greek phrase, “ma' epi' pornei'ai” (Westcott and Hort, Mt. 19.9), and my transliteration and translation, “except for immorality”, the male would be guilty of adultery.)

Besides that issue, it seems the KJV text refers to a marriage with a divorcee, “whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery” (KJV, Mt. 19.9), whereas the Greek, Mt 19:9 text according to my perception, transliteration and translation refers to “another” woman—“a'llan” (Westcott and Hort, Mt. 19.9), a woman not necessarily a divorcee (Westcott and Hort, Mt. 19.9). See Mark 10:11 in the KJV.

Nevertheless, the KJV text generally agrees as to whoever should marry “… her that is divorced committeth adultery” (KJV, Mt. 5.32); and according to my perception of transliteration and translation of “… apolelume'nan gama'sai moicha'tai” (Westcott and Hort, Mt. 5.32), the Greek does so also.

A promiscuous woman cannot form a legitimate marriage: the man is not bound

I suppose we can assume the first part of the compound predicate, “shall put away” (KJV, Mt. 19.9), in one sense, implies that it is proper to divorce a defiled woman of fornication even as Joseph was thinking about putting away Mary, the mother of Jesus (Mt. 1.19). The one who puts away or divorces would not even be prevented from marrying another.

However, the remedy and exception phrase of a case of betrothal could not be the same as a case wherein a defiled dowry wife (which required female virginity and chastity) who committed lesbianism or other form of sexual defilement. Then, it seems the man who divorces would not be tolerated to marry another due to the expiration of polygamy. See 1 Cor. 7:27 and Mark 10:11.

On the other hand, however, if fornication were expanded to mean such immorality it would not negate or nullify Jesus' explanation of betrothal marriage concerning divorce and marriage. The former case would have involved the woman in an act of defilement before consummation with the man who put her away, whereas the latter would not have.

Billy Graham not only failed his audiences, he failed his own family (1 Ti. 3.12). His daughter Ruth, whom I love as a struggling individual and still admire in some ways, my heart bleeds for her, said in her video confession concerning the attempt of her second marriage that he and his wife told her, according to her words, when she mentioned marrying another man other than her former, "wait a while" (“Broken Hearts with Ruth Graham”  00:04:42-48). They should have frankly said to wait a while and keep waiting until all men she has sexually known die because sexual immorality and remarriage is sin! Understanding the exception phrase of Mt. 5:32 and 19.9, an unchaste woman can never achieve a biblical marriage with another man. How much more a divorced woman who has a living husband! So, realizing Billy’s ignorance and neglect of permitting his daughter’s promiscuity without open, public and personal admission of wrong and correction, any learned Christian parent would always direct a child toward purity and singleness after an unapproved sexual relationship with someone.

Marriage related to a mystery and symbolic of Christ and the church

Bibilical marriage is based upon purity, especially sexually as I explained above. It is a delicate institution. Faithful marriage as a spiritual union is on a higher level than a mere physical union. It is related to a mystery and symbolic of Christ and the church, Jesus giving himself for the church, and the church being submissive to him. The husband submits to Christ, and the wife to the husband.

“Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;” (Eph 5:25)

Eve, the first woman (implicitly a virgin) on earth, is referenced as an example of a natural and pure woman, having an acceptable marriage with the male Adam through coitus, meeting the purity requirements of both the new and old covenants. She did not have an ervat davar (uncleanness), defilement or reason to be divorced.

Cognizance factor

When she married Adam, through having sex and uniting physically and spiritually, her intellect and mentality changed, she obtained and possessed a one-male cognizance. Of course, the male who became intimate with her was Adam, the only other human being on earth. Intellectually, he became more than co-existent, he became one with her. They were a clean and undefiled, marital entity, a united body, each became part of the other, one flesh (Gen. 2:24), and they fulfilled the marriage institution, social and psychological adherence and oneness commandment: “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” (Gen. 2:24)

Marital hierarchy

Once the marriage is established and the one flesh becomes a narrative instead of the way a single person might live, the couple needs to maintain a love relationship and tweak it when problems arise when both members don't fully agree how to deal with them. They must remember their gift (1 Cor. 7.7) and blessing from the Lord and that they have a hierarchy to follow: “But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.” (1 Cor. 11.3)

A marriage is a fragile institution of God, requiring psychological unity among both participants, husband and wife. Any emotional break-up requires attention before it gets out of hand and gives opportunity for something worse to occur.

So, actually, defiling a former marriage situation, because he was seemingly glamorous, the rapist of the “rebound” marriage (“Broken Hearts” 00:04:00-05), according to Ruth’s video, should have been legally prosecuted, not given an immorality extension through legalized adultery. She obviously never fully recovered from her sin by marrying a fourth time to a "counselor" (“Broken Hearts” 00:05:27-30) and thinking she is worthy of going into ministry (“Broken Hearts” 00:05:40-52). Anyone who cannot clean up his or her personal sexual life and condemn remarriage is not ready for biblical, marriage ministry.

The rotten decay of our modern churches

Many other preachers and teachers have promoted irreligion. Television, radio, the postal service, and now, Internet, are broad channels for influence. Later on, after Billy Graham, Jerry Falwell and many others promoted remarriage-adultery as well. It has been a problem since the early church. Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart and other perverts were involved in scandals at the same time they were ministering to the public (by the way, I do not hold any grudges against any of these men whom I have mentioned). The point I want to make is that people should be on guard against listening to leaders or advocates of an organized religion and contributing money to them without knowing whether what they teach is true or not and not knowing how such people live.

In God's sight, there is only one body of believers, and its sole source of authority concerning truth and morality is the Holy Bible. All of the members of the body are different individuals with various gifts. We need to become well acquainted with the written word of God and pray that the Lord will work in our hearts so that we will be more useful for Him. If you know the Bible well enough, He will do just that!

The body: temple of the Lord

Now let's take a look at the book of 1 Corinthians. The Apostle Paul asserts to the Christian disciples that the body is not to be used for unlawful sexual activity, but that the body is for the Lord; and the Lord for the body (1 Cor. 6.13). God designed sexual activity as a marital blessing; it is pure. Christians should be purposeful in example, keeping their children at home and training their young not to be defiled. People should put their faith in Jesus Christ and consciously abstain from having sex until the day marriage is desired.

The Apostle Paul’s letter

The Corinthians had previously written a letter to the Apostle Paul, “Now concerning the things where of ye wrote unto me ... ” (1 Cor. 7.1). In reply, the apostle began expounding by suggesting celibacy. See 1 Cor. 7.7, 32-38. By nature, people are susceptible to sexual attraction of the opposite sex. Due to this, every person should have a helpmate rather than to abuse one's body committing fornication (1 Cor. 7.2). (Note) 1 Cor. 7:8, 9.

Teaching of Paul contrasted with specific teaching of God

Paul emphasizes unto the married woman that it is the Lord who commands her not to depart from her husband (1 Cor. 7.10). However, the woman who departs from her husband has two choices: (1) she may remain single, never to marry another man while her husband is living, or (2) she may be reconciled to her husband. Paul also emphasizes to the married man that it is the Lord who commands him not to put away (leave) his wife (1 Cor. 7.11). Of course, this applies to a chaste wife (Dt. 24.4). (Note) the contrast of the speakers in 1 Cor. 7:12.

Adultery: how it is committed

Fundamentally, from a synoptical viewpoint, there are two distinct acts, the one subsequent to the other, which constitute adultery. The first act is a sin of “putting away” because the Scripture says the husband “shall cleave to his wife” (Gen. 2.24); and also, that no one should separate what God has yoked together (Mk. 10.9)—“one flesh” (Gen. 2.24). The second sinful act, “marry another,” is subsequent to the first. It also contradicts 1 Cor. 7.10, 11. Whenever a man puts away a woman, he separates a unified entity which God has joined together. This act in itself does not constitute adultery. However, afterward, if he should marry, he commits adultery against her (Mk. 10.11, Lk. 16.18). Also, if a woman should put away her husband and marry another man, she commits adultery ( Mk. 10.12). Any man who marries her that is put away from her husband commits adultery (Lk. 16.18).

Marriage is meant for a life time and to bless both individuals and their posterity

Every married man has a responsibility to keep his wife under every circumstance, except one: if his wife is unchaste, that is, if his wife has partaken in a sexual act with someone else–this is fornication. Then, and only then, is the husband lawfully (according to the Bible) to put away his wife, and to give her a bill of divorcement. Logically, if a woman, has committed a sin of fornication with someone, a bill of divorcement does not induce her to become unchaste–she has already committed the act which defiled her. If a man puts away his wife for any reason other than fornication, he causes her to commit adultery (Mt. 5.32). Such an act would also violate 1 Cor. 7.10, 11.

As I mentioned before, the king of Israel, David, one of God's great men of the Old Testament, was a holy man, preciously beloved of the Lord. He had several wives: this was a common characteristic among some of the spiritual leaders of the Old Testament. The spiritual leaders of the New Testament had one wife at most, and those, such as the Apostle Paul, chose to live single lives.

A prophet corrected a sinner (actually, another prophet)

The Lord was with David and blessed him in the days of his innocence (even as a polygamist); but when the valiant, young leader committed adultery (lying with another's wife) with Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah, it was accounted as sin unto him. David had despised the commandment of the Lord and had done evil in His sight. The prophet of the Lord said,

“7 And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man. Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul; 8 And I gave thee thy master’s house, and thy master’s wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things. 9 Wherefore hast thou despised the commandment of the LORD, to do evil in his sight? thou hast killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword, and hast taken his wife to be thy wife, and hast slain him with the sword of the children of Ammon.” (2 Sa. 12.7-9)

The Lord brought judgment upon David for his wickedness; he and his posterity suffered, “Now therefore the sword shall never depart from thine house” (2 Sa. 12.10). God brought troubles (defilement that could not be reconciled – Dt. 24.4) upon David within his own house and his immediate surroundings (2 Sa. 12.11). The Lord struck the child that Uriah's wife bare to David, and the child died (2 Sa. 12.18). David's daughter, Tamar, was raped (2 Sa. 13.14). Absalom killed Ammon, his brother, for the outrageous act he committed against his sister (2 Sa. 13. 28, 29). Absalom was eventually killed (2 Sa. 18.9). All this heartache came upon David because he did not follow God's commandment—“Thou shalt not commit adultery” (Ex. 20.14).

David repented of the sin, and his fellowship was restored with God. Of course, he could not bring Uriah back to life and restore his victim's marriage, but he was sorry for what he had done and recognized his error. He did not deny his mistake and try to cover up his actions afterward nor did he just give up; he was ready to try again (Ps. 51). God had used Nathan the prophet to turn the king's direction back to Himself. Since Bathsheba's husband was no longer alive, she was no longer bound to him as a wife; (note) 1 Cor. 7:39, and David was lawfully permitted to keep her as a wife. Afterward, he continued to live the precious, obedient life that he once lived but his life was not the same that it had been before. His conscience had changed too. He had lost his innocence and learned the hard way from some of his mistakes. It is so much easier if people would learn from mere obedience and not have to suffer the results of sin.

God still provides good and blesses those who repent

God faithfully fulfilled his promises of good still to David, but nevertheless, David's life suffered severe affliction. Even though God had freely given him many good things, he paid a tremendous price for his sin of adultery and manslaughter. Eventually, Israel and Judah began to war against one another. The sins of people bring God's judgment. Adultery is a plague to an individual and nation, murder is a plague to an individual and nation, and sin is a plague to an individual and nation.

There is only one righteous way of dissolving a sinful sexual relationship—repentance! Repentance means making a “change” from sin unto obeying God, making a change by doing things God's way, by listening to God's direction, by listening to God's word—the Holy Bible. I hope there is not anything in your life preventing you from carrying out the great commission or delighting in the will of the Lord with joy. God desires that you have the very best in life—which only comes through recognition of God's commandments, followed with obedience.

One living wife at most

Now in closing, with hope concerning the future of our children that they may be instructed righteously and prevail the deception of our time, I will discuss briefly a study concerning virgins. The Apostle Paul answering the letter of the Corinthians begins expounding concerning male virgins. The discourse is directed toward the male (1 Cor. 7.25); (see) v. 28. Paul, knowing the difficulties of marriage, and the problems people were having, thought it was a good thing for a man to remain a virgin (1 Cor. 7.26). Some time had passed before Paul received the letter of the Corinthians. He accounted for the time which had passed before the Corinthians would receive his answer to their letter.

So he asks a question, “Art you bound unto a wife?” (1 Cor. 7.27) I believe what he meant simply in so many words is, “Have you married since I left?” Then he makes an imperative statement, “Seek not to be loosed.” By this statement Paul means that if the male virgin is married now, then he should remain married and not seek a divorce.

Remarriage not permitted in NT

Then Paul asks, “Art you loosed from a wife?” Considering the possibility of the marriage of the male virgin, he also took consideration of the possibility of divorce. Then he makes another imperative statement, “Seek not a wife.” Once having been divorced, Paul disallows a second marriage. Paul considered two possibilities which could have happened while he was away, and he gave his judgment according to each possibility; however, due to his absence, he did not know definitely who had married or divorced.

The Greek distinguishes clearly what sex he is speaking to. Obviously, even from the KJV perspective,  it is clearly seen Paul is speaking directly to the male virgin at the beginning of v. 27. Now, let’s go to the next verse, “But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned”; and he is speaking indirectly concerning the female virgin, “ ... and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned” (1 Cor. 7.28).

Marriage has great use as to fulfilling 1 Cor. 7:2—to prevent fornication

He said that the ones who marry shall have tribulation in the flesh. Marriage involves more problems in the flesh, but Paul would allow them to marry if they desired to do so. Many people today seem to overlook that Paul commended celibacy. A virgin has the advantage of less difficulties than a married person, and besides, if by chance in the future, he or she decides to marry, it is permitted.

CHAPTER II

 Manifestations (Galatians 5.19-21): failing of character

When you have a homogeneous people with a moral requirement of disallowing sin such as immorality and they penalize it, it is effective. It is when the moral fiber of the people breaks that the resulting chaos shreds the stability of the previous status quo. It has been said that the anti-Christian elite and NWO know this, thus, “order out of chaos”.

One reason this chaos occurs is because the politicians and legislators are unlearned of the Bible. Instead of making good law, they are confused and make bad law from their confusion and lack of understanding.

Distorted genealogical distance debate: Marriage of first cousins

Recently Governor DeSantis (“Gov DeSantis” 00:00:44-58) on Hannity mentioned he is working on making a law against marriage of first cousins generally due to Islamic false religion. Well, Islam is a dangerous, anti-Christian cult (Quran 5.72) and should have never been permitted in the US, but nevertheless, marriage of first cousins is a biblical concept and should not be distorted by legal law and changed.

For instruction and guidance in this area of philosophy (marriage and genealogical-racial distance) we need true and pure, divine authority: The Old Testament gives us guidelines (I Tim. 1.8-11). Marital and intra-tribal segregation was instituted among the tribes, genealogical sub-races, within the race of Israel (Nu. 36.5-13).

In order to understand what is Biblically acceptable concerning the close relative law of marriage, you must realize that God's commandments were given in dispensations. From the beginning, Adam and Eve were the progenitors of the whole earth. Thus, hypothetically, through regeneration, the Earth could not have been filled with people without one of their sons having sex with one of their daughters, for example, Cain (Gen. 4.17). The close relative law was not in effect at that time.

Corrections in biblical law through time

Jacob loved Rachel, but Laban deceived him and gave him Leah for a wife first. Nevertheless, Jacob married the sisters. (Gen. 29.15-35) However, close genealogical distance between polygamous wives was outlawed later on:

Neither shalt thou take a wife to her sister, to vex her, to uncover her nakedness, beside the other in her life time. (Lv. 18.18)

As the world passed, what was once permitted in Jacob's time (Gen. 29.15-35) was incriminated in Lv. 18:18. As time continued and passed, God's laws were increased and written. Moses even made a redaction (Deuteronomy 24.1-3) to the first law era (Genesis through Numbers), and Jesus Christ reproved him in the New Testament (Mark 10.2-9).

So, even with a brief recalling, the marriage between cousins may seem surprisingly close today; however, it did not violate the close relative law of Lv. 18:6-18. The father of Rachel and Leah, Laban, was the brother of Jacob’s mother, Rebekah. Therefore he married his cousins. His marriage events were not reproved on that part, but only the marrying of sisters (Lv. 18.18).

Nevertheless, and relative to the point, genealogical laws and commandments (Nu. 36.5-13) protected the inheritance of the people of Israel.

However, all the while, Florida, DeSantis’ state, is full of fornication and remarriage situations. Why doesn’t he promote making a law or reinforcing a law to penalize fornication (Gal. 5.19) and remarriage/adultery (Gal. 5.19) with prison and fines! In the meantime he could encourage people to pick a mate from a more distant genealogical lineage of a person’s race, but not forbid a biblical standard to ban cousin-marriage.

Why conjoined twins must not marry

In relative respect to the biblical law not to marry sisters, we can see that banning dicephalic twins would be a good idea to put into American law. Conjoined twins with two heads and one reproductive system will not allow biblical marriage because the one body has two souls and two cognizant minds.

Since both minds of a female type share their one feminine lower part, a male having sex with such a being would amount to three cognizant minds of the sexual action, the cognizance of the male and both minds of the female. Theoretically, in the OT., before the time of the close relative law (Lv. 18.18), perhaps this could have legitimately been permitted, but not afterward. The law of God and the fulfillment of Jesus Christ provides insight, instruction, moral, ethic and the way to guide those suffering from even a mishap of nature, such as when eggs don't fully separate.

The beginning: no law against close relative sex

Although incest is a horrible sin today, it was not always a sin. In early biblical times, sexual relationships of what we call incest today were necessary to bring posterity to the progenitors. People could not have multiplied otherwise. However, eventually the law of Moses was given and close-relative sex was limited.

Deterrents

We must establish and maintain institutions that condemn and penalize sin and crime. It is necessary to  establish deterrents against things that destroy society and civilization. We need to be able to use the Ten Commandments in our modern era as a basic guideline: Learn how the OT. laws changed and were fulfilled. Adultery prohibition is still biblically effective today even though tyrannous governments do not recognize and enforce the truth!

Judgment coming

Isaiah 24:5 defilement reflections

“The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant.” (Isaiah 24.5)

Currently, we see a world full of defilement. Full of fornication and remarriage. Full of children suffering the consequences of parents who did not follow the commandments of the Lord. God's laws have been changed by man and demon. States and nations are becoming abominable. The mainstream churches have lost their integrity and virtue for sexual purity. Clean and undefiled marriage is rare, even so-called Christians who claim chastity condone fornication, remarriage and defilement.

The Naturalization law of 1790 (United States) formerly disallowed remarriage/adultery. Today, remarriage is rampant. Many presidents and politicians have ignored chastity and lived in fornication or remarriage. Political uncleanness widens the avenue for corruption of the subservient people. State, corrupt, controlling media prevents didactic teaching and promotes contra-biblical ideas, even as the consideration of outlawing cousin-marriage, which I discussed above.

Society and civilization must be based upon God and his law, and fulfillment of the law, as our forefathers somewhat tried to do in the 1700’s. The way man, family, church, state (politics) and the world respond to it makes the difference between good and evil. God recognizes how the world receives or defies his commandments and holiness. Mocking God, Sodom and Gomorrah judgment concepts, and even promoting homosexuality (Lv. 20.13), “and such like” (Gal. 5.21), has been approved today.

Further demise of biblical institution through changing state law

Everyone admits slavery is hard and unwanted for most but that doesn’t mean that nations or states should mislead people about biblical institution. The USA broke the biblical institution of slavery (Ex. 21.1-11, Lv . 25.44-46) and the state opportunity for giving freedom to a Christian slave by replacing it with self-made, so-called humanitarian law after a horrible civil war. The change from a form of state, biblical institutional law to the humanitarian law caused many other types of laws to be changed. Federal law, in a more hierarchical frame, tyrannically, economically and socially further required and promoted the inversion of biblical trend and slave labor law even a level beyond state law.

Former American slavery law had release inherit in it. Many slaves who did not have much of a chance in Africa learned trades and became freemen in the US. Some think that slavery would have eventually become outdated and ceased without the Civil War. However, the children of protagonists who protested against slavery and release law, a biblical institution and an establishment for their own good, are now reaping their negative reward and realizing it by their children not having a stable place in society and the work force. Some serve now, White males, as second class citizens, subject to Affirmative Action tyranny and degradation. The consequences of wayward government looking beyond God and unto their own humanitarian thoughts so as to corrupt and change former White-only citizenship, slavery and release law, and a divine institution seem to be irreparable. Wars seem to always end in grief.

Loss of homogeneous political rule through international financial control

The federal, non-debt based banking system was overthrown and the country became ruled by foreigners. A 24-hour, 7-days-a week, 365-plus days-a-year, interest rule was taxed upon the people. Whoever controls the money, controls the people. The young men of the country were thrown into WW I. The pleasant and Godly way of racial and cultural homogeneity was mocked and distorted. The “roaring twenties” came about and defilement became greater. The depression followed. Accurate accounting of missing money could not be verified. Organized crime prospered. Losing homogeneity and rule brought about the making of a world tyranny war machine. Distortion of our laws and defilement increased.

Women of Europe and Germany were mass raped by Communists and their allies. Morgenthau and Jooish-ISIS imposed starvation became a tool to push the defeated women into prostitution afterward. Bastardization, torture and German genocide was the hateful aim of their persecutors, who despised their former, Christian, righteous, noble, family and homogeneity goals. Now the descendants of those deceived by the foreign, Christian and Japhethic-race haters and war criminals are suffering a similar opposition.

The beginning of the prophetic, Masoretic text, “וְהָאָ֥רֶץ חָנְפָ֖ה תַּ֣חַת יֹשְׁבֶ֑יהָ” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Is. 24.5), which I transliterate as, “Vehaeretz hanefa tahat yoshveya… ” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Is. 24.5), says according to my paraphrastic translation, “And the earth is defiled beneath those dwelling in it... ” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Is. 24.5).

We are seeing today our country destroyed with immorality, spin and media control of the unGodly elite (leftists, heretics, Marxists, atheists), and their “shock” attacks upon the former government Constitution.

Changing of laws

Since the absolving of the slavery institution came the racial and cultural pollution, the loss of the rule of our country, legalized adultery, wars, feminism, white male rape, persecution, and now legalized transgenderism. The people advocating such sins are sitting above and masquerading our defiled land.

Continuing, “כִּֽי־עָבְר֤וּ תוֹרֹת֙” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Is. 24.5), which I transliterate, “... ki-averu torot... ” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Is. 24.5), which says according to my paraphrastic translation, “... for they have passed over laws... ” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Is. 24.5), meaning from my perception, “... because they trespassed or violated laws... ” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Is. 24.5); “חָ֣לְפוּ חֹ֔ק” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Is. 24.5), which I tranliterate, “... halefu hoq... ” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Is. 24.5), meaning from my perception and paraphrastic translation, perhaps “... they replaced statute... ” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Is. 24.5); note how Islam changed/replaced good tradition and teaching with the madness of a sexual deviate and made a k-halefate (my coined transliteration): caliphate—a replacement. Muslims were deceived and reject the Torah and its prophecy of the one among the Hebrews (the Lord Jesus Christ) following Moses to have authority on the things of God (Dt 18.15-18); “הֵפֵ֖רוּ בְּרִ֥ית עוֹלָֽם” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Is. 24.5), which I transliterate as, “... heyfeyru berit olam” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Is. 24.5), and put into my paraphrastic translation, “... they broke covenant of futurity” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Is. 24.5).

Thus, paraphrased, “And the earth is defiled beneath those dwelling in it, for they overlooked laws, they replaced statue, they broke the established covenant.” Not only have Muslims committed this act of treachery, but other unfaithful people, especially, the Jooish, who are a cult and have made-up a genealogical replacement and matrilineal custom for a false substitute of the patrilineal, inheritance law of Israel (Nu. 36.5-13). They are unbelieving toward the one God sent (Jesus), and failing to recognize his deity and incarnate oneness with God, observing their own ideas and only part of the second law rather than the law and fulfillment of the law through the new covenant, which was previously prophesied to fulfill the old covenant, (Je. 31.31). Also, those other than the Muslims and Jooish are defiling the land through their own ways and means, being disobedient and overlooking the Holy Scriptures. All defilers, whether intellectually or physically, are guilty.

The “Jewish” changed/replaced the patrilineal succession law (Nu. 36.5-13) with their Torah-unacceptable matrilineal law. They impliedly present themselves as owners of the land of Israel when defiantly they are not a genealogical, Hebrew tribe or sub-race. Patrilineal succession is biblically necessary for inheritance in the land.

Abraham was a man of faith, and his seed (faithful and spiritual descendants) have faith. Changing and replacing the succession law is not an act of faith—it perverts, transgresses and defies the law (Torah). Abraham's natural, patrilineal, genealogical, children were Hebrew as Isaac, not as Karl Marx and impostors implying they are genealogical, physical and spiritual successors of Abraham by calling themselves Jews/Hebrews. Benjamin Netanyahu gave himself a name in Hebrew, but it was formerly in Polish. Converts and Herzl Matilinealists such as himself can't make themselves Hebrew no matter what they call themselves. They change the law, but they can't fool God!

Racial pollution, miscegenation and Non-Northern European immigration

Non-Northern European immigration and racial pollution followed in the late 1800s. Contrarily, ancient Israel generally isolated itself from other races and cultures (Ne. 10.30), and the USA should have followed their wisdom.

DUI transgressors receive harsh penalty but not violators of promiscuity

Modern American criminal law seems to have been built upon OT. forever-guilty lack of principle, not NT grace. It was good that the USA government in its beginning recognized the Bible and OT. as a moral source of enlightenment. However, it could have been much better if the legislators had implemented more fulfillment (NT) teachings. Sadly, our government was infiltrated through waves of non-homogeneous immigration and proponents of naturalization law diminishment and destruction. Legalism, less gracious and more anti-Christian legal thought, was perpetrated to a greater extent. The better laws were diminished to the favor of the non-White immigrant, and honor of the founder-heir civilization was degraded.

Ancient Hebrews upheld their racial laws and sovereignty

Quite the opposite of “equality” protagonists, racial law and sovereignty is something that righteous Nehemiah restored to the Hebrew peoples, which legislators should do for the USA. For instance, a murderer may have been given a death (OT. similarity) or life sentence (NT grace) for his crime. The latter was much more graceful and still protected society from the near presence of the malicious mind of such a criminal.

Deterioration of law through non-White immigration and dilution of status quo culture and moral

On the other hand, a thief may have been given several years in prison, and then released only to find himself with a criminal record that was forced by government officials to never be hidden from society. This never-ending criminal record, forced divulgence would hold a repentant criminal (even though he did prison time and worked at penance and spiritual rehabilitation) forever under a disability to find employment and an honest means of survival. This seems to be a lack of forgiveness on part of the state vengeance (and people) rather than a forgiveness method ethic (New Testament), which would induce encouragement for repentance and self-adjustment toward turning an about-face toward crime. The influx of anti-Christian and cult-like peoples, who deny Jesus Christ, higher sexual standards and mercy, may have de-sensitized the government further.

By no means should a criminal without penal judgment and penance be merely forgiven by the state, however, that does not mean the state vengeance must be limited to a guilty-for-ever judgment by forcing job application information back further than seven years. My personal opinion in order to correct law and avoid hypocrisy would be that a state institute a forgiveness statute disallowing holding a previous record of a non-violent offender (a person never arrested for a human, bodily or fatal injury) for more than a seven-year period, and up to a life-time year rule for anti-sovereignty frauds (illegal immigration intruders), murderers, man-slaughterers, dope-smugglers, extortionists, rapists and other hard-core acts against society.

Differentiation between continuous and non-continuous moral turpitude

The hypocrisy of holding a non-violent, repentant ex-criminal (candy thief for instance or DUI offender that never caused bodily harm to anyone) to a for-ever-review (full criminal history—all offenses required to be listed) by employers is easily deduced by the state tolerances and overturns of previous moral law, passively or corruptly allowing the penalties for promiscuity and sexual sins (formerly given a death penalty sentence) to be legally ameliorated or not recognized.

Adultery was an Old Testament death penalty crime (Lv. 20.10), not a minor or non-continuous offense. It affects relatives and posterity. Seemingly, to blatantly oppose NT and early American morality, the government has even allowed remarriage-adultery without any penalty. This was also permitted during the second-law era of the OT. (Dt. 24.1-3) to appease the hardness of hearts of men following the redaction of law by Moses; however, Jesus repealed (Mt. 19.3-9) such relative immorality so as fornication, adultery and remarriage was not tolerated in the NT. The early Americans, although growing and not perfect, favored NT influence above Old Testament law that was repealed and made better by Christ, disallowing remarriage/adultery (Mt. 5.32, 19.9). Our legal laws should be more congruent with the whole message of the Bible, timely and transparent also.

Despising or disregarding the NT, deteriorating state law has permitted many former sexual life-time crimes without penalty and resisted individual prevention against it! Family and sexual morality protection-laws were thrown out in some instances. Individual right for a man to protect himself and abide within biblical law was outlawed. Condonation of the once legal killing of an adulterer and adulteress caught in the act by a husband was no longer upheld in some states. State tyranny and enforced community passivity became more important than the deterrent of individual, violent, anti-adultery law.

Of course Christians don't want killing as a resolution of such a horrible crime against a family, but we must not be complacent with erring government's answer such as not avenging very wicked intruders of the family with life imprisonment and securing financial debt responsibility to the victim. If a government sends a soldier to kill in war against a nation that has not attacked us, why can't they judge a violent or harmful criminal (rapist, fornicator or adulterer—person who destroys a family) with a harsh penalty!

Psychological effect upon society

The offspring of adulterous parents do not always get involved with drinking and continuous bad habits, but the lack of home fidelity may be a cause for some misguided youth to go astray. Generational curse may be inherited. State and community protection is needed to prevent defiled living and broken homes.

Ted Bundy and government tolerance of consented immorality

Mr. Bundy deserved at least life imprisonment. Even though he may have been sincere in penance according to his pre-death interviews and news broadcasts, he did not deserve to be allowed to live among society ever again. However, he could have been allowed through a more gracious legal system to make his peace with God and suffer a harsh (without luxurious or pleasant items) prison sentence, and perhaps have been able to make amends with his victims' relatives. With all the unnecessary military killing for foreign influence and anti-Christian, greater Israel, such as the Iran-Iraq war, and now the needless Iran conflict, that has been done unnecessarily through USA backing, allowing life imprisonment in a step forward for not taking another life instead of another death, even of such a horrible, sexually-immoral, killer would not have been so bad. Nevertheless, he was executed. That was implementing state law toward a man convicted of forced immorality and murder. However, to our neglect, murderers (Gal. 5.21) are now released and open or consented immorality isn’t even prosecuted.

Ted Bundy and government tolerance of pornography marketing

As an important observation, he mentioned the things that government allowed without prosecution, probably referring to media perversion and specifically pornography in his conversation. This is just once instance of American legal passivity toward immorality, but we live among many types of on-going corruption without penalty while minor crime records of former offenders are forced for review and perpetual discrimination. Couldn't the USA make a forgiveness statute to help ex-offenders of non-violent, non-family and non-community intrusive (non-adulterous), non-continuous crimes go on with their life!

State law and government can change for better or worse

Moralists, whether government officials or spiritual leaders, due to free will are not mentally held to perpetual legal depravity. and government can change for the better, even making more gracious provisions such as disallowing life-time accountability for non-invasive crimes. However, government can also become worse through apostasy of the people and NWO, anti-nationalistic take-over of governments. Morals and justice can be totally disregarded by an adverse government, state or federal regime, and laws changed so as to suit the distortion of the legislative power.

Improvement of status quo

Incrimination and reinstating penalties for sexual crimes would be a positive move for any government. Institution of a seven-year record holding law for minor, non-continuous crime would suffice. On the other hand, severe penalty and financial liability must be required for sexual and violent crimes of moral turpitude. Law must be lifted up toward biblical standards, not degraded to satisfy the lusts and ignorance of man.

Adultery, the Ten Commandments and death penalties

Adultery was a death penalty sin. “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” (Ex. 20.14) It was a sin as stated. “And the man that committeth adultery with another man’s wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.” (Lv. 20.10)

Wives were expected to be chaste. The marriage was authorized by the male parent. The Ten Commandments were given during the time of the first law era of the Old Testament. However, eventually in time, things and circumstances changed and the second law (Deuteronomy) came about. Moses allowed the men of Israel to divorce and remarry. (Dt. 24.1-3) Nevertheless, time passed and fulfillment of the law was brought in by the Lord Jesus Christ. He eventually restored marital sanctity and purity such as that of Adam and Eve (Mt. 19.8); he reproved and explained remarriage as adultery.

Immorality unchecked

Even though American law in its beginning may have recognized adultery through more pure eyes, we live in the apostasy now, and many heretical churches ignore God's reproof through Jesus the Christ. Our state and federal laws have also deteriorated, and remarriage-adulterers go free without indictment. Fornication and uncleanness (Gal. 5.19) is now an unchecked, everyday matter.

Political science: community improvement, crime deterrent at criminal’s expense

Murder (Gal. 5.21) was also a death penalty sin. “Thou shalt not kill”. (Exodus 20.13) It is a horrible, violent crime. Nevertheless, some criminals repent of their ungodliness, including murderers. Due to NT teachings, I personally believe a murderer (repentant or not) should be given a life sentence (harsh labor, a piece of stale, white bread, vitamin pill and water for the first 50 years—pay for your time and crime—and a piece of stale, wheat bread and cup of soup in later years afterward if necessary until death), not capital punishment. A life-sentence criminal should not be an expense to a community, the criminal should be made to do productive, hard labor and pay through financial confiscation all of his or her wealth as retribution for the crime toward society, provision and cost of administration.

Consumption disorder, Old Testament death penalty sins

Although a person who commits a DUI crime may not necessarily have a habitual drunkenness (Gal. 5.21) problem, it is a crime that bears a record. So does murder. However, shockingly, consented abortion, sodomy, adultery and fornication do not!

Habitual substance abuse becomes a weapon against community and society

Nevertheless, a habitual drunkard becomes more of a threat to society when driving a motor vehicle, and could be potentially dangerous (even without the intent of harm) as a murderer. However, if a DUI convict, without a substance abuse conviction of harming others bodily and beyond a mere fender bender, repents from his vice and seeks treatment for his addiction, or is delivered from it, then that risk toward society is lessened. According to my personal opinion, then, it only seems fair to not keep his record for more than seven years, if that, so as to be viewed nationally by legal authorities, employers and those that pertain to prosperity success of a repentant, substance abuser. However, unfortunately at this time, as far as I’ve seen, American law does not see it this way.

Soul Record

We all have a record with God. He knows everything we've done or will do. Every knee will bow and every tongue will confess to Him. Let us make changes in our lives and prepare to live eternally with our Creator, Jesus the Christ. Amen.

Murder and abortion

In the sense of physical predetermination, God has known from before he made the world whom he would form into a human being. He knew our progenitors would give birth to us before we were born. He knows who will come into being in the future. He knows everyone's eternal destiny. He knows everything. He has been from everlasting unto everlasting.

No one has a right to intervene into the sexual reproduction process God created whether before pregnancy, first trimester, or any other time. In the case of fornication, the fornicator should be penalized, not the child resulting as a consequence of the immoral sex act. Jesus said, “… They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick.” (Mt. 9.12) This statement implies that physicians may be useful, but murder is not a medical technique! There may be medical necessities, but it is never necessary to kill, abort (Gal. 5.21), a pre-born baby. “Thou shalt not kill.” (Ex. 20.13) The rationale of men should never attempt to disannul God's commandments. When Rachel bore Benjamin to Jacob she died. This was a sad occurrence; but nevertheless, good came from it—Benjamin lived! The “taking away” needs to be left up to God, not to mortals: “… the LORD gave, and the LORD hath taken away… ” (Job 1.21).

Condoms are an obstruction to life and interference to the purpose of sex

Abortion is when a person uses any instrument, medicine, drug, or other substance whatever, with the intent to procure a miscarriage of any women. Such a woman does not have to be pregnant, that a miscarriage be in fact accomplished.

Pre-born babies have a right to life. When a woman wishes to abort a baby, her problem is not so much a physical problem as it is a spiritual problem. If any woman acknowledged how much God loved her, and wishes all to repent of their sins and come unto him, and put her trust in him, she would never want to displease God. But even if a woman is unbelieving, she could doubt her negative reasoning and give her baby up for adoption if she did not want it.

The base disrespect for life and the moral depravity in government, the medical profession, and throughout the nation and world is horrible. Abortion was looked down upon in the 1950s.

 “For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,” (Mark 7.21).

Technology, law changes, women not working at home

Gender attributes exist today. The verse Gal. 3:28 declares the unity and equality which is in the liberty of faith in Jesus regardless of sexuality. Unity and equality result in deliverance from the bondage of the law, which was of a former covenant; however, the verse does not say that the God-given attributes which distinguish the sexes are abolished.

Both sexes are the workmanship of a divine Creator: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them” (Gen. 1.27). A creative attribute is intrinsic in the image of the creature, which reflects the likeness of God.

Today, we have men playing in women’s sports. The military has female infantry. Upside-downism seems to be the mode.

Functional attributes

God said in the beginning, “… It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.” (Gen. 2.18). The New Testament states, “Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.” (1 Cor. 11.9). A functional attribute of companionship as a helpmate for the man is inherent in the creation of the woman. A pastoral book reflects (1 Ti. 2.13) some of the details of God's creative order mentioned in the Old Testament.

Judicial attributes

God announced judgment and punishment upon the serpent, the woman, the ground, and the man (Gen. 3.14-19). The woman lost the degree of self-rule which she once possessed (although she formerly had a creative attribute to be a help meet and companion according to God's purpose); however, subsequent to the sin and fall of Eve and Adam, the woman also obtained a judicial attribute (1 Ti. 2.14). God announced to her, “I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee” (Gen. 3.16).

God and divine segregation since Babel, homogeneity, not extra-global humanitarian unity

The US has no biblical authority to deploy extra-global humanitarianism over homogeneity and nationalism, which has existed for millennia except until about 150 years ago. Jacob and Esau were not equal. All men are not created equal, and founder-heirs under Abraham Lincoln were thought to deserve superior position (Lincoln, Collected Works 3:145-146), not American Russians, American Chinese or any other non-Northern European American. However, Affirmative Action desecrates White male identity and deprives white males from positions of employment, schooling and other important opportunities.

Our freedom of speech has been diluted, especially when it exposes anti-Christian, greater Israel pursuits. Elon Musk's Twitter does not allow free speech and censors righteous religion, which exposes “Jewish” myth and fraud. As such, he is not an American leader, he is an American parasite. He tramples over the basic aspect of freedom and protection of rights in the US Constitution. America cannot prosper on the technology of man alone, it must look unto God in all things, and His people must be given the opportunity to reach others on the Internet, including Musk’s X.

The family structure in the US has been toppled. Diverse immigration is toxic to homogeneity and Northern European Americans do not want to have children around adversaries. On the other hand, those who love to live around Northern Europeans seem to have no desire to control their multiplication of children. Being pro-life is also being pro-race and realizing Northern Europeans need their own space (in America).

Punishing the white male for his righteous thought of homogeneity with real estate restriction and Affirmative Action is direct proof that the US was overthrown. The tyranny must turn away from global inter-racial humanitarianism and the return to Babylon.  To the contrary, the demonstration that God set at the Tower of Babel is good direction and nations and peoples must remember to follow God and love their own race and posterity. We must appreciate our Japhethic identity and blessing. (Gen. 9.27)

CHAPTER III

Magna Carta: Backtracking

Loss of theological and political power among descendants of a nation

It is necessary that we backtrack where our people went wrong in order to correct the situation. It is easy to realize how many of our national presidents and politicians lacked spiritual foresight, integrity and diligence so as to bless the descendants of the founders of the Constitution and a once great civilization. Following is a list of the things regarding the detriment, retardation, deterioration, and replacement of white dominion due to cult “Jewish” propaganda and willful, subversive implementation.

The gospel had reached England long before the Magna Carta. From hindsight it seems an Anglo-Jubilean inheritance law in Christian simulation of the Torahian inheritance (Nu. 36:5-13) legal establishment should have been specifically legislated so as not to allow any anti-genealogical, anti-racial, and anti-ethnic or subversive influence destroy the concept of Japhethic affinity and posterity inheritance among homogeneous population.

The Reformation brought about great theological insight. However, through social negligence and the lack of consistently promoted education and aggression against anti-ethnic-homogeneous rule or destructive, public influence, the religious, political and social state of the Northern European races became more vulnerable concerning the viperous so-called “Jew”. Martin Luther and early Christian leaders warned about them, but as many good exhortations are not sufficiently taken heed to, eventually the “Jewish”, a cult and people that are not the same genealogical people of ancient Judaism, gained enough advantages in America, Russia and other countries to mock and subvert Christian influenced governments.

Anti-Christian theology and media pervades America

The “Jewish” attempt to claim they are a people as the ancient people of God. However, this is genealogically fraudulent. God’s people in old times were Hebrews, a people who were under the judgment and command of Nu. 36:5-13. They were genealogical tribes, the “Jewish” are not!

“Jewish” Hebrew replacement theology myth, eschatological heresy (Gal. 5.20)

Then, as somewhat Semitic religious hybrids with non-Hebrews, and due to the loss of register and collapse of the continuous, patrilineal chain, and knowingly having lost their Hebrew inheritance, some who wanted to keep their anti-Christian denial of Jesus Christ and his deity, and some of the former Hebrew religion also, formed a matrilineal conversion cult. A millennium and centuries later after the dispersion, Herzl, one of the modern anti-Christian, “Jewish” founders, made his movement which altogether disregarded Hebrew, birth certificate documentation, Nu. 36:5-13, Ezra 2:61-63 and Hebrew prerequisites for tribal identity. A matrilineal law was established by the new nation of Israel in 1950, of course, with no mention of prerequisites of Hebrew register, Nu. 36:5-13 and Ezra 2:61-63. According to Section 4B of the Law of Return (Amendment No. 2) 5730-1970, “For the purposes of this Law, ‘Jew’ means a person who was born of a Jewish mother or has become converted to Judaism and who is not a member of another religion.” (“Law of Return,” § 4B).

You can never legitimately replace the patrilineal, Hebrew genealogical and identity system given by God through Moses (Nu. 36.5-13) with a made-up matrilineal law—it cannot and will never work! Broken genealogical chains and collapsed pedigrees can never be restored regardless of how many Y-DNA tests are taken and how many Hebrew genealogical markers remain. Nevertheless, the Hebrew judgment and commandment of Nu. 36:5-13 was ignored and mockingly, replaced with matrilineal law. So, lacking birth certificates and proof of Hebrew register was not even mentioned and completely ignored—a disqualification in itself to be a tribal member of the Hebrews. Israel became politically occupied with a different religion and people than the ancient Hebrews without much complaint from a world deluded by myth and that does not understand Hebrew tribal identity law.

Learn the Scripture as a defense against myth

The "Jewish" Hebrew Replacement myth can not fool those who know the Scriptures. There are no Hebrews and Jews today. They became extinct. Nu. 36:5-13 is a law no "Jewish" person has the ability to claim, none have legitimate register (Ezra 2:61-63). Their matrilineal law attests to that fact! Herzl Matrilinealists are frauds and have no biblical right to the land. They have no inheritance in the land of Israel. The children of the rejects of the Ezra congregation had closer genealogical chains than the modern "Jewish". Nevertheless, they were separated from the Hebrew people.

Mere Jewish, written Torah circumvention: evasion of the truth and tribal integrity

The Joos, a name that seems more appropriate to me and does not defraud the patrilineal, patriarchs and tribal integrity (Nu. 35.5-13), are very deceptive as to genealogy. As impostors, some misconstrue a reference of Deuteronomy 7:3, 4 as a defense to their lack of patrilineal pedigree and mandated (Ezra 2.61-63) register. However, those verses (Dt. 7.3, 4) are not verses specifically having to do with inheritance: “נַחֲלָה֙” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Nu. 36.7). I read it in the Hebrew from right to left and then give my transliteration to English from left to right, “na ha la'”.

A modern, “Jewish” person would have to have birth certificates all the way back to at least 70 AD to claim a Torah-required register. A priest position came through inherited, documented, genealogical inheritance, called a register; it was not a chosen profession as a modern-day rabbi. Since the “Jewish” who claim to be Jews hav2e no birth certificates proving they have no broken and collapsed patrilineal, genealogical chain, lacking proof of Hebrew tribal identity much more so than the sons of Barzillai (Ezra 2. 61-62), they are disqualified as a Hebrew and any of its tribes.

Let's look at the Scripture:

61 And of the children of the priests: the children of Habaiah, the children of Koz, the children of Barzillai; which took a wife of the daughters of Barzillai the Gileadite, and was called after their name: 62 These sought their register among those that were reckoned by genealogy, but they were not found: therefore were they, as polluted, put from the priesthood. 63 And the Tirshatha said unto them, that they should not eat of the most holy things, till there stood up a priest with Urim and with Thummim. (Ezra 2:61-63)

Torah-required written documents to live in Israel as a Hebrew

The children of Habaiah could not qualify as members of the tribe of Levi and continuous, descendants from Aaron.

אֵ֗לֶּה בִּקְשׁ֧וּ כְתָבָ֛ם הַמִּתְיַחְשִׂ֖ים וְלֹ֣א נִמְצָ֑אוּ וַֽיְגֹאֲל֖וּ מִן־הַכְּהֻנָּֽה׃ (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Ezra 2:62)

The children of Habaiah were related to Barzillai, who had evidently changed his name (v. 61). They were rejected without a registered birth certificate so to speak, and could not fulfill the Torah-required register. There was no conflict about a former connection and relationship with the priesthood, the conflict came because the men who were sons of Habaiah and under genealogical observation could not prove their genealogical lineage with written documents.

True test of a Hebrew: genealogical-accountability and written documents, not Y-DNA

So, it is the same way with the modern “Jewish”, who have no written, continuous birth record proof—they are as polluted people. They would have to prove by written documents, birth certificates, all the way back to at least 70 AD, that they have no broken genealogical chain. Their word can’t be taken anymore than the children of Habaiah. Their mannerisms and meticulous attempts to keep the Sabbath cannot prove it, continuous, written documents are necessary. So, theologically very important, the true test is not DNA, it is proper accounting with a set of continuous, written documents that prove Hebrew patrilineal inheritance (Nu. 36.5-13, Ezra 2:61-63). By the way, no one in the world today has legitimate, Hebrew register. God forbid the “Jewish” should claim they have found a person of any tribe let alone a legitimate priest (cohen)!

The rejection of those related to Barzillai was within a generation or so due to being without Hebrew, birth certificate documentation, but the rejection of those who claim Hebrew identity today would amount to lack of documentation for around a hundred of generations since at 70 AD. At the time of Barzillai there were Hebrews who knew him but would not accept him due to his lack of required documentation. There are no Hebrews to determine whether others are Hebrew today (Ezra 2:63); how much more would the identification officials have denied those with generation gaps as those of the modern, tribal impostors of today!

Modern Jewish false-heir culture: defying the absolutely required male, patrilineal genealogy as Ezra (Ezra 7.1-5) and Hebrew inheritance law (Nu. 36.5-13; Ezra 10.3; Dt. 4.2; Ezra 2.61-62; Ruth 4.18-22)

What tribe did converts Sammy Davis, Jr., Marilyn Monroe, Connie Chung and Liz Taylor think they joined? Or former, Polish descended Benjamin Mileikowsky, now Netanyahu. Previously, even in the 1800's, men proposing themselves as leaders to Zion so to speak, convinced many that the Gentile-Jewish (not putting it that way, of course) should have a land in Israel rather than Africa. England, having a Rothschild financial connection, and still having a great influence after WW I, gave the genealogical, biological and theological impostors a path to their end-goal with the Balfour Declaration. How this works out is up to God, but we Christians must realize the blatant, political, genealogical and non-tribal discrepancy.

Christians are God’s chosen: the Israel of God (Gal. 6.15-16)

We must keep in mind that the real Israel is the brotherhood of Christians, God's chosen and eternal people (Gal. 6.16). We must also keep in mind that the Hebrew Christian converts at the time of Christ were a different genealogical and consequential biological people than the deceivingly proposed modern “Jew”. We, as Christians, do not attempt to impose that we are genealogically Hebrew. Never! We continue to proclaim the faith of the believing Hebrews at the time of Christ.

Deception of a made-up religion

Sammy Davis, Jr., Marilyn Monroe and Connie Chung claimed to be “Jewish” but genealogically (Nu. 36:5-13) were definitely not people known for having been formerly attached to God as those mentioned, “And thou shalt come up against my people of Israel… ”, עַל־עַמִּ֣י (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Ezekiel 38: 16); which I transliterate as “al ammi” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Ezekiel 38: 16) and translate as “my people” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Ezekiel 38.16). The people of God were genealogically (having patrilineal, genealogical, tribal distinction, not a mere drop of Semitic blood) and consequentially genetically Hebrew, continuous, patrilineal descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

The Ezran Covenant protected the Hebrew tribal inheritance and priesthood. Herzl Matrilinealists cannot patrilineally, genealogically and genetically equate themselves to the Hebrew race and subraces. The rejected women and children at the Ezran Congregation failed the genealogical requirement. Neither can those of the “Jews For Jesus” organization or other modern converts to Christianity honestly declare themselves to be Hebrews and Jews. Even the religious elite in America and Israel don't have the continuous, patrilineal genealogy and consequential biology, or theology (continuous, patrilineal lineage with documentation: Numbers 36:5-13, Ezra 2:61-63) to be a former people, “my people” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Ezekiel 38.16), of God. Remember, if the sons of Barzillai with a lineage very close to the Hebrews could not qualify as Hebrew without register, none of the very distant, modern “Jewish” can. How much more the “Jewish” impostors’ word is not any more qualifying than that of the sons of Barzillai.

Myth, deception and cult influence upon the church

The rationalization of church finance doctrine made non-“Jewish” Gentiles prone to subservience. Many Christians are suffering from biblical pseudo-intellectualism and not understanding the Hebrew prescription (Nu. 36.5-13) for race and demographics: Intra-tribal marital, inheritance and anti-genocide law. The Joos, a name I use that does not defraud the patriarchs and their genealogy, are not a genealogical sub-race as the English, Germans, Italians, Nigerians, Egyptians and other genealogical and genetic sub-racial peoples; they are a religious culture and an artificial one at that, covering the spectrum of the three basic races and mixtures (actually defying Hebrew law and genealogical religion): Japhethic (white), Hamitic (black) and Semitic (reddish or earthly type).

Actually, the Joos are “Jewish” Gentiles. (Luke 21:24) Our media is bought and owned by the anti-Christian elite, so the pseudo-intellectualism taught at Ivy League schools and upside-downism is pushed by the Jooish lobbies.

However, it is slanderous toward the patriarchs to equate the Joos (Herzl Matrilinealists) with the ancient Jews, two different, genealogical and genetic peoples (Nu. 36.5-13). Many have been seduced by the absence of continuous-patrilineal genealogy and false ideology of Herzl Matrilinealism. “Zion revisionism” and an eschatological, “modern return” myth of Herzl Matrilinealists, part of the apostasy we are suffering, has been taught instead of the eschatological, return of the Hebrew, found, lost ten tribes who followed the Lord 2,000 years ago or so. All the Hebrew tribes were united in Christ (James 1.1). Hebrew and Gentile Christians began to overcome nations and political persecution as the servants of God spread Christianity and the gospel. The world began to bloom.

Before the NT

The Maccabees were a great family. They lived before the New Covenant and the coming of Jesus Christ. They were zealous and inspiring men who led others of their people to fight and overcome men against God, very different from the impostors and alternative-Jewish people today, who actually mock covenants and fight against the people of God (Christians) and their racial integrity. The Maccabees honored Hebrew law and that includes continuous, patrilineal inheritance (Nu. 36.5-13; Ezra 10.3; Dt. 4.2; Ezra 2.61-62; Ruth 4.18-22).

Cult disregard of genealogical, intra-tribal race

Regardless of dominant sub-race of other people, the “Jewish”, perhaps over a millennia without a concern for Nu. 36:5-13, which they have nothing to do with, do like to inter-marry white people, especially the more prosperous and intelligent ones. The Rothschild's themselves are racial self-haters so as to condone inter-tribal breeding of their modern religion even though they are generally Japhethic (white). The Joos are matrilinealists and conversionists, that in its self proves they are not the same genealogical and genetic people as the Hebrews. They are marching toward an artificial Zionism and even fraud of God's real estate, the land of Israel.

Conversionists

Sammy Davis, Jr. and Elizabeth Taylor may have been different sub-races but their Jooish-Hellywood sub-race-defying culture was the same. As I mentioned before, the Jooish are not a sub-race so they lack biblical, genealogical discernment and like to marry those who do and do not belong to a genealogical sub-race also. All they may need is to convert the spouse to a Joo is a conversion ceremony. Sadly, many in our poor churches may think, “Wow, a person of the ancient tribes!” However, the Japhethic, Hamitic or Semitic victim of the Jooish marriage may regret the loss of genealogical purity among posterity if he or she is not careful. Racial and cultural background checks are wise.

The matrilineal law of the Herzlists (modern “Jewish”) cannot duplicate patrilineal law (Nu. 36.5-13) nor the principal of the kinsman redeemer, which adhered to patrilineal law. Notice the Torah scribe (Ruth 4.18-22) looked out for us that we would not be deceived by a cult-invention, for instance, matrilineal law. The Herzlist women don't have patrilineal inheritance as Naomi. Nevertheless, Ruth received great grace through Boaz because she was not accepted by her kinsman redeemer who had first choice (Ruth 4.6) because of her progeny and being a Moabitic woman. Suffering worse consequences, the non-Hebrew women of Ezra 10 were totally rejected and put away (amicable expulsion) by the Hebrews.

No biblical inheritance in Israel among the Joos

Today, modern Israel is occupied by the “Jewish”, a non-Hebrew people, who have less credentials than the rejected of Ezra. They have no genealogical, hence genetic and biological, inheritance, and their religious culture (matrilineal succession) is in direct opposition to patrilineal law of God and Moses (Nu. 36.5-13), the covenant (Ezra 10.3) and the kinsman redeemer law. The Jewish can defraud, make themselves a cult and spread myth, but they can't make themselves Hebrews/Jews.

You will be hated if you follow Jesus Christ

Some may openly hate you if you expose their vice and fraud. I was conversing with an ill woman who proclaimed to be Jewish in the comment section of a video on the Internet. She reviled me: “YOU SPEAK AGAINST THE MOST HIGH, A HALLMARK OF THE LAST BEAST!” She said, “Stay in the dark and in bondage to Idolatry, your sin, your choice.” She blasphemed Christianity: “Rabbi shines the Light of Gd and His Holy Eternal Torah, Saul/Paul the Con Man of Tarsus/all things to all men taught against Gd and His Holy Eternal Torah. Christianity is Pure Pagan Idolatry, it is the LAST BEAST!” She spoke evil of the birth of Jesus Christ and many other things: “Remember, it can't be her husband Joseph, for according to the Greek Tall Tales, Joseph wanted to DIVORCE Mary after finding out she was Pregnant. So that means IF Jesus existed, he was born on the wrong side of the blanket, a mamzer which would account for the chip on his shoulder and his rebellious spirit that caused his family to believe he had gone Insane and for Roman Authorities to convict and crucify him for the crime of sedition.” Her blasphemy was so wicked that I retracted a mentioned prayer for God to help her. I could not pray for her.

Myth, made-up religion and lack of required-genealogy

Biblical genealogy and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ does not matter to them, matrilineal culture and anti-Christianity does (“Law of Return,” § 4B). Without a matrilineal, progenitive culture, which they made up in opposition (Dt. 4:2) to the Hebrew, Torah-required, patrilineal law (Nu. 36.5-13), they could not even be a people from the conglomeration of global, cultural (not racial) Jesus Christ-denying ethnicity they are.

A different people than the Hebrews

The Joos are not a genealogical race and they deviate from Hebrew law as to inheritance (Numbers 36.5-13). Even though some of them may have Semitic DNA, they are mere Gentiles, being considered no more Hebrew than the rejects of Ezra 10, and as the sons of Barzillai (Ezra 2.61-62) without possibility of ever having documented proof.  Due to evading Hebrew genealogical law and trying to replace it in many other ways they think they can, they aren't genuine and experts at Biblical law and fulfillment; however, they may know the Hebrew language. Nevertheless, that does not and can never make them Hebrew. Also, cult circumcision can make a person lose weight and flesh, but it can't make him a Hebrew. Logically, if they are not Hebrews, they are Gentiles (see Luke 21:24). These Talmudic heretics (but still Gentiles!) are very skilled at deviating and attempting to make the Old Testament void of a God-only-begotten Christ and a messiah with patrilineal lineage (Mt. 1:16, Luke 3:23), the messiah that fulfilled Dt. 18:15-19. Don't let them deceive you.

Church finance principles and elementary practice

Land is a material basis for autonomy. An important lesson to learn from the now extinct, unbelieving and failing Hebrews of 70 AD is that God ran them out of their given land because of their lack of faith and disobedience to him, especially concerning the messiah (Dt. 18.15-19). Hence, considering their rebellion, wandering, miscegenation, misery and suffering, and failure to repent, no non-Jooish Gentile should ever have wanted to let a descendant of such a dispersed person or disingenuous proselyte, especially the more heretical, manage his affairs. However, gullibility and indifference to this wisdom and hindsight has been one of America's greatest and fatal errors.

Ariel Deceivi Illustration:

Today, it is impossible for a whole-race person let alone a mixed-race person to be a real Jew: Hebrew patrilineal succession and register is required (Ezra 2:61-63). This phenomenon also makes the term "Judeo-Christianity" disgraceful and incoherent in the sense of pseudo-biological pretense and mongrelism.

This racial heresy is contrary to Ezran Judaism, which required continuous, Hebrew patrilineal bloodline progeny. Even as much as half-breeds were deported from the Ezran congregation. The rule is seed of an Israeli father and mother according to Berith (covenant) and Torah (law), no mixing with people of other demographic-genetics (Ne. 10.30). Racial and cultural homogeneity is the standard of old and today.

However, the rule against polluted seed has been molested and covered up to a further extent by modern-Talmud Judaism, which has propagated mongrelism and numbers of cult adherents rather than integrity to God and commandment.

Let me illustrate this:

Non-Jacobean biological groups or hybrid generations actually can not qualify regardless of haplotype, Y-DNA and mtDNA testing— it only took one occurrence of miscegenation (Ezra 2:61-62) to disqualify seed (mixed or partial descendants) from Ezran Israel.

It doesn't take a geneticist to realize skin color may be used for basic discernment among many racial groups and it sometimes does at least show the effect of recent lineage. For example, look at the dark Negro, and on the other end of the spectrum, the light White: both generally give evidence of recent non-racial-miscegenation. The exception to this would be recombined recessive alleles, which would give evidence of non-purity and mixed blood (manifestation of inter-racial genetics). To further clarify by a basic example, if you ever saw a mulatto child from a dark Negro and a light White, in many cases you can tell it does not look totally like either of its parents!

Racial traits and likenesses

Therefore, I believe you can consider it almost sure that if you meet two people in a group with mere, blatant skin color differences, and especially with variant bone structures, who claim to be full, biological Israelites, mother and father from the same lineage as those accepted at the Ezra congregation (Ezra 10), a true parental and matrilineal, genealogical descendant from Jacob without a broken pedigree, you can mark at least one out as a liar. Children of a pure biological background identify their parents through their inherited genealogical-genetic traits or likenesses, not differences.

However, among such a religiously pompous group, if none honestly claims to be a true, full-blooded, biological Israelite but claims to be a Jew without the required patrilineal pedigree (Nu. 36.5-13) and register (Ezra 2.61-63), such is a fraudulent, pretentious hypocrite, who insults the racial integrity of patriarchal Israel, makes void the law, disregards the covenant, and defames the name "Jew" and the patriarchs. Let such a one call himself a Joo or something else, noting a different bloodline and religion of that of the holy, written Torah.

Example

Now, suppose, using hypothetical imagination, back in Ezran times, after the strange women and their half-breed children had been deported from the congregation of Israel, that there was a woman by the name of Miss Deportee. Miss Deportee had righteously been divorced from a man of the congregation of Ezra because she was not an Israeli biological descendant (Hebrew), nor could she claim mother-in-law, deceased son kinsman redeemer rights (Ruth 1.1-5). Therefore she left Israel with a half-breed child.

Now, the child was a female and grew up. She traveled part of the world and met Harry Hongt, whom she married in China. They had a female child. This child grew up and married another (technically speaking) mongrel, named Ariel Deceivi (from an unknown genealogical-biological lineage), who was taught in a heretical (which also would have been ironic at that time), modern-Talmud school (Alternative Jewism) for partial, Jewish advocates and anti-Shemites (non-full Semitic people). Well, as time passed they had children and Ariel claimed his family was “Jewish” to people of different lands although he could not have snowed the Ezran congregation in Israel since it was only a few generations past the established covenant for homogeneity and restoration of the law. (Ezra 10.3)

Now, let's look at the situation from a biblical perspective. In part Ariel would have been rhetorically correct in saying the family was “Jewish” because of the partial Israeli genetic factor through the lineage of the mixed-Israeli child of Miss Deportee, his wife's ancestor. However, he could not say his family was Hebrew. In terms of integrity of Berith and Torah (covenant—Ezra 10, and law—Nu. 36:5-13), that would have been mere deception.

If the child of Miss Deportee could not have been accepted among the congregation of Israel at the institution of Berith (covenant), then it would be impossible for her descendants to be able to obtain the necessary genealogical-biological credentials and written documents (Ezra 2:61-63) which would have prevented her discrimination and deportation in the first place. Therefore, the family of Ariel would have been no more acceptable to the congregation of Israel than the daughter of Miss Deportee, a partially-Israeli ancestor who was considered a non-Hebrew and other-tribe/race mongrel (not capable of inheritance in Israel) deported with her mother.

Thus, similarly, contemporarily we see the results of the lack-of-continuous-genealogy lie of promoted mongrelism and erring religion (cult) of modern-Talmud Judaism/Joodaism today, not the Ezran, patrilineal, genealogical-genetic Judaism of the Bible. Not the documented, genealogical (Ezra 2:61-62) evidence of a Hebrew. False Jewism, in its many various forms, even other than mongrelism, surrounds us everywhere we go. Anti-Christianity among Semitic, Hamitic and Japhethic subraces and mixtures is enveloping our world. To the grief of the righteous, it has had profound and detrimental, intra- and international influence among the naive nations, and even Israel itself.

Summary, anti-Christians and myth-believers have great numbers

So, concluding, whole-race non-documentation, mongrelism and modern-Talmudicism go hand and hand, but are in rebellion against God contrarily to Berith and Torah. It is part of the “Jewish” Hebrew-replacement theology myth.

Credit slaves and duped Japhethic nations

A major event concerning the demise of the USA began with insider special-interest-rule and the Federal Reserve Bank. The biblical principles of land and people, land in tribal perpetuity, and non-usury against a member of the nation were deliberately perverted for the advantage of the national enemies.

The religious doctrine of land and people

In ancient days, Israel was a unique, genealogical group and a nation. However, the re-establishment of the nation of Israel has been perverted with “Jewish” Hebrew-replacement theology and myth. Biblically, the nation of Israel cannot lawfully accept biological impostors (non-documented whole-race persons and pariah-mongrels) as heirs of the patriarchs: Torah. Actually, their citizens are genealogically and  biologically outcast status according to Ezran deportation identification methods and righteousness, and there are no known Hebrews in the land of modern Israel today.

Parasitic, anti-Christian greater Israel policy among Japhethic nations

Today, in modern Israel, there cannot anyone be found with Hebrew patrilineal succession, no priests with the required genealogy and register, and the children of the occupiers of the land are no more genealogically eligible than those that were accounted “… as polluted, put from the priesthood” at the time of Ezra. (Ezra 2.62). According to my paraphrastic translation, such were deposed due to desecration: “יְגֹאֲל֖וּ” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Ezra 2.62), which according to my understanding is transliterated, “yegoahl'u”. The modern impostors cannot produce a Hebrew messiah, which we know has already come—the Lord Jesus Christ, who had patrilineal succession (Matthew 1.1-17). The made-up matrilineal law of the “Jewish” can’t suffice and is 180 degrees from the required patrilineal law of Nu. 36:5-13.

Ante-WW II Germany attempted racially homogeneous (although not specifically in the patrilineal sense) doctrine of its own people, but the Internationalist-misled world in its ignorance and passivity fought against Christian favor, prosperity and the concept of racial purity development. It seems they were led by the anti-Christian, greater Israel policy even then, to intrude, divide, pollute, kill and overcome those who attempted genealogical purity, the posterity-and-demographic conscious, moral ones of the Japhethic and non-“Jewish” peoples. Now, the descendants of Northern Europe, wherever they may be, are struggling to enjoy even a part of their lost sovereignty and to keep their progeny un-polluted (deposed due to desecration) from other races.

Samaritan woman at the well: genetic differentiation between Hebrew and non-Hebrew

Genealogy: According to verse 9 of John 4, we see that the Jews did not associate with the Samaritans, who before the Assyrian conquest the people that lived in their land were part of the northern kingdom (ten tribes) of Israel. This justified separation was probably because of genealogical, genetic and theological differences due to the Samaritans had been previously under the treacherous hegemony of Assyria and later the Romans. Many may have miscegenated.

The 144,000 and found ten lost tribes

All of the Hebrew tribes had been under threat but God spared a remnant. This is evident when Jesus went through Nephthalim: At the time of Matthew there were Hebrew people who had patrilineal inheritance in Israel (Numbers 36:5-13), in Zabulon, and the land of Nephthalim. James 1:1 proves that there were twelve Hebrew tribes united in faith after the time of Jesus Christ also. Even though there had been a former carrying-away by Assyria, all the faithful of the Hebrew tribes in Jesus the Christ were brought together through the light of Jesus Christ. This is the essence of the 144,000.

Modern Samaritans and “Jewish” fail the Hebrew required, genealogical test: lost register

Perhaps it is possible that some Samaritans who were descendants of the ten tribes at the time of Jesus may not had lost Hebrew patrilineal descendancy and proof of register although they were associated with the Assyrians, who conquered and displaced the territory. However, today, no one has necessary, register and evidently did not and was not able to retain it proving consecutive, Hebrew lineage. Many speak Arabic; and Islam, which had hegemony over the people for several centuries, does not follow patrilineal law as the Hebrews did.

Matrilinealism and fake-Jew return eschatology

Nevertheless, the modern “Jewish” do not have patrilineal descendancy either, and lack of necessary and required, register denies them inheritance also in Israel (Nu. 36.5-13). Logically, there can be no modern return of the Hebrews to Israel as the erring eschatological teachers imply. The return of the twelve tribes was at the time of Jesus (James 1.1) and after a great testimony and proliferation of Christians, they are genealogically extinct now.

The return and twelve tribe re-establishment was after the time of Christ. Christians, who believe in the usurpation of Israel by the Herzl Matrilinealists as a worthy Hebrew-return event have been misled with myth and fake-Jew return eschatology. Some of the Matrilinealists and proselytes may have never even had an ancestor who set foot in Israel. Even if they did, none have followed continuous, patrilineal genealogical law (Nu. 36.5-13) and retained the required register (Ezra 2.61-62).

Theology: Samaritan woman

In verse 15 she asks for the water that she will not thirst after and Jesus begins in verses 16-18 to give her that living water that springs up by correcting her sexual immorality (Jn. 4). He reveals to her that the man she is living with is not her husband, and gives her a brief history of her former marriages but not in depth.

Samaritans did not worship the true God because they did not know what they worship (Jn. 4.22). However, she did expect the messiah to come (Jn. 4.25). She learned that Jesus was the Christ and told her people of her experience. They came to see for themselves. (Jn. 4.26-30)

Marriage after death or divorce

Many wonder about the woman's situation: Was she formerly morally married under the biblical law at that time. It seems she was because Jesus said that she has had five husbands (v. 18). A woman was permitted to marry another man if her husband died. She was also permitted according to Dt. 24:1-3 to remarry if she had a written divorce contract.

However, the issue of her immorality is not with the former husbands but with the man that she is not married to (v. 18). The relationship the woman had with the man is mysterious. Was she living in fornication or adultery? It is not directly specified.

Adultery

If it was an adulterous relationship, her last husband would have been alive at the time of her immorality. Today, many seem to disregard the NT and still go by the OT. remarriage law, which Christians consider as adultery. Compare Liz Taylor (who claimed to be a virgin at the time of her first marriage) with at least seven or so legal but not sanctified marriages afterward.

Fornication

If it was a relationship of fornication (I Corinthians 7.2), the Samaritan woman’s last husband would have to have passed or he had given her a written contract of divorce (Dt. 24.1-3). However, it is doubtful that is the latter case because Jesus did not recognize Dt. 24:1-3 in Mt. 19:9. Whatever the case may be, she did not lawfully marry the man she was living with. What if the Samaritan woman had sex with other men after the five husbands and then shacked up with the last man. Compare our many fallen women of America while knowingly being unchaste marrying and defiling other men.

Victim or willing participant

We don't know her life history after her notifying her community she met the messiah. If the Samaritan woman at the well had been sexually abused after the five husbands, she did nothing about it evidently before she met Jesus. That would have been her error and responsibility to correct it. Nevertheless, she was awakened to her circumstances and lack of fulfillment. One step out of immorality and into spiritual advancement and morality would have been a confession and admission to break up with her current man. She did not go that far to do that up to the end of the conversation.

The righteous are different than the sinful because they confess and repent from their error. A victim doesn't have to continue in sin unless she chooses to. Many abused women in our time need to reach beyond the status of what we know about the Samaritan woman, learn and specifically admit their wrong and bring the end of immorality with works following: abstinence of men.

Summary

Jesus told the Samaritan woman that the man she was living with was not her husband. He brought her to the living water through pointing out her immorality. She had drank water before, but it was not water that opened her mind to spiritual things she needed to change. She needed the word of God. After a brief conversation with him, she acknowledged (Jn. 4.19) that Jesus knew she was living in sin.

Regardless, Jesus Christ brought in the new covenant, and remarriage (now adultery in NT times) nor fornication (1 Corinthians 7.2) were permitted according to the message to the deacons (1 Timothy 3.12) and teachings of the church hierarchy. However, for a woman to have a clean conscience and live righteously, she was obligated to repent of her contemporary adultery or fornication and live single. Repentance and living single is a resolve for adultery or fornication. God can give living water and salvation, but for a sinner to repent of her adultery or fornication she must make the personal change of determining to live single. That is reasonable for anyone wanting to live for God and not allow the lusts of the flesh (Gal. 5.19) to be more important than living single for God.

So, to live single may legally require an illegitimate marriage to be righteously dissolved through annulment, a form of divorce (Mt. 19.9). Under all circumstances, living with the former bed-partner would not be acceptable.

Land in tribal perpetuity: the basis for existence and inheritance of particular tribes (Nu. 36.5-13)

Intra-tribal economy: the value standard is directly related to the produce and expenses of the land. The reason our people have been displaced and dispossessed in the USA is because our religious and political leaders failed to promote biblical finance principles.

First, through perpetual inheritance laws, even as Israel and Moses (through God's command) made laws for its Semitic tribes, if our country had legally disallowed our American Northern European (non-Semitic, but favored through the New Covenant) tribes from being displaced and our land from being sold to non-assimilating foreigners, we would not be in such a predicament: border-crossers would not have been able to buy our land and displace us. Moses never tolerated Israel to sell their land to foreigners.  

Second, they should have also legally prevented interest-earning, usury-based finance (especially disallowing the institution of non-Northern-European and foreign organizations such as the Federal Reserve Bank). Since land would have had to be purchased only among our own Japhethic people and by other means than interest-paying credit, we would have been able to favorably manage the properties and institutions, and to restrict the control of real assets of the country in our hands.

Christian jubilean finance system: land held perpetually for heirs

A self-preserving financial system and techniques of providing for our people's schooling and living needs could have been introduced without diminishing our prosperity and posterity. Now we hardly can own and enjoy anything without intrusion from peoples of other lands. It is not likely that we have the collective racial discipline to turn things around. Deterioration gets worse and worse as the decades and now, multi-democracy go by.

American lawlessness has further protruded to destroy the divine rights as to the family social structure once permitted in this country. Intra-tribal (intra-racial) and inter-tribal (inter-racial) laws and ethics as to providing for one's family and posterity are required to preserve a people from financial and moral devastation; this can be seen through the commandments of Moses: these laws and commandments (Nu. 36.5-13) protected the inheritance of the people of Israel. From this, it can be deduced that a righteous nation should protect the inheritance of its people even to the extent of intra-tribal segregation. Intra-tribal laws are small parts or building blocks of the larger set of laws, or tribal laws, of the Bible.

On the other hand, contrary to tribal laws and ethics, are the other-tribal influences, or Philistine antagonism. In contrast to tribal segregation, see Ne. 10:30 concerning laws with other tribes, peoples of different, patrilineal genealogy, biology and culture. Our nation has been subverted and lost its longing for insight from the Old Testament books as a guideline.

We are paying a tremendous price for passivity. Our lack of knowledge of God's things and dignity has given our enemies an opportunity to corrupt and pervert us. Many of our women have been devastated. We have been continually insulted and deprived through desovereignization tactics. Now, the non-white and Philistine-inclined races are taking advantage of the heirs of the founders of the USA in economic, social, and basic fundamental rights as to inheritance. Our Japhethic constituents have not collectively guarded the oil in their lamps.

Anti-church finance schemes (usury) should not have been tolerated to creep into our government

Interest and usury (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Dt. 23.20) are basically the same thing. The word “interest” or “usury” is interchangeable in these particular verses, it is the word “נֶ֥שֶׁךְ” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Dt. 23.20), which I transliterate, “ne'ysheyk” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Dt. 23.20) and sounds like (in what I presume a more phonetic form) “na'y shayk” (Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex, Dt. 23.20). The Psalmist commends, “Lord, who may dwell in your sanctuary? Who may live on your holy hill? He... who lends his money without usury.... will never be shaken” (Ps. 15.1-5). My Oxford dictionary defines “usury” as:

(1) this charge (interest) should be excluded in loans to Christians;
(2) and Christians should resist and reject loan temptations from non-Christian individuals and institutions;
(3) and even if the case may be that both parties are Christians and only Christians, the loan should be without interest and not extend beyond a period of seven years.

Interest-earning as an advantage to God's people (OT. view)

Long ago, in BC times, before the luxurious and holy kingdom of our glorious King David was established, God had given land and inheritance laws, among financial and other beneficial rules, to his followers.

No-interest-earning: the rule for today (NT view)/New Covenant changes upon finance

Formerly, it was not dishonorable gain for a Jew to charge a Gentile interest on a loan: At that time the Jews were God's chosen and favored people. However, the believing and obedient Gentiles were given an entrance into the New Covenant as God's chosen and favored people when Jesus Christ, the Son of God, made a sacrifice by his death for all men. These OT. laws, and NT changes along with the acknowledgment of believing Gentiles as God's people, were remembered by pious, church leaders and the reverent Gentiles.

Christians are under grace, not under the law. The Scriptures had to be fulfilled concerning the new covenant that God said he shall make with his people: “Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:” (Je. 31.31). And also: “God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.” (Jn. 4.24).

This new covenant was brought into effect and established by Jesus. The new covenant is better than the old one—fulfilling the Old Testament laws rather than destroying them. See my free book “Nature, Theology, Law, Prophets And Fulfillment”. New covenant teachings repeal some OT. laws and practices, and extend others, for instance: Sacrifices and gifts were perfected by the sacrifice of Jesus obtaining eternal redemption for us (Heb. 9.10-12); turning the other cheek (active piety by means of non-retaliation, not passivity) rather than “a tooth for a tooth" (Mt. 5.38); cf. Ex. 21:24; allowing all meat to be eaten (including pork) rather than only specified meat (Acts 10.11); cf. 1 Tim. 4:5, Lv. 11:7, and 2 Maccabees 6:18; also note the glorious virtue to abide within the OT. covenant regulations at the cost of their lives (King James Version Apocrypha, 2 Maccabees 6.18-7.42); the Jews are no longer required to keep feast days and celebrations (Col. 2.16); cf. Ps. 81:3-5, Ne. 10:32-33; circumcision of the flesh is no longer required (Acts 15.9); cf. Gen. 17:10, Acts 15:1; etc.

New covenant financial changes

The prophecy-fulfilling, new covenant resulted in a great change in financial aspects toward Gentiles. The contrasting works of love of the Gentiles with the works of evil of the hateful Jews were proof that God had spread his favor among the nations. To the loss of the later greedy, disbelieving and corrupt “Jewish”, who did not accept God's OT. genealogical laws (Nu. 36.5-13) and made up their own religion, nor did they abide by the new covenant and the faithful Gentiles as God's people, Christians were warned not to allow the former Jews, who became extinct, and anyone else to take advantage of them through interest-earning any longer. Church officials were expected to live exemplary lives. The Council of Nicaea, Canon # 17 (First Council of Nicaea) called for the revocation of an office of a church official if he made any money “dishonorable gain”—gains upon interest, no matter how slight.

Capital must protect race and culture

I personally believe money can be used for investment profitably without interest-earning. However, some of the profit of investment must be re-invested into business to keep it prosperous and not lose according to inflation. Growth can be achieved without dishonorable gain.

Capitalism and democracy cannot work hand-in-hand for the abiding people (race) without restrictions for those of a different race and emigrants from other areas. The Henry Ford, Sr. experience has proven this. America has become a tyrannical, anti-democracy through the subversion of the Internationalists. Our politicians, not only our former land and other possessions, are bought and owned by our subverters.

Capitalism is not Christian husbandry

Sure, capitalism is generally better than communism, but both tend to be ruled by the unGodly elite. Both sides promote an economic system for its particular group or subset of people. However, Christian husbandry is a biblical, group way of establishing economics. It is guarded by the laws of Moses (Torah) and advanced by the changes of the NT, which prevent tyranny or the unGodly from ruling over the particular group. The only way unGodliness can overtake Christian husbandry is through the perversion of the group or followers of Christianity. We live in a conglomeration of collective, economic lawlessness and anti-husbandry today. Our world is headed for global tyranny!

Throughout the early centuries the problem of dishonorable gain and interest-earning was dealt with a strong hand by order of church authority, and the people prospered by the church being on target with the Scriptures and this obedience. Although it has been said that Calvin rationalized the no-interest-earning virtue, which I can’t verify and haven’t scrutinized, nevertheless, Martin Luther theologically and politically continued in direct financial faithfulness as to not protecting anti-Christianity and the economic endeavors of the “Jewish” (even though as far as I know, he did not understand and distinguish and express the lack of genealogical register of impostors).

However, this quote below is not hard to find on the Internet, but it may be difficult to find without a “Jewish” apologetic comment and an “anti-Semitic” reference. The dinosaur media, so to speak, manipulates information unfavorably when “Jewish” exposure is performed. If you let context be king, you can see the intention of Luther warning the public against the financial domination of an anti-Christian group.

Martin Luther: rich “Jewish” man with twelve horses, desiring to be a kokhba (star)

It seems the “Jewish” Kockba idea turned into a group financial and industrial wealth and business strategy that has continued until this day. The anti-Christian elite accumulated bank, industry, politics and media control. They multiplied their influence. They countered Luther’s threat of dominion over them and his restrictions for them to have business (and take advantage of others) in Christian lands. They eventually expanded and bought up local and regional media systems in prospective nations. People who have exposed them have been censored and countered with media programs that attempt to ameliorate the seriousness of the demise of Christians, other religious peoples and the non-“Jewish”. The aim seems to be a Jesus-denying and anti-Christian greater Israel, with a non-registered (Ezra 2.61-62) messiah that persecutes and rules over others.

                                      Works Cited

“Broken Hearts with Ruth Graham”, YouTube, uploaded by, Pure Passion Media, Apr. 3,

2012, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=megnwKCP5ao. 9:41

“Democracy, n.” The Oxford Universal Dictionary, 3rd ed., Oxford University Press, 1955.

“Gov DeSantis: They have made a HUGE mistake…”, YouTube,

uploaded by Fox News, Apr. 8, 2026

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9A5RCiAaNA&t=65s 6:42

“Usury, n.” The Oxford Universal Dictionary, 3rd ed., Oxford University Press, 1955.

Leclercq, Henri. "The First Council of Nicaea." The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol.

11. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1911.

https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11044a.htm.

Ford, Henry, publisher. The International Jew: The World's Foremost Problem. 1920

1922. [Radio Islam], [https://www.islam-radio.net/islam/english/books/ford/index.htm].

Graham, Billy. "Marriage, Your Home and You." Decision, June 1986, p. 2

Graham, Billy. The Answer to Broken Homes.   Minneapolis, Billy Graham Evangelistic

Association, copyright 1953 (revised 1955) (copyright renewed 1981).

Lincoln, Abraham. Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln. Volume 3 [Aug. 21, 1858-Mar. 4,

1860]. Rutgers University Press, 1953. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections.

https://name.umdl.umich.edu/lincoln3 Accessed April 26, 2026.

Lincoln, Abraham. Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln. Vol. 5 [Oct. 24, 1861-Dec. 12, 1862].

Rutgers University Press, 1953. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections,

quod.lib.umich.edu/l/lincoln/lincoln5. Accessed April 26, 2026.

Luther, Martin. "On the Jews and Their Lies." 1543. Luther's Works, vol. 47: The Christian in

Society IV, translated by Martin H. Bertram, edited by Jaroslav Pelikan and Helmut T.

Lehmann, Fortress Press, 1971, pp. 121–306.

Protocols of the Elders of Zion, published by Islam-Radio

[https://www.islam-radio.net/protocols/ProtocolsOfZion.pdf]

State of Israel. Law of Return (Amendment No. 2), 5730-1970. Passed by the Knesset on

2nd Adar Bet, 5730 (10 Mar. 1970). Knesset,

main.knesset.gov.il/EN/about/history/documents/kns7_return_eng.pdf.

The Greek New Testament. Edited by Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort,

Harper & Brothers, 1881. Perseus Digital Library, Tufts University,

http://data.perseus.org/texts/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0031.tlg001.perseus-grc1, Accessed 4 April

2026.

The Holy Bible: King James Version. Electronic ed. of the 1769 edition of the 1611 Authorized

Version., Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1995.

The Apocrypha: King James Version. Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1995, p. 2 Mac 6:18.

Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex: UXLC 2.5 (Build 27.6). Tanach.us Inc., Apr. 2026, tanach.us/.

United States, Congress. “8 CFR § 316.10 - Good Moral Character.” Electronic Code of

Federal Regulations, U.S. Government Publishing Office,

www.ecfr.gov/current/title-8/chapter-I/subchapter-C/part-316/section-316.10.

Accessed 15 May 2026.

United States. Naturalization Act of 1790, ch. 3, § 1, 1 Stat. 103, 103–0

Back To Source Page

Next Chapter

Workin’ on it, Lord willing and I should live… https://hesedken.com/free_book.html

Alphabetical Index, Greek And Hebrew Citations