Deuteronomy Chapter 23 Star Chart: Clockwise from when a mongrel or half-breed is born and "shall not enter into the congregation of the (Shekinah) Lord" (23:2) "even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the (Shekinah) Lord" (23:2) is ten laps: first (30-year) generation 1/2; second generation 1/4; third generation 1/8; fourth generation 1/16; fifth generation 1/32; sixth generation 1/64; seventh generation 1/128; eighth generation 1/256; ninth generation 1/512; tenth generation 1/1024 or 300 years (3600°). God wants racial purity -- not an adulterated race. In Ezra 10:3 they "put away all the wives, and such as are born of them". In Nehemiah 13:3 "they separated from Israel all the mixed multitude".

Deuteronomy Chapter 24 Star Chart: Clockwise from "When a (Castor) man hath taken a (Pollux) wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his (lunar) eyes, because he hath found some (red radius) uncleanness in her: then let him (Castor) (red radius) write her a (lunar white) bill of divorcement, and give it in her (Pollux) hand, and send her out of his (red radius) house" (24:1) till "when she (Pollux) is departed out of his (red radius) house, she may go and be another (Castor) man's wife (360°). And if the latter (Castor) husband hate her, and (red radius) write her a (lunar white) bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband (red radius) die, which took her to be his (Pollux) wife" (24:2-3), then "Her former (Castor) husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his (Pollux) wife (360°), after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the (Shekinah) Lord: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the (Shekinah) Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance" (24:4).

Deuteronomy Chapter 25 Star Chart: Clockwise from 1446 B.C. at Rephidim, (Exodus 17:8), "When ye were come forth out of Egypt; How he (Amalek) met thee by the way, and (Perseus) smote the hindmost of thee, even all that were feeble behind thee, when thou wast faint and weary; and he feared not God" (25:17-18) till "when the (Shekinah) Lord thy God hath given thee rest from all thine enemies round about, in the land which the (Shekinah) Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance to possess it, that thou shalt (lunar) blot out the remembrance of (Perseus) Amalek from under heaven; thou shalt not forget it" (25:19) is 47 years later. If each year is 60°, then 47 years x 60° per year = 2820° or 7 laps plus 300° more bringing us from Gemini Israel leaving Egypt in 1446 B.C. till Perseus Amalek is (lunar) blotted out when "the land had rest from war" (Joshua 11:23; 14:10-15) in 1399 B.C. But the task was merely begun at that time. It was continued in 1 Sam. 14:48; 15:2-3; 27:8; 28:18; 30:1,17; 2 Sam. 1:1-16; 1 Chr. 4:43; and Esther 9:12,13. It was not until the days of Hezekiah (a king who ruled in Judah during the years 715-687 B.C.) that the Amalekites were finally and completely destroyed (1 Chronicles 4:41, 43).

Deuteronomy Chapter 26 Star Chart: Clockwise from when "A (Perseus) Syrian ready to perish (of hunger) was my father, and he went down into Egypt, and sojourned there with a (Gemini) few (Gen. 46: In 1661 B.C. -- 215 years after God promised to make Abraham a great nation in Gen. 12:2), and became there a nation, great, mighty, and populous: And the (Gemini) Egyptians evil entreated us, and afflicted us, and laid upon us hard bondage" (+360°)(Deut. 26:5-6) till "we cried unto the (Shekinah) Lord God of our (Gemini) fathers, the Lord (lunar ears) heard our (red radius) voice, and (lunar eyes) looked on our affliction, and our labour, and our oppression: And the (Shekinah) Lord brought us forth out of Egypt with a mighty (lunar) hand, and with an outstretched (red radius) arm, and with great terribleness, and with (zodiac) signs, and with wonders (1446 B.C.): And he hath brought us into this (golden) place, and hath given us this (golden) land, even a land that floweth with (lunar white) milk and (solar golden) honey" (+150°)(1406 B.C.) (Deut. 26:7-9) is 255 years which is 510° (if each year is 2°) from Gemini one complete lap and then 150° more to (golden) honey at Ophiuchus's feet.



A Mongrel Shall Not Enter the Congregation
Till His Tenth Generation

23:1 He that is (red radius) wounded in the (lunar) stones, or hath his privy member (Perseus) cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the (Shekinah) Lord.

2 A bastard (mongrel) shall not enter into the congregation of the (Shekinah) Lord; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the (Shekinah) Lord.

The definition of mamzer as “mongrel” is supported not merely by linguistic evidences but also by supplementary exegetical arguments. If the Deuteronomic law contained no wide and general prohibition on mongrelization, then the reformers Ezra and Nehemiah would have lacked a legal basis for applying their reforms to nations not enumerated in the Law itself. Only Ammonites and Moabites (Deut. 23:3-5) and Canaanites (Deut. 7:1-4) -- not Ashdodite (Philistine) women who also intermarried with Israelites (Neh. 13:23), nor "Egyptian" women who intermarried (Ezra 9). But "Egyptians" granted rights of assimilation into Israel, according to Deuteronomy 23:7-8 were different "Egyptians" than Ezra 9, for Hyksos and other Semites could be classified as "Egyptians", and Deuteronomy 23 describes them as kind hosts, which evidently is not describing the subset of those Hamite Misraim called "Egyptians" who brutally enslaved the Israelites. The best alternative to this racial interpretation of Deuteronomy 23:2 has various faults, leaving the mongrel interpretation as the most legitimate interpretation. Furthermore, we can look to the examples of Pharez and Jephthah (Judges 11:1) as counter-examples to fornication- and incest-based definitions of mamzer; Both examples are disproofs of those two non-mongrel definitions for mamzer. The mamzer of Deuteronomy 23:2 is indeed a mongrel, vindicating a Christian racial worldview. We are forbidden to adulterate the race. This scripture teaches segregation. Zechariah 9:6 uses the same word mamzer when it says “a mongrel race shall dwell in Ashdod.”


3 An Ammonite or Moabite (Gemini) shall not enter into the congregation of the (Shekinah) Lord; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter into the congregation of the Lord for ever:

4 Because they met you not with (solar) bread and with (lunar) water in the way, when ye came forth out of Egypt; and because they hired against thee (Perseus) Balaam the son of Beor of Pethor of Mesopotamia, to curse thee.

5 Nevertheless the (Shekinah) Lord thy God would not hearken unto Balaam; but the (Shekinah) Lord thy God turned the curse into a blessing unto thee, because the (Shekinah) Lord thy God loved thee.

6 Thou shalt not seek their peace nor their prosperity all thy days for ever.

7 Thou shalt not abhor an Edomite; for he is thy brother: thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian; because thou wast a stranger in his land.

8 The (Gemini) children that are begotten of them shall enter into the congregation of the (Shekinah) Lord in their third generation.

9 When the host goeth forth against thine enemies, then keep thee from every wicked thing.

10 If there be among you any (Perseus) man, that is not clean by reason of (lunar) uncleanness that chanceth him by night, then shall he go abroad out of the camp, he shall not come within the camp:

11 But it shall be, when (sun on red radius horizon) evening cometh on, he shall (Eridanus) wash himself with water: and when the sun is down, he shall come into the camp again.

12 Thou shalt have a place also without the camp, whither thou shalt go forth abroad:

13 And thou shalt have a (lunar) paddle upon thy weapon; and it shall be, when thou wilt ease thyself abroad, thou shalt dig therewith, and shalt turn back and cover that which cometh from thee:

14 For the Lord thy God (Ophiuchus) walketh in the midst of thy camp, to deliver thee, and to give up thine enemies before thee; therefore shall thy camp be holy: that he (lunar eyeballs) see no unclean thing (solar manure) in thee, and turn away from thee.

15 Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant which is (Ophiuchus) escaped from his master unto thee:

16 He shall dwell with thee, even among you, in that place which he shall choose in one of thy (solar or lunar) gates, where it liketh him best: thou shalt not oppress him.

17 There shall be no (big or little dog) whore of the (Gemini) daughters of Israel, nor a (big or little dog) sodomite of the (Gemini) sons of Israel.

18 Thou shalt not bring the hire of a whore, or the price of a (big or little) dog, into the house of the (Shekinah) Lord thy God for any vow: for even both these are abomination unto the Lord thy God.

19 Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother; usury of money, usury of victuals, usury of any thing that is lent upon usury:

20 Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury: that the (Shekinah) Lord thy God may bless thee in all that thou settest thine hand to in the land whither thou goest to possess it.

21 When thou shalt vow a vow unto the Lord thy God, thou shalt not slack to pay it: for the (Shekinah) Lord thy God will surely require it of thee; and it would be sin in thee.

22 But if thou shalt forbear to vow, it shall be no sin in thee.

23 That which is gone out of thy lips thou shalt keep and perform; even a freewill offering, according as thou hast vowed unto the (Shekinah) Lord thy God, which thou hast promised with thy mouth.

24 When thou comest into thy neighbour's vineyard, then thou mayest eat (lunar or solar) grapes thy fill at thine own pleasure; but thou shalt not put any in thy (lunar or solar) vessel.

25 When thou comest into the standing (lunar or solar) corn of thy neighbour, then thou mayest pluck the ears with thine hand; but thou shalt not move a (lunar) sickle unto thy neighbour's standing (lunar or solar) corn.


The Reality of RACE

Blacks in America have been proven redundantly by every conceived standard of measure to possess an average IQ of 85. That’s 20 points, or two standard deviations, lower than the Euro-American average of 105. When I say “every conceived standard,” I mean just that: liberals constantly tweak the tests to favor Black culture, providing extra programs, tutors, and cash prizes to inspire better performance in Blacks. In some cases, they even mandate the addition of extra points based upon race – the beneficiaries of which are always Blacks and Mestizos. But even when the tests are rigged to favor Black and/or Mestizo cultures, to liberals’ great chagrin, the gap still remains.

Now, while 85 is admittedly a better average than the 70-point average found among Blacks in Africa, it still leaves a broad breadth of Black men unaccountable for their actions by way of the fact that the Western world regards an IQ of 70 to be, technically speaking, the line of demarcation for mental retardation. In keeping with that resolve, the American justice system officially regards anyone demonstrating a 70-point or lower IQ to be incapable of distinguishing right from wrong or comprehending the ramifications of their actions; this means that the courts will not sentence Blacks in a manner befitting their crimes. This results in an absurd under-representation of Blacks on death row and a continual recirculation of the most vicious monsters back into society.

Think on these realities for 2013:

Blacks were six times likelier to commit murder than non-Blacks
Blacks were twelve times likelier to murder a non-Black than to be murdered by one
Blacks were responsible for 85% of Black-White interracial violence, hence twenty-seven times likelier to assault Whites than the reverse
To understand the enormity of this discrepancy, one need only translate it into a percentage: Blacks are 2,700% more violent than their White counterparts. If a neighborhood is only 8% Black, the average White victim of violent crime in that area will still almost certainly identify his or her assailant as Black – and for that matter, so will the Black, Brown, and Yellow victims. While Blacks make up less than 13% of the American populace, half are women, and another margin is made up of the very old and the very young, so the egregiously offending demographic (Black males, age 13-35) make up about 3% of the U.S. population. Incredibly, that 3% of the population is responsible for more violence than all other people in the country combined.

To the endless chagrin of liberals, these figures aren’t compiled by any dismissible right-wing source, as so many might wish. They are compiled by the federal government, various universities, and the seemingly endless armadas of liberal “think tanks” and ‘”action committees” living off of government endowments. The ideological partisanship is real enough, but it all runs rigidly against the grudgingly inescapable findings. The evidence is just too monumental to be effectively suppressed or explained away. And though the economic materialist construes this disparity as the result of poverty in the Black communities, this Marxist perspective is entirely undone by the reality that America’s rural areas, despite being quite poor by national standards, do not exhibit any sort of parity of criminal behavior with Black communities. The distinguishing factor, of course, is their White population. No matter where they are – be it America, Australia, New Zealand, Iceland, or any of the countries of Europe – and no matter how poor they happen to be, the worst White community is a more moral and safer place than the best Black community. What’s more, this maxim crosses over boundaries of faith by virtue of the fact that the least Christian White neighborhood is still a many times more moral place than the most Christian Black neighborhood. One may object to these realities, but they remain realities nonetheless. The fact that this sociological law remains to date unnamed is unacceptable. Let the Christian-Newsom Constant be added to the American lexicon.

But propositionalists and egalitarians within the Church will undoubtedly quip: “… but that’s only because the European has been steeped in the Gospel so much longer than the African!” But this too is wholly untrue. St. Philip’s ministry to the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:27-39) marked the first-century inauguration of the Abyssinian church and the institution of the Ethiopic See. African Christianity began contemporaneously with European Christianity, but even where the African’s perspectival expressions of the faith have most approached something which we might regard as orthodox, their spirituality has remained in numerous ways so distinct from our own that we have historically had great difficulty even identifying their expressions of the faith as Christian in the most basic sense. For instance, we find that the African conception of the Christian family has typically been a matriarch, overseen by her mother (a grand-matriarch, if you will), and a male blood relative (usually the lesser matriarch’s brother), together rearing the offspring of several different men. Generally, the children are considered the property not of one family alone, but of the village communally. Hillary Clinton notoriously tried to sell this African model to Americans with the phrase, “It takes a village.” This phrase quickly became a byword with which to mock liberals, but Blacks took immediate offense at this because they understood American Whites to actually be mocking African-“Christian” values. The predilection for this type of familial organization has proven so strong in the African that every colonial society of Blacks in the world has quite unconsciously returned to this model as soon as the grip of European paternalism is loosened. There are admittedly exceptions to this pattern. The Maasai tribe is one: the men take multiple wives, and in order to support their tenuous patriarchy, they perform “circumcision” on all their women to better ensure the fidelity of their wives. Meanwhile, the men still remain gratuitous philanderers. But the exceptions actually prove the rule as well, do they not?

No matter how long Whites have spent trying to imbue them with the idea of the Christian family, Christianized Black societies shed the institution as soon as Whites yield control back to Blacks. Hence, Blacks in America, despite claiming Christianity at a higher ratio than Whites, popularly conclude that “marriage is for White people.” because this denial of race, and of the racial distinction between Blacks and Whites in particular, has, is, and will yet still lead to catastrophic violence on our own children if not otherwise addressed. Truth be told, the levels of rape, murder, and mayhem suffered by Whites in close proximity to the Black race are otherwise found nowhere but in theaters of actual war. Plainly put, the cost of denying the reality of race is carnage and death.

It is on this basis that St. Paul could say, “‘Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.’ This testimony is true” (Tit. 1:12-13). No matter how one slices it, the apostle and the prophet (with God back of them) do distinguish between peoples as peoples. God even addresses particulars of ethnic taxonomy such as skin color when He asks rhetorically by the pen of Jeremiah, “Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots?” (Jer. 13:23) So, too, do we find numerous flattering references to Israelites as “white and ruddy” (1 Sam. 16:12; 17:42; Song of Solomon 5:10; Lam.4:7). Scripture speaks ubiquitously in terms of this very same light/good, dark/bad paradigm (Job 24:13,17; Dan. 2:22; John 3:19-21; 12:46; etc.). This metaphysic of light and dark are so delineated in Scripture because “God is light; in him there is no darkness at all” (1 John 1:5). “And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness” (Gen.1:4). Are we saying then that the Hamitic race is not made in the image of God? Certainly not. We are saying, as the Scripture does, that “darkness hides Him” (Ps. 18:11). The usual markers which reveal the image of God in men are distinctly veiled in the African’s constitution, both inwardly and outwardly.

Even twins’ studies have proven redundantly that nature accounts for the majority of our behaviors, tastes, and predilections. The nurture aspect of culture is significant, but not to the extent that it overrides one’s nature. As one would expect if genetics were indeed significant in the constitution of human societies, ethnic similarity in marriage is found to result in greater fertility. Then, there’s the issue of xenotransplantation, i.e. heterogeneous organ, blood, marrow, or tissue transplantation. Even radical leftist Louis Stokes, while decrying what he sees as a thoroughly racist system of selection for organ transplantation, grudgingly admits that “disparity is due to biological matching problems.” What Mr. Stokes objects to, then, is not merely some arbitrary or unjust policy of discrimination, but creation itself. His war is with reality, and the God of reality who is behind these things. Yes, legal minds are in a frenzy to somehow undo these natural distinctions; they war against these undeniable and indelible realities because they run contra their egalitarian dreams:

Disparities in access to transplantable organs can be attributed to the strong preference for antigen matching promulgated by the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN). The more similar the donor and the recipient are genetically, the more likely the chances that the antigens will match. Thus kidneys from white donors will most likely be given to white recipients, even where African-Americans, and other individuals with slightly distinct genetic make-up have waited longer on the same recipient list.

Given the organ transplant issue, the experts can a fortiori say:

Compared to organ transplants, bone marrow donations need to be even more genetically similar to their recipients. Though there are exceptions, the vast majority of successful matches take place between donors and patients of the same ethnic background. Since all the immune system’s cells come from bone marrow, a transplant essentially introduces a new immune system to a person. Without genetic similarity between the donor and the patient, the new white blood cells will attack the host body. In an organ transplant, the body can reject the organ, but with marrow, the new immune system can reject the whole body.

Plainly then, multiracial societies exacerbate transplantation problems in every way, and no amount of politically correct platitudes or liberal indignation can undo what God hath wrought. The anti-racialism with which liberal Whites are so enamored does not come cheap. It costs many, many lives. Every year. Every day. And in many different ways. Even the unfortunate mixed-race offspring resulting from the forced integration imposed upon us by the social engineers demonstrate markedly elevated levels of antisocial behavior by comparison to their mono-racial counterparts, as well as higher rates of violence and substance abuse. That’s really saying something when you consider the crime and pathology statistics generated by Blacks and, to a lesser degree, Hispanics (Latin-American-Indians) as well.

While we’re still on the topic of medicine, it should be mentioned that Blacks are uniquely susceptible to rickets, hypertension, kidney disease, diabetes, heart disease, glaucoma, sickle cell anemia, the contraction of HIV, the progression from HIV to AIDS, sociopathy, schizophrenia, psychopathy, and many other anti-social behaviors besides. Black children are prone to shorter gestation periods (a full week shorter than Caucasians), low birth weight, SIDS (crib death), ADD, ADHD, dyslexia, and congenital retardation. Meanwhile, they are also prone to above-average testosterone, higher ratios of fast-twitch muscle fiber, thicker skulls and tooth enamel, denser bones, longer limbs, high VO2 max, and resistance to UV (sunlight) exposure – all of which is to say that their peculiar handicaps are somewhat offset by their collective gifts, just as is the case with every other race.

In the case of Whites, for example, we are more prone to skin cancer, lupus, osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis, as well as many allergies. (Like Blacks, we Whites too have our own distinguishing gifts, which, for both brevity’s and discretion’s sake, I shall entrust to the reflections of the reader.) Every medical facility and individual health provider is constrained by these facts of biology. As much as they may disdain it, they are forced to gather certain ethnic and racial information in order to provide effective care, because said data bears critically on matters of health. Not all treatments work the same on all races – because race is indeed real.

Moreover, it is the Scripture which gives us one of the most clearly expressed refutations of the a-racial/anti-racial view, in that the text everywhere presupposes the legitimate, lawful, and ontological reality of races and ethnic groups. Specific terms are used redundantly throughout, such as “Gentiles” and “nations” (Heb. goyim/Grk. ethnos), which mean, just as the Greek hints, “ethnicities.” Similarly, the term “peoples” (Grk. genos) is the root of “genes,” “genetics,” “genealogy,” etc., and may be translated by linguists forthrightly as “races.” There are even many words used in Scripture which denote taxonomical, lineal, and legal exclusion from a race: for instance, the term which appears as “other peoples” (Grk. allogenes) is the composite of two Greek words, allos (“other”) and genos (“races”). And the term rendered “illegitimate” or “bastard” (Heb. mamzer/Grk. nothos) in Deuteronomy 23:2 is candidly understood by linguists to mean “mixed-race, mongrel,” as is proven by its translation in Zechariah 9:6, which says “a mongrel race shall dwell in Ashdod.” These are not controversial matters to language experts, only to modern theologians who desperately seek to obfuscate the plain meaning of the text in favor of an egalitarian sociology. Wherever the text speaks in these overtly ethnic categories (which is virtually everywhere), moderns are compelled by the spirit of our liberal age, perhaps unwittingly, to spiritualize all said references. Even the word which is often rendered as “pagan” (Heb. zuwr) in the Old Testament of our English Bibles literally means “alien” or “foreign.” Any religious connotation assumed when one sees the word “pagan” in those texts is but an anachronistic eisegetical (misinterpretive) imposition made by translators. It is patently a racial or tribal term.

The revelation of Jesus Christ through His holy Word, the Bible, and His atoning work for mankind rests upon His irrefutable status as the pure-blood claimant to the throne of Israel – as the “genealogy of Jesus Christ” (Grk. Christogenea) referenced in the Gospels literally means “the racial history of the Christ.” If we deny the meaningfulness of lineal descent and race, Christ could not then be royalty of the race of Shem, Abraham, and David; nor then would He be the holy Seed promised to come through them as Saviour to all the tribes of men. Such a view is the immediate denial of the Gospel itself. A Christian can have none of it. By definition, then, the anti-racialism which has so recently come to ascendance in the churches is plainly self-contradictory and can be squared neither with Scripture nor with reason. Albeit a pretty lie, it is an obvious lie nonetheless.

Divorce & Remarriage

24:1 When a (Castor) man hath taken a (Pollux) wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his (lunar) eyes, because he hath found some (red radius) uncleanness in her: then let him (Castor) (red radius) write her a (lunar white) bill of divorcement, and give it in her (Pollux) hand, and send her out of his (red radius) house.

2 And when she (Pollux) is departed out of his (red radius) house, she may go and be another (Castor) man's wife.

3 And if the latter (Castor) husband hate her, and (red radius) write her a (lunar white) bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband (red radius) die, which took her to be his (Pollux) wife;

4 Her former (Castor) husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his (Pollux) wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the (Shekinah) Lord: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the (Shekinah) Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

5 When a (Castor) man hath taken a new (Pollux) wife, he shall not go out to war, neither shall he be charged with any business: but he shall be free at home one year, and shall cheer up his wife which he hath taken.


Summary of the Bible's Divorce & Remarriage Doctrine

Marriage contracts are conditional contracts. In God's marriage to Israel at Mount Sinai, Israel (the bride) agreed to obey His laws (Ex. 19:3-8). For that obedience, God agreed to give her honor, protection, food and children (Gen. 12:1-3). Israel violated this contract, being incapable of full obedience, and refused to repent; and thus her husband (God) divorced her (Israel) and sent her out of his house (Jer. 3:8; Hosea 2:2). Because God himself is a divorcee, we can safely say that divorce, in itself, is not a transgression of the law. Nor is remarriage a sin. This idea that remarriage is a sin comes from a mistranslation of Matthew 5:31-32 which should be translated "whosoever shall marry her that is so divorced committeth adultery."

1. A rabbi named HILLEL taught that an Israelite could DIVORCE his wife for ANY CAUSE whatever because Deuteronomy 24:1 mentions "indecency in ANYTHING" (Gittin. 9:10). A rabbi named SHAMMAI taught that an Israelite could only divorce his wife if she were UNCHASTE because Deuteronomy 24:1 mentions "INDECENCY in anything." Each school emphasized a different word in this same verse. Matthew 19:9 is Jesus' restatement of Deuteronomy 24:1 with "fornication" being the only "uncleanness" or "nakedness" of anything. Jesus dropped the phrase that "she find no favor in his eyes" since men's personal views were subject to God's. This had been one of the chief arguments of the School of HILLEL in advocating the "every cause" DIVORCE (Matt.19:3; cp. pp.333-334 of Life & Times). Notice that "every cause" (Matt. 19:3) -- like our "no-fault" divorces of today -- included "if she spoils a dish in cooking" or "if he finds a woman more handsome than she" (Talmud Gittin. 9:10; Ant.4:8:23; Life & Times 2:332-334). Or even "speaking to her husband so loudly that the neighbors could hear her in the adjoining house" (Chethub 7:6) (see Sketches of Jewish Social Life, pp.157-158). Thus Luke 16:18 can be translated, "who DIVORCES his wife to MARRY another" (Charles B. Williams). Jesus corrected this liberal Hillel school by saying that Deuteronomy 24:1-4 refers only to "Porneia" (Matt. 5:32; 19:9) and "whosoever shall marry her that is so divorced (i.e. for trivial reasons) committeth adultery" (Matt. 5:31-32). The apostles now thought divorce was so strict it was better not to marry (Matt. 19:10-12). God "hateth putting away" in that "treacherous" every-cause context (Mal. 2:16). But it is not "treacherous" to divorce an adulterous wife, or an adulterous husband.

2. Some "UNCLEANNESS" worthy of DIVORCE is found in Jeremiah 3:8-10 where we read that the crimes of "ADULTERY," "HARLOTRY" and "IDOLATRY" were reasons for God DIVORCING Israel long after the initial marriage. Then in Jeremiah 3:14 we read, "Turn, O backsliding children ... I am your Master" (no longer husband, but still master of the children). Notice that the husband gets custody of children in a patriarchal marriage. He died (Heb. 9:15) so His wife could remarry him (Eph. 5:22-27,323). She is his betrothed wife (Rev. 19:7).

3. If Deuteronomy 24 were only referring to "annullment" in cases of fraud, there would be no need for a DIVORCE since there was really no MARRIAGE. Furthermore, if fornication was a legitimate ground for DIVORCE prior to MARRIAGE, why wouldn't adultery be a legitimate ground for DIVORCE after MARRIAGE? Marriage is a conditional agreement between the man and the woman based on God's law. When the man or the woman violates the agreement, God no longer holds the other party responsible for keeping it. Clearly this scripture in Deuteronomy 24:1-4 is referring to any unlawful sex as cause for DIVORCE. But some ministers give heed to seducing spirits and they "forbid (anyone) to (re)marry" (cp. 1 Tim.4:1-3). At some unspecified point in time after the marriage ceremony, the husband finds some "UNCLEANNESS." The Bible places no limit on this period of time. "It come to pass" denotes a passage of time with no limitation. For instance, Genesis 4:14 and 1 Kings 20:6 where the very same Hebrew word is used. Fraud could occur long after the marriage ceremony as well as before in the betrothal period. However, this right of DIVORCE (Deut.24:1-4) is permanently denied to any husband who accuses his wife publicly and falsely of fornication for the purpose of prosecuting her (Deut.22:13-19). This right of DIVORCE is also permanently denied to any man who was legally forced to marry his wife because of having sex with her prior to marriage when she was a virgin (Deut.22:28-29). It is known today as a "shot-gun" marriage. These two exceptions clearly show that normally DIVORCE was lawful and allowed after MARRIAGE for serious crimes. For 14 centuries, divorce in the Jewish nation, as also among the Gentile nations, had the one and only meaning of dissolution with the right to remarry. A separation-divorce was unknown. The writing of divorcement was called a Bill of Cutting Off. All Hebrew lexicons agree. Deuteronomy 24:1-4 says that after a wife is divorced she could "go and be another man's wife." If she was divorced by the second husband, she could marry a third -- without being an adulteress. God referred to the first or second husband as her "former husband." If divorce does not dissolve marriage, as our opponents claim, then God allowed adulterous remarriage and the illegitimacy of children born in the remarriage. As it is impossible to believe that God allowed adultery, we are forced to the conclusion that the divorce severed the union. This fact destroys the argument that only death can dissolve marriage as Roman Catholics teach.

4. Christ approved the Jewish divorce for the cause of fornication in Matthew 5:32. That was a complete statement. It was not left for Paul to clarify it 25 years later in Romans 7:1-3. Divorce for adultery is not the subject matter of Romans 7:1-3. The Romans, to whom Paul wrote, knew from the law that when a Jew divorced his wife, she could go and be another man's wife without being called an adulteress. Alfred Edersheim wrote, "The Jews have it that a woman 'is loosed from her husband' by only one of two things: death or letter of divorce; hence Rom. 7:2-3." A Jew who heard Christ utter this "isolated text" in Matthew 5:32 could have divorced an unfaithful wife, remarried, and have died before Saul of Tarsus was even converted. Christ approved Jewish divorce for the cause of fornication. There was no need to mention REMARRIAGE in Matthew 5 or 19 for either partner because there was never any question about this. It was allowed by both HILLEL and SHAMMAI, by Moses (Deut.24:1-4) and Christ. Of course, the command, "Thou shalt not commit adultery" (Ex.20:14) is stripped of all its meaning by the School of HILLEL. It becomes ineffectual and powerless if a man can DIVORCE his wife for any petty reason.

5.The Greek word for divorce is the exact equivalent of the Old Testament Hebrew word. The primary meaning is "to set free." If Christ left any doubt about the meaning of "put away", then "Doubtful words will be construed most strongly against the party using them" according to Black's Law Dictionary.

6. In Numbers 25:1-2, the 23,000 of Israel, including the chiefs who committed sexual sins with the daughters of Moab, were not all unmarried. Here their sin is designated with the word zanah (fornication). Paul, in 1 Corinthians 10:8 said, "Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand." Paul here referred to married Israelites who committed fornication. Christ in Revelation 2:14 refers to the same event and calls it "fornication." In Amos 7:17, fornication (zanah) designates the sexual sins of a married woman. Porneia and its cognates are used of idolatrous worship in Exodus 34:16; 2 Chron. 21:11,13; Isa. 1:21; Jer. 3:8; Ezekiel 16 and 23. Idolatry with heathen nations was frequently accompanied by sexual vice. In Rev. 2:20 Christ again used fornication to describe Jezebel's idolatrous worship. In Hosea 2:5, fornication is used of Hosea's wife. "Harlot" is zanah. The sexual abominations of the married in Sodom and Gomorrah are referred to in Jude 7 as "fornication." The word "fornication" does not signify "premarital sin" only. It means sexual sin in general. In Hebrew and Greek, the word fornication includes incest, sodomy, harlotry, perversion and all sexual sin both before and after marriage. Even idolatrous worship. In the Old Testament these sins carried the death penalty (Lev. 20:11-21). Various Old Testament and New Testament references prove that fornication was applied to sexual sins of married people. There is not a single proof for the teaching that fornication refers to premarital sin only. Ancient Israel committed adultery. Ancient civilizations punished adultery by cutting off the nose and ears of the person unfaithful to the marriage. Such bodily mutilation was inflicted by the Chaldeans and Egyptians (Dio. Sic. 1:89-90). This is what is meant by the scriptures that say God would send Israel's enemies against her and "they shall take away thy nose and thine ears; and thy remnant shall fall by the sword" (Ez. 23:19-25). Notice that the death penalty is included.

7. The original law of marriage commands a man to "cleave to his wife; and they twain shall be one flesh." If there is no exception to this absolute law, then if a man's wife is a harlot, he must cleave to her. Those married to sex perverts must be one flesh with them, unless an exception can be found. Hebrews 7:22 and 8:6 say that Christ gave humanity a "better covenant" than the Mosaic Covenant. But Moses, with an inferior covenant, killed the adulterers and sex criminals and set the guiltless mates free to remarry (Deut. 22:23-24; Lev. 20:10). So if the better covenant requires the guiltless to be one flesh with sex offenders, then it seems that Moses gave the guiltless a better deal. Jesus reminded his audience that it was not an adulterous marriage in the beginning. Neither Adam nor Eve committed adultery. The death penalty was the solution to adultery originally. Jesus said nothing against that solution. And when the divorce bill was substituted for the death penalty, He did not say anything against that either. There was no need to divorce them when they killed them -- originally. Later, divorce was a merciful option compared to the original solution. A Jew could use the bill to divorce an unfaithful wife, then remarry, and still be a righteous man. The ministers of non-dissolution denominations are forbidden to perform a marriage for anyone "who has a former companion still living." It frequently happens that a married man or woman kills an adulterous mate. When brought to trial, they plead the "unwritten law" and twelve fellow citizens set them free to be married to another. The murderer can then be remarried by these ministers because when they ask the usual question: "Do you have a former companion still living?" they can truthfully say no. But when they caught their mates in adultery, if they had divorced them instead of killing them, they would not have the right to remarriage because -- they would have a former companion still living. This is the irony of false Roman Catholic doctrine.

8. The word "depart" in 1 Corinthians 7:10,11,15 signified divorce as obtained in the Greek law courts. The believers in verses 10-11 were commanded not to divorce their mates; and if they did, they were to "remain unmarried," or "be reconciled," because there was not valid cause for the divorce, and it did not dissolve the marriage in God's sight. But the "remain unmarried" proves that it had been legally dissolved, and was recognized as such by the Greek courts. But in the divorce of verse 15 where the unbeliever divorced the believer, the case was different. Here Paul did not command the believer to remain unmarried or be reconciled. The believer was "not under bondage" to the marriage. The Lord recognized the validity of the Greek divorce in these cases, just as He had accepted the validity of the Mosaic divorce for fornication. The "remain unmarried" particular of verse 11 was not repeated in verse 15, and what is not specified is not required. The problem of verse 15 is the same today as when a Jew or Moslem becomes a Christian, and the unbelieving partner divorces them because of their faith in Christ. To prevent the divorce, the believer would have to deny Christ. Evidently the unbelievers were satisfied with with their marriages until their mates became Christians, for which cause they divorced them. Therefore, desertion by a mate is grounds for divorce and remarriage.

9. When there is valid ground for divorce, the marriage is dissolved for both parties. It sets both parties free. But the guilty party must take the blame before God for the dissolution of the marriage. Paul, in verse 27, referred to those who had been "loosed" from marriage by divorce, saying: "But if thou marry, thou hast not sinned" (7:28). It reminds us of John 4:17-18 where Jesus said to a woman, "Thou hast well said, I have no husband; For thou hast had five husbands, and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband; that saidst thou truly." Divorce was widespread throughout Palestine when Christ uttered the words of Matt. 5:32 because the opinion of Hillel prevailed. This woman was not an exceptional case.

10. In 1 Timothy 3:2 we read, "A bishop must be the husband of one wife." Rather than forbid polygamy, this requires a bishop to be married rather than single. Rather than divorced.

Polygamy is Biblical. God gave David Saul's wives (2 Sam. 12:8) and the Bible nowhere condemns polygamy (Genesis 4:19; 16:1-4; 29:18-29; Ex. 21:10; Deut. 21:15, Isa. 4:1, etc.). "If he take him another wife" or "If a man have two wives" may be the result of a diminished male population due to warfare. God himself was married to more than one wife (Jer. 3:6-14; Ez. 23:4; Matt. 25) although polygamy is not necessarily the ideal (Deut. 17:14; 1 Tim. 3:2,12; Titus 1:6).

(end of article)  


6 No man shall take the nether or the upper (lunar) millstone to pledge: for he taketh a man's life to pledge.

7 If a man be found stealing any of his (Gemini) brethren of the children of Israel, and maketh merchandise of him, or selleth him; then that (Perseus) thief shall die; and thou shalt put evil away from among you.

8 Take heed in the plague of (lunar white) leprosy, that thou observe diligently, and do according to all that the (Ophiuchus & Hercules) priests the Levites shall teach you: as I commanded them, so ye shall observe to do.

9 Remember what the (Shekinah) Lord thy God did unto (Pollux) Miriam by the way, after that ye were come forth out of Egypt.

10 When thou (Castor) dost lend thy (Pollux) brother any thing, thou shalt not go into his (red radius) house to fetch his (lunar) pledge.

11 Thou shalt (Castor) stand abroad, and the man to whom thou dost lend (Pollux) shall bring out the (lunar) pledge abroad unto thee.

12 And if the (Pollux) man be poor, thou (Castor) shalt not sleep with his (lunar) pledge:

13 In any case thou shalt deliver him the (lunar) pledge again when the sun (sun on red radius horizon) goeth down, that he may sleep in his own (lunar) raiment, and bless thee: and it shall be righteousness unto thee before the (Shekinah) Lord thy God.

14 Thou shalt not oppress an hired (Perseus) servant that is poor and needy, whether he be of thy (Gemini) brethren, or of thy (Ophiuchus & Hercules) strangers that are in thy land within thy (lunar or solar) gates:

15 At his day thou shalt give him his hire, neither shall the (sun on red radius horizon) sun go down upon it; for he is poor, and setteth his (lunar) heart upon it: lest he cry against thee unto the (Shekinah) Lord, and it be sin unto thee.

16 The (Gemini) fathers shall not be put to death for the (Gemini) children, neither shall the (Gemini) children be put to death for the (Gemini) fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

17 Thou shalt not pervert the judgment of the (Perseus) stranger, nor of the (Perseus) fatherless; nor take a (Pollux) widow's (lunar) raiment to pledge:

18 But thou shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in Egypt, and the (Shekinah) Lord thy God redeemed thee thence: therefore I command thee to do this thing.

19 When thou (Perseus) cuttest down thine harvest in thy field, and hast forgot a (lunar) sheaf in the field, thou shalt not go again to fetch it: it shall be for the (Perseus) stranger, for the (Castor) fatherless, and for the (Pollux) widow: that the (Shekinah) Lord thy God may bless thee in all the work of thine (lunar) hands.

20 When thou beatest thine olive tree, thou shalt not go over the boughs again: it shall be for the (Perseus) stranger, for the (Castor) fatherless, and for the (Pollux) widow.

21 When thou gatherest the (lunar and solar) grapes of thy (red radius) vineyard, thou shalt not glean it afterward: it shall be for the (Perseus) stranger, for the (Castor) fatherless, and for the (Pollux) widow.

22 And thou shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in the land of Egypt: therefore I command thee to do this thing.

Ophiuchus Has His (Solar) Shoe Loosed By Castor
Because He "Walked On" Her Vagina


25:1 If there be a controversy between (Ophiuchus & Hercules) men, and they come unto judgment, that the (Gemini) judges may judge them; then they shall justify the righteous, and condemn the wicked.

2 And it shall be, if the wicked man be worthy to be (red radius) beaten, that the (Hercules) judge shall cause him (Ophiuchus) to lie down, and to be (red radius) beaten before his (Hercules) face, according to his fault, by a certain number.

3 Forty (red radius) stripes he may give him, and not exceed: lest, if he should exceed, and beat him above these with many stripes, then thy brother should seem vile unto thee.

"This number forty the Scripture uses sundry times in cases of humiliation, affliction, and punishment. As Moses twice humbled himself in fasting and prayer forty days and forty nights, Deuteronomy 9:9, Deuteronomy 9:18. Elijah fasted forty days, 1 Kings 19:8; and our Savior, Matthew 4:2. Forty years Israel was afflicted in the wilderness for their sins, Numbers 14:33, Numbers 14:34. And forty years Egypt was desolate for treacherous dealing with Israel, Ezekiel 29:11-13. Forty days every woman was in purification for her uncleanness for a man-child that she bare, and twice forty days for a woman-child, Leviticus 12:4, Leviticus 12:5. Forty days and forty nights it rained at Noah's flood, Genesis 7:12. Forty days did Ezekiel bear the iniquity of the house of Judah, Ezekiel 4:6. Jonah preached, Yet forty days and Nineveh shall be overthrown, Jonah 3:4. Forty years' space the Canaanites had to repent after Israel came out of Egypt, and wandered so many years in the wilderness, Numbers 14:33. And thrice forty years the old world had Noah preaching unto them repentance, Genesis 6:3. It was forty days ere Christ ascended into heaven after his resurrection, Acts 1:3, Acts 1:9. And forty years' space he gave unto the Jews, from the time that they killed him, before he destroyed their city and temple by the Romans.

"By the Hebrews this law is expounded thus: How many stripes do they beat (an offender) with? With forty, lacking one: as it is written, (Deuteronomy 25:2, Deuteronomy 25:3), by number forty, that is, the number which is next to forty, Talmud Bab, in Maccoth, chap. 3. This their understanding is very ancient, for so they practiced in the apostles' days; as Paul testified: Of the Jews five times received I forty (stripes) save one; 2 Corinthians 11:24. Moreover, that they might not exceed this number, they used to make a scourge of three lashes, so that every strike they fetched with it was reckoned for three stripes, and thirteen of them made thirty nine; wherefore if they added another stroke, it would have exceeded the number of stripes by two:

4 Thou shalt not (lunar) muzzle the (Taurus) ox when he treadeth out the (lunar or solar) corn.

5 If (Gemini) brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the (Pollux) wife of the dead (Castor) shall not marry without unto a (Perseus) stranger: her husband's brother (Castor) shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband's brother unto her (Pollux).


6 And it shall be, that the firstborn which she beareth shall succeed in the name of his (Castor) brother which is dead, that his name be not put out of Israel.

7 And if the (Castor) man like not to take his brother's (Pollux) wife, then let his brother's wife go up to the (lunar or solar) gate unto the (Gemini) elders, and say, My husband's (Castor) brother refuseth to raise up unto his brother a name in Israel, he will not perform the duty of my husband's brother.

8 Then the (Gemini) elders of his city shall call him, and speak unto him: and if he (Ophiuchus) stand to it, and say, I like not to take her;

but if it is better advice to pluck off the shoe, they give it; as when she is young and he is old, or she is old and he young, they advise him to allow the shoe to be plucked off:

9 Then shall his brother's (Pollux) wife come unto him in the presence of the elders, and loose his (solar) shoe from off his (Ophiuchus) foot, and (Cetus, Drago, Big Dog) (lunar) spit in his face, and shall answer and say, So shall it be done unto that man that will not build up his (red radius) brother's house.

10 And his name shall be called in Israel, The house of him that hath his (solar) shoe loosed.

11 When men (Ophiuchus & Hercules) strive together one with another, and the (Castor) wife of the one draweth near for to deliver her (Ophiuchus) husband out of the hand of him that (Hercules) smiteth him, and putteth forth her (Castor) hand, and taketh him by the (lunar) secrets:

Malicious act to make him unfit for generation

12 Then thou shalt cut off her (red radius) hand, thine (lunar) eye shall not pity her.

13 Thou shalt not have in thy bag divers (lunar stone) weights, a great and a small.

14 Thou shalt not have in thine house divers (lunar stone) measures, a great and a small.

Literally, an ephah and an ephah; one large, to buy thy neighbor's wares, another small, to sell thy own by.

15 But thou shalt have a perfect and just weight, a perfect and just measure shalt thou have: that thy days may be lengthened in the land which the (Shekinah) Lord thy God giveth thee.

16 For all that do such things, and all that do unrighteously, are an abomination unto the (Shekinah) Lord thy God.

17 Remember what Amalek did unto thee by the way, when ye were come forth out of Egypt;

18 How he met thee by the way, and (Perseus) smote the hindmost of thee, even all that were feeble behind thee, when thou wast faint and weary; and he feared not God.

19 Therefore it shall be, when the (Shekinah) Lord thy God hath given thee rest from all thine enemies round about, in the land which the (Shekinah) Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance to possess it, that thou shalt (lunar) blot out the remembrance of (Perseus) Amalek from under heaven; thou shalt not forget it.

Firstfruits Were 1/60th of Total Harvest


26:1 And it shall be, when thou art come in unto the land which the (Shekinah) Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance, and possessest it, and dwellest therein;

2 That thou shalt take of the first of all the (lunar and solar) fruit of the earth, which thou shalt bring of thy land that the (Shekinah) Lord thy God giveth thee, and shalt put it in a (lunar) basket, and shalt go unto the place which the (Shekinah) Lord thy God shall choose to place his name there.

According to tradition, they were to bring the sixtieth part; so says Maimonides,"the firstfruits have no measure (no fixed measure) from the law; but from the words of the wise men, a man ought to separate one out of sixty:" (Maimon. Hilchot Biccurim, c. 2. sect. 17.)

3 And thou (Ophiuchus) shalt go unto the (Hercules) priest that shall be in those days, and say unto him, I profess this day unto the (Shekinah) Lord thy God, that I am come unto the country which the (Shekinah) Lord sware unto our (Gemini) fathers for to give us.

4 And the (Castor) priest shall take the (lunar) basket out of thine hand, and set it down before the altar of the (Shekinah) Lord thy God.

5 And thou shalt speak and say before the (Shekinah) Lord thy God, A (Perseus) Syrian ready to perish was my father, and he went down into Egypt, and sojourned there with a (Gemini) few, and became there a nation, great, mighty, and populous:

6 And the (Gemini) Egyptians evil entreated us, and afflicted us, and laid upon us hard bondage:

7 And when we cried unto the (Shekinah) Lord God of our (Gemini) fathers, the Lord (lunar ears) heard our (red radius) voice, and (lunar eyes) looked on our affliction, and our labour, and our oppression:

8 And the (Shekinah) Lord brought us forth out of Egypt with a mighty (lunar or Castor) hand, and with an outstretched (Perseus) arm, and with great terribleness, and with (zodiac) signs, and with wonders:

9 And he hath brought us into this place, and hath given us this land, even a land that floweth with (lunar white) milk and (solar golden) honey.

10 And now, (lunar eyes) behold, I have brought the (lunar and solar) firstfruits of the land, which thou, O Lord, hast given me. And thou shalt set it before the Lord thy God, and worship before the (Shekinah) Lord thy God:

11 And thou shalt rejoice in every good thing which the (Shekinah) Lord thy God hath given unto thee, and unto thine (red radius) house, thou (Castor), and the (Pollux) Levite, and the (Perseus) stranger that is among you.

12 When thou hast made an end of tithing all the tithes of thine increase the third year, which is the year of tithing, and hast given it unto the (Hercules) Levite, the (Perseus) stranger, the (Castor) fatherless, and the (Pollux) widow, that they may eat within thy gates, and be filled;

13 Then thou shalt say before the (Shekinah) Lord thy God, I have brought away the hallowed things out of mine (red radius) house, and also have given them unto the (Hercules) Levite, and unto the (Perseus) stranger, to the (Castor) fatherless, and to the (Pollux) widow, according to all thy commandments which thou hast commanded me: I have not transgressed thy commandments, neither have I forgotten them.

14 I have not eaten thereof in my mourning, neither have I taken away ought thereof for any unclean use, nor given ought thereof for the dead: but I have (lunar ears) hearkened to the (red radius) voice of the (Shekinah) Lord my God, and have done according to all that thou hast commanded me.

15 Look (lunar eyes) down from thy holy habitation, from heaven, and (lunar hands) bless thy (Gemini) people Israel, and the land which thou hast given us, as thou swarest unto our (Gemini) fathers, a land that floweth with (lunar white) milk and (solar golden) honey.

16 This day the (Shekinah) Lord thy God hath commanded thee to do these statutes and judgments: thou shalt therefore keep and do them with all thine heart, and with all thy soul.

17 Thou hast avouched the (Shekinah) Lord this day to be thy God, and to walk in his ways, and to keep his statutes, and his commandments, and his judgments, and to (lunar ears) hearken unto his voice:

18 And the (Shekinah) Lord hath avouched thee this day to be his peculiar (Gemini) people, as he hath promised thee, and that thou shouldest keep all his commandments;

19 And to make thee high above all (Gemini) nations which he hath made, in praise, and in name, and in honour; and that thou mayest be an holy (Gemini) people unto the (Shekinah) Lord thy God, as he hath spoken.

Next Lesson: Blessing and Cursing On Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal | Back to Home | Email Us