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