William Finck

Do you really know how old the cohenspiracy is christogenea.org/podcasts/je… and also how deep it is christogenea.org/podcasts/pr… and where it all began christogenea.org/podcasts/tw…

The Ethiopian Eunuch, from a Christogenea Topical Discussions podcast, June, 2024: Now I want to say a few words about another very poorly understood subject, which is the Ethiopian Eunuch. This is a subject hotly debated between Identity Christians and denominational Christians, and the denominational Christians continually insist that the so-called Ethiopian Eunuch was some sort of negro, which is certainly not true. The account of the conversion of the Ethiopian Eunuch by the apostle Philip is found in the final passages of Acts chapter 8. There, we read, beginning from verse 26: “26 And the angel of the Lord spake unto Philip, saying, Arise, and go toward the south unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza, which is desert. 27 And he arose and went: and, behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of great authority under Candace queen of the Ethiopians, who had the charge of all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship, 28 Was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet.” Egypt was under the control of the Macedonian Greeks, and a large population of Greeks had come to dwell in Egypt during the Hellenistic period which followed the time of Alexander, and until the Battle of Actium in 31 BC, and the subsequent suicides of Antony and Cleopatra, the Macedonian queen of Egypt, when it fell into the hands of the Romans. The queen of Ethiopia was called Candace, or Κανδάκη in Greek, which was a title for many women who held the office, and there are ten of them who are known in history who had ruled between 260 BC and 320 AD. At least one of them herself had made war with the Romans. The eunuch was not necessarily a literal eunuch, as there are many examples in history that the ancient title had, in later times, continued to be used to describe court officers, who were no longer literal eunuchs. Neither did the eunuch necessarily work in Meroë, the capital of the Kingdom of Kush located on the east bank of the Nile River in modern Sudan. It is plausible that the Ethiopian Eunuch represented the queen in the port cities of Gaza, or perhaps in Egypt. But Gaza is said to have been named from a Persian word for treasury, so perhaps there is also a historic connection there, that we have not yet been able to discover with certainty. Here we read that the eunuch had been to Jerusalem to worship. It is highly unlikely that a native Ethiopian would have done such a thing, since they would not even have been permitted to enter into the temple. During the period of the New Testament, there were warning signs posted around the perimeter of the temple in Jerusalem, threatening death to anyone who was not a Judaean and who dared to enter. All or part of at least such two inscriptions have been found, which stated in Greek that “No foreigner may enter within the railing and enclosure that surround the Temple. Anyone apprehended shall have himself to blame for his consequent death!” (There is a copy of an article explaining this temple warning posted at Christogenea.org - christogenea.org/templewarni…) Later in Scripture, Paul of Tarsus had been falsely charged by the Judaeans with having brought a Greek into the temple, Trophimus the Ephesian, in Acts chapter 21. [Certain Judaeans wanted to kill him for that.] But having been found reading Isaiah, as well as having gone to Jerusalem to worship, it is far more likely that the Ethiopian Eunuch was a Judaean, and that he was fluent in Greek or perhaps even in Hebrew. So when Philip found him, we read: “29 Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot. 30 And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest? 31 And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.” It is not that the eunuch did not understand the language of the Scripture, since he was clearly reading it. But he did not understand the meaning of the prophecy, so he needed a more learned guide, which is a circumstance that we all still experience today. So continuing, we read that “32 The place of the scripture which he read was this, He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth: 33 In his humiliation his judgment was taken away: and who shall declare his generation? for his life is taken from the earth. 34 And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other man? 35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.” The words are indeed a prophesy of Christ. But in the context where they appear in Isaiah, it is stated rather explicitly that the suffering which Christ had undergone was meant specifically for the children of Israel. So in the verses which immediately precede the one which the eunuch had read, we read: “4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. 5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. 6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.” These words were uttered on behalf of the children of Israel in captivity, and neither the eunuch, nor Philip, nor Yahweh God Himself would change the meaning of the words of Isaiah. However the signal proof that the eunuch was a Judaean in the employ of the Ethiopians is this: that the apostle Peter was the first to convert non-Judaeans to Christ, as Peter himself had attested, in Acts chapters 10 and 11. But first, in Acts chapter 9 Luke had changed the narrative and turned his attention to Paul of Tarsus, who had been left watching the garments of the men who stoned the martyr Stephen at the end of chapter 7. So Paul’s persecution of Christians and his Road to Damascus event are recorded, and after some time Paul had begun preaching the Gospel in Damascus, where he had formerly persecuted the Christians. When “after many days” the Judaeans had sought to kill him, he escaped and went to Jerusalem, and joined himself to the apostles there, although at first they were reluctant to have him, knowing his former history. In Jerusalem, Paul eventually gained the trust of the apostles, and also preached with them in Galilee and Samaria, until certain Hellenists among the Judaeans wanted to slay him (Acts 9:29), and the apostles sent him off to Tarsus. From there it is recorded that Peter had “passed throughout all quarters”, went to Lydda where he had spent some days, and then went to nearby Joppa where he had stayed with Simon the Tanner up to the time when he had seen the vision of the sheet, in Acts chapter 10, and went to the house of Cornelius to convert him and his Roman household to Christ. So all of these events, which must have taken quite some time to fulfill, must have all happened long after the conversion of the Ethiopian Eunuch by Philip. While Philip is not mentioned by name after the conversion of the eunuch in Acts chapter 8, in this regard in Acts chapter 9 we read that when the apostles were skeptical of Paul, “27 … Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles, and declared unto them how he had seen the Lord in the way, and that he had spoken to him, and how he had preached boldly at Damascus in the name of Jesus. 28 And he was with them coming in and going out at Jerusalem.” It is very likely that Philip was among these apostles who are otherwise unnamed, as was Peter who was named. If Peter preached the gospel to Romans in Acts chapter 10, and he was criticized for it in Acts 11:2-3 where he had to defend himself, and if he was the first to do such a thing among the apostles, as he himself had professed before all the other apostles in Acts 15:7, then how is the "Ethiopian Eunuch" not a Judaean? The term "Ethiopian Eunuch" describes a government appointment, an office, and it is not an indicator of race. There were many “Roman soldiers” in Judaea, whom Roman history informs us had been Gauls, Iberians, Germans, or British conscripts from Roman-controlled provinces elsewhere in the Empire, but they were not necessarily Romans. After Peter converted the household of Cornelius the Roman in Acts chapter 10, which he had only done reluctantly, having seen the vision of the sheet three times, he reported it to the other apostles, and we read in Acts chapter 11: “1 And the apostles and brethren that were in Judaea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God. 2 And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him, 3 Saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them.” If the Ethiopian Eunuch was a “Gentile”, the apostles would have also taken issue with Philip, but Luke made no such record, so there must have been no such contention. Later in Acts chapter 11, after Peter had fully related his experience in defense of his actions, we read: “15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. 16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost. 17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God? 18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.” Of course, Paul of Tarsus would later identify those so-called “Gentiles” for whom the Gospel had come as the nations of the scattered “lost sheep” of the house of Israel, as it is also found in the prophets. But that is beyond the scope of this discussion. The word “Gentile” itself is problematic, since in Latin the word gentilis described someone of the same clan or race, and not someone of a different clan or race. Much later, as the apostles gathered in Jerusalem to discuss the contention over circumcision and other rituals in relation to the uncircumcised being converted to Christ, in Acts chapter 15 we read: “7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. 8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; 9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. 10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?” Later in the chapter, the apostle James referred to the experience of Peter at the household of Cornelius where he said: “14 Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.” So the process of converting the “Gentiles”, or properly, the Nations, to the Gospel of Christ began with Peter, and not with Philip, and anyone who insists that the Ethiopian Eunuch was an Ethiopian, a negro rather than a Judaean, not only denies the obvious context within the account of the eunuch, but also considers Peter, and James, to have been liars. It cannot be asserted, that the eunuch could have been a "gentile" and an Ethiopian without accusing Peter of having lied, and Peter didn’t lie. Peter didn’t lie, but all those who don’t believe that the Ethiopian eunuch was a Judaean, they lie, and they do it all the time. christogenea.org/podcasts/bi…

All these "JUDEO-Christian" church pastors are grifters and frauds. Then when you give them access to your kids, this is what you get. It's probably also what you deserve, for putting yourself under the "authority" of a man, and not reading your Bible at home. wjhg.com/2026/11/10/ponce-de… He looks like a weak bi7ch, so now Leroy and Bubba are going to sexually batter him.

Why wait? Bring it on now, faggot. Truth is, about all you'll ever have power over is a bratwurst.

Their day is coming.

Artificial Intelligence is dangerous in the hands of stupid people. Especially if they're stupid cops... theguardian.com/us-news/2026… She lost her house, her car, and did six months in jail because she looked like some other woman who robbed a bank in a place she had never been.

A new video at Christogenea: Scriptural Witnesses Against the Trinity Doctrine christogenea.org/videos/scri…

Live tonight at Christogenea, about 8:15 PM US Eastern time: Highlights in Exodus: The Flight from Egypt christogenea.org/event/highl…

The sheboon cop endangered both her homey and the fireman by not tasering her homey. She should be fired immediately. But of course, none of them should ever be cops, or be given any responsibility or compensation beyond a bunch of bananas.

The week at Christogenea:

This is so stupid, and it keeps on happening. So it certainly seems as if the stupidity must be intentional.

Rich Tidwell is just another gatekeeper, like Partridge, Webbon, Torba and a hundred other tools calling themselves "Christian Nationalists". The truth is that none of them are Nationalists, and none of them are even Christian.