Christian Identity Basics - Part 5



by James N. Jester

April 14, 2019

Scripture Reading: Acts 26:1-7, Paul’s Defense Before Agrippa

And Agrippa said to Paul, You are permitted to speak for yourself. Then stretching out his hand, Paul made a defense: Concerning all of which I am accused by Jews, king Agrippa, I think myself happy being about to make defense before you today, you being especially expert in all customs and questions among the Jews. Therefore I beseech you to hear me patiently. Truly, then, all the Jews know my manner of life from my youth, which was at first among my own nation at Jerusalem, who knew me from the first, if they would testify, that according to the strictest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee. And now I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made to our fathers by God, to which promise our twelve tribes hope to attain, serving God fervently night and day. For the sake of this hope, king Agrippa, I am accused by the Jews.” – Acts 26:1-7, MKJV


In the previous lesson (part 4) on Paul the Christian Identity apostle, we ended with the apostle in jail at Caesarea. Paul was still in the process of shaking off his jewish indoctrination as a Pharisee.

Our scripture reading is the beginning of Paul’s defense before king Agrippa during his two-year stay at Caesarea. He has finally shed his judeo brainwashing. No longer does he call himself a “Jew” (Pharisee), but now proclaims “our twelve tribes.” He now understands the Jewish problem just as Jesus and John understood it. Jews are not Israelites and Israelites are not jews. Yet most of the church world thinks they are the same, and they think the children of the devil (as Jesus called them) are the “chosen of God.” What absurdity and embarrassment this is from anyone who claims the name of “Christian”.

We who have already been delivered from the jewish hoax should have a little more patience with those so unable to gain understanding about the jew. Indeed, it is why many in Christian Identity are doing all we can to spread this message to our racial brethren, even though most of them consider our doctrine of racial exclusiveness abhorrent.

As Paul had argued with the jews, he could not understand why they could not believe in the resurrection – this “hope of the promise made to our fathers by God.” Here he was before the king being prosecuted by the jews for preaching this truth. Many others believed him and even the king said, “Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian” (v. 28). But the jews would not believe.

The book of Acts ends with Paul’s arrival at Rome (60 AD), in custody of a soldier, awaiting a hearing before Caesar. One of the first things Paul did in Rome was to call together the leading men of the jews. He told them his case and they denied any knowledge of it. They knew about Christianity, referring to it as a sect that was spoken against everywhere. The jewish leaders appointed a day when Paul would be heard in full. A great number came and listened to Paul explain the kingdom of God, while persuading them about Jesus the Christ. However, the results were true to the pattern that Paul experienced – some believed, but the majority rejected the gospel.

Then Paul quotes the prophet Isaiah (6:9-10, the same as used by Jesus), “Hearing you shall hear and shall not understand; and seeing you shall see and not perceive” (Acts 28:26, MKJV). He further tells them, “Therefore be it known to you that the salvation of God is sent to the nations, and they will hear (Acts 28:28, MKJV).

This is definite – Paul no longer doubts about what the jews are after spending two years confined in Caesarea. The Thayer definition of the Greek word akouō (for hear) means: “to be endowed with the faculty of hearing, not deaf.” Well, this concurs exactly with what Jesus said in John 8:47 to the jews, “He who is of God hears God’s Words. Therefore you do not hear them because you are not of God.” Those born of God (“born from above”, not “born again”) can hear. This is racial – some do not have the capability to hear (understand); it is not in their genetic makeup. Jews are one of those groups of people that cannot hear; and now Paul realizes this.

Thus, Acts closes with the expansion of Christianity into Europe reaching God’s own, the Israelites (nations/Gentiles), who had migrated to the isles afar off. Speaking of isles far away, notice these Scriptures:

Hear the word of the LORD, O ye nations, and declare it in the isles afar off, and say, He that scattered Israel will gather him, and keep him, as a shepherd doth his flock.” – Jer. 31:10

But fear not thou, O my servant Jacob, and be not dismayed, O Israel: for, behold, I will save thee from afar off, and thy seed from the land of their captivity; and Jacob shall return, and be in rest and at ease, and none shall make him afraid.” – Jer. 46:27

And I will set a sign among them, and I will send those that escape of them unto the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, and Lud, that draw the bow, to Tubal, and Javan, to the isles afar off, that have not heard my fame, neither have seen my glory; and they shall declare my glory among the Gentiles.” – Isa. 66:19

Could these isles be Britain? Tarshish, land of tin? Lud, became London?

Paul in Britain

The Bible gives a fairly complete account of the life of Paul; his conversion, his missionary journeys, and his martyrdom in Rome. But there is a period of about six years, of which the Bible remains silent. This would be the period after his trial and acquittal in Rome and before his return to Rome to cast his fate with many other Christians who were being killed by the thousands during the reign (54-68) of Emperor Nero. We do not know the exact date of Paul’s death. The great fire of 64 in Rome was blamed on the Christians, which started the persecution. Nero committed suicide in June of 68. Paul was likely beheaded within this period.

Two years were spent in his house in Rome (Acts 28:30), during which time he wrote letters to the churches. But where did Paul spend the remaining four years (63-67 AD)? We know Paul had expressed a desire to visit and preach in Spain (Rom. 15:28), and according to tradition did visit Spain and Gaul (France). So it would not be unreasonable to believe he would do so and perhaps re-visit some of the churches in Asia Minor.

Paul also expressed a desire to preach the Gospel to those who did not know the name of Christ. There can be no doubt that Paul had heard of the “Tin Islands” because the Romans had already conquered most of Britain. The Apostle could have met many in Rome and elsewhere who had been there, either as traders or with the Roman army. Since he had traveled so near to Britain as Spain and Gaul, it is altogether reasonable to suppose that Paul would have made the short voyage across the English Channel.

As far-fetched as it may appear to some Christians, it is extremely reasonable to accept the probability that the first century apostles of Christ preached the Gospel in the land of Britain. The highly respectable British scholar, Adam Clarke (1762-1832, three time president of the Methodist Conference of Great Britain) made the following commentary under his Matthew 24:14 entry. In his quote, Clarke even enlists the scholarly Thomas Newton, Bishop of Bristol, Dean of St. Paul’s Cathedral in 1768 and author of the treatise, Dissertations On The Prophecies. Concerning the Apostolic propagation of the Gospel, Clarke said:

“And the Gospel of the Kingdom shall be preached in all the world. Perhaps no more is meant here than the Roman Empire. However, we are under no necessity to restrain the phrase to the Roman empire, as previously to the destruction of Jerusalem, the Gospel was not only preached in the lesser Asia, and Greece, and Italy, the greatest theatres of action then in the world; but was likewise propagated as far north as Scythia; as far south as Ethiopia; as far east as Parthia and India; and as far west as Spain and Britain. On this point, Bishop Newton goes on to say, ‘That there is some probability that the Gospel was preached in the British nations by St. Simon the apostle; that there is much greater probability that it was preached here by St. Paul; and that there is an absolute certainty that it was planted here in the times of the apostles, before the destruction of Jerusalem.’” –Taken from “The New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ” – Adam Clarke, LL.D, F.S.A., Vol. 1, p. 229

Additional evidence is found in The International Dictionary of the Christian Church; J.D. Douglas, General Editor; Zondervan Publishing House, 1978. Under the entry “Celtic Church” it states:

“The church which existed in parts of the British Isles before the mission of Augustine (597) and which maintained its independence for some time in competition with the Anglo Roman Church … by the fourth century it was sufficiently organized to send representatives to the Synod of Arles (314) and the Council of Arminum (359).”

The Christian exodus from Jerusalem in 35-36 AD due to severe persecution (referred to in Acts 8:1), without doubt extended as far north as Britain. One of the gross errors commonly accepted by misinformed people today is that the land of Britain prior to the arrival of the Roman Catholic missionary, Augustine (in 597 AD), was totally pagan without any vestige of Christianity. In his book, The Drama of the Lost Disciples, George F. Jowett quotes Eusebius of Caesarea, 265-340 AD, in his Demonstratio Evangelica as saying; “the Apostles passed beyond the ocean to the isles called the Britannic Isles” (p. 80).

Jowett also gives the following quotes as evidence of the first century arrival of the Gospel in Britain.

“The erudite Bishop Ussher writes in his Brittannicarum Ecclesiarum Antiquitates:  ‘The British national church was founded AD 36, 160 years before heathen Rome confessed Christianity.’”

“Christianity was privately confessed elsewhere, but the first nation that proclaimed it as their religion and called it Christian, after the name of Christ, was Britain.” –Sabellus, 250 AD, p. 81

In the third century, Origen wrote; “The power of our Lord is with those who in Britain are separated from our coast.”

The well-known St. Jerome in 378 AD wrote: “From India to Britain all nations resound with the death and resurrection of Christ.” p. 81.

John Chrysostom, the Patriarch of Constantinople, in 402 AD, commented in his, Sermo De Utilit; “The British Isles which are beyond the sea, and which lay in the ocean, have received virtue of the Word. Churches are there found and altars erected. . .though thou shouldst go to the ocean, to the British Isles, there thou shouldst hear all men everywhere discoursing matters out of the Scriptures, with another voice indeed, but not another faith, with a different tongue, but the same judgment.” – The Drama of the Lost Disciples by George F. Jowett, p. 81. In his Consilia, Sir Henry Spelman wrote; “We have abundant evidence that this Britain of ours received the faith and that from the disciples of Christ Himself, soon after the crucifixion.” For further evidence, Jowett adds the statement of Guildas, 520 AD, from his De Exidio Brittannioe; “We certainly know that Christ, the True Son, offered His light, the knowledge of His precepts to our island in the last year of Tiberius Caesar.” p. 81.

Archeologist and Bible scholar E. Raymond Capt, in his book, The Traditions of Glastonbury quotes several ancient historians as evidence that Joseph of Arimathea and his associates were the first to bring the Gospel message to Britain in the year 37 AD.

During the years 63-67 AD between Paul’s two Roman imprisonments, he would have made his journey into Spain and Britain. Jowett records in his book a statement by the Greek theologian, historian and Bishop of Cyrrhus, Theodoret (390-458 AD), “Saint Paul brought salvation to the isles in the ocean.” p. 197.

A more specific reference to Paul in Britain was made by Capellus in his History of the Apostles. “I know scarcely of one author from the time of the fathers downward who does not maintain that St. Paul, after his liberation, preached in every country of the West, in Europe, Britain included.” p. 196.

It would not be by coincidence that during Paul’s stay in Rome, he would be associated with members of a British Royal family. They would include Pudens, Linus and Claudia referred to in II Timothy 4:21. In his book, St. Paul in Britain, R.W. Morgan (1815-1889) refers to Linus as being the first Bishop of Rome. Morgan quotes the church father Irenaeus (180 AD) as saying, “The Apostles having founded and built up the church at Rome committed the ministry of its supervision to Linus. This is the Linus mentioned by Paul in his Epistle to Timothy.” Possibly through this connection, the Apostle received his entrance into Britain.  On page 107 in his book, Morgan cites the testimony of Greek theologian and historian, Theodoretus in 435 AD as saying:

“Paul, liberated from his first captivity at Rome, preached the Gospel to the Britons and others in the West. Our fishermen and publicans not only persuaded the Romans and their tributaries to acknowledge the Crucified and His Laws, but the Britons also and the Cimbri (Cymry).”

Apostle Paul’s statue in Malta

Apostle Paul’s statue in MaltaTwo of the most well known statues of the Apostle Paul in memory of his presence and ministry are in Malta and London, England. The statue on the island of Malta (ancient Melita), is a memorial of the event which took place as recorded in Acts 28. The other memorial statue is located on the grounds of St. Paul’s Cathedral, which may well mark the place where Paul preached on Ludgate Hill (“Lud” of Isaiah; “Mount Lud” of Acts 29:9, Sonnini). The language in which Paul would have preached would have been the common and well known Greek or Hebrew which was similar to the Cymric language of the Britons.

The cathedral dedicated to Paul has stood at this site since 604. After the Great Fire of London in 1666, the cathedral was redesigned by Sir Christopher Wren and built between 1675 and 1710.

The Culdee Church

Most Bible scholars are unaware of the fact that before Paul established the Church in Rome, an earlier Christian Church had been founded in Britain by disciples of Christ. When the great persecution of Christians struck Jerusalem, Joseph of Arimathea executed a plan for many of them to escape into Britain.

With eleven companions, Joseph made his escape on one of his ships to Marseille, France. Caesar Baronius (1538-1609) in his Ecclesiastic Annals identified them as “the two Bethany sisters, Mary and Martha, their brother Lazarus, St. Eutropius, St. Salome, St. Maxim, St. Martial, St. Trophimus, Restitus and Mary, the mother of Jesus.” Baronius’ Annals is quoted from The Acts of Magdalene, a manuscript compiled by Archbishop of Mayence (766-856). The original manuscript also contained the record of the voyage to Marseille and the preaching of the gospel in southern France by the Bethany family. A copy of the original manuscript is in the Magdalene College Library at Oxford, England.

After a period of time Joseph with Mary and other disciples sailed over to Britain, the “Isle of Avalon,” now called Glastonbury, where the group of refugees were welcomed by the Silurian king, Arviragus, cousin of King Caradoc. Land was granted to them so they could build huts and the first “above ground” Christian church, later known as the “Culdee Church” or “Church of the Refugees” was built.

This was confirmed by the Church Councils of Pisa (1409), Constance (1417), Sienna (1424), and Basle (1434), that maintained that, “The churches of France and Spain must yield in point of antiquity and precedence to that of Britain, as the latter church was founded by Joseph of Arimathea immediately after the passion of Christ.”

St. Augustine (597 AD) writing to Pope Gregory:

“In the Western confines of Britain there is a certain royal island of large extent, surrounded by water, abounding in all the beauties of nature and necessaries of life. In it the first Neophites of Catholic Law, God hath beforehand acquainted them, found a Church constructed by no human art, but by Divine construction by the hands of Christ Himself, for the salvation of His people. The Almighty has made it manifest by many miracles and mysterious visitations that He continues to watch over it as sacred to Himself, and to Mary, the Mother of God. –Epistolae ad Gregoniam Papam.

Many think that St. Paul was responsible for taking Christianity to Rome but that is not true. The church in Rome existed before St. Paul went to Rome. Evidence indicates it spread to Rome from Britain, not from Palestine. R. W. Morgan wrote:

“Christianity was first introduced into Britain by Joseph of Arimathea, AD 36-39; followed by Simon Zelotes, the apostle; then by Aistobulus, the first bishop of the Britons; then by St. Paul. Its first converts were members of the royal family of Siluria, that is, Gladys, the sister of Caradog, Gladys (Claudia) and Eurgen, his daughters, Linus his son, converted in Britain before they were carried into captivity to Rome. The two cradles of Christianity in Britain were Ynys Wydrin, “the Crystal Isle,” translated by the Saxons Glastonbury, in Somersetshire, where Joseph settled and taught; and Siluria, where the earliest churches and schools, next to Ynys Wydrin, were founded by the Silurian dynasty.”

Many authorities, including Catholic ones, testify to the antiquity of the British Church. Polydore Vergil, proxy Bishop of Bath and Wells, a parish only a few miles from Glastonbury, Prebendary of Brent and Wells Cathedral, and Archdeacon of Wells, wrote: “Britain, partly through Joseph of Arimathea, partly through Fugatus and Damianus, was of all kingdoms first to receive the gospel.” Genebrard wrote: “The glory of Britain, consists not only in this, that she was the first country which in a national capacity publicly professed herself Christian, but that she made this confession when the Roman Empire was pagan and a cruel persecutor of Christianity.”

The Apostle Paul, before his Christian conversion, was a Jew only by religion. He was not even born in nor was his family home in the land of Judea, but in the city of Tarsus in the region of Cilicia in Asia Minor. By bloodline, he was a Hebrew and Israelite of the Tribe of Benjamin. Paul believed in Christian Identity.

It is interesting to note that Paul, in his letter to the saints at Rome mentioned some of his natural relatives. “Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me” (Rom. 16:11) “Salute Rufus chosen in the Lord, and his mother and mine” (Rom. 16:13). Do these references imply a natural or spiritual relationship?

Concerning Rufus and his mother, we are inclined toward a natural relationship. In the gospel context, a spiritual mother would be one who was instrumental in leading one to Christ. Paul’s conversion came about by Christ Himself, without any human instrument. Paul’s use of the word ‘kinsmen’ denotes that he had natural relatives living in Rome and was part of the body of believers in that city.

Both the Culdee Church and the Church at Rome that Paul visited pre-dated what is known today as the Roman Catholic Church. They, and those like them (Protestants), are not the original and authentic church. The true church of our Lord is not universal and of all races. It is composed of only God’s elect race. Christian Identity is the heir and counterpart of the Culdee and the British Church at Rome.

The 29th Chapter of Acts?

There is a document, The Sonnini Manuscript, also known as the “Long Lost Chapter of the Acts of the Apostles,” which contains the account of St. Paul’s journey to Spain and Britain. It appears to be the conclusion to the Book of Acts. Originally written in Greek, this manuscript was translated by C. S. Sonnini. It was found in the archives of Constantinople and presented to him by the Sultan Abdoul Achmet. Tradition has it that Paul and his companions landed near the modern city of Sandwich in Kent, on the southern coast of England.

1 And Paul, full of the blessings of Christ, and abounding in the spirit, departed out of Rome, determining to go into Spain, for he had a long time proposed to journey thitherward, and was minded also to go from thence to Britain.

2 For he had heard in Phoenicia that certain of the children of Israel, about the time of the Assyrian captivity, had escaped by sea to “the Isles afar off” as spoken by the Prophet and called by the Romans, Britain.

3 And the Lord commanded the gospel to be preached far hence to the Gentiles, and to the lost sheep of the House of Israel.

4 And no man hindered Paul; for he testified boldly of Jesus before the tribunes and among the people; and he took with him certain of the brethren which abode with him at Rome, and they took shipping at Ostrium and having the winds fair, were brought safely into a haven of Spain.

5 And much people were gathered together from the towns and villages, and the hill country; for they had heard of the conversion of the Apostles, and the many miracles which he had wrought.

6 And Paul preached mightily in Spain, and great multitudes believed and were converted, for they perceived he was an apostle sent from God.

7 And they departed out of Spain, and Paul and his company finding a ship to Armorica sailing unto Britain, they were therein, and passing along the South Coast, they reached a port called Raphinus.

8 Now when it was voiced abroad that the Apostle had landed on their coast, great multitudes of the inhabitants met him, and they treated Paul courteously and he entered in at the east gate of their city, and lodged in the house of an Hebrew and one of his own nation.

9 And on the morrow he came and stood upon Mount Lud and the people thronged at the gate, and assembled in the Broadway, and he preached Christ unto them, and they believed the Word and the testimony of Jesus.

14 And Paul abode in his lodgings three months confirming in the faith and preaching Christ continually.

15 And after these things Paul and his brethren departed from Raphinus and sailed unto Atium in Gaul [France].

- The Sonnini Manuscript, London 1801, v. 1-9, 14-15.  [From Truth in]

Why was this chapter missing?

In verse two is the mention of a “Prophet” who spoke of the “isles afar off.” As quoted earlier, these could likely be Jeremiah or Isaiah. Raymond Capt suggests that this Prophet could also be Hosea:

As to why this chapter 29 was omitted, one answer could be found in verse 2: “That it might be fulfilled which was spoken of by the prophet.” The prophet referred to most likely was Hosea, who was Pre-eminently a prophet to the Ten Tribes of Northern Israel. In his book, Chapter 1: 9,10, Hosea wrote: “Then said God, call his name Loammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be your God. Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.”

It is obvious that had this second verse of the Lost Chapter appeared in our Bibles, we could not have remained ignorant of our racial origin, and have become the Lost Ten Tribes. We could not be lost with a plain address like that staring us in the face!

And yet Hosea predicted that we were to be called the “Children of a Living God!” Therefore, the Gospel was taken to Britain by St. Paul, “far hence unto the Gentiles”, to the Goyim, to the “Not-My-People” of the Northern Israel Tribes, “and they will hear it.” (Acts 28:28) The title “Sons of the living God” is a fine Old Testament equivalent for the New Testament word “Christians.” It is a title coined by Divine foreknowledge and Hosea was inspired to so name the Long Lost Ten Tribes of Israel, in the Latter Days. – Raymond E. Capt, The Lost Chapter of Acts, p. 27

Evidence that this could be the concluding chapter of the Book of Acts:

1. It being preserved in the Archives of Constantinople.

2. It has all the appearances of being of an ancient date.

3. It is written in Greek, and in the manner of the Acts.

4. The places and peoples mentioned are called by their Roman names.

5. Its Scriptural brevity and conception of the Divine purpose and plan.

6. Its Gospel-like character is dignified and spiritual.

7. Its prophetic expressions are in a Biblical style.

8. Its ending in the word “Amen.” (The Acts of the Apostles, the books of James and Third John are the only New Testament books not ending in “Amen.” This has led some Bible scholars to believe they are incomplete in their present form).

The Scottish Declaration of Independence

The Declaration of Arbroath also contains evidence for the apostles ministering to the people of God.

In this document, the Scots not only refer to themselves as situated in “the utter-most part of the earth” but also that they are of Israel, and date their history from the Exodus, here termed “the outgoing of the people of Israel.” This furnishes a reasonable explanation for the Apostles carrying the Gospel to Britain. Their ministry was to be an extension of His own, and must lie within the scope of old time prophecy. “Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matt. 10:5,6) “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Matt. 15:24) Without doubt, their ministry was to Israel, and not some mysterious, foreign land and people. This agrees with the vision given to Esdras of “The Most High” leading escaped Israel from Assyria. – Raymond E. Capt, The Lost Chapter of Acts, p. 10


What will judeo-Christianity do with the above evidence presented? This is not just a few “nut cases” talking about British-Israelism. This is a significant number of credible witnesses we have presented for the judeo-Christian world to consider. Judeos should be asking why they have not heard even one of these quotes in their Bible schools and seminaries. And why has the biblical concept of race been hidden from them? They have much to consider. Maybe they should take a two-year sabbatical to ponder this evidence. Then, maybe, they will stop calling the “Jews” God’s chosen people and accept the fact that they have been wrong. That in fact they, the White race, are the true chosen of God.

The apostle Paul quoted the prophet Hosea proving that the Gentiles were Israelite nations (especially of the ten-tribed northern house) taken by the Assyrians.

And it shall be, in the place [such as in America, or other White nations] where it was said to them. “You are not My people; there [in those same nations] they shall be called sons of the living God.” Isaiah also cries concerning Israel, “Though the number of the sons of Israel is as the sands of the sea, a remnant shall be saved.” – Rom. 9:26-27, MKJV

It was “you Gentiles” (“not my people” for so long), who are now living in the West, they are the “sons of the living God.” This remnant, to be saved, is only one particular race of people by divine choice.

The Apostle Paul makes this exclusively racial statement:

Men, brothers, sons of the race of Abraham, and whoever among you fears God, the Word of this salvation is sent to you.” – Acts 13:26, MKJV

Can it be any clearer? The Gospel is not universally to all people on the globe. It is exclusive to the chosen of God.

…to be continued