European-descent South Africans, mostly Christians, are being targeted & murdered by racist communists as the media look away. Trump just exposed it all. It's a sneak preview of their plan for YOU!
This is a direct consequence of eliminating apartheid - that is, racial segregation - under which the whites and blacks essentially lived in peace and the nation prospered.
Anyone who promotes segregation is often accused of being a racist and hater of the other races - a classic case of calling evil good and good evil, per Isaiah 5:20. The opposite is the truth. Total Integration ultimately destroys individual races and cultures. Segregation, protects individual races and cultures.
Like it or not, the Bible teaches segregation, not integration. See Deuteronomy32:8 & Acts 17:26, etc.
Although I mostly agree with your statement, God himself who created all men with equal rights, cannot discriminate against races, but discriminates between good and evil. Every culture is naturally attracted to their own people, ego, George Washington counseled, Commerce with all, Alliance with none. We as people can separate and still trade different items without warring over them.
Rights are a construct of man, nothing more. No one has a right to even life. If we did, God would be our slave and not our Master....
Furthermore, duties and responsibilities as COMMANDED by God are a different matter and are much more potent that fake "rights". That which Caesar grants, Caesar may take away. What God commands cannot be taken away. Rights make a man imponent while duties and responsibilities are what define a man........
Commerce does not require living in the same nation. The original definition of nation required homogeneity, including in race (pure people of the same race living together -- not a racial mix and never a mixed-raced individual). Your point is moot as it pertains to Ted's comment....
I don't believe you've considered that Jacob stole Esau's "birthright" by stealth, or perhaps, "He preserveth not the life of the wicked: but giveth right to the poor." (Job 36:6). There are many scriptures testifying to the righteousness of God, and that "rights" existed before men made laws, as was affirmed by Fredric Bastiat in his treatise on "The Law". The scripture also taught me that even before the 12 tribes were disbanded, some quick checks found that Rahab was a Canaanite, and Ruth was a Moabite in David's blood line. When God scattered the twelve tribes to the ends of the earth, do you really believe that they have not continued to mingle with the inhabitants of the lands to where they were driven?
You totally misunderstand and I can see that you clearly follow with modern, false, Judeo-Christianity. That is NOT the following of Christ! Do you also condone miscegenation, sodomy, and infanticide as well? Do you subscribe to the US CONstitution as the SUPREME law of the land?? Yahweh, true God of Scripture, approves of none of these abominations!!
As far as your comments about Jacob "stealing" the "birthright", you are wrong again as Yahweh foretold this earlier in Genesis. See the following. If you still have questions, you need to take them up directly with God....
🔍 1. "Rights" vs. Responsibilities and Appointments
In Scripture:
No one is “entitled” to anything by their own merit.
What we call “rights” are really responsibilities, appointments, or portions given by Yahweh.
The firstborn wasn’t "owed" the blessing — he was appointed to bear the family's priestly and inheritance role, unless Yahweh chose otherwise.
So instead of saying “Jacob stole Esau’s rights,” it is more correct to say:
“Esau was entrusted with a sacred role, and he despised it.”
📖 2. Scripture Uses Words Like:
“Portion” (חֵלֶק, cheleq) – something allotted, not something earned
“Inheritance” (נַחֲלָה, nachalah) – a gift passed down, not a “right”
“Blessing” (בְּרָכָה, berakhah) – granted by Yahweh or a father, not demanded
“Stewardship” – a pattern shown throughout Scripture: all positions are given by God and carry accountability
🔥 Example: The Firstborn
The firstborn son was given the responsibility of continuing the covenant line.
He was expected to act as priest, protector, and provider for the family line.
This role came with honor, yes — but also great obligation.
Deuteronomy 21:17 – the firstborn is to receive a double portion, not as a “right,” but because he is “the beginning of his strength” — i.e., the first fruits of the father’s generative ability, and appointed to carry forward the house.
📜 Yahweh’s Law ≠ Human Rights Law
Human “Rights” (Modern) Biblical Pattern
Self-claimed or demanded God-assigned and accountable
Individual autonomy Covenant stewardship
Equality of outcome Distinctions by divine calling
Guaranteed by state Appointed by Yahweh
🧠 What Esau Despised
Esau despised his appointed calling — the role Yahweh had permitted him to have by natural order. This wasn't a "civil right"; it was a sacred stewardship. That’s why the text in Genesis 25:34 says:
"So Esau despised his birthright."
He devalued what Yahweh considered holy.
Hebrews 12:16 confirms this:
“...godless like Esau, who for one meal sold his inheritance as the firstborn.”
✅ So How Should We Explain It?
The “birthright” (הַבְּכֹרָה, ha-bekhorah) is not a right in the modern legal or humanistic sense, but a sacred appointment from Yahweh — a trust, an office, and a responsibility to uphold the covenant within a household or nation.
If you are following Christ, then you know from John 1:1 that "all things were made by him, and without him was not anything made. Your presumptions in your questions are inconstant with the Royal Law on which hangs all the law and the prophets. Did not Paul say that he becomes all things to all men, that he might gain some?
Of course I don't condone; " Do you also condone miscegenation, sodomy, and infanticide as well? " As The proverbs 6:15-17 teaches me about the 6 things that God hates, and the seven that are an abomination to him. Is that Judeo/Christian or as the words of Agur in Proverbs 30 says "every word of God is pure? I cannot dispute the righteousness, holiness or gifts of God that his word clearly delineates, But to trust in our own understanding is also folly, as Solomon discovered by searching matters out, and finding that the hidden things belong to God. Deep dive history shows the the U.S. Constitution was more likely than not a usurption of natural rights, (although the Articles of Confederation was even more flawed). You don't think I'm aware that God will break the nations with a rod of iron? But America was established by his divine providence, and since they have collectively turned their backs on him ( or as the Psalmist said "Tossed my words behind your back" God is ripping this nation apart by their own wickedness.
Your most recent comment does not directly address what I said in the previous comment, so I am unsure of what your point is.
As far as "Deep dive history shows the U.S. Constitution was more likely than not a usurpation of natural rights...", I'm not sure what your point is here either. This is a clear logical fallacy. Just because someone's opinion mentions the term "rights" does not make it a reality. Also, key words being "more likely than not", which is not definitive in any way, even if the statement was valid. Who made this claim? Who did this deep dive? What were their misconceived biases (I would say similar to yours since your using it to support your claims -- fallaciously!)?
America, I agree, was established by divine Providence, but the U.S. was not! They are not the same thing. With that, I'll also agree, considering this truth, the nation has "collectively turned their backs on [Yahweh]", for which the nation is under Judgment, for sure. The original source crime being establishing the nation's law of, by, and allegedly for WeThePeople. WeThePeople is the nation's false god and the Constitution is the nation's largest false idol!
CNN is reporting that the images the President showed are not from South Africa. They were from Reuters in another part of Africa in another situation. Of course, there was the inference that what's known to be happening in South Africa is just a conspiracy theory and fake news.
What abject poppycock ! There is no “white genocide “ in South Africa ! Our fascist dictator-in-chief Trump is merely pandering to white racists in America by setting up this ridiculous straw man !
Now this is where the US can truly help by supplying these farmers with helicopters gun ships, and anti personnel drones. Ultimately these farmers would then be able to negotiate a fair price for their farms, and leave South Africa to rapidly descend into a failed state.
This is a direct consequence of eliminating apartheid - that is, racial segregation - under which the whites and blacks essentially lived in peace and the nation prospered.
Anyone who promotes segregation is often accused of being a racist and hater of the other races - a classic case of calling evil good and good evil, per Isaiah 5:20. The opposite is the truth. Total Integration ultimately destroys individual races and cultures. Segregation, protects individual races and cultures.
Like it or not, the Bible teaches segregation, not integration. See Deuteronomy32:8 & Acts 17:26, etc.
Amen, Brother!!!!
Although I mostly agree with your statement, God himself who created all men with equal rights, cannot discriminate against races, but discriminates between good and evil. Every culture is naturally attracted to their own people, ego, George Washington counseled, Commerce with all, Alliance with none. We as people can separate and still trade different items without warring over them.
Rights are a construct of man, nothing more. No one has a right to even life. If we did, God would be our slave and not our Master....
Furthermore, duties and responsibilities as COMMANDED by God are a different matter and are much more potent that fake "rights". That which Caesar grants, Caesar may take away. What God commands cannot be taken away. Rights make a man imponent while duties and responsibilities are what define a man........
Commerce does not require living in the same nation. The original definition of nation required homogeneity, including in race (pure people of the same race living together -- not a racial mix and never a mixed-raced individual). Your point is moot as it pertains to Ted's comment....
In response to your claim about Job 36:6:
Job 36:6 in the original Hebrew (from the Masoretic Text) reads:
"לֹא־יְחַיֶּ֥ה רָשָׁ֑ע וּמִשְׁפַּט עֲנִיִּ֥ים יִתֵּֽן׃"
Transliteration: Lo-yechayyeh rasha, u'mishpat aniyyim yitten.
Literal Translation: "He does not preserve the life of the wicked, but gives justice to the afflicted (or poor)."
Word-by-word Breakdown:
לֹא (lo): not
יְחַיֶּה (yechayyeh): he will cause to live / he preserves life
רָשָׁע (rasha): wicked (person)
וּמִשְׁפַּט (u’mishpat): and justice / judgment
עֲנִיִּים (aniyyim): afflicted ones / poor / humble
יִתֵּן (yitten): he gives / grants
Summary:
This verse emphasizes two aspects of God's justice:
1. He does not prolong or preserve the life of the wicked — implying divine retribution or a refusal to sustain them.
2. He gives justice to the afflicted — highlighting God's care and fairness toward the oppressed or humble.
I don't believe you've considered that Jacob stole Esau's "birthright" by stealth, or perhaps, "He preserveth not the life of the wicked: but giveth right to the poor." (Job 36:6). There are many scriptures testifying to the righteousness of God, and that "rights" existed before men made laws, as was affirmed by Fredric Bastiat in his treatise on "The Law". The scripture also taught me that even before the 12 tribes were disbanded, some quick checks found that Rahab was a Canaanite, and Ruth was a Moabite in David's blood line. When God scattered the twelve tribes to the ends of the earth, do you really believe that they have not continued to mingle with the inhabitants of the lands to where they were driven?
You totally misunderstand and I can see that you clearly follow with modern, false, Judeo-Christianity. That is NOT the following of Christ! Do you also condone miscegenation, sodomy, and infanticide as well? Do you subscribe to the US CONstitution as the SUPREME law of the land?? Yahweh, true God of Scripture, approves of none of these abominations!!
As far as your comments about Jacob "stealing" the "birthright", you are wrong again as Yahweh foretold this earlier in Genesis. See the following. If you still have questions, you need to take them up directly with God....
🔍 1. "Rights" vs. Responsibilities and Appointments
In Scripture:
No one is “entitled” to anything by their own merit.
What we call “rights” are really responsibilities, appointments, or portions given by Yahweh.
The firstborn wasn’t "owed" the blessing — he was appointed to bear the family's priestly and inheritance role, unless Yahweh chose otherwise.
So instead of saying “Jacob stole Esau’s rights,” it is more correct to say:
“Esau was entrusted with a sacred role, and he despised it.”
📖 2. Scripture Uses Words Like:
“Portion” (חֵלֶק, cheleq) – something allotted, not something earned
“Inheritance” (נַחֲלָה, nachalah) – a gift passed down, not a “right”
“Blessing” (בְּרָכָה, berakhah) – granted by Yahweh or a father, not demanded
“Stewardship” – a pattern shown throughout Scripture: all positions are given by God and carry accountability
🔥 Example: The Firstborn
The firstborn son was given the responsibility of continuing the covenant line.
He was expected to act as priest, protector, and provider for the family line.
This role came with honor, yes — but also great obligation.
Deuteronomy 21:17 – the firstborn is to receive a double portion, not as a “right,” but because he is “the beginning of his strength” — i.e., the first fruits of the father’s generative ability, and appointed to carry forward the house.
📜 Yahweh’s Law ≠ Human Rights Law
Human “Rights” (Modern) Biblical Pattern
Self-claimed or demanded God-assigned and accountable
Individual autonomy Covenant stewardship
Equality of outcome Distinctions by divine calling
Guaranteed by state Appointed by Yahweh
🧠 What Esau Despised
Esau despised his appointed calling — the role Yahweh had permitted him to have by natural order. This wasn't a "civil right"; it was a sacred stewardship. That’s why the text in Genesis 25:34 says:
"So Esau despised his birthright."
He devalued what Yahweh considered holy.
Hebrews 12:16 confirms this:
“...godless like Esau, who for one meal sold his inheritance as the firstborn.”
✅ So How Should We Explain It?
The “birthright” (הַבְּכֹרָה, ha-bekhorah) is not a right in the modern legal or humanistic sense, but a sacred appointment from Yahweh — a trust, an office, and a responsibility to uphold the covenant within a household or nation.
If you are following Christ, then you know from John 1:1 that "all things were made by him, and without him was not anything made. Your presumptions in your questions are inconstant with the Royal Law on which hangs all the law and the prophets. Did not Paul say that he becomes all things to all men, that he might gain some?
Of course I don't condone; " Do you also condone miscegenation, sodomy, and infanticide as well? " As The proverbs 6:15-17 teaches me about the 6 things that God hates, and the seven that are an abomination to him. Is that Judeo/Christian or as the words of Agur in Proverbs 30 says "every word of God is pure? I cannot dispute the righteousness, holiness or gifts of God that his word clearly delineates, But to trust in our own understanding is also folly, as Solomon discovered by searching matters out, and finding that the hidden things belong to God. Deep dive history shows the the U.S. Constitution was more likely than not a usurption of natural rights, (although the Articles of Confederation was even more flawed). You don't think I'm aware that God will break the nations with a rod of iron? But America was established by his divine providence, and since they have collectively turned their backs on him ( or as the Psalmist said "Tossed my words behind your back" God is ripping this nation apart by their own wickedness.
Your most recent comment does not directly address what I said in the previous comment, so I am unsure of what your point is.
As far as "Deep dive history shows the U.S. Constitution was more likely than not a usurpation of natural rights...", I'm not sure what your point is here either. This is a clear logical fallacy. Just because someone's opinion mentions the term "rights" does not make it a reality. Also, key words being "more likely than not", which is not definitive in any way, even if the statement was valid. Who made this claim? Who did this deep dive? What were their misconceived biases (I would say similar to yours since your using it to support your claims -- fallaciously!)?
America, I agree, was established by divine Providence, but the U.S. was not! They are not the same thing. With that, I'll also agree, considering this truth, the nation has "collectively turned their backs on [Yahweh]", for which the nation is under Judgment, for sure. The original source crime being establishing the nation's law of, by, and allegedly for WeThePeople. WeThePeople is the nation's false god and the Constitution is the nation's largest false idol!
Bibleversusconstitution.org
White suoremacy run amok. My god.
Saw your overview on this topic in your interview with Brannon Howse on worldviewtube.com last night.
Thanks for letting us know what is really happening and has been happening for a long time and how we might experience the same here in America.
Everyone needs to get ready mentally physically and spiritually and pray for guidance in the days to come.
CNN is reporting that the images the President showed are not from South Africa. They were from Reuters in another part of Africa in another situation. Of course, there was the inference that what's known to be happening in South Africa is just a conspiracy theory and fake news.
What abject poppycock ! There is no “white genocide “ in South Africa ! Our fascist dictator-in-chief Trump is merely pandering to white racists in America by setting up this ridiculous straw man !
Now this is where the US can truly help by supplying these farmers with helicopters gun ships, and anti personnel drones. Ultimately these farmers would then be able to negotiate a fair price for their farms, and leave South Africa to rapidly descend into a failed state.