Watchman Willie Martin Archive

http://israelect.com/reference/WillieMartin/ABEAST%20%5BA%5D.htm

The Beast of the EarthGod's first Divine Law, when He created the earth and everything upon it, was everything after its kind whose seed is in itself. He states this very clearly ten times in the first chapter of Genesis. It applies to all living matter, even vegetable.

Genesis 1:11:

"And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding FRUIT AFTER HIS KIND, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so."

Genesis 1:12:

"And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, AFTER HIS KIND: and God saw that it was good."

Genesis 1:21:

"And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, AFTER THEIR KIND, and every winged fowl AFTER HIS KIND: and God saw that it was good."

Genesis 1:24:

"And God said, let the earth bring forth the living creature AFTER HIS KIND, cattle, and creeping thing, and BEAST OF THE EARTH AFTER HIS KIND: and it was so."

The New Advanced Standard Version relates this verse:

Then God said, Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind; and it was so. (NAS)

Genesis 1:25:

"And God made the BEAST OF THE EARTH AFTER HIS KIND, and cattle AFTER THEIR KIND, and everything that creepeth upon the earth AFTER HIS KIND: and God saw that it was good."

The New Advanced Standard Version relates this verse:

And God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good. (NAS)

In these two verses God clearly makes a distinction between the cattle and the Beast of the Earth. Therefore, if one is to believe the Bible then they must accept the fact that the Beast of the Earth is not cattle, horses or any other four-footed animal.

Strongs Concordance: #2416 chay (khah'ee); from 2421; alive; hence, raw (flesh); fresh (plant, water, year), strong; also (as noun, especially in the feminine singular and masculine plural) life (or living thing), whether literally or figuratively: KJV + age, alive, appetite, (wild) beast, company, congregation, life (time), live (ly), living (creature, thing), maintenance, + merry, multitude, + (be) old, quick, raw, running, springing, troop.

When the word beast or beasts is used in the scripture, it often simply means a living creature. For example, in the Book of Revelation the term beast is used to identify certain heavenly creatures who serve God day and night before His throne. Thus, in Revelation 4:6, 8-11 we have the statement: ...and in the midst of the throne, and about the throne were four beasts...In connection with this, read Revelation 5:6, 8 and 6:1, 3, 5-7, where the word beast is used. We have quoted the above scriptures principally to show that there is nothing belittling, demeaning, or derogatory in the Biblical use of the term beast. It is as honorable as the term angel or man.

Many Bible translations, including the Revised Version, translated the Greek word zoon as living creature, rather than beast, and so it is used in all the aforementioned passages. The same should apply to the Hebrew word chay (khah'ee), and does, according to Youngs Analytical Concordance. Most translations, however, seem to prefer the expression beast of the field, or beast of the earth, to be the best translation of the Hebrew chay (khah'ee).

From this passage it becomes evident that two very definite and distinct types of living creatures are described in the scripture, one identified as beast of the earth, or the field, while the other is described as the beast before the throne. Very often the word beast is used without the phrase of the field, or of the earth.

There is a fundamental principle which every Bible student should remember. It is this: God never troubles to explain things which are not absolutely necessary for us to know. He states the factual truth as it is, and, because HE is completely incapable of untruth or error, He expects us to believe exactly what He says even when no details are given. It is here that faith and trust is the veracity of God always thrive.It is written: In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the earth. (Genesis 1:1) That statement is true! You may ask ten thousand questions about it, such as: Where did God come from? How did He make the earth? Where did He get the materials? How did He make the stars? How long did it take Him to create it all? And many, many others which the wisest of men cannot answer.

The Lord did not say He wanted us to understand everything He does. He simply states the indisputable facts and leaves man to believe or disbelieve as he wishes.

It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter. (Proverbs 25:2)

The scriptures say that a certain man was named Peleg, for in his days the earth was divided (Genesis 10:25). God does not explain what method He used to divide the continents and islands, but in passing, the revealing statement is made: for in his (Pelegs) days was the earth divided. This answers a problem which has baffled the best scientific minds for centuries. If you believe it without explanation, it answers much. If you try and pry into it you get hopelessly lost in the fog.

1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

2 And the woman said unto the serpent, we may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:

3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

4 And the serpent said unto the woman, ye shall not surely die:

5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

8 And they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God amongst the trees of the garden.

9 And the Lord God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?

10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.

11 And he said, who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?

12 And the man said, the woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.

13 And the Lord God said unto the woman, what is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, the serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.

14 And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;

19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them.

22 And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever:

23 Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the Garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.

24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubim, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

Word Origin and History for cherubim

Cherub

n.

late 14c. as an order of angels, from Late Latin cherub, from Greek cheroub, from Hebrew kerubh (plural kerubhim) "winged angel," perhaps related to Akkadian karubu "to bless," karibu "one who blesses," an epithet of the bull-colossus. Old English had cerubin, from the Greek plural.

The cherubim, a common feature of ancient Near Eastern mythology, are not to be confused with the round-cheeked darlings of Renaissance iconography. The root of the terms either means "hybrid" or, by an inversion of consonants, "mount," "steed," and they are winged beasts, probably of awesome aspect, on which the sky god of the old Canaanite myths and of the poetry of Psalms goes riding through the air. [Robert Alter, "The Five Books of Moses," 2004, commentary on Gen. iii:24]

Online Etymology Dictionary, 2010 Douglas Harper

Thus, in Genesis 3:1, where the scripture says, Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made, it becomes a baffling passage, yet wholly true.

We may ask a thousand questions about this passage: Who was the beast of the field who is here referred to as a serpent? Where did he come from? When was he made? If he was a beast, how come he could speak an understandable human language? But God leaves us to believe His Word and then discover its truth, line upon line, precept on precept. Only then does it become understandable.

In Genesis 3:1, we have an introduction to this living creature, called a serpent. The English word for serpent as used here, comes from the Hebrew word nachash. It makes sense, if we use it as a proper name as it was intended to be. Thus the text would read: Now Nachash was more subtle than any beast of the field... The Hebrew word for man is ADAM, and the translators wisely left this word capitalized, naming this first White man as Adam. Why not use the same principle with Nachash?

Strongs Concordance: #5172nachash (nawkhash'); a primitive root; properly, TO HISS, i.e., WHISPER a (magic) SPELL; generally, to prognosticate: KJV X certainly, divine, ENCHANTER, (use) X enchantment, learn by experience, X indeed, diligently observe.

Strongs Concordance: Man #120adam (awdawm'); from 119; ruddy, i.e., a human being (an individual or the species, mankind, etc.): KJV X another, + hypocrite, + common sort, X low, man (mean, of low degree), person.

It is universally admitted among Bible scholars that the Hebrew word nachash presents great difficulty when translated as serpent. However, this difficulty disappears when, instead, it is translated properly as Nachash and we leave it as a proper name as it was intended to be. Dr. Adam Clark, who has become known as the Prince of Bible commentators, has much to say on this subject.In his labors to solve this difficulty concerning Genesis 3, he said that this was one of the most difficult, as well as the most important of all narratives in the whole book of God. We are obliged, he said, to seek for some other word to designate the word Nachash in the text rather than the word serpent, which in every view of the subject appears to me to be inefficient and inapplicable.

In all this uncertainty it is natural for a serious inquirer after truth to look everywhere for information. In such an inquiry, the Arabic may be expected to afford some help from its great similarity to the Hebrew. A root in this language, very similar to that in the text, seems to cast considerable light on the subject. Ghanas, or Khansas, signifies that the (Nachash) departed, drew off, lay hid, seduced, slunk away. From this Arabic root comes ahhnas, knanasa and khannoos, which all signify an ape, or a creature similar to an ape genus.Dr. Clark combats the idea that the tempter of Eve was of the serpent species maintaining that none of them were ever able to walk upright. The very word serpent comes from serpo which means to crawl. For that class of reptiles, it would be neither a curse nor punishment to go on their bellies. Furthermore, serpents have no organs of speech nor any kind of articulate sound. They can only hiss.

Dr. Clark continues with this summary: In this account we find (1) that whatever this Nachash was, he stood at the head of all inferior animals as far as wisdom and understanding was concerned; (2) that he walked erect, for this is necessarily implied by his punishment to crawl on his belly; (3) that he was endued with the gift of speech, understandable to humans; (4) that he was able to reason, and, (5) that these things were common to this creature. There is no doubt that Eve had seen him walk upright, talk and reason and therefore showed no surprise when he accosted her in the language of the text.According to Genesis 3:1, Nachash posed his question as a challenge to God:

Yea, hath God said, ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? It is quite obvious that there was much more to the discussion between Eve and Nachash, than what is recorded, since the scriptural record seems to begin in the middle of their conversation. Eve reiterated what Nachash obviously already knew when she told him that she and Adam were allowed to eat of the fruit of every tree in the garden, except that of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, which was forbidden by God, under pain of certain death.

From the little recorded of this conversation, it becomes evident that Nachash understood very well the disastrous consequences to Adam and Eve, should they disobey God, for he went about his seduction with artful cunning, which is not characteristic of lower animals, and was no doubt inspired by Satan.It becomes evident that the Adversary of Man, sometimes called The Devil or Satan, used Nachash as his willing tool in corrupting mankind. There is little doubt that Nachash was morally responsible for his actions, for he was not of the lower order of animals without mind or consciousness towards God. He was one of the beasts; the living creatures of the field, and the wisest and smartest of them all. If he had not been morally responsible for his actions, God would not have judged him as He did. Notice in Genesis 3:14 that the curse against Nachash was directed against him as an individual and did not affect all members of his kind, as many teach. He was reduced from walking upright to a condition lower than that of cattle, going about on all fours as an ape and compelled to eat his food in the dust of the earth.

14 And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

The judgment on Eve was: (1) greatly increased conception; (2) accompanied by sorrow and pain; (3) her husband should rule over her; (4) and her desire should be to him. 16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.Adam was sentenced: (1) to toil on cursed ground; (2) in sorrow would he eat all the days of his life; (3) thorns and thistles would come forth to fight the food he planted; (4) and with the sweat of his brow he should eat his bread, until he died and returned to dust. The moment Adam and Eve disobeyed God, they began to die, thus fulfilling the curse.

17 And unto Adam he said, because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;

19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.With these thoughts in mind, it might be well for us to consider this seven-fold proposition, all relative to the beast of the field:1) It would be able to speak, reason and carry on an intelligent conversation with humans2) It would be able to fast, pray, and bear responsibility before God

3) It would be able to wear clothing and put them on and take them off under its own power4) It would be biped, walking upright like a man, having hands and feet, rather than the paws and hooves of the other lowly animals5) That he would often associate with man6) That he alone of all the animal family would be able to cross-breed with man and because of this, this cross-breeding was forbidden by God; and,

7) He was not a nation and never had a civilization of his ownThe first proposition states that this beast of the field was not a dumb animal, but an intelligent being, able to speak, reason and carry on intelligent conversation with members of the human family. This proposition has been covered by examining the scriptural account of the conversation between Eve and Nachash. It is evident that Eve was not surprised by his ability to speak to her.

Since he was more subtle (clever) than any others of his species, it is very possible that he had been chosen by Adam to supervise other members of the Nachash and was responsible to Adam for helping him dress the garden. (Genesis 2:15) The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it. Evidently in this pristine setting it was a pleasant task. It is evident that Adam was the ruler in the garden, an overseer, but not a common laborer (otherwise he would not havebeen cursed with the curses: to toil on cursed ground; (2) in sorrow would he eat all the days of his life; (3) thorns and thistles would come forth to fight the food he planted; (4) and with the sweat of his brow he should eat his bread, until he died and returned to dust).

Adams authority was over all the creatures on the earth, in the seas, and under the earth. He was the master in every respect and every creature did his will. Many believe that Nachash and other members of this beast people were his intelligent servants, who had been given this special task by God Himself. When Adam named every creature, he gave them names suitable to their usefulness and ministry and it was not until after his disobedience that man himself became a servant and slave with none to serve under him. He had to make this own way, with the sweat of his brow.

It would seem rather ridiculous for God to place Adam in the Garden of Eden to be its caretaker and place him in control of all creatures, and still neglect to give him intelligent living creatures to help carry out his duties. It was that way in the beginning, and will be that way when the Second Adam, Jesus Christ, comes back to rule in His restored kingdom.In this way Adam was first given dominion and rulership, but through disobedience was forced to do the work that his servants had previously done. When the master became the slave, then Nachash and his race were reduced to nothingness, since they had no one to serve. For this reason the continent of Africa became known as the Black Continent, not because of the color of mens skin who lived there, but because of the darkness that had descended on Nachash and his people. For over 6,000 years they have waited in darkness, ignorance and poverty, for the day when they will once more assume their appointed tasks to the King in His Kingdom. For, in spite, of all efforts by liberals and Black leaders to manufacture a great Black civilization in Africa, there has never been any.We have abundantly proven that this Nachash was an intelligent creature; able to think, reason, and bear moral responsibility. He was not a snake, (as the Judeo-Christian clergy would have you believe) but an intelligent creation known in scripture as a beast of the field. The rendering of the word subtle in the Ferrar Fenton translation indicates that it means: imprudent, lacking in modesty, contemptuous, cocky, and capable of using his intelligence for deceptive purposes, to gain his own advantage.

The second proposition was that this being could fast, pray and bear moral responsibility before God. If we can show that this creature--variously described in scripture as beast of the field or simply beast-- is capable of fasting, prayer and repentance, then most certainly we are dealing with an intelligent being, possessing God-consciousness and far above the realm of serpents, whom, though often associated with man, is not a man, or a descendant of Adam.

In Genesis 1:2731 it says God created male and female, tells them to be fruitful, multiply and have dominion over every living thing, and God beheld everything that He had made and it was good. Everything that God made has its seed within itself, therefore it is good because it produces only its own kind. Like begets like. Never do the simpler forms of life violate this law unless forced to by the higher form, man.All this is in the first Chapter of Genesis with preAdamic male and female created on the sixth day (era). On the seventh day (era) God rests and finds that there is no agriculture, no civilization, no progress; these creatures are still living exactly as they did the day God made them.

A higher intelligence containing God's Spirit is needed to bring forth His Kingdom here on earth. He begins to place His own children here by forming Adam and breathing His Living Spirit into him, then makes a helpmate for him, Eve. The previously created females were not suitable because they were of different seed. Adam and Eve have only their own seed within themselves, so can only produce their own kind. Yet we are asked by intellectual prostitutes to believe that all races came from Adam and Eve. To produce another race or species, another seed would be necessary.

When different races mix, they do not bring forth their own kind; their offspring are mongrels or hybrids. This is a transgression against Divine Law, upsetting Nature's delicate balance and producing that which is not good. Little wonder that, so often in the past, God has destroyed His own children for mongrelizing, and you can be sure He will again.Deuteronomy 7:6:

"For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God: the Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto Himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth."

The Adamic Race is to have dominion over every form of life previously created. This includes not only the four-legged beasts, but the two-legged as well. The Negro is an articulate member of this Beast Creation. For proof that they are beasts, and God calls them exactly that:At the time when the Law was given to Israel at Sinai, this command was given by God to Moses:

...Take heed to yourselves, that ye go not up into the mount, or touch the border of it: whosoever toucheth the mount shall surely be put to death: There shall not an HAND touch it, but he shall surely be stoned, or shot through; whether it be BEAST or MAN, IT SHALL NOT LIVE: when the trumpet soundeth long, they shall come up to the mount. (Exodus 19:12-13)

Surely no one reading this would be foolish enough to believe that this passage was speaking about animals. Dare we charge God with utter foolishness? When He speaks of the HAND of MAN and the HAND of BEAST, then these MUST possess the knowledge and responsibility to refrain from reaching out to touch the mountain. While we do not have time or space to explore this further, it should be accepted as it is given at the hands of two or more witnesses in the Word, and is therefore established!

God has also said of the shedding of the blood of man, that He would require it at the HANDS OF THE BEAST. What animal, again, we ask has hands:

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... (Genesis 9:4-5) KJV

Now why on earth would Almighty God require the blood of a man at the hands of an animal that has no ability to reason or to know that it is killing a man? That just doesnt make any sense. THE BEAST HAS HANDS, AND CAN THINK AND KNOW AND REALIZE THAT IT IS KILLING A MAN!

In proposition five, we stated that the BEAST is closely associated with man. This we have already proven. He talked with Eve in the Garden of Eden. He fasted and prayed with the men of Nineveh.

He was commanded, along with man, to refrain from putting his HANDS on the mountain. In the Book of Daniel (Daniel 4:25) we have a further account of the BEASTS of the field, as they cared for King Nebuchadnezzar when he was driven from dwelling with men during the period of his insanity. Gods Word to the king was: That they shall drive thee from men, and thy dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field, and they shall make thee to eat grass as oxen, and they shall wet thee with the dew of heaven, and seven times shall pass over thee, till thou know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will.

(Please note the words: They shall make thee). A domestic animal would have paid no attention to the king, let alone care about what he ate. But the BEASTS OF THE FIELD caused him to eat grass and sleep in the dew. No known lower animal has ever been known to do things such as this, but remember, the BEASTS OF THE FIELD are not lower animals.

There is one more thing we MUST mention, for it is of surpassing importance in our day. These commands, found in Gods Word are almost completely ignored because of a dreadful lack of understanding on the part of people, especially those who go by the name of Christian.

In Leviticus 18:23, we find this definite command given to Israel by God: ...neither shall he lie with any BEAST to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a BEAST to lie down thereto: It is confusion! And if a man lie with a BEAST, he shall surely be put to death: and ye shall slay the BEAST. And if a woman approach unto any BEAST, and lie down thereto, thou shalt kill the woman and the BEAST; they shall surely be put to death... (Leviticus 20:15-16) Oh, how the Judeo-Christians will cry about this command. They will no doubt say: That was the harsh God of the Old Testament. The New Testament God is a God of love. Yet these hypocrites teach that God never changes, and is the same yesterday, today and forever. If this is true, then His commands against sexual union between MAN and this BEAST (which is not an animal) is as true today as when it was written some 3500 years ago, the teachings of the false Judeo-Christian clergy; Jim Bakker (Jew), Mike Evans (Jew), Billy Graham (Jew), Kenneth Copeland (Jew), Robert Schuler, Oral Roberts, Jimmy Swaggart, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell (a so-called Christian Zionist), John Hagee, V.W. Grant, Larry Buricett, Paul Crouch, Skip Heitzig, Hal Lindsey (Jew), Chuck Missler, Mark Eastman, David Hocking, Jack Van Impe, Benny Hinn (Jew), Frank Peretti, Chuck Smith, Joni Eareckson Tada, Tom Cloud, Ted Baehr, John McDowell. To name just a few.

Any sexual relationship between MAN and this servant race known in the Bible as BEASTS, BEASTS OF THE FIELD, or BEASTS OF THE EARTH, is strictly forbidden. These two morally responsible parties, who cross this forbidden boundary, were to be put to death. (Not our words, but from Gods Law, which was never changed in the New Testament)We have reached a crucial point here. God has clearly ordered that KIND MUST BE AFTER HIS KIND! There MUST be no crossing over between MAN and BEAST (and remember, we are not speaking here about four-footed animals, but about a being that walks upright, can reason, knows right from wrong, and is capable of sexual relations with man)

Any cross over between MAN and this BEAST is confusion and abomination to God according to Leviticus 18:3. The end results are so bad, that in Israel the guilty parties were to be immediately put to death, so there would be no possibility of a hybrid offspring. (Knowledgeable people know this would be impossible with any sexual union between man and lower animals. In fact, it is impossible for man and the lower animals to cross-breed. There is only one being, other than man, who can do this and this is the BEAST OF THE FIELD, which we today know as the Black Race). There is no other conclusion an intelligent person who believes the Word of God can make. (These were a part of the men CREATED from nothing in Genesis 1:27, male and female, and are completely different from ADAM man FORMED from the dust of the earth, male only, in Genesis 2:7).

Exodus 23:1011: "And six years thou shalt sow thy land, and shalt gather in the fruits thereof: But the seventh year thou shalt let it rest and lie still; that the poor of thy people may eat: and what they leave the beasts of the field shall eat. In like manner thou shalt deal with thy vineyard, and with thy olive yard."

If wild or even domesticated animals were beasts of the field, just picture what would happen to your gardens and vineyards. Note the distinction God makes here between the "poor of thy people" and the "beasts of the field" the poor of thy people shall eat first.

Exodus 9:9: "And it shall become small dust in all the land of Egypt, and shall be a boil breaking forth with blains upon man, and upon beast, throughout all the land of Egypt."

You can be sure God was not punishing four-legged beasts by afflicting them with boils.

Leviticus 20:1516: "And if a man lie with a beast, he shall surely be put to death: and ye shall slay the beast. And if a woman approach unto any beast, and lie down thereto, thou shalt kill the woman, and the beast: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

This certainly could not be a four-legged beast that a man or woman could lie with. If it were, God would not demand the death penalty for a dumb animal with no reasoning power.

Exodus 19:13: "There shall not an hand touch it, but he shall surely be stoned, or shot through; whether it be beast or man, it shall not live: when the trumpet soundeth long, they shall come up to the mount."

Now we have a beast with a hand. Do you believe God told Moses to talk to the camels, donkeys, cattle and tell them not to touch the mount?

Jeremiah 7:20: "Therefore thus saith the Lord God; Behold, mine anger and my fury shall be poured out upon this place, upon man, and upon beast..."

Jeremiah 21:6: "And I will smite the inhabitants of this city, both man and beast: they shall die of a great pestilence."

Would God refer to a four-legged beast as an inhabitant of a city?

Jeremiah 27:6: "And now have I given all these lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, my servant; and the beasts of the field have I given him also to serve him."

The Negro race has always been used as servants.

Jeremiah 31:2730: "...the seed of man, and with the seed of beast...But every one shall die for his own iniquity." How can an animal die for his sins and iniquity? They cannot because they do not know Gods Laws so they cannot sin.

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Jeremiah 31:34; "And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more."

It would appear this verse pretty well takes care of the liberal's socalled Brotherhood Program.

Ezekiel 14:15: "If I cause noisome beasts to pass through the land, and they spoil it, so that it be desolate, that no man may pass through because of the beasts."

Only two legged beasts could stop man from passing through the land.

Ezekiel 29:11: "No foot of man shall pass through it, nor foot of beast shall pass through it, neither shall it be inhabited forty years."

Now the beast inhabitant not only has a hand but a foot as well. Animals have hooves or paws.

In the third chapter of Jonah we find an interesting story. (This is just another case where the Bible states the truth, as it is, but does not make any explanation). We should remember, that all Israelites of that time, understood the proper identity of the beasts of the field. Jonah preached, on the order of God, that the city of Nineveh would be destroyed in forty days. The King of Nineveh evidently believed the prophet, and set about to seek Gods mercy for his people. (Please accept the facts as they are recorded in Gods Word without trying to make them fit into modern tradition, which is far more often wrong than right).

Jonah 3:78: "Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water: But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto God: yea, let them turn everyone from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their hands."

What manner of beast would wear sackcloth; have the power of speech and once again we see that the beast has hands?

Note: When word came unto the King of Nineveh (regarding Jonahs message) and he rose from his throne, and laid his robe from him, and covered himself with sackcloth (a burlap sacking, in those days a sign of sorrow or repentance), and sat in ashes. And he caused it to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying: Let neither man nor BEAST, herd nor flock, taste anything: let them not feed, nor drink water... (Now consider the following words very closely) But let man and BEAST be covered with sackcloth and cry mightily unto God. (Jonah 6-8)Read these words again! The herds and flocks, that is, all the lower animals were to be restrained from eating and drinking, but MAN and BEAST were to put on sackcloth and ashes and pray to God and repent! Be honest now, have you ever heard of a cow or horse, or monkey putting on sackcloth and praying to God for mercy? Of course not! They are incapable of this. But the beast of the field, could do this, so the Word says!

Therefore lets start examining the question and see who this creature is who is called a BEAST, but who is capable of fasting, praying, and repenting, just as man can do. The BEAST mentioned here is without a doubt, of the same race as the BEAST mentioned in the Garden of Eden, who talked with Eve and tempted her. NACHASH, the tempter of Genesis 3:1, was of the BEASTS of the field.Note further, that not only was this being capable of fasting and prayer, but along with man, he was commanded to turn from his evil way and from violence that was in his hands (Jonah 3:8). Animals do not have hand! BEASTS of the field do! Lower animals are never guilty of violence that could be accounted as sin before God. So here we see several different points:

(1) These beings called BEASTS can pray;

(2) They can put on clothing (in this case sackcloth);

(3) They have hands and can walk erect;

(4) Finally, like men, they are commanded to put away the violence in their hands. These are things animals cannot do, nor are they ever asked to do so in scripture. Therefore we MUST conclude that the beast of the field is an intelligent, morally responsible creature, similar to man, although not man.

Our fourth proposition was that this creature was biped, walking upright and having hands and feet, not hooves or paws. This proposition has been fairly well covered. But there are other passages which point out the moral responsibility of these BEASTS, and show they have hands and therefore walk erect.

Zechariah 8:10: "For before these days there was no hire for man, nor any hire for beast..."

Here we have beasts that can be hired. If these are four-legged beasts that can be hired, someone should alert the Internal Revenue.

Acts 10:12: "Wherein were all manner of four-footed beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air."

Note the distinction here between four-footed beasts and wild beasts.

2 Peter 2:12: "But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption."

Here we have the brute beasts speaking in a language that a man can understand.

Jude 1:10: "But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves."

Jude 1:4: "For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ."

This refers to the Jews who are deluding the Negro by promising them things they can never achieve, in order to destroy the White Race through miscegenation.The great boast of modern civilization is its unparalleled degree of enlightenment when compared with preceding ages. While marvelous advances have been made in the realm of many sciences, in other respects we are still groping about in a clouded maze of misconceptions. Colleges and Universities have been taken over by aliens and are teaching as truth philosophies which have no substance in actual fact.

For example, because the doctrines of the atheistic school of natural development are accepted as the acme of scholarship, specifically the theory of the evolution of the species, the door to understanding has been fastened shut in regard to the true origin of the races.

The Bible stands as an impregnable bulwark against Christendom's modern slogan that all men, regardless of color, are blood brothers. The patriarchs of the Bible, the prophets of old, the apostles of the early Christian Church, do not support this view. Nevertheless, under the operation of the Law of the Lord, all are entitled to equality of justice and righteousness in judgment. The simple truth regarding the origin of the races demonstrates conclusively that the Negroes and the White Race do not have a common ancestry.

A full grasp of this fact will go a long way toward solving racial problems which are menacing the entire world today. When the undeniable truth is known and acted upon, it will bring about an abrupt and complete cessation of the present attempt to elevate the colored races or Jews to positions of authority over those whom the Lord instructed: "Thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother." [1]So we respectfully ask that you bring to this study an open mind in search of truth. And we feel that if you do you will find that a careful weighing of the evidence presented herein will result in an astounding comprehension of aspects of the story the Bible tells which has long been hidden from view.

In The BeginningOn the sixth day of creation, God issued a command for the earth to bring forth the living creatures, each after his kind. Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness." [2]In general terms, as differentiated from the flying and swimming creatures and from plant varieties, there are two forms of life; animal and human, one the product of the earth, earthly, "after his kind;" the other in the image of God, "after our likeness."

Each order of life has its special place in the overall plan of creation. As long as those "of the earth" adhered to the dictum, "after his kind," and refrained from crossing the boundaries of their particular species, all was well.

Equally so, those created in the image of God were to conduct themselves according to the accountability engendered by their preferential status, for Divine satisfaction with His work was expressed when it was recorded: "And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good." [3]However, in the course of time the Divinelyset barriers were crossed and the resulting defiance of the jurisdiction of the Creator brought about a chain of biological and physiological developments upon the earth leading to dire physical and spiritual eventualities.

One consequence today is that Negroes aspire to wrest a place for themselves in the White Man's domain. Impetus is given to this Negro intrusion by his very ignorance of his own origin. Martin Luther King, Jr., unconsciously sensed that basically the Negro does not belong in the White Man's society by using a revealing phrase in his statement that the Negro must attain "human dignity."King was far more correct than he realized in his intimation that the Negro does not possess the status of the White Man. Actually he never will. He has his place, but the abortive aspirations that urge him on to violently break down the barricade God has placed between the White Man and the black can never come to realization.

A phrase of particular interest appears in the Book of Jude to describe the defection of those angels whom the Apostle Peter says "sinned" before God and are therefore "reserved unto judgment (2Peter: 2:4)Jude says they kept not their "first estate." (Jude 6) In other words, they left their own "habitation," their natural sphere, and invaded another, entering the human plane to marry the daughters of men. This breach took place prior to the Deluge: "And it came to pass...that the sons of God [angels] saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose." (Genesis 6: 1-2) These sons of God, who were of an Angelic Order, descended at that time to a lower plane and today the Negroes are aspiring to ascend to a higher plane than their normal station. Both instances involve an invasion of the human sphere, and in each case with the same objective: to satiate lust and gain power over men.

The Negro who remains in his natural habitat will be at peace, but his illegal encroachment upon forbidden areas, in an effort to obtain rights which are not his, can produce only trouble. In addition to this, the outcome can be nothing less than disastrous for both the blacks and the Whites who attempt to amalgamate. This very danger makes it imperative to arrive at an understanding concerning the ancestry of peoples and recognize the specific realm of activity assigned to each race. Where are we to find the answers to the many questions raised? There is one unimpeachable source of truth and that is the Bible.

However, due to Christendom's failure to "rightly divide the word of truth," and analyze the meaning of the descriptive language used in designating the Negro apart from the White Man, the key to understanding has been lost. Knowledge of the true origin of the races will resolve the present racial dilemma and halt the trend to integrate those whom the Bible definitely teaches must remain racially apart.

We are aware of the identity of the descendants of Jacob in the world today, for modern Israel is found in the AngloSaxon, Germanic, Scandinavian, Celtic and kindred peoples. Few, however, are cognizant of the fact that this race was dedicated to the service of the Lord when Abraham laid his only son Isaac upon the altar.God accepted that dedication and Isaac's descendants (later called Israel and now known as the AngloSaxon, Germanic, Scandinavian, Celtic and kindred peoples) became His servants. Therefore, through the Prophet Isaiah it was proclaimed: "Ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord, and my servant whom I have chosen." Isaiah 43:10A servant race! It is no disgrace to be a servant. The angels of God are properly a serving order and many Scriptural statements bear this out. (Psalm 91:11-12)11For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways.12They shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone.The original place of the Negro was as a serving order. When the Negro finally becomes willing to resume his role according to the Divine design, he will be in a position to engage in the performance of beneficial labors which will be of material assistance--instead of a hindrance--to the servant people. Herein lies the solution to presentday racial problems, confirmed by the evidence disclosing the origin of the Negro.

An Enigma SolvedMany insurmountable obstacles hinder the acceptance of the orthodox position concerning the account of creation, as set forth in the first chapter of Genesis, as far as the creation of man is concerned. The endeavor to postulate a common origin, or parenthood, for both the white and the black peoples, as well as those of other shadings and colors, poses a number of problems which defy solution.

There are basic characteristics setting each race apart by itself which cannot be satisfactorily explained unless the fallacy of a common origin is admitted. There is, in fact, no other logical explanation for the divergences encountered in specific instances as the researcher delves deeply into this subject. The physiognomy of the White Man has always been known to be distinct in almost every respect from that of the Negro. Or, to state it in reverse, the Negro people are known to be distinct in almost every respect from the White Race. The exceptions stem from crossbreeding, but this produces the mulattoes, a mixed seed, whose children are misfits in the society of either race.

Furthermore, it is among the mixed seed that we find the troublemakers who stir up racial animosities, fostering the racial antagonisms which are now rampant.

It is of primary importance, therefore, if we are to properly evaluate the causes of racial problems, to comprehend the purport of the account as recorded when God said, as translated in the King James version of the Bible: "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness." (Genesis 1:26)Origin of the White RaceThe Hebrew word translated "man" is "Adam" and means "to show blood in the face, ruddy; to flush or turn rosy;" that is, a White human being. Therefore, when God said, "Let us make Adam in our image, after our likeness," this constituted the beginning of a new creation. Adam was unique in the creative work of God under the special circumstances that brought him into being.

Obviously, therefore, man was to be distinct from all other living creatures, including the black people. This is the logical deduction that follows a painstaking examination of the phases of the Creator's works of beginning. Accordingly, a careful search of all the Scriptures should not only confirm this but it should also show the Negro, who is so deficient in the characteristics possessed by the white man, to be of a different origin.

At the very outset, the question is posed: Why is the Negro black? This is directly attributable to his origin and was apparently a Divinelyordained distinguishing characteristic to draw a sharp line of demarcation between the white and the black.Segregation MandatoryWe are well aware that this position will be challenged by those whohave claimed a common origin for all the races. All that is asked, however, of those who are willing to pursue this study of racial origins,a subject that may tend in its inception to arouse strong opposition for various reasons, is that the reader maintain an open mind, seeking the truth as we have sought it, which brought us to investigate this whole subject.The revealed facts will speak for themselves and when the truth is fully realized, it will bring an end to the endeavor to institute the deliberate integration of the black among the white people. Quite the contrary, it will reaffirm the absolute necessity for the separation of these races for the good of both the White and the black.

Moreover, it will demonstrate that this separateness is in compliance with Divine regulations, for it is mandatory to heed the Lord's instructions concerning those who are elevated to places of rulership over His people. The command is: "Thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother." (Deuteronomy 17:15)Here we have positive direction that all beings are not to be classified as brothers. This in no wise obviates the necessity to treat every creature with equal justice before the law. Nevertheless, the practice of equity does not require the appointment to authoritative positions those who do not qualify as brothers of the people over whom they are to exercise power.

Man and BeastWho are the "beasts" who have hands and are associated with man in a different relationship than the fourfooted domestic animals? These "beasts" were to put on sackcloth, petition God for mercy and turn from unrighteous practices. In other words, they were creatures who were morally responsible to God and could be judged or rewarded accordingly.

We are faced with the necessity to conduct a full investigation into this matter, for reference to both Strong's and Young's Concordances lists the many Scriptural uses of the term "beast," either as "beast of the earth" or "beast of the field." Let it be understood at the very outset of this study that the word "beasts," as it is to be defined here, is not necessarily a derogatory term. In the fourth chapter of Revelation, beasts are mentioned as worshipping before the throne of God an angelic serving order: "And when those beasts [margin: 'living creatures'] give glory and honour and thanks to Him that sat on the throne, Who liveth for ever and ever, the four-and-twenty Elders fall down before Him that sat on the throne, and worship Him that liveth for ever and ever." [11]Reaffirming Mans DominionFurther emphasis was placed upon the moral responsibility of the "beast" following the Deluge. First, however, the Lord informed Noah and his descendants: "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." [12]This was a restatement of man's dominion over the earth, but with a difference that was especially significant in regard to his association with the "beast of the earth." The words "fear" and "dread" are in the emphatic sense, actually denoting "terror," and this relationship of master and mastered was to act as a barrier to familiarity so that the wickedness that brought corruption upon the earth before the Flood might not be repeated. The purpose was absolute separateness in station. It was stated further by the Lord: "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 [i.e., Adam]" (Genesis 9: 5-6)The whole context here indicates that the "beast of the earth" would be aware of man's origin, in the image of God, and therefore could be commanded to abstain from shedding man's blood or else forfeit his life at the hands of man. This commandment obviously refers to a "beast" endowed with an intellect in order to be morally blameworthy for his actions. Certainly he would not be in the category of those called dumb animals or brutes.

After His KindIt must be understood next, therefore, that the "beast" [the "living creature"] that is associated with man is not a fourfooted animal, a quadruped; he is a twofooted animal, a biped. Actually, he is of the ape species, but he is the most advanced order in this classification. We have already established from the record in the Book of Jonah that this "beast" is intelligent, reasoning and has the power of speech; also, that he has hands as well as feeta biped.

Professor Charles Carroll engaged in profound and copious research to discover the truth about the "beast of the earth," or "beast of the field," and found this "beast" to be of the ape order, or family, but not an ape. He is not human, but an animal order, after his own kind, he is black, he is the Negro. Professor Carroll states: "The Negro, being an ape [more correctly, the anthropoid ape species is derived from the genus of Negroids], entered the ark with the rest of the animals; and as the descendants of Noah spread over the earth, they carried with them the Negroes and other domesticated animals, domestic plants, metallic implements, etc.The descendants of Noah developed those superb civilizations, the remains of which are found on every continent of the earth...No Negro Civilization has ever appeared! The White Man is preeminently the man of civilization. This is just what God created him to be."Subdue the EarthIt was Man who was to have dominion over the earth and "subdue it." (Genesis 1:28-30) Genesis 1:28-30 Authorized (King James) Version28And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

29And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. 30And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to everything that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

The "beast of the earth" is mentioned separately and the conclusion may be logically drawn that a being was created by God in the animal order as nearly as possible like man to take from Adam's shoulders many of the tasks of subduing the earth, maintaining the Garden of Eden and other duties of the earth and the field. It was not until after the fall that Adam was condemned to labor by the sweat of his brow.Originally, therefore, the beasts of the earth and field were the true "beasts of burden." It is interesting to observe in this connection that, prior to the Deluge, man was not a meateater, nor was the "beast of the earth," for the Biblical record states: "And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so." (Genesis 1:30)A word of analysis in regard to "every thing that creepeth upon the earth" is appropriate here, for the general opinion is that this is confined to insects and reptiles. However, the word "creep" means "to move along with the body prone and close to the ground or other surface." Therefore, the phrase is more comprehensive than generally understood and includes all fourfooted animals that can crouch and move forward, as it were, "upon their bellies." Webster's synonyms comment that "creep" is "used more often of quadrupeds."

Noahs ServantsWhen Noah came forth from the Ark, the Lord said: "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, as every beast of the earth." [16]In the Book of Jasher we find the following verses: "And thou and thy household shall go and gather two couple of all living things, male and female.." [17]Animals are always referred to as "pairs" not "couples." "...I will gather to thee all the animals of the earth, The Beasts of the Field and the fowls of the air..." [18]; "...and all The Beasts, the animals, and the fowls..." [19]; "...the Lord brought this about on the next day, and animals, Beasts and fowls..." [20]; "And all the animals, and Beasts, and fowls..." [21]; "And the Lord sent all the Beasts and animals that stood round the ark." [22]It is to be noticed that the "beast of the earth" is mentioned twice. First, to Noah, God said, "of every beast of the earth with you."In the second instance, the final two words do not appear; instead, the "beasts" are included with all those going out of the Ark. Does this not indicate that Noah had servants with him in the Ark, who were "beasts of the earth," to assist him and his sons in caring for the great numbers of animals in their charge, feeding them and bedding them down during the year of the Deluge?

It would seem so and it certainly stands to reason that a great deal of help was needed by Noah and his three sons in the discharge of this monumental task for the year of confinement within the Ark. Thus, the "beasts of the earth" who remained with Noah would be his servants and the other "beasts of the earth" mentioned would be those who disembarked from the Ark after the Flood receded and went their way.

Murrain and BoilsThe account of the plagues which fell upon Egypt to compel the reigning Pharaoh to let the people of Israel go is a familiar Bible story. However, a closer analysis will reveal a confirmatory truth concerning "man" and "beast:" "The Lord said unto Moses, Go in unto Pharaoh, and tell him, Thus saith the Lord God of the Hebrews, Let my people go, that they may serve me. For if thou refuse to let them go, and wilt hold them still, Behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thy cattle which is in the field, upon the horses, upon the asses, upon the camels, upon the oxen, and upon the sheep: there shall be a very grievous murrain." (Jasher 6:25)This came to pass, but Pharaoh only continued to harden his heart. Therefore, that plague was immediately followed by the next: "And the Lord said unto Moses and unto Aaron, Take to you handfuls of ashes of the furnace, and let Moses sprinkle it toward the heaven in the sight of Pharaoh. And it shall become small dust in all the land of Egypt, and shall be a boil breaking forth with blains upon man, and upon BEAST." (Exodus 9:8-9)There was no mention of "beast" in connection with the murrain upon the various domestic animals, but here both man and "beast" were afflicted with boils [there are no known animals which have boils]. This is the beast who is closely associated with man as his helper, the Negro, who shared the discomfort of the Egyptians when a different plague came upon them than which came upon the domestic animals. Because Egypt has always had a preferential place in the purposes of God as far as nonIsraelite nations are concerned, it has also experienced special punishment for arrant wickedness. Through Ezekiel, a prophecy was given that the land would be under Divine chastisement for forty years: "No foot of man shall pass through it, nor foot of beast shall pass through it, neither shall it be inhabited forty years." (Ezekiel 29:11) Notice in this prophecy that the "foot of beast" was not to pass through it, nor the foot of man. Animals have paws or hoofs, but only a biped has feet as well as hands. This "beast," then, was the Negro who would be with man.

The Hands of the BeastWhen the people of Israel were standing before Mount Sinai to receive the Law from the Lord God Jehovah, Moses was instructed: "Thou shalt set bounds unto the people round about, saying. Take heed to yourselves, that ye go not up into the mount, or touch the border of it: whosoever toucheth the mount shall be surely put to death: There shall not an hand touch it [Note: it is a hand, not a paw or hoof], but he shall surely be stoned, or shot through; whether it be beast or man." (Exodus 19: 12-13)The beast to whom reference is made has hands, just as a man has hands, by which he could have touched the mountain. Here again a creature of the animal world is designated, but one like unto man in that he has hands--a biped. This, then, is a reference to the Negro servants who accompanied Israel when they left Egypt.

Providing For the BeastsEvidence that the Israelites possessed Negro servants, who were "beasts of the field," is found in the following command: "Six years thou shalt sow thy land, and shalt gather in the fruits thereof: But the seventh year thou shalt let it rest and lie still; that the poor of thy people may eat: and what they leave the beasts of the field shall eat. In like manner thou shalt deal with thy vineyard, and with thy oliveyard [olive trees]." (Exodus 23:10-11)Here we have addition positive proof that the "beasts of the field" were not domestic animals, for they do not eat grapes and olives. Besides, Israel would never [nor would God ever have commanded it] have turned their cattle, horses, sheep, etc., into their vineyards and olive yards to browse, trample down and destroy them every seven years.

The Negroes would gather the grapes and olives and not injure the vineyards or olive trees. The Negro will eat the products of the fields, gardens, orchards and vineyards, and anything else that a White man will eat.

ConfusionThe inhabitants of Canaan, who were to be driven out by Israel upon their entry into the land, were guilty of committing gross abominations in the sight of the Lord: "For all these abominations have the men of the land done, which were before you, and the land is defiled." (Leviticus 18:27)The Lord warned Israel, therefore, that their continued possession of the land given to them through their forefather Abraham depended upon their strict adherence to the moral laws laid down, for He said: "Speak unto all the congregation of the children of Israel, and say unto them, Ye shall be holy: for I the Lord your God am holy. (Leviticus 19:2)Among the Divine commands was this injunction against the crime of miscegenation: "Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion." (Leviticus 18:23)The reference here is to the "beast" who is nearly like a man, the anthropoidal Negro, who simulates many of man's characteristics and shares his moral responsibility. The violation of this law, and the failure to apply its penalty, brought into being the race of humanoids [mulattos], with all the farreaching consequences now to be faced.

A Precautionary ProvisionThe Canaanites, whom the Israelites were commanded to destroy when they took possession of the land promised to them, were the owners of great numbers of Negroes, as shown by the following statement: "And the Lord thy God will put out those nations before thee by little and little: thou mayest not consume them at once, lest The beasts of the field increase upon thee." (Deuteronomy 7:22)Observe that there was no fear expressed lest the "cattle" and the "creeping things" increase upon the Israelites! But not so with the "beasts of the field" the Negroes.

Let us bear in mind that the country of the Canaanites was a rich, productive country, "a goodly land;" that it was a high state of cultivation "a land flowing with milk and honey;" that it abounded with cities, town, villages, farms, vineyards and orchards. This land was occupied by seven nations greater and mightier than Israel.

It would have been impossible for the people of Israel to immediately populate the numerous cities, towns, villages and farms and maintain this welldeveloped civilization. According to the expressed desire of the Lord, the land of Canaan, with its natural wealth of every description, was to become the property of the people of Israel, the descendants of Abraham, His friend. If the occupying Canaanites were all destroyed "at once," much of their civilization would crumble into ruins for want of upkeep. It would require centuries for the Israelites to increase their numbers to the extent that would enable them to settle the entire land.

Hence, it was the better part of wisdom, as the Lord pointed out, for the Israelites to first possess only as much of the land as they could adequately maintain, leaving the remainder, with its wealth and advanced standard of civilization in the hands of the Canaanites to care for and preserve. In addition to this, there was apparently a greater number of Negroes in the land of Canaan than the Israelites could at first effectively handle.

Therefore, if the Canaanites were destroyed all at once, much of their civilization and accumulated wealth would have fallen into the hands of the Negroes to be wasted and destroyed.

In their primitive state as beasts of the earth, field and forest, they would be preoccupied with following the chase, not maintaining a highly-civilized culture. Also, the prolific Negro would increase very rapidly and would soon become very troublesome neighbors, as Negroes in groups never fail to prove. Finally, it would have been a violation of the Law of God to release the Negroes from the control and protection of their former owners and not give them new masters.

An Identifying CharacteristicWhen the modern Christian is approached, either pastor or layman, with a query about the identification of the "beast of the field" or "beast of the earth," he will very likely reply, "These are the domestic animals, sheep and cattle, and those of draft and burden, such as the horse and the oxen, with which we cultivate the fields."

It is well known that our domestic animals subsist on grass, hay and the cereals. Not one of them is a flesheating animal. But the Biblical "beast of the field" is a flesheating creature; he is the worst form of flesheating animal; he is a maneater, a cannibal, as shown by the following Biblical incident: "And when the Philistine [Goliath of Gath] looked about, and saw David he disdained him: for he was but a youth, and ruddy, and of fair countenance. And the Philistine said unto David, Am I a dog, that thou comest to me with staves? And the Philistine cursed David by his gods. And the Philistine said to David, Come to me, and I will give thy flesh unto the fowls of the air, and to The Beasts of the Field." [32]Notice, in the first place, that the Philistine giant, who was a mixture of bloods, was incensed against David, not only because he was a young man, but because he was "ruddy and of fair countenance," bearing in mind that "ruddy" means "to show blood in the face; rosy": David was a White Human being. David was a pureblooded youth (This we know is true because if he had not been born of pure blooded parents he would never have been able to be the King of Israel [33] and this, in itself, infuriated the coarse, idolatrous champion of the Philistines.

After cursing David, he threatened him with death, after which his body would be thrown to the "beasts of the field." Among the "creeping things" of the earth, the quadrupeds, there are numerous carnivorous animals that will feed upon the flesh of man, but the Negro is the only "beast" [biped] that will feed upon the flesh of man.

This is amply testified to by the widespread cannibalism among the black tribes in Africa. Hence, the "beasts of the field," to which the Philistine said he would give the flesh of David, and the "beasts of the earth," to which David said he would give the flesh of the Philistine, were identical.

This indicates that when Adam named the animals, he gave the Negro the descriptive title: "beast of the field." Both the Philistines and the Israelites recognized the negro as a beast. Sometimes he is known as "beast of the earth" and he is frequently referred to simply as "beast."

It is significant that David referred to the "wild beasts of the earth," for this would properly designate those negroes with cannibalistic propensities. Further support of the fact that the "beasts of the field" are flesheaters is given by the Biblical account of Rizpah's touching exhibition of motherly devotion in guarding the bodies of her sons who were hanged by David's order: "And Rizpah the daughter of Aiah took sackcloth, and spread it for her upon the rock, from the beginning of harvest until water dropped upon them out of heaven, and suffered neither the birds of the air [vultures] to rest on them by day, nor the beasts of the field [cannibals] by night." [34]The Prophet Jeremiah was informed by the Lord about the coming captivity of the southern Kingdom of Judah. At the same time he was instructed to tell the surrounding nonIsraelite kings that they would be compelled to serve Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, whom the Lord called "my servant." They were all to be brought under the yoke of Babylon, for world dominion was to be delivered into the hands of the monarchs of the Babylonian Succession of Empires for a specificallynamed period [Seven times or 2520 years].

Therefore, the Lord commanded Jeremiah to say on His behalf: "And now have I given all these lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, my servant; and The Beasts of the Field have I given him also to serve him." [35]The records of history disclose that slaves from various Negroid tribes acted in this capacity in the palaces and homes of kings and nobles in every age. Later on, when the doom of oblivion was pronounced upon Babylon, the record states: "So Jeremiah wrote in a book all the evil that should come upon Babylon, even all these words that are written against Babylon. And Jeremiah said to Seraiah, When thou comest to Babylon, and shalt see, and shalt read all these words; then shalt thou say, O Lord, thou hast spoken against this place, to cut it off, that none shall remain in it, neither man nor beast, but that it shall be desolate forever." [36]Today the region around the ruins of Babylon abounds in game. Wild, fourfooted animals make their lairs there. But the "beasts of the field," the Negroes along with man himself, are there no more; nor will the Arabs even pitch their tents there.

The Price of ArroganceIn the Book of Daniel the story of King Nebuchadnezzar's period of temporary insanity is told and newlyrevealed information now provides a greater comprehension of the details of this account. Daniel warned Nebuchadnezzar of the consequences of his pride and arrogance, giving him the interpretation of his prophetic vision concerning what would befall the king: "They shall drive thee from men, and thy dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field, and they shall make thee to eat grass as oxen, and they shall wet thee with the dew of heaven, and seven times shall pass over thee, till thou know that The Most High ruleth in the Kingdom of Men, and giveth it to whomsoever He will." [37]Nebuchadnezzar was to dwell with the "beasts of the field," the Negroes who served him, living with them in their quarters while he was insane. They would make him eat grass as oxen; that is, they would feed him as they fed the oxen.

They would compel him to remain in the open field, without shelter from the elements at night, for this was their dwelling place. We have here a literal fulfillment of Jeremiah's prophecy, for he had foretold that the "beasts of the field" were to be given to Nebuchadnezzar "to serve him." His Negro servants cared for him day and night and undoubtedly protected him during those seven years of madness from enemies who would have slain the King and seized his Kingdom. This story has a happier ending than many taken from life's pages, for King Nebuchadnezzar's sanity was restored, as he himself testified: "At the same time my reason returned unto me; and for the glory of my kingdom, mine honour and brightness returned unto me; and my counsellors and my lords sought unto me; and I was established in my kingdom, and excellent majesty was added unto me." [38]Howbeit, the king had arrived at a high degree of spiritual understanding following his humbling experience and he left this record for all to read: "Now I Nebuchadnezzar praise and extol and honour the King of Heaven, all whose works are truth, and His ways judgment: and those that walk in pride He is able to abase." [39]Biblical ProofFrom the Bible itself we have presented proof that the "beasts of the field" [or "earth"] are a high-order of animal life who are vocal, intelligent, who can sin and repent, as well as pray. They are the pure stock of the Negro, a servant order. Let us next turn our attention to the Scriptural account of the orders of creation where we will find conclusive confirmation of the truth that Adam and Eve were created in the image of God, a completely distinctive order of life upon the earth.

Orders of Creation It has been established that the Bible refers to a species of creatures brought into being by Almighty God, the Creator - "beasts of the earth" who were bipeds, that is, toolmaking and toolhandling, twofooted animals. They were intelligent and gifted with speech, but not in any way related to man. It is advisable, therefore, to reexamine the account of creation given in the Scriptures in order to discover their point of origin. Doing so, we find they came into being prior to the creation of man, who was made in the image of God, whereas they were not.

Four-Footed Animals God, the Creator, treats the land animals, with which man was to be closely associated in his efforts to "subdue" the earth, very differently from the manner in which He treats the "fowl of the air" and the "fish of the sea." He divided them into three classes: "cattle," "creeping things" and "beasts," a division that is maintained throughout the Scriptures: "And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. And God made The Beast of the Earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good." [40] In the Biblical classifications of quadrupeds, the word "cattle" is not necessarily confined to domestic animals. In its most general Scriptural definition, it refers to any fourfooted animal, domestic or wild. However, it does more often refer to "herds" and "flocks."

It has already been pointed out that the "creeping things" include a far greater variety of creatures than usually supposed. Since the word "creep" means "to move along with the body prone," i.e., slinking forward close to the ground, the category includes fourfooted animals that can crouch. We repeat what Webster's synonyms point out; that "creep" is used more often of quadrupeds.

After His Kind The section of the animal creation under the descriptive phrase, "beast of the earth," would not have presented a complex problem defying easy solution if the primary creative action, as scripturally-stated, had not been ignored. Among cattle, creeping things and beast, the Lord decreed that each should propagate "after his kind." The development of the atheistical theory of evolution (which states, broadly, that various types of animals, etc., have their origin in other preexisting types) was spearheaded by Charles Darwin's book, Origin of Species, published in 1859. This spurious doctrine aligned itself with the growing apostasy which was to engulf all Christendom and before long produced disbelief in the scientifically accurate but simplyworded statements of the Bible. In spite of the fact that the theory of evolution is based on the idea of "natural development" without the miraculous intervention of any Divine Being, it found a ready and widespread acceptance even among socalled Christian believers.

The evil of this antiBiblical error spread quickly into schools, colleges, universities and seminaries until the time came when no one could read with understanding the elementary phrase, repeated many times in Genesis 1:2425 "after his kind!" The word "kind," as translated from the original Hebrew, means "species" and we should understand from this that each species of animal was created, in its order, according to the Divine design.While there is great diversity in the sorts of families within a species [for instance, the many varieties of dogs], nevertheless, each species remains separate in nature from all others. In fact, the Creator's laws governing procreation do not permit one to cross over into another; most certainly one does not "evolve" into another. There is order in the Divine creation; this is why God saw that it was good. He makes it very plain that mixtures are abhorrent to Him they are confusion!

Kinds of FleshAs a matter of fact, the Apostle Paul mentions how vital it is that, "all things be done decently and in order." [41] Then, as a part of his great discourse on the resurrection, he made this trenchant observation: "All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds." [42]Contrast this Divinelyinspired, unequivocal statement of fact with the mouthings of evolutionists: "'Evolution means a process by which man must trace his ancestry back to some ape form, then to some quadruped, thence to some reptile, thence to some amphibian, thence to some fish, thence to an invertebrate, thence to some singlecelled creature that lived in the slime of the sea." [43]In Great Pyramid Proof of God, George R. Riffert writes under the heading, "An Overworked Word":

"The popularity of evolution as an antiChristian explanation for the universe is not due to anything science has yet discovered in its favor, but rather to the decline of Christianity in the life of the people, the weakening of confidence in the Bible as God's Book of Truth and the widespread indiscriminate use of the word 'evolution' in connection with matters to which it bears no logical relation. 'Evolution' is the most overworked, misapplied and misunderstood word in the English language. Growth, development and improvement are erroneously accepted as its equivalent meanings. So farfetched and ridiculous has been the use of this word that 'evolution' is now applied to anything from the undertaker's business to the making of a universe.

When you say that a substance evolves odors or gasses and a mind evolves ideas, you have said about all that you can say and still be within the bounds of fact and truth concerning evolution. To say that a worm evolved a fish and that apes or lizards evolved men whose descendants produced a Lincoln or a Gladstone, a Handel or a Michelangelo, to say nothing of the Christ of God, is yielding to a speculative wildness of brain activity that is little better than philosophical imbecility." [44]Not The Same BloodWe are led to next consider another related scientific and Scriptural fact. In The Bible and Segregation, by C.R. Dickey, it is stated: "Paul's statement in Acts 17:26 is now so interpreted as to make it mean the exact opposite to what Paul intended. It reads: 'And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation...' Without quoting the latter part of this verse, some people make much ado over the first clause, and use it glibly to overthrow all previous Biblical teaching concerning racial separation. The key word used to prove the oneness of all mankind is 'blood;' yet, actually, it proves nothing because the word 'blood' does not appear in ancient manuscripts. It was added by translators. Ferrar Fenton gives this most logical reading of the passage: 'Himself giving to every one life and breath and all things; because He made by One [i.e. Christ] every race of men to dwell upon the whole face of the earth...'" [45]Furthermore, we are quoting in part from an article that appeared in The Putnam Sun of Palatka, Florida, on April 20, 1961, pointing out the fatal consequences of mixed-blood transfusions: "Unheralded by the kept press of the day, but certainly to have more farreaching effects than the discovery of the atomic bomb, is the news of recent advances in the biological sciences. These are of such a nature that we are today on the threshold of understanding how living things are created and live. No person capable of reading the printed word should miss, in the April 15th issue of The Saturday Evening Post, an article entitled 'The Messages of Life,' by James Bonner, professor of biology at California Institute of Technology.

According to Prof. Bonner 'This almost successful search for the principle, the logic, of life may someday enable us to control the stepbystep development of the human organism to cultivate replacement organs and perhaps even to initiate life in isolated cells. This new biology...is largely concerned with the molecular facts of life...Every day now brings new excitement as research biologists draw close to a final solution. For they have discovered that each cell of each individual contains a blueprint, an instruction manual, which gives the cell detailed instructions on what kind of chemicals to make from the available food, on how the cell shall divide or duplicate itself, on the size and shape of the systems it shall form [that is, elephant or mouse] in short, how the cell should become a part of a particular kind of living thing.'

A tremendous fact developed is that the human races are not the same but particular kinds of living things. The blood of the White Man differs in molecular construction and hereditary factors from that of the Negro. The physical evidence of this difference has been commonly known as sickle-cell anemia, a child killer and causing invalidism in adults. This anemia is not a disease. It occurs in the blood of the Negro as a mutation from the normal and is an inherited characteristic. It can be and is transmitted to the White Race by means of transfusion of Negro blood. Prof. Bonner remarks that 'a striking example of this ...is an enzyme found in victims of the hereditary disease called sickle cell anemia, characterized by abnormal hemoglobin of red blood cells.' Developments are gradually leaking out that the epidemics of hepatitis occurring in hospitals the last few years are closely related to blood transfusions from different races and peoples. This is now being recognized by the American Association of Blood Banks. The 'social engineers' and misguided 'dogooders' devoting their energies to race-mixing as a basis for social adjustment now are proven wrong from every scientific point of view. Race-mixing is bound to result in race suicide. The Red Cross and other blood banks who have mixed blood of the races for transfusions under pressure from minority groups, are guilty of a crime against humanity. The crime is not directed to the White Race alone but there is much evidence that White Blood given to a Negro has, in many cases, a much more serious result. According to the official information received from the Red Cross, 'the race of the donor [of blood] has not been shown on any Red Cross records or on labels applied to the bottles since 1951.' This must not be continued in the face of the scientific evidence that mixed-blood transfusions may have fatal consequences."Anthropology Confirms The BibleOur agreement is with the Science of Anthropology when its members classify all of mankind into three basic groups, viz., anthropologist Dr. Henry Field and his staff of the Chicago natural History Museum who trace the races of mankind from the three primary sources:

1) Mongoloid 2) Negroid 3) White [46]The three great divisions confirm and amplify those three races as set forth in Genesis Chapters 1 and 2, as the "Aw-dawm" (White or Aryan), "Enosh" (Mongoloid) and "Chayee" or "Beast of the Field" (Negroid).

Anthropology distinguishes these groups as Caucasoid, Mongoloid and Negroid by their contrasting physical characteristics. As you will continue to discover, there is much more involved in separating each race from the other characteristically, than most MODERN scientists in fields affecting racial and social studies, will admit. Through grants and funding by large taxfree foundations, many members of the profession of Anthropology have sold their integrity for the price of a ride on the highly profitable "liberal bandwagon."

All of this has worked well, on the unsuspecting public, to help evolve the "onerace" or "Brotherhood of Man" idea the enemies of Christ and His Israel people advocate. However, occasionally a few do speak out on what they find to be true regarding separatist factors among the three racial divisions as pertains to abilities and qualities reflecting upon our Western standards.

Their independent findings have withstood persecution in place of rebuttal. Dubbing a scientist a "racist" is a cowards way of avoiding the responsibility of an intelligent refutation, which seems impossible considering the evidence to be surmounted.That evidence points to, "...the overwhelming balance of probability that racial differences exist in the morphology of the human brain which in turn account for differences in the capacity to adapt to Western Civilization."There is no dispute about the fact that, other things being equal (such as sex, body size, proportion of parts and sulcification) the weight of the brain correlates with intelligence. This has been found to be true throughout the series of vertebrate animals. It is only denied in humans because that truth will not fit in with those who would destroy our Israel people thus destroying Christ's witnesses on earth.sulcus

[sulks]

noun

pl. sulci

1. a groove or furrow

2. Anat. any of the shallow grooves separating the convolutions of the brain

Various studies have been made of the comparative average weights of White and negro brains with results that all fall within the range of about 8 to 12% lower weight for the Negro brain. Such studies have been published by Drs. Bean, Pearl, Vint, Tilney, Gordon, Todd and others. As a racial average, the Negro brain is lighter than the White and this in turn indicates a lower average level of intelligence. In the words of Dr. Carleton Coon, past president of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists: "Among living populations, absolute brain size is generally, although not necessarily individually, related to achievement."Naturally achievement can be attributed to both mental ability (brain size) and will power. This latter attribute is a major contributory factor which must necessarily be evaluated on an individual basis. Dr. Clyde Kluckhohn, Professor of Anthropology at Harvard wrote, "On the premise that specific capacities are influenced by the properties of each gene pool, it seems very likely indeed that populations differ quantitatively in their potentialities for particular kinds of achievement."

Differences In Races Are InnateDr. Henry Garrett, for 15 years head of the Dept. of Psychology at Columbia, tested six cases where Negroes and Whites had the same exact environment. The tests corroborate the direct evidence from other sciences, namely that the Negroes' limitations are chiefly innate!Other tests show that environment contributes about 25% and inheritance 75%, to human capacity; the ratio varying somewhat with different characteristics. Obviously a man's or a race's genetic limitations eventually influence their environment so that the one compounds the other. It will never be possible completely to equate White and Negro "environment" without making the Negro into a White Man. This the "Race Mixers" know! To equate the Negro with the White they must be blended into a composite which can equalized only by diminishing the higher talents of the White Race and raising those of the Negro.Our God expressly forbids this in his 7th Commandment against adultery in Exodus 20:14. Funk & Wagnalls New College Standard Dictionary defines adulterate: "To make impure by admixture of other or baser ingredients; corrupt. Adulterated: corrupted, debased; spurious, Adulterous: from the Latin meaning, to add to, to alter."The Latin from which our English originated was preceded by the Greek which followed the Hebrew of our Holy Scriptures. The entirety of those Scriptures are very definite regarding Adultery as the mixing of God's peop