Sunday, April 25, 2010

The Sixth Law Of God by The Christian Separatist Church Society

We Continue with our study of the Sixth Commandment, which in the Septuagint says "Thou Shall Not Commit Adultery." The study concerns the meaning of the word Adultery as written in the Greek, translated from the Paleo-Hebrew.  Perhaps if Curt Maynard had heeded the Law, he would still be writing about the enemies of our people instead of being a guest on a cold slab in the morgue right now, no? 

Some Highlights:
New Testament Greek written in Koine, or everyday Greek.
Examples from Classical Greek on the words used for adulterating
Examples of willful mistranslation in order to appease ruling powers (i.e. the homosexual King James)
Philo cited in support of the Thesis.


Moich- in Greek Literature
In order to define any word accurately, a lexicographer must examine how a word or family of words was used in all of Greek literature. One mistake that is commonly made is the false assumption that there is a special ecclesiastical or Biblical Greek, and that Greek words take on a new or different meaning just because they are used in the Bible. This theory, however, has been proven wrong time and time again. In the 17th and 18th centuries, scholars assumed that since the Greek of the New Testament did not resemble any of the great classical dialects of Greek used in ancient literature, then it was somehow different and specialized, and therefore the words could have special meanings only in the Bible. This was the basis behind the King James Version of the Bible being translated into very ornate, Elizabethan English and the Luther Bible being translated into High German, neither of which were commonly spoken in England or Germany before the translation of these Bibles. However, in the late 19th century, a very great number of papyrus scrolls began to be discovered, many of which were reflective of common writing during the 1st century. These papyri contained everyday things such as letters, lists, contracts, receipts, etc. What was also discovered was that the form of Greek used in these everyday documents matched the Greek of the New Testament, now called Koine Greek or Common Greek. So, in fact, the New Testament was written in what amounts to common street language.

In addition to this, it must be understood that the books of the New Testament, many of them letters, were being read by everyday Greek-speaking peoples who had no specialized education to understand some sort of ecclesiastical language. Thus, the vocabulary carried no special meaning to them, but was merely the vocabulary they had been schooled in and which they had read all of their lives in classical authors, such as Aristotle. So how Aristotle understood a Greek word would be the same way they would understand a Greek word when they read it in an epistle from Paul.

So let us examine a few passages from Greek literature which show clearly that the popular definition of adultery does not fit the moich- family of words. First, we will read A.L. Peck's translation of Aristotle's Historia Animalium IX.32.6-10:

"Also another kind of eagle is the so-called true-bred. They say these are the only true- bred birds altogether; for the other kinds are mixed and adulterated by each other, including the eagles and hawks and the smallest birds."

Here the English word adulterated is translated for the Greek word memoicheutai, an inflected form of the word moicheuo. It could have just as easily been translated cross-bred or mongrelized. In fact, the word was translated with the phrase "spoilt by the interbreeding of different species" in a translation by D'Arcy Wentworth Thompson. These translators understood that the word moicheuo was in reference to adulteration or cross- breeding. It should be pointed out, especially since men's salvation depends upon a complete and saving knowledge of truth, that this is the exact same Greek word used in Exodus 20:13 in the Ten Commandments and the exact same Greek word used in Romans 13:9.
We also need to make note of some other interesting features of this passage. First, the word kind is translated for the Greek word genos, which when applied to people is translated race.

Secondly, the word true-bred is translated for the Greek word gnesios, which is defined by LSJ and by Lampe as: "belonging to the race." This word is in fact derived from genos, which as we said before, means "race." Donnegan defines this adjective gnesios as: "peculiar to a race, of pure race," and his primary definition of gnesiotes is: "purity of descent," while his primary definition of gnesios is: "purely descended." Critica Sacra records the Latin definition "germanus" which also means purely descended or of pure descent. Finally, all of the lexical authorities agree that gnesios is the opposite of the word nothos, which means mongrel and which we will discuss later. Thus, it is agreed upon by all of these scholarly authorities and by the translator of this passage in Aristotle that the word gnesios means pure-bred, pure race, pure descent or racially pure. Furthermore, we find innumerable examples in Greek literature where this word is used as and must be translated as pure-bred or racially pure to make sense.

What is interesting is that the King James Version translates this same Greek word as the possessive pronoun own in I Timothy 1:2 and Titus 1:4.4 There is absolutely no justification for this absurd translation. In the KJV, I Timothy reads: "Unto Timothy, my own son..." And Titus reads: "To Titus, mine own son..." The Anointed Standard Translation correctly renders these two phrases as, "To Timothy, a racially pure child..." and, "To Titus, a racially pure child..." This is an example of open and willful deception on the part of the KJV translators who knew the one and only definition of the word gnesios and decided not to use it. Their deception is now perpetuated in the Judeo school of theology. Even the Old Latin translated gnesios with the Latin germanus, which again means of pure descent. It should be remembered, however, that this type of dishonesty was quite common among the KJV translators. Another notable example is the occurrence of the Greek word meaning homosexual in I Corinthians 6:9 and Timothy 1:10. Bowing to the pressures of the homosexual King James, the KJV translators translated this word ambiguously as "abusers of themselves with mankind" instead of homosexual so they would not offend King James.

Let us now look at another passage in Aristotle, using the translation of D'Arcy Wentworth Thompson:

"While children mostly resemble their parents or their ancestors, it sometimes happens that no such resemblance is to be traced. But parents may pass on resemblance after several generations, as in the case of the woman in Ellis, who committed adultery with a negro; in this case it was not the woman's own daughter but the daughter's child that was a blackamoor" (Historia Animalium VII.5).

Here we have a clear cut case of a white Sicilian woman who mongrelized with an Ethiopian negro. Aristotle is commenting on the fact that the first generation offspring was rather light-skinned, especially when compared to the second-generation. Both, of course were mongrels, but due to genetic shuffling, the second generation mongrel was so dark that it actually resembled a pure Ethiopian negro. This was what Aristotle was discussing and once again he used the verb moicheuo, the exact same Greek verb used in the Ten Commandments. This same story is also told in four other places in ancient literature,5 and no where is the idea of marital infidelity brought up. In fact, it is clear from the other accounts and the contradictions between some of the information, that it would have been impossible for any of the ancient authors to have known whether the woman was married. Most of the authors, including the other occurrence of this story in Aristotle's own writings, simply say that the woman had sex with the negro. For example, in Aristotle's Generation of the Animals, 722a 10, he says that the woman had sex with the negro, using the Greek word sungignomai, which means "to have intercourse."

In the present passage, however, Aristotle has simply been more specific. If the translator had said who adulterated herself with a negro instead of who committed adultery with a negro, then the passage would be much clearer, but as we shall see later, the phrase commit adultery and adulterate were in fact equivalent terms at the time of the translation of the first Bibles into English.

Let us now read a passage from Aelian, On Animals, VII.39-40, where he discusses a questionable reading from Anacreon:

"Those who falsify the reading and go so far as to say that we should write [eroesses] (for [keroesses]) are soundly refuted by Aristophanes of Byzantium; and I am convinced by his refutation."

Here, A.F. Scholfield, not to be confused with C.I. Scolfield, editor ofthe Scolfield Bible, has translated the verb moichao as falsify. Again, the clear connotation is to change, corrupt, alter from one form to another, adulterate, confuse or change the form of something. Dishonest translators should try to explain how it is possible to commit adultery with a word.

Thus far we have looked at examples in Classical Greek from Greek literature with which the writers of the New Testament and the translators of the Greek Septuagint would have been familiar, as well as the early Christians who read the Greek Septuagint and the New Testament. Let us now look at an example from an early patristic author, Methodius. Reading from the translation of Herbert Musurillo in Methodius' Symposium 3.2:

"Rather, He probably had in mind those who adulterate the truth, who corrupt the Scriptures with pseudo-scientific doctrine and begat an imperfect sort of wisdom, mixing in error with religion."

Here Musurillo has translated the Greek verb moichaomai as adulterate. We note that this adulteration results in an imperfect product and that the adulteration corresponds to mixing two things together. A similar idea was expressed by Synesius Cyrenesius in Epistulae 5.C, where, with the same Greek verb, he states that the Church or Body Politic was being adulterated with false-teachings, which, he says, places a trap for those who are described with the Greek word akeraios, which we have already defined as racially pure.

The emphasis in all of these quotes and throughout all of Greek literature is upon mixing two opposing elements together, whether that be truth and untruth as in the last two quotes or a white woman with a negro in the quote before those. It is true that the word can be and is used for illicit sex between people of the same race, but still the word does not primarily imply that one of the participants is breaking a marriage vow, but rather that confusion is being created in the seed-line of the man whose wife is being violated, for it will be unclear whether a resulting child is the husband's or the other man's. The emphasis is clearly upon mixing things up or causing confusion. In a predominately white, homogenous society, we would expect that when moichos or a related word is used, then the emphasis would be upon corrupting the seedline within the race. But more often than not, it is clear from the study of every occurrence in the Bible that the emphasis is upon race-mixing, except in cases where the context makes it perfectly clear that race is not an issue.

Finally, let us examine an occurrence of the word moicheia in the renowned Israelite scholar Philo's The Worse Attacks the Better 102:

"And because, with a view to the persistence of the race, you were endowed with generative organs, do not run after mongrelization and mongrelization and other non- pure forms of mixing, but only that which is a lawful means of propagating the race of man."

This passage is very interesting. Philo uses two different Greek words, both of which have been translated mongrelization, in describing the "non-pure forms of mixing." One of these Greek words is phthora which has been discussed extensively in other literature.6 The second word is moicheia, the subject word herein. Because Philo used two words with basically the same meaning, the translation of the passage seems redundant in English, but not in Greek, where this technique of using synonymous words in close proximity was quite common, especially in Philo's writings. We should also keep in mind that these two Greek words would have conveyed a slightly different spectrum of meaning to the Greek reader, but both are best translated as mongrelization in English. So redundancy is not an issue in the original Greek. What is important is that Philo specifically says that both of these acts, including moicheia, are forms of "mixing," which is translated for the Greek word mixeis and which is defined by LSJ as "mixing, mingling."

There are other interesting things to note in this passage also. First, it must be understood that Philo was commenting on the Greek Septuagint when writing, so when he refers to the law, he is speaking of the Pentateuch. And when he says "the race of man," he uses the term anthropos, the Greek term used in the Septuagint almost exclusively for the White, Adamic race. It is clear from the passage that Philo is concerned with the issue of race because he specifically uses the term twice, and when he says "persistence of the race," he means so that the race will survive in its pure form. It is also clear that the issue of race- mixing is what Philo is writing about because he specifically uses the terms "non-pure" and "mixing." So Philo has defined very specifically what the Greek word moicheia means, and he also stated very clearly that race-mixing is forbidden in the Pentateuch, that is the first five books of what is commonly called the Old Testament. Philo, an Israelite in dispersion, was of course writing about the Greek Septuagint, the Old Testament used by millions of Israelites during the 1st century AD, including the over 1,000,000 Israelites who lived in Alexandria, Egypt. Philo was a representative of these Alexandrian Israelites.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


4 This word also occurs in II Corinthians 8:8, Philippians 4:3, Sirach 7:18 and III Maccabees 3:19. Gnesios, the adverb form, occurs in Philippians 2:20 and II Maccabees 14:8 and III Maccabbees 3:23. All of these other occurences are dealt with in detail in The Truth Unveiled.

5 Aristotle, GA I 722a9, Antig. 122, Arist. Byz. epit. II 272, and Pliny VII 12.51.

6 The reader is encouraged to consult The Truth Unveiled by Pastor V.S. Herrell, pg. 156, and especially Appendix 10 of the Anointed Standard Translation of the New Testament for more information on this word and its related words.

Great Satan's Military Forced to Retreat from Korengal Valley

The U.S. military has retreated from a base in the remote Korengal Valley, Afghanistan, after spending over four years trying to hold the ground. The U.S. forces even negotiated the terms of their defeat, paying the resistance fighters and leaving them the base fully intact with buildings, fuel, generators and military equipment, in order to be allowed a peaceful retreat out of the valley.

This is great news for Revolutionaires and those who say that the Great Satan can't be beat.  It's a small victory, yes, but a significant one.  Expect to see more of it in the months ahead.  This is exactly how the Soviet Union began to lose the war.  In my view, all effort should be expended to organized enlisted men and low grade officers into the revolutionary struggle that is just ahead of us here in the political entity called the United States.  These men, who have been lied to and used as fodder for corporate and Israeli interests are going to be seeking answers to their questions when they come back stateside to a land that has become a third world country ruled by Negros, Perverts, Traitors and Jews.  We must be there to provide them the answers. 
 
Joel 3:9
Proclaim this among the nations: Prepare for war! Rouse the warriors! Let all the fighting men draw near and attack.

The rest of the story.

Monday, April 19, 2010

The Rules of Engagement

"Our Government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example."


"Decency, security, and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen.

Above:  FBI Waco siege commander Jeff Jamar (e); FBI Waco chief negotiator Byron Sage (f); former FBI Director William Sessions (g); former FBI Deputy Director Larry Potts (h); former Associate Attorney General Webster Hubbell (i); former Deputy Treasury Secretary Robert Altman (j).

If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.
 
 
 
To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means-to declare that the government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private criminal-would bring terrible retribution.
 
 

The LORD is slow to anger, and great in power, and will not at all acquit the wicked: the LORD hath his way in the whirlwind and in the storm, and the clouds are the dust of his feet. Nahum 1:3

One day, O greatest of all satans, you will understand the meaning of these words, which in your babylonian confusion make no sense to you, because you have neither eyes to see nor ears to hear. Even now, the prophecy of Ezekiel is coming to pass:

7 So I prophesied as I was commanded: and as I prophesied, there was a noise, and behold a shaking, and the bones came together, bone to his bone.

8 And when I beheld, lo, the sinews and the flesh came up upon them, and the skin covered them above: but there was no breath in them.

9 Then said he unto me, Prophesy unto the wind, prophesy, son of man, and say to the wind, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live.

10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived, and stood up upon their feet, an exceeding great army.
Ezekiel 37

The bones have awakened and are being called to duty. The Army is being assembled now, and when the time comes for Almighty God to use them, The only Rule of Engagement will be your UTTER ANNIHILATION FROM THE FACE OF THE EARTH! VOTED OUT FROM OFFICE!(suggested revision).DEFEAT IN THE COURT SYSTEM!
what the heck...the only rule of engagement will be TO LIGHT YOU UP!! There, that's mo better!

Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind. It is written.

Dr. Pierce did a very good broadcast about Waco. It was recorded in 1993 and is not available on the Natvan site. Very clear, not like the other broadcasts in 16bit. I found it on Solar General, which is a great all around site for White Nationalists.

Criminals With Badges

Sunday, April 18, 2010

Jesus Is a Straight Shooter

God I love Missouri.  Yeah, the weather sucks and the women ain't California girls, but God bless 'em! 

On the wall is a map of the Exodus from Egypt. On nearby folding tables is an arsenal of shotguns, rifles, revolvers and pistols and books like "Armed and Female."


Welcome to First Baptist Church, in Wentzville.

Missouri Style Church Pot Luck

Jill McClelland, 67, who owns the New Melle Gun Shop, teaches the seminar with gun-shop employee Ann Layton, 53. Both are members of the church.

"Ann and I are here to talk about firearms and what a blessing they are and how much fun they can be if used correctly," McClelland says. She recommends a revolver for beginners.

"It is so simple," she says.

Awww, so precious! Don't you just want to hug 'em to pieces?!

Free, White and Christian. The only way to be.

The History of The Bible from The Christian Separatist Church Society

Today's Sunday School lesson is From the Book The History of the Bible by Pastor V.S. Herrell. We hope you enjoy it.

Introduction




Today, many people who claim to know something about the Bible, especially in the Judeo, so-called Identity movement, have little or no knowledge about the history and development of the Bible, both Old and New Testaments.

The trademark signs of this type of people who are Biblically ignorant include the following: they believe that the King James Version is divinely inspired or that it is the best available translation; they believe that the New Testament was written in Aramaic; they believe in the so-called "sacred names"; they build doctrines on textual interpolations, such as the trinity doctrine; they accept pseudepigraphal writings such as the 29th Chapter of Acts, Jasher, and Enoch as books of the Bible, and build false teachings upon these false books; they believe that the Old Testament has been preserved in the Hebrew Masoretic Text; they believe that Esther should not be in the Bible; etc.

Such are the misconceptions that are, in truth, Jewish fables. Thus, the study of what is called the history of the Bible is of great importance to the true Bible student. Only through a thorough knowledge of how the Bible has come to be can the Bible student see through the Jewish propaganda and lies regarding the Bible. For this reason, the information that follows is very important. Each of the misconceptions mentioned above and many more are answered and exposed in the following pages. Only when the Bible student is aware of these facts can he truly begin to study the Bible. The antichrist Jew would seek to hide this information from the white Christian, and thus I would admonish you to study it carefully.


The New Testament


We need to start our exploration of the New Testament by examining and understanding how the New Testament texts have come to be transmitted down to us. Before the invention of the printing press and modern-type paper, all ancient books were written by hand, thus the word manuscript, and were periodically recopied for preservation and circulation.

The New Testament was written originally in Greek; of this there can be no question. Some men have tried to claim that the New Testament was originally written in Aramaic, a dialect of Hebrew, and then later translated into Greek, but all such men are incapable of presenting a single shred of evidence that points to their contention. If any evidence existed, even fragmentary, we might offer some repudiation, but the fact of the matter is that not one piece of evidence exists. All evidence points to the contrary: Paul wrote letters to believers in Rome, Corinth, Galatia, Ephesus, Philippi, Colosse and Thessalonika, and only a fool would think that any of these people spoke Aramaic or Hebrew. He wrote to men with Greek names, such as Timothy (Timotheus) and Titus. Alexander the Great had conquered the known world three hundred years earlier and had introduced the Greek language throughout the world. Jesus and His students traveled throughout Greek-speaking areas, and the New Testament records that Jesus was able to speak Aramaic and did so when it was necessary, but Greek was still His primary language. Galilee was a Greek-speaking region in the 1st century, and men like Mark and Luke show this in their Greek names. We will look at more of these contentions later in the section entitled Was the New Testament Written in Aramaic?

Thus, the men whom the Mentality of Separation used to write the New Covenant spoke Greek and wrote in Greek, although many of them were certainly fluent in other languages as well. The original manuscripts are not extant today, for reasons we will see later, but a great body of witnesses does exist that points to the original words of the original manuscripts, and through the science of Textual Criticism we shall see how today we can come closer than ever before to knowing with certainty the original words of the New Testament.

With this in mind, let us look at the many different ways the New Testament has been transmitted down to us over the last 1900 years.



Uncials


Today, the uncial manuscripts are the most important of the Greek witnesses to the original text of the New Testament. They date from the 4th to the 9th centuries AD, and they are written entirely in large capital letters on vellum manuscripts or parchment. Because vellum was always at a premium, a number of conventions were taken to save space when preparing a manuscript on it. There are no spaces between the words, no punctuation, and often-used words, such as Jesus, Christ, and God, are abbreviated. The abbreviation technique was further applied to many common or obvious words where the last letter or syllable could be dropped off, just as we today abbreviate many words or shorten titles. Such shortenings were usually marked by a line drawn above the letter. Many of the texts have critical annotations in the margin and show the writing of more than one scribe and oftentimes of later correctors.

Vaticanus. The Vatican Manuscript, represented by the letter B, is the oldest of the great uncial codices and dates to the early 4th century AD. Until its recent release by the Catholic Church, it was kept hidden in the Vatican Library for at least 600 years. The manuscript was known by scholars to exist in 1475 when it was listed in a catalogue of manuscripts in the Vatican Library, and the Septuagint (Greek Old Testament) portion of the manuscript was published in 1587 under the papacy of Pope Sixtus V. However, its New Testament contents were kept a guarded secret. This portion was not seen by scholars until 1815 when Napoleon captured Rome and brought the manuscript back to Paris, where it was studied for a short time. If not for this, it is certain that its contents would still be locked up secure in the Vatican Library today. The Catholic Church considers the manuscript dangerous because it shows so clearly how corrupt their Vulgate is and has become; for this reason it literally took a war before it was seen by scholars.

Codex Vaticanus Ga. 6:12-19, Ep. 1:1-16



Dr. Samuel Tregelles, one of the important figures in Textual Criticism in the 19th century, was two-years-old when the Vatican Manuscript was brought to Paris. Later in his life, he would make another step toward finally allowing the text to be freed from Catholic lock and key. With knowledge of the New Testament portion of the manuscript now a matter of public record, Tregelles traveled to Rome to view the manuscript. However, when he arrived, as he later said, they searched his pockets before he could look at the manuscript, allowed him no writing instruments or paper, and two priests were assigned to watch him and distract him when he spent too much time on any particular passage. They also took the book away from him when he stayed on one page too long. Still, Tregelles managed to tell the scholarly world enough of what was in the manuscript that Pope Pius IX (1846-1878) would be forced to make copies of the Vatican Manuscript available to the leading libraries of the world. This pressure was aided by Konstantin von Tischendorf. Before Tregelles ever viewed the text, Tischendorf had waited several months and was finally allowed to see it for six hours. Later, after Tregelles' visit, Tischendorf returned and was allowed to view the text under similar circumstances as was Tregelles. However, Tischendorf managed to copy 20 pages of the text. When the priests found out, the text was immediately taken from him. He published those leaves in 1867, and then in 1868 the Vatican published the entire New Testament. It was not until 1881 that the Septuagint was released. Photographs were released in 1889-90.

Today, the contents of the manuscript are well known. It contains 759 vellum sheets out of an original 820 or so, probably antelope skins, about 10 5/8 inches square, with text in three columns. It contains the entire Bible, both New Testament and Septuagint, except for Genesis 1-46, Psalms 105-137, and the New Testament after Hebrews 9:14.

Sinaiticus. The Sinaitic Manuscript, represented by the symbol(Aleph), is the second oldest of the uncial codices (early 4th century), and it too has only recently, comparatively speaking, become available. The manuscript was found in May, 1844, by the great German scholar Konstantin von Tischendorf (1815-1874) in the monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. In a fire-bin at the monastery, he noticed 129 sheets of a very old looking manuscript, the oldest he had ever seen. To his surprise, they were of the Greek Septuagint, and he suspected that he had found the oldest copy in existence. Tischendorf then found out that the monks had two other bins full of the text, but the monks, realizing the value, allowed him to have no more of the text. So Tischendorf returned to Germany only with the sheets that he had first found. The English government learned of Tischendorf's discovery and sent a man to try and find the rest and buy it, but he was not able to do so. Tischendorf contacted a friend in Egypt who had influence with the king to see if he could obtain the rest, but his friend soon wrote back:

"The monks of the convent have since your departure learned the value of the parchments, and now they will not part with them at any price."




Codex Sinaiticus Rom. 6:23-8:15



Tischendorf himself returned to the monastery but was able to secure only one more sheet of the text. He did, however, learn that the entire Septuagint (his chief interest at the time) was contained in the manuscript. Again, in 1859, he returned to the monastery with a commission from the Tsar of Russia, but he could not find the rest of the manuscript. One of the monks, however, invited him into his cell where he showed him his copy of the Septuagint. To Tischendorf's surprise, it was the rest of the manuscript that he had seen back in 1844, and not only did it contain the rest of the Septuagint (with Apocrypha), but also the complete New Testament. Tischendorf tried not to show his excitement this time in front of the monk, but asked if he could look over it in his room. Tischendorf later wrote:

"And there by myself, I gave way to my transports of joy. I knew that I held in my hands one of the most precious Biblical treasures in existence, a document whose age and importance exceeded that of any I had ever seen after twenty years' study of the subject."

Still, it was not for another eight years, in 1867, that Tischendorf persuaded the Tsar to do what was necessary to obtain the manuscript for the Tsar's library and public access. Although Tischendorf had published a copy five years earlier, it was based upon hand-made copies of the actual manuscript. The Tsar paid the monks nine thousand rubles and gave them an Archbishopric in exchange for the codex. After the Bolshevik Revolution, the Communist Jews gained control of the manuscript, but the English government purchased it from the Jews in 1933 for £100,000.

This Sinaitic manuscript is also written on vellum, with four columns per page and with two columns per page in the poetic books of the Septuagint. It was originally about 720 leaves, roughly 15 x 13 1/2 inches, but a great deal of the Septuagint portion has been lost. Only about 145 leaves of the Septuagint still exist, and these contain parts or all of Genesis, Numbers, I Chronicles, Esdras, Esther, Tobit, Judith, I and IV Maccabees, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, and Job. Fortunately, the entire New Testament is contained in the manuscript, and also the Epistle of Barnabas and part of the Shepherd of Hermas. In total, there are 393 leaves still existing.

Alexandrinus. The third oldest of the great uncial codices is signified by the letter A, and dates from the early 5th century. This manuscript, with two columns per page, has a nearly complete Septuagint, missing only ten leaves. The New Testament, however, is missing a total of about 37 leaves, with the bulk of those (25) missing from Matthew. 773 leaves still exist (630 of the Septuagint, 143 of the New Testament), measuring 12 5/8 x 10 3/8 inches.

Codex Alexandrinus Ro. 2:26-3:21

This Alexandrine manuscript was owned in 1625 by Cyril Lucar, then Patriarch of Constantinople. A Calvinist and supporter of the Church of England, he sent the text to England as a gift to King James. It first came into the hands of George Abbot, Archbishop of Canterbury, who had played a role in the translation of King James' Bible. Obviously alarmed at what he saw, he stalled the presentation of the manuscript. In fact, King James died before he ever got it, and it was finally presented two years later to King Charles I.

This particular text was written in the 5th century, and had found its way into the hands of the Athonite monks of Egypt by the 10th century. It is unclear how Lucar, who was later killed by the order of the Sultan, acquired the text. Tradition holds that the text was written for Thecla, an Egyptian noble lady in 325 AD. This date, of course, is too early, but other evidence does point to an Alexandria, Egypt, origin.

Codex Alexandrinus is particularly important to the study of New Testament Greek because it contains the best extant text of the Revelation, and for the Septuagint because it contains the oldest complete text of several Old Testament books as well.

Ephraemi. Codex Ephraem is the fourth oldest of the uncials, dating from the 5th century, and is signified by the letter C. When the King James translators made their Bible in 1611, they certainly knew of the existence of Codex Ephraem, for it had been brought to Paris by Catherine de Medici (1519-1589). However, as far as they knew, it was just a 12th century copy of the theological writings of St. Ephraem, a Syrian church father from about 350 AD.

It was not until 1834 that Tischendorf applied a chemical treatment to the text and discovered that it was a palimpsest, that is, someone, wanting to make a copy of Ephraem's works, had rubbed out the 5th century copy of the Septuagint and New Testament and then wrote his works on top of it to save from having to buy vellum. Unfortunately, many of the leaves were ruined or thrown away, and today only 64 leaves of the Septuagint and 145 of the New Testament exist. It measures 12 1/4 x 9 inches, being written in a single column. No books of the New Testament are complete and II Thessalonians and II John are entirely missing.

Tischendorf also played a key role in the final availability of this manuscript, for it was he who, in 1843, published a copy of the New Testament and two years later the Septuagint.

Bezae. This manuscript, dating from the 5th century, is the fifth of the great uncials, but it is also the least trustworthy of the five. It is typical of the Western texts, and shows its Catholic influence in the fact that it is a diaglot of Latin and Greek, that is, it parallels the Greek and Latin facing each other on the pages. It is interesting to note that frequently the Latin and Greek are in total disagreement.

Codex Bezae

It is missing a great deal of the New Testament, and has none of the Septuagint, but the passages it does contain are heavily interpolated with Catholic insertions, some of which have survived into the Textus Receptus, but none of which can be considered original. The Calvinist Theodore Beza discovered the manuscript in Lyons in St. Irenaeus in 1562, although Robert Stephanus had apparently seen the text and used it somewhat in the preparation of a Greek New Testament in 1550. Beza, however, claimed it, and in 1581 gave it to Cambridge University. There it was accessible to the King James translators. It is important to note that the Calvinists readily made available this corrupt text to the King James translators, but they sat on the more valuable and more accurate Codex Alexandrinus.

Codex Bezae is of little textual value, but it is useful for typifying the Western or Catholic expansions into the Greek texts.

Others. There are nearly 300 other uncial manuscripts. Of these, none are complete New Testaments, but some of them are very old (perhaps even older than the ones discussed above), and for the portions that do exist they are very good witnesses. Others are just later copies of the five manuscripts mentioned above or some like them, and contain a multitude of errors all their own.

Minuscules


There are literally thousands of minuscule type manuscripts of the New Testament in existence, and they are of secondary importance to the uncial type manuscripts. Minuscule texts are written in running hand or cursive, with or without spaces between the words. All date after the 9th century, when minuscule-type texts began to replace the uncial manuscripts. Even though these texts are more recent than the uncials, they are still important in that they may point to a very ancient uncial text from which they were taken.

Major Families. The minuscule manuscripts can, for the most part, be placed into families or groups. This is because the minuscules can be compared to one another and many show the same set of common errors or idiosyncrasies, showing that they have a common origin or a common source manuscript from which they were copied. The different families can then be given relative value. This makes comparing the many thousands of minuscule texts much easier, as there are nearly 2800. The different texts within a family can also be used sometimes to reconstruct an uncial text that no longer exists, but which was the basis for the minuscule copies.

Papyri


The papyrus manuscripts are certainly some of the most important tools in ascertaining the original text of the New Testament. In fact, the New Testament was originally penned down on papyrus scrolls. We have been aware for quite some time how papyrus was made by the Greeks and Romans, but until the 19th century we had no papyrus manuscripts. Papyrus becomes brittle when dry and rots when damp, and therefore very few texts have survived. Thus, this most important tool has only recently become available to us.



p46, c. 85 AD (U. of Michigan)


Papyrus was made by taking the Egyptian papyrus plant and cutting the stems into sections and removing the pith; this pith was cut into thin strips, which were laid beside each other, and then another layer laid down at right angles on top of the first; finally, the layers were beaten together to form a sheet, which could be pasted together to form a scroll. These scrolls, which were rolled out horizontally rather than vertically, were usually about 10 inches in height and no longer than 35 feet (although one scroll known to exist is 133 feet in length). The typical scroll might hold something the length of one of the Gospels. The text is written in columns 2 1/2 to 3 inches wide, about 5/8 of an inch apart from one another, and the text was usually only on one side, the side on which the fibers were placed horizontally. Sometimes both sides would be utilized, but only if the work was particularly long or papyrus was at a premium. This practice is even alluded to in the Bible in Ezekiel 2:10 and Revelation 5:1. However, the papyrus manuscripts that have come down to us are in codex form, with only four being actual scrolls. Whether this was how the books were originally written or not is a subject of debate.

Papyrus was used universally until vellum displaced it in the 4th century, and because papyrus is not durable, no complete or nearly complete copies of the Bible, Old or New Testament, predate that time. However, our oldest witnesses to the text of the New Testament are papyri. In fact, p52 dates from c. 125 AD. It is a fragment of a codex of the book of John (18:31-33, 37-38), and though not all that important regarding the reading of the text, it is very important in showing the early circulation of John's Gospel at that time. Other early important papyrus manuscripts include: p45, from the 3rd century, containing portions of all the gospels on 30 leaves; p46, from c. 200, containing on 86 leaves most of the letters of Paul and the Book of Hebrews; p75 from between 175-225 AD, containing on 102 pages most of Luke and John; and p72, from the 3rd to 4th centuries, containing parts of I and II Peter and Jude.

[Update: New dating techniques and a reevaluation of the evidence has pushed the dates of many of these papyri back even further. Also, the recently accepted identification of two new papyri of the New Testament found with the Dead Sea Scrolls in Cave 7 has provided two new very early papyri of the New Testament. The following is a summary:


p46 - 85 AD


p66 -125 AD


p32 -175 AD


p45 -150 AD


p87 - 125 AD


p90 - 150 AD


p64/67 - 60 AD


 -100 AD


7Q4 - <68 AD


7Q5 - 50-68 AD


The reader is encouraged to read Papyrology and the Dating of the New Testament (Separatist Brief 4.09) as a supplement and update to this section of The History of the Bible.]

As can be seen from this small portion of the list of nearly 100 papyrus manuscripts, a great portion of the New Testament text dating back well into the 3rd century [perhaps even 2nd century] can be obtained.

That's it for today.  Next time we visit this subject we'll get into versions and the question of what language the New Testament was written in.







Saturday, April 17, 2010

Classic TV Shows - Andy Griffith

I love the old Andy Griffith shows. Although it took artistic license with the small town theme, there was once a time when America was a lot like Mayberry, especially in the South. That America is gone now, never to return, but it's nice to look back and see how it used to be. As America sinks into the third world and becomes darker, more people will appreciate this TV series, if it makes it that long.

Anyway, I figured I'd start with some scenes featuring Asa, one of my favorite guest characters on the show. This is from The Bank Job Episode,Originally broadcast on December 24, 1962. Barney has been watching Glen Ford G-Man movies and decides to tighten up security.

Asa, clean those bullets!



This is Classic Barney. The Shoplifters, originally broadcast in March 2, 1964. The mannequin scene near the end of the clip is hilarious! Asa, the Rip Van Winkle night guard!

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Diversity News From the Lou

First up is West County (St. Louis county is divided into north, east, south and west). West County is where the more afluent live. Now you can't even leave your car in a parking garage anymore.

 

"I didn't know what to think. I freaked out. I started crying," said victim Katie Hartwig.

She came out from her job at West County Mall to find her Oldsmobile Alero on blocks. Two of the four tires and rims were stolen. The Toyota next to Hartwig's was also on blocks with two of the tires and rims gone. That car also had the gas line damaged. A third car had lug nuts loosened but the tires were not taken.
I've been noticing more niggers in formally white areas of St. Louis and St. Charles county. They are moving them out of North county because they are going to redevelop that area. This actually sounds more like mexicans but negros are known to do this, but in a parking garage??

"I've been here in Des Peres almost 26 years and this is the first time I've seen an incident like this where they've actually jacked the cars up and put cinder blocks underneath the frame and taken the tires and wheels off of them," said Captain Charles Milano with the Des Peres Police Department.

Get used to it, Captain. Hey, at least you'll stay busy, right? Isn't that what all cops want, to keep busy fighting the "bad guys"? No surveillance cameras were installed because there wasn't any need before. Niggers and freedom; like oil and water.

Next is the Central West End in St. Louis city. The city is trying to re-gentrify the area. Good luck. Careful when you are driving in the area, you might catch a stray bullet.

 

Now we move across town to north 8th street. Niggas trying to shoot daddy, get little girl instead. Grandma yells "hit the floor!". Sounds like a war zone, no? Looks like they were a little late in reporting it though.

Police say the girl was inside a home in the 1400 block of North 8th Street when she was hit. She was found about 12:45 a.m. Tuesday with a small cut on her head.

The shooting actually happened about an hour earlier, police say.

Let's move across the river where negros are more than plentiful. Spotlight on minority customer service from Alton!




Man charged with identity theft at Alton restaurant

kmoxnews@kmox.com


ALTON, Il. (KMOX) -- A handful of people became identity theft victims recently, by simply eating at an Alton restaurant.

Madison County Sheriff's Department Captain Brad Wells says two employees of Amarillo Tex's Steakhouse in Alton used a skimmer, to download information from the customers' credit cards.

He says they then downloaded that information onto a computer.

"Then you have another device you can load that information onto a blank card...on the back of a Bogus card" said Capt. Wells.

Wells says a third person, 29 year old Miltiano Johnson used the bogus cards to make several relatively small purchases at stores in North St. Louis County and as far west as Fulton and Columbia, Missouri.

Johnson is in jail charged with Identity theft. Captain Wells says they're still building cases against the other two.


Give a Negro a credit card, and you feed him for a day. Give him a job with access to credit cards and a computer and you feed him for life!

Let's have some comic relief from all the diversity news. We move to southeast Missouri and some white crime. A 23 year old gets mad at his woman and doesn't want to get all messy when he slices her up! This country boy was serious!


Man admits wrapping self in plastic, making threat

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

JACKSON, Mo. (AP) A southeast Missouri man faces sentencing May 10 after admitting that he wrapped himself in plastic, displayed a knife with his wife's name on it and threatened to kill her.

The Southeast Missourian reported that 23-year-old Joshua Wright of Cape Girardeau pleaded guilty Monday to unlawful use of a weapon and third-degree domestic assault.

Wright's wife told police she arrived home March 9 after a fight with her husband and found him wrapped in trash bags from his neck to his feet. He allegedly told her he didn't want to get blood on himself when he killed her.

Weapons on a coffee table included a knife with his wife's name written on the blade and a second knife with her ex-boyfriend's name on the blade. A broken wooden stick had both names on it.

Information from: Southeast Missourian, http://www.semissourian.com


That's it for now, folks. We're not Detroit yet, but we're trying!Remember, you can have diversity or you can have civilization, but you can't have both.

Good News From Russia

Thanks to VNN Forum for the link.

Top anti-racism judge shot dead in Moscow
Posted Mon Apr 12, 2010 8:44pm AEST

One of Russia's top criminal judges has been murdered in the capital, Moscow.

Eduard Chuvashov had presided over several high-profile trials, including the sentencing of some of Russia's most notorious neo-Nazis.

According to one of Russia's main news agencies, a security camera recorded the moment the gunman entered the apartment building and opened fire.

The judge had just come out of his apartment.

Mr Chuvashov is reported to have died instantly after being hit in the head and chest.

The gunman, who managed to escape, is reported to have been in his 20s and of Slavic appearance.

Officials have been quoted as saying this was probably a contract killing connected to the judge's work.

Local media said Mr Chuvashov was the judge who sentenced 12 ultra-nationalists from the Russian fascist group known as the "White Wolves" in February.

Mostly teenagers, the group were found guilty of a string of brutal murders against dark-skinned migrants from Central Asian countries, many of whom had been bludgeoned to death.

- BBC/Reuters


Story here

Our Russian comrades, don't stop there. Get your intelligence network to work and draw up a short list of people involved with "human rights" and immigration. Keep the offensive going. Nothing happens in a guerilla war when you're on the defensive. Hit'em hard, Hit'em fast, Hit'em often.

This should be happening here, in Europe and South Africa. I believe it's coming, and I can't F**king wait!!

Government Official receives traitors justice.


HAIL THE VICTORY!

Monday, April 12, 2010

Attention St. Louis - Negro Flash Mobs Coming Soon

Thanks to the CCOC for the heads up, and a big FU to the controlled media for nothing. Local story only, nothing to see here.

This is the second of two Saturdays in a row that large groups of young teens have been spotted roaming the area. Monday, city and police officials met with representatives of Highwood Property, which owns the Plaza. They're seeking a way to stop future incidents.

Witnesses said the trouble this weekend started when several brawls broke out between young people as moviegoers left a theatre.

"I was leaving the movies and there were so many kids out there," witness Starr Hackett told KMBC's Marcus Moore.

Check out the video here. Unfortunately, you can't embed it.

Susan Haake said the Plaza is her front yard. She has lived in the area for 20 years.

"In absolutely no neighborhood should that occur. People should be respectful of property, of each other, and welcome everyone," Haake said.

Haake said that she hopes what happened Saturday night won't happen again.

"I'm very worried about that because we want it to be a happy place," Haake said.

Susan. Do you think Negros are respectful of others property? You can keep hoping beyond hope, but your happy place is now nigrafied.

Story here. Check out the comments about how the place used to be nice and now you can't even feel safe there. How many times has this story been repeated all over America?

St. Louis just approved a tax to increase service on the Metro, the negro transportation service. You reap what you sow, idiots.

Sunday, April 11, 2010

Robotics

I love Robotics. I find it fascinating and a solution to our labor problem, among other things. The Japanese are way ahead of us in this field. If there were any race to take along with us as we explore the heavens, it would be the Japanese.

Anyway, here's where we've been:


Where we are at now.



A Robot controlled by brain cells!


Where we are going, if we can sort out our current socio-economic problems.

One of my all time favorite movies. This is the club scene, one of the best in the movie (wasting the pig station was the best, but we'll save that for later).

Cyberdyne Systems Model T101, taking multiple Double-ought buckshot blasts to the chest!


Another one of my favorites. This is a great scene too, though the scene where Sigourney is stripping in the Podcraft is my favorite :)

"You have my sympathies."


This movie is so full of hidden meanings. Can you find them in this scene?

The Sixth Law Of God From the Christian Separatist Church Society

Today's lesson will be bringing you the book written by Pastor V.S. Herrell concerning the Sixth Law of God. In the Septuagint, the commandment against adultery is the six law,  While in the Masoretic Bible, it is the seventh. Pastor Herrell is going by the Septuagint, which is a much more accurate translation of the scriptures than the Masoretic. I urge any Judeo-Christian to attempt to repudiate what Pastor Herrell has written here, if you can.  I have a feeling there will be few takers.

I will alternate between this book and A History of the Bible, another excellent, well researched book by Pastor Herrell.


So with that intro out of the way, I bring you Pastor V.S. Herrell's excellent treatise on one of the most misunderstood commandments in the bible.

The Sixth Commandment

In Exodus 20:13 (LXX), we find the sixth commandment 1, a commandment we find repeated in the New Testament in Romans 13:9 and elsewhere (cf. Matthew 5:27, Luke 18:20, Mark 10:19, Jacob (James) 2:11, et al.). So we immediately notice that this commandment is explicitly stated in both the Old and New Testaments. The reason is that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Heb. 13:8). With God, there is no variance or shadow of turning (Jacob 1:17). Obviously, this sixth commandment is very important. In most translations of the Bible, Exodus 20:13 and Romans 13:9 are translated: "Thou shalt not commit adultery." In the literal translation of the Anointed Standard Translation of the New Testament and in the true translation of the Ten Commandments in The Truth Unveiled, these passages are translated as: "You will not mongrelize."

In many people's minds, there is a very great difference between these two translations, though, as we shall see later, this is due primarily to the purposeful degeneration of the etymology of the word adultery. At issue in the Greek Septuagint and in the Greek New Testament are two Greek words: ou moicheuseis.

In the Latin Vulgate, Exodus 20:13 was translated as non moechaberis and Romans 13:9 as non adulterabis. The Latin word moechaberis is an inflected form of moechari, a transliteration of the Greek moicheuo, and is of little etymological importance since what it means is merely dependent upon what the Greek word means, which we will explore. However, what is important is adulterabis, an inflected form of the word adultero, since this is the Latin word most often used in the Vulgate and elsewhere to translate the Greek word moicheuo.

The Greek word ou and the Latin word non are simply negative particles, translated not. Thus, the words that we need to define in order to determine the correct translation of Exodus 20:13 and Romans 13:9 are the Greek word moicheuo and the Latin word adultero.

First, in order to define the word moicheuo, let us turn to a commonly used and commonly available dictionary, the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, edited by Gerhard Kittel and translated into English by Geoffrey W. Bromiley. Now let us note that Kittel was a well-renowned German Greek scholar and is held in high-esteem by the scholarly community.

Under the entry word moicheuo, the following definition is given: "of the intermingling of animals and men or of different races."2 This, of course, is the classical definition of mongrelization. So the Greek of the New Testament and the Greek Septuagint confirm that the translation You will not mongrelize is correct.

So now that we have defined the Greek, what about the Latin Vulgate? Now we must define the Latin word adultero, and we shall do so using the finest Latin dictionary currently available and the standard among Latin scholars, the Oxford Latin Dictionary: "To mix (a substance or kind) with another, adulterate: to impair the purity or strength of, to give a variety of appearances to, change . . . to corrupt, debase." Once again, when this is applied to people, we have mongrelization. So we find age-old agreement between the Latin and the Greek.

Therefore, using two of the most respected reference works available regarding Biblical Greek and the Latin language, and simply looking the words up, we find that these verses in the Bible are in fact an explicit prohibition against race-mixing.

To any intellectually honest person, the above definitions should be more than enough to convince him that the Bible clearly and explicitly prohibits race-mixing. This is exactly why the coalition of evil is so against a true and literal translation of the Word of God. In fact, it may be stated that their theology is little more than a justification system for the breaking of this divine law of God. If the translation You will not mongrelize is wrong, then the two reference works cited above, certainly two of the most prestigious works of their type available, are also wrong. Any legitimate Greek or Latin scholars would agree with these definitions; any one who would disagree with these definitions have in fact turned their backs on legitimate scholarship and should stop being hypocritical and admit that they do not believe the Bible instead of trying to change what it and what legitimate scholars say.

Now, many people will simply go and find a dictionary that defines the above words as adultery, and then ignorantly presume that adultery is defined as marital infidelity and simply forget about the two definitions cited above.

To show the stupidity and intellectual dishonesty of these people, I have previously written a work entitled Hidden Truth, now published under the title The Truth Unveiled, which gave many more proofs of the definitions of the Greek and Latin family of words commonly translated adultery, and examined in detail every Biblical passage, both Old and New Testaments, where these words occurred. That is not the purpose of this present work. The reader is encouraged to also read the chapter regarding this family of words in The Truth Unveiled for a complete Biblical analysis of this family of words. The objective herein is to examine in detail the etymology of both the Greek and Latin words commonly translated adultery, the ways these words were used in other Greek and Latin literature and in key passages in the Bible, and to explore how the web of deception regarding these words has been woven through the degeneration of language. The information presented hereafter is indisputable and not a subject of debate: one will either be intellectually honest and believe it or one will suffer the fate of all liars and those who help make a lie.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1 This is the Sixth Commandment in the Greek Septuagint, but in the antichrist Jew-corrupted, Hebrew, Masoretic Text it is the Seventh Commandment. For more information on the Masoretic Text, please see the last section of this book, 'The Errancy of the Masoretic Text and the KJV', as well as The History of the Bible by V.S. Herrell and The Septuagint vs. the Masoretic Text by David C. Tate. |

2 In the German original, Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament, we find the original words of Kittel: "auch von Vermischung von Tier und Mensch oder von Mischung verschiedener Rassen."


Etymological Introduction

When using lexicons or dictionaries to define words or research etymologies of Greek or Latin, it is very important to have an understanding of the development of the modern lexicon or dictionary and other tools used in translating Greek or Latin into English. For translating Biblical passages or researching Biblical words, it is also very important to understand how the Catholic Church, through the Latin language, has controlled how both Latin and Greek words are defined. These facts are certainly no truer than in the case of the word adultery.

The history of modern Greek and Latin lexicography, especially wherein Greek-English and Latin-English dictionaries are concerned, starts in about the 15th-16th centuries, a time when also the first English translations of the Bible were being made (from the Latin Vulgate).3 At this time, the universal language of scholars was Latin and the source of Latin knowledge was primarily the corrupt Catholic Church. The purpose of the first English translations was to bring the Bible to the common man who could not speak Latin. But Latin was and remained for a very long time the common language of all scholars and scholarly books.

Thus, the first Latin dictionaries did not have English definitions as a Latin dictionary today might have, but rather Latin definitions. Known as Thesaurae, these Latin-Latin dictionaries were much like current day English dictionaries which have English definitions; they were intended for those already fluent and skilled in Latin to better understand Latin words with which they might not be familiar. The greatest of these was the Dictionarium seu linguae latinae thesaurus, printed first in 1531 by Robert Estienne. Not surprisingly then, the first Greek dictionaries were Greek words with Latin definitions meant once again to help scholars already fluent in Latin understand Greek also. The greatest of these was the Thesaurus graecae linguae, a 5 volume work first printed in 1572 by Henri Estienne, the son of Robert.

We will examine the definitions of some of these types of lexicons later in this present work. What needs to be understood at this point, however, is that when Catholics like Wyclif first translated the Bible (again, from the Latin Vulgate), the only Latin dictionaries they had were Latin-Latin thesauri, and in later years when Reformation era translators began consulting the original Greek texts, the only Greek dictionaries that they had were ones with Latin definitions, prepared, of course, by Catholic scholars.

By the time the first Greek-English, Greek-German, or Latin-English, Latin-German dictionaries were prepared, many translations of the Bible in English or German had already been made, as well as of other classical writings. In fact, after the invention of the printing press in the mid-15th century, many non-Biblical Greek and Latin texts were translated into English for public consumption, and nearly all of these documents were being translated either by Roman Catholic priests or Catholic trained scholars or by Jews who controlled many of the printing houses. The effect of this was that the translations were heavily influenced on the one hand by Roman Catholics, who would not dare to contradict any of the then current Roman Catholic teachings in any of their translations, such as universal salvation, and on the other hand, by Zionistic Jews who had their own agenda and motivations to hide truth.

By the time the first Greek-English and Latin-English lexicons were made, the English definitions given were simply whatever English words were being used by translators in the current translations, especially wherein the Bible was concerned. This is much like the Greek Dictionary found in Strong's Exhaustive Concordance which gives as definitions either the same word used in the King James Version or a definition of the English word used in the King James Version. Thus, the first Greek-English and Latin-English dictionaries contained in them all of the theological prejudices of the Catholic Church and the calculated corruption of antichrist Jewish printers, in the same way that Strong's Concordance contains the calculated prejudices of the Protestant English churches. Subsequent Greek-English and Latin-English dictionaries were often mere revisions and expansions of previous dictionaries, with maybe a few more textual references and a slight rewording of the same definition.

An example of this may be found in the current reference standard for the Greek language: Liddell-Scott Jones Greek-English Lexicon. This edition, finished in 1940 (with a subsequent emendations volume being published) was a revision of the eighth edition of the original A Greek-English Lexicon by Henry Liddell and Robert Scott, edited by Henry Jones and Roderick McKenzie. The original Liddell and Scott lexicon, published in 1843, was itself based upon the Wörterbuch der griechischen Sprache by Franz Passow, printed in 1828, which was a revision of the Handwörterbuch der griechischen Sprache by Johann Gottlob Schneider. Schneider himself based his lexicon on previous works in one fashion or another, making great use of the Thesaurus graecae linguae first printed by Henri Estienne II in 1572 and subsequently updated.

Thus, it is rare, if ever, that a Greek or Latin word has been given fresh consideration, and even then it is often that errors still remain. To demonstrate this, we will examine such an error regarding the Greek word akeraios, which I have already dealt with in my previous book The Truth Unveiled. This word has been translated pure-blooded and nonmongrelized in the Anointed Standard Translation of the New Testament where it occurs in Philippians 2:14-15, which reads:

"Do all things separate from murmurers and disputers, in order that you may be perfect in our kind: pure blooded and nonmongrelized, faultless children of God, amidst a race perverse and having been corrupted, among whom we appear like luminaries in the orderly arrangement."

This Greek word is translated harmless in the King James Version, which is a far-cry from pure-blooded and nonmongrelized. But reconciling this difference is a perfect application of what we have learned about the history of lexicons. Let us first look akeraios up in a pre-1830's Greek Lexicon, the Novus Thesaurus Philologico-Criticus by John Schleusner, published in 1829. This was a Greek-Latin lexicon printed in London. The first part of the definition of akeraios reads: " [A keraizen], ... innocentem..." The first thing that we are told in this definition is that akeraios is the opposite of keraizen, then it is defined (in Latin) as harmless. Now it should be understood that when an alpha was placed at the beginning of a Greek word, it often served to negate the word. So what Schleusner and most lexicographers before him assumed was that akeraios was the opposite of keraizen.

When we look keraizen up in Liddell-Scott Jones, we find that it means: "to ravage, plunder." Or in other words to harm, so the opposite must be harmless or inviolate, unravaged, untouched, etc. This was what was assumed at the time of the translating of the King James Version and other early translations, in the 16th-17th centuries, and this explains why the term harmless was incorrectly used in the KJV. Now, however, let us take careful note of the definition of akeraios in A New Greek and English Lexicon by James Donnegan, published in 1839 (first printed in 1832). He gives the following definition: "unmixed, pure ... unharmed, uninjured ... Some derive from [keraizo], but it seems merely another form of [akeratos] and of [akerasios]. Th. a priv., [keranummi], [kerao]."

We notice three important things here. First, that Donnegan gives the definition of unmixed and pure as the primary definition. Secondly, we notice that Donnegan corrects the false origin of the word akeraios assumed by Schleusner and others. The word is, in fact, the opposite of keranummi and kerao, which are the same Greek word, and this word is defined by LSJ as: "to mix, mingle ... mixed half and half ... mix, blend ... compound." Thus, the opposite of that word would mean unmixed, unmingled, etc

The third important thing we notice about Donnegan's definition is that although he had the courage and intelligence to realize that his predecessors were wrong about the origin of this Greek word, still he failed to omit their definitions. He still defines akeraios as unharmed and uninjured even though there is absolutely no basis whatsoever etymologically for these definitions. This is an example of how each lexicon is built upon previous lexicons and that even when a mistake is found, it is not deleted but rather added to. So now Donnegan has left the user of his lexicon with a choice of definitions to use, even though he himself admits that one of the definitions is wrong.

Let us now look up akeraios in the LSJ: "pure, unmixed ... unalloyed ... of persons, pure in blood ... II. unharmed, unravaged." Once again, although Liddell and Scott were honest enough to admit that when the word is being used of persons it means pure in blood, still they have preserved the erroneous definition. In non-Biblical works, translators have no problem translating akeraios correctly. For example, let us read Edward P. Coleridge's translation of Euripides' Phoenician Women, 942-943:

"Now thou are our only survivor of the seed of that sown race, whose lineage is pure alike on mother's and on father's side, thou and these thy sons."
Here Coleridge translates akeraios as lineage is pure. But translators and lexicographers cease to be honest when it comes to the Bible and other early Christian literature. For example, let us look at an accurate translation of Barnabas 3:6:

"So then, brothers, the long-suffering One foresaw that the people whom He prepared in His Beloved should be persuaded in racial purity..."

According to LSJ and Coleridge, this is an accurate translation, rendering akeraiosune as racial purity. However, other translators, such as Kirsopp Lake, use the word guilelessness, a totally absurd translation unsupported by any true scholarship, but used only because the translators capitulate to political and religious correctness. If these translators throw away their integrity on the subject of race-mixing, then it is no large step for them also to endorse homosexuality or other things at the expense of God's Word.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


3 This of course excludes the Wyclif Bible, which was made in 1384, being totally complete in 1397, thus missing the designation "15th century" by three years. But, its scope and importance certainly lies in the 15th century and it was the beginning of many of the problems that would come to be associated with all subsequent English translations, since most were, in some way or another, based upon those translations which came before. I highly recommend that the reader consult my book The History of the Bible for more information.

Adultery and the Lexicons

With this understanding of the tactics of deception employed in our lexicons, we are now prepared to examine the lexical evidence of the Greek and Latin words associated with the common English translation adultery. We will look first at the Greek evidence.

Any Greek word which contains the prefix moich- belongs to the family of words usually translated adultery. When we look these words up in most any Greek lexicon, all we usually find are definitions which contain the English word adultery. What follows are a few important exceptions with comments.

LSJ (1940), for the verb moichao: "falsify." This definition is supplied by LSJ to help ease the translation of the innumerable Greek passages which cannot in any way be talking about marital infidelity, some of which we will look at later. To falsify something carries the connotation of adulteration or debasement or change.

A Patristic Greek Lexicon by G.W. H. Lampe (1961), for the verb moichaomai: "adulterate." Here Lampe, whose lexicon is entirely concerned with early Christian literature written in Greek, also has to admit that this Greek family of words carried the connotation of adulteration and debasement. When we look up moichao in Griechisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch, a Greek-German Lexicon by Hjalmar Frisk (1973), he defines the word with the German "verfälschen," which means to adulterate. Adulteration is the process of adding something to something else and debasing it or mingling things together. When we are talking about people being adulterated in the physical sense, we can only be talking about race-mixing or at the very least mingling family lines together and causing confusion in the family regarding issues of paternity. In fact, in my book The Truth Unveiled, the overall definition which is assigned this family of words is, first, to mongrelize or to mix or mingle races, and secondly, to mix or mingle and therefore corrupt seedlines. As we shall see later, however, the idea of mixing or mingling is paramount to truly understanding the definitions and etymology of this moich- family of words. In this definition by Lampe, we see very clearly that early patristic writers understood that this family of words was used for adulteration or mingling.

A Patristic Greek Lexicon by G.W. H. Lampe (1961), for the adjective moichozeuktikos: "of or relating to an adulterous marriage." Again, we see that some of the early Patristic writers spoke of adulterous marriages. The obvious question is, If adultery involves extra-marital sex, then how can a marriage itself be adulterous? Obviously, the emphasis is upon seedline corruption and mingling, and all throughout Greek literature, we find that very often being married is not an issue when the moich- family of words is used.

A Comprehensive Lexicon by John Pickering (1847), for the noun moichidios: "bastard, spurious." This Greek word should correctly be translated as mongrel, and a true understanding of the English language reveals that when Pickering, in 1847, used the word bastard, he too meant a mongrel. This was a common understanding of the word in the mid-19th century and before, as we shall prove later. Pickering was not the only one, however, to understand that the word moichidios meant mongrel. In Lexicon Manuale by
Cornelius Schrevel (1796), the word moichidios is defined with the Latin word "adulterinus." According to the Oxford Latin Dictionary, or OLD, adulterinus means: "adulterated, impure." Lewis and Short add: "not full-blooded." Leverett's Lexicon of the Latin Language: "begotten basely, not thorough-bred, not full-blooded, adulterated." Most importantly, however, A Large Dictionary by Thomas Holyoke (1672) states that adulterinus is equivalent (in the ancient translations and commentaries) to the Hebrew mamzir, which according to Strong's Hebrew Dictionary means "a mongrel." This dictionary also states in the same definition that the Greek moichikos is equivalent to mamzir and also is equivalent to the Greek kibdelos which is defined by LSJ as: "adulterated, base." We will discuss Holyoke's definitions and the word kibdelos in more detail later, but what is important to notice here is that all of these lexical authorities agree that the Latin word adulterinus means "mongrel," and therefore the Greek word moichidios, universally defined by this Latin word, also means mongrel. Pickering's definition of bastard must be understood to have its mid-19th century meaning of mongrel.

In Lexicon: Anglo-Græco-Latinum Novi Testamenti by Andrew Symson (1658), under the entry "adulterer" for the Greek word moichos: "it maketh a confusion in families, through an illegitimate brood." This is very similar to the definition expressed in Latin in Critica Sacra by Edward Leigh (1662), who said of the Greek word moichos: "nam familias confundit illegitima sobole," which translated says, "for it mingles families with an illegal race." Both of these men understood that the Latin words with the root adulter-, which were used to define the moich- family of words in Greek-Latin lexicons meant to mix, mingle, etc. They are therefore here trying to explain how the idea of mixing or mingling relates to the idea of marital infidelity, and they have both defined the word very closely to the true concept behind this family of words - that of seedline corruption, both interracial and intraracial, and as we have said before, the idea of marriage is very often not an issue in ancient Greek literature where these words are used.

In A Greek and English Lexicon to the New Testament by John Parkhurst (1769), under the definition for moichalis, we find this comment regarding Matthew 16:4: "Dr. Doddridge interprets [genea moichalis] 'a spurious race degenerated...'" In the Anointed Standard Translation of the New Testament, these two Greek words are translated "mongrel race," which is equivalent to Dr. Doddridge's translation, again understanding the archaic language of over 300 years ago. One reason that only a few lexicons actually use the English word mongrel for defining any Greek or Latin word is that the word mongrel was not commonly used 300-400 years ago. Since the lexicons are based upon one another, they preserve many of the archaic terms used in previous lexicons. So instead of saying mongrel, many lexicons use terms like bastard or spurious. The definitions of both of these words have subsequently changed, but that does not erase what men meant by these words when they were originally used several hundred years ago.

In any event, there is no doubt as to what Dr. Doddridge meant by the words a spurious race degenerated, and it is also clear that Dr. Doddridge, an honest scholar, understood the true definition of the moich- family of words.

Finally, we have the definition of Kittel already given for moicheuo: "of the intermingling of animals and men or of different races."

Saturday, April 10, 2010

Katyn Claims New Victims

On the ground, about 1,000 people, many of them Poles, were milling around the memorial site. A Polish priest was to say Catholic Mass once the presidential delegation arrived.

"We were getting ready for the Mass and everybody was expecting the president to arrive any minute," said Yan Rachinsky of Russia's Memorial human rights group. "Suddenly people started talking quietly about something. There were many concerned faces. . . . Soon people started running around and talking to each other. Everybody was wondering what was going on. It was an atmosphere of tension."

The priest led a prayer. Then the Polish ambassador stepped up to break the news. The presidential plane had crashed, he told the crowd. There were no survivors.

"It was a moment of complete shock," Rachinsky said. "We were standing there speechless. We couldn't believe it."

And so the cursed ground claims more of Poland's elite.

The toll cut a swath through Poland's elite. Along with the president, the 97 dead included the army chief of staff, the head of the National Security Office, the national bank president, the deputy foreign minister, the deputy parliament speaker, the civil rights commissioner and members of parliament.

But also aboard the plane were war veterans and surviving family members of Poles killed by the Soviets. There was 90-year-old Ryszard Kaczorowski, Poland's last "president-in-exile" during the Soviet years. And Anna Walentynowicz, the shipyard worker whose dismissal sparked the Solidarity union protests that eventually led to the collapse of Polish communism.

And, of course, Kaczynski himself -- a former Warsaw mayor imprisoned in the 1980s for his opposition to communism.

"The contemporary world has not seen such a tragedy," said Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, who called for two minutes of silence at noon Sunday.

LA Times Article here

Kaczynski was an interesting character. A nationalist and a conservative (he banned homosexual parades in Warsaw), he nevertheless allied himself with the Great Satan, agreeing to allow it to station missiles pointed at Russia, on the pretense of defending Europe from Iran. Anyone who would believe that doesn't have a good sense of humor. I can't really blame Kaczynski for looking toward the West for protection, as anyone who knows the history between Russia and Poland will appreciate. Still, it makes one wonder if this was just another take down of a nationalist. I have no reason to think so but then again, no one consults with me about their plans or intentions. I guess we'll see who benefits from this tragedy.

The Polish leaders were on their way to attend a memorial service for the Poles that were murdered by the communists in 1940, 70 years ago this month. As everyone familiar with the story knows, the Germans were blamed for this for decades until 1990 when the truth became known.



Lavrentiy Pavlovich Beria was head of the heavily jewish NKVD and ordered the massacre. Was Pavlovich Jewish? He certainly looks like one but so did Stalin and there is no credible evidence that the two Georgians were jews. They were However, in league with Jews like Lazar Kaganovich and therefore afflicted with jewthink. Any communist is, as the son of a Rabbi gave birth to the philosophy.



Dr. Pierce put out an excellent broadcast on this subject for those who have never heard it before. One of his best.

To all people of Polish descent around the world, our condolences from Access STL.

Keep Shooting

That's what they say in the video. Think about it for a second. This video was taken by invaders. They are in a country illegally (well, according to ZOG's own rules that they used to execute Germans after WWII) enforcing a brutal occupation on a people who was never a threat to the West at all. The invaders committing these crimes call themselves Americans. I'll bet one or two of them are even Anglo Mamzers. Listen to the comments and ask yourself again why people organize militias. "Keep shooting. Engage targets." We agree, and can't wait for the opportunity.



Now if this was taken on the border of Mexico, or downtown LA, or at the corner of Kings Highway and Delmar in Saint Louis, then I would have a different take on it. When you use force to defend blood and soil, that's good. When force is used to murder people who are being invaded at the behest of an alien power, that's evil. The guys flying those helicopters and the soldiers on the ground mopping up wear red, white and blue flags on their shoulders and call themselves Americans.

Are you an American?

We have a new entry for the 'Know Your Enemy' series of links. Blackwater Tactical Weekly. Here's the home page. Notice the NRA endorsement. Are you a member of the NRA? Anyway, I'm a firm believer in knowing everything you can about your enemy in order to destroy him. And one day, these spawns of Satan will be used to fertilize the reclaimed farmland after the revolution. There will be no bag limit. It's God's Will. Yes sir.