Home | Audio Ministry | Important Books | Broadcast Library | Online Books | Store

Yesterday, Today & Forever

Chapter 10 (Part 2)
Israel’s Scriptural Identity: Spiritual Aspects, Pt. 3

Available for a suggested donation of $14.00.

Israel to Have a New Heart and Spirit and to Be Born Anew

In 1982 the Congress of the United States of America declared the Bible to be the Word of God, and America's president proclaimed 1983 to be the "Year of the Bible":



PUBLIC LAW 97-280 - OCT. 4,1982

Public Law 97-280 96 STAT. 1211

97th Congress

Joint Resolution

Authorizing and requesting the President to proclaim 1983 as the "Year of the Bible."

Whereas the Bible, the Word of God, has made a unique contribution in shaping the United States as a distinctive and blessed nation and people;

Whereas deeply held religious convictions springing from the Holy Scriptures led to the early settlement of our Nation;

Whereas Biblical teachings inspired concepts of civil government that are contained in our Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States;

Whereas many of our great national leaders - among them Presidents Washington, Jackson, Lincoln, and Wilson - paid tribute to the surpassing influence of the Bible in our country's development, as in the words of President Jackson that the Bible is "the rock on which our Republic rests;"

Whereas the history of our Nation clearly illustrates the value of voluntarily applying the teachings of the Scriptures in the lives of individuals, families, and societies;

Whereas this Nation now faces great challenges that will test this Nation as it has never been tested before; and

Whereas that renewing our knowledge of and faith in God through Holy Scripture can strengthen us as a nation and a people: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the President is authorized and requested to designate 1983 as a national "Year of the Bible" in recognition of both the formative influence the Bible has been for our Nation, and our national need to study and apply the teachings of the Holy Scriptures.

Approved October 4, 1982

Today the United States of America is composed of many peoples from other races, but let us face fact. If it were not for the white Celto-Saxon peoples who providentially inhabited her shores, America would never have been a Christian nation and the preceding proclamation would never have been made.

In The Natural History of the Human Species, Charles Hamilton Smith also accredited possession of God's Law to the Caucasians:

He has instituted all the great religious systems in the world, and to his [the Caucasian's] stock has been vouchsafed the glory and the conditions of revelation.91

From a historical perspective, Nathaniel Morton also observed:

In the year 1602, divers godly Christians of our English [Celto-Saxon] nation ... entered into covenant to walk with God, and one with another, in the enjoyment of the ordinances of God, according to the primitive pattern in the word of God .92

In 1630 Pastor John Cotton preached the following as a part of a farewell message to a boatload of fellow Puritans which included Governor John Winthrop:

Have speciall care that you ever have the Ordinances [YHWH's Laws] planted amongst you, or else never looke for security. As soone as Gods Ordinances cease, your security ceaseth likewise; but if God plant his Ordinances among you, feare not, he will maintaine them. Isay 4:5,6. Upon all their glory there shall be a defence; that is, upon all God's Ordinances: for so was the Arke [of the Covenant] called the glory of Israel. I Sam. 4:22.

Secondly, have a care to be implanted into the Ordinances [of YHWH], that the word may be ingrafted into you, and you into it: If you take rooting in the Ordinances, grow up thereby, bring forth much fruite, continue and abide therein, then you are [a] vineyard of red wine, and the Lord will keepe you, Isay 27:2,3, that no sonnes of violence shall destroy you. Looke into all the stories whether divine or humane, and you shall never

finde that God ever rooted out a people that had the Ordinances: never did God suffer such plants to be plucked up: on all their glory shall be defence .93

Our nation's early documents testify to our uniquely Christian heritage whose very fabric is interwoven with the influence of God's Laws and His Word:

1639 - FUNDAMENTAL AGREEMENT OF THE COLONY OF NEW HAVEN [Connecticut]: ... We[Christian Celto-Saxon colonists] all agree that the scriptures hold forth a perfect rule for the direction and government of all men in duties which they are to perform to God and to man, as well in families and commonwealth as in matters of the church; so likewise in all public officers which concern civil order [government], as choice of magistrates and officers, making and repealing laws, dividing allotments of inheritance, and all things of like nature, we will, all of us, be ordered by the rules which the scripture holds forth; and we agree that such persons may be entrusted with such matters of government as are described in Exodus 18:21 and Deuteronomy 1: 13 with Deuteronomy 17:15 and I Corinthians 6:1,6 & 7.94

1639 - CONNECTICUT HISTORY: In June 1639, however, a more definite statement of political principles was framed, in which it was clearly stated that the rules of Scripture should determine the ordering of the Church, the choice of magistrates, the making and repeal of laws ... that only [Christian] Church members could become free burgesses and officials of the colony ... and in 1644 the general court decided that the judicial laws of God as they were declared by Moses should constitute a rule for all courts .... 95

1776 - DELAWARE CONSTITUTION: ... officeholders were required to make and subscribe to the following declaration: "I ... do profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ His Only Son, and the Holy Ghost, one God, blessed forevermore; and I do acknowledge the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by divine inspiration. "96

1776 - NORTH CAROLINA CONSTITUTION: ... no person who shall deny the being of God [YHWH] or the truth of the Protestant [Christian] religion, or the divine authority either of the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall be capable of holding any office or place of trust or profit in the civil department within the State.97

1777 -VERMONT CONSTITUTION: ...required of every member of the house of representatives that he take this oath: "I do believe in one God, the creator and governor of the universe, the rewarder of the good and punisher of the wicked, and I do acknowledge the scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be given by divine inspiration, and own and profess the Protestant [Christian] religion. "98

1777 was also the year that the United States Congress purchased 20,000 Bibles abroad to be resold to the American people

Regarding the motives which prompted the Puritans to seek a new land in which to live, Pastor Cotton Mather wrote the following:

... the God of Heaven served as it were, a summons upon the spirits of his [Christian Celto-Saxon] people in the English nation ... to leave all the pleasant accommodations of their native country, and go over a terrible ocean, into a more terrible desert, for the pure enjoyment of all his ordinances.99

Alexis de Tocqueville recognized the uniqueness of our beginnings and wrote of the Scriptural, moral and civil code which was the foundation for those early laws of New England:

... in studying the earliest historical and legislative records of New England. They exercised the rights of sovereignty; they named their magistrates, concluded peace or declared war, made police regulations, and enacted laws as if their allegiance was due only to God. Nothing can be more curious and, at the same time more instructive, than the legislation of that period; it is there that the solution of the great social problem which the United States now present[s] to the world is to be found.

Amongst these documents we shall notice, as especially characteristic, the code of laws promulgated by the little State of Connecticut in 1650. The legislators of Connecticut begin with the penal laws, and ... they borrow their provisions from the text of Holy Writ. "Whosoever shall worship any other God than the Lord [YHWH," says the preamble of the Code, "shall surely be put to death." This is followed by ten or twelve enactments of the same kind, copied verbatim from the books of Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. Blasphemy, sorcery, adultery, and rape were punished with death .... 100

The 1879 McGuffey's Sixth Eclectic Reader clearly illustrated how early America's Christianity influenced her government:

Their [the Christian Celto-Saxon colonists'] form of government was as strictly theocratical ... insomuch that it would be difficult to say where there was any civil authority among them entirely distinct from ecclesiastical jurisdiction.

Whenever a few of them settled a town, they immediately gathered themselves into a church; and their [Christian] elders were magistrates, and their code of laws was the Pentateuch [first five books of the Old Testament]....

God was their King; and they [the Christian Celto-Saxon colonists] regarded him as truly and literally so .... 101

In a sermon preached in 1770 at Cambridge, Massachusetts, Pastor Samuel Cooke proclaimed that the acts of the legislature must be consonant with the Laws of God:

Justice also requires of rulers, in their legislative capacity, that they attend to the operation of their own acts, and repeal whatever laws, upon an impartial review, they find to be inconsistent with the laws of God, the rights of men, and the general benefit of society. This the community hath a right to expect.102

Noah Webster, an American statesman and the compiler of Webster's original dictionary, instructed all American citizens in the essential elements of lawmaking:

The moral principles and precepts contained in the Scriptures ought to form the basis of all our civil constitutions and laws. All the miseries and evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice, oppression, slavery, and war, proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Bible. 103

The following was part of the decision handed down by Chief Justice John Middleton Clayton in 1837 from The State [of Delaware] vs. Thomas Jefferson Chandler:

Long before Lord [Sir Matthew] Hale [1609-16761 decided that christianity was a part of the laws of England, the Court of Kings Bench, 34 Eliz. in Ratcliff's case, 3 coke Rep. 40, b. had gone so far as to declare, that "in almost all cases, the common law was grounded on the law of God..." and the court cited the 27th chapter of Numbers, to show that their judgment on a common law principle in regard to the law of inheritance, was founded on God's revelation of that law to Moses. 104

That God's Law was the basis for Celto-Saxon common law is evident as far back as the Anglo-Saxon king, Alfred the Great, who ruled West Saxon (Wessex) from 871 to 899:

... [England's King] Alfred gave all his endeavour to the compiling of laws for his disorganized people. His code, which we still have in its Anglo-Saxon words, was made towards the end of his reign, perhaps about 890, although the exact date is not known. In an introduction he declared that his laws were based upon the Ten Commandments given by God to Moses; fulfilled and interpreted by the love and compassion of his Son, the Healer, the Lord Christ; continued in the teachings of the Apostles, and thence down the ages by synods of the church and decrees of kings.105

Justice David Josiah Brewer also testified to the Celto-Saxons propensity for God's Word:

The Bible is the Christian's book. No other book has so wide a circulation, or is so universally found in the households of the land. During their century of existence the English and American Bible societies have published and circulated 250 million copies, and this represents but a fraction of its circulation. And then think of the multitude of volumes published in expostulation, explanation and illustration of that book, or some portion of it.

I could show how largely our laws and customs are based upon the laws of Moses and the teaching of Christ; how constantly the Bible is appealed to as the guide of life and the authority in questions of morals; how the Christian doctrines are accepted as the great comfort in times of sorrow and affliction, and fill with the light of hope the services for the dead.106

James Madison, "the Father of the U.S. Constitution" and our fourth President, understood that the future of our American civilization was (and still is) dependent upon the Laws of God:

We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government; upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God. 107

Once again, what did George Washington pray for? He entreated Almighty God:

... that through obedience to Thy [YHWH's] law, we may show forth Thy praise among the nations of the earth.

Even Harry Waton, a Jew, admitted that the Celto-Saxons put a high value on the Word of God:

What is the greatest literary work known to mankind? The answer is: ... the Bible. And let the Aryans themselves judge. For nearly two thousand years countless millions of Aryans [Celto-Saxons] recognized the Bible as the greatest literary work in existence. If on one scale were put the works of Homer, Aeschylus, Virgil, Dante, Shakespeare, Goethe, and all other great works of the great poets and writers; and on the other scale were put the Bible, and the Aryans had to choose between them, the one or the other, it is absolutely certain that the Aryans would choose the Bible. The Bible is the oldest and most universal literary work in existence, it is still the best seller, and it is still held by the Aryans in the highest esteem. For every German that knows the works of Goethe, there are tens of thousands of Germans that know the Bible; for every Englishman that knows the works of Shakespeare there are tens of thousands of Englishmen that know the Bible; and so it is true of all Aryan [Celto-Saxon] nations. 108

Irish historian, William Lecky, commented upon the profound influence that Hebrew Law had on our American Celto-Saxon government:

Hebraic [Israelite] mortar cemented the foundations of American democracy. 109

Mr. Lecky was not referring to Jewish influence. The Jewish Encyclopedia substantiated that the Jews contributed nothing regarding Colonial legislation:

UNITED STATES: ... the early forms of government and laws were fashioned in a manner upon Old Testament times. This was particularly the case in Massachusetts (whose first criminal code [in 16411 gave chapter and verse from the Bible as its authority), as also in Connecticut. The records of the colony of New Haven, founded in 1638, have distinctly Old Testament character, and Biblical precedent is quoted for almost every governmental act. One can form some opinion of the measure of Old Testament influence when one considers that in the code of colony laws adopted in New Haven in 1656 there are 107 references to the Old Testament....

But Jews as individuals contributed little or nothing to direct the trend of [American] colonial legislation of this early period. 110

God's Law and Word was given as a possession to His people Israel. In which people's possession is the Bible to be found? The Jews, by their own admission, pervert and reject God's Word. While not always in obedience to it, the Celto-Saxons are the only people who can be described as possessing the Word of God.

Israel to Have an Inner Awareness of Biblical Morality

"...days are coming, says YHWH, when I will effect a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah; not like the covenant which I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt.... For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel, after those days, says YHWH: I will put My laws into their minds, and I will write them upon their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be My people." (Hebrews 8:8-10)

Which People Have a Fundamental Morality Aligned With YHWH’s Laws?


We read in the book of Hebrews that the New Covenant was made exclusively with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, and that they (the physical lineage of Jacob/Israel) would have the laws of God written on their hearts and minds. American Celto-Saxons may not be following these laws as a nation, but they do have a basic understanding of morality which the remainder of the non Caucasian world does not have. If you were to ask the average Celto-Saxon a question of right or wrong based on the Ten Commandments, and even if they were disobedient to them they would provide you with the correct answers. Ask the average Indian, Oriental or African (especially those who have not been influenced by Celto-Saxon morality) the same question, and you will likely get totally different responses. Why? Because they are not Israel, and the Laws of God are not written on their hearts.

If Christian Celto-Saxondom did not have false teachers telling them that God's Laws "have been done away" and that they need not keep them, it is certain that they would be more inclined to follow their conscience."' In a 1776 sermon Pastor Samuel West directed our attention to an earlier time in our history when this was illustrated in the lives of American Celto-Saxons:

... in the next place, who could have thought that, when our charter [with England] was vacated, when we [Americans] became destitute of any legislative authority, and when our courts of justice in many parts of the country were stopped, so that we could neither make nor execute laws upon offenders -who, I say, would have thought, that in such a situation the people should behave so peaceably, and maintain such good order and harmony among themselves? This is a plain proof that they, having not the civil law to regulate themselves by, became a law unto themselves; and by their conduct they have shown that they [early Celto-Saxon Americans] were regulated by the law of God written in their hearts. This is the Lord's doing, and it ought to be marvelous in our eyes. 112

Listen to the following two early American patriots as they speak out on morality:

George Washington, President

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion [Christianity] and morality are indispensable supports.113

Daniel Webster, American Statesman, Orator and Author

Lastly, our [Celto-Saxon] ancestors established their system of government on morality and religious sentiment. Moral habits, they believed, cannot safely be trusted on any other foundation than religious principle, nor any government be secure which is not supported by moral habits. Living under the heavenly light of revelation, they hoped to find all the social dispositions, all the duties which men owe to each other and to society, enforced and performed. Whatever makes men good Christians, makes them good citizens. 114

I now proceed to add, that the strong and deep-settled conviction of all intelligent persons amongst us is, that, in order to support a useful and wise government upon these popular principles, the general education of the people, and the wide diffusion of pure morality and true religion [Christianity], are indispensable. Individual virtue is a part of public virtue. It is difficult to conceive how there can remain morality in the government when it shall cease to exist among the people.... 115

Pastor Ezra Stiles also understood that American Celto-Saxons had "obligations" of morality:

... the [Celto-Saxon] United States are under peculiar obligations to become a holy people unto the Lord our God.... 116

William Holmes McGuffey commented upon America's early standards of morality in the 1879 McGuffey's Sixth Eclectic Reader:

Their [the Celto-Saxon colonists'] piety was not merely external; it was sincere; it had the proof of a good tree in bearing good fruit; it produced and sustained a strict morality. Their tenacious purity of manners and speech obtained for them, in the mother country, their name of Puritans, which, though given in derision, was as honorable an appellation as was ever bestowed by man on man.

That there were hypocrites among them, is not to be doubted; but they were rare. The men who voluntarily exiled themselves to an unknown coast, and endured there every toil and hardship for conscience' sake, and that they might serve God in their own manner, were not likely to set conscience at defiance, and make the service of God a mockery; they were not likely to be, neither were they, hypocrites. I do not know that it would be arrogating [presuming] too much for them to say, that, on the extended surface of the globe, there was not a single community of men to be compared with them, in the respects of deep religious [Christian] impressions, and an exact performance of moral duty. 117

Once again quoting New York's Chancellor James Kent from his opinion as the presiding judge in People vs. Ruggles in 1811:

... we are a Christian people, and the morality of the country is deeply ingrafted upon Christianity and not upon the doctrines or worship of those imposters [Mahomet, the Grand Lama or any others].118

Alexis de Tocqueville also testified to America's spiritual morality:

The sects which exist in the United States are innumerable. They all differ in respect to the worship which is due from man to his Creator, but they all agree in respect to the duties which are due from man to man. Each sect adores the Deity in its own peculiar manner, but all the sects preach the same moral law in the name of God.... Moreover, almost all the sects of the United States are comprised within the great unity of Christianity, and Christian morality is everywhere the same. 119

Christianity, therefore, reigns [in America] without any obstacle, by universal consent; the consequence is, as I have before observed, that every principle of the moral [Christian] world is fixed and determinate.... 120

... I am of the opinion that the true cause of their [American Celto-Saxon] superiority must not be sought for in physical advantages, but that it is wholly attributable to their moral and intellectual qualities [given to them by the grace of God]. 121

Eleven current State Constitutions also give witness to the Biblical morality of this nation.*


*See Appendix 2 - Eleven Current State Constitutions.


Contrast the basic morality of the Celto-Saxons to that of the American Indians, Negroes, Orientals, natives of India and aborigines of Australia. Regarding the American Indian, Mr. de Toequeville wrote his conclusions at a time when men were unafraid to tell the truth:

... the savage [American Indian] is his own master as soon as he is able to act; parental authority is scarcely known to him ... and the very name of law is unknown to him....

Far from desiring to conform his habits to ours [Christian Celto-Saxon morality], he [the American Indian] loves his savage [lawless] life as the distinguishing mark of his race, and he repels every advance to [Christian] civilization ....122

... For more than two hundred years the wandering tribes of North America have had daily intercourse with the whites, and they have never derived from them either a custom or an idea ... In the summer of 18311 happened to be beyond Lake Michigan, at a place called Green Bay, which serves as the extreme frontier between the United States and the Indians on the north-western side. Here I became acquainted with an American officer, Major H., who, after talking to me at length on the inflexibility of the Indian character, related the following fact: 'I formerly knew a young Indian,' said he, 'who had been educated at a college in New England, where he had greatly distinguished himself, and had acquired the external appearance of a member of civilized society, When the war broke out between ourselves and the English in 1810, 1 saw this young man again; he was serving in our army, at the head of the warriors of his tribe, for the Indians were admitted amongst the ranks of the Americans, upon condition that they would abstain from their horrible custom of scalping their victims. On the evening of the battle of... C. came and sat himself down by the fire at our bivouac. I asked him what had been his fortune that day: he related his exploits; and growing warm and animated by the recollection of them, he concluded by suddenly opening the breast of his coat, saying, "You must not betray me - see here!" And I actually beheld,' said the Major, 'between his body and his shirt, the skin and hair of an English head, still dripping with gore."123

Today's politically correct version is that the moral conduct of the American Indian is the product of the white man forcing them to live on reservations. However, reservation life has not, determined the basic moral instincts of the modern-day Indian. Their lifestyle is essentially the same as it was in 1702 when Pastor Cotton Mather wrote the following:

Their [the American Indians'] way of living is infinitely barbarous; the men are most abominably slothful; making their poor squaws, or wives, to plant and dress, and barn and beat their corn, and build their wigwams for them.... 124

It is obvious that the American Indian's natural morality is quite different from that of the Celto-Saxons. An overall propensity toward laziness, drunkenness and immorality was very evident in the American Indians' characters long before the establishment of reservations. While greedy traders and agents may have contributed to his reprobate lifestyle, the American Indian is, himself, responsible for his own morality or lack thereof.

Wilmot Robertson revealed another racial problem or condition which goes largely unrecognized in America today:

Collective or organized crime having become a minority monopoly [in America], one would expect to find the ranks of individual criminals filled by Majority [Celto-Saxon] members. But such is not the case. Here again, the minority disproportion is incontestable. In fact, whenever a Majority member, particularly a well-known Majority public figure, is haled into court, it is surprising how often his partner or associate is a minority member.125

Even when it comes to racism, which is supposed to be exclusively the sin of the white man, we find something much different when the facts are investigated. The following newspaper article by Patrick Joseph Buchanan reveals the truth about racism and who the real perpetrators are:

Richmond Times Dispatch, Sunday 24, 1988

The Big Lie About America

A preconceived notion in the mind of the left is that racism is almost exclusively a whte man's disease

There is interracial violence in America. In 1985, 629,000 interracial crimes were recorded ( where the victims survivied to identify the criminal ) but, nine out of ten were commited by blacks against whites.Where white criminals, 98 per cent of the time, prey on other whites - to rape, rob, and asault - black criminals chose fellow blacks as victims less than half the time. Black criminals seem to prefer attacking white people. While only 2 percent

of the victims chosen by white criminals are black, more than 50% of the victims targeted by black criminals - to rape, rob, and assault, are white.

The ugliest manifestation of racisim in America, then - i.e. interracial rape and criminal assault - are predominantly a black against white phenomenon, not teh other way around, as the center's report woould deceive us into believing

In the following Times Herald newspaper article, Jeffrey Hart (a senior editor at the National Review) confirmed that what was true in the sixties and seventies remains the same in the 1990s:

Arizona Republic February 10, 1992

Progress didn't cut crime among blacks

Value of social programs questioned


CHICAGO - rising income and educational levels since World War II were accompanied by a drop in crime rates among whites but not among blacks, according to a study released Sunday.

The author of the study said it challenges "one of the most widely help assumptions of postwar society": that liberal programs can reduce crime by fighting social and economic injustices.

The study by Gary Lafree of the University of Mexico in

Albuquerque, also found that an increase in the number of broken families were not accompanied by a rise in crime among blacks.

"Blacks were making dramatic educational strides in teh 1960s and 1970s at exactly the time crime in blacks was rising," Lafree said. Family income among blacks also increased during that period, he said.

Lafree aslo said his study was based on correlating such things as measure of education and income with the FBI's uniform crime reports.

The April-May 1992 Los Angeles riots following the Rodney King verdict testified to the fact that morality differs from race to race. No one can deny that the rioters were primarily black. Someone may counter: "But it was a black man who was beaten and who received unfair treatment in the courts!" However, had the situation been reversed and it had been black policemen who had been found innocent in a similar beating of a white man, whites would never have taken to the streets in looting and rioting as did the blacks. Why? Because basic morality differs from race to race.

    The Times Herald Norristown PA January 11, 1993

Crime wave dwarfs all other problems

We did not hear about it in during the recent presidential campaign, but there is no doubt about our No. 1 national problem: Violent crime is devistating our cities.

The phenomenon is just beginning to be talked about in respectable quarters. As the statistics escalated, the subject had politely been brushed under the rug, but now the material has begun to pour from the presses.

I have befor me several recently published items, among them two articles in the January issue of Commentary magazine - "Is Police Brutality the Problem?" by William Tucker and "Crown Heights and Its Aftermath", by Phillip Gourevich - and a new book, "Paved With Good Intentions: The Failure of Race Relations in Contempoary America," by Jared Taylor.

This material makes chilling reading, not least because of its merciless use of verifiable statistics.

By the early 1970s in Manhatten, blacks made up more than 60 per cent of those arrested for violent crime but constituted only 20 per cent of the population. More recently, black men have been responsible for more than 85 per cent of felonies committed against New York cabdrivers.

Nationwide, blacks constitute 12 per cent of the population, but represent 64 per cent of violent crimes arrests and 71 per cent of robbery arrests.

In 1988, there were few cases - perhaps 10 - in which a white man raped a black woman. There were 9,405 cases of a black man raping a white woman. Mr. Taylor reports that black men are three to four times more likely to rape a white woman than a white is likely to rape a black.

According to Mr. Taylor, blacks are responsible for 73 per cent of all self-defense killings.

In Washington, D.C. more than half of the population of black males between 15 and 35 is entangled with the criminal justice system - in prison, awaiting trial, on probation or on parole.

Mr. Tuker reports in Commentary as follows:

"Does that mean that America is becoming a far more violent society? Not entirely. What is unique about this crime wave is that it has been confined almost completely to black juveniles (males)."

All this has nothing to do with "neglect." The United States, far from oppressing its black and poor, actually subsidizes them. Apart from myriad private benefactions and grants, the United States has spent $2.5 trillion in federal money since the 1960s in an attempt to deal with th eproblem of the underclass. Probably this money did far more harm than good.

Although the blacks were the primary participants in the Los Angeles riots, they are not entirely to blame. They may have unknowingly fallen prey to a much more grievous immoral scheme of another race. In A Racial Program for the 20th Century, Israel Cohen, a leading Communist Jew in England, wrote the following in 1912:

We [Jews] must realize that our [Communist] party's most powerful weapon is racial tension. By propounding into the consciousness of the dark races that for centuries they have been oppressed by the whites, we can mould them to the program of the Communist Party. In America we will aim for subtle victory. While inflaming the Negro minority against the whites, we will endeavor to instill in the whites a guilt complex for their exploitation of the Negroes. We will aid the Negroes to rise in prominence in every walk of life, in the professions and in the world of sports and entertainment. With this prestige, the Negro will be able to intermarry with the whites and begin a process which will deliver America to our [Jewish Communist] cause.126

The following Chicago Tribune newspaper article provides additional evidence for the difference and inequality of racial morality:

Immigrants stir melting pot:

Rooster blood, court's don't mix

"Nothing will be more rare in the future than a white person, and nothing may be less important than the white man's ways", says Jim Dator, a political scientist...

By Josepph Tybor

Chicago Tribune

A judge is asked to allow defendants to drink a "truth serum" of rooster blood and water to replace the time - honored oath a witness must give in a U.S. courtroom.

This is an example of [the] challenges the nation's courts are facing in a wake of a wave of immigration from Asia, teh Middle East, and Africa.

The United States, long a largely white, European melting pot, is becoming more multicultural. These new immigrants sometime have difficulty in dealing with our courts. The nations they hail from lack roots in the ....Christian tradition that forms the political and philosophical foundation of our government.

Accommodation of cultural mores rather than the law, may be a consideration in defining criminal blame, but if it becomes an excuse for breaking the law, that affects our basic concepts of right and wrong.

Nothing will be more rare in the future than a white person, and nothing may be less important than the white man's ways", says Jim Dator, a political scientist at the University of Hawaii and a futurist.

Dator, a court consultant to the Fereated States of Micronesiaand Hawaii, stated that in the State of Ponape, for example, formal apologies replace prison for crimes, even rape and murder.

Some startling, real - life dramas have stirred these discussions: In Los Angles three years ago, thousands of Japanese Americans offered support to a Japanese house wife who attempted a parent - child suicide in a traditional Japanese manner called oyaku-shinju because of here humiliation over her husband's love affair. The woman was rescued, the children died.

When charged with murder, she told her attorney she thought her only crime was failed suicide.

As far back as the 1800s English poet and critic, Matthew Arnold, noted the problems of race mixing:

... the mixture of persons of different race in the same commonwealth unless one race had a complete ascendancy, tended to confuse all the relations of human life, and all men's notions of right and wrong....127

Wilmot Robertson noted statistics which support the conclusion that race-mixing leads to increased crime:

It is worth repeating that every race and every society have their criminals. But multiracial societies have more crime.... 128

History is insistent in pointing out that when the dominant population group goes, the country goes. As is daily becoming more apparent, the dying fall of the American [Celto-Saxon] Majority is the dying fall of America itself. 129

At this time in the history of the Caucasian race, when Celto-Saxon morality is nearing an all-time low, it still cannot be denied that the basic inner morality of Celto-Saxons aligns itself more closely with God's Laws than does the basic inner morality of any other race. Celto-Saxon morality can even be contrasted with the Arabs (who come from another branch of the same stock as Israel), but the difference is especially obvious when you contrast Celto-Saxon morality with that of the modern-day Jews.


In his book A Rabbi Talks with Jesus, Rabbi Jacob Neusner admitted to the contrasting differences between the Jew's morality and the morality of those who follow the teachings of Yeshua the Christ:

[Yeshua's] way so radically differs from my [the Jewish] way, it is clear we are hearing different voices from Sinai.... 130

As has already been pointed out, the Jews themselves admit that they do not follow the Laws of God given to Moses and to the Israelites at Mt. Sinai; instead they follow the Talmud which originated in Babylon.

According to Herman Wouk: "The Talmud [not the Bible] is to this day the circulating heart's blood of the Jewish religion." The following overview of Talmudic and Biblical morality reveals the stark contrast between these two books of faith and the morality of their adherents:

Approves of Sodomy: "If one committed sodomy with a child of less than nine years, no guilt is incurred" (Sanhedrin 54b) Prohibits Sodomy:"Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind: it {homsexuality] is an abomination" (Leviticus 18:22)

Approves of Child Sacrifice to Idols: "He who gives of his seedto Molech incurs no punishment"(Sanhedrin 64a)

Prohibits Child Sacrifice to Idols: "Whoever gives any of his seed to Molech: he shall surely put to death (Leviticus 20:2)

Cursing Parents Allowed: "One who curses his parents isn't punished unless he curses them by Divine name" (Sanhedrin 66a)

Cursing Parents Prohibited:"He that curses his father or mother shall be put to death" (Exodus 21:17)

Allows Enchanting: "It is permitted to consult by a charm the spirits of oil and eggs, and make incantations" (Sanhedrin 101a) Disallows Enchanting: "None of you shall be an enchanter or a charmer, or consult with familier spirits (Deut. 18:10-11)
Beastiality Condoned:"Woman having intercourse with a beast can marry a priest, the act is a mere wound" (Yebamoth 59b) Beastiality Condemned: "You shall not lie with any beast, nor shall any woman stand before a beast to lie with it" (Lev. 18:23)
Harlotry Lawful: " A harlot's hire is permitted, for what the woman has received is a gift." (Abodoh Zarah 62b-63a) Harlotry Unlawful: "She that plays the whore in her father's house shall be put to death". (Deut. 22:21)
Blasphemy Allowed: "One can revile the Devine Name if mentally appying it to some other object". (Sanhedrin 65a-b) Blasphemy Punishable: "He that blasphemes the LORD[YHWH] shall surely be put to death". (Numbers 30:2)
Not Required to Keep Vows: One may declare: "Every vow which I make in teh future shall be null". (Nedarin 23a-23-b) Required to Keep Vows:"If a man vows, he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that he spoke". (Numbers 30:32)
Murder Condoned: "If ten men smote a man with ten staves and he dies, they are exempt from punishment". (SAnhedren 78a) Murder Prohibited: "He that smites a man with a stave so that he dies, he is a murderer and shall be put to death" (Numbers 35:18)131

The following Talmudic precepts also depict the morality of its Jewish adherents today:

HAGIGAH 15: ... a Jew is considered to be good in the eyes of God, in spite of any sins he may commit.

ABODAH ZARAH 54a: It is allowed [for a Jew] to take usury from Apostates [Christians]....

KETHUBOTH 11b: When a grown [Jewish] man has had intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this (less than three years old) it is as if one puts the finger into the eye. (Tears come to the eye again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years.)

SANHEDRIN 59a: A Goi [non-Jew or Christian] who pries into the law [the Talmud] is guilty of death.

This depravity represents only a very small sampling of the Talmud's immoral perversion. Once again Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz described the staggering impact that the Talmud has upon the lives and morals of its Jewish adherents:

... the Talmud is the central pillar [of Judaism], soaring up from the foundations and supporting the entire spiritual and intellectual edifice. In many ways the Talmud is the most important book in Jewish culture, the backbone of creativity and of national life. No other work has had a comparable influence on the theory and practice of Jewish life, shaping spiritual content and serving as a guide to conduct. 132

Writing about the Talmud's influence upon Jewish life, Arsene Darmesteter summed it up by saying:

The Talmud ... is the faithful mirror of the manners, the institutions, the knowledge of the Jews, in a word of the whole of their civilization ... in which a whole people has deposited its feelings, its beliefs, its Soul. 133

Mr.. Darmesteter also admitted the following about this iniquitous book of Jewish traditions:

Christian scholars for the most part looking upon it [the Talmud] as a monstrosity, an infernal production, which damned the morality of the Jewish people, and the Jews hotly defending the sacredness of a work that was the bulwark of their faith and the embodiment of their religious life. 134

Under the heading "JUDAISM," The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia declares that the Jews shape their own morality

JUDAISM: ... Jewish ethical values and ideals ... are shaped by Jewish experience....* In Judaism the center of gravity is the Jewish people. ...[Judaism] rests its hope upon the perfectibility of the human race [the Jews].135


*Possibly this is where today's situational ethics originated.


In Now and Forever, Samuel Roth admitted to the dissimilitude between the morality of the Celto-Saxons and that of the Jews:

There are very interesting, very vital differences, that reach back to the sources of two separate streams of human conduct [morality].... 136

In Jews Must Live Mr. Roth further testified to his own people's immoral nature and their cancerous effect on the rest of mankind:

... the first of all Jewish creeds is that Jews must live. It does not matter how, by what, or to what end? Jews must live. And so a return was made to the ancient policy of conquest by the more peaceful and delicate methods of cheating, lying and pimping."137

.... the whole purpose of a Jew in business was to get the best of the goy [non-Jew or Christian]. When the goy had been cheated business was good. When the Jew had just come out even, business was very bad, indeed. For the greater the harm he had done in a business transaction with a goy, the deeper appeared the narrative delight of the Jew.... 138

It was practically a moral obligation on the part of every conscientious Jew to fool and cheat the goy wherever and whenever possible.... The rest of Creation - cows, horses, nettles, oak-trees, dung and goyim - were placed there for our, the Jews', convenience or inconvenience, depending on God's good humor for the time being....

The Jews pride themselves on their reluctance to proselytize. They explain that this is a sign not only of religious exclusiveness, but of their good will towards the rest of the religions. It is nothing of the sort. The Jews do not proselytize because they are firmly convinced that they will eventually inherit the earth, and they want as few claimants as possible to this windfall. 139

The attitude of a young Jew towards his profession is really like that of a gangster towards a new racket. The real end is the amount of money it is likely to yield him in exchange for the smallest investment of labor and enthusiasm. 140

What becomes of the young Jews who cannot attain to one of the professions, have not the money with which to buy a news stand or the mental resourcefulness to create a selling line? Most of them remain on the streetcorners of their neighborhoods and become the petty thieves, hold-up-men, strikebreakers, backstore crapshooters, street-corner mashers, dope-peddlers and dope-smugglers, white-slave traffickers, kidnappers and petty racketeers of every peaceful community in America.

Certainly Jews are not the only people who become gangsters, to make civilized life on this continent creepy with a thousand species of repellent crime. The Irish, Greek and Italian immigrants contribute their substantial share. There is, however, this difference between their respective contributions. The Irishman, the Italian and the Greek become criminals out of sheer necessity, and remain so only as long as the necessity lasts. As in every other thing the Jew touches, he immediately conceives of it as a career. The Irish, Italian and Greek gangsters are skin sores on the social body. Eventually, with a little application of remedy, they can be cleared away. The Jewish gangster imbeds himself deeply in the flesh of society. He becomes a permanent if not a fatal tumor. 141

In his book Judaism and the Christian Predicament in a chapter entitled "The Oral Torah," Rabbi Ben Zion Bokser also directed our attention to this difference in morality:

This is not an uncommon impression and one finds it sometimes among Jews as well as Christians - that Judaism is the religion of the Hebrew Bible. It is of course a fallacious impression ... whoever would seek to compare the classic Jewish tradition [of the Talmud] with the biblical world of [the Hebrew and Christian] faith and life would find some startling contrasts. 142

After one reads the previous quotes from the "Oral Torah" (the Talmud), there can be no doubt of this divergence in morality between Jewish tradition and Christian faith. Dr. Oscar Ludwig Levy admitted to the tragic morality of the Jews:

There has been no progress, least of all moral progress.... And it is just our [Talmudic] Morality, which has prohibited all real progress, and - what is worse - which even stands in the way of every future and natural reconstruction in this ruined world of ours.... I look at this world, and I shudder at its ghastliness: I shudder all the more, as I know the spiritual authors [the Jews] of all this ghastliness .... 143

On May 29, 1989 Jewish seminary students raided a Palestinian refugee camp in the Occupied West Bank. While so doing, they murdered a 13 year old girl. Their spiritual leader, Rabbi Yitzak Ginsberg, justified the murder in his comments over Israeli radio:

We have to recognize that Jewish blood and the blood of a goy are not the same thing. Every law that is based on equating goys [non-Jews or Christians] and Jews is completely unacceptable.

In Antisemitism: Its History and Causes, Bernard Lazare admitted that Jewish immorality ruins other nations:

... the Jew, not being an Aryan [Celto-Saxon], has not the same moral, social and intellectual conceptions as the Aryan ... and therefore he [the Jew] must be eliminated, or else he will ruin the nations that have received him .... 144

Nearly one hundred years later, David Saperstein inadvertently admitted to the truth of Mr. Lazare's claim:

The Christian radical right has a dramatically different vision for America [than the Jews]. 145

... no group is more supportive of abortion rights, gay civil rights, separation of church and state, and more opposed to the general ultra-conservative agenda of the Religious Right [Celto-Saxon Christianity] than the Jewish community. 146

Drawing our attention to this difference between the morality of the Jews and the Celto-Saxon peoples, Maurice Samuel wrote:

...your [Christian Celto-Saxon] system of morality is no less a need to you than ours to us [Talmudic Jews]. And the incompatibility of the two systems is not passive. You might say: "Well, let us exist side by side and tolerate each other. We will not attack your morality, nor you ours." But the misfortune is that the two are not merely different. They are opposed in mortal, though tacit [unspoken], enmity. No man can accept both, or, accepting either, do otherwise than despise the other. 147

I believe that the preferences and aversions which I here express will at least serve to make clear the irreconcilable difference between Jewish [Talmudic] and gentile [Christian Celto-Saxon] morality. 148

Our very radicalism is of a different temper. Our spur is a natural instinct. We [Jews] do not have to uproot something in ourselves to become "radicals," dreamers of social justice [Socialism]. We are this by instinct: we do not see it as something revolutionary at all. It is tacit [understood] with us. But with you [Christians] it is an effort and a wrench. Your very ancestry cries out against it in your blood. 149

The Jewish radical ... will discover that nothing can bridge the gulf between you [Christian Celto-Saxons] and us [Talmudic Jews]. 150

Mr. Samuel further identified Jew and Celto-Saxon differences in the following revealing terms:

... another question, more subtle and disturbing, must be faced. I have said, "There are two life-forces in the world I know: Jewish and gentile [Celto-Saxon], ours and yours." If this be a truth, we must not be driven from it.... Here is the gentile life-force: here is the Jewish life-force. What their origin was I cannot say. A can only affirm - to the Jews, in the main, belongs the Jewish life-force, a consistent and coherent force, a direction in human thought and reaction. To you others belongs the gentile life-force, a [Christian] mode of life and thought distinct from ours....

We [Jews] have lived for many centuries in close contiguity [proximity], if not intimacy [with you Celto-Saxons]....

Yet the cleavage is there, abysmal and undeniable. In the main, we are forever distinct. Ours is one life, yours is another....

I do not believe that this primal difference between gentile and Jew is reconcilable. You and we may come to an understanding, never to a reconciliation. There will be irritation between us as long as we are in intimate contact. For nature and constitution and vision divide us from all of you forever - not a mere conviction, not a mere language, not a mere difference of national or religious allegiance. With the best will on both sides, successful adaptation to each other will always be insecure and transient.... But, as has come to pass so often, the difference which is deeper than will, deeper than consciousness, will assert itself. There is a limit to our moral or mental possibilities. We [Jews] cannot climb out of ourselves. The complete and permanent reconciliation of your [Christian] way of life with ours is beyond that limit.151

These two "life-forces" that Mr. Samuel wonders about are easily understood from a Biblical perspective, especially when one has correctly identified the players involved. In Genesis 25 it is recorded that Rebekah bore Isaac twins, Esau (the elder) and Jacob (the younger). While still in her womb the two "struggled together within her." YHWH explained this rivalry to Rebekah:

Two nations are in your womb [Rebekah]; and two peoples shall be separated from your body; and one people shall be stronger than the other; and the older [Esau/Edom] shall serve the younger [Jacob/Israel]. (Genesis 25:23)

Soon after the two boys had grown, this promise began to find it," fulfillment. Genesis 25 relates that Esau sold his birthright to Jacob, and Genesis 27 relates that the blessing became the possession of Jacob as well. As a result, Esau sought to destroy Jacob.

The struggle, which began in the womb, continued as these two boys grew to manhood and it endures today in their descendants. Ezekiel 35:5 and Amos 1: 11 respectively speak of an "everlasting enmity" and a "fury forever" existing between these two peoples, the Edomites and the Israelites. But who is who in this continuing struggle? In order to answer this question, it is necessary to know the names of each man's descendants. It is recorded in Genesis 36 that Esau is Edom and he was the father of the Edomites. It is also recorded in Genesis 35 that Jacob's name was changed to

Israel, and he became the father of the Israelites. These are the two peoples spoken of by YHWH in Genesis 25. Who represents these two peoples today? It is extremely important that this question is answered correctly!

It becomes quite evident as we examine the Scriptural traits of the Israelites that only the Celto-Saxons fulfill all of the marks of Israel. On the other hand, it is very likely that many of today's Jews are the racial descendants of the Edomite nation which adopted the religion of Judaism in the second century B.C.:

."...in the days of John Hyrcanus (end of second century B.C.E.) ... the Edomites became a section of the Jewish people."152

They [the Edomites] were then incorporated with the Jewish nation.... 153

... from then on they [the Edomites] constituted a part of the Jewish people, Herod [King of Judea] being one of their descendants. 154

... they [the Edomites] were hereafter no other than [non-Israelite] Jews. 155

Without recognizing it, Maurice Samuel was simply identifying what God Almighty prophesied several thousand years ago - the ongoing struggle between Esau/Edom and Jacob/Israel. The descendants of Esau/Edom are still trying to destroy the descendants of Jacob/Israel. The Jews today falsely claim to be the "chosen people" of Scripture in order to regain what was lost by their ancestor, Esau/Edom, many centuries ago. However, the birthright and blessings rightfully belong to the Celto-Saxons, the true descendants of Jacob/Israel. 156

One aspect, which Mr. Samuel did perceive correctly, is that the basic morality of the Jews and the basic morality of the Celto-Saxons are diametrically opposed to one another. The morality of the Israelites is derived from God's Law; the morality of the Jews is not. Which people are the true descendants of the Biblical Israelites? The answer should be obvious!

Chapter 10 (Pt. 1)    Table of Contents    Chapter 11

Most Recent Article

An Open Response to Martin Selbrede and Archie Jones’ ‘Book Review’ of Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective

Most Recent Message

Important Books

Home | Site Map | Contact | Order Form

Mission to Israel · P.O. Box 248 · Scottsbluff, NE 69363 · Email