COMMENTARY OF GENESIS chapter 9
9:1-3: "And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto
them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth. And
the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast
of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that
moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into
your hand are they delivered. Every moving thing that liveth
shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you
all things."
"AND GOD BLESSED NOAH AND HIS SONS."
This explains why Noah's curse falls on Ham's seed
instead of Ham, himself (Gen. 9:25), and thus it prevents the
race-mixer from understanding the passage. (See comments on
Gen. 9:25 later in this chapter.)
"BE FRUITFUL, AND MULTIPLY, AND REPLENISH...."
This is the original commission given to Adam (see Gen.
1:28). Noah is a type of Adam in that:
1. They both were sole possessors of the earth.
2. They both had a direct commission from God.
3. They both replaced races which God did not want
controlling the earth.
4. They both had three sons by name.
5. One of their sons was a type of Christ.
6. One was a type of Antichrist.
7. Shem and Abel are connected with Christ.
8. Cain and Canaan are both cursed.
9. Adam is naked when he sins, exactly as Noah.
10. Adam and Noah partake of "forbidden fruit."
11. Adam's prohibition is a VINE, and Noah's
prohibition is BLOOD (see Gen. 9:5).
"AND THE FEAR OF YOU AND THE DREAD OF YOU."
Something "new" had been added. In a world where
animals have lost their docility (see Isa. 11:1-11), man is
given "the reach" in the fight. An instinctive fear of man is
placed in the animals, which is apparent to this day, and not
without good reason. Any animal in his right mind--not
"rabid"--gives man a wide berth when he approaches. There are
animals such as Army ants, or pirhana (a South American fish),
who will devour a man if he is helpless, but these animals
cannot tell the body (or corpse) of man from that of a cow or a
dog. Any animal that KNOWS what man is will stay out of his
way. Killer whales, gray sharks, tiger sharks, and Mayo sharks
will occasionally attack man, but one must remember that this
only takes place where man invades the animal's domain. No
barracuda or manta ray will take the trouble to go swimming into
the city water system to bite a man washing his hands in the
basin! (Man, on the other hand, will pick up mask, fins,
footgear, aqua lung, and spear guns, to go out and hunt these
animals IN THEIR HOMES.) In India, a cobra may attack a man,
but this is only because the cobra has been regarded as a sacred
animal (and has been left unmolested) for so long, he knows he
can "get away with it." Turn some hunters loose there for about
ten years, and the cobras would be hiding in the bushes all day
and praying to St. Christopher before they stuck their heads out
at night.
German shepherds would appear to cancel the decree of
Genesis 9:2, but one must remember that this breed of dog (as
the Doberman Pinscher) was bred for police work and war work.
Where man has projected his authority over the processes of
nature, some "men killers" can be bred. However, not even a
lone German shepherd on a street at night (without his master)
will cross the street to attack a stranger. Brown bears (and
Kodiaks) who have attacked men (as water buffalo and leopards
have also done) NORMALLY do not hunt for men for food. They
will not fight or attack unless cornered, and they will usually
exhaust every resource in "getting away" before they will stand
at bay and face a man with a loaded rifle.
"EVERY MOVING THING THAT LIVETH SHALL BE MEAT FOR YOU."
This explains the previous statement, for at Genesis 9,
man becomes a "meat eater" (cf. Gen. 3:17). Nimrod (Gen. 10:9)
is the first outstanding representative of this class of men who
begin "bringing home the bacon" in Genesis 9:3. The animals of
the earth learn quickly enough that man's menu was changed after
the flood. The whistle of arrows and darts, the sailing shaft
of the spear, the thud of flying rocks, and the grunts, bellows,
screeches, and roars of their companions tell the animals that
"the kingdom must be coming" and that "every day in every way
things are getting better and better," etc. (I say this
facetiously of course; undoubtedly animals have better sense
about these things than men do.)
9:4-7: "But flesh with the life thereof, which is the
blood thereof, shall ye not eat. And surely your blood of your
lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require
it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother
will I require the life of man. Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by
man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he
man. And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth
abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein."
The eating (or drinking) of raw blood is forbidden by
this taboo. The same warning occurs in Leviticus 17, under the
LAW, and again in Acts 15, under GRACE. This is one of the
great "do not cross" warnings placed in the Word. Using the
words of Jesus (taken out of the context of John 6) the Papist
"crosses the deadline" for the "glory of God and Holy mother
church," etc., and offer the "drink offering of blood" (Ps.
16:4), which Paul calls "the cup of devils" (1 Cor. 10:21).
This "MASSacre" (misnamed after "to dismiss") is called a
"SACRIFICE" in Roman Catholic literature, and professes to be
not merely a "continuation" of the Sacrifice at Calvary, but
also a "REPETITION" (see any publication by the Knights of
Columbus). Since this pagan heresy is rebuked in no uncertain
terms in Hebrews 10:8-14, and since the act itself would be a
violation of three testaments--BEFORE, DURING and AFTER the
Law--the Bible believer takes the same attitude toward a
"Pontifical Mass" as he would take toward a rattlesnake; HE
AVOIDS IT.
"AT THE HAND OF EVERY MAN'S BROTHER...."
Here, capital punishment is instituted, and to match its
companion pronouncement on blood, the decree of capital
punishment is found BEFORE (here), DURING (Numbers 35), and
AFTER (Acts 25:11; Rom. 13:1-4) the Law. Capital punishment is
not a subject of debate among real Bible believers, any more
than "the Mass" is. The true believer accepts the infallible
statements of the word on both subjects to be scientifically
accurate, morally correct, infallibly inspired, perfectly
preserved, and absolutely unimpeachable. If the greatest
Christians who ever lived--Peter, James, John and Paul--turned
thumbs down on the pagan practice of the partaking of literal
blood (Acts 15:20; 21:25), then the modern Christian has no
business even thinking that the literal blood of Jesus Christ is
present in the intoxicating liquor used by the priests of Baal.
If the greatest follower of Christ--to whom one-third of the New
Testament was given--submitted cheerfully to capital punishment,
without comment, then the Bible believer already has his
standards to follow. What socialists, Communists, judges, civil
rights workers, college professors, psychiatrists, lawyers, and
popes "think" about these issues is immaterial. When a man
"thinks" something contradictory to the revelation of three
dispensations 2,000 years apart, given by the supreme Judge of
the Universe, well, really...!
The statement is that both man and animals will incur
"blood guilt" from murdering a man. (The rules for cleansing
the guilt of innocent blood are found in Deuteronomy 21.
MANSLAUGHTER is distinguished from MURDER in Numbers 35, and
armed COMBAT is distinguished from MURDER in I Kings 2:5.) What
is complex, obscure, difficult, intricate, complicated, or
"knotty" in the law courts, and the books on higher education is
shockingly simple and clear in the A.V. 1611, which is
available to any 6th grade reader, any time he might care to
pick it up.
"WHOSO SHEDDETH MAN'S BLOOD, BY MAN SHALL HIS BLOOD BE SHED."
Isaiah 26:21 is the final reaping of man for a series of
actions which began with Genesis 4 and will not end until
Revelation 19. Note the peculiar emphasis on BLOOD in the Holy
Bible that is missing from the other great "scriptures" of the
world.
1. The first blood shed is the blood of a LAMB (see
Gen. 3).
2. The second blood shed is that of a "SHEPHERD" (Gen.
4:5-8).
3. The Good Shepherd of John 10 sheds BLOOD (Col.
1:14).
4. The Christian has PEACE through this blood (Col.
1:20), is JUSTIFIED by this blood (Rom. 5:9), is CLEANSED by
this blood (I John 1:7), is REDEEMED by this blood (Eph. 1:7),
is PURGED by this blood (Heb. 9:14), and is SAVED by this blood
(Eph. 2:13).
5. Judas goes to the "field of Blood" (Acts 1:19).
6. Pilate tries to get innocent blood off his hands
(Matt. 27:24).
7. Mystery Babylon is guilty of the blood of saints and
martyrs (Rev. 17:5,6).
8. Her followers DRINK blood (Rev. 16:6).
9. Blood is forbidden in both Testaments (see text).
10. Christ's garment at the Second Advent is dipped in
blood (Isa. 63; Rev. 19:13).
11. Both Testaments are instituted with blood (Heb.
9:8-22).
12. "Innocent blood" is always avenged (Matt. 23:35; II
Kings 9:26).
13. The Christian will DIP HIS FEET in blood at the
Second Advent! (Ps. 58:10; 68:23.)
In more than 350 verses the word appears: blood, blood,
blood, blood. The Bible is a Bloody Book and it capstones the
bloody account of man's bloody history with the statement that
the Blood shed on Calvary was more than a man's, IT WAS GOD'S
BLOOD!! (Acts 20:28). (Now watch all the new translations rush
to change that verse!)
The doctrine of retribution for "shed blood" needs no
confirmation from scholars in any century. The history of this
earth is the history of Adam's noble line, now killing to "bring
in the peace," now killing to "maintain the peace," now killing
because it is the only way to "survive" (Darwin's
interpretation), now killing to keep others from multiplying
(Darwin again), now killing at the commandment of God (I Sam.
15), now killing voluntarily for sport (II Sam. 2:14-16), and
occasionally killing "to bring in the kingdom" (Crusades,
Revolution of 1776, Civil War, etc.). Killer Cain is the first
man born, and all his kinfolk practice his profession. If man
could stop killing for 100 years, the past ledger of
indebtedness might eventually be cancelled out, and the books
"closed" on the account; but since this has never happened, is
not happening, and will not happen, the bloody horror goes on:
Nishar, Herat, Ostend, Austerlitz, Fontenoy, Chalons,
Verdun, Crecy, Chatigny, Mont Blanc, Torgau, Bliethen, Blenheim,
Chateau Theirry, Bellau Words, Concord, Lexington, New Orleans,
Metz, St. Vith, Bastogne, Thermopolae, Chates, Agincourt,
Casablanca, El Alamein, Midway, Wake, Guam, Omaha Beach,
Peleliu, Pusan, Taegu, Osan, Cold Harbor, Bull Run, Chikamauga,
Argonne Forest, the Marne, Soissons, Tobruk, New Georgia,
Saipan, Okinawa, Trawa, Leyte Gulf, St. Lo, Stalingrad, Anzio,
Salerno, Manasseh, Antietam, the Reichswald, Hamburg, Polesti,
Nagasaki, Vicksburg, Heartbreak Ridge, Pork Chop Hill, Seoul,
Chosem, Saigon, etc., etc., and through all this ghastly blood-
letting science and religion deceive men into thinking that a
BLOODLESS religion can redeem them! FERMENTED LIQUOR IS NOT
BLOOD! Neither are the findings of a computer.
As the war in Vietnam retaliated for the Viet Cong, who
were retaliating against the French, who were retaliating
against England, who was retaliating against the Normans, who
were retaliating against...! So, 20th century man is caught up
in an infernal Ferris wheel of retribution that has been
spinning for five-and-a-half millenniums, and it cannot stop
spinning until the "blue blood" shoes up (Rev. 19; Joel 2; Matt.
24; Mark 13; Isa. 11).
From maddened mountaineers, sniping at their vengeful
neighbors with buckshot, to the slaughter of Flanders Field
(500,000 British casualties in a single engagement), man gives a
clear-cut testimony to his basic nature. Where a nation rests
between wars and speaks cheerfully and optimistically of
"peace," four to six other nations keep things going so the
economy doesn't fall apart. With man's rapid "progress" in
education, and his "tremendous strides" in the field of science
(see your State College Catalogue), we have now made such
progress that we have only had 19 wars in the last 50 years.
These wars were the Manchurian war, the Spanish Revolution,
World War I, World War II, the Chinese-Japanese War, the Mexican
Revolt, the Cuban Revolt, the Invasion of Hungary, the Invasion
of Czechoslovakia, the war on the Gaza Strip, the Israeli-
Egyptian War, the Korean War, the French Vietnam War, the
Israel-Arab War, the Nicaraguan revolt, plus two uprisings in
Pakistan and Morocco. We may call many of these slaughter pens
"battles" or "skirmishes" because the term "war" has now come to
mean an engagement in which a dozen nations are involved. The
"war" in Vietnam was quietly referred to by some optimists as
"the struggle for peace"! Isn't that just splendid?
19 "struggles" in 50 years is real headway! Why just
think, that's only one war every two and a half years. Bravo
Darwin!
For comment on verse 7, see notes under Genesis 9:1.
9:8-10: "And God spake unto Noah, and to his sons with
him, saying, And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you,
and with your seed after you; And with every living creature
that is with you, of the fowl, of the cattle, and of every beast
of the earth with you; from all that go out of the ark, to every
beast of the earth."
This is the Noahic Covenant. Its sign is a rainbow (see
verse 13), called simply "bow," as only the 180 degree arch is
visible. The covenant is made with animals as well as men, and
it means that animals will suffer capital punishment (verses
5,6) for killing men exactly as government executioners will
kill men for the same thing (see Ex. 21:28-32).
The covenant is longer than the one given to Adam; and
all subsequent covenants make additions. Notice the lengthy one
given to Abraham (first part in Gen. 12:1-4, and the second part
in Gen. 15:13-21), and then the still more lengthy one given to
Moses (Ex. 20-28).
All covenants from Genesis 1-12 are binding until the
Millennium, which is apparent in the most artless study of
history (see Gen. 3:16-19). Since the Law was given to a
nation--not a man such as Adam, Noah or Abraham--it is
temporarily displaced by the dispensation of grace, after the
nation of Israel rejects their Messiah (see Eph. 2; Gal. 2,3;
Rom. 7; 13:10).
9:11-13: "And I will establish my covenant with you;
neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a
flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the
earth. And God said, This is the token of the covenant which I
make between me and you and every living creature that is with
you, for perpetual generations: I do set my bow in the cloud,
and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the
earth."
This very verse slaps the last seal of authenticity on
the Universal Flood, which modern conservative scholars deny.
God, here, forces the Bible rejecting "Christian" into the
position where he has to make a liar out of God in the text, and
by so doing, he also makes a liar out of his Saviour! (see John
5:46-47). In addition to the Universal Testimony which all
nations give to the flood, and in addition to the fact that a
local flood would have launched the ark in an ocean instead of
on top of a 16,000-foot mountain, it is the final and shattering
statement THAT GOD WILL NOT EVER REPEAT AGAIN WHAT HE DID IN
GENESIS 7,8! If the flood of Genesis 7,8 was a LOCAL FLOOD then
God lied to Noah, or Moses lied when he wrote the account, or
the man who rejects the account is a liar himself (Rom. 3:3,4).
There have been thousands of floods since Genesis 7,8; 100,000
people drowned in a flood at Friesland (1228); 10,000,000 were
left homeless, starved or drowned in floods in North China
(1929); floods in Eastern and Southern China left 1,000,000
homeless or killed (1950); and 445 people were killed in 1963
in flash floods northwest of Barcelona; not to mention the
Johnstown flood (1889) here, in America, where 2,000 died.
You see, the attacks on the word of God are conducted in
such "scholarly atmospheres" with such deep "intellectual
approaches," and dynamic "rethinking of values," that it never
occurs to anyone that the men partaking in them are GOD DEFYING,
BIBLE REJECTING LIARS. Under the guise of "rethinking" (Sin is
always "cloaked"--see John 15:22.), the seminary faculties of
orthodox schools discuss "The Flood Problem," or "Evaluating the
Deluge," or "The Flood Story in the Light of Modern Science,"
and not one of the God-forsaken rascals discussing the problem
will call anyone's attention to the plain English of the A.V.
1611 text (Gen. 9:11), WHICH STATES THAT IF THE FLOOD WAS NOT A
UNIVERSAL FLOOD, THEN GOD WAS A LIAR. "All flesh be cut off ANY
MORE...neither shall there ANY MORE...." Did you notice the
"any mores"? IT WAS DONE. You cannot back out by saying,
"Well, He is saying that a universal flood will NEVER take
place, but local floods will." That is not the sense, meaning,
construction, wording, phrasing, or spelling of the sentence.
It is "any more," "any more." You don't say, "I won't hit you
ANY MORE," when you never hit a lick to start with.
"THIS IS THE TOKEN OF THE COVENANT."
The covenant is "BERITH" (Hebrew), which means "to cut a
covenant." The "cutting" is apparent in the Abrahamic Covenants
(see Gen. 15-17), but not so apparent here. The primitive idea
is the cutting of the head off the sheep (Gen. 4:3-4), and among
primitive tribes it is preserved as the cutting of the wrist of
two men, mingling their blood by incisions to leave a permanent
scar; thus the two men become "blood brothers." (You may have
noticed that "creeping things" are omitted from the covenant
here {vs. 10} even though they entered the Ark in Genesis 7:14.)
"I DO SET MY BOW IN THE CLOUD."
This is the first mention of both natural objects. The
bow is a full "rainbow" in Revelation 4, and one can see this
"full circle" of the spectrum when flying at high altitudes; it
will appear as a circle around the shadow of the airplane on the
cloud bank below it. The moral lesson is obvious. The higher
we go the clearer we can see, and we'll "Understand it better
bye and bye," because we only see HALF the bow down here.
9:14-17: "And it shall come to pass, when I bring a
cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in the cloud:
And I will remember my covenant, which is between me and you and
every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more
become a flood to destroy all flesh. And the bow shall be in
the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the
everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of
all flesh that is upon the earth. And God said unto Noah, This
is the token of the covenant, which I have established between
me and all flesh that is upon the earth."
"AND I WILL REMEMBER...."
(See notes on Gen. 9:1.) The sign is a pledge to man
that the deluge will not return and a reminder to God that when
He is tempted to repeat the catastrophe (see Ex. 32:9,10) He
will abide by His promise. Again, in verse 15 the reader is
reminded that the flood of Genesis 7,8 will not happen again.
If it were a LOCAL flood then God lied, for local floods have
happened scores of times since then. The verse can only refer
to a universal flood, unless you spend your time reading
nonsense like "Christianity Today."
"THAT I MAY REMEMBER THE EVERLASTING COVENANT."
This covenant goes to the end of the Millennium, and if
it is taken strictly in context--referring to a destruction by
water--it is NEVER abrogated. However, Simon Peter, the
unlearned and ignorant fisherman (Acts 4:13), reminds us that
all flesh will be destroyed again; but this time, SO AS BY FIRE
(II Pet. 3:1-12).
It is possible that Noah is the speaker in verse 16;
however, this would be unusual in view of the fact that up until
here Noah has not said a word--at least as far as the scriptural
record is concerned. The reference to God in the third person
would indicate Noah is the speaker, but then the Lord often
refers to Himself in the third Person (John 6:62; 3:16; 5:20,25;
11:4).
We have already commented on verse 17 in relation to
verses 9 and 12.
9:18,19: "And the sons of Noah, that went forth of the
ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth: and Ham is the father of
Canaan. These are the three sons of Noah: and of them was the
whole earth overspread."
We have already commented on the three boys somewhat
(see Genesis 5:32 further in these comments). Two new
developments crop up, however.
1. "HAM IS THE FATHER OF CANAAN." Ham is singled out
immediately from the other two boys.
2. "OF THEM WAS THE WHOLE EARTH OVERSPREAD" shows
conclusively that every man, woman, and child in the United
States today, came from Shem, Ham or Japheth or a combination of
Shem, Ham, and Japheth. This is the line of HOMO SAPIENS
(Latin: "The same saps!"). No amount of ethnological juggling
will improve on the A.V. 1611 account.
Anticipating the location of the sons, grandsons, and
great grandsons named in Genesis 10, we note that Japheth is the
father of the Caucasian race. Among his descendants are found
the Celts, Picts, Angles, Caledonians, Saxons, Waldons, Gauls,
Frisians, Franks, Aryans, and Norsemen of Northern Europe; the
Circassians, Celts, Croatians, Dorians, Bulgars, Bolls,
Moravians, Parsees, Scythians, Phrygians, Huns, Pisidians,
Goths, Slavs, and Thracians from Russia, the Balkans and North
Persia; and the Lombards, Catalans, Etruscans, Basques and
Visigoths of North Spain and Italy.
Shem is obviously the progenitor of the "people of the
East" (see Gen. 10:30). His descendants include "native"
Americans (Mayas, Aztecs, Comanches, Shoshones, Cherokees,
Crows, Creeks, Mohawks, Apaches, Navajos, Seminoles, Sioux,
Mohican, Chippewa, Pawnees, Blackfeet, Algonquins, and the Incas
in the Americas), the Marshall Islanders, Maoria, Samoans,
Hawaiians, Sumatrans, Siamese, Chinese, Koreans, Kalmuks,
Japanese, Sumerians, Manchurians, Eskimos, Persians, Kurds,
Turks, Mongols, AND JEWS.
Father Ham begets Egyptians, Canaanites, Tunisians,
Algerians, Cameroons, Charis, East Sudanese, Bushmen,
Hottentots, Zulus, Kaffir, Veddahs, Fijians, Negritoes,
Tasmanians, Sengalese, Bantus, Philistines, and Berbers.
There is overlapping of course, but since the science of
ethnology decreases as the sciences of transportation and
communications increase, the subject of "breeding" and "half-
breeding" now bears the curious nomenclature of "racism," or
"racists." This is one of those Associated Press words, which
is part of an overall Madison Avenue, "soap selling" gimmick to
promote a mongrel race of brain-washed passivists, who will be
ruled by the Son of Perdition at Rome. The results of human
breeding and cross breeding are more predictable and more stable
than those of animals. The fact that Hitler misused such data,
or the fact that the NAACP does not wish such data to be known,
does not change the facts or the truths regarding it. You do
not get thoroughbreds by taking the fence down and turning the
animals loose on the street; you get them by isolation, where
the fences keep mongrels out. THIS IS A LAW OF LIFE AND NATURE.
Your opinion or the opinion of the Supreme Court (WHO ARE
SUBJECT TO THE LAWS OF LIFE AND NATURE) has no bearing on the
law. This law operates regardless of anyone's opinion about it.
It would be very interesting to see Life Magazine run a
series of stories on races, where they had been clinically
tested and exact data had been procured. Is it not very strange
that in an age gone mad on searching FOR MAN'S "ORIGINS" THAT NO
SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL DARES PRINT ANY FINDINGS ON MAN'S PROGRESS
WHERE IT CONCERNS HIS THREE MAJOR GROUPS? What kind of
scientific objectivity is that? Here is a nation of science-
mad, education-crazy, nuclear nuts, blowing gas and steam around
the world about "man's progress," "directed evolution,"
"controlled evolution," etc., and none of them from the least to
the greatest can even deliver, publicly, a scientific report on
their own species! This is God's big "20th century" circus--a
mass of people who have to ignore obvious differences among
themselves, in order to bring in "the kingdom," and by so doing
renounce their sanity, the facts of history, the investigations
of science, and their own future MORAL progress. While doing
this, the deluded idiots talk about "inhabiting outer space."
What makes you think there is any difference between Jupiter,
Saturn, and Venus? Do they not all have equal rights? Just
because they differ in size, weight, speed, wave length,
distance, color, and atmosphere, what makes you think they are
not the same? Are they not all planets? "Have we not all one
Father?" (Mal 2:10). Just mix them up indiscriminately so none
of them will feel like they are being discriminated against!
That is what Picasso did with lines. That is what Miro did with
figures. That is what the gays do in Greenwich Village. That
is what Copland did with notes. That is what the government did
to the public schools. Do you finally see clearly what
"science" is in this age? It is a political hypocrite.
Where Ham's descendants in South Asia overlap with
Shem's, one finds the Malay, the Moros, the Filipinos and the
inhabitants of South India, Arabia, and Ceylon. Where Shem
overlaps with Japheth in North Asia and Asia Minor, one will
find the Greek, Ottoman and Seljuk Turk, the Jew, the Persian,
the Mongol, the Tartar, and Russian. Where Ham and Japheth
overlap you will find the Carthaginians, Moroccans, Catalan, the
Old Aragonese, and the Mozarabics. (Note the differences in the
gutturals found in the Castilian, Leonese, Galicon, and Basque
dialects in Spain, from the Andalusian and Mozarabic dialects.)
Science is always very careful to avoid giving detailed
reports on anything regarding races. For example, Darwin's
history of man has no "meaning" when applied to "races" UNLESS
SOME RACES ARE AHEAD OF OTHERS. Just let some fanatic like
Fritz Kuhn, Adolph Hitler, George Lincoln Rockwell, Gerald
Winrod, or Horst Wessel accuse someone of having "Negro blood"
or "Jew blood," and then watch the fur fly. Just imply that
Latins, for example, are intermixed in the remote past with Ham,
instead of Shem, and then you'll see how objective "Modern Man"
is! The inbred characteristics of the three divisions of men
coupled with their histories and achievements is part of man's
blood stream, and he can no more deny them than deny his
existence. However, in order to get all nations together under
the Man of Sin, the three divisions with their histories,
characteristics, and achievements will have to be rejected.
THAT IS, IN ORDER TO ATTAIN RELIGIOUS UNITY, MAN WILL HAVE TO
DENY HIS SANITY AND COMMON SENSE.
The descendants of Shem, Ham, and Japheth have 3,000
years to get to America before Christopher Columbus' great-
great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great
grandfather had his diapers changed, so there is no problem in
race distribution except the problems presented by half-mad race
mixers who cannot tell the difference between their mouth and a
hole in the ground. At the tremendous migratory rate of 100
YARDS a day the American Indians travel 61,307 miles before the
First Crusade (1000 A.D.). This means that the Patagonians in
South America have been buying, building, selling, and planting
400 years before Columbus left Spain. (This does not include
Shemites going via "Kontiki" to South America at a speed of
5,000 yards a day!) Crocodiles have swum 558 miles at sea,
polar bears have made it for 19 miles, reindeer for 12-and-a-
half miles. Toads, frogs, and salamanders can't go through salt
water, but any of them can make it on sailboats, dugouts,
outriggers, or canoes! Tigers have been known to make it 10
miles through water. Seeds from spider chutes have blown 5,000
feet at 45 miles an hour, and have been found 10,000 feet high.
Why would any man under heaven think that Darwin was more
accurate than Moses?
Now the problem presents itself, how do we account for
the color differences? The most obvious answer is that before
the change in atmosphere (see Gen. 6:10 and 2:6), the rays from
the sun (which now penetrate the atmosphere) were blocked or
distorted. The 360-day year of pre-deluge days is the standard
year of the ancient chronologists of Africa, Asia, and Europe
until after the time of Solomon. This means that something very
definitely happened to the earth's orbital journey around the
sun and the moon's orbital journey around the earth at the time
of Noah, and there were subsequent disturbances of the
atmosphere which accompanied these changes. There is a
possibility that Shem's red-brown skin begins to turn BROWN,
during the 190-day stay on Mt. Ararat. At the same time the
reddish-brown skin of Brother Japheth begins to turn to a LIGHT
BROWN, and Ham turns a darkish brown. The theory is unnecessary
if one presumes that Noah had a dark-skinned wife, or that Ham
had one. For in this case, all three variations would be found
in the offspring. But in that case, the "color line" would have
to be drawn BEFORE the flood (Gen. 4:9-15). The Darwinian
theory that "climate" determined skin color is of course--like
other Darwinian hallucinations--about as "scientific" as
Einstein's theory of "meaning." Ham's descendants gravitate to
the Equator, but they remain black in Sweden, or New York,
except where they are interbred sexually with white people.
Livingstone, Moffat, and their countrymen (German and
English "Imperialists" of South Africa) did not produce black
children in 100 years, nor even dark brown children. We are to
assume from Darwin's theory that this would have happened in,
say, 10,000 years (give or take a few thousand).
9:20-22: "And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he
planted a vineyard: And he drank of the wine, and was drunken:
and he was uncovered within his tent. And Ham, the father of
Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two
brethren without."
We now approach the most universally hated and rejected
passage of scripture in the Bible since Genesis 3. We have
already identified Noah as a type of Adam (see Gen. 9:1-3), and
the word "Husbandman" (in the A.V. 1611 only!) makes the
connections even closer. (The obscure comments of Keil, Lange,
Murphy, Wordworth, Kalisch, Kuyper, and Delitzsch on the passage
gives no light whatsoever. It is very typical of commentators
to borrow from each other, and to consider LINGUISTS as great
Seers and Interpreters of Truth. However, "Hermes" will usually
"stumble at the word, being disobedient" whereunto he also was
appointed! {I Pet. 2:8}. And the Hebrew scholars who major in
the etymological arts, very rarely do anything with a text but
cover it with a fog of verbiage that a searchlight couldn't
shine through.)
The word "husband," heretofore and herafter--by the
standards of definitions set up by the Bible itself in the
English text--would mean "one who tended a vine." The "fruitful
wife" of Psalm 128:3 with her "plants about the table," needs a
caretaker, or "husbandman" (see Matt. 21:33-41). Note:
"husband-MAN," not "husband-WOMAN." The Hebrew here in Genesis
9:20, "man of the ground," sheds no light, whatsoever, on the
passage IN THE HANDS OF THE GREAT LINGUISTS OF THE CENTURIES.
As a matter of fact, their comments on the original language,
not only are fruitless, they even OBSCURE the cross-references
and destroy the unity of types and events. One must never
mistake "linguistic ability" for consecration, dedication,
common sense, intelligence, ability to interpret, ability to
expound, ability to preach, or spiritual insight.
"AND HE PLANTED A VINEYARD."
Remind yourself again that the A.V. 1611 reveals more
absolute Truth within itself, by comparing scripture with
scripture, than the last 30 sets of commentaries written by
Hebrew and Greek scholars WHO RESENTED THE TRUTH.
"AND HE DRANK OF THE WINE."
The wine is "YAYIN" (Isa. 5:11,12,22) in more than 100
instances in the Old Testament. In its first occurrence, it is
associated with NAKEDNESS (vs. 21) as it was in Eden, and in Uz
(Lam. 4:21), and in Judah (Hab. 2:15). The modern teenager
understands the association very well, even if Delitzsch, Keil,
Starke, Lange, Murphy, and Bleek failed to notice it. ("Sound
scholarship" is defined in the Scholar's Union as a "discourse
or exposition that presents all the facts, WITHOUT APPLICATION
OR REFERENCE TO ANYBODY CONTEMPORARY, OR ANYTHING GOING ON NOW,
OR IN THE FUTURE. See the Lord's comment on this type of
scholarship in Eze. 14:5-9.)
"AND WAS DRUNKEN, AND HE WAS UNCOVERED..."
If Adam is a type of Noah, and vice versa, the text has
tremendous implications, even though any novice in
interpretation knows that types cannot be pressed 100% into the
service of interpretation (Joseph is a type of Christ in 152
particulars--see Gen. 37--but Jesus Christ certainly did not lie
about a silver cup, nor was He put in a COFFIN in Egypt at His
death).
Noah, following the advice of the faculty of Columbia,
Harvard, and Yale universities, gets rid of his inhibitions by
discarding his "false social morals" and "artificial moral
standards," "expressing his true self," and "abandoning false
modesty." (And, incidentally, he gets stoned and passes out,
and lies in a drunken stupor as naked as a jaybird. Do you see
the difference between "sound scholarship" and honesty?)
Since "WINE" is written here for the first time, we
should carefully note its associations so that we will not
"indiscriminately" mis-judge future wine drinkers when they
appear (Ben-hadad, Pope Leo, Lot, Pope John, Belshazzar, Pope
Paul, Nabal, Mystery Babylon, and Cardinal Newman). The context
of Genesis 9:21 is immorality, sodomy, a curse, nakedness,
drunkenness, and bondage (verses 21,22,24,25). What Carl
Sandburg thought about Billy Sunday's "Booze Sermon" (see his
poem on the "Contemporary Bunkshooter"), and what the Catholic
priests think about the Lord's Supper, is at variance with man's
5,000-year march through history. The wine of Genesis 9 is not
the "fruit of the vine" (Matt. 26), which is found in the
CLUSTER (Isa. 65:8), and is called "pure blood" in Deuteronomy
32. The wine of Genesis 9 is the same old "poison of dragons
and asps" (Deut. 32:32,33) which ruined Noah, ruined Ben-hadad,
ruined Nabal, ruined Lot, destroyed the Roman Empire, made Italy
a fifth-rate power for 1,000 years, bankrupted France and
England, and killed more Americans on the highways in the last
60 years than bullets have in two World Wars. Sam Morris of San
Antonio, Texas, has in his files more truth on Genesis 9:21 than
can be found in the combined commentaries of every Biblical
expositor who ever tackled the text. Drunkenness and nakedness
are twin sisters on every College Campus in the United States,
and they both belong to the same Sorority--Tau, Beta, Beta--The
Bottomless Pit (see Prov. 5:5). (If the liquor ads were taken
out of Playboy and Life magazine, both magazines would fold up
in 6 months.)
"AND HAM...SAW THE NAKEDNESS OF HIS FATHER."
Again, the A.V. 1611 text interprets the words without
recourse to the Hebrew, the LXX, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the
Targums, or the help of any scholar of any distinction. The
word "SAW" is interpreted as "DONE" in verse 24. The expression
"UNCOVER" is defined in Leviticus 18,20 as an intimate
relationship involving sex. (Note Deut. 27:20 and Lev. 18:18,
where "uncovering" is the equivalent of the act of fornication.)
There is no doubt about the meaning of verse 22 in the English
text. Ham's boys have a "sex problem," which is documented by
the Congressional Investigations of the Public School System in
Washington, D.C. (1960-1964), and this is a commonly shared
truth, known and confessed by all nations and races except
"Integrationists." Ham's children settled Sodom (see Gen.
10:19). The police records of any station in America--at least
until the mid-1970s--contained records of "sodomy." There is
not the slightest doubt, whatsoever, about the meaning of
Genesis 9:22. The same act is attempted in Genesis 19:1-13, and
the crime is listed in Romans 1. (For further particulars
contact the officials of the city and county jails in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, any time in the next 10 years. A
Bible commentary should never confine its comments to the
historical past, where the text clearly states UNIVERSAL TRUTHS
applicable to the future. Whereas investigation into the Hebrew
and Greek often leads the reader to an historical dead-end in
the past, as the contemporaries of the event describe it, real
Bible exposition, which compares scripture with scripture,
produces an understanding of life itself, as it is manifest in
every age before and since the event.)
Ham clearly violates Leviticus 18:6, and the fact that
the passage had not yet been written doesn't amount to anything
in the light of Romans 1:2-21.
9:23,24: "And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid
it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the
nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and
they saw not their father's nakedness. And Noah awoke from his
wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him."
If the 3 major races come from Shem, Ham, and Japheth,
then we are already getting into trouble with the NAACP, the
Supreme Court, the United Nations, and the Popes, for Shem and
Japheth come out "clean" in this shakedown, and Ham comes out
guilty. The modern solution is to teach that we should judge
every man as an individual, on his individual merit, regardless
of "race, color, or creed." In practice, the modern solution
means the mass-mixing of racial masses, without consent of the
individuals within them. There is no time to judge
"individuals," on an "individual basis," where a socialistic
government is erecting a "one world" situation. They are never
judged on an individual basis.
Socialism deals with MASSES, exactly as Fascism or
Communism deals with them. And the originator of "masses" is
Catholicism! THE WORD "CATHOLIC" ITSELF IS A PLATONIC WORD,
USED BY IGNATIUS (150 A.D.) TO REPRESENT A "MASS" OF
CHRISTIANS--NOT INDIVIDUALS.
Now according to Darwin, the characteristics of animals
are "acquired." How this can be true and man be exempt from the
"acquired characteristics" of his RACE is one of the eight
Wonders of the World. If it works for animals, and man is a
higher type animal, why then does it not work for MEN? Ham has
a sex problem. The rebuttal is: Well, that was HIS problem,
not his descendants. But history will make a liar out of such an
argument every time (see notes on Gen. 9:25).
Verse 23 is self-explanatory. They obey Leviticus 20,
and replace the sheepskin robe (see Gen. 3:21) where God
originally put it. If any of the advocates of the "New
Morality" (i.e. the Old Adultery) had been present, they would
have "demonstrated" with such signs as "Down with Shem and
Japheth," "Long live free love," "Sodomy with Consent is
Americanism," "Down with False Modesty," "Help Stamp Out
Violence," and "Help the mentally sick or I'll kill you!"
"AND NOAH AWOKE FROM HIS WINE."
Then what follows--distasteful though it may be to race
mixers and socialists--is pronounced by a preacher of
righteousness (II Pet. 2:9) who is "cold sober." You will
notice that he awoke "FROM HIS WINE," not "FROM HIS SLEEP!"
"AND KNEW WHAT HIS YOUNGER SON HAD DONE UNTO HIM."
Noah is sober and he is fully aware. He does not need
Shem or Japheth to tell him what happened; God reveals it to him
and he knows exactly what took place while he was "out like a
light."
9:25-27: "And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of
servants shall he be unto his brethren. And he said, Blessed be
the Lord God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. God
shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem;
and Canaan shall be his servant."
"CURSED BE CANAAN."
Here we go again! More "hate literature." For thin-
skinned "modern man" the passage has nothing in it but
prejudice, "negativism," prophesies of gloom, "racism," and
superstitious legend. Still he must abide by it, AND HE WILL.
The racial prophecies of Noah are binding to the Millennium, as
are all covenants from Genesis 1 to Genesis 12.
"CURSED BE CANAAN."
Canaan, Ham's boy, is cursed because Ham has already
been blessed (Gen. 9:1). Canaan is cursed because he is Ham's
SEED and Ham's sin was connected with his "seed" (Gen. 9:22,24).
Modern race-mixers grasp at "Canaan" like a dying man grasps for
air in an oxygen tent, and come out with the ludicrous
interpretation that the Noahic prophecies only apply to one-
fourth of Ham's posterity. In view of the fact that all of
Ham's posterity are Africans (see Gen. 10:1-20), it is amazing
that the modern race-mixer (conservatives among them) has failed
to observe that Ham's two brothers begat Europeans and Asiatics!
Remarkable oversight, eh what? The squeamish and frightened
conservatives and fundamentalists of 1960-1980, in prospect of
vacations in mental institutions and health clinics if they
oppose the integration movement, do not dare to believe what
they read. Instead, we are to believe that the Bible gives
prophecies on the Caucasoid and Mongoloid branches of humanity,
but discminates against them by REFUSING TO PROPHECY on
Negroids. Where does a Negro get the "civil rights" to duck out
of three racial prophecies, which in their contexts apply to
races, NOT individuals? Simple. You simply eliminate all the
NEGATIVE passages in the Bible--of which Genesis 9:25 is one--
and retain the POSITIVE passages of which Genesis 9:26,27 are
two! THAT IS, YOU BECOME A LIBERAL, WHILE PROFESSING TO BE A
CONSERVATIVE.
"A SERVANT OF SERVANTS SHALL HE BE...."
And so it is. Whether Northerners run Hamites, or
Southerners run them, or whether black militants run them, or
the NAACP runs them, or they run themselves (see conditions in
Africa since 1968!), they will SERVE, and they are happy when
they serve and they are not happy when they begin to holler for
"equality." (I realize that this is not in harmony with
Lincoln's Gettsyburg Address, the Statement in the Bill of
Rights, the principles of the French Revolution, the philosophy
of Marx and Trotsky, and similar Laodicean documents, but what
we are interested in, here, is the TRUTH--NOT POLITICAL
EXPEDIENCE.)
Where Ham serves, he excels: where he rules, he "kings"
himself (Martin Luther "King," "King Cassius," Nat "King" Cole,
etc.), and rides off at a gallop before he learned how to trot.
But what saith the Scriptures?
The "servant" is not to be mistreated (I Pet. 2:18,19;
Deut. 24:14-18). The runaway servant is to be returned
(Philemon). The saved servant is a spiritual "brother" to the
saved master (I Tim. 6; I Cor. 7:20-24; Gal. 3:27,28), but "race
mixing" is something else. Abraham's Hamitic relationship ends
with a loss of 13 years of fellowship with God (Gen. 16:1-
4,15,16; 17:1-8). Lot's Hamitic relationship ends in tragedy
(Gen. 12:5-10; 13:10; 19:26), as does Moses' (Num 12:1; 20:1-5),
as does David's (II Sam. 11:3), and Samson's (Jud. 14,15).
These are the actual facts about race-mixing, recorded and
preserved by the Holy Spirit, in the Holy Bible, and they are as
much a part of the "instruction in righteousness" and "sound
doctrine" for the believer as the virgin birth, the bodily
resurrection, and the premillennial coming of Jesus Christ.
They are ignored or denied on the part of modern Christians
because modern Christians have settled down in the world system
and have become so much "part and parcel of it," that they
desire its approval, support, security, and good will (I John
2:15-17). The present world system is preparing for a one world
government, with one language, one religion, and--IF POSSIBLE--
one race. This is the gist of every speech made by every major
political candidate in America since World War II, and it is the
meat of every Papal "address" since 1776.
In view of this coming consolidation and integration of
conflicting elements, the modern Christian does not dare believe
that only one race is destined to "serve." The reasons for
rejecting Genesis 9, again, lie not in a proper understanding of
the text, in the light of its corollaries (Deut. 32:7,8; Acts
17:26,27), but in the Christian's desire to escape the
opposition and persecution which comes from taking a stand with
the Bible against the traditions and philosophy of the age in
which he lives (Col. 2:8). In the Bible, God segregates animals
(Lev. 11), nations (Gen. 11), Israelites (Ex. 3:10), Christians
(II Cor. 6:14-17), plants and vegetables (Deut. 22:9), and human
beings of every age (Rev. 20:13-15). In the Bible women have
privileges which men do not--bearing children! Men have
privileges which women do not--being apostles and bishops. Jews
have privileges Gentiles do not--writing the Bible. Gentiles
have privileges Jews do not--believing the New Testament (see
Rom. 11:7-30). As a matter of truth, the entire Bible, from
"generation to resolution," is one endless blast and tirade of
dualism and absolutes: hot or cold, Heaven or Hell, saved or
lost, just or unjust, back or forth, in or out, Jew or Gentile,
servant or master, holy or unholy, Catholic or Christian, godly
or ungodly, clean or unclean, Old or New, RIGHT OR WRONG! And
this old hell-bound, Christ-rejecting generation of educators
and scientists are sick and tired of the Book! They are sick
and tired of the "conflicts of opposites" and the dogma of
absolutes. What they long for is a synthetic, synthesized,
pliable, plastic, relativistic teaching for a nondescript,
integrated, passive population of indifferent, disinterested,
non-opinionated automen. This is the 20th century "solution"
for wars, and the only thing that stands in its way is the A.V.
1611 Bible.
In the Book, the descendants of Ham are to be "servant
of servants," and if any SAVED descendant of Ham is a Bible
believer, he will accept this lot, cheerfully, thankfully, and
optimistically, and will make the most of it. Hamites who let
Caucasians direct their affairs--Joe Louis, Bubba Smith, Jackie
Robinson, G.W. Carver, B.T. Washington, Lena Horne, Paul
Robeson, Sammy Davis, etc., usually come out fairly well
financially. Hamites who follow Representative Powell do not
make out quite so well, and those who follow Father Divine or
the Reverend Ike come out bankrupt. The followers of Michael
(alias "Martin") Luther King, Jr. built quite an estate for him
and kept him in Cadillacs and $200.00 suits most of his life--
but not a half dozen who obeyed his orders made a living wage.
The worst oppressor of the Negro is the Negro, and this is not
the prejudiced statement of a "white supremist." It is the
reason why the Negroes in America will never return to Africa--
NOT EVEN IF THEY ARE PAID TO DO IT. The "ghettoes" (another
Associated Press word for purposes of distorting truth) of
Harlem and Philadelphia are never quite as bad as living
conditions in the Congo and French Equatorial Africa; in Ham's
original homeland there was neither social security, welfare,
nor government pensions, and certainly not free TV time for
airing grievances!
A successful Hamite is the one who receives the Lord
Jesus as Saviour (Acts 8) and serves in the capacity where God
placed him (Acts 8). The last statement is not a racist's
definition. It is the opinion of the Holy Spirit recorded in
Acts 8:39. Disgruntled, frustrated and bitter Hamites, who have
devoted a lifetime to overthrowing Genesis 9:25, in the
interests of "their fellow sufferers," etc., may rage and grind
their teeth against the ordinances of Heaven, but they will
remain inflexible and unmoveable. The same ordinances dictate
that the Jews (another race!) will be restored to Palestine and
will rule the world for 1000 years (Jer. 31,33). Singing "we
SHALL overcome" does not impress the born-again child of God who
has ALREADY OVERCOME (I John 4:4; 5:4), without the aid of
Congress, demonstrations, or publicity. John Knox, chained to
the galley, was the Lord's "freeman" (I Cor. 7:22), while John
Brown (1800-1859) and Abe Lincoln were "servants of sin," even
while "emancipating" the "servant of servants" (see John 8:34-
36). (Neither John nor Abe made any profession of the new
birth, and finding a clear cut Christian testimony in their
speeches and biographies is like listening for a whisper in a
whirlwind.) What passes for "emancipation" and "civil rights"
and "integration," in the final analysis, is little more than
the operations of political groups, and opportunists using Ham
for their own ends. No man on earth was ever any freer than
George Washington Carver, who openly testified to his saving
faith in the blood of Jesus Christ; and no man sold on the
block was any more a slave than Jack Johnson, who spent his
lifetime consorting with white women and beating up white men in
the ring. Johnson was a slave of sin till he stumbled on the lid
of his coffin and toppled into the grave. If God called you to
be a "servant of servants," you will be happier in that calling
than an emperor whom God called to be a prime minister.
"BLESSED BE THE LORD GOD OF SHEM."
More discrimination! Why did He not say Japheth, or
Ham? What right does God have to pick out people, when He is
"no respecter of persons"? These are the objections of the 20th
century man, and his method of answering them is to throw the
Bible out the window and pretend that Gen. 9:25-27 was Noah's
opinion.
Still, history corroborates what a modern man thinks is
just an "opinion."
"BLESSED BE THE LORD GOD OF SHEM."
The "of" signifies subject or object, thus reading:
"Shem is going to bless the TRUE God (Ps. 103:20,21,22), who is
the Lord God," or it is "The Lord God of Shem"--not Japheth and
Ham--who is "God blessed forever" (see Rom. 9:5). To avoid
these two scriptural interpretations, the RSV (1952) has
invented, "Blessed by the Lord my God be Shem." This attempt to
preserve racial equality at the expense of truth still fails, as
it is apparent that God still did not give this blessing to Ham
and Japheth.
Shem plainly receives something spiritual in Noah's
prophecy in contrast to the physical blessings of Japheth.
Although Shem lives in India, Japheth (Sir Edmund Hillary) has
to climb his mountains. Although Shem lives in Japan, he must
pattern his railways, planes, motorcycles, and ships after
Japheth. Although Shem lives in China, he cannot develop his
resources until Japheth (Russia) fires the primer for the
"Reds." It is Japheth, not Shem, who discovers both Poles, the
passage to India, the way to the Moon, electricity, the steam
engine, the wireless telegraph, the telephone, radio, airplane,
tank, and submarine. Shem plainly does not major in
geographical conquests, scientific inventions, and "higher
standards of living."
But when it comes to spiritual perception, you can't
beat Shem! As a matter of fact, Shem is the author of every
religion on earth (basically two of them--see Gen. 4:4-8).
Students of comparative religions have no trouble at all in
tracing Rosicrucianism, Theosophy, Unity, Christian Science, and
Unitarianism back to India--Shem. Zen Buddhism did not begin in
Germany, Shintoism is not the state religion of Spain,
Confucianism was not invented in France, and the Vatican State
had nothing to do with Brahmanism or Hinduism. Shem is the
author of these religions. Shem is an introvert; he is a
"meditator" and a fatalist--he is a THINKER. Every author in
the Bible can trace his descent to Shem; the Saviour of the
World confessed He was "of the Jews" (not "Hebrews"--see John
4:22), and every branch of Orthodox Christianity can trace its
descent to Romans 11, where the "Gentiles" were grafted into the
good olive tree--Shem, again. The California yogas and gurus of
today are imitations of the "holy men of India" and the
Himalayas--Shem again. And everything found in the Catholic
church, whether it be stolen from Bible Christianity (the Nicene
Creed), or extorted from Israel (the literal promises of the Old
Testament), or borrowed from Babylon (Easter bunnies, X-mas,
Mary), or adopted from pagan Roman and Greek mysteries
(sprinkling babies, sacraments, holy water, etc.), can be traced
to the Jewish Old Testament (Shem!), the Jewish New Testament
(Shem, again!), or Ancient Babylon (Shem and Ham).
"BLESSED BE THE LORD GOD OF SHEM."
The Saviour is of the "seed of David," according to the
flesh (Rom. 1:2-6); his mother and foster-father are Shemites.
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are Shemites; Moses and David are
Shemites, Paul and Peter are Shemites. Whether a man is a
Bullingerite (Paul), or a Papist (Peter), he owes everything he
knows to Shem, when it comes to spiritual things.
"BLESSED BE THE LORD GOD OF SHEM."
When Japheth invents a religion (Seventh-day Adventists,
Jehovah's Witnesses, "Church of Christ," "Christian Science,"
"Mormons"), or when Ham invents a religion (voodoo,
"Pentecostal, Wildfire, Apostolic Holiness of the...Church,"
Black Muslims, etc.), it will have a certain air of spuriousness
about it that is easy to spot. It is the "Lord God of Shem" who
is the author of Spiritual Truth and Spiritual Revelation, and
eventually all religions will have to acknowledge Shem as the
master writer of books.
"AND CANAAN SHALL BE HIS SERVANT."
So said, and so done. Nimrod was the first and last
descendant of Ham to ever control Shem's territory. Hannibal
was the first and last Hamite to ever control Japheth's
territory. Racial discimination in America is a small thing
compared to racial discrimination in India, China, and Japan--
Shem's territory. Shem doesn't give Ham any consideration.
THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A NEGRO IN A GOVERNMENT POSITION IN CHINA
OR JAPAN SINCE ADAM TRIED ON A SUIT OF DOUBLE-BREASTED FIG
LEAVES.
"GOD SHALL ENLARGE JAPHETH...."
This ends all doubt as to the nature of Noah's prophetic
utterances. They have to be racial, or they are nonsense. God
is not going to put 50 pounds of fat on Japheth! He is going to
"spread his descendants out" across the earth. To confirm the
prophecy, Japheth marches out from Ararat, and crosses the
Danube, swims the English Channel, sails the Atlantic, sails the
Pacific, flies over the Arctic and Antarctic and then shoots off
to the moon. And if that were not enough evidence to prove that
the despisers of the A.V. 1611 have brick bats for brains,
Japheth plumbs the depths in a bathysphere, clambers up Mt.
McKinley, Mt. Whitney, and Mt. Everest like he thought mountain
climbing was going out of style! Then he sets up military
installations and diplomatic stations in so many places in Asia
and Africa that in the 20th century Japheth is called "An
Imperialist."
"GOD SHALL ENLARGE JAPHETH."
There is no problem here in trying to find out what God
MEANT when He said it through Noah. We are now gazing back at a
record which has been completely fulfilled. There is no
question in Genesis 9:25-27 about "proper interpretation" in
1989. The Holy Spirit has saved you the trouble. All the
verses came to pass literally, as they appeared in the 1611
text.
"AND HE SHALL DWELL IN THE TENTS OF SHEM."
The verse is spiritualized by most commentators to refer
to the "sharing of the redemptive revelations of the Hebrew
nation," etc., but such doggerel is unbecoming a man who
professes to take God at His word. "Tents," here, refers to
TENTS. The "tents" are Shem's tents, and a blind man would bump
into them traveling across America in 1500, if he couldn't have
seen them 2 feet away. Shem crosses the Bering straits and sets
up "tents" from British Columbia to Cape Horn. Japheth crosses
the Atlantic and takes them from him--more discrimination!--and
the ground you are sitting on right now is not yours at all.
You are no AMERICAN; you are European or African (unless, of
course, you are a full-blooded American Indian!). The ground
your "tent" is on was Shem's hunting ground, where he pitched
his tents from 1000 B.C. to 1800 A.D.
"AND HE SHALL DWELL IN THE TENTS OF SHEM."
Noah's racial prophecies are to be believed literally,
as they stand. They are TOTAL prophecies, involving the three
major branches of mankind. History confirms them, common sense
confirms them, and the Bible confirms them. Japheth has the
tents, a plain case of discrimination. Shem has the Saviour and
the Bible, another plain case of discrimination. Ham serves, a
really plain case of discrimination; and all subsequent
"exceptions" prove the rule.
9:28,29: "And Noah lived after the flood three hundred
and fifty years. And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and
fifty years: and he died."
After Noah's "wine-bibbing," the Holy Spirit closes the
record of his "walk with God." He finishes the allotment of
years granted to pre-deluge patriarchs--950 years--and dies only
two years before the birth of Abraham. Undoubtedly, he lives to
see the Divine Segregation of the races at the Tower of Babel
(see Gen. 11; Deut. 32:7,8), and probably was pleased to see God
honour his word which he had spoken to Ham, for the founder of
Babel was Nimrod, THE GRANDSON OF HAM, who tried to "bring in
the Kingdom" with a United Nations and Universal Language (Gen.
11:1). Since Ham's descendants were plainly "out of bounds"
(Acts 17:26,27) in the Babel Cooperative Program, they were
dispersed and driven back to "the land of Ham" (Ps. 105:23);
those who refused to return, settled in Palestine until they
were slaughtered (Deut. 7:1-6). "Let my people go," in the
original version (Ex. 3-10), was not the Communist National
Anthem of Black Supremists, trying to take over Alabama,
Mississippi, and Georgia; it was Shemites crying for
deliverance from Black Power, and eventually getting it by
Divine Discrimination and shed blood (see Ex. 12-15).
Index of Preacher's Help and Notes
These documents are free from BelieversCafe.com, the complete christian resource site with more than 5000 webpages.