Chapter 17:

Race, Christianity and Judaism

From the earliest times that I can remember, I was a believing Christian. My father is a devout Christian who taught me the salvation that Jesus Christ offers and about His lessons for living. Father was never dogmatic about his faith, and over the years he led my family to different churches without worrying about the denomination. At one time or another, we were members of Presbyterian, Methodist, and Church of Christ congregations. The only important consideration for Father was the quality of the minister and the congregation. When I was in grade school, my family joined the Elysian Fields Methodist Church where Father taught Sunday school. When we traveled we would almost always try to attend Sunday school and church in whatever city we happened to be in. The new perspectives we received from the different Sunday school teachers and preachers were like shots of adrenaline for our Christian faith.

At thirteen, I went to Clifton L. Ganus school, a strongly fundamentalist Church of Christ school in New Orleans. At this same time, my family and I began to attend services at the Carrollton Avenue Church of Christ, which had strong ties to the school. Although I had had an infant baptism in the Presbyterian church, my new teachers and friends convinced me that the Bible taught that a conscious decision about salvation was needed before baptism. I prayed about it and gave myself to Christ as I was lain back in the waters of the baptismal pool in our church’s sanctuary. Not long after my baptism, after much pleading from me, my father found his way to the baptismal pool as well.

My experience of being a renewed Christian had a profound impact not only on my Christian beliefs, but also on my secular ones, for it seemed I saw everything in a fresh light. When a man has confidence in his own beliefs, he is unafraid to joust with contrary opinions. Being “saved” gave me a sense of security that made me more open to different ideas. When someone has doubts about the underlying validity of his beliefs, he feels threatened by challenges to them. The feeling of being “right with God and the world” gave me freedom to explore challenging ideas. It was only a few months after my baptism that I read Race and Reason, i the book that began my intellectual journey toward racial understanding.

In the early ’60s, most churches in the South were still segregated, and even the Catholic church had segregated parochial schools and separate seating during Mass for Whites and Blacks. Accepting racial differences posed no moral dilemma for organized Christianity for its first two thousand years, but after only 50 years of an egalitarian-dominated media, racial attitudes began to change in the Christian establishment. Ironically, the source of this new “Christian” viewpoint came primarily from people who were, in fact, anti-Christians. At first, Christians were told that recognition of racial differences and segregation was inappropriate. When I graduated from college in the mid-1970s, increasing numbers of churches were maintaining that racism was a “sin.” By the 1980s, some churches that had been totally segregated just 20 years earlier even began to consecrate mixed marriages between Whites and Blacks.

When I first questioned the idea of racial equality, it never entered my mind that understanding racial differences could be incompatible with my Christian beliefs, for almost all Christian churches in the South were then segregated. My church and its private school were entirely White.

Later, I did some real soul searching on the issue, for Christianity was not just my belief, but it was also my ultimate moral delimiter. I questioned whether my beliefs on the race issue were somehow unchristian. I began to reread the Holy Bible, paying close attention to the way it dealt with tribes, races, peoples, and nations, and I prayerfully thought about it. I read an article in a Methodist Sunday school magazine that maintained that racial segregation was unacceptable to Christians. The Scripture it used to justify its position was from Acts 17:26:

And he made from one every nation of men to live on the face of the earth…ii

I remembered the deception used by the media concerning Thomas Jefferson’s famous quote: “Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate that these people [the Negroes] are to be free.” When I thought of how they left out the next sentences affirming racial differences and supporting repatriation, I immediately opened my Bible and looked up the verse. It read:

And he made from one every nation of men to live on the face of the earth, having determined their allotted periods and the boundaries of their habitations. (Acts 17:26)iii

Just as with Jefferson, important words — words that complete the meaning of the scripture — were left off. In Biblical terms nation is synonymous with people or race. I thought about the fact that God indeed made the many races of mankind and gave them their distinct characteristics and the “boundaries of their habitations.” As I read the verse in its entirety, it did not seem to me that God favors racial integration, or racial mixing. He himself made us distinct races and He separated us by kind.

The more I reread the Holy Bible, the more obvious it became to me that God seemed very concerned about heritage. The Old Testament is about one nationality, one people: the Israelites, who are designated as a special people, a “chosen people.” Life and death struggles between the Israelites and the Cannanites, Jacobites, Philistines, Amalakites, Assyrians, Egyptians, and dozens of other peoples are recorded exhaustively. Even though, as I’ve mentioned, I was quite surprised and dismayed by the genocide, I continued to find many more verses of the Bible (such as Joshua 6:21iv and 10:28-10:41) v detailing the slaughter of entire peoples.

The Jewish stormtroopers committed their genocide under the strict guidelines established by Moses in Deuteronomy chapter 20. He told them that in the lands set aside to become Israel, they should exterminate every inhabitant, while people in surrounding nations had to be killed unless they submitted themselves as slaves to Israel.

When you draw near a city to fight against it, offer terms of peace to it. And if its answer to you is peace and it opens to you, then all the people who are found in it shall do forced labor for you and shall serve you. But if it makes no peace with you . . . you shall put all its males to the sword, but the women and the little ones, the cattle, and everything else in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as booty for yourselves; and you shall enjoy the spoil of your enemies . . . Thus you shall do to all of the cities which are very far from you, which are not cities of the nations here.

But in the cities of these people that the Lord your God gives you for an inheritance you shall save alive nothing that breathes, but you shall utterly destroy them, the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites and the Perizzites, the Hivites and Jebusites, . . . (Deuteronomy 20:10-18)vi

The wording is unmistakable. Even innocent children were to be killed simply because they were of an enemy nation.

Love Thy “Neighbor”

Since my earliest Sunday and Bible school days, I had been taught that the greatest instruction of God was to “love thy neighbor as thyself” (Leviticus 19:18)vii. Having grown up on the Ten Commandments, the most known passages of the Old Testament, I now wondered how such Old Testament genocide could be understood in light of “thou shalt not kill,” “thou shalt not steal,” and “thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house” (Exodus 20:13, 15, and 17)viii.

I decided to look up the scripture that discusses loving thy neighbor as thyself. I found it in Leviticus 19:18 in the Revised Standard Version Old Testament that had belonged to my grandmother. It read

You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but shall love your neighbor as yourself… (Leviticus 19:18)ix

The following is the Jewish translation of the text for their bible according to Hebrew texts:

You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against your countrymen. Love your fellow as yourself. -TANAKHx

The verse made it clear that neighbors were “the sons of your own people” — in other words, neighbor meant a fellow Israelite and not other peoples. The most recent Jewish translation of the verse uses “your countrymen” in place of “the sons of your own people.”

The Talmud explains in Baba Kamma 113bxi that the term neighbor specifically does not apply to a Gentile. The Jewish Encyclopedia says it clearly, “Here the Gentile is excepted, as he is not a neighbor…”xii Years later I read an article by Dr. John Hartung in which he explained that the Ten Commandments’ legal proscriptions were clearly directed at offenses against a “neighbor,” which excluded non-Israelites. He pointed out that the scrolls from which the Ten Commandments were translated had no periods, commas, or first-word capitalization. Therefore, the part about “Thou shalt not kill” becomes part of a larger context. It could read:xiii

Thou shalt not kill, neither shalt though commit adultery, neither shalt thou steal, neither shalt thou bear false witness against thy neighbor, neither shalt thou covet your neighbor’s wife and you shall not desire your neighbor’s house, his field, or his manservant, or his maidservant, his ox, or his ass, or anything that is your neighbor’s.

So who are the Israelites proscribed from killing? “Thou shalt not kill thy neighbor… the children of thy people, the sons of your own people, your fellow Israelites.” Now the mass killing and theft of other people's lands as commanded by Moses became very consistent with the laws of the Ten Commandments.

The Bible — Politically Incorrect

As much as it may surprise many of the Christians reading this, the Old Testament also supports wholeheartedly the institution of slavery. And again it is made clear that Israelites may forever engage in slavery of other peoples, but they are forbidden to enslave their own.

As for your male and female slaves whom you may have: you may buy male and female slaves from among the nations that are round about you.

You may also buy from among the strangers who sojourn with you and their families that are with you, who have been born in your land; and they may be your property.

You may bequeath them to your sons after you, to inherit as a possession forever; you may make slaves of them, but over your brethren the people of Israel you shall not rule, one over another, with harshness. (Leviticus 25:44-46)xiv

In regard to inter-racial marriage there are unmistakable passages where God commanded, “You shall not make marriages with them.”

And When the Lord thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them, thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor show mercy unto them;

Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son. . . .(Deuteronomy 7:2-6)xv

The Bible goes on to say to Israelites who marry non-Israelites, “so will the anger of the Lord be kindled against you.” (Deuteronomy 7:4)xvi

Elsewhere the Old Testament decries the mixing of the “holy seed of Israel.” Jewish priests complain that “the people of Israel, and the priests and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the peoples of the lands, doing according to their abominations…(Ezra 9:1)xvii For they have taken of their daughters for themselves and for their sons; so that the holy seed have mingled themselves with the peoples of the lands.” (Ezra 9:2)xviii Ezra goes on to list 107 men who renounced their foreign wives and their children by them as part of their obedience to God.

I also found that genealogies were used as proofs of untainted bloodlines. Racially impure genealogies were used to deny the priesthood to some who returned from Babylonian captivity. Every Sunday School child learns that one of the Old Testament proofs of the divinity of Jesus is his unbroken genealogy. I discovered that genocide and forbidding mixed marriages were not the only means used in biblical times to protect the bloodline of the Israelites. The Bible also clearly advocates separation or segregation.

. . . I am the Lord your God which have separated you from other people. (Leviticus 20:24)xix

. . . Now it came to pass, when they had heard the law, that they separated from Israel all the mixed multitude. (Nehemiah 13:3)xx

If the new egalitarian version of Christianity is right and racial separation is sinful, then by their logic God would have to be the first one condemned, for He is the one who created the racial differences of mankind. Whether one believes that God used a complex process of lengthy evolution or a simple act of immediate creation to make us, it is obvious that the different races exist and are geographically separated. If racial integrity is against the laws of God, why did he establish the races, geographically separate them, and give them distinct characteristics and qualities? Is God supposed to have made some big mistake that man in his conceit is now to rectify through integration and racial mixing?

When I brought up the clear racial teachings of the Old Testament, my Sunday school teacher said that Jesus Christ brought a change by His coming for all mankind. I had to agree that the teachings of Jesus Christ do not concur with the harsh ethnocentrism of the Old Testament. The New Testament provides that the grace of God and the salvation of Christ are available to all people and all nations. Those who believe in Jesus Christ become the “children of God,” the new “chosen people” through their salvation. Following are some often-quoted verses from the New Testament.

For you are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, male or female: for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

And if ye be Christ’s then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise. (Galatians 3:26-29)xxi

Egalitarians frequently use these verses to justify their belief in racial and sexual equality. After pondering the verses carefully, I asked myself some questions. Do the verses mean that there are literally no males and females, no Jews or Greeks, and no slaves or freemen in the world? Obviously the answer is no. The New Testament repeatedly recognizes distinctions between men and women, Jews and Greeks, and servants (slaves) and freemen. In fact, although it may shock some who do not realize it, the New Testament routinely accepts the institution of slavery and says explicitly that slaveholders can be believing Christians and brethren. Examine the verses below.

I do not condone slavery or any kind of oppression of people. However, Jesus Christ obviously had no opposition to it, anymore than had God when he told the Israelites that they could keep their slaves (of other tribes) forever. (Leviticus 25:44-46)xxvi Jesus walked among slavery His entire life, reproaching all kinds of sin, yet He never uttered a word condemning slavery or slave owners.

An excellent example of Christ’s attitude toward slavery is found in His encounter with a Roman Centurion and his slave (Luke 7:1–10). The story tells of a Roman Centurion who had a sick slave. He sent word to Jesus asking him to heal the slave, but he also sent word that the Lord need not come to him because he was sure Jesus could heal the slave from any distance. Jesus Christ did not condemn the slaveholder, nor did he instruct the Centurion to set his slave free. He simply healed the slave and praised the slaveholder effusively saying, “I tell you, not even in Israel have I found such faith.” (Luke 7:9)xxvii Passages such as that one suggested to me that the message Christ brought was one of personal salvation, not of liberal social activism.

There is neither Jew nor Greek, bond or free, male or female” does not call for racial integration any more than it calls for the elimination of sexual differences or even the end of slavery. The message is very clear and very simple: salvation of Jesus Christ is open to all who believe in him, male or female, Jew or Greek, slave or free.

It became clear to me that both the Old and New Testaments acknowledge the differences in mankind. Certainly, though, the New Testament expresses a climate of love and respect that represents a change from the harsher dictates of the Old Testament. Jesus Christ and the writers of the New Testament seem to accept slavery, but slaveholders are admonished to treat their slaves kindly, and although Jesus acknowledges the different races that God Himself created and the “bounds of their habitations,” He decrees that His salvation is open to all.

An illustration of how far afield some of the organized Christian churches have strayed from the words of Jesus is the push by many of them for gun control. He said in words one cannot mistake

. . . and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. (Luke 22:36)xxviii

How would the liberal media treat someone today who said, “If you do not have a gun, sell your coat if you must, but buy one!” The liberal, Marxist-oriented, social gospel that egalitarians say is in the Holy Bible exists only in their own minds. Liberal humanism has now been grafted onto the faith of our forefathers. The wimpish and almost effeminate popular portrayal of Jesus today is a good illustration. In truth, Christ Jesus was both gentle and manly. His love came from His inner goodness and great strength. One can contrast the flower-child, hippie, media version of Jesus with the Biblical account of Christ going into the temple, turning over the tables, and driving out the moneylenders with a cat-o’-nine-tails (a scourge usually made of nine knotted lines or small cords). xxix

In recent years, liberal radicals have so perverted the meaning of Christ’s message, that some church money has gone to support Communist revolutionaries. For instance, the National Council of Churches, a prestigious grouping of mainstream churches, sent money to Communists in Africa who were ultimately responsible for the murder of Christian missionaries.

Jewish Anti-Christianism

As I became more and more familiar with the role that organized Jewry played in Communism, Zionism, and liberalism, I also noticed their animosity toward Christians. Hollywood produces an abundance of movies that attack Christianity, and the publishing establishment generates prolific anti-Christian literature. For instance, in my college days I read a best-selling, highly promoted book called the Passover Plot, by a Jewish scholar named Joseph Schonfield.xxx He alleged that Jesus had not died on the cross, but was actually drugged by His followers to fake His death and resurrection. Jewish organizations routinely lead the fight to ban Christian prayers from schools, prohibit the mention of Christ in public facilities, and even forbid the singing of Christmas carols in our schools.

Once, when I criticized Jewish organizations for such actions on a radio talk show, a caller called me un-Christian for daring to criticize them. “After all,” he retorted, “the Jews are God’s chosen people.” I had already done enough biblical research to know that such a statement told only half of the story. For the New Testament makes it clear that believing Christians had become the ”heirs of God’s promise,” and that God no longer viewed the Jews as in his Covenant. xxxi

Looking into the historical attitude of the Christian church toward Judaism, I found that it changed remarkably in this century. This was a period that also marked the rise of Jewish economic, political, and media power. The Christian church had a long record of conflict with the Jews. It is a record of which Jewish writers frequently complain. In the early fledgling days of Christianity, Jewish persecution of Christians, as referenced in the gospels, was still fresh in the minds of church leaders. A former Pharisee, Paul, was one of those cruel persecutors until his miraculous conversion on the road to Damascus. Eventually, Christianity became an overwhelmingly Gentile faith, and organized Jewry became its implacable enemy, claiming that Jesus was a bastard and Mary a whore, and that Christians were to be boiled in excrement. On the other side, using the New Testament, Christians blamed Jews for the crucifixion of Jesus and widespread persecution of Christians.

Many Christians think that the Jews’ only religious books are those found in the Old Testament. As I described in my chapter on Judaic Supremacism, the Talmud is a collection of the chief books of Jewish commentary. The American Heritage Dictionary describes it as “. . . constituting the basis of religious authority for traditional Judaism.”

There are three main branches of the Jewish religion: Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform. The Orthodox is the traditional source of Judaism and is considered to be at its heart. Very similar to Orthodox Judaism is the Conservative branch, but it offers some greater leeway in observance of the stringent Jewish laws. More modernistic, the Reform movement is far less bound by Pharisaic traditions than either of the other branches. The Encyclopedia Judaica describes the current religious picture of the nation of Israel.

There are very few Reform or Conservative congregations in the State of Israel. Orthodoxy is the official religious position in Israel with the majority of the rabbis belonging to the old school of talmudic jurists. xxxii (“Judaism.” Encyclopedia Judaica, pg. 396)

The tendency within the Jewish Theological Seminary [in New York] has been emphatically . . . toward a more orthodox stance than existed within it in the previous generation. xxxiii (“Conservative Judaism,” Enc. Encyclopedia Judaica, pg. 906)

The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia makes it very clear that the Talmud, not the Torah or Old Testament, is the supreme authority for Judaism.

Thus the ultimate authority for Orthodoxy is the Babylonian Talmud. The Bible itself ranks second to it in reality, if not in theory. xxxiv (Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, “Authority” pg. 637)

The Talmud make it clear that Judaism regards Jesus as a “charlatan,” ”magician,” “seducer,” and “deceiver.” The Talmud also alleges that the biblical account of the crucifixion was a lie, maintaining that Jesus was strangled in a pit of dung, and that they hated him so much they executed him four different ways! Christ is portrayed as the bastard son of a harlot, and it even suggests that He was a Gentile. In some startling passages it boasts that the Romans had nothing to do with the death of Jesus, but that the Jews alone executed him for His idolatry. It also states that He has been conjured from the dead by a Jewish magician and then punished by being boiled in hot semen.

Below are direct quotes I confirmed from the Talmud, dealing with Jesus and Christians:

When I first encountered these Talmudic quotations in Elizabeth Dilling’s book The Jewish Religion, such as those above and those reproduced in chapter 16, I told myself that they couldn’t be accurate, that they had to be fakes or forgeries. Then I looked up the offending quotations and confirmed their presence in the Soncino Edition (the most popular 20th century English translation of the Talmud). The anti-Gentile quotations also received ample coverage in the Jewish Encyclopedia, enough so that no one could seriously doubt their authenticity. The Jewish Encyclopedia even details how the English translations use code words such as Amalakites, Cutheans, Egyptians, heathens, and other monikers to denote Gentiles in general, using these specific terms to hide from Gentiles how viciously the Talmud speaks of them. It also says clearly that the word “Balaam” is an alias for Jesus Christ.

As a younger man I reacted to this hidden Jewish racism first with shock and then with anger. How could the liberal Jewish pundits and media moguls condemn Southerners who simply wanted segregation, while their own Holy Writ taught hatred and violence against us, the non-Jews. When I began to talk publicly about the hatred that was in the Talmud, I was branded a hater, a bigot, and an anti-Semite by the media and by groups like the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith (ADL). The ADL is a multimillion-dollar, worldwide organization whose whole purpose is to defame and discredit those who simply tell the truth about Jewish supremacism and hatred against Gentiles.

I became very angry, not only at the hatred that I saw in the traditional Jewish writings, but also in the Jewish leadership’s hypocritical attacks on those who exposed that hatred. They attacked me for simply quoting the Talmud publicly, when I did nothing but simply read directly from their holy books. Yet, they called me the “hater.”

Ultimately, the unjust and hypocritical attacks I faced only sharpened my resolve to stand up, no matter how alone, for the cause I believed in. Unexpectedly, I found that there are a number of Jews who dare to speak out about the truth about Zionism and Jewish supremacism. A much-persecuted and slandered group, they were just as appalled as I was about the intolerant and hateful strains of Judaism that had arisen in the Jewish community and the Zionist State. They included Americans such as Alfred Lilienthal, Noam Chomsky, and a courageous Jew in Israel, Dr. Israel Shahak. These scholars had dared to stand up against Jewish intolerance.

Dr. Israel Shahak risks all to bring what he calls “decent humanity” to Judaism and the Zionist State. Professor Shahak was born in Warsaw in 1933 and was liberated from the Nazi concentration camp at Bergen-Belsen; therefore, by the Jews’ own definition, he is a Holocaust survivor. He immigrated to Israel, served in the Israeli army, and became a respected chemistry professor. Dr. Shahak is a lifelong human rights activist who has written on aspects of Judaism in both Hebrew and English. He has written many books, his latest in 1994 being Jewish History, Jewish Religion. xl Gore Vidal wrote an excellent foreword in the current American edition. Here are some excerpts from Shahak’s book exposing the attitude of the Jewish religion toward Christianity:

Judaism is imbued with a very deep hatred toward Christianity, combined with ignorance about it. This attitude was clearly aggravated by the Christian persecutions of Jews, but is largely independent of them. In fact, it dates from the time when Christianity was still weak and persecuted (not least by Jews), and it was shared by Jews who had never been persecuted by Christians or who were even helped by them…

According to the Talmud, Jesus was executed by a proper rabbinical court for idolatry, inciting other Jews to idolatry, and contempt of rabbinical authority. All classical Jewish sources which mention his execution are quite happy to take responsibility for it; in the [talmudic account the Romans are not even mentioned. . .

The very name Jesus was for Jews a symbol of all that is abominable, and this popular tradition still persists. The Gospels are equally detested, and they are not allowed to be quoted (let alone taught) even in modern Israeli schools. xli

Professor Shahak reports that the Zionists publicly and ceremonially burned hundreds of copies of the New Testament in Jerusalem on March 23, 1980. They were destroyed under the auspices of Yad Le’akhim, a Jewish religious organization subsidized by the Israeli Ministry of Religions.xlii To think that this is the same government that some Christian ministers say we should support with American tax dollars! Among other startling charges, Dr. Shahak says:

Jewish children are actually taught — passages such as that which commands every Jew, whenever passing near a cemetery, to utter a blessing if it is Jewish, but to curse the mothers of the dead if it is non-Jewish. . . it became customary to spit (usually three times) upon seeing a church or a crucifix. . . . xliii

Dr. Shahak quotes the very popular, Israeli-published Talmudic Encyclopedia, which discusses the relationship between Jew and Goy (“Goy” meaning any non-Jew).

If a Jew has coitus [sexual intercourse] with a Gentile woman, whether she be a child of three or an adult, whether married or unmarried, and even if she is a minor aged only nine years and one day — because he had willful coitus with her, she must be killed, and as is the case with a beast, because through her a Jew got into trouble.xliv (the Talmudic Encyclopedia) xlv

I knew of such hateful Talmudic laws long before I read Shahak’s latest book, yet they still astonish me each time I read them. The monstrous implications still shock me. If a Jew rapes a young Christian girl, the little girl must be killed because she got a Jew in trouble! How does one even respond to such depravity, to such evil? Professor Shahak goes on page after page illustrating hateful Judaic laws against Christians, laws that permit Jews to cheat, to steal, to rob, to kill, to rape, to lie, even to enslave Christians.

The bulk of his book shows that Judaism in Israel, instead of moderating these anti-Gentile laws, actually becomes more openly hateful of Gentiles with each passing day. Dr. Shahak says that in order to hide their beliefs from Christians in Europe, many offending Talmudic passages and common prayers were substituted by code words (such as Cuthean for Gentile or Balaam for Jesus) by the Jewish authorities. Lists of Talmudic Omissions were circulated to fully clarify the code words in the viciously anti-Gentile passages. But today the passages are again being restored and published in their original form (without code words) for Israeli schoolchildren.xlvi

From the earliest days of Christendom, Catholic popes issued edicts condemning the Jews for their usury, domination of the slave trade, prostitution and other vices, and their anti-Christian teachings and activities. Protestants were just as vociferously anti-Jewish. The founder of Protestantism, Martin Luther, read the books of the Talmud and called the Jews “agents of the Devil.” xlvii The dominant Christian viewpoint from the first century until the 1960s was that the Jewish people once had a special relationship with God, a Covenant. However, that Covenant was strictly conditional. In Deuteronomy 7:6-12 God states the covenant in explicit terms.

Know, therefore, that only the Lord your God is God, the faithful God who keeps His covenant and steadfast love to those who love Him and keep His commandments, to a thousand generations and requites to their faith those who hate him, by destroying them — never slow with those who reject Him, but requiting them instantly. Therefore, observe faithfully the instruction-the laws and the rules — with which I charge you today. (Deuteronomy 7:6-12)xlviii

Until very recent decades, most Christians believed that the Jews broke the covenant when they crucified and then later spurned Jesus Christ and His apostles. Jesus Christ made salvation available for Jews as well as anyone else, but there was no longer any special relationship for the people who rejected God and his Son. A New Covenant was established between God and all who accepted the salvation of Christ. The Catholic catechism and most Protestant churches persisted in this view until very recent times. Below are some of the scriptures on which this view was founded. I find the underlined passages of particular interest for this discussion.

For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen by race. . .

But it is not as though the word of God had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, …

This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are reckoned as descendants…

As indeed he says in Hosea,

Those who were not my people

I will call ‘my people,’

. . . And in the very place where it was said to them, ‘You are not my people,’

they will be called ‘sons of the living God.’. . .

What then? Israel failed to obtain what it sought. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened,

(Romans 9:1–3, 6–8, 24–26 and Romans 11:7–8)xlix

The book of Hebrews in the New Testament makes very clear that there was an end put to the old covenant and a new one formed through Christ for those who accept Him as Lord.

For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord when I will make a new covenant with the House of Israel and the House of Judah:

Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers, in the day when I took them by the hand out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. (Hebrews 8:6–7, 9–10) l

Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation producing the fruits of it…

And when the chief priests and Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he spoke of them.(Matthew 21:43-45)li

One can argue effectively from a New Testament perspective that the Pharisees crucified Jesus because he challenged Jewish power and practices. Judaism of today traces its lineage directly to the Pharisees. Just days before the crucifixion, Christ raised their ire by turning over the moneychangers’ tables in the temple. He struggled with them all of his life and issued one of the most damning statements ever made against them, calling them the father of the lie.

Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me.

Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do: he was a murderer from the beginning and abode not in truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own; for he is a liar and the father of it.

Then answered the Jews, and said unto him, Say we not well that thou are a Samaritan, and has a devil…(John 8:42-48)lii

Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom there is no guile! (John 1:47)liii

The gospels have repeated admonitions about the anti-Christian and misanthropic nature of the Jews. Some examples are

. . .for you suffered like things of your own countrymen as they did from the Jews, who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove us out and displease God, and oppose all men. . . But God’s wrath has come upon them at last. (1 Thessalonians 2:14-16)liv

This testimony is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, instead of giving heed to Jewish myths or to commands of men who reject the truth. (Titus1:13–14)lv

These kinds of passages, the Judaized Christians seem never to quote. If anyone today would say essentially the same things said by Jesus or the apostles, he would surely be called anti-Semitic. In fact, I shudder to draw the comparison of what would happen to the person who went into a synagogue with a cat-‘o-nine-tails and drove the Jews out. Yet, whoever today complains about hateful anti-Christian Jewish attitudes is quickly libeled as “un-Christian.”

As the centuries passed following the crucifixion, the antagonisms between Christian and Jew grew and became even more hostile. In Rome the first great persecution of Christians occurred under Nero. The early church carefully noted that this persecution came under the ceaseless urgings of Nero’s Jewish mistress, Poppaea Sabina. Even Jewish histories record the collusion of the Jews with the Muslim Moors during their oppressive occupation of Christian Spain. In modern times Jewish Communists played a principal role in the greatest murder and oppression of Christians in history — that which took place under the Communist regimes of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. As I mentioned in the last chapter, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn showed that Jews administered the gulags in Russia that murdered many millions of devout Christians. lvi

Through such evidence uncovered during my research, I came to understand fully one of the most chilling verses of the New Testament. It appears repeatedly in the Gospels:

Yet for fear of the Jews no one spoke openly of him (John 7:13)lvii

In modern America, Jews lead the effort to de-Christianize America. More importantly, Jews dominate the very un-Christian mass media. Book publishing and distribution, major newspapers, magazines, movies, and television are empires in which Jews are greatly over-represented and Christians are vastly under-represented, and those few Christians have often learned to say what they must to survive and prosper. The ancient opponents of Christ are able through their pervasive power in the media, to convince millions of Christians that they are still God’s Chosen People and that God still today has an exclusive racial covenant with the Jewish people. Christians are told that to resist the Jews’ anti-Christian actions would be to oppose the will of God Himself. Yet, God says explicitly in Hebrews 8:9: Not according to the Covenant that I made with their fathers, in the day when I took them by the hand out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my Covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.lviii

Some ministers believe that the Jewish people will eventually come to Christ, and therefore we should support Israel no matter how many terrible, anti-Christian acts it commits. That is equivalent to saying that we should give the keys to our churches to arsonists seeking to burn them down because they may someday come to Christ. The offer of God’s salvation is for everyone, but that does not mean that we should not oppose the forces of evil, or that we should aid the enemies of Christ. I believe that we have a moral obligation to defend our faith against those who attack Christ and to defend fellow Christians who face persecution at the hands of Christ’s enemies.

It is important to clarify that although I think we must defend our faith and heritage, we should not be hateful or spiteful ourselves. We do not need to be hateful, but we must be resolved to oppose their efforts to destroy our way of life, our Christian faith, and our freedom and our very survival as a people. In my life, I have tried to approach every individual fair-mindedly. There is no reason to treat an individual Jew with disrespect or hatred. But if he works to destroy our heritage, we have the right — indeed we must — oppose him.

Television evangelists, who obviously can be booted from the airwaves at any time the controllers choose, are very careful what they say about the “Chosen People.” I remember clearly one of Jimmy Swaggart’s programs long before his sexual scandals. He whimpered and cried that he had to tell us that the Pentecostals were not following the Word of God; that the Catholics were not; that the Presbyterians were not; and that the Methodists were not. Jimmy was careful not to mention the one extremely powerful religious group that openly opposes Jesus Christ. Swaggart may have lost a little by criticizing Catholics and Methodists (fellow Christians who love Christ but who differ in some interpretations of the Holy Bible), but he knew he would have risked much more (in fact, everything) by uttering the slightest criticism of Jews.

As I researched Jewish history, I became aware of the fact that the Jewish people of today share little of the heritage of the Old Testament people called Israelites. Reading the Jewish Encyclopedia I learned that the Jewish people classify themselves into two major divisions: the Ashkenazim and Shephardim. The Shephardim, who migrated from Palestine to the Mediterranean nations, are supposedly related to the original tribes of Israel, while the Ashkenazim first emerged from an area of Southwest Asia called the Khazar (also called Chazar) Empire and filtered into Russia and Eastern Europe.

The Jewish Encyclopedia contains a long article on the Khazars and admits that the Kingdom of Khazaria converted to Judaism around 740 AD. Arthur Koestler, the eminent Jewish author, in an exhaustively researched book called the Thirteenth Tribelix argues persuasively that the Khazars became the Ashkenazim branch of Jewry, which forms the great majority of the modern Jewish people. Of course, this historical inquiry is little pursued because if it could be shown that many of the Jewish people have no direct lineage to Abraham, then their “ancient homeland” justification for the state of Israel would be completely undermined.

Furthermore, many of the original Israelite tribes fell under Babylonian captivity, and Jews have been minorities in every nation of the world in which they have resided. In spite of their ethnocentrism and Talmudic prescriptions opposing intermarriage, without a doubt the Jews have intermarried with their host peoples. Even with only a slight interbreeding compounded over the last 3,000 years, the Jews probably have retained only a portion of their original genetic heritage. Yet, as they have slowly absorbed the genes of other nationalities, close inbreeding in their minority communities has certainly led to great genetic similarity among them. Exclusively Jewish diseases such as Tay-Sachs reveal a linked genetic heritage of Jews no matter where they reside in the world.lx

While in college I encountered the Christian Identity faith that maintains that the original Israelite tribes became the differing nationalities of the European peoples. The denomination claims that with the coming of Christ, those of the original Israelites who maintained their heritage became Christians. They believe that those who were amalgamated with the other peoples (such as the Babylonians and then later the Khazars) and followed the Talmud became what are now called Jews. I researched and prayed about the issue, but I kept my more traditional Christian attitude about Jews. Over the years, though, many Identity Christians have become my friends, and I have been impressed by their dedication to our White heritage and to the Lord Jesus Christ. I view them warmly, as fellow Christians with whom I share many sentiments and with whom I disagree on few. I am thankful that they are united with all racially conscious White people in the struggle ahead.

Whatever its ethnic origins, over the centuries Christianity adopted a European cultural overlay both in its artistic expression and its religious tones. We can see those expressions in the breathtaking paintings of the Sistine Chapel, the sculptures of the Madonna and Child, the gothic cathedrals of Europe, and even the classic Christmas carols that so deeply touch our hearts. Christianity is tightly wound within the heritage of Western man. No race is so intrinsically Christian as the European. The different Christian denominations may differ dramatically in their interpretations of the Scriptures, but all of them share their faith in Him.

In stark contrast to the European forms of Christianity, African and Black Caribbean nations veer sharply from the fundamental Christian precepts. Once White missionaries and influences are completely removed, the forms and practices of Christianity usually become almost unrecognizable in just a few short years. Idol worship, witch doctors, forms of voodoo, and other decidedly non-Christian beliefs develop and flourish, even with the church itself.

I came to understand that I was not going against the Word of God to recognize and wish to preserve the different races that he created. If anything, I was fulfilling the laws of his creation. I also firmly realized that according to the Holy Bible the coming of Jesus Christ created a New Covenant that the chosen people of God now were those who accepted him and his Father. I knew that I was right to defend my Christian heritage from the powers seeking their demise. Then, as now, I believe in freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Judaism has every right to believe whatever it wishes and be actively anti-Christian and anti-Gentile. Zionists have every right to seek their own political supremacy. But, we have the right to oppose them, to defend ourselves from their power, to preserve our heritage in the face of their attacks, and to fight for our precious freedom from their domination.

By the time I graduated from college, I had a firm orientation toward my faith and my political work. The eternal life provided by Jesus Christ has been taken care of since the day I accepted His salvation. I know little of the afterlife, but I do know about the life we experience here on Earth.

I have felt my heart beat resolutely and pump red blood through my arteries and veins. On a mountaintop, I have felt the joy of clean, cool air filling my lungs while viewing a magnificent dawn. My eyes have seen the precious beauty of a baby at the moment of birth. I have experienced the heavenly scent of sweet magnolias on a pristine south Louisiana bayou. Of the inequities that plague us, I am also aware: little boys and girls victimized by crime and brutality, the crushing of the dreams of our youth under the heel of a debauched civilization. I know, as well, of a future bright and shining that awaits our people if only we will seek it with courage.

Perhaps if I were made of sterner stuff, I would have long ago put on the minister’s collar of my Christian faith, but I leave that to far more perfect men, to the men whom God has called.” My unorthodox views, the doubts that sometimes creep in, and my many flaws exclude me from that service. I will, however, use whatever abilities I have in the natural world, the living world. I will fight for my people’s survival and their freedom. I cannot turn my eyes and my hands from the job that needs to be done for a saner, healthier, more noble society possible right here on Earth. Such depends totally on a higher people in body, mind, and spirit. As did our Founding Fathers, I ask God for His help and guidance in the task ahead.

Finally, I truly believe that the future of this country, civilization, and planet is inseparably bound up with the destiny of our White race. I think, as the history of Christianity has shown, that our people have been the driving force in its triumph. Ultimately, because of the genetic potential instilled by our Creator, I think that our progeny will someday travel to the stars and beyond. My life’s task is to help my race toward that destiny with every bit of courage that my heart can muster. If I can help move our people just one inch toward the heavens and toward God, when I pass on, my life will have been worthwhile.

i Putnam, C. (1961). Race and reason: A Yankee View. Public Affairs Press.

ii RSV Acts 17:26

iii RSV Acts 17:26.

iv RSV Joshua 6:21

v KJV Joshua 10:39

vi RSV Deuteronomy 20:10-18

vii KJV Leviticus 19:18

viii KJV Exodus 20:13, 15, and 17

ix RSV Leviticus 19:18

x TANAKH. (1985). A New Translation of The Holy Scriptures according to the Traditional Hebrew Text. Philadelphia. The Jewish Publication Society.

xi Talmud - Baba Kamma (1935). 113b. p.666. Soncino Edition.

xii Funk and Wagnalls Jewish Encyclopedia. (1905). Gentile. p.620.

xiii Hartung, John. (1995). Love Thy Neighbor: The Evolution of In-Group Morality. Skeptic, Vol. 3. No. 4.

xiv KJV Leviticus 25:44-46.

xv KJV Deuteronomy 7:2-6.

xvi KJV Deuteronomy 7:4.

xvii RSV Ezra 9:1.

xviii KJV Ezra 9:2.

xix KJV Leviticus 20:24.

xx KJV Nehemiah 13:3.

xxi KJV Galatians 3:26-29.

xxii RSV Ephesians 6:5.

xxiii RSV 1 Timothy 6:2.

xxiv RSV Titus 2:9-10.

xxv RSV 1 Peter 2:18 .

xxvi RSV Leviticus 25:44-46.

xxvii RSV Luke 7:9.

xxviii KJV Luke 22:36 .

xxix KJV John 2:15.

xxx Schonfield, H. J. (1965). The Passover plot; new light on the history of Jesus. New York: B. Geis Associates. Random House.

xxxi KJV Hebrews 8:9.

xxxii “Judaism.” Encyclopedia Judaica, p. 396.

xxxiii “Conservative Judaism,” Enc. Encyclopedia Judaica, p. 906.

xxxiv Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, “Authority” p. 637.

xxxv Talmud, Sanhedrin (1935). Soncino Edition. 105a-b. p.717.

xxxvi Simon, M. Trans. (1936). 57a Gittin. London. Soncino Press. p.261.

xxxvii Talmud, Sanhedrin (1935). Soncino Edition. 105a-b. p.726.

xxxviii Talmud, Sanhedrin (1935). Soncino Edition. 52b. p.356.

xxxix Talmud, Sanhedrin (1935). Soncino Edition. 105a-b. p.726.

xl Shahak, I. (1994). Jewish History, Jewish Religion. Boulder, Colorado. Pluto Press.

xli Shahak, I. (1994). Jewish History, Jewish Religion. 97-98.

xlii Shahak, I. (1994). Jewish History, Jewish Religion. p.21.

xliii Shahak, I. (1994). Jewish History, Jewish Religion. 23 & 93.

xliv “Goy” Talmudic Encyclopedia as quoted by Shahak.

xlv Shahak, I. (1994). Jewish History, Jewish Religion. 87.

xlvi Shahak, I. (1994). Jewish History, Jewish Religion. p.23.

xlvii Luther, M. L. (1962). The Jews And Their Lies. Chicago. Christian Press Translated From The Erlangen And Weimar German Editions. 1483-1546. Works. 1883 D. Martin Luthers Werke; Kritische Gesammtausgabe. Weimar, H. Böhlau, 1883-<1985.

xlviii RSV Deuteronomy 7:6-12.

xlix RSV Romans 9:1–3, 6–8, 24–26.

l KJV Hebrews 8:6–7, 9–10, and 13.

li KJV Matthew 21:43-45.

lii KJV John 8:42-48.

liii KJV John 1:47.

liv RSV 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16.

lv RSV Titus1:13–14.

lvi Solzhenitsyn, A. (1974). The Gulag archipelago, 1918-1956 : an experiment in literary investigation, I-II. Tran. Thomas P. Whitney. London : Collins : Harvill Press. p.79.

lvii RSV John 7:13.

lviii KJV Hebrews 8:9.

lix Koestler, A. (1976). The Thirteenth Tribe. New York: Random House.

lx Chase, G. A., & V. A. McKusick (1972). Founder Effect In Tay-Sachs Disease. American Journal Of Human Genetics. 25:p.339-352.