Behemah means both nigger and four legged animal

A reader writes:

Hey Nick, Xxxxxx here...  I have a question for you regarding the "beast of the field". I was reading on another identity site which states that the beast of the field is the negro, which is kind of funny in a way, since growing up in the deep south, I've come across many of these "beasts".  At first, I thought this was just a ridiculous theory, but the more I've looked into this, the more it seems to make sense.

In Genesis 1:25, God makes the beast of the earth.  Again, in Genesis 2:19, God forms the beast of the field.  So obviously, we're talking about 2 different types of beasts.  Exodus 19:13 speaks of the fact that not a hand shall touch it, whether it be beast or man.  Jonah 3:8 speaks of a beast that wears sack-cloth and cries mightily unto God.  I don't know of too many beasts (animals) that can cry mightily unto God.

There are other examples which I cannot think of at this time which also refer to this beast.  We know from science that the other races were created before the white race.  Therefore, I'm coming to the conclusion that these "beasts" may indeed be referring to the other races, but maybe not solely to blacks.  God made these beasts in Genesis 1:25, then created "man" (ruddy complected) in Gen 1:27, then formed "the man Adam" in Gen 2:7.  Again, two different events, one created and the other formed.

My only doubt about all of this is the fact that I had always assumed that the word "stranger" referred to the other races.  But I guess it could be possible that God refers to the other races as both beasts and strangers?  Just wanted to get your thoughts on this.  Thanks

Xxxxxxxxx

    How people can regard the below two Scriptures (which you referenced) as pertaining to black people, is beyond all rational comprehension.   Observe the language, and how that it specifies that these beasts are animal species.

Genesis 1:24-25
24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.  KJV

     In the next verse, God contrasts the above with man (human, both male and female):

Genesis 1:26-31
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.
31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.  KJV

And your second Scripture:

Genesis 2:19-20
19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast [chay] of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast [chay] of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.  KJV

The word "beast" above in verse 20 is:

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

     Here is the gist of the "dilemma" and the answer as to why the "beasts of the field" cannot be Negros (or any other human beings):  There are two separate Hebrew words used in our Scriptures here for these animals.  One is behemah and the other is chay.

#929 behemah (be-hay-maw'); from an unused root (probably meaning to be mute); properly, a dumb beast; especially any large quadruped or animal (often collective): KJV - beast, cattle.

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

    Now chay can also be any living thing (including a plant), but let's not confuse this right now.   Staying in context, we shall see that in our Scriptures, chay is referring to a living ANIMAL, not a plant or fish, etc.  (chay means simply: "living", and when applied to animals, it means living animal)   In Genesis 1:24-and again in 1:25 we see these two types of animals mentioned in relation to each other (i.e., they are different):

Genesis 1:24-25
24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living [chay] creature after his kind, cattle [behemah], and creeping thing, and beast of the earth [chay] after his kind: and it was so.
25 And God made the beast of the [chay] earth after his kind, and cattle [behemah] after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.  KJV

     Now to say that these [chay] (beasts) are Negros, is to say that God called for cannibalism; for, in Gen 9:2 & 3 we see that God told Noah that he was eat those [chay] as food!

Genesis 9:1-4
9:1 And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.
2 And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of [chay] 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.
3 Every moving thing that liveth [chay] shall be meat for you; even as [just as] the green herb have I given you all things.
4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.  KJV

     Obviously something is wrong with the "beasts being Negros theory"!  Here is the difference between chay and behemah:   it is not White men and Black men, but rather it is two different classes of animal families.  One is clean to eat, and one is clean to sacrifice unto God.  Yes, there is a difference; while all clean to sacrifice animals were clean to eat, not all clean animals to eat can be offered to God in sacrifice (back when the sacrifice "laws" were still in effect; though they are no longer in effect since Christ's passion).  For example, one may eat a clean fish (one having both fins and scales), but never is a fish sacrificed to God in any Scripture of the Bible, even though certain fish were clean to eat.   That is the simple difference between chay and behemah, when animals is the subject.

     The reason for the confusion when reading the early (pre-flood) Scriptures lies (wherein lies the error of the "Negros are the beasts of the field" dogma) in the fact that God had not yet set up the sacrificial system.  Though Able did sacrifice an animal to God, God had not yet explained this to us in the Bible.  Below God explains it to us in the Bible (but it was provided for and planned from the early creation in Genesis chapter one, as we just observed in Gen 1:24-25 where the two classes of animals were created (PRIOR to Adam in the Garden, I might add).  The below is especially useful in explaining the difference between chay and behemah as both are mentioned, in different administrations, to Noah:

Animals clean to sacrifice to God (behemah):

Genesis 8:20-21
20 And Noah builded an altar unto the LORD; and took of every clean beast [behemah], and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.
21 And the LORD smelled a sweet savour [i.e., He was pleased with the sacrifice]; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.  KJV

Animals clean to eat as food  (chay):

Genesis 9:1-4
9:1 And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.
2 And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of [chay] 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.
3 Every moving thing that liveth [chay] shall be meat for you; even as [just as] the green herb have I given you all things.
4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.  KJV

     So, to recap, we have both chay and behemah in two Scriptures, first in Gen 1 regarding the creation, and secondly in Gen 8 & 9 regarding clean to eat, and clean to sacrifice, animals.  Incidentally, the animal that Able sacrificed to God was of the sheep that he raised (a sheep is a behemah), as we would expect if I am correct here, and if God indeed did provide early on for the sacrificial animal system early on:

Both cattle and sheep are behemah animals (clean to sacrifice and eat):

Joel 1:18
18 How do the beasts [behemah] groan! the herds of cattle are perplexed, because they have no pasture; yea, the flocks of sheep are made desolate.  KJV

     Beast means just that—an animal.  Do you suppose that these "beasts" cannot be animals because God threatened to punish them?  God often punished animals.  For instance, "And if a man lie with a beast, he shall surely be put to death: and ye shall slay the beast." (Leviticus 20:15-16).  This cannot mean "non-Whites, or Non-Adamites, or non-Israelites; for, Israelite males were permitted to take non-Israelite female virgin (much could be said on this as well, but for time [see Num 31:17-18]) wives of the captives of battle. (only males can marry outside their Tribe/race—the women must remain within the tribe—else she is cast out of the tribe and she becomes of the foreign tribe [Why?  Because the seed passes through the male sperm—the woman's egg is a blank slate in that regard—much could be said on this but for time]).

Deuteronomy 21:10-13
10 When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the LORD thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive,
11 And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife;
12 Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house; and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails;
13 And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife.  KJV

     Had beasts of the field been non-Whites or non-Israelites, then the above Scripture is contradictory (which it is not possible for a Scripture to contradict another one). 

      Notice in the Scripture below, which you reference, that the humans are all referred to " 'am " (people).  The Hebrew word " 'am " in the base word in the Hebrew phrase "Lo-Ammi" (i.e., not my people—Hosea 1:9), thus 'am is people, not animals ("lo" means "not").

Exodus 19:11-15
11 And be ready against the third day: for the third day the LORD will come down in the sight of all the people upon mount Sinai.
12 And thou shalt set bounds unto the people round about, saying, Take heed to yourselves, that ye go not up into the mount, or touch the border of it: whosoever toucheth the mount shall be surely put to death:
13 There shall not an hand touch it, but he shall surely be stoned, or shot through; whether it be beast or man, it shall not live: when the trumpet soundeth long, they shall come up to the mount.
14 And Moses went down from the mount unto the people, and sanctified the people; and they washed their clothes.
15 And he said unto the people, Be ready against the third day: come not at your wives.

hand: [I point out "hand" here, because some may say that "animals" don't have hands, therefore, they say, this means different races of humans.  But as we se, it does not necessarily mean the human hand]: hand: Hebrew word #3027 yad (yawd); a primitive word; a hand (the open one [indicating power, means, direction, etc.], in distinction from OT:3709, the closed one); used (as noun, adverb, etc.) in a great variety of applications, both literally and figuratively, both proximate and remote [as follows]: KJV - (+be) able, about, armholes, at, axletree, because of, beside, border, bounty, broad, [broken-] handed, by, charge, coast, consecrate, creditor, custody, debt, dominion, enough, fellowship, force, from, hand [-staves, -y work], he, himself, in, labour, large, ledge, [left-] handed, means, mine, ministry, near, of, order, ordinance, our, parts, pain, power, presumptuously, service, side, sore, state, stay, draw with strength, stroke, swear, terror, thee, by them, themselves, thine own, thou, through, throwing, thumb, times, to, under, us, wait on, [way-] side, where, wide, with (him, me, you), work, yield, yourselves.

beast: hebrew word #929  behemah (be-hay-maw'); from an unused root (probably meaning to be mute); properly, a dumb beast; especially any large quadruped or animal (often collective):  KJV - beast, cattle.

man: Hebrew word #376 'iysh (eesh); contracted for OT:582 [or perhaps rather from an unused root meaning to be extant]; a man as an individual or a male person; often used as an adjunct to a more definite term (and in such cases frequently not expressed in translation): KJV - also, another, any (man), a certain, champion, consent, each, every (one), fellow, [foot-, husband-] man, [good-, great, mighty) man, he, high (degree), him (that is), husband, man [-kind], none, one, people, person, steward, what (man) soever, whoso (-ever), worthy. Compare OT:802.

people: Hebrew word #5971 `am (am); from OT:6004; a people (as a congregated unit); specifically, a tribe (as those of Israel); hence (collectively) troops or attendants; figuratively, a flock:  KJV - folk, men, nation, people.

Your closing comment was:

"My only doubt about all of this is the fact that I had always assumed that the word "stranger" referred to the other races."

You are correct, the stranger is other races other than Israel.

In conclusion: 

	In Gen 1:24 God introduces clean to eat animals, "chay";
	In Gen 1:24 God introduces animals that are to go on to be both clean to eat AND sacrifice, "behemah";
	In Gen 1:26-27 God introduces all the different races of mankind (who later are referred to as "Gentiles"*);
	In Gen 2:7 God introduces Adam's tribe (and perhaps the White race*).

*Not enough info is available in Scripture to determine if a Caucasian-type of peoples were created on the sixth day. However there are in later Scriptures a Caucasian (White) type of peoples who were referred to as "Gentiles."   BUT, the term "Gentiles" did not come about until until AFTER Israel was established: therefore, "Gentiles" does not necessarily mean "people other than Whites," nor does it necessarily mean "people other than of Adam's tribe;" but rather it means "people other than Israel."  And we know that there were many White people of Adam's heritage that where born to other White people before Jacob/Israel was even born.  These people also had descendants who are with us today.  And while all Israelites are White people, not all White people are Israelites.   Many proponents of teaching of "Anglo-Israelism," "Seedliners," "British-Israelism," "Lost Ten Tribes," "Dispersed Israel," or whatever they are called today, fail to realize this stark fact!  There are many White peoples (descendants of Adam), that WERE NOT OF ISRAEL'S HERITAGE, because their ancestors came before, and not through, Jacob/Israel.  Therefore, "Gentiles" does not mean ONLY non-Whites, any more than "beasts of the field" mean Black people or non-Whites.

The early peoples referred to as "Israel" are only the descendants of Jacob/Israel; so, ironically, Abraham (Jacob's grandfather), and Isaac (Jacob's father) were not Israelites!  And had not God changed Jacob's name to "Israel," Jacob himself would not have been an Israelite!  Now you know the reason and the wisdom behind why God changed Jacob's name to Israel.  Had He not, then Jacob, the great patriarch of the peoples Israel, would not have been covered under:

Isaiah 45:17
17 But Israel shall be saved in the LORD with an everlasting salvation: ye shall not be ashamed nor confounded world without end.  KJV

Romans 11:26
26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:  KJV

  Peace.

Copyright @ 2010 by Fathers' Manifesto & Christian Party