Sir David Andrew

jew

Dave – after reading your tome of self-praise I think that you are full of bullshit.   The entire heraldry non sense is English puke.  You accuse Richard of being a Mason and then bring up this nonsense of ours.  We are Americans and look down on all of that limey stuff.  You mention Barrister, meaning to me an engineer, that you have never produced a bit of wealth in your life but have prospered off the hard work of the English people as has the wife of Tony Blair.  That bitch reportedly earned about 250,000 pounds a year due to influence.  For all of you alleged high breeding and education you call others moron etc.  I do not know the ultimate truth of the underlying matter but I suggest that you try a new approach especially when dealing with Americans.  Russell Walker

From: SirDavid-Andrew. [mailto:davidtheherald@a-znet.com]
Sent: Sunday, January 03, 2010 12:56 AM
To: Richard Niemela
Cc: Scott Vaught; Jacob Israel
Subject: Re: My People Shall Know My Name!

Richard, you are a real work of art.  What degree of Masonry do you hold?  Are you a Knight of Templar or Knight of Malta?  You are a bamboozle artist.  Has anyone noticed that Richard uses verse from the KJV, which he knows are DELIBERATELY mistranslated to prove his point and word, which do not have meanings to his liking, he does not give those definition.  I have already stated that I do not wish to become involved in lengthy endless discussions with those, who regurgitate Luciferian and Zionist vomit.

Richard, I have already heard or debated every possible convoluted and twisted Luciferian, Zionist or Judeo-Christendumb's mistranslation and misapplication of Isaiah 9:6, to the point it makes me puck.  You are a deceiver!

You prove yourself to be an egotistic disrespectful idiot by attacking a man's honor whom you know nothing about, which is standard Masonic ploy.  The title Sir is used because I earned my knighthood back in 1971, my barrister in 1993 and was given my heraldry in 1996.  Ecclesiastically, I hold the offices of Bishop and Regent.  Now go back and read the definitions, which used to defame my honor and good name.

You even discredit my works without even reading any and it is obvious that you did not like the quotes, which I presented from Strong's Bible Dictionary, since these definition do not suit the purpose of your Luciferian Theology.  Do not play games with me; I a copy of the teachers edition of Moral And Dogma.  I have digital copy of student's edition of the same, which I would gladly send to anyone, who would like a copy.  This is one book they do not want the sheople to read.

Finally, for your Zionist little brain of slave mentality, I am a direct descendant of King David by at least two bloodlines, am a lawful heir to the Throne of Scotland, holding higher claim them my cousin Elizabeth.  She abdicated the Throne back in 1996 because of several claims against it and she returned King David's Throne Chair to Edinburgh in spring of 1997.  At present the Throne of Scotland is vacant.  I am not a United States citizen, British slave.

I nicely asked you about the Lancelot Brenton Septuagint Version, but you did not have the courtesy to give reasonable answer.  Instead you attempted to prove how smart you aren't.

No, I will not debate you, since casting pearls before swine is forbidden.  You seek not truth, you seek controversy; and you with willful and wanton intent blasphemy the name of Yah, the Creator (Yah-havah).  You are neither a brother or a friend, your are a demoniac.  Ours need be aware.

I am who I say I am.  Who are you?  LORD of the flies?  Did not you used to send out emails with a symbol of a red colored nymph holding a pitchfork next to your name?  It seems to me that was your trademark about five years ago.

Sir David-Andrew.

-------- Original Message --------

David-Andrew, et.al..

Note that I have purposely omitted using the title Sir that you have attached to your name, since its Hebrew and Greek meanings elevate you to a status to which you are not qualified to assume.  Suggest that you see Strong’s No.113, "Sir", its Hebrew word, Adown or Adon, meaning: “to rule, soverign, i.e. controller, human or divine, lord, Master”..In the Greek, No. 2962, it is “Kurios”  meaning:  “supreme in authority, as controller, God, Lord, Master”. Qualifications which I cannot in good faith, attach to your cognomen.

It appears that we are dealing with someone who may be a bit narcissistic and quarrelsome, so it follows that his critique of an ongoing discussion about assigning a “sacred name” to God the Father and to His Son, Jesus the Christ also may exhibit some mistaken views on that subject.

Your criticism, attached, does warrant however, a response so as to dispel another confused viewpoint that God can be assigned a Name by human intervention or interdiction into ancient languages.

In my earlier response to Scott, on Wed.23 Dec. 09, 0951 AM,  I made reference to a number of biblical comments that have considerable impact on the issue of trying to find a Name for God – a human failing and shows that the seekers are violating biblical precepts that are obvious and appear to avoid this seeking since the Name was and is yet, kept secret – from those who seek and ask for it. The current confusion is understandable.

In Judges 13, the Hebrew/Israelite,  Manoah, father of Sampson was advised by his long barren wife that: “A man of God came unto me and his countenance was lsike the countenance of an angel of God, very terrible; but I asked him not whence he was, neither told me his name.” (v.6)  Subsequent discussions  occurred between Manoah and this Angel regarding the pregnancy of his wife, during which Manoah asked for the “angel’s” name. “And Manoah said unto the angel of the Lord, What is thy name, that when thy sayings come to pass we may do thee honor? (v.17)

Here is the response from this “angel.” “And the angel of the Lord said unto him, Why askest thou thus after my name, seeing it is secret?” (v.18)

When a meat offering by Manoah was flamed, the angel of the Lord ascended in the flame of the altar, then disappeared.  When this happened, here are Manoah’s words to his wife: “And Manoah said unto his wife, We shall surely die, because we have seen God.” (v.22)  His wife however, made a comment that confirmed this point and said: “If the Lord were pleased to kill us, he would not have received a burnt offering and a meat offering at our hands, . . .”

Was it God that appeared and insisted on keeping His Name secret?  As we can determine from what Jacob was told in Gen.32 after his wrestling when he asked his opponent His name and it was not given to him: “. . .Wherefore is it that thou dost ask  after My name? . . .”   Now, would it not have been appropriate for God to have told Jacob what His name was if He had wanted it to be known?

Further, consider what is stated in Isaiah 9:6, a verse that provides “names” that refute the current insistence upon a Hebrew language name. Here’s that verse: “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and His name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.”

Now lets consider the Hebrew words for those denoted above:

 “Wonderful”, No.6381, “pala”, “pele” meaning, to separate, distinguish, miracles, great, wondrous. 

 “Counselor”, No.3289, “yaats: meaning: to deliberate, or resolve, advertise, take advice, determine, devise, guide, etc.

The other titles or names by which He is “called” are self explanatory and do not need further elaboration….However, we can see that this was an opportunity for His “Name” to be revealed, but it was not!

In Exodus 3: 13, Moses tells the God of Israel that the people will ask “What is thy name? What shall I say unto them?” Here is a specific opportunity for God to expose His name, but His answer again, avoids being specific: “And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and He said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM  hath sent me unto you.” (v.14)

Lets also consider what is found in Isaiah 52, for there it also makes specific reference to God and His “Name.” The first verses are God’s words that make reference to My people who were suffering in Egypt, but He noted that “. . .My name is continually every day is blasphemed.” 

Again, no Name is revealed as is commonly sought.  Here is how God then proceeded with this name issue: “Therefore My people shall know My name: therefore they shall know in that day that I am He that doth speak, It is I.”

Once more we have an opportunity for God to elaborate and define His name other than His “title.”  He did not do so, which tells me that He will not do so until we find the answer to this issue in Revelation 3:12 from Jesus’ own words: ”Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of My God, and the name of the  city of My God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from My God: and I will write upon him My new name.”

Later in Rev.22:4 this issue is again mentioned: “And they shall see His face: and His name shall be in their foreheads.” 

Despite the many opportunities for God to have spoken His “Name”, He did not do so and even in the prophecy of Rev.3 & 22, it is not offered.  Does this not tell us something?

----- Original Message -----

From: SirDavid-Andrew.

To: Richard Niemela

Sent: Friday, January 01, 2010 11:16 PM

Subject: My People Shall Know My Name!

-------- Original Message --------

Greetings Gentlemen:

I found your exchange of information very interesting.  Most certainly of higher intellect then average.  But then I found it strange that your gross lack of knowledge and usage of Hebrew terms.  In fact, you did not even comment about the difference between the Zionist Massoretic Text and the Hebrew cited below by Scott.  I was shock to see digitized Hebrew text, but even more shocked to see the text was interlineared with Strong's numbers.  Much of what you state is on point.

It is obvious that Jacob and Richard did not bother to read what Scot wrote, since Scot cited the wrong Strong's number for havah (a verb).  The number he sighted is the number of the Hebrew term that corresponds with the Latin term Lucifer.  It is sad that Scot looking up the term havah did not bother to even look at the top of the next column to see the root terms for "JEHOVAH", hovah, which means to destroy and the root tern for Yahweh, havvah, which means to pervert.

The Creator (Yahavah) is neither the Destroyer or the Perverter as you so foolishly suggest, and most certainly as Richard continues to do.  Is not GOD, the whore which stands in New York (Babylon) Harbor?   I cannot comprehend why you stumble and continually make the same mistakes over and over, since my article entitled the Temples of Baal has been around for nearly fifteen years and yet no one has ever proven any point made to be in error.  If you continue to put in wrong data, you will continue to draw wrong conclusions.  Each of you need to go back and read the Temples of Baal.  www.restoreliberty.us  Click on Brothers in Arms and then click on Sir David-Andrew.

I would be more then glad to send you a copy and a copy of last years article entitled Jerome.  If you have not read Jerome, I think you will find that it covers several of your questions.  In fact, it might "enlighten" you!  I have over 47 years of Biblical studies, seven of which are Rabbinical; therefore, I have a good working knowledge of Torah verse Babylonian Talmud.  I believe in the keep of the Great Law of Love and its 679 Statutes of Liberty (Torah).  Masons, Zionist and those of Judeo-Christendumb can all go to HELL or was that HEAVEN, it is hard to tell with all of this upside down teachings and doctrines of state religion.

Jacob, you stated that you were more comfortable with going back to using damnable names likes Jesus and God.  I can assure you I find the use of these terms repulsive, and seldom use either.  The so-called painting of Jesus, which is usually found in churches, is actually a copy of a painting of my great grandfather, thirteen generations removed.  King James (a Knight of Templar) attempted to deify the kings and queens of Scotland to pacify the Scottish and keep them from revolting. 

Scot, I am very much interested in how to obtain the Hebrew Interlinear Bible, which you have cited from.  Please tell me what web site.  Also, I wish to obtain lithograph copy of the Dead Sea Scrolls.  I am not interested in someones translation of the DSS, I want actual copies. I would like to obtain a copy of the Hebrew Fonts, that way I will be able to type in Hebrew.  I have a website that is up coming that will be detailing  Biblical doctrine and terminology in great detail; totally refuting state religion, Judeo-Christianity, Luciferianism and Talmudic Law.

Scot, you are wrong about the double "U".  It is the double "V"   You gentlemen continually use the Tetragrammaton wrongly.  It is not YHWH, it is YHVH.  If it was YHWH then it would translate as the Perverter, and not the Creator.  I have learned both the Yiddish and the Hebrew language.  As of late, I have been study the usage of verbs and adjectives in Hebrew.  Wow! What an eye opener.  I have known for years that certain verses had to be translated certain way, but never knew the why, until this fall.  Verbs and adjectives play a very important roll in the language.

You gentlemen debate pros and cons of the Zionist Massoretic Text, but it is obvious the text Scot quoted is not the Massoretic text and may be text from the Dead Sea Scrolls.

The use of the terms Jehovah, Yahweh and GOD in reference to Yah, the Creator (Yah-havah), is BLASPHEMY.  The Tetragrammaton (Yah-havah) is not Yah's name, it is the most commonly used title.  Yah is the Creator's name.  Yah means source or beginning.  Yah-havah means self existing one or sustainer; therefore, translating as Creator.

Richard mentions Gaelic and compares it to Hebrew.  Most people do not even realize that in Ireland the road signs are in English and Irish.  Many folks in Scotland speak Gaelic and not English as their first language.  What you do not realize is that most of people of Ireland and Scotland are the descendants of Judah.  Which makes it very obvious that JEWS, then cannot be of the tribe of Judah.  Most of the Kings of Ireland and Scotland were the direct descendants of King David.

Richard, you mention using the Lancelot Brenton Septuagint Version.  I am not familiar with that Version.  I prefer using the Septuagint and I most certainly would like to know how to obtain a copy of that Version.  I believe that there are four different translation available.  Personally, I would prefer lithograph copy of the Alexandrian Text, used by Messiah and the Apostles.  The texts, which I have seen are modern Greek, not Alexandrian Greek.

At present I do not have time to become involved in lengthy theological debates and normally do not respond to these discussions, but there was much here that was of importance and can be very useful.  Thank you.

The follow is an excerpt from the Temples of Baal, note the Strong numbers:

Black Robed Devils in the Pulpits

The Creator's name is Yah, which means most vehement (The Source).  {Strong 3050}
The term Yahavah (or Yahvah) is a title, which means Creator or Yah the Self existing One.  {Strong 1934}

{In 3068 through 3074 Strong promotes the Jewish (Zionist) Talmudic lies of Luciferianism, by deliberately misspelling of these terms or titles.}

Yahshua (Joshua or Hosea) means Yah's salvation. {Strong 1954, 3091 and 3442}

The following two terms are of modern man's creation.
These are names of a false deity of the Luciferians and Fellow Travelers.
Yah-hovah (Je-ho-vah) means Yah ruins. [Destroyer]  {Strong 1943}
Yah-havvah (Yahweh) means Yah covets. [Perverter]  Strong 1942}
Having the sense or meaning of be perverted.
I think not!

State Religion and Luciferianism are that which is perverted.

ABOUT FACE!
Lest you be consumed by their evils, and be required to give sacrifice
in the Temples of Baal.

If you disagree with anything contained above, then it is up to you to prove these thing wrong.  If there be any errors, please, send me the proof and I will be glad to make the corrections.  However, most folks are incapable of doing anything, but regurgitate vomit, being incapable of:

Studying to show themselves approved unto Yahavah (Creator), workmen, who need not be ashamed, rightly discerning the words of  truth.  II Timothy 2:15

Calling Yah, the Creator (Yahavah), by the name of a Babylonian false deity (idol), called GOD, is blasphemy.  Selah! Selah! SELAH!

"As for those of you, who abandon Yah (or Yahavah or Yah-havah, chief title of Yah, the Creator), who forget My holy mountain, who lay the table for GOD (Gâd or Gaud, deity of good luck or fortune, a deity of Babylon, the LIGHT SIDE, so-called morning star or Lucifer, Statute of Liberty, Isis, Semiramis), who fill cups of mixed wine {blood & wine} for Meni (The deity of destiny or fate, the DARK SIDE, evening star, Bohemian Owl, Moloch, Tammuz, Jehovah or Yahweh, deity of perversion or ruin, and child sacrifice.), you, I shall sentence to the sword. All of you will stoop to be decapitated, because you have done what I consider evil, you chose to do what displeases me." -- Isaiah 65:11-12.

Go ahead think that it does not matter what you say or worship, its your head that is on the chopping block.  If you know not Yah's name, how can you possibly claim to be his people?  You by your actions and foolish beliefs make Yah to be a liar.

Sir David-Andrew.

-------- Original Message --------

Gentlemen,

Very good points, both of you.

Here are some other personal observations which might help us establish exactly what IS the "name of the LORD", as referenced in the following verse (which is obviously important to understand completely):

And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the LORD, shall be put to death.

Leviticus 24:16

<<<The letter "J" for example, replaced the Old English "I," derived from the Paleo Hebrew "Yod."  (as evidenced in use in the 1611 Bibles.The new letter "J" was used to replace the old English "I" derived from the Paleo Hebrew "Yod". >>>

It's important to remember that, even though the letter "J" didn't exist until then, that the pronunciation of the "I" with a special character on it was pronounced with the "J" sound.  In both Latvian [the world's most archaic language, according to our OWN universities] and Korean, the letter "J" has existed for 6,000 years.  The word "Jew", with that "J" sound, has been pronounced "jew" for a long time, and it's reasonable to believe that the Israelites also had that sound (which I believe was actually Gaelic, not the jew creation now called "hebrew").

I hope that you will take the following in the spirit in which it's intended.

Many of us, literally thousands of us, very closely studied and examined and discussed in numerous forums, including Willie Martin, the following analysis by Pastor Weiland:

http://fathersmanifesto.net/weiland.htm

It's a great study, no matter which side you come up on.

We could not believe that the jews had been able to mislead us so seriously about "God" vs. "YHWH".  But we concluded that they had, and all of us began to use the terms "YHWH" and "Yahshua", as uncomfortable as that was.

The curious thing that happened is that all jews were ecstatic about our use of those terms.  Of course they never told us why--but we also know that the Talmud requires jews to make every attempt to blot out THE name "Jesus" AND "God", which is why no jew ever says "Jesus" and they all spell it "g-d", with a lower case "g" and a - in place of the o.

If the jews were so happy about our use of these terms, it appeared to us that this must be because we were doing THEIR job,so most of us went back to the much more comfortable "Jesus" and "God".

I REALLY have no idea which is correct. 

But I sure hope you will seriously consider these observations and maybe help us sort it all out.

Sincerely,

John Knight

----- Original Message -----

From: Scott Vaught

To: J Richard Niemela

Sent: Sunday, December 27, 2009 6:56 AM

Subject: My People Shall Know My Name!

Hi Richard. We know  the Torah  is not a Jewish Book. The Books of the Law were not given to the Jews, but to Moses, for the House of Israel. Moses was not a Jew. However, virtually every English language bible is through Jewish, Masoretic, or Hellenistic interpretation. This also applies to virtually all other language bibles as well as bible references.

     Knowing this as we do, arms us with caution to be mindful of their influences and to prove all things.   The OT writings say: "By thy Law I know every false way."  The antinomian teaching that the Law has been done away, was the "deeds of the Nicholaitans" condemned in Revelations. For if the Law is done away, there no longer exist the necessary witness of truth for us to "know every false way." "Know ye not that ye are to judge the Saints."  By who's law are we to judge them to confirm they were of our Father, if not our Father's Law.?"  If you are my CO and give me a lawful written Order, which I disobey: What will be the paramount evidence against me at my Court-martial, if not your written order?  

Our Father has given us Written Orders in the form of His Laws and Commandments. If we keep them they (the requirements) are fulfilled, not done away with. If we violate them, they are the paramount evidence against us. This applies to the Saints. Judge them by their deeds, if they obeyed the Laws and commandments given us all, before we follow their lead or embrace their teachings. 

Even the laws of men have no penalty when kept.  A Speed limit is 40 MPH, you fulfill the requirement of the law by driving 40 MPH or under at all times. Was the Law done away ?  No!  Just drive 70 MPH in this same posted 40MPH Limit, and if a Cop is present, you will know that the law was not done away! But rather, the penalty for its violation does not apply, as long as the Law is obeyed, by fulfilling the requirement of the Law.

Concerning the Name: This is my current understanding: Prior to the mid 1400's the Old English language had only 22 letters in its Alphabet, the same as its Paleo Hebrew origin. Four new letters were added to the English Alphabet:   Walla! The "Modern English" now has 26 letters!  The letter "J" for example, replaced the Old English "I," derived from the Paleo Hebrew "Yod."  (as evidenced in use in the 1611 Bibles.The new letter "J" was used to replace the old English "I" derived from the Paleo Hebrew "Yod". As you have correctly pointed out below in the word "Jahovah."   The "W" was added to replace the "double "U," used in Old English, which origin was the doubled letter "Vau" used in Paleo Hebrew. As you can see, the Zionist have been very busy corrupting the English language into modern babble. Its what they do best! What did we expect from our enemies. His name is not: Yehovah or Jahovah, both are Zionist corruptions of Yahweh, more correctly: "Yahuweh,"  (ee-yah-oo-wah).  The four vowels of the sacred tongue is the Father's Name! Hidden forever in plain sight!  We must walk in the light we are given. We cannot walk in another's light, until they meet at the source. Have courage brother, both are from the same source, our heavenly Father is the source of all Light. Blessings. scott

----- Original Message -----

From: J Richard Niemela

To: Scott Vaught

Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2009 9:51 AM

Subject: Re: App0005.rtf Ex 3:14-15

Scott..

In evaluating this word in Stongs No.3068, "Yehovah" -- you can see, it has NO letter "W"...but states that it is "Jahovah", which is labeled as the "Jewish" national name of God! .   But also that it is sourced from a primary root word, No.1961 in Strongs, which is "hayah" meaning, "to exist, be, or become, come to pass,"  etc.     There is no letter "W" in Hebrew.

Nor can we find the Hebrew letters some are promoting as God's Name..YHWH...What is your source for confirmation?

Since it is a referred to in Strong's as a "Jewish" name, note --- we do not follow Jewish terms and definitions -- Judaism is not a source of Christianity nor do we adopt any of their doctrines, whims, mannerisms etc...While Strongs Concordance used the KJV as its basis, recognize too, that its Old Testament is the Masoretic Text or MT, and that these Masoretes were adamantly anti-Christian when they began compiling the modern Hebrew language version around 500 A.D.   working on  it until they gave the Catholic Pope a completed copy in 913 A.D....It has remained our OT ever since...Comparisions between the Masoretic Text and the LXX or Septuagint reveal that these clever talmudic Jews changed the words, verses, omitted much of the original and were generally intent upon modifying the original Bible text to accommodate Jewish views.  Consequently, I suggest always cross-referencing the OT with what is in the Lancelot Brenton version of the Septuagint OT..

Why insist on using a Hebrew word for Our Lord...What's wrong with using our own language to define what we mean..but since God has purposely kept His name Secret, why seek it out?  (See Judges 13:18)  Using old Hebrew words has no doctrinal value nor does it lend itself to the Christian Faith, as you are reverting to Judaism in so doing!

Further, in Rev. 3:12 we can see that Jesus stated about the Overcomers, that He would ". . .write upon him the Name of My God......"and I will write upon him MY NEW NAME."  Perhaps for this reason, we are not to know or understand the name of our Lord....Yet...

In another reference to the future for Israel, Consider God's instructions in Isaiah 52 which addresses the vindication of Isarel of the delivery of Zion from its present Captivity.. In verse 2, God instructs Israel to:

"Shake thyself from the dust: arise, and sit down, O, Jerusalem: loose thyself from the bands of thy neck (Esau's), O captive daughter of ZIon."   Who is the daughter of ZIon but those in America. 

Then, further along, in verse 6, we find God again referring to His Name: inferring that WE DO NOT KNOW HIS NAME TODAY! 

"Therefore My people shall know My Name: therefore they shall know in that day that I am He that doth speak; behold, It is I."

Why the persistence in seeking out a Name for God when you are not so instructed or ordained?

Suggest that you read further along in Exodus, Ch.6:3: 

 "And I (God Speaking) appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the Name of GOD ALMIGHTY, but by My name Jehovah was I not known to them."

Why not use God Almighty or the Lord in lieu of a Hebrew word that is noted as being a Jewish National Word?

JRN

----- Original Message -----

From: Scott Vaught

To: J Richard Niemela

Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 8:07 PM

Subject: App0005.rtf Ex 3:14-15

Richard, Please scroll down to page #2 for the Hebrew Text of Ex 3:14-15, Note Strong’s # 3068 in the second line, third word from left. scott

Copyright @ 2007 by Fathers' Manifesto & Christian Party