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.